Tue 04-Jun-13 11:59 AM | edited Tue 04-Jun-13 12:09 PM by dagoldst
>Bengt says: "Shooting with D800e and a stellar prime you >will experience changing times."
I get that you like your D800E. But it would be inaccurate to say that the D800E image quality is vastly superior. Lets consider.
1.The D800 offers around 19% more resolution that gives it a native print resolution of 24 inches. The D600 has a native print resolution of 20 inches. That's all the advantage, (this is at 300 dpi). If one printed side by side images at 24x36 inches, the pictures would be virtually identical.
2.The D800E can eke out a sharper image without post process sharpening. So can a D7100. It comes with a price of moire in some shots, but we'll put that issue to the side.
3. Both cameras have 14 bit color depth. The D800 can do uncompressed RAW, but in practical terms, the lossless compressed NEF format is not throwing away any data, so I can't see anything other than a larger file being written to a memory card. Not really an advantage I would think. Their ISO ranges are identical and the D800E gets a very slightly better DXOMark score, (and these are the two top cameras in the WORLD for image quality).
3. Every single stellar lens you can mount on a D800 can be mounted on a D600 - advantage? None. Besides, virtually every Nikkor in recent years produces stellar, sharp images when stopped down so primes only come into play shooting wide open and when one needs a fast lens - I am well aware of this, I own lots of primes from my film shooting days that still get used all the time.
So, yes, the D800E is a slightly advantaged camera, but in the right hands, nobody without a loupe and high level of expertise can tell whether a print was taken with a D600 or D800.
For reference on DXOmark numbers, sorry for the broke link, just copy into your browser, it will still get you there.