Range Loser
Established
Yes I could shoot film, 5X4 and 10x8 would be better, but I'm just not that disciplined, large format is a completely different style of photography.
Yes I could get a medium format digital camera system, but I'm not that wealthy.
I know that the high ISO performance won't match a D4 or 1DX or probably 5D 3, but I shoot mostly still subjects.
So as a Nikon user, I have high hopes for some nicely detailed prints from the D800.
Anyone else selling other stuff to make the purchase?
Yes I could get a medium format digital camera system, but I'm not that wealthy.
I know that the high ISO performance won't match a D4 or 1DX or probably 5D 3, but I shoot mostly still subjects.
So as a Nikon user, I have high hopes for some nicely detailed prints from the D800.
Anyone else selling other stuff to make the purchase?
dave lackey
Veteran
Cannot think of a better buy for landscape or any other highly detailed photography. If I still did that sort of thing, the D800 would be my first choice.
These days, I have other fish to fry that fit in my diet. But I can not for the life of me understand how anyone could resist it for $3000.:angel:
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
As a Nikon user I find it very intriguing for the potential it may hold for more detail in prints and I also think it is at a very good price point. That said, I have a low shutter count D700 and will not at this point in time be selling it to get a D800. At the print sizes I usually do I don't think I would see a huge improvement over the D700. Time will tell on that one though. 12 MP seems to be doing it so far for me so I got a gently used D300 for telephoto work instead. Really interested in seeing some hands on real life reviews and photos from the D800 and in particular the D800E.
Bob
Bob
BobYIL
Well-known
Was planning to order the Pentax 645D as I have a number of MF Pentax and Hasselblad lenses at hand, mainly for landscape use. The D800E has caused a change in the plans for it's compact, light and easy to carry along with a bunch of lenses over the rough terrain. Having ordered it I am now selling some old Nikkors to buy their modern cousins.. It seems so that I will have to buy some Zeiss too...
David_Manning
Well-known
"...for it's compact, light and easy to carry..."
I was just coming to terms with my dSLR and primes being bulky, heavy, and terrible to travel with
I was just coming to terms with my dSLR and primes being bulky, heavy, and terrible to travel with
Dana B.
Well-known
For the money, you could buy a vintage Pentax 6X7, a tripod, 55mm wide-angle lens, a bag of Velvia, and produce National Geographic landscape photos. Astill have $2,500 left over for expeditions.
B-9
Devin Bro
There are countless, affordable cameras that could do more with less. Hows the ride on this particular bandwagon?
gavinlg
Veteran
Don't forget the v700 scanner to make use of scanning, and then the supplementary 35mm system to be able to shoot in anything other than good light...
Range Loser
Established
I did title the post "best digital?". I realise that there are many 6x7cm or 6x9cm cameras that could produce similar results, but for me it isn't an option any more. Spent years exposing Velvia and scanning, to good effect, but just prefer the lack of hassle, workflow and results of digital now.
Steveh
Well-known
To answer the original question, yes, I'm seriously considering trading in my D700 and mamiya 7II for a D800 or a D800E, although I want to wait for some reviews and to handle the camera first. I've never been that much of a landscape person but I seem to be heading more in that direction recently so it seems the pefect choice, and I'm increasingly realising that I like the theory of film more than I like the reality.
I also like the ability to drop the resolution to 20mp for normal quality shooting, or use it as a 15mp DX camera. The proper live view implementation (just hit a button on the back, as opposed the ridiculous multi step procedure on the D700) looks a real step forward as well. And being able to shoot hi-res video of the kids with the 24-70 is a nice bonus!
I also like the ability to drop the resolution to 20mp for normal quality shooting, or use it as a 15mp DX camera. The proper live view implementation (just hit a button on the back, as opposed the ridiculous multi step procedure on the D700) looks a real step forward as well. And being able to shoot hi-res video of the kids with the 24-70 is a nice bonus!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
BobYIL
Well-known
"...for it's compact, light and easy to carry..."
I was just coming to terms with my dSLR and primes being bulky, heavy, and terrible to travel with
Sure, certainly not like two M bodies with four lenses in a shoulder bag but try to pack a 645N with inserts, with two primes and two zooms looking like stove-pipes!
Ah, for some thirty years my Nikon F with three prime lenses were always in the tankbag of my motorcycle and I have never complained..
BobYIL
Well-known
I still keep my MF gear, however recalculate the costs after some 200 rolls only including processing, postage and scanning.. 12-exp. per roll is indeed some substantial cost per frame, unlike the 35mm... (Add to this also the "accidents" happening in the labs time to time; those kinds of making you to consider to shoot either the technician or the owner there..
)Paddy C
Unused film collector
One would need something a LOT better than a v700 to match print size/quality with the D800.
That means you are either eating up the entire difference in price to purchase said scanner, or you are doing it over a short period of time getting proper scans done by someone else.
Sorry to go OT, but this notion that digital is more expensive than film has been floating around for a long time and it just isn't true.
Back on topic...if you are a Nikon shooter and want to print large, the D800 looks great. I would wait for some reviews, especially comparisons of the two models before buying.
bobbyrab
Well-known
This is just me thinking aloud really as I've never used the Pentax 645D nor have I seen any files from the D800. I have however used the Leica S2 on a couple of jobs and it seemed to me that the sensor size has a much bigger impact on IQ than just counting the mega pixels. The difference in the file quality from the S2 against my 5D mark2 was night and day, and led me to believe that a 35mm sensor is going to struggle for a while yet to match MF size sensors. Now I know most of you will be thinking at the price of an S2 it should be better, but I would guess that the Pentax will be a lot closer to the S2 than the 5D.
Even with all those tightly packed pixels on the Nikon I doubt it will match similarly pixled MF digital cameras. If you already have the lenses I would hang off until you can try the nikon against the pentax.
S2
syon-285sRGBn by fatbobbyrab, on Flickr
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Can someone please explain to me why so many digital amateurs have to foam at the mouth at the thought of a camera maker building cameras with more resolution?
I'm old enough to remember when everyone was shooting film, and back then if Kodak or Fuji introduced a film with more resolution, it was seen AS A GOOD THING...because IT IS. It is with digital too. Some of us have clients who want the resolution. some of us make large prints on occasion. Resolution matters for professionals like me, and for those amateurs who want to make big prints that don't look crappy because they had to use software interpolation to make the file big enough.
I'm old enough to remember when everyone was shooting film, and back then if Kodak or Fuji introduced a film with more resolution, it was seen AS A GOOD THING...because IT IS. It is with digital too. Some of us have clients who want the resolution. some of us make large prints on occasion. Resolution matters for professionals like me, and for those amateurs who want to make big prints that don't look crappy because they had to use software interpolation to make the file big enough.
WalterM
Established
b-b-b-but i just bought the newest thing and technology advanced??!
WHY DO I EVEN NEED MORE PIXELS AHHHHHH
celluloidprop
Well-known
I don't know about foaming at the mouth - I haven't seen that - but there are trade-offs to more MP. File storage, computer speed, high-ISO noise, etc.. By and large, more megapixels is great, but it's not all net-benefit.
Not sure we should be equating resolution with megapixels, either.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
On large sensors, more pixels does mean more resolution, assuming you have good lenses. High ISO noise is not an issue on todays fullframe cameras. My 5DmkII has less noise at ISO 1600 than my old Nikon D70 (just 6mp) had at 400.
I don't get the worrying about file size either. The 21mp files my Canon gives are tiny compared to my scans from 120 film, and I was editing those massive scans (some 500mb PER IMAGE before adding layers and such) on a now-ancient Powermac G4 with dual 1.25ghz processors and a mere 2 gig of RAM. I used it until I was able to finally get a modern Mac Pro last year. It was actually very fast and usable. Really.
I have not worked with my 5DmkII files on the old G4 but they are so small compared to what my new computer can handle that there is no waiting for anything I do in Photoshop to them.
I only got the new computer so I could run Photoshop CS5 (there were features it had I wanted and I planned to eventually get a newer digital camera whose raw files would need CS5).
I still have the old G4, which I keep in case my newer mac ever needs service, so I will still have a computer to use while I wait to get the other fixed. Haven't needed it, the Mac Pro has been reliable, but the G4 isn't worth any $$$ so I might as well keep it.
gavinlg
Veteran
I agree to some extent - I prefer as many pixels as possible in a full frame camera, and I don't think it necessarily leads to lower DR like people think. In saying that, the 22mp is fine for me. A perfect amount for the mkIII would have been something like 28mp, and the d800 looks awesome for it's huge pixel count.
One thing for sure is that my now 6 year old iMac wouldn't be able to handle the d800 files...