My "fed up" thread started a very similar discussion to the one going on here... although there were some
really great comments on gear/systems, the underlying theme in a lot of comments was this same "
x is better than y" thinking that has gotten out of control.
Funny thing, my questions were intended to get people to share their thoughts about
technology and art... but it turned into a gearfest.
Guy, you were one of the small minority that addressed the underlying funk... thanks.
But here we are again talkin' about gear.
Although I haven't cared much for the D800 personally, I think it's a fantastic camera for those who like the nikon system/aesthetic. It punches hard in a lot of different "boxing rings". It certainly does some pretty unbelievable things for a 35mm format system. What is problematic is that, in the end, there are no rules for which camera should be used on a particular job/locale, yet many imply that there are... and then pigeonhole certain cameras (that fit within those narrow visions of what gear is "supposed" to do). Reality is that MOST of the cams around can do most of the jobs put in front of them.
If I'm going to address the OP... I'd say that both cameras look remarkably good. Personally (ahem), I think the Nikon makes the features of the face look less dimensional... more uni-planar. This isn't good or bad, just different. From a resolution standpoint, both are mighty impressive. I know I like the Hassy color better... but that's a personal call. Without the A/B comparison, I'd be happy with both. The H4D "sings"
for me a bit more. I've yet to get my D800 images to sing, but damn I'm trying!
Mostly, I'm ready for people to be happy with other people's gear decisions... and to just let well enough alone. All this gear-centric chest thumping is getting old.
Hell... I might go buy p25 or a ZD just to spite everyone.