What makes a pro body?

Started Dec 24, 2012 | Questions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Jason Stoller
Jason Stoller Veteran Member • Posts: 6,576
Re: A factory in Sendai, Japan makes a pro body

Robin Casady wrote:

Jason Stoller wrote:

Robin Casady wrote:

Jason Stoller wrote:

Robin Casady wrote:

fft81 wrote:

In terms of ergonomics/durability/functionality, what makes a camera into a pro body?

So, why do people want a D4X when there is D800? I can understand a D4X at 54MPx, but would you still buy a D4X with 36MPx sensor like d800, but in D4 body? What frame rate does 36MPx d4X need to have to be a consideration vs cheaper d800?


A factory in Sendai, Japan makes a pro body. Nikon marketing determines what is classified as a pro body.

Pros who work in harsh conditions tend to prefer the durability and weather resistance of the top-end (D4) Nikon bodies. The integrated grip is also a plus for some. Then there are features in the top-end bodies that are not found in the semi-pro (D800) bodies. For some, these extra features make the pro body a must have.

An optimum resolution for an Epson printer is 360 ppi while 240 ppi is acceptable. A D800 image at 360 ppi prints about 20x14" in size. At 240 ppi it prints 20x30"—no cropping, no distortion correction, etc. A 54 MP image would allow more quality and flexibility with large prints.

-- hide signature --

Robin, sorry to tell you that 54 MP offers you nothing more than 54 MP...

Hmm, 54=54. Can't argue with that.

You can never argue with the obvious lol!

unless they are quality pixel, spaced properly, have the proper noise control in the camera to control the sensor, good color rendition, and software to get a quality input to output for the image produced.

And you think they wouldn't?

Robin it would not be the first time or the last. Engineers do not always design well. Companies develop technology that is ahead of what they actually release, and only release something slightly improved over the previous generation. Since the goal is to get as much money out of your pocket on a regular basis they only want to dangle the carrot of innovation that is necessary to get the job done and hold back technology for the next round.

Look at the history. D700 to D800: along with the resolution increase, the DR was improved and image quality is excellent. Your argument makes no sense. Just because the engineers could screw it up doesn't mean they will. Nor does it mean you should be afraid of increased resolution.

Dynamic Range might be improved but that is not all sensor related.  As a person who has shot both the D700 and D800 sided by side under the same circumstances with the same lens, I agree the image quality out of both the D700 and D800 is excellent.  Have you done the same?  And when I mean the same, I mean over a period of several days.

The real question asks whether or not that difference is noticeable enough and at what size image and print it becomes evident.

I am not saying if an engineer can they will screw something up but there certainly has been a fair share of focus issues with the D800 at first release and enough of an issue that there are still photographers checking their recently purchased D800s for proper focusing.  Guess what Robin engineers are not only responsible for R&D, but also Quality control in the assembly process.  They are responsible for setting the tolerances that are acceptable before something is shipped out the door.  My argument makes perfect sense.  You are speculating about vaporware and talking in generalizations.  Just because I ask you for specifics does not invalidate my argument.

If you want to talk about history, you need to way back before the D700 ever was produced.  You also need to look outside the Nikon line to understand why.

Since you are going to make the assertion that I am afraid of increased resolution, I challenge you to cut and paste where I made that statement.   If you cannot then you really need to retract it.

Keep in mind, there is a point that anything reaches where there is no apparent benefit. The same can be said for ppi (pixels per inch) in a print which for printers is measured differently anyway.

The image sent to the printer is measured in ppi. Since we are talking about camera resolution, that is the correct term. Dots per inch of the printer is irrelevant to this thread.

Yes which was exactly my point so why did you mention the resolution of the Epson printer to start with? As you yourself just pointed out its irrelevant to this thread.

I said, "...resolution for an Epson printer..." not of the printer. The best image resolution to send to the printer. So, ppi is correct and the argument is germane to the topic.

You mentioned a particular brand of printer and its capability into this thread.  I understand exactly how a print is measured and the difference in the units but thanks for clarifying that you do.  I think you are somewhat confused.  Again the resolution of the Epson printer an Epson printer if we are playing semantics is irrelevant.

There point where there are diminishing returns based on the variables you are working with.  It does not matter if its a printer or a camera sensor. Now that is what is really germane to this thread and conversation.

How much can you really improve the quality of things on the same 35mm format sensor size. Of course there are always going to be people that perceive more as being better. Unfortunately that assumption is not always true.

A lot of people were saying the same thing about 36 MP when everyone was shooting 12 MP. Smaller sensors give us a clue as to what will be possible with FX in cameras to come.

There may be some truth in this but there is also truth that if you change too many variables you change the rules and change the game. Canon's fast and accurate focus was a game changer in the photography world. There were major returns that were realized when it was implemented.

What Canon did with AF doesn't say much about sensor resolution. I don't follow your point.

Wow,  What good is the best sensor if you lack the focusing system to put it to work and get the best out of it?   If you cannot get the shot or get it accurately in a reasonable amount of time for your application then how good the sensor is does not matter.

While I am not brand loyal Canon as well has others have made major developments in the sensor world.   Do you know who actually has made the 36mp sensor you are commenting about?

Whether or not the 36 MP sensor is a game changer in the 35mm (Fx) camera market remains to be seen. I will point out again, there is a point of diminishing returns that exists for anything. By the way who are a lot of people and were those people right or wrong?

You really seem to like straw man arguments. Who said anything about "game changer"? We are talking about whether 54 MP is beyond useful. I say it is not and provided arguments to that point.

Those people were dpreview forum members and they were wrong. The D800/E really did improve things on FX format cameras.

Robin, these are not straw man arguments.  What you doing is speculating about vaporware unless your process the technology and the math skills to produce it.  Interestingly enough it has nothing to do with the original question of what makes a pro camera.

Maybe you do not understand what I mean when I use the term game changer?  Ask any Professional sports photographer who was around and shooting digital in the early 2000's and even those shooting film prior to that.

LOL there are lots of people on DPR  forums who are wrong every day including me.  I would not put a lot of stock in what others say in a forum and I would not treat what I read on the internet as gospel.   Got to love the term FX a term invented to tell the difference from DX.

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

Jason Stoller ComicDom1@aol.com
We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their new products!

 Jason Stoller's gear list:Jason Stoller's gear list
Canon PowerShot D10 Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +11 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Higuma MOD
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow