Exactly my thoughts which makes me very sad :-(Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
Again, my sentiments exactly :-(Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
Printable View
Exactly my thoughts which makes me very sad :-(Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
Again, my sentiments exactly :-(Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
I agree. The only upside is that it should at least shut down the 24-70mm f/2.8 IS rumor mill for at least a year :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Setters
No IS on the new 24-70, everyone is disappointed that Canon doesn't have a match for the new D800...Canon lenses wont work on Nikons...it is sad:(
Well, any one selling their Canon gear let me know, I will give 20 cents on the dollar so you can make the switch to Nikon :p
Wow. I'm very curious to see some raw files from this thing. If it doesn't have all the problems that my 5D2 does (most importantly, poor dynamic range caused by pattern noise), I'm definitely going over to the dark side.
Does anyone feel like the D800 is exactly what everyone's been asking for in the 5D Mark III?
Daniel, can you explain what the D800E gains with the addition of the anti aliasing removing feature, which I think helps image sharpness, but is a big plus for the astral photographers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Browning
Sure. Basically, you have to choose between softness and artifacts. Most camera manufacturers have chosen softness, especially since sharpening can improve things. Very few manufacturers have chosen artifacts instead, since those cannot be removed in post. However, if you are shooting under conditions where the image is already soft (e.g. due to seeing with astrophotography), then the additional softness of the anti-alias filter only increases softness further, for no benefit. In such a case, shooting without the filter will improve sharpness.
Plus, it will really help astral photographers capture ghosts and spirits. ;)
And we thought nobody was listening ...obviously someone from Nikon was!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Setters
Ohhh, that makes sense, now I get it, so this camera is even more desirable to someone like you. I think you need to go to that Sushi bar and give your mate from Canon a good hard shake. Ask him what's going on and tell him the faithful are getting nervous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Browning
We engineers like the removal of the anti-aliasing filter as well though not so many of us use SLRs for imaging (though maybe more so in microscopy). Most scientific-grade sensors simply record the charge level. It's up to the operator to remove dark field effects, characterize hot/cold pixels, etc. The moire patterns one gets when shooting a repeating pattern that does not line up in an integer ratio with the pixels are simply an expected outcome. I disagree that such features cannot be removed in post - but it requires intimate knowledge of the repeating pattern and a smidge of math. It's not the sort of things you're going to expect a wedding photographer to be able to do (since every dress' pattern is slightly different). The other thing you've got to understand is that 99% of the time, scientific (and industrial) images look like crap. Its the statistical representation of what you're looking at that matters. And anything that you cannot characterize in the process (like the AA filter element) makes life difficult.