I know this is a bit off topic, and is discussed in the Nikon forum, but many regulars to this forum have Nikon DSLR's and use ALT lenses on them and might have a different perspective on the new Nikon D800 body. How does 36mp appeal to you? How does to possibility of buying without an AA filter appeal to you? Nice set of features beyond the pixel count. How do you think this new body shakes up the market? What will be Canon's and Sony's response? Will available lenses provide resolution equal to the 36mp sensor? What are your thoughts on this new Nikon D800?
I guess I'll may pick it up, but right now the only thing that tempts me is fullframe vs. crop on my nex. The nex can use more versatile lenses and is far smaller. Of course, for landscape detail masturbation, 36 fullframe megapixels without an AA-filter is.. cream.
I hope Sony reads this and will introduce a Nex 7 version without AA.
BTW dpreview has a D800 preview out. Interesting read.
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikonD800/
from dpreview
At 36.3MP the D800 offers a pixel count that rivals medium format on paper, but its sister model the D800E presents a much more serious challenge, boasting the same pixel count but without the stock D800's optical low-pass filter (otherwise known as an 'anti-aliasing' filter).
We haven't had the opportunity to examine any samples in detail, but the comparisons that we've been shown certainly suggest that the D800E will deliver a significant boost in pixel-level detail compared to the 'stock' D800.
I'm considering this as an option but I have yet to decide which version yet. I'm really looking forward to seeing some comparisons between both versions. Given what some of the recent APS mirrorless cameras have been priced at - cough, cough Fuji X-Pro 1 - I think Nikon nailed the price on the D800(E).
Price of the camera body alone is great, but the dent to my wallet for having to buy the updated Ver. II copies of all my existing AF-S glass that will surely be coming out would hurt quite a bit.
Indeed this is a very proper thread for Alt forum member.
Can't help but pre-ordered at Amazon. A dream camera to go with ZF lens. Initially, I was hope something like 18M but can't resist the form factor of D700 size. After careful thinking I think Nikon really nailed on the choice of they making D4 as professional/sport camera, D800 as studio/landscape/hobbyist camera.
I have to say Nikon recent move is very sensible. Looks both Canon and Nikon are doing very good defense on traditional DSLR sector, hope this release will cool down a little bit of Mirrorless fever.
Something I like about:
1. ISO100
2. 100% viewfinder
3. More pix with AA free
4. Lighter
5. Video feature (it is nice to have)
6. Stronger AF
7. Two cards slot
This is a dream camera to me. 1/2/3/5 are the features I missed from D700.
I'm not a Nikon guy so sorry if this is a stupid question, but are you stuck with a 36M file if you want to shoot full frame RAW? Is the only way to have a smaller RAW file to shoot in DX (I assume that's crop) mode?
If so, it seems a bit of a shame. I know I wouldn't want to shoot 36M files all the time. In fact I would hate to due to the processing, storage and backup hassels. I often shoot jobs in sRAW1 (9.9M) on the 5D2 simply because I don't always need large files for magazine publication.
sebboh wrote:
looks pretty sweet! if only it could take more alt glass...
i still don't understand why nobody puts articulated lcds on FF cameras though? do no "serious photographers" ever shoot at low angles?
Would be a nice feature but I guess they figure everyone has already bought a right angle finder that they can use for low angle shooting. I always found mine worked fine until I bought a Gh1 m4/3 camera with an articulating screen and it was quite the revelation and now I'd prefer the option on every camera I own.
Strange that the high end "pro" models for Canikon typically are the more "conservative" in terms of features like EVF's, articulating displays etc. Seem to see those features introduced in the lower end models like the D5100, D60 etc
I think they scaling the specs to exclude kind of a few too many common people.
What would be the RAW file size on that? About 50 megs? And what is the resulting continuous drive hindered to? 4FPS with a 4 or 5 shot buffer? I didn't see those specs in my quick skim...
Why throw away information with Storage are so cheap these day. I agree Canon's small raw feature are nice to have. But it will not be a decision factor for me.
I would prefer to have something in 18M-24M range for FF. But again more pix here doesn't hurt other than processing power and file size, which anyway going to update very quickly based on current trend. This is a really sexy camera.
Bifurcator wrote:
Way too many pixels!
I think they scaling the specs to exclude kind of a few too many common people.
What would be the RAW file size on that? About 50 megs? And what is the resulting continuous drive hindered to? 4FPS with a 4 or 5 shot buffer? I didn't see those specs in my quick skim...
Well, technically (according to the info at Rob Galbraith), it still has an AA filter, just that it is self canceling. If this was a 'technicality' of a mirrorless with a short lens flange distance, it would likely still have a negative influence on image quality with wide angle traditional rangefinder style lenses... but since this is a DSLR, I guess it won't matter so much.
rscheffler wrote:
Well, technically (according to the info at Rob Galbraith), it still has an AA filter, just that it is self canceling. If this was a 'technicality' of a mirrorless with a short lens flange distance, it would likely still have a negative influence on image quality with wide angle traditional rangefinder style lenses... but since this is a DSLR, I guess it won't matter so much.
Can you please link to that info about the AA. If that turns out to be true, this AAless thing may just be a marketing gimmick.
PS: never mind, found it already. Indeed the 800E cannot be described as having no AA filter. It is as I thought a marketing gimmick. No wonder that the difference is not dramatic, as it should be.
OTOH, in the official Nikon D800E sample image #3 at F/8 there is no visible moire. If the cancelling filter in reality acts as a very weak AA filter, doesn't this make it easier to choose the D800E over the D800?
Definitely. And it's not a marketing gimmick, it's probably there to give the rest of the filter package "equal working conditions" - this includes some very important parameters for the microlens arrays.
No good for a short-flange-distance camera like a RF or a mirrorless, but as you say it makes a whole lot less difference in a 40mm min BF distance camera.
Anyway, even the AA-filtered version outresolves and gives more/better detail than the M9 - even in those (quite crappy) conversions Nikon has chosen to publish. Try downloading one and do a good downsample to 18MP. It won't be even close to the results you could get by doing it correctly directly from raw yourself, but cool anyway.
To quote: "We can remove the AA filter and replace with an optical window with the same refractive index (so that focusing and aperture settings don't change)."
I would think it would also help from a cleaning perspective.
