D2X Sharpness?

[ultimind]

I'm becoming more confused with my upcoming new body purchase. :frown: For a while I was considering saving money and going the D1X route, then it was the D200 just because it's an overall upgrade from the D70, THEN it was the D300 because I came into some extra tax refund cash, but after seeing some direct D70 to D300 comparisons, I'm extremely disappointed. The D300 is just way too soft looking.

I know it would cost me a little more, but am I going to experience the same type of sharpness issues with a D2X as the D300 has?

 

[Matt S]

The d2x is razor sharp. Hight ISO is not as good as the new generation of cams. But at low ISO it's just plain hard to beat. However, with the high pixel density, proper technique plays a large role in sharpness. I had a learning curve to overcome when I switched from a D70 to the D2x two years ago. I have never shot the D300 or D3 so I cannot compare to those cameras.

 

[Paul.r.lindqvist]

What sharpness issues ? The D300 requires a little more sharpening then the D2X from my limited testing, just as the D200 did. (not as much though)

Kindest

 

[ultimind]

Every sample I've seen from the D300 comparing it to older bodies all show the D300 as having much heavier in-camera noise reduction being applied. Even when the NR is turned off.

Would a D2X be a viable alternative to a D200? In terms of pure image sharpness?

 

[Paul.r.lindqvist]

D2X is a notch over the D200 in sharpness yes.

 

[j_b_l]

I would say that the D2X and the D300 are very close in sharpness, when paired with the same lens. As Paul mentioned, I have had to apply a little more sharpening to the NEFs that come out of the D300 than out of the D2X.

I also think the D2X would best the D200 in sharpness. It's been a while since I shot a D200, and I didn't shoot it side by side with the D2X, but that would be my thought.

One thing to think about...IMHO the D300 will be able to resolve *MUCH* more than the D70...so any imperfection in your lenses will be magnified by the D300...so an 18-70 lens that looks great on a D70 might not look that great on a D300. This might be what you are seeing...but there is no problem with the sharpness of the D300...here is a shot with my 85/1.4 lens:

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

 

[ultimind]

John - Do you see any of this heavy-handed noise reduction in the D300 NEF's? This sample http://www.pbase.com/ed_k/image/89960727 Looks pretty bad to me. (Both were RAW with no sharpening applied). It looks like the D300 is more smeary.

 

[j_b_l]

I really can't tell from that sample...the images are just too small. I didn't have to do anything but a mild "Smart Sharpen" in PSCS3 to get the image above. IIRC it was shot at ISO200 (native ISO for D300), f7.1, 1/250. Also IIRC, I shot RAW and converted to JPG through ACR.

IMHO, sharpness will absolutely not be an issue with you and the D300.

John - Do you see any of this heavy-handed noise reduction in the D300 NEF's? This sample http://www.pbase.com/ed_k/image/89960727 Looks pretty bad to me. (Both were RAW with no sharpening applied). It looks like the D300 is more smeary.

 

[ultimind]

John - Would you say that a D2X would be a bad idea to upgrade from the D70?

 

[Rich Gibson]

The child's image just provided shows that the D70-D300 sample cited has some problems. Further, in the comparison shot the D70 images were significantly flatter than the D300. You might check Thom Hogan's site as well for a discussion of the D300 vis-a-vis D2X. Choosing either would not be a "bad" idea. Like all tools they function differently for different uses.

It's a very difficult question to answer. You have to consider to what use the camera is going to be put. The D200 is not sealed as well as the D2X; the D2X can shoot faster; the D2X without a built in flash means it is not as handy for the "kodak moment" situation. The D200 is significantly lighter..and so on. Without a thorough study of how a proposed camera will be put to use basing a choice on arbitrary specifications or price could lead to disappointment.

 

[Muonic]

The d2x is razor sharp.

Yes it is. I don't know anything about the D300, but the D2x is very impressive in the sharpness category. I had the same learning curve as Matt when I upgraded from my D70s.

 

[kja6]

I don't see how going from a D70(s) to a D2X would be a bad idea. I did exactly that and didn't have any complaints. The D2X is sharper than the D70s and the colours appear truer, due to more in-camera processing (on default settings).

 

[j_b_l]

John - Would you say that a D2X would be a bad idea to upgrade from the D70?

Absolutely not...the D2X is an amazing camera. I see you're in Cleveland...if you ever want to go shooting, just let me know.

As Rich points out above, you really need to understand why you're upgrading, what you shoot, and what you hope to gain from the upgrade...this will help pave the way.

Cheers,

 

[Dennis Carter]

I had a learning curve to overcome when I switched from a D70 to the D2x two years ago.

I had the same learning curve as Matt when I upgraded from my D70s.

Interesting thread.

I'd love to hear more about your learning curve, folks. Were your initial shots soft? How quickly did you overcome your initial problems, whatever they were? Any problems with your lenses that warranted lens upgrades?

I've expressed my concern in a previous post here:

https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=152203

 

[ultimind]

My main interest in upgrading is to - A: Have more megapixels to crop with, B: Be able to make big prints easier, and C: Not worrying about breaking my plastic D70 all the time!

The D2X is as built as an F5 (it seems so atleast) so I feel much more confident shooting with a heavy hunk of metal. I think I have some pretty good glass so I hope it won't point out too many flaws in my existing arsenal.

 

[Dennis Carter]

My main interest in upgrading is to - A: Have more megapixels to crop with...

Me, too.

I like to shoot tight. Shooting tight with a D1H (2.7MP) and following/catching good action are almost mutually exclusive, at least, for me.

To have room to crop and 8fps would be the "bee's knees." :biggrin:

 

[pforsell]

What sharpness issues ? The D300 requires a little more sharpening then the D2X from my limited testing, just as the D200 did. (not as much though)

Kindest

Hi Paul,
do you have a theory of why this is so? The pixel pitch does not explain the difference between D300 and D2X. AA-filter? Processing? Sensor quality? Is the D2X more prone to moiré?

Yours truly.

 

[Doug]

I took this photo almost 1 year ago, and I was looking at it the other day, and I just love the depth of it even at f3.5. D2X/17-35mm.

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

 

[jStat]

Wow, that's a great shot. You're right--even at 3.5 it seems like it has enough depth to be about f/5.

 

[ultimind]

Doug - Could we see a piece of the middle at 100% of that shot? It looks great scaled down, I'd love to see the sharpness up close!