| Joined: | Wed Apr 18th, 2012 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4186 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
I agree that the MP count sweet spot for me is 16MP.
The D800 is a little bit too detailed for most occasions. The current crop of cameras from Nikon seem to be coming out with 24MP which is the top end of my range but it makes the image look a bit smoother when you compare D3S, D600, D800 outputs.
The D800 is much more finicky to use in low light conditions and the D3S is what I am used to but seems a little too grainy when compared to the D800.
Maybe a D600 beckons if the D400 doesnt arrive but I really want a DX sized camera. The D7100 is the right size for travel photography with a 70-300 AFS on it. For the wide stuff I use my XPro1 with (when it comes) 10-24mm or 18-55mm zooms.
There are a couple of points here.
I would agree with you that for a longtime 16mp was as far as ANY sensor should go. But I do wonder if with the bar being raised at the top end, this might drag the sweetspot a bit higher?
The image quality of the D7000 is very good...it's the responsiveness that lets it down in some situations. The news of the D7100 lacklustre performance is concerning and does make me wonder if Nikon are rooting the performance of these bodies squarely below that of a pro DX. That being the case, I am sure a D400 WILL come along sometime soon. Had the D7100 really outperformed the D7000 I would have been less convinced another DX body was coming anytime soon.
____________________
Eric