Will most of Nikon's lenses even make full use of the D800's 36MP capability?

[s1221ljc]

I have read many reviews by professional photographers but none with all these technical mumbo jumbo & goobledygook, %, mtf etc. Thats the reason I think why many feel it "sounds" like these are from optics engineers. And worse, when one doesnt even have the D800 on hand or used it but just spouting "predictions" based on head knowledge under guise of facts. I thot someone was slammed for this kind of antics years ago & even till now

Oh btw, I dont see herds of people abandoning Canon with their increase in pixels count for the 5DM2.... we take some, we give some, as I've said before prepare for compromises, there are never perfect lens or cameras. AND if $100K Leica S2 system cannot satisfy, what can? So go for the D4, ignore the D800, if speed is important.

 

[edutilos-]

The answer to the question is easy.

Wait for the D800 to be released, shoot with mentioned lens with the D800, see if there is limitation by the lens, or by the body.

End of story. Talk before the real thing is out is just talk. You can postulate all you want, draw all the conclusions you want, extrapolate from existing technology all you want, things change. No need to get worked up about all this and start calling each other names. At the end of the day, if you want to buy the D800, you'll find a reason even if the Nikon lenses are the limiting factor. If you don't want to buy the D800, you will find a reason even if the Nikon lenses are NOT the limiting factor. That's life. Cheers.

 

[daredevil123]

Sometimes you have to wonder why Nikon chose to set up factory in Malaysia? while it sounds like we have many experts here...

 

[diediealsomustdive]

Quote (or is it mis-quote?):

"Older prime lenses such as 85mm f1.4D, 50mm f1.4D will be quite disastrous ...

Corners of 17-35mm f2.8D & 70-200mm f2.8 VR I will look like crap.

85 f1.4D & 50 f1.4D cannot even resolve properly for a 12 mpx crop camera in my standards..."

Strong words used... disastrous, like crap, cannot even resolve properly for a 12 mpx crop camera in my standards...

You determine what to make out of these statements... I have drawn my own conclusion but it would be unwise to share the conclusions.

Just in case he (I assumed it's a he) is right, I will wait and see, if things really go disastrous, crappy and cannot resolve properly when the actual thing comes along. I have a load of old Ai'd, Ai, AiS, AF, AFD and some newer AFS lenses that I will try out. But apart from AFS 50mm f/1.4G (which also got slammed), I have no other f/1.4G lenses (and have no intention of buying any), nor do I have any of the AFS f/2.8 zooms. Looks like I am in hopeless land, by his standard...

I still hold the view that older wide angles will struggle (maybe badly) with corners due to light rays not perpendicular to sensor when arriving at sensor, and teles will be not be impacted. And consumer zooms, probably will be seriously limited as they are intended to be, consumer zooms.

I do not subscribe to the view that the current crop of lenses cannot resolve properly for 12mpx or 36 mpx. But I may be wrong, I will wait and see.

 

[yyD70S]

I, for one, don't consider the 17-35mm corners as "crap" on my 12MP FX. It's less than steller at larger aperture, yes; as one fellow member above just mentioned about "older wide angle primes & zooms not been up to it": BUT it's certainly no crap or even shrimp. We work around it. And it's not like I avoid using it at f2.8 altogether.

As for the 85mm f1.4D, it's the "centre 1/3rd & it’s character at large f-stop" that counts for me; not so much of its resolving capabilities; be in on DX or FX.

Of, course, it (those two lenses) could be a different story on the 14MP DX (D7000) or the coming D800.

I remembered when I had the 4MP D2H, I was happy. Then came the D70S. It’s just a minute MP increase and people were then worried:- lenses not up to it, bad hand-holding technique would be exposed, etc. We moved on. Then came the D3/D300 (double the resolution; double the talk/fear). We moved on… and on… D3X… we moved on… life goes on…

It's up to us photographers to work within the limitations of our gears and not be limited by them.

Will most of Nikon's lenses even make full use of the D800's 35MP capability? My guess: perhaps only a handful are optimized. Because an FX 36MP demands more as compared to the D7000; it utilises even the peripheral of the lenses and not just the sweet spot. Let's wait for some real life user experiences come a few months.

Granted. I have an easier decision on hand. The D800 / D800E is just too expensive for me to buy without selling my current D700. And I won’t. JUST YET. Unless Singapore Pools has something to say about it.

It’s been 6 days since our TS started the ball rolling and after 45 feedbacks, I am looking forward to his/her comments on this topic too.

 

[surrephoto]

Quote (or is it mis-quote?):

"Older prime lenses such as 85mm f1.4D, 50mm f1.4D will be quite disastrous ...

Corners of 17-35mm f2.8D & 70-200mm f2.8 VR I will look like crap.

85 f1.4D & 50 f1.4D cannot even resolve properly for a 12 mpx crop camera in my standards..."

Strong words used... disastrous, like crap, cannot even resolve properly for a 12 mpx crop camera in my standards...

You determine what to make out of these statements... I have drawn my own conclusion but it would be unwise to share the conclusions.

Just in case he (I assumed it's a he) is right, I will wait and see, if things really go disastrous, crappy and cannot resolve properly when the actual thing comes along. I have a load of old Ai'd, Ai, AiS, AF, AFD and some newer AFS lenses that I will try out. But apart from AFS 50mm f/1.4G (which also got slammed), I have no other f/1.4G lenses (and have no intention of buying any), nor do I have any of the AFS f/2.8 zooms. Looks like I am in hopeless land, by his standard...

I still hold the view that older wide angles will struggle (maybe badly) with corners due to light rays not perpendicular to sensor when arriving at sensor, and teles will be not be impacted. And consumer zooms, probably will be seriously limited as they are intended to be, consumer zooms.

I do not subscribe to the view that the current crop of lenses cannot resolve properly for 12mpx or 36 mpx. But I may be wrong, I will wait and see.

Apologies to all if my language sounded crude... so i'd rephrase;

In my opinion, the older prime lenses such as 85mm f1.4D, 50mm f1.4D may not be as sharp as expected wide open...

Corners of 17-35mm f2.8D & 70-200mm f2.8 VR I may disappoint...
85 f1.4D & 50 f1.4D struggles to resolve properly for a 12 mpx crop camera in my standards which may not reflect that of the general crowd...

 

[theRBK]

Will most of Nikon's lenses even make full use of the D800's 36MP capability?

at f8-f11, probably yes... at f1.8 and larger, gonna be difficult especially at the edges...

I think of greater concern is whether we can keep the camera stable enough to make the most of 36MP... 1/(focal length) is not gonna be enough, more like 1/(3 x focal length) or more... or get a heavy-duty tripod and weigh the tripod down, and with a secure tripod head to mount the camera... not kidding... when medium format hit 30MP and higher, users were complaining that it was much more difficult to handle the cameras to maintain optimal sharpness without camera motion contributing to blur...

also, tolerances in build, of the camera and of the lens, will be even more crucial, and so there would be a need for the user to manually check to make sure the focusing of the lens and camera body combination is properly calibrated... another issue which reared its head when medium format hit 30MP and higher...

just a pre-empt, when in future we look at reviews and people complain that so and so lens is blur when due diligence was not necessarily made to make sure everything is optimally set up... both those 2 issues mentioned above are already in play in current cameras, but with higher MP count, they would be even more crucial...

 

[alantkh]

general consensus is people would prefer less MP but better ISO performance, like D4. Nikon also know that lah.... so that is maybe why D800 has the 36meg sensor.

I am wondering if D800s will appear with D4 sensor 1-2 years down the road.

 

[Bravia]

Pardon my ignorance here...
But if you are going to shoot wide open, what's the biggie about "losing some performance" at the edges?

 

[blackman]

It is the CA that people worry about at the edge. When red colour and blue colour are not fall on the same focal plane due to difference in their wavelength, you will see colour fringing. Bigger MP sensor amplifies it.

Pardon my ignorance here...
But if you are going to shoot wide open, what's the biggie about "losing some performance" at the edges?

 

[ellery]

You are assuming that the noise reduction settings and the noise reduction program used are the same on the D7000 and the D800. It is not. Even the assumption that the pixel density of the 2 cameras are the same, may or may not be true. You think it is true, I am not convinced that it is. I looked thru the sample files for the D7000 and for my requirements I choose to stay with D300 as file quality was better in areas of detail capture (sharper & clearer not smudged in the D7000), noise in the D300 once it is tweaked cleaner than the D7000 file.

Some quotes were worded as if they were so technically based - i.e. acting like an optical engineer. Phrases like MTB charts, pixel density were used liberally. Yes I agree that you only need to see the file and better still a print from the file to know where it is all going. So without a D800 where is your source material to evaluate ?

I am a photographer not a optics engineer so I would evaluation from that starting point and not talk jargon to confuse and try to con-vince others that the pov that is being pushed is correct. Just pointing out this for new souls who may be taken in by form of the jargon and missed out that there is no substance.

Same basic point - when the bodies are in then we can test all we want before that it is all nice coffee shop talk.

duh... we don't need to be an optics engineers to review how lens perform. We need to be photographers only.

And we don't need a D800 to tell how it the lens will perform at such pixel density because..... we have the D7000 which has identical pixel density. With D7000 we can tell how the lens perform at the center portion.

This is not hearsay. I think if one has used the D7000, the comparison is entirely valid.

 

[NazgulKing]

As I have learnt repeatedly, the moment people start feeling like they have wasted money, they start acting very irrationally...

 

[diediealsomustdive]

Ultimately I see someone who's heart is with a medium format digital back disgruntly using FX body, who longs for Hassey and Zeiss... Like I said earlier, higher standard than all ...

Rest of us are, but the general crowd...

 

[alantkh]

You are assuming that the noise reduction settings and the noise reduction program used are the same on the D7000 and the D800. It is not. Even the assumption that the pixel density of the 2 cameras are the same, may or may not be true. You think it is true, I am not convinced that it is. I looked thru the sample files for the D7000 and for my requirements I choose to stay with D300 as file quality was better in areas of detail capture (sharper & clearer not smudged in the D7000), noise in the D300 once it is tweaked cleaner than the D7000 file.

You lost me totally. I thought the discussion was on resolution and lens. Since when did noise come in?? The assumption was that you are shooting at low ISO what... common sense right? how can you judge lens performance and shoot at high ISO...

The pixel density are the same or close enough that it does not make any difference to the discussion about lens resolving capability.

 

[2100]

Well, one thing is that pro wedding photographers worry about the correct focusing for their high-end lenses operating between f1.4-f2.8 in low light environments. It's pretty difficult and we bracket like crazy. I am not sure how's the hit rate for a normal amateur photographer. If it's sharp on a 24" LCD (1920x1200) ala 2 megapixels, i think most would be very happy already..... So that's one point for you to think about.

 

[theRBK]

Nikon has made a statement of sorts on which lenses should give good results...

pg 16 of "D800 Technical Guide"

AF-S NIKKOR 14–24 mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S NIKKOR 24–70 mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S NIKKOR 70–200 mm f/2.8G ED VR II
AF-S NIKKOR 16–35 mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S NIKKOR 24–120 mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S NIKKOR 200–400 mm f/4G ED VR II
AF-S NIKKOR 24 mm f/1.4G ED
AF-S NIKKOR 35 mm f/1.4G
AF-S NIKKOR 85 mm f/1.4G
AF-S NIKKOR 200 mm f/2G ED VR II
AF-S NIKKOR 300 mm f/2.8G ED VR II
AF-S NIKKOR 400 mm f/2.8G ED VR
AF-S NIKKOR 500 mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S NIKKOR 600 mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60 mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105 mm f/2.8G IF-ED

although the recommendations are for D800E rather than D800, one would assume that these would do for the D800 as well... not surprising selection of course... of course, they probably assume also optimal aperture value of f8...

 

[diediealsomustdive]

Interesting to note that 50mm f/1.4G and 85mm f/1.8G are not in this list.

One can only hope that Nikon is trying to get people who buy the camera to get the more expensive options (at least in the case of the 85mm) to get more profits from the sales.

One can hope.

 

[asdfg]

Well if you shoot the 9, or 18mp options for small or medium sizes, I don't think there'd need to be any changes to your lens collection. You could say it's a waste of 36mp, but also opens up options having 36mp for specific purposes like macro or landscapes and portraiture (of a different level), and 9 or 18 for general shooting.

 

[ellery]

I saw that from the thrust and direction of your postings that we are not on the same page. I suppose I should amplify my posting help you and other people understand better.

In any evaluation of resolution of a lens with a DSLR you need to consider noise control settings on a DSLR - this has an effect on what quality of details you see in the file. The file is what you are using to make judgements. This is along with any other factors that has impact on what quality of file you will get. Too much and too little noise reduction setting used (whether in camera or in post production workflow) has an effect on the sharpness level seen in the file; noise tends to reduced the apparent sharpness in a file. Think of this (noise) as interference that hides the amount of details than can be seen. This is a a fact you will appreciate if you had work on what noise reduction setting in camera or in post production to get the sharpest file. It is one of those new areas in camera handling for DSLR's that are poorly covered in most of the how to use camera books. Read carefully the newly release Nikon technical guide for the D800 - they mention this indirectly. That little publication contains in essence what is needed to make good files for the D800.

The issue of noise is core inherent for a DSLR, it is there in what ever iso you shoot at. The appropriate handling of how to minimize the noise to maximize the detail in a file is something that needed to be understood. Noise is just more noticeable at higher iso, it does not mean it is not there in lower iso. Under certain situations you can get a lot of more noise when you are shooting at a low iso than if you shoot the same at a higher iso. Knowing what happens when helps you to start on understanding which allows you the tools to work out the best approach to get something done right.

You would want to be able to use the camera to shoot in a variety of situations - low, mid and high light level rather than be restricted to shoot in only a certain range. Similarly you need to be able to know how to use a lens in the same wider range to get the best details in file (aka sharpness). So there for me there is little sense in following common sense or commonly held fallacies if you did not know the basis these were based on. (what is a good example of the semi-blind leading the blind)

Much of how to handle a DSLR to extract the maximum results from the combination of camera body (aka sensor and hardware plus software) and the lens used, is normally poorly documented. Many of the authors who write for the popular masses appears to have missed the new issues that came with digital - they mostly reiterated the instructions used for the film era which for a mass market is about what is good enough. Should you shoot seriously or professionally then you need to work more seriously and dig deeper, research more, experiment, to ultimately come to have a deeper understanding on how to use the equipment and not depend on the equipment to deliver what you need. That is what most professional or obsessed serious hobbyists do otherwise how can there be a difference between the output from them and some one who just shoots occasional and for fun.

You lost me totally. I thought the discussion was on resolution and lens. Since when did noise come in?? The assumption was that you are shooting at low ISO what... common sense right? how can you judge lens performance and shoot at high ISO...

The pixel density are the same or close enough that it does not make any difference to the discussion about lens resolving capability.

 

[Cheesecake]

Nikon has made a statement of sorts on which lenses should give good results...

pg 16 of "D800 Technical Guide"

AF-S NIKKOR 14–24 mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S NIKKOR 24–70 mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S NIKKOR 70–200 mm f/2.8G ED VR II
AF-S NIKKOR 16–35 mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S NIKKOR 24–120 mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S NIKKOR 200–400 mm f/4G ED VR II
AF-S NIKKOR 24 mm f/1.4G ED
AF-S NIKKOR 35 mm f/1.4G
AF-S NIKKOR 85 mm f/1.4G
AF-S NIKKOR 200 mm f/2G ED VR II
AF-S NIKKOR 300 mm f/2.8G ED VR II
AF-S NIKKOR 400 mm f/2.8G ED VR
AF-S NIKKOR 500 mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S NIKKOR 600 mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60 mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105 mm f/2.8G IF-ED

although the recommendations are for D800E rather than D800, one would assume that these would do for the D800 as well... not surprising selection of course... of course, they probably assume also optimal aperture value of f8...

its no surprise that they omitted the D series. they are probably more keen to promote and encourage new and old users to buy brand new lenses so as to raise their own profit instead of diving into the used market for the D lenses.

think you guys worry way too much. i've got a wide selection of D lenses (and only D-lenses) and will do a thorough check through when i get the D800E. i've used the same list of lenses on D3X and they are all an-okay. of cos the jump in MP could render some of these lenses as obsolete but I do not think so.

some people here have such high expectations that i think they are better suited as optical lens engineer instead since they enjoy nit-picking at the littlest detail. perhaps then we will really start to get excellent lens but at a cost of 1million each. or better still, they can work as the QC.

there's always the option of moving on to medium format such as hasselblad so do spare us the needless rants and complaints.