While reading many of the threads on the D2x one point that seems to come up often is "watch the shutter speed because the high resolution D2x will certainly magnify any camera shake" This leads me to this. Is there a trade off lets say between the D1x for example and the D2x for hand holding shots. Obviously the D2x on a tripod should outclass the D1x or D2h but for candid hand held street photography is the D1x or similar body better?????? Would you rather have a tack sharp but slighly less detailed photo or a highly detailed out of focus shot (if that is possible) Now one could say that a D2x is not a street camera or photo journalist's camera do to size and weight but what about wedding and similar situations where a tripod is out of the questions. Maybe the D3 will have a Vibration Reduction system?
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#1. "RE: 12 megs " a real handfull"" | In response to Reply # 0Brian Scherzer Registered since 28th Jul 2003Wed 28-Dec-05 03:23 PM
Please don't take my reply as definitive, since I am still working hard on the very issue you raised. From a strictly user point of view, yes, the D2H would be easier to use as a walk-around camera for handholding. It is more difficult, but not at all impossible, to get a sharp image while handholding a D2X. That is just my opinion, having used both cameras.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#2. "RE: 12 megs " a real handfull"" | In response to Reply # 0mcampos Registered since 15th May 2007Wed 28-Dec-05 03:38 PM
>> Now one could say that a D2x is not a street camera or photo journalist's camera <<
When the D2X works as it should there is no problem with handheld shots, I use mine regularly that way. When I fist got the D2X I had a heck of a time getting sharp images even on a rock solid studio tripod, that body was defective, the replacement by Nikon was much better, but not quite there, the firmware update corrected whatever issues I was having and now I am happy as could be. There were quite a number of people out there that were having problems with this, some very seasoned pros.
On the other hand I also own the D2H and it is a lovely camera to take out for some action shots, fast and it handles quite well handheld.
#6. "I Agree With Mike" | In response to Reply # 2soonipi1957 Registered since 05th Mar 2004Wed 28-Dec-05 10:35 PM
I now routinely shoot my X handheld, even with a 180mm attached with shutter speeds as low as 1/60 and I have absolutely no issues with it whatsoever.
Heck...I even handheld the 500 the other day with a 1.4 TC attached (I don't make a prcarice of this but an opportunity presented itself) at 1/400 and all was fine.
Images @ www.pbase.com/soonipi1957
#3. "RE: 12 megs " a real handfull"" | In response to Reply # 0
Resolution will not MAGNIFY camera shake. A hand-held D2X pic will not be less good than the same shot taken with an F100. What we should have been saying all along is that if you can minimize or eliminate camera shake, the D2X will give you a BETTER pic than a lesser camera on the same shot. Remember, an image of increased resolution must be reduced further to get to the same end size. The quality of a given-size print does not go down as camera resolution goes up.
VR reduces samera shake, it does not eliminate it. For that, use a big, heavy, sturdy tripod -- if that's the quality you need and the kind of images you shoot.
I've been using the same hand holding techniques for 40 years, and while the results are certainly not as sharp as the Nikonian tripod users, I get the same (or better!) crisp results with the D2X that I got with the D100, the F100, the FA, the F2, the F. . .
A New York City Nikonian and Team Member
Please visit my website and critique the images!
#4. "RE: 12 megs" | In response to Reply # 0
I also was afraid of the killer resolution issue, but it didn't seem to make sense to me. I think that there were a lot of cameras which needed attention when they were first released for sale.
I've only had a D2x for a couple of weeks and I find that it shoots just like any other camera.
During testing I've shot sharp photos as low as 1/20th second likewise 1/45th and 1/90th hand held but braced of course. My camera may be the exception and not the rule but the focus is spot on and it will make very very sharp photos at normal shutter speeds.
I find it's just as easy to shoot as my D2h with a lot more detail.
Just my two cents.
Nothing is certain but the unforeseen
#5. "RE: 12 megs" | In response to Reply # 0
>Would you rather have a tack sharp but slighly less detailed
>photo or a highly detailed out of focus shot
To be pedantic it's blurred, not out of focus, and you're seeing the effect because of the higher resolution. Reduce the image to the same pixel dimensions as the D1x image and the two will be more or less equivalent in terms of apparent sharpness.
You do have to be more careful with the D2x to achieve its full potential. Over the years my hand-holding technique had become, well, less than perfect and the D2x showed that fact up brutally. With practice I've become much better and have had some very good results hand-holding the D2x / AF-S 80-200 f/2.8 combination at shutter speeds close to those I used to be able to get away with when using the D1.
#7. "RE: 12 megs" | In response to Reply # 5BJNicholls Charter MemberThu 29-Dec-05 03:13 PM
Exactly. Once you compare apples to apples the difference disappears.
The point of the high D2X resolution demanding better technique applies when you're looking for maximum enlargement potential from all 12 megapixels. There are plenty of scenarios where it's neither practical nor neccessary to shoot for maximum detail. You can't shoot every image at the ideal lens apertures - you'd give up creative use of depth of field. You can't use a tripod for every shot or pack studio lights around everywhere. You can't always shoot at high shutter speeds and again you'd be giving up creative use of blurring. In fact, unless you're primarily a landscape or studio shooter, you should expect to have to compromise on absolute image quality most of the time.
There's nothing new here. The same compromises apply to every format. It's just that DX at 12 megapixels is a degree more sensitive to technique and lens quality than 35mm film or 6 megapixel DX sensors.
#10. "RE: 12 megs" | In response to Reply # 9Elliot73 Registered since 31st Oct 2005Thu 29-Dec-05 04:22 PM
I read these posting and I can't avoid thinking there is something wrong with Nikon. If the camera is going to have all those problems when operationg around the edge of the envelope..... well reduce the envelope and do not make the claims they are making.
Many years ago we had in the US Air Force a magnificent plane. The F104.... It was supersonic it was sleek and precious.... Read the operating manual.... when loaded the plane could not exceed certain speeds because the wing would crack. They took the plane to war as well as the F111 and they had to bring them back because they where not good work horses. They certainly could meet the specs under the right hands piloting the plane. Did the manufacturer lied....? NO...! Was the plane bad....? NO...! Was it good for the mission....? Absolutely NO.....! On top of all the above.... a lot of young pilots got killed while trying to learn how to operate the aircraft. They retired the plane very very very early.
Is there a similarity here....!!! Do we want a camera like the F104 or do we want a workhorse like the F16.... easy, docile and one that would carry out almost any mission without hurting the operator.
I think Nikon has not come out with that kind of work - horse camera. Last afternoon I spent some time at the store trying out the Canons. I took my own hardrive. Hand held inside the store with no flash.... The pictures are very good..... I am a Nikon fan and have purchase a lot of lenses. It seems to me that we are spennding way too much time trying to please the operation requirements of the camera. The cameras should be pleasing us.... I think Nikon has all these backwards.
We need an F22... I guess some people need a Cessna 150 and others an 18 wheeler. He he he
#12. "RE: 12 megs" | In response to Reply # 10adrianaitken Registered since 19th Mar 2004Thu 29-Dec-05 08:50 PM
What Nikon gave us as a work-horse was the D2H(s), the D2X is more a JumpJet, tricky to use but excells in the right skilled hands (novices need not apply - no disrespect but a D2X isn't for people just starting photography).
#13. "RE: 12 megs" | In response to Reply # 10krush0 Registered since 02nd Sep 2002Thu 29-Dec-05 09:12 PM
There really is no problem with the D2X
Yes it requires a good knowledge of photographic principles
to set it up correctly but that is because it is a very
customisable camera. It caters for people who know exactly what they
want the camera to do. Once done then it is simply point and shoot.
I have gone from F100 - D70 - D2X and really have found no difference
in technique. That being said because of the size of the D2 images
(like looking at D70 at 200%) any errors will be more noticeable
its then just a matter of ironing out your rough spots in technique
to get the optimum image quality. It will be less forgiving but then it was never designed with the average consumer in mind. To continue the analogies - you don't buy a Ferrari to drive around the K-mart
car park and complain about the turning circle.
Sydney Down Under
#14. "RE: 12 megs" | In response to Reply # 0
I only picked up the D2X this afternoon but instantly realised how much more careful you need to be.
I am relatively new to photography and readily admit that my technique and knowledge is limited, but I took a couple of shots hand held while walking to the corner shop this evening, and am more than happy with the sharpness. Sure, they are not pin sharp, but at 1/2 sec hand held ... I am not complaining. The zoom is a 100% crop in CS2 saved as a JPG.
What got me more than anything was the superb focusing and the richness of the image. I don't think that I could have captured the same image on my D70.
P.S. I appreciate that this is a wide tele ... if anyone wants, I can go for a walk and test the 70-200mm. Any excuse ...
24mm, f4, 1/2.5s
12mm, f4, 1/6s