Nikon D600 vs. Nikon D7100 comparison (daylight)

While I'm still analyzing the D600 and D7100 low light shots, here are more comparison shots between the D600 and D7100, this time in daylight.  For this test, I used the Sigma 35 1.4 on the D7100 and the Tamron 28-75 (at around 52mm) on the D600.  I know, your first reaction is that it's not a fair comparison because the Sigma is considered one of the sharpest lenses, whereas the Tamron is sharp in the center but it's not in the same league.

Limits of Highlight Recovery With Lightroom and ACR

I love many things about Lightroom, and one of them is that it is very good at highlight recovery.  However, the highlight recovery tool has limits.

Nikon D600 vs. Fuji S5 Pro highlight dynamic range

Many recent DSLRs from Nikon have been tested to show a very wide highlight range.  For example, DPReview reports that the Nikon D800 has as much as 5 stops highlight range with Active D-Lighting at Extra High.

The D600 looks to have promising highlight range.  The D600 has been tested by DXO to have a dynamic range similar to that of the D800.  In my own testing, the D600 also appears to have a fairly wide highlight range, based on the latitude I have seen for recovering highlights.

In this post, I compare the highlight dynamic range of the Nikon D600 with that of the Fuji S5 Pro, a unique DSLR that has unparalleled highlight range.  I wanted to see whether the Nikon D600 has met or even surpassed the S5's highlight dynamic range.

Experiments on Nikon D600 Exposure

UPDATE:  I posted about this on DPReview, got some helpful responses suggesting that there are issues with my shooting method.  That DPReview thread is here if you want to check it out.  I have done follow up experiments that are inconclusive as to the advice given in that thread.  The D600 still appears to overexpose.  I will do a followup post about it.

UPDATE 2: 2nd set of experiments here

I've shot with a number of cameras and they all tend to have different exposure tendencies. For example the Pentax K100D and Fuji S5 attempt to avoid blowing highlights, often producing straight-out-of-the-camera (SOOC) images that appear underexposed.  The Nikon D80 doesn't seem to be very concerned with highlights and produces SOOC images where the subject is correctly exposed but the image often has blown highlights such as in the background. Then there are cameras such as the Nikon D70 and Nikon D3 which in my opinion have a balanced exposure (taking into account the limits of the sensor's dynamic range).

In this post, I took some test shots with the D600 to evaluate whether the D600 has a tendency to overexpose or underexpose. All shots were taken in raw and processed in View NX2.

Choosing the Exposure for Dynamic Range

Over the weekend, we visited Knott's Berry Farm, one of the first theme parks in the U.S.  What I like about Knott's is that the lines are much shorter than those of Disneyland therefore we get to experience more rides within the same amount of time.  I also think Knott's has a more interesting variety of rides for young children like our 5-year old, and has more thrill rides (though not as many as Magic Mountain).  Although the production value is not as high as that of Disneyland, it is still quite high.

During our visit the heat was intense, reaching 95°F (35°C), just one degree below the all-time record of 96 for that area, and 10 degrees hotter than the average for this time of the year.  With the sun blazing overhead, the dynamic range was very wide.  I used two different exposure strategies to deal with the dynamic range.

My First Crush: the Fuji S5 Pro

This is a hands-on review of the Fuji Finepix S5 Pro, a DSLR released back in 2007 that combines the best characteristics of negative film and DSLRs.

Included here is a dynamic range comparison between the S5, the Nikon D3 and Nikon D70.

RAW vs JPEG, Myth or Fact? The Definitive Guide

Too much orange color? Hit the jump to know what's going on

Today I am going to wet my feet and discuss a much debated topic, RAW vs JPEG. This topic causes almost as much debate as the Canon vs Nikon does amongst fanboys, but this post is not about concluding which one is the best, but rather the strengths and weaknesses of each format and when to use either of them.

This post is intended for beginners and experienced photographers equally, I will compare both formats in 5 categories: white balance, highlight recovery, shadow recovery, noise and sharpness.

Hit the jump for the real showdown.

Quality vs. Contrast: Soft Light Ain't All That (Intermediate)

When starting with lighting education, the typical response to unflattering shadows is to seek a softer light source (with less defined shadows). Of course, a soft light source will be more forgiving and many people look better with soft light. However, in my view, soft light by itself is helpful but is not the answer. I suggest instead to emphasize controlling the contrast between highlight and shadow.

To illustrate the difference between these two approaches (quality vs. contrast), check out this test shot:

How does it feel? Except for dramatic purposes, it is not a look that most people seek for portraits. Yet this is a photo with a soft light source. Don't believe me? I agree it sure doesn't look like it is a photo with soft light. However, check out the shadows on the wall. The evidence is right there - shadow edges are blurred - the definition of soft light.

Now, check out the shot above, reproduced here for convenience:

How does it compare to the soft light photo above? It's still edgy (intentionally so) but has a much more mainstream look than the soft light photo above. The shot was done with an SB-800 flash, a popup flash, and of course ambient light.  The flashes were bare.  No umbrella, no softbox, no modifiers, no postprocessing. Check the shadow of the nose or the shadow of the shirt sleeve on the left arm (zoom in if needed). The shadows have a well-defined edge - evidence that hard light was used.

To make the shot work though, I controlled the contrast between highlight and shadow - not letting it get too high. If I recall, I intentionally underexposed the ambient light by about 1 stop. The SB-800 was on TTL, about 1 stop underexposed. My rationale was that with the ambient at 50% of what it should be, and the SB-800 at 50% of what it should be, both would add up to the correct exposure - except that I've controlled the direction of the light. [Note: flash blur is a risk when flash and ambient are equal in intensity but here the shutter speed was 1/250 - therefore any flash blur would not be noticeable.] The popup flash was acting as fill, about 2 stops underexposed if I recall. The purpose was to work with the (underexposed) ambient light to bring up any shadows. If I wanted a less dramatic look I could have increased the intensity of the popup flash instead (e.g., FEC -1.3), which would reduce the highlight-shadow contrast.

The above shots illustrate why in my view, controlling contrast can have more positive impact on your photo than the quality of the light. Fortunately, we don't have to choose one or the other exclusively - we can use both. However, I wanted to make the point that contrast is arguably more important than the quality of the light.

BTW, controlling contrast doesn't necessarily require another flash. For example, we can use reflectors or ambient light as fill.  To learn how to control contrast, please check out the TTL Flash Tutorial (especially Part 2). :)

Related article: simulating soft light with a hard light source.

UPDATE I found a related Strobist.com article (with much better photos!): http://strobist.blogspot.com/2008/10/on-axis-fill-ring-fill-against.html  -- Although David Hobby used a hard and even restricted key light, the photos don't look harsh at all. Instead, they look a bit edgy but pleasant, at least in part due to careful control of the ratios between key, fill and ambient.