Has Anybody Received their D850?

Nikon started shipping the D850 yesterday, September 7. I understand that demand seems high initially such that it would be normal that there is some wait.

 

Has anybody received their D850 yet? (As I said before, the D850 looks great on paper, but I am going to wait a few months. Hopefully I'll get a better deal.)

Yes, today at mid-day, NPS order via the Nikon store.

 

I have not done a lot of comparisons yet because I am still setting up the camera but when shooting in low light at ISO 6,400 and 12,800 with both my 810 and 850's noise reduction set at low in JPEG, I am seeing a good solid stop improvement in noise reduction on the 850. I also see no color noise at all and a lot more details.

Now, when I take the NEF files images into Adobe CC RAW, I still see an easy one stop gain on the 850 compared to the 810. And again, color noise is pretty much gone on the RAW 850 shots at those ISO's. On the 810 at 12800, I see some magenta in the shadow areas and some lack of uniformity in otherwise even areas of color. In the 850 file, it is totally even and there is not a trace of magenta cast lifting the shadows.

I had to go into a closet with just a bit of light creeping in, about 1/125th at 1.4 at ISO 6400.

 

Everything else seems really nice on the camera, I'd call it a very nice upgrade from the 810. With the new card type in it, man does this thing fly through data! And 7 FPS is going to be *plenty*.

 

I'm headed out with my wife tonight, I am bringing the 850 and a 50mm F2 Milvus. I'll see what I can dig up...

I can't answer as I haven't seen one in person, but the local camera shop reported that they got four in yesterday mid-day. They were gone within a few hours.

DB, congrats on your shiny new D850. Please let us know what your early impressions are. However, you won't experience the Multi-CAM 20000 AF module with the Milvus lens, but most of us know how good that AF is from the D5 and D500.

 

Also, I assume the D850 comes with an EN-EL15a (grey color) battery.

I received mine on Thursday, but have not had time to play with it much. I know, have I lost my mind? :)

This is a busy time of year with football and such, but maybe I will have a little more time over the next few days. I did do the basic setup on it and snapped a couple of photos of our dogs. I am attaching one. It was shot indoors without flash at ISO 6400 f/2.8 and 1/500 sec. using the 70-200mm 2.8 VRII lens. There was no noise reduction applied in post. Just my opinion after a quick look, but the noise level looks on par with the D500 or maybe slightly better. The RAW file was 60mb and the full size jpeg was 36mb. The attached was cropped and sized for Photo.net.

DB, congrats on your shiny new D850. Please let us know what your early impressions are. However, you won't experience the Multi-CAM 20000 AF module with the Milvus lens, but most of us know how good that AF is from the D5 and D500.

 

Also, I assume the D850 comes with an EN-EL15a (grey color) battery.

 

I love that 50, LOL. Yes, grey EN-EL15a batteries, I have three. I'll speak more about it all a bit later, got to head to bed. But so far, loving it!

Hi, congrats for getting it so soon

As you are already converting RAW files, did you try with medium and small settings and if so how do they treat WB in terms of adjustment flexibility and your opinion on results, please?

Thanks VM

I love that 50, LOL. Yes, grey EN-EL15a batteries, I have three. I'll speak more about it all a bit later, got to head to bed. But so far, loving it!

Wondering... will those batteries, or wont those batteries also work in other EN-EL15 camera's (like D500) . ? .. Nikon only specifies them on their website for D850 compatible only ... ?

As far as I know, the EN-EL15 and EN-EN15a are completely interchangeable.

Just tried the EN-EL15A in my D750 and also the Nikon brand battery grip for the D750. Worked fine in both and showed both the battery charge % and # of shots taken accurately.

 

I have not tried the medium and small RAW settings yet but will try later today if I get a chance.

See Nikon USA's page on the EN-EL15a: EN-EL15a Rechargeable Li-ion Battery from Nikon

 

Somehow they are leaving out the D600, but otherwise the EN-EL15a is compatible with all Nikon DSLRs that can use the EN-EL15, from the earliest D7000 to the recent D500, D7500, and D850. I am sure it is good for both the D610 (as listed) and the D600.

 

Recently, Nikon also introduced a new EN-EL18b battery for the D4 and D5, as well as the grips for the D800, D810, and D850. When Nikon upgraded the EN-EL18 to the EN-EL18a, the capacity got higher. However, the specs don't change from the EN-EL18a to EN-EL18b. I had a chance to check with Nikon, and the answer is that the chemistry Nikon uses inside the battery had changed a bit, but the functionality doesn't change.

 

The EN-EL15 and EN-EL15a also have the same specs and the functionality doesn't change. The difference is likely to be the same internal chemistry change, but Nikon didn't give me a very specific answer.

I took three shots of a scene using the three RAW sizes. Here are some results:

 

-RAW sizes were 59.1mb, 32.0mb and 23.8mb

-Converted jpeg sizes were 29.8mb, 14.9mb and 7.08mb

-Dimensions were 8256x5504, 6192x4128 and 4128x2752

-WB info for Large RAW was Temp 4774K and Tint -1.06

-WB info for Medium RAW was Temp 4806K and Tint -1.18

-WB info for Small RAW was Temp 4815K and Tint -1..36

 

All WB options were available for all three sizes. To my eye (I'm not a pixel peeper) all three shots looked the same as far as WB after conversion to jpeg.

Thanks VM Barry, good to know it as previous implementation of smaller RAW was said to have some limitations or not allowing to fix different WB values during conversion.

> previous implementation of smaller RAW was said to have some limitations or not allowing to fix different WB values during conversion

 

That seems unlikely, although I can't say I've tried with my D810. If it's a similar implementation (but compressed) to the D810, small raw stores non-linear Y'CbCr 4:2:2, and it records something like 11 bits of useful data (in 12 bits per channel). You can certainly change white balance (you can do this on a JPEG, too). You do have less flexibility for doing so than a "real" raw file, but you can do it.

 

Other than PhaseOne's Sensor+ patents (which I don't believe are just about the downsampling layout), I'm not sure why Nikon wouldn't actually just bin the true raw values. It does imply a very simplistic downsampling filter, which can introduce aliasing, but that's something the raw reading software should be doing. Reducing the resolution should increase the dynamic range (all else being equal), not reduce it - you've got a greater area sampling photons per pixel. At least they're applying some compression these days - but if you want high bit depth lossless compressed content that's not really raw, it feels like they should just be encoding JPEG2000 or something.

 

On another note... Nikon have managed to have at least one minor problem with all of the D600 (oil), D800 (AF module), D750 (light leak) and D810 (white spots). I forget whether the D4(s)/D5 had any release snafus; I don't recall an issue with the Df, but then I have a long list of issues with how that one's supposed to work.

 

Given that, for those of us waiting for the other shoe to drop, any oddities showing up with the D850 yet?

Thanks VM for your info Andrew

 

I'm aware the so called medium and small RAW comes as 12 bit (11 for data as you say) lossless compressed files but what I meant as WB flexibility was already the same as allowed by a "real" RAW file and according to your words it seems we can assume there is a limitation there, closer to a Jpeg's adjustment possibilities.

 

Let's wait and see when examples and some other people's experiences broaden the possibility to evaluate the merits of these file variations and if they can be viable alternatives for regular usage.

For what it's worth, I know nothing about these formats, I only spout things from the interwebs. :-) It would make sense for the sNEF implementation to be similar to the D810's but with lossless compression on top, but I've not actually seen an analysis that proves it. For what it's worth, the compressed medium/small raw options were there on the D500 and D5 too, but I've not seen an analysis of them anywhere. I know a bit (more than I'd like) about Y'CbCr and other colour difference representations; I'm curious to know whether Nikon have followed the ITU in doing a mathematically dubious downsampling-after-nonlinearisation step, but I wouldn't like to try to predict from that what the effect on image quality might be.

 

I would expect the result to be more flexible than a JPEG, which is (usually) only 8 bits of precision - and put through a DCT and lossy quantization step, which doesn't seem to be the case here. On the other hand, something will certainly be lost compared with, say, lossless 12-bit compression; I've not looked in detail to see what "lossy 12-bit compression" does to the image and how they compare. So I doubt these modes are completely useless - but they're probably also not as flexible as the "14-bit raw but four times lower resolution" that I might have hoped from a simple binning implementation.

Andrew,

Thanks VM for coming back and the adicional information.

See Nikon USA's page on the EN-EL15a: EN-EL15a Rechargeable Li-ion Battery from Nikon

 

The EN-EL15 and EN-EL15a also have the same specs and the functionality doesn't change. The difference is likely to be the same internal chemistry change, but Nikon didn't give me a very specific answer.

 

Ah thanx Shun,

 

The Dutch Nikon Website now only shows the D850 and D7500 at the compatability page for the EN-El15a so ...:rolleyes: Next time I will check the USA pages first.. :D

 

Oplaadbare Li-ionbatterij EN-EL 15a Accu Stroomvoorziening D-SLR Accessoires

Just to check in / touch base, I have had the camera for a week now and really like it a lot. I do need to see how viable the silent shutter is in some of the LED light I work in. I have converted much of my house to it and I am getting rolling shutter on nearly all of it at all shutter speeds. Hopefully pro LED lighting for broadcast will not be as much of an issue?

 

I got my D750 back from Nikon yesterday for the shutter recall and now have some numbers to share in terms of high ISO comparisons. Overall from ISO 3,200 and up the 750 is about 1/3rd of a stop better than the 850 at pixel level. If I export the 850 files in ACR to be the same size as the 750, that number flips to the 850 being about one third stop better.

 

Compared to the 810, I had more time and got into it quite a bit more so here goes. How I base my opinion is that I use a formulation of how the grain looks, how the color noise looks and how smeared are the details. I used Adobe ACR CC updated, synced Luminance noise at 15, 40 sharpen, .5 pixel radius, 40 fine details, all else at default.

At ISO 3,200 the 850 is around half a stop less grain, maybe 2/3rd stop less color noise and a half stop less detail smearing so a conservative bet would be 2/3rd of a stop improvement to the 850.

 

At ISO 6,400 it is again, about a half stop finer grain, a full stop less color noise and a full stop less smearing of details. In other words, a one stop improvement overall to the 850.

 

At ISO 12,800, it is 3/4 of a stop less grain, 1-1/3rd stop less color noise and 1 stop less smearing of details, a solid one stop improvement overall.

So the overall numbers are what the image feels like in broad terms compared to the other ones. The breakdown helps to see how it changes as the ISO is ramped up. I have not experimented with using more luminance noise reduction to even out the greater details of the 850 to be on par with the 810 but I suspect if I did, it could bring the overall number to appear that the 850 even has less noise. I tend to not use a lot of NR in post because of loss of detail. I also have all my camera's high ISO NR set to low.

Edited September 15, 2017 by DB_Gallery

On another note, AF fine tune via live view is just fantastic. I took the time to do all 12 of my AF lenses and it was such a pleasure to do it that way that I now can't decide whether to wait for an uprade to the D750 or just sell the 750 and 810 and get another 850.

 

And AF on this thing is really good, even with the 200-500 + TC14III. I have not tried it on tracking yet but the AF feels really robust, even in fairly low light. I think the 750 is better than the 810 in this regard so I think my 810 is going soon. Now, on yet another note, I did a decibel test at 20 feet away and found that the 750 and 850 are about even. The 750 has a sharper clack noise that is about as annoying as I would ever want in a camera but the 810 came in at 3db less, it's truly the most quiet SLR I have ever used, film, digital, etc. Only my Leica M240 was quieter by another 3db.

 

So I am a bit bummed about the louder shutter on the 850 but I am thinking / hoping that silent shutter mode will eliminate that in many situations.

Thanks for reporting back, DB.

 

> Hopefully pro LED lighting for broadcast will not be as much of an issue?

 

I'd hope not. For what it's worth, I've had trouble with my 1 V1 at high frame rates even under incandescent lights, strobing at mains frequency. These days I just use a battery powered flashlight most of the time. If I'm not shooting for more than a couple of minutes (and yes, there's a slow drop in intensity) I can bounce 7000 lumens off the ceiling from my TN36UT and get more light than having the main ceiling lights turned on.

 

> If I export the 850 files in ACR to be the same size as the 750, that number flips to the 850 being about one third stop better.

 

That's respectable, given that the D810 was a fair bit below the D750 at high ISO. We did hear that it wasn't going to trouble the D5.

 

> On another note, AF fine tune via live view is just fantastic.

 

It's a major reason behind my desire to upgrade. Given how long people spent asking for this, I'm surprised it took Nikon so long to incorporate it (even in the D5).

 

> even with the 200-500 + TC14III

 

That's what I like to hear. :-) (Although mine is the TC14-II.)

 

> So I am a bit bummed about the louder shutter on the 850

 

Darn. I've got to say that the quieter shutter (especially in Q) is one of the things I liked about the D810 compared with the D800. I'm still a little concerned about the banding and rolling shutter reports for the truly silent shutter - plus it's not really "all the time" like I could use it for on the D810. Oh well, some you win, some you lose. If it vibrates less than the D810, as claimed, then I'll take it. If you want a really quiet mechanical shutter, leaf shutters (like the Rolleiflex or Mamiya 6) are the way to go; I've had to double-take whether I actually took a shot several times. I was unimpressed by how loud an M3 actually was. On the other hand, I could use my Pentax 645 to scare children.

> Darn.

 

Actually, to clarify... was that the normal "S" mode shutter that's loud? It might have to be to minimise blackout and be able to hit the high frame rate. If "Q" is still reasonably quiet (and avoids any possible image quality issues and the AF problem for silent live view) then I'm happier. The manual suggests that Q is quieter than S even ignoring the delayed mirror return, which I think is true for the D810 too.

While we're doing obscure questions about silent mode... out of interest, does silent live view mix with exposure bracketing? I've almost never normally bothered with exposure bracketing (because the dynamic range of the D8x0 series has usually sufficed with a single exposure), but I happened to be reading about the Minolta Maxxum 7 and its emulation of STF/apodization filters by taking multiple exposures at different apertures, and it struck me that it ought to be possible to emulate that effect with (shutter priority) exposure bracketing - given a static target. Given my love/hate/absolute loathing relationship with a 135mm f/2 DC and being not terribly convinced by the Laowa STF, I'm curious to know how well this works. It would be a little less intrusive if it works in silent shooting, but my first attempt at rummaging through the manual only seemed to mention the conventional (non live-view) exposure modes.

I do want a D850 - eventually; when I need a D810 replacement. But the more I learn about it, the less I think it is worth upgrading from the D810 for in the majority of cases. In particular not when considering that Nikon is now finally working on some hopefully competitive mirrorless. Like with Sony, one can expect that this will shorten update cycles again (for the mirrorless, not the DSLRs) from what I now consider the current "real" Nikon update cycle of 9 years for their prosumer cameras (D300 to D500, D700 to D850, D3S to D5 is somewhat shorter but D3 to D5 falls within the same range).

 

What I think currently is missing, among others, is a sub-$1500 mid-range non-f/2.8 zoom that one actually wants to attach onto a D810 or D850 and not those rather pathetic excuses of lenses like the 24-85 VR or 24-120 VR. Apparently, any mid-range zoom starting at 24mm will either have a narrow range (clipped at 70 to maintain IQ) or its IQ will suffer towards the long end of the range. Boy would I welcome an updated, fixed or variable-aperture version of the venerable 28-105.

 

Others include the by-now-long-in-the tooth 14-24; I'd rather get the Tamron 15-30 VC if I really needed the f/2.8 (I am not exactly sure for what I would need it anyway). For anything else, the Sigma 12-24/4 seems to be a better option.

 

Both Sony and Canon offer 16-35/2.8 lenses - Nikon has the old and no-longer-up-to-current standards 17-35/2.8.

While we're doing obscure questions about silent mode... out of interest, does silent live view mix with exposure bracketing?

 

Iin prepping for a shoot, I just tried it in both A and S modes and it worked fine. It did however made odd but fairly quiet noises in S mode, perhaps the aperture was it.

 

I do want a D850 - eventually; when I need a D810 replacement. But the more I learn about it, the less I think it is worth upgrading from the D810 for in the majority of cases.

 

Interesting, I am thinking the opposite. But to be fair, these are not at all toys but tools for me and just the advances in AF, AF fine tune & one stop better high ISO range make a big difference in how I am able to execute photographs. The added resolution is always welcome, I get requests for images that are to be reproduced 5-10' feet wide.

Edited September 15, 2017 by DB_Gallery