Should you upgrade to a Nikon D850?

Does anyone have any spec on the D850's shutter life expectancy? It just dawn on me that they don't advertise this feature anymore on most model cameras.

Sep 19, 2017permalink

pete guaron

If cost was irrelevant, I'd consider it. But it's not just the question of the cost of the camera body, is it? - I'd need to replace my compact flash cards (the D810 is fitted for them), batteries are different, and I doubt if it stops there.

Frankly, I like my D810 - there are one or two features on the D850 which "grab" me, but not enough to get over-excited about it - and it's all rather "too little, too late". I've put this question aside for the time being, and just getting on with my photography. If I want to spend that kind of additional money, there are several other things competing for the cash already.

I wish Nikon every success with it, but I'm not rushing to join the queue. Later maybe - perhaps. Je ne sais pas, encore - I've yet to give it any more serious consideration.

Sep 17, 2017permalink

BokehFanatic

I miss some fresh D850 news!

Sep 6, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Apart from Video use very high resolution sensors occupy a lot of hard drive space, demand the best graphics and processors and fail always to match expectations because , if you are a reportage photographer dependent on zooms to function normally, no zooms come anywhere near this resolution: and very few primes. So to put them to best use you do need fixed focal length lenses with extremely accurate autofocus, as manual focus lenses are unuseable with DSLRs (unlike LeicaM lenses with a rangefinder) , out of the posed fixed studio and still life/advertising setups where Nikon and Canon both must compete with genuinely larger sensors in bespoke cameras that are made for the job, and which come with their own RAW software designed for moire reduction etc from the get-go. You can , agreed, with zooms produce impressive results, but unless resolution is a match they look like uprezzed lower resolution photographs, because in fact that IS what they are: 16MP or 21MP say on 46MP.

Aug 31, 2017permalink

Rick Knepper

Too many ridiculous statements to take apart piece by piece. I simply recommend ignoring this post altogether.

Dec 27, 2017permalink

technotic

What if I have a Hasselblad Lunar? Is the D850 a good upgrade? I've been waiting for the Lunar II for ages. Not sure if when it will come out.

Aug 31, 2017*permalink

Dude, really, just get the nikon d850.

Sep 1, 2017permalink

Should I upgrade? This is a rather difficult question, because having the D810, D750, D600 and 6D made me realize that there is a catch to everything. I find myself always shooting with a 20ish MP body, and I rarely take out my D810 because more MP slows down my work flow. On top of that, unless I use VR lenses/tripod, I ended up with less keepers, especially shooting longer focal length lenses at wide aperture. Indoors shooting is out of the question for me; I wouldn't push the ISO on the D810 beyond ISO 1600. That's just from the technical aspect of my own debate, and the reliability issues on Nikon bodies certainly is a minus for me; I had the D600 and still own the D750..

With 45 MP on the D850, the mentioned issues will only get more challenging for sure. If I'm a videographer, this is a no-brainer...you get the best of both worlds.

I would need to see the high ISO performance results from either DXO Mark or equivalent, and that's is going to be a major deciding factor.

Aug 30, 2017*permalink

technotic

Seems like a "no" then.

Aug 31, 2017permalink

DarkShift

I guess you could shoot with the 25MP RAW mode then, and enjoy other improvements like better AF and much faster frame rate.

Aug 31, 2017permalink

@DarkShift - Thank you! I'd totally forgotten about that...would that reduce the 45MP to something less?

Sep 1, 2017*permalink

BokehFanatic

This confuses me: "I ended up with less keepers, especially shooting longer focal length lenses at wide aperture". You mean that the depth of field is so narrow that it's difficult to do it correctly? This shouldn't affect the "keepers" though, because the same problem exists on all cameras. The difference is that with more pixels, you can magnify and inspect the focus plane better. But on identical magnifications, there shouldn't be a problem.

More precisely, if you don't see a "misfocus" at 12MP but you do at 45MP, why throw the 45MP image away and keep the 12MP, as the former should be the same on 12MP?

And like DarkShift said, the better focusing mechanism (that's in fact feature no.1 for me) will help you with this "problem" too in combination with the smaller RAW dimensions options..

Sep 6, 2017permalink

@ Bokeh F - Let me clarify in regards to the less keepers statement. It's a combination of misfocus, unsteady hands, mirror vibrations..etc. My point is that high MP cameras are not your casual cameras, because they require more of your attention before you press the shutter release.

I guess once you got over the high MP hype, you start to think about what's being practical...

Sep 6, 2017permalink

Per Inge Oestmoen

Barney Britton writes:

"That extra speed doesn't come cheap, though. If you don't have a bunch of cash to throw around, the D750 is likely to remain pretty competitive for a while yet and except for some niche use-cases (like astrophotography) it should serve you well."

- This I do not understand. I do not see what limitations the D750 would have in astrophotograply. For very large landscape prints, yes, then the D850 is superior because the much larger number of pixels. The D750 is certainly good up to 90 x 120 cm, and perhaps even larger. But the D850 can go bigger, of course.

However, for astrophotography I do not see any obvious limitations. What does Barney Britton mean by his statement?

Aug 30, 2017permalink

@ Per Inge Oestmoen - Barney may not want to do that for reliability reason alone...

Aug 30, 2017permalink

Per Inge Oestmoen

What reliability reasons? Does the D750 have any reliability issues unless its serial number falls within a certain range?

Apart from that, it is clear that Barney Britton alluded to photographic function.

So my question remains: What limitations does the D750 have within astrophotography?

Aug 31, 2017permalink

Kudos to Barney for including the Pentax K-1!

May I add, though, that the K-1 makes a very fine portrait photography or product photography camera as well? As a matter of fact, it appears to me that the K-1 has one weak area only (action) as opposed to being a specialist in a narrow field ("landscape & outdoors").

Yes, the K-1's video is nothing to write home about and the AF is not fit for action photography in the same way as top AF performers, but I'd say that still doesn't justify the comment that for "*most* applications it lags behind the D850", because it really is just video (where the D850 is not an ideal solution either) and action where the K-1 kinda drops the ball.

I don't want this to look like a complaint because I really very much appreciate that you are giving your readers a broad picture instead of only focusing on the brand giants(!), yet, I don't think it is quite fair to somewhat suggest that the K-1 has a narrow application area. :)

Aug 30, 2017*permalink

Keyur Nandaniya

I really would like to know about D5 & D850, as just before few months I got Nikon D5. The only thing which is disturbing me with D 850 is higher pixels. What should I do?
I am a wildlife photographer. Should I exchange my D5 (hardly used) with D 850?

Aug 30, 2017permalink

mako69

IMO, unless you're going to enlarge your prints to 20" x 30" or larger, the D5 with 20 MP is MORE than enough. If you're shooting in low light it's not even close as the D5 is far superior. They both have the same EXPEED 5 processor so there won't be a difference there. Unless you really need 45 MP, don't mind the slower work flow, and only being able to store 44% as many images, stay with the D5. Also remember that the greater number of pixels will also magnify the flaws. As Joed700 mentions above, VR and a tripod become necessities, especially with long lenses.

Aug 31, 2017permalink

really? You say you own a D5 and wondering if you need to sell it an buy the D850. I think if you have to ask that question, then you really are not familiar with the D5, or perhaps, if i dare say so, maybe you dont really own a D5.

Sep 1, 2017permalink

On the D750 low light compassion topic - same sensor size but more megapixels will result in higher noise levels , am I wrong ?

Aug 30, 2017permalink

Yes, you are wrong. See for instance the article "Contrary to conventional wisdom, higher resolution actually compensates for noise".

Aug 30, 2017permalink

Class A

I can't find the article. Could you post a link.

Aug 30, 2017permalink

@ Akpinxit - not necessary, if you look at the Sony a7rii vs the D810, Sony has way more MP, but it performs better than the D810 in low light. I did a little test way back with my friend's a7rii..the a7rii's noise at ISO 6400 is about the same as the D810's ISO 1600, quite impressive.

Aug 30, 2017permalink

https://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/More-pixels-offset-noise

Aug 31, 2017permalink

Not really convinced , since the aticle dated to 2008 and it's not the same sensor technology (CCD vs CMOS)

Aug 31, 2017permalink

Akpinxit

It doesn't matter. The same facts apply. When normalized for size a sensor with more pixels does not have more noise because the S/N ratio remains the same. That has been proven over and over again. Why are you so stubborn that you ignore the facts. Is it because you own a lower res camera so you are trying to convince yourself that it is somehow "better".

Aug 31, 2017permalink

First - I'm not that stubborn , I'm looking at D750 vs 810 at ISO6400 (https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d750/13) and reporting of what I see .
Second ,since I owned the D750 I am trying to convince myself that it is not magic (regarding to shadow lifting in post process) .

Aug 31, 2017permalink

Probably, you are using the "FULL" viewing option of the widget. Change the "image size" to one of the other options (e.g. "PRINT"). Only then you'll be able to make a fair comparison of noise.

In the standard "FULL" mode, you see 100% views which mean that for higher resolution sensors a higher magnification is applied (you see less of the scene). This higher magnification amplifies noise as well. Surely, you will have noticed that your images look more noisy when you "zoom in", i.e., look at them at a higher magnification level. The same effect occurs when you compare images at different levels of magnification.

The default viewing mode for the widget should definitely not be "FULL" for that reason.

Sep 1, 2017permalink

Now it is you who's being stubborn . So if I'll print 5X8 , even my old 7D can stand up to hgh ISO test against full frame sensor ... . Untill now every comment and compare of IQ on this forum was based on 100% zoom screen ... .

Sep 1, 2017permalink

You still don't get it. I'll give you an example. When comparing a 24mp camera with a 36mp camera at 100% the 36mp will be more magnified which exaggerates all flaws, noise, and lens flaws for example. For a fair comparison resize the 36mp image to 24mp and then compare the two at 100%. Next upsize the 24mp image to 36mp and see which looks better at 100%.

Sep 1, 2017permalink

No , I don't get it what will you do if you'll crop or forced to use (print) image at full resolution and - surprise - chrom. noise shows up . Will you explane to your customer that compared to lower resolution sensor the noise isn't there ?

Sep 1, 2017permalink

PK24X36NOW

@Akpinxit yes you don't get it. If you used the smaller resolution sensor and uprezzed to the "full resolution" of the larger resolution camera, or cropped the lower resolution sensor to the same degree (of the frame), you would have the same amount of noise. Less detail, but same noise. What Class A and tbcass are saying is nothing more than this - you have to compare images at the same output size. It's meaningless to compare an 8x10 to a 5x7 and complain about the noise you see on the 8x10 that you don't see on the 5x7 and blame the *camera* for the noise being *visible* on the *bigger* print. Compare two 5x7s, or two 8x10s or two 20x30s, and you won't see "more noise" on the shot taken with more pixels in most cases. Exceptions? Sure, but mostly for cameras being "optimized" for different things (e.g., D810 for low ISO dynamic range vs. D5 for high ISO noise), NOT because more pixels are "bad."

Sep 2, 2017permalink

@Akpinxit
I hope you get PK24X25NOW's explanation.

BTW, you wrote "Untill now every comment and compare of IQ on this forum was based on 100% zoom screen ...". That may be so from your point of view, but even if "every comment and comparison of IQ on this forum" had been based on 100% view comparisons then that would not turn this approach into an appropriate one.

One hundred flat-earthers in a room chatting to each other do not make the earth become flat.

Sep 2, 2017permalink

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5365920428/the-effect-of-pixel-and-sensor-sizes-on-noise/1

I would add that high res sensors downsized will show more detail than low res ones at native size. This can make a bigger difference in IQ than a slight difference in noise. When there is a difference in noise it's visible only at the highest ISO and even then it's small. The following article is informative.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5365920428/the-effect-of-pixel-and-sensor-sizes-on-noise/2

Sep 2, 2017permalink

telawrence

I'm not convinced those landscape photographers will take any better photos, or sell any more with a D850. Those extra MPs aren't really needed, nice to have I guess. Kind of funny when landscape photographers say they'll be able to crop more, as opposed to taking a good photograph in the first place, it's not as if the landscape moved is it?. I can see why you'd upgrade if you want the one camera for landscape, portrait and sports.

Aug 29, 2017permalink

quality glass is a huge factor for those full res large Mpx.

Aug 30, 2017permalink

Healthseeker

The so-called "purists" who would have others believe that a really good photo comes only from first-shot, uncropped pictures are living in a fantasy world. As a random example, the great and much-revered Ansel Adams himself spent hours and days cropping and adjusting his photos and looking for new ways and shortcuts to adjust his images to his liking. He would have given certain very private parts of his anatomy to lay his hands on a 45mp digital camera and the Photoshop or some such software to go with it. So everybody can really just relax, shoot what you see, then adjust later - if and when necessary. It's all in the eye, folks. It takes a good eye to separate the wheat from the chaff in photos and it doesn't matter a damn whether you do it before, during or after your shot. The end result is all that matters. It's ART!

Aug 30, 2017permalink

To "healthseeker", i guess i live in your so called fantasy world. On occasion i like to use a Nikon F100 with kodak color slide film. One shot, one image. No do-overs. I put a lot of thought in every shot, especially film. When really awesome pix come out, they look great on a slide projector. I also use a D800, that now seems almost vintage. Though i would love to get the new D850, it aint gonna happen. Cannot afford. I love it that Nikon went back to no built in flash, the one thing a hate abut the D800. Nikon went back to its roots, the aforementioned F100, no built in flash, And the camera that introduced the current lay out of dials and buttons. With minor exceptions (like the video button) the top plate layout of the F100 is essentially identical to current day pro Nikon bodies. Just my three cents... Adjusting for current day pence

Sep 1, 2017*permalink

So ... why should I downscale the higher resolution ? What if I'll upscale the lower one and claim the all lenses are no good since if compared , image looks blurry ?

Sep 2, 2017permalink

FodgeandDurn

"If you're shooting with a D4, or D4S, there are very few reasons why the D850 would* do the same, or a better job for you than your existing camera."

*Wouldn't?

Aug 29, 2017permalink

mako69

Yes, the D850 is great, but my D4s more than gets the job done, and the low light capabilities are phenomenal!

Aug 31, 2017permalink

FodgeandDurn

Mako - don't disagree, I was highlighting probable use of the wrong word in the article :)

Aug 31, 2017permalink

Dan DeLion

Hopefully, DPR will not take 2 years to review the 850. Remember the 810!

Aug 29, 2017permalink

technotic

Yes, in 2 years Nikon may not even be in business. It may end up on Throwback Thursday at some point though.

Aug 31, 2017permalink

CCD FTW

Nikon holding back features, so typical! Where is the ISO 1.6 million offered in the lowly D7500?! ;)

Aug 29, 2017permalink

the D7500 uses the same sensor as D500. they're designed for high ISO performance. I don't think the D850 is in the same league but we'll need to see some test. Anyway, those 1.6M ISO is useless... at least for me.

Aug 30, 2017permalink

CCD FTW

You don't think the high ISO performance is in the same league as a crop sensor camera? Weird.

Anyway, it was a joke :)

Aug 30, 2017permalink

CCD FTW, i agree but D500 was built for speed. use higher shutter speed... you do bump up the ISO. it's designed to work in these kind of application. we'll never know D850 Hi ISO performance until some one has tested it.

Aug 30, 2017permalink

Adrian Harris

Should I downgrade to a 850 from my M43 cameras, it is twice the weight and doesn't offer half the features ?

Aug 29, 2017permalink

very unique comment.

Aug 30, 2017permalink

Nope. You should downgrade to a Canon, from your m43 cameras. If you dont believe me, just ask Bambi24...

Sep 1, 2017permalink

NexLupus

@Adrian Harris
No, if...
Best in class Auto focus system
Focus speed
Focus tracking
High Iso
Best Dynamic Range
Depth of field control
Weather resistance
Battery life
45+ Megapixels
Ergonomics
100 + native lenses (from 8mm to 800mm)
4K full frame
Best image quality

If you don't need this, then I guess the answer for you is no.

Sep 2, 2017permalink

Barry Benowitz

Doesn't matter it's sold out at this point so wether you get tack sharp images south of 250 is moot!

Aug 29, 2017permalink

Barney Britton

Until it becomes available again.

Aug 29, 2017permalink

Touché

Sep 1, 2017permalink

luigibozi

from my Sony?! No

Aug 29, 2017permalink

Hanoise

AS A CAMERA; NICE.

AS A TOTAL PACKAGE- NOT ENOUGH AT ALL.

POOR LENS SELECTION JUST KILLS IT FOR MOST.

Maybe a canon to Nikon mount adaptor with full communication capability would be a good seller

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Based on your statement, I take that you already bought one of the Sony Axxx?

Aug 29, 2017permalink

russbarnes

To say that about a company that has 50 years of lenses available, is born out of so much ignorance it shouldn't even qualify a response like this. If you were talking about native Sony lenses you'd have every right but with Nikon, you're a discredited troll.

Aug 29, 2017permalink

NexLupus

@Hanoise
Yea, I guess 100 lenses available natively,
or having the most comprehensive 1.4 and 1.8 prime lens line-up,
or having the best super teles currently available,
or having the class leading 70-200 2.8E, 105 1.4, 200 f/2, 19 PCE
isn't sufficient...LOL

Sep 2, 2017permalink

AdrianPocea

Has any of the reviewers actually TESTED this camera in real world? I mean, I had the 5ds, I know what is like to handle almost 50mpx. Where are all the problems of this resolution gone? Wasn't like impossible too get sharp pictures south of shutters of 250 ? Where is the reduced mirror vibration, the reinforced bottom of the camera? Where is the diffraction limit, that kicks in around 5.6 and creeps in at 7.1, making this camera pointless for studio product and macro work, where you need very large depth of field? How can this camera , at almost 50mpx, can have a double iso performance compared to D5, a camera designed for sports an d low light , with less than half of the mpx ? Unless Nikon discovered some miracle water formula from some Harry Potter movie I really don't get how they could have defied the laws of physics. I am waiting for the camera and real world reviews. What I had seen until now, very little, is not convincing for me.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

@AdrianPocea Hand blur, diffraction... these are all valid questions, especially the latter should be thoroughly investigated. Thank you for raising sound doubts.

Aug 29, 2017permalink

CardinalSin

Old news, but new to Nikon people! If there's only one universal mount..we would see who makes the best camera and not relied on dedicated "brand"invested lens mecanism which seems to rule and continue decision of buying year after year.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Mystery Gardener

There is a lot more to a mount than the physical size. Electronics, SW and firmware also differ between lens mounts/lens/camera, I can't see how one could standardize a mount. If we were to pick a 'universal' mount, the Canon EF mount might be the most logical ;-) And yes, I have Canon glass :-)

Cheers, James :-)

Aug 30, 2017permalink

David Bo

Hi Barney. You "forgot" one important camera. The Sony a99II. Unbelievable since it's a better and more close competition to the D850 than the a7RII.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Barney Britton

A fair point, but I wanted a mirrorless option in the article, and I felt the A7R II was a more interesting camera to compare the D850 to, especially given the similarities between the a7R II and the a99 II. I could have added the a99 II but this piece was already getting a bit unwieldy!

How do you think the a99 II and D850 stack up?

Aug 29, 2017permalink

CCD FTW

D850 will have more robust AF performance, slightly better DR at base ISO and maybe slightly better high ISO noise performance. Illuminated buttons and more rugged construction. Faster buffer clearing to XQD. Touch screen which is higher resolution.

On the Sony side it has more advanced video such as oversampled 4K in S35 mode, S-Log and advanced picture profiles, ability to add XLR audio interface, usable (but somewhat odd) autofocus in video. Pretty decent rolling shutter control. It also has IBIS, has higher top frame rates (though not with continuous live view @ 12fps, does at 8fps), doesn't require an expensive and large grip to achieve them either, has larger AF frame coverage, WAY better live view autofocus, is considerably lighter, doesn't require expensive XQD cards to use both slots to have backup. Fully articulating screen.

There is probably more similar between the D850 and A99 II than there is the A7R II and A99 II to be honest.

Aug 29, 2017permalink

Road Trip

To read everyone's replies on the 850 is kinda crazy. There is no one silver bullet to cure all. Everybody seems to have something to say about one camera being better than another in some mode, but no camera is better than all others in every area.
We can look at examples of images here, but unless your computer monitor is high-def AND the video card is high-def, you'll never see it.
In short, a person will be more confused reading all the replies here than just reading the article itself.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Vit Adamek

It is true that hi-res photos on 4k monitor look significantly better than on the previous standard of 1920x1080 aka full HD. The increase in percived IQ in terms of details rendering (leafs on distant trees etc.) shines through readily on 4k monitor as one views such a monitor from much closer distance than TV. I watched some 4k 60p videos on my 4k 40" monitor and they look life like, literally like looking through window.

Aug 28, 2017*permalink

Sprintmedley

I am an eclectic photographer and semi-professional. I ordered the 850 basically because I have nearly always been a Nikon person (could have probably have been a just as pleased a Canon fan but I had to choose one primary brand and I have stood by Nikon for many years). I still have the Nikon F Photomic and still shoot B&W film occasionally for fun. Is the 850 an upgrade for me? - yes - in some respects, but the primary reasons are the new ergonomics, tilting screen, and the higher MP as I do more than my share of cropping (landscapes to insects). I've had the D200, 700, 750, and the dF and now have the 500 & 810 which I use weekly. Each of these have been excellent instruments of my photography needs and, suffice it to say, each had/their own personalities and the 850 will be a welcome family member.

Aug 28, 2017*permalink

crinosil

You keep saying that the D850 will have wider dynamic range than the D810, A7r2, etc. .... how do you know this? Have you tested the camera? The only estimate of DR I've seen says it does not. Might you not be a little early for this article? Will you revisit your conclusions once you actually have a production camera tested?

Aug 28, 2017permalink

JochenIs

*rubbing crystal globe*
They will post 3 more pieces when that happens.

Aug 29, 2017permalink

sh00t3r

I shoot a lot of wildlife/nature with a 200-500 lens which is a little short on FX. To get the extra reach, I was "forced" to use a DX camera, but no more =) Now I can stay with FX and get the same pixel density as DX. All the other new features are just icing on the cake.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Benna78

I think, in the last 2-3 years, we reached a level with any camera/lens that can satisfy almost any photographer for many many years to come.
For the vast majority of us upgrade is GAS or consumism.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

con·sum·er·ism /kənˈso͞oməˌrizəm/

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Benna78

Sorry. Consumerism. I should have checked before typing.

Aug 29, 2017permalink

alcaher

´´The 20MP D500 is a high-speed, relatively low-resolution DSLR´´. Ten years ago 20mp camera was consider high resolution. Specially for a aps-c sensor.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Vit Adamek

There was no 20 megapixel aps-c camera ten years ago...

Aug 28, 2017permalink

alcaher

Go figure !

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Lea5

Yes, but it was 10 fu long years ago.

Aug 29, 2017permalink

Tim Reidy Productions

You should not upgrade to this camera due to it being out of stock. Out of stock cameras have trouble taking current photos. Hopefully this answer will expire by christmas.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

XXTwnz

Your answer may expire as early as next week.

Aug 29, 2017*permalink

out of stock cameras are capable of great pictures. The D800 is proof.
Touché, Tim

Sep 1, 2017*permalink

jbroehl

Should I upgrade from a D70s?

Half joking and half true. Sadly, this is how long I've waited to upgrade. Just been out of the loop as I got busy with other things. But I'm planning to get back in and I'm amazed at what's progressed since the early DSLRs

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Yeah pretty much any DSLR available today will be a revelation in comparison to your D70s - no need to go high end. Welcome back!

Aug 28, 2017permalink

MrBrightSide

No. Don't sell it. That was one of Nikon's magical cameras. I still see photos from D70s that make me furious because they're so beautiful and I feel like an idiot for upgrading to a so-called professional full-frame camera.
Maybe start by trying out one of Nikon's great new f/1.8 lenses for a while. And always set your white balance with a grey card. That really made a difference in my pix.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

@MrBrightSide has a point, assuming you agree with his view on how the D70s renders. You won't get much for the D70s, so perhaps keep it either way? Looks like you'll get $50-200 for it.
@MrBrightSide why not get a used D70s for a penny?

Aug 28, 2017permalink

I went from a D70 (june 2004) to a D800 april 2014. The D70 was (is) a very nice cam. Still own it, never use it.

Sep 1, 2017*permalink

jbroehl

Yeah, I'll never bother selling. I'd get nothing for it. It probably still takes good landscape shots. But my main issue is how slow it shoots. Can't wait to upgrade

Sep 1, 2017permalink

https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.kr/2017/08/i-read-with-great-interest-12th-thought.html

1/3) Read this. 24MP seems to be sweet spot for FF sensor.

(Quote)
Up until we hit 16 megapixels there were always some (few) situations for advertising photographers where more sheer resolution was needed. Once we hit the 24 megapixel mark we could have stopped cold and only 1% of the jobs we handled would have been perceptively impacted. Not made un-doable; just somewhat impacted. When we exceeded that threshold we came face-to-face with mostly diminishing returns. Yes, the BSI sensor in the A7Rii has great image quality but what if Sony had concentrated on bigger but fewer photo sites? Would the files have been even better?
(Unquote)

Aug 28, 2017permalink

skookum8

Thanks for posting that link - nice to get confirmation of what I've been deducing over the past few days looking at Bill Claff's DR charts. IMHO the sweet spot of price/performance is around 24 megapixels for "all around" use. Hopefully the D750 replacement and the A7mk3 will reflect that.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

maljo@inreach.com

Opinion. Not fact. And what if we need to crop?

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Umm cropping?

Aug 28, 2017permalink

@maljo If you find yourself cropping regularly you'd better study Bresson and/or visit an art museum and learn the skills of masters. For example I may suggest you to study the picture The Crucifixion of Saint Peter, 1601 by Caravaggio. Do you think he cropped the picture?

Aug 28, 2017permalink

sh00t3r

@James
my 200-500 lens is 750mm equivalent on DX, and I still need to crop fairly often. If I never needed to crop, 47MP would be overkill, but for use wildlife shooters, it's a blessing.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

@sh00t3r I understand your dire situation. I suspect D500 is a better choice for your purpose since D500 has viewfinder magnification of 1x when that of D850 is 0.75x and the pixel count of D500 is almost the same as that of DX mode in D850. Anyway good luck wildlife shooters!

Aug 28, 2017permalink

sh00t3r

I tried a D500 in the past, but aside from the higher framerate, I didn't think it was much better IQ-wise than the D7200, so I got that instead. Cropping down, especially at higher ISO, just wasn't impressive. Not for a camera that cost more than the D750.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

crinosil

Ah... Sony did just that.... its has 12 and 24 Mpix sensors in A7 series cameras... IQ is still best in the A7r2.... bottom line .... DR, noise performance and resolution.... the BSI sensor in the A7r2 excels at all.... the one in the D850 likely does too (though I wait for tests before I can say that for sure.... unlike DPReview).

Aug 28, 2017permalink

@James Cropping and composition are quite different techniques - one does not necessarily exclude the other. A classic example is a magazine front page - you want portrait format with lots of empty space at the top third of the image. Same image might work as square composition without the top third.
So while Cartier-Bresson knew composition, the approach of cropping for the final composition in the viewfinder is necessitated by the small film format.
If you ever shot 8x10" film you would see things differently - I still find new compositions inside my old 8x10 negs, and there is enough resolution for even a limited crop of a tenth of the image area. Cropping in post truly is an artform by itself.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Toni Salmonelli

@ James: I too have to crop regularly, but only when I use my DSLR (an EOS 6D) and that has practical reasons.

1. I wear glasses and do not see the entire image when looking through the VF. I.e. my pics often include more then I envisioned in the first place. I love the crop mode of the EVF of my EOS M5 for that reason. IMO this is a feature every photographer wearing glasses should know about.

2. The AF coverage of the 6D is way too small.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

lapomattiabarambaniviendalmare

@Lars V @Toni Salmonelli Though I rarely crop, I simply discard ruined shot, I cannot rebut Lars V since his tone is very calm and suave even persuasive I may say.^^ And as a fellow glass wearer I cannot disregard the remark of Toni Salmonelli either. God bless you guys!

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Vit Adamek

@James Bligh Why does the guy, who wrote the article in the link you provided, thinks that BSI sensor technology has anything to do with faster file throughput? How is back side iluminated sensor responsile for that...?

Aug 29, 2017permalink

DualSystemGuy

Nothing is premature when all you care about is releasing as many click-bait Buzzfeed-style articles as possible.

Even on this article you have to click through no fewer than 11 different pages just to read a few blurbs instead of just scrolling down like a normal website.

Aug 28, 2017*permalink

skookum8

Hopefully pop up ads and survey questions aren't next.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

DivineMadcat

Why compare to the A7RII, and not the far more comparable A99II?? The Sony A mount is still going, with a more comparable lens range, and the A99ii body and features more similar to the 850 than the 7RII... its such an odd choice..

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Barney Britton

True enough, honestly I just didn't want this article to get even longer than it already was. I opted for the more 'mainstream' model of the two.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

User9362470513

Does anyone own an A99ii?

Impressive camera, but never seen one in a store or on the streets.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

DivineMadcat

Well, i can certainly claim myself as a rpodu user, and having followed the forums here and elsewhere, it seems like Sony was really pushing them out. To be fair, short of the obvious spots of world wide sporting events, i have never seen a D4/D5 in the wild, but they are popular too.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

tom1234567

I would love to buy the D850 looks a wonderful beast,
BUT I'm saving my monies for the new
X-T2 s when it comes out in the next 18mths
I have the D7200 and the X-T2 so that will keep me going
until Fuji AGAIN brings out the best APS-C camera in the next 18mths

Aug 28, 2017*permalink

Sooner or later I'll buy this one or maybe the upcoming D760.
I miss a BIG viewfinder too much.
Let's hope that I won't miss the extra reach of the D7200 for sports.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

jbroehl

I think this has some kind of DX mode so you can use DX lenses to still get the extra reach but at around 20 mp. I'm not sure, it's worth confirming elsewhere. I'm in the same boat, btw, I'll either buy this or D750 successor. I think I'll wait until early 2018 to see what the specs will be on that one

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Weegee

I already have a D760. It was made by Kodak. 6 mp. and still great images. See if you can pick one up on E-Bay for $ 1500.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

If the gap between your camera and the new camera is two generations or more, you MIGHT want to consider upgrading. Then again, D750 and D810 remain excellent upgrade choices. The recently released cameras are better than most users. Upgrading one's skills is a better idea.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

I have a D810. I shoot sports, landscape, social, portraits, timelapse otherwise no video.

Reasons for me to upgrade: More resolution, better high ISO, tilting viewfinder, illuminated buttons, better AF, higher resolution, faster frame rate, focus peaking, no popup flash, 1:1 crop, in-camera raw batch processing, better OVF, silent mode.

None of those reasons would be enough by itself but together it is a compelling proposition depending on cost. Remains the question how much I can get for my lightly used D810, and when to sell it.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

raztec

I think my D300s is getting dated. Perhaps it's time for an upgrade and the D850 seems like a good option. Most likely it will be the camera I'll use for the next 10 years.

Other than the huge files, which I don't think I'll really need, it's got everything I was hoping for. It should be perfect for every kind of landscape and sports shooters with the high frame rate and pro level AF.

Gonna wait though for a real review to assess it's dynamic range and low light abilities. If it truly delivers then it's the one to get. If not, then I'll look for a used D750 or D810.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

there is something about the D300... if you can afford to keep it, keep it.
i have the same feeling about the D500, probably end up as an one of a kind. something tells me, Nikon may not concentrate on APS-C pro DSLR when they go MILC route.

Aug 30, 2017permalink

mosc

There's a lot of variation in viewfinders between the cameras you're discussing too. For a lot of people, that's a big differentiator.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Thierry_tr

Better to avoid the gear acquisition syndrome. Always the same thing, why this need to upgrade, even if it's far better, if you are satisfied with your present gear ?

Aug 28, 2017permalink

NickyB66

Nice camera...will fit nicely into to Fujifilm product set, when they purchase Nikon.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

there are rumors floating on this... apparently the Japanese government is encouraging Fuji to buy major stake in Nikon. They don't want it to be acquired by foreign entities.

Aug 30, 2017permalink

DSLRShutterBug

A real world side by side test against the Sony A7Rii would tell us a lot. Personally I am excited about this camera but I am going to remain a bit skeptical until we see some real world testing. They will have one tough time beating the dynamic range of the D810. Building a new camera is a major balancing act and ISO performance can come at the expense of dynamic range and vice versa. How much DR - ISO balance will this camera have, and how well the raw files handle will determine if I will pick it up. Also I'm not sure if I will require 45MP for all my work, it seems a bit overkill unless you are a landscape or commercial photographer. Those massive file sizes will probably clog up my workflow as a wedding photographer. I know they have options to shoot at lower resolution but how will those raw files handle? Photographer at https://www.mickealphoto.com/

Aug 28, 2017permalink

"real world side by side test"

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Gon0S

I amazed how many times I read that he or she does not need more than 24Mpx, how much useless are 36Mpx in the D800 and D810 days, now 45Mpx with the D850.
But just imagine if Nikon had released a D850 with a 36Mpx ? imagine one second the amount of badmouth and trash Nikon could receive from the massmarket blinded consumers forumers?

I am on the 36Mpx bandwagon with my D810. The new D850 is really neat, and tempting, but it will not give me enough for the price over the D810.
Better video ? I don't care as I did not buy a video cam. It prefered they made the video as a licence add on for all the wanabee Spielberg shooting 4K for Vine or Snapchat.
More Mpx ? already enough for my needs and my displays available
Better AF ? yeah, it would be a nice upgrade, but coming from a S3pro, D810 AF is already amazing enough for my skills.
More than 5fps ? LOL, again, I lived flawlessly with 1,3fps for last 10 yrs.
Better body ? I don't think so. Maybe just a bit more snappier.
Just not needed!

Aug 28, 2017permalink

The more I use my D810, the more I consider it "great value."

Aug 28, 2017permalink

theprehistorian

Try shooting a gig with a D810! It's so bad in low light that I bought a D750 as well!

I'm thinking I'll chop in my D750 against the D850 and keep my D810 as a backup. The D810 is an amazing camera but flawed.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

cdembrey

"Sony A7rII dynamic range still higher than that of the new Nikon D850"
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-a7rii-dynamic-range-still-higher-new-nikon-d850/

Aug 28, 2017permalink

ivan1973

It doesn't matter to rich Nikon fanboys.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

badi

well... actually it matters only to charts fanboys. The difference is minimal and you will not really notice in real life, even if you would own both cameras. (by the way, not a fanboy of either)

Aug 28, 2017*permalink

Jetfly

This calculation means nothing, its speculated, not measured.
In real world, at base iso, d810 has one stop DR advantage over a7rII. According to Nikon, D850 at least match the DR of 810, and sometimes exceed it. But, these are just numbers. Who cares the numbers, especially if someone talking about dxo normalizied results, others talking about dxo pixel level results, and the rest refers to photons to photons. Like comparing apples to oranges.
So, rather test them than beleive in useless charts.
If you dont have all of this nice equipment - i assume that- download the low-light samples from dpr comparision tool, process them with various post processing software then draw your on conclusion, as I did:)

Aug 28, 2017permalink

MrBrightSide

Hey, I'm a broke Nikon fanboy and regardless of the impressive dynamic range of my D810, it's still impossible to get eyes lit properly—especially people with deep eye sockets—without either a reflector or speed light. Shots look like garbage when you try to pull up eyes by three or even two stops.

Which is why to me this whole dynamic range thing seems to be an overhyped metric—especially when people are saying that one system beats another by fractions of a stop. A two stop difference might be significant, but I would have to be convinced.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

Lea5

Can't say that. To bring back highlights, my D800E is still better than my A7RII who blows out highlights in some situations easier.

Aug 29, 2017permalink

GreatOceanSoftware

As soon as I get mine, I'm taking the mirror out.

Aug 28, 2017permalink

theprehistorian

😂

Aug 28, 2017permalink

pictureAngst

Don't do it straight away in haste - give yourself time to reflect.

Aug 28, 2017permalink