Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Geoffc" data-source="post: 314029" data-attributes="member: 8705">I think one of the problems people have with the 800 is all that resolution. Many people complain that going from a 12mp D300 to a D800 the images are not as sharp. I did this myself initially, as the inclination is to view at 100% in Lightroom. The 800 has enough extra resolution to show any weaknesses in the photograph as taken. You are also looking at something almost twice as big.If you down sample to 16 or 12 mp the images look a whole lot different and provide a fairer comparison. You can't view 100% images of 12, 16 and 36mp at the same distance and draw a fair comparison. Also, noise reduces a lot during this process.I'm only saying this as it took me about a year before I understood my D800.I'm not disagreeing that the D4 AF is superior as I'm sure it is, I'm just wondering if this is apples for apples.What do you think about this observation?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Geoffc, post: 314029, member: 8705"] I think one of the problems people have with the 800 is all that resolution. Many people complain that going from a 12mp D300 to a D800 the images are not as sharp. I did this myself initially, as the inclination is to view at 100% in Lightroom. The 800 has enough extra resolution to show any weaknesses in the photograph as taken. You are also looking at something almost twice as big. If you down sample to 16 or 12 mp the images look a whole lot different and provide a fairer comparison. You can't view 100% images of 12, 16 and 36mp at the same distance and draw a fair comparison. Also, noise reduces a lot during this process. I'm only saying this as it took me about a year before I understood my D800. I'm not disagreeing that the D4 AF is superior as I'm sure it is, I'm just wondering if this is apples for apples. What do you think about this observation? [/QUOTE]

Verification