MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Nikon D800 36MP coming?  (Read 11592 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

antistock

« Reply #75 on: February 11, 2012, 00:35 »
0
And about Canon and nikon.  I've done a lot of workshops and one on One classes, I always found it quite strange that 99% of women used Canon and the same for men and Nikon. Doesn't matter to me at all , Both great cameras Just an Observation...LOL

i think that in the end it's just because they see all the other girls shooting with Canon.

weight and size are also a very important factor for girls, especially if they're asians.
a 45kg girl is not confortable with 4kg of gear on her neck !


antistock

« Reply #76 on: February 11, 2012, 00:36 »
0
If Nikon is offering a no-anti-aliasing version because the filter degrades image quality it sounds as if they have pushed the pixel-packing further than is sensible. Maybe Canon will offer a camera with a larger image area, equivalent to medium format, but that would mean a new lens line-up.

exactly, 36MP are simply too much,and it will never be as good as a 36MP shot with a Hasselblad !

antistock

« Reply #77 on: February 11, 2012, 00:39 »
0
So, you just keep writing. I'm sure everybody finds you entertaining.

i had many models, and yes including a nikon F4.
now i shoot with a D300s, waiting for the upcoming D400 (??).

antistock

« Reply #78 on: February 11, 2012, 00:39 »
0
The main gripe I have with Nikon is their lenses - far below Canon's offer.

then i suggest you to try again because in many areas Nikon smokes Canon away when talking about lenses.

« Reply #79 on: February 11, 2012, 01:27 »
0

And about Canon and nikon.  I've done a lot of workshops and one on One classes, I always found it quite strange that 99% of women used Canon and the same for men and Nikon. Doesn't matter to me at all , Both great cameras Just an Observation...LOL

I think that must be a freak result based on a small sample or a local preference. I've never seen or heard anything to suggest there a strong gender bias to one brand or another. Most people I know seem to shoot with Canon. For most purposes I both brands seem equally good. There could well be more variation between different models in the same line than between their respective flagship cameras.

« Reply #80 on: February 11, 2012, 01:48 »
0
Besides, at this point does anything beyond 20MP offer any financial advantage to the contributor? Isn't the highest commission threshold around 20MP? So a 36MP would give the buyer a much bigger image for the same price and the contributor still gets the same XXXL commission for dropping $3K large on a sparkly new camera. Or am I missing something?
XXXL square compositions will be possible now with a little room to spare.

I must be missing something. Why is the ability to make square images worth me spending $3K?

Probably not by itself, but side by side the 5D II looks and handles like a 4 year old camera. We'll see what Canon comes up with this year, but the Nikon has improvements in almost every respect over the 5D 2, even if it doesn't necessarily look that way on paper.

I looked at a couple samples and the noise patterns were kind of funky. Some of the darker and bokeh'd areas had noise somewhat similar to point and shoot. Kinda chunky and blobby instead of grainy.

I had three Nikons and never really liked my D300. The image quality was just off. I'm not jumping ship anytime soon unless Canon decides to do what Nikon did and wait for 2-3 years to release a higher-res DSLR.

To be honest I haven't really been looking at image samples from any of the new cameras lately to try to work out the tiny differences between different ISO values. For me the quality of the sensors on all DSLR models is high enough to produce the sort of results that will get accepted on all of the agencies, even at moderately high ISOs. I'm still going through some batches of older files shot with things like an Olympus E500, an E30 and the GF1, but haven't had any noise type rejections in a long time. Unfortunately we work in an environment where images are rewarded by size - if not for that I'd happily shoot with something smaller than the 5D II.

Its pretty clear though looking at the D800 that Nikon has put in a lot of work to try to get hold of the 5D II's market share. The other thing they're having to do is to try to put a significant gap in IQ between full frame DSLRs and compact system cameras. I'm not about to jump into that system either, but I can see that it would be worthwhile for some.

After playing with the new Olympus OM-D, I'm seriously thinking of switching back to that system. The new focus and IS system really is quite freakish. Its really hard to tell from testing out cameras at a photo show, but to me the focus felt much faster than the 5D 2, and even a bit faster than the 1DX and D4. Having several stops of IS even on wide angle lenses is also a pretty handy trick.    

antistock

« Reply #81 on: February 11, 2012, 02:25 »
0
wasn't Olympus near bankruptcy due to their recent financial scandals ?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/05/olympus-idUSL4E8D50B020120205

« Reply #82 on: February 11, 2012, 03:35 »
0
wasn't Olympus near bankruptcy due to their recent financial scandals ?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/05/olympus-idUSL4E8D50B020120205


They had a pretty bad year, but I don't think they're going under.

« Reply #83 on: February 23, 2012, 10:36 »
0

« Reply #84 on: February 23, 2012, 18:28 »
0
not a great detailed review but

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/02/22/nikon-d800-vs-nikon-d700-high-iso-comparison.aspx/


I had a bit of a play with the D800 at CP+ in Yokohama it seemed very nice, but Nikon basically set up a black box with their employees wearing white gloves and explaining their cameras (in Japanese which wasn't much use). Canon on the other hand had a row of 1DXs out on a bench with some 70-200 f2.8 lenses and a bright area behind it with a whole lot of models wandering around to shoot. Guess which camera was more fun to shoot with at the show?

As far as noise goes, I don't think any of the next generation of FF cameras are going to show much below ISO3200.

« Reply #85 on: February 23, 2012, 18:32 »
0
not a great detailed review but

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/02/22/nikon-d800-vs-nikon-d700-high-iso-comparison.aspx/


I agree with one of the comments that those high ISO's aren't normally used.  I'd like to see if there is any discernible difference in the 100-400 range.

« Reply #86 on: February 23, 2012, 19:12 »
0
I just received my new D700 after returning the D3S.  One major reason for the exchange was that the D3S was just too large for my chick hands and I kept inadvertently hitting the vertical AF button with my right palm.  I couldn't be more pleased with the D700...and it was an easy learning curve from my D300s.  Very, very happy to have gotten one of the few remaining out there (the camera shop had to get it shipped in from out of country with the help of their Nikon rep.)

« Reply #87 on: February 23, 2012, 19:32 »
0
not a great detailed review but

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/02/22/nikon-d800-vs-nikon-d700-high-iso-comparison.aspx/


I had a bit of a play with the D800 at CP+ in Yokohama it seemed very nice, but Nikon basically set up a black box with their employees wearing white gloves and explaining their cameras (in Japanese which wasn't much use). Canon on the other hand had a row of 1DXs out on a bench with some 70-200 f2.8 lenses and a bright area behind it with a whole lot of models wandering around to shoot. Guess which camera was more fun to shoot with at the show?

As far as noise goes, I don't think any of the next generation of FF cameras are going to show much below ISO3200.


thanks for sharing, even ISO1600 is insane, looking forward to try it out

antistock

« Reply #88 on: February 23, 2012, 23:00 »
0
thanks for sharing, even ISO1600 is insane, looking forward to try it out

without a tripod and without a flash if you shoot nightlife inside bars or poorly lit streets you will need ISO 1600, 3200, and sometimes even 6400
with speeds of 1/30 or 1/60 and this with a F1.8 lens !

so YES a noiseless high-ISO camera is very very welcome as far as i'm concerned.

« Reply #89 on: February 23, 2012, 23:10 »
0
thanks for sharing, even ISO1600 is insane, looking forward to try it out

without a tripod and without a flash if you shoot nightlife inside bars or poorly lit streets you will need ISO 1600, 3200, and sometimes even 6400
with speeds of 1/30 or 1/60 and this with a F1.8 lens !

so YES a noiseless high-ISO camera is very very welcome as far as i'm concerned.

sure I was thinking more of stock, I have seen approved pictures at DT with ISO3200 from a D3100 lol

lagereek

« Reply #90 on: February 24, 2012, 02:12 »
0
Well unless the Nikon engineers have stumbled over something? a sensor that high res and without an AA-filter will for sure result in issues such as moire, etc and thats hard to live with.
I might be old fashioned but I dont trust it.

antistock

« Reply #91 on: February 24, 2012, 05:08 »
0
sure I was thinking more of stock, I have seen approved pictures at DT with ISO3200 from a D3100 lol

maybe they were shot in daylight or just low-light, not by night in a dark street.
the noise in ISO3200 is especially obvious in the dark shadows and there's no perfect way to denoise it unless you create several layers with PS and denoise it selectively one by one and the final image will look overmanipulated.

we're still very far from having a kickass sensor and maybe it will never exist, it's already unthinkable that nowadays the high end models can shoot noiseless at ISO800 and make relatively low noise at ISO1600 or ISO3200.

« Reply #92 on: February 24, 2012, 08:45 »
0
sure I was thinking more of stock, I have seen approved pictures at DT with ISO3200 from a D3100 lol

maybe they were shot in daylight or just low-light, not by night in a dark street.
the noise in ISO3200 is especially obvious in the dark shadows and there's no perfect way to denoise it unless you create several layers with PS and denoise it selectively one by one and the final image will look overmanipulated.

we're still very far from having a kickass sensor and maybe it will never exist, it's already unthinkable that nowadays the high end models can shoot noiseless at ISO800 and make relatively low noise at ISO1600 or ISO3200.

yep they are dailylight but my point is that they got over at ISO3200 and boy they are noise all over..

antistock

« Reply #93 on: February 24, 2012, 23:10 »
0
yep they are dailylight but my point is that they got over at ISO3200 and boy they are noise all over..

another option would be to shoot in 36MP and resize to 24MP, some of the noise should be less visible
but c'mon.. from ISO3200 up the pics look like being shot with an iPhone!

« Reply #94 on: February 25, 2012, 00:11 »
0
yep they are dailylight but my point is that they got over at ISO3200 and boy they are noise all over..

another option would be to shoot in 36MP and resize to 24MP, some of the noise should be less visible
but c'mon.. from ISO3200 up the pics look like being shot with an iPhone!

yep downsize works too but I am not going to buy a 36MP to downsize eheh :D sure if needed

Microstock InsiderPhotoDune

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
67 Replies
11141 Views
Last post March 24, 2012, 14:33
by Uncle Pete
17 Replies
2296 Views
Last post May 03, 2012, 10:14
by tab62
5 Replies
1165 Views
Last post October 15, 2012, 14:51
by velocicarpo
26 Replies
4301 Views
Last post February 18, 2013, 17:36
by gillian
7 Replies
1716 Views
Last post April 05, 2013, 04:46
by Beppe Grillo

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors