What a shame a camera that seems the perfect replacement for the D700 for wedding professionals is in some way compromised. Hopefully there will be a solution to satisfy everyone's needs. Nikon was surely chastened when the Chinese pulled their chain over the D600. Honestly, I expect Nikon to take a more responsible course in response to this issue, whatever the cause. Of course, if the issue IS with more recent Nikon lens design, the problem may not have an easy solution. But the fact the problem seems to exist with this particular camera and not others using the same lens, it may simply be a problem with the D750.
I'm happy for those folks who are able to enjoy this camera without the problems experienced by wedding pros. However, I'm among those who will simply wait and watch all of this unfold. It seems the suggestion it is better to have early adopters work out the kinks in any new camera makes more sense at this time than ever before. Good luck everyone.
This after the D800 and D600 means I'm now decided to sticking to the 'fixed' versions (the D610, D810s of teh future) of nikon's cameras in the future.
lottel wrote:
So, to draw a conclusion, is this a normal occurrence or is it a design flaw that Nikon has to fix? Or, is it something that occurs on earlier models?
Yes it does occur on earlier models. Like my 1970 Nikon F.
Desmolicious wrote:
Yes it does occur on earlier models. Like my 1970 Nikon F.
Based on your picture I am very sure we are talking about 2 very different issues without bringing in more totally unrelated variables like chemical and temperature processing.
Look at your picture and one will notice that there is no pointed light source from the very top or bottom edge of the frame, due to absolutely no reflection from her hair or breast areas.
Yes there is something that looks like light leaks, but we can't tell if it was caused by loading or unloading from the cartridge, or uneven chemical processing or even uneven temperature in the bath trays. And yes I have seen this during my film processing days, but that was usually with the first few frames caused by light leaking through the cartridge lips.
So please do not complicate this issue with totally unrelated variables.
Let's just concentrate on digital format only.
hans98ko wrote:
Based on your picture I am very sure we are talking about 2 very different issues without bringing in more totally unrelated variables like chemical and temperature processing.
Look at your picture and one will notice that there is no pointed light source from the very top or bottom edge of the frame, due to absolutely no reflection from her hair or breast areas.
Yes there is something that looks like light leaks, but we can't tell if it was caused by loading or unloading from the cartridge, or uneven chemical processing or even uneven temperature in the bath trays. And yes I have seen this during my film processing days, but that was usually with the first few frames caused by light leaking through the cartridge lips.
So please do not complicate this issue with totally unrelated variables.
Let's just concentrate on digital format only. ...Show more →
All the other images on the roll were fine, before and after this shot. This one was the only one that had a street light directly overhead the subject, just out of frame.
Which seems to be the modus operandi of how people have apparently recreated this "light leak" .
In my case it is due to lens flare. Which looks uncannily similar to the results from the D750 with the "light leak" issue.
Take that for what you will.
So, if I could recreate this exact same effect, utilizing the exact same scenario, with a 45 year old film camera. Well.
p.s. there was a shopping mall behind me/in front of her, which provided the fill in light.
Yes, I posted the original YouTube video that started a lot of this discussion. Yes, I'm a little annoyed there is a minor flaw with this camera. Yes, I shoot backlit fairly often and anticipate losing a few shots to this.
But the D750 is still the best camera I've ever used. No regrets at all.
Desmolicious, You are not doing an apple to apple test here, if you have used a digital camera and a film camera using the same light source from the same angle like what snapsy have done on 3 different cameras then yes your results are valid, but you are not.
Looking alike by different means does not help to resolve the issue at hand.
Let me put it this way, if I use photoshop to make a picture to look like what we are seeking on the D750. Would that help?
CGrindahl wrote I'm among those who will simply wait and watch all of this unfold. It seems the suggestion it is better to have early adopters work out the kinks in any new camera makes more sense at this time than ever before.
Me, too... and for all we know, there could be other undiscovered bugs, too.
hans98ko wrote:
Desmolicious, You are not doing an apple to apple test here, if you have used a digital camera and a film camera using the same light source from the same angle like what snapsy have done on 3 different cameras then yes your results are valid, but you are not.
Looking alike by different means does not help to resolve the issue at hand.
Let me put it this way, if I use photoshop to make a picture to look like what we are seeking on the D750. Would that help?
The issue is lens flare. Like it or not, believe it or not is your choice. Myself along with other posters have given you and others examples of lens flare, no less on a D810, Fujifilm XT-1, Nikon F etc. that have the same effect as the D750 posts.
So rather than use the horse and water saying I'll say it this way,(no offence intended), You can show people examples until the cows come home but you can't make them think.
I have a very early model (sn: 30022XX), bought in the first days the D750 was available in US. After many attempts to reproduce the problem, I could finally get it in the following conditions:
- initially pointed to a 100W bulb, and then slowly pointed it down. In the beginning it was difficult to get it because it only occurs at a very specific position
- used a 50mm 1.8 G lens . The problem occurs with all apertures from f1.8 to f16. It also occurs with and without a filter or a hood.
- if I use my hand, like an extension to the hood by approximately 2 inches, the problem disappears
- same with a 50 mm 1.4D
- with a 20-35/2.8 @ 35 mm it appers very weak and disappears towards 20 mm
- with a 70-200/2.8 it happens at all focal lengths, but weaker than with the 50 mm
- with a 28mm 2.8D the effect is very strong
- could not reproduce it with other cameras (D300 and Oly EP3) at equivalent focal lengths
In my opinion the veiling flare is the condition, but not the problem. The horizontal bar suggests something inside the camera is blocking the reflected light.
For the kind of photographs I take, this is hardly going to be a problem for me.
JBPhotog wrote:
The issue is lens flare. Like it or not, believe it or not is your choice. Myself along with other posters have given you and others examples of lens flare, no less on a D810, Fujifilm XT-1, Nikon F etc. that have the same effect as the D750 posts.
So rather than use the horse and water saying I'll say it this way,(no offence intended), You can show people examples until the cows come home but you can't make them think.
Time to move on.
I don't understand your logic on this. How does the fact that other scenarios can produce the same type of flare effect on all bodies have significance for a specific scenario where a particular body suffers from the effect where other bodies don't? That's like saying because a person can die in an automobile accident in any car model means no car model is inherently safer than another.
JBPhotog wrote:
The issue is lens flare. Like it or not, believe it or not is your choice. Myself along with other posters have given you and others examples of lens flare, no less on a D810, Fujifilm XT-1, Nikon F etc. that have the same effect as the D750 posts.
So rather than use the horse and water saying I'll say it this way,(no offence intended), You can show people examples until the cows come home but you can't make them think.
Time to move on.
Okay! When you have a lens on, you can call that lens flare. But when others can replicate it without a lens on the D750, can you called that lens flare too?
Where is the lens? And which lens are you talking about? If you are talking about the micro lenses on the sensor, that is still on the camera.
As someone before me has pointed out about the dark bar on top and at the bottom of the pictures, where did that came from? Flare is not shadow because they are opposite to each other.
Like I said there could be more than one issue we are looking at.
I got mine to reproduce the effect. Weird thing was it took the third light on my wall in my house to get it to do it. Couldn't from the hallway light, not from the kitchen light, but from my living room light it came up easily. At a specific angle. This is really lame, on a camera at this price point. However, basically having a camera as good as the D4 or D4s for $2300 I think I will keep it, even though it is still under the 30 day Adorama warranty. I'm guessing on average I might see the effect 1 in 2,000 photos or so. Because the few hundred I have taken so far I don't see it at all. I had a D600 with oil spots, and I never noticed it after taking about 30,000 photos until I started doing real estate photography.
I called Nikon. The tech wanted me to reset my camera and try a bunch of stupid things. I told him it's not a setting that's making it do it. I tried different apertures, shutter speeds, no flash, etc.
Since it only did it in my living room with the lights in there I am guessing many of you doing the test who don't see the issue actually do still have it. I couldn't replicate it anywhere but my living room, and there I seen it in like 5 seconds.
