Initial Review of Nikon's new DS-Ri2 FF camera (Updated)

[pwnell]

I have received my new Nikon DS-Ri2 camera today and decided to put it up against my previous Canon 350D (APS-C) and my current Canon 6D (full frame).

The Nikon DS-Ri2 is a colour, full frame (Nikon FX sensor) microscope camera with USB 3.0 and working with Nikon's NIS-Elements software. With the camera comes a free copy of NIS-Elements F (Very scaled down app).

The camera outputs TIFF/JPEG. Even though it has a 14-bit digitizer, it can only emit 8-bits per channel (24-bit) TIFF images.

I have not yet received my F-mount adapter, so right now the camera is tethered to the microscope using a home made fixture. Therefore it is not parfocal but that would not detract from this short review.

The NIS-Elements F software allows you to connect to one of two "cameras" - either the full 16MP resolution (4908x3264) one or the 3x3 pixel binned (1608x1608) resolution.

If connected to the high res unit, you have the option to switch Live View either to the low res version or the full res version. Low res can give high frame rates - 30fps can easily be had. On full resolution Live View, frame rate will not exceed 6fps.

Capturing an image can be done with the Capture button, or the Auto button. Capture will freeze the display and allow you to add annotations / make adjustments then save the image. Auto will automatically freeze the image, capture it, save it and be ready for the next image. At least that is the theory. Right now I am in discussion with Nikon regarding an apparent issue as I can only capture an image once every 12 seconds or so, due to the Auto button not working every time when pressed, and taking a long time to write the file to disk and be ready again. And this is not due to my hardware, my hardware far exceeds the recommended system specs.

The files are 8-bit per channel TIFF images, and does NOT contain any EXIF information, not even the capture date. This is also a problem for me, as I have no way to know the exposure, gain, custom notes, date, camera model, etc. I have a pending question in with Nikon support on whether this will be fixed or whether a different NIS-Elements suite provide this feature.

Regarding vibration - I have only tested it so far with my 60x/1.2 Water immersion objective and a wet mount, and I can confidently say there are zero mechanical noises when making an exposure, and absolutely no (observable) vibration. This camera is 100% vibration free. However I will re-confirm this when properly attached via the U-FMT mount.

Then on to the image quality. Since this is a scientific instrument and not a commercial camera, some nomenclature is different. They do not speak of ISO but instead the more technically accurate term Gain. Same with exposure - it is not shown as a shutter speed (as there is no shutter), they refer to exposure duration (100µs - 120s). I presume a gain of 1.0 means base ISO, say ISO200 (Nikon). I furthermore presume a gain of 2.0 implies ISO400, and so on. This may or may not be accurate.

I have taken a photo at gain 7.6 and at gain 64 in addition to gain 1. I must say, this camera has VERY little noise at any ISO. It is equivalent to my Canon 1DX when comparing ISO performance. I have not done any scientific measurements but to my eye that is what it looks like. It is certainly cleaner than the Canon 6D. I took some fluorescence photos and could easily crank up the gain such that I get (almost) noise-free images accurately exposed with both the ND25 and ND6 filters engaged, whereas with the 6D I used to have to disengage the ND6 filter (4-stop increase in fluorescence excitation energy). At these levels I can barely see any fluorescence through the eyepieces. This is great news as it means I will most likely suffer less from photobleaching.

A summary of my preliminary findings:

Pros
===
1. Vibration free
2. High quality images
3. Low noise
4. High ISO capable
5. Fast (6fps at full resolution)
6. 16MP should be adequate.
7. Full frame
8. USB 3.0

Cons
===
1. No RAW
2. No 16-bit even though it has a 14-bit digitizer
3. Currently I cannot capture faster than 0.08fps, this is a major issue that needs to be sorted.
4. No EXIF

Below some comparisons. Take note that I could not control the environment perfectly - the old photos were taken up to 2 years ago, so the subject might have changed slightly. It should be useful nonetheless. Also take note that the old photos are a mix of Canon 350D and Canon 6D, but all were taken on the Olympus microscope and as far as possible, under the same settings / objective (except fluorescence).


Full Image
Grasshopper testicle, 4x*1.25*1.4xTC, BF, Canon 6D


Full Image
Grasshopper testicle, 4x*1.6, BF, DS-Ri2




Full Image
Benzoic acid melted, 10x, POL, Canon 350D


Full Image
Benzoic Acid melted, 10x*1.6, POL, DS-Ri2




Full Image
Test Diatoms, 40x, DIC, HF A, Canon 350D


Full Image
Test Diatoms, 40x*1.6, DIC, HF B, DS-Ri2




Full Image
Diatoms, Oamaru N.Z., Auliscus oamaruensis, 40x, POL, HF B, Canon 350D


Full Image
Diatoms, Oamaru N.Z., Auliscus oamaruensis, 40x, POL, HF A, DS-Ri2




Full Image
Harpacticoid Copepod - reef, 20x*1.25*1.4TC, FLUO-C6, HF C, Canon 6D


Full Image
Harpacticoid copepod - reef, 10x*2, FLUO-C6.1, HF C, DS-Ri2




Full Image
Test diatoms, 10x, DF, Canon 350D


Full Image
Test diatoms, 10x*1.4 TC, DF, Canon 6D


Full Image
Test diatoms, 10x*1.6, DF, DS-Ri2

[Beatsy]

Interesting review. Thanks for posting. How much does this camera cost?

[pwnell]

Interesting review. Thanks for posting. How much does this camera cost?

Sent you a PM.

[Pau]

Interesting camera with some nice pro features but about IQ at the forum size there is no real difference compared with DSLRs and at full size only noise seems really better enough to be worth it

Cons
===
1. No RAW
2. No 16-bit even though it has a 14-bit digitizer
3. Currently I cannot capture faster than 0.08fps, this is a major issue that needs to be sorted.
4. No EXIF

maybe you could add another big con:

For anyone that is curious they have an MSRP of $12,000 to 16,000 but that includes software.

[pwnell]

maybe you could add another big con:

For anyone that is curious they have an MSRP of $12,000 to 16,000 but that includes software.

That is only if you opt for their AR or D software packages. That is optional as it ships with NIS-Elements F for free.

[rjlittlefield]

So what's the MSRP for the stuff you got?

--Rik

[pwnell]

So what's the MSRP for the stuff you got?

The MSRP here in Canada is USD 6500.

[Choronzon]

what build of Elements are you running?

[RogelioMoreno]

Waldo,

Congratulations for your new Nikon DS-Ri2 camera.

I would like to know if it has output (something like a PC port) to trigger a flash?

Rogelio

[pwnell]

Waldo,

Congratulations for your new Nikon DS-Ri2 camera.

I would like to know if it has output (something like a PC port) to trigger a flash?

Rogelio

Yes it has a port for triggering other devices. But for that you will need one of the paid for NIS-Elements applications.

[pwnell]

what build of Elements are you running?

The free version - NIS Elements F. It is 4.3.

[pwnell]

So a final update is due.

This camera takes really nice photos. Its sensor is brilliant, especially at high ISO and for fluorescence. In fact, I'd say the hardware is as close to perfect as I could ever hope for.

What lets this camera down however is its software. I cannot comment on the paid for applications (outside of my budget in any case, as the software is more expensive than the camera). My comments only apply to the free NIS Elements application you get with this camera.

As I already mentioned, it does not work on Windows 8 - it requires Windows 7. On Windows 8 I have a very weird issue where I have to click the exposure button twice to capture one photo, with a total lag time of 12 seconds between captures. In Windows 7 this does not happen, however it still takes 4-6 seconds between captures, and more importantly, there is a 1-3 second lag between the time I click the capture button and when the exposure is actually made.

This makes this camera useless to me as many of my subjects move around, and timing is everything. To limit photobleaching one has to limit the exposure time as much as possible - with 6 seconds between exposures this is not working for me.

Then the lack of Exif makes it very hard to keep track of what you photographed, when and at what settings - something I regularly revisit.

Lastly, the fact that it only produces 8 bit TIFF images limits the latitude of exposure corrections significantly.

I have returned this camera to Nikon.

In the mean time I have found the perfect camera - the Canon 1DX. It is vibration free pre-exposure. There is no noise, no vibration when initiating an exposure, only at the end of the exposure there is a brief vibration. I will be using this camera going forward. Naturally high ISO is as good as it can be.

[Chris S.]

Waldo, thanks for the update--and for your entire review, which I've thought both well-conducted and interesting to read (no surprise on either point). For me, your negative findings are both disappointing and sadly expected, as Nikon has a history of making terrific hardware and horrid software. Nikon also tends to discontinue software support after a few years, leaving expensive hardware increasingly difficult to use as computers and operating systems evolve. This history greatly concerns me when considering the camera you tested, as it seems very software-dependent.

As an example, I invested in an optically-excellent Nikon slide/negative scanner, for which Nikon discontinued support after a few years. Fortunately, there exists Silverfast, an independent application that supports a wide variety of scanners, including Nikons. It's far better software than Nikon once provided, so I'm not hurting. But with the camera you tested, who dares bet $6500 that some third-party developer will step in? It's unlikely that enough hardware units will be sold to make third-party software rewarding, and if anybody tries, Nikon will probably refuse to cooperate, making the effort an uphill battle, at best.

How much better if Nikon realized that they are a disaster as a software company, and got out of the software business. Instead, they should become the kind of hardware company that software developers can work with easily and effectively. The ensuing independent software would get better and cheaper. And with top-quality software available, Nikon would sell more hardware. No company can be good at everything; wise corporations know that there are areas in which they should compete, and other areas in which they should cooperate.

While I use Nikon software for my raw conversions, and find the quality of these conversions better than those of third party raw converters, this is not at all because Nikon is better at writing raw conversion software. On the contrary, it's because Nikon refuses to disclose needed information about its raw files and jpeg engine to outside developers. So if you want raw conversions that include knowledge of Nikon's secret sauce, you need to put up with Nikon software's horrid user interfaces and incessant bugs.

Too bad the DS-Ri2 camera came out of the Nikon Instruments division, rather than the group that makes DSLRs. If Nikon were to offer stripped-down versions of its SLRs--minus features like autofocus, user interface buttons and dials, and even the reflex system--Nikon could produce them very cheaply. (OK, they'd need to add electronic exposure gating, but this should not be expensive.) At the reduced cost of producing such stripped-down boxes, Nikon could sell them at a reasonable price, even after taking a greater than normal markup. We could buy and replace these boxes every couple of years as sensors improve. If Nikon were to cooperate on this with independent software developers, and even make the box programmable by these folks, a rich software ecosystem would develop around them. This would raise the bar for other companies trying to enter this niche. Nikon would not get rich quickly, but would have a strong hold on the world of macro, micro, and astro photography, as well as other forms of instrument imaging that will surely grow as time goes on. Customers would tend to stick with the hardware and software that they know, so customer retention would be high, and Nikon could expect to sell generation after generation of these simple boxes.

But Nikon seems not to have this sort of vision, and its management seems focused on short-term profits. And since the instrument division has claimed this space, it's unlikely that any other group within Nikon will dare touch it. Too bad, as Nikon sure seems to understand how to make/implement a sensor.

Waldo, regarding your "perfect" solution--the Canon 1DX--have you tested it against the Nikon D810? The D810 seems roughly half the price of the Canon 1DX, offers more megapixels, and also has a (reportedly) vibration-free electronic first shutter curtain.

Cheers,

--Chris

[Pau]

As an example, I invested in an optically-excellent Nikon slide/negative scanner, for which Nikon discontinued support after a few years. Fortunately, there exists Silverfast, an independent application that supports a wide variety of scanners, including Nikons....

I agree, I also have an excellent Nikon slide scanner... but the sofware didn't work when I upgraded to Win7, after many attemtps Nikon service responded my query saying "buy Silverfast, maybe it could work...". Not exactly a good service... Fortunately at the net there are kind and skilled hackers that solve the problem: just changing one line in the .inf or .dll file! and now NikonScan runs perfectly on Win7 (sorry, this is a bit off topic)

[pwnell]

Waldo, regarding your "perfect" solution--the Canon 1DX--have you tested it against the Nikon D810? The D810 seems roughly half the price of the Canon 1DX, offers more megapixels, and also has a (reportedly) vibration-free electronic first shutter curtain.

I guess this is a little bit like finding the perfect spouse...

The Canon 1DX does not suffer from any of the vibration or software issues I have experienced with other solutions, has very good high ISO performance and its resolution (18MP) matches the objectives I use quite well (at 4x / 10x). 36MP is nice but it is an oversampling at 40x, 60x and 100x.

I have not tried the D810 because I do not have access to such a camera, however I did read a review somewhere on here were it was mentioned the camera cannot have live view engaged while EFCS is used??