Bjorn Roslet's D2X Review -

Joined
Jan 29, 2005
Messages
2,761
Location
nowhere
Two words of warning.

Before jumping to conclusions:

resolution is tested on resolution targets, as perceivable resolution depends on contrast;

Bibble was used to process RAW files, if I read the review correctly. Bibble is not doing justice to cameras, as it is soft, and do not address noise and digital vinghetting according to sensor design ideas;

please use Macbeth ColorChecker simulation to judge colour rendition suggested by the review.

D2x image:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


1DsMkII image:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Simulation:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


I took the liberty of converting first two images to sRGB (they were originally published in Adobe RGB colour space). Extreme caution was taken while converting, 16 bit space was used.

Folks who shoot Canons would continue to get great images in spite of all the hoopla that D2x kills their cameras. Probably this is not an appropriate comment on this most mature forum, so please excuse me friends.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2005
Messages
1,027
Location
Annandale, VA
NeilCam said:
For those of you lucky, lucky barstaffs who'll be getting one!

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

/me starts saving pennies. Calculates will have D2X by 2012.

Neil
Wow! What a review. A long read but incredibly thorough. I like his conclusions: Nikon is in the hunt and the two excellent cameras are different. Take your pick.

Melissa. I'm jealous!. When we get together for the Cherry Blossom festival you can use my 85 f/1.4 If I can take some shots with your D2X (pretty please!...with sugar on it?)

Rich :D
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
994
Location
Alabama
Iliah said:
Folks who shoot Canons would continue to get great images in spite of all the hoopla that D2x kills their cameras. Probably this is not an appropriate comment on this most mature forum, so please excuse me friends.
Iliah,

I'm like Rich in that I enjoyed the review, but I do agree with your comments as well. Looks like Nikon has come up with a great tool, just as Canon did with their top-of-the-line models. I've been most impressed by the shots I've seen from Canon cameras, and it appears that Nikon is hanging in the game pretty well with this new release.

Regards,

Frank
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2005
Messages
2,761
Location
nowhere
I certainly enjoyed the review too. But I'm not sure an early attempt to compare cameras will bring any good to Nikon name. Too many open holes in methodics IMHO. Second, I'm not sure what is the purpose. To hold Nikon customers from migrating to Canon? To show those who doubt they are making a right investment that Nikon is currently better? As you understand, people will look for different and "other side" opinions, and any flaw in the review will be scrutinized, used against the initial purpose, and mocked.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2005
Messages
1,027
Location
Annandale, VA
Iliah said:
I certainly enjoyed the review too. But I'm not sure an early attempt to compare cameras will bring any good to Nikon name. Too many open holes in methods IMHO. Second, I'm not sure what is the purpose. To hold Nikon customers from migrating to Canon? To show those who doubt they are making a right investment that Nikon is currently better? As you understand, people will look for different and "other side" opinions, and any flaw in the review will be scrutinized, used against the initial purpose, and mocked.
I don't agree. I think his approach is essentially sound. So far the criticisms I've seen seem to reflect the criticizer's agenda (ala Paganini and his 10 posts on DPR and Fred Miranda) or are hair splitting. I believe Bjorn could care less about trying to hold Nikon users to the fold. After all he really criticized infrared and called the 3200 ISO noise issue as he saw it, didn't he?

As an engineer (by education) I was shocked by the first review, if you want to call it that, was, as I said over at DPR, egregious. The results, which were seriously bungled basically torpedoed the D2X out of the box. When you get results which are not even close to expectations and in opposition to other's observations, who are highly respected people in the field you go to a third party and try to identify the discrepancies. Instead he posted it for the world to see. You saw the reactions over at DPR people were slitting their wrists and canceling their orders. This was an error of serious magnitude. He lost a lot of credibility; what makes it even worse is his highly iimpressive list of quallifications he posts on his site.

This is quite different from arguing over what one "sees" in two images or to subtle adjustments which could alter a close difference. The gearheads, as Bjorn calls them, are all trying to "spin" this just as European football fans argue endlessly over individual players comparing present ones to past heroes. Their agenda is to bolster their self esteem justifying that they either own or support is "the best." Our world seems to be preoccupied with winning, no matter what the cost.

I think most serious Nikon fans wanted to see if Nikon was capable of reaching the level of performance set by Canon. I believe almost everyone realizes that Canon will release a camera which will top the specifications of the D2X. This appears to be what they do best.

I'll stick with Nikon. I'm starting to save with a target purchase date of 1 October. Once there are D2Xs sitting on store shelves prices will come down.

Rich
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom