Now the hard part D800 or D4

[flyreels]

Now the hard part D800 or D4
I was going to buy a D800 but there is at least a 3 month wait (and I am not known for my patience). I want to use it for everything including macro and sports and some have suggested that an FX would be better so, I was going to get a D7000 as well (next year).
Now too much reading has done my head in, with the wait for the D800 (I also want to wait until they get the focus sorted) I was thinking of buying the lenses for it and then buying the D7000 now and use it until they fix the focus issues and they become more readily available. The lenses I am buying will be the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II I am also buying the AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED and the AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G as well as the AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED some TC’s and Extension tubes. Next year I want to buy the 600mm or the new 800mm depending on price.
Seeing how I have no investment in lenses as yet, I even looked at the Canon 5d mark III but the light fix that canon came up with (black electric tape) has not filled me with confidence in their product so I have ruled them out.
Then I decided to look at the D4 big mistake! I like it, it looks like it will do everything I want easily, It has great lowlight capability has the speed and fast focus to match and the auto focus works way up to f8 so I could use the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II and a TC and it would still be good for some sports or landscape and I could use it until the 600mm or the 800mm comes next year.
So here is the problem the D800 is about $3500 D7000 about $900 do I spend the extra $1600 on the D4 and not buy the AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G (which is about $1600) and leave the D7000 all together, then buy the AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED when I can afford it next year when I buy either the 600mm or 800mm.
I am leaning towards the D4 so any thought would be appreciated.
PS I looked at the 1DX as well but it looks good on paper but I think the low light on the D4 is just that bit better and the auto focus on it isn’t as good as the Nikon so the reviews say, and then there is no auto focus (not a big thing) when used with a TC past f5.6 (unless you tape up the first 3 pins).

[MissionMan]

D4 is $2500 more (if you buy grey) and $3500 more if you buy local. Where did you get the $1500 from?

[flyreels]

"D4 is $2500 more (if you buy grey) and $3500 more if you buy local. Where did you get the $1500 from? "
I never said $1500
D4 is about $6000 the D800 $3500, D7000 $900 lens $1600 = D4 $6000

[I @ M]

There are D800 bodies sitting on dealers shelves if you look beyond the "big name stores" and you don't have to pay a ridiculous price premium for them either. :rolleyes:

[swifty]

I'd love to have your problems :)
Ok.. D800 vs D4. At least IMO, the D800 and D4 are completely different segments and it's pretty clear cut why you'd want the D4. On the top of the list would be the build, integrated grip and extra speed. If those things tick your must have boxes then go the D4.
Otherwise for value for money, it'd have to be the D800. Don't forget that with the D800, you essentially also get a D7000 as well when used in DX mode for extra reach and speed whilst still maintaining pixel density.
In terms of performance vs 1Dx, there will be small differences but at these performance levels, the camera most likely outperforms most photographers and it'll be your ability to setup and learn the camera's nuances that'll get you the best results.

Btw, what would you need the 24-70 and 50 for? You should have fairly clear reasons to purchase particular lenses.
If not and you can afford it, then jz buy it all I guess :)

[Lance B]

Why would you get a D800 and a D7000? If you crop the D800 to DX size, you end up with the same Mp's as the D7000 anyway, ie 16Mp, making the D7000 redundant. I used to have a D700 and a D7000 (for reach due to crop factor) but when I got the D800 I sold off the D7000 as it became redundant. The D800 to me is like 2 cameras in the one body, a FX and a DX, which means I have one lens camera body in the bag.

If you go the D4 route, then a D7000 does make sense as you can use the D7000 as a crop camera for reach and the D4 for FX as it won't take as kindly to being cropped. However, this is an expensive option! Realistically, the D4 is more for sports and weddings or other applications where high fps and high process speeds are required.

If you are going to shoot wildlife and birds, then I believe that the D800 is more your answer as you can get extra reach by cropping to DX and even further. Actually, it is quite amazing how far you can crop the D800 and still have amazing detail and quality IQ.

[flyreels]

Hi I @ M,
In Tassie its hard, I have looked on the web and called a few bigger stores on the mainland and here as well as some online stores, the other reason for waiting for new stock is to try to get a good one with the focus issue fixed. As for the smaller shops I wouldnt know which ones to call as most here would not carrie them (and they charge like a woonded bull) and I thought it would have been the same on the mainland




Hi Swifty,
Thanks for your reply, in regards to the 24-70 it would be ideal for hiking when i want a good all round lens, somthing with a bit of reach and a bit of a wider angle without the weight of the bigger one and the 50 would be a good one inside:)

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks Lance B,
The reason for the D7000 was for the extra speed (fps for sport) and reach, but as you said I could just crop the D800.
As for the D4 I dont think I would need the D7000 as I could use a TC for now, on the 70-200, then I will be right when I get the new 600 or 800 next year for what I want.?
I also like the iso on the D4 the pics are great even at 6400 hardly any noise, not so on the d800 from what I have seen on the web, what about in real life have you had luck?

[kiwi]

have a look at Kai's review on digitalrev

[ricktas]

Seeing as you have no $ invested in lenses and no brand allegiances, I would say drop down from a D800 or a D4, get a cheaper model and a couple of good lenses. After all, we see it all the time, people buy top of the line gear cause they want to get into photography, and then within a few months the camera is sold or packed away and hardly used.

So buy a cheaper body, get out and learn how to use it..and then..if your photography is progressing and you want to make this hobby a lifelong one, upgrade to a better body.

This might sound harsh, but ask anyone who has been around on AP, or camera clubs for a few years and they will tell you they see more people buy gear and stop using it after a few months, than they see continuing on with their photography to an advanced level. Yeah it is nice to go ''oh my gear cost $6K", but just the extra $$ do not make you a better photographer. To be honest, I reckon as a beginner, you are wasting your money. Get an entry level camera, or semi pro, and learn how to take photos. Then if in 2 years time you are still interested in photography and want to, upgrade then to a D5 or a D900.

[swifty]

From Flyreels' other thread it appears he's getting back into photography after a long absence, rather than a beginner.
But Rick does make a good point though. Might be an idea to warm up into it rather than take the deep plunge.
But in the end its your money and your choice. Good luck with your decision.

[ricktas]

From Flyreels' other thread it appears he's getting back into photography after a long absence, rather than a beginner.
But Rick does make a good point though. Might be an idea to warm up into it rather than take the deep plunge.
But in the end its your money and your choice. Good luck with your decision.

but that is my point, If he has had a long absence till now, it could happen again....

[kiwi]

I dunno, if you have the money, buy well buy once

[MissionMan]

"D4 is $2500 more (if you buy grey) and $3500 more if you buy local. Where did you get the $1500 from? "
I never said $1500
D4 is about $6000 the D800 $3500, D7000 $900 lens $1600 = D4 $6000

Sorry, I misunderstood you. If its a choice between glass and a body, I'd go glass any day of the week. I'd personally start with a 24-70, 70-200 and maybe a 1.4x converter and then add the body after that to fit your budget. Then upgrade the glass from there as you have a chance before finally updating the body again. Personally, rather than look at a D7000, you could quite easily get a second hand D700 with minimum shutter count and a battery grip and that'll give you a high frame rate you need. If you can't do what you want with that combo, the body is the least of your problems and at least you can get a D4 later and still qualify for a NPS membership because they're both professional bodies. The reason I say go lower is I don't think you you're thinking about the extras that take the costs up, tripod, ballheads, flashes (multiple), etc. if you buy decent stuff your pricing will jump by $2-3k with that alone.

[flyreels]

Seeing as you have no $ invested in lenses and no brand allegiances, I would say drop down from a D800 or a D4, get a cheaper model and a couple of good lenses. After all, we see it all the time, people buy top of the line gear cause they want to get into photography, and then within a few months the camera is sold or packed away and hardly used.

So buy a cheaper body, get out and learn how to use it..and then..if your photography is progressing and you want to make this hobby a lifelong one, upgrade to a better body.

This might sound harsh, but ask anyone who has been around on AP, or camera clubs for a few years and they will tell you they see more people buy gear and stop using it after a few months, than they see continuing on with their photography to an advanced level. Yeah it is nice to go ''oh my gear cost $6K", but just the extra $$ do not make you a better photographer. To be honest, I reckon as a beginner, you are wasting your money. Get an entry level camera, or semi pro, and learn how to take photos. Then if in 2 years time you are still interested in photography and want to, upgrade then to a D5 or a D900.

Hi Rick,
Thanks for your reply, I have been using a camera for over 35 years now, I used to own Tasman photographic studios and started an apprenticeship there when I was 15 and went on to own it, we used to do weddings, stud and stock as well as portraiture, I used to do all of my own printing (had a really well set up dark room) as well as printing for other photographers around Hobart, I sold it after about 5 years and went on to work in the RHH as their dark room technician in radiology where I used to process around 500 x-rays every day and do all of the quality control, maintenance on the processors as well as do all of the silver recovery etc. I have not done much in the last 10 years or so and I sold off all my camera gear (film), due to bad health but prior to that I was right into it. I am at the stage where I would like some good equipment again and try my hand in the DLSR scene. Even though it is just a hobby, it’s not about how much I have spent just the quality of images I would like to obtain; I used to be a Nikon man that’s why I am leaning towards Nikon this time around.
Cheers Peter

- - - Updated - - -


Sorry, I misunderstood you. If its a choice between glass and a body, I'd go glass any day of the week. I'd personally start with a 24-70, 70-200 and maybe a 1.4x converter and then add the body after that to fit your budget. Then upgrade the glass from there as you have a chance before finally updating the body again. Personally, rather than look at a D7000, you could quite easily get a second hand D700 with minimum shutter count and a battery grip and that'll give you a high frame rate you need. If you can't do what you want with that combo, the body is the least of your problems and at least you can get a D4 later and still qualify for a NPS membership because they're both professional bodies. The reason I say go lower is I don't think you you're thinking about the extras that take the costs up, tripod, ballheads, flashes (multiple), etc. if you buy decent stuff your pricing will jump by $2-3k with that alone.

Thanks I didnt mention it, But I have a tripod and ballhead now, I brought one from advice I got here :) and and I have enough set aside for the SB910 and R1c1, TC-17e II, Extension tubes, filters, cards etc if I go the Nikon way.

[WhoDo]

Even though it is just a hobby, it’s not about how much I have spent just the quality of images I would like to obtain; I used to be a Nikon man that’s why I am leaning towards Nikon this time around.
Hey, Peter, I hope you don't mind if I weigh in here with my all too inexperienced tuppence worth? If you want to get back into photography and want great IQ, why not go for the D7000 and some really, REALLY fast glass? Yeah, I know it's an APS-C sensor size BUT there's not a whole lot to choose between it and the FF options UNLESS you're going to print wall-sized prints. Besides, if you buy FX lenses you get a whole lot of extra reach and you can relegate the D7000 to a second body if you decide you need a FF later.

Of course, I'm biased, but I don't think I'd swap the D7000 for the D4 and I've used both - a relative is one of only 2 Nikon techs in Sydney (if not Australia) that can handle the high end maintenance for Nikon and he's always giving me little tastes of things like the D4. :p Hasn't come up with a D800 for me to play with yet though. Even with my huge hands, I found the D4 awkward to handle compared to the D7000. If you don't want to be disappointed in IQ terms, it seems to me that high quality FX glass is the way to go and worry about the body a bit later. Just a thought from a pretty ordinary amateur. :confused013

[kiwi]

The d600 entry level fx is close too

[reaction]

You're highly skilled, and can afford a D4. I'd say get the D4. I mean it's clear you're willing to buy the proper glass for it so it's not like the choice of D4 and kit lens or D3200 and proper glass.

D600 from all rumors is way too simplified, I mean you're planning serious shooting, don't want to be let down by a slower AF system and that smaller body.

D800s are easy to find, call around. Many non-camera stores have one lying around from a cancel, there's also dodgy gumtree/ebay making a small markup from retail. I'm guessing nobody's buying those since the ads have been around forever.

Also Ryda is filling orders in 2-3wks.

[ricktas]

Hi Rick,
Thanks for your reply, I have been using a camera for over 35 years now, I used to own Tasman photographic studios and started an apprenticeship there when I was 15 and went on to own it, we used to do weddings, stud and stock as well as portraiture, I used to do all of my own printing (had a really well set up dark room) as well as printing for other photographers around Hobart, I sold it after about 5 years and went on to work in the RHH as their dark room technician in radiology where I used to process around 500 x-rays every day and do all of the quality control, maintenance on the processors as well as do all of the silver recovery etc. I have not done much in the last 10 years or so and I sold off all my camera gear (film), due to bad health but prior to that I was right into it. I am at the stage where I would like some good equipment again and try my hand in the DLSR scene. Even though it is just a hobby, it’s not about how much I have spent just the quality of images I would like to obtain; I used to be a Nikon man that’s why I am leaning towards Nikon this time around.
Cheers Peter



Thanks for the added info.

For clarity here for all members. We just upgraded Peter to intermediate from beginner (due to this quoted post), while all the above posts are replies reflecting the belief that Peter was a beginner photographer, as his profile stated at the time of posting.

[Wayne]

I have the D800 and D3s. I considered the D4, but there isn't enough in it to qualify the extra $2k for me, but from the perspective of owning a premium FX body, and the D800, I think it is a winner combination. You have the best of it all.
1. 36.3MP for Studio, portrait, landscape work
2. Ability to crop D800 files to same size as D7000 files for the extra reach
3. D800 is still great in low light
4. D4 has speed, fast I/O, ISO performance,
5. Both have full HD video options
6. Both have redundancy in 2 card slots, although a pain in different form factors.

The noise from the D800 even at 6400ISO is very good (on par with D700) when scaled to 12-16MP, and the additional noise you see when viewed at full resolution quickly disappears once scaled down. The fps will not all that often be a hinderance except for really fast subjects.

I am very happy with my decision to lose my D700 and gain the D800 to work alongside my D3s, I feel I have all of the great features, and am missing none. I have all pro Nikkor glass from 17-35/2.8 to 400/2.8VR and all 3 TC's, and I truly have job covered with ease.

As Kiwi said, if you have the deep pockets, buy once and buy right.

[Lance B]

Thanks Lance B,
The reason for the D7000 was for the extra speed (fps for sport) and reach, but as you said I could just crop the D800.
As for the D4 I dont think I would need the D7000 as I could use a TC for now, on the 70-200, then I will be right when I get the new 600 or 800 next year for what I want.?
I also like the iso on the D4 the pics are great even at 6400 hardly any noise, not so on the d800 from what I have seen on the web, what about in real life have you had luck?

ISO6400 not so from the D800? Hmmm..

All ISO6400, cleaned up with Noiseware Professional in post process:

Original

Model NIKON D800
Focal Length 500 mm
Exposure Time 1/320 sec
Aperture f/5.6
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143716479/original.jpg

Cropped to DX

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143716480/original.jpg

Original

Model NIKON D800
Focal Length 300 mm
Exposure Time 1/250 sec
Aperture f/5.6
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143367563/original.jpg

Crop

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143387368/original.jpg

Model NIKON D800
Focal Length 420 mm
Exposure Time 1/250 sec
Aperture f/5.6
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143367567/original.jpg

Model NIKON D800
Focal Length 300 mm
Exposure Time 1/125 sec
Aperture f/4
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143367569/original.jpg

Crop

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143387370/original.jpg

Model NIKON D800
Focal Length 300 mm
Exposure Time 1/80 sec
Aperture f/4
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143367571/original.jpg

odel NIKON D800
Focal Length 300 mm
Exposure Time 1/250 sec
Aperture f/4
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143367575/original.jpg

Model NIKON D800
Focal Length 300 mm
Exposure Time 1/400 sec
Aperture f/4
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143367574/original.jpg


Already cropped to DX post process
Model NIKON D800
Focal Length 700 mm
Exposure Time 1/1600 sec
Aperture f/7.1
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143463321/original.jpg

Model NIKON D800
Focal Length 110 mm
Exposure Time 1/250 sec
Aperture f/4
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/144062934/original.jpg

Model NIKON D800
Focal Length 420 mm
Exposure Time 1/250 sec
Aperture f/7.1
ISO Equivalent 6400

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/144062940/original.jpg

Need any more convincing about the ability of the D800 at ISO6400. :D

[Bennymiata]

Sounds like you should get a Canon 5D3.
Good FPS, and takes great pictures.
It does everythig I want out of a camera.

The focussing is superb, even in very low light, is easy to carry and use, and I recently got over 600 shots out of a battery.
Canon also has a larger selection of lenses and accessories at more reasonable prices too.

Having looked at many side by side tests between the 5D3 and D800, even many of the Nikon shooters liked the 5D3 and couldn't see much in the way of better IQ but liked how the 5D3 was a better all-around camera.

I'd rather a camera that doesn't give a correct meter reading with body cap on and the top LCD lit up, as I usually have a lens on my camera when I take a photo, than have one with dodgy focussing. :D

[flyreels]

ISO6400 not so from the D800? Hmmm..

All ISO6400, cleaned up with Noiseware Professional in post process:


Need any more convincing about the ability of the D800 at ISO6400. :D

Hi Lance B,
This is exactly what I have been looking for, it shows the clarity and just how the images at ISO 6400 can look.

Its hard on the web as you don't know who or what programs have been at them and whether they have been done to show it at its best or worst depending on who has done the article and where their loyalties lay.

Thank you for sharing all of those wonderful images they are delight to look at.

Regards Peter

[Lance B]

Hi Lance B,
This is exactly what I have been looking for, it shows the clarity and just how the images at ISO 6400 can look.

Its hard on the web as you don't know who or what programs have been at them and whether they have been done to show it at its best or worst depending on who has done the article and where their loyalties lay.

Thank you for sharing all of those wonderful images they are delight to look at.

Regards Peter

Thank you, Peter and my pleasure to assist in your decision making process. :)