D800 initial impressions

[armando_m]

I have just bought a D800, this are my initial impressions

Contrary to what seems the situation in the USA , getting it here was fairly easy, 1 phone call to a local distributor and I had it the same day. Guess there aren't many photo crazy people in México.

I'm coming from a Nikon D300 and my comments are based on my experience with it vs the new D800.

I bought the D800 looking for an improvement in high iso , and dynamic range, which it certainly shows, there are other advantages, and some disadvantages,
Why the move to FX? because I got tired of waiting for a DX improvement in a body similar to the D300.
I never bought into the D7000 because I felt the improvement from the D300 was marginal, I think the same is when comparing the D700 to the D800, this are MY conclusions from seeing reports as the ones in DXOmark.

About using the camera:
Usability is very intuitive moving from the D300 to the D800, biggest change is the new AF control, but it is very easy to adapt from using the tiny lever on the side of the D300 to using the button and rotating knobs on the D800 (similar to a D7000)

When holding the camera, the grip is smaller in the D800, let me explain: with the D300 I can have it hanging from 3 fingers , it clings to my hand even if I do not use my thumb , I had removed the camera strap from the D300 and never felt insecure. With the D800 this is not the case, the grip is shallower , maybe a 1/4 of an inch but I do need to use my thumb to hold it otherwise it will fall from my hand, hopefully someone will come out with a replacement grip in the future, (and i do not mean the vertical grip, replace the rubber in the front for something a bit more bulky) the D300 and the d700 feel really nice in my hand , the D800 doesn't, now this "hanging" from my fingers is only while walking around holding the camera , for shooting the grip is good and I do not feel it makes a difference.

Getting sharp images is not more difficult than with the D300, hold the camera correctly and images come out great, use a sloppy technique and it shows

Autofocus is certainly improved over my D300 things just snap into focus, to me it seems instantaneous, and have not have a situation of hunting for focus even in dark situations.
I tried Auto area continuous autofocus mode on one of my kids in a swing, no problem at all, and no it did not select idiotic spots like the unmoving frame above the swing, it focused on the face. Still have to try with a BIF, that will be a more practical test.

Shooting liveview the AF has to many options , looks like a fancy point and shoot and I do not care much to explore all those options, the viewfinder is way more attractive. Except for macro shooting an then I focusing manually, in this situation Live view is awesome, I used it while shooting from a tripod, I'm not sure if the mirror moves or not when taking a shot , there is certainly a number of noises and certainly takes some time for the display to come back on again, the results are SHARP, even when shooting at 1/6 sec, there is no vibration.

Full frame DOF is wonderful ! Even if not shooting Wide open, there is some blur behind the focused areas which looks really nice.

Dynamic range is also great, all that is said about how better is the sensor so far seems true. Did some shooting in bright sunlight with mixed shadow areas and I have no problems with highlights or shadows, very nice, easy to work with the raw files, or the SOOC Jpgs are still really nice, I'm very pleased with this aspect. Metering seems to need to compensation as it did with the D300, I rarely shoot at 0EV, it was more often at -0.7EV.

More noise due to higher megapixels? Not what I have seen, specially when compared to the D300.

Disadvantages, certainly I have just 3 FX lenses... My DX lenses work fine in DX mode and I still get 15MP images, but the viewfinder only has a rectangle indicating what is in the DX frame , I have not used it enough to judge how difficult it is, certainly useful until I replace the DX lenses , that is if I decide to replace them all.

I'm selling the D300, I do not need 2 DSLRs

As for FX right now I have the 50mm f1.8, 150 f2.8 macro and the 70-300 zoom,
So I'm not covered on the wide side, I'll eventually like to get the new 28 mm f/1.8
and maybe later a fisheye lens, considering the sigma 15mm f2.8 , mostly for the shots I do at night from the stars
Getting the pro f/2.8 zooms is not something I'll like to do, they are huge.

Another disadvantage, the RAW files are 40ish MB they will use 3x times more disk space compared vs the D300. Processing them is a bit slower but only a fraction, for me that I process a few images at a time is not a problem, I'll get up to get something from the fridge and the processing will be complete.

There is still plenty of stuff to learn but so far I'm very pleased with the camera

[Franglais]

Thanks for that. It's pretty much what I've observed also going from a D300 to a D800. I haven't had much opportunity to do any real photos yet, it was raining last weekend.

- I like having two card slots - I use one for the RAW files and the other for the JPG files as a backup.
- First time I handled it I noticed it was smaller than the D300, but since then I've more or less decided to stick to my (12 year old) f2.8 constant lenses which completely changes the feel compared with the D300. These things are huge but they're the best lenses I have.

I'm certainly not selling my D300. I suspect that most of the time the D300 will turn in results that are just as good as the D800. But I need more practice first.

[armando_m]

Sigma 150 handheld, with flash,
AF-C focus priority Focus


Wide angle DX mode in camera B/W sepia


AF-C Auto area plus in camera B/W with plus 3 contrast, auto iso
50mm f1.8 lens
Series of 5 images shot in CH






CH only 4 fps but AF-C did a great job ,
now I want t try with a BIF and my 70-30 zoom

[Franglais]

The weather hasn't been good here, but I've done a couple of small excursions.

When I set about developing the RAW files I realised - this is quite different from the D300. The images are clearer and more beautiful. Plus I have the impression that it's easier to manipulate in RAW - I could go a long way in bringing back burnt-out highlights on the waterfall without it looking unnatural.

The first image of Pierrefonds pretty much sealed the fate of the 24-85 f3.5-4.5 that I had been hoping to use as a walk-about lens. It looks good until I looked closely at the trees top right against the sky - a thin blue line down the trunk. Chromatic aberration.

On the second image of the World War 1 graveyard, same lens - look closely and the grass is just mush. Exit the 24-85.

Next outing was to Les Vaux de Cernay then the Vallée de la Bievre on a much brighter day. 28-70 f2.8, heavy tripod. No problem..

[armando_m]

Wanted to try the AF-C on the D800

It is fast and accurate, the AUTO area worked fine with BIF but I didn't get anything worth sharing

This is AF-C single focus area, which I will continue to use, it seems to work fine even if I loose the the bird for a small fraction of time, the D300 would instantly try and focus at infinity ,maybe my mistake by not having it wait a bit before reacquiring focus



Had it setup at spot metering
EV -0.7 due to strong light and white bird
Lens Nikon 70-300 VR zoom
1/640 f/8 Auto ISO 160
VR was on

Found that VR shooting at 300mm and speeds under 1/320 were blurry ,
This is different to my experience with the D300

[Franglais]

..

Found that VR shooting at 300mm and speeds under 1/320 were blurry ,
This is different to my experience with the D300

Could it be subject movement that is more visible on the more detailed image?

On Tuesday I shot a fashion show in the street (can't publish - copyright). I was using fill-in flash which meant a shutter speed of 1/250s or slower. On every image where the model is moving when I blow up to 100% it's unsharp. But it won't matter after I downsize for publication.

The possibility to crop is remarkable. I messed up one image by focussing on the crowd behind and not the model. But by leaving out 3/4 of the image I get a charming picture of the crowd's reaction to the model in front. It's actually one of my favourites. You would never know it had been cropped - the crowd is sharp because they weren't moving.

[armando_m]

I would have to shoot more to verify if it was subject movement , the situation where I had blur the bird was just standing ...

[Franglais]

I'm curious about this VR problem - but none of my FX lenses have VR.

I just went back to treating a set of D300 RAW images. Wow. They seem really small.

With the D800 I quickly got used to having a huge detailed image that I could crop to suit the client's needs. Not a lot most of the time, just leaving out unnecessary detail (crowd in the background) to concentrate on the subject (model with clothes). Usually I hate cropping but it just seemed natural to do it.

[armando_m]

I'm curious about this VR problem - but none of my FX lenses have VR.
...t.

Charles i shot a few more with the 70-300 VR on , and they came out sharp, so i'm not sure why i was having trouble shooting a week ago, certainly some sort of user error

Today I went to a photo walk for which I did not care to spend time processing RAW files

Set the camera to Jpg small fine, camera indicated I had space for 5K shots , instead of 400
ISO 100 Auto ISO
Aperture mode, set to camera to the widest aperture
DX mode (used my 18-200)
AF-C Auto except when I needed to do spot metering
Basically a bulky/heavy point & shoot

Resized in light room

3 examples
1. she is in direct , very bright sunlight , 95mm , 1/640 sec, f/5.3, ISO 100


2. mostly in the shade, 105mm, 1/160 sec, f/5.3, ISO 140


3. spot metering , spot AF-C on her face, 55mm, 1/100 sec, f/4.8, ISO 100, highlights unrecoverable

[Franglais]

Spectacular, especially the second one, the catchlight in her hair is very sweet.

In fact I had to read it twice to realise - you are shooting in DX mode which essentially means that you are shooting with a simili Nikon D7000 fitted with the 18-200 VR wide open... I think that most people don't need a full frame camera, APS-C is already excellent.

[armando_m]

Yesterday I shot with studio lights, brought my 50mm f/1.8 afs and the sigma 150 / f/2.8

A friend let me use his 24-70 f/2.8, this thing is big and heavy , certainly not something I would like to travel with , or walk around with it hanging of my neck

since we're using studio lights and it is multiple people with all sorts of cameras / lenses all shots are at f/5.6

Regarding sharpness I can not tell the difference between one lens and the other, not surprising at those apertures, but certainly made me appreciate my 50mm and 150 mm lenses

[Franglais]

You mean you were using studio flash or studio tungsten? If it was flash then at f5.6 you should be getting everything the camera/lens combination can deliver. Interesting that you find the lenses are about the same - I would have expected the macro to be a little bit better.

The 24-70 f2.8 is about the same size as my 28-70 f2.8. It's the only wide-to-tele zoom lens I have that matches the performance of the D800 but it's terribly big and heavy:

- the 28-70 stays on the D800 most of the time
- so I only take this bulky combination out for specific missions where I need the best
- so I have kept the D300 + DX lenses for more normal things
- I'm thinking about trying the D800 with DX lenses in DX mode as a sort of simili-D7000

[GB1]

Two things you guys haven't mentioned - video and built-in HDR. How are they both? Can you post examples of the built-in HDR vs one you created in PhotoMatix?

The pix you posted look nice btw. I found your comment that the 800 has improved dynamic range over the 300 somewhat predictable, for this seems to be a major research area by the manufacturers. How long before they basically output one-image HDRs? Hmm.

Anyway, I wonder if the days of buying a body and using it until it fell apart (16 years in the case of my Nikon FA) are over... if DR is improving that quickly, cameras will be 'stale' every three years. You can probably stretch it to four or five, but your pictures won't be as good as your counterparts.

[armando_m]

Greg,

I tried HDR, it is OK, I think I can do better with a single RAW and exposing for the highlights, the ability to recover shadows from the RAW , specially in LR4 is amazing ! if you want the grungy look just tonemap it afterwards and you are done.

Video ? what's that ... I tried it , it works

I don't really know what to do with the video capabilities of the camera, tried at the school of my daughter , it works fine , but to me looks like the video I can take with my point & shoot, I have not even seen it on the computer. I'm not skilled at taking video, while one frame can be made to look spectacular, I wouldn't know how to do that on video, neither do I have the equipment and knowledge.

[Franglais]

Two things you guys haven't mentioned - video and built-in HDR. How are they both? Can you post examples of the built-in HDR vs one you created in PhotoMatix?
....

Ask me about the function that lets you press the shutter release, mirror flips up then the camera waits 3 seconds before taking the shot so that all vibration has died down. No need to carry around a cable release. (integrated into my "Tripod/Landscape" menu)

Ask me about the function that adjusts the shutter speed where auto-ISO kicks in according to the focal length of the lens and that you can squew by up to two shutter speeds so that your shots without tripod are sharp. (integrated into my "Normal/Walkabout" menu)

But don't ask me about video. Please.

I don't have enough experience, there are too many things to take in and I have a wedding at the end of the month. I'll get round to it.

Addendum about HDR and how fast cameras are progressing:

Somehow in the past people managed to do photos without having 14 stops of dynamic range etc. It required more work (graduated neutral density filters in the days of film then HDR for digital) but having a simpler way to do it doesn't make your equipment obsolete.

Having gone D70 > D200 > D300 > D800 my feeling is that I can stick with the D800 as my top-end-needs-utmost-care model for 8 years (2 full camera generations) but that I should be looking for a new general purpose camera (D300) in 4 years.

[Franglais]

I'm just processing 800 or so images that I did at my first wedding with the D800 on Lightroom 4.

This seems much easier than on the D300 + LR3. All those while dresses, I just take the White slider and put the detail back in them. I have the impresson that there is less correction of the exposure to do as well. (I always shoot RAW)

And what level of detail.. Did I really shoot the church ceremony at 3200 ISO? I thought it was still 800 ISO. The images leap out at you.

Remarkable.

[armando_m]

hmmm ... the 2 left most focus points in the center line are off
this is consistent with all my lenses

discovered this because I had to adjust the AF for the 150mm, which now focuses fine, except on the left side

I'll have to send in the camera to have this serviced,
I'll call in first, this is not a show stopper, and I will want my camera returned in short amount of time

[Franglais]

I suppose I'll have to check mine one day. I don't use the left side focussing sensors as much as the right ones (when doing a portrait and focussing on the eyes the camera is right side up). Plus I'm usually shooting at f8-f11 anyway.

[armando_m]

replace the user and try again

The AF points on the far left and right areas are not of cross-type. I used horizontally contrasting pattern for my previous test.

Using vertical contrast has magically "fixed" the camera, I'm happy to say the left side AF points work just fine in my camera :23:

Still wondering why so much difference between extremes left and right when using horizontal contrast, but I can live with that , plus it is specified this are not cross type AF points

[Franglais]

replace the user and try again

The AF points on the far left and right areas are not of cross-type. I used horizontally contrasting pattern for my previous test.

Using vertical contrast has magically "fixed" the camera, I'm happy to say the left side AF points work just fine in my camera :23:

Still wondering why so much difference between extremes left and right when using horizontal contrast, but I can live with that , plus it is specified this are not cross type AF points

(Franglais presses on Facebook Like button)

[Franglais]

Thom Hogan has posted his review of the D800. It had me Laughing Out Loud in several places, especially the guidance for "Prosumer DSLR owner" and "Portrait". I know exactly what he's talking about.

The review is here:

Nikon D800 and D800E Review by Thom Hogan

BTW I did two workshops this weekend (it's the end of the season). That makes a total of eight participants (including me). Four of us were using D800's. And I know that a fifth one has a D800E but this time he came along with a D4, saying that it was enough for a nude shoot