D800

[Vivek]

Doesn't surprise me, given my experience with the S2 and other MF systems - 36MP does require different technique than 12MP, for sure. Forget shooting at 1/60s handheld, with the "standard" lens....Even 1/125s is hit and miss...Once you get into these resolution numbers and if you wish to take full advantage of them (and you do, because otherwise the images look like c..p), you really need to either (a) use a tripod, or (b) shoot handheld at faster shutter speeds - 1/250s minimum with the 70mm lens and 1/500s even better or (c) use flash. And of course, focusing needs to be spot on, there is zero room for error, centimeters and sometimes millimeters make a difference...I suspect many people who buy the D800 will go through a bit of a learning curve first, and wonder initially why their 36MP images don't look as good as they had thought they would. Then they may realize that there is no free lunch and that MF-like resolution requires using MF-like shooting technique...which is not what they necessarily wanted ...My conclusion - for shooting handheld, in available light, a 15-20MP FF camera really is a better choice.

+1

Now, you may be wondering (as I do) what is the point of NEX-7 with a 24MP sensor.

I am desperately looking for a grip for this little beast to make it more stable.

Flash lit pictures are just brilliant.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

The Leica S2 has no image stabilization. That makes a tremendous difference; I can handhold the Sony a850 and 24-70 down to 1/25 pretty easily, especially with a vertical grip and a pole or something to lean against. I seriously expect Nikon to announce a 24-70/2.8 VR before long.

 

[Lars]

And the S2 lenses are slower. Which means shooting wide open in limited light you have to use a higher ISO than on a D800 - and a shorter shutter speed due to no VR. It adds up.

 

[fotografz]

The Leica S2 has no image stabilization. That makes a tremendous difference; I can handhold the Sony a850 and 24-70 down to 1/25 pretty easily, especially with a vertical grip and a pole or something to lean against. I seriously expect Nikon to announce a 24-70/2.8 VR before long.

S2 sensor is bigger ... really a different comparison thing. All the S2 did was bridge the gap between 35mm handling and that of the typical MFD. Not as stable as a 35mm DSLR with IS or VR lenses, but easier to hand-hold than a MFD rig. In other words, a form factor that's a bit more versatile than the typical MFD camera.

D800 is a pretty cool camera that ups the ante over cameras like the Canon 5D-II and Sony A900/850 for those wanting a high resolution 35mm DSLR at a reasonable price point. For those users, what's not to love?

Personally, I'll wait for the Sony entry since every lens I have for it is already stabilized, and I subjectively prefer the Zeiss rendering and Sony's take on color over that of Nikon by a good margin.

Congratulations to Nikon users! Nikon has come a long way in just a few years.

-Marc

 

[fotografz]

And the S2 lenses are slower. Which means shooting wide open in limited light you have to use a higher ISO than on a D800 - and a shorter shutter speed due to no VR. It adds up.

Again, a comparison between Apples and Watermelons which has been throughly hashed out in the other "Poll" thread, and need not be repeated here.

IMO, the comparison should be against the crop of 35mm DSLRs and any user's specific needs ... including against Nikon's own D4 and any strong rumor indications from other makers. Real need and actual applications should be the criteria I would think.

Impact on MFD? Probably. It'll lessen the dreams of an incremental move to the low end of MFD for people that would have to make a large financial "systems" commitment based on number of pixels alone. For those that grasp the whole MFD IQ story, this camera won't mean much ... unless they can't afford it ... in which case, it's not an issue, they aren't a true prospect for MFD anyway.

This camera also solves an age-old dilemma for those who travel and had to agonize over what to take to do walk-abouts and street shooting, and also capture high res renderings of the exotic sites. What a wonderful solution, a really small powerhouse of a camera that will fit many shooters needs, but not all.

-Marc

 

[Lars]

Again, a comparison between Apples and Watermelons which has been throughly hashed out in the other "Poll" thread, and need not be repeated here.

IMO, the comparison should be against the crop of 35mm DSLRs and any user's specific needs ... including against Nikon's own D4 and any strong rumor indications from other makers. Real need and actual applications should be the criteria I would think.

Yes sorry about that - it's so easy to get dragged into those kinds of discussions. As always, I would add that cost is perhaps the most important factor.

 

[ptomsu]

Well folks,

I do not care about any comparisons, just ordered my D800E

The best camera released ever IMHO

Peter

 

[Steen]

to E or not to E


To E or not to E ... :lecture:

On the Japanese Nikon website there is a comparison of D800 and D800E with regards to resolution and moiré.

D800 / D800E

At the middle of the page click the blue link below the pictures of the stone picture and the kimono picture respectively.

The comparison to the right of the images will slowly pop up.

 

[ptomsu]

So even in these samples the D800E looks more impressive to me

Peter

 

[BenH]

Re: to E or not to E

To E or not to E ... :lecture:

On the Japanese Nikon website there is a comparison of D800 and D800E with regards to resolution and moiré.

D800 / D800E

At the middle of the page click the blue link below the pictures of the stone picture and the kimono picture respectively.

The comparison to the right of the images will slowly pop up.

Below is a link to the comparison page in English.

Nikon | Imaging Products | Nikon's original technology - Nikon D800/D800E

Ben

 

[Steen]

Thanks for the link, Ben :thumbup:

 

[Steen]

So even in these samples the D800E looks more impressive to me

I agree with you, Peter

so if the prices of the Standard version and the E version were more or less the same I would also go with the E version ...

or maybe I'll just sit on my hands and wait forever for the camera I really want: the true entry level FF 16 Mp Nikon D750XLPP*

*extra large pixel pitch (or something like that)

I have this obsession with big and bright optical viewfinders

and big, fat photosites

oldfashioned, I guess

 

[Jan Brittenson]

Re: to E or not to E

On the Japanese Nikon website there is a comparison of D800 and D800E with regards to resolution and moiré.

D800 / D800E

I think this is just for illustration purposes. No raw converter that has support for cameras without AA filters, and correctly identifies the camera used, will produce something like that.

 

[ptomsu]

I agree with you, Peter

so if the prices of the Standard version and the E version were more or less the same I would also go with the E version ...

or maybe I'll just sit on my hands and wait forever for the camera I really want: the true entry level FF 16 Mp Nikon D750XLPP*

*extra large pixel pitch (or something like that)

I have this obsession with big and bright optical viewfinders

and big, fat photosites

oldfashioned, I guess

Or go for the D4 - seems to be the right camera for you

Peter

 

[Lars]

I can help wondering if my old Nikon lenses just appreciated or depreciated in value on the second hand market... 85/1.4D, 135/2D DC, 16/2.8D Fisheye, 20/2.8D, 50/1.8 AIs, 180/2.8D, 12-24/4G DX, 80-200/2.8D, 300/4 AF... any good on a D800/E?

From my own experience, especially the 180/2.8D and 300/4 are razor sharp, but that's on a D700... oh wait, I did use them on my D2X as well, that should be closer to D800 pixel pitch.

 

[Steen]

Or go for the D4 - seems to be the right camera for you

only the high end high speed D4 is not exactly 'entry level', pricewise
and I also prefer the smaller form factor
being the slowest gun in The West I could do with a very basic and very slow entry level FF model
not at all an easy decision for me
either I can just sit and wait (for how long?)
or pay what it takes to shoot the D800 while waiting for the D750XLPP
sigh, deep thoughts ...

 

[Lars]

only the high end high speed D4 is not exactly 'entry level', pricewise
and I also prefer the smaller form factor
being the slowest gun in The West I could do with a very basic and very slow entry level FF model
not at all an easy decision for me
either I can just sit and wait (for how long?)
or pay what it takes to shoot the D800 while waiting for the D750XLPP
sigh, deep thoughts ...

Isn't D750XLPP just a longer name for D700? 16 vs 12 Mpx isn't that much of a step up. And if, as hinted by Nikon, D700 will receive a significan price drop while staying in production then it just might be what you are looking for?

 

[Steen]

yes, you are probably right, Lars, but it bothers me a little to use too much money on the three and a half year old D700
if at least they would put the D3S sensor into a D700S model it would feel more like sort of a new and up to date camera
but if as you say there will actually be a significant price drop on the D700 then it might be a sensible FF choice while waiting
do you remember where you have seen this hint ?

 

[Lars]

do you remember where you have seen this hint ?

Not sure, IIRC it was a comment from someone at Nikon, either Japan USA or Sweden. Then again, maye that person didnt speak for Nikon.

EDIT: NikonRumors mentioned the same thing: Nikon D800 vs. D700 specs comparison | Nikon Rumors

"I was told that the D700 will go down in price in the next few days - in France for example, the price is expected to drop from the current EUR 2,100 to EUR 1,800. I have no confirmation about US prices yet."

 

[Steen]

Thanks, Lars !

- - - - -

Here's a link to some full sized high ISO samples

Nikon D800 High ISO Image Samples

NB: The images are JPEGs, straight out of the camera.