smaller pixels

Joined
Jan 29, 2005
Messages
2,761
Location
nowhere
are sharper; but slightest camera tremble makes them to pick up stray information, mute colours, and blur details. Some D2X cameras apparently have their dumping mechanisms and mirror balance poorer then others (compared 3 different cameras).
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
978
Location
Viera Fl
Seem a bit to sensitive Iliah. Is this where all the focus prob are coming from..

Glad I do not have a D2X
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2005
Messages
2,761
Location
nowhere
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
Dear Gale, I do not think this is the single source; our lack of skills, carelessness, misalignments of cameras add to the reasons. My own camera, which is one of the first bunch, has a very mild problem with long lenses, and it seems it will go for calibration to Nikon in September - when the current workload will be down (I'm not shooting tele right now anyway, 85/2.8PC is glued to the camera:). I think the vibration problem should not be too often, and hope that folks who experience it will send sample images to Nikon for diagnostics. It is always benefitial to have the camera serviced - you will have hand-made camera back :)
 
Joined
May 23, 2005
Messages
745
Gee Gale, I don't know if I am "glad" I don't have a D2X, I kinda wish I did all problems/quirks aside.

This small pixel issue is part of why Nikon has to get off their duff and produce some serious pro glass with VR. And not just the super tele's. Why oh why why why was it not incorporated in the 17-55DX?

Hmmm, to any people who said you don't need VR at 50mm... when you have to shoot at 1/150th to get it sharp you could probably use a few stops from VR.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
35,322
Location
Arizona
Real Name
Chris
How big is each individual photo-reactive surface in the D2x sensor (not pixel pitch, but the actual size of the 'light bucket'?)

Anything smaller than about 4 times the wavelength (red light = 0.7 micron, so 2.8 um) should lose information through quantum tunneling. Of course real world seems to be able to beat that by a bit as they've just developed a sub-2 micron sensor.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
7,819
Location
Gilroy, California
According to Phil Askey's review, they are 5.5 x 5.5 um.

I think this camera just requires a little time to adjust to it. Then again pretty much all of the cameras I have used required that.

I am amazed almost daily at the images I can make with it.
 
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
6,099
Location
Denver, CO
Iliah said:
are sharper; but slightest camera tremble makes them to pick up stray information, mute colours, and blur details. Some D2X cameras apparently have their dumping mechanisms and mirror balance poorer then others (compared 3 different cameras).
Good thing we got MLU and a tripod mount then. :) When possible I use mirror lock up via remote and a tripod. If I didn't the D2x would show that I need to lay off the caffeine. :lol:
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2005
Messages
2,761
Location
nowhere
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
For the needs of levering camera and some objects in the scene I assembled a small tilt measuring device based on Memsic chip ( http://www.memsic.com/memsic/pdfs/Accel Primer.pdf ) I tried to use it to measure vibrations of the camera, and it seems that the camera producing sharpest images with 85 mm prime stopped to 5.6 has less vibration then 2 others. I'm not sure my experiment is good enough 9bandwidth seems limited), and will have no time in 3 weeks to come to do more on that. But I will surely return to the problem later, as it seems of be of some interest...
 
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