p.2 #2 · Why I'm switching/upgrading to the Nikon D800 and why you shouldn't.
For the reason you mention in the OP is the reason I am planning to go to the D800 when I get into FF. I only have one Canon lens I may need to sell. I am not tied down with an array of lenses. The 22mp 5DIII really stumped me. I was thinking at least 28mp. I am a landscape shooter and my goal is large prints with fine detail. Now, I end up having to shoot many panoramas or achieve those details and it is a lot of work.
p.2 #3 · Why I'm switching/upgrading to the Nikon D800 and why you shouldn't.
I find the original post sounds a lot better when I read it out loud in my Werner Herzog voice. Mine might not be the single best impression ever performed, but it's definitely in the upper echelon.
p.2 #5 · Why I'm switching/upgrading to the Nikon D800 and why you shouldn't.
Scott Kroeker wrote:
For the reason you mention in the OP is the reason I am planning to go to the D800 when I get into FF. I only have one Canon lens I may need to sell. I am not tied down with an array of lenses. The 22mp 5DIII really stumped me. I was thinking at least 28mp. I am a landscape shooter and my goal is large prints with fine detail. Now, I end up having to shoot many panoramas or achieve those details and it is a lot of work.
28mpx would only result in about 10% bigger print size with the same quality as 36mpx.
36mpx only results in about a 25% bigger print size with the same quality as 22mpx.
I think Canon choice 22mpx because it is a reasonable compromise (1 more stop vs non 1 more stop vs 25% bigger print size vs Nikon D800.) Now if Nikon was 50mpx, that might be noticable in a print.
p.2 #6 · Why I'm switching/upgrading to the Nikon D800 and why you shouldn't.
Appreciate all the good convo guys.
The leap frogging will always happen and that's why I've shot canon for 6 years. No need to ever think about switching...until now. The question is how many years will I shoot nikon before feeling the need to switch back, if ever. IMO canon made a HUGE risk in just making the 'perfect wedding camera' and forgetting about it's top landscape guys. I know a few other top landscape guys that are in the process of switching...especially since most have been using the 5d2+14-24 anyway.
The 25% resolution gain is actually good enough since, depending on the subject I can push my 21mp files to 80" (not every shot).
Canon's reason for staying at 22mp is understandable. Has to do with video as well as there is a sampling correlation (that I dont recall right now) and 22 is the perfect number. Also MOST people dont need more than 22mp so it keeps the files much more managable, plus the high iso performance. It's a GREAT camera. And then we have the d800.
Great for that feedback Jim...have you tried any LOOOOOONG exposures. I heard of some noise issues....hopefully just a freak occurrance.
p.2 #7 · Why I'm switching/upgrading to the Nikon D800 and why you shouldn't.
Rather than going to Nikon, especially if you are earning money, I would go Medium Format. I have been looking at this over the weekend and it is a different world. I was shown 2 images. 1 Shot by a 1Ds2 and the other with a 6MP back. The prints were around 4'x2'. Although the 1Ds2 was good it was a little soft at that size, the 6PM back produced an amazing image with tons of detail. You could actually see all the detail of the fabric even at that enlargement.
Considering you can purchase a Mamiya outfit complete for around $10k, it is worth considering. They do different backs for all purposes. I was shown an enlargement that was printed from a file wit ha 30 minute exposure. It was really hard to pick out any noise. It was amazing. For landscape it would be ideal with the quality you get.
p.2 #9 · Why I'm switching/upgrading to the Nikon D800 and why you shouldn't.
Hey Aaron,
The longest I have shot so far was a 5 sec exposure at ISO 800 last night. The noise was minimal and I had underexposed much of it because the sky was still pretty bright in one spot. I would probably run Noiseware over it and clean it up that way. I will have to try some longer exposures at 100 ISO. I am planning on getting out and shooting stars in the next few weeks with it, so I will know more then.
@dan - appreciate the directness...and overall i think that this forum is much more educated than a lot of other places to interact on the web are. so the post was for the 'general' public.
The moral of the post was that 36mp is just way too much. I've been hearing photogs saying that the files are so big that they have to slow down and shoot more like film b/c of the extra processing time it takes to work through them....which I think is a good thing! If you're budget allows for a d800 but you only want to print 4x6 (inches) or 12x18 or hell even 20x30...stick with the current body, get a better lens (sharper) and refine post-processing skills (makes the biggest difference usually).
The argument against MF digital is that one, it's crazy expensive and 2 the iso range is shit. No way is a Hassy digital going to be able to shoot at iso 12800 (which I'm really looking forward to). Also you cant shoot at 15mm.
Print quality will come down to more detail in my standard 40x60 shots but also allow me to go to 60x90 and even crop to 30x90 out of one file!! Really powerful. Then of course there is stitching...yikes.
All in all I apologize if the tone wasnt sincere but was being a bit frank and a bit funny about the situation.
I tell people basically use what camera you have until you feel that that it is limiting what you are trying to achieve creatively. Then move to the next step. Most of the time cheaper bodies and pro lenses are the way to go anyway. Hell I have a 20x30 from my 8mp 20D in the Poipu Gallery...and bet you couldnt pick it out of the lineup...just not going to print that one 40x60 :P
And Harry...I have no idea how long the backorder is but all my glass is ready to go Now to sit and wait...thanks so much for the kind words.
p.2 #12 · Why I'm switching/upgrading to the Nikon D800 and why you shouldn't.
Keep in mind...you don't have to shot at 36mp. You can shoot at a lower res for the everyday shots and then switch to the higher 36mp res for those more detailed shots. I think it's good to have the range.
p.2 #13 · Why I'm switching/upgrading to the Nikon D800 and why you shouldn't.
Scott Stoness wrote
28mpx would only result in about 10% bigger print size with the same quality as 36mpx.
36mpx only results in about a 25% bigger print size with the same quality as 22mpx.
The "size" isn't important, what matters is entropy - the amount of image. A 30x20 has twice the image of a 15x20: whatever you can fit on on the 15x20 at some particular level of texture and definition you can fit two of on a 30x20. Twice the number of people, trees, houses, blades of grass, rocks, or whatever it is you photograph. You can put two 15x20s side by side - a 30x20 is twice as much. Same goes if you scale both dimensions by 1.4x - you get twice the image. Twice as much of whatever it is you photograph will fit at the same size (4" tall people or whatever you image is filled with). Entropy grows geometrically with size because it's a function of area, not linear dimension.
