Comments on: The First Real World Nikon D600 ISO Test http://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test Video Blog for Creative Professionals Thu, 20 Jun 2013 07:10:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: davidjvelasquezhttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-68519 davidjvelasquez Thu, 28 Feb 2013 16:13:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-68519 This is easy understood with an example, lets say you and an given area of 4 square inches. Lets call this area A1. Lets say that each square inch is a pixel.
This area was build by a= 2 inches (vertical) and b= 2 inch

If you want to double the area, you will have to multiply A1 times 2= A1x2= 4 square inches x 2= 8 square inches
Ok, if you double a, or b, same result, you have double the area, but more resolutions means more pixels in the SAME area. And the shape of that area is constant. Now lets call the initial A1 area, the standard area to report the so call resolution of the camera (p.e. 4megapixels, 8 MP, 16 MP…. You name it) remember they use the same base of area to report the number of pixels.
Now, if you want to put the double of pixels in the same area, and in order to maintain the same ratio, a=b, you will have to put 4 times the pixels, if you don’t do that you will have and area with double of pixels and 2 empty spots.
Conclusion: More pixel located in the same are will means more resolution.
Double the amount of pixels in the same area is not possible because a square configuration must be kept.
4 times the amount of initial pixels will kept the square area intact.
Your math is correct, your conclusions are not.

]]>
By: davidjvelasquezhttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-68520 davidjvelasquez Thu, 28 Feb 2013 16:13:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-68520 This is easy understood with an example, lets say you and an given area of 4 square inches. Lets call this area A1. Lets say that each square inch is a pixel.
This area was build by a= 2 inches (vertical) and b= 2 inch

If you want to double the area, you will have to multiply A1 times 2= A1x2= 4 square inches x 2= 8 square inches
Ok, if you double a, or b, same result, you have double the area, but more resolutions means more pixels in the SAME area. And the shape of that area is constant. Now lets call the initial A1 area, the standard area to report the so call resolution of the camera (p.e. 4megapixels, 8 MP, 16 MP…. You name it) remember they use the same base of area to report the number of pixels.
Now, if you want to put the double of pixels in the same area, and in order to maintain the same ratio, a=b, you will have to put 4 times the pixels, if you don’t do that you will have and area with double of pixels and 2 empty spots.
Conclusion: More pixel located in the same are will means more resolution.
Double the amount of pixels in the same area is not possible because a square configuration must be kept.
4 times the amount of initial pixels will kept the square area intact.
Your math is correct, your conclusions are not.

]]>
By: Stephen Hunthttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-52307 Stephen Hunt Mon, 08 Oct 2012 22:06:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-52307 You are both right.
We have “pixel resolution” which is the number of pixels (h x w) – Tam is right, Then we have “Spacial Resolution” which is the number of pixels in a given space (e.g. pixels per inch) – sasasa is right.

So basically if you are going to put someone down and call them a misled nerd, then you should make sure they are wrong before you say it.

and considering you love using wikipedia, here is the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution

Edit: I see you added this link. Maybe you should have read it.

]]>
By: Christopher Zellerhttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-52284 Christopher Zeller Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:02:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-52284 It doesn’t do this unfortunately. Maybe a firmware hack?

]]>
By: Christopher Zellerhttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-52283 Christopher Zeller Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:01:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-52283 My D70 never bumped modes but my D7000 mode dial is both taller and looser and it bumped modes all the time coming in and out of a holster bag or on my shoulder.

]]>
By: Omar A. Sierraltahttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-51648 Omar A. Sierralta Tue, 02 Oct 2012 07:46:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-51648 After reading Ken Rockwell’s D600 review, Im convinced too that this is just marketing stuff, D4 D800 and D600 have the same innards but just packed differently and with an adapted firmware for a certain target market. And makes sense seeing the performance in dxomarks.com they are so close, that’s suspicious. And if Canon did it with the 1Dx and the 1Dc (swapping just firmware to have a whole new cam) pretty sure Nikon did it too…

]]>
By: Gab Labellehttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-51637 Gab Labelle Tue, 02 Oct 2012 03:19:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-51637 Well you can actually see the screen dim and adjust without the aperture without going back and forth many times.

]]>
By: Marius Mariakinashttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-51165 Marius Mariakinas Sat, 22 Sep 2012 12:35:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-51165 So Lee how was the wedding? :)

]]>
By: drukknophttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-51164 drukknop Sat, 22 Sep 2012 10:13:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-51164 Apart from the higher pixel count, I wouldn’t buy a D600, D7000 nor a D800. None of the new camera’s really impress me much. Just get a cheap D700 and you’re good to go. If you want light and small get a nice micro 4/3 system like the Olympus OM-D.

]]>
By: Eric Gouldhttp://fstoppers.com/the-first-real-world-nikon-d600-iso-test/comment-page-1#comment-51139 Eric Gould Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:32:00 +0000 http://fstoppers.com/?p=52507#comment-51139 This is one area where Canon just makes my Nikon eyes weep. The LCD on the back of  the 5d mark iii is so, too use an old expression, WYSIWYG – makes shooting at night such a painless and fun experience.  Let me know if there are any work arounds, external monitor etc. for the Nikon.  Also, kills me is zooming into focus on the Nikon LCD –  it looks like a TV from the 50′s – especially at night. Unfortunately the same problem on the D800′s. Please Nikon get me a solution – today. (It’s ok to call late in the evening – I’ll stay up way passed bed time to see this dream a reality.)  This works fine on Canon – even the Rebels outshine Nikon here. So, if your asking – yes –  I do have a serious case of LCD envy.

]]>