Rob Galbraith's site has a graphic showing a recombining layout of the low pass filters - could make sense that they'd do that in order to keep the optical path identical distance wise.
Nikon D800......
- Thread starter cowasaki
- Start date
Rob Galbraith's site has a graphic showing a recombining layout of the low pass filters - could make sense that they'd do that in order to keep the optical path identical distance wise.
- Messages
- 4,094
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 4,225
- Name
- Robin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
And at that price I bet it will fly off the shelves.
Someone mentioned earlier - I think it was WEX they phoned - and they were told they were being flooded with D800 calls.
Can't wait to see the 5d3 (if it's called that) specs.
If it's 24Mp and 6fps, then loads will be moaning about not enough MPs and how they don't need 6fps. They will be valid points for some.
Someone mentioned earlier - I think it was WEX they phoned - and they were told they were being flooded with D800 calls.
Can't wait to see the 5d3 (if it's called that) specs.
If it's 24Mp and 6fps, then loads will be moaning about not enough MPs and how they don't need 6fps. They will be valid points for some.
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think you'll find that it only "continues" in that there may be a few still in the system unsold, but after that.....
- Messages
- 8,193
- Name
- Pat MacInnes
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Looks like there's a bit of built-in sync speed hack where the flash still since at 1/320th but with reduced power. Max sync speed is still 1/250th.
The DX or FX movie modes sound interesting, allowing you to get that paper-thin DOF associated with FX sensors, and getting extra reach from telephotos in DX movie mode. Could offer some potentially money-saving film options.
Seems it'll focus up to f/8 too with eleven of the AF points.
Don't know if the lack of 60fps in 1080 mode is usual or unusual, but at least it has it in 720 mode so could offer up some nice slo-mo options.
Truth be told, I really can't see myself buying one of these at all, even if I had the money. The spec is good, but for me, the 36mp is overkill and has pushed the price above what I would have paid. If Nikon had given 16-20mp and gone for a £2000 price point then it would have been on my list because it would be a good balance. But for an ungripped body? Not for me. Mind you, everything else is spot-on, bar what looks like a slightly smaller body form. It's definitely not quite what i expected to see in the Dxxx line-up - I thought Nikon would keep super-high megapixels for the upper tier cameras - but it's here and looks like it'll pull in many fans.
Think that now Nikon has made it clear that DX isn't something it's advancing for pro-use, a D3s is probably the only option for someone like me who needs rugged build, not too many pixels, video built-in and good high ISO functionality.
The DX or FX movie modes sound interesting, allowing you to get that paper-thin DOF associated with FX sensors, and getting extra reach from telephotos in DX movie mode. Could offer some potentially money-saving film options.
Seems it'll focus up to f/8 too with eleven of the AF points.
Don't know if the lack of 60fps in 1080 mode is usual or unusual, but at least it has it in 720 mode so could offer up some nice slo-mo options.
Truth be told, I really can't see myself buying one of these at all, even if I had the money. The spec is good, but for me, the 36mp is overkill and has pushed the price above what I would have paid. If Nikon had given 16-20mp and gone for a £2000 price point then it would have been on my list because it would be a good balance. But for an ungripped body? Not for me. Mind you, everything else is spot-on, bar what looks like a slightly smaller body form. It's definitely not quite what i expected to see in the Dxxx line-up - I thought Nikon would keep super-high megapixels for the upper tier cameras - but it's here and looks like it'll pull in many fans.
Think that now Nikon has made it clear that DX isn't something it's advancing for pro-use, a D3s is probably the only option for someone like me who needs rugged build, not too many pixels, video built-in and good high ISO functionality.
Last edited:
Because otherwise they are charging you extra for removing a bit of the camera.
Sounds like Leica.
The D800E looks interesting to me, although is the Nikon glass up to the demands of this sensor? Those who bought the D3X must be scratching their heads too, I wonder what this will do to their value.
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
You may be right Graham. Only Nikon knows the real answer.
It really depends if you consider the new camera to be a replacement for the D700. Personally, I don't think it is. It's more like a replacement for the D3x.
I think a new D700 will be along, and also a new D300. There are still big gaps to be filled, both in terms of spec and price point, and those two cameras are overdue a make-over.
The 1/320 sync thing is pretty standard with Nikons. Only applies when using CLS flashes IIRC.
None of the Nikons (or Canons foe that matter) have 1080p60. I'd imagine some videographers will care, others won't.
£2000 would have been £300 under the D700's RRP, probably somewhat wishful thinking
Not a new thing for Nikon, the same thing happened to the D200 and D2x in 2007. I can't see not holding back features to protect price points as a bad thing at all.
G
gingerweasel
Guest
I can only imagine what they could have done with ISO performance had they gone with a 16MP FX sensor. Still, reduce that 36MP down to say A3 and the noise will melt away on a print.
- Messages
- 8,193
- Name
- Pat MacInnes
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm not really up on what specs are out there, although I guessed that 60fps @ 1080 might be a bit too high-end for DSLRs at the moment. Been looking at what Countours and GoPros can do and 60fps is very handy for sure.
....£2000 would have been £300 under the D700's RRP, probably somewhat wishful thinking
Very wishful thinking but there's just part of me wanting a manufacturer to really up the ante when it comes to purchase price, instead of just expecting us to keep paying top whack. But then again, I am a tight northerner
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
My thought is that the D400 will come in at around £14-1600, slotting neatly in between the D7000 and D800, pricewise. I also think the D3x will be allowed to die a quiet death and not be replaced...
OP
cowasaki
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 19,708
- Name
- Darren
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Err....no, you were thinking it would be a grand more
Yes I was and I'm quite pleased with the price. It is still £600 more than the D700 was at launch but that is not too much of an issue.
Personally I would buy one at that price to replace the D300 and have both a D700 and D800 but I am just getting into astronomy as well and can I have many more toys I want to buy.
- Messages
- 20,401
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
With the d400 being dx?
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm not really up on what specs are out there, although I guessed that 60fps @ 1080 might be a bit too high-end for DSLRs at the moment. Been looking at what Countours and GoPros can do and 60fps is very handy for sure.
Very wishful thinking but there's just part of me wanting a manufacturer to really up the ante when it comes to purchase price, instead of just expecting us to keep paying top whack. But then again, I am a tight northerner
I wish the camera companies thought like you do. Ever though about a career in marketing? :rules:The D700 has an RRP of £2248 (and tended to retail around £1800 after a bit), the D800 £2400 - only a £152 increase despite the currency shifts - so unless it somehow bucks the trend of every SLR Nikon have ever released, it should hit £2000 or less in not too long a while
OP
cowasaki
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 19,708
- Name
- Darren
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The D700 has an RRP of £2248 (and tended to retail around £1800 after a bit), the D800 £2400 - only a £152 increase despite the currency shifts - so unless it somehow bucks the trend of every SLR Nikon have ever released, it should hit £2000 or less in not too long a while
Digital depot have it up at £2399 which is £600 higher than the D700. When the price goes down then we will see what it gets to. It might get down to under £2000. Hope it does.
- Messages
- 560
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think its a very sensible plan, they have gone "what made the 5DII so good it caught Canon out?" and come out with a very impressive camera that does silly MP and great video. So it will no doubt sell like hot cakes...
Personally I'm a bit undecided, but the second-hand D3S option could be quite appealing - low light and speed, without the D4 price (which will no-doubt be unobtainable anyway this side of the Olympics...)
Hmmm...anyway...I've got a VIP ticket to BVE next week, and Nikon are exhibiting for the first time...could be interesting...
I think I read it still has an AA filter, just not as strong ... but I could quite easily be confused
According to this page http://www.nikon.com/news/2012/0207_dslr_01.htm the aliasing & more reduction operations are disabled in-camera. So perhaps it has the same filter as the 800 but extra circuitry switches things off. :shrug:
Richard - for comparison with your links above, here's a similar portrait from the D3x: http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d3x/img/sample/pic_001b.jpg
Lens is the AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED - shot details here: http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d3x/sample.htm
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,193
- Name
- Pat MacInnes
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'd send them bust in a day
- Messages
- 1,069
- Name
- Scott
- Edit My Images
- No
AM I BEING MISLED??
Just a thought and forgive me I know little about camera and sensor technology. Is the D800 really 36.3 MP?? Is there a difference between "effective" and "actual"?
I've noticed on the promo vid for the D800 that the 36.3MP is effective?
Looking at the Sigma SD1 on WEX
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-sigma-sd1-digital-slr-camera-body/p1522610
I read this...
"The Sigma SD1 Digital SLR Camera is equipped with a 15.3 million pixel APS-C sized imaging sensor. Each pixel has three photosites buried at different depths in the silicon structure of the sensor, meaning that each one records red, green and blue light simultaneously. Because no low-pass filter is needed the camera will capture much more detail than is usual, recording the same amount of information as a 46 megapixel traditional sensor would."
Meaning that the actual MP is 15.3 but 46 effective?
Would that mean then that the D800 is actually a 13.1 MP camera? Or am I looking too much into it?
Just a thought and forgive me I know little about camera and sensor technology. Is the D800 really 36.3 MP?? Is there a difference between "effective" and "actual"?
I've noticed on the promo vid for the D800 that the 36.3MP is effective?
Looking at the Sigma SD1 on WEX
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-sigma-sd1-digital-slr-camera-body/p1522610
I read this...
"The Sigma SD1 Digital SLR Camera is equipped with a 15.3 million pixel APS-C sized imaging sensor. Each pixel has three photosites buried at different depths in the silicon structure of the sensor, meaning that each one records red, green and blue light simultaneously. Because no low-pass filter is needed the camera will capture much more detail than is usual, recording the same amount of information as a 46 megapixel traditional sensor would."
Meaning that the actual MP is 15.3 but 46 effective?
Would that mean then that the D800 is actually a 13.1 MP camera? Or am I looking too much into it?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,193
- Name
- Pat MacInnes
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Digifrog said:
Doesn't sigma use a fovean sensor, which has three layers, hence the tripling of megapixel figures? Something like that anyway....
- Messages
- 2,414
- Name
- Scott
- Edit My Images
- No
the D800 sensor actually has more than 36.3 MP, it's 36.8 but not all pixels/photosites are used.
As mentioned the Foveon sensor is a totally different design so you are comparing chalk & cheese (& only Sigma believe that it equates to a 46Mp Bayer).
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
<snip>
The D700 has an RRP of £2248 (and tended to retail around £1800 after a bit), the D800 £2400 - only a £152 increase despite the currency shifts - so unless it somehow bucks the trend of every SLR Nikon have ever released, it should hit £2000 or less in not too long a while
Yes. So in terms of settled street prices, the D4 is never going to fall below £4k, with the D800 at £2k-ish. Between them that's the D3s/D3x covered, not that the D3x is selling many, like the similarly doomed Canon 1DsMk3.
But it still leaves room for a D700 replacement, perhaps like a D800 but with a very different appeal using the D4's sensor with only 5-6fps and up to 8-ish fps with a battery pack, making it around a £2.5k total. Nikon will pitch it so that even if it does steal D4 sales, they'll still make money (not that I think it will, pros will want the D4's durability and all the remote connectivity stuff).
Then there's a big price gap down to the D300's £1k level that will probably be filled with a crop sensor version of the D700's replacement. It all makes sense to me at least
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks for that. It's a tighter head shot, so hard to compare. Though I'm always suspicious of these promo pics and the only real way to compare is to shooot the same subject side by side.
The point I was trying to make was really one about diminishing returns.
To see the benefits of 36mp, you're going to need a very sharp lens indeed, use an f/number below f/8 to avoid diffraction limits, shoot at a totally shake-free shutter speed that will be somewhere north of the old focal length/shutter speed rule, and make huge prints to examine very closely.
Yes, it's nigh on impossible to compare three shots of three different subjects with three different cameras/lenses - and still make an accurate assessment.
Having said that though - and just for the hell of it - I resized all three jpegs to 1920x1280 (my monitor's native resolution) and applied the same level of sharpening to each. They all look great but there seems to be little or no difference in fine detail between the D800 and D3x shots.
Having said that though - and just for the hell of it - I resized all three jpegs to 1920x1280 (my monitor's native resolution) and applied the same level of sharpening to each. They all look great but there seems to be little or no difference in fine detail between the D800 and D3x shots.
- Messages
- 1,069
- Name
- Scott
- Edit My Images
- No
Doesn't sigma use a fovean sensor, which has three layers, hence the tripling of megapixel figures? Something like that anyway....
Ah right. Thank god for that then.
I was wondering why a Sigma 15MP DLSR costs £5500
- Messages
- 4,225
- Name
- Robin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yep I can certainly see room for that.
Jayst84 said:And so it begins. Fail
Looks good. Had a look at one sample (net's being too slow for any more) from the D800E, some pretty serious resolution.
In my defence, I did post this from the android app which doesn't show stickies in the same list as the other threads.
D800 does look good but way out of my league. (in price and skill)
- Messages
- 560
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
a D800S? Yes, clearly needed - unless there are plans for a fast shutter D400 for Sports/Birders.
And can we please stop the "F8 Diffraction Limit" stuff, its been shot down all over the internet already -the pixel density of the D800 is almost exactly the same as the D7000...
Yes. So in terms of settled street prices, the D4 is never going to fall below £4k, with the D800 at £2k-ish. Between them that's the D3s/D3x covered, not that the D3x is selling many, like the similarly doomed Canon 1DsMk3.
But it still leaves room for a D700 replacement, perhaps like a D800 but with a very different appeal using the D4's sensor with only 5-6fps and up to 8-ish fps with a battery pack, making it around a £2.5k total. Nikon will pitch it so that even if it does steal D4 sales, they'll still make money (not that I think it will, pros will want the D4's durability and all the remote connectivity stuff).
Then there's a big price gap down to the D300's £1k level that will probably be filled with a crop sensor version of the D700's replacement. It all makes sense to me at least
Oh, I agree with you regarding a baby D4 coming out. I just don't think it'll be out until 2013 - for a good while after release Nikon will be able to sell every 16MP sensor they receive in a D4 body for £4800. I don't think it will be any cheaper than the D800 at release though. There's no reason for it to be, as the 36MP sensor is not inherently that much more expensive to manufacture.
Once D4 sales slow and inventory builds up, then that would be a great time to release - the D4 buyers will have already got one, so there's less cannibalisation, and the new body will pick up sales from D4 owners as a backup, D700 owners who didn't get the D800, D800 owners who want a bit more speed, and D300 owners who wanted FX over reach.
That there'll be a D400 I didn't realise was in question
Last edited:
I tend to agree , , even if it was 8fps and maybe 24mp that would be a good one for wildlife ........I hope they use the same battery grip as the D300 ,ha ! not a chance .
- Messages
- 560
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
that definatly won't happen, they had to change the battery designs to meet legal requirements on exposed contacts, hence the new batteries in D7000/D4/D800...
on the subject of which, anyone noticed the price of the Grip for the D800 - £379 without even a battery - WTF is it made from, solid titanium?! I'm sure the aftermarket manufacturers in China are rubbing their hands with glee...