Nikon D800

36MP is super unnecessary unless you are doing something like prints
 
Its also entirely dumb on a 35mm or less sized sensor. Pixel density is way too high. Noise will be through the roof at high ISOs
 
true, the only advantage is a telephoto lens isn't a COMPLETE necessity, as you could just use like a 50 (its not full frame so more like an 85) crop it a shit ton, and still have enough functioning pixels to look halfway decent.
 
Except it's a $4000 camera, I think people willing to dish out that much cash would know exactly
 
Sorry typing on my phone, but they would know what the cameras weaknesses are. But yes 36 mp is worthless to most people, I personally would have liked ito see something less than 25
 
Anything over 12 megapixels is useless for everything except billboards.

The numbers race is really getting old. And no, I don't blame the camera manufacturers; I blame the consumers.
 
There better be an s model with faster Burst...

Also, if they don't include a 24p and 60p I'll be livid, unless, again, they are saving that for an S model. That seems to be the new trend.

I don't see the need for 36MP. I really want this camera, or a version of it, and hope it has the features that I actually need to make it worth my time.
 
thats not really feasible. the lens' resolving capacity limits you just about as fast as sensor resolution, depending on the lens
 
A D800 more PJ/sports oriented is coming. This is supposed to be more of a cheaper D3X I'm guessing.
 
Where did you hear that? because, seriously, I would appreciate an 8 fps burst, and hopefully better video.

(I don't care about the video for myself, I care about it for nikon's sake, they need to compete).

Seriously, things I was hoping for was:

Low light performance

8+ fps

High teens or low 20s MP

Better sync options

24p, 30p, 60p at 1080.

Brownie points:

mid 20 MP with above stats

Higher video resolution

120p

better video codec than h.264

better audio features than the current offerings

seriously, it's almost 2012, how about something that impresses people?

 
I hope they at least announce the stats of the s version at the same time, so we know what to expect.
 
Missed this. I miss the days when the ultimate goal of shooting a photo was to print it. 36MP would be incredible if it's done right. I'm sure Nikon could make it happen, but seemingly at the expense of other innovations that should probably not be ignored / come first / come along with.
 
Sorry bud, but these will never happen on a sub 5000 dollar camera, especially a dslr.
 
can somebody explain what exactly 'expandable to ____' means? i've seen this referring to both frame rate and ISO and i've never been sure about it
 
I'm sure there were people saying the same thing about the features of the t2i or 7d. I read a while ago that people think the next canon will be shooting 120 fps, and the new Sony HDSLR shoots in the AVCHD 2.0 codec. I understand it would be spendy, but that's why I mentioned them as brownie points. I would be less inclined to say "NEVER", and more inclined to say never within the next year, but more likely than not within the next 4.

It seems silly to me to make cameras that are in competition with other cameras on the market. If 36 MP is done WELL and doesn't have issues with noise or color rendition, it will actually compete in some markets.

However, in the broader market, and especially a market that now requests well made HDSLR features, the 36MP version won't do a whole lot, because most pros that use DSLRs don't care that much.

If this new camera (or a version of this camera) had all of the first list and even one of my second list (Assuming it had all the other obvious features of a well built and planned camera) it would ACTUALLY compete with Canon's HDSLR cameras, and people would take note of Nikon's line again.

Seems like they should do a similar separation as the D3 line - one camera that's a workhorse, shoots faster with lower MP and high performance, one camera that's a super high resolution camera that focuses on doing that well, and one that has more specific video features. Or maybe they should make the 800 a well rounded camera in general and save the fancy stuff for the D4 line.

That's mostly just my opinion and speculation, I guess there's no reason to fret about it as I have no say in what Nikon does, but if these are the specs for this camera, it's definitely not the camera I was hoping for at all.
 
If you use settings that use less of the sensor (DX mode) and / or if you buy the battery grip, you can pull more fps out of the camera.

My camera shoots at either 5 or 6 fps, if I were to buy the grip for it it would shoot at 8.

I dont know about the ISO thing, I've never felt the need to worry about ISO past 6400 (call me crazy, haha).
 
I guess when I said never, I meant like in the next update. 120 is not going to be in the next update, 120p takes a fuck up sensor and fucked up processor that won't be under 5k. And avchd 2.0 is a very slight step up, when dslrs start shooting xdcam or dvcprohd or shit, just straight prores422, then the designers will have gotten it right.
 
Oh yea, well I hear you there.

My point is just - if you want to really make waves, step your game up. That pretty much applies to any product or service. Do something out there, do it right, make some waves, it sets you apart.

I mean, 36 mp will set them apart, but to compete in the HDSLR game, they better AT LEAST get the video right in this camera or an "s" version.
 
I hope DSLRs don't progress in the video department. They're good enough that someone can use it as a rudimentary tool to learn filmmaking. If you want quality footage, drop $5k+ on a video camera.

Can you imagine a bunch of 15-year-olds running around shooting out-of-focus leaves in the foreground at native 1080p120 ProRes? Yuck.
 
Hahaha, good point. I guess I'm just looking at it from a competition side of things. It would be nice to have better tools in such a small package, but I have always said that if I were to decide to do video work, I would but a serious video camera and not try to do it with an HDSLR. I guess it doesn't really matter to me if the video features are on point, I just want to see nikon do well.
 
I think its kind of a bummer that Nikon is lacking in the body department, since their glass absolutely destroys Canon's imo.
 
ha so true. its gonna be fucked up whats around in 10 years. think about 10 years ago? vx1000 and gl1....
 
10 years ago people were at their knees begging for something that shoots WHOLE FRAMES for fucks sake, even if it was only pseudo-progressive. Confounded 60i DV tapes...
 
was looking to get the d700 or d800, most likely the d800 but I'll have to see what it's actually going to turn out like. even if it is 36mp, there's no way I'd shoot that, file sizes would be ridiculous for what I need and it would chew through cards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top