Is the 645D worth $7000.00 more than the D800/E
Let me start this conversation by saying that we all have opinions based on our experience and preferences. No more right or wrong than the next guy and I would encourage everyone to try and maintain the same attitude and be pleasantly objective as the conversation progresses. If it does at all. And lets try to stay on track.
So let's make kind of a broad assumption for the purposes of this conversation that we all have good basic skills in our photography. We have taken the time to study camera mechanics and lens optics. We know about diffraction and lenses and that one needs great lenses to get great images. That we know how critical good technique is to the end image. That vibration of any sort ( I like landscape photography, and to steel some one else's words there is no such thing as to big a print ) will eliminate the benefits of the largest sensor regardless of the high number of pixels that sensor might have. etc.... etc... I think we all get the drift.
I've been playing around with a 645D the last few days and am very impressed with the resolution, color palette, micro detail, micro contrast and all the other buzz words we might want to throw around concerning medium format digital. I would be quite content owning one of these. Of course I was equally happy owning and using the canon 1Ds MKIII. But lately I find myself wishing that I could get a little bit more out of my tools. And based on the information thats beginning to surface on the web about the D800 ( there is some great stuff over on Lloyd Chambers blog ) I would probably be equally happy with the D800 or more likely the E version.
The first 645D's were available when? Late 09 mid 2010 perhaps? Not counting the years it took to brink the product to market. So lets say that technology is two years old and the D800 is the latest greatest technology that Nikon has been able to come up with. Has Nikons efforts placed them on the same playing field as 40mp medium format sensors Specifically the 645d? And if so is the 645d $7000.00 more advanced than the D800? And of course our answers will be based partially on individual preferences.
Personally based on my own tests of the 645D the last few days and what I have seen over on Lloyds pages on the D800 I think the two cameras are very close in resolution with the 645D slightly edging out the D800. (Yes it's just the net but if done properly one can glean some useful information) The differences in color are simply that different not so much better than one or another just different I can appreciate both. It seems perhaps the real differences might be in the micro details which when it comes to large print are a have to have kind of thing. As much as I can appreciate what Nikon has accomplished with the D800 the 645D images just seems a little more magical to me. Wether that little bit of so called magic is worth the extra money over the D800 is obviously going to be based on personal preference and what we value as individual photographers. I suppose the proof of the pudding would be to do print comparisons between the two. If some one can do that and offer up an opinion that would be interesting.
So please feel free to add your two cents.
Last edited by Whats_edoo; 04-11-2012 at 07:35 PM.