Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Nikon D7100 1.3x option
Page <<first <prev 5 of 8 next> last>>
Aug 23, 2015 03:30:27   #
oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA
 
oldtigger wrote:
someone made this statement:
"As mentioned it reduces the size of your file thus reducing the quality somewhat too!"
someone else said:
"I use it all the time with FX lenses, it is better than a TC as there is no aperture loss, however there is resolution loss."

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 07:53:32   #
Howard5252 Loc: New York / Florida (now)
 
oldtigger wrote:
someone made this statement:
"As mentioned it reduces the size of your file thus reducing the quality somewhat too!"
Just correcting it.

Here are the two choices in the IMAGE AREA option:
DX (24x16) OR 1.3x (18x12).
PER NIKON regarding the 1.3x:
"Pictures are recorded using a 18.8 x 12.5 Image Area, producing a telephoto effect without the need to change lenses"
It's a "telephoto effect" and if there is one truism in photography, it is that nothing is free ... you pay somewhere; in this case with resolution.

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 08:07:35   #
Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC
 
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Howard5252 wrote:
Here are the two choices in the IMAGE AREA option:
DX (24x16) OR 1.3x (18x12).
PER NIKON regarding the 1.3x:
"Pictures are recorded using a 18.8 x 12.5 Image Area, producing a telephoto effect without the need to change lenses"
It's a "telephoto effect" and if there is one truism in photography, it is that nothing is free ... you pay somewhere; in this case with resolution.

Reply
 
 
Aug 23, 2015 08:32:27   #
oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA
 
Howard5252 wrote:
Here are the two choices in the IMAGE AREA option: DX (24x16) OR 1.3x (18x12).
PER NIKON regarding the 1.3x:
"Pictures are recorded using a 18.8 x 12.5 Image Area, producing a telephoto effect without the need to change lenses"
It's a "telephoto effect" and if there is one truism in photography, it is that nothing is free ... you pay somewhere; in this case with resolution.


And there is that false statement again:
". you pay somewhere; in this case with resolution."

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 08:52:06   #
Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC
 
Here once again is the definition of "RESOLUTION" http://www.elinetechnology.com/definition/967581-resolution now if you can counter the experts in photography, prove it.

oldtigger wrote:
And there is that false statement again:
". you pay somewhere; in this case with resolution."

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 09:11:38   #
oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA
 
Brucej67 wrote:
Here once again is the definition of "RESOLUTION" http://www.elinetechnology.com/definition/967581-resolution now if you can counter the experts in photography, prove it.


the number of pixels devoted to the image is not altered in any way.
My pictures show the same image size, same area, same number of pixels, same resolution in both normal and DX modes.
Pretty much proves it.

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 09:28:40   #
Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC
 
So you are saying that that definition of "resolution" is wrong and you know better. My challenge to you is start blowing up each photo separately until pixelated and see which photo breaks down first. Find an article that defines your definition of "resolution" and post it here to support your premises so that everyone can see (I did on my part) and it must apply to image from camera not lens resolution. I hope I am right that you are not a Troll and that you are just opinionated and are just unwilling to change, I on the other hand am willing to concede to your interpretation of "resolution" from the cameras MB if you can show me an article that states your interpretation.

oldtigger wrote:
the number of pixels devoted to the image is not altered in any way.
My pictures show the same image size, same area, same number of pixels, same resolution in both normal and DX modes.
Pretty much proves it.

Reply
 
 
Aug 23, 2015 09:30:31   #
Howard5252 Loc: New York / Florida (now)
 
oldtigger wrote:
And there is that false statement again:
". you pay somewhere; in this case with resolution."

If you want to believe that the 1.3 x telephoto EFFECT is free (photographically), there will be nothing I can say that will change your mind and I am finished trying.

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 09:45:35   #
oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA
 
Howard5252 wrote:
If you want to believe that the 1.3 x telephoto EFFECT is free (photographically), there will be nothing I can say that will change your mind and I am finished trying.


Show us an image test that proves the DX mode resolution suffers.

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 09:55:55   #
Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC
 
Like Howard5252 I will be finished typing as well and why don't you do the same test that I described, or maybe you don't know how.

oldtigger wrote:
Show us an image test that proves the DX mode resolution suffers.

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 10:34:36   #
oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA
 
Brucej67 wrote:
Like Howard5252 I will be finished typing as well and why don't you do the same test that I described, or maybe you don't know how.


i did your test and posted the results.
The images are the same and breakdown at the same point

Reply
 
 
Aug 23, 2015 10:41:53   #
Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC
 
Show the two separate images (FX and DX) with download and EXIF data intact.

oldtigger wrote:
i did your test and posted the results.
The images are the same and breakdown at the same point

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 10:54:52   #
oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA
 
Brucej67 wrote:
Show the two separate images (FX and DX) with download and EXIF data intact.

The full frame, normal image has the exif data included.
The image showing both normal and DX mode displays the exif for the DX mode because the normal was added onto the DX image.
UHH won't let me downlload the original 7360x4912 images so i just cropped them since we were going to blow them up at least 400% anyway,.
I figured a 6 foot by 4 foot view was large enough to determine quality.

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 11:00:52   #
Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC
 
We don't see it, anyone else who is interested see it in what he posted?

oldtigger wrote:
The full frame, normal image has the exif data included.
The image showing both normal and DX mode displays the exif for the DX mode because the normal was added onto the DX image.

Reply
Aug 23, 2015 11:04:28   #
oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA
 
Brucej67 wrote:
We don't see it, anyone else who is interested see it in what he posted?


i just downloaded the images from the forum and the exif data is intact.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 8 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.