The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

D800

Stefan Steib

Active member
Shashin

maybe because he´s a fashion guy and looks at the camera more as a vehicle for his imagination ? A very healthy point of view, that some of the MF users have completely lost. I´d say an image is an image because its "AN IMAGE" not because it was shot with brand "X" and chip size "Y".

I don´t know, but these Pro´s who are working since years do have a completely differing approach - this expresses pretty good in this video:

Nikon D800 In the Studio with Rob Van Petten on Vimeo

Sure he got money from Nikon, but heck how many of the statements written here on the MF forum part and on LL´s MF forum are from people who got sponsored by Phase or Blad ?

I smell the mileage of people from the business and this guy is just telling what he thinks.

My 2 cents

Stefan
 

stephengilbert

Active member
"[H]ow many of the statements written here on the MF forum part and on LL´s MF forum are from people who got sponsored by Phase or Blad?"

Why don't you tell us, Stefan? How many of the posters here are being paid by Phase and Hasselblad?
 

sflxn

New member
Concerning the higher cost of the non-AA filter, I'm guessing one part of that is the extra canceling filter. The other part of that was probably financial accounting due to investment in moire reduction in the firmware and Capture NX2. I'm not sure about the normal D800, but I've heard a special version of NX 2 ships with the D800E. That might account for part of the price increases too.
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Stephen

you want a list by email or is it enough when I say that you and I know exactly who these are ?
And this is absolutely OK btw. Nobody says that their opinion is less valuable.
Just the opposite, _because_ there is this platform/s it is possible to discuss on a very high level and the inside views.

I for myself am strictly an involved party and I always say this.
This does not keep me from saying things that some may not have expected from me, as it may not even vastly serve my own interests.

Speaking of this new Nikon is reminding me that we need a large CMOS on MF, ............soon ! Otherwise ...........

Regards
Stefan
 

stephengilbert

Active member
No, Stefan, I want you to name the offenders publicly or stop making snide accusations.

Or are you just referring to people who are publicly associated with brands, like yourself?
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Shashin

maybe because he´s a fashion guy and looks at the camera more as a vehicle for his imagination ? A very healthy point of view, that some of the MF users have completely lost. I´d say an image is an image because its "AN IMAGE" not because it was shot with brand "X" and chip size "Y".

I don´t know, but these Pro´s who are working since years do have a completely differing approach - this expresses pretty good in this video:

Nikon D800 In the Studio with Rob Van Petten on Vimeo

Sure he got money from Nikon, but heck how many of the statements written here on the MF forum part and on LL´s MF forum are from people who got sponsored by Phase or Blad ?

I smell the mileage of people from the business and this guy is just telling what he thinks.

My 2 cents

Stefan
Stefan:

Well, it is an exciting camera. It would be good to see some more from it.
 

Lars

Active member
I think the possible sensation of this camera is not whether it can run Phase and Hasselblad out of business but that it brings excellent image quality and detail at a comparably affordable pricepoint.

MF systems have their niche including great lenses but the investment is 5-10x if you look at the entire system - so what's the point in comparing to MF. From a product comparison standpoint it makes more sense to look at what else is available at a similar price point.
 
Last edited:

Stefan Steib

Active member
Exactly Stephen, No conspiration here. Just as I said. If David Grover writes something about Hasselblad or Doug Peterson about Phase nobody feels offended and nevertheless all people get valid information. And nobody would say - ah he is paid by xxxx. So why do you think this Rob van Petten is different? Did you look at his "about" page ? He knows what he´s talking about.

Regards
Stefan
 

nowherean

Member
Now how big can one print from this monster? Will the current Nikon lenses be optimal for this resolution? I remember how Nikon's 70-200 all of the sudden wasn't great in the corners, once I went FX back in 2009.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Now how big can one print from this monster? Will the current Nikon lenses be optimal for this resolution? I remember how Nikon's 70-200 all of the sudden wasn't great in the corners, once I went FX back in 2009.
I enlarged one of the sample images to 120cm/300ppi longest side and printed a crop. Looks excellent even close up. Any size beyond that will normally be viewed from several meters away, so as I see it, there's really no limit with regards to print size.

Some landscape photographers may see it differently though :loco: :ROTFL:

Oh, and check the library sample shot taken with the 14-24mm. That lens is at least up to it.
 

pophoto

New member
I don't think Nikon will release a 36MP camera that will shoot themselves in the foot with regards to the current lenses not being able to handle it. At least from the sample images that I have seen from the Nikon website in JPEG form shows this to be true, mostly shot with the trinity zooms.

How much more it can handle is a different matter altogether and then news about Sony releasing or at least showing off 100MP organic sensors will be more interesting. Canon (Sorry Nikon fans) just announced their new 24-70 zoom, and they seem to have taken 82mm filter size compared with Nikon's 77mm size for their zooms. I think its glassware and mount size might also show it's limits in the near future too, but this just speculation! I decided not to sell off my current Nikon glass with the addition of the D800E. It's very exciting times indeed and this year is off to a great start! :)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I think the possible sensation of this camera is not whether it can run Phase and Hasselblad out of business but that it brings excellent image quality and detail at a comparably affordable pricepoint.

MF systems have their niche including great lenses but the investment is 5-10x if you look at the entire system - so what's the point in comparing to MF. From a product comparison standpoint it makes more sense to look at what else is available at a similar price point.
+1

But I see the niche for MF getting smaller and smaller though!

Peter
 

Brian S

New member
Hi Shashin

sure they put a plain piece of glass where the AA filter was, should have the same diffraction index and thickness. This is how my 5D MK2 was converted.
But..... Regards

Stefan
The replacement material must have the same index of refraction as what it replaces, for the sensor to remain in the same position. If the material differs, the sensor can be moved to compensate. The extra cost- "Wild-Guesses", probably because Nikon expects this to be a lower production camera, possibly a second quality assurance test, and perhaps more stringent alignment of the sensor as the resolving power will be higher than the version with the AA filter.

I would want the non-AA version.
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
"I would want the non-AA version"

:) Does anyone know anybody who will NOT buy the D800E ?

??? At the moment I have read maybe 20 statements of people in the internet who ordered a D800E I also know personally 4, 2 of my customers and NOBODY wants the normal D800.........???

:D

Well done Nikon !

Regards
Stefan
 
V

Vivek

Guest
"I would want the non-AA version"

:) Does anyone know anybody who will NOT buy the D800E ?

??? At the moment I have read maybe 20 statements of people in the internet who ordered a D800E I also know personally 4, 2 of my customers and NOBODY wants the normal D800.........???

:D

Well done Nikon !

Regards
Stefan
I might have considered it (D800) if it had true liveview and no prism plus the annoying IR speed sensor near the shutter to modify it without the AA and UV/IR cut filters to use for multispectral imaging.

As is, it is a no go for me.

I think the $300 extra for the D800E is unacceptable. It should cost more for Nikon to have the AA in place. They are not cheap (Jono already said that) and what they have in place is a different stack without the LiNbO3 AA material but with a plain glass.

Sony is rumored to be working on a new type of sensor and there could be a 100MP (no typos) camera next year.;)
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Hi Vivek

Well from a marketing and PR point of view this is perfect.
As soon as they know that all the customers buy the D800E they can just leave off the 2 Diffraction glasses (whatever these really do...This will make the camera even better and their costs even lower.....:cool: ) and can bring out a D900 E PRO for 4000 € leaving off the nikon sign and the red stripe, just call it black edition and do the Leica thing.

:thumbs: I love it ! Japanese are cool !

regards
Stefan
 

viablex1

Active member
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 agree and that pic of the bride at 640 the skin looks blotchy to me, heck as small as the pixels are can any lens resolve the sensor anyway and at those apertures isn't diffraction happening?

M
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
About diffraction on the D800E - take a look at Diglloyd.com

Lloyd has a theory about diffraction being actually the perfect match for the high resolution - f11 being the fstop which will effectivly eliminate any possible moiree :

diglloyd.com blog - Nikon D800E: More on Moiré

Cool - in german we call this catch two flies with one hit.

Regards
Stefan
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Now how big can one print from this monster? Will the current Nikon lenses be optimal for this resolution? I remember how Nikon's 70-200 all of the sudden wasn't great in the corners, once I went FX back in 2009.
Obviously only the best lenses will bring out the best in the D800. The old 70-200/2.8 was a dog by “best in class standards “ . The current version is more than adequate as are some of the new nikkor primes and the zeiss zf glass. I shot these side by side with my M9 and a d3x . The difference is frequently that you have to use much different raw development settings to achieve similar renderings .

I find the .NEF files harder to tune than the Leica DNG s ..but I think the Leica DNG s are closer to my desired target . The S2 DNG files are a lot flatter than the M9 files but with the proper calibration and presets that look amazingly similar . I am also sure that the fashion photographers are tuning to a very different target .
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
I might have considered it (D800) if it had true liveview and no prism plus the annoying IR speed sensor near the shutter to modify it without the AA and UV/IR cut filters to use for multispectral imaging.

As is, it is a no go for me.

I think the $300 extra for the D800E is unacceptable. It should cost more for Nikon to have the AA in place. They are not cheap (Jono already said that) and what they have in place is a different stack without the LiNbO3 AA material but with a plain glass.

Sony is rumored to be working on a new type of sensor and there could be a 100MP (no typos) camera next year.;)
They didn t eliminate the AA filter ...they still have the 2 low pass filters same as the D800 ..they just did not impart the blur (they use different filters ) . I am totally amazed that they didn t price the camera at $4000 .
 
Top