Some tests seem to find out other facts, like D800 nor D4 can match 5DII (and by that I mean sites that are neutral and don’t have like 7 Nikon and two Sony tests on them… Besides, it’s plain logics and physics. Nice work to get such a great 36MP camera, buet now C en N switch sides: Nikon now has the highest pixel count but also the highest noise that comes with that. Period.
Actually yourt, noise is tricky. The only true measure of noise is one that is integrated across the entire sensor. Assume that the camera is a black box and we know nothing about how many mp it has. The only real objective measure of noise, sharpness etc is obtained by capturing an image and then enlarging that image to a fixed size for evaluation. Same image, enlarged to the same size, taken on different cameras….now compare. What happens is that as you combine pixels from a large mp image down to a specific size, the noise gets averaged out. On a pixel level the D800 has higher noise than several cameras, but for an image of a fixed size the D800 looks like it has the best IQ. The physics are that smaller photos sites require greater amplification to achieve a sensitivity that is equivalent to a given ISO level. That amplification also amplifies the noise that is inherent in electronic circuitry. However cicruit design, circuit layout, micro lens design, power supply design, and shielding all impact noise. So while it is physics, since the electronics have huge impact on noise, you cannot draw a one to one correspondence between sensor size and noise. (My D70 has huge pixels and way more pixel level noise than the D800) What the DXOMark tests show is that Nikon has reduced the pixel size while simultaneously improving the electronics thus providing a cleaner signal to the A/D converter. Nikon has achieved quite an accomplishment with the D800, it has the best IO on the market. But for many, base ISO IQ is not as critical as other considerations…The best camera is what is best for buyer and takes into consideration frame rate, jpeg processing, max ISO, what glass you own, what brand you like and what color you want your lens bodies to be (as well as IQ).
You make some good points. Certainly reduced noise in the electronics is very important. I believe the DA function is integrated into the D800 sensor. In my work I actually deal with noise factors in electronics. Why we are talking digital cameras, noise is actually an analog contamination of the digital content.
On the noise comparison between 5D3 and D800: The sensor MP count difference and the same FX physical size, it is difficult to compare noise between two cameras with such large differences in MP.
Comparing noise at 1:1 then becomes misleading.
A number of comparisons I have seen, between 5D3 and D800, used 50mm F1.4 lenses on both cameras. Under those circumstance the D800 will be at a disadvantage viewed 1:1. We need to examine the same size physical area of both sensors and that means we must compare the D800 with 5D3 with the D800 having 62.8% more pixels. So rather than compare 1:1 – we should be 1.628:1 – and they are not doing that.
So to make it clear, the image from the 5D3 should be viewed at 1:1 and compared with the D800 at 1.628:1 – otherwise the comparison will favour the 5D3 unfairly.
But adjusting by that ratio, we end up comparing the same amount of light falling on the same amount of physical area of the sensor on BOTH cameras.
One thing that is also emerging, and this to me is becoming as important to me as noise, that resizing image from a large MP to smaller MP count is truly a forte’ of the D800. This means the extra resolution amounts to greater IQ when rescaled down on computer screens etc, which is important as we view images on screen much more than in print. That excites me as the extra resolution isn’t just seen when we print the images.
Yourt, I agree with Eric below – you should always make comparisons at the same print size. 100% crop comparisons are downright wrong, simply because one can be printed at a much bigger size. If we solely look at the pixel level, then modern cameras with the largest pixels will always have much cleaner and less noisier output.
Nasim, a suggestion or request. Many are seeking which lenses to buy for use with D800. Many of us long-term (or not-so-long-term) Nikon users have an array of older AF and AF-D Nikon lenses. I for example own ‘the cream machine” 85 1.4 AF-D, 28-105D, excellent 180mm F/2.8 AF. It seems that you do your testing with the most recent premium AF-S G lenses. However, it is quite common for one to own a $900 street-price 85 1.4D and not $2000 85 1.4G lens. Do you have access to, or can you get access to, and, when you test lenses, also test with other older popular Nikon (and possibly third-party) lenses? Many want to know, will D800 work with my existing FX lenses, or will have to upgrade. Nikon has made excellent lenses for F-mount since 1959. I used to own 50mm F/1.2 Ai-S lens which is quite good, for example. In any case, have you considered also using some of the older lenses, or you insist only test with the holy trinity plus 24G, 35G, 85G?
David, will definitely test the D800 with some older glass, but not at the moment – it will have to wait until I get a hold of those lenses…most likely will be testing with the D800e
My long awaited D800 is now here and i am very happy. The only lenses I own are the AFS 50mm 1.4G and the more than 25 years old AI-S 105mm 1.8. I used both on a D7000. The 50 mm performs good. The old 105 mm performs expressively good and is very sharp. But this lens has two problems, first is when shooting against light and second is that it has no AF. But this two problems are not a D800 issue. After one day testing, I ordered immediately two new Nikkor lenses: 85 mm 1.4G ED ann 70-200 mm 2.8 vr II. The 14-24 2.8 G ED will follow. I think the best camera and lenses I owned ever in my 30 years of photography life. Now I am not dreaming from a Pentax D645 or Hasselblad 40 or Phase One … I ask now myself, is there any competitor in the 35mm DSLR market? Whats with the brand that makes so ugly designed collani cameras. Nothing – only an expensive upgrade for everytime JPEG shooting photographers ;) They only need more high iso instead of megapixels because of shooting only in low light so nobody can see what ugly camera they have and less megapixel so nobody can see the details of picture damages that the aggresively camera corrections produces in JPEGs. Oh oh .. will this comment be deleted?
Nasim thanks for this good review. I have no problems about any pc performance with the D800 files. My iMac i5 with “only” 8GB RAM and Aperture 3 performs fast enough. But you are right, 16 MB would run better. RAM is cheap enough to upgrade, so no problems here …
I ordered my D800 one week after introduction from B&H, and of course, it has not yet shipped. I can wait. However, I am interested in one clarification: I have heard and read that the 24mm f3.5 tilt and shift lens will not work on the D800. This seems counterintuitive to me and I can’t fathom a single technical reason why this might be the case. I wondered if you had tested this lens on the D800 to ease my mind.
Thank you for that superb demonstration! I can certainly live with the minor rotation limitation, insofar as this will not affect 99% of my shots. I hated the thought of having to give up my favorite lens.
Thanks so much for your hands on review. You have helped take some the mystery out of the resolution/iso performance of this camera that so bothers many folks out there. The fact that the D800 has almost the same pixel density as the D7000 helps to explain a lot. It is all really about the total size of the sensor that determines performance. Otherwise why have such a large camera and lenses? Almost by accident the true 35mm format is coming to life like never before. Medium format cameras will always have an edge just due to the size of the sensor. But what they do not have going for them is cost, technology advances (market is too limited to afford the R&D necessary to keep up with Nikon and Canon) , and size. The 35mm format has been around so long that there are literally millions of lenses out there some of which are excellent.
Hi Nasim – I am having second thoughts about the d800 e that I ordered. I was using a Nikon d3s which I loved but also ended up buying the d3x because I wanted the higher MP. I shoot only landscapes which are cropped and enlarged quite a bit for my business. Everything I shoot is on a tripod and usually with a remote. My favorite lenses are my nikon 14-24 and my nikon 24-70. For this type of shooting do you think I would benefit a great deal with the d800e or do you think that my current cameras or good enough. I am just not sure if all the new upgrades in the d800e will really help my work. I would love to get your thoughts on this matter. Thank you in advance for your help .
While not having used either camera, to me you seem the prototype of the photographer who would benefit from the D800E. – You shoot only on tripod, eliminating any handheld issues with the high pixel sensor – You shoot only landscapes, eliminating moire issues with the D800E’s lack of (or rather “inverted”?) AA filter – You regularly crop and enlarge photos, thus having great use of the 36MP sensor – Your two mentioned lenses are razor sharp, and should bring the best out of your D800E – In short, based on your shooting preferences, I personally cannot see any camera today more suited to your needs than the D800E (providing it is indeed identical to the D800, minus AA filter)
Thank you Terje for your input. I sometimes seem to go too overboard trying to get the best I can for my work and sometimes there isn’t really that much of an advantage in the end. However, this time I do agree with you and think that the added pixel count and upgraded sensor or things that I cannot overlook. So I think that I will get the d800e that I ordered. I always have my d3x for photos where there might be a moire issue.
Again than you for your advice, I really do appreciate it
Be advised, however: whether you’ll experience substantial improvement on your work by switching from the D3x to D800E will be debatable, and only you can judge whether the upgrade is worth it for you.
I stand by my assumption, though: based on your description of your photography style, the D800E will most likely be the best camera out there.
Jack, I am with Terje on this one – whether the upgrade is worth it for you is really your judgement. The D800E will give you better pixel-level sharpness, more resolution (more cropping opportunities) and more dynamic range. These three are enough to warrant an upgrade in my opinion.
Hi Nasim, It’s a very nice article and Thanks you so much. Btw do you think old prime like 50 mm 1.8D will perform well on D800 or should I upgrade to 50mm 1.8G ? I am not a professional but just a serious hobbyist and I will be getting my D800 soon.
Hi Duwa, I’m not Nasim but I think you should upgrade.
The 50mm 1.8G is a brilliant lens, in some ways even better than the more expensive 1.4G version (that I adored shooting with). I’d highly recommend upgrading considering the kind of resolution we’re talking about.
Would love one, but my marriage and bank account would be my worst enemies if the inflated price Australians are going to see it at was spent on this beaut camera. My Nikon D90 will just have to do…
Dear Nasim, Thanks for listening to our “pleading” ;) Great review & looking forward to the update on using it with birds. I am about to pick up one (just became available in Malaysia) to replace my D7000. Excited.
thanks again. I have a question: for wildlife and birding, one ‘always’ lacks mm’s. I thought of replacing my D300 for the D800 in DX, just to have the 1.5 crop. Would that be a waste too (p 10)? In other words- would it be better to shoot FF and crop the image itself?
Hey Wouter, Its not Hasim, but think about this. The only thing you get from the D800 and a DX crop is a smaller file size right out of the camera. Cropping the FX image to a DX size on your computer will give you pretty much the same result, but…. If you are shooting in FX mode and can fill the frame with your subject, the resultant image will be much nicer than what you will get by filling the DX frame. Since the 1.5X crop factor doesn’t really give you any reach advantage on the 800 (just fewer pixels), why not use the new AF system and consider a TC-20E III teleconverter? (providing your telephoto is compatible) If you are only going to shoot in DX mode, why not get a D7000, or better yet, wait for the D400? Going from the D300 to the D800 in DX mode is basically the same as going from a 12.3mp sensor to a 15.4mp sensor. You’d get more from the 16mp D7000.
Wouter, Eric’s suggestions make much sense. You’d see a slight increase in resolution only. Regarding the D7000 instead, I think it differently: the D7000 is a very nice camera with an incredible sensor, but it lacks in build, and especially in the Autofocus department. It simply is not reliable as the old 3500, or the new advanced 3500; just no contest. For this reason only I’d buy the D800, which would allow you to shoot even at F8 with autofocus. It should prove still reliable and relatively fast even with a 300F4 + TC1.7.
The trouble with the DX line is that you get either AF & build (D300) or Image quality (D7000). But not both… yet.
Hi Lorenzo, Thanks for your comment. You are 100% right. I own a D7000 with DX 17-55 2.8, DX 35 1.8 and 70-200 2.8 VR II incl. a TC-17. I am totally pleased with the image quality but the AF performance is simply is poor. It is still not reliable. Sometimes everything is ok and for some reason other pictures have poor sharpness. The camera was twice at the Nikon Service point. But I think it is a general problem, that, of course, is only obvious if you use your lenses e.g. at 2.8 with a small depth-of-field. You will not see a big problem at 5.6 or 8. And before someone writes that it is not the camera’s fault but mine, then please explain why pictures taken with live view and contrast AF are ALWAYS perfectly sharp under the same conditions. I agree that a D7000 owner has only the possibility the “downgrade” the image quality by buying a more reliable D300s or to upgrade to a D800 / D4. The D800 has the advantage that I can use my DX 17-55 2.8 for some time and shooting in DX mode at 16 MP with a little bit better ISO performance compared to the D7000 and also with some more dynamic range. I hope the AF performance is really better with the D800…
Stefan It sounds like you may have an issue with AF and your lenses. To explain: During manufacture both camaera body and lenses are subject to certain manufacturing tolerences. The AF module assumes that eveything is in tolerance. However when you combine a camera and a lens, the tolerances can stack such that the two together out outside of tolerances. At small apertures, the DoF masks this effect but at large apertures with fast lenses, the shallow DoF cand result in photos that are out of focus at the intended subject. Since composing in live view uses the focus at the image plane, Liveview gives proper focus whereas the phase detect AF module does not. Nikon has provided a solution for this problem in the “AF fine tune” feature found at the bottom of the “Setup” menu. You can use this feature to adjust each lens you own for optimal focus. I use a product called LensAlign available from: michaeltapesdesign.com/lensalign.html But you can do it on your own with a yardstick for a whole lot cheaper. The D7000 will recognize each lens and apply the calibration you have entered. (The camera cannot recognize different copies of the same lens however.)
So, Nikon could take your camera, test it and find everything just fine. The camera could be just fine and the lenses could be just fine and yet the combination could be out.
The problem you are experiencing can occur with the D800 as well. The problem is probably not in the AF module, but in the camera / lens combination. No matter which camera you use, in order to obtain optimum focus fine tuning the AF for your lenses should offer an improvement.
I bought the d800 and used it in 1.2 and 1.5 crop with my 300 f2.8 and TC 1.4 and TC 2.0, it is a waste of money, the tendency to pick up blur and ongoing focus issues, I decided to sell and buy a D700 and keep going with my D300s, I will wait for aD400 or when I can get a D3s or D4 used. The D800 is great for studio, landscape etc, some wildlife shooters use it but maybe my skills lack. I don’t like the slow shutter, massive files and slow workflow. I never use video and love the D700 IQ, I can print poster size and my market is very happy with the IQ. I think Nikon has skipped a generation in the lack of a 16 to 24 mp Pro DX and FX camera that would fill the gap between D700 and D800 ie a D4 in D700/D800 body with high frame rate and focus system with D800 dual card system.
Yes, it is always better to shoot in full frame and crop your images later, if needed. If you need the speed for wildlife (FPS), then wait for the D400.
Once again thank you for a wonderfully informative website. I shoot mainly wildlife in Africa. I find the Nikon 300mm 2.8 VR a very good focal length and speed with the D800 for most animals. It is more transportable and hand-holdable than the 200-400 F4 so I’ve chosen the attributes of the 300mm 2.8 over the benefits of zooming. For birding however, 300mm is often not long enogh. I have 1.4 and 1.7 TCs and am considering the TC-20E iii as well but was wondering if cropping from the 36MP would get similar or even better results than using teleconverters? I thought that with the flexibility for cropping that the D800 provides, the teleconverters with the 300mm 2.8 may not be necessary. I would highly value your opinion here.
Crappy article! I really am having a hard time wrapping my mind around why everyone is so intent on making comparisons between the D800 and other cameras by down sampling the D800 images. This is not an accurate comparison. What is going to happen when brand X camera comes out, is 38Mpx, and blows the D800 away for high ISO? Are we still going to down sample and say, “see, its still just as good as brand X.” Nobody ever compared the D700 to a 5Mpx camera, they didn’t have to because it was readily apparent at full sample size the D700 was awesome. Signal to noise ratio is the only unbiased, accurate and truly meaningful metric for comparing sensors. See for yourself, go out to DXomark and compare the D700 “Full SNR” to the D800. What you’ll find is that the D700 comfortably outperforms the D800 in this specific category. I’m not knocking the D800, it is an awesome camera. However, let’s stop playing games and making excuses for the areas where it doesn’t quite rise to the occasion. I’ll be the first to stand up and say it, “The king is not wearing any clothes!”
How very eloquent. I fail to see how this (plainly very thorough and well written) article has invited or warranted any profanity in response. The only thing that really matters to real photographers is how the same image looks when compared on different cameras, and that’s exactly what’s being compared here.
“This is not an accurate comparison. What is going to happen when brand X camera comes out, is 38Mpx, and blows the D800 away for high ISO? Are we still going to down sample and say, ”
I would assume he would not, because then it would be a fair comparison. What is not fair is compare without downsampling the image to the size of the current competitors and the D800 arises to the occasion. If Canon produce a 36mp camera that produces less noise, I will be the first to say the King is not wearing cloths. If you increase the size of say a 12mp Nikon three times I would have to believe the noise would be bigger thus easier to see. Upsampling also increases softness, is that fair to the smaller camera? I think it is only fair to downsample both images and equally sharpen for any meaningfull comparison.
Come on really? If you have two cameras and want to know which makes better prints you are not going to print one photo at 8×10 and one at 13×19 to compare cameras. That would be absurd. I’m going to print both at 13×19 to compare which is better. Hellooooooo McFly?
Darren, if you want to print your images much bigger than usually, you are right, no doubt! The question is there is no reason to buy this camera with 36 million pixels, if you are going to downsample all your images to 12mp (to reduce noise) and print at the same size you always did with D700.
Yes, it’s really superior, it’s a killer sensor, but again, … Do I (and not only me, I’m sure) need a camera with this sensor if I… reserve about 1/3 of my images I shoot, print less than 0,1% of them at 20 x 30 for the maximum size, do not shoot video at all, and never use crop for recomposition? I think there is no reason to spend much more time managing terabytes of digital information waste (which is a real problem), even there is a very small difference in DR for JPG output:/
I forget to mention that any image taken by D800 even in low ISO like 200 has a noise, easily remarkable at 100% in very defocused and uniform color areas! And, of course, it disappears after downsampling. Thus it has more resolution/details with a little better DR for JPG, but you still have to downsample images to get the “same quality” for 100% view.
Levon, you always downsample images when publishing them online or elsewhere. Why worry about 100% pixel level performance? A high resolution sensor gives you the flexibility to have clean images through downsampling and print large when needed.
Levon, agreed, but the D800 gives you the option to reduce noise if there is too much of it, or allow you to print much larger 36 MP files at low ISO levels – something you cannot do with the D700. If you do not print or crop, then the D700 is good enough for you…
Thanks Nasim!) I just wanted somebody like you to prove that D700 is good enough for somebody like me. Your are right, we always downsample images for the web, that’s why I hate my backup HDD, and do not want to upgrade the camera for resolution (hope people won’t stone me). Nothing against this article and even against D800. Very nice article as always and great camera!
To me, it does not matter if comparison is made by down sampling or up scaling, say D700 images to D800 size. Either way (correct me if I am wrong), a camera with a higher resolution is likely to have an upper hand. I am not sure if comparing the signal to noise ratio is an accurate comparison. It is probably as useful as comparing down sampling images. May be, one needs to run a few statistical tests (!!!) like standard error to provide a statistically valid comparison.
In short, we need a common ground to compare different cameras.
While I understand your frustration, I must disagree because down sampling is valid and here’s why: When comparing FX sensors, you have a piece of silicon of the same size for all sensors. Throw away specs like megapixels, pixel level noise etc. because those specs deal with the pixels, not the image produced. In order to do a comparison of sensors, what we should be interested in is the output image quality. What down sampling does is to treat the various cameras as if the were black boxes…the specs don’t matter, all that is being evaluated is the camera’s ability to produce an image of size X. Since the advances being evaluated are associated with the performance of a piece of silicon of a given size, then the only way to evaluate the relative quality of those chunks of silicon is with an output image of a fixed size as well. For the evaluation of silicon sensors of a specific size, the incident light (fstop and shutter speed), ISO (amplifier gain) and the output size must all be held constant. Any sensor comparison that does not use a fixed output size for all sensors being compared is of dubious value when trying to understand real world comparative performance. So in my opinion, downsizing is necessary.
Dtex, downsampling is the ONLY proper way to compare sensors with different resolutions. If you only judge sensor performance at pixel level, then the camera with larger pixels is always going to win. Why don’t we then just go back in resolution and introduce a 5 MP sensor that will have 1 million+ ISO? Nothing will ever come close to it in terms of pixel performance. But gladly, we are moving in the opposite direction – more pixels with better ISO performance. TVs, monitors, iPads and other electronics demand more resolution and this will only increase going forward.
What if we have a higher resolution camera tomorrow? We will be downsampling images from it when comparing to the D800, just like we are downsampling D800 images when comparing it to the D700. At the end of the day, it is all about the print size – why do you think it is fare to compare a 12 MP print to a 36 MP one?
I’m seeing a lot of crosshatch moire on the blue Austin Powers dvd in many of the test samples from the D800.. why couldn’t the d800’s low pass filter correct this? this would look worse coming from the D800 E
Yes, I saw those too… those diagonal lines are more visible at low ISOs (100-400), but they start to disappear from 800 onwards. From the posted samples, only 5D Mark III has them too (at low ISOs). Maybe this is how that DVD cover is in reality and the other cameras just couldn’t show/render this (fine) detail? And at high ISO this is also lost with the new cameras? I hope Nasim will be more clear on this matter in his updated review. Thanks!
oh ok thanks for pointing that out Roman If that’s texture, then that’s a heck of a camera to pick up such detail so well whereas the older cameras couldn’t ;-)
You forgot to mention the Graphics board as an important upgrade component for an aging computer. Also Nikon has a complete listing on their website, of suitable lenses for the D800. Also many of us DX users who have been using FX Telephotos will be losing some horse power when go FX. Do you recommend an extender, over DX mode on an FX camera or cropping in software to regain telephoto capability? Thanks for your insight. Alan
Alan, cropping definitely works as in the case of DX cameras. But adding a teleconverter actually increases the effective focal length, so you could get closer to the action, plus you still have the ability to crop!
Your additional horsepower is a myth. When you are shooting in DX on the D800 you are only using 15.4 mega pixels as compared with the 36 mp in FX. Why would you want to do that. You are only fooling yourself. Otherwise shoot with the D7000 16mp. It is DX and you won’t be wasting your money buying an FX camera you won’t really be using and you can put the extra cash to lenses.
There is a difference in Image Quality (IQ) between the D800 and the D7000. Yes, the image size is approx the same if you shoot the D800 in DX mode, however the IQ is much better. You could shoot as a 36MP file, and then downsize to 16MP, however if the following conditions apply, then it makes sense to shoot in DX mode. 1) You are at the maximum focal length of your lens; 2) The amount of image you will keep is less than or equal to the DX size.
Now you might say, get closer. However that is not always possible. If you are sitting in the end-zone at a football game, and the play is at the other end, just how much of the image will you use? My experience in sports is that frequently I only keep a small percentage of the image, even when I am zoomed out to the max (I use a 80-400 lens on horse polo, shooting from mid-field). I just received my D800 on May 11th, and have started experimenting with it, mostly shooting in the 1:2 mode (25MP). Having used a D3X for years, the file size is almost the same, and I know that my customers seldom buy a print larger than 8 x 10, so I gain a small speed advantage (5 FPS over 4 FPS), while still able to deliver prints the same size as before, and can now shoot in 14-bit NEF (the frame rate of a D3X in 14-bit is terrible). Better IQ, same frame rate as before, higher bit mode, and not much increase in file size (storage needs).
When I shoot other things (landscapes), then I will change to FX mode. A camera is a tool, and the D800 is very versatile (the Swiss Army knife of cameras). How we, the users, plan to utilize it will vary upon our needs and situations. Yes, the amount of image is smaller, but so what. If the unshot portion of the image was garbage/unusable anyway, nothing is lost.
I do stress, and agree, however, that if the above two conditions do not apply, it would be better to shoot in FX instead of DX, because of the advantages of downsizing (the majority of images will NEVER be used in full-size). Nasim has explained these advantages (see his article for details).
Hello Nasim, Not only a good intro report bit very nice pictures too; Thank you comparing with all the other interesting Cams The D800 a quantum leap; / Karl
Hey Nasim, Thanks for this great review. Just wondered if the D800 can shoot at a lower Raw file setting? I would love the choice of shooting selected work at 36MP and weddings at eg. 12-16MP. I’ve worked hard to streamline my workflow and have concerns about processing and backing up thousands of 36MP files each week.. it’s a lot more than I need and think this would really slow things down and chomp a lot of drive space.
Maybe I’m missing something but as a wedding photographer I’m not sure the D800 or D4 are the best upgrades for my aging D700.
Tim, my wife and I shoot weddings and we are planning to use D800’s. If you want to have smaller file sizes, change your RAW quality setting to 12-bit compressed and your image size will be about 3 times smaller…
I too am disappointed at all the references to Down Sampling the D800. I am not buying a D 800 to downsample it. I want to get higher res images without having to resort to interpolation. Most of my work goes to photo libraries so with D700’s I have to upres all the images to 62 meg or more in 8 bit Tiffs. The comparison I would like to see is how does the D800 full res tiff which should be about 216 meg in 16 bit mode, compare to a D700 image upressed to the same size. This is in my application, much more meaningful as it should show how much better? the D800 image looks, when making full use of the 36 meg sensor which is my reason to purchase this camera. If you are going to down sample the D800 all the time, stick to the D700’s.
With references to all stock photographers and the benefits of upgrading from D700/300’s to the D800, below is my text I posted on a UK forum last week, I hope it provokes some some interest;
“Last year I was contacted by a rather high brow UK agency for permission to use a shot of mine for a double page spread in a glossy UK magazine. (they’d got the image from one of my foreign Agents which I wasn’t best pleased about but that’s life) The UK agency in question has a very strict QC policy with a minimum file size of 50mb and a preference for full frame cameras. Anyway the image was used and looked great, it was taken on a Nikon D200 with a 10mp sensor and the much criticized Nikon 18-200 VR lense. As stock photographers the most we can expect a repro size at will be max A4 double page spread, and I think most will agree that’s a red letter day for most of us. My present kit of D300, D700 and D7000 will suffice for quite a few years yet. Point of this post is, .. its the image that and not the kit that counts, and 36mp creates huge files and is quite unmanageable for uploading and general storage, but of course that’s just my opinion.”
Michael, I will provide some image samples of upsampled images from the D700 and compare them to the D800. One thing I can tell you for sure – the D800 image will contain a lot more detail, because it does not have to “create” non-existent data. One more thing, if a 12 MP image looks good upsampled to 36 MP, think how good a 36 MP image would look like when upsampled to much higher resolution…
I written comment in other article about D800 sensor: ”One more thing is not mesured by DxO. They did not measure a true low-light capabilities, what they measure is mid grey noise with daylight color temperature. Things would be much different in the real low light conditions and D4 sensor would have a near 1Ev advantage to D800 in noise department.” Cause D3s is pretty much similar to D4 in low light your copmaparison beetwen D3s and D800 validated my statement.
Remarkable review. Definitely the best I’ve read so far on the D800 (And I’ve read them all :)).
I have two questions:
1. Can you further explain the focusing at f/8 issue? I find it a bit confusing. I can obviously focus at f/8 even with my D90 and the cheap 18-105mm lens, do you mean that this camera can focus at f/8 in extreme low light situations?
2. Would you say that for this type of camera with this much of megapixels, VR becomes a lot more important? It sounds like those 4 f stops advantage could easily benefit me since I would otherwise require a faster shutter speed. It once again draws me closer to the 16-35mm VR instead of the excellent 14-24mm.
Oded: I think what Nasim means is this. AF systems are designed so that until the shutter is actually pressed, the lens is wide open. For most cameras, this is 5.6. When you put a TC, the actual light coming through drops. If it drops much below the designed 5.6, then the camera has difficulty focusing. Eg, if you put a 1.4 TC on 5.6 lens, the effective wide-open aperture on the lens is 1 stop lower, at f/8. What Nasim is saying is that the D800 can focus even in this situation.
Sridhar, thanks for the info. Although I am still confused about what this means. In effect, even if the largest aperture of the lens is F8 (aperture the lens is at before you press the shutter), the D800 will have the ability to focus per your explanation. But at F8, the amount of light coming through will depend on the ambient lighting!! I mean more light would come through during day-time at F22 than at night at F8….. so a camera should be able to focus at F22 also. Why this cap of F8???
Lavneet: As far as I understand, @ f/8 the camera will focus if there is any light. After that, it is beyond its design parameters and may or may not focus. People have been using 2x TC for years, working at f/8 on cameras designed to focus at f/5.6. So, if there is enough life, the camera should focus.
F8 focus? Here is how I see it all/most cameras use there most capable/wide open F-stop to focus. So even if you have you setting at F16 so you have a wide depth of field your camera will still automatically adjust to it’s widest F-what ever your camera / lens can do to focus. You don’t know your camera is doing this unless you have depth of field preview button even then that is just a preview, the camera/lens setup will still focus at a low F-stop. I’m not sure this effects the masses but i don’t make my living behind the camera or writing about them. I would not let the F8 focus option be your deciding point on a purchase for the D800 I purchased mine so I could take advantage of the resolution and crop in the computer and have the extra information. Yes with extra resolution comes more noise but I don’t print a lot most of my pictures and when I do they are printed at photo book size that a 12Mp can handle I just want the option if I want to print larger or when I crop it I have that extra resolution so the crop file still can print and not have that cropped look.
Oded, all current DSLRs focus at their wide open apertures, no matter what aperture the camera is set to. The aperture on the lens changes only when the image is captured and it happens at the same instant the shutter curtain is raised. Now with the f/8 focusing feature (not an issue), this simply means that very slow lenses will perform better in low light conditions and if you mount a 2x teleconverter on an f/4 lens (effectively decreasing its maximum aperture to f/8), autofocus will still work. For example, previously, the Nikon 200-400mm f/4 would not autofocus when the 2x teleconverter was mounted on it (making it a 400-800mm f/8 lens). Now, the lens combination will autofocus fine, although AF accuracy, image quality, contrast and colors are all impacted negatively.
As for VR, it sure can be useful on lenses, when slow shutter speeds are used. While the camera sensor does not increase blur, it certainly is more visible when viewed at 100%. So I would recommend either increasing the shutter speed, or using a lens with VR to compensate…
1) Can the RRS L bracket for the D300s be used on the D800? 2) I shoot birds and am wondering if, for that specific purpose, it is better to go Dx mode or crop from a Full frame image, for the same lens. I suspect cropping would lead equivalent or better images but just wanted confirmation.
Appears that I am not the only one thinking about cropping in s/w vs using the crop mode for DX. Sorry for the repeated question but would still appreciate an anwer.
I am with Nasim on this one, why would you want to “kill” half your image beforehand? Just shoot full frame if crop it in post if needed. Having more data means that you have more creative control, for the same quality of image. You can play around with the cropping, like making it more attractive for the rule of thirds for example. If you shoot DX in the first place, you’re just limited by what you can do. The only reason I see for going DX is for the increased FPS in those rare occasions.
Sridhar, I have bad news for you – the RRS L-bracket does not work with the D800. I have an L-bracket for my D700 and it does not fit right. Access to the side door is also blocked. RRS has a new bracket for the D800 and I have already ordered one, should be receiving it later this week (they are already shipping those). As for cropping vs DX mode, I always suggest cropping than chopping off more than half of the image!
Was afraid that that might be the case. Wont get too much for the D300s bracket in India. As I am an amateur, the side acccess blocking does not bother me too much but if the dimensions are different enough, then I guess I have to shell out!
1) Set the camera to a high shutter speed (at least 1/1000th of a second). 2) Pick a moving subject, and use AF-C option (may also run test with AF-S option). 3) Have the camera in single-shot mode instead of continuous mode. 4) See how many shots you can squeeze off per second in both FX and DX mode before the buffer fills (shoot in NEF please).
Another suggestion for an informative test. ASA 200 Shoot a 14 bit lossless Nef on tripod using D800 and a quality lens, change body to a D700/D3 for a second shot Open both Raw files in Photoshop/ACR or preferably Capture NX2 if you have it. Upres D700 image in Photoshop Bi Cubic Smoother to same size as D800 image. Can you now comment on the differences in resolution and noise.
At the moment this is the most useful information I desire from the D800
I would think that a better comparison would be to downsample the D800 image to the D700 resolution. Upsampling never truly works, the computer needs to invent and “guess” the missing data which does not exist, using algorithms. With downsampling – you are throwing away some of the data and keep the “average” data, so in theory you are supposed to always get a better image.
The whole idea of this suggestion was to find out how good the D800 is when using its sensor at its maximum potental of 36 meg. I am not interested in the image quality of a 12 meg D800. I agree that downsampling reduces the noise and sharpens the image but I want a 36meg D800, not a 12 meg one. If all I needed was 12 meg I would keep my D700’s and not spend the extra money on the D800, bigger flash cards, more computer power etc
At the end of the day, I want to send someone a 36meg Raw file and would like to know the difference in image quality between the original D800 Raw file and a D700 Raw that has been interpolated up to D800 native size
I agree with you, however one must take things into context.
You are getting the benefits of a 36mp sensor 70-90% depending on your shooting mode. How often do you really need to shoot at 12,800 ISO anyway? The answer ofcourse changes from person to person, but I think for most of us, it is quite rare.
So, for those times when normal ISOs are in use, you get the benefits of a 36mp sensor.
For this times when you need to use high ISO, you get better images at smaller sizes compared to the competition. There is some physics here that we just can’t avoid at the moment, and that is that smaller pixels = more noise. Nikon did a remarkable job of solving that issue for most of the shooting situations, but on those rare occasions where you need to go even higher – you can get an image that is the same size as the competition but with less noise and more sharpness.
To me, that’s the best of both worlds, because it best fits my shooting style.
Not to be insulting, but the argument of some of the posts on this forum that the D800 should provide 36 megapixels and only be judged on its performance at 36 megapixels is absurd. It seems like these posters are attempting to use any irrational criteria to discredit the huge performance gap between the D800 and its competition.
All high megapixel cameras on the market, be it the Phase One or Hasselblad HD50 offer no capability above 800 ISO for a reason. Furthermore, NO high pixel cameras (>30mp) are designed to shoot in low light, fast action type scenarios. The amazing accomplishment of the D800 is that it can approach close to medium format resolution performance and also double as a backup for a D4 shooting in low light up to extreme high ISO (12K). In fact it is so good that if necessary, the image can be down sampled to provide better performance at the final file stage (tif for print) than any camera on the market except for the D3 S and the D4. The 5D3 cannot perform beyond 22 megapixels. It has no further capability. The D800 performs BETTER in lower light situations than the 5D3 if you down sample to MATCH the maximum resolution performance of the 5D3. If you NEED more FPS, there are better cameras, 5d3 is one of them. Most shooters will need high FPS less than they will need high ISO.
To anybody saying that they don’t want to handle the process of downsampling or that 36 megapixel files are too cumbersome for their particular computer, they obviously does not have the experience in the post processing side of the business. A one button action or Lightroom will handle the entire process of downsampling at export if necessary. If you’re old school and don’t know how to do this or choose not to do this, YOUTUBE it and learn. It takes less time than screwing on a gradient filter and is “non destructive” and adjustable to any size requirement. If shooting in a wedding or event type of scenario I’ll simply export at a reduced file size or shot in DX mode. And yes I intend on upgrading my computer just as I upgrade my photographic equipment every 2 to 4 years. I feel it’s a necessary part of the profession today just like a quality enlarger or scanner was 10 years ago. A plenty fast computer and Drobo drive is cheaper than PowerPC and an LS1200 was 20 years ago! Come on people, the D800 is a tool for professional who has a SYSTEM for their workflow. The amatuer should be fine with a D90 and an iMac and investing in lenses if they want to step up. I like fancy new bodies almost as much as lenses, but I keep current in my post production gear, to do so would be counterproductive to my success.
Lets just all agree that this is progress. I am sure that Canon will respond in kind eventually and I am confident that Nikon will someday offer a firmware update to reduce RAW file sizes in this camera or future models. As it stands now, the D800 offers more capability to capture more usable data than any camera out there. How you apply that data in post or what technique you employ to capture that data is a result of your knowledge of the tools capabilities and your creativity in exploiting them. Images in the coming months will demonstrate this process, and reward the pros that see the opportunities that now exist. My D700 is for sale, any takers?
PS: except you don’t think imac icore7 is capable of handling-am curious what you recommend as from your post-I trust your opinion- I am using an imac icore 7 version!
I do think the iMac is capable! I edit with 2.83mgz i5 powerbook w/8gb RAM from 2010. I stack up to 6 layers in Photoshop and save 26Omb tif for panos. Is it fast work? No, but its faster than it used to be. I was processing 500 wedding pictures from a D700, Id probably use a different method of capture such as jpg or cropped to DX and then make small adjustments in Lightroom. Thats how I do it and I do it for a living. I am upgrading to a quad core w/16gb RAM this year, and that machine should will still only be 20% faster. So instead of 5 min an image, i’ll spend about 4 min. It’s nominal at best, and irrelevant when I apply presets or actions and let the machine process while I grab another beer from the fridge. See what I mean by irrational criteria?
Oh good-it looks like I can go another year or so-LOL I have a 2.93 ghz but only 8GB-maybe I could hual this monster into Apple & ask that they install more GB’s! Thanks for the clarification!
Please don’t forget your graphics card. You also need a faster and a better video card. One probably needs (i) two quad core, (ii) 16 – 24 gb ram and (iii) big and faster dual video card.
Please visit this site for a nice comparision of CPU and Video Card benchmarks.
Any modern computer will handle these images just fine. Think about it for a second – processing a 1080p video is orders of magnitude more hard than processing a 36mp image.
Quad Core + 8GB of RAM is all you really need. I have played around with some NEFs available for download on the internet for the D800E, and they work in Lightroom exactly like any other NEF file I have, no lag at all.
Thanks for the review. It will be interesting to see performance of different lenses on D800. Some of the sites are posting a wi-fi flash misfiring (CLS?) on D800 and green colourisation on the LCD, which I think should be fixed on a custom menu. The flash mis-firing seems a serious issue, if proven correct by many, should be be fixed soon by a firmware upgrade. I hope you will be able to comment on thse two.
Shooting D800 using a DX lens, though nothing wrong, completley wastes the full benefit of owning a full frame. A 36MP camera is clearly unforgiving on grains and blurrs (due to camera shake). I do read elsewhere a few photographers moaning about these two issues on D800. Having a great camera does not (obviously) make us good photographers.
You have mentioned the Shutter Speed, ISO and Aperture on some of the photos. It will be fantastic if you could mention the lens used, shutter speed, aperture and ISO on all the photographs.
I would like to ask a question and post an observation:
Image 7/95: There is a loss of sharpness on the right-side of the cute dog. If you were to pick one reason, what would that be? Is it the centre-focus or large prime lens (85 mm) or both or something else?
Nikon D800 vs Canon 5D Mark III ISO 100. The diagonal lines on the 4th DVD is sharper on Nikon D800 than Canon 5D Mark III. I find strength of details on the Nikon D800 on the base ISO pretty interesting.
Srini, it is expected that a new product will have some bugs here and there when it is introduced. Hopefully Nikon will fix most of the bugs through firmware updates, including the green colorization issue. As for aperture, shutter speed and other information on the files – all EXIF data is attached to the files in this review (and in all other articles and reviews posted on mansurovs.com), so you can view them with an EXIF viewer.
Excellent review. Your image of the building and moon show nice detail in the brick work of the building. My question is if the D800E would cast a moiré artifact over the bricks given the same conditions (lighting, camera angle, etc)?
Wonderful review as usual by The Mansurovs. I’m stoked about the ISO performance and sensor performance. I bridge shooting worlds, I shoot a lot of high school sports, but love to do landscapes. This will be a definite improvement over my D90 (which itself has done well for what it’s capabilities).
Reference ordering from B&H, many in our photograper’s group have ordered from there, but are getting apprehensive as to any near-term delivery. One person ordered the night ordering opened up, he is #8 in the queue (so B&H has told him). He’s been told this week that no more deliveries are expected until May! He was previously given an April time frame. To my knowledge none of the other major retailers (i.e Adorama, etc) are any different. One person in our group did call a local Tall’s Camera inquiring as to the delays, they told him the shift of the date from April to May was due to Nikon having to do an annual inventory in April, therefore nothing is getting shipped until that is complete. That’s hard to believe, if anyone here has better sources into Nikon and can find out that would be appreciated.
I understand your frustration with B&H – trust me, I am frustrated even more, because neither my D800, nor the D800E have been shipped from B&H. Sadly, some people have been grabbing D800’s from local Best Buy stores. But B&H is not to blame here. Nikon has had a rough year with all the disasters, so they have a hard time providing enough units to retailers. B&H currently has a huge pre-order list and there are many photographers dying to get their hands on the D800…
Just be patient and wait, I am sure B&H will be sending a bunch of D800’s once they get back from the holidays. I was told that all orders will most likely be fulfilled before the end of May.
Stunning review and camera. The D800 is truly a game changer. Would you say the D700 is obsolete! I almost want to wait a bit for the computer technology to catch up to be able to process and store such huge files that the D800 generates. In that case I think I will keep my D700 until the shutter falls off… it seems like a great camera still!
Firstly, thanks for the hard work. Excellent review. Secondly, a question for everyone. What are your thoughts on this : Shooting with a 36 mp camera will also require a lot of post processing plus processing power to get rid of unwanted details. Details that you would not normally recognize with a lets say 12mp d700 or d3s. D800 also appears to be unforgiving on camera shake as Srini #46 mentions. Therefore, d800 requires a more professional approach to setup and shooting. This camera, while amazing and technically perfect, will be more beneficial to certain styles of photography. And thats besides the relative low fps which might not appeal to action photographers. I think this is the real handicap here. It is a stylistic issue. I shoot with a d700 and dont feel ready to move to medium format-like camera yet even though I will most likely buy the d800 with the hope of getting a better photographer as a result.
While awaiting Nazim’s response, I think if you are already shooting wtih D700, I am sure you would D800. As Nazim wrote in his review, you would automatically start shooting with a higher shutter speed. I wonder, as a standard setup under normal conditions, if “1 / 2 x f” as shutter speed would be a good choice to address the camera shake on this beast as opposed to the normal “1/f”.
Ozzie, everything is relative when looking at high-resolution camera performance. If you do not pixel peep and look at everything in full size or even at the D700 size (12 MP), then you won’t see that blur or lack of details at 100% view. However, if you want to get the best out of the 36 MP sensor, then you will need to be a lot more attentive to many details and you will need to improve your technique.
Ozzie, Don’t worry about it. The D800 will provide the same or better quality of image as your D700 when shot in the same fashion as you currently shoot your D700. However, if you are going to push the camera to its limits, you may need to refine your technique. If you take a d700 image and blow it up to 60″ x 40″ and do the same thing with a D800 image, the D800 image will be sharper. For the D700, a big contributor to that the lack of sharpness will likely be sensor resolution. On the other hand, the higher resolution sensor of the D800 will eliminate much of the sensor resolution induced lack of sharpness and in so doing reveal other negative contributions to a greater extent. (Camera shake, lens quality, DoF, diffraction, etc) The D800 image is still better, but since it is more capable of resolving other factors that can impact IQ, it will take more work to get the most from that camera. In other words if you use the D800 as you use your D700, the D800 will produce better images. With a little extra care, the D800 is incredible. Check out the link below. As you can see in the image, this photo was hand held.
I wish you would have taken the request about DX mode more seriously. Why? How does the D800 perform in DX mode against say a 7d, D300 or one of the other crop cameras. Again why? Some people shoot sports and are not on staff with a sports magazine so choose cameras with higher FPS but in a price range that does not include the pro level. With this information how it performs against similar crop cameras a person could use FF for DOF control or for higher resolution landscapes but then also switch it to crop mode to get a series of shots of a snow boarder or motorcycle doing a back flip. It would be nice to know if a user could still use a wide angle DX lenses until they decide to upgrade to a more expensive FF wide angle lens. While your comment sounds like that of a pro, which I have no problem with, it is a valid point, this camera if it is to sell in great numbers will have to be bought by amateurs who may not shoot sports all the time, or may not always need the higher resolution. If an amateur decides he wants to upgrade, is the D800 going to upgrade to his current DX camera so he can get rid of it? He may be printing mostly 8×10 but on occasion he will print big for some art project or a poster/billboard. So we know the D800 will perform those two functions properly but will it still perform the same functions as his old DX using less resources on the computer/memory card so he can sell his old dx camera and not worry about downgrading his DX performance. Otherwise a great review. Thanks for your insight.
Richard, I look at it this way – why buy a $3K FX camera if one would cap it at 15 MP just to have smaller files? Why not get a DX camera instead, keep all the DX lenses and have much smaller files?
I will do a comparison of the D7000 with the D800 in DX mode soon, once I finish up the 85mm f/1.8G review.
I didin’t really talk about smaller files. My point was FPS and getting the shot. In FX mode the camera only does 4fps which may not catch the shot even 6fps is minimal. Here is a comparison www.youtube.com/watch…X9QifNT7sY You many not shoot any sports so you may not understand my reasonaing. Anyway, thank you for the review, I look forward to your comparison.
Nasim, I feel Richard has a point here – there may be reasons for wanting to shoot the D800 in DX mode and for those of us considering that a comparison to the D7000 for instance would be very interesting.
There may be several reasons for this; FPS is one reason, but in my case it would be to use DX lenses that I cannot or do not want to upgrade right now. This is partly a budget reason – I would want to upgrade those lenses one at a time over a longer period – but also because I use DX lenses that I find impossible to replace on FX. The main one is Sigma’s 8-16mm (and no, at twice the weight and its very high price Nikon’s 14-24mm is no replacement for me).
So occasionally using the D800 in DX mode would allow photographers like me to make use of FX where our lens collections allows while giving us time to upgrade our lenses, or allowing us to use special DX lenses that we find hard to replace. This makes the question of how the D800 compares to DX cameras very relevant, I think.
“I have a suspicion that the whole 6 FPS battery grip requirement is an attempt to make more money by Nikon. When shooting in DX mode, the camera surely does not need a battery grip to get faster frames – more than half of the sensor data is chopped off, which the camera should easily be able to deal with. In fact, Nikon should allow us to go all the way to 8 fps in DX mode.”
Thanks for saying it this clearly! I think your assumption is very likely true.
One only needs to do the math (36MP = 4 FPS, 16MP => 8 FPS) for the amount of sensor data. Especially considering the incredibly high price of the battery grip. Appararently, battery grip customers are subsidizing body-only customers as the profit margins on the body are pretty low (according to NikonRumors) and the grip is way less complex than the body in relation to the price.
Personally, I use a D7000 and the original Nikon battery grip, which was also too expensive in relation to the body and after a year of usage I’m still not satisfied with it. In fact I doubt that I’ll ever be. Yes, it does help shooting in portrait orientation but that’s about it as I have two major problems with it: a) The quality of the dials and buttons is noticeably lower than their equivalents on the camera itself. They simply feel less comfortable and even a bit tacky. The rubber material on the grip is also different from the one used on the D7000. I wouldn’t call it shoddy but it’s clearly less than optimal and what one would expect for the price. b) They should have designed the grip like one of the older ones (for example the one for the D80) where both batteries are located in the grip. As it is one has to unscrew the grip if one wants to remove/exchange the battery in the body – I don’t know how many grip attach/remove operations the electronic contacts allow but they surely don’t get better by this. I’m also suspecting that the balance point would be slightly better with both batteries in the grip – especially shooting in landscape mode with large lenses.
Consequence: I don’t think I ever buy a Nikon grip again. Your mileage may vary, of course. If you absolutely need a grip because you regularly shoot in portrait orientation then at least wait for clone grips to come to the market. There may be some goods ones without (major) problems.
I totally agree with you Marcus! I also liked the D80 grip, because you could put batteries in it without taking the grip off. They screwed up the design starting from the D300. I don’t think I will be buying a grip going forward either!
I understand your comments about the DX format and not buying a D800 just to only use in that format. But I would also like to add that when using long telephoto lenses (400mm or more) for wildlife photography and your subject still cannot fill the frame (does happen a lot for me0 there is some use for the DX format. The D7000 has a much higher pixel density than the full frame D700 so there is the ability to get that bird to have more pixels for a given lens (2.35 times as much). That is not true with the D800. So what do you get with a D800 over a D7000 for maximum telephoto shots? First is a better focusing mechanism. Second is a viewfinder that is 2.35 times larger. This is a big help when trying to even find that bird in the bush. So many times I find myself struggling to locate the animal in the viewfinder as the angle of view is so small. And when I am trying to get birds in flight it really is advantageous to have a larger finder in the hopes that your shot will include all of the flying bird. Now I can get that bird shot, crop it in the camera, and not have unneeded pixels exported to my computer. As you pointed out, it really is about those 36m pixels. Use them or crop to 6m and still have a great shot! ( mind that you don’t have camera shake or focus problems)
John, what do you mean it is not true for the D800? The D800 has about the same pixel pitch as the Nikon D7000, so you could get the same or better results by cropping the image! Why am I against using the DX mode? Because you are throwing away the information completely. What if the bird you are photographing is too large to fit into the DX frame? That information is lost forever…that’s why recording a full FX image and then cropping in post makes a whole lot more sense :)
Hi Nasim, first of all, thanks for the review. Question: what do you think about using this camera for sports? I know the typical answer is that the FPS is too low, but if you really need 10 or 12 FPS to capture the moment, I’m thinking maybe your technique could use some improving. Besides, given that the vast majority of the sports pics I take I crop, that 36 MB sure would be a nice alternative to buying more powerful lenses. What’s your take on this?
Thank you for once again producing a very balanced review, or should I say beginning of review.
However the introduction with the history part made me raise my eyebrows.
Unless you have insider information from Nikon (which I have hard to beleive as I find it unlikely they would reveal their marketing strategy about the past just a few years ago) and know better my view is different.
I don’t think Nikon made a mistake at all by releasing the D700 with same sensor etc. as D3.
As constructing a camera from start to release takes several years Nikon was already working on D700 even long BEFORE the release of D3 and D300 in 2007! By then most of the specs must have been fixed already.
Anticipating D700 would eat a big piece of the D3 sales is such obvious that the Nikon mangment must have accounted on that happening.
Introducing the D700 and accepting the loss of D3 sales for a year was actually one of Nikon’s smartest moves!
D700 has been a tremendous success generating not only sales of bodies but full frame lenses and other accessories for more than three years generating profit that most propably have been many times greater than the loss of (low volume!) D3 sales for a year. Taking a part of the market Canon owned 100% for several years with the 5D was a very important and wise decision by Nikon!
What you lose at the swings you take back (several times!) at the merry-go-round!
It simply never was a problem for Nikon that D700 were eating the sales of D3. It was according to their plan as they were already working on the D3s being released just a year later!
I agree one can question the D3X and its astronomic price although they propably made a good profit on every body just because of the price. Would not a D700X for half price have sold many more bodies and generated a bigger profit? We will not know. But there may be other reasons like production constraints, either by Nikon or in the number of sensors Sony could produce, influencing Nikons choice.
Also I like a few other here really would like to know about your knowledge of a coming D400. You seem to know a lot as you claim to know already which battery it will use! Or are you just jumping to conclusions?
Are you just assuming we will see a replacement of D300s named D400 with a DX sensor in a D800 similar body, just as D300 and D700 shared the same basic body?
The big question is: Are there really enough customers who will buy a DX D400 just to get 8 or even 9 frames per second instead of ‘just’ 6 fps with D7000 and D800 (in DX-mode with grip and D4 battery)?
D7000 already has the better sensor and almost all the functions of D300s. The replacement (D7100?) expected at Photokina this year will for sure have even more improvements, propably erasing the few limitations in D7000 versus D300s and adding several new features. It will of course still have the smaller “enthusist” body size like D7000. Those who prefer the semi-pro body get an in every way better camera than D300s by using D800 in DX-mode, except for maximum 6 fps.
My speculation(!) is that D300s was the last semi-pro DX-camera. Such a camera doesn’t make sense to produce anymore with D800 already on the market and within half a year the improved replacement of D7000.
The price gap between D800 and ‘D7100’ should logically instead be filled with a FX entry level model using the basic body from ‘D7100’ as increasing the number of FX-camera owners will generate more sales as FX-users generally buy more lenses (coming from DX they propably need new lenses!) and accessories.
Most likely an entry level Nikon FX-camera will use Sony’s new 24 MP sensor rumored to be inside Sony’s own A99 SLT (Contrary to your claim it will use the 36 MP sensor inside D800. But maybe you know better than the other rumorsites?) expected this year, propably at Photokina. Such a camera could of course debut at same time as ‘D7100’. But as it seems there is an agreement Sony will get at least half a year head start using their own sensors inside their cameras before Nikon do I don’t expect to see an entry level Nikon FX camera until next year.
And the name actually could be D400! It would make sense as it finally would make order in Nikon’s model-numbers reserving DX00 for FX-cameras and DXX00 for DX-cameras. I do however agree D400 propably will use same battery as D7000 and D800. But I don’t take it for granted!
Wonderful detailed review that covers all aspects. Thanks for all the hard work.
A new FX buyer or someone that needs high resolution or video should go for the D800.
A D700 owner would think twice about upgrading, the image improvement is marginal on a computer screen not to mention small prints and the high resolution makes files too big to handle.
Frankly, as an amateur, am having so much fun shooting the Nikon 1v with or without the ft1 mount that makes new uses for all my Nikon lenses and will wait for Nikon 1 developments before spending any more on cameras. Peter
Hi Nasim, It is always a pleasure to read your reviews! For people (like me) who are thinking about an upgrade from a DX camera, it would be helpful to have comparison images from a D7000 also downsampled to 12 MP to see the difference at ISO levels 100-25600. Best regards Stefan
Hi Nasim Thanks for taking your valuable time to write reviews for all of us, it has been great reading and with a lot of usefull informations. It’s without a doubt a fantastic camera, not without pitfalls, but overall mega great. I have ordered mine, I wasn’t too sure, but I’ll take the risk and see if this will do the same for me as my D700 did, but in a different way. PS. one new PC and a NAS is on the way too ;)
Excellent review,simply and clearly put. As a pro I use the Nikon D700 as my day to day camera, my standard print size is A3+ and I get stunning sharpness in them.My spare camera is a D7000 and although I prefer the IQ from the 700, it does the job. The lenses I use most of the time are 14-24,24-70,24PC-E plus the Sigma 85mm 1.4.
If I had unlimited money I would be buying a D800 but…looks like the 700 is going to be used for a little while longer…
Thank you for the input on that new camera. You just need to complete the video part… Using the D7000 (and the D700) I am not surprised by the fact that many will have to work on the way they hold/set the camera. But it’s a small sacrifice compared to the image quality you can obtain!
Hi thanks for the review and today I am able to put hand on my D800! :D
My initial impression, which may put some negative side comment:
1, As a long time D3 user, the D800 first impression is … much cheaper than D_ model, which is reasonable. 2, More specifically, the shuttle is very different. The sound is much softer than D3, no wonder the life cycle is only half of it! 3, The memory card bay door. It is horrible, sorry to say that. My D200 memory card door is even better than that. Guess what? It is a D50 design! 4, The shuttle release speed is very slow, compared with D_ model. This actually is right because the high resolution means better landscape, studio portrait, etc. 5, I generally tried movie function, very good. However, the internal mic may record the AF action noise so external mic is much preferred.
As for the picture quality, 36MP is AMAZING; and ISO noise control is very good, just as it is reviewed here. Interestingly, a huge hornet appeared in my room and fell into a glass jar. So I took a picture.
The 1:1 crop here farm8.staticflickr.com/7271/…2d_b_d.jpg and the whole picture is this (but resized) farm8.staticflickr.com/7194/…26_b_d.jpg . This is not a good photo because of the transparent holder, so next time I should take the hornet out of it? :O Anyway, I just hope these pictures could provide you with 7,360 x 4,912.
Now I have loads of accessories to get… By the way, how much RAM for the PC is powerful enough to process the D800 full size pictures in LR4? Now mine is not slow, but much slower than before! (and LR4 is slower anyway! :( )
All in all, D800 is D800, it is not D4, you should be aware of that; but as the first 36MP DSLR, it is a pioneer, and that’s why I am very excited with it, and I am very fond of it! Now there are more possibilities to create great pictures, with this excellent tool!
Thanks! Actually that’s my point. Some ‘casual’ or ‘failed’ action perhaps can still be ‘usable’ due to the 36MP. No a good spirit as a photographer, but sometimes can be a lifesaver…
I was using 4GB RAM, just upgraded to 12GB. Much better! :D
Maybe you want to get MB-D12 and insert EN-EL18 battery to slightly increase the fps? However, with out a D4, the cost of EN-EL18 and charger can be ridiculous… Bad Nikon, very bad.
I don’t get it, this review states the D800 has better high ISO handling but the other reviews/comparisons (the examiner, imaging resource, engadget, digitalrev, cnet asia) says the 5Dmark III have superior high ISO performance. It is better to check other reviews as well, observe the testing methods and, see the unanimous or majority decision. I still think the 5D mark III in more things than the D800 that’s why some reviews state that for studio and landscape = D800 and for all around = 5D mark III. i also think the 5Dmark3 will be the more popular and sales leader like its predecessor, even Nikon users like it. Long time Nikon user Jared Polin of fro knows photo likes the 5D mark III’s grip and already considering getting it as his first Canon DSLR. Kai Wong, Nikon fanboy and digitalrev host picked the 5D mark III over the D800 in their latest video, D800 vs 5D mark III (watch it on youtube, digitalrev videos are always fun to watch, informative, and unbiased) . Wedding photographer Ryan Brenizer wrote a review titled ‘A Nikon user’s review of the Canon 5D Mark III’ and concluded ‘Canon is primarily competing with the Nikon D800. At $500 cheaper and with a high-resolution, high dynamic range sensor, the D800 will be a tempting option for most users. For someone like me who takes more than a quarter million photos a year, the idea of a sensor that only shoots 36MP is a non-starter.’ Everybody seems to like the 5D mark III more than the D800 so I have no doubts the it (5Dm3) will be the preference of most people.
You seem to confuse the output from the manufacturers JPEG processing engines with processing a RAW image that was taken under highly standardized conditions and processed exactly the same way. Thus, the latter compares high iso SENSOR performance, the former the end product (picture) of what canon or nikon believe is a “good” high iso jpeg.
Although I am a Nikon guy, I personally like the high iso jpeg output of the 5DMkIII better than the Nikon D800 one, however, Nasim showed us at least equal performance of Nikons Raw-processed and downsampled (to 12 Megs) images compared to 5DMkIII. The other internet sites you quote did not do a comparable Raw comparison, therefore they might come to a different conclusion. Additionally, some people hate chroma, shadow or luminance noise most, and some -like me- like a smoother jpeg image over a noisier/grainier one with more detail, it’s all a matter of taste.
The decision between 5DMkIII and D800 is all about the most versatile camera (5D) vs. the highest possible image quality (D800). For me, the D800 is a no-brainer, especially seeing the high iso raw output Nasim showed us (but I don’t shoot >250.000 pics a year…)
Thanks for enlightening me. I understand now. Seems that Canon has made an excellent noise reduction system at the expense of losing details but not much and better than the NR of the previous Canon DSLR bodies. Most reviews conluded that it all depends on what you need, the 5Dm3’s advantage are better grip/handling(this is important to most people and one factor why some will choose the 5Dm3., burst rate, and jpeg high ISO performance. For Nikon, the details and benefits of high megapixel(which also depends on the lens quality) and the price. Video is about the same but Canon has the advantage of being able to adjust sound levels while recording (as seen in digitalrev’s D800 vs 5DmarkIII hands on review on youtube, you need to stop recording on the D800 to adjust volume levels) and tweaks (like removing the optical low pass filter significantly enhances the 5Dm3’s video resolution).
Not sure Canon will sell more 5D Mark IIIs. There seems to be far more demand for the d800, simply because it’s a more exciting proposition (believe it or not, that’s a very important drive for sales, even among professionals).
Although probably not completely accurate, Amazon sales are still a good indicator of the difference in enthusiasm for the two cameras. At the moment, among all DSLR sales, the d800 is number 1 (followed by two Nikons) and the Mark 5D III is number 9. This may fluctuate day by day (if later readers click the link): www.amazon.com/Best-…olife0c-20
Even more interestingly, at the moment the d800 is number 32 in ALL electronics sales. This is unprecedented. All electronics include the kindle series, ipods, Blu-Ray players, etc. The most expensive items ahead of the d800 are around $300. The d800 is the first item that costs thousands of dollars. www.amazon.com/Best-…olife0c-20
The 5D Mark III is not in the top 100 best selling electronics list.
Actually, I was wondering who’s buying it. I’m not, not yet at least. Quite happy with the d7000. But I want it badly – I’ll probably buy it by the end of this year. Though in my professional work the d800 will be a great boon, now I’m playing with things that are new to me. I’m good at interiours, landscapes, things without people. But this year’s big photography project for me is shooting people. I wanna be as good at that as with interiours. And currently, the d7000 is not my limit, still lot to learn. I’m getting good, but not as good as with interiours and landscapes. The d800 would immediately benefit my interiours and landscapes, there, I can say, I’m camera limited. I’m not yet with “people” shots, especially lighting. And right now, and for the next few months I concentrate on the latter, don’t do much interiours and landscapes. The d800 is not particularly urgent until the end of this year.
So who is buying it? I guess the “medium format territory” is not just marketing speech. I know a lot of MF users are buying the d800. Some interest from videographers as well, most of them 5D MK II shooters – Canon butchered Nikon in this respect for years with the MK II. Just like you, I know lots of Canon users who are buying the d800 as a second camera (Colby Brown comes to mind, a 9 year Canon veteran). I also no some switchers, though if I were heavily invested in Canon glass, I’m not sure I would switch: the 5D Mark III by all accounts, is a fantastic camera. I can’t find ANY flaw with it, it would be perfect for many things. It’s just not as exciting right now as the d800. Whether or not that excitement will last – we don’t know. Right now, Nikon has a huge lead in interest, and it seems that Nikon is delivering the goods. Most photographers who had their hands on it describe it as a fantastic camera, or as a “breakthrough” as Nasim puts it. The 5D Mark III is “the autofocus finally works” camera, minor tweaks in all areas, perhaps with the exception of ISO, which is serious improvement over the 5D Mark II.
Csaba, I remember from a previous post that you are using a Sigma 8-16 with your D7000 for interiors. If you would purchase a D800 – what ultra-wide lens would you get/use? The 14-24 or the slightly slower but VR-equipped (for non interiors, obviously) 16-35?
What other lenses would you (have to) replace?
The reason I’m asking: I’m planning a bit ahead to figure out how much money I’d have to save up to replace my D7000 + lenses (even if it likely doesn’t break in the next two years I’m sure that I want to get to next level one day). The way I see it I would get the “zoom trinity” including the 14-24 plus the widest PC-E lens available – to not only profit from the higher resolution but also from better, faster lenses. Are you interested in a PC-E lens yourself?
Very good question, and this has been a bit of a dilemma for me. I never used filters, but I want to in the future, so the 16-35 seems to be the better option. That’s about 10.5mm field of view on the d7k. However, I’ll still lose 2.5mm compared to what I have now. If I chose the 14-24mm, I’ll lose about 1.5mm. Doesn’t sound much, but in tight spaces that can be significant.
However, lately I didn’t have any interiour work, and I’m moving towards people photography – engagement, maybe wedding, some events and if I’m lucky, I’ll have some opportunities for commercial photography. So, for the moment, I don’t worry about the ultra-wide end. My main concern is a good lens for events. I love the 50mm F/1.8 – very reasonable price, but may need wider stuff for group shots. So I’m looking at the 24-120 F/4 and 24-70mm F/2.8. The former is almost half the price of the latter, has some bokeh capabilities, and based on the reviews I’ve read, it’s an incredibly good lens. Not to mention VR, which is not that important for events (you need high shutter speeds to capture movement anyway) but it might come in handy for stills in low-light. So I think I’ll go for that as a general events lens, and will use the 50 on the d7k for close-ups (I’m definitely not selling the d7k – still in love with that camera, and will come in handy as a backup camera).
Yeah, I’m doing the same thing you do Marcus – planning ahead. I need money to grow my business now, can’t spend so much at once on gear. I think it’s gonna be the 24-120mm first which will work well on the d7k as well for events. Then the d800. Next it’s going to be probably a wide angle, either the 16-35 or 14-24. I may buy the 85mm F/1.8 as well somewhere in between – that’s not a very expensive lens. And finally, the PC-E Nikkor – I’ve been reading about it for quite some time. If I get some bigger interiour/architecture jobs in the future, then I might consider it. It’s probably going to be the last on the list.
Interiour photography is more of a nieche market than events/weddings/people. This year I had one big job, and don’t expect many others. Probably 3-4 big assignments a year if I’m lucky. Have to fill in the between, and I enjoy people tremendously right now.
Yes, right now the Nikon is having D800 shortages due to high demand. But for how long? I think initial sales of the D800 beat 5D mark III but what about the long run? most people will probably buy 5D mark III before the year ends. I’m just speculating here because the consumers will prefer a better all around camera. Sure the 5D mark III is $500 more expensive but buying a D800 would mean you need to upgrade your hard disk drives and maybe your desktop PC or laptop. And have you read the news that the 5D mark II became the no. DSLR used by flickr users? previously it was the iphone4 then D90 and 3rd 5D mark II. It is possible that the price drop of 5D mark II affected 5D mark III’s intial sales hence the spike in 5D mark II usage, it sell more than the mark III right now. Who would want to buy a 5D mark III? a lot of people I think, especially the ones who like the grip/handling of the mark 3 than the D800. Since the 5D mark III manage to impress Nikon pros (and fanboys), it’s a good indication of very good sales.
Well, by know we know everything there’s to know about the d800 – looks like it’s a brilliant camera. And these are just minor fluctuations, but right now, the d800 climbed 3 more places in the all electronics top 100 list that shows growing demand. The Mark II climbed to the 13th place in DLSR sales, probably due to the significant price drop. I just had a chat with a fairly big magazine’s editor. Their Canon guy is switching. I know, this is anecdotal evidence, but the interest for the d800 is staggering. Maybe I’m biased reading far more news about Nikon than Canon, but it is my impression that Nikon hit gold with this launch, while Canon… They corrected all complains and then some, but again, as I said, the level of excitement for the Mark III is just not there. If we are to believe the reviews, the d800 is just as revolutionary as the D3S was in 2009, while the Mark III is an evolutionary step at best. Seems to me that Nikon shook off its risk-aversion approach, and they are willing to go in bold, new directions. I wouldn’t be surprised to see an MF camera from them, probably a d4x at the d3x’s price point, for example. The tech is there – the big question mark is lenses. Canon is a 10x bigger company, but when it comes to glass, they are pretty much each other’s equals in terms of production and R&D capabilities.
Unlike many, I think that their mirrorless approach is also sound. The V1/J1 sensor sits right between the largest P&S sensors and APS-C. Going 4/3 would not have made any sense for Nikon, nor producing a mirrorless APS-C at this time. DSLR sales are still going strong, probably for at least a couple of years. Besides, with the V1/J1 line they have a good testbed for future tech. Forget about sensor size, and look at some of the techs in there (specifically, the focusing system). I also believe that Nikon will produce a mirrorless APS-C in the future, in fact I think they could do it right now if they wanted to (or if it made sense). The p&s market it shrinking, there is no way to grow except going down and developing some phone tech, and by going up by moving the current p&s line up to the new V1/J1 sensor eventually. I think both their mirrorless line and p&s line will be based on the same sensor eventually, and then they’ll have mirrorless APS-C for serious amateurs and some professionals, and high end full frame and medium format cameras for demanding professionals. Pure speculation, of course, but they seem to be on the roll, while Canon at the moment, seems to be focusing on high-end video with the C300, but Sony is breathing down their necks in that department.
Csaba, you should really read more news about other brands as well, not just Nikon news. You mentioned Nikon mirrorless, you should know by now that Nikon J1 and V1 is not a best seller, it was criticized for having inferior image quality than the micro 4/3 camera. Google ‘Mirrorless surpasses DSLR in Japan’ and for the 1st time since December 2011, mirrorless camera outsells DSLR cameras in Japan. The only reason why Nikon and Canon doesn’t really get into the whole MILC camera craze is because they don’t want to cannibalize the sales of their DSLR cameras. Like I’ve said before, just because the D800 is selling hot right now doesn’t mean it’s in for the long run. Sooner or later people will realize the additional expenses of buying the D800 like upgrading computers, hard disk drives, etc. I believe some Canon users will buy the D800 and vice versa, as mentioned in most reviews and video reviews I cited before, some well known Nikon users(Jared Polin, Kai wong) already wanted and recommended the 5DmarkIII. Canon is not the only one who should be threatened by Sony, Nikon will likely be the first victim of Sony’s rise. Did you know that Sony already took the #2 spot from Nikon in the UK and Taiwan market? you should google that or check the Nikon Rumors site.
I have to disagree with the statement: “Everybody seems to like the 5D mark III more than the D800 so …”. The sales figures say something very much the opposite. Most of the on-line reviews reflect a bit of personal bias, if only in how they weight the various differences between the two cameras. If you are invested in Canon, you can find a rationale in the reviews to go with the MkIII. If you are invested in Nikon the D800 is a no-brainer. However, jpeg reviews of IQ are inadequate for a comparison of what a camera is capable of. In a similar fashion pixel level noise is misleading. The ISO metric should be: Raw data converted to an image of the same size. This test shows what a FF sensor can produce when “printing” to a given size. Anything else is evaluating software choices. Nasim did an excellent job in his review by providing meaningful evaluations. The best reviews of senors are at :
The better camera is a matter of personal choice. Higher frame rate->Canon, Better IQ->Nikon, Quieter jpegs->Canon, Sharper jpegs->Nikon, Faster AF->Canon, More Accurate AF->Nikon, Ergonomics->personal preference. The differences are all small enough to allow brand loyalty to have a huge impact on buying decisions (and reviews). Personally, I find the D800 to be a more attractive camera than the 5D MkIII and my observation is that a comparitive evaluation is causing more Canon users to switch to Nikon than the other way around. However,what’s most important is that the top DSLR brands are very comparable. This generates competition and we all get to enjoy the new technology that results.
I don’t think Jared Polin and Kai Wong are bias because they’re both long time Nikon Users. And wedding photographer and Nikon user Ryan Brenizer also liked the 5D Mark III and implied that he preferred it over the D800(Ryan Brenizer’s website). Jared said he will get the 5Dm3 as his first Canon system(fro knows photo D800 vs 5Dmark3). Kai Wong said that the answer is obvious that he would pick the D800 but he picked the 5Dm3 instead despite being a self professed Nikon fanboy because it is the better all around camera(digitalrev D800 vs 5Dmark3 video). This is the first time I’ve read or watch reviews where Nikon users actually like a Canon DSLR. I disagree with what you said Nikon having more accurate AF when most reviews said it is both fast and accurate. If Nikon is so superior and will likely make more people switch, then how come Canon is still number 1? and why do the popular and highly paid professionals like Russel James, Pete Souza, Joey L, Dave Hill, Andresej Dragan, Lara Jade, Karl Taylor, Dan Busta, Joshua Hoffine, Yana Lapikova all chose Canon?
I’m not going to run down anyone for choosing either Nikon or Canon. Most pros have enough invested in glass that it takes a pretty big difference to make us want to switch brands. If you are invested in Canon, the 5DMkIII is a great choice for an all around camera. However, the best image you can get from a D800 will be better than the best image you can get from a 5DMkIII (Base ISO, tripod, blah, blah, blah). On the other hand the 5DMkIII will always shoot faster. For me, I want the best image quality possible and am more than willing to accept the tradeoffs of slower frame rate and slighly reduce low light performance. When I shoot sports or photojournalism, I want a Cannon D1X or Nikon D4 or Nikon D3S. While the D800 has actually moved DSLR image quality into the MF range. For some folks, that has a lot of value. How you evaluate the features and differences against a collection of expensive glass is personal preference. … To answer your question as to why Canon is #1: Canon got on the AF band wagon before Nikon, and this was revolutionary enough to cause a lot of pros to switch. Once you have the glass, it takes something revolutionary to make you want to switch. Canon could make inferior cameras to Nikon (I’m not saying they do) and still remain in the top spot for quite a while… just so long as they weren’t too much worse. … The 5DMkIII looks to be a phenominal camera, I can’t imagine anyone who purchases one being unhappy. However, in my workflow, using raw images not jpegs the Canon has only a slight advantage in ISO (for a given ouput size) and the Canon has a a higher frame rate while the Nikon D800 at base ISO provides better image quality. IQ matters to me, a lot. … For me the D800, D4 combo covers it all, and does so better than a 5DMkIII, 1DX combo. Nikon has differentiated their pro tools to a greater degree than Canon. I see the D800 as a revolutinary tool that brings MF pefromance to the DSLR range at a very affordable price. Depending on the intended use, and investment in glass, the 5DMkIII may make more sense. My point was that for many, the ability to achieve MF sensor performance at DSLR prices has been a reason to switch brands. From the discussions I have had, the slight difference in ISO performance and higher frame rate attributed to the Canon are seen as less compelling when it comes to engendering a brand switch. At the end of the day, Canon will probably still be #1, but the margin will be smaller. But as a consequence of the competition, we all win.
I definitely agree with you on some points. True, some people will go for the highest IQ they can get and that is why some will go for the D800. Some people will prefer the best a versatile camera without the need for highest megapixel for details and that’s the people who will prefer the 5Dm3. It’s like choosing one of two supercars, would you go with the supercar with the highest top speed like the Bugatti Veyron Super Sport or is the Ferrari 458 Italia good enough for you for your skills or style of driving? I know that Nikon has always been the leader when it comes to high ISO image quality and AF technology, most Canon-using professionals know that but they still stick with Canon and because their Canon DLSRs already have what they need and does not ask for more. Famed celebrity photographer Annie Leibovitz is a Medium format camera, a Canon, and Nikon user, shoots more with her 5D mark II, but now recommends an iPhone 4S as the snapshot camera. Being a studio and portrait photographer, she would probably like the D800. Nikon user and excellent wedding photographer, Ryan Brenizer said it best ‘For someone like me who takes more than a quarter million photos a year, the idea of a sensor that only shoots 36MP is a non-starter’ in his “a Nikon User’s Review of the 5D mark III’ article (well written, unbiased review) and would likely stick to his D3S or prefer to shoot with the 5Dm3 than get a D800 because of his line of work.
Thanks for pointing out Ryan Brenizer’s article. For him, a 1.6x increase in file size (over the 5DMkIII) and a 3x increase over the 3DS is not worth the increase in resolution of the D800. I expect that he also rarely prints over 11 x 17. .. It makes sense that he is sticking with the D3S. Personally, I think disk space is cheap so the image size issue is mainly associated with uploading (I use a firewire CF card reader). I think the biggest differentiators between the 5DMkIII and the D800 are sensor resolution and frame rate. Either camera will do great stuff. As an all around camera, the D800 does a pretty good job because the sensor buys so much. Just the enhanced ability to crop has a lot of value. But the 5DMkIII will be better for sports when it comes to getting that incredible action shot. As I see it they are both excellent choices. A collection of expensive glass is a huge factor when it comes to upgrading, it can be the difference between a $3,000 upgrade and a $30,000 upgrade. That’s huge. The way I tally things, the D800 is a better camera for me as well as a better value. Most Canon users will come down on the other side… Depending on the intended use, workflow etc. I believe you could make a credible argument for which is the better all-around camera. Given that the D800 is $500 cheaper and has the capability to produce better (large) images, I feel that it is the more exciting of the two. But if I were a MkII user with a collection of glass, I’d see the MkIII as awesome.
I totally agree, the D800 is a breakthrough camera. A CSI pixel monster. The high resolution is a bless for all wildlife and especially bird photographers. I bought the D800 instead of the D800E because of potential moiré on the feather as you recommended. In case someone is interested to see how the 600mm performs, I have taken some bird pictures with the D800.
Dear Simon Delighted you posted these bird images. I have been eying the D800 for birds. I am currently using the Nikon D7000 SLR with a Sigma AF OS Zoom 150-500mm because I want to do work that is entirely handheld (some of my images here orientalbirdimages.org/photo…der_ID=545). I have hence avoided the heavier cameras & lenses (cost not a big issue for me). I love to wander in the forest, try and make friends with birds (find birds get distressed with the tripod). I wonder if you have any experience or opinions with handheld for the D800 at 400-500mm.
Since I got the D800 only a few days ago and I normally shoot with tripod I don’t have any experience with handholding the D800. But since you are experienced in doing so, and the D7000 has a slightly higher pixel density than the D800, I would assume that you will get even better results with your D7000.
(1) Imaging resources uses a Sigma lense. The lens make a signficant difference to the result. I would have personally liked to see the results using original Canon and Nikon full-frame lenses. I would therefore ignore this result.
(2) Examiner uses DPL review results. I would therefore look at DPL review, who are pretty good technical reviewers. I look at their reviews all the time. I do not know if they are professional real-life.photographers.
I also recommend watching Digitalrev’s 5D mark 3 vs D800 review www.digitalrev.com/artic…xNjI0OTY_A I would recommend watching digitalrev’s reviews like L lens vs Non-L and the 550D vs D90 durability test where they dropped the camers down an escalator, pour coffee on them, use them as hammer and shoes, and a ot more. Their comparisons and reviews are not boring, funny, but at the same time deliver the facts and real world tests.
The DigitalRev durabilty video is great but they didn’t actually use these cameras but predecessors. This doesn’t make the video any worse but I thought I spare some readers the disappointment that their favorite body isn’t mutilated. ;-) They also have some great advice and inspirational videos like the nightly city shoot.
Nasim, I think you did wrong. You zoomed out for Nikon 800, That’s kind of cheating. Take a look that link www.slrlounge.com/on-im…omparison/ that was provided by Srini. I think that is right way to compare samples between 5D mark 3 and Nikon D800.
In my personal opinion, Imaging Resources comparison is probably not valid as the lenses used are Sigma for Nikon and Canon/Sigma lenses for Nikon. I think one should use a full-frame lenses of Nikon and Canon to facilitate a fair comparison.
In my personal opinion, Imaging Resources comparison is probably not fair as the lenses used are Sigma for Nikon and Canon/Sigma lenses for Canon. I think one should use full-frame lenses of Nikon and Canon to facilitate a fair comparison.
Sergo, how fair is it to compare 36 MP to 23 MP at the pixel level? The ONLY proper way to compare sensors with different resolutions is to down-sample a higher resolution sensor to the smaller one. Or you can print both at a certain print size and also compare, which would yield very similar results.
It is the same as comparing the Nikon D700 with 12 MP to the Canon 5D Mark II with 22 MP – if you looked at the pixel level, the Nikon D700 would destroy the 5D Mark II. However, if the image from 5D Mark II is down-sampled to 12 MP, then the difference between sensors is not that big…
And by doing 100% crop, noise on both sides probably will be the same. On you review, you were sound like D800 better in noise and also has more MP, which is I think, it is not true about noise. With 100% crop, the noise comparisons probably will be same or better on 5D M3, but 5D M3 has smaller resolution. I don’t know if follow me…
About D700 and 5D mark2, I don’t care if D700 destroy 5D M2 on noise. Both sides have pluses and minuses. I wasn’t even talking about them…
Sergo, looks like you have a problem understanding basic things about sensor comparisons here. Didn’t you understand Nasim when he talked about comparing D700’s 12 MP sensor to 5D MK II’s 22 MP sensor? It is completely pointless to compare lenses with different resolutions. Why would you want to look at crops at 100% – it is a given that the 5D Mark III will look better at 100%, simply because it has bigger pixels, hello! If everyone would look at camera sensor performance at 100%, manufacturers would work on decreasing the number of megapixels instead of increasing them! The whole point of having a high resolution sensor is to be able to down-sample when needed and have super high resolution at low ISOs at all other times!
So stop coming back with your “cheating” and “zoomed out” comments. It is plain stupid to take a 36 MP image and try to compare it at 100% to a 23 MP image with the same sensor size. Why don’t you compare the Canon 1D X and the 5D Mark III at 100% view? Is that fare? Of course not!
I know where you going Praveen, but I don’t think you got to my point. I’m agree with down-sampling. But then it should be mention in summary. I did not like how the summary was written -” As you can see, the Nikon D800 sensor has no competition, even from its biggest rival, the Canon 5D Mark III still cannot quite match what the D800 can do. Don’t forget that there is also a big resolution difference between the two”. And the reason 5D M3 sample has a larger noise because D800 sample was down-sampling. I’m a canon user, so little respect to cannon would be appreciate. And Praveen, don’t Hello! me
Sergo, perhaps you did not see that it says “Please note that the camera comparisons are only based on image quality. Also note that all images are down-sampled to the size of the sensor with the lowest resolution (when comparing to D700, down-sampled to 12 MP and when comparing to the 5D Mark III, down-sampled to 23 MP)” on the very top of the “Comparisons” page?
Sergo, I wrote the quick summary right before taking off to New Mexico, so it is rather incomplete! I will go back and add a few things, change a few things in the comparisons pages. I think the D800 vs 5D Mark III situation is like the D700 vs 5D Mark II situation a couple of years ago, but reversed – two cameras for different needs. One has more megapixels, one has better ISO performance at the pixel level.
I have been shooting with the 5D Mark III for the past 2 weeks and I am impressed by it. The autofocus is accurate and fast (although I do not like the way autofocus points are changed), colors are beautiful and the shutter sounds much nicer than on D800. Metering is a little off here and there, but pretty good overall. Dynamic range is better than on 5D Mark II in my opinion. And the camera feels better on hands than the D800 – the grip is much more comfortable.
I will be writing a full review of the Canon 5D Mark III within the next week or so, hopefully before I take off to Europe…
This is what was on top of the “Comparisons” page – “Let’s see how the new D800 compares to the older D700. Below you will find image samples normalized to 12 MP by down-sampling. Please note that the camera comparisons are only based on image quality. Additional information and differences in camera features will be provided shortly.”
Sergo – I am not sure what you are asking. I just got back from Glenwood Springs. Shot with your 17-40mm f/4 lens a little, then used 50mm f/1.2L and 24mm f/1.4L – man, those are sweet lenses! Your lens is a tad soft in the extreme corners, but very sharp everywhere else. The 50mm is tough to focus, but very sharp and awesome. The 24mm f/1.4L is very similar to the Nikon 24mm f/1.4G – super sharp, colorful and very nice. So far I am liking the Canon 5D Mark III. Will call you tomorrow bro!
Praveen, please respect our visitors and do not post abusive comments like this. Sergo is wondering about my testing methodology and yet you are attacking him instead of explaining nicely.
In my opinion what a camera comparison should do is simply ask the question: “For a given image, taken at equivalent settings and printed to equivalent sizes, which camera produces better results?” When I capture an image, I want to be able to reproduce it at the highest quality possible; this means raw files printed to a given size. Pixel peeping is misleading. Throw away in-camera jpeg processing and print to the same size…which image do you like better. That is the only way to assess camera capability. Once you have those images in hand, then if you want jpegs you can readily make a better jpeg than you will ever achieve in-camera. Nasim has provided the most useful review out there…Great job!
Sergo, I never said that the D800 is better than the 5D Mark III at 100% view. At the pixel level, I have no doubt that the 5D Mark III will have cleaner images, just like other websites have shown. Thats kind of a “given”, because the 5D Mark III has less pixels and therefore bigger pixel size. What I talked about was comparison when the 36MP image is downsampled to 23MP – that’s where the differences are rather small, with Nikon having an edge over the 5D Mark III. I only pointed out about the resolution, because at low ISO levels such as ISO 100, the D800 also has a megapixel advantage, allowing for larger prints/more cropping opportunities.
So, if you crop D800 to 800X600, then crop 5D mark3 with same size, and then do comparisons. Like I was mention earlier, the way you did it, you zoomed out for D800. So, if use same crop size for both sides and if D800 still shows better result, then you can say D800 has better ISO comparisons with bigger resolution.
AH, I see the misconception. When comparing camera sensors you don’t crop. Typically, you would combine pixels from the larger sensor into an image of the same pixel size as the smaller. The idea is to use the entire sensor to build equivalent images. Cropping uses a subset of the sensor, and that is why 100% crops are misleading. If I have two sensors that I want to compare, I should make that comparison using all of the data provided by the sensor. I then need to evaluate Images of equivalent sizes. Anything else results in an improper comparison.
You recently reviewed the Nikor 24-120 f4 lens and gave it a very high approval rating. Would like to see what you think of this lens now that you have the D800. I am sure you are already trying out this combo.
I watched this video on an interview with Jim Brandenburg (legendary National Geographic photographer ) on his first impressions of Nikon D800, see: jimbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2012/…about.html May be of interest to others considering the camera. I hope to be testing the D800 for myself next week before making final decision to plunge in. The FX format is only thing holding me back for now (will loose reach as currently using a DX format with D7000). Will try and test on birds with old & new format (handheld at 500mm) and see if cropping will allow me to get better results than what I have now.
I am happy with mt D3 and D700. Maybe wait for next model to upgrade. The image quality is more or less the same. Iam thinking about investing in better lens
I am happy with my D3 and D700. Maybe wait for next model to upgrade. The image quality is more or less the same. Iam thinking about investing in better lens
I am looking forward to your D4 review. I picked up my D4, 1 week ago (moving from a D700), and loving it. I had to run the Calibration mode on the battery charger, to get full capacity.
e where you are coming from. But I just want your opinion in choosing between these lenses due to two reasons, 1. Budget: I’m an amateur considering the move to FX and 2:Availability: These are more easily available where I am. So if you had to choose one of then based on sharpness, colour and handheld use, which would it be? The 24-120 is also on my list, but last option as its very expensive here. Please let me know what you think. Once again thanks, not only are your article superb but your patience in answeing them is great.tience in answeing them is great.
Ken Rockwell and many others see the Nikon 28-300 VR as a great lens for the D800. As for price, I’ll put up the “cheap” Nikon 300mm f4 up against the far more expensive and way HEAVIER 300mm f2,8. Not only that, it works great with the TC-14E and TC-17E the latter of which is almost never removed from the 300mm. The old relatively inexpensive Nikon DX 70-300 was a superb lens when I was shooting DX. I just got rid of my Nikon 14-24mm and replaced it with the Nikon 16-35mm which has VR. Finally I sold both my D3S and D3X and got far more than it will cost me to get a new D800 and a D800E. In the world of Nikon, more expensive doesn’t necessarily mean better. While I have a 50mm and 85mm Nikon prime, I almost never use them for general use because of the great performance of the 28-300mm [this was before I sold the D3X and D3S].
Somebody must think the 28-300mm is great. Just try and find one for sale these days!!
Anyway Nasim your review of the D800 is by the far the best I’ve seen yet!
For me I decided to wait for the D400 first. DX means lighter, cheaper and smaller lenses, more flexibility and faster workflow. I expect the D400 to have at least 18 megapixels (maybe 24 megapixels) and good high iso’s as well. To travel with a € 3000,- camera + dito big and heavy (paparazzi look) lenses means asking for troubles. I expect to make make the best pictures with a small, discrete and light camera set that (in case of a D400 or even D300) offers plenty resolution and IQ. If the message of your picture is strong enough nobody will ever cares about ultimate sharpness or noise. Photographs are about content and creativity!!!
Max, the Nikon D400 will have a 24 MP sensor, the same one from the Sony A77, except better image processing pipeline, so less apparent noise at high ISO levels. You are right – DX means lighter body, smaller, lighter and cheaper lenses…
As for me, if I were to buy a cropped-sensor camera today, it would be a mirrorless one. I am strongly considering the Fuji X-Pro 1.
Nasim, I am a bit surprised that you would prefer a mirrorless for a cropped sensor. I personally think that lightweight systems would be much more useful for an armature like me but while the mirrorless camera bodies are great, choices regarding good compact lenses are still very limited. With NEX 5N, almost all the lenses (except the 16mm 2.8) are too large for that body. I think that for NEX, Sony should have made the 35mm or 50mm compact prime before the 16mm and for Nikon 1, Nikon should have made 20mm prime before the 10mm. I don’t understand why every mirrorless system manufacturer is making a wide angle prime but not a normal or short tele prime. I know that Sony and Nikon are not stupid but I fail to see the logic. How is it possible that users of mirrorless camera find a wide angle prime more useful than a normal prime? Can you think of any reason?
Amit, I agree with your comments on lenses – manufacturers clearly need to fill the gap quickly for normal primes or their systems won’t get any serious consideration from pros and amateurs. The reason why I prefer cropped-sensor mirrorless systems, is because they are much smaller and compact – great for travel and everyday photography. Owning heavy-duty DSLRs, I would not invest in a smaller DSLR body with a smaller sensor…mirrorless is clearly the future for anything smaller than 35mm.
The Fuji X-Pro 1 is a highly interesting camera for sure but just (and only) for traveling or similar situations. I look forward to see a comparison between the coming D400 and the D800. Of course the D800 will beat the D400 in pure IQ but I expect the D400 to be so good that the difference in normal usage will not be relevant any more. Nowadays I find my 12-24mm 24-70mm combo as a base highly satisfying on my D300s. A little bit more resolution and a bit better High iso’s would be fine but 24 MP and better high iso’s than the D7000 should be more than enough for 95% of the photographic needs, keeping the advantages of DX. Maybe it is an other discussion and a matter of taste and subject but i.m.o so many of the digital pictures that I see today are already too clean and too (digitally) sharp to deliver a beautiful artistic experience.
If there’s some thing I like more than these reviews, it is those amazing pictures you’re taking, Nasim!
You know, some websites out there like dpreview publish some excellent reviews, but it’s all techie stuff – distortion,fall-off, chromatic aberration, ISO comparisons etc… It’s all very important, but when you get to the image samples page, all the images look just plain ridiculous – a potato here, a window or a wheel there.
What I like about your reviews is the artistic point of view that you’re bringing to the table. At the end of the day, that’s what truly matters.
Because 1000’s of us own D7000’s, just to prove the D800 is vastly superior as indicated in reviews could you please do a comparison test, side by side images D7000 vs D800. I am betting that an excellent photographer could match results up to 16×20 (cropping not an issue) . But I don’t have a D800 to test my theory.
Thank you for your excellent website and reviews, very much appreciated!!!
Forrest, I am working on a couple of other reviews at the moment, so the D7000 comparison will have to wait a little (have a couple of trips planned within the next 2 weeks). One thing for sure – the D800 will have a huge lead over the D7000 when down-sampling is applied. For pixel-level performance, the performance should be very similar on both.
Just saw Srini’s youtube link ‘Canon 5D MK III vs Nikon D800 with Nathan Elson’ as expected the Nikon guy like AF of 5D mark 3, D800’s slight edge is the extra megapixels. High ISO RAW files are almost the same with Canon getting advantage at ISO 12800 and Nikon slightly sharper at ISO 1600 and 3200. However, when it comes to jpeg the 5D Mark 3 dominates because of better Noise Reduction processing as seen in cameralab’s review here: www.cameralabs.com/canon…d_mark_ii/ this is also supported by imagingresource, DPreview, and other comparison review sites. This is why the 5D mark 3 was reported to have better high ISO performance than both D4 and D800, their NR is superior but when it comes to RAW files it’s a toe to toe battle.
Tonight I looked at the same D800 image in Nikon Capture NX2 and Lightroom 4. I made sure all the settings were as close as possible, with no noise reduction. What I noticed was that noise was much more obvious using Lightroom 4.
In the past, Capture NX always converted NEF files much better than Lightroom. I think the trend continues. I wonder how accurate many of these tests are since I’m guessing Canon files will look cleaner in Adobe since their file format is not closed like Nikon’s.
Dean, I have done some side-by-side comparisons with Capture NX and Lightroom and I do not have the same conclusion as you do. Noise performance on RAW level should be very similar on both…
But if NX output is surely cleaner (I have to go back and retest), then it is another advantage to the D800 files!
Canon has really done a nice job on their in camera noise reduction when producing jpegs. However, I think the early reports that claimed the MkIII to be the new low light king and touted a 2-3 stop improvement over the MkII illustrate that comparing jpeg results can be a slippery slope. Nikon seems to choose sharpness over noise reduction in their jpeg processing. Personally in most cases I find the noise to be more distracting than softer edges, so I prefer Canons jpeg processing. That having been said, I prefer the results I get by proceesing the raw files myself (as computer based processing of raw files to remove noise can provide better results than any in-camera processing). I think that if the goal is IQ, and you have the proper glass, a sturdy tripod, proper release etc., then the D800 is the DSLR king. I print really big, so the D800 is a dream come true.
Yes, Canon definitely has better JPEG rendering out of the camera, but that’s only important for those that shoot JPEG. I personally never shoot in JPEG…
And mind you, the Camera Labs comparison shows pixel-level performance, which is never the right way to compare image sensors that have different resolutions…I hope Gordon updates his review with some real comparisons, because what he has right now makes the D800 look like a crappy camera in comparison.
Thanks for this wonderful review, and I can’t wait to see your lens combo review. I currently have a 50mm 1.4D on order (1.4G version is out of stock every where), and I would love to hear if that 50mm 1.4D would be a good lens to use with D800.
Hi Albert. I have tested the 3 great classics 50mm 1.4D, 35mm 2.0D and 85mm 1.8D on the D800, and from my humble judgement, they appear ok. They are sharp on aperture 4.0 and up. But softness is somewhat noticeable below. But then again. Everything is more noticeable on 36mp. So I would not be initially alarmed by using these lenses, but test them thoroughly on full 36mp to see if it fits your personal liking of low aperture softness before choosing to spend money.
But!
The 50mm 1.8G (New One), is doing a greater job. Noticeably better contrast and sharpness, than the 50mm 1.4D and even the 50mm 1.4G. (Yes I handed in my 50mm 1.4G, cause i was severely disappointed in its ugly vignetting at f1.4 – f2.0).
The 50mm 1.8G has its flaws, on handling, rather than image quality. The squeaky autofocus noise and the tough to turn manual focus ring for DSLR video is not that great.
But for the price tag its the best of all these.
So not entirely the answer to your question, but hope it helped anyways.
Albert, I am with Sofus on this one – the older “D” primes are only OK on the D800. Their wide open performance is far from being impressive, so I would rather get the newer glass that performs better. Did you consider the new Nikon 50mm f/1.8G? It is much sharper than the old f/1.4D and f/1.8D and in some ways even better than the new f/1.4G. See my Nikon 50mm f/1.8G review for details.
If you are still in the 30 day return window, I would return the AF-D and get better glass.
Nasim-I shoot for publications–they like to do full page cocktail table books so resolution is critical for me. I had a pair of Orca jumping off the coast of Cabo Del Sol Mexico, that made it thru the Photo Editor but when it came to production and a full pager—I got dinged for resolution! Maddening!! Also, price is a factor. What I learned from your excellent review is that I will get excellent resolution, FPS is not a huge deal for me, (no sports) the sensor story is a home run and I don’t have to buy the 910 flash!! My bet is the D4 availability will be coming not as fast as the D800–this is what B&H told me. My lenses are the 24-70 70-200 and 300 2.8. These are perfect for me.
I got the first one in my town but had put my preorder in last November. Try calling the Shutterbug Shops that in in the Pacific Northwest-they may still have a few left in inventory.
Great reviews! For my D700 I’ve got the 14-24mm f/2.8G ED, 24-70mm f/2.8G ED, 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR I, 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II, 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED & assorted Nikkor prime lenses (e.g., wonderful old manual ED 600mm); some DX (18-200mm) for my D200. Couple questions: 1) having been happy with my current cameras (D700/200) does it make sense to upgrade to the D800 (the 36.3MP CMOS sensor (compared to 12.1MP) is very enticing)? 2) do you find that the camera works better with primes than zooms? I am an amateur; shoot mainly wildlife, landscapes and youth sports.
Mike, it all depends on whether you need the better dynamic range and higher resolution or not. See the updated review above for information on wildlife and sports photography. Basically, if you are OK with the slow fps speed and much larger files, the D800 surely does not disappoint. But I would prioritize your needs before jumping with the D800 – do you shoot mostly landscapes, or wildlife and sports? If you do mostly wildlife and sports, then I would skip the D800. But if your priority is with landscapes and occasional wildlife/sports, then the D800 is a superb candidate for an upgrade. Another option is to keep the D700 for your wildlife/sports needs and use the D800 strictly for landscapes (if your budget allows that).
Nasim, Thanks for the insight, I have a bunch of older AIs FX lenses from old film bodies. I.e. 50mm 1.4, 20mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, 105mm 2.5, and a 135. I live in Ivins,Ut about 40 minutes from Zion natl park. I loaded up the gear and headed out to Zion to test my new D800 and the lenses, I shoot slow and methodical, always on a tripod, so using manual lenses is fine with me. The resolution, crispness, saturation, Etc. was stunning. It was simply jaw dropping, I would put this camera and older Nikon AIs lenses against anything out there. I have access to some of the top Nikon glass out there and these older lenses will hold there own against anything I ave ever used.
Dave, thank you so much for your feedback – I am sure others will find it very useful!
It is good to know that older glass still rocks with a super high resolution sensor. I have been mainly playing with all the new AF-S pro lenses and so far they have all been very good as well. No wonder why the D800 is in such huge demand, because a lot of people are realizing how good and capable it really is! :)
Hi Dave, I’m currently using a D700 with the following AIS lenses: 24mm F 2.0, 28mm F 2.8, 35mm F 1.4, 85mm F2.0 and 200mm F4.0. Hoping to upgrade to a D800. Do you have any samples of your Zion shoot on Flickr or any other photo site. Link much appreciated. Thanks!
Dear Nasim, thanks for taking the trouble to photograph some birds. The American Kestrel is a great image. I am definitely going to invest in the D800. Now to get my hands on it as demand locally (Malaysia) is also high.
I dont shoot landscape or wildlife, but primarily outdoor portraits sessions, some weddings and parties both indoor and outdoor. I currently use a d7000 and want to upgrade as well as have a second body. I normally shoot indoor at iso 800 and would love to be able to shoot at 1600-3200 if necessary. How do you think the d800 will compare to my d7000?? The D4 is too expensive for me, my budget is $3k TOPS!
I do have good Nikon glass 17-55(which i will sell and replace with the 24-70) 70-200 and the 85 1.8G. thanks for the help, Mike
Mike, as I have shown in this review and other articles, the Nikon D800 is a superb camera for all photography needs, except for wildlife and sports (mostly because of its 4 fps limitation). For your needs, the D800 will be a huge upgrade over your D7000, especially considering how good its AF system is in comparison. Plus, you have a lot of options to crop and down-sample images to reduce their noise…
Loved the review. I currently shoot indoor sports, college Basketball, with two D3s and 24-70mm and 70-200mm Nikon 2.8’s at 3,200 or 6,400 iso and get great results even with crops. I have most of Nikon’s top glass save some telephoto’s but 24,35,50, 85 1.4G’s, 105 VR micro and 200 Micro and 135 DC. Do you feel that I could replace a D3s with a D800 in the above enviroment with the same results. I am very tempted but I know what I get in this shooting environment with the D3s and don’t want to give anything up. Thanks so much.
Skip, you should skip the D800 upgrade, you will surely be disappointed with it when compared to the D3s. The Nikon D3s is a much faster camera with phenomenal pixel-level performance, so why replace it with a camera with so much resolution? If you were a landscape photographer, I would certainly advise to upgrade to the D800, but for sports – a definite no.
There are numerous discussion thread related to 11-16 on FX on dpreview and flikr.
Most probably you will need to explicitly set the image mode to DX as this is a third party lens. However, if you do not change the picture mode to DX, 16mm may still be passable on a FX if you don’t use filter or hood. At this point let me make it clear that these are my assumptions based on a few articles I have read. I don’t own this lens and I have a DX camera not FX. Someone who has tried to use this lens on FX will be able to guide you better.
I am at an intermediate level and am learning about photography at a moderate rate. I am debating if I should get the D7000 or the D800. My delimma is that I currently have a D3100 but would eventually like the D800. The price difference between the D7000 and D800 is large. I feel I’ll be ready for a D800 by years end. Should I go with the D7000 and wait for my skills to improve or just get the D800 now?? Also, does the D800 have an “Auto” setting like my D3100 does, so that I can use it until I learn the more advanced skills?
No offense, but if you shoot in Auto mode, learn more advanced photography with your D3100. Although your pictures will be a little bit better with a D7000 in Auto (eg because of a better metering system), I think you will be disappointed from your step up with both possible choices. The advanced DSLRs you want are a pleasure to use because of many direct controls, thus no searching in the fiddly menus. But that means learning to handle a camera.
On the other hand, if you tell us that you need a high fps or shoot a lot of high iso scenes, than you will benefit from both choices. If you really WANT one of those, note that you will need really expensive pro glass to get nice results with the D800. Greets, Dee
No offense taken. That’s why I asked the question. I do shoot in Auto, but am mainly shooting in more advanced settings now ( I should have stated that earlier ). I don’t have a “full” knowledge of the advanced settings, but am learning quickly. So I think the D7000 is the way to go and the D800 is definately out for now. I do need a high fps for some sports shots. So do you think the D7000 would be O.K. ?
Thank you for your D800 review which is by far one of the best one can find on the Internet. In your review, you keep on mentioning “down sampling”, what is it this feature of D800? I am using a D200 and have never heard of these technical terms. Would you please explain. Thank you.
Down sampling is done on a computer. Essentially this is the first time any camera is compared to another based down-sampled images and not out of camera results. This is very confusing and not on par with what has been done before.
Much like everybody complaining about shorter battery life of D4. It is shorter but not by as much as people think. Nikon was forced to redesign battery based on new safety requirements and then test it based on CIPA standard (which probably applies more to chimping style of P&S shooters)
If you look into the D4 manual you’ll see that the camera is able to take far more picture per Nikon battery testing standard then per CIPA standard so between the D3s and D4 we are not comparing apples to apples.
Few years ago the redesigned Nissan Maxima had less horsepower than the previous model and everybody was WT_? Well, it had the same exact engine but the testing procedure has changed.
Conversely, the D800 scores higher on DXO mark because a different methods were used then in prior camera testing. Nobody down-sampled images from MF cameras to match the resolution of the popular 8-12MP range of DSLRs. Heck, even the D4 wasn’t “down sampled” to the D3 resolution to perform side by side comparison.
When the D3s came out it was faaar superior to any other camera with out of camera results, no down sampling was needed.
I am a big Nikon fan but these results are artificially inflated with new testing procedures never employed before the D800. While I see the strong points the D800 has to offer I think a lot of people will be surprised, read disappointed.
I’m afraid I disagree. Forget megapixels. All that matters is how well a given camera, using a given group of settings produces an image of a given size. DXOMark has always used that methodology and it has not changed. The D3S has lower noise than a 5DMkIII after downsampling the MkIII image. Pixel count may be an indication of many things, but ultimate image quality at a given size is the ONLY way to compare cameras. Once you have a comaprison (raw images, printed to a given size) then you can evaluate other factors like fps, storage requirements, battery life whatever. But things like pixel level noise of jpegs is a metric that can be prettty far removed from the possible image quality that can be achieved with raw files printed to a given size. Down sampling does not inflate results. Rather down sampling is required in order to achieve valid real-world comparisons.
Excellent work/review. However, your ISO review comparing the D800 to 5D mark III contradicts camera lab review which shows that mark III clearly outperforms D800, starting from ISO 800:
“the D800 wins on detail at low sensitivities, while the 5D Mark III wins on noise levels and cleaner output at higher sensitivities…At 50-400 ISO the D800 remains sufficiently clean for most people and manages to out-resolve the Mark III. At 800 ISO and above though, the D800 becomes noticeably noisier than the Mark III. I’d say the Mark III is very usable at 1600-6400 ISO with impressively clean results, whereas the D800 has become very noisy in comparison”:
Cameralabs has done 2 things different than what Nasim has done. – You will notice that the D800 pics look like zoomed in as compared to 5D MK3. This is because they have compared 100% crops. – They have compared JPEGs using in-camera defaults.
CameraLabs has done the same exact thing everybody has been doing for ages. Both Nasim and DXO have employed a new procedure comparing a downsampled images from one camera to a 100% crop from another.
Using much the same logic one can argue that a Ferrari is as fast as Ford in stop and go traffic.
The camera labs review is poorly done. The first problem is that it is comparing jpegs. The second problem is that it is comparing images of different sizes (look at the pictures). The only way to truly compare cameras is to answer the question: “For a given set of camera settings, how do the cameras compare when producing images of the same subject and printed to the same size?” Pixel level noise in jpegs is not a useful comparison. The camerlabs reveiw notes that the 5DmkIII is less noisy while at low ISOs the D800 is sharper…these are both influenced by philisophical decsions made during jpeg processing. In order to actually compare cameras, you must compare raw images and you must compare at the same output size. As photographers, we want to frame a photo, capture the image and then reproduce it. By using jpegs, the cameralabs review is also evaluating software decisions. By using images of different sizes, they are putting the D800 results under a magnifying glass. Consider this: given two images at 100% crop, how can the D800 be sharper?…the pixels are the same size…Is the nikon lens better? No? The difference is in the jpeg engine. Canon is sacrificing sharpness for improved noise. Now, if I take the D800 raw file and shrink it down to the size of the Canon raw file, the pixel averaging that takes places reduces noise too. So if you get rid of the jpeg decsions and make the images the same size, the results begin to look different. Since raw files, processed, then printed to a given size is what we do as photographers, shouldn’t that be the way we compare cameras? The cameralabs assessment compares pixel level jpegs. If the goal is to shoot jpegs without any further processing, and pixel level quality matters more than image level quality then I suppose its fine. On the other hand, if the goal is to be able to determine which cameras are capable of producing the best images under a range of conditions, well, the camera labs review is doing a disservice to its readers. Hats off to Nasim for doing such a great job!
Have already got the D800, and try to use it in all its area. Sa far, j’m very happy. Many thanks for your interesting review. Waiting with impatience for the following article. Great Work, Thanks very much
when i enable bracketing (3, 5, 9 shots, whatever), and set the camera to self-timer, it’s only taking one shot. it’s not "completing" the full bracket sequence. to complete the sequence, i have to manually press the shutter button each time. however, if i set the camera to CL or CH, it will fire off the expected number of shots.
checking page 136 of the d800 manual, it says the following:
In self-timer mode, the camera will take the number of shots selected in Step 2 on page 133 each time the shutter-release button is pressed, regardless of the option selected for Custom Setting c3 (Self-timer) > Number of shots (0 291); the interval between shots is however controlled by Custom Setting c3 (Self-timer) > Interval between shots.
so … from what i can tell, it should work the way i expect. any ideas or if i’m doing something wrong?
thx!
btw, i also have a d7000 and the bracketing works exactly the way i am thinking it should. i can’t see any reason for the functionality to be different on the d800???
I’m really looking forward to reading your thoughts on how the different lenses perform on the D800. I’m interested in the 24-120 f4, but cannot make my mind up to get this or the 24-70?! I’m really interested in sharpness more than lowlight performance. Have you tested the 24-120? Is it up to scratch on the D800?
Great review, Nasim. Thanks. Just sold my D90/18-200VR/SB-700 for the D800/24-70 2.8ED/SB-910. D800 is backordered and have to wait another 10days :( …. I get through just looking at and admiring the Nikkor glass and the flashlight ! A feature I was keen to know about and wasn’t covered was speed and quality of auto focussing during HD video recording. How good is it? One of the biggest misses on the 5D2, is it available on the 5D3 and how is it compared to that of the D800? If the 5D3 is missing good and quick AF during video recording, it’s another no brainer in favor of the D800!!
Congratulations! Your question on the auto focusing during HD video mode, actually is my biggest concern now, after I played with my D800 for several days.
The focus performance during live view (photo or video mode) is much slower than in viewfinder mode. It is so for a reason: when the mirror is up, the camera can only focus by the image contrast instead of phase detection.
I have never used Canon camera especially in live view video recording mode, but I believe it is similar. For example if someone is walking towards to you, you can NEVER focus his face ALL THE TIME. The AF will keep working – no matter how good your lens is- and the face will be clear and blurred repeatedly.
I have asked around, including some camcorder master. In film business, the follow focus is mostly manual. You can search ‘follow focus’ on internet and find some attachment to improve the common focus mechanism – which only make the process more comfort and confident.
So in short. For live view photo shooting, the AF is quite fast (not as fast as in the viewfinder), and usable; but live view hd recording, do it manually if you can,or get help with follow focus accessories, and much experience.
Fantastic review, thank you very much. I also think that Exposure delay in connection with a self timer is a great option to prevent shake. So far, I have been using the D800 with old AIS lenses and it works beautifully. Although just manual focus, their optical quality is excellent.
Thanks for the wonderful review! I haven’t bought a D800 yet but stocking up lens before I could buy it. I bought Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 SP and Tokina 100mm 2.8 macro while I am waiting for D800. I can’t afford both nikon 24-70 mm and 105 mm macro so I compromised on the lenses. Do you or any readers have an idea if these two lenses would be decent enough on D800? I have been testing Tamron 28-75 on my D90 and it is looking good though the ultimate aim is use it on D800 body. I would appreciate if anyone could comment based on an experience. I have 6 more days to return the lens so your feeedback will be really helpful.
Hi, as a previous 28-75mm f/2.8 SP owner, I think I perhaps can give some idea.
Sorry but I think D800 deserve better glasses. If you want to get the advantage of high resolution, some top Nikon lens really matter.
In other words, if you want to use Tamson or Tokina, (I like Tokina), a D700 (which is half of the price of D800) is more than enough to matching them. Of course your D90 is also great with them.
Thanks Leon! I have been contemplating this. I think that D800 deserves the G-series lenses i.e. 24-70 , 70-200,105 etc. Correct me if I am wrong.
I think 24-120 f/4 is decent but with its price range, it is pretty close to 24-70 and I would rather go for the latter. What are your suggestions for medium-range zoom lenses?
I have both the 24-70( practical but boring) and the 105 – the 105 is one of my favorite lenses and never fails to produce beautiful images – if I had to chose between the two- the less expensive 105 would be my pick!
Thanks to everyone who replied to my question regarding the lenses. I am returning Tamron 24-85 and Tokina 100mm macro. I am planning to buy Nikon 105 Macro to start with.
For Tokina lovers like Leon, I have another Tokina 11-16mm that I love very much. I won’t be returning that particular lens and I plan it use this on D800 in the DX mode. Tokina 11-16 DX lens is one of the best I have seen in my limited budget.
On one of your previous D800 posts I asked if you believed the D800 would be more capable than the D700 at astrophotography. Given your hands-on experience, do you have any new thoughts to share? From what you have said, what I saw on the DXOMark testing and a few other sources, the D800 is looking promising?
Andrew, yes, I believe the D800 is more capable for astrophotography than the D700. Just use good fast glass like the Nikon 24mm f/1.4G (shooting wide-open) and try not to go above ISO 1600. If you use longer lenses, you might need to increase ISO even more…
Does the D800 sensor have any effect on the diffraction induced fuzziness? I dont think I understand diffraction limits very well but was just wondering if the greater number of pixels adversely affected diffraction or not
Sridhar, diffraction is a lens issue and its effect (depending on the size of aperture) is related to the sensor size. The smaller the sensor, the less tolerance on f stop. For 35mm full-frame cameras, diffraction is visible at the f/11 mark. For cropped-sensor Nikon cameras, diffraction is visible at f/8 and smaller. For the Nikon 1 V1 system, diffraction is visible at f/5.6…
Is the effect of diffraction more visible on the D800? Yes, when looking at an image at 100% view it definitely is!
You recommend a hard disk for external storage of the RAW files. Do you know whether (or do you think that) it would – speedwise – also work to store these files on a NAS?
Nasim, I have a dual core imac with 4Gb of RAM. Since I am broke from my d800(still on backorder )-: ) I would prefer not to upgrade to a new computer. I currently use Lightroom 3 and Photoshop. If I upgrade my current mac to a solid state drive do you think I will have enough power to process the large d800 RAW files. Thanks for your help and excellent blog!
I got my D800 days ago and upgraded my PC and now I am quite satisfied. I am using Win 7 64bit, Intel i5 750, with 4GB memory previously. I spent only small amount of money on 8GB RAM extra, and now with 12GB, I am quite happy with Lightroom 4!
Of course you are using MAC, but I think it is worthwhile to upgrade the memory, with little money. However, I am not sure your MAC can detect more RAM than 4G…
My Mac had 8gb (2,2,2,2) and I called this week to upgrade-Apple will look up your model # & let you know what the MAX is-I am adding 2 more 8 GB= 16GB as I guess you have to add evenly-the cost is $200. per 8gb so 400. & I would love to get 16gb but after buying the D800 $400. is going to hurt!!! I have noticed everything grinds away more slowly since editing all of these huge images so have to increase my memory in hopes of getting back to normal.
Thank you very much for the review and the fantastic images your getting! I’m considering an upgrade from my D7000 to the D800. I shoot both stills and video. I see that the U1 and U2 modes from the D7000 are missing on the D800 which is a shame. Do the Shooting Bank and Custom Settings Bank fill this need or is that something else?
Hi Nasim, Are you experiencing any focus issues with the left most focus point when shooting at 18mm-50mm, at apertures 1.4 to 2.8 at subjects farther that 10 feet? There are considerable amount of reports stating that the left most focus point in not nearly as accurate as the rest of them.
OK- my model # shows as an iMac 11,3 and I did locate this memory that is half of what Apple was going to charge-Do you know if this is considered a good quality memory?
OK- my model # shows as an iMac 11,3 and I did locate this memory that is half of what Apple was going to charge-Do you know if this is considered a good quality memory?
I can’t Thank you enough for taking the time to point me in the right direction-Literally I am getting DBL the memory for the same price- 32GB for 400. versus: 16gb for 400. that apple mac store was going to charge!!!
Thank you so much for taking the time to write such a detailed post about the D800. I currently shoot weddings and portraits with a D3 and D700, so this information is helping me to decide if I should upgrade to the D800. Thank you again!
Nasim, when you publish the 85mm 1.8G review then will it be possible for you to compare it with 105mm 2.8 VR Micro. I know that one is faster than the other and once is for macro work so the comparison might not be fair exactly, however, this was exactly the case with 40mm 2.8 micro and 35 1.8DX and for that you did the detailed comparison. I am sure it would have helped those who were deciding between these lenses. Due to budget constraints and fear of back pain, I do not want to buy too many lenses :). If 105mm micro is marginally inferior than 85mm 1.8G for portraits then overall it would be a better lens for me.
I know that you have been playing with a lot of equipment lately :) and I believe that you have used both of these lenses. I am eagerly waiting for your opinion.
I visited Sergo’s website and found your martial art pics. I loved those pics…and your expressions :)
As a D700 owner, I’ve wrongly assumed that flash exposure compensation was decoupled from exposure compensation – aparently it isn’t on the D800 either, unlike the D4.
Thank you for all of your hard work! I was really hoping the d800 would be phenomenal and with this data my hunches are looking great. Suppose to be here this week Ya hoo. I was planning on selling the d700 but I think I’ll hang on to it and let my daughter get into the dslr world Sitka, Alaska
Question for Nasim, or anybody that has tried this combo (especially on the D800):
If you must have the reach, which combo would you rather shoot with:
A 70-200 VR II + TC-1.7, or A 70-200 VR II + TC-2.0?
I understand what each will do to the minimum f-stop. Concerned about picture quality, especially hand-held (will normally be shooting with a speed of 1/3,200 or 1/4,000). The second combo makes the lens a 140-400, and at a lot lower price (and weight!) than the 200-400.
The other option I am considering is a 300 f/4 with a TC-1.4. If use this option it would be the second camera/lens, while the first camera/lens would be the 70-200 VR II, also with a TC-1.4. Again, main concern is picture quality.
William, without a doubt, the Nikon 300mm f/4 with the TC-14E II will give you much better results than the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II. I own both and I personally avoid the 70-200mm for birding, because it has no chance against the 300mm.
The only “birds” I will be “shooting” would have to be named Pegasus, as they are all horses. The main issues are photo quality and quick focus, both of which you seemed to like in your reviews of these two lenses. I don’t know how much sports shooting you do, but with polo the horses move quickly, change directions constantly, and the size of the field (300 yards long by 165 yards wide), makes shooting the sport a real challenge. I shoot from mid-field, so that I can get the entire match (most people pick a spot and only cover part of the match).
I have been using the Nikon 80-400, and have about ragged out my lens. Am thinking/planning to switch to two cameras, one with the 70-200 + TC-14, and the other with the 300 f/4 + TC-14. Will leave out details as to why that combo, however will work except when they are too close to the boards (if you would like, I can provide links to some recent shots to show what I mean). I believe that even with the TC-14s, both of these lenses will focus faster than the 80-400. Have been shooting on a D3X, but am upgrading to twin D800s (IF they ever get delivered). Twin D4s would cost way too much.
Super report on the D800,very detailed testing,very much appreciated,just wish Nikon would get more into the UK,I have had mine on order since mid February.Afer reading your report I am now counting the days,It look’s to be a Landscapers dream camera.
Thank you for your feedback Douglas. Yes, it is a landscape photographer’s dream camera for sure. Sorry that you have to wait, but it is well worth it! :)
Federico, I have seen some reports on this issue, but my D800 does not seem to show such problems. I will be doing some in-depth lab comparisons to test this for sure as soon as I come back from my trip.
Great article – thanks! Just a couple of quick points.
I buy the DxO labs argument about reducing SNR by averaging pixels (though it’s important to note that only subsampling of this nature has that effect – just sampling 1 out of every 4 pixels, for example, will have no effect on SNR), but i find normalised DR a slightly pointless statistic. In truth, as evidenced by your examples, the reason most photographers care about dynamic range is because it tells them how much more detail they can pull out of shadows and highlights. In this respect, the raw DR captured by the sensor is what counts, because by the time you sub-sample the image you will already have post processed for the DR you want in the final image. In other words, for dynamic range I’d argue the “screen” DxO labs values are more relevant, because they represent how much real dynamic range is in the raw file for me the play with in post. Looking at those graphs, the D4 has overtaken the D800 by ISO200.
The truth is, every camera sensor (and as you rightly highlight, image processing pipeline) is a trade-off. In the case of very high resolution, you get the option of supreme levels of detail in ideal conditions and equivalent SNR in non-ideal conditions at reference resolution by effectively trading some of that detail for a reduction in your noise floor, but the cost is the massive amount of data the camera has to shift around, and the compromises inherent in smaller photo sites (dynamic range). The alternative is a larger photo site, which has a lower noise floor, more dynamic range, and has much less data to deal with, but doesn’t have the LOD when you want or need it.
Personally i shoot weddings with a D3s, and for me, the D800 most certainly is not the ideal lone wedding camera (i’d definitely like one in the bag for some of it though). But that’s because of how i shoot. Almost everything i do is candid and natural. I don’t use flash except when i have to (and for the few formal/group portraits i do) because 1) it ruins the aesthetic (which is worth the noise-cost imo) and 2) it tells my subject i’m there. I fully respect the fact however that there are togs out there who take a much more conventional approach to weddings (the whole “portraiture on the move” vibe) and there there is definitely a market for that because plenty of clients want it, and that for them, perhaps the d800 is a better compromise. For me, i value the speed and the frame-rate too much, so I’ll be looking at a D4 at some point mainly for it’s low light AF capabilities, which would be invaluable to me. Or perhaps I’ll wait for the D4s ;)
The thing is, why only now we talk about “Resizing/downsampling is normal”? Why we didn’t discuss about this when the D3x came out and didn’t downsample it to match the original D3?
The answer is because many people want the D800 be the ‘be-all, end-all kind of camera-Which of course its not. Go straight to D4 or even a used D3s for ultimate high iso if you need one.
I’m buying the D800 simply not because of downsampling the image just to match the D3/D700. It might okay for those of you who shoots 2-3 images during concerts at high iso. But for paid assignments where i shoot 200-250 images at high iso, the downsampling thing is really wasting my time.
Well, some of us did talk about subsampling as a means to reduce the effect of noise when shooting with a D3x ;)
But you’re absolutely right: you should buy the camera which fits your requirements. If you need to be shooting at high iso all the time, buying a camera like the d800 which captures oodles of detail, just to throw that detail away in order to reduce noise, is self defeating. I think the point about the d800 is you can – to some extent – have the best of both worlds. Or, better put, you don’t have to trade off high iso performance completely to get that extra detail. If most of your shooting requires the extra detail and you only shoot high iso occasionally, then the d800 is a great compromise. If you don’t really need the extra detail and you shoot low light all the time and need the speed, then the d4 is the better choice. Course, the D4 is a lot more expensive too.
I agree with you entirely that capturing all that detail purely to throw it away in sub-sampling is inefficient. You buy a d800 because most of the time you want that extra detail. It just so happens that what you also get is a pretty competent low light shooter too for those odd times you do it.
David, I did talk about the D3x downsampling process before, that it matches the D3 at the same resolution. And many other people talked about the same thing on other websites and public forums. This has been a known solution to reducing noise and many photographers that own the D3x know it. Simply because the D3x was not such a popular camera due to its high price, it did not get as much attention and coverage as the D800.
The downsampling process is built into both the camera and all post-processing software packages like Lightroom and Photoshop. You can shoot in medium/low size JPEG, which automatically does this for you inside the camera, or you can do it while exporting images out of Lightroom.
Nice Review Nasim. Eagerly waiting for the updates. You mentioned that you used faster than 1/f shutter speed to get rid of the blur due to camera shake. How fast did you actually go? Did you actually find a pattern?
Girish, yes, in some cases I had to go 50% to 100% faster shutter speed to get sharp images at 100% view. It really depends on the focal length, shutter speed, etc. At fast shutter speeds above 1/500, it is generally not a problem.
Nasim thank you for your excellent review. Have you noticed any of the AF issues which have been mentioned here and there across the net. I know most of these sort of “issues” tend to be non-issues associated with user error but in this instance I have seen a couple of respected individuals mention this. The issue seems to be with focus issues on the left and mid-left focus points producing out of focus isssues. This seems to be particularly the case with wide angled lenses ( wider than 24mm )
One report is saying that NPS in his area has been asked to forward these reports for Nikon HQ to investigate. They seem to be taking these reports seriously.
There are SERIOUS problems with this camera and the confirmed defects are climbing and being reported daily. Some of them are not immediately apparent and develop with time. It is my belief that the firmware and possibly even some of the hardware will have to be repaired or redesigned. I just cancelled my order for a D800E from B&H but have an order at a local store where I will get a D800 or D800E whenever any more are received.
I am a Nikon sychophant and will never buy anything that isn’t Nikon, but it is still plain that the D800 family is a horrid PR and technical problem for Nikon that needs resolution. We can only hope it is soon.
BTW I did receive a D800 in the initial shipment but it was defective and I returned it immediately.
Please note that some observations are exaggerated in some public forums. There are many happy D800 owners who do not seem to have any problems with AF. Let’s give it some time and see if the occurrences are small or if the issue affects every single D800 out there. If every D800 has an AF issue, Nikon will recall the camera.
I love your review but note I said some, and those reporting problems now are people with D800[s] whose cameras seemed perfect at first. I often see posts from Canon owners who despise and ridicule Nikon. They are easy to identify.
The very fact that there effectively is no second shipment, yet, speaks for itself. All Nikon admits to is “production problems” which could be almost anything. I hope the guy responsible for Nikon PR takes some anti-ulcer medicine. He may need it.
William, so far focusing seemed to be fine on my Nikon D800 and I have been shooting a lot with it. I have not performed any in-depth lab tests with focus charts to test AF sensors yet, but will as soon as I come back from my trip to Europe.
Dear Nasim, First of all thank you for your efforts. I am pretty happy with my D800 and could find no errors so far.
One thing struck me however. It may be that it is quite normal, perhaps you are familiar with the problem. If I am shooting in portrait or landscape format and try to focus on exact horizontal objects or lines for example edges of flat objects, then the camera can not focus. But if If I hold the camera in 15-20 degree angle then the camera focuses correctly. Is this normal or an error?
Thanks for that, Nasim. I will look forward to your tests on your return. As you say, many users seem to be very happy with this camera and I am mad keen to get one, but just getting a little concerned as these reports seem to be getting more numerous. Of course the internet is a bit of a minefield so I’ll look out for your report with interest.
Enjoy Europe. I’m in London and at the moment the weather could be an awful lot better ;-)
I think that the D800 will shoot 6 fps in the 1:2 crop which is ~21 mp(?). If this is the case, wouldn’t this be the preferred mode for higher fps? Also, as I have not found an illustration of the crops available, what are the dimensions of this crop?
My D800 has literally Frozen up on me twice & would not shoot/focus at all-I turned it off once & that worked but the 2nd time I had to remove the battery & restart!
What should we do-my camera store is not going to take mine back & if I contact Nikon I am concerned that they will take it in for repair & dismantle it but that does not always fix an issue & causes other issues???
That is truly sad. The ONLY reason I buy locally [California] is because the store absolutely backs their sales. This means I pay a whopping almost 8 percent sales tax, but local GOOD camera stores deserve support. I canceled my order with B&H for a D800E because it will probably take forever to get it from them due to high demand. I’m still waiting for my local camera store to get a second shipment so I hopefully get a WORKING D800 or D800E [whichever arrives first is mine]. Very frustrating.
I had to get my first (inoperative) D800 at Best Buy due to a screw-up at my preferred local store. Even good stores sometimes screw up. I returned the one I bought at Best Buy with no problem after a few days of frustration trying to get LR4 or Capture 2 NX to work properly or at all with the bum D800 I purchased at Best Buy.
I am also fortunate because there is an AUTHORIZED Nikon repair facility in nearby Sacramento. I will NEVER send a camera to Nikon USA for any reason. One time was enough to cure me forever [I had a lens out in the 110 degree heat and the chip blew]. They are ridiculously slow. I had the “skin” replaced on my grandson’s D200 at the repair facility in Sacramento in less than 5 working days and at that they had to order the skin. My love for Nikon does not include their repair facility. Good luck.
Hello Nasim Thank you for your great information on D800. Which lens will perform good with D800 for wedding? I know that 50mm 1.8G is a great prime lens but what about wide angle? Thanks
Dear Nasim, Italy I follow your comments and find them very interesting and instructive. Thank you. I would ask your advice. For about a year with great satisfaction using a D7000 and now I’d like to go to the FX format. What do you recommend I take a 36Mp D800 even if I seem too much, or look out of the next FX (D400?) With maybe 24 Mp? Thanks again and best regards. GianCarlo.
Pick a static scene “S”, shoot the scene in each available ISO (100, 200, etc) in 12-bit NEF. Then shoot the exact set of shots again in 14-bit NEF. The question is this: Is there an ISO level (“X”) at which there is no longer a benefit to shooting at 14-bit NEF, or will the higher bit rate always give you at least some benefit?
Ive been reviewing various cameras making my decision on which camera I’m planning to purchase someday and I have decided on getting the D800 but I’ve been hearing about a problem with the LiveView interpolation issue and wondering if you encountered this problem on your D800 and what your take is on this and what solutions can be done to work around the issue as my sight isn’t very good thru the viewfinder and I rely on Live View mostly to focus and check sharpness… here is a link to see what this poor LV interpolation looks like as this person describes it…
This gem is not available anywhere in Toronto. Everyone is taking back-orders and even then, they aren’t promising that they could deliver in 3 or 4 months (may be after summer). I ordered mine on Henry’s Camera Store for $3380. Anyone get it in Toronto or surrounding area’s?
Very helpful review. I’m on my way to O’Leary’s Camera World in Cork, Ireland, to pick up my D800 which arrived yesterday. Can’t wait to get my hands on it.
Thanks Nasim, your review and photo samples has convinced me and tilted my decision for D800. I will not wait to order. Now looking forward to your Lens recommendations.
Me too! I would really want some lens recommendations… I am seriously thinking between the f/4 VR II and the f/2.8 without VR options…
Yesterday I was working with my 50mm 1.8 plus the standard VR “kit” lens of the D90 and it is quite clear to me that VR will never be important as a good and FAST lens. The question is – will f/4 be enough in low-light situations? I guess with the good ISO performance of the D800 it’s less of an issue.
I stumbled on your site and found it very very informative. Thank you for your reviews.
I am intending to return to photography (as I missed it so much). I previously owned a D300 and loved it. Now I am considering buying a D800 or a used D3s. My friends is selling me his D3s plus 24-70mm f/2.8 at at almost the price of a b-new D3s.
@Antoni. I’m not Nasim, but I recently sold my D3S for nearly the price of a new one. The situation is that the D4 is in short supply and the D3S is a slightly better low-light camera. IMHO the best deal on a used Nikon is a a D3. Although not quite a D3S, the D3 has a DXOMark score of 81…Which is the same as the newly released Canon 5DMkIII. The pro level shutter of the D3 has a lot of life, so a used D3 with say 75,000 actuations should last you a long time. After selling my D3S and waiting and waiting for either a D4 or a D800E to arrive (still waiting) I was left using a D2X or a D80…and I discovered I had been spoiled. So, I got on-line and found a used D3 with only 5,400 actuations on the shutter. The D3 is a great camera and compares very favorably to the D3S. With the D3S, I limited my max ISO to 6400. With the D3 I obtain comparable quality by limiting my max ISO to 4000. My point is that you can get a D3 for less than half the price of a comparable D3S. What you lose is near a stop of low light capability and the video on the D3 is clunkier… Disclaimer: My comparison of the 5DMkIII is only to illustrate that the the D3 sensor is still relavant.
Given the increased resolution of the D800, do you see any issues using the 16-35 on the D800? In general, how does it perform on the D800? Have you had cause to change your opinion of this lens when used on the D800?
Asking mainly because you point out in the Q&A of the 16-35 review that the Canon 17-40 results may be different because of the difference in resolution between the two systems.
Great review, but I think that is a very small compliment given your high quality & depth of writing.
One quick question, were most of the photos taken with the 24-120 f/4, handheld or tripod based? And would you recommend the 24-120 f/4 or the 24-70 f/2.8, considering only handheld usage?
Hi Nasim, thanks for the review .. but now I’m a bit more confuse on what I should get next … Been using a D90 for 3 years now and planning to move to full frame in the next couple of months ..
Now I know there’s no Jack of all trades .. mostly of my photography is Architecture and landscapes (some wildlife/birds) but I do also photojournalism and portraits .. planning to do more b/w nudes too …
I was considering to get a used D3S or D3X .. or eventually a D4 if I can stretch my budget .. but now some reviews of the D800 are making me a bit confused .. on one side you have the tons of details of 36MP that are great for landscape and architecture .. on the other .. the low light noise is handled much better by the the D3 or D4 .. with less colour aberration too ..
The D3 has the advantage of having real field testing from lots of photographers .. and all of them love it .. the D800 and D4 are still a bit of a surprise …
Any D800E review in the horizon? My D800 is still in the waiting list, but the people who already got the D800E report some visible improvement in sharpness with the E compared to the D800. Would love your feedback on this.
Hello Nasim, Firstly thanks for sooo much information between this blog and the other discussion of 800 vs 800E. Also, to the blog participants have added so much with their questions and frequent answers.
It seems that most questions/concerns are compared to owners of ‘other’ digital cameras. Well, I’m still a MF film holdout. My Fuji 645w is an easy companion, and the tripod is a third arm. The Canon 5d and nex7 has not made me a convert. Have never had an exposure problem at 400 so 3200 is alien to me. Am an older amateur and not really interested (or competant) in the digital darkroom. BUT it is an expensive hobby with film at 10.00 and processing and digital to HRes at 25.00 per. But D800 and good glass is $5,000.00. That is still a lot of film buying and processing. So, what’s a senior to do? Could I use this new Nikon w/out having to take a college class in photo-shop (I use ACDS and can do basic stuff) Am 90% satisfied with WYSIWYG.
Again, thanks for an informative review and lively discussion blog.
Many thanks for the interesting and informative review. I look forward to the updates!
A non-technical question: where did you take the sample shots which show the amazing rock formations? Particularly the ones with the wafer thin slabs of rock sitting atop other rocks?
May I also say that this is the most refreshingly well-mannered photography forum I have ever read. Well done for cultivating an atmosphere of mutual respect!
Can you confirm whether or not D800 acts the same as my D700 & D300, in regards to result of setting AF-C & AF-S to FOCUS, & the AF Activation to AF-ON only, in the single & dynamic area selections. I find on the D700 & D300 that by using this system that the VR can be engaged whilst the focal point is out of focus, & then pressing the AF-ON button, the camera will fire as focus is acquired. I have read that the D800 will fire on the shutter button if set up this way, even when out of focus, unless the AF-ON button is held in. This means that to let VR settle you must half press the shutter button while holding in the AF-ON, before finally pressing fully the shutter button. I have found my way very good, & it works very well with flash. When in a hurry it is quiet hard to only hold a half press.
I’ve been waiting on the sidelines for years, hoping an (affordable?) hi-rez full frame Nikon would come along. I think the wait may be over. Now I’m concerned that certain old Nikkor lenses that I’ve been preserving might be too long in the tooth to measure up to the capabilities of the D800. For instance, my Nikkor 400mm f/3.5 IF-ED. How do you think this would fare, especially in conjunction with a Nikkor 2x teleconverter?
Doug, you would be surprised just how well some of the older lenses work with the D800. I don’t know about the 400mm f/3.5 in particular, but give it a try – you might love the results!
First very nice review. Thank you for taking your valuable time in doing this for us. I was wondering if you had considered doing an image comparison between the D800/800e and the D4? That would be very helpful for me as I am considering a D4 as well, but would like to see how they compare before making that additional purchase.
Chris, I have not received the D4 or the D800E yet. I will be doing a comparison as soon as I receive them. The Nikon D4 is very similar in high ISO performance as the D3s, so you can look at the D800 vs D3s comparison and make your judgement…
Thanks Nasim for your very down to earth & balanced review. I only read it well after buying my D800 just out of interest, and haven’t read many of the 383 previous comments, but thought I could make some practical comments on the camera from a user’s point of view. I came from many years of film, then D70, D200, D7000. I shoot lots of different styles, weddings, portraits, landscape, performance, so an all-round camera is required. All of the aforementioned cameras did their jobs, just requiring more or less input, compromise, invention, etc to achieve results. Financially, the 6MPx D70 was the most spectacular when I sold many k$s of landscapes (A3+ & A1) & am still selling them. But when I saw the D800, I realized I could do everything with that camera. I’m not into spray & pray, when I want a dancer at the top of a splits leap, I time it, I don’t do much sports but still if I watch the action, I get the shot. This comes from using film with only 36 exposures available. So when I read the specs for the D800, it seemed to fill the bill. This is how I use it: Landscapes, 36MPx raw. Weddings, raw + jpg small fine (9MPx perfectly good for an album) & only use the raw for full page spreads or to recover a mistake (wrong white balance, u/o exposure). This makes workflow quick & easy. Portraits, architecture, raw. For all other work jpg large fine. My main lens is a 24-70 f2.8 which is perfect for this camera in that if I pixel-peep, there is only one undecided pixel between one side of an edge & the other. This is as good as is possible as a point of light cannot be expected to land exactly on one pixel. If light conditions are bad, ISO6400 is fine at 9MPx. Much, much better than the 10MPx D200 at max ISO. So far I’ve hardly had to touch images in PS as exposures & white balance have been fantastic. Overall, this camera is simply mind-blowing. And for all those people worrying about file size, adjust to your needs & there is always the 36MPx when & if you need it.
I have a comment for those folks who are wondering whether or not a specific lens will work well with the D800. The answer IMHO is that any lens you own will preform at least as well with the D800 as it does with your current camera. If you are currently printing 11 x 17 with that lens, then the D800 results at 11 x 17 will be at least as good. The worst case scenario is the one in which on your current body, IQ is already limited by the lens. In this case you may see some improvement with the D800 (due to more information for sharpening etc.) but switching to the D800 will still leave you limited by the capability of the lens. While the D800 may allow you to more readily see imperfections associated with a lens, the image at a given size will not be worse… However, if you wish to extract everything you can from the sensor and print at 60×40 inches the difference in glass will become evident. It is difficult for anyone to guess how well a given copy of a lens will preform. My advice would be to buy the body, and if it turns out you aren’t happy with some of your glass, you can look at replacing lenses over time. You aren’t going to get a lower IQ than you already have, and you may be pleasently suprised.
Has anyone tried shooting the D800 with the Nikon 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 lens? My concern is that the D800 may not have the strength to power this lens, due to its smaller battery (focus speed main concern). I currently use as the primary lens on my D3X for horse polo, and it works quite well on that camera.
On my D3X, I tried shooting a 70-200 with a TC-14, however it did not seem to work that well in poor light (very cloudy day, with slight rain). I also shot a 300 f/4 with a TC-14, and again was not satisfied with the results. The 80-400 seems to me to focus faster than either of those two lenses (when they had TCs on them), perhaps because it is not using a teleconverter.
Williams, AF goes pretty well on D700 with 80-400, even without battery grip, so why not on D800? Sure, if you need a lightning fast AF you should better chose another lens (i.e. 80-200 AF-S or 70-200 VR and TCs…)
I have a D800 and the Nikkor 80-400mm zoom. I used both on a shoot in South Africa recently and did not find any problems with battery life. The auto focus systen perfomed very well.
Battery life is not the issue. The problem is focus speed and accuracy. With my D800, the 80-400 (when shooting horse polo) was too slow to respond. Had no such problem with the D3X. I always shoot with review off, and can easily get 4K plus shots on a battery.
I have the Nikon D800 and wanted to know the difference between shooting 14-bit RAW : Lossless Compressed (41.3MB) versus Uncompressed (74.4MB) modes. Is the benefit of shooting RAW uncompressed worth dealing with a much larger file?
There is no difference in the image quality when you are shooting lossless compressed or uncompressed. I have seen tests that state that the D800 can write an uncompressed file (to a fast card) quicker than it can compress and write. Consequently, using raw uncompressed should allow your buffer to clear faster. … I don’t see a need for shooting uncompressed unless you are intending to use the D800 for repeated maximum frame rate bursts, then you might gain a bit.
Hi Nasim, very impressive review it’s unbelievable you went to all the comparisons and details. I am sold D800 is the way to go! Do you think this will be awesome to use in stitched panorama with a Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 lens?
Well done ! – it is great to have so much information and breadth of opinions on what appears to be a stunning camera …. I think it’s time to go try one and see for myself ! Nasim, Thank you for all the research…. you mean you enjoy it ? !!
It amazes me how many people are willing to discard the D800 because of high pixel density and noise that ‘might’ come with it… I got my D800 2 weeks ago and the detail it produces is unseen in the FF segment. But the real kick is the dynamic range! I’d never sacrifice that over shooting at ISO 100000 that will yield pictures you can only look at on a mobile phone screen while drunk. I love night photography, but even for that I never go higher than ISO 400. Use better glass, a tripod and a wireless flash. That’s the way produce stunning pictures that can be printed on billboards ;).
The high ISO discussion has about the same value as the one about gold-plated HDMI cables…
Thanks for such a detailed and professional review. I used to follow Ken Rockwell, but you seem to know your stuff better. Rockwell is a bit amateur at times. I like how you’re very scientific and unbiased in your reviews!
Great review and amazing photos! I wish that you could put some captions under your photos that say where and how they were taken. I think people would like to know…
Nasim, Just retread your review and am very excited that I will be receiving my D800 in the next few days. While waiting for my new camera I used my D7000 on a recent trip to Hawaii shooting with the 16-35 f/4, 24-120 f/4 (both purchased in anticipation on the D800) and the 70-200 f/2.8. I really took the time to compare lenses this time and was amazed at the sharpness & quality of images that they all produced. I anticipate that these lenses will perform even better on the D800.
My D800 (which I only ordered two weeks ago just arrived yesterday) as did my D4 (which i ordered the first day of pre ordering.
I am psyched about the D800 but rather blasé about the D4 .Even though I love the idea of 10 fps, image quality to me is more important. I will have to do some quick tests, but am thinking of returning the D4 unopened and purchasing another D800 (maybe even the E, although I don’t like to deal with moire and realize it cannot truly be fixed by software.)
4fps with a motor drive on a Nikon F or F2 when I first started out in photography was fast enough in those days of film (which I miss – especially that Panatomic X,) even for sports and wildlife. Honestly, why do we need 10fps?. I still believe in composing and waiting for the right moment. In sports, wildlife, and even riots…
Will make my decision soon! Curious whether other shooter prefer the D800 over the (heavy) D4.
I am an amateur canon user who primarily takes pics indoors… family etc. I currently shoot with a 5d mk2.. love it to death. Now the D800 is making me want to buy one. The question is whether it makes sense to hold on to the canon with all its lenses or just jump ship? Is there a huge difference (for an amateur) between the mk2 and the d800? I am not talking very technical stuff, but I dont see my self using a tripod very often unless its a family portrait. I need some advice if I should get a d800 or be happy with my mk2 with the few lenses I have. I have a tamaron 28-75 f2.8 xrdi (my daily lens), a 70-200 f/2.8L, a 50mm f/1.8 and a 100mm f/2.8 macro.
Ragz Only you can really answer this question, but ask yourself why you are considering changing. My guess is that resolution isn’t an issue for you as the 5DmkII has plenty of pixels for the type of photography you are doing. Increased color depth? Dynamic range? Improved noise? These all might be an issue for you, but for many the capability of the D800 will go largely unrealized. In looking at your lens collection, there seems to be an opportunity to improve your glass. There is a reason why Canon, Nikon, Zeiss glass is more expensive than other brands. My point is that upgrading your glass may be a worthwhile investment, and if such is your inclination then your current lenses may be less of a consideration for the brand switch. In order to get the most out of the D800 or the 5DmkII or 5DmkIII you really need excellent glass. If you want to have the capability of the D800, then also consider the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8. A less expensive alternative might be a set of 3 Nikon f/1.8 primes (28 f/1.8G, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G). Ultimately most serious photographers end up with a much larger investment in lenses than they do in their camera bodies and it is really hard to justify the $ for new glass. As an example, the Nikon zoom “trinity” set of 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 would have a combined value of nearly $6300. A dedicated birder or surf photographer might have nearly $10k in a 600mm f/4. You might also consider upgrading to the 5DmkIII ($3500) and keeping your glass. Or for the same $3500, you could get the D800 and a 50mm f/1.4G lens. So, my suggestion would be to buy the D800 and 50mm f/1.4G lens. Shoot the D800 and the 5DmkII in a head to head comparison and see what you like best. If you don’t feel that there is enough of a difference for you and your needs, sell or return the Nikon equipment and stick with what you have.
I have a Nikon d80 currently and hate the low light performance and am disappointed with overall performance. Only been using it this long as I don’t have much money. I have a few lenses sigma 105mm f2.8 macro, sigma 10-20mm f3.5, tokina 80-200mm f2.8, and the standard Nikon 18-55 vr and 70-300. I love macro and landscape and often take photos in a dark church with a huge variety of lighting. Love to print my macro and landscape big and am very fussy with sharpness, but only use my high iso shots for small posters and web. I also love night time photos especially lightning, so I’m considering the d7000, d700, d3s, and d800. What will best suit me? Your advice is appreciated and even tips on my next lens purchases would be great :) thanks
The rumors I have seen are that it is to be an entry level FX body. Perhaps 24mp (D3X sensor?). Here is the link to the Nikon Rumors page: nikonrumors.com/2012/…pecs.aspx/
This is a wonderful site indeed and I am only sorry I did not stumble upon it earlier! I have two samples of the D4, and one sample of the D800. One of my D4 and my D800 has the left AF point issue, and it is especially pronounced with my 24mm f/1.4 G. The test is very simple and does not require any test charts. I basically set my camera on a tripod, selected center AF point, then right most and left most AF points; I focused by pressing the shutter, and then used self-timer to actually take the photo. then I repeated the test with Live View AF. The results were consistent with the reports that I read on the web. At f/1.4, there is substantially noticeable focus issue with the left most AF point; in live view, all three photos were perfectly focused. This problem does not exist on my sample of the D3x, the other D4, or my D7000 using the same lens. This problem also does not exist with my 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S or any lens with 2.8 or smaller aperture.
I took my D800 back to Nikon USA (in El Segundo). They are just 5 minutes from where I live. At first, they returned the camera to me with no adjustments, noting that the AF performance was within factory tolerance. After I asked to speak with the supervisor, and demonstrated the problem to him in person, he acknowledged there may be a problem. Th stickiness of this issue is that this is NOT a AF fine tune issue. Because the center and right most AF points do not have the problem; it is only with the left bank of AF points. The supervisor said he will do an elaborate focus calibration on my sample of D800 and see if that solves the problem, and I am awaiting for the results to decide whether to return my D4 that shares the same problem or have Nikon try to fix it as well. At a minimum, it would seem that is problem is not a myth and is common, but may not be universal as some suggest but to really detect this problem you need to have a 24mm f/1.4 G. With the 85mm f/1.4 G, I found the focus even at center AF point to be inconsistent, and like some have reported on the web, I found the LCA problem with the D800 + 85mm f/1.4G that I did not have with my D3x.
I would be interested whether you can conduct a similar test on your sample of the D800 with the 24mm f/1.4G and see if you arrive at the same result. I am hoping the answer is no, then we would know this is a production problem and not a general issue with the D800.
David Thanks for your observations. I have been waiting for my D800E since Feb 8…I hope I’m getting close. What baffles me is the manner in which the problem seems limited to just one side of the frame. If the center was in focus, I would expect an alignment issue to to result in corresponding problem on the right side of the frame as well. So, engaging in wild and completely unsupported sepculation… I wonder if the problem could be software. Specifically, suppose the Nikon built into its new AF sensor a system that tried to compensate for field curvature. As the lenses get wider, the field curvature becomes greater and as the the aperture is farther open DoF drops… It might be that there is an experimental software routine that was inadvertantly enabled for one side of the AF sensors, but not the other. If such is the case, then the question is whether the AF module software can be updated. This brings up the question as to how universal the problem is and whether or not there is sample to sample variability. You would expect a software issue to affect all cameras with the variation being attributable to sensor alignment. It seems possible that in evaluating a modification to the AF module a easy way to test it would be to apply the software to a subset of the AF sensors thus allowing an esay comparison of the results…. If an experimental piece of code was inadvertantly left in the AF software, then this odd behaviour could perhaps be explained. Thanks again for you observations and thanks again to Nasim.
Thank you for explaining the process as I have dreaded even trying to determine if mine is defective as I suspect that it is based off a few images. Will you please clarify for me what you mean when you say after selecting center AF you right most & left most? Does that mean after setting center AF-snap a pic & them=n take a pic at each af points to the right & left so that I end up with a batch of images to look over & then repeat w/Mup? I have both the 24m & 85mm so will try it with both. Thanks in advance for the clarification.
well–just got my D800–took some shots, started to crop and the shots are not in focus–they are soft. I contacted Nikon, they were great–had me send three shots in and now I am waiting to do whatever they tell me. Stay tuned!
I very much enjoy this forum as I feel it is an excellent source of information with some very knowledgeable forum members.
I am hoping to clarify a difference between the 5D MKIII (or Canon in general) and the D800 (or Nikon in general). The difference is in regards to an apparent colour reproduction problem as exemplified in the Dave Dugdale investigation of both systems (see video here: vimeo.com/41756540. I have been lucky enough to briefly handle the 5D MKIII and the D800 and although I lean towards Nikon the difference in colour is an issue that I found to be true.
Much like Dave, I am an amateur entering the world of Full frame Professional Cameras for the first time and I found myself saying the same thing Dave did “Maybe I’m just an amateur, but I just couldn’t get the D800 to whitebalance correctly”. I could easily draw a conclusion like Dave did where he simply went for the 5D MKIII. In post, I could get the colour to look more natural once I had spent a few minutes with the Lightroom sliders, whereas the Canon looked more or less “right” out of camera with minimal intervention. Why is this?
I have not had the opportunity to fully test either camera but I would very much like to understand what gives the Nikon a “Greenish Tint”? What attracted me to mansurovs.com was when I saw the brilliant photos that were taken with Nikon gear, it made me happy but frustrated at the same time. Is the D800 a more sensitive tool where there needs to be a custom WB set? There was a blind test where Nasim exemplified this issue (photographylife.com/nikon…n-a-studio) This fun game turned my greatest frustration into reality as the Nikon looks far more neutral, a little bit too much so (although they are all great shots, to taste).
Can anyone shed any knowledge as to the “Canon ‘strong-red-channel'” vs. “Nikon ‘greenish tint'” notoriety?
Louis, I’ve had the D800 for a couple weeks now. The issues you are referring to really only apply to JPGs. (which are compressed and edited by the camera). To get the full value of a camera like this, you should be shooting in raw. All photographs are then edited to taste in post. The camera will not automatically output 36MP of sharpness. If you want to use this camera to it’s potential you need to work at it. Pro lenses (really sharp), A tripod, and careful considerations of depth of field. If you are not willing to put the work in than you don’t need a 36 MP camera.
I was shooting RAW and JPEG and yes the JPEG were actually pretty wild on both bodies. I found that side by side shooting RAW the D800 leaned towards green whereas the 5DMKIII had a prominent red. That’s the issue that I have been trying to get my head around, this was noticeable out of camera.
I certainly understand the accuracy that the D800 calls for and I only got to take some indoor pictures at the store while the Nikon rep described the features with the 24-70 2.8. Pictures were very impressive, but perhaps the issue was the ‘bad’ lighting the D800 WB was trying to deal with. I know that in RAW WB is yours to make as you wish, I just spent quite a bit less time with the 5D MKIII trying to get the color to look “right”.
I had a thought that this might be monitor calibration, maybe the Nikon is more accurate with less contrast and less reds.
I own the D800 as well as a D7000, D3100, and V1. All behave the same in regards to White balance and the Picture settings. Canon uses a different approach and thus out of the box will look different in regards to the JPGs each produce. Both cameras allow the user to greatly modify the appearance of the JPG output to suit ones own taste. I am mostly familiar with the NIkon set up and over the years have tweaked my settings to my own taste. What I really like is that all my Nikons have the ability to be set in the same way and thus I get consistent results when changing camera bodies. In my case I have white balance set to A2,M-1. I use the Standard picture setting with Sharpening at +6 and color at +2. Other settings are the default ones.
As to RAW, I am working myself there slowly but surely. It will take time for computers to get better at processing such large RAW files but I am patient as I am in this for the long haul.
Luis, Uploads take a little longer especially if you are converting to DNG (no big deal). If you choose “lossless compression” on uploading raw files it will save you about 40% disc space without any loss in resolution. Editing in “Camera Raw 7” doesn’t cause any noticeable delays. I am using a Mac Pro 2.66ghz Quad core.
That’s a good tip! I have LR4 and it includes import options, I will have a look, it’s Camera RAW 7 underneath, I believe. I run a 2009 iMac 3.06Ghz Core2Duo topped up with 16GB of RAM, I’m hoping not to upgrade quite yet.
Do you calibrate your monitor(s)? I’m wondering if the iMac is calibrated out of the box or if I should look to calibrate it properly.
Very nice camera gear you have! I think Nikons are very consistent. I had a chance to shoot with a D300S and a D7000 and I thought they were both very good, with the D7000 being awesome I would say. Then I did a shoot with a D700 for my son’s martial arts class and WOW I couldn’t turn off the way the FF sensor helped the depth of field and made shadows look so 3 dimensional.
I have requested a loan from Nikon as the local rep is awesome and an enthusiast for Nikon like no other. He said I could borrow a D800 for a day I just would need to find the lenses. I have a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 lined up from a photographer friend of mine, I really would like to dig in to some settings at that point but ultimately shooting RAW so I don’t know how much the picture settings will help.
I have the 70-200 2.8 and as others have said, this lens is just perfect with the D800. Slightly less contrast and slightly less sharp in the corners at f2.8 but from f4 to f11 just stunning sharpness with beautiful bokeh. A very 3d effect! I also have the 14-24 2.8 and sent it back for repair after putting it on the D800. Very soft in the corners. The folks at Lens Rentals where I bought the lens agreed and have repaired the lens for me. I get it back this Friday. I also use the 50mm f1.8 and the same story of stunning sharpness from f4 to f11.
I think the biggest disappointment with the D800 is the realization that often you just don’t need all that sharpness! But maybe in the future when there are computer monitors with 30mp or more pixels, the true beauty of this camera will be realized. For now getting 20×30 or larger prints is the only way to really see what 36mp can do for you.
By the way, I did my own noise comparision with the D800 Vs the D7000. Using both in the DX mode high ISo comparision favored the D800 by 2/3rd stop. I would have thought they would have been equal. When doing the comparison using FX and then downsampling to the D7000 16mp the advantage is close to 2 stops in favor of the D800.
That is very interesting about the D800 vs D7000 in DX mode, Nasim said it’s a waste to buy the D800 for DX but I had thought of using the D800’s DX mode with the 16-35 F4 for general shooting and having something like the 35 1.4 and the 105 2.8 Macro for paid work… I like the 35 1.4 and the 100 2.8 Macro on the 5D MKIII I liked those 2 focal lengths on a FF sensor.
The D7000 is such a fantastic camera but I know I will regret not going full frame in the long run… Now there’s this talk about a D600 FX for USD $1500 24MP, it would be something to explore if it were true.
I have only one DX lens, the 16-85mm. I tried it on the D800 and found that you can either have the camera automatically crop by 1.5 or you can try full frame. So when I did the full frame option I was a bit surprised in how much larger the actual image captured was over the arbitrary DX crop mode. What you get in the FX mode is an image that looks like the early Color TV’s of the 60’s. The image goes from top to bottom but has a circular shading on the sides. What final pixel count you get depends upon what crop ratio you pick. Go with a square and you can get 20mp! Do a 16×9 and you can get 16mp! Crop 8×10 vertically and you get the total height of the full frame. (camera in horizontal position) These are more pixels than I can get with the D7000
The amount of “extra area” you can get depends upon the focal length, fstop etc. that you pick. I did a close up flower photo at 85mm and had rather realistic shading but only in the corners.
The sharpness of the 16-85 held up well in the areas outside of the DX crop. Sure, a real FX lens would be better but if you do not have such yet you can still have fun.
Luis While I thought Dave Dugdale did a nice job, I would have weighted his results differently. In addition to the resolution, the dynamic range and color depth of the D800 are superior to the 5DmkIII, and for me that is much more important than high ISO video noise. Mr. Dugdales intended use is focused more towards the video as opposed to Landscapes etc.; recall that his website is LearningDSLRVideo.com … his focus is video. As far as the white balance is concerned, He was evaluating “Auto” white balance…I’m not certain why it looked so far out on his white balance test, but seemed fine on all of the other examples. I really haven’t seen the color that far out. While it may be the the auto white balance responses are different under the conditions tested, I only use Auto for these situations where the lighting is odd anyway…and even then I shoot in raw a correct in post. As for the red issue with Canon sensors, here is a great article that talks about the design philosophy between Nikon and Canon sensors: www.dxomark.com/ This is a technical article that actually looks at the spectral response of the different colored pixels of somewhat older cameras. It provides insight into why the D800 color depth and dynamic range are better as well as addressing the differences in red response.
Eric, thanks very much for your link and information, This is the answer I was looking for:
“The red channel of the Nikon D5000 shows a typical behavior, but the red channel of the Canon 500D presents a very high mix of red and green. As its sensor is not able to distinguish the little nuances between green and red, the color rendering algorithm of the Canon RAW converter software has to compensate for this lack of color accuracy by applying high gain during color processing.”
This is exactly it, I believe that Canon has made an effort to make this ‘lack of color accuracy’ the standard as this Canon ‘red look’ has the tendency to help skintones. This subtle difference is what I noticed. I have been to DXO mark many times for lens ratings but had not looked to this article.
My take on it then is that Canon lucked out by having this color inaccuracy work in the favor of skintones, unanimously, when I asked my friends and family to tell me which pictures they look better in, they picked the Canon, out of camera.
Admittedly, there was a mix once the images had been processed, but, when one is learning it’s easy to dismiss the advantage of color accuracy as people like to look pink rather than accurate. I can see that we may take advantage of the color accuracy as Nasim exemplifies on this website.
One more thing, if I could trouble you, I have a 2009 iMac, should I be looking to calibrate my monitor?
Hey Luis Out of camera JPEGs are definitely a consequence of software decisions. When I shoot JPEGs (rarely), I always adjust the in-camera settings. FYI here is a video comparison of the D800 vs the Hasselblad H4D40: www.youtube.com/watch…UBTE4xpvpk . In this comparison, they find that the Nikon is a little too red/magenta as compared to the Hasselblad. My point is that white balance, particularly auto white balance is based on software assumptions. The auto white balance algorithm may be optimized to discern the difference between Tungsten and flourescent or perhaps optimized to discern the difference between shade and cloudcover. The different decisions are going to impact the look of jpegs shot with auto WB. However, if you look at the D800 jpeg comparison at dpreview, its pretty tough to find a significant difference in color between the D800 and 5dmkIII, thus implying the difference seen is probably in the bias of the auto WB algorithm.
In my opinion, you should definitely calibrate your monitor. If you ever want to print your images, having an uncalibrated monitor can be very frustrating. It is very disappointing to have the printed version look way different than what you had seen on-screen. It also a bit painful to find that 3 years of photos suddenly look wrong when you buy a new monitor. Calibrating your display allows you to be certain that what you see is what you want, and makes your images independant of hardware.
I use the Colormunki Photo to calibrate my monitor and to generate my own ICC profiles for each paper and printer I print with. It’s easy to use and the profiles integrate into LR and PS. I have found that even with an inexpensive printer such as an Epson Artisan, I prefer generating my own ICC profiles over using the generic profiles supplied by the paper manufacturers. Since I often print big (40×60 inches is not unusual), getting accurate color the first time matters.
I have also used the Spyder4 Pro which only profiles the monitor. I was happy with it.
I have not used the Colormunki Display monitor profiler, but based on my experience with the Colormunki Photo, if I was going to buy something for only profiling a monitor, this is the unit I would buy.
If you think that you might want to make your own prints for display, I’d get the Colormunki Photo. If you aren’t interested in producing your own prints, then I’d look at the Colormunki Display (even though I haven’t used it). I think the Spyder4 pro is a fine device as well.
Yes Eric this helps immensely, I’m very grateful for your time. I will look into the Colormunki as I very much appreciate the ability to detach my image colour correction from my hardware.
Just started following your website and it’s been fantastic reading so far. I’m not sure if someone has asked already but would it be possible to know what lenses and perhaps settings you used for some of your photos?
That is a great review and outstanding example pics. Can you share the location of these rocks? They looks like around NV/AZ/UT but not sure some of them look different.
Man, I love this group collaboration thing going on here – big thanks to all those that are helping me out in responding to comments. Your help is very much appreciated!!!
Nasim… Today i did some test with my d800 and 70-200 vr II. What’s the point to get the 105mm micro when u can have amazing macro pics with a 70-200mm and cropped it beautifully with d800’s 36mp???
Danielle I’m not Nasim, but I own both lenses. The 105 has a 1:1 maximum reproduction ratio whereas the 70-200 has max ratio of 1:4. So while a macro shot properly framed with the 105 and D800 would give you a full 36mp image, the same cropped shot from the 70-200 would only give you about 9MB at best. Plus, with the loss of pixels you may see more noise and lower detail (depending on the final size used). If your intended use if primarly on-screen (and not huge screens) then cropping should be fine. If on the other hand you want to achieve maximum quality for prints, you might be happier with the added pixels. Having said that, your implied observation that the D800 offers a lot of flexability is right on.
thanks Eric you’re right… def the 105mm is gonna give you much better quality… i think is gonna be my next lens… just wondering if i really gonna use that much to justify the difference in price between the lens or use my others+cropping
If you’re shooting macros, say under 6 inches in maximum dimmension you will start to see the difference. The 105 is a really sharp lens and great with the D800. Another possibility is the 200 f/4 micro. Greater standoff, but a full stop slower, still 1:1, no VR. If you are shooting flowers, bugs etc, the 105 or 200 micro are great lenses. You could try a set of closeup lenses for your 70-200 to see how often you use them…
I agree with Eric. The micros are far better at getting really close but alternatives for your present lens is either a close-up lens and/or extension tubes. The Canon 500D is a quality close-up lens that can be used on the 70-200 as well as the 105 Micro. If you get it in 77mm you can then use step down rings to use on other size lenses. The Kenko Auto extension tube set comes as a series of 3 different size tubes to increase the magnification of the lens it is used on. I have actually used the close-up lens in conjuction with an extension tube on my 105mm micro to get even closer than 1:1.
I have one question and perhaps someone can give me a helpful answer. I am not sure to buy a D800 (actually I own a D7000), because I don’t need the full resolution for every photo. In this case, what is better:
1. To shoot in resolution “M” with a full frame lens or 2. To shoot in “DX mode” with a good DX lens (I own the 17-55 2.8)
Stefan Because of the number of variables associated with your question, it is difficult to give you a definitive answer. The D7000 is a very capable camera. The D800 is incredible, it has great Dynamic Range, Color Depth, Hi ISO capability, and so forth. But if you aren’t printing large and trying to extract the most from the sensor, the differences in image quality may not be what you will notice most by moving up to a full frame camera. What you might find to be the most exciting aspect of a full frame body is the wider field of view that can be obtained. Nikon’s widest DX lens is the 12-24 zoom. However, this lens on a DX body has an equivalent field of view to that of a 18-36 on an FX body. Lenses like the 14mm f/2.8 or the 14-24 f/2.8 or the 16-35 VR offer perspectives that are unavailable in DX. Your 17 – 55 is comparable to a 25-82 on an FX body. So the answer to your question will really be based on how you intend to use your camera. If you find yourself shooting at 17mm a lot now, then the D800 and some wide glass may be the place you want to be. While there is no problem shooting in DX mode and essentially turning a D800 into a D7000, I expect you will fall in love with the Full Frame viewfinder and quickly begin to desire full frame glass.
Thank you for your wonderful, insightful review. One question, can you clarify what you mean by down sampling the image for comparisons to smaller sensors? Does this just mean for example exporting the image from Lightroom or Photoshop as a JPEG resized to the number of pixels of the smaller sensor?
This is probably the best review of D800/E I have read so far online. You have really set the bar up high for all the reviewers out there. I have also read your article on downsampling which is great and I was wondering should I use the same parameters for downsizing D800 images that you have mentioned in your “How to properly resize images in Lightroom”?
Question: What is the advantage of shooting in TIFF mode on the D800, as opposed to 14-Bit NEF? Is there more detail (especially shadow recovery) available, or better color, or perhaps some other advantage(s)? I convert my pictures to JPGs using DxO (they finally released modules for the D800), and then sell them on Smugmug (they don’t except TIFF files unless you pay extra). Therefore I ask the question above, especially if the final JPG will not reflect the difference.
I need some help…I going to new york next month (I live in Venezuela) , It seems that I won’t be able to buy/find the D800. Is it a waste of money to buy the d700 (2200) . Should I wait? ( I have a d90 and I want to upgrade to fullframe)
Edgar The D700 is a huge step up from the D90. Full frame aside, the ISO capability will offer you a huge improvement. I would reccomend getting the D700. You will love it. If you find you need the higher resolution, the D700 will always serve well as a second body.
If you are planning to keep the D90, my suggestion is to sell it and go for the D800. That counter intuitive advise has the following justificaiton – You have a $900 (used) + $2200 D700. The total cost is > the price of D800. The DX capability of the D800 is as good or better than the D90. So, you give up nothing and have a pretty nice camera.
On the other hand, if you are selling the D90 to finance the D700 or if you NEED a backup (meaning you are a pro) then a D700 is sensible.
Yes, but… The D800 is better than the D3 and D700 but not quite as good as the D3S. However, at the pixel level, you might see more noise with the D800 than with the D700. But at the image level, the D800 is clearly better. In other words, framing the same image with a D700 & D800 under the same exposure conditions will yield a lower noise image with the D800 when viewed at the same image size.
I hope when you are comparing the d800 to the d3 and d700 you mean noise level. If that is the case, that’s correct. Matter of fact, some say d800’s noise beat the d4. I shot d800 a few time with 4000-6000 iso (pretty high right? mainly because in door, low light, dance party, you get the idea), and the noise level is amazing. Hardly noticeable, especially considering it’s 36.3 megapixel, which allow some post noise reduction. I highly recommend the d800 Edgar, the d800 is much better for your type of photography, not saying the d700 is bad, but it’s like comparing a mountain bike to a road bike. They are both good “bikes” just different purpose. However, what is in you’re lens bag? Lens make just as much difference if not more. If you don’t have some decent lens, i would go d700 + some sweet lens, and then slowly save up for the d800 and eventually sell or back up your d700. D700 is not a bad camera, with sharp lens and d700, your image would look about the same as d800 with some cheap lens.
I will put my d3x up against the new d800. I think we are all getting so crazy about the latest cameras and thinking that the camera will make you that super photographer. Secondly good quality lenses are much more important when you get up to this level of high end cameras. Maybe we all need to concentrate more on our craft and less on the latest, newest camera body that will be outdated in another year or so.
Hello, and thank you for your time, and responses, I was curious to know if anyone has, or even will use the Nikon D800 with the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8? I plan on buying the Nikon D800 and saving up for lenses when possible, and my sole lens would be the 50mm f/1.8, and I am certain that even though it is a basic lens, it would serve well until then. I am an avid enthusiast and I enjoy using my Nikon D700, with the 50mm, and my favorite Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 MF, with the ability to turn out some very decent keepers! I am considering the D800 for the new features it offers over he D700. Thank you. Yes I am aware that an enthusiast does not need this camera, however, I am only interested in what I want. I actually have a tendency to float toward what is considered the “artistic” side of photography, and I feel the Nikon D800 would help me in that area, and also allow me to print canvas sized if needed. :)
In response your your question about using the 50mm f1.8 with the D800, I have some good news for you. This lens is very, very sharp especially between F4 and F8 . At F2 and F2.8 there is some corner softness (not bad though) and at F11 you will just start noticing diffraction sneaking in. I was so impressed with this simple prime lens that I have ordered the 24mm F2.8 as well. The best zoom currently available (Nikon 24-70 F2.8) has shown not to be as sharp, way bulkier and way more expensive. The only Zoom I have that shines with the D800 is the Nikon 70-200 F2.8. (if you are into animal or bird photography this is the lens you must have! Save up for it and you will not regret getting this lens) Also great is the 2.0 Tele converter although lots of practice is needed to obtain sharp photos.
Is this 50mm F1.8 D or G? I have heard that 24-70mm is not as sharp and does not seem to be worth the money. On the other hand 70-200mm 2.8 VR2 may well be the best lens Nikon has ever made, certainly the best zoom.
I have the D but there is no optical difference between the two. The 70-200 is my favorite lens. Not light but still easily handheld. The only way to get better quality than this lens is to spend three times as much for lenses that are twice the weight. I use this lens frequently with the x2 tele converter to get to 400mm. The problem with that much zoom is your technique. It can deliver very sharp results but focusing is very critical, as is atmosphere clarity, shutter speed, available light etc.
I have the Nikon D700 and really like this camera a lot, I have had it for 3 years. Lately I have been photographing events that require distance shooting and action. I also have been photographing wildlife, horse shows etc. I am thinking my second camera should be a DX camera instead of a D800 another full frame. I need a faster camera to shoot action so was wondering which one I should get. I am assuming all my full frame lenses will have increased distance on a DX camera. Thank you of any insight.
The D800 and the D7000 (DX camera) have the same pixel density so there is no difference between these two cameras in regards to your telephotos at maximum distances and magnification. However, both these cameras have three times the pixel density of the D700. But there is more to the story than just pixels. Ability to focus fast and accurately and perhaps have the ability to shoot at a fast frame rate could dominate over pixel count. That is why there is the D4.
I have the D800 as the best compromise. It has the best focus system, pixel count, and best high iso performance in existence today. It’s possible downside is the 4 frames/second maximum.
I still have the D7000 which is frankly almost equal to the D800 if you are just doing the telephoto lenses. It has a faster frame rate than the d800, almost as good focusing system, and almost as good high ISO performance.
There is one other thing you should take note of. Most of the best nature/animal photographers use the D700. The biggest gripe for some folks was the lack of any video option for this camera.
Thanks John. I know my friend who is a birder was going to order the D800 but she said she needed a faster camera for burst mode so she went with the D7000. My other friend same scenario went for the D300s at least I think it has an “s” after it. I definetly need another camera body as photographing events I can’t be switching lenses from wide angle to telephoto. So I guess I was trying to figure out for sports, events, wildlife or anything that moves :) what the best 2nd camera body would be. The D4 sounds amazing but then I saw the price tag, yikes! If I go with that one I had better start saving quickly! Thanks for the information.
Don’t you have a battery grip for the D700? I just looked at the D700 specs and you can get it as high as 8fps which is the same as the D300s fps with its grip
Don’t know about the D400 I hear that may be coming soon but it looks like Nikon will be also releasing it’s first entry level full frame D600 much sooner and I don’t know about the specs for either camera but I suspect the D400 will likely have the same speed as the D300s but i doubt it will have the increased speed with a grip as several new cameras haven’t been configured to increase speed with the new grips so its a wait and see how they turn out :)
No, I never got a battery grip as my hands are smaller plus I wasn’t used to the weight of the camera and lenses. So I opted out and just have 3 batteries. I started off just doing portraits, abstracts, flowers so the battery grip wasn’t an issue. Now that I am in the field more I could see how it would be helpful. But than again I will have to purchase another L plate from RRS to accommodate that. :0 Never ending costs with photography, yet I love it so it make it all worthwhile. :) I may just hold off for awhile especially since I am making monthly payments on my Nikon 12-24. Awesome lens and worth every penny or I should BIG BUCKS! The next camera I get I will get the battery grip. I would like a camera that can handle more weather conditions so assuming that is the D300s or whatever follows. Or is that the D4 that is more for extreme conditions?
Thanks Tim. Looks like the D4 would be the top of the line and do what I need but the D300s is more in my ballpark cost wise. Of course originally I said that about the D90 and though a great camera I decided for the D700 and I have had no regrets. It is hands down a great camera. Someone told me since the D800 came out probably a D400 or something newer than the D300s is on the horizon. Do you know? Thanks again Tim and John for getting back to me. :)
Susan You can also look into a good used D3 (or D3S). They are available with under 20,000 clicks on a 200,000+ click shutter. They have full pro bodies with incredible weather proofing etc. Downside (for some) is that they are big and heavy. However, compared to a D4 you can save quite a bit of money. Since the D3 has the same sensor as the D700, you could sell the D700 and wait until fall when you can get a D600. Then you’d have a fast action camera (D3), and a 24mp camera body (D600) for landscapes etc. … Both full frame.
If you need the reach, have you considered some new glass instead of a DX body. The nice thing about lenses is that they last forever. Many people are very happy with the 80-400 zoom, although the autofocus may be a little t0o slow for some fast sports. Available new at under $1700, it might be an option. Sigma makes a 50 – 500 for about the same price as the Nikon 80-400. Sigma also makes a 150-500 that is available for under $1000. I tried them both, was pleasantly surprised, (prefered the 150-500), but ended up with the Nikon 200-400.
I’m buying the D800. I have a 70-200 2.8, a 17-35mm 2.8, a 50mm 1.4 and 28-70mm 2.8. I have the D300 and the D300s. I never bought DX lenses because I was advised early on about the eventual full frame on the digital camera. Today I almost sold my 17-35 and my 28-70 to replace them with a newer 24-70. After reading up, I’ve decided to see how the lenses I already have work with the D800. I normally use my 50, my 17-35 and my 70-200 anyway. I shoot weddings and portraits mostly. I found I had fast focusing issues in low light with the 28-70. Not sure if it was the camera’s or the lens. Sometimes the shutter button would freeze at key moments no matter what lens I used so maybe it’s the camera’s. I always carry two on me during a wedding ready to grab the other if needed.
I am wary of the 24-70 f2.8 in that it does not have image stabilization. I have come to realize that this is as important as having a lower F stop. I think you will see some real improvements in this zoom range over the next year or two. It is the one area where there just is not enough choice. Already Tamron as come out with such a lens that has gotten very good reviews and costs much less than the Nikon.
It is time Nikon does a zoom in the normal range that is as good as their 70-200 f2.8. Myself, I am going to use the primes for this range. I have the 50mm 1.8 and the 24mm f2.8 and both give very, very sharp images on my D800.
Re the future being with FX and choosing lenses accordingly, you have been very wise. I have the 17-35mm – I am looking forward to see how it goes on a D800E. I also have the 28-300mm which some have said will be up to the job and others says no. We shall see. But I have some 2.8 pro primes too. I too would counsel against the new 24-70mm and the fact it has no VR – and it is not in the same class as 70-200 VR2 – which will be on my shopping list. A number of lens manufacturers have NOT come up with a pro grade 2.8 midrange zoom yet – a definite hole. I can see Nikon must be working on that right now.
Re the future being with FX and choosing lenses accordingly, you have been very wise. I have the 17-35mm – I am looking forward to see how it goes on a D800E. I also have the 28-300mm which some have said will be up to the job and others says no. We shall see. But I have some 2.8 pro primes too. I too would counsel against the new 24-70mm and the fact it has no VR – and it is not in the same class as 70-200 VR2 – which will be on my shopping list. A number of lens manufacturers have NOT come up with a pro grade 2.8 VR midrange zoom yet – a definite hole. I can see Nikon must be working on that right now.
Josie I think you should keep the 17-35. A wide zoom is spectacular on an FX body. I have both the 17-25 and the 14-24 and I use them both whereas I rarely use my 24-70. In addition, the 28-70 is a great lens and I am not sure you would see much of a difference in upgrading to the 24-70. Since the D800 has improved low light AF, the issues you are experiencing may go away. I reccomend that you keep the glass you have since its all great stuff. … If you do want to make a change, have you considered the Micro 105 VR f/2.8? It is one of Nikon’s sharpest and might make a nice addition for things like tabletops, flowers, rings etc.
For those who have or who will soon have the D800, I have some interesting comments for you all to consider. Of course the resolution of this camera is a primary draw. When I first did some test photos, I must say my excitement dropped a bit. Why? When displaying on my 4mp Mac cinema display (one of the best out there) the photos look exactly like those from my D7000. Yes, I can see vast differences when viewed at 100% but that gets old after a while. It is the whole photo I want to see, not just bits.
Then I did a test at various ISO’s and I discovered one of the D800’s best features. When I compared shots taken at 100 through 3200 ISO I could not see any difference! Remember I am looking at a 4mp photo here. (I did the same test with the D7000 and it is easy to see the loss of detail and heightened noise at ISO 3200) I get the same results when I print at an 8×10 size.
Those 36mega pixels have more going than just resolution. Few of us will ever print large enough to see the extra detail, but when you need that high ISO or you need to really crop (that bird just was too far away!) you really start to appreciate the D800.
I like to think of pixels as film grain. The finer the grain the sharper the image. In the days of film there was limited ability to change the grain, at least at a cost that was affordable. The digital sensor reverses that static trend of film. Over the years digital sensors just got better and better. With the D800 we may have reached the point where the grain is so fine that the limitations become your lenses and technique only. And that is the way it should be.
Great review! I have a question: Is it possible to get the D800 to focus just before tripping the shutter on “self timer” mode? I purposely focused to a blur, set the self timer, and the D800 did not re-focus. I had autofocus set to Auto C and it did not track! If there is a way to manage this I’d like to know.
Since nobody responded to my question and there may be someone else with the same concern, the following appears to be the best answer:
To do self-portraits you can use interval timer shooting…
[Menu] [Shooting menu] [Interval timer shooting] [Start time = now] (you waste the first shot but it saves you having to wait a minute) [Interval time 00:00:10 seconds] ( or however long you need between shots ) [Set 5 intervals X 1] ( this will take 5 timed shots 10 seconds apart) [Start = On] Put it on the tripod Hit [OK] and run round the front.
It will focus just before it takes each of 5 shots. I guess my question wasn’t professional enough LOL
thanks for a great review. i am eagerly awaiting your review of the 5d mark iii. one thing i am curious about . . . maybe you could consider saying a little something about it. it may be p.r. spin, but i imagine quite a few people have read the interview with the d800 engineering team that nikon put up on their site:
one of the engineers suggests that people should consider shooting in the (approx.) 20.3 megapixel mode. he explains that this uses the full sensor, and essentially downsamples in some (hopefully ideal) way. this would mean that the d800 is like having two cameras in one: something like a 5d mark iii (though obviously slower, BUT with better dynamic range and possibly sharper detail), and then a very high resolution camera for those times when you know you want everything the sensor has to offer.
deciding when 20.3 mp is enough would depend on a lot of factors. maybe some people would just never use that mode. but it seems to me that this makes more sense than using dx format. you get plenty of detail, you use the full sensor, you get a hopefully ideal sampling algorithm designed by the nikon engineers (who apparently had this usage in mind), and you get to have some of your files be smaller when you feel you don’t need the whole nine yards.
the main question, then, is how do you think the d800, shot in medium 20.3 mp full frame mode, compares to the 5d mark iii? the review at cameralabs www.cameralabs.com/canon…d_mark_ii/) suggests that the d800 looks a bit sharper (and, to the reviewer’s eye, more naturalistic).
if you think you can mention this in your 5d mark iii review, that would be marvelous. i would be quite happy with the 5d mark iii if it weren’t for the fact that the d800 seems to have a noticeable advantage in dynamic range. i know i can make great photos with both of these wonderful cameras. but the d800 does seem to be revolutionary, and i am tempted to go in that direction (even though i generally prefer the canon ergonomics and user interface). with either camera, i know i will be very pleased, but i find the d800 so tempting . . . just looking for any extra insight you might have.
thanks for all the service you give to the photographic community. it’s a big deal to do all this work in addition to the photography itself. much appreciated.
I thought I would comment on your thoughts about using the D800 at the 20.3 megapixel mode. I tried this myself the other day (also tried the 9.3 megapixel mode as well) on my D800. I primarily did this to see whether the down sampling in the camera would improve the noise at higher ISO’s (3200 and above). I am happy to report that it does make the noise less visible yet the detail is still there. You hit on what makes the d800 so versatile. If one wants maximum detail at low ISO’s then use 36mp. If one is using ISO’s above 1600 then use the 20.3 or the 9.3 mode. High ISO photos are not going to be blown up to large size prints so why waste the memory the larger files take?
thanks for your reply, John. good to know people are trying this out. anyone else out there who has tried this?
John, if you don’t mind a follow up . . . can you say anything about the slight hesitation some people have mentioned with the d800 autofocus? a few reviewers have mentioned a behavior in which it locks on quite quickly, but then second guesses itself or something. this is discussed, for instance, in first video review by calgary’s “the camera store”:
as for resolution settings . . . seems like there might be situations even at low iso in which one could still decide to go with the medium resolution.
i am still curious if anyone has done or could do some comparisons between the d800 at full frame medium resolution and the 5d mark iii at full resolution. maybe Nasim will mention this in his 5d mark iii review.
i really wouldn’t care so much about all this comparison except that i love the way the eos body feels in my hands. that’s a personal thing . . . hand shape and the way some user interfaces seem more intuitive to one person rather than another (like . . . i still don’t understand why some people have a hard time using windows). so, something in me would rather just get the canon.
however, that extra dynamic range in the d800 . . . seems like that would be so great. the rich detail of the d800 is surely something i would like to try and use as well, but i’m not drooling over megapixels. and i can see myself being quite happy to shoot at 20.3 mp in a lot of situations, especially while learning the camera. i’m sure i will get used to the feel and interface of the d800 if that’s the way i go. in either case, i’m very excited. two very solid cameras.
My experience with the focus has so far been limited to just using the center spot in AF-S mode. I use this mode a lot for animal photography. It has been spot on and I have had no problems. I have fine tuned all my lenses, something that is more important to do when you have this much resolution. It will take many months to get into the groove of this camera. At first I was not as impressed as I thought I would be, but as I use it more I am getting more enthused. I have a (D7000 which I use for comparisons). I have just been shooting DX for years and going back to FX is not without a bit of practice. Focus is more critical just for starters. Less depth of field, heavier feel to the body, larger viewfinder just to name a few more.
There is no monitor that can even begin to display the quality this camera possesses, but over time I expect that to change. I will soon have some 20×30 prints done to see how they compare to ones I have done with the D7000, and before that the D300. i will be in the Sierra Nevada mountains this coming week and will get my first chance to test this camera in the field.
If there is some focus issues I am sure Nikon will address them. They have a lot at stake in this camera.
The size options of medium and small are only available with JPGs, not with NEFs. As such, for those of us who spend a lot of post-production time on files, we normally only shoot in NEF. I will, however, run some tests (I have just set my D800 to shoot in FX, and record both NEF and medium size JPG). I normally shoot with all in-camera adjustments (Distortion, Vignette, High ISO, etc) turned off. For purposes of my testing, I will keep my settings that way.
Note: The medium or small JPG option can be chosen with any of the D800 image sizes: FX; 1:2; 5:4 or DX. Testing, however, is still required to see if the results are the same as post-production downsizing.
Ran test, and the sharpness of the NEF files is better than that of the medium JPG files. I process my files using DxO Optics. Ran test with the Nikon 80-400 lens. All shots were handheld, with shutter speeds of 1/4,000 for some, and 1/5,000 for others. If anybody want to see the shots, let me know, and I will create a gallery on my website.
You should post those shots. It would be a great example as to one of the ways to get the maximum sharpness out of the D800. After all most folks are getting this camera just because of the resolution.
Here is a link to some of the test shots I took. I don’t normally shoot insects, however this was a “target of opportunity.” All shots can be downloaded to your computer. This is a hidden gallery on my website, and can only be accessed using the link below. Let me know if you have any questions.
I checked out your postings and I am having a problem. When I view the butterfly at 100% the N version is quite a bit larger. (I would say 50% linear or over double in area). So I find it hard to make a fair comparison.
It is well established that all else being equal, RAW will be sharper than JPEG no matter what settings used. I would note however that Nikon JPGs are slightly soft out of the camera as the default sharpening is only +3. I have found +5 or + 6 to be a better default setting. Thanks for taking the time to post.
thanks for making that clear. i did not realize that the medium setting was jpeg only. canon have a reduced resolution raw option, and i didn’t realize that nikon didn’t offer that on the d800. are you sure there is not a medium raw as well as a medium jpeg?
meh . . . so it goes. i would be shooting raw in most circumstances, so that means the medium mode would be of limited use. i can always downsample in post, but it would have been nice to potentially manage some of the file size and noise by means of an in-camera downsampled raw file—at least in some cases.
The D800 can record NEF files in four sizes: FX; 1:2; 5:4 and DX.
Each of the four NEF sizes can be simultaneously recorded in three different JPG sizes: Large; Medium and Small. In addition to size, the JPG can also be one of three types: Fine; Normal or Basic. Another setting for JPGs, later in the menu, is JPG Compression: Optimal or Size.
And that doesn’t even cover your TIFF options.
The D4 offers the same options.
I agree that the option to automatically downsize would be nice, however Nikon, so far, has yet to offer this. So I shoot in NEF, normally in the 1:2 size (few of my customers ever order bigger than 8 x 10, so final print size in not a problem), as this give me 5 FPS.
I am currently testing my D4, and MIGHT afterwards sell my D800. Hey Bob, are you interested in a used D800, if you are still waiting on a new one?
I am a regular reader of your blog posts and loved your articles. I would like to know your opinion about one post from Thom Hogan (May 14 ‘2012 D800 Lens Choice) where he commented “At 36mp on the D800, though, diffraction impacts start recording noticeably at f/8 and above “. What are your findings here and how can we counter such problems? Thanks.
There is a rare quality about this site which I like. The tone is productive and friendly. So thank you and your guests for that. Keep it like that :-)
I have been following this thread for some time and thought I might hand in my little review of the D800 which i was lucky to get in march.
I was waiting to get my D4 when I had a chance to sneak peak a testing model of the D800. The pictures this thing could do for almost half the price made me change my path.
My only concern for getting the D800 was how would the low light performance be like compared to the D3s, and the D4.
So here goes:
Stills: The D800 performs way beyond my expectations in regards to still photography. The dynamic range was/is always good on the D3, but here its amazing. Much more than any computer display or printer (at this date) will ever show. The resolution is astonishing. Go look for artifacts on 14bit raw. Good look. I am printing native A2 prints in 360dpi that would blow your mind.
ISO performance: I will shoot any assignment at any time in full size raw up to 6400 ISO. The little noise (or pleasant grain) on 6400 is just beautiful and astonishing on 36MP. I have no clients who ever once would say. “Uh those small grains in your picture are ugly”. They are not. They just add some lowlight feel to it, that we have seen so many times in movies, old black and whites etc.. All my clients recognize this as a treasure. Why all the no noise hype?
Display: The display on the D800 is not what I would call revolutionary. The whole idea of making it “smart” is not smart. The Hue, Saturation and auto light just doesn’t do it for me. I am thrown more off the actual image than on. But all I personally need the display for is; Is it sharp. Does the histogram show any warnings? I find the Display on the D3 at least just as good and much more trustworthy. So no upgrade here.
Autofocus and Lightmetering: Well. The autofocus on this is good. Basically all I ask, is that its trustworthy. It has at times been off on faces and eyes, which the D3 was excellent at. I never normally use anything but the center focus point. But have started to use the 3D continuous mode which is truly excellent. Actually better than center focus single mode. Its seems to me like the 91.000k sensor truly kicks in once in 3D mode, but doesn’t do the job on single center point mode? Light metering is good. But so was the D3. So I see no improvement here and none was needed if you ask me.
Handling and weather protection: At first its a bit cramped getting your hands around the grip. Especially being used to the D3. But all thats forgotten. The quality of the house and feel lives totally up to my expectations. Mine has been in rain and sandstorms already and the sealing is impressive. The only thing I dislike about the handling is that d… ISO button. Its just not the best place to put it. I keep finding my self fumbling to locate and then hold down the ISO select button and dial to find the ISO i want.
Video: I also bought the D800 for video. Not the main reason, but to get the DSLR video look and to lesson all the video gear I own. I am very impressed on the handling, the contrast autofocus which I never thought I would use anyway. But I have started on using it cause its reliable. I will not blame the camera for the hard to see when its in focus. Cause there are third party tools to help here. Like the LCDVF from www.kinotehnik.com or another one from www.zacuto.com. The MOV files are really easy to work with. Nikon has really prepared themselves for a good video launch in this camera. And praise to them for that. There is Moiré. And more than most would like. YES its true. This will for some be a downside and for others like me. Doesn’t matter. Not that I am not professionally proud. But for the cost of this thing I do not expect the top. The picture quality of the video is already mind-blowing. Audio handling is important and like any DSLR for video its also a drag to work with here. BUT. I am truly amazed on the quality of the Nikon ME-1 stereo mic. Its a great little mic and if you set the max gain on the D800 to manual 11/20 you get good enough sound that you in some cases can use as reportage on track two, and for later reference its more than good.
Computer hardware and how much do I need to spend: Well it takes time to load these .NEF (raw) on to a disk. three times as long as the D3. Likewise for Lightroom to generate a 1:1 preview of the .NEF. Also you will find your filling up your disks faster than usual. But at the same time I take less but better pictures when on assignment. This camera can reward you with some technically brilliant shots if you take your time to learn it. How often are any of us in a situation, where we only have 1 second to take a shot? Very rare. So since the D800 has landed in my backpack I have changed the way I take pictures. Less shots but more thought of. So if your a news photographer or work in speedy deadlines. DO NOT BUY THIS CAMERA.
Thoughts: I respect those who do not see what they need 36MP for. But I cannot understand why so many are talking about buying the D800 and then using it in DX mode. I hope not to tread anybody on the toes here. But if your trying to convince your self to get the D800 and then only shoot 20MP in DX mode, then get another camera! I would never dream of shooting in anything but its maximum at all times. I do still believe that a picture should be cropped when taking it. Not later. Some of the magic of an image is lost each time we crop from the full size. For many it might be worth waiting for the not yet officially announced D600 for its lesser pixel size yet Full Frame capabilities if 36MP is to much.
The best thing about this camera is its resolution and ISO performance on this resolution. So if your specifically interested in the D800 ask your self.
Do I want a slow (FPS) camera that takes amazing 36MP raw images even at 6400 ISO? And would that fill in my needs? Or could my photography perhaps take a new path with this new camera?
Cause these are the true unique things about the D800 that no other camera has to offer at the moment for this price.
Насим привет! Наконец то я поймал тушку! Как побороть зеленый дисплей? На дисплее фото зеленят а на компьютере нормально? Возможно здесь ответ потеряется, можно его скинуть на почту мне: [email protected] Заранее благодарен!
Равиль, Никон утверждает, что цвета на новых дисплеях правильные, и что все предыдущие камеры добавляли слишком много синего цвета. Так что исправлять ничего они не собираются. Если честно, я на дисплей камеры смотрю в основном для оценки четкости изображения. На цвета я вообще мало обращаю внимания, потому что снимаю на RAW и цвета все равно меняю в Lightroom или Photoshop…
Да, спасибо Насим. В принципе это не критично, просто купив камеру я пошел на съемку и не сделав съемочные тесты дома, был немного удивлен. Далее скопировав все файлы на компьтер, увидел что все в порядке и это не критично. Ждал от Вас подтвеждения об этом. Еще раз благодарю Вас!!!
A great article thank you. I’m just a photo hobbyist, so spending on gear is hard thought over. The UK prices don’t help either!
I use a D7000 & find it an exceptional DX camera, with the D800 having similar pixel density, if it delivers like the D7K but with 2.5x the frame size it is going to be as you point out, an evolutionary step. It also offers the possibility to use a DX lens & get D7K equivalent (or better) images while you build up more suitable lenses, it’s the wides that usually DX specific.
I will be buying – once Nikon actually make some, & selling the D7K while it still fetches a worthwhile sum.
Hello Nasim, Im experiencing a problem with my new D800 and studio lighting. i take measurements with my seconic meter and shoot with a large softbox. images come out about 2-3 stops underexposed. when i used my d3200 and d300s in the same setup at the same time, the images are perfect. even histogram on D800 shows that images are way underexposed. i was wondering if anyone had issues like that. thank you. P.S. i trigger the strobe with Pocket Wizard.
David, to understand your problem, you are measuring the light with a light meter, then dialing the result into the D800 that is set to Manual mode right? Are you also setting your ISO manually? I have used the D800 in a studio and I did not have any problems with exposure, so maybe it is a camera setting that is doing it?
I have ordered D800 from Amazon, not received yet. But I saw a comment from Amazon today:
“I read hundreds of reviews and ordered the D800. But then I downloaded the technical manual from Nikon-usa……And that’s when I started worrying because they made it pretty clear that you are expected to be on tripod for great results. What they did not say is that you actually have to be on tripod for anything but mediocre results! The camera came today and after dozens of trials with super good Nikon lenses it became obvious that NO usable sharp photos are possible handheld unless you are at unrealistic speeds and ISO. Very disappointed and the camera is packed up and waiting for UPS pick up!
NO , under no circumstances would I recommend it to a friend…..Actually not even to an enemy. ”
Is it the case that shooting D800 has to use a tripod? If so, I am scared as well.
Jay This is just wrong. Nikon’s point is that if you want to obtain medium format results, you will need to use medium format techniques. Yes the D800 can resolve vibrations that a lesser sensor cannot, and if you zoom in to the pixel level, you can see the impact. … But if you normally print to 8 x 10, then if you scale down the D800 image to that size it will look BETTER, even hand held. Similarly, if you are planning to use the D800 to allow more agressive cropping, then again, you might see the need for better technique. In all cases these are positive features that allow us to up our game, but they do not provide limitations as compared to other cameras. The D800 is not more prone to shake, it just has the pixels to be able to resolve it. Use a D800 just like you would any other Nikon DSLR and you will get similar or better results. If you compare the D800 to a D### and start with a similarly framed image in the viewfinder, then display at a similar size on the monitor or print, the D800 will not be worse.
On the other hand, if you do not go to the extra effort of sturdy tripod, mirror up, remote release etc. you may not be able to extract the best quality of which the camera is capable. IMHO Anybody who claims that the D800 sensor is in some way limiting is making an error.
The quote you listed might be associated with an individual bad camera, but it is not indicative of D800 performance. I have compared handheld results of the D800 to these models: D70, D80, D90, D7000, D2x, D3, D3s. On average I get better results with the D800. So either the camera was bad, the user was making a mistake, or this was some troll seeding misinformation.
I have D800E, but it’s early days but already learnt a couple of things. One is that now VR lenses with static images taken hand-held are going to be more important than ever AND the crop-ability of this camera (especially the “E”) – which has an equivalent in focal length of the camera. You crop or go pixel-peeping and it is the similar effect to optically zooming in. So the same rules apply re keeping up shutter speeds with tele-zoom lenses.
What I am saying is that I agree with you and don’t blame the camera.
Agree, i’ve read some where that a save bet is use inverse of the focal length in shutter speed. So if lets say a 300mm lens, use 300th of a sec. Of course that’s in the safe zone. I have shot 200mm with 30/40th of a sec, which is crazily low for a telephoto, but i got a steady hand, and i just lean against a object (good way to do it).
Dear Jay, I have used the d800 with 70-200 2.8, 85mm 1.4, 50mm 1.8, sigma marco 50mm 2.8, nikon 14-24 2.8, and nikon 28mm 2.8. We (a professional photographer that i work with and I) only used the tri pod once for a long exposure (over 5 sec), while every other shots were done handheld in all sorts of situation. We are unique in the senses that we can shoot everything, perhaps not everything, but a wide range of items. We shoots events, weddings, Bat/Bar Bitzvah, sports, etc. Certainly the D800 focus system is not as fast as the d3, but still usable base on the result of a baseball game we were hire to shoot for. Mean while, the real test for the sensor is probably shooting a recent Bat Mitzvah event. As you know, low light + people running/dancing around, is perhaps the least ideal situation possible. We did use a flash later on, but that’s way after dark. None, never, we experience any sorts of strange sharpness issue like you. We were mainly shooting at 60th – 80th of a sec and boost to some where about 200th from time to time. Like Eric mentioned, perhaps it’s “either the camera was bad, the user was making a mistake, or this was some troll seeding misinformation.”.
Forget “fear of flying,” now we’ve got sensor resolution paranoia. Please, can someone with a bit of insight and experience with the 800 comment. Were all the other reviews part of a Nikon ruse, or was “Very Disappointed” sponsored by Canon or, as a less nefarious option, victim of sudden onset Parkinson’s syndrome? :~)
Donn I responded to Jay above. IMHO “Very Disappointed” did not make sense. The reported results are not consistent with the laws of nature. The camera AF might have been bad, or perhaps it was, as you imply, a disgruntled fanboy of a competing brand. As an observation, I find that folks who have “super good Nikon lenses” and know how to use them recognize the value of providing full information and usually list the lenses they used. This individual did not mention lenses used or any other Nikon bodies for comparrison… it does make you wonder. “Sensor Resolution Paranoia” (SRP for short) is a purely psychosomatic afflication cruable by a placebo. As such the appropriate cure is for the sufferer to don a Jimmy Buffet Parothead hat and drink margarittas until a rational thought process has been restored.
Comment (522), I’ve used a d800 hand full of time, and the result are simple. Like this post mention, noise can be cause not only by Pixel Density and Size, but also the pipeline. The d800 shooting at 4000iso (Very un-ideal situation, low light indoor) were clean. In fact i wouldn’t go above 4000 on a d3, but the d800 i be alright with 5200, and a little freak out at 6400, although it’s still fairly clean. Note, a lot of people down size samples of “noise comparision” to like a tiny fraction of a picture. Of course you are going to see noise. However, the reality is, if you look at the picture as a whole, if the image is clean, it’s clean. Unless you go into a art gallery and stick your face 1inch away from the art. As in big print, 13×19, no problem. And also, if the picture will be print big enough to be bother by the noise, that gotta be like a wall size photo, where you be 5 feet away. Have any of you ever walked up to a bill board 1 feet away and study it’s pixel and noise? Probably not.
So that was the noise, which a lot of people in concern with for a sensor with huge amount of pixels and tiny pixel size. As in the auto focus system, as expected, it’s slower than the sport beast d3, which make perfect sense. Getting a d800 to shoot sports is like cutting vegetables with a folk. However, the focus is extremely accurate. We were surprise when it was able to auto focus on the closest eye to the camera during a headshot, because the person had glasses on. Amazing that it can tell the difference between the glasses and the eye.
Build quality, i love it. less bulky than the d3 (i actually like the d3 weight and size), the d800 nailed it, good balance of weight and still substantial
Benefit of extreme high megapixel. Three main thing, bigger size, sharper, more detail. -We all know that high megapixel = allow us to print bigger size. But like i mention before, no one walks up to a billboard with 2 feet of distance away from it. -Sharper, well obviously because let’s say the edge of a object and the background is captured by 1 single pixel, then it will combine the two different intensity of the light wave and have a average, thus not as sharp. Oppose to two individual pixel for each light wave, that means more accurate in capturing the light wave, thus give a better shape of the object. Hard to explain, i tried. -Details, similar idea as sharper, camera captures a scene in a 2 dimensional, unlike our eye, 2pt perspective. So how can the camera tell the shape of the object? Well, by the difference in the light intensity that hits the sensor, Brighter vs darker, which give us the shape, since when we see a object, we are actually look at the light it reflects. So the idea is, more pixel = more accurately capture the difference in light intensity, thus better image detail.
What more can I say? I don’t want to talk about the crazy nerd technical parts and all those junk (although i kinda did briefly), real experience shooting the camera is better than ANY controlled test result IMO. Im sure it’s same for you guys and girls, if not, why not just read Nikon’s feature/description? We want to hear each other’s experience with it, that’s why we’re here. And my experience with the d800 is… holy cow, that’s amazing!
I really appreciate your responses/comments, as well as sharing your experience. I just got an email from Amazon that they shipped out the D800, so I should get it soon. Now all of you have given me the confidence that D800 can be used handheld just like any other camera. I will purchase a Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S to try out with and w/o a tripod, and once I like the camera, I will gradually order more lenses . Any thoughts, comments are welcome.
Jay Of course it depends on what you enjoy shooting. My favorite lens is the 14-24 f/2.8, however the 16-35 is also very sharp and has VR. But… I think you should consider the 105 f/2.8 Micro. This is a very sharp lens, and it will help you to be able to get the most from your camera. Also, the close focus capability allows you to take incredible images of flowers etc. If your primary use is weddings, people at events, street photography etc, many folks would consider the 24-70 f/2.8 a must have. For indoor sports and concerts, the 70-200 f/2.8. Having said all this, I know of some folks who have purchsed the 28-300 for their D800. IMHO, if you want to get the most from your camera, the 28-300 might not be the best option as it starts becoming diffraction limited very quickly. Of course all of the fast primes are great choices too. Ultimately, it comes down to your budget. My advice is to decide what your shooting priority is and then consider consider one of the f/2.8 lenses I listed above.
Thanks. I tested D800 using 85mm/1.8G for two weeks and overall I think it is very good. I also tried to test the auto focus issues and not completely sure if the camera I got has an issue or not on the far left side. I have one concern about the D800 for the 36.3 MP which I do not think is useful for me and I probably do not want to deal with it.
I finally decided to return it, and purchased a D700. I am thinking to get a 16-35/4.0 to start with. Any suggestions for the lenses for D700?
D700 now has better user review than D800 on Amazon.
Jay, D700 is a great camera and unless you are printing big probably a better choice than the D800 for many. Having said that I am ecstatic about the D800E. The 16-35 is a great lens. I prefer the 14-24, but the trade-off between the two is that with the 16-35 you get VR and filters whereas with the 14-24 f/2.8 you get higher shutter speeds in low light, a slightly wider field of view and better subject isolation if desired. The 17-35 f/2.8 is also a great lens, no VR but f/2.8 aperture and it takes filters. The 16-35 f/4 is the lowest priced.
After the wide zoom (which really shows off the FX sensor), it all depends on what you want to shoot. The 28-300 is a very covenient lens and in conjunction with the wide zoom would cover the entire range of focal lengths. The IQ of the 80-400 is better, but you have a hole in the mid range. To fill that hole, I love the 24-70 f/2.8 as an event lens, I haven’t tried the new 24-85 VR. If you want to shoot indoor sports, get the 70-200 f/2.8 VRII. If you want to do any macro work the 105 f/2.8 VR is your best bet because it gets you greater standoff than the 60 micro. For low light, any of the f/1.4 or f/1.8 FX lenses would probably work… The 50mm f/1.4G seems the best value. Having said all of that, if you don’t need the long end, the other nice option is the 24-120 f/4 VR.
So. I think that for FX a wide zoom (16-35) is a must. After that….I’d say try the 28-300 to see where you are shooting. Fine tune your AF. Then see what focal lengths you are using the most. If you are always using the 16-35 at 16, consider the 14-24. If you mostly use the 28-300 within a certain range you can upgrade to the pro glass that covers that range. I have a great collection of lenses and although the 28-300 is not quite as sharp as some, it is so versatile that I use it to be sure I get the shot. In your case it might be the ideal tool to help you to determine what (if any) other lenses you may need.
I have just completed a camping trip in the Sierras of California with the D800. This was a good test of hand held shots in lesss than ideal conditions ( freezing temperatures, lots of dust etc)
Very,very sharp photos using the 70-200 f2.8, the 50 f1.8 and the 24 f2.8 Nikon lenses. Never used a tripod. What I did notice were (1) some problems with the single focus mode hunting when aimed at small targets such as distant birds, and (2) soft corners on a few photos that have to do more with the FX format over the DX format which does use the sweet part of the lens.
I like to photograph animals and lots of deer were around to give me practice. The D800 I’d very well. I have had much practice before using the D7000 (same pixel density) and this has paid off when using the D800. Py attention to your shutter speeds, focus, and aperture and the results handheld will be spectacular. I see no need for a tripod unless lighting is really bad and you do not want to up the ISO. (up to 3200 ISO is really not a problem with the D800)
Hello, I usually use the real-time zoom of the live view in order to shot macro photos. With my brand new D800E (just 3 days ago I changed my D90 for this beast :D) I have a problem which causes the image on the live view to be a preview of the shot. Sometimes this is a problem, for example when you shot with the flash, since the screen becomes totally dark and unusable. Could you please suggest a fix to this “problem”? I think is a problem that can be simply fixed changing a setting… but which one?
I am a regular follower of your site.the articles u post are very accurate and clear to understand.As i am a serious amateur photographer having passion for nature & wildlife,your articles have helped me a lot in improving my photography.
I have a question to ask abt Nikon D800.At present m using Nikon D200 with sigma 150-500mm.Now m thinking to upgrade my body coz m using D200 since last 4yrs.But now i m confused whether D800 is a good option for me wid my Sigma 150-500mm.
Also can u plz guide me about nikkor 300mm f4 + 1.4TC or 1.7TC with D800. Kindly waiting for yor reply…
I have the Sigma 150-500mm and did a few test shots the other day – only got D800E a little over a week ago and haven’t had a chance to take it on a field trip yet. But the Sigma auto-focussed quite well. I also tried it with a Kenko 1.4 TC (700mm) and it didn’t do too well. Read that reducing auto-focus to 11 points is better, so night time here, will try outside tomorrow. But test shots I did around my neighbourhood shows the Sigma very capable with D800E and lots of detail, even with the Kenk0, which is no slouch. Bottom line, don’t hesitate getting and using a D800 with the Sigma. Fantastic value lens you already got.
Nasim (or anybody else) The D800 has a USB 3.0 connection. The Sony XQD reader that comes with the D4 also has a USB 3.0 interface. Do you know of a reliable USB 3.0 board that will go into a Mac Pro computer? It would sure be nice to have a USB 3.0 interface to get pictures from the D800.
Dear Mansurov,I decided to go for D800 after reading your review.I never saw any mention about the green tnit in Lcd and other bugs that a lots of people are crying about in other forums.Are these problems real? Think this and other bugs could be resolved with firmwares in future?Is there cause for worry?My D800 is already shipped and will reach me on the 26th.I am surprised you find time to answer most of the quistions asked by your readers.Thanks a lot for each and every article that you have put up for us.I can imagine how much of time and effort has gone in to this.It reflects your passion for photography.You generously share your knoledge with your readers.I have benefited greatly from your site.Thanks a ton.Your pictures are great too.You inspire.All the best.
hello nasim and all folks. Iam new to the forum ,i consider my self an advance amateur,i have been using nikon d700’i just recieved my d 800’and iam truly impressed with the camera performance,this one phenominal camera but all new gear there is learning curve,the real biggy is i dont need zooms you can downscale or magnify your picture.This is complete camera in my veiw.You can use dx lenses with resolution of around 16 mps ,now thats simply fantastic ,i have handled the canon mk3 but it does evoke industrial prescision as the nikon,thats why iam a nikon shooter forever. Nasim can you please share your settings for outside,and studio projects and also the use of built in HDR Thanks Mustaqeem Ahmed Qazi.
Hi Nasim & Lola Love your website! I’ve learned so much by venturing on here everyday… even at the office. lol I just purchased a Nikon D800 (body only) and was wondering you opinion on good lenses for Landscapes, Weddings, Fashion, Corporate Events, and street photography. I’m considering two FX lenses for now to start off with
Would someone please explain why a higher resolution sensor is going to cause a higher degree of camera shake at the same shutter speed? If you are shooting a 125mm lens at 1/125 second, shouldn’t a D800 have a comparable image sharpness (due to camera shake) as a D700?
No difference in shake if you down size the D800 image to the 12 MB of the D700. But at 36 it picks up finer detail when you look the picture at 100% and finer detail means you will see more of the impact of shake, poorer lens, etc.
Eliot is right. There is a “telephoto” aspect to this as we “zoom” into the image, similar rules apply as they would to telephoto lenses.
But I would also add this: The DOA (Depth of Field) is also affected. I took a 3/4 length portrait and the D800E detected the face and focussed on the right eye – exactly as you would want it to do and shows the intelligence of the camera. The subject was illuminated with a nice softbox and it came out very 3D like.
The lens was 50mm and F5.6 and a reasonable distance. The right eye was perfect, but then I noticed the right ear just behind, that it was ever so slightly out of focus. Not much but still obvious. I feel sure I would never have noticed that on my D700. DOA is certainly been affected.
In many ways we are discovering new things with the D800/E – and in the above example the “E” may well have been the key.
Depth of field in terms of “circle of confusion” will not be effected by the higher resolution sensor. THat is unchanging physics. However, smaller pixels will pick up a smaller circle of confusion and so something will seem out of focus that would be seem n focus with larger pixels. (A pixel can only resolve something larger than it is.) It is analogous to the magnification effect you mentioned. Something appearing in focus will be out of focus when magnified. The same thing happens with diffraction which will be noted at more wide open apertures.
Exactly, the COC does not change but simply becomes more exposed. Perhaps ‘real’ and ‘perceived’ DOF impression has real world affectations with the D800/E.
There is another thing that strikes me, get a photo pin-sharp using say F5.6 midrange to short prime, then when pixel-peeping at 1:1 the D800E looks significantly less vague than D800 where you need to go to to 2:1 to loose that vagueness or softness. Under those ‘special’ circumstances when everything comes together just right, the E is seen as having less DOF. The plane of exact sharpness is noticeable smaller.
But is this just academic? Or does the ‘E’ really have an edge that matters. The latest interview with Jim Brandenburg says ‘yes’ – but that is in the context of the work he does.
All I know is that for me the world of photography got a lot more interesting – and glad I got the E as it appeals to some part of me… now the other part of me needs to take more photos. LOL
The true DOF between E and non E has to be the same but since non E is slightly less sharp you will need more fuzziness to note a difference and so DOF will appear to less with the E. Of course all of this occurs only when pixel peeping at 100% and is unlikely to have real world impact except perhaps in huge prints or a lot of cropping.
To put it differently, the higher resolution sensor allows you to resolve a smaller amount of shake. And yes, the D800 and D7000 are similar in that have a similar pixel pitch, so for a given lens, blurring at the pixel level due to camera shake etc. should be the same. However for a given image (ia framed to use the whole sensor), The D800 will show worse blur because each pixel represents a smaller portion of the subject.
Andrew.It may take two months or more.Keeping the order try your luck with nikon store and local stores online.You may get lucky.If you get one earlier you can cancel your order at BHS.Nikon store has one or two available for people who keep checking there more often.I got mine from target 2 days after ordering it and so I canceled my Adorama order.all the best. Again do not get disappointed if you cannot get one from nikon store in the first attempt.Keep trying.You have a great chance to get one.
I’ve thought of that but as I’m not base din the US, any online order charges my card immediately – not on dispatch of the order. So having more than 1 order placed gets pretty expensive….
Try Samy’s camera…I waited for 2 months at Beach Camera and nothing. When I placed the order with Samy’s Camera they sent notice it was shipping in 2 days! I also got my 28mm 1.8G which nobody had at the time from them…also boxes are brand new with no signs of store demo etc. They have been the best for me…
I very recently received the new Nikon 24-85mm VRII lens that I am now testing on my D800. I am very happy to report that this lens is very, very good with this camera.
I tested this lens against the Nikon 14-24,and 24mmF2.8 at 24mm focal length from f4 through f16. This lens was the equal of the 14-24 and generally better than the 24mm F2.8 in sharpness at all these apertures.
I also tested this lens against the 50mm f1.8 at the 50mm focal length. By f5.6 both lenses were equally sharp in the center. By f8 the corner sharpness became almost identical as well, though with a slight nod to the fixed 50mm lens for sharpness and contrast.
My last test was at 70mm focal length against the Nikon 70-200 F2.8. At F4 the 70-200 easily was superior, but by f8 the 24-85 caught up in the center (but not in the corners).
Of course I did not get this lens to compete against the 70-200 but for the wide angle performance. I think Nikon has a real winner here. My guess is this lens will be preferred over the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 because it is much lighter, has VR, and costs much less.
How does the Nikon Nikkor Wide-angle lens – 20 mm – F/2.8 – Nikon F lens stand up next the Nikon 17-35 2.8. I know it’s a no brainer as far as cost.. the 17-35 should be much better but I need a wide and have limited funds. I have the 17-35mm but I could sell it if the 20mm I have would suffice.
I have both and never use the 20. The other option is the 16-35, and if you like wide the 14-24. I think that for the money, the 16-35 is the best buy.
I was just told by one of my photographer friends that the wide format printers made by Epson such as the 7890 that he prints with were not capable of printing such a high resolution as the D800. Any thoughts on this matter? Seems from your review you think such wide format printers will be able to.
Thanks Donn, So, what you are saying is, a 1″x1″ print versus a 24″x36″ tries to put more pixels into each print and therefore the smaller size print just has too many pixels to make a clear print? How about if I wanted to print 5″x7″ prints? This sounds like the larger print I make the better it will appear using the D800 – up to a point.
In fact, I have been considering the 7900 printer, thanks.<
Very nice article. Can’t wait to read the full review!
Thank you Aiman!
I have the very same helicopter, good stuff !
Oh my god!, I have same movies, good stuff!
Hi Nasim,
Great review! Do you know where can I find more info about video features of D800?
Cheers
What program would you use in the PC world
Lightroom or Capture NX2
Beyond amazing! The Canon 5D Mark II and Mark III cannot keep up with the high-res D800! Wow…drooling :)
Raj, the 5D Mark II definitely cannot, but the 5D Mark III is pretty close!
Some tests seem to find out other facts, like D800 nor D4 can match 5DII (and by that I mean sites that are neutral and don’t have like 7 Nikon and two Sony tests on them…
Besides, it’s plain logics and physics. Nice work to get such a great 36MP camera, buet now C en N switch sides: Nikon now has the highest pixel count but also the highest noise that comes with that. Period.
Actually yourt, noise is tricky. The only true measure of noise is one that is integrated across the entire sensor. Assume that the camera is a black box and we know nothing about how many mp it has. The only real objective measure of noise, sharpness etc is obtained by capturing an image and then enlarging that image to a fixed size for evaluation. Same image, enlarged to the same size, taken on different cameras….now compare. What happens is that as you combine pixels from a large mp image down to a specific size, the noise gets averaged out. On a pixel level the D800 has higher noise than several cameras, but for an image of a fixed size the D800 looks like it has the best IQ. The physics are that smaller photos sites require greater amplification to achieve a sensitivity that is equivalent to a given ISO level. That amplification also amplifies the noise that is inherent in electronic circuitry. However cicruit design, circuit layout, micro lens design, power supply design, and shielding all impact noise. So while it is physics, since the electronics have huge impact on noise, you cannot draw a one to one correspondence between sensor size and noise. (My D70 has huge pixels and way more pixel level noise than the D800)
What the DXOMark tests show is that Nikon has reduced the pixel size while simultaneously improving the electronics thus providing a cleaner signal to the A/D converter. Nikon has achieved quite an accomplishment with the D800, it has the best IO on the market. But for many, base ISO IQ is not as critical as other considerations…The best camera is what is best for buyer and takes into consideration frame rate, jpeg processing, max ISO, what glass you own, what brand you like and what color you want your lens bodies to be (as well as IQ).
You make some good points. Certainly reduced noise in the electronics is very important. I believe the DA function is integrated into the D800 sensor. In my work I actually deal with noise factors in electronics. Why we are talking digital cameras, noise is actually an analog contamination of the digital content.
On the noise comparison between 5D3 and D800: The sensor MP count difference and the same FX physical size, it is difficult to compare noise between two cameras with such large differences in MP.
Comparing noise at 1:1 then becomes misleading.
A number of comparisons I have seen, between 5D3 and D800, used 50mm F1.4 lenses on both cameras. Under those circumstance the D800 will be at a disadvantage viewed 1:1. We need to examine the same size physical area of both sensors and that means we must compare the D800 with 5D3 with the D800 having 62.8% more pixels. So rather than compare 1:1 – we should be 1.628:1 – and they are not doing that.
So to make it clear, the image from the 5D3 should be viewed at 1:1 and compared with the D800 at 1.628:1 – otherwise the comparison will favour the 5D3 unfairly.
But adjusting by that ratio, we end up comparing the same amount of light falling on the same amount of physical area of the sensor on BOTH cameras.
One thing that is also emerging, and this to me is becoming as important to me as noise, that resizing image from a large MP to smaller MP count is truly a forte’ of the D800. This means the extra resolution amounts to greater IQ when rescaled down on computer screens etc, which is important as we view images on screen much more than in print. That excites me as the extra resolution isn’t just seen when we print the images.
Sold my D700 and awaiting my pre-ordered D800.
Yourt, I agree with Eric below – you should always make comparisons at the same print size. 100% crop comparisons are downright wrong, simply because one can be printed at a much bigger size. If we solely look at the pixel level, then modern cameras with the largest pixels will always have much cleaner and less noisier output.
Насим купить так же еще по преордеру?
Равиль, если есть нужда :)
Nice start. Looking forward to more.
Nasim, a suggestion or request. Many are seeking which lenses to buy for use with D800. Many of us long-term (or not-so-long-term) Nikon users have an array of older AF and AF-D Nikon lenses. I for example own ‘the cream machine” 85 1.4 AF-D, 28-105D, excellent 180mm F/2.8 AF. It seems that you do your testing with the most recent premium AF-S G lenses. However, it is quite common for one to own a $900 street-price 85 1.4D and not $2000 85 1.4G lens. Do you have access to, or can you get access to, and, when you test lenses, also test with other older popular Nikon (and possibly third-party) lenses? Many want to know, will D800 work with my existing FX lenses, or will have to upgrade. Nikon has made excellent lenses for F-mount since 1959. I used to own 50mm F/1.2 Ai-S lens which is quite good, for example. In any case, have you considered also using some of the older lenses, or you insist only test with the holy trinity plus 24G, 35G, 85G?
David, will definitely test the D800 with some older glass, but not at the moment – it will have to wait until I get a hold of those lenses…most likely will be testing with the D800e
My long awaited D800 is now here and i am very happy. The only lenses I own are the AFS 50mm 1.4G and the more than 25 years old AI-S 105mm 1.8. I used both on a D7000. The 50 mm performs good. The old 105 mm performs expressively good and is very sharp. But this lens has two problems, first is when shooting against light and second is that it has no AF. But this two problems are not a D800 issue. After one day testing, I ordered immediately two new Nikkor lenses: 85 mm 1.4G ED ann 70-200 mm 2.8 vr II. The 14-24 2.8 G ED will follow. I think the best camera and lenses I owned ever in my 30 years of photography life. Now I am not dreaming from a Pentax D645 or Hasselblad 40 or Phase One … I ask now myself, is there any competitor in the 35mm DSLR market? Whats with the brand that makes so ugly designed collani cameras. Nothing – only an expensive upgrade for everytime JPEG shooting photographers ;) They only need more high iso instead of megapixels because of shooting only in low light so nobody can see what ugly camera they have and less megapixel so nobody can see the details of picture damages that the aggresively camera corrections produces in JPEGs. Oh oh .. will this comment be deleted?
Nasim thanks for this good review. I have no problems about any pc performance with the D800 files. My iMac i5 with “only” 8GB RAM and Aperture 3 performs fast enough. But you are right, 16 MB would run better. RAM is cheap enough to upgrade, so no problems here …
Ha ha, Dencelly! :D
Barbara, it is my pleasure, if I could amuse you ;) I hope you are not one of the soap dish design camera users :D
Once again, you have posted a terrific review. Thank you very much, Nasim!
Thank you for your feedback Matt!
I ordered my D800 one week after introduction from B&H, and of course, it has not yet shipped. I can wait. However, I am interested in one clarification: I have heard and read that the 24mm f3.5 tilt and shift lens will not work on the D800. This seems counterintuitive to me and I can’t fathom a single technical reason why this might be the case. I wondered if you had tested this lens on the D800 to ease my mind.
This might help answer your question:
www.youtube.com/watch…ehkWWCRWZE
Thank you for that superb demonstration! I can certainly live with the minor rotation limitation, insofar as this will not affect 99% of my shots. I hated the thought of having to give up my favorite lens.
Thanks so much for your hands on review. You have helped take some the mystery out of the resolution/iso performance of this camera that so bothers many folks out there. The fact that the D800 has almost the same pixel density as the D7000 helps to explain a lot. It is all really about the total size of the sensor that determines performance. Otherwise why have such a large camera and lenses? Almost by accident the true 35mm format is coming to life like never before. Medium format cameras will always have an edge just due to the size of the sensor. But what they do not have going for them is cost, technology advances (market is too limited to afford the R&D necessary to keep up with Nikon and Canon) , and size. The 35mm format has been around so long that there are literally millions of lenses out there some of which are excellent.
John, you are spot on with everything you have said! 35mm will never be like MF, but the cost advantage is huge!
Will, here is some more information: photographylife.com/news/…c-e-lenses
Really appreciated reading your Positive Review-All of your Images were Stellar & Thank you for leaving the EXIF DATA intact!
You are most welcome! I never remove EXIF from images posted on our website, so I am glad that you find it useful.
Hi Nasim – I am having second thoughts about the d800 e that I ordered. I was using a Nikon d3s which I loved but also ended up buying the d3x because I wanted the higher MP. I shoot only landscapes which are cropped and enlarged quite a bit for my business. Everything I shoot is on a tripod and usually with a remote. My favorite lenses are my nikon 14-24 and my nikon 24-70. For this type of shooting do you think I would benefit a great deal with the d800e or do you think that my current cameras or good enough. I am just not sure if all the new upgrades in the d800e will really help my work. I would love to get your thoughts on this matter. Thank you in advance for your help .
jack mitchell
While not having used either camera, to me you seem the prototype of the photographer who would benefit from the D800E.
– You shoot only on tripod, eliminating any handheld issues with the high pixel sensor
– You shoot only landscapes, eliminating moire issues with the D800E’s lack of (or rather “inverted”?) AA filter
– You regularly crop and enlarge photos, thus having great use of the 36MP sensor
– Your two mentioned lenses are razor sharp, and should bring the best out of your D800E
– In short, based on your shooting preferences, I personally cannot see any camera today more suited to your needs than the D800E (providing it is indeed identical to the D800, minus AA filter)
Thank you Terje for your input. I sometimes seem to go too overboard trying to get the best I can for my work and sometimes there isn’t really that much of an advantage in the end. However, this time I do agree with you and think that the added pixel count and upgraded sensor or things that I cannot overlook. So I think that I will get the d800e that I ordered. I always have my d3x for photos where there might be a moire issue.
Again than you for your advice, I really do appreciate it
jack mitchell
You’re very welcome.
Be advised, however: whether you’ll experience substantial improvement on your work by switching from the D3x to D800E will be debatable, and only you can judge whether the upgrade is worth it for you.
I stand by my assumption, though: based on your description of your photography style, the D800E will most likely be the best camera out there.
Regards,
Terje
Jack, I am with Terje on this one – whether the upgrade is worth it for you is really your judgement. The D800E will give you better pixel-level sharpness, more resolution (more cropping opportunities) and more dynamic range. These three are enough to warrant an upgrade in my opinion.
Hi Nasim,
It’s a very nice article and Thanks you so much.
Btw do you think old prime like 50 mm 1.8D will perform well on D800 or should I upgrade to 50mm 1.8G ?
I am not a professional but just a serious hobbyist and I will be getting my D800 soon.
Thanks
Hi Duwa, I’m not Nasim but I think you should upgrade.
The 50mm 1.8G is a brilliant lens, in some ways even better than the more expensive 1.4G version (that I adored shooting with). I’d highly recommend upgrading considering the kind of resolution we’re talking about.
Hi Noel,
Thanks for the reply. I will order 50mm 1.8G.
Duwa
Duwa, I am with Noel here – unless you will be shooting only at f/4 and above, I would highly recommend to upgrade to the 50mm f/1.8G version.
Hi Nasim,
Thanks for the reply. I will go and get 50mm G version then.
Thanks
Would love one, but my marriage and bank account would be my worst enemies if the inflated price Australians are going to see it at was spent on this beaut camera. My Nikon D90 will just have to do…
No camera is worth the cost of a broken marriage! :)
I’m currently using Nikon D700 camera. Thank you for this valuable information.
You are most welcome!
Dear Nasim,
Thanks for listening to our “pleading” ;) Great review & looking forward to the update on using it with birds. I am about to pick up one (just became available in Malaysia) to replace my D7000. Excited.
Amar, thank you for your feedback. Some info for birders is coming soon!
Hasim,
thanks again.
I have a question: for wildlife and birding, one ‘always’ lacks mm’s. I thought of replacing my D300 for the D800 in DX, just to have the 1.5 crop. Would that be a waste too (p 10)? In other words- would it be better to shoot FF and crop the image itself?
Thanks!
Wouter
Hey Wouter, Its not Hasim, but think about this. The only thing you get from the D800 and a DX crop is a smaller file size right out of the camera. Cropping the FX image to a DX size on your computer will give you pretty much the same result, but…. If you are shooting in FX mode and can fill the frame with your subject, the resultant image will be much nicer than what you will get by filling the DX frame. Since the 1.5X crop factor doesn’t really give you any reach advantage on the 800 (just fewer pixels), why not use the new AF system and consider a TC-20E III teleconverter? (providing your telephoto is compatible) If you are only going to shoot in DX mode, why not get a D7000, or better yet, wait for the D400? Going from the D300 to the D800 in DX mode is basically the same as going from a 12.3mp sensor to a 15.4mp sensor. You’d get more from the 16mp D7000.
Wouter, Eric’s suggestions make much sense.
You’d see a slight increase in resolution only.
Regarding the D7000 instead, I think it differently: the D7000 is a very nice camera with an incredible sensor, but it lacks in build, and especially in the Autofocus department.
It simply is not reliable as the old 3500, or the new advanced 3500; just no contest.
For this reason only I’d buy the D800, which would allow you to shoot even at F8 with autofocus. It should prove still reliable and relatively fast even with a 300F4 + TC1.7.
The trouble with the DX line is that you get either AF & build (D300) or Image quality (D7000). But not both… yet.
Hi Lorenzo,
Thanks for your comment. You are 100% right. I own a D7000 with DX 17-55 2.8, DX 35 1.8 and 70-200 2.8 VR II incl. a TC-17. I am totally pleased with the image quality but the AF performance is simply is poor. It is still not reliable. Sometimes everything is ok and for some reason other pictures have poor sharpness. The camera was twice at the Nikon Service point. But I think it is a general problem, that, of course, is only obvious if you use your lenses e.g. at 2.8 with a small depth-of-field. You will not see a big problem at 5.6 or 8. And before someone writes that it is not the camera’s fault but mine, then please explain why pictures taken with live view and contrast AF are ALWAYS perfectly sharp under the same conditions.
I agree that a D7000 owner has only the possibility the “downgrade” the image quality by buying a more reliable D300s or to upgrade to a D800 / D4. The D800 has the advantage that I can use my DX 17-55 2.8 for some time and shooting in DX mode at 16 MP with a little bit better ISO performance compared to the D7000 and also with some more dynamic range. I hope the AF performance is really better with the D800…
Stefan
It sounds like you may have an issue with AF and your lenses. To explain: During manufacture both camaera body and lenses are subject to certain manufacturing tolerences. The AF module assumes that eveything is in tolerance. However when you combine a camera and a lens, the tolerances can stack such that the two together out outside of tolerances. At small apertures, the DoF masks this effect but at large apertures with fast lenses, the shallow DoF cand result in photos that are out of focus at the intended subject. Since composing in live view uses the focus at the image plane, Liveview gives proper focus whereas the phase detect AF module does not. Nikon has provided a solution for this problem in the “AF fine tune” feature found at the bottom of the “Setup” menu. You can use this feature to adjust each lens you own for optimal focus. I use a product called LensAlign available from:
michaeltapesdesign.com/lensalign.html
But you can do it on your own with a yardstick for a whole lot cheaper. The D7000 will recognize each lens and apply the calibration you have entered. (The camera cannot recognize different copies of the same lens however.)
So, Nikon could take your camera, test it and find everything just fine. The camera could be just fine and the lenses could be just fine and yet the combination could be out.
The problem you are experiencing can occur with the D800 as well. The problem is probably not in the AF module, but in the camera / lens combination. No matter which camera you use, in order to obtain optimum focus fine tuning the AF for your lenses should offer an improvement.
I bought the d800 and used it in 1.2 and 1.5 crop with my 300 f2.8 and TC 1.4 and TC 2.0, it is a waste of money, the tendency to pick up blur and ongoing focus issues, I decided to sell and buy a D700 and keep going with my D300s, I will wait for aD400 or when I can get a D3s or D4 used. The D800 is great for studio, landscape etc, some wildlife shooters use it but maybe my skills lack. I don’t like the slow shutter, massive files and slow workflow. I never use video and love the D700 IQ, I can print poster size and my market is very happy with the IQ. I think Nikon has skipped a generation in the lack of a 16 to 24 mp Pro DX and FX camera that would fill the gap between D700 and D800 ie a D4 in D700/D800 body with high frame rate and focus system with D800 dual card system.
Yes, it is always better to shoot in full frame and crop your images later, if needed. If you need the speed for wildlife (FPS), then wait for the D400.
Once again thank you for a wonderfully informative website. I shoot mainly wildlife in Africa. I find the Nikon 300mm 2.8 VR a very good focal length and speed with the D800 for most animals. It is more transportable and hand-holdable than the 200-400 F4 so I’ve chosen the attributes of the 300mm 2.8 over the benefits of zooming. For birding however, 300mm is often not long enogh. I have 1.4 and 1.7 TCs and am considering the TC-20E iii as well but was wondering if cropping from the 36MP would get similar or even better results than using teleconverters? I thought that with the flexibility for cropping that the D800 provides, the teleconverters with the 300mm 2.8 may not be necessary. I would highly value your opinion here.
Crappy article! I really am having a hard time wrapping my mind around why everyone is so intent on making comparisons between the D800 and other cameras by down sampling the D800 images. This is not an accurate comparison. What is going to happen when brand X camera comes out, is 38Mpx, and blows the D800 away for high ISO? Are we still going to down sample and say, “see, its still just as good as brand X.” Nobody ever compared the D700 to a 5Mpx camera, they didn’t have to because it was readily apparent at full sample size the D700 was awesome. Signal to noise ratio is the only unbiased, accurate and truly meaningful metric for comparing sensors. See for yourself, go out to DXomark and compare the D700 “Full SNR” to the D800. What you’ll find is that the D700 comfortably outperforms the D800 in this specific category. I’m not knocking the D800, it is an awesome camera. However, let’s stop playing games and making excuses for the areas where it doesn’t quite rise to the occasion. I’ll be the first to stand up and say it, “The king is not wearing any clothes!”
How very eloquent. I fail to see how this (plainly very thorough and well written) article has invited or warranted any profanity in response.
The only thing that really matters to real photographers is how the same image looks when compared on different cameras, and that’s exactly what’s being compared here.
“This is not an accurate comparison. What is going to happen when brand X camera comes out, is 38Mpx, and blows the D800 away for high ISO? Are we still going to down sample and say, ”
I would assume he would not, because then it would be a fair comparison. What is not fair is compare without downsampling the image to the size of the current competitors and the D800 arises to the occasion. If Canon produce a 36mp camera that produces less noise, I will be the first to say the King is not wearing cloths. If you increase the size of say a 12mp Nikon three times I would have to believe the noise would be bigger thus easier to see. Upsampling also increases softness, is that fair to the smaller camera? I think it is only fair to downsample both images and equally sharpen for any meaningfull comparison.
Come on really? If you have two cameras and want to know which makes better prints you are not going to print one photo at 8×10 and one at 13×19 to compare cameras. That would be absurd. I’m going to print both at 13×19 to compare which is better. Hellooooooo McFly?
Darren, if you want to print your images much bigger than usually, you are right, no doubt!
The question is there is no reason to buy this camera with 36 million pixels, if you are going to downsample all your images to 12mp (to reduce noise) and print at the same size you always did with D700.
But then again at lower iso’s (say 50-1600) the D800 is clearly superior right? better DR and resolution? a D700 cant do 36mpx the way D800 can!
Yes, it’s really superior, it’s a killer sensor, but again, …
Do I (and not only me, I’m sure) need a camera with this sensor if I… reserve about 1/3 of my images I shoot, print less than 0,1% of them at 20 x 30 for the maximum size, do not shoot video at all, and never use crop for recomposition? I think there is no reason to spend much more time managing terabytes of digital information waste (which is a real problem), even there is a very small difference in DR for JPG output:/
I forget to mention that any image taken by D800 even in low ISO like 200 has a noise, easily remarkable at 100% in very defocused and uniform color areas! And, of course, it disappears after downsampling. Thus it has more resolution/details with a little better DR for JPG, but you still have to downsample images to get the “same quality” for 100% view.
Levon, you always downsample images when publishing them online or elsewhere. Why worry about 100% pixel level performance? A high resolution sensor gives you the flexibility to have clean images through downsampling and print large when needed.
Levon, agreed, but the D800 gives you the option to reduce noise if there is too much of it, or allow you to print much larger 36 MP files at low ISO levels – something you cannot do with the D700. If you do not print or crop, then the D700 is good enough for you…
Thanks Nasim!)
I just wanted somebody like you to prove that D700 is good enough for somebody like me. Your are right, we always downsample images for the web, that’s why I hate my backup HDD, and do not want to upgrade the camera for resolution (hope people won’t stone me).
Nothing against this article and even against D800. Very nice article as always and great camera!
To me, it does not matter if comparison is made by down sampling or up scaling, say D700 images to D800 size. Either way (correct me if I am wrong), a camera with a higher resolution is likely to have an upper hand. I am not sure if comparing the signal to noise ratio is an accurate comparison. It is probably as useful as comparing down sampling images. May be, one needs to run a few statistical tests (!!!) like standard error to provide a statistically valid comparison.
In short, we need a common ground to compare different cameras.
While I understand your frustration, I must disagree because down sampling is valid and here’s why: When comparing FX sensors, you have a piece of silicon of the same size for all sensors. Throw away specs like megapixels, pixel level noise etc. because those specs deal with the pixels, not the image produced. In order to do a comparison of sensors, what we should be interested in is the output image quality. What down sampling does is to treat the various cameras as if the were black boxes…the specs don’t matter, all that is being evaluated is the camera’s ability to produce an image of size X. Since the advances being evaluated are associated with the performance of a piece of silicon of a given size, then the only way to evaluate the relative quality of those chunks of silicon is with an output image of a fixed size as well. For the evaluation of silicon sensors of a specific size, the incident light (fstop and shutter speed), ISO (amplifier gain) and the output size must all be held constant. Any sensor comparison that does not use a fixed output size for all sensors being compared is of dubious value when trying to understand real world comparative performance. So in my opinion, downsizing is necessary.
Dtex, downsampling is the ONLY proper way to compare sensors with different resolutions. If you only judge sensor performance at pixel level, then the camera with larger pixels is always going to win. Why don’t we then just go back in resolution and introduce a 5 MP sensor that will have 1 million+ ISO? Nothing will ever come close to it in terms of pixel performance. But gladly, we are moving in the opposite direction – more pixels with better ISO performance. TVs, monitors, iPads and other electronics demand more resolution and this will only increase going forward.
What if we have a higher resolution camera tomorrow? We will be downsampling images from it when comparing to the D800, just like we are downsampling D800 images when comparing it to the D700. At the end of the day, it is all about the print size – why do you think it is fare to compare a 12 MP print to a 36 MP one?
I’m seeing a lot of crosshatch moire on the blue Austin Powers dvd in many of the test samples from the D800.. why couldn’t the d800’s low pass filter correct this? this would look worse coming from the D800 E
Yes, I saw those too… those diagonal lines are more visible at low ISOs (100-400), but they start to disappear from 800 onwards. From the posted samples, only 5D Mark III has them too (at low ISOs). Maybe this is how that DVD cover is in reality and the other cameras just couldn’t show/render this (fine) detail? And at high ISO this is also lost with the new cameras? I hope Nasim will be more clear on this matter in his updated review. Thanks!
That is texture, not moire. :)
oh ok thanks for pointing that out Roman If that’s texture, then that’s a heck of a camera to pick up such detail so well whereas the older cameras couldn’t ;-)
Thank you Nasim for a very thorough review. I think it is the best and most detailed comparison on the internet. Your work is of high quality.
Thank you for your feedback Guy!
You forgot to mention the Graphics board as an important upgrade component for an aging computer.
Also Nikon has a complete listing on their website, of suitable lenses for the D800.
Also many of us DX users who have been using FX Telephotos will be losing some horse power when go FX.
Do you recommend an extender, over DX mode on an FX camera or cropping in software to regain
telephoto capability? Thanks for your insight. Alan
Alan, cropping definitely works as in the case of DX cameras. But adding a teleconverter actually increases the effective focal length, so you could get closer to the action, plus you still have the ability to crop!
Your additional horsepower is a myth. When you are shooting in DX on the D800 you are only using 15.4 mega pixels as compared with the 36 mp in FX. Why would you want to do that. You are only fooling yourself. Otherwise shoot with the D7000 16mp. It is DX and you won’t be wasting your money buying an FX camera you won’t really be using and you can put the extra cash to lenses.
There is a difference in Image Quality (IQ) between the D800 and the D7000. Yes, the image size is approx the same if you shoot the D800 in DX mode, however the IQ is much better. You could shoot as a 36MP file, and then downsize to 16MP, however if the following conditions apply, then it makes sense to shoot in DX mode.
1) You are at the maximum focal length of your lens;
2) The amount of image you will keep is less than or equal to the DX size.
Now you might say, get closer. However that is not always possible. If you are sitting in the end-zone at a football game, and the play is at the other end, just how much of the image will you use? My experience in sports is that frequently I only keep a small percentage of the image, even when I am zoomed out to the max (I use a 80-400 lens on horse polo, shooting from mid-field). I just received my D800 on May 11th, and have started experimenting with it, mostly shooting in the 1:2 mode (25MP). Having used a D3X for years, the file size is almost the same, and I know that my customers seldom buy a print larger than 8 x 10, so I gain a small speed advantage (5 FPS over 4 FPS), while still able to deliver prints the same size as before, and can now shoot in 14-bit NEF (the frame rate of a D3X in 14-bit is terrible). Better IQ, same frame rate as before, higher bit mode, and not much increase in file size (storage needs).
When I shoot other things (landscapes), then I will change to FX mode. A camera is a tool, and the D800 is very versatile (the Swiss Army knife of cameras). How we, the users, plan to utilize it will vary upon our needs and situations. Yes, the amount of image is smaller, but so what. If the unshot portion of the image was garbage/unusable anyway, nothing is lost.
I do stress, and agree, however, that if the above two conditions do not apply, it would be better to shoot in FX instead of DX, because of the advantages of downsizing (the majority of images will NEVER be used in full-size). Nasim has explained these advantages (see his article for details).
WEJ
I wanna say THANKS! many many many thanks
You are most welcome Roberto!
Thanks Nasim, a very informative comparison along with some real world quality samples. Looking forward to the full article especially movie mode!
Thank you for your feedback John! I am hoping to finish it up within the next few days…
Hello Nasim, Not only a good intro report bit very nice pictures too;
Thank you comparing with all the other interesting Cams
The D800 a quantum leap;
/
Karl
Thank you for your feedback Carl!
Hey Nasim,
Thanks for this great review. Just wondered if the D800 can shoot at a lower Raw file setting? I would love the choice of shooting selected work at 36MP and weddings at eg. 12-16MP. I’ve worked hard to streamline my workflow and have concerns about processing and backing up thousands of 36MP files each week.. it’s a lot more than I need and think this would really slow things down and chomp a lot of drive space.
Maybe I’m missing something but as a wedding photographer I’m not sure the D800 or D4 are the best upgrades for my aging D700.
Tim, my wife and I shoot weddings and we are planning to use D800’s. If you want to have smaller file sizes, change your RAW quality setting to 12-bit compressed and your image size will be about 3 times smaller…
Hi Nasim,
I too am disappointed at all the references to Down Sampling the D800.
I am not buying a D 800 to downsample it. I want to get higher res images without having to resort to interpolation. Most of my work goes to photo libraries so with D700’s I have to upres all the images to 62 meg or more in 8 bit Tiffs.
The comparison I would like to see is how does the D800 full res tiff which should be about 216 meg in 16 bit mode, compare to a D700 image upressed to the same size.
This is in my application, much more meaningful as it should show how much better? the D800 image looks, when making full use of the 36 meg sensor which is my reason to purchase this camera.
If you are going to down sample the D800 all the time, stick to the D700’s.
Regards
Michael
With references to all stock photographers and the benefits of upgrading from D700/300’s to the D800, below is my text I posted on a UK forum last week, I hope it provokes some some interest;
“Last year I was contacted by a rather high brow UK agency for permission to use a shot of mine for a double page spread in a glossy UK magazine. (they’d got the image from one of my foreign Agents which I wasn’t best pleased about but that’s life) The UK agency in question has a very strict QC policy with a minimum file size of 50mb and a preference for full frame cameras.
Anyway the image was used and looked great, it was taken on a Nikon D200 with a 10mp sensor and the much criticized Nikon 18-200 VR lense.
As stock photographers the most we can expect a repro size at will be max A4 double page spread, and I think most will agree that’s a red letter day for most of us. My present kit of D300, D700 and D7000 will suffice for quite a few years yet.
Point of this post is, .. its the image that and not the kit that counts, and 36mp creates huge files and is quite unmanageable for uploading and general storage, but of course that’s just my opinion.”
Gary
Michael, I will provide some image samples of upsampled images from the D700 and compare them to the D800. One thing I can tell you for sure – the D800 image will contain a lot more detail, because it does not have to “create” non-existent data. One more thing, if a 12 MP image looks good upsampled to 36 MP, think how good a 36 MP image would look like when upsampled to much higher resolution…
I written comment in other article about D800 sensor:
”One more thing is not mesured by DxO. They did not measure a true low-light capabilities, what they measure is mid grey noise with daylight color temperature. Things would be much different in the real low light conditions and D4 sensor would have a near 1Ev advantage to D800 in noise department.”
Cause D3s is pretty much similar to D4 in low light your copmaparison beetwen D3s and D800 validated my statement.
Interesting observation Bare, thank you!
“The upcoming Nikon D400 camera will also use the same EN-EL15 battery.”
What other D400 info do you have? ;)
Dan, not much info at this point, but it should also have a high-resolution sensor, similar to what the Sony A77 has.
This is looking like a very nice camera indeed, thanks for the review.
You are most welcome Rhys!
Remarkable review. Definitely the best I’ve read so far on the D800 (And I’ve read them all :)).
I have two questions:
1. Can you further explain the focusing at f/8 issue? I find it a bit confusing. I can obviously focus at f/8 even with my D90 and the cheap 18-105mm lens, do you mean that this camera can focus at f/8 in extreme low light situations?
2. Would you say that for this type of camera with this much of megapixels, VR becomes a lot more important? It sounds like those 4 f stops advantage could easily benefit me since I would otherwise require a faster shutter speed. It once again draws me closer to the 16-35mm VR instead of the excellent 14-24mm.
Thanks again!
Oded S.
d800club.com
Oded: I think what Nasim means is this. AF systems are designed so that until the shutter is actually pressed, the lens is wide open. For most cameras, this is 5.6. When you put a TC, the actual light coming through drops. If it drops much below the designed 5.6, then the camera has difficulty focusing. Eg, if you put a 1.4 TC on 5.6 lens, the effective wide-open aperture on the lens is 1 stop lower, at f/8. What Nasim is saying is that the D800 can focus even in this situation.
Interesting. Thanks for the info!
Sridhar, thanks for the info. Although I am still confused about what this means.
In effect, even if the largest aperture of the lens is F8 (aperture the lens is at before you press the shutter), the D800 will have the ability to focus per your explanation.
But at F8, the amount of light coming through will depend on the ambient lighting!! I mean more light would come through during day-time at F22 than at night at F8….. so a camera should be able to focus at F22 also. Why this cap of F8???
Lavneet: As far as I understand, @ f/8 the camera will focus if there is any light. After that, it is beyond its design parameters and may or may not focus.
People have been using 2x TC for years, working at f/8 on cameras designed to focus at f/5.6. So, if there is enough life, the camera should focus.
Hmmm…maybe D800’s F8 focus ability needs a rider that says “Assuming constant ambient light of 2Lux or above)
F8 focus?
Here is how I see it all/most cameras use there most capable/wide open F-stop to focus. So even if you have you setting at F16 so you have a wide depth of field your camera will still automatically adjust to it’s widest F-what ever your camera / lens can do to focus. You don’t know your camera is doing this unless you have depth of field preview button even then that is just a preview, the camera/lens setup will still focus at a low F-stop. I’m not sure this effects the masses but i don’t make my living behind the camera or writing about them. I would not let the F8 focus option be your deciding point on a purchase for the D800
I purchased mine so I could take advantage of the resolution and crop in the computer and have the extra information. Yes with extra resolution comes more noise but I don’t print a lot most of my pictures and when I do they are printed at photo book size that a 12Mp can handle I just want the option if I want to print larger or when I crop it I have that extra resolution so the crop file still can print and not have that cropped look.
Oops, looks like plenty of responses were given to you Oded :)
Oded, all current DSLRs focus at their wide open apertures, no matter what aperture the camera is set to. The aperture on the lens changes only when the image is captured and it happens at the same instant the shutter curtain is raised. Now with the f/8 focusing feature (not an issue), this simply means that very slow lenses will perform better in low light conditions and if you mount a 2x teleconverter on an f/4 lens (effectively decreasing its maximum aperture to f/8), autofocus will still work. For example, previously, the Nikon 200-400mm f/4 would not autofocus when the 2x teleconverter was mounted on it (making it a 400-800mm f/8 lens). Now, the lens combination will autofocus fine, although AF accuracy, image quality, contrast and colors are all impacted negatively.
As for VR, it sure can be useful on lenses, when slow shutter speeds are used. While the camera sensor does not increase blur, it certainly is more visible when viewed at 100%. So I would recommend either increasing the shutter speed, or using a lens with VR to compensate…
Nasim:
I have a couple of slightly off-topic questions.
1) Can the RRS L bracket for the D300s be used on the D800?
2) I shoot birds and am wondering if, for that specific purpose, it is better to go Dx mode or crop from a Full frame image, for the same lens. I suspect cropping would lead equivalent or better images but just wanted confirmation.
Would appreciate your response. THanks.
Appears that I am not the only one thinking about cropping in s/w vs using the crop mode for DX. Sorry for the repeated question but would still appreciate an anwer.
Thanks.
I am with Nasim on this one, why would you want to “kill” half your image beforehand? Just shoot full frame if crop it in post if needed. Having more data means that you have more creative control, for the same quality of image. You can play around with the cropping, like making it more attractive for the rule of thirds for example. If you shoot DX in the first place, you’re just limited by what you can do. The only reason I see for going DX is for the increased FPS in those rare occasions.
Sridhar, I have bad news for you – the RRS L-bracket does not work with the D800. I have an L-bracket for my D700 and it does not fit right. Access to the side door is also blocked. RRS has a new bracket for the D800 and I have already ordered one, should be receiving it later this week (they are already shipping those). As for cropping vs DX mode, I always suggest cropping than chopping off more than half of the image!
Thanks, Nasim.
Was afraid that that might be the case. Wont get too much for the D300s bracket in India. As I am an amateur, the side acccess blocking does not bother me too much but if the dimensions are different enough, then I guess I have to shell out!
Thanks for the clarification on DX vs cropping.
Would love to hear more about the D400………..does it exist??
Mike, not yet, but we will surely see it later this year!
A suggestion for a test to run:
1) Set the camera to a high shutter speed (at least 1/1000th of a second).
2) Pick a moving subject, and use AF-C option (may also run test with AF-S option).
3) Have the camera in single-shot mode instead of continuous mode.
4) See how many shots you can squeeze off per second in both FX and DX mode before the buffer fills (shoot in NEF please).
Thanks,
WEJ
William, the review has been updated with an fps/buffer video. I did not perform any tests on DX though…
Another suggestion for an informative test.
ASA 200
Shoot a 14 bit lossless Nef on tripod using D800 and a quality lens, change body to a D700/D3 for a second shot
Open both Raw files in Photoshop/ACR or preferably Capture NX2 if you have it.
Upres D700 image in Photoshop Bi Cubic Smoother to same size as D800 image.
Can you now comment on the differences in resolution and noise.
At the moment this is the most useful information I desire from the D800
Thanks for your help.
Regards
Michael
I would think that a better comparison would be to downsample the D800 image to the D700 resolution. Upsampling never truly works, the computer needs to invent and “guess” the missing data which does not exist, using algorithms. With downsampling – you are throwing away some of the data and keep the “average” data, so in theory you are supposed to always get a better image.
The whole idea of this suggestion was to find out how good the D800 is when using its sensor at its maximum potental of 36 meg. I am not interested in the image quality of a 12 meg D800.
I agree that downsampling reduces the noise and sharpens the image but I want a 36meg D800, not a 12 meg one. If all I needed was 12 meg I would keep my D700’s and not spend the extra money on the D800, bigger flash cards, more computer power etc
At the end of the day, I want to send someone a 36meg Raw file and would like to know the difference in image quality between the original D800 Raw file and a D700 Raw that has been interpolated up to D800 native size
Michael
I agree with you, however one must take things into context.
You are getting the benefits of a 36mp sensor 70-90% depending on your shooting mode. How often do you really need to shoot at 12,800 ISO anyway? The answer ofcourse changes from person to person, but I think for most of us, it is quite rare.
So, for those times when normal ISOs are in use, you get the benefits of a 36mp sensor.
For this times when you need to use high ISO, you get better images at smaller sizes compared to the competition. There is some physics here that we just can’t avoid at the moment, and that is that smaller pixels = more noise. Nikon did a remarkable job of solving that issue for most of the shooting situations, but on those rare occasions where you need to go even higher – you can get an image that is the same size as the competition but with less noise and more sharpness.
To me, that’s the best of both worlds, because it best fits my shooting style.
Not to be insulting, but the argument of some of the posts on this forum that the D800 should provide 36 megapixels and only be judged on its performance at 36 megapixels is absurd. It seems like these posters are attempting to use any irrational criteria to discredit the huge performance gap between the D800 and its competition.
All high megapixel cameras on the market, be it the Phase One or Hasselblad HD50 offer no capability above 800 ISO for a reason. Furthermore, NO high pixel cameras (>30mp) are designed to shoot in low light, fast action type scenarios. The amazing accomplishment of the D800 is that it can approach close to medium format resolution performance and also double as a backup for a D4 shooting in low light up to extreme high ISO (12K). In fact it is so good that if necessary, the image can be down sampled to provide better performance at the final file stage (tif for print) than any camera on the market except for the D3 S and the D4. The 5D3 cannot perform beyond 22 megapixels. It has no further capability. The D800 performs BETTER in lower light situations than the 5D3 if you down sample to MATCH the maximum resolution performance of the 5D3. If you NEED more FPS, there are better cameras, 5d3 is one of them. Most shooters will need high FPS less than they will need high ISO.
To anybody saying that they don’t want to handle the process of downsampling or that 36 megapixel files are too cumbersome for their particular computer, they obviously does not have the experience in the post processing side of the business. A one button action or Lightroom will handle the entire process of downsampling at export if necessary. If you’re old school and don’t know how to do this or choose not to do this, YOUTUBE it and learn. It takes less time than screwing on a gradient filter and is “non destructive” and adjustable to any size requirement. If shooting in a wedding or event type of scenario I’ll simply export at a reduced file size or shot in DX mode. And yes I intend on upgrading my computer just as I upgrade my photographic equipment every 2 to 4 years. I feel it’s a necessary part of the profession today just like a quality enlarger or scanner was 10 years ago. A plenty fast computer and Drobo drive is cheaper than PowerPC and an LS1200 was 20 years ago! Come on people, the D800 is a tool for professional who has a SYSTEM for their workflow. The amatuer should be fine with a D90 and an iMac and investing in lenses if they want to step up. I like fancy new bodies almost as much as lenses, but I keep current in my post production gear, to do so would be counterproductive to my success.
Lets just all agree that this is progress. I am sure that Canon will respond in kind eventually and I am confident that Nikon will someday offer a firmware update to reduce RAW file sizes in this camera or future models. As it stands now, the D800 offers more capability to capture more usable data than any camera out there. How you apply that data in post or what technique you employ to capture that data is a result of your knowledge of the tools capabilities and your creativity in exploiting them. Images in the coming months will demonstrate this process, and reward the pros that see the opportunities that now exist. My D700 is for sale, any takers?
Finally someone with some Sense around here-ITA!
PS: except you don’t think imac icore7 is capable of handling-am curious what you recommend as from your post-I trust your opinion- I am using an imac icore 7 version!
I do think the iMac is capable! I edit with 2.83mgz i5 powerbook w/8gb RAM from 2010. I stack up to 6 layers in Photoshop and save 26Omb tif for panos. Is it fast work? No, but its faster than it used to be. I was processing 500 wedding pictures from a D700, Id probably use a different method of capture such as jpg or cropped to DX and then make small adjustments in Lightroom. Thats how I do it and I do it for a living. I am upgrading to a quad core w/16gb RAM this year, and that machine should will still only be 20% faster. So instead of 5 min an image, i’ll spend about 4 min. It’s nominal at best, and irrelevant when I apply presets or actions and let the machine process while I grab another beer from the fridge. See what I mean by irrational criteria?
Oh good-it looks like I can go another year or so-LOL I have a 2.93 ghz but only 8GB-maybe I could hual this monster into Apple & ask that they install more GB’s!
Thanks for the clarification!
Please don’t forget your graphics card. You also need a faster and a better video card. One probably needs (i) two quad core, (ii) 16 – 24 gb ram and (iii) big and faster dual video card.
Please visit this site for a nice comparision of CPU and Video Card benchmarks.
www.cpubenchmark.net/
The only question is: are photoshop and lightroom desinghed to handle dual quad cores processors.
Friends, let’s not get carried away here.
Any modern computer will handle these images just fine. Think about it for a second – processing a 1080p video is orders of magnitude more hard than processing a 36mp image.
Quad Core + 8GB of RAM is all you really need. I have played around with some NEFs available for download on the internet for the D800E, and they work in Lightroom exactly like any other NEF file I have, no lag at all.
You can try them yourselves at this link:
www.fotopolis.pl/
OK-Here is what I have so it looks like I will be calling the Mac Store on Monday to see if I can upgrade/Add!
Processor 2.93 GHz Intel Core i7
Memory 8 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
Graphics ATI Radeon HD 5750 1024 MB
Thank you Tory, exactly what I have been saying here ever since the D800 was announced…
Nazim,
Thanks for the review. It will be interesting to see performance of different lenses on D800. Some of the sites are posting a wi-fi flash misfiring (CLS?) on D800 and green colourisation on the LCD, which I think should be fixed on a custom menu. The flash mis-firing seems a serious issue, if proven correct by many, should be be fixed soon by a firmware upgrade. I hope you will be able to comment on thse two.
Shooting D800 using a DX lens, though nothing wrong, completley wastes the full benefit of owning a full frame. A 36MP camera is clearly unforgiving on grains and blurrs (due to camera shake). I do read elsewhere a few photographers moaning about these two issues on D800. Having a great camera does not (obviously) make us good photographers.
You have mentioned the Shutter Speed, ISO and Aperture on some of the photos. It will be fantastic if you could mention the lens used, shutter speed, aperture and ISO on all the photographs.
Looking forward reading more. Well done!
I would like to ask a question and post an observation:
Image 7/95: There is a loss of sharpness on the right-side of the cute dog. If you were to pick one reason, what would that be? Is it the centre-focus or large prime lens (85 mm) or both or something else?
Nikon D800 vs Canon 5D Mark III ISO 100. The diagonal lines on the 4th DVD is sharper on Nikon D800 than Canon 5D Mark III. I find strength of details on the Nikon D800 on the base ISO pretty interesting.
Srini, it is like that because there was not enough depth of field to cover the whole head of the dog :)
Srini, it is expected that a new product will have some bugs here and there when it is introduced. Hopefully Nikon will fix most of the bugs through firmware updates, including the green colorization issue. As for aperture, shutter speed and other information on the files – all EXIF data is attached to the files in this review (and in all other articles and reviews posted on mansurovs.com), so you can view them with an EXIF viewer.
Thanks for the reply. Appreciated.
Also, Do oyu recommend in general to leave Auto ISO on?
Why not? Auto ISO has always been a great feature on Nikon DSLRs. I leave my camera on Auto ISO 95% of the time…
Nasim –
Excellent review. Your image of the building and moon show nice detail in the brick work of the building. My question is if the D800E would cast a moiré artifact over the bricks given the same conditions (lighting, camera angle, etc)?
Johnniee, no, I do not believe the D800E would have caused moire in this particular image. Simply because the pattern is not very close.
Wonderful review as usual by The Mansurovs. I’m stoked about the ISO performance and sensor performance. I bridge shooting worlds, I shoot a lot of high school sports, but love to do landscapes. This will be a definite improvement over my D90 (which itself has done well for what it’s capabilities).
Reference ordering from B&H, many in our photograper’s group have ordered from there, but are getting apprehensive as to any near-term delivery. One person ordered the night ordering opened up, he is #8 in the queue (so B&H has told him). He’s been told this week that no more deliveries are expected until May! He was previously given an April time frame. To my knowledge none of the other major retailers (i.e Adorama, etc) are any different. One person in our group did call a local Tall’s Camera inquiring as to the delays, they told him the shift of the date from April to May was due to Nikon having to do an annual inventory in April, therefore nothing is getting shipped until that is complete. That’s hard to believe, if anyone here has better sources into Nikon and can find out that would be appreciated.
Thank you for your feedback Glen!
I understand your frustration with B&H – trust me, I am frustrated even more, because neither my D800, nor the D800E have been shipped from B&H. Sadly, some people have been grabbing D800’s from local Best Buy stores. But B&H is not to blame here. Nikon has had a rough year with all the disasters, so they have a hard time providing enough units to retailers. B&H currently has a huge pre-order list and there are many photographers dying to get their hands on the D800…
Just be patient and wait, I am sure B&H will be sending a bunch of D800’s once they get back from the holidays. I was told that all orders will most likely be fulfilled before the end of May.
Stunning review and camera. The D800 is truly a game changer. Would you say the D700 is obsolete! I almost want to wait a bit for the computer technology to catch up to be able to process and store such huge files that the D800 generates. In that case I think I will keep my D700 until the shutter falls off… it seems like a great camera still!
Brian, the D700 is still a phenomenal camera! I am keeping mine as a backup body until its shutter falls off :)
Firstly, thanks for the hard work. Excellent review. Secondly, a question for everyone. What are your thoughts on this : Shooting with a 36 mp camera will also require a lot of post processing plus processing power to get rid of unwanted details. Details that you would not normally recognize with a lets say 12mp d700 or d3s. D800 also appears to be unforgiving on camera shake as Srini #46 mentions. Therefore, d800 requires a more professional approach to setup and shooting. This camera, while amazing and technically perfect, will be more beneficial to certain styles of photography. And thats besides the relative low fps which might not appeal to action photographers. I think this is the real handicap here. It is a stylistic issue. I shoot with a d700 and dont feel ready to move to medium format-like camera yet even though I will most likely buy the d800 with the hope of getting a better photographer as a result.
While awaiting Nazim’s response, I think if you are already shooting wtih D700, I am sure you would D800. As Nazim wrote in his review, you would automatically start shooting with a higher shutter speed. I wonder, as a standard setup under normal conditions, if “1 / 2 x f” as shutter speed would be a good choice to address the camera shake on this beast as opposed to the normal “1/f”.
Ozzie, everything is relative when looking at high-resolution camera performance. If you do not pixel peep and look at everything in full size or even at the D700 size (12 MP), then you won’t see that blur or lack of details at 100% view. However, if you want to get the best out of the 36 MP sensor, then you will need to be a lot more attentive to many details and you will need to improve your technique.
Ozzie, Don’t worry about it. The D800 will provide the same or better quality of image as your D700 when shot in the same fashion as you currently shoot your D700. However, if you are going to push the camera to its limits, you may need to refine your technique. If you take a d700 image and blow it up to 60″ x 40″ and do the same thing with a D800 image, the D800 image will be sharper. For the D700, a big contributor to that the lack of sharpness will likely be sensor resolution. On the other hand, the higher resolution sensor of the D800 will eliminate much of the sensor resolution induced lack of sharpness and in so doing reveal other negative contributions to a greater extent. (Camera shake, lens quality, DoF, diffraction, etc) The D800 image is still better, but since it is more capable of resolving other factors that can impact IQ, it will take more work to get the most from that camera. In other words if you use the D800 as you use your D700, the D800 will produce better images. With a little extra care, the D800 is incredible. Check out the link below. As you can see in the image, this photo was hand held.
nikonrumors.com/2012/…nt-page-1/
I wish you would have taken the request about DX mode more seriously. Why? How does the D800 perform in DX mode against say a 7d, D300 or one of the other crop cameras. Again why? Some people shoot sports and are not on staff with a sports magazine so choose cameras with higher FPS but in a price range that does not include the pro level.
With this information how it performs against similar crop cameras a person could use FF for DOF control or for higher resolution landscapes but then also switch it to crop mode to get a series of shots of a snow boarder or motorcycle doing a back flip. It would be nice to know if a user could still use a wide angle DX lenses until they decide to upgrade to a more expensive FF wide angle lens. While your comment sounds like that of a pro, which I have no problem with, it is a valid point, this camera if it is to sell in great numbers will have to be bought by amateurs who may not shoot sports all the time, or may not always need the higher resolution.
If an amateur decides he wants to upgrade, is the D800 going to upgrade to his current DX camera so he can get rid of it? He may be printing mostly 8×10 but on occasion he will print big for some art project or a poster/billboard. So we know the D800 will perform those two functions properly but will it still perform the same functions as his old DX using less resources on the computer/memory card so he can sell his old dx camera and not worry about downgrading his DX performance.
Otherwise a great review. Thanks for your insight.
Richard, I look at it this way – why buy a $3K FX camera if one would cap it at 15 MP just to have smaller files? Why not get a DX camera instead, keep all the DX lenses and have much smaller files?
I will do a comparison of the D7000 with the D800 in DX mode soon, once I finish up the 85mm f/1.8G review.
I didin’t really talk about smaller files. My point was FPS and getting the shot. In FX mode the camera only does 4fps which may not catch the shot even 6fps is minimal. Here is a comparison www.youtube.com/watch…X9QifNT7sY You many not shoot any sports so you may not understand my reasonaing. Anyway, thank you for the review, I look forward to your comparison.
Nasim, I feel Richard has a point here – there may be reasons for wanting to shoot the D800 in DX mode and for those of us considering that a comparison to the D7000 for instance would be very interesting.
There may be several reasons for this; FPS is one reason, but in my case it would be to use DX lenses that I cannot or do not want to upgrade right now. This is partly a budget reason – I would want to upgrade those lenses one at a time over a longer period – but also because I use DX lenses that I find impossible to replace on FX. The main one is Sigma’s 8-16mm (and no, at twice the weight and its very high price Nikon’s 14-24mm is no replacement for me).
So occasionally using the D800 in DX mode would allow photographers like me to make use of FX where our lens collections allows while giving us time to upgrade our lenses, or allowing us to use special DX lenses that we find hard to replace. This makes the question of how the D800 compares to DX cameras very relevant, I think.
“I will do a comparison of the D7000 with the D800 in DX mode soon”
This is my first visit to this blog and I find the quality of the review and the discussions excellent.
I am an amateur enthusiast currently using a D7000 with a variety of lenses.
I look forward to seeing your comparison of the D7000 to the new D800
“I have a suspicion that the whole 6 FPS battery grip requirement is an attempt to make more money by Nikon. When shooting in DX mode, the camera surely does not need a battery grip to get faster frames – more than half of the sensor data is chopped off, which the camera should easily be able to deal with. In fact, Nikon should allow us to go all the way to 8 fps in DX mode.”
Thanks for saying it this clearly! I think your assumption is very likely true.
One only needs to do the math (36MP = 4 FPS, 16MP => 8 FPS) for the amount of sensor data.
Especially considering the incredibly high price of the battery grip. Appararently, battery grip customers are subsidizing body-only customers as the profit margins on the body are pretty low (according to NikonRumors) and the grip is way less complex than the body in relation to the price.
Personally, I use a D7000 and the original Nikon battery grip, which was also too expensive in relation to the body and after a year of usage I’m still not satisfied with it. In fact I doubt that I’ll ever be.
Yes, it does help shooting in portrait orientation but that’s about it as I have two major problems with it:
a) The quality of the dials and buttons is noticeably lower than their equivalents on the camera itself. They simply feel less comfortable and even a bit tacky. The rubber material on the grip is also different from the one used on the D7000. I wouldn’t call it shoddy but it’s clearly less than optimal and what one would expect for the price.
b) They should have designed the grip like one of the older ones (for example the one for the D80) where both batteries are located in the grip. As it is one has to unscrew the grip if one wants to remove/exchange the battery in the body – I don’t know how many grip attach/remove operations the electronic contacts allow but they surely don’t get better by this. I’m also suspecting that the balance point would be slightly better with both batteries in the grip – especially shooting in landscape mode with large lenses.
Consequence: I don’t think I ever buy a Nikon grip again. Your mileage may vary, of course.
If you absolutely need a grip because you regularly shoot in portrait orientation then at least wait for clone grips to come to the market. There may be some goods ones without (major) problems.
I totally agree with you Marcus! I also liked the D80 grip, because you could put batteries in it without taking the grip off. They screwed up the design starting from the D300. I don’t think I will be buying a grip going forward either!
This is Contrast noise. Canon has better contrast, that’s why Canon’s (M3) sample pictures are shows larger noise then Nikon D800.
Sergo, at the end of the day, both systems are very good.
Informative, well written. Thanks!
Hi Nasim,
I understand your comments about the DX format and not buying a D800 just to only use in that format. But I would also like to add that when using long telephoto lenses (400mm or more) for wildlife photography and your subject still cannot fill the frame (does happen a lot for me0 there is some use for the DX format. The D7000 has a much higher pixel density than the full frame D700 so there is the ability to get that bird to have more pixels for a given lens (2.35 times as much). That is not true with the D800. So what do you get with a D800 over a D7000 for maximum telephoto shots? First is a better focusing mechanism. Second is a viewfinder that is 2.35 times larger. This is a big help when trying to even find that bird in the bush. So many times I find myself struggling to locate the animal in the viewfinder as the angle of view is so small. And when I am trying to get birds in flight it really is advantageous to have a larger finder in the hopes that your shot will include all of the flying bird.
Now I can get that bird shot, crop it in the camera, and not have unneeded pixels exported to my computer. As you pointed out, it really is about those 36m pixels. Use them or crop to 6m and still have a great shot! ( mind that you don’t have camera shake or focus problems)
John, what do you mean it is not true for the D800? The D800 has about the same pixel pitch as the Nikon D7000, so you could get the same or better results by cropping the image! Why am I against using the DX mode? Because you are throwing away the information completely. What if the bird you are photographing is too large to fit into the DX frame? That information is lost forever…that’s why recording a full FX image and then cropping in post makes a whole lot more sense :)
Hi Nasim,
first of all, thanks for the review. Question: what do you think about using this camera for sports? I know the typical answer is that the FPS is too low, but if you really need 10 or 12 FPS to capture the moment, I’m thinking maybe your technique could use some improving. Besides, given that the vast majority of the sports pics I take I crop, that 36 MB sure would be a nice alternative to buying more powerful lenses. What’s your take on this?
Sergio, I updated the review with some information on sports and wildlife photography…
Thank you for once again producing a very balanced review, or should I say beginning of review.
However the introduction with the history part made me raise my eyebrows.
Unless you have insider information from Nikon (which I have hard to beleive as I find it unlikely they would reveal their marketing strategy about the past just a few years ago) and know better my view is different.
I don’t think Nikon made a mistake at all by releasing the D700 with same sensor etc. as D3.
As constructing a camera from start to release takes several years Nikon was already working on D700 even long BEFORE the release of D3 and D300 in 2007! By then most of the specs must have been fixed already.
Anticipating D700 would eat a big piece of the D3 sales is such obvious that the Nikon mangment must have accounted on that happening.
Introducing the D700 and accepting the loss of D3 sales for a year was actually one of Nikon’s smartest moves!
D700 has been a tremendous success generating not only sales of bodies but full frame lenses and other accessories for more than three years generating profit that most propably have been many times greater than the loss of (low volume!) D3 sales for a year. Taking a part of the market Canon owned 100% for several years with the 5D was a very important and wise decision by Nikon!
What you lose at the swings you take back (several times!) at the merry-go-round!
It simply never was a problem for Nikon that D700 were eating the sales of D3. It was according to their plan as they were already working on the D3s being released just a year later!
I agree one can question the D3X and its astronomic price although they propably made a good profit on every body just because of the price. Would not a D700X for half price have sold many more bodies and generated a bigger profit? We will not know. But there may be other reasons like production constraints, either by Nikon or in the number of sensors Sony could produce, influencing Nikons choice.
Also I like a few other here really would like to know about your knowledge of a coming D400. You seem to know a lot as you claim to know already which battery it will use! Or are you just jumping to conclusions?
Are you just assuming we will see a replacement of D300s named D400 with a DX sensor in a D800 similar body, just as D300 and D700 shared the same basic body?
The big question is: Are there really enough customers who will buy a DX D400 just to get 8 or even 9 frames per second instead of ‘just’ 6 fps with D7000 and D800 (in DX-mode with grip and D4 battery)?
D7000 already has the better sensor and almost all the functions of D300s. The replacement (D7100?) expected at Photokina this year will for sure have even more improvements, propably erasing the few limitations in D7000 versus D300s and adding several new features. It will of course still have the smaller “enthusist” body size like D7000. Those who prefer the semi-pro body get an in every way better camera than D300s by using D800 in DX-mode, except for maximum 6 fps.
My speculation(!) is that D300s was the last semi-pro DX-camera. Such a camera doesn’t make sense to produce anymore with D800 already on the market and within half a year the improved replacement of D7000.
The price gap between D800 and ‘D7100’ should logically instead be filled with a FX entry level model using the basic body from ‘D7100’ as increasing the number of FX-camera owners will generate more sales as FX-users generally buy more lenses (coming from DX they propably need new lenses!) and accessories.
Most likely an entry level Nikon FX-camera will use Sony’s new 24 MP sensor rumored to be inside Sony’s own A99 SLT (Contrary to your claim it will use the 36 MP sensor inside D800. But maybe you know better than the other rumorsites?) expected this year, propably at Photokina. Such a camera could of course debut at same time as ‘D7100’. But as it seems there is an agreement Sony will get at least half a year head start using their own sensors inside their cameras before Nikon do I don’t expect to see an entry level Nikon FX camera until next year.
And the name actually could be D400! It would make sense as it finally would make order in Nikon’s model-numbers reserving DX00 for FX-cameras and DXX00 for DX-cameras. I do however agree D400 propably will use same battery as D7000 and D800. But I don’t take it for granted!
Wonderful detailed review that covers all aspects. Thanks for all the hard work.
A new FX buyer or someone that needs high resolution or video should go for the D800.
A D700 owner would think twice about upgrading, the image improvement is marginal on a computer screen not to mention small prints and the high resolution makes files too big to handle.
Frankly, as an amateur, am having so much fun shooting the Nikon 1v with or without the ft1 mount that makes new uses for all my Nikon lenses and will wait for Nikon 1 developments before spending any more on cameras. Peter
Hi Nasim,
It is always a pleasure to read your reviews!
For people (like me) who are thinking about an upgrade from a DX camera, it would be helpful to have comparison images from a D7000 also downsampled to 12 MP to see the difference at ISO levels 100-25600.
Best regards
Stefan
Hi Nasim
Thanks for taking your valuable time to write reviews for all of us, it has been great reading and with a lot of usefull informations. It’s without a doubt a fantastic camera, not without pitfalls, but overall mega great. I have ordered mine, I wasn’t too sure, but I’ll take the risk and see if this will do the same for me as my D700 did, but in a different way.
PS. one new PC and a NAS is on the way too ;)
thanks again
Excellent review,simply and clearly put. As a pro I use the Nikon D700 as my day to day camera, my standard print size is A3+ and I get stunning sharpness in them.My spare camera is a D7000 and although I prefer the IQ from the 700, it does the job. The lenses I use most of the time are 14-24,24-70,24PC-E plus the Sigma 85mm 1.4.
If I had unlimited money I would be buying a D800 but…looks like the
700 is going to be used for a little while longer…
Wow, thanks for the review. Definitely the best one I’ve read so far.
I was trying to decide between the D800 and the 5D mark III but after I saw the low light performance comparison, I am sold — D800 it is!
I had my D800 delivered last Thurs.
Detail is amazing as expected. What I did not expect is the dynamic range. This camera lives up to the hype!
Thank you for the input on that new camera. You just need to complete the video part… Using the D7000 (and the D700) I am not surprised by the fact that many will have to work on the way they hold/set the camera. But it’s a small sacrifice compared to the image quality you can obtain!
Hi thanks for the review and today I am able to put hand on my D800! :D
My initial impression, which may put some negative side comment:
1, As a long time D3 user, the D800 first impression is … much cheaper than D_ model, which is reasonable.
2, More specifically, the shuttle is very different. The sound is much softer than D3, no wonder the life cycle is only half of it!
3, The memory card bay door. It is horrible, sorry to say that. My D200 memory card door is even better than that. Guess what? It is a D50 design!
4, The shuttle release speed is very slow, compared with D_ model. This actually is right because the high resolution means better landscape, studio portrait, etc.
5, I generally tried movie function, very good. However, the internal mic may record the AF action noise so external mic is much preferred.
As for the picture quality, 36MP is AMAZING; and ISO noise control is very good, just as it is reviewed here. Interestingly, a huge hornet appeared in my room and fell into a glass jar. So I took a picture.
The 1:1 crop here farm8.staticflickr.com/7271/…2d_b_d.jpg and the whole picture is this (but resized) farm8.staticflickr.com/7194/…26_b_d.jpg . This is not a good photo because of the transparent holder, so next time I should take the hornet out of it? :O Anyway, I just hope these pictures could provide you with 7,360 x 4,912.
Now I have loads of accessories to get… By the way, how much RAM for the PC is powerful enough to process the D800 full size pictures in LR4? Now mine is not slow, but much slower than before! (and LR4 is slower anyway! :( )
All in all, D800 is D800, it is not D4, you should be aware of that; but as the first 36MP DSLR, it is a pioneer, and that’s why I am very excited with it, and I am very fond of it! Now there are more possibilities to create great pictures, with this excellent tool!
Cheers and welcome to the D800 world!
Leon
Maybe not a good picture, but I can still count the number of pollens on the hornet ;) Amazing resolution.
Thanks! Actually that’s my point. Some ‘casual’ or ‘failed’ action perhaps can still be ‘usable’ due to the 36MP. No a good spirit as a photographer, but sometimes can be a lifesaver…
i got yesterday some raw from both D4 & D800 from a friend which could attend a Nikon presentation.
I see almost no difference in raw loading in LR4… my computer is over 1year old, 6GB of ram is enough.
And for high iso, from the raw i got, @100% the D4 is 1EV better (6.4K raw of D800 @ 100% looks pretty much the same as the D4 ones at 12.8K ISO)
only “bad point” is the 4fps :(
I was using 4GB RAM, just upgraded to 12GB. Much better! :D
Maybe you want to get MB-D12 and insert EN-EL18 battery to slightly increase the fps? However, with out a D4, the cost of EN-EL18 and charger can be ridiculous… Bad Nikon, very bad.
Hi Nasim,
I own a Nikon D5100 with a 70-300 mm lens Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Lens. I want to know more about filters.
Tushar
What kind of filters? and how does this pertain to the D800? Great review! Many Thanks!
I don’t get it, this review states the D800 has better high ISO handling but the other reviews/comparisons (the examiner, imaging resource, engadget, digitalrev, cnet asia) says the 5Dmark III have superior high ISO performance. It is better to check other reviews as well, observe the testing methods and, see the unanimous or majority decision. I still think the 5D mark III in more things than the D800 that’s why some reviews state that for studio and landscape = D800 and for all around = 5D mark III. i also think the 5Dmark3 will be the more popular and sales leader like its predecessor, even Nikon users like it. Long time Nikon user Jared Polin of fro knows photo likes the 5D mark III’s grip and already considering getting it as his first Canon DSLR. Kai Wong, Nikon fanboy and digitalrev host picked the 5D mark III over the D800 in their latest video, D800 vs 5D mark III (watch it on youtube, digitalrev videos are always fun to watch, informative, and unbiased) . Wedding photographer Ryan Brenizer wrote a review titled ‘A Nikon user’s review of the Canon 5D Mark III’ and concluded ‘Canon is primarily competing with the Nikon D800. At $500 cheaper and with a high-resolution, high dynamic range sensor, the D800 will be a tempting option for most users. For someone like me who takes more than a quarter million photos a year, the idea of a sensor that only shoots 36MP is a non-starter.’ Everybody seems to like the 5D mark III more than the D800 so I have no doubts the it (5Dm3) will be the preference of most people.
You seem to confuse the output from the manufacturers JPEG processing engines with processing a RAW image that was taken under highly standardized conditions and processed exactly the same way. Thus, the latter compares high iso SENSOR performance, the former the end product (picture) of what canon or nikon believe is a “good” high iso jpeg.
Although I am a Nikon guy, I personally like the high iso jpeg output of the 5DMkIII better than the Nikon D800 one, however, Nasim showed us at least equal performance of Nikons Raw-processed and downsampled (to 12 Megs) images compared to 5DMkIII. The other internet sites you quote did not do a comparable Raw comparison, therefore they might come to a different conclusion. Additionally, some people hate chroma, shadow or luminance noise most, and some -like me- like a smoother jpeg image over a noisier/grainier one with more detail, it’s all a matter of taste.
The decision between 5DMkIII and D800 is all about the most versatile camera (5D) vs. the highest possible image quality (D800). For me, the D800 is a no-brainer, especially seeing the high iso raw output Nasim showed us (but I don’t shoot >250.000 pics a year…)
Thanks for enlightening me. I understand now. Seems that Canon has made an excellent noise reduction system at the expense of losing details but not much and better than the NR of the previous Canon DSLR bodies. Most reviews conluded that it all depends on what you need, the 5Dm3’s advantage are better grip/handling(this is important to most people and one factor why some will choose the 5Dm3., burst rate, and jpeg high ISO performance. For Nikon, the details and benefits of high megapixel(which also depends on the lens quality) and the price. Video is about the same but Canon has the advantage of being able to adjust sound levels while recording (as seen in digitalrev’s D800 vs 5DmarkIII hands on review on youtube, you need to stop recording on the D800 to adjust volume levels) and tweaks (like removing the optical low pass filter significantly enhances the 5Dm3’s video resolution).
Not sure Canon will sell more 5D Mark IIIs. There seems to be far more demand for the d800, simply because it’s a more exciting proposition (believe it or not, that’s a very important drive for sales, even among professionals).
Although probably not completely accurate, Amazon sales are still a good indicator of the difference in enthusiasm for the two cameras. At the moment, among all DSLR sales, the d800 is number 1 (followed by two Nikons) and the Mark 5D III is number 9. This may fluctuate day by day (if later readers click the link):
www.amazon.com/Best-…olife0c-20
Even more interestingly, at the moment the d800 is number 32 in ALL electronics sales. This is unprecedented. All electronics include the kindle series, ipods, Blu-Ray players, etc. The most expensive items ahead of the d800 are around $300. The d800 is the first item that costs thousands of dollars. www.amazon.com/Best-…olife0c-20
The 5D Mark III is not in the top 100 best selling electronics list.
Actually, I was wondering who’s buying it. I’m not, not yet at least. Quite happy with the d7000. But I want it badly – I’ll probably buy it by the end of this year. Though in my professional work the d800 will be a great boon, now I’m playing with things that are new to me. I’m good at interiours, landscapes, things without people. But this year’s big photography project for me is shooting people. I wanna be as good at that as with interiours. And currently, the d7000 is not my limit, still lot to learn. I’m getting good, but not as good as with interiours and landscapes. The d800 would immediately benefit my interiours and landscapes, there, I can say, I’m camera limited. I’m not yet with “people” shots, especially lighting. And right now, and for the next few months I concentrate on the latter, don’t do much interiours and landscapes. The d800 is not particularly urgent until the end of this year.
So who is buying it? I guess the “medium format territory” is not just marketing speech. I know a lot of MF users are buying the d800. Some interest from videographers as well, most of them 5D MK II shooters – Canon butchered Nikon in this respect for years with the MK II. Just like you, I know lots of Canon users who are buying the d800 as a second camera (Colby Brown comes to mind, a 9 year Canon veteran). I also no some switchers, though if I were heavily invested in Canon glass, I’m not sure I would switch: the 5D Mark III by all accounts, is a fantastic camera. I can’t find ANY flaw with it, it would be perfect for many things. It’s just not as exciting right now as the d800. Whether or not that excitement will last – we don’t know. Right now, Nikon has a huge lead in interest, and it seems that Nikon is delivering the goods. Most photographers who had their hands on it describe it as a fantastic camera, or as a “breakthrough” as Nasim puts it. The 5D Mark III is “the autofocus finally works” camera, minor tweaks in all areas, perhaps with the exception of ISO, which is serious improvement over the 5D Mark II.
Csaba,
I remember from a previous post that you are using a Sigma 8-16 with your D7000 for interiors.
If you would purchase a D800 – what ultra-wide lens would you get/use? The 14-24 or the slightly slower but VR-equipped (for non interiors, obviously) 16-35?
What other lenses would you (have to) replace?
The reason I’m asking: I’m planning a bit ahead to figure out how much money I’d have to save up to replace my D7000 + lenses (even if it likely doesn’t break in the next two years I’m sure that I want to get to next level one day).
The way I see it I would get the “zoom trinity” including the 14-24 plus the widest PC-E lens available – to not only profit from the higher resolution but also from better, faster lenses. Are you interested in a PC-E lens yourself?
Thanks in advance for taking your time to answer!
Very good question, and this has been a bit of a dilemma for me. I never used filters, but I want to in the future, so the 16-35 seems to be the better option. That’s about 10.5mm field of view on the d7k. However, I’ll still lose 2.5mm compared to what I have now. If I chose the 14-24mm, I’ll lose about 1.5mm. Doesn’t sound much, but in tight spaces that can be significant.
However, lately I didn’t have any interiour work, and I’m moving towards people photography – engagement, maybe wedding, some events and if I’m lucky, I’ll have some opportunities for commercial photography. So, for the moment, I don’t worry about the ultra-wide end. My main concern is a good lens for events. I love the 50mm F/1.8 – very reasonable price, but may need wider stuff for group shots. So I’m looking at the 24-120 F/4 and 24-70mm F/2.8. The former is almost half the price of the latter, has some bokeh capabilities, and based on the reviews I’ve read, it’s an incredibly good lens. Not to mention VR, which is not that important for events (you need high shutter speeds to capture movement anyway) but it might come in handy for stills in low-light. So I think I’ll go for that as a general events lens, and will use the 50 on the d7k for close-ups (I’m definitely not selling the d7k – still in love with that camera, and will come in handy as a backup camera).
Yeah, I’m doing the same thing you do Marcus – planning ahead. I need money to grow my business now, can’t spend so much at once on gear. I think it’s gonna be the 24-120mm first which will work well on the d7k as well for events. Then the d800. Next it’s going to be probably a wide angle, either the 16-35 or 14-24. I may buy the 85mm F/1.8 as well somewhere in between – that’s not a very expensive lens. And finally, the PC-E Nikkor – I’ve been reading about it for quite some time. If I get some bigger interiour/architecture jobs in the future, then I might consider it. It’s probably going to be the last on the list.
Interiour photography is more of a nieche market than events/weddings/people. This year I had one big job, and don’t expect many others. Probably 3-4 big assignments a year if I’m lucky. Have to fill in the between, and I enjoy people tremendously right now.
Yes, right now the Nikon is having D800 shortages due to high demand. But for how long? I think initial sales of the D800 beat 5D mark III but what about the long run? most people will probably buy 5D mark III before the year ends. I’m just speculating here because the consumers will prefer a better all around camera. Sure the 5D mark III is $500 more expensive but buying a D800 would mean you need to upgrade your hard disk drives and maybe your desktop PC or laptop. And have you read the news that the 5D mark II became the no. DSLR used by flickr users? previously it was the iphone4 then D90 and 3rd 5D mark II. It is possible that the price drop of 5D mark II affected 5D mark III’s intial sales hence the spike in 5D mark II usage, it sell more than the mark III right now. Who would want to buy a 5D mark III? a lot of people I think, especially the ones who like the grip/handling of the mark 3 than the D800. Since the 5D mark III manage to impress Nikon pros (and fanboys), it’s a good indication of very good sales.
Well, by know we know everything there’s to know about the d800 – looks like it’s a brilliant camera. And these are just minor fluctuations, but right now, the d800 climbed 3 more places in the all electronics top 100 list that shows growing demand. The Mark II climbed to the 13th place in DLSR sales, probably due to the significant price drop. I just had a chat with a fairly big magazine’s editor. Their Canon guy is switching. I know, this is anecdotal evidence, but the interest for the d800 is staggering. Maybe I’m biased reading far more news about Nikon than Canon, but it is my impression that Nikon hit gold with this launch, while Canon… They corrected all complains and then some, but again, as I said, the level of excitement for the Mark III is just not there. If we are to believe the reviews, the d800 is just as revolutionary as the D3S was in 2009, while the Mark III is an evolutionary step at best. Seems to me that Nikon shook off its risk-aversion approach, and they are willing to go in bold, new directions. I wouldn’t be surprised to see an MF camera from them, probably a d4x at the d3x’s price point, for example. The tech is there – the big question mark is lenses. Canon is a 10x bigger company, but when it comes to glass, they are pretty much each other’s equals in terms of production and R&D capabilities.
Unlike many, I think that their mirrorless approach is also sound. The V1/J1 sensor sits right between the largest P&S sensors and APS-C. Going 4/3 would not have made any sense for Nikon, nor producing a mirrorless APS-C at this time. DSLR sales are still going strong, probably for at least a couple of years. Besides, with the V1/J1 line they have a good testbed for future tech. Forget about sensor size, and look at some of the techs in there (specifically, the focusing system). I also believe that Nikon will produce a mirrorless APS-C in the future, in fact I think they could do it right now if they wanted to (or if it made sense). The p&s market it shrinking, there is no way to grow except going down and developing some phone tech, and by going up by moving the current p&s line up to the new V1/J1 sensor eventually. I think both their mirrorless line and p&s line will be based on the same sensor eventually, and then they’ll have mirrorless APS-C for serious amateurs and some professionals, and high end full frame and medium format cameras for demanding professionals. Pure speculation, of course, but they seem to be on the roll, while Canon at the moment, seems to be focusing on high-end video with the C300, but Sony is breathing down their necks in that department.
Csaba, you should really read more news about other brands as well, not just Nikon news. You mentioned Nikon mirrorless, you should know by now that Nikon J1 and V1 is not a best seller, it was criticized for having inferior image quality than the micro 4/3 camera. Google ‘Mirrorless surpasses DSLR in Japan’ and for the 1st time since December 2011, mirrorless camera outsells DSLR cameras in Japan. The only reason why Nikon and Canon doesn’t really get into the whole MILC camera craze is because they don’t want to cannibalize the sales of their DSLR cameras. Like I’ve said before, just because the D800 is selling hot right now doesn’t mean it’s in for the long run. Sooner or later people will realize the additional expenses of buying the D800 like upgrading computers, hard disk drives, etc. I believe some Canon users will buy the D800 and vice versa, as mentioned in most reviews and video reviews I cited before, some well known Nikon users(Jared Polin, Kai wong) already wanted and recommended the 5DmarkIII. Canon is not the only one who should be threatened by Sony, Nikon will likely be the first victim of Sony’s rise. Did you know that Sony already took the #2 spot from Nikon in the UK and Taiwan market? you should google that or check the Nikon Rumors site.
I have to disagree with the statement: “Everybody seems to like the 5D mark III more than the D800 so …”. The sales figures say something very much the opposite. Most of the on-line reviews reflect a bit of personal bias, if only in how they weight the various differences between the two cameras. If you are invested in Canon, you can find a rationale in the reviews to go with the MkIII. If you are invested in Nikon the D800 is a no-brainer. However, jpeg reviews of IQ are inadequate for a comparison of what a camera is capable of. In a similar fashion pixel level noise is misleading. The ISO metric should be: Raw data converted to an image of the same size. This test shows what a FF sensor can produce when “printing” to a given size. Anything else is evaluating software choices. Nasim did an excellent job in his review by providing meaningful evaluations. The best reviews of senors are at :
www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings
The better camera is a matter of personal choice. Higher frame rate->Canon, Better IQ->Nikon, Quieter jpegs->Canon, Sharper jpegs->Nikon, Faster AF->Canon, More Accurate AF->Nikon, Ergonomics->personal preference. The differences are all small enough to allow brand loyalty to have a huge impact on buying decisions (and reviews). Personally, I find the D800 to be a more attractive camera than the 5D MkIII and my observation is that a comparitive evaluation is causing more Canon users to switch to Nikon than the other way around. However,what’s most important is that the top DSLR brands are very comparable. This generates competition and we all get to enjoy the new technology that results.
I don’t think Jared Polin and Kai Wong are bias because they’re both long time Nikon Users. And wedding photographer and Nikon user Ryan Brenizer also liked the 5D Mark III and implied that he preferred it over the D800(Ryan Brenizer’s website). Jared said he will get the 5Dm3 as his first Canon system(fro knows photo D800 vs 5Dmark3). Kai Wong said that the answer is obvious that he would pick the D800 but he picked the 5Dm3 instead despite being a self professed Nikon fanboy because it is the better all around camera(digitalrev D800 vs 5Dmark3 video). This is the first time I’ve read or watch reviews where Nikon users actually like a Canon DSLR. I disagree with what you said Nikon having more accurate AF when most reviews said it is both fast and accurate. If Nikon is so superior and will likely make more people switch, then how come Canon is still number 1? and why do the popular and highly paid professionals like Russel James, Pete Souza, Joey L, Dave Hill, Andresej Dragan, Lara Jade, Karl Taylor, Dan Busta, Joshua Hoffine, Yana Lapikova all chose Canon?
I’m not going to run down anyone for choosing either Nikon or Canon. Most pros have enough invested in glass that it takes a pretty big difference to make us want to switch brands. If you are invested in Canon, the 5DMkIII is a great choice for an all around camera. However, the best image you can get from a D800 will be better than the best image you can get from a 5DMkIII (Base ISO, tripod, blah, blah, blah). On the other hand the 5DMkIII will always shoot faster. For me, I want the best image quality possible and am more than willing to accept the tradeoffs of slower frame rate and slighly reduce low light performance. When I shoot sports or photojournalism, I want a Cannon D1X or Nikon D4 or Nikon D3S. While the D800 has actually moved DSLR image quality into the MF range. For some folks, that has a lot of value. How you evaluate the features and differences against a collection of expensive glass is personal preference. … To answer your question as to why Canon is #1: Canon got on the AF band wagon before Nikon, and this was revolutionary enough to cause a lot of pros to switch. Once you have the glass, it takes something revolutionary to make you want to switch. Canon could make inferior cameras to Nikon (I’m not saying they do) and still remain in the top spot for quite a while… just so long as they weren’t too much worse. … The 5DMkIII looks to be a phenominal camera, I can’t imagine anyone who purchases one being unhappy. However, in my workflow, using raw images not jpegs the Canon has only a slight advantage in ISO (for a given ouput size) and the Canon has a a higher frame rate while the Nikon D800 at base ISO provides better image quality. IQ matters to me, a lot. … For me the D800, D4 combo covers it all, and does so better than a 5DMkIII, 1DX combo. Nikon has differentiated their pro tools to a greater degree than Canon. I see the D800 as a revolutinary tool that brings MF pefromance to the DSLR range at a very affordable price. Depending on the intended use, and investment in glass, the 5DMkIII may make more sense. My point was that for many, the ability to achieve MF sensor performance at DSLR prices has been a reason to switch brands. From the discussions I have had, the slight difference in ISO performance and higher frame rate attributed to the Canon are seen as less compelling when it comes to engendering a brand switch. At the end of the day, Canon will probably still be #1, but the margin will be smaller. But as a consequence of the competition, we all win.
I definitely agree with you on some points. True, some people will go for the highest IQ they can get and that is why some will go for the D800. Some people will prefer the best a versatile camera without the need for highest megapixel for details and that’s the people who will prefer the 5Dm3. It’s like choosing one of two supercars, would you go with the supercar with the highest top speed like the Bugatti Veyron Super Sport or is the Ferrari 458 Italia good enough for you for your skills or style of driving? I know that Nikon has always been the leader when it comes to high ISO image quality and AF technology, most Canon-using professionals know that but they still stick with Canon and because their Canon DLSRs already have what they need and does not ask for more. Famed celebrity photographer Annie Leibovitz is a Medium format camera, a Canon, and Nikon user, shoots more with her 5D mark II, but now recommends an iPhone 4S as the snapshot camera. Being a studio and portrait photographer, she would probably like the D800. Nikon user and excellent wedding photographer, Ryan Brenizer said it best ‘For someone like me who takes more than a quarter million photos a year, the idea of a sensor that only shoots 36MP is a non-starter’ in his “a Nikon User’s Review of the 5D mark III’ article (well written, unbiased review) and would likely stick to his D3S or prefer to shoot with the 5Dm3 than get a D800 because of his line of work.
Thanks for pointing out Ryan Brenizer’s article. For him, a 1.6x increase in file size (over the 5DMkIII) and a 3x increase over the 3DS is not worth the increase in resolution of the D800. I expect that he also rarely prints over 11 x 17. .. It makes sense that he is sticking with the D3S. Personally, I think disk space is cheap so the image size issue is mainly associated with uploading (I use a firewire CF card reader). I think the biggest differentiators between the 5DMkIII and the D800 are sensor resolution and frame rate. Either camera will do great stuff. As an all around camera, the D800 does a pretty good job because the sensor buys so much. Just the enhanced ability to crop has a lot of value. But the 5DMkIII will be better for sports when it comes to getting that incredible action shot. As I see it they are both excellent choices. A collection of expensive glass is a huge factor when it comes to upgrading, it can be the difference between a $3,000 upgrade and a $30,000 upgrade. That’s huge. The way I tally things, the D800 is a better camera for me as well as a better value. Most Canon users will come down on the other side… Depending on the intended use, workflow etc. I believe you could make a credible argument for which is the better all-around camera. Given that the D800 is $500 cheaper and has the capability to produce better (large) images, I feel that it is the more exciting of the two. But if I were a MkII user with a collection of glass, I’d see the MkIII as awesome.
I totally agree, the D800 is a breakthrough camera. A CSI pixel monster. The high resolution is a bless for all wildlife and especially bird photographers. I bought the D800 instead of the D800E because of potential moiré on the feather as you recommended. In case someone is interested to see how the 600mm performs, I have taken some bird pictures with the D800.
Dear Simon
Delighted you posted these bird images. I have been eying the D800 for birds. I am currently using the Nikon D7000 SLR with a Sigma AF OS Zoom 150-500mm because I want to do work that is entirely handheld (some of my images here orientalbirdimages.org/photo…der_ID=545). I have hence avoided the heavier cameras & lenses (cost not a big issue for me). I love to wander in the forest, try and make friends with birds (find birds get distressed with the tripod). I wonder if you have any experience or opinions with handheld for the D800 at 400-500mm.
Since I got the D800 only a few days ago and I normally shoot with tripod I don’t have any experience with handholding the D800. But since you are experienced in doing so, and the D7000 has a slightly higher pixel density than the D800, I would assume that you will get even better results with your D7000.
sorry, meant to say “better than with your D7000” ;-)
check this out …video comparison
www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/…ter-video/
The remaining link for the reviews mentioned by XGlite015
www.slrlounge.com/on-im…omparison/
www.axs.com/
ryanbrenizer.com/2012/…-mark-iii/
Let’s wait for Nazmim to update his work-in-progress….
Cheers
(1) Imaging resources uses a Sigma lense. The lens make a signficant difference to the result. I would have personally liked to see the results using original Canon and Nikon full-frame lenses. I would therefore ignore this result.
(2) Examiner uses DPL review results. I would therefore look at DPL review, who are pretty good technical reviewers. I look at their reviews all the time. I do not know if they are professional real-life.photographers.
I also recommend watching Digitalrev’s 5D mark 3 vs D800 review www.digitalrev.com/artic…xNjI0OTY_A I would recommend watching digitalrev’s reviews like L lens vs Non-L and the 550D vs D90 durability test where they dropped the camers down an escalator, pour coffee on them, use them as hammer and shoes, and a ot more. Their comparisons and reviews are not boring, funny, but at the same time deliver the facts and real world tests.
The DigitalRev durabilty video is great but they didn’t actually use these cameras but predecessors.
This doesn’t make the video any worse but I thought I spare some readers the disappointment that their favorite body isn’t mutilated. ;-)
They also have some great advice and inspirational videos like the nightly city shoot.
Nasim, I think you did wrong. You zoomed out for Nikon 800, That’s kind of cheating. Take a look that link www.slrlounge.com/on-im…omparison/ that was provided by Srini. I think that is right way to compare samples between 5D mark 3 and Nikon D800.
In my personal opinion, Imaging Resources comparison is probably not valid as the lenses used are Sigma for Nikon and Canon/Sigma lenses for Nikon. I think one should use a full-frame lenses of Nikon and Canon to facilitate a fair comparison.
Sorry for the typo errors in the reply above:
In my personal opinion, Imaging Resources comparison is probably not fair as the lenses used are Sigma for Nikon and Canon/Sigma lenses for Canon. I think one should use full-frame lenses of Nikon and Canon to facilitate a fair comparison.
Sergo, how fair is it to compare 36 MP to 23 MP at the pixel level? The ONLY proper way to compare sensors with different resolutions is to down-sample a higher resolution sensor to the smaller one. Or you can print both at a certain print size and also compare, which would yield very similar results.
It is the same as comparing the Nikon D700 with 12 MP to the Canon 5D Mark II with 22 MP – if you looked at the pixel level, the Nikon D700 would destroy the 5D Mark II. However, if the image from 5D Mark II is down-sampled to 12 MP, then the difference between sensors is not that big…
All I was saying, when you compare, you need to do 100% crop for both sides.
And by doing 100% crop, noise on both sides probably will be the same. On you review, you were sound like D800 better in noise and also has more MP, which is I think, it is not true about noise. With 100% crop, the noise comparisons probably will be same or better on 5D M3, but 5D M3 has smaller resolution. I don’t know if follow me…
About D700 and 5D mark2, I don’t care if D700 destroy 5D M2 on noise. Both sides have pluses and minuses. I wasn’t even talking about them…
Sergo, looks like you have a problem understanding basic things about sensor comparisons here. Didn’t you understand Nasim when he talked about comparing D700’s 12 MP sensor to 5D MK II’s 22 MP sensor? It is completely pointless to compare lenses with different resolutions. Why would you want to look at crops at 100% – it is a given that the 5D Mark III will look better at 100%, simply because it has bigger pixels, hello! If everyone would look at camera sensor performance at 100%, manufacturers would work on decreasing the number of megapixels instead of increasing them! The whole point of having a high resolution sensor is to be able to down-sample when needed and have super high resolution at low ISOs at all other times!
So stop coming back with your “cheating” and “zoomed out” comments. It is plain stupid to take a 36 MP image and try to compare it at 100% to a 23 MP image with the same sensor size. Why don’t you compare the Canon 1D X and the 5D Mark III at 100% view? Is that fare? Of course not!
I know where you going Praveen, but I don’t think you got to my point. I’m agree with down-sampling. But then it should be mention in summary. I did not like how the summary was written -” As you can see, the Nikon D800 sensor has no competition, even from its biggest rival, the Canon 5D Mark III still cannot quite match what the D800 can do. Don’t forget that there is also a big resolution difference between the two”. And the reason 5D M3 sample has a larger noise because D800 sample was down-sampling. I’m a canon user, so little respect to cannon would be appreciate.
And Praveen, don’t Hello! me
Sergo, perhaps you did not see that it says “Please note that the camera comparisons are only based on image quality. Also note that all images are down-sampled to the size of the sensor with the lowest resolution (when comparing to D700, down-sampled to 12 MP and when comparing to the 5D Mark III, down-sampled to 23 MP)” on the very top of the “Comparisons” page?
Sergo, I wrote the quick summary right before taking off to New Mexico, so it is rather incomplete! I will go back and add a few things, change a few things in the comparisons pages. I think the D800 vs 5D Mark III situation is like the D700 vs 5D Mark II situation a couple of years ago, but reversed – two cameras for different needs. One has more megapixels, one has better ISO performance at the pixel level.
I have been shooting with the 5D Mark III for the past 2 weeks and I am impressed by it. The autofocus is accurate and fast (although I do not like the way autofocus points are changed), colors are beautiful and the shutter sounds much nicer than on D800. Metering is a little off here and there, but pretty good overall. Dynamic range is better than on 5D Mark II in my opinion. And the camera feels better on hands than the D800 – the grip is much more comfortable.
I will be writing a full review of the Canon 5D Mark III within the next week or so, hopefully before I take off to Europe…
I did see it for D700, but no for 5D M3
This is what was on top of the “Comparisons” page – “Let’s see how the new D800 compares to the older D700. Below you will find image samples normalized to 12 MP by down-sampling.
Please note that the camera comparisons are only based on image quality. Additional information and differences in camera features will be provided shortly.”
Sergo, I have been updating the review yesterday and today.
Who are you but the way? Nasim is that you?
Sergo – I am not sure what you are asking. I just got back from Glenwood Springs. Shot with your 17-40mm f/4 lens a little, then used 50mm f/1.2L and 24mm f/1.4L – man, those are sweet lenses! Your lens is a tad soft in the extreme corners, but very sharp everywhere else. The 50mm is tough to focus, but very sharp and awesome. The 24mm f/1.4L is very similar to the Nikon 24mm f/1.4G – super sharp, colorful and very nice. So far I am liking the Canon 5D Mark III. Will call you tomorrow bro!
Want to go shoot at RMNP this weekend?
Praveen, please respect our visitors and do not post abusive comments like this. Sergo is wondering about my testing methodology and yet you are attacking him instead of explaining nicely.
Sergo
In my opinion what a camera comparison should do is simply ask the question: “For a given image, taken at equivalent settings and printed to equivalent sizes, which camera produces better results?” When I capture an image, I want to be able to reproduce it at the highest quality possible; this means raw files printed to a given size. Pixel peeping is misleading. Throw away in-camera jpeg processing and print to the same size…which image do you like better. That is the only way to assess camera capability. Once you have those images in hand, then if you want jpegs you can readily make a better jpeg than you will ever achieve in-camera. Nasim has provided the most useful review out there…Great job!
Sergo, I never said that the D800 is better than the 5D Mark III at 100% view. At the pixel level, I have no doubt that the 5D Mark III will have cleaner images, just like other websites have shown. Thats kind of a “given”, because the 5D Mark III has less pixels and therefore bigger pixel size. What I talked about was comparison when the 36MP image is downsampled to 23MP – that’s where the differences are rather small, with Nikon having an edge over the 5D Mark III. I only pointed out about the resolution, because at low ISO levels such as ISO 100, the D800 also has a megapixel advantage, allowing for larger prints/more cropping opportunities.
So, if you crop D800 to 800X600, then crop 5D mark3 with same size, and then do comparisons. Like I was mention earlier, the way you did it, you zoomed out for D800.
So, if use same crop size for both sides and if D800 still shows better result, then you can say D800 has better ISO comparisons with bigger resolution.
AH, I see the misconception. When comparing camera sensors you don’t crop. Typically, you would combine pixels from the larger sensor into an image of the same pixel size as the smaller. The idea is to use the entire sensor to build equivalent images. Cropping uses a subset of the sensor, and that is why 100% crops are misleading. If I have two sensors that I want to compare, I should make that comparison using all of the data provided by the sensor. I then need to evaluate Images of equivalent sizes. Anything else results in an improper comparison.
Hi Nasim,
You recently reviewed the Nikor 24-120 f4 lens and gave it a very high approval rating. Would like to see what you think of this lens now that you have the D800. I am sure you are already trying out this combo.
John, surprisingly, the Nikon 24-120mm f/4 works extremely well on the D800, so the review is still valid!
I watched this video on an interview with Jim Brandenburg (legendary National Geographic photographer ) on his first impressions of Nikon D800, see: jimbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2012/…about.html
May be of interest to others considering the camera.
I hope to be testing the D800 for myself next week before making final decision to plunge in. The FX format is only thing holding me back for now (will loose reach as currently using a DX format with D7000). Will try and test on birds with old & new format (handheld at 500mm) and see if cropping will allow me to get better results than what I have now.
I am happy with mt D3 and D700. Maybe wait for next model to upgrade. The image quality is more or less the same. Iam thinking about investing in better lens
I am happy with my D3 and D700. Maybe wait for next model to upgrade. The image quality is more or less the same. Iam thinking about investing in better lens
As always your make things very clear Nasim. Thanks for the continuing review of the D800!
Many thanks for your thorough and precise analysis of the D800!
Thank you Christian!
I am looking forward to your D4 review. I picked up my D4, 1 week ago (moving from a D700), and loving it. I had to run the Calibration mode on the battery charger, to get full capacity.
If you want to see a few shots check out:
for daytime, and
for after dusk.
Thanks for great reviews, especially the D800.
Ditto on the D4 review.
I will publish a Nikon D4 Review as soon as I get my copy. Been waiting for a while now and still no word on its availability…
Nasim,
How would you rate the Nikkor 24-85 f/2.8-4d IF for the D800? And how would that compare with the Nikkor 28-300 VR for the D800?
The main criteria desired are sharpness, colour and handheld use. Which one would be better?
Please do reply soon. Looking forward to your opinion.
thanks,
Anand
Anand, to be honest, I have never been a fan of the 24-85mm or the 28-300mm. You get what you pay for.
e where you are coming from. But I just want your opinion in choosing between these lenses due to two reasons, 1. Budget: I’m an amateur considering the move to FX and 2:Availability: These are more easily available where I am. So if you had to choose one of then based on sharpness, colour and handheld use, which would it be? The 24-120 is also on my list, but last option as its very expensive here. Please let me know what you think. Once again thanks, not only are your article superb but your patience in answeing them is great.tience in answeing them is great.
Ken Rockwell and many others see the Nikon 28-300 VR as a great lens for the D800. As for price, I’ll put up the “cheap” Nikon 300mm f4 up against the far more expensive and way HEAVIER 300mm f2,8. Not only that, it works great with the TC-14E and TC-17E the latter of which is almost never removed from the 300mm. The old relatively inexpensive Nikon DX 70-300 was a superb lens when I was shooting DX. I just got rid of my Nikon 14-24mm and replaced it with the Nikon 16-35mm which has VR. Finally I sold both my D3S and D3X and got far more than it will cost me to get a new D800 and a D800E. In the world of Nikon, more expensive doesn’t necessarily mean better. While I have a 50mm and 85mm Nikon prime, I almost never use them for general use because of the great performance of the 28-300mm [this was before I sold the D3X and D3S].
Somebody must think the 28-300mm is great. Just try and find one for sale these days!!
Anyway Nasim your review of the D800 is by the far the best I’ve seen yet!
Fantastic review on the D800, Thank you!
Thank you Paul!
For me I decided to wait for the D400 first. DX means lighter, cheaper and smaller lenses, more flexibility and faster workflow. I expect the D400 to have at least 18 megapixels (maybe 24 megapixels) and good high iso’s as well. To travel with a € 3000,- camera + dito big and heavy (paparazzi look) lenses means asking for troubles. I expect to make make the best pictures with a small, discrete and light camera set that (in case of a D400 or even D300) offers plenty resolution and IQ. If the message of your picture is strong enough nobody will ever cares about ultimate sharpness or noise. Photographs are about content and creativity!!!
Max, the Nikon D400 will have a 24 MP sensor, the same one from the Sony A77, except better image processing pipeline, so less apparent noise at high ISO levels. You are right – DX means lighter body, smaller, lighter and cheaper lenses…
As for me, if I were to buy a cropped-sensor camera today, it would be a mirrorless one. I am strongly considering the Fuji X-Pro 1.
Nasim,
I am a bit surprised that you would prefer a mirrorless for a cropped sensor. I personally think that lightweight systems would be much more useful for an armature like me but while the mirrorless camera bodies are great, choices regarding good compact lenses are still very limited. With NEX 5N, almost all the lenses (except the 16mm 2.8) are too large for that body. I think that for NEX, Sony should have made the 35mm or 50mm compact prime before the 16mm and for Nikon 1, Nikon should have made 20mm prime before the 10mm. I don’t understand why every mirrorless system manufacturer is making a wide angle prime but not a normal or short tele prime. I know that Sony and Nikon are not stupid but I fail to see the logic. How is it possible that users of mirrorless camera find a wide angle prime more useful than a normal prime? Can you think of any reason?
Amit, I agree with your comments on lenses – manufacturers clearly need to fill the gap quickly for normal primes or their systems won’t get any serious consideration from pros and amateurs. The reason why I prefer cropped-sensor mirrorless systems, is because they are much smaller and compact – great for travel and everyday photography. Owning heavy-duty DSLRs, I would not invest in a smaller DSLR body with a smaller sensor…mirrorless is clearly the future for anything smaller than 35mm.
The Fuji X-Pro 1 is a highly interesting camera for sure but just (and only) for traveling or similar situations. I look forward to see a comparison between the coming D400 and the D800. Of course the D800 will beat the D400 in pure IQ but I expect the D400 to be so good that the difference in normal usage will not be relevant any more. Nowadays I find my 12-24mm 24-70mm combo as a base highly satisfying on my D300s. A little bit more resolution and a bit better High iso’s would be fine but 24 MP and better high iso’s than the D7000 should be more than enough for 95% of the photographic needs, keeping the advantages of DX. Maybe it is an other discussion and a matter of taste and subject but i.m.o so many of the digital pictures that I see today are already too clean and too (digitally) sharp to deliver a beautiful artistic experience.
If there’s some thing I like more than these reviews, it is those amazing pictures you’re taking, Nasim!
You know, some websites out there like dpreview publish some excellent reviews, but it’s all techie stuff – distortion,fall-off, chromatic aberration, ISO comparisons etc… It’s all very important, but when you get to the image samples page, all the images look just plain ridiculous – a potato here, a window or a wheel there.
What I like about your reviews is the artistic point of view that you’re bringing to the table. At the end of the day, that’s what truly matters.
Keep up the great work!
Oded, thank you so much for your feedback, I really appreciate it!
Nasim –
Because 1000’s of us own D7000’s, just to prove the D800 is vastly superior as indicated in reviews could you please do a comparison test, side by side images D7000 vs D800. I am betting that an excellent photographer could match results up to 16×20 (cropping not an issue) . But I don’t have a D800 to test my theory.
Thank you for your excellent website and reviews, very much appreciated!!!
Forrest
Forrest, I am working on a couple of other reviews at the moment, so the D7000 comparison will have to wait a little (have a couple of trips planned within the next 2 weeks). One thing for sure – the D800 will have a huge lead over the D7000 when down-sampling is applied. For pixel-level performance, the performance should be very similar on both.
Just saw Srini’s youtube link ‘Canon 5D MK III vs Nikon D800 with Nathan Elson’ as expected the Nikon guy like AF of 5D mark 3, D800’s slight edge is the extra megapixels. High ISO RAW files are almost the same with Canon getting advantage at ISO 12800 and Nikon slightly sharper at ISO 1600 and 3200. However, when it comes to jpeg the 5D Mark 3 dominates because of better Noise Reduction processing as seen in cameralab’s review here: www.cameralabs.com/canon…d_mark_ii/ this is also supported by imagingresource, DPreview, and other comparison review sites. This is why the 5D mark 3 was reported to have better high ISO performance than both D4 and D800, their NR is superior but when it comes to RAW files it’s a toe to toe battle.
Tonight I looked at the same D800 image in Nikon Capture NX2 and Lightroom 4. I made sure all the settings were as close as possible, with no noise reduction. What I noticed was that noise was much more obvious using Lightroom 4.
In the past, Capture NX always converted NEF files much better than Lightroom. I think the trend continues. I wonder how accurate many of these tests are since I’m guessing Canon files will look cleaner in Adobe since their file format is not closed like Nikon’s.
Dean, I have done some side-by-side comparisons with Capture NX and Lightroom and I do not have the same conclusion as you do. Noise performance on RAW level should be very similar on both…
But if NX output is surely cleaner (I have to go back and retest), then it is another advantage to the D800 files!
Canon has really done a nice job on their in camera noise reduction when producing jpegs. However, I think the early reports that claimed the MkIII to be the new low light king and touted a 2-3 stop improvement over the MkII illustrate that comparing jpeg results can be a slippery slope. Nikon seems to choose sharpness over noise reduction in their jpeg processing. Personally in most cases I find the noise to be more distracting than softer edges, so I prefer Canons jpeg processing. That having been said, I prefer the results I get by proceesing the raw files myself (as computer based processing of raw files to remove noise can provide better results than any in-camera processing). I think that if the goal is IQ, and you have the proper glass, a sturdy tripod, proper release etc., then the D800 is the DSLR king. I print really big, so the D800 is a dream come true.
I agree with you Eric!
Yes, Canon definitely has better JPEG rendering out of the camera, but that’s only important for those that shoot JPEG. I personally never shoot in JPEG…
And mind you, the Camera Labs comparison shows pixel-level performance, which is never the right way to compare image sensors that have different resolutions…I hope Gordon updates his review with some real comparisons, because what he has right now makes the D800 look like a crappy camera in comparison.
Thanks for this wonderful review, and I can’t wait to see your lens combo review. I currently have a 50mm 1.4D on order (1.4G version is out of stock every where), and I would love to hear if that 50mm 1.4D would be a good lens to use with D800.
Hi Albert. I have tested the 3 great classics 50mm 1.4D, 35mm 2.0D and 85mm 1.8D on the D800, and from my humble judgement, they appear ok. They are sharp on aperture 4.0 and up. But softness is somewhat noticeable below. But then again. Everything is more noticeable on 36mp.
So I would not be initially alarmed by using these lenses, but test them thoroughly on full 36mp to see if it fits your personal liking of low aperture softness before choosing to spend money.
But!
The 50mm 1.8G (New One), is doing a greater job. Noticeably better contrast and sharpness, than the 50mm 1.4D and even the 50mm 1.4G. (Yes I handed in my 50mm 1.4G, cause i was severely disappointed in its ugly vignetting at f1.4 – f2.0).
The 50mm 1.8G has its flaws, on handling, rather than image quality. The squeaky autofocus noise and the tough to turn manual focus ring for DSLR video is not that great.
But for the price tag its the best of all these.
So not entirely the answer to your question, but hope it helped anyways.
Albert, I am with Sofus on this one – the older “D” primes are only OK on the D800. Their wide open performance is far from being impressive, so I would rather get the newer glass that performs better. Did you consider the new Nikon 50mm f/1.8G? It is much sharper than the old f/1.4D and f/1.8D and in some ways even better than the new f/1.4G. See my Nikon 50mm f/1.8G review for details.
If you are still in the 30 day return window, I would return the AF-D and get better glass.
Hi Nasim, First of all let me tell you thank you very much for this wonderful website.
Nasim I don’t have d800 but I have download manual and read in that they say 5 FPS not 4 FPS and with Battery grip 6 FPS.
And some where in your review I read that you don’t like nikon change -+ indicator. you can change it see page no 319.
Thanks….
Hemant, see this official Nikon D800 page, where it clearly states that the D800 has 4 FPS speed…
And as far as the -+ indicator, I updated the review with more information.
Perhaps my reply is redundant but just a quick reminder that using EL18 battery in the grip 5 FPS can be achieved, and that’s all. :-)
Thank you for Nice Review. It is very helpfull for me.
Just cancelled my D4 and ordered the D800 based on you review!! I owe you a dinner!! ;-). Thanks!!
Tom, it would be interesting to know why you changed your mind on the D4 – it is a very different camera for different needs :)
Nasim-I shoot for publications–they like to do full page cocktail table books so resolution is critical for me. I had a pair of Orca jumping off the coast of Cabo Del Sol Mexico, that made it thru the Photo Editor but when it came to production and a full pager—I got dinged for resolution! Maddening!! Also, price is a factor. What I learned from your excellent review is that I will get excellent resolution, FPS is not a huge deal for me, (no sports) the sensor story is a home run and I don’t have to buy the 910 flash!! My bet is the D4 availability will be coming not as fast as the D800–this is what B&H told me.
My lenses are the 24-70 70-200 and 300 2.8. These are perfect for me.
Tom, in that case you have made the right choice :) Good luck with your photography!
I got the first one in my town but had put my preorder in last November. Try calling the Shutterbug Shops that in in the Pacific Northwest-they may still have a few left in inventory.
Thank you for the information!
Great reviews! For my D700 I’ve got the 14-24mm f/2.8G ED, 24-70mm f/2.8G ED, 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR I, 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II, 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED & assorted Nikkor prime lenses (e.g., wonderful old manual ED 600mm); some DX (18-200mm) for my D200.
Couple questions:
1) having been happy with my current cameras (D700/200) does it make sense to upgrade to the D800 (the 36.3MP CMOS sensor (compared to 12.1MP) is very enticing)?
2) do you find that the camera works better with primes than zooms?
I am an amateur; shoot mainly wildlife, landscapes and youth sports.
Thanks,
MR
Mike, it all depends on whether you need the better dynamic range and higher resolution or not. See the updated review above for information on wildlife and sports photography. Basically, if you are OK with the slow fps speed and much larger files, the D800 surely does not disappoint. But I would prioritize your needs before jumping with the D800 – do you shoot mostly landscapes, or wildlife and sports? If you do mostly wildlife and sports, then I would skip the D800. But if your priority is with landscapes and occasional wildlife/sports, then the D800 is a superb candidate for an upgrade. Another option is to keep the D700 for your wildlife/sports needs and use the D800 strictly for landscapes (if your budget allows that).
Good way to put it!
D800 – Portrait / Landscape.
D700 – Sports / Wild life.
So which camera is better? depends on situation!
Nasim, Thanks for the insight, I have a bunch of older AIs FX lenses from old film bodies. I.e. 50mm 1.4, 20mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, 105mm 2.5, and a 135. I live in Ivins,Ut about 40 minutes from Zion natl park.
I loaded up the gear and headed out to Zion to test my new D800 and the lenses, I shoot slow and methodical, always on a tripod, so using manual lenses is fine with me. The resolution, crispness, saturation, Etc. was stunning. It was simply jaw dropping, I would put this camera and older Nikon AIs lenses against anything out there. I have access to some of the top Nikon glass out there and these older lenses will hold there own against anything I ave ever used.
Dave, thank you so much for your feedback – I am sure others will find it very useful!
It is good to know that older glass still rocks with a super high resolution sensor. I have been mainly playing with all the new AF-S pro lenses and so far they have all been very good as well. No wonder why the D800 is in such huge demand, because a lot of people are realizing how good and capable it really is! :)
Hi Dave, I’m currently using a D700 with the following AIS lenses: 24mm F 2.0, 28mm F 2.8, 35mm F 1.4, 85mm F2.0 and 200mm F4.0. Hoping to upgrade to a D800. Do you have any samples of your Zion shoot on Flickr or any other photo site. Link much appreciated.
Thanks!
Dear Nasim, thanks for taking the trouble to photograph some birds. The American Kestrel is a great image. I am definitely going to invest in the D800. Now to get my hands on it as demand locally (Malaysia) is also high.
Thank you for your feedback Amar!
nasim,
I dont shoot landscape or wildlife, but primarily outdoor portraits sessions, some weddings and parties both indoor and outdoor. I currently use a d7000 and want to upgrade as well as have a second body. I normally shoot indoor at iso 800 and would love to be able to shoot at 1600-3200 if necessary. How do you think the d800 will compare to my d7000?? The D4 is too expensive for me, my budget is $3k TOPS!
I do have good Nikon glass 17-55(which i will sell and replace with the 24-70) 70-200 and the 85 1.8G. thanks for the help, Mike
Mike, as I have shown in this review and other articles, the Nikon D800 is a superb camera for all photography needs, except for wildlife and sports (mostly because of its 4 fps limitation). For your needs, the D800 will be a huge upgrade over your D7000, especially considering how good its AF system is in comparison. Plus, you have a lot of options to crop and down-sample images to reduce their noise…
Nasim,
Loved the review. I currently shoot indoor sports, college Basketball, with two D3s and 24-70mm and 70-200mm Nikon 2.8’s at 3,200 or 6,400 iso and get great results even with crops. I have most of Nikon’s top glass save some telephoto’s but 24,35,50, 85 1.4G’s, 105 VR micro and 200 Micro and 135 DC. Do you feel that I could replace a D3s with a D800 in the above enviroment with the same results. I am very tempted but I know what I get in this shooting environment with the D3s and don’t want to give anything up. Thanks so much.
Skip, you should skip the D800 upgrade, you will surely be disappointed with it when compared to the D3s. The Nikon D3s is a much faster camera with phenomenal pixel-level performance, so why replace it with a camera with so much resolution? If you were a landscape photographer, I would certainly advise to upgrade to the D800, but for sports – a definite no.
Nice, Love it . Well done. D800 is my favorite.
Thank you!
Dear Nasim
Excellent review
Just wanted to find out, will Tokina 11-16 work in cropped format on D800, as it is a DX lens
Thanks and regards
Ateeq
While you wait for a reply from Nasim, have a look at the following articles:
kenrockwell.com/tokin…6mm.htm#fx
dombowerphoto.blogspot.in/2010/…-dslr.html
There are numerous discussion thread related to 11-16 on FX on dpreview and flikr.
Most probably you will need to explicitly set the image mode to DX as this is a third party lens. However, if you do not change the picture mode to DX, 16mm may still be passable on a FX if you don’t use filter or hood. At this point let me make it clear that these are my assumptions based on a few articles I have read. I don’t own this lens and I have a DX camera not FX. Someone who has tried to use this lens on FX will be able to guide you better.
Thanks Amit for the views.
I already have a Tokina 11-16 since last two years, it is an excellent lens, and would
love to have it with me once I upgrade to D800
My only concern was that is it compatible with D800 or not
The creators of the more expensive 5D Mark III must be truly embarrassed.
Just wanted to say thanks for the great (i.e. practical and sensible) review
Would love more full-size samples. Any chance you can make those available? :D
I am at an intermediate level and am learning about photography at a moderate rate. I am debating if I should get the D7000 or the D800. My delimma is that I currently have a D3100 but would eventually like the D800. The price difference between the D7000 and D800 is large. I feel I’ll be ready for a D800 by years end. Should I go with the D7000 and wait for my skills to improve or just get the D800 now?? Also, does the D800 have an “Auto” setting like my D3100 does, so that I can use it until I learn the more advanced skills?
No offense, but if you shoot in Auto mode, learn more advanced photography with your D3100. Although your pictures will be a little bit better with a D7000 in Auto (eg because of a better metering system), I think you will be disappointed from your step up with both possible choices. The advanced DSLRs you want are a pleasure to use because of many direct controls, thus no searching in the fiddly menus. But that means learning to handle a camera.
On the other hand, if you tell us that you need a high fps or shoot a lot of high iso scenes, than you will benefit from both choices. If you really WANT one of those, note that you will need really expensive pro glass to get nice results with the D800.
Greets, Dee
No offense taken. That’s why I asked the question. I do shoot in Auto, but am mainly shooting in more advanced settings now ( I should have stated that earlier ). I don’t have a “full” knowledge of the advanced settings, but am learning quickly. So I think the D7000 is the way to go and the D800 is definately out for now. I do need a high fps for some sports shots. So do you think the D7000 would be O.K. ?
Yep, i have a D7000 and its a great camera! 6fps should be quick enough. i’m sure you will like the camera when you got used to it
Sorry, but I think the comment of this page is super long… do you have any good idea to fix it? Or… whatever :D
I just want to ask about the Lightroom 4 support for D800. Currently it is not working! Too bad!!! :(
Mr. Mansurov,
Thank you for your D800 review which is by far one of the best one can find on the Internet. In your review, you keep on mentioning “down sampling”, what is it this feature of D800? I am using a D200 and have never heard of these technical terms. Would you please explain. Thank you.
I think ‘down sampling’ means resizing a high-pixel picture into a smaller one, which should be done in computer.
You must take a Large picture in D800, then resize it into a smaller one. So it is not a feature of D800…
Down sampling is done on a computer. Essentially this is the first time any camera is compared to another based down-sampled images and not out of camera results. This is very confusing and not on par with what has been done before.
Much like everybody complaining about shorter battery life of D4. It is shorter but not by as much as people think. Nikon was forced to redesign battery based on new safety requirements and then test it based on CIPA standard (which probably applies more to chimping style of P&S shooters)
If you look into the D4 manual you’ll see that the camera is able to take far more picture per Nikon battery testing standard then per CIPA standard so between the D3s and D4 we are not comparing apples to apples.
Few years ago the redesigned Nissan Maxima had less horsepower than the previous model and everybody was WT_? Well, it had the same exact engine but the testing procedure has changed.
Conversely, the D800 scores higher on DXO mark because a different methods were used then in prior camera testing. Nobody down-sampled images from MF cameras to match the resolution of the popular 8-12MP range of DSLRs. Heck, even the D4 wasn’t “down sampled” to the D3 resolution to perform side by side comparison.
When the D3s came out it was faaar superior to any other camera with out of camera results, no down sampling was needed.
I am a big Nikon fan but these results are artificially inflated with new testing procedures never employed before the D800. While I see the strong points the D800 has to offer I think a lot of people will be surprised, read disappointed.
I’m afraid I disagree. Forget megapixels. All that matters is how well a given camera, using a given group of settings produces an image of a given size. DXOMark has always used that methodology and it has not changed. The D3S has lower noise than a 5DMkIII after downsampling the MkIII image. Pixel count may be an indication of many things, but ultimate image quality at a given size is the ONLY way to compare cameras. Once you have a comaprison (raw images, printed to a given size) then you can evaluate other factors like fps, storage requirements, battery life whatever. But things like pixel level noise of jpegs is a metric that can be prettty far removed from the possible image quality that can be achieved with raw files printed to a given size. Down sampling does not inflate results. Rather down sampling is required in order to achieve valid real-world comparisons.
Thanks Leon and B! for the explanation. I got it now, down sampling = resizing.
Excellent work/review. However, your ISO review comparing the D800 to 5D mark III contradicts camera lab review which shows that mark III clearly outperforms D800, starting from ISO 800:
“the D800 wins on detail at low sensitivities, while the 5D Mark III wins on noise levels and cleaner output at higher sensitivities…At 50-400 ISO the D800 remains sufficiently clean for most people and manages to out-resolve the Mark III. At 800 ISO and above though, the D800 becomes noticeably noisier than the Mark III. I’d say the Mark III is very usable at 1600-6400 ISO with impressively clean results, whereas the D800 has become very noisy in comparison”:
www.cameralabs.com/canon…d_mark_ii/
Cameralabs has done 2 things different than what Nasim has done.
– You will notice that the D800 pics look like zoomed in as compared to 5D MK3. This is because they have compared 100% crops.
– They have compared JPEGs using in-camera defaults.
CameraLabs has done the same exact thing everybody has been doing for ages. Both Nasim and DXO have employed a new procedure comparing a downsampled images from one camera to a 100% crop from another.
Using much the same logic one can argue that a Ferrari is as fast as Ford in stop and go traffic.
The camera labs review is poorly done. The first problem is that it is comparing jpegs. The second problem is that it is comparing images of different sizes (look at the pictures). The only way to truly compare cameras is to answer the question: “For a given set of camera settings, how do the cameras compare when producing images of the same subject and printed to the same size?” Pixel level noise in jpegs is not a useful comparison. The camerlabs reveiw notes that the 5DmkIII is less noisy while at low ISOs the D800 is sharper…these are both influenced by philisophical decsions made during jpeg processing. In order to actually compare cameras, you must compare raw images and you must compare at the same output size. As photographers, we want to frame a photo, capture the image and then reproduce it. By using jpegs, the cameralabs review is also evaluating software decisions. By using images of different sizes, they are putting the D800 results under a magnifying glass. Consider this: given two images at 100% crop, how can the D800 be sharper?…the pixels are the same size…Is the nikon lens better? No? The difference is in the jpeg engine. Canon is sacrificing sharpness for improved noise. Now, if I take the D800 raw file and shrink it down to the size of the Canon raw file, the pixel averaging that takes places reduces noise too. So if you get rid of the jpeg decsions and make the images the same size, the results begin to look different. Since raw files, processed, then printed to a given size is what we do as photographers, shouldn’t that be the way we compare cameras? The cameralabs assessment compares pixel level jpegs. If the goal is to shoot jpegs without any further processing, and pixel level quality matters more than image level quality then I suppose its fine. On the other hand, if the goal is to be able to determine which cameras are capable of producing the best images under a range of conditions, well, the camera labs review is doing a disservice to its readers. Hats off to Nasim for doing such a great job!
Have already got the D800, and try to use it in all its area. Sa far, j’m very happy.
Many thanks for your interesting review. Waiting with impatience for the following article.
Great Work, Thanks very much
wow! I have never read and seen such a brilliant review! thanks for posting..
hi all –
when i enable bracketing (3, 5, 9 shots, whatever), and set the camera to self-timer, it’s only taking one shot. it’s not "completing" the full bracket sequence. to complete the sequence, i have to manually press the shutter button each time. however, if i set the camera to CL or CH, it will fire off the expected number of shots.
checking page 136 of the d800 manual, it says the following:
In self-timer mode, the camera will take the number of shots selected in Step 2 on page 133 each time the shutter-release button is pressed, regardless of the option selected for Custom Setting c3 (Self-timer) > Number of shots (0 291); the interval between shots is however controlled by Custom Setting c3 (Self-timer) > Interval between shots.
so … from what i can tell, it should work the way i expect. any ideas or if i’m doing something wrong?
thx!
btw, i also have a d7000 and the bracketing works exactly the way i am thinking it should. i can’t see any reason for the functionality to be different on the d800???
Dear Nasim
Need our expert advise , how you rate new generation mirror less cameras with SLR.
Do you thing that mirror less cameras are the future of photography.
best regards
MM
Hi Nasim,
I’m really looking forward to reading your thoughts on how the different lenses perform on the D800. I’m interested in the 24-120 f4, but cannot make my mind up to get this or the 24-70?! I’m really interested in sharpness more than lowlight performance. Have you tested the 24-120? Is it up to scratch on the D800?
Thx
JC, the Nikon 24-120mm f/4 VR works really well on the D800, better than the 24-70mm, as I have shown in my Nikon 24-120mm Review.
Great review, Nasim. Thanks. Just sold my D90/18-200VR/SB-700 for the D800/24-70 2.8ED/SB-910. D800 is backordered and have to wait another 10days :( …. I get through just looking at and admiring the Nikkor glass and the flashlight !
A feature I was keen to know about and wasn’t covered was speed and quality of auto focussing during HD video recording. How good is it?
One of the biggest misses on the 5D2, is it available on the 5D3 and how is it compared to that of the D800?
If the 5D3 is missing good and quick AF during video recording, it’s another no brainer in favor of the D800!!
Lavneet
New Delhi
Hi Lavneet,
Congratulations! Your question on the auto focusing during HD video mode, actually is my biggest concern now, after I played with my D800 for several days.
The focus performance during live view (photo or video mode) is much slower than in viewfinder mode. It is so for a reason: when the mirror is up, the camera can only focus by the image contrast instead of phase detection.
I have never used Canon camera especially in live view video recording mode, but I believe it is similar. For example if someone is walking towards to you, you can NEVER focus his face ALL THE TIME. The AF will keep working – no matter how good your lens is- and the face will be clear and blurred repeatedly.
I have asked around, including some camcorder master. In film business, the follow focus is mostly manual. You can search ‘follow focus’ on internet and find some attachment to improve the common focus mechanism – which only make the process more comfort and confident.
So in short. For live view photo shooting, the AF is quite fast (not as fast as in the viewfinder), and usable; but live view hd recording, do it manually if you can,or get help with follow focus accessories, and much experience.
Fantastic review, thank you very much.
I also think that Exposure delay in connection with a self timer is a great option to prevent shake. So far, I have been using the D800 with old AIS lenses and it works beautifully. Although just manual focus, their optical quality is excellent.
Thank you for your feedback Sven! I wish Nikon went back and fixed the firmware on all previous-generation Nikon DSLRs that do not have this working…
Thanks for the wonderful review! I haven’t bought a D800 yet but stocking up lens before I could buy it. I bought Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 SP and Tokina 100mm 2.8 macro while I am waiting for D800. I can’t afford both nikon 24-70 mm and 105 mm macro so I compromised on the lenses. Do you or any readers have an idea if these two lenses would be decent enough on D800? I have been testing Tamron 28-75 on my D90 and it is looking good though the ultimate aim is use it on D800 body. I would appreciate if anyone could comment based on an experience. I have 6 more days to return the lens so your feeedback will be really helpful.
Hi, as a previous 28-75mm f/2.8 SP owner, I think I perhaps can give some idea.
Sorry but I think D800 deserve better glasses. If you want to get the advantage of high resolution, some top Nikon lens really matter.
In other words, if you want to use Tamson or Tokina, (I like Tokina), a D700 (which is half of the price of D800) is more than enough to matching them. Of course your D90 is also great with them.
Hope this helps.
Thanks Leon! I have been contemplating this. I think that D800 deserves the G-series lenses i.e. 24-70 , 70-200,105 etc. Correct me if I am wrong.
I think 24-120 f/4 is decent but with its price range, it is pretty close to 24-70 and I would rather go for the latter. What are your suggestions for medium-range zoom lenses?
At a similar price, I would pick 24-70 F2.8. Personally I think a larger aperture is more important than the focal length.
Of course it depends on your application i.e. how to use the lenses. If move around a bit can solve the distance issue, why not? :)
I have both the 24-70( practical but boring) and the 105 – the 105 is one of my favorite lenses and never fails to produce beautiful images – if I had to chose between the two- the less expensive 105 would be my pick!
I agree, the Nikon 105mm is a phenomenal lens!
Thanks to everyone who replied to my question regarding the lenses. I am returning Tamron 24-85 and Tokina 100mm macro. I am planning to buy Nikon 105 Macro to start with.
For Tokina lovers like Leon, I have another Tokina 11-16mm that I love very much. I won’t be returning that particular lens and I plan it use this on D800 in the DX mode. Tokina 11-16 DX lens is one of the best I have seen in my limited budget.
Hi Nasim,
On one of your previous D800 posts I asked if you believed the D800 would be more capable than the D700 at astrophotography. Given your hands-on experience, do you have any new thoughts to share?
From what you have said, what I saw on the DXOMark testing and a few other sources, the D800 is looking promising?
Thanks,
Andrew
Andrew, yes, I believe the D800 is more capable for astrophotography than the D700. Just use good fast glass like the Nikon 24mm f/1.4G (shooting wide-open) and try not to go above ISO 1600. If you use longer lenses, you might need to increase ISO even more…
Dear Nasim
Does the D800 sensor have any effect on the diffraction induced fuzziness? I dont think I understand diffraction limits very well but was just wondering if the greater number of pixels adversely affected diffraction or not
THanks.
Sridhar, diffraction is a lens issue and its effect (depending on the size of aperture) is related to the sensor size. The smaller the sensor, the less tolerance on f stop. For 35mm full-frame cameras, diffraction is visible at the f/11 mark. For cropped-sensor Nikon cameras, diffraction is visible at f/8 and smaller. For the Nikon 1 V1 system, diffraction is visible at f/5.6…
Is the effect of diffraction more visible on the D800? Yes, when looking at an image at 100% view it definitely is!
Thanks, Nasim
Appreciate the prompt and clear reply.
Doesn’t change anything for me; am still moving from d300s to d800 but was curious
Sir;
Have you tested the Nikon 300mm f/4 with the TC-14E on the D800? Curious as to how much this affects the focus speed with that combo.
Also, is there a lot of difference in picture quality between the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 and the 300mm f/4 (especially when used on the D800)?
Thanks,
WEJ
Dear Nasim,
You recommend a hard disk for external storage of the RAW files. Do you know whether (or do you think that) it would – speedwise – also work to store these files on a NAS?
Best regards,
Christian
Realy Great and amazing review. Now, I’m planning to buy the D800.
I will be using it to take shots of my new born baby, indoor and outdoor family snaps mostly.
which lens shall i buy to have the best result for the above purpose, and at the same time i can shoot other scenes with good result as well.
Thanks in advance :)
Nasim,
I have a dual core imac with 4Gb of RAM. Since I am broke from my d800(still on backorder )-: ) I would prefer not to upgrade to a new computer. I currently use Lightroom 3 and Photoshop. If I upgrade my current mac to a solid state drive do you think I will have enough power to process the large d800 RAW files. Thanks for your help and excellent blog!
By the way my current Mac is dual core 2 ghz.
Hi Josh,
I got my D800 days ago and upgraded my PC and now I am quite satisfied. I am using Win 7 64bit, Intel i5 750, with 4GB memory previously. I spent only small amount of money on 8GB RAM extra, and now with 12GB, I am quite happy with Lightroom 4!
Of course you are using MAC, but I think it is worthwhile to upgrade the memory, with little money. However, I am not sure your MAC can detect more RAM than 4G…
My Mac had 8gb (2,2,2,2) and I called this week to upgrade-Apple will look up your model # & let you know what the MAX is-I am adding 2 more 8 GB= 16GB as I guess you have to add evenly-the cost is $200. per 8gb so 400. & I would love to get 16gb but after buying the D800 $400. is going to hurt!!!
I have noticed everything grinds away more slowly since editing all of these huge images so have to increase my memory in hopes of getting back to normal.
Hi Nasim,
Thank you very much for the review and the fantastic images your getting! I’m considering an upgrade from my D7000 to the D800. I shoot both stills and video. I see that the U1 and U2 modes from the D7000 are missing on the D800 which is a shame. Do the Shooting Bank and Custom Settings Bank fill this need or is that something else?
Thank for your time.
Hi Nasim,
Are you experiencing any focus issues with the left most focus point when shooting at 18mm-50mm, at apertures 1.4 to 2.8 at subjects farther that 10 feet? There are considerable amount of reports stating that the left most focus point in not nearly as accurate as the rest of them.
@312 (Tinkers’ Realm). If you want to save lots of $ do NOT buy memory from Apple. Same thing here and easy to install: www.macsales.com/
This is where everybody (esp pros) buys their Mac upgrades. Apple is a ripoff when it comes to extras.
Best of luck.
Wow-It is alot less $ but it only shows 4gb avail & not the 8gb cards-I will defintiely bookmark this for future!
Thanks!
OK- my model # shows as an iMac 11,3 and I did locate this memory that is half of what Apple was going to charge-Do you know if this is considered a good quality memory?
OK- my model # shows as an iMac 11,3 and I did locate this memory that is half of what Apple was going to charge-Do you know if this is considered a good quality memory?
16.0GB (8GBx2) PC3-10600 DDR3 1333MHz SO-DIMM 204 Pin CL9 SO-DIMM Memory Upgrade Kit
Item Number: OWC1333DDR3S16P | View Product Details | Availability: Same Day
I can’t Thank you enough for taking the time to point me in the right direction-Literally I am getting DBL the memory for the same price- 32GB for 400. versus: 16gb for 400. that apple mac store was going to charge!!!
Thansk again!
Thank you so much for taking the time to write such a detailed post about the D800. I currently shoot weddings and portraits with a D3 and D700, so this information is helping me to decide if I should upgrade to the D800. Thank you again!
Nasim, when you publish the 85mm 1.8G review then will it be possible for you to compare it with 105mm 2.8 VR Micro. I know that one is faster than the other and once is for macro work so the comparison might not be fair exactly, however, this was exactly the case with 40mm 2.8 micro and 35 1.8DX and for that you did the detailed comparison. I am sure it would have helped those who were deciding between these lenses.
Due to budget constraints and fear of back pain, I do not want to buy too many lenses :). If 105mm micro is marginally inferior than 85mm 1.8G for portraits then overall it would be a better lens for me.
I know that you have been playing with a lot of equipment lately :) and I believe that you have used both of these lenses. I am eagerly waiting for your opinion.
I visited Sergo’s website and found your martial art pics. I loved those pics…and your expressions :)
As a D700 owner, I’ve wrongly assumed that flash exposure compensation was decoupled from exposure compensation – aparently it isn’t on the D800 either, unlike the D4.
Thank you for all of your hard work! I was really hoping the d800 would be phenomenal and with this data my hunches are looking great. Suppose to be here this week Ya hoo. I was planning on selling the d700 but I think I’ll hang on to it and let my daughter get into the dslr world
Sitka, Alaska
Question for Nasim, or anybody that has tried this combo (especially on the D800):
If you must have the reach, which combo would you rather shoot with:
A 70-200 VR II + TC-1.7, or
A 70-200 VR II + TC-2.0?
I understand what each will do to the minimum f-stop. Concerned about picture quality, especially hand-held (will normally be shooting with a speed of 1/3,200 or 1/4,000). The second combo makes the lens a 140-400, and at a lot lower price (and weight!) than the 200-400.
The other option I am considering is a 300 f/4 with a TC-1.4. If use this option it would be the second camera/lens, while the first camera/lens would be the 70-200 VR II, also with a TC-1.4. Again, main concern is picture quality.
Thanks for any feed-back.
WEJ
William, without a doubt, the Nikon 300mm f/4 with the TC-14E II will give you much better results than the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II. I own both and I personally avoid the 70-200mm for birding, because it has no chance against the 300mm.
The only “birds” I will be “shooting” would have to be named Pegasus, as they are all horses. The main issues are photo quality and quick focus, both of which you seemed to like in your reviews of these two lenses. I don’t know how much sports shooting you do, but with polo the horses move quickly, change directions constantly, and the size of the field (300 yards long by 165 yards wide), makes shooting the sport a real challenge. I shoot from mid-field, so that I can get the entire match (most people pick a spot and only cover part of the match).
I have been using the Nikon 80-400, and have about ragged out my lens. Am thinking/planning to switch to two cameras, one with the 70-200 + TC-14, and the other with the 300 f/4 + TC-14. Will leave out details as to why that combo, however will work except when they are too close to the boards (if you would like, I can provide links to some recent shots to show what I mean). I believe that even with the TC-14s, both of these lenses will focus faster than the 80-400. Have been shooting on a D3X, but am upgrading to twin D800s (IF they ever get delivered). Twin D4s would cost way too much.
Thanks again, WEJ
Hi Nasim,
Super report on the D800,very detailed testing,very much appreciated,just wish Nikon would get more into the UK,I have had mine on order since mid February.Afer reading your report I am now counting the days,It look’s to be a Landscapers dream camera.
Thank you for your feedback Douglas. Yes, it is a landscape photographer’s dream camera for sure. Sorry that you have to wait, but it is well worth it! :)
Hi Nasim,
Does your D800 show alignment problems of left bank AF points, like many others in the world in these days? Have you heard about that?
Thank you
F.
Federico, I have seen some reports on this issue, but my D800 does not seem to show such problems. I will be doing some in-depth lab comparisons to test this for sure as soon as I come back from my trip.
Thank you Nasim, I’ll gladly read it!
F.
Great article – thanks! Just a couple of quick points.
I buy the DxO labs argument about reducing SNR by averaging pixels (though it’s important to note that only subsampling of this nature has that effect – just sampling 1 out of every 4 pixels, for example, will have no effect on SNR), but i find normalised DR a slightly pointless statistic. In truth, as evidenced by your examples, the reason most photographers care about dynamic range is because it tells them how much more detail they can pull out of shadows and highlights. In this respect, the raw DR captured by the sensor is what counts, because by the time you sub-sample the image you will already have post processed for the DR you want in the final image. In other words, for dynamic range I’d argue the “screen” DxO labs values are more relevant, because they represent how much real dynamic range is in the raw file for me the play with in post. Looking at those graphs, the D4 has overtaken the D800 by ISO200.
The truth is, every camera sensor (and as you rightly highlight, image processing pipeline) is a trade-off. In the case of very high resolution, you get the option of supreme levels of detail in ideal conditions and equivalent SNR in non-ideal conditions at reference resolution by effectively trading some of that detail for a reduction in your noise floor, but the cost is the massive amount of data the camera has to shift around, and the compromises inherent in smaller photo sites (dynamic range). The alternative is a larger photo site, which has a lower noise floor, more dynamic range, and has much less data to deal with, but doesn’t have the LOD when you want or need it.
Personally i shoot weddings with a D3s, and for me, the D800 most certainly is not the ideal lone wedding camera (i’d definitely like one in the bag for some of it though). But that’s because of how i shoot. Almost everything i do is candid and natural. I don’t use flash except when i have to (and for the few formal/group portraits i do) because 1) it ruins the aesthetic (which is worth the noise-cost imo) and 2) it tells my subject i’m there. I fully respect the fact however that there are togs out there who take a much more conventional approach to weddings (the whole “portraiture on the move” vibe) and there there is definitely a market for that because plenty of clients want it, and that for them, perhaps the d800 is a better compromise. For me, i value the speed and the frame-rate too much, so I’ll be looking at a D4 at some point mainly for it’s low light AF capabilities, which would be invaluable to me. Or perhaps I’ll wait for the D4s ;)
Thank you for this detailed review.
The thing is, why only now we talk about “Resizing/downsampling is normal”? Why we didn’t discuss about this when the D3x came out and didn’t downsample it to match the original D3?
The answer is because many people want the D800 be the ‘be-all, end-all kind of camera-Which of course its not. Go straight to D4 or even a used D3s for ultimate high iso if you need one.
I’m buying the D800 simply not because of downsampling the image just to match the D3/D700. It might okay for those of you who shoots 2-3 images during concerts at high iso. But for paid assignments where i shoot 200-250 images at high iso, the downsampling thing is really wasting my time.
Well, some of us did talk about subsampling as a means to reduce the effect of noise when shooting with a D3x ;)
But you’re absolutely right: you should buy the camera which fits your requirements. If you need to be shooting at high iso all the time, buying a camera like the d800 which captures oodles of detail, just to throw that detail away in order to reduce noise, is self defeating. I think the point about the d800 is you can – to some extent – have the best of both worlds. Or, better put, you don’t have to trade off high iso performance completely to get that extra detail. If most of your shooting requires the extra detail and you only shoot high iso occasionally, then the d800 is a great compromise. If you don’t really need the extra detail and you shoot low light all the time and need the speed, then the d4 is the better choice. Course, the D4 is a lot more expensive too.
I agree with you entirely that capturing all that detail purely to throw it away in sub-sampling is inefficient. You buy a d800 because most of the time you want that extra detail. It just so happens that what you also get is a pretty competent low light shooter too for those odd times you do it.
David, I did talk about the D3x downsampling process before, that it matches the D3 at the same resolution. And many other people talked about the same thing on other websites and public forums. This has been a known solution to reducing noise and many photographers that own the D3x know it. Simply because the D3x was not such a popular camera due to its high price, it did not get as much attention and coverage as the D800.
The downsampling process is built into both the camera and all post-processing software packages like Lightroom and Photoshop. You can shoot in medium/low size JPEG, which automatically does this for you inside the camera, or you can do it while exporting images out of Lightroom.
Nice Review Nasim. Eagerly waiting for the updates. You mentioned that you used faster than 1/f shutter speed to get rid of the blur due to camera shake. How fast did you actually go? Did you actually find a pattern?
Girish, yes, in some cases I had to go 50% to 100% faster shutter speed to get sharp images at 100% view. It really depends on the focal length, shutter speed, etc. At fast shutter speeds above 1/500, it is generally not a problem.
Nasim thank you for your excellent review. Have you noticed any of the AF issues which have been mentioned here and there across the net. I know most of these sort of “issues” tend to be non-issues associated with user error but in this instance I have seen a couple of respected individuals mention this. The issue seems to be with focus issues on the left and mid-left focus points producing out of focus isssues. This seems to be particularly the case with wide angled lenses ( wider than 24mm )
One report is saying that NPS in his area has been asked to forward these reports for Nikon HQ to investigate. They seem to be taking these reports seriously.
Any ideas?
William
There are SERIOUS problems with this camera and the confirmed defects are climbing and being reported daily. Some of them are not immediately apparent and develop with time. It is my belief that the firmware and possibly even some of the hardware will have to be repaired or redesigned. I just cancelled my order for a D800E from B&H but have an order at a local store where I will get a D800 or D800E whenever any more are received.
I am a Nikon sychophant and will never buy anything that isn’t Nikon, but it is still plain that the D800 family is a horrid PR and technical problem for Nikon that needs resolution. We can only hope it is soon.
BTW I did receive a D800 in the initial shipment but it was defective and I returned it immediately.
Please note that some observations are exaggerated in some public forums. There are many happy D800 owners who do not seem to have any problems with AF. Let’s give it some time and see if the occurrences are small or if the issue affects every single D800 out there. If every D800 has an AF issue, Nikon will recall the camera.
Nasim:
I love your review but note I said some, and those reporting problems now are people with D800[s] whose cameras seemed perfect at first. I often see posts from Canon owners who despise and ridicule Nikon. They are easy to identify.
The very fact that there effectively is no second shipment, yet, speaks for itself. All Nikon admits to is “production problems” which could be almost anything. I hope the guy responsible for Nikon PR takes some anti-ulcer medicine. He may need it.
William, so far focusing seemed to be fine on my Nikon D800 and I have been shooting a lot with it. I have not performed any in-depth lab tests with focus charts to test AF sensors yet, but will as soon as I come back from my trip to Europe.
Dear Nasim,
First of all thank you for your efforts. I am pretty happy with my D800 and could find no errors so far.
One thing struck me however. It may be that it is quite normal, perhaps you are familiar with the problem. If I am shooting in portrait or landscape format and try to focus on exact horizontal objects or lines for example edges of flat objects, then the camera can not focus. But if If I hold the camera in 15-20 degree angle then the camera focuses correctly. Is this normal or an error?
Thanks for that, Nasim. I will look forward to your tests on your return. As you say, many users seem to be very happy with this camera and I am mad keen to get one, but just getting a little concerned as these reports seem to be getting more numerous. Of course the internet is a bit of a minefield so I’ll look out for your report with interest.
Enjoy Europe. I’m in London and at the moment the weather could be an awful lot better ;-)
Thanks again
William
Hi,
Thanks for the great article and photos.
I think that the D800 will shoot 6 fps in the 1:2 crop which is ~21 mp(?). If this is the case, wouldn’t this be the preferred mode for higher fps? Also, as I have not found an illustration of the crops available, what are the dimensions of this crop?
Thanks for your attention to this post.
Donn
Well, just ignore my previous post, silly question.
For what it’s worth, it looks like it does 6 fps only in Dx mode, but is does do 5 fps in 1.2x which is 3×2 and 25 mp.
My D800 has literally Frozen up on me twice & would not shoot/focus at all-I turned it off once & that worked but the 2nd time I had to remove the battery & restart!
See my post #344. You are not alone. I have seen several posts re D800 with this problem.
What should we do-my camera store is not going to take mine back & if I contact Nikon I am concerned that they will take it in for repair & dismantle it but that does not always fix an issue & causes other issues???
That is truly sad. The ONLY reason I buy locally [California] is because the store absolutely backs their sales. This means I pay a whopping almost 8 percent sales tax, but local GOOD camera stores deserve support. I canceled my order with B&H for a D800E because it will probably take forever to get it from them due to high demand. I’m still waiting for my local camera store to get a second shipment so I hopefully get a WORKING D800 or D800E [whichever arrives first is mine]. Very frustrating.
I had to get my first (inoperative) D800 at Best Buy due to a screw-up at my preferred local store. Even good stores sometimes screw up. I returned the one I bought at Best Buy with no problem after a few days of frustration trying to get LR4 or Capture 2 NX to work properly or at all with the bum D800 I purchased at Best Buy.
I am also fortunate because there is an AUTHORIZED Nikon repair facility in nearby Sacramento. I will NEVER send a camera to Nikon USA for any reason. One time was enough to cure me forever [I had a lens out in the 110 degree heat and the chip blew]. They are ridiculously slow. I had the “skin” replaced on my grandson’s D200 at the repair facility in Sacramento in less than 5 working days and at that they had to order the skin. My love for Nikon does not include their repair facility. Good luck.
Hello Nasim
Thank you for your great information on D800. Which lens will perform good with D800 for wedding? I know that 50mm 1.8G is a great prime lens but what about wide angle?
Thanks
Dear Nasim, Italy I follow your comments and find them very interesting and instructive. Thank you. I would ask your advice. For about a year with great satisfaction using a D7000 and now I’d like to go to the FX format. What do you recommend I take a 36Mp D800 even if I seem too much, or look out of the next FX (D400?) With maybe 24 Mp? Thanks again and best regards.
GianCarlo.
Another test that could be run:
Pick a static scene “S”, shoot the scene in each available ISO (100, 200, etc) in 12-bit NEF. Then shoot the exact set of shots again in 14-bit NEF. The question is this: Is there an ISO level (“X”) at which there is no longer a benefit to shooting at 14-bit NEF, or will the higher bit rate always give you at least some benefit?
Thanks,
WEJ
www.dxomark.com/
81… :) is this a mistake or what
Great reviews. I plan to move from 5DMKII to D800. Thank a lot for the reviews
Hi Nassim
Ive been reviewing various cameras making my decision on which camera I’m planning to purchase someday and I have decided on getting the D800 but I’ve been hearing about a problem with the LiveView interpolation issue and wondering if you encountered this problem on your D800 and what your take is on this and what solutions can be done to work around the issue as my sight isn’t very good thru the viewfinder and I rely on Live View mostly to focus and check sharpness… here is a link to see what this poor LV interpolation looks like as this person describes it…
D800: Poor LiveView interpolation
www.dpreview.com/forum…t/41042567
Thanks,
TimR
Tim, see point #16 in the above review – I specifically mention this issue.
This gem is not available anywhere in Toronto. Everyone is taking back-orders and even then, they aren’t promising that they could deliver in 3 or 4 months (may be after summer). I ordered mine on Henry’s Camera Store for $3380. Anyone get it in Toronto or surrounding area’s?
Very helpful review. I’m on my way to O’Leary’s Camera World in Cork, Ireland, to pick up my D800 which arrived yesterday. Can’t wait to get my hands on it.
Thanks Nasim, your review and photo samples has convinced me and tilted my decision for D800. I will not wait to order. Now looking forward to your Lens recommendations.
Me too! I would really want some lens recommendations… I am seriously thinking between the f/4 VR II and the f/2.8 without VR options…
Yesterday I was working with my 50mm 1.8 plus the standard VR “kit” lens of the D90 and it is quite clear to me that VR will never be important as a good and FAST lens. The question is – will f/4 be enough in low-light situations? I guess with the good ISO performance of the D800 it’s less of an issue.
Hi Nasim,
I stumbled on your site and found it very very informative. Thank you for your reviews.
I am intending to return to photography (as I missed it so much). I previously owned a D300 and loved it. Now I am considering buying a D800 or a used D3s. My friends is selling me his D3s plus 24-70mm f/2.8 at at almost the price of a b-new D3s.
I would like to get your opinion on the matter.
@Antoni. I’m not Nasim, but I recently sold my D3S for nearly the price of a new one. The situation is that the D4 is in short supply and the D3S is a slightly better low-light camera. IMHO the best deal on a used Nikon is a a D3. Although not quite a D3S, the D3 has a DXOMark score of 81…Which is the same as the newly released Canon 5DMkIII. The pro level shutter of the D3 has a lot of life, so a used D3 with say 75,000 actuations should last you a long time. After selling my D3S and waiting and waiting for either a D4 or a D800E to arrive (still waiting) I was left using a D2X or a D80…and I discovered I had been spoiled. So, I got on-line and found a used D3 with only 5,400 actuations on the shutter. The D3 is a great camera and compares very favorably to the D3S. With the D3S, I limited my max ISO to 6400. With the D3 I obtain comparable quality by limiting my max ISO to 4000. My point is that you can get a D3 for less than half the price of a comparable D3S. What you lose is near a stop of low light capability and the video on the D3 is clunkier… Disclaimer: My comparison of the 5DMkIII is only to illustrate that the the D3 sensor is still relavant.
Dear Nasim:
Given the increased resolution of the D800, do you see any issues using the 16-35 on the D800? In general, how does it perform on the D800? Have you had cause to change your opinion of this lens when used on the D800?
Asking mainly because you point out in the Q&A of the 16-35 review that the Canon 17-40 results may be different because of the difference in resolution between the two systems.
Nasim,
Great review, but I think that is a very small compliment given your high quality & depth of writing.
One quick question, were most of the photos taken with the 24-120 f/4, handheld or tripod based? And would you recommend the 24-120 f/4 or the 24-70 f/2.8, considering only handheld usage?
thanks again,
Anand
Hi Nasim,
thanks for the review .. but now I’m a bit more confuse on what I should get next … Been using a D90 for 3 years now and planning to move to full frame in the next couple of months ..
Now I know there’s no Jack of all trades .. mostly of my photography is Architecture and landscapes (some wildlife/birds) but I do also photojournalism and portraits .. planning to do more b/w nudes too …
I was considering to get a used D3S or D3X .. or eventually a D4 if I can stretch my budget .. but now some reviews of the D800 are making me a bit confused .. on one side you have the tons of details of 36MP that are great for landscape and architecture .. on the other .. the low light noise is handled much better by the the D3 or D4 .. with less colour aberration too ..
The D3 has the advantage of having real field testing from lots of photographers .. and all of them love it .. the D800 and D4 are still a bit of a surprise …
What would you suggest? thank you for reading.
Any D800E review in the horizon? My D800 is still in the waiting list, but the people who already got the D800E report some visible improvement in sharpness with the E compared to the D800. Would love your feedback on this.
Oded, I have not received my copy of the D800E yet :( Still waiting in queue, hopefully will get it soon!
Hello Nasim,
Firstly thanks for sooo much information between this blog and the other discussion of 800 vs 800E.
Also, to the blog participants have added so much with their questions and frequent answers.
It seems that most questions/concerns are compared to owners of ‘other’ digital cameras. Well, I’m still a MF film holdout. My Fuji 645w is an easy companion, and the tripod is a third arm. The Canon 5d and nex7 has not made me a convert. Have never had an exposure problem at 400 so 3200 is alien to me. Am an older amateur and not really interested (or competant) in the digital darkroom. BUT it is an expensive hobby with film at 10.00 and processing and digital to HRes at 25.00 per.
But D800 and good glass is $5,000.00. That is still a lot of film buying and processing.
So, what’s a senior to do? Could I use this new Nikon w/out having to take a college class in photo-shop (I use ACDS and can do basic stuff) Am 90% satisfied with WYSIWYG.
Again, thanks for an informative review and lively discussion blog.
Hi Nasim,
Many thanks for the interesting and informative review. I look forward to the updates!
A non-technical question: where did you take the sample shots which show the amazing rock formations? Particularly the ones with the wafer thin slabs of rock sitting atop other rocks?
Best wishes,
Tom
No need to reply – just found it: Bisti Badlands.
May I also say that this is the most refreshingly well-mannered photography forum I have ever read. Well done for cultivating an atmosphere of mutual respect!
Hi Nasim
Any idea when you are going to bring out, if at all, a comparison between D800 & D800E? Mainly interested in differences in image quality.
Cheers
Amitava
Can you confirm whether or not D800 acts the same as my D700 & D300, in regards to result of setting AF-C & AF-S to FOCUS, & the AF Activation to AF-ON only, in the single & dynamic area selections. I find on the D700 & D300 that by using this system that the VR can be engaged whilst the focal point is out of focus, & then pressing the AF-ON button, the camera will fire as focus is acquired. I have read that the D800 will fire on the shutter button if set up this way, even when out of focus, unless the AF-ON button is held in. This means that to let VR settle you must half press the shutter button while holding in the AF-ON, before finally pressing fully the shutter button. I have found my way very good, & it works very well with flash. When in a hurry it is quiet hard to only hold a half press.
Hi Nasim
Sorry for my previous post seeming to be curt.
I find your web site very informative & interesting, & have learnt from it.
Thanks & keep up the good work.
Not sure if these images have been sharpened, but everything looks cut-out, especially the landscape shots.
Nathan, yes, I did apply some sharpening to images while exporting out of Lightroom. But the images look fine on my monitors…
Well impressed of this review. I like the detailled info, most of all the comparisons between different types of Nikon itself and other major brands.
Thanks for the effort… :-)
Thank you for your feedback Patrick!
Hi Nasim,
I’ve been waiting on the sidelines for years, hoping an (affordable?) hi-rez full frame Nikon would come along. I think the wait may be over. Now I’m concerned that certain old Nikkor lenses that I’ve been preserving might be too long in the tooth to measure up to the capabilities of the D800. For instance, my Nikkor 400mm f/3.5 IF-ED. How do you think this would fare, especially in conjunction with a Nikkor 2x teleconverter?
Thanks!
-Doug
Doug, you would be surprised just how well some of the older lenses work with the D800. I don’t know about the 400mm f/3.5 in particular, but give it a try – you might love the results!
First very nice review. Thank you for taking your valuable time in doing this for us. I was wondering if you had considered doing an image comparison between the D800/800e and the D4? That would be very helpful for me as I am considering a D4 as well, but would like to see how they compare before making that additional purchase.
Thanks, Chris
I am considering the same thing.
Chris, I have not received the D4 or the D800E yet. I will be doing a comparison as soon as I receive them. The Nikon D4 is very similar in high ISO performance as the D3s, so you can look at the D800 vs D3s comparison and make your judgement…
Thanks Nasim for your very down to earth & balanced review. I only read it well after buying my D800 just out of interest, and haven’t read many of the 383 previous comments, but thought I could make some practical comments on the camera from a user’s point of view.
I came from many years of film, then D70, D200, D7000. I shoot lots of different styles, weddings, portraits, landscape, performance, so an all-round camera is required. All of the aforementioned cameras did their jobs, just requiring more or less input, compromise, invention, etc to achieve results. Financially, the 6MPx D70 was the most spectacular when I sold many k$s of landscapes (A3+ & A1) & am still selling them. But when I saw the D800, I realized I could do everything with that camera. I’m not into spray & pray, when I want a dancer at the top of a splits leap, I time it, I don’t do much sports but still if I watch the action, I get the shot. This comes from using film with only 36 exposures available. So when I read the specs for the D800, it seemed to fill the bill. This is how I use it: Landscapes, 36MPx raw. Weddings, raw + jpg small fine (9MPx perfectly good for an album) & only use the raw for full page spreads or to recover a mistake (wrong white balance, u/o exposure). This makes workflow quick & easy. Portraits, architecture, raw. For all other work jpg large fine. My main lens is a 24-70 f2.8 which is perfect for this camera in that if I pixel-peep, there is only one undecided pixel between one side of an edge & the other. This is as good as is possible as a point of light cannot be expected to land exactly on one pixel. If light conditions are bad, ISO6400 is fine at 9MPx. Much, much better than the 10MPx D200 at max ISO. So far I’ve hardly had to touch images in PS as exposures & white balance have been fantastic. Overall, this camera is simply mind-blowing. And for all those people worrying about file size, adjust to your needs & there is always the 36MPx when & if you need it.
John, thank you so much for your feedback! Looks like you have the same experience as me with the camera – I also find it to be phenomenal.
I have a comment for those folks who are wondering whether or not a specific lens will work well with the D800. The answer IMHO is that any lens you own will preform at least as well with the D800 as it does with your current camera. If you are currently printing 11 x 17 with that lens, then the D800 results at 11 x 17 will be at least as good. The worst case scenario is the one in which on your current body, IQ is already limited by the lens. In this case you may see some improvement with the D800 (due to more information for sharpening etc.) but switching to the D800 will still leave you limited by the capability of the lens. While the D800 may allow you to more readily see imperfections associated with a lens, the image at a given size will not be worse… However, if you wish to extract everything you can from the sensor and print at 60×40 inches the difference in glass will become evident. It is difficult for anyone to guess how well a given copy of a lens will preform. My advice would be to buy the body, and if it turns out you aren’t happy with some of your glass, you can look at replacing lenses over time. You aren’t going to get a lower IQ than you already have, and you may be pleasently suprised.
Eric, thank you for your valuable comment, I agree with you.
Hi Nasim,
Someone on a Nikon list has just published the fact that the D800 also activates VRII with the AF- ON button, can this be true?
Sorry cant test at the moment due to lack of VR lenses.
Regards
Michael
Michael, yes, I have just tested it and it is true – VR is activated when you hold the AF-ON button! Tested this with the 70-200mm VR II.
Lens question:
Has anyone tried shooting the D800 with the Nikon 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 lens? My concern is that the D800 may not have the strength to power this lens, due to its smaller battery (focus speed main concern). I currently use as the primary lens on my D3X for horse polo, and it works quite well on that camera.
On my D3X, I tried shooting a 70-200 with a TC-14, however it did not seem to work that well in poor light (very cloudy day, with slight rain). I also shot a 300 f/4 with a TC-14, and again was not satisfied with the results. The 80-400 seems to me to focus faster than either of those two lenses (when they had TCs on them), perhaps because it is not using a teleconverter.
Thanks,
WEJ
Williams, AF goes pretty well on D700 with 80-400, even without battery grip, so why not on D800? Sure, if you need a lightning fast AF you should better chose another lens (i.e. 80-200 AF-S or 70-200 VR and TCs…)
F.
William
I have a D800 and the Nikkor 80-400mm zoom. I used both on a shoot in South Africa recently and did not find any problems with battery life. The auto focus systen perfomed very well.
Rodger
Battery life is not the issue. The problem is focus speed and accuracy. With my D800, the 80-400 (when shooting horse polo) was too slow to respond. Had no such problem with the D3X. I always shoot with review off, and can easily get 4K plus shots on a battery.
Great review Nasim. Thank you.
I have the Nikon D800 and wanted to know the difference between shooting 14-bit RAW : Lossless Compressed (41.3MB) versus Uncompressed (74.4MB) modes. Is the benefit of shooting RAW uncompressed worth dealing with a much larger file?
Please enlighten us. Thanks again
There is no difference in the image quality when you are shooting lossless compressed or uncompressed. I have seen tests that state that the D800 can write an uncompressed file (to a fast card) quicker than it can compress and write. Consequently, using raw uncompressed should allow your buffer to clear faster. … I don’t see a need for shooting uncompressed unless you are intending to use the D800 for repeated maximum frame rate bursts, then you might gain a bit.
Hi Nasim, very impressive review it’s unbelievable you went to all the comparisons and details. I am sold D800 is the way to go! Do you think this will be awesome to use in stitched panorama with a Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 lens?
Well done ! – it is great to have so much information and breadth of opinions on what appears to be a stunning camera …. I think it’s time to go try one and see for myself !
Nasim, Thank you for all the research…. you mean you enjoy it ? !!
It amazes me how many people are willing to discard the D800 because of high pixel density and noise that ‘might’ come with it… I got my D800 2 weeks ago and the detail it produces is unseen in the FF segment. But the real kick is the dynamic range! I’d never sacrifice that over shooting at ISO 100000 that will yield pictures you can only look at on a mobile phone screen while drunk.
I love night photography, but even for that I never go higher than ISO 400. Use better glass, a tripod and a wireless flash. That’s the way produce stunning pictures that can be printed on billboards ;).
The high ISO discussion has about the same value as the one about gold-plated HDMI cables…
gorgeous pics… what lenses did u use for the pics of this review?
Thanks for such a detailed and professional review. I used to follow Ken Rockwell, but you seem to know your stuff better. Rockwell is a bit amateur at times. I like how you’re very scientific and unbiased in your reviews!
Great review and amazing photos!
I wish that you could put some captions under your photos that say where and how they were taken.
I think people would like to know…
Nasim,
Just retread your review and am very excited that I will be receiving my D800 in the next few days. While waiting for my new camera I used my D7000 on a recent trip to Hawaii shooting with the 16-35 f/4, 24-120 f/4 (both purchased in anticipation on the D800) and the 70-200 f/2.8. I really took the time to compare lenses this time and was amazed at the sharpness & quality of images that they all produced. I anticipate that these lenses will perform even better on the D800.
yes with the d800 the lens are very good, on a d800 and d7000 PS i love the d7000
yes with the d800 the lens are very good, on a d800 and d7000 PS i love the d7000 the d800e is a joke
…the d800e is a “joke”??
— interesting why so many pros are choosing this above the d800…
UNBELIEVABLE!!!!
My D800 (which I only ordered two weeks ago just arrived yesterday) as did my D4 (which i ordered the first day of pre ordering.
I am psyched about the D800 but rather blasé about the D4 .Even though I love the idea of 10 fps, image quality to me is more important. I will have to do some quick tests, but am thinking of returning the D4 unopened and purchasing another D800 (maybe even the E, although I don’t like to deal with moire and realize it cannot truly be fixed by software.)
4fps with a motor drive on a Nikon F or F2 when I first started out in photography was fast enough in those days of film (which I miss – especially that Panatomic X,) even for sports and wildlife. Honestly, why do we need 10fps?. I still believe in composing and waiting for the right moment. In sports, wildlife, and even riots…
Will make my decision soon! Curious whether other shooter prefer the D800 over the (heavy) D4.
you have to much money dude… buy hasselblad :D
And you should go back to school dude: TOO much money and not TO much money
well a mistake?!
i know that my education grad is higher than yours… and that kind of childish behave or you are just an asshole, with TOO much money.
I am an amateur canon user who primarily takes pics indoors… family etc. I currently shoot with a 5d mk2.. love it to death. Now the D800 is making me want to buy one. The question is whether it makes sense to hold on to the canon with all its lenses or just jump ship? Is there a huge difference (for an amateur) between the mk2 and the d800? I am not talking very technical stuff, but I dont see my self using a tripod very often unless its a family portrait. I need some advice if I should get a d800 or be happy with my mk2 with the few lenses I have. I have a tamaron 28-75 f2.8 xrdi (my daily lens), a 70-200 f/2.8L, a 50mm f/1.8 and a 100mm f/2.8 macro.
thanks
Ragz
Only you can really answer this question, but ask yourself why you are considering changing. My guess is that resolution isn’t an issue for you as the 5DmkII has plenty of pixels for the type of photography you are doing. Increased color depth? Dynamic range? Improved noise? These all might be an issue for you, but for many the capability of the D800 will go largely unrealized. In looking at your lens collection, there seems to be an opportunity to improve your glass. There is a reason why Canon, Nikon, Zeiss glass is more expensive than other brands. My point is that upgrading your glass may be a worthwhile investment, and if such is your inclination then your current lenses may be less of a consideration for the brand switch. In order to get the most out of the D800 or the 5DmkII or 5DmkIII you really need excellent glass. If you want to have the capability of the D800, then also consider the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8. A less expensive alternative might be a set of 3 Nikon f/1.8 primes (28 f/1.8G, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G). Ultimately most serious photographers end up with a much larger investment in lenses than they do in their camera bodies and it is really hard to justify the $ for new glass. As an example, the Nikon zoom “trinity” set of 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 would have a combined value of nearly $6300. A dedicated birder or surf photographer might have nearly $10k in a 600mm f/4. You might also consider upgrading to the 5DmkIII ($3500) and keeping your glass. Or for the same $3500, you could get the D800 and a 50mm f/1.4G lens. So, my suggestion would be to buy the D800 and 50mm f/1.4G lens. Shoot the D800 and the 5DmkII in a head to head comparison and see what you like best. If you don’t feel that there is enough of a difference for you and your needs, sell or return the Nikon equipment and stick with what you have.
I have a Nikon d80 currently and hate the low light performance and am disappointed with overall performance. Only been using it this long as I don’t have much money. I have a few lenses sigma 105mm f2.8 macro, sigma 10-20mm f3.5, tokina 80-200mm f2.8, and the standard Nikon 18-55 vr and 70-300. I love macro and landscape and often take photos in a dark church with a huge variety of lighting. Love to print my macro and landscape big and am very fussy with sharpness, but only use my high iso shots for small posters and web. I also love night time photos especially lightning, so I’m considering the d7000, d700, d3s, and d800. What will best suit me? Your advice is appreciated and even tips on my next lens purchases would be great :) thanks
Dear all,
Has anyone received any further information on an upcoming “D600” that shall be positioned slightly below the D800?
Best, Christian
The rumors I have seen are that it is to be an entry level FX body. Perhaps 24mp (D3X sensor?). Here is the link to the Nikon Rumors page:
nikonrumors.com/2012/…pecs.aspx/
Hello Nasim,
This is a wonderful site indeed and I am only sorry I did not stumble upon it earlier! I have two samples of the D4, and one sample of the D800. One of my D4 and my D800 has the left AF point issue, and it is especially pronounced with my 24mm f/1.4 G. The test is very simple and does not require any test charts. I basically set my camera on a tripod, selected center AF point, then right most and left most AF points; I focused by pressing the shutter, and then used self-timer to actually take the photo. then I repeated the test with Live View AF. The results were consistent with the reports that I read on the web. At f/1.4, there is substantially noticeable focus issue with the left most AF point; in live view, all three photos were perfectly focused. This problem does not exist on my sample of the D3x, the other D4, or my D7000 using the same lens. This problem also does not exist with my 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S or any lens with 2.8 or smaller aperture.
I took my D800 back to Nikon USA (in El Segundo). They are just 5 minutes from where I live. At first, they returned the camera to me with no adjustments, noting that the AF performance was within factory tolerance. After I asked to speak with the supervisor, and demonstrated the problem to him in person, he acknowledged there may be a problem. Th stickiness of this issue is that this is NOT a AF fine tune issue. Because the center and right most AF points do not have the problem; it is only with the left bank of AF points. The supervisor said he will do an elaborate focus calibration on my sample of D800 and see if that solves the problem, and I am awaiting for the results to decide whether to return my D4 that shares the same problem or have Nikon try to fix it as well. At a minimum, it would seem that is problem is not a myth and is common, but may not be universal as some suggest but to really detect this problem you need to have a 24mm f/1.4 G. With the 85mm f/1.4 G, I found the focus even at center AF point to be inconsistent, and like some have reported on the web, I found the LCA problem with the D800 + 85mm f/1.4G that I did not have with my D3x.
I would be interested whether you can conduct a similar test on your sample of the D800 with the 24mm f/1.4G and see if you arrive at the same result. I am hoping the answer is no, then we would know this is a production problem and not a general issue with the D800.
David
Thanks for your observations. I have been waiting for my D800E since Feb 8…I hope I’m getting close. What baffles me is the manner in which the problem seems limited to just one side of the frame. If the center was in focus, I would expect an alignment issue to to result in corresponding problem on the right side of the frame as well. So, engaging in wild and completely unsupported sepculation… I wonder if the problem could be software. Specifically, suppose the Nikon built into its new AF sensor a system that tried to compensate for field curvature. As the lenses get wider, the field curvature becomes greater and as the the aperture is farther open DoF drops… It might be that there is an experimental software routine that was inadvertantly enabled for one side of the AF sensors, but not the other. If such is the case, then the question is whether the AF module software can be updated. This brings up the question as to how universal the problem is and whether or not there is sample to sample variability. You would expect a software issue to affect all cameras with the variation being attributable to sensor alignment. It seems possible that in evaluating a modification to the AF module a easy way to test it would be to apply the software to a subset of the AF sensors thus allowing an esay comparison of the results…. If an experimental piece of code was inadvertantly left in the AF software, then this odd behaviour could perhaps be explained. Thanks again for you observations and thanks again to Nasim.
Thank you for explaining the process as I have dreaded even trying to determine if mine is defective as I suspect that it is based off a few images. Will you please clarify for me what you mean when you say after selecting center AF you right most & left most? Does that mean after setting center AF-snap a pic & them=n take a pic at each af points to the right & left so that I end up with a batch of images to look over & then repeat w/Mup?
I have both the 24m & 85mm so will try it with both.
Thanks in advance for the clarification.
Hi Tinkers,
Here are some reports on the web that explains the test (probably better than I can):
www.falklumo.com/lumol…nsors.html
And here is some discussion by Mien on the various lens + D800:
blog.mingthein.com/2012/…rformance/
Hope that helps!
Thanks for the links David-I will read them tomorrow & try to test my D800!
well–just got my D800–took some shots, started to crop and the shots are not in focus–they are soft. I contacted Nikon, they were great–had me send three shots in and now I am waiting to do whatever they tell me. Stay tuned!
Hello Nasim and the mansurovs.com community,
I very much enjoy this forum as I feel it is an excellent source of information with some very knowledgeable forum members.
I am hoping to clarify a difference between the 5D MKIII (or Canon in general) and the D800 (or Nikon in general). The difference is in regards to an apparent colour reproduction problem as exemplified in the Dave Dugdale investigation of both systems (see video here: vimeo.com/41756540. I have been lucky enough to briefly handle the 5D MKIII and the D800 and although I lean towards Nikon the difference in colour is an issue that I found to be true.
Much like Dave, I am an amateur entering the world of Full frame Professional Cameras for the first time and I found myself saying the same thing Dave did “Maybe I’m just an amateur, but I just couldn’t get the D800 to whitebalance correctly”. I could easily draw a conclusion like Dave did where he simply went for the 5D MKIII. In post, I could get the colour to look more natural once I had spent a few minutes with the Lightroom sliders, whereas the Canon looked more or less “right” out of camera with minimal intervention. Why is this?
I have not had the opportunity to fully test either camera but I would very much like to understand what gives the Nikon a “Greenish Tint”? What attracted me to mansurovs.com was when I saw the brilliant photos that were taken with Nikon gear, it made me happy but frustrated at the same time. Is the D800 a more sensitive tool where there needs to be a custom WB set? There was a blind test where Nasim exemplified this issue (photographylife.com/nikon…n-a-studio) This fun game turned my greatest frustration into reality as the Nikon looks far more neutral, a little bit too much so (although they are all great shots, to taste).
Can anyone shed any knowledge as to the “Canon ‘strong-red-channel'” vs. “Nikon ‘greenish tint'” notoriety?
Louis, I’ve had the D800 for a couple weeks now. The issues you are referring to really only apply to
JPGs. (which are compressed and edited by the camera). To get the full value of a camera like this, you should be shooting in raw. All photographs are then edited to taste in post. The camera will not
automatically output 36MP of sharpness. If you want to use this camera to it’s potential you need to work at it. Pro lenses (really sharp), A tripod, and careful considerations of depth of field. If you are not willing to put the work in than you don’t need a 36 MP camera.
Hi Alan,
I was shooting RAW and JPEG and yes the JPEG were actually pretty wild on both bodies. I found that side by side shooting RAW the D800 leaned towards green whereas the 5DMKIII had a prominent red. That’s the issue that I have been trying to get my head around, this was noticeable out of camera.
I certainly understand the accuracy that the D800 calls for and I only got to take some indoor pictures at the store while the Nikon rep described the features with the 24-70 2.8. Pictures were very impressive, but perhaps the issue was the ‘bad’ lighting the D800 WB was trying to deal with. I know that in RAW WB is yours to make as you wish, I just spent quite a bit less time with the 5D MKIII trying to get the color to look “right”.
I had a thought that this might be monitor calibration, maybe the Nikon is more accurate with less contrast and less reds.
I own the D800 as well as a D7000, D3100, and V1. All behave the same in regards to White balance and the Picture settings. Canon uses a different approach and thus out of the box will look different in regards to the JPGs each produce. Both cameras allow the user to greatly modify the appearance of the JPG output to suit ones own taste. I am mostly familiar with the NIkon set up and over the years have tweaked my settings to my own taste. What I really like is that all my Nikons have the ability to be set in the same way and thus I get consistent results when changing camera bodies. In my case I have white balance set to A2,M-1. I use the Standard picture setting with Sharpening at +6 and color at +2. Other settings are the default ones.
As to RAW, I am working myself there slowly but surely. It will take time for computers to get better at processing such large RAW files but I am patient as I am in this for the long haul.
John, Computers are there already it might be all you need is an upgrade.
Alan, did you have to upgrade to handle the D800 files? If so, do you care to share what specs you find adequate for the D800 files?
Luis, Uploads take a little longer especially if you are converting to DNG (no big deal). If you choose “lossless compression” on uploading raw files it will save you about 40% disc space without any loss in resolution. Editing in “Camera Raw 7” doesn’t cause any noticeable delays.
I am using a Mac Pro 2.66ghz Quad core.
That’s a good tip! I have LR4 and it includes import options, I will have a look, it’s Camera RAW 7 underneath, I believe. I run a 2009 iMac 3.06Ghz Core2Duo topped up with 16GB of RAM, I’m hoping not to upgrade quite yet.
Do you calibrate your monitor(s)? I’m wondering if the iMac is calibrated out of the box or if I should look to calibrate it properly.
Hi John,
Very nice camera gear you have! I think Nikons are very consistent. I had a chance to shoot with a D300S and a D7000 and I thought they were both very good, with the D7000 being awesome I would say. Then I did a shoot with a D700 for my son’s martial arts class and WOW I couldn’t turn off the way the FF sensor helped the depth of field and made shadows look so 3 dimensional.
I have requested a loan from Nikon as the local rep is awesome and an enthusiast for Nikon like no other. He said I could borrow a D800 for a day I just would need to find the lenses. I have a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 lined up from a photographer friend of mine, I really would like to dig in to some settings at that point but ultimately shooting RAW so I don’t know how much the picture settings will help.
Thanks for your input!
I have the 70-200 2.8 and as others have said, this lens is just perfect with the D800. Slightly less contrast and slightly less sharp in the corners at f2.8 but from f4 to f11 just stunning sharpness with beautiful bokeh. A very 3d effect! I also have the 14-24 2.8 and sent it back for repair after putting it on the D800. Very soft in the corners. The folks at Lens Rentals where I bought the lens agreed and have repaired the lens for me. I get it back this Friday. I also use the 50mm f1.8 and the same story of stunning sharpness from f4 to f11.
I think the biggest disappointment with the D800 is the realization that often you just don’t need all that sharpness! But maybe in the future when there are computer monitors with 30mp or more pixels, the true beauty of this camera will be realized. For now getting 20×30 or larger prints is the only way to really see what 36mp can do for you.
By the way, I did my own noise comparision with the D800 Vs the D7000. Using both in the DX mode high ISo comparision favored the D800 by 2/3rd stop. I would have thought they would have been equal. When doing the comparison using FX and then downsampling to the D7000 16mp the advantage is close to 2 stops in favor of the D800.
That is very interesting about the D800 vs D7000 in DX mode, Nasim said it’s a waste to buy the D800 for DX but I had thought of using the D800’s DX mode with the 16-35 F4 for general shooting and having something like the 35 1.4 and the 105 2.8 Macro for paid work… I like the 35 1.4 and the 100 2.8 Macro on the 5D MKIII I liked those 2 focal lengths on a FF sensor.
The D7000 is such a fantastic camera but I know I will regret not going full frame in the long run… Now there’s this talk about a D600 FX for USD $1500 24MP, it would be something to explore if it were true.
I have only one DX lens, the 16-85mm. I tried it on the D800 and found that you can either have the camera automatically crop by 1.5 or you can try full frame. So when I did the full frame option I was a bit surprised in how much larger the actual image captured was over the arbitrary DX crop mode. What you get in the FX mode is an image that looks like the early Color TV’s of the 60’s. The image goes from top to bottom but has a circular shading on the sides. What final pixel count you get depends upon what crop ratio you pick. Go with a square and you can get 20mp! Do a 16×9 and you can get 16mp! Crop 8×10 vertically and you get the total height of the full frame. (camera in horizontal position) These are more pixels than I can get with the D7000
The amount of “extra area” you can get depends upon the focal length, fstop etc. that you pick. I did a close up flower photo at 85mm and had rather realistic shading but only in the corners.
The sharpness of the 16-85 held up well in the areas outside of the DX crop. Sure, a real
FX lens would be better but if you do not have such yet you can still have fun.
Luis
While I thought Dave Dugdale did a nice job, I would have weighted his results differently. In addition to the resolution, the dynamic range and color depth of the D800 are superior to the 5DmkIII, and for me that is much more important than high ISO video noise. Mr. Dugdales intended use is focused more towards the video as opposed to Landscapes etc.; recall that his website is LearningDSLRVideo.com … his focus is video. As far as the white balance is concerned, He was evaluating “Auto” white balance…I’m not certain why it looked so far out on his white balance test, but seemed fine on all of the other examples. I really haven’t seen the color that far out. While it may be the the auto white balance responses are different under the conditions tested, I only use Auto for these situations where the lighting is odd anyway…and even then I shoot in raw a correct in post. As for the red issue with Canon sensors, here is a great article that talks about the design philosophy between Nikon and Canon sensors: www.dxomark.com/
This is a technical article that actually looks at the spectral response of the different colored pixels of somewhat older cameras. It provides insight into why the D800 color depth and dynamic range are better as well as addressing the differences in red response.
Eric, thanks very much for your link and information, This is the answer I was looking for:
“The red channel of the Nikon D5000 shows a typical behavior, but the red channel of the Canon 500D presents a very high mix of red and green. As its sensor is not able to distinguish the little nuances between green and red, the color rendering algorithm of the Canon RAW converter software has to compensate for this lack of color accuracy by applying high gain during color processing.”
This is exactly it, I believe that Canon has made an effort to make this ‘lack of color accuracy’ the standard as this Canon ‘red look’ has the tendency to help skintones. This subtle difference is what I noticed. I have been to DXO mark many times for lens ratings but had not looked to this article.
My take on it then is that Canon lucked out by having this color inaccuracy work in the favor of skintones, unanimously, when I asked my friends and family to tell me which pictures they look better in, they picked the Canon, out of camera.
Admittedly, there was a mix once the images had been processed, but, when one is learning it’s easy to dismiss the advantage of color accuracy as people like to look pink rather than accurate. I can see that we may take advantage of the color accuracy as Nasim exemplifies on this website.
One more thing, if I could trouble you, I have a 2009 iMac, should I be looking to calibrate my monitor?
Hey Luis
Out of camera JPEGs are definitely a consequence of software decisions. When I shoot JPEGs (rarely), I always adjust the in-camera settings. FYI here is a video comparison of the D800 vs the Hasselblad H4D40: www.youtube.com/watch…UBTE4xpvpk . In this comparison, they find that the Nikon is a little too red/magenta as compared to the Hasselblad. My point is that white balance, particularly auto white balance is based on software assumptions. The auto white balance algorithm may be optimized to discern the difference between Tungsten and flourescent or perhaps optimized to discern the difference between shade and cloudcover. The different decisions are going to impact the look of jpegs shot with auto WB. However, if you look at the D800 jpeg comparison at dpreview, its pretty tough to find a significant difference in color between the D800 and 5dmkIII, thus implying the difference seen is probably in the bias of the auto WB algorithm.
In my opinion, you should definitely calibrate your monitor. If you ever want to print your images, having an uncalibrated monitor can be very frustrating. It is very disappointing to have the printed version look way different than what you had seen on-screen. It also a bit painful to find that 3 years of photos suddenly look wrong when you buy a new monitor. Calibrating your display allows you to be certain that what you see is what you want, and makes your images independant of hardware.
I use the Colormunki Photo to calibrate my monitor and to generate my own ICC profiles for each paper and printer I print with. It’s easy to use and the profiles integrate into LR and PS. I have found that even with an inexpensive printer such as an Epson Artisan, I prefer generating my own ICC profiles over using the generic profiles supplied by the paper manufacturers. Since I often print big (40×60 inches is not unusual), getting accurate color the first time matters.
I have also used the Spyder4 Pro which only profiles the monitor. I was happy with it.
I have not used the Colormunki Display monitor profiler, but based on my experience with the Colormunki Photo, if I was going to buy something for only profiling a monitor, this is the unit I would buy.
If you think that you might want to make your own prints for display, I’d get the Colormunki Photo. If you aren’t interested in producing your own prints, then I’d look at the Colormunki Display (even though I haven’t used it). I think the Spyder4 pro is a fine device as well.
Hope that helps
Yes Eric this helps immensely, I’m very grateful for your time. I will look into the Colormunki as I very much appreciate the ability to detach my image colour correction from my hardware.
For anyone looking for further reference, I found this great post here at mansurovs.com
photographylife.com/case-…r-problems
What a great site this is!
Salam Nasim,
Just started following your website and it’s been fantastic reading so far. I’m not sure if someone has asked already but would it be possible to know what lenses and perhaps settings you used for some of your photos?
Thx
Dan, I preserve EXIF data in my images for our readers – see this article I posted a while ago: photographylife.com/what-is-exif-data
Thank you Nasim!
Hi Nasim
That is a great review and outstanding example pics. Can you share the location of these rocks? They looks like around NV/AZ/UT but not sure some of them look different.
Murali, absolutely! The place is called “Bisti Badlands” and it is located in a very remote location of northwest New Mexico.
Thanks Nasim. It’s awesome.
Man, I love this group collaboration thing going on here – big thanks to all those that are helping me out in responding to comments. Your help is very much appreciated!!!
Nasim… Today i did some test with my d800 and 70-200 vr II.
What’s the point to get the 105mm micro when u can have amazing macro pics with a 70-200mm and cropped it beautifully with d800’s 36mp???
Danielle
I’m not Nasim, but I own both lenses. The 105 has a 1:1 maximum reproduction ratio whereas the 70-200 has max ratio of 1:4. So while a macro shot properly framed with the 105 and D800 would give you a full 36mp image, the same cropped shot from the 70-200 would only give you about 9MB at best. Plus, with the loss of pixels you may see more noise and lower detail (depending on the final size used). If your intended use if primarly on-screen (and not huge screens) then cropping should be fine. If on the other hand you want to achieve maximum quality for prints, you might be happier with the added pixels. Having said that, your implied observation that the D800 offers a lot of flexability is right on.
thanks Eric you’re right…
def the 105mm is gonna give you much better quality… i think is gonna be my next lens… just wondering if i really gonna use that much to justify the difference in price between the lens or use my others+cropping
If you’re shooting macros, say under 6 inches in maximum dimmension you will start to see the difference. The 105 is a really sharp lens and great with the D800. Another possibility is the 200 f/4 micro. Greater standoff, but a full stop slower, still 1:1, no VR. If you are shooting flowers, bugs etc, the 105 or 200 micro are great lenses. You could try a set of closeup lenses for your 70-200 to see how often you use them…
I agree with Eric. The micros are far better at getting really close but alternatives for your present lens is either a close-up lens and/or extension tubes. The Canon 500D is a quality close-up lens that can be used on the 70-200 as well as the 105 Micro. If you get it in 77mm you can then use step down rings to use on other size lenses. The Kenko Auto extension tube set comes as a series of 3 different size tubes to increase the magnification of the lens it is used on. I have actually used the close-up lens in conjuction with an extension tube on my 105mm micro to get even closer than 1:1.
Hello,
I have one question and perhaps someone can give me a helpful answer. I am not sure to buy a D800 (actually I own a D7000), because I don’t need the full resolution for every photo. In this case, what is better:
1. To shoot in resolution “M” with a full frame lens or
2. To shoot in “DX mode” with a good DX lens (I own the 17-55 2.8)
Thanks for your help!
Regards
Stefan
Stefan
Because of the number of variables associated with your question, it is difficult to give you a definitive answer. The D7000 is a very capable camera. The D800 is incredible, it has great Dynamic Range, Color Depth, Hi ISO capability, and so forth. But if you aren’t printing large and trying to extract the most from the sensor, the differences in image quality may not be what you will notice most by moving up to a full frame camera. What you might find to be the most exciting aspect of a full frame body is the wider field of view that can be obtained. Nikon’s widest DX lens is the 12-24 zoom. However, this lens on a DX body has an equivalent field of view to that of a 18-36 on an FX body. Lenses like the 14mm f/2.8 or the 14-24 f/2.8 or the 16-35 VR offer perspectives that are unavailable in DX. Your 17 – 55 is comparable to a 25-82 on an FX body. So the answer to your question will really be based on how you intend to use your camera. If you find yourself shooting at 17mm a lot now, then the D800 and some wide glass may be the place you want to be. While there is no problem shooting in DX mode and essentially turning a D800 into a D7000, I expect you will fall in love with the Full Frame viewfinder and quickly begin to desire full frame glass.
Actually the Nikon DX wide angle zoom is now 10-24 or 15-36 in FX terms
Right you are. I had missed that one as I haven’t shot DX in a while. That lens makes the D7000 a lot more attractive if you don’t need the pixels.
Thank you for your wonderful, insightful review. One question, can you clarify what you mean by down sampling the image for comparisons to smaller sensors? Does this just mean for example exporting the image from Lightroom or Photoshop as a JPEG resized to the number of pixels of the smaller sensor?
Thanks, keep up the great work
Eliot
Eliot, yes, you are right – downsampling means resizing to a smaller resolution.
Hi Nasim,
This is probably the best review of D800/E I have read so far online. You have really set the bar up high for all the reviewers out there. I have also read your article on downsampling which is great and I was wondering should I use the same parameters for downsizing D800 images that you have mentioned in your “How to properly resize images in Lightroom”?
Thanks
Gogol
Question:
What is the advantage of shooting in TIFF mode on the D800, as opposed to 14-Bit NEF? Is there more detail (especially shadow recovery) available, or better color, or perhaps some other advantage(s)? I convert my pictures to JPGs using DxO (they finally released modules for the D800), and then sell them on Smugmug (they don’t except TIFF files unless you pay extra). Therefore I ask the question above, especially if the final JPG will not reflect the difference.
Thanks,
WEJ
I would love an answer to this as well.
Hi,
I need some help…I going to new york next month (I live in Venezuela) , It seems that I won’t be able to buy/find the D800. Is it a waste of money to buy the d700 (2200) . Should I wait? ( I have a d90 and I want to upgrade to fullframe)
Thanks ,
Edgar
What’s the main type of photography you do? (sports, photojournalism, wedding, portrait, landscape, etc)
Hi,
landscape, wedding, portrait
Edgar
The D700 is a huge step up from the D90. Full frame aside, the ISO capability will offer you a huge improvement. I would reccomend getting the D700. You will love it. If you find you need the higher resolution, the D700 will always serve well as a second body.
My 0.02$ …
If you are planning to keep the D90, my suggestion is to sell it and go for the D800. That counter intuitive advise has the following justificaiton
– You have a $900 (used) + $2200 D700. The total cost is > the price of D800. The DX capability of the D800 is as good or better than the D90. So, you give up nothing and have a pretty nice camera.
On the other hand, if you are selling the D90 to finance the D700 or if you NEED a backup (meaning you are a pro) then a D700 is sensible.
Hi all,
I’m a D700 user and going to upgrade with the D800, but does the D800 do noise performance really better than the d700?
thanks guys.
Hey there
Yes, but… The D800 is better than the D3 and D700 but not quite as good as the D3S. However, at the pixel level, you might see more noise with the D800 than with the D700. But at the image level, the D800 is clearly better. In other words, framing the same image with a D700 & D800 under the same exposure conditions will yield a lower noise image with the D800 when viewed at the same image size.
I hope when you are comparing the d800 to the d3 and d700 you mean noise level. If that is the case, that’s correct. Matter of fact, some say d800’s noise beat the d4. I shot d800 a few time with 4000-6000 iso (pretty high right? mainly because in door, low light, dance party, you get the idea), and the noise level is amazing. Hardly noticeable, especially considering it’s 36.3 megapixel, which allow some post noise reduction. I highly recommend the d800 Edgar, the d800 is much better for your type of photography, not saying the d700 is bad, but it’s like comparing a mountain bike to a road bike. They are both good “bikes” just different purpose. However, what is in you’re lens bag? Lens make just as much difference if not more. If you don’t have some decent lens, i would go d700 + some sweet lens, and then slowly save up for the d800 and eventually sell or back up your d700. D700 is not a bad camera, with sharp lens and d700, your image would look about the same as d800 with some cheap lens.
I will put my d3x up against the new d800. I think we are all getting so crazy about the latest cameras and thinking that the camera will make you that super photographer. Secondly good quality lenses are much more important when you get up to this level of high end cameras. Maybe we all need to concentrate more on our craft and less on the latest, newest camera body that will be outdated in another year or so.
Hello, and thank you for your time, and responses, I was curious to know if anyone has, or even will use the Nikon D800 with the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8? I plan on buying the Nikon D800 and saving up for lenses when possible, and my sole lens would be the 50mm f/1.8, and I am certain that even though it is a basic lens, it would serve well until then. I am an avid enthusiast and I enjoy using my Nikon D700, with the 50mm, and my favorite Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 MF, with the ability to turn out some very decent keepers! I am considering the D800 for the new features it offers over he D700. Thank you. Yes I am aware that an enthusiast does not need this camera, however, I am only interested in what I want. I actually have a tendency to float toward what is considered the “artistic” side of photography, and I feel the Nikon D800 would help me in that area, and also allow me to print canvas sized if needed. :)
In response your your question about using the 50mm f1.8 with the D800, I have some good news for you. This lens is very, very sharp especially between F4 and F8 . At F2 and F2.8 there is some corner softness (not bad though) and at F11 you will just start noticing diffraction sneaking in. I was so impressed with this simple prime lens that I have ordered the 24mm F2.8 as well. The best zoom currently available (Nikon 24-70 F2.8) has shown not to be as sharp, way bulkier and way more expensive. The only Zoom I have that shines with the D800 is the Nikon 70-200 F2.8. (if you are into animal or bird photography this is the lens you must have! Save up for it and you will not regret getting this lens) Also great is the 2.0 Tele converter although lots of practice is needed to obtain sharp photos.
Is this 50mm F1.8 D or G?
I have heard that 24-70mm is not as sharp and does not seem to be worth the money. On the other hand 70-200mm 2.8 VR2 may well be the best lens Nikon has ever made, certainly the best zoom.
I have the D but there is no optical difference between the two. The 70-200 is my favorite lens. Not light but still easily handheld. The only way to get better quality than this lens is to spend three times as much for lenses that are twice the weight. I use this lens frequently with the x2 tele converter to get to 400mm. The problem with that much zoom is your technique. It can deliver very sharp results but focusing is very critical, as is atmosphere clarity, shutter speed, available light etc.
I have the Nikon D700 and really like this camera a lot, I have had it for 3 years. Lately I have been photographing events that require distance shooting and action. I also have been photographing wildlife, horse shows etc. I am thinking my second camera should be a DX camera instead of a D800 another full frame. I need a faster camera to shoot action so was wondering which one I should get. I am assuming all my full frame lenses will have increased distance on a DX camera. Thank you of any insight.
Hi Susan,
The D800 and the D7000 (DX camera) have the same pixel density so there is no difference between these two cameras in regards to your telephotos at maximum distances and magnification. However, both these cameras have three times the pixel density of the D700. But there is more to the story than just pixels. Ability to focus fast and accurately and perhaps have the ability to shoot at a fast frame rate could dominate over pixel count. That is why there is the D4.
I have the D800 as the best compromise. It has the best focus system, pixel count, and best high iso performance in existence today. It’s possible downside is the 4 frames/second maximum.
I still have the D7000 which is frankly almost equal to the D800 if you are just doing the telephoto lenses. It has a faster frame rate than the d800, almost as good focusing system, and almost as good high ISO performance.
There is one other thing you should take note of. Most of the best nature/animal photographers use the D700. The biggest gripe for some folks was the lack of any video option for this camera.
Thanks John. I know my friend who is a birder was going to order the D800 but she said she needed a faster camera for burst mode so she went with the D7000. My other friend same scenario went for the D300s at least I think it has an “s” after it. I definetly need another camera body as photographing events I can’t be switching lenses from wide angle to telephoto. So I guess I was trying to figure out for sports, events, wildlife or anything that moves :) what the best 2nd camera body would be. The D4 sounds amazing but then I saw the price tag, yikes! If I go with that one I had better start saving quickly! Thanks for the information.
Don’t you have a battery grip for the D700? I just looked at the D700 specs and you can get it as high as 8fps which is the same as the D300s fps with its grip
Don’t know about the D400 I hear that may be coming soon but it looks like Nikon will be also releasing it’s first entry level full frame D600 much sooner and I don’t know about the specs for either camera but I suspect the D400 will likely have the same speed as the D300s but i doubt it will have the increased speed with a grip as several new cameras haven’t been configured to increase speed with the new grips so its a wait and see how they turn out :)
No, I never got a battery grip as my hands are smaller plus I wasn’t used to the weight of the camera and lenses. So I opted out and just have 3 batteries. I started off just doing portraits, abstracts, flowers so the battery grip wasn’t an issue. Now that I am in the field more I could see how it would be helpful. But than again I will have to purchase another L plate from RRS to accommodate that. :0 Never ending costs with photography, yet I love it so it make it all worthwhile. :) I may just hold off for awhile especially since I am making monthly payments on my Nikon 12-24. Awesome lens and worth every penny or I should BIG BUCKS! The next camera I get I will get the battery grip. I would like a camera that can handle more weather conditions so assuming that is the D300s or whatever follows. Or is that the D4 that is more for extreme conditions?
if you want a fast camera the highest fps on the DX line is the Nikon D300s which shoots 6fps and 10 fps with the battery grip attached
The D7000 also does 6 fps but doesn’t go any further with the battery grip
If you want the fastest possible I’d suggest the D300s with the battery grip
woops the d300s is 8 fps with the battery grip… my mistake
8fps is plenty fast for action shooting
but if you want to go any higher, only the heavy and expensive full frame D4 can go as high as 11fps…
Thanks Tim. Looks like the D4 would be the top of the line and do what I need but the D300s is more in my ballpark cost wise. Of course originally I said that about the D90 and though a great camera I decided for the D700 and I have had no regrets. It is hands down a great camera. Someone told me since the D800 came out probably a D400 or something newer than the D300s is on the horizon. Do you know? Thanks again Tim and John for getting back to me. :)
Susan
You can also look into a good used D3 (or D3S). They are available with under 20,000 clicks on a 200,000+ click shutter. They have full pro bodies with incredible weather proofing etc. Downside (for some) is that they are big and heavy. However, compared to a D4 you can save quite a bit of money. Since the D3 has the same sensor as the D700, you could sell the D700 and wait until fall when you can get a D600. Then you’d have a fast action camera (D3), and a 24mp camera body (D600) for landscapes etc. … Both full frame.
If you need the reach, have you considered some new glass instead of a DX body. The nice thing about lenses is that they last forever. Many people are very happy with the 80-400 zoom, although the autofocus may be a little t0o slow for some fast sports. Available new at under $1700, it might be an option. Sigma makes a 50 – 500 for about the same price as the Nikon 80-400. Sigma also makes a 150-500 that is available for under $1000. I tried them both, was pleasantly surprised, (prefered the 150-500), but ended up with the Nikon 200-400.
Food for thought…
I’m buying the D800. I have a 70-200 2.8, a 17-35mm 2.8, a 50mm 1.4 and 28-70mm 2.8. I have the D300 and the D300s. I never bought DX lenses because I was advised early on about the eventual full frame on the digital camera. Today I almost sold my 17-35 and my 28-70 to replace them with a newer 24-70. After reading up, I’ve decided to see how the lenses I already have work with the D800. I normally use my 50, my 17-35 and my 70-200 anyway. I shoot weddings and portraits mostly. I found I had fast focusing issues in low light with the 28-70. Not sure if it was the camera’s or the lens. Sometimes the shutter button would freeze at key moments no matter what lens I used so maybe it’s the camera’s. I always carry two on me during a wedding ready to grab the other if needed.
Hi,
I am wary of the 24-70 f2.8 in that it does not have image stabilization. I have come to realize that this is as important as having a lower F stop. I think you will see some real improvements in this zoom range over the next year or two. It is the one area where there just is not enough choice. Already Tamron as come out with such a lens that has gotten very good reviews and costs much less than the Nikon.
It is time Nikon does a zoom in the normal range that is as good as their 70-200 f2.8. Myself, I am going to use the primes for this range. I have the 50mm 1.8 and the 24mm f2.8 and both give very, very sharp images on my D800.
Re the future being with FX and choosing lenses accordingly, you have been very wise.
I have the 17-35mm – I am looking forward to see how it goes on a D800E. I also have the 28-300mm which some have said will be up to the job and others says no. We shall see. But I have some 2.8 pro primes too.
I too would counsel against the new 24-70mm and the fact it has no VR – and it is not in the same class as 70-200 VR2 – which will be on my shopping list. A number of lens manufacturers have NOT come up with a pro grade 2.8 midrange zoom yet – a definite hole. I can see Nikon must be working on that right now.
Re the future being with FX and choosing lenses accordingly, you have been very wise.
I have the 17-35mm – I am looking forward to see how it goes on a D800E. I also have the 28-300mm which some have said will be up to the job and others says no. We shall see. But I have some 2.8 pro primes too.
I too would counsel against the new 24-70mm and the fact it has no VR – and it is not in the same class as 70-200 VR2 – which will be on my shopping list. A number of lens manufacturers have NOT come up with a pro grade 2.8 VR midrange zoom yet – a definite hole. I can see Nikon must be working on that right now.
Josie
I think you should keep the 17-35. A wide zoom is spectacular on an FX body. I have both the 17-25 and the 14-24 and I use them both whereas I rarely use my 24-70. In addition, the 28-70 is a great lens and I am not sure you would see much of a difference in upgrading to the 24-70. Since the D800 has improved low light AF, the issues you are experiencing may go away. I reccomend that you keep the glass you have since its all great stuff. … If you do want to make a change, have you considered the Micro 105 VR f/2.8? It is one of Nikon’s sharpest and might make a nice addition for things like tabletops, flowers, rings etc.
I meabt 17-35, not 17-25
Thanks Eric,
Yes, Thanks to what I’ve read, I’m keeping my lenses. I’ll check out the 105 micro too!
For those who have or who will soon have the D800, I have some interesting comments for you all to consider. Of course the resolution of this camera is a primary draw. When I first did some test photos, I must say my excitement dropped a bit. Why? When displaying on my 4mp Mac cinema display (one of the best out there) the photos look exactly like those from my D7000. Yes, I can see vast differences when viewed at 100% but that gets old after a while. It is the whole photo I want to see, not just bits.
Then I did a test at various ISO’s and I discovered one of the D800’s best features. When I compared shots taken at 100 through 3200 ISO I could not see any difference! Remember I am looking at a 4mp photo here. (I did the same test with the D7000 and it is easy to see the loss of detail and heightened noise at ISO 3200) I get the same results when I print at an 8×10 size.
Those 36mega pixels have more going than just resolution. Few of us will ever print large enough to see the extra detail, but when you need that high ISO or you need to really crop (that bird just was too far away!) you really start to appreciate the D800.
I like to think of pixels as film grain. The finer the grain the sharper the image. In the days of film there was limited ability to change the grain, at least at a cost that was affordable. The digital sensor reverses that static trend of film. Over the years digital sensors just got better and better. With the D800 we may have reached the point where the grain is so fine that the limitations become your lenses and technique only. And that is the way it should be.
Great review! I have a question: Is it possible to get the D800 to focus just before tripping the shutter on “self timer” mode? I purposely focused to a blur, set the self timer, and the D800 did not re-focus. I had autofocus set to Auto C and it did not track! If there is a way to manage this I’d like to know.
Since nobody responded to my question and there may be someone else with the same concern,
the following appears to be the best answer:
To do self-portraits you can use interval timer shooting…
[Menu] [Shooting menu] [Interval timer shooting] [Start time = now] (you waste the first shot but it saves you having to wait a minute) [Interval time 00:00:10 seconds] ( or however long you need between shots ) [Set 5 intervals X 1] ( this will take 5 timed shots 10 seconds apart) [Start = On] Put it on the tripod Hit [OK] and run round the front.
It will focus just before it takes each of 5 shots.
I guess my question wasn’t professional enough LOL
Nasim,
thanks for a great review. i am eagerly awaiting your review of the 5d mark iii. one thing i am curious about . . . maybe you could consider saying a little something about it. it may be p.r. spin, but i imagine quite a few people have read the interview with the d800 engineering team that nikon put up on their site:
one of the engineers suggests that people should consider shooting in the (approx.) 20.3 megapixel mode. he explains that this uses the full sensor, and essentially downsamples in some (hopefully ideal) way. this would mean that the d800 is like having two cameras in one: something like a 5d mark iii (though obviously slower, BUT with better dynamic range and possibly sharper detail), and then a very high resolution camera for those times when you know you want everything the sensor has to offer.
deciding when 20.3 mp is enough would depend on a lot of factors. maybe some people would just never use that mode. but it seems to me that this makes more sense than using dx format. you get plenty of detail, you use the full sensor, you get a hopefully ideal sampling algorithm designed by the nikon engineers (who apparently had this usage in mind), and you get to have some of your files be smaller when you feel you don’t need the whole nine yards.
the main question, then, is how do you think the d800, shot in medium 20.3 mp full frame mode, compares to the 5d mark iii? the review at cameralabs www.cameralabs.com/canon…d_mark_ii/) suggests that the d800 looks a bit sharper (and, to the reviewer’s eye, more naturalistic).
if you think you can mention this in your 5d mark iii review, that would be marvelous. i would be quite happy with the 5d mark iii if it weren’t for the fact that the d800 seems to have a noticeable advantage in dynamic range. i know i can make great photos with both of these wonderful cameras. but the d800 does seem to be revolutionary, and i am tempted to go in that direction (even though i generally prefer the canon ergonomics and user interface). with either camera, i know i will be very pleased, but i find the d800 so tempting . . . just looking for any extra insight you might have.
thanks for all the service you give to the photographic community. it’s a big deal to do all this work in addition to the photography itself. much appreciated.
Hi,
I thought I would comment on your thoughts about using the D800 at the 20.3 megapixel mode. I tried this myself the other day (also tried the 9.3 megapixel mode as well) on my D800. I primarily did this to see whether the down sampling in the camera would improve the noise at higher ISO’s (3200 and above). I am happy to report that it does make the noise less visible yet the detail is still there. You hit on what makes the d800 so versatile. If one wants maximum detail at low ISO’s then use 36mp. If one is using ISO’s above 1600 then use the 20.3 or the 9.3 mode. High ISO photos are not going to be blown up to large size prints so why waste the memory the larger files take?
thanks for your reply, John. good to know people are trying this out. anyone else out there who has tried this?
John, if you don’t mind a follow up . . . can you say anything about the slight hesitation some people have mentioned with the d800 autofocus? a few reviewers have mentioned a behavior in which it locks on quite quickly, but then second guesses itself or something. this is discussed, for instance, in first video review by calgary’s “the camera store”:
www.youtube.com/watch…mTo7UxbJX8
as for resolution settings . . . seems like there might be situations even at low iso in which one could still decide to go with the medium resolution.
i am still curious if anyone has done or could do some comparisons between the d800 at full frame medium resolution and the 5d mark iii at full resolution. maybe Nasim will mention this in his 5d mark iii review.
i really wouldn’t care so much about all this comparison except that i love the way the eos body feels in my hands. that’s a personal thing . . . hand shape and the way some user interfaces seem more intuitive to one person rather than another (like . . . i still don’t understand why some people have a hard time using windows). so, something in me would rather just get the canon.
however, that extra dynamic range in the d800 . . . seems like that would be so great. the rich detail of the d800 is surely something i would like to try and use as well, but i’m not drooling over megapixels. and i can see myself being quite happy to shoot at 20.3 mp in a lot of situations, especially while learning the camera. i’m sure i will get used to the feel and interface of the d800 if that’s the way i go. in either case, i’m very excited. two very solid cameras.
Hi Aiden,
My experience with the focus has so far been limited to just using the center spot in AF-S mode. I use this mode a lot for animal photography. It has been spot on and I have had no problems. I have fine tuned all my lenses, something that is more important to do when you have this much resolution. It will take many months to get into the groove of this camera. At first I was not as impressed as I thought I would be, but as I use it more I am getting more enthused. I have a (D7000 which I use for comparisons). I have just been shooting DX for years and going back to FX is not without a bit of practice. Focus is more critical just for starters. Less depth of field, heavier feel to the body, larger viewfinder just to name a few more.
There is no monitor that can even begin to display the quality this camera possesses, but over time I expect that to change. I will soon have some 20×30 prints done to see how they compare to ones I have done with the D7000, and before that the D300. i will be in the Sierra Nevada mountains this coming week and will get my first chance to test this camera in the field.
If there is some focus issues I am sure Nikon will address them. They have a lot at stake in this camera.
The size options of medium and small are only available with JPGs, not with NEFs. As such, for those of us who spend a lot of post-production time on files, we normally only shoot in NEF. I will, however, run some tests (I have just set my D800 to shoot in FX, and record both NEF and medium size JPG). I normally shoot with all in-camera adjustments (Distortion, Vignette, High ISO, etc) turned off. For purposes of my testing, I will keep my settings that way.
Note: The medium or small JPG option can be chosen with any of the D800 image sizes: FX; 1:2; 5:4 or DX. Testing, however, is still required to see if the results are the same as post-production downsizing.
WEJ
Ran test, and the sharpness of the NEF files is better than that of the medium JPG files. I process my files using DxO Optics. Ran test with the Nikon 80-400 lens. All shots were handheld, with shutter speeds of 1/4,000 for some, and 1/5,000 for others. If anybody want to see the shots, let me know, and I will create a gallery on my website.
WEJ
You should post those shots. It would be a great example as to one of the ways to get the maximum sharpness out of the D800. After all most folks are getting this camera just because of the resolution.
Here is a link to some of the test shots I took. I don’t normally shoot insects, however this was a “target of opportunity.” All shots can be downloaded to your computer. This is a hidden gallery on my website, and can only be accessed using the link below. Let me know if you have any questions.
Link: !i=1892049625
WEJ
Hi,
I checked out your postings and I am having a problem. When I view the butterfly at 100% the N version is quite a bit larger. (I would say 50% linear or over double in area). So I find it hard to make a fair comparison.
It is well established that all else being equal, RAW will be sharper than JPEG no matter what settings used. I would note however that Nikon JPGs are slightly soft out of the camera as the default sharpening is only +3. I have found +5 or + 6 to be a better default setting. Thanks for taking the time to post.
William,
thanks for making that clear. i did not realize that the medium setting was jpeg only. canon have a reduced resolution raw option, and i didn’t realize that nikon didn’t offer that on the d800. are you sure there is not a medium raw as well as a medium jpeg?
meh . . . so it goes. i would be shooting raw in most circumstances, so that means the medium mode would be of limited use. i can always downsample in post, but it would have been nice to potentially manage some of the file size and noise by means of an in-camera downsampled raw file—at least in some cases.
The D800 can record NEF files in four sizes: FX; 1:2; 5:4 and DX.
Each of the four NEF sizes can be simultaneously recorded in three different JPG sizes: Large; Medium and Small. In addition to size, the JPG can also be one of three types: Fine; Normal or Basic. Another setting for JPGs, later in the menu, is JPG Compression: Optimal or Size.
And that doesn’t even cover your TIFF options.
The D4 offers the same options.
I agree that the option to automatically downsize would be nice, however Nikon, so far, has yet to offer this. So I shoot in NEF, normally in the 1:2 size (few of my customers ever order bigger than 8 x 10, so final print size in not a problem), as this give me 5 FPS.
I am currently testing my D4, and MIGHT afterwards sell my D800. Hey Bob, are you interested in a used D800, if you are still waiting on a new one?
WEJ
Hi Nasim,
I am a regular reader of your blog posts and loved your articles. I would like to know your opinion about one post from Thom Hogan (May 14 ‘2012 D800 Lens Choice) where he commented “At 36mp on the D800, though, diffraction impacts start recording noticeably at f/8 and above “. What are your findings here and how can we counter such problems? Thanks.
Dear Nasim and good folks
There is a rare quality about this site which I like. The tone is productive and friendly. So thank you and your guests for that. Keep it like that :-)
I have been following this thread for some time and thought I might hand in my little review of the D800 which i was lucky to get in march.
I was waiting to get my D4 when I had a chance to sneak peak a testing model of the D800.
The pictures this thing could do for almost half the price made me change my path.
My only concern for getting the D800 was how would the low light performance be like compared to the D3s, and the D4.
So here goes:
Stills:
The D800 performs way beyond my expectations in regards to still photography. The dynamic range was/is always good on the D3, but here its amazing. Much more than any computer display or printer (at this date) will ever show.
The resolution is astonishing. Go look for artifacts on 14bit raw. Good look. I am printing native A2 prints in 360dpi that would blow your mind.
ISO performance:
I will shoot any assignment at any time in full size raw up to 6400 ISO. The little noise (or pleasant grain) on 6400 is just beautiful and astonishing on 36MP. I have no clients who ever once would say. “Uh those small grains in your picture are ugly”. They are not. They just add some lowlight feel to it, that we have seen so many times in movies, old black and whites etc.. All my clients recognize this as a treasure. Why all the no noise hype?
Display:
The display on the D800 is not what I would call revolutionary. The whole idea of making it “smart” is not smart. The Hue, Saturation and auto light just doesn’t do it for me. I am thrown more off the actual image than on. But all I personally need the display for is; Is it sharp. Does the histogram show any warnings? I find the Display on the D3 at least just as good and much more trustworthy. So no upgrade here.
Autofocus and Lightmetering:
Well. The autofocus on this is good. Basically all I ask, is that its trustworthy. It has at times been off on faces and eyes, which the D3 was excellent at.
I never normally use anything but the center focus point. But have started to use the 3D continuous mode which is truly excellent. Actually better than center focus single mode. Its seems to me like the 91.000k sensor truly kicks in once in 3D mode, but doesn’t do the job on single center point mode?
Light metering is good. But so was the D3. So I see no improvement here and none was needed if you ask me.
Handling and weather protection:
At first its a bit cramped getting your hands around the grip. Especially being used to the D3. But all thats forgotten. The quality of the house and feel lives totally up to my expectations. Mine has been in rain and sandstorms already and the sealing is impressive.
The only thing I dislike about the handling is that d… ISO button. Its just not the best place to put it. I keep finding my self fumbling to locate and then hold down the ISO select button and dial to find the ISO i want.
Video:
I also bought the D800 for video. Not the main reason, but to get the DSLR video look and to lesson all the video gear I own.
I am very impressed on the handling, the contrast autofocus which I never thought I would use anyway. But I have started on using it cause its reliable.
I will not blame the camera for the hard to see when its in focus. Cause there are third party tools to help here. Like the LCDVF from www.kinotehnik.com or another one from www.zacuto.com. The MOV files are really easy to work with. Nikon has really prepared themselves for a good video launch in this camera. And praise to them for that.
There is Moiré. And more than most would like. YES its true. This will for some be a downside and for others like me. Doesn’t matter. Not that I am not professionally proud. But for the cost of this thing I do not expect the top. The picture quality of the video is already mind-blowing.
Audio handling is important and like any DSLR for video its also a drag to work with here. BUT. I am truly amazed on the quality of the Nikon ME-1 stereo mic. Its a great little mic and if you set the max gain on the D800 to manual 11/20 you get good enough sound that you in some cases can use as reportage on track two, and for later reference its more than good.
Computer hardware and how much do I need to spend:
Well it takes time to load these .NEF (raw) on to a disk. three times as long as the D3.
Likewise for Lightroom to generate a 1:1 preview of the .NEF. Also you will find your filling up your disks faster than usual.
But at the same time I take less but better pictures when on assignment. This camera can reward you with some technically brilliant shots if you take your time to learn it. How often are any of us in a situation, where we only have 1 second to take a shot? Very rare. So since the D800 has landed in my backpack I have changed the way I take pictures. Less shots but more thought of.
So if your a news photographer or work in speedy deadlines. DO NOT BUY THIS CAMERA.
Thoughts:
I respect those who do not see what they need 36MP for. But I cannot understand why so many are talking about buying the D800 and then using it in DX mode. I hope not to tread anybody on the toes here. But if your trying to convince your self to get the D800 and then only shoot 20MP in DX mode, then get another camera! I would never dream of shooting in anything but its maximum at all times. I do still believe that a picture should be cropped when taking it. Not later. Some of the magic of an image is lost each time we crop from the full size.
For many it might be worth waiting for the not yet officially announced D600 for its lesser pixel size yet Full Frame capabilities if 36MP is to much.
The best thing about this camera is its resolution and ISO performance on this resolution.
So if your specifically interested in the D800 ask your self.
Do I want a slow (FPS) camera that takes amazing 36MP raw images even at 6400 ISO? And would that fill in my needs? Or could my photography perhaps take a new path with this new camera?
Cause these are the true unique things about the D800 that no other camera has to offer at the moment for this price.
Atb of good photography
Sofus Comer.
PS, there are some D800 images on my website. www.sofuscomer.com
Насим привет! Наконец то я поймал тушку! Как побороть зеленый дисплей? На дисплее фото зеленят а на компьютере нормально?
Возможно здесь ответ потеряется, можно его скинуть на почту мне: [email protected]
Заранее благодарен!
Насим ответите?
Равиль, Никон утверждает, что цвета на новых дисплеях правильные, и что все предыдущие камеры добавляли слишком много синего цвета. Так что исправлять ничего они не собираются. Если честно, я на дисплей камеры смотрю в основном для оценки четкости изображения. На цвета я вообще мало обращаю внимания, потому что снимаю на RAW и цвета все равно меняю в Lightroom или Photoshop…
Да, спасибо Насим. В принципе это не критично, просто купив камеру я пошел на съемку и не сделав съемочные тесты дома, был немного удивлен. Далее скопировав все файлы на компьтер, увидел что все в порядке и это не критично. Ждал от Вас подтвеждения об этом. Еще раз благодарю Вас!!!
absolutely love this camera.. great for stills… superb for video.. shot some test video … have a look
bought it mainly for shooting stills (have couple of D700) in weddings.
Cheers
Abhinav
A great article thank you.
I’m just a photo hobbyist, so spending on gear is hard thought over.
The UK prices don’t help either!
I use a D7000 & find it an exceptional DX camera, with the D800 having similar pixel density, if it delivers like the D7K but with 2.5x the frame size it is going to be as you point out, an evolutionary step.
It also offers the possibility to use a DX lens & get D7K equivalent (or better) images while you build up more suitable lenses, it’s the wides that usually DX specific.
I will be buying – once Nikon actually make some, & selling the D7K while it still fetches a worthwhile sum.
Thanks for a great read.
Hello Nasim,
Im experiencing a problem with my new D800 and studio lighting. i take measurements with my seconic meter and shoot with a large softbox. images come out about 2-3 stops underexposed. when i used my d3200 and d300s in the same setup at the same time, the images are perfect. even histogram on D800 shows that images are way underexposed. i was wondering if anyone had issues like that. thank you.
P.S. i trigger the strobe with Pocket Wizard.
David, to understand your problem, you are measuring the light with a light meter, then dialing the result into the D800 that is set to Manual mode right? Are you also setting your ISO manually? I have used the D800 in a studio and I did not have any problems with exposure, so maybe it is a camera setting that is doing it?
Hello. Yes everything is set manually. 1/250, d800, iso 100. No compensation.
Hello Nasim,
I have ordered D800 from Amazon, not received yet. But I saw a comment from Amazon today:
“I read hundreds of reviews and ordered the D800. But then I downloaded the technical manual from Nikon-usa……And that’s when I started worrying because they made it pretty clear that you are expected to be on tripod for great results. What they did not say is that you actually have to be on tripod for anything but mediocre results!
The camera came today and after dozens of trials with super good Nikon lenses it became obvious that NO usable sharp photos are possible handheld unless you are at unrealistic speeds and ISO.
Very disappointed and the camera is packed up and waiting for UPS pick up!
NO , under no circumstances would I recommend it to a friend…..Actually not even to an enemy. ”
Is it the case that shooting D800 has to use a tripod? If so, I am scared as well.
Thanks,
Jay
Jay
This is just wrong. Nikon’s point is that if you want to obtain medium format results, you will need to use medium format techniques. Yes the D800 can resolve vibrations that a lesser sensor cannot, and if you zoom in to the pixel level, you can see the impact. … But if you normally print to 8 x 10, then if you scale down the D800 image to that size it will look BETTER, even hand held. Similarly, if you are planning to use the D800 to allow more agressive cropping, then again, you might see the need for better technique. In all cases these are positive features that allow us to up our game, but they do not provide limitations as compared to other cameras. The D800 is not more prone to shake, it just has the pixels to be able to resolve it. Use a D800 just like you would any other Nikon DSLR and you will get similar or better results. If you compare the D800 to a D### and start with a similarly framed image in the viewfinder, then display at a similar size on the monitor or print, the D800 will not be worse.
On the other hand, if you do not go to the extra effort of sturdy tripod, mirror up, remote release etc. you may not be able to extract the best quality of which the camera is capable. IMHO Anybody who claims that the D800 sensor is in some way limiting is making an error.
The quote you listed might be associated with an individual bad camera, but it is not indicative of D800 performance. I have compared handheld results of the D800 to these models: D70, D80, D90, D7000, D2x, D3, D3s. On average I get better results with the D800. So either the camera was bad, the user was making a mistake, or this was some troll seeding misinformation.
Good reply Eric.
I have D800E, but it’s early days but already learnt a couple of things. One is that now VR lenses with static images taken hand-held are going to be more important than ever AND the crop-ability of this camera (especially the “E”) – which has an equivalent in focal length of the camera. You crop or go pixel-peeping and it is the similar effect to optically zooming in. So the same rules apply re keeping up shutter speeds with tele-zoom lenses.
What I am saying is that I agree with you and don’t blame the camera.
Agree, i’ve read some where that a save bet is use inverse of the focal length in shutter speed. So if lets say a 300mm lens, use 300th of a sec. Of course that’s in the safe zone. I have shot 200mm with 30/40th of a sec, which is crazily low for a telephoto, but i got a steady hand, and i just lean against a object (good way to do it).
Dear Jay,
I have used the d800 with 70-200 2.8, 85mm 1.4, 50mm 1.8, sigma marco 50mm 2.8, nikon 14-24 2.8, and nikon 28mm 2.8. We (a professional photographer that i work with and I) only used the tri pod once for a long exposure (over 5 sec), while every other shots were done handheld in all sorts of situation. We are unique in the senses that we can shoot everything, perhaps not everything, but a wide range of items. We shoots events, weddings, Bat/Bar Bitzvah, sports, etc. Certainly the D800 focus system is not as fast as the d3, but still usable base on the result of a baseball game we were hire to shoot for. Mean while, the real test for the sensor is probably shooting a recent Bat Mitzvah event. As you know, low light + people running/dancing around, is perhaps the least ideal situation possible. We did use a flash later on, but that’s way after dark. None, never, we experience any sorts of strange sharpness issue like you. We were mainly shooting at 60th – 80th of a sec and boost to some where about 200th from time to time. Like Eric mentioned, perhaps it’s “either the camera was bad, the user was making a mistake, or this was some troll seeding misinformation.”.
Forget “fear of flying,” now we’ve got sensor resolution paranoia. Please, can someone with a bit of insight and experience with the 800 comment. Were all the other reviews part of a Nikon ruse, or was “Very Disappointed” sponsored by Canon or, as a less nefarious option, victim of sudden onset Parkinson’s syndrome? :~)
The Sky is Falling so Have a Good Day,
Donn
Donn
I responded to Jay above. IMHO “Very Disappointed” did not make sense. The reported results are not consistent with the laws of nature. The camera AF might have been bad, or perhaps it was, as you imply, a disgruntled fanboy of a competing brand. As an observation, I find that folks who have “super good Nikon lenses” and know how to use them recognize the value of providing full information and usually list the lenses they used. This individual did not mention lenses used or any other Nikon bodies for comparrison… it does make you wonder. “Sensor Resolution Paranoia” (SRP for short) is a purely psychosomatic afflication cruable by a placebo. As such the appropriate cure is for the sufferer to don a Jimmy Buffet Parothead hat and drink margarittas until a rational thought process has been restored.
Comment (522), I’ve used a d800 hand full of time, and the result are simple. Like this post mention, noise can be cause not only by Pixel Density and Size, but also the pipeline. The d800 shooting at 4000iso (Very un-ideal situation, low light indoor) were clean. In fact i wouldn’t go above 4000 on a d3, but the d800 i be alright with 5200, and a little freak out at 6400, although it’s still fairly clean. Note, a lot of people down size samples of “noise comparision” to like a tiny fraction of a picture. Of course you are going to see noise. However, the reality is, if you look at the picture as a whole, if the image is clean, it’s clean. Unless you go into a art gallery and stick your face 1inch away from the art. As in big print, 13×19, no problem. And also, if the picture will be print big enough to be bother by the noise, that gotta be like a wall size photo, where you be 5 feet away. Have any of you ever walked up to a bill board 1 feet away and study it’s pixel and noise? Probably not.
So that was the noise, which a lot of people in concern with for a sensor with huge amount of pixels and tiny pixel size. As in the auto focus system, as expected, it’s slower than the sport beast d3, which make perfect sense. Getting a d800 to shoot sports is like cutting vegetables with a folk. However, the focus is extremely accurate. We were surprise when it was able to auto focus on the closest eye to the camera during a headshot, because the person had glasses on. Amazing that it can tell the difference between the glasses and the eye.
Build quality, i love it. less bulky than the d3 (i actually like the d3 weight and size), the d800 nailed it, good balance of weight and still substantial
Benefit of extreme high megapixel. Three main thing, bigger size, sharper, more detail.
-We all know that high megapixel = allow us to print bigger size. But like i mention before, no one walks up to a billboard with 2 feet of distance away from it.
-Sharper, well obviously because let’s say the edge of a object and the background is captured by 1 single pixel, then it will combine the two different intensity of the light wave and have a average, thus not as sharp. Oppose to two individual pixel for each light wave, that means more accurate in capturing the light wave, thus give a better shape of the object. Hard to explain, i tried.
-Details, similar idea as sharper, camera captures a scene in a 2 dimensional, unlike our eye, 2pt perspective. So how can the camera tell the shape of the object? Well, by the difference in the light intensity that hits the sensor, Brighter vs darker, which give us the shape, since when we see a object, we are actually look at the light it reflects. So the idea is, more pixel = more accurately capture the difference in light intensity, thus better image detail.
What more can I say? I don’t want to talk about the crazy nerd technical parts and all those junk (although i kinda did briefly), real experience shooting the camera is better than ANY controlled test result IMO. Im sure it’s same for you guys and girls, if not, why not just read Nikon’s feature/description? We want to hear each other’s experience with it, that’s why we’re here. And my experience with the d800 is… holy cow, that’s amazing!
Dear Jay K., Eric and others,
I really appreciate your responses/comments, as well as sharing your experience. I just got an email from Amazon that they shipped out the D800, so I should get it soon. Now all of you have given me the confidence that D800 can be used handheld just like any other camera. I will purchase a Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S to try out with and w/o a tripod, and once I like the camera, I will gradually order more lenses . Any thoughts, comments are welcome.
Thanks again!
Jay
Of course it depends on what you enjoy shooting. My favorite lens is the 14-24 f/2.8, however the 16-35 is also very sharp and has VR. But… I think you should consider the 105 f/2.8 Micro. This is a very sharp lens, and it will help you to be able to get the most from your camera. Also, the close focus capability allows you to take incredible images of flowers etc. If your primary use is weddings, people at events, street photography etc, many folks would consider the 24-70 f/2.8 a must have. For indoor sports and concerts, the 70-200 f/2.8. Having said all this, I know of some folks who have purchsed the 28-300 for their D800. IMHO, if you want to get the most from your camera, the 28-300 might not be the best option as it starts becoming diffraction limited very quickly. Of course all of the fast primes are great choices too. Ultimately, it comes down to your budget. My advice is to decide what your shooting priority is and then consider consider one of the f/2.8 lenses I listed above.
Eric,
Thanks. I tested D800 using 85mm/1.8G for two weeks and overall I think it is very good. I also tried to test the auto focus issues and not completely sure if the camera I got has an issue or not on the far left side. I have one concern about the D800 for the 36.3 MP which I do not think is useful for me and I probably do not want to deal with it.
I finally decided to return it, and purchased a D700. I am thinking to get a 16-35/4.0 to start with. Any suggestions for the lenses for D700?
D700 now has better user review than D800 on Amazon.
Jay,
D700 is a great camera and unless you are printing big probably a better choice than the D800 for many. Having said that I am ecstatic about the D800E. The 16-35 is a great lens. I prefer the 14-24, but the trade-off between the two is that with the 16-35 you get VR and filters whereas with the 14-24 f/2.8 you get higher shutter speeds in low light, a slightly wider field of view and better subject isolation if desired. The 17-35 f/2.8 is also a great lens, no VR but f/2.8 aperture and it takes filters. The 16-35 f/4 is the lowest priced.
After the wide zoom (which really shows off the FX sensor), it all depends on what you want to shoot. The 28-300 is a very covenient lens and in conjunction with the wide zoom would cover the entire range of focal lengths. The IQ of the 80-400 is better, but you have a hole in the mid range. To fill that hole, I love the 24-70 f/2.8 as an event lens, I haven’t tried the new 24-85 VR. If you want to shoot indoor sports, get the 70-200 f/2.8 VRII. If you want to do any macro work the 105 f/2.8 VR is your best bet because it gets you greater standoff than the 60 micro. For low light, any of the f/1.4 or f/1.8 FX lenses would probably work… The 50mm f/1.4G seems the best value. Having said all of that, if you don’t need the long end, the other nice option is the 24-120 f/4 VR.
So. I think that for FX a wide zoom (16-35) is a must. After that….I’d say try the 28-300 to see where you are shooting. Fine tune your AF. Then see what focal lengths you are using the most. If you are always using the 16-35 at 16, consider the 14-24. If you mostly use the 28-300 within a certain range you can upgrade to the pro glass that covers that range. I have a great collection of lenses and although the 28-300 is not quite as sharp as some, it is so versatile that I use it to be sure I get the shot. In your case it might be the ideal tool to help you to determine what (if any) other lenses you may need.
Hi,
I have just completed a camping trip in the Sierras of California with the D800. This was a good test of hand held shots in lesss than ideal conditions ( freezing temperatures, lots of dust etc)
Very,very sharp photos using the 70-200 f2.8, the 50 f1.8 and the 24 f2.8 Nikon lenses. Never used a tripod. What I did notice were (1) some problems with the single focus mode hunting when aimed at small targets such as distant birds, and (2) soft corners on a few photos that have to do more with the FX format over the DX format which does use the sweet part of the lens.
I like to photograph animals and lots of deer were around to give me practice. The D800 I’d very well. I have had much practice before using the D7000 (same pixel density) and this has paid off when using the D800. Py attention to your shutter speeds, focus, and aperture and the results handheld will be spectacular. I see no need for a tripod unless lighting is really bad and you do not want to up the ISO. (up to 3200 ISO is really not a problem with the D800)
Finally got my D800 with 24-70mm 2.8g. Love it…thanks Henrys for D800…thanks Vistek for lens
Hello,
I usually use the real-time zoom of the live view in order to shot macro photos. With my brand new D800E (just 3 days ago I changed my D90 for this beast :D) I have a problem which causes the image on the live view to be a preview of the shot. Sometimes this is a problem, for example when you shot with the flash, since the screen becomes totally dark and unusable. Could you please suggest a fix to this “problem”? I think is a problem that can be simply fixed changing a setting… but which one?
Thank you in advance, Valerio!
Hi Nasim..another gr8 article.
I am a regular follower of your site.the articles u post are very accurate and clear to understand.As i am a serious amateur photographer having passion for nature & wildlife,your articles have helped me a lot in improving my photography.
I have a question to ask abt Nikon D800.At present m using Nikon D200 with sigma 150-500mm.Now m thinking to upgrade my body coz m using D200 since last 4yrs.But now i m confused whether D800 is a good option for me wid my Sigma 150-500mm.
Also can u plz guide me about nikkor 300mm f4 + 1.4TC or 1.7TC with D800.
Kindly waiting for yor reply…
I have the Sigma 150-500mm and did a few test shots the other day – only got D800E a little over a week ago and haven’t had a chance to take it on a field trip yet. But the Sigma auto-focussed quite well. I also tried it with a Kenko 1.4 TC (700mm) and it didn’t do too well. Read that reducing auto-focus to 11 points is better, so night time here, will try outside tomorrow. But test shots I did around my neighbourhood shows the Sigma very capable with D800E and lots of detail, even with the Kenk0, which is no slouch. Bottom line, don’t hesitate getting and using a D800 with the Sigma. Fantastic value lens you already got.
Nasim (or anybody else)
The D800 has a USB 3.0 connection. The Sony XQD reader that comes with the D4 also has a USB 3.0 interface. Do you know of a reliable USB 3.0 board that will go into a Mac Pro computer? It would sure be nice to have a USB 3.0 interface to get pictures from the D800.
Nasim, here is a nice comparison of filters I found online.
www.lenstip.com/113.1…ction.html
Dear Mansurov,I decided to go for D800 after reading your review.I never saw any mention about the green tnit in Lcd and other bugs that a lots of people are crying about in other forums.Are these problems real? Think this and other bugs could be resolved with firmwares in future?Is there cause for worry?My D800 is already shipped and will reach me on the 26th.I am surprised you find time to answer most of the quistions asked by your readers.Thanks a lot for each and every article that you have put up for us.I can imagine how much of time and effort has gone in to this.It reflects your passion for photography.You generously share your knoledge with your readers.I have benefited greatly from your site.Thanks a ton.Your pictures are great too.You inspire.All the best.
hello nasim and all folks.
Iam new to the forum ,i consider my self an advance amateur,i have been using nikon d700’i just recieved my d 800’and iam truly impressed with the camera performance,this one phenominal camera but all new gear there is learning curve,the real biggy is i dont need zooms you can downscale or magnify your picture.This is complete camera in my veiw.You can use dx lenses with resolution of around 16 mps ,now thats simply fantastic ,i have handled the canon mk3 but it does evoke industrial prescision as the nikon,thats why iam a nikon shooter forever.
Nasim can you please share your settings for outside,and studio projects and also the use of built in HDR
Thanks
Mustaqeem Ahmed Qazi.
Hi Nasim & Lola
Love your website! I’ve learned so much by venturing on here everyday… even at the office. lol
I just purchased a Nikon D800 (body only) and was wondering you opinion on good lenses for Landscapes, Weddings, Fashion, Corporate Events, and street photography. I’m considering two FX lenses for now to start off with
1.)AFS NIKKOR 24mm f/1.4G) &
2.)AFS- NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VRII)
your feedback will be most appreciated :)
Thank you in advance
Would someone please explain why a higher resolution sensor is going to cause a higher degree of camera shake at the same shutter speed? If you are shooting a 125mm lens at 1/125 second, shouldn’t a D800 have a comparable image sharpness (due to camera shake) as a D700?
Thank you,
No difference in shake if you down size the D800 image to the 12 MB of the D700. But at 36 it picks up finer detail when you look the picture at 100% and finer detail means you will see more of the impact of shake, poorer lens, etc.
Eliot is right. There is a “telephoto” aspect to this as we “zoom” into the image, similar rules apply as they would to telephoto lenses.
But I would also add this: The DOA (Depth of Field) is also affected. I took a 3/4 length portrait and the D800E detected the face and focussed on the right eye – exactly as you would want it to do and shows the intelligence of the camera. The subject was illuminated with a nice softbox and it came out very 3D like.
The lens was 50mm and F5.6 and a reasonable distance. The right eye was perfect, but then I noticed the right ear just behind, that it was ever so slightly out of focus. Not much but still obvious. I feel sure I would never have noticed that on my D700. DOA is certainly been affected.
In many ways we are discovering new things with the D800/E – and in the above example the “E” may well have been the key.
Depth of field in terms of “circle of confusion” will not be effected by the higher resolution sensor. THat is unchanging physics. However, smaller pixels will pick up a smaller circle of confusion and so something will seem out of focus that would be seem n focus with larger pixels. (A pixel can only resolve something larger than it is.) It is analogous to the magnification effect you mentioned. Something appearing in focus will be out of focus when magnified. The same thing happens with diffraction which will be noted at more wide open apertures.
Exactly, the COC does not change but simply becomes more exposed. Perhaps ‘real’ and ‘perceived’ DOF impression has real world affectations with the D800/E.
There is another thing that strikes me, get a photo pin-sharp using say F5.6 midrange to short prime, then when pixel-peeping at 1:1 the D800E looks significantly less vague than D800 where you need to go to to 2:1 to loose that vagueness or softness. Under those ‘special’ circumstances when everything comes together just right, the E is seen as having less DOF. The plane of exact sharpness is noticeable smaller.
But is this just academic? Or does the ‘E’ really have an edge that matters. The latest interview with Jim Brandenburg says ‘yes’ – but that is in the context of the work he does.
All I know is that for me the world of photography got a lot more interesting – and glad I got the E as it appeals to some part of me… now the other part of me needs to take more photos. LOL
The true DOF between E and non E has to be the same but since non E is slightly less sharp you will need more fuzziness to note a difference and so DOF will appear to less with the E. Of course all of this occurs only when pixel peeping at 100% and is unlikely to have real world impact except perhaps in huge prints or a lot of cropping.
To put it differently, the higher resolution sensor allows you to resolve a smaller amount of shake. And yes, the D800 and D7000 are similar in that have a similar pixel pitch, so for a given lens, blurring at the pixel level due to camera shake etc. should be the same. However for a given image (ia framed to use the whole sensor), The D800 will show worse blur because each pixel represents a smaller portion of the subject.
Hi everyone,
I recently placed my D800 order with BH Photo.
Does anyone have an idea of how long it might take until delivery?
Am I unrealistic to expect it before mid August?
Thanks,
Andrew
Andrew.It may take two months or more.Keeping the order try your luck with nikon store and local stores online.You may get lucky.If you get one earlier you can cancel your order at BHS.Nikon store has one or two available for people who keep checking there more often.I got mine from target 2 days after ordering it and so I canceled my Adorama order.all the best. Again do not get disappointed if you cannot get one from nikon store in the first attempt.Keep trying.You have a great chance to get one.
Thanks George,
I’ve thought of that but as I’m not base din the US, any online order charges my card immediately – not on dispatch of the order. So having more than 1 order placed gets pretty expensive….
Thanks for the reply.
Try Samy’s camera…I waited for 2 months at Beach Camera and nothing. When I placed the order with Samy’s Camera they sent notice it was shipping in 2 days! I also got my 28mm 1.8G which nobody had at the time from them…also boxes are brand new with no signs of store demo etc. They have been the best for me…
I very recently received the new Nikon 24-85mm VRII lens that I am now testing on my D800. I am very happy to report that this lens is very, very good with this camera.
I tested this lens against the Nikon 14-24,and 24mmF2.8 at 24mm focal length from f4 through f16. This lens was the equal of the 14-24 and generally better than the 24mm F2.8 in sharpness at all these apertures.
I also tested this lens against the 50mm f1.8 at the 50mm focal length. By f5.6 both lenses were equally sharp in the center. By f8 the corner sharpness became almost identical as well, though with a slight nod to the fixed 50mm lens for sharpness and contrast.
My last test was at 70mm focal length against the Nikon 70-200 F2.8. At F4 the 70-200 easily was superior, but by f8 the 24-85 caught up in the center (but not in the corners).
Of course I did not get this lens to compete against the 70-200 but for the wide angle performance. I think Nikon has a real winner here. My guess is this lens will be preferred over the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 because it is much lighter, has VR, and costs much less.
How does the Nikon Nikkor Wide-angle lens – 20 mm – F/2.8 – Nikon F lens stand up next the Nikon 17-35 2.8. I know it’s a no brainer as far as cost.. the 17-35 should be much better but I need a wide and have limited funds. I have the 17-35mm but I could sell it if the 20mm I have would suffice.
I have both and never use the 20. The other option is the 16-35, and if you like wide the 14-24. I think that for the money, the 16-35 is the best buy.
I was just told by one of my photographer friends that the wide format printers made by Epson such as the 7890 that he prints with were not capable of printing such a high resolution as the D800. Any thoughts on this matter? Seems from your review you think such wide format printers will be able to.
Simple answer: As you print larger copies, more your camera’s pixels are mapped.
A printer’s resolution/sq. inch remains constant, of course, therefore any printer will ultimately outstrip the 800’s (or any sensor’s) resolution.
So, full-resolution d800 postage stamps not good, full res 24×36 very good.
My 7900 is very happy dealing with those troublesome 800 files, especially when used with Qimage.
Hope this helps.
Why do I spot typos the minute after submitting a commmment?
Thanks Donn, So, what you are saying is, a 1″x1″ print versus a 24″x36″ tries to put more pixels into each print and therefore the smaller size print just has too many pixels to make a clear print? How about if I wanted to print 5″x7″ prints? This sounds like the larger print I make the better it will appear using the D800 – up to a point.
In fact, I have been considering the 7900 printer, thanks.<