I've had a D7000 for almost 2 years. I always read that the D7000 was a bit more advanced than the D90 since the 7000 was newer etc. So I picked up a used D90 recently to have as a back-up and was comparing images, and it seems the 90 is sharper in all of the ISO settings that I used. Can anyone shed any light here? In my test I used all the same body settings, same lense, tripod mounted, same distance, everything the same.
#2. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 1
Interesting post. When I swopped my D90 to the D7000 I immediately wanted my D90 back! I worked very hard to tame the D7000 to meet the IQ of the D90 and finally did. It much depends on what you are using the camera for. I used the D90 and now the D7000 for wildlife and birds in flight. It took me a long time to match the D90. I actually don't like the D7000 because of the steep learning curve caused me pain, that said it is still a fine camera and much applauded by others.
When I bought the D800 it was a transition from the D700 and it was a breeze with no regrets whatsoever and the D700 was until I changed the best ever camera I'd had. The D7000 now spends a lonely life with only occasional outings.
#3. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 2
My experience with going from the D90 to the D7000 is the opposite. The colors ,sharpness etc were much improved with the D7000. Grain was less with higher ISO . For me the D7000 is the APS equivalent of a D800. Both the the best in class.
#4. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 0
>So I picked up a used D90 recently to have as a >back-up and was comparing images, and it seems the 90 is >sharper in all of the ISO settings that I used. Can anyone >shed any light here? In my test I used all the same body >settings, same lense, tripod mounted, same distance, >everything the same.
The problem may be that you also used a relatively slow shutter speed. The greater pixel density of the D7000 sensor shows slight camera movements, shake, etc., as blur. The lower pixel density of the D90 is much more forgiving - unlike the D7000, the same slight camera movement doesn't always show up as visible blur in shots made with the D90.
The simple solution is to speed up your shutter whether you're shooting handheld or from a tripod. Do that and your D7000 technical image quality will suddenly start to look much better than the D90.
I have the feeling that many of us got used to unrealistically low shutter speeds and less than optimal handheld and tripod technique while using 6, 8, 10 and 12 megapixel cameras. We never could have gotten away with that back in the 35mm film days. But forgiving pixel densities and VR spoiled us to some extent. The new breed of higher resolution, high density sensors of 16mp or more demand better technique and faster shutter speeds.
#5. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 0
By all accounts and reviews the D7000 is more advanced than the D90. Will it take a better picture depends on the user. The D7000 requires better techniques since the resolution is greater which in turn shows mistakes clearer. Keep at it and you'll see how much the D7000 can really do. Good luck.
Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others. <><
#6. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 4
St Petersburg, RU
The shutter speed point is a good one. I got my first DSLR as a D90 when it came out and was very happy with the versatility after decades with film and got used to being able to shoot at lower SS than I ever was able to in film. The habit went with my to the D7000 and it took a good solid afternoon of experimenting before I realized shooting with film like speeds really made a difference. No question the D90 is a competent camera that hits a very comfortable and forgiving spot on the scale of skills required versus performance obtained, that allows or encourages less attention to the details of shooting. Another factor in apparent image quality is the D90 needed a little more sharpening to overcome its overly mild default settings. Everyone learned to boost sharpening and contrast in custom PC's. When the D7000 came along, the default settings were even less dramatic so the rear screan and the low res computer monitors did not show the increased data captured to its best advantage. Next in my Nikon NAS was the D800 but I was prepared with still faster shutter speeds, not by much but enough to make a visible difference. The result was a transition from D7000 habits to D800 habits took minutes. I still have not read the manual. Going from a D90 or point and shoot, which so many new users did, would have been even less encouraging than the easy transition from D7000, or D3x. Slowing down the picture taking, increasing the shutter speed a bit and tweaking your favorite PC will result in large gains in image quality. Stan St Petersburg Russia
#7. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 5 Thu 03-Jan-13 07:18 AM by richardd300
I would like to support what both Stan and Howard have said and although I was damning about the D7000 at the time, certainly the most important thing I learned was the upping of shutter speeds was vital to achieving success. This was even more important when capturing moving subjects. Many of the problems I encountered could have been eliminated if Nikon had produced a technical manual as they did with the D800.
As has been pointed out the learning from the D7000 set me in good stead for the D800.
#8. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 5
Rock Hill, US
Thank you folks for the replies and assistance. My test images were done with a 35mm f1.8 lense with both bodies settings the same (sharpness, contrast, etc.) tripod mounted. After tweaking the lens fine-tuning in the D7K, it seems to be coming around a bit. Now I will find myself checking every lens I mount for the ultimate focus with the fine-tuning feature. I would like to post my test images on here. Can anyone tell me how to resize small enough to post on the forum?
#9. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 4
Howard, I'd like to be respectfully contrary; my experience and knowledge of these matters pales in comparison to what you (and Stan & Richard) bring to this forum. However, consider the below shot from my gallery: taken with a D7000, handheld, 400mm, and 1/200th shutter speed. Clearly, VR did its job. Looking only at sharpness, it seems (to me) that this image is sharp.
Maybe I just got lucky. Maybe it's not as sharp as I think. Maybe VR explains everything - and maybe one lesson I can walk away with is that VR really is that important in my hands.
#10. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 9
Great image and believe you me I bring nothing compared to Stan and others to the table. I just had a hard journey, however the D7000 is capable of splendid images as posted here when the technique and conditions are correct.
#11. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 8
Much better qualified people to help on this but first you'll have to resize the image to <300KB, and longest dimension to 1200 pixels, and then save as a JPG. If you have a software (like LR4) that does the above it makes it much easier; if not, the contrast of the image often has me changing the KB and pixel size until it is accepted.
To post your image I have found it very easy if you'll put it in your Gallery by following those instructions, under actions on the top right, choose the file where you have the picture located and put it in your gallery. If the size, etc. is correct it will be entered into your gallery; then click on the picture and when it comes up, near the bottom you'll copy the information in the "For forum posts" section. This allows you to open a post and paste the file.
Another method is to click on "Post", fill in the title, type in the message and at the bottom you'll see an attachment window. Click here choose the file, browse to find the file, double click it (or open button), bottom left corner click on Upload. If the file is the right size it will appear in your post. Before posting, I'd suggest you preview it. Hope this is correct and good luck.
Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others. <><
#12. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 10 Thu 03-Jan-13 01:53 PM by agitater
My suggestion was mainly based on the observation that far too many contemporary amateur photographers have become overly reliant on VR/IS/OS/VC and as a result become disappointed when unusually low shutter speeds in average-to-poor light produce obviously soft photos. I fully agree that VR works very well, but your 1/200s shutter speed is fast enough for a sharp, handheld, high res capture. The shutter speeds that cause problems for many photographers shooting high density sensors are less than half of that and all too commonly used I think.
Turns out the OP is using a 35mm f/1.8 and is now tweaking the AF Fine Tune settings and I think also doing focus testing, so I'll wish him luck with that.
#13. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 12
<<My suggestion was mainly based on the observation that far too many contemporary amateur photographers have become overly reliant on VR/IS/OS/VC and as a result become disappointed when unusually low shutter speeds in average-to-poor light produce obviously soft photos.>>
Totally agreed and the higher shutter speeds helped me to largely eliminate soft images. That said, I also learned that inappropriate use of optical stabiliation ie. too high a shutter speed when hand held can be a real problem as the stabalisation gets confused. Something else I learned from Thom Hogan's report on VR.
<<Turns out the OP is using a 35mm f/1.8 and is now tweaking the AF Fine Tune settings and I think also doing focus testing, so I'll wish him luck with that.>>
#14. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 9
St Petersburg, RU
We do not disagree at all Bob, 1/200 with VR at f/5.6 and a 35mm field of view of 600mm hand held shows two things in that fine shot, that VR really works by several stops and you have learned some pretty darn good holding technique. Not many of us would have gotten that shot so devoid of motion blur. Stan St Petersburg Russia
#16. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 12
> The shutter speeds that >cause problems for many photographers shooting high density >sensors are less than half of that and all too commonly used I >think. > >Turns out the OP is using a 35mm f/1.8 and is now tweaking the >AF Fine Tune settings and I think also doing focus testing, so >I'll wish him luck with that. >
Points taken. Maybe I've learned more than I thought.
#17. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 8
>Thank you folks for the replies and assistance. My test >images were done with a 35mm f1.8 lense with both bodies >settings the same (sharpness, contrast, etc.) tripod mounted.
Same settings does not mean same end results when comparing different bodies and this is an area you can also be having a bit of issue with. I came up from a D80 to the D7000 and found that I needed a much higher sharpening setting with the D7000 than I was satisfied with on the D80.
Nikon tweaks each successive new model and as such the same Picture Control settings you used prior with an older model may not give the same acceptable results with the newer one.
There are tons of threads dealing with sharpness and AF-fine tuning with its plus and minuses. As such I am going to refrain from posting my thoughts about it here.
#18. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 17
+1 to that. and to increasing shutter speed. I raised the sharpening level in Post from what I used on previous cameras and suddenly my D7K images (shot in raw) started to look like I expected them to. It also helps to use a higher sharpening value in camera if you check image sharpness on the rear lcd. Nikon software will recognize the higher sharpening value, so your images shouldn't look soft on the monitor, but you still need to sharpen in post processing to achieve optimum sharpness. The D7K has a pretty steep learning curve, but once you figure it out, the camera will produce great images.
#21. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 20
Apologies Pete, you are correct. I was not thinking of Capture NX2, but Adobe and other software suites. I do use Capture NX2, but never for first stage post processing, I use Lightroom 4. Personally, I cannot think of a reason to in-camera sharpen as it is pretty uncontrollable. It's only advantage, in my view, is that it is useful when examining the NEF jpeg thumbnail in the camera display. Each to their own technique though
#24. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 22
Just out of curiosity guys when you are mentioning use a higher shutter spped than normal for the D7K to improve your shots, how do you go about that if using the metering as a guide to get the right exposure, do you just underexpose for one stop (im guessing the little dot on the meter screen) as a general rule of thumb???
#25. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 24
St Petersburg, RU
I am not sure what you are asking. If, for a desired exposure level, shutter speed is increased, the two remaining components of exposure can be used to compensate. Either increase the light sensitivity(ISO) or increase the size of the opening in the lenses to allow more light to strike the sensor, or both. What dot are you referring to? When shooting in manual mode you have manual control of all 3 of the base elements of exposure and any changes made will reflect on the light meter display in at the bottom mid right portion of the viewfinder. In Aperture or Shutter priority modes plus any of the Auto or Scene modes the meter disappears but the shutter speed, ISO(if selected to display) and aperture are displayed. For example, if you are in Aperture priority mode and have set the aperture to f/4 and ISO is 400, the speed will be adjusted by the camera to expose well for the scene light level it is seeing. If the calculated shutter speed is too low for a handheld shot, you have a number of choices; use a tripod, increase ISO to have the camera recalculate a new, faster shutter speed or change the aperture to a smaller number(larger opening), say f/2.8.
#29. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 26
>All the modern nikons come from the factory set soft ..you >need to set the sharpness at +9 and contrast at -1
Not all; maybe not even most. I'm jumping to Nikon's defense here.
After having gone through 16 Nikon digital SLR bodies over the years, I've only encountered three that needed a basic sharpness or contrast tweak to get cleaner JPG files. My D70 and D70s produced superb JPG files. A backup D40 and D60 and another D60 used by my wife produced remarkable JPG files. My D300 and D300s both needed a slight sharpening increase (+1 over the default setting), and a second D7000 needed a sharpening and contrast tweak (+1 over each of the default settings). Everything else has also produced sharp photos (JPG and NEF) right out of their boxes: D200, D700 (x2), first D7000, D800, D3, D3s.
I think it's obvious that variations in factory calibrations exist. But I don't think that Nikon production and testing specs are set up to package bodies that produce soft images.
Then again, it depends on what you define as a soft image. Nikon has developed and promoted its own particular look, and it's certainly easily identifiable and notably different from the Canon look (which many feel is crisper in some respects). Lab analysis of high resolution detail of Nikon and Canon test shots though, reveal more about the processing approach programmed into internal camera image data processing system, sharpening philosophies related to that, and the calibration of the monitors used to view photos afterward, than it does about any material differences in image sharpness.
But even if it has nothing to do with comparisons with other camera makers, sharpness is still too often a matter of perception. Could be too that your visual acuity and perception of edge definition and fine detail is just really, really good and you're simply a better observer who exceeds the averaged acuity target that Nikon uses during factory calibration. I have a good friend with vision like that - I'm envious. I guess it wouldn't hurt some of the camera and lens makers one bit to improve the calibration and testing standards they're using.
#31. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 30
I'm going to ask that you stop claiming that setting sharpness to +9 is universally necessary - i's not. Making this same assertion in so many threads, several of them about unrelated probloems, is not really helping our membership.
#32. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 30
>I got bored half way through your post
. . . thank you.
>But I am talking >modern nikons not old D40 stuff
I mentioned the D40 . . . and the D800 and many camera models in between. The D40 though, is a camera produced in 2006 originally. Definitely modern, even by digital photography standards. Of course I agree that a 5 year old might think that 2006 is ancient history today since it arrived before he was born. I get that.
>and trying to help a guy >looking for a reason ..he checks it out on both cameras and >comes to a conclusion....
The problem with brevity online is that it often results in too little information and the concomittant poor understanding of needs. So people respond - it's a discussion and opinion forum after all - based on the information provided. Thank you for this additional bit of information. I do apologize for offering any opinion or thoughts which bored you. It was only my intention to offer suggestions.
Then again of course, the degree to which one responds to a post by a relative newcomer to any forum should, in the main it can be argued, perforce take into account some range of possibilities. For many who participated lightly on Nikonians, early on in their interest in this forum and site, brevity ruled the day until they became more familiar with the pace, rhythms and expectations, contextually, in a wide range of discussion topics.
Nonetheless, brevity, even for relative newcomers to any particular forum, is not necessarily a virtue. Especially at Nikonians, brevity very often masks important detail which makes it easier for contributing members to write the most helpful sorts of posts. Brevity for its own sake, tends also to belie true intent - perhaps inadvertently - and consequently reveals detail much later which could have saved a lot of excess writing and posting by members earlier in a thread.
There is no question though that participation, in and of itself, unavoidably and necessarily produces content that is of value to someone, with emphasis, though sometimes not to the original poster or even a replier in the midst of a particular thread. People, Nikonians members derive benefits from time to time from threads in which they originally took only a passing interest. But some extended or somewhat detailed intramural part of the thread revealed a fact or thought or approach or idea that was novel or interesting or simply factually valuable. Brevity eliminates much of that (if not all of it).
Brevity for its own sake can, in my opinion, on occasion be balefully self-centred (apologies for the British spelling) because it eschews participation by anyone with some general as well as specific thoughts to offer on a particular matter. Some will login to ask a question or offer an opinion, brevity at the fore, and then resist even the slightest conversation that departs from the point or which - because of the minor challenge of the original question in the first place - voices an alternative opinion.
The brevity of the original poster is put to the test at that point, because the poster leaves his point of brevity to chastise a contrary opinion or mete out bits of additional information or otherwise reveal that he or she has failed to absorb the mood and positive environment of the Nikonians forum, thereby placing himself or herself in an unenviably tenuous position of fractious visibility.
Brevity has its virtues certainly. It would seem oddly boring, though, to insist on brevity in a discussion forum. By its fundamental definition in any circumstance, a photography discussion forum is a place in which opinions, facts, problem solving technical matters and creative matters are discussed. The boredom inflicted by strict brevity - at its fundament invariably too little information - seems oddly impractical and pointless and largely counterproductive.
I hope this brief treatise is not unwarranted or otherwise met with cries of "What's all this ruckus!?" Of course I would suggest to anyone who finds the expression of heartfelt opinion to be a boring insinuation or an opinionated challenge offered solely for what inherent merit it may possess to simply avoid participation in things such as discussions in which the possibility that some participant, lurker or casual observer might be bold enough to disturb brevity by offering his own thoughts on a matter brought to hand. XOXOXO
#33. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 28
I bought 3 recently and all were set at sharpness -1..even the rockwell says +6
Well that's not really worth much, dear Ken does have a habit of making strange statements! I cannot for the world believe that Nikon allows an out of camera image to be soft out of camera. That said Thom Hogan, a good reliable source, does recommend applying a little jpg sharpening, but only when using RAW, so the camera LCD screen jpg image is sharper.
#34. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 32
yes our ken is a bit extreeme and of course tom is very reliable but if you are using jpeg rather than raw and dont want to spend the time sharpening 1000 images when you come from a wedding then the in camera sharpening is the way to go ...
As far as the OP is concerned he needs both cameras on the same settings and sharpness/contrast and back focus are all part of that comparison....
#35. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 34
<<ps did not even read the long last post....>>
Howard benefits from much experience in Nikon dSLR's, far more than I have gained after a mere 5 Nikon bodies. If there's one thing I've learned after my time with Nikonians is to listen to those wiser and more knowledgeable than myself.
#36. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 34
>As far as the OP is concerned he needs both cameras on the >same settings and sharpness/contrast and back focus are all >part of that comparison....
As I stated before, same settings between different generation bodies does not necessarily equate to same end result.
For example Thom Hogan suggest Nikon tweaked the Bayer Filter array in the D7000 which in itself would require different handling. I would also think the pixel density difference would require a different sharpening routine.
Also the D7000 uses the Expeed 2 were as the D90 uses Expeed.
I would think it best to set each camera individually to achieve the best results for that model and stop comparing the two.
#37. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 36
I think its quite reasonable to expect the 7000 to be better than the 90 and yes each should be tuned to give the best picture ...if thats RAW after manipulaton or large Jpeg with in camera adjustment its up to the OP to deciede............
#38. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 30
>I got bored half way through your post But I am talking >modern nikons not old D40 stuff and trying to help a guy >looking for a reason ..he checks it out on both cameras and >comes to a conclusion....
#39. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 25
>I am not sure what you are asking. If, for a desired exposure >level, shutter speed is increased, the two remaining >components of exposure can be used to compensate. Either >increase the light sensitivity(ISO) or increase the size of >the opening in the lenses to allow more light to strike the >sensor, or both. >What dot are you referring to? When shooting in manual mode >you have manual control of all 3 of the base elements of >exposure and any changes made will reflect on the light meter >display in at the bottom mid right portion of the viewfinder. >In Aperture or Shutter priority modes plus any of the Auto or >Scene modes the meter disappears but the shutter speed, ISO(if >selected to display) and aperture are displayed. >For example, if you are in Aperture priority mode and have set >the aperture to f/4 and ISO is 400, the speed will be adjusted >by the camera to expose well for the scene light level it is >seeing. If the calculated shutter speed is too low for a >handheld shot, you have a number of choices; use a tripod, >increase ISO to have the camera recalculate a new, faster >shutter speed or change the aperture to a smaller >number(larger opening), say f/2.8. > >Stan >St Petersburg Russia
Sorry I should have been more specific with my question.. Thanks for the response regarding how to adjust the parameters to have a good exposure, im still finding my way around manual mode now and just learning to use the l;ight meter to get the right exposure Few people above have mentioned using a higher shutter speed than NORMAL to get better results from the D7000 Is there a set minimum shutter speed you need to be above for the D7K to prevent blur during hand held shots???? cheers
#40. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 39
I for one have been shouting high shutter speeds from the roof tops
All the difficulties I had mirrored everyone else's problems with achieving sharp images. The answer is, as stated, higher shutter speeds. My problems spoilt my time with my D7K and still now the legacy of a torturous journey remains. Very frustrating as the answer was simple really.
#41. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 39 Mon 04-Feb-13 01:11 PM by agitater
>Few people above have mentioned using a higher shutter speed >than NORMAL to get better results from the D7000 >Is there a set minimum shutter speed you need to be above for >the D7K to prevent blur during hand held shots????
Many Nikonians members have posted in this forum and others, over the past couple of years, about the quite common need to increase typical shuttter speed when shooting the higher resolution sensors.
There is no set minimum. It depends partly on how good the photographer's handheld shooting technique happens to be. But it's easy to find out what works best for you. Pick a few of your favorite subjects, set the camera to shutter priority, 1/125s, start shooting, and then increase your shutter speed as you make more and more shots. Examine the shots at home on a 15" or larger monitor. Judge for yourself which shutter speeds helped make the sharpest shots.
Practice good handheld technique first and foremost - elbows against your sides, straight back and neck, balanced with feet apart, right hand comfortably gripping the camera but not squeezing it, left hand cupping bottom of camera body and lens barrel, press down only the shutter button with one finger as opposed to pressing down the whole camera slightly (a common cause of blurry shots). Take a breath, exhale, stop, shoot. Breathing movement is another common cause of blurry shots.
I know at least two D7000 and D800 shooters whose handheld technique is so solid that they only rarely have to increase shutter speed higher than what they used to get razor sharp shots with lower resolution cameras. Wish I could say the same for myself. Both shooters have excellent handheld technique.
#42. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 31
Quote not really helping our membership. of course its not as all of them know already about the ability to sharpen the image (not) If sharpening is required to make a 3 inch screen "better" then you certainly need it if you are into jpegs and dont want to sharpen hundreds of photos individually ....let the member make his own mind up ....
and if this is being pointed out to new owners then its valid
#43. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 42
>....let the member make his own mind up ....
That is exactly what I'm trying to achieve.
Your suggestion to always set in-camera sharpening to the maximum value (9) when shooting JPEGs is simply not the right solution for every camera, photographer and situation. I'm glad it works for you.
My advice to members is to work out what sharpening regime suits them best, and beware of those who think there is only one way to do it.
#44. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 42
St Petersburg, RU
Brian was making the reference to a value that is obviously too high for any good to result if your advice is followed. Strong artifacts and halos will ruin the image with that much sharpening.
There is a general consensus that a little sharpening is useful in creating an impression of finer detail and edge sharpness on the D7000, +1 or maybe +2, when viewing the rear display or JPGs on a computer screen. Few people have complained of lacking sharpness at those values.
So Brian's remark was right on point, it is not helpful to tell those who are new to the camera to use values that will result in poorer images than if they did no adjustments. Since each new model has come out, there are initial problems encountered with applying techniques and habits that were learned to improve images on prior models. A few new rules of thumb or habits will have to be learned. Brian has been through the initial learning curve with new owners for many models so he speaks from experience from helping thousands of people adapt to their new cameras.
Adaptability is probably the most useful personal trait in photography. It allows habits that do not apply any longer to be dropped and new beneficial habits to be absorbed. Some habits are model related and others are basic photographic principle based. Some early DSLRs lulled people into sloppy use, that they had to master in film. For example, film required higher shutter speeds generally than what we could get by with with D80s or D90s which are very forgiving cameras. The Matrix metering got many people thinking that active evaluation of the tone range of a scene was not needed anymore. The D7000 quickly reminded those who remembered film habits to increase shutter speed over what they were in the habit of using with lower res early digital cameras. Stan St Petersburg Russia
#46. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 45
>well if thats the case km8xz then I have 30000 images this >year all rubbish and covered in articacts ...funny my >customers are very happy and the albums printed by acerboni >are fine .... > >Test it out dont assume
Tested it. Set sharpening to +9. Results are awful. Severely oversharpened with all the artifacting and ugly effects typical of oversharpening. Fine detail loss as well. Like to see some of your heavily in-camera +9 sharpened JPG files for comparison.
#47. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 45
I'm sorry, but although you have had success in selling images, I do not agree with your blanket philosophy on sharpening and with the greatest respect few would.
Far better to take in RAW, any sharpening can be achieved post processing. Stan is absolutely correct and halo's and artifacts can be the demise of a good image.
As an example last week I was punished in a society photo competition for over sharpening as the judge used a loupe to examine close up detail and that was my loss. It was an old image I took at least 5 years ago and when I was naive about the perils of sharpening.
Carry on as you see fit and you will be respected for it, but others be warned of the unwanted effects.
#49. "RE: Comparing images : D7000 & D90" In response to Reply # 47
Far be it from I to criticize, but looking at Steve's site and although the majority of the gallery contain excellent images, some B&W and colour images do suffer with obvious over-sharpening. When switching from image to image, those over sharpened jump out at me and required a longer viewing distance to overcome this.
Personally, please may I say that I think this issue of sharpening has run its course. Although the original post has got life in it perhaps