#3. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 1 Fri 29-Oct-10 12:02 AM by MstrBones
>I'm thinking the noise-reduction algorithm in the EXPEED2 processor has become better
Possibly, though most high ISO images can be made to look better if shot RAW and post processed for noise reduction where you, as the editor, can trade detail for NR. I find in-camera settings to be rather coarse.
DXO has written some interesting stuff on the different generations of denoising algorithms and how one can extract a better image today from and older RAW image than they could, say, 5 years ago. Its a good argument for shooting RAW or RAW+Jpeg.
As far as the sensors go, it appears that the D7000 is somewhat finer grained in its noise, but my suspicion is it is just high resolution and our 96 dpi screens are sort of lying to us about 100% resolution viewing of these images.
#4. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 0
Imaging Resource has the RAW version of the images posted above. I updated NX 2 this morning to 2.2.6 and pulled down a sampling of the images.
I have to say, and this means eating my earlier words, that the D7000 is pretty impressive. Definitely a step above the D300 family and even the D90 with its enhanced sensor.
What is interesting with the RAW images is being able to tweak the noise profiles and sharpening.
I can't post what I did, since the images belong to Imaging Resource, but one can do this themselves if they update to NX2 2.2.6.
The images I posted the links to at the beginning of this thread have much higher chroma noise than I see in the RAW version/NX2, (I turned off any form of noise reduction to view). I think this gets back to Nikon knowing their sensor better than anyone else.
#6. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 5
St Petersburg, RU
There is talk on other forums about how ViewNX converts the NEF files of the D7000 differently. After seeing the samples on IR, I think that might be true. One person who had LR3 with ACR and ViewNX posted the same image series and there was a big difference between the results. It looks like the version of ViewNX found on the CD that came with the D7000 is optimized for the D7000, possible a little NR and sharpening in base default settings but detail got better instead of dulling like NR normally does. The download version of ViewNX did not show the difference, however, according to two posters who tried both. The posted images looked very close to a D700 image of the same scene but the ACR rendered NEF looked a full stop lower than the D700 at 12k. Even a full stop would be very welcome and place it at the top of the DX heap. Someone with an extra D7000 what to loan it to me for tests.....I promise to give it back....someday;>) Stan St Petersburg Russia
My D7000 is coming into the local Camera shop Monday. If their shipment includes a second one, do you want me to get it for you or will the one you ordered arrive sooner? I do not know what to do with your rupples, perhaps you could pay in kugerrands?
#8. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 0 Mon 01-Nov-10 01:06 PM by MstrBones
I had an interesting experience this weekend with NX2 2.2.6. I took some older high ISO images from my D70s and D200 and reprocessed them.
I also shot a load of images at a saturday evening Halloween costume party with my D200/SB600 and processed the ones I liked yesterday. All were shot at ISO 1600.
In a nutshell, all the images exhibit lower visible noise, I would say nearly a full stop's worth from an appearance perspective.
It appears there is a change in 2.2.6 from 2.2.5 in the denoising algorithm and when it is applied. I can SEE the difference comparing older TIFF files, (I always create a 16 bit TIFF from my RAW files and then print it from Photoshop).
Which gets us back to the difference between the way that the sample images look when viewed with noise reduction turned off in NX2 for a D7000 RAW image. It is clearly being cleaned up when compared to the images that Imaging Resource posted as unprocessed jpegs.
I am wondering if anyone else has observed this. I am also wondering about the results people are talking about compared to their older cameras. I would be curious to see what D90 owners see before/after an upgrade.
#12. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 7
St Petersburg, RU
Hi Roger Thank you for the offer. I live on two currencies, dollars and rubles, and use which ever is stronger at the time. As it turns out, my mother is insistent on my coming back to the States before the holidays, maybe in 3 weeks so if there are D7000s in the stores I might have an excuse to get one. Unfortunately the air fares are getting higher so a slight will be higher than a new camera.
All the news of this camera is exciting but I really get by nicely with my current set up, a D90, grip, a few SB900s and some nice glass. I use flash most of the time so some of the benefit of the D7000 will be muted by the flash. My GF's friend asked to buy my D90 if I get a new camera. Tempting, but only if a DB-D11 is available at the same time. I am personally, quite happy about the 12mpx so raw files are reasonable in size. The improved AF would be the most welcome addition but I would not turn down an offer to have another stop + in high ISO performance if it was thrown in on the deal. The AF fine tune is nice but I've never had a AF misalignment problem with my lenses that was not user error. My next planned visit back after this upcoming one I just found out about, is March 2011 so that gives some time to save for a camera body only plus grip and a 24-70. Considering that my business has no income but full expenses from October through mid spring "saving" will consist of cutting out dinners out and the more serious clubbing. Luckily my new GF is a great cook who pampers me shamelessly;>) Stan St Petersburg Russia
#13. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 12 Mon 01-Nov-10 11:26 PM by KnightPhoto
For your shooting I would also factor in the D3S sensor. I know you were looking at it earlier and digressing, were Nikon to offer it in a D700 style body, you may find yourself wanting to give it serious attention.
Of course the 24-70 would give you great flexibility in this decision.
The good thing is that by March we may have some indication from Nikon as to which sensor will go into a D700 replacement.
#14. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 13
St Petersburg, RU
Hi Steve You are right, that upgrade has been in the back of my mind as an option all along. I got my glass D3s jar full of money but started tapping into it along the way; another SB900 for $685(ouch!), a 17-55, and a Sigma 50mm 1.5. I really do not need great reach so FX would not be out of the question at all. This next spring and summer will likely produce some surprises in new releases. I sure like the sound of the D7000 size body with a solid feel/grip however. Stan St Petersburg Russia
#15. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 12 Thu 04-Nov-10 02:25 AM by RRRoger
Monterey Bay, US
>Hi Roger >Thank you for the offer. I live on two currencies, dollars and >rubles, and use which ever is stronger at the time. As it >turns out, my mother is insistent on my coming back to the >States before the holidays, maybe in 3 weeks so if there are >D7000s in the stores I might have an excuse to get one. >Stan >St Petersburg Russia
Well, They only got one camera and it was a kit, which they broke for me. The body is very nice and solid to hold. Lots of good stuff included.
Downside: not very forgiving. The extra megapixels really show user error. You and I would be better off with a D3s. My D3 has a huge keeper rate. All I have to do is hold down the AF-On button and fire away.
Next day update: I took some pictures at Ben Lomond Park were I am doing some Landscaping. (Day job pays the bills and keeps me in shape). All the photos except the one into the sun came out extremely good. I will be testing the Video at our Church Sunday. Then I will be able to tell whether everything about the D7000 beats the D90 or not.
#16. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 15
St Petersburg, RU
Roger, you might have a good point, for events, the D3s might be the best compromise in resolution and shooting conditions. For a long time it has been apparent that my keeper rate in clubs and events was much higher than those of peers who had a lot more experience in such activities. They all use 7d's 5dII's. We both assumed the hi miss rate was the poor low light AF of those two cameras, which do well in good light. The general "missed" shots might be also because both of those are higher res cameras and conditions are just not well suited to such high res. I would imagine that under good conditions and in low light the D7000 is potentially a world beater in the DX sphere but will also require better technique to give images equal to their potential. I am particularly curious about the AF performance. I always use single point, center and recompose even in action shots because that is the most consistent and accurate on a D90. We all know how great the D3s is for tracking in all sorts of conditions. With more color information available to the CAM4800 from the new 2k RGB metering sensor, just how good is the 3D tracking? Let's see some shots with your D7000 of a cutting horse in full fury, that would be a great test; low light, dust, flying dirt, unpredictable direction and rate, blazing quickness, large surface of similar color that extends deep into the depth of field etc....That would be the ultimate test...not those 200mph stock cars or darting running backs that are more predictable and further away ;>) Stan St Petersburg Russia
#17. "RE: D7000 vs D90 test images" In response to Reply # 16
Monterey Bay, US
I would imagine that under >good conditions and in low light the D7000 is potentially a >world beater in the DX sphere but will also require better >technique to give images equal to their potential. >I am particularly curious about the AF performance. just how good is >the 3D tracking? Let's see some shots with your D7000 of a >cutting horse in full fury, that would be a great test; low >light, dust, flying dirt, unpredictable direction and rate, >blazing quickness, large surface of similar color that extends >deep into the depth of field etc....That would be the ultimate >test...not those 200mph stock cars or darting running backs >that are more predictable and further away ;>) >Stan >St Petersburg Russia
Many of us would be thrilled to test the D7000 on cutting horse photos. Best I am able to shoot is horse and rider doing a timed jump around in an unlit barn Saturday after next. I will be using an AFS Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 lens at ISO 6400 and center point.
Shooting thru dust seems to be the "greatest" test, as the AF seems to want to track those particles with a D3. Also cutting behind jumps can throw the AF off. Panning a 200 mph car is easier for me than a static subject without a tripod.
My limited testing has led me to believe the D7000 AF performance is way ahead of the 5D2. My action shot "keeper" rate is dismal with that camera.