Nikon D810

Mod edit: removed quote


You mean I'm argumentative? I'm sure they know that.

Why did I post that? Dunno... maybe because some bloke barges into an 8 page old thread, accuses everyone proceeding him of talking rubbish, then starts hurling insults because I pointed out that his argument may not be as robust as he thought it was. That and I'm a little bored today.


Ozei said:
I don't think ACR 8.6 final will be any better than using NX-D v1.0.0 - just one less step to get from NEF to Photoshop.
Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking. NX-D doesn't seem that bad - I was playing with it al morning. It's no Lightroom, but it does a good job and it's really easy to use once you get used to it, and it's free. I'd be tempted to use it until LR get's an update.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pookeyhead said:
You mean I'm argumentative? I'm sure they know that.

Why did I post that? Dunno... maybe because some bloke barges into an 8 page old thread, accuses everyone proceeding him of talking rubbish, then starts hurling insults because I pointed out that his argument may not be as robust as he thought it was. That and I'm a little bored today.
Click to expand...
Summer holidays eh, and who says we pay teachers too much.
 
Last edited:
Gary Coyle said:
How very grown up of you.
Click to expand...

Gary... if the guy hadn't instantly retaliated with a whole suite of insults, I'd have just shrugged and carried on reading my book. I'm not saying two wrongs make a right, and I'm well aware that I'm not exactly being a beacon of adult behaviour, but the guy was pretty full on in the insult department from the get go, and yes, I found needling him quite satisfying. So sue me or something.
 
ISO rating of 2853 for the D810 is pretty good, considering the D4s is 3074. Interestingly the SNR at 6400 for the D810 is almost identical to the D3S, dynamic range suffers a little (half a stop), so happy days really.
 
psenior1 said:
ISO rating of 2853 for the D810 is pretty good, considering the D4s is 3074. Interestingly the SNR at 6400 for the D810 is almost identical to the D3S, dynamic range suffers a little (half a stop), so happy days really.
Click to expand...

I think we've reached a point where pretty much any high end camera can achieve pretty much the same results now. Differences are minimal between the D3S, D4 and D8xx and D6xx in reality.. even in tests actually. Nikon's pre-launch blurb just got everyone excited. We should know better I suppose.

Gary Coyle said:
Summer holidays eh, and who says we pay teachers too much.
Click to expand...


Aren't you just escalating an argument now by that edit?.. pretty much like you accused me of? :)
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
I think we've reached a point where pretty much any high end camera can achieve pretty much the same results now. Differences are minimal between the D3S, D4 and D8xx and D6xx in reality.. even in tests actually. Nikon's pre-launch blurb just got everyone excited. We should know better I suppose.
Click to expand...

I agree with this... I think they've pretty well maxed out the CMOS sensor technology and we're not likely to see much in the way of significant gains until there is a significant technology shift. Most of the "improvements" are in the processing... much of which doesn't affect the raw file; and what does affect the raw file can pretty well be duplicated in post.
 
sk66 said:
I agree with this... I think they've pretty well maxed out the CMOS sensor technology and we're not likely to see much in the way of significant gains until there is a significant technology shift. Most of the "improvements" are in the processing... much of which doesn't affect the raw file; and what does affect the raw file can pretty well be duplicated in post.
Click to expand...

Sony are pushing the ISO limits with the A7S, by dropping the mp count to 12, that sensor in a D810/800 body would be awesome.
 
Wilky said:
Sorry but again in real world photography shooting you are again wrong there is a big difference in iso capabilities between the D800E and D810 I know this as I shoot both. How do you base your above assumption? by online reports or actual experience with the two cameras curious as to your response...
Wilky
Click to expand...
The only way to accurately compare low light/high ISO performance is to use a constant SS/Aperture and vary the lighting level (and if you want to get really picky, swap the same lens between the bodies). Anything else is going to be misleading...

Although, if the "different type" of comparison test is controlled then the results should be usable/valid w/in context... i.e. if you want to compare the benefits of using higher ISO in order to use higher SS's in a constant lighting situation.
 
psenior1 said:
Sony are pushing the ISO limits with the A7S, by dropping the mp count to 12, that sensor in a D810/800 body would be awesome.
Click to expand...
Yep, but it's really the pixel count/size that's doing it. And I honestly think they're just doing a better job of filtering the chroma noise when generating the raw file (compared to something like a D3s).
 
absolutely unbelievable.

some of you guys need to get off your self proclaimed podiums and start behaving like adults.
 
Back onto topic...

If anyone is interested this is DXO Comparisons of the three D8xx Models...

Nikon-D810-DxOMark-test-score.png
 
The thing is I have a web site full of 100,000 plus images good,bad,and average yet I posted my thoughts on the d810 and some bloke who has no website shoots and nit picks, oh well off I go again into the ether for an other year unbelievable how real life shooting experience is poo hoo'ed by some desk wally.

Wilky
 
So, we've established that there's not a lot to chose between all three - thanks for posting that Joe.

When my D800 is good it's very good but to make it more suitable for wildlife I'll take the extra fps (25% increase, not to be sneezed at) and an improvement to the focus.

Will there be any introductory quality control issues? Only time will tell - but I'll sit it out for a while yet as previous releases haven't gone as well as they could have!

cheers, cw
 
Wilky said:
The thing is I have a web site full of 100,000 plus images good,bad,and average yet I posted my thoughts on the d810 and some bloke who has no website shoots and nit picks, oh well off I go again into the ether for an other year unbelievable how real life shooting experience is poo hoo'ed by some desk wally.

Wilky
Click to expand...
As input from an impartial person that's been watching these last few pages for the entertainment value:

That 'some bloke' has some exceptional images and clearly has a wealth of knowledge photography. If he is perceived as argumentative it's because he is usually right and wants to make his point.

It only becomes annoying when you can't discuss an opinion without having to insult or get silly about it.
 
Phil Young said:
As input from an impartial person that's been watching these last few pages for the entertainment value:
.
Click to expand...
And from a mods point of view, I think you lot would do well to quit the personal insults,
there have been far too many in this thread.
So please either behave like adults, or stay out of the thread.
 
Joeturner11 said:
Back onto topic...

If anyone is interested this is DXO Comparisons of the three D8xx Models...

Nikon-D810-DxOMark-test-score.png
Click to expand...


Yep.. all pretty much exactly the same.

There's only one real reason to upgrade left... if you exclude the the fact that you just want to of course, and that would be the improved video features. As others have said though, I do wonder why anyone seriously into video as much as still image making would still be clinging onto Nikon instead of getting a 5D MkIII or even a dedicated video system.

Nikon, Canon.. whoever... they just want you little sheep to keep giving them money on a regular basis, and this is how they do it.

Look into my eyes..... you want a Nikon D810.... it's significantly better than everything else we've made.... in fact... every other Nikon we've made is poo..... Buy a Nikon D810 or your friends and peers will think you are not professional, as you need to best to be a good photographer (and a website apparently)... Consume.. buy... make us... er, I mean your lives richer.
 
Last edited:
Well you're nearly right David, but there are reasons other than improved video features.
My D800 has one or two weaknesses that Nikon have hopefully addressed.
As I said earlier I'll take the extra frame - 25% increase, useful but it's not a deal breaker.
However, having an improved autofocus that is more reliable in the field is a deal breaker.
I appreciate that the D800/810 aren't aimed at wildlife togs - but the D4/s isn't perfect either when you take into account the cost, the card mix etc.
Also, once the mega-pixel cat is out of the bag and you become used to the versatility that that sort of resolution gives, then 16 ain't enough (for me at any rate).

So, should the D810 come without any nasty surprises I'll upgrade - but I'll wait a wee while yet.
And I'll never part with my D3x which is utterly reliable and I bought because it is the last great DSLR made without video (obviously IMHO!!).

cheers, cw
 
I can't comment on the AF thing, as I've never had it cause any issues. I don't shoot wildlife though.

As for nasties... I'm sure someone will moan and start blogging how crap it is as soon as they see a speck of dust on the sensor :)

If my camera was stolen tomorrow, I'd buy a D810 without hesitation. In common with most people though, I've not noticed an AF problem of any kind, and I've never moved the shooting mode from "S" since I bought it. I wonder whether I'm in a minority or not there?
 
The AF on my D3x is far more reliable - but my D800 is better in low light which is why I bought it.......................
Perhaps Nikon should adopt a modular approach -
"Dear Sir
I'd like to order a pro body with a 24mp FX sensor that shoots at 8fps and is great in low light"

but then the upgrade train might grind to a shuddering halt!

And I appreciate that sensors are so easy to clean yourself that it's no longer an issue.
But the D600 owners were in my opinion treated very shoddily by Nikon. I know you don't agree with that but hey, that's what keeps this place interesting!

cheers, cw
 
Unfortunately at present LR5 doesn't recognize the D810 raw files format, as I've just discovered. Anybody know how long it takes Adobe to incorporate new camera formats?
Suppose I'll have to use ViewNX2?
 
BrynBoru said:
Unfortunately at present LR5 doesn't recognize the D810 raw files format, as I've just discovered. Anybody know how long it takes Adobe to incorporate new camera formats?
Suppose I'll have to use ViewNX2?
Click to expand...

LR5.5 only came out on 18th June.
 
I haven't got my hands on a D810 yet but if I have understood the specifications then the improved AF, combined with the new shutter and processor makes this suitable for sports and wildlife photography in addition to established landscape and studio work. The increased buffer performance is also another factor. My initial opinion is that this camera is a good all-rounder. That's been the missing link in the Nikon FF for some time.
 
If you're in the market for a 35mm DSLR I can't see why you wouldn't want a D810. However because it's not got a APSC sensor and isn't badged D400 Nikon are very bad people for bringing this out...that's the feeling I'm getting here?
 
BrynBoru said:
Unfortunately at present LR5 doesn't recognize the D810 raw files format, as I've just discovered. Anybody know how long it takes Adobe to incorporate new camera formats?
Suppose I'll have to use ViewNX2?
Click to expand...


You can also download Nikon Capture NX-D for free as a stop gap.
 
ST4 said:
If you're in the market for a 35mm DSLR I can't see why you wouldn't want a D810. However because it's not got a APSC sensor and isn't badged D400 Nikon are very bad people for bringing this out...that's the feeling I'm getting here?
Click to expand...


Just humour him everyone....

[Sybil Fawllty] Oh I KNOW.... yeeeesss. I KNOW... I KNOW.... Mmm... I know. I KNOW [/Sybil Fawlty]
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Times I've used the video function on the D800E - hmmm, 3 that I can remember, and don't think I've even looked at those clips for about 6 months.

Times I've had issues with the AF: 0 - even in very dim lighting

Times I've wished I had more fps: 0

I should just forget about it really, and be happy with what I have.

I love that DXO just had to give it that 1 mark higher :D I predicted as much. They were hardly going to have it exactly the same, there'd be riots! - I know, I know, it probably is worth the one mark higher ... it's just funny.

Also, seems like the E is tops for ISO performance, so much for all that about the 810 being a stop better.
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
If you're in the market for a 35mm DSLR I can't see why you wouldn't want a D810. However because it's not got a APSC sensor and isn't badged D400 Nikon are very bad people for bringing this out...that's the feeling I'm getting here?
Click to expand...

I would say the reason is that for £800 more than a D800 you don't get much more for your money aside from a newer badge! Plus, many people do buy 2nd hand so that difference would be more like £1350-1400 as there are obviously no 2nd hand 810s around.

I am contemplating a new (to me camera). Tempted by another D700 as very happy with current one, although if D800 values drop a bit more so they are closer to £1k then that will be tempting.
 
Having a breather while shooting my second wedding with the D810, the D3s's days are numbered, love this camera. Battery life is crap though, 18% remaining after 404 shots, have tweaked some of the monitor off delay settings, hopefully that will help a little.
 
cambsno said:
I would say the reason is that for £800 more than a D800 you don't get much more for your money aside from a newer badge! Plus, many people do buy 2nd hand so that difference would be more like £1350-1400 as there are obviously no 2nd hand 810s around.

I am contemplating a new (to me camera). Tempted by another D700 as very happy with current one, although if D800 values drop a bit more so they are closer to £1k then that will be tempting.
Click to expand...

Great, so if you want a D800 they are cheaper too. Tech moves on quickly, so we will always see minor improvements often to gear/gadgets/cars even. The newest when its new out, always costs a bit. Some are willing to pay it. Some will leave it a bit.

Nows a great time to buy a D800 or D800E if you don't want/can't make the jump to D810. Loads of low count 800's/800's will appear. Bargain time. Remember, your D800/D800e isn't any less capable just because this came out, they are still great
 
My D800 is noticeably slower and less consistent than my D4 is in AF... same lens, same settings, same situation. Enough so that I sent it back to Nikon for adjustment/calibration (no real improvement that I can tell). I have no idea why though, the specs say they should be equal. If the D810 is significantly improved in that aspect I would consider that pretty important (unless you shoot mostly slow/stationary stuff).

I still don't think I would choose it for sports/wildlife though... you really have to do things "right" to see any significant advantage from those 36MP's and it is very seldom I ever have need for that big of an image.
 
sk66 said:
My D800 is noticeably slower and less consistent than my D4 is in AF... same lens, same settings, same situation. Enough so that I sent it back to Nikon for adjustment/calibration (no real improvement that I can tell). I have no idea why though, the specs say they should be equal. If the D810 is significantly improved in that aspect I would consider that pretty important (unless you shoot mostly slow/stationary stuff).

I still don't think I would choose it for sports/wildlife though... you really have to do things "right" to see any significant advantage from those 36MP's and it is very seldom I ever have need for that big of an image.
Click to expand...

IIRC correctly there comments around the D700 and D3 saying similar -the AF should be the same but in reality aren't. The AF in the D810 is certainly better than the D3s, can't say how it compares to D4s though. One thing I'm very glad to see the back of is the focus inaccuracies caused by tungsten backlight.
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
My D800 is noticeably slower and less consistent than my D4 is in AF... same lens, same settings, same situation. Enough so that I sent it back to Nikon for adjustment/calibration (no real improvement that I can tell). I have no idea why though, the specs say they should be equal. If the D810 is significantly improved in that aspect I would consider that pretty important (unless you shoot mostly slow/stationary stuff).

I still don't think I would choose it for sports/wildlife though... you really have to do things "right" to see any significant advantage from those 36MP's and it is very seldom I ever have need for that big of an image.
Click to expand...

Has Nikon or anyone explained specifically why they aren't the same when they have the same specs?
 
Laudrup said:
Has Nikon or anyone explained specifically why they aren't the same when they have the same specs?
Click to expand...
I haven't heard of anything...my best guess would be something like "RAM." Like running the same computer with 2GB vs 8GB... I have no idea if the buffer RAM is what is used for other functions, but the differences in buffer sizes/load would explain it if it is.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top