Nikon continues the MP wars with the 36mp D800/D800E

Roger

Roger

Member
Staff member
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-57371 ... ss-option/

The "E" variant is something old....the E variant removes the AA filter from the sensor so while you'll have a larger problem with moire, in theory, you won't *have* to use extreme top of the line Zeiss primes in order to get 36mp from a full frame sensor.

I am a little shocked that Nikon did this, unless they know that Canon is planning on doing the same thing (more MP!) with the new 5D whatever they call it (Seen Mk III, or Mk X to match the EOS-1DX). ; Canon isn't making a "professional" (built-in vertical grip) high megapixel camera anymore...but Nikon is still selling theirs. ; The Canon answer is due to be announced by the end of February...
 
I also saw that the D3200 is rumored to be 24 Mp. ; Madness! ; I fear that the D400 will be the same. ; Time for another multi-terabyte file server. :(
 
It seems as if Nikon is sticking with Sony-originated sensors, which means they go with what Sony puts out. ; Sony has the 24MP APS-C, so that's what Nikon would most likely work with next, and rumors point to the A99 full frame having that very same 36MP. ; I'm quite sure Canon will respond, as they did when Sony went 14MP and they went 18MP, etc. ; The MP war is seemingly endless...now with a rumored organic sensor being developed by Sony, full framers might be seeing 100MP or more in the not-too-distant future. ; Time to start thinking Petabytes, people!
 
"zackiedawg" said:
; The MP war is seemingly endless...now with a rumored organic sensor being developed by Sony, full framers might be seeing 100MP or more in the not-too-distant future. ; Time to start thinking Petabytes, people!
Click to expand...

I just want it to stop at 12.7mp. ; With a camera that can process for more than 30 mins of full 12.7mp video at 48fps. ; (aka 4K)

<sigh>

The biggest reason that the consumer sensors are still going MP crazy is because post-processing zooming is so easy. ; Easier than changing lenses on a trip.
 
I'd have to say on APS-C that 16Mp seems to be a good sweet spot for me - res is plenty, high ISO still very good, detail quite good, nice croppability, but not ridiculous for storage and file size...and the cameras can be developed to process them fast enough for good continuous frame rates and in-camera processing tricks. ; I don't care for video, so that isn't something I worry about, but it seems the 16MP sensor is well regarded for video too.

I think I'd like to see full frame stop around 20MP, and work on making every one of those pixels better, with less noise and faster processing algorithms. ; But that's just me - some folks may love the extra pixels.
 
You know my stance on this...totally nuts! ; Looks like Nikon has come out with a niche camera and in two flavors at that. ; I hope it flops big time!

IF I could have a direct line to Nikon I would have wanted one of two things for the D700 upgrade/replacement: ;

  • Either a minor upgrade by putting in the D3s sensor (call it the D700s) which would have upped the no noise ISO to 1600. ; No one would have blamed them after the Japan disasters.
  • Or putting in the D4 sensor as they did with the D700 and dumbing down the firmware and hardware specs. ; And for gosh sakes...use the same MB-10 battery grip! ; Why a new one?

Okay, rant off. ; Again, I hope this flops big time. ; Of course, maybe I am all wet and Nikon will hit a home run further telling me this hobby is getting way too expensive even for us advanced amateurs.
 
That is crazy. ; If you want to print billboards straight out I the camera then go for it but those are going to be HUGE files. ; Wow. ;
 
&quot;zackiedawg&quot; said:
I'd have to say on APS-C that 16Mp seems to be a good sweet spot for me - res is plenty, high ISO still very good, detail quite good, nice croppability, but not ridiculous for storage and file size...and the cameras can be developed to process them fast enough for good continuous frame rates and in-camera processing tricks. ; I don't care for video, so that isn't something I worry about, but it seems the 16MP sensor is well regarded for video too.

I think I'd like to see full frame stop around 20MP, and work on making every one of those pixels better, with less noise and faster processing algorithms. ; But that's just me - some folks may love the extra pixels.
Click to expand...

Right here with you on the MP count.

My biggest reason for wanting to upgrade is for superior high ISO performance. At this point, I guess I'll hope for a drop in price on D700s in the secondary market.
 
Well it's apparent that this model is a direct response to the EOS-5DMk whatever is coming next. ; Canon has decided to go with a no-vertical grip attached pro level high MP body for wedding photographers/landscape/portrait photographers/semi-serious videographers (the latter because they now have an EOS video camera), with the high ISO going to the vertical grip pro body camera with less MP. ; Which is what the D4 is.

Looks like both companies aren't going after the non-vertical grip high ISO low MP crowd right now.....
 
&quot;WDWFigment&quot; said:
Right here with you on the MP count.

My biggest reason for wanting to upgrade is for superior high ISO performance. At this point, I guess I'll hope for a drop in price on D700s in the secondary market.
Click to expand...

I feel the price of used D700's is now going to raise as Nikon has dropped production of this model and demand will increase. ; Here's hoping the D400 is actually an FX sensor with a viable cropped DX mode. ; Maybe the rumored 24MP SONY sensor?
 
I think they had no choice but to go with this high a MP camera. From a technical point of view, the engineers probably said, we can give you either the same number of pixels with a lot better ISO performance, or we can give you lots of pixels. Choose one, but not both, it's just possible at the same time. From a marketing point of view, the decision was obvious.

I don't get the fascination with advertising a DX mode on an FX camera. There isn't anything going on that I can't do with a crop tool to cut off the DX lens vignetting, right?

Oh, and leave the D400 a DX camera! Making it FX would drive up the price too high.

Erich
 
&quot;ELinder&quot; said:
I don't get the fascination with advertising a DX mode on an FX camera. There isn't anything going on that I can't do with a crop tool to cut off the DX lens vignetting, right?
Click to expand...

Thom Hogan has a brilliant analysis of this. ; The D800 is designed to be a natural upgrade from the D7000. ; With the DX mode on the D800 you don't lose much from the D7000's MP.

I thought about this some more last night. ; This upgrade was unavoidable. ; Canon struck first with the 12mp 5D. ; Nikon a few years later followed with the 12mp D700.

Canon hit back with an almost 24mp 5DMk2. ; Nikon never responded. ; So now Nikon almost triples the D700 with the D800. ; Now Nikon is a few weeks ahead of Canon, who is going to release a similar MP count new 5D Whatever. (I say whatever because apparently the testing units out there had two different plates on it).

The D400 would be based on Sony's 24mp APS-C sensor, so it would be DX, not FX. ; The D800 is based on Sony's upcoming FX sensor, so it appears that Nikon may have mostly exited the sensor market...unless they aren't going to use Sony's sensor in the D400.
 
To be fair though, the FX sensor at 36MP is less dense pixel-pitch wise than Sony's 24MP DX sensor...so it may be a respectable performer - not the high ISO king for sure, but not as noisy at the higher ISOs as the 24MP APS-C has shown. ; Of course, it's still a seemingly silly huge file size and pixel dimension for a vast majority of shooters, except for a rare class of photogs who need that huge resolution for landscapes or the like. ; And even then, most of them would seem better off with medium format, which can give that resolution and higher, and likely better.

Sony seems to be trying to straddle both markets with their sensors: ; on one hand, they make some of the best high ISO sensors with reasonable resolution, but on the other hand they are turning out these MP-war sensors aiming for huge resolution but compromising the high ISO ability of the cameras. ; It's probably not a bad marketing strategy, and one Nikon has been subscribing to - just having multiple versions of cameras in each market - one for the res, and one for the ISO.

I, for one, would have loved to have seen a Sony version of the A77 body with the 16MP sensor from the A580/D7000/K5. ; The 24MP A77 could be for those chasing resolution, and the 16MP version for those who don't need the additional res but want clean high ISO results right out of the camera.

It'll be interesting to see how the D800 stacks up against medium format.
 
I have mixed feelings on it-

I like the fact that it's quite a bit lighter than the D700 (900g vs. 1074g)


It annoys me it still won't bracket at more than 1 stop increments (one of my few D700 complaints)


I really don't want giant 75MB Raw files although with my shooting style lately (fewer more planned shots mostly with a tripod) more MP's makes sense to a point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top