Wait for the successor to the D800?

bowiesalvatore

Hi NikonRumors,

I've started out as an amateur photographer back in 2008, and I've been at it for more than 5 years now. I've owned many DSLRs (only Nikons because I'm loyal like that...) and these cameras have served me very well. I've owned the D90, then I upgraded to the D7000, and now I'm using the D7100. I've used many other cameras like the Nikon D5000 series, the D3000 series, and the D300S. As you're probably sensing right now, I've only been using DX cameras, probably because I lacked the confidence to take-on professional-grade FX cameras. 5 years is a very long time, and time does change people. I have been deliberating for a very long while, and have decided to go all out. I've been saving up for a new equipment for a long while now, and I know it sounds stupid, but I have a 'photography jar' that has roughly 7000 dollars in it. The D4S has just been released and the 16.2 MP was really a big letdown. I mean, for most people, 16 MP is sufficient, especially if the file size is a major concern. To me, something around 20 - 25 MP should be ideal, and the 36.6 MP on the D800 is just too much for me to handle.. The file sizes ranges from 80 MB, to a whopping 100+MP. I'm using the late 2013 iMac with everything maxed out, but I'm not sure how long it can handle this amount of stress. I keep most of my pictures externally, which means that there is a lot of cost involved when handling these pictures. I'm speaking from a 1-month experience with the D800 (borrowed from my friend). The FPS is a major problem for me too. I don't like to have lots of cameras at home, slash that, I prefer to have one multi-purpose camera, which can be professionally used for my sports, wedding, studio, landscape, cityscapes, wildlife.. literally everything. The D800 shoots at 4 fps? and 5 fps in the DX Crop mode. I would be perfectly contented with a D800 with the same 36.6 MP sensor, with the 1.2x Crop Mode (25 MP I think?), but the only issue I have with it is the FPS. I need some advice from real veterans, please advice me as to whether I should wait for the successor to the D800, or get the D800

ThomasHorton

Sounds like you already know that the D800 is not the camera for you. And there is nothing wrong with that.

I would not wait for a "successor" to the D800 but choose another Nikon camera that has the features you like and not the ones you hate.

sevencrossing

.

now I'm using the D7100...

I prefer to have one multi-purpose camera, which can be professionally used for ..... literally everything. .......

but the only issue I have with it is the FPS.I need some advice from real veterans, please advice me as to whether I should wait for the successor to the D800, or get the D800

Ok I have been taken photographs for 50 years and currently use a D800 for : Real estate, , weddings ( not very many) , studio, landscape, cityscapes, wildlife.. literally everything. At the moment, IMHO, the D800 is the best for all of the above
Should you wait for the next upgrade?
I suspect the replacement for the D800 will have more fps
But we may have to wait a couple of years before we get it
Do you shoot all the subjects you listed professionally ? ( by professionally, I mean being paid a professional rate )

There are a lot of professionals who use the D800, most have solved the big file issue, by buying a new computer
How much RAM do have in your i Mac have you have checked out by a tame techie

Msmoto

@bowiesalvatore

Welcome to NRF. I changed the title of your post to more accurately describe your question.

My first thought is that at anything up to 24" x 36" you cannot tell the difference between a D4 and D800. And, if I were to purchase a D800 I would go with the E. You shoot sports, wildlife, and everything ……. This is a simple choice about one's priorities. If high speed action sports, e.g., motorsports, is a high priority, the D4 might have an advantage. Also, birds in flight, again D4 may be preferred. Having said this, you will find on NRF the folks who shoot everything, some with a D4, some with a D800, some with a D610.

The final image quality is about 90% a result of the photographer's technique and post processing, 10% the camera used when one is looking at Nikon Pro cameras.

WestEndBoy

I will make an assumption that since you own DX cameras of a certain price range, your lenses and other accessories are of a similar quality.

A good rule of thumb for me is that the camera is at most 25% of the cost of your entire gear and if you include computer equipment, 15-20%. That means that to do a D800 justice, you need a budget of $12,000 - $15,000. I am talking professional lens here, as the D800 is a professional camera. Zooms are a minimum of F/4.0 constant aperture and preferably 2.8. Primes are all 1.8s and preferably 1.4s. Bags, tripods, batteries, memory cards, battery grips - they all add up.

So until you can get to the above budget, possibly by selling some of your stuff used, I would think about sitting tight. If you get a D800 now with sub-standard lens, you are essentially sitting tight until you get the better lens, but with a very expensive unused D800.

Msmoto

In reality, the images from the D7100 will be as good as a D800, for a variety of reasons. And, as noted, the move from DX to FX is not without huge costs. I might suggest the acquisition of several FX lenses prior to purchase of a new FX body….and by then the new D800 successor will be here.

DenverShooter

@bowiesalvatore

My first thought is that at anything up to 24" x 36" you cannot tell the difference between a D4 and D800. And, if I were to purchase a D800 I would go with the E. You shoot sports, wildlife, and everything ……. This is a simple choice about one's priorities. If high speed action sports, e.g., motorsports, is a high priority, the D4 might have an advantage. Also, birds in flight, again D4 may be preferred. Having said this, you will find on NRF the folks who shoot everything, some with a D4, some with a D800, some with a D610.

The final image quality is about 90% a result of the photographer's technique and post processing, 10% the camera used when one is looking at Nikon Pro cameras.

Just a couple of thoughts. I have a D800E, D4 and D7000. I shoot a lot of D800E images when I am shooting for magazines or posters or know that I am going to need to crop or the magazine is going to want to post produce (as I don't do Photoshop). 99% of the time the D4 would be just fine for this. However the 1% of the time is where the massive image size of the D800E really pays off.

I was shooting the Rocky Mountian Region Porsche Club of America (RMR PCA) Ice race at Georgetown Lake in January with both my D4 and D800E. The cover shot of the RMR PCA High gear magazine was a vertical shot with my D800E and Nikon 600mm F/4. The article shots were done 90% with the D4 on either a Nikon 24 mm to 70 mm F/2.8 or the Nikon 70mm to 200mm F/2.8. You need to think about what you are shooting for and the requirements that presents and select your gear accordingly.

And let me just state for the record that the whole file size "sturm und drang" with D800 is a red herring. Hard disks are cheap and so is SDRAM and computer power. I programmed on punch cards when i was in High School and the NCR Century 100 computer those programs ran on had a whopping 64K of core memory and cost a couple of million. Now I have a pair of 8 TB drive arrays (primary and backup) that cost under $500 each. These are just about full and my next stop is a 24 TB RAID 6 array with Thunderbolt interface automatically backed up to an off site data center. Cost? Under well under $4K and it should carry me through the next 3 or 4 years at which point the cost of drives will have be half of what they are now with double the capacity.

Denver Shooter

proudgeek

I would agree with Denver's assessment on file size being a non-factor. I have a 2013 Macbook with a Retina display (16GB of RAM) and have found no performance degradation with the D800 files (I had been shooting with a D90 prior to that). I have also built a Thunderbolt Drobo system with twin 3TB drives (redundant) at a cost of $1,000, which is nearly infinitely scalable. On the flip side, the cropping capability of the D800 files is a huge boon, much greater than I'd imagined. And I know the 4fps is a problem for many, but I feel like I've been just fine shooting birds. Do I get every frame? No. But are the frames I do get amazing? Yes.
The successor to the D800 isn't going to have 8-10fps, nor is it going to have a smaller file size. So you have to ask yourself what spec in a successor would make this an attractive camera to you. If I'm really hearing what you're saying, I'd buy a D4 (which may see a small price drop following the D4s release). Unless you plan on printing something that's going to go on the side of a bus.
All that said, I'm not a real veteran, just a guy out there having a good time.

Msmoto

What we do not know is the glass the OP has in hand. For $7000 one cannot get a lot of FX glass if the idea is to improve IQ by moving up to FX. Let's see, 14-24, 24-70, 70-200….about $6,000.

D800 File size…14 bit lossless, compressed is about 41 MB. Not really an issue.

So, my recommendation remains…buy the glass, then the body.

PB_PM

If file size is an issue, waiting for the D800 successor, which may have even more megapixels, is unlikely to be the best solution.

As Msmoto says, if you want to move to FX, keep saving. That is unless you op for the F4 lineup (16-35mm F4 VR, 24-120mm F4 VR and 70-200 F4 VR.

sevencrossing

What we do not know is the glass the OP has in hand. .

As the title, given by the OP has changed and this was his first post, he may have lost the thread

Symphotic

I never understood the fear that the d800 files are too large. If you like to do a lot with your photographs, the D800 has the right amount of pixels. I have a Df and it is a great camera, but I do a lot of cropping and printing large, so the D800 is more flexible.

One month of experience on a borrowed D800 probably wasn't enough for you to learn how to really tweak the D800 for your requirements. For example, you can substantially reduce the size of the files and not see any difference in 99% of the cases by selecting 12 bit RAW recording instead of 14 bit RAW recording: you will move from 42 to 33 MB on a typical lossless compressed NEF file. You can save 2 more MB or so with compressed rather than lossless compressed files.

But even with 14 bit and lossless compressed I do focus stacking of multiple RAW files on a 3 year old macbook air with a cheap 3 TB external drive, and don't run out of computer. Moore's law and all that.

As for waiting for an D800 replacement, I would go along with buying a D800E instead. I'd get one myself, but I've already bought too many D800s. Still, if you want frame rates, the D800 replacement will probably not give you satisfaction.

SO, if I were you, I'd buy a D4s. You won't be disappointed in the pixel count. The images we have seen so far are flat out amazing.

Or get a D610: You'll get 6 FPS and enough pixels for your stated requirement, plus one of the best deals in photography today. You have lots of options.

WestEndBoy

I never really understood the appeal of a D800E vs a D800. I appreciate the difference in picture quality but I wonder if more than 1% of us would really notice. I put the money to more glass.

PB_PM

I think that if you print large, it could be noticeable. For the average person that never prints larger than 8x10, or views images on a computer screen, most likely not.

Symphotic

I never really understood the appeal of a D800E vs a D800. I appreciate the difference in picture quality but I wonder if more than 1% of us would really notice. I put the money to more glass.

Good point, but if you must have more two, get one of each.
I remember the first day I showed up with a D800 my colleague sold his 5D MkII and ordered a D800E. Yeah, he paid extra for the letter at the end, but he takes great photos!

Golf007sd

What we do not know is the glass the OP has in hand. For $7000 one cannot get a lot of FX glass if the idea is to improve IQ by moving up to FX. Let's see, 14-24, 24-70, 70-200….about $6,000.

D800 File size…14 bit lossless, compressed is about 41 MB. Not really an issue.

So, my recommendation remains…buy the glass, then the body.

This is the best advice for anyone thinking of going FX. Moreover, I also agree with what PB_PM, proudgeek and DenverShooter have said.

bowiesalvatore,

You have been in the industry long enough to know what works for you. Moreover, you have tasted and received the benefits of DX and the lenses you have used with them. Please give us a list of lenses you own and hopefully they will suit your FX move, if not..then take the steps needed to do so. The bodies will only get better in time...it is the lenses that will deliver the goods you seek in image quality regardless of the FX body.

TheLoneWolf

ok.. i am also in a similar predicament as the OP.. i wanted to go D800... but i think i might as well wait for the update and buy good glass for the time being....
another reason not going for D800 at the moment could be the processor... expeed 4 has any benefits? will the successor to D800 have the latest and best processor??

spraynpray

I'd bet on it. It will also have the newest image processing software which will help too. I wonder about the sensor - 50Mp?

Gjesdal

Wife caught me looking at camera porn a couple of months ago and asked if I was planning on getting a new camera body, I told her truthfully I had no plan on getting a new body yet, not until D800(E) gets a replacement and that can take some time. *But* I haven't told her about the D4s... Wouldn't it be logical for Nikon to release D810 with Expeed 4 soon?

sevencrossing

... i wanted to go D800... but i think i might as well wait for the update and buy good glass for the time being....

Remember the up date game never ends, after expeed 4 comes expeed 5
As the D800 has been out 2 years it is sensibly priced
The replacement will almost certainly sell at a premium price and may have a waiting list

Re glass
Glass needs to match the body
There in no point in putting the 24mm f 1.4 on a Dx body
that said, there is no Dx equivalent of Nikon's new gobsmackingly amazing 80 -400

Ironheart

Sure there is, its called the 120-600mm and it's even sweeter than the 80-400 'cause you only use the sweetest part of the lens :P
And what's wrong with a 24mm f1.4 on a DX?

FreezeAction

And what's wrong with a 24mm f1.4 on a DX?

Nothing. I'm buying FF glass for a D5300 that is destined for hopefully a D810e and a D4s. Ordered the AP-S 70-200 f2.8 with the 2X III Tele converter today and it will be here in the morning. I see bull riders and sky divers on the horizon for this weekend. I also renewed my membership in AMA so as to have access to the flight line for RC prop and jet models. There is going to be some action freezing going on. I'm practicing what I've preached for years. Useable body first while good glass is put in the stable and when that is done to a working point start adding bodies. At this stage in the game I'll wait for the D810e or what ever. September surprises are coming. I've lost all interest in a D400 or 7D Mark II.

sevencrossing

And what's wrong with a 24mm f1.4 on a DX?
nothing actually wrong
but at a third the price, If you are a Dx shooter why not buy the Samyang 24mm f1.4 ED AS IF UMC
.....'cause you only use the sweetest part of the lens
the 80 -400, like most current Nikon lenses, does not seem to have a sour point

Ironheart

And what's wrong with a 24mm f1.4 on a DX?
nothing actually wrong
but at a third the price, If you are a Dx shooter why not buy the Samyang 24mm f1.4 ED AS IF UMC
.....'cause you only use the sweetest part of the lens
the 80 -400, like most current Nikon lenses, does not seem to have a sour point

Well you were the one that said there was no point :-) I am following exactly in the lines that Freeze is talking about. I have a few DX lenses like the 10-24 for the wide end, but the rest are FX in order to give maximum flexibility and quality. I dont want the Samy for a variety of reasons. Not to drag too far off topic but any MTF chart will show that the center part of the lens is sharper than the edges, except for maybe the 800mm, that puppy is almost a straight line.

Back to the topic which is buy the D800 now or wait? I'd say build up your lenses and see what happens. You can always buy the D800 if a bag of ¥$£ falls from the sky.

Msmoto

GARETH asked about…..
Haven't bought a D800, might buy the D800s if it fits the bill. I really need a second body after selling my D300s a while back.

So what are people's realistic expectations of the D800s?

The D4s offers (over the D4)

Expeed 4
Higher fps
More movie frame rates
An AF group mode

I think we can assume a D800s would also offer all of these things.

sevencrossing

The D800 has always been about quality rather than speed
So yes to
Expeed 4
More movie frame rates ( any stats on how many use the D800 for video?)
An AF group mode

May be a few more fps; but if you want more than 6, I think Nikon will want you to buy the D4s
increasing it beyond 6, might mean a bigger heavier body, which would be a turn off for those of us who want to reduce the weight of our gear

A radio CLS would be very nice
So would some form of sophisticated remote control
more megawahtnots ??? perhaps a few, if it would mean even greater dynamic range

How about a James Bond number plate change mechanism; that when you engage Dx mode, it changes the name to D400