Photoclubalpha

"Expectations Surpassed: The 36.3-Megapixel Nikon D800 Is The Multimedia HD-SLR That Shatters Conventional Resolution Barriers For Maximum Fidelity"
http://press.nikonusa.com/post/2012/02/ ... -fidelity/
Brochure
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d8 ... 00_28p.pdf

The D800 looks to be a very impressive camera, I like the DX 15.3MP mode is available as well, it means you have probably close to two cameras in one. And it looks like the LV mode is a design that makes sense, shoot with a non battery consuming 100% optical VF or choose rear screen LV, nice one Nikon. (don't know if it has peaking though)
Greg

Time to listen to "connoisseurs"...
When 10MP sensors evolved, they said it's wrong and that 6 was enough.
...Then they said 12 is enough...
... MP race is wrong, 16 MP is enough...
And now Nikon "has the guts" to reveal the D800... (Sony sensor, right?)

Basically, the sensors must have higher resolution than the best of lenses provide. Only this way the sensor may register all what is there without unnecessary losses. And then you obviously don't need AA filters.

That said, you may not need that many megapixels in the output image. So having some variable binning/downsampling directly on the sensor chip is an absolute must. So you could choose to have a full 400Mp once in a minute, or 6Mp at a very high FPS rate, or anything in between. Yet the absence of AA filter means that even the 6Mp output would have higher real resolution than some 10Mp sensor with AA filter were ever able to produce.

I see that Nikon claim it is a Nikon developed sensor. http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikonD800 if you can handle the amount of ads and stuff on that site that infest the bandwidth that you are paying for, I can’t for very long.
Greg

Actually I find 6mp is enough for "most" of what I do

On the Nikon it's a strong camera so much so it's got Canon users seriously worried, they're getting out-gunned quite a lot recently and long overdue D400 will complete the pain for Canon. Canon's CEO is going too I'm sure they will fight back as they always do.

Personally I neither have the funds nor the desire for such a camera, but some will and it's going to sell well. For it's price it overnight makes the 645D irrelevant and hugely overpriced. As for the FF serious bodies I doubt anyone has the capacity to challenge Nikon bar Canon. Pentax forget it they don't have the FF glass to even try, as for Sony they will find their SLT strategy sorely out of touch with the needs of this type of buyer. And as that's a year away or more they're out of the game effectively. They could bounce back with a cheaper FF body that is good..but this is what happens when you let your FF models get outdated and don't update them.

Sony could easily update the A900 with a better sensor, and beef it up. It's again a lack of consistency from them that makes them a far less attractive option than they should be.

bfitzgerald wrote:
Sony could easily update the A900 with a better sensor, and beef it up. It's again a lack of consistency from them that makes them a far less attractive option than they should be.

Agreed! They could just stuff this same sensor into the 900 and have a 950 that would be an instant success, or call it a 930 and add video and all the latest wiz-bang gimicks for the 950.

Dusty

Exactly! Not hard to do really is it?
No need to do anything radical with the body design (bar a few tweaks and probably a better top LCD)
Update the sensor, shove live view and video in there..fiddle with a few bits extra and bingo competitive body that would likely do quite well.

Also notice Nikon still have the built in flash a trick Sony missed IMO with the A900