D200 "Banding" Issues


Status
Not open for further replies.

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,899
0
0
Planet Nikon
Read this off another forum,


Bjørn Rørslett said:
In my test shots I can get signs of "banding" if the image is grossly underexposed (more than -3 stops), then has the shadows lifted over 5 stops. When an image is mistreated like this some banding is not your main problem, since the image as a whole is in a pretty badly shape anyway.

Bjørn Rørslett said:
Yes, tried to shoot directly into the sun to provoke "banding", and still had to abuse the image grossly to get the weakest signs of anything. So I'm not convinced this is a real issue. Blooming of the sensor was a real issue for D70 (CCD) on those subjects but not on D200(CCD) or D2X (CMOS).

I've seen those allegedly supportive images on the web and am puzzled as to how the comb-like pattern arises. From most DSLRs you can get "banding" which really is a precise recording of the phases of alternating current (AC), 50 Hz here in Europe. You can easily see this if you shoot rain on a dark night in the vicinity of a street light, the raindrop trails get "zebra-striped" crosswise due to the AC. I observed this first time with D1 and have recorded similar will all later Nikon models.

The comblike weave on D200 might be a "beat" or interference pattern between CCD read-out and AC current of the light source. Really hard to tell for the time being and not an easy matter to isolate for testing.
Bjørn Rørslett said:
This is an example of the degree of abuse I need to employ before any sign of the tiniest banding occurs. See legend below for details.

Image illustration

Legend as follows,

A. Original. Exposure -3 stops below meter reading to show sun rays.

B. Added +2 EV to basic exposure in Bibble Pro 4.5, then increased "exposure" further by curve tool so as to bring RGB-levels above 12 into clipping.

C. 200% crop of original. Note no signs of CCD blooming, no signs of shadow noise.

D. 200% crop of abused image (B). Barely visible signs of banding noise.

Taken with 28 mm f/2 Nikkor AI at f/22, 1/160 sec, ISO-equivalent 100.


Does this test show that there is an issue with D200? Absolutely not.


Comments and feedback was all by Bjørn Rørslett.
 

mpenza

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2002
12,937
0
0
Singapore
www.instagram.com
espn said:
Read this off another forum,

From most DSLRs you can get "banding" which really is a precise recording of the phases of alternating current (AC), 50 Hz here in Europe. You can easily see this if you shoot rain on a dark night in the vicinity of a street light, the raindrop trails get "zebra-striped" crosswise due to the AC.

Comments and feedback was all by Bjørn Rørslett.
hmm... never thought of this. probably that was what happened to some shots I took off a observatory ;p
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,899
0
0
Planet Nikon
mpenza said:
hmm... never thought of this. probably that was what happened to some shots I took off a observatory ;p
I wouldn't either, didn't really think of it till Bjørn Rørslett was commenting about it when some users were overly worried about the banding issues. :)
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
espn said:
I wouldn't either, didn't really think of it till Bjørn Rørslett was commenting about it when some users were overly worried about the banding issues. :)
mm.. can anyone elaborate how this could happen? I'm still abit lost as to how the CCD could record the phases of the 50/60Hz hum.

The worse case would be to be in the direction of a standing wave where different distances from the source would give you different intensity captured onto the CCD where every multiple of wavelengths would give you either the brightest/darkest intensity, but I've never heard of it with light on CCD/flim. Probably the wavelengths get diffracted thru a rain drop as described and formed their own individual standing wave?!?! :dunno:

I've only seen such things happening on RF and sound systems.

espn: can point me to the source of your quote? I would like to read more about it.
mpenza: can show me how the banding due to "ac phases" look like? I'm really interested.

I'm thinking it's more of an sampling aliasing (not wavelength aliaing) problem from the sampling of the CCD rather than banding of AC phases as described.
 

Beachboy

Senior Member
Feb 5, 2004
1,810
2
38
Singapore, Jurong East
actually i notice the banding after i took few night picture and zoom it 100% (on the bright and dark subject like the lamp ) then i saw the banding problem....

i am not kpkp because the banding problem not critical, i cant see the bending even if i print on A4..:cool:

just waitting for nikon to release the new firmware to overcome this ;)
 

Andy Ho

Member
Jan 10, 2003
389
0
16
Punggol
Actually I do notice this banding issue with my D2X also when shooting with the 17-55 lens stopped down. When using other "film" lenses I don't get this problems. I actually did a few pictures from my home with camera set on tripod and switching lenses while at different zooms. What prompted me to do this test was because I wasn't happy with the lack of starburst effect when shooting with the DX 17-55mm f/2.8 lens with the aperture stopped down to f/11 or f/16.

I then switched it to my AF 24-85mm f/2.8-4 lens and then do I see the difference in quality a dedicated "film" lens can give me. Of course I was doing a fair test of matching the zoom range for both lenses.

My next test was to match it to a AF 20mm f2.8 D lens with the zoom for the 17-55 set at 20mm and of course it is not a fair test but I did it anyway to see if I get a nice starburst effect from the prime. Again the result is mind-blowing.

Now I can't help feeling that I am getting 2nd grade quality glass after paying $2K+ for the 17-55 lens. :thumbsd: Should have gotten the 17-35mm instead.
 

Beachboy

Senior Member
Feb 5, 2004
1,810
2
38
Singapore, Jurong East
Andy Ho said:
Actually I do notice this banding issue with my D2X also when shooting with the 17-55 lens stopped down. When using other "film" lenses I don't get this problems. I actually did a few pictures from my home with camera set on tripod and switching lenses while at different zooms. What prompted me to do this test was because I wasn't happy with the lack of starburst effect when shooting with the DX 17-55mm f/2.8 lens with the aperture stopped down to f/11 or f/16.

I then switched it to my AF 24-85mm f/2.8-4 lens and then do I see the difference in quality a dedicated "film" lens can give me. Of course I was doing a fair test of matching the zoom range for both lenses.

My next test was to match it to a AF 20mm f2.8 D lens with the zoom for the 17-55 set at 20mm and of course it is not a fair test but I did it anyway to see if I get a nice starburst effect from the prime. Again the result is mind-blowing.

Now I can't help feeling that I am getting 2nd grade quality glass after paying $2K+ for the 17-55 lens. :thumbsd: Should have gotten the 17-35mm instead.
i shoot using 70-200 also have the same banding problem, so the banding problem is not cause by DX lens
 

Andy Ho

Member
Jan 10, 2003
389
0
16
Punggol
Beachboy said:
i shoot using 70-200 also have the same banding problem, so the banding problem is not cause by DX lens
Really? My test is not really conclusive regarding the banding problems although I do see a huge difference between my "film" lens and my DX lens. Actually I wanted to see if the DX lens is capable of achieving the starburst effect like the normal "film" lens when stopped down but I found out other issues also, and one of them is the so called banding problems.

I know I did not do much justice by comparing with only one DX lens but then again that is the only DX lens I have currently. I actually use that lens mainly for event shots. For my other shots like corporate or commercial I stick to my old trusty prime lenses.
 

litefoot

New Member
Jan 27, 2005
888
0
0
espn said:
Read this off another forum,











Comments and feedback was all by Bjørn Rørslett.
Why are you even bother to worry about it? Go out and shoot! <- pro comment right? :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,899
0
0
Planet Nikon
litefoot said:
Why are you even bother to worry about it? Go out and shoot! <- pro comment right? :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
I'm not bothered nor worried about it, even if I can get the next D3X at the first batch, I won't even think about problems arising from defects etc.

Shoot first, talk later.

This is just to inform people that they're over-worrying for nothing. I'm not a pro nor do I have a D200, thus I'll let the real PRO speak about it.
 

wiz23

Senior Member
Jun 20, 2005
2,940
0
0
Bukit Panjang
www.pbase.com
If Bjørn Rørslett says it's not a problem, then it's not a problem :bsmilie: He is my hero!
 

Zenten

Deregistered
Jun 13, 2004
9,843
8
38
D200 so fast got complaints already ? Nikonians are really hard to please ......:bsmilie:
 

litefoot

New Member
Jan 27, 2005
888
0
0
wiz23 said:
If Bjørn Rørslett says it's not a problem, then it's not a problem :bsmilie: He is my hero!
He is lagi a bigger hero to someone else. :D :D
 

litefoot

New Member
Jan 27, 2005
888
0
0
markccm said:
who who?
just say lah.
Dun act blurr lah. Watcher lor. Right? Watcher?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.