D200 vs D2X

Had a play with something interesting? Got something that we all covet? Found a real lemon? Write a few lines about it, and share your experiences.

Moderator: Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

D200 vs D2X

Postby smac on Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:37 pm

OK, I got bored this afternoon and thought I'd compare a D200 image with a D2X image.

I took the following 2 images with the same lens, same flash unit, same ISO, same f-stop etc.

I applied the same process in Photoshop and resized to the current image dimensions.

I have no idea what I hoped to prove but I will let you compare the two images and see if you can pick the difference......I can't....

Of course, if you look at the EXIF data you will be cheating.

Image
Image
'Tis better to have loved and lust than never to have lust at all.
User avatar
smac
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:15 pm
Location: Baulkham Hills, Sydney

Postby Trieu on Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:48 pm

Ummm I am certainly no expert, but would I be right in saying the colour in the first pic is more vibrant?

Would the first pic be the D2X?

(I have not looked at the EXIF data)
Cheers,
Trieu
30D and TWO L's
User avatar
Trieu
Member
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 2:36 pm
Location: Sydney's West Canon 30D

Postby gstark on Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:55 pm

Stuart,

What about the underlying wb? What was the baseline colour temperature for each of these images?

I agree with Trieu in that the former of these appears to have slightly better saturation or greater intensity. I've not yet looked at the exif to see which is which, but other than the varying saturation levels (which I'm also seeing as a very slight difference in the white as well) these do look very close.

Given that, I feel compelled to offer you $5 for what is very obviously a faulty and substandard D2X. :)

Thanx for posting; I look forward to your further comments on this.
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby smac on Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:01 pm

Gary, I checked the Exif data to try to get the information you asked for and I noticed that the first image was shot at f/6.3 and the second at f/5.6...just goes to show that I will never make it as a scientist!

Both images were shot at the default flash ISO for the camera, I am not sure if these are exactly the same white balance temperatures for the two cameras but I presume that they would be.
'Tis better to have loved and lust than never to have lust at all.
User avatar
smac
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:15 pm
Location: Baulkham Hills, Sydney

Postby Matt. K on Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:30 pm

Stuart,
Thanks for the trouble you took with this. Very informative and proves a point. The differences are very minor.
Regards

Matt. K
User avatar
Matt. K
Former Outstanding Member Of The Year and KM
 
Posts: 9981
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:12 pm
Location: North Nowra

Postby Sir Tristram on Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:33 pm

Stuart, I think the D200 photo is absolute rubbish and very sub-par quality wise.. Poor Poor Poor...

I think you should definately stick with your D2X and sell that piece of rubbish D200 to me..

Now let me know where I deposit the $200 cash so I can help you out with this embarrasment of a camera.

:lol:
And this is where I met the leprechaun - He told me to burn things
User avatar
Sir Tristram
Member
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:17 pm
Location: Dundas - NSW - D70s

Postby LostDingo on Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:35 pm

Now that is boredom :shock:

You have to drag out 2 sub-standard Nikons and compare the two.....how do you do it :?: :lol: :lol:

More test shots are in order so we can get some controversial discussions started :idea: :twisted:
User avatar
LostDingo
Senior Member
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 8:18 am
Location: Rozelle

Postby admajic on Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:36 pm

Overall, to me the top pic looks better so Im guessing its the D2X.
D50 - AF-S NIKKOR 18-70mm 3.5-4.5G ED
User avatar
admajic
Member
 
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 3:55 pm
Location: Sydney - Bondi Junction

Postby smac on Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:40 pm

As most of you have guessed, the top image (test1.jpg) is the D2X. There could be a touch more saturation in the first image, I didn't go to the extent of making sure all of the custom settings were the same in each camera. I was bored but I wasn't THAT bored.
'Tis better to have loved and lust than never to have lust at all.
User avatar
smac
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:15 pm
Location: Baulkham Hills, Sydney

Postby sirhc55 on Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:00 pm

Stuart - your test has certainly shown that the D200 is no slouch :)
Chris
--------------------------------
I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
User avatar
sirhc55
Key Member
 
Posts: 12930
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: Port Macquarie - Olympus EM-10

Postby birddog114 on Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:17 pm

smac,
Keep your D200 inside the X5 glove box and showing off the D2X or the newer with the "s" as LostDingo got :lol:
Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
User avatar
birddog114
Senior Member
 
Posts: 15881
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Belmore,Sydney

Postby nito on Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:22 pm

Gee the differences are minor. :D
nito
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Gladesville, NSW

Postby padey on Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:53 pm

I can see the difference. And I'm surprised you all have seen it. It's the extra few $100 notes hiding behind the D200 image that you saved.
Andrew


Canon make photocopiers and stick lenses on them....
padey
Member
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:23 pm
Location: Sydney, Hills Area

Postby gstark on Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:53 pm

Stuart,

If you have the raw image files, load them in NCE and set the colour temperature so that they're the same, and then see if there are any differences.
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby big pix on Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:57 pm

to there appears to be a lot more digital noise in the first pix than the second......... but I am looking using my laptop......
Cheers ....bp....
Difference between a good street photographer and a great street photographer....
Removing objects that do not belong...
happy for the comments, but
.....Please DO NOT edit my image.....
http://bigpix.smugmug.com Forever changing
User avatar
big pix
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4513
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:52 pm
Location: Lake Macquarie NSW.

Postby Nnnnsic on Sun Jun 04, 2006 11:20 pm

Woohoo, I got it right.

The blue affinity is what gives it away as the D2x in the first image.
Producer & Editor @ GadgetGuy.com.au
Contributor for fine magazines such as PC Authority and Popular Science.
User avatar
Nnnnsic
I'm a jazz singer... so I know what I'm doing
 
Posts: 7770
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2004 12:29 am
Location: Cubicle No. 42... somewhere in Bondi, NSW

Postby Justin on Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:15 pm

The first image appears to have more detail in the fine fibres around the blue woollen hat - I can't really comment on the saturation. Could the detail in the fibres be to do with the aperture difference? And if you changed the aperture, wouldn't the exposure have been longer on the first shot than the second?
D3 | 18-200VR | 50:1.4 | 28:2.8 | 35-70 2.8 | 12-24 f4
picasaweb.google.com/JustinPhotoGallery
"We don't know and we don't care"
User avatar
Justin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Newtown, Sydeny

Postby petermmc on Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:35 pm

There is a more prominent nose hair on the first than the second. I'm not sure what that means but it had to be said.

Peter Mc
Nikon & Olympus
User avatar
petermmc
Senior Member
 
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:24 pm
Location: Figtree, Wollongong

Postby Steffen on Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:00 pm

The first image is a bit greener, and the red is a bit more saturated. On my work monitor at least (non-calibrated).

Cheers
Steffen.
User avatar
Steffen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:52 pm
Location: Toongabbie, NSW

Postby LostDingo on Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:07 pm

Steffen wrote:The first image is a bit greener, and the red is a bit more saturated. On my work monitor at least (non-calibrated).

Cheers
Steffen.


Is it an ACER :shock: :shock: Little 15 inch :shock:
User avatar
LostDingo
Senior Member
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 8:18 am
Location: Rozelle

Postby Glen on Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:40 pm

Stuart, thanks for those two images, really proves the value of the D200.

The only noticable differences I could tell was on the first has better fine detail which could be due to the aperture change. If you look at the beanie you are wearing, on the left of the pom pom is a thread which is far more visible in the first. There is also a little fluff ball on the right of the pom pom (1.5cm to the right), its attributes and hairs are more visible in the first.

Great result for both cameras.
User avatar
Glen
Moderator
 
Posts: 11819
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Sydney - Neutral Bay - Nikon

Postby Steffen on Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:56 pm

LostDingo wrote:
Steffen wrote:The first image is a bit greener, and the red is a bit more saturated. On my work monitor at least (non-calibrated).

Cheers
Steffen.


Is it an ACER :shock: :shock: Little 15 inch :shock:


No, it's actually a Sony 21" (GDM-520, or so). But uncalibrated nevertheless. It has a built-in adjustment feature. I reckon it uses the same in-tube sensor as the Apple 21" studio display, but only does a quick fix of gamma and white balance for sRGB.

Cheers
Steffen.
User avatar
Steffen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:52 pm
Location: Toongabbie, NSW

Postby Steffen on Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:11 am

In fact, now looking at them on a calibrated monitor and on a colour space aware system (the images are in aRGB, so it matters), I find:

- the first image is still a bit greener (apparent in the arm on the left, and by the fact that the yellow hair is less orange)
- the second image seems overall more saturated, esp the black and blue, but including the red (which appeared darker on in the first pic on teh PC monitor) which makes me think it has been less exposed than the first.
- zooming in it becomes apparent that the first image has far more detail than the second.

May I look at the EXIF now?

Ok, so the exposure was identical. The apparent difference in brightness/saturation can have any number of reasons, including the curve used by Photoshop to convert from RAW.

Not sure about the extra detail the first image, don't the D2X and D200 have similar amounts of pixels on their sensors?

Cheers
Steffen.
User avatar
Steffen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:52 pm
Location: Toongabbie, NSW

Postby Grev on Tue Jun 06, 2006 3:15 am

You can see the fine hairs around the first image much better. Aperture problem or just the wraith of the D2x? :shock:
Blog: http://grevgrev.blogspot.com
Deviantart: http://grebbin.deviantart.com

Nikon: D700 / D70 / AiS 28mm f2 / AiS 35mm f1.4 / AiS 50mm f1.2 / AiS 180mm f2.8 ED / AFD 85mm f1.4 / Sigma 50mm f1.4 / Sigma 24-70 f2.8 macro / Mamiya 80mm f1.9 x2 /Mamiya 120mm f4 macro
User avatar
Grev
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1025
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: 4109, Brisbane.


Return to Equipment Reviews