Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 73
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    oslo, norway
    Posts
    1,019
    Over at imaging resource you can now compare D4 and 5DMKIII images at various ISO's (http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM), and there's a "first impressions" article on the D4 over at dpreview (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/601...g-the-nikon-d4) aswell as ISO samples (see the last page of the article). What kind of bummed me out is that the D4 looks pretty much like the D3s. Not that the D3s is bad, I just expecting more from the D4 as they've only pushed it to 16mp. The 5DMKIII doesn't look that much different to the D4, even at 22mp. I might even go so far to say that I prefer the 5DMKIII over the D4. Good job canon.

    Will be interresting to see where the D800 fits in all of this..

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    Jpegs straight from camera, not all that interested in that to be honest. I have seen the dpreview raw shots and I think the d4 and d3s are roughly the same in noise performance. No mkiii raw shots yet that I know of. I doubt the d800 will be able to be able to match even the d700 in low light, let alone the d3s.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    oslo, norway
    Posts
    1,019
    The closest thing I've seen so far to some D700 VS D800 comparison are these:
    http://nikonrumors.com/2012/03/05/an...mparison.aspx/

    But for some god forsaken reason the #%"## who took them has resized the D800 images, making the comparison a bit pointless. But there are full size (god how nice and big the full size is ) here http://www.flickr.com/photos/5597954...57629509475519

    Just judging from these, compared to my own high iso d700 shots, at 100% the D700 looks better. But resized down to web size (1000-1400 pixels width) the d800 files looks on par with the d700. But seeing as I'm just comparing shots taken at different locations with different lights and lenses... Yeah, it's pointless to even make a comparison But I'm with you on the D800 not beeing able to touch the D3s. Seeing as the D4 looks like the D3s at 16mp, the best I'm hoping for in regards to the D800 is that it can match the D700. Some of it will come down to how much of the D4 tech nikon has put into the D800. One of their strong points for the D4 is the retention of detail at higher iso, which is supposedly "much" better than the D3s (believe it was some one from Nikon in an interview who stated it). And I'm still very curious about the dynamic range in all of these, and how much can be recovered from raw files.

    Porn:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYTolayglIs

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    Basically ? I think they're full of shit. There is no way in hell that it's "much" better. The d3s was a noticeable stop or more over the d3. But the d4 is not going to be that. And the d800, even with all of the d4 tech will be very lucky indeed to match the d700...I would be amazed. I reckon what were gonna see is some superb nr algorithms but not really a massive improvement in light sensitivity. I suppose it would be a huge win if Nikon could actually triple the detail and retain the same iq as the d700 in low light.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    2,200
    It's nice to now have RF based speed lights from Canon; hope it doesn't take Nikon long to offer the same and do away with the need of PockWizards or RadioPoppers.
    _______________
    Nikon D3, D300, F-100, 10.5 Fisheye, 35 f/1.4, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.4, Zeiss 100 f/2, 105 f/2.5, 200 f/4 Micro, 200 f/2 VR, 300 f/2.8 AF-S II, 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, SU-800, SB-900, 4xSB-800, 1.4x and 1.7x TC
    (2) Profoto Acute 2400 packs w/4 heads, Chimera Boxes

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,205
    Bill Claff over at DPreview has taken the time to do a complete analysis from unedited RAW files at the folowing link. The first 4 links on his site are the most recent data points.

    http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/

    Indeed, the D800/E is looking amazing, the more I see. I am really looking forward to getting mine in a few weeks.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    nothing ive seen has "amazed" me. i wait in eager anticipation.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1
    Howdy from Deep South Texas.
    I just joined this forum. I've been lurking in the shadows for a while listening, learning and laughing with you people. I've been checking out the 800 also. I'm on the fence between it and the 800E. Is it really worth the extra grand?
    Rooz you were p.o. because it didn't have a flip screen. Neither do the high end pro cameras because .... they have a tendency to break off. I am good friends with my local camera guy and he has fixed four of them so far on the D5100. As soon as Nikon pulls the plug on that he'll have to send them in. He's not happy about that.
    Anyway as things go along you'll find that I have a thick skin and can take your shots but expect them back. Yea, sometimes I have a big mouth and shoot it off without engaging my head. Apologies before hand for that.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    Quote Originally Posted by tramsey View Post
    Howdy from Deep South Texas.
    I just joined this forum. I've been lurking in the shadows for a while listening, learning and laughing with you people. I've been checking out the 800 also. I'm on the fence between it and the 800E. Is it really worth the extra grand?
    Rooz you were p.o. because it didn't have a flip screen. Neither do the high end pro cameras because .... they have a tendency to break off. I am good friends with my local camera guy and he has fixed four of them so far on the D5100. As soon as Nikon pulls the plug on that he'll have to send them in. He's not happy about that.
    Anyway as things go along you'll find that I have a thick skin and can take your shots but expect them back. Yea, sometimes I have a big mouth and shoot it off without engaging my head. Apologies before hand for that.
    Welcome. We need more straight shooters in this place.

    Olympus have been making rugged flip screen pro dslrs for years with no problem. And sorry, no they don't have a tendency to break off. lol they have been in video cameras, p&s cameras etc for decades without a significant issue.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, CA
    Posts
    3,591
    Anytime you add moving parts there's less durability, but if the camera is treated with a little respect I don't see any reason why the flip LCD wouldn't last for the life of the camera.
    Lukas

    Camera: Anonymous
    I could tell you but I wouldn't want you to get all pissy if it's the wrong brand

    Flickr

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •