I shoot 14bit RAW whenever I can, simply because I have more data to work with. I get cleaner images after noise reduction, plus more shadow and highlight detail recovery room. I also notice that there is a slight improvement in DR, more so at high ISO though.

jonnyapple said:
I guess that's the safe thing to do, TTJ. It can't hurt as long as you don't need the all the frames per second. I'm interested in knowing if 14bit slows down the D7000, too.

Sorry for hijacking the thread, OP. I was just curious.

JA,
it will more than likely be slowed down...another nikon differentiator between the d_ series and d700 series was that 9fps was maintained in the d_ independent of 12 or 14; with the d700 it came down to 3 or 4fps...unless the new Expeed processors change this...all speculation

I guess that's the safe thing to do, TTJ. It can't hurt as long as you don't need the all the frames per second. I'm interested in knowing if 14bit slows down the D7000, too.

Sorry for hijacking the thread, OP. I was just curious.

jonnyapple said:
... I doubt anyone with a D300/D300s could show significant differences.

*experience with my D300
I agree with that 99% of the time. The only time I can really tell a difference is with sunrises and sunsets with clouds. For some reason the graduation in the clouds goes a little funky-er at times during those specific times. This is for each of the settings-12,14,jpeg. Never did any real testing - I just leave my raw at 14bit, lossless and it looks the best it can be for me. I do loose some frame speed though.

I have read some interesting debates on the # of bits weather or not:
-our eyes can tell the difference
-monitors can show the difference
-what printers can print the difference
-what software does to correct the difference no matter what we want it to be.

That is defiantly a different thread though. (One I would rapidly run away from)

No doubt raw is lots better than jpeg and I agree that there are worlds of difference when you've got extreme (or even not so extreme) changes to make. My question was about the difference between 12 and 14 bit raw. Shivas, you might see a difference as a D3 owner, but I doubt anyone with a D300/D300s could show significant differences.

i've noticed the greatest difference in shooting 14-bit when using Nik Silver Efex - outstanding conversions compared to when I use JPG (8=bit). . .

JA - lol, yes, let's work on a trade. . .haha, still, the D7k is stout, love to see the 1080p and enhanced metering put to good use bro!

jonnyapple said:
Jpeg is 8-bit, and I understand the claimed benefits, but I guess I was asking whether anyone has seen a difference in practice or has seen example shots where you can see a difference.

The point I'm getting at is that it seems like it may be a marketing gimmick because if your sensor has, say, 11 stops of dynamic range at some ISO setting (maybe even the base ISO, but I'm making that number up), all of the info fits in 12 bits. I know it can't hurt and may help so with my d300 I just switched to 12 bit when I needed 6 fps.

edit: just looked it up, and for what it's worth, DxO mark sensor measured 12 stops of dynamic range for a D300s at ISO 200. I think (maybe naively) that 14 bits can't make a difference if that's true.

Hi,

It makes a huge difference when _editing_ RAW files, particularly with curves and levels, shadow and detail. Working with layers and masks will take on a new meaning, too.

If one is a shoot JPG or just convert from RAW with very little editing, it likely won't matter much, but for others who use Photoshop, it's a really, really big thing.

My best,

Mike

Jpeg is 8-bit, and I understand the claimed benefits, but I guess I was asking whether anyone has seen a difference in practice or has seen example shots where you can see a difference.

The point I'm getting at is that it seems like it may be a marketing gimmick because if your sensor has, say, 11 stops of dynamic range at some ISO setting (maybe even the base ISO, but I'm making that number up), all of the info fits in 12 bits. I know it can't hurt and may help so with my d300 I just switched to 12 bit when I needed 6 fps.

edit: just looked it up, and for what it's worth, DxO mark sensor measured 12 stops of dynamic range for a D300s at ISO 200. I think (maybe naively) that 14 bits can't make a difference if that's true.

jonnyapple said:
Has anyone ever seen/read anything convincing about the difference between 12 and 14 bit NEF? For the life of me I could never tell the difference on my D300, but maybe I didn't know what to look for.

It deals with the color depth/range that it can record. Think of it as the banding in the sky at sunset. The deeper the bit depth, the better the graduations. Shooting Raw give you the maximum bit depth - Jpeg limits to 10bits I believe. Many of the medium format systems out there seem to have better pictures - the top are 16bit which I believe is higher than almost all dslrs.

as for 14bit raw, it gives You slightly more information, that are nice when You need to tweak Your picture a little bit more (get something from shadows or highlights), the file take only little bit more, and the speed is only slightly altered (at least with en-el4a batteries in the grip)

I ordered from amazon as well with 2-day shipping. It's going to be down to the wire.

The better question is who's going to have the better camera to film the unboxing? (Answer: me.) ;-)

Yeah I don't get the 12 vs 14 bit neither.

lol JA we should make bets who one of us from here gets the first D7000. I have amazon prime account so that's where I ordered it. I wonder which retailer will start shipping them first.

I preordered it within 3 minutes of knowing I could. I wouldn't complain about a d3 and I would (obviously) trade you straight up if you were willing. It doesn't look like D3 high ISO performance, but maybe a stop better than the D90 and 16MP, which will help with noise reduction.

Has anyone ever seen/read anything convincing about the difference between 12 and 14 bit NEF? For the life of me I could never tell the difference on my D300, but maybe I didn't know what to look for.

jonnyapple said:
Hey now, PB PM and Adamz. I wrote those things before the release. ;-)

And, also before the release (when only pictures were up), this is what I said here:
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2453&page=9#post-42703

Wait you're getting one before me JA?!! Yeah I hate you, lol!

I'm not sold on the High ISO capabilities just yet, but the camera is DAMN close to the D3/D700 sensor. . .so I'm a little peeved I just got a D3. . .BUT, such as the story with Nikon, every 4 years, something AMAZING comes out. . .so JA, you'll get the envy nod now ;-)

Hey now, PB PM and Adamz. I wrote those things before the release. ;-)

And, also before the release (when only pictures were up), this is what I said here:
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2453&page=9#post-42703

I don't see why people are complaining about extra buttons in this time when most manufacturers are going away from having real controls. I'm excited to see the mode dial the way it is, too (I think you're just jealous that I'm going to be first in line to get one, shivas ;-).

I wouldn't be surprised to see AF fine tuning, AI-S metering, and the focus motor staying in this model. It makes sense to me to have something at this level for advanced amateur/semipro and release a D2x DX sucessor to replace the D300s and charge a few hundred extra dollars for it (around $2000-2500).

That D7000 is one beautiful camera. I can't wait.

JA - d7000 has the motor. and the support for manual lenses is also an improvement over d90 - finally :)

Dahveed - welcome to this forum, how did You managed to break d200, had it for long time, used it in many "ugly" places and never broke it :) as for handling d90 feels much better in hands and layout than d60, so it's gonna be a huge upgrade for You. as for comparison between d200 and d90/d7000 it's a tie in speed, IQ is better from the second one once You cross iso400, handling is pretty much the same. so if You don't need 16mp and faster fps and video go for d90 and grab some glass

jonnyapple said:
Well, to your first point, the AF motor was not taken out of the D90, so don't hate it for that. It's still not clear whether or not the D7000 will have the AF motor, too.

The D7000 does have the AF motor. It is shown clearly in the preview of the D7000 at Dpreview.

I'm in the same boat as you neesehome. My D200 died in a watery motorcycle accident. Now I'm saving for the replacement. I've used my daughter's D60 and the smaller size main disadvantage is less room for buttons. The camera has much of the same abilities, but i've got to go searching in the menu function to control them. The D200 also seemed better balanced for the bigger lens then the smaller bodies.

If money was no object, I'd be buying a D700. But money is an object that is fairly scarce so I'm looking at a D300s or now maybe a D7000.

You guys sounds like you all know each other, and with the grip it will be a perfect size for me, so It looks like I am going with the D7000.

NikoDoby said:
The D7000 has a 2016 pixel metering sensor versus 1,005-pixel RGB sensor on the D300S. So how is that better metering? As for size I find the D7000 perfect, don't knock it until you handle it. It's not that much smaller and with the grip attached it's nothing.

D300/s Vs D90 on the metering I was not referencing the D7000. Ahhh the ole "does size matter?" debate... well I'm used to heft in my hands and don't see downsizing anytime soon. :)

heartyfisher said:
I thought you went on a "hot date" what are you doing here?

Yeah I'm going, I was just waiting for her to hurry up and finish getting ready.

jonnyapple said:
I'm pretty sure he just wanted to see what we'd say behind his back.

Nah, I can just ask admin if I want to know that.

TaoTeJared said:
I like the size of the D300 series over the D90 as well as, the better meter, AF, weather sealing, and other little software items that just make life easier.

The D7000 has a 2016 pixel metering sensor versus 1,005-pixel RGB sensor on the D300S. So how is that better metering? As for size I find the D7000 perfect, don't knock it until you handle it. It's not that much smaller and with the grip attached it's nothing.

I'm pretty sure he just wanted to see what we'd say behind his back. I'd have to recommend the D7000 to you, neesehome.

NikoDoby said:
Sorry, I only take Western Union money orders made payable to Sir Niko Doby Esquire of The Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks.

And no I have no idea who heartyfisher is so deal only with me directly.

I thought you went on a "hot date" what are you doing here?

I really enjoyed the F4s over the N90 back in the day, I was able to have more options which I was surprised that I used, Right now I am stronly leaning towards the D300s and just bit the bullet. But I am going to wait to see the D7000 before i pull the triger. Thank you for all your help! well most of everyone's help.