View allAll Photos Tagged Comparison
It's my 200th picture on flickr! Figured I'd upload the comparison shot for you guys. Comments are appreciated!
Back in February I did a pre shoot for him to test out some lighting, poses and concepts in the actual gym. you can refer back the picture here: Pre Shoot Photo
Three months later were here with results! Stay tuned for some studio, environmental and gym pictures with this fitness shoot.
Strobist info: two sb-700's in 24" soft boxex right and left of the person about 2 feet higher than him pointing down on top of him.flash triggers: were neweer flash trigger's they're (very unstable with poor mounts they work but i wouldnt recommend them, they were only 20 dollars)
Here's a picture of the basic set up: www.flickr.com/photos/aandaphotography/8703263802/in/phot...
musedoll ciel - custom house choa - Luts white skin (2006) +dim belita head - Luts normal skin - volks SD10 swaricco
here are different headcups, I hope description is clear enough ;)
It you have specyfic question about what match best and what not among above resind, please ask, I will answer as well as I can :)
-Dollmore Zaoll luv (WS), 2/2014, 52 cm
-Elfdoll Vivien reminisce (mod.) head (SS), date ??? + Supia original (old) body (NS) 11/2014, 59 cm
be sure to view the comparison chart on Full Screen
OK. At first glimpse, this comparison might sound unfair. The D300, featuring a 12 MP sensor was released in 2007, while the D7100, featuring a 24 MP sensor was released almost 6 years later in 2013. Six years. That is a long time in the digital world.
PREFACE
But let's start from the beginning. I am, or at least was most of the time very happy with my D300 for more than 5 years now. The camera travelled from the darkest basements to far asian cities and islands. And I never considered it an option to give away my cam as it never failed, never let me in the dark, never disappointed me. After having the D40 for a year before going to the D300 I was learning to appreciate the straight and clean layout of the control elements on the D300. It is truly straightforward. Shooting modes (P,M,S,A), ISO, WB, Exposure, Aperture and many more important settings can be very easily accessed without ever going into the menu. Hold the specific settings button while clicking the exposure dial thru the option value range. Release the button and it is set. Thats it. This straight UX approach was another strong reason I was soo happy with that camera. Also with the quality of the camera, especially its built quality – full metal (magnesium alloy) body - and the haptic feeling I was always more than satisfied over those years. For the image quality I was also quite pleased. Except, that sometimes I felt a bit more resolution for cropping could have been in those situations where you once again had to hurry snapping a shot without fine adjusting of the frame. On other occasions I was feeling like wanting more High ISO with less noise to shoot in the dark by hand. But as both of those requests seemed like only having one answer, namely going to full-frame (FX-Format) I dismissed the idea of upgrading . I was more than often on a holiday in a situation were I was tired to carry around my bulky and heavy bag. Going to full frame would not have meant to spend much more money on lenses but also to carry around an even bulkier and more heavier bag than the one I am sick of right now. So on holiday you will see me often just with the camera hanging from my shoulder, having the 35mm f/1.8 on and thats it. I highly appreciate the ability to move virtuously. Without moving, there is not much different scenes you are going to take in a day. And if you don't have a car with you or someone who is happy to carry your equipment (tripod, bag, umbrellas … what else do you need?) you really don’t feel like moving that much while taking all that material with you.
I remember also one of my close friends wanting me to convert to Canon, but this was also never an option for me. Not only having to switch a whole system of lenses, flashes and accessories, but I was and I am appreciating the nature of Nikon products in all ways a lot. Canon cameras often come out with newer features (Full-Frame-Sensors, Video, ...) or higher image quality more soon than Nikon ones. But to me they never felt that solid holding them in my hands as the Nikon cameras. I had Canon Cameras in my hand which cost more than double of the D300, but they always feel like cheap plastic to me. They never feel that solid as I would spend that much money on them. I also have some recent models of premium cars in my mind where manufacturers really failed in interior materials for +100k USD cars. I never would going to buy those – even I had the money - as they have cheap plastic buttons on the command panel, despite of being highly awarded by the so called independent specialized press.
COMMON FEATURES
OK. Lets first take a look, not at the differences of those both cameras. Let's take a look of what they have in common. Both are Nikon F-Mount DSLRs with a DX-Sensor (crop factor 1.3x). Both have the four basic important shooting modes – P, M, S, A. Both have an HDMI output on the left and a LCD on top. And the D7100 has at least a body which is partially made of magnesium alloy. Both have a 100 % viewfinder (0.94x). Both can shoot 14-bit NEF's, and both are featuring a 51-point AF sensor and an AF-motor, so non AF-S lenses will have AF function on both cams as well. Both can be equipped with a battery grip, and if you take a look at the menus you'll also find both cameras having extensive settings options which is almost the same huge feature list once more. And interestingly the D300s (the video enabled succeeder of the D300) is available at almost the same price right now as the D7100 is.
VIDEO
Let's just assume for a second that the only feature I am missing on my D300 is the video. Especially on holiday there is always something funny happening you want to take a video of, but often that is not in ideal light conditions. Smartphones just miss up taking videos in dim light and they don't have any optical zoom. So for taking just a little bit serious video it might be a good feature to have on the camera. But for buying a new camera with new money the step from to the D300s is just not far enough for me. It does not feature 1080p or 30fps video recording. And compared to the D300 there is just not more in the box finally than the video.
When spending money on a new camera you want to have more than just one feature. I never thought before that I am going to leave this super straight and solid prosumer Nikon line – not in favour for a less-pro product line. But as it turns out, the D7100 has much more image detail and quality offering in a package which is even lighter and more easy to carry than my old D300 and it is giving me 1080p video, while spending even a little less than for the D300s without missing all those detailed menu settings and major features. That's it. Said like this, it sounds very simple.
DIFFERENCES
Finally, I want to point out, which features you might be missing in case you are going for that same “upgrade” as me, or which features you might gain.
D300 havs, D7100 don't havs - flash sync plug (the old round one) - round 10 pin cable socket for remote cable shutter release and the older style GPS modules - display cover (protects your display from scratches) - straightforward controls - CF card slot (big cards, easy to grab, but be careful with the pins) - manual pop up flash (it never fires unless you release it first, no matter which program – that makes you look more smart than those people who are taking photos in the night of far objects (like skylines) or shooting thru windows with accidently firing the flash ;) - more solid body - bigger top LCD - bigger body more easy to grab (but also more heavy) - high shooting rate of up to 6/8 shots per second (8 only with battery grip or sw tweak***) - big buffer space (will enable you continues shooting of up to 18 RAWs (12-bit) at 6 FPS with fast cards) - LCD screen features more realistic tones and colors - in camera preview is of higher quality
D7100 havs, D300 don't havs - 24 MP sensor - Video recording - SD cards (hell are these small!) - DUAL SD card slots (second one can be set to JPG, backup or overflow) - IR sensor (for triggering the shutter) - many shooting scene modes (your friends who are not into photography might be able to take photos as well) - flash pop up is controlled by software now (to disable the flash, be sure to choose the right settings first) - shooting rate at 6 shots per second also for 14-bit NEFs (3 on the D300), but as of the - limited buffer space the burst rate drops dramatically (under 3 fps depending on your card) after 5 or 6 takes. - support for newer style GPS receivers and the Wifi-Adapter - LCD screen features adjustable backlight - HDMI-C socket (HDMI-A-Cables need an adapter)
That is not a comprehensive list, but the biggest differences I have encountered so far.
LOW PASS FILTER
Finally one last stop at the so called “low-pass-filter”. I have read on many sources on the web that there is “no significant difference” in picture detail by removing the low-pass-filter. I can confirm now while comparing both cameras that this is not true. The D7100 100% crops show definitely higher sharpness on the pixel level than the shots from my D300. Sure, that effect can only be observed while having a lens which is able to deliver that high detail. Just look at the photos I took here. Despite that DX prime lens' super low price tag, its able to deliver this. And there are probably more pricy prime lenses available which can even surpass this performance.
DISPLAY
The back display of both cams are different, but I cannot see any benefit in case of the D7100 LCDs in having another W-subpixel. If you place the cameras side by side you will easily notice that the colors and tones on the display of the D300 are much more natural. The D7100 has an adjustable backlight now and a little bit more true black. That is both a plus. But the photos on the D7100 seem oversharped on playback. But luckily this effects can only be observed on the screen. The photos itself on your memory card are of highest quality on both cams.
Image playback on the D7100 over HDMI shows black bars on left and right side - even if you zoom in into the photo - this is something nobody likes to see, especially as the D300 was able to do that better back then in 2007 already. But despite Nikon knowing from customer complains about this problem they never went to fix it and so this sticks out as a deliberate attempt to cancel this as a pro-camera and keep a distance to the higher priced 3-digit and one-digit product line.
VERDICT
As for the overall picture quality there is not much big difference between both cams. They perform almost equal in terms of dynamic range and white balance. But when you have the right lens mounted, the D7100 is the clear winner in resolution and detail. Also in Low-Light situations the D7100 tends to preserve more details than the D300.
I read on many sites on the web that people recommend the D300(s) as a more solid working body for professional photographers who take their 3000 images a week, but finally I believe that professional photographers can afford more recent and more pricey equipment as the D4 for example. So we are really not talking about professional photography here I guess.
I really liked the super solid body and the straightforward controls on the D300. But at the same time I don't want to miss that resolution and detail plus on the D7100 anymore. If you are used to the controls on any prosumer Nikon it might need a little time to get used to the layout of the controls on the D7100, but that is nothing to worry about if you have that time. Also the smaller image buffer on the D7100 might be something to consider, as the burst rate just drops much more early than on the D300. As a fashion show photographer this drop in burst rate, is unacceptable. The D300 image buffer allowed taking 3 times the number of RAW pictures slowing down, as long as you agree on the fact that 12 bit raw is enough and you wont need 14 bit.
Finally, I believe, that if you don't care about using CF or SD cards, and if you don't care about having a camera body fully made of metal alloy or half synthetics, the D7100 will give you much more than just more image detail. It will give you a more advanced focussing system, a lighter body, a second memory card slot and of course Video. And all that for a very decent price tag. So for me it is really an option while not going to FX (more weight, more pricey lenses) but still having major image detail improvement and a few relevant features.
And as my friend Ivo says. It is a new toy to play with as well for sure. :)
- Fashion Royalty Rayna Ahmadi A Fabulous Life
- Fashion Royalty Poppy Parker City Sweetheart Off Beat
- Made to Move Barbie body ( Poppy head)
Left to right:
BATO-Goji (1992), RADO-Goji (1993), MOGE-Goji (1994)
Between 1992 and 1994, Bandai issued the same mold for the Heisei Godzilla three seperate times, one each for Godzilla v Mothra (1992, BATO-Goji), Godzilla v MechaGodzilla (1993, RADO-Goji), and Godzilla v SpaceGodzilla (1994, MOGE-Goji). While, on the surface, these three figures appear to be identical, there are several differences that make each figure stand apart:
Copyright Date: 1992
Serial Number: 205020-0037322-1600
Original Retail: 1600 ¥
Tag: Godzilla v Mothra
Mold Color: Charcoal Gray
Dorsal Spines Color: Silver
Vinyl: Hard Vinyl
Copyright Date: 1992
Serial Number: 205020-0037322-1600
Original Retail: 1600 ¥
Tag: Godzilla v MechaGodzilla
Mold Color: Black
Dorsal Spines Color: Metallic Blue
Vinyl: Hard Vinyl
Copyright Date: 1992
Serial Number: 205020-0037322-1600
Original Retail: 1600 ¥
Tag: Godzilla v SpaceGodzilla, Gatefold
Mold Color: Black
Dorsal Spines Color: Metallic Blue
Vinyl: Soft Vinyl
It is important to note fromt he above that all three figures have the same 1992 stamp on the foot, and the same serial number. On the other hand, only the 1992 figure has silver spines, and only the 1994 figure has both metallic blue spines and is molded in the softer, more pliable vinyl.
The mold was used yet again in 1998, when it was rescaled down from 8 to 6 inches for the Godzilla Island series of figures.
Sir Walter Watson Hughes.
Walter Hughes was born in 1803 in Scotland in Pittenweem near St Andrews in Fife. In his early teens he went to sea and eventually bought his own ship the brig Hero in Calcutta in 1829 when he was 26 years old. He then traded in Asia. He settled in Adelaide in 1814 and married a year later in 1841. Whilst working for a mercantile company he began sheep farming in the Adelaide Hills and amassed some money and a flock of sheep. He took this flock to his new leasehold lands at Hoyleton and later Watervale in 1851. Earlier in 1844 he had taken up leasehold runs on Yorke Peninsula. In 1851 he took out a small mining lease and instructed his shepherds to look for minerals and one John Boor discovered copper at Wallaroo in 1860. Hughes took out mining leases but others soon rushed to the area and also took out mining leases, especially in the area that became Kadina. Hughes became the largest shareholder in his Wallaroo Mining Company which was originally known as Wandilta Mines. In June 1860 the first ship load of copper ore was taken to Port Adelaide at a cost of 8 shillings a ton. By comparison transport of ore from Burra cost 50 shillings per ton at that time. The wallaroo ores were 20 to 30 % pure copper but some ore was up to 50% pure copper. Bricks and mining equipment was unloaded at Wallaroo for Hughes in September 1860 and over 20 men were working his mines. By November 1860 the mine was being worked in conjunction with Elders Stirling and Company (Thomas Elder, Robert Barr Smith, John Taylor and Edward Stirling). Hughes early start was not popular with other mining lease holders. Then to further sully Walter Watson Hughes’s reputation another shepherd Patrick Ryan in May 1861 found copper on Hughes leasehold run at what was to become Moonta. This was the mine that produced great wealth and saved and made the fortunes of Hughes and Elder Smith and Co as many believed the Wallaroo mine alone would have bankrupted them all.
Ryan tried to register his mining claim but was too drunk tor remember where it was. Hughes then used skulduggery and cunning and registered four mining leases on the next day after Ryan had tried to register one. Some of Ryan’s partners were ready to register the claim the next day but they were “pipped at the post”. But Hughes heard of Ryan’s unsuccessful claim, sent one of his men on horseback overnight to get to the Surveyor General’s Office first before Ryan’s partners. Hughes also had Ryan sign an agreement with him. Hughes also registered a further 26 buffer zone mining rights as well. Some later claimed Hughes had no moral or legal right to these Moonta mining rights but after years of court appeals and legal fighting the Privy Council in England ruled in favour of Hughes. When the legal fight was settled Hughes returned to live in England from 1864 to 1870.
Then after just four more years in the colony he retired permanently to London in 1874 until his death. From 1865 his city house in Adelaide was Torrens Park House which he bought from Robert Torrens who had built it in 1854. Walter Watson Hughes in turn sold Torrens Park House to Robert Barr Smith in 1874 just after Hughes’ return to London. The establishment of the Moonta Mine was life changing for all the five major investors. It was the first mine to return a profit of one million pounds. Once it was operational Hughes bought Torrens Park House, built a grand mansion to replace his simple stone cottage on Hughes Park at Watervale, sailed back to England for a few years, took up leased lands near Lake Eyre and acquired large freehold estates at Watervale and Gum Creek. In Wallaroo he built the first copper smelter in 1861 followed by other furnaces as the Moonta mines grew. Mining operations at Moonta were complex and some shafts exceeded 700 metres in depth. This created problems with water (and heat for the miners) so large pump houses were required such as the Hughes Engine House which still stands, albeit in ruins. The Moonta mine lasted for over sixty years. The Copper Triangle became the largest population centre outside of Adelaide by the 1870s. In the first year of operations the Moonta Mine produced over £100,000 profit. But it had another sixty years of operations after that!
Was Walter Watson Hughes the father of 19th century Aboriginal leader John Sansbury? Walter Watson Hughes took up his Yorke Peninsula runs with his head station at Point Riley just north of present day Wallaroo in the 1840s. He also took out leasehold runs in 1851 at Hoyleton and Watervale which was where Hughes lived. He never built a substantial homestead on his Wallaroo run which was run by his brother-in-law John Duncan. According to Narrung oral genealogy John Sansbury who was born in 1854 to “King Tommy” and “Queen Mary” leader of all the clans on Yorke Peninsula was actually the biological son of Walter Watson Hughes. This was never acknowledged by Hughes or ever reported in the white press. When John Sansbury married in a church in 1874 he only listed his father as King Tommy. Presumably this church was at Point Pearce Aboriginal Mission which was established in 1868. A group of nondenominational missionaries led by the Moravians had started mission work with the Aborigines near the copper mines of Moonta in 1867. But Walter Watson Hughes gave a pension for life to King Tommy supposedly as compensation for his lands and King Tommy’s help in the discovery of copper. Or was it a pension to assist in the upbringing of his biological son? We will never know the full truth of this but photographs of John Sansbury in the 1870s certainly show a remarkable resemblance to Walter Watson Hughes. The Hughes name was also taken up by other Narrung people which was very common in the 19th century when Aboriginal people adopted the name of any white person that they worked for. We do know that Walter Watson Hughes and his wife Eliza never had any children of their own. Consequently Hughes left his South Australian freehold lands – Hughes Park at Watervale and Gum Creek station near Booborowie and parts of his fortune to his nephew in South Australia – Sir John Duncan the son of Hughes’ sister. Sir Walter Watson Hughes was buried near his London home in Chertsey, Surrey as was his wife Eliza who died in 1885. Hughes died on New Year’s Day 1887. He was knighted in 1880 for his services and philanthropy to South Australia. Apart from the University he was a substantial donor to the Presbyterian Church which was in Flinders Street. His memorial window in that church donated by his nephew John Duncan was moved to Scots Church North Terrace after the Flinders Street Church was sold to the YMCA in 1956.
A comparison pic of London next to Ender. The size difference is ridiculous xD London looks like he just woke up...
I personally prefer London's size, tbh. He's not too big, not too small, and he looks mature. Just perfect~
Two of my RS boys. Caesium is on the body that normally comes with the Gang. He is the shorter of the two. Andreus is on the original 70cm body that came with the long and... feng I think. I was asked to do a side by side of these bodies for a friend :) I have to admit, I rather like how they feel together. Andreus has so much energy and Cas is always more... withdrawn. I did this picture using light painting which eliminated the need for me to have a cool set or... well to even clean the room up much. I think the exposure of the two pictures I used was each about 15 seconds each. One image was dominantly blue washed while the other was very warm. I like the mix.
back row: Jun(Sage) on stock taeyang body and wearing shoes so he's a bit taller than usual, Summer(Rovam) on 27cm obitsu and wearing converse and again is a bit taller than normally.
front row: Nunnally(Frara/Furara) on 23cm obitsu, Littlefee Bisou, she's wearing shoes so she's a little bit taller by a few millimeters
Note: even though they're wearing shoes, there's only a few millimeters difference in height but just making a bit more clear.
Here's a comparison picture of how tall/short littlefee bisou is compared to the jun planning dolls. I'm going to do another one with my other bjds later on.
Comparison between Obitsus SBH bust M white, 25-27cm
O comprimento do tronco é praticamente o mesmo, mas o obitsu de 27cm tem mais curvas na cintura, seios maiores e pescoço e ombros mais largos do que o de 25cm.
The light on the crests of these sand ripples was created by the afterglow of the sun and ambient light from the sky. It was actually getting quite dark and one or two lights had come on in the village of Lelant in the distance. The original colour image is relatively flat in comparison and I converted the image to "vivid landscape" in Photoshop and boosted the contrast a little to bring out the texture in the ripples and this also added drama to the sky beyond.
wtf of idealian 72 heigth?!? °° from L to R
Idealian 72 - popodoll 68 - soom supergem fantasy legs - april boy body new - supergem human - iplehouse sid - migidoll - CP delf
What a difference just a couple of weeks makes! My zucchini and sugar pumpkins have trippled in size. The bush beans have little flower buds on them and my jalapeño has multiple little peppers growing on it. So, so exciting!!
A comparison shot of two ladies bicycles , one in Brisbane and the other in London . Why bicycles , no particular reason , just because they were there and caught my eye . Its pure coincidence that they are women's bikes , they are both facing in the same direction , both have carrying baskets attached , ( a main feature that caused this comparison in the first place ) , and both are leaning against a metal railing . Interesting again , the above is in front of a vehicular ramp leading below ground level and the English bike is in front of stairs that lead to a traditional below ground level basement area , again pure coincidence but a fact worth noting . Their presentation and colouring I find interesting , thats not to say they don't have red bicycles in London and grey ones in Brisbane … Even the weather under which these shots were taken says something , the above in strong sunshine and the English shot in more subdued light , indicative of that locations weather , again pure coincidence on the day ..
CBD . Brisbane
Comparison of Glitter'n Gold and Classic Jem. I love how pink Classic is. Don't get me wrong, I also love Glitter'n Gold as well. She is so luxe.
Of course, I don't have Hollywood to compare. Came too late to the party :(
Blythe, Momoko, Mama Chapp, Licca, Secret person
Not a great pic but okay for the time being...it's been a long week for me
Knee bent.
Narae: barely 90 degrees, but look at that toe point!
Withdoll: 90 degrees
MNF: about 45 degrees
DOC: between 90 & 45 degrees +amazing ankle movement
Here is my Company vs. What I've done to my tan celine "October Ransom ". Sorry if I'm late but I didn't have nice photos and wanted to join. October is my only doll I can post. The rest are unfinished. Dx well she is too but actually not in pieces.
Blythe - Bambicrony Ciao Bella - Angel Fantasy BB elf (yo-sd)
A few people have been asking for some size comparison shots so here they are!
Izestage Taeyeong Head, NS
Body: IOS 80cm, ns
*i use a neck part!
Do not use my pictures without my permission!
Simple comparison of scales between the 1/24 Solido RM and it's EFE baby sister in my more usual 1/76 scale.
Bit of a difference!!
In fact, given how wildly out the colours I originally blocked in the blue bits were with it's not looking too bad now. The left wall was dreadful at first, as I'd got the colour and the approach for the underpainting wrong, and it's taken a fair bit of reworking to rescue it - just need to adjust it's shape now and do the final texture and shading. The acrylics paint over earlier coats nicely as I thought they would - and I think the wash for the shadow on the pavement may well be possible - thinned some of the paint for shading the green part.
Overall, fairly pleased with progress so far.
Here I tested Phoenix 200 in a direct comparison with an established film. Both shots are completely un-postprocessed. These are the raw scans as I received them from the lab.
I used two cameras with light meters that I know to be reliable. To the left a Nikon F5 with Harman Phoenix 200, shot at the box value of ISO 200. To the right a Canon A-1 with Kodak Ektar 100. The location and lighting conditions are identical. The framing is not, but that should not matter.
Ektar 100 is not known to be a very forgiving film but it acquitted itself of its task quite well. The colours of the neon lights have been faithfully preserved and the exposure is good. Highlights are not blown out and the dark parts show as much detail as one can expect, with no colour hues. Conversely, in the Phoenix shot the highlights are blown out and at the same time the dark parts have lost most detail and acquired a greenish hue that just wasn't there. From most other Phoenix shots I've seen, including those on my first test roll, I'd assumed that Phoenix should be shot at a lower ISO rating than the box value. The dim background seems to bear that out. But I wonder: The highlights are already blown out - that would get worse with overexposure, as would the unpleasant halation that appears to be unavoidable with Phoenix.
To the left:
Camera: Nikon F5
Lens: AF Nikkor 50 mm 1:1.8 D
Harman Phoenix 200 colour negative film shot at ISO 200
Developed and scanned by www.meinfilmlab.de
To the right:
Camera: Canon A-1
Lens: Canon FD 50mm 1:1.4 S.S.C.
Kodak Ektar 100 professional grade colour negative film shot at ISO 100
Developed and scanned by www.meinfilmlab.de