Nikon D750 & D780

rookies said:
Notice you really love your 70-200 seems like your most used lens?

Cracking image
Click to expand...

Thanks Andrew. Interestingly, The 24-85 VR is my most used lens [emoji4]
 
Paulie-W said:
Interesting technique ... I usually (well used to) hold it like that throwing side swipe under arm :)
Click to expand...

Not my technique, but somehow she seems comfortable with it.
 
snerkler said:
There's two camps, those that say it doesn't affect RAW and those who says it does ;)
Click to expand...

I have done some study on Nikon's Actibe D Lighting.

In a nutshell, this setting tries to suppress highlights and boost shadows to give a balanced image and not blow or underexpose a shot.

If you set it on camera and shoot raw and use Nikon raw software, it will be fine as the curve it uses will be maintained.

If you use any other raw converter - DO NOT use any other setting than off as the camera applies a tone curve that may result in a underexposed photo.

If you shoot jpeg, this can give you good results in certain scenes.

I use the off setting on Camera and use the command in CNX2 sometimes where it really renders a nice image and boosts shadows or reduces highlights on both raw and jpeg. Also corrects contrast and black level.
 
anibap said:
I have done some study on Nikon's Actibe D Lighting.

In a nutshell, this setting tries to suppress highlights and boost shadows to give a balanced image and not blow or underexpose a shot.

If you set it on camera and shoot raw and use Nikon raw software, it will be fine as the curve it uses will be maintained.

If you use any other raw converter - DO NOT use any other setting than off as the camera applies a tone curve that may result in a underexposed photo.

If you shoot jpeg, this can give you good results in certain scenes.

I use the off setting on Camera and use the command in CNX2 sometimes where it really renders a nice image and boosts shadows or reduces highlights on both raw and jpeg. Also corrects contrast and black level.
Click to expand...
That's interesting, I will get around to testing it properly one day with some 'scientific' tests. In theory active d lighting is like camera profiles in that it's set on the jpeg and not the RAW file, RAW data is just that. However, from other people's findings it does effect the RAW file still, and if using a program such as LR that doesn't recognise the profile it won't add it. It might be a little like WB and camera profiles in that it makes such negligible difference to the RAW file that folk say not to worry about it.

The guy taking the Nikon Class I went to who advised me that d lighting does affect RAW also says that WB and camera profile will affect the RAW, but to what degree is debateable. TBH though I've not found a single shot to date where auto WB hasn't been pretty damn close to what I'm seeing with my eye so I don't worry about WB too much. As for camera profile, I don't tend to swap it from standard as I always open up my files as Adobe Standard profile and find Nikon Standard and Landscape profiles in lightroom far too contrasty. Flat profile is supposed to be good and allows for even more recovery, but I've never tried it. Maybe I will one day.

The only issue with using all these profile settings etc on the camera is that the histogram on the camera is for the jpeg image and the RAW file histogram can be quite different when you import into LR etc.
 
Pros and cons of d-lighting

Here I prefer the image without d-lighting
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and-explore/article/fsqd6p6h/active-d-lighting.html

But here I prefer both with d-lighting
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-an...exposures-with-nikon-s-active-d-lighting.html


Interesting that you can bracket to have one shot with d-lighting and one without and choose later which is best, might try that next time for a bit of fun ;)

@anibap I've not really used the Capture-NX software as I didn't like the layout or controls, but am interested to see how it handles profiles and d-lighting and such like. Can you import into NX to get the camera settings and then export straight into LR to do the rest of the adjustments? Or do you have to export to the hard drive as a TIFF and then import this TIFF into LR? If it's the latter can you also export as a .DNG to get smaller file sizes as TIFF's are huge?
 
rookies said:
That interesting saying he wouldn't suggest upgrading from a A7ii to a A7rII whilst his camera is the A7Rii
Click to expand...
And haven't you had the A7ii and come back to the D750?
 
snerkler said:
And haven't you had the A7ii and come back to the D750?
Click to expand...

I had a A7ii yes and it was dirty as hell went 3 times in a week for a sensor clean it was bad.. I could of had another there and then but decided to go back to a D750 as they gave me a great deal where I didnt acutely lose anything money wise..
 
rookies said:
That interesting saying he wouldn't suggest upgrading from a A7ii to a A7rII whilst his camera is the A7Rii
Click to expand...
He owns both, but uses the A7II more. See again.
 
snerkler said:
@anibap I've not really used the Capture-NX software as I didn't like the layout or controls, but am interested to see how it handles profiles and d-lighting and such like. Can you import into NX to get the camera settings and then export straight into LR to do the rest of the adjustments? Or do you have to export to the hard drive as a TIFF and then import this TIFF into LR? If it's the latter can you also export as a .DNG to get smaller file sizes as TIFF's are huge?
Click to expand...
I haven't tried the setting in Camera on my D750 or D610, but on using it on D5100 and importing into LR most pics were underexposed in raw.

I can open in NX2 and import in LR as jpg or tiff.
 
anibap said:
He owns both, but uses the A7II more. See again.
Click to expand...

The Subtitles as a bit poor on the video as I am sure your aware I am Hard Of hearing.. But thank you for clarifying this for me..
 
rookies said:
The Subtitles as a bit poor on the video as I am sure your aware I am Hard Of hearing.. But thank you for clarifying this for me..
Click to expand...
Sorry, he says it is not worth the upgrade rather spend on lenses and the A7II is his main camera for wedding.
 
anibap said:
I haven't tried the setting in Camera on my D750 or D610, but on using it on D5100 and importing into LR most pics were underexposed in raw.

I can open in NX2 and import in LR as jpg or tiff.
Click to expand...
That's a shame, either you lose a lot of data or have huge files. Shame Nikon and Adobe haven't come together to get the two to work seamlessly like LR and PS
 
anibap said:
Sorry, he says it is not worth the upgrade rather spend on lenses and the A7II is his main camera for wedding.
Click to expand...

Yeah I got that bit.. Did he say if the AF is really the much difference think he said just a bit but not enough for the upgrade?
 
snerkler said:
That's a shame, either you lose a lot of data or have huge files. Shame Nikon and Adobe haven't come together to get the two to work seamlessly like LR and PS
Click to expand...
Also one reason why I don't use LR much even though I have a free license. I prefer CNX2 rendering over LR. D750 is perhaps the last camera I would use CNX2 , so have to learn LR at some point.
 
anibap said:
Also one reason why I don't use LR much even though I have a free license. I prefer CNX2 rendering over LR. D750 is perhaps the last camera I would use CNX2 , so have to learn LR at some point.
Click to expand...
I've just had another quick play with Capture NX, it's sooooo 'clunky' compared to LR, 5 mins and it drove me mad ;) There's a delay between making changes and the changes actually being applied. Interesting to see how it renders the profiles though. Also, there is an option to add d-lighting even though it's not set on my camera.

I notice that you quote CNX-2 not CNX-D, is there much of a difference?

Edit: just done another quick test. Camera standard in NX-D and LR are 99%+the same once vignette was taken care of in LR. At least it was on the shot I tested it on. Colours were the same, reds etc had the same hue.
 
Last edited:
anibap said:
Not my technique, but somehow she seems comfortable with it.
Click to expand...
As long as she can throw it, mate ;) ... My daughter throws like ................ a girl :rolleyes:
 
So, if shooting RAW + JPEG, is it possible to have the Active D lighting applied only to the jpeg, and have a genuine RAW too ?
If so, when importing into LR, would the active d curve (or whatever ) be recognised, or is it only using Nikon software?
I shoot raw only, but have thought of shooting raw + jpeg, and applying some in camera effects to the jpeg.
 
GHP said:
So, if shooting RAW + JPEG, is it possible to have the Active D lighting applied only to the jpeg, and have a genuine RAW too ?
If so, when importing into LR, would the active d curve (or whatever ) be recognised, or is it only using Nikon software?
I shoot raw only, but have thought of shooting raw + jpeg, and applying some in camera effects to the jpeg.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that it's applied to both. LR won't recognise it in the RAW file but obviously the JPEG will have it applied as the camera has already processed the file to produce the JPEG.
 
I guess my luck had to run out sometime, the £600 70-200 was an absolute crapshoot, AF was clunking and then stopped working after 3 shots...refund it is!

On the plus side, my bargain 50 ART is being replaced by 35 ART and JJs 85mm 1.4, so I'll actually have the combo I want :)
 
ukaskew said:
I guess my luck had to run out sometime, the £600 70-200 was an absolute crapshoot, AF was clunking and then stopped working after 3 shots...refund it is!

On the plus side, my bargain 50 ART is being replaced by 35 ART and JJs 85mm 1.4, so I'll actually have the combo I want :)
Click to expand...

Doh!
 
I've had worse luck buying stuff from proper shops than I have off eBay! Biggest issues with the latter have been DoA kit for my server which just goes straight back and is refunded. So far so good on the camera kit - where was your lens from?
 
I think I've gone soame way to determining why d-lighting affects RAW files and underexposes them. I did some test shots this morning setting exposure in full manual taking shots with and without d-lighting. First of all I shot without d-lighting and set the exposure so that the meter was zeroed. I then turned d-lighting on and to high and it was then telling me that the same shot was going to be 0.7 ev over exposed. I shot two more shots, one with the original exposure settings and one with the light meter zeroed according to the d-lighting exposure. Here's the results.

1. No d-lighting: jpeg and RAW 'normal'
2. d-lighting active but exposure left unchanged: jpeg underexposed, RAW file exactly the same according to my eyes and the histogram
3. d-lighting active exposure set according to the d-lighting light meter reading: jpeg exposed correctly, RAW file 0.7 ev underexposed.

So my take on this is that d-lighting does not affect the RAW file per se but affects the exposure/light meter. D-lighting appears to underexpose the image in order to lift the shadows in processing, and hence at the same time preserving highlight detail. This would explain why RAW files are underexposed, it's like d-lighting is adding a global exposure fine tune in a negative value and it is only during the processing stage that shadows are lifted. I would imagine that Capture NX does this same, if you could see the unaltered RAW it would be underexposed but obviously it recognises d-lighting was active and automatically adjusts for it in post.
 
Toby, repeat the test using a non manual mode - it will affect the raw file. The reason why it didn't affect the raw in manual was that you didn't make any changes as such and the camera won't (because it is in manual!!). In any automated (semi or otherwise) mode if it affect the meter, it affects the exposure it therefore MUST affect the raw file ...
 
snerkler said:
I think I've gone soame way to determining why d-lighting affects RAW files and underexposes them. I did some test shots this morning setting exposure in full manual taking shots with and without d-lighting. First of all I shot without d-lighting and set the exposure so that the meter was zeroed. I then turned d-lighting on and to high and it was then telling me that the same shot was going to be 0.7 ev over exposed. I shot two more shots, one with the original exposure settings and one with the light meter zeroed according to the d-lighting exposure. Here's the results.

1. No d-lighting: jpeg and RAW 'normal'
2. d-lighting active but exposure left unchanged: jpeg underexposed, RAW file exactly the same according to my eyes and the histogram
3. d-lighting active exposure set according to the d-lighting light meter reading: jpeg exposed correctly, RAW file 0.7 ev underexposed.

So my take on this is that d-lighting does not affect the RAW file per se but affects the exposure/light meter. D-lighting appears to underexpose the image in order to lift the shadows in processing, and hence at the same time preserving highlight detail. This would explain why RAW files are underexposed, it's like d-lighting is adding a global exposure fine tune in a negative value and it is only during the processing stage that shadows are lifted. I would imagine that Capture NX does this same, if you could see the unaltered RAW it would be underexposed but obviously it recognises d-lighting was active and automatically adjusts for it in post.
Click to expand...

That's very helpful, thanks, and exactly what I'd assumed.
 
So I finally picked up a D750.. bought second 2nd hand.. great nick, 1 year old UK model with 7k shutter count.. no recall on serial.. Couple of wee points.. coming from a D700 viewfinder seems very small as does top LCD display, slightly less ergonomic than the D700.. It came with a Sigma 24-35mm F/2, which is probably too much glass for me, but ice for a play none the less.. also a 50mm Sigma macro which seems great.. Just need some new SD cards and I'm away.. :-)
 
technics100 said:
So I finally picked up a D750.. bought second 2nd hand.. great nick, 1 year old UK model with 7k shutter count.. no recall on serial.. Couple of wee points.. coming from a D700 viewfinder seems very small as does top LCD display, slightly less ergonomic than the D700.. It came with a Sigma 24-35mm F/2, which is probably too much glass for me, but ice for a play none the less.. also a 50mm Sigma macro which seems great.. Just need some new SD cards and I'm away.. :)
Click to expand...

1yr old, you sure its not effected by recalls? Congrats, its a great camera.
 
technics100 said:
So I finally picked up a D750.. bought second 2nd hand.. great nick, 1 year old UK model with 7k shutter count.. no recall on serial.. Couple of wee points.. coming from a D700 viewfinder seems very small as does top LCD display, slightly less ergonomic than the D700.. It came with a Sigma 24-35mm F/2, which is probably too much glass for me, but ice for a play none the less.. also a 50mm Sigma macro which seems great.. Just need some new SD cards and I'm away.. :)
Click to expand...
I think they made the top lcd smaller so they could make the grip deeper. And yep the viewfinder is smaller and square, but the D750 is also lighter too :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top