In a word, great.
Active D-Lighting: None on left, “Normal” on right
These shots, both of VMI’s Travis Holmes, were taken on the same night, on the same area of the court, albeit with different D300/lens combinations (the photo on left was shot with a Sigma 18-50/f2.8 HSM at 50mm, 1/400 @ f2.8, ISO 800; the photo on right with AF-Nikkor 85/f1.8D, 1/400 @ f1.8, ISO 400).
Nikon recommends setting Active D-Lighting to “Low” for high ISO images, and “High” for low ISO shots. Here’s a comparison of the three settings, as well as Active D-Lighting turned “off,” with variations from the originally recorded setting of “Normal” made through Capture NX v1.3.
Clockwise from top left: Off, Low, High, Normal
These results compare favorably to improvements made in post-processing with the software-based D-Lighting adjustment in Nikon Capture:
D-Lighting: Off on left, strength “20″ on right
The value of the Active D-Lighting, of course, is that it is accomplished in-camera, and requires no additional post-processing. This is great for my D300 workflow, as I have found that the out-of-camera images generally require no post-processing and I have begun to eliminate that step for the bulk of my images.
Clicking on each of the thumbnails above will bring you to a slightly larger (700 pixels high) version of each image. If anyone feels the need to see the full-sized images, email me and I will send them to you.
14 responses so far ↓
1 czei // Jan 9, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Have you ever tried Lightroom’s fill light feature? The problem with the in-camera d-lighting is it only works on JPGs; RAW files still have to be processed with Capture NX, which of course is a giant hassle.
On the other hand, Lightroom’s fill light feature is quick and painless to apply to a group of photos since its not rendered until the images are output.
2 The Sports Photo Guy // Jan 9, 2008 at 3:28 pm
I gave Lightroom a try during the public beta, and didn’t particularly like it. I do remember the fill light feature being an improvement over the Shadow/Highlight adjustment in PhotoShop.
I suppose if I shot RAW more routinely, I would like Lightroom better. But truth be told, I’m much more inclined to try to get my JPGs to come out of the camera the way I want them.
3 Brent // Jul 10, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Just got issued a d-300 and have been reading the manual. Page 168 talks about Active D-lighting an d sez “additional time is required to record images”
so is their a perceptible shutter lag when it is used?. Thanks Brent
4 The Sports Photo Guy // Jul 10, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Not shutter lag, just longer for each image to be recorded to the card. You could fill up the buffer more quickly with a really long burst, but you won’t see shutter lag until that happens.
5 Chris // Jul 13, 2008 at 4:58 pm
I’ve read that Matrix metering is suggested to be used in conjunction w/ ADL….I tend to shoot CW or spot.
What have you shot? (no EXIF found)
6 The Sports Photo Guy // Jul 13, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Honestly, I haven’t noticed a lot of difference between ADL in matrix, center-weighted, or even manual.
7 Steve // Nov 23, 2008 at 7:03 am
Curious, given you shoot sports with an MB-10 motor drive, has Active D Lighting and the resultant slower write speeds to CF limited you? Do you ever need more than a 12 shot burst?
8 The Sports Photo Guy // Nov 23, 2008 at 7:51 am
It can, though seldom for basketball. In outdoor sports, especially football, I’m just as likely to use exposure compensation of 1/3-2/3 of a stop to lighten shadows.
9 Dave // Nov 23, 2008 at 9:07 pm
In football I hit the limit several times with ADL on, even at 6 fps. When it happened, I just started thinking “OK, I have the release button jammed all the way down, what is wrong here?” Like our host, I gave up on ADL for outdoor sports.
I ordered one of the Phottix MB-10 clones, and hope I can use ADL for basketball at the higher frame rate without hitting the limit of the buffer. I feel ADL is very important for basketball, as faces are often poorly illuminated by the direct overhead lighting. I did get a faster CF card (Sandisk Extreme IV 16GB UDMA 45MB/s), hopefully that will let me get more shots before the buffer fills and the frame rate drops.
10 adrienne // Jan 30, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Would ADL help when shooting in-door photos for real estate? Or, is an external flash necessary?
11 The Sports Photo Guy // Jan 30, 2009 at 6:10 pm
ADL helps in most moderately high-contrast situations. But bouncing an external flash off the ceiling would probably be better for real estate interiors.
12 cleek » Active Delight ! // Aug 7, 2009 at 4:40 pm
[...] of the story: Active D Lighting can give really good results in some situations. But if you have a high contrast shot with a solid background, Active D Lighting [...]
13 Steve // Jun 28, 2010 at 8:24 pm
Wow, your site comes out great on my iTouch! I almost never surf on a PC when traveling, so it is great to be able to still go back to old articles when on the road with a mobile device.
14 The Sports Photo Guy // Jun 29, 2010 at 6:58 am
Good to hear…I try to keep it simple, and WordPress/Cutline go a long way at that. It works well on my Blackberry too.
Leave a Comment