D800 vs. D800E- is the difference worth the extra?

Cagey75 said:
Phil, a few have said it now, and not just said but seemed to strongly state, that the D800 is only good to ISO 400-800, and that is so misleading it's not even funny.
Click to expand...
From what I've read, the post largely in question stated it would give excellent results below iso400.

That doesn't mean it's not great above it but by the looks of it, that statement touched a nerve with some people, strangely.
 
Lol, touched a nerve ... aye ...

I don't mind what others do with their cameras, but it's mildly irritating, let's say, to see people state stuff like that. It 'could' potentially put people off buying a wonderful piece of gear.
 
Phil, sk66, pmac, thanks for your rational approach and for adding some facts.

To all those who think I'm bashing the D800, please read my postings soberly. And apologies to the thread starter if I gave information beyond what he actually asked for.

Cagey, I was trying to give correct information, and I think I did, without adding any comments to it. If what I said puts people off of the D800 because they think I said it's a bad camera, then I'm sorry but it's their own fault, because I didn't say anything bad about the D800 at all.

To say it loud and clear, it's a great camera, IMHO the best of them all for the purposes it was built for, as long as you use it within the parameters where it performs best. If you go outside those parameters, another camera may catch up - that's just a fact. But the D800 still remains a very good camera (technically - how good the images are depends on you and me more than on the camera anway).

As for lenses - I use the Sigma 35mm F1.4, and a Nikon 85mm F1.8 G. I have other lenses in the cupboard, but I hardly use them.
 
Cagey75 said:
I still don't get why anyone compares the D800 to the D4 - sure let's compare the D800 to a D200! about the same priced difference :p

Phil, a few have said it now, and not just said but seemed to strongly state, that the D800 is only good to ISO 400-800, and that is so misleading it's not even funny.
Click to expand...
You are obviously misunderstanding me.
I'm not only comparing the D800 to the D4, but also the D3/D3s/D700/D7000.

The OP asked if the D800 or D800E was a better upgrade. Seeing that he already owns a D3, I question the upgrade to either. Same for the other poster who owns a D700 already.
I don't believe anyone is "bashing" the D800... I'm not. But if I were to have to choose one Nikon camera today, it wouldn't be the D800/E...I would buy a used D3s. Or if money were tighter, a D3/D700.
 
Last edited:
I agree with whats being said around using good glass, personally the Sigma 35mm f1.4 is my main lens with a Nikon 50mm f1.8G also, I've also used the Nikon 85mm f1.8D which I was really impressed with.

Also worth saying though I use the Nikon 24mm f2.8D as my wide angle and find it to be excellent if not as sharp as the Sigma or 50mm... certainly not any worse than it was on my D600.
 
"Good lenses" for use w/ the D800 are ones that achieve thier maximum sharpness at f/5.6 or wider. Then, when used at f/5.6 or wider you can actually record the maximum MTF/lens resolution. If the lens has higher resolution than the sensor then you're limited to the sensor resolution. If the sensor has higher resoltuion than the lens (more typical) then you are limited to the lens' max resolution and you can stop down to the point where they "match" w/o any IQ loss.

Above f/5.6 the maximum resolution is limited by the lens (aperture) regardless.

FWIW, as a "walkaround setup" I'll use my 28-300 on the D800. That's certainly not using the camera to it's potential...but it can be more than adequate.
And I'll often stop down beyond f/5.6 because the lens IQ or DOF requirement is more important.
 
Last edited:
Phil Young said:
That's fair enough Keith - totally get the irritation, I'd feel the same is somebody said don't use the D7000 above iso200...but people should remember that fact that, actually nobody said don't use it above xxxiso.
Click to expand...


Saying it's best up to 200-400 is not far off saying it's not very good beyond that IMO. No matter to me, I've used it at all ranges without fuss.

My old D200 ... now, there's a camera that really needs to stick to 400 or below. But that's how old now?
 
Cagey75 said:
Saying it's best up to 200-400 is not far off saying it's not very good beyond that IMO. No matter to me, I've used it at all ranges without fuss.

My old D200 ... now, there's a camera that really needs to stick to 400 or below. But that's how old now?
Click to expand...
Ok...here's an example of where I would understand the post...

Couple of weeks back, took a shot of a building at iso100 (D7000), it was exposed well, as was the cloudy sky.
Turned iso to 200 to get a little more DOF, sky blew out (although sharpness and noise levels were great and non-existent).
 
Cagey75 said:
Saying it's best up to 200-400 is not far off saying it's not very good beyond that IMO. No matter to me, I've used it at all ranges without fuss.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between using what you have, and deciding what to buy. I'll use the D800 up to ISO 1600 w/o concern (unless in DX mode or heavily cropping). I'll use whatever I have to if the image is critical (an image is almost never "critical" for me), but if I have another body with me I'll switch cameras first.
In fact, most of the time I choose to use a different body because that suits the situation/subject/goal better. And if I were choosing which camera to buy as my only body, it would not be a D800.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top