i have bought the trey ratcliff new zealand tutorial.
on that are original files from the D800.
i honestly don´t know what the fuss is about.
when i look at the original NEF files included i see nothing that is breathtaking.
all images he has on that DVD don´t show a better image quality then a 5D MK3 or 6D.
the borders look mushy.
and i guess the MP are wasted because his lenses can not resolve.
i can hardly see any more details in his images then i see in 5D MK3 images.
his images are not bad, thats not what im saying.
i am just saying that, looking at the images from acknowledged and prominent pro, i see nothing that makes me wish to have a D800 over a 5D MK3.
this is just useless talk. 36 MP or 22 MP will not make a big difference in most cases... not even at 1:1.
It takes a lot of energy to explain away the benefits of Nikon / Sony's 36Mp resolution with a wide dynamic range.
well from what you guys make of the sony sensor.. IT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS BY LOOKING AT IMAGES... not?
when you have to explain the benefits of the sony sensor .. they can´t be worth much to someone who is interested in photograpyh... and not gear talk.
It's very easy to see the benefits of a sensor that has higher resolution, wider dynamic range, better color resolution, transitions. if you know where to look for.
ah, so now im just not able to see it because i lack the technical skills.
well im doing photography for more then two decades and im a MF user too.
what books should i read to get it?
i don´t speak about shadow banding or DR.
above i speak mostly about MEGAPIXELS.
megapixel that´s what this thread is about and something a lot of you guys here are obsessed with.
im absolutely for better DR!
and even more for cleaner shadows that can be pushed even further.
it´s just not that the D800 makes such a big difference as some people wants us to believe.
Can I have please at least 56MP from Canon with S/N value= 14,4 stop DR at base iso and better color resolution
well get my phase one or a hassi when you need that.