Page 2 of 2

PostPosted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 1:26 pm
by klausesser
Artisan New wrote:- D800 (the best camera in the world period . . .

Definitely not.

Klaus

PostPosted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 9:33 am
by Artisan New
klausesser wrote:
Artisan New wrote:- D800 (the best camera in the world period . . .

Definitely not.

Klaus

http://www.dict.cc/?s=except

Greets, Ed.

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 10:49 am
by Hellkeeper
interesting what such a small Question can set off! ;-)

Did I get it right that way?

FX advantages:
- less noise
- higher dynamic range
- according to http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html better DOF for FX ... ? (Hyperfocal @ 827,3m)
- larger RAW buffer
- CF slot (we got lots of fast CF cards)
- better battery
- longer shutter life (expected)
- ?!? ... what else ... ?!?

DX advantages:
- 1,5x Crop (but I guess my Lens isn't sharp enough to take advantage of it ...)
- cheaper
- more Gigapixel (but maybe not the Quality of FX as Lens is the limiting factor)

So I guess it's clear that FX is the way to go?!? Just not quite sure if the higher Price of the D800 is justified in relation to the D600?!?

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 6:37 pm
by Artisan New
Hellkeeper wrote:interesting what such a small Question can set off! ;-)

Did I get it right that way?

FX advantages:
- less noise
- higher dynamic range
- according to http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html better DOF for FX ... ? (Hyperfocal @ 827,3m)
- larger RAW buffer
- CF slot (we got lots of fast CF cards)
- better battery
- longer shutter life (expected)
- ?!? ... what else ... ?!?

DX advantages:
- 1,5x Crop (but I guess my Lens isn't sharp enough to take advantage of it ...)
- cheaper
- more Gigapixel (but maybe not the Quality of FX as Lens is the limiting factor)

So I guess it's clear that FX is the way to go?!? Just not quite sure if the higher Price of the D800 is justified in relation to the D600?!?

FX
- less noise, yes certainly but since you have also less not more DOF (if you know how to read DOF meister) you have to stop down more and the compensates.
- higher dynamic range (yes, marginaly so but compared to your D300 the D5200 and D400 will also shine)
- larger RAW buffer (indeed important but have you hade problems with the D300, then de D400 will also be okay)
- CF-slot (wel SD-cards are the way to go these days).
- better battery (I power my GH2 from a 9v 15.000 mAH battery, runs like a charm for about 4 hours (of filming) with a monitor on the 12V)

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/84/power-solutions-powering-whole-rig-for-hours-from-40-battery/p1

- longer shutter life, I've seen D300 do quit a lot more shuttermovements then advertised and for the price of on D800 you can buy 5 D5200...

DX
- more DOF at the same length of lens
- cheaper (indeed)
- more Gigapixel but I can't take advantage of it.....wrong....since the Sigma stops performing after 370 mm according to lenstip.de both the DX and the FX (36 Mpixel) will belimited by the lens. Remember the DX takes the sweet spot out of the lens the FX uses the edges of the frame that are usually even worse (and in which the stitching takes place).

But feel free to go the FX route.....It's not my money you spend :). And the D800 is one hell of a camera, you won't go wrong with that. But what I've heard about the D400 (september release) is also not half bad....it's a twin to the D800 if rumours are right (and they usually are).

Greets, Ed.

PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 7:24 am
by spherorama
Hi Artisan New,
I use the D800 for Gigapixel panoramas. 2 years or so I stumbled over an adaptor that allows me to use Hasselblad lenses on my Nikon bodies. I still had my old Hasselblad equipment in a camerabag, which was no more used since all things went digital. With the D700 it was already a wonderful way to take panoramas. With the D800 you have jet more possibilities. Recently I bought a 500 mm f8 Hasselblad Zeiss Tele Tessar which cost me only 290€ on ebay. As mentioned in some posts above it's like using a FX lens on a DX sensor. You use only the the very center part of a medium format lens and get good results.
I would suggest to take the D800 because it offers you so many possibilities in it's settings e. g. different crop factors for the sensor. But you have to consider that the files at full resolution are rather big and you definitely ned a powerful computer along with the D800. I use an iMac 27" with a 3 TB Fusion Drive and a 3.4 mhz quad core i7 processor. For now it's fast enough to use with APG. 650 images at 36 mp each from the D800 are rendered in a little more than 3 hours.

PostPosted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:44 am
by Artisan New
I use an OM-D and I'm not about to change that. But Hellkeeper can buy what he (or she) pleases....but if you go for Gpixels with a certain lens an DX beats an FX any time.

Greets, Ed.

PostPosted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:30 pm
by klausesser
Artisan New wrote:Hellkeeper can buy what he (or she) pleases....

That´s very generous, Ed! :D

Artisan New wrote:but if you go for Gpixels with a certain lens an DX beats an FX any time.

"a certain lens" - whatever that might be - most likely needing to shoot "some" more images. That takes more time - which
most likely is a problem when you have fast changing light or/and moving clouds and so on.
But of course you can mount two DX cameras with identical lenses on a head for saving time . . . :cool:

You also can shoot gigapixels using a compact camera selecting it´s longest focal-length or add converter lens . . .

Klaus

PostPosted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:41 pm
by klausesser
spherorama wrote:Hi Artisan New,
I use the D800 for Gigapixel panoramas. 2 years or so I stumbled over an adaptor that allows me to use Hasselblad lenses on my Nikon bodies. I still had my old Hasselblad equipment in a camerabag, which was no more used since all things went digital. With the D700 it was already a wonderful way to take panoramas. With the D800 you have jet more possibilities. Recently I bought a 500 mm f8 Hasselblad Zeiss Tele Tessar which cost me only 290€ on ebay. As mentioned in some posts above it's like using a FX lens on a DX sensor. You use only the the very center part of a medium format lens and get good results.

I definitely agree! I also use some Hasselblad-Zeiss lenses from the V-system. They´re simply great!

spherorama wrote:I would suggest to take the D800 because it offers you so many possibilities in it's settings e. g. different crop factors for the sensor.

I second that! Aside from that: there are lots of phantastic manual Nikon lenses avaiable which perform real great still.
I used a manual 85mm here: http://www.klausesser-interaktiv.de/HiRez

Klaus

PostPosted: Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:47 am
by Artisan New
Klaus,

Your first post I do agree with.....it will take longer (even up to 1,5 to 2 times as long to be precise) and you gain about 30% in resolution, and indeed shooting with 2 or more (the more the merrier) camera's is advisable....but having said that....when shooting Giga's unfortunatly you can rarely stay on the same spot (most high rises have roofs covered in machinery or you only have clear view from the edge, etc. you should know). So in order to be quicker multiple camera's are used anyway (some on the same tripod/head.....like some Clauss Rodeon heads do), but mostly on different heads to shoot from various parts of the building (in this case the BT tower in London). Shot with 4 7D camera's.....and 4 big shot tele's and 4 Clauss Rodeons to shoot about 12.000 pictures per camera, per day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQGVBRDSWo0

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/

And your second post is also correct.....in fact I can use all those glorious Nikon lenses on my OM-D as well (and I do) a great tele is a 80-200 f 4.0 I own (bought for a few bob of the Interweb).

Now before you start indeed with 4 D800 you'd be quicker.....but again you'd not get the 320 Gpixel resolution with the same glass you needed 1.3 times longer glass and longer means heavier and also more photo's. As I said these people aren't half assed.

Greets, Ed.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:22 pm
by klausesser
Artisan New wrote:Klaus,

Your first post I do agree with.....it will take longer (even up to 1,5 to 2 times as long to be precise) and you gain about 30% in resolution, and indeed shooting with 2 or more (the more the merrier) camera's is advisable....but having said that....when shooting Giga's unfortunatly you can rarely stay on the same spot (most high rises have roofs covered in machinery or you only have clear view from the edge, etc. you should know). So in order to be quicker multiple camera's are used anyway (some on the same tripod/head.....like some Clauss Rodeon heads do), but mostly on different heads to shoot from various parts of the building (in this case the BT tower in London). Shot with 4 7D camera's.....and 4 big shot tele's and 4 Clauss Rodeons to shoot about 12.000 pictures per camera, per day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQGVBRDSWo0

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/

And your second post is also correct.....in fact I can use all those glorious Nikon lenses on my OM-D as well (and I do) a great tele is a 80-200 f 4.0 I own (bought for a few bob of the Interweb).

Now before you start indeed with 4 D800 you'd be quicker.....but again you'd not get the 320 Gpixel resolution with the same glass you needed 1.3 times longer glass and longer means heavier and also more photo's. As I said these people aren't half assed.

Greets, Ed.

Ed - to say it in short: i´m not in the hunt for XXL-GigaPixels. Definitely not. But i know from the production of commercial 4 - 8 gigapixel shoots that a D800 for my way of working is an ideal choice. Period.
What other people do is not of my business.

Once you did it yourself commercially i guess you also would gather this experience. Without ever having done it - indoors and outdoors - it´s all redundant speculating.

Klaus