Is camera shake a bigger issue on Full Frame cameras?

Oscar Rico said:

Here you go, handheld D800 wide open keeping the speed up using the corresponding ISO.

Regards: Oscar



http://www.pbase.com/tanguero/galleries

Click to expand...

Oscar Rico said:

No VR just the Nikon 24-70 2.8.

Best,

Oscar

Click to expand...

RoyAmatore said:

I bought the D750 and have been taking some shots around the neighborhood and at home. I am finding that, on close inspection, following the shutter speed = focal length rule is not sufficient for truly sharp images. Indeed, even doubling the shutter speed does not seem to do the trick. I also notice that of all the sample pics I've seen, its very hard to find one that demonstrates the camera's sharpness. I realize that there are many factors that contribute to sharpness, but when I stand 8 feet away from a small object with a 50mm lens set at f.28 at low ISO and 1/50th of a second, and then zoom in to the LCD at 100%, the small object is not tack sharp. I would like to see a sample pic that shows incredibly sharp detail at 100%. That's what I expect from this camera. Is the full frame format the culprit here? Is VR a must? Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

Andrew 3 said:

Gareth Bourne said:

I don't think you understand the premise.

This is about the idea of whether or not a "high megapixel camera" (like the D8x0/e) is more susceptible to camera shake than a "low megapixel camera" (like the D3, D700, or maybe the D6x0 or D750).

If you believe the answer to that premise is YES, that a high megapixel camera is more susceptible to camera shake than a low megapixel camera, then you have to explain why you believe that when the difference in the size of the pixels between the cameras is of the order of 1/1000 of 1mm.

I believe the answer to be NO, and that all cameras are susceptible to the same movement, and anyone who think they can see a difference is imagining it.

This has nothing to do with how you display the relevant images, or to the degree you crop them, or the size you print them out. That is completely irrelevant to the question being asked.

--
http://www.flickr.com/ggbourne

Click to expand...

I understand it perfectly fine, thank you. You on the other hand are stuck in an incorrect premise and refuse to work through it logically with an open mind. For some reason you are fixated on the physical size of an individual pixel yet cannot complete the picture (see the pun?) around how they are ultimately used.

Click to expand...

Andrew 3 said:

I see no point in a dialog with someone illogical and close minded so I'll leave you with a quote from Nikon to consider:

"At the high resolutions offered by the D800/D800E, even the slightest camera motion can result in blur."

Click to expand...

Alan Brown said:

Andrew 3 said:

Gareth Bourne said:

I don't think you understand the premise.

This is about the idea of whether or not a "high megapixel camera" (like the D8x0/e) is more susceptible to camera shake than a "low megapixel camera" (like the D3, D700, or maybe the D6x0 or D750).

If you believe the answer to that premise is YES, that a high megapixel camera is more susceptible to camera shake than a low megapixel camera, then you have to explain why you believe that when the difference in the size of the pixels between the cameras is of the order of 1/1000 of 1mm.

I believe the answer to be NO, and that all cameras are susceptible to the same movement, and anyone who think they can see a difference is imagining it.

This has nothing to do with how you display the relevant images, or to the degree you crop them, or the size you print them out. That is completely irrelevant to the question being asked.

--
http://www.flickr.com/ggbourne

Click to expand...

I understand it perfectly fine, thank you. You on the other hand are stuck in an incorrect premise and refuse to work through it logically with an open mind. For some reason you are fixated on the physical size of an individual pixel yet cannot complete the picture (see the pun?) around how they are ultimately used. I see no point in a dialog with someone illogical and close minded so I'll leave you with a quote from Nikon to consider:

Click to expand...

Yes.. we're all looking at the output of the sensor not the sensor itself.. aren't we?

Click to expand...

RoyAmatore said:

I bought the D750 and have been taking some shots around the neighborhood and at home. I am finding that, on close inspection, following the shutter speed = focal length rule is not sufficient for truly sharp images. Indeed, even doubling the shutter speed does not seem to do the trick. I also notice that of all the sample pics I've seen, its very hard to find one that demonstrates the camera's sharpness. I realize that there are many factors that contribute to sharpness, but when I stand 8 feet away from a small object with a 50mm lens set at f.28 at low ISO and 1/50th of a second, and then zoom in to the LCD at 100%, the small object is not tack sharp. I would like to see a sample pic that shows incredibly sharp detail at 100%. That's what I expect from this camera. Is the full frame format the culprit here? Is VR a must? Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

buybuybuy said:

so is bigger or isn't bigger issue. can somebody summarize?

Click to expand...

buybuybuy said:

so is bigger or isn't bigger issue. can somebody summarize?

Click to expand...