Anti-Aliasing Filter Removal

Well, after only 2 days with the D7100 I am firmly convinced that the correlation between removing the Anti-Aliasing Filter and image sharpness is undeniable. It's like an amp that goes to 11. So, I'm seriously considering whether or not I want to send my D600 off to have the AA/Low Pass filter removed. The folks at Kolari Vision (who did my IR conversion) charge $400 for the service ($100 less than LifePixel), which is right on the border of what I'd consider given the value of the camera. That said, it's about what it would do for me for the rest of the life of the camera, and I am fairly sure I'd upgrade a lens at a cost $400 if it promised to be that much sharper than what I had.

Anyone know of anybody who has had this service done? Only drawback seems to be that the Self-Sensor Cleaning function is removed with the filter (makes sense since that function simply vibrates the AA filter).

What do you think?

I'd do it....I think the D7100 is an awesome camera with the AA fiter removed. Would love to see the D610 or in your case, the D600 w/out the filter. I'm thinking Nikon screwed up by not removing it for the D610 at the least. Love the clarity of the D7100.

If it's not coming off the assembly line with the AA/low pass removed, I'd be nervous . . . Like souping up cars . . . It improves performance in one way, but you're sacrificing in other areas . . . But, I agree with you, low-pass filter removal does improve IQ. You raise an interesting point. I can imagine what Nikon would say, but they're biased.

I'm curious what they physically do to the camera to remove the filter. (I'm sure I could google it, but I'm feeling lazy)

I know a couple people who have bought cameras with damaged AA filters on the cheap and had them converted.

I am not one to embrace new technology without a whole lot of research. After all, I am still using hand planes that are over 100 years old. The AA filter solved a given problem. I guess my central question is how hard is the post processing need to correct that problem if it occurs?

I believe omission of the OLPF was dependent on pixel density. There was a reason why Nikon only omitted them on the higher density sensors. Might want to research that, I can't remember why.

Just wait, D620 will come without the AA filter and the expeed4 processor, and may be 4K video!

Rick M said:

I believe omission of the OLPF was dependent on pixel density. There was a reason why Nikon only omitted them on the higher density sensors. Might want to research that, I can't remember why.

Click to expand...

Seems like I remember reading that smaller pixels are less likely to match up to patterns of the average problem subject. Hence the tendency to drop the OLPF on the denser sensor. As I understand medium and large format cameras do not have them, but the photographer usually has more control of the subject and lighting, so not as necessary.

If they pluck it out and you have issues can they de-pluck it back in?

It looks promising but I wonder if you wouldn't loose resale value. I do find it tempting though, and cheaper than getting the D 810.

Another thing to consider is that newer processors in cameras without the OLPF (D7100) are optimized to deal with the moire, this could be an issue with the D600. This article is against removal:

Lol, this article has a wonderful sports car analogy for Jake

Tipps & Tricks

The next body I buy will be without the filter as I'm all for removal. But, I'm not sure I would risk the D600 with a modification.

I read that Nikon has a patent on a switch for the OLPF to be on/off. Why doesn't Nikon utilize that patent? My guess is that it's just that Nikon wants to save that feature for another body down the road. Money talks.

I am now subscribing to Rick's thoughts on the subject....don't think I'd tinker with the AA filter unless you run into someone who has had it done, and know all the pros and cons. It's such a waste though to have it on the D6xx and not have the option to turn it on/off.

sonicbuffalo said:

I read that Nikon has a patent on a switch for the OLPF to be on/off. Why doesn't Nikon utilize that patent? My guess is that it's just that Nikon wants to save that feature for another body down the road. Money talks. ..........

Click to expand...

My thinking is that's it's too expensive to put into production.

You can patent anything idea you want. But you've got to make it economical enough to produce. I could patent the idea of putting helicopter blades on an Abrams M1A1 tank. But actually making a tank fly & hover is, to say the least, an expensive engineering proposition.

It's like having a simple surgical procedure done. No matter how simple it might seem, there is always a risk of the patient not achieving the desired outcome. I think surgery is to be only used when totally necessary. I fear my D600 would die on the operating table or maybe later . . . With my luck.

Flashback: I just recalled the Seinfeld episode where Kramer and Jerry were viewing a surgery in a balcony of the old and outdated operating theater that was used to train young residents. They're sitting there eating candy and Kramer drops a piece into the patient's open body . . . You can figure out the rest . . . It was a great show. I'm a Seinfled fiend.

Marcel said:

It looks promising but I wonder if you wouldn't loose resale value. I do find it tempting though, and cheaper than getting the D 810.

Click to expand...

Losing even more resale value on the D600. You're funny, Marcel!! LOL

Hadn't thought about the pixel density issue - good point. That's why we ask questions.

sonicbuffalo said:

I read that Nikon has a patent on a switch for the OLPF to be on/off. Why doesn't Nikon utilize that patent? My guess is that it's just that Nikon wants to save that feature for another body down the road. Money talks.

I am now subscribing to Rick's thoughts on the subject....don't think I'd tinker with the AA filter unless you run into someone who has had it done, and know all the pros and cons. It's such a waste though to have it on the D6xx and not have the option to turn it on/off.

Click to expand...

I'm wondering how that would work given that the filter is at the top of the stack, and I can't twist my head around a way to turn a physical piece of glass off. Perhaps there's a software-based switch that interprets the light data differently based on what comes through, but the surgery required here is the replacement of a physical piece of glass.

I know that the OLPF is reversed in some fashion on the D800e, while it's physically absent on later models that boast of lacking the filter.

BackdoorHippie said:

I'm wondering how that would work given that the filter is at the top of the stack, and I can't twist my head around a way to turn a physical piece of glass off. Perhaps there's a software-based switch that interprets the light data differently based on what comes through, but the surgery required here is the replacement of a physical piece of glass.

I know that the OLPF is reversed in some fashion on the D800e, while it's physically absent on later models that boast of lacking the filter.

Click to expand...

That's why I quickly changed my mind....seems like there might be software problems if you removed the filter...wouldn't want to take that chance unless we knew for sure.

I'd be interested in seeing test before and after pictures of a D600 with the filter removed...

here's the link for the switch article.