Adventure Sports Photographer Editorial Corporate Stock Advertising Photography

Equipment Review: Nikon D2x

August 2005 (See Update below after October 2006 Firmware upgrade)

Nikon’s D2x has completely changed my perception of digital photography. There are so many good things about this camera that I have decided to take five pages for this review making this the longest and most detailed review I have ever written for the newsletter. Along with this review, I have also decided to compare the D2x to 35mm and medium format film. Please note that these comparisons are not scientific, my comments here are based on looking at images from all three image formats and comparing large format prints.

First off, I have to say that Nikon did a great job with the ergonomics of the D2x. Everything is laid out very logically and the controls are just about perfectly placed in my opinion. When I first pulled the camera out of the box I was amazed that it felt lighter than my F5 and when you hold the D2x the first thing you notice is the hand grip. It fits my hands perfectly and feels rock solid.

At first using the D2x, the sound it makes when you take a photo seems strange - at least coming from a film camera. With the D2x there is a noticeably short click of the shutter and that is it. Gone is the fake film advance sound I have heard in other DSLR’s. In that respect the D2x reacts so quickly, my F5 feels sluggish in comparison and that is saying a lot.

The autofocus is as fast as it gets, in fact Popular Photography even went so far as to say that the autofocus (with Nikon’s AF-S lenses) was just a hair faster than Canon’s autofocus - that is the first time I have heard that. The autofocus system has 11 focus points that span practically the entire focusing screen and are laid out in a grid pattern. Some might even say that the points are a little too spread out but it is nice to have so many options and to be able to move from point to point so quickly and easily with the focus point selector on the back of the camera. Nikon has also gone to great lengths to make the autofocus as customizable as anyone could wish. In that regard it can be quite confusing if you don’t figure out all the possible varieties but the ability to customize the autofocus is a welcome addition.

On the topic of custom settings there are so many options it is dizzying. You can set the camera up ten different ways and switch between the custom settings with the push of a button. Also of note is the menu system and the LCD. First the LCD is the largest of it’s kind on any digital camera out there and that includes medium format digital backs. I still find it is hard to get a really good sense of the image on the camera’s LCD but it is fairly easy to check for sharp focus. And you can zoom into an image to 200%. Major kudos go to Nikon for the menu system as well. It is laid out logically and with the large LCD it is easy to read even in bright sunlight. Nikon has also added a “last setting changed” menu that is super useful and saves time trying to hunt down that setting you just changed.

A few other features worth mentioning are High Speed Crop mode and multiple exposures. In it’s normal mode the D2x shoots 12.4 MP images at 5 fps, but by pushing a button and rotating the thumb wheel you can switch to “High Speed Crop” mode which crops the sensor down to 6.8 MP and increases the framing rate to 8 fps thus creating an incredibly versatile camera. As a result of the cropped sensor you also have a 2x focal length magnification factor instead of the normal 1.5x factor. Hence, my 80-200mm f/2.8 effectively becomes a 160-400mm f/2.8 in high speed crop mode which in certain circumstances becomes incredibly useful. The viewfinder also has guides for the 2x crop so that you can frame in high speed crop mode - these guides also create a “sports” finder so that you can see when the action is coming into frame and going out. And while 6.8 MP might not seem like much it is still about the same image quality as 35mm film from my tests.

Another fancy new feature only available on the D2x is multiple exposures. This is the first and only digital camera that can blend separate image captures to effectively create a double (or multiple) exposure image. And you can also control each image in the multiple exposure individually to create the effect you want.

There are many more nifty camera functions and what not but let’s get to what you really want to hear about: image quality. To assess just how good the image quality of the D2x is I compared it to 35mm and medium format film. I did comparisons on screen by blowing up the images to the same size (20x30 inches) from the highest resolution files/scans I could. I also made sample prints of each and compared them since a fine art print is the ultimate comparison and on screen comparisons can be tricky. Please note that I did not favor one camera over another when I performed these tests and I did not try to give an advantage to one camera over another. All cameras were mounted on a tripod and give equal opportunity to excel.

With that in mind I was incredibly impressed by the D2x’s performance. As you can see in Figure 1 (below) the D2x out resolved 35mm film by a huge margin. Even with these test photos only at 72 ppi in this newsletter it is easy to see the lack of detail in the 35mm film image when compared to the D2x image. Granted the film was not scanned on a drum scanner so it might actually show a little more detail than it does here. For this test I scanned all of the film on a Nikon 8000ED at 4000dpi which is very close to drum scan quality so I don’t think a drum scan would have changed the outcome. If anything this may be more accurate to what actually gets published since these days most clients are asking for my high res film scans to print the images in their magazines and ads. So to all of you photo buyers out there, please let this reassure you that indeed the digital files from the D2x are superior to 35mm film.

Figure 1: The D2x vs. 35mm film: As is plainly obvious (even at screen resolution) the D2x blows the doors off 35mm film. I enlarged each image to 20x30 inches so the differences would be magnified and the D2x image on the left still has incredible detail. You can see individual fibers in the ropes sheath with the D2x image while the film image shows no fiber detail. The film’s image detail is marred by the film grain. Test Specifics: Film image shot on Fuji Provia 100F film at ASA 100 with Nikon F5 at f/8 & 1/30th sec. D2x image shot in uncompressed RAW at 100 ASA at f/8 & 1/30th sec, Adobe RGB, Color Mode II, no sharpening, all other settings default. Both images shot with the 28-70mm f/2.8 AF-S Nikkor (no filter) to allow similar crops and both cameras were mounted on a tripod. No sharpening was applied to either image. Film image scanned on Nikon 8000ED with ICE on at 4000dpi.

Compared to medium format film shot with a Hasselblad the results are not quite as clear cut - see figure 2 (below). It is very hard for me looking at the prints or at the screen images to say that the 120 film is better than the digital or vice versa. I would have to call it a tie. There is about the same amount of detail in both images, they just look different. The digital has a cleaner look to it while the film created a much more saturated image. I am a little shocked myself I have to say that the D2x is this good! I was pretty sure it was significantly better than 35mm film but I didn’t know just how it stacked up against medium format film - I thought it might be close but I didn’t think it would be just as good. I must say I think that for really huge prints, upwards of 30 x 40 inches, I think the Hasselblad might still create a better print but that is such a rare occurrence that it doesn’t even matter.

Figure 2: The D2x vs. Medium Format (120) film: Again both images were enlarged to 30” along the horizontal axis since the Hasselblad image is square. Visible in this comparison the D2x is very close if not just as good as the Hasselblad and 120 film. I’d call it a tie. Of note the D2x was sharper in the corners than the Hasselblad but this might be a result of the greater depth of field inherent in the D2x. Test Specifics: Film image shot on Fuji Provia 100F film at ASA 100 with a Hasselblad 503CW and Zeiss 80mm f/2.8 lens at f/8 & 1/30th sec. The film image is cropped top and bottom but not on the horizontal axis. D2x has the same settings as in Figure 2. Both cameras were mounted on a tripod. No sharpening was applied to either image. Film image scanned on Nikon 8000ED with ICE on at 4000dpi.

So, now we have a 35mm camera that can produce the same resolution as medium format and the D2x is a far more versatile camera than any medium format option out there! I must say I still love the square format and the D2x’s sensor size seems a little too rectangular. I’d love it if Nikon would increase the sensor size on the top and bottom just a little to create a 6x4.5 shaped sensor. That would increase the resolution a little and match magazine page sizes better which would mean less cropping of the image. I don’t feel the need for a full frame sensor. And seeing how hard my lenses have been pushed at 12 MP, full frame might do more harm than good. American Photo reported that the D2x “was noticeably sharper in the corners than the Canon 1DS Mark II” with its full frame sensor. And on that note, almost everyone who has directly compared the D2x and Canon’s 16.7 MP 1DS Mark II have found the D2x to hold it’s own against a camera with four more MP.

Figure 3: One more 35mm film and D2x comparison. These images were shot with the same settings as Figure 2 though they were handheld using a studio flash outdoors. Still the D2x has significantly more resolution especially apparent in the eyelashes.

Another hot topic these days with digital cameras is noise build up at higher ASA settings. Not having directly compared the D2x’s noise with the competition I can’t say how it fares, but I do know that it has the least amount of noise in any DSLR that Nikon has ever made. I have gone all the way up to ASA 800 on the D2x (it goes to 3200) and even at 800 with a little help from Noise Ninja the images are very publishable for magazine work. For a 12 MP CMOS sensor in a DX format (i.e. smaller than 35mm film) the lack of noise is nothing short of amazing and I think that fact shocked a lot of people when this camera came out. Along those same lines Nikon spent a lot of time in their marketing materials talking about “faithful color reproduction, smoother transitions and color stability.” I’m not sure what all that adds up to but the color accuracy of this camera is superb. In all of the test shots with the rope the D2x images are right on in terms of color accuracy while the film images are exaggerated. Part of this color accuracy is the excellent auto white balance. With earlier digital cameras I found that setting a custom white balance in the camera - set by metering off a pure white litedisc made for a serious improvement in image quality. With the D2x I have yet to run into a lighting situation where a custom set white balance beat the auto white balance setting and that just makes my job easier. I can tell that Nikon has gone to great lengths with the D2x to not only make a high resolution camera but also to make an excellent all around camera. Maybe that is why it took so long for them to bring this machine to market but it was well worth the wait.

I must also say that the D2x is murder on lenses. This camera will find any faults in your lenses and show them to you big as day. I have the best lenses Nikon makes, all AF-S zooms and the sharpest primes and still my 17-35 shows significant chromatic aberrations (i.e. color fringing) when shot at 17mm. Luckily this is easily dealt with in post processing but it makes me wonder how much more resolution can be had with 35mm lenses. I think we are very close to the limit of what 35mm lenses can resolve. And I have also found that the D2x is merciless when it comes to camera technique - at slow shutter speeds you need to have incredibly steady hands or you will see the motion blurs in your images. I now tend to crank up the ASA to avoid this if my shutter speeds creep below 1/200th second.

Conclusion: Medium format image quality in a 35mm body with wicked fast autofocus and color matrix metering that surpasses everything else on the market. The D2x may not be the highest MP DSLR out there but even so many other reviews online show that the D2x is on par with the Canon 1DS Mark II, and some reviews even found that the D2x had higher resolution than it’s 16.7 MP competitor. I’m not bashing the Canon - it is a great camera as well. But this just goes to show you that Megapixels aren’t everything. There is only one fault I can find with the D2x and I found that out when I went to clean the CMOS sensor. You have to buy a $75 AC cord to access the “cleaning mode” on the D2x. I find it a little chincy on Nikon’s part that they don’t include that cord with the camera. And further the competition has a cleaning mode that doesn’t require an extra cord at all. Maybe it’s safer to use the AC cord while cleaning the sensor instead of using battery power but it’s a pain to have to cart around an extra cord. Nikon, if you are reading this, please correct this in the next go around. Otherwise, the D2x is the best DSLR I have ever used and easily the fastest and most versatile digital camera on the market. Kudos Nikon - you hit a home run with the D2x.

Update 10/29/06: On October 3, 2006, Nikon released Firmware 2.00 for the Nikon D2x to bring it up to par with the new version of this camera, the Nikon D2Xs.

This upgrade brought with it several notable improvements in the camera with no additional cost to the consumer - bravo Nikon! Most notable among the improvements are lower noise, the addition of one-third stops of ISO between 800 and 1600 ISO (.3 and .7), a black and white shooting mode, an easier to read font for the LCD menus, more accurate auto-focus and finally (thank you VERY much Nikon!) the option to clean the CMOS sensor without using the AC adapter. This is of course only a partial list of the items I found the most exciting. The firmware upgrade included many other new features but I won't go into those here. Check Nikon's website for the complete list.

Since upgrading the firmware almost a month ago, I have been shooting rock climbing in West Virginia under cloudy skies and had to crank up the ISO to get acceptably sharp images. Normally I wouldn't use anything higher than ISO 640, but when I downloaded the first batch of images shot at ISO 640 I noticed they had much less noise than images I had shot previously at that ISO. The next day it was raining but we were still shooting under an overhanging cliff and it was even darker out so I cranked it up to ISO 800 for one route and then ISO 1250 (HI .3) for the next. Once I downloaded the images I was amazed at how little noise the images had in comparison to my earlier tests. With the new firmware, images shot at up to ISO 1600 are now usable, especially with some help from Noise Ninja noise reduction software (www.picturecode.com). It isn't often that I shoot at ISO's above 800 but to know that they are useable for my work and my clients opens up a whole new world. I don't know how Nikon did it in a firmware upgrade but I am very impressed.

In my original review above, I berated Nikon for not allowing users the ability to clean the CMOS sensor using the camera's battery. They must have been listening because now we can. And on top of that they have added a much welcomed black and white shooting mode as well. The only difference now between the D2X and the D2Xs is that in the crop mode the D2Xs darkens the outer portions of the finder not in use - that isn't a big deal for me as I like being able to see what is coming into and going out of the cropped frame.

This firmware upgrade bodes well for Nikon professionals because Nikon has shown us they can improve an existing camera through a firmware upgrade. It also tells us they are listening to what we need. All good things…