You are making a rather large assumption. Yes, some people that buy the D800 will do so because they want to take advantage of all the resolution the D800 has to offer. But many will buy the D800 and use it just like they would have used a D700 had they bought it.
You car analogy is apropos because most people that buy a Ferrari NEVER use the car near its potential.
crewshin wrote:
Naa, you took my entire post out of context. I was only comparing the resolutions because that's the only difference between the two (when talking about this specific topic that is).
Btw, "magnifying" is a very grey area word in this case. It doesn't exaggerate or magnify per se... it's just allowing you to see the issues more clearly because there is a higher resolution. That's different than magnifying the issues which makes it sound like the issues are getting bigger and stronger.
If anyone is confused by all of this and can only take away one bit of info from this entire thread it should be this........ the issues on topic are NOT any worse/better than the D700. They are identical... with the exception of being a bit clearer at higher resolutions. Just like they were from the D2H to the D3.
Also take this away from the convo... "relax, it's all good"....Show more →
You should read more carefully lol. No comment; I think I'll stop here .
Scott, I don't disagree that most will not use a camera / car / toothbrush, to it's full potential.
People who buy the D800 and want to use it at it's full potential, either by printing large or by cropping into the image, will want to ensure that they know what they're doing to get the most out of it.
If people are buying a D800 so the only thing they can do is publish 600x400 pixel webshots, have no place in this discussion.
That's not even driving the Ferrari in traffic, it's parking it outside Starbucks so everyone can see it!!!
nikt wrote:
Scott, I don't disagree that most will not use a camera / car / toothbrush, to it's full potential.
People who buy the D800 and want to use it at it's full potential, either by printing large or by cropping into the image, will want to ensure that they know what they're doing to get the most out of it.
If people are buying a D800 so the only thing they can do is publish 600x400 pixel webshots, have no place in this discussion.
That's not even driving the Ferrari in traffic, it's parking it outside Starbucks so everyone can see it!!! ...Show more →
The new Canon 5D Mark III/X won't have these perceived problems. I've been a Canon shooter for decades and that's why I'm waiting before making a decision on the D800. But if I like the specs better on the Nikon I'm going with it without reservation. To keep things in perspective, it's an incredible camera for the price.
What I will add here is that it's perfectly reasonable for a shooter to buy a D800 and use it in the same way as he used the D700. If his clients, events, needs, print sizes, and other things have not changed, then he will output the same kinds of images in the same way. And in a few months when the D700 runs out, the D800 is the only choice he'll have for an FX Nikon at/around $3K.
Said shooter will get equal or better images (my money's on better) at all of the print sizes and conditions he used to use, because the D800 will not need as much upsampling for large print sizes and because it will allow some downsampling for smaller print sizes. Assuming good technique (either initially there or practiced later), this shooter will also have the option of printing larger than he did before with acceptable quality.
For anyone about to shell out $3K for a camera, the D800 is a very clear win for the shooter, even if he does not "upgrade" his technique, but doubly so if he works hard to get the max possible benefit out of the newest technology. It's that simple... no matter how much I love the details of technology, a bunch of you are tying yourselves into very silly and very useless knots in this argument.
I find this exchange quite humorous. Some posters suggest that unless you're printing billboards and are willing to spend $10,000 for the latest and greatest Nikon or Zeiss lenses, that this camera is being wasted. Yes, when I owned Corvettes I wanted to drive them fast and the result was a great many tickets and a couple of occasions when I had no drivers license. I'm content with my four cylinder Acura and don't get tickets any longer because I don't need to speed.
Nikon has released a camera that is the only game in town for those of us committed to shooting FX who can't afford the high price spread. I don't want video and am not excited about having to deal with 36 megapixels, but this is the only game in town. Yes, it looks like a remarkable camera and a very fair price, so I'm not complaining. But I am a bit offended by the suggestion that since I don't own or use a tripod and prefer to shoot with manual focus Nikon lenses, some of which were produced forty years ago, that this camera is lost on me. If/when I buy one, I'll find a way for it to work. That I don't print is beside the point.
Fortunately the camera is out now so all the speculation by so-called experts can be put to the test. It appears the camera actually works when in the hands of ordinary people, even those using old lenses. All is well with the world. The sky didn't fall.
Jim Brandenburg had a pre-release D800 for a month, and said it was a "game changer". He doesn't use a tripod, and he's not restricted to VR lenses. YMMV.
CGrindahl wrote:
Fortunately the camera is out now so all the speculation by so-called experts can be put to the test. It appears the camera actually works when in the hands of ordinary people, even those using old lenses. All is well with the world. The sky didn't fall.
Agree with everything you said.... Pixel peepers will peep and speculate. Photographers will shoot, and enjoy the camera!
.
