D800 ?

[Kym]

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/11/19/ladies-and-gentleman-i-present-to-you-the-nikon-d800.aspx/

So what about a D4 ?

[Kym]

Also http://nikonrumors.com/2011/11/17/three-possible-scenarios-for-the-nikon-d800-and-other-rumblings.aspx/

[Tommo1965]

yes was reading that today...will be interesting if its the real deal..it looks like a winner to me on the spec sheet..time will tell of course

[Wayne]

Many who are usually in the know are tight lipped, and the admin of NR states he believes it is real and 99% sure it will be the replacement we get. From the specs, and some of the comments, I agree with that 36MP sensor (same one as D3x?) we are not likely to get HI-ISO anything like the D700/D3 or magical D3s. The slow fps would also be disappointing if reports are correct, and all this may be Nikon's way of defining the model in the market and differentiating it from the full pro D3s replacement.

I watch very very closely....

[kiwi]

To be honest im looking forward to a d400 with similar performance to the current D3 re ISO and Af for sport

[arthurking83]

LOL! NR?? :lol:


.... "Or maybe they just want to see how people will react to a 36MP sensor?" ....

In the years I've had Nikon's they've always pandered to the user base. :rolleyes:
(y'know!!.... 40mm Dx Micro lenses and so forth! ;))

I seriously doubt that Nikon would give any D700 replacement 36Mp.
If they maintain their D3/D3x product differentiation, then 36Mp for a D3x replacement for sure .. possibly maybe even more just to get it close to the 45Mp of the 645 Pentax.

I think any D3/D700 replacements will struggle to get past 20-22Mp at best.
I think their priority will be clean ISO200K images!!

[Wayne]

To be honest im looking forward to a d400 with similar performance to the current D3 re ISO and Af for sport
I too would be very interested in a DX body with high FPS like the D300s or faster and the ISO/AF performance above the D3/D700, hopefully above the D3s. If not, the somewhat higher MP sensor if thats what appears in the new FX line along with better than D3/700/3s ISO and FPS performance would keep me very happy.

The lesser ISO/AF performance of the current DX line is what has stopped me buying one now, because with only 12MP in the D700, I could use that DX crop factor for sports and wildlife, although it's moot if all the goodies along with the big MP sensor appear in the D700/D4 replacement.

[AutumnCurl]

I wish they would just release, something, anything vaguely DSLR shaped... thats a start right? :action: I'm sick of waiting and want to upgrade :angry0:

[gqtuazon]

I am just thankful that there is a newer product or replacement for the D700. We've been waiting for this for about 2 years or so now. It may not appeal to everyone but we'll just have to wait and see. It's too soon to judge it but most of it's feature will be welcome by others. Can't please everyone.

[arthurking83]

To be honest im looking forward to a d400 with similar performance to the current D3 re ISO and Af for sport

If history repeats itself(and it usually does) and Nikon sticks with the Sony sensor... that doesn't look to be a likely proposition!

Have you seen the noise of this Sony sensor on raw images on DPR?

Nikon and Pentax have both shown that they seem to have an ability to extract better NR capabilities from their implementations of the same Sony sensor where applicable, but this still doesn't look all too good. While it's true that at 24Mp ultimate detail rendering will be higher than a D300(s) the noise performance of the D300 looks to better the 24Mp sensor!
How Nikon will tackle this issue is anyone's guess!

I think everyone was or is, expecting an evolutionary advancement in this level of camera, and probably expecting better ISO performance than the D7000.

A D400 will almost certainly have better performance in the usual specs that it's supposed to have buffer size/speed, shooting specs, AF performance, etc.

That D800 mockup, hardly looks to be anywhere near the size of an Fx camera. Distance between the edge of the grip and the RHS of the screen is hardly even D7000 spacing, which indicates that the D800 is about the size of a D5100.
I doubt that Nikon would reduce the size of the D400, so it's unlikely to be that either.

If 'this D800' has video as expected, you would at a minimum expect it to have a minimalist articulating review screen, more likely to be a full articulating screen.
But the real give away is the lack of a focus mode switch! :confused013

Well at least we now know why Nikon have delayed this camera for so long. After a year long gestation period, someone at Nikon suddenly realised that they forgot to add the focus mode switch and they had to do a quick re design. :p
The Thai flood was just a convenient excuse! ;)

[RRRoger]

It will be 36 MegaPixels because it can.
This is meant to counter a 35 Megapixel 5DIII.
I hope I won't need a gyroscope and remote shutter release for my TriPod.
I wonder if the sensor is more forgiving of user error and bad glass in DX mode?

So I hope the Video is much better than in the past.
This D800 will have to compete with Canon and Sony.

I also expect the High ISO to be slightly better than the D7000 (same pixel density).
I am shooting at Auto ISO 12800 now and bumping over 6400 quite often.:eek:

[MattNQ]

I'll believe it when Thom tells me :D

[swifty]

Everyone better get practicing with their shooting discipline otherwise you won't be seeing 36MP even if the specs says so.

[phototyke]

"The lesser ISO/AF performance of the current DX line"

jeez you must be difficult to please!

[mongo]

NR have never got it right yet - so MOngo is not holding his breath. He will believe it when he sees it. Moreover, Nikon had better come up with something worth waiting for. It would have to go a long way to even match Sony's new 24 mega pixel, mirrorless, 16000 ISO etc etc for about $1300 ; let alone beat it !

[Wayne]

"The lesser ISO/AF performance of the current DX line"

jeez you must be difficult to please!

How many FPS does the D300s/D7000 shoot?
What is a usable HI-ISO from the best DX body at present (D7000)

Are the best of the 2 above in the same body?? No..

Once you have had D3 & D700 you are a little spoilt, and while the D300s has same FPS as D700 and almost same as D3, it's ISO performance is well below both FX models. The D7000 has better ISO than the D300s, but still not as good as the FX bodies, and the FPS is much slower.
I would like either a DX body or a high MP FX one for wildlife and sport, but going from pro bodies to DX bodies with lesser performance in 2 critical areas is not something I am willing to do.

[phototyke]

d300 = 8fps ,more than adequate for sports
d300 iso 3200 = more than usable for pro football at night if exposed correctly

I guess it depends what you will use the photos for,I shoot for an agency and publications and havent had any knockbacks or complaints of the shots from the D300

I sometimes think we are reliant on camera technology too much,after all there have been some outstanding sports images made with manual focus cameras and grainy 1600 film!
learning a sport and anticipating the 'moment' negates having 11fps
ps I have a d700 as well

[scpleta]

learning a sport and anticipating the 'moment' negates having 11fps


i think that's what a good photographer should be - capturing the right moment even without having such a high tech camera! it does the job anyway.

although a better camera should yield better results.

[Wayne]

ISO3200 from a D300s for a newspaper or the like will usually be quite ok, but for large hi res prints you will see quite a bit of noise and then start to lose sharpness by using NR applications.
The D7000 actually has better ISo performance than the D300s...

When we start to look at the ISO performance from a D3s (which I am considering buying - just waiting to see what the replacement will bring and how it affects D3s pricing) it takes very usable images at ISO25600 which helps a great deal when trying to keep shutter speed up on fast moving subjects in near darkness. Bear in mind I mate the body for my sports shooting to my 400/2.8VR which really shows it's low light gathering strength when mounted to pro bodies, but a DX crop factor would be handy too if that body had similar ISO and AF performance of the FX cousins.:th3:

[kiwi]

ISO3200 on a D300 im sorry is very average

Maybe Im useless, but high FPS is great for me, difference between THE moment in an action sequence is a very small window.

[Lance B]

Even the D700 is OK at ISO25600:

There is a little bit of noise, but it is manily due to the fact that it is mostly black in the background. Shoot an evely reasonably lit scene and the noise will be ngligible.

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/131791682/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/131791685/original.jpg

Here are some evenly lit shots at using the D7000 ISO6400 which shows that it is the blacks and dark areas that cause the trouble!

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/131919298/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/131791678/original.jpg

[Wayne]

Thanks for the samples Lance.

It just re-affirms what I said. The D300s at ISO25600 would be all but mush (don't recall if it even goes there), I know my D300 was not that great above ISO1600 and just passable for small or low res viewing/printing at ISO3200 unless you applied hard core NR and start to lose detail anyway.

The D7000 is better than the D300s no doubt, and your samples at 25600 (are they PP'd for NR or straight .jpg from a raw file?) show you can get quite (for some purposes) usable shots from that body, but I wouldn't want to be printing your examples for sale at 300ppi. I admit that body has tempted me for the past 6 months or so...
At ISO6400 the D7000 is very good, and certainly usable for almost any output, but where the dilemma lies is that the D7000 is a slow (FPS) camera when used for sports and BIF applications, and it's AF based on previous discussion with you was slower than the D700 and undoubtedly somewhat slower than a D3/s for fast moving subjects especially if they are low contrast scenes. I would love to catch up one day and shoot that D7000 on the end of my 400/2.8VR (being the fastest AF Nikkor)

If only the two important (to me) benefits of these 2 DX bodies could arrive in one, I would be hard pressed to resist buying one, but if the D700 FX replacement has a high MP sensor and equal or better ISO performance of the D700, I would no longer consider a DX body.

[Tommo1965]

yep im with you wayne..the only caveat Id put on it though..is still nice to have two bodies and not as much lens swapping ..say a DX for day time reach..and a FX low light super ISO for night time gigs....

if the D800 is too dear for me {probably will be}..Ill opt to keep me D300s and grab a used D700 from the guys that upgrade..although I expect that a ways off ...as Ill limit my buy price to around $1500 for a D700

[Lance B]

Thanks for the samples Lance.

My pleasure. :)


It just re-affirms what I said. The D300s at ISO25600 would be all but mush (don't recall if it even goes there), I know my D300 was not that great above ISO1600 and just passable for small or low res viewing/printing at ISO3200 unless you applied hard core NR and start to lose detail anyway.

The D7000 is better than the D300s no doubt, and your samples at 25600 (are they PP'd for NR or straight .jpg from a raw file?)

The 25600 shots are from the D700 + 70-200 f2.8 and are RAW converted in Capture One Pro to 16bit TIFF and then in Photoshop, I use Noiseware Pro for noise reduction.


show you can get quite (for some purposes) usable shots from that body, but I wouldn't want to be printing your examples for sale at 300ppi. I admit that body has tempted me for the past 6 months or so...
At ISO6400 the D7000 is very good, and certainly usable for almost any output, but where the dilemma lies is that the D7000 is a slow (FPS) camera when used for sports and BIF applications, and it's AF based on previous discussion with you was slower than the D700 and undoubtedly somewhat slower than a D3/s for fast moving subjects especially if they are low contrast scenes. I would love to catch up one day and shoot that D7000 on the end of my 400/2.8VR (being the fastest AF Nikkor).

That would be great, however, you being in Outback Queensland and me in Sydney makes that a little difficult! :)


If only the two important (to me) benefits of these 2 DX bodies could arrive in one, I would be hard pressed to resist buying one, but if the D700 FX replacement has a high MP sensor and equal or better ISO performance of the D700, I would no longer consider a DX body.

I am the same if the D800 is 36Mp. I would probably sell off the D7000 and just keep the D800. Being able to crop the 36Mp to DX size means that the resultant image is still 16Mp, so the same as the D7000. So, when I go birding, I can just ise the D800 and use the DX frame in the VF to show the resultant cropped image in post process.

We live in interesting times! :)

[Tommo1965]

double post

[Wayne]

That would be great, however, you being in Outback Queensland and me in Sydney makes that a little difficult! :)





I also live in Sydney Lance, and as I have transferred with work back to working in QLD on a 7on 7 off roster instead of 2 weeks on 1 week off working in WA, I will be home in Sydney much more frequently. Mount Isa has been home for the past few years, but from mid next year it won't be any longer.:)

[Xebadir]

Will be real interested to see where this camera goes in terms of specs and tech...if it is the 36MP beast then I will be looking at it as a replacement for my D300...its rare I need the FPS anyway, and would still give a good enough equivalent to DX performance such that the D300 was superfluous for my uses. There is also alot to be said for the potential storm and landscape images at higher resolution :cool:. Hopefully the ISO performance is on par with the D700, As lance as shown above I am quite happy with the performance through to 6400. That and 36 MP and the 14-24 would be a very nice match :P. Note all that being said, I would be happy with a body with 18 or 24 MP performance as long as the ISO performance was better than the D700.

[hectic3]

This DigitalRev blog post suggests that the D800 would have an 18MP sensor. (www.digitalrev.com/en/nikon-d800---the-best-goes-to-those-who-wait-6474-article.html)

Perhaps there maybe 2 different types of D800s, one with high MP, the other for speed?

[Xebadir]

Would be very disappointed if all they have really worked on is the video capability. That would pretty much be worthless...Video to video cameras...not DSLRs IMO. I've seen whats happened to canon users while stormchasing, they get torn between getting video and picture and end up with missing the best for either. I'm not entirely sure what they are really talking about re the 5DMkII competition: clearly that boat has sailed as the next thing to be released by Canon with be the MkIII...and you don't really want a semi-periodic camera to be competitive against their previous model. Will be interesting to see when and if its finally released what sort of specs and whats been done to improve it (if anything).

[Lance B]

I also live in Sydney Lance, and as I have transferred with work back to working in QLD on a 7on 7 off roster instead of 2 weeks on 1 week off working in WA, I will be home in Sydney much more frequently. Mount Isa has been home for the past few years, but from mid next year it won't be any longer.:)

Let me know when you're next in Sydney and maybe we can do a day at the zoo for testing your 400 on the D7000.

[Wayne]

Let me know when you're next in Sydney and maybe we can do a day at the zoo for testing your 400 on the D7000.

Will do Lance, that would be fun, as I haven't been to Taronga in almost 30 years.

According to NR, announcement of Nikon press release for November 30th says new SB-910 speedlight(replacing SB-900 with LED light for video) and one other product (reportedly a lens, possibly updated 85/1.8 maybe AF-S?).....

[arthurking83]

Would be very disappointed if all they have really worked on is the video capability. That would pretty much be worthless...Video to video cameras...not DSLRs IMO. I've seen whats happened to canon users while stormchasing, they get torn between getting video and picture and end up with missing the best for either. .....

But these kinds of photographers are numbskulls. If they don't know what they want, they're never going to get it anyhow!

I want video, good quality video, but I don't want a medium end video camera, and won't spend the money on a high end video camera either.

If DSLR's can do reasonable video, then there is no reason not to include it as an option..

I'd gladly take a D800 which has the D3s sensor and it's processing power if it's only an update with video capability.

More Mp's for the sake of having more Mp's is of no interest to me.

If it's simply more megapixels that anyone wants, then the 24Mp of the impending D400 should keep them happy enough for a while.

[Lance B]

I think the benefit of more Mp's, for the rumoured 36Mp for the D800, is for long lens shooters specifically requiring that they can crop to APS C size for the same Mp of say a D7000. It means that they essentially have a crop sensor inside their FF camera. :) The noise etc of this fabled 36Mp sensor should be at least as good as the D7000 and will probably be better as they will use more up to date algorithms etc. I wouldn't be surprised that the high ISO noise is at least as good as the D700 already is.

Another possible benefit is that it is possible to do away with the AA filter for sharper images requiring less post process sharpening.

Anyway, time will tell if all this speculation comes to fruition.

[arthurking83]

The problem with this 'high Mp' sensor is that it's a one way street.
if they do this and not have a lower Mp sensor that does high ISO/low light well, they lose the cache of having the high ISO camera to aspire to.

If cropping to APS-C is the basis for more detail in the image, then this currently exists in the for of the D7000, and will be bettered by the D400 in a few months time anyhow!

This is why the 'rumoured' 36Mp sensor in a D800 sounds implausible(and in fact laughable).

Down the track if the D3x is due for an update, it may have this anticipated 36Mp sensor.

18-22Mp sensor seems to be the most logical evolution for a D800.

In fact, this seems to be more likely in a D3s replacement anyhow, and before a D700 replacement comes to fruition anyhow.

There is the possibility that both a D3s and D700 replacement will be announced concurrently, with a D3x replacement to be called at a later date too.
With the Olympics due early next year, I'd say this may now be the event that Nikon are hoping to capitalise on.

All I want is a D700 with video.... early next year(ie. before I spend all my money :p

[Xebadir]

Yes they are. But I would rather not see good cameras used by numbskulls :P. Its a waste of parts. And its more than a little sad to watch...makes me want to hit them.

I would much rather a decent 18 MP D3s performance equivalent. Thats all I am asking for. So that when I am forced to crop that tornado that occured just too far away, or to pull it out of a larger image I won't have a problem. Sometimes you have no option with framing in my situation, and you need to be able to crop. With 12 MP...you are on the edge of usefulness. Unlike most photography storms involves getting the best shots you can from whatever vantage point you have before the subject changes...so if the storm just happens to be producing a feature of interest at that moment, you take your shots then and there and you only have your trusty 70-200...you can crop in on it.

As for video, I reckon you would get finer quality out of a Sony HD handycam...something like an CX150 without compromising your shooting capabilities. And I guarantee you won't be paying anywhere near as much for it as you will for the video upgrades on this camera.

If its a D700 with video...I won't be bothering. If its got a D3s sensor performance and a few extra MP as well...then I may very well be tempted.

[arthurking83]

LOL! ... on the Sony CX150.

that's a far cry from a DSLR with a 50/1.2 or a 300/2.8 in terms of creative freedom!

I doubt that any D700 update will simply be the same old technology sensor with the added feature of video.

As a minimum, it'll have the now more than 2 year old D3s sensor, as it will be coming up to it's end of useful life cycle, so this camera is technically due for an update as well.

I think this is why the persistent rumours of the 36Mp D800.
Going on Nikon's recent history(as well as their operational woes over the past year) .. what would make sense in terms of new releases in the next few months could be something along the lines of:

D4 18-22Mp new higher quality ISO sensor and boost in fps and other hardware parameters
D800 using the current D3s sensor with video *
D400 (without a doubt about to be announced any month now)
possible D4x with this 36Mp sensor.


A spate of releases along this thinking would be within Nikon's recent philosophy.

* D800 could well be a down specced D4 instead of a D700 with a D3s sensor, but the issue with this marketing move is the price.

Expect a D4 to be in the 6-7K range, and if the D800 has only eg. 1 or 2 fps slower or any other slightly inferior spec in terms of hardware, it will eat into sales of the D4 initially which Nikon would rather not see happen.
I'm sure that D3s sales maintained a momentum due to the fact that it was 1 stop superior to the D700 in terms of ultimate ISO ability, with further extension into ISO values that the D700 could never achieve as well.

Some folks want or need super clean ISO 25K images, whereas others are happy with clean 6400/12K ISO on the odd occasion that this exposure level is required.
People with needs will pay for the ability to achieve this performance. Nikon surely knows this and to create a D800 to close to the D4 flagship in specific areas is only going to hurt their bottom line.

So my guess for the impending new Nikons would be something like:

Not too far apart in terms of release date:
D4 @ 20(ish) Mp
D400 @ 24 Mp(this is almost a dead cert, going by the A77's specs)
D800 @ current D3s specs
D4x @ 36Mp(or whatever Nikon is currently working on, but ultimately .. who cares? A $12K camera body is the furthest thing from my mind .. and even if I had this kind of money to throw around, I'd prefer a Pentax 645D anyhow!)

[swifty]

It is the silly season afterall so here are my prediction/wishlist.

D4 very similarly specced to 1Dx. 1Dx pretty much hit all the sweet spot for the target audience. The battle would be who can do better within the parameters of those general specs.

D800 with the 36mp AA-filterless sensor with some sort of binning tech. Nikon likes cannibalising their flagships so bye bye D3x, hello D800 or whatever it's called.

Another 'mystery' FX with more video orientated specs. So that the video guys can have their uber cam and leave the other cameras stills- orientated.

I did start this post by saying its the silly season didn't I? :christmasparty: