Women will hate D800 *full size image*

[stve]

What is perceived as over-sharpening is likely a result of the 36 MP: in theory, the higher the MP, the more the resolution, and the more the detail. A camera’s imaging is not gender specific. If it shows an image that is less than optimal for women, it will do the same for men.

I would suggest looking at Digital Photography (Dpreview) Reviews “First Impressions: Using the Nikon D800”. Please note that the reviewer uses an very old lens, adapted to use with modern DSLRs.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1690347434/first-impressions-using-the-nikon-d800

One other thing, iMagic stated that her eyes look out of focus. It would be interesting to know what aperture was used. The Dpreview article indicates that the camera is “very unforgiving” for even minor focusing errors when the lens is wide open.

iMagik has updated his post

To me her eyes look out of focus. Not enough lip hair touch ups lol.

UPDATE. Sorry I looked at it on my ipad and it didnt look too sharp. On my real monitor though..... in the words of George Takei "ohhh myyy". Looks like a good camera for landscape and a lots of post work camera for studio. Other shots on that website are similar detail.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 10:49:28 PM by iMagic »

Open the photo yourself & view at original size her eyes are tack sharp
http://www.bezergheanu.com/TestNikon/Test-Nikon-D800/22087378_KqWcB7#!i=1762732879&k=5k9zTrt

 

[CanineCandidsByL]

Maybe this sort of ugly reality can stop the mindless megapixel war.

Nah. It didn't stop HDTV, makeup artists were taken to task even on the news, and now they are already talking 4k.

Megapixels will go on until we can actually see DNA, which we can then modify to produce pixel perfect people.

 

[V8Beast]

I have 130 lady goats - would you like to come to a speed dating session

My family portrait

I must admit that is a rather tempting offer

 

[V8Beast]

I enjoy the troll posts because I can replace D800 with 5DmkII and D700 with 5DmkIII and find the priests of low light swapped places with the megapixel crusaders. It is fun to watch, and yup, goes for all the canon guys that are now the priests of the low light religion! Watch if canon makes a 30+MP camera and how suddenly, 22MP is too little and OMG how did we manage with that 8).

I find this humorous as well. The D800 is a fabulous camera, but it's just not the camera for me. It doesn't change the fact that it's the current King of 35mm resolution and DR.

Personally, I was always envious of the D700's balance of speed, high ISO performance, and AF. Consequently, since the specs of the 5DIII are more of what I expected from the D800 (high resolution at the expense of speed), and the specs of the D800 are of what I expected from the 5DIII (less resolution and more FPS), I'm not complaining

 

[briansquibb]

I am half looking at a real MF - the D800 would be just a faux MF. Would rather have a 80Mb MF

 

[poias]

I am half looking at a real MF - the D800 would be just a faux MF. Would rather have a 80Mb MF

Good luck finding that for $3000.

D800 is a killer in resolution, DR, and even low light... its resolution and DR compares to MFDBs and its low light performance compares with D4. What more can you ask for?

 

[briansquibb]

I am half looking at a real MF - the D800 would be just a faux MF. Would rather have a 80Mb MF

Good luck finding that for $3000.

D800 is a killer in resolution, DR, and even low light... its resolution and DR compares to MFDBs and its low light performance compares with D4. What more can you ask for?

Price is not the issue - I would expect somewhere in the region of $35k which is what you have to pay for the best.

I dont think in my remotist dreams think that a 36mp D800 will compare with a 80mp MF.

Low light performance? Iso 200 is fine for me with a MF. You dont shoot sports with a MF

 

[poias]

I am half looking at a real MF - the D800 would be just a faux MF. Would rather have a 80Mb MF

Good luck finding that for $3000.

D800 is a killer in resolution, DR, and even low light... its resolution and DR compares to MFDBs and its low light performance compares with D4. What more can you ask for?

Price is not the issue - I would expect somewhere in the region of $35k which is what you have to pay for the best.

I dont think in my remotist dreams think that a 36mp D800 will compare with a 80mp MF.

Low light performance? Iso 200 is fine for me with a MF. You dont shoot sports with a MF

Sorry, but it was YOU who compared D800 to MFDB. Highlighted above in red, you said that you were "half looking at a MF". That is comparing, still.

 

[Orion]

please excuse if the link has been posted already, but here is the link to all the images, including the original posted in this thread:

http://www.bezergheanu.com/TestNikon/Test-Nikon-D800/22087378_KqWcB7#!i=1763885715&k=BN6QTnD

hover your mouse over the larger image to see the list and select "original"

The images DO appear heavily sharpened, due to some artifacts you see on the monitor but not so much when you view from your desktop. . . I just got the 5DmkIII, and this D800 is also a very good camera. I hope you all get to enjoy your camera and not worry too much about these things as Canon is also comming out with a more MP system later in the year.

The 5D mkIII is amazing to ME because I have just swithced from the 30D I am as happy as can be! Be happy for me and forget all this talk about too sharp v resolution v iso . . . heck if it's too sharp, then you can fix that . . . . if ISO is a problem, realize that it is not , and if you need a greater resolution due to the rare need to print on museum canvas to cover a wall or for advertising on a side of a building or a bus, then by all means get a D800 or wait for Canon's response. . . . or you can realize that the need for such high res is only viable for professional MFesque work where the clients think they need such high MP camera to meet their needs. . . . they need smooth skin tones, with no hair anyway

P.S. some of you are being VERy mean to this poor girl that may have the heart of a dove. . . .

 

[briansquibb]

I am half looking at a real MF - the D800 would be just a faux MF. Would rather have a 80Mb MF

Good luck finding that for $3000.

D800 is a killer in resolution, DR, and even low light... its resolution and DR compares to MFDBs and its low light performance compares with D4. What more can you ask for?

Price is not the issue - I would expect somewhere in the region of $35k which is what you have to pay for the best.

I dont think in my remotist dreams think that a 36mp D800 will compare with a 80mp MF.

Low light performance? Iso 200 is fine for me with a MF. You dont shoot sports with a MF

Sorry, but it was YOU who compared D800 to MFDB. Highlighted above in red, you said that you were "half looking at a MF". That is comparing, still.

What hogwash you talk. I can only assume you are a Nikon fanboy who is convinced that the D800 is better than a 80Mb MF. Read the other threads in this forum and it will be apparent that it doesn't hold a candle to a good MF. The only valid point you have made is that at $3000 it is cheap for 36Mb

 

[poias]

I am half looking at a real MF - the D800 would be just a faux MF. Would rather have a 80Mb MF

Good luck finding that for $3000.

D800 is a killer in resolution, DR, and even low light... its resolution and DR compares to MFDBs and its low light performance compares with D4. What more can you ask for?

Price is not the issue - I would expect somewhere in the region of $35k which is what you have to pay for the best.

I dont think in my remotist dreams think that a 36mp D800 will compare with a 80mp MF.

Low light performance? Iso 200 is fine for me with a MF. You dont shoot sports with a MF

Sorry, but it was YOU who compared D800 to MFDB. Highlighted above in red, you said that you were "half looking at a MF". That is comparing, still.

What hogwash you talk. I can only assume you are a Nikon fanboy who is convinced that the D800 is better than a 80Mb MF. Read the other threads in this forum and it will be apparent that it doesn't hold a candle to a good MF. The only valid point you have made is that at $3000 it is cheap for 36Mb

Sorry, again, but you are the only only one who is constantly talking about "80Mb(sic) MF". I simply think D800 is very detailed, hence this post. Comparing it against larger format systems is what you are doing.

Me thinks you are a little insecure.

 

[takoman46]

I don't think it takes a 36mp image to pick up the amount of fuzz this lady has on her face because you can make it out very clearly at the fitted scale to browser window. Any reasonably good DSLR sensor would probably be able to pick that up lol. I'd say 5DmkII or III for sure and maybe even a 7D or 60D. I think a more challenging example of detail should be presented.

 

[briansquibb]

I am half looking at a real MF - the D800 would be just a faux MF. Would rather have a 80Mb MF

Good luck finding that for $3000.

D800 is a killer in resolution, DR, and even low light... its resolution and DR compares to MFDBs and its low light performance compares with D4. What more can you ask for?

Price is not the issue - I would expect somewhere in the region of $35k which is what you have to pay for the best.

I dont think in my remotist dreams think that a 36mp D800 will compare with a 80mp MF.

Low light performance? Iso 200 is fine for me with a MF. You dont shoot sports with a MF

Sorry, but it was YOU who compared D800 to MFDB. Highlighted above in red, you said that you were "half looking at a MF". That is comparing, still.

What hogwash you talk. I can only assume you are a Nikon fanboy who is convinced that the D800 is better than a 80Mb MF. Read the other threads in this forum and it will be apparent that it doesn't hold a candle to a good MF. The only valid point you have made is that at $3000 it is cheap for 36Mb

Sorry, again, but you are the only only one who is constantly talking about "80Mb(sic) MF". I simply think D800 is very detailed, hence this post. Comparing it against larger format systems is what you are doing.

Me thinks you are a little insecure.

'Constantly talkng about the 80Mb MF'. I mentioned it once and you wade in with personal attack and now you wade in with yet another unfounded personal comment.

You might think the D800 is very detailed but you clearly haven't wandered into the MF world yet you state

D800 is a killer in resolution, DR, and even low light... its resolution and DR compares to MFDBs and its low light performance compares with D4. What more can you ask for?

Well I have seen the output from a 80Mb MF first hand at the recent UK show - a wall sized print of outstanding detail. Personally I think the initial portrait is ghastly and doesn't show the D800 at its best.

And now I am getting attacked for 'half looking' at a MF. Rather like abusing someone who looks at a Ferrari having seen a Mustang.

 

[Canon-F1]

i don´t know why this forum is called EOS BODIES.. when all the nikon stuff is posted here.

im not interested in reading about nikon when i visit the EOS BODIES forum....

why is no mod moving this thread?

 

[marekjoz]

i don´t know why this forum is called EOS BODIES.. when all the nikon stuff is posted here.

im not interested in reading about nikon when i visit the EOS BODIES forum....

why is no mod moving this thread?

Well... Competition is good, comparing competitive products is good and seing beyond borders of EOS bodies is also good as one can imagine what will achieve after Canon has released competing product in the future. It's as about EOS as about photography in general. Personally I don't see anything inapropriate in this.

 

[poias]

i don´t know why this forum is called EOS BODIES.. when all the nikon stuff is posted here.

im not interested in reading about nikon when i visit the EOS BODIES forum....

why is no mod moving this thread?

I can only speak for myself, but I think D800 is getting noticed is because it THE best camera for fraction of the cost (i.e. value!) with off the charts (literally) performance.

Look at more detail:

http://pcfoto.biz/images/testovi/Nikon_D800E_preview/048_T10p_galerija_n70-200_f2-8gVRII_jpg.jpg

 

[jrista]

i don´t know why this forum is called EOS BODIES.. when all the nikon stuff is posted here.

im not interested in reading about nikon when i visit the EOS BODIES forum....

why is no mod moving this thread?

I can only speak for myself, but I think D800 is getting noticed is because it THE best camera for fraction of the cost (i.e. value!) with off the charts (literally) performance.

Look at more detail:

http://pcfoto.biz/images/testovi/Nikon_D800E_preview/048_T10p_galerija_n70-200_f2-8gVRII_jpg.jpg

Personally, I find there to be far too much detail in that image. I like a pretty gal as much as the next guy, but I only really want to see that much up-close detail if I'm up close in person because that pretty gal is my girlfriend or wife. Assuming I purchased the D800 for its ability to print larger with more detail...yikes! I wouldn't want to print photos of ANYONE with THAT much detail and sharpness...its almost a crime.

I much prefer portraits taken with lenses with a bit of spherical aberration (which is often the case with ultra-fast 50 primes), where a bit of soft focus smooths features and produces amazing boke.

 

[seekn]

i don´t know why this forum is called EOS BODIES.. when all the nikon stuff is posted here.

im not interested in reading about nikon when i visit the EOS BODIES forum....

why is no mod moving this thread?

I can only speak for myself, but I think D800 is getting noticed is because it THE best camera for fraction of the cost (i.e. value!) with off the charts (literally) performance.

Look at more detail:

http://pcfoto.biz/images/testovi/Nikon_D800E_preview/048_T10p_galerija_n70-200_f2-8gVRII_jpg.jpg

I agree too much resolution can be unflattering. You are kind of misguided I think in your statement. The "best" camera for what application? You really think it will be the best camera for sports? weddings? travel/journalistic photos? I highly doubt it. You have a case if you say it may be the best camera for its value for "specific" uses - which I think even Nikon would agree with.

 

[rpt]

P.S. some of you are being VERy mean to this poor girl that may have the heart of a dove. . . .

+100!

I think she was very brave to have her photo published. Let us be caring about what we write.

 

[briansquibb]

P.S. some of you are being VERy mean to this poor girl that may have the heart of a dove. . . .

+100!

I think she was very brave to have her photo published. Let us be caring about what we write.

It is the snapper that has the problem ;D ;D