polarhei: I think,i shall take a new try of the other brand since Large Number may be meaningless
I will consider the Sigma SD1m instead of it since there is not so much improvements.
You wouldn't get more noise. If you displayed/printed both images at the same magnification, you'd get the same noise performance.
Carl Sanders: What camera to choose. The D800 with the filter or the D800E without. Couple of points;
Taken that the D800E may need post production if moire is to be removed on stills how would this equate to a small movie in post production?
Would not the D800 with a little manipulation with a unsharp mask not obtain similar effect to the D800E but with less time consuming post production?
Why have Nikon not given a side by side comparison of the same image instead of different ones? It would have been of more use to do this. Whilst we crave for perfection and sharpness in our images we should purchase the D800E but Nikon have not convinced us that this is a credible option.
In the theme of comedian Harry Hill, "We like the D800 and we like the D800E, but which one is best? There is only one way to find out!
The D800 will be the best choice if you don't need a bit sharper image. It'll be a pain in the ass to remove the aliasing.
seabasstin: Not to be mean but some seriously miss-informed comments here...
Mega Pixel≠picture quality. Size of PIXEL = image quality.
The 16MP D4 has much larger pixels, which reduce noise, increase low light quality and make for better images then the 36MP D800. (for a reference the camera on the Hubble telescope is only 16MP but each pixel's GIANT)
D800 is more versatile and adaptable to a variety of contexts, like a swiss army knife, its a generalist's tool.
The D4 is more specific in application and therefore can have more constraints to its focus (weight, size, etc.) its a specialists tool
Canon is 10x larger then Nikon, and the PRO camera market is just a tiny part of Canon's bizness.
The Canon C300 only seems like a mistake to uninformed photographers... In the market of that particular camera, you have RED, Arri and Panavision, and the price ranges are $10k to $150K for similar quality. The C300 is well placed to provide additional rev for canon for a bag engineering project.
You are the one misinformed. You wouldn't get more noise. If you displayed/printed both images at the same magnification, you'd get the same noise performance.
SiliconVoid: Sadness befalls the world - The legendary performance introduced by the D700 has been reduced to a product footnote in Nikon's history.Future generations will one day be able to read: '..and at one time Nikon pursued a true digital evolution of film photography, and for a short time produced an iconic DSLR known as the D700. Unfortunately they abandoned that pursuit a few years later after succumbing to megapixel envy and consumer ignorance.
Graham Lacdao: Really? whats not to like about the D800.... I've got the D700, S3 Pro, EPL-1 20mm f1.7 and the D5100... And all are great camera's
Well I'm saving up for mine slowly.. Can't wait !!!...(But in no rush since the brain op) I mean 36mp thats the realm of Medium Format (and they rarely shoot over ISO 400 for advertising).
If you need to chop the chroma noise at high ISO skip down to 12mp on the D800 (But I guess to this not necessary due to improvement in technology)..
I do not think it is envy and consumer ignorance... I mean the Leica M9 cost twice as much as D800 and I wish I could afford one (cannot fault any Leica Lens and a M9 is damn sharp at 18mp), but I find it practical to spend it on a D800 (invested on Nikon Lenses). So on that note I think Nikon is selling the D800 at really good price considering you got 36mp, 1080p video and 100% Viewfinder. What more can you want.
Just check this out:http://vimeo.com/36305675
Samos151: Nikon just posted a technical guide on the D800 regarding techniques to avoid blurr with the high 36mps.
Actually they don't really need to explain it to us.
Ivan Azzopardi: 36mp is good for those who uses prime lenses as there would be a room for cropping. the only thing i am not sure about the pixel-per-pixel sharpness like the D700. I think Nikon has to coach d800e users in order to nearly eliminate the case of moire effect. Maybe the D800 will be the same sharpness as the D700 and the D800e with much more sharpness.
D800 will be at least 3 times sharper for 3 times the resolution, if the lens resolution is high enough for D800.
Superka: P.S. I found one really important advantage of Nikon over Canon.
That''s why Nikon is more quiet.
And why Nikon gets less vibration from the mirror.
Telefoto: "In a perfect world, I would have loved to have seen the 24.5MP of the D3X harnessed with the speed and low light capabilities of the D3S. Neither the D4 nor D800 are that camera..."
Yes! As a D3x user, that's my feeling exactly. I've been mystified why no one else seems to voice that view, but I guess it's because there are very few D3x users on the forums. So, for all the 12 MP shooters here, I guess the D4 looks like an upgrade (stills wise) and the D800 looks like ... I dunno exactly, but it's some kind of step forward even though it breaks with the purpose of the D700 (high ISO shooting). But, I can't help thinking this strange D800 broke the bank. Witness for instance that even in DX mode, it's a step back in FPS from the D3 generation. That's strange and rather unwelcome to me.
D3X actually has better low light ability than D3S. It has one time more pixels, so if you were to display/print both images you got from both cameras at the same magnification/size, you'd get better performance from D3X. That's the reason why DxOMark selects the scores for each sensor when the images are resized to 8MP.