Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Well - if Alpha rumours are to be believed . . . . but maybe they have a 'hold off' agreement with Nikon? I'd like to wait and see - what Sony do, but also what Leica may choose to do - I'm willing to swap systems again (i.e from Sony to Nikon) but the reasons will have to be pretty good! One thing is for sure, I'd rather use Zeiss lenses than Nikon . . . So I don't really see how they're going to be that good!I watched the London launch video and they showed a pixel level comparison between the D800 and D800e. There was quite a difference in micro detail, with the clear advantage going to the no AA filter 800e, unsurprisingly.
It also appears the D800 uses a Sony sourced sensor which makes one wonder why Sony won't be releasing their own camera based on this sensor until early 2013.
Actually, there is a two low-pass filters that compensate for each other eliminating the AA. Because of focus, Nikon has to put something in the light path to preserve the optical path distance. Imaging resource has a good description.Yea pretty funny you pay more for ripping out a part of the camera. Lol
Certainly - but recent history would suggest that these sensors are first designed by Sony and then (substantially) tweaked by the second company.Just because the sensor is manufactured by Sony doesn't mean its a Sony design, or that Sony inherits the rights to use or resell the design. Nikon seems to claim it's their design but I haven't seen any clear statements either way.
I quite agree - but it seems that rather than removing it, they've cancelled it!Re higher price without AA filter - first, some of us obviously are willing to pay more so why not price it higher? second, 800E might be produced in significantly lower volume which often means higher cost.
They probably don't expect the D800E to be made in quite the same volume, and it requires somewhat specialized training for the factory calibration.I think it's a very smart move to offer it in two flavours as well (although why you have to pay more for less is an interesting point - AA filters are not cheap things as far as I'm aware).
It's discussed in the Imaging-Resource link up above, and actually makes some sense that it might cost more. I still think it should cost the same, but whatever... $300 ain't a deal killer for what you get.They probably don't expect the D800E to be made in quite the same volume, and it requires somewhat specialized training for the factory calibration.
Those files look a little overprocessed, but there's also no raw support for the camera yet - and they were made in July 2011. So you're probably looking at early in-camera JPEG results, and those tend to not be so great. The files in particular have had way too much NR and some bad form of sharpening applied. The gamut looks a little off. Like with most cameras, I don't give too much weight to the various early JPEG samples.I downloaded the jpgs from their site including the samples from the D800E, still think the Leaf Aptus II 28/33/40 megapixel RAW files I've been playing with have more detail/sharpness
I don't think the D7000 is particularly good for skin hues. But this is a function of the color filtration, which if you order a million imagers can be customized to your liking. The D7000 is clearly targeted to an audience that wants to point it at something not very colorful and get a colorful image. But point it at something colorful and it goes overboard, starting with clipping the red channel. Point it at something with a mix, like a person wearing colorful fabrics and jewelry, and it's unable to differentiate. It just punches everything up no matter what - clearly this is a design goal for the target market. This is often accomplished by minimizing spectral overlap between channels; this results in increased saturation and contrast, but loss of differentiation of subtle hues and poor neutrals. The D700 looks completely different from the D7000, as does the D3S. I expect the D800 to perceive color more like the D700 than the D7000 since it's aimed at a completely different kind of buyer. (But apart from its color response the D7000 is a sweet camera; I absolutely love using it.)If color rendering is the same as the D7000 ..you will get much improved landscapes but skin tones will be just OK . I expect they will be better as some of the beta testers were fashion photographers and this should be nikon s offering for fashion. (unless a D4X is coming which I doubt).