Previous page Next page

July 2014 | By Barney Britton
Buy on GearShop$3,296.95


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
198
I own it
332
I want it
52
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 1484
12345
StevenMajor
By StevenMajor (16 min ago)

OK DPR we've been patient. it's been 2 + months since the this first impressions review was published. Where is the review? Have you found something that Nikon would not like to see in print? Have politics intervened? Are you just overworked? Understaffed? What could it be that delays publishing the test results of this marvel?

0 upvotes
Hasa
By Hasa (18 hours ago)

Viz. the lab report: To me it looks like the raw images of the D810 are the same as the raw images of the D800. This should not be so. I would like to suggest that dpreview stop using the 50mm lenses of Canon, Nikon and Sony and use the 55mm Zeiss Otus instead on tests of all 3 brands. This is not a lens test. It purports to be a sensor test. How can it be a sensor test when the D8xx sensors outresolve Nikon's 50mm lenses by a far margin?
I guess people who upgrade to 810 also have Zeiss lenses and they would like to see what more they will get from the 810 that they do not already have in the D800 (e). If time permits: The Zeiss 15mm, 50mm and 135mm would be good choices. ( I only have the 35mm F2 ). This test would also show us what more we get from 36 Mpix that we do not already have from the 20-24 Mpix range. ( I have a good idea - but that is not a professional's opinion ).

0 upvotes
jerrywielo
By jerrywielo (1 day ago)

Nikon’s service advisory for thermal issue (white dots) during long exposures with the D810 camera...

Read more on NikonRumors.com: http://nikonrumors.com/2014/08/19/nikons-service-advisory-for-thermal-issue-white-dots-during-long-exposures-with-the-d810-camera.aspx/#ixzz3AqgPMT6x

0 upvotes
Love nic
By Love nic (2 days ago)

I am considering D810 and like to know if the lens I am thinking about a single lens for general photography is good choice. I am thinking of Nikon AF-S FX 24-70/2.8D.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
StevenMajor
By StevenMajor (1 day ago)

For 3oz and $ 700 less the Tamron is better says DXO lens testing.

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses

The site requires searching but the test info is there...for every worthy lens

0 upvotes
duttind
By duttind (1 day ago)

I went for the Tamron 24 700 f2.8 could'nt have been happier

0 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (57 min ago)

Cameralabs has a very good comparison: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_vs_Tamron_24-70mm_comparison/. I tested both, find the Nikon focuses faster and behaved better when shooting into the sun. As to DXO: look at the curves: Tamron is better for wide angle shots, wheres Nikon takes over from 50-70mm, so depends on your needs.
Another thing: if you want to use fine tuning, only ONE lens of a non-Nikon company can be tuned. All others use the same preset (or you remember it and set it to the desired value everytime you shoot). In case you add a macro or other lens, it's good to know that.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
StevenMajor
By StevenMajor (3 days ago)

Concerning Lab Report No 10.
What does this say (if anything) about shutter vibration caused sharpness issues when using a shutter speed higher than 1/80 sec? Will a higher shutter speed eliminate the shutter vibration caused sharpness issues? if so, at what shutter speed will all vibration issues be eliminated?
or
Are there shutter vibration issues at all shutter speeds, and the only way to eliminate them is by using the mirror up mode ?

0 upvotes
TBImages
By TBImages (4 days ago)

Anyone done any performing arts photography with the 810 yet? I shoot mostly dance and theater and have relied on my D4 pretty exclusively to do so. However, the D810 looks pretty interesting.

FPS speed is a non issue for me. Focus speed / accuracy and high dynamic range are.

0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (4 days ago)

All I'm going to say is that after nearly a month, this is a special, no, exceptional DSLR. Really great. All of the issues associated with the D800E have just been solved. The camera just works.

Some user impressions here:
http://wp.me/p2wMAg-C5

Pity that in true DPR fashion we have plenty of people with sour grapes everywhere on this comments section. I guess that is what it is. However, if people get put off by that they are missing a treat...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (4 days ago)

Strangely I just turned in my D800 for a new discounted E. I must be certifiable. ;-)

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 days ago)

Thank you for your experienced reply. Also for your user website. Gives me good reasons to purchase. Interesting that there is only overall complimentary websites on D810, but only in DP Review so many have no better thing do do but bash the camera. The more great cameras, the more griping trolls.

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 days ago)

@Galbertson: I'm not sure if your commentas directed at mine, but if it was, you misunderstood me by a country mile. I wasn't bashing the 810, nor your praise for it, at all. It happens a lot on the net.
The 810 is an incrementally better camera than the 800/E on every imagineable front. At least, that's my opinion after having tried it a few times.

Any questions?

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 days ago)

Sorry, my poor eyesight mistakenly responded, intended for sgoldswo. I have .been noticing how many positive responses to the D810.. It has every single function i need to at times replace my 4X5. The only thing missing is articulating LCD. But would get 5" external monitor. Its peeking feature would help me see for focus, apparently not available on camera. Still will need my magnifiers to help me read words of menu. I do not have central "target" eyesight, but compose with perifera portion. Not easy, and needing assisting tools to improve camera operation.

The tactile feel and function of contols and buttons tremendously important, the D810 appear excellent, but will only know when in my hands. I have had many cameras in my hands, can honestly say Fuji X-T1 has buttons for baby fingers, tiny and no sense of activation. Cannot afford to make that mistake.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 days ago)

Yes, I noticed in some other entries that your eyesight is impaired; you're not to be envied for that. My father was an enthousiast photographer, and when at 75-80 his eyesight went, it took a lot out of him. I admire how you're coping. Difficulties are put in your way to overcome them I suppose.

The D810 is an excellent camera, and I hope and expect it will work for you like that.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 days ago)

Since you have D810, if shooting highest res for main card, will it automatically put lower res in cf card, or do i have to shoot again for lower res file?

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 days ago)

No, I had the 800, and now have the 800E, not the 810, but I'm guessing they work the same in that respect. You select image quality (f.i. Raw + Jpeg) and primary and secondary card selection. Maybe in the 810 you can choose a combination of high res and lower res Raw, and send to cf and sd respectively; you'd have to look in the menu.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 day ago)

Mike,
Appreciate your more than you might image. Have studied in depth the world of blindness. For some fortunate reason, my compositions have refined and matured. Magic happens I guess.

D810 question...if shooting hi res raw image, can i set up camera to automatically load a low res jpeg into CF card? Or do I have to go into menu to set the camera, then shoot the same image again? My hi res files for large printing use. The low res jpegs for web , cataloging and emailing. I have a good fried who does my post work, but I would hope to not depend on him to downsize from raw files for my low res use, would hope to download jpegs directly from camera to my iPad.

Again, thanks for your words of confidence.

1 upvote
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 day ago)

Mike
Darnit, sorry didnt catch your answer to my question.
One thing about loss of eyesight is screwing up...just something to get accustomed to. I might call tech support to confirm. Camera still ideal for me.

1 upvote
chris1444
By chris1444 (4 days ago)

Have you seen the moiré on the tests? Look at the close-up of the b-w picture on the left. It is a deal breaker for me. The Canon does not have such an issue. The picture is completely clean.

The most worrying is that it is also present for the D800 and D800E.

BTW I am not a Canon troll. I am a real Nikon fan since decades. I and have bought several Nikon bodies so far plus several lenses, and no Canon. But moiré puts me really off. I am not talking about video where the amount of moiré is ridiculous.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Guenter Hofstaedter
By Guenter Hofstaedter (6 days ago)

i wonder why they make the sample shoots with all this zooms and not with a good prime ! I got my D810 on the first day it was released, just can tell you the samples here showed on DP are not the max you can get out of this camera !

0 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (1 week ago)

I have reservations about the "Real World" sample photos presented here. What are the sample photos suppose to illustrate? Good looking pictures does not mean anything for evaluating the camera performance because there is no basis of comparison. As for the processed RAW, what does it proved regarding the camera capability? If the purpose is to illustrate the dynamic range, then the three or four samples illustrate the shortcoming of this D810. I have gotten better results of high and varying lighting condition from my D800 than the samples shown in this review. It seems to me that the shooter did not set the HDR properly.

Is the purpose of the sample photos is to compare the D810 against the D800 and D800E, then why not make a side-by-side shots from all three cameras? The comparison to the Canon camera shows the lack of knowledge by the tester because there is no common and controlled basis of comparison. Moreover, it is not relevant.

Was I expecting too much from DPReview?

1 upvote
InTheMist
By InTheMist (5 days ago)

You can look at test charts if you like, I suppose.

0 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (5 days ago)

@Inthe Mist - In the 2003-2006, DPR used to present a side-by-side photos of subject taken by cameras being compared against one another. Shots were of identical setting from identical lenses. Test charts were also used. The side-by-side photos illustrates the tester's point and removed reliance on memories. As I recall, the photographs were NOT post processed. . . I wonder if you recall those times.

1 upvote
InTheMist
By InTheMist (5 days ago)

Ok, I get you're pining for the old days, but I quite like real-world photos.

0 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (4 days ago)

Oh yes, REAL WORLD photos of outdoor scenes, bridges, buildings, lakes/rivers/mountains, sporting events . . . name it. The point is the "side-by-side" comparison of JPEG files right off the camera. While you did not mention RAW, I have nothing against raw files, only that I prefer to compare the ability of the camera on the consumer's view point. Of course D800/800E/810 are not for the average consumer who thinks that raw applies to how their food is prepared.

0 upvotes
PVCdroid
By PVCdroid (1 week ago)

For some reason the D810 isn't as sharp as the A7R and contrast isn't as defined. I thought DPReview used the same lens for these tests? idk but can definitely see a difference. Weird. I'm also surprised at how much moire the D810 is generating compared to the A7R.

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

"DPReview.com is kindly brought to you by the Nikon Corporation."
This blatant infomercialising should be beneath this site. It really is beyond insulting. Why should we have any other reviews? I mean, it's not like any other camera in history has ever been as important as the D810.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 week ago)

Without focus peeking, how would i see expanded areas before shootin to see total focus area in broad landscapes? I have limited eyesight and use 15X loupe to see focus on my 4X5.

I have read(i cannot see to read, only recognizing word shape with large magnifier, but use Voicr Over on iPad to speak the words) that external monitors have image peeking. That might be the answer...yes?

0 upvotes
thejohnnerparty
By thejohnnerparty (1 week ago)

Did anyone happen to catch the photographer's reflection on the old truck's headlight rim?

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (1 week ago)

I'm looking for how the D810 moves groups of focus points around like the D200, D300, and D700 do. It is advertized but there is not a sign of it here. I do hope this really is included in the full review, because it is a huge factor in photography.
The Group AF option on a D700 is excellent and so much easier to use than any of Canon's slow two-stage options. It will be the biggest factor in purchase options for many, as mis-focussing is inevitable on occasion when you have zero AF control of where the focus goes, as with the D800(E) and D7100. I am certainly hoping Nikon supply a firmware fix, as that would be easy using the pad that only works ( and so slowly!) using manual focus (and just one point).

This is more important than anything else! As to moire, well, I get moire with my D800 quite often.It's a normal occurrence.Had I known, I would have an E got! Using Capture NX2 I remove it, so moire is a non-issue except for video, and well you can just defocus a little?

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

Yes. It does. And the autofocus seems to be a little faster than other Nikons I've used.

0 upvotes
Al Cris
By Al Cris (1 week ago)

Nikon - if you read this - add a real quiet shutter on the next D 820 or D 900 :-)

0 upvotes
Zoron
By Zoron (1 week ago)

and Trinity Reboot with Fluorine and vaseline coating

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Mikael Risedal
By Mikael Risedal (2 weeks ago)

best SLR camera out there IQ wise, if you are a spray and pray sport photographer, then you have D4s or 1dx
But for now, there are no competition regarding , metering, resolution, DR, AF, etc etc. Nice work Nikon

9 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (2 weeks ago)

I have not seen a D810. I am curious about comments made regarding vibration at some shutter speeds with the D800(E) models. What are these shutter speeds please, as I have no VR lenses yet have not ever seen this phenomenon using a D800. I have had blurred due to my movement and/or subject movement. And blurred due to the lens being imperfectly focussed, but nothing as described here that I can see.

Nikon removed the filters as at this magnification you can see that everything is slightly off-at all speeds. That said I have not ever been able to detect a visible difference in resolution-just micro-contrast and acuity.tight 0.2 pixel @ 400% USM deals with that.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Mikael Risedal
By Mikael Risedal (2 weeks ago)

look at this video, sum up what I think, now are also AF improved , better than my 5dmk3 ps I have also Canon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR7Kjeq2aH4

3 upvotes
mayurgogoi
By mayurgogoi (2 weeks ago)

Dear Shooters--what is your experience abt ISOs performance of NIKON D810?

0 upvotes
solomonshv
By solomonshv (2 weeks ago)

the ISO performance is as good as you can get at this price. if ISO performance is what you are looking for then look no further.

FYI, I am a Canon user but I currently have a D810 in my possession. ISO performance definitely shits all over Canon but I still find that my 5D Mark III units are more complete cameras and easier to use.

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

ISO performance is excellent on the D810. Better than the 5D MkIII.

I'd go with the D810 for handling too, but which is easier to use really depends on where the user is coming from. I adjusted to the Nikon system very fast after previously being a Canon shooter.

3 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (2 weeks ago)

It's really great, at least the jpegs out of the camera are—Adobe is still fine tuning its raw converter. But I've shot a lot at 6400 and they're wonderful as long as you look at them as photos and don't go all nerdtastic over them...
If you zoom in to 200 percent they're a little grainy but nothing that makes them unusable. And if you set your masking at 80 or 90 percent in ACR they're awesome.

3 upvotes
Ben Lazar
By Ben Lazar (2 weeks ago)

I sold my D800 to a friend and got the D810 over the weekend. In my opinion, it's absolutely worth it, mostly for the improved mirror mechanism--much less vibration and it's so much quieter. With far less mirror vibration, focus acuity is noticeably improved, and I can bring my shutter speeds down without any fear of the slight blur that I would sometimes get out in the field with my D800, and which relegated it to mainly studio shooting for me. All the little changes have added up to a greatly enhanced shooting experience--the D810 is a camera I'm enthusiastic to take anywhere, under any shooting conditions--Fashion, Landscape, event work, etc. I'm still just getting into the camera, but so far it just feels wonderful, with no niggling issues whatsoever.

7 upvotes
TravelPhotog
By TravelPhotog (2 weeks ago)

I always knew the D800 was only good for in-studio!! ;)

(we can say that now that the D810 is out right?? Which makes Nikon still awesome right??? Even though we were saying they were awesome when they weren't....??? ;) )

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
1 upvote
DaveE1
By DaveE1 (2 weeks ago)

TravelPhotog , the D800 is a great camera; one of the best out there. The D810 improves on it.

That's not that different to how technology has always improved over time, so no real need to over analyze or worry about it.

1 upvote
francowan
By francowan (2 weeks ago)

Cool. I want it.

2 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 weeks ago)

Another question...if using EyeFi card, will iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch work as extermal monitor? Will controls operate camera wirelessly from one of these devices? This might solve my need for external monitor that Hoodman loupe works on.

0 upvotes
EricCul
By EricCul (2 weeks ago)

@Galbertson First, I haven't used EyeFi, so I'm not able to directly answer your question. My guess is that EyeFi is for the transfer of files, rather than remote control via iPad/etc. I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.

The CamRanger product may be of interest to you... I have no affiliation whatsoever to the company that produces it; I just thought this link may be helpful:

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

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 week ago)

Eric,
If i had cam ranger on d810, connecting to my IPad, would Voice Over speak the worded options showing in live view?

0 upvotes
Gunawan Budihardjo
By Gunawan Budihardjo (1 week ago)

As long as I understand EyeFi is only to transfer photos directly from your camera which is using the EyeFi SD Card to your mobile or other gadget so that you can send the photos directly to your friends and family. Also to empty you cards directly to iPad or other gadgets.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 days ago)

Okay, i understand. But assume there is a way to connect and use iPad as external monitor. But my most important question is if the Voice Over function on iPad speaks words when fingers touches screen. I am still waiting for Apple to introduces MacBooks or iMacs with touch screen/Voice Over. Then i could do my own post of raw files. I can see color, but need lots of magnification to see sharpness. But still cannot read words unless Voice Over speaks to me. I accept this rare issue.

Thanks for your help.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 weeks ago)

When attaching external monitor to D810, does it disble lcd on camera?

Ideally want 3.2" external monitor, but not made. Because of very limited eyesight, need to use magnifying lcd hood, such as Hoodman. Since D810 does not have articulating lcd, seeking ideas. I even thought purchasing articulating lcd from D5300, but not sure if electronics compatible, plus no technician to manufacture with hdmi out cable.

Any help greatly appreciated.

0 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (3 weeks ago)

Conclusion of someone testing thoroughly (shutter shock, resolution ...):
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6704

1 upvote
jackspra
By jackspra (3 weeks ago)

Found the sample shots boring and unimaginative.

2 upvotes
muesliman
By muesliman (3 weeks ago)

Thanks for that, mate.

0 upvotes
GrahamJohn
By GrahamJohn (3 weeks ago)

Finally. A sensor that matches or exceeds Sigma's Foveon.

3 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (2 weeks ago)

They already have it for some time. D800(e) and the sony a7r.
Besides even an decent compact beats the crap out the foveon at anything above base iso.

1 upvote
Pierre Bellefeuille
By Pierre Bellefeuille (3 weeks ago)

Too much people don't catch that with cameras having over 20 megapixels there a real need to calibrate the lenses for a specific body. The best thing to do with Nikon or Canon Camera is to bring the lenses and the body to an expert technician that will make very fine tunings. This is of a prime importance with a body such Nikon D800 or D810. With 36 megapixels, it can be pretty easy to mess with focus if anybody doesn't understand well that matter.

I bought lately a Sigma 50mm, f/1.4 Art and a Sigma 17-70, f2.8-4 Contemporary. I am using these lenses with a Nikon D7100. I bought too the Sigma USB Dock to calibrate the lenses. It is really easy to use. I used a Datacolor target to better identify the back or front focus at many distance for predetermined focals on my zoom lens, as an example. The whole procedure is too long here to describe, but if you would like to know more, there is lots of valuable informations on the internet. It makes a huge difference. Really accurate!

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Pierre Bellefeuille
By Pierre Bellefeuille (3 weeks ago)

By the way, many pro just do that: they bring their cameras and lenses every two or three years to an expert that calibrate the whole kit for them.

0 upvotes
marc petzold
By marc petzold (3 weeks ago)

@MikeF4Black

Troll on the roll'? Nice bashing...but just think about who makes many of "Nikon" Sensors - Sony! You must be a die hard Nikon Fan, i like the brand since the 80s - but i enjoy my A7 way much, and it's not sh*t - way silly comment of yours.

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

Which particular entry are you referring to Marc? It was probably in jest. I maybe a longterm Nikon user (although there once was a Leica M5 in my life, and there still is a Contax RTSIII), but I don't consider myself to be a fanboy, and really dislike bashing other brands in the process.

But to be honest, you wouldn't catch me using a viewfinderless or EVF-equipped camera (nor an SLR with a porthole viewfinder).

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
marc petzold
By marc petzold (3 weeks ago)

it was more to the bottom, but there was no "Reply" button, so i wrote it just on top - you said it that way. I'm way happy to have a FF DSLM with my old lenses. The RTS III - was a dream since my teenage days...someday i'd buy one as collector item for my camera collection. If i'd be a billionaire, i would resurrect the Contax brand from the dead & just develop HighEnd DSLR/DSLM under the Contax brand.

I do like a OVF much more then an EVF, but it does have it's advantages - live histrogramm, picture playback into the EVF,
Zebra Mode, etc..the EVF from the A7 is great, but at the end
of the day, i'd like to look through the OVF from my D7000 more.

1 upvote
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

I tried the OMD, X-T1 and A7 in a shop, and was frankly very disappointed by the glimmer, and the noticeable building-up of the image when you swayed the camera. I really don't see any advantage, but I'm old (my first camera was a Werra, very small plain viewfinder) and probably oldfashioned.

Speaking of viewfinders, the D800's not bad, but certainly doesn't reach the level of that of my F2AS or my RTSIII... ;-)

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

Ahh Marc, I've found it. "We could all just agree" etc.

I found the discussion on the merits of adapters and Sony's apparently severely lacking lens range less than interesting, so tried to stop that discussion. I think I succeeded. Ha!

0 upvotes
sneakyracer
By sneakyracer (3 weeks ago)

Word on the forums is that the D810 improvements are most welcome and really make working with the camera much more enjoyable. The improved Live View is receiving high praise and is a great asset for landscape and architectural users. The quieter and smoother shutter also.

3 upvotes
SushiEater
By SushiEater (3 weeks ago)

Who cares about D810, we already know what Nikon is capable of.
I just shot with 2 D800e over 3000 photos in 4 days in really lousy conditions and not a single photo is out of focus!!!!! Two years ago I was doing the same with Canon 5D2, 5D3 and 7D and I had lots OOF.
So there is absolutely no reason making any complaints about D810 because it should be even better.

1 upvote
Lassoni
By Lassoni (3 weeks ago)

it's a little so-so. There's plenty of users out there who aren't happy with the consistency of D800 AF.

4 upvotes
SushiEater
By SushiEater (3 weeks ago)

That is because these users don't know what they are doing. D800 has very consistent AF.

0 upvotes
_Federico_
By _Federico_ (3 weeks ago)

No way. I've sold my 2 D800e because focus was terrible. With df the consistency is way better. Ops...the same photographer.

6 upvotes
_Federico_
By _Federico_ (3 weeks ago)

D800 is a very poor camera for consistency with f1.4 AFS Nikkors.

3 upvotes
SushiEater
By SushiEater (3 weeks ago)

Maybe you needed to sell f1.4 nikkors. I use 35 and 85 Sigmas. No problem at all.

0 upvotes
R Vaquero
By R Vaquero (3 weeks ago)

The D800 hasn't a really accurate AF, not bad but it should be better, as the D810 would surely be...

1 upvote
SushiEater
By SushiEater (3 weeks ago)

The proof is in the pudding. It is certainly better than Canon 5D III which I used for a year with D800e. And Canon claim that 5D III has the same AF system as in 1DX. But 1DX has better processor so AF in it is better. Pro friend of mine has 1DX and we compared AF with my D800e and could not really determine which one is better. In over 2 years I have shot with one D800e body close to 100K (already have 20K on the second body) I am only getting few OOFs and all of them my fault. I just don't see anything better than that. No left AF point problem either.

0 upvotes
matthew saville
By matthew saville (2 weeks ago)

I'd love to personally peruse 3,000 images shot at f/1.4 (or even at f/2.8) that are all perfectly in focus, LOL.

As a professional post-producer who edits plenty of images, (and as someone who teaches entire workshops on the subject of autofocus alone) ...I have to say, you're full of it. Yes, the D800 / D800e are amazing. But no, they're not perfect. They miss focus all the time, in tough conditions. They're not impervious to front / back-focus, either. I've used plenty of fast Nikon AFS-G primes, and Sigma Art lenses, and the results are the same. There is room for improvement, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, I think that improvement comes in the form of hybrid AF using an EVF, but that's just my personal experience. (As someone who tests and reviews cameras for another well-known website, BTW...)

=Matt=

=Matt=

1 upvote
SushiEater
By SushiEater (2 weeks ago)

All together I shot over 120k images with 2 cameras and there is hardly any OOF. That is why I got rid of Canon entirely. I have plenty images with Sigma 85mm F1.4 of actors being interview in low light and as long as I pre-focus and wait until peek movement stop I get perfectly focused shot. Same thing with F2.8 lenses (70-200mm and 120-300mm) at very close distances.
You know what they say: If you CAN you DO and if you CAN'T you teach or review.

0 upvotes
sierranvin
By sierranvin (3 weeks ago)

Why does dpreview dribble out their testing in pitiful fragments instead of presenting us with a complete review?
It is a habit that suggests, sloth, stupidity, understaffing... many possibilities, none correlating with competence or pride in a job properly done!
I'm f'in' sick of it!
(emits loud Brooklyn raspberry sound, followed with some quality Philly boos!!!)

1 upvote
matthew saville
By matthew saville (2 weeks ago)

Unfortunately, as someone who works in this industry as well, I have to say this is just the nature of the social media beast. It's becoming more and more normal to produce content in this manner. Personally I'm not a fan, but I do understand the system and why it is implemented this way...

A full review will come when it is done. It simply couldn't be done this quickly. DPR's reviews are incredibly thorough, and probably take many days / man-hours to accomplish.

=Matt=

1 upvote
StevenMajor
By StevenMajor (2 weeks ago)

The dribble creates more copy (why produce 1 article when you can produce 3), anticipation ( to bring back readers), and most importantly, increased advertising opportunities.
It IS crap, and the price of admission at DPR...and, just one of the many dark corners of capitalism displayed.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (2 weeks ago)

@sierranvin and StevenMajor - I totally fail to see how the timely delivery of studio and real-world samples, plus initial findings regarding handling and image quality could ever be regarded as a bad thing. As for the nonsense about 'creating copy' that's just sheer ignorance (each page is after all only published once...) and ditto 'advertising opportunities'.

If you really, really REALLY just want to wait for the full review, you're totally free to go ahead and wait. But characterizing this kind of content as 'pitiful fragments' is offensive and wrong-headed.

6 upvotes
sierranvin
By sierranvin (2 weeks ago)

OK, Barney, let's approach it from a different tack:
please explain why you don't release full reviews, prompt and complete, rather than bits and pieces, spread across weeks?
All you did in the above was act as a vigorous apologist for the status quo, it didn't explain anything!
As for "wrong-headed" - that sounds like Tennyson's description of someone who opined the French rather than the British should have attained colonialist hegemony over India. Of course thinking the French should have ruled India was simply wrong-headed! But I still think reviews parsed out as crumbs and morsels days and even weeks apart rather than arriving as one timely cupcake is annoying and cheap from a Google-owned company! Why not use some of your billions, Dr. Evil!

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (2 weeks ago)

"please explain why you don't release full reviews, prompt and complete, rather than bits and pieces, spread across weeks?"

Because if we did that, you'd be waiting for quite a long time to read anything, meanwhile lesser competitors suck up all of the interest in the product and the final piece lands with a dull thud of more-or-less indifference.

As has already been (correctly) pointed out, our reviews represent a lot of work, and that work takes time. Our thinking is that we may as well provide you with as much as we can, in as timely a manner as possible.

6 upvotes
sierranvin
By sierranvin (1 week ago)

Well, I thank you for an explanation. I have a life, and prefer to visit the website less frequently, and find and get what I need when I do steal time from my life to visit- i.e., one visit per new camera, not three visits. The "crumb and morsel" method is one potential strategy, and I respect your at least explaining why. I still don't like it; not liking it DOESN'T make me "wrong-headed"; good businesses like Eddie Bauer and Nordstrom actually listen to their customers, as opposed to berating them with Victorian opprobrium! I suggest you have one or more part time employees charged with showing up for a couple days' intense technical work when a significant new camera release occurs. This might allow you to complete a prompt review. Really, for billion dollar Google to do otherwise SO points to Stephen Major's "let's string'em out and make 'em visit again and again " increased ad revenue theory! Deeds, not words!!!

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (1 week ago)

I'm not sure where your reference to 'Google' comes from (we have no relationship with that company) and I'm sorry if you took offense at 'wrong-headed' but to put it in context, this was in reaction to your somewhat uncharitable characterization of our publishing philosophy as 'slothful, stupid and incompetent'.

Ultimately, if you want to wait for a full review before reading anything, you're entirely free to do so.

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
sierranvin
By sierranvin (1 week ago)

Yeah, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, we're all grist for the corporate mill in the sky...
You're not encouraged to acknowledge you're owned by Amazon, then, I take it? Amazon, not Google, yet ... SCHMOOGLE .. Who cares? The point, which you continue to minimize, is that your site, owned by the megacorp Amazon with a market cap of $147 billion could certainly produce timelier and complete results if anyone felt it was a priority. Also, pretty uncool how you've twisted my original criticism around from what was actually stated. Bogus.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (1 week ago)

"The point, which you continue to minimize, is that your site, owned by the megacorp Amazon with a market cap of $147 billion could certainly produce timelier and complete results if anyone felt it was a priority"

Seems like you're straying from your original point...

0 upvotes
phoman
By phoman (3 weeks ago)

It really is a silly thing to say that D810 is not suited for wedding photographers

2 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

No it's not. It's too sharp. As are the 800 and the 800E. Too sharp.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (3 weeks ago)

Mike:

Why do you think it too sharp?

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

&HowaboutRaw: at the lower to medium ISO's it shows so much detail it can be embarrassing. I shot some new female colleagues for our website a while ago, amd the detail the 85/1.4G gave at f4.0 with the D800 was slightly frightening. Some details you'd rather not see, and I wished I'd put on my old 85/2.0Ai... ;-)

0 upvotes
cpkuntz
By cpkuntz (3 weeks ago)

One of the best in the business, Ben Chernivsky, uses a D800.

http://love.chernivsky.com/

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (3 weeks ago)

MikeF4Black:

On a website these embarrassing details were more visible than they would be if say a Canon 6D had been used?

That doesn't make sense unless you were putting up full sized jpegs that started out as raws.

1 upvote
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

Well, to go into a bit more detail: it didn't matter anyhow as they were destined to be converted to a coarse b&w for that website, but looking at the RAW's, even after my customary sharpening and a bit more luminance reduction than usual to soften things up a bit I was still wondering if one of the subjects regularly shaved her chin, if you get my drift. Ambient lighting outside in front of the office didn't help either I guess, although there was no direct light involved. I can't compare to any other camera as I don't use those...

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (3 weeks ago)

cpkuntz:

And the colour in most of those shots would be improved a lot by the use of a different body.

So "best" is stretching things. Good composition though. Nice to see clichés avoided, for the most part.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (3 weeks ago)

MikeF4Black:

All I can say is that painters have known since the Renaissance to avoid reproducing every small detail. And when one sees a painting with the wrong details in exacting execution it can be disconcerting. Similarly not good scenic back grounds can have these problems--explaining why good scenic painters earn a good living.

More recently, since about 2005: Why do you think those street photos of Hollywood types rarely look like the images in movies?

A Zeiss, or very good Sigma, lens could improve things with the Nikon D800, the "problem" details will still be there, but they won't jump out as much since those lenses do better colour than even good Nikon lenses. What this means is that a Zeiss sees the subtle color differences around the detail so it's lost in gradations. And of course some Zeiss MF lenses aren't real sharp, like the old 50mm f/1.4.

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

HowaboutRaw

Interesting points, and you obviously speak from vastly more experience than I have.

I've contemplated going back to Zeiss mf zf.2 lenses more than once (I've had them) but decided against that. AF suits me with a DSLR, and I find the 24, 35, 58 and 85 1.4G primes I use have their own character that's certainly not just neutral or clinical. So I'm sticking with these, and will just try to optimize the AF.

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

MikeF4:

Those are good lenses. But the richness of Zeiss will fix some of the too many details, because there will be other details to see that Nikon lenses don't really see. (Realize I've repeated myself.)

Perhaps you could try the Sigma "Art" 50mm. I've not used it.

Yes I tried the Zeiss Otus outdoors on D800, though not shooting people.

All I'm trying to say is that there are options.

1 upvote
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

@HowaboutRaw: yes there are, I know that, Zeiss glass seems to give you an extra dimension; I had the 2.0/35, 1.4/50, 2.0/50 Makro-Planar amd the 1.4/85 for my D700 and D800. The last Zeiss to go was the Makro-Planar and the new 58 Nikkor came in; just couldn't resist. That's one h*ll of a challenging lens, but I wouldn't let it go now I've learned to use it. For my type of portraiture it's invaluable; for anything else it might be deemed mediocre at best. The 85 might be just too sharp for flattering portraiture; I actually don't use it a lot. The 58 just seems to cover most of my bases in that respect.

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

Mike:

That new 58mm lens is a good portrait lens, but I've only taken a few test shots with it.

It's not a lens I'd choose.

I like the Zeiss 85mm f1.4, though yes I understand it's only sharpest in the center.

I look forward to trying the Sigma Art 50mm at some point.

The new Foveon sensor in the Sigma Quattro shows real promise thru ISO 400, and a bit beyond. I'd be interested in a Sigma DSLR with that sensor and fast buffer.

1 upvote
matthew saville
By matthew saville (2 weeks ago)

I've been using the D800e for the past wedding season, and just took the D10 out to a huge Hindu wedding ceremony. LOVE it! I use it in 1.5 DX crop mode for telephoto shots when I don't need all that detail, and I use it FX for large group portraits of 5+ people and / or wide-angle portraits etc. The D800e was, and the D810 is, the ULTIMATE wedding camera.

(And this is coming from a die-hard dual-D700 user who SWORE never to upgrade, BTW.)

=Matt=

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 weeks ago)

matthew saville:

What lens(es) do you use on the D800 when shooting weddings.

(The D800 isn't really an "upgrade" to the D700; they're different full framed camera lines.)

0 upvotes
SMPhoto
By SMPhoto (2 weeks ago)

I've shot plenty of weddings with D800 and I can't imagine why it's capture of detail would be an issue. Detail can easily enough be softened in Raw to JPG workflow where desired to be flattering to people, and retained where it benefits, such as venue, decorations, flowers, large groups, etc.

0 upvotes
rwdphotos
By rwdphotos (1 week ago)

"It's too sharp."

Well, then downres. You don't have to give all 36MP every time.

0 upvotes
PVCdroid
By PVCdroid (1 week ago)

That's the craziest thing I've ever heard. I'd much rather have too sharp and post process it softer than have to sharpen shots from a lousy sensor or lens.

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (1 week ago)

Uhhh... You're all so serious. It's too sharp!

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (1 week ago)

MikeF4Black,

What lenses are you using?

0 upvotes
wherearemyshorts
By wherearemyshorts (3 weeks ago)

What the Sony Nex/Alpha has over any Nikon and probably will have forever, I can basically use any lens I want. I am not stuck with Nikon lenses or Nikon mount lenses.

1 upvote
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

That's such a sad comment. But enjoy your "Sony".

5 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (3 weeks ago)

It work both ways, with Sony, you need a converted to use Nikkor lenses. But let's be practical, there are third party lenses such as Tamron, Sigma, Zeiss and others made for Nikon.

0 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (3 weeks ago)

And what Nikon has over Sony is a fantastic selection of lens that will actually AF on the camera.
If you want great selection, your pretty much stuck with third party. Course, most if it wont af worth a hill of beans on those adaptors, but what they hey, you can take pictures of statues.

3 upvotes
armandino
By armandino (3 weeks ago)

You sort of have to with the Sony as the native lens selection sucks so bad!!!!

1 upvote
ecube
By ecube (3 weeks ago)

I have repaired cameras and lenses back in the the mid-1960s. Before adapters were commercially available, I machined various adapters for Asahi Pentax, Canon, Miranda, Kodak Retina, Nikon, Minolta lenses. I did that as a hobby and favor to friends. Time became a scares commodity when I started working for a living that I did not have time to repair camera or make lens adapters.

I had collections of Leica, Minolta, Retina, Canon, Nikon, Konica, Asahi camera and lenses. I DONATED most of my gears in the mid-1980s, keeping only the Nikon body and Nikkor lenses. I started easing back to serious photography in 2002 with an inexpensive digital Minolta, then "SLR-like" Lumix. Because of my compliment of Nikkor prime lenses, I purchase a D90. Successfully use all my "ancient" Nikkors on the D90. My three latest toys are the D5100, D600 and D800. I wish I kept the Summicron lens.

I am not a "fanboy" of any manufacturer. Each camera and system has merits. Happy clicking ... Enjoy!

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

Enjoyed your experiences and perspective.

Hope to soon purchase D810 and use my nikkor AI lenses. But have yet to find honest IQ tests on D800/D800E. Some say "great" , some say "poor"have no seen or shown examples of their meanings.

0 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (3 weeks ago)

@ Galbertson - Thanks for the compliment.
NIKONIANS is a Nikon user's group I stumbled upon in November 2013. There are FREE and PAID Membership, I assume the benefits for each type is self explanatory. Nikonian posted a Nikon body V Nikkor lens compatibility matrix.

It is evident that I used my vintage Nikkors on D90 some 8 years before reading the Compatibility Matrix. All my "ancient" Nikkors has the Indexing Fork. I took the fork out to ensure against damaging the camera. I don't know if AI lens has Indexing Fork. You know what to do if it has. Also check the lens for contact terminals. You MIGHT need to apply a dub of nail polish to insulate the terminal. My Nikkors do not have terminals.

If you want to experiment, I suggest you buy a used D40, 50, … 3100. You should be able to get a used one for under $100, perhaps as low as $50.

I posted ways to get sharper images (not sure if it was yesterday or early today). To save time, search for my post.

Best regards

0 upvotes
mayurgogoi
By mayurgogoi (3 weeks ago)

I have gone through many reviews regarding Nikon D810--but the summery may be like this--This camera is the house of technical upgrade,but not in noise!

Am I correct?

I am not a pro-technical man to give certificate to Nikon D810--but my opinion is removal of Anti-Aliasing filter is creating a new problem--moire is seen in cloths etc--and though pics are more clear,but due to Moire Nikon is finding an solution --!

I am also noticing that Nikon D810's pics are little colourless,faded as Compared to 800E/800?My observations may not be correct!But My final words--Nikon D810 is technically best camera of Nikon,but We can not certify that it is 100% stunning--some faults are here!

http://www.pocket/-lint.com/review/129959-nikon-d810-review-says--NOISE is seen@ISO 560 in shadow areas(100% crop)

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
AlephNull
By AlephNull (3 weeks ago)

Are you making judgments based on images in reviews? That's generally a mistake.

AA filters were needed, even vital, back when digital sensors were comparatively low in resolution - 2 megapixels, even 8 megapixels. As resolutions increase, they become increasingly unnecessary.

I owned and used a Leica M9 for a while, and I owned and used a D800e for two years. Moire has not been a problem (however, I mostly shoot models without nasty moire-inducing clothing). I am looking forward to seeing how much better the D810 is than the D800e - no AA filter is better than half a filter and a reversal.

There are other benefits I have already discovered - the shutter is much more discreet, for example.

It's not perfect. The strap that comes with it is rather cheap and nasty - disappointing.

0 upvotes
mayurgogoi
By mayurgogoi (3 weeks ago)

Ofcourse--yes--because--though it is a mistake--but I have no option--since to buy and give a review--difficult thing from me--but My opnion is moire is problem for NIKON and they must solve this problem and noise of Nikon D810!If@ISO560--noise is obvious--why I should buy giving more than $3000 us dollar?This price is great for me to bear--I must take a loan from Bank before buy this camera at high price!--Thanks for your opinion--

0 upvotes
SMPhoto
By SMPhoto (2 weeks ago)

AlephNull, I'm not sure if you mean that the clothing your models wear doesn't induce moire, or that they aren't wearing any... If the latter, Chapeau! lol

0 upvotes
AlephNull
By AlephNull (2 weeks ago)

Your opinion is that moire is a problem, even though you have never tried using the camera. Have you any experience with any digital camera without an AA filter? Have you used a D800e?

I have over two years experience using the D800e, and moire was never a problem. I had almost a year of experience using the Leica M9 (no AA filter) and moire was not a problem. I have several days experience with the D810, and I haven't seen a problem yet :)

I do not think moire is an issue for Nikon. I'm not the only one - there are quite a few articles discussing moire on the D800e, and some of the reviews of the D810 make a particular point of mentioning the subject.

Most important point, though - if the D810 is too much of a commitment for you, then don't buy it. Buy a camera you can afford comfortably. I understand wanting the best, and I have over-committed myself in the past. Don't do it.

1 upvote
AlephNull
By AlephNull (2 weeks ago)

@SMPhoto: you got it - skin doesn't show moire.

1 upvote
mayurgogoi
By mayurgogoi (2 weeks ago)

Infact I was worried when I read the reviews that ISO PERFORMANCE @100% crop becomes noisy,and pics are seems little dull in videos --thanks for your kind comments and sharing experiences with Nikon D810---<and you are very correct on over committment---I trust one thing--the man behind the camera...>

0 upvotes
Mr Physics
By Mr Physics (3 weeks ago)

I never really had a use for the "Qual" or WB" buttons. If they just had a 2-button thing for metering and ISO, I might get one of these. O.K., I'm not telling the truth. I'll still get one of these, despite too many buttons. :)

2 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (3 weeks ago)

@Mr.,Physics - Do you have D800/E and never used the Qual nor WB buttons? I use these two buttons (on my D800) frequently.
Naturally, you could set or change the size/ quality and the WB by other means such as going thru the menu each time,or creating My Menu, or performing Custom Settings (A, B, C, D).

If there is one button I find redundant, it is the OK button because the center button on the multi-selector is also an OK switch.

Does your last sentence mean you do not have D800 or D800E?

1 upvote
Mr Physics
By Mr Physics (3 weeks ago)

I'm a D700 and RAW recording guy so it makes sense for me to be in 14 bit compressed NEF always. I've always tweaked the WB in post processing and generally leave the WB in auto.

I've been wondering if the quality and range of actual light data captured would be better if I'd simply select an appropriate WB at capture time but never had the ambition to study this question in detail. I wouldn't know where to start. We have the options of direct sunlight, shade and cloudy but there doesn't seem to be an in camera compensation to accommodate the difference in the Sun's light from bright mid-afternoon to the red-ish orange of dusk. When I find myself with mixed source lighting indoors (often a combination incandescent and florescent lighting) I don't have a clue what option to pick at capture time. I usually choose "Auto" and sort it out in post processing. So I haven't ever used the WB and QUAL buttons.

0 upvotes
Mr Physics
By Mr Physics (3 weeks ago)

The last sentence should imply that I lust the D810 and I'm trying to rationalize the expenditure despite already having very good light writing machines (D700 and D90).

0 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (3 weeks ago)

Mr. Physics - Physics was my favorite subject in High School that my classmates called me "Senyor P6" . . . no I am not Hispanic.

I have never used a D700 so I don't know the choices for it. I use the WB button in D600 and D800 when on artificial light such Sodium Vapor, Florescent and Tungsten (Incandescent) other than that I just live it at Auto. Outdoor, I want to capture the mode be it sunrise, sunset, cloudy, sunny so I don't bother making changes.

The Qual button is a faster way for selecting the type: RAW, TIFF, Fine, Standard, Normal, Basic AND the size (pixels): Large, Medium, Small. The front and rear wheel is used with the Qual button.

If I were you, I would not waste my money of D800/810 for the QUAL and WB buttons. I believe the D700 has "My Menu". Simply add these two functions if they are important to you.

BTW - for me, D90 and D300 maybe the best DX format camera. I am able to use ALL my 40+ year old Nikon F prime lenses.

1 upvote
Peter K Burian
By Peter K Burian (3 weeks ago)

Capture NX2 supports D810 RAW files ... apparently, anyway. v.2.10.0
https://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/19104

There is an update which will provide this support but today, I could not get it to work (HELP > Update NX2) ....

I got a message when I tried that: Could not communicate with server. .... I'll need to try it next week.

0 upvotes
Reality Check
By Reality Check (3 weeks ago)

"Anyone who has ever used a Nikon D800/E or, for that matter, a D700, D7100 or D4 could pick up the D810 and feel completely at home."

You obviously meant to say -D7000-, not D700, because there are significant real-time use differences between the D700 and D8xx in external controls if nothing else.

4 upvotes
AnHund
By AnHund (3 weeks ago)

"This is good news, although for D800 shooters it might leave a slightly bitter taste in the mouth (there's really no reason why the D800's JPEGs couldn't look sharper, too with tweaked firmware)."

Despite a nice and fair review the above statement is complete nonsense imho. The jpgs can be very, very sharp from the d800, but I'm not sure who would ever shoot jpegs with any of the D8xx series, well yes, I think Ken Rockwell would :-)

8 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (3 weeks ago)

JPEGs from the D800 are not as sharp and detailed as those from the D800E and D810, even at apertures where diffraction removes any distinction in raw image quality. We demonstrated this in our review of the D800/E.

2 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (3 weeks ago)

Still wouldn't matter. The images from the D800 compared to the E look almost like the camera lens lacks contrast or suffers from some minor spherical aberration. For lack of a better term, D800E images look "less veiled."

0 upvotes
skyrunr
By skyrunr (3 weeks ago)

IMHO it is spot on. I owned the D800 for eight months. There is NO reason why it shouldn't render JPG's, or why they can't address that in firmware.

1 upvote
Peter K Burian
By Peter K Burian (3 weeks ago)

I am still wondering whether the new CLARITY feature in Picture Control modes is one reason that D810 images have greater apparent sharpness. Clarity increases mid tone contrast making images appear sharper. (No previous camera includes this feature).

1 upvote
ecube
By ecube (3 weeks ago)

@AnHund - your last statement sound like you are thumbing down on those who are contented shooting Jpeg. While I am not impressed by Ken Rockwell, I feel you are claiming you are better than him. Is it possible you are trying to bring him down to your level?

I set my SD card to record Jpeg and the CF to record NEF. Very seldom do I have to post process but when I do, it is not to pixel peep. The various settings available in D800 at my disposal gives me the image I want to create. The six basic picture control setting by itself gives the user control on the sharpness. Each of this setting can be tweak to suit individual TASTE of preference.

I also select the appropriate lens I fell is best suited to express the mode of the photograph I want to create.

1 upvote
AnHund
By AnHund (1 week ago)

@ecube - I think I learned a lot from KR, but one thing I would suggest, is never to shoot jpegs only (like KR always suggests), because that limits your possibilities of changing your images at a later time.

1 upvote
ecube
By ecube (1 week ago)

@AnHund - do you then mean that the last sentence on your original post should be" … , but I'm not sure who would ever shoot jpegs [ONLY] with any of the D8xx series…"?

As for KR. I do not know him personally nor am I a fan, still, I feel it is best to not disparage him.

0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (3 weeks ago)

Raincheck time people. IF there is an increase in resolution you will not see it. You will see increased microcontrast and acuity, no more than that. Yes, it is a lot, it is quite a big improvement, but all current lenses have no more than 16MP across the frame resolution at best, including Nikon's dream team (dream on!) and the best Zeiss and Sigma Art offerings.

We are nowhere near what a 36MP sensor can resolve yet, and the impression of greater resolution is due to size-to magnification, not resolution, so people who keep using their D800s gain enormously as when that day comes that they actually do manufacture decent enough lenses they will have saved up to be able to buy one!!

Nikon have a "damned cheek" increasing the price over the D800 and D800E, since this D810 is what they SHOULD have "given" (LOL) us in the 1st place!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
sandy b
By sandy b (3 weeks ago)

You really think 16 mp cameras out resolve the best lens today? I am no optical whiz, but I have read here that the best lens are capable of more than 50 mp. Just curious.

7 upvotes
BBQJim
By BBQJim (3 weeks ago)

Lens Rentals tested the superior Canon 24-70 II on the 5dIII to Nikon's 24-70 on the D800 and found that the higher resolution sensor allowed for a greater resolving ability across the board. Even mediocre lens's will benefit from higher resolution.

8 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (3 weeks ago)

you need to check out Photozone de. and DXO mark tests. You there will see for yourselves that the 16MP Fuji APS-C sensor resolves more than 3000. When I had a 1Ds MkII (16.7MP) no lens Canon made could outresolve the sensor except in very small areas at specific apertures. I use both a D800 and a D7100 and despite having very good optics indeed, and having bought used and returned all dream team lenses (as simply not sharp enough) I have not yet used a lens that can resolve 36MP at all, not by a huge margin, and I have 105mm macro and 85mm primes. The advantage with nothing in the way of the lens is however obvious- you do not need to sharpen your images at all. They are already as sharp as can be. Now do you see how the 1 stop improvement in high iso noise comes about, as sharpening ALWAYS increases image noise, which then requires noise reduction and the pics go soft again.
The Canon 5D MkIII, like the MkII I bought and returned smooths away low contrast detail- and resolution!

1 upvote
munro harrap
By munro harrap (3 weeks ago)

As to the 24-70mm f2.8 , if you divide the image area like a noughts and crosses game into nine rectangles, then the lens at 24mm is only ever sharp in that central ninth area. You are inside a sphere of lens curvature. The sphere you are inside can only contact the image field where it is focussed-even at f8 (beyond which aberrations kill resolution anyway-f5.6 is best here) because the camera image field-that of the lens curvature is circular, not flat ( see the photozone APS-C test for this lens).
I was really heartbroken to discover this at huge cost, as I had traded in my perfectly good 1Ds MkII believing from reviews that the Nikon zoom-my standard go to lens -was much better than Canon's.
Not only was it not, but additionally if you want detail and do landscapes the red/green fringing on the 24-70mm nano nikkor is so bad you get three images of all detail outside the central area-making it useless for film and bad on 36MP

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 weeks ago)

If you shooting landscapes, you should not be using zooms, only primes.

In a perfect world, sensor/film matches capability of lens. Just use the best primes you can afford, and accept the results. If camera manufacturers do not make the perfect camera and lens up to your perfect standards, don't buy them.

Why sooooooo much bickering? Go ahead and enjoy your D800/E, the D810 just slightly better, both great capturing machines. For me personally, don't have Neither, so choice easy, beings price of both same. If i could afford, would get Pentax 645z. I can guarantee you, i will love using my next camera. If any photographer is truly out in the field using their camera, he or she shouldn't have so much time to worry soooooo much what camera soon to be released.

2 upvotes
EricCul
By EricCul (3 weeks ago)

Terrible misinformation and pseudo-science there, munro! Besides, your experience seems to be at odds with a lot of others, including the testing labs.

The bottom line is... if you can't take sharper images with better equipment, you'd be foolish to part with so much money to upgrade. Most people I know, who are quality focused in their work, do notice a difference. And so do I.

Enjoy your photography and shoot what you feel most comfortable with. Just, refrain from confusing personal feelings and technique with technical measurements.

3 upvotes
EricCul
By EricCul (3 weeks ago)

@Galbertson Good comment!

0 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (3 weeks ago)

@Galbertson - "Why sooooo much bickering?" - - - Perfect! In my opinion, there are those who want to appear to know it all. There are those who rely too much on the gadget instead of using their eyes and imagination to create the picture they like. There are those who are NEVER pleased with the photos (or "data" as one reader put it) captured by their lens, camera and digital memory card, hence, insists on taking RAW file only and processing that data to create the viewable picture.

For me, photography is a hobby to capture scenes, events, and everything else that gives me pleasure viewing over and over.

I very much agree with your post.

0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (3 weeks ago)

Cul?
I am not a lobbied, sponsored, advertizing test lab, but if you do go by them and not me try actually reading DXO on, for example CA on the 24-70 nikkor and Photozone de. on the field curvature problems.
I am here to try to get people like you to avoid the suffering falling as I did for this lens caused me. I own use and love my D800 dearly, and everything I have said here is true. I go ENTIRELY by what comes out of the cameras, and tell you what I see.

0 upvotes
AlephNull
By AlephNull (2 weeks ago)

The D810 is the same price as the D800e, and given that it is the development of the D800e, that's understandable.

You are sorely mistaken about lenses being unable to out-resolve a 16Mpixel sensor. Roger at LensRentals has measured a great many lenses on the D800 (and he measures multiple samples of each) - I suggest you read his results.

Still, you are under no obligation to buy a D810. Feel free to use a D800 if you have one, or something else, if that's what you have.

I told myself I didn't need the D810 as an upgrade over the D800e. I wanted it. I traded in my D800e on it. I am not regretting it! YMMV :)

0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (2 weeks ago)

IF I did not have a D800 already, and had no full-frame Nikon at all, and wanted one, it goes without saying I woyuld buy a D810. BUT, the fact remains that at this size focus has to be spot on, and depth of field too for landscape shots to succeed.
As to primes, well folks, list to my rant! They shrink your vision. You have to go around looking for 24mm or 50mm or 105mm shots etc. You have mentally to be a limited 35mm 50mm or 105mm viewfinder yourself- you have to become only that.
The pictures can be good, sure, but they are only certain types of pictures, rather than the infinity of types a great zoom makes POSSIBLE.

Hence the NEED for sharp zoom lenses. Their lack is wrecking photography's ability to progress visually.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (2 weeks ago)

And the other factor is the dreadful digital colour we are still stuck with. Do you realize that a correctly balanced spectrum in camera would mean you did not have to waste weeks of your life trying to get the reds somewhere near what you saw etcetera. We still have 1999 colour- these has been NO progress. Progress is no need for ANY correction at all. You are still paying several thousands for an inherently defective machine that then requires expensive time-consuming software to be able to function at all.

0 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (2 weeks ago)

@munro harrap - Reading your post in this thread, specially the last two makes me wonder if you have taken time to know your D800. While I do not totaly agree with Galbertson's statement of limiting landscape shots to prime lenses, your rant on color, sharpness, and claim the the D800 being a defective machine is irresponsible. Since you claim earlier that you LOVE your D800, I wonder if you keep track of your posts.

Would be nice to know how you set you camera, the lighting of the subject, where you view your photos (the LCD on your camera or computer), the color calibration of the computer, etc.

Other than cropping, straightening and adjusting light intensity to correct for under or over exposure to SUIT MY PREFERENCE, I practically avoid post processing. I have adjusted and customized the setting for the type of photos I want to take (Action, Portrait, Landscape, and General photography). I have created several customized WB. My computer monitor is color calibrated.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (2 weeks ago)

Nothing special. Calibrated 2713H monitor, all from Adobe RGB RAWs, camera set to -2 and standard for nature and neutral and -2 saturation for people shots as dayglo reds and pinks are dreadful.
process in Capture NX2 with camera settings, but I might try changing the neutral on people shots to portrait if the reds and pinks are the kind you can do this with (not many!).

The camera is the THIRD I have had. The first had AF problems and bad colour, the second trashed completely the odd raw file and had bad colour, and this one direct from Nikon they claim is perfect but the colour is as bad (which is why they gave me NX to help out). But despite this reds visibly shift in highlights unacceptably and obviously- to what depends on the initial hue.

For happy snaps using sRGB I have no idea as I do not cripple my colour work using sRGB. So I dont post Abobe RGB jpegs now, as last time every impertinent fellow demanded I send RAWs to Dropbox, as if using sRGB they could not see the problem

0 upvotes
ecube
By ecube (1 week ago)

If Nikon D800 is not good enough for you, how about ditching your Nikon D800 in favor of Canon or Hasselblad or Olympus, or Leica or Pentax or Sony.

You must be a very important customer of Nikon for them to GIVE you Capture NX2. I only have the basic Nikon View NX2 and I don't have any problem with photos taken with Nikon D90, D5100, D600 and D800. My fallback PP is the old PhotoShop 7.0.

I do very little PP. I definitely do not waste my time pixel peeping. You and I have divergent setting because we have different preference. I wonder if you have experimented with different setting. I did until I found the settings most pleasing to me.

I am confused by your last paragraph. The first sentence of that paragraph is contradictory. In the last sentence, you put RAW and sRGB as if you are treating RAW to be an sRGB. That very much confused me.

You made me feel being in a gondola lifted by hot air with the strong wind pushing the gondola in 360 degree different directions.

0 upvotes
marc petzold
By marc petzold (3 weeks ago)

@HowaboutRAW

The Nikon D810 is sth better, of course...but costs also more than twice then the A7R - for neglible more performance, also it's much more heavy, and i must say the best thing with E-Mount ever is that you can virtually adapt every lens from the past 60-70 years, that doesn't work with most DSLR because of the mirror box, and bajonet flange. *If* i would have the money, i'd go for E-Mount, not Nikon anymore...it's just too heavy, too expensive (good lenses) and take too much space into the bag anyway - but i do enjoy shooting with my APS-C Nikon's, but i won't upgrade them to FF, because of size and price issues, i'd go for Sony. For example, it's way cheaper (and more fun) using the A7 with legacy mf primes for myself rather than buying the D610 with the 35/1.4 Sigma...much more expensive, no aperture control onto the lens, plastic lens body, etc...and more weight into my bag anyway.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (3 weeks ago)

The D810 is much much less audible than the Sony A7r, and the Nikon has very very good AF.

6 upvotes
Eric Hensel
By Eric Hensel (3 weeks ago)

Those two things aren't of particular importance to me...

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (3 weeks ago)

Eric,

Okay, but fast AF and very quiet shutters/mirror-movements are sought out things for some.

Given how quiet the A7S can be, the A7R is an embarrassment.

1 upvote
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (3 weeks ago)

The D810 outperforms the A7r in every tangible feature.
Shutter lag
Af
AF tracking
low light
dynamic range
hand holdable
shutter noise
and is backed by a real system with about 70 or so lenses currently available to choose from.
If these things are not important to you; cool
While the A7R is a nice camera, the D810 is a great system!

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
EricCul
By EricCul (3 weeks ago)

@Bamboojled I agree with you. I have both cameras now and the D810 is the one I currently use for more serious work. That doesn't mean that I don't take the A7r seriously! In fact I love it for some things. It just means when I have the choice, and weight is not an issue, the D810 is working better for me as part of a wider system.

People sometimes try to explain away the advantages of systems they don't have as a way to reassure themselves that they're not missing anything. That's fine too, if it helps them feel good about what they are using.

2 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (3 weeks ago)

@Bamboojled @ EricCul +1

0 upvotes
marc petzold
By marc petzold (3 weeks ago)

@Bamboojled

well, you can choose virtually *any* lens mount, via adapter,
not the very few native e-mount lenses, isn't that enough?

Of course - the D810 is better than the A7R, but it depends - i wouldn't carry the extra weight of a D810 plus lens combo compared to the A7R with lens, and i wouldn't also spent more
then twice the money the A7R costs here into germany, for instance, for a D810 body, it's simply too much.

A7R Body into germany (1.8. price) 1599 EUR
D810 Body (1.8. price) 3299 EUR

To say it simple: the D810 is better than the A7R, but *not*
twice as good as the A7R, also i do love nikon, i won't buy anything more for my DX systems, and at last not a FF Nikon.

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

I doubt you will get that good pictures with a lens adapter tho.

1 upvote
marc petzold
By marc petzold (3 weeks ago)

why not? i'm happy to use my different glas that way.

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

We could all just agree that Sony A7's are sh*t cameras, and be done with it.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Lassoni
By Lassoni (3 weeks ago)

A99m2 with a A7s sensor @ 14-18mp , 8-9 FPS, 2800-3000 dollars. It doesn't need to be "low light king", just as long as it is closely comparable or similiar to Nikon Df low light, and give it a proper AF pls (consult canon if need arises).

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

Lassoni:

And I like the A99, but Sony needs to be careful not to compress raws, so any A99II with a lower pixel count also needs full sized 14bit raws.

Sony has already proven that it can mess up the A7S raws.

1 upvote
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 weeks ago)

Eric,
Exactly how do you use your A7R. Obviosly weight dictates use sometimes. Is lightweightness only reason?

0 upvotes
EricCul
By EricCul (3 weeks ago)

@Galbertson It's mainly a question of weight, yes. The A7r is an excellent camera for times I just don't need/want a full system with me. But if someone pays me enough to do a set up, it wouldn't be my first choice.

When I have an A7r and a Nikon D810 sitting side by side, it's the Nikon that gets picked up. I prefer using it, and I get better results with it. I've never found the size of a DSLR to be a problem on jobs and it balances nicely with the lenses I prefer. I love the smaller cameras for pockets and backpacks when I'm not working and weight is an issue.

Others may have different thoughts on them, of course.

0 upvotes
Eric Hensel
By Eric Hensel (3 weeks ago)

I'm certainly happy we straightened that out...
"The D810 outperforms the A7r in every tangible feature."
Depends on what you consider tangible --and some of those you list are really too close to call.
I'm not a pro...don't shoot sports, seldom use AF, and after carrying SLR's around for years, have no interest in that form-factor, or the OVF.
I'm looking ahead to improvements in milcs. My Nex has interface issues, but nothing that's a deal-breaker, and they just get better.

0 upvotes
AllOtherNamesTaken
By AllOtherNamesTaken (3 weeks ago)

All that and not a word about autofocus, perhaps the D810's most significant improvement? Did I miss something?

2 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (3 weeks ago)

you missed the fact that the review is not finished yet. It is still a preview.

6 upvotes
AllOtherNamesTaken
By AllOtherNamesTaken (3 weeks ago)

I realize that, but I figured arguably the most important aspect would be at least briefly touched on in such a detailed preview, that went into detail of far smaller features. I was just curious though, I will wait for the review :). Thanks.

7 upvotes
Joe Federer
By Joe Federer (3 weeks ago)

Agreed, AONT. AF inaccuracy was the Achilles heel of the D800 ... has it been fixed with the D810?

4 upvotes
AllOtherNamesTaken
By AllOtherNamesTaken (3 weeks ago)

It definitely has, all reports including other credible reviews show the AF to be nothing less than astonishingly good. Nearly everyone is reporting they no longer need AF fine tune on any combo, including those with TC's, as well. Looks to be a winner. I was just curious of DPreview's take on it, but I expect it to match everyone else's, which is glowing.

4 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (3 weeks ago)

You'll have to wait on the "performance" chapter of the review. Dpreview tends to discuss AF there.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (3 weeks ago)

We're actually looking at AF right now (Rishi is shooting at a wedding with the D810 and fast lenses) so we should have some findings soon. I was one of those people who never had an issue with the D800 bodies that I used, and the D810 gives identical-feeling performance, to be honest. We'll do more work on this, but for now the addition of the group-area AF mode is the only major change that we've noticed. Naturally though, we haven't yet had time to point the D810 at a particularly wide range of subjects.

1 upvote
AllOtherNamesTaken
By AllOtherNamesTaken (3 weeks ago)

I'll be curious to read your findings, especially with so many people, including other respected reviewers, noting huge improvements in general speed, lock on, confidence, accuracy, lack of focus chatter, etc. In fact I've yet to read a single review or user report that hasn't said it is vastly improved. A wedding is a perfect torture test though, and I will be curious to see the outcome. Thanks for the reply!

0 upvotes
Joe Federer
By Joe Federer (3 weeks ago)

To be fair, DPR said this: "The D800's low light focusing ability is impressive, among the better performing cameras we've seen" of the D800 ... and it's widely regarded as having one of the worst performing autofocus in recent memory (even after the left-side-AF inaccuracy that Nikon fixes via warranty).

1 upvote
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

There's one poster, either here or on NikonRumors, that says all his lenses required +9 on af finetuning. That sounded a bit strange to me, as it appears very unusual that either, all your lenses just happen to be equally calibrated (or just perefect), or that particular body's af just happened to off by nine steps on every lens that you put on it. Certainly doesn't work that way with my D800. All four primes front focus, but in different amounts.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (3 weeks ago)

"it's widely regarded as having one of the worst performing autofocus in recent memory"

This is simply untrue.

4 upvotes
Eric Hensel
By Eric Hensel (3 weeks ago)

"Nearly everyone is reporting they no longer need AF fine tune on any combo, "
Given mechanical tolerances, this is a ridiculous claim.

1 upvote
AllOtherNamesTaken
By AllOtherNamesTaken (3 weeks ago)

"it's widely regarded as having one of the worst performing autofocus in recent memory" Haha is that some sort of joke? Other than a small number of affected users with early serials, the D800/E already had one of the best AF systems in the segment, with better low light acquisition and tracking than a 5DM3. In fact I know a few people who ditched their 5DM3's specifically for the D800's low light AF ability for weddings. The fact that the D810 has improved on this is quite amazing.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
EricCul
By EricCul (3 weeks ago)

Been shooting the D810 a bit lately and the AF is superb.

I'm sorry if that comes as bad news to the poster of the sensationalist comment earlier about the D800 being "widely regarded as having one of the worst performing autofocus in recent memory"

Comments like that give me a giggle... I do try to picture the person typing it :D

1 upvote
Joe Federer
By Joe Federer (3 weeks ago)

It's the AF is fast, no doubt... and great when it works... but it's simply off at a rate that's unacceptable. I've personally used the D800 since it came out, had it sent to Nikon a few times (no luck as it came back 'within spec') and I know a dozen or so other people that have had the same experience: the AF just isn't trustworthy (compared to the D700, D3, D4, D300, D4s, or any other modern Nikon). It's like trying to work with a dull knife. Quite a few of those dozen sold and went back to the D700... reliability of AF is more important in some fields (weddings being a great example) than specs..

Now, it could be the way that certain people shoot (1.4 vs f8) or it could simply be bad QC that's put enough bad D800's into the mix that they've gotten a bad rep among pros... but the fact of the matter is, that when I need an image to be 'in focus' with a shallower DoF (especially screw-driven AF) I grab the D3 (yeah, almost 7 years old) over the D800 every single time.

2 upvotes
EricCul
By EricCul (3 weeks ago)

@Joe Federer, seems like you have found a problem with your D800, and found the solution (to use your D3). Great. We got the point.

Likewise others do not have the same experience with their D800's and are producing some fantastic work with them.

I can personally confirm that the D810 works flawlessly for me so far. And I am a stickler for performance.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (3 weeks ago)

@ Joe - Downsize the D800 'out of focus' shot to 12MP and I'd be prepared to bet it will look the same as the 'in focus' shot from the D3. The point being that 36MP is EXTREMELY demanding. Easy to forget, given that we're all in the habit of going straight to 100%.

2 upvotes
Joe Federer
By Joe Federer (3 weeks ago)

@EricCul - great to hear about the D810. I like to think I've also produced a lot of great work with my D800 - it's not like it NEVER hits... I use it basically any image I have time to set up, take the shot, check focus, and re-take a shot if the camera failed me.... AND I know I'll want the added resolution. Formals, posed informals, landscapes, etc. Don't get me wrong, the sensor is great... the AF leaves a lot to be desired,however. (if nothing else, the silly "middle of the frame " DX-sized cluster Nikon keeps peddling ...hah!)

@Barney -- I agree that the additional resolution is much more demanding of both technique and lenses. Often times a downsize DOES in fact make it look more in focus... however, it also produces shots that are simply, actually, out of focus (ie: the ear is in focus even the the AF point was on the eye) at a rate way higher than the D700 or D3 (or D4, D4s, etc). Still a reasonable camera... but that doesn't mean the AF isn't it's weak point (imho).

2 upvotes
Lassoni
By Lassoni (3 weeks ago)

I bought my D800 6 months ago, and I must say that I haven't been too impressed of it (same applies to D7000 that I also had for same ammount of time before it, it also didn't have the AF I hoped). The AF doesn't seem to focus sharp enough. Sometimes it is off, sometimes it just isn't pin sharp. It's almost as if only the manual focus is trustworthy solution, but it's very hard to see the best lines with the viewfinder (not enough magnification). Alot of comparisons say 5d3 has better AF, and that even D700 has better. If this is the case, why is it that nikon can't put some more money into developing a more trustworthy AF for these cameras?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
HFLM
By HFLM (3 weeks ago)

@AllOtherNamesTaken: Ming Thein reports he had to refine the autofocus, too, but less so than with his D800. Checked my settings again, three needed +9 as one commentary indicated already before, I adjusted the 50/1.8G today. Needed +2, 18-35G needed -2. So could be a coincidence with the +9 of the others. I find the autofocus to be extremely precise, when adjusted (I do the fine tuning using my retina display as described here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3182827).

0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (3 weeks ago)

"Less so". That's not a major improvement. Considering the demands of 36MP, the inevitable manufacturing tolerances and the field curvature which many lenses exhibit, fine tuning would appear to be the norm. As long as the AF of the body is consistent, that's fine with me, and worth the fine tuning effort.

1 upvote
clicstudio
By clicstudio (3 weeks ago)

I don't shoot Nikon but use ACR. Why would you want the clarity style to be on by default? I think the more naked the image, the better. You can't go back and undo an in-camera effect.

2 upvotes
Peter K Burian
By Peter K Burian (3 weeks ago)

...........Compared to the D800, images from the D810 look like they've had a veil removed............... OK, but is this due to the elimination of the low pass filter OR the new Clarity feature in Picture Controls? (I'm surprised you do not discuss the Clarity feature)

With Clarity set fairly high (as it is in some Picture styles) the images definitely look more snappy in MY preliminary tests. The key is to compare a D800 vs. D810 image .... made with the D810 Clarity control set to OFF. (I have not done so yet)

You can set Clarity high in Adobe Camera Raw with any camera but the D810 has this feature in-camera, and it is ON by default (at various levels depending on the Picture style in use) ... while the D800 does not.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (3 weeks ago)

The Moiré issue depends on pixel size in relation to pattern size and focal length plus distance. Hence you can work around it when it becomes an issue.

1 upvote
57even
By 57even (3 weeks ago)

I am really struggling to see any difference to the detail levels between the D800 (RAW ISO100) and the D810, though I do see a lot more moire.

Not sure I could use this camera for a fashion shoot, or even a studio portrait.

2 upvotes
Lassoni
By Lassoni (3 weeks ago)

The AF is still the big question mark of D8xx series imo. It just doesn't seem consistent enough.

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Sastro
By Sastro (3 weeks ago)

The specifications you list for AE bracketing differ from those in the D810 manual. You have it as "±5 (2, 3, 5, 7 frames at 1/3 EV, 2/3 EV, 1 EV steps)", whereas according to the manual, steps of 2 and 3 EV are available at 3 and 5 frames. This is of importance to those shooting for HDR. Could you clear this up. please, before I spend a lot of money on something which (if your present version is correct) does not do what I need??

0 upvotes
marc petzold
By marc petzold (3 weeks ago)

@HowaboutRAW
The A7/R/S Series use a 11+7bit Delta compression in RAW terms,
for myself, i'd be happier with a true 14bit lossless or lossy RAW compression -
but let's face it - it seems almost *all* current Sony DSLR/DSLMs are using that kind of delta RAW compression - and you just can't say that the results into RAW from the A7/R/S or A77, II & A99 are just bad, period - no offence.
I'm happy with my A3000, NEX5 & A7 series with the RAW results, into the end, the picture, composition counts, not any technical camera specs onto paper.

And yes, there's a difference between 12/14 bit RAW, lossy & lossless compression, but negligble, i've read the results ages ago onto the net which tested the D300(s) with 12 & 14bits for example, my D7000 shoots always 12bit RAW, and about 1-2% into 14bits lossless when it does really count. About the A7R shutter: i don't find it that annoying, but i don't own the A7R, but have had it in my hands. I shoot RAW since 2001 (Oly C-5050Z).

Greetings

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
marc petzold
By marc petzold (3 weeks ago)

To be continued...i am way sure you're aware of this, about the Delta 11+7 Bits compression:

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140212_2-SonyA7-RawDigger-posterization.html

For sure, that does exist, but...i've never seen sth like that into the real world, from my A7 Pictures yet, i mean, no compression artefacts, to be exactly.

One has to mention that these are also way special circumstances. I hope Sony would include a real lossless compressed 12 & 14bits RAW Mode, for instance, my Sony DSC V3 from 2004 already recorded 14bit RAW files.

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

marc:

I don't think I've ever called the raw results from the A99, A77 and, now A77II, bad. In fact I like all three of those cameras for lower ISOs. And the image quality improves with use of the good A mount SonyZeiss lenses.

I don't like the fact that a Sony sales representative told me, in person, that that the A77 would be nearly noise free at ISO 6400. Nor do I like it when Sony claims the mirror doesn't impede high ISO performance one bit--when clearly the Nikon D610 is a better high ISO body than the A99, but uses nearly the same sensor.

I don't spend a lot of effort reading up on the exact terms of the raw compression used for the A mirrorless, but the results seem consistently weak. And it is simply baffling as to why Sony insists on this compression, when Sony has perfectly good to excellent lenses for this system. (I guess smaller raws allow for faster frame rates, well then Sony should provide a choice.)

2 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (3 weeks ago)

Could you explain why you speak devotedly regarding your Sony equipment and experience? How does this specifically relate to Nikon D810? I must be missing something. Or shouldn't your words have been posted in Sony A7 review instead?

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (3 weeks ago)

Galbert:

Don't know whom you're addressing, but the Nikon D810 almost certainly uses a variation of the Sony sensor used in the A7R. And generally, Nikon uses many Sony sensors, though not exclusively.

One of the 5000 series Nikon APSC DSLRs may use the Sony 24MP sensor from the A77II.

And the Nikon D610 uses a Sony sensor pretty much exactly like the Sony sensor in the A7.

Hope that explains why people start writing about Sony when the subject is the Nikon D810/800/E and the D610.

(The D7100 uses a Toshiba sensor, and the D4s/Df use Renesas sensors.)

2 upvotes
Guenter Hofstaedter
By Guenter Hofstaedter (3 weeks ago)

I own the D810, but to be honest, the sensor technology is at a point where no significant improvments can be done ! yes, the D810 is a good camera, but the sensor technology is old chesse. have you ever seen stills from a Sigma Merill 2 or 3 ? ( not perfect for all, but in native Iso the details and colors are shocking ( especialy for pround 36mp camera users)

6 upvotes
marc petzold
By marc petzold (3 weeks ago)

exactly, if you take the time and carefully postprocess the Sigma Merrill RAWs...the details are awesome, my DP2M does have medium format quality.

For these guys who always believe in nothing, check out this youtube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3VjyHQiqdE

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Guenter Hofstaedter
By Guenter Hofstaedter (3 weeks ago)

its better then medium format marc, just imagine that quality with 60 mp instead of 16 on a big sensor !
i bought the d810 to work with, but i don´t see any reason to buy another update in maybe 16 Month if the sensor technology doesnt change. So probably i will stay for next 15 Years with my D4s and D810 or any other company get the jump for better sensors! The Merril it self is a fun camera, but unfortunately not to work with !

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

totally agree with you, non of the current full frame sensors can match with insane resolution of sigma dp merrill cameras altough they are equipped with aps-c size sensors..

the reason why merrill cams are not so popular,is they are not interchangable and noise extremely high even in iso800 due to hardcore sensor.

0 upvotes
marc petzold
By marc petzold (3 weeks ago)

Hi Guenter,

perhaps... but unfortunately, the DP Merrills rely onto their way propritary Sigma Photo Pro Software - no Linux Version is avialable, also that RAW Converter is slow...and the DP2M, DP3M
are the best one's of the trio...the DP1M Lens is not exactly that good...battery life is also a problem, but the IQ is stunning - i wish Sigma would do a FF Sensor DP2M, but perhaps then the
battery would be empty after just 20-25 shots...maybe...

I'd love to have a longer Battery life, and especially a OVF, or
let's say a 2.88 MP EVF for the DP1/2/3 Merrill Series....it's a pain in the ass composing photographs in bright sunlight with
just the LCD display...

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (3 weeks ago)

marc petzold:

Iridient (Mac only and no Quattro yet) will extract Sigma Merrill raws.

http://www.iridientdigital.com/products/rawdeveloper_cameras.html

Imaging Resource put up some out door raws shot with the new Sigma Quattro, they look amazing thru ISO 400, and some 800 ISO shots look perfectly useable.

There are also Sigma Quattro raws at PhotographyBlog.

Exporting to a tiff at 2 times provides a file that could easily be printed at a meter on the long side at 120ppc. I bring this up because even the new Pentax 645z can't produce files that clear (raws for the Pentax at PhotographyBlog), though the Pentax is a much better high ISO body.

Here's the link to Sigma Pro Photo 6.0 software, only for use with Quattro raws so far:

http://www.sigma-global.com/en/download/cameras/sigma-photo-pro/

Albeit still slow and a CPU hog.

0 upvotes
Eric Glam
By Eric Glam (3 weeks ago)

DPreview team,

The video samples you've posted are 23.976fps, not 60fps (I've downloaded the original MOV files).
Please correct the labels under the videos, and please upload a true 60fps video.
Thanks.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Total comments: 1484
12345