[interested_observer]

For everyone else, there’s no question the D800 can actually get those pixels to show up in the final product (assuming your final product is a big print – they’re going to be wasted posting on your Facebook page). But you’d better have some really good glass in front of it. I don’t think the 28-300 superzooms are going to cut it with this camera.

• LensRentals.com - “D” resolution tests

[Coeurdechene]

Yep...Gold glass, zeiss glass, and we'll have to see how other third party lenses behave if we want to squeeze all the potential out of the d800 sensor. If we need a versatile lens, won't enlarge, etc the d800 will do just fine (never worse than the d700 for a determined viewing size)...i personally won't put any superzoom in fron of it, only the 2,8 zoom and later some primes.

[jogiba]

Why would anyone buy a FF DSLR only to put a consumer 28-300 superzoom on it ?

[rawr]

Does anyone do a K-mount to Nikon adapter?
Be interesting to see some of the FA's or other good K glass working on the D800.

[westmill]

Why would anyone buy a FF DSLR only to put a consumer 28-300 superzoom on it ?

For the same reason anyone would buy a superzoom in
the first place I would imagine lol
Why would anyone buy one for four thirds or APSC ?
In fact a 28-300 makes far more sense on FF than it would on four thirds since the wide angle end would
become a 56mm.
I would never use a superzoom full stop lol
but I can understand the people that do.

[jsherman999]

• LensRentals.com - “D” resolution tests

More and more I'm distrusting that lensrentals guy - I'm seeing evidence that he writes his columns to try to help inoculate his business against refunds (ie "my lens front-focuses? Myth!") and now this... (hint: rental fees on higher-end lenses are more.)

The fact is that any lens you'd shoot on the D700 is going to resolve more on the D800. You will have more detailed images in every respect. If you do have focus errors, camera motion blur or lens softness, it will only be more visible on the D800 if you zoom to 100% to see it - and then, the D700 will not resolve more, it just will be hiding those faults with the bigger pixels.

At the same display and print sizes, the D800 will never look worse than the D700 shot under the same conditions, and in fact will look better (more detailed) in every situation where you're not severely shutter-speed restricted. When you are severely shutter-speed restricted, they will look the same as D700 at same display sizes - never worse. Saying using less than Zeiss lenses 'limits the camera' is almost misleading, because it's so open to misinterpretation.

Consider this $200 lens MTF scores plotted on the D3 (12MP) vs. the D3x (24MP) :



Diffraction isn't really even as much of an issue - see how the lens at about f/13 on the 24MP sensor resolves as much as the lens at it's peak capability (f/5.6) on the 12MP sensor?

To maximize the D800 sensor, you would want to maximize everything - lens, tripod, mirror-up, etc. People read that, and translate it to "I need the best glass, or my D800 images will suck!" That is simply false, a misinterpretation. To get better (higher detail) shots with the D800, you don't have to do anything different than before if you don't want to - physics takes care of it for you John Sheehy and 'bobn2' (the guy who developed the sensorsgen site) and others have been battling this "you need the best lenses or things will suck" myth for weeks now.

(And regarding that 28-300 - I wouldn't use it because I hate variable-aperture zooms, but there's a guy who wrote a two-article user-review on the D800 last week linked on dpreview, and he was shooting that lens, among others - and got pretty impressive results)

EDIT:

Roger did graph the D700 in the first set, then dropped it for the rest of the tests - and his results illustrate again how every lens will get 'better' with more MP



.

[Coeurdechene]

Does anyone do a K-mount to Nikon adapter?

there is..but it incorporates glass that degrades IQ...Nikon is NOT a good system to adapt lenses..it has to do with the register distances...
That's why most people wanting to adapt other brands lenses go with Canon instead.

[westmill]

Just out of curiosity Ive just checked on photozone and they have only tested 7 lenses on the K5 so far. Out of the seven tested, only two lenses are scratching the surface of the resolution limits of the K5. One is the 70mm 2.4 ltd and beleive it or not the other is the cheap as chips 35mm 2.4 AL lens. On the Nikon side, loads have been tested on the D7000. Ive noticed lenses like the 85mm 1.8 that was reaching the resolution limits of the the 10milion pixel D200 doesnt reach the same heights on the 16milion pixel D7000.
If they print a chart showing the full resolution testing the D800 Ive an Idea there is going be a lot of space at the top lol ... Cool !

[tuco]

I don't see why it would need better glass than any other camera with the same pixel density.

[mccook]

Either way, it sure looks like a good problem to have. Dear God, I hope we see Pentax use that sensor just as it went with the D700-K5 scenario. With a Pentax version of the "DX mode" it would be like having a free K5 inside.

[reeftool]

If I follow his argument, the old lenses and cheap lenses I purchased in garage sales and look fine on my K10D should look worse on the K5 because the superior sensor out resolves the lens. Not true. All my shots look better on the K5 with every lens I own so I don't think the guys argument is going to hold up. He's in the lens renting business and probably sells a lot of them too. Anybody with common sense knows a better lens = better picture. Based on my experience which I will admit is limited in this regard, a better camera isn't going to make a well focused, properly exposed shot without motion blur or shake look worse. Really good lenses like the DA 15 and DA 40 are killer combos on the K5 but shots from my cheap Sigma 70-300 look super too.

[westmill]

If I follow his argument, the old lenses and cheap lenses I purchased in garage sales and look fine on my K10D should look worse on the K5 because the superior sensor out resolves the lens. Not true. All my shots look better on the K5 with every lens I own so I don't think the guys argument is going to hold up. He's in the lens renting business and probably sells a lot of them too. Anybody with common sense knows a better lens = better picture. Based on my experience which I will admit is limited in this regard, a better camera isn't going to make a well focused, properly exposed shot without motion blur or shake look worse. Really good lenses like the DA 15 and DA 40 are killer combos on the K5 but shots from my cheap Sigma 70-300 look super too.

Having a better sensor cant make your lenses worse, only bring out what they have. Its nice to be able to use and see what a quality lens is capable of though. K5 does that nicely

[JinDesu]

If I follow his argument, the old lenses and cheap lenses I purchased in garage sales and look fine on my K10D should look worse on the K5 because the superior sensor out resolves the lens. Not true. All my shots look better on the K5 with every lens I own so I don't think the guys argument is going to hold up. He's in the lens renting business and probably sells a lot of them too. Anybody with common sense knows a better lens = better picture. Based on my experience which I will admit is limited in this regard, a better camera isn't going to make a well focused, properly exposed shot without motion blur or shake look worse. Really good lenses like the DA 15 and DA 40 are killer combos on the K5 but shots from my cheap Sigma 70-300 look super too.

A sensor that resolves more can make a lens look worse - but that's at pixel peeping. A scaled down picture from the D800 vs a D700 will look the same, or maybe better on the D800 side depending on how it's scaled down. A blown up printed picture will look better on the D800 than on the D700. But people who are used to low MP cameras and pixel peep will see their lines softer on weaker glass.

But I'm sure D700 users aren't the type to misinterpret it anyways.

Side note: Going from 10MP to 16MP isn't that big of a difference, but going from 12MP to 36MP is a bit more of a difference. I believe the statement was, you need 3x the MP to have twice the size of a picture of something like that.

[Smeggypants]

• LensRentals.com - “D” resolution tests

What a load of BS

[Rondec]

More and more I'm distrusting that lensrentals guy - I'm seeing evidence that he writes his columns to try to help inoculate his business against refunds (ie "my lens front-focuses? Myth!") and now this... (hint: rental fees on higher-end lenses are more.)

The fact is that any lens you'd shoot on the D700 is going to resolve more on the D800. You will have more detailed images in every respect. If you do have focus errors, camera motion blur or lens softness, it will only be more visible on the D800 if you zoom to 100% to see it - and then, the D700 will not resolve more, it just will be hiding those faults with the bigger pixels.

At the same display and print sizes, the D800 will never look worse than the D700 shot under the same conditions, and in fact will look better (more detailed) in every situation where you're not severely shutter-speed restricted. When you are severely shutter-speed restricted, they will look the same as D700 at same display sizes - never worse. Saying using less than Zeiss lenses 'limits the camera' is almost misleading, because it's so open to misinterpretation.

Consider this $200 lens MTF scores plotted on the D3 (12MP) vs. the D3x (24MP) :



Diffraction isn't really even as much of an issue - see how the lens at about f/13 on the 24MP sensor resolves as much as the lens at it's peak capability (f/5.6) on the 12MP sensor?

To maximize the D800 sensor, you would want to maximize everything - lens, tripod, mirror-up, etc. People read that, and translate it to "I need the best glass, or my D800 images will suck!" That is simply false, a misinterpretation. To get better (higher detail) shots with the D800, you don't have to do anything different than before if you don't want to - physics takes care of it for you John Sheehy and 'bobn2' (the guy who developed the sensorsgen site) and others have been battling this "you need the best lenses or things will suck" myth for weeks now.

(And regarding that 28-300 - I wouldn't use it because I hate variable-aperture zooms, but there's a guy who wrote a two-article user-review on the D800 last week linked on dpreview, and he was shooting that lens, among others - and got pretty impressive results)

EDIT:

Roger did graph the D700 in the first set, then dropped it for the rest of the tests - and his results illustrate again how every lens will get 'better' with more MP



.

I don't think his point was that the D800 won't out-resolve a D700, of course it will, even with crappy glass. At the same time, it is clear that you will notice soft borders and corners a lot quicker with the D800 than you do with a D700, particularly with wide angle lenses.

I noticed this when going from a K100 to a K10 and again to K20. There just were some lenses I couldn't shoot wide open any more and I ended up getting better glass as a result. Would they have been fine at web sizes? Sure. But, I am a pixel peeper and not particularly ashamed of it.