Nikon d200 photo quality

Rens · Dec 2008

I was wondering what kind of quality pictures you guys get straight out of the camera.

I have a d200 + nikkor 70-300 1.45-5.6 lens.
Some time ago i send it back to be fixed because it never made sharp pictures, and they replaced the AF transmission.

I know that im not pro on settings, but i tried alot, and made a shitload of photos.
But im getting kinda sad that a sonycybershot of 100 bucks, takes better pics then a 2k machine.

I have an example of the average photo i get straight from the camera.

http://rensedeboer.com/temp/d200test.jpg

They all are pretty noisy, lacking contrast, unsharp ect. and its pissing me off.
Do i just suck or could there be something wrong with the equipment, or is this all i can get?

PfhorRunner · Dec 2008

It's you, not the camera that makes the picture. The D200 is in Nikon's Intermediate class, (Between Pro and Noob) so if you haven't taken any photography classes, or been trained on proper use of an intermediate SLR, then things will probably end up disappointing. Sometimes buying the best isn't the best if you aren't the best.

Most of the Images on this site were shot with a D200. (tis my brother's)

http://www.kk-graphics.com/home.html

Joshua Stubbles · Dec 2008

Also, most if not all photos will require post processing. Maybe if you're uber pro you can take a perfect pic. But cleanup is required for most of us saps.

JO420 · Dec 2008

Could it be your lens? Ive read a few articles that suggest if the lens is not of good quality there are times where a normal point and shoot can outperform a DSLR. One thing i plan on doing when i get back to America is looking around and hand shops and buy me decent pentax lens to replace the in box one. Since pentax lens mount is practically unchanged over the years any old lens will fit the camera and im sure i can fine a cheap lens to use until i can afford something nicer

http://thomashawk.com/2006/04/10-tips-for-new-digital-slr.html

This guy wrote some tips and basics on good photography

Joshua Stubbles · Dec 2008

Here's an example of simple post processing:

The original on top is actually well leveled (according to levels in Photoshop), but sometimes you want to exaggerate it to make things pop. The edited one below has levels adjustments, color channel tweaks, hue/sat tweaks and a photo filter applied, along with sharpening.

If you're having trouble shooting in lower-light conditions, make sure your shutter delay is longer. To eliminate noise, use a lower ISO setting
Want more stuff in focus? Increase your fstop (this increases shutter speed though, so you have to compensate with longer exposures, or higher ISO's). I usually shoot with ISO 200 and fstop at 4.5-5.6
If shooting in darker conditions, I'll use ISO 400-600 (no higher or it makes too much noise) and then use a tripod and longer shutter delay.
If you want to "snap" photos in the dark, you must use a flash. It's the only way.

JO420 · Dec 2008

Thats what i figured,that you need some sort of tripod to get really good dim lit shots. Theres a product out there called gorrilapod which seems quite light weight and versitile but i think you have to go with the dlsr version for weight purposes.

JO420 · Dec 2008

This is one of the pics i was experimenting tonight adjusting level,saturation and contrast to get a better result. Top one is post photoshop.

Rens · Dec 2008

Thanks alot for the reactions guys,

I know a photographer around here, going to ask if she can teach me a thing or two about how to use this thing.

"I usually shoot with ISO 200 and fstop at 4.5"
I did the same here with this photo, i might have even used ISO 100

-i switch modes a bit ( A, M, S, P) and see what i can get with those,
-i have my lightmeter now mostly at center, or spot
-focus point is the center

i resetted my cam and am changing some settings to see if it does any good.
trying new options like "optimize image" --> custom --> color mode I --> III
extra sharpening
contrast +

seems to be working out.
also a tripod is a big must i guess, going to borrow one for now, exp a bit with it.

I feel like taking the photo, is only 50% or less of the work, photoshopping it to perfection is the biggest deal.

To get rid of the background noise, i duplicate the layer, blur it our a bit, and then erase the focused parts with a soft brush.

Entity · Dec 2008

the d200 is more than capable of taking good pictures, provided you stick around to base iso

Rens · Dec 2008

yeah

just made a test shot, kept the settings basic, did change some things in the menu.

shooting menu:

optimize image

custom

image sharpening + 2

color mode 3

tone compensation - more contrast

didn't change much in photoshop, just a bit of levels and a 25% sharpen layer.

Rick Stirling · Dec 2008

If you've not tried it, download the demo of Adobe Lightroom. It's basically photoshop for photographers with all the painting tools and filters stripped out.

As well as being an excellent photo management tool, I use it for almost all my processing instead of Photoshop.

Rens · Dec 2008

Thanks Rick, i will

Entity · Dec 2008

Lense quality is also an important factor in the overall IQ. Cheap zoom lenses usually perform badly at larger apertures, so definately try stopping down to f/8.

Prime lenses are amazingly sharp, especially the cheapo nikkor 50mm f/1.8. Here's a snapshot taken with the lense stopped down to f/2.2, no pp done at all.

100% zoom

Sa74n · Dec 2008

rens.. you should really use camera raw (ps plugin but integrated into ps since cs3 i think) for post processing if you haven't already. and yes, you're right about taking the photo only being half the work

but also only half the fun.
camera raw has a function to remove color or luminance noise. in ps there's also better tools for noise removal than gaussian blur. try smart blur or reduce noise to clean up your photos from noise.
usually it also makes sense to not let the camera apply and effects and do ALL the post processing in ps. you have way more control this way.

and remember not to oversharpen your photos. it makes them look too artificial and digital

also that 1.8 lens entity mentioned kicks ass. its cheap and fun to use

Rens · Dec 2008

That lens looks like alot of fun! will buy it sometime soon

I do make some common mistakes in photoshop like sharpening too much

Thanks for the tips guys, appreciate it.

e-freak · Dec 2008

i'm experiencing the very same with my Canon EOS 350D - i think it's the lenses which cut the most of the perfect sharpness. On the other hand I only had to work with the full resolution outcome a few times for print-design and for all web-related stuff and image-shows I'm usually have to resize the pictures that much that it doesn't really matter if it is only 99% sharp. more important is camera raw and lightroom (or photoshop or digital photo professional) for fixing colors, increasing color dynamics and that stuff.

Entity · Dec 2008

usually, its almost always the lense. Of course, skill also comes in play, and a general rule is to set the shutter speed to a higher value than your focal length. For example, lets say I was using a 50mm lense on a fullframe body (which means no crop factor) I would need to set the shutter speed to something higher than 50 = 1/60s to avoid blur from handshake.

Here's another picture taken with the cheap 50

Rens · Dec 2008

defenitly going to get that lens ^^

Cody · Dec 2008

by cheap you mean....under 100 bucks?

Entity · Dec 2008

Not under, but definately close to that price. I bought mine for 108usd

Rens · Dec 2008

Its around 110 euros over here.

I just got some one on one training in a studio today, and voila, (we just messed around with some objects and lights, no perfect setup..)

its just scaled down, straight from the cam with the telelens i've been using all along.
real size: http://rensedeboer.com/temp/d200studiotest.jpg

wednesday im going back to practice some more

Nikon d200 photo quality

Replies