Nikon Announced D800 and D800E, 36MP FX-Format

[szrimaging]

<blockquote>

<p>To save Zach a download, the D7000 does make the same claim (p.95).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks. I just got done shooting a headshot for a newsletter here at work, and the D7000 consistently focused on the spot right between the eyes.</p>

[juan_su]

<p>Does anyone know if the D800/E models do video with AF? I'm just curious whether this is a feature of the cameras. I can't see to find any literature on that and most of the reviews I've read/seen online don't seem to mention this either. Thanks.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>I'm sure autofocus is supported during video (it is in the D7000) but it may not be all that great. Nikon has developed fast phase-detection based AF using sensors embedded in the main imaging sensor for the V1 and J1 cameras, but this technology has not yet propagated into DSLRs AFAIK. Perhaps in the D5 generation they have a new FX sensor that can do that.</p>

<p>Cliff Mauntner has been using the D800 and he says the high ISO performance is about on par with D3 and D700, but not as good as D4 or D3s. Images posted by Victor Zaykovskiy at www.ferra.ru and also hosted at</p>

<p>http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d800-high-iso-image-samples#more-26736</p>

<p>suggest to my eye that Mauntner is right. The ISO 3200 image from the D800 resampled to 12 MP</p>

<p>http://mansurovs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Nikon-D800-High-ISO-Image-Sample-Downsampled-3.jpg</p>

<p>looks pretty good. The 25600 image downsampled to 12MP</p>

<p>http://mansurovs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Nikon-D800-High-ISO-Image-Sample-Downsampled-4.jpg</p>

<p>looks quite noisy but there is no visible banding that I can see whereas with D3/D700 there was problematic banding at the Hi-2 setting so I never used it. So it looks like quite respectable performance from the new D800, not D3s level but I wouldn't call it in any way a handicap to the camera. If one specifically wants excellent high ISO performance beyond the D700 level then a second hand D3s (2500-3000 EUR?) seems to be the easiest way to get it until the D4 sensor propagates to D800 class cameras (if ever). </p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>D700's are popping up for sale all over the place. 6 on the local C-list this morning, asking about $2000. Me thinks the D700 resale price will quickly settle in the $1500-1600 range.</p>

[aaron l]

<p>Perfect! Get both low light performance (used D700) and top performance otherwise of the D800.</p>

[peter_cohen]

<p>87 D700 bodies sold on eBay in the past five days from about $1800 to $2700 with grip.</p>

[vince-p]

<p>Dan --- I don't think the avg will be below 1800. Possibly higher. If the D800 had a 16MP or 18MP sensor it would utterly supplant the D700 and perhaps force prices down to those levels but as it is now what you'd use a D700 for, and with, is quite different from what you'd do with your D800. And the lens replacement situation has been much discussed. So the new camera is not really a substitute for the old; it's a whole different thing, more competitive with the D3x category and the more portable digitial MFs. This is the same size sensor as on the Leica S2, lenses for which go for 7-10K if I properly recollect. </p>

[dan_south]

<p>The D700 had a problem with PC-E lenses. The built-in flash restricted upward shift ("rise" in LF terminology). Given that the D800/e look to be about the same size as a D700 and include built-in flash, is this likely to be a problem as well for the D800?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>The D700 had a problem with PC-E lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not really. You can always turn the 24mm PC-E by 180 degrees so that the one knob that is blocked by the viewfinder/flash overhang is facing the opposite direction. By doing so, you can achieve exactly the same shift effect without any restriction. (And I am not talking about flipping the D700 body upside down or some crazy camera orientation like that.)</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p><em>The built-in flash restricted upward shift</em></p>

<p>That's not quite right. There are no limitations with using the D700 with either the 45 or the 85mm PC-E. When using the D700 together with the 24 PC-E, the shift is not limited along the main axis of the sensor (each position is achievable, through hoops). But if you want a diagonal shift, there are limitations. The main issue for me is that if you have shifted the lens up and want to go from horizontal to vertical (retaining the shift) or vice versa you need to go through a complicated set of movements which may eventually wear the shift lock out (together with the skin in your fingers) after doing it regularly. (Nikon gave me another one, thankfully, as they had no parts for repair.) I would prefer not to work with this combination for architectural photography given a choice of another camera, but it's <em>possible </em>to use it (for most things you'd want to do). With the D3 series (and likely the D4), using the 24 is easier. I wait with interest for confirmation as to whether there is more space for movements with the D800.</p>

 

[dan_south]

<p>Vertical shift is what I use 99 percent of the time. Are you stating that there are no restrictions on vertical shift when using the PC-E 24 with a D700? In portrait OR landscape orientation?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Are you stating that there are no restrictions on vertical shift when using the PC-E 24 with a D700? In portrait OR landscape orientation?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What I am stating is that every type of vertical shift the 24mm/f3.5 PC-E can achieve on a D3 type body whose viewfinder does not restrict any tilt and shift movement can also be achieved on the D700. As I pointed out earlier, the D700's viewfinder would block one particular knob on the 24mm PC-E; however, you can rotate the front of the lens by 180 degrees to get that knob out of the way, and then you can achieve the same shift in the opposite direction and get the same results. I bought the 24mm PC-E and the D700 within a couple of months back in 2008, and I studied that combo very thoroughly.</p>

<p>If my statement confuses you, an anology is rotating the camera by 90 degrees to shoot vertical. Somehow you are restricted so that you cannot rotate the camera clockwise by 90 degrees. However, you can rotate it counterclockwise by 90 degrees and you'll get exactly the same image and same effect.</p>

<P>

Hopefully the D800 will also have no restrictions on the 24mm PC-E. That is the best wide-angle lens I have used on the D3X; its extra large image circle means I can avoid using the corner of the image circle such that I can get edge-to-edge sharpness on my landscape images. It should be an excellent match for the D800.

</P>

[Allen Herbert]

<p>Nice cams.</p>

<p>But i think the aipha 65 is the best deal.</p>

[rick_chen]

<p>Errrmm..noobie here. Does anyone know if pro fx lenses are good enough for this 36mp sensor? things look wonderful in my d700 and d7000, but if it looks not sharp in 36mp..what's the point....<br>

I've ordered my d800 though, plain addiction<br>

or maybe i will do the 5:4 crop with lower mp</p>

[zlight_b]

<p>unfortunately (fortunately for some of us like me), the limit of digital has been reached. any "improvements" may be useful for some specialist professionals whose livelihoods may depend on it. for the rest of us who are passionate about photography, such tweaks simply translate into a direct line to our pocketbooks. a particular sensor will now show the limits of the lenses we already have and vice versa - aka the computer conundrum of hardware vs. software or the "windows dilemma" i.e. throw your existing computer out of the "window" every two years or so. indeed, these new bodies will also impact our computer inventories...<br>

the D800 comes with a bundle of "trouble" ie. moire or non-moire etc. etc. etc. Most regular folks could ask themselves - what really is the advantage of the d800 over D700? i don't have either, still happy with the D300, but can see the point of FX (if nothing else, a 24mm is 24mm, not 36mm!). but seriously folks, what really is the big deal about 51 autofocus points vs. just one (and some understanding of depth of field etc.). just my two cents on how to go out and take pics rather than pixellating over pixels :)</p>

 

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Zlight, there's a lot of truth there, especially when it comes to resolution and file size. I think the only way big progress can be made is Dynamic Range, ie the <em><strong>range</strong></em> between the brightest and darkest bit of the scene. Better ISO is good, but not for everyone.</p>

<p>A lot of imaging disappointment comes from the..... '<em>it didn't look like that when I shot that Sunset</em>' etc Usually the sky's too bright and washed out <em><strong>AND</strong></em> the foreground is featureless and too dark <em><strong>AT THE SAME TIME!</strong></em> This is because the Dynamic Range is too small. There are lots of software twists to try and overcome this but the limit is the sensor. Throwing money at it does help, but it still isn't enough............YET!</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>May I remind everybody that it was none other than zlight B who started a thread in June last year with the title: <a href="00Ytvg">is nikon missing the bus/boat on a successor to D700?</a></p>

<p>For over 30 years I shot color slide film with 5 stops of dynamic range. I used gradulated neutral-density filters occasionally to gain another couple of stops. I don't recall having a lot of problems with sunrise/sunset shots. What digital provides today is a major luxury in comparison, such as the auto HDR feature on the D800.</p>

<p>I always feel that the major limitation in photography is in the photographers. No advance equipment will ever compensate for that problem.</p>

[zlight_b]

<p>shun, point taken! (however, in the thread i started, my fairly devious desire was this - once the successor to the D700 was releases, the probability that the "i need the latest, preferably yesterday" would drive the price of the D700 down :) To some extent this is happening and probably will accelerate further once the D800 actually hits the stores...then i will be the proud owner of an affordable D700.<br>

however (there is of course, always an however), down the road, existing computers may not connect to the D700, the compact flash cards may no longer be manufactured, etc. etc. and we will be forced to junk a pretty good camera. not news to anyone really, yet a sad state of affairs, at least on one level. but on another level, lest i be misunderstood, i don't grudge companies making money and the process supporting our hobbies and profession...no easy way out, i recognize that :)</p>

[zlight_b]

<p>shun:<br>

"I always feel that the major limitation in photography is in the photographers. No advance equipment will ever compensate for that problem."<br>

absolutely true! (as long as we have access to discounted D700's :)</p>

<p> </p>

[bob_bill]

<p>Shun, I agree. I wish I would never again hear "the D__ takes great pictures." Cameras dont take great pictures, photographers do. I test new gear to determine the limits and often find myself shooting in that zone. The iso is about there for me, but I would like more dynamic range next, an advantage still held by medium format. Like you, I lived with the 5 stops and learned to work with it. We work in a medium that has, as any other, limits and we have to learn to work with them to achieve our vision. Clint said "improvise, adapt, overcome" and it is something I have learned to enjoy when a shot throws challenges at me. I hope the next frontier that is improved will be dynamic range. But the low light capability now available is something I have craved for years. I could still stand a couple more stops though. </p>

[zlight_b]

<p>bob bill:<br>

" Cameras dont take great pictures, photographers do."<br>

that's a viewpoint. unfortunately i have yet to come across anyone who could take a pic without a camera - great or "ungreat". the fact of the matter and a truism it is that both cameras and photographers are indispensable when it comes to taking pics - great or "ungreat". </p>

 

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Somewhere between,<br /> <strong><em> A bad worker blames their tools</em></strong><br /> and<br /> <em><strong>Always use the right tool for the job </strong></em>............lies the truth of this.</p>

<p>I believe this is called a <em>symbiotic</em> relationship, you each NEED the other to exist and BOTH benefit.</p>

<p>No Cameras = No photographers & No Photographers = No cameras (I know they're not <em>sentient</em>..yet!)</p>

<p>The D800 and D800E are very positive evolutionary developments, and I'm sure Nikon will unveil more quality instruments before the year is out.</p>

<p>PS I don't suppose many people, after being invited to a great home-cooked meal, would complement the chef on the obvious high quality of their mixer/oven/microwave etc..... you probably won't be invited back!!<br /> <strong><br /></strong></p>

<p><strong><br /></strong></p>

[julianv]

<p>When people see my photos, they often say: "Wow, you must have a really good camera!"<br>

I sometimes tease these folks by asking them to ponder whether Rembrandt got similar reactions: "Wow. you must have a really good paintbrush!"<br>

[Disclaimer: I'm not the original author of that comeback - I forget where I first read it.]</p>

[johne37179]

<p>Without commenting specifically on the D800, I think the advances in technology that are most attractive are those that open doors or expand the horizon. I'm not concerned about large files, etc. I remember when we were told by IBM there was no need for desktop computers or by Microsoft that no one will ever need more than 512K of RAM. shooting a crisp billboard size print with a handheld camera might be really neat. Being able to crop a postage stamp element out of a 16 x 20 and have it be 4000 pixels across would be great. Digital photography still has a long road ahead. I don't think we are even close to the end of progress here.</p>

[mark_mitchell5]

<p>Without commenting specifically about the attributes of either the D800 or D4, no question, it would be a blast to use either camera, but I'm still shooting with a D90 and my budget allows for neither newer camera. I'm pretty darn sure I haven't hit the limit of what the D90 is capable of without improvement on my part and a more consistent technique, I wouldn't benefit from either camera. Can't blame the tool here.<br>

I did, however, get a chuckle from Mr.Rockwell alluding to the 'idea' that the D800 may eliminate the need for telephoto lenses - just crop your way to that 300mm. It will be interesting to see pictures from these two cameras in capable hands.</p>