D800

SkipT · Sep 10, 2013

Anyone shooting with a D800? How is it. The reviews all say to buy it over the D700 if you are not FF yet. I was going to buy the D700 untill now, it looks like the D800.

kja6 · Sep 10, 2013

I love mine, especially being able to crop HALF of the photo and still have it be a printable 18mp. Crop power!

KmH · Sep 10, 2013

The D800 is a pretty significant advance over the D700.

Not only does the D800 have significantly more MP, the image sensor itself is a more recent design, and Nikon has improved it's EXPEED image processor.
All that adds up to better low light performance.
The D800 also has the newer version of the Multi-CAM 3500 AF module.
The D800 can also do video (the D700 doesn't do video), though you would still need at least another $2000+ of ancillary video accessories to do professional quality video.

Getting back to the image sensor, Nikon changed the design of their anti-aliasing (AA, or low pass) filter that is in front of the image sensor.
Consequently the D800's resolution exceeds all but the highest quality pro grade lenses that are available for it.
Another factor regarding the AA filter is that there is a much greater chance of seeing moiré interference in images that have a lot of close geometrical edges.

For most photographers, amateur and professional, the D700 is more than sufficient.

SkipT · Sep 10, 2013

KmH said:
For most photographers, amateur and professional, the D700 is more than sufficient.

I could get buy with the D700 but the cost outlay for D800 is not going to be much more and I still would have the ability to have video if I need it. Eather one I buy I am going to have to buy new glass. My old len's will work for awhile untill I do that tho.

Thanks for the input

sandollars · Sep 10, 2013

There is Soooooo much reading in here about the D700 and the D800 you should just jump in and start reading and form your own opinion.

SkipT · Sep 13, 2013

Oh I have been reading alot and alot and I have decided I am going with the D800 it has more bang for just a little more then the D700 and it has video also.

runnah · Sep 13, 2013

I've spent the last month researching new cameras. Right now I am torn between the d800 and the 5d mark 3. After watching tons of videos and thousands of photos I've decided the past approach is for me to rent both and see which I like.

I figure $100 for each is worth it in the long run so I end up with the camera that is right for me. You wouldn't buy a car without a test drive right?

SkipT · Sep 14, 2013

Thats a good idea, but not worth it for me. Would rather put the money toward new glass.

snerd · Sep 14, 2013

runnah said:
I've spent the last month researching new cameras. Right now I am torn between the d800 and the 5d mark 3. After watching tons of videos and thousands of photos I've decided the past approach is for me to rent both and see which I like.

I figure $100 for each is worth it in the long run so I end up with the camera that is right for me. You wouldn't buy a car without a test drive right?

Even though I've only had my 7D for a few months, I'm looking at this choice as well. However, seeing as how I have no Nikon glass, the cards are stacked in favor of the 5D3. Don't tell Mr. Carter, but I've been lusting in my heart for it.

JTPhotography · Sep 14, 2013

I plan on posting a detailed thread on this in the near future, but I am a 20+ year canon user (currently 5dmkII and 7d) and I just bought a Nikon D800. I used it for about an hour and that's all it took to decide that I would sell all of my Canon gear and go Nikon. It is that good.

One of the reasons I did so is I had a chance to pick up a 200-400 version I at a good price. The results that I am getting from the d800 and the 200-400 are literally 10 times better than what I was getting from my 7d and 100-400.

Regarding the detailed thread I plan on posting, it may be short, I really can only think of a few things that I liked better with my canons, just minor stuff.

runnah · Sep 14, 2013

JTPhotography said:
I really can only think of a few things that I liked better with my canons, just minor stuff.

That is all it really comes down to in the end. Both the mk3 and d800 are top tier cameras with very little between the two.

In my case I want to actually get hands on and test them for video quality.

nickzou · Sep 14, 2013

I heard the mark III kicks the crap out of the D800 in low light. And video? Well is that even worth mentioning? Two very big points in Canon's favour. Sadly I've already invested in the Nikon camp and am unlikely to switch which leaves me in an undesirably situation. I would be more than happy to spend 3k+ for the mark III's noise performance, while I a lot more iffy about spending that kind of money on the D800 for a noticeably but not dramatic improvement over the D700's ISO performance which I regard to be only about a little less than half a stop better than the D7000 (my current camera). It's a complete roll reversal right now, the Canon is impressing the hell out of me with their new stuff with the Nikon's seems to be lagging behind and boasting features that are ultimately mere gimmicks.

For example, no low pass filter on the D7100 vs 70D, barely noticeable and sometimes worse. And having finally tried both of their latest 70-200mm VR/IS models, while by no means is the Nikon a slouch but the Canon noticeably better.

JacaRanda · Sep 14, 2013

Uh oh, I see a fight brewing.

Sent from my iPad using PhotoForum

JTPhotography · Sep 14, 2013

Its just all about what your priorities are... for me, low light performance isn't tops on the list. I like to print big and I need good dynamic range.

kja6 · Sep 14, 2013

nickzou said:
I heard the mark III kicks the crap out of the D800 in low light. And video? Well is that even worth mentioning? Two very big points in Canon's favour. Sadly I've already invested in the Nikon camp and am unlikely to switch which leaves me in an undesirably situation. I would be more than happy to spend 3k+ for the mark III's noise performance, while I a lot more iffy about spending that kind of money on the D800 for a noticeably but not dramatic improvement over the D700's ISO performance which I regard to be only about a little less than half a stop better than the D7000 (my current camera). It's a complete roll reversal right now, the Canon is impressing the hell out of me with their new stuff with the Nikon's seems to be lagging behind and boasting features that are ultimately mere gimmicks.

For example, no low pass filter on the D7100 vs 70D, barely noticeable and sometimes worse. And having finally tried both of their latest 70-200mm VR/IS models, while by no means is the Nikon a slouch but the Canon noticeably better.

I didn't understand a word you said.