Nikon releases new D800 and D800E

xtm

xtm

Active member
holy...36.3MP :eek2: 1080P video, ISO 100-6400 native and up to 25600.:eek2: 51-AF, full weathersealing.. $2999.00 :eek2:
http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25480/D800.html

It comes with 2 versions: D800 with AA filter and D800E with no AA filter

This thing totally destroys the Nikon flagship D3x, which doesn't have video and "only" has 24MP. It's crazy how Nikon isn't afraid to put out a prosumer body that cannibalizes their flagship body. I can imagine that it would benefit a lot of macro shooters as well because they can crop a lot and still retain details. Bigger question is... will landscapers ditch their D3x and 5DMkII, 1Ds and go for this body? How will LR deal with the 60+mb raw files? This is pretty much like a medium format, but much MUCH cheaper.

i think I want one
:beer:
 
Last edited:
They also released the D4. The only thing remotely interesting to me it the lack of an AA.

What you're seeing with this release is confirmation that pixel count really doesn't matter much. The the new D4 pro body is has a much lower pixel count than the D800. Pro's understand that more pixels don't automatically equal a better image. Consumers? not so much.
 
I wonder how well it handles higher ISO with all those pixels crammed onto a sensor?
 
Haven't read the specs, I probably will at some point. Not sure how it blows the D3x away or others. So much more that goes into a body beyond MP, AF points, etc,etc.

For just one example how many of those 51 AF points are high precision X points rather than just horizontal or vertical? Nor does it have two chips (for metering, AF, etc). The MDmkii has more on paper than my 1Dmkiv but theres no way Id trade one for the other.

RE MP.
My stock agencies require 50MB flattened tiff files. At 16 bit, my files are 100mb+ at 8 bit 45ish and so I upsize a hair and have zero issues with 50-55MB tiffs. Word just came down from the like of Getty etc that 60MB is the new standard.

Will I run out and buy a 5Dmkii or 1Dx (when its released)?
Not a chance.

Not saying in any way this isn't a fantastic body. Just the MP isnt all that (while you can crop larger files, you still need it stand up to the crop) and for most people 12MP to 14MP is more than enough.

PS
At 20 or 30MP think about how much of a drag that will be on hardware and software resources. Almost feel sorry for people who run out and buy them and then cant process, and also have to run out and buy a couple terabytes of extra disk space :)

No AA filter surprises me especially with that many pixels crammed in.
 
JBen said:
Haven't read the specs, I probably will at some point. Not sure how it blows the D3x away or others.
Click to expand...

Because it has 36 MP compared to the D3X's 24MP, has video, and about $5K cheaper. The only thing the D3X has going for it is the pro build/built-in vertical grip. The thing that scares me at the moment is file size, which is rumored to be around 60MB each (RAW) :eek:
 
Xtm don't get me wrong, depending on the context my comments might be different.
More MP can be seen as a red herring. Who really needs 30mp files?
My requirements are about as high as they come. Files need to be capable of very large reproductions and they also have to pass stringent IQ at 100%.
At 17MP I have all the MP I need.

So ok, 34MP sounds great but "really" to what practical end, especially, presumably for advanced amateurs and non Pros? Meaning people who will most likely rarely,if ever print larger than 8.5 x 11.
For sure people with the need will buy this segment including Pros. But it's just as much aimed at the average advanced enthusiast who has no need for 100MB tiffs (or double that).

I bought a 1Dmkiv and I can you it wasn't because it had more MP than a mid level or high end prosumer. There's sooooo much more.

Off the top of my head the new 1Dx has 28 high precision X AF points (of 45). 51 AF points is great. Of my 45 I routinely use about .5 of them or two at a time and most of those are the high precision X points, not the horizontal or verticals. Just guessing ( I could be wrong) but that might remain a difference and only 1 reason of many that separates the two types of bodies. Things that are a lot more important than MP and video (although that's becoming more important as well,as lines get blurred)

It like my mkiv had two chips ( separate metering, AF processing etc). Whats the sensitivity in low light. Eg I'll AF in very low light, grab contrast (even when my eyes struggle to make out a buck in the pre dawn) and a 7D or 5D won't get AF and so on

Don't get me wrong, lots of people/pros see no reason to spend the extra above a 5D and they are right not to. That doesn't mean the 5D blows a 1D away or the pro bodies get cannabolized.

They cost that much more for reasons, and these types of bodies cost 3G for reasons to. Meaning if they aren't feature rich and very capable everyone would buy they line down at $1000-1500.
 
Last edited:
I don't even know how many mega-pixels my D90 has, nor do I care. I have never run into a situation where I said to myself, "damn, I need more megapixels". This is the same thing PC manufactures do, they pick certain numbers that are guaranteed to go up, but realistically, mean nothing unless put into context.

Don't get me wrong, if someone offered me a D800 for my D90, I would almost defiantly take it because the other features of the camera are better then mine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top