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 #24313
View in linear mode

Subject: "Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100" Previous topic | Next topic
Toby01 Silver Member Nikonian since 19th Nov 2012Fri 22-Feb-13 03:22 AM
229 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
"Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"


El Sobrante, US
          

This question is for the technical experts in our community. What do you expect the effect(s) of the sensor not having an AA filter to be? I realize that moire may be more likely, but I'm wondering whether this change will enable us to get sharper shots with less noise. If the shots coming off the sensor are sharper than with an AA filter, then I would expect that we can use less pp sharpening and thus less sharpening of any noise in the image. Does this make sense, or are there reasons that this would not be the case? Thanks.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
JPJ Silver Member
22nd Feb 2013
1
Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
TomCurious
22nd Feb 2013
2
Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
Robman3
22nd Feb 2013
3
Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
KnightPhoto Gold Member
22nd Feb 2013
4
Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
jec6613 Silver Member
22nd Feb 2013
7
Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
TomCurious
22nd Feb 2013
5
     Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
Robman3
22nd Feb 2013
6
     Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
Robman3
23rd Feb 2013
14
Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
jbloom Gold Member
22nd Feb 2013
8
     Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
TomCurious
22nd Feb 2013
9
          Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
jbloom Gold Member
22nd Feb 2013
10
               Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
TomCurious
22nd Feb 2013
11
                    Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
Marmion4 Gold Member
22nd Feb 2013
12
                         Reply message RE: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100
Chris Platt Silver Member
22nd Feb 2013
13

JPJ Silver Member Nikonian since 20th Aug 2009Fri 22-Feb-13 03:35 AM
1327 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 0


Toronto, CA
          

Well if it's anything like the effect in the D800E, then Thom Hogan's article here explains what you can likely expect (see under "Resolution, Diffraction, and To E or Not to E": http://www.bythom.com/nikond800review.htm

Basically at wide apertures you can expect sharper edges, however, as you stop down, diffraction sets in quickly and kills any advantage it might otherwise give you. At least on the D800 Hogan suggests this starts around f/5.6.

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

TomCurious Registered since 03rd Jan 2007Fri 22-Feb-13 03:38 AM
2318 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 0


Bay Area, US
          

This is all correct. But the pixel density of a 24MP DX sensor is so high that any AA filter would be very, very weak anyway, and therefore the lack thereof will be barely noticeable. Even on the D800E one had to run a controlled experiment and then look closely at every pixel to see the slight difference.to the D800. And that is "only" at 36MP. The pixel density of the D7100 would be equivalent to 56MP FX. At these and future higher densities, the difference of AA vs no AA filter will largely be theoretical, with regards to sharpness, noise and moire. AA filters will be a thing of the past.

Tom
Bay Area Nikonian


http://www.tkphoto.me/

  

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

    
Robman3 Registered since 12th Apr 2010Fri 22-Feb-13 04:10 AM
1756 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 2


West of Santa Monica, US
          

Tom, a basic question.

The math, at crop 1.5 X 24MP is 36MP, am I missing something?

Thanks,

Rob

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

        
KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Fri 22-Feb-13 05:02 AM
4170 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 3


Alberta, CA
          

FX is something like 2.25 times the area of the DX sensor, thus you multiply the DX #mp x 2.25 to arrive at the equivalent mp for that sensor upscaled to FX. Tom's used ~2.33 which might be the more accurate figure. I know at one point I used to think it was 2.4 times. Might depend on the minor size differences amongst the various DX and FX sensors, which do vary.

On the OP I agree with your post, less sharpening = less noise, which should imply slightly better high ISO performance. At least that was my rationalization for getting the D800E

I think it's great Nikon left off the OLPF, we don't need them anymore. Incidentally, on the D7100 I am not hearing Nikon used the D800E technique of sandwiching in a top layer and a lower layer that self-cancels. I think on the D7100 there are no OLP filter layers.

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

  

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

            
jec6613 Silver Member Nikonian since 12th Feb 2013Fri 22-Feb-13 07:09 AM
645 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 4
Fri 22-Feb-13 07:12 AM by jec6613

Norwalk, US
          

>FX is something like 2.25 times the area of the DX sensor,
>thus you multiply the DX #mp x 2.25 to arrive at the
>equivalent mp for that sensor upscaled to FX. Tom's used
>~2.33 which might be the more accurate figure. I know at one
>point I used to think it was 2.4 times. Might depend on the
>minor size differences amongst the various DX and FX sensors,
>which do vary.

The DX sensor used in the D5200 and D7100, among the smallest Nikon DX sensors, is 23.5 x 15.6 mm, which gives us 366.6 square mm. An FX frame on the D4 is 36.0 x 23.9 mm, or 860.4 square mm, giving us a sensor 2.35 the size.

However, if we look at the FoV, we need to measure the diagonal. If we plug those into the Pythagorean theorem, which is 28.2 mm on DX, and 43.2 mm on FX, we get a diagonal 1.53 times bigger on FX.

This is one of the classic problems of one thing increasing on a linear and another on a square curve, and it's not just to paint it in a better light, either. Photographically, if two sensors are otherwise equal, the 1.5 is what matters, not the 2.35. APS used 24 mm and the related IX-240 designation because with its multiple aspect ratios it made sense, and everybody knows that 135 means 35 mm width.

There are many things I'd accuse marketing in being behind, but this one is really the engineers, I'm sure. Mostly because if marketing was behind it, they'd be screaming for the 2.35x number. Want to know why? Because FX is still a recent entry, DX was the standard for years and went against film, so camera makers could just point to the high ISO performance of digital bodies and didn't need to market it as an area percentage because it didn't matter - they were comparing apples and oranges, so if they ever pointed out the 2.35 they could also say, "Yes, and look at how awesome our digital sensors are in their high ISO!"

  

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

        
TomCurious Registered since 03rd Jan 2007Fri 22-Feb-13 05:20 AM
2318 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 3


Bay Area, US
          

Steve already explained it well. I might add that in the past I also fell for that "1.5 crop factor". My believe is that this was a marketing ploy to make DX appear in a better light, Rather than publishing the ratio of sensor areas like any normal person would, they used the ratio of field of view. Imagine you moved to an apartment half the size and told your friends that your new place has a 1.5 crop factor. So your question is perfectly understandable. The reality is that the FX sensor is more than twice the area of the DX sensor.

Tom
Bay Area Nikonian


http://www.tkphoto.me/

  

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

            
Robman3 Registered since 12th Apr 2010Fri 22-Feb-13 05:46 AM
1756 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 5


West of Santa Monica, US
          

OK then, thanks.

The real rub is the 60fps for slow motion, should make the video folks happy especially with the filter gone.

Thanks to you both for the information.

Always a thrill.

Rob

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

            
Robman3 Registered since 12th Apr 2010Sat 23-Feb-13 03:56 AM
1756 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 5
Sat 23-Feb-13 03:58 AM by Robman3

West of Santa Monica, US
          

Another conversation this afternoon.

Motion picture imagery, in film, used the frames running top down (vertically), still cameras used the same (generally) size stock across, or horizontally.

If one takes the DX sensor size, and turns it on end, it will take up around one half the area if placed onto an FX sensor.

Hence yes, the 2x plus size difference.

Simple after all.

RM





Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

    
jbloom Gold Member Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments in several forums. Nikonian since 15th Jul 2004Fri 22-Feb-13 11:54 AM
6048 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 2


Wethersfield, US
          

Moiré is not dependent on physical pixel density per se. It comes about from the interference between the pattern of lines in the image projected onto the sensor by the lens and the geometric pattern of the sensels.

If moiré is being produced on a 24-MP FX sensor for a certain image, and you then project that same image onto a 24-MP DX sensor, having adjusted the focal length of the lens to make the image 1.5x smaller (linear dimension), you will get the same moire, all else being equal.

Of course, "all else" is not quite equal. Where pixel density does come into play is in diffraction limitation. The D7100 sensor will be diffraction limited at around f/7. That means that for apertures of f/7 and smaller, the effect of diffraction will act in a way similar to an AA filter, fuzzing the lines and thus reducing moiré. (Actually, visible diffraction will creep in well before you stop down to f/7. I suspect it will begin to become visible somewhere between f/4 and f/5.6.) Plus, the lens has to be capable of resolving the fine lines of the image projected onto a smaller sensor.

Also, the more pixels in the image, the finer the pattern of lines in the image that would be needed to produce moiré. So it's true that more megapixels makes moiré less of a problem. But at wide-open apertures where diffraction effects are not limiting, 24-MP FX and 24-MP DX are subject to the same moiré effects.

At 24 MP, the D7100 is going to be more susceptible to moiré than the D800E, not less. Once you stop down to f/5.6 or so, though, diffraction will start taking over. The bottom line is that while the lack of the AA filter can lead to more moiré, we are talking about marginal cases of wide apertures and using lenses capable of resolving fine detail. I guess Nikon figures the trade-off is worth it. I'm not sure I agree, but it's not a big deal either way to me.

-- Jon
Wethersfield, CT, USA
Connecticut High School Sports Photos

  

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

        
TomCurious Registered since 03rd Jan 2007Fri 22-Feb-13 03:41 PM
2318 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 8


Bay Area, US
          

That's a good write up, but I disagree with your conclusion thy the D7100 will be more susceptible to moire than the D800E. I think that many lenses will not resolve enough detail for the D7100 pixel pitch when used wide open to excite aliases. There may be a few lenses that do, the best Zeiss lenses perhaps and Nikon's resolution champions lie the 200/2. In other words, lenses that are not found very often on a consumer body.

Tom
Bay Area Nikonian


http://www.tkphoto.me/

  

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

            
jbloom Gold Member Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments in several forums. Nikonian since 15th Jul 2004Fri 22-Feb-13 05:25 PM
6048 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 9


Wethersfield, US
          

It may be that many users with a D7100 will use lenses that don't resolve that well, but if so, that's a property of the lens, not the sensor module. And I think you're underestimating the resolving power of many top-grade Nikkors (like the f/2.8 "kings" and the newer f/4 series).

-- Jon
Wethersfield, CT, USA
Connecticut High School Sports Photos

  

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

                
TomCurious Registered since 03rd Jan 2007Fri 22-Feb-13 06:00 PM
2318 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 10


Bay Area, US
          

Well you can't get moire without a lens, can you. You're right the f/2.8 and f/4 zooms are very good, but many things, including top notch technique have to come together to get pixel level resolution even on the D800/D800E sensor that would allow for moire. See how rare moire turned out to be with the D800E. I believe the D7100 will not show more moire than the D800E, instead it will be a total non-issue with this camera.

Tom
Bay Area Nikonian


http://www.tkphoto.me/

  

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

                    
Marmion4 Gold Member Nikonian since 21st Sep 2008Fri 22-Feb-13 08:35 PM
187 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 11


Near Sacramento, US
          

I have yet to experience moire in my D800E and honestly hadn't heard of the term before the release of the D800/D800E.

With the timing of the D7100 release Vs announcement of D800/D800E and lack of product--wonder if the missing AA filter is due to the popularity of the E?

Sold my D7000 and picked up a D600. I will bypass this camera for now--but agree with those who have stated the lack of filter is really a mute point and a change toward the future as the MP of new cameras climb.

Laura

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

                        
Chris Platt Silver Member Nikonian since 30th Sep 2012Fri 22-Feb-13 08:49 PM
474 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: Effect(s) of missing AA filter in D7100"
In response to Reply # 12
Fri 22-Feb-13 08:52 PM by Chris Platt

Newburg, US
          

I'm sure it's because the Nikon engineers have determined that it doesn't make sense to apply the anti-aliasing resolution hit to ALL images to avoid the now very remote possibility that moire will ever show up in any image. Oh, and there may be some production cost savings.

Visit my gallery.

  

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

Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #24313 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.