Nikon D800 Camera is Here. What do YOU Think?

 Prev 1 2 3 4 5

nikon d800 chase jarvis

You may be interested in:

220 Responses to Nikon D800 Camera is Here. What do YOU Think?

  1. lolaxfick February 9, 2012 at 10:13 am #

    IT LOOKS DOPE! check out lolaxfick.tumblr.com

    • Vincenzo July 31, 2012 at 5:29 am #

      This is a beautiful camera with set up features that are before it’s time. Yes, Nikon put 36MP sensor in it after years of capping their pro camera at 12MP. Why, most people ask? Because the tech to make it work has finally arrived. Most dont want the extra file size and complain that it’s excessive. I disagree, the benefit of such a sensor is information and with more information comes 2 things, increased color depth and dynamic range. These two things are what has set the d800 above the d4 and the 5d mlII in DxO’s reviews. Color depth means accurate colors and the ability to make more changes and adjustments to you images, particularly raw images before they start to break down. With an additional 2 stops of dynamic range over my d700 I am confident that I can push and pull my exposure to a larger extent because I have more detailed file information to read from in my highlights and low lights. SPEED, wow you wedding shooters hate this, 4fps ….. I’ve never shot a wedding on Cl or Ch, regardless the decrease in boot up time and shutter lag on the d800 vs my d700 is fantastic. That’s the speed that I need. I think Nikon built this camera to compliment the d700 as much as “replace” it and to me it’s a perfect companion. I get the resolution and information, increased focus speed and an improved metering system with the 800, and I super high speed 8fps all around solid camera from my 700. So no, I won’t be selling my d700 but every pro should have two body’s, I can’t think of two I would rather have. Price point and all considered, Nikon is giving us a lot for the money.

  2. Jeff February 9, 2012 at 10:16 am #

    what the heck is that 4th image??

    • Cris February 9, 2012 at 10:24 am #

      A mistake. :)

      • Chase February 9, 2012 at 10:26 am #

        yep – fixed. sorry ;) replaced the mistake with the overhead shot of the camera.

        awesome thanks!

        • JohnnyD February 9, 2012 at 11:16 am #

          Chase, when will it be safe for you to chime in on your thoughts? We’re all dying to hear…

      • Jeff February 9, 2012 at 10:33 am #

        but what was it?

  3. Fred February 9, 2012 at 10:16 am #

    What will you do with 36MP on a FF DSLR?

    • Dana February 9, 2012 at 10:27 am #

      What will one do with 36MP? Well, most importantly, one probably will not need to get a medium format camera in many (not all) cases. I was looking to get a medium format setup for weddings/portraits/landscapes, but if the D800/D800e approaches the dynamic range and image quality of MF, then I just saved myself a heap of $$$. Plus it’s faster and easier to use than a MF setup, and I have a full spectrum of glass since I use a Nikon D3s already.. From what I’ve seen, the D800 makes sense, and finally Nikon has drawn a line in the sand between the D4 and the D800….which they didn’t really do with the D3 and D700. Most pros, depending of course on what they are shooting, will probably want both the D800 and D4 in their arsenal for different purposes. I know I will.

      • O. February 9, 2012 at 10:50 am #

        The image quality of a digital medium format camera like the Leica S2 or a digital Hasselblad will never be reached by the D800. The pixel pitch of the D800 is simply to small to deliver all the details the S2 can capture. Just compare these http://www.photoscala.de/Artikel/Leica-S2-%E2%80%9Ein-echt%E2%80%9C images with any D800 shot.

        On the other hand, you won’t get medium format for $3000. But who needs 36 megapixel anyway? ;)

        • deven February 9, 2012 at 1:09 pm #

          +1

        • Jim February 16, 2012 at 1:57 pm #

          +2. I’d have easily traded 12 MP or more for D3s-level ISO performance and a higher fps. I get way more value out of those two things on a daily basis than I do MEGA-megapixels, and if I really wanted that quality, you simply can’t get it from a chip that small. (though I haven’t poured over samples yet.) I’m not giving up hope yet, but I’m pretty sure the gap I was hoping to be filled is still a gap.

        • Jonny February 21, 2012 at 8:00 am #

          Well said. There’s far more to medium format than the MP.

        • Anonymous March 19, 2012 at 3:52 pm #

          +3, the sensor size is way too small to compare anything close to what medium format gives. Besides it was Nikon who printed, NLT a couple of years ago, the optimum mega pixel size for DSLR was approx 16-18 megapixels. Now they release this!! Confusing .

          • Singularity May 3, 2012 at 3:29 pm #

            Hi Guys,

            I’ve shot the D800 and from the samples I saw home it handles very well. It handles dynamic range far better than current medium format sensors. Also the refference to 16-18Mpix is already outdated. The progress in technology during the last 10 years is imense. And frankly, I rather shoot my D700 + a D800 than to bother with slow medium format hardware, which is many times more expensive. My technik is still not the best to reach for medium format and the D800 will enable for me a solid learning curve on my path. So whenever I earn enough to justify the purchase, I will buy one 4 sure,

            Cheers

            Paul

      • tornwald February 11, 2012 at 9:29 am #

        Indeed. I have some similar thoughts. I come from medium format film (6×7 mostly)
        And I am looking for a digital, affordable, replacement. Until now I was thinking 645D Pentax, although stil way out
        of my budget. Now, with the d800 with 36 megapixels and a 5:4 ratio option this might look interesting.
        Still, I would miss the large viewfinder of a medium format camera and also I have some doubts on the Nikon lenses with this amount of megapixels. I would love to put a Leica or a Limited Pentax on this system to see how well it delivers.
        Does anyone have some thoughts about great primes (from other brands also) to put on a Nikon full frame?

        • J Duffy February 14, 2012 at 1:59 pm #

          I pre-ordered the d800. I don’t foresee any issues with the top tier G Nikkor lenses…especially my 200 f2….or my Zeiss 100 f2. Now, I reaaaaly want the Zeiss 25 f2. They all certainly looked great on the D3x, which I luckily sold in December. :)

  4. Shutter Actuations February 9, 2012 at 10:19 am #

    I just need A FM3A with a digital FF sensor, manual focus. maybe they invent a FM3D for me. 1fps is ok. no huge LCD is ok. when will nikon do that? …zzzzzzzzzzzzzzZ

    • Nicolas HARTER February 10, 2012 at 6:42 pm #

      I would love that one, with those small/non G voigtlander lenses, but i think it’s not going to be… maybe some fuji X-something version?

    • Fernando February 11, 2012 at 6:27 pm #

      Me too, something like this: http://jancology.com/blog/archives/2004/06/09/nikon_fm3d.html

    • johndt March 28, 2012 at 9:22 pm #

      amen That would be my dream camera. Can’t they put the d3s sensor in the D7000 make it bit more solid and bigger viewfinder and add a 7 frame autobracket and you have killer camera. WHy not a very sharp Electronic viewfinder that could display the histogram live or review the shots even in bright sunlight. . A dream camera.. I would buy two.

  5. Anthony February 9, 2012 at 10:20 am #

    Am I a dope for being disappointed with the massive sensor? I wrote about it kind of verbosely on my blog.

    http://oftheairphoto.com/2012/02/no-nikon-d800-for-me-and-the-nikoncanon-debate/

    Apologies if linking to it here is inappropriate. The bottom line is that I was hoping for a small D4, maybe with some features removed (they have to differentiate models after all), even though I knew from all the early rumors that this thing would be 36MP. Now I’m hoping for something like a D800S with a smaller sensor and better high ISO performance.

    • Jordan February 9, 2012 at 11:40 am #

      Yes less megapixels higher iso on a d800s would be the one to get for me. Video producer/photographer (in that order).

    • Kevin February 9, 2012 at 1:19 pm #

      I agree. I would give up some of those megapixels for better ISO in a heartbeat. Then you’d have a perfect camera for someone who’s budget doesn’t include the D4. I want this camera, but I feel like I would be wasting my money/it’s potential since I would use 36 megapixels.

      I also feel that the price on the grip is a bit high. Maybe they are making up for the low price on the body?

    • Powerbill February 10, 2012 at 4:58 am #

      I agree. I was hoping for less megapixels too. Mostly because of file size and archiving issues. ISO is important to me, but I’ll wait to see some proper images before I make a judgement on that. A tad faster frame rate would be little nicer too. I’m waiting on D400 before I buy. I will admit that I’m intrigued by it though. Now it just makes my decision so hard: used D3 vs. D700 + used lens vs. D400 + new lens VS D800. The D3s is out of my price range. Man I hate making these kinds of decisions. Any advice on how to spend about three grand to upgrade from a D90?

    • Randy February 20, 2012 at 4:17 pm #

      Not a dope at all–completely agree with you. As I read the description I became more and more disappointed. I argued the same point you make here over on Ken Rockwells facebook page (not sure why I even spent the energy there). Higher ISO performance (by far more important) as well as faster frame rate would have fit the needs of far more photographers than this beast. This thing gets a mind numbing 4 fps full-frame ONLY with the optional MB-?? accessory. As O. and Jim mentioned above you are still not matching medium format quality with the smaller sensor, so what is the point if 24 mp will suffice for 90% of the applications at this chip size.

      This should not have been named as the seeming successor in the lineage to the D700 and should have had a “call sign” all it’s own. Nikon still needs to fill the upgrade void missing for d700 users. Perhaps they are thinking that is the D3s when/if the price comes down when the D4 is out for a while.

  6. Josh February 9, 2012 at 10:21 am #

    The MP are overkill and useless to me as a wedding photographer. The back thumb switch which used to control the AF mode is a huge downer for me, I ride that switch all evening at receptions as I go back and forth from normal shooting to firing frames off from above my head or from a low angle. I’ll wait for the D700 discounts or the wave of used D700′s the D800 release will produce and pick up another one or two, I ♥ my D700, it does everything I need and more. The addition of video would be nice as we’re getting into cinematography as well, but my D7000 takes amazing video with the rig we’ve put together so I don’t think the trade-offs are worth it. Just my $.02!

    • Rafael R February 9, 2012 at 10:42 am #

      I’m with you the back thumb switch that used to control AF options is a big downer, plus the new AF-C / AF-S button switch plus dial is way too slow for me

      • Monte Rudze February 9, 2012 at 12:22 pm #

        I agree on the back switch, disappointing, but the AF-S AF-C change is welcoming. First looked odd, but it was always a pain when accidentally I would hit it into AF-C when I didn’t want to.

        • Alex Nelson February 9, 2012 at 12:56 pm #

          +1000 accidentally bumping from AF-S to AF-C was my single complaint about the D700. I had been wishing for a lock mechanism, but moving it all together is great. I always leave it on AF-S….AF-C shots are way too soft to be useful.

    • sj February 9, 2012 at 11:11 am #

      I completely agree with you Josh, although as a photojournalist rather than a wedding photographer. I would much prefer half the megapixels and better ISO performance, or hell just half the megapixels – 36 mp will slow down my workflow too much. I love my D700. I want a mini-D4, not primarily due to the price (which is a factor) but mainly due to the size. The D4 is too big for me to shoot comfortable, quickly and instinctively – I am not a sports photographer so I will trade off size for some functionality. The D800 is not really an evolution from the D700, it’s more like a totally different line of camera.

      I also rely on the back thumb switch that controlled focus, and less frequently the front AF-S/AF-C and would regret losing those. I too will likely opt to pick up another D700 at a discount rather than upgrade.

    • Martin Beebee February 9, 2012 at 11:29 am #

      Absolutely. I disbelieved all the 36MP rumors because it just didn’t make sense — the majority of the market that was in love with the D700 just didn’t need them. As a studio camera, I guess I could see the point, but PJs and wedding photogs? Not so much.

      Shooting 2,000 images at a wedding at ~75MB/images = 150GB of images. Is that math right? Good god.

      And I still can’t figure out why they went with two different formats for the card slots — I haven’t seen a single explanation for this that might make sense. Now I have to carry around two sets of cards? Anyone?

      The video specs look good (though still no 1080p60), but since I’m primarily a still photographer just dabbling in video, that doesn’t sway me much.

    • Marek February 9, 2012 at 11:35 am #

      Apparently the AF mode selection has been moved to the viewfinder;

      “AF and AF-area mode selection is also now possible without taking the eye away from viewfinder (…)”.

      Source: http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/10-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-nikon-d800-1061511

  7. Antoine Thisdale February 9, 2012 at 10:22 am #

    I am quite excited about it. The Mega Pixel jump is.. well overkill is the word i’m looking for here. It certainly will get a lot of people raving it. but 36 on that small censor… that’s asking for trouble. I’d much rather have a larger format camera, with less mega pixel… the idea is for a better censor size, rather than pixels, no?

    Anyhow, the ergo is pretty much what you would expect i think, its like a D700 that mated with a D3, so that’s cool. I’m hoping for a battery grip redesign tho, more curvy (D3 style). The double mem-card slot is a nice touch, especially since we can use the eyecard or whatever for wireless tether (if so inclined).

    As for whether to get it or not. If you own a D700, i don’t see the point. On my side, i’ve been running the 5D(1) for quite a while and been wanting to go back to Nikon for a few years and this might be my jumping point. With a good prime or two, this camera can work professional jobs easy.

    That’s my take on it.

    • Emanuel Papamanolis February 11, 2012 at 5:12 pm #

      Antoine …what about people like myself who have a D700 but were waiting for HD video in aDSLR like the 5dm2 we don’t really have much choice, D4 is outside most most people’s budget unless you are a Pro. I think the D800 will be a great camera for. I rarely shoot over ISO 2000 and I’m sure the D800 will be on a par with the D700 at this ISO level.

      • J Duffy February 14, 2012 at 2:06 pm #

        ISO=D700: Especially if you apply some NR and downsize the files to 16MP or 12MP. To me, the D800 is a D3x and D700 in one body with HD video. Pretty amazing imo.

        • Giovanni February 23, 2012 at 9:31 pm #

          thats a perfect way of explaining the d800.. i cant wait to see how it performs in my hands lol im gonna buy a 24-70mm 2.8 as soon as the camera is out.

  8. Steve February 9, 2012 at 10:23 am #

    I’ve been waiting for Nikon to make a more usable vid camera in their DSLRs in a Full Frame camera. Another thing this is nice is 60fps at 720p. The low light capabilities are awesome and I can’t wait to start shooting with one!

  9. Roger February 9, 2012 at 10:23 am #

    I’m interested to see it and try it out, but with my workflow 36.6 megapixels are just too much to deal with. They’re projecting RAW files sizes upwards of 75mb per image, whoa. I am currently a D700 user and love the camera. For right now it offers all I ever needed in capturing stills as a portrait photographer. I know they’re challenging Medium Format with the release of the D800 and D800E, but if I wanted to shoot Medium Format, I’d rather put my money into that system to upgrade. Following in the footsteps of Zack Arias and David Hobby and you too Chase of course.

    Again having said all that, if Nikon were to send me one for free I sure wouldn’t mind that.

    • Jonny February 21, 2012 at 8:02 am #

      Yep, this. I shoot in 10mp mode most of the time because 30mb RAW files from my 5DmkII cost too much money to store. I’ve filled up 4TB worth of space just shooting a couple weddings over the last 2 years. Nice looking camer otherwise

  10. Kjeld February 9, 2012 at 10:23 am #

    Is it a step backwards from the D700 in noise levels at high ISO’s

    • Alex Nelson February 9, 2012 at 12:59 pm #

      Completely disagree. D800 samples at ISO 25,600 are MUCH cleaner then D700 ISO 6400 photos I’ve shot.,

      • Powerbill February 10, 2012 at 5:17 am #

        I would love to believe that. Where can I see these images? This is a big factor in my deciding on buying this camera. I’m a budding pro who’s shooting more weddings and portrait stuff. I’m concerned about the high ISO performance of the D800 vs the D700. I did see some images from wedding photog, Cliff Mautner, on his website. They looked beautiful of course.

  11. Tim February 9, 2012 at 10:24 am #

    It’s nice to see the new body finally. And I’m curious to see how the video stacks up to Canon’s offerings. The 5D Mk II is pretty stinking solid. 36 MP is large. I’d have preferred 21 MP with native ISO that extends far higher than 6400. Yeah it’s expandable, but that shiz is pretty noisy.

    • Adam February 9, 2012 at 10:51 am #

      5D mkII video is as bad as most other dSLRs at the moment thanks to pixel binning introducing softness and artefacts,
      I fear that on such a high res sensor, unless they have some powerful chips sampling the full resolution, those issues will actually be worse. As a still camera though, it looks incredible.

  12. Jay R. February 9, 2012 at 10:25 am #

    *Disclosure, i shoot Canon :) I also rarely shoot video

    From what i’ve been reading/hearing, it has been a toss up between HDSLR shooters actually liking the magapixel increase or not. But with such a large increase and even with whatever new back end computing is going on, i can’t help but think that still images HAVE to become more noisy, right?? I mean, there must be some out-of-this-world-revolutionary ish going on for it not to! This makes me uneasy and continues to keep my hopes up for the 5Dmkiii (which hopefully will not come with 42.38957 megapixels)

  13. Alexander Petrov February 9, 2012 at 10:25 am #

    I am so eager to ask this – I don’t care if I sound dumb… but… D4 & D800… they seem to sort of equal each other out (except the price & the new fancy flash card deal in D4). How do I choose the right cam without trying to play with both first?

    • JohnnyD February 9, 2012 at 11:13 am #

      Alexander, the D4 and D800 are very different still cameras but very similar video cameras. The D4 will give you better looking/lower noise stills in low light, much faster frame rate if you’re a volume shooter (sports, wedding, photojournalist), while the D800 will be best if you’re a landscape or studio or commercial still shooter. The D4′s files will be much smaller, while the D800 files may tax your computer if you work with tons of images, depending on the speed of your computer.

  14. Nick Smarto February 9, 2012 at 10:25 am #

    I hope that the huge bump in resolution wasn’t at the expense of pixel pitch and low-light performance. I’m interested to see if, and by how much, the D800 lives up to the D700 legacy of superior low-light performance.

    I also wonder if FPS can be boosted in lower resolutions, and if Nikon included a lower resolution RAW file option. I have a feeling that I’m going to want to shoot RAW as always but won’t frequently need to cram a card full of 36MP images.

    Thoughts, anyone?

    • Martin Beebee February 9, 2012 at 11:34 am #

      DX-format can shoot up to 5fps; I don’t see anything in the specs about smaller RAW files, other than 1.2x, DX, and 5:4 formats (which have <100% viewfinder coverage).

  15. Ed February 9, 2012 at 10:26 am #

    I’m surprised Nikon has gone from the “quality” pixel mode to the “quantity” pixel mode. I don’t need that many pixels for what I do….then I got to thinking…medium format is getting more and more popular. In the old days, pro wedding shooters were using medium format and with the price coming down, we may see a move back to this in the next 5 years or so. So why the “more pixels”? Are more pixels to help “hide” imperfections like noise when downsized to an 8×10? Perhaps Nikon (and Canon) are trying to position themselves if a migration to MF happens. Even though it’s more about sensor size than pixels…I’m thinking it’s a marketing move.

    My next camera will probably be a Mamiya 645 with a 20mp back and 80mm leaf shutter lens. It will be in the price range of D4 or a 1D-X with a 80mm 1.2 lens. Nikon and Canon don’t have medium format offering.

    • Dan The Photo Man February 9, 2012 at 9:33 pm #

      It looks to me like Nikon is not giving up quality for quantity. The low light performance looks great for ISO 3200 and 6400. However, this camera will not go to the ISO extremes of the D4, which I don’t need. For the work I shoot, I would much rather have a versatile D800 rather than a cumbersome medium format camera.

  16. Shane Srogi February 9, 2012 at 10:26 am #

    As a landscape shooter I’m thrilled to see the direction Nikon has taken with the D800. I was just talking with National Geographic Photographer Raymond Gehman last night, and we both concur…..this is a camera we look forward to shoot with.

    -Shane

  17. Gregory February 9, 2012 at 10:26 am #

    It’s worth mentioning it’ll be available in two versions – D800 and D800E (which has ability to disable optical low-pass filter).

  18. LV February 9, 2012 at 10:27 am #

    Does anyone know if it has an “Exposure Simulation” feature for Live View?

  19. Krebs February 9, 2012 at 10:27 am #

    RATIONAL RESPONSE: 36MP!? Are effing kidding me? $3,300 is just the start of cost because I am going to need to upgrade my cards, RAM, etc. I hardly shoot any video. Way more camera then I need at this time. EMOTIONAL RESPONSE: I want to make love with this camera.

  20. Malinda Hartong February 9, 2012 at 10:27 am #

    We purchased a D7000 last year over a 2nd 300S body for video production and have gotten beautiful results – check out the video to promote volunteering for Wyoming Fire Dept at wyohfire.org all shot on D7000 & gopro. Cant wait to see what the D800 will bring to shooting dslr video.

  21. Nate Perkes February 9, 2012 at 10:28 am #

    While I definitely think the MP boost is insane…and not needed in MY line of work, it IS pretty amazing that Nikon basically replaced/upgraded their D3X which remember is an $8,000 camera, with the D800 for less than half the price. I’m a fan of that…even if it’s not necessarily the camera for me.

  22. Tommy February 9, 2012 at 10:28 am #

    I am seriously looking into this box, and have been reading many recent posts by photographers who have tested the D800….the pros are the 36.6 mp’s plus video that I don’t currently do……light weight is also a plus……the con for me is having to purchase the new grip MB-D12 versa using the two MB-D10′s that I already have…..its more of an added cost factor…..other than that, I am still researching and justifying the cost to upgrade…….

  23. Samy FRANCOIS February 9, 2012 at 10:28 am #

    waaaaaaaaayyyy too much pixels!!!! I’m a D700 user and will be for long. I’d rather something like the FM3D (as said by shutter actuations) or a Digital FE.
    An other cool feature would have been real High speed sync like the D70 is able too. The “crappy D70″ can sync at 1/8000s and the D800, the old same 1/250s!!!!! That sucks. Really Nikon……
    Honestly, if/when I have the money I go for medium format camera as a high end camera, not for D800 or D4.

    • Sebastian March 8, 2012 at 5:17 am #

      I use a d700 also. The “crappy D70″ uses an electronic shutter to reach those shutter speeds. It reduces image quality, because a charge has to be sent through the sensor to tell it to turn off; increasing noise and other digital artifacts. Not to mention because there is no physical barrier between the sensor and light, the sensor still partially accepts the light as energy; heating up the sensor and overcharging it. Again, this decreases image quality. Furthermore, the D70′s sensor has been known to die, or have dead pixels, when shooting with flash that has a decent tail (most do) at higher than x-sync shutter speeds; because there is still light hitting the sensor.

      The pixels will be useful. I love my d700, but the lack of resolution detail kills me.

  24. Brandon Bloch February 9, 2012 at 10:29 am #

    Looks awesome for my DSLR video needs… Just wish it was a Canon so I didn’t have to lose so many lenses (this keeps happening!) :-\

    • Bruce February 11, 2012 at 9:33 pm #

      Brandon, if it makes you feel better, Canon Rumors website is saying that the 5D X will have 45 MP.

  25. John February 9, 2012 at 10:32 am #

    I think it’s sexy, but it’s not for me. I’m rather disappointed they removed the WT-5, LAN port and web server that features on the D4, and that it doesn’t use QXD (given the size of the files). If they also remove that from the D400 (which they presumably will), I’ll probably hold on to my current bodies until I can justify a D4.

    It is impressive, but if I got one, I’d still be wanting more (not more MP though, obviously, heh).

  26. Bede February 9, 2012 at 10:32 am #

    I’ve been thinking hard about this, and as a really keen amateur photog, I don’t think this is the camera I move to from the D700. It’s great that they got the weight down, but video isn’t a key feature for me and the reason I stretched my budget to the D700 was shooting hand-held in low light. Looks like Nikon is choosing to make low-light performance a D4 selling point. I simply can’t afford entry to that club, so I will look closely at the successor to the D300s, and a return to a lighter, smaller DX kit. If it had the D4 sensor, I’d already have pre-ordered.

  27. Rafael R February 9, 2012 at 10:33 am #

    I currently use a D3x and I am very happy with it, 36 MP is a bit too much for me, my D3x already puts my computer through a hard time, and my clients are very happy with my current 24 MP, so for me the camera I’ll get will be the D4 love to have the things I cant currently do, like high ISO and lots of frames per second.

    I dont like Nikon following Canons early path and its megapixels race, that was the reason I bought a D3x in the first place, magazines were demanding of me , more than 12 MP but I see now 24 MP are just fine for that, I mean I dont shoot for Gucci or anything like that, but my local clients (mostly Catalogues) are happy with my D3x files.

    Those are just my thoughts, 36 MP is overkill in my opinion.

  28. Eero H. February 9, 2012 at 10:36 am #

    This looks like something I just might get myself for my birthday!

  29. Pol Santos February 9, 2012 at 10:38 am #

    I was actually hoping this camera would be the one that gets me to switch over to Nikon. Im a canon shooter right now, and knowing that Nikon would most likely make the D800 with a bigger res image chip excited me as most of my commercial clients want a bigger resolution. I also shoot lots of concerts/nightlife. Which is where the problem is, Nikon is def better performing in low light, but Canon usually offers the best bang for the buck in terms of resolution. But I def couldnt afford having to comera systems. Basically Zack Arias problem lol. While the D800 could still ultimately get me to switch to Nikon, I def have to wait and See if the High Iso performance has stayed the same/improved or if it has taken a hit with having such a big megapixel size. I also have to see what canon comes up with for the new 5D and whether its high Iso performance is the same and if their low light AF improves a bit + if they really do make the improvements to the 24-70 f/2.8 they should to make it more comparable to Nikon’s beastly version.

    • John February 9, 2012 at 10:40 am #

      The ISO performance isn’t there, not if you’re looking on the scale of the D3s/D4. This is a studio/landscape camera primarily.

      • Alex Nelson February 9, 2012 at 1:03 pm #

        Cliff Mautner one of the guys who shot promo images says the ISO performance was on par with a D3, but the sample images I’ve seen make it appear even better than a D3.

    • J Duffy February 14, 2012 at 2:30 pm #

      Sorry to repeat myself, but unless I’m missing something….

      Just apply a *bit* of NR with Topaz Denoise or Nik’s Dfine 2…then downsize to 16MP and sharpen a bit. I would expect it to look slightly better than the D700 on a 16×20 print. I think Cliff Mautner’s images support this expectation. You get the same resolution as the D4. Pretty good compromise…36MP for studio work + D700 Hi ISO at 16MP in one body. Worse case, downsize to12MP for iso 6400 images.

      If I am wrong, please correct me!

  30. Adam J McKay February 9, 2012 at 10:42 am #

    I am currently in the process of starting up a media production company. With limited startup capital I need most of what I purchase to be multi purpose, so in this case a couple full frame HDSLRS’s. Having been a Nikon shooter for all of my brief career, I am now looking at making the switch to Canon. The D800 seems great on paper, but just don’t think 36mp was a good idea, especially for the video side of things. That is essentially an 8k sensor being down sampled to 1080p. That is a lot of information that has to be thrown away. And so far, it doesn’t look to do a very good job at it. I am really hoping Nikon gets this camera in the hands of some great cinematographers to see what the video can do, but for the time being, this D800 announcement has made me more excited for the 5D3 announcement.

    • J Duffy February 14, 2012 at 4:24 pm #

      Curious, what you have seen in the way of video that is worse than a 5d2? Have you seen any uncompressed 8bit 4;2;2 footage?I work with 5d2 and 7d footage every single day…and Joy Ride compressed for youtube certainly doesn’t look worse than a 5d2 to my eyes.

  31. Sudip February 9, 2012 at 10:43 am #

    I am personally disappointed with the release. 36MP is definitely overkill for most of us and am sure will be a deal breaker for most. I am personally not going for it just because of 36MP. I would have prefered 16 to 18 MP, the new AF module from D4, better ISO compared to D700 and at least similar frame rate as D700. I least care about Video. Both new releases i.e. D4 and D800 seem to be focused on video , although D4 did not dissapoint photographers. I do not really get why all DSLRs need to have video capabilities.. I do not like to pay for feature i do not use. They can release a full frame camera with D4 specs and no video and bring down price o 4k. That will probably make many happy.

  32. Matt February 9, 2012 at 10:45 am #

    Although I love the D800 (from the photos, videos, and specs I’ve seen), Nikon has thrown me for a loop with the megapixel count. I knew the rumors would be pretty accurate, but it still came as a bit of a shock to me when it was made official. They (Nikon) have seemed to change their marketing strategy. With the current lineup of the D700, D3s/D4, and the D3X, it makes sense. The D700 is a streamlined, “baby” D3, while the D3X is catered to individuals needing the MP count. Now, we have the D800, which is a beast of a camera on its own, but, to me, it looks more like the successor to the D3X, while at a D700 price range…I’m noticing this trend. The D7000 was similar, in that it replaced the D90, but the features it packs is closer to the D300s line. And you (Chase) are right; Nikon is really pushing the idea of video with the D800, as well as the D4. There is definitely a shift in marketing in Nikon’s roadmap that I can’t figure out just yet.

    As confused as I am, the excitement I have far exceeds it. I know when it comes down to it, the best camera is the one that’s with you (as you say), and you are only limited by your own imagination and creativity. However, it’s always fun to see new cameras hit the market!

  33. Jeff February 9, 2012 at 10:47 am #

    I am really stuck. I was waiting for this camera for a while. I am a wedding and portrait photographer who would love to start experimenting with video. Experiment at this point. I love my D700 but honestly I want a few more megapixels…much like the D7000 has. I was excited at the prospect of getting more MP with the D800, but 36 just seems like way too much. I do shoot in low light, so I need that performance as well.

    I hate to say it, and I never thought I would, but 5D Mk2 might best suit me. I just can’t part with my beautiful, beautiful arsenal of Nikon glass.

    Hmmph

    • Adam J McKay February 9, 2012 at 2:16 pm #

      Don’t worry, you can get some adapters to make all your Nikon glass work on the 5Dmk2.

  34. Eileen February 9, 2012 at 10:50 am #

    It looks like an amazing camera. Would love to have one just for studio & portraits. But, as many have said, this is not a replacement for the D700, it is a whole new beast. I currently have a D300 and am really at a point that I need to upgrade to a full frame camera. I don’t want to buy a several year old camera in the D700, and the D800 won’t meet all of my needs, (sports). So, it looks like I will need to bite the bullet and go for the D4. Wish I had preordered it earlier, but was waiting for this announcement. I could see where a pro with the budget for it would love to have both the D4 and the D800 in their arsenal!

  35. S. Allman February 9, 2012 at 10:50 am #

    No mention of dynamic range? I’m disappointed that these companies value marketing megapixels over image quality. I want a DSLR with 14-18 stops of dynamic range, like most of the new generation of video cameras offer. Most of my images go to the web as stills or video. Anything over 10 megapixels is overkill IMHO. Dynamic range and low noise get my dollars, everything else can be fixed in post.

  36. JohnnyD February 9, 2012 at 10:58 am #

    There are some great comments here to sum up how I feel, but I’ll add this:

    The problem I have is not with Nikon releasing this camera, but with how they’ve positioned it. This is a successor to the D700 in name only (which I own). It’s a new category. Hyper-MP, studio, commercial and a filmmaker’s camera. The issue is, will they release an actual successor for the segment that needs a D700? A camera that is efficient, good for volume, won’t choke Lightroom, shoots in the dark, and competes with the 5DmII/III in stills.

    My take will change if the testing reveals that the D800′s still ‘medium’ (20mp) and ‘small’ (9mp) settings render images that surpass the D700′s overall quality, low-light performance, and especially file sizes. If this ends up being true, I’ll buy it. If it doesn’t, I cannot afford the D4 and so Nikon will not get my money until they release an actual D700 successor with world-class video.

    Heck, they could solve this right now by releasing a D800L with the D4′s 16mp sensor. They would expand sales, not cannibalize from the D4 as much as they might think, so long as they delay the D800L’s release for 6 months.

    • J Duffy February 14, 2012 at 2:40 pm #

      If Nikon is reading the threads here and elsewhere… and I bet they are….it’s obvious there’s a major demand for the camera you described.

      Instead of Nikon throwing the wonderful D3s sensor in the trash can, why not put it in a “D700s” and add video? Curious if such a camera would make you happy?

  37. James Cummings February 9, 2012 at 10:59 am #

    I’d 1st like to say that i’m a Canon 5d2 & 7D user but can still quite openly say that this camera looks like an amazing piece of kit, particularly to someone like me who shoots some commercial video alongside other stills work. I agree with many of the comments about overkill on the megapixels, and drawing on what was commented on by the user who suggested this system would negate the need to jump to medium format i’ve got two counter arguments: 1. Medium format lenses resolve a ‘different’ level of detail than those designed for 35mm or equivalent formats 2. The RAW files on my 5dmk2 are already large enough to slow my 2010 2.66gHz dual core macbook pro down to a 2 second ish standstill when previewing, and i’d suggest that anything more than this would drive me literally insane!

    I think this is the first of the next generation of 35mm format DSLR’s which will eventually see a new class of lenses brought out for them in order to resolve sufficient detail, but at what cost? Surely the next line up of gear is going to be similar prices to medium format, in which case we’re kind of defeating the point…. Unless you’re Nikon/ Canon/ Pentax/ Sony & seeking to sell people on the way your camera works & therefore get them hooked on your system: excellent long game plan when you consider the epic way they’ve all dealt with the budget end of extraordinarily saturated the market. We’re all hooked, and soon everyone else will be too! That’s good business.

    I am certain this camera literally kicks ass though…..!

  38. Christian Hansen February 9, 2012 at 11:05 am #

    As a current D7000 user wanting to go FX i love that it doubles batteries with the D7000 and uses SD card…!! Look forward to getting my hand on one..

    Fearing the high Mpix is too many.. but we will see…

    i know more who talked about investing in a medium format now will give the D800 a try and utilize their Nikkor lenses instead of the bigger investment…

  39. Karine Ardault February 9, 2012 at 11:07 am #

    I have been waiting to upgrade my D300. Will I go for the D800? hmmm, only 4 images seconds… I still shoot wildlife, action and weddings. A bit slow. Nothing from the D300 is usable on the D800: batteries or grip. Grip for D800 is enough to by a decent reflex. glurp.
    I do not have much comments on video as i am not so interested in it….
    Plus de 36M pix to be handled in the bush most of the time (i still live in Tanzania) are definitely not a must.
    Will i go for the D800. Not sure. I will however consider the D4 instead! more expensive but in the end not that much with regards to all the features and what I have to invest in total.
    It is certainly a kick-ass camera but it does not kick asses where I wanted…

    • JohnnyD February 9, 2012 at 12:07 pm #

      If you don’t prioritize video, I’d recommend looking at a D700, used or new, sooner rather than later before people drive up the price, as a way to save $4K over the D4. I have used both D700 and D300 alot, and the D700 is a BIG improvement in image quality, low-light performance. Or for cheaper, the D7000 has 6 frames per second vs the D700′s 5 vs D800′s 4.

  40. Leo February 9, 2012 at 11:16 am #

    I think that it is stupid that they put in SD and CF cards.
    Because when you have also a D4 and I think a lot of photografers out there are thinking about to have both, than you have to have THREE different types of cards which is bad.
    And when the would have put in also these new XQD-or-whatever-cards then the f/ps-rate would propably have been higher.
    I would only buy one if I would be a videographer

  41. theo February 9, 2012 at 11:17 am #

    I wish Nikon would provide more information on how their upcoming Capture NX software will deal with moiré patterns when shooting with the D800E. Someone on another blog passed along this Capture One video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEfk3Aw2TNI which would suggest that D800E shooters (or their assistants) will be spending a lot of time making adjustments in Capture NX, Lightroom 4 ( http://forums.adobe.com/message/4195272 ) or their preferred app. If Nikon doesn’t want to provide a moiréd RAW file for the internet to test, how about releasing a video using an internal build of their Capture NX software? It would be beneficial to those of us pre-ordering the D800 / D800E. Thanks.

  42. Scott Stadler February 9, 2012 at 11:20 am #

    This is a lot of camera, but overkill for me in the megapixel department. Since this is basically replacing the high megapixel D3X for half the price, wouldn’t it be interesting if Nikon came out with a full frame D400 with 18mp sensor at around the same price as the current D300s? It seems like it could be a possible trend with the D7000 coming out basically replacing the D300s in a lot of ways, now the D800 coming out, I could see Nikon implementing a strategy of, D0000 cameras are entry level / enthusiast cameras and are DX sensors, D000 and D0 cameras are pro build quality with full frame sensors, Those are just my thoughts though, I have no idea what Nikon is planning.

    • Powerbill February 10, 2012 at 7:47 am #

      Me likey a lot! That would make total sense to me. Even if the cost was around $2500. I think that would be the perfect camera. Basically just an upgraded D700, which the D800 is anything but.

  43. Ben February 9, 2012 at 11:24 am #

    I am just getting serious about photography and making money with it. Right now I use a D90 and have been waiting to see what to upgrade to. A D7000? The D300s replacement? Full frame?

    The D800 is very exciting to me, but I think there would be more costs involved than just the camera and some primes. I have serious concerns that my 2008 iMac which has a 4GB ram max won’t be able to handle the files. And I also have concerns that the camera will be much better than me…all of the pros I have read who did the advertising for this have said they used tripods in situations where they normally wouldn’t have. That scares the daylights out of me.

    All of the early looks and semi-reviews have been very positive, but I will need to see more comprehensive and end-user reviews before making a decision.

    • Powerbill February 10, 2012 at 7:50 am #

      This is precisely my situation. Same camera, computer and concerns. What to do? I’m waiting to see the 300s replacement and weigh that against a used D3/700. I just hate to spend the money on such an old camera, but the file size of 75mb files scares my computer a tad more at this point.

  44. Wolf February 9, 2012 at 11:32 am #

    I’m a D7000 user, I’m very impressed by the megapixel count of the D800, I often do a lot of cropping in my shots so this could be useful.

    On the other hand I’m worried about computer performance when loading and editing the files – and also filling up memory cards too quickly.

    I’m not too worried about low light performance since I’m already impressed by the D7000 low light performance.

    I might switch to full frame at some point, a $3300 camera comes close to affordable. I don’t do enough photography to justify the cost at the moment.

    • david reinfeld February 9, 2012 at 2:04 pm #

      memory is cheap; it will be great

  45. Len February 9, 2012 at 11:33 am #

    As a canon owner, nikon is really tempting me to switch. This is what I hoped canon will come out with in the 5d mk iii, but from the rumors they will not be.

    So far in the unedited test shots I do not see a lot of noise and improved dynamic range. The increased fps with the crop factor for concerts and sports is impressive. Oddly one of the options people are not talking about is the facial recognition AF through the viewfinder! This sounds like a amazing feature! Yes, 36MP is a lot of data but technology changes quickly and you need to deal with it. It will allow you to print larger and crop easier.

    Only disappointments are the ISO range and “only” two frame HDR. I would had hoped you could select a higher number.

  46. Simon Banthorpe February 9, 2012 at 11:34 am #

    I’ll just wait for money to grow on trees… or rather buy something that’s not a slow 5fps for the cost. Good to see Nikon sort out the filming options – headphone socket, audio control (I think), mic socket and 60fps in 720p but again for the price, you could get a very good broadcast camcorder. It doesn’t scream “the next best thing” as far as I’m concerned. It’s not perfect and adding tons of megapixels doesn’t impress me when each raw photo is considered to be around 70mb in size which will make you fork out for extra hard drives costing yet more money. It seems rushed and Nikon’s usual approach in considering the market and consumer seems to have gotten carried away with one idea – more megapixels. Saying that, with the right glass and scene, I expect it takes one hell of a photo.

  47. HotDuckZ February 9, 2012 at 11:34 am #

    It’s very sexy, nice feeling when touch.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/thanatham/6834733141/

  48. Kevin February 9, 2012 at 11:43 am #

    I’ve read a lot of comments about how the D800 is not really the upgrade the the D700 and I would agree. Nikon had a huge hit with the D700 since it was such a versatile camera. I think that a lot of photographers just wanted a D700 with a few minor upgrades like the addition of video, dual memory card slots, and maybe a higher megapixel count like around 18 or 22 and maybe throw in a couple other features that could set it apart from the D700. But now with 36mp, a slower fps rate, and the potential reduction in low-light ability (haven’t seen any high ISO comparisons yet) I think people are going to question whether or not they should buy the D800.

    Maybe when it becomes available the D800 will win over the masses but for now you can sense a lot of reluctance. I suppose time will tell. I’m kind of eager to see what the 5d Mark III (or 5DX) has to offer.

    • bert March 25, 2012 at 1:24 pm #

      It IS a worthy successor of the D700.
      Why?
      - It improves 1 stop on the high ISO
      - It improves 2 stops on the D-range
      - It has 3 times the number of pixels, IF YOU LIKE
      - It has 20 mpixels if you think the 5D has it right with the pixel count
      - It added professional crop modes like 4:5 and 16:9 for film stills
      - It is a better D300 too: bird enthusiasts can use a D800 in crop mode, and mix it with FX landscapes
      - It is still 4fps: the theoretical 7fps of the D700 is hardly used in my case. Don’t forget, this is a reporter camera, not a sports beast that should team with a 3kg tele lens.
      - It adds video
      - You still get the useful built in Flash (people underestimate its usefulness! I flash container ships with my D700 flash at 50meters).
      - You get the best all time DXO mark sensor score
      - It has better high iso than its competitor (5DmkIII), even though Nikon is shy on paper (mentioning just 6400 iso).

      So it is the best upgrade possible to the D700. They even invite MF users to grab a bunch of D800′s.
      And don’t be a sissy about the FPS. A good photographer has to do just 1 thing: press the shutter release at the right moment. Then fps don’t matter.

  49. Chris M February 9, 2012 at 11:47 am #

    I’m a little confused. So…what is the purpose of the D3x now?

    Wasnt that the superduper crazy detail camera for studio/landscapes? Now the D800 is better and cheaper? Or is there something I am missing?

    Also if Nikon is listening they should be making the D400 a full frame ~$2k camera and have the D9000 pick up the D300s legacy.

  50. Carlos Garcia February 9, 2012 at 11:53 am #

    You kidding me, this is a no brainer. In with the new out with the old. I’m keeping my D700, but as soon as I get the funds for an 800 this will be my new toy. I just got rid of my Sony trinitron for a 60 inch LED, technolgy rocks!

  51. David February 9, 2012 at 12:08 pm #

    I think this is brilliant. I think the market it’s aimed at is perfect. This is a studio camera. Also by attractive for a stock shooter. This gives you the resolution to crop and still qualify for the largest image sizes.
    To those complaining about it’s price (or, ironically the price of the D4 by comparison) *News Flash* this is photography. It ain’t cheap. A 24-70/2.8 and a 70-200/2.8 together cost a grand more than the D800. Cards are expensive. Hard drives are easy to buy and connect.
    If costs are that much of an issue for you, get a D7k and an 18-200. Or sigma glass. I’d bet the pixels of the D800 are technically the same as the D7k. Do the math. This MP count is exactly the pixel pitch of the D7000, expanded to full frame size. Even has the exact ISO range.
    If you want cheap, don’t shop the pro bodies.
    The practical applications of 36 available megapixels can’t be overstated.
    Of course, if those complaining have more industry insight than Nikon does. And by industry I mean all of it. Not just your little piece of it.

  52. Monte Rudze February 9, 2012 at 12:13 pm #

    A long waited and welcome addition of video, the 36MP is over the top but that only means Canon is on its heels. Somehow either N and C work together or have the best spies in the industry. Give it 2-3 years and DSLR resolutions above 36 will be the norm.
    One thing I was not too pleased to see was the same simple memory card door from d700. D300 has a lever, D4 has a special opening, but this stayed the same pull slide.
    I would also like to hear what others think of the focus assist light. I currently have d300 and the light is only good for small lenses, with 24-70 and a hood the light is useless. I can’t believe there is not a single engineer at Nikon that would say ‘hey, we should move the light so it doesn’t get blocked’. Otherwise I can’t wait for mine to show up in March.

  53. Chris McCrackin February 9, 2012 at 12:14 pm #

    I like most of the updates to the video side but why 36mp? I’d rather have a more affordable mini D4 like how the D700 was a mini D3. Save the 36MP for the D4X. 36mp files are not something I want to deal with. For that reason alone I likely won’t be getting this camera.

  54. Tim K February 9, 2012 at 12:20 pm #

    I was waiting on the D800 to upgrade to a FX with more frames per second than my current DX, as I mainly shoot sports and need a higher FPS body. The D800 was my hope for a sub $3k FX camera I could afford and it really doesn’t offer me anything worth upgrading to. The CS side of me keeps thinking Moore’s law applied to SLR’s will double the data able to be processed every 18months. While Nikon doubled the data per shot, I was wanting the FPS doubled not the MP/frame.

  55. Mike February 9, 2012 at 12:21 pm #

    Depending on the forum one visits, there is a completely different atmosphere surrounding the D800. This seems to be the anti-D800 place to be. I suppose Chase tainted the waters with a opening comment involving “camera nerds”.

    When rumors of 36 mp initially made their way around the rumour site(s) I was appalled at the thought of 36 mp, I admit. I have a D3s and I’m all about quality pixels. The thought crossed my mind to sell it, get the D4 and a used D700 as a second body/back up. But when the price for the D800 was announced, I couldn’t ignore it. It made more sense to keep the D3s as the high performance generalist and get a D800 as a specialist. For wedding work (I’ve never taken 2000 images), I see the D800 getting used for portaits, group shots and details and in high DR situations. Then on down time, I can take the ungripped body on landscape shoots at full resolution. Think outside the box people. Lots of pixels for perspective correction. Saves me T/S lens purchases. Lots of pixels will save you work flow time if you stitch panoramas together routinely. Anyway, it’s not for everyone I agree, but its not the Godzilla that its being made out to be. Bottom line is that there are more options to be had with a high mp camera, just as one had more options with what they could do with high ISO than they could pre-2007. The D4 is about getting the shot no matter the light level and getting it out to the virtual world. The D800 is about a slower work flow with some different flexibilities.

  56. David G. February 9, 2012 at 12:32 pm #

    Wow what a camera! Has me wondering where/when I’m going to get $$$ together for one???

  57. Dan February 9, 2012 at 12:34 pm #

    I held off for almost 2 years, waiting for a D700 replacement so I could upgrade to a reasonably priced FX body with video. I couldn’t be more disappointed by the 36mp specs. I thought everyone was in agreement that ISO trumps MP? Nikon has left me without a camera to upgrade to. I won’t be purchasing a D800 and I’m having trouble justifying the cost of a D4 for my needs.

    • Steven February 16, 2012 at 1:48 pm #

      Well said. I’ve been waiting for a full frame to upgrade from the D300. The trick of having both a FX and a 15mpx DX in the same body is nice, but more than I need. The thought of managing all of those large files gives me the willies…

      I want some more megapixels from the D700, the low light capability and don’t want to buy another DX body.

  58. Mike D February 9, 2012 at 12:36 pm #

    LOL….. I have to chuckle at the number of “photographers” that complain about the pixel size! That’s like saying, “I don’t want the 550hp BMW M5, why can’t they just make a slower one with only 250hp that has a smoother ride…. for the same price, because I don’t think I could handle the power and it’s less fuel efficient.”

    In the M5, you don’t have to use all 550hp every time you give it throttle, there’s an “M” button whereby you can choose how much you’d like to use. Just the same, the D800 does not have to shoot 36mp on every shot. Shoot in a reduced resolution!! Here’s the listed image capture sizes available.

    • FX format (36×24): 7,360 × 4,912 (L), 5,520 × 3,680 (M), 3,680 × 2,456 (S)
    • 1.2× (30×20): 6,144 × 4,080 (L), 4,608 × 3,056 (M), 3,072 × 2,040 (S)

    I am personally very excited for this camera. It is what I’ve been hoping for, and meets my needs exactly.

    Mike

    • Jeff February 9, 2012 at 1:52 pm #

      you cannot adjust the “size” of RAW. You can step down the compression, but you cannot adjust the RAWness of the file.

      • stanchung February 10, 2012 at 5:46 am #

        Cool video & other nice stuff with differentiation between D4,

        Ditto, Nikon is lagging- it didn’t not catch up with Canon on making options for capturing RAW at smaller/multiple resolutions.
        5MP – for internet pics.
        12MP for sports
        16MP for most print
        >20 MP for landscape & studio

        RAW is the life saver for night shots- shooting at 14bit-what appears dim can be saved on my D7000.

        This D800 is unfortunately what I’m NOT saving for. D4 is way too expensive as I’m still collecting glass.

    • Raoul February 9, 2012 at 2:18 pm #

      I like your comparison but my question is, would the RAW format be available to all sizes? or it would only be on the FX (36×24)? If it is then I’m totally sold with your rationale.

    • Mat February 10, 2012 at 6:38 am #

      Shows you’re a “photographer” and have no idea what you’re talking about..
      It’s not the number of pixels that’s the problem, it’s the density of them! And no matter how you crop or shoot in DX mode or whatever, pixel density remains the same!
      Sure, 36Mpx on a MEDIUM format sensor is great, but on 35mm it’s a disaster! Why do you think the new flagship D4 has “only” 16Mpx?? Because people who buy it, don’t “need” more?? Year, right! Cos that’s the optimum number to retain max resolutions, sharpness, dynamic range and low light capabilities..

      So D800 SUCKS!
      I have D700 and wanted to upgrade due to stupid 96% viewfinder and I wanted video, now this thing..

  59. Sterling February 9, 2012 at 1:04 pm #

    I think it will be a great camera. I do kind of wish Nikon had gone in a different direction and given it fewer megapixels and more frames per second. That way, there could be a camera for a person wanting to get into shooting sports without having to pull the trigger for a D4. But I guess Nikon figured since the barrier to enter sports was so expensive for all other equipment, they might as well capture some of that profit.

  60. Keri February 9, 2012 at 1:07 pm #

    Very nice camera, I can see how the specs fit a niche, just not a camera for me at this time.

    Too rich for my blood both spec & price.

    A D300s replacement would be good for me and my shooting topics at present.

  61. Chuck February 9, 2012 at 1:12 pm #

    What is a “Built-in External” microphone? It’s either built-in or it’s external.

    • Sim February 9, 2012 at 1:34 pm #

      It’s probably a miss type. The word “jack” was omitted.

  62. KevinS February 9, 2012 at 1:19 pm #

    I was hoping for a smaller D4. I wanted its high native ISO and although not expecting the same high fps I did want at least the same as the D700.

    I don’t see why they didn’t do like the D3 make and X which was high mega pixels.

  63. Sim February 9, 2012 at 1:31 pm #

    I’m fine with large megapixel count as long as the camera can deliver a decent image. The pixel density is about the same as the D7000 and its’ video looks great. The main thing I’m interested in is how well the video quality will look downscailing a 36mp full frame sensor to 1080p.

  64. mike from LA February 9, 2012 at 1:56 pm #

    was hoping for more than just 15/51 cross-type focus points… :-/

    • mike from LA February 9, 2012 at 2:09 pm #

      btw, was really hoping that the D800 was going to be the body that kept me form dropping Nikon for the big “C”. But with the possible issue of NIKON NOT selling parts to 3rd party repair shops and lack of a decent CPS type support (at least one that you don’t need to be Chase to join) kinda make me weary of staying.

  65. John February 9, 2012 at 2:40 pm #

    I’ll echo other’s sentiments re the D400 wish list. Nikon could address many concerns/needs by making the D400 full frame, adding value by further distinguishing each DSLR’s role. I’d be happy with the 12 MP as in the D700, but don’t think they should go higher than 16 MP.

    The D700 is such a near perfect balance for still shooters: low light performance, file size, responsiveness, general performance, etc. So preserve this balance, add video and let pros and prosumers choose between the D400, D800, D4 based on their needs.

    So, Nikon, if you’re reading this, it’s hard to justify sacrificing the value the current D700 offers. Yes, we need to move forward given the remarkable new technology. Yet, MPs and sensor sizes are all about physics. Currently, the D700 has found an impressive equilibrium. Why not bring this to the D400?

  66. Kevin Lloyd February 9, 2012 at 2:46 pm #

    I agree with most, this looks like a great camera, but with the wrong sensor to be a replacement for the wonderful multipurpose D700. Put in the D4 sensor, up the frame rate to 6, and most would be happy.
    I make 17″ x 23″ prints on an Epson roll printer with my D700, sell them display them etc, never had a complaint about resolution lol
    I also use a NEC 30″ monitor… The D4 sensor is enough of a jump in resolution if we must have one.

    Nikon, release a D800S nuff said.

  67. Kevin Lloyd February 9, 2012 at 2:51 pm #

    Let me just add, I think the D800E for landscape shooters looks great.

  68. Minh Insixiangmy February 9, 2012 at 2:58 pm #

    The division of the tree for the d4 /d800 good for Nikon and users. Pro speed shooters get the d4. Studio+ shooters the d800 is a great solution. Frames rates and super high ISO are not my requirements. The d800e addresses the thing I wish my d700 had and more. 100% viewfinder, exp3 engine, d4 af system and meter,more Megapixels. It suits my needs and that’s why I preorder

  69. adrian February 9, 2012 at 3:17 pm #

    really tired of people bitching about ‘the megapixel war” and then in the same breath guffing on about high iso performance!
    both items are dick measuring, and both have their uses for different kinds of photography…
    you want high iso? stick with your d700 or step up an buy a d4! personally, having owned a d700 since day one, I can’t wait to get my d800….. I WANT 36 megapixels…. in fact 50 megapixels would be cool too!!!
    I mostly shoot landscape, so who cares about fps…. seriously, Nikon have made the difference between the d4 and the d800 as obvious as its possible to make…. get over yourselves and go take pictures!!!

    • Kevin Lloyd February 9, 2012 at 8:16 pm #

      “get over yourselves and go take pictures!!!” hmm…after I’ve dropped $6299 plus tax just to get D4 when all I want is to pay $3000 plus tax to buy a D800 with a D4 sensor (with the benefit’s of a smaller body). Sure you’re happy, but please have some understanding of the situation here? Does money grow on trees for you? lol

  70. Roderic February 9, 2012 at 4:07 pm #

    I am looking forward to this I was beginning to lose hope in Nikon, this restores my faith and means I won’t have to buy a medium format just yet.And before the comments come I know it takes more than higher megapixels to replace a medium format but I think this is potentially a great camera for studio shooters I have very high expectations for this camera.Nikon don’t let me down.

  71. jol February 9, 2012 at 4:31 pm #

    I was hoping for something in pink or blue.

  72. Joe February 9, 2012 at 5:21 pm #

    I’m excited about the D800…36 megapixels…yes! I look forward to having my clients hang a 40×60 group portrait on their wall. Thank you Nikon… As Tom Petty says, ” the waiting is the hardest part.”

  73. Harn Sheng February 9, 2012 at 5:48 pm #

    I’ve been waiting for this for so long! As a D200 user for both personal and works, the iso have always been a limiting factor especially when i went into the jungle of lowlight condition. I love my D200 for it’s capabilities and ergonomic. Although the iso performance was bad, i love the colors and reproduction from the CCD sensors (which sometimes, i dream of a new Nikon with CCD) And due to that, i chose not to upgrade to D700 but stays with my trusty D200, no matter in what condition.

    The new D800 makes me drools, not just because of the megapixels. It’s slightly bigger than my D200 (which is good in terms of ergonomic), full frame!, and im not sure about others, i like the DX mode too! at 15mp, it is very useful to get an extra reach without compromising the mp count and resolution like the D3 or D3S. 36mp will be perfect for my landscape shoot, wedding shoot and the 15mp DX mode! Oh my.. Dont complain bout the spaces you need. Hard disk is dirt cheap nowadays, and dont be trigger happy all the time. Think before you click the shutter!

    Movie mode is just a bonus for me. Not really a video shooter but, why not giving it a try. I might find new love in movie with D800 :)

  74. Thomas Chamberlin February 9, 2012 at 5:54 pm #

    Does this mean there will not be a scaled down D4 for the many, many amateurs who can’t afford a D4 or who want a lighter version for travel photography?

  75. Sebastian February 9, 2012 at 6:40 pm #

    I think it was a smart move; D4 is pro for all conditions, but lacking Res. D800 is an awesome studio cam (like the 5D mkii is, but better), now available to amateurs and semi-pro’s alike. Opening up a whole new world of post-production capabilities, I love my D700 for its versatility; wicked auto-focus, awesome lowlight ability etc. But when it comes down to pushing the files in post; there’s just not enough detail in the skin and other subtle textures to grab on. With 36MP of data, I could really grab texture and make it pop. Not to mention eyes! Holy Moly, the level of detail in the iris would be very impressive!

  76. Sarah Holden February 9, 2012 at 7:29 pm #

    Well, the 36mp doesn’t really seem necessary unless your doing art reproduction or perhaps product photography. Something where you need a massive amount of spacial resolution to capture the finest detail. But with all that spacial resolution your going to give up tonal resolution and dynamic range theoretically. With the pixel’s being so small the noise is obviously going to go up, which is why the ISO doesn’t go up as high as people these days think it should go up too. I guess it depends on whether you want to spend money on a camera with a crazy amount of spacial resolution or go for something else. Technically most people don’t need that amount. Especially if your shooting stuff like portraits and weddings where tonal resolution is probably more important.

  77. Chaz February 9, 2012 at 7:54 pm #

    As a D700 shooter this looks like it could be a complete disappointment. I’ll reserve judgement until I’ve had a chance to play with is, but the first thing that comes to mind is low light sensitivity. I love what my D700 can do with high ISO in low light. If it is not as amazing, then it’s a loser for me. I don’t care about video. I just want a great DSLR that’s a better still camera then what I have. If Nikon can produce that I’ll be happy.

  78. tom February 9, 2012 at 8:15 pm #

    In this imperfect world, an camera that allows us to capture the true impact of humans on the planet is a a good thing. Reshaping public opinion required compelling images. I think the D800 is work a shot…

  79. Aaron Codling February 9, 2012 at 8:20 pm #

    D700 prices should be falling soon……..hmmmm could always use a couple spares.
    Besides, my RZ shoots just fine for big prints.

  80. Dan The Photo Man February 9, 2012 at 9:42 pm #

    I am really surprised by the number of people who feel the 36mp is overkill. This much information gives you flexibility when it comes to cropping or making large prints. And from the samples I have seen, the quality seems to be great up to 6400. I don’t need the crazy high ISOs of the D4. I will just do more in-camera editing to help limit what goes on the computer. For the type of work I shoot, this camera is a dream for both me and my clients.

  81. Jason Mitchell February 9, 2012 at 9:45 pm #

    As a motion guy who has switched to stills, I’m ecstatic to see the uncompressed HDMI out. This is the big one for HDSLR as it will allow the use of a recorder like a Pix 240 to shoot straight to ProRes or DNxHD. And I’m hoping the 36mp will keep me from having to switch to medium format for a little longer for my fine art studio work. If this camera was targeted to anyone, it’s me. I’ve resisted the 5D as I think the images are a bit rough. Hopefully the quality will stand up (with the recorder or not) and I’ll split time between my Epic and the D800. And I’m curious to do a side by side with my D3x to see how the extra MP stand up.

  82. Dan The Photo Man February 9, 2012 at 9:53 pm #

    Wow, looking back through the posts, there are many people assuming that the high ISO performance will be worse than the D700. From the samples I have seen, the high ISO performance is the same as the D700 and D3 (they use the same sensor). Technology moves forward and all of the old rules don’t always apply!

  83. Pablo February 9, 2012 at 10:03 pm #

    This camera is amazing, a little jewel, but… though heartbroken… I’ll have to leave my Nikon D7000 and go with Canon next time.

    I’ll switch to Canon once they launch the upgrade for the Canon 5D (either the Mark III or the X, whatever the rumor is)… Yes, I love Nikon but the 5D is industry standard now. I’m a director and 90% of the DPs I could call use the 7D or 5D.

    I wish there were more Nikon for film out there….

  84. Ben February 9, 2012 at 10:22 pm #

    Wow, just wow. I was just sweating reading these comments…

    Megapixels: To all of you that are whining about too many megapixels. You’re obviously don’t know much about camera technology. Nikon will offer 2-3 sizes of RAW files. Not every damn shot you take has to be at 36MP. All of this ranting and complaining about it is totally moot and ridiculous. Having 36MP as an option is awesome. Will you you it on every shot? I will, tons of real professionals (non-wedding/PJs) will and YOU probably won’t–so dial it down and stop complaining.

    Also, people need to understand something else…. You need to TRIPLE megapixels to DOUBLE resolution. A 36MP camera only has ‘twice’ as much resolution as a 12MP camera. So this new camera with what seems like crazy high MP is simply doubling the actual resolution of the D700 image. That is NOT a massive overkill. It’s called progress. And again, you don’t have to shoot at that resolution every time.

    Noise: Stop assuming noise will be bad on this camera. Wait until real samples are out. Also, if you’re clamoring for 128,000iso capabilities, then you shouldn’t be spending $3,000 on a camera. You obviously don’t know how to shoot images in low light. And/or you’re trying to photograph your kids basketball game on a $300 f/5.6 lens. Upgrade those, then buy a new body.

  85. Chris February 10, 2012 at 1:11 am #

    Awwsome specs, just what I was hoping for. Some cool features and all very useful.
    But and it’s a big but, too many megapixels!
    For my work as a domestic photographer it’s complete overkill. I’ll stick to my d700/d3 combo and upgrade to the D4 when necessary.
    Chris

  86. Ziv February 10, 2012 at 4:42 am #

    It missed the mark for me. Too many pixels for full frame. I like my pixels fat and juicy.
    My D800 wet dream would have been 18mp, native 50 ISO, 16 stops of dynamic range and a 105mm f/1.8 leaf shutter kit lens that syncs at 1/1000, for $3k.
    Wait …. give me a minute before you wake me.

  87. Drew Gardner February 10, 2012 at 5:24 am #

    I think th D800 promises to be a good camera.

    My beef with it is in the sales pitch which claims it will challenge Medium Format.

    Which in my opinion is plain wrong.

    Anyone who thinks that a few more mega pixels is a substitute for medium format 16bit capture with a large sensor and a real would aspect ratio is missing the point.

    Regards

    Drew

    • J Duffy February 14, 2012 at 4:01 pm #

      Drew…absolutely love your work.

      For me, I would say the D800 will indeed “challenge” MF, but please allow me to define “challenge” as: 80% as good for 1/8th the price. For many, even with the cash for MFD, that just doesn’t make sense.

      Scenario:
      If I shoot the same subject with an IQ140 and a D800. I make two prints at 33×46 inches (A0), one from each camera. I have a buyer and I say this print is $3000 (D800)…and this print is $25,000 (IQ140+body). Do you think the buyer will choose the $25,000 print? Do you really think the IQ140 will look “dramatically, night and day” better?? For a $22,000 difference shouldn’t it look night and day better? Personally, I would have to think the D800 image looked like crap to justify that difference. I’ve seen similar comparisons with the D3x…and while I did prefer the MF images, *I* would characterize the difference as subtle. You find yourself saying things like “it just has that….”. That’s cool !!… but worth $22,000.? Not to me. And if not comparing side by side??…the D800 image will fare far better.

      Lastly…if MFD is so clearly superior….won’t it be obvious to us all?…with no need to defend it’s superiority on your blog and elsewhere? This whole MFD vs DSLR, FX vs DX, ISO vs MP, LF vs MF…yowsa. Sorry but I think I’m having a bit of an epiphany about how massively misplaced my priorities are in photography…gear, bragging rights (conscious and unconscious), etc, etc. The people shooting with iPhones seem to be having more fun. Need to go contemplate my navel.

  88. Harald Voglhuber February 10, 2012 at 5:47 am #

    I think high ISO capability will make or break the deal for me. I hoped to get some kind of D700/D3s high ISO with some more resolution.

    What’s interesting for me as a wedding and commercial photographer is that you can choose from various resolutions.

    For weddings you can choose between DX crop 15 MP what’s plenty (imho) for nice prints and huge books or 1.2 crop with 25 MP for portraits (I think you probably never ever need 36 MP for weddings).

    As commercial photographer I find myself smiling to have the choice to switch to 36 MP for customers who need it really big. So you can serve various needs with one camera.

    I really hope for some “miracles” regarding high ISO. ISO 1600 on the D7000 is not great but fine, if I get results like with the D700 or let alone the D3s I would order one today :-) but I do not really expect that. Hope dies last ;-)

    Cheers, Harry

  89. Mike F February 10, 2012 at 5:55 am #

    Looks like an excellent camera with more megapixels than I imagined (expected 24 or 32).
    As long as it drops D3X prices to $2500-3300 I’ll be ecstatic.

  90. Chris Kuhlman February 10, 2012 at 5:59 am #

    I’ve been with Nikon for 40 years. Shooting corporate annual reports and advertising work, they have never failed me. Now we offer video and I ended up with some Canon gear, 5d’s and glass. With the exception of the Canon FF sensor, I’m not impressed. The build of the body & the lenses, don’t compare to my D700′s and Nikon glass IMO. I placed my order for the D800 though NPS immediately. I will continue to shoot the D700′s for my reportage stills. I’ll use the D800 for specific ad shots where we need the pixel count as I used to go to the Hasselblad and certainly for video. I have great expectation from Nikon, so much that I purchased sight unseen for the first time ever. I glad they are recovering from the devastating Tsunami and floods and want to continue my support.

  91. Huffoto February 10, 2012 at 6:52 am #

    Well. I’m not a videographer so I think for now I will stick with my D700 bodies. I can’t see why upgrading to this camera (with out wearing out my 2 D700 bodies first) would benefit me. One concern I have, since I shoot a lot of sports, is the loss os shutter speed. With my grip on my D700 I get 8+ fps in my display. This one is 3 fps slower. Is this progress?

  92. Paul Smith February 10, 2012 at 7:02 am #

    Here’s one from an ex Nikon guy considering flip flopping back. Have they fixed the build quality especially the round toggle on the back ?
    I shoot at least 3000 to 5000 images a day (not a joke) 5 days a week and when I owned the original D1X and the D2X it couldn’t handle the work load. It was constantly in the shop and NPS even gave me a replacement at one point! I’d love to hear anybody’s thoughts.

    Thanks Paul.

    ps: Chase, if you read this. Thanks for sharing mate !

  93. Knips February 10, 2012 at 7:28 am #

    36 megapixel? My first thought was has Nikon done something amazing or is this the world’s most expensive point-n-shoot camera? If it were any other camera company other than Nikon I would laugh it off as a way to pander to marketing hype and grab a few quick sales. Image quality; however, has always been a Nikon prerequisite. I’m fascinated by this megapixel monster. Can’t wait to read the reviews.

  94. RobyFabro February 10, 2012 at 7:54 am #

    What I’ve seen from a photographer (Cliff Mautner) whom actually used the D800 on the field, the images are fab and the quality of the 100% crops at high iso are better then I expected!
    The new Nikon looks a perfect companion to a D4\D3s or why not, even a D700! The price of the body is fine, the battery pack, however, it’s a bit on the steep side!!
    You have to get what suits your needs!
    I see the D800 as a D3x on a budget, more megapixels at 5000 megadollars less! And with the apparently brilliant video of the D800 you could even film yourself, on a Caribbean beach, counting all the thousands of dollars you saved!!
    I can see the D800 joining my other two bodies soon.

  95. Tony R February 10, 2012 at 8:20 am #

    Would have much preferred to see these specs in a ‘pro’ body like the D4. Love the MP count, love the price. Now how does Nikon justify a D3x for $8k vs the D800 for $3k?

  96. MikeScott February 10, 2012 at 11:52 am #

    There needs to be one more FX camera in the lineup – call it the D800S or D700+ or whatever.. Something that relates to the D4 the way the D700 related to the D3 family – 16MP, 1080p HD, good high ISO performance. Then the D400 needs to replace the D300s at the top of the DX chain – and it obviously needs to be a step up from the D7000 – better 1080p HD video, 16MP, better high ISO, fit/finish etc.

  97. Andrew Shinn February 10, 2012 at 11:58 am #

    36 megapixels is overkill. The return-on-megapixel calculation doesn’t work out for me. I’ve been making great prints from 12 megapixels for my portrait and wedding clients, and more resolution does nothing but cost me extra money and time. I’ve been very happy with my D3 and D700 for resolution and ISO. I had hoped Nikon would release a D700 upgrade with better performance and video capabilities. The D4 is great, but I was hoping for a lower-priced equivalent, like the D700 was the the D3.

  98. Alex Gauthier February 10, 2012 at 12:27 pm #

    Naturally, the web is currently filled with a litany of comments about what this camera should or should not have. I was hoping for an updated D700 like many but I have a D700 now and a D4 on the way after seeing this release. I’m quite sure that for what I shoot 16MP is sufficient but I do have a couple clients that want the huge files that a Phase One or similar will produce. It’s important to note that mostly, these folks *think* they need all those pixels but I happen to know they don’t.

    All that aside, however, I think Nikon’s only real stumble with this release has been it’s messaging and product positioning. Knowing, that a lot of folks were expecting something with the noise performance of the D700 or D3X but with more megapixels, I would have expected Nikon to get in front of that ball a little more. Setting expectations without giving away information before a release is a tricky business certainly, and even Apple doesn’t always pull this off. Ultimately, I don’t have any complaints about the D800 but if I were to offer advice to Nikon, it would simply be to pay a little more attention to managing customer expectations versus product road maps.

    For my part, I’ll probably ditch my D700 when I have the D4 in hand and purchase a D800 sometime this summer as a low cost way to avoid purchasing an expensive medium format back or medium format digital.

    • Ric February 11, 2012 at 4:20 am #

      Alex – understand where you are coming from, and you may be right as to the issue of product positioning. However, in a world where mirrorless cameras with smaller sensors have reached the 24MP range and where during the lifespan of the D800 the market will be inundated with those cameras, Nikon had to do something dramatic to ensure that 2 or 3 years from now their camera would still be selling and not be swallowed-up by the fast approaching mirrorless technology. Like the side mirror in our cars, “objects behind you may be closer than you think.” Nikon could I’ll afford these objects to catch up in a couple of years time.

  99. matt fong February 10, 2012 at 12:58 pm #

    ill stick with my XA

  100. Bruce Hemingway February 10, 2012 at 1:52 pm #

    I ordered the D800E the first minute it could be pre-ordered. But, I also have pre-ordered the Fujifilm XPro-1 and three lenses. That I can carry around easily.

    The trick is to know when to use which one…

  101. Ric February 10, 2012 at 3:16 pm #

    Why do I get the feeling that no matter what Nikon did, the same crowd would be here arguing with the same ferocity. Like so many of you, the D4 is what I wanted, but the trade off of having to sell a kidney to do it made me settle for the D800. What’s more, many here are condemning Nikon based on what they see on paper, but I for one will not do this until I get my hands on the camera. After all, didn’t they give us the wonderful D3s and D700 in the past? Why immediately assume that the same minds didn’t know what they were doing now? Their track record is very good indeed.

  102. Brian February 10, 2012 at 9:39 pm #

    I got a hands on experience with the new D800 and was totally impressed. Nikon continues to listen to blogs and photographers rants to improve there cameras. Kudos to you Chase and Nikon for this awesome release.

    Here is my analysis from CP+ on youtube: http://youtu.be/m0Wru4tr-ig

    I am buying a D4, D800 and D800E, I have been waiting too long!

  103. Levi February 10, 2012 at 9:40 pm #

    I see a used D3s in my future.

    • J Duffy February 14, 2012 at 4:03 pm #

      +1

      A used D3s for $3,500 and a D800 for $3,000. Luv it!

  104. Moto February 11, 2012 at 1:22 pm #

    For me, it’s clearly a great camera, but it’s not what I was waiting for. Like a lot of people above, I wanted something akin to the D4, less pixels but better noise control, a natural successor to the D700. The D800 is a very different beast. From a landscape perspective, and for general wedding working in good light it looks amazing, but then my D300 does a good job there too and in broad daylight my iP4 is no slouch either. What I needed was something to cope with low lit churches and chapels, the first dance at twilight without flash etc etc. What I was hoping for was a D700 with a few more pixels, will that be a 5d MkIII?

    I’m a bit puzzled too at the price structure too. It’s launched at £1k more than Canon’s offering. I appreciate there’s a monumental pixel uplift but reading above, it appears no one was asking for that. To enter this part of the market 3 years late with a product that seems to be over specced and over priced suggests Nikon have misunderstood it’s market. If this camera was an ace performer at high iso then I’d see that as some sort of vindication, but it’s not. Sample images posted already on line show it’s top end ISO is unusable unless you b&w the shot and although 6400 examples looks ok in clean light, there’s noise there and I’d wager the second you start to push or pull the exposure it’ll jump out at you. To be expected on a sensor this size packing this many pixels? Of course, it’s not a crit, it’s just not what it seems most of us wanted from this body.

    I’m puzzled too as to why it outguns the d3x on pix count. It’s like Nikon put the wrong sensors in the wrong bodies. If the D4 was a 36mp 11fps monster I’d get the price tag, but as the spec stands, I’m not totally sure where the extra £2.5k goes for the jump to D4.

    Will I buy one? I genuinely don’t know now. My next upgrade was supposed to be a Nikon, and I’d still like it to be but I can’t stretch to a D4 and the D800 doesn’t really tick the boxes I need. I’m not waiving the Canon sabre to stir it up, but for the same price as an 800 body, I could pick up a 5d and a decent l series lens. For me now, (depending on what the mkIII version offers when announced), it sort of has to be a consideration.

    If Nikon really do pay attention to this blog then a couple of things. First, I think you got this wrong. Two great products released no doubt, but possibly off target. Second, how do you justify a £450 price tags for the Wt-5? it;s a wifi card, they cost pence. And finally, please sort out your UK office. The apathy and arrogance I’ve encountered there really does the firm no justice.

  105. Daniel Cox February 11, 2012 at 5:39 pm #

    Another amazing camera from Nikon. However, for the type of work I do I’m hoping they have an updated D700 coming. Maybe a D700AS or whatever. Can anyone remember the F2AS? I love the low light capabilities of the D700 but would love to see a new version with video and better AF. Time will tell.

  106. michael murphy February 12, 2012 at 4:21 pm #

    think overpaid by 4 grand for the d4! HA! JUST KIDDING. I think it will be a fine camera, both of them. A little angry with my d4 delivery date though. just found out, after thinking it would arrive in about a week, that all are pushed back a month or so. GRRRRRRR.

  107. Michael Noble Jr. February 12, 2012 at 8:53 pm #

    I think that nikon did a amazing job with the D800, its alomst every thing you want in a camera now adays and more. Nikon has been on a spree of releasing innovative camera first the D7000, then D4, and now this D800. I trully wish I could get my hands on this camera. This camera at concert shoot would be so amazing, I never used a camera with that many megapixels. Nikon you did great!! I can’t wait to see what chase does with one of these!

  108. jB February 13, 2012 at 6:26 am #

    It seems photographers go in stages, first we all think the more MP the better, then we realise this is wrong. But then we think more MP is bad which is also wrong. A site on a sensor is not a site on a sensor, they improve as the technology increases. Yes its easier to control aspects with a larger sensor but that doesn’t mean a smaller sensor is bad. I have been looking forward to the D800 release for quite a while and you know what, its not the camera for me, which is a bit gutting, but I like the fact its quite clear. If you are a studio guy iso aint really an issue and the same with landscape as you have a tripod, you don’t shoot fast. So all the energy has been put into things that matter to these people MP and DR. and then you have the D4 for most other people who need a bit more to a lot more speed better noise control and either don’t need or don’t want the extra MPs. So really its seems peoples complaints are that they want a d4 for less, understandable but not really a complaint right. Does anyone listen to Chase…its all about the image and it doesn’t matter what you use to get it, and this works both ways, I.e if you need use 30 grands worth of gear to get it, then thats what that shot requires, so you either use that gear or if you aint got it you use your skills as a creative to get the shot.

  109. nick February 13, 2012 at 5:39 pm #

    A full frame that does 1080p video, but cheaper than D4 – is that too much to ask?

    • nick February 13, 2012 at 5:46 pm #

      scratch that. looks like d800 is for me!

  110. ben February 13, 2012 at 6:37 pm #

    Only two things that I don’t like about the D800:
    -Definitely too many megapixels. Good for some people, but for most, it’s just taking up too much hard drive and back-up drive space. 12MP was good enough.
    -Replace that amateur pop-up flash with a larger glass prism. Given the ISO range, you don’t need a flash “just in case”. Also, no flash means better weather sealing.

  111. Kari Lautamaki February 14, 2012 at 1:46 am #

    I´m not satisfied with 36mp, i hope Nikon will produce D800s with better ISO and more fps. D4 is to heavy to carry in the mountains and to expensive for me so I wait and se what Canons next camera will be.

  112. Eugene February 14, 2012 at 8:36 pm #

    Yeah, it works for me…great price point. 36 mp for me as a hobby landscape (panos) and garden, and still-life photographer…this will be nice. I just developed a 50″ x 35″ enlargement w/over 9700 pixels on the long side which was a photo merge of 10 frames. This will help me get that large w/o loss of resolution and w/o a lot of photo merge efforts. Workflow…I shoot 20-200 frames at a typical day hike or session. And the same for portraits and family events (no, I am not a pro) . So the processing does not spook me, though I just upgraded to 16 GB ram. I ordered the 800E.

    • Brett February 15, 2012 at 12:15 am #

      Forgive me if I am wrong, but a 36MP image sensor is all very well and good, the question is, do the current lenses on offer for Nikon camera have the optical resolution to justify it?

  113. Fernando February 15, 2012 at 1:10 am #

    My next camera. The D800 is pretty much the camera I was waiting for. I would have preferred it to have no flash. My big complaint is using two different kinds of memory cards.

    I do like the idea another FX camera in this size, that has fast frame rates and excellent high ISO performance – a D4 lite if you will.

  114. eric February 15, 2012 at 6:13 pm #

    I don’t think so. 36 mega pixels so what? I will get my 36 mega pixels when D4S comes out. D4 is the definite way to go.

  115. Mike Noble February 16, 2012 at 5:17 am #

    I shoot with two D700s which I adore. They are great cameras. I think that Nikon hit it out of the park with this camera – a small D3. I was hoping for an upgrade camera that would be a small D4. I am disappointed. I can see the 36mp files from the D800 slowing my work flow considerably. Not to mention filling up storage very quickly. I shoot for print and the Web. The quality and resolution of the D700 images are great for these purposes. Also, I am a photographer not a videographer and I really hate having to pay for features that I will not use. There are some great features on the D800 but the above mentioned downsides will negate any purchase. For the future, I see that the price of the D3S is already beginning to come down. So maybe I can sell one D700 and pick one up – maybe a refurbished one. (Yes, I know it has video but you just can’t avoid it.) My D700s will last a long time so I do not have to make any immediate decisions.

  116. John Bell February 16, 2012 at 4:28 pm #

    I made my deposit yesterday! Good bye D90… Hello D800! (when ever it gets here)

  117. Florante February 18, 2012 at 8:16 am #

    It’s Florante from GearBundles. Nice post on Nikon D800 – can we feature it on
    our Nikon page? Drop me an email at florante@gearbundles.com. Thanks.

  118. gusde w February 19, 2012 at 3:10 pm #

    well Nikon now i have reason to stay along with you =) …its psychological war..note to Nikon: ” Nikon don’t put your price too high and too far from Canon!”…

  119. Alex February 19, 2012 at 8:39 pm #

    This D800 seriously makes me want to switch to Nikon. I am still holding my breath on the Canon 5DX or 5D MARK III rumors but if they don’t come close to this or blow it out of the water, I’m switching systems to Nikon… I never thought I’d say that… But… Nikon… Here I come…

  120. Harry February 20, 2012 at 3:47 am #

    Definitely selling off my canon gear and moving over to the dark side after the announcement of this. Such an amazing piece of kit for nearly the same price as a 5d2… Who would bother waiting for the 5d3?

  121. Steve February 22, 2012 at 6:03 pm #

    Like other posters, I was hoping for the true D700 upgrade – 1 more stop of ISO and same or better frame rate. My use is for wildlife photography. The D800 drops the frame rate (presumably because of increased megapixels), but based on press adds the ISO. The D4 of course provides all I want, but not in an affordable and lightweight package like the D700.

  122. Coenrad February 23, 2012 at 3:36 am #

    Personally, I love the idea of a ” medium format” camera that doesn’t require a lottery win, especially for landscape images and if you have seen Nick Brandt’s images at full size, some subjects do benefit from a large image size, better yet, ( Elephants on postcard sized images just aren’t the same) it cost the equivalent of one Kidney as apposed to both for the D4, I can live with that, not the D4 costing.

    What DOES IRRITATE ME is the lack of in depth information related to the D800E, Nikon should really invest more effort in clearing up the benefit, WHY is it better for finer detail, WHAT should the criteria be when deciding between the D800 models, NOTHING would be worse than coughing up the extra spleen to add to the already sold kidney to pay for the D800E only to find that with NIK or Lightroom 4, you cant tell the difference between the 2 camera’s post RAW processing.

  123. Coenrad February 23, 2012 at 3:49 am #

    Just to be more specific, someone at Nikon proposed the idea of the Low Pass filter modification, LOADS of people agreed or Nikon would never have spent the time, money and effort working up the second model, there is a definite benefit or it would never have made it to production, especially for a company hard hit by production issues since the issues in Japan and Thailand which virtually halted Lens and Pro-DSLR production, they have a back-order for production as is.

    BUT, that justification which lead Nikon to set aside a production line for the 800E was definitely not as scant and fringing on a few paragraphs as us consumers are getting.

  124. Iain February 24, 2012 at 5:45 am #

    Dear Nikon, if you’re reading this PLEASE release a D700s!
    A D700 body with the D3s internals would be the perfect camera for the large percentage of Nikon shooters who see the new 36MP D800 as overkill for their work. The D700 obviously ate into a lot of D3 sales, so it was wise for Nikon not to release a D700s before now – it would most likely have affected D3s sales in exactly the same way. However the release of the D4 and discontinuation of the D3s will hopefully quash that concern.
    As others have said, while the D800 looks like a fine camera it’s certainly not a replacement for the D700 – and I think what most of us really want is that replacement.

  125. ry February 29, 2012 at 10:08 pm #

    would be an awesome studio camera for sure =]

  126. The Shades of Grey | Elal March 1, 2012 at 10:56 pm #

    I’d like to try this one, although I’m not so attracted with the large MP thought, and decide for myself. On the other hand, I’m looking forward to D4S.

  127. Sebastian March 5, 2012 at 1:46 pm #

    funny! nikon user questionnaires _ the 36mp. and as a canon user, you are just jealous. Canon releases in my opinion, one not improved still image camera? but reaches nikon up to medium format?

  128. Knips March 8, 2012 at 10:19 am #

    I pre-ordered one against my initial better judgement prior to seeing the reviews. This is not a D700 replacement. I own a D700. The D800 is a new category of camera. The pixel pitch is similar to the D7000. Basically a D7000 sensor just more of it. I suspect the best pre-review of the D800 can be found by reading the D7000 reviews. Granted, I may be over simplifying it.

    I am betting on loosing only about 1 stop of ISO versus the D700. Keep in mind that the D700 has a five year old sensor. It has gone from a 12 mp, 25,000 ISO D3 sensor to a 16mp, 200,000 ISO D4 sensor since then. The D800 sensor is obviously not the D4 sensor but the point I am trying to make is that somebody appears to be defying the “then known laws of sensor physics”.

    36 mp versus 12 mp. If all I loose is about 1 stop then I consider this an amazing achievement. We dwell too much on the sensors. Most of the damage is done moving the signal from the sensor through the electronics to the CF card. I suspect that here is where the bulk of the improvements lie.

    I am also betting on much higher sensitivity to blown highlights with the D800. I have got about 2 stops of headroom to recover highlights in the D700. If the D800 is close to the D7000 I will be able to recover about 2 stops in the shadows without excessive noise. Nikon has finally wrestled their amp noise problem to the ground. This will require a different approach to shooting.

    I suspect that I will top out at f8 versus f11 before defraction sets in. I have high end lenses but I am sure the D800 will push them to the edge of their performance or squeeze every last drop of goodness out of them depending on how you look at it.

    And I am very sure that the D800 will force me to “up my game” with respect to my technique (mirror lock up, Live View focusing, tripod, remote trigger, etc.). You know…all those things that you probably should be doing anyway. That’s not neccessarily a bad thing. I doubt that the D800 will be as forgiving as my D700 but my D700 has occasionally let me get away with too much.

    So I’m am betting a lot. $3,000 to be precise. But one thing that I will take to the bank is that Nikon has always delivered on their promise of industry leading image quality from their products. I’m betting that they will deliver again.

  129. Tim Colston March 20, 2012 at 12:52 pm #

    It seems that people were really looking forward to picking up a “baby” D4 if only Nikon had followed its previous format that they provided with the D3/D700 offering. I own a couple of D700′s and despite having the capability, I never really used the ISO to the point where I depended upon it for EVERYTHING i shot. It’s nice to have the option, but being a studio/location shooter who lights when its needed, i think this is a great offering for me and the way I work. I’m still on the fence to see how far away from MF this camera is, because that is the next step for me. Better handling, robust AF and overall faster use, I am hoping it can bridge the gap for me until I can no longer afford to ignore the “gains” I will get from MF.

  130. John Ireland March 26, 2012 at 5:29 pm #

    Apparently it’s the new King of cameras at DxOMark getting the #1 position with a score of 95. Very Impressive for a camera with 36MP. Better than some MF backs. I would say for $3K, this camera rocks.

  131. Jeff Cruz March 29, 2012 at 9:57 pm #

    Hey all, first post on here. So far I’m loving the D800. I realized I now need to upgrade to a new computer system to handle the large files. Here is a link to my first impressions blog (with sample images) post about it: http://bit.ly/Hqkbgy

    A few things that stuck out: battery door rubber stopper fell out second day. My mirror may have a hairline scratch. Camera froze on me during first test shoot with it. I had to remove the batteries to reset it.

    What I love about the D800:
    -Huge 36MP sensor dipping into medium format territory
    -Great in low light performance
    -New video features are great: power aperture, sound monitoring, broadcast quality.
    -Lighter
    -Smaller
    -Improved shooting dial
    -Dual card slots
    -Great price at $2999.95 (at most Canadian retailers)
    -Nikon service is top notch

    What I’m not a fan of:
    -Battery grip contacts
    -Button spacing and layout is going to take some getting used to
    -Shutter sounds a bit different
    -Centre of gravity is different
    -The camera froze during my first portrait shoot (we’ll see if it keeps doing that)
    -Questionable quality? The battery door rubber stopper came off and a possible scratch on my mirror (need to confirm this)

    Cheers!

  132. Anonymous April 3, 2012 at 12:59 pm #

    The technology has changed drastically since the d700. So when do you shoot above 3200 anyway? Like never. For those of you doing weddings I am guessing you have two cameras on your body anyway. Make sure one is a d4 or if out of your price point a d700 the other one the d800. Different tools for different jobs. The resolution is just as good if not better on the d800 than the d700 even at 6400. But as a wedding photographer I don’t shoot at 6400. Even with my d700. Grab your prime lenses and with both cameras at a wedding you are covered. The only thing this camera would not be good for is sports. Too slow. I shoot a lot of dance and drama performances for the University of Calgary and even in those high contrasty, low light, fast motion shooting situations I never take my d700 over 3200. When I get my d800 it will be interesting to see how it performs in those conditions and if not so good then I keep using the d700 or d4 if/when I get that one too. Landscapes, portraits in studio stuff will all be taken over by the d800. Of course it isn’t a medium format camera. It isn’t supposed to be. What it is is an amazing tool if used for the right job. There wouldn’t be much you couldn’t accomplish with a d700/d4 – d800 combination.

  133. Dave April 4, 2012 at 1:13 pm #

    This is what we thought. http://youtu.be/AfA2mTMt0u8 (The F%^&ing Nikon D800 vs. Canon 5D MIII Shootout)

    • Michel Sauret April 5, 2012 at 5:22 pm #

      THAT. IS. HILARIOUS. And totally unbiased, of course.

  134. Michel Sauret April 5, 2012 at 5:04 pm #

    I just got this camera last week, and I freaking LOVE it. Well… there are a couple minor things about the ergonomics that bug me, but the image quality blows anything I’ve seen by a DSLR out of the water!

    Here’s a review (and pictures of donuts) I wrote on my blog:

    http://onewaystreetproduction.net/2012/04/05/initial-thoughts-the-donut-that-made-me-fall-in-love-with-the-nikon-d800/

    Enjoy!

  135. Patrik Lindgren April 19, 2012 at 2:22 pm #

    I got one of each now, a D4 and a D800. Different cameras for different purposes, but they are both awesome.
    The D800 is superb with it’s great DR and it’s monster megapixels. And for that price, it’s a friggin bargain that’s for sure.

  136. Raymond Patrick April 19, 2012 at 4:12 pm #

    I’ve had the D800 for about a week and a half and shot a Lexus job with it in Japan last week.
    First impressions:

    1. Shoots very sloooooooooow. D700 is way faster. Grip does not make it faster. FX mode only is what I shoot.
    This really pisses me off the slow frame rate. WTF?!

    2. Files are way to big, computer gets super hot with fan on just transferring files/doing backups. Slow loading overall in all programs naturally due to size. I don’t get why Nikon made the files so large. It’s like going to costco and buying 24 rolls of toilet
    paper when all you need is 4. A complete waste of hard drive space and time, it’s very time consuming considering it
    takes more than three times as much time to backup files compared to the D700. You just don’t need raw that big. This is
    a huge mistake and I’m considering selling and getting the D4 for smaller files and frame speed alone. It would have been
    perfect if they made it with 16mb files (up to say 20mb tops), but 36 if just ridiculous. You’ll never ever need it. Just have to get
    more memory for the Macs and bigger hard drives all around.

    3. It’s lighter and feels cheaper than the D700.. feels almost like plastic. Also the finish is a splattery black paint that looks
    quite ugly in light with the highlights hit it, almost like a black camouflage. I’m completely baffled.

    4. Quiter sound than the D700.. I love the D700 sound, it sounds like a “professional” camera. I used to use the Pentax 67
    which is really loud and the Mamiya RZ67 Pro II, which is louder too. Nikon should make the professional level cameras
    different than the regular consumer cameras with things like this.. so you “feel” more like a professional instead making them
    the same as the consumer level GWC (guy with camera’s). Make it louder.

    5. Body is smaller slighter, why? Make it bigger for the Pro’s. Like I said I used to use the Pentax 67 and RZ.. you felt like
    a “professional” photographer. By the way I really don’t like the term “professional” photographer, but just using that to
    illustrate my point.

    Good points:

    1. Meter is absolutely superb. In back light it just is spot on. Much better in back light than D700.

    2. Image quality, looks great, but D700 was great, but it’s cleaner overall. Metering is a bigger difference.

    3. Feel with grip is very balanced.

    4. Buttons are easier to push and therefore more fluid using it. Rear dial is superb compared to the clumsy
    loose the D700 dial.

    5. I’ve not shot much video with it so cannot comment on that too much. It looks good and is easy to use and you
    have AUTO-focus. Nice.

    Overall: It’s a nice camera. Files are WAY too big and camera frame rate is slooooooooow.

    I wish they could make an updated version D800 2.0 and give it 16mb and 8-10 frames a second.
    Then you’d have something more people could use.

    • Raymond Patrick May 2, 2012 at 10:05 am #

      I’d like to add something about the D800.. I’ve gotten used to the camera a little more;
      the quality and richness of the images is really extraordinary. Post production
      has been done on some of my selects and it’s When it comes down to having stunning
      images the D800 delivers far and away the best image quality I’ve seen in a DSLR. Raw
      files are huge which I don’t like and the camera could shoot more frames per second,
      but the quality you get and can deliver to clients is phenomenal.

      Also on the metering, unbelievable. Shooting in back light especially needs no adjustment,
      the images come out perfect. This is extraordinary, truly extraordinary. I just compared this
      to a friends Canon 5D MKII (it’s old now), but there was no comparison. The D800 images
      were perfect, the 5D, underexposed every time and very red skin tones (shot under ordinary
      tungsten bulbs in my apt).

      No doubt the D800 is one of the best cameras to emerge ever.

  137. Andrew Johnson April 23, 2012 at 7:19 am #

    I’ve had my D800 for a couple of weeks now and I’m loving it, especially in Low Light.

    However, like @Jeff Cruz My mirror also has a hairline scratch on it. I have phoned Nikon and they grabbed their D800 to have a look and what do you know.. a hairline scratch…. I do not recall seeing this on any other Nikon.

    Scratch is maybe 1/2 cm from the bottom of the mirror and around 2cm in length. It does not appear to affect the view through the viewfinder but nevertheless in my opinion should not be there.

  138. PabloSRT8 April 25, 2012 at 8:48 pm #

    I also have a scratch mirror.
    Why, why why Nikon…
    Oil drips everywhere…
    and now a recall!

  139. Daniel May 4, 2012 at 10:54 am #

    Like my D800 so far. What is missing is the new e4 setting found with the D4. Nikon, can you get this feature to the D800 too, please?

  140. Keith Fredrickson (studio7sitka) May 5, 2012 at 9:18 pm #

    I thought I would put my two cents in. I have had my D 800 for about two weeks now. My prior camera was a D7oo that I shot for about three years. In my opinion these are two different cameras. I loved my D 700 everything about it lowlight image quality I had the external battery pack Really liked the camera. But thed800 is soooo much better. I read about button placement and how people don’t like it. I actually really like the button placements even better.
    On the D 700 my left hand would continually knock the switch out of autofocus and into manual focus continually. The pictures would be really good but I would always need to adjust them a little. So far the D8 hundred is incredible. Metering and pictures are spot on, and the quality is just blowing me away! , . The camera feels awesome in my hand. I love the ergonomics of the D8 hundred. I got the external battery pack and the camera just feels awesome. The redesign shutter button feels perfect to me. I can reach all the buttons more easily than the D 700. But again I go back to metering and the picture quality not even close to my d700.
    I do a lot of Panoramic’s and I am very excited about the quality of this camera. I just sold a 8ft x 30ft panoramic to a hotel. Taken with my D 700. The picture looks incredible. but with the D8oo with so much more info on the file these next pictures should be even better! Yes I am very very happy with this camera! Thank you Nikon.

    • Stu July 21, 2012 at 10:00 pm #

      Totally agree- especially knocking the focus on the old 700. 1 thing I’ve also noticed is the sensational autofocus speed- it’s blazing fast (IMHO) – I put an old cheap AF 50 1.8 on it and I’ve never heard such a screaming fast old style focus. My 105mm AFS was notorious for hunting around and getting lost- while it still hunts around and occasionally gets lost- it’s doing it much much faster now.

  141. Jermaine May 6, 2012 at 2:55 pm #

    What an amazing camera. I am totally blown away by the 36+ mega pixels. I have always known that nikon brings quality pixels per pixel than a lot of the other guys. Looking forward to owning one in the near future!

  142. Cecil May 15, 2012 at 5:43 pm #

    LMAO. Yeah I bought a 36 megapixel cameral and shoot on Program mode.

  143. Amna May 18, 2012 at 7:41 am #

    I love my D700. I’m not one for video so so the D800 doesn’t offer much which interest me – might at some point be looking for a higher ISO rather than more megapixels though

  144. Tom Winter May 22, 2012 at 11:24 am #

    I own a D4, D800, and a D700. I use the 4 most of the time, the 700 second cause it shoots great images and has a smaller file size, and my D800 only occasionally, it’s just not the go to camera for most of my work. The massive file size is a hinderance. The d800 noise at hi iso is almost the same as the d700, really hard pressed to tell the difference.

  145. Jesse Taylor May 28, 2012 at 12:39 am #

    I’ve been shooting the D800 for a few weeks now and I absolutely love it. It’s a huge step up from the D700 I used previously.

    Image quality is outstanding. Noise is similar to D700 (maybe slightly better), but if you’re making the output smaller than native resolution this kills a lot of noise in the process and this means the final images look better.

    Yes, the files are huge and slow down post-production – what do you expect from 36MP? I’ll be investing in more memory – it’s not a big deal if your computer can take it.

    I also had to invest in more memory cards, the old ones fill up way too quickly now! Having the SD card slot as an instant backup is great and SD cards are so cheap.

    Yes, the frame rate is slow. Exactly as advertised. It’s not designed for sports.

    Think of the D800 more as a replacement for the D3x (at a fraction of the cost) rather than for the D700.

    Only criticism is that in AWB images often have a greenness to the hue. I always shoot raw so easily corrected in post, but it is irritating when reviewing on the LCD and clients have also commented when reviewing images. Anyone else notice this?

  146. Kyle Whitney July 5, 2012 at 6:47 pm #

    I have finally rented the D800 – its a nice camera but it is not for me. The green tint is there most of the time. its cramped and small. I dunno, I still think its a nice camera but just not for me.

  147. Stu July 21, 2012 at 10:06 pm #

    I’ve had a D700 for a few years and love it- but I was always nervous when doing Billboards and Buses as sometimes the graphics guy would whinge that the Res wasn’t high enough- which of course it is but you never want a client to hear those words about your image. The D800 suits me just great- I live in a remote area and so getting access to support is near impossible- the big medium camera brands just don’t do that. The D800 is a god send for me.

  148. Nico August 16, 2012 at 8:18 am #

    I have sold my D7000 few days ago. This camera sure do a great job within this 1 year with me. Now I’m looking for a FX body, since D800 is way too damn much pixels for me and D3s is way to costly and bulky to suit my photography style. So I think that D700 suits me better, since I’m shooting some culture, human interest & travels.
    Now, the question is..
    Is it worth to “upgrade” from D7000 to D700. Since D7000 is more advance in techonology and features than his 2 years old big brother (beside the size of the sensor).

  149. Unquestionably imagine that that you said. Your favourite
    reason appeared to bee at the net the easiest thing to take note of.
    I say to you, I certaiinly get irked while folks consider issues that they plainly don’t recognize about.
    Youu managed to hit the nail upon the topp and outlined out the whole thing without having side-effects , people can take a signal.
    Will probably be back to get more. Thanks

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Nikon D810: Sharing My Preliminary Ideas as Nikon Improves an Already-Strong Digital camera | TiaMart Blog - July 17, 2014

    [...] then, right here’s a fast 2 cents… The D800 was an excellent strong digital camera when I posted about it two years ago, however the D810 adds a handful of meaningful upgrades to the system. A few of its enhancements [...]

Leave a Reply

Highslide for Wordpress Plugin