NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: BruceSD on March 08, 2024, 05:25:47
-
.
Do You Prefer The Rendering Of "Vintage" Nikon Cameras To "Modern" Nikon Cameras? Here's a link to a quick side by side test I just did today.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/f2guru/albums/72177720315303628
To my eye, I prefer the colors, contrast, and dynamic range of the Nikon D1X to the Nikon Z6. Which do you prefer and why?????
-
One is processed to be darker and more contrasty than the other. When seeing them side by side on a 27" monitor, I prefer the left hand one, which is labelled Z6. I think this says more about my personal taste in contrast and tonality than it does about the cameras!
-
The Z6 image shows wider dynamic range of the newer mirrorless model. I think it is not all that difficult or tricky to process the Z6 image to look like D1X one.
-
The D1X had a peculiar sensor layout resulting in images with detail smear. Some equalled this to a film-like appearance. However, what result one ended up with for the D1X depended to high degree on the software used for processing the NEFs. Thus, D1X NEFs could be processed to be 10 MPix with the appropriate software, like the famous Bibble program by Eric Hyman, and having much better quality than if processed by Nikon's own software, even when the latter was set to use 10MPix size.
Another factor of importance is the lense(s) used in a comparison. F- and Z-mount lenses are inherently differently designed. I see the actual test was performed with the 75-150 E, which is a medium-contrast, not very high-resolving, optic. The text mentions D1X as having a 5.33MPix sensor which points to the NEFs not being pushed to their limit.
-
While I'm pretty poor at color (one of the reasons I shoot B&W), the snappiness of the D1 looks better to me. The Z6 photo is flat and lifeless. (The Z6 image is how I adjust my images before I start processing in Silver Efex--flat and dull. From there I can work with the tones to get what I like.)
-
I agree that the difference is due to processing (in-camera or otherwise) rather than the sensors.
-
I should find a D1X or two in my cupboards if I rummage sufficiently around for them ... perhaps set up another shoot-out?
If memory serves me -- something one never can rely on these days -- the D1X was appreciated as giving a more 'film-like' look than other DSLRs of its time. The AFS-Nikkors 17-35/3.8 & 28-70/2.8, Zoom-Micro-Nikkor 70-180mm f/4.5-5.6, Zoom-Nikkor 50-300mm f/4.5 ED, and the AFS Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 ED-IF all were great with that camera.
-
I have always processed all of my digital photographs though Camera Raw but the current version is so much better then earlier versions that I have found it necessary to update all of my NEFs. I have just finished the mammoth task of updating all (multi-thousands!) of them to today's version of the software.
These advances in software underlines the importance of keeping all original RAW files and why I always update and often re-edit each RAW file before publishing it.
-
Thank you for all of your comments!
The above images were both jpg's. I'm unable to get this old D1X to take RAW files, and it does not have the many jpg options that modern cameras have. So, the D1x just shoots one basic jpg file and I can't do jpg film simulations like I can with my Fuji X bodies.
So, when shooting the Z6, I set the jpg profile to "neutral" as I thought that it would likely be closest to the standard jpg coming out of the D1X.
Birna, if you or others are inclined to continue this little study I certain would be interested in seeing your results.
-
I think it is not all that difficult or tricky to process the Z6 image to look like D1X one.
I have previously read of people using post processing to make a CMOS sensor image have that CCD look. As I recall, the CMOS image eventually did end up looking similar to the CCD image, but the post processing steps they went through to replicate the look were quite lengthy.
Akira, please feel free to download the Z6 image file from Flickr.com and post process it to look like the D1X file. It would be interesting to see how close you can get to matching the images, and how long and how many steps it took to achieve your transformation.
-
I agree that the difference is due to processing (in-camera or otherwise) rather than the sensors.
Sorry, but I can not agree. Having owned over a dozen CCD cameras (e.g. Pentax K10D, Sony A350, Nikon D200, etc.) and many CMOS cameras, to my eye, I believe that there is a difference in color rendering between these two types of sensors.
-
D1X can produce NEFs and many converters exist to process them. PhotoNinja does them well enough if I can't get the old workhorse Bibble to run on my computers.
I'll find a camera during the weekend, hopefully. Just cross fingers I can get a battery charged to make the camera operative. Or I might have a A/C pack for it if I recall my ancient setup correctly. Somewhere the proper cable for the Garmin GPS unit I used with my D1X must be found, too.
-
I have previously read of people using post processing to make a CMOS sensor image have that CCD look. As I recall, the CMOS image eventually did end up looking similar to the CCD image, but the post processing steps they went through to replicate the look were quite lengthy.
Akira, please feel free to download the Z6 image file from Flickr.com and post process it to look like the D1X file. It would be interesting to see how close you can get to matching the images, and how long and how many steps it took to achieve your transformation.
Bruce, I'm no expert of PP, but would like to give it a try. Please set your Flicky page to allow the download of the image files (just for a while).
-
Please set your Flicky page to allow the download of the image files (just for a while).
Done...
-
D1X can produce NEFs and many converters exist to process them. PhotoNinja does them well enough if I can't get the old workhorse Bibble to run on my computers.
I'll find a camera during the weekend, hopefully. Just cross fingers I can get a battery charged to make the camera operative. Or I might have a A/C pack for it if I recall my ancient setup correctly. Somewhere the proper cable for the Garmin GPS unit I used with my D1X must be found, too.
Great, I wish you luck and look forward to seeing your results.
The D1X batteries and chargers are somewhat rare and expensive. The only place they can be purchased here is USA is on Ebay. Even Amazon does not carry them. Also, they are expensive. Used D1X cameras are selling on Ebay for $100 USD (with no battery or charger). Batteries are selling for around $100 USD, and the charger for over $100 USD.
I currently have 2 D1X batteries and am charging them both up. I plan to make some photos using some of my better lenses this weekend. Also, I just was able to activate RAW capture on my D1X. I've got various different image editing software programs that I can use to process the D1X RAW files. I'll first try Luminar Neo (my current favorite). So far, I have not found any type of RAW file that Neo was unable to open.
-
Bruce, I'm no expert of PP, but would like to give it a try. Please set your Flicky page to allow the download of the image files (just for a while).
Here's a link to a thread on how one photographer successfully in post makes his CMOS images look like CCD images. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/61-post-processing-articles/350673-get-ccd-look-k-3-k-3ii-lightroom.html
While it seems like a lengthy process, he has saved it as a preset and now is able to do it with just one click.
-
Done...
Thank you! I have downloaded the largest JPEG files from both cameras.
-
The first attempt using ACR. The first one is the original D1X image and the second one, the edited Z6 one. Both images are resized.
The adjusted parameters: exposure, contrast and shadow in the "Light" tab, temperature, vibrance and saturation in the "Color" tab, hue, saturation and luminance sliders of red, blue and yellow in the "Color Mixer" tab.
The mid-tone area (the lawn on the right-hand side and the foliage in the background) looks a bit too bright...
-
Great, I wish you luck and look forward to seeing your results.
The D1X batteries and chargers are somewhat rare and expensive. The only place they can be purchased here is USA is on Ebay. Even Amazon does not carry them. Also, they are expensive. Used D1X cameras are selling on Ebay for $100 USD (with no battery or charger). Batteries are selling for around $100 USD, and the charger for over $100 USD.
I currently have 2 D1X batteries and am charging them both up. I plan to make some photos using some of my better lenses this weekend. Also, I just was able to activate RAW capture on my D1X. I've got various different image editing software programs that I can use to process the D1X RAW files. I'll first try Luminar Neo (my current favorite). So far, I have not found any type of RAW file that Neo was unable to open.
Looking forward to your results with the Nikon D1x ( I have to search my attic, must have a D1x too somewhere)
-
The first attempt using ACR. The first one is the original D1X image and the second one, the edited Z6 one. Both images are resized.
The adjusted parameters: exposure, contrast and shadow in the "Light" tab, temperature, vibrance and saturation in the "Color" tab, hue, saturation and luminance sliders of red, blue and yellow in the "Color Mixer" tab.
The mid-tone area (the lawn on the right-hand side and the foliage in the background) looks a bit too bright...
Thanks for the processing and posting, Akira. At first glance: The Z6 has a kind of 'extreme' sharpness, where the results with the D1x are 'rounder'
-
Thanks for the processing and posting, Akira. At first glance: The Z6 has a kind of 'extreme' sharpness, where the results with the D1x are 'rounder'
As would be expected, since most processing software simply downsampled and smoothed to get 6MPix (nominal) instead of the 10MPix the D1X sensor could deliver. The reason is of course the problem of how to handle the rectangular pixel matrix of the D1X which had approx. dimensions 4028 x 1324 pix. Most programs rearranged this to be approx. 3008 x 1960 pix, which lead to a strong smoothing of detail. Many users compared this to a 'film-like' character of the files. A few programs, including Nikon's own software, could do the development to approx 4000 x 2600 pix. This lead to much better acuity but depending on the details of the subject might also introduce an issue of jagged lines.
-
As would be expected, since most processing software simply downsampled and smoothed to get 6MPix (nominal) instead of the 10MPix the D1X sensor could deliver.
Adobe Camera raw will now process the 10Mp file (Best Quality) (4011x2614) if you select this option in the ACR workflow.
I presume that this is the best development possible?
-
Well, yes, if the subjects don't have strong line structures in the 'wrong' direction. No, if you wish to play safe and use the 6MPix version instead. Do note the camera always record the rectangular pixel matrix thus the user can freely choose the best processing later.
I retrieved a well-worn D1X body from my cupboards and also found a battery and the bespoke GPS cable, but no charger. Later, found a car charger for the battery, however my Peugeot only delivers juice to the charger if I'm driving. Ouch. Ruth's birthday is today so I cannot start on any long drive to charge the battery. If it isn't dead already?
-
I'll forego D1X testing for now until I can locate its charger and more batteries, or the wall socket to car charger adapter I just ordered arrives from the 'far East'.
Meanwhile, I'll pull some old D1X NEFs from my digital archives and try running these through a modern program. Or failing that, fire up a virtual old Windows installation on one of the Linux boxes and run the files through Bibble there.
-
Thanks for the processing and posting, Akira. At first glance: The Z6 has a kind of 'extreme' sharpness, where the results with the D1x are 'rounder'
Thank you for the initial assessment. The Z6 file was processed from the JPEG file and then resized. The sharpness should be quite a bit affected by the processing and resizing, admitting that D1X has much less megapixels in the first place.
Compared to the unprocessed (only resized) D1X image, the Z6 image still looks a bit warmer, and the yellow color on the facade of McDonald shop is less pale.
That said, I would think some film simulation plug-in is more convenient than using an old camera with the CCD sensor, if you go for the film-look.
-
When raw files are converted into a useable form, how much of the process is specific to a particular sensor? (I mean the initial conversion, before any tinkering or choices by the photographer.) In other words, how much of the differences that Bruce reports can be ascribed to the sensor versus the combination of sensor plus initial conversion?
-
The first attempt using ACR. The first one is the original D1X image and the second one, the edited Z6 one. Both images are resized.
The adjusted parameters: exposure, contrast and shadow in the "Light" tab, temperature, vibrance and saturation in the "Color" tab, hue, saturation and luminance sliders of red, blue and yellow in the "Color Mixer" tab.
The mid-tone area (the lawn on the right-hand side and the foliage in the background) looks a bit too bright...
Akira, thank you for sharing your efforts to make the two images look similar. Your post processed Z6 image does look much closer to the original 1DX image. But even after your adjustments, the yellows/greens/reds of the D1x CCD image still look (to my eyes) different than those colors in the processed Z6 image. Now, which version an individual prefers is up to the individual. For me, I the yellows/greens/reds of the 1DX still look a bit "richer" to my eyes.
-
I just had a quick try, Bruce. Like Akira, I can get much closer but am struggling to match the colours. Is it me or do the yellows from the D1X have a bit more green in them?
-
I took some more photos with my ancient Nikon D1X today. I'll be posting a few.
Today I used a Nikkor 105mm DC on the D1X. Shot it wide open with the DC set to 0. Here's a photo I took of a red fire hydrant across the street.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/f2guru/53577249249/in/dateposted-public/
For a camera that's 22 years old, I'm impressed with its' color and sharpness (notice the individual grass shoots and the brush marks on the curb).
The original file was a TIFF file. I set the D1X to RAW uncompressed, and TIFFs were what I got. Oh well, I guess that I can work with TIFFs although I'd prefer a RAW file.
-
I just had a quick try, Bruce. Like Akira, I can get much closer but am struggling to match the colours. Is it me or do the yellows from the D1X have a bit more green in them?
Good observation. Maybe that explains the difference in colors.
-
NEF is a specialised TIF file.
-
Here's a colorful shot from today using D1X and 105mm f2 DC Nikkor.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/f2guru/53577683320/in/dateposted-public/
I'm really liking the CCD colors that I get directly out of my Nikon 1DX.
-
I'm quite pleased with the sharpness in this D1X image.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/f2guru/53577691420/in/dateposted-public/
I'm beginning to think that for my typical Internet image postings, I probably don't need anything better than this old D1X.
-
Akira, thank you for sharing your efforts to make the two images look similar. Your post processed Z6 image does look much closer to the original 1DX image. But even after your adjustments, the yellows/greens/reds of the D1x CCD image still look (to my eyes) different than those colors in the processed Z6 image. Now, which version an individual prefers is up to the individual. For me, I the yellows/greens/reds of the 1DX still look a bit "richer" to my eyes.
Bruce, one thing to consider is that my computer monitor is just a generic one and not dedicated or calibrated for the image processing.
That said, it should be easy to make the color of Z6 image "richer" even processed from JPEG which is a lossily (sic!) compressed 8 bit data, as opposed to an original 14 bit RAW file. In this case, I was trying to make it closer to the one shot with D1X.
By the way, I'm curious about the potential to render the gradation of D1X sensor. For example, I wonder how it can tackle the rendition of the dawn gradient between orange area around the rising sun and the blue area of the sky?
I think the comparison is similar to that of analog signal on LP records and digital ones on CD. The dynamic range of the latter is clearly much wider than that of the former.
-
.
Another photo from my $100 USD, 5-megapixel, Nikon D1x and 105/2 DC Nikkor lens today.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/f2guru/53578163989/in/dateposted-public/
I especially like how these ancient CCD sensors render the color red...
-
This thread reminds me of the comments on the D70s images I posted in this thread https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=9143.msg151762#msg151762
-
.
Another photo from my $100 USD, 5-megapixel, Nikon D1x and 105/2 DC Nikkor lens today.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/f2guru/53578163989/in/dateposted-public/
I especially like how these ancient CCD sensors render the color red...
Yes, very nice rendering.
-
.
Another photo from my $100 USD, 5-megapixel, Nikon D1x and 105/2 DC Nikkor lens today.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/f2guru/53578163989/in/dateposted-public/
I especially like how these ancient CCD sensors render the color red...
So do I with one caveat, it is not easy to keep it control. The red channel had a tendency to overblown. I remember having trouble with the shoot of a redhead friend in a red gown and another time with some intense red flowers. still, the results were very pleasing
-
I am waiting for my batteries to load, but I used the AC Adapter EH-4 to get a shot of Dobby ;)
D1x AF 50/1.8
-
I am waiting for my batteries to load, but I used the AC Adapter EH-4 to get a shot of Dobby ;)
D1x AF 50/1.8
I like this photo. Nice colors and composition. A noble looking cat.
I would have expected to see a bit more noise in the curtains at the upper right. Am I correct in assuming that you used base ISO and noise reduction in post? Because the cat's face remains quite sharp, I expect that if noise reduction was used that you probably painted it in with a brush locally to avoid reducing the subject's sharpness.
-
Thanks Bruce.
Yes I have used the base ISO here. I did brighten the original (+0.7) in ACR, did some 'smart' sharpening after resizing but left the noise 'as it is'. So post-processing was limited on this image.
-
Li-On batteries are now available for the Nikon D1x instead of the unreliable NiMH.
https://electropapa.com/en/battery-replacement-for-nikon-en-4-1800mah-72v-li-ion-500268400 (https://electropapa.com/en/battery-replacement-for-nikon-en-4-1800mah-72v-li-ion-500268400) Pretty cheap in Europe via Amazon
-
Li-On batteries are now available for the Nikon D1x instead of the unreliable NiMH.
https://electropapa.com/en/battery-replacement-for-nikon-en-4-1800mah-72v-li-ion-500268400 (https://electropapa.com/en/battery-replacement-for-nikon-en-4-1800mah-72v-li-ion-500268400) Pretty cheap in Europe via Amazon
John, I have exclusively been using NiMH batteries in my two Nikon D1X cameras for some time now, and have had no problems with them. I have no expertise in battery technology, and would love to learn why Li-On batteries are better than NiMH. Do Li-On batteries last longer?
-
John, I have exclusively been using NiMH batteries in my two Nikon D1X cameras for some time now, and have had no problems with them. I have no expertise in battery technology, and would love to learn why Li-On batteries are better than NiMH. Do Li-On batteries last longer?
Yes
"High-quality Li-ion cells for optimal device performance: " *)
Lithium-ion batteries have a high energy density and are among the most powerful batteries.
Compared to NiMH batteries, they have a low self-discharge rate and are not subject to memory effect.
They do not require regular discharging so are low-maintenance.
When correctly stored, these rechargeable batteries have a long service life, are durable and have a high number of possible charging cycles.
Li-ion batteries are used in various portable devices with high energy requirements e.g. smartphones, notebook computers, cameras and power tools. These batteries can also be used in radio-controlled models and telecommunication applications.
*) Quote from the link I posted earlier.
-
Streetgarden
D1x with the Nikkor AF-D 50/1.4
-
Streetgarden
D1x with the Nikkor AF-D 50/1.4
Lovely example of the richness of yellows, greens and blues out of a CCD sensor.
-
Thanks Bruce.
I like the output of the Nikon D1x. Great sensor.
Same scene, same lens, but now in the early morning sun
-
I used the D700, D800, Df, Z6ii and now I'm using the Zf.
In parallel, I have used the Olympus OM-D E-M5 and -M1.
In the whole set:
- the Olys had a nice rendering, but somewhat "chemical": they looked heavily processed. Not surprizing, given the smaller format.
- of the Nikons, only D800 was disappointing (bad color) but it remains a fine BW camera, esp. for studio portraits. Df was maybe the best, and better than the D700. Zf is very good and, despite having the same sensor, better than the Z6ii. All subjective statements, not resulting from side-by-side comparison.
-
The Nikon D1 was binning D1X was half binning :o 8)
http://www.sassmannshausen.eu/2016/02/05/d1x-15th-anniversary/
See 10 MP ;)
-
This is a photomicrograph of the D1 sensor at 20X magnification. The subpixel structure (for the 10MPix sensor) is clearly visible. By binning 4 subpixels Nikon arrived at the original 2.7MPix sensor for the D1.
(photo taken in 2003, just saying....)
-
.
Thanks to everyone for your input. I've learned so much from you. This is a great website, with very giving members.
I'm having so much fun with my D1x, that I purchased 3 more (average price $50 USD).
Yesterday I tested the following old Nikkor lenses on them: 105mm f/2.5; 135mm f/2.8 ; and 200mm f/4. While I know it's unfair to compare such a wide variety of focals to each other; I none-the-less found that I preferred the rendering of the non-Ai 135mm f/2.8 best (see attached photo). What other older Nikkors have you found that pair nicely with the D1X?
Next I'll like try a bunch of Zeiss Milvus lenses on the D1x to see which of them I prefer. Specifically, it will be interesting to see how the Zeiss Milvus 135/2 compares to the humble Nikkor non-Ai 135/2.8.
-
I will try more lenses but my experiences with the AF's 50/1.4 and 50/1.8 are very good.
This is with the AF 50/1.8 at 2.8
-
IBrowsing my archives, was surprised to find this photo actually was taken with the D1X (and AFS 200/2). The autumn colours of the riparian vegetation are gorgeous.
(the archive file wasn't optimised for web viewing thus I replaced it with a more appropriate version)
-
IBrowsing my archives, was surprised to find this photo actually was taken with the D1X (and AFS 200/2). The autumn colours of the riparian vegetation are gorgeous.
(the archive file wasn't optimised for web viewing thus I replaced it with a more appropriate version)
The colours are indeed splendid!
-
IBrowsing my archives, was surprised to find this photo actually was taken with the D1X (and AFS 200/2). The autumn colours of the riparian vegetation are gorgeous.
(the archive file wasn't optimised for web viewing thus I replaced it with a more appropriate version)
Beautiful Birna !!
-
IBrowsing my archives, was surprised to find this photo actually was taken with the D1X (and AFS 200/2). The autumn colours of the riparian vegetation are gorgeous.
(the archive file wasn't optimised for web viewing thus I replaced it with a more appropriate version)
This image reminds me of the video of you and Michael Reichmann posted on the Luminous Landscape website which I still watch and enjoy occasionally.
-
IBrowsing my archives, was surprised to find this photo actually was taken with the D1X (and AFS 200/2). The autumn colours of the riparian vegetation are gorgeous.
(the archive file wasn't optimised for web viewing thus I replaced it with a more appropriate version)
Did you shoot it at the NikonGear workshop in Norway? I think I recall all of us shooting under the spectacular waterfall,,,
-
This was back in 2010,,, :o ;D
Noct Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 AI-s P on D3
-
No NG workshop as NG wasn't in existence yet. This was autumn 2004 when I and Lloyd Chambers toured Western Norway.
-
I was also thinking it didn't fit with the timeline of D1X,,, but the place?
-
I was also thinking it didn't fit with the timeline of D1X,,, but the place?
The place is called 'Gudbrandsjuvet' ('Gudbrand'=male given name, 'juvet'=narrow gorge). Located in Norddal municipality, Møre og Romsdal County, Norway; you'll find it directly on Google Maps. Extremely easy accessible by car -- of course -- although I never seen anyone else making the same picture.
The waterfall is actually a side river emptying into the main River Valldøla.
-
Avocado leafs
The D1X with the AF-D 50/1.4
-
Must blow off the dust of my AFD 50/1.4, apparently. I used it a lot with the D1/D1H/D1X cameras, I recall fondly. Later it is fallen into disuse, which is sad.
-
When we talk about the 'true colours' of the D1X, we probably should base our assumptions on whatever Nikon factory cooked up for the jpgs straight off the camera. Otherwise we open a whole can of software-related worms.
I agree that the jpgs from the D1X look very pleasant and natural, dare I say with a 'film look'?
I got a replacement battery of the modern Li-Ion type rushed to me so I can now try the camera at least. Main problem so far is finding CF cards small enough for the camera to accept them :) 2GB apparently is an upper limit size-wise?
The Voigtländer 58mm f/1.4 SL.2 does excellent service on the old-timer camera, by the way. It has to do until I find my older 50mm f/1.4 Nikkors in their hiding place.
-
However -- and here comes the funnier part -- we can of course indulge the peculiar pixel layout of the D1X and make images look as alienated as desired :)
Nikon D1X with Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 AI, native 4024 x 1324 pix
-
I got a replacement battery of the modern Li-Ion type rushed to me so I can now try the camera at least. Main problem so far is finding CF cards small enough for the camera to accept them :) 2GB apparently is an upper limit size-wise?
Yes I checked. The D1X won't accept Fat-converted 4GB cards (The Fuji S2 does). 2GB is the max unfortunately ;)
-
Must blow off the dust of my AFD 50/1.4, apparently. I used it a lot with the D1/D1H/D1X cameras, I recall fondly. Later it is fallen into disuse, which is sad.
I can imagine, it's a great lens. Love this version on all Camera's (and the size is a bonus), has more character than the later G 50/1.4. Too bad it won't auto focus on the Z's.
-
I started looking up D1X images in my archives and was a little surprised on the diversity displayed by my old captures.
I fondly remembered this example because it once was published in double page-spread size and looked gorgeous. Also recalled the practical difficulties to be sorted before I succeeded with my planned shoot.
'Catch the cake snatcher'
Nikon D1X, AFS 300mm f/2.8
-
Great shot, Birna. What kind of bird is that?
-
Some kind of passerine or sparrow, I believe. Very fond of cake, that's for sure. And small.
-
The D1X was the first of the digital Nikons with GPS, which endeared the model to me. The GPS hook-up was very awkward by today's standards and required special cables and a GPS unit (Garmin) communicating over a serial port.
Another aspect was the availability of lens CPU units allowing for the first time 'chipping' of manual Nikkors. Sometimes even the most bizarre combinations could be tried out, like my attempt of using the RS-Micro-Nikkor 50mm f/2.8 for my D1X -- under water. It did work, but involved a high risk of killing the camera and its electronics circuitry. Such disasters were part of exploring the new digital era.
The snail is Littorina saxatilis, by the way.
-
Does the D100 share the image charms of the D1X?
-
The D1X was the first of the digital Nikons with GPS, which endeared the model to me. The GPS hook-up was very awkward by today's standards and required special cables and a GPS unit (Garmin) communicating over a serial port.
Another aspect was the availability of lens CPU units allowing for the first time 'chipping' of manual Nikkors. Sometimes even the most bizarre combinations could be tried out, like my attempt of using the RS-Micro-Nikkor 50mm f/2.8 for my D1X -- under water. It did work, but involved a high risk of killing the camera and its electronics circuitry. Such disasters were part of exploring the new digital era.
The snail is Littorina saxatilis, by the way.
Love the unusual transition from detail to out of focus background that looks almost painted. The colours are great too.
-
Does the D100 share the image charms of the D1X?
Not in my experience. Other members may chip in with their own stories.
-
I don't own a D1x. Had some experience with the d100, but is the d2x that has some je ne sois quoi (and for me the D200 as well, also in IR)
I am attached to older models because I had developed an emotional relationship with them. I still love to take the D3s (great gear) d300 (not so great but I still.like it) etc.... So I may be bias :)
-
Not in my experience. Other members may chip in with their own stories.
No,not in my experience too. The sensor outcome of the D1x reminds me more of the Fuji S3 and Fuji S5
Posted in earlier in March 2024
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10896.0;attach=61230;image)
-
Winter is on repeat -- again.
A spot of morning RGB with the CV 58/1.4 SL.2 on my D1X.
-
No,not in my experience too. The sensor outcome of the D1x reminds me more of the Fuji S3 and Fuji S5
I just bought a D100 (original box, etc) on a whim - but it was only ¥6000, so I’ll probably flog it once it arrives.
-
Try the camera first -- you might happen to like it :)
Other people's responses are not more important than your own.
-
Does the D100 share the image charms of the D1X?
I never owned the D100, but do own three copies of the D200. Both the D200 and D1x of course use CCD sensors. Although the D200 has higher resolution, I find that I prefer the rendering of my D1x.
I owned a D300 with CMOS sensor for many years, frankly, I never cared for it's colors or sharpness. I would not trade my D1X for 4 mint D300 bodies.
Yesterday I took the below photo using my D1X and an adapted Leica 180/2.8 R lens. I don't like the color of the blue in the sky. This Leica lens renders skys far too cyan. I much prefer the way my Nikkor 105/2 DC lens renders blue skys. So, I think that what lens you put on your D1X also impacts the overall color of images that it makes.
-
Appears to be mint!
-
Just charge the battery and fire away !!! A nice find.
-
Lest people should think all evolution is perfect and old stuff is just crap, have a look at this comparison..... I shot with the AFS 300mm f/4 PF-E on D1X and Zf. As this lens operates only at f/4 on the D1X, I used it wide open on both cameras. ISO 400. AF is very snappy on both cameras, the caveat being for the D1X, one should use AF-ON only otherwise the cameras starts to mull over the current geopolitic situation or whatever occupies its mindset.
I haven't labelled the crops which is 100% for the Zf. No sharpening., NEFs run straight through Photo Ninja. Make your own decision what is the "better" one.
-
D100 was my first DSLR bought in 2004 until I got a D300 in 2009. It taught me about lighting as I could follow the EXIF since I was lax in recording aperture and shutter speed in film.
Colours were nice, rear screen so small I never used it and it did not meter with AI lenses. The 6mp CCD gave a nice colour rendition.
Here are some straight from camera converted in Capture NX2 from a trip to HKG in 2004. Like most of my shots even today, I seem to tilt slightly to the right
-
Lest people should think all evolution is perfect and old stuff is just crap, have a look at this comparison..... I shot with the AFS 300mm f/4 PF-E on D1X and Zf. As this lens operates only at f/4 on the D1X, I used it wide open on both cameras. ISO 400. AF is very snappy on both cameras, the caveat being for the D1X, one should use AF-ON only otherwise the cameras starts to mull over the current geopolitic situation or whatever occupies its mindset.
I haven't labelled the crops which is 100% for the Zf. No sharpening., NEFs run straight through Photo Ninja. Make your own decision what is the "better" one.
I can't tell. ;)
Kerria Japonica
D1x AF Micro Nikkor 55/2.8
-
Oh well. Tried a new 4tb CF card. Formatted in camera, but got the dreaded CHA error message. Tried a known to be working card from another camera, formatted in camera, and got CHA again. Cards do not have a lock switch, so that’s not the issue.
Examining the pins in the camera they look fine, and not bent.
Oh dear. Looks like it’s going back to the dodgy seller :(
-
Lest people should think all evolution is perfect and old stuff is just crap, have a look at this comparison..... I shot with the AFS 300mm f/4 PF-E on D1X and Zf. As this lens operates only at f/4 on the D1X, I used it wide open on both cameras. ISO 400. AF is very snappy on both cameras, the caveat being for the D1X, one should use AF-ON only otherwise the cameras starts to mull over the current geopolitic situation or whatever occupies its mindset.
I haven't labelled the crops which is 100% for the Zf. No sharpening., NEFs run straight through Photo Ninja. Make your own decision what is the "better" one.
The 2nd image (right image) has the most details and better contrast so I would say that it is the Zf. But this image also have a bit of red color cast in the snow?
The 1st image (left image) has "whiter" snow.
-
I didn't change the colour balance which for both cameras were "Auto W/b". Not sure why there was a slight reddish cast for the Zf, unless it picked up reflections of indoors lights in the window?
The D1X is left panel and Zf is right panel, so your assumption is correct,
As to the similary in details, which at first seemed a bit unexpected: both cameras have in fact an identical pixel pitch on the major axis approx. 168 pix/mm. The difference is for the minor axis where D1X is only 44% of the Zf in terms of pixel pitch, thus clearly inferior as far as maximum resolution is concerned. However, for nature scenes, this might not be as limiting as one would think since Nature rarely displays a fine-gridded pattern.
-
Oh well. Tried a new 4tb CF card. Formatted in camera, but got the dreaded CHA error message. Tried a known to be working card from another camera, formatted in camera, and got CHA again. Cards do not have a lock switch, so that’s not the issue.
Examining the pins in the camera they look fine, and not bent.
Oh dear. Looks like it’s going back to the dodgy seller :(
Why not try a smaller card, say 1 or 2GB? 4GB may well be outside what the camera's built-in file system (likely FAT16?) can handle.
-
Trying a 4gb card, which works in another camera, but the issue remains. ‘This card cannot be used’.
Don’t have a smaller card …
—-
Apparently without the v2 firmware the D100 will only recognize up to 2GB cards, but I cannot find a way to check the current firmware :-(
-
Trying a 4gb card, which works in another camera, but the issue remains. ‘This card cannot be used’.
Don’t have a smaller card …
I believe the max is 2gb, the same as for the D1x
-
Trying a 4gb card, which works in another camera, but the issue remains. ‘This card cannot be used’.
Don’t have a smaller card …
What I do in your situation is to use a free download called "Paragon Partition Manager 17CE" to turn the 4gb card into either a 1gb or a 2gb card. Always worked for me.
-
I didn't change the colour balance which for both cameras were "Auto W/b". Not sure why there was a slight reddish cast for the Zf, unless it picked up reflections of indoors lights in the window?
The D1X is left panel and Zf is right panel, so your assumption is correct,
As to the similary in details, which at first seemed a bit unexpected: both cameras have in fact an identical pixel pitch on the major axis approx. 168 pix/mm. The difference is for the minor axis where D1X is only 44% of the Zf in terms of pixel pitch, thus clearly inferior as far as maximum resolution is concerned. However, for nature scenes, this might not be as limiting as one would think since Nature rarely displays a fine-gridded pattern.
The red cast is probably refleksions.
I had a D2X and sold it quite cheap for about 500 Euros many years ago. The new owner was very happy and he wrote back that he liked the way it rendered. He was a professional photographer.
For me the D5200 was a big step-up in quality. Both resolution and ISO performance. Maybe he could see some in D2X images I did not notice. It was a very well made camera.
Now I have a Z50 and for me a step-up compared to D5200. Even that Z50 is only 20 MP. I look at Z5 in the moment as there are some good offers. But I wonder how much of a difference the images will show.
The IBIS is nice for non VR lenses and also the better ISO performance and also that the DOF is less for portraits etc. Maybe when Z6III arrives the Z5 price will drop further. I am happy to be a little "behind" and then save a lot of money. But if Z6III comes out as a 40 MP of so wtih better ISO performance than Z5 I may be tempted for a Z6III or if Z6II drops a lot. Z50 is almost vintage now?
-
Lest people should think all evolution is perfect and old stuff is just crap, have a look at this comparison.....
There is an adage (source unknown) that seems appropriate:
There are two kinds of fool: one says, "This is old and therefore it is good;" the other says, "This is new and therefore it is better."
-
Lest people should think all evolution is perfect and old stuff is just crap, have a look at this comparison..... I shot with the AFS 300mm f/4 PF-E on D1X and Zf. As this lens operates only at f/4 on the D1X, I used it wide open on both cameras. ISO 400. AF is very snappy on both cameras, the caveat being for the D1X, one should use AF-ON only otherwise the cameras starts to mull over the current geopolitic situation or whatever occupies its mindset.
I haven't labelled the crops which is 100% for the Zf. No sharpening., NEFs run straight through Photo Ninja. Make your own decision what is the "better" one.
I guess D1x is on the right with warmer lighter rendering - I did notice the Zf's strong contrast on mine. Depending on usage one or the other may be better suited.
-
I guess D1x is on the right with warmer lighter rendering - I did notice the Zf's strong contrast on mine. Depending on usage one or the other may be better suited.
The placements were the opposite.
-
Just checked with my D100: 8GB CFs are handled fine, internally formatted with FAT32!
I stand corrected!
Further tests revealed:
D100 uses FAT16 for internal formatting.
4/8GB CFs externally formatted with FAT32 are accepted, even with double capacity (both show 410 RAWs uncompressed) shown in the LCD! (I didn't check if they will be filled up...)
4/8GB CFs internally formatted are truncated to 2GB (210 RAWs uncompressed)
-
The D100 finally worked with a 2GB card :-)
It has firmware v2, which should have enabled it to use larger cards (even if only 2gb of the card is recognized), but I am at least happy the 2gb card works.
Can’t seem to get a shutter count for this camera, but it is outwardly in very nice condition. Now I need to study how to use this freakin’ thing!
-
Can’t seem to get a shutter count for this camera, but it is outwardly in very nice condition. Now I need to study how to use this freakin’ thing!
The Shuttercount in the EXIF was introduced with the Nikon D2h, so the earlier camera's won't have the option to read this information.
-
More D1X images from my archives. Indulge me :)
Nikon D1X, AF-D Zoom-Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8
-
Indulge me
Happily!
-
More D1X images from my archives. Indulge me :)
Nikon D1X, AF-D Zoom-Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8
.
You used the perfect shutter speed to freeze the young man jumping, AND to make the waterfall look it's best. Well done.
The shirt is a very rich looking blue - love that CCD sensor.
As far as sharpness goes, I downloaded the file and looked at it full size. I was shocked that I could make out the man's toenails on his left foot!
Did this young man land safely on the rocks, or did he end up in the water on his backside?
-
He didn't fare well -- got himself quite wet. The ladies weren't too impressed .....
I now got a nice almost mint MH-15 charger and hope this will be able to revive some of the old D1/H/X batteries I found floating around. The new Li-Ion kind is apparently very good, but on the expensive side when shipping and taxes are added. So would be nice to be ale to use the older batteries despite their shorter longeivy and lower capacity.
-
Is it just a pipe dream to be able to somehow get a D1X firmware updated to v5, in this day and age? ??? ??? ???
-
Ask the bit people :)
It's a strange experience to put a modern AFS lens on my ancient D1 and notice how well -- within limits, of course, the AF works.
I might convert a D1X to infrared again and have fun with it. With the new charger in place, batteries are not that limiting factor anymore.
-
The new Li-Ion kind is apparently very good, but on the expensive side when shipping and taxes are added.
For the Netherlands Amazon (nl or de) had the best deal. Are they active in Norway?
-
This one has had some good reviews.
https://electropapa.com/en/battery-replacement-for-nikon-en-4-1800mah-72v-li-ion-500268400
-
The link does not mention what is the most compatible charger for this replacement Li-ion battery and its more contemporary chemistry.
From my limited understanding of the chemistry of Li-ion and LiMH batteries, their individual chargers are not necessarily compatible with both of these chemistries.
Am I missing something here?
TIA
This one has had some good reviews.
https://electropapa.com/en/battery-replacement-for-nikon-en-4-1800mah-72v-li-ion-500268400
-
The link does not mention what is the most compatible charger for this replacement Li-ion battery and its more contemporary chemistry.
From my limited understanding of the chemistry of Li-ion and LiMH batteries, their individual chargers are not necessarily compatible with both of these chemistries.
Am I missing something here?
TIA
I don’t have that battery, but reports on DPR forums say that the stock Nikon chargers work, however unintuitive that is.
-
I have charged the "new" Li-Ion battery pack with Nikon's original car charger, plus the MH-15 which I just received.
Apparently both work well. My old NiMh batteries did a quick resurgence with the car charger, but died pretty fast off in use. Just a few frames. When I used the MH-15 to refresh then recharge them, they had died completely? Perhaps I try the car charger again to see if its more crude and rough charging can ignite new sparks within the packs.
-
The first, and accidental, shot with my 'new' Fujifilm S3 Pro.
Plusses for me are:
Takes AA batteries.
F mount.
Somewhat able to tweak JPEGs in camera.
Not heavy.
Main minus:
The weird interfaces for settings.
-
Before I used a Sony, I thought the Fuji S3 Pro was the weirdest DSLR ever. I had the "special edition" S3 Pro UV/IR and acording to the maker the camera should only be sold to forensic experts!! Only change from the ordinary model was they had replaced the filter over the sensor and put stickers on the box stating "Limited Edition" and "UV is dangerous". Probably an attempt to shift surplus stock before the launch of the S5Pro??
User interface was clumsy and frustrating awkward. The camera devoured batteries at an alarmingly fast rate and 'boasted' 30 sec max. live view, if the camera was in the mood for such frivolities. AA batteries and Norwegian winter was a bad combination. Raw files were almost impossible to process unless run through the "Hyper Utility" or whatever they designated the worst program I have ever used. Despite being labelled for 'UV' use, the camera didn't record much more in UV than ordinary cameras , even through my UV-Nikkor lens :( I later found out the Fuji didn't record more than a fraction of the EXIF data compared to my Nkons, thus writing a routine to automatically find the lens and extract shooting data to my database was tricky indeed.
-
The Fuji S2 used the 4 AA batteries plus a pair of CR123 batteries supposedly for powering the flash only. A few functions did behave oddly as the CR123's became drained. Like the S3 the S2 also used F mount lenses.
Color temperature could be controlled manually on the S2 but there was no way to set tint. If a series of exposures was made under constant lighting conditions, indoors or outdoors, variation in the saturation of blues and yellows was common enough to not be a surprise.
-
I've used the D1X on and off for a while, thanks to the new Li-ion battery packs.
Apart from the lack of GPS connectivity, or rather, the extremely clumsy and akward GPS hook-up, the camera still has a lot to offer. Colours are really realistic and good, when the NEFs are run through NX Studio, Darktable, or Photo Ninja. The NEF format is 4012 x 1324 pix, which by NX studio or other Nikon software is processed into 3008 x 1960 pix. Processing to 10MPix is an option and results are on the soft side. Darktable by default makes 4012 x 2648 pix images and Photo Ninja keeps the 4012 x 1324 layout unchanged. Later they can be resized to match the other alternative dimensions. Photo Ninja is able to extract more fine detail at the expense of a slight increase in noise compared to the others, though.
Combined with the AFS 17-55mm f/2.8 Nikkor the D1X makes for a functional and well handling unit, but is rather heavy as I think I'll resort to smaller lenses for it for future work with this vintage camera. Which, after being stood in my camera exhibition cabinet for 15 years, still works flawlessly.
In terms of sharpness, the D1X in fact has approx. the same horizontal resolution as the Zf (1), viz. ~170px/mm. The vertical resolution is only half that of the Zf, however, at ~85 px/mm. Thus the motif itself dictates what comes out the sharpest. Plus of course the Zf is FX format and covers a wider area than the D1X, from the same vantage point.
-
A few from the D200
-
With such a glorious model available, any camera probably wpuld have turned in excellent results :)
By the way, the last image shows bad banding in the sky. Major edits on a jpg is rarely a good idea. Neither is walking in coarse gravel and pebbles with heels ....
-
To bring back a point I've made earlier in the discussion of the D1X. KIt has virtually the same horizontal resolution ~170 px/mm as the Zf and its siblings. Vertical resolution is poorer at around 50%.
For many scenes, the difference isn't that great. It all depends. And of courde the D1X is DX format thus covers a narrower angle of view than the bigger FX models (same FX lens from same vantage point).
Which is which of the crops below? Taken with Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 AiS both cameras set to native base ISO (100: Zf, 125: D1X). The lens at f/5.6 for both. 100% for each crop. The camera was hand held thus crops are not identical, but you get the general idea.
-
With such a glorious model available, any camera probably wpuld have turned in excellent results :)
By the way, the last image shows bad banding in the sky. Major edits on a jpg is rarely a good idea. Neither is walking in coarse gravel and pebbles with heels ....
Yes on all accounts. Gorgeous, talented, sweet models. We use to work together and they were game for any pictorial idea. Talk about luxury!
That day Candy walked all around the desert in those shoes :)
I'm think the banding was a problem with that specific camera body and i had to exchange it for a new new one but I'm not sure. I do know I used two D200s on those early days.
-
To bring back a point I've made earlier in the discussion of the D1X. KIt has virtually the same horizontal resolution ~170 px/mm as the Zf and its siblings. Vertical resolution is poorer at around 50%.
For many scenes, the difference isn't that great. It all depends. And of courde the D1X is DX format thus covers a narrower angle of view than the bigger FX models (same FX lens from same vantage point).
Which is which of the crops below? Taken with Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 AiS both cameras set to native base ISO (100: Zf, 125: D1X). The lens at f/5.6 for both. 100% for each crop. The camera was hand held thus crops are not identical, but you get the general idea.
I´ll say zf the second one because of the handling of the highlights? but not sure at all.
-
D1x first, because of the jagged lines on the roof rails?
-
The second is also sharper, so that could be the Zf. First one looks like the D1x
-
Yes, 2nd has more resolution and less artifacts so must be Zf :-)
-
D1x first, because of the jagged lines on the roof rails?
Ditto!
-
For many scenes, the difference isn't that great.
I'm concerned
For the last 5 months, nearly all the photos Birna has taken in Noway have contained snow.
Suddenly these don't.
Bright sunshine in each image seems suspicious!
:P
-
Yes, you are correct, Bruno. However, if such delibate attempt to disclose the nature of sensor had been avoided, telling the two cameras apart -- based on the sensor outcome - had been more difficult. Given they are separated by two decades of techology development, that is some food for thought.
-
Colin, we had the last snowfall three days ago .... however, any snow will very quickly disappear as night temperatures have climbed above the freezing point.
-
I agree Birna, I had to look for a clue. Without the question, I would probably not have noticed the difference.
BTW, this thread, particularly the comments about the colors, made me look for a D1x, which I just found at 50€. I’m eagerly waiting to use it.
-
You'll need a charger and working batteries as well :) I gave up finding my old MH-16 charger, only found a car charger, on first search. So purchased a MH-15 and 2*Li-Ion battery packs for a total of (equivalent) 120 Euro. I already had the camera, plus the various other D1/D2 versions. For the D2H/X I have chargers and batteries, just remains to test the packs are in working order. Hopes are not very high and if they fail to charge properly, I let my revival of the vintage Nikons end with the D1X.
It's interesting to put modern AFS/G lenses on the D1X and learn they work -- now, that is backwards compatibility !!
-
The body comes with a charger which used to work till the battery died and I found another original charger and 3 batteries, one original declared dead by the seller but with two replacements working. Testing scheduled for next week, I’m visiting a friend in Provence this week.