Evaluating D800 images shrunken to 12 or 16mp defeats the purpose.

Started Mar 10, 2012 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
DocS Regular Member • Posts: 287
Evaluating D800 images shrunken to 12 or 16mp defeats the purpose.

If the D800 were a 12mp or even a 20mp camera, it wouldn’t offer anything spectacular over the D700. It seems that the D800’s claim to fame is its resolution.

So when you’re evaluating its (high) ISO performance, it would seem reasonable to me that you’d have to do it at its full resolution of 36mp. Or, at least, at 20-ish megapixels at a minimum. To shrink the D800’s high ISO images down to 12mp to compare it to the D700 simply defeats the purpose of the camera. If comparisons have to be made that way, then basically you’re paying an extra thousand dollars (on top of the D700’s price) to take super high-resolution photos ONLY in good light with impeccable lenses.

I guess you could say that you want to know that, for lack of a better analogy, you are getting better pixel-for-pixel performance from the D800 than the D700.

Nikon D700 Nikon D800
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow