36 Megapixel (7360 x 4912) Nikon D800 Pictured

I wonder what the image quality will be like.
It swamps my 1100D lol.

36megapixel that is overkill, imagine the RAW image size !

Really, they should be focusing more on a larger dynamic range and better high ISO performance than more raw MP.

Even for the majority of pro photographers, 10MP is more than enough (10MP allows you to print a standard A4 sheet picture at 300 dpi).
Take a cue from Cannon's latest pro body and stick to 18MP (A3 print size at 300dpi) focusing on better IQ instead.
Anyone who pro who wants to print poster size or larger will be shooting with a large format body anyways...

And joytech, your 1100D actually has really good pixel level quality, better than my 60D even.
Just slap some good glass on it and it will rock!

*drooooool* Great post! Thanks for sharing

Considering 14-bits RAW, that's 60.3MB.

Bullshit, I work for Nikon and I don't have any information about any new DSLR.

Moreover:
1. any new FX camera will allow at least ISO 12800 (equal to D3S) or more likely 25600 (Canon 1D X)
2. 36mpx sensor is very unlikely, Nikon has always preferred image quality rather than resolution
3. Face-recognition is a feature for people taking snapshots and family portraits with $200 Coolpix, not for professionals who spend $3900 for one camera body. The professional cameras don't even have full auto mode.
4. $3900 is a price between D700 and D3 so for a flagship model it would be too cheap and for D700 successor too expensive.

I'm not at all convinced by these claims of 36MP that would take the camera well beyond the top Nikon resolution of the D3x (currently sitting at circa 24MP).

Nikon have a history of releasing new sensors in the top line cameras first and this would go against that. I would think it's more likely we'll see the D3x style sensor in the D800, perhaps one that has been improved to performs better at high ISO (the D3x as good as it is does not perform as well at low light as the D3s or indeed the D3).

I still think it's more likely we'll see a new top of the line camera first perhaps a D4 or new D3 before a D800 but we'll see......

here comes the noise! barf! 5dmkII ftw!!!

+1. I mean what is the use of ISO 6400(hell imagine 12800) to begin with. Unless this is the best sensor EVER made, it is going to look like someone finger painted the image.

IF they make a new camera, its time to get better low light performance with less noise. Hell even the coolpix S8100 seems to have better low light performance(backside illuminated sensor maybe?) then my D90. It does not have as much clarity, but for a quick low light without having a powerful flash, it is pretty good(It auto focus is the worst ever tho...It is good to see a point and shoot that rarely selects an iso over 200-300, this helps keep image noise down.).

When I can, my D90 is kept at the lowest ISO setting just to keep the image looking better.

nonsense

If you take a pic, then crop it down to a tenth of the original pic or less, then blow it up...you will need every bit of those megapixels.

@nukemaster - huh? what? In the first paragraph you question the value of high ISO settings - in the second you suggest they focus on low light performance with less noise. The two are synonymous! If you want to capture an image in low light without adding light (i.e. flash) then either you use a larger aperture, use a higher ISO sensitivity or increase exposure time (slow shutter speed). Increasing aperture is a lens function - it's independent of the camera body. That leaves shutter speed and ISO. If your S8100 is able to produce an image in low light at ISO 200-300 then it's probably of low clarity due to the extremely long exposure time. Put it on a tripod. Perhap image stabilization is helping you out. That's also a lens function in Nikon DSLRs so not something a new body will help with.

All that being said, I found this article by following a link from Tom's Hardware under the heading "Latest News" and it lead to a second-hand version of an unfounded conjecture, originally posted on a site that actually contains the word "rumours" in its URL. Latest News? Really? Is the "news" that someone posted a rumour on a rumours site?

That jump in resolution seems a bit unrealistic... where is Nikon getting that sensor from?

And to the people saying the high pixel count is not needed you're wrong. In the pro field more is always better. Of course other things matter too, and of those more is better as well. It blows my mind how far DSLRs have come. The ISO seems a bit low on this camera though if the above report is true.

I just hope they aren't releasing a successor for the d7000 any time super soon. I just bought one and if they announce that they have a new 20+ megapixel camera for the same price as the d7000, I'm gonna be irritated. Of course, I'm still loving this camera! I definitely wouldn't be surprised if they really are releasing a successor to the d700. The d7000 has a 16.2 mp sensor while the d700 only has a 12 mp one. I'd be pretty surprised if they have a 36 mp sensor up their sleeve. The file size of that thing in RAW would be absolutely nuts...

I have respect for Tomshardware, but please don't post anything based on Nikonrumors. I followed this site for a year or so, and I haven't seen even one rumor/speculation post end up correct. The site also has no direct connection to Nikon, or even links to their marketing department, so like all their other previous rumors, I doubt that this random website would be the first to have a picture of a camera that hasn't even been announced yet. I don't expect your sources to be academic every time, but quoting a rumor site (including their made up specs, made up announcement and release dates, and even the made up price) is just bad. There is nothing to back up any of this "information."

For anyone who says 36megapixels is overkill you don't know photography. The more pixels the better. RAW pictures is precisely why there's 2 memory slots

Well otacon72, thank you for the education in photography, but what people are saying is that 18MP is more than enough for pretty much anyone except fashion and landscape photographers, and that if they had to choose between resolution and image quality, they'd pick IQ. Also, pro sports photogs, who've forgotten more about photography than you'll ever know, would definitely rather have lower resolution and higher fps, so it's not all about pixels. And that's YOUR photography lesson for the day.

High ISO values? Only for extremely long expositions of night sky.

Most people who are buying an SLR care about image quality, not specs. These high MP counts mean nothing most of the time; zoom into an image at 100% and it'll be grainy anyway.

Kodak's 50 MP sensor is being used by Hasselbald and

hetneo : High ISO values? Only for extremely long expositions of night sky.has been since about 2008.

Fireworks???

back when film was still used as the norm, we looked at a pro photographer who used a disposable camera to take some really amazing shots, crap we never thought was possible outside of a slr. for almost every application, the photographer matters far more than the camera.




clarity of picture > size of picture.

Finally, a camera for me to take a picture the size of 10 acres, lay it out in a corn field, and show it to the astronauts in the space station.

The usual naysayers against MP count has reared its ugly head again.

For the semi-professionals using these cameras, the MP count IS important. These cameras already have amazing ISO sensitivity to begin with. The semi-pros need to be able to see every detail possible.

I'm still taking pictures with my OLD 8MP camera, and the pictures on my camera are amazing.
So I can't even begin to imagine what 36MP or 4 and half times more than my camera would look like.

They are not, backside lit sensors capture more light(because they are more efficient by way of a redesign) and there by do so with less noise(an issue at higher sensitivities). no need for iso settings that make the image look like it was taken with a phone now is there?

I am fully aware longer exposure lets more light(at the cost of quality in some cases)
and that opening the aperture will capture more light at the cost of depth of field.

Thanks for stating the obvious. I am saying better sensors are better then larger megapixels.

on the S8100(i do not own one of those by the way, just got to play with it), I said it takes ALL its pictures at lower ISO(not saying a night photo will not get to 800+) then most of the other Nikon point and shoot camera's and has far less noise because of it I had seen many others running auto 800+ indoors with flash, they looked like crap...

U must be a pro photographer than, huh? Well, u are wrong on that one.

U surely don't think that Nikon giant has only one factory, do u?

My BS detector is ringing... doubtful this would float. I think a lot of folks are wishing for an upgrade to the D700, so NikonRumors gave them one...

36mp will be too much for aps-c sized sensor, using it will just uncover the flaws of your most expensive lens.

OK kids, time to straighten out a few things.

I've never heard of a "D700m," just the plain D700, unless it's the name used in some markets.

This "D800" as proposed is a full frame sensor, not an APS-C. Also, ISO 6400 and above is VERY useful. There is no comparison between high ISO in a back illuminated CMOS sensor in a bridge camera and a full frame DSLR; at least for any photos you want to publish or sell to people.

I regularly shoot my D700 in nightclubs, caves, and local concerts, where flash is not allowed. I can go up to ISO 4000 before the dynamic range and colors start going south. One of the big selling points of the D3s is it can take clean photos at ISO 12,800 and even go up to 102,400 but the pictures are only marginal. And no, you don't need this for fireworks; those are really bright, you just need a steady mount and a 2-5 second exposure,

That said, I doubt this is real. Nikon normally releases first a flagship model, then a consumer one, a high speed sports one, and a large image size portrait/landscape one; but they haven't always been consistent Enhanced/improved models are followed by an "s" at the end of the model name.

The D3 was followed by the D3X, D3s, D700, and D300/D300s. There was no high speed model as there was probably no need since the D3 did well as it is, and the D700 was really what the D300 should have been.

The upcoming model should be the D4; the "D800" seems more like a "D700X" than something new. A lot of us have been hoping for a D3s sensor (which is different from the one in the D3) in a D700 body. This clearly isn't it, not does it make sense in Nikon's naming scheme and release pattern. Maybe it's all they can do after the earthquake and Thailand floods, but I doubt it.

I would argue that anyone that crops to 1/10 or less of the picture then makes a large print is really neither going to care about image quality (final or initial) nor spend the cash on a DSLR.


This is so true; I wish I could +1000 you.


More MP is not inherently bad, just massively overkill for the mast majority of photographers (pro and not alike).
As stated above, even a 10MP image is large enough to make an A4 print without dropping below 300dpi.

The real issue with high density sensors is that you must reduce the size of the photosites which reduces the capacity of each to capture light.
As the capacity to capture light is reduced, each photosite will give a less accurate readout therefor increasing noise, reducing dynamic range and overall pixel level quality.

Personally, I almost never print larger than A4 and only once or twice have printed A3 or larger (18MP to stay above 300dpi); this probably holds true for the vast majority of photographers.
With this in mind, I would rather that the majority of advances in sensor tech went towards better quality instead of stuffing more pixels on the same surface area.

IM NOT THAT BOTHERED ABOUT THE D700 REPLACEMENT, excepr for the fact there will be some real D700 bargains around. I will buy a second d700 body as it is a stunning camera that gives wonderfull files , i especially like the HIgh end ISO low nose levels i can get from it
cheers don