D800 official release

[D.P.]

http://www.nikon.com/news/2012/0207_dslr_01.htm

As rumoured. 36.3MP sensor with an option of a model withou AA filter.

Will have to wait how the sensor performs at 12-18mps before I part with my cash.

 

[D.P.]

"Nikon has said that the noise performance equals that of the 12.1 megapixel full-frame D700 despite the sensor including exactly 3x as many pixels. This seems like quite a bold claim, however this is explained by the camera sensor being several years newer, than the D700 sensor, which was originally announced with the Nikon D700 in 2008. Until we've been able to test a full production camera we will not be able to give our full verdict, but look forward to seeing if these bold claims are warranted. From the example images we saw images looked very good despite being from a pre-production camera."

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikon-d800-d800e-digital-slr-hands-on-review-18420

It is not hard to understand. 3x the resolution and equal noise would mean an improvement in technology of around than 1.5 stops. The Nikon D3s improved sensitivity compared to the D3/D700 of about 1 to 1.3 stops. The Nikon D4s supposedly around 1- 1.3 stops above the D3s. Therefore, one could expect the technology in the D800 sensor to have 2-2.6 stops better performance than the original D700 sensor, so a 1.5 stop improvement is about what can be expected at least.

What is claimed is that a D800 image at ISO6400 looks the same as the D700 at ISO 6400, and if the D800 is sampled down to 12MP then it will be equivalent to the D700 at ISO 2000 roughly. In other words ISO 6400 images should be perfectly usable when properly exposed and when not printed to billboard size images (and if you are printing at billboard size images then the D800 is just the camera you need, under appropriate lighting or tripod of course).

 

[D.P.]

All the samples for the E are ISO 100 or 200, and all the samples for the standard D800 are ISO 640 and below. Not very promising.

No camera manufacturer ever releases high ISO images at launch time.

I wouldn't worry too much. At the worst, the D800 sensor will be the D7k sensor enlarged to full frame gaining about 1.5stops in the process, the D7K is no slouch at all.

Then there maybe further improvements in technology- Nikon is renowned for tweaking sensors (D3s vs D3), or improvements brought about because this is a higher end camera and Nikon pay put in high-end amplifiers etc.


Still, I am not going to buy one until I have seen some ISO 6400 shots.

 

[D.P.]

http://cliffmautner.typepad.com/

The 3D color matrix meter III, the improved auto focus with more cross sensors, additional dynamic range, and the improved AF performance in low light are just a few features that are glaring improvements. From a focus standpoint, I found it hard to believe there could be improvements to the D3S focus system. But, this camera does focus faster and will allow me to make pictures I couldn't make before.

Some info floating around, like the above, mentioning that the AF is better than the D3s. It is important to remember that just because Nikon kept with the same 51-point AF layout as the D700 doesn't mean that it can't have been tweaked and improved. For reference sake the D700 already had AF abilities that more or less matched the Nikon D3 and Canon 1DMK(s)III, so even if no improvements were made it would be more than adaquate for a majority of people. if it has been imrpoved then it will be sufficient for everyone except the most hard-core extreme sports photographers working in a dudgeon shooting basketball etc., the kind of people who will own a Nikon D4 and a 200mm f/2.0 VR and still complain at the light.

 

[D.P.]

Some comparisons of the D800 with and without AA filter:
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/features01.htm#a12

Also has some useless ISO 6400 shots to compare.

 

[D.P.]

What is also a key feature for the video fans is the ability to record uncompressed Raw video output through HDMI.

This is a key ability for use by pros who will post-edit the video and will want to compress at the final output stage.

 

[D.P.]

Sorry for the spamming...

Thom Hogan has a very detailed discussion, but no hands on experience yet:

http://bythom.com/d800intro.htm


Seems like the D800 is mostly a D4 in a smaller lighter body but with a monstrous 36Mp sensor, and a much friendlier price tag. Hopefully some more hands on testing will verify the AF and handling.

Prior to release some people were worried that the D800 will lack what made the D700 special, i.e. a pro-grade D3 in a smaller, lighter, cheaper but still pro-grade body. D80 doesn't seem to have changed that winning recipe, but has changed the sensor radically. This pushes the the D800 in to the lime light for landscape and fashion shooters, but should also entice wildlife photographers, getting more pixels on the duck/bear/wolf. The D800 should make a very good DX camera actually.

Price also seems reasonable and in-line with the D700 launch prices (accepting inflation and some currency changes), once the first price drop comes about I will be very interested.


the thing is my new Nikon 24-70 2.8 probably is no use on the D800 to get close to the theoretical 36MP and I will need to get some more primes.

 

[D.P.]

as much as I want the camera, I really want the video but am thinking it would just be cheaper to get a 5dmk2 and adapter to use nikon lenses.

If you really want a camera for video I wouldn't look at the 5MKII.

For starters, the D800 has many important features that would very useful, such as raw uncompressed output, headphone and audio level monitoring, full manual control of shutter speed/aperture/ISO, etc.

But then if you are really interested in a video camera then perhaps look at buying a video camera?

 

[D.P.]

No it's not. Massive prints are designed to be viewed from greater distances so don't need high resolution. Unless you're printing enormous posters designed to be viewed from six inches away, what's the point?



Well it appears they're swapping. Nikon had a good "all-rounder" in the D700 with a FF sensor yet good AF and FPS for action/sports whilst Canon had one or the other in the 7D for action or 5D2 for studio/portraiture.

Now it appears Nikon have gone more towards the 5D2's traditional market with the D800, with silly megapixels and lower FPS whilst, if the rumours are true, Canon are bridging the gap twixt the 5D2 and 7D with the 5D3.

The only important thing the D800 doesn't have relative to D4 is the high speed shooting, but then the D700 was no different. The D700 was a slower camera, but had equal AF and metering abilities with the same sensor. thus the sports pros went with the D3.
Not any different this time round, the d800 appears to have identical internals as the D4, but with a high resolution sensor.
So it is not fair at all to say that Nikon has made the D700 replacement like the Canon 5Dmk2, quite the opposite.
The D800 is now a very cheap D3x replacement with even higher resolution and D4 internals, i.e. it is a D4x that costs far less.
To put it another way, the D800 should have better AF and metering than the Canon 1DsMKiii and have a much better sensor in a smaller, lighter, cheaper box. How is that anything like a Canon 5D?


Now Canon may well play catch up and release a 5Dmk3 with the same internals as the it's 1D-X counterpart, but that is not the same as Nikon making 5D type camera.

 

[D.P.]

Well to be fair, maybe tech has just moved on that far and fast, a lot can happen in a few years!

Similar to the D700 announcement, most people said it would be a colossal failure.

Who the heck said the D700 would be a failure??? no one with half a brain. A Nikon D3 in a smaller lighter body for half the price, who would not want one of those? The only discussion was pros annoyed that they could get a D3 at half price as D700, and much debate on if the D700 would steal D3 sales. It didn't by the way, those who needed 10Fps still got a D3, and the d700 was often purchased as a backup camera, so Nikon were more than happy with sales of both lines.
The D800 has moved to a high res sensor simply so comparisons with the 5Dmk3 are on even playing ground. It also made sense for a studio and landscape camera.

 

[D.P.]

^^^
By the sounds of it in the Canon forums, they are after the 5Dii upgraders, it seems a number of Canon folks are excited by this 36mp chip with D700 like features and handling.

The D3x images rivaled lower-end medium format images without question. The D800 should easily surpasses the older high-end MF and the new low end. They wont touch the new high end MF except will spank them at the high-ISO stakes. The D800 will also be 5-7times cheaper.

The D3x stood up OK against the Pentax 645D, the D800 will undoubtedly surpass it, even with the lens issues.

But the lens issues are really what will hold the D800 back, especially for landscape use. It wont be possible to get 36MP at suitable apertures. Hyperfocal focusing ill be an absolute requirement and choosing the optimal focal point will be must. I'm even wondering if using the focus stacking techniques from the Macro world would be needed to gain the DoF.

This is where MF will still rule for the Pros. In the Studio, although I'm sure they like the high-end MF backs, i don't really see that they need anything more than a D800. The D800 will happilly make billboards, heck the 12MP D700/3 made billboard size photos withe ease.

The D800 will push techniques and stability to the limit. I am glad I went for a Gitzo 3531s and BH-55. I doubt hand holding it you will ever get more than 20MP.

 

[D.P.]

It certainly does with my experience - true, it had a 24-70L on the end at the time.

It made an average-looking photo opportunity look awesome and it was easier to use than even my 20D. AF in even indoor lighting conditions was poor as a trade-off, however, so...

I like the look of the D800 and I currently own Canon gear, so I get to play for awesome upgrades either way.

If th Af was poor then it wouldn't be an easy camera to use IMO. Flawless AF is a requirement for an easy camera.

I have borrowed a friend's 5DMKII and I can honestly say I much prefer the handling of my D90. For my type of photography ( a lot of landscaper, still and wildlife) I could make the 5DMKII work for me but for all that money it was just very disappointing.

 

[D.P.]

Yep, is official, the D800 smokes the competition. That must be the biggest jump in leader-board position of any DSLR.

An incredible 14.4 Stop DR, and a High ISO score a smidgen behind the D4/D3s.


I think this news has bright DXOmark to its knees. get the images here: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/03/23/nikon-d800-gets-tested-at-dxomark-gets-the-1-spot.aspx/

 

[D.P.]

For landscape, "the D800 achieves the best score ever measured

Sold. I'm buying

 

[D.P.]

It is crazy how they managed to get such a high Quantum efficiency while pushing the resolution so far. It kind of makes the D4 a little less impressive, even although it managed to grab 2nd spot before the D800 came along.

 

[D.P.]

Nicely written user initial review: http://blog.mingthein.com/2012/03/23/first-impressions-review-the-nikon-d800/

And the second part: http://blog.mingthein.com/2012/03/24/nikon-d800-review-update-daylight-shooting/

Although it is a nice review I notice something that a few people keep saying about the difficulty using the 36MP sensor and other drawbacks such as the need for more accurate AF.

The pixel density of the D800 is higher than previous FF DSLR so care will have to be taken to maximize performance but some perspective is needed here, and this doesn't make it worse than low pixel density cameras.
The pixel density of the D800 is slightly less than the D7000, so it will be about the same level of technique and shutter speed required to get the same results. In other words, it will be a fair amount easier than the Canon 7D for example, and actually a lot easier than any point and shoot camera which most people hand hold carefree.

Even if you did induce more pixel level motion blur from hand holding due to the pixel density, if you printed to the same output size or downsampled it you would get the same or better sharpness than the low pixel density D700.

Same with any focus issue. If there is apparent loss of sharpness due to slight focusing issues then this doesn't make it worse than the D700 using the same lens. It can only be equal or better when printed to the same size or downsampled to the same resolution. You wont be squeezing out the best IQ that the sensor can offer but it wont be making things worse.

same goes for lenses and diffraction limits or lens limitations into the corners. The Higher resolution sensor wont make it any worse than the D700 when normalized, it can only be equal or better.

 

[D.P.]

im hearing rumours the whole of UK only got like 1000 units to sell andyou wont get a d800 till around august time.

All due to the fact Nikon underestimated the demand for this camera.

No wonder why its 1k cheaper them the mk3. hard to get, like gold dust LOL.

edit: if the d800 really is a sensational camera, then **** canon, charging 1k more then a inferior product. not thanks. canon ripping people off big time or d800 is bargain of the century. which is it? i could buy a d800 plus a decent wlakaround lens for same price asa 5mk3 and flog my 70-200 and buy nikon equivalent.

Canon taking the P

I doubt the limited supply rumours are remotely true. thy seem to emanate from Canon fanboys trying to persuade people not to buy the D800. Nikon knew there would be a huge demand for the D800 and setup production to cope with their forecast high demand. What is official is that the demand and pre-orders has been even high than their high expectations, that is official. The evidence is there to see on websites like Amazon where the D800 is the best selling camera of the last weeks and seems to be far outselling pre-orders for the 5dMKII for example. B&H has made similar statements saying the D800 was their fastest ever selling camera.

This doesn't mean there will be a long wait for the next batch to arrive. Supply rarely meets demand for a new DSLR in the first months. If Supply was bigger than demand it probably means no one is interested in the camera. It is not so easy to get people to stump up $3000 for a camera that has barely been released or reviewed. There will be a steady supply of D800s from April I would guess. Thom Hogan (bythom.com) normally has a good over view of supply.


And to answer your question, the D800 really does appear to be a sensational camera and to be the deal of the century. It is pushing $50,000 medium format digital backs out of the way. The $8000 D3x battled with low end medium format backs, the D800 is battling with high end medium format and comapred to the D3x offers better dynamic range, increased ISO performance, increased color depth, 50% higher resolution, better AF, better metering for a mere $3000.
That is a deal of the century.

 

[D.P.]

Shame the Nikons are a pig to hold, use.
For me anyway. Its the only thing stopping me from ever going with them.

Most people prefer the Nikon ergonomics. It has been a strong point of Nikon for a many decades now. Canon 1 series is very good but below that the ergonomics is kind of poor.

There does seem to be a kind of left-handed or right-handed difference between some photogs, and the way focus+zoom direction of Nikon and Canon cameras are reversed. Canon lenses clearly go backwards IMO, others probably think the other way round.

 

[D.P.]

I wouldn't say the 5DMKIII is a dud, just seem that it is what the 5dMKII should have been, or a 5DMK2.5 The Canon 5DMKIII does seem overpriced compared to its competition but I don't know if that is screwing you over, just less favorable pricing. I'm sure Canon will revise their pricing if the it doesn't sell as well as they hoped. Whether the Canon is over priced or the Nikon under-priced is all kind of relative. For sure Nikon could charge a chunk more for the D800 without loose many sales but it is an attractive price point. There could be several reason why the D800 is relatively cheap. It may be an aggressive pricing policy to entice Canon users or new purchasers to move to the Nikon system. It may be that they want more Nikon people to upgrade to full frame nikon cameras where there is a higher profit margin in lenses.


The D700 was better than the 5DMKII in almost every way, better AF, better metering, better weather sealed body, better ergonomics, better high ISO performance, faster etc. Did people complain that the 5DMKII was a dud, not really, or at least not to the extent that you would expect. The D800 just improves on everything again and sports a great sensor.

Canon seem to be struggling to push there sensor very far in recent years compared to Sony/Nikon. Nothing Canon has released has properly competed with the Nikon D3/D3s for high ISO performance, nothing has compared well to the Nikon D3X for resolution+high ISO+ Dynamic range + color depth, No canon crops sensor competes with the Nikon tweaked Sony sensor in the D7000. When the D3 was released some Canon pro photographers switched to Nikon to get better high ISO performance. With the D3x release some Canon landscape users switched to Nikon, they were already using the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 with an adapter because Canon doesn't have a decent wide angle option. have a look at the DXOMark top ranked cameras, Canon fall someway behind Nikon.

With the D800 there are bound to be many Canon photographers switching system. I've sen several Canon landscape shooters that have already pre-ordered a D800. They were already using the Nikon 14-24 so were good to go. But for the most part it is not a big deal. The biggest weakness of the 5DMKII was the metering and AF, both should be massively improved. The sensor was good before, it should be a little better now, so it is perfectly sufficient. Just not as good as the D800.


But it is all cycles really. Before the Nikon D3+D300 release Nikon sensor technology was some way behind Canon. The Nikon D2h was clearly worse than Canon's offering.
Who knows what Canon release in the next generation of bodies. Nothing inherently stops them using a Sony sensor.


Bottom line the photographer will be more important than the camera in the hands.

 

[D.P.]

Can you actually back that up at all? The 7D is an awesome camera to handle, the rebel series do suffer from the lack of a back wheel etc though. The D700 felt so odd when I used it lately, but I put that down to Canon familiarisation. I use a 7 year old Canon body with a dodgy two button control methodology so I hope I could use pretty much any camera I use lenses on the Canon that zoom\focus different ways and it's not an issue at all. Nikon users are saying that the D800 is giving them cramp when using, which is something they haven't experienced before, that is odd.

The 7D is a great body but a lot of the canon bodies just don't seem anywhere near as comfortable as similar class Nikon bodies for me and many reviews. Always seems you have to jump to the next body up in the Canon line to get a body with the same comport and build quality. Plenty of exceptions of course but it is something that many reviews and users have noted for a long time. That was the sole reason I started down a nikon route when i moved to digital, the Canon 300D was just an uncomfortable plastic box compared to the Nikon D70. I've used plenty of 40D/60D types cameras and they just are not as comfortable as a Nikon D90 or D300.


Will pay attention to the D800 feel but i doubt it is much different to the D700, very similar bodies.