Autofocus tracking D800 - improved with 810?

<p>Greetings.<br>

Here is my problem:<br>

I was happy with my combination of D3 and D800 in usage and image quality. However, due to age and health condition my D3 is getting too heavy for me, e.g. with my 70-200 f2.8 zoom but even more when several lenses are in the bag. Like I would shoot fast and tele-zoom with the D3 and wide angle with the D800. <br>

Mostly my D800 fulfils my need but when it comes to action the AF of the D800 is not fast enough.<br>

For example: Yesterday I was shooting aerobatic flight displays of model plains and I lost several shots in a series and often had to refocus in a series.<br>

My be I get out of practice too much but my memory is that the D3 was always spot on when following planes 1) approaching or leaving and 2) following the subject when in addition moving sideways in the viewfinder. <br>

Now small planes are quite fast and the demand is high on focus tracking. <br>

I did not follow the Nikon model updates but heard that the D810 improved quite a bit on focus tracking so would i just need to update to an D810?<br>

Updating my D3 to a D5 is not worth the money for my non commercial use also in view of the weight.<br>

For landscape and macro the D800 is fine for me with a good tripod and selected lenses like my Zeiss 100mm F2.0 Planar ZF2.<br>

As a second question in terms of low light high ISO performance is there any less heavy replacement for the D3?<br>

I always shoot raw, and process in PS btw, so in camera noise removal is of no concern and all my lenses are FX format.<br>

Any suggestion would be appreciated.<br>

Thanks<br>

Walter</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Back in 2014 when the D810 was introduced, I had a loaner from Nikon USA and used that for a while. (Actually I had two loaners. The first one was defective and generated intermittent corrupted RAW files.) I never noticed any significant AF differences between that and my D800E. They are all based on the basic Nikon Multi-CAM 3500 AF module design from the D3 and D300 in 2007, although Nikon did improve a few things such as certainly AF point can work with f8 lenses. However, a number of people claim that the D810 has better AF.</p>

<p>IMO, if you want improved AF from Nikon, you need to get the latest Multi-CAM 20000, which is the first major AF design change since 2007. Currently the 20000 is only on the D5 and D500, but I would imagine that it will be in the D800/D810's successor. Recall that back in early 2012, Nikon and Canon introduced the D800 and 5D Mark III within a month with each other. Canon has just announced the 5D Mark 4, and I have every reason to believe that Nikon will be introducing a new entry to the D800 family in the near future, probably within 6 months.</p>

<p>On the other hand, I did compare high ISO results between the D800 and D810. I observed no differences. The end result is that I never bother to upgrade to a D810.</p>

Nikon's autofocus implementations vary from camera to camera, e.g. the AF on the D3 was optimized for speed and is

measurably faster than in the other Nikon FX cameras of that era. You can check Marianne Oelund's measurements on

dpreview's forums some years ago for numerical data. I noticed the D3 focused screwdriver lenses about twice as fast as

my D700 though I didn't measure it, just observed by eye.

 

The D800 I had was a sort of a black sheep in my experience with various cameras that use Multi-CAM 3500 sensor

family members. The autofocus error was highly dependent on lens, and almost every fast lens pretty much required fine

tuning to be usable (the 70-200/2.8 II was a notable exception). The variation from lens to lens was 9 points (standard

deviation on the lens specific fine tune scale), which is about twice what I experienced with previous Multi-CAM 3500 (the

D800's was called "Advanced" which is a characterization I find hard to agree with). The D800 AF was also highly sensitive to colour and the errors varied

from blue skylight to warm artificial light. Finally with many lenses the autofocus would be totally off at long distances if

adjusted to work correctly in the middle or near ranges. Many of my lenses stayed largely unused because of these

problems. The D810 normalized things and the AF has been good to me: no significant colour dependency, no significant

distance dependency of AF, and optimal AF fine tune settings average at about +2 +- 4 (mean +- SD). I am very happy

with this camera. However, some dependency of AF error remains in zoom lenses where the optimal AF fine tune setting

depends on the focal length set on the zoom ring. This is manageable however and the error is not too large.

 

I find the D5's AF to be a big improvement in low light and especially when focusing on faces using a fast lens using one

of the more peripheral AF points. This is a big improvement for portrait orientation shooting of whole body shots of

people. The automatic fine tuning process works very well in controlled conditions and I'm happy that Nikon has been

able to streamline the process. I've been particularly happy with the D5's AF performance in low light dance photography.

However, D5 is very expensive, and the D810 gives better image quality most of the time for me, so I'm not suggesting

that one should just get a D5 without careful consideration. I would expect the D5's AF in some variant to be present in

the D810's successor. It may or may not focus as quickly, but I am sure Nikon will do their best on accuracy as the high

resolution camera arguably stands the most to benefit (or lose) due to the successful (or unsuccessful) implementation of

AF. Certainly without vertical grip the D810 body is lighter and smaller than the D5, and this is likely to be the case for its

eventual successor.

 

As for low light high ISO image quality, the D810 is slightly improved in that it doesn't display quite as striking patterns in

the shadows of ISO as the D800 did, but both the D5 and D750 are markedly better at ISO 6400 than the D810. The

D750 is one possibility if you want a more compact and lightweight alternative for low light shooting. However, it is a bit

too small for my hands, and I find the smallish buffer annoying. The D750 does have good autofocus capability and the

image quality across the ISO range is very good.

 

Personally my favorite Nikon is the D810 but for the kind of action that you are talking about, perhaps a D500 would work

well? It has the D5's AF and is more compact and lighter weight. And you get more pixels on the subject so you get some

extra range. If you need better low light image quality with high ISO a D750 comes to mind, although it is not a personal

favorite of mine, it cannot be denied that it is both compact and effective.

<p>Thanks for the fast response.<br /> Perhaps I try and rent a D500 and see what it will do for me.<br /> Or wait for a newer model. A few month wait would be OK.<br /> The fine tune setting probably was not it. When I saw the focus going off I pushed the focus button and focus seemed ok again. I had to do this every few frames at the slow series setting. <br /> I certainly could not complain about lack of contrast on this occasion :-)<br>

PS: Sorry for the large image. 800 seemed so small :-) </p>

<div></div>

<p>Walter _ owned a D800 and upgraded to the D810. I did not see an appreciable difference in AF speed between the two, but I never had both bodies at the same time to compare. </p>

<p>I do have the new D500 since I was in the market for a DX body that would give me the boost in apparent focal length. The AF on the D500 is nothing short of remarkable. It is literally instantaneous - quite noticeable compared to anything else but the D5. But only you can decide if you can live with the DX format when your lenses are probably optimized to the FF format. It made sense for me since I use it for sports photography. Might not for you. As an aside - I like everything about the D500.</p>

<p>For me, the D810 improved "consistently accurate" AF results over the D800 it replaced for me. My D810 seems as "responsive" when shooting sports as the D3s I use at the same time. I don't remember thinking that the D800 I had was less responsive than the D3 I had at the same time, but:</p>

<p>Having used at least two different D3 (not D3s) bodies, I still have the impression that one of the D3 bodies I had was more responsive than the other D3 (and D300/700). I am sure that this must have had something to do with the way the cameras were set up, but I am pretty careful with matching all of the custom settings. From <strong><em>memory</em></strong>, that one <em>well</em> used D3 still has the "fastest" AF I have used, and seemed at least as fast as the D3s and D810 I have now. Think that one had the buffer upgrade which might have helped. Anyone else have the impression that there are differences between bodies of the same type? My impressions were formed while shooting basketball at high ISO's.</p>

<p> Wonder if the ebayer that got the "good" D3 still has it and my offer to buy it back if he wanted to sell it, LOL.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The fine tune setting probably was not it. When I saw the focus going off I pushed the focus button and focus seemed ok again. I had to do this every few frames at the slow series setting.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>To correct this you could try to set the af to continuous mode and press the af button continuously while aiming. The D800 obviously shows focus errors well, if not too well.</p>

 

<p>Incidentally, in the US, if you buy a new D810 now, they'll give you a free MB-D12 vertical grip:</p>

<ul>

<li>http://www.adorama.com/inkd810sh.html</li>

<li>https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1062499-REG/nikon_d_810_digital_slr_body.html</li>

</ul>

<p>I too never upgraded to the 810 from my 800E for the simple reason that my D750 focuses faster and is more accurate in low light. The D500 is simply on another planet though.</p>