Feel the excitement: D810

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,860
Like?
Re: Feel the excitement: D810
In reply to Teila Day, 6 months ago

Teila Day wrote:

ultimitsu wrote:

Teila Day wrote:

  • Higher resolution LCD screen
  • Built-in GPS
  • 5 fps (6fps with the MB-D12)
  • The new camera will be lighter (compared to the D800/D800E)

Nice but incremental.

Screens are fine enough for me where they stand today on most cameras.

D800's LCD is 960k, which is about 640 x 480, pretty low by today's standard. My cellphone' screen is 1920 x 1080.

Which is irrelevant to my statement. I said that today's screens are fine enough for me where they stand today on most cameras. I am able to accurately check what I need to check on the LCD virtually 100% of the time, and I don't really have a need for a better screen. I'm not saying that better screens aren't nice, pretty, beautiful, and eye-candy-like when I look at them; it's just not something that I need as opposed to being a nice-to-have.

But I wasnt saying D800's LCD wasnt good enough for you. I explained why it is, while enough for you, not enough for others.

  • 4k video is unlikely
  • No Built-in Wi-Fi

These are sort of essential these days.

"Essential"? I suppose if waiting all day to push big data between your camera and computer via WIFI is essential. 4k vid nice for those who work or dabble in areas where they or their clients would notice a difference... which isn't most people... thereby making 4k vid not really "essential"

These are two seperate features.

Like an apple and an orange are different fruits. I'm not sure why you wrote the obvious.

Because you said this

"I suppose if waiting all day to push big data between your camera and computer via WIFI is essential."

You made it as if I said 4K and wifi in conjuncture is essential

4K is essential in the sense that almost all high end cameras in their respective classes have 4K now, not having 4K for a late 2014 high end DSLR is exactly like not having video for D700.

That's where you're wrong. Video wasn't nor is it "essential" for the D700, especially during the D700's height in popularity. Video is great to have to many (I use it on my Canon 5d2, and was one reason out of many why I skipped the D3x) but it isn't an essential feature for most (not all) photographers. It wasn't essential 5 years ago, and it isn't essential today.

Well, I am not wrong. video was indeed the feature that made 5D2 significanlt outsold D700. Even though many people who wanted 5D2 werent pro videographers, just like they wanted liveview yet not many actually had to have it. 4K video is in that same place.

Someone else already explained why 4K is a very useful feature when for 1080P displays.

I wasn't discussing whether or not 4k is "useful". I only touched on whether or not 4k was ESSENTIAL.

Your position of it not being essential is directly based on your view that it isnt useful, which is reflected in this statement"

"4k vid nice for those who work or dabble in areas where they or their clients would notice a difference.."

In other words, you dont think 4K is useful or "nice" unless one is a pro videographer whose clients will notice the difference. Fact is one doesnt have to be.

Camera built-in Wifi isnt meant for video let alone 4K video. it is meant for quick still photo sharing or transferring. If you havent used it then refrain from commenting whether it is or is not essential.

(sigh) I get that too, since many of us shooting to eat and pay the mortgage are often looking for faster ways to xnsfr photos from the camera to a notebook or computer used to process incoming files and to "send" the files to people's iPads. Sure, there's people out there who want to send files to their cell phone so they can update their Facebook with whatever photos they took over the weekend, but that isn't the majority of D800 shooters and slow WIFI still isn't an "essential" facet in professional photography no matter how you cut it. Lightening fast WIFI would be horse of another colour!

The bottom line is that wireless has been a slower option in my experience than being tethered. Now maybe today wireless is really fast, and if that is the case then I can see where WIFI would be an advantage to many on location and during studio work; heck, if it's that fast today, then I'll require wireless in my next camera body or at least the availability of 3rd party wireless solution... but the bottom line is that unless things have changed recently- WIFI isn't going to be a fast studio solution nor faster than handing a flash card to an assistant using a dedicated card reader. Now, if I'm wrong, then educate me so I can take advantage of this new WIFI super high speed technology...

But from what I can remember WIFI is slow (and buggy on medium format). I understand the advantages of WIFI.. nothing new there. Tell me how much time it will take to send 25 full resolution D800 series raw files to an iMac in the studio, while I'm still shooting.

I think the root of our disagreement is what we think "essential" mean. Your definition seems to require the feature to be essential to the intended market to be considered "essential". That is not the meaning I had in mind when I used the word. What I was saying is that as a high end camera of late 2014, a product has to have certain features because everyone else have them. It is like it is essential for high end cars to have heated seats even if it is sold in Hawaii or Maimi, it is essential for high end TV to have 3D even if many rich people who may buy them are over age of 60 and will never watch anything in 3D.

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