# D800 Announced!



## Trever1t (Feb 6, 2012)

Nikon D800 Full-Frame DSLR Packs 36 Megapixels | PCWorld


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 6, 2012)

Looks like a used D3 or another D700 is in my near future


----------



## Destin (Feb 6, 2012)

Wait... They're taking the low pass filter out, aka removing a component of the camera, and that causes the price to jump up $300 when you are getting less? How does that work? Lol


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 6, 2012)

Destin said:


> Wait... They're taking the low pass filter out, aka removing a component of the camera, and that causes the price to jump up $300 when you are getting less? How does that work? Lol



Same reason a fisheye costs 5 times as much as a nifty fifty..... lower demand.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 6, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Looks like a used D3 or another D700 is in my near future



That's the path I'm taking!


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 6, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Nikon D800 Full-Frame DSLR Packs 36 Megapixels | PCWorld



Nikon's website.


----------



## nickzou (Feb 6, 2012)

I wonder what the ISO performance is. I wonder if it could actually be worse than the D700.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 6, 2012)

sweet announcement!


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 6, 2012)

I'm non-plussed.  The D4 priced itself out of my reach, and the 36mp of this cubical egg makes me puke.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 6, 2012)

480sparky said:


> I'm non-plussed.  The D4 priced itself out of my reach, and the 36mp of this cubical egg makes me puke.



Well same sensor as D4 and they couldn't let it perform as well. Had to throw an extra handful of pixels at it?


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 6, 2012)

nickzou said:


> I wonder what the ISO performance is. I wonder if it could actually be worse than the D700.


If i read correctly,  yes. The D800 will offer better cropability at the cost of ISO performance. Smart to not over shadow the D4 this time.D800 is aimed at the consumer more than the prosumer..


----------



## Netskimmer (Feb 6, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Trever1t said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like a used D3 or another D700 is in my near future
> ...



Unfortunatly, I don't see too many people rushing to trade in their D700 for this 36MP, 4fps beast so the price probably won't drop as much as I was hoping. 

I'm not too worried though, by the time I accumulate the quality glass I wanna get before I upgrade to FX the D4S will probably be in the bargain been.


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 6, 2012)

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually, I don't think it's half bad. If the D800's ISO capability is the same as the D700, honestly I am happy with it. The D700 is a very capable camera, the D800 adds video and shear size. Think about it, at DX the D800 still captures 15+mega pixel, far larger than the D700's 12mp at FX. So basically, you can use DX lens on D800 and still get larger image than D700 at FX. That opens up many opportunities!

Wondering if they will ever come out with a true D700 replacement in the future. I highly doubt so though.

Also, being just slightly lighter than the D700, that I am quite disappointed.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 6, 2012)

Netskimmer said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > Trever1t said:
> ...



Yeah, I was kinda hoping there's be a glut of D3/D700s.... one of those, 'you can't swing a dead cat by the tail without hitting a bargain' type of thing.

I wonder how the D800 would perform as a lower MP setting, say the Medium (20mp) level.  If it could record NEFs at that level instead of that stupid 36 mp, I might be on-board.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 6, 2012)

molested_cow said:


> NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Actually, I don't think it's half bad. If the D800's ISO capability is the same as the D700, honestly I am happy with it. The D700 is a very capable camera, the D800 adds video and shear size. *Think about it, at DX the D800 still captures 15+mega pixel,* far larger than the D700's 12mp at FX. So basically, you can use DX lens on D800 and still get larger image than D700 at FX. That opens up many opportunities!
> 
> ...



I'm confused about the megapixels being a "big deal", can you ellaborate and help me understand. The D7000 captures more than this at DX anyway?


----------



## timethief (Feb 6, 2012)

Seems like alot of people are let down by the 36MP sensor.
 Is it not possible that the performance of these many pixels be worth it ? 
Should we not see some benchmarks before deciding ?
Did Nikon not take into account market surveys ? or are the market surveys perhaps leaning towards the 36MP?
Why have they decided to go this way ? What would the alternative choice for them have been ? Did they think they would have been worse off ? or is there yet another product lurking to be announced ?


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 6, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> molested_cow said:
> 
> 
> > NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> ...



But the D7000 cannot do FX. I am comparing it to D700, not D7000.

Say if I have a D800, I can continue to use the 50mm F1.4 at FX, then switch to DX with a Tokina 11-16mm for wide angle. Both lens are about $600 new, instead of using the expensive Nikkor 12-24mm. Yet I am still getting a very decent photo size. The D700 gives you only 6mp at DX.

Therefore, for $500 more (D700 @ $2500 vs D800 @3000), I am buying a whole lot more options for lens. I know the depth of field blah blah is different between FX and DX, but that's really up to personal taste.

36mp is huge, more than most people will need, but at the same time, it's not a bad thing to have.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 6, 2012)

More to the point...... what can 36mp do so much better than a measly 24 or skimpy 20 or an anemic 16 can't do?  (Besides fill up your hard drive faster!)


----------



## Destin (Feb 6, 2012)

Any word on the size of a .NEF file from this monster?


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 6, 2012)

Destin said:


> Any word on the size of a .NEF file from this monster?



I'm sure one can extrapolate the number from existing files.  Comparing to my D7000 NEFs, I calculate 52mp per.


I heard a while back Nikon was going to offer Medium and Small NEF capabilities.  Not sure if the D800 was gonna start that trend or not.  But if it shoots only 7,360 x 4,912 NEFs, I'm not playing that game.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 6, 2012)

molested_cow said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > molested_cow said:
> ...



Thanks.  The megapixels are a hindrance rather than an asset, I suspected they threw that huge truckload at the D800 to hinder its performance (since it shares the same sensor as the D4).  I'm still open-minded to the cam but was just wondering your take when you mentioned pixels as a good thing.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 6, 2012)

Hard drive space is cheap.  I dont care.  Edit the photo, crop, import it to jpeg however size you want, delete the raw.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 6, 2012)

Same sensor as D4....but this:

"The D800's image resolution translates into a slower burst-shooting  speed at full resolution when compared to the D4 (the D800 snaps 4  frames per second versus the D4's continuous shooting speed of 10 fps)  and* an ISO range that isn't quite as expandable as the one found in the  D4*"


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 6, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> Thanks.  The megapixels are a hindrance rather than an asset, I suspected they threw that huge truckload at the D800 to hinder its performance (since it shares the same sensor as the D4).  I'm still open-minded to the cam but was just wondering your take when you mentioned pixels as a good thing.



I myself don't need 36mp at FX either. However it will be nice to use DX at larger pixel than the miserable 6mp that D700 does. For FX resolution, 12mp is good enough.

It will be funny if Canon's up coming 5DMIII ends up being a high ISO with smaller resolution, the exact opposite of the D800. I almost think they conspire to avoid each other's market haha!


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 6, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> ............ delete the raw.














j/k


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 6, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> Hard drive space is cheap.  I dont care.  Edit the photo, crop, import it to jpeg however size you want, delete the raw.




Haha the photographer don't even need to care about where he's aiming anymore.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 6, 2012)

molested_cow said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks.  The megapixels are a hindrance rather than an asset, I suspected they threw that huge truckload at the D800 to hinder its performance (since it shares the same sensor as the D4).  I'm still open-minded to the cam but was just wondering your take when you mentioned pixels as a good thing.
> ...



I don't use my D700 in DX mode, are you shooting DX lenses? I'm trying to see a reason to upgrade to the latest and greatest but I'm not feeling it?  Plus my back-up body is DX so for me that point isn't making me get a rise for this D800. But I was hoping to upgrade.  There's got to be more to it than what we've been told.


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 6, 2012)

I don't use DX mode. All of my lens are FX, which is limited by budget.

My sister has D90 and I got her a Tokina 11-16, which I think is a bargain for the price.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 6, 2012)

molested_cow said:


> I don't use DX mode. All of my lens are FX, which is limited by budget.
> 
> My sister has D90 and I got her a Tokina 11-16, which I think is a bargain for the price.



I had that lens and sold it when I got the D700.  I miss it!


----------



## nickzou (Feb 6, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> molested_cow said:
> 
> 
> > NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> ...



Well if it is not a big deal than there shouldn't be any reason for D700 users to be holding onto their old cameras so tightly.

Anyways, having a 15+ megapixel DX equivalent allows DX users to upgrade without switching all of their glass and still shoot higher-res than D700 users. And if the ISO performance is about the same... it's almost as if they have a D7000 built-in (maybe even better since the D7000 doesn't quite perform as well in low light as the D700).


----------



## xyphoto (Feb 6, 2012)

nickzou said:
			
		

> Well if it is not a big deal than there shouldn't be any reason for D700 users to be holding onto their old cameras so tightly.
> 
> Anyways, having a 15+ megapixel DX equivalent allows DX users to upgrade without switching all of their glass and still shoot higher-res than D700 users. And if the ISO performance is about the same... it's almost as if they have a D7000 built-in (maybe even better since the D7000 doesn't quite perform as well in low light as the D700).



Why would people want to spend $3000 on an FX camera just so they can use their DX lenses?


----------



## Netskimmer (Feb 7, 2012)

nickzou said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > molested_cow said:
> ...



I would also be cool to be able to select DX mode even if you have an FX lens attached if using the camera in DX mode also upped the FPS that would be like the best of both worlds.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 7, 2012)

xyphoto said:


> Why would people want to spend $3000 on an FX camera just so they can use their DX lenses?



Mebbe $3k is all they can afford, so they'll use their DX lenses until they can afford FX glass.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 7, 2012)

480sparky said:


> I'm non-plussed.  The D4 priced itself out of my reach, and the 36mp of this cubical egg makes me puke.



So you hate your D7000?


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 7, 2012)

EchoingWhisper said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > I'm non-plussed.  The D4 priced itself out of my reach, and the 36mp of this cubical egg makes me puke.
> ...



No reason I should.  No reason you should think I would.  And no reason I should fall ass-over-elbows over a D800, either.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 7, 2012)

The Real Megapixel Myth


----------



## Markw (Feb 7, 2012)

Netskimmer said:


> nickzou said:
> 
> 
> > 2WheelPhoto said:
> ...



If I read everything correctly, you can.  And The FPS does increase from 4 at FX, to 5 at 1.2x, to 6 in DX.

I preordered a D800E through B&H, and a D800 through Amazon.  I'll wait to see what the tests show, as I can't handle the moiré in my videos, and, frankly, don't want to deal with it in my photos if most of them will have it.  But, there is incredible detail from both of them because of the new enhanced low-pass filter in the D800, and the lack of any at all in the D800E.  This is going to be a bigger hit than everyone thinks it is.  I'd lay money on it.  Approx $3k, actually. 

Mark


----------



## jake337 (Feb 7, 2012)

I'll wait till I see some reviews by pros actually using the body before I decide.


----------



## nickzou (Feb 7, 2012)

xyphoto said:


> nickzou said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Here's a situation. Suzie wants to go full frame but is warned against picking up the D700 because of its place in the product life cycle so she waits for the eager announcement of the D800. When it comes out it costs a more than what she intended to spend on the D700 and now doesn't have any extra money left to spend on FX glass. But that's okay, because she has her old DX lenses from her D5100. She gets the D800 and "wow, lo and behold it has the same ISO capabilities as the D700 but at 15 megapixels!" So while she waits to save up for some very expensive FX glass, she can shoot at a higher resolution than the D700 that she would've got without sacrificing image quality. It's like she has a D700 but better and she hasn't even cranked it up to 11 yet. Wow what a buy!


----------



## analog.universe (Feb 7, 2012)

nickzou said:


> xyphoto said:
> 
> 
> > nickzou said:
> ...



This is nice in theory...  but if all I had was a D5100 and a bunch of DX lenses, and I had $3000 to spend, I'd be buying more glass before a body.


----------



## Markw (Feb 7, 2012)

jake337 said:


> I'll wait till I see some reviews by pros actually using the body before I decide.



No one charges your card until it ships.  But, if you don't jump on the list soon, you'll have to wait until everyone who 1) _did_ get on the list and 2) beat you to the punch after those on the list.

That is, if you were interested in the first place, of course.

Mark


----------



## nickzou (Feb 7, 2012)

analog.universe said:


> nickzou said:
> 
> 
> > xyphoto said:
> ...



I also have this theory about people underestimating DX glass.


----------



## vipgraphx (Feb 7, 2012)

Gunna need some processing power to go with that 36 mega pixel camera. Especially if you edit raw files.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 7, 2012)

vipgraphx said:


> Gunna need some processing power to go with that 36 mega pixel camera. Especially if you edit raw files.



I believe a 16 gig RAM would be sufficient for it without any lag at all.


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 7, 2012)

Most people hoped that this will be the baby D4, but if Nikon did so, it will definitely kill the sale of D4. Since both products are released within such close time frame, it's a rational move that they have clear distinctions. Perhaps there won't be a D4x or D4s. Perhaps the D800 is the D4x. This way, they can avoid having too many SKUs on the market while still serving their core customers.

Now I am very interested to see what the D400 will be.....


----------



## Garbz (Feb 7, 2012)

xyphoto said:


> Why would people want to spend $3000 on an FX camera just so they can use their DX lenses?


 
Why would people want to throw away perfectly good glass just because the new camera doesn't have a usable resolution? 

There are a myriad of photographers out there who may be buying a D800 as their first full frame camera, who may have quite a collection of small and perfectly functional DX lenses, some acquired at considerable expense because Nikon never actually gave FX a thought until a few years ago, and who skipped on the D700 because damn they're not going to spend $3k on a camera which ends up taking 5mpxl photos. 

It may come as a surprise to you but not everyone buys an entry level crap camera and then purchases pro grade lenses for it. The words you're looking for is "Upgrade path"



Destin said:


> Any word on the size of a .NEF file from this monster?



74MB.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 7, 2012)

LOL @ people who keep their RAW file forever.


----------



## ph0enix (Feb 7, 2012)

U.S. price: $2999.95:
Nikon D800 D-SLR Camera | High Dynamic Range Camera


----------



## fsquare (Feb 7, 2012)

Another who will stick with my D700.


----------



## Infinite_Day (Feb 7, 2012)

I'm not looking to upgrade from my D7K because I've only had it less than a year. However, I would not throw $3K into this body. It seems like they're going to try and market it more 50%+ toward the video segment. I'm not interested in video from a dSLR at all. That's just me though. I'd rather have faster burst and better ISO. If I were looking to go FX right now I'd probably look at one of the older bodies - D3 or D700 right now over a D4 (which I couldn't afford anyway) or a D800. I would guess given the stats and my understanding of the D800 that the D700 isn't going to drop in price right away. Particularly not the new ones because if the D800 isn't moving they're going to keep the price point similar to entice people to go with the new model instead.


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 7, 2012)

So the D800 is basically 5DMII with good AF and ISO capability (relatively speaking).....?


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 7, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> Hard drive space is cheap.  I dont care.  Edit the photo, crop, import it to jpeg however size you want, delete the raw.




Blasphemy!!!


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 7, 2012)

> *D700 ISO Sensitivity *
> 
> ISO 200 - 6400
> Lo-1 (ISO 100)
> ...





> *D800 ISO Sensitivity *
> 
> ISO 100 - 6400
> Lo-1 (ISO 50)
> ...




SO is it slightly better or the same or less capable in low light? According to the spoecs directly off Nikon's web page it actually has comparable usable range?


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 7, 2012)

That 36mp looks really sweet from a macro veiwpoint (Super crops if needed).. and since all the macro I do is with flash, I could care less about the ISO (which is still damn good, btw). But I guess I will stick with the D4 for now....


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 7, 2012)

Can I get a clear Explanation why someone would and would not want a D800 "E" .. is it supposed to have higher IQ without the filter?


----------



## ph0enix (Feb 7, 2012)

Why only 4fps in burst?   The D700 can do 5.  It means that anyone who needs high burst capability will have to go with the D4.


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 7, 2012)

Nikon screwed up releasing the D700 when it was about as capable as the D3...they learned their lesson and won't do that again assuredly. If you want high-speed burst you want a D4. If you want high IQ and the best ISO performance you need a D4...only good business sense. 

I don't know if I can justify a D4...but it's starting to look really enticing


----------



## DiskoJoe (Feb 7, 2012)

nickzou said:


> I wonder what the ISO performance is. I wonder if it could actually be worse than the D700.



This could be a possibility. They stated that image resolution was a key factor for the d800 and the lower light capability were focused on more with the d4. Sounds like it would be a great camera for a studio photographer.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 7, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Nikon screwed up releasing the D700 when it was about as capable as the D3...they learned their lesson and won't do that again assuredly. If you want high-speed burst you want a D4. If you want high IQ and the best ISO performance you need a D4...only good business sense.
> 
> I don't know if I can justify a D4...but it's starting to look really enticing



Dang.. I am agreeing with everything you say this morning! lol!


----------



## ducatiman1967 (Feb 7, 2012)

Can the human eye process 36mp, or is it overkill?


----------



## Village Idiot (Feb 7, 2012)

Any comparisons of d800 vs d800e photos out there yet?


----------



## Big Mike (Feb 7, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Can I get a clear Explanation why someone would and would not want a D800 "E" .. is it supposed to have higher IQ without the filter?


Without the AA filter, the images are susceptible to moire when photographing something that has a pattern.  That is why 99.9% of digital cameras have AA filters.  But the cost of the AA filter, is that it robs some possible sharpness...hence, the market for cameras without the filter.

Also of note...I believe that LR4 has an moire fixing feature in the adjustment brush...making life easier for those shooting without an AA filter.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 7, 2012)

fsquare said:


> Another who will stick with my D700.



I'm still undecided about my D700, going to sit on the sidelines and watch.  I was thinking I'd up to a D800, but now I'm thinking D4. I'm so not into the high megapixels as Nikon's way of knocking the D800 sensor back from the D4's performance. As a student just can't justify the D4, maybe after college classes.  This old boat anchor D700 may have to trudgingly continue to shoot =)


----------



## Dao (Feb 7, 2012)

Big Mike said:


> Trever1t said:
> 
> 
> > Can I get a clear Explanation why someone would and would not want a D800 "E" .. is it supposed to have higher IQ without the filter?
> ...



36mp without aa filter.  Are they trying to steal some digital medium format market?


----------



## cannpope (Feb 7, 2012)

I'm glad I went ahead and got my D700.   No regrets here!


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 7, 2012)

For sure the D700 is going to a viable tool for another year or 2. The technology isn't increasing multi-fold as in the past, it's more subtle.


----------



## Big Mike (Feb 7, 2012)

Dao said:


> Big Mike said:
> 
> 
> > Trever1t said:
> ...


Probably.  Or at least be a viable option for studio photographers who require high MPs.  
But the MF cameras are advancing as well.  60 and 80 MP cameras/backs are being used by those who have the means and/or need for them.


----------



## tirediron (Feb 7, 2012)

fsquare said:


> Another who will stick with my D700.


Me as well...  If I'm going to shoot a 36Mp sensor, I'll spend a couple of extra dollars and pick up a nice, used Phase One back for my 645AFD.


----------



## jake337 (Feb 7, 2012)

Markw said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > I'll wait till I see some reviews by pros actually using the body before I decide.
> ...


Not to decide on buying one right away, but to decide if I want a d800 or d4 a few years from now on the used market.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 7, 2012)

jake337 said:


> Markw said:
> 
> 
> > jake337 said:
> ...



Yeah I suspect our elderly D700s will carry us. I'm thinking D3s bodies will be on the cheap too


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Feb 7, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Nikon screwed up releasing the D700 when it was about as capable as the D3...they learned their lesson and won't do that again assuredly. If you want high-speed burst you want a D4. If you want high IQ and the best ISO performance you need a D4...only good business sense.
> 
> I don't know if I can justify a D4...but it's starting to look really enticing



I think Nikon may of screwed up with this release, time will tell though. I still don't get why the prosumer level full frame camera is being aimed at studio photographers.. an interesting move! The thing that makes me laugh yet again.. is I saw yet more rumours that Canon are going with 22MP for the 5D3... this will really throw the cat amongst the pigeons if Canon does this.. who knows who will be the winner... the D800 is not a camera that has any interest to me.. My mac struggles enough with 12MP RAW files let alone 36MP RAW files. 

 The other thing that made me smile is the main positive people seem to be seeing in this thread about 36MP, is the fact you can get 16MP using DX lenses on an FX body. I'm not sure this is what Nikon were hoping to be a USP when designing the D800. Even though I'm a self confessed Nikon fanboy, Nikon have left me a bit cold with this decision to say the least. It just dosen't sit right to me.


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Feb 7, 2012)

I've said it once and I will say it again!

They are trying to steal the studio market with the prosumer level full frame body? WTF????? :er: Please someone explain this to my naive mind.. The D3X was clearly a PRO level studio camera.. this isn't mean to be a PRO camera? Or have I missed something?


----------



## analog.universe (Feb 7, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:


> Trever1t said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon screwed up releasing the D700 when it was about as capable as the D3...they learned their lesson and won't do that again assuredly. If you want high-speed burst you want a D4. If you want high IQ and the best ISO performance you need a D4...only good business sense.
> ...



Totally agree with this.  I've not met a single person who says "18mp isn't enough for what I do".  I'm sure they exist, but they already own Hassy's and PhaseOne's...  I really don't understand what Nikon was going for in this cam.  6400 is the highest analog ISO?  We've had that for years...

The metering and focus look pretty sweet, but I really wonder how many people will actually want this sensor.


----------



## Big Mike (Feb 7, 2012)

It seems to be that both Canon & Nikon are going a great job of stirring up the bee's nest of internet malcontents with every new camera.

I can't remember the last time a new camera was met with majority approval on internet forums.  All I hear is how disappointed people are and how they wish it had lived up to their wishes/expectations.  

:roll:


----------



## analog.universe (Feb 7, 2012)

Big Mike said:


> It seems to be that both Canon & Nikon are going a great job of stirring up the bee's nest of internet malcontents with every new camera.
> 
> I can't remember the last time a new camera was met with majority approval on internet forums.  All I hear is how disappointed people are and how they wish it had lived up to their wishes/expectations.
> 
> :roll:



Honestly, the D4 and 1Dx both look really awesome to me...  not the D800 though.


----------



## jake337 (Feb 7, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > Markw said:
> ...


D700?  My d90 will work for years to come!   Although a full frame sensor would be nice I can't justify it.  Maybe when my girl starts working things may change.


----------



## mjhoward (Feb 7, 2012)

tirediron said:


> fsquare said:
> 
> 
> > Another who will stick with my D700.
> ...



Gonna need a lot more than a couple extra dollars to pick up a used 30MP+ Phase One back


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 7, 2012)

Found this comparison Nikon D700 vs Nikon D800 - Pocket-lint 

and

Nikon&rsquo;s latest camera is made for videographers, and it shows - The Washington Post



I don't want a video camera


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 7, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Found this comparison Nikon D700 vs Nikon D800 - Pocket-lint
> 
> and
> 
> ...



+1 me either


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 7, 2012)

I'm on Amazon's list for the D4...I really was hoping to take a nice long vacation this year, damn it!


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Feb 7, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Found this comparison Nikon D700 vs Nikon D800 - Pocket-lint
> 
> and
> 
> ...



Now this is interesting, the D700 is not going to be discontinued? I had no idea, at least that leaves the lower MP as an option for people. Maybe Nikon are not being as DUMB as I first thought. Would be nice to see them make some minor updates to the D700 though.


----------



## fsquare (Feb 7, 2012)

If anything they will probably discontinue the D3x


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Feb 7, 2012)

fsquare said:


> If anything they will probably discontinue the D3x



OK OK I am starting to get this more now... the D700 will remain as the cheaper low MP FF body, the D800 will be the high res camera to take the place of the D3X and could also be a videographers dream to rival Canons video domination, the D4 is the camera for the true PRO's who need PRO performance. Sports shooters etc... 

I really think that's great though, it means that people will not be forced to buy 'USED' if they don't want and it means that if someone has a D700 that dies, they will not have to upgrade to the D800 which is a completely different camera. It also means that I will have the chance in the next couple of years to buy a Brand new D700 and also have a full 2 year UK Nikon warranty.. RESULT! :thumbup:

I think I get it now! State of confusion over..


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 7, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:


> fsquare said:
> 
> 
> > If anything they will probably discontinue the D3x
> ...



According to Nikon the D800 is for the pro portrait shooter who may want tight crops, D400 is for the one who needs to shoot faster in lower light such as sports...they gave many more examples but both are pro bodies targeting a different crowd.


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Feb 7, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> Nikon_Josh said:
> 
> 
> > fsquare said:
> ...



You enlightened me 2wheel my old mate, if the D800 is for pro portrait shooters then I get why 36MP is required. I had NO idea Nikon were clasifying this camera as a PRO body, I honestly thought it was the replacement for the D700.
Nikon D800 High Resolution Image Samples .. check these out!! Those portraits are just so sharp they should not be allowed....  I can see the resolution being beneficial for the 'portrait studio' crowd and the 'landscape tripod' shooters.


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 7, 2012)

Maybe one of each isn't a bad idea .. Hmmm


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 7, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon_Josh said:
> ...



But I'm not feeling it for the higher resolution, or the D800 pics being sharper than the D4 or any other cameras with lower resolution.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 7, 2012)

nickzou said:


> I wonder what the ISO performance is. I wonder if it could actually be worse than the D700.



I would say it will be no where near the D700 if it is aimed for fashion and studio


----------



## gsgary (Feb 7, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon_Josh said:
> ...




And not a cheap lens in sight  anyone buying this camera needs to be prepared to spend on lenses


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Feb 7, 2012)

gsgary said:


> Nikon_Josh said:
> 
> 
> > 2WheelPhoto said:
> ...



Yes, you said it!!! 36MP could outresolve most lenses ever created, especially some of the FX lenses which are known to suffer at the corners more often than not.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 7, 2012)

Some of us already spend on our lens addictions


----------



## ThornleyGroves (Feb 7, 2012)

ok so if anyone can help me i'd be very grateful.

i'm basically getting a photography degree at bournemouth university currently, and i use a nikon d90. In the future id like to be a photojournalist/travel photographer, even considering war photographer. i was just wondering what would be best for me to do considering i have a £3,000 budget. 

I'd keep my d90 as a second body etc, but should i get a used D3 body or should i get a D800.... Open to other suggestions too, but i think id benefit off hearing some good advice from people in the know!

Tom


----------



## tirediron (Feb 7, 2012)

mjhoward said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > fsquare said:
> ...


They're starting to show up used in the 5-6K$ range now...


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 7, 2012)

I may hold out for the rumored *D7S *


----------



## timethief (Feb 7, 2012)

Here is the link to what Hogan has to say about the D800. In case you haven't read it already..
*
The Nikon D800 Introduction*


----------



## Destin (Feb 7, 2012)

Honetly, this is a nice camera, but it didn't knock my socks off. Neither did the D4, but that's probably just because I'll never be able to afford it, so I didn't spend too much time drooling over it. 

I'm thinking the D400 is going to really blow us out of the water for a top of the line crop body, and will be an ideal sports/wildlife camera. Can't wait to see it if/when it comes out.


----------



## mjhoward (Feb 7, 2012)

tirediron said:


> mjhoward said:
> 
> 
> > tirediron said:
> ...



Really?  I've seen some sub 20MP in that range but I think the cheapest 30MP+ I've seen has been ~8K


----------



## bhop (Feb 7, 2012)

xyphoto said:


> nickzou said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mjhoward (Feb 7, 2012)

bhop said:


> xyphoto said:
> 
> 
> > nickzou said:
> ...


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Feb 7, 2012)

Further images-- More stunning detail using the best of Nikkor lenses I might add.

Cliff Mautner Photography: IT'S HERE... The Nikon D800!!!!


----------



## bhop (Feb 7, 2012)

mjhoward said:


> bhop said:
> 
> 
> > xyphoto said:
> ...


----------



## ghache (Feb 7, 2012)

I don't get why people seeing the large mp sensor as a downside of the camera. it is going to be better than the d700 and the camera will handle the noise better than the d700 EVEN packed with 36mp. its a NEW sensor. Even the d7000 with 16mp packed on a crop sensor is handling the noise as good as the d700.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 7, 2012)

ThornleyGroves said:


> ok so if anyone can help me i'd be very grateful.
> 
> i'm basically getting a photography degree at bournemouth university currently, and i use a nikon d90. In the future id like to be a photojournalist/travel photographer, even considering war photographer. i was just wondering what would be best for me to do considering i have a £3,000 budget.
> 
> ...



No brainer D3, D800 will be too slow for PJ/war photography


----------



## ThornleyGroves (Feb 7, 2012)

gsgary said:


> ThornleyGroves said:
> 
> 
> > ok so if anyone can help me i'd be very grateful.
> ...



ah cheers, any other bodies you think that could compete with the d3 other than the d3x? would a d3 be the best bet?


----------



## djacobox372 (Feb 7, 2012)

nikon should really consider updating the d700 with the d3s sensor/processor.  Call it a d700s.


----------



## greybeard (Feb 7, 2012)

Well, I'm waiting for it to come out and after all the hype is over and the true performance figures are out and they are what I hope they are, I may just have to get one.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Feb 7, 2012)

Destin said:


> Wait... They're taking the low pass filter out, aka removing a component of the camera, and that causes the price to jump up $300 when you are getting less? How does that work? Lol



Simple.  In many situations, with the low-pass filter removed, the sharpness and optical quality will be noticeably better at 1:1.  Now the flipside is that in images with lots of texture or pattern, you can get some moire.

I'm not going to buy the D800 on pre-order, mostly because I just bought a D700 at a great price.

---

Bottom line:  These specs, at this price point is an AUTOMATIC purchase.  A month ago, we all thought this camera was going to be $4000.  It's a grand less than that...


----------



## Markw (Feb 7, 2012)

Anyone else hoping for another crop feature to be announced in a firmware update?  The D4 has FX, DX, AND CX (1:1) in video.  The D800 has FX and DX, with incredible cropability.  They say they didn't offer a 1:1 because it would be like 5x their DX or something like that.  So, why not offer a 2.5x crop mode?  Or even a 2.0 or 3.0 crop mode in video (and preferably photos as well)?  I, for one, am desperately hoping they will.  Hopefully they can do it with a firmware update.

Mark


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 14, 2012)

chatted with B&H this morning, they expect the first shipment "after March 18th" but according to the sales rep, Nikon hasn't indicated the day or even qty of units to be delivered. Amazon sent emails saying 2013 but surely that's in error.


----------



## Markw (Feb 14, 2012)

Yeah.  The fact that everybody got the same date (give or take 2 days due to geographic location) proves that it's a glitch.  I have a feeling many of the people who received it (myself included) will get another email in March saying "Your order has been shipped.  Oh, and about that $3k we discussed..." 

Mark


----------



## xyphoto (Feb 14, 2012)

I got an email from the place I ordered D800. They were saying that they could not ship it to me because it has back ordered. Duh...


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 14, 2012)

lol, backordered....where's the front orders?


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 15, 2012)

Destin said:


> Wait... They're taking the low pass filter out, aka removing a component of the camera, and that causes the price to jump up $300 when you are getting less? How does that work? Lol



They are not taking the low pass filter out, its just that the filter doesn't have anti aliasing properties.


----------



## Garbz (Feb 15, 2012)

EchoingWhisper said:


> They are not taking the low pass filter out, its just that the filter doesn't have anti aliasing properties.



So in other words they are replacing a carefully designed and cut birefringent piece of calcite with a microscope slide and it's somehow supposed to cost $300 more?


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 15, 2012)

Garbz said:


> EchoingWhisper said:
> 
> 
> > They are not taking the low pass filter out, its just that the filter doesn't have anti aliasing properties.
> ...



I don't know, may be caused by marketing or just because there is low demand for this type of low pass filter, so its production cost is higher.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 15, 2012)

Garbz said:


> EchoingWhisper said:
> 
> 
> > They are not taking the low pass filter out, its just that the filter doesn't have anti aliasing properties.
> ...



Enough with the smart-arse nonsense. Go here. Read. Learn. Stop posting crap.

Rob Galbraith DPI: Announced: Nikon D800 with 36.15 million image pixel sensor


----------



## nickzou (Feb 15, 2012)

ugh... they still have that pinch button b******t for the shuttter release mode dial.


----------



## Markw (Feb 16, 2012)

No more January date. .       



> Hello,We have received new release date information related to the order you placed on February 06, 2012 (Order# 105xxxx).
> 
> The item(s) listed below will actually ship sooner than we originally expected based on the new release date:
> **"Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)"***
> ...



Mark


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 16, 2012)

yay!


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 17, 2012)

Nikon has confirmed the D800 will be released from suppliers on March 22nd. Nikon D4 and D800 launch dates revealed - SlashGear


----------



## Tee (Feb 17, 2012)

Ok. I'm gonna admit it. I'm catching a touch of "gotta have it" fever. Keep an eye out for a mint D700 in the buy and sell section. Kidding. Or maybe not.


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 17, 2012)

there's like 5 or 6 D700's for sale on CL right now rangine from $1900-$2600 (gripped). Looks like more every day. I really hope to see people selling off more lenses


----------



## Mach0 (Feb 17, 2012)

Trever1t said:
			
		

> there's like 5 or 6 D700's for sale on CL right now rangine from $1900-$2600 (gripped). Looks like more every day. I really hope to see people selling off more lenses



Just gotta make sure they are legit lol.


----------



## Tee (Feb 17, 2012)

Trever1t said:
			
		

> there's like 5 or 6 D700's for sale on CL right now rangine from $1900-$2600 (gripped). Looks like more every day. I really hope to see people selling off more lenses



I saw one on my local list as well. I'm gonna stick with my D700 but it sure is fun to think about it. I haven't maxed out my current features so no need to upgrade. I really like that the D700 is camera only, no video. I know I'm in the minority but that is a big sticking point for me. I'll most likely spend the tax refund on an SB-910. Played with one this week and loved it, especially the hard filters.


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 18, 2012)

http://www.nikonusa.com/en_US/o/Y6wrkA9OU_z04IreazIXl_22UII/PDF/D800_TechnicalGuide_En.pdf


----------



## djacobox372 (Feb 18, 2012)

nickzou said:
			
		

> Well if it is not a big deal than there shouldn't be any reason for D700 users to be holding onto their old cameras so tightly.
> 
> Anyways, having a 15+ megapixel DX equivalent allows DX users to upgrade without switching all of their glass and still shoot higher-res than D700 users. And if the ISO performance is about the same... it's almost as if they have a D7000 built-in (maybe even better since the D7000 doesn't quite perform as well in low light as the D700).



From the examples ive seen the iso performance is NOT as good as a d700, it appears to be about one stop worse--similar to a d7000.  I would imagine that the resolution might make up for the increased noise which would make the claim that it performs as well as the d700 not complete bunk. However this isn't a consideration when shooting dx.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 18, 2012)

djacobox372 said:


> nickzou said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No. Please read this - The Real Megapixel Myth


----------



## amg (Feb 19, 2012)

Hmmmmmm.......I was about to buy d7000 but maybe I will hold off and see if everyone jumps on the bandwagon and start selling thre d700 maybe I can get one for a good price


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 6, 2012)

Not sure if the rest of you are keeping up on this but ...

Another Nikon D700 vs. Nikon D800 high ISO comparison | Nikon Rumors 


The more I hear the more I likey.


----------



## ghache (Mar 6, 2012)

people talk too fast. they think that because they cramped that many pixels in the same size sensor that iso performance will be worse. its new technologie. it will be better.end of story.


----------



## gsgary (Mar 6, 2012)

ghache said:


> people talk too fast. they think that because they cramped that many pixels in the same size sensor that iso performance will be worse. its new technologie. it will be better.end of story.



But will it be as good as the 5Dmk3


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 6, 2012)

I'm going to agree with that statement. What was impossible yesterday is probable today with improved technology, simple. From what I have read and my limited understanding, the D800 is going to excel, better than the D4 in the shadows and mid-tones in high-iso photography. At comparable sized viewing a full stop better than the D700. 


I hope I ordered in time to make the 1st deleivery


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 6, 2012)

gsgary said:


> ghache said:
> 
> 
> > people talk too fast. they think that because they cramped that many pixels in the same size sensor that iso performance will be worse. its new technologie. it will be better.end of story.
> ...



Better!


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Mar 6, 2012)

gsgary said:


> ghache said:
> 
> 
> > people talk too fast. they think that because they cramped that many pixels in the same size sensor that iso performance will be worse. its new technologie. it will be better.end of story.
> ...



The era of Canon dominance was put on life support in 2008 with the introduction of the D3 series.  It is now officially over with the introduction of the D4 series and the D800.  For the vast majority of shooters (those who photograph people), Canon is completely inferior thanks to AF and high-ISO issues.  On paper, Canon looks good, but we all don't shoot on paper.  The only people who have any reason to stick with Canon are those who are already invested in Canon glass, the brainless fanboys who will never learn, and their friends who listen to them for tech advice...


----------



## grayson (Mar 6, 2012)

haha. you guys are insane about this nikon hype. so funny to watch.


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 6, 2012)

^^ has my last name as his screen name...wth?


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 6, 2012)

Yeah I'm not getting a thrill out of the D800 Trever.  Seeing how its 5 years or so newer technology than the D700 I was expecting it to OBLITERATE it and make me lust for it until I spend savings.

I'm actually attentative to the canon announcements.


----------



## gsgary (Mar 6, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > ghache said:
> ...



I don't think so


----------



## gsgary (Mar 6, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > ghache said:
> ...




We will see when the 1Dx and 5Dmk3 come out


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 6, 2012)

To each his own, apples and oranges I say! For me the D800 looks good. If reports are correct it's going to a fine addition to my tool chest. I don't belittle Canon, contrary they dominated from the beginning, but it does seem to be a pretty even playing field more each day. 


Anyway, I started this thread for the D800 folk and those interested, not to debate what's a better brand so if we could keep it on track that'd be just fine


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 6, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > ghache said:
> ...



It's ironic that you used "brainless fanboys" to describe Canon users. As any post you make about Canon is bashing it, yet you still suckle on Nikon's teet in the same post. Seems like fanboy statements to me IMO. 

High ISO samples of the 5DIII came out today. There are some real world tests. Looks like ISO 25,600 is perfectly usable. Now we just have to see about how the AF performs in real world tests, rather than just speculating about it.


----------



## Markw (Mar 6, 2012)

That looks awesome.  I saw that when it posted too. 

Mark


----------



## gsgary (Mar 6, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> jamesbjenkins said:
> 
> 
> > gsgary said:
> ...



Canon say it is the same af as 1DX


----------



## MLeeK (Mar 6, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > ghache said:
> ...



You have really not read anything to have a clue what you are talking about have you? You might want to take a look at those high ISO images published for the "oh so superior" D800 and the 5d3 as well as those from the 1Dx and D4. You also may want to take a look at the re-vamped focus system in those canon cameras AND try using it before you open you spout of information with nothing practical to back it up. 
This coming from a Canon FanGirl who had SERIOUSLY considered the switch to Nikon up until the 5d3 announcement. If it performs as the testers say it does? You can keep your inferior D800.


----------



## rexbobcat (Mar 6, 2012)

gsgary said:
			
		

> Canon say it is the same af as 1DX



It is the same tech, but it's not as sophisticated or as 'intelligent' as the 1DX...Apparently


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 6, 2012)

enough Canon talk, you guys have your own appreciation thread


----------



## Patrice (Mar 6, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> enough Canon talk, you guys have your own appreciation thread



Once started, a thread belongs to the forum as a whole and thus to any one who wants to participate in it. If the conversation veers off from the original topic, so be it. Not like it hasn't happened before now.


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 6, 2012)

gee, thanks for that!


----------



## Village Idiot (Mar 7, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> enough Canon talk, you guys have your own appreciation thread



It was invaded by the Noink fanboys.


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 7, 2012)

I'm interested in the Canon, not for personal use but to compare technologies. If I had the $ I'd buy one of each  

I'm just glad the D800 looks like it will fit nicely in my kit. Not replace my D700 but accent it.


----------



## Forkie (Mar 7, 2012)

Looking at the body, I'd miss my focus area and focus mode switches!


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 7, 2012)

On the D800? I think they're going to be easier to use. One location, button and dial. Read in viewfinder. Might take a little getting used to but not thqt big a departure from the D700.


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 11, 2012)

Have you guys downloaded the high ISO RAW files and played with them? ISO 3200 is better on the D800 than theD700, LR4 editing workflow feels just as quick as D700 processing.  It's an awesome camera and I'm really getting excited.


----------



## gsgary (Mar 11, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> I'm interested in the Canon, not for personal use but to compare technologies. If I had the $ I'd buy one of each
> 
> I'm just glad the D800 looks like it will fit nicely in my kit. Not replace my D700 but accent it.



In the end the make of camera does not matter if the photographer does not know how to use it


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 11, 2012)

that pretty much goes for everything eh?


----------



## greybeard (Mar 11, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Have you guys downloaded the high ISO RAW files and played with them? ISO 3200 is better on the D800 than theD700, LR4 editing workflow feels just as quick as D700 processing.  It's an awesome camera and I'm really getting excited.


What sight has these files?


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 11, 2012)

DP Review forims has quite a bit of interesting tech info includjng RAW files and engineering data.


----------



## Garbz (Mar 12, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Have you guys downloaded the high ISO RAW files and played with them? ISO 3200 is better on the D800 than theD700, LR4 editing workflow feels just as quick as D700 processing.  It's an awesome camera and I'm really getting excited.



The bitchfight between the D700 fans and the D800 fans is quite interesting. In every respect the D800 has worse noise than the D700 and statistical analysis across the recorded picture will confirm this. However all that changes when you actually stop pixel peeping and look at the damn picture you just took.

The far higher resolution has the effect of making the noise pixels smaller. You can compare this to having a film with a finer grain. The result is more detail and a *more pleasing* noise response across the image. That and with the additional detail and smaller pixels you can do significantly more noise reduction without squashing the visible detail in your picture. 

Ultimately there are now two camps on the noise performance, those who compare 100% shots of the D700 to 100% shots of the D800 (as asinine as pixel peeping in my opinion), and those who compare 100% shots of the D700 to 57% shots of the D800.


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 12, 2012)

Yes, exactly. It's my belief that OUPUT size is what should be compared and not 12mp@100% Vs. 36mp@100%....I mean it's ouput size that truly matters, eh? No bitchfight as I have a D700 as well. I've played with the files available, seen what can be produced up to ISO3200 and am pleased with the results. 

I agree with your summary


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 12, 2012)

Garbz said:


> Trever1t said:
> 
> 
> > Have you guys downloaded the high ISO RAW files and played with them? ISO 3200 is better on the D800 than theD700, LR4 editing workflow feels just as quick as D700 processing.  It's an awesome camera and I'm really getting excited.
> ...



I simply expected the D800 to blow the D700 away so bad I had to scrap my D700 and have one.  Its too close for me to do such.  If I was buying new I'd buy the D800 of course, but it doesn't seem all that to trade up to.  Thats my only gripe. Perhaps I'm wrong and once it comes out I'll be forced to change my mind and make the D700 my back-up cam, but I'm just not feeling it yet.


----------



## greybeard (Mar 12, 2012)

I just got a message from Amazon, D800's will be available March 20th.......


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 12, 2012)

Yeah, I saw that, Amazon will be ready to ship on 3/20

2Wheel, I understand and can agree somewhat. While it's not a replacement for the D700 it is looking like a great companion. If I was going to buy my first FX body I'd still opt for the D700 as it's gone down in price significanty and offers truly the best deal for the $.


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 13, 2012)

Nikon D700 vs D800 high iso comparison


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Mar 13, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> Garbz said:
> 
> 
> > Trever1t said:
> ...



As great as the D800 may seem, I'm still trying to work out how the D800 will do in terms of potentially out resolving lenses, diffraction issues, sharpness issues caused by hand shake.. These are all issues that intrigue me. And not to mention Dynamic Range?

I am seriously hoping the D400 is a baby FX camera and dosen't use that complete 24MP piece of S*** sensor that was used in the A77 though. 16-18MP is enough for DX users IMO. I suppose Nikon could make a poor sensor, good though.


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 13, 2012)

Better technique will be required, perhaps a slightly faster shutter, same as shooting a D7000  Diffraction may be more apparent after f11 but again, only if you're pixle peeping eh? If you look at the samples I posted in the link above, he shot those with an older 17-35f2.8 at 35m at 1/13.... a little slow for 35mm but still pretty usable. Stop worrying, the D800 is going to blow everyone away, sure of it. Surprisingly, there is more hoopda over the D800 than there is about the D4. 

I'll be sure to post my own pixle peeping review once in my sweaty hands at the end of the month...if I am lucky enough. I ordered on Feb 8... 1 day after B&H opened pre-orders so I'll just have to keep my fingers crossed


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 13, 2012)

Just played around with a D800E RAW ISO 12800 file, um...amazing. I mean AMAZING resolution and damn low noise, even at that high ISO. 

Find the files here...look for the money shots!    Fotopolis.pl: Nikon D800E - zdjcia testowe

On the laptop I do see a little lag with LR4 moving sliders but not so in ACR 6.7. 
Importing into LR is fast, faster than I expected.
Exporting to JPG nets a 46.9mb file from a 48.6mb RAW (?)


----------



## Garbz (Mar 14, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> I simply expected the D800 to blow the D700 away so bad I had to scrap my D700 and have one.  Its too close for me to do such.  If I was buying new I'd buy the D800 of course, but it doesn't seem all that to trade up to.  Thats my only gripe. Perhaps I'm wrong and once it comes out I'll be forced to change my mind and make the D700 my back-up cam, but I'm just not feeling it yet.


 
Other than the D3 stepup from the D2, and the introduction of the D7000, has any Nikon release in the same line of cameras ever given you this opinion? I mean the D300 was yawnable compared to the D200. The D90 over the D80. D60 over the D50. For the most part people step up between product ranges. The D60s jumped to the D7000, the D80s to the D300s, etc. 



Nikon_Josh said:


> As great as the D800 may seem, I'm still trying to work out how the D800 will do in terms of potentially out resolving lenses, diffraction issues, sharpness issues caused by hand shake.. These are all issues that intrigue me. And not to mention Dynamic Range?



For some perspective people did not have the same complaints about the Canon 7D, 60D, 50D, 550D  500D, or Nikon D7000 which all have a finer pixel pitch than the D800, and borderline below the Nikon D3100 at just under. The step-up in resolution in a full frame 36mpxl camera is insignificantly more than any ~15mpxl APS camera on the market. Yet there's no major complaints about lenses, resolution, or hand shakiness on those cameras. 

I honestly think people are scared of the the wrong big number here because of the dramatic departure from Nikon's past product offerings.


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 14, 2012)

any clue I'm excited about this?  


Check out this comparison site Imaging Resource "Comparometer"  Digital Camera Image Comparison Page


----------



## skieur (Mar 14, 2012)

Dao said:


> Big Mike said:
> 
> 
> > Trever1t said:
> ...



Of course, that is where the current development objective is leading.  On a side by side comparison the Canon T3i produces sharper shots than the Nikon D4 at 16 megapixels. The Nikon D800 will eliminate that gap and surpass the Canon T3i by a good 20 percent if not more depending on the detailed specs.

skieur


----------



## skieur (Mar 14, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:


> I've said it once and I will say it again!
> 
> They are trying to steal the studio market with the prosumer level full frame body? WTF????? :er: Please someone explain this to my naive mind.. The D3X was clearly a PRO level studio camera.. this isn't mean to be a PRO camera? Or have I missed something?



You have missed a lot, as usual.  The Nikon D800 using the Sony chip will have to compete with 2 Sony A99 cameras in the wings both with 36 megapixels: one will be their replacement for the A900 and their new flagship model also without filters....interesting, eh?

You may not like the direction that the technology is taking, but as far as I am concerned, competition is always good for photographers: amateur and professional.

skieur


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Mar 15, 2012)

skieur said:


> Dao said:
> 
> 
> > Big Mike said:
> ...



This sounds like another classic comedy case of a post that is from 'downhill skier' syndrome... . The T3i is sharper than the D4? :lmao:


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Mar 15, 2012)

skieur said:


> Nikon_Josh said:
> 
> 
> > I've said it once and I will say it again!
> ...



I am actually converted on the idea of the D800 now, it has taken awhile but due to some of the informative posts on here concerning the matter.  I am having a change of heart, the D800 seems as if it could be great camera! I see the 36MP as overkill for my own needs still, but it will be a highly usable camera by the sound of it.

Am I interested in what Sony is releasing? No I am not interested at all.. I really COULD NOT CARE LESS!


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Mar 15, 2012)

skieur said:


> Dao said:
> 
> 
> > Big Mike said:
> ...



You're joking right? Did you take the AA filter into account, the lens into account?


----------



## Markw (Mar 15, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> any clue I'm excited about this?
> 
> 
> Check out this comparison site Imaging Resource "Comparometer" &#8482; Digital Camera Image Comparison Page



That site's a joke.  They use the same photos for the 1DsIII (I believe that was the one I chose) and the D300s.  No way to compare.



skieur said:


> Of course, that is where the current development objective is leading.  On a side by side comparison the Canon T3i produces sharper shots than the Nikon D4 at 16 megapixels.
> skieur



:lmao:  That's hilarious.

Mark


----------



## Derrel (Mar 15, 2012)

I went to the site and compared the Canon T3i and the Nikon D4 at ISO 400. I downloaded *both full-sized images from the "New Indoor (INB) 400" *set. I noticed that the focus on the Nikon photo is not quite right on much of the mannequin. Look at her necklace, and you can see that only the very left edge of it is within the depth of field, and the right hand side is already slipping out of the depth of field zone, and into defocus!

Looking at the *wine glass and wine cork* however, the Nikon's image IS IN the focus plane, and is a slight bit crisper and sharper than the T3i image. One thing that is clear too is that, on the book the mannequin is holding,and on her wrist watch, there is a goodly amount of magenta chromatic aberration showing on the black type and the watch band shot with the Canon lens. The Nikon lens sample is completely free of that chromatic aberration. The depth of field, or focus point, in the Nikon shot, is not "quite right" on the sample photo I downloaded. Perhaps this is due to the lesser depth of field a full-frame sensor gives compared to a 1.6x crop sensor. Or perhaps it's due to sloppy work. The Nikon image appears to me to be over-exposed a slight bit as well--making me wonder how the exposure was determined. By a light meter? By in-camera meter? By histogram?

Anyway, the claim that the Canon T3i delivers "sharper images" than the Nikon D4 is a pretty broad claim. Many cameras aimed at newbies have the default in-camera sharpening set pretty high, creating that kind of point & shoot type eye-candy type of file that newbies often want. Without Photoshop, and shooting in-camera JPEG, many newbies want to have HIGH in-camera sharpening applied by default, and we can see this by looking at the dPreview camera reviews; MANY cameras aimed at beginners, like the Canon T3i, use strong in-camera sharpening. Many pro cameras use lower sharpening, which is less-destructive, and which allows the user to process the images as needed in Photoshop or CaptureOne, using SOPHISTICATED sharpening methods out of the reach of the skill set of newbies.

As to being sharper...I looked on dPreview, and the T3i seems capable of around 2,500 l/ph resolution with normal processing, and as high as 2,700 l/ph with added sharpening. They have not yet tested the D4, but I expect its larger sensor to produce higher l/ph figures than the T3i. Regardless, the D4 is optimized for speed, and high-ISO capabilities. The D4 is the Ferrari Testarosa to the T3's Volkswagon Jetta...not really a fair race, but then, we all know that.


----------



## skieur (Mar 15, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> > Dao said:
> ...



Needless to say, someone with a limited mindset such as yourself, would not even bother to check it out. :lmao:

It would seem from Derrel that there are image quality weaknesses in both, which is not unexpected.  My point however is accurate that the Nikon D800 is intended to surpass its Canon competition in image quality.  Why else would they produce it?

New technology in cameras goes to where the market is.  If the prosumer market represents more sales than the pro market, then the improvements will hit those cameras first, which is probably the tact that Nikon is taking.  Notice that new features often appear at the point and shoot level, the compact level, entry DSLR level, prosumer level, and finally the pro level.

Pros have a choice.  Buy a slightly older technology pro camera, buy a new technology prosumer camera, or wait for the new technology to hit the pro level.

In Nikon terms: buy the D4, buy the D800, or wait for the D5.

skieur


----------



## skieur (Mar 15, 2012)

EchoingWhisper said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> > Dao said:
> ...




Why remove the anti-aliasing (AA) filter in the Nikon D800E? | Nikon Rumors


skieur


----------



## gsgary (Mar 15, 2012)

But it still won't be as good as a Sony A77


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 15, 2012)

ok have we had enough fun?


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Mar 15, 2012)

Do you realise that at the same equivalent focal length and same lp/mm, a larger sensor will always beat the smaller sensor in terms of resolution (and sharpness)?


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Mar 16, 2012)

EchoingWhisper said:


> *Do you realise that at the same equivalent focal length and same lp/mm, a larger sensor will always beat the smaller sensor in terms of resolution (and sharpness)*?



Yes Michael, you are completely right! But SOME people on this forum like to come and hijack threads to give a controversial opinion that they know will cause a flame war. It has been proven on numerous occasion that larger sensors will give better resolution and sharpness than smaller sensors. The issue of a T2i being better than a D4 can not be proven by some poxy test results from some poxy site run by geeks, it has been proven on numerous occassions in real world use that large sensors produce better sharpness than smaller sensors. 

But yes I apologise Trever, I should know better. Lets get back on topic..


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 16, 2012)

Yay!


----------



## greybeard (Mar 16, 2012)

It is not the same as with film when it comes to format.....A 16mp crop frame and a 16mp ff image will have the same file size and pixels. The ff pixels are larger and should have better low light performance but 2 images shot at iso 100 will be hard to see a difference.  (My expedience)


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 16, 2012)

greybeard said:


> It is not the same as with film when it comes to format.....A 16mp crop frame and a 16mp ff image will have the same file size and pixels. The ff pixels are larger and should have better low light performance but 2 images shot at iso 100 will be hard to see a difference.  (My expedience)



depth of field will be different using same MM lens of course. baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack up with an 85mm portrait lens. I don't even take my cropper in the studio as a back-up cam any more.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 16, 2012)

Trever will you please post some pics with you new D800 so this thread doesn't tun into a threadjack debate with croppers suggesting all this stuff


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 16, 2012)

Of course I'm gonna show you all how bad a photographer I really am  

I'm going to try and take some comparisons against the D700 and then some real world hand helds ...


I have no idea where I stand in the pre-order line. I placed my order at 8am on the 8th of Feb so there may be 1000 ahead of me?


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 16, 2012)

the manual is now available http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/dslr/D800_EN.pdf


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Mar 16, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> Of course I'm gonna show you all how bad a photographer I really am  I'm going to try and take some comparisons against the D700 and then some real world hand helds ...I have no idea where I stand in the pre-order line. I placed my order at 8am on the 8th of Feb so there may be 1000 ahead of me?


Any idea of time frames of when you may get it? I look forward to seeing the results, I also am looking forward to the online reviews of the camera.


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 16, 2012)

Well just reading the manual now seeing how different the AF system is, looks good. No idea when I wil be getting mine, tried to find out but B&H isn't divulging any info other than they receive their first delivery on the 22nd. I ordered 24 hours after they opened for pre-order. Fingers crossed


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 16, 2012)

Man wow some pixel peeping aginst the D700 will be great, maybe I'll be sold on it and pull the trigger on an order too


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 16, 2012)




----------



## Josh220 (Mar 16, 2012)

Here comes the waaaaambulance. Can't wait to see hands on reviews. I am waiting to see whether I want the D700 or D800.


----------



## skieur (Mar 16, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon_Josh said:
> ...



Whether you care what Sony is releasing is irrelevant. Nikon's point of view and perspective will determine their strategic moves in the marketplace.

skieur


----------



## skieur (Mar 16, 2012)

EchoingWhisper said:


> Do you realise that at the same equivalent focal length and same lp/mm, a larger sensor will always beat the smaller sensor in terms of resolution (and sharpness)?



In theory yes, BUT, I have not seen any side by side photos that illustrate your point.  Can you direct us to some?

skieur


----------



## skieur (Mar 16, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:


> EchoingWhisper said:
> 
> 
> > *Do you realise that at the same equivalent focal length and same lp/mm, a larger sensor will always beat the smaller sensor in terms of resolution (and sharpness)*?
> ...



Well, if you suddenly want to stop insulting me and get back on topic, then PROVE YOUR POINT.  Where are the photos?

skieur


----------



## skieur (Mar 16, 2012)

Josh220 said:


> Here comes the waaaaambulance. Can't wait to see hands on reviews. I am waiting to see whether I want the D700 or D800.



Well, I would suspect that Nikon has the noise under reasonable control in the D800 or they would not be putting it out so soon.  The more important issue is probably cost/price and that is personal.

skieur


----------



## skieur (Mar 16, 2012)

gsgary said:


> But it still won't be as good as a Sony A77



Well, then go ahead and buy the Sony A77, if that is what you think.

skieur


----------



## tirediron (Mar 16, 2012)

*Okay, let's all take a deep breath and see if we can keep this thread on topic and step back on the snide remarks, that way, maybe, jussstttttt maybe it can make 15 pages!*


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 16, 2012)

Thanks, nothing wrong with a debate but let's keep it adult like eh?


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Mar 16, 2012)

skieur said:


> EchoingWhisper said:
> 
> 
> > Do you realise that at the same equivalent focal length and same lp/mm, a larger sensor will always beat the smaller sensor in terms of resolution (and sharpness)?
> ...



It's obvious, a larger sensor has more 'mm' therefore has more 'lp'.


----------



## KmH (Mar 17, 2012)

EchoingWhisper said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> > EchoingWhisper said:
> ...


I don't think it's obvious at all, and agree that in practice it's entirely possible for more "mm" to have fewer actual 'lp'.


----------



## Markw (Mar 17, 2012)

Well, I ordered mine within 2 minutes of amazon opening their flood gates.  I chose $4 1-day shipping, and I have a scheduled arrival date of the 21st.  SUPER excited and anxious to get it in my hands!  

Mark


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Mar 17, 2012)

Markw said:


> Well, I ordered mine within 2 minutes of amazon opening their flood gates.  I chose $4 1-day shipping, and I have a scheduled arrival date of the 21st.  SUPER excited and anxious to get it in my hands!
> 
> Mark



What lenses are you getting for it Mark?


----------



## Markw (Mar 17, 2012)

I have a 24-70/2.8II from Sigma (Yeah, I know, not a Nikon..:er, 80-200/2.8D (Yeah, I know, not a 70-200..:er, 50/1.8G coming shortly, Sigma 180/3.5 Macro, and may pick up the 85/1.8G.  I know I'm probably not fully utilizing that amazing sensor, but there's not much more I can do.  I wouldn't hesitate putting a DX equivalent of those lenses on a D7k.  So, I won't on the D800.

Mark


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Mar 17, 2012)

And we haven't take the lens into account. If both the FX and DX lenses are made to have the same depth of field (same entrance pupil), like Helen B said, the FX lenses will outperform DX lenses in terms of resolution per area. I do agree that in practice in might be less obvious because DX/APS-C systems sell more lenses and more money may be poured into it to make it better.

EDIT: I found out that at the same focal length and same depth of field (entrance pupil), the FX lens will outperform the DX lens. But once I have both lenses at the same equivalent focal length, the difference is gone. I guess the only advantage for a FX system is more mm = more lp.


----------



## xyphoto (Mar 17, 2012)

I also pre ordered mine from Amazon. Not sure when I will get. Don't know why I chose the "FREE Super Saver shipping". Being cheap I guess.

Well if I do get it by the end of this month, I will be able to do some comparison shots between D800 and my current D700. I have Nikon 24-70 and 70-200 and Sigma 85 1.4 to do the testing in my home studio.

Just let me know in which particular areas you would like see the comparison shots done. I know most people want to see high ISO performance and 100% pixel peeping.


----------



## Markw (Mar 17, 2012)

You can always change the shipping speed until it ships.  I get student discounted 1-day shipping ($3.99!).  Until then, you can always send me your Sigma 85/1.4 and I'd be happy to test it out for you. :mrgreen:

Mark


----------



## Markw (Mar 21, 2012)

By the way, arrival date postponed until April 15-30. Notified the day AFTER it was supposed to be out for delivery. 

Mark


----------

