Nikon D800 image leaks, said to have a 36 megapixel sensor

Discussion in 'Digital Photography, Home and Portable Electronics' started by kanej2007, Nov 21, 2011.

  1. kanej2007

    kanej2007 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 TI 11GB
    Maybe not in video but certainly in image quality & size. :D

    Anyway who cares about video, over 90% of people who buy slr cameras use them for taking pictures not videos...

    If people want videos then they go and buy a proper video camera especially for videos...

    As I mentioned above there is no such camera that is perfect or the best in everything from megapixel count to high iso ( low light) as well as video...

    But if Nikon seriously releases the D800 with 36mp as specified along with a CHEAP £2500 price tag then it's amazing value for money, being HALF the price of the D3X & having an extra 12mp...

    Time will tell, looking forward to the official specification, price tag & release date. :D
     
  2. NoviceRei

    NoviceRei Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Inno3D 460 825/1079/1650


    Agreed. IMO DSLRs should be for stills, and VideoCams for vids. No crossovers.

    i would have preferred the extra time and money spent on improving performance in taking still photos, rather than developing video for DSLRs. or at least take out the video capability and make the bodies cheaper.
     
  3. NoviceRei

    NoviceRei Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Inno3D 460 825/1079/1650
    soo.. the long wait will soon be over, and January 6 is the date. anyone else anticipating the launch/release?

    something to keep me busy for the next few days with the onslaught of reviews/articles/unboxings and whatnot. :D
     
  4. kanej2007

    kanej2007 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 TI 11GB
    Be sure to post them here on Guru3D, would LOVE to get more information with regards to the Nikon D800.

    The second it's announced I will be reserving one regardless of the cost...
     

  5. Thug

    Thug Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,188
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 970 on 2x 28" monitor
    The thing that worries me is the size of the files.
    On my Canon 5dII which has a 21mp sensor each photo is a hefty 24mb or there abouts.
    Not sure how the extra pixels will relate in file size, but to give an idea, a 10mp file off my old Canon 400d was as small as 8mb, so half the pixels, but a lot less than half the file size.
    At that rate each file might be about 45mb (complete guess BTW).
     
  6. kanej2007

    kanej2007 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 TI 11GB
    Same to you! The D700 was around £2100 when it was first released. Now it's around £1700.

    Your about right, each image will be approximately 45-50mb, especially wide angle photos.

    I've seen several D3X images and their about 24mb.
     
  7. Mikedogg

    Mikedogg Banned

    Messages:
    2,844
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Radeon HD 4650M 1GB
    Given the MP count is quite impressive, I can see down scaling an image to certain sizes on 36MP will cause distortion. Let's hope this model comes with a few different MP options.
     
  8. NoviceRei

    NoviceRei Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Inno3D 460 825/1079/1650
    i'm really rooting for pixel binning........


    if that's true.
     
  9. sovietdoc

    sovietdoc Master Guru

    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti
    You are so wrong sir. Sooooo wrong.

    Have you seen how much a video capable DSLR costs and what video quality it produces, versus professional video camera with similar quality interchangeable lens?

    Look it up the camera/lens price differences. Then you may feel like 5-8 grand for a DSLR may not even seem that much.
     
  10. kanej2007

    kanej2007 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 TI 11GB
    Yes, I somewhat agree with you. A professional video camera does indeed cost an insane amount of money, many costing $10,000 and up whilst a DSLR costs well under half the price while producing similar quality.

    However with a current DSLR you won't get all the functions/options/handling of a professional video camera and there is insufficient memory at this time for large amounts of video unless you fancy carrying about dozens of memory cards...

    Supposing a large movie producer decided to make a movie which is to be released in the theater and used an SLR camera for the recording.

    It will be great, not far off from a dedicated professional camera only there are some drawbacks about SLR cameras producing video:

    1 - Not enough memory - Recording say a 3 hour movie would need several memory cards which is inconvenient. There is no built in memory as of now. Pro video cameras have far more space.
    2 - Speed/Focussing - As we know the autofocus of SLR cameras are very slow since their not made for video recording, it's just an extra option. The focussing speed of a pro video camera would trump any current DSLR.
    3 - Handling/options - Pro video cameras have endless options and settings all of which can be changed. With an SLR you have limited and very few basic options which can be changed such as focussing, resolution, frame rate and very few more minor options which can be altered. These basic options are nothing and can no way compete with a Pro video camera.
    4 - Inputs/outputs - These are once again very limited on an slr because of size. Apart from GPS, a mic slot and hdmi slot that's about it...
    5 - Resolution - 1920x1080 full HD is the limit a the moment for SLR cameras. As for Pro video cameras, you get upto 4096 x 2304 which is 4 TIMES bigger than an SLR. This is a large difference especially when compared with on a large screen.

    My opinion is that current SLR cameras are great for video recording and over the years have quickly improved and continue to get better and better.

    Not long ago the first SLR cameras that recorded video were just 640X480 in resolution and had a limit of 4-5 minutes.

    Now we have 1920x1080 full HD and up to 20 or 30 mins of recording time.

    Over a period of 2-3 years this is a quick and big step forward...

    It makes you wonder what will happen/change in the next 2-3 years, perhaps even higher resolution, more options/effects, better & quicker autofocussing, etc...

    However, as of now you cannot compare an SLR to a Pro video camera. As you said price wise, YES, an SLR offers great value for money and for this reason your getting bang for your bucks. However should you need the ultimate quality you will need to fork out $$$ for a Pro camera.

    If SLR's are so good for recording video why do movie producers not use them? Spielberg & Ridley Scott don't use them, there's a reason and limits as to why their not used at this time.

    Possibly they would be used in the near future when they catch up!
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2012

  11. NoviceRei

    NoviceRei Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Inno3D 460 825/1079/1650
    i'm in with the "DSLRs should be for stills" boat.

    for the same amount, they could've made a better DSLR for stills, or make it cheaper without all the video stuffs.
     
  12. kanej2007

    kanej2007 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 TI 11GB
    Or even better to keep everyone happy offer the same camera in 2 versions, one with video and the other without.
     
  13. Loobyluggs

    Loobyluggs Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,259
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    EVGA 1070 FTW
    As I wrote in another thread, that is not how pricing is determined.

    Video capture in a DSLR providing 1080P broadcast quality lowers the cost, it doesn't increase it.

    The demand for the DLSR would be higher, so the price equilibrium of demand would lower the price.

    Remove the video capture and the demand lowers, affecting the equilibrium price.

    :biggun:
     
  14. sovietdoc

    sovietdoc Master Guru

    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti
    That is assuming we live in an economic system where prices are based on supply and demand laws. But we live in a corporate system where supply and demand don't exactly work the way you might think, and they have less of an effect on price.

    Why do you think Ferrari comes out with a car that costs 120,500 pounds, then Lambo comes out with a car costing 120,500 pounds, and then Porsche comes out with a car costing 120,500 pounds?

    Supply and Demand? Clearly.
     
  15. NoviceRei

    NoviceRei Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Inno3D 460 825/1079/1650

  16. kanej2007

    kanej2007 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 TI 11GB
  17. NoviceRei

    NoviceRei Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Inno3D 460 825/1079/1650
    no prob man, glad i could be of help.


    on another news, have you read/seen the new rankings in DXO ratings? D800 ranks first with a score of 95, on top of the Phase One IQ180 and Nikon D4.
     
  18. sovietdoc

    sovietdoc Master Guru

    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti
    Well, DxO mark has very little to do with reality. For example, their suite gives Canon EF 70-200 mark I, 21 points and mark II 18 points.

    Anyone who has shot with either lens will tell you that Mark II is better than mark 1 in every single way, in some cases pretty significantly yet DxO says it's a lot worse.

    I don't trust DxO's test suite for obvious reasons like that, because they've been proven wrong multiple times. Now, it's obvious that D800 has higher DR than 5DIII but comparing low light raw samples, 5DIII looks slightly better than D4, more into D3s territory, and if DxO will still give low light preference to Nikon, then it will be obvious again that their benchmark is wrong. Based on what I've seen from RAWs, 5DIII should be best low light performer next to 1DX. So if DxO doesn't show that to be true (which one can easily see from comparing RAWs) then their "benchmark" has no value at all.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2012
  19. NoviceRei

    NoviceRei Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Inno3D 460 825/1079/1650
    well yes, there are oddities on there ranking system. we will have to wait for the 5DIII and 1DX as i'm also interested. :nerd:
     
  20. NoviceRei

    NoviceRei Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Inno3D 460 825/1079/1650

Share This Page