Yikes! The rumored Nikon D800.

Started Oct 5, 2011 | Discussions thread
sparkling elk
sparkling elk Contributing Member • Posts: 829
Re: Yikes! The rumored Nikon D800.

there you talk about the quality of pixels. i agree that there is an improvement over the last years. however, IQ is more subtile than just high iso performance. finally, it should be all together (colors, contrasts, sharpness and DR).

my only experience with cameras concerning larger pixels and smaller pixels is the change between the 30D to 50D (8mp to 15mp) and 1D3 to 1D4 (10mp to 16mp). for both cases i confirm even better high iso (well, the 50D IQ did not satisfy me, while the 30D was more "lovely", to be unclear).

5D2 was something different. i'd tax it's IQ (5D pixels are larger) below the 1D4, also because of the way how it exposes in certain light situations.

to make it short: (supposed to talk about same sensor technology and not needing an extremely high resolution application-wise)

isn't there really no advantage of larger pixels over smaller ones concerning realisation of best IQ from lowest to highest iso ?
what the hell i should do with rawfiles of 40MP and and original jpegs of 25MP ?
or rawfiles > 50MP ?
honestely, i dont see this need now.

maybe in 5 years, when i will be able to work on a XXLcore computer, high capacity SSD disks and home-NAS, i could deal with this resolution. (not to forget superfast 64GB CF and SD cards ... and: maybe you'll need the latest EF L-lens versions to keep pace with extreme resolutions... ).

canon's APSH became as good as FF some years ago. APSC might get as good soon (refering to D7000 discussion). will i need high end FF (replacing MF at a similar performance) ?

i would be happy with a 2x mp sensor and best possible DR, let it be 1.2, 1.3 or FF, but with best ergonomics bodywise and some innovations mentioned here (like stabilised sensor).

bobn2 wrote:

sparkling elk wrote:

simply the fact that the pixel pitch of the D3s is much bigger than on the D3x sensor makes the 12mp D3s a much better low light camera. thats what i want...

It is not ' the fact that the pixel pitch of the D3s is much bigger than on the D3x sensor' that 'makes the 12mp D3s a much better low light camera'. It is the fact that the D3s has a much higher quantum efficiency.

the D3s already has such a spec.
who would like such a thing from canon (lets say with 16 or 20mp) ?

If this D800 sensor has D7000 pixels it will be very nearly as good as the D3s in low light, with 36MP. I expect the D4 to have D3s levels of low light performance or better and 24MP. With the pixel they have designed for the J1 and V1 Nikon could make a camera with D3s levels of low light performance and 72MP.

Canon have to up their game to match even the D7000 pixel, let alone the D3s and J1 pixels.

-- hide signature --


 sparkling elk's gear list:sparkling elk's gear list
Ricoh GR Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM +12 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow