69 of 112 people found the following review helpful
Increased contrast and sharpness you can't get from post-processing.,
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Nikon D800E 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (Electronics)One of the reasons I decided to go for the D800E over the D800 is the contrasts and depth you get from not having an anti-aliasing filter on the camera, which the D800E does not have. Sharpness is one item everyone talks about, but really what makes an image are the subtle contrasts and tonal differences you can't retrieve from post processing.
Now that I've had a good amount of time to spend with my camera, I can say that the camera has exceeded my expectations. The dynamic range and the sharp, crisp details I can achieve are just phenomenal. I primarily shoot street and landscape.
- Excellent dynamic range. I rarely have to do any HDR or dual exposure/layer masking work.
- Although the file sizes are huge, I absolutely enjoy being able to crop very deep in and still have enough resolution to print large.
- The HUD during live view is awesome!
- Low light performance has exceeded my expectations.
- Moire rarely ever occurs.
- I love the compact flash / SD card setup. Just added flexibility, plus SD cards are so much cheaper and work fine for taking still images.
However, some thing that I do not like:
- Battery life is pretty short. You definitely need a couple of spare batteries. A grip is recommended.
- During playback of images, the camera has a tendency to automatically turn off the playback. I haven't quite figured out why this happens. It's almost like I've hit another button which switches the playback of images off, but I haven't.
- I wish there was a live histogram you can view while in live view mode.
- I also wish there was a swivel for getting awkward angle shots.
Note that a 64 GB card will store approx 801 RAW 14bit, lossless compressed images. My rating still remains a 5.
Tracked by 7 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 11-20 of 34 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 12:43:34 PM PDT
Hi Sean,this "I think its also important to point out that the effect of the AA filter (or not having one) can't be "fixed" or "undone" with software or post processing" is true but do you think that deconvolution sharpening (Raw Developer.. Mac only) can successfully mitigate the effects of a blurring (AA) filter...or even come close to it?
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 12:47:06 PM PDT
Dragoneer,do you think that the Lense is most important to contrast (both global and micro)or perhaps the way colour is assigned in A/D conversion?What are your thoughts on colour depth (Better with CCD than CMOS?) and tonality..
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 12:57:11 PM PDT
I took nothing you said as negative. Your post was fine and added to the discussion. I have noted that many photographers, pro or am, don't know a lot about the technical aspects of the art and feel opinionated hand waving is sufficient to enter engineering and physics discussions. These same people seem quite offended if you push for a definition of a term - contrast in this case - to try and figure out what is actually being said.
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 1:11:28 PM PDT
With some of the new digital sensors the effect called "diffraction limiting" may become the most difficult "aberration" to overcome. I used quotes because it isn't really an aberration. Simply put, when the wave length of light is the same order of magnitude as sensor (or silver grain) separation, nature is going to hurt you. I haven't done the computation but the D800 must be nearly there. This is an aberration that neither the camera nor lens can do much about. Getting better as measured by the usual metrics wont mean much.
My fantasy is that picture post processing might use some sort of AI along with "conversations" with the photographer to determine what the picture is supposed to be all about, then software will use clues from the image and draw an excellent picture from scratch. At the current stage of AI and optics my vision is hocus pocus but seems like a fun prediction.
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 1:18:35 PM PDT
Interesting vision of the future,A blend of exposure bracketing and focus stacking comes to mind...
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 1:21:04 PM PDT
Sean U says:
Deconvolution is the work of the Devil! Just kidding... I'm happy with a plain old unsharp mask in Lightroom. It's all guess work, but if you like the way it looks on screen or on paper then that's all that matters.
From what I've seen the D800 has a pretty weak AA filter, and I've seen photos with moire even with the AA filter.
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 1:30:52 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 23, 2012 1:31:15 PM PDT
The work of the Devil.. LOL... I have a few RAW's from the D800 and they sure look good,I agree that the D800 AA filter seems weak (as does the 1D mk4 filter) and the D800E may not be worth the extra money (and extra moire).A lot of chatter on forums about this being as good as medium format but from what I've seen so far it's for sure good and seems as good at pixel peeping level(100%) but to my eye's at least the files seem to lack the 3d look and tonality of a good medium format file..But for the money this camera is a bargain and I think a game changer..
another thing I found interesting is the idea that sub 5 micron pixel's change the function/performance of the bayer array due to the smaller sites,do you know anything about this?
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 25, 2012 9:33:46 AM PDT
Tom S. says:
Maybe this is a stupid question, but it seems to me that if one buys the D800E and stores as RAW, it should be possible to have software that can create similar output to 800. No?
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 25, 2012 9:53:14 AM PDT
The simple answer is no. Slightly different information reaches the sensors of the D800 and D800E. If the image is random in the sense that you don't have a model of what the original object is, then you have no means of improving the image. If you do, there are some model-based filters that will probabilistically improve the image. (I'm using the word "filter" in its true sense, not as something limited to simple local pixel arithmetic.)
Sean U., in a prior message gave a simple description of how sensors work. Read that post and apply the description to several situations and see how information might get lost. For example: thin lines with tiny color patches that hit the "right" color sub-pixel; thins lines that slightly curve; objects with sufficient depth to blur badly in front or back with only a few pixels to show the transition from near to far; etc. You will find some of these examples hard to differentiate from one another depending on the sensor used.
In reply to an earlier post on May 6, 2012 12:57:19 PM PDT
James Fairchild says:
Loved the "Mayan cycle" comment. I was one of the first ones to order an 800E from B&H, and they've finally given up sending emails saying they don't know what's going on. Jim