Printable View
http://www.pcworld.com/article/24937...egapixels.html
and here
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikonD800/
Lets keep this thread for discussing this camera! what a monster. i should have gone with nikon! canon are pants when it comes to camera bodies
TBH,36MP might be all find and dandy but as with anything - do you actually need it ATM j.o.s.h.1408?? On top of this do you have the investment in lenses to make full use of such a high MP sensor??
I don't see anything wrong with the MP counts for the current Canon range. I am sure that they will try to match Nikon though,just to show they are "not behind" in the technology stakes.
The camera seems to be for people who consistently do large prints especially for landscape,architectural and perhaps studio work. However,at least for the last kind of work media format digital cameras seem to dominate it(larger sensor and higher MP count and the cameras are optimised for lower ISOs).
Looks like a D7000 sized body which is a slight negative.
I've probably the same idea as most current DX users who are looking to jump to FX and waiting to see what the effect this will have D700 s/h prices.
Slight kneejerk? Crikey you're almost as bad as petercook for Daily Mail style overreactions :clapping:Quote:
Originally Posted by j.o.s.h.1408
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
TBH i dont need it 36mp but i may do in the future as i do want to print large images and frame them at home.
Also, with 36mp you can crop it down to 2x and still have 18mp image! That is insane mate and wont need no 200-500mm type lens!
Quote:
Originally Posted by rox0r
Not really. i want a FF camera that has a up todate AF syystem and there is none on the canon front mate unless you go for a 1d.
Why do you think there are millions of thread about "7d vs 5mk2/ which one to get? 7d or 5mdk2"
So you calculated that 36MP is required for the print size you need for the prints you might print. OK,its clearer now! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by j.o.s.h.1408
http://i559.photobucket.com/albums/s...culasaurus.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by j.o.s.h.1408
did i get my maths wrong?
There are advanatages for using different focal lengths in photography and for different sensor or film sizes. There is one main advantage or disadvantage(dependent on the person) for using larger sensors(not MP related) which many people don't think about.
You've some serious miss understandings about megapixels.Quote:
Originally Posted by j.o.s.h.1408
The D800 has a 36megapixel sensor, which gives a FF aspect 7360 x 4912 pixels
My K-5 has a 16megapixel sensor, which is an APC-S 4928 x 3264 pixels.
As you can see, it is not twice the size. It is twice the area. Big important difference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differe...es#In_geometry
If your going to be looking at having a camera which will demand multi-thousand pound glass set up!
For me a 15megapixel sensor is more than enough to show up the mistakes I made composing the image, and whilst I still harp back to full frame, I doubt its practical or given the recent advances over the last 2 years really needed for me. I'm just not a good enough 'tog!
makes sense. cheers homie
I don't think Cat was referring to the focal length of your lenses either sorry Josh.Quote:
Originally Posted by j.o.s.h.1408
On my Canon 550D (18MP) with kit lens, I wasn't particularly happy about taking 100% crops from the image, as the imperfections in the glass were too clear (i.e. it just wasn't sharp enough).
Since upgrading to the 17-55mm and the 70-200mm f/4 IS, it's a completely different story. I'm now a lot more comfortable about cropping in PP now. Of course, that's about a £1600 investment in just two lenses, and so it goes on.
Bear in mind that more megapixels by itself is no indicator of final image quality either. I'd have to see noise comparisons at similar ISO sensitivies too, as each pixel will be receiving less light (on equivalent size sensors).
So why do people rave about more MP then?Quote:
Originally Posted by FatalSaviour
Marchitecture!Quote:
Originally Posted by j.o.s.h.1408
The problem is that its quite hard to say what makes a camera great, its quite subjective too, but if you instead tell people its all about the megapixels, it becomes easier!
Its also been the driving force behind sales of cameras simply because it was the first thing to get excited about. When you hark back to the days of handheld digital cameras with 300 x 300 dpi cameras that first became popular, and the grainy photos they took, and then compare them with a few years on and suddenly we had 4.8 MP cameras and crystal clear shots, fast forward a little more and we have 12 and 14 MP cameras (and these are just point and click things). So extremely high resolutions but you would be hard pressed to notice the difference between the 2nd and 3rd offerings if its a simple photo.
If you compare it to the car market, taking a fairly standard car, the Golf 1.6, and look at its incarnations throughout the years. The engine size (a major selling point to any car salesman) remains the same but the car itself have changed radically, same basic shape but these days you get cd players, electric windows, immobilisers etc as standard, but back in its first incarnation these things either didnt exist or cost a hell of a lot to add to it. It wouldnt be too hard a job for a salesman to convince a car buyer that an older 1.6 model would be better than a new 1.4 GT sport because of its bigger engine, as folks look for that number and think thats what makes it good. A discerning buyer will look at acceleration, BHP, Torque, comfort, brakes, facilities and attractiveness to the ladies.....
MP is one of those things I believe, that you need a minimum of, but its not everything. I wouldnt buy a Golf with a 300cc engine, and I wouldnt buy a camera with a 300 x 300 dpi. I would however shave a couple of MP off for a camera with better facilities (although right now the use of those facilities still eludes me, we really do need a Hexus camera meet).
I'm quite tempted by a change to FF
Downside is having to swap all my very decent Pentax lenses. Couple of DA*, FA Limited and DA Limiteds that I'm really keen on.
If I went with the D800 it would mean maybe only one (two at maximum) lenses for a year or so. I need to see how well reviewed it is and what its like with long exposure work.
Some of your pics are very FF-like.Quote:
Originally Posted by kushtibari
I really wanna go FF myself