-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
D800, what are the known weak points vs a Canon
- Thread starter hunk
- Start date
I have a G12 for the reason, great little camera for snapshots!
My D700 was picked up tonight, sold it for about what I paid for it (thanks Nikon for last years price hike re the MAP issue). D800E on preorder, let the huge files try their best. Lexar USB3 reader and 32GB CF+SD combos are already waiting for you! My drives are screaming for some nasty AA moire files
--
I'z lovez my AiS'ez
My D700 was picked up tonight, sold it for about what I paid for it (thanks Nikon for last years price hike re the MAP issue). D800E on preorder, let the huge files try their best. Lexar USB3 reader and 32GB CF+SD combos are already waiting for you! My drives are screaming for some nasty AA moire files
--
I'z lovez my AiS'ez
DvD5
Leading Member
Yes.
Yes--from the Nikon site:
With EN-EL15 batteries (FX/5:4) CL: approx. 1 to 4 fps, CH: approx. 4 fps, (DX/1.2x) CL: approx. 1 to 5 fps, CH: approx. 5 fps
Other power sources (FX/5:4) CL: approx. 1 to 4 fps, CH: approx. 4 fps, (1.2x) CL: approx. 1 to 5 fps, CH: approx. 5 fps, (DX) CL: approx. 1 to 5 fps, CH: approx. 6 fps
--
http://www.dvd5.zenfolio.com
maiaibing
Veteran Member
Seems very close to the Canon solution for all practical purposes - even if they technically are different ways of reducing the file size..
DvD5
Leading Member
Remember, though, that the viewfinder image is cropped accordingly (it shades out the portion of the image that won't be recorded). This is actually very handy when shooting 4:5 format as you can compose for that ratio and see what the effect will be.
Don
--
http://www.dvd5.zenfolio.com
hunk
Senior Member
I need the high MP more than anyone. My clients are Lynx, Porsche and others. I'm just asking what people do when they want a smaller picture.
eyefi in my Canons has a limited range and produces errors, the wt-4 seems capable but impractical. Why doesn't the wt-5 fit?
Don't get me wrong, I'm in love with the D800 ;-)
If you want the option to share small pictures, why not take a full size jpeg or RAW pic and just downsize it in post production? It takes two seconds. You always have that option going from full size, but you can't take an sRAW or small jpg and go up if you wanted full quality. I don't see the problem here. Is that honestly a deal breaker for a 3000$ 36MP camera? I think this is beyond nitpicking...
hunk
Senior Member
I'm a high volume shooter, on a full size wedding I take 2000-4000 pictures. I just work very hard... ;-) Well, if you assume two weddings in a weekend... 6000 x 75MB that needs to get sorted out, processed.... With my 1DmkIII with 10MP it's not a problem but the D800 files are 6 times as big. I think I'll end up with an additional D700 for the party shots and such.
Btw, 36MP sounds great for high end weddings with enormous books and groupshots with 150 people...
--
fun; http://www.x32.nl
work; http://www.ministerievanbeeld.nl
Marcin 3M
Senior Member
Just imagine that You have just finished work that required 36MP, packed up, went home and discovered, that sRAW is ON.
Sounds like nightmare, doesn't it?
I rather prefer bath conversion to sRAW on PC.
And cards are not a big problem nowadays...
--
Marcin_3M
Sounds like nightmare, doesn't it?
I rather prefer bath conversion to sRAW on PC.
And cards are not a big problem nowadays...
--
Marcin_3M
irish-george
Senior Member
RAW = ALL the unprocessed data from the sensor. So, IMHO, sRAW is a bit of an oxymoron. Not being a Canon person (other than P&S cameras), is Canon compressing the data, interpolating (creating new data, such as taking a 4x4 pixel area averaging them and calling the 4x4 a large, single pixel) the data down to a smaller size, or truncating (throwing away, like in any crop) the data? Anything that comes to mind, I wouldn't consider to be RAW.
Martin Grecner
Leading Member
Here is an article on Canon sRAW if someone wants to go in detail:
http://dougkerr.net/Pumpkin/articles/sRaw.pdf
Based on that article, Canon sRAW is a special file format with these main characteristics:
1. It is no RAW format representing fotosite values from the sensor
2. While downsamplig image resolution to 1/4th of the original, it skips the complex demosaicing process and simply takes RED, BLE and GREEN pixel(s) from the RAW sensor output and makes them RGB values for the one resulting pixel.
3. The format is not RGB, but rather chrominance luminance representation of pixels, with chroma subsampled (equivalent to 4:2:2 known from video files)
This means sRAW has less color information than original RAW file.
On Nikon side, if the small image resolutions can be saved as TIFF, I believe that 16 bit TIFF can provide the same as sRAW does.
TIFF may not be appropriate for you processing workflow, though...
Martin
thomas2279f
Senior Member
Thanks for the information - saved this article off and read it... information that can be recycle again for future posts...lol
Anyway good news is that the D800 has crop modes 1:2, 1:5 (DX) , etc which I will use depending upon where I'm going to use this camera once I get it sometime in 2012.
Going to view the D800 as a long term investment and still going to use my D300s and D7000 as these cameras still take stonking photos.
Anyway good news is that the D800 has crop modes 1:2, 1:5 (DX) , etc which I will use depending upon where I'm going to use this camera once I get it sometime in 2012.
Going to view the D800 as a long term investment and still going to use my D300s and D7000 as these cameras still take stonking photos.
Peter Rongsted
Senior Member
To get clean files? ;-)
Peter Rongsted
Senior Member
no text
gonzalu
Forum Pro
wi-fi transmitter. I am missing something here, can you elaborate? I didn't know all Canon cameras came with a small wi-fi transmitter with iPad display capabilities natively ?? Or is it something different?
I thought that Eye-Fi was the only game in town of its kind.
--
Manny
http://www.pbase.com/gonzalu/
http://www.thrustimages.com/
FCAS Member - http://fcasmembers.com/
I thought that Eye-Fi was the only game in town of its kind.
--
Manny
http://www.pbase.com/gonzalu/
http://www.thrustimages.com/
FCAS Member - http://fcasmembers.com/
Cultured Vulture
Senior Member
bobn2
Forum Pro
The difference is that Canon has been making some of the interesting glass for a lot longer. You can get a second hand 24/1.4 for Canon much cheaper than a 24/1.4 for Nikon.
--
Bob
ovrebekk
Senior Member
So?
The same goes for ISO, bracketing, over/under exposure and a lot of other things. Modern cameras have a lot of features, and I personally think it's a good thing.
As long as you can store and restore a set of 'preferred settings' I don't see a problem with it, and I would love a reduced RAW format!
eNo
Forum Pro
Why do you need RAW for snapshots. Shoot DX crop JPG at low quality, and voila!
I guess you have use for WIFI, so maybe reading the specs before a big purchase will work out better next time. I don't want to be overly dismissive because WIFI isn't what I would think about first when I consider a photographic piece of equipment. Actually, I wouldn't think of WIFI at all.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image
Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Google plus: http://www.gplus.to/imagesbyeduardo
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/imagesbyeduardo/
calson
Forum Pro
There is a DX crop which functions much the same as sRAW but with better image quality. Nikon cameras tend to provide better autofocus accuracy in most situations. Nikon lenses have a 5-year warranty and do not require frequent recalibration.
On the minus side a D800 costs $3,000-3,300 while a 5D Mark II currently sells for $2075. In that limited aspect the Canon cameras are a better value bases solely on specs and IQ if one ignores AF performance.
On the minus side a D800 costs $3,000-3,300 while a 5D Mark II currently sells for $2075. In that limited aspect the Canon cameras are a better value bases solely on specs and IQ if one ignores AF performance.
Similar threads
- For sale
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum