Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nikon D800 announced
- Thread starter El Cabong
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Already ordered mine. Will go nicely with the D4 I ordered as well. Can't wait. Looks like Nikon threw down the gauntlet. Canon can't match this yet...
I didn't go with the D800, 36mp doesn't provide me any value. Good camera on first appearances - but not my thing. A D800s might be more useful with less megapixels and more speed.
But I guess they do exactly that - it's called a D4 - and it's double the price.
But I guess they do exactly that - it's called a D4 - and it's double the price.
Looks like a fantastic camera - and Nikon has leapfrogged the 5DII on most specs. Very rugged body, dual card slots... even a flash (so handy as a master controller for external units).
Given that we've had both inflation in the UK/US, and a slide in the £/$ against the ¥, the price of £2400/$3300 looks like a bargain. Pretty much the same price-point Canon hit with the 5DII three years back.
I sold my Nikon D300 and bought a Canon 5DII when that came out... but I doubt I'll be changing systems again any time soon. This looks like a fantastic camera. It'll be interesting to see if Canon can match it.
800 or 800E?
I think I'd go for the no-antialiasing filter version if it were me.
Given that we've had both inflation in the UK/US, and a slide in the £/$ against the ¥, the price of £2400/$3300 looks like a bargain. Pretty much the same price-point Canon hit with the 5DII three years back.
I sold my Nikon D300 and bought a Canon 5DII when that came out... but I doubt I'll be changing systems again any time soon. This looks like a fantastic camera. It'll be interesting to see if Canon can match it.
800 or 800E?
I think I'd go for the no-antialiasing filter version if it were me.
The Nikon rep featured in the hands-on demo on The Verge said that each RAW file weighs in at ~75 MB! :wow:
ordered.. it was actually cheaper in the local store than most of the rest of Europe and only within a couple of hundred more than in the US... interesting... 
Probably uncompressed, which most people won't (or at least shouldn't) use. Lossless compressed 14-bit image files from my 12Mpx camera are ~15MB, so triple that for files coming from a camera capturing 3 times the pixel count.
Interesting camera. I will be looking forward to the professional reviews. I don't need to be the first kid on the block with a new toy, so I won't be ordering one right away.
Interesting... Calumet just called me asking if I'd like to pre-order one - based on me buying a D300 from them 4 years ago. I've not been called by them before; looks like they know they're onto a good thing!
The D800 is definitely a smaller, lighter D3x more so than a D4. It's a body type that will serve studio and wedding/fashion photogs in the field more so than the action shooter that needs faster speeds.
I agree, D800s for the sports shooter would be welcomed. Something to compliment the D4.
The D4 is the sports shooters camera. Luckily it happens to be able to shoot portraits, landscapes as well. Please tell me one camera that can shoot 36 megapixel RAWs at 11 frames a second. Not possible. The D4, in my opinion is fine for just about everything else and nothing can match its low light functionality.
I don't get your point.
What I was saying is just that . . . the D4 is a action camera. The D800 is not. The D800 was built more so to compliment the D3x, a high resolution body that will see more action in portraiture, landscapes, fashion, wedding, and so forth photography.
There may be space for a D800s that is the smaller/cheaper D4, but neither Nikon nor Canon have made body style like that in their lineup. Although, there was talk of Canon moving the 1.3x cropped sensor into their lower end and ditching the 1.6x sensor.
I doubt Nikon will have a 16MP D800s that does 8-9fps at $3000 that compliments the D4. Too much fabrication space would be taken away from the D800, D4 and D3x and the D300/D400 may better fill that gap.
Yeah, that happens to me on the regular. Either because of how I write it or how someone reads it.
I was hoping for something with more superior low-light performance, rather than more FPS...granted, I'm sure it's much better than what I'm using, but yes...I wanted better high ISO performance instead of more megapixels. A D800s with a lower MP count would probably suit me well.
Still, while it is more expensive than I was hoping for, I'll probably bite eventually. At first, I thought I would not, but than I remembered that it's also pretty decent value for money as a second video camera. And since the affordable Scarlet with Nikon lens mount isn't happening, this looks like the closest thing to it I'll ever find.
Still, while it is more expensive than I was hoping for, I'll probably bite eventually. At first, I thought I would not, but than I remembered that it's also pretty decent value for money as a second video camera. And since the affordable Scarlet with Nikon lens mount isn't happening, this looks like the closest thing to it I'll ever find.
Yes, it's slower.
Judging by early indications, low light performance is probably "pretty darn close" to the D700, likely substantially better if you factor in downsizing to 12MP.
This is not an event camera, folks. Stop wishing that it was. You want to play with the big boys? Buy a used D3s or D4 and machine gun away. Different tools for different jobs.
Judging by early indications, low light performance is probably "pretty darn close" to the D700, likely substantially better if you factor in downsizing to 12MP.
This is not an event camera, folks. Stop wishing that it was. You want to play with the big boys? Buy a used D3s or D4 and machine gun away. Different tools for different jobs.
The point is not that the D700/D800 are cheaper. The point is that they are smaller when you need it.
True, but you won't be able to get 36MP at 8fps. Downsizing to 12mp and getting 6 is a nice trade-off. Needing more than 6fps means that a shooter needs to get their hands on a larger body, or a smaller sensor.
Having a larger body for more fps bursts reminds me a lot of the old motor grip days. The F3HP was HEAVY with it's grip attached.
But you don't necessarily need a larger body for more fps.
The D700 does 5 fps in full frame without grip, while the D800 does 4 with its grip.
The D800 also has to process at least three times the amount of data through its processing unit. in the small body etc.
The thing with the amount of data is that you are processing an insane amount of data through the same pipeline as the D4. The d4 has a larger body and can do natively in full size RAW 9fps. the d800 is rated at 4 fps. Consider that the D800 has more than double the resolution of the D4.. the normal scaling of numbers actually match.
The fact that in DX mode, the fps on the 800 are not increasing much just shows why there is also a price difference between the d800 and the d4.
Nikon, just like Canon have their biggest profit margin on the big ticket DSLRs, nothing new. I still think that the D800 for what you get ,on paper as we don't have real world review yet, is a VERY good value.
I am sure the D4 guts can be fitted in the size of a D800, the problem is the resolution of the latter.
I don't want a fast D800. I want a small D4.
Understanding the "small D4" should be 6 fps without grip, 9 fps with it.