POLL: Will you sell your MFD gear if the D800 holds good on its promise?

[fotografz]

HI Marc

Whilst I understand what you're saying, I don't agree - at least personally. I don't want to go to MF - but I do want to be able to get good full sized prints from my Epson 3880 - the A900 just about cuts it (as does the M9) - the D700 certainly didn't. 36mp would be enough.

So - I think there really is a market for high MP 35mm bodies - not to suggest for a second that it's a substitute for MF -. I take you're point about shooting it like an MF camera - but even if you don't, you don't get bad images, just don't maximise

No - but lots of us do need that - or at least want it.

all the rumour sites seem to suggest that the next FF camera from Sony will be 24mp and that the 36mp version won't come until next year. One would assume that a new 24mp FF sensor from Sony would be really good in the high ISO arena . . . really REALLY good!

I would expect the 800 to be pretty good at high ISO as well - the pixel pitch suggests a jumped up version of the sensor in the D7000 and the Pentax K5 - both of which do well. I think 3200 is enough for most wedding work . . . and all of these cameras will surely do this.

But wedding photographers always whinge :ROTFL: (I know - because I do it myself)

The reason I don't want a D800 is because I've discovered the joys of focus peaking with Leica R lenses . . . and of course, that won't be available, so I'll need to wait for the Sony equivalent. . . . . but I would like the 36mp for at least some of my work.

Excellent points here Jono, and subsequently by others. By taking it out of MFD verses D800, and evaluating the merits of the D800 against personal need, a clearer positioning can be discussed. Yes, I could see this becoming a number one choice for a Travel/Adventure camera. There are always threads by people agonizing over what to take to some exotic location ... and it usually centers around size/weight verses IQ.

Point also taken on the printing aspect. While I think the A900 and M9 are perfectly able to make 17X22s on my 3880, the ability to crop a 36 meg file provides more creative lee-way.

I seriously hope the rumors and assumptions of a high ISO Sony Alpha DSLR are true. 24 meg with a super clean 3200 or even 6400 is exactly what I need to keep this system alive for my application needs, because the current A900 can't compete with the S2 for all the rest. I'm more interested in how the M10 will do in that respect than a 35mm DSLR.

As to weddings, the camera is over-kill for most professionals ... while you may shoot weddings also, the people I'm quoting do it for a living and shoot upwards of 30 to 50+ weddings a season on average. Many felt the 5D-II went to far, but mitigated that criticism because a compressed RAW could be shot. IMO, anyone that HAS to shoot anywhere near 50 weddings has every right to whine :ROTFL:

-Marc

 

[anGy]

SLR hand held shooters don't need MF - in fact MF it is a dumbing and sub optimal exercise in futility for that style of work.

ANY 35mm SLR is better than ANY MF camera for that style of shooting or work.


Pete

There is a more 'open' point of view:
Make a trip to Thailand, take hand held photos in a crowded market, of children running in the streets and from a boat - then wake-up early next morning for a technical landscape shot on tripod, etc.
Can do that with a D3x and then a Phase One if you have the money and find not to be a problem to travel with such large equipment kit (good luck on the plane) - or with a single system that (almost) reach medium format IQ and still has DSLR shooting ergonomic and convenience.
I really doubt that the D800E will be good enough in pure IQ (maybe to early technologically) but sometime it will happen. Nevertheless a good D800E review will be worth reading.

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Check out this image from this blogger. I think it is quite amazing for a 3k camera. The tiff of a fashion model is linked at this address:

NIKON D 800 « PHOTO LEGACY

So what do you guys think of the IQ?

We need to see pictures taken with decent lenses rather than zooms, the sharpness just isn't up to par on this shot even with sharpening. Or is this the version with the AA filter? I thought it was the E version.

 

[Paratom]

There is a more 'open' point of view:
Make a trip to Thailand, take hand held photos in a crowded market, of children running in the streets and from a boat - then wake-up early next morning for a technical landscape shot on tripod, etc.
Can do that with a D3x and then a Phase One if you have the money and find not to be a problem to travel with such large equipment kit (good luck on the plane) - or with a single system that (almost) reach medium format IQ and still has DSLR shooting ergonomic and convenience.
I really doubt that the D800E will be good enough in pure IQ (maybe to early technologically) but sometime it will happen. Nevertheless a good D800E review will be worth reading.

What I dont understand here would be the big difference between the D3x and the D800 besides a little bit more resolution.
If you are writing about MF IQ and (near) DSLR-shooting experience it would be the S2 in my eyes.

And-I might get critics for that- but I find the approach to shoot with the S2 not that much different than shooting with a DSLR.
I keep the exp times a little shorter (if possible - however I have also had good shots with 1/30 Sec. handhold) and you have to compensate a bit the shallower DOF by stopping down. The AF is a bit slower but then its very accurate and the large viewfinder makes it much easier to check if you have focus correctly or tomanually focus if you like.
The S2 with 2 lenses (I can often decide for 2 lenses when I know what I will be shooting) fits in a relativly small backpack leaving the upper area of the backback free for other stuff or a third lens.

What I am trying to say is that MF doesnt necessarly mean that you cant use it in the field. I carry it even for the sundayafternoon walk with the family in a sling bag.

 

[fotografz]

Where is it overexposed or blown?

I took readings off this shot, and even the specular highlight in the eye from the Octa box is holding ample tone. The only zero reading is directly behind her right shoulder and the small specular highlight on her thumbnail.

We may not like the lighting approach, but the tone is there for adjustments. This can tell us the degree of plasticity the files have for curves adjustments even with a tiff. Try it yourself, bring it into LR4 and also experiment with the new more sensitive exposure adjustment tools.

The Exif info says it's ISO 100, and 70mm @ f/9. Oddly, the exif doesn't identify which lens. I'd guess it's the 24-70/2.8 (or maybe the 70-200/2.8), both of which are very good Nikon lenses. IMO, to say we need to see shots from primes, begs the question "which primes?" ... this was shot at f/9 where the difference is all but eliminated depending on which lenses we're talking about. Besides, eliminating zooms further limits the whole notion of versatility from a 35mm DSLR. IMO, zooms have to be taken into account regarding IQ.

At 100% screen, the shot doesn't look very detail-sharp for a 36 meg camera. At 1/160th shutter along with flash duration, subject/camera movement shouldn't be the issue. The hair with-in the plane of focus on the light side (camera right), isn't defined, and the lower eye-lashes are blurry/mushy. I sure hope the hell that diffraction isn't setting in that much at f/9.

I agree with the blogger regarding the skin-tones ... this is one reason I abandoned Nikon, and it seems to persists with this camera based on this example. Remains to be seen if it is representative. In no way can something like this skin rendering compete with my MFD cameras, especially a Dalsa chipped MFD. In fact, my A900 does a much better job. Skin is important because it is the most difficult thing to adjust, so counting on Post processing is not always the wisest plan of action.

Time will tell ... initial images always seem to be lacking. However, it is an alert to be vigilant and not just jump in without seeing a lot more.

-Marc

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Think I've been hoping to try to give it the benefit of the doubt Marc by hoping it's lens/software based, the mush isn't very inspiring.

I was chatting to Stefan last night, he mentioned that the skin colour/tone deficiencies we see in these cameras is on purpose, it's the way they prefer the rendition in the far east, the cameras are not calibrated for western tastes in facial colour/tones. Interesting take on things.

 

[fotografz]

Think I've been hoping to try to give it the benefit of the doubt Marc by hoping it's lens/software based, the mush isn't very inspiring.

I was chatting to Stefan last night, he mentioned that the skin colour/tone deficiencies we see in these cameras is on purpose, it's the way they prefer the rendition in the far east, the cameras are not calibrated for western tastes in facial colour/tones. Interesting take on things.

Well Ben, I guess I had a D700, D3 and D3X that was calibrated that way then ... odd, since I bought my Nikons in the USA ... along with every modern, nano coated new lens available at the time ... even the 200/2 VR.

Processing wedding files from those cameras took twice as long as it does with my Sony A900 (which has the same sensor as the D3X but obviously doesn't adhere to the same color calibration as the Nikon ). Skin is a bitch to deal with, and as you well know, 99% of a wedding and 100% of portrait work involves skin tones. It's my evaluative basis for any system.

However, let's not place to much stock in one initial image. Give the thing some breathing room and time to get it into a lot more hands.

-Marc

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

He was talking about Nikon and Canon cameras in general.

 

[Paratom]

Think I've been hoping to try to give it the benefit of the doubt Marc by hoping it's lens/software based, the mush isn't very inspiring.

I was chatting to Stefan last night, he mentioned that the skin colour/tone deficiencies we see in these cameras is on purpose, it's the way they prefer the rendition in the far east, the cameras are not calibrated for western tastes in facial colour/tones. Interesting take on things.

This might explain why I - as a german-like the Leica colors
But i heard that before- for example between the Panasonic DLUX4 and the equivalent Leica digicam showing different color and that Europeans like other color than Asians. I dont know about the Americans-which color-approach they would prefer

 

[anGy]

What I dont understand here would be the big difference between the D3x and the D800 besides a little bit more resolution.
If you are writing about MF IQ and (near) DSLR-shooting experience it would be the S2 in my eyes.

And-I might get critics for that- but I find the approach to shoot with the S2 not that much different than shooting with a DSLR.
I keep the exp times a little shorter (if possible - however I have also had good shots with 1/30 Sec. handhold) and you have to compensate a bit the shallower DOF by stopping down. The AF is a bit slower but then its very accurate and the large viewfinder makes it much easier to check if you have focus correctly or tomanually focus if you like.
The S2 with 2 lenses (I can often decide for 2 lenses when I know what I will be shooting) fits in a relativly small backpack leaving the upper area of the backback free for other stuff or a third lens.

What I am trying to say is that MF doesnt necessarly mean that you cant use it in the field. I carry it even for the sundayafternoon walk with the family in a sling bag.

D800 vs D3x = 50% more resolution, 50% less weight and volume, 50% of the price. So if - and only if - IQ is good enough, it can well replace the D3x (when no pro body is needed).

I'm sure the S2 is a wonderful system. Really tempting thanks to its ergonomics and lens quality. But I keep thinking that such investment with no possibility to use it on a tech cam is a biiiig draw back. This is why I chose a Phase One back.
And this is also why I secretly hope that the D800E will be ''good enough'' to make me choose to play with it in certain circumstances and leave my IQ back at home.

 

[fotografz]

He was talking about Nikon and Canon cameras in general.

Do you agree with that regarding Canon Ben? I don't, nor do I agree regarding Sony either. Skin tones from the Sony A900 have been on, or very close, right out of the camera regardless of ethnic origin.

While this test shot is preliminary, it is indicative of my previous (subjective) experiences with Nikon skin rendering. Not that it can't be adjusted, but that it has to be adjusted to that degree in the first place.

What is a bit disconcerting is that this sample was done with clean light, and while it renders the details of the skin quite well as evidenced by the pores and blemishes @ 100%, the over-all feel lacks the luminance of skin ... (even taking into account heavy make-up, I doubt her arms are heavily made up). The general effect is like color was added afterward, which never looks quite real.

Oh well not my worry ... I have no plan to get one anyway.

-Marc

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Struggling over samples right now is a exercise in futility. No one EVER shoots great samples out the door. Simply can't judge things right now until it's out and software is supporting it. Not sure why anyone thinks this is a MF killer. There may never be one. I say that as I am buying more lenses for my tech cam and just bought a cube for it. LOL

Okay back to workshop but have to say folks scanning these posts your all nuts. MF is MF nothing smaller will equal it end of day but sure this may get closer but getting your panties in a wad of a pissing match is not worth the effort over it.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Relax have fun and go enjoy photography.

 

[b&w]

It is all the same, every time a new camera present to the market, the old ones are just old crap - a day before best you can get, a day after impossible to make photos with it

Relax have fun and go enjoy photography.

:thumbup:

 

[kdphotography]

....I am buying more lenses for my tech cam and just bought a cube for it. LOL

.....

The last hold out.

Congratulations! Now we're all twinsies! :ROTFL:

ken

 

[Paratom]

D800 vs D3x = 50% more resolution, 50% less weight and volume, 50% of the price. So if - and only if - IQ is good enough, it can well replace the D3x (when no pro body is needed).

I'm sure the S2 is a wonderful system. Really tempting thanks to its ergonomics and lens quality. But I keep thinking that such investment with no possibility to use it on a tech cam is a biiiig draw back. This is why I chose a Phase One back.
And this is also why I secretly hope that the D800E will be ''good enough'' to make me choose to play with it in certain circumstances and leave my IQ back at home.

Yes, not being able to use the S2 as a digital back on a tech cam is maybe its biggest disadvantage - but I guess its the price for having a relativly compact and weatherproof MF camera. Even though I have to admit that it was more the process of using a Tech cam than really taking benefit of the T/S stuff which made me use the Artec.
I think Techcams are overhyped anyways these days

 

[richard.L]

Think I've been hoping to try to give it the benefit of the doubt Marc by hoping it's lens/software based, the mush isn't very inspiring.

I was chatting to Stefan last night, he mentioned that the skin colour/tone deficiencies we see in these cameras is on purpose, it's the way they prefer the rendition in the far east, the cameras are not calibrated for western tastes in facial colour/tones. Interesting take on things.

Fuji vs. Kodak.

30 years later, Fuji growing; Kodak shrinking.

 

[KeithL]

but I guess its the price for having a relativly compact and weatherproof MF camera.

Nah, the price for having the S2 is twenty thousand quid, or seventeen and a half thousand quid more than the Nikon.

 

[Paratom]

Nah, the price for having the S2 is twenty thousand quid, or seventeen and a half thousand quid more than the Nikon.

Actually the difference is a little bit less - but yes - I agree, it is a lot of money one has to pay if you want medium format image quality.
Thats why my wife has to drive an 9 year old VW-T4 instead of a new T5 But I believe its worth it.

 

[Stefan Steib]

"....I was chatting to Stefan last night, he mentioned that the skin colour/tone deficiencies we see in these cameras is on purpose, it's the way they prefer the rendition in the far east, the cameras are not calibrated for western tastes in facial colour/tones. Interesting take on things...."

Does someone remember these strange looking calibration samples that were sold by Fuji maybe 10 years ago, Japanese Girl sitting on a table with lots of stuff and colorcharts. On western standards she looked like already been a vampire, but the Japanese like that. Still if you take alook at Japanese magazines their skintones are different and overall they like more color saturation and a bit more flat gradation.

I am sure that the international marketing departments have had a voice in this connection and Canon and Nikon are doing different firmware for different markets too. Raw output is differing anyway, but I strongly suspect that the beta bodies used for these shots were running japanese develloper style prerelease firmware and the JPG output was directly from the camera.

regards
Stefan