D800
- Thread starter SneakerX
- Start date
Yes, why not? 36MP on FX has about the same pixel density as 16MP on DX. I don't find people complaining that their better lenses are not good enough for the D7000
... although many older lenses will still struggle, esp at the edges of the frame.Yes, why not? 36MP on FX has about the same pixel density as 16MP on DX. I don't find people complaining that their better lenses are not good enough for the D7000
should not be a reason that lens cant keep up with body..
kentwong81
Senior Member
According to the rumours, D800(high fps/high MP - for sports/studio) is supposed to be the replacement for D3X instead of D700 and D4(high iso/low MP - for photojournalist) is supposed to be the replacement for D3. It seems that there is no replacement for D700 and Nikon doesn't seem to make another new but cheap full frame DSLR as D700 has affected the sales of D3(same sensor as D700).
Last edited:
cichlid
Senior Member
If this is true, then a lot of people have been waiting in vain for the D700 successor.
It is very obvious that Nikon is going to go the Canon route. A smaller resolution (landscape) monster plus a speed/ISO demon as top of the line.
Kit
Senior Member
Well, a lot of people don't even need a D700 successor.....
??? is V1 AF better than D700?
With the minute sensor in V1 and dim lens, I expect the DOF in V1 is much higher than D700 and so the AF in V1 probably isn't as sophisticated.
ZerocoolAstra
Senior Member
Remarkable as V1's AF system is, it should still be slower than a DSLR
Because of the lack of a mirror box in the 1-series, they've had to try and implement phase-detect AF capability directly onto the image sensor. This is not necessary with a DSLR.
kwanhan
Senior Member
Remarkable as V1's AF system is, it should still be slower than a DSLR
Because of the lack of a mirror box in the 1-series, they've had to try and implement phase-detect AF capability directly onto the image sensor. This is not necessary with a DSLR.
guess i've been thrown off by marketing once again lol
"Fastest AF x Most Focus Points in the World" from nikon sg's site.
Thom Hogan on the AF:
Focus
"As I noted in my J1 review, the Nikon 1's autofocus system is quite good. Very DSLR-like in most aspects, including speed and tracking ability. In the mirrorless realm, there really isn't anything that matches the Nikon 1's focusing. Some Olympus/Panasonic m4/3 camera/lens combinations can acquire focus almost as fast as the Nikon 1 models, but they can't track motion like the J1/V1 can.
This is the result of phase detect sensors being built into the imaging sensor, coupled with the high frame rate of the sensor, plus all the computational horsepower that Nikon has stuffed into the camera. Certainly in bright light you might be fooled into thinking you're shooting with a DSLR (assuming you're out of the default settings, as I note above). Focus acquisition is swift and focus tracking good (typically on the D3100/D5100 level; in a few cases, better).
With one exception: you need a subject that has contrast in it. It appears that the focus system on the Nikon 1 tries to confirm that it found focus by looking at contrast information. If you don't have any contrast under the area the camera is focusing on (for instance, the side of a dark ship), all bets are off. Obviously, this problem is bigger in low light with non-contrasty subjects (think black cow at dawn). But in good light with subjects that have contrast in them, I'd characterize the focus as DSLR-like. Not D3s-like, but certainly in the realm of DSLR expectations."
