Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
The test is interesting in that AP puts resolution at 38 on their test basis.
I think the next highest DSLR has been the Sony Alpha 77 24 MP at 32.
Whilst I have reservations about judging resolution on a monitor, AP's method makes basic comparisons one model to another possible.
Perhaps the main point is AP puts resolution well above anything else currently available in 35mm format.
By AP's standards noise holds up well at 3200. There is also only a moderate resolution fall to 34.
The report suggests MLU is important for landscapes at slower than 1/125 - though I am not convinced the reviewer was aware of the compromise of Nikon's 2 second exposure delay mode which might make 1/60 OK. It is reasonable to expect a "safe" MLU speed around 1/15 at 12 MP needs to be faster at 36 MP.
For the few who already own a D800 - do you broadly agree with the test?
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
If you have already paid out over £2000 for a camera body why would you need a bunch of sycophantic camera hacks to justify your choice with dubious testing?
I think it's fair to say that using the D800 WILL be like moving from 35mm to medium format, with the emphasis on better technique, MLU, sturdy tripods and plates etc. - it's just that many of this generation of new photographers never made that jump and so don't realise that it can be an issue.
Maybe they see the opportunity for the next generation of photo mag articles - "How to make that 48Mp D900 sensor deliver" and so on...
Chasing a never ending dream at a never ending increase in cost with 99% of users never needing the performance of the camera.
This time next year you'll find some people on EPZ asking when the replacement for the D800 will be out as it's bound to make you a better photographer!
I doubt the majority of new to DSLR users will care, For just over 500 quid, They get 24 Mega pixies with the D3200, More than enough resolution to set up shop as wedding photographers, All wrapped up in a nice lightweight, Colour coordinated body too......
Whats more, They will not need a 36 Terabyte server to store all the images, A laptop will do if they shoot jpegs, Personally I think the camera makers are getting a bung from the hard drive makers, Its all a big cash rush before SSD's take over the world.......
There is always an endless silver lined " Cloud " for some, I guess.....
Quote: This time next year you'll find some people on EPZ asking when the replacement for the D800 will be out
LOL.... I believe the question has already been asked, By Hasselblad headquarters.....
There was a saying in the early days of computers for the masses that the size of software increased in a direct ratio to the size of memory and hard drives available at the time....36 million pixels?...to print A4 at 300dpi and view on a monitor of doubtful quality?...who is kidding who?
Being half asleep, I had to google MLU. The first description that came up was "Mean Length of Utterance, a measure of linguistic productivity"
Whilst the D800 is on my wish list. Is it worth spending an other 300 quid on the D800e.
One reason for asking for feedback from the few who have the camera is a D800e is on the horizon - but in approximately 9 months time when street discounts come through. Right now, having just got a new car, I cannot afford one
I do a lot of wildlife and cannot afford anything longer than the 200-400 or faster than the 300 f2.8 VR so the D300s plays a part for extra magnification as does the D7000 for it's extra resolution even though the AF is not quite so good.
At the moment the D3s does my sports and low light work; and many of my landscapes when magnification is not an issue.
An A2 printer is on the near horizon.
A Gitzo Series 5 was acquired long ago as a good route to sharpness with the 200-400 + converters on DX.
The D800 or 800e is the planned wildlife upgrade when magnification is important for it's superior AF and good DX resolution - and price relative to a 600mm
The D800/e also fits an FX landscape upgrade for it's resolution. It also fits in well with my planned photographic evolution to A2 and maybe A1 prints.
Many, including me, have used a medium format film body with the challenge of an "earthquake" mirror action - few have actively used medium format digital because of the entry cost of the bodies.
If I win the lottery big time the D4, D800e and a 600 could soon arrive.
In the real world no testing is as good as hiring something like a D800e for 2 weeks for my type of photography from perhaps Calumet and getting at least half the rent back if I buy one. I do not regard the AP test as using "a bunch of sycophantic camera hacks to justify your choice with dubious testing?"
What can also help is constructive feedback from those who own a 36MP camera.
Len the answer is more how big do you print. If Fred Miranda cannot see the resolution difference 5DIII to D800 at 17x22 size (close to A2 size) then how subtle will be the D800 to D800E differences? In fact reading his article I would say you are better putting the money into decent tilt shift lenses so you can optimise your depth of field in the image while keeping the aperture large to keep away from diffraction.
As mentioned above it sounds that if you want to maximise the resolution you will need to invest in techniques used in medium format or even large format cameras.
Sounds like top quality A2 prints are a reality with good technique. Now do you need that????
also with long lenses will we see even more atmospheric issues with such high resolution??
This is a genuine question prompted by this forum...how do you see the difference in a well exposed full frame image shot on 12mp and one shot 36mp using a decent £150/200 monitor or a print at A4 on a decent epson or canon printeras used in the "real world"?
Quote: This is a genuine question prompted by this forum...how do you see the difference in a well exposed full frame image shot on 12mp and one shot 36mp using a decent £150/200 monitor or a print at A4 on a decent epson or canon printeras used in the "real world"?
You don't see any great difference, simple as that. The difference only becomes apparent on a 6x4 foot print.
I remember seeing demos of prints of various sizes taken on a 6Mp and a 12Mp camera a few years ago, where the viewer could only tell the difference when the prints size got to above 30x20 inches. That was a real eye opener for me - and as someone above has said, 90% of the D800 purchasers will never use it close to its full potential.
Quote: You don't see any great difference, simple as that. The difference only becomes apparent on a 6x4 foot print.
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
1st March 2014 - 31st March 2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View March's Photo Month Calendar