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

[CvhKaar]

My guess (more speculation!) is the hardware is already finished, and there'll be a real announcement in the Autumn .

 

In the little announcement video at News and Press - Naar pers - Nieuws & Pers it says : "Shot exclisively on the Nikon D850 , so if that is true then there should be at least 1 D850 for which the hardware is finnished..

 

[BeBu Lamar]

I think they have made at least some samples but they may have problem starting production. I don't think they are still designing it.

[Richard Williams]

There are also supposedly leaked press photos of the camera at places like Nikon Rumors (which has led to the frenzy of speculation about a possible hybrid EVF).

[ShunCheung]

Sure looks like Nikon is getting what they set out to achieve: lots of publicity and speculations on their 100th anniversary. And then there will be more excitement (or perhaps more indifference) when they actually announce the D850 with details.

[Dieter Schaefer]

Personally, I would welcome if Nikon indeed would amalgamate mirrorless and DSLR in one body. Not so sure how that would play out in the marketplace though. It would certainly require on-sensor phase detection and quite likely some firmware tweaks to make that work properly with current lenses.

 

Oh boy, now I've done it - more speculation, playing right into Nikon's hands.

 

Sure looks like Nikon is getting what they set out to achieve: lots of publicity and speculations on their 100th anniversary.

Not a bad thing IMHO. Certainly better than the news that they can't deliver the anniversary edition of the D5 before August (which isn't all that far away anyway).

 

And then there will be more excitement (or perhaps more indifference) when they actually announce the D850 with details.

As long as it isn't disappointment :rolleyes:

[rodeo_joe1]

"Shot exclusively on the D850"

 

Yeah, I could print a Dymo label with 'D850' on it too and stick it on my D800. Then call it a D850 prototype.

 

Sorry to sound jaded and cynical, but after all it's just another camera. Like buses, there'll be another one along soon. With the slight difference that you know the bus is already in existence, where it's going and what it'll look like.

[Albins images]

Am looking forward to a new camera with exciting features? Yes! Good for Nikon and good for photography and good for us fans to drool over.

Can I afford it within reasonable time..? Mmm..

Photography has been a thing of passion rather than a thing of generating income for over 30 years now.

And admittedly, my D800 is serving that passion rather well, still.

Better AF and 4K video would be most welcomed .. which is about all that I could wish to add to my current camera.

And keeping the renowned backward compatibility with Nikon's legacy lenses, please!

[ilkka_nissila]

I think a hybrid viewfinder is possible but I suspect it would reduce the quality of the optical viewfinder. The D810 viewfinder quality is an improvement over its immediate prefecessor (better clarity) but the D5 viewfinder appears to be more evenly lit. Rather than add features I would like to see further improvement in the quality of the viewfinder and increased eyepoint as well.

 

I get it that for video and manual focus use, some would like an EVF but from my perspective the OVF is almong the most important parts of the camera and I would rather not compromise on it. Now that the pop-up flash is likely to be absent, there is perhaps space to do improvements while reducing the length of the viewfinder overhang so the 24mm PC can rotate more easily.

 

I really like the way Nikon implemented radio control of flash. It is reliable which I can't say for a third party system which I've been using. Its use doesn't require extra transmitter and receiver batteries. I love it that I can use an older i-TTL flash on the hot shoe and control the SB-5000 by radio and everything just works. However, I sometimes need to use two cameras and it will be great to have Nikon's radio flash support on the D850. It would have been even nicer if Nikon had gone with radio control when they introduced CLS in 2003 (?) but I am happy to take it now that it is becoming available.

 

The Multi-CAM 3500 series modules have been good in my experience but with one important exception. When taking vertical full body shots of people, I want to focus on the face, not the chest. Multi-CAM 20k provides a number of small cross type sensors in these areas which mean the AF can see even faint facial details on the cheek, instead of focusing on the backlit hair some distance from it which is what can happen with the D8x0 if the selected point misses the eye. It really makes a difference to the rate of focus keepers with wide aperture lenses especially in backlit conditions. However, the D5 doesn't excel in low ISO dynamic range and sometimes in the summer I need to shoot in hard sunlight. Focus is great on the D5, but the D810 produces nicer images at low ISO and permits shooting without fill flash in these conditions and lifting the tone curve up from the middle produces very little visible noise at low ISO on the D810. I realize sometimes it is necessary to use flash but I'm not always prepared to shoot that way. I think combining the D5's AF with the D8x0 sensor will be a great combination. For me the extra resolution (45MP? vs 20-24MP) is not all that important but I love the smooth tones from the D810 low ISO images.

 

Without doubt there will be another camera after the D850. And we will be discussing it here when the time comes.

[Dieter Schaefer]

lots of publicity and speculations on their 100th anniversary

Unless Nikon feeds some more info soon, that D850 publicity will die down quickly. The "hybrid viewfinder" rumor seems already "disproved". Now its "8+fps". This is getting old fast; raising expectations sky high can only end up with disappointment when the real specs are finally revealed.

[ShunCheung]

Sometimes I wonder whether Nikon themselves "leak" some product images, but it is usually the rumor sites that fan the flames of rumors and wild, unrealistic speculations to generate web traffic.

 

If you want 8+ fps, get a D5 or D500, or maybe a D7500. A DSLR in 2017 is not going to have both 40+MP and 8 fps at the same time. A 36MP or more camera is for those still subject where you can carefully compose and focus, such as portraits, studio fine art images, landscape, and architecture .... Perhaps 1 or 2 fps is sufficient.

[rodeo_joe1]

"Personally, I would welcome if Nikon indeed would amalgamate mirrorless and DSLR in one body."

- That's been around for some time; it's called "LiveView". The only difference is you can't hold the rear screen up to your eye to see it properly in bright light.

 

Incorporating an eye-level EVF in an SLR would be very counter-productive. The worst of both world's IMO. AF would still have to be bounced around the mirror box, and some sort of "Pepper's Ghost" arrangement made for diverting the EVF image into the optical finder..... shudder!

 

No. The flipping mirror is no longer necessary. Keep it, or get rid of it altogether, but don't cripple a mirrorless camera by shoehorning the stupid thing in there as well.

Edited July 29, 2017 by rodeo_joe|1

[Dieter Schaefer]

Incorporating an eye-level EVF in an SLR would be very counter-productive.

I am flip-flopping on the issue at this time: best of both worlds or worst idea ever?. Simply because I have not seen a fully convincing EVF yet. What I've seen has advantages over the DSLR's OVF in certain situations and disadvantages in others; this leads to me wanting to have both at the same time. But incorporating it into a DSLR IMHO also requires on-sensor phase detection which in essence means that there would be two PDAF systems in the same camera (naturally driving price up) - the one in the mirror box during OVF operation and the one on-sensor during EVF operation (the on-sensor one could also work in conjunction with the mirror-box one refining/fine-tuning AF once the mirror has swung out of the way. I that sense, the amalgamation of DSLR and mirrorless would give me the best of both worlds. Because quite frankly, so far Nikon's live view implementation has not been very convincing and one reason is the lack of phase-detection AF and the sole reliance on contrast AF detection. A DSLR with hybrid viewfinder and without on-sensor phase detection AF is hubris indeed. And let's not forget that black-out-free viewing as available now on the Sony A9 requires a new sensor technology that Nikon may not have access to at this time (as well as the use of an all-electronic shutter).

 

But I also see the dangers in "merging" mirrorless and DSLR into one: more complexity, higher price and for many the feeling they are paying for something they don't need (like it is now with DSLR and video). Also trying to do too many things at once can easily lead to doing none of them right and it might indeed be better to keep DSLR and mirrorless separate. If Nikon indeed favors the hybrid viewfinder approach (now or farther down the road) they are putting all their eggs in one basket; surely a very risky move. If, however, Nikon's path will include separate mirrorless and DSLR in the future, and especially if mirrorless comes with a new lens mount, then I am not better off than I am now: two incompatible systems to maintain and haul around. Sony hasn't managed to make A-mount lenses adapt well to their E-mount cameras (and third-party Canon-lens adapters so far don't appear to be all too convincing either) so I don't expect Nikon to do better in that regard given all the incompatibilities and complications the current mount already entails.

 

So far, I have enjoyed the advantages EVFs offer with regard to manual focusing (but I recently disposed of all my manual focus lenses). Now I am exploring how well my Sony A7II does with AF and comparing it to what I am used to from my Nikon DSLRs. Until now though, I have not made use of the more advanced modes (Auto and 3D, face detection) on my Nikons based on previous negative experiences using them; now I need to investigate if there have been improvements in that regard on the D810 and D500. On the A7II I was surprised on how well the zone AF mode worked (with or without face/eye detection) shooting some beach volleyball. And dismayed how early the AF packed up when the light got dimmer.

 

Nikon has stated that they are working on mirrorless. Somehow I doubt it's going to come in form of a DSLR/mirrorless hybrid. It most likely will come with a new mount and a new lens system. And somehow I doubt that once that is established, Nikon will continue producing DSLRs. Sony doesn't and their A-mount line hasn't seen much love lately.

[ilkka_nissila]

AFAIK Sony was reasonably successful when they made DSLRs but with the switch to EVFs and semitransparent mirrors, they lost much of their market share, which they have now gained back with mirrorless. Sony wanted EVFs because it is better for video/stills integration, but most users only seem to have accepted it if it meant the camera would be smaller. Sony is repeatedly saying that the main reason they hear from customers for switching to their mirrorless cameras is that they are smaller. I think many high end Sony mirrorless users prefer it for its video capabilities as well, and some for manual focus. Many reasons basically. But do they apply to a possible Nikon mirrorless, and what advantages would Nikon have in the mirrorless market?

 

Nikon users who are asking for a mirrorless seem to by and large want to use their old lenses. This is difficult to achieve because even with OSPDAF, there are situations where CDAF is required to get good performance. I think mirrorless needs its own autofocus lenses (and shorter flange distance makes sense to achieve the size advantage) and no doubt Nikon is working on that, but I would not expect an easy transition.

 

Personally I want to stay with OVFs and DSLRs. I am happy to consider mirrorless for silent shooting applications but would prefer it to be equipped with an OVF even if it is only a hybrid one.

Edited July 29, 2017 by ilkka_nissila

[m_allegretta]

With a new 46MP sensor, the camera will become a great test platform for all lens' sharpness appraisals. Anyway, what type of memory card does the D850 accept? And what card storage capacity is needed to store reasonable length 8K video time lapse? Don't expect a cinema camera here.

[ilkka_nissila]

I would expect XQD and SD UHS-II card slots similar to those on the D500. I would like dual XQD but suspect that's not likely to happen.

 

I would expect 8K time lapse videos to take less than normal JPG stills times the number of frames in the sequence. Not that expect many people to use such a feature. I would prefer to use the interval timer instead.

[Two23]

n $3,000

 

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 the past five years or more my strategy has been to wait until a new top line camera is announced and then buy a used previous one. Currently using the D800E as my main camera (D5300 as back up/travel camera.) I intend to completely skip the D810 as I just don't see any added benefit for me. I can't justify spending $3,000 on a camera; cameras seem to make little difference to my photography. I'll most likely wait a couple of years when the D850 will be selling for under $2,000. I'd rather spend the difference on travel. That's what makes a bigger difference for me. In the past I have attempted to buy a camera for over $3,000, but it wasn't a digital one. It was a pre-Civil War era (1850s) full plate (6x8 inches) wet plate field camera. I bid it up over $4,000 but still didn't get it. These kinds of cameras excite me and hold their value well over the decades.

 

 

Kent in SD

[BeBu Lamar]

n $3,000

 

 

 

For the past five years or more my strategy has been to wait until a new top line camera is announced and then buy a used previous one. Currently using the D800E as my main camera (D5300 as back up/travel camera.) I intend to completely skip the D810 as I just don't see any added benefit for me. I can't justify spending $3,000 on a camera; cameras seem to make little difference to my photography. I'll most likely wait a couple of years when the D850 will be selling for under $2,000. I'd rather spend the difference on travel. That's what makes a bigger difference for me. In the past I have attempted to buy a camera for over $3,000, but it wasn't a digital one. It was a pre-Civil War era (1850s) full plate (6x8 inches) wet plate field camera. I bid it up over $4,000 but still didn't get it. These kinds of cameras excite me and hold their value well over the decades.

 

 

Kent in SD

 

So you can justify $2000 although the camera makes little difference to your photography?

[Two23]

So you can justify $2000 although the camera makes little difference to your photography?

 

 

I paid $1,800 for one D800E, and $1,500 for the second. I charge $2,000 for a wedding, so one job paid for each. Can't justify the $3,000 because: (1) customers will never see the difference (2) there will be no noticeable improvement at all in my shots (3) rather spend the money on travel.

 

 

Kent in SD

[BeBu Lamar]

I paid $1,800 for one D800E, and $1,500 for the second. I charge $2,000 for a wedding, so one job paid for each. Can't justify the $3,000 because: (1) customers will never see the difference (2) there will be no noticeable improvement at all in my shots (3) rather spend the money on travel.

 

Would your customers notice images from the D850 vs your current D800? If not why spend the $2000.

Kent in SD

[Two23]

Would your customers notice images from the D850 vs your current D800? If not why spend the $2000.

 

No, they don't notice. None could tell any difference between images made with D7100 vs. D800E, until I start making big enlargements (bigger than 11x14). I have been doing a couple of those a month for the past several years--they are very profitable. And remember, I do NOT spend $2,000 on a camera--always less than that. (Unless it's an exceptional historical camera, perhaps.) I do buy new cameras every few years, mostly for the reliability aspect. An 8 yr. old digital camera is getting "iffy." Remember that my back up/personal camera is a used D5300. I do have great lenses, and 10,000ws of flash power. :)

 

 

Kent in SD

[rodeo_joe1]

"Nikon has stated that they are working on mirrorless."

 

- Of course they are. They'd be mad not to. And why else would they introduce E lenses? Except to make their DSLR lenses easily adaptable to a shorter register body.

 

Once you've made the lens interface completely electrical, any mount adapter becomes a simple tube with pass-through connectors.

 

Although the E-mount doesn't bode well for backward compatibility with mechanical aperture coupled lenses.

[ilkka_nissila]

E lenses are sold in such small numbers that it has no impact on the adapter implementation for mirrorless; an adapter which only supports 0.1% of Nikkors would be considered of not much value.

 

The real purpose of E is to facilitate diaphragm control in such lenses where it would be difficult mechanically. Also to improve consistency of exposures at high frame rates especially with long lenses.

[mike_halliwell]

OK, so it's low to mid 40s regarding MPix to enable 8K timelapse (double the D5); does 'more than' 8.5fps and has the focusing module from the D5....all for $3000

 

Really? How are they going to sell a D5 after that? Yes, I know it has higher fps, but the jump in $ is substantial, way more than double.

 

For my format prediction, I'm guessing at Dual SD UHS II.

 

I'd be curious whether they'll be a D850A or maybe D850M (mono)?

 

I'm really looking forward to a reality check, ie the Big Reveal... but WHEN?

 

There's too long a gap in tease vids!

[CvhKaar]

I would expect XQD and SD UHS-II card slots similar to those on the D500. I would like dual XQD but suspect that's not likely to happen.

 

I would expect 8K time lapse videos to take less than normal JPG stills times the number of frames in the sequence. Not that expect many people to use such a feature. I would prefer to use the interval timer instead.

MM Not so sure about XQD slots .. I agree it works fast and clean ( i do own a D500), but now that Lexar seems to be closed down soon the only remaining supplier of XQD cards will be Sony, and when it is Sony only" it in genaral means ""(to) expensive" and to be phased out within years ,like all "sony specials", ( like sony batteries , mcd's , earbuds with special connectors and the famous"memory stick" etc.)

[ilkka_nissila]

You can still buy memory stick cards though new models with higher specs do not seem to be developed. XQD is used by some of Sony's own very successful professional video cameras which are sure to be important to Sony. The alternative for Nikon would be CFast 2.0 which is almost twice as expensive as XQD (128GB) and physically bigger and older tech so it is not a good choice from the consumer point of view: pay a lot more and gain very little over XQD. Lexar CFast cards are also discontinued, along with their other memory cards if the business is not purchased by someone else. And then there is CFexpress which is currently only made by Delkin in one size and no cameras as yet support it. XQD is the best choice of the currently available high speed cards IMO. I am certainly not going to be paying a lot of money for flimsy SD UHS-II cards. I will use what uhs-i cards I have as backup in the D850 but do not intend to buy new ones. Unless of course my current SD cards stop working which unfortunately has happened to too many of mine. I hope the next version will have dual XQD or dual CFexpress if they must change to it. I suspect there is no practical need for the latter outside of high end cinema cameras (8K), but I really appreciate the ruggedness and speed of the current XQD. Edited July 31, 2017 by ilkka_nissila