D800 and 810 differences

Evening all,

 

I went and did it. I've been wanting another 8xx series camera body and found one this morning at my local camera store. Actually there were five, an 800 and four 810's. The lowest count 810 came home. I've been after a second 8xx body for use in weddings and other events. The MP count is the same and there don't appear to be many differences in the two. Neither is an E version. I looked on YouTube and the 810 appears to be an upgraded 800 and not a replacement as the 850 might be. At least with the 810 I have an owners manual written in English, can't say that for the 800.The 810 seems to be a bit faster or perhaps quicker than the 800. The point of this little narrative is to ask if anyone is aware of some more noticeable differences in the two. I also got the Nikon battery grip for it. I'll go over it closely but likely will miss something. Thanks.

 

Rick H.

The D810 has quite a few minor improvements over the D800, but at least IMO there isn't one improvement that is very major. Therefore, I have a D800E and never bothered to upgrade to the D810. However, the D850 is a bigger jump, especially with a new AF module and XQD card slot.

 

See this old thread for more info:

D800 or D810

Edited September 12, 2018 by ShunCheung

I did upgrade from a D800e to a D810, and was happy I did. As you say, it's a bit faster - as much in interaction as having the extra 1fps. I use the extra dynamic range of ISO64 as often as I can. Autofocus is a bit more reliable (allegedly to do with allowing for telecentricity changes, IIRC) - although possibly a bit weaker in low light. The quiet mode on the shutter is actually quiet (something I miss on the D850). Live view doesn't stall the camera while writing and doesn't line skip at full zoom. The finder is arguably better. There the split screen mode. There's highlight priority metering, although it's not the ETTR I wish it was. I forget - was it the D810 or D800 that let you map ISO to the record button (after a firmware update)? The AF button is a little easier to feel.

 

Various minor changes, none of which are critical, but they add up to a nicer camera to use. I traded my D800E and D700 for the D810, and have no regrets - I've not heard many say they wish they'd saved the money. But there's certainly no stand-out feature like the D850 (which had several). That said, I took my D810 and D850 whale watching with different lenses, and didn't feel that switching was taking a major step back. (I also have an infrared D90, and that's really from a different era when using it.)

 

Enjoy your new camera. It's a good one. (And don't forget it can do 6fps in 1.2x crop!)

To me the big difference between the 2 is where they were made.

To me the big difference between the 2 is where they were made.

 

To save anyone looking that up, that's Japan for the D800/D800e (presumably Nikon's main plant where they make low-volume items; was that what got hit by the tsunami?) and Thailand (presumably Nikon's mass production facility since the D3400 is made there) for the D810/D850.

 

Personally I lean towards mass-produced items, because companies are more inclined to make really sure there are no problems before setting up a large autonomous production line that can be run without the supervision of head staff - remember the D800 had issues with misaligned autofocus sensors, which seems to have been an assembly problem. (The D810 had some white spot issues, which were more a manufacturing issue.) I don't recall any issues at all with the mass-produced D3x00 and D5x00 bodies, hence my theory that the design gets more of a shake-down before production starts - although they're also a little less bleeding-edge. That doesn't mean there can never be problems (ahem, Note 7), but a problem in mass production is a bigger issue for a company than an engineer not aligning something properly on a few items, so they're more motivated to test and the conclusions might be more repeatable.

 

I imagine (to take an example from a recent radio programme I was listening to) that the Japanese-made bodies are like Rolls Royces - parts don't have to have good tolerance because they're hand-assembled and the mechanic can file or shim things as needed to make a perfect fit. The Thailand factory is like Ford's production line: tolerances actually have to be much higher on parts, because you can't slow down and correct a defective item.

 

That could be completely unfair, and I don't actually know that the assembly procedure is different between the countries. But it certainly means I have no snobbishness about "made in Japan" - the expensive items are made there, but only because that's where items for which setting up a large production line is uneconomical get assembled.

 

Sigma make all their lenses in Japan (I think), of course.

To me the big difference between the 2 is where they were made.

I choose to interpret such a comment like it does not matter; there is no big difference between the two.

 

Personally, I would rather compare the D800E to the D810. I have used both the D800 and D800E only to find that it was worth getting the D800E. In terms of IQ, I completely agree with Shun's comment above. Group AF, chosen AF sensor can be orientation dependent, a noticeably more quiet mirror mechanism and the extra frame per second are what I consider the D810's strongest improvements.

Eh, I do think ISO 64 matters (an extra 2/3 stop dynamic range isn't nothing), but then I tweak a lot in post-processing and don't like blown highlights. YMMV. There's certainly no noticeable resolution difference. But the quiet shutter difference is certainly significant in some scenarios.

Please note that ISO does not have an exact linear relationship to dynamic range. A 2/3 lower ISO does not automatically translate into 2/3 stop extra dynamic range. According to Photonstophotos.net and their data on photographic dynamic range versus ISO setting the difference between the D800E and D810 is 0.14 stop to the D810's advantage at ISO 64. I know it is measurable, but I doubt it will be noticeable in that many photos.

 

The D810 manages a dynamic range of 11.60 at ISO 64 and the D800E manages 11,46 at the same ISO. In the range from ISO 80-12 800, the D800E actually manages a slightly (again, measurable, but doubtfully noticeable) dynamic range than the D810 does. (Same holds true for the D850, which also falls behind the D800E at ISO 80 but catches up at ISO 400).

 

That is why I did not see ISO 64 and the increased 0.14 stop in increased dynamic range as one of the biggest improvements. (The D850 manages a dynamic range of 11.63 stops at ISO 32 and 64, which is more of an improvement over the D800E as it also features a higher resolution.)

Dynamic range just one parameter; by allowing 2/3 stops more exposure before saturating, the D810/D850 can produce images with better SNR in highlights, midtones and shadows.

 

D810's group area AF is a feature I've found highly effective in action photography. Focus points can also be tied to orientation of camera in the D810, so the camera remembers the selected point separately for verticals and horizontals. The D810 is also a bit faster and has a much larger buffer. I found the D810's AF to be very consistent with fast primes whereas the D800 was not, with most of them. The D810 has a better coated viewfinder, enhancing the clarity by reducing flare. D810 is quieter, as well. D810 includes electronic front curtain shutter which is great for telephoto landcape photography on tripod.

 

I felt the D810 was a major upgrade because many things that didn't work well in the D800 were refined in the D810.

 

By the way, all D810's are without anti-aliasing filters. There is no separate E model. This can be both good and bad; I have encountered moire several times with the D810, but not on the D850 (which also doesn't have the filter but because of the higher resolution, it doesn't seem to need it, either).

Hmm. DxO shows a roughly 0.4EV difference between ISO64 and ISO100. I don't deny it's a small difference, but I'll take what I can get, and I don't have a problem hitting ISO64 in a lot of shots (it's not theoretical). I didn't have the bodies side by side, but I could believe the D810 sensor loses out slightly in the mid range. I do think I'm getting a little more range than the D800 gave me at base ISO, without the ability to prove it. That said, I've not even compared my D810 and D850 at ISO 64 - though I do believe the D850 is coping significantly better at high ISO.

I just bought a Korea Kia made near Atlanta, GA. Only thing I wish for is an understandable manual when studying some of the more esoteric features.

 

Now that robots do the manufacturing of most everything, even a Tesla factory can spring up anywhere and spit cars out of a tent.

 

I recently took a tour of the local Toyota truck factory and the automation and robots are not to be believed.

 

For some reason I prefer the look and feel of my old Nikon 'made in Japan' lenses, but that is only because they are made of metal. Today's plastic ones are probably lots better optically.