On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 19:02:25 +1300, Me wrote:

On 3/03/2012 6:03 p.m., Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
wrote:
Downsize the D4 images or whatever, but the output from the D3S is
still the best of any DSLR.

http://tinyurl.com/7mmbmkq

Perhaps your subjective opinion is... eerrrrrr, less that valid?

Here's something a little less difficult for you the
analyze. See if you can tell us in what way it supports
your bull**** opinion?

http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/TestIm/ISO200snr.gif
http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/TestIm/ISO3200snr.gif
http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/Te...SO12800snr.gif

What you are most interested in, since you probably
don't know, is where the graphs show different cameras
in each ISO at the -6 EV and lower. Specifically the
D3S is the light green color, while a normalized to 12
MP D800 graph is in red and a normalized to 12 MP D4
graph is in blue.

In all cases, but particularly at ISO 200, the D4 and
D800 both have better SNR than the D3 and D3S.

This information (collated by Marianne Oelund, Bill Claff, and others)
just ain't going to "get through". The forums on DPReview are full of it.
I'd hoped the 5dIII would have been near enough to 36mp to quell
inter-brand BS on what "perfect pixel density" is. Dammit, now the
Canon 5DII apologists will be arguing for exactly what they argued
against when Canon had more pixels.

Have you ben following the conversations on those DP Review boards?
It's hilarious. Apparently, Canon has introduced the camera the
Nikonians want while Nikon has introduced the camera the Cannonites
want. Neither side is pleased with their company's introduction. For
me, the 5D III is what I was looking for. Same resolution but vastly
improved metering and AF, as well as better sealing. 22MP is plenty
for me, and those 75M Nikon files could be a bit much. I'll be
upgrading to the III in about 6 months.