Nikon D800 / Nasim Mansurov

Morceaux choisis des commentaires de Nasim Mansurov
http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d800-high-iso-image-samples

181
(...) "I consider the D800 to be a revolutionary product. We have not
seen anything like this for many years from Nikon"

51
(...) Here is my take on the D800: I consider it to be a revolutionary
product, similar to how the D3 was when it came out. In fact, I consider
it more revolutionary than the D3, given that it costs only $3K. We have
not seen anything like this for a very long time.

35
(...)excellent AF module + metering + video from the D4

16
(...)its video output is pretty much the same as on the $6K Nikon D4
(except for very high ISO capabilities)

142
(...) The Nikon D800 is better than the D700 in every way, except for
the fps speed. So yes, the images from the D800 do make a difference in
image quality for portraiture…

52
(...)you are talking about JPEG image sizes ? In that case, yes, we
should see less noise on the smaller version of the JPEG. But why would
you let the camera do it? You can get much better results if you convert
RAW to a smaller JPEG. You do not even have to use Photoshop for that –
Lightroom’s export tool will do it for you automatically.

134
(...) by using a DX mode on an FX camera, you are cutting off more than
half of the resolution with no chance to get it back. Why not shoot in
FX and crop as much as you want later? Your field of view could then be
changed to whatever you want.
By using a DX mode, you are also eliminating good chances of removing
noise by down-sampling an image

182
(...) you would be trading one type of camera (sports and wildlife) for
another (landscapes, macro, portraits, etc). If you shoot in high ISOs,
then you will be disappointed with the D800 performance.

22
(...)
Why forget down-sampling ? That’s the only proper way to compare the
image output of the D800 to the D700. As I have already written many
times before, the Nikon D700 will surely beat the Nikon D800 at 100%
view. It is expected, again, because of the twice bigger pixel size. But
down-sampled to the same 12 MP resolution, we should be getting clean
images with lots of details and I believe we are, judging from the above
image samples.

77
(...)
I do a mix of landscapes and portraiture (weddings mostly) and I rarely
ever have to shoot above ISO 1600 (all landscapes are shot at ISO
100-200, unless I do not have a tripod with me). It is a different story
when I go shooting birds occasionally, where my Nikon D3s is
irreplaceable, but for everything else, I try to stay at low ISOs. So
the Nikon D800 would fit my needs perfectly, just like it does with many
others. As for your statement “just doesn’t seem right to buy a 36mp
sensor and then being somewhat forced to down-sample to get better image
quality” – you do not get better image quality by down-sampling, you
simply reduce noise when you have to, if the noise levels are
unacceptable to you. I do not expect to do much down-sampling with the
D800, since I will keep on shooting at lower ISOs. However, if I am
inside a church and I cannot use a flash, it is nice to know that I can
crank up ISO to higher values and still get decent results when the
image is down-sampled