Lens Resolution

P

paulminus273

Suspended / Banned
Messages
544
Name
paul
Edit My Images
Yes
I no longer have my D700 so MPB have D780 and D850 at a price that is affordable and not much difference. Use mostly studio and Landscape, will the FX lenses I have be good enough to show the difference , Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 and Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR. Plus is there any other consideration to think about. Thanks for any help give.
 
IMO it is less about the lenses... there is (almost) always an increase in recorded resolution when you increase sensor resolution; but when lens limited (normally) it is far less than the numbers indicate. However, there are other differences/benefits/tradeoffs.

The D780 has a more advanced image processor (Expeed 6 vs 5)... really only makes a difference if recording jpegs or videos.
The D780 has more advanced video capabilities.
The D780 uses dual SD cards (cheaper).

The D850 has a more advanced AF system (153pt vs 51pt). The 51pt system has better "blocked shot" behavior IMO, but otherwise the 153 system is far better.
The D850 has higher resolution.
The D850 does not have an AA filter. Allows camera/lens to use more of the resolution, but increases chances of recording moire.
The D850 uses CFE and SD. CFE is more robust and faster; but more expensive, requires two readers, and you may not (probably won't) need the increased capability; pretty sure the D850 can't actually use it.

Of the two, for critical photography I would (did) pick the D850 and probably upgrade lenses at some point. For less critical use and/or video I would pick the D780.
 
Last edited:
When I bought my 850 a couple of years ago, I had a look at the 780 as it was a little newer, but it was a very brief look because the 850 ticked more boxes.

I'm very pleased that I made the right choice, it is a great camera - I'm now looking for another to keep as a spare because I've sold my D800 & D810 . . .
 
@sk66 i had to go double check the d780 speck,I was very suprised it has an AA filter, I wonder why they went back to that after removing it from most of the later 3 5 and 7 series and d810 and now 850?
OP
Have you considered the D810 re price and still a damned good camera?
 
Depends what you want. A 850 is a much bigger camera than a 780. I have a 850 and a 750 and the 750 gets more use. The 750 is easier to carry about and the files are a lot smaller. The 850 is probably better at everything else. A 780 is a 750 with enhanced live view and video so if size is not important get the 850 (and an extra hard drive).

Another thing is that the 850 focus points cover a bit more of the screen.

If you shoot at low apertures and pixel peep, your lenses may not seem great on a 850. In reality, the pictures won't be any worse as both cameras can out-resolve human eyes. FX primes are really cheap if you feel the need for better resolution anyway.
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
@sk66 i had to go double check the d780 speck,I was very suprised it has an AA filter, I wonder why they went back to that after removing it from most of the later 3 5 and 7 series and d810 and now 850?
OP
Have you considered the D810 re price and still a damned good camera?
Click to expand...
It is the fact that most lenses, in most situations, cannot resolve small details in a scene down to the level of the high resolution sensors that allows the removal of the AA filter; without creating a probability of recording moire. Nikon seems to think that a 5um pixel pitch is the balance point and <5um (>24MP FF) doesn't need one.
 
sk66 said:
It is the fact that most lenses, in most situations, cannot resolve small details in a scene down to the level of the high resolution sensors that allows the removal of the AA filter; without creating a probability of recording moire. Nikon seems to think that a 5um pixel pitch is the balance point and <5um (>24MP FF) doesn't need one.
Click to expand...
Excuses about moire make me tired. I can get plenty of moire with my heavy aa sub 24mp canons whenever I want. You just lose resolution all the time without any benefits.
You can always deal with moire in post or just pop a frame at diffraction aperture like f11
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Excuses about moire make me tired. I can get plenty of moire with my heavy aa sub 24mp canons whenever I want. You just lose resolution all the time without any benefits.
You can always deal with moire in post or just pop a frame at diffraction aperture like f11
Click to expand...
If you realize you are getting moire there are several things you can do that may help... but realizing it is the problem. And I have not found any method in post that is particularly good at dealing with moire; at least not difficult cases/examples.
 
sk66 said:
If you realize you are getting moire there are several things you can do that may help... but realizing it is the problem. And I have not found any method in post that is particularly good at dealing with moire; at least not difficult cases/examples.
Click to expand...
LR adjustment brush is pretty decent, fixed the problems for me quite a few times. Video may be a harder case through. When you have roofs or some particular fabrics you just know you will have it. But you can't have it at f/11, or when not in focus.
 
Looking at your lenses, I think the 70-200 may be the weak point. That is a film/DX-era lens and the D850 will emphasise the weaknesses in the corners. The VR2 and FL addressed those points, corner to corner sharpness is better. I have the VR2 and happy with it, it is not perfect (focus-breathing being one flaw), and unless I see the FL at a very reasonable price I will only replace it by a Z (when I get the Z8). I don't know about the Tamron, I hear only good things, although I do have the K-mount version which showed up my Nikkor 24-70/2.8 non-VR to quite an extent the Nikkor was sold and not been replaced.
 
welshwizard645 said:
Looking at your lenses, I think the 70-200 may be the weak point. That is a film/DX-era lens and the D850 will emphasise the weaknesses in the corners. The VR2 and FL addressed those points, corner to corner sharpness is better. I have the VR2 and happy with it, it is not perfect (focus-breathing being one flaw), and unless I see the FL at a very reasonable price I will only replace it by a Z (when I get the Z8). I don't know about the Tamron, I hear only good things, although I do have the K-mount version which showed up my Nikkor 24-70/2.8 non-VR to quite an extent the Nikkor was sold and not been replaced.
Click to expand...
if you - rightly - consider 70-200mm lenses lacking on high resolution cameras, the 24-70mm will be far far worse - in particular ALL DSLR models. Mirrorless designs got them better but they will never match good primes
 
I was just referring to the Mk1 LLP.... the original was launched long before D3 came out, and it was considered better in the centre being optimised for DX whereas the later ones have better edge to edge overall sharpness. The Zs are better still I admit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top