nikon d800...36mp???

Stealthy Ninja wrote:

Joe Photo Daddy wrote: Am I missing something? Why would a 36MP Nikon camera be a mistake if the quality is par with other camera's that Nikon makes?

Few reasons:
1. More MP generally means more noise.
2. If they used less MP they could get less noise.
3. So many MP isn't needed unless you crop a LOT or bring really big.
4. The files would be huge and would take really amazing computer not to be crippled by them when editing.


That said, there is one situation where Nikon might not be as crazy as we all think.

Pixel Binning.

36MP means the D800 would have the same pixel density as the D7000. Which means the high iso noise would be ok, but disappointingly bad for the typical fx (and worse than the current fx cam lineup for sure).

However, if you could bin every other pixel and combine the data to make a sorta super pixel, you could get a 16MP file with D700 or better noise levels. Reduce that to 12MP and you've beaten the D3s perhaps.

This is a big if though. AFAIK no camera has pixel binning. Maybe Nikon will be first?

Why can't they make a high MP with less noise?

Mayo wrote:

Stealthy Ninja wrote:

Joe Photo Daddy wrote: Am I missing something? Why would a 36MP Nikon camera be a mistake if the quality is par with other camera's that Nikon makes?

Few reasons:
1. More MP generally means more noise.
2. If they used less MP they could get less noise.
3. So many MP isn't needed unless you crop a LOT or bring really big.
4. The files would be huge and would take really amazing computer not to be crippled by them when editing.


That said, there is one situation where Nikon might not be as crazy as we all think.

Pixel Binning.

36MP means the D800 would have the same pixel density as the D7000. Which means the high iso noise would be ok, but disappointingly bad for the typical fx (and worse than the current fx cam lineup for sure).

However, if you could bin every other pixel and combine the data to make a sorta super pixel, you could get a 16MP file with D700 or better noise levels. Reduce that to 12MP and you've beaten the D3s perhaps.

This is a big if though. AFAIK no camera has pixel binning. Maybe Nikon will be first?

Why can't they make a high MP with less noise?

I can't go into the scientific details, which somebody on here will soon enough...but they haven't been able to yet. The best high MP cam with good high ISO is probably the 5d mark 2. It sometimes has weird pattern noise though..

People...including me are speculating there will be a 2nd camera announced with it. Priced at $4000 for a replacement doesn't seem to make much sense in the marketing sense.

The pixels on a CMOS or CCD sensor chip are called photosites. The larger they are, the more light they are able to collect.

If you cram more in a smaller space, they have to be smaller. Smaller photosites require more amplification to be brighter. More amp = more noise.

MLKstudios wrote: The pixels on a CMOS or CCD sensor chip are called photosites. The larger they are, the more light they are able to collect.

If you cram more in a smaller space, they have to be smaller. Smaller photosites require more amplification to be brighter. More amp = more noise.

Yeh this.

The first one to come up with an amplifier that doesn't add noise (aka THD in the audio world) will be a rich man (or woman).

But, the way things are moving, it may happen sooner than we think.

If Nikon could control the noise at that level of MP, that would be a bad a$$ camera

If you take a 36MP cam with the pixel density the same as a D7000 and reduce the size to the same as a D7000 the noise will be better than the D700 I guess. But you have to resize it.

I'll believe it when I see it

Moe wrote: I'll believe it when I see it

Maybe your eyes will be lying to you.