Why do I keep seeing ridiculous comments like "Nikon has no control over their sensors". Everyone knows the D800 sensor was manufactured by Sony. Can anyone reasonably assume that Nikon was not involved in the DESIGN of the sensor? Sony can make sensors at lower cost than Nikon due to economies of scale, but the sensor DESIGN is definitely Nikon's - that is what is important to know.
ZorSy: I'm not sure where this kind of reviews published on DPR are taking this site to: I don't work for or with Nikon, nor have D800 for that matter. There have been grips and 3rd party accessory for cameras before, never "reviewed" in this fashion. It was part of discussions and comments about the stuff one can buy on e-bay, for good or bad (none has to tell us it's cheaper than OEM stuff, we know that anyway). Why did DPR pick to this way so of the sudden is a bit of mystery. Independent reviewers can go the way they want, without question - following the "line of money". But why with D800 grip? I'm sure the number of MB-D10 clones and variants sold over years for D80/90 is plain vast compared to the number of D800's out there - yet never even remotely mentioned, virtually non-existent. Hmm..
Let me offer a possible explanation. The D800 has been one of the most newsworthy professional level cameras of the year so far. Demand has been strong since it came on the market. Now, most serious shooters at this level will at least consider the vertical grip at some point - many have been put off by the unreasonably high price of the MB-D12 which is construction-wise, no different from its predecessor, the MB-D10. The result of all this is outrage among a lot of Nikon shooters about the pricing of this desirable accessory. If you look online, you will find a lot has been said about this, and not just in forums. What this means is that this is probably the most 'newsworthy' vertical grip so far for a digital SLR, hence DPR's interest in reviewing it. I personally am grateful for the review as will likely influence my purchasing decision.
teeoh717: As a Canon user, I couldn't imagine owning a 36mp camera without the option of sRaw. I use it *all the time* with my 5DII.
And I'm sorry, but the Lossless/12 bit/compressed RAW options are useless in my mind. Why would photographers want reduce the quality of their photos? We're talking about reducing *size*, not quality. Greatly limits the versatility of the D800—something that would prevent me from purchasing it if I were a D700 user.
There are simply times that I am not shooting for billboards. Sometimes it simply comes down to the fact that I am shooting for Facebook on a long trip with no opportunity to dump the card. Why waste the space and time in post??
If you are shooting just for Facebook, small jpeg is a fine format.
I swear Nikon has discovered some alien technology!
nicolas guilbert: And so what !, I think most still use a DSLR for Still.
I imagine that is true for the circle in which you operate. That is not necessarily an accurate barometer for the rest of the world. Someone in the videography profession may think differently of this. The 5D mark II made significant waves not only in television but in Hollywood as well. Just recently I noticed that two of the cameras used by crew of a local TV station were DSLRs (on sophisticated booms). I think the videography landscape may be changing and that is the reason for the interest.
malevopfgm: Wow !!!, it's just me or it outresolves the D800 detail ?, I've just compared the portrait samples from both and I can see the same detail, just check the reflection in the eyes.
I think it's you.