Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nikon D70 - Do pictures require Photoshop fixing?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
January 28, 2005 4:46:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dear all,

I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
your experience?

I am likely to edit my best shots in PS anyway, but if I am away on
vacation, I want to be able to shoot 200 pictures in JPG and get them
printed with minimum of fuss - am I looking at the wrong camera?

Last point, if the answer is "yes you have to fix all your pictures",
can I just set up a "Auto Levels/Auto Colors" action in PS, and
automate the lot? This would be an acceptable solution for me.
Your thoughts are appreciated.

Tim (UK)
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 10:03:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Tim" <timpharrison@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106905568.640861.292940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Dear all,

I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
your experience?

------------------------------------

Using the default settings and shooting RAW files, yes. Nikon's engineers in
general seem to prefer a slightly underexposed, desaturated look with a
slightly soft focus. This ensures that the most detail is captured and makes
the picture great to work with in Photoshop, but the unprocessed pictures
are a little muddy. OTOH, many photographers prefer this look and despise
what they regard as the over-saturated, over-exposed trash with jaggy edges
created by the popular consumer cameras.

However, you can adjust all that in the menus and take very printable JPEGs
straight out of the camera with just the look you want.
January 28, 2005 11:24:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

The default settings look pretty bland but you can increase the contrast
saturation & sharpening. I haven't yet figured out how to batch RAW
files but you can shoot RAW+basic JPEG & simply store the RAW for in
case some day on CD or even delete them (except the one prize winning
pic you get lucky with.

The other issue with a DSLR is you'll need to spend a lot of money on
lenses to get the same function as a high end P&S. Better quality but
bigger & more expensive & more hassle switching lenses.


Tim wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
> current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
> However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
> very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
> your experience?
>
> I am likely to edit my best shots in PS anyway, but if I am away on
> vacation, I want to be able to shoot 200 pictures in JPG and get them
> printed with minimum of fuss - am I looking at the wrong camera?
>
> Last point, if the answer is "yes you have to fix all your pictures",
> can I just set up a "Auto Levels/Auto Colors" action in PS, and
> automate the lot? This would be an acceptable solution for me.
> Your thoughts are appreciated.
>
> Tim (UK)
>
Related resources
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 2:00:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> "Tim" <timpharrison@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106905568.640861.292940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Dear all,
>
> I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
> current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
> However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
> very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
> your experience?
>
> I am likely to edit my best shots in PS anyway, but if I am away on
> vacation, I want to be able to shoot 200 pictures in JPG and get them
> printed with minimum of fuss - am I looking at the wrong camera?
>
> Last point, if the answer is "yes you have to fix all your pictures",
> can I just set up a "Auto Levels/Auto Colors" action in PS, and
> automate the lot? This would be an acceptable solution for me.
> Your thoughts are appreciated.
>
> Tim (UK)

hello tim

the d70 is a superb camera for the price you pay. i keep hearing that its
pictures need especially much post processing and have to say that this is
bull. most dslr's are alike in this point. if you take the pictures with the
right settings pre-set then you can minimize your photoshop wok - however -
it is somewhat equivalent to what you can do in the dark room with analog
cameras. one thing why photoshop is named a lot in connection with the d7-
simply is the fact that the raw format allows you additional functionality
in post processing, which is a good thing and pointed out in most reviews.

there is no problem with setting up an action like you suggested, however,
the auto-functions in photoshop are good, but they are not perfect, so you
might actually make some images look worse than the original versions, or
give away some of the potential you could get out of a shot by manually
tweaking the settings. i would compare it to having your analog pictures
developed by a big lab, which automatiacally tweaks pictures's levels,
compared to having it done in a pro lab or yourself in a dark room, where yo
u can evaluate each image on its own.

i hope i could help
sid
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 2:17:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 28 Jan 2005 01:46:08 -0800, "Tim" <timpharrison@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Dear all,
>
>I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
>current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
>However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
>very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
>your experience?
>
>I am likely to edit my best shots in PS anyway, but if I am away on
>vacation, I want to be able to shoot 200 pictures in JPG and get them
>printed with minimum of fuss - am I looking at the wrong camera?
>
>Last point, if the answer is "yes you have to fix all your pictures",
>can I just set up a "Auto Levels/Auto Colors" action in PS, and
>automate the lot? This would be an acceptable solution for me.
>Your thoughts are appreciated.
>
It has program modes that lets you use it as a snapshot camera with
output at a choice of JPEG levels.



Rodney Myrvaagnes NYC J36 Gjo/a


"Biologists think they are chemists, chemists think they are phycisists,
physicists think they are gods, and God thinks He is a mathematician." Anon
January 28, 2005 7:34:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I've taken pictures using the default (auto) settings and printed them with
my dye sub printer and they look good. It's a lot about personal opinion
really. Anyway, I believe there are settings you can set prior to taking
pics. I haven't gotten that far yet.

"Tim" <timpharrison@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106905568.640861.292940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Dear all,

I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
your experience?

I am likely to edit my best shots in PS anyway, but if I am away on
vacation, I want to be able to shoot 200 pictures in JPG and get them
printed with minimum of fuss - am I looking at the wrong camera?

Last point, if the answer is "yes you have to fix all your pictures",
can I just set up a "Auto Levels/Auto Colors" action in PS, and
automate the lot? This would be an acceptable solution for me.
Your thoughts are appreciated.

Tim (UK)
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 7:50:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:03:19 -0800, "C J Campbell"
<christophercampbellNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Tim" <timpharrison@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1106905568.640861.292940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>Dear all,
>>
>>I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
>>current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
>>However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
>>very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
>>your experience?
>
>Using the default settings and shooting RAW files, yes. Nikon's engineers in
>general seem to prefer a slightly underexposed, desaturated look with a
>slightly soft focus. This ensures that the most detail is captured and makes
>the picture great to work with in Photoshop, but the unprocessed pictures
>are a little muddy. OTOH, many photographers prefer this look and despise
>what they regard as the over-saturated, over-exposed trash with jaggy edges
>created by the popular consumer cameras.
>
>However, you can adjust all that in the menus and take very printable JPEGs
>straight out of the camera with just the look you want.

I agree with everything C J C says here.

In an attempt to give you some idea of the amount of adjustment
needed, I work in RAW with color settings at camera factory defaults,
and usually no EV compensation. So, in RAW, and it's not so apparent
if you shoot JPEG, the vast majority of images tend to need:

1/2 to 1 stop increase in exposure.
7-10% boost in saturation. Less for portraits (which means it's a
taste thing).

In addition to these, I do a whole slew of minor mods. Auto color
balance however, is usually very good. And unsharp mask is always used
at the very last step of processing (it's *pointless* doing this
in-camera like so many do).

If you shoot lots of similar images (like for a model shoot for
example), then RAW adjustments can easily be set correctly on the
first frame, and then bulk-applied to the other pictures in the shoot.
Thus manual adjustments to render extremely high quality images
doesn't need to take a long time.

--
Owamanga!
January 28, 2005 8:51:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Tim" <timpharrison@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106905568.640861.292940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Dear all,

I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
your experience?


Sometimes they need a level adjustment (when I didn't pay enough attention
to the histogram). They may need sharpening, but you could do that in the
D70.
Jim
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 9:37:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Perhaps Tim is asking if D70 photos taken straight out of the camera will be
"inferior" to
those from a good point-and-shooter in terms of colou saturation, sharpness,
contrast...etc.




"sid derra" <ng_NO_@_SPAM_emolife.net> wrote in message
news:35ugq8F4qel1vU1@individual.net...
> > "Tim" <timpharrison@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1106905568.640861.292940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
> > current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
> > However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
> > very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
> > your experience?
> >
> > I am likely to edit my best shots in PS anyway, but if I am away on
> > vacation, I want to be able to shoot 200 pictures in JPG and get them
> > printed with minimum of fuss - am I looking at the wrong camera?
> >
> > Last point, if the answer is "yes you have to fix all your pictures",
> > can I just set up a "Auto Levels/Auto Colors" action in PS, and
> > automate the lot? This would be an acceptable solution for me.
> > Your thoughts are appreciated.
> >
> > Tim (UK)
>
> hello tim
>
> the d70 is a superb camera for the price you pay. i keep hearing that its
> pictures need especially much post processing and have to say that this is
> bull. most dslr's are alike in this point. if you take the pictures with
the
> right settings pre-set then you can minimize your photoshop wok -
however -
> it is somewhat equivalent to what you can do in the dark room with analog
> cameras. one thing why photoshop is named a lot in connection with the d7-
> simply is the fact that the raw format allows you additional functionality
> in post processing, which is a good thing and pointed out in most reviews.
>
> there is no problem with setting up an action like you suggested, however,
> the auto-functions in photoshop are good, but they are not perfect, so you
> might actually make some images look worse than the original versions, or
> give away some of the potential you could get out of a shot by manually
> tweaking the settings. i would compare it to having your analog pictures
> developed by a big lab, which automatiacally tweaks pictures's levels,
> compared to having it done in a pro lab or yourself in a dark room, where
yo
> u can evaluate each image on its own.
>
> i hope i could help
> sid
>
>
>
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 1:17:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic view
finder cameras.
I have a D70, a Sony 828 and several P&S digital cameras. I think it is
insane to get a D70 or any digital SLR if your primary interest is jpeg
shooting.
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 7:54:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:p SyKd.17571$wZ2.2078@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
> You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic view
> finder cameras.
> I have a D70, a Sony 828 and several P&S digital cameras. I think it is
> insane to get a D70 or any digital SLR if your primary interest is jpeg
> shooting.

Insane is such a strong word. I would agree with you but you are wrong
because a D-SLR opens up so many possibilities that the P&S cams cant do and
will give perfect prints up to and above 8x10 using jpeg.
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 7:54:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Pete D wrote:
> "bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:p SyKd.17571$wZ2.2078@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
>>You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic view
>>finder cameras.
>>I have a D70, a Sony 828 and several P&S digital cameras. I think it is
>>insane to get a D70 or any digital SLR if your primary interest is jpeg
>>shooting.
>
>
> Insane is such a strong word. I would agree with you but you are wrong
> because a D-SLR opens up so many possibilities that the P&S cams cant do and
> will give perfect prints up to and above 8x10 using jpeg.
>
>
While it is obvious that DSLRs are vastly more flexible, in the hands of
a competent photographer, one might not be the ideal camera for him. It
certainly isn't for ME as I don't want the weight, or bulk of a DSLR,
and don't enjoy using manual controls, and would NEVER consider carrying
several pounds of lenses around. A good P&S can produce pictures larger
than 8x10 that are of excellent quality these days. Given than in 55
years of taking pictures, I have NEVER printed anything large than 8x10,
and only half a dozen that large, I see no use in a camera the can print
such sizes. One needs to match the camera to his individual wants/needs.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 11:06:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jim" <j.n@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AYuKd.20290$wi2.5024@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Tim" <timpharrison@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1106905568.640861.292940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Dear all,
>
> I am about to take the leap to digital and have been looking at the
> current range of post £1000/$1000 DLSRs and am opting for the D70.
> However I have read in magasines that the pictures taken by the D70
> very often need to have levels/contrast fixed in Photoshop. Is this
> your experience?

There are lots of internal settings you can choose, to try to optimize pic
for printing. However I think camera is a bit of a waste for people who
don't like to do post processing.

>
>
> Sometimes they need a level adjustment (when I didn't pay enough attention
> to the histogram). They may need sharpening, but you could do that in the
> D70.
> Jim
>
>
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 11:13:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:BkIKd.2243$Dg4.120@fe06.lga...
> Pete D wrote:
>> "bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>> news:p SyKd.17571$wZ2.2078@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
>>>You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic view
>>>finder cameras.
>>>I have a D70, a Sony 828 and several P&S digital cameras. I think it is
>>>insane to get a D70 or any digital SLR if your primary interest is jpeg
>>>shooting.
>>
>>
>> Insane is such a strong word. I would agree with you but you are wrong
>> because a D-SLR opens up so many possibilities that the P&S cams cant do
>> and will give perfect prints up to and above 8x10 using jpeg.
> While it is obvious that DSLRs are vastly more flexible, in the hands of a
> competent photographer, one might not be the ideal camera for him. It
> certainly isn't for ME as I don't want the weight, or bulk of a DSLR, and
> don't enjoy using manual controls, and would NEVER consider carrying
> several pounds of lenses around. A good P&S can produce pictures larger
> than 8x10 that are of excellent quality these days. Given than in 55
> years of taking pictures, I have NEVER printed anything large than 8x10,
> and only half a dozen that large, I see no use in a camera the can print
> such sizes. One needs to match the camera to his individual wants/needs.

I agree with you completely. However, I'm pretty new to photography and am
getting a lot of nice 11x14's from my D70 and i9900. And instant on and 3
fps etc are really very nice. My olympus 3040 3mp does a great job, and
sometimes better right out of the camera, but if I though i had a chance at
a real winning shot of something very important I'd choose my D70 over the
3040, as it's faster and has a lot of valuble features. But I like post
processing too. Also I think I'm learning more about photography that I
would have by staying exclusively with my olym 3040 p&s, as I'm forced to.
11x14's for the right picture look quite impressive compared to a 5x7 or
8x10. When people see my pics framed, they are seeing a size their not
always used to from digital.
>
> --
> Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 1:16:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> Pete D wrote:
> > "bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> > news:p SyKd.17571$wZ2.2078@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> >
> >>If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
> >>You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic view
> >>finder cameras.
> >>I have a D70, a Sony 828 and several P&S digital cameras. I think it is
> >>insane to get a D70 or any digital SLR if your primary interest is jpeg
> >>shooting.
> >
> >
> > Insane is such a strong word. I would agree with you but you are wrong
> > because a D-SLR opens up so many possibilities that the P&S cams cant do and
> > will give perfect prints up to and above 8x10 using jpeg.
> >
> >
> While it is obvious that DSLRs are vastly more flexible, in the hands of
> a competent photographer, one might not be the ideal camera for him. It
> certainly isn't for ME as I don't want the weight, or bulk of a DSLR,
> and don't enjoy using manual controls, and would NEVER consider carrying
> several pounds of lenses around. A good P&S can produce pictures larger
> than 8x10 that are of excellent quality these days. Given than in 55
> years of taking pictures, I have NEVER printed anything large than 8x10,
> and only half a dozen that large, I see no use in a camera the can print
> such sizes. One needs to match the camera to his individual wants/needs.

differences are interesting.
I rarely print anything smaller than 8x10.

>
> --
> Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
January 29, 2005 7:13:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

There will always be people that are almost offended to find some one with a
good decent digital SLR and use it for JPEG shooting. I have a feeling it
would bother you to know that some times I only shoot with JPG output using
my D70. I'm terribly sorry if you're offended easily, but I don't like the
slow speeds of P&S models and I like the long battery life of this
particular model. If Nikon intended their D70 model such a high end camera
and would never think of the middle budget they wouldn't even have included
the support for JPG image output. It's obvious it bothers you to some
degree...sorry.

"bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:p SyKd.17571$wZ2.2078@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
> You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic view
> finder cameras.
> I have a D70, a Sony 828 and several P&S digital cameras. I think it is
> insane to get a D70 or any digital SLR if your primary interest is jpeg
> shooting.
>
>
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 12:58:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <10vnv4ipgp5v356@corp.supernews.com>, <xman@thedripper.com>
wrote:

> There will always be people that are almost offended to find some one with a
> good decent digital SLR and use it for JPEG shooting. I have a feeling it
> would bother you to know that some times I only shoot with JPG output using
> my D70. I'm terribly sorry if you're offended easily, but I don't like the
> slow speeds of P&S models and I like the long battery life of this
> particular model. If Nikon intended their D70 model such a high end camera
> and would never think of the middle budget they wouldn't even have included
> the support for JPG image output. It's obvious it bothers you to some
> degree...sorry.
>
> "bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:p SyKd.17571$wZ2.2078@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> > If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
> > You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic view
> > finder cameras.
> > I have a D70, a Sony 828 and several P&S digital cameras. I think it is
> > insane to get a D70 or any digital SLR if your primary interest is jpeg
> > shooting.
> >
> >

And of course there are those of us that get paid to shoot those
jpegs and want changeable lenses.
January 30, 2005 2:30:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

That would really bother some...knowing some are making money!!!!


"Inaccessible" <pandemonium@pitchedpipes.com> wrote in message
news:p andemonium-BBF88B.17033929012005@news.verizon.net...
> In article <10vnv4ipgp5v356@corp.supernews.com>, <xman@thedripper.com>
> wrote:
>
> > There will always be people that are almost offended to find some one
with a
> > good decent digital SLR and use it for JPEG shooting. I have a feeling
it
> > would bother you to know that some times I only shoot with JPG output
using
> > my D70. I'm terribly sorry if you're offended easily, but I don't like
the
> > slow speeds of P&S models and I like the long battery life of this
> > particular model. If Nikon intended their D70 model such a high end
camera
> > and would never think of the middle budget they wouldn't even have
included
> > the support for JPG image output. It's obvious it bothers you to some
> > degree...sorry.
> >
> > "bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> > news:p SyKd.17571$wZ2.2078@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> > > If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
> > > You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic
view
> > > finder cameras.
> > > I have a D70, a Sony 828 and several P&S digital cameras. I think it
is
> > > insane to get a D70 or any digital SLR if your primary interest is
jpeg
> > > shooting.
> > >
> > >
>
> And of course there are those of us that get paid to shoot those
> jpegs and want changeable lenses.
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 8:00:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

My clients requirements forced me to go digital in some areas, thus I bought
the Niknon D70. Less hassel in makeing money with either medium/fine jpeg or
raw. I usually use the highest quality jpeg, one level below raw, for some
special events for the clients want me to burn a CD to give them before I
leave. Which is ok by me for part of the deal is that they pay me before I
leave, and since the shots are mostly "grip and grin, ribbon cutting" they
can have the "negative". When I get back to the studio I then burn an
archival CD, just in case their people screw things up. I used to do film to
Kodak Photo CD and give them a CD, then I keep the negs and a 2nd CD as
backup. But would you believe they tried to put the thumb nails in their
newsletters and complain on the poor quality. I actually had to hold a
seminar on how to open Photo CDs. Now it is a now brainer. They get a jpeg
ready for reproduction with a minimum of fuss.
So, thanks Nikon for the D70. I also get to use all my Nikon lenses!
Have Fun and make pictures,
Yours,
Tom


<xman@thedripper.com> wrote in message
news:10vooobmhqaaif6@corp.supernews.com...
> That would really bother some...knowing some are making money!!!!
>
>
> "Inaccessible" <pandemonium@pitchedpipes.com> wrote in message
> news:p andemonium-BBF88B.17033929012005@news.verizon.net...
> > In article <10vnv4ipgp5v356@corp.supernews.com>, <xman@thedripper.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > There will always be people that are almost offended to find some one
> with a
> > > good decent digital SLR and use it for JPEG shooting. I have a feeling
> it
> > > would bother you to know that some times I only shoot with JPG output
> using
> > > my D70. I'm terribly sorry if you're offended easily, but I don't like
> the
> > > slow speeds of P&S models and I like the long battery life of this
> > > particular model. If Nikon intended their D70 model such a high end
> camera
> > > and would never think of the middle budget they wouldn't even have
> included
> > > the support for JPG image output. It's obvious it bothers you to some
> > > degree...sorry.
> > >
> > > "bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> > > news:p SyKd.17571$wZ2.2078@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> > > > If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the
D70.
> > > > You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic
> view
> > > > finder cameras.
> > > > I have a D70, a Sony 828 and several P&S digital cameras. I think
it
> is
> > > > insane to get a D70 or any digital SLR if your primary interest is
> jpeg
> > > > shooting.
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > And of course there are those of us that get paid to shoot those
> > jpegs and want changeable lenses.
>
>
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 9:53:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> writes:
> If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
> You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic view
> finder cameras.

Why do you say that? DSLR jpeg images I've seen online look better
than anything I've seen from a P&S, just because the DSLR's CCD cells
are larger. With the recent price cuts I think I'm finally about to
buy a D70. I guess I'll do some RAW comparisons but my expectation
has been that I'll generally shoot jpeg.
Anonymous
April 3, 2005 12:43:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote in message
news:7xll80vd6a.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
> "bmoag" <apquilts@pacbell.net> writes:
>> If you primarily want a good jpeg shooter you should not get the D70.
>> You will bet better jpeg results from upper level P&S or electronic view
>> finder cameras.
>
> Why do you say that? DSLR jpeg images I've seen online look better
> than anything I've seen from a P&S, just because the DSLR's CCD cells
> are larger. With the recent price cuts I think I'm finally about to
> buy a D70. I guess I'll do some RAW comparisons but my expectation
> has been that I'll generally shoot jpeg.

I get my best result with RAW, but a lot of how your image turns out has to
do with light. The D70 produces great jpeg's, IMHO, when outside with good
lighting, or inside with flash. When the lighting is bad outside you have
to adjust for what you want. Do you want a muddy looking picture on a muddy
looking day, or do you want to snap it up? And my worst photos have been
indoors with low light where even Photoshop can't do much to make them look
like they came from a $1K camera. This is the only place my old point and
shoot beat the D70. Also, you gotta keep on eye on WB. Some cameras do a
much better job in automatic mode.

The weather around here has been pretty yucky since I got my camera.
Looking forward to sunny days, daylight savings and blooming flowers. :-)
It's a great camera. I just need to make some great opportunities, and most
of my shots are saved as jpeg's.
Anonymous
April 3, 2005 12:43:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Sheldon" <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> writes:
> I get my best result with RAW, but a lot of how your image turns out has to
> do with light. The D70 produces great jpeg's, IMHO, when outside with good
> lighting, or inside with flash. When the lighting is bad outside you have
> to adjust for what you want. Do you want a muddy looking picture on a muddy
> looking day, or do you want to snap it up?

Are you saying that RAW is better for adjusting underexposed shots?

> And my worst photos have been indoors with low light where even
> Photoshop can't do much to make them look like they came from a $1K
> camera. This is the only place my old point and shoot beat the D70.

You mean there's a digital P/S that does better in low light? Or do
you mean a film P/S with fast film? I still have film SLR's but haven't
used them in years. I've had the impression that the D70 does far better
at 400 or 800 ISO than any digital P/S possibly could, because of the
D70's much larger sensor.

I see I can get a used D1 for around what I can get a used D70 for.
Maybe I should think about that, since it has even larger pixels (2.7 MP)
and will meter and autoexpose with my 35/1.4 MF Nikkor (my favorite lens
for indoor shooting). The closest thing to it in an AF lens is the
28/1.4 AF which costs something like $1600 :-(.

> Also, you gotta keep on eye on WB. Some cameras do a much better
> job in automatic mode.

Hmm, interesting.
Anonymous
April 3, 2005 6:24:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

What happens if your clients find out they are getting P&S images at
professional prices?
They don't pay people to pump gas anymore either.
Anonymous
April 3, 2005 10:59:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 02 Apr 2005 20:00:35 -0800, in rec.photo.digital Paul Rubin
<http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:

>"Sheldon" <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> writes:
>> I get my best result with RAW, but a lot of how your image turns out has to
>> do with light. The D70 produces great jpeg's, IMHO, when outside with good
>> lighting, or inside with flash. When the lighting is bad outside you have
>> to adjust for what you want. Do you want a muddy looking picture on a muddy
>> looking day, or do you want to snap it up?
>
>Are you saying that RAW is better for adjusting underexposed shots?

Yes, you have the 12 bit sensor data to work with, not the 8 bit jpg data.


>> And my worst photos have been indoors with low light where even
>> Photoshop can't do much to make them look like they came from a $1K
>> camera. This is the only place my old point and shoot beat the D70.
>
>You mean there's a digital P/S that does better in low light? Or do
>you mean a film P/S with fast film? I still have film SLR's but haven't
>used them in years. I've had the impression that the D70 does far better
>at 400 or 800 ISO than any digital P/S possibly could, because of the
>D70's much larger sensor.

Sounds to me this might be possibly be comparing the kit lens against a
faster lens on a P&S. I can't see how this would be the case for shots
taken at the exact same exposure conditions. If this is the case bump the
iso up a bit on the D70 to make up for it. You're better off from a noise
standpoint to have a properly exposed image taken at higher iso, than an
underexposed image pushed in software.

>> Also, you gotta keep on eye on WB. Some cameras do a much better
>> job in automatic mode.
>
>Hmm, interesting.

Soot raw and this is not a concern. Choose wb at the time of conversion.
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
April 3, 2005 1:08:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ed Ruf wrote:

> On 02 Apr 2005 20:00:35 -0800, in rec.photo.digital Paul Rubin
> <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:
>
>
>>"Sheldon" <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> writes:
>>
>>>I get my best result with RAW, but a lot of how your image turns out has to
>>>do with light. The D70 produces great jpeg's, IMHO, when outside with good
>>>lighting, or inside with flash. When the lighting is bad outside you have
>>>to adjust for what you want. Do you want a muddy looking picture on a muddy
>>>looking day, or do you want to snap it up?
>>
>>Are you saying that RAW is better for adjusting underexposed shots?
>
>
> Yes, you have the 12 bit sensor data to work with, not the 8 bit jpg data.


RAW is better for any adjustments to brighten up a muddy scene.
Anonymous
April 15, 2005 3:43:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Actually, here in Oregon, they do still pump your gas for you and they
do pay people to do it :D 

I wouldn't consider that getting P&S images and professional prices, as
I see it, the camera itself a does not a great photographer make.. but
the skills and eye for the subject and composition is what defines a
great photographer. That is what you pay for, the skills and
knowledge.

Isn't it?
!