R Vaquero: Not too bad, three long years after the Nikon D800 release... ;)
Canon never made any D800 equivalent...unfortunately for Canon users
Not too bad, three long years after the Nikon D800 release... ;)
This is not the D700 update, it really was the D800
Wi-fi, it was about time! Why don't the D810 have any?
TBImages: The answer to this question may be obvious to those on this forum exceptionally familiar with the engineering details of the D810, not so much for me....
Is there an impact on dynamic range, noise, etc. when using the D810 in something other than full resolution mode? 20 megapixel or 9 megapixel mode for example?
At least noise is less visible shooting with lower resolutions, don't know about DR
sandy b: Nothing new, except Nikons new policy to react proactivly when an issue comes up. Your D800 as well as many other cameras would exhbit the same dots. I would suggest the Mansurovs test their older cameras too.
Yes ideed, the D800 has the very same issue, but it's shown at 24 x 36 full format. You don't need to set it to 1,2X...
R Vaquero: Copying Apple as usual...
iPhone 4 didn't work really well? Whatever you want, but I will never spend money on a crappy imitation loaded with the complicated Android OS.
Rinkos , every smartphone is a more or less cheap copy of the iPhone, maybe more things inside but worse user experience- build quality, OS, etc.BTW, an iPhone 4 working fine for more than three years of heavy use...
Copying Apple as usual...
SushiEater: Who cares about D810, we already know what Nikon is capable of.I just shot with 2 D800e over 3000 photos in 4 days in really lousy conditions and not a single photo is out of focus!!!!! Two years ago I was doing the same with Canon 5D2, 5D3 and 7D and I had lots OOF.So there is absolutely no reason making any complaints about D810 because it should be even better.
The D800 hasn't a really accurate AF, not bad but it should be better, as the D810 would surely be...
I see a good improvement in high ISO performance compared to the D800.
"There is a rule in the cruise ship business that you never go on a vessel’s first voyage..." Sometimes, a lot of us can't wait to replace -let alone two long years- our camera for a really important reason: being a pro and the need to replace our main tool to work with. Therefore we have to deal with the very first versions of a new camera. It's not the best choice if you don't really need the upgrade, but we have to do it when our main camera body gets overused.
Gosman: I love this article and seems to come out of my own mouth. Indeed I'm the one on the Nikon forum that pinned the name "Guinea Pigs" upon the early adaptors of the D800. I urged everyone to wait. What I didn't know was that it would take Nikon 2 years to upgrade and make the must needed changes. It is a huge lesson to all of us about product life cycles. This is why I decided to stay with Pentax and the K-3 which is now at the height of the crop sensor life cycle. I decided to stay away from full frame for awhile and see where the product cycle takes it along with the mirror less cameras. And yes, I am a Kodachrome baby and it is the first thing I thought of when I saw the ISO (we called it ASA) was 64!
Sometimes a lot of us can't wait to replace -let alone two long years- our camera for a really important reason: being a pro and the need to replace our main tool to work with. Therefore we have to deal with the very first versions of a new camera. It's not the best choice if you don't really need the upgrade, but we have to do it when our main camera body gets overused.
avronaut: It's about time! The FM2 was the last perfect styled Nikon.
I want to pay just once for every PS update, like I have done so far. I will never pay any fee every month to use any software. Otherwise, competitors will have a new customer :(
Waiting for the D300 successor...here you are! ;)
Louis_Dobson: Well, I have no dog in the fight - I got rid of the D3 for an OM-D.
But I'm baffled by the review. Look at page 23 - feeble sensor DR (as picked up by DxOMark). So this camera is a one trick pony - low noise at high ISO. Who wants to carry around a brick to get that? Wedding shooters. And a very high proportion of wedding shooters want their shots out and paid for with minimal PP, which means JPG. The camera's other weakness? The JPG engine.
So it's not really terribly good, is it? It's only good at one thing, and in the end it isn't very good at THAT either.
Nonetheless it will sell well, because people are foolishly obsessed with using "what the pros use". If they bought their cars the same way they'd have delivery vans and taxis.
Me, I'd like a D800, but the OM-D is too good to justify having both. This, I'd not touch thanks, unless I decided I wanted to shoot weddings and couldn't afford a D4.
Many of the best wedding photographers shoot JPG. In fact shooting RAW in a wedding has little sense, unless your technique is not that solid...
Shame on Canon trolls that don't accept Nikon has released a great camera. Accusing Dpreview has been bought by Nikon is even more ridiculous.
Great job, DPreview. Congrats!
Opened D800 files on NX2 and IQ is really fantastic, a 1600 ISO file is widely usable for me for high quality purposes. Seems to be a fantastic camera that will change our working mind.