D800e

bespoke images

bespoke images

Suspended / Banned
Messages
73
Edit My Images
No
Hi all

Thanks in advance.

What's the latest opinions on the D800e or D3x the price difference isn't a lot but seeking advice on which would be the best buy - I mainly shoot functions and people (weddings and special events). If that helps.
I read d800e produces sharp images and dynamic range is amazing

What's the opinions of the users on the street.

Thanks.
 
I wouldn't pick either of those for weddings or events tbh. But hey ho.

Even a budget DSLR produces sharp images, its the person using it and the lenses attached to it that make the difference.
Just because your camera costs £5k, doesn't mean you are a good photographer.
 
bespoke images said:
Hi all

Thanks in advance.

What's the latest opinions on the D800e or D3x the price difference isn't a lot but seeking advice on which would be the best buy - I mainly shoot functions and people (weddings and special events). If that helps.
I read d800e produces sharp images and dynamic range is amazing

What's the opinions of the users on the street.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Have you considered the D3S or D4? That's what I'd go for.
 
As above.

Depending on your budget I'd be suggesting D3s or D4, or even a well loved D3.

You'll rarely need more than 12MP - I shot 8 seasons of weddings on between 6MP and 12MP DSLRs and never failed to deliver large albums and prints at high quality.

I used the D3x for 2.5 weddings and it was a pain to edit down the images because of the size of each file - let alone the volume of disk required to store that many RAW files - even if you only kept them until after album delivery.

The D3x and D800 are much more suited to corporate photography and portraiture (and landscapes and fine art etc) where you would be more likely to use larger images in print and much lower number of frames per job...

You'll also benefit (at least with the D3s and D4) of better high ISO than the D800 and certainly the D3x which I never used in anger above 1600 ISO, and ideally not above 800. 3200 on the D3s and 6400 on the D4 would be equivalent in terms of quality and there isn't any real substitute for that in a dark candlelit church in the middle of winter.
 
The D800 is perfect for weddings. I don't get all this. It's a belter at higher ISO, not far behind the D4 according to most tests I've seen, and it's not like you'll be rapid firing at a wedding. Just don't shoot ridiculous amounts like 1000's of images, as there is really no need.

I'd choose the D800 over the D3x anyday, but a D3s would also be great. Easy for people to recommend the D4, are they forgetting it's double the price?

As for the E version. I think I've had moiré once since I got it. Suits may be a problem, I'll see soon. I'm shooting a wedding with it New year's eve.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
The D800 is perfect for weddings. I don't get all this. It's a belter at higher ISO, not far behind the D4 according to most tests I've seen, and it's not like you'll be rapid firing at a wedding. Just don't shoot ridiculous amounts like 1000's of images, as there is really no need.
Click to expand...

With all due respect show me a website with a season of 20-30 weddings (not one that expired 2 weeks ago) and I'll happily take that comment. With no website and a flikr stream and facebook site with no wedding images I can only assume that is conjecture and not based on fact.

Depending on style most wedding photographers shoot between 700 and 2000 images a full wedding. My average was about 1200 for a full days coverage - bridal preps to just after first dance, and I would consider my self fairly restrained. Do the math on 36MP files vs 12 or 16MP files and whilst it isn't impossible to use a D800 setup for wedding coverage, and believe me groups on the D3x looked lovely, if I was going into the market today to buy a setup specifically for weddings it wouldn't be a D800. When you factor in the price of cards, HD space, potentially more computing power, and then most importantly your time in editing the difference in body price between £2000 or £2400 (D800e) and £4700 rapidly reduces.
 
Last edited:
I never said I was a wedding photographer :D So with all due respect, do you actually own a D800E? You don't have to be a pro wedding 'tog to know howto shoot one. I shot one last year, and I'm doing one this year - as a gift. I shot 900 images at the last one, covering the whole day and all scenarios you can think of. I don't rip off shots, I don't do doubles. In the end I processed 300 of the best ones and the bride was more than delighted.

I don't need to do the math, I wouldn't shoot anything near 1200 images. That's overkill, I don't care how experienced you are.

Oh and thanks for the heads up on the expired url ...

"show me 20-30 weddings" ... lol, so you can't have an opinion on something unless you're an old pro then? I'm sure even you could give suggestions on sports photography or landscape or whatever. Just because I don't do it for a living doesn't mean I couldn't, if I wanted to.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
What are you on about? I never said I was a wedding photographer :D So with all due respect, do you actually own a D800E?
Click to expand...

Yes I do.

"show me 20-30 weddings" ... lol, so you can't have an opinion on something unless you're an old pro then? I'm sure even you could give suggestions on sports photography or landscape or whatever. Just because I don't do it for a living doesn't mean I couldn't, if I wanted to.
Click to expand...

My point if not that you couldn't shoot a wedding with a D800 but that if you were doing it week in week out you probably wouldn't chose to. If you have never shot that many weddings in a year and delivered them to clients then no, I don't think you are as qualified to comment as someone that has.....
 
Last edited:
And you're telling us it's a pain to process the larger files?? I'm processing D800E files just as quickly as my old D90 RAWs. People make such a big deal about these mega file sizes! It's like first world problems.
 
No point being smart about it, you're the one pulled me up on it, I was suggesting to the OP, not you. People are allowed differ opinions.
 
2000 images? thats 3 a minute, every minute for 11 hours non stop :D You might be better off with a HD camcorder and just print off stills ;)
 
meonshore said:
As above.

Depending on your budget I'd be suggesting D3s or D4, or even a well loved D3.

You'll rarely need more than 12MP - I shot 8 seasons of weddings on between 6MP and 12MP DSLRs and never failed to deliver large albums and prints at high quality.

I used the D3x for 2.5 weddings and it was a pain to edit down the images because of the size of each file - let alone the volume of disk required to store that many RAW files - even if you only kept them until after album delivery.

The D3x and D800 are much more suited to corporate photography and portraiture (and landscapes and fine art etc) where you would be more likely to use larger images in print and much lower number of frames per job...

You'll also benefit (at least with the D3s and D4) of better high ISO than the D800 and certainly the D3x which I never used in anger above 1600 ISO, and ideally not above 800. 3200 on the D3s and 6400 on the D4 would be equivalent in terms of quality and there isn't any real substitute for that in a dark candlelit church in the middle of winter.
Click to expand...

I have a D800 and agree with you.
 
I own a D800 and I think it would be an odd choice for a wedding photographer. Massive files will eat into your storage in short order (you will have to archive your images for re-orders) and while you don't need a high burst rate for wedding, if you've fired off a few, it can still be chewing it's way through writing for quite a while afterwards. I'd hate my camera to be the reason for missing a shot, especially if it cost me £2K.

Personally I'd probably opt for a D3 or D3s, or maybe even a D600 if I wanted something more portable and lighter. The venerable old D700 is still a by word for reliability amongst wedding photographers I know too, so don't rule that out.

The D800 is clearly made as a studio camera, or for more considered location work where truly large prints are required.. but even then I'd be inclined to go digital medium format for that. I see the D800 as a studio/location all rounder when medium format gear is too impractical. In fact, that's exactly why I bought it.
 
Last edited:
Just typing this as I wait for my laptop to convert a batch of 100 raw files to jpeg taken on my D800E.

It's a great camera and I love it, but can't pretend it's not taking an awful lot longer to process files than it did on my D700.
 
I can't say I noticed much difference in processing time. Then again, I have a 3960X running at 5GHz... but even if it did take twice as long... it's worth it IMO. I bet it's a real difference between D700 files and the D800 on a laptop!
 
I wouldn't feel comfortable with either for several reasons that are similar.

D800 - fire off 16shots and you're waiting 2 minutes for the buffer to clear. File size and waiting time being huge influences as well.

D3x- ISO1600 Max native. Enough said.

I would shoot 800-1500 images at a wedding (after deleting throughout the day) and after editing 3-500 I wouldn't like to think about doing it with D800 files.

I think the choices would be...

D3s
D3
D700
D7000

Before either of the two listed.

Good luck.
 
meonshore said:
With all due respect show me a website with a season of 20-30 weddings (not one that expired 2 weeks ago) and I'll happily take that comment. With no website and a flikr stream and facebook site with no wedding images I can only assume that is conjecture and not based on fact.

Depending on style most wedding photographers shoot between 700 and 2000 images a full wedding. My average was about 1200 for a full days coverage - bridal preps to just after first dance, and I would consider my self fairly restrained. Do the math on 36MP files vs 12 or 16MP files and whilst it isn't impossible to use a D800 setup for wedding coverage, and believe me groups on the D3x looked lovely, if I was going into the market today to buy a setup specifically for weddings it wouldn't be a D800. When you factor in the price of cards, HD space, potentially more computing power, and then most importantly your time in editing the difference in body price between £2000 or £2400 (D800e) and £4700 rapidly reduces.
Click to expand...

I'm quiet happily shooting weddings with one. So much so I'm just about to buy a second to replace my remaining d3s. And I do shoot more then 20-30 weddings a year.

Editing time is no different to files using a d3s. OK the files can take more aggressive processing, but it doesn't take longer. As long as you have enough RAM to ensure never touching the scratch disk in photoshop then there is no speed difference.

I'm sorry but the file size argument with respect to storage is complete rubbish. A fully edited wedding finishes around 50gb - hardly massive, and when I delete rejects that reduces to 20 or so. Against 10 or so for a finished wedding on 2 x d3s. Storage is so cheap, that 20gb wedding isn't going to be an issue.

Pookeyhead said:
I own a D800 and I think it would be an odd choice for a wedding photographer. Massive files will eat into your storage in short order (you will have to archive your images for re-orders) and while you don't need a high burst rate for wedding, if you've fired off a few, it can still be chewing it's way through writing for quite a while afterwards. I'd hate my camera to be the reason for missing a shot, especially if it cost me £2K.
Click to expand...

what are you doing that you miss shots as results of your gear?. You've seriously missed shots cause of write rate to the card?.

Phil Young said:
I wouldn't feel comfortable with either for several reasons that are similar.

D800 - fire off 16shots and you're waiting 2 minutes for the buffer to clear. File size and waiting time being huge influences as well.

D3x- ISO1600 Max native. Enough said.

I would shoot 800-1500 images at a wedding (after deleting throughout the day) and after editing 3-500 I wouldn't like to think about doing it with D800 files.

I think the choices would be...

D3s
D3
D700
D7000

Before either of the two listed.

Good luck.
Click to expand...


you don't shoot weddings though. So...................

One thing that it strikes me everyone misses in this sort of conversation is that the ISO may not be as good as the D3s but its far better then the d700 at 6,400 and certainly produces very useable images at that level. It also seems to get missed the image quality, tones and dynamic range is far above that of the d3/d3s/d700.
 
boyfalldown said:
what are you doing that you miss shots as results of your gear?. You've seriously missed shots cause of write rate to the card?.
Click to expand...

If your buffer is full, it has a buffer delay of between 1 and 2 seconds, and as it takes an age to clear the buffer I can foresee it being a problem for someone who needs to respond quickly sometimes. It's never been an issue for me, but I'm mainly a studio photographer and all of my work is far more planned. I still shoot medium format film.. so clearly the 800 isn't going to be an issue for me. I wouldn't like to be a press photographer with a D800 let's put it that way.
 
Pookeyhead said:
If your buffer is full, it has a buffer delay of between 1 and 2 seconds, and as it takes an age to clear the buffer I can foresee it being a problem for someone who needs to respond quickly sometimes. It's never been an issue for me, but I'm mainly a studio photographer and all of my work is far more planned. I still shoot medium format film.. so clearly the 800 isn't going to be an issue for me. I wouldn't like to be a press photographer with a D800 let's put it that way.
Click to expand...

Nor would I, but the conversation was specifically around its use for wedding photography. For that, it's a non issue
 
Pookeyhead said:
I can't say I noticed much difference in processing time. Then again, I have a 3960X running at 5GHz... but even if it did take twice as long... it's worth it IMO. I bet it's a real difference between D700 files and the D800 on a laptop!
Click to expand...

Agreed...the increased time I'm experiencing is probably because my laptop could do with an upgrade.

But the D800 is sooooo good, I'm more than happy to wait a bit longer for processing..... I can always come here and read the forum while it's doing it :)
 
Phil Young said:
Sorry, I didn't realise you had to shoot them every weekend to have a say here!

Sorry folks, disregard my content, clearly I have no idea what I'm talking about...
Click to expand...

actually Phil now you mention it you seem to speak from a position of authority without any real clue........

for example

D800 - fire off 16shots and you're waiting 2 minutes for the buffer to clear. File size and waiting time being huge influences as well.
Click to expand...

really, thats from experience?

I would shoot 800-1500 images at a wedding (after deleting throughout the day) and after editing 3-500 I wouldn't like to think about doing it with D800 files.
Click to expand...

I've just pointed out that editing time is no different for a d800 (assuming you have RAM to cope with not needed a scratch disk) but yet again the voice of experience

I think the choices would be...

D3s
D3
D700
D7000
Click to expand...

so thats a number of cameras atleast 2 generations old ( and only one thats just a generation old). Do you not think maybe that things like dynamic range/iso/image quality have moved on? No ones saying they aren't great cameras. They are, but things have moved on a little. Incidently the d700 buffer will fill more quickly and take longer to clear then a d800.
 
boyfalldown said:
actually Phil now you mention it you seem to speak from a position of authority without any real clue........

for example

really, thats from experience?

I've just pointed out that editing time is no different for a d800 (assuming you have RAM to cope with not needed a scratch disk) but yet again the voice of experience

so thats a number of cameras atleast 2 generations old ( and only one thats just a generation old). Do you not think maybe that things like dynamic range/iso/image quality have moved on? No ones saying they aren't great cameras. They are, but things have moved on a little. Incidently the d700 buffer will fill more quickly and take longer to clear then a d800.
Click to expand...

You'll have to excuse my tone if I'm being a bit harsh but there's something about wedding photography that makes the photographer very arrogant - because you don't shoot weddings FT then you have no idea what you're talking about.

It's really annoying and something that you don't really get in other areas. You should have seen the uproar when I shot my first wedding and said it was not as stressful as people make out lol all hell broke loose.

Regarding the D800 comments...

I watched a really good comparison video about the D800 and 5D3 which showed a 16 shot burst rate ajd the D800 was dead for 2 minutes, couldn't do anything. The canon kept reeling off shots at a rate of around 1fps.

Regarding editing time.

I run 2.6ghz dual core, 8gb ram. Not exactly a snail.

You're telling me when I load in 50mb RAWs into LR as apposed to the 17mb ones now, I won't notice a speed degraduation?

Lastly.

Don't tell me you will get better images with a D800 than a D700, I'll just bang on about PP.

I understand when people buy equipment there is a lot of justification going on with it and although you are justifying why you have your D800, there are far more photographers that have noticed slower editing times...who to believe...

Like I said, sorry if I sounded a bit harsh and I hope you're not offended but I felt your disregardment for my input very rude and saying "you don't shoot weddings so......" is directly related to my comment RE arrogance. I wouldn't disregard anything anyone says like that, it's just rude.
 
Last edited:
Phil Young said:
You'll have to excuse my tone if I'm being a bit harsh but there's something about wedding photography that makes the photographer very arrogant - because you don't shoot weddings FT then you have no idea what you're talking about.

It's really annoying and something that you don't really get in other areas. You should have seen the uproar when I shot my first wedding and said it was not as stressful as people make out lol all hell broke loose.
Click to expand...

no Phil, its not arrogance or anything else. Its just experience which I have and you don't. Same as you're far better qualified to comment then me as to whats involved in personal training. See the difference now?

Phil Young said:
Regarding the D800 comments...

I watched a really good comparison video about the D800 and 5D3 which showed a 16 shot burst rate ajd the D800 was dead for 2 minutes, couldn't do anything. The canon kept reeling off shots at a rate of around 1fps
Click to expand...
link please. And having tried it earlier I can tell you you are wrong. 100%. It will carry on in the same way.


Phil Young said:
Regarding editing time.

I run 2.6ghz dual core, 8gb ram. Not exactly a snail.

You're telling me when I load in 50mb RAWs into LR as apposed to the 17mb ones now, I won't notice a speed degraduation?
Click to expand...

yes. Exactly that. LR edits a database and preview files. Not the file itself. It makes no difference at all. Incidently 50mp h4D files also edit at the same speed. On your spec you will slow down in photoshop cause you will hit the scratch disk and that will slow you down.

Phil Young said:
Lastly.

Don't tell me you will get better images with a D800 than a D700, I'll just bang on about PP.
Click to expand...

The sensor has higher dynamic range,and is better at high ISO, but better is subjective.

Phil Young said:
I understand when people buy equipment there is a lot of justification going on with it and although you are justifying why you have your D800, there are far more photographers that have noticed slower editing times...who to believe...
Click to expand...

yes Phil.As below I've just corrected alot of wrong information you spout without owning the camera
Phil Young said:
Like I said, sorry if I sounded a bit harsh and I hope you're not offended but I felt your disregardment for my input very rude and saying "you don't shoot weddings so......" is directly related to my comment RE arrogance. I wouldn't disregard anything anyone says like that, it's just rude.
Click to expand...


I'm not offended. I am gobsmacked that someone with no experience of the camera can discuss editing times, buffer rates and a heap of other things for a set of cameras they don't own......
 
Last edited:
I felt that too, and often have on forums or in general when discussing photography with wedding regulars. They do try make you feel like you know nothing, because you don't shoot them all the time. You don't hear landscapers put others down like this, they're more likely to advise, give tips, suggestions, they'll hear you out. They'll realise you know enough, doesn't matter if you shoot landscapes daily/weekly ...

For me, and it boils down to personal preference no matter the style, the D800 is perfect for a wedding. I won't be ripping off shots, I'll be anticipating, and capturing the more important scenarios. The bride has already informed me that she doesn't need 1000s of images, she wants a couple of hundred quality pics. And I'll deliver. No worries.

I use an i7 2.3GHz with turbo boost to 3.3, 8GB RAM, 1TB HDD - it's plenty fast enough to work LR4 & CS6 simultaneously. I've had a few hundred RAWs open and processing between the 2, as I do, and have had no slow down issues.

It's not like you only have a day or 2 to process a wedding, you could do them in batches. Why the need to rush? Take the time to get it right, same when shooting, no need to be ripping, pick off the best shots, unless you're half asleep on the day you should be well able to anticipate the 'special' moments.

This is just my view. I don't need people to agree. I'll still see it this way.
 
boyfalldown said:
no Phil, its not arrogance or anything else. Its just experience which I have and you don't. Same as you're far better qualified to comment then me as to whats involved in personal training. See the difference now?

link please. And having tried it earlier I can tell you you are wrong. 100%. It will carry on in the same way.

yes. Exactly that. LR edits a database and preview files. Not the file itself. It makes no difference at all. Incidently 50mp h4D files also edit at the same speed. On your spec you will slow down in photoshop cause you will hit the scratch disk and that will slow you down.

The sensor has higher dynamic range,and is better at high ISO, but better is subjective.

yes Phil.......

I'm not offended. I am gobsmacked that someone with no experience of the camera can discuss editing times, buffer rates and a heap of other things for a set of cameras they don't own......
Click to expand...

I appreciate the fact that you have the camera and I don't. My knowledge is that of my own research which apprently is wrong.

I'll dig out a link when I'm on my laptop, it will take some searching on YouTube though so won't be doing that on my phone right now...

Fair enough you have more experience of the camera and weddings, I'll back down from that - your initial post to me just got my back up :)

Have time say though I do a lot in PS much more than LR so editing time on that would be factored in...but then again I'm not the one buying it.
 
Cagey75 said:
I felt that too, and often have on forums or in general when discussing photography with wedding regulars. They do try make you feel like you know nothing, because you don't shoot them all the time. You don't hear landscapers put others down like this, they're more likely to advise, give tips, suggestions, they'll hear you out. They'll realise you know enough, doesn't matter if you shoot landscapes daily/weekly ...

For me, and it boils down to personal preference no matter the style, the D800 is perfect for a wedding. I won't be ripping off shots, I'll be anticipating, and capturing the more important scenarios. The bride has already informed me that she doesn't need 1000s of images, she wants a couple of hundred quality pics. And I'll deliver. No worries.

I use an i7 2.3GHz with turbo boost to 3.3, 8GB RAM, 1TB HDD - it's plenty fast enough to work LR4 & CS6 simultaneously. I've had a few hundred RAWs open and processing between the 2, as I do, and have had no slow down issues.

It's not like you only have a day or 2 to process a wedding, you could do them in batches. Why the need to rush? Take the time to get it right, same when shooting, no need to be ripping, pick off the best shots, unless you're half asleep on the day you should be well able to anticipate the 'special' moments.

This is just my view. I don't need people to agree. I'll still see it this way.
Click to expand...

For me, there's 2 types of wedding photographer...

The sniper.
The "hit and hoper".

Sniper will shoot less but have a higher percentage of good shots. Bit more likely to "miss" a shot.

I recently videoed a wedding where a hit and hoper snapped 5k in the day. I edited them and the "good shot" ratio was about 1:20

Made me happy to be a sniper ;) lol.
 
Phil Young said:
I appreciate the fact that you have the camera and I don't. My knowledge is that of my own research which apprently is wrong.

I'll dig out a link when I'm on my laptop, it will take some searching on YouTube though so won't be doing that on my phone right now...

Fair enough you have more experience of the camera and weddings, I'll back down from that - your initial post to me just got my back up :)

Have time say though I do a lot in PS much more than LR so editing time on that would be factored in...but then again I'm not the one buying it.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to get your back up. I'm sorry if I did.

For ps I think you need at least 16gb ram and ideally 24 to avoid any slow down with it
 
I guess I'm a sniper then :D sounds cooler anyhow.
 
boyfalldown said:
I didn't mean to get your back up. I'm sorry if I did.

For ps I think you need at least 16gb ram and ideally 24 to avoid any slow down with it
Click to expand...

I need more really for HD video editing.

I'd like 32gb or more but don't know of any laptop that can accept it (not getting a PC).
 
Firstly thank you,

Some real valid thoughts - all of which are greatly appreciated and valued. RAW file size is an issue, high ISO is a benefit.

In Practice is there a significant image Difference between the D3 and D800 - I mean on image quality. Most prints would be for a wedding album and biggest size would be no larger then 40x30

Some mixed views clearly.

I need a second body but equally - I want to buy a camera for a few years to some.

Lens are all Nikon - 24-70f2.8 and 70-200f2.8 and prime 85f1.8 and 50f1.4 - using these on my D700 but demands increasing for second body which will become main shooting camera

S.
 
boyfalldown said:
link please. And having tried it earlier I can tell you you are wrong. 100%. It will carry on in the same way.
Click to expand...


I just tried this with mine. Fired off 16 shots, and then it was dead as a dodo for around 20 seconds... then fired another shot... then another 20 seconds... etc,. It took 1minute 42 seconds to clear the buffer totally after shooting 16 shots and then leaving it. A faster card will help, but seriously... this is NOT a camera for those who need to work fast.

A faster card is essential if you're bothered about speed. This was all with a 45MB/sec Sandisk Pro SD card BTW... not not a crappy class 4 card from Tesco.

You really need a fast CF card in a D800 to get anywhere.

This is with a 90MB/sec 600x CF card.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CUKp7kXhI8

With a 1000X Lexar Pro in it it would be usable perhaps, but for thos who upgraded from a D7000 and already have a wealth of SD cards, like me.. fast shooting is just not an option.
 
Last edited:
In what situation would you need to rip off 16 shots or more?? Sports? A D3s would be yer man, or D4 if you can afford it. The D800 isn't designed for ripping shots. I can't imagine a wedding being the kind of event that requires ripping shots either.

Use 95mb/s cards.
 
Cagey75 said:
In what situation would you need to rip off 16 shots or more?? Sports? A D3s would be yer man, or D4 if you can afford it. The D800 isn't designed for ripping shots. I can't imagine a wedding being the kind of event that requires ripping shots either.

Use 95mb/s cards.
Click to expand...


Correct, which is why it has a modest continuous shooting speed of 4 fps.
From the Nikon press release last February:-
"This makes this model optimal for landscape and artistic photography with which higher resolution and clear definition is demanded."

There is no point getting this camera then being disappointed at not being able to fire it off like a machine gun.
In addition to using a faster cards (as per above) shoot lossless compressed raw files which are much smaller than uncompressed files and are exactly what they say - lossless.
 
Cagey75 said:
In what situation would you need to rip off 16 shots or more?? Sports? A D3s would be yer man, or D4 if you can afford it. The D800 isn't designed for ripping shots. I can't imagine a wedding being the kind of event that requires ripping shots either.

Use 95mb/s cards.
Click to expand...

Confetti. Easily.
 
16 shots for a bit of confetti?? Wha? Not much sniping then. And even if, you'll have certainly grabbed the shots required, a minute or so of buffer clearing right after won't be missing much. Also, that's what back up cameras are for. One is clearing it's buffer? well, use the spare ...

I shoot 12 bit losless compressed. I can't see any difference between that and 14 bit uncompressed tbh, bar the massive file size difference. 29mb files are enough for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top