Nikon D800 wins Camera Grand Prix 2012 award and public 'best camera' vote

What difference does it make when a profile was created. Maybe I forgot my password or something...

I am not saying that the D800 is a bad camera, or that it cannot yield great images. The reality however is it does not provide the best dynamic range, nor ISO performance at the sensor level - only when evaluated by a down sampled (pixel binned) image.

I suggest looking at the data yourself before getting your panties in a wad because someone else does not think your dream camera is as great as you do.

Someone posted a response in another thread regarding the sensor level performance, using the same system that gave it the recording breaking score (DxO), and I was surprised myself to see that at the sensor level it is good, but clearly not the best.

There are at least three other cameras that perform better at the sensor level, and if those cameras were rated based on a test image of ~78% pixel bin, they would not only score higher than their current score but higher than the D800.

As widely accepted as DxOMark is, it is amazing how many people do not understand the way they evaluate the scores. What I see from most people is simply depending on which brand they like the best (regardless of reason) they do not care how the scores are derived as long as their ego is satisfied. My opposition is to that mentality, not the camera.

@AnHund
The DR is only higher if binning the image, at the sensor level both the D4 and 5DmkIII are higher (to give two examples.) Compare either of those cameras at the same ~78% pixel bin and they will score higher than the D800. Try it yourself if you want.

Nikon was able to maintain comparative ISO to the D700 (binned!) which is impressive - but also essentially a requirement if they hoped D700 users to upgrade.

MF photography isn't just mps and DxO Dynamic Range scores. I can get 40x60 canvas prints with the same detail from my H4D-40 (representing a mere ~20mp density compared to 35mm) because the better designed, higher-tech, larger photosites resolve more detail per pixel.

Nikon basically took a 5DmkII/D700 model, added mp, video, and better AF system, which is certainly a blow to their competitors after milking the D700 for so long. But wait, DOH!, that is essentially the same thing Canon did with the 5DmkIII.

So, yeah, they played catch-up aside from the mp increase. ;=)

@Rage Joe
I am sorry you are not aware of the effect of downsampling, however your ignorance of the technology has little to do with my day to day working knowledge.

While there is certainly specific software today to perform pixel binning for image quality purposes, and even maintaining the same image dimensions if required, it is also the bases of how any software downsamples images. Downsampling algorithms utilizes evaluative pixel comparison and overlay to 'compress' the file resulting in an image of smaller dimension with lower pixel count. If pixels were simply removed, no matter the matrix, you would lose detail not to mention a zero gain in color, tone, dynamic range or noise reduction.
The image file DxO creates and uses for evaluation is not by feeding a printer the ~75mb 36mp file and printing, it is the cameras output file downsampled to 8mp digitally for software measurement of its data.

Thank you for comments though.

yup. D600 = awesomess. NO screw AF = pure win. time to get rid of that obsolete technology when nikon has switched anything that is worth it to AF-S

"however nikonrumors.com suggests that it will not have a built in AF motor,"

Right. Because one of the arguments most often brought up in favor of a "low cost full frame" is the enormous assortment of "film days" lenses.

Nikon Rumors has a severe RCI problem.

The point of no focus motor (if any of this is even true) is to increase the number of lenses sold. This has historically been a problem with cameras whose lens mount has been around for a long time. People buy the body or one new lens and they're gone. Almost like selling an inkjet printer and no ink.

Did you tried it by yourself, or you are voting "from specs" too?

This is the best way to explain this phenomemon that I have heard so far & I definitely agree.

No one detail may be revolutionary but the combination of medium format image sensor resolution without sacrificing sensor noise and broad (best?) dynamic range at a price that is far below what might be expected for this combination of features IS revolutionary.

But personally , I would say just the sensor with it's overall performance without the expected poorer noise trade-off is revolutionary. I can use the center portion of the image at still relatively high pixel count (like in DX mode) and suddenly my 70-200mm F2.8 can be a 140-400 f2.8 without spending around $7,000 for a lens like this.

Much like the 240Z when it first sold for $4,000 initially (yes, I am rather hold, ha ha) was revolutionary for what you got at that price. Many cars had more power or as good or better handling but no where near that price point.

I'm with Mike here; calm down folks. Yes it's a nice camera, but it really hasn't shaken the pillars of heaven for a lot of photographer's needs, nor really ascended into the stratosphere above everything else, or caused "confusion and disorientation."

It does not match or come close to matching a CCD med format chip in any way! It is a step in CMOs developement which has only seen refinements over the past 4-5 years...no big steps, No need to wet your pants over this. Canon controlling noise in the CMOs chip when many said CCD was the only way to go, that was a big step.

@marike6 - designing of video-enable sensor means compromising it still ability. Ergonomic being carved for decades with still in mind getting bastardized in video favor. Now they came to lenses, to make stepless aperture. Canon screw up mirror making it semitransparent. List going to be only longer. And as result you still cannot effectively shoot video from hand - ergonomic of whole "device" still not capable for this and PROPER tripod required. But do not worry - they working to bastardize it even future. YMMV though.

@KSV
Dont follow your logic at all - the D800 sensor is better than the D700 sensor even with video so why would you wish for an inferior sensor just because it can do video
Black and white only without the bayer array is going to give you < stop improvement in light - you can increase the ISO to compensate and then downsize and you have your B&W D700

So what if some people are making video lenses - dont buy them

Sounds to me like you want to give the image of a no compromise photgrapher but what you are railing against is not worsening stills photography - it gets better all the time despite any video technology inclusion

The D800 is hardly compromised in it's ability to take top class still photography

@RP McMurphy
It been beaten to death and if you do not accept arguments, so be it - no-one will be able to change it. My points are crystal clear - if they do lesser pixel sensor without video capability ON THE SAME TECHNOLOGY it yet will be better. Do I "need" it? Nope - even D700 aplenty. Will I be better photographer with yet better sensor? Nope - even D700 aplenty. Do I LIKE to have yet better one? You bet it! You honestly believe that B/W only less then a stop of improvement? Really? How about vast majority of pixels after bayer filter no more then approximation - does it trigger anything in your brain? And yet again - do I "need" it? Read above. And indeed D800 IS compromised. Like 5DMkII and plenty of other herd oriented cameras. Have a good day.

@marke6: Going by the list of previous winners, I do not think sensor quality is even under consideration here. Reviewers for the Camera Grand Prix prize score the cameras according to their overall capabilities and innovative technology.

It's also why I find it perplexing the Sony Axx series cameras have not won anything so far for the Camera Grand Prix. It offers new technology for a digital interchangeable lens camera. In this regard, Popular Photography's choices for Camera of the Year seem to make more sense:

2011: Sony NEX7
2010: Sony A55
2009: Nikon D3X
2008: Panasonic Lumix G1
2007: Nikon D300
2006: Sony A100
2005: Canon 5D
2004: Nikon D70

@photo nuts

So true. It doesn't matter if the D800 is a good camera. If any part of the camera is not made by Nikon the camera itself shouldn't get any praise, just like the iPhone didn't get any praise since many components in it were made by Samsung...

And yes, I'm sarcastic :P

"This camera is more then only megapixels."
Yup. But if they would do 12MP on the same technology, then IQ will be better, DR will be wider and it will be performing astonishingly in low light. Some happy trade those extras for pixels. Me not.

@KSV
Yo0u can have 12mp performance by downsampling to 12MP
It doesn't work the other way though

I'm glad to get a camera that can outperform the D700 in the areas the D700 excelled at but when the necessity requires can get 36MP or crop with impunity

It's so flexible because you can compromise on the areas you want to get what you want, it's a high MP machine, it's a v competent low light machine, it can achieve the highest DR of any camera - so it can take on any competition in any area and still be a front runner

When all said and done though you cannot get the same detail at 12mp with the D700 than you can get with the D800

I wont print v often at the sizes this camera can achieve but my images are going to be sharper at the sizes I do print with than if I used a lower MP camera

Dont see what's not to like unless you have an old technology and are starting to feel bad about it so you deride the replacement

@RP McMurphy
Downsampling. Also been beaten to death. Why do I need to do downsampling if I can get YET EVEN BETTER results with native lower resolution sensor? Did you ever compare A3+ prints from 6MP 10MP and 12MP sensors? From your post it is obviously that you not - all pixel peepers study outputs on screen in 400% magnification. Yep, you found "more details" in this way. Do you need them if they invisible on prints? I personally do not - I would rather have more DR better ISO etc. But of course YMMV. Cheers & congrats - you bound to win in this conversation because herd will follow pixelmania, they simply cannot get anything else.

nearly every nikon lens is ok as long as it is not a kit lens. the sensor pitch is merely the same as a D7000. Lenses are stressed a lot more with an old 7D which has a higher pitch and nobody complains ther lenses don't resolve.

stop spreading missinformation. you're just spreading myths.

photo nuts: If only innovation scores for you, then you should spect Lytro to win, but usability and IQ in real world shoots is also taken into account, so there is a balance and D800 seems to win when all factor are summed.

Some years canon wins in this innovation+usability, others it is nikon, or sony, it doesn0t matter, this is the game that force them all to make better cameras, so it is good to have fan boys flaming over the others... you just can buy better and cheaper cameras every year!

@Rage Joe
I complain that they can achieve yet even better DR and/or high ISO performance with fewer pixels. DR and high ISO is always welcome while pixels (after certain point of course) not. You cannot substitute one by another - does not matter what downsampling brigade advocates. 12MP is plenty for A3+ prints and I do not do bigger. 36MP is waste of space, time and resources for 95% shooters. Only very few really need them. But in return if you do indeed like to utilize those so "needed" pixels you have to use very careful shooting technique and use best possible glass (this what they said in review, and I truly agree). And we already paying for that megapixelburden by mediocre FPS and not-so-fast overall response. Those pixels just marketing gimmick. Prove? Look at top FF professional cameras from Canon and Nikon - both have far fewer pixelcount. Why? Because professionals do not need them. But somehow soccer mums do. Live me alone.

lol, right The D3 wasn't revolutionary in any way, neither was the 5DmkII or the medium format pentax. you're right....er not.

I have no idea where you live, however try and buy a D800 in the UK, not available yet ! otherwise I would have one, and be able to pass on my views about it, rather than non public

Ah ..must be due to the 36MP sensor.. why else would a camera that strangles babies in their sleep win such an award ;)