Previous page Next page

June 2014 | By Barney Britton


Preview based on a pre-production Nikon D810

Two years after Nikon shook up the high-end DSLR market with the 36MP D800 and D800E, it has consolidated the 800-series with the release of a new camera, the D810. The D810 replaces both previous 800-series models, and will be offered at an MSRP of $3299 - about the same as the D800E, and a little more than the D800. Why is the D810 priced like the D800E, and not the D800? Well, the D810 takes the D800E's 'AA filter cancellation' trick one step further by dispensing with an AA filter entirely, which should result in a camera that offers greater resolution than either of the two models that it replaces.

Anti-aliasing filter aside, the D810 is not by any means a reinvention of the popular D800/E concept, but the handful of major changes should make the new camera more capable than its predecessors. Perhaps more importantly, they should also make the camera more attractive to potential buyers who have been weighing up whether or not to jump into full-frame. The D810 isn't a camera that you should necessarily sell your D800 or D800E for, but it's a better camera than both older models - at least on paper.

Following Nikon's general philosophy a few of the refinements made in the D4S have trickled down into the D810 and videographers especially should be pleased with a couple of the additions to its video feature set. Other welcome changes include a redesigned shutter and mirror mechanism to mitigate resolution-reducing shock from shutter actuation, and a new S-Raw mode for reduced-resolution raw capture (Nikon owners have been asking for that one for years).

Nikon D810: Key Specifications

  • 36.3MP Full-frame CMOS sensor (no AA filter)
  • ISO 64-12,800 (expands to ISO 32-51,200)
  • Electronic first-curtain shutter and redesigned mirror mechanism
  • New 'RAW Size S' 9MP Raw mode
  • Expeed 4 engine
  • Max 5fps shooting in FX mode, 7fps in DX (with battery grip + EN-EL18 / AA batteries)
  • 3.2in 1,229k-dot RGBW LCD screen with customizable color
  • OLED viewfinder information display
  • Improved Scene Recognition System allows face detection in OVF mode
  • 'Split screen zoom' display in live view allows horizons/lines to be leveled precisely
  • 51-point AF system with new 'Group Area AF' mode (inherited from D4S)
  • New 'flat' Picture Control mode (intended to appeal to videographers)
  • Auto ISO available in manual exposure mode
  • Zebra strips for focus checking in video mode
  • Uncompressed HDMI output with simultaneous recording to memory card
  • Built-in stereo microphone

D800 and D800E: Two become one...

In testing, we found that the practical difference in raw detail reproduction between the D800 and D800E was minimal except in a very narrow range of circumstances - specifically, tripod-mounted short shutter duration shooting at wide apertures with prime lenses.

As such, if two models must be consolidated into one, it makes sense for that single model to offer the highest possible resolution. We can only hope that Nikon has given the D810 the same sharper, more detailed JPEGs that it (apparently arbitrarily) gave the D800E, which were significantly more print-ready than those from the D800 for no obvious reason at all beyond justifying the extra $300 MSRP.

Some people might not have been entirely sure why Nikon released the D800 and D800E as separate models two years ago. Our take on it at the time was that the D800E offered some advantages, sometimes, but if you weren't too bothered you could be perfectly happy with the D800 and you'd have saved a little cash. Perhaps now, after success with the D7100 and D5300 the company felt more confident about omitting the AA filter from its highest-resolution body - albeit naturally at the risk of more moiré than we'd expect from the D800 and possibly also the D800E.

D810 versus D800/E: Specification highlights

  • 36.3MP full-frame CMOS sensor with no AA filter (D800E has effects of AA filter 'canceled')
  • 5fps maximum shooting in FX mode (compared to 4fps in D800/E)
  • New 'Group Area AF' mode (5 AF points can act together)
  • New electronic first-curtain shutter and redesigned sequencer/mirror balancer to reduce vibrations
  • New 'highlight-weighted' metering option (to preserve highlight detail in contrasty scenes)
  • 1080/60p movie recording with built-in stereo mic (compared to 1080/30p with monaural audio)
  • 3.2" 1,229k-dot RGBW LCD screen (compared to 3.2" 921k-dot RGB)
  • Power aperture available while shooting video to SD/CF card (compared to only when using HDMI)
  • The ability to record to memory card while simultaneously outputting video over HDMI
  • New 'flat' Picture Control mode (intended for videographers who need broader dynamic range)
  • Unlimited continuous shooting (previously 100-frame limit)


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2014 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
64
I own it
235
I want it
26
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 1022
12345
Vladik
By Vladik (16 min ago)

Wow, these are some vibrant photos!

0 upvotes
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (2 hours ago)

read DXO mark on this one, you will see the IQ is the same or extremely similar to that of the D800E.
and considering the price difference between the D810 and the D800E, there is no point getting it if you do not need a touch better AF, a bit better LV,etc over the D800E.
I think this is what D800E should have been, but it is now already dated even at this point, Nikon should focus its very limited R and D money onto FX mirrorless.
for me , the Sony A7R wins over all this extremely old dated D-SLR.

0 upvotes
tom43
By tom43 (1 hour ago)

Why is it dated? The D810 delivers best image quality of all current full format sensor cameras together with a fantastic optical view finder, nice display, fast autofocus, huge number of lenses and this is all based on a technology platform which has been proven to deliver results under most demanding conditions. A true professional instrument! If you are as good as a photographer you should be proud of yourself!

2 upvotes
tom43
By tom43 (5 hours ago)

Wouldn´t it make more sense to wait for the final versions of the RAW converters like ACR or (better) Capture One Pro? Furthermore, does it make really sense to judge this high resolution cameras with sub-optimal lenses? Why not shooting with a Zeiss Otus 55, Sigma 50 Art or Zeiss Apo-Sonnar 135? To my opinion these sensors deliver such outstanding results that you have to work under perfect conditions!

5 upvotes
wingnut1
By wingnut1 (3 hours ago)

Totally agree, should have used some of Nikon's best (or other brand) fixed focal length lenses for at least 50% of test rather than "high quality" zoom lenses

1 upvote
Picturenaut
By Picturenaut (6 hours ago)

DSC_8558 impressed me most: looks like the D810 is the sweetest pastry-shooting DSLR in the world. Good news for pastry shooters!

1 upvote
rubank
By rubank (6 hours ago)

Interesting. Almost as good as the "old" D800.
Definetly more moié, and less resolution according to DPRs studio comparison, especially in edges and corners.

Possibly a little, and I mean little, less colour noise from ISO 12800 and up.
So what.

0 upvotes
lensberg
By lensberg (7 hours ago)

The 5D Mark III is an all-round class act... definitely superior to the D800 / 800E / 810 in low light...

As for DXO... well I suppose the average Nikon fan needs their egos propped up from a "scientific" point of view... thus its existence...

Its amazing how many pro's use Canon... despite DXO's claims of Nikon's vast sensor tech prowess... at most major international sporting events white lenses still reign supreme... with perhaps with a thin speckling of black glass here and there... :)

0 upvotes
paulski66
By paulski66 (5 hours ago)

You sound somewhat desperate...

6 upvotes
LSE
By LSE (5 hours ago)

it's a nice camera but for low light 1DX d4 are the way to go. which leaves the question what is the 5DIII good for since its low resolution and banding problems make it a non starter for landscape and studio. I guess the extra 1fps over the 810 is better but the compromises in DR and noise are too much to ask for 1fps.

6 upvotes
raybies
By raybies (3 hours ago)

I just sold my 5D3. I recently took it and my a6000 on a 6 week vacation. I also took a low powered ultrabook + LR5 and it really struggled with Canon RAW files, where as Sony ARW's would look quickly.
I was able to get more shadow detail with the a6000. In all honesty the only thing the 5D3 was slightly better at was fast auto focus of moving subjects... which I rarely shoot. The a6000 beat it in every other way... AE, WB, detail, colour, noise.
PS: I hate the a6000's viewfinder.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
badi
By badi (1 hour ago)

@lensberg:
Oh, I didn't know DXO exists to please Nikon and it's fans. Thank you for the info.
By the way, maybe you should write that down on wikipedia so everybody to know it :).

0 upvotes
brycesteiner
By brycesteiner (45 min ago)

>>Its amazing how many pro's use Canon... despite DXO's claims of Nikon's vast sensor tech prowess... at most major international sporting events white lenses still reign supreme... with perhaps with a thin speckling of black glass here and there... :) <<

Because brand is what defines good images....

I learn so much here!

0 upvotes
crashpc
By crashpc (8 hours ago)

With all respect of (IN MY OPINION :-) ) better Nikon output for general use, I´m surprised how well 5D III holds its own, and how good it still is at low light. It still looks that Canon sensors noise cleans out easier, and also has better character. Hope they make some progress for their new lines, and that high megapixel count sensor will make it to APS-C, otherwise I´ll have to save some mony for Nikon :-)

2 upvotes
beavertown
By beavertown (11 hours ago)

Strange DXO Mark always bashes Canon's sensors. But the 5D Mark III produces better IQ than the newly released D810 in terms of colours, sharpness, noise performance both in JPG and RAW.

7 upvotes
halfwaythere
By halfwaythere (10 hours ago)

You forgot to add "In my humble opinion" at the beginning of your second sentence.

7 upvotes
d3xmeister
By d3xmeister (10 hours ago)

As much as I love the Mark III, it doesn't even come close in any IQ aspect to the D800

10 upvotes
Johannes Zander
By Johannes Zander (10 hours ago)

The D800 is allready better than the 5D MKIII.

9 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (10 hours ago)

Everyone cares about pixel sharpness over anything else. Disregarding how much moire issues are being revealed in both the studio or real-world samples. Moire issues show on small prints while extra sharpness requires a slight nudge of a slider to be imperceptible on large prints. Why Nikon ignores their DR advantage and only focuses on their tack-sharp moire inducing AAless sensors is mind boggling.

Even in flat lighting with a zoom capturing even movement and I see moire.
DSC_8514 and DSC_8563 is just two I found so far.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
KW Phua
By KW Phua (6 hours ago)

Now I look at the jpeg to see how good the IQ, because they is no raw RAW OFC. If the jpeg can be clean and detail then other, that mean that the RAW is good also. Some camera cooked too much on RAW, and taken up too much time on processing the RAW. The RAW look like slightly better then Canon's jpeg.

0 upvotes
LSE
By LSE (5 hours ago)

the problem is that DR wise the 5DMKIII is basically a noise and banding party in shadows which is a non starter if you want real life DR. see Loyd Chambers extensive comparison of the huge drawbacks of the canon sensors. you simply cannot take them seriously and canon needs to catchup badly.

4 upvotes
KW Phua
By KW Phua (4 hours ago)

@LSE DR wise I have to agree with you. Canon really need to catch up. DR mostly affecting Landscape photography, for action shooter usually shoot with higher ISO, Canon still not bad.

0 upvotes
KW Phua
By KW Phua (4 hours ago)

Can Canon catch up with the IQ if the MP increase? I am not sure. This is what many birders like. We can crop a lot. Do not need to carry heavy lens. Canon please give me 7D2 with Hi MP and good IQ.

0 upvotes
InTheMist
By InTheMist (13 hours ago)

Is it me or is the white balance looking much better?

1 upvote
Alec
By Alec (15 hours ago)

I currently have a D800, and for tethered shooting using HDMI out to an external 24" monitor for manual focusing, I currently have to use an EyeFi card, because D800 won't simultaneously enable USB tether and HDMI output.

Is D810 able to do the latter?

Also on the video front, is it scaled from all pixels on the sensor or produced using line-skipping?

0 upvotes
Zlik
By Zlik (15 hours ago)

about the video, it looks like it's the same line skipping method as the D800... Watch the moiré at 0:22 and 0:34 :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvP3bi6qU4c

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (14 hours ago)

No hd,i tethering to external monitor??? I have limited eyesight and had hopes of using 7" monitor to focus stills shooting. Please tell me i can still use external monitor without using eye fi card!

0 upvotes
Alec
By Alec (14 hours ago)

Galbertson on a D800 you can, if you capture pix on a memory card as opposed to directly in a computer.

Since D800 can write video to the memory card AND HDMI out, I was thinking it might also be able to do USB3 tethering and HDMI out concurrently as well, that D800 can't. So, anyone?

0 upvotes
Blackraven
By Blackraven (15 hours ago)

I owned a D800 for 18 months but sold it because the focussing couldnt be trusted. I used it primarily with a Nikon 20-70mm f2.8 and had the combo calibrated by Nikon. This improved the performance significantly but still only managed to produce in-focus shots around 90% of the time. I do a lot of travel photography and the mis-focussing caused many once-in-a-lifetime shots to be spoiled.
I have many other Nikon lenses and the only way that I could guarantee a high level of focus accuracy was when I manual-focussed with AI lenses using the green-focussing dot as an initial guide - but with final focus confirmation by eyesight. This got very tiring - especially as I am not a teenager any more!
As I have so many Nikon lenses - around 12 - I need to get another Nikon body. I was eagarly waiting for the D810 and with the supposed improved AF, I really hope that this time Nikon have got their AF act together.
I really hope that the D810 is what the D800 should have been in the first place

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Esign
By Esign (8 hours ago)

Well, the camera doesn’t know where you want your exact focus point. In will make the best possible guess from the average of 51 measurements and hope for the best. But it still doesn’t KNOW. More pixels means more missed shots. In critical work, you must always choose YOUR focus point. That’s what real photography is all about. With my EOS-M, I can tap the screen, and haven’t missed focus once. Slow, but good.

1 upvote
brycesteiner
By brycesteiner (15 hours ago)

I'm a little disappointed in this. The image samples have a lot of noise even at relatively low ISO (1800). The shuttershock is also noticeable in quite a few pictures and mentioned in the review on what they had to do for the sample page. Expecting your wedding party to wait 3 seconds between shots for the shutter to stop vibrating is excessive nowadays. Hopefully they'll have fix soon.
The sensor has so much detail, it really shows issues with the lenses.
I think I would choose a D4 over this one.

0 upvotes
Mike Griffin
By Mike Griffin (14 hours ago)

I see no evidence of shutter shock

0 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (14 hours ago)

The shutter shock is noticeable in our studio scene? No it's not - there was no shutter movement at all as we used electronic 1st curtain (EFC).

And, technically, it's more the mirror slap that a wedding photographer would have to worry about. As we show in our 'Lab Report - Electronic 1st Curtain' page, the shake introduced by the VR mechanism responding to the shutter opening is pretty much eliminated by EFC.

That said, no photographer - besides a landscape photographer - wants to shoot in Mirror Up mode.

By the way, EFC is only available in Mirror Up mode on the D810. We think this is a very strange choice by Nikon. Perhaps they feel that the vibrations induced by the mirror flipping up will swamp any benefits an EFC might bring? Secondly, EFC doesn't reduce shutter shock outside of Live View unless a delay is added between the shutter opening & initiation of exposure via EFC (since the shutter has to open). Perhaps they were unwilling to add this delay.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (14 hours ago)

But what makes least sense is Nikon's omission of EFC in Live View shooting mode sans Mirror Up. In Live View, the mirror is already up, so it makes little sense to ever engage Mirror Up in Live View. Nikon's requirement of Mirror Up simply to engage EFC means an odd shooting experience in Live View with EFC: the first press of the shutter does nothing (since the mirror is already up), and then the second press initiates the exposure electronically. The first press of the shutter button is an entirely unnecessary step. When EFC is engaged in Live View, the first press of the button should initiate the exposure electronically - as is the case for many mirrorless cameras.

We feel this is likely an oversight on the part of Nikon, and hope to see a fix for it in a future update.

1 upvote
brycesteiner
By brycesteiner (14 hours ago)

Rishi, That is exactly what I was referring to.
>>"Note that in order to get maximal image quality out of the D810, we flipped the mirror up 3s prior to each exposure, and engaged electronic 1st curtain to eliminate any effects of the shutter opening on image sharpness. We talk about the benefits of electronic 1st curtain on the next page."<<
Which was the right thing to do. And I agree with you "We feel this is likely an oversight on the part of Nikon, and hope to see a fix for it in a future update."
Mike: quite a few of the samples demonstrate the shock. Here is one I grabbed quickly. Look at her eye brows or about any contrast details:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/masters.galleries.dpreview.com/2982018.jpg?X-Amz-Expires=3600&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAJ7ICBHXPIPPMTNCQ/20140724/us-east-1/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20140724T021625Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=230f6cd598d9709c63cfd81f7a4f7aae4738ac8710a5efff1ce1a5c427aefb38

0 upvotes
brycesteiner
By brycesteiner (14 hours ago)

Her hair on her forehead clearly shows it too. Perhaps it just a lousy lens, but I don't think so.

0 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (14 hours ago)

brycesteiner: That particular shot looks plenty sharp to me. At these resolutions, though, anything outside the plane of focus will appear unsharp.

Note also that that shot was taken at 1/250s. We're still going through our hundreds and hundreds of mirror slap/shutter shock images, but there's little reason to believe you'd see it at such a high shutter speed at the focal length used in that photo (55mm).

0 upvotes
brycesteiner
By brycesteiner (14 hours ago)

The E-M5 and the E-M1 both had users deny the existence of it even though the images showed it. Olympus finally fixed the problem.
Maybe I'm seeing something else, but her right eye has double image around the eye brow. Her hairline in the center of her forehead also shows the double image even clearer. There are sections that look sharper on the right side of the image and don't seem to experience the shuttershock.
I would get the same thing on the Olympus cameras too. Part of the image would have it and other parts wouldn't. 1/250 is in the range for that size of sensor.

0 upvotes
Mike Griffin
By Mike Griffin (17 hours ago)

The D810 really shines when resolving the green feathers and their shafts in the widget where there are very subtle colour differences.

0 upvotes
Marcelobtp
By Marcelobtp (17 hours ago)

The only thing i want to know about the d810 is dynamic range at iso 64.
It is better then a7r iso 100?
This is really a true base iso 64 with all of its vantages?

0 upvotes
LSE
By LSE (5 hours ago)

check Lloyd Chambers comparison. the D810 runs circles around any DSLR or mirrorless out there. it's the finest 35mm sensor in the world for this task.

2 upvotes
Marcelobtp
By Marcelobtp (1 hour ago)

Thanks LSE.

0 upvotes
David Kinston
By David Kinston (17 hours ago)

Question re shooting video with DX lens in DX mode on FX cameras.
What is the effect on resolution and other video settings?
I'm hoping the camera is smart enough to use the cropped area to produce full resolution videos without any penalty.
(I asked this question a while back re the D610 but no answers).

0 upvotes
chillgreg
By chillgreg (11 hours ago)

Probably better luck asking in the forums David.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/1021

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (17 hours ago)

Lens issue: in RAW, lots of fringing, visible as you move into the corners. Also , lens seems soft in corners. Which lens was used?

1 upvote
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (17 hours ago)

Nikkor AF-S 85mm f/1.8 G, as noted in the metadata if you hover over 'i' at the bottom right of each crop.

We can't control for lens/body mount variations, which are more visible with these high resolution sensors. And we don't wish to shoot at apertures smaller than f/5.6 b/c of diffraction-induced softening.

0 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (9 hours ago)

The D800 studio shot still looks to be the best done. Either the lens copy was sharper or the test was done better, or something was magical about the D800 as it clearly is just as sharp with the least moire. So far it seems the best of the 3 for the versatility and money is the D800, the rest seems to be technique, chance, or lens copies.

0 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (17 hours ago)

The only improvement I can see (and I'm talking only RAW) is that at high ISO the D810 has less chroma noise, otherwise they are so close as to not matter, at any ISO. Clearly Sony won't be getting any more out of its current sensor technology, not that it needs to do much more. The main reason I'd get a D810 is if I had a D700, it's not worth a D800 user upgrading. The native ISO 64 and increased shooting speed are welcome but not reason enough to upgrade.

I wonder if there are many real breakthroughs left on the sensor front using current technology. Canon needs to deliver a 7D II with a sensor that is line-ball with the Sony efforts, lest they face the nightmare of Sony releasing all new sensors that further widen the considerable gap that already exists.

0 upvotes
mgblack74
By mgblack74 (17 hours ago)

Actually, as a D800 user I don't really care what real world samples are like. I know they will only be good. But thanks for trying to think like a D800 user. What has sold me on the upgrade is the multitude of refinements, specifically in AF, AF accuracy, and group AF and a new warranty to replace my early D800. ISO 64 may not sound significant but it buys me some f/stops when using a big flash outside that only syncs to 1/250. The IQ may be a tick better without an AA filter but it's the easier operability that will sway D800/E users.

0 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (17 hours ago)

It doesn't matter much, D800/810. If people want the lowest noise and to preserve detail at high ISO, then a 36mp sensor is not the way to go, even if you downsize to match a 12-16mp sensor. If they bring out something like a new D700 with the 4s sensor, that would be an alternative.

0 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (16 hours ago)

Only D800 owners with more money than sense would rush out to upgrade. If you seriously think the small differences will improve your photography you need a new hobby.

4 upvotes
Daviddgf
By Daviddgf (15 hours ago)

So your a canon researcher for your day job?
What a dick!

0 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (14 hours ago)

Note that the D810's seemingly lower chroma noise at high ISO might be due to lower overall saturation in these ACR conversions. The ACR version used is a beta version, so the color profile may not yet be final.

Take a look at how much more saturated the D800E appears to be. That'll likely have an effect on observed chroma noise.

We'll hold back on more definitive comments on noise until a final ACR version is released.

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (12 hours ago)

Sorry Daviddgf that you are flipping burgers for a career, but no need to take it out on others. I'm sure you'd love to do research, if you knew what it meant.

1 upvote
chillgreg
By chillgreg (11 hours ago)

@Daviddgf is your "I'm a whackjob" T-Shirt in the wash?

0 upvotes
aftab
By aftab (18 hours ago)

High ISO noise is better than D800 and better than A7r starting from ISO400.

0 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (18 hours ago)

The differences are marginal, at best (in Raw, anyway).

Also, make sure you're comparing shots taken with the same exposure. In ISO 12.8k shadows, the D810 performs on par with the D800E, & perhaps a tiny bit better than the D800. The fact that the D810 & D800/E perform better than the A7R in this particular comparison is mostly due to the fact that the A7R received 1/3EV less exposure.

We are still in the process of making sure all cameras are shot at the same exposures in Raw.

0 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (18 hours ago)

Also, in general, noise differences of less than 1/3 EV aren't worth poring over, as they likely fall somewhere within the margin of error.

First, there's the issue of potential shutter speed inaccuracy at high shutter speeds. To be fair, though, the margin of error is likely tighter in our low light scene b/c the lower shutter speeds used tend to be more accurate.

But then you have to consider that ACR performs some basal level of noise normalization, even with NR set to 0 (as we do).

So we'd encourage everyone to be wary when talking about minuscule differences in noise performance.

2 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (17 hours ago)

Mr. Sanyal: at photographylife.com they talked about using the new Nikon software instead of ACR, since ACR delivered suboptimal results. This of course would make comparisons with other cameras redundant. Nevertheless, could it be that at this stage the D810 is not supported in an optimal way by ACR? Other than that, I appreciate the effort you provide in making things as transparent as possible and the way you interact with the commenters!

4 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (17 hours ago)

No worries, that's appreciated. Audience perspective is important when you're trying to address, well, an audience :)

Yes we choose not to use manufacturer software as it's a limited use-case. Furthermore, the manufacturer software's default settings are generally what's reflected in JPEG anyway.

ACR use is far more widespread. But it has its downsides for comparisons - mainly some level of noise normalization. Of course, such normalization is sensible - it's not like you see worse or smaller sensors performing as good as better or bigger ones b/c of this basal level of NR!

There's some internal interest in using dcraw for noise comparisons, at least when it comes to quantitation. The upside of using dcraw is that there's absolutely no noise reduction performed on the Raw data (AFAIK). The downside is that very few people use dcraw, so for visual results, we feel ACR (zero'd out) is more representative. So we're kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place there...

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
qianp2k
By qianp2k (16 hours ago)

Only slightly. Bear in mind that DPR used Planar T* 85mm F1.4 ZA lens which is an Alpha-lens thru adapter tested on A7R, not a native FE lens such as FE 55/1.8, so it's not a quite fair test. If that adapter is LA-EA4 that built-in SLT motor, then A7R will inherit 1/3-stop ISO disadvantage from SLT compared to the native lens on D810.

1 upvote
Photoman
By Photoman (16 hours ago)

The good thing now that Nikon's NX-D software is free...for Windows only thought.

0 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (16 hours ago)

qianp2k: We used the LA-EA3, no built-in SLT.

There is still a 1/3 EV disadvantage to the A7R in Raw b/c of the shorter exposure. We will re-shoot it shortly using our new, standard, matched exposure method in Raw.

Probably with the FE 55mm as well, btw.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
qianp2k
By qianp2k (15 hours ago)

Thanks Rishi. In very high ISO, A7R could have slight more noise due to full-time LV so sensor will be overheated a bit more.

0 upvotes
qianp2k
By qianp2k (19 hours ago)

It still show more moire than A7R.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=nikon_d810&attr13_1=sony_a7r&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&normalization=full&widget=130&x=-0.6282213213349404&y=0.37960868016953847

2 upvotes
InTheMist
By InTheMist (13 hours ago)

Yep. Weaker AA filter

Neither camera looks really good in that specific use case.

0 upvotes
Sonylover1
By Sonylover1 (19 hours ago)

Comic.
800E looks better - and less moire.
Sony A7R kicks them both.
End of story.

If I had Sony A7R sensor in my old trustworthy Canon 7D I could go on for 10 years still to come. The 7D is my all-favourite for action-photo.
My RX100 for street.

I think you shouldnt by a new camera more than 2 times in a decade.

2 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (18 hours ago)

? What are you comparing? At ISO 6400-25600, RAW the Nikon looks better IMO than the A7r, slightly less noise, especially color noise. Several review sites already pointed to 1/3 to 1/2 a stop advantage. Your comment is exaggerated ("kicks them both"). At lower ISOs differences in the used lenses could make a difference. But even then I can't see an advantage in the A7r or D800E.

7 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (18 hours ago)

800E having less moire is highly debatable; they're very similar here. And if it does have less moire, it may be due to slight softening by the presence of the OLPF + the element that reverses its effects, or by the ever-so-slight softening due to the shutter going up to initiate the exposure.

0 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (18 hours ago)

Where does the A7R kick them both? Remember to not over-interpret edge/corner sharpness, as this is highly lens/mount dependent. That is variation in lens quality, lens decentering, lens/body mount variations, etc. These are all more noticeable at such high resolutions.

More centrally, the D810 is the sharpest compared to the D800/E & A7R.

Though, at this point, we're really splitting hairs, so to speak.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
EricCul
By EricCul (18 hours ago)

@Sonylover1. I also have an RX100 series and A7R cameras and love them. But, you need glasses if you think the A7R "kicks" the Nikon D810. Then again, it may be a silly fanboy comment to get attention.

The Nikon D810 is top of my shopping list.

0 upvotes
Valiant Thor
By Valiant Thor (16 hours ago)

"More centrally, the D810 is the sharpest compared to the D800/E & A7R.

Though, at this point, we're really splitting hairs, so to speak."

Well then, let's get some hi-res samples of split hairs and get to the bottom of this.

0 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (10 hours ago)

There is an area that the Sony A7R is superior, and that is contrary to Nikon's claims of improved moire handling (because it surely isn't that good in NX-D and just isn't there in its OOC jpeg), the Sony's A7R *clearly* does seem to have some good anti-moire mojo going on in their OOC jpegs. This is a real-world advantage.

0 upvotes
Anastigmat
By Anastigmat (19 hours ago)

Digital camera sales are slumping, and it is not hard to figure out why. There is really little that is worth buying. If you have an APS-C model, you can either keep upgrading to another APS-C model and get no improvement in image quality, or you can spend $2K or more for a slight improvement in image quality. Prices are not falling, and image quality has pretty much remained the same. Consumers are asked to pay more when Nikon took out an expensive low pass filter so the chance of a photo being ruined by moire is increased. Sounds like a raw deal to me.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
Retzius
By Retzius (19 hours ago)

I'm sure this is a great camera but somehow these output of these images don't wow me.

5 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (20 hours ago)

Looking at the D810 vs D800 (non E) RAWs, the D800 seems a bit sharper and (of course) suffers less moire. Very noticeable in the etching to the left and other places of fine detail around the test scene.

1 upvote
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (18 hours ago)

But you have decouple the effects of lens/body mount variations on left/right/corner sharpness.

We've noted that the D810 with our 85/1.8 lens suffers from slight left-side softness, while the D800E with the same lens suffers from right -side softness. On the other hand, the lens seems well aligned w/ the D800.

0 upvotes
Rishi Sanyal
By Rishi Sanyal (18 hours ago)

The larger point here is that small variations at edges shouldn't be over-interpreted.

The D810 is considerably sharper than the D800 more centrally.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
gonzalu
By gonzalu (21 hours ago)

Not working for me. I don;t see the D810 in the drop down :(

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (20 hours ago)

Try again. Sorry about that.

2 upvotes
gonzalu
By gonzalu (20 hours ago)

Works! yay...

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 day ago)

Had D810 in hand at camera shop. The Nikon rep was there stating only new lenses will resove best the 36mp sensor, whereas i had read my pro AI lenses would still resolve just fine

Has anyone done crital comparison tests? Some blogs say great, some say poor. Cannot afford to buy camera to find out have to shell out thousands more for lenses.

0 upvotes
rwdphotos
By rwdphotos (1 day ago)

Lenses made in the film era generally don't resolve as well (read, "as well"- not necessarily badly) as lenses made in more recent years. There are newer coatings, but it mostly has to do with how digital sensors only accept light at narrow angles (hence the need for microlenses on sensors), as well how film comparatively has larger swaths of photosensitive area (akin to, but not quite like, the difference between larger photosites on the D700 and smaller ones on the D800). Details from older lenses that look fine on a D700 or lower resolution camera might not appear as fine on higher resolution cameras. You also tend to get more aberrations and haziness. Digital sensors reflect light, and lens coatings help against ghosting.

If you move up to digital in any brand you will likely need to invest in better lenses if you want to make the most out of the sensor.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (20 hours ago)

Nonsense it depends on the lens, not on the era. Modern coatings may give more microcontrast, but you can ad that in post (and thus keep control over it)

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (20 hours ago)

Sounds like the Nikon rep is doing his job by making you feel insecure about old lenses and running out to buy new ones.

7 upvotes
Anastigmat
By Anastigmat (19 hours ago)

for people upgrading from an APS-C model, if they find that the lenses they have been using are good enough, then the same lenses will be good enough for fullframe, unless the lenses are APS-C models that cannot fill the image circle of a full frame lens. Some of the sharpest lenses ever made were designed in the film area. There is no guarantee that a newer version will necessarily be sharper. They may simply have built-in VR, which allows the lens makers to charge more for their lens.

1 upvote
EricCul
By EricCul (18 hours ago)

@Jogger. The Nikon rep is doing his job. He's just stating the fact that these high resolution sensors - and one as sharp as the D810 - do need lenses that are capable of resolving that detail.

That's useful information for anyone spending that amount of money on a camera body such as the D810.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
1 upvote
7829mark
By 7829mark (2 days ago)

The native 6400 ISO is impressive as well as the new 12800. The highlight weighted spot metering is a very nice tweaking towards perfection. The shutter is significantly quieter. It is faster, better buffering. I know this has not been mentioned but downloading USB 3 is faster? I am not sure. Perhaps wishful thinking but something I noticed and I wasn't looking for it.

0 upvotes
Epoca Libera
By Epoca Libera (2 days ago)

I am disappointed with D810 because it is not capable of shooting true Full Frame video like 5D3 does. During the so called by Nikon "FX-based movie format" a narrower field of view (not only in the height for obtaining the 16:9 but also in the width) of the lens will be used by D810 for the video. This is a very important disadvantage. The information appeared yet only in the Nikon-Asia website: When using the "FX-based movie format" of D810, "the width of the image area is approx. 91% of that in the still image FX format". This means that in FX video D810 uses only the 32,6mm of the sensor's width while 5D3 uses 35.8mm for the same function.

0 upvotes
rwdphotos
By rwdphotos (1 day ago)

So your FOV from a 50mm at infinity will now be like a 55mm? I regret nothing.

0 upvotes
Epoca Libera
By Epoca Libera (1 day ago)

@rwdphotos For me the problem is not with the normal lenses or the the tele-lenses but with the wide. For example the FOV of the 20mm lens will be like 22mm. This is a dramatic difference when you want to film with a classic 20mm lens. Another problem that I have is that on the market there are only 24-70 lenses, there is no 22-65mm. So when at the reportage, where I usually use 24-70 (on the D800 that i own, which has the same problem with D810) the colleague who uses 24-70 on the 5D3 has the correct FOV and I may lose some action or i have to move behind filming the heads of the colleagues...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
gonzalu
By gonzalu (21 hours ago)

..which is still tons larger than the 5DIII overall pixel count ;)

1 upvote
InTheMist
By InTheMist (3 days ago)

Review coming soon? /wink

My local shop canceled on me and therefore my preorder wasn't in time for the first shipment. Switzerland is sold out!

0 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (2 days ago)

Photographylife.com has a wedding test with the D810 online. Seems to be improved in important areas. You own a DF too. What's your impression of it?

1 upvote
InTheMist
By InTheMist (2 days ago)

Df? Amazing, nostalgic, every-day, fun camera. They could have thought about the controls a bit more and the smallish focusing system irritates me at that price.

My Df is just fun, while my D800 is for special occasions and work, but I still don't trust the focus and wish I had gone with the "E" originally. I also do sports from time to time, so the 6 FPS (my personal sweet spot for the sports that I shoot) is my reason for upgrading.

Still waiting though on D810 availability here. Sold out!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 week ago)

Hflm,
Does d800e have true mirror lock up? Isn't it first curtain slap that causes vibration that owners are discussing? At least d810 new electronic first curtain is supposed to diminish camera shake.

But, if you correct about vibration solved with mirror lock up, will wait for d800 prices to drop, or buy used since more will soon be available. I am strickly stills shooter, actually enjoying slow pace for composition.

0 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (5 days ago)

look here: http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4767
There is a lot on that on Lloyd Chambers site, too (one needs to pay, unfortunately).

0 upvotes
Chad Kelley
By Chad Kelley (5 days ago)

I have a D800 and have tested for mirror slap; my tests verify that it is an issue. When shooting critical work I use the 2 and 3 second Exposure Delay Mode. Clears it up very well.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 days ago)

Chad,
I have heard of this. Could you explain the details of you delay process?
Thanks!

0 upvotes
rwdphotos
By rwdphotos (1 day ago)

Exposure delay doesn't rid of mirror slap; it rids of you moving the camera when you press the shutter release.

What people are talking about when it comes to shutter shake is the rendition of finer details being disturbed by the vibration of the first shutter curtain hitting the camera after the mirror has already been raised prior to exposure, and is only really visible within a range of shutter speeds. Fast shutter speeds negate this effect.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
gonzalu
By gonzalu (21 hours ago)

There is more to be said about D810 that is an improvement over my D800. Just the shutter alone is reassuring. The new Bracketing options are nice to have, more buttons always welcome. Better UI in menus, image quality seems to be a bit better to me at 100% pixel peep ...

0 upvotes
cjvalencia
By cjvalencia (1 week ago)

Excuse my english...
I think its a shame this chage now (its too late!!!). I've bought a D800e 10 months ago, and its clear for me (and for someone who loves photos) that shutter and mirror have a bad design, and makes a really lower resolution in fact!!!. I know this trouble with the first 30 or 40 shoots, and I'm only and amateur.
I always used nikon bodies and lenses, and its incredible for me that nikon left buyers (me, for example) who have paid more than 3000euros for a body bad desgned in nikpn factory, and now the only solution is shell old model and buy new one, cause I have my lenses from nikon. Its a shame!

2 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (1 week ago)

I didn't recognise any issues and for critical things use mirror lock up.

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (1 week ago)

CJValencia: the D800/E is a very demanding camera; those pixels you know. It's a camera you need to learn well; 40 shots is nothing.

I've had a D800 for well over a year now and yes, focus and sharpness are more difficult to achieve than with say a D700 (my previous camera), but certainly not impossible. I never noticed the "bad design" you mentioned, until the new D810 press blurb made a point out of the apparent improvement. Shutterspeeds (I use auto-ISO and one stop faster than the inverted focal length as a guideline) and accurate focus are essential, and practice makes perfect. Practice!

I took the D810 out for a trial run just a few hours ago, and am curious as to the results which I'll see tonight.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
cjvalencia
By cjvalencia (1 week ago)

I know that 40 shots is nothing...I've said that in 40 shots I was able to view how the shutter shock (and mirror) damage the reala resolution. Now, 10 months later, I think the same

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (5 days ago)

I come from many years shooting landscapes with 4X5 film. Loo
Looking for camera to replace for lighter hikes. I often have moving water in my images, requiring specific shutter speeds, no slower/no faster than 1/4-1/15. Both Sony A7R and D800E say to avoid those speeds to keep from shutter shake. Practice is not the issue for me, true, absolute control of my canera is. This shutter shake problem should have never been handed down to unknowing customers.

I can only see a D810 as future camera...unless affording Pentax 645Z.

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (5 days ago)

I tried out the D810 today; no verdict on the iq (Jpeg only due to my negligence), but that shutter is noticeably smoother in hand.

0 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (5 days ago)

Galbertson: There are many people using it successfully without problems. Physics will introduce slight shutter shock, but mirror-lockup worked fine for me and many others. This site has lots of test, diglloyd.com, too:
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4767

0 upvotes
rwdphotos
By rwdphotos (1 week ago)

I'm curious as to why Amazon describes this camera as having focus peaking. Interesting. I wonder where they got that information.

1 upvote
NinpouKobanashi
By NinpouKobanashi (18 hours ago)

Camera has zebra added for video.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (1 week ago)

July 17,

There are studio raws for download at Imaging-Resource and Capture NX-D should open them.

0 upvotes
CFBMD
By CFBMD (1 week ago)

Excited!
B&H has my order which I placed yesterday.
D810 + Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 VRII

I was torn between the 24-70 vs. 70-200mm. However, The 70-200mm won.
Now I will save up for the Sigma 35mm 1.4

It has been a while since my last DSLR update (The D2x will go to my kids now).

1 upvote
jacobwhite
By jacobwhite (1 week ago)

I simply don't understand why there is no choice for a full-frame camera in a professional body in the range of say 20-24 mp. For goodness sake just throw out a second model, everything the same just with a smaller sensor for those users who don't need a grip most of the time, but do require a professional body (i.e. not a D610). I'm not saying there isn't a place for the D810, I'm saying there is a need for a "Nikon 5DIII".

10 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (1 week ago)

That would be an interesting thing. I like the DF-sensor, but not its price. The A7s looks really nice, too. A 16MP Nikon (D700 body) would be interesting for me.

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (1 week ago)

HFLM:

Even with a good lens, the Zeiss 55 f/1.8, the Sony A7s really can't come close to the color from say the Nikon Df or D4s. And then the Nikons improve with the use of Zeiss lenses instead of Nikon lenses. (Sigma Art lenses would probably also help the Nikon.)

Also the Df is a better high ISO camera than the A7s.

I like how quiet the A7s is though.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
jrobbie3
By jrobbie3 (5 days ago)

Good Point. The D700 would have been a good place to start. Bump up the mp's to 20-24 and maintain the functional capabilities. No, someone wanted to further exploit the American market and chase Canon, 'model for model'. "Change" gets to be EXPENSIVE! Go back and review or determine "if" there was a real plus-up from the D700 to D800 and now to the D810 ...?? Also think about the ROE from the latter two upgrades, Worth it? BTW, I am only using the camera for photos not movies/videos. Peace!

PS: This was an augmenting comment to Jacob white's suggestion.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (5 days ago)

jrobbie3:

I kind of like the high ISO performance of the Df, or D4s, or D3s, in comparison to the D610.

So for the suggestion to work well, Nikon and Renesas would have to work out a new sensor, which would make the camera more expensive.

0 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (2 days ago)

HowaboutRAW: Sadly, there is no DF sensor in a D700 body. I wanted to but a new cam for my wife as a 2nd body (she uses a D610, me XT1). The D800 had issues I didn't like (LCD, focusing). The A7 series looks promising but lacks native lenses. I tried the A7 again yesterday, they were too slow for me, battery life mediocre. The A7s looks better, but I don't want to use the Sony SLT adapter for fast glass. The DF sensor is a good compromise, but the Df is expensive (besides high ISO advantage is there any other benefit over the D610?). I almost pulled the trigger but now the D810 exists. Lloyed Chambers praises it, the guys over at photographylife.com, too. Their wedding test seems to show that low light autofocus+tracking is very good (+5,5 stops shadow recovey at base ISO). Donwsampled tests give you nice ISO 25600 files, enough for me). I would like the Sony form factor, or a Df sensor in a D700 body but I will go with the D810. Do you own the DF? Maybe it's better than what I think?

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (1 day ago)

HFLM:

Unless you want the knobs and wheels, high ISOs are the only real advantage the Df has on the D610.

The Canon 6D is a somewhat better high ISO camera than the D610 and cheaper than the Df.

1 upvote
AEY
By AEY (1 week ago)

Is D810 sensor the same as Sony A7r?

0 upvotes
Lucas_
By Lucas_ (1 week ago)

AFAIK it's Sony's latest 36MP FF sensor, therefore, it must be the A7r's.

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (1 week ago)

AEY:

I believe the A7r's sensor has special microlenses, so a tiny bit different.

0 upvotes
Lucas_
By Lucas_ (1 day ago)

Right

0 upvotes
bill nu
By bill nu (1 week ago)

I do not think this camera is as good at the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4. The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 cost is less.

0 upvotes
SueMadgic
By SueMadgic (1 week ago)

I am a BIG Panasonic fan, and have owned an FZ10, FX18 and FZ30 - my 'sacrificial' camera now is a GH4. But to suggest that the Panny is in the same class as, let alone better than, this Nikon is just not right.

2 upvotes
write2alan
By write2alan (1 week ago)

The D810 has a "New electronic first-curtain shutter". Does this mean it can sync with flash/strobes at higher speeds? I am really interested in knowing. If this baby is capable of higher sync speeds we have a winner. I am not talking about high speed sync though.

0 upvotes
PeakAction
By PeakAction (1 week ago)

Anyone want to buy my D800? It sounds like the 810 is worth the upgrade, IMO.

4 upvotes
Arionesei
By Arionesei (1 week ago)

I would. You could send more details on the condition of the camera, price etc. at alexander.ray@mail.mcgill.ca

0 upvotes
Robert Dauphin
By Robert Dauphin (1 week ago)

I would like to know the condition and price of your D800. Is it in USD?

0 upvotes
SueMadgic
By SueMadgic (1 week ago)

Not unless it's a D800E.

0 upvotes
scehotch
By scehotch (2 weeks ago)

DOn't see the point. If you want a video camera, buy one. I can only assume tha the 800E didn't sell and they can make this cheaper than either the d800 or the 800E. No other reasons to have it. And 36mp is still too many

5 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (1 week ago)

Too many? That's just plain stupid.

3 upvotes
scehotch
By scehotch (1 week ago)

Stupid? Please enlighten us as to why you need more?

2 upvotes
ttorda
By ttorda (1 week ago)

The 36 MP raw is great when the long lens is not long enough - birds, animals etc...
Tom T

4 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (1 week ago)

@scehotch: You said "too many", which I find a plainly stupid statement. Too many for you, possibly, not for me and many others. Do we need it? Think back some years, when top flight DSLR's had 2, or 4, 0r 6 MP?

5 upvotes
scehotch
By scehotch (1 week ago)

so this is what you call 'enlightenment'? Here is what you could have said...
The number of pixels is one of the factors in the equation of speed, resolution, sensitivity and ultimately, end-use of the camera. Massive number of pixels gives massive files and slows down the camera usually. If the end-use of the camera does not justify this then you don't need them. The Nikon d3, for example, has 12mp and is possibly a different compromise from the d800 but few people ever complained about d3 resolution.

I think you get the drift...there are ways of answering questions which add value and yours doesn't. Have another go as to why 36mb is essential with some examples perhaps?

1 upvote
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (1 week ago)

Let's stick to the facts. You said "too many", I never said "essential". Agreed?

1 upvote
scehotch
By scehotch (1 week ago)

A lawyer speaks..
OK, why is it NOT too many?

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (1 week ago)

So I am. My answer? I can handle them, although it's demanding. Comparing files from the D700 I had before with these, the difference is very noticeable. Where should I start?

0 upvotes
ajendus
By ajendus (1 week ago)

"DOn't see the point."
But there is a point, so...

"If you want a video camera, buy one."
It is a video camera.

"I can only assume tha the 800E didn't sell and they can make this cheaper than either the d800 or the 800E."
Baseless assumption and incorrect conclusion.

"No other reasons to have it."
Reason 1: Take photos. Reason 2: Shoot video.

"And 36mp is still too many."
Baseless statement.

With false assumptions aren't founded on facts, actual data, observations or they are based on subjective data and only applies to a specific person(s). The best way to discuss your point of view is to use qualifying statements.

For example: Assuming the moon is made of cheddar cheese, I would eating it.

While the moon isn't made of cheese, the statement is valid.

So, to expand of this, perhaps a better wording for your assertion: While I don't need the 36mp, I don't think I'll need this camera.

It is a generally neutral statement rather than an inflammatory statement that isn't valid.

0 upvotes
scehotch
By scehotch (1 week ago)

I am sure there is a reason why video is generally shot with dedicated video cameras and I am sure you will enlighten us.
At the same time you can share you manufacturing costing experience of course.
For 36mp, why don't you post some photos showing how good the d8xx is - assuming you have one..

0 upvotes
ajendus
By ajendus (5 days ago)

I don't think we are the one's with the burden of proof as you've made the assertions. Then again, it is hard to prove a negative; really the issue with the argument(s) to begin with. But the D800/E has proven itself and I suspect the D810 will too.

But I am a cinematographer. You've likely seen my work. And while I prefer to shoot with cameras other than DSLRs, they are widely used in film/TV, and when used properly, an effective system for cinema and definitely have their purpose.

0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (4 days ago)

If your a cinema guy why are you even interested in Nikon.
They are well known for crippled video modes with low bitrates slow frame rates and many artifacts.

Panasonic gh4 is an stills camera with great video capability.
The Nikons are better stills camera's but that does not seem to be your work.

1 upvote
ajendus
By ajendus (3 days ago)

One of two still systems I frequently use is Nikon. Just because I'm a cinematographer, doesn't mean I don't do anything with photography. The industry is filled with photographer who shoot for film/TV and vice versa.

0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (1 day ago)

Then use 2 systems.
Nikon can't do proper video at this point in time

0 upvotes
ajendus
By ajendus (57 min ago)

That's an interesting statement. I'd love to know what "proper video" is. That's not a term I'm acquainted with in film/TV. You'll need to qualify your statement.

I don't follow, "Then use 2 systems." I use many systems. Nikon, m43, Alexa, Red, Sony, Canon, etc. There is no real reason to use only one or two systems in cinematography. I wouldn't shoot a documentary with an Alexa and I wouldn't shoot a scifi film with a Canon DSLR. Use the right tool for the right job.

0 upvotes
thomas2279f
By thomas2279f (2 weeks ago)

Looks good enhancement but still don't get Nikon reason on why not putting 1 X XQD Card to accompany the SDXC card slot, to have a larger user take up of XQD Cards and as a natural progression for users who would like to add / move up to their Full Pro Cameras D4/s +

1 upvote
munro harrap
By munro harrap (2 weeks ago)

With close subjects an APS-C machine gives far greater depth of field for the same angle of view, so depending on the sizes you want to see your work at, it can be argued that the D7100is a better choice, IF you do not need high isos.

This is because at 24MP and 100% the images always are sharper than using the D800 at the same magnification. This will always be so especially for the distances from around 4-5ft to 10-15ft. You cannot stop down a full-frame lens correctly focussed and guarantee sharp results this close, and with macro shots it is even more of a problem, especially with moving subjects as high shutter speeds are then needed, with higher isos, and more noise.

5x4" or 10x8" is a doddle in comparison as to get to the same print size, far less magnification is required, and as you said, you can stop right down and retain resolution.(end part 2)

1 upvote
mainzerphoto
By mainzerphoto (1 week ago)

This is wrong. At 100% the 36 meg has more pixels than the 24mg, but sharpness is a function of good focus and lens. 36 mg gives you better detail in the tonal range and a print of 40x60 will show the difference.
Of course you can stop any lens down to its optimal aperture for maximum sharpness and contrast. Lenses perform best at the middle of the f stop range as all tests show, usually f8.

1 upvote
munro harrap
By munro harrap (2 weeks ago)

As most lenses are losing resolution between f5.6 and f11, tripod work with a full-frame DSLR becomes a very dicey business unless you use manual focus and keep your distance from your subject, as with the hugely increased magnification and large images onscreen and in prints the technology enables, the lack of sharp focus crucially affects the viewers ability to enjoy what they are looking at , if at 100%
It becomes VERY necessary to use live-view and to maximise depth of field. Manual lenses have DOF scales, but nowhere near as good as old M Leica lenses do, and the scales of many AF lenses are both inaccurate and, if autofocus is used-even on APS-C nikkors, it is common for the hyperfocal distance often to set the nearest focussed point as that furthest away. These lenses often ignore the intervening space is empty- so they chose a 1m setting for a closest distance of 5ft, say . And often AF zooms will behave this way manually focussed, as I am now discovering (end part 1)

1 upvote
KonstantinosK
By KonstantinosK (2 weeks ago)

A D809, with the 24mpx sensor of the D610, would be nice...

3 upvotes
ABM Barry
By ABM Barry (2 weeks ago)

"Zebra strips for focus checking in video mode?????

NO Try Exposure.

Video uses other systems for focus, X 10 and peaking etc.

Zebra patterns have nothing to do with focus.

0 upvotes
TheBaldEagle
By TheBaldEagle (2 weeks ago)

All future Nikon high end (>$1200 on and Full frame) cameras should have 4K@30p or better Video feature at least for output for external recorders in order to Compete well with Panasonic 4K and other 4K cameras. 4K & 8K are the future for the next Ten years. When people invest in expensive cameras which should last several years before getting obsolete! That is the reality!

1 upvote
HFLM
By HFLM (1 week ago)

For you maybe. I'm not interested at all in video, and what the D810 offers is enough for me.

2 upvotes
jacobwhite
By jacobwhite (1 week ago)

Really? 4K on a DSLR is for amateurs who think more resolution makes them better video/photographer. I have plenty of colleagues in the videographing business and they keep their hands off HD for most filming jobs - never-mind 4K. There's just way too much time and equipment investment in the post to make 4K worthwhile - unless you're hired by Peter Jackson to film the next Lord of the Rings… in which case you'd probably want to go with a more film dedicated system!!

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
1 upvote
calking
By calking (1 week ago)

@ jacobwhite:

Sounds like another blanket statement that shouldn't be made. The draw for enthusiast and competent videographers to 4k today has more to do with the quality of the HD down-sampled output compared to shooting in HD from the start.

As far as other formats your friends in videography are shooting, that depends on WHAT they're filming and who the target audience is. If you're suggesting there's no tangible difference between low-fps and HD/4k then you're not looking at video on a modern-day monitor. Otherwise, quality differences are noticeable to those who know.

Having said that, are 4k/HD resolution REQUIRED for someone shooting video of their dog in the park to be shown on YouTube? Probably not, but then again the consumer looking to be able to do that is more likely filming with his smartphone anyway and not someone seeking cinematic quality output.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
RodneyG
By RodneyG (2 weeks ago)

Can anyone explain what this line means: "Uncompressed output over HDMI with simultaneous writing to memory card"

Is the output to the card compressed while at the same time we can capture somewhere else with no compression?

1 upvote
PeakAction
By PeakAction (1 week ago)

Yes, that is exactly what that means. You can write to a field recorder, such as the Atomos Ninja, while also writing to the internal memory card for backup or proxy files.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
NinpouKobanashi
By NinpouKobanashi (18 hours ago)

Ya, in the D800, it's hard to output to HDMI and record a backup to the SD/CF at the same time.

I wanted to do that experiment to see how much gain one can get from using the ProRes HQ codec vs. the internal H.264 codec, using the same EXACT footage.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 weeks ago)

Have isolated my next camera to nikon d810 or pentax 645 Z. I have many older manual nikkor glass as well as many pentax 645/67 manual glass. Certainly 645Z better image quality and dynamic range. Know well its other pros and cons for my particular use. I strictly shoot landscape, concern for large prints. Only tripoded, f16 and above, 1/15th second and slower.

Pentax lots more money, for sure.

But my question, can older manual f lenses use resolving power of d810, or hinder it. If i have to start building bew lenses, pentax looks affordable.

1 upvote
AluKd
By AluKd (3 weeks ago)

At f/16, you've been diffraction limited for a while, so you're not really enjoying the whole sensor resolution - more like only half of it, so lens sharpness is probably the least of your concerns.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 weeks ago)

Sorry, did not mention i have been shooting 4x5 film many years, defraction at f22-f32 not an issue. I had hope to capture as deep of dof as possible in dslr. I never select focus, other than one third into shot general rule to capture as much as possible in focus. Yes, aware of effects of defraction, but overall focus my goal, hoping to find happy medium.

Still curious of quality of my older manual nikkor glass on 810. Comparitively, is IQ and capture of detail to new AF glass.

0 upvotes
archivue
By archivue (3 weeks ago)

F16/F22 for 4X5 it's ok for shure !
F8/F11 for 24X36 36MP is the maximum !
Diffraction have to do with the density…
The best is a medium format back for your purpose used at F11/F16

3 upvotes
EcoPix
By EcoPix (2 weeks ago)

Short reply, you standard and short tele primes all good, long tele primes have lateral chromatic aberration problems, and older wide primes don't work very well at all.
Older wide or standard zooms will have weak corners (the 50-135 Ai is good).

Re depth of field, consider a mirrorless rig that will accept a Nikon tilting adapter - you can work the way you did with the 5x4.

1 upvote
jorgeysusa
By jorgeysusa (2 weeks ago)

My experience with old Nikkor lenses and D800 has been awful, to say the least. With the new D810... just forget it.

2 upvotes
Airee
By Airee (2 weeks ago)

Disagree. It vastly depends on lenses. The 105/2.5 AI(S) deserves highest honours. Most 50mm lenses when stopped down are also a good match. I however found the 55/2.8 disappointing on 36MP (quite ok on 16MP though).

Manual focussing is however uncomfortable with D800, and the green dot is close to useless. LV helps there, and since it got hopefully improved with D810 (low light performance), using MF lenses for landscaping still makes sense.

0 upvotes
EcoPix
By EcoPix (2 weeks ago)

Apologies for the brief earlier post. It's a complex ask because lenses differ so much. Sharpness wise, you could expect fine results with lenses like the 50mm 1.4, 105 2.5, micro-Nikkors. Any of the really fine, simple but well corrected primes between 50mm and, say, 180mm. You would need to focus by live view - it's been a long time since the f16-and-guess worked.
Unless there are colour banding issues with the filterless D810, but I don't know whether that would be the case. The old Kodak cameras had no filter, and colour banding was lethally bad with them, but that was years ago.
Nikkor wides, even the well-regarded ones like the 28 Ai-S, don't work well on sensors, because of peripheral issues and CA. The only old wides that seem immune are the Distagons for Contax, but you need a Canon body for them. Maybe Leica, too - I don't know.
Modern glass has better corners, CA control and flare control (I'm speaking of the top class ones).
MF glass works well on 35mm sensors - (cont.)

0 upvotes
EcoPix
By EcoPix (2 weeks ago)

the rule of thumb is that lenses made for film work okay on sensors one size smaller than the film they were designed for. I've used some newer P67 lenses on APS-c even, although the old-old ones weren't so good. The V Hasselblad lenses are beautifully sharp on 21mp 35mm sensors, without any corner issues. I expect you could get manual adapters for any MF system to Nikon.
The MF vs miniature format decision is an old chestnut, but you get what you pay for. Just remember that MF digital is so fine res that you really have depth of field issues with rigid bodies. Pro landscapers might use both and tailor format to depth of field requirements and print size.
Re lenses reaching sensor resolution, 36mp FX is only 15mp DX, so it's not rarefied - a blanket guess is yes in the centre, no at the edges, but remember that it's not necessarily a good thing - in the absence of a filter, a more pleasing, artefact-free image can sometimes be gained by a lens that's a bit 'kinder' to the sensor.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 week ago)

Thanks for respnses. But where might i find tilt shift adapter for nikon d810?

Affording digital back for my 4X5 is out of question. Realize i am unrealistic to assume i could depend on my old AI lenses to maximize D810 sensor. Just trying to jump into digital, still produce tack sharp 30X40 gallery framed prints.

Why should i totally forget using AI lenses on D810? Would hope to read or see literal test results.

Thanks again

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 week ago)

I do not believe anyone makes true nikon tilt adapter for nikon FF lenses to FF bodies. It would require shift to bring image circle from lens to align to sensor. The only tilt only adapters i have seen is for FF lenses on four thirds or aps-c bodies. I have found tilt/shift adapters...but my, are they expensive

0 upvotes
PeakAction
By PeakAction (1 week ago)

All of my older Nikon lenses fail the D800 resolution test for the most part. The new nano crystal glass, however, is amazingly sharp. If you are curious about using your old Nikon glass on the D800/810, I'm of the opinion that you will be disappointed unless you're sizing down the photos. It is a camera that really needs the latest in optics technology in order to realize its full potential. I used to have a D600 however, and that was a different story; the 24MP sensor looked great when used with my D series lenses.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Airee
By Airee (1 week ago)

Indeed; many AI(S) lenses fare well on the 16-Mpix Df. I guess it is one of the reasons why Nikon chose that resolution (apart from the inprecision inherent to MF - but is it really such a problem, given that AF itself is not quite at the required level?). I also agree with EcoPix that AIS wide angles are less satisfactory, in general. This is also why I bough a 2nd hand 28/1.8; the highly praised 28/2 is simply not for D800. I sometimes use the 20/2.8 AIS with some success though, mainly because it is such small and light - but set at f/8 or f/11, nothing else.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
EcoPix
By EcoPix (1 week ago)

But where might i find tilt shift adapter for nikon d810?
You will need a T/S lens (expensive). A mirrorless eg Sony is thin enough to accommodate a tilt adapter.

Affording digital back for my 4X5 is out of question. A used P25 is not that expensive and as good as it gets, but your lenses would be rather narrow.

Just trying to jump into digital, still produce tack sharp 30X40 gallery framed prints. Are you new to digital? Try a used 5DMk2 with some Zeiss -Contax primes and some stitching as a cheap entry.

Why should i totally forget using AI lenses on D810? Would hope to read or see literal test results.

Avoid the heartache and believe what those are saying who have already tried!

0 upvotes
Airee
By Airee (1 week ago)

Yep. So, in my experience, 105/2.5, 180/2.8 (lower contrast than modern lenses, but still adequately sharp), 50/1.2 and Voigtländer 58/1.4 (quite at the level of the 50/1.8G)...
Determining factor for using the above is however not lens generation, but the ease you will perceive at manual focussing. You have to try it for yourself. If you are not at ease, you will ruin your pleasure, which will also ruin your photography.

On the WA side, the only one that I would recommend is the Zeiss 35/2; not the Nikkor 28/2 or 20/2.8; others I did not test.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
hrt
By hrt (3 weeks ago)

The limit with APS-C DX's was its lens - restricted availability of prime lenses.
Why ? Because Nikon continued to adhere to full-frame in the long term, in order to sustain its fame established with the Nikon F, together with the long-time Nikon SLR users with a bunch of Nikon (or Nikon compatible) lenses.......see how Nikon is introducing new prime lenses for the FX series.
Although I can't afford to buy the new D810 (and I am happy with my D610), I believe that full frame is the way to go, at least for the next decade, while film SLR users are still active in the market.
As sensor technology for APS-C or 3/4 formats gets innovated, so will the same for full-frame. Will mirror less DSLR's overcome traditional DSLR's ? I don't believe so in terms of sensor performance.
If there are threats against full-frames, I think that it would be Pentax 645 or the FOVEON sensor, in terms of resolution.

5 upvotes
EcoPix
By EcoPix (2 weeks ago)

Not arguing with your thesis, except that it's a stretch to think Aunty backed full frame against DX out of a sense of loyalty to old film photographers. They started out in digital with a cropped sensor so the old lenses were still usable (without terrible corners).
But Canon went full frame and be damned about the corners, and Aunty Nikon had to match the 1Ds.
Since then both makers have pursued full frame because it's a bigger money spinner in lenses. Why make a camera that can use an old lens when you can make one that demands a new lens to get decent corners? And why make a camera that can reach the subject at 300mm f4 when you can sell one that needs 500mm f4?
Forget the poor photographers, this is about making money!

0 upvotes
hrt
By hrt (1 week ago)

Thanks.
My thesis is based on the assumption that Nikon has so many pro's and semi-pro's, who, Nikon believed, would pay thousands of dollars/euros for their full-frame DSLR's.
Customer retention is always the safest way for brands like Nikon to secure investment return for new products. If so, why did Nikon limit their investment in new lenses for the DX series or in a totally new series of premium compacts to make money ?
I think that Nikon did so because they adhered to full-frame DSLR's with Nikon's traditional penta-prism, focal plane shutter and established line-up for 35mm lenses.

0 upvotes
hrt
By hrt (1 week ago)

Besides, since the 90's, Nikon has always been asserting about retention of customers owning their lenses / SLR's.

0 upvotes
mike concannon
By mike concannon (3 weeks ago)

I'l continue waiting for the D400
Until then.. My D300 does everything that I need it to do.

2 upvotes
BaronMax
By BaronMax (3 weeks ago)

I would be really surprised if Nikon came out with a D400. I suspect that the D7100 has basically taken over the top of the APS-C line and the D600/610 is the "replacement" (mostly in spirit) of the D300S. I own both a D7100 and D300 and the D300 rarely leaves the shelf because the D7100 is just so much better. The low-light is superior, features are comparable and image quality is slightly better overall. But I am strongly considering trading both on a D810.

0 upvotes
animal900
By animal900 (3 weeks ago)

So when the D400 comes out, your D300 will stop doing everything that you need it to do?

9 upvotes
Man-Fai Wong
By Man-Fai Wong (3 weeks ago)

The D400 is almost certainly not coming given how long it's been and how the landscape is shaping up...

That's why I ended up taking the plunge on a refurbed D800 a few months ago... That's not to say everyone should move to FF (or some other new body) of course -- I stuck w/ my old D200 for a long time too and then defaulted to my daughter's neglected D5100 for a couple years...

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
BaronMax
By BaronMax (1 week ago)

Actually, several rumor sites are reporting that there WILL BE a replacement for the D300s, but it will be called the D9300. It will be interesting to see how they improve upon the D7100, as it's an extraordinary camera. About the only things they could do to differentiate the two models would be higher build quality, larger buffer and 60p at 1080 recording.

I too went for a refurbished D800, should be here tomorrow. I suspect that it's really not going to be a whole lot better than the D7100, image-wise, other than perhaps one stop better ISO (which is significant, of course). I've been unable to tell any sharpness differences between the D7100 and D800 in the DPreview tests. Of course the benefits of FX are obvious (shallower DOF, better lens quality, slightly better ISO, etc).

Nikon didn't really offer me much in the D810 that made me NEED to upgrade over the D800 though.

0 upvotes
Heiks
By Heiks (4 days ago)

Yes it offers
Silent shutter alone, is enough to trade for 810
Not to mention better autofocus, clearer/sharper image, better iso
I have it now for 2 days and its lovely

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
GuyAF
By GuyAF (3 weeks ago)

Several years ago it was Nikon should do this and Nikon should do that and Nikon is going down the drain.

Once more it's the same "should this" and "should that" and "its days are over" and what not.

How infinitely more intelligent or superior must we be that we assume people at Nikon have no clue as to what needs to be done, technically and market-wise.

The article of the WSJ is tendentious to say the least. Wishing for a thing doesn't make it so.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 1022
12345