mike_halliwell Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>I wonder if any enterprising (read...daring ie daft!) clonists/hackers will devise an MB-D12 that can use all those 'spare' and expensive EN-El4's that upgraders have?</p> <p>Lets face it, if there are people willing to dip there D3's in a bucket to show weather-proofing, anything's possible!!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lwg Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Most of the hard-core holdouts will have to retreat to medium format film, I guess, but how many will want to bother?</p> </blockquote> <p>This makes no sense. It's not an arms race. If you are doing work you like on 35mm film, after this camera is released you will still be doing the exact same work on 35mm film. If you wanted more out of film at times you would have already moved up in format size. Or if you wanted the convenience or look of digital, you would have switched. I can't imagine there is anyone sitting out there thinking "finally I can give up my 35mm film camera now that Nikon has released the D800".</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve m smith Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Most of the hard-core holdouts will have to retreat to medium format film, I guess, but how many will want to bother?</p> </blockquote> <p><br />Why should they bother? If they are happy with 35mm now, they will be happy with it in the future.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kari_oinonen Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>Anti alias filter: in the case of lens not being able to outresolve the sensor - where is the aa filter needed?<br> We know that many phone cameras, even better ones, do not have aa filters.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossb Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Most of the hard-core holdouts will have to retreat to medium format film, I guess, but how many will want to bother?</p> </blockquote> <p> I am not a hard core film shooter myself since I also own a DSLR. However even with the steady stream of new expensive computerized camera's I plan to still shoot film as a hobby. I have always loved the look of my prints and I will just keep on going. <br> Even if they come out with the best camera ever imagined I still have a family to support. Kids in college and a retirement to save for. I am not buying a $3K camera body. I would buy a nice FE2 however if I saw one around on the cheap. <br> I do agree the camera looks like a wonderful camera for a National Geographic photographer or a rich hobbyist. But I will not be buying one.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjk Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>Did anyone look in detail at sample image #2? (http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/sample01.htm)<br> The "bride" has a zit on her cheek and you can see a couple of (black) facial hair strands (chin, over the upper lip). <br> I find it interesting to have this in a sample image -- unless the point is to prove the detail-resolving power of the sensor (and the 70-200 VII)? </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landrum Kelly Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <blockquote> <p>I can't imagine there is anyone sitting out there thinking "finally I can give up my 35mm film camera now that Nikon has released the D800".</p> </blockquote> <p>No need to give it up, but what do you do with it when you won't want to use it anymore? </p> <p ><a name="00ZyZW"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1787762"></a></p> <br /> <blockquote> <p><br />Why should they bother? If they are happy with 35mm now, they will be happy with it in the future.</p> </blockquote> <p>Yes, scanning and cleaning scans is so much fun. . . .</p> <p>I do not doubt that some will always prefer the look of film, but, as they pass from the scene, how many new recruits will there be?</p> <p>I do personally believe that this is the proverbial nail in the coffin for film. We spoke of the day when that would come over ten years ago, but now that time has arrived--if it had not already arrived with the D3X, or even earlier with the Canon 1Ds II. The point is not to knock film. Scanning simply takes time, and rolls of film simply are too limiting. There just is not much point anymore, unless one really finds the look of film that compelling.</p> <p>This is not supposed to be a film v. digital thread, but pardon me for saying that that debate now really is just about dead. The D800 did not do it, but, as I said, it is pretty much the nail in the coffin of film, which will be an even smaller niche market than previously.</p> <p>There are economic factors above all here: the higher and higher cost of film and film processing, and the time costs of scanning--plus the inconvenience of changing film. Fewer and fewer people will want to bother.</p> <p>I do not rejoice in this fact. I have five Hasselblad bodies and several Bronica bodies, not to mention my F3HP and a few other assorted great cameras that I simply do not use. Those who are masters of film photography will continue to shoot film, and God bless them. I wish them well.</p> <p>--Lannie</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene11664880918 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Very funny...... 1- so all those rumors are NOT just rumors after all. Is Nikon playing a game with all the people waiting for a new camera? Some people can't talk about what they know and yet, Nikon itself leaks info like NO AA FILTER. No one has ever before talked about a camera with or without an AA filter. I dint know what it was. Maybe wrong info but in target. That info can only come from Nikon and yet the thread was closed. 2- I'm so happy about this D800..... as soon as I read 36 mp I knew I dint want it so I'm out of the temtation. 3- then again, back to rumors...... People kept talking about 36 mp and I thought they were crazy coz not even the new to come D4 had that many pixels. Then again those crazy rumors were right. 4- can any one guess what Nikon is doing? To me they have the best cameras and until something else comes along after digital cameras I will be using Nikon. But????? What that hell is wrong in this picture? They go from D40 to D60.... From D90 to D7000..... From D300 to D700 and now to a complete new field with a D800. 5- what about the price????? D800 in the USA for around 3.000 USD. In Japan the price is 340,000 Yen. At today's rate that is 4.432.00 USD....... Is Nikon really making a fool of their COSTUMER'S and the rest of their cult? If you don't see me here for a while maybe is because I have been suspended for a month or even more...... Have fun you guys and hope you enjoy your new toys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kj_thomas Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Did anyone look in detail at sample image #2? (http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/sample01.htm)<br />The "bride" has a zit on her cheek and you can see a couple of (black) facial hair strands (chin, over the upper lip). <br> I find it interesting to have this in a sample image -- unless the point is to prove the detail-resolving power of the sensor (and the 70-200 VII)?</p> </blockquote> <p>Cesar, I think they definitely want to show the resolving power of the camera. Also, I think Nikon, as well as the photographers, will think it's blasphemous to photoshop advertisement examples for this camera. A few of the other pictures show a bit more detail than I would be comfortable with as well (tartar on teeth, blemishes on the whites of the eye, etc.). This camera will force those who wish to get into fashion/glamour photography to step up their game, particularly hiring better make-up artists and retouchers.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryan_long Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>I'm pretty excited about this camera and may move to it after this wedding season.</p> <p>I am really pleased about the price point. I was expecting a substantial bump from D700 level + inflation and am pleasantly surprised! </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig_Cooper11664875449 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Most of the hard-core holdouts will have to retreat to medium format film, I guess, but how many will want to bother?</p> </blockquote> <p>The problem here is the usual one in which the only metric considered is resolution. Resolution is certainly not the primary reason most film users continue with the medium. So this argument around the impending affect of the D800 on film is a little misdirected...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene11664880918 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I'm sorry but I feel a bit led down right nown. I'm a paying member of Photo Net and my membership has been pay until 2016 I think...... When I read the thread about the AA filter I didn't know what it was about...... I also NEVER go to read rumors..... All I read about cameras. Is in here.... PHOTO NET....... In the NIKON FORUM...... So if someone comes with some info about something and the moderator knows what he is talking abou BUT then again he can't talk about it, the thread should go on..... And NOT BE SENSOREDSHIP..... That is just my own way of thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric friedemann Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>Shun, from reading years of posts, you seem to have owned or shot all of Nikon's digital bodies from at least the last five years; and you've now been briefed on the D800-variant cameras. Assuming that you will purchase at least one of the D800-variant bodies, will you be buying a D800E body- why or why not?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric friedemann Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>Also, Shun, how much of a boost in resolution will the D800E's AA-cancelling filter produce- if that gain in resolution can be quantified?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene11664880918 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Eric.... I'm sure I can answer for Shun here...... NO he won't coz it doesn't fit his style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jose_angel Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>Craig, I agree, absolutely.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p><em>Nikon itself leaks info like NO AA FILTER. No one has ever before talked about a camera with or without an AA filter</em></p> <p>Most Kodak sensors that I know of are without AA filters, and they got a lot of severe criticism for that back in the days of the 14MP full frame DSLR they made early on. Leica M9 doesn't have an AA filter to my knowledge. Some medium format cameras/backs come without AA filters or have one which you can take off when you don't need/want it and put it back on when the images exhibit moire.</p> <p><em> in the case of lens not being able to outresolve the sensor - where is the aa filter needed?</em></p> <p>Right, but most high quality lenses easily outresolve current DSLR sensors at least at some apertures. So you will have the option of stopping down to f/32 to avoid moire ;-) How fun is that ;-)</p> <p><em>That info can only come from Nikon</em></p> <p>Maybe, or someone working for a company who makes the printed brochures etc.</p> <p>Personally I think it would be better if Nikon gave the correct specs rather than let rumors roam. Having the correct information six months in advance would be very helpful in planning what to buy. Canon did just that with their 1D X announcement.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenseelig Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>I would really like to see image quality compared between D4, D800 and D700 at ISO 1600, 2000, 2500 and 3200. <br> I would also like to hear with other portrait/wedding photographers are thinking about as they look at the D4 and D800. Which path and why? </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two23 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>Everytime a new camera is released, I look it over carefully. What will it do for me? Will I get significant improvement enough to justify the cost? For me, the D700 did not. The D800 might. My calculation is as follows: for me to go from D300 & Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 & Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 to a D800 & Nikons 14-24mm & 24-70mm will cost just over $5,000. That's net, after selling the older system. I could substitute the Nikon 16-35mm f4 for the 14-24mm f2.8 and save about $700, so a switch would then cost me $4,300 net. I have enough unused camera gear to sell that would cover that. For me, it might come down to just how good ISO 3200 looks on this camera. If at least as good as what I'm getting from D300 @ ISO 800 (i.e. a 2-stop improvement,) I could then also sell my seven White Lightning X3200 monolights and replace with the cheaper Alien Bees B1600. I also would also not need to own any f1.4 lenses any more. All of this would help pull the cost of the SYSTEM down. <br> I'm certainly going to look hard at the D800, but still think it would be wise to wait and see what else Nikon comes out with this spring. There might be an even better option for me. At any rate, I'm usually not one to be the first to jump on the wagon. What I mostly want from a camera is higher resolution than 15mp, good quality at ISO 3200, and something relatively compact and easy to travel with.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_p Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>Thanks, Shun.</p> <p>I figured there would soon be a reason for quad core notebooks. Both models are quite interesting, myself being a detail junkie.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two23 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>RE: "Why would someone still use film?"<br> I still shoot a Chamonix 45n-1 4x5 camera. I love it! I love the work flow. I love the lens movements. I love that I can use my 1840s vintage Grubb Petzval, 1865 Voigtlander, and my other historical lenses on it to get a soft, dreamy look I can't get from digital. I still use my 1937 Voigtlander Bessa 6x9, and my 1914 Kodak Special No. 1 6x9. I absolutely love the classic look I get from this gear. With it, I'm able to produce images I can't get with my Nikon DSLR. And, they sell too! Mostly I'm shooting b&w film, but also some Portra 400 from time to time. For those of you who don't know the unique look given by a Petzval or Heliar lens, you are really missing out on something cool!</p> <p>Kent in SD</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_cohen Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>Just found an answer to my own question earlier in this thread. DPReview cites RAW file size as "approximately" 76.5MB, although they don't state what flavor of NEF that is.</p> <p>Memory card manufacturers must be jumping for joy.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve m smith Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Why would someone still use film?</p> </blockquote> <p>Because we want to.</p> <blockquote> <p>Why should they bother? If they are happy with 35mm now, they will be happy with it in the future.</p> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>Yes, scanning and cleaning scans is so much fun. . . .</p> </blockquote> <p>And some of us don't scan, we do it properly with an enlarger.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kj_thomas Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <p>76.5MB RAW files? It looks like those 64GB memory cards will get some more sales...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 <blockquote> <p>There goes using less than stellar lenses on this baby..</p> </blockquote> <p>People have been saying that since the 11MP Canon 1Ds was released.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now