Nikon D800 review updated with D800E side-by-side testing

D800 85%
D800E 84%

5d mIII 80%

That's how i see it after reading tons of reviews. Funny to see Dpreview thinks the opposite way. Money not important to DPR so 5d gets status quo. A very very very tiny sharpness increase give 2% extra, without getting price penalty XD I disagree again.

D800 (non e) is by far the best purchase at the moment, of an enthousiast who want fullframe but doenst have endless amounts of money.

I wonder why Nikon has released two different versions of the D800 ... Perhaps to be talked about just! And it seems to be very effective!
Really work with a camera is taking pictures, sell them, for advertising, for books, magazines, prints exhibitions.
Look at a picture of 36 million pixels at 100% or more on a computer screen, to find the difference, is it really useful? The Nikon D800 is a great camera, and probably also D800e.
Enough talk, let's work now.
Best regards.

"This seems like an odd way of doing things; why not just remove the filter altogether?"

One of the two LiNbO3 filters serves as the sensor cover glass, it's not part of the stack. So, the only way to remove it is to make a change on the chip manufacturing line, which means new part numbers, validation, etc. for sensor and circuit board.

Altering the second LiNbO3 filter, the one in the stack, is much easier. You don't have to change as much stuff, stock two kinds of chip, rerun validation, etc.

So, as repeated when the 'e' was announced, for landcape shooters, Its not a few hundred £/$ more, its a few thousand as Tilt-Shift Lenses are a MUST to make the 'e' version worth-while for landscapers...

Re: the "Should I buy a D800E?" section.
"So if you're a portrait photographer working between F4-5.6 then yes - in your day-to-day photography you'll see the benefit of the D800E's special sensor design." Isn't the thing about portrait photography that in general you don't aim for images that are at the extreme of sharpness b/c they begin to look clinical which isn't the most desirable. Obviously giving the buyer the highest baseline IQ could be one goal, and then let the user alter things in PP or in-camera settings, but as a practical matter it seems the advantage of the E is not necessarily an advantage in portraiture.

Am I the only one that can't tell jack from these type of tests?

Perhaps DPR could do some tests on:
Fabrics
Roof Tiles
Insects (eyes of a housefly)
Fencing patterns
Flyscreens
Barcodes
Hatch drawings
Currency bill macros
...
The local neighborhood view just don't cut it...

.

Nikon should have just made de D800E and called it the D800.

I think Nikon made a major boo-boo in keeping the framerate (purposely?)so low. I hope they will re-think their strategy when the possible D400 or whatever is / if launched.

I can sharpen the D800 RAW park scene to look indistinguishable from the unsharpened D800E version, but it is tough to get the moire in the E version to look at good as the D800. Also, the small white railing in the D800E image looks like it has an extra horizontal line running through it that doesn't appear in the D800 version. Maybe it is there in reality, and maybe not. These arguments make me lean towards the D800.

On the other hand, one can immediately see the difference in sharpness and contrast when comparing the D800 and D800E side-by-side at optimal lens resolution. And maybe most images have so much color anyway that a little moire takes a long time to notice. These arguments convince me that the D800E is the way to go.

I suspect the Nikon engineers and marketing folks also couldn't decide.

Well to me the premium of the D800E over the D800 still does not seem worth it, even after all of the millions of words and images written over the last few months. There is a tiny difference in image quality at specific apertures only, easily recovered through a small amount of sharpening. In fact in many ways I would say that you can control image quality far easier with the D800 over the D800E. I'd rather add a small amount of sharpening to a specific area in my image than be attempting to blur or remove moire and aliasing effects. I praise Nikon for their efforts and for once again innovating in the market, but I fail to see how the D800E can be given a higher score here based on "value" when the camera costs considerably more to get that tiny increase in resolution, which often comes with a trade off in overall image quality.

Best review yet of the amazing duo. I ended up with the D800 because that is what was available in the shop the day I stepped in. Had it been the "e", I would have purchased the "e", just to generate that feeling that there is no way of getting more detail in any given shot, all other circumstances remaining equal. But then, I would have also generated a constant FUD regarding moiré, false colours, etc, that would have ended up in pixel peeping sessions and fastidious slider tweaking "just to be sure". Coz that is the way I am, and probably quite a few others as well.

So, at the end, with the D800, unless I print at maximum size for a gallery exhibition with "e" owners or pixel peep in comparative sessions with a "e" body, I know I will have an absolutely marvelous result when I do things right.

Regrading ease of use: I've learned many things since packing that D800, by the way. One of them is that it can also be used as the ultimate point & shoot.

There's a lot of resolution there, but I'm not seeing the gorgeous subtle skin tones that one sees from the older Nikon DSLRs. I'm using a calibrated monitor, and I also notice that plants all look a little chlorotic, they all have a little bit of a yellow cast. It seems like we've gained detail but lost color rendition.

Do I have to turn in my camera if I can't tell a bit of difference in image quality between the two cameras, even the 100% crops? I think if I try real hard I can almost confirmation bias my way into seeing a tiny bit more detail, but then when I blink it is gone again.

When you see the effort required to eek out the best resolution from this camera it becomes clear that lack of in body image stabilisation should be negatives in the reviews.

Amazing detail from the 800E though, simply amazing.Well done Nikon - i think its a game changer

I love my e to pieces!!!

D800E is the way to go if you want optimum quality - including at higher f-stops

moire can be corrected, but getting that extra crispness in every well taken shot should not be underestimated

5D mark III 82% Gold
D800 82% Gold

D800E 84% Gold (better IQ scores and better value?)

That is fun, the mistake of giving D800 and 5D3 the same 82% was corrected. But - by giving D800E higher "Value" rating?

What I learned from this: DxO Optics Pro 7 isn't as good as ACR or NX2.

OK...we get it, more detail and junk..but what does the E stand for DPreview? Its a important question we must have answered!

I think this review and comparison shows that we're at the point where those wanting deep DOF on FF cameras while maximizing resolution should be using tilt lenses where possible. Unfortunately, SLRs aren't as well suited to making use of camera movements as view cameras. MF cameras with movements potentially have a real advantage here.

Moire doenst seem to be much of an issue in any review/test/real world photo that I've seen; wondering why Nikon didnt just stick with the "E" model as the only production one. Could have possibly reduced the backlog with only one model to produce...