My D200 producing funny noise/grain, could it be borked?

Alok said:
Here is a 400 percent crop to see what its like...

Hmm... Is this normal?
Click to expand...

Go to Advanced -> Gimmicks -> Games under main menu and uncheck Maze.

Seriously though, judging from your experience I fairly confidently assume you're shooting raws (nefs whatever), so I'd blame the converter software first. Normally this sort of moir/aliasing only appears when you're shooting some aligned lines at nearly maximum lens resolving density.

Check your raws with a raw viewing software (the one that shows exact Bayer patterns). Don't remember the name as I'm a film guy, but there is one out there.

Edit:
Here you go, someone agrees with me!
 
Last edited:
otispunkmeyer said:
^ well ok, but i dont see that being a too useful a test... i know im not that good at photography but i'd never underexpose anything by 8 stops. thats like creating a situation that doesnt really exist, to prove a point. its moot.
Click to expand...

Well, uh, duh. I'd hope you wouldn't be underexposing by 8 stops, but the test was to show just how far you could push Raw data as opposed to JPEG. That example alone should have been enough to show you how much more exposure and colour data Raw contains. Exposure latitude can be more beneficial than you might think!


i was reading on ken rockwells site and he reckons that most of the time, raw is a waste of time. especially for action shots. he did some comparos and you can actually see that the jpg is more vibrant, but has a little less contrast/detail/sharpening than the Raw which has been able to retain the details in the bushes n trees much better. the Raw does actually look better, but this was on a D200 @100% crop.
Click to expand...

Good god, not Ken fucking Rockwell. The guy is a tool who just spews BS with zero facts to back it up. Vibrant? Yeah, because the guy shoots JPEG with the saturation cranked to maximum in-camera. Have you also noticed that 99% of the shots on his site are crap? Yeah, not someone I would take photo advice from. There's a couple decent tidbits of info in his site, but the vast majority is shit. Also, his e-panhandling is massively annoying. All these things are the reasons that he's the running joke of the photographic community.

(Sorry, but KR's distribution of misinformation drives me crazy.)
 
Last edited:
Go ahead, BCS, tell us how you really feel :lol:

I follow his updates for the entertainment value and gadgetry news, but, yeah, he euphemizes "opinion flip-flopping" as "epiphanies" and his photos are...meh. And he needs to get off the film train. WE GET IT, YOU LIKE FILM. WE DON'T CARE.

Someone needs to make a parody site called "kencockwell.com" :lol:
 
Last edited:
He does have a point on the D40 though. :mrgreen:

(see sig)
 
BerserkerCatSplat said:
Well, uh, duh. I'd hope you wouldn't be underexposing by 8 stops, but the test was to show just how far you could push Raw data as opposed to JPEG. That example alone should have been enough to show you how much more exposure and colour data Raw contains. Exposure latitude can be more beneficial than you might think!




Good god, not Ken fucking Rockwell. The guy is a tool who just spews BS with zero facts to back it up. Vibrant? Yeah, because the guy shoots JPEG with the saturation cranked to maximum in-camera. Have you also noticed that 99% of the shots on his site are crap? Yeah, not someone I would take photo advice from. There's a couple decent tidbits of info in his site, but the vast majority is shit. Also, his e-panhandling is massively annoying. All these things are the reasons that he's the running joke of the photographic community.

(Sorry, but KR's distribution of misinformation drives me crazy.)
Click to expand...

calm it man!

thanks for not quoting the rest of what i siad right after the first bit... you know the bit that said i know what your trying to show... (sorry i hate selective quoting because sometimes it looks like a deliberate attempt to make me look like a dick)


as for ken...i gathered he was a bit of douche from his rather arrogant style of writing. like i said i only just discovered his site when a friend linked to this monster http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/13mm.htm

that is a biblically sized lens
 
freefall said:
six-shooter-IMG_2426.jpg
Click to expand...

That photo is a fake, you can tell because he is wearing his watch on his left hand and all his cameras are right handed.

KR-WAP-2k.jpg


This image show that his Nikon is a special left handed camera and that he is left handed (watch on his right hand). :D
 
ken_rockwell.jpg

:idiot:

ok I'm just bored while Alok is trying to find his way out of the maze :?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top