Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

D800 v. D800e

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

User_Removed
10 Jan 2013 - 5:46 PM

Does anyone here have personal practical experience of using both the D800 and the D800e?

If so, is the increase in sharpness with the "e" version as good as some pundits suggest?

Secondly, is the lack of any of the predicted moiré problems as genuine as some pundits suggest?

I am really only wanting to hear about opinions on those issues as a direct comparison between the two models from users with personal experience of both.

Many thanks.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
10 Jan 2013 - 5:46 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62426 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
11 Jan 2013 - 6:00 PM

As no one has replied within 24 hours I presume no one owns and shoot with both cameras.
The UK amateur photographer test showed the D800e as having about 4% more file resolution.
Reports of issues with moire seem infrequent. There is software to reduce the problem when it shows in a image.
If I win the lottery for a substantial amount Smile I will add the D800e to my D800 and report in more detail.

thewilliam
11 Jan 2013 - 6:58 PM

What seems like an eternity ago, we used Kodak DCS760 bodies that came without AA filters. Sharpness was way ahead of its contemporary, the Nikon D1X, that had the same pixel count.

Moiré was sometimes an issue, especially when photographing denim in the studio. We got used to a new way of bracketing: the camera was rotated slightly between shots of the same scene and at least one would be free of moiré.

Then Capture One did a brilliant anti-moiré plug-in that remained as part of Photoshop after the free trial period had expired.

Last Modified By thewilliam at 11 Jan 2013 - 6:58 PM
mikehit
mikehit  46107 forum posts United Kingdom9 Constructive Critique Points
11 Jan 2013 - 8:14 PM

Apparently the problems with moire are decreasing as resolution of sensors increases because moire is dependent on details with a pattern repeat smaller than the resolution of the sensor.
On Luminous Landascape, Michael Reichmann has often considered it a relatively minor problem for most photographers, and maybe the AA filter is a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

779HOB
779HOB  2998 forum posts United Kingdom
12 Jan 2013 - 7:17 AM

I am half thinking about buying an 800 - I had no plans to replace my 700 as my main camera until I was with someone shooting with an 800. It seemed to be producing amazingly clear shots at high ISO - shooting at 3200 there just wasn't any noise. I shoot a fair amount in low light and don't use a flash very often so this made me take a little more interest in the 800.

Am I right in thinking that the 800e is only meant to be better when shooting at plus 8 apertures?

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62426 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
12 Jan 2013 - 4:27 PM


Quote:
Am I right in thinking that the 800e is only meant to be better when shooting at plus 8 apertures?

My understanding is it has more resolution at every aperture.

User_Removed
12 Jan 2013 - 7:43 PM


Quote: Am I right in thinking that the 800e is only meant to be better when shooting at plus 8 apertures?
My understanding is it has more resolution at every aperture.

The "resolution" is actually the same in both models. It is the way that the very high resolution is used to produce "sharp, detailed" images that differs. And, yes, I can't see why that would only apply at certain apertures.

779HOB
779HOB  2998 forum posts United Kingdom
12 Jan 2013 - 8:24 PM

I think they were saying the anti-aliasing filter was not effective at wider apertures. I didn't read the article but was told about it, I will ask the person who told me where they saw it.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62426 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
12 Jan 2013 - 8:56 PM

Nikon's comment is at https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/51632/kw/Moire

779HOB
779HOB  2998 forum posts United Kingdom
12 Jan 2013 - 9:01 PM

Thanks Len, reading that I would say the 800 is all I need as I don't work in a studio ever or do landscapes. Now I need to decide if I can save a little more and get one or buy an X100s for fun!

strawman
strawman  1021997 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jan 2013 - 12:23 AM

Re real world resolution, when the lens is stopped down past a certain point the lens itself limits resolution through its diffraction characteristics. When the lens is wider open than that then assuming it out-resolves the sensor then the anti-aliasing filter may well be the limiting element. But like everything there are many items that can impact the final image qualities so it is best not to get too hung up on it.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62426 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
13 Jan 2013 - 7:29 AM


Quote: Thanks Len, reading that I would say the 800 is all I need as I don't work in a studio ever or do landscape

For those trying to make a similar decision there are two other Nikon link,
https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/9554h https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1391

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62426 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
13 Jan 2013 - 7:53 AM


Quote: Re real world resolution, when the lens is stopped down past a certain point the lens itself limits resolution through its diffraction characteristics. When the lens is wider open than that then assuming it out-resolves the sensor then the anti-aliasing filter may well be the limiting element. But like everything there are many items that can impact the final image qualities so it is best not to get too hung up on it.

Sorry I, and perhaps more important the laws of camera optics, do not agree with any of this.
While diffraction limits lens resolution measured in isolation image resolution is limited by both sensor resolution and lens resolution.
If you increase sensor resolution, image resolution goes up even when the lens is operating at a diffraction limited aperture. On a technicality every lens is diffraction limited at every aperture. It just so happens that other lens aberrations keep the lens resolution below the diffraction limit for most apertures.
When a lens is wide open resolution, particularly in the corners, is lower than stopped down to perhaps f8 and f11. Lens resolution in isolation never sets an upper limit to image resolution. If sensor resolution is increased, image resolution goes up with every lens at every aperture and every focus distance.
Digressing slightly while the best image resolution is obtained by combining the best lenses and the best sensors, making the big leap from 12MP to 36MP usually provides more extra image resolution than upgrading your lenses. In the context of this thread the file resolution increase between a D800 and D800e of up to about 4% in file a resolution is relatively small, but useful in some shooting situations. Depending on the individual resolution of the lens and sensor, a 4% increase in file resolution may require a 12-15% increase in sensor MP when no low pass filter effect is used.

Last Modified By LenShepherd at 13 Jan 2013 - 7:58 AM
User_Removed
13 Jan 2013 - 11:43 AM


Quote: If sensor resolution is increased, image resolution goes up with every lens at every aperture and every focus distance.
.

That is undoubtedly true.

But, again, it does mask the fact that, in the final photograph, file resolution and image sharpness/detail are not necessarily the same thing.

In the 10 months I have been using the D800 I have come across countless folk (here and elsewhere) who say that a 36Mp sensor is pointless. My reply to that is that, for snapshots printed from full frame to A3 - or whatever - that may be true. But what the 36Mp D800 sensor gives me is masses more data in the Raw files to play with and manipulate in a huge variety of different ways.

In a sense, it extends my control and creativity over the final print even farther away from the moment of clicking the shutter release. That entire concept is anathema to some photographers - but I like it.

strawman
strawman  1021997 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jan 2013 - 5:23 PM


Quote: Sorry I, and perhaps more important the laws of camera optics, do not agree with any of this.

Len care to give me an example. Have you by chance disproved the airy disks and removed the Rayleigh criterion? The following is technically incorrect.

Quote: If sensor resolution is increased, image resolution goes up with every lens at every aperture and every focus distance.

The correct statement is;
If sensor resolution is increased you reach a point where the recording resolution increases but the resolvable detail is ultimately limited by the optical aberrations of the lenses or diffraction.

There is a value in having an oversampling of the system for digital signal processing and compensating for lens aberrations. Also remember the diffraction value changes with wavelength and the anti-aliasing filter by its nature has to impact ultimate resolution. This is why the D800e is capable of resolving more detail than the D800 with certain lenses before they are stopped down too far. If it were not so Nikon for example would not have put out their application note on getting the best from the D800.

It is there in the maths that define how optics work. I think you are confusing the a number of things from the sample data size with point at which diffraction or aberration starts to impact the image and with the point at which you are truly limited. And as I said there is a value in having sensors that can resolve more than the lens can. This is a fairly good basic coverage of the issue if it helps. There is still a value in a D800 replacement having even more pixels. But expect to get less and less in terms of real world resolvable detail.

But its like depth of field it is important to note what the maths tells you and understand where the rules of thumb apply (distant objects) and where they do not (true macro photography). A 36mp D800 does not truly capture at 36mp resolution so the maths needs to be backed off. that is not to run down or complain about the D800.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.