# Nikon D810 Internal Memory Buffer Replacement & Upgrade



## donny1963 (Dec 25, 2016)

Ok, i have this Nikon D810, and saw on Ebay some one was selling a broken smashed Nikon D5, Which that camera has a unreal FPS shooting rate, of like 12 FPS at full Image Quality in continuous shooting rate..  And one of the things that is needed for something like that is a huge high speed memory buffer..

Now My nikon D810 can do continuous shooting at like 5 to 6 fps and will do this until it reaches around 30 to 35 frames then the memory buffer gets full and has to slow down until it catches up..
How ever the Nikon D5 can do 12 FPS up to 200 Frames before it will start to slow down, basically it really n ever slows down until maybe a couple minutes of continuous shooting..

But i thought to myself once i reach around 30 frames, it starts to bog down in fps to catch up..
So i done some research and found out that, the memory buffer in the D810 is the same chip size and configuration meaning the number of connectors soldered in to the board as the D5 the only Difference  is that the memory size and speed of the D5 is way lager and faster..

So i purchased this broken Nikon D5 for $150.00 for parts and then got my soldering iron to work.
I used a soldering suction unit that pulls solder that is melted when you heat it up by the press of a button, so this made it easy for me to remove the ships out of the board..

Then i went to work on my D810 and removed the chips from that, and replaced them with the memory from the D5,,  Now this was a long shot i was not sure if the camera would even turn on and work after this, but low and behold yeah the camera turned on and worked fine..

Not only that, when i put the camera in continuous shooting mode and full raw image quality
for some reason the frames FPS rate increased to like 7  or 8 FPS not sure why that was effected but i'll take that.. and not only that, i was never able to over fill the buffer to make it start to bog down to catch up, i tested this  holding the shutter button for over 4 minutes and it never slowed down one bit..
Now this was a major breakthrough for me, i was very pleased of the results, now i'm sure Nikon never expected some one to do this, because if they knew people may do this they would probably change the type of memory chip each camera takes, making it impossible to do..

Now i did check to see if Nikon would sell the Memory buffer chips for replacement parts, and see what this would cost, thinking to myself i could make some quick $$$ offering to upgrade peoples D810's to have this upgrade, how ever, sadly Nikon will not Sell any circuit board parts unless your a authorized repair dealer   oh well.
the only parts they would sell is external parts like grip replacements eye piece, battery doors stuff like that..

So i share this with you if your able to get your hands on a Broken Nikon D5 that some one will sell for parts cheep and you got a Nikon D810 , and your feel comfortable working on circuit boards and can use a soldering iron, then you could turn your Nikon D810 to a camera that will do continuous shooting mode at around 7 to 8 FPS  at an unlimited amount of shots  with out slowing down..

this is really cool knowing that i can hold down the shutter button and not have to worry about running out of buffer, this is especially great if you want to do some TIMELAPSE  shots at 1 frame per second  and not have the camera crap out before your timelapse shots are done..

for me this was annoying when i wanted to capture 1 fps for 5 to 10 or even 20 min for a timelapse sequence but after like few seconds the damm buffer was filled up and would ruin my timelapse..
i would have to do it in JPEG at a medium quality,, I now can do this in RAW and if there is any work i want to do in lightroom i get full post options editing raw..
So this upgrade is really awesome..

BTW, this process to do this is quite difficult, unless you have taken camera's apart before and think you can put it back together with out ruining it, because in order to take this camera apart and you have to be careful of disconnecting the ribbon cables on the boards..

you need some tools and  it takes about 1 hour to dismantle and another hour to put back together, so your total time if you know what your doing is about 2 and a half hours of work all said and done..


----------



## astroNikon (Dec 26, 2016)

Do you have any pictures of the process.
Cameras are jammed pack with electronics.
I know many in the past wondered if something like this would work especially with the d7100.

The FPS buffer is amazing.  I have a d500 now.


----------



## Dave442 (Dec 26, 2016)

Nice work. Not often I hear of people taking apart a perfectly good working camera, but it looks like it worked out for you.


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 26, 2016)

Hmm, this seems somewhat suspicious.  Could you share the link for the broken D5?  I've seen smashed D4 sell for 1200 and I didn't see a completed D5 listing for $150

Now if this is really true, it really shows that Nikon is crippling it's cameras intentionally.. If the D810 was really capable of 8 FPS you would think Nikon would have upped the specs and sell it for more money.  That would give the camera a throughput of 288 MP/S which would be moving more data than any other Nikon camera available. Have you done a timed test to see what the actual FPS is?  Does it increase even more in 1.2x or DX mode?


----------



## Destin (Dec 26, 2016)

coastalconn said:


> Hmm, this seems somewhat suspicious.  Could you share the link for the broken D5?  I've seen smashed D4 sell for 1200 and I didn't see a completed D5 listing for $150
> 
> Now if this is really true, it really shows that Nikon is crippling it's cameras intentionally.. If the D810 was really capable of 8 FPS you would think Nikon would have upped the specs and sell it for more money.  That would give the camera a throughput of 288 MP/S which would be moving more data than any other Nikon camera available. Have you done a timed test to see what the actual FPS is?  Does it increase even more in 1.2x or DX mode?




My thoughts exactly. The math on this just doesn't add up or make sense. Until we see proof this seems hard to believe for a handful of reasons.


----------



## Dave442 (Dec 29, 2016)

I was hoping for the video of it being done and then tested.


----------



## robbins.photo (Dec 29, 2016)

coastalconn said:


> Hmm, this seems somewhat suspicious.  Could you share the link for the broken D5?  I've seen smashed D4 sell for 1200 and I didn't see a completed D5 listing for $150
> 
> Now if this is really true, it really shows that Nikon is crippling it's cameras intentionally.. If the D810 was really capable of 8 FPS you would think Nikon would have upped the specs and sell it for more money.  That would give the camera a throughput of 288 MP/S which would be moving more data than any other Nikon camera available. Have you done a timed test to see what the actual FPS is?  Does it increase even more in 1.2x or DX mode?



So you've never been tempted to take a working camera worth two grand, tear it all apart, desolder the main chip from the motherboard, solder a new one in it's place with no idea if it's even compatible or if the pin outs are the same just to see what would happen?

I mean sure odds of turning both of these expensive cameras into paperweights is pretty high, your violating whatever warranty you may have had an no reputable repair shop in it's right mind would try to fix this afterwards for almost any amount of money... but, on the upside...

Umm.. wait, there really isn't an upside here.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 2, 2017)

coastalconn said:


> Hmm, this seems somewhat suspicious.  Could you share the link for the broken D5?  I've seen smashed D4 sell for 1200 and I didn't see a completed D5 listing for $150
> 
> Now if this is really true, it really shows that Nikon is crippling it's cameras intentionally.. If the D810 was really capable of 8 FPS you would think Nikon would have upped the specs and sell it for more money.  That would give the camera a throughput of 288 MP/S which would be moving more data than any other Nikon camera available. Have you done a timed test to see what the actual FPS is?  Does it increase even more in 1.2x or DX mode?



No i don't have a link but this is true, don't forget the D5 that i bought, was cheap because it was smashed, it was ran over by a vehicle, so there was really nothing about it that was any good except the computer parts...
so it really had no value, because the external parts was not usable again..

And of course Nikon and every other camera manufacture  cripple the camera's intentionally, it's called cost effective, they manufacture a product and use the same template from one model to another, but 99% of the time use the same internal parts, because it cost less to manufacture less number of parts, why go produce millions of parts for 1 model and then have to do the same for another model, why not use all the same parts of most of it,  and killing 10 birds with one stone..

This is the main reason they do this,   you will find in alot of  products from model to model your getting the same thing from one model to another with just a few intentional modifications to enable and disable features that they want you to pay for ($$$)


It's all computers people, a camera is basically a computer with mechanical parts..
So the computer part they can disable specific features from one model and enable the others on another model..
here is an example,   Cannon came out with the 50D, then they came out with the 60D, now they was more features on the 60D vs the 50D
for example the 60D did video the 50D didn't , or did it?

 Well turns out some one made a hack called magic lantern that would access the
main board of the 50D and be able to enable the video features of the camera, where out of the box you could not.
the 50D and the 60D was basically the same camera inside with a couple minor differences.

And right now with some help i'm researching about the Nikon D5 and the Nikon D810 and checking out to see if the D810 is capable of shooting at
12 FPS like the D5 just by hacking into the main board and enabling it to do that..

I'm sure it would be possible because when i opened the D5 up and then the D810 the shutter system was identical mechanically any way..
so i will let you all know when and if i'm able to figure this out..

If it's true what i suspect, then i'll have a Nikon D810 that is capable of shooting 12 FPS
After all,  it now has the buffer memory for it     Thanks to my research..

Right now i believe i'm the only one who has a Nikon D810 that can do continuous shooting at full quality with out it running out of buffer.,
I'm sure if Nikon Corp knew about this they would not be very happy, and probably might even try to take me to court for braking some sort of terms of use of their product, You never know Greed can cause people to do drastic things, but i say good luck to them with that..

They are many products that are capable of this type of thing..
Back in 2013 i had a Nvidia GTX 690, which was a good card, i use to do alot of gaming, and i had a friend who shelled out the bucks for a Nvidia Quadro K5000,  his graphics card was close to $800.00 more then my card was, and one thing we noticed the cards looked nearly the same.
So we did our research and with the help of another friend of mine who is an electrical engineer we figured out the slight differences between the two cards..
And it was basically just a couple of things..
It turns out that the card responds to a device ID as assigned by a series of analog values,
these can be tweaked by swapping resistors in just the right places..
Once you did this all you had to do is re-install the drivers for the K5000 model and it would accept it because the software drivers wasn't able to distinguish the difference between the GTX 690 and the K5000, in fact it thought the K5000 was the unit plugged in the slot of the computer lol
So after the new driver install, yes i had a Nvidia Quadro K5000 but only paid for a Nvidia GTX 690.

Till this day Nvidia still manufactures their graphics card products the same way,
if you have any electrical background you can turn your lesser costing card to the more expensive one..
WHY?? well because electronic corporations are greedy and want to save money,
so they template all thier models of their products the same just intentionally disable the goodies they want you to pay for..
This is how it works people, it's all about the dollar.. $$$$$

chances are if you walk into BEST BUY and look at computer monitors and you see 2 monitors side by side made by the same manufacture, only one of them cost $150.00 and the other cost $600.00  Chances are you can buy the $150.00 and get all the wonderful features and performance of the $600.00 model,   that is if they are both the same size and same everything but one says it is a faster sync and better picture quality,
chances are in alot of cases that they are the same, with only just a couple of technical adjustments..
Now of course this is possible because HP , OR NEC knows most people
don't have the education or balls to do this on their own and take advantage of it..

Many of you people got a less expensive camera, that is capable of giving you the features
of the camera of your dreams that you always wish you could afford,
and you actually have it in your hands and don't even know it,, The only trick is you need
to have a bit of education background in electronics and the balls to take it 

Don't look so surprised this type of thing has existed for many generations..

Donny


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 2, 2017)

robbins.photo said:


> coastalconn said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm, this seems somewhat suspicious.  Could you share the link for the broken D5?  I've seen smashed D4 sell for 1200 and I didn't see a completed D5 listing for $150
> ...


 Sure there is, first off, i'm not just some retard who doesn't have any background in electronics, i use to work for company called flextronics,  they was a contracting company for many brand computer names that assembled computer boards..
So i have a background in soldering, and working with IC's and computer chips...

So really the risk was low, of course it was possible that i might have ruined something in fact administering a high enough tempture to melt solder, it is possible to burn out a memory chip, yes that thought has crossed my mind and it was a slight chance..
How ever my education and efforts paid off and i was successful.. so there was total UPSIDE to it all!!!!!!
So in fact i gained everything and lost really nothing, well i did lose $150.00 ,  which i was very happy to pay for the upgrade that i gained, and
 if anything ever happens to my camera it would not be because of the memory upgrade thus would not effect my warranty, in fact no technician would probably even know what i done..
Oh and the kicker about this nikon d810 i have i didn't pay two grand for it lol i paid $200.00 for it some idiot who was married to a guy who died,  decided out of greed to sell all his photography gear out in a yard sale on the front lawn, who was a very selfish nasty person i might add, didn't know the value of this Nikon D810 and sold it to me for only $200.00 about 10 months ago lol i also picked up a couple of lenses cheap as well..

Eh some people got all the luck lol

Donny


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 2, 2017)

Destin said:


> coastalconn said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm, this seems somewhat suspicious.  Could you share the link for the broken D5?  I've seen smashed D4 sell for 1200 and I didn't see a completed D5 listing for $150
> ...


I don't need to hand off proof, i really don't care if you believe it or not i was just sharing the experience of it, and maybe you might be able to use this information if you ever wanted to do the same thing..


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 2, 2017)

Dave442 said:


> I was hoping for the video of it being done and then tested.


I'll tell ya what when and if i do the research on seeing if i can get the D810 to do 12 FPS like the D5 does, i'll make sure i record a video..

Donny


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 3, 2017)

donny1963 said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > coastalconn said:
> ...



I guess you and I view upside differently.  See, assuming what you stated is the truth you've now got a D810 that has pretty much no resell value.  I sure wouldn't buy something like this from someone who admits that they modified the camera's internal systems by themselves at home.  Most repair depots are not likely to want to work on this thing as a result, so if I were to need to have the camera serviced that might either become an extremely expensive proposition or simply not be possible, at all.  So nobody in their right mind would buy this camera now that it's been messed with to such an extent.  

I'll also admit I'm extremely skeptical of the prices your quoting here - $200 for a D810?  $150 for a D5?  Even one that isn't in operable condition?  Sorry but that just seems really, really far fetched.  A once in a lifetime deal is just that.. once in a lifetime.  And the prices your quoting?  Go well, well beyond that.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 3, 2017)

... or a video of the new upgrade in action ...


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 3, 2017)

Donny[/QUOTE]

I guess you and I view upside differently.  See, assuming what you stated is the truth you've now got a D810 that has pretty much no resell value.  I sure wouldn't buy something like this from someone who admits that they modified the camera's internal systems by themselves at home.  Most repair depots are not likely to want to work on this thing as a result, so if I were to need to have the camera serviced that might either become an extremely expensive proposition or simply not be possible, at all.  So nobody in their right mind would buy this camera now that it's been messed with to such an extent.

I'll also admit I'm extremely skeptical of the prices your quoting here - $200 for a D810?  $150 for a D5?  Even one that isn't in operable condition?  Sorry but that just seems really, really far fetched.  A once in a lifetime deal is just that.. once in a lifetime.  And the prices your quoting?  Go well, well beyond that.[/QUOTE]


Who says it has no resell value? just because you wouldn't buy it doesn't meany any one else would not..
Who says i want to sell it? LOL

And as far as what i did to the camera, that doesn't make it unstable because of what i did, Maybe because you have no experience or education in this field  you think  that automatically the camera is now no good lol..
I worked on main boards for a living, a camera is nothing but a computer with mechanical parts that's all it is, it has a main processor, a graphics processor, a bios, firmware on it,  memory, hell your smart phone is nothing but a mini computer that can make phone calls, but hey now  tablets and computers can do that to..
Your tablet is nothing more then a oversized smart phone,, with calling features on it lol
when you take your camera to be repaired who do you think does the work on it? people like me and other's like me.
They don't send it to special people who have superpowers .LOL

where do you think these people that work on your camera come from?
They don't fall from the sky, they don't pass though a membrane from another reality.
and about you believing what i paid for the camera's well i don't care if you believe it or not, hey when i got the D810 i talked about it about a year ago..
here is the proof..
WOW Nikon D810

Oh wait Yes maybe just maybe i posted that a year ago planing to a year later to make up a conspiracy lie of how i got D810 for $150.00 yes, that must be it, to corroborate a future lie that i didn't even think up yet!!! LOL

You don't happen to wear aluminum foil around your head to protect your mind from being peeked into do you?? LOL


----------



## Frank F. (Jan 4, 2017)

I took the fredom to post this claim to a place where people do some really nerdy things with Nikon cameras and lenses, lots of scientists and engineers, always well documented with photos. If someone can testify or debunk this, it will be the Nikongear people. What the Nerds Do


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 4, 2017)

Stop spraying and praying.  Problem solved.


----------



## Frank F. (Jan 4, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Stop spraying and praying.  Problem solved.



Hey, you speak in toungues. Please enlight us upon the meaning of you post....


----------



## Frank F. (Jan 4, 2017)

donny1963 said:


> Dave442 said:
> 
> 
> > I was hoping for the video of it being done and then tested.
> ...



Even if the shutter can do it, the read out of the 36MP chip will not allow for that frame rate, because the data rate would be well above that of the D5.

Max speed of the D5 is 14 frames per second (without AF) x 21 Megapixels = 294 Megapixel per second, that is what the D5 can do with the chip tuned to fast read outs.

You claim to suck 7.5 frames per second x 36 Megapixels from your D810 = 270 Megapixels per second. You very probable reached the ceiling if your story has any discrenible relation to reality and is not just entertaining...


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 4, 2017)

donny1963 said:


> Who says it has no resell value? just because you wouldn't buy it doesn't meany any one else would not..
> Who says i want to sell it? LOL



Well I wish you well with that one I guess.  I can't imagine it's going to fly off the shelves.  I can see the ad for it now..  One of a kind D810 - it's been internally modified by the owner to include parts from a D5.  The warranty has been completely violated and if you have any problems at all with it no authorized repair center will touch it with a 10 foot pole.  So any problems at all and you'll have the worlds most expensive paperweight on your hands... 




> And as far as what i did to the camera, that doesn't make it unstable because of what i did, Maybe because you have no experience or education in this field  you think  that automatically the camera is now no good lol..



Actually I used to repair laptops for a living.  Not exactly the same as cameras, granted, but they have many of the same design considerations.  Ran into more than a few guys like you who figured, it's just a chip.. it's just this, it's just that.. no reason why you can't just slap it in...   

More than once I saw some guy thinking he could just drop in any old processor he wanted.  My favorites where the guys who would modify their laptops with add on video cards because the board inside would support them - but the laptop was never designed to have an external video card installed.

99 times out of a hundred the results were the same - the laptop chassis and internal cooling systems were never designed to handle the extra heat of the video card, and it would overheat the system and usually fry the processor as a result.  Yes, the card would "fit" in there with some modifications.  But the rest of the system was never designed to accomodate it.  So some pinhead would trash a perfectly good laptop because he thought he knew better than the engineers that designed it.  

So no, I wouldn't consider myself an expert in camera repair - but I would never advocate anyone do what you've supposedly done to that D810.  It's just incredibly foolish.



> They don't send it to special people who have superpowers .LOL



So I guess you can take off your outfit then, Condescending Man...



> here is the proof..
> WOW Nikon D810



So your "proof" is that you told the same rather outlandish story before?  I think you might want to hit the dictionary and look up the word "proof".


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 4, 2017)

Frank F. said:


> donny1963 said:
> 
> 
> > Dave442 said:
> ...


course the shutter can do it, it's the same shutter, i never said it would work for sure, i don't know yet, if it's roadblocked  because the processor is slower on the D810 then it won't work, but if it's a matter of just changing the settings in the frimware chip then it will work, don't forget the Canon 50D doesn't do video out of the box, but if you use the firmware hack  (Magic Lantern) you get video  just like the Canon 60D.. Becuase they are really the same camera , it's just a intentional setting in the firmware that stops you..


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 4, 2017)

Frank F. said:


> I took the fredom to post this claim to a place where people do some really nerdy things with Nikon cameras and lenses, lots of scientists and engineers, always well documented with photos. If someone can testify or debunk this, it will be the Nikongear people. What the Nerds Do


Wow this means alot to you to debunk huh? never thought this would matter to you so much lol, well good luck they won't be able to debunk it because i did it.. 
lol

Good luck in your venture., what ever that may be..


----------



## coastalconn (Jan 4, 2017)

I would still like to see a video of the super d810 in action.. Film it with your phone and hold the shutter button down. Shouldn't be that hard to prove what you have done. Or are you afraid the men in black might come after you?


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 4, 2017)

donny1963 said:


> course the shutter can do it, it's the same shutter, i never said it would work for sure, i don't know yet, if it's roadblocked  because the processor is slower on the D810 then it won't work, but if it's a matter of just changing the settings in the frimware chip then it will work, don't forget the Canon 50D doesn't do video out of the box, but if you use the firmware hack  (Magic Lantern) you get video  just like the Canon 60D.. Becuase they are really the same camera , it's just a intentional setting in the firmware that stops you..



Ok, well a couple of things it doesn't look like you've considered.  The D810's shutter mechanism may look similar to the D5's, but is it truly the same?  Is it made of exactly the same components and to the same tolerance levels?  Or is it possible that they may have used cheaper components in a similar design to save money?

Why is that important?  Assuming the rest of this works your not giving the shutter the rest time it's accustomed too - your stressing it a lot more than the original design called for, and you might lessen the lifetime of that shutter dramatically.

Now the chip itself, from the original description you soldered it into the original board used by the 810.. but again, can that board accommodate that chip properly?  Will that chip run hotter than it's predecessor?  Draw more current?  Can the board stand up to that?  Even if it works initially are you not putting more stress on those components by having them operate outside their engineered tolerance level?  What about the components around it in that area of the camera?  Can they take the extra heat, and if so for how long before they begin to fail? 

Other interesting thing to note.  Originally you stated you did this already and gave us a FPS rate that you supposedly achieved.  In this posting your talking about "if this works" and "I don't know yet" as if you haven't done it yet... so again, starting to strain credulity here.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 4, 2017)

coastalconn said:


> I would still like to see a video of the super d810 in action.. Film it with your phone and hold the shutter button down. Shouldn't be that hard to prove what you have done. Or are you afraid the men in black might come after you?



Crap.  I wore purple today.  Lol


----------



## Frank F. (Jan 4, 2017)

Tipp: If you make up stories you should stick to the "FACTS" you make up. Now go and check the two versions of the garage sale for several inconsistencies. I am just here for the Nachos...

The Nerds think I mistook 1/4/17 with 4/1/17



There is a spring loose somewhere


----------



## tirediron (Jan 4, 2017)

Okay people, enough.  This thread either stays on-topic or it will be locked.


----------



## DarkShadow (Jan 4, 2017)

The D810 is one heck of of a camera as is, but if you did as you said kudos for that.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 4, 2017)

Frank F. said:


> Tipp: If you make up stories you should stick to the "FACTS" you make up. Now go and check the two versions of the garage sale for several inconsistencies. I am just here for the Nachos...
> 
> The Nerds think I mistook 1/4/17 with 4/1/17
> 
> ...


There is no inconsistencies, i even posted it in this topic..


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 4, 2017)

robbins.photo said:


> donny1963 said:
> 
> 
> > course the shutter can do it, it's the same shutter, i never said it would work for sure, i don't know yet, if it's roadblocked  because the processor is slower on the D810 then it won't work, but if it's a matter of just changing the settings in the frimware chip then it will work, don't forget the Canon 50D doesn't do video out of the box, but if you use the firmware hack  (Magic Lantern) you get video  just like the Canon 60D.. Becuase they are really the same camera , it's just a intentional setting in the firmware that stops you..
> ...




About the shutter, no i'm not 100% sure about the shutter, by looking at both they appear to be exactly the same.
But there is no guarantee's, if i want a guarantee i'll buy a toaster..

How ever i doubt they will make two separate shutter systems, when they can just use one they already manufacture, unless the build of it calls for a different layout.

about the chip,  no the chip won't run hotter then the original chip, it's basically the same chip only more memory storage and the speed of it is faster.
Memory chips don't generally heat up, it's not a processor, totally different design type of a chip.

Example, you buy memory sticks for your computer that plug in the sockets, example 72 pin DDR3  4MB made by kingston.
or you can buy a 72 pin DDR 3 8 MB made by kingston, Now if you look at them 2 memory sticks they would look and appear to be exactly the same,
Until you read the print on it telling you it holds 8 MB vs 4 MB and maybe the speed of the memory could be different as well.
but both plug into the same socket, same computer, both compatible to each other , only one is better then the other..

as far as power drawing, yes the chip out of the D5 draws .3 more volts then the one from the D810,
but the power supply system for each camera is the same identacle unit, and the same part number as well. so the power is not an issue.. in fact
i check that to make sure, i do, my homework, i'm not a amateur when it comes to this,.
Both camera's are the same size with the exception of the D5 having the built in battery grip layout, not detachable.
and 1 extra button on one side of the front near the lens mount.
Also the graphics board are identacle, this is what gives your back display screen visual.
almost everything of both camera's are the same, with a few exceptions.

I never said i achieved the frame rate thing yet,  How ever i did notice the shutter in continuous shooting test after the memory modification was a tad faster, now i didn't measure this with a stop watch and count how many images i got to see, but just sounded a tad faster, could be it just sounded like 1.5 seconds faster but hey that's a bit hard to calculate by listening to it..
How ever it is possible because the memory is faster and allowing less shutter lag who knows..

and as far as being 100% sure the shutter will handle this, NO not 100% like i said if i want a 100% guarantee i'll buy a toaster, but pretty sure.
but if i'm wrong then the shutter could screw up and start failing or doing funny things, or things i didn't anticipate.
But that is a very slim chance.

If i have any doubt in anything what so ever i will not go forward with trying to get the shutter speed the D5 has, on the D810..
I'ts not all that important to me. How ever the ability to hold the shutter button down and not ever get any shutter bog because of filling up the memory is something i do care about , hell Nikon should design all their camera's to not shut down because of you want to use the continuous shooting feature..
that's really stupid..   They could very well put the correct memory to not allow the camera to stop shooting because of buffer fill.
Hell when you had film and attached a speed winder to your camera you could get the full continuous shooting until your film was depleted..

But as i said before it's all about money, if customers want to do continuous shooting as it should be, they want you to pay for it..
So they want you to get the camera they designed specific for that task, The D5, How ever 2 or 3 grand more. LOL

Think about the differences mechanically and circuit  board wise,  there is not much difference between the two camera's  with the exception to
a different amount of memory and battery grip feature and small other things, the cost to manufacture both of these camera's are probably very similar, maybe couple hundred dollars more to manufacture the D5, but get a 2 to 3 thousand dollar return profit..

Of course they don't want every one to be aware of this and their is probably no way to prove it, but business is business..
This is why Nikon's  executive team, pulls in 1.2 mil a year  or more, with Free mercedes to drive  around in and, a $100,000 expense account each year LOL

Any way when i get the time i'll look into the shutter speed thing i'm almost sure that it would work with just a new Firmware programing.
But not sure just yet.

Also could be computer component like a different resister value as well, holding back the power to the shutter motor when pressing the shutter button.
that would be a simple mod, just replace the correct resister with a less value.. working in the same way of a blinking LED  the more resistance the slower the pulse..

Research is where it's at.

Donny


----------



## Dave442 (Jan 4, 2017)

I don't see where Nikon should be supplying the D5 chip in the D810 just because they can. They want to fill a market segment and one way to keep the D810 in it's segment is to limit the buffer.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 4, 2017)

Dave442 said:


> I don't see where Nikon should be supplying the D5 chip in the D810 just because they can. They want to fill a market segment and one way to keep the D810 in it's segment is to limit the buffer.


I think it's more about money..   why should a shutter bog down because the memory buffer gets full, and rather quick i might add? when all it takes is more memory..
it's all about making customers go out and give them more $$$


----------



## Frank F. (Jan 5, 2017)

donny1963 said:


> Dave442 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see where Nikon should be supplying the D5 chip in the D810 just because they can. They want to fill a market segment and one way to keep the D810 in it's segment is to limit the buffer.
> ...




Two things:

Sony makes the "Alpha 99 II" which can shoot 42 Megapixel RAW at 12 fps, showcasing that fast high res cameras are possible today, i.e. a camera with the FPS of the D5 and a resolution above the D810. You can see that as "crippeling" on the Nikon side, or you can see that as a marketing strategy, a strategy for Nikon to survive the decreasing sales in a saturating market.

The D810 has Exspeed 4 image processor and not Exspeed 5 and features no extra chip for AF, which means slower "Multi-CAM 3500FX" instead of super fast "Multi-CAM 20K" with dedicated AF-processor like you can find them in the D5 and D500. And it means another WB-System and another ISO range with the same processor.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 5, 2017)

Ok, so from the original post:

"Then i went to work on my D810 and removed the chips from that, and replaced them with the memory from the D5,, Now this was a long shot i was not sure if the camera would even turn on and work after this, but low and behold yeah the camera turned on and worked fine..

*Not only that, when i put the camera in continuous shooting mode and full raw image quality
for some reason the frames FPS rate increased to like 7 or 8 FPS *not sure why that was effected but i'll take that.. and not only that, i was never able to over fill the buffer to make it start to bog down to catch up, i tested this holding the shutter button for over 4 minutes and it never slowed down one bit.."

(emphasis mine)

And from your most recent posting:

"*I never said i achieved the frame rate thing yet*, How ever i did notice the shutter in continuous shooting test after the memory modification was a tad faster, now i didn't measure this with a stop watch and count how many images i got to see, but just sounded a tad faster, could be it just sounded like 1.5 seconds faster but hey that's a bit hard to calculate by listening to it..
How ever it is possible because the memory is faster and allowing less shutter lag who knows.."

(emphasis mine)

So yes, it all seems more than a bit dubious.  In the end it's your camera, so by all means do whatever you want with it.  Hopefully no one else will follow in your footsteps.  Other than that I don't see much point in continued discussion on the topic, at least not for me.  So I wish you well in your endeavor and move on.


----------



## DarkShadow (Jan 5, 2017)

Start turning D3400 into D7200,D7200 into D500 and D500 into D5.Yay


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 5, 2017)

well, I dont know why everyone is doubting the OP...seems perfectly reasonable to me. 
for example...I just picked up a "parts" D500 with  broken body mounts for $100 on craigslist and swapped the entire D500 internal system into my old D100 body. 
so now my D100 has a 20mp sensor and the multicam 20k with 153 focus points.
and since I have an actual picture, my story is clearly the more believable one.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 5, 2017)

pixmedic said:


> well, I dont know why everyone is doubting the OP...seems perfectly reasonable to me.
> for example...I just picked up a "parts" D500 with  broken body mounts for $100 on craigslist and swapped the entire D500 internal system into my old D100 body.
> so now my D100 has a 20mp sensor and the multicam 20k with 153 focus points.
> and since I have an actual picture, my story is clearly the more believable one.
> ...


I don't know if it's people are paranoid these days, or just ignorant of  computer Technology, lol

They don't seem to understand how this works, and that Camera's are nothing but Computers that operate mechanical parts.
Your Phone is a computer, Your Tablet is a computer, Your Camera is a computer, Hell these days even your cable box is a computer if it's the X1 Box for Xfinity..

They don't realize just how easy it is if you got any background in this what so ever you can pretty much do what you want if you know what your doing..
They also don't understand the Business aspect of Camera companies. 

They don't understand to keep the costs down most Comptuer / Camera Manufactures, Make many models of their products, but most of them all use the same parts and computer components. and they just cripple some features on one model and allow it to function on other's..
most of the camera's models in the same class use the same shutter , or the same buttons or the same view screen or the same chips.
they do this because it cost money to build these parts, and so to keep the costs down they just build may of the same part and throw them in many of their models of their products..
When some one sends their D810 to repair the shutter they go on the shelf and grab the part number for that camera, and i bet you dollars to donuts that when they repair the D5 Shutter  they grab that same part number off the shelf for the D810, and most likely all the D810 series or Full frame models..
they are probably all the same shutter same graphics card same firmware chip just different firmware programs burned on them..

Most of all the Nikon Camera models are the same stuff inside with some exceptions depending on what models your talking about.
Like the New Canon 80D  uses most of the same stuff that the 70D, in fact they are basically the same camera with just a couple differences.

So until they understand all this , they will remain ignorant..

Donny


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

Nikon has deliberately made some terrible (for users) cost-cutting decisions in recent years, like the write mechanism in the D7100: OMG, like Thom Hogan mentioned...Nikon bought a LOT of cheap componentry, and put it in the D7100...what was the raw buffer limit? Was it six frames?

The D2x from 2004 (late 2004)had a 29-frame .NEF buffer, $4999 new.  This was HOT s**+ when I bought it in May of 2005!!! 5 FPS in RAW 1.5x FOV, 8.2 FPS in High-Speed Crop Mode (2.0 FOV factor)

The D3x, $7999 new in 2009, same buffer, 28 to 29 frame in 12-bit .NEF mode...5 FPS.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 5, 2017)

Derrel said:


> Nikon has deliberately made some terrible (for users) cost-cutting decisions in recent years, like the write mechanism in the D7100: OMG, like Thom Hogan mentioned...Nikon bought a LOT of cheap componentry, and put it in the D7100...what was the raw buffer limit? Was it six frames?
> 
> The D2x from 2004 (late 2004)had a 29-frame .NEF buffer, $4999 new.  This was HOT s**+ when I bought it in May of 2005!!! 5 FPS in RAW 1.5x FOV, 8.2 FPS in High-Speed Crop Mode (2.0 FOV factor)
> 
> The D3x, $7999 new in 2009, same buffer, 28 to 29 frame in 12-bit .NEF mode...5 FPS.


I believe the raw buffer limit is 4 frames after that it bogs down lol
D7100 is a great camera i have one, and the D7000, they are pretty much the same camera only one does a bit better video i believe..
But it works great, i don't use it as much any more but the D7100 does take great pictures..
Donny


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 6, 2017)

donny1963 said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > well, I dont know why everyone is doubting the OP...seems perfectly reasonable to me.
> ...



hey, im with ya man...
I totally understand. which is why I made my totally awesome D100 hybrid.
we should get together some time and compare notes. might be a good business in this sort of thing.


----------



## Frank F. (Jan 6, 2017)

Derrel said:


> The D3x, $7999 new in 2009, same buffer, 28 to 29 frame in 12-bit .NEF mode...5 FPS.




The D3 was the Miliestone Game Changing camera that left Canon in the dirt for a while. The D3X was an interesting yet overpriced glimpse into a fauture that brought us the still unchallenged D600/610/750

Sony made the A7R2, another game changer mile stone because it is low ISO (same as the D810) high ISO (bettter than the D5) and high Density (42 Megapixels), yet Nikon did not yet deliver that to us, because they fear the D5 to look bad. So they might possibly sell a D5X for 9000 Euros with "the same ISO capability but better resolution and slower" ...

As Sony shows in the A99II the chip can even be as fast as the D5, but they only use the SLT Tech instead of DSLR tech.

D5X would be the thing for me,. even if it might be slower than the A99II...

In that case, a firmware hack could bring the camera up to speed.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

pixmedic said:


> donny1963 said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...



Yeah that would be cool, exchange of ides always goes a long way..

Donny


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Frank F. said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > The D3x, $7999 new in 2009, same buffer, 28 to 29 frame in 12-bit .NEF mode...5 FPS.
> ...


yeah i've learned that Firmware has control of alot of aspects of the camera..
I believe that is one of the methods they use to cripple a camera of features that is available but not meant to be
used on that camera..  Just like Canon Did with the 60D / 50D.
The 60D has video capability, but the 50D does not, How ever the 50D is able to do video the only reason you can't
do it with the 50D is they crippled it with the firmware,  that's where Magic Lantern came in  ( Magic Lantern | Home )
Trammell Hudson, was the person who created the firmware replacement software.
many features in this firmware replacement, including enabling the video operations of the Canon 50D that was not
available out of the box..
Magic Lantern has been around sense 2009 and still out there..
Magic Lantern has been know to be a very stable Firmware software replacement, and i say replacement because that is what it is.
you install it in your Canon Camera just like you would upgrade your firmware from your manufacture,  the same what, only Magic Lantern 
replaces the entire firmware.

And it works for many models, so like i said most camera's use the same firmware structure, with small differences for specific models..
you got to be careful when replacing or upgrading your frimware, because that is the first thing that the camera looks for when you turn it on, if you 
mess up the process of upgrading or replacing and it gets corrupt in some way of fails when writing to the chip, your screwed, you won't be able to boot your camera, and you would have to either Be able to Burn the firmware back on your Chip, or send it out to have a Tech do it for you.
Some things can cause shut a fail, like if your battery was too low and ran out of energy during the process and just simply turned off.
or a glitch just like in anything else like when your hard drive wrote a file and glitched and the file got corrupt and unusable..
Like i said if that happens during a firmware upgrade, your camera simply will not boot back up when you turn it on and render the camera useless until you get the firmware back on the chip..
That's why i never really upgrade my firmware when it's just a minor upgrade that really is pointless to take that chance, because this can become a major inconvenience and hassle..


----------



## CdTSnap (Jan 6, 2017)

I'd believe it. 

Also I saw someone say it's not possible because the D5 files are much smaller. That's incorrect. They are the same if not larger in some cases then the D810 


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Frank F. (Jan 6, 2017)

CdTSnap said:


> I'd believe it.
> Also I saw someone say it's not possible because the D5 files are much smaller. That's incorrect. They are the same if not larger in some cases then the D810



That is an interesting statement. If you do not compare apples with oranges, you will need the same scene, same lens, same ISO, bit depth, shutter speed, aperture and focus point to comare two camera files. In that case a camera with more megapixels will ALWAYS produce a larger unprocessed file. A RAW file is a list of photon count results. For 36 Megapixels the List is longer as it is for 21 Megapixels. Simple as that.


----------



## CdTSnap (Jan 6, 2017)

Frank F. said:


> CdTSnap said:
> 
> 
> > I'd believe it.
> ...



The D5 files are less compressed than a D810 on uncompressed I've used both. If you don't believe me try it yourself 


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 6, 2017)

The raw files from my 16mp fuji were bigger than the raw files from my 24mp d7100


----------



## Derrel (Jan 6, 2017)

pixmedic said:
			
		

> The raw files from my 16mp fuji were bigger than the raw files from my 24mp d7100



Not surprising; Fuji has in the past used some oddly different, non-Bayer array sensors that have MORE info than a typical bayer camera has. the Fuji S2 was a 6-MP camera, that up-rezzed to 12-MP, and JPEGS from it were often quite big, and the . raw format .RAF files were quite bloated as well. On Fuji S2-era raw .RAF files, converting them to Adobe's DNG created a sigificant, quite large file space svaings for offloading onto media or drives. The same is not the case for the Bayer-sensor cameras I've tried the .DNG conversion on.

Same with Fuji's 12-MP S5 Pro...notably bigger file storage needs than the 24-MP D3x JPGs from Nikon.

Also: in terms of speed of writing files:there's some empirical data on s-Raw and m-Raw files taking a LOT,LOT longer to be written and flushed from buffer than regular, 12- bit or even 14-bit RAW files from high-end Canon and Nikons. Why? Because s-RAW and m-RAW are not really RAW DATA, BUT PROCESSED data, usually down-rezzed and 11-bit files which are basically kind of like the ERI JPEG format Kodak invented years ago.

Same goes for .JPEG compresson on large images--that can take time and CPU cycles to do the mathematical work...in some cases with the older Fuji S2 camera, writing a BIG 16-megabyte  "6 megapixel" .TIFF file was faster than writing a finishjed JPEG image which would be: 1)Shot at 6MP sensor sites>2)immediately be up-rezzed to to 12MP in buffer>then 3) down-rezzed  and compressed to 6MP and saved as .JPG! OMG!!!

File sizes are not the entire issue when writing images to memory card, or in clearing a camera's buffer, which are really two different issues. Does anybody recall the 2- to 3-minute wait for Nikon D100 compressed .NEF writes? Oh_My_Lord...you could sketch the scene before that camera could write *a compressed NEF*, which was, as I recall, 3.8 to 3.9 megabytes!


----------



## Bill The Lurker (Jan 6, 2017)

long time lurker, first time poster, can't let this one go.

original post is total BS. virtually all parts on that PCB are BGAs, which can be reworked but v. challenging and, this is important _the one tool you do not use is a soldering iron.
_
also, it's well over an hour to rework a BGA on a board. you have to pull it (not using a soldering iron) and then reball the BGA which is a ton of v. finicky work and then replace it (again, not using soldering iron)

lets see some pix, or at least cite a couple part #s which a real rework guy would have given us most likely w/o even thinking about it


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Bill The Lurker said:


> long time lurker, first time poster, can't let this one go.
> 
> original post is total BS. virtually all parts on that PCB are BGAs, which can be reworked but v. challenging and, this is important _the one tool you do not use is a soldering iron._
> what ever LOL  how ever    there is no way to remove and replace the chip with out the soldering..
> ...


----------



## Bill The Lurker (Jan 6, 2017)

solder yes soldering _iron_ no

see, e.g., BGA rework

note list of tools. no soldering iron. you simply do not use this tool anywhere in a BGA rework. sorry. you use heat guns or an oven. an iron creates spot heat which will destroy a BGA, you need uniform heat to even remove any surface mount technology. surely you know this since you worked at flex.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Bill The Lurker said:


> solder yes soldering _iron_ no
> 
> see, e.g., BGA rework
> 
> note list of tools. no soldering iron. you simply do not use this tool anywhere in a BGA rework. sorry. you use heat guns or an oven. an iron creates spot heat which will destroy a BGA, you need uniform heat to even remove any surface mount technology. surely you know this since you worked at flex.


well i used an iron lol


----------



## Bill The Lurker (Jan 6, 2017)

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-remove-BGA-chips-by-soldering-iron


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Bill The Lurker said:


> https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-remove-BGA-chips-by-soldering-iron


First off it wasn't a chip like that...   i wouldn't spend that amount of time..


----------



## Bill The Lurker (Jan 6, 2017)

whut?

that's what all the chips on the D810 main board are like. go look at any teardown web site. for any camera, not just the D810. they're all



donny1963 said:


> a chip like that...



so. whut. what you're describing is _literally impossible_. not challenging, not difficult, not unlikely, _literally impossible._ which is why i'm posting in the first place. anyways i think we're done here.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Bill The Lurker said:


> whut?
> 
> that's what all the chips on the D810 main board are like. go look at any teardown web site. for any camera, not just the D810. they're all
> 
> ...


The chip your talking about  is a processor chip,  the memory chip is nothing like that what so ever..


----------



## Bill The Lurker (Jan 6, 2017)

you don't give up easy do ya? _all_ the chips on a camera mainboard are BGAs.  you must have the old memory buffer chip out of the D810 lying around handy, right? post us a picture of it. just grab your phone, take you 30 seconds.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Bill The Lurker said:


> whut?
> 
> that's what all the chips on the D810 main board are like. go look at any teardown web site. for any camera, not just the D810. they're all
> 
> ...



the boards on my Nikon are not BGA..


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Bill The Lurker said:


> you don't give up easy do ya? _all_ the chips on a camera mainboard are BGAs.  you must have the old memory buffer chip out of the D810 lying around handy, right? post us a picture of it. just grab your phone, take you 30 seconds.


The memory chips on the board are not pins that go strain down they are pins that come out the side then down, they are not what you are describing...
sorry


----------



## Bill The Lurker (Jan 6, 2017)

stolen pics of canon guts.

Camera and Photography forum | Cameralabs • View topic - Weathersealing in practice - your experiences please!

and

Ben trong may anh Canon EOS 5Ds co gi

for shame.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Bill The Lurker said:


> stolen pics of canon guts.
> 
> Camera and Photography forum | Cameralabs • View topic - Weathersealing in practice - your experiences please!
> 
> ...


i didn't say they was mine lol i said the boards are not BGA, i'm not tearing down my nikon to show you my boards.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Bill The Lurker said:


> stolen pics of canon guts.
> 
> Camera and Photography forum | Cameralabs • View topic - Weathersealing in practice - your experiences please!
> 
> ...


the pictures i got where off google,  which is fine,
you said they where BGA off any camera  not just nikon..so why should i start to tear down my camera to send you pictures of what i already know lol


----------



## Bill The Lurker (Jan 6, 2017)

BGAs don't have pins at all, which you would know if you were what you claim. look up Nikon 810 mainboard on eBay and marvel at all the BGAs and all "no other kinds of chips"

anyways, you should be taking a vacation from tpf shortly anyways, so.

anyone actually interested but still unsure PM me i can send you resources to confirm all this crud yourself, make your own judgement. the rest, well, probably not a lot more to see here. have a good day y'all.


----------



## donny1963 (Jan 6, 2017)

Bill The Lurker said:


> BGAs don't have pins at all, which you would know if you were what you claim. look up Nikon 810 mainboard on eBay and marvel at all the BGAs and all "no other kinds of chips"
> 
> anyways, you should be taking a vacation from tpf shortly anyways, so.
> 
> anyone actually interested but still unsure PM me i can send you resources to confirm all this crud yourself, make your own judgement. the rest, well, probably not a lot more to see here. have a good day y'all.


i know what bga is, Ball grid array, it's pins into soldering balls, the mem chips are not BGA.. sorry they are pins they look like legs going out the side then strait down into the board.  enough... I don't need to argue pointless bs


----------



## Overread (Jan 6, 2017)

And I think that's quite enough now.


----------

