49 replies to this topic

[Pink Floyd]

crazzy88ss, on 08 February 2012 - 02:26, said:

Yea the 5D MKII is only 3.9FPS. It's slower than the 5D MKI was.

I'm 100% fine w/ 4FPS at 36mp. But I was hoping they'd be smart and push it to 8FPS in DX mode. If they can pull 11FPS out of the D4, what's wrong w/ 8FPS in DX mode? I feel the FPS came from the marketing department, and not the engineering department.



While I think it's 100% true, I'm not sure how this applies to my statement. Are you saying they put it at 36MP to imply quality?

I'm guessing Nikon doesn't want ppl from using the new D800 for photojournalism, sport or any occasion where you need fps.

Personally, I don't need high fps, and I would really like to see IQ with that much MP, but at that price

[Andre]

TheReasonIFailed, on 08 February 2012 - 18:31, said:

The specs look nice but the camera looks a little small. Honestly; I loved the size of my D300 with the MB-D10 grip. It was perfect!

Curved shape of the body makes it look smaller than it actually is. D800 is only slightly smaller than D700, which is big and bulky.

[crazzy88ss]

Pink Floyd, on 08 February 2012 - 18:40, said:

I'm guessing Nikon doesn't want ppl from using the new D800 for photojournalism, sport or any occasion where you need fps.

So then why give it ISO 25k? Nobody in a studio's going to use anything over ISO 1600.

Andre, on 08 February 2012 - 18:19, said:

Seeing how this camera is aimed at landscape and studio photographers primarily, I don't see how low FPS is an issue. Even still, 4 fps at 36MP is more than plenty. For comparison, medium format digital back Leaf Aptus-II 7 33MP shoots at 1FPS.

Yea but 1FPS is laughable with today's technology. And photographers owning that camera most likely own a bunch of other cameras, too.

TheReasonIFailed, on 08 February 2012 - 18:31, said:

The specs look nice but the camera looks a little small. Honestly; I loved the size of my D300 with the MB-D10 grip. It was perfect!

The D700 is bigger than the D300.

[qdave]

This cam is extremely nice but for a person who doesnt earn money from photography, 3000$ is kinda a lot. Still its definitely one of those things which i desire

[Andre]

crazzy88ss, on 09 February 2012 - 01:35, said:

So then why give it ISO 25k? Nobody in a studio's going to use anything over ISO 1600.

For the same reason D4 has ISO 204800.

[crazzy88ss]

But the D4 is aimed at photojournalism, which uses high ISO probably daily. That was the point somebody made.

[crazzy88ss]

http://cmphotography.com/blog.cfm

There's some 100% crops on there at up to ISO 6400. Pretty damn clean.

[Andre]

No photojournalist will shoot at 204800. Paparazzi - maybe.

All in all, it's nothing more than a natural progression. High ISO with 36MP is just out of this world at this moment. D5 will most likely have native ISO of 51200 or 102400 at around 30MP.

[Draconian Guppy]

that site that crazzy posted, compared the d800 to the d3 and d700 (ISO wise?) shouldn't a new sensor and new technology out do old technology?

[crazzy88ss]

Andre, on 10 February 2012 - 02:30, said:

No photojournalist will shoot at 204800. Paparazzi - maybe.

Untrue. I've seen lots of photojs post things like "I shot this at iso 100k for [some publication]. It wouldn't have been possible with out the [insert D3s or 1D MKIV]. I don't know how OFTEN it's used, but it is used.

Draconian Guppy, on 10 February 2012 - 02:58, said:

that site that crazzy posted, compared the d800 to the d3 and d700 (ISO wise?) shouldn't a new sensor and new technology out do old technology?

That's the thing, they didn't make an "apples to apples" change on the D800. They kind of combined the D700 and the D3x, so you can't compare the two.

Check the performance of the D3x vs the D800.

[Draconian Guppy]

crazzy88ss, on 10 February 2012 - 20:04, said:

Untrue. I've seen lots of photojs post things like "I shot this at iso 100k for [some publication]. It wouldn't have been possible with out the [insert D3s or 1D MKIV]. I don't know how OFTEN it's used, but it is used.



That's the thing, they didn't make an "apples to apples" change on the D800. They kind of combined the D700 and the D3x, so you can't compare the two.

Check the performance of the D3x vs the D800.

Did a quick search, a lot of people ranting at dpreview, fredmiranda about the maximum ISO.

I've a quick question though, I guess it will be thoroughly answered when we get d800, But shouldn't the d800's sensor perform better. Eg.

D800's ISO @ 6,400 will probably look like a D700 @ 1,600?

[Andre]

D800 will perform somewhat better than D700/D3, but not by much - maybe a stop or so. However it should have a much better dynamic range.

[crazzy88ss]

In the long run, if I ever have time for photography, I'll probably end up w/ the D800 (or "D800s" by the time I'll have free time again) and slap the grip on it and be set for a while.

Although, the way I'm shooting my D90, that time might come sooner than I think. It's got over 60,000 frames and starting to show its age (like a memory card door that snapped clean off!).

[Zain Adeel]

Anybody here care to elaborate on dynamic range?

for example i saw a review back sometime of a full sensor cam and one with a cropped one.

And both the videos had the same settings and everything. But i noticed the eyes of the subject were dark brown but in the cropped video they were black. I mean let me explain.

The video of the cropped unit had harder contrast. Where as the video of the full frame sensor had a lighter midtone (kinda like very minor HDR)

So can anybody explain whats responsible for this?

[Argote]

In a nutshell, Dynami Range means what spectrum of colors / levels of light per color a camera is able to capture before it is "blended" into other colors. In other word, how well it can differentiate similar but not equal colors.

It is, of course, more complicated but this should give you an idea.