MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Nikon D800 36MP coming?  (Read 17024 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 07, 2011, 04:57 »
0
Looks like it's finally on its way

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/10/03/the-name-will-be-nikon-d800-the-sensor-will-be-36mp-99-probability.aspx/

    What number of pixels is 3630 megapixels.
    4 frames per second continuous shooting in body only, about 6 frames per second will be used to DX mode with the optional battery pack.
    A little late to be released by the model resolution sought to eliminate the low-pass filter.
    Full HD video in 1920 1080/30p.
    Headphone jacks, can be input from an external device such as a PCM sound recorder. Corresponding to USB3.0. Be available in new small wireless transmitter.
    86K pixel split control, AF, exposure, white balance, etc. compatible. Face Recognition AF features.
    Larger LCD monitor, automatic brightness adjustment, the structure is not cloudy.
    Two media CF card and SD card slot.
    Shutter durability of 200,000 cycles.
    Market price is about 300,000 yen. The announcement on October 26, released on November 24.


Xalanx

« Reply #1 on: October 07, 2011, 07:59 »
0
Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

« Reply #2 on: October 07, 2011, 12:44 »
0
Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

I agree! BUT

I initially did not post this online, but after receiving some additional info I can now confirm with a 99% probability only the name D800″ and the sensor size of 36MP.

RT


« Reply #3 on: October 07, 2011, 13:34 »
0
I thought the megapixel race was over.  ::) Hope Canon don't feel the need to cram even more into an already overcrowded 35mm sensor, unless Nikon have done what Canon hinted at a couple of years ago and create a MF slr?

tab62

« Reply #4 on: October 07, 2011, 15:08 »
0
Check this one out

http://www.43rumors.com/fuji-will-not-join-m43-they-will-make-a-large-sensor-mirrorless-system-larger-than-fullframe/


Now I can get one and expect 100% accepted photos on all the MS site with my sales growing tenfold within a month or so...


T

« Reply #5 on: October 07, 2011, 16:03 »
0
Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

Whose to say they aren't planning an upgrade to the d3x. 36Mp does seem a bit over the top to be believed though.

« Reply #6 on: October 07, 2011, 16:06 »
0
300,000 yen is about $4k US.

Xalanx

« Reply #7 on: October 07, 2011, 16:11 »
0
Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

Whose to say they aren't planning an upgrade to the d3x. 36Mp does seem a bit over the top to be believed though.

Yes, it looks more like specs for d4x. However, 36 MP for a full frame is certainly too much. I wouldn't bet on a good image quality. Also, you would need the very best lenses to work with that.

« Reply #8 on: October 07, 2011, 16:26 »
0
Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

Whose to say they aren't planning an upgrade to the d3x. 36Mp does seem a bit over the top to be believed though.

Yes, it looks more like specs for d4x. However, 36 MP for a full frame is certainly too much. I wouldn't bet on a good image quality. Also, you would need the very best lenses to work with that.

LOL I guess if you go for a D3x or a D4x or a D800 you have already nice lens, if not it doesnt make sense

« Reply #9 on: October 07, 2011, 20:32 »
0
36MP isn't really going to be a problem on a FF sensor. The pixel density is still going to be very low compared to APS-C sensors, and you'd expect in the years since the last version, the technology has gotten significantly better. Just as the jump from 12 to 21MP in the Canon 5 series resulted in better IQ, you'd expect this in both the Nikon cameras and the new Canon cameras whenever they come out. 3 years is a long time in terms of both sensor and processor development.

Really the game for both Canon and Nikon needs to be to have a FF camera that competes with and beats larger sensored alternatives. I'd be surprised if the 5D3 has anything less than 35MP - more likely it will be at or about 40 MP.

« Reply #10 on: October 07, 2011, 21:26 »
0
Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

Maybe because Canon sold as many 5DMIIs as it could make while all of the flagship cameras have been collecting dust.

$7,000 DSLRs are dead. Both Canon and Nikon must have been making massive profits on them.

« Reply #11 on: October 07, 2011, 23:01 »
0
Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

Whose to say they aren't planning an upgrade to the d3x. 36Mp does seem a bit over the top to be believed though.

You won't see that until spring 2012

« Reply #12 on: October 08, 2011, 01:35 »
0
What is with new Canon 5D mark III?

« Reply #13 on: October 08, 2011, 01:56 »
0
What is with new Canon 5D mark III?

There isn't one. Maybe events in Japan have pushed it onto the back-burner.

In any case, how many people would dump the MkII in order to get a MkIII? The MkII's capabilities are already beyond what most people need.

More megapixels mean more visible signs on distant buildings, more visible features on distant subjects, more time spent checking for minor defects, more problems with CA and shake.

Xalanx

« Reply #14 on: October 08, 2011, 02:03 »
0
Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

Maybe because Canon sold as many 5DMIIs as it could make while all of the flagship cameras have been collecting dust.

$7,000 DSLRs are dead. Both Canon and Nikon must have been making massive profits on them.

Surely the're not dead. Take 5d2 vs 1ds3 for example - image quality is almost the same, 5d2 is even better at high iso. BUT - you pay for 1ds because it has proper wheater sealing, one billion of AF points, dual card slots, integrated grip and a lot of other things. It appeals to a certain range of photographers.
For stock? 5d2 is perfectly good, the best I would say. And not only for stock, that's why Canon doesn't hurry to replace it. It still sells as it reaches the shelves in stores. Unfortunately, Nikon doesn't really have an alternative at this point. From the stock point of view, d700 was a poor attempt, with only 12 mp and no video. So to speak, they managed to create a full frame that has almost the resolution of the old 5d (which was 12.7 mp) :P .
I would be glad for Nikon to come up with something extraordinary. But taking into account the semi-fiasco with the V1 and J1, I wouldn't be so confident.

Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

I agree! BUT

I initially did not post this online, but after receiving some additional info I can now confirm with a 99% probability only the name D800″ and the sensor size of 36MP.

It means nothing to me if a bloke on some rumors forum "confirms with a 99% probability" anything.

« Reply #15 on: October 08, 2011, 06:20 »
0
Why would nikon release a full frame that dwarfs their own flagship (d3x) in resolution, shooting full HD video and at a better price?

Maybe because Canon sold as many 5DMIIs as it could make while all of the flagship cameras have been collecting dust.

$7,000 DSLRs are dead. Both Canon and Nikon must have been making massive profits on them.

Surely the're not dead. Take 5d2 vs 1ds3 for example - image quality is almost the same, 5d2 is even better at high iso. BUT - you pay for 1ds because it has proper wheater sealing, one billion of AF points, dual card slots, integrated grip and a lot of other things. It appeals to a certain range of photographers.
For stock? 5d2 is perfectly good, the best I would say. And not only for stock, that's why Canon doesn't hurry to replace it. It still sells as it reaches the shelves in stores. Unfortunately, Nikon doesn't really have an alternative at this point. From the stock point of view, d700 was a poor attempt, with only 12 mp and no video. So to speak, they managed to create a full frame that has almost the resolution of the old 5d (which was 12.7 mp) :P .
I would be glad for Nikon to come up with something extraordinary. But taking into account the semi-fiasco with the V1 and J1, I wouldn't be so confident.


If they are not dead yet they will be soon. Sorry, but "one billion of AF points, dual card slots, integrated grip" does not cost $5,000 more dollars to produce. I could see a $4K or maybe $5K higher end camera but $7K? It would need to have some amazing specs far beyond dual card slots for that kind of money.

Nikon has been sitting on the sidelines wondering how not to cannibalize its D3X with a D800. Too late. It was inevitable as soon as the 5DMII and A850/A900 $2,000 full framers were released. I waited, and waited, and waited for a D800. I finally dropped Nikon due to their lack of response to the 5DMII and now have thousands of dollars of Canon glass. Not switching back.

« Reply #16 on: October 08, 2011, 10:19 »
0
What is with new Canon 5D mark III?

There isn't one. Maybe events in Japan have pushed it onto the back-burner.

In any case, how many people would dump the MkII in order to get a MkIII? The MkII's capabilities are already beyond what most people need.

More megapixels mean more visible signs on distant buildings, more visible features on distant subjects, more time spent checking for minor defects, more problems with CA and shake.

I think they will eject markIII on market soon after Nikon D800...

RacePhoto

« Reply #17 on: October 12, 2011, 07:58 »
0
What is with new Canon 5D mark III?

There isn't one. Maybe events in Japan have pushed it onto the back-burner.

In any case, how many people would dump the MkII in order to get a MkIII? The MkII's capabilities are already beyond what most people need.

More megapixels mean more visible signs on distant buildings, more visible features on distant subjects, more time spent checking for minor defects, more problems with CA and shake.

More storage space, faster computers with more memory, there are a bunch of things that happen with huge files and sizes that make it more time consuming and expensive for us to shoot. New memory cards for the camera. Yes, much better photos. How far do we need to go would be an interesting question. (I think the G-12 has reached my point for bridge camera, I want one!)

If digital has surpassed film for resolution and lack of grain, what's the point. Heck 2 1/4 square is giant and giga resolution. Before digital, everyone didn't run around with Graflex press cameras, the 35mm and 2 1/4 were just fine.

Does that mean I wouldn't want one at 36MP, nope, but I think there has been a level of excess that I'm not going to need to go much bigger than an APS-C sensor. And yes I shoot Canon anyway, but they will come out with something similar. Both are excellent top level cameras with matching lenses.

What I want is the external sensor unit for a 4 x 6 view camera. Maybe it will be like shooting sheet film, take a shot, wait awhile, saves directly to a computer or four shots per memory card? limited rate of shots, but imagine the size and resolution of that baby! Same technology on a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 with the new packed sensors and it would be a 300MP image. Oh Wow!

« Reply #18 on: October 12, 2011, 11:01 »
0
What is with new Canon 5D mark III?

There isn't one. Maybe events in Japan have pushed it onto the back-burner.

In any case, how many people would dump the MkII in order to get a MkIII? The MkII's capabilities are already beyond what most people need.

More megapixels mean more visible signs on distant buildings, more visible features on distant subjects, more time spent checking for minor defects, more problems with CA and shake.

More storage space, faster computers with more memory, there are a bunch of things that happen with huge files and sizes that make it more time consuming and expensive for us to shoot. New memory cards for the camera. Yes, much better photos. How far do we need to go would be an interesting question. (I think the G-12 has reached my point for bridge camera, I want one!)

If digital has surpassed film for resolution and lack of grain, what's the point. Heck 2 1/4 square is giant and giga resolution. Before digital, everyone didn't run around with Graflex press cameras, the 35mm and 2 1/4 were just fine.

Does that mean I wouldn't want one at 36MP, nope, but I think there has been a level of excess that I'm not going to need to go much bigger than an APS-C sensor. And yes I shoot Canon anyway, but they will come out with something similar. Both are excellent top level cameras with matching lenses.

What I want is the external sensor unit for a 4 x 6 view camera. Maybe it will be like shooting sheet film, take a shot, wait awhile, saves directly to a computer or four shots per memory card? limited rate of shots, but imagine the size and resolution of that baby! Same technology on a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 with the new packed sensors and it would be a 300MP image. Oh Wow!

The point is that you have the option to shoot at higher resolution when you need it - for example you're shooting wildlife but only have a 200mm lens, so want the option of "digital zoom". For smaller format cameras the need isn't as great because you can get small enough telephoto lenses, but on FF, there would be considerable advantage if you could get the same sort of range as APS-C at sufficient resolutions.

The key in future will be more efficient sRAW formats, and faster image processing all round so that you can still have an efficient workflow in the situations where you don't need as much resolution.

RT


« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2011, 11:56 »
0
The point is that you have the option to shoot at higher resolution when you need it - for example you're shooting wildlife but only have a 200mm lens, so want the option of "digital zoom".

That does and will have it's limitations no matter how big the sensor is, if they bring out a 400mp camera in the future it doesn't mean you can stand on the balcony of your safari hotel with a 50mm lens and shoot an elephant six miles away, safe in the knowledge you could digitally zoom into a 16mp size and it'll be perfect.  :P

« Reply #20 on: October 12, 2011, 12:04 »
0
The point is that you have the option to shoot at higher resolution when you need it - for example you're shooting wildlife but only have a 200mm lens, so want the option of "digital zoom".

That does and will have it's limitations no matter how big the sensor is, if they bring out a 400mp camera in the future it doesn't mean you can stand on the balcony of your safari hotel with a 50mm lens and shoot an elephant six miles away, safe in the knowledge you could digitally zoom into a 16mp size and it'll be perfect.  :P

No but getting 400mm equivalent out of a 200mm lens shouldn't be too far out of range.

lagereek

« Reply #21 on: October 12, 2011, 12:08 »
0
I have always found the Nikon strategy a bit strange but to make their flagship, the D3X, redundant, well that beats me. Maybe that explains why we havent had any late D3X updates, etc.
Its going to be intersting to see Canons response.

RT


« Reply #22 on: October 12, 2011, 12:08 »
0
^ Well keep the camera you've got and buy a 400mm lens, the result will be better.

« Reply #23 on: October 14, 2011, 10:10 »
0
  :)
« Last Edit: October 15, 2011, 21:06 by Vonkara »

« Reply #24 on: October 14, 2011, 10:25 »
0
I'm sure that you know this already, but I don't get it. A APS-C sensor is only 1/4 smaller than a FF (1.5x). If you have 16mpx aps-c sensor then a 20-21mpx FF sensor is about the same density. 36mpx is a lot on a full frame sensor to me.

Full frame 36mm*24mm = 864mm
Canon APS-C (EF-S) 22.2mm * 14.8mm = 329 mm

RacePhoto

« Reply #25 on: October 16, 2011, 00:40 »
0
I'm sure that you know this already, but I don't get it. A APS-C sensor is only 1/4 smaller than a FF (1.5x). If you have 16mpx aps-c sensor then a 20-21mpx FF sensor is about the same density. 36mpx is a lot on a full frame sensor to me.

Full frame 36mm*24mm = 864mm
Canon APS-C (EF-S) 22.2mm * 14.8mm = 329 mm

Much easier than all the math and why a lens is about 62% which is why people multiply the "crop" sensor to get 1.6 times the full sensor. Or maybe that's more confusing?

Anyway an APS-C is 62% the size of a full frame.

I hadn't thought about the bigger sensor and then cropping it, for a digital zoom. The term digital zoom, makes me cringe. Especially when people use it on their P&S cameras. It's not a zoom, it's a crop!

Same reason why a 200mm on a crop sensor is... still a 200mm lens! Not a 320mm.  :-X

So lets see a 5D Mk II is full frame 21MP, take 62% of that and you have... 13MP. Oh wow, and the 7D crop sensor is? 17.9MP. So which one is bigger? An equal crop of a 5D or a 7D original size. Let me add that on a crop sensor, you are getting the sweet spot of the lens, not the edge to edge. So the images in theory are sharper.

Might be why I still shoot crop and don't need over 12MP images anyway.

ps 36MP x 62% = 22.3MP crop. Almost what we get on a crop now.

Yes I understand a full size is bigger and I can't make a crop image larger, (not without losing resolution and quality) but I can crop a full size. But if the answer is being able to crop a portion of the 36 to make the image appear closer, a crop sensor camera is far better.

I can't justify buying a 36MP camera for whatever the price is, when it adds little to what I can do with a good crop sensor 7D. In the studio, yes. I don't shoot in the studio.

« Reply #26 on: February 06, 2012, 20:05 »
0
Images taken from nikon rumors, camera is supposed to be announced tomorrow with the following specs.

36 MP sensor (7360x4912)
100% viewfinder coverage
Improved AF with face recognition the D800 will still have 51 points AF point
CF+SD memory card slots
USB 3.0
ISO range: 100 6400, ISO LO @ 50 and ISO HI-2 @ 25600
The screen will be larger than 3 inches (probably 3.2 in.)
The D800 will not have built-in GPS
Expeed 3 processor
There will be two different D800 versions/models, one with the antialiasing filter removed
4 fps continuous shooting, about 6 fps in DX mode with optional battery pack
Video modes: 1080p/30/25/24 and 720p/60/30/25/24
Headphone jack, can input from an external device such as a PCM sound recorder
86k pixels RGB sensor
200,000 shutter cycles




« Reply #27 on: February 06, 2012, 20:16 »
0
Pretty sweet. I'm keeping my Canon stuff but am drooling just a bit.

mlwinphoto

« Reply #28 on: February 07, 2012, 00:23 »
0
It's official!  D800: 36MP, $3,000   D800E (no AA filter): 36MP, $3300.

rinderart

« Reply #29 on: February 07, 2012, 00:31 »
0
I'll take one without the filter , thank you.

« Reply #30 on: February 07, 2012, 02:41 »
0
This is first I'm hearing about option to get D800 w/o anti-aliasing filter. Why would it be more expensive?

gillian

  • *Gillian*

« Reply #31 on: February 07, 2012, 03:49 »
0
This is first I'm hearing about option to get D800 w/o anti-aliasing filter. Why would it be more expensive?

um, cos they've got to train someone to NOT put it on? lol
or code the machine to not include it...?

it looks delicious and the price is not scary at all. But, my D700 is has only just turned 1... I've got a 3 year warranty on her.

« Reply #32 on: February 07, 2012, 05:44 »
0
Canon? Canon? Buehler?

« Reply #33 on: February 07, 2012, 08:08 »
0
Nikon's site warns of moire without an AA filter on the D800 and shows examples of moire generated with a D800 without an AA filter. Problem seems to be significant enough that they are shipping a new version of Capture NX with a moire reduction tool.  I don't want to have to search for moire in every image I generate and then have to spend the time processing in, so it will be D800 with AA filter for me.  Here's a link to the Nikon examples:  http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/features01.htm

« Reply #34 on: February 07, 2012, 08:41 »
0
why dont they sell only a D800 without the anti-aliasing filter? who will get the D800? dont understand really, I feel they are damaging the brand itself, two models?

« Reply #35 on: February 07, 2012, 08:54 »
0
why dont they sell only a D800 without the anti-aliasing filter? who will get the D800? dont understand really, I feel they are damaging the brand itself, two models?

I would get the D800. I shoot a wide variety of subjects and don't want the danger of moire patterns just for a little extra sharpness. With 36MP I could always shrink the image down a bit if necessary. I don't see the point in paying extra to have a useful tool removed. It's a bit like buying a car and then paying to have 'unnecessary' equipment, like the air con or the audio gear, removed to save a little weight. Sure, the car will go a bit faster but with less comfort.

« Reply #36 on: February 07, 2012, 09:46 »
0
right.. I believe we need to wait for some reviews..

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or9FI4TJ_8g[/youtube]

jbarber873

« Reply #37 on: February 07, 2012, 09:51 »
0
    My first digital SLR camera was a kodak camera with a nikon body. It shipped without a AA filter, but they gave you one to use if you wanted to pop it on. I used the camera to shoot a ton of images for a national party supply store, and ran into a lot of moire' with fabrics, so I put the filter on and it was gone. It was impractical to put it on and off ( dust, mostly ) so I just left it on. I really couldn't see any difference. This camera was a crispy critter- the images were excellent. The limitation was the file size, around 10mb as I recall. And of course, kodak in it's wisdom stopped supporting the camera after a few years. If I were going to make a choice, i would definitely get the AA filter, based on my experience with this camera. Moire' is out there in more places, and unexpected places, than you can imagine.

« Reply #38 on: February 07, 2012, 12:13 »
0
thank you for above comments about D800E's anti-aliasing pattern filter

D4 - VS - D800
Besides Nikon D4 costing double the D800, some significant differences between them, for me, are: ISO, MP, and built-in flash.
I do NOT have money to burn, and when choosing between D3 and D700, I went with D700, which also had 2 big pluses: pop-up flash & automatic sensor dust removal.

My top priority relevant to second FF body is using just ambient light in awful low light situations, so it looks like D4 would be better choice.

D4
ISO 100-12800 ISO (down to ISO 50 equivalent, or up to ISO 204800 equivalent)
16.2-megapixel FX-format CMOS Sensor
no built in flash

D800 / D800E
ISO range from 100 to 6400, expandable to 25600
36.3-megapixel FX-format CMOS sensor
pop-up flash

Video in both seems fine, both have 2 card-slots... Am I overlooking anything significant?
« Last Edit: February 07, 2012, 12:15 by ann »

« Reply #39 on: February 07, 2012, 12:17 »
0
Anyone in the market for a used 5D II??? ;)  (just kidding... sort of)

« Reply #40 on: February 07, 2012, 13:35 »
0
Anyone in the market for a used 5D II??? ;)  (just kidding... sort of)

Anyone willing to go through all the hassle selling the current Canon gear? If I wasn't that lazy I'd probably do it. Sort of...

« Reply #41 on: February 07, 2012, 13:44 »
0
Anyone in the market for a used 5D II??? ;)  (just kidding... sort of)

Anyone willing to go through all the hassle selling the current Canon gear? If I wasn't that lazy I'd probably do it. Sort of...

Or one could simply wait for the canon 5d mk III...

« Reply #42 on: February 07, 2012, 14:00 »
0
This is first I'm hearing about option to get D800 w/o anti-aliasing filter. Why would it be more expensive?

I'm guessing the difference is because most buyers won't want it.  To have an option for a small percentage of purchasers means dividing the cost of marketing, distribution and the like among fewer units, which will raise the price for each.  And that's separate from having a separate assembly line or part of one to build the variant product.

« Reply #43 on: February 07, 2012, 14:00 »
0
Anyone in the market for a used 5D II??? ;)  (just kidding... sort of)

Anyone willing to go through all the hassle selling the current Canon gear? If I wasn't that lazy I'd probably do it. Sort of...

Or one could simply wait for the canon 5d mk III...

Unless Canon is leaking misinformation, the specs for the 5DMIII are showing around 22MP plus or minus a couple. I probably won't be getting a D800 but if the MIII specs are accurate I probably won't be buying one of those either.

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?

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have 30MP+ but the more I think about it the less I need anything other than my 5DMII. Maybe the agencies will see they can make more money and create a new XXXXXXXXXL price tier.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2012, 14:03 by PaulieWalnuts »

traveler1116

« Reply #44 on: February 07, 2012, 14:04 »
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.

« Reply #45 on: February 07, 2012, 14:08 »
0
XXXL square compositions will be possible now with a little room to spare.

Very good point!

« Reply #46 on: February 07, 2012, 15:11 »
0
The whole reason I would sell my Mark II for the D800 would be the ability to downsize, that resolution from 36 megapixels will allow me to shoot at a higher ISO then downsize to XXXL and get it approved. Not to mention when you do some harsher edits you create noise, so doing a harsher edit on a 36 mp image then downsizing will again give it a higher chance of approval. That to me, would be worth the investment.

The Mark III is rumored at 22 megapixels, so we'll see what Canon does there. But for now, stock is all about resolution assuming your not shooting moving objects all the time. And the D800 is looking pretty good.

« Reply #47 on: February 07, 2012, 16:07 »
0
This is first I'm hearing about option to get D800 w/o anti-aliasing filter. Why would it be more expensive?

I'm guessing the difference is because most buyers won't want it.  To have an option for a small percentage of purchasers means dividing the cost of marketing, distribution and the like among fewer units, which will raise the price for each.  And that's separate from having a separate assembly line or part of one to build the variant product.

sounds logical - thanks!

wut

« Reply #48 on: February 07, 2012, 16:54 »
0
Cool promo video, racing, hookers and gangbangers, what more could you wish for :D :
Nikon D800 D800E Official Promo Video - Joy Ride ★★★★★ HD

« Reply #49 on: February 07, 2012, 18:00 »
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?

« Reply #50 on: February 09, 2012, 08:41 »
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.

« Reply #51 on: February 09, 2012, 17:59 »
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.

« Reply #52 on: February 09, 2012, 18:28 »
0
So, can we expect response from Canon? What is with MK3, just rumors or...?

« Reply #53 on: February 09, 2012, 19:27 »
0
So, can we expect response from Canon? What is with MK3, just rumors or...?


http://www.canonrumors.com

antistock

« Reply #54 on: February 10, 2012, 02:24 »
0
D800 is using the new 36MP sony sensor.

Canon has nothing of that class, the MK3 will barely be 24MP i think.

besides, what do you guys expect ? Canon is the Acer of photography, the 5D2 was the cheapest FX camera to start with ! good sensor and all, but the usual cheap-as-s plastic body.

i'm too a bit fed up with nikon's image quality sometimes, but feeling a nikon body in my hand is so manly compared to canon, i've big hands i can't stand canon toys, and i can't see why people keep saying these cameras are too heavy, what they want a powershot-sized FX body with pink HelloKitty lenses ?

female photographers should just forget about using a DSLR.

« Reply #55 on: February 10, 2012, 03:17 »
0
D800 is using the new 36MP sony sensor.

Canon has nothing of that class, the MK3 will barely be 24MP i think.

It's in fact a Nikon-developed sensor, not Sony. You'd better get your facts right before writing. Also, the Canon will be around 22 MP according to rumors.
Nevertheless, I am rather dissappointed with D800 sample images. Noise in all of them and around iso 360 the noise is worse than APSC level (look at the yellow flowers landscape, around the water). Also, the images are sharpened in post-processing, you can clearly see that. 36 MP is way overkill for FF and the D800 is nowhere near MF quality, as some claimed.
I believe that if Canon release a fast focusing, fast fps 22 MP 5d3, it'll be a winner.
D800 for what? Even for landscapes, you'll need to downsize or denoise a lot of your images.
Users with D700 will be frustrated for the drop in fps from 8 to 4, I have a few nikonists friends who are looking forward for Canon announcement.

« Reply #56 on: February 10, 2012, 05:30 »
0
D800 is using the new 36MP sony sensor.

Canon has nothing of that class, the MK3 will barely be 24MP i think.

It's in fact a Nikon-developed sensor, not Sony. You'd better get your facts right before writing. Also, the Canon will be around 22 MP according to rumors.
Nevertheless, I am rather dissappointed with D800 sample images. Noise in all of them and around iso 360 the noise is worse than APSC level (look at the yellow flowers landscape, around the water). Also, the images are sharpened in post-processing, you can clearly see that. 36 MP is way overkill for FF and the D800 is nowhere near MF quality, as some claimed.
I believe that if Canon release a fast focusing, fast fps 22 MP 5d3, it'll be a winner.
D800 for what? Even for landscapes, you'll need to downsize or denoise a lot of your images.
Users with D700 will be frustrated for the drop in fps from 8 to 4, I have a few nikonists friends who are looking forward for Canon announcement.

Canonrumors is now saying there could be a Canon with around 40MP but it won't be the 5DMIII.

« Reply #57 on: February 10, 2012, 05:44 »
0
D800 is using the new 36MP sony sensor.

Canon has nothing of that class, the MK3 will barely be 24MP i think.

besides, what do you guys expect ? Canon is the Acer of photography, the 5D2 was the cheapest FX camera to start with ! good sensor and all, but the usual cheap-as-s plastic body.

i'm too a bit fed up with nikon's image quality sometimes, but feeling a nikon body in my hand is so manly compared to canon, i've big hands i can't stand canon toys, and i can't see why people keep saying these cameras are too heavy, what they want a powershot-sized FX body with pink HelloKitty lenses ?

female photographers should just forget about using a DSLR.

The 5DMII has a mostly magnesium alloy body.

Have you even held a 5DMII before? I doubt it. I had a D300 and the 5DMII was around the same size. Same goes for the D700 probably the D800. I have fairly large hands and the 5DMII feels more natural to me.

antistock

« Reply #58 on: February 10, 2012, 07:01 »
0
D800 for what? Even for landscapes, you'll need to downsize or denoise a lot of your images.
Users with D700 will be frustrated for the drop in fps from 8 to 4, I have a few nikonists friends who are looking forward for Canon announcement.

i haven't seen the samples so i can't judge.

for landscape you shoot ISO200 with tripod so the issue is a non-issue.

it might be that D800 is the actual replacement of D3x instead of D700 ?

antistock

« Reply #59 on: February 10, 2012, 07:04 »
0
D800 is using the new 36MP sony sensor.

Canon has nothing of that class, the MK3 will barely be 24MP i think.

besides, what do you guys expect ? Canon is the Acer of photography, the 5D2 was the cheapest FX camera to start with ! good sensor and all, but the usual cheap-as-s plastic body.

i'm too a bit fed up with nikon's image quality sometimes, but feeling a nikon body in my hand is so manly compared to canon, i've big hands i can't stand canon toys, and i can't see why people keep saying these cameras are too heavy, what they want a powershot-sized FX body with pink HelloKitty lenses ?

female photographers should just forget about using a DSLR.

The 5DMII has a mostly magnesium alloy body.

Have you even held a 5DMII before? I doubt it. I had a D300 and the 5DMII was around the same size. Same goes for the D700 probably the D800. I have fairly large hands and the 5DMII feels more natural to me.

for starters, Canon's shutter button is very gay compared to Nikon.
Canon is also too roundish and feels cheap.
size doesn't matter, i'm talking about the whole feeling, Nikon is simply so much robust and sturdy.

and if you really ask me, i would gladly go back to real bodies like Nikon F4 ...

« Reply #60 on: February 10, 2012, 07:14 »
0
D800 is using the new 36MP sony sensor.

Canon has nothing of that class, the MK3 will barely be 24MP i think.

besides, what do you guys expect ? Canon is the Acer of photography, the 5D2 was the cheapest FX camera to start with ! good sensor and all, but the usual cheap-as-s plastic body.

i'm too a bit fed up with nikon's image quality sometimes, but feeling a nikon body in my hand is so manly compared to canon, i've big hands i can't stand canon toys, and i can't see why people keep saying these cameras are too heavy, what they want a powershot-sized FX body with pink HelloKitty lenses ?

female photographers should just forget about using a DSLR.

The 5DMII has a mostly magnesium alloy body.

Have you even held a 5DMII before? I doubt it. I had a D300 and the 5DMII was around the same size. Same goes for the D700 probably the D800. I have fairly large hands and the 5DMII feels more natural to me.

for starters, Canon's shutter button is very gay compared to Nikon.
Canon is also too roundish and feels cheap.
size doesn't matter, i'm talking about the whole feeling, Nikon is simply so much robust and sturdy.

and if you really ask me, i would gladly go back to real bodies like Nikon F4 ...

I like how you say "Canon" instead of 5DMII. So you've never held one or probably any mid-range to pro Canon body.

It's okay. Your decision to go with Nikon is fine. You don't need to feel insecure and defensive about it.

antistock

« Reply #61 on: February 10, 2012, 08:01 »
0
sorry but you're wrong :)

2 yrs ago i was seriously switching to Canon, went 3-4 times in many shops, tried both the 7D and the 5D2 but each time they felt so awkyard in my hand, it was like .. what is this toy ??

even a D90 with battery grip feels stronger than a 5d2 or 7D.

for anything else we can talk, i don't deny canons in general can produce better images in some instances, but for me ergonomics is very very important.

« Reply #62 on: February 10, 2012, 08:11 »
0
sorry but you're wrong :)

2 yrs ago i was seriously switching to Canon, went 3-4 times in many shops, tried both the 7D and the 5D2 but each time they felt so awkyard in my hand, it was like .. what is this toy ??

even a D90 with battery grip feels stronger than a 5d2 or 7D.

for anything else we can talk, i don't deny canons in general can produce better images in some instances, but for me ergonomics is very very important.

You talk through the back end of your trousers, you prefer Nikons theres nothing wrong with that but at least be honest about it. There is no way the 5DmkII  or the 7D handle like toys and as for the D90 feeling stronger thats just plain rubbish.

Druid

« Reply #63 on: February 10, 2012, 08:17 »
0


for starters, Canon's shutter button is very gay compared to Nikon.
Canon is also too roundish and feels cheap.
size doesn't matter, i'm talking about the whole feeling, Nikon is simply so much robust and sturdy.


Strewth! Do you ever read the rubbish you write before you post it? Rather than just admit you are wrong about the 5D MkIIs construction and don't know what you are talking about you decide to complain that the shutter button is "gay" and the camera is "roundish". Frankly that's about the girliest assessment of a camera I've ever heard.

I started out with a 300D which actually does have a plastic (kevlar) body and I actually think it is a very good solution to providing a very robust body that is reasonably light. Metal fractures where kevlar bounces (and I know that from experience).

« Reply #64 on: February 10, 2012, 09:58 »
0
sorry but you're wrong :)

2 yrs ago i was seriously switching to Canon, went 3-4 times in many shops, tried both the 7D and the 5D2 but each time they felt so awkyard in my hand, it was like .. what is this toy ??

even a D90 with battery grip feels stronger than a 5d2 or 7D.

for anything else we can talk, i don't deny canons in general can produce better images in some instances, but for me ergonomics is very very important.

You use "F4" to make it sound like you're an old pro from the glory days but you write like an immature teenager. I'm guessing teenager, and you've probably never held an F4 either.

So you were looking at a 5DII and 7D and decided to go with a D90? Right....... Why not a D700 or something more comparable?

Plus a D90 is basically a D80 with a D300 sensor. I've owned both a D80 and D300 and the D80/D90 is smaller and closer to a toy. I owned the 5DMII and D300 at the same time and compared them side by side. They are almost identical in size and to me feel pretty similar.

So, you just keep writing. I'm sure everybody finds you entertaining.

« Reply #65 on: February 10, 2012, 10:15 »
0
D800 is using the new 36MP sony sensor.

Canon has nothing of that class, the MK3 will barely be 24MP i think.

besides, what do you guys expect ? Canon is the Acer of photography, the 5D2 was the cheapest FX camera to start with ! good sensor and all, but the usual cheap-as-s plastic body.

i'm too a bit fed up with nikon's image quality sometimes, but feeling a nikon body in my hand is so manly compared to canon, i've big hands i can't stand canon toys, and i can't see why people keep saying these cameras are too heavy, what they want a powershot-sized FX body with pink HelloKitty lenses ?

female photographers should just forget about using a DSLR.

The 5DMII has a mostly magnesium alloy body.

Have you even held a 5DMII before? I doubt it. I had a D300 and the 5DMII was around the same size. Same goes for the D700 probably the D800. I have fairly large hands and the 5DMII feels more natural to me.

for starters, Canon's shutter button is very gay compared to Nikon.
Canon is also too roundish and feels cheap.
size doesn't matter, i'm talking about the whole feeling, Nikon is simply so much robust and sturdy.

and if you really ask me, i would gladly go back to real bodies like Nikon F4 ...

Too 'gay' and 'roundish'. That's some valid criticism. I'm not sure what the issue is with even the cheapest plastic bodies. I've owned models up and down the line, and none of the bodies have even come close to falling apart or anything. In fact, my old 20D made it through several long-distance hiking trips where it got rained on, dropped on rocks, infested with midges, etc and still worked like a champ. I'll take the lightweight magnesium over old metal tanks any day.

« Reply #66 on: February 10, 2012, 10:21 »
0
D800 is using the new 36MP sony sensor.

Canon has nothing of that class, the MK3 will barely be 24MP i think.

It's in fact a Nikon-developed sensor, not Sony. You'd better get your facts right before writing. Also, the Canon will be around 22 MP according to rumors.
Nevertheless, I am rather dissappointed with D800 sample images. Noise in all of them and around iso 360 the noise is worse than APSC level (look at the yellow flowers landscape, around the water). Also, the images are sharpened in post-processing, you can clearly see that. 36 MP is way overkill for FF and the D800 is nowhere near MF quality, as some claimed.
I believe that if Canon release a fast focusing, fast fps 22 MP 5d3, it'll be a winner.
D800 for what? Even for landscapes, you'll need to downsize or denoise a lot of your images.
Users with D700 will be frustrated for the drop in fps from 8 to 4, I have a few nikonists friends who are looking forward for Canon announcement.

Canonrumors is now saying there could be a Canon with around 40MP but it won't be the 5DMIII.

Yes, I read that too. I surely hope the rumor is wrong, I see absolutely no way to get better quality than 5D2 from a 40 MP full frame.

« Reply #67 on: February 10, 2012, 10:52 »
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.

« Reply #68 on: February 10, 2012, 11:00 »
0
I think they're aware of the enormous pixel density on the d800, that's why they served "workarounds". D800 images are most likely to be soft, lacking definition, so if you want something sharp, you'll get the D800E. But then you'll probably have moire issues so they'll provide you with Capture NX with moire removal option. This kind of "fixes" sound an alarm to me. Anyways, I'm quite eager for the reviews and real life image samples.

traveler1116

« Reply #69 on: February 10, 2012, 12:55 »
0
It's in fact a Nikon-developed sensor, not Sony. You'd better get your facts right before writing.

Sorry where do you see that it is made by Nikon?  All I found says that it was made by Sony. 
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/nikon-d800-with-sonys-36-megapixel-sensor-announced/
http://sonyalphalab.com/2012/02/new-sony-36-mega-pixel-full-frame-sensor-in-the-nikon-d800-sensor-specs/

« Reply #70 on: February 10, 2012, 14:34 »
0
It's in fact a Nikon-developed sensor, not Sony. You'd better get your facts right before writing.

Sorry where do you see that it is made by Nikon?  All I found says that it was made by Sony.  
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/nikon-d800-with-sonys-36-megapixel-sensor-announced/
http://sonyalphalab.com/2012/02/new-sony-36-mega-pixel-full-frame-sensor-in-the-nikon-d800-sensor-specs/


http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond800/page3.asp

Read the paragraph "Sensor".

LE: if I'm correct, it's their first developed sensor, for a dslr.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2012, 14:36 by Tabimura »

traveler1116

« Reply #71 on: February 10, 2012, 15:12 »
0
It's in fact a Nikon-developed sensor, not Sony. You'd better get your facts right before writing.

Sorry where do you see that it is made by Nikon?  All I found says that it was made by Sony.  
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/nikon-d800-with-sonys-36-megapixel-sensor-announced/
http://sonyalphalab.com/2012/02/new-sony-36-mega-pixel-full-frame-sensor-in-the-nikon-d800-sensor-specs/


http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond800/page3.asp

Read the paragraph "Sensor".

LE: if I'm correct, it's their first developed sensor, for a dslr.

Interesting, I think it would be their first as well.  I'm not sure why the dpreview article says: "It is also worth noting that the D800's sensor has a similar pixel pitch to the well-regarded 16MP D7000, which has very encouraging implications for image quality in both FX and DX capture modes." if the other sensor is made by Sony.

rinderart

« Reply #72 on: February 10, 2012, 15:31 »
0
Too bad Nikon uses a proprietary raw format. This means D800E purchasers will have to wait for Adobe to reverse engineer the format and release a support update.

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

« Reply #73 on: February 10, 2012, 16:16 »
0
Too bad Nikon uses a proprietary raw format. This means D800E purchasers will have to wait for Adobe to reverse engineer the format and release a support update.

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

Hey I am a Nikon gal... I guess I am that 1% then:) I'll be waiting on their new version of D3X though...

« Reply #74 on: February 10, 2012, 16:42 »
0
Too bad Nikon uses a proprietary raw format. This means D800E purchasers will have to wait for Adobe to reverse engineer the format and release a support update.

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'm pretty sure Lightroom 4 which will come soon will support the new d800. They'll also release a new Camera Raw update, obviously.

Nikon and Canon - both make great cameras and I'm shooting part time also a d700 beside my 5D2, especially for sport or fast moving subjects. Their competition is always good for us. The main gripe I have with Nikon is their lenses - far below Canon's offer.

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


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
67 Replies
15310 Views
Last post March 24, 2012, 14:33
by RacePhoto
17 Replies
3643 Views
Last post May 03, 2012, 10:14
by tab62
5 Replies
2243 Views
Last post October 15, 2012, 14:51
by velocicarpo
26 Replies
7688 Views
Last post February 18, 2013, 17:36
by gillian
7 Replies
4240 Views
Last post April 05, 2013, 04:46
by Beppe Grillo

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors