D810 Owners thread anything to do with the D810

Tried a mates D810 today with the 24-70. I really thought my DSLR days were over, but shooting woodland with it today, reminded me how much I really like using one.

The results are a bit mixed as it was a bit too bright and sunny. But the experience of going back to a DSLR is intriguing.

Got me thinking though, whether to look for a nice used one and trade in my Fuji X-H1. :oops: :$
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
wibbly said:
Tried a mates D810 today with the 24-70. I really thought my DSLR days were over, but shooting woodland with it today, reminded me how much I really like using one.

The results are a bit mixed as it was a bit too bright and sunny. But the experience of going back to a DSLR is intriguing.

Got me thinking though, whether to look for a nice used one and trade in my Fuji X-H1. :oops: :$
Click to expand...

I have one for sale in the classifieds! you will love it!
 
So, are many D810 users still out there using their kit.

Pondering the option of picking one up, mainly to shoot a bit of woodland and landscape with it.

I was thinking of using one with a 24-120 f4 lens. Any thoughts on that combination, weight isn’t a major issue but coming from a Fuji there would obviously be a bit of a consideration and that combination would suit 95% of how I shoot.
 
wibbly said:
So, are many D810 users still out there using their kit.

Pondering the option of picking one up, mainly to shoot a bit of woodland and landscape with it.

I was thinking of using one with a 24-120 f4 lens. Any thoughts on that combination, weight isn’t a major issue but coming from a Fuji there would obviously be a bit of a consideration and that combination would suit 95% of how I shoot.
Click to expand...
I've got one and absolutely love using it. Did consider the 24-120mm f/4 lens having read some very positive reviews but in the end decided to stick with my approach of using one lens on camera with an alternative in the bag. I don't find the weight an issue but I tend not to let the camera dangle from my neck all day. The grip is 'just right' for my big hands. No balance issues when using a 16-35mm f/4 or Sigma Art 85mm f/1.4. Runs happily for a couple of days on a single battery and for an eternity when using manual focus lenses.

I did think about part-exchanging it for a D850 but I really can't see the justification at the moment. It's a very capable bit of kit.
 
wibbly said:
So, are many D810 users still out there using their kit.

Pondering the option of picking one up, mainly to shoot a bit of woodland and landscape with it.

I was thinking of using one with a 24-120 f4 lens. Any thoughts on that combination, weight isn’t a major issue but coming from a Fuji there would obviously be a bit of a consideration and that combination would suit 95% of how I shoot.
Click to expand...

My 24-140 is on my D810 90% of the time. Such a useful focal range, and while it’s not the fastest lens in terms of aperture, the VR works well and image quality is very good. It is a big combination though compared to a Fuji set up - I also use an X-T2 and a couple of zooms which I use when I don’t want to be lugging the Nikon round all day.
 
I've recently sold my D810 (and still regretting it) in favour of a D850 and the 24-120 was always attached to it when my 150-600 (for birds) wasn't. A great lens and amazingly sharp for what was supposed to be just a 'kit lens'. They were a great combination and I would highly recommend them both. (y)
 
Sky said:
I've recently sold my D810 (and still regretting it) in favour of a D850 and the 24-120 was always attached to it when my 150-600 (for birds) wasn't. A great lens and amazingly sharp for what was supposed to be just a 'kit lens'. They were a great combination and I would highly recommend them both. (y)
Click to expand...

Are you regretting selling the D810 or regretting buying the D850? Every now and again I toy with the idea of selling my D810 and D4 and getting a D850 but I’ve never got round to it. Is it worth it?
 
viewfromthenorth said:
Are you regretting selling the D810 or regretting buying the D850? Every now and again I toy with the idea of selling my D810 and D4 and getting a D850 but I’ve never got round to it. Is it worth it?
Click to expand...

Selling the D810. I was going to keep it as a back up, but couldn't justify it as I've hardly done anything in the last year with my cameras due to Covid and my vulnerability issues. This would have meant it may have sat unused for another year or so just depreciating in value and I already have too many cameras that's happened to already.

In the end I figured, I'd just do as much as I can with the D850 (which is absolutely brilliant BTW) in the studio and maybe get another one (if I need it) when the prices drop a little more.
 
I still have/use my Nikon D810 but not so much now I am more into videography
 
I only recently bought one. I should have got the D850 for the AF, but I decided to stick to my budget as I didn't want gear that I'd worry too much about should something happen to it especially when doing the Munro's.

So far very happy and the AF has been fine. I've always liked Nikon's colour science and output. Just took a posed family photo yesterday at ISO 64 and the quality really is excellent.
 
adrianday said:
I've got one and absolutely love using it. Did consider the 24-120mm f/4 lens having read some very positive reviews but in the end decided to stick with my approach of using one lens on camera with an alternative in the bag. I don't find the weight an issue but I tend not to let the camera dangle from my neck all day. The grip is 'just right' for my big hands. No balance issues when using a 16-35mm f/4 or Sigma Art 85mm f/1.4. Runs happily for a couple of days on a single battery and for an eternity when using manual focus lenses.

I did think about part-exchanging it for a D850 but I really can't see the justification at the moment. It's a very capable bit of kit.
Click to expand...

I appreciate this is from a few years ago but I can't find much on here about this lens (Nikon F mount). Could I ask how did you find the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 with the D810?
 
gman said:
I appreciate this is from a few years ago but I can't find much on here about this lens (Nikon F mount). Could I ask how did you find the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 with the D810?
Click to expand...
It's a crackingly good lens. It's heavy but I tend to use it mainly on a tripod. Still can't justify 'upgrading' to a D850. Have shot it handheld and subsequently cropped photos from the 85mm/D810 and printed them at 20"x30" with no problems whatsoever. Since writing that post, I've settled upon a primary choice of Nikkor 16-35mm f/4, Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8, Voigtländer 40mm f/2, Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, Voigtländer 58mm f/1.4 and Sigma 85mm f/1.4. Two lenses and one body pick and mix to suit the expected occasion.
 
Last edited:
adrianday said:
It's a crackingly good lens. It's heavy but I tend to use it mainly on a tripod. Still can't justify 'upgrading' to a D850. Have shot it handheld and subsequently cropped photos from the 85mm/D810 and printed them at 20"x30" with no problems whatsoever. Since writing that post, I've settled upon a primary choice of Nikkor 16-35mm f/4, Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8, Voigtländer 40mm f/2, Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, Voigtländer 58mm f/1.4 and Sigma 85mm f/1.4. Two lenses and one body pick and mix to suit the expected occasion.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, it's really tempting and I've been looking up various reviews today. The only issue that seems to keep cropping up in the reviews is the autofocus being a little inaccurate, something like 20%+ missed focus? I think one user review said that they had to buy the usb dock as well to calibrate the focus and had to adjust to the max level 20.

I understand that there's a lot of glass to move and for most parts the AF shouldn't be a deal breaker, but I wonder if it will be up to the task of capturing my dog?

Another point regarding autofocus that to be fair I only saw in one review, was an editor's note where they said the autofocus actually gets worse over time and needs to be recalibrated accordingly with the usb dock? Apparently Sigma will also recalibrate it for free if still under warranty.

Have you heard or experienced any of this? I wonder if it could be related to early copies.
 
gman said:
Thanks for that, it's really tempting and I've been looking up various reviews today. The only issue that seems to keep cropping up in the reviews is the autofocus being a little inaccurate, something like 20%+ missed focus? I think one user review said that they had to buy the usb dock as well to calibrate the focus and had to adjust to the max level 20.

I understand that there's a lot of glass to move and for most parts the AF shouldn't be a deal breaker, but I wonder if it will be up to the task of capturing my dog?

Another point regarding autofocus that to be fair I only saw in one review, was an editor's note where they said the autofocus actually gets worse over time and needs to be recalibrated accordingly with the usb dock? Apparently Sigma will also recalibrate it for free if still under warranty.

Have you heard or experienced any of this? I wonder if it could be related to early copies.
Click to expand...
It might be that I’m lucky but one thing I’ve learned with this lens is that the depth of field at short distance is very small. The lack of VR on an F-mount is something I suspect makes people feel that this lens in somehow inferior. I use back button focusing and, when not using a tripod, at maximum aperture, you need to perfect your breathing. It’s not a sports lens. It’s a high quality piece of glass on par with an expensive Zeiss Otus.

Learning how to control my breathing (and heart rate) is something I continue to attempt to improve.
 
adrianday said:
It might be that I’m lucky but one thing I’ve learned with this lens is that the depth of field at short distance is very small. The lack of VR on an F-mount is something I suspect makes people feel that this lens in somehow inferior. I use back button focusing and, when not using a tripod, at maximum aperture, you need to perfect your breathing. It’s not a sports lens. It’s a high quality piece of glass on par with an expensive Zeiss Otus.

Learning how to control my breathing (and heart rate) is something I continue to attempt to improve.
Click to expand...

Cheers, that's some great information for me to mull over. I was pondering the possibly of keeping the 70-200mm and getting the Sigma as well, but then I'm doubling up on focal ranges. I need to have a good think about this. Thanks for the quick feedback. (y)
 
On my D810 is usually a TamronSP 24-70mm f2.8 Di VC USD G2 lens is on it. I may be lucky but sharp enough for my needs

taken at approx 7mtr+ (23ft ) away unedited. Jpeg normal on the D810 (Hoya UV fiter on lens for protection mainly)

24 mm
_DSC7323a.jpg


70mm

_DSC7321a.jpg
Hand held the VC (vibration compensation) is rock steady, even in my hands
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
On my D810 is usually a TamronSP 24-70mm f2.8 Di VC USD G2 lens is on it. I may be lucky but sharp enough for my needs

taken at approx 7mtr+ (23ft ) away unedited. Jpeg normal on the D810 (Hoya UV fiter on lens for protection mainly)

24 mm
View attachment 394366


70mm

View attachment 394367
Hand held the VC (vibration compensation) is rock steady, even in my hands
Click to expand...

It certainly seems to handle distortion very well! I forgot all about Tamron, will need to have a look at their range.
 
Gman
At the time of looking for another 24-70mm lens I as usual did quite a bit of research, not just on sharpness etc that can as you know be worked on in PP. I was well impressed with how well that lens did with camera shake compared to other makes. I had an older Nikon version beforehand so had something to use as a comparison.
So after several days of checking and cross checking and watching youtube videos on 24-70mm lenses I bought that Tamron 24-70 version I mentioned. Not only did it meet my expectation , but even exceeded it and I don't have the steadiest of hands.
 
Last edited:
This is one of the reasons why I want need :D1.4, I took a quick test shot of my haughty Beagle with the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II and wanted to keep the ISO at 64, but this meant a ridiculously low shutter speed,

Manual increase to 1/20 still resulted in camera shake despite deploying Simo Häyhä breathing and the lens apparently having 4 stops of VR. Even a more realistic 3 stops should have been enough, so maybe I'm not as steady as my younger days! lol

At a more ideal 1/80 for the 70mm focal range, I'm about 2.5 stops underexposed and simply increasing the exposure in LR resulted in a rather unpleasant image. It needed lots of highlight and shadow recovery and her fur became far too saturated and needed adjustments as well. To me you can tell the final image has had work done on it.

Whilst the sensor has done a wonderful job of grabbing lots of detail, I can't help but wonder if f/1.4 would have resulted in a far better and more natural result. I know that there would be a dof difference, which I don't mind. Whilst I appreciate the Sigma doesn't have VR, it is shorter and significantly lighter.

So my question is, would in this case the f/1.4 have resulted in a naturally better quality image due to less post processing adjustments being required?


Original
Photo 1 Original.jpg


Edited
Photo 1 Edited.jpg
 
Forgot to mention Graham that Tamron lens has an 82mm front lens-- length @ 24mm = 4.5 inch -- @ 70mm = 6 inches weight 1.15lb. Balances well on the D810
 
Last edited:
I did a quick test this evening and as suspected if I deliberately underexpose by say -2 EV to allow a faster shutter speed then the red channel comes pouring in when raising the exposure in post. Hmmm, f/1.4 is calling strong now but the numerous references to the autofocus is a sticking point.
 
gman said:
I did a quick test this evening and as suspected if I deliberately underexpose by say -2 EV to allow a faster shutter speed then the red channel comes pouring in when raising the exposure in post. Hmmm, f/1.4 is calling strong now but the numerous references to the autofocus is a sticking point.
Click to expand...
From my experience, the autofocus isn’t “bad” on the D810, the real issue is learning how to breath when using using wide apertures at short focusing distances, A few millimetres of movement whilst you take the photo can result in twice as much change in the focus point on the subject when using a typical portrait focal length.

With regards ISO, add more light or increase the ISO in camera and clean it up post. That said, the ISO range on the D810 is pretty good. I suspect shooting at ISO 400 would be a better starting point for the case you posted.
 
adrianday said:
From my experience, the autofocus isn’t “bad” on the D810, the real issue is learning how to breath when using using wide apertures at short focusing distances, A few millimetres of movement whilst you take the photo can result in twice as much change in the focus point on the subject when using a typical portrait focal length.

With regards ISO, add more light or increase the ISO in camera and clean it up post. That said, the ISO range on the D810 is pretty good. I suspect shooting at ISO 400 would be a better starting point for the case you posted.
Click to expand...

Cheers. I might be getting a little obsessed with ISO 64, but I'm chasing that big clean dynamic range (one of the reasons I moved from the A9) and from the charts I've seen it falls off pretty quick as you increase it. Although I appreciate the "technical" charts should probably be more of a guide and as you say it still seems to be good up to ISO 400.

I can hire one for £46 for three days, maybe that would be a good idea?
 
gman said:
This is one of the reasons why I want need :D1.4, I took a quick test shot of my haughty Beagle with the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II and wanted to keep the ISO at 64, but this meant a ridiculously low shutter speed,

Manual increase to 1/20 still resulted in camera shake despite deploying Simo Häyhä breathing and the lens apparently having 4 stops of VR. Even a more realistic 3 stops should have been enough, so maybe I'm not as steady as my younger days! lol

At a more ideal 1/80 for the 70mm focal range, I'm about 2.5 stops underexposed and simply increasing the exposure in LR resulted in a rather unpleasant image. It needed lots of highlight and shadow recovery and her fur became far too saturated and needed adjustments as well. To me you can tell the final image has had work done on it.

Whilst the sensor has done a wonderful job of grabbing lots of detail, I can't help but wonder if f/1.4 would have resulted in a far better and more natural result. I know that there would be a dof difference, which I don't mind. Whilst I appreciate the Sigma doesn't have VR, it is shorter and significantly lighter.

So my question is, would in this case the f/1.4 have resulted in a naturally better quality image due to less post processing adjustments being required?


Original
View attachment 394420


Edited
View attachment 394421
Click to expand...

I think it is ok actually.

I would approach differently. Leave the under exposed file, take the white point on the curve just before it starts clipping. You an always after doing this with the luminance curve, start playing with the black, and white points of each R, G and B curve as well as gamma values to get it where you want to tbe
 
gman said:
Cheers. I might be getting a little obsessed with ISO 64, but I'm chasing that big clean dynamic range (one of the reasons I moved from the A9) and from the charts I've seen it falls off pretty quick as you increase it. Although I appreciate the "technical" charts should probably be more of a guide and as you say it still seems to be good up to ISO 400.

I can hire one for £46 for three days, maybe that would be a good idea?
Click to expand...
ISO64 is really for sunny days, or tripod mounted landscapes. I am proofing some files with my old D810, for a nigh on 10yr old camera the results are highly impressive.
 
SFTPhotography said:
I think it is ok actually.

I would approach differently. Leave the under exposed file, take the white point on the curve just before it starts clipping. You an always after doing this with the luminance curve, start playing with the black, and white points of each R, G and B curve as well as gamma values to get it where you want to tbe
Click to expand...

Cheers, I'll have another play about with the edit.

I've been thinking a little more and perhaps I should give the 70-200mm some time first as I've hardly used it, although the weather has turned a bit crap now.

If I end up getting on with it then maybe look at a 35 or 50 1.4 to compliment it rather than replace for a walkabout lens and keep the 70-200mm for more specific stuff. Although, I worry I'll end up like the A9 where the 35mm 1.4 never came off and the telephoto became shelved.

If I don't get on with it, then I will probably replace with either a 35, 50 or 85 1.4. The Sigma's in this range all seem to look pretty decent?
 
gman said:
Cheers, I'll have another play about with the edit.

I've been thinking a little more and perhaps I should give the 70-200mm some time first as I've hardly used it, although the weather has turned a bit crap now.

If I end up getting on with it then maybe look at a 35 or 50 1.4 to compliment it rather than replace for a walkabout lens and keep the 70-200mm for more specific stuff. Although, I worry I'll end up like the A9 where the 35mm 1.4 never came off and the telephoto became shelved.

If I don't get on with it, then I will probably replace with either a 35, 50 or 85 1.4. The Sigma's in this range all seem to look pretty decent?
Click to expand...

Sigma ARTs are incredible. The 35mm 1.4 is the weakest of them but still decent. Never had their 85 1.4 but its supposedly excellent. The 28, 40 are also great but unusual FLs for a fixed lens.
 
SFTPhotography said:
Sigma ARTs are incredible. The 35mm 1.4 is the weakest of them but still decent. Never had their 85 1.4 but its supposedly excellent. The 28, 40 are also great but unusual FLs for a fixed lens.
Click to expand...

Cheers, I've been looking at the 40mm, I don't mind unusual focal lengths and apparently it's nice and sharp right into the corners and doesn't have any af concerns, other than a little focus shift. Used prices look decent as well, so could happily compliment my current lens. I've seen plenty of sample shots on a D850 and it seems to resolve fine, so shouldn't be a problem for me?
 
I don't know why your messing about with thinking about different prime mm lengths when that Tamron I mentioned does it all and very well too. At least I think so. Everyone else only talks about different primes but I notice no examples have been put up, I wonder why?
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
I don't know why your messing about with thinking about different prime mm lengths when that Tamron I mentioned does it all and very well too. At least I think so. Everyone else only talks about different primes but I notice no examples have been put up, I wonder why?
Click to expand...

I don't really know much about the Tamron to be honest and I haven't looked into it because I've been focusing on f/1.4. I've only glanced at the DXO data, which I only use as a guide, and the sharpness score is a little on the lower side, I think in particular wide open if memory serves, so I'm wondering how it is with the D810's sensor under more challenging conditions?

From past experience I find I prefer a prime when it comes to a walkabout lens as I find it forces me to move with my feet and I end up with more consistent compositions as I get used to the focal length. I'm open to all suggestions though and not in a rush.
 
Nowadays I prefer to have the Panasonic camcorder as a go to rather than The D810 but won't go into why as this is a nikon thread and don't want tgo hijack it..
 
realspeed said:
Nowadays I prefer to have the Panasonic camcorder as a go to rather than The D810 but won't go into why as this is a nikon thread and don't want tgo hijack it..
Click to expand...

For photo? For video I could understand as I think video af is a bit of a weak spot with the D810.
 
realspeed said:
Gman
At the time of looking for another 24-70mm lens I as usual did quite a bit of research, not just on sharpness etc that can as you know be worked on in PP. I was well impressed with how well that lens did with camera shake compared to other makes. I had an older Nikon version beforehand so had something to use as a comparison.
So after several days of checking and cross checking and watching youtube videos on 24-70mm lenses I bought that Tamron 24-70 version I mentioned. Not only did it meet my expectation , but even exceeded it and I don't have the steadiest of hands.
Click to expand...

Even though I sold my D810 last year - never really got on with it - I still have its' 36MP sister, the K-1, coupled with the Tamron in drag - the D-FA24-70. I am getting results with the K-1 & D-FA I was struggling to get with the D810 and my departed 24-70AF-S....
 
welshwizard645 said:
Even though I sold my D810 last year - never really got on with it - I still have its' 36MP sister, the K-1, coupled with the Tamron in drag - the D-FA24-70. I am getting results with the K-1 & D-FA I was struggling to get with the D810 and my departed 24-70AF-S....
Click to expand...

I can't remember when I last got the D810 out, I've was too busy during Autumn and missed some landscape opportunities and since then the weather up here has been pretty crap. In what area do you mean when you say you are getting results with the K-1, is it autofocus?
 
I am seriously considering selling all my Nikon gear purely because of weight. This year (age 79) has hit me with feeling a lot weaker than ever before, I just don't seem to have the same strength to lug about a lot of( for me) heavy camera equipment. If I do sell it would mean buying everything in one lot,splitting means I may be left with something I can't use,

I seem to use (as my go to photographic gear ) my Panasonic DC-TZ95 compact and Panasonic HC-X1500 camcorder more often than not.

Graham
The issue with using the D810 is having to check that the shutter speed is twice the frame rate, before using the video feature. So changing from stills to video I often forgot to check first. hence getting a dedicated camcorder
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top