Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nikon D800 announced
- Thread starter El Cabong
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mate, I was having a joke.
I know mate. Was come back with something cheeky but you beat me to it
It's easier and more accurate to edit and touch up. Even if the final image gets reduced in size, I've found that I can get much better results using my 5DII.
The D800 isn't that much higher resolution than the D700 - just 70% more lineally (not 3x more!). The pixel pitch is the same Canon's been using for the last couple of years for it's 18MP crop frame cameras). It looks like a great cameras - and the specs aren't excessive.
Hi, actually it's not meant for screen, it's meant for print. High resolution print you never know. also..just as a SIDE note, look how small devices are using their resolution (iPad 3 with rumored double the resolution on a small screen), photos with high resolution will look amazing. But, like TheReef mentioned, yes you can crop the hell out of that resolution and still have VERY good print resolutions. The same question can go why did we need 21 megapixels 3 years ago when the 5d mark 2 came out. For 80% it's a gimmick and they will never use the resolution except scaling it to 1024x768 or smaller for their Facebook pictures. The other 20% will use, crop and rescale. For example, if you take a noisy shot with the D800 @36 megapixels, and scale it down to , say, 16 megapixels, the noise becomes very clean all of a sudden and the image becomes pin sharp.
To answer your question, I think the 36 megapixels are needed for high resolution print and for cropping/adjusting. Also, can you imagine printing a large poster from a RAW of 36 megapixels of a landscape with the dynamic range that is better than that of the D3s? I am SOOO looking forward to my D800
btw, before anyone asks: According to DxoMark the d7000 has a higher dynamic range than the d3s and the d800, according to paper, should have at least that. Of course we will not see until its out.
Hi, actually it's not meant for screen, it's meant for print. High resolution print you never know. also..just as a SIDE note, look how small devices are using their resolution (iPad 3 with rumored double the resolution on a small screen), photos with high resolution will look amazing. But, like TheReef mentioned, yes you can crop the hell out of that resolution and still have VERY good print resolutions. The same question can go why did we need 21 megapixels 3 years ago when the 5d mark 2 came out. For 80% it's a gimmick and they will never use the resolution except scaling it to 1024x768 or smaller for their Facebook pictures. The other 20% will use, crop and rescale. For example, if you take a noisy shot with the D800 @36 megapixels, and scale it down to , say, 16 megapixels, the noise becomes very clean all of a sudden and the image becomes pin sharp.
To answer your question, I think the 36 megapixels are needed for high resolution print and for cropping/adjusting. Also, can you imagine printing a large poster from a RAW of 36 megapixels of a landscape with the dynamic range that is better than that of the D3s? I am SOOO looking forward to my D800
btw, before anyone asks: According to DxoMark the d7000 has a higher dynamic range than the d3s and the d800, according to paper, should have at least that. Of course we will not see until its out.
Sorry, the idea/joke is that with that many pixels, photographers don't even need to think about the picture they're taking, just snap away at anything and hope to find a suitable composition later
One of my photographer friends once mentioned it and I found it amusing.
In a less extreme sense, this cropping ability is very useful - for example cropping at a bird to make it appear larger in the frame. This is a lot cheaper than shelling out thousands on a longer high quality telephoto lens, although for all these pixels to resolve additional detail, you do need high quality glass in front of the camera in the first place.
Thank you all of you for answering my question, this is one of the reasons why i like this forum because people are so helpful as i haven't in some others.
Last edited:
You came to the right place. flosseR, and compuwar are pretty much the tech guru's here and offer the best advice. You might want to consider passing by any advice offered by anyone who's username represents: a three-dimensional solid object bounded by six square faces, facets or sides, with three meeting at each vertex.
Last edited:
Thanx for the great info, this really helped
Sorry, the idea/joke is that with that many pixels, photographers don't even need to think about the picture they're taking, just snap away at anything and hope to find a suitable composition later
One of my photographer friends once mentioned it and I found it amusing.
In a less extreme sense, this cropping ability is very useful - for example cropping at a bird to make it appear larger in the frame. This is a lot cheaper than shelling out thousands on a longer high quality telephoto lens, although for all these pixels to resolve additional detail, you do need high quality glass in front of the camera in the first place.
Essentially it enables photographers to get more out of their high quality lenses.
You came to the right place. flosseR, and computer are pretty much the tech guru's here and offer the best advice. You might want to consider passing by any advice offered by anyone who's username represents: a three-dimensional solid object bounded by six square faces, facets or sides, with three meeting at each vertex.
haha yep i take the said person's advice with a grain of salt
Sorry, the idea/joke is that with that many pixels, photographers don't even need to think about the picture they're taking, just snap away at anything and hope to find a suitable composition later
One of my photographer friends once mentioned it and I found it amusing.
In a less extreme sense, this cropping ability is very useful - for example cropping at a bird to make it appear larger in the frame. This is a lot cheaper than shelling out thousands on a longer high quality telephoto lens, although for all these pixels to resolve additional detail, you do need high quality glass in front of the camera in the first place.
Essentially it enables photographers to get more out of their high quality lenses.
You're an Aussie, so it's all good.
For what it's worth, some of us have been known to print things extremely large. I once printed a banner ad featuring a pair of guys on it, in which they were larger than life. People were impressed you could see the one guy's knuckle hair, and it was a waist-up shot where the guys were a couple feet apart.
Adobe passed going to 64-bit on CS4, saying that nearly all the users didn't need to use more than 3 GB of RAM. I had used 6 GB within 5 minutes of starting Photoshop CS5 for the first time.
I know we're a minority, but the huge print crowd can actually use all of those megapixels for stunning prints. I've done a panorama of dunes that was 7' long, the aforementioned banner was 52" x 84", and you can use all the resolution you can get when you're printing huge. Right now I'm using a "merely" 10 megapixel camera and upscaling or photo-merging, but I have a use for those megapixels. I would prefer to have the low-light performance of the D4, but it is handily out of my price range.
Adobe passed going to 64-bit on CS4, saying that nearly all the users didn't need to use more than 3 GB of RAM. I had used 6 GB within 5 minutes of starting Photoshop CS5 for the first time.
I know we're a minority, but the huge print crowd can actually use all of those megapixels for stunning prints. I've done a panorama of dunes that was 7' long, the aforementioned banner was 52" x 84", and you can use all the resolution you can get when you're printing huge. Right now I'm using a "merely" 10 megapixel camera and upscaling or photo-merging, but I have a use for those megapixels. I would prefer to have the low-light performance of the D4, but it is handily out of my price range.