Nikon D4 & D800: What do the Professionals Think?

It's been a busy couple of months for Nikon, during which the Japanese camera maker has announced two new models, the D4, a 16MP professional workhorse intended for hard use in a wide range of shooting environments, and the 36.3MP D800 - the long-awaited successor to the 12MP D700. With these two models Nikon has introduced some significant new technology to its high-end DSLR lineup, perhaps the most significant of which is a very impressive-looking video specification. Both cameras offer full HD video with live audio monitoring and the option to record uncompressed footage to a harddrive via the built-in HDMI port.

As far as the D4 is concerned, the improved video specification is arguably the most significant change to the spec sheet compared to the D3S. It gets a small resolution boost, from 12MP to 16, and improved high ISO performance but other refinements are relatively subtle. The D800 on the other hand (and it's near-twin the D800E) breaks through a major barrier, offering a currently unmatched pixel count of 36.3MP for $3000 - half the cost of the D4. Despite the cost and resolution disparity though, the two cameras have a lot in common. 

Click here for our detailed first impressions (including samples) of using the D4
And here for our  overview of the Nikon D4
And here for our  in-depth preview of the Nikon D800

Following our announcement and preview content of these cameras, we wanted to get a feel for what professional Nikon shooters think. We asked four photographers, whose work and expertise spans a wide variety of genres to tell us what they think of the D800 and D4. Our own in-depth reviews will follow in the coming weeks.

The Sports and News Photographer: Leon Neal

I've been waiting for the D4 for some time but, unlike previous product refreshes, the D3s had never really left me crying out for anything apart from improved video. I was pretty sure that full HD video would be included in the D4,and handling a pre-production camera it was a real pleasure to finally see "1080p" displayed on the screen while shooting video.

August 2011. The morning after serious violence in central London which resulted in the destruction of several homes and businesses. Shot with a Nikon D3S and AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8

In my normal stills shooting though it's the little things that make a difference. The D4's screen, for example now has a resin coating between the plates which, Nikon claims, will eliminate fogging when the cameras have got wet. This might not sound significant but I have two D3 bodies that have never recovered from shooting one particularly wet job, so I'm pleased to see that changes have been made. 

Likewise, the D4's time-lapse feature takes the maths out of the process, simply asking you how often you want to shoot and then displaying how long the finalised clip will be, depending on the interval that you currently have set. Not only that, but on completion, the D4 stitches the sequence together and outputs a high-quality movie file. No more messing around in Quicktime Pro...

I haven't been able to shoot any images on a production camera yet but just from looking at pictures on the LCD screen I could see that the noise levels produced in the higher ISO ranges were definitely improved, even compared to the D3s. Having shot quite a bit of low-light sport recently, I'm impressed with what the D3s can produce but with the D4 I'm looking forward to shooting at ISO 12,800 hopefully without needing to worry about noise affecting detail.

I honestly can't wait to use the D4 in anger at the London Olympics later this year if it's as good as it looks so far. The D4 has come along at a good time for me because I'll be shooting swimming and several other indoor events so I'll need the best image quality possible at high ISO settings. The 2012 Olympics will also be 'wired' so I'm really pleased that Nikon has added an Ethernet port to the D4. Also, as a regular user of the WT-4 wireless transmitter, it's great to hear about the new smaller-form WT-5 unit. Less gear to carry is always a plus point, no matter what other features it has!'

After six months' planning Leon got only a few minutes at an effective focal length of 850mm to get this shot of Prince William and Kate Middleton's kiss after the Royal Wedding in April 2011.

This image was shot using a Nikon D3X with 600mm lens and 1.4x teleconverter.  
This image of the World Short-track Speed Scating Championships was shot in March 2011 using a Nikon D3s and 14-24mm f2.8 lens.

As for video, I regularly shoot 'webclips' for my employer Agence France-Presse which involve creating short 1-2 minute clips that can be used online to support text and photo stories. I've also shot footage for broadcast though, at last year's riots in inner London, for example. I like the fact that video is more tightly integrated into the D4 than the D3S and I'm really pleased to see that as well as full HD output, a headphone output has now been added for live audio monitoring. It's such a simple thing but the video teams at AFP were always astounded that the D3S didn't allow me to monitor my audio in any way. As well as 24, 25 and 30 frames per second, the D4 also allows 60 frames per second at the reduced 720p quality, which will allow me to capture slow-motion footage in camera - potentially very useful.

As for the D800, I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on one. A more compact form factor, incredible pixel count and full HD video makes it very very appealing for general-purpose stills and video work. I've always loved the size of the D700 and if the D800 can maintain D3-like image quality with three times the pixel count, it could feasibly end up being the more exciting of the two cameras. Bring it on!

Leon Neal is a staff photographer for international news agency Agence France-Presse. Leon shoots everything that comes his way including news, sport, features, fashion and live music. Although mainly based in the UK, foreign assignments include the revolution in Libya and the Winter Olympics in Vancouver.

To see more of his work visit www.leonneal.com 

The Multimedia Photojournalist: Dan Chung

The Nikon D4 and D800 are very interesting to me. I was running both Canon and Nikon systems side by side for ages - Nikon for stills and Canon for stills and video, but a couple of months ago I finally got rid of my Nikon bodies, mainly because I just wasn’t really shooting on them. I kept all my Nikon glass though, so if I decide to get another Nikon body I’ll be ready to start shooting again immediately. 

One of the main things I liked about the D700 for stills was it's faster frame rate compared to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II. The D800 is a slower camera than the D700, but the biggest draw compared to the 5D Mark II is the more advanced video specification.  

Canon EOS5DmkII, One night in Beijing (shot with Nikon lenses). from Dan Chung on Vimeo.

Both Canon and Nikon are producing great cameras now that you can shoot excellent video footage with. The difference obviously is that Canon is better established in that field. The D4 and D800 are still unknown quantities for now, but I know I could go on a broadcast shoot with a Canon EOS C300 tomorrow, and mix the footage in with video from the 1 DX or 5D Mark II and it would work.

This is why right now I would consider myself a Canon shooter. Until to the launch of the D4 and D800 there’s been no other choice for DSLR video really. Sony’s DSLR video stuff doesn’t quite cut it, and the Nikon D3S didn’t really cut it either - it didn’t have enough video resolution, the frame rates weren’t there, and frankly the image quality in video mode just wasn’t up to the same level as the Canon EOS 5D Mark II. As a stills camera the D3S is lovely but right now I need a video camera that shoots stills, not a stills camera that shoots video.

Shot on the Nikon D700 and AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8, this image is part of a 2009 case study of Hasina Begum, Char Atra, Bangladesh, taken by Dan for Oxfam. 

That's why I think the new Nikons look really interesting. I will definitely be looking at the D4 and D800 in more detail because I can’t afford not to. But I’d say the same thing about the Canon EOS-1 DX as well. There are a couple of key features missing from the Canon EOS-1 DX though that the Nikons have got - a headphone jack, and clean HDMI output. The headphone jack is something that I’ve been asking both Canon and Nikon to put on their DSLRs for a long time, and I hope that it’ll become a standard feature.

I think we’re getting to the stage now where the video functionality isn’t something that a multimedia photojournalist would switch systems for, as I've been forced to do in the past. So if you’re a Nikon shooter and you’re deeply invested in Nikon then there’s probably no need any more to go to Canon purely for video. Whatever system you use, video is definitely here to stay in DSLRs. Even for broadcast and movie professionals using RED or Cinema EOS equipment, cameras like the D4, D800 or EOS-1 DX could potentially be really interesting as B units or C units. The form factor is nice and compared to the pro video equipment they're attractively priced, too.

I need to see more footage though - only when I'm confident that video quality from the D800 and D4 is comparable to what I've seen from the EOS-1D X and whatever replaces the 5D Mark II will I really be able to decide which works for me. I've got some tough decisions to make but I'll definitely be spending some money soon! 

Award-winning photojournalist and videomaker Dan Chung made his name as a photographer for The Guardian and Reuters news agency, and has since pioneered the use of DSLRs in filmmaking, particularly in news coverage. Dan lives and works in China, but travels the world on assignment.

Dan also runs the industry blog www.dslrnewsshooter.com 

Click here to read page 2 of this article, Nikon D4 & D800: What do the Professionals Think?

1300
I own it
401
I want it
64
I had it
Discuss in the forums
297
I own it
250
I want it
22
I had it
Discuss in the forums
189
I own it
68
I want it
57
I had it
Discuss in the forums
849
I own it
99
I want it
294
I had it
Discuss in the forums
206
I own it
12
I want it
95
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 391
123
The Man With a Mask
By The Man With a Mask (Feb 23, 2012)

These updated versions are just pointed for those who makes huge loads of money via photography and those collectors who have no idea to where to spent there cash on.

There are no Visible differences in the sets of photos shot on each other than the resolution details, but who needs to pump it up in the size of a moon ?
My feelings are like they should not jumble and mix match the features, one in this and the other in that, but i should also point htis out that these matters to only those who buy Dslr s reading the attached specification sheet which i haven't gone through even once till now.

the speed and low light capabilities with a good sensor reflex is something i welcome the most and i don't want to hear and remember these much model numbers.

Please Nikon/Canon Please. Make it uniform.

4 upvotes
RudivanS
By RudivanS (Feb 23, 2012)

Yes, interesting - think out of the box - thoughts

0 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Feb 23, 2012)

Most professional photographers make very little money really. Certainly when compared with accountants, lawyers, dentists and so on.
There are - so I was told - less than 10 photographers earning 6 figure salaries in NZ for example.
Anyone who does it thinking they will get rich is probably not going to be pleased!

2 upvotes
ksgant
By ksgant (Feb 23, 2012)

I'm a professional, and I don't make 6 figures, but I hardly would say I make "very little money".

It's hard work...as in you constantly have to be chasing that buck, but it's doable if you're persistant. Some get rich off of it...like the ones that charge $30,000 on a wedding (which isn't unheard of in certain parts of the country).

0 upvotes
pfzt
By pfzt (Feb 23, 2012)

$30.000 for a wedding? the wedding of tom cruise and katie holmes? i can't imagine any other wedding where you can charge that kind of money :D

0 upvotes
The Man With a Mask
By The Man With a Mask (Feb 27, 2012)

Many draw good figures as paycheck working for certain companies and i know that. Talking not about free lancers who sell their photograph, but about those who are working for certain advt. companies. I think we have to wait till the next advancement like ' micro full scaled sensors' or 'pure stabilized bodies' or 'aperture fixed on body' or anything which makes a difference .. i wish to see that and nothing like 36.5 mp vs 34.2mp or any hell like that.

0 upvotes
Debankur Mukherjee
By Debankur Mukherjee (Feb 23, 2012)

Waiting to compare the high ISO performance of the D4 vs D800.....

2 upvotes
Telefoto
By Telefoto (Feb 23, 2012)

"In a perfect world, I would have loved to have seen the 24.5MP of the D3X harnessed with the speed and low light capabilities of the D3S. Neither the D4 nor D800 are that camera..."

Yes! As a D3x user, that's my feeling exactly. I've been mystified why no one else seems to voice that view, but I guess it's because there are very few D3x users on the forums. So, for all the 12 MP shooters here, I guess the D4 looks like an upgrade (stills wise) and the D800 looks like ... I dunno exactly, but it's some kind of step forward even though it breaks with the purpose of the D700 (high ISO shooting). But, I can't help thinking this strange D800 broke the bank. Witness for instance that even in DX mode, it's a step back in FPS from the D3 generation. That's strange and rather unwelcome to me.

1 upvote
MichaelEchos
By MichaelEchos (Feb 23, 2012)

D3X actually has better low light ability than D3S. It has one time more pixels, so if you were to display/print both images you got from both cameras at the same magnification/size, you'd get better performance from D3X. That's the reason why DxOMark selects the scores for each sensor when the images are resized to 8MP.

0 upvotes
TheEye
By TheEye (Feb 23, 2012)

"one time more pixels"? As in 1x2= 3? :-P

0 upvotes
gabeb1946
By gabeb1946 (Feb 23, 2012)

Exactly - the truth is very few were able to afford a D3x, and now Nikon seems to have screwed those folks ( if you're seeking ultimate pixel count ) with the much more affordable 800. Telephoto I'm curious - are you a pro? What is your primary style and/or subject? Always envied the huge enlargements and fabulous quality D3x users enjoyed. Keeping my much loved 700 for the time being - it was perfect for me at the time and it certainly hasn't become any less great. "Horses for courses". PS - great reply Barnaby !!

0 upvotes
Telefoto
By Telefoto (Feb 23, 2012)

Gabe, I'm an amateur wildlife and macro guy. I love the high res of the D3x and unfortunately am too frequently forced to rely on the cropping ability it gives. So, 36 MP is interesting to me. But, I'm not loving the D800 package. What I'm thinking is, maybe the D4x will be 50 MP with D3x image quality and I'll wait for that. And, no video.

I really don't get this "I love video too" thing because capturing good quality video is so vastly different than capturing good stills. All different set up, prep, execution. When these pros say "my employer expects me to grab video clips for the web while I'm out shooting stills," all I can think is, those must be some pretty stinky, useless video clips because you don't generally get good video by just standing in the same place and switching to video mode.

0 upvotes
Boxbrownie
By Boxbrownie (Feb 23, 2012)

I am a D3X user and a D300S user....different horse for each cart as far as I am concerned, I have been a professional for.... bloody hell....I just worked it out.....over 40 years now! The D3X is a great studio/macro and crowd/group camera, I shoot at 100asa in the studio and 800 or 1600asa depending upon circumstances for interior group shots (up to 300 people) I find the 800asa on the D3X will produce 100" x 30" without problem and very little noise, no complaints here. If the D800 is even a shadow of the D3X capability it will be my "home" camera, I for one regard pixels as king and low light performance as a secondary requirement, as I said horse for courses (or the right cart). I wish people would not denegrate that which they will never use.
As for video....its a stills camera, I have a perfectly good Sony broadcast camera for video, and feels right in the hand/on the shoulder, but then I am an old fart and beleive you should use the correct tools for the job.

0 upvotes
Jack Simpson
By Jack Simpson (Feb 23, 2012)

Never thought I'd see Neil here :o but he is cracking shooter :D

1 upvote
Fotogeneticist
By Fotogeneticist (Feb 23, 2012)

Thank God we're finally getting the perspective of the D4 and D800 from people who actually use cameras to their full potential on worthy subjects. Although I won't be upgrading since my D700 still has plenty of life, I like the fresh direction Nikon is going with these latest models.

2 upvotes
Ben Raven
By Ben Raven (Feb 23, 2012)

As others have noted, the photographers' comments revolve overwhelmingly around the video capabilities.

Much about high ISO improvement, yet little specific mention of the ABSOLUTE potential increase in IMAGE QUALITY !!
And not a word on the the D800E and, what I at least, consider a major push to unleash the full quality and Rez potential of the sensor -- dropping the Anti-Aliasing filter altogether -- hopefully a major future (near future, please !!!) trend. Let's see if Sony grabs that ball and runs with it, in its upcoming FF, and subsequent cams, . . .and "hello", Canon !

In future, let's see the opinions of a broader spectrum of Photographer-Types, even if, indeed, at this point this is all merely taking the temperature of anticipation for as yet untried product.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (Feb 23, 2012)

> yet little specific mention of the ABSOLUTE potential increase in IMAGE QUALITY !!

Looking carefully at the photos attached (esp on page 2) one could probably think that IQ itself isn't the top challenge the pros in this interview face.

0 upvotes
Michael Uschold
By Michael Uschold (Feb 23, 2012)

Hallelujah - someone finally decided to make it easy to take timelapse movies. Are you listening Canon???? I don't mind the extra expense for the feature, I do mind having to carry and extra bit of gear around. And while you are at it, what's up with limiting exposures to 30 sec? Why not an arbitrary amount of hours or minutes. Compared to the stunning amount of complexity of the algorithms for noise reduction and everything else - providing a simple timelapse feature or setting longer exposures is utterly trivial.

1 upvote
D1N0
By D1N0 (Feb 23, 2012)

That's wat B is for

0 upvotes
Frank C.
By Frank C. (Feb 23, 2012)

where's the baby d4? hello nikon, you there?

6 upvotes
aliraqi
By aliraqi (Feb 23, 2012)

hope there prices can be lower, for Full frame camera 5000+ are too much.
and the D700+D800 are way too expensive .
they can compete with canon in the price

1 upvote
xsimplyjosh
By xsimplyjosh (Feb 23, 2012)

5000$ isn't too much when you're making huge load of profit out of your photography.

I think the D4 is priced reasonably well, 800$ lower then the upcoming Canon 1Dx + Nikons D800 at 3000$ for 36mp is reasonable, compared to the previous Nikon D3x at 8000$ for 24 megapixels. D700 maybe alil bit for the RRP, but considering i got mine at 1700$, I don't think it's too bad for a FX camera.

I think prices are quite reasonable for the things that we all expect from Nikon's 2 new FX cameras... if you don't have the money, don't buy it then, wait awhile more.

0 upvotes
fmian
By fmian (Feb 23, 2012)

Xsimplyjosh: Didn't you hear from that wedding photography article the other month? Photographers don't make much profit at all, and have to scrape to make ends meet.

2 upvotes
bgbs
By bgbs (Feb 23, 2012)

From what I'm getting, professionals only want video. Previe please produce an article about those pros who are not interested in video

5 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 23, 2012)

You've not read page 2 then...?

15 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (Feb 23, 2012)

Why bother reading when you've already made up your mind?

0 upvotes
fz750
By fz750 (Feb 23, 2012)

I do think the link for the second page is a bit lost at the bottom of the article (to distinguish between the social media location and colour and the start of the comments or ads) and design generally is a bit confusing and would question why 2 pages are needed anyway.. (pages..?! it''s the internet.. :-)

3 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (Feb 23, 2012)

Barney:
> You've not read page 2 then...?

BTW, can you please ask your webadmins to make the navigation buttons tad bit larger? It would also help to position them in the center, as where they are in reviews. Thanks.

0 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Feb 23, 2012)

I agree completely. As the one other poster said "has the world gone mad?" It sure seems to have. I don't know if I blame the photographers as much as the news agencies demanding video from people who are not videographers. Accept what a person's skills are & don't ask them to be something they're not. I don't ask my plumber to repair my car, or my car mechanic to fix my computer.

0 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (Feb 23, 2012)

I once asked my typist to learn how to use a computer word processor.

0 upvotes
rockport5
By rockport5 (Feb 23, 2012)

D4= RIP OFF
D800 = BS MP

4 upvotes
jmmgarza
By jmmgarza (Feb 23, 2012)

Nice cameras... great lenses.

2 upvotes
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Feb 23, 2012)

It sounds like a baby D4 is the camera that Andy Sheppard would like. Maybe around a year from now one will come..

3 upvotes
Jimmy Drew
By Jimmy Drew (Feb 23, 2012)

Technically they were married when the kiss was photographed....so isn't actually Mr. and Mrs....Prince William?

0 upvotes
mike earussi
By mike earussi (Feb 23, 2012)

I'd be curious to hear what MF back studio photographers think about possibly using the D800(E) as a much cheaper, smaller and lighter weight alternative.

1 upvote
barreto_co
By barreto_co (Feb 23, 2012)

I am curious too. Very curious. I am a studio photographer who uses a 7 year old digital back and I am pondering on whether to buy a new back or the D800E. If you look at the sample images, I have my doubts but I intend to get the D800E so I will let you know.

0 upvotes
Sam Carriere
By Sam Carriere (Feb 23, 2012)

Still can't figure out for the life of me why someone who wants to shoot video doesn't get a video camera.

3 upvotes
RPJG
By RPJG (Feb 23, 2012)

Still can't figure out for the life of me why someone can't understand that other people have different requirements to themselves.

17 upvotes
AmaturFotografer
By AmaturFotografer (Feb 23, 2012)

Video camera can't shoot still. DSLR can do both.

13 upvotes
vFunct
By vFunct (Feb 23, 2012)

Why would anyone get a separate camera for video?

7 upvotes
Ladisai
By Ladisai (Feb 23, 2012)

And can you figure out why someone takes photos with a phone? Or listens to music with a handheld game console?

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (Feb 23, 2012)

Let's see, more video oriented controls, video optimised sensors that perform better in low light and have less scaling/downsampling issues. More video specific funtions, onboard audio features, more robust video codecs, manual gain control, better mounting points, video optimised lenses, electronic viewfinders, more suitably mounted articulated displays, much larger/better battery/power options, external recorder options, proper split monitoring options, top handles, shoulder mounts, much better onboard mics, much greater external connectivity options.

The ONLY advantage of DSLRs in video is that the feature is usually in a camera you already have as a stills camera (and obviously it's stills capability). Everything else is compromised, but hackers and users find lot's of workarounds for some of the downsides. Other issues can't be fixed which is why users are always begging for particular features in the next model. Dedicated video cameras are still a fair way ahead of DSLRs.

4 upvotes
ScottyNV
By ScottyNV (Feb 23, 2012)

Actually, a number of video cameras *can* capture stills, at high resolution.. the Sony VG-20 comes to mind with its APS-C 16mp sensor... The difference is that the VG-20 is designed for video with the ability to capture (high quality) stills, where my 5D2 is designed for stills with the ability to capture (high quality) video. Both do both jobs, quite adequately, but are oriented at different markets and users.

1 upvote
DStudio
By DStudio (Feb 23, 2012)

A DSLR has both low cost and relatively small size - thus it can be mounted on, for example, a moving vehicle to get an interesting shot. The lower cost also makes it worth the risk of the camera getting damaged.

The larger video cameras are just too big for some shooting situations, so now cameras are sometimes placed in spots they never were before.

0 upvotes
ivan1973
By ivan1973 (Feb 23, 2012)

It a market driven demand. People wants everything.

0 upvotes
ksgant
By ksgant (Feb 23, 2012)

Yeah, why not use video cameras like professional TV studios use when shooting a TV show. Wait, several episodes of House are shot on the 5D MkII, and most of the first season of the reboot of Hawaii 5-0 were shot on it also. Guess those guys shooting those shows don't know what they're doing.

Also, show me a video camera priced at the 5D or D800 level that has the sheer amount of interchangeable lenses available to it.

Sometimes, you people need to back away from your computers and stop with your assumptions. Seriously...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
muratime
By muratime (Feb 23, 2012)

Good Question!
no answer is clear or correct here.. bla bla bla..
answer is lens investment!
Today if you have good lenses in your hand DSLR gives you a very expensive edge compare to a similar cost videe camera.. creativity will be endless.. depth of fields, wider angles... artistic videos..
if you really wanna do similar with a real video camera? you need prof grade and investment on lenses, result is great but cost is not compareable what we are talking here...

I know I am not so fluent, but hope you got the point.. :)

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 23, 2012)

I guess you didn't notice the entire industry of HDSLR gear that has sprung up because people DO want to shoot video with a DSLR. HDMI field monitors, rails rigs and should mounts, LCDVF, external HDs like Ninja, etc

And contrary to what you may think, pro use DSLR video for all kinds of shoots. The reasons are many. Here are a few:
a) full frame and APS-C DSLR video cameras have a unique look due to shallow DOF. That is why all the fragrance ads on TV are shot with 5D mk II
b) Small sensor video cameras with 1/3" sensors have too much DOF, see a. That's why products like Letus 35 were created, to try to solve the awful everything in focus look achieved with videocameras.
c) a proper video camera like a Sony F3, or RED will cost many thousands of dollars more ($20,000 or triple that if you want an Arri Alexa)

@abortabort The even make PL mount adapters and hot rod mounts for Zeiss, Fuji PL cine lenses on DSLR. You think anyone who do so if there was no interest in HDSLR?

0 upvotes
jwalker019
By jwalker019 (Feb 23, 2012)

I think that would be Prince *William* kissing his new bride, not "Edward" ;)

Thanks for presenting these thoughts - nice to hear some pro opinions.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 23, 2012)

Fixed, sorry about that. They all look the same... ;)

8 upvotes
jimrpdx
By jimrpdx (Feb 23, 2012)

Wow! Toto, we (DPR) are not in London any more! :^)

1 upvote
MichaelK81
By MichaelK81 (Feb 23, 2012)

Considering none of these photographers have used neither one of these cameras, let alone field tested them, this interview just seems a bit... premature and speculative.

18 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 23, 2012)

'How important is a bigger house to you?'

'Don't know - ask me when I've moved in'.

22 upvotes
Bart Roskam
By Bart Roskam (Feb 23, 2012)

Well, they do not know how big the house will be, do they? This makes the article exactly what Michael stated; a bit premature and speculative.

3 upvotes
jnk
By jnk (Feb 23, 2012)

Considered that D3/s is the camera body that went to outer space where failure rates are not acceptable at this level and you're complaining about a 'wet job'?

Get real about the build of Nikon - Navy Seals used the D700 for their night missions and that should spell out the sealing questions of these bodies.

2 upvotes
MASTERPPA
By MASTERPPA (Feb 23, 2012)

As far the D3 going into space, you will laugh at the reason. NASA has a HUGE collection of Nikon lens.

5 upvotes
TOF guy
By TOF guy (Feb 23, 2012)

That's not the reason why Nasa chooses Nikon.

2 upvotes
nomiss777
By nomiss777 (Feb 23, 2012)

Considering the Olympus E-3 did a fine job in space and how much it cost less than the D3. I'm very impress.

5 upvotes
pablo de roma
By pablo de roma (Feb 23, 2012)

I think it is you who should get real here. Olympus E-3 went to outer space too. Seals do go bad on cameras and lenses with time.

1 upvote
robmanueb
By robmanueb (Feb 23, 2012)

Navy Seals never go bad.

1 upvote
DStudio
By DStudio (Feb 23, 2012)

jnk, I thought it was a very interesting observation - something I'd never thought about. It's a very real problem he experienced, and something Nikon has now moved to fix. Obviously the D3 needed improvement here.

1 upvote
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (Feb 23, 2012)

jnk - outer space is very dry place, actually ;)

1 upvote
TheEye
By TheEye (Feb 23, 2012)

I'm a Navy seal on a mission to take nighttime underwater pictures of the Anunnaki on Nibiru later this year. :-P

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
1 upvote
jnk
By jnk (Feb 24, 2012)

hmm - Olympus huh? I used to shoot the E510 which has been sold - it served it's purposes at the time - however - if I still own Oly stuff now - I would worried because of the scandals lately:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/16/Olympus-Scandal-Arrests-include-President-Chairman-Kikukawa

0 upvotes
Argent22
By Argent22 (Feb 23, 2012)

I'm surprised they didn't include fine art and studio photographers, especially given the resolution spec on the D800.

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 23, 2012)

Thats's something I'd like to explore in a future article, once D800s are actually available and in photographers' hands :)

5 upvotes
Octane
By Octane (Feb 23, 2012)

LOL Barney, just a few questions above you dismiss the comment that interviewing photographers about cameras they have never used is a little premature, and here you make the exact opposite point.

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 23, 2012)

@Octane - there's much more to write about the D800 and D800E as regards fashion/studio, because of their potential to occupy a new niche and shake up an established industry. This is an article about upgrade options for an established user-base, it's different. More will follow in a separate piece.

0 upvotes
Octane
By Octane (Feb 23, 2012)

@Barney, fair enough! I agree the D800E breaks into a market that was mostly MF. It certainly pushes into regions that have not been possible with SLRs before and we will have to see what the effect will be.

0 upvotes
nomiss777
By nomiss777 (Feb 23, 2012)

Wow that sucks... "I have two D3 bodies that have never recovered from shooting one particularly wet job". That's ridiculous, for a body that cost multiple grands, they should have made it better at weather sealing

6 upvotes
robmanueb
By robmanueb (Feb 23, 2012)

It's not an underwater camera

0 upvotes
Octane
By Octane (Feb 23, 2012)

what is considered a 'wet job' is pretty much up in the air. Sometimes the expectations are a little too high. Nikon never made any claims that you can go in a shower with a D3.

I've seen photographers crawling through swamps with their D3 and it worked fine. The camera was covered in mud in a way I would never treat my D3 but it worked fine. So I really wonder how wet that other 'wet job' must have been to kill a D3.

1 upvote
Tim the Grey
By Tim the Grey (Feb 23, 2012)

I have an Olympus E-1. It's been in the shower. And in 24 hours of rain. It's been put under a running tap to wash fine beach sand off/out of it.
It's 7 years old, and NEVER steamed up or missed a beat.
THAT is what I call weathersealing!
For the rest, yes, I want a D4. I'll make do with a recycled D3, though...

2 upvotes
noneyabidnis
By noneyabidnis (Feb 23, 2012)

I'm so very excited about this camera!!! I've always loved taking pictures and got a used Nikon D700 a year ago, but now the D800 will allow me to become a true professional. I don't think I want to do photography for a living, but I like knowing that all my pictures will have that professional looking quality about them.

0 upvotes
pablo de roma
By pablo de roma (Feb 23, 2012)

Please tell me this was just a joke. It's not the camera that makes one a pro photographer.

10 upvotes
RicksAstro
By RicksAstro (Feb 23, 2012)

Look at his Avatar (and posting history)...says it all...

2 upvotes
DStudio
By DStudio (Feb 23, 2012)

It looks like someone is having too much fun on this site ...

1 upvote
tmy
By tmy (Feb 27, 2012)

nice!!
some of the pther posts are pretty silly.

did you see any bears indeed!

at least a post that's not whining...

0 upvotes
Graystar
By Graystar (Feb 23, 2012)

"perhaps the most significant of which is a very impressive-looking video specification."

WHAT?? Pass what you're smoking, cause I want some!

At this level, if a pro needs pro video he's going to use a real video camera! The AF operation down to f/8 is far more significant, allowing the 500mm and 600mm lenses to auto-focus when used with the 2X teleconverter. THAT'S important to a photographer! Not video!

2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Feb 23, 2012)

So, despite two pros saying it's important to them (and two saying it isn't), we must be 'smoking something' to suggest that the biggest single feature change on the D4 is significant to pros?

19 upvotes
locke_fc
By locke_fc (Feb 23, 2012)

Yeah, I wonder who's smoking what. Apparently some people have not heard of the heaps of *professional* video work done with the 5DII in the last few years.

Interesting article, btw.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 23, 2012)

I like how you just decided what is important for two professional photographers. Anyway, since you know what's a real video camera is, what would that be? And if as you say pro would use a "real video camera", why is every perfume ad on TV shot with a 5D MK II as well as TV shows like House, blah blah blah? Face it, you have zero idea what you are talking about.

4 upvotes
WT21
By WT21 (Feb 23, 2012)

A fellow on my street makes a living shooting docs and music videos. He uses a 7D (though he's moving to a C3000) or a Red.

0 upvotes
Neroon
By Neroon (Feb 23, 2012)

Simply sublime logic. Let's see, what do you do for a living? Are you a Pro? The reason the 5D2 was so ground breaking was it's video. Movies and TV have used them to shoot scenes. DOF is the reason along with the size of the sensor and noise levels at low light. It's the reason we now see the new FF video cameras coming out -- why is RED so hot, thank the 5D2. You and Sam can from a club of people in denial about technology and why progress happens. This reminds me of the silly Film versus Digital debates back around 2000.

1 upvote
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (Feb 23, 2012)

I think Graystar this shows how out of touch you are of what the pro market wants and use.

This morning I have been uploading some stills to a website from a professional short film shot on a M43 camera because it has depth of field similar to a 35mm movie camera. Whilst at the outside location an actress on the film spotted a professional singer whose music she likes and listens to having a music video shot a few 100 feet away on a Canon DSLR. This is the reality of what is happening in the professional video industry.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Graystar
By Graystar (Feb 23, 2012)

I'd think that a featured billed as "most significant" would be important to more than 50% of photographers polled. I'd bet dollars to donuts that every pro sports and wildlife photographer will think much more of the ability to finally have AF with their $8000 and $10000 dollar lenses on a 2X converter, than the ability to have what still amounts to a limited video camera.

0 upvotes
marklaing
By marklaing (Feb 24, 2012)

Yes would have liked to see more from wedding photographers and portrait type stuff as well. I'm a Canon guy way back from the A1, and T90 days but the D800 looks like making me a Nikon guy. It seems to have a superb feature set and, from what I can see from Canon the 5D MKIII looks typical Canon, "wait for Nikon to push the envelope then (maybe) add a little more".

0 upvotes
costinul_ala
By costinul_ala (Feb 24, 2012)

i am stunned about how much criticism this camera is getting ... why ? it is not supposed to prepare your breakfast, too. I find this segment 5d/D700/D800 very appealing

0 upvotes
Total comments: 391
123