How can any wedding photographer get the shots with the 800?

Started Jan 21, 2013 | Discussions
marike6 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,088
Re: What a joke and troll
1

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

You don't own this camera (by your own admission) and have not used it. But you start a thread that has a subject line that indicates you are frustrated by its inadequate AF system. Why shouldn't this be considered as trolling?

Totally agree.  I don't know who started this absurd "D800 inadequate AF system" but people do realize that the D800 has the exact same AF module as the D4, don't they?

If people can't focus with a camera like the D800, perhaps they should take up golf.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Shaun_Nyc
Shaun_Nyc Senior Member • Posts: 2,279
Re: How can any wedding photographer get the shots with the 800?
1

RP McMurphy wrote:

Kerry Pierce wrote:

RP McMurphy wrote:

OK, sorry, didn't realise that weddings were fast action sports events

They aren't, IME, but that doesn't mean that high FPS can't be useful in weddings and like events.

If you read what I wrote I did say "FPS only" as a reason for noth moving to D800. If you want FPS then, granted, the D800 maybe a little slow for spray and pray; but I didn't think wedding photographers needed to capture 'action'.

I don't think it's really necessary to be so demeaning of those who have different wants and needs than you. The d800 is a fine camera, but there are instances where shots will be lost due to the slow frame rate, even on single portraits, but more frequently on group shots, where you're trying to get a shot where everyone has their eyes open and their mouths shut, with a nice smile perhaps.

It's not a huge deal, but it's not a welcome change to those accustomed to having a faster camera like the d700. I like my d800, but I wish it had the same capability of my d700.

Kerry

Of course it can be useful, but I did say that EXCEPT for FPS it's a perfect camera imo, he then said psst what about weddings like it's incapable of shooting weddings UNLESS it has high FPS

You really should try to read things properly first before jumping on the bandwagon

Hey rude UK person you should try to read & comprehend a bit yourself. I said the camera has buffer problems for 75mg 14 bit raws. Where did I say Fps ? 4 fps is not the problem for events, its getting the files out of the camera before it locks up. As kerry said, sometimes we want that perfect emotion or that huge family shot w everyones eyes actually open. You havent the foggiest, stick w the kids big mouth

 Shaun_Nyc's gear list:Shaun_Nyc's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Nikon D50 Nikon D3 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +10 more
joneil Regular Member • Posts: 179
Re: How can any wedding photographer get the shots with the 800?

RP McMurphy wrote:


Why do you need an updated D700 - FPS only?

What I would like in an updated D700?

- dual CF cards.   I once fried a SD card with a carpet shock.  good thing the D7000 I was using at the time  has dual SD card slots.  Just a good idea to have a backup.

- video.   Seldom use it, but the few times I did use it on my D7000 it was really nice to have.

- maybe a 16mp sensor, like the D4.  I do think the overall dynamic range on the newer FX cameras is better, but I can sure live with my D700

Other wise I am pretty happy with it.

Unless you want heavy build and high fps then the d800 can be used and you just output to a lower resolution with the added advantages of more detail at 12mp than a D700 can give you

I really do not understand why a D700 user wanting a new camera cannot find what they want in a D600 or a D800, I would have thought that basically those wanting less MP, more fps and a D800 quality body would not be that plentiful in number

The D600 is to me, built like a plastic toy.  I am rough on my gear.  Natural klutz bascially.  I would destroy the D600 in a month.    D800 is too many MP for me, and i like the controls on the D700 better than on either the D600 or the D800.    I may still get a D800 some day, but my D700 will still be my "everyday" camera.

I can understand Nikon's point of view - there maybe a niche in the market, but is there a market in the niche?

For those that still aren't happy, there's always Canon

And I would warrant more have switched from Canon than the other way round

Canon makes fines cameras and fine lenses.  But I have almost 30 years of Nikkor glass, so whatcha gonna do? 

Also, I don't know about digital SLRs, but I have found, overall, in film, Nikkors were about the toughest brand out there.  You don't want to know what I put my old FM and FM2 through, and they still both work. 

joneil Regular Member • Posts: 179
Re: this thread is the eptiome of what is wrong with DPReview forums

intensity studios wrote:

Craig wrote:

Nikon please just take the D3s or D4 sensor and stick it into a D700 body and we are good to go.. thanks.

I cannot use the tools available, so nikon please make an obscure product to match only my needs!

Of course!  And at the same time, please solve world peace, world hunger, and give me the winning numbers to next week's lottery while you are at it. 

Seriously though, for me the real issue is Nikon should  never have dropped the D700 to begin with.  If Nikon felt it was "out of date", then a couple of  tweaks like upgrading the sensor and renaming it the D750 or the D700x or whatever, would of solved the issues.

IMO, this is not about making an obscure product, it's about dropping a well established product that had very few if any real problems and issues, and offering no real direct replacement.

OP Craig Veteran Member • Posts: 5,923
I dismissed this camera when it first came out because

I thought it was overkill with the 36 MP.s and for my needs. I value Low light and speed performance more than the Hi Res image quality. So when i would come here and check out peoples comments and focusing problems it further convinced me that the D800 was not the camera for me.

I liked the performance of my D3s so much that I wanted the next D700 to be similar. That never happened, so I figured i would live with what I have.

But I have to admit the problems I have read here have been blown out of proportion as usual after I started looking at the cameras reviews on other sites too.

The low light performance is on par with the D700 or a tad better?

However from what I read more care is needed to get sharp pictures? With the D700 when not using flash I set the camera to 1/100 sec and auto ISO and would be happy up to 6400 Iso shots and that would be using a 85mm 1.4f lens.

It seems to me from what others are saying you need to increase the shutter 1/250 to get decent hand held images so there you basically lose 1 full stop in ISO performance. Yes?

To be honest the file sizes are crazy big. I rarely use any hi speed shot captures so that's not an issue but reviewing files can be slow is that true?

I moved from Minolta/Konica/Sony because Sony always went with the most MPs and sacrificing hi iso capabilities so that made me sell out of that system and came to Nikon starting with the D3.

Having the movie feature is ok but not necessary for me. I do take some clips during weddings with the D3s for my slide shows but its a pain sometimes..

So I have to admit the D800 camera is much better than I thought, again because I did not give it a chance, so if I get serious to buy another camera I may consider it.

However I would prefer something like a 16-24mP.s sensor that is like the D3s. I think the 36mp. is overkill for what I need.

thomas2279f
thomas2279f Senior Member • Posts: 2,862
Re: How can any wedding photographer get the shots with the 800?
1

Didn't stop the Wedding Shooters on the Canon side effectively using the excellent 5D MK I & MK II (3.9 fps) - why would it hamper the Nikon users of the D800 shooting Weddings ?

 thomas2279f's gear list:thomas2279f's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon D850 Apple iPad WiFi +1 more
thomas2279f
thomas2279f Senior Member • Posts: 2,862
Re: Looks like new cams focus better not worse

Agree and another Yawn posts you seen not only on this forum but other forums.

However would be ace if Nikon did do a baby D4 in D800 body and perhaps a monsterous 54 FF D4x as well.

 thomas2279f's gear list:thomas2279f's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon D850 Apple iPad WiFi +1 more
Kerry Pierce
Kerry Pierce Forum Pro • Posts: 19,757
Re: How can any wedding photographer get the shots with the 800?
2

RP McMurphy wrote:

Kerry Pierce wrote:

RP McMurphy wrote:

OK, sorry, didn't realise that weddings were fast action sports events

They aren't, IME, but that doesn't mean that high FPS can't be useful in weddings and like events.

If you read what I wrote I did say "FPS only" as a reason for noth moving to D800. If you want FPS then, granted, the D800 maybe a little slow for spray and pray; but I didn't think wedding photographers needed to capture 'action'.

I don't think it's really necessary to be so demeaning of those who have different wants and needs than you. The d800 is a fine camera, but there are instances where shots will be lost due to the slow frame rate, even on single portraits, but more frequently on group shots, where you're trying to get a shot where everyone has their eyes open and their mouths shut, with a nice smile perhaps.

It's not a huge deal, but it's not a welcome change to those accustomed to having a faster camera like the d700. I like my d800, but I wish it had the same capability of my d700.


Of course it can be useful, but I did say that EXCEPT for FPS it's a perfect camera imo, he then said psst what about weddings like it's incapable of shooting weddings UNLESS it has high FPS

You really should try to read things properly first before jumping on the bandwagon

I did read things properly.  You had to go on about spray and pray and that you didn't realize that wedding photographers needed to capture "action".  That is just juvenile nonsense, trying to be demeaning of people that use higher FPS.

You can't have it both ways, either it's useful or it's not.  Since you admit that it can be useful, then what is with the juvenile nonsense?

Kerry

-- hide signature --

my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

 Kerry Pierce's gear list:Kerry Pierce's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC Nikon AF Nikkor 135mm f/2D DC +17 more
Kerry Pierce
Kerry Pierce Forum Pro • Posts: 19,757
Re: D800 weddings and Events

RP McMurphy wrote:

Well turn off dynamic area AF and leave it on AF -C

Of course it tries other areas to focus on if it cant acquire focus with the selected focus point, it's not a mind reader

My oh my, you're the nasty one, aren't you.  At least you think you are. LOL   You're going into the ignore list with the other boneheads that can't play nice.

Kerry

-- hide signature --

my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

 Kerry Pierce's gear list:Kerry Pierce's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC Nikon AF Nikkor 135mm f/2D DC +17 more
olyflyer
olyflyer Forum Pro • Posts: 24,313
Re: I dismissed this camera when it first came out because

Craig wrote:

I thought it was overkill with the 36 MP.s and for my needs. I value Low light and speed performance more than the Hi Res image quality. So when i would come here and check out peoples comments and focusing problems it further convinced me that the D800 was not the camera for me.

The D800 has better low light performance than the D700.

I liked the performance of my D3s so much that I wanted the next D700 to be similar. That never happened, so I figured i would live with what I have.

That's fine. There is no need to buy a new camera unless you feel you need it, but the D3s and the D700 are totally different, so which part of the performance you would want in "your" D800? Higher frame rate? For a wedding shooter 4fps should be enough, don't you agree?

But I have to admit the problems I have read here have been blown out of proportion as usual after I started looking at the cameras reviews on other sites too.

Right.

The low light performance is on par with the D700 or a tad better?

Exactly. What people WRONGLY is they take 100% images of one camera and compare with 100% images of the other, totally different camera. By comparing different image sizes they claim that the D700 is better than the D800, but that is nonsense. Compared in the same size the D800 beats the D700 at any ISO, not only in noise but also in DR and detail. The additional size may and may not be an advantage for you, but in any case, if you ever get a client who needs cropped images or large prints the 36MP comes handy.

However from what I read more care is needed to get sharp pictures? With the D700 when not using flash I set the camera to 1/100 sec and auto ISO and would be happy up to 6400 Iso shots and that would be using a 85mm 1.4f lens.

It seems to me from what others are saying you need to increase the shutter 1/250 to get decent hand held images so there you basically lose 1 full stop in ISO performance. Yes?

No. That's another Internet hoax. If you can hand hold the D700 and take sharp and well focused images with that camera then you can do the same with the D800 as well. Again, compare equal sizes, not different ones. You may not get maximum resolution at 36MP if you are hand holding at that shutter speed, but the compared with the D700 and downsized to 12MP the D800 images should not be worse. Anyone claiming that with the D800 you need to use 1/250s for the same shot that needed 1/100s have no idea about what he is talking about and just spreading this nonsense further on.

To be honest the file sizes are crazy big. I rarely use any hi speed shot captures so that's not an issue but reviewing files can be slow is that true?

Reviewing files is definitely not slow. If you would experience slowness then your computer has been outdated for several years already anyway, so don't blame the D800... Yes, no doubt that the D800 needs more computing power than the D700, but it is not that a decent computer would not be able to manage it.

I moved from Minolta/Konica/Sony because Sony always went with the most MPs and sacrificing hi iso capabilities so that made me sell out of that system and came to Nikon starting with the D3.

Having the movie feature is ok but not necessary for me. I do take some clips during weddings with the D3s for my slide shows but its a pain sometimes..

So I have to admit the D800 camera is much better than I thought, again because I did not give it a chance, so if I get serious to buy another camera I may consider it.

Yes, you have to give it a chance and stop believing every negative post on the Internet. Especially in terms of AF performance, ISO noise and DR I find it amazing. It has it's weaknesses but any wedding pro should be able to handle it.

However I would prefer something like a 16-24mP.s sensor that is like the D3s. I think the 36mp. is overkill for what I need.

Yes, many times 36MP is overkill, but now and then it comes handy.

Good luck with your decision, but like I said, there is no need to buy the D800 or any other camera if you are happy with the D700.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads