Blur Shadow
Senior Member
Cowseye said:
Haha. I believe you. I am certainly looking forward to owning one myself!
DL Editor's Pick is the 5D3
- Thread starter UncleFai
- Start date
Haha. I believe you. I am certainly looking forward to owning one myself!
probably.
why you people complain about everything?
this DL whatever is just doing you guys a favor. You have been whining and ranting ever since day one the D800 was released about the stock availability.
So DL is trying to persuade the rest of the potential D800 consumers to switch to 5dmk3 which has abundance of supply.
By doing so there will be less people on the queue for the D800 and help to ease the hype so you can get one on your hand sooner.
this DL whatever is just doing you guys a favor. You have been whining and ranting ever since day one the D800 was released about the stock availability.
So DL is trying to persuade the rest of the potential D800 consumers to switch to 5dmk3 which has abundance of supply.
By doing so there will be less people on the queue for the D800 and help to ease the hype so you can get one on your hand sooner.
after what i've seen off lloyd chamber's subscription site. i wouldn't worry so much about who prefers what. and with the finest lenses and excellent photographic technique - he shows that you can have the d800 with the zeiss 100m/2 makro planar virtually match the output resolution of the leica s2 paired with the 120/2.5 summarit-s macro lens.
its the photographer. cameras don't take images for themselves. while its nice to have the latest and the greatest in order to not feel so left out in the progress of technology, i'd say that getting great images with any camera beats getting crap with a top tier dslr. i shoot with hasselblad, leica, nikon, canon and several other brands - both film and digital. there will always be another lens to buy, always be another body to acquire. but they don't guarantee good pictures. the individual does.
i shoot several brands and would just say - please, don't sweat it. its going to be just fine. another several years down the road if someone ever gets to supersizing that nex-7 sensor into full frame, we'll be beating our chests all over again when 54MP systems come out. just take pictures and enjoy it. when you have great images hanging on the walls on museum, no one really cares what camera brand you used to grab the shot.
its the photographer. cameras don't take images for themselves. while its nice to have the latest and the greatest in order to not feel so left out in the progress of technology, i'd say that getting great images with any camera beats getting crap with a top tier dslr. i shoot with hasselblad, leica, nikon, canon and several other brands - both film and digital. there will always be another lens to buy, always be another body to acquire. but they don't guarantee good pictures. the individual does.
i shoot several brands and would just say - please, don't sweat it. its going to be just fine. another several years down the road if someone ever gets to supersizing that nex-7 sensor into full frame, we'll be beating our chests all over again when 54MP systems come out. just take pictures and enjoy it. when you have great images hanging on the walls on museum, no one really cares what camera brand you used to grab the shot.
strikeback4
Deregistered
I read the review & found many flaws in the report... note the below are quoted as what can be found on today Digital Life page 7-9
"The larger the sensor, the more light it gathers, and the better the image quality."
So a full frame with a lens set at aperture f/22 will gather more light than a crop sensor with a f/1.4 lens? Does the author know lights capture is based on things like aperture, shutter speed?
"In Addition, with an image sensor the size of 35mm film frame, you don't get the crop factor of the smaller sensors in mid-range or entry level DSLR cameras. This means the image your wide-angle lens capture will remain as "wide", without any part of it being cropped out"
There are wide angle lens built solely for crop frame sensors which full frame camera cannot be used, for Nikon case can be used but because the lens cover a small area, dark circle can be seen, take for example a sigma 10-20mm lens will equal to 15mm(16mm for Canon) which majority of the full frame wide angle lens cover...
"The Nikon D800 will be more attractive to commercial and landscape photographers who need big billboard-size prints while the Canon EOS 5D MK III will cater to those who prefer a jack of all trades. The D800's noise performance may not rival that of the 5D MK III's, but D800 buyers usually do not shoot pictures above ISO 400."
With this kind of comment, no wonder the author get flamed by both camps', 5D MK III not mean't for landscape photographers who need big billboard-size prints? A friend of my uses his 5D MK II and print out wonderful A0 size landscape shots for a company...
D800 buyers do not shoot above ISO 400? what makes the author sure they will only shoot at ISO 400 & below only? I seen online samples of ISO 1600 and it is much better than D700 & D700 was a popular low light camera in its time, take a look at the link and you can see both D700 & D800 side by side noise comparision...
Nikon D800 vs. Nikon D700 high ISO comparison | Nikon Rumors
Another Nikon D700 vs. Nikon D800 high ISO comparison | Nikon Rumors
"The larger the sensor, the more light it gathers, and the better the image quality."
So a full frame with a lens set at aperture f/22 will gather more light than a crop sensor with a f/1.4 lens? Does the author know lights capture is based on things like aperture, shutter speed?
"In Addition, with an image sensor the size of 35mm film frame, you don't get the crop factor of the smaller sensors in mid-range or entry level DSLR cameras. This means the image your wide-angle lens capture will remain as "wide", without any part of it being cropped out"
There are wide angle lens built solely for crop frame sensors which full frame camera cannot be used, for Nikon case can be used but because the lens cover a small area, dark circle can be seen, take for example a sigma 10-20mm lens will equal to 15mm(16mm for Canon) which majority of the full frame wide angle lens cover...
"The Nikon D800 will be more attractive to commercial and landscape photographers who need big billboard-size prints while the Canon EOS 5D MK III will cater to those who prefer a jack of all trades. The D800's noise performance may not rival that of the 5D MK III's, but D800 buyers usually do not shoot pictures above ISO 400."
With this kind of comment, no wonder the author get flamed by both camps', 5D MK III not mean't for landscape photographers who need big billboard-size prints? A friend of my uses his 5D MK II and print out wonderful A0 size landscape shots for a company...
D800 buyers do not shoot above ISO 400? what makes the author sure they will only shoot at ISO 400 & below only? I seen online samples of ISO 1600 and it is much better than D700 & D700 was a popular low light camera in its time, take a look at the link and you can see both D700 & D800 side by side noise comparision...
Nikon D800 vs. Nikon D700 high ISO comparison | Nikon Rumors
Another Nikon D700 vs. Nikon D800 high ISO comparison | Nikon Rumors
most of us will have to use the finest lenses, and have near impeccable technique to draw forth the best image quality capture at source in order to fully get the most out of all those 36 million pixels on the d800. not to mention that the light has to be reasonably good too to make our subjects look great, whatever they may be.
i presently shoot a hasselblad h4d system for my medium format work, and almost invested in a Leica S2 with more lenses for "better image quality." what i saw from controlled testing did knock the socks off my feet. whatever nikon did to this sensor, it is possibly one of the best sensors of all time.
reference link here for those interested: diglloyd.com blog - Readers Comment on my Nikon D800 vs Leica S2 Shootout
the d800 and the E variant it seems, will technologically revolutionize photography as its image quality capture trickles down into the rest of the consumer market. whatever Nikon did, they took the outstanding dynamic range, color fidelity and anchored black tones of the D3X, and paired it with the noise suppression and detail retention of the D3S (i have owned the D3X for 3+ years, and the D3S for 2+ years) and packed even more pixels in to make it the ultimate all around digital SLR.
the way i see it, the majority of nikon glass will not be able to keep up with the demands of the sensor. we'll be diffraction limited at one end - and yet not able to optimize image quality at maximum aperture (unlike the Leica-M glass). autofocus will have to give way to live view on a tripod for the most reliable and consistent AF. its a different animal altogether. In case anyone thinks I'm knocking on Canon, I've shot canon for 7+ years now, since the original 1D and 1Ds and all the way to the 5D2 and 1D4 and have a veritable amount of L glass as well.
for best results, I am inclined to agree - you need to invest in top tier Zeiss/Leica-R adapted glass, shoot off a sturdy tripod, use the live view and focus with absolute precision. pretty much anything less than excellent technique and lens will yield suboptimal results.
I am thinking of trading in my D3S in exchange for a D800E in the future (since all my primary shooting systems have no AA filters on the sensor) and was also taken aback at how high ISO shots on the D800 when downsampled to native D3S resolution - looked... like D3S files.
This camera is a game changer. It just cut off the bottom third of the medium format digital market overnight and reduced the price point for such image quality by a factor of eight.
i presently shoot a hasselblad h4d system for my medium format work, and almost invested in a Leica S2 with more lenses for "better image quality." what i saw from controlled testing did knock the socks off my feet. whatever nikon did to this sensor, it is possibly one of the best sensors of all time.
reference link here for those interested: diglloyd.com blog - Readers Comment on my Nikon D800 vs Leica S2 Shootout
the d800 and the E variant it seems, will technologically revolutionize photography as its image quality capture trickles down into the rest of the consumer market. whatever Nikon did, they took the outstanding dynamic range, color fidelity and anchored black tones of the D3X, and paired it with the noise suppression and detail retention of the D3S (i have owned the D3X for 3+ years, and the D3S for 2+ years) and packed even more pixels in to make it the ultimate all around digital SLR.
the way i see it, the majority of nikon glass will not be able to keep up with the demands of the sensor. we'll be diffraction limited at one end - and yet not able to optimize image quality at maximum aperture (unlike the Leica-M glass). autofocus will have to give way to live view on a tripod for the most reliable and consistent AF. its a different animal altogether. In case anyone thinks I'm knocking on Canon, I've shot canon for 7+ years now, since the original 1D and 1Ds and all the way to the 5D2 and 1D4 and have a veritable amount of L glass as well.
for best results, I am inclined to agree - you need to invest in top tier Zeiss/Leica-R adapted glass, shoot off a sturdy tripod, use the live view and focus with absolute precision. pretty much anything less than excellent technique and lens will yield suboptimal results.
I am thinking of trading in my D3S in exchange for a D800E in the future (since all my primary shooting systems have no AA filters on the sensor) and was also taken aback at how high ISO shots on the D800 when downsampled to native D3S resolution - looked... like D3S files.This camera is a game changer. It just cut off the bottom third of the medium format digital market overnight and reduced the price point for such image quality by a factor of eight.
I think you must not have been informed. D800 inherits the AF of D4, able to focus up to f/8 (those using TC will be thrilled, as well as low-light focusing), have face detection to improve metering against back lighting scenes, the video of D4 which is the best Nikon have so far, more dynamic range, new base ISO of 100, ... it is not just a D700 with 36 MP. Nikon never release a D700 > 12 MP last time is because they can't give good IQ with high MP but technology since 3-4 years have improved. With 36 MP, there is now the ability to crop more without losing much IQ, so can save on > 400m lens for now or as a cheaper alternative. Can down sample image to 12 MP to get better IQ and noise improvement. So far all the pictures taken by D800 by people around the world just shows something different. Something exciting.
If you are only considering stills, 5dm3 on the other hand... is more like D700, something that we enjoyed for 4 years. And for the price of new 5dm3 you can get a used D3s which is so much more better than 5dm3.
D800/e is a new tool like never before and will certainly get photographers excited and give more room for growth. It's so much more exciting than Canon, for now.
I'd tested (in NSC) and another pro fashion photographer friend of mine had tested a mere 50mm AF-D on the D800, the result is just as good, if not better. I have choose to believe the current set of Nikkor glasses will have no issue working on D800.
Damn, I want to like your post but I can't find the link?!
LIKED :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
To be honest afta seeing the online review of the battle between D800 & 5D3, i really muz confess, nikon clearly got smashed by canon in this are of low light perf, not that i agree with the statement but nikon could hve done more kinda of like the notion of leave no stones unturned
Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800 - Hands-on - YouTube
Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800 - Hands-on - YouTube
Blur Shadow
Senior Member
shelomoh said:
Haha! You're probably right. I shall be sure to look out for the features you talked about when I get my hands on a Nikon D800.
Although I'd still get that 400mm lens! Haha!
That's becos, it's not their agenda to be very good at the ISO department. I believe it's to be the same or beat D700 by a bit will do. Or else, it will be the same D3 lose to D700 problem all over again.
Being that, D800 might lose to Canon in the high ISO department, how about low ISO? D800 was rated BETTER than D4 by DxOmark for ISO below 400. Where will 5Dmk3 be? ;p
And, we have all seen, ISO 6400 is not bad already. Just push another stop to 12800 and clean up the ISO later, what more can we demand? Clean ISO at 25600? Can 5Dmk3 do that?
In fact, after scrubing thr the last bit of the video about the image preview of the D800 versus 5Dmk3 at high ISO, I'd once again confirmed D800 will be better for me. Look at the details at 25600!! Not smugy at all compare to canon! It's like half a stop of noise above ISO3200 of a D300s! Which is very possibly usable!
I so want this camera now! Right now! hahaha!
Sorry... pardon me for my excitement...
Blur Shadow
Senior Member
Cowseye said:Look at the details at 25600!! Not smugy at all compare to canon! It's like half a stop of noise above ISO3200 of a D300s! Which is very possibly usable!
I so want this camera now! Right now! hahaha!
Makes the Nikon D300s, which I loved so much, look like junk, doesn't it? Haha!
Shh... I'm trying to sell mine away
Haha D300s is still good for speed lah. If not becos I got a D700 deal, I wouldn't give it up....
Blur Shadow
Senior Member
Cowseye said:Shh... I'm trying to sell mine away
Haha D300s is still good for speed lah. If not becos I got a D700 deal, I wouldn't give it up....
Yeah! Loved the buffer and the incredible fps.
I sold my D300s already, in anticipation of the D800. Too bad I can't get a set. So now, I'm living on a D7000. One more zero than you!
Similar threads
