Happy 100th Birthday, Nikon and the Development of the D850

[Andrew Garrard]

> It appears that the Sony A9 is way ahead of the pack in terms of data processing/transfer. Seems to require the new kind of sensor architecture they introduced though; highly doubtful that they let Nikon have it at this point.

 

A little, although some of the magic (stacked chip processing) appeared with the A7R2 (if not before). I guess we might find out what Nikon end up with. If Nikon could keep the base ISO DR at D810 levels, I'd be happy with the other features of the A7R2 sensor - possibly especially if Nikon suddenly get PDoS for video (ah, V1, I remember you well).

 

The A7R2 can do high speed readout of 4K by doing on-sensor processing (although I don't know how distributed the processing is - it may well be at least downsampled before it goes off-chip). Raw 8K readout is more challenging, although I'd love a write-to-buffer mode at a higher frame rate. But I'm trying to save my wish list for a more structured format. :-)

[Richard Williams]

The video is 4K (UHD, not DCI) if I am not mistaken (shows 3840x2160, so 16:9 ratio). 8K (UHD) is 7680 wide (x 4320) so a D810 falls indeed 300 pixels short ( about 40MP required).

Yes, but the video couldn't be 8K anyway, unless Nikon is actually launching an 8K video camera, which doesn't seem likely - the bit at the beginning looks like live video, not stop motion. The text near the end says '8K time-lapse', so the starry night stuff has been down-sampled if it was shot at full resolution.

[Palouse]

Well, there is this: Nikon Made the Weirdest Music Video for Its 100th Birthday

 

Caution, some may find this cheesy, weird and otherwise harmful to ones health.

[bebu_lamar]

Do they have 8K display? Correct me if I am wrong that 8K is about 16MP? Besides from 8K the question is can it do video full frame? Currently no Nikon DSLR can do full frame video isn't it right?

[Richard Williams]

Do they have 8K display? Correct me if I am wrong that 8K is about 16MP? Besides from 8K the question is can it do video full frame? Currently no Nikon DSLR can do full frame video isn't it right?

The various 8K resolutions are over 33MP - see: 8K resolution - Wikipedia. It doesn't seem likely the D850 will be able to handle that much data in real time at video fps, which is probably why they emphasise time lapse photography.

 

The dancing video made my day!

[rodeo_joe1]

Is that what passes for entertainment in Japan?

 

I hope those unsynchronised dancers were all Nikon employees. If so, then I'm sure they enjoyed a day off making the video. A bit of in-house fun, but surely not fit for public release. I don't think Disney Pixar have anything to worry about!

 

Back to the D850 > in development <

That's a phrase that could mean anything, and I think we're all wasting our time speculating.

 

It could be at any stage from being a waste basket full of rejected ideas to a prototype under wraps. Who knows, who cares? All that's known is that nothing is known. So why waste discussion space on it?

 

When you can actually see the specs, know the price and buy the camera might be a better time to start discussing its video capabilities.

Edited July 26, 2017 by rodeo_joe|1

[Richard Williams]

I think we're all wasting our time speculating.

You must be new here. Welcome to photo.net!

[Andrew Garrard]

> Do they have 8K display?

 

If that means "do they exist?" then yes, although they're rare. There are a few (possibly prototype?) large TVs that are 8K. The most practical option is the Dell UP3218K, which is only moderately hellaciously expensive (and last I looked hadn't made it to the UK). Connectivity is a bit awkward (although I gather it still does 8K with just one cable, but at reduced frame rate - much as the old T221 3840x2400 panel I have can be run with anything from a single DVI cable to dual dual link); I'm not keen on the idea of compressed 8K, so I don't mind that. It can't do HDR, but otherwise most aspects of the panel are state of the art. It's on my shopping list, in the distant future (especially if I have a way to shoot video for it!)

 

16K is a bit more challenging. :-)

 

RJ: Nikon say the camera was designed with customer feedback, then haven't given more details. Maybe this *is* the customer feedback stage? This is one of the most educated fora in the world to speculate on functionality on a Nikon camera - we probably won't get "16K at 400fps" as an expected feature. It's a good a place as any - although we had a thread or two about this some months back, hence my promises of a survey.

[Wouter Willemse]

Expectations regarding what Nikon will offer/can do seem to be rather low these days.

 

True, and this thread is full of it. Yet, I can't help wonder whether some expectations are realistic.

We've seen digital cameras make huge leaps in the last decades, and now development is slowing down as product matures. Can we realistically continue to expect big novelties at the rate we had 5-10 years ago? I know people will now point at the rate of innovations that other manufacterers claim to have, but frankly, all the recent camera releases where the press and marketing departments shout "game changer".... I don't see it, realistically: just more evolutionairy steps, just like Nikon is doing. Mostly welcome steps, and it's good to see increased competition and pressure from more different manufacterers and different camera designs, so nothing bad about it. Just saying we should have right expectations. The D850 is not likely to be a quantum leap forward, but that doesn't have to mean it's going to be a mediocre camera.

 

That said, there is one expectation we sure can have, and that's a solid, reliable camera; and with the amount of issues that lots of the recent bodies have suffered, that confidence is at a justified low. In that sense, Nikon does probably better at not wasting too much time at celebrating, and spend that time instead on improving the internal processes.

 

The D850 video.... ah well. If they would have said nothing, everything would still be the same. Let's see what's what when it is released and reviewed.

[ilkka_nissila]

with the amount of issues that lots of the recent bodies have suffered, that confidence is at a justified low

 

IMO this is a popular myth, nothing more. Nikon body issues are not more common today than they were in the past. Let's see the ones I remember.

 

F3HP (1980-)): LCD display illuminator stops working. F4 (1998): no issue that I'm aware of. F70 (1994): exposure meter issues. F5 (1995): early units had serious problems working on AA alkaline batteries. F6 (2004): no issue that I'm aware of.

 

Digital cameras: D2H (2003), D70 (2004): blinking green light of death syndrome: camera shows the memory card light blinking and fails to do anything else (in fact this happened to all of the D70 camera samples that my friends and family had). Both cameras were recalled. D2X (2005): not aware of any issues. D200 (2005): early units had banding in shadows which was later alleviated. D300 (2007): D3 (2007): not aware of any major issues, though there was a problem in one of the D3 firmware updates. D3X (2008), D3S (2009): not aware of any issues. D5000 (2009) had a recall due to a power issue. D7000 (2010) had a new AF system which I had issues using the 200/2 (really poor shot-to-shot consistency of focus); I believe it was related to stability of the main and submirror assembly, later fixed silently as cameras came into service for other reasons. D4 (2012): not aware of any issues. The D800, D800E had in some units some problems with AF system alignment leading to the so-called left AF point issue; I didn't experience this but experienced two other issues: the AF was very sensitive to the colour of light, leading to front or backfocus depending on the colour of the light, and another issues was that fast primes had distance dependent focus errors, some were very severe. In 2012 there was a large scale battery recall of EN-EL15 units. The D600 (2012) had the well published shutter oil issue. D610 (2013), Df (2013), D4s (2014), D810 (2014): not aware of significant issue (early D810 did have some thermal noise issue affecting long exposures but I would't call it a significant issue). D750: AF sensor blocked flare issue affected a few people who intentionally shoot portraits with flare and want the flare to be pretty: this lead to a recall, although dpreview tested a number of cameras and found the Canon 1D X to have a worse case of this, yet it wasn't recalled (probably because its users know how to use and what to expect from a camera). Additionally there were shutter recalls. D5 (2016), no issue that I'm aware of. D500: as far as I know there are no major issues.

 

Now, cameras that I didn't mention include D2Hs, D2HX, D50, D40, D40X, D60, D80, D90, D5100, D5200, D5300, D5500, D5600, D3000, D3100, D3200, D3300, D3400, which I'm not aware that had any issues. If you calculate you can probably find that there is no statistically significant difference in frequency of issues in different eras. The ones above which I would list as significant issues include the F5 (1995) power issue, the F70 (1994) metering errors, the D70/D2H BGLOD issue (2003-4), the D7000 (2010) and D800 (2012) AF issues, the D600 (2012) oil issue would be something I'd consider significant but the others not so much. I do believe in the peak years (2010-12) there were higher incidence of issues because production of cameras was so high and there was also the flooding, earthquake and tsunami in 2011. However since then issues have been rare if you consider how many camera models are in production a small minority had issues or recalls. I think it is fairly safe to guess that the D850 is likely to work fine and if there is an issue Nikon will fix it. Of course it may be a good idea to wait for the first six months for any teething problems to surface and be fixed and possibly purchase the camera at a discount. But of all the Nikon cameras I've used, the newest ones are by far the best and with least issues that affect practical use. In the early years (mid 90s) I found it very difficult to find a model which would be a good match to my needs. Also when transitioning to digital cameras, the early cameras had lots of practical issues. Not so today.

[Wouter Willemse]

Good point, Ilkka, and basically you're right of course about the quantity and severity of issues.

What is an issue nowadays though is how much exposure any issue with a new camera gets online, and the amount of noise that gets generated. Nikon doesn't seem to have a good grasp yet how to deal with such situations and (to me anyway) often seems extremely clumsy in their communications - even when they do the right thing (recall, free repair etc.), they can't contain the negative news flowing, and I can't shake the idea other brands manage that better. Sometimes it's not so much the message they give, but how they give it, that erodes the faith in the brand.

 

Still, indeed, yes, my earlier statement was well overcooked, and more a gut-feeling rather than fact-substantiated.

[Richard Williams]

>Nikon say the camera was designed with customer feedback, then haven't given more details. Maybe this *is* the customer feedback stage? This is one of the most educated fora in the world to speculate on functionality on a Nikon camera - we probably won't get "16K at 400fps" as an expected feature. It's a good a place as any - although we had a thread or two about this some months back, hence my promises of a survey.

My guess (more speculation!) is the hardware is already finished, and there'll be a real announcement in the Autumn (if the timing of the 'in development' statement about the D5 is anything to go by - see above). On reflection, they aren't going to want to depress the sales of the D810 (and to some extent the D500 and D750) for too long, even to make an anniversary announcement. Few people who can afford to wait will be buying the D810 now (unless there's a significant price cut) - they'll either want the new model or a better deal on the old one.

[rodeo_joe1]

I find this fixation with the video performance of a still camera a bit worrying. Capturing moving images has never really interested me as an art form. So am I really in a minority of one?

 

One old boy I knew long ago dismissed the cinema as "shadders on the wall", and to be honest it hasn't moved on a lot IMO. In fact with the amount of CGI content in movies I wonder if a camera is used very much in their creation at all these days.

 

4k, 8k, 16k .... where's the limit to be drawn for, let's face it, amateur or semi-pro use. The D850 isn't positioned to be Nikon's flagship model, but aimed at the enthusiast, pro 2nd body, semi-pro market. Which cares how much about video? And more to the point, how much about 8k video that only a tiny percentage of people have the hardware to watch?

 

Another issue is whether the human eye/brain actually cares or indeed can physically detect detail in a moving image above a certain level. The fact that a high degree of compression can be got away with in broadcast TV transmissions kind of gives the lie to high resolution in moving images being necessary or even visible.

[Wouter Willemse]

Capturing moving images has never really interested me as an art form. So am I really in a minority of one?

 

No, I also don't care one bit. But, it seems a reasonable part of the market now feels that inclusion of video in these cameras is important enough, and in fact I've seen plenty wedding videographers switch to DSLRs. So it has become an important part of the spec-sheet, just like other options some will use and some not (GPS, in camera RAW editing options, tilting LCD screen, direct upload options, for some even autofocus - stuff like that). In the end, all of the video stuff is just one button on the camera, which I could easily ignore. In all the years with my D300 and D700, I don't think I ever used the QUAL button either, and the fact that it's there never mattered much. Video, as far as I am concerned, is the same thing.

[rick_jack1]

46mp & $3300. Glad I didn't buy an 810 recently. I will give this some thought.

[Andrew Garrard]

My guess (more speculation!) is the hardware is already finished, and there'll be a real announcement in the Autumn (if the timing of the 'in development' statement about the D5 is anything to go by - see above).

 

Oh, I agree. I can hope that Nikon was paying attention to our previous "what would we like?" discussions - I'm treating any remaining survey I get together as more for our benefit than theirs. Although to be honest more than half of the features I'd like could be done purely in firmware, and there's always a chance they'll update that later.

 

Rick: Rumoured or confirmed? I've not been following. The rumoured images suggest no flash, which probably means it's time I went radio trigger.

[Dieter Schaefer]

I know people will now point at the rate of innovations that other manufacturers claim to have, but frankly, all the recent camera releases where the press and marketing departments shout "game changer".... I don't see it, realistically: just more evolutionary steps, just like Nikon is doing.

The only one I would grant the label "game changer" is the Sony A9 - that's the first camera that offers something a DSLR will never accomplish: black-out free viewing, silent operation, and frame rates in excess of 15 fps. Also, it currently seems to be handling data transfer quite a bit faster than even Nikon's or Canon's flagship cameras.

 

 

Capturing moving images has never really interested me as an art form. So am I really in a minority of one?

Nope, just like Wouter I don't care one bit about video. But it has become an important part for others. Its side effect is live view which admittedly I have not utilized much at all as I find it rather cumbersome to use.

[bob_bill]

Joe, I agree, video wasn't even on my list. It is on my d500 and I haven't even checked how to use it in 3 weeks. But the live view/ tilt screen, really helpful when I don't want to lie in the sand or water to get low or hold over my vertically challenged head when no apple box or ladder available. I have been waiting for years for the 810 replacement and as Illka describes, I will wait another 6 months after release for any bugs to be worked out and for possible price drop. If it has 8 fps instead of the d500 10, good Iso at 1600 or 2000 that is allowing 1/1000 shutter speeds that negates my lack of vr on the 135 and 400 I can dump the d500. I like the 100 optimized iso also and can drop it to 50 to help knock down light. r I am down 2 stops from my d700 and will lessen the amount of vari nd I need to dial in making focus and composing easier when knocking down ambient with flash out doors.

[bebu_lamar]

46mp & $3300. Glad I didn't buy an 810 recently. I will give this some thought.

 

I am not so sure about that. If you bought the D810 recently on the sales for $2500 and sell the free grip for a couple hundreds bucks the D810 would be $1000 less than the D850 and it has 36MP.

[ShunCheung]

I am not so sure about that. If you bought the D810 recently on the sales for $2500 and sell the free grip for a couple hundreds bucks the D810 would be $1000 less than the D850 and it has 36MP.

I'll be more than happy to pay that (estimated) $1000 difference. Multi-CAM 3500 and CF cards are very old technologies. There is no way I would buy another new Nikon FX DSLR that uses the Multi-CAM 3500. The Multi-CAM 20000 on the D5 and D500 is a huge improvement over it.

 

If one wants to save money, get a used D800 or D750. In 2017, paying for a brand new D810 that was introduced in 2014 and with technologies that are mostly from the 2012 D800 doesn't make a whole lot of sense. That is why I thought Nikon should have introduced the D850 in 2016; they can't possibly be selling a whole lot of new D810 any more, even with deep discounts.

[Dieter Schaefer]

new D810 any more, even with deep discounts

Haven't really seen "deep discounts" on new D810 yet, have we? Seems to be hovering at $2800 ($500 off the initial introductory price) with the occasional additional $300 discount ($2500). Doubt there are enough in stock that Nikon would feel compelled to sell them for $2K or below once the D850 becomes available.

 

'll be more than happy to pay that (estimated) $1000 difference. Multi-CAM 3500 and CF cards are very old technologies.

I am not. Yes, it's old technology but not in a way that hinders my photography.

 

There is no way I would buy another new Nikon FX DSLR that uses the Multi-CAM 3500.

And I didn't. Camera was used - 50 clicks on it.

 

If one wants to save money, get a used D800

Even though the technology differences between the D800 and the D810 are minor, the two cameras feel entirely different to me. There seems to be little price difference between used D810 and used D800E bodies; so only D800 can be had at "bargain" prices.

[ShunCheung]

Remember this thread from a few months ago? Nikon price drop on D750 and D810, Rebate Ends June 17

 

David Cerutti bought a D810 with the 24-120mm/f4 AF-S VR and Nikon threw in a "free" MB-D12 grip for just under $3000. I would say the price for the body itself was probably around $2100 to $2200, depending on how much one manages to sell the MB-D12 for if you don't want it.

 

And then there have been gray-market D810 for below $1900 ....

 

I am sure Nikon is much more interested in selling brand new D850 for $3300 or perhaps a little more instead.

[BeBu Lamar]

I'll be more than happy to pay that (estimated) $1000 difference. Multi-CAM 3500 and CF cards are very old technologies. There is no way I would buy another new Nikon FX DSLR that uses the Multi-CAM 3500. The Multi-CAM 20000 on the D5 and D500 is a huge improvement over it.

 

If one wants to save money, get a used D800 or D750. In 2017, paying for a brand new D810 that was introduced in 2014 and with technologies that are mostly from the 2012 D800 doesn't make a whole lot of sense. That is why I thought Nikon should have introduced the D850 in 2016; they can't possibly be selling a whole lot of new D810 any more, even with deep discounts.

 

For you definitely NO because I know you're the one who is always after the latest.

[ShunCheung]

For you definitely NO because I know you're the one who is always after the latest.

Yeah, I take photography very seriously. Life is short, and many photo opportunities will not have a second chance. I might as well use the best equipment I can get at the present time to achieve the best images I can.

 

But I don't always get the latest. I already have both the 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR II and 70-200mm/f4 AF-S VR. To me, those are great lenses such that I am in no hurry to get the latest 70-200mm/f2.8 E FL version. I can't imagine that new lens can possibly make a whole lot of difference to me. However, the AF module in the D5 and D500 means considerably more sharp images over the AF capability in the D810.

[Wouter Willemse]

The only one I would grant the label "game changer" is the Sony A9 - that's the first camera that offers something a DSLR will never accomplish: black-out free viewing, silent operation, and frame rates in excess of 15 fps. Also, it currently seems to be handling data transfer quite a bit faster than even Nikon's or Canon's flagship cameras.

 

While it's the camera that took the biggest leap of recent introductions, I still see it as an evolution. The A7 models already showed that mirrorless is perfectly ready to give DSLRs a good run for their money, and no surprise that the sports/action cameras would be next. Again, nothing wrong with evolution - re-inventing the wheel just for the sake of it makes little sense so better slowly work to perfection on something that is working well.

For me, I strongly prefer a optical viewfinder, so the D850 remains vastly more interesting to me.