< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Rumors: Nikon D800 refresh instead of D4x

Nikon_D800_2
Some new rumors started circulating that Nikon will not release a D4x camera but instead refresh the Nikon D800 (D800s?) the way they updated the D4s (same sensor, improved ISO, slightly faster, higher price tag). It is too early to mark this rumor with anything above 50% probability.

Nikon is rumored to announce 3 or 4 new DSLR cameras this year: so far we already have the D3300 and the D4s (already announced); the remaining two will be the rumored D7200 and D800s.

This entry was posted in Nikon D810. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • LarryC

    With Nikon’s trend toward eliminating the AA filter isn’t it more likely this would be the D800es?

    • n11

      With more megapixels just make it the D800sex

      • Mike

        I don’t think they will increase the megapixels. I believe Nikon, will increase frame rate do to the fact of the new processor in D4s.

      • Vin

        That is so funny! You would be right, upgrade would be an S. E. & X.

      • koenshaku

        I would patent that lol

      • ShaoLynx

        Nah, in that case it would be the D800’better than’sex ;-)
        A long as a name, though – LOL

        • Nikon

          I AM SEX.

          • Vin

            NICE! GET Slogan, you are the new marketing manager.

      • bob2

        Take the mirror out and it’s a D800 SEX MILF–mirrorless interchangeable lens F mount.

  • Steve Griffin

    54MP would be interesting. That’s 2x the 24MP APS-C as was the original D800 2x the 16MP APS-C.

    • Eric Duminil

      Pardon my French, but what the f**k would you be doing with 54MP that you cannot do with 36MP?

      • cpm5280

        Oh come on. This argument: “Today’s X is barely better than yesterday’s” is so much BALONEY. Some of us use our pixels, and it”s ridiculous for you to engage in this kind of “ZOMG You don’t need that tool! ” crap.

        • Mansgame

          It’s called Phase One.

          • waterengineer

            No it certainly is not. No way the Nikon can or would compare to the Phase One. Period. It is about physics, the glass and the light roll off. Nikon cannot compete, no matter what you want to believe. Sorry

            • Mansgame

              I meant that if you need that kind of pixel, get a phase one.

            • umeshrw

              Just the reason people want D400 instead of D800. Also price is a major problem.

            • Anto de Chav

              Phase one is 10x the price…

            • Scott M.

              1.5 fps too

            • Reality Check

              And 5x the quality.

            • MyrddinWilt

              Jargon does not make for an argument. Every digital camera has light roll off, even the iPhone camera. Its just a design choice, where to map the curves. Its the sort of are where Nikon and Canon have a dozen engineers working and Phase One can barely afford half.

              A 50+MP FX camera can easily outpace medium format film for under $10K and that is the standard that matters here.

            • 35mm rules

              all that physics and glass = only 200 ISO usable and costs like a used BMW.

              Its not phase one… its the hot models, ultra skilled retouching, makeup, location, everything else…

            • Clint

              Keep telling yourself that.

            • Ralph

              I remember reading that same ‘physics’ baloney when digital first came out. Digital will never be able to replace film, years later – Digital will never be able to reach medium format. Its not a question of if, but when. I like more pixels because I shoot landscape on my D800e but I would love the divide by 2 function sRAW files because sometimes I shoot stuff that doesnt need 36MP, thats 9MP on the D800e – perfect.

            • http://www.levannart.com/ Levent ERYILMAZ

              I am sorry, but curious what kind of photography you do that the small difference makes a huge difference to you to make this strong argument? My friend and I did test indeed D800E and phase One Digtital back longtime ago: Yes there is a difference of course but there difference is not that huge to make such ” You cannot even compare” a strong case. Yes sensor size difference puts them into different categories, if you say they are not in the same category i would understand but such a statement that lead to make day and night difference is just a misleading comment in my opinion. Do you think that hasselblad dslr is far better than Sony dslr because it is expensive? Just my two cents.

            • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

              Ah, you must have a Phase One. Or an inferiority complex.

        • Eric Duminil

          You didn’t answer the question.

      • lobsterhat

        Cropping and Downsampling

        • Eric Duminil

          You cannot crop and downsample with 36MP?

          • boulderghost

            I crop to panoramic dimensions and print up to 90″ wide. I sell them for a premium price and enjoy a successfull business as a landscape photographer. More megapixels gives me options to print even larger offerings as more profitable products in my gallery. Sure I could merge exposures, but at sunsets and starlight, exposures and subject matter change rapidly. One shot is alway’s the best if possible. This is how I would use this proposed tool. If you see no use for it for your business, save your money and enjoy your business model given the tools that work for you. Also, I have used a Phase One (briefly) and honestly, prefer the features, cost and ruggedness of a D800 for use in Yellowstone Winters, Surf side, dusty trails, etc…. Oh did I mention cost? Besides, my clients haven’t seen the difference. It’s business.

            • Peter

              Not trying to argue with you, but if your clients don’t see the difference between 60 megapixel medium format and 36 MP D800, they won’t see the difference to a higher-res D800x either.

              Also keep in mind that at some point, common 35 mm lenses reach their resolution limit and you would have to buy extremely expensive third party lenses, if you can find any at all, to make use of your sensor. Otherwise you’d just be wasting storage space. At some point, medium format would be cheaper overall since your high-resolution 35mm lenses would be crazy expensive (have a look at the price for real cine glass to get an impression).

            • boulderghost

              They don’t see a difference, yet I save @$35,000 in cost. Thats the point. More MP’s would only allow me to print larger before they do. Again, this is a business issue, not a so much a pixel peeping technical comparison. You print big until you hit limits. More MP’s = higher limits. Higher limits = +$

              As for the lens resolution issue, Im not buying the hypothosis that Nikon ED lenses can’t resolve up to 50mp. DX sensors aren’t out resolving Nikon glass yet and their density is higher than the D800. Where are you seeing this problem with say the D7000?? Its a theory, but not a logical one given the performance of the D7000 with even lower quality DX glass.

            • Peter

              Interesting point. Still, in your case, going with something like the Pentax MF system might be a better compromise since it’s much more affordable than Hasselblad/Phase1/Leaf/Leica etc., but gives you all the other medium format advantages like the look of a bigger sensor.

            • mwei

              you just don’t get bloulderghost’s point do you? i don’t know if you’re trolling or just dumb? he’s talking about not spending 30k grand for medium format when he can do it with a D800 for just under 10k grand. jeez man

            • Peter

              I get it very well, which is precisely why I suggested the Pentax system might be worth considering. Have a look at the pricing of the current model:

              http://goo.gl/lDwHjJ

              Also weather sealed, SLR form factor and ISO up to 1600. Current model is 40 megapixels, but they announced a new model a few days ago that is expected to use the same sensor as the next generation Hasselblad and Phase1 cameras. You would still be roughly in the $10k range you mentioned, certainly not 30k.

              The point is that 50 megapixels don’t make sense for the majority of the photographers using or considering a D800 now, hence Nikon may not offer that kind of resolution boost in the near future. I was merely suggesting a possible alternative that is overlooked by many photographers, just in case the next D800 upgrade won’t deliver what boulderghost needs.

            • Art

              I ran the numbers awhile back and a sensor with the same pixel density
              as the D7000 but with a full size sensor works out to …. 56MP. As has
              been pointed out, nobody is complaining that the D7000’s is better than
              the glass. While I appreciate the point that we will hit a limit, we
              aren’t IMHO there yet. I would bet we can get to 100MP or even more
              before that limit is hit. (Just think — with a sensor that big, only 7 raw
              photos would fit on a CD …. It’s only 16 now … My have times changed.)

              I’d be more than happy to accept a camera that did 100MP. I’d use it and love it when appropriate. When I wasn’t using it, I’m sure a camera like that could downsample and provide whatever size RAW that was asked for. You want 24MP? No problem! 12MP? 11MP? 6MP? No problem for any of them. Downsampling is a trival solution to the whole MP issue. It costs the same to make a chip that is 12MP, 24MP, or 100MP. I have a friend who designs chips for a living and we’ve discussed this very issue. Other than R&D, the actual manufacturing costs are the same. So it isn’t really worth complaining about.

            • Math101

              You need to take math again..
              You do not calculate it by DX modes of FX bodies, no need to calculate pixel size, it is simply the physical size of the sensor in relation to the number of pixels it contains.
              The DX sensor is approximately half the size of FX (15mmx24mm versus 35mmx24mm). So even if we approximate the calculations it would be more accurate than whatever you did. If you doubled the size of the DX sensor it would be 30mmx24mm, which would be 5mm short of the FX sensor. The D7000 is ~16mp, so if you put two of those sensors together you would get ~32mp but only a 30mmx24mm sensor – we need another 5mmx24mm section. So divide the D7000 sensor by three to get a 5mmx24mm section which would be approximately 5.3mp. Now if you add that 5.3mp 5mmx24mm section to the 32mp 30mmx24mm sensor you would end up with ~37.3mp…
              No idea what ‘numbers’ you ran to get 56mp.

              …and your friend does not understand the dynamics of the microelectronic industry, it costs exponentially more to manufacture a chip with higher megapixels.. The cost cannot be a comparison of what you paid for yesterdays 12mp against what you pay for todays 100mp, those would probably be the same as the technology was more expensive to produce back in the 12mp days.. However if you compare what it costs to manufacture a 12mp chip today versus the cost of manufacturing the 100mp chip today the 12mp will be considerable less as it is old, inexpensive technology versus the newer 100mp technology.

            • Art

              I stand corrected — partly. I meant the D7100, not the D7000. The pixel density of the D7100 (24MP) when blown up to cover a full size sensor is about 54MP.

              As far as my friend goes, he designs chips for a living. Given that, I suspect that he knows what he is talking about. He said that the costs cost about the same no matter the chip. All the main manufacturers have (more or less) the same equipment. The difference between new technology and old technology are mostly the parameters used to tweak the machines to do what you want. He said that there are with the current machines at least several lifetimes of parameters and techniques to explore. He did say though that the Foveon sensor would of course be an exception to this rule.

            • Fred Noteboom

              And if you are printing larger, you clients will view from further away, – standing with your nose against a 90inch pano would be like viewing a sunset with binoculars – so their retinas will resolve the same pixel density – laws of diminishing and indistinguishable returns come into play!

            • boulderghost

              The point is, if my clients can’t see the difference, why spend $30,000 more? Now if Nikon does release a D800S with 50mp, I would by it for many reasons. The least of which is that for $3000 I could print LARGER and sell more profitable prints. Its a business tool and it worked for me the same way upgrading from a D700 to a D800 worked to allow me to print 50% larger prints.

              As for the lens argument, Google “Nikon D7000 lens resolve”. 50mp on the Trinity glass is a non issue. The D7000 sensor has more density than the D800 and no problems. Don’t worry if a 50mp dslr isn’t for you, it will sell anyway and many people will know how to employ it to their benefit.
              FYI a D700 is not coming. Nikon has no interest in catering to the “jack of all trades” semi pro photographer. The want to lead the industry in all niches and you can’t do that with a Do Everthing good enough body for 1/2 the price of a D800. If you need an all around good enough body, get a D610 until you know what you really need.

            • Spy Black

              You know, for panoramas you don’t need high megs. I made 132 and 172 meg pana’s with my D5100 and panoramic software. I guarantee you I got a lot more detail in those shots, and it only cost me the price of a D5100 body and an 85mm f/2 and 105mm f/2.5 Ai Nikkors.. ;-)

            • boulderghost

              Yea, I know that. I’ve made monster pano’s with my D800 stitching 6 portrait frames together. Where it’s nice to use one high res shot cropped is when you’re shooting sunsets with changing light on the horizon or astral milky way shots where every shot is 30 seconds long. Still the more MP’s gives me choices. I can shoot in DX mode or crop in for tighter wildlife shots instead of using a $10000 tele. Or shoot architecture, and have room to crop after adjusting the verticles…

              Or I can sell a magazine a cropped landscape shot as a portrait image with resolution to spare for the cover…

            • http://www.levannart.com/ Levent ERYILMAZ

              Boulderghost,
              I use D800E since it is launched and do landscape and nightscapes including stargazing besides some studio work. I did a pano of Chicago skyline once with 16 portrait images, it was insane. I am just curios too see some of your images? Is there any link you can share? Thank you. Levent

            • boulderghost

              Hi Levent
              My images can be seen at: http://www.toryshoots.com
              Most of the Panos are from single frames. I have several that are merged but they are not on my website (yet) The are all on display at SaddleTree gallery in Ketchum, Idaho. Most will make it to my website this month….hopefully!

            • http://www.levannart.com/ Levent ERYILMAZ

              You have some very fine work there, very nice. My first shocking moment with D800E was the dynamic range on the raw images. Did you feel the same way. I think there is still room for 50-60 Mpix based on current crop sensors, but hope they will not increase resolution with sacrifice of dynamic range or color depth or other factors that are still important.

              I don’t have a dedicated web page for landscapes etc but if you want check my flickr:

              http://www.flickr.com/photos/levent_eryilmaz/

              or for studio work:

              http://www.levannart.com/

            • Boulderghost

              Thank you for the compliment. I agree with you completely. I would welcome more MP, but more dynamic range is what I noticed most going from the D700 to the D800. Huge difference. And cleaner files. I think with the best lenses from Nikon/Zeiss we can go much further with higher MP’s. When photographers realize the benefits of higher MP’s for creative cropping, panos, more editing latitude, etc. they will embrace it. Im sure the DR will scale up as well and Landscape/Wedding/Studio photogs will love the results. The D800 is an intimidating, demanding, and expensive tool. Some photographers don’t have the skills, subject matter or $$$ to use it. I just wish they would buy something else and leave Nikon to continue to push the limits for those of us who appreciate it. I can’t wait for the next version.

            • boulderghost

              Stunning work! Your lighting is top notch.

            • Art

              I agree. I shoot various panoramas and even higher MP would be wonderful. I shot this not too long ago:

              http://www.gigapan.com/gigapans/140376

              It is composed of 442 photos from my D800E with the new 80-400 lens racked out to 400mm. (Which I think is really 380 but be that as it may ….) More MP would mean cooler pano in this case. (Try zooming in to the top of the mountain peak. You can see the rocks and tree roots.)

            • Eric Duminil

              May I ask how big do you print?
              The D7000 has more density than the D800, but it also uses the center of lenses.
              Your explanation about niches makes sense, but I just find it frustrating that Nikon actively cripples cameras in order to avoid producing an all around good enough body.

            • http://www.levannart.com/ Levent ERYILMAZ

              Nikon started to use Canon business strategies after D800 series, which makes me pretty unhappy but hey it is a very competitive shrinking market. They ve got to do what they need to to stay alive. Especially considering the fact that Nikon is such a small company compared to giant Canon.

            • Peter

              The D700 certainly was a professional tool in every respect, not an “all around good enough” product. A D3 didn’t offer much beyond that for most situations, except FPS and a few other minor things. Sensor resolution is not everything. A low-noise 24 megapixel image is a lot better than a noisy 36 megapixel image, it all depends on what your subjects and shooting conditions are and what your output size and format is. Just for your information, here in Europe, by far more professionals I have met use the D700/D300(s) line rather than a D3/D4 (including me), it was what we “really need”, and right now, Nikon has stopped offering an upgrade path unless we decide to either go with an unnecessarily expensive D4 (compared to, say a Canon 5D III, which also offers a bit more resolution) or an intentionally crippled D610 or Df (AF, flash sync, ergonomics). Many of the pros with a D300(s) here are even starting to migrate to Fuji’s X system instead, many others are buying the D700 again used to replace their old ones for the time being. But my comment was never about me and what I need.

              In fact, I completely agree with you, for landscape photographers, a higher resolution D800 would certainly be great, the question is just for how many people interested in the D800 line it would be a hinderance (ISO compromise, file size, transfer and processing speed etc.). I was merely suggesting you not rule out other options because Nikon may likely decide against your wishes. There are some rather affordable medium format options available that you may not have been aware of, like the Pentax system, which is much closer to a D4s in price and ergonomics than it is to other MF systems, which most people don’t know. I was just trying to help, no need to be condescending.

            • boulderghost

              Hey now…I wasn’t being condescending….just irritated at the constant whining I hear for generalist low budget photogs who complain that they can’t get a D700 replacement that is pretty much a 16mp, 8fps D800 for $2000. They never will any more than I’ll be driving a new BMW M3 for $150000. The D800 is the next step up for you if you can’t afford a D4s and can’t deal with a D610 for some silly reason. Downsample with an action on import and your fix the scary big file issue. Besides, any D700 “replacement” that has 8fps in a smaller body with a D4 sensor is going to run $3500-$4000. Nikon won’t ship a camera that costs that much as it probably wouldn’t sell to the photogs who want it and aren’t satisfied with D610. BTW, I recently sold my backup camera, a D700 for a D610….so my much BETTER! Better ISO. Better IQ. Better features. Better AF. I don’t care about a slower Flash sync because if I shoot HSS I shoot with HSS triggers and get the light off the camera (who wouldn’t). The D610 is lighter and just as ergo as the D700 after 3 days.

              As far as Medium format, let me try to explain again. Pentax or any medium format system is far more expensive, limited to ONLY landscape/studio, far less ergo and not nearly as durable when your backpacking in gear for a week. It’s a non starter and offers little if any profitable advantage for the end product. It’s a niche, niche, niche and will probably be dead in five years when FX hits 60mp+ and clean ISO 50,000. IMHO.

            • nostatic

              I take exception to your opinion. For one, it certainly sounds condescending, indeed. “You can’t spring for a D800? Clearly, you’re not a pro.” You’re missing the point, I think. The bitch everyone I know has with the D800 is you have to make too many compromises for the money. I will never need that many megapixels, and for $3k, why should I hassle with downsizing, buying bigger cards etc.? The D610 is a fine camera and takes equally great images, but it lacks the controls and versatility of the D800, so for many it’s not the perfect option either. As I said in another comment, all Nikon needs to do is take a D800, make it 24 MP for around $2500 and all us D700 users will be quite happy.

            • Name

              The price for that body (Dxxx FF) has always been $3,000. If you’re not willing to pay $3,000 for it, you’re justifying perfectly why Nikon isn’t building it.

            • nostatic

              Eye roll. Nikon will eventually quit dithering about and answer demand for the D700 replacement, pricing it somewhere between the D610 and D800. What’s more, it’s not the price tag of the D800 that keeps many of us from purchasing it, it’s the other stuff. While Nikon still produces generally great cameras, albeit with quality control issues of late, their marketing has become cynical and misguided. If you look at their most recent announcement about how they intend to return to greater profitability, it’s all about offering customers less for more. As someone who has been in the business for 40 years, I can promise you this strategy is doomed to failure. Short-term profit, long-term loss.

            • Name

              Nikon won’t price a D700 replacement lower than the D800. Maybe lower than the D800s/x, if they raise the price of that, but not below the $3,000ish price point. Why should they?! Further, they don’t need another “model” splitting the difference between the D600 and D800. All they need to make the D800 the same “generalist” camera the D700 was is to increase the frame rate (and perhaps buffer) of the D800. Once you can get a similar frame rate from a D800, you no longer “need” an intermediate model to have a “generalist” camera. A D800 offering the same frame rate of the D700 would be a superior camera in every respect.

            • nostatic

              Again, I disagree. It’s the bloated file size, not the frame rate that’s keeping a lot of folks away from the D800. A D800s/x won’t solve that. And who are you kidding, Nikon splits model differences all the time. D3300, D5300, D7100; all within a few hundred of each other and arguable appealing to the same basic market. A D700s/x with a new processor, 24MP and 6-7FPS priced at $2500-2800 would fly off the shelves. (And if would be easy for Nikon to price it this way since there’s little new technology or manufacturing costs. Basically, a product line extension.) Heck, I’d buy it even of it were priced the same as the D800. Check out the forums, a lot of the Nikon fateful are tired of the company’s failure to satisfy demand with a new D400 and D700s/x. Instead we get niche crap like the Df, and lazy iteration after iteration.

            • Richard Hart

              you could also resize the image in photoshop and not worry about the megapixels. I have done 60inch prints on 16mp camera because the bigger something is, the further back you go to look at it. Regardless of the mp, you lose quality of image because of the focus and sharpness of the lens. 3x12mp images stitched will look different to one 36mp. I use a d800, not because of the mp but because of the functionality. I still think my d200 had better focusing…

            • Reality Check

              Ditto that with my experience. Not only does the central AF point of my D200 focus more consistently with my fast primes than my D800, it also does so with no micro adjust capability. The most needed update on the D800 isn’t the sensor… it’s the unreliable PDAF implementation.

            • Boulderghost

              Interesting. That hasn’t been my experience, but I do stitch exposures from the D800 for really large panos. Never noticed a limitation from lens sharpness. I use a 16-35 f4 and its tack sharp at my largest prints. When I shoot a single exposure and then crop to pano, I often focus stack 3 images all shot at f8 giving me DOF and no diffraction. My point was the D800 panos from a single exposure are a viable option the wasn’t possible with my old D700. My clients love the “scale” and enjoy seeing detail and more detail as the walk up to the print. It sells.

        • Patrick Pedersen

          If I wanted, I could literally crop my heart out with my D800E shots.

      • http://kyleclements.com/ Kyle Clements

        If the sensor is capable of recording at least double the resolution of the lens, you will get crisp detail and no moire. (eg. a 50MP sensor with a lens with a <25MP DXO score)

        24MP DX is perfect, 54MP FX would be a nice touch.

        plus, it'll be nice to explore the limits of that shiny new sigma lens…

      • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

        Convincing clients to pay extra for retouching.

      • yrsued

        My sentiments exactly.

        My 36MP Images have to be reduced to publish in covers and even in Double Truck.

        36MP is suficient.

        The only ones that want larger Cameras is Seagate, Western Digital, Lacie and other Hard Drive Manufacturers.

        I know, I run Four DROBO’s and I have to Upgrade Drives every year to get more room.

        • boulderghost

          Please. Moore’s Law is still in effect with storage. Next year, you will be twice as wrong.

          • yrsued

            This is NOT about being right or wrong. It’s common sense. IF you shoot for a magazine that prints a cover in 8.5×11 at 350 DPI, why would you want to shoot something so much bigger??

            First, you have to process and store the RAW Files, the Final Files and all the Intermediate Files and Data>

            I already store almost 15TB on DROBO and Cloud since 2007, Everything prior is on other Media.

            I run D800’s in the studio and like I mentioned before, the Files are being reduced to fit the Magazine Format.

            Magazines are not getting bigger, but files are. I would rather get better Image Quality than Mega Pixels.

            • boulderghost

              Right or wrong is contectual, I guess so I’ll give you that…However, if you shoot commercial photos for large displays, prints on a fine resolving paper like Fuji Pearl or other large gallery prints, then truncating your master file to a smaller capture size just to save on storage space is wrong headed. Especially in a world where storage space is less than .05/mb and dropping by 1/2 every year! Here’s a link: http://www.statisticbrain.com/average-cost-of-hard-drive-storage/ If your end product only requires a print size of 11×17 then, sure all you need is a D7100 or a D610. However the D800 is aimed primarily at landscape shooters and commercial shooters that produce large scale product. Nikon has a tool for you, perhaps you should pick the right one? And by the way Mega Pixels are part of image quality, along with dynamic range, noise ratio, bit depth, contrast, etc…. you don’t have to just pick one.

            • Scott M.

              I saw where a guy is selling 36×110 panos
              That. Is. Big.

            • boulderghost

              Yep, and in the landscape biz, size matters. Thats the MAIN reason the big names in landscape/gallery work use medium format studio gear. It’s not because a Hassie or Phase One have “buttery bokah” or the “look that magazines want” and it certainly isn’t their cough… cough…”affordability”. It’s because they can produce files big enough to print large (32×48+) prints that sell for more $$. Then came along the 36mp d800 and turned the industy on its head. Don’t believe me? Look at the top shots on 500px and tell me how many come from D800 vs D700 or even 5d3’s? There is a reason and its not sponsorship, its MP size. The D800 has been a Godsend to the photogs it was made for and has rescued Nikon from the Canon 5d2. Learn to use its strengths. Downsample or print BIG. Im so sick of portrait studio’s, senior portrait, wedding photogs bashing the D800 and bitchin about their slooooow imacs and cramped hard drives! Buck up! Buy a decent work station and start selling large prints to your client as a revenue stream or buy a D610 and shut up.

            • Scott M.

              I shoot whales and print 24×36″ Love my D800

            • Peter

              Believe it or not, there is a world outside of landscape, portrait and wedding photography. As soon as you need to shoot in really low light for example, the high resolution of the D800 actually works against you instead of giving you higher quality. And there other scenarios I’m sure. The D610 is very limited (AF, flash sync, ergonomics), and the D4 also has its weaknesses compared to even a much lower-priced 5D III for example (video, resolution, shutter sound, bulkiness and so on).

              And why on earth are you taking people criticizing Nikon so personally? A lot of people are understandably disappointed that the company in whose system they invested now does not offer them a viable upgrade path in favor of intentionally crippled cameras like the D600/D610/Df. A lot of people would have preferred the top line (D4) to get the ultra-high resolution instead, and a lot of people disagree. That has nothing to do with you, nobody thinks you are a bad person for buying a D800 or wanting higher resolution. Whether that resolution makes sense or not for the majority of D800 users or even the D300(s)/D700 users looking for an upgrade is a different question, but none of that is a personal attack on you. Different people have different needs. Nikon produces the D800, which fits yours. You already won.

            • boulderghost

              Peter, I don’t care to defend Nikon, I just see your argument as a solution in search of a problem. Many people see the that what has the “Where’s the new D700 with all the best features of a D4 and a D800 for half the price” as a whiny annoyance who don’t “get” the market or the increasingly specific needs of profession’s sub catagories. I understand that there is more to photography than landscape, portrait, weddings. But do you understand what is needed to be relevant in those discplines? And please explain to me how the D800’s mp work against you in low light??? That is wrong and even less true when you downsample. I have had a D700 and a D800 and the D800 kicks ass in ISO performance. Need more? get a D4 or D4s. You can’t have it all for less $$$, By both a D4 and a D800. The D610 is a superior image quality all arounder than the D700. This is all trivial except for the fact that I would like Nikon to further develop their landscape/studio slr, the D800 to provide more of what it is good at: High resolution, High Dynamic Range, in a flexible, durable platform. If you need better speed and low light performance they have a camera for you too: D4/D4s. Don’t have the $$$ for either? Welcome to the real world, the D610 is your compromise until you decide what kind of professional photographer you want to be. So see, we can all win!

            • Eric Duminil

              The problem is that if you want a Nikon pro body with less than 36MP, you need to pay $6000.

            • Guest

              Bingo, That is it right there. $$$$$ or bugger off is the idea…

            • yrsued

              OK, Lets talLK Large Prints!!

              One of my D2X Images was blown up to…

              16×24…..FEET!!!

              It looked Glorious!!

              Why??

              It was printed by a Professional Printer and..

              It was 30 feet up in the air and the only way you view an image like that is from 50 feet away!!

              You don’t view an image 16×24 Foot Image at 300% on a Computer Screen with your nose pressed against the Screen!

              If your Image is good to begin with, you can print it pretty much any size you want, viewing distance is it.

              FWIW, I’ve had countless D3 Images blown into 10×10 Foot Booth Displays printed on Dye Sub Stretch Fabric and other media for booth Displays.

              One thing is reading theory, another thing is seeing how your work gets printed very large and how it actually displays.

            • Eric Duminil

              Thank you.

            • Boulderghost

              My clients like detail and scale. They hang it in their living room and light the prints for display, so yes they expect a high level of detail at large scale. It’s this quality that defines a certain level of work as a baseline. Yes you can print a banner from an iphone file. That is not the current market for large prints in high end landscape galleries. Ever wonder why Mangelson or Peter Lik use a Linhof 617 with HUGE files and print HUGE prints that have detail? The sell for HUGE sums of cash. They know a little something about the biz and are successful in the industry for a reason. Just sayin.

            • yrsued

              That is what makes us different.

              In the 80’s we shot everything on 4×5 and 8×10 film…

              In 2000 when I was a Staff at the Cabelas Studio in Sidney, NE, we shot Covers in 4×5 Ektachrome, The Megavision Cameras the Studio had weren’t enough.

              You shoot for Wall Prints, good!

              I work for Magazines and Catalogs, those don’t go more than 8.5×11

              The Japanese Magazine I shoot for does everything at 350 DPI, they do a Double Truck, Covers and Full Pages, and lots of 1/8th Page shots. I’m good for the Moment

              Once in a Blue Moon, I sell stock for Trade Show booths, they print those at 150 DPI and like I said, those are viewed from quite a bit of distance, not at someones living room.

              At this time, for my uses, the D800 does what I need and then some.

            • boulderghost

              I understand and for your business you are squared away. For me the march of technology is welcome and rewarding in that my business can leverage it and I can grow in my art and my pocketbook. Good for both of us!

            • TheFacts

              Actually, at native resolution (your super large prints) you are getting worse output from the D800 than you could get from ~dozen other bodies – you are getting more mp, but at lower IQ.. Heck, many of the current DX bodies Nikon has on the market perform better at native resolution than the D800 does at its native resolution (or downsampled to those resolutions) beyond ~400 ISO… Against other FX bodies (at their respective resolutions) the D800 is Nikon’s worst performing body compared to current/recent bodies like the D4, D4s, D600, D610, D3s, D700. So if you are actually seeking/using the higher mp of the D800 you are also getting the worst IQ performance of Nikon’s FX bodies.
              Look it up, go to DxO, select any recent FX body, select select the measurements tab, select Screen results (full pixel) and see for yourself. As a guideline for those considering, you do not get the D800’s overrated DxO performance unless you downsample near the arbitrary ~8mp image sample that DxO measures at (which would not produce super large prints).
              And while on the subject of IQ… it is understood that more mp allow for larger prints before any need to upscale, but in the scope of photographic image reproduction itself (dr, color, tone, contrast…) megapixels have nothing to do with IQ. You can resolve more detail than is visible by the human eye with even a 6mp sensor.

            • boulderghost

              Well, hmmmm. Not sure I agree with most of this. I have used the D3s and the D700. The ISO on the D800 is better than the D700 and the DR on the D800 is better than both. DXO may or may not be overated or arbitrary…I’ll use my experience to judge for myself. I still know that the noise and MP of the D800 have given me cleaner files at higher ISO’s and the prints that I am getting from those files are larger and “sharper” at a larger print sizes. If you think you can get superior prints from a D700, D4s or whatever, by all means knock yourself out. I’ll keep using my D800 and gladly buy a higher resolution model if/when its released. My suggestion for Nikon users is to encourage higher specs from Nikon instead of bashing what you don’t “need” or can’t afford. I am glad I sold my D700. I am happy with the D800 and I can’t wait to see the next version! :) YMMV

            • Name

              Your method of “comparison” is essentially meaningless, since it’s the equivalent of comparing a print of 8″ x 10″ to a 13″ x 19″ print. An upsize of the smaller pixel count camera to match the bigger format camera’s “native” pixel dimensions would yield a result similar to DxO’s 8MP “standardization.” The lesser pixel count camera would not have better noise, AND it would show less detail. Comparing small prints to big prints tells you NOTHING, as does comparing “100% crops” of pictures taken with cameras of different pixel counts.

            • Richard Hart

              gigapixel images are good fun! although there isn’t much of a business model for it…

              http://www.itsrich.info/360vr/san-francisco-gigapixel-panorama/

      • Steven Solidarios

        Buying/Renting whatever Zeiss makes to accommodate the detail increase.

      • Anto de Chav

        Print big!!the real problem is getting glass that could resolve this kind of resolution,Zeiss otus can do it,but there aren’t many other lenses that can!

        • Scott M.

          Lots of them can. Too many to list…

      • Mjf

        Just got to love these comments or missing the point , all we are going to get here is an improved processing pipeline and in truth that’s all you need.

        Learn to improve your photography before thinking I need a new toy.

      • Steve Griffin

        What I do to my pixels is between me and the pixels ;)

    • No.

    • jvossphoto

      Like administration said, it will have the same sensor.

    • Joseph Li

      would all the pro lenses, which were produced at the time of 12mp bodies, be outresolved by a 50+ MP body? nikon’s lagging behind in lenses not to mention upgrading all the pro lenses…

  • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

    I would upgrade if it had some kind of S Raw and faster FPS for when I shoot sports.

    • Eric Duminil

      That.

    • Sports

      Two extremely desirable features, but the S Raw is just firmware, which Nikon should supply to D800 owners for free.
      (But they won’t, of course … because they’re Nikon.)

      • W

        Unfortunately, D800’s older processor doesn’t have the capability to down-sample 36MP to a manageable size. With the new Expeed 4, the processor has become strong enough to give us that ability and that is one of the features we will see on D800s.

        It’s easier to say it’s just firmware when we cannot fully understand what is limiting Nikon.

        • Sports

          You could be right, but Canon’s been able to do this for years, so it doesn’t necessarily require 2014 tech.

          • Mike

            Canon has never had 36 mp for its processor to contend with.

            • Duff

              2008 – Canon 5D Mk2 – 21MP + SRAW (5 or 10MP)
              2013 – Nikon D610 – 24MP – no SRAW

              The difference is only 3 MP but 5 years. Go figure.

          • W

            There are two issues there. Nikon relies on Fuiji to build their imaging processors so if Fuji lags behind than so does Nikon.

            Secondly, Canon has the ability to put together multiple of their imaging processors to create sort of like a multi-processor system which apparently Fuji’s processor lacked. So you might notice that 1Dx has dual DIGIC5 compared to Nikon’s Expeed.

            • Thom Hogan

              Fujitsu, not Fujifilm.

              As I’ve reported, the processor used in the latest Fujitsu chips has changed.

      • Stark-Arts

        someone please explain to me what an SRAW is – I’ve asked Canon shooters and canon employees with no clear answer and I’ll ask you all. You keep asking for it but the fact is that it is NOT raw at all. It’s a type of compressed file where the computer is deciding what is the most important part of the image. The funny thing is that it’s nikon shooters always whining about it but most Canon shooters that have it don’t use it. they WANT the resolution that the camera comes with….

    • Eric Calabros

      If its 8 fps with bigger buffer, why you need S Raw? Dont say “storage” for gods sake

      • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

        Processing, plus, I prefer more buffer over more pixels. But storage is not insignificant. I’ll shoot 3000 photos in a weekend of motocross.

        • Eric Calabros

          Why not shooting full resolution and batch downscaling? It gives you less noise and more accute edges. a core i7 laptop can do it in few minutes. Many people are already editing 4k in their Macbook. Why a pro who shoots 12k photos a month, hasnt invested enough on his computer?
          I personally like a D800s with D4s sensor, but if you gonna have 36mp, dont throw half of that away…maybe two years later you want to crop them in another way :-)

          • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

            Eric, that’s a pretty good idea. Can you do that in Lightroom? I’m ok with DNG output.

            • Eric Calabros

              There are many batch resizer softwares out there but those of them support NEF, may have issues in raw converting, I havnt tested them. Fortunately you can do it in lightroom, in Export window you can select DNG, uncheck “use lossy compression” and set the desired resolution in mega pixels.
              I read few blogs of some wedding photogs who use script or action in photoshop to perform that

            • Jon Ingram

              Yes, I go through and flag the few photos that are really epic out of a whole batch that I want to keep big, then I select all the rest for batch down-sizing in DNG.

            • Eric Calabros

              unfortunately resizing is limited to new lossy DNG, but unless in case of pushing too hard in highlight/shadow recovering, you dont see any difference to lossless

            • Eric Duminil

              Too bad the exported DNG really isnt RAW anymore.
              Also, you still need twice as many cards, and a lot of processing time. Just using sRAW would be much more convenient.

            • Eric Calabros

              I dont think they do downscaling in sRaw mode very well anyway, cause its CPU intensive, especially in burst mode, or at least not as good as how pc softwares do it. here is D7100 sample image at ISO 6400. NR is off. left is lossy and resized to 10 mega pixel. only 7.2MB file size. right is lossless at original size, 32MB file!
              both at %100 crop.

        • MJF

          Then why even look at a D800

          • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

            Because I don’t shoot that much sports.

      • Eric Duminil

        storage.
        Also processing, and for many photogs, no real advantage over 16-24MP but only downsides.

    • Josh Norem

      You can also change RAW settings to 12-bit or 14-bit, compressed or uncompressed.

    • Aldo

      An S raw would put it at 5 fps as it is (not counting the expeed 4)… whalaah! d700 replacement everyone has been crying for.

      • boulderghost

        LOL. You are killing me. :) Problem is, as Nikon develops specific camera lines that raise the bar, every “generalist” photog who wants a D700s then wants the latest performance at a low ball price, all in one body…. I just hope that Nikon continues to bring out high speed models with 1 milion ISO and/or D800x’s with 50mp until the rest of the lost souls switch to 4/3’s and get day jobs.

    • jr456

      This would make me buy a D800s…no questions asked. I could have the Megapixels when I want and the speed when I want.

    • Guest

      ” faster FPS for when I shoot sports.” Lol Good luck on THAT one, although I am sure many of us out here agree with you. Seems the Nikon attitude is, if you want fast fps in a pro body, $$$$$$$ or get lost. Canon is actually looking very good right now and for amateurs, Pentax K-3. OR we can line up in the LONG queue to buy a used D3 or D700, which interestingly, are holding their prices very well……interesting that.

  • http://z7photo.com/ Csaba

    The Nikon d800 is one of the few cameras on the market (from any manufacturer) that actually doesn’t need an update. The only current camera capable of similar IQ is the A7r from SONY, but it’s not even close in feature parity (AF-C performance, fps, CLS, etc.).

    In the meantime, I’m going to replace my backup d7000 with a Fuji, because they got the lenses I need for an APS-C system, while Nikon has the 35mm F/1.8G DX… and that’s about it.

    I get the feeling that both Nikon and Canon are losing direction. A d800 replacement just boggles the mind. I’m good for the next 3 years with my d800. In the meantime, for a lot of d700 users the d800 wasn’t the answer – they are waiting for something else. There is no d3x replacement, and no d300s replacement either. This can’t be true.

    • Sports

      If it’ll shoot 8 fps, then, finally, there’ll be a true upgrade path for both D300 and D700 users. Maybe more expensive than what people hoped for, maybe larger files, etc., but still. It would make sense.
      But if Nikon doesn’t deliver – if it’s like 5.5 fps – then you’re right. It’ll please absolutely no one that wasn’t already pleased with the D800. It would be a complete waste of “new model resources” that could have been spent better.

      • boulderghost

        Ummm, the D800 is NOT for sports work. Nikon understands that sports shooters can afford a D4$ and they brought it out for them. Why would any sports photog complain about a body price when they have $15,000 in glass?? Landscape, commercial, product pros use the D800 and welcome the megapixels…..bring us more! Wedding photogs can use the D4, D800, D600…choose your weapon based on your budget. Who are the important photo pros that Nikon would market a 8fps, low iso 16mp body for under $2000 too???? Let me guess, college students shooting skate board/bmx/snowboard pics and trying to get their first photo credit in Transworld? Nikon doesn’t care. Want to be a pro sports photog? Step up and buy a D4 or 5D3 (budget). In 3 years, if you make it you will be spending 3x that on glass. Nikon knows what they are doing, and Moores Law doesn’t always apply to pro photo equipement so stop expecting to get what you need for 1/2 less $ every product cycle.

        • Sports

          Oh, boy, are people not allowed to take pictures without being a pro?
          You are right about Moores law, and no one expects a cheaper D300 or cheaper D700 (or cheaper D4 for that matter). Just some sensible updates every 2 or 3 years to some actual, existing products would make the enthusiasts happy. It’s not that complicated.

          • boulderghost

            So buy a D610, it’s for you. I have one and I sold my D700 to get it…it is better in every way and a replacement despite what enthusiast would wish. The image quality and ISO is a generation better.
            It’s not about being a Pro or not. Its about understand the context of the industry in which these products are used. Im happy with Nikon’s lineup. I enjoy the direction they are going for both D4 users and D800 users. If you cant afford either and need both, isn’t that your problem? I sold my D700 and bought a D610. it’s better in every way except flash sync speed and HSS triggers solve that non issue. If Nikon really thought that a (all around) 5D3 type of body was really in demand and they gave it to you, would you pay $4000 for it? Or would only Pros who saw the need have one body that did everything almost as well as a D4 and D800 pay $4000 for that kind of camera? I think that Nikon is thinking clearly and the D800 has been outselling the 5D3 from the beginning…interesting!

      • Joven

        8FPS? It could be 5.5, 6, or 6.5 FPS and it’d be an improvement over the D700’s 5FPS lol. Let me guess, “But it did 8FPS with the battery grip!” If that’s the case, then I never want to hear a D700 owner complain about the size of the D4/D4s again.

        The D800 AF module is rated at -2EV while the D700 is -1EV (which is the same as the D600).

        It sounds like people are just trying to get as close to the D4 without having to pay for it.

        • Sports

          “It sounds like people are just trying to get as close to the D4 without having to pay for it.”
          Bravo, that’s the whole point. Nikon saw this in 2007, and targeted this market in not just one, but two ways: D300 & D700 … at a decent price. And both very succesful.
          Do you really believe it’s suddenly impossible to build such a body?

          • Joven

            AND most likely cannibalized D3 sales.

            • broxibear

              Hi Jovan,
              Sorry, but this “cannibalized D3 sales” thing is a joke.
              If the profit margin in the D700 was more than the profit margin on the D3 then which one makes more money for Nikon ?
              Nikon sell very few D3, D3s, D4, D4s bodies and the profit magin is small on those compared to other bodies.
              Just because the same sensor was in the D700 didn’t mean that people who were going to buy the D3 suddenly changed their mind and got a D700. And even if they did then so what, it’s still a Nikon sale rather than a Canon, Leica or whoever.

            • Name

              I think the margin on the D3, D3s, D4 and D4s bodies is much bigger than you think, and certainly bigger than the D700. How do you imagine that a $5,000 – $6,000 body has less margin per unit that a $3,000 body?!

      • codeNsnap

        Even if it does 6fps in FF mode and 8 fps in DX mode, a lot of folks lime me who waited for D400 will jump on it since they will get a D400 and a great all round FF.

    • JohnH

      Actually I can think of a few things that it could use in an update:
      – Better sensor that doesn’t have the magenta hue in the shadows (amp glow) along the bottom of the frame at high ISOs – major pain to fix
      – Fix live view to be every line – it really does hamper critical focusing when lines are skipped
      – Replaceable focusing screens such that Katzeye can start making them for the D800s
      – Higher precision AF module so that body-caused front/back focus is reduced
      – Better manual focusing aid in the viewfinder
      – And of course further improvement in dynamic range is always welcomed

      • boul

        Yes, yes, yes, yes! Dynamic range has revolutionize the industry in the last 5 years. Smaller light’s or no lighting is now possible.

        Focus peaking would be VERY useful.

      • Xam

        ^^ What JohnH said pretty much. I don’t need higher fps but I wouldn’t say no to it either.

      • Spy Black

        Looking at your list:
        Using a new processor/firmware may address the sensor issue, assuming people have complained to Nikon about it. If no one’s complained, then there is no problem, right? I highly doubt there will be a new sensor (witness D4s), other than one without an AA filter.

        Can’t see why the live view issue can’t be addressed, assuming (again) they’ve had complaints about it. If not, it may be the same.

        What makes you think you can’t replace you focusing screen?

        Nikon doesn’t do manual anymore (witness the Df’s lack of available MF screen), but a good custom eyepiece magnifier will help you see better.

        I bet DR can be improved with a new processor and firmware.

      • http://z7photo.com/ Csaba

        I could think of several things to improve in the d800 – most of your points are valid. But there are bigger gaps in the Nikon line-up right now. If Nikon didn’t have one of the worst after-sales support of any camera company, they could deliver some of those enhancements in a firmware upgrade. I know, never going to happen. With all its warts, the d800 is still the best all-round camera on the market in my opinion.

  • Richard Grainger

    If it has the sRAW feature, then it might be the perfect wedding camera. 36MPs is overkill at the reception. Similar to killing an ant with an elephant gun. :-)

    • Peter Allinson

      Faster frame rates (8 at fx with 10 at dx), better af and better iso performance would be desirable, especially in the same body as the current d800 series.
      I agree that it should be an 800es and not a 800s. I would trade up one of my 800e bodies for that upgrade

      • rob

        8fps is getting too close to Nikon’s D4s. They are limiting FPS from a sales perspective imo, plus the fact even with a 30% increase in processing power, the D800’s usual 4fps would only go up to 5fps. Nothing ground shattering… unless they made sraw workable, then you might be able to hit something closer to 8fps.

        • codeNsnap

          Agreed. IMO it will be 6fps in FX mode and and 8fps in DX mode. That way it will not affect D4/S sales.

      • Scott M.

        I would be very happy with just 6.5fps. I think sRaw is kind of silly. 36mps is fine for me also.
        (Like your sperm whales avatar :)

    • El Aura

      Small RAW, a quarter of the resolution (4 MP) at half the file size. You’ll get better IQ using full-size 12 bit lossy compressed raws at almost the same file size. From the D4s manual:
      – 14 bit uncompressed raw: 4928 × 2768 — 33.6 MB
      – 12 bit lossless compressed raw: 4928 × 2768 — 15.4 MB
      – 12 bit compressed raw: 4928 × 2768 — 14.1 MB
      – 12 bit small uncompressed: 2464×1640 — 13.1 MB

      So, since this doesn’t really offer anything smaller in regard to file size than what is already available, this only helps with image processing CPU load but not with storage space. But maybe this is also meant for people with fear large numbers.

      And with some raw converters (which offer the function to do a straight 2×2 binning instead of a demosaic) you can have that processing speed advantage already with full-size raw files.

      • El Aura

        Sorry, the full size should have been of course: 4928 x 3280 (I had copied the size for the 16:9 aspect ratio).

  • Mansgame

    So again, just a firmware update that you gotta pay for if you already own a D800. Even Apple gives those for free and Apple don’t like free stuff.

    • Peter

      In the camera market, Fujifilm are the only ones to really do that or have done that with the X100 firmware 2.0. And I remember how big of a deal it was for Canon to bring out a fix for all the video issues on the 5D Mk II.

    • Naval Gunfire

      Still clinging to the notion that they can provide new hardware with a firmware update?

  • JimP

    A D800s makes much more sense than a D4x. I’m thinking 6 fps, 7 fps in 1.2x crop mode and 8 fps in DX with grip. Finally Nikon might sell an FX camera with a reasonable combination of resolution and performance for wildlife and outdoor sports. Obviously this camera will be an “E” so it will replace the D800E and sell for a premium over the D800 price.

    • G0nzo

      that would be cool. d800 with 6-7fps

    • boulderghost

      8fps, 36mp or more, one stop more dynamic range and features like focus peaking would make for a perfect wildlife/landscape body. If i need to shoot more then 8fps, even for birds, im buying a D4s for the high ISO long lens performance and focus tracking. But that’s a niche niche.

  • Duarte Castelo Branco

    it seems like nikon is going to separate their photographers in two different segments and opting for leaving out the “jack of all traits” photographers abit disappointed, that being said, few photographers need both, Sport prefer the d4, the others will surely go for the d800. Amateurs or semi pro are the ones that usually want a bit of everything, d610

    • Peter

      Though now that all the amateurs who used to buy pro cameras are catered to with dedicated models (like the D600 and Df), fewer people will be buying the pro models, meaning those will most likely become more and more expensive in the long run or only the top level will remain. I hope I’m wrong.

    • boulderghost

      Bingo. Nailed it.

    • Scott M.

      it’s “Jack of all trades” but I like your version too..

      • Duarte Castelo Branco

        you’re right, i apologize

  • MINE.

  • Guest

    I was only saying a couple of days ago, that Nikon should do a D800s on fb. My guess would be that they give it the expeed 4 processor, 1080p 60fps (I would like 2k but I don’t think it will happen, much more practical than 4k). Get rid of the low pass filter. Incorporate the D4s AF system. Have small raw file option. Probably go up to 5fps on the shutter, with 7 or 8 in DX mode. Still 36mp. Allow the rear LCD screen to be more colour adjustable (similar to the D4). Body will pretty much be the same, as will the 2 cards. Quite mode will be improved, as I guess that they will change the shutter mechanism, slightly more similar to the D610.

    • fgsa

      You want 2K? Because that will give you 20px more than 1980px in 1080p?
      Yes, the K is on the long side.

    • Bruce

      I think you are spot on with that analysis. I think they’ll drop the 800e in favour of an es, keeping the D800 but slightly lowering the price to sweat it a bit more. I would like to see mraw and sraw too, like Canon. I would see me buying this camera based on your spec’s

  • Kasponaut

    Admin – I believe you forgot about the Nikon D3300 ;)
    So that means 2 DSLRs announced this year so far.
    Do you have any approximate time for this new Nikon D800 version?

    I think the name will be Nikon D800s and be some sort of combined 800 and 800e version without OLPF plus the D4s enhancements.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      You are right, so I think we now have all DSLRs fro 2014.

    • http://www.davidkasman.com/ David Kasman

      Yes, it would be good to simply have one D800 series camera, one without an AA filter. Nikon was overly conscientious about potential moire problems for the average user … ironic isn’t it, given their real DSLR defects of late.

  • Michael Laing

    I was only saying a couple of days ago, that Nikon should do a D800s on fb. My guess would be that they give it the expeed 4 processor, 1080p 60fps (I would like 2k but I don’t think it will happen, much more practical than 4k). Get rid of the AA filter. Incorporate the D4s AF system. Have small raw file option. Probably go up to 5fps on the shutter, with 7 or 8 in DX mode. Still 36mp. Allow the rear LCD screen to be more colour adjustable (similar to the D4). Body will pretty much be the same, as will the 2 cards. Quite mode will be improved, as I guess that they will change the shutter mechanism, slightly more similar to the D610.

  • sperdynamite

    If they could make a D800 that can do 36/16mp modes in raw. Hells bells, perfect DSLR for wedding shooters. They’ll have finally actually replaced the D700.

    • ag

      The D700 replacement must have fewer MP, the D700 was 12MP, so itsreplacementshould be 10MP

      • boulderghost

        And 1million ISO, until you learn how to use lighting. And because “natural” light is the best light.

        • Aldo

          Oh yeah, natural light is the best. Especially when you have overhead spot lights at a church… couples love that eye shadow effect in their wedding photos. Makes them look like they didn’t sleep for 3 days wrapping up the last details of their wedding.

          • boulderghost

            “Look up please….look up more…more…..Got it” “um…can you squint less please?”

      • sperdynamite

        If that’s a joke I have to say I’m not getting it…?

  • itcrashed

    Looking forward to all the focus chart posts.

  • Lubos

    It is just sad that Nikon is not making two or three versions of D610. one in current state, one with better AF system, and then one with everything (RGB sensor from D4, 1/8000s, 1/250 flash). This line of these three cameras would be killers. :-)

  • Martin

    If the D800s had a 16 to 24 MPx sensor, it’d be the perfect successor of my D7000. But 36 MPx are too much for me, while the D600’s auto-focus is lame cause of the small area.

    • codeNsnap

      Ditto. Having given up hope on D400 and D600/D610 for its AF system, I hope this will be it. Hope the price is not more than that of D800e.

    • Scott M.

      Martin, the D7000 has exact pixel density of D800. So you are just getting a full frame version of D7000. Should be the perfect upgrade for you.

  • broxibear
    • itcrashed

      Seems like nobody in the US has received any shipping confirmation from any of the big 3.. Amazon, BH, and Adorama.

      • broxibear

        All the UK shops are still showing them as Pre Order or waiting for stock…BV Nikon are the supplier for the whole of Europe.
        Nikon always seem to have stock problems with higher end cameras…I don’t know why.

  • broxibear

    I don’t have any information about a possible D800 refresh, but let’s assume it’s true.
    This is exactly what I don’t understand about Nikon, and why so many get so annoyed with them. I’ve never heard any photographer anywhere say “You know what, I’d love Nikon to update the D800″. What I have heard and keep hearing is D700 replacement, D400, wideangle DX lenses, 24mm AF-S to update the f/2.8D, 135mm update.
    It’s as if they purposely do things to annoy the hell out of current Nikon users, keep doing it and they’ll be something else users.
    What’s next, a new 14mm AF-S f/2. that costs £2000 that no one wants but they make anyway because there was a hickery dickery noct version in 1969 that Nasa used on the fake moon landings ?

    • Imperious Images

      Def agree about the 135mm update. Nikon is way behind vs Canon in that range of current prime portrait lenses.

      • Andrei C

        Sigma is rumored to launch a 135 f2 this year … so do we really need another Nikon at a double price :D?

      • Mr. Mamiya

        Get the Sigma 150mm/2.8 OS today. Chunky but luveley. Or the Zeiss 135/2. Brilliant.

    • Sports

      + + + + + +
      So true, and well phrased.
      The big question is why ………

    • AM

      You forgot to mention that we want updates to the 18-xxx mm lenses.

      • broxibear

        Sorry…I meant to add “etc” after “135mm update”.
        I don’t think Nikon have any strategy, they’re just making it up as they go along.
        I’m not talking about what people “want” as far as products go, but what the Nikon system needs so that it works for the photographer.
        Anyway…I’m bored…I’m going to make some scrambled eggs, coffee and watch the latest episode of NCIS…why did Ziva leave, she was cute, lol ?

        http://ncis.fantasy-web.net/gal/6/orig_22.jpg

    • Aldo

      You are right… but they may want to kill two birds with one stone… with greater fps and S (small) and M (medium) raw file sizes you will have both the d300s replacement and the d700.

      • silmasan

        Or it’ll just be 9mp s-raw at 5.5fps…

    • Photo-Jack

      You ‘re so right. Nikon really developed the art of pissing customers off.
      Not that I’d trade a D800 for any other DSLR yet. But Nikon fails customers on a regular basis:
      Be it mirrorless, be it the attempt to come up with an high end 50mm (only the price is high end on the 58/1.4 but not the sharpness!) the 28/1.8 comes with focus shift and almost everything in the tele department has horible focal length breathing, the Df is a missed chance (the idea of a old style manual was not bad but the way it’s carried out is not professional)
      The update from D4 to D4s is nothing else than an alibi to get back to MSRP – Customer wants did not play a role. Same now with the D800s. What am I to do with ISO 1 million? I never went beyond ISO 3200. And even that is worse than in a Fuji X.

      Not that I think, that there is nothing left to be improved on a D800. But Nikon wouldn’t give it to us anyway. Nikon is driven by fear to cut into sales of other own products and even cut the usability of old Nikon manual focus lenses by their fixed screens being afraid more people would switch to Zeiss lenses. And truely, the day Zeiss comes along with AF and Zomm lenses Nikon will be badly screwed as they do almost nothing in the lens department.

      • Spy Black

        “…the day Zeiss comes along with AF and Zomm lenses…”
        …the Nikkors like the 800mm f/5.6 will sell like hotcakes for their bargain prices…

    • Spy Black

      They’re merely recycling what’s in their parts bin with a few new bells and whistles. The production pipeline is already in place, all you have to do is add a few things, give an alt name, and charge X more for it. Just look at the D4s, Df, D610, all of them essentially from their available parts bins, and now probably this. Easy as pie.

      • Espen4u

        Yea indeed, a minimal effort refresh. And all the good engineers at Nikon can concentrate on making more coolpixies.

  • Herman Au

    what I really need, is a refresh D700. Not a D800, not a D4s, not a Df.

    Thd D700 has the perfect ergonomics, the perfect focusing system, and the perfect blend of features and it just needed an update with more MP, better dynamic range, better high iso performance, and video. DONE

    How hard is it really Nikon?

    I bought not one, but three D800 bodies already and after 100,000+ frames I still don’t like the grip, and I still don’t need all that 36MP and I have no way to shoot smaller in RAW (firmware update anyone??); I love the DF’s design and that sensor is amazing and it’s lighter, but the AF isn’t good enough for what I need and damn the focus points are so close to one another it’s stupid. D4/D4s are too heavy for my back to handle two bodies on me for a whole day.

    Seriously, give us a D710 PLEASE LISTEN TO US NIKON.

    • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

      So true. It just doesn’t make any business sense to allow Canon to have no competition to the 5DIII.

    • Gavin Lister

      spot on……I really wish Nikon would listen and do something about this.

    • Herman Au

      maybe if we put together a petition and make our voice heard Nikon wouldn’t be able to continue to ignore our voice. I don’t mind them expanding the product lines and splitting the D700 to D800 + D600, but why on earth would you eliminate one of the most iconic and successful Nikon DSLR line altogether? By forcing your consumers to buy either more or less, but not giving them exactly what they want?

      Nikon Rumors if you put together this petition I’ll be the first to sign it

      signed,
      Herman Au
      http://hermanau.com

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

        petitions do not work (at least in this case)

        • Aldo

          They are sure listening to those lawyers in Cali

    • Peter

      You forgot to mention the quiet shutter mode that Canon added to the 5D Mk III.

      And Hermann, the D800 is not “more” than the D700 product level, it is less in many respects. The ISO performance of a state-of-the-art D700 would outperform the D800 by miles for example. If my current main camera breaks, I’ll probably get another D700 used rather than buy a new camera from Nikon.

      • boulderghost

        So…. How much would you want to PAY for this D700 with 8fps+, better dynamic range, better ISO than a D800, and better focusing and features than a D610, with say 16mp??? $2500?(never gonna happen) $3000?(most likely) $3500? (canon 5d3)
        Just curious…

      • Mr. Mamiya

        a) The D800 already has a ‘quiet’ shutter mode.
        b) The D800 already has ‘state of the art’ ISO, similar to a D4 (when sampled down to 16 MP).
        c) The only thing that the D800 has ‘less’ is 4 vs. 5 fps.

        • umeshrw

          That quiet shutter is a joke. Rest everything I agree. Love mine for that

    • saywhatuwill

      Sorry, hate to say this but the Df was the new D700. It’ll never be a baby flagship camera like the D3 again, so the Df is what we get.

    • Mr. Mamiya

      “… it just needed an update with more MP, better dynamic range, better high iso performance, and video.”

      >>> D800???

      Ah, I see, it’s the grip… ;)

  • d800e_shooter

    I suspect for FPS, 5 (FX) / 6 (1.2x) / 7 (DX-crop) is probably all that Nikon would want to give us.

    The new D4 AF, Expeed 4, 1080/60p video, and RAW-S would be a given. and probably that’s it.

    I hope Nikon would have the gut to make a 7fps 24MP D800s and 36MP D800Es….but they probably won’t.

  • Rick

    It would also be very nice if Nikon introduced raw or pro res capabilities into its video on a successor to the D800. I realize I may be in a minority but there must be a lot of other Nikon users who are into both video and stills. I imagine there are a lot of technical issues with that, or maybe they just don’t see the market potential.

  • decisivemoment

    This actually makes a lot more sense to me than a D4x. Use Expeed 4, get the capture rate up to six frames a second, maybe even eight with a booster grip that would take the EN-EL18 battery (so that the D4 folks whose use both platforms stop grousing about incompatibility), nine megapixel small-raw to complement the 36MP full frame, some build quality improvements, maybe some proper handling of custom shooting banks (dare I ask), tweak the sensor and fix the amp glow, improve the video support, but otherwise don’t mess too much with a winning formula.

    • Imperious Images

      There not going to change the battery for the vertical grip to be different from the standard battery

      • Josh

        The D800 Battery grip can already take an EN-EL18 battery. It (or AAs) allows for 6 fps in DX mode.

        • Imperious Images

          I didn’t know that. Thanks for the info.

          • Josh

            You’re welcome. You do have to use the BL-5 Battery Chamber Cover which is sold separately though. But I guess if you’re spending over $200 a for a battery an extra $35 or so for the cover isn’t that big of a deal.

  • Mjfphotographer

    Here’s a thought instead of thinking the more pixels the better, may be we should be asking for a 16bit image pipeline for better IQ

  • SteveHood

    Higher frame rate would be nice but a quieter shutter should be the top priority.

    • Scott M.

      I have used it in a quiet room during a speech. You are supposed to click shutter, hold it and then let it go-so two sounds with space between them. It works but could be better.

  • nek4life

    I know this is just a rumor, but where would this camera fall in the nikon upgrade schedule. D800 with higher FPS is the camera I’ve been looking for.

  • d800e_shooter

    D4 was announced Jan 2012 -> D4S announced Feb 2014.

    so

    D800 was announced Feb 2012 -> D4S announced March/April 2014 ??

    • http://ztj.io/ Zachery Jensen

      Try again…

      • Scott M.

        That looks pretty acurate…?

        • http://ztj.io/ Zachery Jensen

          Pretty sure the D4S will not be announced again.

          • Scott M.

            Not the issue
            D800 was announced one month later than D4.
            Ipso facto, D800ES is one month later than D4S

  • Mike

    What about D400?

    • Scott M.

      Oh,
      That doesn’t exist.

    • codeNsnap

      My gut feeling is that those looking for D400 would have to get D800s and use it in DX mode to get the fps.

  • Zhu

    What about the D2300 then? Do you still believe it will be announced? Or it won’t be a DSLR?

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      The D800 refresh may happen next year.

      • SteveHood

        By then they will need something more than just a minor refresh.

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

          It could also be for Photokina in September, I just don’t know.

      • Scott M.

        Next year? Why you get us all excited? How about next month?

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

          I have no info on the announcement time frame – the way Nikon is behaving lately, you never know.

  • Hyperphokal

    No one have said any word about a possible M-Raw, for me it would be great to have s-raw and m-raw in a d800 like sensor.

    In a possible 54mp sensor, we can get L-raw of 54mpx, M-RAW of 27mpix and S-RAW of 13mpx, it would be perfect.

  • D700guy

    This is a camera I definitely will not need

  • stormwatch

    But what can we actually expect this time? The D4s was a huge dissapointment, it’s an old D4 with souped up firmware with no 4k video and no 14-15fps…man…it’s the TOP OF THE LINE Nikon and it should be the top of the line…so what will the D800s look alike? 36mpix with 4.5 fps and 1080 50/60p and that’s for 500 Euro more than D800….it’s ridiculous.

    • G0nzo

      you know the best thing you can do is: invent/build a time machine, travel 4-5 years to the future, come back, then show us your new camera! stop wining and stop talking ridiculous things…nikon should have put in. I don’t even want think about those grumbler, if nikon managed to put 4k into to d4s but the result wouldn’t be as expected…check the CANON 1D-X and 1D-C , wait i will post you the link.

      http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/827036-REG/Canon_5253B002_EOS_1D_X_EOS_Digital.html

      http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/855962-REG/Canon_EOS_1D_C_EOS_1D_C_4K_Cinema.html
      Question: “where is Spot!”

      Imho, there’s no need for nikon to shove 4k in d4s arse for nothing!

      • stormwatch

        Nikon surely needs the time machine…when top of the line camera in 2014 still don’t have something like WI-FI, GPS, stereo mic and a touch screen it shows complete lack of understanding the market…take a look at the Df – being the prime example of the ultimate fail…everyone knew it would fail, it is fail when you use it because of the badly positioned knobs, no one serious about photography would say that using Df is a joy…so, for the rest of the world it is fail, but only on this site it’s glorified to the most high and it’s more than ridiculous. Look what the Panasonic is doing, soon we will have 4k video, lots of FPS and everything else whan an 2014 camera is supposed to be – and for the price of ~2k $.

        • G0nzo

          either you are comparing a comsumer camcorder that supports 4k or the pro filming camera that can natively 4k, in one case: the result are blah. in the other case: as i can say over and over again, you are comparing two types of cameras…the panasonic pro one is a film camera. like the Canon 1d-c (!!!!), the Nikon D4s in the other hand is still, a still camera that gives you the option to film…you can’t expect a very good (that’s was people want, very good everything else ends in a shitstorm) result below USD 10.000!!!! ( it’s just bullshit.) not yet. maybe in furture ,4-5years. Be realistic!!

        • If they start adding touch screens, i’ll explode.

  • dclivejazz

    Ha, of course. Everyone can thank me. I very recently bought a D800e.

    • Rob

      I just bought one yesterday too :(

      DANG IT!!

      • saywhatuwill

        We have no idea when or if it’ll even be released so you did well by buying one. Plus when/if a new one comes out it’ll be hard to find in the first few months…then the bugs and complaints…by the time they iron all that out it’ll be 1 year later.

    • Radek

      Should have bought D300s instead :-) R>

    • Pat Mann

      I did as well, and testing indicates it’s going to do a terrific job of what I bought it for. I’m very pleased with it and have no complaints if it’s going for an upgrade – it’s a fantastic camera and an upgrade won’t really make a difference for what I’m using it for. But I still need a D300s replacement. D800 is OK as a D300 backup, the view for DX is OK but isn’t great (haven’t tried the magnifier yet) and i t ‘ s v e r y s l o w.

      My thanks to Nikon at least for bringing out the D800e.

  • MB

    Would be nice if Nikon backports some of the firmware enhancements and fix outstanding issues on D800 (card I/O hangups, unusable live view, bring back focus trap functionality …)

  • Neopulse

    If there is a refresh, chances are it will be for certain an AA-less camera stand-alone 5 fps and 6 with grip, better AF tracking (like with the D4s), increased battery life and better noise reduction (which is already damn good as it is imho).

    Do you think they’ll add something extra? Maybe not Wi-Fi, but integrated GPS? IN the end this is pure speculation if there is ever a refresh.

  • Ernesto Quintero

    Cool, old version will get a reduced price to clean the shelfs before the new models release: Time to buy and save some $. Sorry Df, I found some one else.

  • Matthew

    No thanks! I no longer want bulky or boring DSLR. Why don’t refresh DF instead?

    • AM

      The last time I checked, the Df was a DSLR.
      Also, are you aware that the differences in weight and dimensions between a Df and a D610 are negligible?

      • Aldo

        last time I checked the df was bulky too

        • Michiel953

          A digital ff FM2/FE2/FM3a it certainly isn’t… Which was a major letdown for me and made me appreciate my D800 a lot more. The almost perfect camera!

          • Aldo

            FM2 size would have been awesome.

            • Michiel953

              And probably technically not possible…

    • Scott M.

      Df is about 3 months old so far.

    • Morris

      why not a paper film kodak ?

  • MrOzMan

    I’d like to see Nikon do 4K before Canon does. If you don’t want it, don’t use it, but they will sell more bodies and lenses if they do it.

    • Peter

      I wish they got 1080/60p right first. I’d rather have an excellent HD image (Alexa-quality S-log 10-bit ProRes, no moiree/aliasing, downsampled from higher resolution to compensate for the bayer sensor) rather than one that’s 4K in theory but every bit as shitty as the 1080 output of current DSLRs.

      • MrOzMan

        I want both. 4K with no moire, HFR, global shutter, efficient H.265 12 Bit 4:4:4, and 24/96 PCM balanced audio (all thrown in for free) :)

      • MrOzMan

        I want both. 4K with no moire, HFR, global shutter, efficient H.265 12 Bit 4:4:4, and 24/96 PCM balanced audio (all thrown in for free) :)

        • Naval Gunfire

          So you want the world but you aren’t prepared to pay for it? You have to spend some serious money right now to get a camera capable of delivering those specs. I can’t see those kind of specs being available for under $3k any time soon.

          • MrOzMan

            Yep, pretty much! :) Ok I went a bit overboard with the specs, but 4K should be free. Especially when there’s talk of phones including 4K. I don’t think Sony plans to sell the Xperia for more than $3,000. I suspect about $300 or less. The balanced audio can be an accessory you have to buy, as with Sony’s RX10 and AX100 cameras.

    • John

      You do know Canon has already done 4k?

      • Morris

        what is that turkish flag ?

      • MrOzMan

        Yeah I realized that thanks, I could have been clearer. I am talking about thrown in for free in the 5D/6D/7D series, rather than a dedicated cinematography series cam. Anyway, if it’s more than $3,000, I will continue to pretend it doesn’t really exist.

      • G0nzo

        obviously nobody knows this cam.

  • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

    For the love of Bob and all that’s unholy, PLEASE Nikon, get rid of the freakin flash. Canon gots it right. You got it right on the F100 and F6. Just gimme a proper weather sealed, flashless camera without integrated grip and I can die happy.

    • Aldo

      Nuuuu…. I like my flash.

      • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

        After my D700 getting wet and frying (right after the friggin tsunami) I don’t.

        • Aldo

          sorry to hear that brother.

          • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

            Meh, live and learn. I learned that I don’t want a built in flash.

            And I learned that you should also not break a Nikon body, because it’ll take them a full year to fix it right. Tsunami aside, I sent it back at least eight times, and was sent 3 different refurbs before I got a working one. And I was being picky–these were major malfunctions.

    • Peter

      I find it quite useful as a last-resort way to trigger slave flashes in case radio triggers break and the backup sync cable is too short for the problem at hand.

      • Aldo

        I use it as a fill sometimes too… works well.

        • JXVo

          I use my D800 a lot for wildlife. The built in flash is obviously too weak to illuminate scenes more than a few metres away but it works a treat for putting a catchlight in the subject’s eyes.

          • Scott M.

            Great idea!

            • Aldo

              indeed

      • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

        Yeah, at 1fps only, and you can’t point it. Next to useless. If I wanna use light triggered slaves, I just put a flash in the hot-shoe and go. If you want built in flash, there’s lots of options available. If you don’t, there’s not. It’s either the DF…or that’s it. If you want a small, weather sealed FX body, you don’t have much choice in Nikon land.

        Except maybe gaffers tape. Which I’d say is sub-optimal.

    • boulderghost

      Yep, the little built in can save your bacon when your triggers fail and your backups fail and you have to trigger optically….it happens….don’t ask.

    • Michiel953

      A bit of black (or any other colour; pink springs to mind) duct tape will solve your problem in the wink of an eye.

      • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

        Yes, duct tape is the ideal solution for a $3000+ piece of gear. (yes, of course I already do this–and it’s Gorilla or gaffers, not duct, which will leave a nasty residue)

        • Michiel953

          Ok, gaffer tape it is!

  • guest

    What happened to the rumored worlds smallest DSLR NIKON D2300? Nikon dropped the idea?

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      No, it still just a rumor. I will do another rumors recap this week and will list all expected cameras.

      • Scott M.

        Shake the D800ES tree

  • SkyMeow

    NOOOO I want my D4X!!!!!

  • saywhatuwill

    If Nikon wanted to really be put the photo industry on their ear they could make the new D800 (or whatever new camera may come out) with 16-bit color instead of 14. Not much change but enough to make a difference. It will, however, make the difference between medium format and full-frame DSLR (35mm size) null and void other than sensor size.

    • boulderghost

      More dynamic range….yesssssssss.

      • Mr. Mamiya

        16 vs. 14 bit has nothing to do with dynamic range, but with color depth! You could display 281.474.976.710.656 vs. 4.398.045.511.104 different colors. I don’t know how 16 bit would improve much in everyday imaging.

    • Eric Calabros

      You dont see the comments here? People are already complaining about 14 bit file size!

      • Scott M.

        They have old computers

        • Michiel953

          They don’t have a clue how cheap adding RAM and hard drive storage is. Anyway, are these people also looking at their great D800 images on their old computers? Talking about waste…

          • Mr. Mamiya

            Good luck with adding “cheap RAM and hard drive storage” to a recent Macbook Pro, to name an example.

            • Michiel953

              Maybe that’s why I still have my almost four year old Thinkpad W510, excellent screen and graphics processor (Nvidia FX880), calibrated, RAM up to 12, 1Tb external hard drive.
              Still gets quite hot, but it gets the job done.

              Using my D800 in machinegun style last Sunday, “shooting” our nine month old twins, I ended up with 225 RAW’s. Took a while to download, but processing them is relatively easy. I’m not a pro, would probably shoot Jpegs then.

      • saywhatuwill

        Wimps. They need to beef up their computers to something faster than a Pentium 4 in their PC and PowerPC’s in their Macs. Hee-hee. Just kidding. It seems bad, but there are hundreds if not thousands of people using high megapixel medium format backs and you don’t hear any of them complaining.

  • Jeff Hunter

    4K video please. I just bought a Sony 4K TV. The D800 full-size jpegs look spectacular on a 4K screen. I don’t have a PC with a 2160 graphics card yet so I have to copy the jpegs to a flash drive and plug directly into the TV for 4K results.

    • Aldo

      you realize 4k screens have less than half the resolution of the d800 full size files?

      • Jeff Hunter

        Of course. I’m looking forward to an 8K screen some day. Even an 8K screen with 4320 pixels of vertical height won’t have quite as many pixels as the full-size D800 image at 4912 pixels of vertical height. The frustrating thing about the wonderfully detailed images a D800 produces at a low ISO is that there are no display devices to show the image in all its glory. The 4K screen has about four times the pixels of a 1080 screen. The difference of viewing a D800 image on a 4K screen vs. a 1080 screen is very noticeable. But to enjoy the full benefit you must sit about five feet in front of the 65″ screen.

        • Aldo

          very true… a lot of people don’t realize that to really perceive ultra hd … screen needs to be at least 50 inches or larger.

          • Jeff Hunter

            The bigger the better! Sony makes an 84″ version that sells for $25,000. Needless to say that’s out of my price range. If 4K catches on, prices will come down of course. That’s a big if though. Outside of digital photographers and gamers most people are satisfied with the 1080 resolution. There’s not much 4K content at the moment. But fortunately, engineers have discovered a way to get all those additional gigabytes of information on a standard sized DVD by encoding a single disc with multiple layers that playback seamlessly in a 4K DVD player. Interestingly, engineers developed the 4K screen before they figured out how to fit a 4K movie onto a standard DVD disc. And yes, a movie shot on 35mm film will look sharper when reproduced as 4K vs. today’s Blu-ray.

            • Scott M.

              Learned something, thanks

        • http://ztj.io/ Zachery Jensen

          Print…

    • Morris

      you bought a 4k tv, 99.9% of the world population wont get one within 10 years
      if you shoot for yourself you are good to go :P

      • Jeff Hunter

        Yes, I know. But I just had to see my D800 photos on the best display available. An 8K would be even better!

  • photoguy

    I love my D800. The only thing it lacks is speed. Put in the newer processor and it will speed up writing to card and improve the ISO even more. That’s it! Nikon don’t screw with perfection!!

    • JXVo

      Agree. But I have a slightly longer list of mods. Higher fps and a lighter mirror that does not shake the camera so much would seriously extend the versatility of the D800. Some extra settings banks would help too. Longer battery life would be a nice bonus.

  • Sashimi

    Nikon, juste make a f*cking 200Mpxl camera so I can shoot any kind of scenery, including wildlife from 2km away, at 14mm, and still crop the hell out of it and make it to billboard size at retina resolution.

    • Jeff Hunter

      You would probably have to mount a camera with those specs on the bed of a pickup truck.

      • Michiel953

        So?

  • Scott M.

    This is great news! Hope it is true. Rather have D800 with higher fps than spend $6500 on D4s.

    • Degsy

      Which is why it wont happen

  • LetThereBeLight

    D800 doesn’t need an update… The D700 does: What happened to a D4 sensor in a D800 body? The D610 is not a update to the D700 either. I would love a D800 body, 51pt AF, and about 16-18mp.

  • Michal Zdunek

    got the D800E jsut a month ago… don’t care about a upgrade… (yet) anyhow, updates are always good, let’s hope it’s a evolution and not a revolution ! let’s keep the revolution for the D5 or something

  • Jeff Curtner

    I wonder if the upgrade/replacement will use a full frame version of the 24mp DX sensor. By just simple scaling the 24mp DX sensor to 135mm full frame we will have a 54mp sensor.

    • Michiel953

      It’s not a replacement, it’s not an upgrade, it will be an update. Same sensor, some improvements. How difficult a concept is that to grasp?

  • Parampreet Dhatt

    Instead of a higher megapixel model, Nikon should make a D800S, with these specs – 16 MP D4/D4S sensor, ISO 50-204800, 8 fps.
    A true D700 replacement !

    • Jeff Hunter

      It wouldn’t be a D800 then.

    • Michiel953

      Some people never stop, whatever happens in the real world.

      You’re on the D400 pre-order list as well of course.

  • TheLoneWolf

    HALLELUJAH!!!!

    • Morris

      ahah :D

    • Scott M.

      Can I get an amen?

  • Back to top