Hey everyone, thanks for all your replies. All this seems to put things in context and I'm reconsidering returning the camera.

Now that I understand things better I do think it's foolish to zoom 100% and pixel peep.

But I want to make sure that my unit is normal. So I've uploaded a fresh RAW file here - https://www.dropbox.com/s/ac0i9vrifiyevr4/DSC_0252.NEF

If you could download it and inspect it and let me know if the grain levels are acceptable and that the image is sharp, I'd appreciate it.

I took it with the 28-70mm f2.8D AF-S lens that I borrowed. It was taken handheld.

Also I just love to see an unedited RAW file of an image from your D800 that you would consider your sharpest or your best image in terms of image quality. Of course you don't have to oblige if you're concerned about copyrights or something but it's just something I want to see to compare images from mine and make sure my unit is alright.

Ultimately, all I want is for me to have a fully functional flawless unit and I don't want to make any compromises even if it means I have to be overcautious. I hope that's understandable.

Thanks everyone!
 
SushiEater wrote:

I took few of my own at the same ISO and F stop with Sigma 85mm F1.4

As you can see a different light and different angle make all the difference because board is reflective.

Yours is on the left. My was shot in RAW without any processing. I could not match your light quality obviously.

5b218a5065984d07904f390e9dda30b7.jpg


Thanks for the effort! I appreciate it!
 
Lasse Eisele wrote:
RudivanS wrote:

Using Quiet mode seems to help a little ... or maybe it's just placebo ;)
Don't know if it's placebo or not, but I'm using the quiet mode all the time and have found my D800E to be much easier to handhold than I expected. I'm mostly using 1/2xFL to stay safe but I can often get very sharp images at slower speeds. By very sharp I mean that they are much sharper than anything I ever got out of my D300.
Thanks for your observation.

It would be good to hear from others on the Quiet mode vs regular Single shot with D800/E.

(Sorry, this is a little off topic)
 
u007 wrote:

Also what RAW software are you using? That conversion is terrible. Where's the dynamic range? It looks like you put a film preset on it or something.
u007, thanks for the reply.

No, this is not a joke post at all. Serious concerns!

Anyway a lot of you have been saying that my RAW conversion is bad. I don't usually shoot in RAW and don't know the nuances.

I have Photoshop CS6 and it couldn't open the RAW files out of the D800 so I had to install the latest version of Camera RAW plugin. It was DNG Converter 8.2. Right after I installed it I could open the RAW files in Photoshop and I'm posting crops saved as JPEGs right after opening it that way. I made sure that the quality of the JPEG export is at 12 standard.

Am I doing something wrong?
 
I think you need to work on raw processing skills and strategies. If you do no noise reduction, you'll see noise in crops like yours except at nearly base ISO. Any good converter can deliver better luminance noise results without significant loss of detail. You could fix your white balance in processing, and if you're not using lens correction in your processing you should try it. Especially if there are presets for those lenses.
 
Gobbly wrote:

Hey everyone, thanks for all your replies. All this seems to put things in context and I'm reconsidering returning the camera.

Now that I understand things better I do think it's foolish to zoom 100% and pixel peep.

But I want to make sure that my unit is normal. So I've uploaded a fresh RAW file here - https://www.dropbox.com/s/ac0i9vrifiyevr4/DSC_0252.NEF

If you could download it and inspect it and let me know if the grain levels are acceptable and that the image is sharp, I'd appreciate it.

I took it with the 28-70mm f2.8D AF-S lens that I borrowed. It was taken handheld.

Also I just love to see an unedited RAW file of an image from your D800 that you would consider your sharpest or your best image in terms of image quality. Of course you don't have to oblige if you're concerned about copyrights or something but it's just something I want to see to compare images from mine and make sure my unit is alright.

Ultimately, all I want is for me to have a fully functional flawless unit and I don't want to make any compromises even if it means I have to be overcautious. I hope that's understandable.

Thanks everyone!
Pre-edit
Pre-edit

Post edit.
Post edit.

Your D800 is Fine and will render amazing results in post processing. This Photo was even shot with a slower shutter speed then desired and the focus is even off. Keep your camera and learn it if you think the end result will be worth it.
 
Last edited:
Gobbly wrote:

Am I doing something wrong?
it's not so much you're doing something wrong as that you lack experience with the camera.



bbda9b780db141a9942cfdf728a63c12.jpg

i shot this image yesterday morning using a willing coworker as my subject. it was also shot with a 50mm lens, but mine is an f/2 AI lens -- manual focus. this was shot with the lens wide open, with a 1/500s shutter and SB-700 at 1/32 power. it was subsequently post-processed in NX2 and scaled down to roughly D700 dimensions.

i have no doubt whatsoever that i could produce substantially the same image using your camera.

while it's hardly a great photograph, there's no distracting softness, grain or CA. i'll tell you my secret:

i've been using the camera for 18 months now. photography is a craft as much as an art, and one has to learn to use the tools in order to achieve consistently high-quality results.

it's pretty darned simple, really.
 
Why do you need 36MP???

Ridiculously high megapixels that requires tripods and mirror-up technique to ensure crisp sharp images free from vibration at normal speeds. I mean with 36MP gone are the days where you can handhold at 60th/sec and get a nice sharp image.

The vibration caused by the mirror slamming up against the padding and then down again slamming in to its padding is enough to ruin photos, let alone any micro-movement caused by hand holding.

I guess you can tell I'm not a fan of uselessly high megapixels. But hey, people demand them and buy them so Nikon is not the fool here.

For me personally even 16MP is way over-the-top and I have never yet wished I had more MP's.

:-)
 
Lasse Eisele wrote:

First of all, I don't agree at all with the people saying that you need impeccable technique and the very best lenses to make the D800 shine. The camera is actually quite easy to use and it works fine with consumer grade lenses.
Good one, Lasse. I've said it a dozen times or more, the D800 is the easiest camera ever to get a technically excellent image. If you've mastered your previous camera, the D800 will do exactly the same stuff, only with much better consistency and far higher resolution. No iron shot discipline is needed to get pixel sharpness. No tripod, no remote, no multi thousand dollar lenses, no gizmos of any kind. Just a reasonably steady grip and a high enough shutter speed. I have literally thousands of handheld shots that will withstand the closest scrutiny without any problem.

In the case of the OP, the D800 focusing is very much better than his D90, just for starters. But these test pics are some of the worst focusing targets I've seen since the glory days of the D7000 in the DX forum, and we did in fact see hundreds of posts just like this one. He needs to start over and calm down. Maybe even take some normal pictures.
 
BillyInya wrote:

Why do you need 36MP???

Ridiculously high megapixels that requires tripods and mirror-up technique to ensure crisp sharp images free from vibration at normal speeds. I mean with 36MP gone are the days where you can handhold at 60th/sec and get a nice sharp image.
Nothing is gone. It is just a rumor that with higher resolution cameras you can see more camera shake. Actually exactly the opposite. Film is actually higher in resolution than any digital right now. Lots og things depend on the individual, camera mirror slap etc....

Here is one taken handheld at 1/2 second. I can probably do even better than that.



051da18c83a94ba5ad0c76b075ac70ad.jpg







The vibration caused by the mirror slamming up against the padding and then down again slamming in to its padding is enough to ruin photos, let alone any micro-movement caused by hand holding.

I guess you can tell I'm not a fan of uselessly high megapixels. But hey, people demand them and buy them so Nikon is not the fool here.

For me personally even 16MP is way over-the-top and I have never yet wished I had more MP's.

:-)
 
Why do you need 36MP???

Ridiculously high megapixels that requires tripods and mirror-up technique to ensure crisp sharp images free from vibration at normal speeds. I mean with 36MP gone are the days where you can handhold at 60th/sec and get a nice sharp image.

The vibration caused by the mirror slamming up against the padding and then down again slamming in to its padding is enough to ruin photos, let alone any micro-movement caused by hand holding.

I guess you can tell I'm not a fan of uselessly high megapixels. But hey, people demand them and buy them so Nikon is not the fool here.

For me personally even 16MP is way over-the-top and I have never yet wished I had more MP's.

:-)
The vibration will be there at 16MP as well. Just because you don't see it, it doesn't mean it is not there.
 
'Film is actually higher in resolution than any digital right now'

baloney

1/2 a second hand held - more baloney or you just got lucky kid.
 
Well, welcome to the world of FX and 36mp. When I went from the D300 (DX) to the D700 (FX) I thought the same thing - that the images were "soft". Well I learned the error of my ways and figured out that there was just simply NO NOISE at all in the images. When I added some noise in Photoshop, suddenly the images looked "sharp" to my eyes. It's all an adjustment phase...


The D800 is a different animal. You need

1. Good glass

2. Good technique

3. Focus carefully, preferably using a tripod with Live View so you can zoom in to fine focus.

Seriously, the D800 is a very very high resolution camera. Coming from a D90, it is an entirely different universe.

I would have recommended the D7100 to you, not the D800. The D7100 would still be a huge upgrade, but not such a shock to your eyes.

Give the D800 time. It will grow on you. Use a tripod, use Live View. Learn about good photographic technique. It will be worth it in the long run.
 
RudivanS wrote:

'Film is actually higher in resolution than any digital right now'

baloney
A high resolution film like Fuji Velvia is rated at anywhere 90-150mp.Google it.
1/2 a second hand held - more baloney or you just got lucky kid.
I have more than 40 years experience in photography and I will gladly share it with you if you come to Los Angeles. I sometimes can shoot 1 second shots if I really want to. D800e has too much mirror slap but I can do it with Canon 5D III in silent mode and with battery grip attached. I have battery grip on D800e too.
--
Rudi - freelancer
'15 years in bladerunner Tokyo - back in sunny Sydney now'
 
anotherMike wrote:

1) The Nikon D800 isn't known for being an excellent high ISO body. A Nikon D600/D610 would be a better choice for that.
Is that why the D800 and D600 have almost the exact same Low-Light ISO (Sports) score on DxOMark? Because the D800 isn't know as an excellent high ISO body?

Camera Low-light ISO (Sports) score from DxOMark sensor ratings

D600 2980 ISO

D800E 2979 ISO

D4 2965 ISO

D800 2853 ISO

D700 2303 ISO

The extra resolution and extremely low S/NR make the D800 a terrific choice for low-light shooting.

To suggest the OP change cameras because of an incorrect assumption about the d800s and D600 high ISO ability seems extreme. There won't be all that much difference between the D800 and D600 in the final prints or web galleries.

The OP seems to have some technical problems or a defective cameras. He should send it Nikon to be evaluated or use tighten up his technique. A tripod would be a good start in retesting.
 
Last edited:
Gobbly wrote:

Hello,

Background:-

I've been using a D90 for the past 5 years and I have a Nikon 50mm 1.8D lens and a Tamron 90mm 1:1 Macro lens besides the Kit lens my D90 came with. I've been very satisfied with the D90 unit that I have. But I wanted to upgrade to a Fx body because the one thing that I wasn't satisfied with my D90 was the low light performance and also I wanted to get into film making.

What happened:-

After what seems like an eternal wait, I finally saved up the money and ordered a brand new D800 off Amazon and it reached my hands yesterday. I was expecting to be blown away by the IQ but right off the bat something didn't feel right. I just couldn't put my finger on why but I certainly wasn't blown away. I was in fact disappointed.

With the Nikon 50mm 1.8D, my most favorite lens of all time, I wasn't getting the sharpness I loved it for. With the image as is on the LCD screen, everything seemed alright but when I zoomed in, there was notable softness and worse of all GRAIN! I slept unhappy last night and this morning I started researching and noticed that a lot of people were saying the D800 needs "good technique" and that I can't expect good sharpness while shooting hand-held. I mean, even at 1/8000s my images were soft and grainy. I just don't expect a $3k body to be so soft even at 1/8000s.

The issue:-

Mind you, this isn't an issue of back focusing or front focusing. The focus is quick and spot on, both in the left and the center focus points. The issue is with softness and grain.

The following shot is taken handheld with a Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens that I borrowed from my campus photographer. My hands were very steady.

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld (steady though) with the Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens.
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld (steady though) with the Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens.

I know the ISO is bumped up to 2500 and that could result in some grain but quite frankly this much grain is unacceptable to me on a camera that is known for its low light performance.

Our campus photographer was surprised with the lack of sharpness too but he suggested that it might be because of the low shutter speed or that perhaps my hands weren't steady enough.

What I did:-

Anyway today I went out in the cold to do some real testing to eliminate all possible operator errors. I used my tripod and shot some timed shots. Here are the results.

[ATTACH alt="100% crop of unedited RAW image taken using Nikkor 50mm 1.8D mounted on tripod with timer and the Image Quality setting on the camera was "Fine" and the print size is "Large". I made sure that the aperture wasn't too wide open so that the DOF wasn't too shallow."]413956[/ATTACH]
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken using Nikkor 50mm 1.8D mounted on tripod with timer and the Image Quality setting on the camera was "Fine" and the print size is "Large". I made sure that the aperture wasn't too wide open so that the DOF wasn't too shallow.

I used my Tamron 90mm macro for the following shot.

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken mounted on a tripod with timer using the Tamron 90mm lens, which is very sharp with my D90. I ensured that the DOF wasn't too shallow, thus the small aperture.
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken mounted on a tripod with timer using the Tamron 90mm lens, which is very sharp with my D90. I ensured that the DOF wasn't too shallow, thus the small aperture.

To me, images of such poor sharpness TAKEN IN CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENTS devoid of shake (both on the camera and the subject) on lenses that are known for their sharpness is simply unacceptable.

But as I was experimenting with different subjects, I noticed something even more alarming - Chromatic Aberration that was quite ugly and scary.

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 50mm 1.8D lens
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 50mm 1.8D lens

EWWW!!!

Note that close examination of this subject revealed nothing other than just pure white text on brown background.

I tried on a 85mm f1.4 lens that I had borrowed and the CA got worse! Here's the shot:-

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 85mm f1.4 lens
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 85mm f1.4 lens

I was worried that the earlier handheld shots were because I had "poor technique" and the IQ bothered me a lot. I was just disappointed but now after doing all the testing using tripod and timer, I'm convinced there's something terribly wrong and it isn't just my technique that's at flaw.

I went for Amazon because of their beautiful return policy and I'm seriously considering returning this unit and getting a new one but I want to be sure that this is the unit's flaw and not something that I'm doing incorrectly or worse, if this is expected of the D800. I just want to make sure that I won't have the same issue with the new D800 that I'll purchase after returning this one.

So the following are the questions I have:-
  1. Are these results expected of a brand new D800 and the lens combinations?
  2. Am I doing something incorrect?
  3. Can you confirm with certainty that my unit is flawed?
Thanks a lot for reading through this extremely long post. I appreciate any constructive comments.

PS - I have to add, PLEASE view the images in original size to appreciate my concerns of grain and softness. The images as is in the post don't reveal the grain as much.


Some thoughts:

- the D800 is MUCH higher resolution than your D90: 36mp vs 12mp as you well know. That's 1.7 times more resolution each way. The result of this is that anything that might have looked fine when seen at 100% on your D90, might not look so fine anymore at 3x the surface resolution and 1.7x more linear resolution.

- typical issues will include:
(1) focus - you never mention AF fine-tuning but clearly if you want perfect results with your D800 at full resolution when viewed at 100% then you need to fine-tune the AF. This didn't exist on the D90. As a side note I'm sure you are aware of manufacturing tolerances: because of these, even if a given lens and body are perfect together, the same lens might need AF fine-tuning when used on a different body.
Also PDAF will never be as precise as CDAF - so for anything where you really need very critical focus then use live view.

(2) user movement. Here you show some shots where you comment "hand-held but I have very steady hands". But sorry, this doesn't fly. If you are going to get so worried about IQ then you need a tripod - hand-held won't do (on other shots you DO use a tripod - but why bother to worry about the other shots).

(3) aperture. You show a macro shot of a piece of rock where you have used f16. Sure f16 is needed for more DOF but here I don't see that you needed much DOF. And, from around f8 a 36mp sensor will make diffraction very visible (Nikon's own technical guide to the D800 confirms this). So if you want the very best results then try to not go smaller aperture than f8, or if you do, then don't look at 100% because you will see the effects of diffraction (which your D90 did not show). Also sure you're using a tripod but I don't see the logic of 1/6th and ISO 500 on a camera where ISO 1600 is still very clean.



As for the "chromatic aberration" you mention, this is just axial, not lateral, chromatic aberration. It is common with "fast" lenses used at or close to maximum aperture.



Bottom-line:
- you do sound like you need to go up the learning curve and adjust your methods to this camera. Or alternatively, just realise that nothing is wrong with the camera, but that a 36mp sensor will show problems more clearly when shots are viewed at 100%
- you also do sound like perhaps you spent more than you could afford, which makes you more worried than if you had bought something that you could afford

If you want really precise focus (ie CDAF) and a more reasonable price and video, then I think that any of the current mirrorless cameras will be much more suited to your needs.



Good luck
 
3 words; Lack of skill

Now instead of complaining on a forum go out and practice :D

 
Lasse Eisele wrote:

The Tamron shot (#3) is different. It was taken at f/16 and 1/6 s. At f/16 you will inevitably get some diffraction softness, but what we're seeing here is camera shake. You just can't use the self timer at 1/6 s with a 90 mm lens. The mirror slap will kill the image. You need mirror lock-up and a remote release. Or stay away from the tricky speeds (say, 1/2-1/30 s). I own the Tamron 90/2.8 and it is stellar on my D800E.
I don't necessarily agree.

IMG_20130702_0875-O.jpg


This was a 2 second exposure at f16 and ISO1600 using my 50mm/f1.8G, without a tripod, without self-timer, without mirror lockup and without remote release. I just kneeled down behind a rock boulder and held it on there to steady my hands. And it is sharp, no motion blur. And this is not the longest exposure I have made utilizing a solid object to create sharp shots without tripod.
--
Gijs from The Netherlands
Nikon D800
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top