Dx mode or crop?

[O]

There are two different possibilities that might be what you are referring to as single point metering and they meter differnetly ... the smallest metering area and most "precise" is Spot and the next level up is Center Weighted and the size of the "center" can be adjusted in the D850 even more than in the Z9.

Thanks Ken, Metering is the word , if you look at the test shots i mention above and just switch from DX to FX in the same camera regardless there was a difference in ISO

I just put the camera into P mode floated the iso and switched from DX to FX a) in single point then b) in matrix.

 

[LL4D500]

You triggered a walk down memory lane. At 75 I have changed my photographic emphasis and my Nikon Professional Services (NPS) is now "retired"

I still print large, less than I used to now, but I have no hesitation in using DX mode on my Z9 "if" that is what I need if the bird or other subject is to far to fill the frame to the level I want based on the composition I want.

As you noted the most common time I use DX is when the bird is distant, espeically if low contrast, to help AF and I would be cropping in post anyway.

I printed DX images from my D500 up to 8 feet but usually more often 11x14, 12x18, 16x20, 24x48. Majority was wildlife and mostly birds. D850 came along and I used D500 far less and went to DX as needed as I do now in Z9.

D6 was an entirely different FX tool low light and fast action it's forte I did not use DX mode that I remember.

Z9 dynamic range, new Z lenses, and other Z9 features let me do everything I used to with D500, D850 and D6 with one body that fits my new photographic interests well.

What Z lenses do you have? Do you have any F lenses that you use?

 

[Ken Miracle]

Thanks Ken, Metering is the word , if you look at the test shots i mention above and just switch from DX to FX in the same camera regardless there was a difference in ISO

I just put the camera into P mode floated the iso and switched from DX to FX a) in single point then b) in matrix.

There is no such thing as single point metering ... only single point focus area and they are two different things. When it comes to metering the smallest area is Spot the next is center weighted and it is adjustable in the D850 as to the size of the center weighted area and then there is matrix and one more Highlight Weighted that is only available with specified lenses. Here are the tech. specs. info. from Nikon on the D850

1. Exposure Metering System​

   TTL exposure metering using approximately 180K (180,000) pixels RGB sensor

2. Metering Method​

   Center-weighted: Weight of 75% given to 12 mm circle in center of frame. Diameter of circle can be changed to 8, 15, or 20 mm, or weighting can be based on average of entire frame (non-CPU lenses use 12-mm circle)
   Matrix: 3D Color Matrix Metering III (type G, E, and D lenses); Color Matrix Metering III (other CPU lenses); Color Matrix Metering available with non-CPU lenses if user provides lens data
   Spot: Meters 4 mm circle (about 1.5% of frame) centered on selected focus point (on center focus point when non-CPU lens is used)
   Highlight-weighted: Available with type G, E, and D lenses

3. Metering Range​

   ISO 100, f/1.4 lens, 20 °C/68 °F
   -3 ± 20 EV (Matrix or center-weighted metering)
   2 to 20 EV (spot metering)
   0 to 20 EV (Highlight-weighted metering)

 

[Ken Miracle]

What Z lenses do you have? Do you have any F lenses that you use?

I sold the last of my f lenses in May of 2022 after getting my Z800 5-1-22 and using it for a couple of weeks. Last f mount I sold was 600 f/4 E.

Being a bird ID photographer most of the time I use the Z800 pf about 90% of the time.

I have two Z9's
The last 3 lenses on the list are my most used by far.
Z 50mm f/1.8 S
Z 14-30mm f/4 S
Z 24-120 f/4 S lens
Z 70-200 f/2.8 VR S
Z 400mm f/4.5 VR S (my wife seldom lets me use it ... it is usually on her Z7II)
Z 100-400/4.5-5.6 VR S
Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR
Z mount Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8 model A058Z
Z 800mm f/6.3 VR-S

 

[O]

There is no such thing as single point metering ... only single point focus area and they are two different things. When it comes to metering the smallest area is Spot the next is center weighted and it is adjustable in the D850 as to the size of the center weighted area and then there is matrix and one more Highlight Weighted that is only available with specified lenses. Here are the tech. specs. info. from Nikon on the D850

1. Exposure Metering System​

   TTL exposure metering using approximately 180K (180,000) pixels RGB sensor

2. Metering Method​

   Center-weighted: Weight of 75% given to 12 mm circle in center of frame. Diameter of circle can be changed to 8, 15, or 20 mm, or weighting can be based on average of entire frame (non-CPU lenses use 12-mm circle)
   Matrix: 3D Color Matrix Metering III (type G, E, and D lenses); Color Matrix Metering III (other CPU lenses); Color Matrix Metering available with non-CPU lenses if user provides lens data
   Spot: Meters 4 mm circle (about 1.5% of frame) centered on selected focus point (on center focus point when non-CPU lens is used)
   Highlight-weighted: Available with type G, E, and D lenses

3. Metering Range​

   ISO 100, f/1.4 lens, 20 °C/68 °F
   -3 ± 20 EV (Matrix or center-weighted metering)
   2 to 20 EV (spot metering)
   0 to 20 EV (Highlight-weighted metering)

Thanks Ken much appreciated

 

[O]

Thanks Ken much appreciated

When i noticed the iso change just by switching from FX to DX in the same camera with the same lens fixed on the same subject with just matrix mode, simply had me asking questions, it was surprising.

 

[Ken Miracle]

When i noticed the iso change just by switching from FX to DX in the same camera with the same lens fixed on the same subject with just matrix mode, simply had me asking questions, it was surprising.

If no other variables and with the way matrix metering works then ISO could change since you have cut out a fair chunk of real estate around the subject that was being metered in FX. In "theory" if metering was Spot metering done exactly on the same point of the same subject with no other variables (so manual with auto ISO and not other changes to other settings) or change in light on subject then ISO should be the same in FX and DX.

 

[O]

If no other variables and with the way matrix metering works then ISO could change since you have cut out a fair chunk of real estate around the subject that was being metered in FX. In "theory" if metering was Spot metering done exactly on the same point of the same subject with no other variables (so manual with auto ISO and not other changes to other settings) or change in light on subject then ISO should be the same in FX and DX.

Perfectly explained, thank you,

But now here is the kicker, auto focus was used at all times, subject in doors closed room perfect stable point on a piece of furniture, camera on tripod, the only change was touch menu flick FX to DX accurately check focal point on the button on the sofa, the iso jumped the same after on several takes between FX DX.

In single point Every time i switched from FX to DX the iso jumped, switching back the iso went down in both cases by the same amounts indicating no other influences.

Could the difference come from using more of the center of the lens ??

Puzzled ?

 

[Ken Miracle]

Perfectly explained, thank you,

But now here is the kicker, auto focus was used at all times, subject in doors closed room perfect stable point on a piece of furniture, camera on tripod, the only change was touch menu flick FX to DX accurately check focal point on the button on the sofa, the iso jumped the same after on several takes between FX DX.

In single point Every time i switched from FX to DX the iso jumped, switching back the iso went down in both cases by the same amounts indicating no other influences.

Could the difference come from using more of the center of the lens ??

Puzzled ?

When you say single point are you saying spot metering or just single point focus ?

 

[O]

When you say single point are you saying spot metering or just single point focus ?

spot metering

 

[Ken Miracle]

spot metering

That definetly deepens the mystery ... if manual with auto ISO ... but as you noted whatever the subject is it is now larger in the frame ie. a higher percentage of the frame. The cameras metering system could theoretically be picking up different tonal value ie. if textured then a different reflected light.

Bottom line real world probably not enough change in ISO that we would never notice it.

Since I no longer Have a D850 I can not "play along"

 

[O]

That definetly deepens the mystery ... if manual with auto ISO ... but as you noted whatever the subject is it is now larger in the frame ie. a higher percentage of the frame. The cameras metering system could theoretically be picking up different tonal value ie. if textured then a different reflected light.

Bottom line real world probably not enough change in ISO that we would never notice it.

Since I no longer Have a D850 I can not "play along"

Appreciate your efforts greatly, i think for curiosity sake and because Bold and the Beautiful is very boring at the moment and the surfs not up, i will do the same thing with the Z9 and the 50mm 1.8s

Thanks for playing this far LOL.

Note i am not using manual focus, always auto single point focus, first in FX then DX, then as another test in spot metering the another in matrix. The iso is higher when i move to DX, or spot ?


My observations came about when i was in the bush and switched only to DX for a moment in lower light, i then noticed the jump in iso, hence raising my curiosity when this subject came up, hence the test in stable light and conditions.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Appreciate your efforts greatly, i think for curiosity sake and because Bold and the Beautiful is very boring at the moment and the surfs not up, i will do the same thing with the Z9 and the 50mm 1.8s

Thanks for playing this far LOL.

Note i am not using manual focus, always auto single point focus, first in FX then DX, then as another test in spot metering the another in matrix. The iso is higher when i move to DX, or spot ?


My observations came about when i was in the bush and switched only to DX for a moment in lower light, i then noticed the jump in iso, hence raising my curiosity when this subject came up, hence the test in stable light and conditions.

When I say manual with auto ISO I am saying manual mode with auto ISO ... so your setting your shutter speed and aperture and letting the ISO float. The auto focus method then from what I have read is Auto Focus - continuous and using single point AF area mode. To bad I can not be there to help with the hands on with my Z9's

 

[bleirer]

Under ideal conditions in spot metering no other differences, metering on the identical spot switching fx to dx should net the identical exposure. Same light per unit area, same exposure. On my Canon it would have to be the center of the frame because that is where spot metering lives. Does Nikon follow the in focus point or also use only the center? If it was matrix metering the brightness of the area not included in DX could change the exposure.

Again on my Canon using evaluative (their version of matrix) there is some weight given to the focus point. Does nikon do that?

 

[wotan1]

OK my head is spinning with all of this and maybe I have not had enough coffee yet this morning. So maybe I am confused.

I will state what I get from all this and someone can tell me what I am missing.

First, I shoot with a Z9 on almost exclusively Z lenses.

I am getting that whether I use DX mode or crop, the resulting image will be essentially the same. As such it would be easier to do your editing in post so crop is generally favored.

Now with the Z8/9 cameras shooting in DX may help the autofocus. The subject is larger in the frame and for birds the eye would be bigger. So switching to DX may help me lock on better and get me more keepers. As such I should keep an eye on how autofocus is doing and consider DX to help autofocus work better. I can do that.

Now there is a lot of discussion about ISO, noise levels and exposure and my head is spinning hard now.

So here is what I am thinking.

It used to be with film cameras ISO was important because there was a direct correlation with image sharpness. Shoot out at high ISO and the image became very grainy. I got that with film, high ISO bad low ISO good and the lower the better.

Now i shoot digital with a Z9 and I have denoise and sharpening available to me in POST. I look at some of my images taken at unbelievably high ISO levels. I have seen some amazingly sharp images taken at high ISO levels.

What I am getting from all that is while low ISO is always good, I don't need to be afraid of high ISO like I was in the past. The technology I have now allows me to make that work.
In particular for this discussion I am not going to be that concerned if the choice between crop or dx may change the ISO level and create more noise.

FINALLY on exposure, to me when birding it is all about the bird. I need to get the image to capture the fine detail of the bird's feathers and eye. Things like the direction of the light, the contrast between light and shadow, distance and temperature differences can all affect me getting my bird.

While I have made progress there, this is an area where I feel I have room to learn and grow as a photographer. I need to read, view videos and study more. I can do that.

So this is where I sit today.

I thank all of you for your thoughts, comments and insight. This forum is a learning place and we have many good teachers in here.

 

[bleirer]

Changing to crop mode shouldn't change the iso level. The exposure should stay the same. But yes, the result of cropping is more noise being visible.

Iso by itself isn't the cause of the noise, its more caused by less actual light getting to the sensor. Since we want a faster shutter speed or smaller aperture that makes the meter suggest a higher iso.

 

[O]

OK my head is spinning with all of this and maybe I have not had enough coffee yet this morning. So maybe I am confused.

I will state what I get from all this and someone can tell me what I am missing.

First, I shoot with a Z9 on almost exclusively Z lenses.

I am getting that whether I use DX mode or crop, the resulting image will be essentially the same. As such it would be easier to do your editing in post so crop is generally favored.

Now with the Z8/9 cameras shooting in DX may help the autofocus. The subject is larger in the frame and for birds the eye would be bigger. So switching to DX may help me lock on better and get me more keepers. As such I should keep an eye on how autofocus is doing and consider DX to help autofocus work better. I can do that.

Now there is a lot of discussion about ISO, noise levels and exposure and my head is spinning hard now.

So here is what I am thinking.

It used to be with film cameras ISO was important because there was a direct correlation with image sharpness. Shoot out at high ISO and the image became very grainy. I got that with film, high ISO bad low ISO good and the lower the better.

Now i shoot digital with a Z9 and I have denoise and sharpening available to me in POST. I look at some of my images taken at unbelievably high ISO levels. I have seen some amazingly sharp images taken at high ISO levels.

What I am getting from all that is while low ISO is always good, I don't need to be afraid of high ISO like I was in the past. The technology I have now allows me to make that work.
In particular for this discussion I am not going to be that concerned if the choice between crop or dx may change the ISO level and create more noise.

FINALLY on exposure, to me when birding it is all about the bird. I need to get the image to capture the fine detail of the bird's feathers and eye. Things like the direction of the light, the contrast between light and shadow, distance and temperature differences can all affect me getting my bird.

While I have made progress there, this is an area where I feel I have room to learn and grow as a photographer. I need to read, view videos and study more. I can do that.

So this is where I sit today.

I thank all of you for your thoughts, comments and insight. This forum is a learning place and we have many good teachers in here.

I agree there are so many wonderful helpful people in the BCF with incredible knowledge.

I find investing in your self is the most valuable tool one can have.

I even learnt some things out of this post.

Everyone does things slightly different, its what suits you and meets the needs exactly, the outcome is what matters and speaks the loudest.

I find nothing wrong with shooting DX even on a FX camera, i do it myself at times for very a variety of good reasons.

I get a lot of people telling me why i shouldn't shoot just JPEG fine, but i am happy in Myself shooting in JPEG fine, why because its all i need and good tools used well allow me to do it so very well, the outcomes tell it all. For those important critical shoots i shoot JPEG Fine and RAW.

I like JPEG fine even be it in DX mode on a FX camera, its so i can adjust internally contrast, saturation, etc to particularly suit the area and moments, other times i leave it stock, and yes where applicable i even shoot in P mode, and people would never even know LOL,
in fact In several camera clubs recently they have had lecture nights on the very aspect of using JPEG fine with those internal camera custom setting options, surprisingly so many people actually were really unaware of the outcome or even the possibility's or those options existed, they have all been brought up on you only shoot RAW, and there is nothing wrong with that. RAW has its benefits unquestionably.

DX mode options in a FX camera is there for a reason, its a dam good tool and very fit for purpose, as are the JPEG fine options and internal customization options.

The camera and lenses are tools nothing but.

The greatest assets apart from one self i find is Light and being happy.

Only opinion

 

[Nimi]

Changing to crop mode shouldn't change the iso level. The exposure should stay the same. But yes, the result of cropping is more noise being visible.

Iso by itself isn't the cause of the noise, its more caused by less actual light getting to the sensor. Since we want a faster shutter speed or smaller aperture that makes the meter suggest a higher iso.

Sort of. ISO over base level is accomplished by electrical amplification which on its own a noisy process. Greatly improved in the past three four years, but still a factor. Second chart on Photonstophotos.

 

[O]

I am very happy using DX on a FX and its a great benefit when used or needed for the right purpose.

But i am careful - mindful when using DX not to crop to hard or having to much low light..............that can be in cases asking the tool to do more than its capable of.

The same goes for when to know not to shoot JPEG fine over RAW again to avoid exceeding the tools capability.

The knowing comes from listening learning and investing in oneself.

Only an opinion

 

[Nimi]

OK my head is spinning with all of this and maybe I have not had enough coffee yet this morning. So maybe I am confused.

I will state what I get from all this and someone can tell me what I am missing.

First, I shoot with a Z9 on almost exclusively Z lenses.

I am getting that whether I use DX mode or crop, the resulting image will be essentially the same. As such it would be easier to do your editing in post so crop is generally favored.

Now with the Z8/9 cameras shooting in DX may help the autofocus. The subject is larger in the frame and for birds the eye would be bigger. So switching to DX may help me lock on better and get me more keepers. As such I should keep an eye on how autofocus is doing and consider DX to help autofocus work better. I can do that.

Now there is a lot of discussion about ISO, noise levels and exposure and my head is spinning hard now.

So here is what I am thinking.

It used to be with film cameras ISO was important because there was a direct correlation with image sharpness. Shoot out at high ISO and the image became very grainy. I got that with film, high ISO bad low ISO good and the lower the better.

Now i shoot digital with a Z9 and I have denoise and sharpening available to me in POST. I look at some of my images taken at unbelievably high ISO levels. I have seen some amazingly sharp images taken at high ISO levels.

What I am getting from all that is while low ISO is always good, I don't need to be afraid of high ISO like I was in the past. The technology I have now allows me to make that work.
In particular for this discussion I am not going to be that concerned if the choice between crop or dx may change the ISO level and create more noise.

FINALLY on exposure, to me when birding it is all about the bird. I need to get the image to capture the fine detail of the bird's feathers and eye. Things like the direction of the light, the contrast between light and shadow, distance and temperature differences can all affect me getting my bird.

While I have made progress there, this is an area where I feel I have room to learn and grow as a photographer. I need to read, view videos and study more. I can do that.

So this is where I sit today.

I thank all of you for your thoughts, comments and insight. This forum is a learning place and we have many good teachers in here.

Noise is half the picture (no pun intended) and is now fairly controlled at higher ISO and can be cleaned up in post. What's still an issue as you go above say 2000 or 3000, is the decline in dynamic range. Practically what that means is that there is no recoverable data in the shadows, just a brown blob. Ditto in highlights; there is simply no data to be brought out by reducing highlights, whites or exposure. Some sensors are better at this than others.

 

[O]

Noise is half the picture (no pun intended) and is now fairly controlled at higher ISO and can be cleaned up in post. What's still an issue as you go above say 2000 or 3000, is the decline in dynamic range. Practically what that means is that there is no recoverable data in the shadows, just a brown blob. Ditto in highlights; there is simply no data to be brought out by reducing highlights, whites or exposure. Some sensors are better at this than others.

Fundamentals don't really change, traditionally the higher the iso the more dynamic range is sacrificed somewhat. Look at a image at 8000 iso then one at 30,000 iso.

Larger pixels sensors tolerate higher iso so much more, this is evident in MF, those sensors tolerate higher iso more than any known 35 mm sensor, a 35mm sensor tolerates more iso than a Cropped sensor.

The solution maybe is a built in or added dynamic range using AI LOL, but that doesn't hold up the purity of a RAW file, so maybe slipping in slowly a option of a hybrid version of RAW, the new punters will accept LOL.

You cant have it all.

Only an opinion

 

[Nimi]

Fundamentals don't really change, traditionally the higher the iso the more dynamic range is sacrificed somewhat. Look at a image at 8000 iso then one at 30,000 iso.

Larger pixels sensors tolerate higher iso so much more, this is evident in MF, those sensors tolerate higher iso more than any known 35 mm sensor, a 35mm sensor tolerates more iso than a Cropped sensor.

The solution maybe is a built in or added dynamic range using AI LOL, but that doesn't hold up the purity of a RAW file, so maybe slipping in slowly a option of a hybrid version of RAW, the new punters will accept LOL.

You cant have it all.

Only an opinion

Sort of. After ISO, sensor surface area is the next important factor. For example, Fuji GFX100 has smaller pixel size then the Z9, but higher dynamic range. The rules have changed, and pixel size is low on the list of dynamic range factors in new sensors. The new iPhone has something like 15 stops with tiny sensor and 45mp.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Under ideal conditions in spot metering no other differences, metering on the identical spot switching fx to dx should net the identical exposure. Same light per unit area, same exposure. On my Canon it would have to be the center of the frame because that is where spot metering lives. Does Nikon follow the in focus point or also use only the center? If it was matrix metering the brightness of the area not included in DX could change the exposure.

Again on my Canon using evaluative (their version of matrix) there is some weight given to the focus point. Does nikon do that?

Nikon meters off the focus point

 

[Ken Miracle]

I agree there are so many wonderful helpful people in the BCF with incredible knowledge.

I find investing in your self is the most valuable tool one can have.

I even learnt some things out of this post.

Everyone does things slightly different, its what suits you and meets the needs exactly, the outcome is what matters and speaks the loudest.

I find nothing wrong with shooting DX even on a FX camera, i do it myself at times for very a variety of good reasons.

I get a lot of people telling me why i shouldn't shoot just JPEG fine, but i am happy in Myself shooting in JPEG fine, why because its all i need and good tools used well allow me to do it so very well, the outcomes tell it all. For those important critical shoots i shoot JPEG Fine and RAW.

I like JPEG fine even be it in DX mode on a FX camera, its so i can adjust internally contrast, saturation, etc to particularly suit the area and moments, other times i leave it stock, and yes where applicable i even shoot in P mode, and people would never even know LOL,
in fact In several camera clubs recently they have had lecture nights on the very aspect of using JPEG fine with those internal camera custom setting options, surprisingly so many people actually were really unaware of the outcome or even the possibility's or those options existed, they have all been brought up on you only shoot RAW, and there is nothing wrong with that. RAW has its benefits unquestionably.

DX mode options in a FX camera is there for a reason, its a dam good tool and very fit for purpose, as are the JPEG fine options and internal customization options.

The camera and lenses are tools nothing but.

The greatest assets apart from one self i find is Light and being happy.

Only opinion

One of my favorite teachers and pros who owns 2 camera stores and a studio and is a wildlife first photographer hates to edit is not fond of computers and is very good and fast at adjusting metering picture control settings etc. on the fly so he dos not have to edit, other than an occasional crop (his wife usually does those for him) he drags and drops raw files to his computer desk top and then opens them in NX Studio those he keeps after cropping he exports/saves as TIFF's . He was really bummed when he could not shoot in Tiff with his Z cameras.

He then exports as jpgs to one of his favorite printing labs who what just top end jpg's in SRGB. I use that pro lab also with great results.

In the heat of bird ID action I definetly can not do all that he does, especially adjusting settings in his chosen picture control, usually standard, on the fly. So I spend more time in Light Room Classic and use the keyword and library search capabilities of LRC that Nikon NX Studio does not have.

My wife also uses just NX studio.

 

[Anjin San]

Everyone does things slightly different, its what suits you and meets the needs exactly, the outcome is what matters and speaks the loudest.

Yep…and really we are debating about polishing the cannonball to a great degree here. I switch to DX of AF needs the help but otherwise it’s easier to keep the BIF in the viewfinder in FX and I crop later…and most of the time I crop to something bigger than DX would anyway.