Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-16-2012, 10:11 PM   #61
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,103
QuoteOriginally posted by CDW Quote
...
Although Nikon will likely use their processing expertise to extract every bit of performance out of the 36 meg sensor, the upper ISO spec of the D800 is not in the stratospheric range of the new Canon 17 meg sensor or the K-5 with the 16 meg.
If you took the K-5 sensor and kept the same pixel pitch and just increased the number of pixels to fill the FF real estate, you'd have more MP. But would you expect it to be worse in high ISO now just because it has more MP? Does not the D800 have about the same pixel pitch of around 4.75Ám as the k-5 I thought I heard?


Last edited by tuco; 02-16-2012 at 10:21 PM.
02-17-2012, 03:52 AM   #62
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3
Big Sensor means better pics
02-17-2012, 03:52 AM   #63
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3
I'm gonna compare them in april cause I ordered a Nikon D800e as a back up camera..
02-17-2012, 05:41 AM   #64
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
Don't forget that the D800 has a CMOS sensor and the 645D a CCD so in the lower ISO's the 645D will most likely win in all aspects because of that.
High ISO is a different matter but the 645D isn't make for that to begin with.

02-17-2012, 05:44 AM   #65
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
If you took the K-5 sensor and kept the same pixel pitch and just increased the number of pixels to fill the FF real estate, you'd have more MP. But would you expect it to be worse in high ISO now just because it has more MP? Does not the D800 have about the same pixel pitch of around 4.75Ám as the k-5 I thought I heard?
If so i wonder which one is better at 1:1 magnification where some here are so keen on to know....
Would be funny if the older K5 with the smaller sensor out preform it then
02-25-2012, 03:33 PM   #66
Forum Member
chicagonature's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Downers Grove, IL
Posts: 89
Digitalis,

Thanks. I ended up ordering the Nikon 14-24mm lens instead of the Tokina 16-35mm. Yes, it's $1300 more, but, I don't want to buy a 36MP camera only to have it look like an 18 MP camera because of less-than-perfect optics. That would be penny wise and pound foolish. So, thanks again for the advice!

Mike
02-25-2012, 05:01 PM   #67
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,796
QuoteOriginally posted by chicagonature Quote
Digitalis, Thanks. I ended up ordering the Nikon 14-24mm lens instead of the Tokina 16-35mm. Yes, it's $1300 more, but, I don't want to buy a 36MP camera only to have it look like an 18 MP camera because of less-than-perfect optics. That would be penny wise and pound foolish. So, thanks again for the advice! Mike
well i'm here to educate and inform - though the thing that annoys me about the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G is that it doesn't handle flare very well, but the resolving power of that lens is simply unrivalled. Canon do pretty well with their lenses above 24mm - but below that, nikon has the advantage.
02-26-2012, 04:06 PM   #68
Forum Member
chicagonature's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Downers Grove, IL
Posts: 89
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
well i'm here to educate and inform - though the thing that annoys me about the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G is that it doesn't handle flare very well, but the resolving power of that lens is simply unrivalled. Canon do pretty well with their lenses above 24mm - but below that, nikon has the advantage.
I was wondering about the flare. I believe I read that it isn't a problem. One report I did read that reported flare was because the front element stuck out in front of the side lens shade (not the top). But, my application is landscape photography using a tripod. If the sun is out of the frame, I would simply block the sunlight hitting the front element with my body, hat, or whatever?

In your experience, when the sun is "in the frame," do you get flare?

02-26-2012, 04:27 PM   #69
Veteran Member
Coeurdechene's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: madrid
Photos: Albums
Posts: 833
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Don't forget that the D800 has a CMOS sensor and the 645D a CCD so in the lower ISO's the 645D will most likely win in all aspects because of that. High ISO is a different matter but the 645D isn't make for that to begin with
Not necesarily...at least according to dalsa (sensor manufacturer):CCD vs. CMOS
Depends on how well each sensor was designed...In some years we'll see what sCMOS has to offer, since it promises to combine the best of each.
02-26-2012, 09:06 PM   #70
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,796
QuoteOriginally posted by chicagonature Quote
I was wondering about the flare. I believe I read that it isn't a problem. One report I did read that reported flare was because the front element stuck out in front of the side lens shade (not the top). But, my application is landscape photography using a tripod. If the sun is out of the frame, I would simply block the sunlight hitting the front element with my body, hat, or whatever? In your experience, when the sun is "in the frame," do you get flare?
yes, if the sun is striking the front element there is a chance of flare occurring, however it is very dependant of where the sun is in the frame. But the flare on this lens doesn't kill contrast the way it does with other lenses, and because of the extreme FOV at 14mm it can be rather difficult to shield the bulbous front element from sunlight, however if the flare becomes a problem, a trick I prefer to use is to take two frames - one with the flare and another with the light source causing the flare blocked, in photoshop you can use the frame with the light source blocked to recover the flare affected portion. It is also important to note that the 14-24 f/2.8G tends to flare in the green part of the light spectrum - so instead of taking an extra frame it is possible with some clever channel shifting PP work to reduce its impact.
03-15-2012, 10:12 AM   #71
Forum Member
chicagonature's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Downers Grove, IL
Posts: 89
Nikon D800E vs. D800: Which is more Diffraction Limited?
The Technical Guide to the Nikon D800/D800E was just published and I believe it is saying that the D800E (the one with effectively no anti-aliasing filter) is more Diffraction Limited than the D800. Here's the quote, "The D800E offers better resolution at apertures where diffraction is not an issue. The effects of aperture may therefore be more noticeable than with the D800, and care may be required to avoid loss of definition due to diffraction." Does this makes sense from a physics point of view? I mean, shouldn't it be just the opposite of what Nikon is saying because the Nikon D800 is causing the Airy Disk to be a little bit larger due to the increased blurring caused by the anti-aliasing filter? Plus, Nikon uses the word "may" and they show images from the D800, not the D800E. It's confusing.

I have a D800E on pre-order (along with the 14-24mm lens) and I have an opportunity to switch to the D800 without losing my place in line. My application is this: Landscape photographs with the nearest foreground subjects located VERY close to the lens, requiring very small apertures. With my Pentax 645NII medium format film camera, I frequently shoot at f/32 using a 33mm lens (the same as using a 20mm lens at f/20 on 35mm full-frame camera). However, with the D800/D800E, they say it's diffraction limited at f/11. Still, I want to choose the best possible camera for the job.

(Ultimately, I'm simply trying to do as well or better with digital than I am with medium format film. I suppose with the 645 camera at f/32, for all of these years my pictures may be well beyond the diffraction limit anyway and I never really notice it.)

I appreciate help from those who better understand this topic.

Thanks!
03-15-2012, 10:32 AM   #72
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
Diffraction is an overrated issue IMO. Effect will show sooner on a faster higher quality lens than they will on a lower quality lens for one. Optically perfect lenses don't exist
If your prints have been satisfactory shooting 645 at f32 then there is no reason to expect them to be less than satisfactory at f20 or so on a D800 (not a direct corollary since film varies in how much it can resolve as well.
That being said the 645D should hold out against diffraction better than a D800. I've never heard anyone one say gee too bad that beautiful print was degraded in resolution by diffraction
03-15-2012, 11:13 AM   #73
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Coeurdechene Quote
Not necesarily...at least according to dalsa (sensor manufacturer):CCD vs. CMOS
Depends on how well each sensor was designed...In some years we'll see what sCMOS has to offer, since it promises to combine the best of each.
That's what i based my comment on so i wonder where we read things differently?

These things are pluses for CCD for the low ISO performance.
Fill factor - High
Amplifier mismatch - N/A (this is why you have a little noise even with low ISO with CMOS sensor and you see that back with the points below)
System Noise - Low
Dynamic Range - High
Uniformity - High
03-15-2012, 11:21 AM   #74
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by chicagonature Quote
Nikon D800E vs. D800: Which is more Diffraction Limited?
The Technical Guide to the Nikon D800/D800E was just published and I believe it is saying that the D800E (the one with effectively no anti-aliasing filter) is more Diffraction Limited than the D800. Here's the quote, "The D800E offers better resolution at apertures where diffraction is not an issue. The effects of aperture may therefore be more noticeable than with the D800, and care may be required to avoid loss of definition due to diffraction." Does this makes sense from a physics point of view? I mean, shouldn't it be just the opposite of what Nikon is saying because the Nikon D800 is causing the Airy Disk to be a little bit larger due to the increased blurring caused by the anti-aliasing filter? Plus, Nikon uses the word "may" and they show images from the D800, not the D800E. It's confusing.

I have a D800E on pre-order (along with the 14-24mm lens) and I have an opportunity to switch to the D800 without losing my place in line. My application is this: Landscape photographs with the nearest foreground subjects located VERY close to the lens, requiring very small apertures. With my Pentax 645NII medium format film camera, I frequently shoot at f/32 using a 33mm lens (the same as using a 20mm lens at f/20 on 35mm full-frame camera). However, with the D800/D800E, they say it's diffraction limited at f/11. Still, I want to choose the best possible camera for the job.

(Ultimately, I'm simply trying to do as well or better with digital than I am with medium format film. I suppose with the 645 camera at f/32, for all of these years my pictures may be well beyond the diffraction limit anyway and I never really notice it.)

I appreciate help from those who better understand this topic.

Thanks!
Really, what they are trying to get in front of is the misconceptions that would come from the visible effects of diffraction at f/13 and lower (f/16, etc) at 100% view.

In other words, the blur you would get from the larger pixels of say a 12MP FF camera may mask the effects of diffraction at those apertures - but the 12MP image wouldn't actually resolve any more detail, because the loss of detail the larger pixels introduce is greater than the effects of diffraction on the denser sensor.

Consider this plot: 50mm 1.8 + D3 (12MP) vs. 50mm + D3x (24MP.) Notice how both combos start to lose resolution after f/5.6 - and yet the higher-MP combo still has higher resolution, even at say f/13 vs f/5.6 - it's resolving more even at higher diffraction levels. The slope of the d3x graph is slightly steeper after f/5.6, meaning it's losing resolution to diffraction at a slightly higher rate, but it still retains more resolving power than the 12MP combo at every equivalent aperture.


.


(data from this graph taken from DxO and graphed by bob2n in this very good thread.)
.

To summarize - don't worry about diffraction being a limiting factor on the FF sensor just yet

.

Last edited by jsherman999; 03-15-2012 at 11:33 AM.
03-15-2012, 12:11 PM   #75
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
test photos, RAW and jpg online.
Not the E version though
Nikon D800 Camera Samples - First Shots
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
645d, camera, d800, medium format, nikon, pentax
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
645D vs Nikon D3x, What should we test? Adam Pentax Medium Format 76 12-03-2011 08:35 PM
Pentax 645D vs Nikon D3x Review Discussion Adam Pentax DSLR Discussion 48 12-03-2011 08:31 PM
Pentax SMCP-FA 645N 80-160mm f/4.5 lens on Pentax 645D Imatest results JDOAK Pentax Medium Format 6 01-23-2011 12:56 PM
645D vs Nikon D3x steve perry Pentax Medium Format 20 12-05-2010 06:16 PM
Pentax 645D vs Nikon vs Canon yurihuta Pentax Medium Format 4 04-23-2010 03:44 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:34 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top