Started by Michael Erlewine, July 25, 2017, 01:19:52 am
Quote from: sbay on August 24, 2017, 12:10:51 pmHow do they compare to jpegs out of the D810?
Quote11) The Nikon D850 uses a backside-illuminated (BSI) sensor, but not for the reason you might think. The D850 uses the first backside-illuminated sensor in Nikon's DSLR lineup, but when we asked about it, it turned out the reason wasn't to provide better low-light performance (its pixels are big enough that there's not much gain in ISO speed by moving the wiring to the back of the chip), but rather to give more flexibility in the chip's wiring, to achieve the high speed they were after. Interesting...
Quote14) Nikon says dynamic range will be as good or better than that of the D810, despite the higher pixel count. They've stated that there is no trade-offs to be made in balancing dynamic range at base ISO vs. higher ISOs, and that this sensor resolution represents the optimum balance for performance and image quality.
Quote from: BartvanderWolf on August 24, 2017, 07:28:30 pmSome interesting aspects selected from the Imaging-resources website's review:Might be Marketing speak?QED
Quote from: BartvanderWolf on August 24, 2017, 09:22:09 amI was wondering. We'll soon be able to derive the actual information from Raw files ourselves, but aren't Back-Side Illuminated (BSI) sensors better in Quantum Efficiency (QE) but somewhat worse in Dynamic Range (DR), compared to front side illuminated CMOS devices?
Quote from: BJL on August 24, 2017, 07:45:57 pmI do not see any fundamental reason for BSI sensors to have lower DR; indeed it seems to have the potential for greater well depth leading to increased DR. But it might be the case with implementations so far. The tentative good news on DR is that the base speed is still the same low 64 ISO, with "pulls" down to 32.
Quote from: BJL on August 24, 2017, 07:45:57 pmI do not see any fundamental reason for BSI sensors to have lower DR; [...]
Quote from: Christopher on August 25, 2017, 02:36:45 amMissing some the best ISO... http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D810,Nikon%20D850
Quote from: Ray on August 25, 2017, 03:05:22 amI'll wait for DXOMark's results which I've always found to be reasonably accurate according to my own rigorous testing.
Quote from: BartvanderWolf on August 24, 2017, 09:04:09 pmI'm not sure, but wouldn't having the transfer gates behind the photo-sensitive areas, reduce the real-estate for deep "wells"?Cheers,Bart
Quote from: kers on August 24, 2017, 01:34:10 pmquestion,if i buy a perpetual version of Lightroom will it cover the d850?or will it only be covered in the CS version.
Quote from: davidgp on August 25, 2017, 04:50:32 amNot really... before the electronics were in the way of the light path... BSI increases noise - ratio performance and DR... especially in smaller sensors... in bigger sensors like full frame, the benefits are smaller, since the wiring was already very small with respect the area of the pixel... there is probably a benefit, but an small one... http://dgpfotografia.com
Quote from: davidgp on August 25, 2017, 04:53:52 amYes, unless Lightroom releases version 7, version 6 is updated like the CC verdion, new features will be disabled, but camera, lens support and bug fixes will be available for both..http://dgpfotografia.com
Quote from: shadowblade on August 25, 2017, 05:08:48 amThat doesn't actually affect the maximum DR, but the rate at which light can be collected. That affects high ISO performance (more light hitting the sensor in the same space of time means a higher SNR above base ISO and less amplification needed to achieve the same ISO), but moving the circuitry from the front to the back doesn't, in itself, increase the SNR or DR at base ISO. Only increasing the FWC or reducing the noise will do that.In a way, it's a bit like changing the aperture on a lens - opening it up will let photons in faster, but won't actually change the maximum number which can be recorded by the sensor.You can see it in comparing the A7r and A7r2 sensors (although there's more than just BSI to that). The A7r2 has similar DR at base ISO, but significantly more at high ISO. Since more photons are being collected in the same space of time (with fewer being blocked by circuitry/hitting non-photosensitive areas) the SNR achieved at any given ISO level above base is higher than for the non-BSI sensor.
Quote from: kers on August 25, 2017, 05:19:00 amOk thanks- that will be my upgrade path from CS6. A lightroom 7 with a new Raw engine (2012!) would be even better...Main problem now is for me is moiré and false colour in general.
Quote from: BernardLanguillier on August 25, 2017, 05:47:23 amI would give C1 pro a try, it works wonders on Nikon files.Cheers,Bernard
Quote from: kers on August 25, 2017, 06:10:59 amI did - a few times- but somehow did not like it- maybe i will try it again with the next upgrade...i like the uniform sharpness of ACR in the images ; for instance if you have a picture of grass ( football field) capture-one mashes up some parts ( discontinuity) while ACR gives a more uniform sharpness from close to far.For colour i would choose Nikons NX- but is miss the sharpness i get with ACR....(Speaking of grass- i really am sensitive to that colour green on photographs often find it a very ugly colour... while in reality it is not an issue)For sensitive photos i have a work around to deal with the colour issues in ACR. On the whole i like the workflow of ACR and also use it for 6400 asa images. I test everything printing it on my 44 inch printer 150 dpi to check.
Page created in 0.044 seconds with 16 queries.