Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese
Being a Nikon man from way back I would hold off Greg. This camera looks more like a studio unit rather than anything else. While it can go to 25600 in ISO its working range is similar to my D3 yet it is supposed to be an advanced camera.
Yes it has FX and lots of pixels I wonder what the frames per second ability is in real life. It says 4fps and that says a lot about the buffer to me.
Not being a pro body also says a lot to me. Hold off for the pro body mate in a year or less. It will make this look like a toy.
|
There's some awesome choices coming up.
The Nikon D4, the D800 or D800E (you can disable the low pass filter) or the upcoming 5D Mark iii or whatever they will call it or the new Canon 1Dx.
This D800 will be a lot for Canon to match. There are no rumours about Canon having a sensor with that many pixels. Where Canon may go better is the video ability. No autofocus for the D800's video.
Depends on what you want to use it for. The D800E may not be the ideal astro camera or time lapse camera, the D3 series or D700 may be the go for that.
But for landscape, portraits, weddings, on paper it sounds very good.
For me the main thing is full frame and also video ability.
I wonder also this E version with no low pass filter or the ability to disable it as described in the Nikon press release. I wonder if that means its like a modified astro camera and will have fabulous Ha response. If so it will be the 20Da Nikon never made!
Would these things make good planetary cameras with 30 FPS? You can also shoot DX mode. I read there was some possible time lapse ability built in as well.
I'm thinking DSLRs may be nudging astro CCDs a bit here. 36mp? There is no 36mp astro CCD that is any good. The Kodak KAF39000 is a joke so is the KAF50100 for astrowork.
With Kodak bankrupt even if they sold the CCD arm I would not expect too many advancements from them until the financial dust settles. The CCD arm may reevaluate their business model and markets.
Greg.