D800E's power to resolve.

S

Silven

Senior Member
I am more and more amazed by how far THIS much resolution and a relative steady hand and sharp lens can go. The following picture was shot hand held on a D800E with a 70-300 VR F4.5-5.6 at 1/200 iso 100. The second one is the same only cropped 200%!!! While its not poster or calendar worthy it sure isn't offensive to the eyes right? Shots were only shrunk to 1000 pixels by 667 to fit here and signed. Nothing else was done to them. Cinnamon Black Bear A.JPGCinnamon Black Bear.JPG
Please anyone else feel free to post your own versions of this amazing power of the D800/E to resolve. :)
 
M

Mfrankfort

Senior Member
I think he's looking at you... I would have used a 800mm lens and stayed as far away from that thing as possible! haha. It really is a great camera. Wish I could afford one... feel free to send one my way.
 
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
In reality you could have got exactly the same result with a D7000. Same pixel density for the area actually used. You would have got an even better result with a D7100. The D800 and its 36 mp is only impressive when you actually use it all.

Just a thought.
 
S

Silven

Senior Member
Geoffc said:
In reality you could have got exactly the same result with a D7000. Same pixel density for the area actually used. You would have got an even better result with a D7100. The D800 and its 36 mp is only impressive when you actually use it all.

Just a thought.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, maybe in your reality but certainly not in mine. The D800/E has a 36 300 000 pixel count. The D7100 has a 24 100 000 pixel count. When you crop the 36 300 000 pixel count by the 1.5 crop factor of the D7100, (Not to mention the D7000 is even less.) you get 24 200 000. That's a 100 000 pixel difference which might not seem like much until you blow it up to 200%. There's NO WAY the pixel density is going to be the same. Even if I would have shot the pictures in DX mode, the D800E's image would still have had not only more pixel density but also greater detail. Use all of it or don't, the D800/E sensors are rated as the best sensors in a DSLR for a reason.
 
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
Your image is using only the DX portion of the sensor. Effectively the same as using the D800 in DX mode. The D800 is just slightly less MP than a D7000 in DX mode. The D7100 would cover this area with 24 mp which is greater than both.

How many pixels is your cropped image.

I have a D800 so I'm not trying to rubbish it, however I have given this subject a lot of thought over the last year including owning all of these cameras at some point. In reality my D800 only using the DX portion of the sensor is not that much better than my D300s. Doing the same thing with a 24mp D600 is worse than a D300.

This is not a crop factor debate, it's a sensor area used one.
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Silven- I know exactly what you mean.

I was going to start a thread for extreme cropping. That should put an interest to most since most of the cameras now including the entry level have 24 mp.
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Geoff is spot-on regarding the D800's pixel count. I know, I did extreme amounts of math when the D7100 came out and I was considering it to replace my D7000 as my "wildlife camera". While the pixel count math gave the D7100 the edge I wound up going with the D800 because of the fps vs. buffer size math was just too unfavorable for the way I shoot birds in flight.

Just remember, pixel count is only part of the equation when it comes to cropping. The rest has to do with the quality of the sensor with all those pixels. No doubt the D7100 has a fine sensor, and likely produces results that hold their own with the D800 for subjects like these, and if that's you needed it would win that contest. But I love having all those pixels on an FX when my subject fills the frame as well ... though my hard drive might complain. LOL
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
I love to see what full frame cameras can do in the right hands,the cropping possibility’s are obvious
but full frames are not within easy reach for a lot of people,not only the cost of the body but the glass they deserve to bring the best out.

Like so many my equipment has been decided on taking loads of things into consideration, the main one is budget,my crops may improve when I learn more about PP but i feel they are value for money.

The one below is raw converted to jpeg but no PP from me.


Nikon D7000
Sigma 120-400
iso 200
1/640 @ f6.3

DSC_0042.JPG


DSC_0042_01.JPG
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
Here is one from my D7100 with Nikon 70-300 VR, @ 260mm, f5.6 iso200, 1/200 sec shutter. Handheld.

I have increased the exposure in aperture by about 1 stop, as it was a bit dark.

Not sure how to get it to 200%, but I am guessing this must be pretty close.

DSC_1876.jpg


DSC_1876 (1).jpg
 
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
BackdoorHippie said:
Geoff is spot-on regarding the D800's pixel count. I know, I did extreme amounts of math when the D7100 came out and I was considering it to replace my D7000 as my "wildlife camera". While the pixel count math gave the D7100 the edge I wound up going with the D800 because of the fps vs. buffer size math was just too unfavorable for the way I shoot birds in flight.

Just remember, pixel count is only part of the equation when it comes to cropping. The rest has to do with the quality of the sensor with all those pixels. No doubt the D7100 has a fine sensor, and likely produces results that hold their own with the D800 for subjects like these, and if that's you needed it would win that contest. But I love having all those pixels on an FX when my subject fills the frame as well ... though my hard drive might complain. LOL
Click to expand...

Jake,

Thanks for confirming that I'm not going mad. To put this to bed properley I'm going to do a controlled test with my D800, D300s and my wifes D7100. unfortunately I don't have access to a D7000. I will use a tripod, a stuffed cat for detail and the same lens on each camera to demo the difference. I will make sure each is only using the 23mm*15mm (DX) portion of the sensor for the actual subject. Unfortunately I won't be able to do it for a few days. I wasn't trying to cause truble with my initial response, however some people seem to think the d800 gives the best resolution in all situations and it simply doesn't. I wish it did as I bought one. Now it may (or not) be a different debate when it comes to dynamic range ISO performance or colour depth.
 
S

Silven

Senior Member
So let's see if I'm understanding this "Math" correctly. Because the pixel pitch of the D800/E is 25% greater then the D7100. When magnified 200%, 300% or greater etc etc, the smaller pixels of the D7100 should yeild a significanty higher IQ then that of the D800/E. With that reasoning the D3200, D5200 and the D7100 should all have higher IQ then pretty much any other DSLR out there. Same sensors right? How about the new Nokia cell phone with a 40MP camera. I'd imagine that sensor is pretty tiny so it's pixel pitch must be astronomical, ergo the IQ should be too right? Too bad that theory doesn't take into account the minimum size that a point of light R G B can be focused down to vs pixel size in a sensor. This is where the pixel size of the D800/E is key vs the smaller pixels of the D7100. Sure your pixel pitch is better on the D7100 but your going to need more of them to represent the same point of light then you would on the D800/E.

By the way Ironwood and mikew, great examples.
 
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
Silven said:
So let's see if I'm understanding this "Math" correctly. Because the pixel pitch of the D800/E is 25% greater then the D7100. When magnified 200%, 300% or greater etc etc, the smaller pixels of the D7100 should yeild a significanty higher IQ then that of the D800/E. With that reasoning the D3200, D5200 and the D7100 should all have higher IQ then pretty much any other DSLR out there. Same sensors right? How about the new Nokia cell phone with a 40MP camera. I'd imagine that sensor is pretty tiny so it's pixel pitch must be astronomical, ergo the IQ should be too right? Too bad that theory doesn't take into account the minimum size that a point of light R G B can be focused down to vs pixel size in a sensor. This is where the pixel size of the D800/E is key vs the smaller pixels of the D7100. Sure your pixel pitch is better on the D7100 but your going to need more of them to represent the same point of light then you would on the D800/E.

By the way Ironwood and mikew, great examples.
Click to expand...

I talked about the pixel pitch of the 7000 not the 7100. And by the way math has an S on the end.
 
C

crycocyon

Senior Member
The D7100 has the highest pixel density of all the Nikon cameras at this point, even when compared to the D800 in DX mode. So if you want the DX crop factor, the D7100 is the way to go.

Hope you don't mind me saying but for that kind of photography you really need a prime lens to bring out the capability of resolution of that camera. Even with a manual 300 mm F4 you would be seeing the individual wiskers on that bear. Not only that, the contrast is so much better.
 
S

Silven

Senior Member
Geoffc said:
I talked about the pixel pitch of the 7000 not the 7100. And by the way math has an S on the end.
Click to expand...

Pixel pitch on the 7000 is even less of an argument then the superior D7100. Also Math is a plural word. You can add an "S" to it if you like, I'm not the grammar police. ;)

Cool example on the bug leg Scott, thanks for that.
 
Scott Murray

Scott Murray

Senior Member
Silven said:
Pixel pitch on the 7000 is even less of an argument then the superior D7100. Also Math is a plural word. You can add an "S" to it if you like, I'm not the grammar police. ;)

Cool example on the bug leg Scott, thanks for that.
Click to expand...

No worries, its not a great shot and not even that sharp as it was handheld using only the ring light and adding to that I am very tired.
 
Top