D800 'studio purposes' comments

[sweetsonic]

Maybe a dumb question, but are people considering the D800 specs good for the studio because they're assuming strobe/flash use, therefore few low light problems?

What makes the D800 specs good for studio use as opposed to event, wedding, macro, landscape, etc.? It seems like a great camera for just about any application. Maybe I'm naive...

 

[Ayrshirephotographer]

Maybe a dumb question, but are people considering the D800 specs good for the studio because they're assuming strobe/flash use, therefore few low light problems?

What makes the D800 specs good for studio use as opposed to event, wedding, macro, landscape, etc.? It seems like a great camera for just about any application. Maybe I'm naive...

D800 is better than the D700 in terms of ISO 'performance' higher up the scale. Its closer to the D3s than the D700. So you cannot complain about low light performance.

--
"I come to this forum because it sucks less than the others."

 

[cluna]

D800 is better than the D700 in terms of ISO 'performance' higher up the scale. Its closer to the D3s than the D700. So you cannot complain about low light performance.

I'm still amazed that this is being preached. If I ask to see a nef from a D800 that has been taken this week, it wont happen.

-C

 

[Ayrshirephotographer]

D800 is better than the D700 in terms of ISO 'performance' higher up the scale. Its closer to the D3s than the D700. So you cannot complain about low light performance.

I'm still amazed that this is being preached. If I ask to see a nef from a D800 that has been taken this week, it wont happen.

-C

You will eat your words when it comes out, that's all I'm saying. I'll show you this post of your disbelief! Just wait. lol
--
"I come to this forum because it sucks less than the others."

 

[Josh152]

and they all say the noise preformance is as good the D700.

 

[sweetsonic]

Obviously we won't know until it comes out, but it seems to me that it would be pretty much be on par with the D700, if not slightly better. That's why I'm confused why people keep pushing it as a studio (and landscape as well i guess) camera. Why can't it be used to great effect for weddings, events, portraits, etc?

 

[Ayrshirephotographer]

Obviously we won't know until it comes out, but it seems to me that it would be pretty much be on par with the D700, if not slightly better. That's why I'm confused why people keep pushing it as a studio (and landscape as well i guess) camera. Why can't it be used to great effect for weddings, events, portraits, etc?

It can.

Search google Cliff Mautner D800 wedding.

--
"I come to this forum because it sucks less than the others."

 

[Josh152]

Obviously we won't know until it comes out, but it seems to me that it would be pretty much be on par with the D700, if not slightly better. That's why I'm confused why people keep pushing it as a studio (and landscape as well i guess) camera. Why can't it be used to great effect for weddings, events, portraits, etc?

It can be. Though the huge files could be an issue if you are shooting a high number of frames at an event or wedding.

 

[calson]

Certainly for portrait and fashion studio use the higher resolution will enable large prints that would in the past require the use of a MFT camera that would be in the 30K price range plus the cost of the lenses.

With value pricing for family portraits bigger is definitely better and a lot more profitable. Same applies to fine art prints where the selling price per square inch goes up dramatically with very large prints (30x40 up to many feet).

 

[cluna]

D800 is better than the D700 in terms of ISO 'performance' higher up the scale. Its closer to the D3s than the D700. So you cannot complain about low light performance.

I'm still amazed that this is being preached. If I ask to see a nef from a D800 that has been taken this week, it wont happen.

-C

You will eat your words when it comes out, that's all I'm saying. I'll show you this post of your disbelief! Just wait. lol

No sh.t....when it comes out, read my words again. How can you say it is better if you havent any proof?

It may be better but you are just like the little old ladies at the tea room gossiping about something that is more than 4degrees of separation of first hand knowledge. Or simply, a fool hedges his bets on hearsay

-C

 

[Scott McMorrow]

D800 is better than the D700 in terms of ISO 'performance' higher up the scale. Its closer to the D3s than the D700. So you cannot complain about low light performance.

I'm still amazed that this is being preached. If I ask to see a nef from a D800 that has been taken this week, it wont happen.

True, but you will be able to see NEFs that were taken on February 7th. That isn't good enough for you?

Camera: Nikon D800
Lens: AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G
Shot at 50 mm
Exposure: Auto exposure, Aperture-priority AE, 1/2,000 sec, f/2.8, ISO 12800
Flash: Off, Did not fire

Focus: AF-S, at 60cm, with a depth of field of about 2.2cm, centered on the focus point
AF Area Mode: Single Area
Date: February 7, 2012 2:44:11PM (timezone not specified)

(17 days, 10 hours, 46 minutes, 33 seconds ago, assuming image timezone of 3 hours ahead of GMT)
Time Zone Offset: +03:00
File: 4,924 × 7,424 NEF (36.6 megapixels)
50,000,000 bytes (47.7 megabytes) Image compression: 54%

 

[rinsephotographic]

No sh.t....when it comes out, read my words again. How can you say it is better if you havent any proof?

there are sample images all over the web and several comparisons have already been made. google it. so far it would appear that the d800 outperforms the d700 at equivalent print sizes. i'm waiting for some more substantive testing but real-world high ISO samples so far are very impressive.

--
dave

 

[Luke Kaven]

The D3/D3s/D4 sensors are noisy at low ISO settings, being optimized for read noise further up, around ISO900.

The Exmor sensors in the D3x and D800 are optimized for lowest read noise at base ISO. As such, they achieve higher dynamic range than any other sensor of the same size. If the D800 is like its predecessors, it will achieve around 14 stops of DxO-type DR and take the crown away from every other camera but the best medium format digitals.

These sensors also have historically been noted for their color renditions and skintones, as with the A900 and the D3x.

So if you are a studio photographer, and you have lots of light, you can get 36 million really good clean pixels.

This says nothing about whether the camera is good for use in low light. The D800 when downsampled to 12MP is as good as the D3s at native 12MP. You can't get 36 million good pixels in low light easily, and very often because there just aren't enough photons around to fill out every pixel, and quite a few strays.

Maybe a dumb question, but are people considering the D800 specs good for the studio because they're assuming strobe/flash use, therefore few low light problems?

What makes the D800 specs good for studio use as opposed to event, wedding, macro, landscape, etc.? It seems like a great camera for just about any application. Maybe I'm naive...

 

[Ilkka Nissilä]

High resolution is easier to achieve if you have a lot of controlled light available and it being flash light the subject movement is usually not an issue. Powerful studio flashes will easily let you shoot at f/11 ISO 100 so sharpness across the frame doesn't require great focusing skills.

 

[cluna]

No sh.t....when it comes out, read my words again. How can you say it is better if you havent any proof?

there are sample images all over the web and several comparisons have already been made. google it. so far it would appear that the d800 outperforms the d700 at equivalent print sizes. i'm waiting for some more substantive testing but real-world high ISO samples so far are very impressive.

But you cannot compare unless shot under controlled or very similar situations and scenes. Ill take a high iso shoot out side with my D700 and a similar with D3s and the D700 will look better . ...but how do think this indictative of real potential?

-C

 

[bbbinohio]

First, before I get yelled at let me explain. I absolutely LOVE what I feel confident that the D800 is going to shown to be once the actual reviews come out.

But I think exactly like you do, for me, the D800 is going to go everywhere and do everything. (except sports and telephoto work, for which I will probably use a DX body like the anticipated D400 when it comes out)

Not only do I expect the D800 to be GREAT for wide angle work (personally I expect to be using the 14-24mm f/2.8) and macro work (105mm f/2.8) but I think if you throw a 24-70mm on the D800 that it becomes a great "knock-around" camera that will do a fabulous job taking snap-shots of just about anything that you might bump into on a casual walk around town.

AND don't believe this tripod crap, I'm confident that the D800 will produce GREAT results by just hand holding the thing. Sure, the prints will not be quite as sharp as if you took the shot on a tripod, but they will still be every bit as sharp as any of the shots you might have seen from the D700, D3s and D3x are when they were shot hand held.

Personally, I am very, very excited about this camera, and it's EXACTLY what I would have asked Nikon to produce for me.

Bob from Ohio

Bob from Ohio

 

[Tony Beach]

...I think if you throw a 24-70mm on the D800 that it becomes a great "knock-around" camera that will do a fabulous job taking snap-shots of just about anything that you might bump into on a casual walk around town.

I'm thinking of dusting off my old Nikkor 18-70 DX kit lens and using that as a walk-around combo with the D800. The lens is small, light and inexpensive (virtually free for me). The files will be smaller, and the image quality will be decent enough.

 

[Leos]

I think if you throw a 24-70mm on the D800 that it becomes a great "knock-around" camera that will do a fabulous job taking snap-shots of just about anything that you might bump into on a casual walk around town.

AND don't believe this tripod crap,

I am quite certain that the D800 will not be a worse casual snapshot camera than the D700. And probably not better neither.

 

[Jon Rty]

Sure you can, you can measure the efficiency of the sensor, and compare that. Which is what Marianne and Bill have done. They've been able to measure the QE of the pre-production D800, and it's very close to that of the D3s, and substantially higher than that of the D700. Now, surely we don't expect the production model to be any worse, do we?

But you cannot compare unless shot under controlled or very similar situations and scenes. Ill take a high iso shoot out side with my D700 and a similar with D3s and the D700 will look better . ...but how do think this indictative of real potential?

-C

 

[Luke Kaven]

I think if you throw a 24-70mm on the D800 that it becomes a great "knock-around" camera that will do a fabulous job taking snap-shots of just about anything that you might bump into on a casual walk around town.

AND don't believe this tripod crap,

I am quite certain that the D800 will not be a worse casual snapshot camera than the D700. And probably not better neither.

Reams of flat nothing moments rendered with extraordinary clarity and vividness at 36MP...disks and disks full of it. Half-forced smiles...bored cats...birthday hats...kids showing off...all printable at wall size. Oh the humanity.

Of course, there is always the reduced size options. I'll bet it makes some nicely detailed-looking JPGs at 1000x1500 right out of camera.