p.3 #1 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
Not sure here which I'd choose. Without AA would be great for extra-sharp landscapes. With AA would be better for shots with patterns like the chain link fence-behind-fence, certain fabrics, car radiators, louvers, and fishnet stockings. I'd probably take the sharpness hit with an AA filter given 36 mp resolution, and see how it worked out from there. I sure don't like accidental moire patterns in my pics. OTOH, I can't really say it's ever been much of a problem for me.
p.3 #2 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
B SMOOTH wrote:
This quote from Chambers really irks me for some reason... yeah, let's just keep jacking up the prices of lenses.
Note that the recent Zeiss designs (21/2.8, 35/1.4 and 25/2) have already become more highly corrected than predecessors, with correspondingly higher prices. I would like to see Zeiss take that approach still further, even if it meant greater cost, since owning fewer better lenses is preferable to more lesser lenses.
You've got to understand where Lloyd is coming from with that comment.
No one, barring possibly Leica, makes the 'best lenses we can possibly make no expense spared' for 35mm format DSLRs. There's is a market hole there to be perfectly honest, even if it's a small hole.
In cinema they have the Zeiss Master Primes, Leica M mount has their APO Summilux line (even those don't seem to be 'no expense spared'). For the DSLR shooter who wants the absolute best lens possible, the choices are very limited.
There are people out there who will buy $5K-$15K lenses, Zeiss is just scratching the surface of that market with their updated ZF.2 lenses and they are keeping an eye on the final price to make them as accessible as possible.
p.3 #4 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
GroovyGeek wrote:
Why would a camera WITHOUT the filter cost more than one with it? I am sure there is some reason, it just escapes me.
It's likely the same reason that Sennheiser headphones without sound-muffling foam cost more than otherwise-identical headphones that have the extra foam installed:
It's a simple way for manufacturers to sell the same model at different price points.
p.3 #6 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
Thorsten wrote:
It's likely the same reason that Sennheiser headphones without sound-muffling foam cost more than otherwise-identical headphones that have the extra foam installed:
It's a simple way for manufacturers to sell the same model at different price points.
or because they know that more noobs will be returning it (omgwtf my sony takes better pictures no rainbows!!!!one111) so there is a troll fee in it
p.3 #8 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
GroovyGeek wrote:
Why would a camera WITHOUT the filter cost more than one with it? I am sure there is some reason, it just escapes me.
Because the people that want one without will probably pay more for it. I also imagine it will be less popular and they will have to recoup some of the cost of manufacturing two versions plus it's probably not as simple as just leaving the filter out of assembly.
p.3 #9 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
bs kite wrote:
Please explain: Why will a 3 mp aa filter be weak?
Do you mean "36MP"?
A "3"MP AA filter will be very strong. The filter is set to have a certain spread width, defined as a fraction of the pixel size.
Pixel size smaller >> AA filter weaker (thinner)
p.3 #10 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
Mark_L wrote:
Because the people that want one without will probably pay more for it. I also imagine it will be less popular and they will have to recoup some of the cost of manufacturing two versions plus it's probably not as simple as just leaving the filter out of assembly.
If I were in charge, I would make it a 1k option just to keep the common person who does not know any better from buying the one without the AA filter.
I will still be stunned if they offer one without an AA filter. It is just asking for trouble to release a consumer camera that has the potential for moire. (I still want one)
p.3 #12 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
I'm having a hard time understanding all the comments here.
I'm WAY behind on the technical knowledge that many of you have but then I'm not so much interested in that as of my final result.
From all the sites and forums that I've been to, trying to gather info about AA or not to be able to decide which version to buy for myself one thing keeps coming up, that many of you are concerned about the moire. Afaik many photo editing tools remove all this w/o any problems, or am I missing something here?
For ex this photo taken without AA and then PP in LR: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/02/04/why-remove-the-anti-aliasing-aa-filter-in-the-nikon-d800e.aspx/#more-32586
To me it looks like PP removes all of the moire, no problems. Again, what am I missing that so many are complaining about?
For all you tech guys.
I take mostly wildlife macro photos and at times I have to crop heavily too. Taking macro means using great apertures a lot of times and with high ISO. Macro of insects can contain a lot of repetitive patterns but hearing that PP, especially in the new LR4, of moire in apps like Capture NX and LR4 is of no concern I can only see benefits in using the non-AA D800. Am I on the right track here? What would you say about this?
p.3 #13 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
it is basically because jpegs from camera will in those cases be almost uncorrectable, the PP correction of moire is not good enough. From RAWs no problem, but jpegs are hard. Also it is to be expected that video from that camera (without AA) will have even more pronounced line skipping artifacts.
but you are right, most people just don't understand it.
i will sure be getting one without AA filter. I am used to moire (and it's removal) from my MF system and Capture One does excellent job in it.
p.3 #14 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
If you're shooting for demanding clients you simply can't remove moire to an acceptable level. I've lost entire shoots on Hassy backs by shooting at moderate apertures (needs to be F11ish to block it). Moire over an entire outfit. Raging clients.
For your average Joe shooting family pics or ducks I'm sure no AA would be superb.
p.3 #15 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
Sp12 wrote:
If you're shooting for demanding clients you simply can't remove moire to an acceptable level. I've lost entire shoots on Hassy backs by shooting at moderate apertures (needs to be F11ish to block it). Moire over an entire outfit. Raging clients.
For your average Joe shooting family pics or ducks I'm sure no AA would be superb.
have you tried capture one or NX2? what makes you think that milk glass in camera is better then much powerful computer with "unlimited" time, cannot do it better?
i shoot on MF back for a long time already and we print big and often, coming also from commercial and ad area where clients are "demanding" and never found any image i cannot correct in post.
p.3 #16 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
Kittyk wrote:
have you tried capture one or NX2? what makes you think that milk glass in camera is better then much powerful computer with "unlimited" time, cannot do it better?
i shoot on MF back for a long time already and we print big and often, coming also from commercial and ad area where clients are "demanding" and never found any image i cannot correct in post.
If you were looking for a maximally accurate image (not best looking, not most useful, simply most accurate with regard to what was actually in the scene) PP removal of moire can't ever be as good as a good AA filter. Moire is only one incarnation of aliasing. That people generally only talk of colour moire shows how well designed the AA filters are (colour resolution is a long way below luminance/spatial resolution on Bayer filtered sensors, and AA filters tend to blur detail above somewhere in between the two, which is why even with the AA filter on you can still get moire on DSLRs.
People like aliasing artifacts. They tend to call it things like "crispy" and "tack sharp".
I'm personally not interested in an AAless 36MP camera because I prefer correcting for the AA filter than for the aliasing artifacts
Photographers are (rightly, IMO) rarely after maximally accurate, though
p.3 #17 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
No one seems to have the knowledge to tell me about the specific implications of AA-filter or not in my area of photography. Seems to me that shows that most just don't know much about this.
All you that are so much against non AA-filter cameras, where are your photos to prove your point?
All I see is proof, photos, showing how much better it actually is without the AA-filter, how much better the photo looks to the eye, which is the only thing that matters.
p.3 #18 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
Ratatosk wrote:
No one seems to have the knowledge to tell me about the specific implications of AA-filter or not in my area of photography. Seems to me that shows that most just don't know much about this.
All you that are so much against non AA-filter cameras, where are your photos to prove your point?
All I see is proof, photos, showing how much better it actually is without the AA-filter, how much better the photo looks to the eye, which is the only thing that matters.
i think there was many answers and nobody can really help you answer it, because it is also very depending on personal taste and use.
In short:
- without AA you get details which otherwise are blurred and when needed (disturbing moire) it can be blurred/removed later.
- With AA filter, you usually get no or little moire, but details are lost forever. With 36Mpix, maybe many even don't need any more details then they will get with AA, so...
Photography is not only about sharpness, so it is not deal breaker, but each to his own. Without AA filter you get more control over image, in expense of more work in post (sometimes).
Also AA filter is never black or white, how it is balanced (how strong it is), can influence if you would rather prefer the model without AA or with. Maybe it is very weak, so you will take one with AA filter because it is cheaper, maybe it is very strong (to make Video more useful) and you will have to take one without to get anything useful out of it.
It is also not photography-style depending. You need many details also in portraiture (when couple is small on the photo, for group shots,...), not just for landscape or macro/product photo work.
I will be buying without AA filter in any case, i work with MF bodies and am used to remove moire when it sometimes disturbs.
p.3 #19 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
Kittyk wrote:
have you tried capture one or NX2? what makes you think that milk glass in camera is better then much powerful computer with "unlimited" time, cannot do it better?
i shoot on MF back for a long time already and we print big and often, coming also from commercial and ad area where clients are "demanding" and never found any image i cannot correct in post.
Because the "milk glass" is designed very precisely to match with the Nyquist of the sensor and microlenses, providing a more accurate data set (not necessarily better, but definitely most accurate) of what's in front of the camera. My computer is only guessing at what it thinks it should have been. I do mostly fashion work, Moire removal almost always strips the fabric of detail such that an F11 image is sharper, more lifelike, and saves me the time I would have to pay my assistants to apply moire removal. I feel much more in control of my images with an AA filter. I create false detail by sharpening, not my camera.
p.3 #20 · Would you prefer D800 with or without AA filter ?
you sure have the right to feel so. i usually keep similar distance to the couple for a series of shots and for me is then enough copy paste adjustment of moire and clarity to all affected photos in capture one. same was on commercial shoots or corporate head shots i have done or art portraiture we do a lot. I adjust the sliders so that i like it and use and readjust on all affected images. It is not more work then adjusting color temperature or saturation in party shots in mixed light. C1 does excellent job in keeping all the details.
Look at this image. You will never find clothing which would more provoke moire. the groom's dress and his tie and even texture on shirt, RAWS were SCREAMING rainbows. One slider, all was gone and fabric is fully intact, in all sizes and print. (not the best image, but was my worst moire pain clicky
