# D800 price are falling, what to do...



## coastalconn (Jul 25, 2014)

I've been toying with the idea of going FF for a while now.  D800 prices seem to be falling well below 2k in the used market and I am teetering on grabbing one.  The wait for the unicorn d400 seems to be non existent.  The one thing I can't quite get through my head is how noise compares in DX mode to the D7100.  I know FF is 1 stop better more DR etc, but when I was shooting with the D600 the noise seemed about the same as the D7100 when the same shot was cropped to the same size.  I know most comparisons are done with "equivelent FOV in the other direction framing the same shot.  I also see that the Tamron does even better on a FF supposedly.  What are the thoughts of my TPF faithful?  Even if the D400 is announced at photokina, other than speed will it really be better than the proven IQ of the D800?


----------



## TWright33 (Jul 25, 2014)

I'm also wondering the same thing you are right now. 

I'm just going to sit here and listen


----------



## ruifo (Jul 25, 2014)

It will indeed be a great and interesting time to getting a good deal for a D800 or a D800E.


----------



## DevC (Jul 25, 2014)

^^Hopefully the new ones will drop in price too.

Would love to go full frame


----------



## ruifo (Jul 25, 2014)

^^
What I understand is that the D810 replaces both the D800 and the D800E, so new ones will only endure duriung the current shop stock. And their prodution will be terminated. Ony used will be availible in a few time. Or am I wrong?


----------



## molested_cow (Jul 25, 2014)

Hey hey, if I were you, I'd just go for the D810 instead. Why? You mentioned that you wanted a D400 instead. Well, the D810 now shoots RAW in smaller formats too, which means you can shoot in crop mode in RAW. Plus many other small but somewhat significant perks, I think it's a more logical choice than simply going for the D800.

My friend bought a D800 a few months ago and he now hates himself.


----------



## hopdaddy (Jul 25, 2014)

I'm Holding out till I can get the D810 ,now . .............. Soon I hope ,But now I want to see if there are any "Bugs " to be fix with the new ones .?


----------



## Derrel (Jul 25, 2014)

molested_cow said:


> Hey hey, if I were you, I'd just go for the D810 instead. Why? You mentioned that you wanted a D400 instead. Well, the D810 now shoots RAW in smaller formats too, which means you can shoot in crop mode in RAW. Plus many other small but somewhat significant perks, I think it's a more logical choice than simply going for the D800.
> 
> My friend bought a D800 a few months ago and he now hates himself.



The new sRAW is useless. Thom Hogan details the pitfalls of sRAW...basically he calls it "11-bit JPEG". The data is highly compromised, and it absolutely KILLS the buffer AND the damned things are just a tiny,tiny bit smaller than 12-bit compressed raw!!! The buffer goes down from 58 compressed 12-bit RAWs to a mere 18 frames in sRAW...it is a useless feature...there's no significant file size savings, and the data is already mangled. The data is not really raw either. It's a lose-lose situation.

The sRaw Myth | byThom | Thom Hogan


----------



## runnah (Jul 25, 2014)

D800 as it sits now is still a 5 year camera. If it weren't for video I'd have gotten one. The 810 seems to be a very minor upgrade.


----------



## bc_steve (Jul 25, 2014)

Go full frame and you'll need a longer lens! 

I am thinking about upgrading the ol' D7000 too.  The used market isn't all that good up here away from the bigger cities so a new D810 may be my best option.  Saving a third of the price and getting a D800(E) sounds like the smart choice though.


----------



## runnah (Jul 25, 2014)

bc_steve said:


> The used market isn't all that good up here




How many pelts does a D810 cost?


----------



## bc_steve (Jul 25, 2014)

runnah said:


> bc_steve said:
> 
> 
> > The used market isn't all that good up here
> ...



20-25 wolf pelts otta do it


----------



## runnah (Jul 25, 2014)

bc_steve said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > bc_steve said:
> ...



Well get in your bark canoe and start trapping! Maybe you can get a few beaver and get a new flash.


----------



## photoguy99 (Jul 25, 2014)

Are you sure the bigger sensor is what you want? The 24 megapixel crop sensors have substantially smaller pixel pitch that the D800. If you're cropping significantly, all the big sensor does is allow your aim to be worse. Which might be worth it right there, to be sure.

That 36Mp sensor sounds so good until you do the arithmetic. For maximum reach the 24 crops can be better.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 25, 2014)

photoguy99 said:


> Are you sure the bigger sensor is what you want? The 24 megapixel crop sensors have substantially smaller pixel pitch that the D800. If you're cropping significantly, all the big sensor does is allow your aim to be worse. Which might be worth it right there, to be sure.
> 
> That 36Mp sensor sounds so good until you do the arithmetic. For maximum reach the 24 crops can be better.


huh ??
:scratch:


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 25, 2014)

I think it's one of those timey wimey things


----------



## photoguy99 (Jul 25, 2014)

I can't really think of a better way to say it then I already did.

In DX crop mode the D800 becomes a 15mp camera, more or less. The 3300 (and higher end friends) is a 24 mp crop sensor camera.

The D800 had a lot going for it. But for some of the use cases wildlife people see, and generally people interested in maximizing reach, the modern crop sensor may deliver more usable performance than the D800. I dare say coastal is all aware of this, I bring it up because I am a pedant.


----------



## ruifo (Jul 25, 2014)

It'd need a 54MPix FF sensor to be equivalent to a DX 24MPix sensor.
It'll get there, eventually, despite all the complains.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 25, 2014)

photoguy99 said:


> I can't really think of a better way to say it then I already did.
> 
> In DX crop mode the D800 becomes a 15mp camera, more or less. The 3300 (and higher end friends) is a 24 mp crop sensor camera.
> 
> The D800 had a lot going for it. But for some of the use cases wildlife people see, and generally people interested in maximizing reach, the modern crop sensor may deliver more usable performance than the D800. I dare say coastal is all aware of this, I bring it up because I am a pedant.



Yup.  I misread it .. because I have a 24mp FF and you were talking about a 24mp crop.
I also have a 16mp crop


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jul 25, 2014)

Get a D800e or D810. Skip the D800.


----------



## Tailgunner (Jul 25, 2014)

coastalconn said:


> I've been toying with the idea of going FF for a while now.  D800 prices seem to be falling well below 2k in the used market and I am teetering on grabbing one.  The wait for the unicorn d400 seems to be non existent.  The one thing I can't quite get through my head is how noise compares in DX mode to the D7100.  I know FF is 1 stop better more DR etc, but when I was shooting with the D600 the noise seemed about the same as the D7100 when the same shot was cropped to the same size.  I know most comparisons are done with "equivelent FOV in the other direction framing the same shot.  I also see that the Tamron does even better on a FF supposedly.  What are the thoughts of my TPF faithful?  Even if the D400 is announced at photokina, other than speed will it really be better than the proven IQ of the D800?



Still no signs of a D400 I see. 

Anyhow, I switched from a D7100 to a D800 and noticed improved performance as far as noise goes. Especially in low light conditions. Example was shooting our son's basketball games last year. I made the switch from the D7100 to D800 during the middle of the season. Anyways, I found that I would shoot most of my shots using the D800 @3200 ISO where I had to bump the D7100 up to 6400 ISO. I saw quite a bit of noise on the D7100 6400 ISO shots compared to the D800's 3200 ISO shots. Speed wise, the D800 isn't a sports body but it did a really good job shooting his basketball games. I'm just not sure how well that will carry over to wide life photography. The D800 is in my opinion an awesome body but I mainly shoot landscapes and architecture.


----------



## coastalconn (Jul 25, 2014)

molested_cow said:


> Hey hey, if I were you, I'd just go for the D810 instead. Why? You mentioned that you wanted a D400 instead. Well, the D810 now shoots RAW in smaller formats too, which means you can shoot in crop mode in RAW. Plus many other small but somewhat significant perks, I think it's a more logical choice than simply going for the D800.
> My friend bought a D800 a few months ago and he now hates himself.


Small raw doesn't do much for me, and I can give about 3300 reasons why, lol.  I'm looking at the 1700-1800 range...



bc_steve said:


> Go full frame and you'll need a longer lens!
> 
> I am thinking about upgrading the ol' D7000 too.  The used market isn't all that good up here away from the bigger cities so a new D810 may be my best option.  Saving a third of the price and getting a D800(E) sounds like the smart choice though.


Well that would only leave the Nikon 800 F5.6 or the sigmonster, lol...



photoguy99 said:


> Are you sure the bigger sensor is what you want? The 24 megapixel crop sensors have substantially smaller pixel pitch that the D800. If you're cropping significantly, all the big sensor does is allow your aim to be worse. Which might be worth it right there, to be sure.
> That 36Mp sensor sounds so good until you do the arithmetic. For maximum reach the 24 crops can be better.


I've been overstuffing those 24 MP lately between the Osprey and "george"  I guess my question is if the quality of those 15.3MP are better at higher ISO than the 24 MP.



Vince.1551 said:


> Get a D800e or D810. Skip the D800.


  Price 



Tailgunner said:


> coastalconn said:
> 
> 
> > I've been toying with the idea of going FF for a while now.  D800 prices seem to be falling well below 2k in the used market and I am teetering on grabbing one.  The wait for the unicorn d400 seems to be non existent.  The one thing I can't quite get through my head is how noise compares in DX mode to the D7100.  I know FF is 1 stop better more DR etc, but when I was shooting with the D600 the noise seemed about the same as the D7100 when the same shot was cropped to the same size.  I know most comparisons are done with "equivelent FOV in the other direction framing the same shot.  I also see that the Tamron does even better on a FF supposedly.  What are the thoughts of my TPF faithful?  Even if the D400 is announced at photokina, other than speed will it really be better than the proven IQ of the D800?
> ...


Hey, TG, how is the buffer in 1.2x crop mode in 12 bit compressed?  I would probably add a grip so I could still get my 6 FPS in crop mode.  when I shot with the D600 crop mode didn't bother me as much as I thought it would.  Did you notice an improvement in noise when cropping to D7100 size?


----------



## Tailgunner (Jul 25, 2014)

coastalconn said:


> molested_cow said:
> 
> 
> > Hey hey, if I were you, I'd just go for the D810 instead. Why? You mentioned that you wanted a D400 instead. Well, the D810 now shoots RAW in smaller formats too, which means you can shoot in crop mode in RAW. Plus many other small but somewhat significant perks, I think it's a more logical choice than simply going for the D800.
> ...



I wished I could help dude but I really don't shoot in Crop mode and I shoot in 14 bit. If it helps, I'm able to fire off a 3 round burst pretty easy. I usually only do this when i'm hanging to free hand it in places that aren't very tripod friendly. As for cropping down to D7100 size, I do see some occasional noise but it's usually light and manageable.


----------



## Aloicious (Jul 25, 2014)

I've never had buffer issues with either of my d800's I've had even running FX 14 bit, EXCEPT when using slower cards, I've noticed a difference using slower 30MB/s and 35MB/s are the worst, 45MB/s is better but still lags, where as above 80MB/s things go much much better (and there isn't much difference with high speed cards above that, which makes me think the bottle neck for writing is with the cards below 80MB/s, and the camera itself for cards above 80MB/s) I've got 80MB/s, 90MB/s, 95MB/s, and 160MB/s between SD and CF cards (all sandisk, even the slower ones). 

but I almost never shoot more than 5-7 shots per burst (usually 3-5) when I'm shooting in burst, so I'm usually never around the buffer limit.

as far as the camera itself, these are the buffer specs I can find, which seem to be correct from my use (though slow cards will limit these further):



> 14-bit uncompressed RAW, 74.4MB
> camera buffer memory 16 frames
> 
> 12-bit lossless compressed RAW, 32.4MB
> ...



and from these numbers, a rough estimation for 1.2x mode in 14bit uncompressed RAW would be somewhere around a ~20-21 frames, 12 bit lossless compressed would be close to ~30 frames

As far as ISO, given the exact same environment and processing, etc, the 800 should have a noise advantage over the 7100 when viewed at 100%....though I've never used a d7100 to compare.


----------



## hamlet (Jul 25, 2014)

If you aren't going to buy a d4 then stick the d7100. I mean as a birdster, you are giving up your crop advantage that give you that extra bit of reach.


----------



## Tailgunner (Jul 25, 2014)

I guess I should mention my cards:

32 GB 1000X Lexar CF
32 GB Extreme Pro 95mb SD


----------



## Mike_E (Jul 26, 2014)

If you're going to get one, get one quick.

The price drop is because there will always be some that have to have the latest and greatest which is bumping up the supply.

Once they have disposed of their cameras to fund the next in line it's doubtful that you'll see very many extra D/800/e on the market.  Beyond the usual turnover that is.

The next step up for the vast majority of photographers really is Medium Format.  Any further increase in pixel density is useless to most.  Dynamic range is effectively as good as there ever was (If Nikon can get this above 16 stops I may actually have to rethink my position).  

Beyond really minor refinements there really isn't much more you could ask if a 35mm camera.

I guess you can tell I'll be keeping mine until the shutter explodes and maybe longer.


----------



## coastalconn (Jul 27, 2014)

As I was teaching someone how to use their D3S this morning (sigh) and Osprey were diving in the drizzle, I kept thinking about the D800..  So let me re-ask my question in a different way...  This shot is taken at ISO 4500 on my D7100.  The cropped image size was 4175x2193.  A quick calculation results in 3340x1754 on a D800, so would the D800 have looked better at ISO 4500 on this shot?  Let's hypothetically say I wanted to print it 10x20.  On the D7100 I would have around 200 DPI on the D800 I would have around 175 DPI.. which would look better?   I had to use a ton of noise reduction, btw...


Osprey with fish 7_27 by krisinct- Thanks for 2! Million + views!, on Flickr


----------



## D-B-J (Jul 27, 2014)

coastalconn said:


> As I was teaching someone how to use their D3S this morning (sigh) and Osprey were diving in the drizzle, I kept thinking about the D800..  So let me re-ask my question in a different way...  This shot is taken at ISO 4500 on my D7100.  The cropped image size was 4175x2193.  A quick calculation results in 3340x1754 on a D800, so would the D800 have looked better at ISO 4500 on this shot?  Let's hypothetically say I wanted to print it 10x20.  On the D7100 I would have around 200 DPI on the D800 I would have around 175 DPI.. which would look better?   I had to use a ton of noise reduction, btw...
> 
> 
> Osprey with fish 7_27 by krisinct- Thanks for 2! Million + views!, on Flickr




Everything I've read shows that the D800 is SIGNIFICANTLY better with higher ISO's when compared to the D7000.  When mine comes in this week I'll post some high iso comparison shots.  

Jake


----------



## Tailgunner (Jul 27, 2014)

coastalconn said:


> As I was teaching someone how to use their D3S this morning (sigh) and Osprey were diving in the drizzle, I kept thinking about the D800..  So let me re-ask my question in a different way...  This shot is taken at ISO 4500 on my D7100.  The cropped image size was 4175x2193.  A quick calculation results in 3340x1754 on a D800, so would the D800 have looked better at ISO 4500 on this shot?  Let's hypothetically say I wanted to print it 10x20.  On the D7100 I would have around 200 DPI on the D800 I would have around 175 DPI.. which would look better?   I had to use a ton of noise reduction, btw...



It just seems to me like you could have shot this at a lower ISO using the D800. I really want to say it would have still turned out better using the same ISO settings on the D800 due to it's better ISO performance. 

Honestly dude, I would rent a D800 for the day and see what you think first hand.


----------



## D-B-J (Jul 27, 2014)

Tailgunner said:


> coastalconn said:
> 
> 
> > As I was teaching someone how to use their D3S this morning (sigh) and Osprey were diving in the drizzle, I kept thinking about the D800..  So let me re-ask my question in a different way...  This shot is taken at ISO 4500 on my D7100.  The cropped image size was 4175x2193.  A quick calculation results in 3340x1754 on a D800, so would the D800 have looked better at ISO 4500 on this shot?  Let's hypothetically say I wanted to print it 10x20.  On the D7100 I would have around 200 DPI on the D800 I would have around 175 DPI.. which would look better?   I had to use a ton of noise reduction, btw...
> ...



Also a good option.


----------



## greybeard (Jul 27, 2014)

I understand your thinking, the pixels on a d800 and the pixels on a d7000 are basically the same size.  The d800 has more of them because the sensor is bigger.  How can a shot from a d800 have any less noise than a shot from a d7000 if you have to crop the image from the d800 twice as much to get the same reach you are getting with your d7000, right?


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 27, 2014)

D-B-J said:


> Tailgunner said:
> 
> 
> > coastalconn said:
> ...



Jake, That is a good idea.
Thus, a proposition.   Go Rent a d800 for a year.  In the mean time, send me the d800 that you just ordered.
If you don't like the d800 after a year you can return it.  If you do like it, you can buy the one you are renting.  :mrgreen:


----------



## D-B-J (Jul 27, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> D-B-J said:
> 
> 
> > Tailgunner said:
> ...



That seems doubly expensive for me and cheap for you...


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 27, 2014)

D-B-J said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > D-B-J said:
> ...


I'm fine with it


----------



## D-B-J (Jul 27, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> D-B-J said:
> 
> 
> > astroNikon said:
> ...



My bank account is not...


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 27, 2014)

D-B-J said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > D-B-J said:
> ...


I'm still not seeing a problem here :scratch:


----------



## coastalconn (Jul 27, 2014)

Tailgunner said:


> It just seems to me like you could have shot this at a lower ISO using the D800. I really want to say it would have still turned out better using the same ISO settings on the D800 due to it's better ISO performance.
> Honestly dude, I would rent a D800 for the day and see what you think first hand.


Well the D800 will not change the exposure triangle, for the shutter speed I needed and the aperture that I shot at ISO will be the same on any camera...

I'm still debating my options.  I just really wish I knew if Nikon is going to counter Canon's 7dm2...



greybeard said:


> I understand your thinking, the pixels on a d800 and the pixels on a d7000 are basically the same size.  The d800 has more of them because the sensor is bigger.  How can a shot from a d800 have any less noise than a shot from a d7000 if you have to crop the image from the d800 twice as much to get the same reach you are getting with your d7000, right?


This is basically what I am wondering...  well actually the D7100 since the noise would be even finer grained...


----------



## Aloicious (Jul 28, 2014)

you will still have noise on the d800, its not magic, but I would strongly recommend renting one, that way you could compare it in your own style, method, and using the lenses and such that you already have. Otherwise it'll just be comparing opinions from people on here...

I can tell you that I've been very happy with my 800E (and my previous 800). for all my use including wildlife, nature, landscape, astrophotography, sports, events, people, etc...sure there might be something here or there that I'd like, but for what it gives, it does extremely well. also since you're used to a 7100, you might want to look at the 800e rather than the straight 800, both the 7100 and 800e don't have the AA filter (or don't have the AA bluring effects)...where the 800 does have an AA filter. the difference is subtle, but with fine details like fur and feathers, it does make a difference especially when cropping (I've had both the 800 and 800e, I kept the 800e).


----------



## IzzieK (Jul 28, 2014)

I'd wait until December 15 when the new prices will drop further more for the D800, 800E (as announced) before making any serious decision. In the meantime, be happy with what you have for another few months more...


----------



## greybeard (Jul 28, 2014)

Given the quality of what you have been doing, I would think that changing formats to a system that is going to give you 1/3 less reach might be a step backwards. I'm basically in the same boat in that I shoot a lot of hand held macro (close ups) and I often crop heavily. Going full frame probably would not be that much if any help to me. I'm waiting for the D7200 or D9300. The idea of renting or borrowing makes the most sense. Camera shops need to have a program like music stores have for students starting into the band. The student rents a rental horn for a period of times and if they decide to stay with the program they return the rental and the store sells them a brand new horn and applies the rental moneys towards the price of the new horn.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 28, 2014)

coastalconn said:


> I'm still debating my options.  I just really wish I knew if Nikon is going to counter Canon's 7dm2...
> ..



Are you contemplating trying Canon ?


----------



## manaheim (Jul 28, 2014)

D800 is a five year old camera?  How do you figure? 

From Wikipedia...

"It was officially announced on February 7, 2012 and went on sale in late March 2012[SUP][2][/SUP] for the suggested retail price of $2999.95 in the U.S., £2399 in the UK, and 2892 in the Eurozone.[SUP][3][/SUP] Shortly after the camera went on sale, Nikon's UK subsidiary increased the price of the D800 in that market by £200 to £2599, saying that the original price was due to an "internal systems error". However, Nikon honored the original price for all pre-orders placed before March 24, and added that no price changes would be made in other markets.[SUP][4][/SUP]"

As a side note, I got my hands on one the other day. The most surprising thing was the shutter. It was CRAZY quiet. Sounded like a pistol with a silencer on it.


----------



## D-B-J (Jul 28, 2014)

manaheim said:


> D800 is a five year old camera?  How do you figure?
> 
> From Wikipedia...
> 
> ...



I think he meant as in you could easily have it for five years. Like it's NOT old.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 28, 2014)

greybeard said:


> Camera shops need to have a program like music stores have for students starting into the band. The student rents a rental horn for a period of times and if they decide to stay with the program they return the rental and the store sells them a brand new horn and applies the rental moneys towards the price of the new horn.


Yeah, but the profit margin is absurd when you know what it is.  
It's like renting a lens for several months ...  at some point, when you learn all the costs involved, you realize it's cheaper just to buy than to rent.


----------



## MichaelHenson (Jul 28, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> Somewhat off topic, but I would recommend you get your hands on a raw file from one of the newer exmor sensor equipped Nikon cameras. What you can pull out of the shadows cleanly with them is amazing (and this is coming from a Canon shooter).
> 
> Here are a pair of Lightroom screengrabs I did from D800 files to show the amazing amount of latitude those sensors have:
> 
> ...



Not sure if this helps (or is relevant based on the cropping question) but in my "newbie mind" it seemed relevant to show what is possible after you have the shot with the D800. This is from a different post discussing real estate stuff but the clarity (at least in these examples) that is available in processing is VERY impressive to me. 

Again, not sure if this helps...If it doesn't, just think of this post as a time-out and now you can resume your previous conversation...


----------



## D-B-J (Jul 28, 2014)

MichaelHenson said:


> Scatterbrained said:
> 
> 
> > Somewhat off topic, but I would recommend you get your hands on a raw file from one of the newer exmor sensor equipped Nikon cameras. What you can pull out of the shadows cleanly with them is amazing (and this is coming from a Canon shooter).
> ...



This makes me so excited to shoot sunsets with it!


----------



## vanbredat (Jul 28, 2014)

See Nikon D800 vs. Nikon D7100 - Sensor Comparison for pixel size comparison of the D7100 and D800


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 28, 2014)

The Dynamic Range is one reason I love the d600.  It's great for pulling details out of the shadows .. like at car shows when a hood is open on a bright day and the car is well exposed, but the engine isn't (if you do it opposite the outside is blown out).  Then you bring out the shadows and it's great.


----------



## hamlet (Jul 28, 2014)

I am very curious what specs we'll get with the d7200 and the d620. They'll both be equipped with the new expeed 4 processor.


----------



## D-B-J (Jul 28, 2014)

hamlet said:


> I am very curious what specs we'll get with the d7200 and the d620. They'll both be equipped with the new expeed 4 processor.



As am I.


----------

