D800 vs 645D

tuco · 03-20-2012, 07:54 AM

Originally posted by stanleyk

Dude, the likelihood of me canceling the X Pro is less than 0. My favorite camera is the X100. I've never had a camera I enjoy as much as the X100.

I don't see how you could have any fun with the X100 when Adam's review of the camera here on PF said it was unusable.

stanleyk · 03-20-2012, 08:01 AM

Originally posted by Emacs

I understand this, mirrorless is fun to use unlike bulky DSLRs. I just trying to point a fact fuji could sacrifice some parameters in order to bring up high iso performance and (possibly) DR, and comparing 15Mp with 36Mp images both at pixel level is kind of pointless. Personally I'm waiting for DXOmark tests. Although I will stick with M10 anyway, enough crop for me

I draw the line at $3K or so on a camera body. Given my photographic skills, I can't even really justify that. I'm 52, divorced, with no kids....that's my justification.

I might buy a Leica one day, but for now I rarely even use the D700. I do almost all of my photography hiking with my dogs so it would be kind of silly to carry around a $6000+ camera and really expensive lenses.

I did have an M3 for a number of years which I got from a co worker whose wife insisted he sell it if he wanted to buy another camera. In the end I didn't use it much either because I don't have a darkroom.

I usually just carry the X100 + the GXR with 50mm module. It fits in a small bag and it doesn't weigh me down. I have three large rescue dogs and we usually go out hiking on the weekends for 3+ hours at time. Plus I do a lot of camping in the Spring and Fall.

stanleyk · 03-20-2012, 08:04 AM

Originally posted by tuco

I don't see how you could have any fun with the X100 when Adam's review of the camera here on PF said it was unusable.

HA!!!!!!!!!!!!

jogiba · 03-20-2012, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by JinDesu

1600 ISO is a bit unfair on that 645D =p

If I posted 100 iso then some would say yeah but try 1600 iso.

Just go to DPR and try any other setting.

Christine Tham · 03-20-2012, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

You missed focus on the two bird shots in that set. I think you may have missed focus slightly on the first otter shot as well.

.

Otter is in focus - the focus zone can be determined from looking at the rock on which the otter is running on.

The 3rd shot of the bird is also in focus, again judging by the ground on which the bird is on. There is motion blur on the bird though - the bird was running as I was taking the shot.

The first bird shot is slightly back focused (but even so, it's very slight - most of the blurriness is motion blur) - it was focused when I took this photo (but I actually like the one posted earlier as it's more interesting):

These are all high ISO photos as it's pretty dark - for the example the one above is ISO2000. I selected a shutter speed of 1/400 - the presence of motion blur even at this speed is an indication of how fast the movement is on the bird.

None of these shots are possible on the M9 due to ISO limitations (max ISO 2500 - some of the shots I posted are at ISO3200 and the wombat is at ISO6400), shutter lag, lack of high continuous rate and ability to focus quickly.

tuco · 03-20-2012, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by Christine Tham

None of these shots are possible on the M9 due to ISO limitations (max ISO 2500 - some of the shots I posted are at ISO3200 and the wombat is at ISO6400), shutter lag, lack of high continuous rate and ability to focus quickly.

These comparisons are pretty silly. Shall we find things your camera can't do that more sophisticated pro cameras or special purpose cameras can and say, look! See!?

**Digitalis** · 03-20-2012, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by tuco

These comparisons are pretty silly. Shall we find things your camera can't do that more sophisticated pro cameras or special purpose cameras can and say, look! See!?

I don't know tuco, I can't use my Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED VR on my Leica M9 - it must be a bad camera.

Christine Tham · 03-21-2012, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by tuco

These comparisons are pretty silly

There is no comparison implied by these photos.

I posted them because I originally mentioned that I considered the M9 to be a "flawed" camera. Obviously, flawed from my perspective.

Digitalis then asked me to justify my opinion. I listed several reasons, including technical flaws such as the camera crashing and magenta cast on some lenses. I also said the shutter lag and the continuous rate was too slow for me.

Digitalis said something along the lines of never being bothered by shutter lag and never used continuous shooting mode.

No issues with that, but I wanted to point out that those limitations do affect the type of photos that can be taken on the camera. Since I want to take those kind of photos, therefore the camera is "flawed" from my perspective. If someone never wants to take those type of photos and never will, then good on them and the camera is not "flawed" for them. Perhaps it was unrealistic of me to expect to be able to take those kind of photos on an $8k body.

The fact that I used the NEX-5N to take these photos is not an endorsement of the NEX-5N - I only used it because I have M-mount lenses on my NEX-5N, the same lenses that would have been used on the M9. The truth is, just about any camera could have taken these photos on any lens. Most DSLRs and most recent compacts - as long as the shutter lag is minimal and there is a decent continuous rate.

Sure, maybe there's a few medium format cameras that would have struggled. But the M9 is hardly in the same class as a medium format camera.

D4rknezz · 03-21-2012, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by Digitalis

I don't know tuco, I can't use my Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED VR on my Leica M9 - it must be a bad camera.

Wrong. Its your Nikkor thats clearly defective.

But if you are convinced , feel free to send the M9 to me for a free removal thats environmentally friendly

D4rknezz · 03-21-2012, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by Christine Tham

Perhaps it was unrealistic of me to expect to be able to take those kind of photos on an $8k body.

I agree. There are a lot of examples of this with other electronic products.
Take an expensive Korg electric piano or a Roland for example - the more expensive it is, the less features it has compared to the $50 casio keyboard you find in the department store. It just does what its supposed to do, well.

Dlsr vs point and shoot is another example. the more expensive DSLR doesnt even come with a lens in the box, while a point and shoot covers 10mm to 250mm with one attached lens.

I think flaw is the imperfect implementation of an included feature, rather than the absence of a feature. For example, shutter lag will be a flaw, absence of 20fps as ooposed to 10 or 5 is not a flaw. Because otherwise, compared to D4's FPS, the K5 20 fps is a flaw, and the k7's...and so on and so forth.

Christine Tham · 03-22-2012, 11:19 AM

Originally posted by D4rknezz

I agree. There are a lot of examples of this with other electronic products.
Take an expensive Korg electric piano or a Roland for example - the more expensive it is, the less features it has compared to the $50 casio keyboard you find in the department store. It just does what its supposed to do, well.

Every product trades off features against price.

Using your example of an electronic piano - I recently bought a top of the line Kawai stage piano - yes it only supports a dozen or so sounds compared to a Casio, but it has real weighted keys that simulate a grand piano mechanism, and it behaves and feels like a grand piano with escapement (key let off) etc. But it's really heavy and I'll need a roadie to move it for me.

Generally medium format cameras trade off weight and some camera performance for ultra high sensor resolution.

To a certain extent the M9 tries to do this but unsuccessfully - the Kodak sensor is not significantly better in resolution than the Sony sensor, and has poor high ISO. So in the end the only real advantage is that the M9 has a full frame sensor.

I'm looking forward to the big Leica announcement in May - let's hope we will finally get a camera worthy of the Leica name.

**Digitalis** · 03-22-2012, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by Christine Tham

To a certain extent the M9 tries to do this but unsuccessfully - the Kodak sensor is not significantly better in resolution than the Sony sensor, and has poor high ISO. So in the end the only real advantage is that the M9 has a full frame sensor.

you are also forgetting that Leica makes some of the best lenses on the planet the Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH was made to counter criticism over the lacklustre High ISO of the M9. And I can personally say that it certainly reduces the need to use High ISO on the M9. Leica also has a range of more affordable* high performance primes for the M9 as well the Summicron, Summarit, Elmarit and Elmar lens lines are much cheaper than the summilux lens line.

*well as affordable as things get for a Leica product, the 35mm f/2 'cron still cost around $2500AU but compare that to the cost of the 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH - $5500AU.

jogiba · 03-23-2012, 05:55 PM

**Digitalis** · 03-23-2012, 10:15 PM

Jogiba - as we all know if a 645D sensor was constructed with the same technologies that are used on the D800's sensor the 645D would be on top - by a significant margin, the fact that the 645D is still able to be compared to the D800 with old sensor technology speaks volumes.

jogiba · 03-24-2012, 06:07 AM

If Pentax made a clone of the D800 with K-mount for $7,000 less than the 645D it would sell at 10x the rate of the 645D.

Nikon D800 SLR Digital Camera (Body Only) 25480 B&H Photo Video

Pentax 645D Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) 17971 B&H Photo Video

Try making this with the 645D.

03-20-2012, 12:57 PM	#36
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,029	Originally posted by Christine Tham None of these shots are possible on the M9 due to ISO limitations (max ISO 2500 - some of the shots I posted are at ISO3200 and the wombat is at ISO6400), shutter lag, lack of high continuous rate and ability to focus quickly. These comparisons are pretty silly. Shall we find things your camera can't do that more sophisticated pro cameras or special purpose cameras can and say, look! See!? Last edited by tuco; 03-20-2012 at 01:18 PM.

03-24-2012, 06:07 AM	#45
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491 Original Poster	If Pentax made a clone of the D800 with K-mount for $7,000 less than the 645D it would sell at 10x the rate of the 645D. Nikon D800 SLR Digital Camera (Body Only) 25480 B&H Photo Video Pentax 645D Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) 17971 B&H Photo Video Try making this with the 645D. Vimeo

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
5D Mk 3 Vs D800	D4rknezz	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	03-02-2012 10:42 PM
D800 IQ is far from MF	ogl	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	54	02-21-2012 01:44 AM
Nikon D800 FF due soon?	joe.penn	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	8	12-26-2011 11:53 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen, say hello to the D800!	JohnBee	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	22	11-22-2011 06:05 PM
Nikon D800	Netsoft	Photographic Industry and Professionals	7	11-20-2011 03:26 PM

03-20-2012, 07:54 AM	#31
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,029	Originally posted by stanleyk Dude, the likelihood of me canceling the X Pro is less than 0. My favorite camera is the X100. I've never had a camera I enjoy as much as the X100. I don't see how you could have any fun with the X100 when Adam's review of the camera here on PF said it was unusable.

03-20-2012, 08:01 AM	#32
stanleyk Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Taylor, Texas Posts: 1,018	Originally posted by Emacs I understand this, mirrorless is fun to use unlike bulky DSLRs. I just trying to point a fact fuji could sacrifice some parameters in order to bring up high iso performance and (possibly) DR, and comparing 15Mp with 36Mp images both at pixel level is kind of pointless. Personally I'm waiting for DXOmark tests. Although I will stick with M10 anyway, enough crop for me I draw the line at $3K or so on a camera body. Given my photographic skills, I can't even really justify that. I'm 52, divorced, with no kids....that's my justification. I might buy a Leica one day, but for now I rarely even use the D700. I do almost all of my photography hiking with my dogs so it would be kind of silly to carry around a $6000+ camera and really expensive lenses. I did have an M3 for a number of years which I got from a co worker whose wife insisted he sell it if he wanted to buy another camera. In the end I didn't use it much either because I don't have a darkroom. I usually just carry the X100 + the GXR with 50mm module. It fits in a small bag and it doesn't weigh me down. I have three large rescue dogs and we usually go out hiking on the weekends for 3+ hours at time. Plus I do a lot of camping in the Spring and Fall.

03-20-2012, 08:04 AM	#33
stanleyk Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Taylor, Texas Posts: 1,018	Originally posted by tuco I don't see how you could have any fun with the X100 when Adam's review of the camera here on PF said it was unusable. HA!!!!!!!!!!!!

03-20-2012, 09:48 AM	#34
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491 Original Poster	Originally posted by JinDesu 1600 ISO is a bit unfair on that 645D =p If I posted 100 iso then some would say yeah but try 1600 iso. Just go to DPR and try any other setting.

03-20-2012, 12:22 PM	#35
Christine Tham Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,269	Originally posted by jsherman999 You missed focus on the two bird shots in that set. I think you may have missed focus slightly on the first otter shot as well. . Otter is in focus - the focus zone can be determined from looking at the rock on which the otter is running on. The 3rd shot of the bird is also in focus, again judging by the ground on which the bird is on. There is motion blur on the bird though - the bird was running as I was taking the shot. The first bird shot is slightly back focused (but even so, it's very slight - most of the blurriness is motion blur) - it was focused when I took this photo (but I actually like the one posted earlier as it's more interesting): These are all high ISO photos as it's pretty dark - for the example the one above is ISO2000. I selected a shutter speed of 1/400 - the presence of motion blur even at this speed is an indication of how fast the movement is on the bird. None of these shots are possible on the M9 due to ISO limitations (max ISO 2500 - some of the shots I posted are at ISO3200 and the wombat is at ISO6400), shutter lag, lack of high continuous rate and ability to focus quickly.

03-20-2012, 03:53 PM	#37
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by tuco These comparisons are pretty silly. Shall we find things your camera can't do that more sophisticated pro cameras or special purpose cameras can and say, look! See!? I don't know tuco, I can't use my Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED VR on my Leica M9 - it must be a bad camera.

03-21-2012, 12:00 PM	#38
Christine Tham Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,269	Originally posted by tuco These comparisons are pretty silly There is no comparison implied by these photos. I posted them because I originally mentioned that I considered the M9 to be a "flawed" camera. Obviously, flawed from my perspective. Digitalis then asked me to justify my opinion. I listed several reasons, including technical flaws such as the camera crashing and magenta cast on some lenses. I also said the shutter lag and the continuous rate was too slow for me. Digitalis said something along the lines of never being bothered by shutter lag and never used continuous shooting mode. No issues with that, but I wanted to point out that those limitations do affect the type of photos that can be taken on the camera. Since I want to take those kind of photos, therefore the camera is "flawed" from my perspective. If someone never wants to take those type of photos and never will, then good on them and the camera is not "flawed" for them. Perhaps it was unrealistic of me to expect to be able to take those kind of photos on an $8k body. The fact that I used the NEX-5N to take these photos is not an endorsement of the NEX-5N - I only used it because I have M-mount lenses on my NEX-5N, the same lenses that would have been used on the M9. The truth is, just about any camera could have taken these photos on any lens. Most DSLRs and most recent compacts - as long as the shutter lag is minimal and there is a decent continuous rate. Sure, maybe there's a few medium format cameras that would have struggled. But the M9 is hardly in the same class as a medium format camera.

03-21-2012, 01:34 PM	#39
D4rknezz Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 1,196	Originally posted by Digitalis I don't know tuco, I can't use my Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED VR on my Leica M9 - it must be a bad camera. Wrong. Its your Nikkor thats clearly defective. But if you are convinced , feel free to send the M9 to me for a free removal thats environmentally friendly

03-21-2012, 01:42 PM	#40
D4rknezz Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 1,196	Originally posted by Christine Tham Perhaps it was unrealistic of me to expect to be able to take those kind of photos on an $8k body. I agree. There are a lot of examples of this with other electronic products. Take an expensive Korg electric piano or a Roland for example - the more expensive it is, the less features it has compared to the $50 casio keyboard you find in the department store. It just does what its supposed to do, well. Dlsr vs point and shoot is another example. the more expensive DSLR doesnt even come with a lens in the box, while a point and shoot covers 10mm to 250mm with one attached lens. I think flaw is the imperfect implementation of an included feature, rather than the absence of a feature. For example, shutter lag will be a flaw, absence of 20fps as ooposed to 10 or 5 is not a flaw. Because otherwise, compared to D4's FPS, the K5 20 fps is a flaw, and the k7's...and so on and so forth.

03-22-2012, 11:19 AM	#41
Christine Tham Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,269	Originally posted by D4rknezz I agree. There are a lot of examples of this with other electronic products. Take an expensive Korg electric piano or a Roland for example - the more expensive it is, the less features it has compared to the $50 casio keyboard you find in the department store. It just does what its supposed to do, well. Every product trades off features against price. Using your example of an electronic piano - I recently bought a top of the line Kawai stage piano - yes it only supports a dozen or so sounds compared to a Casio, but it has real weighted keys that simulate a grand piano mechanism, and it behaves and feels like a grand piano with escapement (key let off) etc. But it's really heavy and I'll need a roadie to move it for me. Generally medium format cameras trade off weight and some camera performance for ultra high sensor resolution. To a certain extent the M9 tries to do this but unsuccessfully - the Kodak sensor is not significantly better in resolution than the Sony sensor, and has poor high ISO. So in the end the only real advantage is that the M9 has a full frame sensor. I'm looking forward to the big Leica announcement in May - let's hope we will finally get a camera worthy of the Leica name.

03-22-2012, 03:49 PM	#42
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by Christine Tham To a certain extent the M9 tries to do this but unsuccessfully - the Kodak sensor is not significantly better in resolution than the Sony sensor, and has poor high ISO. So in the end the only real advantage is that the M9 has a full frame sensor. you are also forgetting that Leica makes some of the best lenses on the planet the Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH was made to counter criticism over the lacklustre High ISO of the M9. And I can personally say that it certainly reduces the need to use High ISO on the M9. Leica also has a range of more affordable* high performance primes for the M9 as well the Summicron, Summarit, Elmarit and Elmar lens lines are much cheaper than the summilux lens line. *well as affordable as things get for a Leica product, the 35mm f/2 'cron still cost around $2500AU but compare that to the cost of the 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH - $5500AU.

03-23-2012, 05:55 PM	#43
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491 Original Poster

03-23-2012, 10:15 PM	#44
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Jogiba - as we all know if a 645D sensor was constructed with the same technologies that are used on the D800's sensor the 645D would be on top - by a significant margin, the fact that the 645D is still able to be compared to the D800 with old sensor technology speaks volumes.