>How is someone suppose to get great depth of field in >landscapes if you can't go above f8.0? Does shooting at f16 or >f22 reduce the sharpness and detail so much that the increase >in depth of field is useless, because the overall image will >be soft? By the way, I am referring to the use of a wide angle >lens.
Just for a ballpark numerical estimate I looked at a DOF calculator with the D3X (it wasn't updated with the D800). With a 24mm lens, at f22 it says the near limit is 2.2' with hyperfocal at 2.86.
with F8 it is 4.4' and hyperfocal at 8'.
That could be a significant difference if you wanted to get a very near object, but I really wonder how often you use that 2.2' in between in a landscape shot?
Clearly the numbers may change slightly with more pixels available.
But one more comment:
>Doees shooting at f16 or f22 reduce the sharpness and >detail so much that the increase in depth of field is >useless, because the overall image will be soft?
Bear in mind that diffraction is a lens feature, not a camera feature. The D800 just let's you see it more if you peep way down in the pixels. Your images will be LESS soft (or to be more precise you can resolve more detail) with a given lens and scene than with a lower resolution camera, you will just be able to get more improvement at F8 than F22.