I have been debating (probably paralysis from analysis now) on a second body for my D3 and a friend as offer a D800 in mint condition (300 clicks) for $2500 (just never used it). I shoot sports / events and mainly in poor lighting conditions (gyms / stadiums at night) - so the high ISO performing and focusing system on the D800 is reason for the consideration. Read a lot of varying opinions D800 is not a "sports" camera because of file size and low frame rate (some good debate on frame rates out there ).
Plus - the D600 lurks out there and I have one kit ready to pick up for $400 bucks less.
Thoughts from D800 users? more than I need? investment? ... too many choices of the aging mind.
i'm debating the same thing. I shoot a mixture of things though, and would primarily be using it for my studio work or for my specialty lens' (tiltshift/fisheye) at events.
Thanks everyone for the responses. I would still use the D3 as primary for action and the second body for some action but mainly for various other off-action / atmosphere images.
I sold my D3 to purchase a D800. I received one on the first batch to hit the USA, maybe I got lucky but the camera has been perfect in every way.
I don't do a lot of fast action shooting so the frame rate hasn't bothered me.
The only thing I miss about the D3 is the size even though I have small hands the D3 just seamed to fit better, plus the extra controls.
I think having each would be nice and if I could have afforded to have both cameras I would have kept the D3.
I wish they made a high rez D4 but the it would be above my means.
If the two different size bodies don't give you problems going from one to the other.
I think you will really like the D800.
Dennis
While capable of capturing faster action, I would have to say that the D800 leans more towards the slower paced side of photography. I like to think of it a lot like shooting with a medium format camera... there is a process into making the image with this camera.
lxdesign wrote:
While capable of capturing faster action, I would have to say that the D800 leans more towards the slower paced side of photography. I like to think of it a lot like shooting with a medium format camera... there is a process into making the image with this camera.
So just cause the D800 has higher resolution and is slower than the D3, you all of a sudden CARE about the image you're making a little more? Like you spend more time composing, lighting, or dialing in a scene? It's not sheet film for pete's sake....lol
sportsdadof3 wrote:
I have been debating (probably paralysis from analysis now) on a second body for my D3 and a friend as offer a D800 in mint condition (300 clicks) for $2500 (just never used it). I shoot sports / events and mainly in poor lighting conditions (gyms / stadiums at night) - so the high ISO performing and focusing system on the D800 is reason for the consideration. Read a lot of varying opinions D800 is not a "sports" camera because of file size and low frame rate (some good debate on frame rates out there ).
Plus - the D600 lurks out there and I have one kit ready to pick up for $400 bucks less.
Thoughts from D800 users? more than I need? investment? ... too many choices of the aging mind.
I'd probably opt for either the D3s or D4 if fps and high ISO performance are important. However, in the hands of a very capable photographer, I suppose the D800 can be used a sports camera to a certain extent.
I am a sports photographer, I just picked up a D800 but its not really a sports camera to me, I shoot strobed basketball with it and everything non sports. It is amazing for strobed basketball but the speedos in the catwalk are the limiting factor in terms of frame rate, not the camera. That said I used it as a remote for NFL yesterday and the framerate was enough to get the image I needed. From my basketball work I can say the AF is up to snuff for sure, framerate will be up to you in terms of acceptable or not tho.
Consider why you want a second body. If it is fundamentally to act as a familiar backup in case of camera failure or loss then it should be just like the primary body, only working. If it is to provide an alternative capability then the D800 is quite attractive - unless you still only want to shoot low-res jpegs for someone else to rummage through as fast as possible and as soon as possible while you are still shooting.
The D800 loses its appeal if you don't shoot raw and especially if you don't want large files to deal with.
If you want to use anything but the centre AF sensors (e.g. the centre sensor with AF expansion enabled, or just the outer AF sensors) then be sure that the D800 you buy has had a recent fix for the focus issues. The early fixes don't count because Nikon didn't have the right solution then.
).