Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       end
  

Archive 2013 · Nikon D4x soon I hope
  
 
theSuede
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


Binning "before" is quite a lot different from doing it post. When you do it post, you're adding in electronic noise from each pixel, like:
Noise.tot = (noise.n^n + noise.n+1^n...) ^(1/n)

Adding together four pixels in post doubles the electronic noise. Binning them keeps electronic noise the same as if reading one pixel.

The minimum real bin size is 4x4 in a Bayer camera. That's reducing the the MP by 4*4=16x, or the same as making a D800 into a 2.2MP camera. With absolutely freaking brilliant high-ISO performance, but anyway...
...........

The reason Canon sRAW's are smaller (in MB size) is that they:
a) lower tone resolution and use YCbCr encoding. They are not raw values any more.
b) sRaw1 uses video/jpeg-style 4:2:2 coding (in the smaller sRaw2, 4:2:0), decreasing color resolution to about 1/4 the MP of the total image size.

End result: 4-8x lower color resolution and about 2x lower tone resolution than the original raw - and you saved what? 10MB on the card? And there's absolutely NO gain on the sensor stage, you still have to read each and every pixel one by one.



Mar 17, 2013 at 09:48 PM
Engelsen
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #2 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


M Lucca wrote:
How about providing a better AF system with X-type points spread around the sensor plane instead of center-clustered.
See Canon's 61-point AF system to start with.
Better LV implementation for the lanscapers and macro shooters.

Fix current QC issues. Treat your current loyal nikon customers right.

+1



Mar 17, 2013 at 09:52 PM
binary visions
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #3 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


theSuede wrote:
The minimum real bin size is 4x4 in a Bayer camera. That's reducing the the MP by 4*4=16x, or the same as making a D800 into a 2.2MP camera. With absolutely freaking brilliant high-ISO performance, but anyway...


Great information, thanks. What requires the bin size to be so large, vs., say, 2x2 which would capture a full RGB set of photosites?



Mar 17, 2013 at 10:00 PM
theSuede
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


2x2 is very hard to do from a read-out point of view, and you're basically gaining only one thing while losing out on quite a lot of the "good stuff" involved in a full readout.

2x2 doesn't do anything else than clump two greens together. The noise decrease is sqrt(2), and only in green. Blue and red gains nothing.
Another really limiting thing about 2x2 is that you lose all interpolation, which HAS to be present (unless you're shooting at at least F16 or higher). The interpolation adds in missing information, that is then included in the dowsampling.
If you skip the interpolation step, then you're building the full image from 25% of the blue & red channels that are sparsely sampled. The 75% of image information area that isn't there is really important to do the downsampling correctly.

Trying to downsample a sparsely sampled signal is like BEGGING for aliasing and the worst kind of moire.
...........

3x3 doesn't work, since each group of pixels clumped together would contain only one pixel of either red or blue, giving you an only quite small advantage in noise, but lowering the MP amount by 9x....
You could theoretically use 3x4, in a reasonable readout scheme, but the gains in resolution compared to 4x4 is relatively small.
4x4 is the smallest group of pixels where you are sure of having more than one of either blue or red in the group.



Mar 17, 2013 at 10:14 PM
M635_Guy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #5 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


Kerry Pierce wrote:
Interestingly enough, I just had a back-channel conversation on this topic with Mr. Hogan. He wasn't happy with some comments that I'd made on DPR about one of his articles, where I'd said something similar to what Jammy said about his wedding shoots, but that Hogan was doing the fanboy thing, defending the MP race against those wanting a true d700 replacement.


I think it is kinda funny that you're accusing him of being a fanboy. He's probably been harder on Nikon over the last 18 months than anyone on the internet.

I read the article you're referring to, and as a guy with a fair bit of background in product management, I found myself agreeing with him. When the D800 was announced, I wrote an open letter/blog post titled "Where's MY full-frame" and listed features I'd see in a D700 replacement. The camera I described was pretty close to the D600. Thom's bridge for D700 replacement by the D800 and D600 made a lot of sense to me even if I started reading it with a completely different opinion (which was closer to yours).

I've had a few e-mail conversations with him as well, and between those and his site, I find him to be pretty methodical, data-driven and absolutely not driven by marketing or any desire to please Nikon. Like lots of folks in the photography world, he's not exactly a politician, but I've never felt like he was being a groupie.

I think Nikon is doing the right thing with their FX family. DX is another story (I think you and I both want to see a D400), but at the end of day Nikon is pushing the technology forward. If they wanted to expand FX, they needed a prosumer D600. They wanted to raise the bar with the D700 replacement, and the D800 certainly does that.

Will they do a D4x? Given the features and price of the D4, it seems like it absorbed the D3x and D3s. D4x would be a new platform in terms of price and features that we haven't seen from Nikon. I guess it would be cool for the few people who could afford a camera that costs $8K-$10K. I'd rather them spend their resources on a D400 and executing with far better quality.



Mar 17, 2013 at 10:42 PM
Kerry Pierce
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #6 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


Mr. Hogan and I have a history going back several years. As a general rule, I take what he says without too many questions. IOW, I've learned to respect his opinions, long ago. But, that doesn't mean that I won't disagree with him and give him a twak when I think one is due, or just to jerk his chain.

In this instance, I think he's wrong to deride those that aren't satisfied that the d600/d800 completely fill the niche that was created by the d700. IMO, the d300/d700 pair set a standard for high speed, high performance bodies. Neither of the new amateur bodies meet that standard. I felt he was taking the party line with that stance, which is why I said the review was written by his fanboy side. That's basically what I told him backchannel, when he decided to take me to task on my post.

Sorry if you got the impression that I was really slamming on him. That wasn't the case.

Kerry



Mar 18, 2013 at 12:18 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


Kerry Pierce wrote:
Mr. Hogan and I have a history going back several years. As a general rule, I take what he says without too many questions. IOW, I've learned to respect his opinions, long ago. But, that doesn't mean that I won't disagree with him and give him a twak when I think one is due, or just to jerk his chain.

In this instance, I think he's wrong to deride those that aren't satisfied that the d600/d800 completely fill the niche that was created by the d700. IMO, the d300/d700 pair set a standard for high speed, high performance
...Show more


Kerry,

You should check his page now... I think it has an interesting perspective that you would appreciate ... seems you may have made in impression.

Cheers,
Andre



Mar 18, 2013 at 12:51 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #8 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


theSuede wrote:
2x2 is very hard to do from a read-out point of view, and you're basically gaining only one thing while losing out on quite a lot of the "good stuff" involved in a full readout.

2x2 doesn't do anything else than clump two greens together. The noise decrease is sqrt(2), and only in green. Blue and red gains nothing.
Another really limiting thing about 2x2 is that you lose all interpolation, which HAS to be present (unless you're shooting at at least F16 or higher). The interpolation adds in missing information, that is then included in the dowsampling.
If you skip the interpolation
...Show more

***********************

Very interesting, I was not thinking of it in terms of ISO performance but in terms of pushing out a smaller RAW file and thus enabling higher frame rates and deeper effective buffer on a high MP camera... I guess it depends on what your goal is.

Personally, I think the high-ISO performance of current bodies is great and for some applications, I like the idea of large MP raw files ... but for other applications, a small MP raw file would be great even without any high ISO gains. So, in that case, a 2x2 bin would be useful in bringing the file size down without loosing too much resolution ... but such a bin would be without all the gains of a 4x4 bin as you have explained them.




Mar 18, 2013 at 12:57 AM
Kerry Pierce
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #9 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


Kerry Pierce wrote:
Mr. Hogan and I have a history going back several years. As a general rule, I take what he says without too many questions. IOW, I've learned to respect his opinions, long ago. But, that doesn't mean that I won't disagree with him and give him a twak when I think one is due, or just to jerk his chain.

In this instance, I think he's wrong to deride those that aren't satisfied that the d600/d800 completely fill the niche that was created by the d700. IMO, the d300/d700 pair set a standard for high speed, high performance
...Show more
Andre Labonte wrote:
Kerry,

You should check his page now... I think it has an interesting perspective that you would appreciate ... seems you may have made in impression.

Cheers,
Andre


Thanks for the pointer, Andre. Yes, his new article is quite interesting and certainly a departure from what he'd written previously. I'm happy to see that. I rather doubt that I played a significant part in that turnaround. He said that he was a getting a LOT of emails on the topic. In the end, I suspect that given the amount of resistance he'd encountered, I think that he simply re-evaluated his position. TBH, his new position is what I'd have expected from him to begin with, given his past writings.

Now, the important part is to get Nikon thinking along the same lines, to where they put out killer replacements for the d300 and d700 and d3x.

Kerry



Mar 18, 2013 at 06:21 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #10 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


Kerry Pierce wrote:
Thanks for the pointer, Andre. Yes, his new article is quite interesting and certainly a departure from what he'd written previously. I'm happy to see that. I rather doubt that I played a significant part in that turnaround. He said that he was a getting a LOT of emails on the topic. In the end, I suspect that given the amount of resistance he'd encountered, I think that he simply re-evaluated his position. TBH, his new position is what I'd have expected from him to begin with, given his past writings.

Now, the important part is to get Nikon
...Show more

****************

You're welcome, Kerry. While I agree with Thom Hogan regarding the MP vs. ISO issue with modern sensors, I too have had issues with calling the D800 a D700 replacement due to speed and file size. I think Thom's current article and the thinking outlined therein make much more sense.

I hope the killer replacement you call for come! That would be very cool.



Mar 18, 2013 at 11:58 PM
dmora
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #11 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


This thread has to be a troll thread...


Mar 19, 2013 at 02:36 AM
JWilsonphoto
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #12 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


pookipichu wrote:
I'd buy a D4X. I'd pay for faster/better low-light AF (over the D800), better circuitry, better mirror damping (less mirror slap), and if it's going to be over 36MP, definitely want sRaw, better live-view implementation in low light. The D800 is pretty wonderful but I know that there's room for improvement in a D4X.


Exactly. The one thing that can be taken from this thread is, 18.1 mp is "enough" for some, 36.6 mp just whets other's whistles for the next bump. We all have different needs, different expectations, different talents, and different budgets. There is no "too much", the D800 got me back into Nikon after 25 years, and the D4X will get me even more deeply committed. They're all just tools so whatever does the best job for the type of work one does, or whatever tool gets you closer to your vision, that's the right one for you.



Apr 12, 2013 at 11:06 PM
jtgray
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #13 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


who the hell needs 56mp? you would need a super computer to process it.


Apr 13, 2013 at 02:40 AM
MarcG19
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #14 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


jtgray wrote:
who the hell needs 56mp? you would need a super computer to process it.


I have heard the iPad is more powerful than a Cray 2...... . And if that's True, a $500 desktop is more powerful than many later supercomputers.

Only thing I have to say about the rest of this thread is that I have many doubts on whether Nikon will be able to support lenses for a new 54 megapixel sensor. I'd imagine very few of the current lenses are going to be suitable for such a camera, and so Nikon would have to refresh them, perhaps with a new line or label.

It hasn't done very well at all lately for CX, done nothing for DX. Even it's current penchant for consumer fx and the odd exotic fx (why a 24mm f/1.4 when a 16mm f/2 or 2.8 dx has 10x the market and would make it far more boggles the mind) is still going rather slowly compared to Canon or even m4/3's additions. I have many doubts for a rapid iteration of a new series of 54 megapixel suitable lenses

Edited: to fix typos from Siri. This is what you get when you post with an iphone and don't bother to proofread.



Apr 13, 2013 at 03:14 AM
NikonDeb
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #15 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


I'm still waiting for a SMALL body with great hi ISO capability. My d3/3s are too heavy. Very glad I didn;t buy the d4 since it appears the new card format is not the norm


Apr 13, 2013 at 03:42 AM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #16 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


jtgray wrote:
who the hell needs 56mp? you would need a super computer to process it.



- People said that exact same thing about 24MP and then 36MP. Just for the record, I have stitched shots with my D800e that produced a 60MP file - I was able to post process it without too much trouble on a computer that was several years old.

That said, I do wonder how well the current crop of lenses will hold up, although keep in mind at 54MP the pixel density is the same as the current D7100. Edges and corners might be a concern though. Still, I'd be willing to try it



Apr 13, 2013 at 12:56 PM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #17 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


Steve Perry wrote:
- People said that exact same thing about 24MP and then 36MP. Just for the record, I have stitched shots with my D800e that produced a 60MP file - I was able to post process it without too much trouble on a computer that was several years old.

That said, I do wonder how well the current crop of lenses will hold up, although keep in mind at 54MP the pixel density is the same as the current D7100. Edges and corners might be a concern though. Still, I'd be willing to try it



More sensor resolution simply shows the weeknessess and strengths of the lens better if you crop down to the point that you can see the pixels. However, since resolution is always a function of both sensor and lens, more resolution at the sesnor will only improve the image if compared to a lower res sensor at the same IMAGE size. Better lenses may be needed to get 100% out of the new sensor, but the higher meg sensor will ensure you get 100% out of the lenses.



Apr 13, 2013 at 01:33 PM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #18 · Nikon D4x soon I hope


Andre Labonte wrote:
More sensor resolution simply shows the weeknessess and strengths of the lens better if you crop down to the point that you can see the pixels. However, since resolution is always a function of both sensor and lens, more resolution at the sesnor will only improve the image if compared to a lower res sensor at the same IMAGE size. Better lenses may be needed to get 100% out of the new sensor, but the higher meg sensor will ensure you get 100% out of the lenses.


Yes, agree 100% and should I have been more clear. You never go backwards in IQ with higher res, but what I'm wondering is when will we reach the point of diminishing returns. When does the difference in higher MP no longer translate into any (significant) real world advantages?



Apr 13, 2013 at 04:35 PM
1       2       3      
4
       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password