Yikes! The rumored Nikon D800.

Started Oct 5, 2011 | Discussions thread
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,958
Like?
Re: Yikes! The rumored Nikon D800.
In reply to sparkling elk, Oct 10, 2011

sparkling elk wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Not really. Of course, you need to talk not only about pixel size and number of pixels, or equivalently sensor size and number of pixels. Generally, for the same size sens or the more pixels the better, until you get to really tiny pixel dimensions.

no doubt that "very good" resolution is better than less (than very good). but do we need to go to a kind of HD quality ?

only if you want to. If you want to, stick to budget lenses and P&S, tehre is no-one forcing you to go better.

and from what size on pixel get (too tiny) ? 5 or 4um ?

Much smaller than that, with current tech 1 or so, but it keeps going down

and until what degree of resolution the optics will be outresolved ?

'outresolving' doesn't happen, each part of the imaging chain affects resolution, make one better it makes all better.

and generally: how much comfort and tolerances huge resoutions will cost for how much advantage in IQ (DR) ?

i can see the advantage of the 60% more resolution betweenthe 1D3 and 1D4. but how many pixels more this sensor could take, keeping the same overall (DR, iso, color) ?

'ISO' doesn't depend much on pixel size, DR gets better as they get smaller, colour is affected but when they get really tiny.

it seems in this case (1D3 - 1D4) the increased 60% resolution is keeping a similar DR but increases iso performance ( STRANGE i thought bigger pixels will always offer a better iso performance). would be more even better (keeping DR) ?

Seems what actually happens doesn't match what you thought.

30x mp might be ok for an FF sensor, using the performance of this 1D4 sensor. so i might be wrong that 2x mp is the thing, ok.

1*MP seems OK for a 1.6x sensor, and even 24MP, so 46 at least should be just fine for FF

These cameras can do in-camera raw processing, that is you can get the camera to do your raw conversion according to your requirements and then dump it out to your computer, if your computer isn't fast enough.

cannot believe that. i think the most efficiant control of raw conversion will be reserved for PP on a nice panel.

Certainly, but I'd bet you'll get better from a 36MP process by the manufacturer's own raw processor than you will froma 12MP hand optimised, could be wrong, but my guess is that those who must have the best processing will get a good computer to do it.

The best possible DR comes from having many small pixels,

ok, many (lets say really enough) pixels is better than 1x mp designs. but honestly, when i look at my 16mp files, i dont need more resolution. i am not sure BTW that you'll get so much more DR increasing resolution from a certain momen on.

Increasing the pixel count isn't all about resolution, sometimes it's just about DR, small pixels give better DR, sometimes it's about better contrast in the detail.
--
Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow