Too many mega pixels ???

[Deleted User]

Yes but you are changing the actual frame size. so like DX and 4 3

PB_PM

Yes but you are changing the actual frame size. so like DX and 4 3

Ummm what? The different sized jpeg outputs have nothing to do with frame size. The jpegs are simply down-sampled from the original 36.2MP image.

The D800 also has crop modes, which support RAW, but that is not the same thing that we have been talking about.

Ade

I don't believe Canon sRAW / mRAW files are made from downsized TIFFs.

TIFF files are "fully processed" in the sense that the Bayer image data have been demosaiced (converted to RGB) at a certain bit-depth, white balanced, and has a gamma curve applied. Other image processing steps are then applied as well (sharpening, saturation control, etc.)

As far as I know, sRAW files are still "raw" and have not been processed like the above. Rather, they are just reduced resolution version of the full RAW data. How exactly this reduction is achieved is not known (Canon proprietary) -- e.g., whether they use a form of line skipping, or maybe pixel binning, etc.

Personally, I don't think I'd use sRAW even if Nikon implements something similar -- but I can see why people would, especially if one can get extra FPS while still having RAW data to work with.

snakebunk

So you cannot get a smaller size nef file out of the D800 when shooting in FX?

Ade

No reduced resolution option in FX, the way Canon sRAW works.

However, you can get smaller NEF files by using compression (both lossless or lossy) and by reducing the RAW bit depth from 14-bits to 12-bits.

With lossy compression, Nikon estimates 35-55% reduction in file size "with almost no effect in image quality".

tc88

But once you downsample, you've lost information, and once you eliminate part of the information, you can't keep the resolution or the DR.

Down sampling means losing resolution so that you can't print big. However, I believe DR can be kept. If anything, the noise should go down.

Personally, I don't think I'd use sRAW even if Nikon implements something similar -- but I can see why people would, especially if one can get extra FPS while still having RAW data to work with.

I'm of the same opinion. Seems that there is a population that asks for this, and Nikon can easily deal with it by just adding this software capability and be done.

Golf007sd

I have a D800 - I am not that happy with it. 36 Mpix is too much for me. just overkill.

So why on earth did you buy the body in the first place? Or was it a gift? If you are unhappy with it, by all means put it up for sale and get a body that will meet your needs. Problem solved...happiness obtained.

For me the most important aspect of an image captured is: low noise and DR. Thus, for me, in order to take full advantage of the my D4's DR, RAW is the true solution. In fact, larger sensor size, hence, bodies with large mega pixels..is not the driving force for me. Neither is storage...given the $/per Gig now and days.

It is important to note that: the photographer needs to have a good understanding of what he or she is shooting and what form the images will be views or distributed.

heartyfisher

I get quite frustrated when people keep comparing 12bit vs 14bit raw against 8 bit Jpg. It like comparing apples and oranges.. well actually it more like comparing Iron ore with a steel rod.

Just like a generic steel rod. When you talk about JPG you need some more qualification. A "fine" jpg with 97% compression vs a basic jpg with 70% compression is very different in quality. Jpg with 99% compresion can be practically just as good as TIFF/RAW depending on the method of compression used. (Yes there are different methods to compress JPG! )

Ok sorry rant over .. back to the normal programing please .. ;-)

Photobug

Donaldejose said:
They are saying they don't want all the negatives which go with a 36 megapixel sensor and they realize that for their use they will not really see any improvement in the image which offsets the negatives.

That is me and why I did not seriously consider the D800.

kanuck

I too was quite happy at 12mp. I still believe this is more than enough resolution especially if you have your processing techniques down to a science. Nikon's entire 12mp line D3, D700 and D3s cameras were simply outstanding in terms of noise, dynamic range and handling. However, that being said Nikon will never go back to this resolution territory again in the future. Even the D4 at 16mp will be increased next year. Just imagine the D4x sensor which is rumored to be anywhere from 48-60mp. Perhaps this will be Nikon finally entering the medium format niche with a body style to match although the D800 release already attracted many shooters from this format already I think.

kenadams

So why on earth did you buy the body in the first place? Or was it a gift? If you are unhappy with it, by all means put it up for sale and get a body that will meet your needs.

I don't think he's got very many options at hand there if build quality and autofocus and all are part of the equation. But that has been discussed at length here, right.

[Deleted User]

kstyle said:
Yes but you are changing the actual frame size. so like DX and 4 3

Ummm what? The different sized jpeg outputs have nothing to do with frame size. The jpegs are simply down-sampled from the original 36.2MP image.

The D800 also has crop modes, which support RAW, but that is not the same thing that we have been talking about.
- See more at: http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/1588/too-many-mega-pixels-/p2#sthash.tFUoAVQe.dpuf


Dude asked how to make a smaller raw file. Shoot it in a crop mode is the only way so it is exactly in line with what is being discussed here. Ummm what yourself.

[Deleted User]

kstyle said:
I have a D800 - I am not that happy with it. 36 Mpix is too much for me. just overkill.


So why on earth did you buy the body in the first place? Or was it a gift? If you are unhappy with it, by all means put it up for sale and get a body that will meet your needs. Problem solved...happiness obtained.

For me the most important aspect of an image captured is: low noise and DR. Thus, for me, in order to take full advantage of the my D4's DR, RAW is the true solution. In fact, larger sensor size, hence, bodies with large mega pixels..is not the driving force for me. Neither is storage...given the $/per Gig now and days.

It is important to note that: the photographer needs to have a good understanding of what he or she is shooting and what form the images will be views or distributed. - See more at: http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/1588/too-many-mega-pixels-/p2#sthash.tFUoAVQe.dpuf


How would I know that I didn't like it if I didn't own it. At first I really liked the camera but our relationship has become strained. When I do sell the camera I will very likely end up selling all the glass that goes with it and moving to canon. Until then I'm going to shoot the camera and tell my opinion of it when asked.

[Deleted User]

Isn't it true that you can capture different size NEF (RAW) images from the D800? I read this on the Nikon site:

umm what what?!?!?!?

Yes it is true. Using the image area options.
The D800/D800E offer four image area options: FX format (35.9 x 24.0 mm), 5:4 (30.0 x 24.0 mm), 1.2x (30.0 x 19.9 mm), and DX format (23.4 x 15.6 mm)


Only way to get smaller raw files. other than using compressed raw or whatever.

sevencrossing

Anyways. I have a D800 - I am not that happy with it. 36 Mpix is too much for me. just overkill.

Kstye
I have to admit to being puzzled by this
most people who claim 36 mp is too many, have never used a D800
but you have
Please can you give us a bit more information , what it is you don't like about the D800, why you feel 36Mpis is a overkill and why you feel you would be better of with a Canon

SquamishPhoto

Anyways. I have a D800 - I am not that happy with it. 36 Mpix is too much for me. just overkill.

Kstye
I have to admit to being puzzled by this
most people who claim 36 mp is too many, have never used a D800
but you have
Please can you give us a bit more information , what it is you don't like about the D800, why you feel 36Mpis is a overkill and why you feel you would be better of with a Canon

He's a troll. Ignore him.

Golf007sd

kstyle said:How would I know that I didn't like it if I didn't own it. At first I really liked the camera but our relationship has become strained. When I do sell the camera I will very likely end up selling all the glass that goes with it and moving to canon. Until then I'm going to shoot the camera and tell my opinion of it when asked.

Understanding what a Nikon gear have to offer can be best obtained by going to a camera store and getting your hands on it. Renting gear is also another option...try that before you buy another camera body. Being novice can cost you in more ways than one.

The D800 may not be the body for you...not sure what you photography style is. But given the time that you have spent with the D800, hopefully it will aid in your next move.

Good luck.

P.S. Please use the Quote button in responding to other posts. In addition, please try to keep it all one post vs one to each.

[Deleted User]

100% false. Going to the camera store and holding one tells you nothing. Renting one for a weekend will tell you only a little. Rent one fora month and you get a good feel for something. Being novice ? Keep your passive aggressive insults to yourself. Seriously that has nothing to do with this discussion other than to insult people you think are better than.

The d800 is still a great camera. 36 Mpix is still to much.

PB_PM

Don't feed the troll folks.

Golf007sd

100% false....Keep your passive aggressive insults to yourself....

Does the word "novice" insult you? Come, come, now....how old are thee? Lets put this into another context by asking you a question: do you ask a person you are interested in to marry you before getting to know that individual in the first place? Do you just walk in a clothing store grab what look good to you, without looking at the size or trying it on? These action would be in line with your thinking process....right?

Let me guess your response: "100% False."

Perhaps SquamishPhoto & PB_PM had it right....I'm done feeding.

[Deleted User]

Your comment was made in a passive aggressive way. I am just pointing this out. it appears that English is not your first language so maybe you didn't mean it like that but that is how it sounded. Your follow-up also comes off sounding passive aggressive. did you mean it to? nobody will ever know because now you will just label me as a troll. It would be kinda boring if my camera were as simple as a shirt. And it would be horrible if my camera were as complicated as a potential mate. Please come up with a better metaphor.

[Deleted User]

PB_PM
Don't feed the troll folks.

______________________________

Yes I am a troll because I pointed out that you can indeed end up with a smaller raw file by shooting in a crop mode. Which is exactly what the other poster was talking about.

Nothing trollish about that is there.

heartyfisher

Anyways. I have a D800 - I am not that happy with it. 36 Mpix is too much for me. just overkill.

Kstye
I have to admit to being puzzled by this
most people who claim 36 mp is too many, have never used a D800
but you have
Please can you give us a bit more information , what it is you don't like about the D800, why you feel 36Mpis is a overkill and why you feel you would be better of with a Canon

He's a troll. Ignore him.

He does not sound like a troll. His opinion seem legitimate to me .. for now.. ;-)

@Kstyle I am keen to hear how this 36mp is causing you problems..

sevencrossing

Kstye I am keen to hear how this 36mp is causing you problems.

+ 1
This the whole point of this tread

[Deleted User]

Thanks. I think my opinion is legit... I mean, it is only my opinion. Thing is, the 36 Mpix is not causing me any problems maybe some grief but no real problems.

36 Mpix is just slow. Huge files go slow. I am unhappy with the D800 for a list of reasons the sensor is the least of them but this thread is about the sensor so yeah.... It can be annoying at times. Coming from a D3s and D700, those things were so quick. It was like they matched the processor to the sensor in those body's and the processor in the D800 struggles to keep up with all the resolution.

I think the D800 high ISO noise performance is not that great as well. I just don't. to me it just sort of falls apart past 1600 ISO even with down sampling.

Also the line skipping. OMG this annoys the crap out of me. Had they gone with less resolution would liveview work better? had they spent less time engineering such a high resolution sensor would they have been able to engineer the liveview better? I don't know but this is a major annoyance.

There you have it.