- Messages
- 1,815
- Name
- James
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's OK people, Ken Rockwell says the only lens you need for the D800 is the 28-300mm.
Haha, Ken Rockwell.
Haha, Ken Rockwell.
Nikon D800......
- Thread starter cowasaki
- Start date
- Messages
- 9,848
- Name
- Vlad
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It will be very interesting to see the reviews when they start to appear.
Which reviews?
Which reviews do you look to for honest opinion? If you think any magazine or major website is going to say anything other than "OMFG please kiss my bottom Mr Nikon" then you are sadly mistaken.
Equally, few early adopters are going to say "I was so stupid to spunk the cash on this" - thats true of every big ticket item, reluctance to look stupid always seems to drown out anyone with an honest opinion.
No, it will be over a year before you hear anything like the real truth, but I can't imagine its going to deviate much from the current view...
Feel free to come back and quote me 12 months from now ;-)
- Messages
- 6,918
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I always find DPReview quite detailed and exhaustive in their reviews. They've been spot on with the cameras I've bought. Cameras I've bought not just on the opinions in their reviews I should add.
DPReview seemed quite open and unbiased in their reviews of the Canon S100 recently and the numerous dodgy versions of that camera they received before they got a version they felt they could review properly.
There are so many reviewers, that if there were major problems they would come to light pretty quickly.
I think as soon as the reviews are out in number, and they get in peoples hands, the true verdict will not be long coming imho. Yes, people will not be too eager to 'dis' their new purchase, but those that take it uber seriously, or are a Pro, will quickly voice their dissatisfaction should that be the case. Bad news travels fast, and these days even faster than ever as people have an opinion on everything, and can easily share it with everyone. :shrug:
- Messages
- 1,069
- Name
- Scott
- Edit My Images
- No
I wouldn't say that was entirely accurate. I remember when the D700 & 5DMk2 were released and head to head reviews were given by magazines like What Digital Camera, Photography Monthly etc. and they found in favour of the 5DMk2, so it doesn't go all Nikons way. As far as I read, I remember the reviews being honest and fair - seperate out what doesn't apply to you and then and only then then are minds made up. Personally, I think it's a little foolhardy to preorder anything at such an early stage.
For me, I'll be waiting for images pertinent to my style of photography, reading EXIF info and then seeing what people honestly have to say.
- Messages
- 9,848
- Name
- Vlad
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Actually, I didn't just mean kissing Nikon's backside, any vendor is the same. People who get review kit don't say bad things about it, well not unless they don't intend on getting more or having any advertising...
If you haven't seen this before then you haven't worked inside the press!
If you haven't seen this before then you haven't worked inside the press!
Ah see, you've not quoted the whole sentence.
"So buy the D800E (with its higher perceived res), deliberately incur some diffraction by shooting at f/13/14 (if needed) will eliminate any potential moire and give greater Dof."
As in, buy the D800 & stay under f/9 to stop diffraction creeping in or buy the D800E (mildly sharper due to modified OLPF) and shoot at f/11 for greater DoF and if any slight diffraction does creep in it will hold back moire. Forgive me, it was kinda rhetorical really, I was thinking aloud due to some headspin on the whole D800 thing
Ah, thanks Scott - I understand what you were saying now (am also in a headspin over the whole 800 thing!
).Btw - what ND are you using for your seascapes?
- Messages
- 1,069
- Name
- Scott
- Edit My Images
- No
I find if you put semantics to one side and read between the lines, even though they'll say "it's a very capable camera which delivers great results but if you don't want to mess around worrying about xy or z then the other may be what you're looking for." In short, there is some level of impartiality.
Ah, thanks Scott - I understand what you were saying now (am also in a headspin over the whole 800 thing!
Btw - what ND are you using for your seascapes?
Yes, will shooting the D800e at f/10 offer the same image quality as shooting the D800 at f/9.
My seascapes are normally shot with the Lee Big Stopper (or the B+W ND110) together with a grad. The usual setup is ND3.0 + ND 0.9 graduated filter (Lee).
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not true in my case, i bought one of the very first MKIV's and said it was a pile of crap from day one
- Messages
- 4,225
- Name
- Robin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What didn't you like about it?
bastic
A star
- Messages
- 3,795
- Name
- Lukas
- Edit My Images
- Yes
bastic
A star
- Messages
- 3,795
- Name
- Lukas
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Looks impressive
I liked 5d3 high ISO samples and was worried that at such high resolution d800 will look worse but it doesnt
I do like to 'pixel peep' from time to time but not when I shoot at such high ISO
- Messages
- 7,821
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I thought that the current Nikon bodies removed the CA in camera?
Must have been turned off on this one
bastic
A star
- Messages
- 3,795
- Name
- Lukas
- Edit My Images
- Yes
never heard of that...
- Messages
- 7,821
- Edit My Images
- Yes
bastic
A star
- Messages
- 3,795
- Name
- Lukas
- Edit My Images
- Yes
In camera lateral CA removal, certainly on the D300, D700 and D3
is it?!?!?!?!
I bet you it is switched off on mine lol
which menu is that ??
I think it's automatic - so not in the menus.
I can't find any mention of the word 'chromatic' in the D300, D700 or D3 manuals so it must be permanently on.
Capture NX2 has two controls in two different editing sections - Auto Lateral Color Aberration (on/off) and Lateral Color Aberration (Red-Cyan & Blue-Yellow sliders).
- Messages
- 7,821
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think that it is automatically applied to .jpeg and raw images, it can only be turned off on the raw images using Capture NX2, it is permanent with the .jpegs
I think you're right.
- Messages
- 7,821
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What is strange is they do not make much fuss about this feature in their brochures, I found it almost by accident as a throw away comment.
- Messages
- 7,821
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Perhaps cos they dont want to admit their lenses 'may' have chromatic aberration? If the camera deals with it anyway, it's not a problem.
Most lenses would have it in some form, even top end astro scopes struggle to totally eliminate it, and they come at a fair old price.
It's also strange that none of the camera manuals make any sort of reference to it.
Although I've seen it in the FX body brochures I'd actually forgotten about it til you mentioned it here.
- Messages
- 9,928
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm not sure if this has been posted before but it's very impressive even despite having a full production team!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU54Acbsmuk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU54Acbsmuk
- Messages
- 7,821
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I just stumbled upon this link on the 5D3 thread, LINK it is a comparison on a Canon forum.
Whilst I am not interested in a one v the other debate, the thread starters summary at the foot of his post suggests that the D800 has 2 stops better dynamic range, is this a product of the down sampling that they seem intent on doing for these tests or is that in real terms an accurate statement.
This coupled with the number of pixels I have to crop my bird images with may make this an interesting body for my wildlife photography.
Whilst I am not interested in a one v the other debate, the thread starters summary at the foot of his post suggests that the D800 has 2 stops better dynamic range, is this a product of the down sampling that they seem intent on doing for these tests or is that in real terms an accurate statement.
This coupled with the number of pixels I have to crop my bird images with may make this an interesting body for my wildlife photography.
- Messages
- 9,848
- Name
- Vlad
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That is quite interesting, but the link they got it from has some interesting comparision shots too:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
I just checked out a D300S vs a D800 on their still life sample...
I'd say if you downsampled the D800 to the same res as the D300S it might *just* have the edge.
The curious thing with this test is that it shows that a D300S is capable of really acceptable large sized images at ISO1600 and ISO3200... this is more to do with the lighting of the seen and the exposure times than anything else.
I have had enough gash, noisy images from my D300 but am just having a eureka moment about exposure that probably is a lot of the answer.... I wonder how many other high ISO fans are also moaning about it because they also haven't clicked what the trick is to keep it down....
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
I just checked out a D300S vs a D800 on their still life sample...
I'd say if you downsampled the D800 to the same res as the D300S it might *just* have the edge.
The curious thing with this test is that it shows that a D300S is capable of really acceptable large sized images at ISO1600 and ISO3200... this is more to do with the lighting of the seen and the exposure times than anything else.
I have had enough gash, noisy images from my D300 but am just having a eureka moment about exposure that probably is a lot of the answer.... I wonder how many other high ISO fans are also moaning about it because they also haven't clicked what the trick is to keep it down....
- Messages
- 7,821
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have always been happy with my high ISO stuff from the D300, not as happy as with the results from the D700 though
I shall wait and see the real world results once it is released.
- Messages
- 560
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That's because those "high iso" shots they shot are completely meaningless for real world high-iso shooting.
Would you ever shoot at 1/1250 and 6400 ISO? ...No! That's a very well lit test shot, its not a person in a dark room where you have to go up to 6400 ISO just to get a shutter speed that isn't all blury and shakey. If something wasn't moving you would be able use a tripod and so keep the ISO low...just like everyone managed for 150 years before the invention of the D3...
- Messages
- 7,821
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just because we managed for 150 years does not mean that we should ignore the advantages provided by new technology, I have used a high ISO setting to achieve a high shutter speed when I wanted it, because I have the technology to allow me to do so, and can think of no reason that I should not have done so.
I do not think that we should be constrained by what we could do with old film cameras, you need to understand and embrace the modern technology and use it to your advantage.
So? (bear with me, I'm not being rude)
I don't understand the point. Sure, real world situations require 6400 when the light is low, but does that matter when comparing the sensor's ability?
If we were to set-up controlled lighting and take 1 shot at iso 6400, 1/2000 sec and 2nd shot at iso 6400, 1/100 (with lighting levels to match), would the quality at the end be different? I guess you're suggesting they will be different, so have you got any links to such a test? (and if you have, then I guess you're right and I've learnt something).
- Messages
- 7,821
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This subject was raised by StewartR a while back and debated at great length, various theories were put forward as to why it should and should not be the case, rather than hijack this thread have a read HERE
- Messages
- 5,275
- Name
- Ryan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So for those less technically minded, is the general concensus that the D800 will be worse than the D700 (say) at high ISOs? I thought the buzz was it was as good as if not better.
Personally I always doubted that a 36mp would be as good as 12mp for noise but I'm more than happy to be proved wrong.....
Personally I always doubted that a 36mp would be as good as 12mp for noise but I'm more than happy to be proved wrong.....
Thank you. I didn't see anything there to suggests that the amount of light prevents these high iso shots from representing what a camera can do. OOF areas are more of an issue, and you have to take that into account.
- Messages
- 560
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Eh? I think you misunderstand me...I shoot at high iso all the time, because I have to. In fact, if you'd clicked on the last picture I posted to Flickr shown in my .sig, you'd have seen it was ISO 6400, 1/30sec, F2.8...(and handheld, no flash allowed...) which is so far out of the possibilities for old film cameras its not even worth contemplating!
The Auto-Iso function with minimum shutter speed is invaluable but I will still choose to keep the ISO as low as possible to maximise picture quality however, and so frequently disable the function to force ISO 200 when shooting outdoors (e.g. landscapes).
- Messages
- 560
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The simple version is that noise in the Blacks (shadows) is far more apparent than in lit areas. (and worse if shooting jpg due to compression algorithms being biased towards the centre of the histogram). Basically, shoot test charts by all means, but in the dark...
The actual shutter speed per-se will not make a difference until you get into very long exposures and quantum effects come in...but that's not really relevant here.