Should I buy a D800 or wait for its replacement?

<p>This is my first sighting of someone asking this question. <br /> <br /><a href="http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=883632">Link to Model Mayhem </a><br /> <br />In this very forum I see similar chatter. By 2010 the D700 was not recommended by many as its replacement was just around the corner (still waiting). Cameras get labeled as "old technology" very quickly, "who in their right minds in 2013 would buy that camera?" <br /> <br />Many of us on this forum are gearheads so of course we are going to babble over the latest offering. But we post questions like, "I just got my tax return, what lens should I buy" instead of "I can't get a good shot of that little tiny bird, what lens should I buy?" It seems to be about aquisition, not photography. Have we lost our balance?<br /> <br />This is probably just a rant, I am probably just frustrated that I own such an old camera (Nikon D700) ;)</p>

<p>Some of us follow a contrarian approach. I typically buy/upgrade to the last-but-one model, if the new camera, or computer, or whatever, has new features that address problems I don't have or do things that I don't do -- then I'm happy to save money and get the fully debugged and time-tested older model.<br>

On the other hand, EVERYTHING is going to be replaced, sooner or later, so waiting for the new one is not usually a good strategy unless you really are <em>sure</em> that a new model is actually coming out soon. <br>

As for balance, absolutely!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Many of us on this forum are gearheads</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, there is a difference between gearheads and gearheads. Many here like using good quality gear, capable of good quality results. There are also real gearheads, that will act like a camera will go obsolete because a new model has arrived, and one *must* upgrade, because otherwise it's simply impossible to shoot a decent photo.<br>

Yes, there are many questions about "what should I buy". At least here, half the responses will be "why buy anything"? Hop over to some other forums, and you see how happy people can be to spend other people's money (Q: "<em>I bought this D3100, and I like to shoot pictures of birds, I have $500 to spend... which lens?" </em>A:<em> "The 600 f/4VR with a 2x TC</em>"). It's really not that bad here.<br>

But maybe I am in a mild mood, as my D700 is not old at all. Bought new 6 months ago, and produced in 2012. Nothing old about it, and still extremely capable camera. Love it. ;-)</p>

<p>However reasonable and adult one tries to be about it, I think it's almost impossible to completely resist the relentless pressures of the 'upgrade'.<br>

Of course spending thousands of pounds on something that's all bells and whistles when you buy it only for it to diminish six months or a year later is going to be at least irritating and quite easily infuriating - however much you remind yourself it's just a tool. I don't know why but out of all consumer items I think cameras suffer from this particularly. More than phones (usually much cheaper) and computers seem to be on a slower and less dramatic cycle. </p>

<p>Advertisers have spent a great deal of time, money, and effort over a period of decades to convince people that whatever they have is no longer good enough and they need to spend more money to catch up.</p>

<p>I hear ya. I wonder if the D800 changed me :) I had a D200, I hated it. The dynamic range was awful, the fact it fired my flashes sporadically and randomly on its own, my 50mm and 70-200 F2.8 VR were pretty pointless because if I focused on the eyes their nose would be in focus in the final shot (and it doesn't have adjustment). </p>

<p>I saved up enough $ to buy the D700 a few years ago, but then I borrowed one. I found it frequently wouldn't take the photo I don't know if others have experienced it it would autofocus and then do nothing sometimes. I found occasions I wanted to take video of my son and all I had was the D700. I decided to wait. </p>

<p>Then came the D800. I did not like that it was 36MP, but I researched very heavily how good its JPEG capability was and the D800 at the time and possibly today takes the best JPegs. I saw it took sharper movies, with more dynamic range, with more "WOW" factor than the 5D Mark III (unless you shoot outdoors at night, in bars at night, or panty-hose at oblique angles). Since I'd saved up for 5 years I had enough to buy it and I did. At first I didn't like 36MP but now I find it hard to live without. I purchased it for its jpeg capability but after seeing the RAW it converted me I won't shoot in any other format. Big surprise, was the feature "Face detection in the viewfinder" that's one I will struggle immensely with one not having it. My little man (3 years old) looks at the camera for a second sporadically and that's it. Because of this feature I've gotten him looking at me more times in a week than I did in a year with my D200 or D700, if he's looking at the camera and I press the shutter it gets him. I really like the ability to put the camera away from my face and interact with kids and people while I take pictures of them. Because of the face detection I don't have to worry, am I focused on him or the table in the back, or their neck, etc. it locks on any face looking my way. I also found if there's a face it detects the exposure in the picture is flawless, and I really enjoy the newer auto-iso and what they've done with it. .</p>

<p>So the D800 changed me. I hated RAW and now I wouldn't shoot any other way. I hated 36MP, now I would struggle any other way. I wanted it for the movies, but I've found taking videos isn't as easy as I thought. I didn't think auto-iso was useful but now i use it for almost every single picture I take (the new auto-iso is awesome). The face detection in the viewfinder is a total winner I don't think I could live without. It's also nice my 50mm and 70-200 F2.8 VR can be adjusted on the D800 so now if I focus on the eye I get the eye in focus... and unlike my D200 that took 2-3 times to get the exposure perfect the D800 I find almost faultless in getting it. The reasons I bought it, now have little to do with how I use it I'm changed.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Advertisers have spent a great deal of time, money, and effort over a period of decades to convince people that whatever they have is no longer good enough and they need to spend more money to catch up.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree with you when it comes to phones and other types of consumer electonics like iPods. But I wonder about cameras, at least good ones. In terms of Nikon dslr's I have only ever seen ads for the least expensive ones. I think the best and most current Nikon dslr I have seen advertised is the Nikon D5200. To the best of my recollection I have never seen an ad for a D700 or D800. Maybe they have them in photo magazines but I don't read them, I am too busy reading Playboys ; ) <br /><br />Somehow I think it is ourselves. This forum, for example, puts more pressure on us to upgrade than anything Nikon does in the media. And by "this forum" I mean ourselves.</p>

<p>I think the newer cameras are great and I'd like to have one.<br>

But, you know what? My D300 and D700 take <em>even better</em> pictures now than when I first got them.</p>

<p>The other day several pictures I took with a D2X were published. I am deeply ashamed of myself. I mean I have an excuse. My D3s was in for service and my D800 was too slow for the fast action I was shooting and besides it was substandard not being the E version. </p>

<p>If one reads Photo.net there is nothing short of the latest professional body and fast glass that will do. Pity the poor beginner who thinks that they might take nice photos with a D3100 kit. All they have to do is drop by here and all of that fancy advertizing that Nikon does will be for naught. </p>

<p>Well I had better go get some black tape. I need to cover up the model of my camera. God forbid someone should see it is not a D4 and revoke my press pass.</p>

<p>Love it Rick! </p>

<p>I was going to go a similar route - the other night I was shooting an event for my daughter's school. I decided to go light, since I knew it would be a zoo - literally. </p>

<p>I went with a D40 and sb800, along with a 18-105 vr lens. I got there and lo and behold the local paper guy was there with dual D4's 5 extra lenses (7 total)... I felt completely inadequate. I think I need to run up the CC's and get more gear. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>Wait for the D900 next year, much better than the D800.</p>

<p>I know what you mean David. I was shooting a rodeo the other day and one of the local newspaper guys was carrying so much stuff that he couldn't have climbed a fence if he had to. The two PRCA guys and I were trying to figure out what he thought he was going to shoot with the 400 F/2.8 on a 7D. My guess is some deeply personal pictures of a bull.</p>

<p>I once shot a front page pic for the CSM with a D100 and Tamron lens. (Its a long story.) </p>

<p>You should buy what you need when you know that you need it, and you should avoid at all times buying things that you don't need. </p>

<p>I have d800e and I have not been able to completely master this camera yet. It's demanding. You have to have top line of lenses to optimize the quality this camera can offer. Right now, I am resetting my lenses line up. What were used to be good with previous bodies, now they are just marginal lenses with d800e. General rule of thumb finding the right lenses for d800e is generally nikkor labelled with AF-S, Nano Coating and G. Some might argue with with me. But I find all my D lenses and non-nano coating G lenses are marginal. So having D800e will keep me busy for 2-3 years ahead. If there is newer model released, unless it has better dynamic range and better high ISO performance (there is always large room for improvement in this area), I will not be interested to replace my d800e.</p>

<p>Now that I'm on my third generation digital camera (not counting the ones in mobile devices, or the pocket versions), I find that i still go through the 100,000 plus digital images I have and like some of those taken with the early Nikon D1 as well as those taken with the D7000. It's not the camera that takes the photograph, it is the photographer!</p>