| Moderated by: chrisbet, | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7   |
|
|||||||
| D800 File Size? - Page 4 | |
| Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 02:21 |
|
31st Post |
jk
|
Constable wrote:Touching wood and crossing fingers, I have had no problem with 2TB drives. My primary RAID has 8 2TB drives. Yes I tried to get a Drobo 8 unit but they were going for silly money and they are twice as large so getting from UK to Spain was a problem. I have the unit running now but I am awaiting new drives for the two dead ones.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 02:26 |
|
32nd Post |
jk
|
TomOC wrote:Well, I won't be testing the 800 any time soon. I thought it was due today (2 day prime shipping)... Wrong... Not till July 5 to 23rd !!! Well done Tom. I dont know how Ed is finding his unit but my D800 certainly seems to be producing good results when used with flash or under controlled conditions. I have a double flamenco shoot this weekend and next so that will be my first test of the D800 in these conditions.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 06:40 |
|
33rd Post |
Squarerigger
|
Would someone please explain to me why one would select one model of the D800 over the other. Please keep it in layman's terms  If one model or the other is best suited for a particular type of photograph. Is each model a well rounded body, or more specialized?
____________________ -------------------------------------------- Gary |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 07:16 |
|
34th Post |
Robert
|
Squarerigger wrote:Would someone please explain to me why one would select one model of the D800 over the other. Please keep it in layman's terms The D800 is the 'Normal' body. The D800E has had the anti-aliasing filter omitted (not fitted). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-aliasing_filter It means that the images may potentially be sharper but at the cost of moir© patterns in some images which have repeated stripe patterns in them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moir©_pattern Yer pays yer money and take the chance. Moir© is difficult to remove in post processing. The D200 is said to have too strong an anti-aliasing filter therefor produces less sharp images than it is capable of. I have removed it from one of my D1x's but I haven't noticed the difference.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 08:09 |
|
35th Post |
Squarerigger
|
Thanks Robert for the explanation. I have looked at the photos on this site done with a D800, such as Graham's, and those by Ed with a D800e, I believe, and I see no difference. Maybe it's the resolution on the site but I think both are very sharp.
____________________ -------------------------------------------- Gary |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 08:38 |
|
36th Post |
Robert
|
You won't see it at this scale Gary, you will only see it with a top quality monitor which is displaying the actual file, not a degraded JPEG which this forum (and most other internet viewers) displays. You need to have the actual file on your own computer to see the difference. Which kinda negates the benefits if you only ever intend to view or display your images via the internet.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 10:39 |
|
37th Post |
jk
|
That is the problem. Showing results on screen relies on someone noticing moire in the original image then taking a screen shot of the offending area. We are now into situations where showing the image is just not good enough as the complete image has a size that are so large that they take huge amounts of disk space and also bandwidth to upload/download.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 10:47 |
|
38th Post |
Dave Groen
|
The D800 has the usual anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor. The D800e does not, so you get less hardware for $300 more money, slightly better sharpness, and a chance for moire with certain subjects. Nikon's explanation is HERE. Scroll down a little for the comparisons. Attachment: Snap3.jpg (Downloaded 27 times)
____________________ I started out with nothing and still have most of it left |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 11:29 |
|
39th Post |
Squarerigger
|
Thanks Dave, that was helpful. I guess Nikon is hoping we buy one of each. A D800 for everyday use and a D800e for macro, studio, etc.  By the way Dave, is that new avatar a photo of you at a high school ball game in St. Louis? 
____________________ -------------------------------------------- Gary |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 18:59 |
|
40th Post |
Dave Groen
|
Squarerigger wrote:By the way Dave, is that new avatar a photo of you at a high school ball game in St. Louis? It's not me. It's from a St Louis Cardinals game in the good(?) old days when anyone could smoke at a ball game, even kids.
____________________ I started out with nothing and still have most of it left |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| This is topic ID = 211 Current time is 06:20 | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | |
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Cameras > D800 File Size? | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Modern editor
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0649 seconds (64% database + 36% PHP). 84 queries executed.
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0649 seconds (64% database + 36% PHP). 84 queries executed.