D800 hyperbole

[Hans Kruse]

There are some test pictures here http://www.fotopolis.pl/index.php?gora=1&lewa=2
Use Google translate and find the D800 and D800E and the Leica S2 and compare. You can download RAW files.

Here is one screen shot from Lightroom 4 of D800 and D800E and it should be obvious which one is the D800E

I would have attached it but it was too big.Here is a link to the screen shot http://www.pbase.com/hkruse/image/142193651/original

[Jack Flesher]

Here is one screen shot from Lightroom 4 of D800 and D800E and it should be obvious which one is the D800E

I would have attached it but it was too big.Here is a link to the screen shot http://www.pbase.com/hkruse/image/142193651/original

While it is "obvious," I personally don't think the difference is "significant." 

Flame-suit donned

[Steve Weldon]

Unless an article on this site is attributed to someone else, I'm the guilty party.

Michael

Thanks Michael.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I tried some pretty hefty sharpening on both, not easy to say what sharpening is optimal. I still think that the D800E is sharper, D800E on the right.

Best regards
Erik

There are some test pictures here http://www.fotopolis.pl/index.php?gora=1&lewa=2
Use Google translate and find the D800 and D800E and the Leica S2 and compare. You can download RAW files.

Here is one screen shot from Lightroom 4 of D800 and D800E and it should be obvious which one is the D800E

I would have attached it but it was too big.Here is a link to the screen shot http://www.pbase.com/hkruse/image/142193651/original

[Hans Kruse]

So you found the files after all. Did you look at the S2 files also?

I find the D800E to look a little sharper but it's not obvious that there is (much) more real detail.

What sharpening parameters did you find optimal on each? I did tweak them individually and used my normal default low ISO sharpening for fine detail for my 1Ds mkIII and the params are a=50,r=0.6,d=70,m=30

[dreed]

All things being equal, more pixels will never deliver less absolute details. In the very worst case, the D800 would not deliver any additional details over the lower resolution D700. In most cases, there will be some advantage. Indeed, individual pixels may look more blurred, but the image will look identical.

Now, all things are not being equal because the high ISO behavior of high density sensors may be worse. In the present case though, it seems that after down res to 12 mp, the D800 is about one stop better than the D700/D3 at high ISOs, which puts it roughly at the level as or slightly below the D3s in terms of high ISO noise capability.

This looks like the closest thing to the universal camera. MF like DR/detail at low ISO, D3s like image quality at high ISOs..

If this looks to be a universal camera then my concerns are as follows:
- what are the requirements for shooting hand held - does the average person need 1/2xfocal-length or 1/3x-focal-length or..?
- how do the various lenses with Nikon's current VR technology help with the above?
- do I need to spend $3000 on the camera and then how many more thousands on lenses to make use of 36MP if I don't have any Nikon equipment currently and I want to cover wide angle (somewhere at or below 19mm) to medium telephoto (300mm)?
- I suppose the last question is really asking the question, for how many people is this a $3000 camera and for how many will it be a much more expensive camera if they want good quality 36MP images?

I'm content to wait for DxO and other websites to find out how good/bad the sensor is but similarly, DxO and those other websites generally never tell me what it really means to own/use cameras nor what it really costs me to get into them.

[michael]

I'm content to wait for DxO and other websites to find out how good/bad the sensor is but similarly, DxO and those other websites generally never tell me what it really means to own/use cameras nor what it really costs me to get into them.

Well, then wait for my review in late April. 

Michael

[BJL]

If this looks to be a universal camera then my concerns are as follows:
- what are the requirements for shooting hand held - does the average person need 1/2xfocal-length or 1/3x-focal-length or..?

That depends a lot on your requirements and hand-steadiness, but let us not be dazzled by the exaggeration (or at least amplification) of resolution differences cause by counting pixels instead of good old lines per mm, or lines per picture height. The 36MP of the D800 promises about twice the linear resolution of 9MP, which is roughly comparable to what good low to moderate ISO speed 35mm format color film gives. So if that leads you to want to print at about twice the linear size and view from equally close, then you probably need to about double the shutter speed for hand-holding.

So if you used 1/(focal length) with 35mm film and a target of sharp 8"x10" prints, you might try 1/(twice focal length) with the D800 and a target of 16x20" prints that are as sharp as you old 8x10s when viewed from equally close.

P. S. As I have said elsewhere, even the D800 probably only matches the resolution of the finest grained monochrome films like TMAX 100, so maybe one could experiment with a film like that to get a hint of what is needed to get the most out of the D800, as fas as technique, lens choices, f-stops, etc.

Another option would be to look at the focal length to shutter speed rule that works for you with a 16MP DX format camera, which is like examining a crop from the D800.

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

I even put my 10 MP compact on a tripod on a trip with clearly better results than handheld.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Yes I found the files after some digging.

My sharpening was:

D800: 51,0.5,100,9
D800E: 38,0.5,100,9

Both in LR4

Thanks for the tip on the S2, didn't have the time to check out, yet.

Best regards
Erik

So you found the files after all. Did you look at the S2 files also?

I find the D800E to look a little sharper but it's not obvious that there is (much) more real detail.

What sharpening parameters did you find optimal on each? I did tweak them individually and used my normal default low ISO sharpening for fine detail for my 1Ds mkIII and the params are a=50,r=0.6,d=70,m=30

[LesPalenik]

I suppose the last question is really asking the question, for how many people is this a $3000 camera and for how many will it be a much more expensive camera if they want good quality 36MP images?

That's a good practical question.
And how would that 36MP FF image compare with a MF Pentax 645 or an older 31MP or 39MP Hassy?

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

What I feel is that the Leica needs a sensor with higher resolution. With the present size of pixels I feel the image has to much staircase effects.

Anyway, the Leica S2 is imply to expensive for my budget. Nikon owners/buyers have now a really affordable high res camera at an affordable price.

Best regards
Erik

So you found the files after all. Did you look at the S2 files also?

I find the D800E to look a little sharper but it's not obvious that there is (much) more real detail.

What sharpening parameters did you find optimal on each? I did tweak them individually and used my normal default low ISO sharpening for fine detail for my 1Ds mkIII and the params are a=50,r=0.6,d=70,m=30

[JohnBrew]

If this looks to be a universal camera then my concerns are as follows:
- what are the requirements for shooting hand held - does the average person need 1/2xfocal-length or 1/3x-focal-length or..?
- how do the various lenses with Nikon's current VR technology help with the above?
- do I need to spend $3000 on the camera and then how many more thousands on lenses to make use of 36MP if I don't have any Nikon equipment currently and I want to cover wide angle (somewhere at or below 19mm) to medium telephoto (300mm)?
- I suppose the last question is really asking the question, for how many people is this a $3000 camera and for how many will it be a much more expensive camera if they want good quality 36MP images?

Over on Nikongear there are D800 shots with legacy lens which indicate that the older glass will be quite good on the new body. No need to rush out and buy "G" lenses.

[stamper]

what does ....quite good.....mean? It isn't a technical term that I am aware of.

[Hans Kruse]

Over on Nikongear there are D800 shots with legacy lens which indicate that the older glass will be quite good on the new body. No need to rush out and buy "G" lenses.

The pixel density of the D800 is the same as the D7000 and did people suggest that new glass was needed for that camera? These comments come every time a new camera with more megapixels comes around and especially full frame. I remember how the Canon 1Ds mkIII would stress even L-glass according to some reviewers and having in mind that the pixel density is like the old 20D APS-C sensor And nobody suggested new glass for that one. Of course there is always the question about sharpness in corners and edges but the lack of sharpness on some glass in these areas will be stressed also by lesser resolving sensors like e.g. the D700 or 5D.

[Ray]

If this looks to be a universal camera then my concerns are as follows:
- what are the requirements for shooting hand held - does the average person need 1/2xfocal-length or 1/3x-focal-length or..?
- how do the various lenses with Nikon's current VR technology help with the above?

Being able to use a sufficiently fast shutter speed for hand-held shots at low ISO has always been a problem in photography when the subject is not brightly illuminated. It's why Canon invented its Image Stabilisation system, and it's why Nikon followed later with its VR system. I find these technologies tremendously useful. They remove the need for a tripod much of the time.

One should not forget that neither a tripod nor VR technology will serve much purpose when the subject is moving. However, for static subjects, modern VR and IS lenses can offer a 3-stop shutter speed advantage which actually translates to 1/8FL when using a non-VR lens.

For example, if a non-VR 100mm lens requires a shutter speed of 1/100th for a reasonable chance of a sharp shot, then a 100mm lens with the latest VR technology should provided similarly sharp results at 1/13th sec, but not a guaranteed sharp result of course, because of the random nature of hand-shake.

I've never bothered to test this, but the methodology would be to take several shots of a static target, using say a 100mm lens at 1/13th with VR on, then the same number of shots at 1/100th with VR off.

After examining the results, one should find that a few of the shots in both cases are tack-sharp, some moderately sharp, and a few, perhaps most, below standard.

In order to increase the chances of getting a sharp result, I would prefer to use 1/2FL without VR, say 1/200th with a 100mm lens, and 1/25th with VR switched on.

In a situation where a shutter speed of 1/13th or even 1/25th of a sec is required with a 100mm lens, I think a tripod would be more reliable than VR.  It should produce sharp results every time, provided MLU is enabled.

On the other hand, if lighting conditions permit a shutter speed of 1/FL, I think that could reasonably be considered sufficient to get the best out of a D800 if the lens has VR technology. Perhaps this is why most of the lenses recommended by Nikon for use with the D800 are VR lenses.

[Isaac]

I even put my 10 MP compact on a tripod on a trip with clearly better results than handheld.

I even put my 14MP compact on a mini-tripod strapped to ski-poles, tent-poles, fences, road-signs; or simply used body-weight to jam the closed mini-tripod against walls, trees,... with clearly better results than handheld.

Now with a heavier camera and lens those ad hoc approaches don't work so well - but using a bean bag support works better, the additional weight helps.

[Michael LS]

Say...I looked at those samples in the link...eh, wasn't that "cloth"?
Yes, it was. So, where's my moiré on the D800e sample?? I DEMAND to
see moiré! Ok, maybe it wasn’t the right frequency, Kenneth. Or perhaps
the photographer cleaned it up before posting. Regardless…the D800e
has a slightly sharper, cleaner look.

In deference to my fellow D800 shooters, I doubt anyone will see a diff between the
D800 and D800e in most human-scale prints. Nevertheless, I’m ok with ordering
the “e”, at least until I have a chance to shoot a variety of subjects myself. If Michael
gets his D800e before I do, and his review can convince me the “e” is a worthless
paperweight, then I’ll cancel my order, or send it back to Amazon, as the case
may be. Then I’ll order a D800 and wait till the year 2015 to get it. Or, I could order a
Fuji X-Pro 1, an Nex-7, or a 5d Mark III, or just keep shooting my D7000.
It’s all good, these days. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

For what it's worth, Amazon lists D800 as #1 selling camera currently. Where is Canon 5Dm3?... 16th place!

[BernardLanguillier]

Being able to use a sufficiently fast shutter speed for hand-held shots at low ISO has always been a problem in photography when the subject is not brightly illuminated. It's why Canon invented its Image Stabilisation system, and it's why Nikon followed later with its VR system. I find these technologies tremendously useful. They remove the need for a tripod much of the time.

I know it is not the point, but for the sake of historical correctnes, VR was in fact released in a Nikon compact camera first and was later followed by Canon in DSLR lenses.

Cheers,
Bernard