Nikon D800

[JRCrowe]

<p><a href="http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/features01.htm#a12">Here</a> is a nice explanation of the difference between the D800 and D800E on a Nikon website. </p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>I was able to finally see the D800 and D4 in person at a NPS event in Helsinki, which I briefly attended (had to get back to work, alas). I checked out the D800 and 24 PC-E and the functionality appeared to be similar or slightly better than with the D700 i.e. you have to be careful when mounting and rotating the lens, but normal vertical and horizontal shifts can be applied fully, also 45 degree diagonals are now free of hindrance (the viewfinder basically touches the lens at 11mm shift). I didn't check 60 degree diagonals that might be limited. I didn't have my D700 with me but it appeared to be a slight improvement in usability. There is still little space for the fingers for locking the shift when doing a vertical shift with the lens shifted but it's workable.</p>

<p>However, there is another issue. The ocular of the D800 is basically at the same level with the LCD back and this means I have to press my nose really hard against the back of the camera to see the whole viewfinder image. The D3 series, D4, etc. do not have this problem as they have a deeply recessed ocular. I don't recall this problem with the D700; either the viewfinder optics or the geometry of the body seem to have changed. Or it can be that the larger 100% image is simply harder to see with the existing geometry - without comparing them side by side I don't know. The D800 viewfinder magnification is 0.72x while that of the D4 is 0.7x, so there is a slightly bigger image (helpful in focusing no doubt, but it together with the non-recessed geometry of the ocular does present a problem for me). </p>

<p>Anyway, I also checked out the wireless transmitter units and the WT-5 is positively tiny. It acts as a web server so you can just use an iPad to operate the camera and use as a big screen. :-) With the D800 only the WT-4 is supported, and for studio shooting it seems very large and comparatively primitive. While I can understand the rationale 1) if Nikon still has a lot of WT-4 in stock they need to be able to sell it, 2) if the battery consumption of the WT-5 is too big for the small battery of the D800 they can also use it as a justification (WT-4 has a battery of its own) but I think they left out WT-5 support because they prefer to sell the more expensive D4.</p>

<p>I asked about wireless flash control with radio ... and the Nikon rep recommended Pocketwizard said they're working with them as they need to have something ... I would prefer an integrated solution (with the radio built into the flash) like Canon's, but they didn't admit or deny they're working on it. Incidentally I saw Joe McNally there and got to chat with him about it, he had he simply got fed up with the TTL Pocketwizards and didn't have new info about whether they had fixed the problems. He thought Canon's new flash with radio might trigger Nikon into something. I hope so.</p>

[eric friedemann]

<p><em>"The ocular of the D800 is basically at the same level with the LCD back and this means I have to press my nose really hard against the back of the camera to see the whole viewfinder image."</em></p>

<p>So, if you have a big nose, you'll have to get rhinoplasty to use a D800 variant? </p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>I guess it depends on the exact geometry of your face and how much you're willing to press your nose against the camera, as well as if you wear glasses. If I turn my face down and my eyes up to see the viewfinder image, I can see the whole image without much pressure, but then when doing this I have to view the image through the edge/corner of my eyeglasses in an angle so this makes it tricky to see clearly. </p>

<p>The D4 viewfinder was ergonomically wonderful when I tried it today, and so have been most high end Nikons since the F3HP (which I think was the best of all in this respect). I think the protruding ocular in the D3/D4 type design may make it fit less easily in a camera bag and this may have motivated the design of the D800. Portability has been a priority clearly with the D800. Anyway, I don't want to put anyone off the D800; clearly it is a great camera for many people; I'm just a bit down right now about this matter. </p>

[Didier Lamy]

Eyepoints:

D800 17 mm (max distance between the center surface of viewfinder eyepiece lens to the eye);

D700 18mm,

D4 18 mm,

F3HP 25mm,

(and 5D Mark III 22mm...).

 

I don't understand why those Nikon eyepoints are now so short, especially on the D800 where focusing is an important parameter.

 

I have been using a F3HP - and wearing glasses - for years, I might find the D800 ocular very unconfortable.

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>17mm is really short and explains some of the difficulty I was experiencing. I don't think I've ever owned a Nikon with such a short eyepoint. The F6/D3 series/D700 have 18mm and that's ok (for me) when hand-holding the camera as long as the ocular is clearly recessed from the back of the camera. For use with the camera on a tripod use I find 18mm to be somewhat uncomfortable if the camera is lower than my normal standing position eye level. My film Nikons have significantly longer eyepoints.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>I ordered a D800, but if there were a D800HP I'd have gone with that. Is it odd that the D800 eyepoint is actually 2.5mm shorter than the D7000 and D90?</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>The DX camera viewfinder is easier to implement in a compact size and with a good eyepoint as the dimensions of the focusing screen are smaller yet the whole camera is not scaled down as much as the image size.</p>

<p>Canon full-frame cameras typically have the same issue that I can't see the whole frame easily. That's the main reason I use Nikon - with the exception of the D70 I've always been able to find a Nikon with a good viewfinder that works well with my facial geometry and glasses. In this case it means that I will get to put a good number of frames through my D3X after all. </p>

[peter_j2]

<blockquote>

<p>Canon full-frame cameras typically have the same issue that I can't see the whole frame easily.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is true with my Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II and Canon EOS 5D. Without glasses, the entire frame can be viewed when my eyebrow is in contact with the rubber eyecup. I don't know if this issue has been corrected with the Canon EOS-1 D X and Canon EOS 5D Mark III.</p>