Better body with more pixels + my old lens = worse photos?
Discussion
Hi all,
I thought I would ask the PH experts on this as I am a little confused about the debates I have read on other forums!
I currently have a D90 which I like very much, but I want to sell it so I can buy a D7000, primarily because I read the D7000 handles noise better at high ISO and I have found myself getting paid by friends to take shots of stuff like DJ's in nightclubs and festivals etc so I find myself shooting at around 800 or 1600 ISO to get good shots, depending on how dark the venue is.
Also, I think someone well known on here said that in their opinion the D7000 was the best crop sensor available right now in any camera, which is praise enough for me!
But... what I have been reading on other forums is that some people say that because the higher-res sensor is so good, it is showing up all the flaws in poor lenses and actually making the overall photo look slightly worse than if you took it with say a D90 or D70 etc.
Can anyone explain this to me please as I am not sure if it is true, or what it means in the real world to someone like me with a few bits ok 'half decent' lenses.
The glass I currently use is:
Nikon 18-200mm VR (love this lens, use it every time I go travelling abroad, it just does everything I need and the images always seem to come out fantastic)
Nikon 50mm F1.8
Nikon AF-D ED 80-200 F2.8
Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 (use this loads for my car photography and cityscape/landscape type stuff)
Thanks in advance
I thought I would ask the PH experts on this as I am a little confused about the debates I have read on other forums!
I currently have a D90 which I like very much, but I want to sell it so I can buy a D7000, primarily because I read the D7000 handles noise better at high ISO and I have found myself getting paid by friends to take shots of stuff like DJ's in nightclubs and festivals etc so I find myself shooting at around 800 or 1600 ISO to get good shots, depending on how dark the venue is.
Also, I think someone well known on here said that in their opinion the D7000 was the best crop sensor available right now in any camera, which is praise enough for me!
But... what I have been reading on other forums is that some people say that because the higher-res sensor is so good, it is showing up all the flaws in poor lenses and actually making the overall photo look slightly worse than if you took it with say a D90 or D70 etc.
Can anyone explain this to me please as I am not sure if it is true, or what it means in the real world to someone like me with a few bits ok 'half decent' lenses.
The glass I currently use is:
Nikon 18-200mm VR (love this lens, use it every time I go travelling abroad, it just does everything I need and the images always seem to come out fantastic)
Nikon 50mm F1.8
Nikon AF-D ED 80-200 F2.8
Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 (use this loads for my car photography and cityscape/landscape type stuff)
Thanks in advance
Don't worry about it. The photos won't be worse.
What people mean is that the more pixel density you have (i.e. more pixels on the same size of sensor), the better the lens and your technique has to be to get the benefit of the increased resolution. But at very worst, you'll have the same resolving ability as with your current camera. Most likely you'll get increased resolution, depending on how good your technique is. Plus you get whatever other benefits the newer camera has.
And exactly the same things apply with your current camera; it's not something that only comes into relevance above a certain pixel level.
What people mean is that the more pixel density you have (i.e. more pixels on the same size of sensor), the better the lens and your technique has to be to get the benefit of the increased resolution. But at very worst, you'll have the same resolving ability as with your current camera. Most likely you'll get increased resolution, depending on how good your technique is. Plus you get whatever other benefits the newer camera has.
And exactly the same things apply with your current camera; it's not something that only comes into relevance above a certain pixel level.
^^^ This - exactly.
I moved to a D2X five years ago. Quite high pixel density and this was fussy on glass. But let's put that in context, I did a reshuffle of glass because I wanted to. Not because I was getting poor results. It would show the difference between a 180mm f/2.8 and a 70-300mm ED version, I didn't find my 20mm f/2.8 too brilliant and changed to a 17-35mm which was brilliant, a 55mm f/2.8 micro wasn't brilliant at other than close up....
.... but I was looking right in at each pixel. It was perfectly fine for 30"x20" prints from the 20mm and from an 85mm f/1.8D I used to have.
Now I've changed to a D800 which is similar in pixel density to the D7000 - perhaps quite not as extreme. Others have commented that I'll start to notice issues in the 17-35mm. Maybe my 50mm and 85mm f/1.4s won't be so good because they're older AF-Ds.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
The sensor is absolutely stunning in what it can do and I have now started using Lightroom lens profiles more which correct the distortions and vignetting. But would I take a step back to 2003/4 technology of a D2X? No, no, no! Now my bigger issue is the diffraction that is noticeable as you go past f/11. That's just physics you can't cure by throwing more money on glass.
Although I don't have exactly the line up you have, the 80-200mm and 50mm will be somewhere better than pretty good, and the 18-200mm is a compromise anyway, but I bet will turn out perfectly acceptable results. Pixel peep if you want to be a pessimist, otherwise JFDI!!!
I moved to a D2X five years ago. Quite high pixel density and this was fussy on glass. But let's put that in context, I did a reshuffle of glass because I wanted to. Not because I was getting poor results. It would show the difference between a 180mm f/2.8 and a 70-300mm ED version, I didn't find my 20mm f/2.8 too brilliant and changed to a 17-35mm which was brilliant, a 55mm f/2.8 micro wasn't brilliant at other than close up....
.... but I was looking right in at each pixel. It was perfectly fine for 30"x20" prints from the 20mm and from an 85mm f/1.8D I used to have.
Now I've changed to a D800 which is similar in pixel density to the D7000 - perhaps quite not as extreme. Others have commented that I'll start to notice issues in the 17-35mm. Maybe my 50mm and 85mm f/1.4s won't be so good because they're older AF-Ds.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
The sensor is absolutely stunning in what it can do and I have now started using Lightroom lens profiles more which correct the distortions and vignetting. But would I take a step back to 2003/4 technology of a D2X? No, no, no! Now my bigger issue is the diffraction that is noticeable as you go past f/11. That's just physics you can't cure by throwing more money on glass.
Although I don't have exactly the line up you have, the 80-200mm and 50mm will be somewhere better than pretty good, and the 18-200mm is a compromise anyway, but I bet will turn out perfectly acceptable results. Pixel peep if you want to be a pessimist, otherwise JFDI!!!
You have absolutely nothing to be concerned about. I'm using a D5100 as a second body a the moment (same sensor as D7000) with no issues what so ever and that includes the use of an 18-200 amongst other things. Nikon ship those with 18-55 kit lenses so they can't be that worried.
As above, if you zoom to 100%, the image you see of a high mp camera might suggest 'fuzzier' IQ than that of a lower mp body but that is only because you'll be looking at a much smaller part of the image and so any camera shake will start to show. Present both images at the same size and there will be nothing to tell them apart, except that the D7000 will have slightly better dynamic range and a fair bit better high ISO.
As above, if you zoom to 100%, the image you see of a high mp camera might suggest 'fuzzier' IQ than that of a lower mp body but that is only because you'll be looking at a much smaller part of the image and so any camera shake will start to show. Present both images at the same size and there will be nothing to tell them apart, except that the D7000 will have slightly better dynamic range and a fair bit better high ISO.
NinjaPower said:
The glass I currently use is:
Nikon 18-200mm VR (love this lens, use it every time I go travelling abroad, it just does everything I need and the images always seem to come out fantastic)
Nikon 50mm F1.8
Nikon AF-D ED 80-200 F2.8
Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 (use this loads for my car photography and cityscape/landscape type stuff)
Thanks in advance
Your pics wont be worse. Viewed at 100% they may look worse but printed/viewed the same size they will be as good or better.Nikon 18-200mm VR (love this lens, use it every time I go travelling abroad, it just does everything I need and the images always seem to come out fantastic)
Nikon 50mm F1.8
Nikon AF-D ED 80-200 F2.8
Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 (use this loads for my car photography and cityscape/landscape type stuff)
Thanks in advance
18-200 is OK, superzoom, probably see some improvement.
50/1.8 should be great
80-200f2.8 will be good
11-16 will be great.
Dont worry.
RobDickinson said:
D400/D600 may be out soon , the D7000 will get a refresh to the d7100 but not for a while I think.
...and even if it does, the D7000 sensor IS phenomenally good. It's difficult to see a huge step forward.There are some stunningly good shots on here with the likes of the D300s and D700, given the slightly newer D7000 I think it will be a little while before there's another big step forward - so you're splashing out for this over, what, 3, 4 year lifespan? Per year that's a bargain!
K12beano said:
..and even if it does, the D7000 sensor IS phenomenally good. It's difficult to see a huge step forward.
There are some stunningly good shots on here with the likes of the D300s and D700, given the slightly newer D7000 I think it will be a little while before there's another big step forward - so you're splashing out for this over, what, 3, 4 year lifespan? Per year that's a bargain!
Yes I'm thinking even if the D7100 or whatever does come out, I will still be happy with the D7000 for quite a while.There are some stunningly good shots on here with the likes of the D300s and D700, given the slightly newer D7000 I think it will be a little while before there's another big step forward - so you're splashing out for this over, what, 3, 4 year lifespan? Per year that's a bargain!
Off to either Jessops or Wilkinsons to buy one tomorrow as their prices actually seem similar to the online retailers for once!
Bought one!
Walked into Jessops with £820 in £20's burning a hole in my pocket... Only to find, surprise surprise that they didn't have a D7000 in stock.
In fact they didn't have hardly anything left in there and I just got the usual "We'll order you one".
No thanks.
Went to Wilkinsons and they had 2 in stock so bought one
But... Got back to my office, opened the box so I could charge it up this afternoon so I could play with it tonight and discovered there was NO BATTERY!!
Phoned the shop and they were a bit funny with me on the phone to be honest, but then they guy suddenly changed his tune and said "oh erm, yeah, sorry... Just bring it back this afternoon and we will sort it for you"
Very strange!
Walked into Jessops with £820 in £20's burning a hole in my pocket... Only to find, surprise surprise that they didn't have a D7000 in stock.
In fact they didn't have hardly anything left in there and I just got the usual "We'll order you one".
No thanks.
Went to Wilkinsons and they had 2 in stock so bought one
But... Got back to my office, opened the box so I could charge it up this afternoon so I could play with it tonight and discovered there was NO BATTERY!!
Phoned the shop and they were a bit funny with me on the phone to be honest, but then they guy suddenly changed his tune and said "oh erm, yeah, sorry... Just bring it back this afternoon and we will sort it for you"
Very strange!
K12beano said:
PS - double check on Nikon's website what the supplied accessories are supposed to be for any model.
Good idea.I wonder if anything else is missing?
I also wonder why the battery is missing at all... Been played with in the shop? A return from a customer?
These are questions I will be asking
NinjaPower said:
K12beano said:
PS - double check on Nikon's website what the supplied accessories are supposed to be for any model.
Good idea.I wonder if anything else is missing?
I also wonder why the battery is missing at all... Been played with in the shop? A return from a customer?
These are questions I will be asking
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff