D800 - ooooooohhhh. love it.

skeg · Post by **skeg** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:29 am

http://www.youtube.com/iamnikon#p/u/12/qbcZ_BkOJMQ

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d800.htm

Viking Lars · Post by **Viking Lars** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:47 am

It's certainly a beast, and probably one that'll blow Canon right back to the cave they came from :-) (Sorry guys, just kidding :-). But I have to say that I really have no desire at all to own this camera. I mean, at 36 megapixels, it'll be cranking out RAW-files of probably 60 or 70mb a piece and that requires a new computer as well, at least if you want to maintain an acceptable workflow.

Besides, I don't have the need to print door-sized posters, which is what this kind of resolution os meant for :-).

Lars

Paul Arden · Post by **Paul Arden** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 11:25 am

You could make a lifesized cardboard cut-out of yourself, Lars, wielding a battle axe or a shooting head and hide it unexpected places. That's what I would do.

skeg · Post by **skeg** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:41 pm

Lars, usually I do not need 21Mp raw files for my "everyday" photography, that's why I shoot mostly in Med.-resolution on my 5D...BUT I think (I'm not a thech expert, tho), that the 21Mp sensor has something to do with the final result of the pics being less noisy, sharper, have better reso, etc.
...I guess the 36Mp could do the same, just a bit better...who knows.
It's just a feature, what's good to have.

4 FPS...that's what hurts a bit. (my exD300s could do 7 without a grip)...even that is faster than the 5D's 2and a half FPS...

and the AF and metering is extraordinary @Nikon.

Crackaig · Post by **Crackaig** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 6:02 pm

Cameraporn! I came over all strange

C.

Eric · Post by **Eric** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 7:01 pm

Was just reading the 1Dx specs (unreleased) and they've stayed at 18.1 mp sensor. Isn't there something about sensor resolution over-running glass quality now?

Morsie · Post by **Morsie** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 8:09 pm

I think its been like that for a while Eric.

Morsie

Janesch · Post by **Janesch** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:14 pm

MP in cameras = GHz in computers
I`m sick of this, instead of improving other characteristics they`re just boosting MP :sick:

Morsie · Post by **Morsie** » Wed Feb 08, 2012 3:17 am

I also agree with that Janesch, we're starting to get into medium format territory here. My next camera body will be another 7D or a 5DMkII (or I'll put some money into some new lenses. They do everything I could ever possibly want for what I do. I suspect that crunching more MP's is about all they can do to stay ahead of the competition.

Morsie

skeg · Post by **skeg** » Wed Feb 08, 2012 2:27 pm

Eric,

my speculation about Mp's is, that it's for different users.
The 1D @ Canon, and D4-range @ Nikon is for pro photojournalists, sportphotographers, etc.... there speed is very important.
The 18 Mp fullframe is more than enough for most commercial use, and the processor can "digest" the shots much faster than 36Mp reso'. That's why there are 10Fps in the 1D range, and 3 in the 5d...
Janesch, tell me what "other caharacteristics" should be improved let's say in the D800?

...except FPS

...I miss the built in metering and the AF speed of the Nikons in my 5DMk2. Most probably the D800 AF blows the 5D's AF speed in every focus point...and there's 51. Decomposing the shot after focusing is not the best option when you shoot at wide open.

James de P · Post by **James de P** » Mon Mar 05, 2012 4:30 am

I suspect the D800 is aimed at studio and portrait photographers requiring high resolution for larger than life size enlargements, and have heavy control over lighting conditions.

I don't know about them just cranking up the MP to stay ahead. When Nikon released the D3 people were amazed that the sensor was 'only' 12mp, when you could buy a point and shoot that had a 15+ sensor. This is until they saw the image quality at ISO 1600+. Keeping the sensor resolution lower allows for larger pixel lenses which capture more light in a cleaner way (less noise). They've now increased it by a 1/3, but keep the same outstanding high ISO quality of the D3.

The upcoming D400 (or whatever they call it) should be something special. Same sensor (or similar) as the D7000 and the improved AF and other intro's from the D4. Can't wait to get my hands on one of these. It's a shame they aren't launching a D4 in a smaller body, like they did with the D3 and D700. Would love to have the FX sensor without the monstrous 36 MP of the D800 or tonnage of the D4. One can but dream!

I'd agree somewhat on the lens part. Once you start getting into the 30's+ MP you're getting close to needing super high quality lenses like zeiss's. Seriously expensive!!! and no AF. WTF.

Morsie's right though, as operationally the characteristic haven't changed in 20 years, so they have to do something to differentiate and MP's are probably the cheapest way to do it. People say digital has made photography cheaper. However, in the film era you could by a pro grade camera and it would still be outstanding ten years later, given you used quality film. Now your pro grade camera is out of date within months of purchase, with no way to upgrade the 'film' without buying the latest model! Though saying that, we wouldn't have the high ISO quality of modern DSLR's, so pluses and minuses I guess.

I moved from Canon to Nikon when they launched the D300 and wow what a difference when it comes to the metering. As I understand it Nikon cameras are the only ones with colour metering. All other have B&W meters that convert the results via software to give a figure for a colour image. Is this still the case? Also having many more function buttons on the outside also helps with quick changes.

The Archived Board

The Archived Board

D800 - ooooooohhhh. love it.

D800 - ooooooohhhh. love it.

Who is online