Upgrade the memory of your 2018 Mac mini up to 64GB
Handpicked deals...
$1299 $1124
SAVE $175

$2998 $2498
SAVE $500

$1199 $920
SAVE $279

$1999 $1599
SAVE $400

$2799 $2399
SAVE $400

$400 $280
SAVE $120

$1798 $1598
SAVE $200

$3297 $2797
SAVE $500

$3397 $2797
SAVE $600

$1398 $898
SAVE $500

$3698 $2998
SAVE $700

$1799 $1329
SAVE $470

$1999 $1199
SAVE $800

$2299 $1599
SAVE $700

$2399 $2049
SAVE $350

$2799 $1899
SAVE $900

$997 $897
SAVE $100

$2099 $1699
SAVE $400

$1999 $1369
SAVE $630

$1349 $949
SAVE $400

$4499 $3999
SAVE $500

$1499 $1029
SAVE $470

$1499 $1289
SAVE $210

$2199 $1999
SAVE $200

$3399 $2199
SAVE $1200

OWC Thunderbolt 3 Dock
Ideal for any Mac with Thunderbolt 3

Dual Thunderbolt 3 ports
Gigabit Ethernet
5K and 4K display support plus Mini Display Port
Analog sound in/out and Optical sound out

Works on any Mac with Thunderbolt 3


D2X D200
Pigeon Point Lighthouse near Pescadero, CA
click for larger versions


Normally I discard test results in which technical errors are present, but this example has been included to illustrate the perils of comparing lenses and/or camera bodies without multiple cross-checks and multiple frames to detect errors. The examples on this page were cross-checked from the left of the frame to the right of the frame to verify that optical misalignment was not the issue. Three frames were taken with each camera, allowing autofocus to refocus each time.

Frames shown were taken at 1/80 second @ f9, ISO 100 with both cameras. A B+W polarizer was also used, with care taken to not alter focal length or polarizer position when switching the lens between camera bodies.


In this example [below], observe that the D2X has back-focused (focused behind the subject), yielding resolution inferior to the D200. Yet the camera had just returned from Nikon service a few days prior to this test “operating per factory specifications” according to Nikon.

Focus accuracy has been a recurring problem with my Nikon bodies, and has left me with less hair on my head than when I began this review, as less than perfect focus renders any comparison meaningless. For this review, I was forced to perform more than one reshoot of what should have been straightforward comparisons. For more on this subject, see Focus Accuracy.

When comparing lenses or camera bodies, I now favor subjects that can show front-focus or back-focus errors—and the results are disheartening, occurring with two D2X bodies, the D200, and with different lenses. I have concluded that autofocus accuracy is simply not accurate enough for critical sharpness with many lenses and under many real-world conditions. This problem will be explored in detail in a future Diagnosing Sharpness Issues article, which will consider both Canon and Nikon equipment.

Shown below are crops from three D2X frames. Each shows different resolution, due to slightly varied focus. The fact that they were all taken at f9 shows that the amount of backfocus was so large that even the increased depth of field could not compensate for the error!

Nor is it clear that the “best” frame seen below is actually optimal, so in this example we can’t be sure that there isn’t a sharper result possible with the D2X, just one not achieved in 3 frames.

Such focus errors are simply unacceptable for professional use—there is little point using a 12.2 megapixel camera if autofocus error effectively downsamples the resolution to 10 or 8 or 6 or 4 megapixels. Without a doubt, focus errors are the likely genesis of many online complaints about lenses being “soft”; the errors seen below are at f9—at f2.8 the errors would be even more pronounced!

Backfocus Example—Nikon D2X, 28-70/f2.8 AFS, f9 @ 60mm
Unsharp Mask {500, 0.3, 0}
Actual Pixels (as from camera)

Best Frame 2 Frame 3

By comparison, the D200 did a fine job of achieving consistent focus. I don’t believe that a sample of 3 is statistically valid, but few photographers would consider shooting 10 frames or more an acceptable approach to get a job done. A single frame ought to be enough. What’s more, I had fewer instances of back-focus errors with the D200 than with the D2x. All 3 D200 frames below look crisp.

Backfocus Example (lack thereof) —Nikon D200, 28-70/f2.8 AFS, f9 @ 60mm
Unsharp Mask {500, 0.3, 0}
Actual Pixels (as from camera)

Frame 1 Frame 2 Frame 3
OWC Envoy Pro EX SSD
Blazingly fast USB-C SSD!

Up to 2TB capacity, USB-C compatible with Thunderbolt 3.

√ Fastest USB drive MPG has tested!

Comparing the D2X to the D200 (matched resolution)

Comparing another section, the increased contrast of the D2X is apparent, even though both images were shot and processed with identical settings. Taking the contrast difference into account, the D2X has little (if any) apparent resolution advantage over the D200, even though the D200 image was enlarged by 10.7% (D200 3872 pixels wide upsized to the D2X's 4288 pixel width). Taking the 10.7% enlargement into account, it’s clear that the D200 has outperformed (or at least equaled) the D2X simply by achieving more accurate focus.

upsampled to D2X resolution
actual pixels

The D200 frame is also more amenable to post-processing in that its overall contrast is lower and more natural looking (though not necessarily more accurate); observe the brick green foliage in particular.

Caveat: the frames were shot using a polarizer, so the reader might wonder whether the difference could be attributed to the polarizer. A fair question, but special care was taken to not move anything while the lens was transferred between cameras. Also, as observed on other pages of this review, the D200 always shows slightly lower contrast than the D2x.

√ B&H Photo PAYS THE SALES TAX FOR YOU More info...


Focus errors can eliminate any resolution advantage that the D2X offers over the D200, even when well stopped down (f9 in this example). Perfect focus is required to extract the optimal results from these cameras (this is true of Canon EOS bodies as well).

There can be no assurance that my particular D2X is operating at the potential of the D2X design, but Nikon returned it to me “operating according to factory specifications”.

USB-C Travel Dock

Fast charging with up to 100W!

HDMI, SD card reader,
USB-C port, 2 USB Type-A ports
Built-in cable self-stores neatly.
See also OWC 14-port Thunderbolt 3 Dock"


View all handpicked deals...

Sony Alpha a7R III Mirrorless Digital Camera Body with Accessories Kit
$2998 $2498
SAVE $500

diglloyd Inc. | FTC Disclosure | PRIVACY POLICY | Trademarks | Terms of Use
Contact | About Lloyd Chambers | Consulting | Photo Tours
RSS Feeds | Twitter
Copyright © 2019 diglloyd Inc, all rights reserved.