Nikon D4 vs D800 (or E)

[SnappingShark]

In a similar vein to a similar thread .. Do people have a personal experience over The D4 vs the D800E ?

A lot have said they're very similar ... The battery life is better on the d4, it shoots faster, has better light sensitivity and less noise.
But then ... the resolution is better on the D800E, It's thinner and cheaper ... by about 2.5 GRAND!!!

I will be moving up to full frame eventually, and am curious whether to go "high end" or "professional".

 

[jaomul]

If 16mp is enough and you don't mind weight the pro cameras are a significant step up. Having had Canon's (1d2 and 1ds) they were better built, faster and more customisable than the 5d. The truth is though that I am not a pro and didn't need a pro camera. Sometimes less is more

 

[KmH]

The D4 is essentially a pro grade action sports camera, which is why it has the high burst rate (up to 11 fps) and high ISO performance.

The D800/D800E are essentially designed for studio work, and to an extent by dint of the high MP count, are meant to compete with medium format studio cameras.
But, the D800/D800e are prosumer grade Nikon's because they lack the pro grade features like a built in vertical grip and Voice Memo.

Nikon's pro studio camera is the $8000 D3X, and at the pro level is what you would compare to the prosumer D800/D800E.

Depending on when you eventually upgrade to FF there may be newer, or other Nikon options.

 

[SnappingShark]

The D4 is essentially a pro grade action sports camera.
The D800/D800E are essentially designed for studio work.
But, the D800/D800e are prosumer grade Nikon's.
Nikon's pro studio camera is the D3X, and is what you would compare to the prosumer D800/D800E.

So out of the D3X, D800/E, D4, which would be the better "all rounder".
The pixels are bigger in the D4 due to the sensor, right? so less is sometimes more? Or have I got that wrong?

 

[JTPhotography]

d800 hands down winner there.

 

[SnappingShark]

Why? Excuse my ignorance

 

[JTPhotography]

Why? Excuse my ignorance

Well, when you factor in price, image quality, performance, regardless of terms like "prosumer", the d800 is the clear choice. But as others have said, if you are shooting sports and/or will be firing off many images consecutively, the d4 would have the edge. My concern is final image quality and what I am getting for my money. In that case, it isn't even close. I have the d800e and love it.

 

[KmH]

So out of the D3X, D800/E, D4, which would be the better "all rounder".
The pixels are bigger in the D4 due to the sensor, right? so less is sometimes more? Or have I got that wrong?

The better "all rounder" would be the D4.

These days, pixel count and size is pretty much irrelevant.

 

[SnappingShark]

and when it comes to printing out an image, let's say for a billboard (I have a project to do one of these, for personal, not pro) - which would be better?
Not that I'd buy for just the one piece of work, but am curious.

 

[JTPhotography]

The d800 has 20 more than double the resolution and a 1+stop advantage in dynamic range, for anyone printing large and doing landscape nature work, it is a no brainer. That's my 2 cents anyway.

 

[Derrel]

The d800 has 20 more than double the resolution and a 1+stop advantage in dynamic range, for anyone printing large and doing landscape nature work, it is a no brainer. That's my 2 cents anyway.

The D3x bought used is my preference for the best all-arounder. It has the more-capable AF area selection system of the D3 series, which was eliminated in the D800, which has a sort of dumbed down AF area system. It has 24 MP shot in full-frame, and also offers in-camera 8x10 aspect captures, as well as a 2.0x APS-C size capture. To me, the 8x10 capture is a reallllllllly useful feature, especially for people work. It allows you to see the final, 8x10 or 4x5 or 16x20 aspect ratios as you compose. The problem with the 3:2 aspect ratio is it's "too tall" in portrait mode, and the landscape mode is also a bit too wide )or not tall enough!) for computer monitor aspect ratio.

DxO Mark tests show that the D800 resolves about 13% more than the D3x does, but at a 30% File size penalty. It takes QUADRUPLE the megapixels in order to double resolution...

I think what KmH was getting at, in one respect, is the per-pixel quality of a sensor. The "quality" of the data, at the pixel level, is as important, or maybe even more important, than the total number of pixels. If the image at the pixel-level is really excellent, the image can easily be up-rezzed in software by Photoshop, or a printer's RIP (raster image processor), and the original capture size of the camera that made the image becomes...basically irrelevant.

Best is a tricky thing...if you like a flagship-level camera, the D3 or D4 series bodies have a different feel than the D800 or D700 or D610 or whatever. If you want a half-height body, then the D600 or D610 or D800 are nice. The D4 does amazingly well at high-ISOs shooting SOOC JPEG, but I suspect the D610 probably does as well, but I have not yet seen any files from the D610.

I looked at the D4, the D3s, and the D800 early last year, and I do not like the "new body" controls of the D800 and how it's changed from what I like ergonomically, and to me the D4 is also very new and different...I went with the D3x instead of the D800 based more on the body, the file size, and what I am used to (D1,D1h,D2x).

 

[Tailgunner]

Since Professional bodies comes with a built in grip, do they have twin batteries or just use a much larger battery?

 

[JTPhotography]

The d800 has 20 more than double the resolution and a 1+stop advantage in dynamic range, for anyone printing large and doing landscape nature work, it is a no brainer. That's my 2 cents anyway.

The D3x bought used is my preference for the best all-arounder. It has the more-capable AF area selection system of the D3 series, which was eliminated in the D800, which has a sort of dumbed down AF area system. It has 24 MP shot in full-frame, and also offers in-camera 8x10 aspect captures, as well as a 2.0x APS-C size capture. To me, the 8x10 capture is a reallllllllly useful feature, especially for people work. It allows you to see the final, 8x10 or 4x5 or 16x20 aspect ratios as you compose. The problem with the 3:2 aspect ratio is it's "too tall" in portrait mode, and the landscape mode is also a bit too wide )or not tall enough!) for computer monitor aspect ratio.

DxO Mark tests show that the D800 resolves about 13% more than the D3x does, but at a 30% File size penalty. It takes QUADRUPLE the megapixels in order to double resolution...

I think what KmH was getting at, in one respect, is the per-pixel quality of a sensor. The "quality" of the data, at the pixel level, is as important, or maybe even more important, than the total number of pixels. If the image at the pixel-level is really excellent, the image can easily be up-rezzed in software by Photoshop, or a printer's RIP (raster image processor), and the original capture size of the camera that made the image becomes...basically irrelevant.

Best is a tricky thing...if you like a flagship-level camera, the D3 or D4 series bodies have a different feel than the D800 or D700 or D610 or whatever. If you want a half-height body, then the D600 or D610 or D800 are nice. The D4 does amazingly well at high-ISOs shooting SOOC JPEG, but I suspect the D610 probably does as well, but I have not yet seen any files from the D610.

I looked at the D4, the D3s, and the D800 early last year, and I do not like the "new body" controls of the D800 and how it's changed from what I like ergonomically, and to me the D4 is also very new and different...I went with the D3x instead of the D800 based more on the body, the file size, and what I am used to (D1,D1h,D2x).

Good points, that D3x is sweet. Price and the fact that I like going huge with prints and utilize those extra pixels pushed me to the D800e, but ergonomically, as you indicated, there is a little weirdness, and I am having to get used to that. The d800e also allows the different formatas and you can see the format change through the viewfinder. I LOVEEEEE this feature.

 

[SnappingShark]

I think after all these points, and wasting time at work today researching, that I'm going to go for the D800, and not E.
I'll get a battery grip straight away, as I currently have one on my D7100 and I love how it adds the extra options and weight.

Not sure I'll splash out $250 for the Nikon grip, as I used an Xit grip on the D7100 and it was awesome! No issues for 45 bucks!

I'll also spend on a 85 1.8G and a Tokina 16-28, which means I'll still be $2000 under the price of the D4!

Ahh, I love it when decisions come together.
Just leaves me without a zoom in my bag for now, but that can come in time, I'm not a fast shooter (hence one of the decisions for the D800).

 

[Derrel]

Since Professional bodies comes with a built in grip, do they have twin batteries or just use a much larger battery?

Well, the D2x and D3x both had EXTREMELY powerful batteries...the best ones ever developed in any camera. The D2x used the EN-EL4, a 1900mAH battery of 11.1 Volts. The D3 series uses an even beefier battery, the En-EL4a, a 2500 mAH battery, also 11.1 Volts.

The D2x can easily shoot 2,500 frames, or more on a single charge. The D3x according to Nikon' site Nikon | Imaging Products | D3S | D3X - Flagship Reliability

says "What’s more, because the power consumption and power management systems of the D3S and D3X have been engineered for greater operating efficiency, professionals can expect exceptional battery life: up to approx. 4,200 frames per charge with the D3S* and as much as 4,400 frames per charge with the D3X*.
* Based on CIPA Standards, with EN-EL4a battery. "