D800 successor - any info, tips, rumors?

Elvishefer

@proudgeek - We just moved across the country and bought our first house, so while I agree with you in principal about value is utility, I am not in a position to overlook monetary value. I have too many things I should buy.

sevencrossing

I keep coming back to body depreciation =.

over 3 years, a D800 could deprecate more than the D800s

If you are doing photography professionally, I would try to avoid S/H as you have no idea what the camera might have been through but If Nikon start heavily discounting the D800, then may be get one

After the D700, once you get used to it, The D800s should blow you away, I am afraid, you will not want to use the D700 again

I would not worry about warranty on your D700, they are very reliable cameras

I bough my, now somewhat battered, D800 when they came out, I don't worry about depreciation, it has earned its keep many time over

PB_PM

After the D700, once you get used to it, The D800s should blow you away, I am afraid, you will not want to use the D700 again...

Totally disagree with this statement, since I use my D800 and D700 just about equally. It totally depends on how you use your images. If you are primarily displaying your images on 1080p displays (or even 4k), or for calendars and standard prints you won't notice much of a difference. Now if you print large, you might.

henrik1963

About a year ago my youngest asked me to do a print for her. She send me a file less than 2 MP - taken with an outdated phone. Picture was taken at night - there was all the kinds of noise you have ever seen. I had to crop the file - it was square. I printed it to A4 - 12*8.

None of us inhere would be proud of that print - but she was very happy. The picture meant a lot to her.

I almost gave up before I ever started making that print. But after I saw what I could get out of that file I was amazed - it was not good but it was nowhere as bad as I had expected.

The difference between a file coming out of an outdated phone and a file coming out of a D700 is huge. The difference between a file coming out of a D700 and a D800 is small - unless you want to do something crazy.

I will bet that the difference between files coming out of a D800 and a D800s is close to nonexistent in the real world.

It is time for me to look more on the picture than the pixels :-)

Go shoot some pictures. Your camera is far better than you think. You do not need a new one - Happy shooting :-)

haroldp

. Your camera is far better than you think. You do not need a new one - Happy shooting :-)

I am doing this for a long time (50 years), both professionally and as an enthusiast, and have never managed to develop expertise as to what other people do or do not need.

I am recently doing a fair amount of birding, and the higher frame rate, 1 stop ISO upgrade, faster auto focus, and hopefully more buffer capacity, make the proposed D800s particularly interesting to me for birding applications. In that use, these features increase the chance of 'getting the shot'. A shot that I get has infinitely better IQ than one that I missed because focus wasn't ready, or buffers were full. 1 stop better ISO means faster shutter speeds or more DOF, again increasing ones chances.

For landscape and city work it doesn't matter, and I often use Leica's.

For most applications, there is no difference between current and proposed D800 that matters, but some of us may have specific use for certain features or improvements.

Regards ... H

Beso

I realize this topic is quite old now but now that there is a new release date for the D800/D800e set for the end of this month (June 26th) I was wondering how many current D800 owners will bite on this refresh? I have to admit I am a little underwhelmed with the new specs and the fact that it is most likely going to be made outside of Japan also turned me off a bit. Any thoughts? Worth the extra grand? It will be a tough call for me I think....

First, I found it rather humorous to look through this thread again and see what all the prognosticators had to say. I hope none of them are relying on their skills at prediction for their livelihood. LOL

Second, I will probably buy the D800s. Not because of the significant improvements over my D800 but because I was already looking at a D800e as a second body. What I was really hoping for from Nikon was the low light performance and speed of the D4, a 24 MP sensor, improved autofocus, and better buffer capability. Since that may come at some point in the future as a D5 or D900 or ??? I expect it will be a year or more out. I would really like to have the second body now and I can sell my D800 if and when a D5 or D900 materializes.

Digital cameras are very much like most other electronic technology. If you wait for the latest and greatest you will be waiting forever. Buy what works for you now knowing that whatever is available today will be replaced in the not so distant future. Hopefully Nikon will ensure that our expensive glass, where the majority of the investment lies, will continue to work regardless of the evolution of bodies and features.

sevencrossing

PB_PM It totally depends on how you use your images. If you are primarily displaying your images on 1080p displays (or even 4k), or for calendars and standard prints you won't notice much of a difference.

I will have to disagree .

I think it depends on the subject, rather than print size

If you shoot in good conditions, with the sun over your left shoulder, you may not notice much of a difference

If you shoot high contrast subjects (in to the sun) the high dynamic range of the D800 can give you fidelity in the shadows and high lights, completely lacking with a D700

the AUTO ISO and exposure on the D800 is better, so is the focusing. I have found the CLS, when using fill in flash, better on the D800

@ Elvishefer if you are happy with your D700 and are concerned abut deprecation, another D700 might be your best bet
(Mine is for sale but I live in the UK)

Elvishefer

@seven - that's a good point! I will keep my eyes open for a D700 for sale locally.

I was shooting some sports on the weekend in a gym and was using my D700 at ISO3200 or less to keep shutterspeed up, and while I'm not displeased with the images, I was definitely reminded why the D3s/D4/D4s class of camera exists. One of the downsides of being a generalist, non-professional photographer is that my needs span a very wide gamut and I can always find a reason to not go all-in.

On a separate note, I figured out that it cost me $118/year to own my D300s (cost - sale price / years owned). I'm very pleased with that, especially since I have images on my walls taken with that camera.

sevencrossing

@Elvishefer The high ISO performance of the D800 is similar to the D700 but the D800S should be significantly better
You mentioned getting more photography jobs, assuming these are paid jobs. Would get more work, could you charge more, if you had a D800/S or a D4S?
Some clients appreciate and will pay for, high IQ; some cant tell the difference, between a picture taken with a smart phone and a Hasselblad

haroldp

@Elvishefer The high ISO performance of the D800 is similar to the D700 but the D800S should be significantly better

I use both, if you downres the 36mp d800 images to 12mp, it's high ISO performance is much better than the D700, and retaims more detail. I use this technique for theater work with stage lighting at ISO 6400.

Regards .... H

PB_PM

The D700 is much better to use for sports for the same reason many sports shooters like the D3s/D4/D4s, smaller file size and faster shooting speed. Being able to shoot at 8FPS with the grip vs even the possible 5FPS of the D800s, it's no contest as to which is going a) have a deeper, faster clearing buffer, b) be more manageable while working with a large amount of files. A good example was when I was shooting motor-cross last night, the D800 would have been hopeless. I could tell from experience that if I had used the D800 I would have come home with half as many keepers. Why? The buffer, and FPS. The D800's AF is slightly better in low light, but the light was still good, so that was not a limiting factor. ISO never went over 1600, so again no difference. Does the D700 have less resolution and detail, sure. Does it really matter for the size that the files would be used at? Nope.

Thus is the reason I keep the D700 for sports, and use the D800 for anything that doesn't require speed, and large amounts of files. While the difference between the two cameras looks large when you compare them in test charts and DXO reports, in real life shooting the difference is much smaller. That's my experience working with the two cameras over the past several years anyway. If all things were equal (shooting speed and buffer), would i pick the D800 over the D700. Yes, but all things are not equal, so I still use the D700 often.

TaoTeJared

Never owning a D700 but having a D300 (with all the same accessories) and having used a D700 enough to know it's capabilities, I keep thinking about picking up a D700 for a back-up and to use when resolution is not an advantage. I agree with others that the "real" difference between a D700 and a D800 is much less than what DXO and others try to make people believe. I do believe that upgrading to a D800 from a D700 is a enough of a improvement to justify it.

I'm always left with the uneasy feeling of the age of the D700 cameras that can be picked up used. Shutter counts don't mean anything as they can be reset, and the actual age of a body can also be just as much of an issue - especially when it comes to servicing. I maneuver through used markets very often, and even with my larger experience, I have to admit that there are just enough unknowns when added to the age of the bodies, the uncertainty gap widens.

As many know, I keep track of release dates of bodies (I need to update it though) but I am noticing that "mid-cycle" updates are being pushed from 24 months to 30 months (except for the D4-pro bodies which still match the two seasonal Olympics.) I'm not sure if that means anything, or is an indication that they are taking more time to ensure better quality controol, or anything else. Just an observation.

kanuck

Great to hear so many interesting and different opinions on this upcoming release. I am pretty sure I will sit tight as I am quite happy with my D800e still. donaldejose you made a good point about skipping a release sometimes and waiting for significant advances in technology. For example, I can only imagine the shock people must have experienced going from a D200 to a D700 or even more extreme, a D300 to say a D4.

henrik1963

@PitchBlack: How do you cover that range? I see 3 ways: 1: Super zoom - not so good. 2: Cropping - not so good. And 3: 3 Cameras - 24-70, 70-200 and 200-400 - very good but very expensive. What do you do?

sevencrossing

henrik1963 very good but very expensive.

If photography is your Hobby, then yes 3 D800s' seems expensive

But remember a professional could buy Ten D800s' for the cost of a Hasselblad H4D-200MS

henrik1963

@PitchBlack: Knowing the game must help a lot when shooting a fast moving game like polo - reducing the complexity - to focus on where the action will be.

I like your work. You have a very distinct style.

PB_PM

Consider that the field is 300 yards long and 150 yards wide, I have to crop, and that these people often make big prints, it's easy to see how every single little megapixel counts and that a 16mp file just won't do. I would much rather have fewer high quality shots to choose from dozens of shots that are only suitable for prints the size of a sheet of paper.

To me, a 50% increase in speed is a *major* upgrade.

If you have to crop so much that you need the D800, you have the wrong lens. Sorry, no if ands or buts about it.

sevencrossing

PB_PM If you have to crop so much that you need the D800, you have the wrong lens. Sorry, no if ands or buts about it.

PitchBlack When they make a 50-800/f4

or in my case, a FX 16 - 200 f4

PB_PM

@PB_PM: clearly you don't understand the game, so please don't judge.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this subject. To me you're simply giving a straw mans argument.

PB_PM

What I don't understand is why anyone would choose not to use all of the tools at his or her disposal in order to create the best image possible for the client.

Depends on what you define the best. For the way I shoot the sports I shoot the D700 IS the best tool at my disposal. I already listed the reasons why I choose to use the D700 for some shoots, there is nothing to debate or question. It is simply a matter of shooting style.

If I shot sports for commercial purpose as you do, then yes the D800 would likely be better. I am not questioning that! I shoot some sports in a photojournalistic style, so I just miss too many key shots with a slower camera like the D800.

PB_PM

Last year I caught a great player in a perfect swing on a famous pony just perfectly, and the breeder of that pony paid for the D800 in one shot to print it out 1.7 meters wide. You just can't do that with any other camera.

Sounds like work that is right up the D800's ally. Personally I would love to shoot sports with the D800, the files are much nicer to work with. My 2011 27" iMac has no trouble working with files, on an individual basis, but when I start working with hundreds to thousands of shots the process starts to get time consuming, and edited files get into hundreds of MB's each. Sadly nobody pays me $3k for one shot, so the time and hard drive space required to do so are not cost effective. Thus, I mentioned that the D700's files are more manageable for the way I shoot some sports.

Ironheart

Well, according to the main blog, we have new name, D810

donaldejose

I am sure it will be a great camera. The D800/800e is perhaps Nikon's best camera at this time (and I include the D4/D4s) if you don't need the fps the D4 offers. But we don't all need all the 36mp all the time. Fortunately, Nikon gives us choices.

TaoTeJared

I am sure it will be a great camera. The D800/800e is perhaps Nikon's best camera at this time (and I include the D4/D4s) if you don't need the fps the D4 offers. But we don't all need all the 36mp all the time. Fortunately, Nikon gives us choices.

Unfortunately it costs $10,000 to have both.

sevencrossing

Unfortunately it costs $10,000 to have both.

but given the D810 has ISO 12,800 and 6 fps
is there any need for both ?