Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon D800E - Amazing Resolution ...but "Houston, We Have A Problem!"  (Read 18708 times)
Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1907



WWW
« Reply #20 on: May 31, 2012, 05:59:06 PM »
ReplyReply

I guess you want to discuss this solenmly again, don't you?  Grin

Following your comments about an - imaginary - lack of weather seals and worst camera body... today's D800 issue is the wide angle lenses?

Perhaps you can start by clarifying at what f stop these Australian 24mm "tests" were performed?

Cheers,
Bernard


No need to take that tone - totally unnecessary.

I already stated that the website is not my own - so I have no further information to add to their own report (you would have to email them and ask them yourself).

Guess you missed my comment about not shooting the messenger  Tongue Seems anytime anyone posts anything that might possibly be considered a swipe at the D800 it draws you out guns blazing.... take a chill pill. Its just gear dude - it aint' oxygen!
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8009



WWW
« Reply #21 on: May 31, 2012, 07:05:38 PM »
ReplyReply

No need to take that tone - totally unnecessary.

I already stated that the website is not my own - so I have no further information to add to their own report (you would have to email them and ask them yourself).

Guess you missed my comment about not shooting the messenger  Tongue Seems anytime anyone posts anything that might possibly be considered a swipe at the D800 it draws you out guns blazing.... take a chill pill. Its just gear dude - it aint' oxygen!

Hint: we could have the same conversation about whatever other camera you decide to trash talk.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1907



WWW
« Reply #22 on: May 31, 2012, 07:51:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Hint: we could have the same conversation about whatever other camera you decide to trash talk.

Cheers,
Bernard

No ones trash talking anything - I have already said the sensor in the D800 is amazing. Its just the body that sucks (IMO) and the weather sealing which is laughable. As to the original link - the evidence speaks for itself - more to the issue of Nikons lens line up than anything else.

And BTW: I have never trash talked a camera - so don't try and drag down my comments.
Logged

Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8884


« Reply #23 on: May 31, 2012, 08:00:46 PM »
ReplyReply

That makes sense if one is comparing also to MF options, not just to other 35mm format options. What I would like to see is something like resolution measurements (maybe by the standard of 50% MTF) for center and corner performance of various lens-body combinations --- and this will become easier as the sensor resolution gets so high that the measurements are primarily about lens performance.

However if one is wiling to deal with the cost and complications of "a Tech camera with Schneider or Rodenstock lenses", the D800E should be evaluated with the best available lenses. So I look forward to that site's testing with the Zeiss 21mm and Nikon 24/1.4G.

BJL,
The results at Photozone using a D3X provide some insight into the corner performance of a number of Nikkor lenses. They don't use the term 'corner' but 'extreme border'. It's clear from their MTF 50 results that the corner sharpness of the 14-24/2.8 is worst at 24mm and gets progressively better as one moves to the wide end. At 21mm, my second set of test crops, corner performance should or could be actually slightly better than the Nikkor 24/1.4G, depending on QC variations. At 14mm, the corner resolution of the 14-24 is significantly better than the 24/1.4G by a degree which is about equal to the degree to which the 24/1.4G is better than the 14-24 at 24mm. (I've assumed here that Photozone have mixed up their LW/PH results at certain apertures for 'Border' and 'Extreme Border'. It would be very unusual for a lens to have an MTF curve which rises towards the edge of the frame.)

One could go to a lot of trouble and expense searching for prime lenses which would provide noticeably better performance than the 14-24/2.8. One would probably need about 4 such prime lenses, say 14mm, 18mm, 21mm and 24mm, and they probably wouldn't have full functionality.
Logged
Peter Le
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


WWW
« Reply #24 on: May 31, 2012, 08:14:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Hint: we could have the same conversation about whatever other camera you decide to trash talk.

Cheers,
Bernard
 
        What is happening around here lately....everyone is taking everything so personally ! It is not your son or daughter....it is a camera. Things will be hashed out...the D800 will stand on it's own.....it does not need you to protect it. It is a excellent camera...but to learn more we need to look at it's pluses and it falts....or maybe not falts....but you don't know with out discussing it indefensibly. 1st it's Ellis....now it's you losing your cool. You both are well respected around here whether you like it or not you have to live up to it. If you don't feel the article is not right...fine....help us all by disproving it. Not just the typical fan boy aproach....I thought you were above that. JMHO....
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8009



WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 31, 2012, 08:50:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Its just the body that sucks (IMO) and the weather sealing which is laughable.

And BTW: I have never trash talked a camera - so don't try and drag down my comments.

Just re-read the 2 sentences above...

But yes, I'll stop here.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Peter Le
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


WWW
« Reply #26 on: May 31, 2012, 09:12:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Just re-read the 2 sentences above...

But yes, I'll stop here.

Cheers,
Bernard

    I agree.......but it is best to stop.....
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1801



WWW
« Reply #27 on: May 31, 2012, 09:50:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Josh-H5
No ones trash talking anything - I have already said the sensor in the D800 is amazing. Its just the body that sucks (IMO) and the weather sealing which is laughable. As to the original link - the evidence speaks for itself - more to the issue of Nikons lens line up than anything else.

And BTW: I have never trash talked a camera - so don't try and drag down my comments.
So I take it you have taken the D800 apart or taken in out in a hard rain and had it fail? If you haven't then yes you are trash talking a camera.

And the blog article you originally linked to? They spelled "Houston" correctly.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1907



WWW
« Reply #28 on: May 31, 2012, 09:56:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So I take it you have taken the D800 apart or taken in out in a hard rain and had it fail? If you haven't then yes you are trash talking a camera.

I had a D800E for a week. It did not rain during the week I had it. My friend in Sydney killed his though as I already posted in another thread. Yes, he dunked it momentarily when he slipped in a river; but it filled with water in that moment. I don't think its trash talking a camera to state I don't like the body and ergonomics and question the weather sealing. Look, I'm sure its fine for light drizzle and maybe even some rain (probably not the flash though). But I doubt it comes close to the weather sealing of a D4 or 1DS MK3. 'Weather sealing' is a subjective term - but cameras seem to get branded with it more and more and I suspect many of them are really not that well sealed. Canons 5D MKII is a good example. I saw several of these die in Antarctica. Time will tell for the D800 in terms of its environmental seals. One of the people coming to Iceland with me in July this year is bringing the D800E. I will be paying close attention to see how it fares in inclement weather.

Quote
And the blog article you originally linked to? They spelled "Houston" correctly.

They have subsequently corrected the typo. It was misspelled originally.

Perhaps this is a viable solution
« Last Edit: May 31, 2012, 10:16:17 PM by Josh-H » Logged

Pingang
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


« Reply #29 on: June 01, 2012, 06:11:58 AM »
ReplyReply

I would say there is no such thing as perfect camera.  From what my own try and use of D800E, I think the high resolution of the sensor control in ways to produce the results i have, I would consider it a great camera.  There are areas D800E does less, but that apply to all cameras. 

Pingang
Shanghai
Logged
arlon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



WWW
« Reply #30 on: June 01, 2012, 07:25:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, he dunked it momentarily when he slipped in a river; but it filled with water in that moment.Perhaps this is a viable solution

In that situation I think you'd have to have a sealed lens and lens mount as well as camera body. I don't see how something like that could have any reflection on a camera BODY itself though. Good reason to buy a "valuable items" policy with your home owners insurance (for us non pros). As to rain, that's why I carry a pack of disposable ladies shower caps in my camera bag. Perfect for keeping the camera mostly dry. Wouldn't help a dunk in the creek though.. (-:}
Logged

Honey, did you bring an extra battery?
ariliquin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #31 on: June 01, 2012, 08:31:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Would a 645 lens on A D800 show better edge to edge performance with the 35mm sensor being within the sweet spot?
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5894


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #32 on: June 01, 2012, 08:50:27 AM »
ReplyReply

What are we discussing here people? That lenses generally tend to have worse corners than center? I guess that would be the news for those living under a rock, or waking up from a hundred-year coma.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8884


« Reply #33 on: June 01, 2012, 09:25:20 AM »
ReplyReply

What are we discussing here people? That lenses generally tend to have worse corners than center? I guess that would be the news for those living under a rock, or waking up from a hundred-year coma.


I think we're discussing the fact that a high-resolution sensor widens the gap between corner resolution and centre resolution, not because corner resolution becomes worse, but because centre resolution becomes better.

This is clearly a serious issue of inequality. High resolution sensors therefore should be banned in order to protect the integrity and well-being of corner resolution.  Grin
Logged
arlon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



WWW
« Reply #34 on: June 01, 2012, 09:26:16 AM »
ReplyReply

What are we discussing here people? That lenses generally tend to have worse corners than center? I guess that would be the news for those living under a rock, or waking up from a hundred-year coma.

You don't understand. You see a new camera with so many pixels and costing so much should be able to fix a hundred years of issues with round lenses on rectangular receivers..   (-:}
Logged

Honey, did you bring an extra battery?
theguywitha645d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 970


« Reply #35 on: June 01, 2012, 09:47:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Uh, folks, dividing a format into more pixels does not make it softer. You do understand that. If a lens produces sharp images on a lower resolution sensor, it will continue to produce sharp images on a higher resolution one. When I view my 645D images at 100% on a 24" monitor in Photoshop, I am examining a 9mm x 5mm section of the 44mm x 33mm chip. That would be like looking at a 44"x33" print from 10" away.
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1801



WWW
« Reply #36 on: June 01, 2012, 09:59:31 AM »
ReplyReply

I had a D800E for a week. It did not rain during the week I had it. My friend in Sydney killed his though as I already posted in another thread. Yes, he dunked it momentarily when he slipped in a river; but it filled with water in that moment.

Please try that with any  single digital Canon, Nikon, Leica, etc  film or digital camera and let us know what happens.

Submerging a camera in a stream is hardly proof of "bad weather sealing" .

Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Derry
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61


WWW
« Reply #37 on: June 01, 2012, 11:02:12 AM »
ReplyReply

interesting how people can become so involved, emotional and controversial about a device to take photographs,,

in my past years as an astronomer one of the items that always made an evening of viewing with others so enjoyable was we never looked down or talked the negatives of others scopes,, if he paid a few hundred for his scope and was out enjoying the evening skies we were thrilled they were with us,, if he paid twenty thousand for his scope we were still happy to see the person,, everyone shared their scopes and helped those less knowledgeable find the the main objects in the sky for and evening of viewing,,

being the age of 72 I do recall back in the film days when there was that sort of camaraderie,, sure everyone had their favorite brand but we still extended a hand to help the other guy rather than trying to "prove" your point on why your gear is better than his or trash his gear with negative talk,,

has the internet become the tool which changed our ability to have a civil discussion as we no longer see that other person face to face and can turn it off and leave when we feel like it, seems so,, such a shame,,

I'm not a big contributor to LuLu but have always enjoyed the level and depth of the subjects,,

Derry



Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5130


« Reply #38 on: June 01, 2012, 11:38:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Would a 645 lens on A D800 show better edge to edge performance with the 35mm sensor being within the sweet spot?
It would have to be of the same focal length, 24mm, for the comparison to be relevant.

We are after all talking about viewing the images from a rather wide-angle lens enlarged to the equivalent of about a 60"x40" print.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #39 on: June 01, 2012, 11:48:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Derry

I think that the problem is certainly Internet-related. Trouble seems to be that folks all want to appear in/on  it - we think it proof to ourselves that we exist - but after a relatively short while, at least with photography, we discover that there really isn't much to say about it. You can either do it or you can't, and in that way it's much like sex, but that hasn't prevented a huge porn industry from springing up. And the trouble with that is that it muddies the real waters of sex and creates unrealistic expectations, beliefs and codes of conduct that are probably couterproductive to worthwhile relationships in the real world. And so with photography: the bullshit takes precedence over the real thing, and while little of value gets done much nonsense gets itself talked about instead.

What on Earth can sane, adult persons find to say about photography after a few brief exchanges of opinion? It ends up having to be all about the gear and personal brand-beliefs.

Photography, if you mean it, is about personal expression at best and/or professional fulfillment of assignments within which one tries to inject one's own vision (when allowed) and pay the rent. It's basically a very private function; doing it en masse is an exercise in seeking group pleasures which can be found as readily in a model aircraft club, a football club or simply the local bar.

Where these Internet sites are worth their weight in gold is in the area of learning. There is always an army that knows a hell of a lot more than one does about almost anything - tapping into that information source is invaluable.

But it's not really about photography: it's about mechanics and electronics. It didn't use to be like that, which is where your memory and mine are so similar, and possibly why minds are tinged with a touch of regret.

Rob C
 
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad