Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: Mr. Capp on July 11, 2013, 09:11:42 am
-
I'm looking to get a D800 but have a few concerns when comparing it against the D800E.
I never shoot wide open, usually f11-16 and it looked like on tests I've seen the differences are none at this aperture due to diffraction,
even more wide open with a tad of sharpening it looks pretty identical. Would I be benefiting with the E, as I loves my sharpness, am considering
the sigma 35 to go with it.
I'm a canon owner and considering the shift is becoming more and more daunting, Quality control issues mainly. Canon is a bit frustrating. Would hate to leave a girl because she's awesome and all but just wont step up to the next level, know what I mean? DR, Resolution, etc.
Plus it seems when the new megapixel/redesigned sensor camera comes out, it's gonna prolly be a 5,000 body. but the QC is there, but sheesh.
so 800 or 800e?
-M
-
I bought a D800 when they first came out in March 2012. The only reason that I did not buy a D800E at the time was that I wanted the camera for a 7-week phototour over in America starting in early April and it was unlikely that the 800E would arrive in time.
Then, in January of this year I decided that I wanted a second body - mainly so that I could have two lenses mounted for immediate use. Naturally (or maybe not so naturally) I chose the D800E.
Having now run both side by side and virtually interchangeably since then, I have to confess that I cannot see any difference whatsoever in the image quality. I'll qualify that by saying that I rarely print larger than A3+ although sometimes that may be from a fairly tight crop.
So, based on my own experience, I would suggest buying the D800 and spending the £300 you save on beer.
-
Thanks for your input.
Did you or do your shoot canon too? was it a big diff in feeling, intuitiveness?
Have you noticed any QC issues with your nikons?
I'm going to rent a body and lens to really know what I'm getting into before jumping ship and dropping $$$
-
Do you find your d800 sensor gets dirty rather easily?
-
Do you find your d800 sensor gets dirty rather easily?
I have my d800e just cleaned by Nikon- once every 3-4 months....
( the sensor stays longer clean than the d3x ;once every 2 months)
If you use apertures from d5,6 and larger ( number smaller) there is no problem at all..
-
Hi
I currently have a Nikon D800E that I use for my personal work. I use Canon for my pro work.
I was a Nikon guy the first twenty years of my career. Then when Nikon dropped the ball on digital I had no option but to switch to Canon. So I've been a Canon guy for the past ten years now. I have to say Canon bodies seem much better built than Nikons in the past - I'm not sure about current Nikons other than the D800E I've been using for the past six months or so.
The Nikon images are fantastic. Sharp and lots of dynamic range. I first got the D800 and was a bit disappointed in the sharpness. We were shooting an architectural job and my tech said the images were dull compared with the D800E he had used a week earlier. So I returned it and got the E. He was right. To me there is a big difference in sharpness. I think both cameras are great but I like the E for it's un-compromised sharpness in details. I do use it with only the best lenses usually at f5.6 to f8.
That said I think the biggest advantage to this camera is not the sharpness or megapixels - it's really the dynamic range that sets it so far ahead of my Canons and everything else I've tried.
-
Thanks for your input.
Did you or do your shoot canon too? was it a big diff in feeling, intuitiveness?
Have you noticed any QC issues with your nikons?
Never shot digital Canons (I use their film cameras) so can't really comment upon relative intuitiveness other than to say that having come through D80, D300 and D3s, the D800s are up to scratch in terms of handling.
No QC issues at all with either the D800 or D800E.
I started to notice a few dust specks on the D800 sensor after about 9 months and cleaned it at that stage. Haven't had to clean it again and haven't had to clean the D800E sensor. I believe that there was an early batch of D800s shipped to America that seemed to have problems with oil on the sensor but haven't heard any comments about that for the last year.
-
Thanks for your input.
Did you or do your shoot canon too? was it a big diff in feeling, intuitiveness?
Have you noticed any QC issues with your nikons?
I'm going to rent a body and lens to really know what I'm getting into before jumping ship and dropping $$$
Here's my take on the 5D2 & 5D3 vs D800E. I've posted it elsewhere as well (below is slightly updated). Hope you find it useful (can't comment on D800 vs D800e other than to say I bet at f/16 you prolly wouldn't notice a difference):
"I currently shoot with a 5D2, 5D3 & D800E.
First & foremost, at ISO 100 & 200 the image quality of the D800E blows the Canons out of the water - plain & simple. DR and detail are stunning. If you shoot a lot at these low ISOs you can't get better than the D800E's sensor. At those low ISOs, in a high DR scene, a shot that only needs one exposure with the D800 might very well need 2 with the Canon to capture clean shadows. At ISOs 400-800 the DR and IQ are generally about equal with the exception of more details for the D800E. At above ISO 800 the 5D3 starts to pull ahead in DR and maybe noise but I find the noise of the D800E files easier to deal with.
As for AF, I agree with others that the 5D3 has an edge (update: for action stuff).
As for ergonomics/shooting comfort overall I prefer Canon but not by much. The one design feature the D800E has that's inexplicably missing in the 5D series is a built-in viewfinder curtain. What is Canon thinking? And why neither cam has a flip out, tilting LCD screen is a real mystery. Update: the more I get used to the Nikon ergonomics, the more I think it's a wash - both work, you just need to get familiar with them.
Update: In camera controls - I love it that Nikon has an easily programmable, intervalometer as a menu choice.
Oh, and Canons liveview is way, way better than Nikon's (update: way better - for me, it's the D800e's Achilles's heel).
As for build quality, the 5d3 feels better. Same too for shutter noise/feel.
As for frame rate, I kinda like the D800 option of using a 1.2 crop to get 5-6 fps (resulting in a 24MP file) but it takes practice to mentally switch from a full frame POV to a smaller crop.
As for lenses, I've seen a lot of 24-105 vs 24-120 talk in the thread with folks saying the 24-105 is a lot better. I don't agree. I have & love them both for their usability and IQ and find them comparable. As for overall lens line-up, I prefer Canon for its amazing TSE lenses and L quality mid zooms like the 70-300 and 100-400 and 70-200 f/4 IS (Update: but it looks like Nikon's newish 70-200 f/4 and 80-400 are terrific altho I haven't tried them - the 80-400 is on my short list of things to buy). On the wide end, Nikon has the wildly good 14-24 and useful 16-35 f/4 VR. I've rented a 14-24 to use on my 5D2 and wow, it's nice. I opted for a Zeiss 21 f/2.8 for the D800E but am still considering the 14-24 or 16-35 VR since I really like AF and handheld stuff. Update #1, I bought a 16-35 f/4 VR to use in my handheld wanders. Aside from its well documented wild distortion at the wide end, it's a nice lens. Update #2 I'm really enjoying the ability to find affordable but great quality, small and light manual legacy lenses to use with the D800e. Update #3: I'm also enjoying that, with an adapter, I can use all my Nikon lenses on my Canon cams.
Update: I enjoy IR photography and it turns out that newer Nikon DSLRs aren't very IR conversion friendly (which is really disappointing - I'd love a high DR IR camera!) so Canon gets the nod for IR.
As others have pointed out, your choice of body has everything to do with how you shoot and what you enjoy shooting. For ISO 100-200 use, the D800 smokes Canon for image quality and it's about equal up to ISO 800. The 5D3 might be a slightly better general use DSLR but not by much and only if you use higher ISOs and need a little better fullframe frame rate or slightly better low light AF.
If you can, rent one and find out for yourself how it'll work for your needs.
Good luck!
Oh, and BTW, my D800E did unfortunately have the left side AF problem (fixed by Nikon)). But on the other hand, my 5D3 exhibits a light leak thru the viewfinder when I'm using liveview. Sigh, nothing's perfect.
-
Depends what you shoot.
The D800 is a more general-purpose solution - it will work for everything. The D800e will give you better image quality for some subjects, but be less-than-useable for some others. Ideally, you'd want one of each.
I'm still shooting Canon, and the only reason I do so is for the TS-E 17 and TS-E 24, which Nikon cannot match, and which cannot be fitted to Nikon bodies due to the greater flange distance in the Nikon mount. I also use a Nikon 14-24 lens with a Canon adapter.
If it weren't for these tilt-shift lenses, I'd have moved to Nikon long ago - the image quality is so much better, in terms of both dynamic range and pattern noise (Canon's pattern noise is a killer if you do a lot of fine-tuning in Photoshop, and is particularly annoying in the midtones), and Canon really hasn't improved their full-frame sensor image quality since the 1Ds3 in 2007. High-ISO noise reduction, certainly, but not ultimate image quality. Meanwhile, the D800/D800e is usually compared against medium-format cameras, and sometimes it's little brother the D600 - no-one even bothers comparing it against other 135-format DSLRs.
Any idea if there are any adapters which let you fit Canon lenses onto a Leica M-mount? Aside from the Sony Exmor sensors, the M240 seems to be the next-best thing... As an aside, the TS-E 17 and TS-E 24 are probably two of the finest medium-format lenses out there, and the TS-E 17 is the only way you can get that wide in a single frame!
-
The D800 is a more general-purpose solution - it will work for everything. The D800e will give you better image quality for some subjects, but be less-than-useable for some others. Ideally, you'd want one of each.
That's a bit of a myth promulgated by the pre-release Technical Note issued by Nikon basically intended, I suspect, to cover their backs. I imagine that they regret it now.
Remember that the only difference between the two cameras is that the D800E has an additional filter over the sensor (another myth is that it has none!!).
As mentioned above, I use both cameras interchangeably and can discern no difference in image quality whatsoever. No lack of sharpness with the D800 and no moiré or other problems with the D800E. Stevesanacore, on the other hand, did suggest he could identify a difference. Theoretically, according to DxO data, the D800E should be 3% sharper than the D800.
As also mentioned above, a huge benefit of the D800/E is the DR - which applies equally to both variants.
And the other big step forward with those cameras is the high-ISO performance. When I was first tempted by the D3s, one of the "selling points" was the alleged ability to produce usable photographs at up to ISO 102,400. In practice, I could count the number of times I ever went over ISO 6400 on the fingers of one hand. So, when I swapped the D3s for a D800 I was ready to accept ISO 6400 as a realistic maximum. What I found, of course, was that at all ISO settings up to, and including, 6400, the D800 outshone the D3s. (Above that, it did deteriorate more rapidly). But the real surprise was not only that there was so little noise at 6400, but that the "quality" of the noise was dramatically different. With the D800/E at ISO 6400, what little noise there is is more like film grain rather than the multi-coloured artifacts found with lesser cameras.
-
As mentioned above, I use both cameras interchangeably and can discern no difference in image quality whatsoever. No lack of sharpness with the D800 and no moiré or other problems with the D800E. Stevesanacore, on the other hand, did suggest he could identify a difference. Theoretically, according to DxO data, the D800E should be 3% sharper than the D800.
Hi,
That's similar to what I found when I analyzed the limiting resolution differences (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=65927.msg523733#msg523733), based on an image pair graciously made available to me by Michael Reichmann.
The difference was that the D800 showed a limiting resolution of 93.9 cycles/mm or 92.0% of Nyquist, and the D800E shows a limiting resolution of 94.9 cycles/mm or 92.9% of Nyquist. The almost 1% difference could stem from small focus differences (despite his best efforts) that benefitted the D800 a tiny bit more, thus closing the gap even further than the 3% from DxO.
I did notice that the Raw converters at that early stage of availability had more difficulty in avoiding a nasty reddish edge glow artifacting on the D800E images. Maybe that has improved over time, but it did show that a different/specific Raw conversion engine adjustment for both models would be required and beneficial.
Cheers,
Bart
-
This may seem a bit bizarre but does anyone have a experience using an older nikkor, specifically the 28 or 35mm f2d's on the d800? You may say what on earth? But to me it seems like at f11-16 things are all pretty similar I guess except for chromatic aberration which can fairly easily removed in Lightroom.
Of course I really want the new sigma 35 but in this economy I may splurge on one prime and go old school on another.
-
This may seem a bit bizarre but does anyone have a experience using an older nikkor, specifically the 28 or 35mm f2d's on the d800? You may say what on earth? But to me it seems like at f11-16 things are all pretty similar I guess except for chromatic aberration which can fairly easily removed in Lightroom.
Of course I really want the new sigma 35 but in this economy I may splurge on one prime and go old school on another.
My favorite lenses on the D800e are the old Nikkors. They don't look so "digital", have a different color rendition and rendering. The 28 AI-S is fantastic, especially the 2.8 version. You get some purple fringing on high contrast edges, even stopped down a bit to F4/5.6, but this cleans up easily in post.
-
Hello,
From my experience with the 28mm AF F2.8D lens even on a Nikon D3X it was a shocking lens. The corners where very soft even at F11.0. The Nikon AF 35mm F2.0 wasn’t that much better at the same aperture. The Tokina ATX 28-80mm F2.8 performed better than these two Nikon prime lenses.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tokina-AF-28-80mm-f-2-8-AT-X-PRO-280-Nikon-AF-D-FX-Full-Frame-Lens-Nr-MINT-/181167504423?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item2a2e6cbc27
When it come to the Nikon D800E this camera is very unforgiving when it comes to lenses. Since I purchased both versions of the D800 I have up graded all my Nikon lenses to the G version.
Also the Sigma 35mm F1.4 from my experience was soft in the corners even at F11.0 which is why I returned to the distributer and have stayed with the Nikon 35mm F1.4G lens.
For doing panoramas I have found the Nikon 16-35mm lens to be excellent especially when shooting with the camera vertically.
Cheers
Simon
-
But to me it seems like at f11-16 things are all pretty similar ...
At f/11 the diffraction pattern already has a diameter of approx. 3 sensels on the D800/D800E, so only the very best lenses would be able to make a tiny bit of difference, and only in the exact focus plane, because defocus will kill all micro-contrast.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hello,
From my experience with the 28mm AF F2.8D lens even on a Nikon D3X it was a shocking lens. The corners where very soft even at F11.0. The Nikon AF 35mm F2.0 wasn’t that much better at the same aperture. The Tokina ATX 28-80mm F2.8 performed better than these two Nikon prime lenses.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tokina-AF-28-80mm-f-2-8-AT-X-PRO-280-Nikon-AF-D-FX-Full-Frame-Lens-Nr-MINT-/181167504423?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item2a2e6cbc27
When it come to the Nikon D800E this camera is very unforgiving when it comes to lenses. Since I purchased both versions of the D800 I have up graded all my Nikon lenses to the G version.
Also the Sigma 35mm F1.4 from my experience was soft in the corners even at F11.0 which is why I returned to the distributer and have stayed with the Nikon 35mm F1.4G lens.
For doing panoramas I have found the Nikon 16-35mm lens to be excellent especially when shooting with the camera vertically.
Cheers
Simon
That 28 AFd was bad on film outside of teh center 1/3 of the frame. My understanding is that the optical formula was from the old 28 2.8 E lens, which was terrible.
-
Hello,
I still have my old Nikon 28mm F2.8, 50mm F1.4 and 105mm F2.5 AIS lens.
The Nikon 28mm F2.8 AIS lens is sharper than the Nikon AFD 28mm lens but the Tokina 28-80mm was even sharper in the the corners when I did my test back when I was using a Nikon D3X.
Now the new Nikon 28mm F1.8 G lens is superb and is worth every penny. The resolution is sharp right to the edges and with the Nano coating the images have a wonderful clarity to them.
And for only $697.00 US is a bargain.
Cheers
Simon
-
Thank you all for all this input.
I'd love to think an older nikkor can perform well, I'm especially concerned at the corners, and will try some.
"At f/11 the diffraction pattern already has a diameter of approx. 3 sensels on the D800/D800E, so only the very best lenses would be able to make a tiny bit of difference, and only in the exact focus plane, because defocus will kill all micro-contrast."
This is pretty much why i'd want the new sigma, to really let the d800 do it's thing.
-
I guess I have one more concern about the d800 in general.
Is diffraction such an issue at f11-16 that its not worth having this?
Would a d600 resolve at those apertures or is this just like any other
Camera and you get slightly softer results at smaller apertures. People
Scare me with comments like you can only use this camera wide open to f8.
It just seems a bit ridiculous. I tend to shoot f11-16 Iso 100 on a tripod in
Live view with a 28-35mm lens. I couldn't see the d800 being any worse than
Any other camera at that aperture range, only better. Seem like my paying attention
To pixel peepers is getting out of hand, and adorama better get a new stock
Of refurbished ones in soon...
Any input of course is so appreciated....
-
People Scare me with comments like you can only use this camera wide open to f8.
It just seems a bit ridiculous. I tend to shoot f11-16 Iso 100 on a tripod in
Live view with a 28-35mm lens. I couldn't see the d800 being any worse than
Any other camera at that aperture range, only better.
That is of course 100% true, D800e is better than anything with any lens or aperture. If the e is $300 better than the plain D800 at those apertures is another matter altogether. I suspect you would pay that extra just for the peace of mind, not any perceptible difference in sharpness. I have the D800e, but I did not have to pay for it myself (company gear). I have not noticed any moire in any pictures, but others have noticed some quite good looking pictures I have taken with it...
Old lenses: I really like the 135 f/2 DC portrait lens, stopped down to 5.6-11. The shorter sibling 100 f/2 DC which is 20 years old, got really good marks on the DxO test, much better than the new 105mm macro for example. 135mm test results are not out yet.
-
Hi,
Diffraction is same on all cameras, it is a function of aperture and wavelength of light. So the D800 suffers as much as the D600. Diffraction is benign to sharpening, so yo may sharpen a bit more at smaller apertures.
Best regards
Erik
I guess I have one more concern about the d800 in general.
Is diffraction such an issue at f11-16 that its not worth having this?
Would a d600 resolve at those apertures or is this just like any other
Camera and you get slightly softer results at smaller apertures. People
Scare me with comments like you can only use this camera wide open to f8.
It just seems a bit ridiculous. I tend to shoot f11-16 Iso 100 on a tripod in
Live view with a 28-35mm lens. I couldn't see the d800 being any worse than
Any other camera at that aperture range, only better. Seem like my paying attention
To pixel peepers is getting out of hand, and adorama better get a new stock
Of refurbished ones in soon...
Any input of course is so appreciated....
-
Over a year later I don't feel I missed anything by choosing a D800 over a D800E.
-
Interesting questions.
I'm a D800E owner; I decided on the "E" because in early comparisons I saw a very slight (and please understand I'm using the word "slight" for a reason) advantage to images that contained complex fine detail over the stock 800. It wasn't a moderate or gigantic difference, it was slight, but to me, noticeable. Since both cameras can be provoked to produce moire, I personally didn't see spending the money by not getting the machine that performed the best, even if the slight improvement would mostly occur at apertures beneath F/11. A year later, this is my favorite camera ever in the 35 years I've been shooting in any format, from any brand. If as a young, poor 17 year old kid you had told me that in 2012 I'd be buying a camera that would easily match 6x7 chrome film and approach large format quality (which I have shot) in a 35mm package, I wouldn't have believed you, yet here we are.
However, after shooting with it for a year, using essentially near or at the very best lenses you can mount on it, I would have to say that if you are really desiring to see the maximum potential of what a D800E can do, you'll have to learn to shoot in less diffraction impacted apertures. In the old days I happily shot at F/11 and sometimes F/16, but these days I'm aperture bracketing, usually in the range from F/7.1 - F/10, often landing at F/8 or F/9, in order to still get close to what the cameras potential is. Search this sites article on "sensor outresolve lenses" and you'll see some information that shows you how much actual megapixel resolution is possible at each aperture due to diffraction - it's interesting, and may point you to a 20/24mp body if you insist on only shooting F/11 - F/16. I would highly suggest F/16 is one you stay away from on the D800E for those reasons.
Now, note in that previous paragraph I used the term "really desiring to see the maximum potential" and that's exactly what it means. I regularly shoot my D800E in the studio at F/11 and get wonderful results - I need the aperture for DOF reasons. But I know if I'm living at F/11 that I'm not getting the maximum potential out of the body and I'm good with that. However, for landscape work, I try everything I can to be lower, preferably in that 7.1 - 9 range if I can get the DOF for it. Think of it this way: If I gifted you tomorrow with a Bugatti Super Veyron automobile, obviously this would be likely the fastest car you own or have owned. And it would move. You could drive around a track with it and do very well. However, at the same time, if you then, after my gift, went and took a 12 week long driving course with a master race driver, you'd now go back home and be able to "see the maximum potential" of what the car could do, that you didn't earlier. This is a more coarse analogy than with the D800E, but the concept in my view is sound; you can shoot a D800E all day at F/11, but the smaller incremental gains you'd get in microcontrast and detail rendition from shooting a highly complex (in terms of detail) scene at F/7.1, F/8, or F/9 might be important to you. Or they might not be. So anyone who gets the camera gets a nice camera with a lot of dynamic range, but in order to really extract the sharpness/detail aspect of it to the maximum potential (there's that pesky potential word again) takes excellent craft, and excellent lenses.
In terms of the Sigma 35/1.4; I have one; it's replaced my Nikon 35/1.4G as I found it sharper, corner to corner, edge to edge, on my 800E in both close, moderate, and infinity distance tests. However, there seems to be a bit of sample variation as some folks took a few tries to get a good one. I was lucky - the sample I evaluated I then purchased and it's been stellar. That being said, I do feel it's performance is slightly (again, the word slightly) better in the closer moderate range, where it's bloody fantastic, as opposed to landscape distance/infinity, where it's just every day excellent. A lens that truly shines on the D800E is the Zeiss 21/2.8 by the way.
Now - at the end of the day, I generally don't advise brand shifts without solid, well thought through reasons. My "worry" is that if you are dead set on living in the F/11 and F/16 word that outside of the dynamic range improvement, you wouldn't really benefit from a D800E over a current 20/21mp Canon. And Canon will come out with a higher (perhaps even higher than 36mp) body with likely better dynamic range performance, so the question of how much you NEED (versus want) a higher rez/more dynamic range body has to be asked.
Good luck with your decision.
-m
-
@nashvillemike
Thanks you for your detailed and thoughtful answers. They are a real help.
Doing studio work with fine detail as you say, I must ask if you've run into moire
Issues with your "E"? Had to ask...
-
Doing studio work with fine detail as you say, I must ask if you've run into moire
Issues with your "E"? Had to ask...
It (clearly visual aliasing artifacts) would depend on (mostly repetitive) subject matter to become obnoxious, but even if it's not in your face, it looks unnatuaral, because it is ...
Cheers,
Bart
-
I get moire on about the same subjects I did previously with the D700, perhaps actually, less than I did with the 700. Mesh lingerie are the worst offender (fine repeating pattern). Stopping down an extra touch to intentionally walk into diffraction zone a bit sometimes helps. So far it's not really been that much of a worry for me honestly.
-
-m
-
I've had several Phase One digital backs without an AA filter so I prefer the look of non AA cameras, just personal taste the latest being a Fuji XE-1
With my 800E I can stop down when moire is an issue and shoot at f4-f6 when sharpness is primary, with the 800 you need to add more sharpening for the same level of acuity.
I would make the choice, 800 if used as a general purpose camera, 800E if used primarily for nature and landscapes.
Marc
-
The reason why I chose a D800E over the D800 is because I was able to get one earlier in Australia, because it was a less popular model than the D800. I was able to put in my preorder for one of the first shipments of the D800E to reach Australia and I received the camera a few weeks later. I would have had to have waited another couple of months for a D800.
Any differences in resolution between the two models, and any advantages or disadvantages regarding the AA filters, were of trivial concern to me. The extra resolution that a good lens can provide, and/or the extra resolution that a 36 mp sensor can provide, as opposed to the 22 mp of the Canon 5D3 for example, are of far greater significance.
-
I get moire on about the same subjects I did previously with the D700, perhaps actually, less than I did with the 700. Mesh lingerie are the worst offender (fine repeating pattern). Stopping down an extra touch to intentionally walk into diffraction zone a bit sometimes helps. So far it's not really been that much of a worry for me honestly.
-
-m
That's because the pixels are a lot smaller - it takes a much finer pattern to produce moire on a 36MP sensor than a 12MP one.
It (clearly visual aliasing artifacts) would depend on (mostly repetitive) subject matter to become obnoxious, but even if it's not in your face, it looks unnatuaral, because it is ...
Cheers,
Bart
Moire can be very natural and apparent to the human eye, in the right conditions for it.
Look at the moire in the upper few rows of windows, in Bangkok's Suvarnabhumi Airport. The moire is apparent even when you're looking at it, not just through a digital sensor, and is induced by rows of fine dots on the window panes, which are used to filter out some of the light. The lower two rows don't have the dots, and don't show moire.
-
I would make the choice, 800 if used as a general purpose camera, 800E if used primarily for nature and landscapes.Marc
I was thinking the opposite. If the cameras show pretty much the same results beyond 5.6 or so it would seem the D800 would be a better choice as a dedicated landscape camera since most landscapes are shot beyond that aperture. If the D800e is better at the wider apertures it would seem to be a better choice as a general purpose camera since most portraits, travel, street images are shot at the 5.6 and wider.
-
That's because the pixels are a lot smaller - it takes a much finer pattern to produce moire on a 36MP sensor than a 12MP one.
Correct. The D800/D800E has a higher sampling density than the D700, with an approx. 4.88 micron versus a 8.46 micron sensel pitch. Detail must be more than 42% smaller to cause aliasing, everything else being equal (which it rarely is).
Moire can be very natural and apparent to the human eye, in the right conditions for it.
Look at the moire in the upper few rows of windows, in Bangkok's Suvarnabhumi Airport. The moire is apparent even when you're looking at it, not just through a digital sensor, and is induced by rows of fine dots on the window panes, which are used to filter out some of the light. The lower two rows don't have the dots, and don't show moire.
Yes, but the dots are on a 3 layer membrane, so you are probably looking at an overlay of dot patterns. That can cause moiré just like 2 other (e.g. insect) screens would (it's not natural but an artifact created by man). I've seen a documentary about the design, but forgot the details. I think I remember it was meant to reduce the light at the hottest time of day, and let more light through when the angle of the sun was more tolerable.
Cheers,
Bart
P.S. I've found an better description about the 3-ply membrane (http://thaiarchitecture.blogspot.nl/2010/06/suvarnabhumi-international-airport.html).
-
Yes, but the dots are on a 3 layer membrane, so you are probably looking at an overlay of dot patterns. That can cause moiré just like 2 other (e.g. insect) screens would (it's not natural but an artifact created by man). I've seen a documentary about the design, but forgot the details. I think I remember it was meant to reduce the light at the hottest time of day, and let more light through when the angle of the sun was more tolerable.
Cheers,
Bart
P.S. I've found an better description about the 3-ply membrane (http://thaiarchitecture.blogspot.nl/2010/06/suvarnabhumi-international-airport.html).
That's my point - moire isn't just an artifact of digital sensors. It's a natural effect of an interference pattern, and can be observed even by the human eye when looking at such a pattern.
-
I was thinking the opposite. If the cameras show pretty much the same results beyond 5.6 or so it would seem the D800 would be a better choice as a dedicated landscape camera since most landscapes are shot beyond that aperture. If the D800e is better at the wider apertures it would seem to be a better choice as a general purpose camera since most portraits, travel, street images are shot at the 5.6 and wider.
I shoot most of my landscapes between f4 and f8 to maximize sharpness on the D800E
Marc
-
I shoot most of my landscapes between f4 and f8 to maximize sharpness on the D800E
Hi Marc,
Yes, depending also a little on the lens used, you'll probably start losing lower contrast micro-detail starting from f/5.6 (diffraction pattern diameter exceeds 1.5x sensel pitch) going towards narrower apertures. And you could probably use focus stacking (much harder to do when airborne) if you want uncompromised DOF.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I was thinking the opposite. If the cameras show pretty much the same results beyond 5.6 or so it would seem the D800 would be a better choice as a dedicated landscape camera since most landscapes are shot beyond that aperture. If the D800e is better at the wider apertures it would seem to be a better choice as a general purpose camera since most portraits, travel, street images are shot at the 5.6 and wider.
I agree with jwstl and went with the D800.
Thom Hogan did an in-depth review on the differences between the two and his conclusion was that when shooting in RAW, after f/5.6 diffraction rendered them equal. However, for anyone who needs or chooses to shoot in JPEG (I don't) the D800E was, in his opinion, clearly better up to and including f/11.
Of course, focus stacking at wider apertures is an option and I have the software for that too but it seems there's almost always enough wind blowing when I'm outside shooting to make it problematic.
Either way one goes, they're awesome cameras and I'm continually amazed at the quality of the images the camera produces.
Phil
-
As a landscape photographer using a D800 I routinely us f16 and many times f22. I've done tests and find that I still prefer the image with the correct DOF over the one that is slightly sharper. I think at times people get too hung up on using the sweat spot as opposed to what they really want. In fact I have had at least one professional landscape photographers tell me that there telephoto zoom works best at f22.
-
As a landscape photographer using a D800 I routinely us f16 and many times f22. I've done tests and find that I still prefer the image with the correct DOF over the one that is slightly sharper. I think at times people get too hung up on using the sweat spot as opposed to what they really want. In fact I have had at least one professional landscape photographers tell me that there telephoto zoom works best at f22.
I'm in the same camp. Whatever works for someone is perfectly fine with me but I too, have no qualms at using hyper focal focusing at f/22 if I feel the scene warrants it. With proper developing and sharpening, they still look awesome and if a bit of sharpness is sacrificed to create a more aesthetically pleasing image to my eyes, I'm good with that.
To each his own though!
Phil
-
Hi,
A telephoto zoom that works best at f/22 should be sent to repair or used as paperweight.
I made a nice series that shows the effects of shopping down, unfortunately it stops at f/16: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/49-dof-in-digital-pictures?start=1
Now, there is nothing wrong to stop down to f/22, if needed. Diffraction is also benign to sharpening, especially if you use smart sharpen with gaussian PSF and radius adjusted to the Airy ring dimeter.
Best regards
Erik
-
Hi,
Check this page:
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/76-my-medium-format-digital-journey?start=12
and also this page: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/49-dof-in-digital-pictures?start=1
Best regards
Erik
I'm in the same camp. Whatever works for someone is perfectly fine with me but I too, have no qualms at using hyper focal focusing at f/22 if I feel the scene warrants it. With proper developing and sharpening, they still look awesome and if a bit of sharpness is sacrificed to create a more aesthetically pleasing image to my eyes, I'm good with that.
To each his own though!
Phil
-
I'm in the same camp. Whatever works for someone is perfectly fine with me but I too, have no qualms at using hyper focal focusing at f/22 if I feel the scene warrants it. With proper developing and sharpening, they still look awesome and if a bit of sharpness is sacrificed to create a more aesthetically pleasing image to my eyes, I'm good with that.
To each his own though!
Hi Phil,
Although by using f/22 on a D800, it will not resolve any more detail than a 21 MP camera with ultra strong AA-filter, and have worse contrast, with less capability to recover any detail, even with the best possible deconvolution sharpening.
It beats me why someone would want to use a D800 for that?
But as you say, to each his own ...
Cheers,
Bart
-
I have owned both cameras using the tilt shift lenses. The only reason you would need a d800e is if you print large and everything in your technique from capture to print is flawless. If it is then you will see a difference.
-
That's my point - moire isn't just an artifact of digital sensors. It's a natural effect of an interference pattern, and can be observed even by the human eye when looking at such a pattern.
I don't see much of a point. Cameras should (be able to) record images "as they are" or "as the are perceived by a human". Having a camera introduce moire, blurring etc of its own is usually undesirable.
-h
-
The point is that, in that case, moire wasn't introduced by the camera - it was plain to see, even with the naked eye.