D800/E question

PHOTOMAYBEPHOTOMAYBE Registered Users Posts: 60 Big grins
edited July 24, 2012 in Cameras
So I am wondering since we now have a 34 or wahaever megapixel sensor on a SLR body,a geat feat of course,but can the Nikor lenes utilize the quaility?
I was always taught the glass is the most important featue.
Just curious......

Comments

  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,156 moderator
    edited July 23, 2012
    People have long wondered about the resolving ability of lenses versus the resolving capabilities of modern dSLRs.

    Partly, the high gross pixel count of the Nikon D800/D800E does appear to be useful in many of the top-tier, gold-ring Nikkor lenses.

    Partly too, the high pixel count helps with smoother printed flesh tones and smooth gradated blue skies and clouds.

    To understand why this is you first have to understand that the Nikon D800, like most modern digital cameras, uses a Bayer mosaic imaging sensor. A Bayer sensor does not capture complete luminance or chrominance information at any single photosite. Instead, the RAW data from all photosites is processed through a Bayer demosaicing algorithm, which interpolates the luminance and chrominance for each photosite/pixel, based on the data of the surrounding pixels. Since each pixel is interpolated, each pixel is slightly "off", compared to using a monochromatic chip and separate exposures for luminance, red, green and blue filtrations, for instance.

    Having a very high pixel count allows for much better approximations for both color and luminance at any given location on a print. This yields smoother looking continuous tones and shades.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited July 24, 2012
    The bottom line is that more megapixels are always better. Even if they "expose" a lens' flaws a little bit, you're still better off with the added resolution, if you're trying to print big.

    Glass is just another part of the equation. Sure, high-end glass is a good investment from the standpoints of reliability, image quality and resale value. But what if you're going on a ten day backpacking trip? You gonna lug around that f/2.8 zoom or that f/1.2 prime? Not me, I'm going straight for the f/4 zooms or old f/2.8 and f/4 primes. Heck, even some of the variable aperture zooms are incredibly sharp these days, the 16-85 DX and 24-85 FX are incredible performers and weigh just a few ounces and cost just a few hundred bucks.

    So, I say, buy the gear that fits your needs. It takes time to define your style and decide which lenses you should be investing the most in or which lenses you can afford to skimp on just to "cover the bases", but eventually you'll know exactly what your ideal setup is. Personally, I'd love to have a D800 and the 16-35 f/4, and hopefully Nikon has a 70-200 f/4 VR up their sleeve for later this year. If the Canon 70-200 f/4 is any indication, we're in for a real treat as far as sharpness is concerned...

    =Matt=
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,156 moderator
    edited July 24, 2012
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    The bottom line is that more megapixels are always better. Even if they "expose" a lens' flaws a little bit, you're still better off with the added resolution, if you're trying to print big.

    ...

    Just to elaborate, we don't want people equating large pixel count with quality; it's not that simple.

    If the large pixel count means a large amount of per pixel sensor noise and lower dynamic range, then more pixels just means more overall problems. (This includes the latest cell phone cameras which have large pixel counts but whose overall performance gets really bad really quickly, especially when subjected to less than optimal conditions.)

    Fortunately, the Nikon D800/D800E sensor and image processor system has rather excellent and superb noise and dynamic range (DR) figures at base ISO, and at high ISO the aggregate and normalized noise/DR is only a little worse than the Nikon D3S. It's a truly remarkable job and Nikon is to be congratulated.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited July 24, 2012
    I have had no problems with my glass keeping up with the D800E.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • PHOTOMAYBEPHOTOMAYBE Registered Users Posts: 60 Big grins
    edited July 24, 2012
    Lenses
    Harryb wrote: »
    I have had no problems with my glass keeping up with the D800E.
    I assume,notice assume ,you use the top of the line Nikor plus maybe others that have been adapted to the Nikon?????

    This is all hypothetical of course,but I see Ziggy's point.

    I worked for a guy , Bob Day , way back when and his Leica R4 plus the Leica lenses put my cCnon F-1 and the Flurite lenses to shame,,thus my querry...


    Thanks one and all....
Sign In or Register to comment.