This is great news, and not entirely unexpected.
I'm most excited about the dynamic range rating of the camera. That said I have never completely understood the DXOmark numbers. I assume they are accurate as some kind of relative measure, but I don't think I've ever squeezed as many stops out of a raw file as they say I should be able to.
Does anyone understand their formula and its strength's / limitations? Do you think we'll really see better real world DR than in an IQ180?
Now to see if the lenses live up to the camera
What should I say ....
Far better than my old H3D39 but also better than the IQ180....
I for myself have already started thinking .....
My own anecdotal experiences don't necessarily agree with DxO's testing methods not that I own a MFD, but have used them. I am not convinced at this early stage my newly acquired D4 has the DR range of my D3 yet just last week they tested it has having far more. And then there is my Betterlight scan back (12 micron pixel sensor) using an 10-11 fstop curve in the field with this thing provides so much headroom its ridiculous which I don't think any of my DSLR's can match.
I spent a good part of the morning reading their white papers on how they test and arrive at such numbers. Effectively they claim smaller pixels will have a lower SNR as any engineer will verify, but the addition of the extra pixels more than makes up for this issue. Even after reading it I am having a hard time believing it. The papers get pretty technical, definitely not bedtime story material.
The images Nikon provided on their website to download left a lot to be desired. Poor detail and texture along with mediocre tonal range however the Imaging Resource images from this camera looked much more promising. It will be interesting to see how early users fare with this camera for sure.
Its averaged, the portrait score is 3rd ( first IQ180, 2nd P65+, 3rd d800 on par with P40+
Landscape first ahead of IQ180 !
Sports nearly as good as 3Ds and D4
overall a brilliant performance.
I guess this means welcome to the Top CMOS !
I allready experienced in the past that my eyes are not synchronized to dxo-numbers so I am still waiting for more real world images.
There are samples online from dpreview - looking pretty good
my impression: especially the Nikon wideangles do NOT keep on par with the sensor - there are several really blown edges. But the sensor - really nice.
Calls for Zeiss Nikon mount - and - put Hasselblad V lenses with adapters on it and this thing will fly !
>my impression: especially the Nikon wideangles do NOT keep on par with the sensor
Did you try the 14-24mm?
Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
Amazon.com: Fotodiox Pro Adapter, Hasselblad Lens to Nikon Camear Mount Adapter -- for Nikon D1, D2, D3, D3x,D3s, D100, D200, D300, D300s, D700, D40, D40x, D50, D60, D70, D70s, D80, D90, D3000, D3100, D5000, D7000: Camera & Photo
I suppose not even the best of the AIS lenses will be up to the job.
For weeks now, I've been trying to think of ways to avoid this camera, but finally, I've concluded that there's no way around it. For most Nikon shooters serious about photography, not to speak about those of us who make money from our photos, the D800 offers so many advantages that it's not a question of if but of what I can sell and how fast to be able to buy it.
Although some lenses won't be up to it 100%, the end result will be more resolution than most or all other Nikon bodies. That's enough for me.
I don't care what gear I have.
Things I sell: http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/413...html?rid=61105
I was just talking about the samples on DP Review. I know the 14-24 is a great lens, unfortunately they did not use it. I saw several zooms and a 16-35mm. The Macro stuff is also OK, but still - I would bet put our Hartblei 4/120mm Makro TS or the Hartblei 4/40 IF TS on it and this will break the roof !
Good point about the Hassi lenses, Stefan.
Perhaps it is time to invest in a Mirex TS adapter:
MIREX-Adapter fr die besondere Fotografie
I've been thinking of buying MF DB... till now. Until prices are reasonable on MF gear I don't think it's bearable.
Frankly you're only going to get acceptable results from the D800 I'd you use the very best Nikon glass. The 16-35VR is a very useful lens but not up to the PC-E, new wide G's & 14-24.
??? "who I dare not mention (KR)"
Could you nevertheless enlighten me ?
Janik posted a link for an article written by Roger Cicala of lensrentals in the other thread over in the MF section, which I find especially very enlightening.
LensRentals.com - “D” resolution tests
as it seems that the lenses do need about any bit of performance and do as well NOT get to the resolution(Nyquist) limit of the sensor I think the question for the Non AA version is answered- it is simply not necessary as the lenses will probably not run into moiree, or if any only under VERY uneasy conditions.
it is not only the high ISO capabilities, but also DR etc.
Listen, I am not arguing that it can replace a MFDB, but IMHO the quality is so good, that it is very close in many areas, especially when combined with the sheer never ending lens offerings, where MF is (and always will) lack behind.
I am excited about the D800E, will make all my photography much easier with still high IQ.
Nikon's own samples show moiré potential with a number of their lenses, which indicate sigificant modulation at frequencies above 102 lp/mm.
KR - Thanks Graham !
So it´s a give and take, isn´t internet nice ?
about the 14-24 - indeed this is a superb lens and my next project.
I finally want to destroy(cut) one. I think I can even supply a new wider sunshade from our 40mm Superrotators to protect the front lens.
and I did a typo in my post should be:
....I think the question for the AA version is answered.......
Well- I can only interpolate from my experinces with MF and the last 2 years with my de AA´d 5DMK2. It seems to me that as the pixelsize gets smaller and smaller the amount of moiree goes down in realworld images.
there are some things I would consider taking the AA version:
shooting fashion, portrait and fabrics for catalogues.
Otherwise I think an experienced user can live easily with non AA.
Even for Architecture with a little experience you can get along with some control, tweaking (defokus a bit, stopping down and rotating slightly) plus post in C1 with moireemasks.
I am debating the 800 vs 800E right now, and pretty much assume that I won't be able to make my decision until people start posting results with the E version late in April. My work is urban / industrial, with things like brick walls, fences, bars, window screens, air conditioners, grates, wires ...
I just don't know how to predict the benefits or the pitfalls for the work I do.
So ... one of each is on order. Finger is on the trigger to cancel one or the other.
[also: it would be nice to be able to play with video, and I've been reading that aliasing can be a bigger bear in video than in photography. But I've no experience with this]
3 ev of DR
DxOMark - Sensor performance