D800 vs D40 image size comparison

TordFuglstad

TordFuglstad

Suspended / Banned
Messages
185
Name
Fuglstad
Edit My Images
No
So my very first DSLR was a Nikon D40, which had 6.1 Megapixels. Not bad for being back then. My newest camera is a D800 which has 36.3 Megapixels, which is insane for a 35mm digital camera.
I recently tested out my D40 again and found the files to be supersmall.
That's why I wanted to compare the two with this little photoshot creation.

D800vsD40Imagesize_zps3041ea81.jpg
 
Bejaysis! Some difference alright. never really thought much on the size of the D800 images really, as my PC gear has evolved alongside my camera gear.
 
Well.. you know what? It's all relative :)

EKy1rFP.jpg


 
Last edited:
Looking at those graphics David, it appears that the D800 has a less tightly packed sensor than the phase one. How do they compare as far as noise goes at longer exposures/high ISOs? I know that pixel density isn't the only factor and that the density difference isn't great (and a medium format system with a phase one back is far beyond my needs anyway), I'm just curious!
 
I don't often use the IQ180... as it's not mine... it's work's. Noise from the Phase One seems comparable on a crop for crop basis at ISO100... never really tested it. It's a studio camera, and I've only used it in that context so far, so I doubt they've made it to shine in that dept.
 
bastic said:
I was scanning negatives last night and each frame was 17000x10000 ;p
Click to expand...


Yeah, but regardless of how big you scan them, you're only scanning a finite amount of detail that the film is inherently capable of resolving. You can scan a 35mm neg to 50,000 pixels across if you want... it won't have any more detail than one scanned at 17000 :)
 
Thanks David, curiosity satisfied! Very much horses for courses and MF isn't really a walkabout format (compared with 35mm/"normal" SLRs)!

Can't remember at which resolution scanned negs/slides top out (where the grain is analogous to a pixel). I know it depends on the film and its own peculiarities anyway! Been a while since I've scanned any film but IIRC, I try for an output at 200ppi at A3 (someone can do the maths if they care enough!). 17:10 aspect ratio? What film format is that?
 
It's all relative though, unless you want to print across the side of a building!
 
odd jim said:
It's all relative though, unless you want to print across the side of a building!
Click to expand...

...or a 44 sheet billboard, or a A1 exhibition print... or any other use for large prints. Yes.

If you don't print larger than A3, you probably don't have a need for anything too exotic in the sensor department, no.
 
My first dSLR was a Nikon D60, and now I have a D200. I'm probably not the example you're looking for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top