D800?

[EchoingWhisper]

I do have a d700 and still have no intention of up grading. Have no interest in video and 36mp reeks of too much pixel density. Something has to go at some point.

Marketing has too much say these days! IMHO

So you are saying the D7000's pixel density is too much too?

 

[EchoingWhisper]

And even if you realise that the noise performance is not as good, you could always downsize (post and bicubic) it 16.2 megapixel to get the same noise performance as D4 if the technology in both sensors are at the same level.

 

[baturn]

i voted "no" because I don't aspire to full frame.

 

[manaheim]

And even if you realise that the noise performance is not as good, you could always downsize (post and bicubic) it 16.2 megapixel to get the same noise performance as D4 if the technology in both sensors are at the same level.

That's not going to happen unless the individual sensors (pixels) are the same size and have ample breathing room for heat dissipation and such. Given the 3x count in sensors I highly doubt it.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

And even if you realise that the noise performance is not as good, you could always downsize (post and bicubic) it 16.2 megapixel to get the same noise performance as D4 if the technology in both sensors are at the same level.

That's not going to happen unless the individual sensors (pixels) are the same size and have ample breathing room for heat dissipation and such. Given the 3x count in sensors I highly doubt it.

Hmm.... Good point. Maybe someone should do a test when both of them are out.

 

[molested_cow]

I'm waiting for the rumored D900.

 

[pashabelman]

I think we just might upgrade....

 

[manaheim]

I'm waiting for the rumored D900.

You may be waiting a long time.

 

[Rosy]

congrats, please share your images

 

[greybeard]

It really depends on the features the D800 brings to the table. 36MP? I will believe it when I see it. If Nikon does come out with a FF 36MP body having the kind of low light, low noise, and high ISO capabilities we have come to expect from Nikon, I will be all over it.

 

[BlairWright]

Why are you all knocking 36MP?

 

[greybeard]

I do have a d700 and still have no intention of up grading. Have no interest in video and 36mp reeks of too much pixel density. Something has to go at some point.

Marketing has too much say these days! IMHO

16mp DX sensor has the pixel density same as the 36mp FX if we use the sensor size as a reference.

Help me out here, I'm no mathematician so I'm thinking that a 16mp DX sensor has a crop factor of 1.5. To calculate focal length equivalence you multiply the DX focal length x 1.5 (right). Wouldn't you multiply 16 x 1.5 to calculate the pixel density for a FF sensor with the same pixel density as a DX 16 mp sensor? 1.5x16=24 Is my logic to simplistic?

 

[EchoingWhisper]

I do have a d700 and still have no intention of up grading. Have no interest in video and 36mp reeks of too much pixel density. Something has to go at some point.

Marketing has too much say these days! IMHO

16mp DX sensor has the pixel density same as the 36mp FX if we use the sensor size as a reference.

Help me out here, I'm no mathematician so I'm thinking that a 16mp DX sensor has a crop factor of 1.5. To calculate focal length equivalence you multiply the DX focal length x 1.5 (right). Wouldn't you multiply 16 x 1.5 to calculate the pixel density for a FF sensor with the same pixel density as a DX 16 mp sensor? 1.5x16=24 Is my logic to simplistic?

Nope, 16.2 megapixels times 1.5 square = 16.2 megapixels x 2.25 = 36 megapixels.

 

[greybeard]

16mp DX sensor has the pixel density same as the 36mp FX if we use the sensor size as a reference.

Help me out here, I'm no mathematician so I'm thinking that a 16mp DX sensor has a crop factor of 1.5. To calculate focal length equivalence you multiply the DX focal length x 1.5 (right). Wouldn't you multiply 16 x 1.5 to calculate the pixel density for a FF sensor with the same pixel density as a DX 16 mp sensor? 1.5x16=24 Is my logic to simplistic?

Nope, 16.2 megapixels times 1.5 square = 16.2 megapixels x 2.25 = 36 megapixels.

I figured that I needed to square something somewhere in my calculations. So you are saying that if Nikon can pull off 16.2 in a DX format then 36 in a FX should be no problem.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

Help me out here, I'm no mathematician so I'm thinking that a 16mp DX sensor has a crop factor of 1.5. To calculate focal length equivalence you multiply the DX focal length x 1.5 (right). Wouldn't you multiply 16 x 1.5 to calculate the pixel density for a FF sensor with the same pixel density as a DX 16 mp sensor? 1.5x16=24 Is my logic to simplistic?

Nope, 16.2 megapixels times 1.5 square = 16.2 megapixels x 2.25 = 36 megapixels.

I figured that I needed to square something somewhere in my calculations. So you are saying that if Nikon can pull off 16.2 in a DX format then 36 in a FX should be no problem.

Yes that is what I am trying to say.