Отзывы о Фотоаппарат Nikon D800 Body
618 отзывов пользователей o Nikon D800 Body
Пользовались
Nikon D800 Body?
Поделитесь своим опытом и помогите другим сделать правильный выбор
Скроменый эксперт
30.07.2013
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I bought the D800 for my upscale wedding photography packages. Now, after using it for a year it rarely comes to weddings. One of the weddings I shot had a 12"x16" album. When I opened it up, the spread was 16x24 inches. Yes it looked lovely, but even that size was too small to see all the resolution of the camera. I sat there with a 5 power magnifying glass and looked at each grass blade clearly, but for the most part it was lost on the client. What was not lost was the each 64 gig SD card only took 800 shots. I shoot around 2000 images at a wedding.When you put on good, clean glass and mount this body to a tripod you'll get images that are every bit as good as a medium format negative. With a high quality, large ISP monitor you'll see things with this camera you've never seen before. I'm sure I could find even faster memory cards and learn to adapt my shooting style to use this at weddings. But to me, it's too special. When a dear family friend needed 28 faces photographed in one family portrait, a first and last time for many years to come this is what I used. The blow up was nearly 40" wide and 16" tall, I could make out people's eye colors.If you do a lot of portraits and a lot of retouching this is a great camera to own. If you do landscapes and commercial it's also a great camera to own. IF you shoot weddings and work on speed and volume of images, it's a bit too much. I used to think that no camera was too good for a wedding. I'm a guy who dragged around a Mamiya RB67 to a wedding at one point. For larger, more elaborate weddings I have used this for portraits and slide back to my D300 for everything else. Unless you like buying 2 terabyte hard drives every few months for storage you may want to keep this as a portrait camera and leave it at home for weddings. The money dance doesn't need 36 megapixels. Yes, you can turn down the resolution but you're wearing out the shutter just the same.This is like the pair of shoes you're supposed to wear to work but they are so nice that you save them for special occasions. The D400 whenever it comes out will be my new go-to camera. The D800 is the camera I use when I want to take my time and make art.__________Update: 11/26/2013For reasons still unknown to me my commercial business continues to grow. The D800 is the camera of choice for my commercial jobs. It's a bit interesting to say but I can very much see differences between lenses with this body. I've been using a 135mm AIs lens (yes, old school) and at F11 there is nothing sharper. Portraits where you can see every pore of the skin as clear as day. Simply amazing. If you can get your hands on a 105 f2.5 AI or AIs shoot it close to wide open with available light. This lens design is based off of the the Zeiss Sonar lens that you'll find on Hasselblads.When you hold the D800 it feels substantial in your hands. It's just very nice to hold and to use. It's the one camera that reminds me of my film days. It faintly reminds me of my F3 but gives results much like medium format.I still stand by initial review, the D800 isn't really a wedding camera. It's also not a first camera I would buy. If this is your first DSLR get something like a D7100. The D800 is a great second body that you take out on special occasions. My D300 is beaten down and it's just nice to have a nice, large clean camera like the D800 available for special shoots.I haven't had focusing issues per say like others have experienced. So far I feel it focuses faster and better than any other Nikon I've worked with except for the F5. The thing that turns me off a bit to the D800 is the old 65nm image processor. Canon has moved onto ARM image processors and Nikon has only introduced them in the new Nikon One line.Perhaps the question that most people will wonder about is that they are thinking of buying a D7100, but for about $800 they can get into an FX body (Nikon 610). And for $1000 more they can have the D800. I shoot with by DX and FX cameras and lenses. Day in and day out the DX line is my bread and butter. I'd say buy the D7100 and wait to see if Nikon updates the D800 in the next year or so. The $1800 you save not buying the D800 can buy you one impressive zoom lens or a few great quality prime lenses. The 35mm F1.8G lens from Nikon is around $200 and it will be a lens that will make you a DX believer. But then again it comes down to what you shoot. If you are retired and take nice vacations and you want to pack as many megapixels than by all means jump into the D800. If you're younger and the D800 is going to stretch out your finances start smaller with a DX body. I don't think I would appreciate the D800 as much if I had only shot FX. There's a difference, not as big as you would imagine but you need experience with both DX and FX to see it.
Скроменый эксперт
27.03.2013
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
This is my second rewrite of my original, somewhat negative, review of the Nikon D800; the others having been written, then revised, at one and six months after purchase. You can see the improvement in my shooting by visiting flickr.com/photos/210rgturbo . There are 700 plus shots taken over four years. I began with a $225 point and shoot Sony. I moved to a fun but ultimately unsatisfactory Lumix super zoom. I then moved to a Nikon D5100 but exchanged it in favor of the D7000. The difference in build was very obvious although the D7000 must NEVER get even slightly wet around the control buttons. Later I borrowed a Canon 5D Mk II for a month and realized that I needed a camera whose ISO capabilities exceeded either the D7000 or the 5D.After a great deal of research and watching the original problems with the focus of the D800 being resolved between 2/12 and 7/12 I bought my D800 in 8/12, I decided it was what I needed for the low light shooting that I love to do.Like the good soldier it is, the D800 has proven to take astonishing pictures right up to ISO 6400, (when there's reasonable light). At night/low light I try and stay between 1600 to 2000 if nothing else is working. Otherwise a very sturdy tripod is required as the shutter used by the D800, especially in viewfinder mode, snaps with ballistics that will blur not only hand held pics, but some tripod mounted pics as well. The user manual states, in smallish print, that the D800 "needs to be used in Mirror Up mode when the viewfinder is the means of focus". In very low light there is not enough contrast for Live View mode whose shutter action is entirely different from the viewfinder. If you don't wish to shoot manually in mirror up you can choose to use the "Exposure Delay Mode" that lifts the mirror for one, two, or three seconds before then dropping the shutter again. This is very handy if you are not able to use a remote shutter trigger. Why the D7000 has almost no feedback in viewfinder mode seems strange. I wonder if the D4 has this kind of sharp "snap" to its view finder setting. The trouble with the "Exposure Delay.." is the loss of ability to use the multi shot modes. If you're going to take several shots a second, its best be sure you're at least at 1/500th of a second. I prefer 1/640th as the lowest speed for repeated shots. This tends to completely cancel out the "bounce" from the shutter when using the viewfinder.As a resident of New York City I like to go into Central Park or to the Hudson or East Rivers around dawn and take pictures of the birds and other wildlife that is found in those places. What one sees throughout the year is amazing. But the need to shoot as high speeds in this low light is essential. When things work, the shots can be hard to believe considering how long it takes to process the large RAW files. Becoming familiar with the camera to the point that I now know it inside out though it seems there's always something to learn has paid off.Four pro lenses have now replaced the lesser FX and reasonable DX lenses that I already owned. The moment I took my first shots with a the 80-200 ED (non VR) the difference was not only obvious but remarkable. My photography has improved in proportion to each new pro lens that I purchased. The other three are older. The 28-70mm F2.8 ED, the 50mm F:1.8, FX/DX with aperture ring; not as good as the 1.4 but one fourth the price. Lastly an early 70s 300mm Nikkor-H Auto F4.5. The second best part - detail being the first, was the price of $25. If I take a bad photo with one of these four lenses I'm certainly at fault. The trouble I had with the cheaper lenses was a tendency to back focus when I was using faster F stops.Common problem: the 10 pin lower connection on the camera's right side (looking at the front) that is covered by an attached piece of rubber Mine worked GREAT for a radio controlled remote. I could get 300 feet away and take pics with the remote in my pocket! Great for animals who get used to the camera just sitting there. After about 4 months the plug INSIDE the camera came loose and cannot be accessed without opening the entire case and reattaching it. Really? For $3,000? I was told by the NYC authorized Nikon repair people that this is a COMMON PROBLEM. One can use a flash shoe mounted remote, but it TOO must connect to the 10 pin connector. I've been stuck without any kind of remote - a stupid act by Nikon who has so many kinds of ports on the D800 that they could easily have used something else as well in case the 10 pin went bad. You're going to want some sort of remote with the D800....My original and continuing complaint about THIS D800 is a hairline fracture that goes all the way around the Live View screen other sections of the rear camera. Not seeing this for several weeks, I only noticed when I nearly pulled the back completely free from the main body! I pushed it back into place then sealed the camera's cracks with very strong ga
Скроменый эксперт
02.05.2014
8/10
Оценка пользователя
Хорошо
The Lens:
I am going to start by saying this is not a high end lens. I would not use this lens as a main lens. It is I have taken about 20 pictures with it so far. I will post them as soon as I figure out how to post pictures to a review.
The build quality is pretty good. It does not feel loose. Everything is tight. The only negative in the build that I have found is how the zoom functions. The zoom is not a twist zoom, it is a slide. That is not the problem. The lens has a ring that you can spin your camera from portrait to landscape. I ended up spinning the tube on the slide, not the proper mount ring. Not a big deal. But I want to point it out that I ran into that issue.
The lens does have some weight too it. I feel that if the lens had a couple extra pounds it would be more stable. But it was fine on the supplied monopod.
The slide was not smooth enough to shoot video with. I think with some practice I could get smooth enough to shoot action. Things like boats on water, birds in the air, anything with motion.
At 650mm the widest view, it was very easy to find my target and focus. At 1300mm, the full zoom, I had to work a little to find my target and focus. I ended up zooming in steps and focusing along the way. Once the lens was zoomed all they way in I found it difficult to shoot. Using only a monopod it is hard to hold the camera steady enough to get a decent shot. I was shooting at 7pm and the sun was still up. I was at f16 and shooting at 1/80sec shutter. My shots were mostly clear. But having more sun light would have helped with the shakiness I was facing.
The focus ring responded well. There is no play from when you first turn the ring before anything in the lens moves. It is very tight. Focus is easy enough when pulled full wide. But as said before it needs plenty of light when zoomed in.
Overall the lens at this price is great. I paid $269.99 with a package deal. It was available at the time for $259.99 with just the lens and adapter for specific brand cameras. I did research into this and read numerous threads on a couple photography forums. Most people bashed this lens based on the fact it is a "no-name" brand. And the fact it is cheap. Yes you can get a much much much much nicer lens and spend 10-20x more. This is a great product for someone like me who just likes to play photographer. I take pictures of my daughter at the park or taking pictures of sky lines from roof tops.
The Package:
The product I came with had a bunch of stuff in the box.
The T Mount to Nikon Mount. I like it. I have not used one before. But it all fits, the part is machined smooth and fits tightly. There are some set screws that I need to tighten. When trying to remove the lens from the body the lens tried to spin off of the adapter.
2x Converter. Looking through it at a light it is clear. The glass has no scratches. It is too dark to give it a real test. But it is solid.
Camera cleaning kit. This is pretty standard. It works and it is always good to have extra cleaning supplies.
MonoPod. This is a big one. It is not high end by any stretch. But it is taller than I need it to be. I am 6'2'' and the camera was about 6'' too tall for me. I say that is something big.
Overall, I am happy with my purchase.
I am going to start by saying this is not a high end lens. I would not use this lens as a main lens. It is I have taken about 20 pictures with it so far. I will post them as soon as I figure out how to post pictures to a review.
The build quality is pretty good. It does not feel loose. Everything is tight. The only negative in the build that I have found is how the zoom functions. The zoom is not a twist zoom, it is a slide. That is not the problem. The lens has a ring that you can spin your camera from portrait to landscape. I ended up spinning the tube on the slide, not the proper mount ring. Not a big deal. But I want to point it out that I ran into that issue.
The lens does have some weight too it. I feel that if the lens had a couple extra pounds it would be more stable. But it was fine on the supplied monopod.
The slide was not smooth enough to shoot video with. I think with some practice I could get smooth enough to shoot action. Things like boats on water, birds in the air, anything with motion.
At 650mm the widest view, it was very easy to find my target and focus. At 1300mm, the full zoom, I had to work a little to find my target and focus. I ended up zooming in steps and focusing along the way. Once the lens was zoomed all they way in I found it difficult to shoot. Using only a monopod it is hard to hold the camera steady enough to get a decent shot. I was shooting at 7pm and the sun was still up. I was at f16 and shooting at 1/80sec shutter. My shots were mostly clear. But having more sun light would have helped with the shakiness I was facing.
The focus ring responded well. There is no play from when you first turn the ring before anything in the lens moves. It is very tight. Focus is easy enough when pulled full wide. But as said before it needs plenty of light when zoomed in.
Overall the lens at this price is great. I paid $269.99 with a package deal. It was available at the time for $259.99 with just the lens and adapter for specific brand cameras. I did research into this and read numerous threads on a couple photography forums. Most people bashed this lens based on the fact it is a "no-name" brand. And the fact it is cheap. Yes you can get a much much much much nicer lens and spend 10-20x more. This is a great product for someone like me who just likes to play photographer. I take pictures of my daughter at the park or taking pictures of sky lines from roof tops.
The Package:
The product I came with had a bunch of stuff in the box.
The T Mount to Nikon Mount. I like it. I have not used one before. But it all fits, the part is machined smooth and fits tightly. There are some set screws that I need to tighten. When trying to remove the lens from the body the lens tried to spin off of the adapter.
2x Converter. Looking through it at a light it is clear. The glass has no scratches. It is too dark to give it a real test. But it is solid.
Camera cleaning kit. This is pretty standard. It works and it is always good to have extra cleaning supplies.
MonoPod. This is a big one. It is not high end by any stretch. But it is taller than I need it to be. I am 6'2'' and the camera was about 6'' too tall for me. I say that is something big.
Overall, I am happy with my purchase.
Скроменый эксперт
08.07.2013
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I am a semi-retired professional photographer with 40 years experience. I use 35mm Nikon f4s film cameras, a couple of Hasslelbads and 4"x5" cameras. My previous digital camera was a Nikon D70s which served me well. I have been holding off upgrading until a full frame digital camera came out that would allow me to take advantage of my extensive set of Nikon lens...especially the wide angle lens that were limited by the DX format. But I also wanted to get a camera that offered more than basic functions. I finally found that in the D800 Nikon.First...as a picture taking machine it has impressed me VERY much....more to follow on that. The particular features that have impressed me the most:1. HD video capability2. Handling- while the camera body feels good...the addition of the Meike Vertical battery pack and control really makes it fit my hand well...reminds me of my Nikon F4s cameras.3. Ability to do a lot of image processing right in the camera that I would normally use Photo Shop to do.4. Ability to create custom favorite setups and assign to 4 different master settings.5. 100% viewfinder coverage6. Real time viewing of image on the camera screen in both stills and videos7. Ability to STILL use all my older Nikon AF lens...this was the reason I originally swapped my entire camera system from Canon which obsoleted my older lens with their new cameras.8. Use of two memory cards...Compact Flash and SD...I use CF for high quality RAW images and SD card for video and copy of each RAW image in JPGs. The backup provides extra insurance and elimates making a coversion to JPGs later.9. Electronic "level" in XandY assistance...very handy for architecture.10. Image correction to somewhat simulate a view camera.11. Electronic grid in view finder ...use for same reason as #9.12. HDR capability very useful for strong lighting differences.Things missing that I would like:1. ability to record sound bite with each still picture2. I use AAs in the accessory Mieke grip....would prefer to use AAs in the body also as they are obtainable in an emergency from just about anywhere. I use the included battery in the body but set the camera to always use the AAs first. The included battery is 1900mAhr whereas I can get 2800 mAhr rechargeable batteries which give more exposures although not dramatic.Now about the most important thing in any camera....image quality.I am noted for my larger print sizes...generally 16"x20" up to 17"x25" printed on my Epson 3800 Pro printer or even larger printed commercially at a lab. As a medium format and 4"x5" user I often print large sizes and at very high quality levels that have been magazine covers,shown in galleries, etc. I decided to try some tests for sharpness, color fidelity, image smoothness and noise (grain to film users). I shot at ISO 100 a few flower images under controlled lighting conditions to maximize range. On one I noted a couple of ants walking on the flower so decided to see what it would look like blown up to huge dimensions. I enlarged the full frame image so that it was 10' wide. I than cropped a 8"x10" piece of that print including the ant. I was amazed to see that the ant was still extremely sharp and detailed and the noise/grain was still not evident. This all was not modified from the raw image using my normal "trick" of using a fractal program...just used PS to enlarge the image. In truth this image quality was as good as my best Hasselblad images (but no my Hasslelbad is NOT for sale).I think this is probably the camera to get if you want the best image quality in the Nikon Line. The top of the line Nikon camera (at double the price) are probably better for sports photography but that is not my interest. The 36MP FX chip does indeed do its magic if your subjects are portraits, product, architectural, scenic. As a side note...you can shoot at very high ISOs and the noise is very acceptable. The abiliity to automatically use noise reduction for very high ISOs and long duration exposures if very handy too.Overall...this is a superlative camera but it has an incredible amount of features so don't expect to just pick it up and start shooting....if you do you will miss all of its "good" stuff. Take the time to read the user manual a couple of times and try all the examples out.
Скроменый эксперт
11.10.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
While a lot people are waiting for their perfect D800, I got mine the day before yesterday on Oct. 9th (not from Amazon).First of all, let me talk about the AF issue,I spent two days crunched all kinds of test to find AF issue in my D800.Summary:The D800 I received has very minor/acceptable left AF issue;Serial #: 30494xxTest conditions: paired with 24-70 F2.8, ISO800(cleaner than ISO400 of D7000), bright room light,1/60 sec, with tripodFindings:At 24mm F2.8:Left AF sensor with no AF fine tune just started to show blur, it requires -3 AF fine tune(FT) to be in best focus,and requires -1 AF FT to reduce blur to indiscernible level.Center/right sensors requires no AF FT.At 70mm F2.8:(which most people are less concerned of)Left/center/right all shows optimal focus results without AF FT.Strictly speaking, the D800 I have do have minor left AF issue,In my opinion, it's totally tolerable, if it just require -1 to be sharp.Test approaches:1. Shooting at three Siemens stars on the wall with left center and right AF sensors, compare with live view focusing for each case. With this test, it's very hard to find the left AF point has issue. Yes, at 24mm, the left AF focusing is little more blury than live view focusing, but not to the extent that I can draw conclusion that my D800 has AF issure. AF focusing is softer than live view all the time for other DSLRs. If I just stop here, I would probably end up saying "I got a perfect D800", cos I know the D800 some people got has way off left AF point.2. So I did one more simpler test: shooting at a ruler at an angle (~45 degree), I fine tuned my D7000 this way. It's better to use a metric ruler, since the numbers are closer. At 24mm, when I focused at, say, 5cm, with left AF point, the best focus was between 6 and 7cm,(smaller number closer to the camera) which means my camera has back focus problem. It requires AF FT -3 to move best focus back to 5cm. Center and left points show perfect focusing results.3. I did another test to confirm. I shoot at Siemens star again with left AF point. Instead of comparing with live view focusing, I scanned through the AF fine tunes from +3 to -6. Find my image are clear/acceptable from 0 to -5, best focus is between -2 and -3, which confirmed with my findings with method 2. Again find center and left point requires no fine tune.Bottom line:I am pretty happy with the results, given that some people received one that require 20+- AF FT.Imagine -2 and -3 fine tune is totally acceptable, and without fine tune the image quality is acceptable too.Also, this only happens for 24mm F2.8, longer focal length has less to no AF problem.How many times when I shoot at 24mm with F2.8 (F2.8 for landscape?)?How many times when I need to use the leftmost focus point for those circumstances?Close to none! 90% times I use the center AF point.Sadly, the AF results are not consistent across all points.But how many people really test all of the AF points this way for their DSLRs,I bet none of the camera will give perfect focusing for all their sensors.I should test my D7000 too sometime later.Solutions:Keep the camera and do nothing about the left AF point.Initially I set the AF FT to -1,I found it brings my center and right AF points to front focus a little bit,my center AF point has to be perfect,So I move my AF FT back to 0.Other comments:I don't want to repeat the great things other people already said.Great ISO performance, clean at 1600, usable at 3200, sharp at 800.Great and accurate color, even though I prefer the colors my D7000 more,I think I just need more time to get used to it.Great size, weight, and handling, I find my D7000 too small/light for pro lens like, 24-70;now is much balanced. This is also the main reason I refrained from D600,given that it's a little wider D7000 with FX sensor.It's a pity that the battery handle is not magnesium like D4 or Canon pro cameras,and it's not fully enclosed with magnesium, with opening under flash.Mine has no greenish tint !Will forget about the AF problem and go out take some great pictures!Wish you best of luck in getting the D800 that you can love!*Some quick update on my test with D7000 AF using ruler approach, tested with 50mm F1.8 at F1.8.When the center AF point focus perfectly, both left and right AF point show slight back focusing and require -1 ~-2 AF fine tune. Good thing is the problem is symmetric. Imagine if the right point is perfectly aligned, the left point will probably need -2~-3 AF fine tune. Nikon probably adjusts the left first, then adjusts the right which messed up the left a little bit, that's my guess.I think this problem is probably because at wide angle (50mm is not as wide as 24mm when I test D800, I just don't bother to exchange lenses) and aperture wide open, the image is no long perfectly flat. Nikon adjusts the rest focus point so as when they focus the center point is in focus too if shooting a flat surface (it's totally my guess here).I wonder how many peopl
Скроменый эксперт
30.07.2014
2/10
Оценка пользователя
Ужасно
First of all, these are pictures of a $6,500 D3x, NOT a D800 (which sells new for about $3,000 new), and another person has an unanswered question concerning this discrepancy (as of this review, it's gone unanswered for almost a week). Secondly, why does the title say "Brand New" when it's actually a USED camera?
All-in-all, listing a USED camera as "Brand New," and showing multiple pictures of a camera that costs twice as much and not responding to legitimate questions should at least raise some concerns. Add in that, as of this review, somebody is listing a "Like New" D800 for sale at $1,000 though it's "currently unavailable," and the other sellers range from $2,300-$2,800, and this whole product page is just way too messed up to risk thousands of dollars (factoring in that it doesn't come with a lens, so that's another expense).
Both the D3x and D800 are great cameras, but they're in TOTALLY different leagues (like confusing a private turbo prop plane and a 747). Nikon makes great cameras for each of the markets in which they offer them, from general personal use to professionals, but photographers (of all levels) need to know what they're getting and what they really need (just my opinion). The D800 is a great camera for most people; it shoots awesome pics and has some great features. But the D3x has $3,000 worth of extra features that aren't justified by most people. For example, generally, there won't be any relevant difference if taking pics for web pages, or for pictures that are for screen displays. As for print, the higher end (or professional) cameras generally require very nice printers if print is the goal (that is, that extra $3,000 worth of additional coolness won't make any difference on most consumer printers).
Also, both of these cameras use FX lenses, so if someone already has many DX lenses, they won't be able to take full advantage of either camera. If anyone wants a quick-but-good article on the FX vs DX differences, PhotographyLife.com has a great write-up for people who want to know but don't want overly-technical details : http://photographylife.com/nikon-dx-vs-fx
I'm not writing this review just to troll some product page, but I do think that, for this much money, no one should have to sort out this much confusion, and since no one is answering the original question, it doesn't get displayed, so I wanted to point out some things people might want to investigate before clicking the "Buy-Now" button...
At a minimum, this page should be fixed, and the right info should be made available to folks...
.
All-in-all, listing a USED camera as "Brand New," and showing multiple pictures of a camera that costs twice as much and not responding to legitimate questions should at least raise some concerns. Add in that, as of this review, somebody is listing a "Like New" D800 for sale at $1,000 though it's "currently unavailable," and the other sellers range from $2,300-$2,800, and this whole product page is just way too messed up to risk thousands of dollars (factoring in that it doesn't come with a lens, so that's another expense).
Both the D3x and D800 are great cameras, but they're in TOTALLY different leagues (like confusing a private turbo prop plane and a 747). Nikon makes great cameras for each of the markets in which they offer them, from general personal use to professionals, but photographers (of all levels) need to know what they're getting and what they really need (just my opinion). The D800 is a great camera for most people; it shoots awesome pics and has some great features. But the D3x has $3,000 worth of extra features that aren't justified by most people. For example, generally, there won't be any relevant difference if taking pics for web pages, or for pictures that are for screen displays. As for print, the higher end (or professional) cameras generally require very nice printers if print is the goal (that is, that extra $3,000 worth of additional coolness won't make any difference on most consumer printers).
Also, both of these cameras use FX lenses, so if someone already has many DX lenses, they won't be able to take full advantage of either camera. If anyone wants a quick-but-good article on the FX vs DX differences, PhotographyLife.com has a great write-up for people who want to know but don't want overly-technical details : http://photographylife.com/nikon-dx-vs-fx
I'm not writing this review just to troll some product page, but I do think that, for this much money, no one should have to sort out this much confusion, and since no one is answering the original question, it doesn't get displayed, so I wanted to point out some things people might want to investigate before clicking the "Buy-Now" button...
At a minimum, this page should be fixed, and the right info should be made available to folks...
.
Скроменый эксперт
20.07.2012
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
In mid to late 2011 I decided that I would move to FX primarily (and m4/3 for lightweight/portable). I had been using a pair of D7000 bodies semi professionally, but good as they were there were problems that just got in the way. The primary one is the depth of field control the larger sensor allows. A close second is lens availability. There is no 16-50mm f/2.8. The 70-200mm f/2.8 is too long at the short end on DX for event work. There are no PC-E lenses. The options for 16mm are very limited and awkward, even with 3rd party lenses. All of which is unfortunate because the D7000 handles pretty nicely especially with the grip. I had used a D3 and D700 as stop gaps while I tried to settle on a D4 or D800 (or D700 or D3s or D3). I wanted good video as a possible option; I wanted the new generation AF system and controls etc. etc. Just all the little things that would be better about the new generation compared to the old, so I pre-ordered both a pair of D4s and D800s, the D800s from Amazon on Feb 7. While waiting for them, I canceled the D4 ... basically, the frame rate wasn't something I needed and the flexibility of using the D800 without grip + the extra pixels won out. Especially at a $6k discount!It's been a decidedly mixed bag since. On one hand, the handling, image quality, and low ISO performance, cropping flexibility are everything that I hoped for and more, there has been a lot of friction as well.I had a trip to Yosemite scheduled with me departing May 13. Though Amazon estimated delivery by April 30, and mid April I contacted Amazon to confirm the estimate, the bodies didn't show up until May 14. Splitting CF/SD slots is annoying. One or the other, eh? $450 for the battery grip is grating, even if you have become accustomed to Nikon's gouging on accessories.And now, the cherry on top, the dreaded left focus issue. On both bodies. I had been driving myself nuts trying to figure out why some of my pictures were OOF. I have pretty good technique and usually get good hits. My subjects move sometimes so I thought that might be it. Something was bothering me and I couldn't figure out what. Then I ran the test and >.< two defective bodies. I had hoped to exchange via cross shipping the defective D800s Amazon delivered to me. No luck with that, the window apparently closed June 14 so July 17 is right out. They did inform me that I could contact Nikon.So I did. I'll just say that the tech rep I spoke with there wasn't too impressed with my plight. Suggested that I upload some test shots to "my nikon" and in 2 or 3 days someone would get back to me, and we would go from there. If it needed repairs maybe in 2-3 weeks I'd get my bodies back. Renting 2 D800 replacements for 3 weeks while Nikon fixes the defective units they produced would be north of $1000. Not impressed with the help I'm getting here, especially from Nikon who messed up big time.So I have a product with lots of spectacular qualities. And lots of downsides. And not a lot of help from the manufacturer when I run into trouble. If felt better about other aspects of Nikon beyond the engineering the D800 is a 5 star product, hands down. As it is, if you buy one you have to buy the Nikon organization too, at least after 30 days.*** Edit *** There have been some posts questioning the left sensor focus problem. I have posted to flickr the test I conducted on a tripod with a cable release and lit by flash; you will notice that all of the live view and the right phase detect sensor produce acceptable focus; the center phase detect is marginal and the left phase detect sensor is awful. This was try for both D800s I purchased from Amazon. As of 7/23/2012 I am still waiting to hear back from Nikon. A downgrade from 3 stars to 2 seems more likely.*** Update 8/1/2012 **** Changing review from 3 stars to 2 stars. Nikon didn't even look at the photos I sent them before yesterday. Then all they did was email me back stating the photos had been "edited in some way". They hadn't, but apparently Nikon considers NEF->Lightroom->JPEG editing. So I tried to upload the NEFs. But their web application won't accept the NEFs their own camera generates!!!! I uploaded the nefs to my own website and sent them a link. I asked them to acknolwedge. They didn't. I called and the support said they were "after hours" and couldn't help me because HQ had the case. HQ still hasn't responded. It's ridiculous; The images show what Nikon has seen many many times before now. Left phase detect sensors that are badly calibrated. They are making me jump through hoops for what purpose rather than telling me when they will fix their defective product. Beware buying Nikon the company along with the body. It's really too bad that they managed to royally mess up such an otherwise excellent product with their "support" culture.*** Update 8/17/2012 *** I received the first one back from NikonUSA and with some quick testing the focus seems to
Скроменый эксперт
07.07.2012
8/10
Оценка пользователя
Хорошо
I know doing a review here would trigger the Nikon fans. If I do this same review on the 5D Mark iii it would have been the opposite. You can see it on the feedbacks. I will try to be as objective as I can even after I got burned dumping the Nikon equipment and switched to Canon. This has been my weeks of research finding the right full frame DSLR. First I like to state that I was a Nikon D90 owner and has been extremely happy with it. The reason I started with Nikon as my first DSLR was because Nikon had lower noise on high ISO compared to Canon and I was not impressed with Canon's mega pixel hype. My research was targeted to 2 DSLR, Nikon D800 and Canon 5D Mark iii and I was determined to get the full frame with higher quality still image. I went through at least 90% of the video reviews online for the D800 and Mark iii, so this is going to save you many nights of research. I was a Nikon fan but I ended up with a Mark iii and since have not looked back after I've confirmed my findings, comparing my Mark iii with my friend's D800.1. More mega pixel, more noise. Nikon just shot themself on the foot getting into the mega pixel race which Canon used to play. The D800 has noticeable noise level than the Mark iii when compared at 12k or higher ISO. I shot photos of green leaves on an indoor plant when I did the side by side comparison.2. Auto white balance under fluorescent lighting shows a greenish tone on the D800 which looks very unnatural. Even after I played with it by adjusting the Kelvin, I could not make it better than the Mark iii image taken under the same condition with Auto white balance.3. Moire on video on the Mark iii is slightly better but only if you compare the 2 videos side by side.4. D800 shows more detail outdoor, or indoor with tons of light. I would buy the D800 if I need the mega pixel badly but it has no use for me other than chewing up my memory and slowing down the frame rate. The D800 has to wait for 2 minutes for the buffer to clear after shooting about 15 continuous frames. The Mark iii kept on going but at a much slower rate. At least the Mark iii was still usable while the Nikon was not responding at all.5. Focus on the Mark iii is faster than D800. The D800 does hesitate a bit whereas the Mark iii was push and click, yes it's scary fast.6. Canon video has more accurate white balance and this carries on to the Mark iii. If you do video, Mark iii is a no brainer. The video was also a lot sharper than my Canon M52 which incorporates the 1/3 inch sensor, the big camcorder uses. Again a no brainer if you are a cinematographer.7. Most people are using the camera for sports, family, wedding and not landscape and the Mark iii is better for those applications.8. Nikon however is coming out with the D600 that may improve ISO over the D800 since it is going to be much lower mega pixel. Update: D600 proves to have more ISO noise than D800.I have switched to Canon because of my need but it does not mean you have to. It all depends on your need. If you are a landscape photographer or wants to blow up your photo extremely large with more mega pixels and you have plenty of lights, stick with Nikon. If you are a cinematographer, sports, wedding or simply indoor photographer go with the Mark iii. Canon is not always going to be better than Nikon and Nikon isn't always going to be better than Canon. But I can honestly tell you, for now this year Canon has stepped up and broken the ISO barrier. It has caught up with Nikon's low noise technology after 2 complete product cycles. What took Canon so long, I have no idea. I am hoping Nikon will come up with something better next year but for now their strategy, isn't better technology instead they will be focusing on prices. It is working, look at the D800 back orders. Is Nikon going to lose the war to Canon, no so fast, watch for the D600 which is the next sign of full frame price war. Within 2-3 years, full frame cameras will be average pro-summer cameras, no longer pro. The Sony Nex 7 is another example, mirror-less, smaller body, big crop sensor, big lens, point and shoot. Pro is going for much bigger sensors than 35mm. Buy full frame lens, I predict the crop lens will eventually be something casual moms will be using and the price will drop significantly because they will be produced in much larger quantities.Update, I was wrong about Mark III not have any moire issue at all. The other day I was reviewing my video, I notice a bit of moire not as noticeable and much better than D800. So far all the cameras I researched have moire issue some better than others. I was paying attention to all the movies and noticed the cameras Hollywood uses all have some sort of moire issue. After the Cine Gear Expo, I noticed something which you should greatly take into consideration. Canon has a flag ship of video cameras including the 1DC and the C500 and Nikon had none. What that tells me is Nikon is very behind on the video part. How does this affect your decisio
Скроменый эксперт
07.07.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
There are many reviews out there on the D800, so I'll make this as brief as possible. I am "upgrading" from the D200. I have been waiting since 2007 for the right model to upgrade to. My main reasons for waiting were, FX, useable DX MP (> 10MP), CMOS sensor, low noise at high ISO, and true USEABLE 1080p HD video with full AF. I have been on the "fence" on FX since the D700 was released and as of late, have been waiting for the rumored D600 - mainly for less MP and price (more on this later...).This review is for those who maybe on the "fence" as I was. Bottom line: YES, go for the FX and continue using what lenses you already have!Here's some reasons why (I'll update as I come across more things or as comments/requests are posted...):1. The D800 allows you to select what "crop factor" you want. I have been using the Nikkor 17-55/2.8 lens for six years as my "everyday" lens. My first shots with the D800 was with this lens. The camera's (default) setting is auto select DX crop when a DX lens is on the mount. In the view finder, the view remains 100% FULL FRAME, but you see a black DX boarder inside the full frame. As the camera focus locks, the boarder will flash red (as well as the focus point). And likewise, if 5:4 crop mode is selected, a 5:4 boarder is displayed in the viewfinder. Ok, so what does this mean? NEF (RAW), jpeg, and tiff files reflect 15.4MP DX file size. For example, D800's FX NEF (lossless compressed) is around 40MB. DX NEFs (also lossless compressed) are about 20MB. [I was not able to find this information anywhere...] In comparison, the D200's (10MP) NEFs (lossy compressed) is around 9MB. I really didn't want to be working with the size of 36MP NEF files if I continue to use DX lenses! I am not a "pixel peeper" and was reluctant for the large MP sensor. In contrast, the D600 is rumored to have 24MP - one that makes my storage hard drives a little "happier."2. DX lenses CAN be used as FULL FRAME lenses. However, they may not be as sharp and may have other distortion properties. Using the 17-55/2.8 at 17-28mm range (in FX mode), the corners of the frame are lost. However, the center/focus point remains sharp. Also as mentioned earlier, the FX mode lossless compressed NEFs are 40MB. I'll continue to test if 30-55mm range remains sharp in the FX mode through all apertures. If the results are good, then it seems I have a true 30-55mm/2.8 from the 17-55 lens, and I also have 45-80mm/2.8 (DX crop) too! (I will now be looking for the 14-24/2.8 :-).)3. Pics are SHARP! I am very pleased with how well the camera handles noise at 3200-6400 ISO! Have I mentioned the pics are sharp? True, at wide apertures the pics are not as sharp as the D800e model, they are still sharper than the D200 at ISOs greater than 200!4. D800 is feels much lighter than the D200! I have to readjust my balance points with this new camera. The 17-55/2.8 on the D200 felt balanced. It now feels much heavier than the body. It is something I will have to get used to - since I've been so comfortable with the D200.Other info:Switching from video to camera mode is a little awkward. The shutter, aperture, and ISO settings are NOT retained from the camera mode when switched to video. They are completely independent.I'll continue to test with other lenses - 70-200/2.8 (also with the TC 2x), 50/1.4, and 24-70/2.8.-- update July 10, 2012 --These lenses were tested:17-55/2.8 (DX): In FX mode shows significant vignetting 17-30mm, PS and Aperture cannot really fix it. However, from 30-55 Aperture 3.x does pretty good adjusting for vignetting. In DX mode, no significant issues with apertures 2.8 through 11 (a tiny bit of vignetting just in the far corners barely noticeable).50/1.4: In auto mode, the d800 detected this as a DX glass... shot crisp pics (focus pt center focus) at 1.4. In FX mode slight vignetting almost undetectable in the corners that are easily fixed using Aperture or other software. Until I can afford the 85/1.4, this glass will remain my "portrait" lens.70-200 VR: DX just as good as on the D200. FX mode does NOT disappoint! A super piece of glass!TC-II 2.0x: DX mode better than the D200! With the D200 (600mm/5.6 equivalent) I notice some purplish fringe in some areas (especially flash reflection in eyes). This did not happen with the D800 even with the "pop-up" flash! I do not use the built in flash other than in CMDR mode but used it just for testing. No issues - provides so much flexibility. SO SHARP.I've tested AF-C and S with these lenses with no significant issues. 3D and Auto tracking works awesome! Tracks kids, pets, and wildlife with ease! However, it is a battery drain!--------------IMHO, the D800 will NOT completely replace my D200 for outdoor sports (6 fps with my battery grip), and shooting in direct sunlight. Many reports online stating CCD sensors are still better than CMOS in extremely bright conditions.-- update July 10, 2012 --Direct sunlight: The D80
Скроменый эксперт
13.08.2013
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
Just to say something about myself before I discuss this camera: I am a long, long time Nikon user and lover, am a semi-professional photographer, and I'm a pixel pusher. I am therefore an obvious LOVER of this camera. I shoot in urban and natural environments pretty equally, and I cover macro to landscapes and everywhere in between. Recently my work has focused on portraiture and birds as I struggle to improve my eye in other fields. Mine has a few oil spots on the sensor due to similar problems voiced regarding the D600 and D800. I need to have removed, which will cost me as I don't have the cajones to do it myself, and I am still giving this thing 5 stars. This hopefully gives my review a bit of perspective:While I always recommend people do some serious research before they buy a camera, this is different. Unlike the majority of Nikon DSLRs and point-and-shoots below this one, there are no scene settings, no auto setting, no standard automatic setting calibrations built in... this is just a really really legit camera with base functions that mimic an old Nikon film SLR (with MUCH better ergonomics). Leaving aside the full, 35mm (FX) frame and insanely high-megapixel sensor, this is a camera for someone who takes great images and actually knows how to use a camera. It is not for people who take great photographs on auto with their cell phone or point and shoot (you guys, look at the D600). If you are at that stage in your photography where you are ready/need this camera, you will know it. You will just feel it. Not only that, but you will actually know about cameras and a review like this is essentially useless, repeated information. When that happens, do whatever you can to buy this camera.Bear in mind that the only thing you don't get with the D800 that actually counts in a high frames-per-second rate. If you can get around that and know what you are looking at here, you honestly can't go wrong. Put the battery grip on it and it is far better than any camera I have ever used both ergonomically and functionally. I do include the D4 in that conversation, mostly because my work finds greater benefits in the D800's high resolution vs. the D4's speed and processing power.In short: if you feel like you want/need this camera and are ready for it, don't hesitate. If you're filthy rich, don't hesitate and make sure you match the purchse with a sweet donation somewhere. If you're still a rook but have money to burn and you're buying something no matter what I say, check out the D600-in the end you still may wind up here and I wouldn't blame you. If you shoot on auto, go buy a used DSLR or break out the one you already have-learn to shoot manual before you even think about this thing.Regarding the D800E: I probably should have gone with the D800E based on how and what I shoot combined with my skills in post, but I decided to just go with ol' reliable (anti-aliasing filter over the sensor). Who knows when, where, and for what I will want to use this camera in the future, so why risk subject/process confinement brought on by the D800E's potential for additional moire in certain settings? In the end I find the debate to be a bit mute anyways, as the resolution different being discussed is so fine it really should not have any major impact on your photography. This thing has so much resolution that unless you are working with the world finest glass with ideal depth of field in perfect light, you'll hardly notice the difference at 100% ASIDE from the occasional addition of moire via the D800E. The D800 is also cheaper and was on sale...
Скроменый эксперт
01.07.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I have been shooting with Canon 5D Mark II since it came out. Prior to that I was using Canon 5D. So I have a long history of using full-frame cameras in the opposite camp. Sure the 5D series had limitations, but so what, the images they took rivaled medium format film (not digital). Then came Nikon D800 and D800e, with specs out of this world. Nikon packed everything that they had; their best sensor, their best meter, and their best AF in this package, and that for a very reasonable $3k.I ordered this camera on Amazon the night it was announced; both D800 and D800e. While Amazon delayed shipping I got my camera from elsewhere, then eventually I got deliveries from Amazon. Including the cameras I purchased and borrowed from friends, I have now played with half a dozen camera now. So what I say below is not based on my experience with one camera but all of these.1. Image Quality.While Canon 5D series rivaled medium format film, images from D800/e rival that of from medium format digital. So much has been written about the shadow details on this sensor. In addition to that I can pull down highlights much better than anything I used before. I can increase contrast, reduce contrast, increase saturation, increase sharpness to crazy levels and the raw files just take all of it in strides without breaking a sweat. I want to specially mention the color response. On my previous cameras, I could play with contrast and color only so much before getting noise or color shifts. I have not seen any such thing happening on D800. The sensor is truly next generation.2. MeteringOn my canon I am used to adjusting exposure compensation all the time. As I am moving around and changing subjects, I am always adjusting exposure. Nikon's newest color metering is so good that I have actually reprogrammed the camera so that the Main command wheel sets ISO instead of exposure compensation. This is because I haven't had to adjust exposure often. Canon supposedly has similar metering in 1Dx but not in 5D Mark III which inherits the meter from 7D.3. AutofocusDue to color metering feeding into AF tracking, the AF tracking is much better than what I have seen elsewhere. Single point AF, at least with the lenses that I have, is a bit slower then I am used to on Canon.4. High ISO;In my opinion, this camera has 1-stop better ISo performance than my Mark II. The ISO 3200 on 5D Mark II is about the same as ISO 6400 on D800. I have taken pictures from this camera at 25600 ISO. Some thing I have never done before. At normal print or display sizes, the pictures look exceptional. Of course, if you enlarge to 100% you will see high ISO artifacts, but remember that 100% images seen on 96 DPI monitor are equivalent to huge mural sized prints. So it is unfair to compare the 100% output of 36MP sensor to 100% output of 12MP or 22 MP sensor. I have uploaded an ISO 25,600 picture in imagesThis camera breaks new ground in 35mm picture taking and therefore has garnered significant criticism from people who either wanted this to be perfect or are trying to defend other brands. I will address some of these below.LCD Color Cast: I did notice this on the first D800 that I received but on the most recent ones it seems OK. On the first one that I saw this, it was not a big deal. I had Canon 5D for two years which also had a color cast on LCD but I had not problem living with it, partly because I shoot Raw.The reason for color cast is mostly related to Auto WB. It is easy to change the Auto WB to have a magenta bias, which should take care of green tint.Left AF Point: Depending on ow you test it, you can find some fault with extreme AF points in single AF mode. In my testing this issue was only visible when testing on wide-angle lens, I could not see it on 50mm or longer lenses. Nevertheless the left most point, on some cameras, seems to be off, sometimes. On a whim I tested the left-most point on my 5D Mark II also. It was way off! I had never noticed it and no one ever complained about this specific point. FWIW, the camera has 51 AF points. Even excluding the left-most point, you get 50. In real life, what will happen is that you will use either on of the center points, or if you are shooting in portrait mode, then rightmost point. The use of left point is rare and will mostly be in continuous AF mode in which case no single point determines AF accuracy. Anyway, I hope that down the road Nikon will be able to adjust this point. If you do have to use that location, switch to Live View and use contrast detect AF, which is very good (better than Canon), which brings us to the next pointLive View: Here most of what others have said is true. Live view has many problems. It skips lines, so 100% or higher view is very annoying, the screen blacks out after every pictures for 1-4 seconds while image is written to card, using manual focus in dark settings is difficult because the camera always stops down the lens. These are quite annoying things and all I can say to Nikon
Скроменый эксперт
22.06.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
First please allow me to introduce myself. I am an avid amateur. I am a member of the Delaware Photographic Society of which I am the Equipment Chair, and the Photographic Society of America.I have been shooting my D800 for over 6 weeks. I have about 1500 shutter actuations. My previous (and still owned) DSLR IS a Nikon D300 (22,000+ shutter actuations). I use a number of lenses, including a very excellent Nikkor AF 80-200mm f/2.8 (circa 1995) lens, and also the outstanding AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8. I also have 4 AF-S lenses including the 105 f/2.8, the 28-300 and the 10-24 DX, and the 50mm f/1.4..I have gone into detail on my lenses so you will know what I have been using on the camera. Please note, before continuing this review - it is the photographer that produces the images, the camera only records what the photographer sees, and the camera body is less important to the quality of the photo than is the glass on the front of the camera. Poor lenses will produce poor photos on any camera made.I have read reviews complaining about focus issues. I have had no trouble with focus or sharpness of my photographs with this camera. I must respectfully disagree with the other reviews which complain about focus on the D800. I seldom use a tripod and have not felt compelled to do. I recently shot two events with both of my cameras - the professional bicycle race in Philadelphia (June 3) and the more recent MS Society MuckRuckus in Newtown Square, PA. Both events were action events and I found no difference between the two cameeras on the quality of the images concerning focus. The Camera behaved flawlessly. My biggest issue with sharpness of my photos is when I am too quick on the trigger, not the camera's fault.This camera has 1 drawback to my shooting - the slow frame rate on continuous high speed shooting. I suspect that is due to the large file size with respect to the size of the buffer memory in the camera. Having said that I can still get 6 frames a second with a battery pack (and essential item of my inventory - never have to worry about missing a moment due to battery change) and shooting in DX Mode. That gives me 19MP images which is more than large enough if I frame the photo anywhere near correctly. That is my one big Con on the list.Pros:1. High ISO performance: I have no fear kicking the ISO up to as much as 4000 (or more) thousand for regular shooting. In my own limited experiments I have found miniscule noise difference between ISO 400 and ISO 4000. That enables me to use very high shutter speeds with my fast glass. That in turn has essentially removed all real concerns about sharpness.2. AF Performance: On my D300 I have had some issues with older non-AF-S lenses due to relatively slow focus rate by the mechanical drive. however, with AF-S lenses it was wonderful. On my D800 those concerns have evaporated. The mechanical drive focus lenses (read AF Nikkor) focus so fast, the focus rate is almost indistinguishable from the AF-S lenses. I use both freely, without concern on the camera, and have had great success with both.3. Lens compatibility: I can use almost any lens made by Nikon since 1959. Older lenses do need to have be converted to AI (Aperture Index) configuration unless they are fixed aperture (Cat lens - f/8 only). That is also true for my D300 so that is not a change. But that fact is one of the major contributing factors in my choosing Nikon over other brands. In addition, though the D800 is a full frame sensor camera it will use my APS-C lenses as well - it simply switches to DX (Nikon's term for APS-C) mode and includes a black frame in the view finder to show the coverage of the lens. Some of my best lenses are used lenses I bought for a song compared with newer lenses and have given me truly wonderful results. I can use every lens I have with either camera D300 (DX or APS-C) and D800 (FX or full frame).4. Build quality: True the camera is not quite built like the D4, but then it costs half as much. Over all I have found it to be a very solid, well built, well balanced camera. I have already been caught in soft rain and drizzle with the camera and have had no problems with it weather sealing. I have had no software issues with the camera either - no freezing or other glitches in its operation.5. Update: Since I submitted the review I remembered something else that is a definite Pro. Raw File size: The D800 will take pictures in 12 or 14 bit color depth. When shooting uncompressed Raw files in 14 bit color depth the file size is about 75MB per photo. However Nikon has included 2 versions of Raw recording which create smaller files. There is a mode called "Lossless compressed Raw". Lossless compressed mode compresses the files with a reversible compression algorithm. If you choose"Lossless compressed Raw" and use 12 instead 14 bit color depth the file size per photo is reduced to about 32.4MB, less than half of the largest file size. There is also a "Compressed Raw" mode, which using 12
Скроменый эксперт
26.09.2014
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I bought my D800 in Feb of 2013. I have spent over a year with the users manual and have used simply every page of the 447 page document. The camera is easy to use, as you can find the functions you want in the manual and the steps for setup and functions are clearly written. I have done night sky, landscapes, macro photography, wildlife, product photographs, and one wedding with occasionally spectacular results. I have never resolved the CF Flash card issue on my camera.. it simply never recognizes any card of any manufacturer I have tried. I gave up as it has no material effect on what I do and I would rather use the camera as is than send it to Nikon for whatever they would do. This camera will push you to upgrade the rest of your kit. You need a better tripod, you will want specialty lenses (I have gone away from zoom lenses for the most part but my kit runs 50mm Nikon, 16-28mm Tokina (aspherical), 100mm Tokina macro (perhaps the wrong purchase but a very good lens), 80-400 Nikon (this came from purchase with my old camera body but still is very good for wildlife) and a 200mm Nikon "Micro" lens for macro work that is a bit of magic. You are going to want a high quality flash (I have two including a ring flash) and a big kit to roll all this stuff around.) and you are going to want the time to try to get to the edges of the envelope of this camera. RAW images run 50 Mb and will challenge your post processing ability but you will create images that will simply make you go WOW.... I have taken perhaps 4500 pictures in the last year and created a portfolio of maybe 60 that have something special about them. I have hung photos as large as 36X24 on my walls that I do not seem to get tired of at all. My children and my parents have asked for and received prints that they have hung as well... some from the simplest of subjects. This whole thing is stupidly expensive, it creates a black hole for money for equipment, trips, software, and photographs hung as art. I would not change a thing, it has been the best year ever.
Скроменый эксперт
24.05.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I am not going to give a full review of this camera since it is likely you are already well aware of much of what is out there. That being said, there are a few things I have noticed which there don't seem to be much feedback on which I would like to highlight. For point of reference I am coming from a D700 and have many of the high end FX lenses.One of the absolute best improvements (aside from obvious things like resolution, improved DR etc.) is the Auto ISO feature. Am I the only one who loved this on my D700 and love it even more on the D800? Nikon has tweaked the min shutter speed setting on this so it is a little more intelligent. Instead of just saying 1/50 or whatever you want as the min (this would be a decent setting for a wide lens) the D800 takes it 1 step further and allows it to float relative to the focal length. In other words 1/50 with a 200mm lens might be a little low in my opinion but the D800 will set it to 1/200 (following the 1/ FL rule). Furthermore, you can tell the camera to set it faster or slower (there are 5 levels with the mid setting as 1/FL) so the same 200mm lens will have some multiple (or fraction) applied to this as well. I like the one step up setting so my 200mm lens never shoots with a shutter less than 1/400. This makes it so much easier on longer length lenses and especially zooms like the 70 - 200 where you might jump around and going back into the menu is a pain to set the min shutter each time... Call me lazy but I love this feature - great addition.EDIT: After shooting 2,000 shots or so with the D800 (and especially with any longer non-VR lenses) I see why this feature has been added... With the D700 the 1/FL rule seemed to work just fine, especially with VR equipped lenses (most non caffeine junkies can get away with far less). With the D800 this rule just doesn't work as well and will produce mixed results. With a D700 and my 24-70 I would shoot at ISO 100, 50mm and 1/50s all day long. On the D800 I have found it is better to go to 1/100 or even a little higher with ISO 200 or higher - the ISO change is a lot less noticeable than the increase in sharpness due to the shutter. With the 14-24 this "new" rule (haven't decided yet if the new rule should 1/2*FL or 1/3*FL) isn't too hard to follow but with the 70-200 I find myself pushing the ISO frequently of changing the setting down a bit due to the presence of VR (I use the VRII model). I honestly would not have guessed that the increase in MP would require this much of a change in technique but it does. Of course you can always downsample and still be better off than where you were with the D700 so don't take this as a negative to the camera - just a required change in technique in my opinion. When I first wrote this review I loved the new feature and I still do now but there is one change they now need to make: Recognize VR equipped lenses and allow conditional rules such as 1/2*FL with VR and 1/3*FL without. None the less I just change the setting in "my menu" when I use a 16-35VR or 70-200VR (although the longer one can sometimes benefit from just leaving it) and the end result is the same but Nikon made it 90% of the way on the new feature, why not round it out. I did also pick up a grip and use rechargeable AAs simply to add weight & this also helps but D800 + grip + 8 rechargeable AAs + 70-200 is not something I walk around with for hours on end.Other more minor comments:- This is less about Nikon as it is about Adobe but it caught me off guard: LR3 will not read D800 RAW files nor will it ever! You either have to use a converter (add more workflow steps which is unacceptable in my opinion) or upgrade to LR4. I suppose I can see both sides but it is annoying to say the least. Adobe should really support this in LR3. It made me want to use Aperature instead but I also use PCs so that is just a pain.- Built in HDR is a joke. Any respectable HDR shooter will bracket with at least 5 frames and likely use Photomatrix or something similar. It also does not work if you shoot RAW - only JPG and only 2 images hence the joke. Your probably not buying the camera for this anyway.- The quiet mode is also useless. Fractionally less noisy than the std and a waste of a spot on the dial.- The + / - on the image zoom is backwards from the D700. Just takes some getting used to...- Folks, it is a 36mp sensor; you will need a bigger drive and 16GB cards barely scrape by now. I am finding 14 bit lossless compression files in the 50mb range - directly after a format the camera reads 200 available images on the 16GB card. A 2GB card is like an old roll of film now for 25 "exposures" LOL. I get that wedding shooters are going to need a lot more bigger drives but you can't have more detail without more space... Yes, people say you can downscale but this poses a serious workflow bottleneck for me. I have also found that in addition to more drive space working with these large files, particularly in PS & HDR SW with a dated dual-core
Скроменый эксперт
12.05.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
UPDATE: 2012_06_07 I have been using the camera for a month and I want to echo the advice of others. The minimum size CF card that is realistic with this camera IMHO is a 16 gb. It will hold 200 RAW images. I have also found that 400X is the minimum speed I find provides acceptable performance during a photo shoot. Lexar has the 400X 16 and 32 gb cards at a very reasonable price. Don't forget the second slot for the SDHC card. Speed there is an issue particularly if you are using for backup. Personally, I find the added steps with this camera to be useful because it slows me down and I spend more time with composition and lighting. That pays off. The camera renders beautiful color tones, particularly skin tones. So the budget for this camera should have room for new cards and if possible, a solid tripod. Good luck with your purchase.Bottom line, the D800 is a magnificent camera. I would buy it again in a heart beat. I have used Nikon cameras and lenses for 40 years.I shoot a lot of available light portraits in less than ideal situations and I can see that it will not be easy to get the best images with this camera without a lot of work and attention and bumping up the iso more than I would like. I do 24x30 prints or larger for exhibits and I am greedy about keeping the iso as low as I can:) BUT to actually be able to use this camera to its full extent it is important to know that it is really best suited for photographers who work at an advanced amateur or professional level. Even then, there are many professionals who will discover that the camera is not flexible enough to meet their needs. Be very cautious, do not buy this camera until you have read the entire Nikon Technical Manual available for download. This is separate from the manual.If you are not very experienced, I recommend that you consider the D 7000 instead. It is far easier to get the best pictures. The D800 is a very complex camera and achieving the kind of images you want requires lots of practice, patience and study. It also requires a tripod in many settings, Nikon says that in multiple places. I agree. I did not at first and my images were not as sharp as I wanted them to be. I work as a professional and I bought the D800 to replace my Mamiya medium format with the 28 mp back. The Mamiya lenses are excellent lenses. I only shoot RAW. The images so far have better richness, depth, and three dimensionality than the best of my medium format images. The rendering of shadows is wonderful with undetectable noise. Images at an ISO of 400-800 are still superb, unlike my other cameras. But Nikon is very clear that to take advantage of the high resolution you need to use a tripod in most situations. Please review the Nikon Technical Manual. What they say about even minuscule movement is true. They recommend using live view, but I find it very slow because the scene cannot be seen until the camera writes the entire file. BUT it is important to emphasize that this camera indeed replaces the medium format digital cameras and then some. Medium format cameras have trouble with noise in shadows among other problems, the Nikon puts them to shame. The D800 renders perfect and I mean perfect skin tones and dynamic range. The colors are rich and and have a real depth to them.Obviously the lenses are a big factor but I used the same lenses on my D200. I usually use a hand held meter, but the center weighted metering when I tested it works beautifully. The bokeh with the 16-35, 50, and 70-200 lenses is exceptional and the images have a haunting beauty almost 3-D quality. Again, believe it. It focuses so fast with the G lenses that I often think it has not focused. I have read that some people describe an asymmetric softness in the view finder, I have not seen that. I use a camera without my glasses and I have ordered the 2+ diopter viewfinder lens because the built in dial is about 1-1.5 diopters short of what I need. My glasses have a 2.75 add. I have some exceptional images from a portrait session of a mother and child in my studio. I use the Profoto lighting system, and my main light is usually powered at 1,000 watt seconds with a 300 watt second bounced fill. I used my Nikon 50mm 1.4mm lens, ISO 100, 1/250th, f 7.1. I did not use a tripod or live view or mirror up. I had wonderful detail but even when they were absolutely still there is a slight softness of the whole image. Truthfully, it was a bonus because the image is exactly what you want to deliver to a client. Detailed but not so sharp as to be unflattering. Under the exact same settings with the Mamiya, the detail was so sharp that one could see individual pores on the face and I had to back it off in photoshop. I know that as I get more skilled with the camera imagers will be very detailed and much sharper and I will need to deal with that sharpness. In a natural light portrait session with the same woman, again sharp but not the sharpness that one would expect. I was using a tripod, 1/50th,
Скроменый эксперт
14.06.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
Let me first state that this camera will not make you a better photographer. Not even close. It may even make you a worse photographer. Why? because the hand shaking that was forgivable before will now be more evident at 100% zoom. Wait, why are you pixel peeping a 36MP camera? For pixel peepers, avoid this camera at all cost! I'll explain more below.The beauty of a high megapixel camera is that it makes your pictures better at the same megapixel size as your last camera! Let me explain this, for most lens, sharpness differences can be viewed at 100% zoom. Unless you print at gigantic 36MP, which only a very small percentage of pros will be using, it's moot. Now, when you downsize a picture, the pixels are interpolated. Lens that were previously unacceptable at 12MP all of a sudden look pretty decent at 12MP downsized from 36MP! For example, a picture that was taken with slight motion blur at 100% pixel peep will disappear when I re-size it to 12MP. That's the thing, most will not print a 36MP picture at 36MP! You will have to resize it to make prints! It's pretty insane to upload 36MP JPEGS to make 4x6 prints anyway. Although someday, I will hang a 36MP picture on my wall.So what's the purpose of getting a 36MP? First, high ISO noise will be interpolated out of existence when downsized. Second, blurriness will be sharpened out of existence when downsized. Third, your not so sharp lens at 100% will look pretty darn good downsized. You need to compare the pictures produced at the printed size and not at 100% zoom! If you take a picture of your face and zoom in at 100%, it'll be pretty unflattering with all the pores and stuff. Same concept here. So if you buy this camera just to view pictures at 100% zoom, you will all be disappointed because that simply is not the point.Coming from a D90, these are the things that are better.1. Full frame. Your 50mm prime now has a real 50mm FOV rather than a fake 75mm FOV.2. Bokeh. You get to see more of that 50mm FOV which means the bokeliciousness that were lost on the D90 is now there. The further you go away from the focus point, the softer the bokeh is. When the DX picture is truncated, you lose that bokeh. This is why full frame appears to have better bokeh.3. ISO. When downsized, my ISO 6400 looks like ISO 100 on a 12MP. Maybe I'm exaggerating a little...but not by much.4. Sharper image with the same lens. Yes, at 100% zoom, all the short-comings are there to see. At 12MP downsized, it will look very great.5. Cliff Mautner looking pictures. Yes, I went there. I've always looked at those nice midday pictures where Cliff take pictures of his models in front of a green background (trees) and the model's faces has that cool looking rim lights... yeah, I can replicate that! Except his models are better looking. Is this due to the better sensor or the better imaging processor?6. Better dynamic range. When the sun's beating down on you at high noon, dial the exposure compensation down -2EV, shoot without flash, and then fix the under exposed parts without blowing out highlights. Tada, natural light at high noon without flash! Very nice, Nikon!I have no green cast. I have no out of focus focus points (that I know of). My beep on focus function is broken. I turn it on, but it doesn't beep. I don't know why. At 100% zoom, my prime doesn't look that sharp at F1.8 as it does at F4. But I don't care. If you want a camera to test out lens sharpness, this camera is it! But don't blame me if you proceed to throw them all in the trash to buy sharper lens.Is this a better camera than the D700? It depends. Is it worth the $1300 premium for the added functionality? Is a $3000 Channel purse worth $1300 more than a $1800 LV purse? A purse doesn't even take pictures and you sure as heck can't downsize it on command! And yet my wife buys a new one each year. For me, yes it's worth it! I'm referring to the camera, not the purse. Then again, if you were reading carefully, I previously own a D90 not a D700.As a final note, I'm going to read more books on photography because this camera tells me what I'm terrible at it. I look at the pictures on Flickr that people took using this camera, then I compare it with my pictures, all I want to do is to punch myself in the face. If I become a better photographer as a result of owning this camera, then I guess the $3000 is worth it.This is the Internet. Feel free to tell me I'm idiot and that I'm wrong in the comments.Update 6/23/12: (1) The beep issue was resolved by deleting bank A and then use bank B. Unfortunately, my camera has the left focus issue. Most of my lens are fine, however I borrowed a friend's 24-70mm and the left most focus definitely has a problem on this one. In liveview, it works fine. I'm going to wait a few months to see what Nikon says about this before sending it in for repair.
Скроменый эксперт
25.04.2013
4/10
Оценка пользователя
Ужасно
It is leaking lubricant or oil on the 2nd replacement body.... see update below!1st I did was to test the left focus to see if I have the problem as some people reported. I tested it on all 6 Nikon lens (24mm (D), 60mm (D), 85mm (D), 300mm(D), 17-55mm (DX, G) and a 24-120 zoom (G)) and am glad to find out that i don't have any of the issue that others mentioned. It is either Nikon had fixed it or the problem is lens related. (Likely through the lens data...)The detail record on D800 image is just incredible. (I don't really think I need a D800E to see that) The movie capture quality is really good when paired with a VR lens for personal use. However, the size and weight of lens + camera have made it hard to pan it for the video purpose. The focus in movie mode is relatively slow compare to the photo mode and made a lot of noise that is audioable in recording. I ended up using a monopod with quick release and a external mic for video shooting and it helps a lot. On the photography side, the high ISO capability of the D800 has greatly improved over the D200. Overall, I am very satisfied with the D800.UPDATED 4/27:It is unfortunately, the the image sensor has the infamous oil deposits on it. It is not easy to see when doing a still images. However, when shooting video footage it became very easy to see when panning the camera around bright sences. I had order a replacement from Amazon... Buying from Amazon is probably the safetest way to purchase an expensive item.Updated 5/1:I have received the replacement camera body. Checked the autofocus on the left and right on all my lens. I can't detect any issue. Pointed the camera to the bright lamp with f22 to check for any oil spot on video footage. I didn't found any oil or black spots but surprising I found a batch of dead sensor. On video footage it is like a firefly flashing red and yellow. The dead pixel can be verified on the full frame still picture also, once you know where to look for it. 30 minutes later I deceided to check it again before I pack it up and send it back Amazon. To my surprise, it is not showing up in the new video footage I inspected. The only possible explaination is that the imaging sensor of the camera was not working properly earlier. (electronically or mechanically) The body was quite warm as it was baked inside the UPS truck under Flroida sun. I have decided to keep it for now. However, I would have to take the chance that those pixels may have shorter life span than the rest of the sensor.updated 5/04:After a 2 second high speed continuous shooting (4 fps of total of 8 shots), both the black spot and oil spot appear on the image and video footage. The built in low pass filter cleaning mode could not remove neither spot. The solid debris appear black against background. The oil or liquid spot will appear bright against background with dark hallow around it. It is very clear when shooting with small aperture, f/11 and up. It is a design flaw to have thin low pass filter that allows dust be so close to the focus plane.Final verdict 5/27:I have decided to keep it. The picture quality is good and video performance are also quite well. I end up buying a couple lenspen sensorklear to clear the new found oil spots. To minimize the risk of sensor contamination, it makes every lens change an uneasy task. No zoom while in live view. Turn off live view immediately when not in use. Limiting continuous shooting (CL or CH). Prepare to clean the sensor yourself. If you can live with all that, then you should be fine with it and be a happy purchase. Otherwise, get a D600 and save a couple thousands toward D4 when they test and proof out all problems here on D800 and D600 customers.
Скроменый эксперт
16.04.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
You all know what the specs of this camera are. I won't lose your time with that. I have the camera for about 20 days and here are my impressions so far.In the beginning I was very upset by the Mpx number. After just the first shoot, I have to tell you - I don't want to have a camera with small resolution any more. Period!The level of details is astonishing! The images are excellent even straight from the camera - with no edit at all. The dynamic range is excellent.Also the AF is very good. It literally sees in the dark. I tried to take pictures in dark room at night (no light - all lights turned off) and the AF assistant light was enough to focus, without even hunting. I wasn't able to see ANYTHING, because it was complete dark, but the camera did. Daytime I never experienced any problems with the AF.I believe the fast AF and details level are also determined by what lens you use (and I have really good optics), but I do compare with D700 and D7000 and there is significant improvement.I like the ergonomics. It's comfortable to hold, even for quite long time. I like the screen resolution, but it does have that slight greenish tint (if that's bothering you it can be changed in the settings).The only things I don't like are:There is a slight noise even in low ISO values - 400 and above, but it is only when you look at 100% and the noise is very fine grade, extremely easy to remove in LR.I would also like to see some more customization options for some of the buttons - like I never use the WB (well almost never) and since I shoot RAW, for me this is quite useless button.I currently own the Sony NEX-7 and I'm impressed with the level of customization of that camera. You can do all your settings just with your thumb - A, S, ISO, etc. I really would enjoy to see at least some of this on D800.Overall, D800 is a dream camera - I highly recommend it to everyone!~~~~~~~~~~ Update 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~ (after 4 months of use):Lowering my score to 2 stars.I do not change my mind on what I've written before about this camera. Everything is correct, except with one - the AF.I said I didn't have problems with my AF, but surely now I do.And it's the commonly spread left AF points problem.I did not discover it in the beginning, because I rarely use the very left AF points. Few months after the camera was on the market, I started to read reviews, describing this problem, but since I haven't experienced those, I neglected to test myself. Until one day, when shooting outdoor I saw my images come extremely soft and blurry (with 24mm 1.4G lens). I tested with the 16-35mm - same thing. 50mm 1.4G - same. I had inconsistent problems with my 85mm 1.4G lens while ago, thinking first that it is caused by backfocusing. After I talked with the technical department from Nikon I realized that this could be caused by the fact I was shooting kids, and you never can be sure how fast they move, etc.However - this was something different now.I now remembered what I read about the left AF points and when I got back home, I decided to test myself. I downloaded some charts, put those on the wall and started testing my D800.It clearly had problem with AF when the left points are used. The problem is bigger with wide angle lenses at big apertures(small numbers) - especially with 24mm at f/1.4. It fades away after f/5.6-f/8.And as you switch from wide-angle to tele lenses it also fades, even at big apertures.That's why it is not very easy to discover the problem, until you don't fell in a situation like mine, or just decide to test your camera in the beginning.I contacted Nikon, sent them multiple pictures and they requested the camera for check.I'm waiting now (already about 10 days) and meanwhile reading the latest review from Mansurov's website (how the guy received his camera with fixed left AF, but they screwed up his center AF, which is worse). I hope it will be different with my camera and everything will be ok, but I know Nikon from before - it's not easy to deal with them when have troubles with your equipment.So wait for my second update, once I receive the camera back.Until then my score is 2 stars....and it could go either way..~~~~~~~~~~ Update 2 ~~~~~~~~~~~ (after 3 weeks in Nikon's service center):I can say the camera is repaired in general.I did the tests again and it's fine, but you can still see small difference in sharpness when use left AF points (more top left now, than middle and bottom), but it is acceptable, keeping in mind that this is visible ONLY with my 24mm at f/1.4.At f/1.8, f/2, etc. it is sharp. With the 50mm at f/1.4 is sharp now too.There is another issue though - the pictures taken with LiveView are sharper, than the ones taken using the viewfinder. I'm sending the camera back to be fine tuned.I'm also changing my review to 4 stars - this is otherwise awesome camera, but there are still few issues! Hope Nikon will do a better QC next time.~~~~~~~~~~ Update 3 - The last one ~~~~~~~~~~~ (after many months of use):I'm raisin
Скроменый эксперт
26.07.2012
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
This camera pushed me, a long-time Nikon user, to Canon.This camera would probably be wonderful in a studio environment on a tripod or doing landscapes. Also, I thought the video quality was very good, arguably better than the Canons' straight-out of the camera even considering some of the limitations pointed out in reviews aimed to more professional videographers. (See Phillip Bloom's excellent review of the MkIII and D800 video comparision.) However, for everything else, I didn't see the point in using the D800. It is much more of a speciality camera in my book than an all-around tool. For the speciality tasks it undertakes (on a tripod), the results are wonderful. Yet its performance the rest of the time, I believe, will be eye-opening to the average buyer expecting to use it as an all-around camera like the D700.More details:With the D800, I couldn't get anything usable handheld without crazy-high shutter speeds. Unfortunately, high shutter speeds routinely caused the ISO to be bumped. Then, I noticed noise before zooming in at all, much less pixel-peeping. Having owned a D700 for years, I found myself reverting back to the D700 as an all-around camera and only shooting the D800 when a tripod was possible. However when a tripod was used, the image quality improvement over the D700 was apparent to virtually any non-technical user (read: clients, family) -- and isn't that ultimately all that matters? That clearly better image quality over the D700 when a tripod was possible got me lusting for something more all-around that had higher IQ than the D700.Curiosity got the best of me and I bought a Canon MkIII and a few assorted lenses, fully expecting to return or resell the camera unless the quality was immediately apparent. I found myself shooting the MkIII alongside the D700 and D800. In many situations where a tripod wasn't possible or practical, most of the D800 images simply got deleted upon review in Lightroom due to blurring. In the situations where the D800 and MkIII were both used on a tripod, the D800 images were better than the D700, but simply on par with the MkIII unless one really started pixel-peeping (then the D800 looked far cleaner), but again I could care less about pixel peeping since clients too could care less.That left me primarily going-to and comparing the D700 and MkIII for nearly all non-tripod shooting I do. (After collecting dust for a while, I sold the D800, at a profit.) While I could take a Nikon image and run it through Lightroom and Photoshop to get the looks I wanted, I was pleased/surprised to find the Canon starting points on images to be closer to the final look I was after. (Note: I am not saying Canon images are better or more right, I am just saying the basic imported Canon files take *me* much less work than the Nikon files to achieve *my own personal look*.) After doing a few shoots and realizing how much less Lightroom and Photoshop work I had to do with the Canon images, I slowly got to using the MkIII nearly exclusively and just carried the 2 D700s and lenses with me as backups.It's now been about a month using nothing but Canon and I am seriously thinking of just selling my Nikon gear altogether. For *my personal style*, I find that I get many more "keeper" images with the MkIII than I ever did with my Nikons (D40s, D300s, D700s, D7000s, D800s) -- i.e. I am routinely amazed by getting very sharp images at 1/50th of a second handheld -- something I couldn't do with any of my $2000+ Nikon VR lenses. Then, the time savings in post for my style really pushed me more and more to Canon. Others' goals may be much different and the looks they are after are better suited for Nikon. For example, I could see journalistic or sports photographers preferring a Nikon over Canon. I would too in their shoes. However, *for me* the Canon very surprisingly fit me much better. (After investing so much in Nikon, eagerly awaiting the D800 for months, and spending so much in Nikon lenses, I never thought I would *ever* make that statement.)In the end, my advice is to simply rent or borrow the different cameras and try them, ignoring online reviews such as this one. You can go blind reading review after review, get caught up in gear-head stats on the different cameras that have virtually nothing to do with making good pictures, and still make the wrong decision. There is absolutely no substitute for holding the camera and lenses, looking at the output first-hand, and only then making your own *personal* decision.
Скроменый эксперт
21.12.2014
8/10
Оценка пользователя
Хорошо
This camera is a BEAST! (and I mean that in a good way!) It's far more camera than I'm accustomed to and find myself learning (slowly) how to control it! I'm speaking from the fact that I've been using DX cameras for a couple of years or so. The particular camera that I purchased from the retailer was in good condition as far as I could tell except for the animal hairs and funky smell. The camera initially looked clean, but when opening up the enclosures, I noticed the animal hairs in various places. I love animals, but this was a bit nasty! Over all, so far, this camera is still a great purchase and the retailer did delivered it much sooner than expected.
The reviews that I've been getting on the camera have been great except for the constant talk about a moires patter (which I did notice) on your images that need to be corrected in post production...which many of us don't really have time for.
Still, a great camera though, I think that it should be priced much cheaper than it goes for.
The file sizes aren't a huge issue for me being that I use a Macbook Pro and when I shoot, I don't pop off 3 million shots when you can affectively get a few really GREAT images saving a huge amount of time doing something else productive!
The reviews that I've been getting on the camera have been great except for the constant talk about a moires patter (which I did notice) on your images that need to be corrected in post production...which many of us don't really have time for.
Still, a great camera though, I think that it should be priced much cheaper than it goes for.
The file sizes aren't a huge issue for me being that I use a Macbook Pro and when I shoot, I don't pop off 3 million shots when you can affectively get a few really GREAT images saving a huge amount of time doing something else productive!
Скроменый эксперт
15.07.2012
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
When you purchase this camera, you first and foremost pay for the sensor. And it is an outstanding sensor. It has very high resolution (36MP), very good high-ISO performance, and a color fidelity not seen in previous Nikon digital cameras. The pictures coming from this sensor are downright stunning.The camera features are OK. Only 4FPS, but when you consider the high bandwidth needed for pushing 36MP, that was to be expected. Somewhat disappointingly, Nikon decided to cripple the 16MP DX-format output to just 5FPS, even though the camera clearly is capable of more. You do get "HD" video, but I haven't been very impressed by the video output. You certainly aren't getting 2MP of video resolution. Besides, any old camera has video these days.Overall, single lens reflex technology is starting to look old, and Nikon is not doing much innovation to keep it up to date. Even though the D800 has an improved AF module, edge and corner auto-focus points are inaccurate, and even the center AF points can be hit-and-miss. It seems the auto-focus is not able to keep up with the high megapixel count. It would be nice if Nikon offered something like focus-bracketing to compensate for the inaccuracy inherent in using phase-detect auto-focus, but no such luck. Phase-detection AF in general is getting long in the tooth, compared to the new mirror-less cameras out there that offer extremely fast and accurate contrast-detect auto-focus. Nikon's version of contrast-detect AF, available in "live-view" mode, is sluggish and inaccurate by comparison.This of course assumes the AF module works in the first place. There is some kind of manufacturing defect with the AF module in the D800, causing the left AF points to be wildly off, especially when using fast wide-angle lenses. I have tried three D800 cameras, and they all have this problem. I strongly suspect this issue affects all D800 camera bodies to varying degrees.Given that your new D800 is likely to have the same AF issue, and given that the sensor is so demanding it will expose every single flaw of every one of your lenses, expect to send both your camera and lenses in to Nikon for service. And this is where the bad news begins.... Nikon service & support is very poor. In my experience, they are slow to respond, and repairs are sloppy. It usually takes a week or even two for technical support to get back to me, and another two-three weeks for service to evaluate the camera or lens. And even then, they almost never take the issue seriously on the first try, meaning you have to send the camera back in for a re-repair, which takes another three-four weeks. My D800 has been in for service twice, and I still have the same auto-focus issue, so I have to send it in a third time. Overall this means I will end up being without my new camera for a total of three months since purchasing it. Be ready for a similar experience! I think this level of service is unacceptable given the price point of this camera, and things have gotten worse since they closed down the El Segundo call center recently.Finally, a note on the D800 and Nikkor lenses: the 36MP D800 sensor exceeds manufacturing tolerance on Nikkor lenses. I have tried multiple copies of the new 85mm f/1.8 for example, and they all show tilted lens elements. The same is the case with the 50mm f/1.8. Same with the new 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 VR. Each type of lens shows it's own kind of deviations, but interestingly, the defects are the same across samples, indicating a manufacturing issue. This isn't necessarily a big deal unless you plan to do landscape photography or other critical work where sharpness across the entire field is important. But it's something to be aware of if you plan to take maximum advantage of the high-resolution sensor. Apart from that, many Nikkor lenses resolve surprisingly well on the D800. You are going to have far more trouble getting sharp pictures due to focusing inaccuracy and camera shake than due to soft lenses!Given the difficulties inherent in taking full advantage of the high-resolution sensor, and the well-known defects with the AF module, it's worth considering carefully if it's worth it before you buy. And keep your old camera for a while after your purchase - you're going to need it while your brand new D800 is being serviced.
Скроменый эксперт
22.12.2014
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
Don't know the seller, I know the camera. Been an owner of the Nikon D80 for a long time. I thought that was all I needed. I've been saving up money for a long time as well, intending to buy a Canon 5D MKII. In fact, I did buy the 5D MKII from a local camera store. I returned it because the wife really did not like me spending the money at that time.
I'm glad I listened to the wife. A couple years later, I had enough saved to buy a Nikon D800. I initially ordered it from B and H Photo but didn't like the idea of waiting for the camera. I was lucky enough to purchase it from my local camera store.
I have owned it for several years now and I really, really love this full frame camera! I shot all my pics in raw at first, but now, I'm feeling pretty good about shooting on my own settings that I pretty much shoot in jpg format only. I shoot raw when I really need it for some important shots I can't afford to make a mistake on my shooting.
The old Nikon lenses work superbly on this camera and I love all the customization with this prosumer camera. I use an old 80-200 2.8 lense and a 24-70 2.8.
I'm glad I listened to the wife. A couple years later, I had enough saved to buy a Nikon D800. I initially ordered it from B and H Photo but didn't like the idea of waiting for the camera. I was lucky enough to purchase it from my local camera store.
I have owned it for several years now and I really, really love this full frame camera! I shot all my pics in raw at first, but now, I'm feeling pretty good about shooting on my own settings that I pretty much shoot in jpg format only. I shoot raw when I really need it for some important shots I can't afford to make a mistake on my shooting.
The old Nikon lenses work superbly on this camera and I love all the customization with this prosumer camera. I use an old 80-200 2.8 lense and a 24-70 2.8.
Скроменый эксперт
21.06.2012
4/10
Оценка пользователя
Ужасно
Waited three months for this camera. It received such amazing reviews and testimonials I was thrilled when it finally came. Unfortunately my copy also seems to suffer from the apparently growing left point Auto Focus problem. When you focus on the subject (flat and parallel to camera sensor) with the AF point in the center everything is fine and sharp, but if you take the same shot moving only the AF point all the way to the left, rack the focus on the lens and re-focus with AF, the subsequent picture is noticeably blurrier and out of focus. I tested this several different times with different subjects on my old Nikon 28mm f/2.8D, which is by no means a jewel but still a good lens. Others have reported the same problem with newer 24-70mm lenses for example. I called Nikon, and they'll only admit that people have called about the same issue, though they won't admit it's a problem yet nor have they mentioned anything about it. This doesn't really make me feel cozy, but I understand, they know it's probably not something you can fix with a firmware update, and it's a not a problem that happens with casual, more amateur usage. Seems to me they're just playing the waiting game to see how bad it gets before they do something about it. Other people on Nikon and various other forums have speculated *perhaps* 1 out 10 cameras could have this problem, while some speculate ALL the cameras that share that particular auto focus module have this problem to some degree. The thing is that since it's not a feature that's used often, and since the malfunction is more pronounced with wide, fast lenses, many people won't even know the problem exists on their camera. It might not be a big deal for some people but personally for my style of photography this is a real bummer. I use that feature often in landscape and architecture photography, which this camera is theoretically especially good for. Unfortunately that kind of subject and 36 megapixels makes accurate focusing especially CRITICAL. I really don't have confidence in the Auto Focus ability of this camera and the fact that Nikon's customers have become their beta testers, making us take pictures to prove the problem exists to Nikon before you can send it in for repair is not good practice, they should be doing their own Quality Conrol. Not to mention that people have sent their D800s in for repair, only to find that it either wasn't fixed or the left point was fixed but then the right and middle points were out of whack. And yes, perhaps I don't need auto focus for what I'm doing, but when I pay $3000 for a product I expect EVERYTHING to work about it. Period. Because of this and because of Nikon's non-stance on the issue I have returned my D800 like others have and will be waiting for Nikon to officially admit this is a problem or buy the D700 till the next model comes out or till new batches of D800s are confirmed to be working %100. After the green cast on the LCD, the camera lock-up during playback, wireless transmitter problems, meter display issues after installing firmware update, etc. etc. something tells me maybe I should wait on this one.There are many forums, threads and articles online, including videos, from professional photographers, that show the problem is very real. Michael Tapes and Ming Thein are two that come to mind. I tried to include links to them but Amazon won't let me, but a quick search for 'D800 left point Auto Focus problem' will give you the information you need. Here is a quote from Falk Lumo's blog about outer AF sensor accuracy on the D800."We conclude that the issue with the accuracy of the outer AF focus points of the D800 is real and probably affects all units out there to some (varying) extent. It is said to be pronounced at ultra wide angles. However, we found it to be (just) unacceptable at 24 mm as well. We guess that every camera with the "Nikon Advanced Multi-CAM 3500 FX" auto focus module is affected, i.e., D800, D800E and D4." From Falk Lumo, a conclusion that was reached from SERIOUS, accurate and extensive testing, the results of which you can see on his website and LumoLabs.Caveat Emptor
Скроменый эксперт
27.03.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I just happened to be reading a Nikon rumor website the night the D800 was introduced in Japan so was able to order it from Amazon within minutes of when they put it online. Sure enough, it shipped the first day they had it in stock and now I have it!I would class myself as an advanced amateur. I've switched back and forth several times between Canon and Nikon but since the D7000 came out I've been pure Nikon. With this camera I am feeling really good about my decision. For me, this is the ultimate camera. Useful for landscapes, weddings and macro but also good enough for my kids' soccer matches using a DX lens.I've only just unboxed the camera so don't have a whole bunch of observations but I will share what I see so far. My first picture was numbered 53, which I found odd. I reset the counter. I tried "quiet" mode, but I don't find it so quiet. With a mirror that large, it will be hard to make it truly quiet. Really all it seems to do is delay the return (flip down) of the mirror until you let off the shutter. No big deal. Focus is very quick. The feel of the camera is very solid and the shutter sound is nice, with authority, although not as sharp a sound as I remember from the D700 (which I tried briefly). Compared to the D7000 that I've been shooting for well over a year now, it looks classier. Specifically I like the fact that it does not have any shiny stuff on it. The rubber (or whatever it is) has a great feel to it.I tried the AF-S Micro 105mm, the AF-S Micro 60mm and the AF-S 50mm 1.4. All performed beautifully. As an aside, I did not like the fact that the 105, despite being a pro lens, is now made in China. Yeah, I know the quality is probably identical to the Japanese made version but it just rubbed me the wrong way. I found a nice used one on eBay that was made in Japan. Saved money too! It was bought in anticipation of the D800, so today is the first I've shot it. Nice lens, looks very sharp and focuses very quickly.Back to tested lenses, I then tested a 20mm 2.8 AI-s (non auto focus) lens that I also bought specifically for the D800 because it is supposed to be very sharp. And I figure I don't need auto focus for landscapes. By the way, the lens was bought brand new (it is still made). Great feel. Anyway, to make it work correctly I had to set the non-CPU lens data so that the camera would know the focal length of the lens and understand the f-stops. I assumed that I would have to set the lens at f22 and then use the command dial to set aperture but actually you set it on the lens itself and the camera recognizes the setting (but only after you set the non-CPU lens data). Prior to setting the data, the camera calls f2.8 f0, f4 it calls f1, f5.6 it calls f2, etc. After setting the lens data, the f-stops are registered and recorded correctly.Finally, I tried a DX lens, the AF-S 18-200 II that I used mostly on the D7000. I plan to continue to use this lens for sports and the like because of the 1.5x magnification and the faster shutter compared to using real FX lenses. When you look through the viewfinder, around the outside of the view you see a black circle since a DX lens cannot completely cover the FX sensor. You also see a black rectangle corresponding to the area that will actually be captured. It's nice. Also, this happens automatically since the camera recognizes that you have a DX lens mounted. I believe you can purposefully set an FX lens to DX mode too, discarding the outside part of the frame, but I did not try this. One advantage to using a DX lens (or an FX in DX mode) is that you can get a faster maximum frames per second. I did not test how many frames per second I got (I presume it was 5 as the specs state) but I did test how many frames I could take before the buffer filled up and the frame rate dropped. I was shooting NEF only. The camera took about 20 frames at full speed before slowing. The card in use was a Lexar Pro SDXC Class 10 (133x) 64GB card.One other thing that my D7000 didn't do but the D800 does is allow easy access to change the Auto ISO settings. Now, you hold the ISO button and spin the rear command dial to change the target ISO (basically the minimum ISO in Auto mode) and what's new (to me at least) is that you can spin the front command dial to turn Auto ISO on and off. On the D7000, as far as I know you had to delve into a menu to do that.
Показаны отзывы 385-408 из 618.
