D800 vs D800E sample photo at 100%

I downloaded the 100% crop of the D800 and D800E photos from this website to take a closer look. When viewing on the website it seemed the D800E had more contrast but otherwise did not look to have more detail. After downloading and applying some contrast and a little sharpening to the D800 cropped photo I was able to make the two 100% crops look identical. I am not questioning that there should be a difference between the output of these two cameras but I do question whether the two 100% crops provided are legit.

I downloaded the 100% crop of the D800 and D800E photos from this website to take a closer look. When viewing on the website it seemed the D800E had more contrast but otherwise did not look to have more detail. After downloading and applying some contrast and a little sharpening to the D800 cropped photo I was able to make the two 100% crops look identical. I am not questioning that there should be a difference between the output of these two cameras but I do question whether the two 100% crops provided are legit.

Probably not legit - they may have been just trying to illustrate the point.

Probably not legit - they may have been just trying to illustrate the point.

Hi, if you're referring to the examples in this article: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikon-d800-d800e-digital-slr-hands-on-review-18420 Then they were from the Nikon presentation, which you can find a link to on here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/new-36mp-nikon-d800---d800e-digital-slrs-announced-18421

Hi, if you're referring to the examples in this article:
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikon-d800-d800e-digital-slr-hands-on-review-18420

Then they were from the Nikon presentation, which you can find a link to on here:
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/new-36mp-nikon-d800---d800e-digital-slrs-announced-18421

Full size samples from the D800 have been provided by Nikon here: http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/sample01.htm and D800E samples here: http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/sample02.htm

Full size samples from the D800 have been provided by Nikon here:
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/sample01.htm

and D800E samples here:
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/sample02.htm

Cheers Josh, I just tested one of the Nikon samples, A pretty girl with a nice little pussy cat.....:D Took the image up to 800% in IE9, Still no pixelation to be seen anywhere, In fact at the default download size it looks a tad oversharp, That is probably similar to many downsized images, But at 400/600/800 % it look great, So on the face of it and until we see one of your hands on, It looks like Nikon have performed a miracle in squeezing that much resolution into a full frame sensor. Great camera for the pixel peepers.....;)

Cheers Josh, I just tested one of the Nikon samples, A pretty girl with a nice little pussy cat.....

Took the image up to 800% in IE9, Still no pixelation to be seen anywhere, In fact at the default download size it looks a tad oversharp, That is probably similar to many downsized images, But at 400/600/800 % it look great, So on the face of it and until we see one of your hands on, It looks like Nikon have performed a miracle in squeezing that much resolution into a full frame sensor.

Great camera for the pixel peepers.....

Just had a look at some others from the links by Josh....! I have a feeling that models are gonna hate this camera, Just look at the spots & pimples some of these pretty girls have, Either that or they are going to have to pay thier MUA's a great deal more money......:D

Just had a look at some others from the links by Josh....!

I have a feeling that models are gonna hate this camera, Just look at the spots & pimples some of these pretty girls have, Either that or they are going to have to pay thier MUA's a great deal more money......

[quote]Just had a look at some others from the links by Josh....! I have a feeling that models are gonna hate this camera, Just look at the spots & pimples some of these pretty girls have, Either that or they are going to have to pay thier MUA's a great deal more money......:D[/quote] My thoughts exactly and how scary is it to be able to see such detail on the screen? At that size of print we'd be standing well away from it, but it's actually not very pleasant to be able to see that much detail in glorious technicolour! Also not wild about some of the OOF detail, although I suppose we should maybe be looking at the lens for that.

Quote:Just had a look at some others from the links by Josh....!

I have a feeling that models are gonna hate this camera, Just look at the spots & pimples some of these pretty girls have, Either that or they are going to have to pay thier MUA's a great deal more money......


My thoughts exactly and how scary is it to be able to see such detail on the screen? At that size of print we'd be standing well away from it, but it's actually not very pleasant to be able to see that much detail in glorious technicolour! Also not wild about some of the OOF detail, although I suppose we should maybe be looking at the lens for that.

Interesting commentary on the method used by each of the (presumably) experienced photographers who took the sample photographs used by Nikon. Of the seven images, five used Manual exposure and two used Aperture Priority Auto.

Interesting commentary on the method used by each of the (presumably) experienced photographers who took the sample photographs used by Nikon.

Of the seven images, five used Manual exposure and two used Aperture Priority Auto.

More importantly have nikon designed a full range of lenses to accomadate this high resolution sensor? Or will it show even greater weaknesses of the lenses we thought were superb ????

More importantly have nikon designed a full range of lenses to accomadate this high resolution sensor? Or will it show even greater weaknesses of the lenses we thought were superb ????

[quote]More importantly have nikon designed a full range of lenses to accomadate this high resolution sensor? Or will it show even greater weaknesses of the lenses we thought were superb ????[/quote] It's not getting close to lens resolution. 36Mp on a Nikon FF is equivalent to about 15Mp on a Canon APS-C sensor, or 8Mp on a 4/3 sensor, or - do your own calculations.

Quote:More importantly have nikon designed a full range of lenses to accomadate this high resolution sensor? Or will it show even greater weaknesses of the lenses we thought were superb ????


It's not getting close to lens resolution. 36Mp on a Nikon FF is equivalent to about 15Mp on a Canon APS-C sensor, or 8Mp on a 4/3 sensor, or - do your own calculations.

[quote]It's not getting close to lens resolution. 36Mp on a Nikon FF is equivalent to about 15Mp on a Canon APS-C sensor, or 8Mp on a 4/3 sensor, or - do your own calculations.[/quote]It is for some lenses. Remember that APS-C crops out the middle but the full frame lens has to project at the required resolution across the whole of the projected image. A look at a few lens charts will show that the lens resolving power falls as you move from the centre, so at wide open apertures some resolution issues may crop up. Also chromatic aberration may be easier to spot. And at some point past f9 diffraction will cut in to limit the maximum resolution (you could run your own calculations to verify that). So yes a m4/3 lens may well be projected a good lines per mm level of detail but remember it does so over a smaller projected area. So the full frame lens has to do that over a greater area. I think its a fair question and time will tell. Nikon have some excellent lenses so it will be interesting to see. And even if the lens is limiting resolution it will still be a significantly higher resolution than the camera it replaces. Those extra pixels will also make it easier to correct for lens defects so even those using sub optimal lenses may benefit.

Quote:It's not getting close to lens resolution. 36Mp on a Nikon FF is equivalent to about 15Mp on a Canon APS-C sensor, or 8Mp on a 4/3 sensor, or - do your own calculations.
It is for some lenses. Remember that APS-C crops out the middle but the full frame lens has to project at the required resolution across the whole of the projected image. A look at a few lens charts will show that the lens resolving power falls as you move from the centre, so at wide open apertures some resolution issues may crop up. Also chromatic aberration may be easier to spot. And at some point past f9 diffraction will cut in to limit the maximum resolution (you could run your own calculations to verify that).

So yes a m4/3 lens may well be projected a good lines per mm level of detail but remember it does so over a smaller projected area. So the full frame lens has to do that over a greater area.

I think its a fair question and time will tell. Nikon have some excellent lenses so it will be interesting to see. And even if the lens is limiting resolution it will still be a significantly higher resolution than the camera it replaces. Those extra pixels will also make it easier to correct for lens defects so even those using sub optimal lenses may benefit.

[quote]Remember that APS-C crops out the middle but the full frame lens has to project at the required resolution across the whole of the projected image. A So yes a m4/3 lens may well be projected a good lines per mm level of detail but remember it does so over a smaller projected area. So the full frame lens has to do that over a greater area. .[/quote] Those comments are really only valid when related to the use of an FX lens on either a DX or m4/3 camera. Lenses designed for DX or m4/3 bear the same relationship to their respective sensor sizes as FX lenses do to FX sensors.

Quote:Remember that APS-C crops out the middle but the full frame lens has to project at the required resolution across the whole of the projected image. A

So yes a m4/3 lens may well be projected a good lines per mm level of detail but remember it does so over a smaller projected area. So the full frame lens has to do that over a greater area.
.


Those comments are really only valid when related to the use of an FX lens on either a DX or m4/3 camera. Lenses designed for DX or m4/3 bear the same relationship to their respective sensor sizes as FX lenses do to FX sensors.

That was my point. So the converse of because a 4/3 lens can achieve a certain level of resolution per mm of projected image it does not follow a full frame lens can.

That was my point. So the converse of because a 4/3 lens can achieve a certain level of resolution per mm of projected image it does not follow a full frame lens can.

?? I think the main reason that the edges of the image don't have the same resolution is because the light is hitting the sensor at an oblique angle - so it's bound to be more blurred, even if you discount the problems that digital sensors have with oblique light. M4/3 lenses tend to deliver light more nearly perpendicular to the sensor and are less affected by this problem. APS-C (cropped cameras) don't pick up this part of the image and therefore avoid most of the problem. Whether the 36Mp FF sensor is more susceptible to problems at the edges of the image is something we don't know yet.

??

I think the main reason that the edges of the image don't have the same resolution is because the light is hitting the sensor at an oblique angle - so it's bound to be more blurred, even if you discount the problems that digital sensors have with oblique light. M4/3 lenses tend to deliver light more nearly perpendicular to the sensor and are less affected by this problem. APS-C (cropped cameras) don't pick up this part of the image and therefore avoid most of the problem. Whether the 36Mp FF sensor is more susceptible to problems at the edges of the image is something we don't know yet.

[quote]because the light is hitting the sensor at an oblique angle - so it's bound to be more blurred,[/quote] Is it? I always thought it was part of the optical compromise when designing rectilinear lenses and the focussing achievable at the centre and the focussing achievable at the edge. Which is why you pay more for better edge quality because you need more correction elements at the edge. You learn something new every day.

Quote:because the light is hitting the sensor at an oblique angle - so it's bound to be more blurred,


Is it? I always thought it was part of the optical compromise when designing rectilinear lenses and the focussing achievable at the centre and the focussing achievable at the edge. Which is why you pay more for better edge quality because you need more correction elements at the edge.
You learn something new every day.