Sad and disappointed (Previously a happy Nikon User)

[surrephoto]

I'm using a D3S and all my 1.4 lenses (85G, 24G, 300 2.8G) all have dead on focus. Looks like if you don't want to MA, you need to simply go for the best. Not sure whether this is the phenomenon for the C-camp though.

Yes, i've noticed but I cannot confirm as I have never owned a D3s. One thing to note is the D3 and D3s have sharper screens than D700, at base sharpness it will look different and affect our judgement.

There no such thing as the perfect thing.

Yes, you are right 100%. But we need to try to achieve as close to perfect as possible to make work easier.

I feel that the TS genuinely wants some help. So what if he's young and have the gears, thats his problem. The question is not about that in the first place.

I also feel the same way about Nikon Vs Canon. I have been a Nikon camper all along, it has served me well in terms of its capability (accurate and fast focusing etc) for the genre I liked. However, portraiture does not seem to be a strong point of N. I have recently started to dabble in portraits and find that the Canon 5D seems to produce the skin tones (maybe its just the plastic feel people talk about instead of the natural feel of Nikon) which makes it suitable for portraiture....Check out the top wedding photographers in Singapore too....most of them are 5D users...since 5D is erratic in focusing (something deterring me from switching), why are these people whose rice bowl depends on the right moment still with C.

Just go to flickr, select explore and browse for portrait shots. I have been through this a lot to learn about portraiture. 8 out of 10 of those great portraits I adore came from the 5D (classic or MarkII), seldom do I see them coming from Nikons sadly...I came to a point where I could just really tell they came from the 5D. Of the few that came from N,that also encouraged myself to work towards their standard.

That said, some forumers elsewhere have been saying that PP can solve everything...are we saying that the 5D users are doing a lot of PP??

Guess I will get flamed too, but whatever, I just wanted to voice out.

Your point is not scientific but has been brought up many times before. Some fred-marindians analyzed the sensors with colourchecker and concluded the mapping is different.

One of the world top wedding photographers Jerry Ghionis is using Nikon. The regular WPPI winners CM Leung from Hongkong and Kenneth Tan from Malaysia are also using Nikon. Bryan Jean from Singapore is also using Nikon. Their portraitures work are real good.

Well, what I want to point out is that camera and lenses are just tool and nothing is perfect. You have to deal with the weakness and craft the images that you can deliver. Without Canon or Nikon, you still can create fabulous images using Sony, Pentax or Olympus, but in different ways that counter the weakness of these brands. So most importantly you have to find out your own style and see if it can deal with the weakness of the camera brand you are using.

Colour is subjective, if you shoot RAW and work in Lightroom/Photoshop, the colour can be changed 360 degrees according to your taste. There is a software called PS Kiss that can allow you to use Canon colour profile on images created by Nikon. So it is no big deal.

I've been shooting many weddings and I'm very satisfied with my Nikon D700, 24mm and 50mm f1.4G, especially noise control capability of D700. I seldom encounter many miss focuses like what TS said. D700 also has very clean noise control and accurate AWB. And I love the Nikon flash SB900 system too. That's why I still shoot with Nikon now because it can help deliver my jobs in ease and suits my shooting style.

Unfortunately the D700 AWB is nothing close to accurate imho. But thanks alot for your advice with PS Kiss. I'm taking a look now. Noise levels are better but not significantly if you do properly noise reduction on 5D2 files. It's more of a 12 mpx vs 21 mpx difference.

I'm not going to give the great advice or description here but just my 2cts.
Somehow Nikon and Canon do produce a different 'feel' in the portraits. As a frequent Flickr/500px browser, before I check EXIF data I can more or less deduce whether a Nikon or Canon shot it. It gives a different tone, texture and feel. I have noticed that Nikon delivers very true-to-life colours, more 'aggressive' in pulling out details and clarity - a somewhat more raw (raw as in raw, not RAW) looking photos, as if the image is tangible. Canon delivers this smooth, silky, subtle clarity and more refined feel in portraits I've had a hard time developing a style for as a Nikon user.
That said, countless, countless, professional portrait-centric or fashion photographers use Nikon extensively, and it would be unreasonable for me to say useless things like Canon or Nikon is better as an unproven statement. As for Lightroom, it does 'strengthen' the 'Nikon look". You might want to try Aperture which has a more natural skin tone (to me). Theres also DxO and Capture One.

I believe adaptation to a different brand is the key here... pros use Leaf, Phase One, Mamiya, Leica, Hassy in complement to their Nikons or Canons. When you make a step up, say you're offered a chance/tasked/upgraded to/paid to shoot medium format, you will again want your skills to thrive on the new system. With the current context in mind, try to adapt to Nikon since you're already in the Nikon camp.

But question is, why the change to Nikon when Canon had served you so well previously?

I'm facing very similar issue to you but you managed to put in words. Kudos to you. But the situation is complicated and people often say "just shoot raw", RAW is not the holy grail, it goes down to intepretation (by e software), dynamic range (brightness & color too). Obviously an out of camera jpeg is going to be easily identifiable as C or N.

---

For those who question my colour management. I'm currently using a i1 Display Pro calibrator and previously had a Spyder 3 Pro and am aware that my windows 7 colour-management sucks.

And about service cost being the same. Sorry but to me canon is literally "delighting me always" with impeccable service and satisfying prices. NOT Nikon in this aspect.

Currently sticking to Nikon camp for consistent AF. But it's not true canon AF always sucked. When I used my 85L Mark I back with the 5D & 1DsII, the hit-rate was 9 out of 10 and anything wrong was a moving subject or user-error. Thats an old lens. Higher accuracy and precision does exist but our friendly manufacturers know better than giving you the best performance.

 

[surrephoto]

How do you configure your auto focus: center point focus and recompose/ shift the AF point/ Continuous/ Single? and how do you calibrate your lenses for microadjustment?

I use all the techniques you mentioned for AF.

If a subject is stationary at an average distance which is comfortable (eg. full-body shoot of a couple with 85mm). I will use center-point and allow abit of recomposition.

Whether I will or how much I recompose will be dependant on how much DOF i think I have. If your DOF is 0.5 m, recomposition is not going to kill you but may affect subjects or objects at both ends of the "field".

I use AF-C and "hantam" irregular moving subjects with a 1 selective point or dynamic AF (either 9-point or 21-point). However with the newer lenses especially 35 f1.4, it's accurate but not precise so "hantam" with AF-C for non moving or slow subjects works better for me.

To MA a lens I test all useful focusing distances (close, middle, infinity) and make sure all are a decently sharp. For different lenses the technique is different... imagine 35 f1.4 you have the luxury for more depth behind your subject so I MA it such that the DOF is towards the back a little (infinity sucks on my 35 1.4G without MA in the first place). For 85 1.4G wide-open this obviously doesn't work in the same way... so e usual one-third two-third rule for DOF is the best.

 

[SAMUELS]

TS, as you have agreed, I am facing the same issue as you, and I, like everyone else seem to be far from a concrete sure-fire solution.

My only suggestion left for you now is shoot both Canon and Nikon. pull out the Canon when you need that exact look and you can sacrifice consistent AF you need, and pull out Nikon when you can forget about skin tones and you need to grab that shot accurately at that instant. Afterall, all pros have at least 2 bodies.
Or try the unpopular - use Nikon glass on Canon body. I don't know what that will look like, maybe it will be a cross between the two where you will find a perfect compromise.

 

[LukaviZ]

wow! TS only 21 years old then owned sooooo many camera bodies and lenses...quite impressive, to me...

You make it sound as though age should be a huge determining factor for choice/quantity of equipment... =)

does it entertain you to troll on public forums?


Nonetheless, my personal opinion towards skintone on nikon is that the processor plays a part in terms of colour reproduction. Do many fellow forumers feel that the nikons with the expeed 2 processor give 'better/more accurate' colours?
It does seem to me that way, and thus, it would be safe to say that henceforth, new releases SHOULD have such colour at least, or better.

 

[nikonriana]

Hi bro, I am 21 yrs and used 5D1, 1DsII, 5D2, D700 & D3. Not a choice and this my job aka bread. I hope you meant it in a non-sarcastic manner. [/ QUOTE]

haha.. bro we used to used the exact same system. just that i started with 450D, den 5d1, 1ds2, d700 and d3... but with the address to your problem... I find them still alright...
in fact my cilent loves the colors of my D700 and D3, i don't often have time to pp my photos as most events i cover requires instant submitting of photos to them.

I've yet to try out a 35f1.4 but my 24 f1.4 and 85 f1.4 is doing just fine.

Servicing is expensive thou, without doubt. and location as compared to canon's harbour front, is so inconvenient for me... haha...

In reality.. no one zoom all the way in the look at if your photo is fully sharp..
those nicely bokeh photos are rather art to most people.. seldom do they do wall printings...
those photos that they do make wall printing out of it.. i do believe you wouldn't be shooting with f1.4, at least f5.6 or more...
so sharpness wise it doesn't matter anymore.

As for focus precision, standing toe to toe, a 5d2 aint any better den a d700, but if u were to ask me if i were to compare 1ds2 and d3, i'd pretty 1ds2 but i seriously hated that small screen so give it to d3 for that...

AWB was never a problem for me somewhat.. i do realised alot of complains about the greenish effect..

when i travel, D700 built in flash is seriously awesome.. no joke about it...that was the most plus points i would give to D700 when i travel for leisure..

Anyway if anyone do realised... nikon sucks at VR system. it's slow and noisy. Canon is so much better..
If only i can mount canon lenses onto nikon body... C=

 

[surrephoto]

Hi bro, I am 21 yrs and used 5D1, 1DsII, 5D2, D700 & D3. Not a choice and this my job aka bread. I hope you meant it in a non-sarcastic manner. [/ QUOTE]

haha.. bro we used to used the exact same system. just that i started with 450D, den 5d1, 1ds2, d700 and d3... but with the address to your problem... I find them still alright...
in fact my cilent loves the colors of my D700 and D3, i don't often have time to pp my photos as most events i cover requires instant submitting of photos to them.

I've yet to try out a 35f1.4 but my 24 f1.4 and 85 f1.4 is doing just fine.

Servicing is expensive thou, without doubt. and location as compared to canon's harbour front, is so inconvenient for me... haha...

In reality.. no one zoom all the way in the look at if your photo is fully sharp..
those nicely bokeh photos are rather art to most people.. seldom do they do wall printings...
those photos that they do make wall printing out of it.. i do believe you wouldn't be shooting with f1.4, at least f5.6 or more...
so sharpness wise it doesn't matter anymore.

As for focus precision, standing toe to toe, a 5d2 aint any better den a d700, but if u were to ask me if i were to compare 1ds2 and d3, i'd pretty 1ds2 but i seriously hated that small screen so give it to d3 for that...

AWB was never a problem for me somewhat.. i do realised alot of complains about the greenish effect..

when i travel, D700 built in flash is seriously awesome.. no joke about it...that was the most plus points i would give to D700 when i travel for leisure..

Anyway if anyone do realised... nikon sucks at VR system. it's slow and noisy. Canon is so much better..
If only i can mount canon lenses onto nikon body... C=

Yep... VR is at least a generation behind of IS IMHO.

I tried the 70-200 VR II and was impressed only because it was hordes better than 70-200 VR I which had (to me) almost useless VR.

But recalling the time on a 70-200 IS I and 20D, I rmbed I could handhold 1/10 second at 320 mm equivalent. After I tried the 70-200 IS II, i was completed blown away... somewhere online they rated it effective 5 stops of IS.

 

[crazyson]

color sucks, awb sucks, raw sucks, jpeg sucks, AF has problems, service is bad, VR is 'a generation behind of IS'

the last strength that nikon has is good ISO performance, but from your point of view, its not that fantastic after all?

so, with no malicious intent, why are you still using Nikon?

 

[jeff7id]

If you are not happy with both Canon 5D Mark II and Nikon D700/D3, and prefer with the color, AWB, the service, IS system of Canon, than you should stick with Canon system.

I am Nikon user but My "Photo-Kaki" are all Canon users, they have already saved money for Canon EOS 1DX which would be available by early of next year.
Canon U.S.A. : Consumer & Home Office : EOS-1D X

I think you shall do the same.

My case is different. I was previously Canon user who switched to Nikon user, and still a happy Nikon user.
I like camera settings, custom settings menu, and the ergonomics of the Nikon body. Just don't like the price of Nikon LOL.

I AM BLACK, I AM NIKON :devil:

 

[L-coholic]

color sucks, awb sucks, raw sucks, jpeg sucks, AF has problems, service is bad, VR is 'a generation behind of IS'

the last strength that nikon has is good ISO performance, but from your point of view, its not that fantastic after all?

so, with no malicious intent, why are you still using Nikon?

I am wondering why TS has not switch back to Canon too.
may be he is thinking to have both system together?

 

[Cheesecake]

Hi all. Would like to share some sentiments I've had from various experiences as a nikon user in the last 1 year. The disclaimer would be that I'm an ex-C camp user but do not bring in brand war conversations unless you really know what you're talking about.

Alot of things i'm going to share are not always scientific that's why I would like the opinions of fellow users. I'm a D700 user and have used 4 copies of D700s. Have owned a D3 as well.

1. Current Nikon AF system is "degrading" in relative quality due to the release of the new recent f1.4 lenses eg. 24G, 35G, 85G.

Previously I did not notice issues while I was using the 50 f1.4G. These lenses are all higher quality but all required micro-adjustment to achieve peak accuracy/precision. NSC told me this is the user's responsibility. Interestingly the MA value for multiple bodies are the same. This subject is more complicated than it looks because accuracy not equals precision and focus shift can affect the best MA value to get the best DOF balance for all AF distances. On average I spent 3 months on each lens to figure out that magical number. That is a heck load of time wasted. I can share some of my findings if any of you bros need help. Btw I spent a short time on a D3 and could not fix these issues. The D3S was much better (from LCD screen).

in all honesty, when i upgraded to D3s from D700, I do notice a much better AF (more spot on) with some of my lenses (namely Angieneux AF28-70 f2.6). but it is only with the older lenses that are not-so-spot-on with the AF as compared to the newer ones.

thus, i think from my perspective, TS' claims could maybe be validated.

however, i would like to add, TS could be perhaps too overly picky or maybe, he has got lemons but I cannot be sure as I do not own any lens that have an in-built motor (G lenses) or have VR in it.

2. Maintenance pricing at NSC Singapore is simply too expensive. I don't expect angelic service and non-rhetorical warranty but estimations of $500-$600 for an average shutter change and $100+ dollars for a hot-shoe is infuriating.

I use both Nikon and Canon system and I can attest to the fact that Canon has the better servicing user-experience hands-down.

to me, using Nikon is very much like a 'premium' thing. perhaps the shutter system is 'better well made' and the workmanship are somewhat 'better' than Canon?

anyway, they are free to price their own servicing and parts. if this really bothers one, perhaps one should really try to take better care of their equipments, like less 'machine-gun' shooting, clean up the lenses after each use, fire off the flashes once every few weeks if they are not in use for a while etc. etc.

3. I still do not like out of box nikon color even after shooting RAW and custom WB. First off I'm all for skintones. I've used everything from CaptureNX, Lightroom 3 (my main workhorse software) & I believe that simple PP can't solve this problem because C & N color/balance rendition is just different starting from the sensor & lens coating. JPEGs from the D700 are unusable to me. When I first migrated from 1DsII to D700 my workflow for colour became more complicated overnight, correct yet pleasing RGB/CMYK skintone is easy to achieve last time but for the nikons (D3/D700) it's abit of a chore. Btw, i'm not a photoshop expert so I might be all wrong.

TS has to work on his digital workflow and must seek to improve his own post-processing skills/methods.

i am delighted when I upgraded from D200 to D700 because the colour is simply fantastic but of course, it still pales in comparison to FujiFilm's S2Pro, an ultra antique DSLR from yesteryear.

thus, I just spend more time with my digital workflow and created one that suits the camera's RAW output.

colour is subjective but everyone can and will appreciate fine colour rendering. perhaps TS should and must learn how to get the best digital workflow/post-processing and colour rendering.

4. AWB is awful or not to my taste. This applies especially for the D700 AWB (greenish cast in 60% of situations yet Magenta 1 shift destroys skintones) and sadly the D3S samples I saw were better but not by a huge margin. Could this just be a matter of taste or a real technical issue?

I only shoot in RAW and thus the AWB issue does not apply to me as I will personally edit the WB and colours after every shoot. i mean, such an expensive camera and i only use it to shoot JPEG? sorry, but its not for me.

I would think that TS should start to maximise the cameras he is working with and start to shoot more in RAW mode and of course, spend more quality time honing and perfecting his post-processing skills.




there is no perfect system. choose one that is most suitable for your own needs.

otherwise, try to 'grow' with the system and adjust your style to complement it.

 

[Cheesecake]

---

For those who question my colour management. I'm currently using a i1 Display Pro calibrator and previously had a Spyder 3 Pro and am aware that my windows 7 colour-management sucks.

And about service cost being the same. Sorry but to me canon is literally "delighting me always" with impeccable service and satisfying prices. NOT Nikon in this aspect.

Currently sticking to Nikon camp for consistent AF. But it's not true canon AF always sucked. When I used my 85L Mark I back with the 5D & 1DsII, the hit-rate was 9 out of 10 and anything wrong was a moving subject or user-error. Thats an old lens. Higher accuracy and precision does exist but our friendly manufacturers know better than giving you the best performance.

agreed with the Canon servicing part.


I think TS' biggest issue is with colours and digital workflow.

would like to ask if TS print out his fotos? and if so, where?

does the foto's colour matches that of the monitor's?


cheers!

 

[Ben Ang]

I'm not sure if this affects the newer AF-S glass (i use AIS), but field curvature might be the source of your problems. the focus plane is never perfectly flat, and if you af with the center point and then recompose your subject to the corners or edges you ll have issues with keeping sharp focus.

another thing, using AF-C on stationary objects throws off the af system sometimes if you jerk just before the exposure cos the system pre empts the movement. in short, i've found that when i use the wrong setting for the job, i sometimes miss focus, but when i pay attention and set it right, both my 17-35 and 180 2.8 give spot on performance almost 100% of the time. if you want to be extra kiasu, get the canon EC-S focus screen and you ll know exactly when a shot will turn out mis focused.

I use all the techniques you mentioned for AF.

If a subject is stationary at an average distance which is comfortable (eg. full-body shoot of a couple with 85mm). I will use center-point and allow abit of recomposition.

Whether I will or how much I recompose will be dependant on how much DOF i think I have. If your DOF is 0.5 m, recomposition is not going to kill you but may affect subjects or objects at both ends of the "field".

I use AF-C and "hantam" irregular moving subjects with a 1 selective point or dynamic AF (either 9-point or 21-point). However with the newer lenses especially 35 f1.4, it's accurate but not precise so "hantam" with AF-C for non moving or slow subjects works better for me.

To MA a lens I test all useful focusing distances (close, middle, infinity) and make sure all are a decently sharp. For different lenses the technique is different... imagine 35 f1.4 you have the luxury for more depth behind your subject so I MA it such that the DOF is towards the back a little (infinity sucks on my 35 1.4G without MA in the first place). For 85 1.4G wide-open this obviously doesn't work in the same way... so e usual one-third two-third rule for DOF is the best.

 

[surrephoto]

If you are not happy with both Canon 5D Mark II and Nikon D700/D3, and prefer with the color, AWB, the service, IS system of Canon, than you should stick with Canon system.

I am Nikon user but My "Photo-Kaki" are all Canon users, they have already saved money for Canon EOS 1DX which would be available by early of next year.
Canon U.S.A. : Consumer & Home Office : EOS-1D X

I think you shall do the same.

My case is different. I was previously Canon user who switched to Nikon user, and still a happy Nikon user.
I like camera settings, custom settings menu, and the ergonomics of the Nikon body. Just don't like the price of Nikon LOL.

I AM BLACK, I AM NIKON :devil:

I ready to go for the 1DX if after testing i'm satisfied. Canon can't make another mistake so I guess this guy will be good.

Ergonomics and camera settings are things we can get used too I think. Everyone who touched the 1DsII commented to me that it was the camera with the most horrible ergos ever made. But honestly if you got used to it, it feels very intuitive since everything is button "combos"... abit like playing games. Of course, Nikon has more switches and thats useful for 1-touch operation. The custom settings menu is a pain to those who are not technical but gives you more control... alot of give and take.

color sucks, awb sucks, raw sucks, jpeg sucks, AF has problems, service is bad, VR is 'a generation behind of IS'

the last strength that nikon has is good ISO performance, but from your point of view, its not that fantastic after all?

so, with no malicious intent, why are you still using Nikon?

The real reason is because the 5D2 is worse than D700 in the hit-rate and performance aspect. Nikon is more responsive for sure. And 5D2 does not share the same reliable AF as the 1DsII. I changed from 1DsII to D700 because it was slow and had outdated ISO performance. But at low ISO, it's a king for sure.

I can live with the problems... and in all honesty non of my clients have ever said my colours were bad, most even comented that they were nice. It's just my pursuit for better.

Sometimes for a system we look at it as a whole. Since I don't use VR, VR part is not a concern. Since I don't use JPEGs for 9 out of 10 jobs, sucky JPEGs is not a concern either. AWB sucks just makes my post-work more tedious. Colours suck... this one is sensistive! Haha!

in all honesty, when i upgraded to D3s from D700, I do notice a much better AF (more spot on) with some of my lenses (namely Angieneux AF28-70 f2.6). but it is only with the older lenses that are not-so-spot-on with the AF as compared to the newer ones.

thus, i think from my perspective, TS' claims could maybe be validated.

however, i would like to add, TS could be perhaps too overly picky or maybe, he has got lemons but I cannot be sure as I do not own any lens that have an in-built motor (G lenses) or have VR in it.



I use both Nikon and Canon system and I can attest to the fact that Canon has the better servicing user-experience hands-down.

to me, using Nikon is very much like a 'premium' thing. perhaps the shutter system is 'better well made' and the workmanship are somewhat 'better' than Canon?

anyway, they are free to price their own servicing and parts. if this really bothers one, perhaps one should really try to take better care of their equipments, like less 'machine-gun' shooting, clean up the lenses after each use, fire off the flashes once every few weeks if they are not in use for a while etc. etc.




TS has to work on his digital workflow and must seek to improve his own post-processing skills/methods.

i am delighted when I upgraded from D200 to D700 because the colour is simply fantastic but of course, it still pales in comparison to FujiFilm's S2Pro, an ultra antique DSLR from yesteryear.

thus, I just spend more time with my digital workflow and created one that suits the camera's RAW output.

colour is subjective but everyone can and will appreciate fine colour rendering. perhaps TS should and must learn how to get the best digital workflow/post-processing and colour rendering.




I only shoot in RAW and thus the AWB issue does not apply to me as I will personally edit the WB and colours after every shoot. i mean, such an expensive camera and i only use it to shoot JPEG? sorry, but its not for me.

I would think that TS should start to maximise the cameras he is working with and start to shoot more in RAW mode and of course, spend more quality time honing and perfecting his post-processing skills.




there is no perfect system. choose one that is most suitable for your own needs.

otherwise, try to 'grow' with the system and adjust your style to complement it.

I believe they've tweaked the D3S.

I shoot only in RAW. However, there are times when this is not possible, usable JPEGs and good AWB will be very much appreciated. I've spent alot of time researching and understanding skintone workflow. Things have improved but are just not perfect yet.

About nikon cameras being better build. I'm laughing really. Perhaps the D3 is well built... at least the rubber grips which fall off after a few months are under $100 to replace for most nikon cams. Never had a rubber fall off on a canon.

agreed with the Canon servicing part.


I think TS' biggest issue is with colours and digital workflow.

would like to ask if TS print out his fotos? and if so, where?

does the foto's colour matches that of the monitor's?


cheers!

The colours are an adequate match in both colours and contrast on my IP4680 inkjet previously with my spyder 3 pro. I'm not so bothered by printing and did not spend much to profile my printer to perfection.

I'm not sure if this affects the newer AF-S glass (i use AIS), but field curvature might be the source of your problems. the focus plane is never perfectly flat, and if you af with the center point and then recompose your subject to the corners or edges you ll have issues with keeping sharp focus.

another thing, using AF-C on stationary objects throws off the af system sometimes if you jerk just before the exposure cos the system pre empts the movement. in short, i've found that when i use the wrong setting for the job, i sometimes miss focus, but when i pay attention and set it right, both my 17-35 and 180 2.8 give spot on performance almost 100% of the time. if you want to be extra kiasu, get the canon EC-S focus screen and you ll know exactly when a shot will turn out mis focused.

I'm aware of field curvature and focus shifting on these large aperture lenses. However these focusing defects occur on simple test charts in good lighting. About the AF-C on stationary objects... if the lens lock-on is in-accurate and you and the subject could also move unexpectedly, it all boils down to a bit of luck.

 

[Cheesecake]

I believe they've tweaked the D3S.

I shoot only in RAW. However, there are times when this is not possible, usable JPEGs and good AWB will be very much appreciated. I've spent alot of time researching and understanding skintone workflow. Things have improved but are just not perfect yet.

About nikon cameras being better build. I'm laughing really. Perhaps the D3 is well built... at least the rubber grips which fall off after a few months are under $100 to replace for most nikon cams. Never had a rubber fall off on a canon.



The colours are an adequate match in both colours and contrast on my IP4680 inkjet previously with my spyder 3 pro. I'm not so bothered by printing and did not spend much to profile my printer to perfection.

understand that some fotographers shoot in JPEG especially those in event fotography.

as for your skin-tone digital workflow, i guess you just have to find one that suits not only ur taste but the client's.

u like to share with us ur workflow?



i'm not sure about Nikon bodies being better built or not but none of the Nikons that i've owned have ever had the rubber thing coming off.

to some extend i'm certain that sweaty palms play a big part and yeah, the replacement rubber sure is expensive but then again, Nikon Singapore can price it at any amount they deem fit. so... ... LLST la.




how do you pass your completed work to your client? any printed copies from the foto labs? or just digital copies?

 

[SAMUELS]

understand that some fotographers shoot in JPEG especially those in event fotography.

as for your skin-tone digital workflow, i guess you just have to find one that suits not only ur taste but the client's.

u like to share with us ur workflow?



i'm not sure about Nikon bodies being better built or not but none of the Nikons that i've owned have ever had the rubber thing coming off.

to some extend i'm certain that sweaty palms play a big part and yeah, the replacement rubber sure is expensive but then again, Nikon Singapore can price it at any amount they deem fit. so... ... LLST la.




how do you pass your completed work to your client? any printed copies from the foto labs? or just digital copies?

Would love to know the details of TS's shoot to finish workflow too... it would be easier to see what can be changed or improved on.

As for Nikon quality.. every mass production company will have problems here and there. for Canon, the mirrors fall off in 5D MKIIs, 60D's grip peeling and hotshoe problem, just to name a few of the more common problems. Same for Nikon - we have sticky rubber for some users, and hot pixels from the D7000 now fixed by firmware.

 

[surrephoto]

For those who wanted to know my workflow... it's actually very straight-forward.

1st, I import images (usually raw NEFs) into LR3 and depending on the requirements (what i'm shooting, who i'm shooting with, who i'm shooting for) I will start by determining the colour profile... usually "Adobe Standard" or "Camera Standard".

2nd, based mainly on the skintone of the subject I will adjust AWB & Tint till the Melissa RGB values are right. Then sometimes but seldom, saturation and vibrance to save the day if all fails. Other things like contrast and curves are done here too. Stuff like sepia & b/w will be done here and I have made personal presets.

3rd, sharpen, noise reduce then export out as sRGB JPEGs.

4th, I analyze the skintone in photoshop and apply changes by masking/rgb/various techniques till the image looks right. For images that are sepia/b&w I will usually skip this step unless need to work on the skin.

 

[surrephoto]

as for your skin-tone digital workflow, i guess you just have to find one that suits not only ur taste but the client's.

how do you pass your completed work to your client? any printed copies from the foto labs? or just digital copies?

As said no one has actually complained about the skintones i produce from my work. It's more of the increased amt of work to get skintone (specifically) right after the canon to nikon switch.

My theory is that OOB canon colors are more accepted in the south-east asian market as people prefer to not look too yellow. Certainly canon has it's way of balancing skintones of various races yet retain that type of saturation that we love (think 5D2). Honestly it irks me when I see nikon images of caucasians... and they look so healthy and yellow... imagine how WE look with those exact settings.

I usually just submit digital copies.

 

[Cheesecake]

For those who wanted to know my workflow... it's actually very straight-forward.

1st, I import images (usually raw NEFs) into LR3 and depending on the requirements (what i'm shooting, who i'm shooting with, who i'm shooting for) I will start by determining the colour profile... usually "Adobe Standard" or "Camera Standard".

first off, why Adobe RGB?

are your printers set to Adobe RGB?

are the printers/labs you frequent using that colour profile?

what RGB colour setting you use for your camera?

personally, i hate lightroom. i think its a joke but then again, different workflow i guess.

2nd, based mainly on the skintone of the subject I will adjust AWB & Tint till the Melissa RGB values are right. Then sometimes but seldom, saturation and vibrance to save the day if all fails. Other things like contrast and curves are done here too. Stuff like sepia & b/w will be done here and I have made personal presets.

3rd, sharpen, noise reduce then export out as sRGB JPEGs.

4th, I analyze the skintone in photoshop and apply changes by masking/rgb/various techniques till the image looks right. For images that are sepia/b&w I will usually skip this step unless need to work on the skin.

hmmmm...

for my workflow, i shoot RAW and i use only Photoshop.

my colour profile never change, it is always in tune with the lab's colour profile, so what I see on my monitor is the result I will get after I printed the fotos. this to me, is the most crucial.

thus, my digital workflow revolves around working with RAW fotos on Photoshop.

after the initial RAW Reader page having adjusted the WB and such, I will go onto editing the pimples/wrinkles away.

then I will crop the image.

adjust the Curves to get the right colour setting I want (could be the post-processed look).

then the last step is UnSharp Mask before I save it as a Tif or a JPEG.



come to think of it, I think you might be overly obsessed with skin-tone. you have a sample foto to show us on what you think is the ideal skin-tone and your own foto whereby you think the skin-tone CMI?

 

[Cheesecake]

As said no one has actually complained about the skintones i produce from my work. It's more of the increased amt of work to get skintone (specifically) right after the canon to nikon switch.

My theory is that OOB canon colors are more accepted in the south-east asian market as people prefer to not look too yellow. Certainly canon has it's way of balancing skintones of various races yet retain that type of saturation that we love (think 5D2). Honestly it irks me when I see nikon images of caucasians... and they look so healthy and yellow... imagine how WE look with those exact settings.

I usually just submit digital copies.

probably what really matters is what your client think and want.

if no complain, then it is good.


do you know how to work with Action in Photoshop? not sure if lightroom has Action........

i'm suggesting that you can save a certain workflow into an Action and the next time you edit skin-tone, you simply run the same Action and you'll save alot of hassle in post-processing.

the basic rule of not looking too yellow is to add in a tinge of blue.




i'm not as particular in skin-tone colour as you. i'm way more concerned with high ISO performance.

and of course, what the whole system can provide for me.

since our wants differ, you should re-look at the issue again and really weight out what is more important to you.




Skin-tone or the whole system?

 

[SAMUELS]

first off, why Adobe RGB?

are your printers set to Adobe RGB?

are the printers/labs you frequent using that colour profile?

what RGB colour setting you use for your camera?

personally, i hate lightroom. i think its a joke but then again, different workflow i guess.



hmmmm...

for my workflow, i shoot RAW and i use only Photoshop.

my colour profile never change, it is always in tune with the lab's colour profile, so what I see on my monitor is the result I will get after I printed the fotos. this to me, is the most crucial.

thus, my digital workflow revolves around working with RAW fotos on Photoshop.

after the initial RAW Reader page having adjusted the WB and such, I will go onto editing the pimples/wrinkles away.

then I will crop the image.

adjust the Curves to get the right colour setting I want (could be the post-processed look).

then the last step is UnSharp Mask before I save it as a Tif or a JPEG.



come to think of it, I think you might be overly obsessed with skin-tone. you have a sample foto to show us on what you think is the ideal skin-tone and your own foto whereby you think the skin-tone CMI?

IMHO Nothing to do with RGB... Even if you cannot view and print Adobe RGB, always work in the largest colour space possible, like Melissa RGB, and export in sRGB for print or screen.

Actuallu, I have seen TS's photos prior to this skin tone issue here. I don't see any problem with the skin tone, although its not fantastic, its not bad or screaming for skin tone adjustment.