Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Resolution
2 views
Skip to first unread message
darkman
Feb 18, 2011, 5:52:55 PM2/18/11
to
Might be a dumb question, but here goes - I've had an old Nikon D50
'starter' DSLR for years, and have progressed up the chain to a D200,
D300 and now a full-frame D700, all with Nikon's excellent glass.
Trouble is, despite all the hoopla the old D50 seems to have better
apparent sharpness before Photoshop tweaking - consistently better
images. The D300 and D700 (12+ MP) all need aggressive sharpening, even
when they were shot at higher shutter speeds or mounted on tripods,
while the old 6MP D50's files just look crisp right up front. I shoot in
RAW exclusively, so compression isn't an issue. Is there some inherent
difference in the way the sensors process information? I've seen
needle-sharp results from D300s in magazines, but despite it all I can't
get the same results - except with my old 'plastic' D50 and its dinky
kit 18-135mm AF lens. What's wrong here?
'starter' DSLR for years, and have progressed up the chain to a D200,
D300 and now a full-frame D700, all with Nikon's excellent glass.
Trouble is, despite all the hoopla the old D50 seems to have better
apparent sharpness before Photoshop tweaking - consistently better
images. The D300 and D700 (12+ MP) all need aggressive sharpening, even
when they were shot at higher shutter speeds or mounted on tripods,
while the old 6MP D50's files just look crisp right up front. I shoot in
RAW exclusively, so compression isn't an issue. Is there some inherent
difference in the way the sensors process information? I've seen
needle-sharp results from D300s in magazines, but despite it all I can't
get the same results - except with my old 'plastic' D50 and its dinky
kit 18-135mm AF lens. What's wrong here?
0 new messages