Nikon D810 vs D800E ISO Comparison

After I received the Nikon D810 in the morning today, I thought about posting an article on the ISO performance of the camera and how it stacks up against the Nikon D800E. After Adobe announced the release of the Camera RAW 8.6 RC, I thought about using the Adobe converter for the Nikon D810 RAW files instead of Nikon’s software like Capture NX-D or ViewNX. Well, that was a really bad call on my side, because I ended up wasting the whole day trying to figure out why the performance of the D810 was coming out so bad when compared to the D800E. I ran many different tests and each one of them showed the same thing – the D800E was surpassing the D810 at every ISO above 3200. Whether it was with retaining colors and dynamic range, to plain noise – the D800E was just killing the D810 in every case. Although the D810 images were coming out about a stop brighter (with the exact same exposure settings and even custom white balance set at 4700K), I even tried to equalize the brightness both in cameras and post, only to see variations of the same problem. Nothing made sense and I simply could not believe that Nikon would release a camera that was inferior than its predecessor in image quality. That really did not make sense, but that’s what I was seeing!

Nikon D810 vs D800 / D800E

After wasting a few hours with Adobe’s Camera RAW and DNG converter, I installed Nikon’s free Capture NX-D software. Loaded the exact same files into Capture NX-D, ran the conversion and voila – the D810 looked better than the D800E! It turns out that Adobe’s 8.6 “Release Candidate” is one of those junk beta releases where the converter is doing something funky with handling the D810 RAW files. Take a look at the following two files shot on the D810 (Left) and D800E (Right) at ISO 12800 for a comparison:

Nikon D810 ISO 12800 Adobe CR Nikon D800E ISO 12800 Adobe CR

If you look at the EXIF data of both images, you will see that both were shot with identical exposure settings. The D810 image has weird colors (despite my efforts in trying to match the white balance), there is a heavy loss of colors (particularly in the shadows) and there is generally more grain in the image. In addition, as I have mentioned earlier, the D810 images appeared brighter at the same settings. I even blamed it on the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art lens, thinking that perhaps the lens was not closing down properly to f/5.6, so I used an older Nikkor manual focus lens, only to arrive at the same results. Long story short, it was a complete waste of time, thanks to my blind trust in Adobe’s RAW converter.

With the Capture NX-D, things look completely different and they make a lot more sense. Although there is still a slight difference in exposure brightness between the two cameras (with the D810 appearing brighter by up to 1/3 of a stop), ISO performance with NX-D rendered RAW files look noticeably good, in favor of the Nikon D810. That’s something I was expecting and it is not a surprise, since the D810 sports a newer, more improved version of the 36.3 MP sensor.

Let’s take a look at the comparison between the two, starting from ISO 64. Since the D800E does not have ISO 64, the below crop was shot at ISO 50 (Low ISO boost):

Nikon D810 ISO 64 Nikon D800E ISO 50

There is not much to say about low ISO performance – both cameras produce superb results at low ISOs. Except the D810 does not have to boost anything at ISO 64, since it is its start of the “native” ISO range. I have not performed any dynamic range tests yet, but hopefully this means more dynamic range for the D810.

Next, here is ISO 100 (Left: Nikon D810, Right: Nikon D800E):

Nikon D810 ISO 100 Nikon D800E ISO 100

Performance at low ISOs is excellent on both cameras, so there is no need to look here – let’s skip to ISO 800 and above.

Nikon D810 ISO 200 Nikon D800E ISO 200

Nikon D810 ISO 400 Nikon D800E ISO 400

Noise patterns look a little different between the two, but I cannot say that one is better than the other.

Nikon D810 ISO 800 Nikon D800E ISO 800

The same for ISO 1600.

Nikon D810 ISO 1600 Nikon D800E ISO 1600

At ISO 3200, we can see that the D800E starts to develop more patches of false color in some areas of the image.

Nikon D810 ISO 3200 Nikon D800E ISO 3200

As we push ISO higher towards 6400, we can now see that the shadow area on the D800E is clearly more affected with noise patterns.

Nikon D810 ISO 6400 Nikon D800E ISO 6400

And this is much more evident at ISO 12800, where the D810 is clearly better in handling noise throughout the image.

Nikon D810 ISO 12800 Nikon D800E ISO 12800

ISO 25600 is just too much for both cameras, but once again, the D810 appears visibly better.

Nikon D810 ISO 25600 Nikon D800E ISO 25600

And the D810 comes with a useless ISO 51200, which I personally would never use due to severe loss of details, colors and way too much grain.

Nikon D810 ISO 51200

Please note that all of the above are 100% crops from the center of the frame. No processing was performed on images, including sharpening, contrast, levels, etc.

ISO Performance Conclusion

Judging from the preliminary data, the performance difference between the two cameras is between 1/3 to 1/2 of a stop at ISO 3200 and above. Although Nikon pushed native ISO a full stop higher, I do not see a full stop of difference between these cameras. Now I do have to say that the brightness difference that I noticed and showed above between the two cameras (the D810 being brighter) is actually in favor of the D810. If I were to equalize the brightness levels of both cameras by darkening the D810 images, noise levels would appear even better in comparison. I do not know if it is just my sample of the camera that appears to be off in exposure, but after conducting around 12 separate tests in two different lighting conditions, the D810 appeared to yield brighter images every time.

Now this has nothing to do with Adobe’s broken RAW processing engine. Adobe was actually overexposing D810 images even more in comparison, in addition to yielding funky colors and having a massive loss of colors and dynamic range that I talked about in the beginning of this article. I have also tried out the latest versions of DCRaw (9.22) and RawDigger for processing D810 images and both were yielding strange results (blacks were off), which tells me that they are probably not fully ready for the D810 RAW files yet.

It appears that we have hit the wall in terms of pure ISO performance for such a high resolution camera. Soon enough, unless something drastically changes in sensor technology, such comparisons might become useless, since we are seeing less and less improvements with the newer generation cameras. It does not mean that we are done with innovation though – the primary factor for competitive advantage now lies with features and other technological advancements. That’s where the D810 certainly does deliver. I have already listed the many advantages of the D810 over the D800 / D800E and here is another one that should be added to the list – the Live View implementation of the D810 is amazing. Everything is crystal clear, with no interpolation of any kind. For me, this alone is worth the upgrade, since I absolutely hated the interpolated Live View of the D800 / D800E. Whether I was out shooting landscapes or testing lenses in my lab, the crippled Live View of my D800E was very painful to use. Now I can focus with any lens with confidence, whether it is an AF or a Manual Focus lens. And that mirror + shutter mechanism…boy, does it sound good! The D800E is probably twice louder in comparison and it vibrates like crazy every time that mirror moves. The D810 is very smooth and it sounds much damper, similar to the shutter on the Canon 6D. Sadly, Nikon did not properly implement the Electronic Front-Curtain feature! It does not work with Exposure Mode delay and only seems to be available in Mirror Lock-Up Mode. Sad, but I am hoping that Nikon will fix it in a firmware update soon.

I will be shooting a wedding tomorrow with the D810, so stay tuned for more detailed information about the camera! I will be performing a number of tests this weekend, including sharpness comparisons to see if the lack of the AA filter on the D810 has any advantages compared to the “AA cancelling” filter pack on the D800E. This one will be very geeky, but a fun one to check out!

Comments

  1. 1
    ) William Jones
    July 19, 2014 at 5:48 am

    Nasim, when possible (if you still have), could/would you please run a High ISO comparison of the D810 to the D3S? Reason: Native ISO on the D3S is 200 thru 12,800. It would be interesting to see how well the D810 does against that camera.

    Thanks for the quick feedback on the D810. Like many people, I am on the bubble about upgrading from my D800E to this.

    Thanks,
    WEJ

    • July 19, 2014 at 6:00 am

      William, unfortunately, I sold my D3S last year :( I have access to the D4 and D4s, but not the D3S anymore…

      • 9
        ) William Jones
        July 19, 2014 at 6:26 am

        Drat! I would loan you mine, but I am in Florida, not Colorado. A bit of a drive (though there is always FedX). Thanks for quick reply.

      • 35
        ) Paul Digney
        July 19, 2014 at 1:24 pm

        I am very interested in a D4S to D810 comparison. Early in the new year I want to get one of the two. I’m on a D610 now.

        • 40
          ) Anon
          July 19, 2014 at 3:39 pm

          I have both a D4s and the D810 (and shot many, many photos with the D800E). They are both outstanding cameras but have very different sweet spots. If you need extreme speed (close up or fast-moving sports or wildlife) or extreme low-light performance with moving targets (concert photos, evening street photography, etc.) then the D4s will do much better than the D8XX. If you want the most detailed possible images under adequate lighting conditions (most landscapes) then the D8XX is much better. The faster frame rate and better AF of the D810 moves it a bit closer to the D4s in low-light/fast-action capability, but it still has a ways to go since not even Nikon can beat physics.

          • 45
            ) Paul Digney
            July 19, 2014 at 7:38 pm

            Wildlife is one interest and the other excuse for a new camera is dance photography (poor light, no flash, moving subjects) so I guess I am back to considering the D4S again. If rental here (in Canada) wasn’t so stupidly expensive I’d use that as a way to try them. The only advantage of the 810 would be lots of room for cropping in both uses.

          • 80
            ) Paul Digney
            July 21, 2014 at 10:58 am

            I should be more clear. The D610 works adequately for the low light dance situation. I know for sure the D4S would be fantastic (I’ve used a D4 for a day once). But the D810 is half the price of the D4S. I could get it and the much rumored D300 replacement with some money left over.

            So if the D810 has AF that is not too far off the D4S and ISO capability that is at least that of the D610 it might work for me and give me some cropping flexibility when 600mm isn’t enough reach when chasing wildlife.

            Comments?

            • 83
              ) Cesar
              July 21, 2014 at 8:15 pm

              I just sold my d610 and bought the d810. The auto focus on the d810 seems twice as fast than the d610. I can focus close to far away pretty smoothly and fast. That’s the main thing I noticed on it. The shutter is half as quiet than the d610. And the way the buttons are layed out and ergonomics are quicker for me. I fiddled around a lot on my d610 to get settings correct. A lot of people brag about u1 and U2 on the d610 but I never used them I think every photographers should learn their camera down to the last button and menu. Light changes constantly and using those modes makes it easy for you to forget how to use your settings. Get the d810, you’ll be extremely happy with it. D4s is too much of a camera it’s best suited for sports photographers who need those Fps. The cropping on the d810 is amazing, has the small raw file setting, and if in dx mode has 6fps like the d610. It does have 1/3 stop brighter in photos, at least my camera does, but not so much that it would ruin pictures. I got the d810 and the money I save from buying a d4s could go to new lenses or equipment.

  2. 2
    ) Gromit44
    July 19, 2014 at 5:50 am

    Nasim,

    Did you have clarity switched on in the D810? That might explain the difference in brightness.

    Also, the 64ISO D810 shot is paired with a ‘Lo 1′ 50ISO D800E shot. Using any of the ‘Lo’ speeds might have unknown effects, so I’d have thought a better comparison would have been the two base settings – i.e. 64 on the D810 and 100 on the 800E.

    • July 19, 2014 at 5:58 am

      Gromit44, everything was shot in RAW and then converted to JPEG, so none of those sharpness and clarity camera settings mattered. After several tries, I did end up making both cameras identical though, including WB (set to 4700K) and camera profile settings. Nothing impacted the brightness – the D810 was still a little brighter in comparison.

      As for the Low 1 comparison, I did state that it was a boosted ISO. If you want to compare though, just download both and do a side by side comparison between ISO 64 on the D810 and ISO 100 on the D810 – both are provided…

      • 10
        ) Alfredo
        July 19, 2014 at 6:31 am

        Nasim, Groomit’s suggestion may not be far off (about the clarity). For example, in my Olympus camera, the picture control setting that I choose for the JPEGs affects the overall camera metering. I literally had to change the metering mode from natural to portrait because it was underexposing for about 1 stop. I don’t know about Nikon but it might be worth a test.

      • 11
        ) Stefan
        July 19, 2014 at 6:31 am

        A smile came on my face when I started to read your article. Why?
        Read Thom Hogan’s article from few days ago:

        http://www.dslrbodies.com/accessories/software-for-nikon-dslrs/software-news/warning-about-d810-comparis.html

        May be in some time Adobe will adjust ACR and LR and we will have results, similar to these in Capture NX-D.

        Cheers!

      • 12
        ) Gromit44
        July 19, 2014 at 6:38 am

        Ok, I’ve just done this test using Photoshop.

        1. Load the D810 100 ISO file & the D800E ISO 100 file into the same Photoshop document (as two layers (810 above, 800E underneath).

        2. Line up the two layers vertically using a DVD spine as a reference point.

        3. Add a layer mask to the 810 layer and erase a slim vertical strip using the rectangular marquee tool. (I placed the strip midway horizontally along the DVD spines).

        4. Add a brightness/contrast adjustment layer above the D800E layer (and below the D810 layer).

        5. Adjust the brightness slider until the vertical strip disappears.

        The strip becomes more or less invisible when the brightness slider is at +12 (out of 150). So to match the two cameras, the D800E would need a brightness boost equivalent to +12 in PS. This probably translates to something like +1 brightness in the camera’s picture control settings (perhaps less).

        (PS. I’m using a hardware calibrated monitor – the +12 figure could vary slightly on other monitors that are calibrated differently).

      • 14
        ) James
        July 19, 2014 at 6:58 am

        Nasim,

        I know you haven’t done the Dynamic Range testing, yet. But, do you think the brightness differential might be due to a bump in DR? I’m thinking that more details in the shadows might trick the eye into seeing a brighter image.

      • 37
        ) proteeck
        July 19, 2014 at 2:47 pm

        Hi Nasim
        Are the raw files available for download? If that is the case, could you please share the link?
        Thanks for all the good work

      • 96
        ) Akkual
        September 15, 2014 at 9:31 am

        This is a bit late, but the bright difference can be just firmware/sensor manufacturing thing. The ISOs on digital cameras are something that manufacturers decide. That is, ISO800 on one camera model isn’t the exact same as ISO800 on another camera model. They certainly are close, but you will get different real exposure. DXoMark actually measures this, there’s a graph where you can see what the real ISO of the said ISO800 is. Sometimes the difference can be even 1/3 EV.

  3. 3
    ) kc lim
    July 19, 2014 at 5:56 am

    I just got my d810 this afternoon. Initial impression compare to my d610, 1. The grip is so much more comfortable, 2. Positions of af on and shutter button very ideal, 3. Shutter sound softer, smoother and feels more damped

    • July 19, 2014 at 5:59 am

      It is a sweet camera – can’t wait to shoot a wedding tomorrow with my D810. The grip is more comfortable for sure and that shutter is amazing!

    • 33
      ) Brian
      July 19, 2014 at 12:38 pm

      I feel the D610 grip is a little small, is it the same for you? I think the shutter sound is quiet, but I’m coming from film cameras, which are rather loud.

  4. 7
    ) Arka Mukherjee
    July 19, 2014 at 6:23 am

    Hi,
    Best wishes for your wedding shoot tomorrow. Please post a detail review of the D810 later . Your reviews are the best , so egarly waiting of that.

    • 34
      ) Jason
      July 19, 2014 at 1:18 pm

      yup! Nice, practical, usable reviews…

  5. 8
    ) DVDMike
    July 19, 2014 at 6:24 am

    Nice article. Thanks for sharing. But you are not really going to use the 810 as your primary camera at a wedding today are you? Have you done enough testing under wedding conditions to be sure you know what you are getting? It sounds riskey to me when you have a working d800 and you’ve only had the 810 for a day. Just my two cents….

    • July 19, 2014 at 8:59 am

      I’m also going out and shooting a wedding with my D810 today, even though I’ve only had it for a day and my D800 has already been demoted to “backup body”. Honestly, the D810, for all practical purposes, feels just like the D800 when you’re using it. If you’re comfortable with the D800, there is no learning curve. Sure, there’s a bit of trust involved that Nikon put out a good camera and not a lemon, but knowing my D800 is available to me at any point during the day eliminates any doubt I might have about using a brand new camera to photograph a wedding. Why wouldn’t we want to give our clients the best images possible?

      • 23
        ) Chuck
        July 19, 2014 at 10:07 am

        Image quality has very little to do with the camera you’re holding. You guys should know that. Why is the D800 not good enough for image quality for your clients? Why spend another $3,000 + ?

        • July 19, 2014 at 10:51 am

          Chuck, it’s not necessarily image quality but image potential. My D7000 makes beautiful images. So does my D800. But, the ability to squeeze out an extra stop of light at a very dim reception, more accurate AF tracking for the processional or dancing, better low-light focusing and a faster processor and larger buffer all create potential for images that might have been missed with the D800.

          I agree, if someone buys the D810 purely for a minute increase in image quality, they’re wasting their money. For me (primarily a wedding photographer) there are some significant changes that warrant the upgrade (not to mention my D800 already has close to 150k actuations).

          • 30
            ) DVDMike
            July 19, 2014 at 11:39 am

            I have little issue using a brand new camera as a second body. But a brand new model just released is riskey and a would not risk a clients wedding on shooting the critical moments until I put it through more rigor. Until you’ve shot enough shots, you might jot know if your images were being completely written to the card under every circumstance. Stranger things have happened with version 1 firmware. I would personally not take the risk in return for a modest improvement over an excellent camera at a wedding, especially in such a letigious nation as the USA where I live and shoot. For myself, It’s just not worth the risk until you have confidence in your specific camera. I would not hesitate breaking it in on not so important reception moments or letting my assistant shoot with my brand new 810.

            When I went from a d2x to a d3 for weddings, I don’t think that I used the D3 as my primary the first week that inowned it. And there was a much bigger image difference between the D2x and D3 than the 800 to the 810! It’s all about what you consider the risk vs reward is.

            • July 19, 2014 at 12:18 pm

              Those are all valid points and great suggestions. It does come down to risk vs. reward. Personally, I view the risk as small and the potential reward as great. It’s a good thing we don’t all think the same, otherwise the world would be a pretty boring place! :)

        • 43
          ) Phil Harris
          July 19, 2014 at 6:38 pm

          I think that’s a pretty fundamental misunderstanding.
          Image quality has everything to do with the camera you are using, combined with an ability to operate it successfully.
          Perhaps you meant to say that the quality of the image has very little to do with the camera?

  6. 13
    ) Jeroen Idema
    July 19, 2014 at 6:50 am

    I see exactly the same with the expose, my D810 is about 1/3 of a stop brighter dan the D800. Regarding noise I find it hard to see much difference, it’s probably within 1/2 stop range. But the many small improvements add up to a better handling camera and I am very happy with it so far.

  7. 15
    ) Max
    July 19, 2014 at 7:58 am

    Sorry but imo for most photographers these crazy pixelpeeping comparisons are completely useless. With modern DSLR’s sharpness is for 98% no issue anymore (except being tóó sharp). Completely clean and noiseless images feel “dead”. Every new camera will be “better”. Where are the “better”photographs? Let’s face creativity!!! Realize that it is so often imperfection that gives a photograph character!!!!!

    • 24
      ) Chuck
      July 19, 2014 at 10:11 am

      Max, agreed. But these guys here don’t seem to get it.

      • 62
        ) Global
        July 20, 2014 at 6:40 pm

        I think you guys meant to write:

        “Sorry, but imo for most photographers they want to know what they are buying when they pay out thousands of dollars. With modern DSLRs the purchase is 98% about being comfortable (to help bring to life one’s own style of photography). Every camera has a different “feel.” Photographers are looking to generate a specific “feeling.” Let’s say ‘thank you!!!’ to guys like Nasim who document and share the differences, sharing tips and insights so we can learn, work smarter, and choose our tools wisely. Realizing the strengths and imperfections of each camera, lens and photographer gives our photographs character!!! Everyone reading this site can agree on this. But Chuck and Max don’t seem to get it.”

        Just a bit of Sunday fun, mates. ;-) Lots of us curious about the new cam. Quite a few folks mightve been confused about tge software were it not for Nasims insights. No need for put downs.

    • 28
      ) jd7000
      July 19, 2014 at 10:48 am

      “Sorry but imo for most photographers these crazy pixelpeeping comparisons are completely useless. ”

      I disagree with you Max, the differences Nasim cites are plainly obvious to me while simply viewing a web on my laptop computer monitor (Retina) in the kitchen. That is most definitely not pixel peeping.

      • 31
        ) max
        July 19, 2014 at 12:13 pm

        In geberal these pixelpeepings are showing marginal differences seen on 1:1 pixel level and not of any importance or value for the content of a photo. If these differences are important to you on a as seen on a laptop you have a hobby that is maybe interesting for you but not of any relevance in real photography. Photography has to do with content, message, creativity and aesthetics. The ultimate sharpness or noise free images can be important (in very rare cases) for someone whose photographs are printed really big and will be show in a museum. Believe me as long as you don’t buy the worst lenses and worst camera’s they are all completely competent to deliver stunning photograhps. If not, don’t blame the equipment but the photographer (btw this is of course not what the camera industry wants to hear because they want to sell so they always need something new and “better”).

        • 41
          ) Chuck
          July 19, 2014 at 3:45 pm

          Well said, Max. Hopefully, Nasim will agree.

          • July 19, 2014 at 11:51 pm

            Max, Chuck,

            you make a lot of valid points, but please remember – only from your point of view. These comparisons may not be that important to you. In fact, they are not important to me, either, I still use a D700 and find its image quality satisfactory. That said, I would never dear say that makes the comparisons useless. First of all, there are people who really do care about these things – people who are choosing between D800 and D810, for example. Both cameras cost a lot and when you are spending your own hard earned money, you want to spend it wisely.

            Secondly, and most importantly, Nasim has a system according to which he reviews all cameras, he spends a lot of time and effort doing what he does so that all of his reviews can serve as wide an audience as possible, so that more people find it useful. ISO tests are part of every review he does. Trust me, it’s no fun doing them, but they are necessary. Outside of these tests, he realizes fully what’s important in photography and what isn’t, I’ve talked to him about this plenty of times.

            We do a lot of articles about actual photography, too, perhaps even more than about gear and technical quality. And yet not everything is or should be about photography, some things are about equipment, because there are people who care about it and find it useful. Why would you discredit that?

            In any case, thank you for sharing your opinion, we will take it into account!

            • 52
              ) max
              July 20, 2014 at 2:45 am

              Hi Romanas,

              I realize that these pixelpeepings are important for many people. The problem with this kind of comparison is that you MAKE them important. Sure there is a group of pixelpeepers that is very interested in this kind of stuff but should you encourage this? Too many people (especially amateurs ) spend much too much money because they start to think they need “better” newer and more equipment. Most of the times the opposite is true! I think there is a big group of photographers that is helped by NOT writing this kind of articles (or at least relativate it strongly). Greetings Max.

              • July 20, 2014 at 3:08 am

                Max, again, valid points. But, as you mentioned, these comparisons are important for many people. Do you think less of such people because they are interested in technical image quality? I don’t. So, in a way (perhaps not for you or me), this article is just as important as the article Sharif posted on B&W photography. It’s merely different in that the target audience is different, not worse, not better – different.

                You asked me whether we should encourage interest in technical image quality and my answer is – no, we should not. But then nor do I think we are encouraging it, not only because we’ve expressed so many thoughts on the importance of technical quality and its ultimate irrelevance when it came to photography itself (Nasim does that a lot himself even in the technical sections of his reviews), but also because we publish so many articles that are about photography and not gear or pixels.

                And so I ask you this – should we discredit the importance of technical image quality and, by doing that, the importance of people who are interested in it? I do not think so. Not posting these articles, not including information on technical image quality in our reviews would be discrediting people’s interest in it.

                The key is finding balance. We will never discredit the importance of technical image quality even though, trust me when I say this, none of our team is actually hung up on it. We will always give it due attention, no more, no less than necessary, because, as we’ve both established, there are plenty of people who do and should care about it at least some amount. At the same time, we will also emphasize the importance of creativity, attention to light, subject, composition and so on. Whenever possible, we will highlight how much more important these aspects are at the end of the day.

            • 54
              ) Eled.
              July 20, 2014 at 3:39 am

              I feel like you (plural), like many others, consider photography from your very own point of view, and consider relatively “out of touch with reality” or even flat-out invalid anything that could be useful outside of your realm.

              Pretty much like the many comments on the internet that say the only “needed” lens would be a prime 50mm, anything else being either laziness, too-much-technical-ness, non-photography-ness, or any such B.S. of that level.

              To me there is absolutely no boundary between photography and technique, the technique is a mean to an end. When you start shooting bears at dusk in the distance, tell me you still don’t see a point in having clearer images at high ISO. This might seem an extreme example, but at any given point in time, if you don’t restrict yourself to very narrow niches, you can take a different view on your subject and the execution could be enabled by the difference in gear performance.
              You CAN do photography with a P&S, it’s just that you will have much less options in what you can achieve.

              High ISO, high dynamic range, different focal lenses, sharpness, high speed, large buffers, weather sealing, pixel count (Oh god how I hate those “You don’t need more than X”, what about cropping when no other option is available ?), etc., all these have practical application and are definitely more than just a number on a paper sheet, and it’s not because you only practice street photography and portraits, for example, that there is no point in talking about these things. Other people have broader interests, other people have narrow interests in extreme situations. Some of them don’t need more than what they have, some want to push further their ability to seize the opportunity.

              • July 20, 2014 at 4:24 am

                Eled,

                I could not have said it better myself. Although I do wonder why you think I view photography just from my own point of view since, well, I was trying to make basically the same point as you were.

                In any case, well put, thank you. :)

            • 56
              ) Eled.
              July 20, 2014 at 6:01 am

              Romanas,

              I’m sorry, I guess my post was more directly aimed at the arguments of Max and Chuck, which looked very much like blanket-statements to me.

              I was more directly making a comment regarding the idea of “Making pixel-peeping look important” by posting this kind of article.
              “We should not encourage interest in technical image quality” doesn’t make much sense to me. I don’t understand how posting about gear could be some kind of unavoidable plague that you can’t help but deal with. Gear (as an object, and knowing how to use it) is just the other side of the same coin, nothing to be wary of !

        • 93
          ) Stanzhg
          September 9, 2014 at 3:17 am

          @max,
          Lucky the camera industry don’t listen to you, or else we will still be using film, or better yet, we are still using camera obscura, up till now. In my opinion if a person has the budget to spend on the latest cutting edge technology gadget, Why not?. Its like sports car enthusiasts, heyy I like manual better, its not the car, its the man behind the wheel….. sureeeeee… Lets see what happen with a guy with the same skill and drive the same car with the dual clutch, pedal shift automatic gearbox, see who is faster, take a wild guess? Its the same as photography, a better equipment will yield a better result, given the same skill, If this is not the case, then I guess hasselblad, phaseone, broncolor, they all have already gone out of business. And there will be no well known professional photographers will purchase those super expensive equipments. Even at a small print, the difference is very noticeable, and if you can’t see it, maybe you should consult your physician. There must be something seriously wrong with your eyes. Your argument is a sour grape. If Nasim dont agree with me, I would ask him one essential question, why in the world you purchased a D810 or D800, just use nikon D90 with a nice lens, it should be enough. After all its your skill that matters, Sharpness and clean image is only important at a very rare cases….According to you, right Max????, ooh yeah.. do you have HD Tv at home??? if you do go throw it away.. cuz sharp and clean image is not very important…. Go watch tube…TV and edit your photo on your old tube monitor…. Sharpness and clean image are not important… You make me laugh…

    • 87
      ) Nick
      July 22, 2014 at 7:10 pm

      Max, when considering to purchase the brand new D810, or the slightly older D800E, these comparisons are important, they make it clear that from an ISO perspective alone, the difference may not be worth the $300 it will cost.

      That said, a complete side by side review is important, if it weren’t, we’d all still be shooting D100 or D1. I love me D2x. But it is time for an upgrade. We went with the D810 for several reasons, side by side comparisons allow a buyer to go in to the process of buying a new camera with as much information as possible.

      Are some of the comparisons little more than nit picking? Sure, but when spending over $3000, I’m ok with picking a few nits.

      • 88
        ) Max
        July 23, 2014 at 1:15 am

        Hi Nick,

        From your situation. I agree with you. In fact I was talking about MOST photographers and not ALL photographers. At the same time I think it is usefull if people here realize that there is a big and fast growing group of photographers that really becomes tired (or even irritated) by the ever nitpicking comparisons and “better better better” fever. Especially because it is always about “non items” like sharper and less noise. All professional photographs are clean and sharp nowadays. The question is: is sharper and cleaner better? In fact I see the incredible sharpness that modern camera’s deliver more as a “special effect” that is unnatural and most of the time does not add anything. Camera’s nowadays see much sharper than we can with our eyes. A slightly noisy picture gives so often more feeling than a completely clean and sharp “mainstream” picture. I did not forget that in the film time we bought higher Iso films to get MORE grain and everybody loved it. I think too many people are brainwashed by the camera industry and really believe that sharper and cleaner pictures are better. But again: they are easy and measurable selling argument for the camera industry, they love all these nitpicking comparisons in the internet (and do secretly sponsor the sites)!

        • 94
          ) Stanzhg
          September 9, 2014 at 3:48 am

          “there is a big and fast growing group of photographers…” Welll how big is big statistically in comparison to general population of all photographers in the world? maybe you can state the facts to make your argument becoming more valid…:)
          Btw Max, welcome to the 21st Century, welcome to the HD and 4k technology, where everything is sharp, clean, and colorful. For most modern people this image quality seem to be more pleasing to their eyes. If you still wanna live in the 20th century, by all means do that…:).

  8. 16
    ) Jay
    July 19, 2014 at 7:59 am

    It is amazing how everyone is chirping about the shutter sound being so much quieter. When I first shot with my new Pentax K-3, that was my first impression too. Glad Nikon is catching up!

    • 81
      ) Mike
      July 21, 2014 at 2:33 pm

      Typical Pentax owner. They feel so left out in the world that they have to take every little thing that seems an advantage and amp it up. Your K3, in 2014, finally, I say FINALLY, has decent AF. It’s still behind the times for sports focusing and tracking but better but only in the year 2014!

      • 82
        ) Jay
        July 21, 2014 at 7:12 pm

        Mike, at least you seem to have done your research on the K-3 just like I have with the Nikon D800/E/810. I wanted to buy one of these Nikons over the last two years, but I couldn’t get away from the fact that you are getting into bigger cameras and bigger lenses. I’m wanting to stay small. So it was either go mirror less, which I don’t think is quite there yet, or stick with Pentax and my small lenses until the mirror less cycle improves to point of changing over. I’m still intrigued by the technology that Nikon brings and can only hope that Ricoh can bring Pentax back to its original glory! With the K-3, Ricoh has brought some of it back with a crop sensor camera that Nikon left behind in the D300 series. Weather resistant and solid and with a very quite shutter!

  9. 18
    ) Lois Bryan
    July 19, 2014 at 9:15 am

    Hey Nasim … while I’m not in the market for the D800 series … sigh … I was very happy to find out about Capture NX-D. Don’t know what corners I’ve been sniffing around in that I missed this, but want to thank you profusely for the link. Downloaded and just processed a nice image and it did a lovely job. Anything that can get me away from the nonsense Adobe is doing right now is a plus. Thanks again!!

  10. 19
    ) KnightPhoto
    July 19, 2014 at 9:16 am

    Appreciate your efforts and particularly your analysis of the results, thanks Nasim!

  11. 20
    ) Francisco
    July 19, 2014 at 9:51 am

    Hi Nasim,
    I’m aware this is off topic,could you please help me out?
    Do you have a list of lenses that will not cause visible banding in the shadows at iso 3200 and up on the D4?
    My 50mm afs 1.4 G and 1.8G will cause some banding in the shadows when using iso above 3200,clearly visible at around 8000 iso.
    Under the same conditions with my afs 24-70 and 70-200 vrII the images don’t show this “problem”.
    DPReview used the afs 85mm 1.8G,so that one causes the same “electromagnetic interference”(?!),that i’m getting with the 50’s(f1.4 and f1.8).
    I’m mostly interested in knowing if the afs 85mm f1.4G,afs 14-24 f2.8 G and the afs 200-400 f4 vr I and II,will cause that type of interference with the D4.
    Thanks in advance,Francisco

    • 22
      ) Karen Grigoryan
      July 19, 2014 at 10:02 am

      Francisco, I have this banding with almost all lenses on D3s bodies and it happens only to couple of shots of the same sequence (in burst or just fast clicking)… Contacted Nikon several times about it and they said that it is normal and I am pulling shadows too much… I guess they just don’t want to admit it… Here is the crop from the corner: http://www.grigphoto.com/img/s1/v46/p954247372.jpg

      Kinda sad, but I have to live with it… Didn’t know though that D4 bodies are affected with this EMF issue too… :-(

      • 25
        ) Francisco
        July 19, 2014 at 10:16 am

        Karen,You can see it at http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d4s/7
        Just select raw,let’s say 12800 iso ,D4 .Check the upper left corner.
        My D3 does not have this(although it has blooming).
        Maybe because the barrel of the 24-70 and 70-200 are made of metal this “EMF” doesn’t go through(?!)
        Or the gold ring lenses have some different electronics/shielding(?!)

        • 26
          ) Karen Grigoryan
          July 19, 2014 at 10:27 am

          I guess it is different… On D3 body I didn’t have it but on both D3s bodies do… With 24-70 and 70-200 VRII as well, but again only when I pull shadows pretty hard and only on couple of shots from the sequence… Going a little easier on shadows makes those line almost invisible…

          • 51
            ) RIxPIx56
            July 20, 2014 at 2:34 am

            Hi Nasim,
            thank you for your great site and reviews. They are of interest to many people, but no-one has to read them there are plenty of other resources for the art of photographic imagery – so I’m keen to express support for what you do and your honest impressions. One observation – over the last few days I have had cause to doubt blind faith in Adobe too.
            I have been a Lightroom user for a few years and find it the best overall program, but I have also cause to be very disappointed that even in Lightroom 5.5 (CC) it cannot render colours of a mainstream camera properly. Certain tones/hues of the colour red from raw files are rendered ‘pink’ and quite extremely so from Nikon D7000 and D600 if you use the Adobe standard profile. It takes a great deal of work to bring them close, and never quite close enough to what you saw and the camera recorded in JPEG. This has nothing to do with monitor calibration because DxO Pro 9, and the proof, Capture NX-D, render these red colours perfectly (or near enough) on the same monitor, but Lightroom is way way off. I was plagued by this for months, and getting very frustrated, but only yesterday through an oblique reference in an answer on Adobe’s Lightroom Forum that I sought help on, did I think to check camera profile. Manually setting the camera profile to “cameral neutral” fixed it – but why Adobe, should I have to do this in Develop mode for every shot from a D600? The point is that it is easy to trust Adobe to have got it right, but in this case a 2 year old camera is rendered so wrong.
            Keep up the good work, your site is one of my favourites
            Regards

            • 64
              ) Baf
              July 20, 2014 at 11:04 pm

              RIxPIx56, I think that there is somewhere a setting in LR with the help of which you can apply your favourite profile on the import on your images. Ask if you cannot find it

            • 68
              ) Gromit44
              July 21, 2014 at 2:58 am

              Baf & RIxPIx56,

              Try the Import module – on the right there’s a dropdown called Apply During Import.

              If you add the Camera Neutral profile (or whichever one you prefer) to the appropriate folder** it should appear in the dropdown list.

              ** Which might be (I haven’t tried it) C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom

            • 91
              ) gregorylent
              August 2, 2014 at 9:43 am

              switching more and more to capture one for that reason .. plus some other cool things like gradient masking

  12. 21
    ) Karen Grigoryan
    July 19, 2014 at 9:55 am

    Hi Nasim,

    Can you please be so kind and shoot something RAW and sRAW with a totally opposite WB, like inside with tungsten lighting but WB set for sun (everything will be orange) or opposite – shoot outside and set WB for Tungsten (everything will be blue) and then quick recover it in ACR (WB dropper on known white area) and post all 3 shots – original (messed up), from RAW and from sRAW?

    That would tell us how RAW is sRAW in terms of WB recovery?

    Thank you in advance!!!

  13. 27
    ) Michael Podlusky
    July 19, 2014 at 10:34 am

    Thanks Nasim for your many reviews and help articles! What are your thoughts on new Capture NX-D compared to ViewNX or Capture NX? If we do not switch to newer cameras yet is changing to NXD worthwhile? I use D7100. Thank you!

  14. Profile photo of Muhammad Omer
    36
    ) Muhammad Omer
    July 19, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    It is so wonderful that photography life gets new articles everyday now. I visit this site whenever i access the internet. There was a time when a whole week would pass without any new articles but now it is absolutely wonderful to read new stuff everyday.

    • July 19, 2014 at 11:58 pm

      Muhammad,

      that’s our goal. Those times that you’ve mentioned – we were extremely busy back then. We still are a little, but things are moving forward swiftly, soon we will be able to write every day, perhaps even a couple of articles daily. :) You just wait.

  15. 38
    ) Steve
    July 19, 2014 at 3:17 pm

    Exchanged my D800 for D810, which arrived on Friday 18th. Boy what an improvement! Sharper, quicker and quieter; generally an improvement worth the extra.

    • 42
      ) Chuck
      July 19, 2014 at 3:48 pm

      Sharper? A camera makes photos sharper?

      • 44
        ) Phil Harris
        July 19, 2014 at 6:47 pm

        If the auto focus works better, then obviously yes, it can.
        My initial testing with the D810 has so far showed me that the auto focus success rate is very much improved over the D800.
        This means that probably 20% of my pictures are more accurately focused, therefore sharper.

    • 57
      ) celebrity photographer
      July 20, 2014 at 7:37 am

      Keep my d800e. …bought a d810 as the primary body. Ran some test with the nikon 24-70 and tamron 24-70. Noticed a considerable faster auto focusing on tbe d810 especially with the nikon lens. .observed a bit of hunting in low light scenarios compared to the d800e. Tamro 24 to 70 produced sharper images IMO but slowly in auto focusing. In initial observation thus far.

  16. 39
    ) George
    July 19, 2014 at 3:30 pm

    Great article Nasim.
    Thank you very much for your work !
    Waiting eagerly to see how it performs at tomorrows wedding and your initial thoughts.
    Thank you
    G.
    wwwIsaacImage.com

  17. 48
    ) David
    July 20, 2014 at 12:16 am

    Nasim,
    Nikon Tech Support informed me that my backed-up settings I have from my D800 (which I no longer own) is not compatible with the D810. So since I have to rebuild mine, I’d like to see what yours are for the D810. Would you mind sharing with us what your preferred settings are for the D810?
    Thanks!
    David

  18. 49
    ) Heiki
    July 20, 2014 at 1:29 am

    I find d8xx is good for tele’s to get better detailed and sharper birds or whatever is over there far away

    For everything else d700 is good enogh

  19. 50
    ) abhijeet chatterjee
    July 20, 2014 at 1:45 am

    I have a nikon d7100 with 18-200mm lens. I can not adjust at singal focus on AF-C it shifted other focus. When duel light shooting in high ISO 800-1200 .I got more noice in my image. Please help me.

  20. 58
    ) Bryan
    July 20, 2014 at 9:09 am

    One of the issues that the D800/e had/has is white dots showing up on long high ISO exposures. This is documented in many places on the Internet and detailed here: http://scottreither.com/blogwp/2012/07/01/nikon-d800-e-long-exposure-issues-problems-2/. Using LENR eliminates the white dots. And there are other workarounds, but my biggest disappointment with the D800 is the white dots.

    Does the D810 show this white dot issue?

  21. 59
    ) Shalil
    July 20, 2014 at 10:51 am

    Very interesting. This technical article on noise, ISO, and resolution has garnered more comments and an astounding 595 FB likes in stark comparison to two very good articles on photography itself written by two talented and up-and-coming photographers in Alpha Whiskey and John Sherman.

    John’s article, “The Weston Dream”, has thus far garnered 32 comments and 186 FB likes, while Alpha’s article, “Choosing Black and White”, has received a mere 31 comments and 156 FB likes!

    There is something disturbingly wrong with this picture. How about showing some more respect to these authors/photographers on real aspects of photography? Or do you care more about pixel peeping, noise, resolution, and software programs?

    What is wrong with you people???

  22. Profile photo of Peter Taylor
    60
    ) Peter Taylor
    July 20, 2014 at 10:56 am

    I am an enthusiastic amateur, so my comments below may not be entirely relevant to those of you who are experts and they are certainly not backed by technical analysis or the competence you might be used to on this excellent site. But then, when I look at images and like what I see, perhaps that is worth sharing to those uncertain, like I was, as to whether to jump to the D810. From my history in using a Nikon D80, D 300 (great camera), D3X (great, totally solid, but expensive) and D3S; back in November 2013 I bought a D800. I respect those who say pixel count doesn’t matter but I can only report that I can see a huge and beneficial improvement between even the D3X and D800. (I put pictures on the web but also print A4 to A2+) Clarity, sharpness, colour and dynamic range all seem so much better to my untrained eyes. Normally I would never buy a newly released camera, especially after the problems of the early D600 and D800 cameras. But at my age, you can’t wait too long – I may not be around in the future! So against all advice I traded in my impressive, to me, D800 for the D810. Why? Because reports that the D800E was even better than the D800 made me think the D810 might be the best yet.

    So the camera arrived Friday. Storms etc have kept me at home photographing flowers etc in our garden. Useful, as I have earlier work to compare these new images with. Also, unusually, I have so far just used a new Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens and my older Sigma 105mm Macro lens. I have Nikon glass which I will use later. Well, to my great relief, the camera worked out of the box. I like the shape and handling ( I have added my MB D12 Battery Grip, saved over from my D800, which I find helpful) the low ISO 64 and the new shutter, which just sounds so much better! (Non-technical response!) The images with the Sigma 35mm are so clear, very, very sharp and full of colour – taken using the TIFF file format as LR and Photoshop are yet to update to accept the D810 RAW format. My normal workflow is almost redundant as the images out of the camera are superb. Is this TIFF doing something or am I looking at a real improvement in quality? Images from the 105 lens require a little more work and more sharpening but the results are so encouraging. Just so sharp and clear. I cannot say I have tested the D810 to destruction and I do get the odd error message which is easily overcome, but so far it works well and the results, to my untrained eye, are outstanding and worth the cost and risk of purchase. Let’s hope this positive experience continues. Also, I am using Live View much more. Seems so simple to operate on the D810 and works really well.

    So there we are. Did I make the right decision to move from D800 to D810. Yes I think so based on evidence through the lens and on the screen, so far. But be assured the D800 and I assume the D800E are still great cameras so if you want to wait a little more there is, in my humble opinion, nothing to be anxious about. Nikon clearly doesn’t get everything right but, perhaps, on this occasion it has.

  23. 61
    ) Chris Cullen
    July 20, 2014 at 12:14 pm

    Thanks for the info Nasim.
    Got my D810 2 days ago too. Sharpness wonderful and AF superb.
    After your interesting article recently about ISO performances (and the suggestion that quality is at its absolute best when sticking to whole 1EV ISO steps (e,g, ISO100 / 200 / 400 etc).
    The D810 starts with base ISO64 but the next ‘whole EV’ step it does (if set that way) is ISO100.
    Now I’m note quite sure which ISO’s are interpolated and which are not……
    (also interesting that my 3rd gen iPad can read the D810 RAW files but not Lightroom 5 at the time of writing).
    Looking forward to more, grateful as ever!
    Chris

  24. 65
    ) Gromit44
    July 21, 2014 at 2:32 am

    Is there such a thing as an interpolated ISO?

  25. 66
    ) EJPB
    July 21, 2014 at 2:36 am

    I like this review. To cut it short, it proofs that the view on a camera’s performance is 100% depending on the RAW conversion. If you’re not using the best suited convertor for a particular camera the complete premium might go a away and the results might even be below par compared to older or cheaper models that are using the very best convertor. It will become even more visible at higher ISOs, pictures containing more noise/grain, skin tones. And here comes my statement: I do not understand why the world is turning to LR as centre of the universe. For quite a few cameras LR is not showing the best results. For some like Fuji the RAW conversions are even mediocre. And even for the D800, you’ll notice a serious difference in quality vs. Capture NX-D, in particular for more noisy pictures. In these cases, Capture NX-D even performs better than the Nik-based NX2 tools or DxO. No, I don’t like Capture NX-D, but I just want to express that if you want to exploit all that extra resolution, sharpness, color and noise performance, the answer lies much more in tools you are using than the camera than you’ll think and don’t assume that LR is the universal answer.

    • 69
      ) Gromit44
      July 21, 2014 at 3:05 am

      NX-D performs better than NX2 – really?

      Not in my experience it doesn’t.

      • 74
        ) EJPB
        July 21, 2014 at 7:13 am

        Yest it is… at higher ISO values. In skin I can see coloured noise while in Capture NX-D it isn’t there @ more detail. Capture NX-D is based on Silkypix (a software I really hate to use, to be honest) but the optical/technical qualities are also for f.i. Fuji outstanding.

        • 75
          ) Gromit44
          July 21, 2014 at 7:25 am

          An unedited NEF should appear exactly the same in both programmes – there should be no difference in noise levels before making an edit.

          Any noise reduction that is then done as an NX-D edit can also be done as a Capture NX2 edit.

          CNX2 is a far superior programme.

          • 77
            ) EJPB
            July 21, 2014 at 8:45 am

            Have you tried it? No edit, just straight from the camera to the disk. Zoom in – export, whatever you want but don’t touch anything of the settings. The core Capture NX-D engine performs better than ANY other program, not only in noise mgm’t but also detail that is being revealed. I admit, it is not difficult to find any competing software that has better ergonomics and controls than Capture NX-D has… but this is the reality. How sure are you that VNX2/CNX2 engine is delivering you the best RAW conversion? Versus any other program? Before I had a Fujifilm X I didn’t want to believe this was possible. This camera with its controversial CFA did me try a lot of things… including with my Nikon stuff and… same story here. I tried all major RAW convertors and it is incredible what the difference can be. Not the biggest names get the best scores for me.

            • 79
              ) Gromit44
              July 21, 2014 at 9:38 am

              Of course I’ve tried it – I installed the beta NX-D the day it came out and I’ve been trying it ever since (now on v1.0.0). I’ve had nineteen versions of Capture NX & Capture NX2 and there is no way NX-D is better at noise reduction or anything else. They may improve it at some point but since they’ll never get rid of those pesky sidecar files I’ll stick with NX2. I’ve used Lightroom 4 to 5.5, Photoshop CS4 to CC 2014 and Capture One Pro 6 to 7 – and CNX2 is still my raw converter. Nothing matches Photoshop for complex editing so I’ll stick with that too.

  26. 67
    ) Gordon Longmead
    July 21, 2014 at 2:52 am

    I would be interested in hearing from anyone using photography equipment who would like to write an honest review for the Peoples Photographic Society magazine – World Image – , there is no payment of fees, the magazine, like the Society, is free and is supported by interested people who also submit articles for free.

  27. 70
    ) Stefano
    July 21, 2014 at 6:11 am

    Hi Nasim,
    could you tell us more on the AF accuracy and reliability of the new D801 compared to D800?
    Would you kindly test the D810 for the infamous left-focus issue?
    Thanks for your help.
    Stefano

    • July 21, 2014 at 6:12 am

      Stefano, better AF (noticeably better) and no left AF focus issue. Tested it on a single unit so far, but I have not discovered any flaws so far. No memory card writing issue either! All this will be covered in the upcoming review, which I am working on :)

      • 76
        ) Stefano
        July 21, 2014 at 7:32 am

        Thanks Nasim, also for the celerity of the answer!
        I’m just an amateur, but after two years of usage I still feel that AF of my D800E is not reliable at 100%, and a significant improvement in this area probably would convince me to make the upgrade….
        I’ll wait your review for the final decision!
        Ciao

        Stefano

  28. 72
    ) celebrity photographer
    July 21, 2014 at 6:38 am

    Nasim
    what lens are you using on your tests…..I have dried all my lenses and find the tamron 24-70 struggles a bit with the nikon d810. .pls advise.

    • July 21, 2014 at 6:44 am

      Haven’t used the Tamron 150-600mm yet, but will do later this week. So far have used Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (primarily), 70-200mm f/2.8G, 24mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.8G. Will be shooting with the 14-24mm and 24-70mm lenses pretty soon too.

  29. 78
    ) Travis
    July 21, 2014 at 9:07 am

    The D810 is an amzaing cam….my first ff cam…love it so far!

    Just missing the built in wifi, gps and the use or decision from nikon for one storage format cf or sd cards…..dont understand why not they improved the sd card slot to uhs II standard like the fuji xt1 has….would be the right standard for the high resolution cam, bigger data, faster transfer of bigger files, faster reading and writing etc…

    If you dont want to spend too much money on the nikon wt 5a (@Nasim would love if you could test or confirm if you already knows that the wt5a for d4s is recommendable without any hesitation/issues for the d810 as well….) you could buy the TP-LINK TL-MR3040 at amazon for $35, and use free app qDslrDashboard (Android, Windows, Mac), you will have the wireless connection to any Nikon and Canon cameras with ton of useful functions: advanced custom bracketing, timelapse photography… You could set Raw+Small Jpeg to have faster jpeg transfer to you device for preview. The qDslrDashboard is far more function than CCP2. I forgot to mention that you need to flash the openWRT firmware for the TPlink which explain clearly at qDslrDashboard….

    I think the d7200/d400 and then the successor of the d610 next spring probably will have the wiif and gps built in for the first time in a ff cam (nikon history)!

    Excited on your D810 review Nasim!

  30. 84
    ) Hoeras
    July 22, 2014 at 1:11 am

    I am coming to grips with mine, but have had one disappoint(?) and that is the Nikon Grip MB-D12 that worked fine in the D800E, when fitted to D810 it does not see the battery fitted to the Grip. Very odd, the Grip works OK except no point putting a battery inside the Grip and that kind of defeats half thr purpose of having the Grip, which is Nikon and not 3rd party, so it should work.

    I am ‘on the road’ at the moment and yet to see the photos on a decent screen – but I got some good looking photos on the D810 screen that should come out looking really nice (forest with lakes full of green algae that is amazing in colour intensity), but it looks like I have to d/load Nikon’s software until Adobe catches up (I am on their CC Photographer plan) and get to see what I have really got. Still getting used to the camera…

  31. 85
    ) Hoeras
    July 22, 2014 at 1:13 am

    I have to say it feels snappier and less sluggish than the D800E so far. The buffer is also a lot bigger I suspect.

  32. 86
    ) Randy Stephens
    July 22, 2014 at 1:05 pm

    Has anyone had to calibrate the D810, especially on the 800mm VR and 500mm VR? I did a quick check and the focus seemed to be right on. I went out and photographed some hawks in very dim light requiring 1/125 to 1/250 sec at F7.1 semi hand held, balanced over a truck window, and the photos did not seem sharp. Photos with a tripod taken on a Focus Tune target at ISO2000 seemed sharp although I didn’t have time to do the complete Focus Cal procedure. Any info will be appreciated.

    Randy

  33. 89
    ) A Ronald Gallant
    July 25, 2014 at 10:01 am

    Question: For the D810, suppose a choice between setting the Auto ISO range to 64-1600 or to 100-1600 for hand-held shooting. Minimum shutter speed is not an issue: I have that set to twice the focal length and use VR above 70mm because I don’t have steady hands. The high end is not an issue; I change that while shooting if need be. So, which of the two Auto ISO settings will give me better image quality on average?
    Ron

  34. 90
    ) Gromit44
    July 25, 2014 at 10:42 am

    64 – but the difference is so tiny you won’t see it.

  35. 92
    ) Vaughan
    August 17, 2014 at 4:57 pm

    I purchased a Nikon D810 in July. I have two iMac computers in different locations. Both iMacs are OS 10.9.4, both have Photoshop CS6 loaded with the most recent PS update. I loaded the new Adobe Camera Raw 8.6 & DNG Converter into both computers. One computer reads the D810 files, the other does not. I have re-loaded the Camera Raw update twice into the computer that will not read the D 810 files. I have re-started multiple times. That same computer will read my Nikon D800E files but refuses to read the the D810 files. Any suggestions?
    Thanks,
    Vaughan

  36. 95
    ) SoaringBird
    September 11, 2014 at 3:42 pm

    Hi Nasim,
    Have you noticed the D810 red glow at high ISO settings. This problem is at it worst using ISO 51200 but can also be seen as low as ISO 12800. The easiest way to see this problem is to take a picture with the lens cap still on. You will see red glow along the picture edges and especially at the bottom edge. This has ruined many of my nature shots after sunset.
    I used to have the D800E and I don’t remember seen that problem on it.
    Is that a problem unique to my own copy of the D810 or is it on all of them?
    Thanks.

  37. 97
    ) Hoeras
    September 16, 2014 at 4:41 am

    Now we have a new latest official release of ACR 8.6 – does anybody have an opinion and is it now up to Nikon’s RAW converter?

Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of the published material.

Leave a Comment