Wed 02-May-12 12:56 PM | edited Wed 02-May-12 12:58 PM by David D Busch
The poll is missing a response: None of the above. All these models have the tools to allow you to fine-tune the color rendition they produce in-camera, within a reasonable range.
But, out-of-the-box, with no adjustment, my D2x was best. Exquisite color with no tweaking. But I still applied Picture Controls and/or post-processing when appropriate. In the interests of full disclosure, I never owned a D1x/D100, but have owned/own each of the other models listed.
Yeah ..Thats why I added the last one...I too Like the D2X best, I had a D7000 and no amount of tweaking of picture control or custom settings provide colors I liked, Reds and Oranges always looked off to me...Red channel would often blow out. I love the skin tones on the D2x - I just thing each sensor family has a slightly different look much like film emulsions provided slight differences.
Anywhoo - no right or wrong answer - just personal preference..i was curious
I would have agreed with the survey results so far but had to add a positive response for the D4 - so far, it is really superior to my D3! I had a D2X and, yes, it was great, but I think Nikon has taken us forward with the D4 - probably a result of its dynamic range.
A good follow on question for polling would be which lens produced the most pleasing color rendition?
Yes, of course color can be corrected and improved with Lightroom, Camera Raw, etc., but reducing time consuming steps, however small, are always welcomed!
I own and still use a D1X, have owned a D2x (which I sold to get the D3), and now use a D3 and D1X. In terms or raw files opened in Lightroom with no enhancements, the color and resolution of the D2x was a marked improvement over my D1x, but I have to give the edge to the D3 because of the full frame sensor. Many D3 image files need no enhancement or correction other than lens calibration, especially using Zeiss lenses. I didn't have the Zeiss lenses when I owned the D2x, so I can't comment there, but I'll say the my D1x files look better with Zeiss lenses as well; sharper but with less resolution.
I have not decided whether or not to go for the D4. The expanded low light capability is not an issue for me so far, and I don't know if the other "enhancements" justify my buying it. Also, I want to see how this XQD card issue works out.
Bottom line: D3 with Zeiss lenses.
De l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace!
Question: For purposes of this poll, are we talking in-camera processed images, where the color is rendered by the camera built-in software, or raw where the color is rendered by computer software, or either?
>I'd say either.....I think a Raw from a D2X looks different >than a Raw from my D7000 in lightroom or ACR just a s a JPEG >does. As I said its just a matter of what you like....no right >or wrong answer.
Right – I prefer D7000 to D2Xs at first look in Lightroom, but do I attribute this to the camera itself or the default camera profile designed and applied by Adobe in Lightroom? Is there any way to tell which contributes what? Or, if I’m using X-rite Passport profiles rather than Adobe defaults is it the X-rite software making the difference?
Is there a way to look at a raw file without it being interpreted and adjusted by software, be it Nikon, Adobe, X-rite…?? If not, how can the cameras themselves be compared for something as subjective as color rendition? (Not intending to be argumentative here - just asking.)
I think the X rite passport profiles would make the raws look darn near identical color wise with other Bodies using an x-rite profile. I just know I do very little color correction on my D2Xs files and usually no custom X-rite profiles, whereas I sold my D7000 because I just didnt like the color no matter what I did. Since I sold my copy I have shot with another D7000 which seemed just fine ...I am thinking mine had an issue with the color metering ?.
>whereas I sold my D7000 because I just didnt like the color no >matter what I did. Since I sold my copy I have shot with >another D7000 which seemed just fine ...I am thinking mine had >an issue with the color metering ?
That’s interesting to hear. Could have been the camera or an issue with an early implementation of ACR?
I actually made the switch from pro to prosumer (D7000 specifically) based on the post below:
Even though it had been “Topaz Spicified” I was amazed at the colors from the D7000 and bought one the next day. Unless I was using a camera most days for most of the day (where ergonomics are really worth the investment) I don’t think I would go back to the pros when they are obsoleted in 2-3 years to the extent they can no longer equal a camera costing a third their price.
I think your groups make it difficult to make a choice. My D3s is superior and completely different in this regard that the D300 that I had, for isntance. I suspect teh D700 adn D800 also are different. The D700, in fact is closer to the D3 series.
>I think your groups make it difficult to make a choice. My >D3s is superior and completely different in this regard that >the D300 that I had, for isntance. I suspect teh D700 adn D800 >also are different. The D700, in fact is closer to the D3 >series. > >Mick >http://www.mickklassphoto.com >or >Visit >my nikonians gallery>
Mon 07-May-12 10:10 AM | edited Mon 07-May-12 10:14 AM by KnightPhoto
I am another D7000 vote. Love any ISO 560 and especially even lower ISO image that comes out of the camera due to its high dynamic range. Most often for Wildlife or other subjects I am not a base ISO shooter, I need shutter speed, so I need a camera whose colours hold together as you go up the ISO ladder.
I didn't vote D4 only because I don't know it well enough yet. In another month or two I will!
My second choice would have been my D700 which really has been great over the years, very versatile image-maker!