< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Rumors: Nikon D800s camera preliminary specifications

Nikon_D800_camera_drawing
Here is the first set of rumored specifications for the Nikon D800s DSLR camera:

  • No low pass (AA) filter (just like the D800E)
  • Improved software to suppress moiré
  • Expeed 4 imaging processor
  • sRAW
  • Same AF improvements like in the D4s
  • Improved low light capabilities
  • 5 fps (6fps with the MB-D12)
  • Price between D800 and D800E - probably around $3000
  • No firm announcement date yet - my guess is Photokina (September 2014) or CES (January 2015)

It is still too early to mark those rumored D800s specifications with anything above 50% probability. Hopefully I will receive some additional information in the upcoming weeks.

This entry was posted in Nikon D810. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • n11

    I wonder if they’re capable of improving the DR anymore. Win with sRAW though! Too bad it probably won’t be able to do 8fps in sRAW though.

    • Zograf

      Even 5fps is great if it can maintain them in 3D tracking with focus priority.

      • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

        I don’t think there can be any guarantees with focus priority.

        • Scott M.

          I wasn’t aware that anything over 1 fps or less, was possible with focus priority AF. I think you were missing a smiley face at the end there.

    • AM I Am

      Photography theorems:
      - If your photography sucks at 4fps, your photography will suck twice at 8fps.
      - If your photography is great at 1fps, your photography won’t get any better at 8fps.

      • Jon Ingram

        Camera’s don’t make the photographer…, but photographers love their cameras. Nothing wrong with that. I’ll take any updates they will give me.

        • yrsued

          Same here, I will take the Upgrades and send my D800 Bodies for Overhaul and throw them in the Location Kit.

          • longzoom

            Updates and upgrades aren’t synonymous… Overhauling of D800 will not pay, I do afraid…

        • searching

          Any GAIN in ISO?

          • MyrddinWilt

            @joningram:disqus I doubt that we will see an ISO boost. We did not with the D300/D300s.

            The ISO boost of the D3/D3s and D4/D4s came after the release of a lower end body sharing the same sensor. So they are almost certainly doing what Intel do with their CPUs: make all the CPUs in the exact same way then test them. The ones that perform best get the highest speed rating and sell for the most.

            On the FPS thing, I have no idea why people make such a fuss. The D800 and D4s are professional cameras. Both are aimed at photojournalists. If that is your trade and you think your editor cares how many shots you take then you are going to starve.

            Thing is that professional photography isn’t nearly as glamorous as made out here. If you drive a taxi for a living then a pro photographer is probably doing a lot better. But the shots that make the money are taking school pics and pics of sports teams and selling overpriced prints to the doting parents. 98% of customers are paying for results and not art.

            Having 8fps rather than 4fps might well be the difference between the editor buy your shot and buying the one from the schlub standing next to you. And that may be the difference between a profit and a loss. Just take a look at those photo pools at the Olympics and ask if its an easy business to make money in.

            • Shaun V

              I am confident in saying that there will definitely be gain in ISO. This is the first “s” upgrade in Nikon history with a completely new processor. If the D800s indeed has Expeed 4, we will see a gain of native ISO up to 128,000 similar to the D3300 and D5300. And I’m guessing the D800s will be a stop better than the D800 at 6400 as well.

            • henk

              WORD!

            • DoglessAtheist

              The CPU would have minimal impact on noise. It’s in the sensor design including the ADC accuracy, crosstalk, pathways, etc…

            • Jorge

              And the high ISO images coming out of a D800 will still suck.

            • Shingo

              High ISO images from the D800 have never sucked.

            • Thom Hogan

              To my knowledge, no, that’s not how it works with sensors.

            • Vin

              I agree with Thom, that is not how it works with sensors.
              that is also not the process of picking out cpu quality and speed. They get reworked, or dumped.

            • MyrddinWilt

              Processors are a little different because they have more options for dealing with defects. If a core is faulty they can program the CPU to disable it. So the 2 core CPUs used to be 4 core chips where one or two of the processors failed testing.

              That doesn’t work on sensors… They can flag hot or cold pixels but they can’t recycle failed FX sensors as DX.

              There is a manufacturing variance though.

              It is possible Nikon has cut a completely different set of masks for the D4s but that is a huge cost for a low volume sensor. And the high ISO model has only come out for the flagship models and only after a lower end body came out.

              If Nikon has some magic sensor juice they would deploy it across the line. It would be nice if the D800s had improved noise response but I suspect thats not going to happen.

            • RBR

              Noise, and IQ in General, is the result of the total image capture and processing sequence. It would not be an unexpected result if an improvement in the ASIC chip set and its processing firmware were to improve high ISO noise and IQ rather than simply increase the rate at which those images are processed to increase frame rates. I would hope that Nikon have been tearing down, analyzing and reverse engineering the Canon 1Dx to see just what was done to increase its frame rate to 14 fps with a firmware update. In any event, sRAW would be welcome.

            • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

              He’s suggesting they make D4 sensors, test them, and then put the better sensors in the D4s and the inferior sensors in the Df (although this does not make sense for the D800s unless a cheaper 36MP camera is on the way).

              Intel bins parts based on how well they work at higher clock speeds. It’s not impossible that sensor performance might vary from chip to chip in similar ways, but I suspect that the advantage is in improved post-processing (faster CPU and software improvements)

            • Vin

              I don’t believe that the D4, Df, & D4s is the exact same sensor either, after working for a fab, it can be very similar and be different, but also the smaller.

            • Vin

              Small variations in recipes

            • 103David

              Actually, nothing you just said makes sense, from the idea that they’d pointlessly spend extra time & effort excessively testing already at-spec or above sensors to the idea they’d willingly put sub-standard sensors in nearly $3K body. Duh! Read a book on marketing.

        • Richard Hart

          have to agree…
          …but actually, the dynamic range on the d800 has allowed me to do some really cool post production tricks – so in a way, it allows me to produce better images and I suppose that makes me a better photographer!

          Don’t you just hate it when people ask what camera you use… …I just say Nikon

      • ama

        Tell that to a sports or war photographer.

        • HotDuckZ

          Sport photographer will reply him as fast as Usain Bolt. War photographer will reply him rapidly like a machine gun.

        • B

          James Nachtwey did a pretty good job with that crap ass focusing 5d. He probably went back to his hotel every night and cries himself to sleep because of the lack of Fps.

        • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

          A lot of combat photographers use Leica because the damn things (a) small and (b) are carved out of metal bricks. With war the adage “f8 and be there” has never been more true.

      • EJP

        Point number two is completely nonsensical if you have ever shot any action like sports or wildlife in action, birds in flight, etc….

        • Jon McGuffin

          I think it was a more tongue in cheek comment anyway. The point is that a fps here or there improvement ought not make you a better photographer, but I think we all agree it’s helpful and a benefit.

          • nikclick

            More than frame rates , better buffer will be good.
            Nothing is wrong if one wants 5 or 8 fps as far as its useful. Not just wildlife or sport photographers or war photographers will benefit but even wedding photographers too will benefit never missing some rare candid moments.

            • RBR

              Even as an amateur I have grown weary of the crippled buffers on the D7000 and D7100. To make matters worse the write speeds from buffer to cards is shamefully slow. Nikon seem to be going out of their way to annoy customers.

        • jmb

          A D800 has never been marketed at shooting sport or wildlife. D3s or D4/D4s are better suited at this type of use.

          • Nobody Cares

            I think there are many who would like to do that without dropping 6k on a body.

          • Stephen Roberts

            The D800 can shoot whatever you want it to. I use mine for wildlife all the time. More FPS would be a benefit.

      • dslr

        Not a very smart statement…there are many aspects to photog why limit yourself with such naive statement?

        • http://www.leonsuetfeld.com Leon

          Well put, thanks.

        • silmasan

          Because… Disqus comment points do matter ;-)

          (ehh… to some anyways.)

      • Cristian

        Great!!!!

      • yrsued

        Now, those are wise words!!

        I don’t care about FPS myself, that is what the D4 is for.

        This could replace my two D800 Bodies in the Studio for Still Life work, I use Single Frame and Manual Focus with the 85MM PC-E Lens.

      • Thom Hogan

        The theorem practiced by many is actually this:

        - If you randomly get a great shot every X shots at 4 fps, you will get 2X the random great shots at 8 fps.

        • effective spend

          for those who have random $3K or 6K to spend…

          • silmasan

            There are alternatives. I love the current 12MP 8fps full frame option flooding the used market at about $1000~1200 that is the D700 + MB-D10.

            Gotta be smart though, always buy from a hobbyist who rarely get to touch his gears ;)

        • mark

          spray and pray

        • RBR

          Thom, I realize what you are saying, but frame rates and buffers matter when shooting air shows of jets moving at 500 knots even when you know the maneuvering will begin at show center, not to mention the opposing solo pass where the closing speed is in excess of 1,000 knots, or, more commonly, humming birds or some other animal flirting about.

          • Thom Hogan

            @rbr I understand what you’re saying, but you’re still gambling to get “the shot” on a direct cross. There are other techniques that can be employed that have higher success rates. This isn’t the place to try to elaborate on that, though. And, yes, these are things that I have to point out to students on safari when we’re dealing with, for instance, birds taking flight.

            Paradoxically–and this is one of the reasons why the missing D300s update is so so big a mistake–it’s not the pro that tends to max out on fps (though there are times we do), it’s the amateur. And it’s for the same reason why auto exposure and autofocus came along: if you don’t have the time to learn how to do it manually with perfect success, then you highly prefer the “help” the automated features give you. As I’ve written before, I’ve stood next to a name pro shooting a very difficult to time sport shooting on single frame, watching him nail it, while all the amateurs next to him shooting at high fps were missing the peak action every time. High fps in the numbers we’re talking about (6-12 fps) just isn’t enough to nail peak moment in most sports, except by chance.

            • Vin

              You bring up a very strong position here, know your subject, wildlife, or human, or sport, the experience can not be purchased. In the days of film you SOL if you missed the trimming or didn’t know the game, blow right threw 36exp, in 5-8 sec if you were not paying attention. Then grab the other camera or change film. So much has not changed, yet we forget this, or newer photographers have not spent enough time just watching the game or subject.

            • Thom Hogan

              Thanks. Someone gets it.

              Even on a D4, if you’re a real shutter masher you can get yourself into buffer wait situations (for raw shooters; JPEG shooters can just shoot away), which is sort of the same thing as running out of film, only you change rolls faster ;~).

              It’s not that you never use high fps. It’s like VR: situational. You use it when it’s the best possible solution to your problem. But it’s the best possible solution far less often than a lot of people think.

            • RBR

              Thom, I certainly agree that those who are experienced, most often the professional, are much better equipped to anticipate the movement or activity of the subject and time the shot. The same individuals are more often able to be better positioned because of their knowledge of the subject and experience. Yes, an experienced pro is much less dependent upon hardware as a crutch.

              I guess I will have to so some research to see about alternative techniques to time the opposing solo shot. At the closing speeds involved, the margin is quite small.

              It surely would be interesting if Nikon were to put a new management team in charge. To me at least, Nikon needs a shakeup. Thanks.

      • Ronan

        Agreed… i started in high school with a film camera with 3fps and that’s all i ever needed to shoot indoor sport and events… Din’t have any fancy autofocusmezzolatee3D, just plain manual focus and then normal AF.

        • Stephen Roberts

          So why bother upgrading ever if you could do it with manual focus, why get AF, if you could do it with film why go digital?

          • Ronan

            I don’t upgrade all the time. I’m still using a D3s (replaced a D3 that was stolen, i paid the difference with my insurance since it was a better deal that grabbing another D3) and a D7000.

            I see no point in buying every new model like a lot of photographers due. It’s a complete gimmick most of the time and when i see them posting how it’s revolutionary and how they can finally take which ever picture, is a complete joke.

            The camera does not make the photographer, at all. This is proven every time people posts amazing photo’s taken with some basic DSLR from a few years ago (and sometimes even more!).

            I went digital simply because of the workflow, same with AF. It makes life easier and i am able to get work done quicker. I still shoot film, specifically 120 depending on my need. I sure don’t need the latest digital camera to take photos (unlike some photographers apparently that need to let everyone know they are upgrading so they can finally take that indoor stadium shot or something… Heh my old D2h was already doing that… So you don’t need a D4s to do it).

            • Stephen Roberts

              So if you can do it with 4 fps why can’t you do the same with one? So you went digital because it makes life easier and you have AF because it’s easier why is it that higher frame rate isn’t the same.
              When you need that shot of the bird taking off or the player passing the goal line it’s great to have high frame rate to accomplish that. It’s no different then using AF or going from film to digital.

            • Ronan

              Please read what i wrote.

              My comment was directed to people who THINK they need 10-15 FPS to get a shot while people have been doing it for ages with just 3-4 FPS.

              They try to compensate for their lack of skills with technology, and i think that’s absurd.

            • Stephen Roberts

              First there has been high frame rate cameras for 30 years. And they have there place. I’m not sure why you have such a hard time understanding that.

            • Ronan

              Still missing the point people are making.

              Back to English 101 for you :)

            • Stephen Roberts

              Your the only one making no point. My English is fine I’m not sure what your issue is but your not making any sense.

            • mikeswitz

              Actually Stephen, your English isn’t that great. You need to understand the difference between you’re and your, their and there, and has and have. Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit either.

            • Stephen Roberts

              Wow a grammar nazi. You bring so much to this discussion everyone loves a grammar nazi. By the way what does my terrible grammar have to do with my reading comprehension?

            • Michiel953

              Dat your English may nod be so fein after alles!

            • Stephen Roberts

              My English is fine. My grammar does suck. And thank god your here to point it out. Now what does my dyslexia have to do with high frame rates and there usefulness?

            • Michiel953

              Nothing at all squire, but as this thread has derailed completely and irretrievably long ago, I don’t think I broke any rule, written or unwritten…

            • Stephen Roberts

              And it was done until you started it up again. Way to go.

            • Michiel953

              I always love it when the exchanges get personal and inevitably off-topic. It’s like a civil war unfolding in slow motion. Riveting!

            • Stephen Roberts

              So you come in and troll to keep it going? Small things amuse small minds I guess.

            • Michiel953

              Very apt, Stephen. Am I helping you getting rid of your dyslexia? Glad to be of service. And oh, small mind, but a big head…

            • Stephen Roberts

              Thanks for the help but you can’t get rid of dyslexia.

            • Michiel953

              You seem to be doing allright; I wouldn’t worry too much about it.

            • Stephen Roberts

              Your acceptance really means a lot to me. I’m not sure if I could have gone on without it.

            • Michiel953

              I know Stephen. In a dark world ruled by insecurity, every little bit of support helps.

            • Stephen Roberts

              Where do you live my world is bright and sunny. but I’m sorry to hear about your insecurity. You should get help for that.

            • Michiel953

              Fail… ;-)

            • Joven

              I’ll take grammar Nazis over D700/D400 talk.

            • mikeswitz

              By asking what reading comprehension has to do with your english skills seems to go right to the point. You can neither write nor understand the language very well, so you insult the posters to compensate. I don’t think dyslexia has anything to do with bad manners.

            • Stephen Roberts

              I asked what grammar has to do with reading comprehension. But nice try

            • mikeswitz

              If you don’t know when you are making a grammatical error, you probably don’t have very good reading comprehension either. Above is a perfect example. “Actually Stephen, your English isn’t that great.” was my lead sentence. “Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit either.” was my final sentence. The “either” refers back to the first sentence. Asking what grammer has to do with reading comprehension was completely beside the point of my first post. Hence your understanding of the English language, how should I put it….sucks.

            • Stephen Roberts

              Actually my reading comprehension is fine I do have a terrible grammar problem that i am well aware of thanks. I understand you have some problem with me and I really don’t care.
              Your the one that has totally derailed this thread for no other reason then to make yourself feel superior. I hope its going well for you.

            • mikeswitz

              As far as I can tell, you’ve never posted on NR before this particular thread. At least under the name Stephen Roberts. You may be a bit young to decide who derails threads, especially in such a condescending manor that only makes you look even more clueless.

            • Stephen Roberts

              Well I’m not sure what age has to do with it but i am old enough to say that it was you that derailed the thread. It’s really not hard to figure that out. Your the one that changed it from a discussion about the usefulness of high frame rate into an attack on me and my grammar.

            • mikeswitz

              You’re not sure what age has to do with it, not sure what grammer has to do with it, not sure what reading comprehension has to do with it. Yet your are quite sure that when Thom Hogan posts something he only wants a “win”? You have no idea what anybody is talking about, yet you have the balls to say to Thom, who has forgotten more than you will ever know, he really “needs a win”. Time to move on, sonny? Go pray and sray somewhere else!

            • Stephen Roberts

              You do like to put words in peoples mouths don’t you. You call me condescending? You really need to look at yourself.
              I know exactly what I’m talking about. Thom Hogan is just a glorified Ken Rockwell. I lost all respect for him when he decided to not recommend the D800 but still sell his book on it. And I shoot a D800 and don’t have the luxury of high frame rate but i wish I could shoot faster.Its not for spray and pray.

            • stesk

              Try to understand the technique of a D800.

              Why do you think the D4s has 16MP and not 36MP.

            • Stephen Roberts

              I own a D800 I understand the technology fine. What does the difference between 16mp and 36mp have to do with the discussion?

            • bonem

              Great story bro, very touching. Though what you’ve said has no bearing on whether someone will upgrade or not. Your post is like a bumper sticker. It will make no impact.
              I’m pretty sure I’m going to upgrade my D800 when the new one comes out. Why not? I love being on the top of the tech tree. I do think it makes me a better photog too. It makes me happy and when I’m happy I’m motivated and generally produce better work.
              Moral of my bumper sticker story, do what makes you happy!

            • Manvin

              hey ronan,

              I feel the same way as you think, people will always upgrade camera, computer, mobile phone, tv, video games system, car etc….

              Some will survive or some will put themselves into financial mess…

      • Stephen Roberts

        Sorry but that really is a dumb statement. There are a lot of times where high frame rate is a must. Not everyone that uses a high frame rate is just spray and pray

        • Spy Black

          “Not everyone that uses a high frame rate is just spray and pray”

          So, tell me how you would use it otherwise, and how blasting away at 10 fps in not spray and pray.

          • n11

            I’m not even sure how to explain. I’m not certain of your photography level.
            Are you going to take 4 photos of that bird taking off, or would you rather have a variety with 8-12fps? What about Motorcross? Are you capable of timing your shots PERFECTLY? Burst gives that flexibility for higher chances of getting the best photo.
            None of use 12 fps to take group shots of people posing.

            • Spy Black

              Fine and well, but this person is claiming that not everyone uses a high frame rate to “just spray and pray”. I would lie to know what the other uses are.

            • Stephen Roberts

              I wouldn’t call using high frame rate to capture the peak of the action spray and pray. It is a deliberate use of the function. Now maybe your perfect and know exactly when to click the shutter but most mortals don’t have that ability.
              Hi frame rate doesn’t make you a better photographer but it can help to get what you want.

            • Spy Black

              Fine and well, but you still haven’t defined how else you would use a high frame rate other than “spray and pray”.

            • Stephen Roberts

              Actually I have.
              For one I use high frame rate while bracketing for HDR. People also use it to get the peak of action.
              This is not spray and pray. If you need a definition of spray and pray I’m sure you can find it.

            • Spy Black

              “For one I use high frame rate while bracketing for HDR.”

              Good, you finally found something.

              “People also use it to get the peak of action.
              This is not spray and pray. If you need a definition of spray and pray I’m sure you can find it.”

              You just did.

            • Stephen Roberts

              No it’s not. You really have no clue. What would you do if you wanted that photo of the bald eagle taking off from its nest? Are you trying to say you can sense when this is going to happen down to the 1/10 of a second? Most people that know what there doing use the highest frame rate they have to get the peak of the action.
              This is not the same as firing off till your buffer is full and hopping you get something.
              Funny how it’s the pro cameras that have the highest frame rate but in your narrow mind you see it as a consumer thing.

            • Spy Black

              I don’t see it as a consumer thing at all. I’m just pointing out the obvious that firing away at full high speed fps is spray and pray. The buck stops there.

            • Stephen Roberts

              And you would be wrong. If you want to be dense about it that’s your choice.

            • Spy Black

              Yes, I choose to remain densely cognizant about what it is.

            • OnTheRopes

              Frame rate can be selected you know? Less than 11fps is an option and some know how to use it.

            • Spy Black

              You mean some know how to make better use of it. It’s still a gamble.

            • Thom Hogan

              Actually, I’d say that I try to time it down to the 1/1000 of a second ;~). And yes, it takes practice. Which is why many amateurs prefer high fps: doesn’t require practice and has a reasonable chance of getting a good bird position. But that’s exactly why it’s referred to as “spray and pray.” Because you’re spraying (lots of shots) and praying that you get the one good one out of the sequence.

              This isn’t to say that there are times that pros don’t use high fps. When total unpredictability is present, you don’t have much of a choice. However, if something is predictable, you’re better off learning how to time it correctly.

              And by the way, in the very example you cite, the most common thing I’ve seen from amateurs is that they get NO usable photo, or if they do, it’s the very first one. Why? Because they don’t press and hold the shutter release until they see the bird move ;~). So, yes, it’s a matter of timing whether you use high fps or not.

            • Stephen Roberts

              Ok fine your right . You seem to really need that win. Anyone who uses high frame rate is just a rank amateur and has no idea what there doing. I hope that statment makes your day.

            • reductron

              On what basis have you decreed how to capture peak of action?

            • Remedy

              On knowing well my subject. How abour fking that for a start? Wonder how da hell did all those National Geographics photogs were able to capture those amazing shots back then… oh right, they knew what they were doing. kthxbai

            • reductron

              I’m with you Remedy. Heck, give me a 15FPS D800sex.

            • Spy Black

              No motor drive here…
              http://tinyurl.com/jwlrp4s

            • silmasan

              I see what you mean. Capturing every golden moment just with a single exposure. Every single time the opportunity comes. Like a goddamn master.

              “Whatever your purpose is… don’t touch a camera unless you’re a goddamn master.” ~ The Goddamn Master, from the book Wisdom of the Goddamn Masters.

            • Spy Black

              There was a time when people got “the shot” without motor drives you know.

              I understand the point of shooting more frames in order to hopefully get “the shot”. However it’s still spraying and praying because “the shot” may come between frames 6 and 7 in a 10fps blast.

              You’re correct about higher frame rate cameras making it all moot. Even at 24-30 fps in video you can usually find “the shot”, albeit not at a resolution you may prefer.

              As for the “golden moment”, no motor drive here:
              http://tinyurl.com/jwlrp4s

            • Thom Hogan

              Are you sure 6k and 60 fps is enough? ;~)

              If you’re going to get the bird frozen and in focus, you’re at 1/1000 with most long lenses. At 60 fps, you’re likely at 1/100. If you shoot instead at 1/1000, the video looks too “edgy” for most people, as there’s no interframe blur. Moreover, if you’re shooting at 1/1000 at 60 fps, you’re still missing 94/100′s of a second. What are the odds that the moment you want are in that 6/100′s you captured?

              High fps is a tool, just like any other tool. There are times when it is useful. But just like VR, too many people rely far too heavily on high fps. There are consequences to using a tool when it isn’t necessary. Indeed, the number one complaint I get when someone starts shooting at 8 fps is that the focus system doesn’t work.

            • Mike D

              I shoot BIF, professional surfing contests, and college football. I love spray & pray. Cropped frame really is suitable for this purpose. While most my equipment is Nikon, including a D800, I feel Nikon is ignoring the DX high frame rate shooter so I have my pre-order in for the new A77 II which shoots 12 FPS with a 60 frame buffer for only $1,200. Nice. If it breaks, I’ll just buy another new one. BTW, the new Nikon 80-400 AFS is almost as good as the Sony 70-400 II but with slower auto focus.

            • reductron

              How about “to capture more distinct moments in time”? Seems some are arguing that wanting/needing/wishing for higher FPS is a sign of poorer skill.

            • Spy Black

              Well, I’m not implying that it is a sign of poorer skill. I’m merely implying that it’s a gamble.

            • Ronan

              You really don’t need more than 4-5 FPS to shoot motorcross… Just proper position and skills.

              None of that spray and pray that people have been relying this past 5-10 years…

            • Stephen Roberts

              Well why can’t you do it with 1 if your that good

            • Remedy

              I can.

            • Thom Hogan

              As I’ve said many, many times, I don’t believe that “burst gives…higher chances of getting the best photo.” Timing a single shot right nets you the best chance. Many pros practice that every day. For example, in a basketball or ice hockey arena, if you’re using strobes you can’t take a burst of shots anyway.

          • Stephen Roberts

            Well for one I use it to bracket for HDR

          • Clubber Lang

            Imagine yourself at an American vacation destiny like….Sea World. Now I would never support Sea world for personal reasons but there are plenty that do. That’s besides the point. We are talking Frame rate here. After driving five hours to this Fish fest everyone is wrapped up in the moment. Shamoo’s flopping around like the nutty goofball that he is making everyone giggle, splishing and splashing.The dad drags out his gear when he notices his daughter in the foreground is just about to feed snacks to another sea creature called a sea lion. This shit happened so fast and he was not prepared because he was too busy cleaning the ice cream his son dropped onto his shirt moments earlier. Go f..ing figure. Just bought that shirt and now it has chocolate stains on it and it’s only day one of vaca. Just then his daughter leans out to feed the otter sea creature rat and then it happens. Dad takes a deep breath, gently presses the shutter and captures 25 photos of his daughter feeding a sea otter a small fish……..that my friends is what this shit was made for.

            • Spy Black

              I understand that, there was a comment made however that there is something other than spray and pray that high frame rates are used for.

            • KnightPhoto

              “Spray and Pray” is the term used by unskilled/rookie photographers that miss the shot by sipping too lightly on their shutter buttons, while their experienced and heavy footed compatriots walk away with the goods yet again. This is because the experienced lead-footed shooters know when to hammer, hammer hard, and by all means keep on hammering as long as it takes to get the shot ;-)

            • Spy Black

              Are you referring to hammering individual frames at decisive moments, or just leaving the shutter pressed down indefinitely?

            • KnightPhoto

              Neither. I’m identifying the “sipper” as a guy that can quite easily and most often DOES miss the shot, because he’s simply not recognizing there is something special happening, nor does he have the knowledge and experience with what those extra frames gives him when that something special occurs.

              The experienced shooter a) recognizes there is something special going on, and b) holds the shutter down during the special portion of the action, and c) doesn’t let up as long as the action continues to be special. At the same time the experienced shooter is not holding the shutter button “indefinitely”. In fact the experienced shooter might be tracking but not actually pressing the shutter as he knows it is about to get better. The experienced shooter will also let off earlier, he knows when the best part is over and simply remains vigilant should it improve again.

              Like many things “Spray and Pray” is just a silly saying that prevents real learning and improvement. Just like “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” is actually a drag on progress. Instead we should be thinking “continuous improvement”, I forget the Japanese word for this – oh yeah – Kaizen.

            • Spy Black

              That’s still gambling (i.e. spray and pray), albeit with a better hunch that you’ll have a chance to get that shot you anticipate will be in that spray.

            • umeshrw

              Maybe that is why only pro cameras have higher FPS. Better to be called a gambler than miss that perfect shot AND your pay. You on the other hand can afford to be a snob about skill with single shot camera and capturing the right moment. In such times I think only this. If it is there in the topmost level and priciest camera AND pros buy it then it is useful. I cannot know if it will help me or not as I do not shoot sports etc. But that does not mean it is not necessary. When you are dealing with one time shots or very expensive shoots or/and it is your job, frankly nothing is overkill.

            • Spy Black

              I’m not implying that it is not necessary, or that I am above any of you. All I’m saying is that you’re still gambling any way you look at it. As silmasan pointed out, when these cameras reach astronomical frame rates it will all be moot.

            • Clubber

              Ha..I was just being silly about the Sea World example. but, I have seen sports photographers with their cameras above their heads at the end of the Super Bowl taking shots without looking into their viewfinder because of the crowds….maybe this is an example where the more shots the better just to get a lucky one.

            • Spy Black

              Apparently one shouldn’t call it “spray and pray” if a professional photographer is doing it. ;-)

            • Michiel953

              Oh jeez, Clubber, you’re here as well, enlightening us all with your penetrating insight! ;-)

            • Clubber Lang

              Lol. Yes, unfortunately, I am addicted to reading about this stuff. I try to shake it but I start to jones about day three if I don’t visit Nikon Rumors,

            • Michiel953

              So it wasn’t S Huff???

            • Jorge

              Whether you meant this as a joke or not I LOVE IT! Funny one. Best post yet my friend, best post yet.

        • Ronan

          Sorry, but it’s been proven time and again that you do NOT need a high FPS to take the photos you want. If people were doing it with 3-4 FPS 10-15 years ago, you can do it just as well.

          People aren’t quicker in basketball, cars aren’t crazily faster either… So if you can’t do it, it’s a lack of skill.

          • Guest

            I think the F3 did 6 FPS with the mirror down, maybe 8 with it up.

            • Ronan

              I had the regular motor grip, 4 FPS it was set on.

            • Spy Black

              I would say shooting x frames per second with your mirror up to be the pinnacle of “spray and pray”.

            • Thom Hogan

              Sure. But it didn’t autofocus ;~) I think the folk arguing for high fps want autofocus and VR and everything else they can get.

          • Stephen Roberts

            15-20 years ago you could shoot at 10 fps.
            You can get a shot with 4 fps but it’s easier with 11fps. When you need that decisive moment at the peak of action.

          • n11

            You can call it “luck” in that case. Why move from 1-2 fps? Why move from film? Let’s just stand still.

            • Ronan

              Now you are just being an idiot/troll.

              At least try to bring something to the table when debating someone.

            • Stephen Roberts

              And how are you doing anything different?

          • Scott M.

            If high fps didn’t have value, Nikon wouldn’t charge so much for them

            • Ronan

              It has value, i never stated otherwise. It helps photographers without enough skills (or that are too lazy) shoot and (hopefully) get the shot they want.

              Consumers go crazy for that, i’m sure you are aware their’s an entire industry thanks to it.

            • Scott M.

              You say it only helps the lazy and the unskilled. Unless you see the photographer shoot the photos, you would have no idea what the frame rate was of your favorite action shot. Might be one, might be 11. They got it in focus, it is composed well and captures the moment. Luck?
              Luck favors the prepared.

            • Nobody Cares

              So the market for the D4/s is lazy unskilled photographers?

            • Stephen Roberts

              Funny how the highest frame rate is on the Pro models. You know how all those consumers love spending $6500 on camera bodies.

            • Alwin Papegaaij

              For some photographers this applies yes.
              When shooting sports you can’t control everything and can’t anticipate on everything. The timing on the action of the subject you are shooting might be perfect but the subject might have one eye semi-closed or just have an expression on its face like it is a retard. You can’t control that. Than it is nice that you can shoot with 10fps instead of 4 because with 10 the same action is happening but the subject does not look like a retard anymore. With 4 fps the action moment might be gone.
              This has not much to do with the skill of the photographer. I think it does count as spray and pray but it does have a distinct function.

      • n11

        Very good. Here’s another one:
        -More FPS helps capture action shots
        *!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

      • Tom

        Sports!

      • Ronan

        Yupp.

      • Nobody Cares

        True, but if you’re shooting sports or some other action photography, the extra frames don’t hurt. In the film days, i was far more averse to shots that weren’t likely to work. Film cost money and I only brought so many rolls for an event. Most of the time I have no use for 8 frames, but every now and then, it’d be nice…but it’s pretty rare that I think, “If only had 3 or 4 more shots from that second.”

      • Yoohooo

        Now that´s a load of BS when we are talking about action photography or wild animal photography. Faster FPS will mean more success if you even basically know what you are doing with your camera.

      • Ian Collins

        While there is some merit in what you’re saying, clearly you don’t have a clue about shooting action sports. Or at least you can’t wrap your head around the fact that sports shooters need a high frame rate.

      • Ezra Ekman

        Clearly you don’t shoot live performance events.

        Best-case scenario: you are carefully framing each shot, dramatically increasing your keeper-to-crap ratio.

        Reality: Sometimes you have to focus, frame, and then hold down the shutter (spray-and-pray) when the belly dancer starts spinning, or the lead guitarist for Flogging Molly leaps into the air, or the Cirque du Soleil skater is spinning around while the other is flying out in the air.

        I’ve shot all of these and more. I love my D800. But I still use the D700 with the vertical grip for those kind of shots because it’s no contest: 8fps simply makes those shots more possible.

        Gear and specs don’t make the shot. But it does sometimes make the shot easier to attain.

      • stanley

        It tiz relative to what you are shooting say if jimmy
        bean is standing next to billy jelly donut on the sidelines of a sporting event
        & bean has 4fps & donut has 8fps
        who`z fps will capture more of that split-second action… some times no but most
        times it is better & an advantage but if you are taking pictures of paint
        drying then no but a butterfly in flight yes architecture of a building no OH
        and what about a hotdog eating contest you want to catch every possible moment
        when that contestant on the end starts to hurl chunks too

    • Cesar

      No it probably won’t, as the thing is only capable of 5fps…

    • Thom Hogan

      DR goes up about a stop every 24-36 months. However, short of developing a new technology (e.g. rollover saturation), we’re only a couple of full generations away from pretty much maxing out the current sensor designs.

  • Syncros

    Hope they put out an update to bring sRAW to the D800 as well, those 45mb RAW files add up quick..

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      Yes, sRAW is part of the rumored specs.

      • cppguy16

        I doubt they’re going to firmware update the existing D800, though.

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

          I doubt that too.

          • http://www.leonsuetfeld.com Leon

            that’s really bad, it was my #1 (any pretty much only) complaint about my D800 right from the start. I’d even pay for an sRAW firmware upgrade…

            • Jorge

              I don’t understand what the big deal is about D800 raw files? So what if they are 45mb or bigger; that to me is the BEAUTY of the D800! Data and more Data

            • http://www.leonsuetfeld.com Leon

              In a world with unlimited storage, yes, but if you’re shooting events with it it just fills up a lot of space unnecessarily.

            • Paul

              Anyone buying a d800 just needs to plan on another $3K in supporting computing gear. I would imagine most people with d600 or greater have laid down $$$ on new computers, drives, etc. otherwise they are in a world of hurt when they are importing files. unless they are just a light hobbyist with a couple imports per month.

            • http://www.leonsuetfeld.com Leon

              If you mean 2.5 for a laptop + .5 for external storage (NAS), you’re pretty much spot on in my case.

            • Guest

              I just spent $1K on a maxed out Mac Mini and it works like a charm. I am not a full-time pro, but I do free-lance weddings. As for the field storage, I just bring along a Sanho drive with me and I have absolutely no problem storage-wise. I shoot RAW+JPEG Fine.

            • Jorge

              That’s what I’m talking about! I bought the D800 FOR THE FILE SIZE and what it can bring to the table. And, as I shoot jpeg+Raw I am very stingy on keepers. Disk space is cheap, and getting cheaper by the day.

            • Dester

              if you’re shooting events shoot jpg.

            • http://www.leonsuetfeld.com Leon

              I want to provide a certain standard of image quality, and outblown highlights/ noisy shadows and off WB just don’t do it for me, so I’m going with RAW also for events. It also makes me feel more safe, knowing theres at least some room for error (from me or the camera), which there is not in jpg mode.

            • delayedflight

              What sort of event are you referring to I’ve shot all day drift events with my D800 on two 32gb cards fine.

              Unless you’re keeping all your rejected photos it’s actually not that hard to have the required storage and processing power to use a D800.

            • http://www.leonsuetfeld.com Leon

              Well, weddings and proms mostly. It’s no problem with card storage, 64+32 gigs get me through everything, but if on a long day you end up keeping, say, 600 images, thats 30GB just for the raws. And in the long run, it makes me run out of storage quicker than necessary. That’s why I’d like the sRAW mode for the D800, too.

            • MyrddinWilt

              The big deal is that people here whine and whine and whine. And it is easier to put in a fix that shuts the idiots up than to make a whole new 12MP version of the D800 for those ‘give me a D700′ people.

              The d4s does not need sRAW. On a D800 it makes a lot of sense. Other than that, the specs given are just like the D4s, a minor mid life spec tweak aimed at prodding people who are still on the D300 and D700 to buy.

            • metsatsu

              Call me a whinging idiot then :) I want a D700 replacement. and I concur with the sRAW for D800s

            • SiestaKey1

              I agree!!! I love the 36mp on the D800. I have a D800e and D4s. LOOOOOOOVE the D4s (fun to shoot with) but miss the ability to crop in on a shot like I can with the D800e. However, this just makes me compose better on the D4s so it’s not a bad thing. I don’t mind the RAW file sizes either. They work nicely on my newer Retina MacBook Pro 15.

            • Jorge

              There you go. And another question that I have, and something I don’t understand if you manipulate a raw file into sRaw, is it still a raw file from the sensor? I say no.

            • Jeff Shapiro

              Keep in mind sRAW is only 12bit vs 14bit RAW

            • Mr. Mamiya

              With the D700 it was always recommended to keep the RAWs 12bit, because 14bit didn’t make any difference.

            • Jeff Shapiro

              On a 12MP camera it won’t but on a 36MP the difference will be in the SHADOW DETAILS. Not saying it won’t work depends on the type of work you do ;)

            • Mr. Mamiya

              The D800′s S-RAW might be around 8 MP?! Though I don’t understand what it has to do with the MP count. To my understanding you have a slight advantage in massively over- or underexposed images. But who does this? 14 bit has almost no practical value.

            • Jeff Shapiro

              14bit on a 36MP the dynamic range is greater again it would mainly be in the shadow detail you would lose going the 12bit would you miss it, depends on the shot/exposure – if you want to tweak it you will have less adjustment latitude to play around with -

            • Lcky

              You’ve posted that twice here, you obviously don’t push your raw files in software often. Saving a beautiful shot at 4+ EV and retaining color definition is valuable. I’ll see your 12 and raise you a 16bit Mamiya ;D..

            • Mr. Mamiya

              I don’t doubt there is a mathematical advantage. But how often do you miss a correct exposure by 4 stops AND that one is the million Euro shot that you need to recover for that magazine cover? ;-)

              Here’s a good discussion:
              http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1099741/0

            • Lcky

              touché!

            • Lcky

              Even though, I hardly ever raise above iso 50. The highest ill set is 200, maybe 400 for a job. I’d much rather push EV in software on raw. Black in playback, but sharp and well defined in post!

            • Mr. Mamiya

              And in fact I shoot 14bit, I never changed the D800E’s factory default. ;)
              It’s just that nobody should worry if Nikon’s S-RAW has 12bit only. A similar discussion would be Adobe RGB vs. sRGB.

            • drpeters

              I love getting back not only shadow detail, but highlights as well. I can’t wait for 16 bit raw from Nikon!

            • Eric Duminil

              It sure made a difference if you had to correct exposure with more than 2 EV.

            • Jon McGuffin

              12-bit is fine, no real discernible difference between the two in countless posts/forums and first hand trials.

            • marktim

              No difference in JPEG, but lot of highlights detail in RAW.

            • nc_mike

              I see significant differences in the shadow detail in nighttime city scapes between 12-bit and 14-bit. It really shows up clearly in my 24″ x 36″ prints.

            • Jon McGuffin

              Well, I’m frankly glad to hear that there is a difference because on my D700, I couldn’t ever see any. Sounds like the bigger resolution bodies help in this regard.

            • arachnophilia

              and that sRaw doesn’t seem to actually be raw at all.

            • Thom Hogan

              It’s also “cooked.” It’s not actually true raw data. Still, that’s better than 8-bit compressed images at the same size.

          • Fred

            Hi moderator,

            Any news regarding U1 or U2, will the D800 update have it?

            • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

              No info on this.

            • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

              U1 and U2 would require a new left-side dial which is not in evidence.

        • Zoner Bahana

          It’s a processor feature, not just software/firmware, unfortunately…

      • stormwatch

        Now that is what is called the ultimate sad and low-life story of once a great company…if they’re making the new camera and call “improvements” a rewriten firmware which enables a smaller files….it is so sad and so low that only a die die die die hard fans of Nikon and company employers can say it’s an improvement.

        • Lcky

          Then they even go and sell it “new”! oops! look at all the other cam companies, time to “innovate”!

    • Thom Hogan

      My guess is that sRAW is unique to EXPEED4.

      • Jason Schultz

        You’re probably right. But I hope you’re wrong. I’d love the sRAW feature on my D800

      • lord eels

        I think so as well, especially since it’s really cooked and not RAW at all. might as well be called sTIFF w/actions, IMO

        • Jon Ingram

          @ lord eels, could you point me to info on this? I’ve been wondering about the process. Thanks

          • El Aura

            Have a look at the posts of Iliah Borg in this thread: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53291174

            • arachnophilia

              yeah, this looks disappointing. it looks like you’re discarding half your resolution, baking in some processing, and saving all of 1 MB. i don’t understand what’s small or raw about small raw.

              nikon. wtf.

            • El Aura

              sRAW only makes sense for some very specific applications. If you have to process thousands of images within hours, every second counts and having a lower resolution (but more bit depth than normal jpegs) can help. If importing and exporting out of LR takes up a significant part of ones ‘work’ time, the smaller resolution can help. Of course, not being raw anymore alone already helps with processing needs.

              However, if a raw converter offers a mode where the ‘demosaic’ is just a 2×2 binning (ie, averaging the two green pixels and just taking the values of the red and blue pixel from 2×2 pixel block), the raw conversion is reduced to colour and tonal adjustments and at no time a full-size image has to be generated and handled and thus processing requirements should come pretty close to what these 12-bit ‘jpegs’ require … without throwing away resolution that one might be able to use at some later point in time.

            • Jorge

              Agreed. I bought the D800 for the gorgeous, detailed RAW files. Why would I want to besmirch my machine with cooked sRAW files? Memory cards are cheap, and disk space is probably cheaper on a cost per gig basis.

      • Maji

        I think you are right too. The Expeed4 has the horsepower to cook the RAW files.

        • Thom Hogan

          Not so much horsepower, but fixed algorithms in the hardware.

      • Vin

        How about a DX SRAW format? I have always wondered why they did not have an improved DX or FX file read speed with battery grip in these new generation cameras?

        • Vin

          improved file write speed, i mean to say.

          But if this update if 6fps in FX and possible 8fps in DX this would fill a lot of gaps in line up. now if we could get some small wide primes in DX, and some extra wide F2.8 FX lenses.

          • Vin

            I will definitely put off a Df, or D610 purchase to see what really is coming in the form of new D800s

          • Thom Hogan

            Frankly, I’d rather have a DX camera that does what people want (e.g. the mythical D400).

        • manhattanboy

          Just drop the bits down and you do have a smaller RAW format. Personally I do not like it and prefer to know I can get as much information out of the pic as possible, but to each his own.

        • Thom Hogan

          Not sure what you mean. We’re talking about a D800s here, and it would likely have the choices of sRaw, 1.5x crop, 1.2x crop/5:4 crop, full frame. Something like 8, 15, 24-26, and 36mp, respectively. Do we need more discrimination than that?

          • Vin

            Yes I agree a true D400 would be nice, smaller light, do what it should. Try not to fit a circle in a square box.

          • jp

            So are we seeing a D300 replacement as well? I think it will flood Nikon by $$ if the price stays around $3000,-

          • Vin

            I guess I was thinking if Nikon some how rolled the D800s build into a combination D400/D800s, but we can’t get away from the actual need of a D400 and accompany lenses.
            Besides my thoughts on a D400/800 would actually be a
            D800 X, and D400 abilities in DX mode.

            • Thom Hogan

              Probably not. Remember, we had a D300, D700, and D3, all 12mp, and all with pro bodies and fast fps. All three of those cameras sold well, and to different audiences for different reasons. Nikon didn’t do a great job of updating the D4, and didn’t update the D300 or D700 (other than the wimpy D300s update).

              Thus, we actually have people at three different price points and levels (US$1800 DX, US$3000 FX, and US$6000 FX) that are all currently less than satisfied with their options. I can’t think of another example in the photography industry of such a big miss by a company.

              So, even if they produced a D800 update that satisfied the D700 user base, they still won’t satisfy the D300 user base.

            • Shaun

              This.

              At this point, I don’t even care about specs. I just want a professional camera coming in at under $2,000.

            • Vin

              Frankly a D610 update could potentially be a very comfortable upgrade with the right forethought at $1900 FX, I do wounder where that would put a professional grade DX in price? I do totally agree that they missed the ball completely in not building a D300s replacement and D700 replacement in a timely fashion. Those were both cameras I was planning on buying. The D800E was more of a happy birthday surprise, i still look forward to them in the future in some form.

        • Ola

          The limit on FPS comes from the SENSOR readout speed. Thus, you have to SKIP pixels to increase FPS. This is done to get 24 fps for video for example.
          The PROCESSOR speed has NOTHING to do with FPS rate.

          • Vin

            I suppose, when the buffer is full everything slows down to full stop, so I would say there is several factors including processor and buffer and storage.

      • Jon McGuffin

        Let’s just hope that the sRAW on the D800 will deliver something in the realm of 16MP – 18MP files. :)

        • Aldo

          Proportionally the mp count should be d800sraw = (36×4)/16= 9megapixels… you also get the same result using half the megapixels across and vertically 3680×2456= 9mp (roughly). We need another formula to get those megapixels we want.

    • torwag

      Huh,

      I thought sRAW is about pixel-binning. That would be a hardware (CCD-chip) and not a software (firmware) feature.
      Can someone shine a bit light on this.

      Thanks

      • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

        It’s data so whether it’s “binned” on the sensor or the cpu is pretty much irrelevant. In general, any feature that CAN be implemented on the CPU will be because software is cheaper than hardware, and CPUs are cheaper than sensors (as witnessed by the Expeed 4 first appearing on less expensive cameras).

    • El Aura

      Given that the 12-bit, lossy-compressed, quarter-size sRAW on the D4 is only 7% smaller than a 12-bit, lossy-compressed full-size RAW (13.1 vs. 14.1 MB), the benefits of sRAW are largely only in the processing time department and not on the storage side. sRAW is essentially just a 12-bit JPEG with a different compression algorithm.

      • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

        No it’s not. JPEG is very different from RAW because it’s a delivery format and intentionally throws away data where it won’t be noticed assuming that the image it’s compressing is final. As soon as you post-process an image, that assumption becomes bad and the lossy compression becomes more apparent. (A cleverly compressed JPEG would actually be more useful than sRAW, but that’s another story.)

        • El Aura

          sRAW is de-mosaicced data with noise reduction and tone curve conversion already applied. It is compressed differently than a JPEG and it has a greater bit depth (nominally 12-bit, in reality due to the compression a bit less).

          • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

            The bit depth is only reduced if compression is lossy in some way. It’s perfectly possible to compress files losslessly. I don’t have any special knowledge of Nikon’s file formats.

    • JcPhotoMedia

      anyone want to explain

  • PapaZerg

    D4 sensor in D800 body please

    • Henry

      just go to get Df~ haha

      • JakeB

        Not even in the same performance bracket, buddy…

    • http://www.leonsuetfeld.com Leon

      I think what you mean is D4 sensor at D800 price…

      • DSLR

        no he meant D4 sensor&AF in smaller body like how D3/D700 were…don’t think we will ever see that combo again though…

        • http://www.leonsuetfeld.com Leon

          why would you want a smaller body other than for monetary reasons?

          • DSLR

            compact/portability?

          • arachnophilia

            there are times i leave my grip at home.

      • manhattanboy

        Why stop there. Give us our choice of the D4 sensor or the D800 sensor at the 3100′s price, in our choice of body. They will sell like hot cakes, I guarantee.

    • DSLR

      maybe sRAW in the rumored D800s is the answer? though not sure what the file size (resolution) will be in sRAW

      • RMG

        Based on the D4s, I speculate sRAW will be 9 megapixels (36/4).

    • Boulderghost

      You are never going to get the D4 sensor in a D800 body, for a D800 price. No company likes to give their product away. However, you might get a D600 sensor in a D800 body (with all of the features and possibly faster FPS) for $2000? Or would you rather actually get a D4 sensor in a D800 body and pay…$5000?? Those are the only remote, but possible choices that make any economic sense at all. Does either scenario sound attractive or do you still want something for nothing?

      • JoeC

        I’d take a D600 sensor in a D800 body for $2000 in a heartbeat, if it had the D800 AF. My major beef with the D600 is that the controls aren’t quite up to the price level, and the feel in my hand really isn’t as good as the D700 or D3.

        My problem with the D800 is the large file size, low speed, higher price, and resolution beyond what I’m capable of using. In some ways it’s too much camera for me. I’d need to be way too anal with technique to make the most of 36mp, and most of my work goes on the web so it’s wasted on me anyway.

        The D600′s sensor in a body with slightly better ergonomics, durability, and AF performance would really support the way I shoot and make it worth upgrading.

      • Thom Hogan

        This discussion never goes away, yet it ignores some basic economics.

        Let’s say that you can sell 5000 D4′s a month at US$6000 or 20000 D700s’s a month at US$3000. Which will make you more profit? ;~) It’s called elasticity of demand, and it’s highly studied in MBA programs and by companies that have wide product lines.

        As I’ve pointed out elsewhere, Nikon has changed strategies. When you graphed their old strategy, the price curve went steeper and steeper upwards between models. Today we have flatter spots at the bottom, and then again in the D610 to D800E realm (which includes Df and D800). I personally don’t think this can be the correct strategy, and believe Nikon got there by overproducing product and then trying to find distinct new entities that they could squeeze in that might re-generate demand at a price point (e.g. Df).

        Further, there were distinct differences between the D700 and D3/D3s. Obviously, body. Battery. Mirror blackout. CPU speed (which affected focus performance in continuous). Additional info displays and buttons. Double card slots. Bigger buffer. Most of those things were important to the pro willing to pay more, not so much to enthusiasts wanting a bargain. I believe this was proper strategy in the D3 generation, and wonder why Nikon stopped it in the D4 generation. If it works, don’t break it.

        • JJ168

          Obviously the sale of 5d2 compare to d700 proved nikon was wrong.

          • umeshrw

            Apples to oranges? Also 5Dx models were an instant hit more because of video inclusion.

          • Thom Hogan

            It’s quite possible that Nikon paid more attention looking at what Canon was doing than what the Nikon customers wanted. But that doesn’t mean that the D700 shouldn’t have had a followup. Just the opposite.

            Basically, what you’re saying is that Nikon didn’t do a D700s with the 16mp sensor because 16mp looks wimpy compared to 23mp. And that they did a D800 because 23mp looks wimpy compared to 36mp. This is the old “my d*** is bigger than yours” kind of thinking. Not exactly sure I want my cameras designed that way.

            • JJ168

              Thats exactly how i see it. It doesn’t mean i agree with what they did. I guess they having a go at it. I personally wish them offer high quality product withiut compromise. For example high MP d800 where pretty much most thing are similar to the flagship d4 in terms of processor, AF and most camera control just like d700 to d3. In addition they should also make a fast action camera in compact body like d700, again with no compromise like above. 16-24Mp (probably 24), 6-7 fps, best AF as current flagship, dual card and price it high enough $4-4.5k?, so it wont hurt d4s sale (no more d700 kind of pricing), improve QC. Keep price stable over the life of the product. This way users will be proud and happy with their purchase. Then you have d610 for price sensitive user base. This should be best for them, no loop hole in its user base.

    • kotozafy

      A D600 sensor in D800 body please !

      • Mr. Mamiya

        2 years ago everybody still said “Uuh my gosh, that D3X’s 24 MP is so scary, how can we ever deal with it” Today it’s the common entry level resolution that every amateur can handle. My 4 years old Macbook Pro can handle 1000s of D800 files from a wedding or event at ease. What’s the problem?

        • kotozafy

          Dear Mr. Mamiya, the problem is MONEY. I love the D800 body for having played with it a couple of days. Far better handling than my D600 and excellent command placements. But this camera is quite a bit expensive for amateurs like me. So I dream of a midrage sensor like the one in the D600 which would make the price somewhere between the 2. With my 6 years old Lenovo laptop I DON’T either have any trouble processing the D800′s 36mpx files!!

          • Mr. Mamiya

            I don’t think a 24 MP sensor will make the D800 substantially cheaper. The D700 wasn’t cheaper (in MSRP). The used market might be your thing.

            • kotozafy

              Please remember, the D700 had THE flagship sensor when it came out…

            • Mr. Mamiya

              By looking at the Df, you can see what will happen pricewise, if Nikon puts the “flagship” sensor in a smaller body nowadays. ;-)

            • kotozafy

              Exactlly! That’s why D700 was expensive.
              That’s why a D800 with D4s sensor will be very expensive. But a “D800″ with D600 sensor can be more affordable than the D700 was, and yet a top performer!

          • Marktim

            Body itself takes most of the price.

    • JJ168

      Only if you are willing to pay $4k for it..

      • PapaZerg

        i cant see why they cannot make it for $2,700 or less.
        the only reason why they are not making this is because they are afraid that it might impede on the flagship camera sales.

        i would sell my D4 for this to be honest.

        • JJ168

          This is the very reason why they won’t make one to date. I think they should make one as the demand is there, but they need to work out the right price to maximize profit whatever the equilibrium is (potential lost of D4 sales, additional cost of having a new production line, etc)

          • PapaZerg

            they can easily cripple it by giving it a smaller buffer, slower FPS, no small RAW,etc. things that the D4 market will find important.

            also waiting for the D400. i hope they give us that

            • JJ168

              I used to have d700 with the grip. I loved it to death knowing i had a 95% of a d3 with an automatic sensor cleaning and can be smaller/lighter when i wanted to although i rarely utilised the 8fps. Frankly, it was a bargain for the price that sometimes i felt i cheated on nikon. I have now upgraded to d800. I do not think nikon will do d700 mk2 with the same features and price as d700 ever again. I do think they should produce a fast action (but not too fast) camera maybe 24mp, 6-7fps in full res and faster in small res that will make those needing higher resolution and buffer to go for d4s alike, expeed4, same AF as d4s, dual card slot in the same format, improve lv and iso will be a bonus and price it around $3.5-4k. I am sure this will kill all the d700 replacement whiners for good and in doing so may kill canon 5dmk3 at the same time. The higher price will ensure higher profit, better quality control as well as protecting the d4s sale. The good features (same AF and expeed 4) will also provide good user experiences (lesson learnt from d600/df where lots of.features are 2nd class).

  • Henry

    I want to have sRaw and mRaw…..

    • kikica sutich

      and I want a dRaw…

  • Thomas

    “No low pass (AA) filter (just like the D800E)”

    The D800E has a low pass filter, it is just canceled out. I wonder if this new camera will just eschew the low pass filter entirely.

    • Zograf

      Good point. I’d guess for the D800/D800e they did it to keep distances/calibration the same. I hope for the rumored new D800s they don’t need this and will entirely remove the two canceling antialiasing filters.

      • Jimmy

        Technology exists now to make the LP effect programmable.

  • Spy Black

    I have yet to understand what the D800E system is doing. There is supposedly an AA filter on the sensor, but it is somehow bypassed. How do you bypass a physical optical filter placed on top of your sensor?

    • Physics.

    • Thom Hogan

      Most modern, sophisticated AA filters these days deal with detail on one axis at a time. What the D800E does is filter the axis on one axis then unfilter it. There’s a reason why Canon, and then Nikon, and now others, went to the one-axis-at-a-time method: it has a tendency to help telecentricity of the light.

      • Spy Black

        “What the D800E does is filter the axis on one axis then unfilter it.”

        Can’t say I follow the logic there. If you filter it than “unfilter”, you’ve hacked up the data. That’s akin to interpolating an image 2x up, then interpolating .5x down.

        • Thom Hogan

          A fuller explanation is in my book ;~).

          We have a lot of ways of hacking light; polarizers and wave plates, for example. Unfortunately, everything gets very, very difficult because photons can and do work both as waves and as particles and the quantum effects and math gets crazy to try to explain.

          I’m not sure there’s a completely simple way of describing exactly how the lithium niobate crystals change the spread or focus of a light wave, but that’s essentially what happens: the wave gets spread on one axis, then re-focused on that same axis. In the D800, the wave gets spread in one axis then spread again in the other axis, a technique that I believe Canon was first to use.

  • tman

    If the Moire is dealt with by software, will sRAW have the software correction? If so will this cause any tradeoff?
    Since it’s an “S” I assume no 4k video or touch-screen AF (I would bet money the D800 successor will have these to be competitive).

    • Jorge

      OMG. STOP with the “touch screen” That would be ridiculous on a pro body. Want a touch screen? Get a coolpix or something else. Come on.

  • DSLR

    “6 fps with MB-D12″…so there is hope that it can go higher in DX mode?

    • Spy Black

      What about half resolution? Wouldn’t it be able to run faster?

      • DSLR

        are you referring to sRAW? from nature/wildlife perspective, I would prefer DX mode to give that apparent reach with faster fps

        • Spy Black

          No, I meant half resolution, 18 megs.

      • DSLR

        or give us both – faster fps in sRaw as well as DX mode with the grip….

      • Thom Hogan

        It’s not just sensor data that’s involved with fps. CPU, focus, mirror blackout, mirror bounce, shutter; there’s a whole host of parts that need to be capable of the faster speeds.

        The Nikon 1 is actually remarkable in this respect. 20 fps is pretty darned fast to be running a focus system for still photos (with video, every frame doesn’t have to have perfect focus).

        • Spy Black

          Is the 1 running a mechanical shutter at 20 fps? Considering it’s much smaller that not impossible.

          As for the full frame bodies, but how much different are the shutters going to be (to some degree) between full frame (or APS-C for that matter) bodies? Do you believe the shutter in the D800 is different than the one in, say, the D4?

          • Thom Hogan

            I don’t know the exact answer at the moment, as I don’t have a V3 yet. The electronic shutter goes to 60 fps, not sure if the mechanical is 5, 15, or 20 fps.

            • JimP

              6 fps on the V3.

    • Scott M.

      I bet Nikon grip ‘only’, allows extra fps. No 3rd party ebay grips will work on the new s version. Maybe it will take the D4 battery to do it.

  • Spy Black

    “Price between D800 and D800E – probably around $3000″

    Nikon has fallen ill? They’re not charging you MORE?

    • Rafa R

      Agree, thats strange…

      • Studor13

        What’s strange is that no one here, not even Spy Black, know what Nikon is coming out with, let alone how much they are going to charge, and yet all these “geniuses” come out of the woodwork’s and give thumbs up to SB.

        Go figure!

    • jenxrj .

      Might be $300, no one would pay $3000 for a weaker AA filter.

      • http://www.rmjphotography.net/ RMJ

        I agree. I would pay 4000.

        • Eric Calabros

          Dear Nikon, don take the comment above seriously.. Just kidding

          • decisivemoment

            I’m not kidding. Don’t. Take. It. Seriously!

  • Alex

    Those specs should be for the D800X and the D800s should be a 24mpx (or 16mpx) with AA filter camera.
    So many Nikon users thinking and wishing about this for years, is it so hard Nikon?

    • bouderghost

      So, like a D800 with a D600 sensor and a speed bump in FPS (8fps?) for @$2000?? D800s??

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      Then how about the D600?

      • Boulderghost

        Exactly. The D600 is the new D700. It may be hard for some to admit, but a D800 with a D4 sensor would be at least $5000. The D610 may not have the best ergo, but its specs and features eclipse the d700 for the most part.

        • codensnap

          Only if they had put the AF System from D700 in the D600/D610.

  • Paul

    Small improvements here and there. Think we’ll get 1080p at 60fps?

  • Paddy

    I’ve been extremely pleased with my D800E, these past few years, but a refresh is appreciated, because there’s always room for improvement.
    But, it appears clear, by Nikon’s recent introductions, that we’ll probably get shafted with their old stock/outdated low res. screen, with sub-pixel sampling when magnified. The D800/E is their one camera, that really begs to have a much, much better screen for critical manual focusing, for studio, macro, landscape work, etc. I wonder if they’ll include the colour tweaking for the screen, like the D4S now has.

    • Aeroengineer

      Agree completely re: support for critical manual focusing. From my perspective, the only major let down in the otherwise stellar D800E.

    • Jorge

      Have to agree. The live view is horrendous when zoomed in to try and focus. They need to look at Canon’s which is so nice and clear.

  • http://www.relivelastnight.com/ relivelastnight

    ill buy my 3rd d800e when d800s comes out. hehehe. gets cheaper and cheaper.

  • Christyan

    No subsana los problemas de enfoque de nikon d800 ni atiende a tus afectados pero hace una nueva “sin los problemas de la d800″ entonces si tenia fallos? jajajajaja lo mismo que la D600 remplazada con la d610. CAMBIAROS DE CANON!!

  • Joseph Li

    Since we never had a d700s, is a d800s a minor d800 update (such as D4s to D4) or actually a d700 replacement (lower MP, higher fps?) a bit confused

  • AnoNemo

    No AA? It makes sense, Nikon will eliminate the D800E and only make the D800s.

  • ano

    Only 5 fps with expeed4 ? Disapointed ..
    No way to get 8 fps with nikon without less than 6000 euros…

  • Roy

    It seems that if you are happy with your D800E, and I am, you just don’t need a D800s, unless you are looking for a backup. I have done a couple of weddings now using the D600 for a backup. It performs really well, but it cannot match the D800E for photo quality, so I might have to save my nickles and get one of these when it shows up.

    • Jon Ingram

      Yeah, I agree. The mid-life updates always seem to be like this, which is ok with me. The big changes usually come with a new title.

  • xtt2

    cheaper than D800E?

    • karlo m.

      Sounds strange but then again, this is only a rumor with 50% probability.

  • disappointed

    As mirrorless AF gets better and evf technology improves, I see fewer and fewer reasons why someone would go for a DSLR. Unless the d800s includes more updates to address existing weaknesses of the d800,I don’t see much reason to stick with Nikon for my next body when Sony and Fuji are doing great things. Nikon needs to go all out on this update.

    • Jorge

      I have both – D800, D700, Fuji X-E1, and the new Fuji X-T1. You are 100% correct. I don’t have experience with the Sony, but the FUJI’s are PHENOMENAL especially the EVF.

      • Marco Pasquini

        He is 100% correct?

        You are 100% incorrect, then…

        • Jorge

          Wow. Good comment. Helped a lot. Thanks

    • Tom Malewicki

      One reason only to stick with DSLR, battery life. X-T1 gets less than 400 pics on a full charge. I did switch from D7000 to E-M1 and now I actually have to worry about battery life when I go out to take pictures. Never did with my D7000. The only time my E-M1 shined was when I was shooting a gymnastics meet. I took almost 2000 pics on my E-M1 (10 fps and/or 6.5 fps) and had a 1/3 battery life left. When I shoot 1 picture at a time on my E-M1, battery life is no better than the X-T1.

      • Jorge

        My X-T1 gets about the same 350-400 shots shooting jpeg+raw. I have four batteries for it. MORE than enough for a nice day out. And, the batteries are relatively inexpensive.

    • Jon Ingram

      If you can’t see clear advantages of a D800 over anything Fuji offers, than it’s not the right system for you. I love Fuji, probably more than most people, but for AF, resolution, quality of raw files, speed of operation, flash system, the D800 is worlds better. Fuji is good for travel, backpacking, etc… still not many pro applications.

      • disappointed

        Hi Jon,

        I agree that there are currently some advantages that the d800 has over the current mirrorless options. My point is that as the mirrorless AF improves (perhaps as good as DSLR in next gen?), then there aren’t many advantages to the DSLR form factor. The resolution, raw quality, and speed of operation are all things that can easily be improved and offered in mirror less cameras. I agree that sony and Fuji are many years away from matching Nikon’s flash offerings.

        I guess what I’m anticipating or hoping for is something like a next gen a7r, or high resolution FF x-t1. If it has 36mp with 14bit lossless raw, an evf liks an x-T1, and AF coming close to the d800, then as far as the actual camera is concerned, I see few advantages for the DSLR form factor.

        • Paul

          The sony options are intriguing. but as someone that is very particular about the ‘look’ that I get from certain lenses (vignetting, contrast, bokeh, etc.) I don’t know that I would be happy with some new glass that I slap onto the Sony. Also, once you start putting good glass on them, the size profile is near the same size as my DSLR, so I’m not seeing a lot of benefit.

          • price

            What about price. A7r vs d800e is what? Around $800

            • Paul

              i hadn’t thought of that comparison. Mostly was looking at the a7 vs. d600, but you are right, that is a cost advantage. But I gotta imagine that somebody that needs 36MP is also going to be super picky about how the lens resolves that.

      • Jorge

        On paper the win goes for the D800 no doubt and I do use mine. In real life, to me and the stock agents I shoot for I don’t care, nor do they. Assuming the image is a good one no one cares what camera it came out of which is the whole point right?
        I’ve also made some beautiful prints (so far) up to 24 x 20 customs from the X-E1 and the X-T1 and they look pretty darn good. With that said I’m planning a six -day stock shooting trip out west and my D800 will be my primary with the X-T1 as my secondary unit so I do see the value of the larger files, better DR, etc.

        • Jon Ingram

          Hi Jorge, I don’t disagree on any particular point. As I said, I love the Fuji system. My point is this: I can’t depend 100% on the Fuji system in many pro scenarios. Fuji is great for anything that doesn’t move too fast or doesn’t need to be printed too big, so it has its pro applications and some pro’s use it. However, for situations when I absolutely need perfect AF, resolution, flash etc…, the D800 wins because I can count on it every time. The fuji system is getting there in these areas…, but has a way to go. Fuji pros: best size to quality compromise, good glass, looks awesome. Fuji Cons: weaker AF, weaker flash, Adobe-unfriendly raw files. D800 pro’s: good at everything (AF, flash, resolution, glass selection). Cons: very large and heavy, sometimes prohibitively so.

    • Jon Ingram

      If you can’t see clear advantages of a D800 over anything Fuji offers, than it’s not the right system for you. I love Fuji, probably more than most people, but for AF, resolution, quality of raw files, speed of operation, flash system, the D800 is worlds better. Fuji is good for travel, backpacking, etc… still not many pro applications.

  • Marcel Speta

    if solved AF issue and 6fps FX (maybe 7 or 8 DX?) then its already acceptable for me…. so next to my D3s, D700 and D300 there is new brother coming ;-)

    • jr456

      Agreed, this would meet my needs as well. If we can get 5 fps without the grip then maybe more with SRAW then that would be great.

  • Maji

    This maybe the D700 successor, at least to some extent, and wedding photogs who shoot 1500-2000 exposures per session will like it because of the sRAW.

  • ShaunV

    Kinda unrelated but, does anyone else miss the larger top lcd screens of the D200 and D300, always wished they carried over to the FX semi-pro cameras. Miss the locks the memory card doors too….

  • ano

    I hope for more than 5 fps with expeed 4, it is disappointed.
    No way to get a DSLR with 8 fps and good buffer with Nikon without less than 6000 euros …

    • Marcel Speta

      i do believe that 7fps with Expeed4 is realistic at 36Mpx res, but not more. Just count the amount of data…. D4s 11fps/16Mpx = 4.8fps/36Mpx. I know that this is not that simple mathematics, but anyways… don’t expect 8fps/36Mpx … this is already toooo much data….

      • ano

        your compute is to simple.

        The limiting factor is miror switch on D4s and not processor.

        The processor could allow to go higher.
        On D800, with expeed 4, the fps is only a marketing choice.

        • Marcel Speta

          well, i do not argue, but do you really have quite secret Expeed 4 technical specidification? I doubt.
          I am a programmer for 25 years, so my estimation is pretty realistic considering the known facts. So i can only compare to D4s. Expeed 4 specification is totally hidden for me :-)

          • ano

            sorry but the spec of fujitsu millbeaut processor is well known … expeed 4 is custom designed based on milbeaut.
            http://jp.fujitsu.com/group/fsl/en/release/20130904-1.html

            • Pablo Ricasso

              You’re oversimplifying it, ano…

            • ano

              It seems to be very difficult to lean something …
              stop for me, it is always the same thing on forum ..

            • Marcel Speta

              interesting link. Thanks.
              Now i am convinced D5 is gonna be 24Mpx camera at about 12fps …. future will tell if am i wrong? :)

            • Michael Steinbach

              That would be great as long as they go back to dual compact flash cards. That is the reason I shoot with the d800s in place of d4s. Xqd is already dying a slow death.

        • Ronald Patterson

          “The limiting factor is miror switch on D4s and not processor.”

          Not quite. Tell it to the Canon 1DX owners…

          Marcel is correct, it’s the MP that’s the real limiter with the D800 shutter speed.

      • Chris Weller

        V3 is doing 18 mp at 20 fps – It is a compressed 12 bit raw though. Not sure how the math all works.

        I actually expected this fps spec to be exactly as reported. 4 to 5 fps is a 25% increase. To expect 50% increase 4 to 6 fps, likely too much. Hopefully they won’t cripple the DX and will let it fly at 8 or even 10 fps. It’s a D800 and a D400 all in one! I’m fine with the 15.4 MP count DX. Even something in between like a 1.3 crop with 24 MP at 7-8 fps would be interesting. I think the only thing holding Nikon back from doing this is there fear that you will only need to buy ONE camera. Too bad.

  • broxibear

    Hmmmmmmm…I wonder if this is the mythical D700 replacement ? The camera you hear whispers about, the camera people claimed to have seen with gaffa tape covering up all the logos, one camera to rule them all ? Lol.

    • ShaoLynx

      Nah, Nikon would not be so dumb as to do that…
      Who wants a D700 successor anyway, I’ve already got my D800.
      Nikon listening to what users really want… what a silly idea! I mean, come-on, really… And what will they think of next? A D400, perhaps? Don’t be ridiculous!… Giving people what they really want. That is so passé…
      Er, what? What’s wrong with some reverse-psychology?… :-p

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

      Nice try, but the “s” is too dark and saturated compared to the “D800″.

      • broxibear

        Hi David,
        I wasn’t trying to suggest it was a real box.

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

          No worries. I didn’t mean to sound mean spirited or to suggest that you were really trying to fool people. It is a joke all around.

          • broxibear

            Hi David,
            No problem.
            Love the Jose Mateo Ballet Theatre piece. Bet your heart was beating a touch faster when you saw the crane lifting it into the sky ?

  • Lubos

    My ideal camera would be D610s with improved AF (51 points evenly spread), speed (1/8000), better ISO with Expeed 4

    • Jon Ingram

      Well that would be awesome indeed…, don’t see it happening though, Nikon is too afraid. The main reason I went for D800 over D600 was AF and shutter speed.

    • Marcel Speta

      same here :-)

    • Paul

      You just described the D800…

    • Paul

      You just described the D800…

      • Spy Black

        Except that he didn’t.

    • Michael Steinbach

      I completely agree. Right size, just missing the AF and and sync speed.

    • nikclick

      and flash sync 1/250

  • Jon Ingram

    Best improvements: Up to 6fps, improved low-light sensor and AF performance, and sRaw. If it truly has all these things, it’s a nice update. It’s also a good way for Nikon to make money, since they just have to add or tweak a couple things and keep everything else the same.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      Exactly, D800 sales are probably slow and Nikon is not yet ready with the next generation of cameras. Mid-life refresh makes sense.

      • Thom Hogan

        D800 sales certainly slowed, but based upon the data I’ve seen, they’re still pretty healthy. Indeed, they’ve gone up a bit since the appearance of the A7r, believe it or not.

        No matter what, the D800 is a camera Nikon has to defend at all costs. It’s at the heart of their most serious user base (as were the now lost D300 and D700 ;~). So I’m very happy to see a significant mid-term update of the camera. It’ll give it another year or two of life before everyone demands even more ;~).

        What has me scratching my head is this:

        * D3xxx, D5xxx, D7xxx — updates as usual
        * D800, D4 — updates as usual

        Everything else? Total update/release confusion. So in between the low consumer and the high pro we have Nikon:

        * Not updating the D300s
        * Not updating the D700
        * Releasing a consumer FX body (D600)
        * Re-releasing the same consumer FX body (D610)
        * Releasing a different DSLR (Df)

        Really? Why the total confusion between US$1100 and US$3000?

        • Deep_Lurker

          The D600 release made sense. The D610 made a bad sort of sense as a response to the D600 oily-shutter problem. The Df is one of those “what the heck, lets try it” things that I think it’s healthy for a company to go with on infrequent intervals. A company that never tries anything like that is too stodgy :o)

          My best guess for the lack of D300s and D700 updates is still that EXPEED4 was very very late, that Nikon was counting on EXPEED4 to let them do 24MP at 8 fps, and that Nikon considers 24MP at 8 fps to be essential to the D300s and D700 updates.

          And with EXPEED4 running late, Nkion went into “we will do what we can, rather than what we want to or need to do” mode.

          • Guest

            Your guess makes sense!

            My guess is that Nikon will release D800s in 2014 and people who have been holding off upgrading to D800 due to various issues (file size, etc) will jump onto it.

            Then in 2015, Nikon will update D610 to achieve higher FPS at 24MP with 51AF with EXPEED 4.

            Btw I will be upgrading my D300 late this year so I am kinda excited by this rumour.

          • Thom Hogan

            Possible. But that just means that the problems at Nikon are deeper and more problematic than most think.

            Bandwidth needs are actually pretty predictable far in advance, especially since the sensors themselves have long lead times. That a technology-oriented company like Nikon would fumble a critical path technology need like that is not a good sign. Again, assuming what you say is true.

            However, note that the V2 was running EXPEED3 and generating 60 fps at 14mp. So I’m not entirely sure that there was truly a bandwidth issue. Moreover, the D4 used EXPEED3 on the 16mp sensor, and certainly doesn’t have a bandwidth issue. So I’d tend to say, no, that isn’t the reason.

            • Deep_Lurker

              My understanding is that the D4 does have a bandwidth issue: That Nikon had to limit the D4 to 16MP and then practice dark arts to work around the issue and give the D4 its high fps.

              If bandwidth wasn’t an issue, I’d expect the D4 to have been 24MP instead of 16, and for the D800 to be 5.5. or 6 fps at 36MP, instead of 4 fps. (Or, possibly, the D800 would have been 24MP running at 6 fps normally, with the possibility of goosing it up to 8 fps with a grip or with firmware hacks.)

              Also, from what I see in Wikipedia, the Nikon 1 used an ARM based EXPEED – like the EXPEED4, and unlike the EXPEED3 of the DSLRs which was based on a different chip.

            • Thom Hogan

              The problem with EXPEED3 is that it isn’t multi-core, multi-threaded, and it most certainly has a top end for bandwidth. The issue, though, isn’t that there isn’t enough bandwidth to do large mp at high fps, it’s that while you’re doing that you can’t do other things (or at least you’re limited in what you can do). So there are certainly timing issues you have to deal with to make it all work.

              We also don’t know how much custom work Nikon is doing in EXPEED. It appears that it is highly modified from the Fujitsu chip being used at the core. But the how and why is important here.

            • RBR

              Nikon needs to do more work on the image processing and writing to memory cards. Current SD cards are supposedly 95 MB/s rated (yes, I know the reality is something less) and yet the write speed of the D7100 is believed to be less than 45 MB/s. The processing of the image files prior to that is well behind tech industry capability. An ASIC chip set is merely a dedicated DSP chip. Nikon are big enough to hire people to straighten things out if they lack the in house capability. The way the tech industry moves makes Nikon look like they are trying to come up with the successor to the Model T. The way Nikon’s management bungles things I have to wonder about the company’s future, much as I want the company to succeed and prosper. The company simply fails to meet expectations on a regular and frequent basis.

      • jen

        Picked up 2 D800′s from best buy in 2 days and both had clocks set to June 2012 when powered on, shutter count = 1. Basic test shots showed both with left focus issue. Had to return both and BB confirmed they don’t have 2013 or newer in stock, so sales seems slow around my area. Thanks for this news, now I just have to keep my D300 and wait.

  • HR

    What’s about 4K, a stereo micro, no AF and aperture noise during recording movies and an AF working using life-view and recording movies?

    • Lcky

      2016, after every 4k smartphone on the market becomes a threat!

  • Ласточка ¢

    54 mp?

  • Scott M.

    This would be great for me. Hope it is soon.

  • stoooopid

    So the NR schedule was that we would see one more DSLR announcement this year. I heard before that the great likelihood was that we would see a new product like a D2300 – a small SL1 competitor. So is it now the case that NR believes this will be the last DSLR announced this year, not the D2300?

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      I will have another recap on what to expect, but I think there will be more than one Nikon DSLR camera announced by the end of this year.

      • Thom Hogan

        Agree. The number is 2 to 3, with that 3rd one being a little iffy at the moment.

  • Dan

    If it matches the Df/D610 low light capabilities i might be tempted

  • jp

    The funny thing is that after years of hunting for ´more´ pixels is ‘less´ pixels the most appreciated feature =)

    • arachnophilia

      it’s probably the feature that’s going to make me buy a D800.

      i like to shoot events, theatre, sports, etc in raw, and 9mp is fine. 36mp is prohibitive.

    • Marcel Speta

      how did you come to this conclusion?
      Personally i am sticked to my D3s .. D800s would be mostly for landscape/product photography.

  • Bring IT!!

    Me too!! WE NEED THE D4X!!

  • bgbs

    Its a welcome addition, and I might even pull the trigger to replace my D700

    • arachnophilia

      i’m thinking this could be the much-desired replacement for BOTH the D700 and the D300s.

      • Deep_Lurker

        A replacement for the D700? Maybe – at least for those who don’t insist on being able to goose it up to 8 fps.

        A replacement for the D300s? No. A D300s replacement needs to be DX and $2000; a $3000 FX D800s could not be a D300s replacement any more than a D700 and a D300s could be considered interchangable.

        • arachnophilia

          well, if it can go faster in sRaw and crop modes… but that’s looking less likely now.

  • Anto de Chav

    I hope they sort out live view.. it’s pretty poor compared to canon.

  • Fabrizio Giuffra

    No wi-fi, no gps, no viewer 100%, no silent theatre mirrorless-like mode, no important upgrade. Some sensor, some machine, new higher price.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      The D800 viewfinder already has 100% coverage.

      • preston

        I think he means an option to zoom in to 100% in the viewfinder (not 100% viewfinder coverage) like in the new Fuji X-T1. This is of course not going to happen in a dslr. The only reason the Fuji can do it is because it is an EVF.

        • nwcs

          I thought he meant 100% magnification instead of 0.71x or whatever. Not 100% pixel zoom. Perhaps he will clarify?

        • ShaoLynx

          Yeah, well, I’m happy people are starting to chime in on the EVL. If mature that technology could have many advantages, just like Fujifilm is demonstrating, right now. Critical focus (in several ways) and especially: realtime histogram in the view finder are the most prominent ones for me.
          So, Nikon: keep developing a stellar EVF and put it in your top models…

    • Marktim

      You already have smartphone with all such abilities.

  • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

    I’ll buy it just for the SRAW and faster FPS.

    • jr456

      Agreed, this is huge feature for those hesitant to buy this camera before.

  • WorldShooter

    Hmmm, contradictory information… The supposed D800S will have “no low pass filter” and a couple of extra goodies like Expeed 4, but will still be priced between the D800 and D800E? That’s not gonna fly…

    • Thom Hogan

      Not gonna fly for whom? D800 users who already want an upgrade? No, it won’t, though why they think they need an upgrade to the best all-around DSLR currently made I’m not sure ;~).

      The reason to do the s updates is to extend the life span of a product for new-to-it users. It’ll fly just fine with those.

      • Ken Elliott

        I agree. I think the sRAW option – done right – might cause a few D700 users to make the jump. 8MP would be perfect for a lot of jobs that will never be printed large.

      • WorldShooter

        It’s not gonna fly for Nikon, Thom.
        This supposed D800S is not a D800 upgrade, it’s a D800E upgrade. And then for less money? I wonder…
        The D800 and D800E are still the unsurpassed DSLRs in the world, by any brand (OK, here come the Canon fanboys), so I wonder if they are really Nikon’s priority right now.
        I would very much welcome a D800S, but with some different specs: D800 body, D4 sensor and 8~10fps. Now that would be a complement to my D800E (setup, support equipment, like batteries, charger, memory cards). It’s probably also not gonna fly with Nikon, as it would eat to much into D4(S) territory…
        And you’re right: I don’t need an upgrade for my D800E…

        • Thom Hogan

          Sorry, but you’re mixing two things, and I sure as hell hope that Nikon doesn’t make the mistake of doing so.

          You’ve got a good product with strong sales. You want to extend it’s product life cycle. So you do a mid-term update. That’s what the D800s is about. A D800s is NOT about catering to current D800/D800E customers, though I suppose a few might pick one up (for example, I might sell my D800 body and pick up a D800s body to replace it, keeping me relatively current).

          The demand for a D700 replacement is a whole different beast. And one that Nikon fumbled, IMHO. Nikon management seems to think that a 16mp sensor with 8 fps in a D800 body will hurt their D800 sales. It might, but having a pair of choices at US$3000 (16mp D800h, 36mp D800x) would increase their total sales at US$3000, I’ll bet.

          I suspect that their spreadsheets show that D4s/D800s sell more than D4s/D800h/D800x. But I’d even challenge that assumption, and there’s another risky proposition living underneath Nikon’s assumption: if all pros and serious amateurs see is D4s/D800s, then this means that Nikon is restricting choices at the high end. It only takes one other player to increase choices at the high end to make that another failed strategy.

          Sometimes you have to work PERCEPTION as much as you do product. The correct perceived product for FX is:

          * consumer (D610)
          * prosumer twins (D800h, D800x)
          * pro twins (D4s, D4x)

          It’s Nikon themselves that established this perception. Now they’ve backed away. Very, very dangerous, especially since they really haven’t offered us a true alternative strategy that’s clear.

          • david

            I agree with you Thom, without reservation, just for a change !!

            • Thom Hogan

              What’s that? People agreeing with me. That can’t be right. I must have taken the wrong drugs. Pardon me while I adjust dosage… ;~)

  • Manvin

    Another great additional model, I would be surprise if they have fix video especially on aliasing issue.

  • Jon McGuffin

    Well, it looks to me like as a D700 customer, I just found out what my next camera is going to be. sRAW + 5-6fps will do perfectly coupled with fantastic DR and good ISO performance. For $3,000 I’m sold; bring it on Nikon!!!

    • Thom Hogan

      9mp is okay with you?

      • decisivemoment

        Sure, in the sense of having the camera be able to perform both high-res duties and action photography in NEF mode. If they get the downsampling right, with two greens, a red and a blue for each pixel, these will be really good 9MP files; what I’m concerned about is that they’ll end up rather big files as they appear to on the D4s. If that’s the case then I’d rather just take the storage hit at 36 and do the downsizing myself in post, if the software can keep up.

      • Jon McGuffin

        Well, if in being frank, it’s not much to work with but at the same time I’m a guy who’s perfectly happy on my 12Mp D700. What’s going to happen with guys like me is that I’m gonna go ahead and plunk down the $3k for that body and all that glorious resolution for my paying and important personal work. When it comes to shooting the more basic events, even some that pay, the mirrorless world is going to catch up in both performance and price to marginalize out the mid-body DSLR’s IMO. This is gonna make a DSLR have a kind if “medium format” like presence in 3-5 years. That’s perfectly fine by me but I don’t understand how canon and Nikon can be essentially so far behind the obvious in this.

        • Thom Hogan

          In their defense, if mirrorless isn’t there yet, do Canon and Nikon need to be there? ;~)

          I’ve written it before: if and when any other camera company truly has a breakthrough camera that begins to steal market share from Canon and Nikon, both those companies can and almost certainly will respond. Despite all the hype and hoopla you see on the Internet about various cameras, Nikon’s actual market share of interchangeable lens cameras just hasn’t moved much from it’s 33% center line mark for well over a decade. Sometimes it rises a bit above (D3/D300), sometimes it falls a bit below (D2h/D2x).

          • Jon McGuffin

            It may not be there, yet, but it’s getting closer and closer. The OMD-EM1/Fuji XT1 bodies are getting pretty darn close from all accounts I’ve seen and yes, I know people root for them to do well and that has a bias built in however. Technology can move quickly.

            I’m sure Nokia & Motorolla thought they had a pretty good business model in place in the cell phone industry year after year until something “new” came on the block and look what happened.
            Mirrorless is catching the eye of a lot of people for a lot of good reasons. I have no idea if the future of mirrorless has AF performance to be on par with a Pro DSLR & battery life to improve as well. If companies like Olympus & Fuji can grab a lead now, when the tables turn it could be an uphill battle for Canikon. Not manufacturing these cameras out of fear that you’ll eat into your existing market share is like not making more money because you’ll have to pay more taxes; that’s just backasswards thinking IMO.

            • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

              Makes you wonder if they have something ready and waiting. Would have to.

            • nikclick

              Agree with you..

              Beyond every economical strategies or predictions there lies a truth that People trust Canon & Nikon more than any other manufactures. They haven’t shout down their camera business at any point. An ordinary customer will buy a mirrorless camera if its Canon or Nikon.

            • Thom Hogan

              My sense is that mirrorless is getting verbal traction primarily for two reasons: (1) smaller and lighter than the DSLRs; and (2) the “systems” look like they’ll be more complete than DX/EF-S and again smaller/lighter.

              I use the words verbal traction because when you look at sales numbers of the X-T1, E-M1, and A7/A7r, we’re talking relatively low numbers. The D800 sold more in its first year than any of those cameras appear to be doing.

              I’ll have a lot more to say about all this in a few weeks, as I’m in the midst of a head-to-head testing session. But one of the things I’ve already noticed is that in every case, including DSLRs, you give something up to get something. So I think the real question is whether there’s been a shift in what customers actually value most. For a long time it was image quality (pixels, DR, etc.). I’m not so sure that’s true any more.

  • David Portass

    Best get some more work in and save them pennies :)

  • PGi

    Oh then I need to sell my d800 cameras to make some cash soon,I want Sraw

  • Arsen

    I hope they release this before capture NX2 is discontinued.. I have the D800E and best camera I have ever owned or used for my needs. The resolution after 2 years still blows my mind away. I don’t care about the file size, space is no issue for my NAS server. I prefer the larger files to work with to crop if I need to. I can always reduce the output for various formats. I would buy this camera if the support is for Capture NX2 with U point technology for the raw files. Otherwise I will hold on my D800E.

    • decisivemoment

      Nikon reps are taking suggestions about NX-D. I told one that it was really important that it take plugins, including NIK (which would mean retaining the U-point capability). He said he’d pass it on and that they’re actively taking suggestions. So call in and tell them the same thing.

      • Arsen

        Thank you for the info.. I will tell them that U point is a must.. I just love it. Its a must.. I am actually thinking of getting the D5300 as a second body for my son and still has Capture NX2 Support.

  • Arsen

    I would like to see live view improved on this camera.. My only complaint so far for the D800E .. Using 24mm Tilt shift lens, manual focus with live view is critical..

  • Rob

    Shut up and take my money!

  • Josef

    Any word on potential improvements to the live-view function?

    That’s really my only criticism of my D800. It’s very slow when shooting in live-view mode.

  • George Kalogeris

    I hope we get better VIDEO performance/conveniences.

    * 1080/50p is a must nowadays
    * 1080/25p recording in card while 1080/25p hdmi output
    * Auto-ISO in M mode please… (check sony A7)
    * fine digital zoom please… (check sony A7)
    * clean HDMI signal with switchable overlay info
    * ability to turn off screen while outputting to HDMI

    * smooth Aperture change (power aperture) during recording

    • MarkG.

      auto iso is already available on D800 in M mode

      • George Kalogeris

        Not true, just test it!
        When in Video mode Auto-ISO gets disabled

  • dpolzine

    Dear Nikon, please give us bracketing by 2 and perhaps even 3 stops… You can have the 1/3 stop back if you need it, we certainly don’t.

  • Sebastian Rasch

    Unlike the D7100 the D800E DOES have a low pass filter, but without AA filter. What’s it gonna be for the D800s? No low pass filter at all or same as D800E?

    • decisivemoment

      I’d assume none at all. I think part of why the E needed one was so that it could be produced on the same assembly line as the standard D800.

  • Back to top