Searching \ for '[OT]:: At last the Nikon D800 :-( :-( :-( :-( :-(' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=last+nikon+d800
Search entire site for: ': At last the Nikon D800 :-( :-( :-( :-( :-('.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]:: At last the Nikon D800 :-( :-( :-( :-( :-( '
2012\02\07@073723 by RussellMc

face picon face
After a long long wait Nikon have announced the eagerly anticipated  d800.
Full frame DSLR in a dwarf';s body.

            DPReview hands on preview
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond800/

         Image thereof
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond800/images/intro.jpg

Alas it's got a  36 MP sensor and max basic speed of 4 fps.
(You can raise that to 6 fps with extra $ or subterfuge).

No mention is made in the DPReview preview of noise performance. But,
unless Nikon have worked some utter magix (always possible) the
existing 3.5 year old D700 will be a better high ISO machine.

Lokks like I may have to start watching D700 prices :-)


2012\02\07@232435 by V G

picon face
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 7:36 AM, RussellMc <spam_OUTapptechnzTakeThisOuTspamgmail.com> wrote:

> After a long long wait Nikon have announced the eagerly anticipated  d800..
> Full frame DSLR in a dwarf';s body.
>
>             DPReview hands on preview
> http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond800/
>
>          Image thereof
> http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond800/images/intro.jpg
>
> Alas it's got a  36 MP sensor and max basic speed of 4 fps.
> (You can raise that to 6 fps with extra $ or subterfuge).
>
> No mention is made in the DPReview preview of noise performance. But,
> unless Nikon have worked some utter magix (always possible) the
> existing 3.5 year old D700 will be a better high ISO machine.
>
> Lokks like I may have to start watching D700 prices :-)


If it is one thing that I have learned from this list, it is that all of
you have accumulated a great deal of wealth, and don't think twice about
spending a few bucks on small things like chips, components, getting PCBs
made professionally, tools, etc.

So why watch D700 prices? The most it'll drop is, what, $200 or so? And I'm
sure you have WAY more than $200 lying around. If you really want it, BUY
IT NOW!

I know if I had as money as all of you do, I certainly wouldn't be so
frugal with respect to good quality items such as this camera

2012\02\08@002101 by John Ferrell

face
flavicon
face
Hopefully, you will have a class in Engineering Economics. It will answer questions that you have yet to discover!


On 2/7/2012 11:24 PM, V G wrote:
{Quote hidden}

-- John Ferrell W8CCW
Be thankful we're not getting all the
government we're paying for. - Will Rogers

2012\02\08@005736 by RussellMc

face picon face
>> Looks like I may have to start watching D700 prices :-)

> If it is one thing that I have learned from this list, it is that all of
> you have accumulated a great deal of wealth, and don't think twice about
> spending a few bucks on small things like chips, components, getting PCBs
> made professionally, tools, etc.

If that was really the one thing you had  learned here then it would
be  sad AND you would have been mislead. (Fortunately, I know from
observation that you have learned many other and more useful things as
well).

The income and wealth levels amongst list members are very varied, a
significant number here have low incomes and/or net wealth by your or
general western standards, and the ratio of discretionary or
disposable income to gross income can vary widely, either due to
choices people have made and/or to circumstances beyond their control.

Also, 'Owls are not what they seem' - how people appear here and the
reality of their lives can be substantially different, This may at one
extreme be because they create a false front or at the other  because
they have not spelled out what goes with the territory that others
see. In my case I have travelled extensively in Asia in recent years
both on business and privately and had extensive involvement with
Asian manufacturing BUT my income levels have been modest by the
standards of many others who are in similar circumstances -  largely
due to voluntary choices I have made. And my discretionary income is
voluntarily limited by choices made re priorities. I could buy a Nikon
D3s now (as Olin did recently - a superb camera and an excellent
choice) or a new D4 when available BUT doing so would be contrary to
my priorities.

The introduction of a new top end camera model that is intended to
replace an old one can have severe impact on prices of the old model.
D700 pricing COULD drop $1000 in the next year. And I'd much rather
have that $1000 to spend on eg a lens that giving it to a salesman.
(That's about the cost of an NZ-Hong Kong air fare special that was
advertised yesterday. In the case of the D800 which appears to be
likely to have grossly inferior high ISO performance wrt a D700, the
effect may not be as severe as in cases of clear replacement

And Nikon may yet come to their senses and offer a D700s with Olins
D3s sensor in it :-)..


   Russell



>
> So why watch D700 prices? The most it'll drop is, what, $200 or so? And I'm
> sure you have WAY more than $200 lying around. If you really want it, BUY
> IT NOW!
>
> I know if I had as money as all of you do, I certainly wouldn't be so
> frugal with respect to good quality items such as this camera.
>

2012\02\08@011129 by PICdude

flavicon
face
Or perhaps being frugal on the higher-ticket items allows not putting  in too much thought over the cost of the smaller things.

I grew up in a culture that haggles the price of everything, but over  time I've found that since time is money, there is a threshold where I  won't debate the price of small items.



Quoting V G <x.solarwind.xspamKILLspamgmail.com>:

{Quote hidden}

2012\02\08@020311 by V G

picon face
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 12:56 AM, RussellMc <.....apptechnzKILLspamspam.....gmail.com> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

You keep mentioning "Olin" and "D3whatever" in the same sentence. Why

2012\02\08@040541 by Lyle Hazelwood

picon face
xkcd.com/1014

2012\02\08@042025 by IVP

face picon face
> http://xkcd.com/1014/

Haha. So many worry about what's in the camera instead of what's in the viewfinder

2012\02\08@080529 by RussellMc

face picon face
>
> >> I could buy a Nikon
> >> D3s now (as Olin did recently - a superb camera and an excellent
> >> choice) or a new D4 when available BUT doing so would be contrary to
> >> my priorities.
>


> >> And Nikon may yet come to their senses and offer a D700s with Olins
> >> D3s sensor in it :-)..
>


> > You keep mentioning "Olin" and "D3whatever" in the same sentence. Why?
>
> I think it parses OK in std English - but you can never guarantee that
100% with me :-)

The top sports 35mm full frame DSLR in the world and probably the
"production" top sports camera in absolute terms is the Nikon D3S. It has
"ONLY " a 12 MP sensor but could probably take usable pictures at the
bottom of a deep well on the dark side of the Moon (transportation extra).

A D3s is very big, very heavy and very expensive (compared to almost any
other production 35mm DSLR).

Olin bought one a few months ago.

The new Nikon D4 MAY be slightly better noise wise. But may not.

A Nikon D3s meets my photographic needs precisely except for the big, heavy
and expensive parts.



   Russel

2012\02\08@080913 by M.L.

flavicon
face
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 2:02 AM, V G
>>
> You keep mentioning "Olin" and "D3whatever" in the same sentence. Why?

D3s:
http://www.adorama.com/INKD3S.html

It's a nice camera. Russell likes to talk about cameras.

-- Martin K

2012\02\08@081941 by RussellMc

face picon face
>  ... Russell likes to talk about cameras.


Amongst other things :-)

2012\02\08@114551 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 08:19 AM 08/02/2012, you wrote:
>  >  ... Russell likes to talk about cameras.
>
>
>Amongst other things :-)

"Russell likes to talk"

Better?  ;-)

P.S. Very interesting on the camera. Maybe time for an upgrade from my D300
soon- I'd like to see some in-depth reviews of the low-light-performance
compared to the D3S when downsampled to 12MP-ish resolution.

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
EraseMEspeffspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTinterlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

2012\02\08@121436 by V G

picon face
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 8:04 AM, RussellMc <apptechnzspamspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote:

> I think it parses OK in std English - but you can never guarantee that
> 100% with me :-)
>

Yeah, I've noticed that.


> Olin bought one a few months ago.
>

I was asking more along the lines of what it had to do with Olin, but this
clears it up

2012\02\08@122501 by RussellMc

face picon face
> P.S. Very interesting on the camera. Maybe time for an upgrade from my D300
> soon- I'd like to see some in-depth reviews of the low-light-performance
> compared to the D3S when downsampled to 12MP-ish resolution.

If you care about low noise at high ISO, but a D700 while you still can.
I'm expecting an eg D700s to surface some time soon. Nikon cannot be
as stupid as they appear so far.
In good light at up to 640 ISO the D800 results are stunning. NO
sample photo I've found so far is at > 640 ISO.

The "truth" will pop up here soonish.
This is the "sports" part of the rankings which is what I mot care
about. Roughly ~=  base on SNR (signal to noise ratio) at given ISO.

            http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/(type)/usecase_sports

These have been adjusted for the effects of downsampling to an 8 MP
image for comparison ~= 12" x 8" print at 300 dpi.
You can take that at face value and trust them OR start the wading in here

         http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/About/Sensor-scores/Use-Case-Scores

I feel there is something wrong in subjective result in that more MP
seems to help a dog to rank better.
eg the Sony Alpha A850 and A900 are truly pathetic at high ISO.
Compared to a Canon 5D MkII they are terrible at say 6400 ISO. BUT
they rank better in measured terms than cameras which I believe do
better. Their scaling for SNR is 20 log (sqrt(MP ratio) gain by
descaling or = 3dB gain for 2:1 MP increase.


    Russell McMaho

2012\02\08@140702 by David

flavicon
face
On 08/02/2012 17:24, RussellMc wrote:
> The "truth" will pop up here soonish.
> This is the "sports" part of the rankings which is what I mot care
> about. Roughly ~=  base on SNR (signal to noise ratio) at given ISO.
>
>              http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/(type)/usecase_sports

Interesting how the equivalent ISO "range" of cameras has increased
massively over the last ~10 years but the scores haven't actually
increased so much.

For example the Canon 1Ds, the sports DSLR of choice for many years,
still scores very well compared to cameras released 6 years later.
(Yes, I know these have been downsampled so it's not quite comparing
apples for apples).

> These have been adjusted for the effects of downsampling to an 8 MP
> image for comparison ~= 12" x 8" print at 300 dpi.
> You can take that at face value and trust them OR start the wading in here
>
>           www.dxomark.com/index.php/About/Sensor-scores/Use-Case-Scores
>
> I feel there is something wrong in subjective result in that more MP
> seems to help a dog to rank better.

Comes straight back to the fact that one person can potentially create
amazing images with a pinhole camera and others couldn't take a decent
picture with a $5000 DSLR/lens.  Hugely interesting if you're a camera
geek or doing science, not so much if you are taking pictures of sport.

Davi

2012\02\09@063557 by RussellMc

face picon face
> Comes straight back to the fact that one person can potentially create
> amazing images with a pinhole camera and others couldn't take a decent
> picture with a $5000 DSLR/lens.

That's often said and it's obviously got merit BUT a good photographer
can usually more easily  be a great one with superb tools.
(ignore ascended masters who do better with pinhole cameras.)

BUT

> Hugely interesting if you're a camera
> geek or doing science, not so much if you are taking pictures of sport.

No. Not at all.
My aim is to be able to take hand hand reasonable quality photos in
almost any conceivable situation, and in a few others as well.

The Nikon D700 achieves this well enough. The D3s is slightly better.

The D800 doesn't and my new Sony A77 doesn't.

Sports photography often benefits from high shutter speed and small
aperture. High ISO is the necessary 3rd leg of the stool to achieve
this.


Bride and father in shadow at back of church in shadow. Photographer
at front of church. Being able to take reasonable quality hand held
photos without flash in such situations is my aim. A D700 about
achieves this.

Xian. Crowded bus. I missed the landmarks and the bus is now
travelling away from my place of residence, but I don't know that yet.
Lighting is street lights flickering through windows. I take a small
group photo IN the bus - me and a few others - strangers aka friends I
hadn't met that the camera allows me to "communicate" with as we sway
in the jostling crowded almost darkness.  That was taken at 6400 ISO -
max available on an A700. The result is a noisy mess unsuitable for
any normal use. It's great ! Just what I expected. Went with the
situation. BUT a D700 would actually almost take an OK photo in that
situation. You can always force it to take noisier ones if you must


Russell

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2012 , 2013 only
- Today
- New search...