No 100% crop mode for video and it looks like no remote control. Those two would have had me jumping all over this and ordering 3. A little disappointed because 3xD4 is unrealistic for me .
I'm not blown away by the high res files myself. Whilst the level of detail is incredible, largely because the images are so massive, when doing the ol' pixel peeping I am not blown away by the sharpness and when viewing at full res you can see very apparent noise even at very low ISO. This aside, it looks like an epic camera indeed and I am certainly considering a swap from the D4 to this but I think overall the D4 is more enticing for me.
I think I will likely stick and enjoy my D4 next week, woop woop.
Bruce Sawle wrote:
Has anyone been able to confirm if there is a small raw setting?
I have been looking for this all over the place, this one feature would make the D800 a consideration, but at 36MP and 75MB RAW it is not of interest to me. They add an sRAW option and then I might consider it.
James Markus wrote:
Oddly...all but two are shot at f/8? One at f/10, and one at f/4.5. I want to see some wide open shoots. What would a camera like this bokeh be like?
The bokeh will be identical as bokeh is a function of the lens and not the sensor. The only difference is that the bokeh blob will be 1000px high rather than 750px in a lower res camera.
The Nikon sample shots do reveal that stopped down, the Nikkor zooms appear easily capable of resolving 36MP even out to the extreme corners of the frame. Quite impressive. The question does remain, however, how good is that 14-24 going to hold up into the corners at f2.8? Also notice that nothing is really shot at higher than f/8, since diffraction would probably start to rob your images of crispness at anything higher.
I suspect by putting up most of the shots at f/8, they are doing their homework on marketing. f/8 seems to be the ideal sweet spot for lens performance but avoiding diffraction, leading to maximum detail/sharpness. This is not a surprise when you're selling your new 36MP camera as the "detail king".
wjmeyer wrote:
I have been looking for this all over the place, this one feature would make the D800 a consideration, but at 36MP and 75MB RAW it is not of interest to me. They add an sRAW option and then I might consider it.
If you're not going to shoot at 36MP, don't buy a D800? There's literally no point?
I would like to see side by side comparison images with the D4 vs D800. The D800 has more pixels but the individual size of pixels is smaller (with possibly more noise).
IsleofGough wrote:
I would like to see side by side comparison images with the D4 vs D800. The D800 has more pixels but the individual size of pixels is smaller (with possibly more noise).
The D800 is absolutely going to have more noise than the D4.
cputeq wrote:
Non-JPEG shooters that don't always want 36MP files, but at other times do?
Is hard to downsample your files in post?
Basically you have to make a decision. If you're a 12MP shooter with the occasional want for 36MP, then you're better off buying a 12MP camera, and stitching when you want the res.
If you're a 36MP shooter but occasionally only need 12MP, then just downsample when you don't need it.
If you're halfway in between, then I guess you're screwed. So just pick whatever's cheaper .
I looked at the samples again and now this time i like 800 images more but when i zoomed in i like 800E, totally confused, i still like to know, which one is better for outdoor shooting?
Uzay wrote:
I looked at the samples again and now this time i like 800 images more but when i zoomed in i like 800E, totally confused, i still like to know, which one is better for outdoor shooting?
If you're asking then go with the 800. If you don't know exactly when and where you want no AA filter, it's just going to be a lot of grief when aliasing strikes.
The E should not actually give an appreciable resolution boost over the plain 800 if the filter is well designed. It will give slightly better microcontrast and crispness at the price of risk of aliasing (moire, stairstepping etc).
.
.