When shooting Hassy 50MP/60MP bodies, their compressed 16-bit raw files are normally slightly above 100MB but it will take just a tad of seconds for the image to show up on LCD. I was wondering how D800 will perform there.
The lack of high ISO samples is telling I think. I think ISO6400 will be usable for most folk (which is pretty good for 36mp) but above that it probably gets a bit ugly (or noisy at least). I don't think this will be a huge issue for the target market anyway.
I expect a down-sized D800 image will be within a stop of the D700 at high ISO's based on the D7000 sensor performance.
Along with so many others I am curious how the D800 will stack up at higher ISO values. I wouldn't be too concerned by the lack of high ISO sample shots though. The highest 'official' sample for the D700 on nikon's site is only ISO 400. I believe the D4 and D3s are the only cameras that have samples which were taken over ISO 400. There are some ISO 6400 D4 shots and some ISO 12800 D3s shots.
I would hope that on a pixel level the D800 would at least match the D7000 noise levels. If this is the case then I would expect it would just edge the D700 when down rez'd.
In addition to the noise performance I am really curious to see the DR performance.
To my untrained eye it really looks like a flash was used to light the base of the tree.
That being said. If the D800 sensor performs like the D7000 sensor then it would have very low read noise at base ISO and permit shadows to be pushed quite significantly.
This camera is NOT for shooters who need high iso results. Not going to happen. Maybe 3200 will be tops but I believe more like 1600, with 3200 being a bit rough. It's a camera that is intended for use by landscape, fashion and studio photography, where it's common to shoot at ISO's below 800/1600. Remember that almost all of the large format backs from Phase One and Hasselblad, which this is intended to compete with, do NOT even offer ISO's of 1600. If you need High ISO performance you need a camera that has a larger pixel pitch, like a D3 or D3s, D4, D700.
Ruahrc wrote:
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".
If you're not going to shoot at 36MP, don't buy a D800? There's literally no point?...Show more →
Your kidding right? Not everybody needs 36 mp all of the time.
I am surprised no wildlife photographers have chimed in.Looks like with that resolution you get a couple hundred mm longer lense with the crop ability given you have the right glass and technique. Doug
i agree. it was also shot as JPEG so i believe that with some RAW engine you can get even better results. but as it is, is good enough for me. But i expected it will be so. 6400 ISO is native for D800 so i believed nikon makes it "good enough"
So, looking at all these high res images I am not necessarily blown away at this point. I think a big part of the problem is that the image files are so massive that it's almost like I can see noise in the darker areas of the images even at iso100. I would not expect this and I know that the argument would be simply that the image is so huge, but I don't see why this matters.
If I look at an image from my D7000 at 100% I don't see any noise. I wouldn't expect to either.
Anyone else see what I'm talking about?
P.S I am not even that impressed with the sharpness I have seen on the images either. When viewed at 100% edges appear quite soft and not exactly awe inspiring. I look forward to seeing real world images from new owners of this camera as the samples I have seen so far have not impressed me like I was hoping.
if you look closely you see noise even at ISO200 of D3s. There is always noise. It depends on your raw converter how much it lets out.
I find it completely ok.
ct8282 wrote:
So, looking at all these high res images I am not necessarily blown away at this point. I think a big part of the problem is that the image files are so massive that it's almost like I can see noise in the darker areas of the images even at iso100. I would not expect this and I know that the argument would be simply that the image is so huge, but I don't see why this matters.
If I look at an image from my D7000 at 100% I don't see any noise. I wouldn't expect to either.
The D800 will have the same per-pixel noise performance of the D7000. Noise is dependent on exposure so to compare two images of equal pixel pitch (like the D800/D7000) you have to compare areas that are of equal exposure, ie fall at the same point on the histogram
ct8282 wrote:
P.S I am not even that impressed with the sharpness I have seen on the images either. When viewed at 100% edges appear quite soft and not exactly awe inspiring. I look forward to seeing real world images from new owners of this camera as the samples I have seen so far have not impressed me like I was hoping.
This is the pitfall of comparing at 100%. An 8MP pixel will always look cleaner/sharper than a 36MP pixel.
Amazing!!!! You can see the plaque between her teeth on the first girls photo. Not seen in the large file but seen on the original. So it picks up some serious detail.
