Sun 14-Oct-12 04:03 PM | edited Sun 14-Oct-12 04:06 PM by NDGraham
I took these two moonies within minutes of each other on October 3rd using my 70-200 f/2.8VR with a TC-20E III 2x tc on my D300 (first shot) and D7000. Interesting how the denser pixel count on the D7000 seems to give more detail. (Both shots handheld.) Neill Proud to be a Montreal Nikonian http://picasaweb.google.com/NeillDGraham
Very impressive images. I'm somewhat confused though by what appear to be radical differences in the exif data between the two shots. If the D300 shot really was a 1.7 second exposure and the D7000 was 1/1000, I'm not sure your D300 was given a fair chance to compete for detail
I would expect to see a similar difference if they were both taken with the D7000. Even with VR a shot at 1.7 seconds should be softer and show less detail than one at 1/1000.
I'd love to see a comparison like this with identical exposure settings on both cameras.
Creator: Neill D. Graham Camera: Nikon D300 Lens: 70-200 mm f/2.8Shot at 380 mm Exposure: Auto exposure, Aperture-priority AE, 1.7 sec, f/5.6, ISO 400, Compensation: -10/3 Date: October 3, 2012 12:46:38AM Software: Capture NX 2.2.6 W Field Of View: 3.6 deg File: NDG_6206.NEF749 × 936 JPEG, 0.19 megabytes, Image compression: 90%
Camera: Nikon D7000 Lens: AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-EDShot at 400 mm Exposure: Auto exposure, Aperture-priority AE, 1/1,000 sec, f/8, ISO 200, Compensation: -14/3 Flash: Off, Did not fire Date: October 3, 2012 12:00:49AM Software: Capture NX 2.2.6 W Field Of View: 3.4 deg (1.40 m) File: 879 × 1,100 JPEG, 0.23 megabytes, Image compression: 92%
I too was looking at the EXIF. The D300 EXIF says f5.6, 1/500s, ISO 400 and the D7000 EXIF says f8, 1/1000s, ISO 200. This doesn't make sense to me. It seems the D300 shot was made 3 stops brighter exposure than the D7000. How can that be? Adjustments in post?
I would also think that an f5.6 (fully open aperture) versus f8 is an unfair comparison. So is 1/500s versus 1/1000s (including when handheld).
I do agree that higher pixel density would bias the D7000 to a sharper image.
As I was shooting, I had to change the exposure on each shot until I started getting viewable images.The first shots were over exposed so it meant having to play with WB until the shots were adequate. This is why the settings were different. At the time, I was not trying to compare the two cameras. That was an afterthought. If I had intended a "fair" comparison, I would have tried to use the same settings on both cameras as you suggest. This was not my intention. Try shooting moonies hand holding the gear I was and you are glad just to get bursts of shots before you have to lower the rig. Neill Proud to be a Montreal Nikonian http://picasaweb.google.com/NeillDGraham
Mon 15-Oct-12 02:46 AM | edited Mon 15-Oct-12 02:46 AM by NDGraham
Thanks for your comments, Chris. As also noted above, it would be interesting to try using the same settings on both cameras. Next time, I'll use a tripod as well and set up both bodies so we can see what the results would be then using the same lens setup on both cameras. I'm not sure why the exif data gave that 1.7 sec. number as that was not the case. It was actually 1/500 sec. as Peter noted. Cheers. Neill Proud to be a Montreal Nikonian http://picasaweb.google.com/NeillDGraham