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 #4876
View in linear mode

Subject: "D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..." Previous topic | Next topic
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Tue 18-Jan-11 12:33 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
"D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."


US
          

Here's a scene I took a few images of... D7000, 9.5mm, f/5.6, 1/800th, hand-held.

Now, on this posted image, there's a 3" sign on the right-hand door that's easily readable at 100%. This image is VERY sharp. But the D7000 resolution cuts two ways...

While I'm super pleased with the posted image, I tossed a few of the exact same scene, shot at exactly the same settings, because at 100%, I could see effects of vertical motion blur, induced by me.

My reason for posting this is because I believe the increased resolution of the D7000 means that the standard rule of thumb relative to focal length/shutter speed doesn't always hold up. Normally 1/800th at 9.5 millimeters would easily be fine, and maybe when viewed at 50%, it still would have been. But, since we commonly use 100% viewing magnification, be prepared for sometimes seeing some imperfections (that may have always been there) but you might never have noticed.


www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

  

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

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
JPJ Silver Member
18th Jan 2011
1
Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
billD80 Silver Member
18th Jan 2011
2
Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
gkaiseril Gold Member
18th Jan 2011
3
     Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
billD80 Silver Member
18th Jan 2011
4
          Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
dm1dave Administrator
18th Jan 2011
5
          Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
billD80 Silver Member
18th Jan 2011
6
          Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
dm1dave Administrator
18th Jan 2011
7
          Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
JPJ Silver Member
18th Jan 2011
9
          Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
JohnE Nikon Silver Member
19th Jan 2011
19
               Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
dm1dave Administrator
19th Jan 2011
21
          Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
gkaiseril Gold Member
18th Jan 2011
8
Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
RickMz Silver Member
20th Jan 2011
27
Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
micaelak
18th Jan 2011
10
Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
billD80 Silver Member
18th Jan 2011
11
     Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
agitater Gold Member
18th Jan 2011
12
          Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
billD80 Silver Member
18th Jan 2011
13
               Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
agitater Gold Member
18th Jan 2011
14
                    Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
rtg
19th Jan 2011
15
                         Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
Tom Gresham
19th Jan 2011
16
                         Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
billD80 Silver Member
19th Jan 2011
17
                         Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
gkaiseril Gold Member
19th Jan 2011
18
                              Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
billD80 Silver Member
19th Jan 2011
20
                                   Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
rtg
20th Jan 2011
22
Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
KnightPhoto Gold Member
20th Jan 2011
23
Reply message RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways...
billD80 Silver Member
20th Jan 2011
24
Reply message RE: Where does the "rule of tum" come from?
Len Shepherd Gold Member
20th Jan 2011
25
Reply message RE: Where does the "rule of tum" come from?
billD80 Silver Member
20th Jan 2011
26
     Reply message RE: Where does the "rule of tum" come from?
KnightPhoto Gold Member
21st Jan 2011
28
          Reply message RE: Where does the "rule of tum" come from?
billD80 Silver Member
21st Jan 2011
29

JPJ Silver Member Nikonian since 20th Aug 2009Tue 18-Jan-11 01:02 PM
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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 0
Tue 18-Jan-11 01:02 PM by JPJ

Toronto, CA
          

Maybe the lesson from all of this is that we need to stop pixel peeping at 100%. Ultimately very few people are going to use the image in a way where that viewing size is relevant. At corresponding relevant viewing sizes any perceived motion blur becomes undetectable.

Now stop posting your Sigma 8-16 photos, you are making me jealous and you are going to cost me a lot of money!

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

    
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Tue 18-Jan-11 03:33 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
#2. "RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 1


US
          

>Maybe the lesson from all of this is that we need to stop
>pixel peeping at 100%.

I think you've got a great point. What might also help is a clear way of understanding what 100% translates to in an an actual print. This wopuld put it all in perspective, for me at least...

>Now stop posting your Sigma 8-16 photos, you are making me
>jealous and you are going to cost me a lot of money!

Sorry about the Sigma. It really is a fine product.


www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

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

        
gkaiseril Gold Member Nikonian since 28th Oct 2005Tue 18-Jan-11 04:15 PM
6739 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 2
Tue 18-Jan-11 04:19 PM by gkaiseril

Chicago, US
          

The rule of thumb is not an absolute rule. It is derived from experience. And for the rule of thumb to work, one must have a good hand holding technique for the SLR type of camera. The rule is very general but individual differences could affect it. The biggest problem is establishing the proper stable stance.

Some EXIF information might provide more information aobut the settings.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

  

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

            
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Tue 18-Jan-11 04:51 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
#4. "RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 3


US
          

>The rule of thumb is not an absolute rule. It is derived from
>experience. And for the rule of thumb to work, one must have a
>good hand holding technique for the SLR type of camera. The
>rule is very general but individual differences could affect
>it. The biggest problem is establishing the proper stable
>stance.

Yeah, I'm with you on the technique thing.

My original post relates to the use of a very hi-res. sensor, in conjuction with a very sharp lens, where extremely tiny details in an image viewed at 100% may show very slight movement that lesser res. sensors would have left imperceptible. Yet these images might be excellent in actual execution.

A real world explanation of what 100% of a 16mp sensor really translates to in a print, might demonstrate that while useful in many ways, 100% viewing might be overkill in determining "real-world use" sharpness.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.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 2006Tue 18-Jan-11 04:58 PM
11299 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 4
Tue 18-Jan-11 05:07 PM by dm1dave

Lowden, US
          

“What might also help is a clear way of understanding what 100% translates to in an an actual print. This wopuld put it all in perspective, for me at least...”

This can be determined by the resolution and size of your monitor.

Using my workstation with a Dell 2209WA monitor…

The monitor is 18.75 inches wide and the horizontal resolution in 1680px. So my monitor displays 89.6 pixels per inch.

A D7000 image is 4928 pixels wide. So 4928 divided by 89.6 is 55.

So viewing a D7000 image at 100% on my Dell 2209WA I am viewing an image that is about 55 inches wide by 37.69 inches high.

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

                    
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Tue 18-Jan-11 05:08 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
#6. "RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 5


US
          

>So viewing a D7000 image at 100% on my Dell 2209WA I am
>viewing an image that is about 54.26 inches wide by 35.94
>inches high.
>

Holy moley!

Thanks Dave! That's very helpful and, in my opinion, very informative and revealing.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.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 2006Tue 18-Jan-11 05:29 PM
11299 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 6


Lowden, US
          

I have found that for most printing, at least up to 24in wide, viewing the image at 50% on screen will give you an accurate representation of the image sharpness in the final print.

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

                    
JPJ Silver Member Nikonian since 20th Aug 2009Tue 18-Jan-11 08:16 PM
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
#9. "RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 5


Toronto, CA
          

>So viewing a D7000 image at 100% on my Dell 2209WA I am
>viewing an image that is about 55 inches wide by 37.69 inches
>high.
>

Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about, no one prints this big in the real world (usually).

I am not going to dissuade people from practicing great technique but we have to put things in perspective. Any 'flaws' we see at 100% are not going to be visible on normal prints or photos posted for web viewing.

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

                    
JohnE Nikon Silver Member Nikonian since 15th Jun 2010Wed 19-Jan-11 05:37 PM
916 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 5


New HArtford, US
          

> “What might also help is a clear way of understanding
>what 100% translates to in an an actual print. This wopuld put
>it all in perspective, for me at least...”

>
>This can be determined by the resolution and size of your
>monitor.
>
>Using my workstation with a Dell 2209WA monitor…
>
>The monitor is 18.75 inches wide and the horizontal resolution
>in 1680px. So my monitor displays 89.6 pixels per inch.
>
>A D7000 image is 4928 pixels wide. So 4928 divided by 89.6 is
>55.
>
>So viewing a D7000 image at 100% on my Dell 2209WA I am
>viewing an image that is about 55 inches wide by 37.69 inches
>high.
>

I use a 30" monitor for viewing. At 100% magnification, do I have the same field of view as you?
Obviously viewing an image to fit on screen my image is larger and I will be more apt to see flaws, but I wonder about 100% magnification. If my field of view is the same as on a smaller monitor I am even a worse pixel peeper than I thought.

JohnE Nikon
https://plus.google.com/photos/104310967428146619677/albums?hl=en

https://picasaweb.google.com/104310967428146619677


"Cameras and lenses are simply tools to place our unique vision on film. Concentrate on equipment and you'll take technically good photographs. Concentrate on seeing the light's magic colors and your images will stir the soul." Jack Dykinga

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 2006Wed 19-Jan-11 10:28 PM
11299 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 19
Wed 19-Jan-11 10:31 PM by dm1dave

Lowden, US
          

It depends on the resolution of your monitor. In Windows go to your Display Properties to see the resolution being displayed on your system.

Note the horizontal resolution, let’s call it HR. That will be the larger of the two numbers. (For example if it the resolution is 800 x 600 then 800 pixels is the horizontal resolution.)

Measure the actual width of your screen in inches (SW). Now divide HR by SW the result is the actual Pixels Per Inch (PPI) displayed by your monitor.

HR / SW = PPI

A D7000 image is 4928 pixels wide. So 4928 divided by PPI equals the overall width of image.

4928 / PPI = Image Width
3264 / PPI = Image Height

For the most part monitors usually display between 70ppi to 92ppi on matter how big the screen around 50in is probably a good guess of the size of the overall image when viewed at 100%.

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

                
gkaiseril Gold Member Nikonian since 28th Oct 2005Tue 18-Jan-11 05:58 PM
6739 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 4


Chicago, US
          

Some got sloppy or never learned good hand holding technique with the smaller MP cameras.

This may account for some the problems that P&S users have when using dSLRs.

More than once I have had replies that the proper hand holing technique in the Nikon user guides and described on this site is just to hard. It is same technique that I learned with film cameras.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

  

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

    
RickMz Silver Member Nikonian since 13th Oct 2006Thu 20-Jan-11 10:19 PM
78 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 1


Navarre, US
          


>Now stop posting your Sigma 8-16 photos, you are making me
>jealous and you are going to cost me a lot of money!
>
I know what you mean! I got mine a couple of months ago and LOVE it! 

Rick Montanez
D700, D7000/SB-700 and D-80/SB-800

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

micaelak Registered since 08th Aug 2009Tue 18-Jan-11 08:32 PM
461 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 0


Ravenna, US
          

This is good information. I work for a printing company large format screen,litho and digital printing. Our screenprint presses will print 6 color 54in x 120in litho 52 x 77in and out digital inkjet printer will print sheets or web 80inches wide by whatever length. I have printed a couple of my pictures from my D300s to 10 feet tall after running them thru genuine fractal program and one of the biggest issues in large format printing is viewing distance, similar to enlarging on your computer monitor. If you could stand close up to a billboard the resolution is terrible but stand back and it look great. So if you were to print a 30 x 40 enlargement it should be viewed from some distance and not standing 2 feet from it, so if you want to view at 100% you should back up from your monitor some

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

    
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Tue 18-Jan-11 09:18 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
#11. "RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 10


US
          

So if you were to print a 30 x 40 enlargement it
>should be viewed from some distance and not standing 2 feet
>from it, so if you want to view at 100% you should back up
>from your monitor some

Point extremely well taken.

And while good technique is critical, human beings breathe, and have heart-beats...

With 16mp at 100% from 14" viewing distance, imperfect details only a few pixels wide may be perceptible, but even at, say, 16x24, they may be completely invisible.

The technique, lenses, etc. may be near-perfect, but at 100%, the "flaws" may be far more pronounced on-screen than they ever could be on paper.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

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

        
agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Tue 18-Jan-11 09:46 PM
3970 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 11
Tue 18-Jan-11 09:51 PM by agitater

Toronto, CA
          

>And while good technique is critical, human beings breathe,
>and have heart-beats...

But Bill . . . that's exactly the point. Good technique means establishing handholding methods, stance and grip which take breath movement and heart pump movement into account.

>With 16mp at 100% from 14" viewing distance, imperfect
>details only a few pixels wide may be perceptible, but even
>at, say, 16x24, they may be completely invisible.
>
>The technique, lenses, etc. may be near-perfect, but at 100%,
>the "flaws" may be far more pronounced on-screen
>than they ever could be on paper.

Most of these (and similar) so-called flaws aren't reproduced by printers on any kind of paper. As well, minor so-called flaws seen at 100% mag are also, I think, completely meaningless viewed on screen because they tend to reveal only the limits of the optical and electronic technology, the limits of handholding technique in certain circumstances - nothing more - and represent a view or look at a particular photo which will never be seen by any other human being.

Photographers don't make photos and then deliberately enlarge them 100% for printing, exhibition or display unless they specifically want to show softness and/or grain-noise and/or special effects.

The whole notion of blowing up images to large magnifications grew out of the need for high-resolution photo editing in which individual pixels have to be manipulated in order to do re-touch work. Obviously we can't easily, efficiently or accurately manipulate individual pixels unless we're working at extremely high magnifications in Photoshop or some sort of similar pixel-level editing software.

Viewing digital images at 100% mag never had much to do with determining focus accuracy or identifying flaws in shooting technique. After all, if we're not editing/manipulating individual pixels and if some so-called flaw is not visible at intended print sizes or at intended display sizes, what the heck are we really looking at and why are we wasting time doing it?

As an academic exercise which demonstrates how terrific these cameras really are, the effort is fascinating. But it may have little practical value other than unequivocally satisfying us that everything from the D200 on up is capable of technically amazing results.

Do you happen to know the cornerstone date of the building in your sample shot?

(Added: your lovely, sharp, bright image reminds that I'm already fed up with snow and road salt even though it's still only mid-January).

My Nikonians Gallery

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

  

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

            
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Tue 18-Jan-11 11:10 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
#13. "RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 12


US
          

>>And while good technique is critical, human beings
>breathe,
>>and have heart-beats...
>
>But Bill . . . that's exactly the point. Good technique means
>establishing handholding methods, stance and grip which take
>breath movement and heart pump movement into account.

Thanks for noticing. It's why I posted in the first place. As one who has more than a few portraits hand-held at 1/15th, I was pointing out (perhaps not clearly enough) how 100% mag of 16mp images (even at 1/800th) with very small details may well "reveal" so-called "imperfections" that are actually quite excellent results.


>Do you happen to know the cornerstone date of the building in
>your sample shot?

1857 for the Main Building, 1917 for the Front Pillars and Stucco.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

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

                
agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Tue 18-Jan-11 11:52 PM
3970 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 13


Toronto, CA
          


>>Do you happen to know the cornerstone date of the building
>in
>>your sample shot?
>
>1857 for the Main Building, 1917 for the Front Pillars and
>Stucco.

Well maintained American Federal architecture is almost always a great subject in any sort of long light. There's little else like it anywhere outside the U.S., but your building seems to be a remarkable combination of post-colonial and greek revival. It's strange, but it works. Wonderful building.

My Nikonians Gallery

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

  

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

                    
rtg Registered since 27th Dec 2010Wed 19-Jan-11 12:32 AM
75 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 14


US
          

I wonder if the shock created by the movement of the mirror is captured with the higher resolution? Although the camera has a fair amount of mass to it I can still slightly feel the mirror movement. This is easily tested by taking an image hand held with it down and then MUP. Hand movement tends to be a low frequency disturbance compared to the mirror movement which a high frequency disturbance.

As a closed loop system VR is likely has a low frequency loop response that I would guess is slightly under damped. This would not handle any high frequency disturbances.

Just a thought.....

Rob

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

If you are into boating checkout: www.SilvertonForums.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

                        
Tom Gresham Registered since 08th Dec 2005Wed 19-Jan-11 03:38 PM
85 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 15


US
          

For more than 30 years, I've been telling photographer groups . . .

"Your next lens should be a tripod."

Get a GOOD one, and use it.

And, learn good hand-holding techniques.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

                        
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Wed 19-Jan-11 05:02 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
#17. "RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 15


US
          

>I wonder if the shock created by the movement of the mirror
>is captured with the higher resolution?

I think this is entirely possible, and while I have and use a good tripod, I'm going to make more use of the Mirror-up settings.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

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

                        
gkaiseril Gold Member Nikonian since 28th Oct 2005Wed 19-Jan-11 05:25 PM
6739 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 15


Chicago, US
          

At the half shutter position, one needs to allow the VR system to encgage and lock on the image before fully dpressing the shutter release.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

  

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

                            
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Wed 19-Jan-11 06:09 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
#20. "RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 18


US
          

>At the half shutter position, one needs to allow the VR
>system to encgage and lock on the image before fully dpressing
>the shutter release.

I don't doubt it, although I can't say because don't have any VR/OS/IS lenses.

In general, it looks as though the 16mp sensor at 100% will show certain details (positive or not) that may well have been undiscernable before, and at "normal" print sizes, may well be undiscernable after.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

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

                                
rtg Registered since 27th Dec 2010Thu 20-Jan-11 11:02 AM
75 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 20


US
          

>>At the half shutter position, one needs to allow the VR
>>system to encgage and lock on the image before fully
>dpressing
>>the shutter release.
>

I was trying this out last night and you can in fact see through the view finder when the VR locks. It does take a second or two to achieve lock. I was viewing the moon at 200mm, hand held. So any slight movement is magnified as well.

So to see this yourself, as pointed out above hold the shutter release half way while holding the camera and note the image movement literally lock as the VR kicks in. FWIW the lens I was using was the 18-200mm VRII. I was pretty impressed how well the VR system worked. Probably goes without saying but the subject should be stationary.

Rob

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

If you are into boating checkout: www.SilvertonForums.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

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

KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Thu 20-Jan-11 12:31 PM
4213 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: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 0


Alberta, CA
          

Very nice image, light, and sharpness Bill!

And I can't believe the sharpness you are getting out of that Sigma 8-16mm and stopped down only a little to f5.6.

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

    
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Thu 20-Jan-11 12:42 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
#24. "RE: D7000 Resolution -- Cuts Two ways..."
In response to Reply # 23


US
          

>Very nice image, light, and sharpness Bill!
>
>And I can't believe the sharpness you are getting out of that
>Sigma 8-16mm and stopped down only a little to f5.6.
>
>Best regards, SteveK

Thanks Steve! It's a little counter-intuitive, but Sigma designed this lens to perform best from wide-open to about 5.6!

The reviews at PhotoZone (Canon mount) and SLR.COM really bear this out, especially at the 8mm end.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

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

Len Shepherd Gold Member Nikonian since 09th Mar 2003Thu 20-Jan-11 02:00 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
#25. "RE: Where does the "rule of tum" come from?"
In response to Reply # 0


Yorkshire, GB
          

>My reason for posting this is because I believe the increased resolution of the D7000 means that the standard rule of thumb
>relative to focal length/shutter speed doesn't always hold up.
When Olympus launched the OM system with the first shutter dampening system in the late 1960's their advertising mentioned 1x shutter speed with an SLR had become possible, though 2x was more reliable - interesting!
The earliest references I can find go back to the 1950's - when it has recognised that a Roleiflex with leaf shutter cradled in the hands induced far less camera shake than a medium format Thornton Pickard SLR.
The Kodak Professional Photoguide from 1977 works to an edge blur of 1/50 of an inch in a 10x8 inch print with a standard lens at 12 feet distance - a quite modest sharpness level by 2010 standards.
Subject magnification also plays a part - with the 1x guideline for some shots sharp and 2x for most shots sharp only being relevant for subjects between about 8 feet wide and infinity. By 1:1 magnification camera shake increases by the equivalent of about 5 shutter speeds.
It follows that the "rule of thumb" can be as variable as the length of a piece of string.

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

    
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Thu 20-Jan-11 07:42 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
#26. "RE: Where does the "rule of tum" come from?"
In response to Reply # 25


US
          

>When Olympus launched the OM system with the first shutter
>dampening system in the late 1960's their advertising
>mentioned 1x shutter speed with an SLR had become possible,
>though 2x was more reliable - interesting!


This is fascinating! As is your whole post.

I owned an OM-1 (which I believe came out in the early 70's) and indeed, the shutter was just beautiful. I actually think the D7000 is smoother/quieter! I'll have to get my OM-1 back from my daughter and compare...

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

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

        
KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Fri 21-Jan-11 05:02 AM
4213 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
#28. "RE: Where does the "rule of tum" come from?"
In response to Reply # 26


Alberta, CA
          

Wow that Sigma 8-16 MTF is crazy (in a good way). And 4 FLD elements!

I have been hemming and hawing over the Nikon 14-24 or 16-35 for my FX camera, but maybe the 8-16 on a DX camera is the way to go... Looks pretty good in your stuff.

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

            
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Fri 21-Jan-11 02:13 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
#29. "RE: Where does the "rule of tum" come from?"
In response to Reply # 28


US
          

>Wow that Sigma 8-16 MTF is crazy (in a good way). And 4 FLD
>elements!
>
>I have been hemming and hawing over the Nikon 14-24 or 16-35
>for my FX camera, but maybe the 8-16 on a DX camera is the way
>to go... Looks pretty good in your stuff.

Thanks! There's a guy somewhere on this Forum who's actually compared the 8-16mm on his DX very favorably with the 14-24 on his FX.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

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

Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #4876 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.