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
56
I own it
234
I want it
24
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 945
12345
qianp2k
By qianp2k (40 min 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

0 upvotes
Sonylover1
By Sonylover1 (45 min 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.

1 upvote
HFLM
By HFLM (15 min 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.

1 upvote
Anastigmat
By Anastigmat (49 min 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
0 upvotes
Retzius
By Retzius (50 min ago)

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

1 upvote
Simon97
By Simon97 (1 hour 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
gonzalu
By gonzalu (2 hours ago)

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

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (2 hours ago)

Try again. Sorry about that.

1 upvote
gonzalu
By gonzalu (2 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 (22 hours 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
1 upvote
D1N0
By D1N0 (1 hour 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 (1 hour 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.

4 upvotes
Anastigmat
By Anastigmat (31 min 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
7829mark
By 7829mark (1 day 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 (1 day 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 (22 hours 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 (7 hours 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 (2 hours ago)

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

0 upvotes
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 (1 day 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?

0 upvotes
InTheMist
By InTheMist (1 day 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 (5 days 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 (4 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 (4 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 (2 days ago)

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

0 upvotes
rwdphotos
By rwdphotos (21 hours 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 (2 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 (5 days 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!

1 upvote
HFLM
By HFLM (5 days ago)

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

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (5 days 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 (5 days 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 (4 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
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".

5 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 (1 day 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 (21 hours 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.

0 upvotes
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_ (21 hours 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.

1 upvote
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.

3 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 (1 week 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

4 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (1 week ago)

Too many? That's just plain stupid.

1 upvote
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

3 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?

3 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?

0 upvotes
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 (4 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.

0 upvotes
ajendus
By ajendus (2 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
thomas2279f
By thomas2279f (1 week 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
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 (2 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 (2 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?

8 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
0 upvotes
BaronMax
By BaronMax (5 days 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 (3 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
ZenTao
By ZenTao (3 weeks ago)

Nikon should dismiss the built-in flash and reinforce the upper side of the camera. every photographer who has such a camera is likely to have a good flash. That tinie flash makes a weakness feelig an alwais is poping out when you less expect it. I'm lookin for financial to buy that cámera and a Zeiss Otus attached. Money makes to turn my lens.

0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (3 weeks ago)

Au contraire. I use the built in flash all the time to trigger my Speedlights off camera. I find it works 99 percent of the time for what I do. When it doesn't I just pull out the Pocket Wizards. And the flash is also useful for reducing contrast when dialed back to -2 or -3. There is nothing superfluous on a Nikon.

5 upvotes
vicon
By vicon (3 weeks ago)

I have the smallest Nikon flash: SB 400 - it gets marvelous shots indoor (although the merits go to 800E). When hiking, I don't want to carry it with me. I use the built-in flash set to -2 to get the details in the shadows + nice highlighted background. It transforms the non-interesting photos into art. It would be a mistake to remove it. It is there when you need it.

1 upvote
jacobwhite
By jacobwhite (1 week ago)

agree! certainly would make the camera less bulky - and bulk is one of the key anti-features of dslr's vs mirrorless

0 upvotes
Hauer
By Hauer (3 weeks ago)

The possibility of a prosumer DX camera being launched is preventing me from deciding to buy the D810. Just wish Nikon would at least inform us in respect of their DX-strategy!
We D300/s owners have been waiting now for such a long time...

2 upvotes
Lassoni
By Lassoni (3 weeks ago)

It's going to be a hard decision for nikon, because if they decide to go with something like 9300, it would probably have to be not only better but also faster than 7xxx series. They're going to have to limit it artificially, maybe with less built-in bracketing? In D7000 you could use the U1 and U2 modes to gain extra bracketing, whilst D7100 (newer camera tho) came with more brackets built-in

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

There's almost certainly no D400 coming.

However, if you're inclined, I'd suggesting waiting a few more months before jumping on the D810. Might be good to wait for any issues to get ironed out first (w/ the first batches) before taking the plunge... unless you really need the camera asap, which you probably don't since you still have a D300/s.

I went w/ a refurbed D800 a few months ago myself, but I was coming from my D200 antique (w/ busted/unreliable built-in AF motor) and a D5100 that I defaulted to for the last couple years.

IF the modest improvements of the D810 over the D800 don't excite you, you might consider getting a refurbed D800 and save the $$$ toward lenses instead -- a refurbed D800 goes for ~$2500 from reputable dealers and comes w/ 90-day Nikon warranty (and possibly additional extended warranty if it's a company like KEH).

0 upvotes
HarrieD7000
By HarrieD7000 (3 weeks ago)

Jake64
And I'm convinced that is the reason why the D610 only has 39 points, more to the centre of the frame. I don't need 36 megapixel but for all the other possibilities I want to have on my new camera, I must buy the D800 or now the D810.

1 upvote
Man-Fai Wong
By Man-Fai Wong (3 weeks ago)

It's probably because they essentially recycled the D7000 body to make the D600/610 and didn't fully redesign the AF module for better coverage.

39 points could be enough if distributed well.

0 upvotes
Jake64
By Jake64 (3 weeks ago)

I am still convinced that if the D610 got 51 point AF to cover more of the frame, it would remove the need for the D8xx cameras.

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

I don't know about that, but agree the AF coverage was one definite aspect that turned me off wrt the D610.

Seemed like the problem had more to do w/ Nikon seemingly recycling the D7100 body into the D600/610 w/out fully redesigning the AF part for better coverage in FF.

Still, even the AF coverage on the D800 isn't quite as big as on the D7100 though... unless one shoots in a crop mode -- I often shoot in 1.2x crop myself.

0 upvotes
Ramjager
By Ramjager (3 weeks ago)

A stronger opponent with the 5DMk3 in terms of Autofocus?
You mean the Nikon AF system works this time or is it still sharp on the right soft on the left?
Funny how in the DPR D800 review no mention was made of the poor AF and QC issues which plagued the D800 bodies.
How many people went through multiple bodies to get one good one that had an AF system half as good as Canons...lots.
Yet hey it had 36MP its the king.
Your kidding yourseld DPR thinking some actually read and take your reviews seriously until you start reviewing properly and thoroughly.
But hey its got 36.3 MP and made by Nikon it must be good..right?

1 upvote
daggah
By daggah (3 weeks ago)

Troll much?

9 upvotes
mimot13
By mimot13 (3 weeks ago)

@Ramjager : yes, that's one of the main reason why I switched from Nikon D800E to Canon with a 5D MkIII, with satisfaction, lenses ok, autofocus fine, silent aso.. Just compare, on field and real photo conditions, the Nikon 24-70/2.8 AFS with the Canon 24-70/2.8L II ! Just a reminder : photos are recorded out of a sensor, but light go through the lens ! Second point is often forgotten ? Mpix changes nothing here..

0 upvotes
DaveE1
By DaveE1 (3 weeks ago)

New camera from a big name. Frenzy time for trolls.

If people love their Canon badges that much, wouldn't they be happier in the Canon sections of the site? Canon articles and forums are aplenty, so knock yourselves out.

It's a safe bet that no one commenting on this new Nikon has used it yet, much less have much experience with it.

6 upvotes
mimot13
By mimot13 (3 weeks ago)

@DaveE1 : "If people love their Canon badges that much, wouldn't they be happier in the Canon sections of the site? Canon articles and forums are aplenty, so knock yourselves out" : they are !
NB : some can have both experiences..

We all have different opinions about our gear.. but you, most probably don't like or admit it ?

0 upvotes
DaveE1
By DaveE1 (3 weeks ago)

@mimot13, I have both brand badges on my gear. Not really interested in you chewing my ear off about either though.

2 upvotes
WillieG
By WillieG (3 weeks ago)

The 5DMk3 has its own AF problems. You just have to Google it to see that. Combine that with the oil/dust issue that is now plaguing Canons 1DX and 5DMk3 and you'll find that QC problems are everywhere. In a recent 1DX/D4 comparison the Canon AF was found to be spot-on for only 9 shots out of 12 while the Nikon's was 100%. Canon shooters have nothing to crow about with AF anymore.

8 upvotes
mimot13
By mimot13 (3 weeks ago)

@DaveE1 : so why leave a comment on a forum, forum where we don't necessarily have same opinion ? If you don't like, don't write or critisize other opinions, furthermore without any real and understandable argument. Thanks for your effort..

1 upvote
Wubslin
By Wubslin (3 weeks ago)

@DaveE1: I didn't know I had to be a Canon owner to criticise Nikon for their many failings.

But since I don't own anything by Canon your attempt at diversion has failed.

0 upvotes
Daniel Stehura
By Daniel Stehura (3 weeks ago)

What Camera for $3300 has better Digital Image Quality? I have both Sony RX 100 II and Nikon D800. I hear a lot of weenies bickering about little cameras being better because their lazy to take a pro DSLR with them!! I will take the weight of my D800 and enjoy how light it is compared to what Ansel Adams carried (8X10).
If Ansel Adams shot his work on a Leica M1 - M3 to save weight the results would be like the weenies enjoy pure Shlock'o garbage. I am tired of Lame-o-weenies saying how progressive Sony is. Yes Sony is trying their best and if they were #1 I would not own both. Weenies please go to the Kodak Brownie web site!!! Your all into the Kodak moment and mindset.

9 upvotes
ipecaca
By ipecaca (3 weeks ago)

Hahaha, yeah the bigger the better!) I don't think anybody sane will argue rx100 is equal to D800. But aps-c dsr or mirrorless - no difference apart from size nowadays. FF vs aps-c bokeh advantage is only an advantage in portrature, I guess in any other type of photography more DoF is appreciated. Tilt-shift dx or fx - does it really matter then if you will have a 50mp(dx) or 70mp(d800) in the end?

1 upvote
rfsIII
By rfsIII (3 weeks ago)

The Kodak Brownie Hawkeye shoots 120 film which equates to about 50 megapixels. Beat that, Nikon!

1 upvote
Elaka Farmor
By Elaka Farmor (3 weeks ago)

The D800 was almost perfect, so this small upgrade make sense. Why change things that is already brilliant? For the very same reason, I expect only minor upgrades for the next models (D820 and D830) the coming 5-6 years.

3 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (3 weeks ago)

How does the D1s compare to the D810? It doesn't seem to me that the D1s is worth twice the price of the D810. The D810 not only has more than twice the resolution but now it is also quite fast for action shooting in crop mode, which is how those picture will be published anyways. D810 IQ can't be matched with the D1s you can see that by DXO marks with the D800 are the highest.

I can buy two D810s for the price of a D1s which gives more flexibility when shooting events, weddings, etc, so is the D810 the top of the line for Nikon?

0 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (3 weeks ago)

I assume you're talking about the Nikon D4, the successor to the D1. The Nikon D4 is basically a fast focusing camera with high frame rate for sports photography. And because this kind of camera often works exposed to the elements and with large and heavy telephoto lenses, the mechanical construction is more robust than the average DSLRs. Of course, all this is reflected in the price.

That said, cameras like the Nikon D4 and Canon 1D are with their days numbered. In a few years, they will be replaced by mirrorless cameras with electronic shutter operating at frame rates of 100 fps or more. A camera for amateurs like the Panasonic FZ1000 gives an idea of where the technology is pointing. When operating in 4K video mode, the FZ1000 produces very good 8MB images at 30fps, what is more than double the maximum frame rate of a Nikon D4. The mirror system and mechanical shutter of the current DSLRs have no future.

3 upvotes
Tim S Smith
By Tim S Smith (3 weeks ago)

Frank_BR has it just right. But perhaps his observation could be extended to most of the high-end mirror/mechanical shutter DSLRs, the D810 and the Canon 5D's not excluded. This is not the future of "still" photography.

2 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (3 weeks ago)

Yes Frank, I was referring to the D4s, thanks.

Agreed, now the second big problem for Canikon is the System itself which is great but big and heavy. I shoot FF and every time I look at my pictures just have a big smile as IQ is so much better in any light condition than any smaller sensor camera. But eventually technology will catch up or by the means of smaller sensor with extreme high IQ or by the means of lens technology that allows to produce a smaller lens for a FF sensor (like that curved sensor)...
Whenever this happens it will shock the whole market in a way never seen before. Only the ones with big pockets and quick to action will be able to adapt and take leading positions. Canikon is currently in decision paralysis because they are the ones protecting their systems and every critical business decision is made with their "cash cow" system in mind. Perhaps they need a guy like Steve Jobs who excelled by being bold and take Apple where it is now.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (3 weeks ago)

It is crystal clear that what Nikon did was basically a slight makeup on the D800 to raise the price. The D810 would be a fairly modern camera if it was released in ... 2012!

Nikon is truly facing difficulties to innovate its product line. Meanwhile, the "mirrorless" camp keeps accelerating and introducing increasingly modern cameras. The result is already appearing on the market, as shown in this graph of unit-sales growth by camera type:

http://www.43rumors.com/wsj-praises-olympus-and-blames-nikon-startegy/

The Wall Street Journal, which is not a specialized publication in photography but knows a lot about business, has realized that the mirrorless cameras are not only the future, but also the present of the photographic technology. And the WSJ is extremely critical of Nikon:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB2000142405270230358050457963379
1058180538

0 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (3 weeks ago)

Unfortunately, that article is only for subscribers. Could you elaborate...?

0 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (3 weeks ago)

This is a link for Google search result:

https://www.google.com.br/?gws_rd=ssl#aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&hl=pt-BR&q=Nikon+Lost+in+Hall+of+Mirrors

If you click on the first link of the page you'll go to the WSJ article (it worked to me, and I am not a subscriber, too)

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (3 weeks ago)

Thanks a lot! And yes I was referring to the D4s.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
eastwestphoto
By eastwestphoto (3 weeks ago)

If Nikon makes a serious Mirrorless DSLM, I would consider going Back too Nikon! I still have a draw full of high end Nikon AF lenses; waiting. Interesting that Nikon is buying Sony chips in full Frame, isn't it? You thought Nikon was king? Don't think I don't like Nikon idiot, I have five very expensive Nikon Rangefinders, and Five pro-SLR Nikon's. I made a living shooting Nikon Film cameras & even sold my D-70s a while ago. Still The konica Minolta Sony Nex 7 made a real believer out of me & so does the Sony A7r, so friends, Nikon cameras are just too huge in size and weight, Nikon DSLR are too large for the travel photographer, who needed Light, ultra compact, ultra precision digital cameras. Sony moved in with there electronics technology and bought a merged optical house who made great cameras going back to the 1920's. One day soon Nikon will make a serious DSLM in Full Frame of ultra compact size using the Nikon AF lens mount. I am waiting...... Don@Eastwestphoto

4 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (3 weeks ago)

The question is, how many serious travel photographers are there who need a Sony A7r FF, compared to the masses? I didn't find any statistics showing how much revenue companies make, selling products like A7(r), Em1, XT1, D800... I teach at a university and the last couple of years asked my students every new semester whether they bought (last 3 years) or will buy a camera the next couple of years, out of curiosity. Over the last 6 semesters (600 students on average, 2nd year, engineering): 17,12,14,8,5,2. If they use one, they use their parents DSLR (Canikon) the one's who bought a new one bought Sony NEX models (I was surprised by that, but they say theses cameras are more smartphone-like) and Canikon (those who got a kid and wanted to capture precious moments (entry level)). They didn't know what FF is, nor did the majority hear about mirror less cameras,. They think smartphones to be good enough and update every 1.5 years on av. The debate here, I fear, is that of enthusiasts only.

3 upvotes
hrt
By hrt (3 weeks ago)

I have been a long time Nikon owner, but In recent years I have been considering whether to change my set of camera gears.

Fuji's X-T1 looks very nice in terms of portability, versatility,high ISO performance and weather seals.

In terms of

1 upvote
GuyAF
By GuyAF (3 weeks ago)

Well I for one don't need a DSLM, give me a DSLR of even the size of the D4(s) or D800(E) with MB-D12. The optical viewfinder in these cameras is superior to anything else. Interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras are smalller, but you cannot put them in a pocket like you can with compact cameras either. I really cannot see what all this fuss is about.

5 upvotes
kangoo1707
By kangoo1707 (3 weeks ago)

Mirrorless cameras are not made to be pocketable, neither were they advertised to be so. Smallness is a feature, an outstanding feature that unburdens our backpacks, allows more discrete shooting while giving comparable IQ to any DSLR.

1 upvote
ipecaca
By ipecaca (3 weeks ago)

GuyAF:
"Superior OVF" - yeah with live histogram, focus peaking, exposure preview, 100% coverage, display of the photo just taken, etc.)

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

Live view has its usefulness, but it isn't always a good substitute for a good OVF.

Better to have option to choose as one needs me thinks.

And personally, I'm not sure I want things cluttering my view all the time anyway -- somethings can be better done the old fashioned way instead of relying too much on the latest tech.

1 upvote
Imagetracker55
By Imagetracker55 (3 weeks ago)

I wonder if you'll have to do a focus adjustment for each lens you use with this new camera? That was annoying and didn't instill much confidence in the system.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
daggah
By daggah (3 weeks ago)

AF fine-tuning is just a consequence of PDAF and the mirror box. Manufacturer tolerances aren't perfect. That's why AF fine-tuning is a feature on the camera bodies, to allow for that.

0 upvotes
7829mark
By 7829mark (3 weeks ago)

Who are these Sony zealots coming in here to praise their cameras? Sounds a lot like p-envy, very low self esteem, etc. I have no desire to go into a Canon forum and talk about how my Nikon is better. Who cares about more dots on an LCD, ISO in manual, and you can list them all but one thing they did not touch - IMAGE QUALITY. And when it comes right down to it, that's what photography is all about. I guess if Sony were to add polka dots these same maggots would be in here shaking their finger. Never mind, I will keep printing the best images out there and it won't be with a Sony. Oh, did I mention the glass? Hellooooo where is Sony?

4 upvotes
SkilakDeZoo
By SkilakDeZoo (3 weeks ago)

is it that "here" we have a kind of D810 shrine? ;)

1 upvote
Wilmark
By Wilmark (3 weeks ago)

The camera has to work properly without flaws, MUST have good after sales service BEFORE we can think about great image quality. What are you calling a "Canon forum" is THIS a Nikon Forum?

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (3 weeks ago)

Image Quality? What about technique or image composition? I've seen pretty many winning photos made with smartphones. So who cares about pixel peeping when a 6 mp image has enough information to make a billboard post? I do agree that portability of a system is more important nowadays because your IMAGE QUALITY is already great enough across all reasonably sized sensor systems for the human eye.

3 upvotes
ipecaca
By ipecaca (3 weeks ago)

7829mark
Ehm, hello-o, your d 800 is manufactured around sony sensor. And all the IQ you rave about is coming from a sony sensor, So get over it, you're "printing the bet images out there" with a sony;)
by the way sony 70-400 (both versions) is way sharper than nikon 80-400 mk I

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Bob Lundrigan
By Bob Lundrigan (1 week ago)

I don't comment often, but could not resist this one. No matter how important, the sensor does not constitute a system. Synergy is achieved when all the parts work together to achieve greater results. The Sony sensor is just one of many parts. Like those who think their WRX is a faster car than a Corvette because of its horsepower rating alone, Sony's tires are spinning and smoking while Nikon is already at the finish line.

0 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (1 week ago)

However, in the digital era (no film) the ability to capture light is a core technology for any camera maker. In this regards Nikon has succumbed to Sony. Nikon IQ can only be as good as the Sony sensor allows it to be while Fuji, Canon, Sony and others who care to develop state of the art sensors control their own fate.
This is very unfortunate for Nikon as being a small company it may not have the resources to develop new sensors.

0 upvotes
ipecaca
By ipecaca (1 week ago)

Bob, If we're talking about the whole ecosytem canikon are unbeatable simply because no other brand is offering such a service for pro users, when you can get any repair in days in whatever part of the world you are. Second - noone else has as wide a lens range.
But we were talking IQ, nikon IQ has a sony logo on it.
Lacikuss, Fuji is using sony sensors with their special CFA on it.

0 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (1 week ago)

ipecaca, So the Fuji X-Trans sensor is made by Sony?

0 upvotes
ipecaca
By ipecaca (2 days ago)

Lacikuss, yes, that is for sure. Fujifilm only develops the x-trans color filter array.
While there are rumors that fujifilm and panasonic are developing an organic sensor together, we shall see. AFAIK apart from sony and canon, only samsung, panasonic and sigma develop their own sensors.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (1 day ago)

Interesting, thanks.

I think that sensor technology still has long ways to go. Nikon at this point can embrace sensor technology development or wait and see who comes out with a better idea. The problem with the later one is that if it is a big company who also wants to dominate the camera market then Nikon will always play catch up which eventually limit their ability to compete.
Don't fool yourself, if Sony can come out with a sensor technology that will render all Canikon 35mm lenses obsolete then they will be the happiest company to oblige. (Curved sensors? hmmmm)

0 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (3 weeks ago)

It's amazing that many of the "new old" features of the 2014 Nikon D810 were already introduced in 2012 by Sony on the A99:
• Electronic first-curtain shutter
• 3.2in 1,229k-dot RGBW LCD screen
• Auto ISO available in manual exposure mode
• 1080/60p movie recording
• Uncompressed HDMI output with simultaneous recording to memory card
• Built-in stereo microphone

Consider also that the Sony A99 can record simultaneously to both memory cards, the GPS is built-in (it is optional in the D810) and the LCD is fully articulated (it is fixed in the D810).

Bottom line: Nikon is a company that is years behind Sony in the technological race. While Sony already has years of experience in building mirrorless cameras and is firmly entering the era of 4K video, Nikon is trapped in the DSLR technology, and only now is able to deliver 1080/60p video in its $3k camera.

Oh, I almost forgot to say, the main advantage of the D810 over rival 5D mkr III is the 36MP sensor, which is made by… Sony!

4 upvotes
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (3 weeks ago)

Yet Nikon outperforms Sony in terms of sales.

A good sensor in a lousy camrea system is still just that.

For serious shooting, I take the D800-D810 any day of the week, vs. Sony's offerings.

17 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (3 weeks ago)

Lousy camera? Don't be ridiculous! The Sony A99 received the DPR's gold medal with score of 84%, what is higher than the 82% received by the D800. And unlike the Nikon D800, the A99 never suffered from the infamous focus inaccuracy that plagued so many D800s.

3 upvotes
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (3 weeks ago)

LOL reading comprehension is not one of your virtues. Go back and notice I said "camera system"...You know, as in lenses, speedlights, and availability of accessories.

The camera system is what makes canon and nikon the most likely choice for professional photographers. Go out there and look for the Pros...see what they shoot, then come tell us how many A99s you see.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
13 upvotes
GuyAF
By GuyAF (3 weeks ago)

I mean, come one, how many of your statements can one make? I'll give another example: Porsche introduced its torque vectoring on its 911 Turbo more than 10 years after Mitsubishi ((super)active yaw control) on its Evo IV in 1996 and Honda (torque management system) on its Prelude in 1997. Sony and Nikon are best friends, but oh you 'forgot' to say that too. And didn't Sony have to buy some expertise from other camera makers. Maybe Nikon tells them how good cameras should be made, might give them some reduction in sensor cost... And Nikon makes steppers for Sony...

3 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (3 weeks ago)

Calm down, gentlemen! Only a blind man cannot see that the "new" D810 is just a collection of relatively old technologies that other companies have been using for years in their cameras. Nikon is a technologically exhausted company.

About Nikon and Sony are "best friends", well, that's nonsense. Just uninformed people do not know that Sony aims to overtake Nikon and become the second largest producer of cameras in the world. And Sony is in the way to.

3 upvotes
OseasMillan
By OseasMillan (3 weeks ago)

It´s easy, go for Sony.

1 upvote
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (3 weeks ago)

"Just uninformed people do not know that Sony aims to overtake Nikon and become the second largest producer of cameras in the world. And Sony is in the way to."

LOL. Get the hell out of town with your insider information...you just blew Sony's master plan to overtake the camera world :S This is some hilarious stuff.

I get most people around here are gear geeks and brand fanatics, but this is beyond ridiculous. As I said earlier, the Pro's know best. Go out there and count how many of them use the Sony system...and come report back.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
1 upvote
pschreiber52
By pschreiber52 (3 weeks ago)

We are photographers (or like to be) and not technologicians. To be one or two years later does not any matter. Look at Leica (M Series - they perform very restrictive and long term, but the optics and the pictures are for ever). This is value - not some hardly understandable feature. Nikon is closer to Leica philosophy (may be except of genially simple handling of M Series cameras which is far ahead of all competitors in this segment).

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (3 weeks ago)

"Just uninformed people do not know that Sony aims to overtake Nikon and become the second largest producer of cameras in the world. And Sony is in the way to."

Exactly, I've been saying this for a while. Who can argue that sensor technology is not a core technology of any camera maker. Nikon doesn't have this core competency, while Sony, Canon, Fuji and the whole M4/3 have it...

I wonder, what is Nikon's core competency now, as even glass design is being matched by Sigma and Tamron latest offerings...

It is too bad the Nikon is facing this situation just when the market is deflating and the competition is bigger than ever.

2 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (3 weeks ago)

lacikuss: I'm not sure whether this is necessary. Nobody knows how cameras evolve in a shrinking market. Does Apple use Apple screens or CPUs? I think software is more important in the long run because cameras are good enough already for most of us. The whole Nikon system works just great and DSLRs still sell very well and mirror less stagnate. I'm wondering if Sony makes a revenue if I look at the recent prices of their bodies (A6000, A7, contrary to Zeiss lenses which are expensive). Look at Thom Hogans article today with new numbers.

0 upvotes
daggah
By daggah (3 weeks ago)

I'll take a Nikon camera with a Sony sensor any day of the week over a Canon camera with an outdated sensor.

0 upvotes
Miike Dougherty
By Miike Dougherty (3 weeks ago)

I was up in Olympic National Park last month with a dozen other photographers mostly shooting Nikon (D800 & D7100). One of the photographers had a Canon 5D mkr III. The lighting was very difficult so the images showing up on the LCD screen weren't very representative of the RAW images I was shooting. When it came to color accuracy, the 5D mkr III kicked Nikon's butt. We were all scrambling to reset our settings to get better jpg renditions. None of us could even get close to the 5D mkr III. In the end my RAW images processed beautifully but I am still stunned how Canon really nailed it with that camera.

0 upvotes
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (3 weeks ago)

While I don't fully buy Mike's story, there have been times (under certain lighting conditions) when my X-T1 achieves better White Balance than my D600.

Once processed though, the D600 output is always better.

0 upvotes
Miike Dougherty
By Miike Dougherty (3 weeks ago)

Alex, 95% of the time my D7100 and D800 render images beautifully on the LCD but this one time it was in the late afternoon under the forest canopy and the greens were rendered just terribly. Images I thought were trash came out nicely after converting from RAW.

0 upvotes
lacikuss
By lacikuss (3 weeks ago)

HFLM, i was looking at Thom's article and then I read an article on WSJ on Nikon. The interesting thing is that WSJ sees only the mirrorless market slightly growing which contradicts Thoms view. I wonder who is right but for sure the market is quite soft and I've seen far more mirrorless camera introduced recently than dslr which seems to support that is a growing market as per WSJ view.

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

Wow guys. According to some of the logic presented here, Ferrari's must be junk too. For those who don't know it, Ferrari licensed traction control and magnetic ride control from the Corvette people (Chevy) too. This so their cars would stop getting smoked by Vettes. But does this make the Ferrari a product of a bunch of old technology and thus junk?

0 upvotes
ipecaca
By ipecaca (8 hours ago)

Bob, your coparison is incorrect, simply) Ferrari producing cars with Corvette's engine - this is the correct comparison, and yes then ferrari would be total junk.
It's just Sony is ferrari in sensor technology right now, so putting their sesors in a camera only makes it better. But doesn't make Nikon more advanced.

0 upvotes
CagomoC
By CagomoC (3 weeks ago)

good thing I didn't buy a d800.. or followed others that made a canon switch cause kelby did....

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
AngryCorgi
By AngryCorgi (3 weeks ago)

Expensive but nice!

0 upvotes
ajamess
By ajamess (3 weeks ago)

@ DPR - you spec list is incorrect. You should update the spec list to include that we finally get more than 1EV bracketing :).

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d810/spec.htm

"2 to 9 frames in steps of 1/3, 1/2, 2/3 or 1 EV; 2 to 5 frames in steps of 2 or 3 EV"

3 upvotes
ajamess
By ajamess (3 weeks ago)

you -> your, whoops.

0 upvotes
balico
By balico (3 weeks ago)

That is great news, thanks for sharing. The sensor's high dynamic range can cover this easily and makes shooting brackets for exposure fusion more convenient.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
R9IL
By R9IL (3 weeks ago)

And where Cannon
7D long since been upgraded
Nikon makes nice to its customers

0 upvotes
PredatorsPrey
By PredatorsPrey (3 weeks ago)

The Nikon counterpart of the 7D isn't updated as well. Or have you seen a successor of the D300s (like D400 or D310)?

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Stanchung
By Stanchung (3 weeks ago)

maybe they saw/crunched the numbers and didn't wanna make one... yet.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
joero
By joero (3 weeks ago)

I don't think the difference between the D800E and the D810 is worth that much, much less $3300. I'll keep my E thank you.

2 upvotes
Total comments: 945
12345