A 46 MP DSLR??? Crazy!!

A

aZuMi

Senior Member
I heard about this...and Canon dropped MK2's price even lower to stop Canon guys from switching over (screwing over the 2nd hand market).

I wonder what Nikon's answer for these Canon rumors..
 
S

stmv

Senior Member
see, thank goodness for competition! I am sure that Nikon will have some D4x around the corner, who knows, maybe a real 50 million camera, but to do so, they will have to really pump up the processing engine to not inpact the frame rate.

That will be the killer for them, but at that price, they should be able to have two processors in the body, and split the work load. I am sure that the next exceed processor will be a multi core engine, just like the PC engines of today. Its all about bandwidth at this point.

For me,, I am going to sit back and enjoy the D800, and wait and wait, for Nikon to improve upon this awesome camera. I predict another 5 years or more before a D900 comes along that beats this package.
 
S

Somersetscott

Senior Member
Haha you've gotta love some of pretentious banter on that website :D

Well, all technologies are advancing - fair played if they can pull it off, it'll be sky-high out of the 'normal persons' price range :(

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
 
T

TedG954

Senior Member
If you actually, and sincerely, require more than 12MP, then you should probably be able to write off your equipment as a business expense.

Buying what you can, versus what you need, is what the jumbo MP crowd is appealing to. Other than a professional billboard photographer, who would need 46MP, yet alone 64MP? If you have a $30,000 lens, then the need has no relevance. Obviously, money is no object and the competition requires you to grab every advantage you can. Is that you? Are you a successful professional that budgets for equipment? If you're not successful, a new camera with more MP isn't going to make you solvent.

It's easy to get caught up in the race. The D600 is a good bargain and has more resolution than I'll ever need in my entire life.

I'm a hobby oriented photographer. If I made money using a camera, I might be able to justify 24MP. After that, it's just "mine's bigger than yours".

Actual photo results are what count. Not the equipment you can afford.

Be sure to read my disclaimer below.
 
P

pedroj

Senior Member
TedG954 said:
If you actually, and sincerely, require more than 12MP, then you should probably be able to write off your equipment as a business expense.

Buying what you can, versus what you need, is what the jumbo MP crowd is appealing to. Other than a professional billboard photographer, who would need 46MP, yet alone 64MP? If you have a $30,000 lens, then the need has no relevance. Obviously, money is no object and the competition requires you to grab every advantage you can. Is that you? Are you a successful professional that budgets for equipment? If you're not successful, a new camera with more MP isn't going to make you solvent.

It's easy to get caught up in the race. The D600 is a good bargain and has more resolution than I'll ever need in my entire life.

I'm a hobby oriented photographer. If I made money using a camera, I might be able to justify 24MP. After that, it's just "mine's bigger than yours".

Actual photo results are what count. Not the equipment you can afford.

Be sure to read my disclaimer below.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of "MINES BIGGER THEN YOURS" on all photography forums....

I can still make good money with my D300 and the lens that I have...
 
B

Billy Y.

Senior Member
I wouldn't even want 46 megapixels, the D800's files are large enough, and i don't mean print size, I mean storage size. IMO 24-36 is plenty, unless you want Medium format.
 
S

stmv

Senior Member
I would like to see more emphasis on dynamic range, and function such as raw HDR, and auto focus stacking (that would be so cool), and then even built in 3D assist, but I will say that the D800 reached my sharpness needs, where no longer is sharpening as much as an issue, just like the D700 reduced the amount of noise reduction.

but,,, still not perfect, I still find plenty of shots with noise issues.
 
Photowyzard

Photowyzard

Senior Member
You knew this was going to happen, just a matter of time. Really, I feel the ship came and went and Canon wasn't on it. Wait until they get a load of the processing and storage required for the massive files!

So, what is next? I shudder to think. The d800 has taxed my computers to the limit and obsoleted two of my systems. It is eating my storage space as fast as I can pour a glass of water and they are pushing the envelope even further.

Local processing shops only want 8mb files for prints and the pro service shops want $39-$50 for 8x10's in this league.

I think it is all starting to get to the point where our eyes are bigger than our stomachs!
 
B

Billy Y.

Senior Member
Photowyzard said:
You knew this was going to happen, just a matter of time. Really, I feel the ship came and went and Canon wasn't on it. Wait until they get a load of the processing and storage required for the massive files!

So, what is next? I shudder to think. The d800 has taxed my computers to the limit and obsoleted two of my systems. It is eating my storage space as fast as I can pour a glass of water and they are pushing the envelope even further.
Click to expand...

Art, you just have to be more liberal about not saving the mediocre shots. I actually like that about it. I have 1000's of 8 Megapixel photos stored that I will never use, and for what? I am only keeping what I feel is a good, or a possible sale shot now, but still, it will add up in the long haul. 46 is un-needed for most people - I mean really, but that is just my opinion.
 
S

stmv

Senior Member
actually, the rate of data storage and higher processing speed computers have kept up. With the USB3 connection and the current generation processors keep up well with the D800.

I can upload the pictures as quickly as my D700 with the USB 3.0. Luckly, my notebook was 4 years old and worn out, so, it was an excuse for an upgrade, but 500 dollars buys a nice notebook nowadays.
 
Photowyzard

Photowyzard

Senior Member
stmv said:
actually, the rate of data storage and higher processing speed computers have kept up. With the USB3 connection and the current generation processors keep up well with the D800.

I can upload the pictures as quickly as my D700 with the USB 3.0. Luckly, my notebook was 4 years old and worn out, so, it was an excuse for an upgrade, but 500 dollars buys a nice notebook nowadays.
Click to expand...


Only with well equipped and current equipment. I have a MacBook Pro I just bought and it handles the operation well. All prior gear... useless. Way too slow.

If you buy one of these heavy mp cameras, be prepared to pay the price for more ram, faster systems and lots of HD space!
 
Photowyzard

Photowyzard

Senior Member
Billy Y. said:
Art, you just have to be more liberal about not saving the mediocre shots. I actually like that about it. I have 1000's of 8 Megapixel photos stored that I will never use, and for what? I am only keeping what I feel is a good, or a possible sale shot now, but still, it will add up in the long haul. 46 is un-needed for most people - I mean really, but that is just my opinion.
Click to expand...


I hear you Billy, but it is so difficult to get rid of ALL the images that are so-so. I did a huge culling last year and still, I have tons of images.

My cut off on trashing is soft focus. If an image isn't tack sharp, I typically trash it. I also trash poor exposures. Otherwise, I have a hard time with the D key! LOL
 
Top