Would I see a "big" impormant dynamic capture range

[Sunesha]

Good evening,

I am in the grounds to upgrade my old D200 to a D700. I am still trying to figure out if it is worth it. So set out whats important for me. I never had a problem with noise with my D200 for my kind off photography. I use around ISO 100 on tripod. Often with filters and other things. So whats made me think the most is. Will I see a diffrence capture photos for example in woods, in shadow from a mountain. Other areas where constrast range is far beyound the capture range for my D200. This would be biggest improvement for me. As it is quite task to multi-stack multi exposed panoramas.

Is there a pratical diffrence off the capture range. I have hard time to set the reviews specs into pratical meaning.

Will I feel, "nice it captured the whole scene, I dont have do multi-exposed stacking". I dont use HDR software. I use mostly a kind exposure blending tech.

What make it worth upgrade is if could just capture a scene better. I am pratical guy. I care about the print. As mentioned earlier higher ISO capabiltity isnt worth it for me. I tried look out for the visual diffrence in print beetween the older D200 and D700. The test prints I made off lower ISO off D700 hasnt been a big diffrence. Thats why I look for the shooting experience diffrence.

So that is important for me if you can share. You that used older 10mpix camera off Nikon to the now more modern D700 and D3. Specially for panoramas where contrast range can be big from one part to the other.

Do you see a big diffrence off capture a scene?

I am just thinking I maybe shall wait annother 2-3 years for a much bigger improvement and buy more lenses. I think it is a hard time with reviews for my style off photography. As much off the reviews just surround the higher ISOs which I rarely use at all. Also that there is hard time to compare capture range off dynamic range.

Cheers,

Ps. Sorry for long post, but wanted explain my question without the misunderstanding Ds.

[Plekto]

You really should learn to use simple HDR software.  Bracketing and blending is an enormous advantage in these situations.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06092502fujifilms5pro.asp

This will use your Nikon lenses and it has in-camera HDR.  It produces very very good results without blending(though it will also bracket and you can do that as well to really push the limits.  There is a new version of it coming out, but I don't like the way they've made the sensor work compared to the older S5's sensor - and when the new camera comes out, the S5 will drop a lot in price. (win-win)

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms5pro/
Note the new redesign on the sensor.  By placing the smaller photo sites at 45 degree angles and placing them in between the larger main ones, it gives you effectively about 25% more resolution due to making moires and interpolation errors much smaller(looks comparable to a typical 8-9MP camera according to most people)   If you're familiar with the typical Bayer pattern, you max out at a theoretical 0.66X resolution versus actual photo site ratio compared to film.  With a more tightly packed hexagonal layout, you approach 75%. And our eyes notice the smaller defects in the picture less.

I suggest using the "zero noise" software that is discussed in the following thread here.  It blends and deals with HDR/bracketed shots at the same time.  Plus, it's free.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....p;hl=zero+noise

[john beardsworth]

Having switched my main camera from D200 to D700, I'd say one of the biggest surprises was the extra dynamic range. Just after getting it I took a series of bracketed images with the intention of doing an HDR blend, but first tried to see how much I could squeeze out of the most underexposed frame. Once I'd lifted the shadows with Lightroom's fill light, I had plenty of detail in those areas and they contained none of the noise I would have expected with the D200. Maybe I should have expected it, but I was surprised and impressed. I'm sure I'll do HDR again with other scenes, but this time I threw away the other bracketed frames.

The other practical thing worth considering is the effect of full frame - your wide angle lens will be wide again.

Maybe for you the high ISO performance isn't important, but again it is remarkable.

John

[Sunesha]

You really should learn to use simple HDR software.  Bracketing and blending is an enormous advantage in these situations.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06092502fujifilms5pro.asp

This will use your Nikon lenses and it has in-camera HDR.  It produces very very good results without blending(though it will also bracket and you can do that as well to really push the limits.  There is a new version of it coming out, but I don't like the way they've made the sensor work compared to the older S5's sensor - and when the new camera comes out, the S5 will drop a lot in price. (win-win)


I suggest using the "zero noise" software that is discussed in the following thread here.  It blends and deals with HDR/bracketed shots at the same time.  Plus, it's free.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....p;hl=zero+noise

I would love S5 if it where 10mpix or above. I need more resolution for my prints thou. A fujifilm 10mpix fullframe would have me running for the store. I often do panoramas so resolution isnt often the problem. But 6 mpix is a bit to little. Often I use panorama just to gain resolution with 10mpix already for the bigger prints. Depends. A mountain photo with lake 10mpix holds up good. Forest photo with alot off foliage 10mpix doesnt always cut it.

Great post off the "zero noise", I forgot about it. I am back on windows from mac. So I gotta try that one out again.

Having switched my main camera from D200 to D700, I'd say one of the biggest surprises was the extra dynamic range. Just after getting it I took a series of bracketed images with the intention of doing an HDR blend, but first tried to see how much I could squeeze out of the most underexposed frame. Once I'd lifted the shadows with Lightroom's fill light, I had plenty of detail in those areas and they contained none of the noise I would have expected with the D200. Maybe I should have expected it, but I was surprised and impressed. I'm sure I'll do HDR again with other scenes, but this time I threw away the other bracketed frames.

The other practical thing worth considering is the effect of full frame - your wide angle lens will be wide again.

Maybe for you the high ISO performance isn't important, but again it is remarkable.

John

John,
I never thought about that. The better noise improvement can pay back if you lift shadows. The 2nd thing I want is to have a wide 24mm again. I have the 24PCE and want the 45 one also. So the choice stands beetween the 45 and the D700. I have to download som .nef from the net to do some treatments in this area.

The D200 files can be a bit to noisy if you lift shadows are you lose resolution in the shadows due to noise. Hence my exposure blending. Often just the shadows that get it. As the shadows become to blocked out and lifted to much.

I will see. My dealer has a problem. Everytime he gets in a batch off D700 he sells the same day. So he hasnt be able to borrow me one for 2 days testing. He have trust in me as. I often buy if I just like it.


Thanks all, I see I have to rethink a bit. But you guys got me thinking again. So I will try do so more checking.

[Plekto]

The real "trick" with the Fuji is that while the internal blending and hdr happens on the fly/instantly, and you get an effective 1.4x resolution(about 8.6 useable MP vs a Bayer pattern), you *CAN* drop it into standard mode and use the zero blending software and bracketing with a tripod of course to obtain identical results.   The advantage of the Fuji is that it does this blending in-camera for action shots and the like.

Bayer sensor: 12MP X 0.66 (interpolation losses)
Fuji Sensor: 6MP X ~0.90 (dual mode)
Fuji Sensor: 12MP X ~0.75 (hexagonal layout high-resolution mode)

It's exactly like the old Hitachi Diamondtron monitors versus the Tri-dot technology.  By gaining better angular alignment in each direction, your eyes see less distortion and cleaner text. Try looking at both sometime with a static gray image - the moires are far less pronounced with the Hitachi technology.

http://www.digicaminfo.btinternet.co.uk/sensors.htm
Note in the article how large the Fuji is compared to everything else other than a full-frame sensor.

EDIT:
The Fuji sensor does have more pronounced jaggies though on hard edges in standard mode.  But DIY blending takes care of that quite well.(or the in-camera mode)

http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/nikond40_samples/
The big deal here is picture #8.  That spot of sunlight is hideous.

http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/fujis5pro_samples/
Picture #5 is similar.  Note how it doesn't nuke the foreground shadows/trip the camera's aperture compensation as badly.  Picture #1 is even better.  One bright spot but otherwise fine.  

Blending yourself will get the same results, but it's nice to not have to always carry a tripod, IMO.  Great for trips and such, and for composed landscapes and the like, DIY bracket at full resolution.

[Panopeeper]

Will I see a diffrence capture photos for example in woods, in shadow from a mountain. Other areas where constrast range is far beyound the capture range for my D200

I measured the D3 @ ISO 200 against the D200 @ ISO 100 (the D3's sensor is the same as the D700). The dynamic range of the D3 is about 1.5 EV (or a bit more) higher than the D200. Note, that the D200 is excellent @ ISO 100, it fully takes up with the D300 @ ISO 200.

So yes, this will be a definitive improvement.