No (I'm more confident on this point one that the next). Regardless which camera you use, you will have an intended final result (print, online image etc), so the question is which camera will give the best result. It's not important which one looks best at 100%, because 100% is down to how many pixels you have, and the pixel (or is it dot) density of your monitor.doesn't that not negate the point in having a 36mp camera when you are going to reduce it to 12mp pictures. so if you want to use it as intended t will be worse.
I don't think so, but I'd need to test to know. I think this is again down to viewing at 100% - a reviewer will point out that at 100% on your D800 you can see you've got motion blur, and thus not used your camera to its full potential (bad form). But I don't think (I'm prepared to be corrected) the printed image will look worse than with a D700 - it's just there are instances were it won't look better, as it should.okay what i thought was that even in normal light you will need a higher shutter speed compared to a d700 to get as sharp a picture due to the higher mp.
But when we're into high iso, we're into a different game - we're making the best of a bad situation. We're not talking about 6 feet prints of a beautiful landscape, we're trying to get nice 10" prints of a bride or basketball player, so the same level of precision (camera on tripod) isn't required.
I wasn't really expecting an improvement for wedding togs, but for portrait (studio) and wedding togs it looks like it could do both jobs (I don't think you need more than 4fps at a wedding do you?).im not saying that its bad for weddings just that there is no big improvement,especially in fps or iso from what I've seen so far.
If you just do weddings, I imagine the D3s or D4 is better, and the D700 mostly good enough. It will be interesting to learn more about the differences though.this is why i didn't pre order one.