nikonem wrote:
Agree with wjmeyer. But I don't hold out hope for a D700s although it's the camera I've been wanting Nikon to sell... until now. Now that the new cameras have been announced I think a D700 with D3s sensor could be a step backward. A D800 with D4 sensor, that's something that interests me.
I wouldn't hold my breath for that one either. My guess is that while the D700 was probably one of the smartest moves Nikon has made recently, it did in fact undercut sales to the D3. I think this is why we saw a D3s but never saw a D700s, and likewise why we'll never see a D800s with the D4 sensor. That being said, since Canon and Nikon both have made hi res versions of their top of the line (D3x and 1Ds) in the past, I wonder if they'll now consider a low res version, and maybe we'll get a D800L (for Low) or whatever, but then again, I doubt that as well, I think any D800 that is close to the D4 in MP will compete with it too much (I'd like to be wrong though), and that includes adding an sRAW option for the D800. Could they have done that, absolutely, but Nikon may think too many people who would buy the D4 would opt for the D800 because they can shoot at 18MP and still get great high ISO images close to the D4. Basically, they want you to buy the D4 and have positioned their products far enough apart to make them very different. My guess is the D400 will probably come in around 18MP as well, but the fact it is APS-C sets it apart from the D4.
The D800 is the nature photographers dream! If I still shot that I would be super excited, but that never paid the bills Having super high resolution for those large wall prints from the beautiful Nikon WA glass, and then being able to shoot at 15MP with a 1.5x crop for closeups on birds and wildlife all in the same body... that is pretty darn cool!
I'm buying. The time lapse video feature sold me on it. Additionally, the ability to use my Zeiss lenses on a video camera is a big plus.
BUT ... I will not sell my D700. The D7000 will go, but not the D700. I see the D800/D700 combo meeting my needs for a long time. As others have said, a D4 sensor in a D700 body would have been ideal. That will eventually come, and when my D700 is worn out, I'll go with that and it will probably be the last camera I buy, I'm just getting too old for this.
slrl0ver wrote:
Without trying to sound like a broken record, I'll say it again:
If you feel the D800 should have an 18MP FX mode, then let's start an organized campaign to respectfully ask Nikon to add this feature in. Bickering about 36MP being too much or too little doesn't solve *anything*. The firmware in the camera just has to be tweaked to support pixel binning -- it's a net win for everyone! I'm in the camp that would love an 18MP RAW mode.
Is there someone willing to start a blog and take e-mail signatures?
- slrl0ver
I think there are many willing to put their name on a petition or something like that, but it must be an avenue that has influence on Nikon decisions makers, the fact that the D800 does not have any pixel binning option tells me they, for whatever reason, did NOT want that feature to be a part of the D800. What has the most impact on corporate decisions is sales, if the D800 doesn't sell as well as the D700 then that alone may influence them to do something different, but if it does sell better, then they aren't going to care unfortunately.
wjmeyer wrote:
I think there are many willing to put their name on a petition or something like that, but it must be an avenue that has influence on Nikon decisions makers, the fact that the D800 does not have any pixel binning option tells me they, for whatever reason, did NOT want that feature to be a part of the D800. What has the most impact on corporate decisions is sales, if the D800 doesn't sell as well as the D700 then that alone may influence them to do something different, but if it does sell better, then they aren't going to care unfortunately....Show more →
Hi wjmeyer,
I agree with your comment that anything done publicly has to be credible, but we have enough credible photographers here (with websites, and/or blogs) that someone could step forward and be a beacon. Canon also, for whatever reason, didn't have industry standard frame rate support for video, and enough people banded together to politely tell them, that they did something about it! *My experience is that Japanese companies tend to largely ignore direct feedback from North America unless the volume of commentary is large. It wouldn't be unlike an American company like Dell not really paying attention to what people in Japan are saying about their monitors or laptops.
*I make this observation as someone who has worked in electronics design for 15+ years.
I know that the camera has just been released and so there might be some surprises in the pipe, but I don't expect a D700x or D700S to come out with a 24MP sensor (sadly). Supporting multiple camera bodies is an expensive proposition and they've priced the D800 to be "the" solution. Unlike Canon, Nikon seems to release bodies at a slower pace but supports them for longer.
So, as THE customers of photographic equipment, the ball is our court to provide feedback.
Hi slrl0ver, I just put in a note to NikonRumors to put up a poll to ask how many would like to see an sRAW option, whether he'll do it or not is another question. But even NR is such a small chunk of the Nikon users worldwide. Does anyone from Nikon ever read the FM Forums? I used to be part of the DWF forums and Chuck Westfall (from Canon) used to post and read posts on there all the time. How do we know "where" Nikon is looking for feedback on their products?
Nikon may not read the FM forums, which is why a nice blog (entire web-facing) with links to forums such as this, and or poll threads would help get some attention. If something like that is set-up, writing a polite letter to Nikon's marketing in US & Japan giving them links will probably do the rest.
I work in consumer electronics design, and I can tell you once you get peoples' attention via these kinds of campaigns, it makes its way up quickly. You can get engineers in Nikon probably suggested this kind of thing, but the feature-set has to come from the marketing side.
I see your point, and my hope is there are enough of "us" who would like to see a smaller FF RAW file that someone will eventually do this, but whether or not the plea would actually make it to the decision makers in Nikon remains to be seen.
If the D800 is the D700 replacement, I'm keeping the D700 - no way I'm letting it go now.
BrianJarvis wrote:
Ken Also said the D7000 was the best camera Nikon ever produced. While I don't mind his website, there is some decent info on there, he is a Nikon fanboy through and through and Nikon can do no wrong. Every new product Nikon puts out is "the best they've ever made"
I'd sooner not get into a discussion re. KR, but FWIW he did completely pan the Nikon 1 system.
nikonem wrote:
I doubt D800 will match the high iso capability of the D700 or D3s. I could be wrong as technology keeps advancing in that area. But people seem to be trying to push the square D800 through a round hole. It's not a hi-iso camera. Nor is it a speed demon for sports shooters. Nikon has all the pieces in the parts bin to make it faster, give it a smaller file size and great hi-iso capability. The only question is whether they will put those parts together and sell that camera.
If the linked sample below is any indication, the high ISO performance looks to be quite acceptable.
Can't say for sure if this is better than my D700, but given that this camera has 3 times the resolution, I think Nikon's got a winner. I only hope my pre-order makes it in before my trip to Death Valley in late March.
I would be a bit cautious about that ISO 6400 chandelier. Note: f/5 at 320th of a second. That is not a low light situation. It makes high ISO look extra good when you feed it plenty of light. But use it when you usually would, in low light, and the stress and strain shows up more.
To double check, I took my 5D II and found a scene I could shoot at those settings, same ISO, f/stop, shutter. Much better result than the chandelier shot. But on the other hand, with 5D II I almost never use ISO 6400 for real shots, because it is so noisy when it counts, in the dark.
I am looking forward with real interest to see what the D800 does with genuinely marginal light. I haven't seen any samples yet that show that.
Like shooting in a candle lit church with a 70-200 f/2.8 VR II at f/2.8 and 1/40th shutter speed and ISO 6400 Did that with a D3s and was quite impressed, but yes splathrop, I would like to see something that is a bit more challenging for the sensor; however, I am still impressed with the results.
nikonem wrote:
Agree with wjmeyer. But I don't hold out hope for a D700s although it's the camera I've been wanting Nikon to sell... until now. Now that the new cameras have been announced I think a D700 with D3s sensor could be a step backward. A D800 with D4 sensor, that's something that interests me.
I'm hoping for this too. But the thing is, looking at the high iso samples of the D800, the camera doesn't do too badly at 6400. I'd use that. Theres detail, the colour is decent, some decent level of dynamic range (may be wrong). Its grainy but i'd take detail over mushy and "cleaner" anytime. If it performs close to a stop or 1 1/3 of stop to the d4 (which i read compares at 12800 to the d3s in terms of noise but holds detail better), i don't know if nikon will bother with a D4 sensor in the D800, since the AF is the same. The only diff would be 1-2 stops higher iso and a couple fps (say 2-3fps). I know 2 stops and i havent seen d4 samples side by side with a d800 or d3s/d700 but it may well be less than that. The d800 could be what the 5d mark II is to canon, something with 'balance' and higher res. And canon may well go down the nikon route and head for higher iso capability. I know though, if canon comes out with a 3D with lowlight capabilities, then nikon may be forced to stick a D4 sensor in a D800.
wjmeyer wrote:
Like shooting in a candle lit church with a 70-200 f/2.8 VR II at f/2.8 and 1/40th shutter speed and ISO 6400 Did that with a D3s and was quite impressed, but yes splathrop, I would like to see something that is a bit more challenging for the sensor; however, I am still impressed with the results.
The problem is that the higher resolution you go the higher shutter speed you will need to keep the shot sharp. More pixels means more susceptibility to crossing pixel boundaries as you shake. While you can downsize to mitigate the problem, you can still end up with a less sharp shot. Counter intuitive for some, I realise.
aFrIcanSH wrote:
And canon may well go down the nikon route and head for higher iso capability. I know though, if canon comes out with a 3D with lowlight capabilities, then nikon may be forced to stick a D4 sensor in a D800.
One can hope, but I gave up on hope with Canon coming out with any kind of 3D anytime soon. They seem to want to milk all they can out of their 1 series and are by no means going to make a body that might takes sales away from their 1, especially now that their only 1 series option is at $6800, making a 3D with the same sensor and AF system as the 1D X (exactly what Nikon did with the D3/D700) would truly cut into sales of the 1D X. I think Nikon did it to gain back some marketshare and pull some photographers away from Canon. Nikon is not (apparently) making the same mistake again. I do not see another body that will have the same sensor and AF as the D4 unfortunately, but hopefully I am wrong
Okay, I still am not liking the whole idea of how huge the files are for 36MP; however, after reading Cliff's blog some and getting the point of view from a real working professional wedding photographer, I may be starting to sway a little in favor of the D800. I still would really like to see sRAW, but the other merits of the camera are becoming more tempting, especially his comment about: Auto focus. Another area not really being highlighted much. I can tell you first hand that the autofocus has been improved... even from the D3S- which I didn't think was possible. Here, the 3D tracking maintains focus throughout the series of images. The focus point continues to move reliably allowing me to maintain focus.
I use 3D tracking a lot with my D700 and while it's not perfect it has really performed well and been, in some situations, better than my "focus and recompose" technique that I've used for so many years. Cliff claims that the D800 is really improved in this area. Then he mentions: Here, our model Rachel Johnston was photographed in Philadelphia at around 3pm in July in very harsh back light. Absolutely no fill flash or reflectors were used. The dynamic range speaks for itself. Detail in the veil, detail in the gown, and her face is well exposed. In my eyes, there is absolutely improved dynamic range with this camera. I'll be able to maintain more detail in these conditions that ever before.
I often face these lighting conditions in the harsh Colorado sun and the fact that he says no compensation was used whatsoever is very impressive, I am usually having to go back in Lightroom and adjust for the faces because they are too dark. He then says a little further: This image was shot in Aperture priority with absolutely ZERO compensation. The advantages here are obvious. Even in a challenging lighting scenario, if the camera can recognize the human face, it'll expose for that face without the need to adjust, thus, nailing exposure consistently without the need to compensate.
When you look at the images that he refers to from the above comments it is really, really impressive what this new camera can do.
Yes, I am still frustrated it had to be 36MP and the resulting enormous file sizes, but I may see a benefit in the other great features of the camera that may cause me to consider this, so now I need to figure out if the pros outweigh the cons, but I may yet be convinced.
wjmeyer wrote:
Okay, I still am not liking the whole idea of how huge the files are for 36MP
I'm not liking it either. I do think the D800 is a great camera though, just not the one I was looking forward to. And I don't think I'll be able to convince myself otherwise. The reality is that Nikon will most likely not introduce a camera with a D4 sensor that's less than half the price of the D4. At least not until the flagship has been out for a good while. Until then, there are worse things one could do than to pick up a D800 for that incredible feature set and price.
nikonem wrote:
Until then, there are worse things one could do than to pick up a D800 for that incredible feature set and price.
A very good point indeed. And the fact they kept the price at $3000 is also a big surprise, I'm sure Canon was thinking $4000 for their new 5D Mark III but this announcment may have put a damper on the greedy execs over there Not that Nikon's are any less greedy, but having seen Canon's new price increase policy for new bodies and lenses, I am thankful I decided to switch to Nikon some time ago.
Having super high resolution for those large wall prints from the beautiful Nikon WA glass, and then being able to shoot at 15MP with a 1.5x crop for closeups on birds and wildlife all in the same body... that is pretty darn cool!
Did that with a D3s and was quite impressed, but yes splathrop, I would like to see something that is a bit more challenging for the sensor; however, I am still impressed with the results.