Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Printer-friendly copy Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #12038
View in linear mode

Subject: "Disappointing test results for jpeg performance publish..." Previous topic | Next topic
Davidpeter1 Silver Member Nikonian since 07th Mar 2004Sat 17-Sep-11 05:54 PM
556 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"


Cardiff, GB
          

The October 2011 issue of a well known UK photography magazine has done a comparison of the jpeg images produced by four current similar level cameras, the D7000, Canon 600D, a Sony, and a Pentax. The D7000 outperformed the others in a low light conditions, but for more normal conditions, in daylight outdoors, it came bottom of the pile by some way with overexposure of between half and a whole stop, and yellow colour casts, general inconsistancy.

The camera was praised for low noise, but condemned for not getting the basics of exposure right. The result was that when all the scores were totalled, the Nikon was bottom, Sony was well received for best tonal range, and the Canon was judged to be the best overall. This even surprised the team doing the tests. I think the Nikon was also the most expensive of the cameras.

Another October magazine has done a full test on the D5100, and mentions that it doesnt suffer from the exposure problems of the D7000.

Now, all this has got me concerned. I've got a D200 and have been watching for a sensible replacement for a long time, and had hoped that the D7000 was going to be the one. I'm not too worried that it doesn't have the swing out screen of the D5100, although it would have been nice, but at least it can focus with all my older lenses. But that's no good if it's picture quality is beaten by the offerings of all the other brands, and I have to pay more for the privelidge.

So, can anyone tell me whether there is a bit of a problem with the D7000 exposure or am I just being spooked by something that isn't causing trouble for everyday users?
thanks

David.

Cardiff,Britain.

BE A BLOOD + BONE MARROW DONOR TO FIGHT CANCER, YOU MAY SAVE A LIFE.
http://www.nikonians-images.com/galleries/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=16427

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
briantilley Moderator
17th Sep 2011
1
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
Winterfell Silver Member
17th Sep 2011
2
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
TheDraftsman
17th Sep 2011
3
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
agitater Gold Member
17th Sep 2011
4
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
dm1dave Administrator
18th Sep 2011
5
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
JosephK Silver Member
18th Sep 2011
6
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
dm1dave Administrator
18th Sep 2011
7
     Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
Davidpeter1 Silver Member
18th Sep 2011
10
          Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
J_Harris Silver Member
18th Sep 2011
11
               Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
dm1dave Administrator
20th Sep 2011
19
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
Davidpeter1 Silver Member
18th Sep 2011
13
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
Clint S Silver Member
18th Sep 2011
8
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
luckyphoto Silver Member
18th Sep 2011
9
     Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
billD80 Silver Member
18th Sep 2011
12
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
jamtins Silver Member
19th Sep 2011
14
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
jules
19th Sep 2011
15
     Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
Davidpeter1 Silver Member
19th Sep 2011
16
          Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
jules
19th Sep 2011
17
          Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
dm1dave Administrator
19th Sep 2011
18
               Reply message RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance pub...
jules
20th Sep 2011
20
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world...
km6xz Moderator
20th Sep 2011
21
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world...
jules
20th Sep 2011
22
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world...
carpemoment
20th Sep 2011
23
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world...
jules
20th Sep 2011
24
Reply message RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world...
agitater Gold Member
20th Sep 2011
25
Reply message RE:Review the reviewer?
Len Shepherd Gold Member
21st Sep 2011
26
Reply message RE:Review the reviewer?
jules
21st Sep 2011
27

briantilley Moderator Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003Sat 17-Sep-11 06:16 PM
28751 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#1. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 0


Paignton, GB
          

>So, can anyone tell me whether there is a bit of a problem
>with the D7000 exposure or am I just being spooked by
>something that isn't causing trouble for everyday users?

No, there isn't, and yes, you are

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Winterfell Silver Member Nikonian since 21st Mar 2009Sat 17-Sep-11 08:52 PM
35 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 1


Roseville, US
          

The D7000s default jpeg settings are tuned to be more neutral, where the D5100 is tuned for punchy, sharp jpegs straight out of camera. The good news is the jpeg settings are completely adjustable.


For the best color output with the D7000, shoot in RAW and edit in the post-processing software of your choice. The D7000 has world class dynamic range.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
TheDraftsman Registered since 20th Jan 2011Sat 17-Sep-11 11:11 PM
97 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 2
Sat 17-Sep-11 11:20 PM by TheDraftsman

middlesex, US
          

I just bought my wife's D7000 off of her this weekend since she decided it was too much camera for her. Keep in mind I do shoot mostly RAW but I also shoot jpegs too. After two days with it, I can tell you first hand, there is a lot of yellow contrast in the white balance settings as far as cloudy, shade, direct sunlight, and incandecent "out of the box" settings. Using Auto WB changed everything and was more accurate in just about everthing I shot. So far, I customized the incan setting but I never seen a camera do so poorly with its incan and direct sunlight WB settings. Lots of green and yellow.

As far as the over exposure I saw that also especially with Neutral setting and Auto WB. I fixed that with customizing my settings in both Standard and Neutral with turning up the contrast and -1 in brightness. dprevirew even noted the D7000 as overly bright in most shooting.

On top of that I learned coming from my D90, if you are going to be a jpeg shooter, you need to turn up the sharpeness in Standard and Neutral and stay out of the Vivid setting.

My point in this reply is that the reviewers know the D7000 is the better camera but they constantly test a camera with its out of the box settings and looking only at what a camera does with the jpegs. But the bad WB and sharpness settings out of the box is Nikons fault and not the cameras.

Visit Current D90 Set-up.


http://fototime.com/{04CF383D-D221-4184-A88C-5F1B6AFC4AE4}/origpict/proudownerfinal.png

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Sat 17-Sep-11 11:33 PM
3979 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 1
Sat 17-Sep-11 11:34 PM by agitater

Toronto, CA
          

What Brian said . . .

These sorts of so-called camera 'tests' are little more than filler articles. While there are certainly measurable differences between the JPG files produced by each camera, remember that all JPG files are not supposed to look alike from camera maker to camera maker. Nikon has always had its own look. Canon has always had its own look, which is different from Nikon's look. Olympus has always had its own look which is different from both Nikon and Canon - and so on. In addition to all that, because individual camera makers believe their own look is best, the camera maker's individually and uniquely program their respective picture controls. It is exceedingly difficult to make a JPG shot with a Canon DSLR look exactly like a JPG shot with a Nikon DSLR.

Aside from all that, there is no international standard JPG look by which all other JPG images are measured.

As I said, these sorts of comparison 'tests' are nothing more than magazine filler. The articles are all written to seem technically important, but they're meaningless in practice. For the record too, I personally don't pay attention to articles like this even when Nikon ends up on top. To read some of the tests in the mags and online you'd actually think sometimes that Nikon or Canon or Pentax or Olympus or Samsung or Panasonic or Sony (depending on the mag, blog and writer/reviewer) actually generate bad JPG image files. It's nonsense - all of the cameras produce eminently usable JPG files bar none. That some cameras need to be adjusted in order to optimize the appearance of JPG files to suit an individual's (or a reviewer's) preference is the reason Nikon, Canon, Sony and all the others give us all those picture controls in the first place for pete's sake.

The reviewer who laments, midway through a comparison piece, that one camera overexposes and requires -0.07 eV (or whatever) in order to generate a satisfactory histogram in some light, is the same reviewer who lauds some other camera's fine control over exposure later on in the same article. It's idiotic and it's always been this way. A Canon-centric reviewer unavoidably adds selection or preference bias to his conclusions. A Nikon-centric reviewer unavoidably adds preference or selection bias to his conclusions.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Sun 18-Sep-11 01:15 AM
11303 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 0
Sun 18-Sep-11 03:33 AM by dm1dave

Lowden, US
          

As already stated there is no problem with the D7000’s exposure.

Take a look at Thom Hogan’s D7000 review scroll down to Metering System. He discusses internet comments about overexposure and offers a pretty good explanation of what is really going on.

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.


Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
JosephK Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his excellent and frequent contributions and sharing his in-depth knowledge and experience with the community in the Nikonians spirit. Nikonian since 17th Apr 2006Sun 18-Sep-11 02:03 AM
4177 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#6. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 5


Seattle, WA, US
          

Link correction to Thom's D7000 review:
http://www.bythom.com/nikond7000review.htm

---------+---------+---------+---------+
Joseph K
Seattle, WA, USA

D200, 17-55mm f/2.8 DX, VR 70-200mm f/2.8 II, 50mm f/1.4 D,
18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 DX, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 ED, D70S

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Sun 18-Sep-11 03:34 AM
11303 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#7. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 6


Lowden, US
          

Thanks for that link correction.

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.


Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Davidpeter1 Silver Member Nikonian since 07th Mar 2004Sun 18-Sep-11 05:15 PM
556 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#10. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 7


Cardiff, GB
          

thanks everyone for the replies. Having read them, I am reassured, particularly by Welsh Brian and the Thom Hogan article. My conclusion is that as the camera develops from pinhole to the latest thing, we need to amend the sophistication of our approach to getting the camera ready to press the button. I remember initial disappointment in results when I changed from Praktica PLC2 to Nikon FE+50/1.4 - the vastly superior camera was capable of producing inferior results if I took it's quality for granted.

I think I would be happy again to buy a D7000, and be confident that I would be able to get the improvement in image quality over that of the D200 that I am seeking. Frames per second and speed of AF is not really of interest to me, it's the picture quality of something that doesn't move much that is my real concern, and I want to make sure that when I change gear, the stuff I buy really delivers a lot of "bang for the buck" in that department above all others.

Nevertheless, there are enough warnings in Hogan's article, some of the replies above, and in those magazine stuffers, to suggest that there are things about this camera that actually NEED adjusting before going into action against a sunlit church and landscape, and it's more than just a matter of personal preferences. I imagine there may well be the same opportunities to adjust the settings of the rival cameras, so perhaps a better test would be one where all the cameras had been fiddled with, but I think that would make an objective measurable test more difficult to achieve than a straight out of the box comparison.

I suppose that when we bought our car we could have taken it straight from the show room to a mechanic to tune it up, alter this and that and squeeze every last bit of potential out of it's great big engine, but actually, we just turned the key and cruised home in luxury without worrying about it. It looks like I'll have to lift the bonnet (hood) on the D7000 before I turn the key.

David.

Cardiff,Britain.

BE A BLOOD + BONE MARROW DONOR TO FIGHT CANCER, YOU MAY SAVE A LIFE.
http://www.nikonians-images.com/galleries/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=16427

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
J_Harris Silver Member Nikonian since 29th Mar 2011Sun 18-Sep-11 05:45 PM
664 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#11. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 10
Tue 20-Sep-11 05:21 PM by J_Harris

US
          

/

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Tue 20-Sep-11 03:11 AM
11303 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#19. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 11


Lowden, US
          

Hi Jerry,

Sorry your question got lost in this quick moving thread.

I am pretty sure you wanted to know... How much the other manufactures cameras needed to be "fiddled with" by users?

The amount of adjustment required from default settings is more often than not a matter of personal taste.

I think it is safe to say that any individual is just as likely to need to changes default settings no matter what brand of camera system they choose. While there are countless users out there who shoot their cameras using out of the box settings there are just as many (and at the D7000 level camera probably more) who will make adjustments to fit their shooting style and subjects.

The D7000 and its Cannon, Sony, etc. counterparts are marketed to advanced users. The manufactures expect this level of user will want to take control and adjust the camera to suit their needs and vision.

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.


Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Davidpeter1 Silver Member Nikonian since 07th Mar 2004Sun 18-Sep-11 09:22 PM
556 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#13. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 5


Cardiff, GB
          

I've just seen your pictures, that's the best evidence that what you say is right, well done!

David.

Cardiff,Britain.

BE A BLOOD + BONE MARROW DONOR TO FIGHT CANCER, YOU MAY SAVE A LIFE.
http://www.nikonians-images.com/galleries/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=16427

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Clint S Silver Member Nikonian since 02nd Jan 2011Sun 18-Sep-11 03:42 AM
445 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#8. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 0


Chula Vista, US
          

There is no problem the D7000 exposure and you are being spooked.

The D7000, with default settings, does produce brighter images than many other cameras, but not overexposed. I have not seen any yellow cast in my images.

The camera is more accurate in how it meters than others cameras and can be significantly different than other cameras.

Visit my Nikonians gallery - my Spare Time gallery

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
luckyphoto Silver Member Nikonian since 27th Dec 2010Sun 18-Sep-11 12:12 PM
743 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#9. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 8


Port Charlotte, US
          

To put it another way, the original magazine article was looking at the best out of the box "point and shoot" camera. That's not the D7000.

Hunters will tell you that you don't take a brand new rifle and scope out of the box and go hunting. You have to "sight-in" the scope at the range first. Hunters bypassing this step usually go hungry!

The article's credibility was significantly tarnished when they measured the quality and performance of the camera not on its capabilities, but on its initial settings.

Similar to measuring the value of a gift based on the bow and wrapping paper it was wrapped in.

Larry

"Red is gray and yellow white, but we decide which is right
....and which is an illusion"

Moody Blues - Nights in White Satin

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Sun 18-Sep-11 07:05 PM
2141 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#12. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 9


US
          

>The article's credibility was significantly tarnished when
>they measured the quality and performance of the camera not on
>its capabilities, but on its initial settings.

I, for one, think Nikon intended the D7000 for an advanced user, perhaps one in the market for a D400... I fit that bill to a 't'.

The factory sharpening setting for the D7000 is VERY conservative (and this is something you'd do deliberately for a user you anticipate does significant PP, not someone happy with JPEGs right out of the box.)

When it's all said and done, when it comes to image quality, if the end user can't get a D7000 to perform competitively with ANY DSLR currently available, it's not because of the camera...

Personally, I question reviews that seem not to appreciate the deeper aspects of a given design, and I remember feeling this way when Olympus was putting out cameras like the OM-2/OM-4 series.

These were tremendous machines, but not as instantly appreciated by the Canon AE-1 crowd. Of course, Canon had a big advertizing footprint...

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

jamtins Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd May 2011Mon 19-Sep-11 12:10 AM
87 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#14. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 0


Meadow Heights, AU
          

I haven't seen the article, so can't comment on its methodology or its conclusions.

I teach photography, and see a range of cameras in various situations used by beginners to skilled photographers. The end results don't seem to me to show one is any better than the other.
I have used a variety of Nikon DSLRs including the D200. I traded our last d200 on a D7000 as soon as it came out. Long before the reviews, both good and bad.
Mostly because I wanted to see how the latest higher ISO works. And I shot nature now with it at 800, and occasionally 1600.

It seems to me the issue of "D7000 overexposes" is looking in the wrong place for an answer. As a photographer, I believe I have the ultimate choice in is it too dark or too light, and a quick check of the histogram always reveals this, and I make any changes needed. But then I used to have a hand-held meter and did sort of grasp the 'Zone system".

I can't recall every coming back from a shoot, with a card full of 'overexposed' pictures with the D7000. or any other Dxxx for that matter.
I have set the Fine Tune Optimal Exposure to -3/6. Just so I can be sure to get detail in white feathers and such. But I did that before reading any reviews.

I shoot either JPEG or nef, depending on job, and for magazine work its almost always JPEG.
I use the Picture Control set to Neutral, and modify it by turning "Brightnesss" to -1. (It seems to me that it increases noise levels.).
I also change the Contrast depending on the subject. Overcast day, I increase it a bit, Bright sunny, I decrease it. I think it's easier increase and control contrast in software later.

Is the D7000 worth trading up a well setup, familiar D200? Will you run into exposure problems?
Personally I think the benefits are worth it.
No camera straight out of the box, is going to meet everyone' needs. Which is great as it gives us choice and a chance to exercise our creative opportunities.

Enjoy taking pictures, we do.

DJ

.. I set out to discover the inventions of God. -John Muir

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
jules Basic MemberMon 19-Sep-11 06:30 AM
967 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#15. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 14
Mon 19-Sep-11 06:32 AM by jules

GB
          

I've seen the article and it's Bunkum! Pure an simple!
Been shooting the D7000 for Landscapes in the past two weeks in the Lake District of England with no problems at all!
You have to know what your doing, I shoot RAW+Jpeg so I want both to come out correctly and they do!
If the Camera is left to Auto everything you get Auto everything results!
If you have a lot of DR in the scene stick the Dynamic Range Correction (Correct me here Brian! I almost never read the Manual...) to High, the low noise floor and High DR of the D7000 Sensor lets you bring back the very few dark shadows with ease even in Jpeg. I haven't used my Grads in two weeks and if you know what our weather has been like we've had pretty much everything thrown at us, every type of sky you can imagine! The D7000 has come thru with flying colours! (Pun intended!)
The Camera comes with a lot of tools and you must use them to get the best from it, the trouble with a lot of reviews is that the Reviewer only spends an afternoon with the Camera, Not long enough IMHO, I hate to say it but it looks to me that the Mag in question has a Canon Axe to grind? (They must be paying the rent this month!)
Get one and don't worry, within your first couple of days with it the good shots will start coming...
Cheers jules..
tri-elmar-fudd
www.exaggeratedperspectives.co.uk

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Davidpeter1 Silver Member Nikonian since 07th Mar 2004Mon 19-Sep-11 07:57 PM
556 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#16. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 15


Cardiff, GB
          

...Canon Axe to grind....

I've suspected this previously, but wouldn't put that forward as a serious or objective reason for the D7000 coming bottom of their test.

There are so many people here passionately defending the honour of Nikon that perhaps someone should challenge the magazine directly.

As for me, even my new variofocal glasses are by Nikon, but I don't dismiss reviews of our chosen brand just because they don't go the way we would all prefer.

The reasonable logic of Hogan etc, the positive experiences of day to day users, and some of their actual photos is enough to tell me that the simple test of jpegs in the magazine might not tell the full storey......confirming my practice of never buying it, but it normally makes a nice break between the vegetables and household goods in the aisles of ASDA. I won't bother reading it for a third Friday night in row!

David.

Cardiff,Britain.

BE A BLOOD + BONE MARROW DONOR TO FIGHT CANCER, YOU MAY SAVE A LIFE.
http://www.nikonians-images.com/galleries/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=16427

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
jules Basic MemberMon 19-Sep-11 08:10 PM
967 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#17. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 16
Mon 19-Sep-11 08:16 PM by jules

GB
          

>...Canon Axe to grind....
>
>I've suspected this previously, but wouldn't put that forward
>as a serious or objective reason for the D7000 coming bottom
>of their test.
>
>There are so many people here passionately defending the
>honour of Nikon that perhaps someone should challenge the
>magazine directly.

It was a throw away comment! Indicated by the "paying the Rent" bit at the end! Not meant to be taken seriously by anyone, the Camera speaks for itself and needs no Defenders, Since I have owned all the Sensor's they reviewed, I'll put them in my own Order.
3rd 60D (The Sensor is Gritty and I could never get rid of it!)
2nd K5 (Very close call, the K5 is lovely but the Jpeg's are sometimes rough/Jaggy)
Ist D7000 (Has to be taken off Auto but the potential output is superior!)

There the Worlds redressed and since my review puts the D7000 ontop then it's one all...
Isn't it...

Cheers jules...
tri-elmar-fudd
www.exaggeratedperspectives.co.uk

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Mon 19-Sep-11 10:05 PM
11303 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#18. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 16


Lowden, US
          

"...simple test of jpegs in the magazine might not tell the full story..."

The above line is a perfect summery of this thread.

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.


Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
jules Basic MemberTue 20-Sep-11 05:47 AM
967 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#20. "RE: Disappointing test results for jpeg performance published - overexposure"
In response to Reply # 18


GB
          

>"...simple test of jpegs in the magazine might not
>tell the full story..."

>
>The above line is a perfect summery of this thread.
>

I agree totally!

Cheers jules...
tri-elmar-fudd
www.exaggeratedperspectives.co.uk

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

km6xz Moderator Awarded for his in-depth knowledge in various areas, including Portraits and Urban Photography Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2009Tue 20-Sep-11 06:47 AM
3300 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#21. "RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world of Guerrilla Marketing"
In response to Reply # 0


St Petersburg, RU
          

Not to be too cynical but I have come to the inescapable conclusion that it is Nikon's fault. They do not buy enough ad space with those magazines.

Notice how the non-profit sites rank the D7000 or any Nikon higher than its competitors but only those commercial publications/sites do where a lot of ad space/impressions are purchased.
When DPR did its review of the D7000, as predicted, they found fault with minor issues that were actual positive features. It was downgraded because the Auto ISO did not function identically with Canon labeling it as a faulty design because it did not copy "industry standard". Nikon didn't because their idea is a better tool.
Later, when the readers complained how the test was illogical and flawed, the author admitted that he did not know Nikon and did not read the manual because he said new users should not be expected to either. He was an avid Canon shooter so felt that Nikon, in a lower market position should have followed Canon's lead.
When the 60D was released it got praise when it was clearly a step down from the 40d and 50d in terms of quality build and was panned by Canon shooters. The reviewer neglected to point out the horrible banding in skies or solid colors that continued in the Canon tradition in the 7d and 5d series that can't be corrected in post.
The positive review of the 60d placed essentially even with the d7000 in score when in fact they are in different leagues and do not naturally directly compete. The D5100 and 60D are competitors, but the D5100 still has the low noise at all ISO's and lack of artifact advantages.
Hundred of readers complained that the entire forum's background and colors had been changed to match a ad series that put 60D ads on every single page using a obnoxiously bright red color. When readership and complains declined and increased respectively, the background was pulled. It was not a coincidence that the much better than deserved score of the 60D and the lower than deserved score of the D7000 fit with an Advertising Age published press release for several weeks before the reviews and background change was published where the ad agency for Canon was bragging about this record ad buy for the new product release.

There is no image, word or impression that a reader or viewer sees or hears in commercial media, movies, TV, or ads that is not planned in great detail to influence the audience, to try to sell something which naturally the audience member would not have purchased or invested in. Large sums of money have also been transferred for that influence access. See a brand name in a movie, even fleetingly? The film producers were paid from tens of thousands of dollars for a fleeting second to millions for a longer view in the scene.
News has been shifted to be under the entertainment and advertising departments of networks for example, for a good reason, it operated on the same model now. At one time there had to be a glass wall between public information providers(news division) and commercial entertainment.
Nikon is just more conservative in how it uses its cash. It appears to put more if its resources into R&D instead of advertising which it can't compete with Canon and Sony level budgets.

Another increasingly common practice found on forums and user review web sites like Amazon, Trip Advisor, Harmony Central, Hotels.com etc and certainly camera sites are spam fake posts by "users" who are actually paid or part of a promotion company. A few studies have been done on the way this practice had changed advertising and public perception more than any other tool available to the advertisers.
This was found to be a major influence on readers of political forums and newspaper "reader's" comments sections so has become active.
I suspect sites like DPR are riddled with paid promoters, their posts have all the key signature trademarks. Publishers have found that a few positive reader reviews greatly influenced sales on Amazon and suddenly the user reviews are pitting pro "readers" against other paid representatives of competing publishers on Amazon so even terrible books have a good chance of becoming best sellers.
It is unethical but great for business. I am a Destination Expert volunteer writer for Trip Advisor and only of my battles is revealing fake posts and reviews, and get little assistance from the company.
For example a small unknown hotel or cafe which wants to become known but has no budget or no positive reports from prior customers will create a fake user account or 2 and post very positive reviews. Since the average review score determines ranking, 2-5 100% reviews of a hole in the wall bed and breakfast will place it at the top of a destination's hotel list. For example here in St Petersburg, a small cafe on a dingy street that had few customers foreign or local started posting 5-6 fake glowing reviews. Within a week it is the 3rd top rated restaurant beating out Michelin ranking fine dining establishments. When I walk by now, there is a line snaking out the door for foreign visitors who are waiting hours to get one of the 6 tables for its fake Mexican cuisine.
So when reading posts in forums like DPR, if a post complains or praises in a way that is different than what you know to be true from personal experience, have confidence that it is fake, intended to drive sales away or to a product.
When the D7000 came out, there were a long series of complaints about it, but only one at each period of time. For example...images are soft, unusable. A month later hundreds of posts about stuck pixels. When that died down, AF problems, back focus problems by the hundreds, when that faded, color of skin, then it was overexposure, peaked and now it is oil spots on the sensor. These complaints all seem to have a similar nature, similar phrasing and have active supporters of the idea that the D7000 is not as good as a Pentax or Canon. A scan of the other forums, and the complaints are much more random and far fewer so I get the distinct impression, based on seeing how influential fake commercial posts are in other venues, that the vast majority of bad press is based on a couple people intentionally trying to induce sales losses for Nikon while promoting Pentax while others are promoting Canon. Paying an ad agency say $100,000 to impact sales as much as these fake posts have would be the bargain of the century.


Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
jules Basic MemberTue 20-Sep-11 08:42 AM
967 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#22. "RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world of Guerrilla Marketing"
In response to Reply # 21
Tue 20-Sep-11 08:46 AM by jules

GB
          

Shan't qoute all of that for space considerations Stan but I think I agree with all of it, so well done for taking the time to put it all into Prose! Especially the bit about the 18Mp Canon Sensor Camera's, I had a lot of trouble with the 6OD and Latterly the 7D, I just could not get clean images but tried two to make sutre it wasn't just me. Came back to Nikon and Bingo! The sensors a filth monster but thats a different story!
It's the World we live in I'm afraid...
Cheers jules...
tri-elmar-fudd
www.exaggeratedperspectives.co.uk

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
carpemoment Registered since 17th Dec 2009Tue 20-Sep-11 11:42 AM
282 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#23. "RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world of Guerrilla Marketing"
In response to Reply # 21


Raleigh, US
          

As always, well said Stan. I just wish that my experience with my D7000 was playing out better than it is. When it works, I love it. About 3 weeks ago I had the "f--" error message along with a few other odd issues. I had to send it in for repair. They turned it around quickly and even tightened the command dial which I forgot to mention. Last night in the middle of a shoot, I get the "Err" message and as before, not even the two button reset will respond. So, once again, I'm glad I have my D90 as a backup but now I am going into a shoot this weekend without a backup. All of the technical spec superiority isn't worth much if I am sending it in for repair every 2-3 weeks. To make matters worse, in his attempt to console me, the technician, made some despairing remarks that has shaken my confidence in Nikon. Great service is a good thing, in moderation!

Visit <www.carpemoment.com>.


or http://gary-adkins.fineartamerica.com


Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
jules Basic MemberTue 20-Sep-11 01:29 PM
967 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#24. "RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world of Guerrilla Marketing"
In response to Reply # 23


GB
          


>All of the technical spec superiority isn't worth much if I am
>sending it in for repair every 2-3 weeks. To make matters
>worse, in his attempt to console me, the technician, made some
>despairing remarks that has shaken my confidence in Nikon.
>Great service is a good thing, in moderation!
>

You have my sympathy! When I shot F100's for three Years (Road Motorbike Racing in Ireland amongst other things.) One or the other was always at Nikon Service! Effectively I had only one Body for three Years! I eventually sold em off and got two F5 Boat Anchors!
I'm awaiting Pricing on the D400, I have around a thousand Quid to go towards a second body, obviously it'll be a bit more than that! If they don't hurry up I'll just buy another D300/s Like I used to have but I'm not too keen on having two the same again...

Cheers jules...
tri-elmar-fudd
www.exaggeratedperspectives.co.uk

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Tue 20-Sep-11 02:30 PM
3979 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#25. "RE: Disappointing test results.....welcome to the world of Guerrilla Marketing"
In response to Reply # 21
Tue 20-Sep-11 02:31 PM by agitater

Toronto, CA
          


>Another increasingly common practice found on forums and user
>review web sites like Amazon, Trip Advisor, Harmony Central,
>Hotels.com etc and certainly camera sites are spam fake posts
>by "users" who are actually paid or part of a
>promotion company. A few studies have been done on the way
>this practice had changed advertising and public perception
>more than any other tool available to the advertisers.
>This was found to be a major influence on readers of political
>forums and newspaper "reader's" comments sections so
>has become active.
>I suspect sites like DPR are riddled with paid promoters,
>their posts have all the key signature trademarks. Publishers
>have found that a few positive reader reviews greatly
>influenced sales on Amazon and suddenly the user reviews are
>pitting pro "readers" against other paid
>representatives of competing publishers on Amazon so even
>terrible books have a good chance of becoming best sellers.
>It is unethical but great for business. I am a Destination
>Expert volunteer writer for Trip Advisor and only of my
>battles is revealing fake posts and reviews, and get little
>assistance from the company.

Great post Stan. User forums - like Nikonians - are terrific, generally, but only if they're well-moderated (like Nikonians). Your TripAdvisor experience is reflected in the frustrations that reputable innkeepers periodically encounter when they come across so-called reviews of their hotels which have been submitted by unreasonably difficult customers, people who've never visited or stayed at the their hotels (and are simply chiming in on some perceived wrong), or vandals intent on messing with the system. Many hotels now have a staff member dedicated to online relations - a person who spends hours and hours every day in an effort to battle bad information on the many and varied travel sites.

Mixed in amongst the accurate end user product reviews on Amazon and almost all other retail sites, are product complaints from angry people who are unrealistically demanding, liars intent on venting their frustrations after making bad decisions, people who've never purchased or used the products but write reviews to make themselves feel in touch with trends and things they cannot afford, and so on. User reviews are a morass - useless in the main, often misguided, very rarely useful, and outright lies at worst.

Amazon and other large retails sites tout the force of numbers and their claim that people naturally tend to absord an impression which skews favourably toward a product, and discount the effect of occasional bad reviews. That's nonsense and flies in the face of almost all experience. The fact is that consumers respond to density - the busier a product page happens to be, the more likely it is that visitors will purchase that product. Density - activity, whether it's good, bad or indifferent - generates buzz. Buzz is great for converting page visits into clicks on the Buy button. That the so-called end user product reviews on any particular product page are deliberately skewed (really bad ones deleted by the site managers or never allowed to appear in the first place), is a poorly kept secret. People driven to a particular product page by whatever retail purchasing urge they happen to be experiencing at that moment, get converted (pushed over the edge if you will) by the action on the page. I often seen callouts of reader reviews - you know, little sidebars containing quoted portions of some glowing product reviews - place in quotation marks as though from some reputable publication or as though written by some well-known reviewer. It's nonsense that verges on outright deception.

The implicit warning in Stan's post, I think, that reviews in formal publications (print and online) are often co-opted by the influence of advertisers is IMO accurate. I'm a publisher and I feel the pressure - I've felt that influential pressure for years. Nor is selection bias by individual reviewers moderated by senior editors any more. Senior editorial staff, when it exists, has other issues to deal with. My point is simply that the formal publications, biased though they may be (Canon one year, Nikon the next, Pentax or Panasonic six months after that, etc., etc., ad infinitum), at least present to us the face of a known quantity. End user reviews on retail sites have no basis in anything, no testing standard, and are written by utter strangers who aren't even properly identified (if they were, the volume of user reviews would dwindle to a trickle very quickly), offer no perspective of experience, no age reference (to help 'review' readers understand whether or not they're reading something written by a 12 year old or an 80 year old or someone inbetween), and on and on. Retail customer reviews on retail web sites are a product marketers dream, but they should never, ever be the basis for any decision making.

Let me put it this way - if you need the encouragements of random strangers to push you into a purchase, or if you need the discouragements of random strangers to talk you out of a tempting purchase, you have no business messing around with your own hard earned money. Better to save the money and put it towards a photography trip using your existing gear.

We live in a world which has been cleverly and surreptitiously turned into a global retail economy. It's a mess. So all this product review nonsense perpetrated on us all by the formal publications is not so much inaccuracy and bias as it is a concerted effort to part us from our money for no good reason. One product is not better than another. That we've all chosen Nikon as our favourite photography product maker, and that we all have each other's support, is reason enough for us to avoid reviews altogether. Like Nikon is going to produce a bad DSLR? One camera product in a particular competitive category is no better than its immediate competitors. But we have to choose something and stick with it in order to become accomplished photographers - to develop our technical and creative photography skills. That's why I stick with Nikon. It's not because I believe that Nikon photography gear is inherently better than Canon or Sony or Olympus. It's that I've invested years and years of time and effort in learning the Nikon system and the Nikon approach to things. I think I could change systems and in a few weeks or months of intensive shooting reach my current level again. But why would I ever do such a thing?

So my view is that competitive product reviews, as Stan has written, are nothing more than a vehicle designed to satisfy a raft of potential advertisers. If some product makers are lower in ranking in a particular comparison 'test', you can be sure those makers will get their respective turns at the top of the ranking in some other category in the next go-round (or the one after that).

All an ad salesperson has to say to a previously low-ranked maker is, "Hey we're getting ready to test your new 232-D800-blah-blah-blah and we've heard really great things about it and we want to bring that out in the piece." The test units show up instantly, the ad placements show up nicely timed to coincide with the piece, and all is well with the world. "Oh no," the product makers say, "we had no influence on the outcome of any review. Heaven forbid! No, no, not at all. We were just supremely confident in the product and knew it would beat the competition!" It just doesn't work that way. How can it when all the competing products are really so good? The only thing limiting the supremely creative, artistically meritorious and technically outstanding use of any Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus, Pentax or Panasonic interchangeable lens camera is the photographer holding the thing. It's been that way for a very long time.

Sometimes I think we're all suckers.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Len Shepherd Gold Member Nikonian since 09th Mar 2003Wed 21-Sep-11 04:46 PM
12722 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#26. "RE:Review the reviewer?"
In response to Reply # 0


Yorkshire, GB
          

>The October 2011 issue of a well known UK photography magazine has done a comparison
Some UK magazines get very little right
Some are quite good.
You have not mentioned which magazine.
My D7000 is very good at getting most exposures right.

Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.

Len Shepherd

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
jules Basic MemberWed 21-Sep-11 07:05 PM
967 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#27. "RE:Review the reviewer?"
In response to Reply # 26


GB
          

>>The October 2011 issue of a well known UK photography
>magazine has done a comparison
>Some UK magazines get very little right
>Some are quite good.
>You have not mentioned which magazine.
>My D7000 is very good at getting most exposures right.

Same initials as but not Popular Photography and British Leonard!

Cheers jules...
tri-elmar-fudd
www.exaggeratedperspectives.co.uk

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #12038 Previous topic | Next topic


Take the Nikonians Tour and learn more about being a Nikonian Wiki /FAQ /Help Listen to our MP3 photography radio channels Find anything on Nikon and imaging technology - fast!

Copyright © Nikonians 2000, 2014
All Rights Reserved

Nikonians®, NikoScope® and NikoniansAcademy™ are trademarks owned by Nikonians.org.
Nikon®, Nikonos® and Nikkor® are registered trademarks of Nikon Corporation.