D850 - The Superb; the Good & OK; the Ugly

[Frank Fremerey]

The Link shows some great photos. In table top still life, the split screen focussing seems a really nice feature. His example with the two ladies is phantastic and this is only a tilt shift, not a real Sinar setup.

[Frank Fremerey]

.... and reported, I bet .... 

I trust that picture under reply #1 was only to illustrate your point, and not for being an example of good composition.

I like the picture and the band likes the picture.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Silent shooting with optical viewfinder in a DSLR outside of live view is possible all it takes is a pellicle mirror and electronic shutter.

[chambeshi]

Photography Life have just published a detailed review of the D850, acknowledged to be a work in progress that'll be updated

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-d850

[David H. Hartman]

Silent shooting with optical viewfinder in a DSLR outside of live view is possible all it takes is a pellicle mirror and electronic shutter.

Yes but! Who wants to loose an f/stop of exposure and half the brightness of the viewfinder particularly at night? Unfortunately silent SLR viewing requires a special camera. I can't be a mode that one turns on and off.

We have the wrist TV and even finally have true JetPack Aviation not just a rocket pack that allows 15 seconds of flight and then sudden death! ...

JetPack Aviation

All we need is for some Sci Fi to become reality and for Nikon to be there first with the patents.

Dave Hartman

[Jan Anne]

I like the picture and the band likes the picture.

That is of course what counts.

To my eye however the shadows are way over lifted with nasty artifacts all over the image, so your remark about induced noise is not surprising as you will induce noise with any raw file when overcooking an image like this.

There's a lot of DR leg room in high res files from the D8xx or a7RII but it still isn't limitless

[Matthew Currie]

That wasn't a rangefinder window but rather a photocell for non-TTL light metering.

Dave

Sorry, I guess I misremembered. I just recall that there was a prototype F with an extra window.

[David H. Hartman]

I'm pretty sure I read that the Nikon F was based on the Nikon SP. The SP was widened to make space [in the center] for a mirror box.

Dave

[MFloyd]

I'm pretty sure I read that the Nikon F was based on the Nikon SP. The SP was widened to make space for a mirror box.

Dave

Indeed:


F and SP body, side by side


first F body with clip-on “not through the lens” external selenium meter


Nikon F with early Photomic model (viewfinder with built-in exposure meter, but without TTL-metering)

courtesy Nico Vandijk

[Frank Fremerey]

That is of course what counts.

To my eye however the shadows are way over lifted with nasty artifacts all over the image, so your remark about induced noise is not surprising as you will induce noise with any raw file when overcooking an image like this.

There's a lot of DR leg room in high res files from the D8xx or a7RII but it still isn't limitless

You are right. Not limitless. If I expose for the lights I have to filter the chrominance noise from the pulled shadows, a behaviour not seen to such an extent with the 24 MP Sony sensor where I found this troublesome only at higher ISO values.

If I expose correctly, like 18 percent grey of the middle between the important parts as in right and left side of faces, I get a lot of blown highlights combined with a lot of sunken shadows. I could of course use huge reflectors, but not on a live gig. A white tent as diffuser would help, but they came for the music not for the photos.

A thing to try is underexpose plus set in-camera-shadow-push to "high" but this usually gives a plastic look similar to the one I produced above.

ETTR is not a good idea either in such a situation. You want to avoid blown highlights with the D850. ETTR is walking a thin blade.

Solution might be to use another RAW converter that is better in shadow pulling. I hear ACR trumps NXD here.

I will continue to experiment.

[Erik Lund]

The light balances seems to be way off in that image Frank.


To me it looks like blown highlights that shine and colour noise in the a pumped up HDR look that I don't like.


It is like a lot of elements in the image is pulling in very different directions.

[Frank Fremerey]

The light balances seems to be way off in that image Frank.


To me it looks like blown highlights that shine and colour noise in the a pumped up HDR look that I don't like.


It is like a lot of elements in the image is pulling in very different directions.

Erik. Ist there a good how to on dealing with this kind of lighting? The example was exposed for the lights and later developed for the shadows in such a way that I could save all shadows and all lights. Later I had to compress the dynamic range again. I took the decision to blow the clouds from the sky and not to make all notes on the score readable. I wanted balanced lights on the faces, I wanted the eyes look not like black holes. Here is another example. This time I exposed for the eyes and used the blown highlights as a symbol for brightness

[Erik Lund]

First, of course it is allowed to blow highlights, but it should work with the subject not against Lot's of nice into the sun images on this site New thread maybe?

When shooting in light conditions like your sample, it will be a compromise always, you are not in control of the light as such however you have some freedom to operate regarding other elements that has a huge impact on the final image, such as:


Your position and angle with regards to the direction of light

Exposing so the highlights can be recovered, usually around 1/6 stop down from Standard Matrix Metering
Choose a lens that doesn't flare easily, good coatings, long lens hood no filters
Pull up exposure in PP
pull down highlights in PP
pull down shadows in pp


Very similar light in Bergen Norway, Den Gamle By,,, done how I like it   Leica M9


L1000250 by Erik Gunst Lund, on Flickr
 

[MFloyd]

I like the picture and the band likes the picture.

If the band likes the picture, well so be it, alleluia.  I guess they value more the souvenir aspect of the picture than it's intrinsic photographic quality.  You might like the picture for similar reasons; but I have quite difficulties to understand that a professional photographer can second such a picture: (1) you are talking about "double HDR"; for me this supposes combining more than one picture to overcome a wider dynamic range; it appears that this seems to be a single picture with some PP to achieve the same objective; what "double HDR" means: up to you to explain; (2) composition: well, this goes simply nowhere, or should I say, it goes in all directions.  For me (1) can be solved by improving your PP skills; or adapting the shooting angle e.g.; (2) the art of composition is a much more subtle one; there are some basic rules; but the rest is "ars", sense, feeling, and much more a gift than something learned (BTW the picture under #26 is of similar nature i.e weak composition).

I would have stopped after my first comment, but as you seem to subscribe the picture in it's entirety. Therefore, my quid pro quo.

[Frode]

First, of course it is allowed to blow highlights, but it should work with the subject not against Lot's of nice into the sun images on this site New thread maybe?

When shooting in light conditions like your sample, it will be a compromise always, you are not in control of the light as such however you have some freedom to operate regarding other elements that has a huge impact on the final image, such as:


Your position and angle with regards to the direction of light

Exposing so the highlights can be recovered, usually around 1/6 stop down from Standard Matrix Metering
Choose a lens that doesn't flare easily, good coatings, long lens hood no filters
Pull up exposure in PP
pull down highlights in PP
pull down shadows in pp


Very similar light in Bergen Norway, Den Gamle By,,, done how I like it   Leica M9


L1000250 by Erik Gunst Lund, on Flickr

Well captured! The reflection in the instrument gives the image almost like a 3D- effect.