< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon D810 recap

Nikon-D810-DSLR-camera
In the past 24 I hours updated almost all D810 posts with some additional information, check those links again for the latest news:

Here are few additional D810 related links:

Nikon D810 ISO test crop comparsion

  • Few more Nikon D810 video samples (if you can trust the YouTube description):

  • Nikon D810 vs. D800E shutter sound:

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

    So…ISO 64 seems noisier than ISO 100. Am I wrong?

    • Taliwanker

      Looks blurry…

      But on the other hand, ISO 6400 doesn’t look nearly as bad as before…

      • jk

        looks like a stop better than the D800E, and about as good as the D610 in terms of high ISO noise and detail.

        • koenshaku

          Which is a big deal considering the green noise from before. The sharpness is amazing in contrast to that of the mark III 5D I can’t wait on official reviews ^^

      • stormwatch

        Considering 36mpix sensor, ISO 6400 was superb then, but this…this is really hard to beat in the next few years.

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

          That’s what they said couple years ago.

          There’s no way to stop development.

          • stormwatch

            I tought about NIKON beating themselves, of course it will happen, but not in the so near future. On the other side Canon is still using sensor technology from 2005. even in the newest models. The only thing which keeps their cameras together is the firmware with multilevels of picture enhancing algorhytms, and people who switch from Nikon to Canon because Canon cameras are FLAT like Mac computers.

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

              I was referring to Nikon only, also.

              Give them a year or two and today’s cameras are outdated, again.

    • http://www.michaelbrinkerhoff.com Michael Brinkerhoff

      It could be because it was ISO 64 and there was accidental shake due to slower shutter speeds. Not much info.
      Are those 100% crops or scaled down images?

      • http://www.michaelbrinkerhoff.com Michael Brinkerhoff

        OK I spoke too soon. The images came from danvojtech.cz website. They are 100% crops.

      • neonspark

        I’ll say operator error. What we need are the RAWS not these stupid crops. I need to take a raw and boost the shadows and peek at the noise levels. that is where ISO64 will shine

        • http://photokaz.com/ Mike

          Apparently he posted jpegs because he doesn’t have a raw converter for the D810. I doubt LR or ACR have updated to include this camera yet.

    • jk

      it does not look good, but I think it is jpeg or RAW converted with the terrible Nikon Capture D.

      • Tadao_Isogai

        No
        ;)

        Shutter Speed Value : 1/3200
        Aperture Value : 22.0
        White Balance : Auto
        Gain Control : High gain up
        Contrast : Normal
        Saturation : Normal
        Sharpness : Normal

        • Teo

          f/22 with a 36mpx sensor?! Maybe it’s blurry because of diffraction!

          • Tadao_Isogai

            :)

    • Aldo

      good for those fast lens freaks wanting to take pictures under the sun at f1.2

      • Global

        With Nikon’s new f/1.4 G-series and Sigma’s stunners wide-open, this is becoming more common than you’d think! Our generation does seem to love wide-open. :-)

        • MUAH

          Yeah, bokeh everything. There’s literally tons of “Look I am a great photographer” -blogs, where every single picture is shot wide open and “look cool” but do not really have anything interesting content nor really any other aspects of photography.

          • Aldo

            pretty much.

          • umeshrw

            Or anything much in focus. Even when necessary.

          • Maji

            Well said… tired of looking at portraits with one eye sharp only…

      • neonspark

        think beyond shutter speed. Think possible gains in DR and color depth which always drop as the ISO gets cranked up. I can’t wait for DP and DXO to run all the tests at this setting.

    • UA

      I am not sure about following, but I have understood that this is possible technically (if someone knows better, please correct me). On CMOS sensors there’s an amplifier amplifying the detect signal for each pixel. That amplifier has a range. When sensitivity is increased the dynamic range or headroom gets smaller and you start to get noise (similar to distortion from speakers, if you turn up the volume too much). When it’s decreased, there’s point that the sensor won’t “see anything”, since amplification won’t do anything, and again you will get noise (or with speakers, you won’t really hear everything on the recording). The sensor is probably designed so that the sweet spot/the largest dynamic range is at around ISO200-400. Putting it to ISO64 would then remove the headroom in higher ISOs and worsen those.

      • Global

        Yes, and no, Broxi. In case of artificially “boosted” ISO 64, ISO 100, that can happen.

        But in case of the D810, the ISO 64 is a TRUE base (just like ISO 200 is a true base in the D700).

        There should be no loss to the dynamic range.

        • neonspark

          correct. we have had LO.1 and LO.2 but I prefer not to use them for that reason. This is true base 64 ISO which is the one thing I’m curious to see measured in this camera. All those low light freaks and their ISO 4 million can go shoot in the dark closet they belong. This camera may be the Low ISO god for those of us that do photography, not dark-o-graphy.

        • next

          just buy me a D900…

      • Bob

        Yeah that’s what I’ve read too. The best dynamic range and noise performance is at the native ISO of the sensor, which is usually 100 (or 200 on older Nikons). Go lower, and it’s about the same noise, DR, color depth, etc. For example, these graphs demonstrate it pretty clearly: http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm#D300,D700,D800,D4S
        What I want to know: is the D810 **really** a new sensor, or is it like the D4/D4s/Df where the sensor is the same and just the software changed. We’ll know when the DxO tests are out I guess.

        • Global

          Good link, Broxi. It shows it quite clearly. +1

          I am a bit shocked at the rate of drop off using higher ISOs though. I hadn’t realized it was that dramatic (the range), even though I knew noise increased. But it makes sense.

          • Bob

            Yeah DxO charts this stuff for all the sensors they review. SNR (noise), dynamic range, tonal range, and color depth all drop off rapidly as you increase ISO. Nikon D800E for example: http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Nikon/D800E—Measurements
            Interestingly, DxO measures the native ISO of the D800e at “73” (vs. Nikon’s claim of “100”). So again, the D810 may not be a new sensor at all. Nikon may just be changing the software to say “64” as the base ISO, and stretching the min/max. They did it with the D4s already.
            .
            From a business point of view, it would be much more profitable for Nikon to use the same sensor in as many cameras as possible, for as long as possible. Canon has done this for years with their 18MP APS-C sensor, and Nikon already did it with the D4/D4s/Df as well as other cameras.
            .
            Further, Nikon is barely surviving financially, and the D800 is already one of the best full frame sensors available – the only people they’d be beating in the sensor contest would be themselves, and they certainly can’t afford to be wasting money on bragging rights right now.
            .
            Given that information, and the fact that the sensor is exactly the same pixel size, I really don’t expect the D810 to have a truly “new” sensor at all – most likely the same old thing, with a few different layers on top, and some new software.
            .
            But, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. The new software might actually improve the performance of the sensor enough to be noticeable, since the faster processor provides more bandwidth for pre-processing the raw data before generating the raw file. Seems unlikely to be significant (since it seems they used the extra bandwidth for an extra 1fps shutter speed), but, we’ll see what DxO says when they measure it I guess…

            • neonspark

              I don’t think nikon is rounding down. but we’ll see.

        • UA

          Yepyep. The ISO is something that camera manufacturers “dial in” with digital sensors. They select the amplifiers so that the best dynamic range is with about the same exposure than with ISO 100 film. So the “native ISO” is something the sensor manufacturer can select. I think it’s really trial and error process depending on the properties of the semicondutor fabric and the amplification. So my guess was that if you dial down the amplification to get best out of the sensor, you might start get some noise, since you do not capture everything hitting the sensor. But this part I was not sure. At least on those graphs it doesn’t happen, but I have seen some DSLR sensor measurements in DXoMark that had little bit worse SNR at ISO 100 than ISO 200 (which I based my guess). Probably need to be CMOS photosensor engineer to answer this (I have CMOS IC background, but it doesn’t help here).

        • neonspark

          shhhh don’t tell the high ISO religion that their pompous pictures at ISO 1 billion have the dynamic range of a fax machine even if they measurebate to the low noise.

          • http://www.michaelbrinkerhoff.com Michael Brinkerhoff

            Normally I don’t like trolling, but that was funny :D
            Haha!

          • guest789

            Why are you talking when you have nothing to say?

      • Martin Brooks

        You’re comparing analog technology (speakers) with digital technology. They can’t be equated.

        • Greg

          It’s analog through the amp before the sampler…

          • ZoetMB

            But he was talking about distortion through the speakers. At that point, it’s all analog again.

    • Jason Hermosa

      That sounds about right. ISO 64 is like a “Lo1″ comparable to the “H01″ so it’s understandable that it should perform worse than ISO 100. ISO 64 is basically telling the computer to not interpret all the light from the sensor so that it could cut it down… making your fastest shutter speed and highest aperture about a stop darker. I think the Nikon D90 had this Lo1 setting for ISO 100 as it’s lowest ISO was 200.

      • neonspark

        . ISO 64 is base. ISO 32 is lo1

  • nikoncheapslut

    Sell a nikon d8oo for 1.500$ 1.5 year old because nikon product rocks

    • jk

      why is it so cheap if it so rocks? I can sell my D800E for about 1.8k or 2k.

  • virtualkyr

    ISO performance doesn’t look much better than my D90 at 1600. lol

    • Really

      Stop trolling please.
      I own a D90, and the D90 ISO performance is nowhere near as good as the D810 ISO performance.
      Seriously, the D90 at ISO 800 noisier than the D810 at ISO 6400.
      They simply don’t play in the same category.
      What are you talking about man ? Seriously…

      • Global

        Believe it or not, starting with the D90, things got extremely good in DX (perhaps you could say beginning with the D40, but at 6mp its a lower class, though very good). The D90 took everything to a new level, and its dynamic range is very similar to a D700. The D7100 improved ISO even that much better. I have a hard time distinguishing D7100 from D700 (in crops). And a similar small gap exists between the D700 and D800 (in crops).

        This is the D90 at ISO6400:
        http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00Q/00Qoht-70511584.jpg

        • MUAH

          I have had D40, D90 and now have D700. You cannot really compare their ISO performance. Yes, D90 made acceptable pictures at ISO3200 and sometimes even at ISO6400, but this was only the case with well lit exposures like your example. The shadows etc. were crappy as hell and the pictures just lacked the *omfph* that you get with D700 (dynamic range / color retention etc.). D7000 and D7100 are a different story, and they compete up to ISO3200 with D700. ISO 6400 however isn’t really up to the level of D700. I made a lot of testing between D700 and D7000 before jumping from DX to FX. More interestingly, D700 is a stellar up to ISO 800, where as D90 and D7000 start to fail right after ISO 400. That was also one big reason to go for FX back then.

          • Jon McGuffin

            I agree with this 100%. D700 @ ISO 800 is like base. D7000/D7100 takes a hit each time you move up although I concede, they’re pretty darn good up till you hit ISO 1600.

        • Jon McGuffin

          Having owned a D90, as well as a D7000, D7100 and now a D700, I can, without question, say that you’re analysis is inaccurate. The D7100/D7000 were noticeably (albeit small) better than the D90. The D700 is at least a full stop better in ISO performance it not more.

          Yes, this is even after downsampling. The FF cameras are just superior in this regard without a doubt.

        • umeshrw

          Can you say the same for shadows ?

      • Global

        And this post has the D90 for ISO 800-3200 (including the 1600 thats being discussed). To say the least, the D810 is important for reasons OTHER than ISO, although its ISO is extremely good. But all Nikons from the D90 through the D810 have been very similar (in basic small prints). I think the Df is where things get revolutionary in ISO.

        http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/40610092

    • Really

      Stop trolling please.
      I own a D90, and the D90 ISO performance is nowhere near as good as the D810 ISO performance.
      Seriously, the D90 at ISO 800 noisier than the D810 at ISO 6400.
      They simply don’t play in the same category.
      What are you talking about man ? Seriously…

    • neonspark

      if your measure of performance neglects dynamic range and color depth. which off course it would mean you have not clue how to measure high iso performance meaning you’re best now owning this.

  • DavidMCano1

    ISO 6400 doesn’t look nearly as bad as before… http://to.ly/zX0T

  • trekamg

    I sold my D800 last week on ebay for $2400, and now I have the D810 on preorder

    • itcrashed

      Get back to work you troll lol

    • jk

      a very good move, you are very smart , I wish I did the same, but too late. now I have to sell my D800E for 1.8k or 2k…..it is quite sad.

      • Global

        Its not sad; what’s really sad is that you’re going to have to sell the D810 for that much too once do this all again when the D900 comes out. :-P

        • lan ban

          Exactly after 1,5 year lol nikon product sucks gets cheap to quick

      • Jay

        D800E in good condition, moderate shutter count still selling for $2400+. definitely not under 2k.

    • Michiel953

      Eur 1400 was the offer for me, on exchange for a Df, December 2013, for my April 2013 D800… And that’s not going to get a lot better.

    • Aldo

      what are you shooting with in the mean time? O.o … when I sold my d700 I had to rent the d300s a few weekends waiting for the d800

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

        You do know you are allowed to own more than one body ? It’s not forbidden in law. In any country. Not even in the states.

        • guest

          They got no bread for they overhead. Too much buy-‘n-sell.

        • Aldo

          It’s forbidden by the wife

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

            Wives are like bodies, they come and go.

            • Aldo

              Not the woman I married.. she comes only once in a lifetime… and I’d be a fool to let her go.

            • broxibear

              “she comes only once in a lifetime” ?
              You do realize you’re asking for crazy follow up comments after posting that, lol ?

            • Aldo

              LOL … thought it’d be interesting

            • Vlad Dusil

              Hopeless romantic. I like it.

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

              Then you married the wrong one. :) Or you were in wrong to marry anyone…

              Recycling is the thing. One or two years is enough (without any official marriage of course, or whatever they believe they want). And even that is stretching.

            • Aldo

              lol no thanks… I like relationships with some dof :P

            • Michiel953

              F22???

          • Mike

            ….. as she wonders which of her 10 pairs of shoes to wear with one of her 12 purses…. ;-)

    • lan ban

      New d800 cost 2000$ lol

      • Mirko Pazi-Metak

        Go back hide in that hole,you troll.

  • Michiel953

    The shutter noise comparison must have set an all time world record for unscientific approach. My D800 sounds exactly like the D810, and I’m not kidding ye!

    Tbh, the D810 appears to be a very attractive camera, but whether it’s worth turning in my D800 for it? I doubt it.

    • jk

      it is worth it, go for it, sell your D800 ASAP. the electronic first curtain, the improved LCD and the LV mode, the much better video, the much better OVF,etc makes it a no-brainer.

      • Michiel953

        Thanks jk. LV and video don’t matter to me. Improved high ISO, improved AF, better OVF??, a slightly better, more D700 like, grip, a slightly quieter shutter, and the loss of the AA filter without any downsides, might.

        But never forget, the D800 already is a very very good camera. Hard to improve on.

        • Global

          Not to mention a NEW D800 is $2550 on ebay, whereas a new D810 is $3,250.

          $1,000 is a good amount of cash to save towards a future D900 in 2 years.

          • Michiel953

            That might be my answer too. Still a very attractive camera.

            On the other hand, shooting female portraits (new colleagues; for the website, stealing money from the pros here) in (soft) daylight with the 85/1.4G @f4.0 required a lot of pp. The D810 is even sharper? Great!

      • This Nikkor Guy

        ITS NOT ANELECTRONIC CURTAIN !
        Its same thing as in Nikon 1 series. the mirror and curtain are up already and sensor turns on and off electronically.

        Also D800 has same kevlar/carbon shutter material as D810. I was lucky to play wih a D810 production model body before even the UK noisy pic leak. Enough said.

  • jk

    I ‘d say it is not a minor update as many say. but it is actually a big update and I think I will buy one, I think the electronic first curtain combined with improved LV alone makes it a big worthy update. and ISO64 and 32 are big pluses , I think I will try it and compare it to my D800E and finally decide buy one or two of these.

  • Sebastien Girard

    I would really like to switch from DX (D7000) to this great camera, or to a D620 that would have a better AF system.

  • Aldo

    nikonrumors please stop posting this…. you are gonna make me buy one.

    • broxibear

      Don’t do it Aldo, you’ll cry when the D700 replacement is announced in early 2015.

      P.S. Don’t tell anyone I told you that, lol.

      • Aldo

        gasp!!!! no worries your secret it’s safe… I’ll just tell my friends on FB but that’s it… pinky swear.

  • Global

    The music on the shutter sound video was ridiculous. Sorta like cleaning the pallet before tasting wine, they shouldn’t have insanely loud beats before measuring a clicking sound. Jump to 0:20 seconds mark to spare your ears.

    • Ryan McBride

      LOL.

    • Vlad Dusil

      URRRRBODY GET DOWN unfz unfz unfz unfz unfz.

      Srsly.

  • Global

    For “ISO Peepers” and “ISO junkies” (like me), its worth having a look at B&H’s comparison of the D800 and the Df. Although the D810 is improved (better than D800 very very slightly), and even though I often make fun of the Df, the Df truly is a spectacular low-light machine. And for those who want VERY clean ISO 6400, don’t count on the D810 to give it to you. The Df might still have your name on (i’ll avoid any put-downs for this post, because the Df is just THAT good at ISO. Its lovely).

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/hands-review/nikon-df-vs-d800

    • Global

      (Notice that the B&H reviewer still preferred the D800, specifically because of its detail, though; but for low-light and clean ISOs, wow, that Df does its job well — I really hope to see that in a D900).

    • neonspark

      so you’re saying don’t use the camera meant for well lid conditions in the dark? sage advice!

    • HF

      Dowsized to the same resolution and ISO 6400 should be comparable. Look at Dpreviews comparison of A7s, A7r and 5dMarkIII in a recent article. Downsized a7r images were similar at ISO 6400 (+more details) and even at 25600 the difference was small. So for me the D810 offers both possibilities: great DR and resolution at low ISOs and very usable high ISO shots especially when downsized to 16 or 12MP.

  • mikeswitz

    I don’t mean to be a dick , but does anyone here think these videos are even half way decent? The one shot in in India is entirely soft, much of it over exposed, with the DR of an Instamatic. Even Dream Park which is beautifully photographed by top professionals looks soft with highlights consistently blown. I’m honestly confused? Why would Nikon spend so much money on a project which just shows the limitations of DSLR video when using lenses meant for still capture? Am I being too picky?

    • Mike

      Take samples with a grain of salt. There is a lot of internet compression going on.

      • mikeswitz

        That’s kind of my point. If they are not that bad (and I can’t believe the India one isn’t) why post them? Too much mney was spent on Dream Park to have an out of focus Grandma.

    • cowboycoffee

      the videos aren’t great. the compression doesn’t help either.

  • neonspark

    I’m very interested in ISO 64. In particular I want to see how much noise it pulls from the shadows. This may be a killer HDR setting.

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

    Can we now, please, also finalize the new naming scheme ?

    I wouldn’t want to keep pushing it to people’s head anymore… 2 (3?) years is a long time… And still some are arguing it doesn’t exist, when it was obvious since the beginning…

    A post from 1,5 years ago:
    http://nikonrumors.com/2013/01/01/the-remaining-2013-nikon-predictions-from-impress-magazine.aspx/#comment-755136573

    I don’t mind, per se… It’s been fun arguing about it but it was so obvious since the beginning… (which, of course, even more people would say now that it’s too late)

    So… Any rumours of the upcoming D9000 ? (and yes, that’s the final name of D400)

  • Jon McGuffin

    I think the real question I know myself (and I’m sure a LOT of others want to know is…. How does this new baby perform side by side against a D800e @ ISO 3200 & ISO 6400?

    Claims of an entire stop I think are not going to be very realistic. I’m hopeful we have some visual level of improvement though.

    • Eric Calabros

      who told you that one stop improvement is for RAW?

  • MB

    So it seams Nikon is finally listening to what customers want when designing new better cameras … how can it be …

  • broxibear

    Anyone in “Nikonrumorsland” heard any further information on where the D810 is made ? I know Peter (admin) is pointing towards Thailand, has anyone genuinely heard different from that…I’m trying to join a few dots of information I was given ?
    (The image below is manipulated, there was no text on the bottom plate image of the D810 that was part of the press pack apart from “Nikon”)

    • fjfjjj

      The image you posted says “Made in China” right under the barcode.

      • broxibear

        Lol, I know…I put it there.
        I also posted The image below is manipulated, there was no text on the bottom plate
        image of the D810 that was part of the press pack apart from “Nikon”.

        • Yup.

          You do know China and Malaysia are two different places, right?

          And I doubt it matters much anyway. The D300s was made in Thailand and loved by people. The D800 was made in Japan and had battery / AF problems at first.

          • broxibear

            Yes I am aware of different countries, I’m just asking a question to the readers of nikon rumors. I’m not making a judgment on which country has made it, or if one is better than another.

          • Neopulse

            The AF problem wasn’t because of a manufacturing problem in Japan.

    • guest

      The Nikon USA website posted an answer to that question. Thailand

      • broxibear

        Could you post a link, I’ve searched Nikon USA and I can’t see it anywhere.
        Thanks.

  • bgbs

    We’ll find out the true performance of the sensor when we’ll see some RAW. In the mean time please let’s not panic.

  • sjpadron

    At this time, I just want to congratulate at the administrator for the excellent work and for make Nikonrumors the compulsory reference for all users of Nikon. Greetings to all

  • lan ban

    buyin dslr nikon for 3300$ after 1,5 year you sell it for 1,800 $ Wow a good product dont fall in price that quick

    • orpickaname

      A good non-electronic product, you mean? ;)

    • delayedflight

      The D800[E] is a good product if you can’t get a decent image on it it’s not the camera’s fault.

      It’s second hand price is low because enthusiasts are dumping their cameras and trying to get new gear that’s pretty much it (plus they realise that they didn’t really need 36mp after all).

      D800s sell second hand average for about 2300~2500AUD in mint condition a little lower depending on how desperate the person is trying to dump it. Those 1800 dollar D800s are usually gray market cameras bought in Hong Kong.

      Right now you can get a D800 new for about 2600AUD (including rebate).

      • avidsiman

        I have a D800E and will be selling it to upgrade to the D810.

        I cannot get a decent image out of the D800E because the shutter creates so much vibration it introduces motion blur into every shot, even when using a tripod. I figured out I can reduce the vibration using quiet mode, but I cannot use quiet mode for all the shots I take.

        While many don’t consider an extra frame per second or extra increment of ISO worthy of upgrade, I do. I do a lot of action work in low light, so having improvements on both those fronts are kind of a big deal. But the improved shutter is the biggie I need right now.

        The D810 is what the D800/E should’ve been out of the box.

  • Jon Delano

    Is there any samples of the sRAW yet?

  • Steve Griffin

    Has the Amp Glow issue improved at all?

    • lorenzo

      I have that issue in my D300S, haven’t checked on the D800E.
      Where does it happen to you?

      • Steve Griffin

        Hi, sorry for the delay in answering you. I get pink amp glow along the bottom of the image on longer exposures. I was shocked when I saw this on my two D800e’s because none of my Pentax cameras has anything like it.

  • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

    Any news on the buffer? I’ll probably be using the 6 FPS 1.2 crop mode regularly.

    • broxibear
      • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

        Thanks broxibear. THAT’s interesting.

        Nice buffer, but it shows that sRaw is basically useless:
        – Same file size as 12-bit .NEF
        – Worse buffer than 12-bit .NEF

        • broxibear

          It does beg the question “What is the point ?”
          Is it just for marketing purposes to match Canon products ?…it’s all a bit strange.

      • KS

        Hmm…what’s written there doesn’t track with the info provided by Nikon, ie the pixel dimensions of the sRAW are half (or 3680 × 2456 pixels–or 9 mpx) In 12-bit RAW, that works out to ~ 13.6mb file. Half the dimensions, quarter the megapixels.

    • http://behance.net/coloretric coloretric

      Buffer news is in the japanese booklet however if you can’t translate, Nasim over at photographylife.com has gone ahead and done that for you :)

      http://photographylife.com/nikon-d810-buffer-size

      It’s two thumbs up from me on the buffer upgrade ;)

  • lorenzo

    Uhm…I start having some doubts here:
    Mr. Ken R. (the one that never uses a tripod and shoots only JPEG) in his review of the D810 writes “Made in Japan”, while DPR (as the Admin) say Thailand. Any pictures of the D810 bottom – beside the Made in China down below which is even more suspicious?

  • lorenzo

    I didn’t watch all videos posted here but I found this one on the Nikon site
    http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/D810.html
    IT IS THE WORST VIDEO I HAVE EVER SEEN FOR BOTH QUALITY AND CHOREOGRAPHY….
    It is actually a series of shots, most of which are blurred.

    • KS

      Are you talking about the “First Look” video? It looks cobbled together, probably by Nikon USA. Poor production values, and that Sr. Product Manager must think he’s photogenic (he’s not).

    • HF

      I don’t find it bad, I’ve seen worse ones. To call it the worst means that you will be able to do MUCH better. I would like to see that.

    • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

      Low budget.

      Did you see the India one? Worse

    • http://molnarcs.500px.com Csaba

      I couldn’t watch it. Got some cheese stuck in my throat around the 4th minute mark. And grandma’s out-of-focus eyes bothered me to no end – she looked creepy.

  • Spy Black

    I find it hard to believe that’s the stock Nikon setting for video. Nikon traditionally does apply excessive sharpening. The video in that D810 vs 5D Mark III video comparison has excessive sharpening to the point of hideous ringing artifacts.

  • http://www.povazanphotography.com/ Jozef Povazan

    IMO this high ISO chart does not seems to show any huge improvement of the D810 over previous D800 when the ISO is over 3200… just saying but, extra EV stop could look a bit better IMO :)

  • Carlos

    nikon sweetspot iso160, huge flexibility
    sigma dp sweetspot iso100, no flexibility
    leica sweetspot iso200, some flexibility
    ….
    find it, use it.

    • I always use ISO 160 on my Nikon too. :)

  • KMountaineer

    Dinosaur companies like Canikon are trying to convince people to buy their version of Blu-Ray and upgrade to “Fool Frame”. Cameras like this are dead in the water thanks to nimble and innovative companies like Pentax releasing cool and interesting products like the 645Z.

    • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

      Wow, I didn’t realize that! Thank you for your insightful and relevant comment!

      Next time a new camera, feel free to compare it to an $8500 Pentax.

    • Neopulse

      Wait, wait…. Dinosaur companies like Canikon in comparison to Pentax? Pentax has been around for ages too ya dumbass.

  • http://molnarcs.500px.com Csaba

    When I shoot events, people often ask me about my camera. What camera do you have? Canon or Nikon? Hate that question. Nobody ever asks what settings I used or even more broadly, how I take photos like that. We know this mentality, the general belief that it’s not the photographer, it’s the camera that takes the pictures.

    As a d800 owner, and looking at all my decent shots, I can’t find any that the d810 would improve. Better models, better styling, better command of lighting, better props (and good locations, which I’m lazy to scout for), more preparation – these are the things that would take my photography to the next level, not a new camera body (some of my shots here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/molnarcs/ ). More importantly, about 70-80% of the shots there could have been easily taken with my old d7000! And if you’re into portraiture and off-camera flash, take a look what some people can accomplish with a d3100: https://www.flickr.com/photos/dthomasd/

    This is just a word of caution – I think a lot of people gushing over the specs of the d810 would have a bigger payoff investing money into learning and improving their skills, or investing money in people (models, stylists, MUAs), or locations. The camera body should be at the bottom of your lists, there are just so many other things with better payoff to spend money on. Unless you’re rich, in which case go ahead ;) If I earned $10000 from photography a month, I would buy the d810 right away. But I think that’s not really the case with people obsessing about questions like how much better the new sensor is. 1/3 or 1/2 stop better high ISO? Seriously? Is that what will take your photography to the next level? I’d like to see some proof of that (show us your portfolio;))

    • broxibear

      Hi Csaba,
      You’re right in much of what you say, I don’t think anyone with photographic knowledge or an understanding of what photogaphy is would argue against what you say.
      The bottom line is that manufacturers like Nikon have to sell products, they sell them by employing people like Miss Aniela and Sandro to convince people to upgrade their existing equipment. Miss Anelia, Sandro and Nikon know fine well they got get almost identical results as they did using a D810 had they used a D3200…but that isn’t going to sell the new camera.
      Various blogs, forums and websites play along because they want to be amongst the first to have a “hands on review” so more people visit their site, so more people see their advertising. When was the last time you saw a review on DPR or Amateur Photographer magazine that said, ” you know what, this is a nice camera but your 5 year old body will do 95% the same thing and you’re better off buying more glass.” ? The places that do try and offer more sane advice tend not to get the equipment to test because Nikon etc don’t want anything but positive reviews.

      All the advertising, the dramatic films, the ambassadors are all there to sell you that camera and that lifestyle…and many people fall for it.
      You’ll get people saying, “that’s business” or “welcome to capitalism”, personally I don’t think it has to be one or the other.
      If people want to buy everytime a new model comes out then that’s up to them…I would just like to see more honest reviews and tests, so people could at least make a better choice over upgrading their current equipment.

      • http://molnarcs.500px.com Csaba

        I agree with you broxibear :) Yeah, basically this is consumerism at work. Do you want to take better photos? Pay $$$ and you will – that’s the basic message of camera companies. Most people buy this line, and are willing to spend on cameras endlessly without actually looking at their own portfolio and seeing what their real weakness is (clue: it’s usually not the camera). BUT! Without those people, the DSLR market would be an even smaller niche, more similar to the MF market, and I wouldn’t like that. That’s the silver lining of mass ignorance :D

        I do think it’s a good release by the way. I don’t see a good reason for upgrading from a d800(E), but for d700 holdouts, this could be it! Hope Nikon sells a lot of d810s ;)

        I find photographylife reviews pretty good – at least it’s done by real photographers, the quality of images in their camera reviews are fantastic ;)

      • HF

        Agree to Csaba and you. But remember that our industry and other industries, too, need growth. If everybody thinks so for every product than most companies won’t sell much and will try to reduce cost, get rid of employees, which can’t afford any camera any more … Bottom line, we need the gear heads lusting after the next best thing to help improve it and give growth to the industry.

    • Neopulse

      I get what you’re saying for your kind of portraiture work. It doesn’t depend too much on being the latest and greatest (since you’re working in controlled settings). But there are other forms of photography that depend on faster fps, bigger buffer and less noise at higher ISOs when shooting sports or wildlife for instance.

      And about the “Canon or Nikon?” comment, yeah, hear it too often.

      • http://molnarcs.500px.com Csaba

        I’d expect sports shooters to go for the d3s/d4/d4s bodies. Still, I intended my comment mostly to people who already have the d800. For wildlife shooters, I see your point :)

        • Eric Calabros

          Sorry, cant agree with you and all of these “mine is good enough” reactions to new tools. people are already spendin billions of dollars for starbucks coffee that goes no where! (Heck even it may cause diabet and cost another billions of dollars in health care system).. Why we shouldnt pay for better technology? With your logic we wasted resources to migrate to digital, cause film was already doing the job very fine! Its not always about improving the output. sometimes its about making things easier
          By the way, the reason you could have that “good enough” D800 for only $3000 was Consumerism!

          • http://molnarcs.500px.com Csaba

            I never said you shouldn’t pay for technology. I think you misunderstood my comment.

      • Mike

        Or more reliable AF with fast glass. I have an early D800. Some lenses I’ve run out of fine tuning room. It’s been to Nikon thrice. And now it’s out of warranty. I photos likely won’t improve with the D810, but I’ll be able to use some lenses again faster than f/4. Group AF mode is a beautiful thing.

        • Neopulse

          Sucks about the AF :-S I remember reading often about some 24-70mm f/2.8G lenses having AF problems and took a person quite a few returns in order to get a good copy. It happens with many man-made things nowadays. (Although hope it gets an update real soon).

      • O.o

        Ah, the quintessential perspective that perpetuates the incremental upgrade paradigm manufacturers literally bank on…

        There are certainly thousands upon thousands of ‘photographers’ who form a dependency on faster fps, bigger buffers, less noise at higher ISOs, and more mp too in order to achieve any proficiency in their task – however – there are no forms of ‘photography’ that depend on any of those things.

        • Neopulse

          Well let me give a brief explanation then,

          Faster fps: Shooting birds hunting a fish over the water getting each step as it flies, grabs, splashes, fish and goes away with the fish in it’s claws. To choose then later the ideal shot/s to print or publish or whatever one does with the shot. To help save time when it comes to deadlines rather than having to wait for the same event to repeat again trying to time right one shot. It helps over the fps.

          Buffer: Goes hand in hand with fps, but also to help not miss the shot when shooting consecutively so that one doesn’t have to pause and wait until it has finished writing the files. Bigger buffer helps the unlikeliness of missing the shot when doing so. Many people have had problems with the Nikon D7100 for example with it’s buffer size not being a decent D300/s replacement.

          High ISO performance: Kind of dumb to mention, since not every situation has controlled lighting (in most forms of photography like outdoor sports) in which one can shoot at ISO 100 or less to get clean files.

          MP: I never mentioned MP previously, although yeah there is importance in it since usually higher MP helps to have an increase in dynamic range and some photographers need that kind of detail for certain situations. And of course cropping yeah, if the subject didn’t pass by in a certain distance from your lens, it helps with cropping to change perspective and to even out the scene.

          What do you shoot with? A box camera right? Because if you shoot digital, then that would be considered an “upgrade” of sorts from the film era and in terms of commodity also.

    • Jeff Hunter

      Yes, the improvements are marginal. Some D800 owners wishing to upgrade will sell their D800 and then buy the D810 for a net cost of half or better than the full $3,300 price.

  • James Blake

    Will the D810 be sharp at every F stop ? For example the D800 using the 24-70mm has very sharp mm’s and f stops like at 50mm its very sharp at f5.6. Will the D810 be sharp all over or only at certain F stops? Just wondering.

    • Jeff Hunter

      That’s a function of lens performance not camera/sensor performance.

    • Michiel953

      Yes it will

      • Michiel953

        Oh. Sharp all over, every f stop; irrespective of shutterspeed.

        • mikeswitz

          Sharp as a tack wide open @ 5 sec. hand held

          • Michiel953

            And the good thing is: it’s all done with mirrors.

    • O.o

      In regard to sharpness across the frame (edge to edge, corner corner – regardless of aperture) that is a result of lens design, not sensor design.

  • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

    Stop the presses!

    He who shall not be named (KR) says it’s the “world’s best” in his detailed review.

    • megadon357

      Actually, he said it has the world’s best technical image quality for a 35mm film sized sensor. Is he wrong?

      • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

        Probably not!

        The key word was “detailed” that I was trying to use to indicate sarcasm. He’s almost certainly never seen one. He just rushes every “review” out and calls just about everything world’s best for something.

        • JoCarpenter

          In my humble opinion, KR is a hack. I want my five dollars back, KR!

  • Michiel953

    Just a question to all you professional/regular D800/E users: how many times did you miss THE (or a) shot because autofocus didn’t lock? Happened to me four or five times with the 58 Thursday night in 3200 ish low light (graduation ceremony).

    Be interested to learn of your experience, and your thougts on whether the D810 will be an improvement here.

  • Jonas from Sweden

    I would like a Kodachrome-mode for that camera. I do miss that film.

    • mikeswitz

      Try Dx0 Film Pack. Its has a Kodachrome mode. ;=)

    • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

      I use VSCO, but there is no Kodachrome as far as I know.

  • Alex

    Am I the only one who is royally pissed that the D810 doesn’t come with built-in GPS after all? I cancelled my pre-order after I realized this. Why isn’t anyone else furious that they couldn’t put in a $5 chip in a $3300 camera?

    • KS

      But it’s not just the GPS circuit, but also the antenna that requires space. I’m not making excuses for Nikon, but my AW110 has GPS, and the antenna takes some top surface room. If I need to geotag on my D810, I’ll plug in my Nikon GP-1, which probably gives me better reception than an smaller built-in antenna could.

      • Alex

        Well, but that’s exactly why this whole not-having-a-GPS on the D810 makes no sense at all. The AW110 is a much smaller, much cheaper camera. My dinky cellphone, also much much smaller than the D810, has had one for years. The D810 is not sold on being lightweight and small, so adding a bit of space should be the least of their concern.
        If the 5D Mark IV comes with a GPS, I will seriously trade in all my Nikon gear and switch. This is getting absolutely ridiculous.

        • Alderaan

          Change to Canon just for GPS? Nikon camera bodies and lenses clearly outscore Canon regarding image quality. Shouldn’t image quality be the main concern? It’s a camera, not a device to use tinder on.

          • Alex

            With all due respect, I don’t think that Nikon “clearly outscoring Canon regarding image quality” is a totally fair and unbiased statement. I’ve shot Nikon all my life, but Canon has a really good, solid lens line-up that’s right on-par with Nikon’s. Yes, image quality is the main concern, but for a multi-thousand $ camera, I expect basic modern-day features to be there. It’s like if you want to buy a BMW M5–yeah, the car should run well. But if it doesn’t come with power windows or power door locks, would you say, well driving is the primary concern and other things don’t matter, or would you say, WTF?

            • Darkness

              I wouldnt buy Audi though, troll.

        • HF

          ??? Why is GPS that important? I don’t care at all and if I want it I can use my cell phone to look up the position. Other bad side effect: http://ohm-image.net/opinion/photophile/obstruct-poachers-by-turning-off-your-gps

          • Alex

            How do you tag photos with GPS coordinates when you use a cell phone separately? Yeah, there are ways to do it, and you can sync photos using time stamps. But wait… what year is this? Isn’t it 2014 or am I daydreaming? Why is Nikon having us to this when we’re shelling out $3300? Oh, and seriously? I guess GPS is just a fad, like electricity.

            • O.o

              You seriously consider the GPS feature as significant as electricity???

              You are a child.

              Throwing a tantrum because ‘you’ are not getting something that ‘you’ want.
              Even though you have been replied to by people who do not share your obsessive life-supporting need for GPS, and find no quantification for your obsession (likely the reason the feature is not included) you continue to scream, kick, and threaten to take your ball and go home.

              Apparently the target demographic for the D8xx does not include a significant percentage of social network media bloggers who feel the need to ‘prove they were there’.
              One would think that if the physical location of an image were that important, apparently more so than your subject, you would incorporate enough of the surrounding to easily determine where the shot was taken.. If there is not enough of the background/surroundings in the image to discern where it was taken, then you could most likely replicate the shot anywhere else…

        • Alderaan

          GPS is just another thing to clutter the camera and interfere with smooth operation… A pointless addition to a camera.

          • Alex

            Pretty much every smartphone sold in the last 5 years has GPS in it. The slickest, tiniest iPhone, Android phone, or Windows phone has GPS, with NOTHING sticking out or getting in the way. I don’t see how GPS “clutters the camera” and “interferes with smooth operation.” If every cellphone maker can make tiny phones with GPS that works, Nikon’s inability to do it would only be a reflection of its own incompetence.

    • JoCarpenter

      Not to mention wifi. I would think the ability to instantly select certain photos to send to social networking sites would be a priority for a camera company that’s threatened by mobile phone cameras.

      • Me

        The people who buy D800s are worried about best image quality not instagramming hotdogs. Moreover, and this needs to be said repeatedly apparently, your home wifi network is not like a public wifi spot.

        The latter has to deal with many un-prioritized connexions. Basically it’s allowing all cars on the road to move without street signs or traffic lights. This is why connections at stadia are so ‘bad’. For the pro/pro-am cameras, the best solution is a private network to your laptop/phone and 3/4G to your cell network.

        • JoCarpenter

          Hi Me,
          I agree D800 users care about image quality, but fail to see what that has to do with instagramming hotdogs.
          Do you have something against the All-American hotdog? Are you Taliban?
          Nor do I understand your comments on wifi- I am ignorant in this matter. A private network over the cell phone sounds grand. What’s wrong with quickly and painlessly sharing an image straight from the camera? Send it to the phone, send it to the world. Sounds like a win to me.

          • Manuela

            Taliban is plural, singular would be Talib ;-)

        • JoCarpenter

          Maybe some type of Bluetooth connection would work to send specific images to a smart device. Like Airdrop. I just want a simple way to share images in real time!

      • JXVo

        Current Wifi protocols are a bit slow for 36 Mp images. Try it! Restrictions on GPs and Wifi exist in various places where the camera would conceivably be used.
        An add-on unit makes some sense for a camera sold all over the world. Problem is, the add-ons need to be small and inexpensive – but they aren’t!

    • Alex

      Thanks, everyone for commenting on this thread. Constructive comments, whether agreeing or disagreeing, are always appreciated. Some have said that GPS is “pointless,” or asked why GPS is so important? Let me say why GPS is so important to me. I don’t do a lot of studio work–I mostly shoot subjects in random places in cities all over the world. Before GPS came to cameras (which felt like 5000 years ago), I would have to bring a pen and notebook everywhere I go, and if I take a picture that I think might get submitted/published somewhere, I would have to stop and jot down the address/name of the place so that I can appropriately caption my photos. GPS is a godsend because when my photos are geo-tagged, I can just click on the coordinates in Lightroom, and Google maps would take me right to the place where I took the photo, accurate to within a few meters. There, I know the address, name of the place, and pretty any piece of information I’d care to find about the nature of the photo. No more bringing pens and notebooks, using pens and notebooks, organizing notes, stopping in the rain to write things down, worrying that I forgot this/that……… In short, GPS is NOT pointless. And NO, using an add-on GPS is NOT acceptable to me on a multi-thousand $ camera, in year 2014.

      • DeeEff

        A gp1 thingy costs NOTHING versus the time and money you claim to lose with notebooks and pens, so if you really shoot the way you say you do, you would be using two of them by now. Stubbornly using pens instead just make you look silly. Bye!

        • Alex

          Thank you for the irrelevant advice, but as a matter of fact, I have a GP-1, and a handful of other third-party GPS add-ons. Maybe you don’t understand my post, but as I already said, an add-on GPS is not an acceptable solution. They are too clunky. I would suggest that you take some English reading comprehension classes to improve your understanding of basic internet postings. Your local community college should offer some classes, and I’d be happy to point you to their web site. However, seeing as you have no appreciation of technological convenience, maybe you’d prefer to write them a letter and send it through carrier pigeon instead.

    • kassim

      Stop making noise already, Nikon’s managers want to milk their customers by selling add-on GPS module.

  • zoli

    sRAW is 3680 x 2456 pixels?

    • KS

      Yes, that’s what I read too. It would be like dividing the full-size FX image by 4 (or 36.3/4) = 9.07 mpx image. So if a 12-bit lossless compressed NEF in L is 32.4mb, then the sRAW should be ~ 8mb.

  • zoli

    Nikon should invent the mRAW…

  • Nicholas Fulford

    Everybody will make up their own minds about what they want to do. As a D800 owner I am very happy to see the evolution of a great camera, but it is not enough to make me change up the D800 for a D810.

    What do I plan to do. Simple: Wait until the D900 comes out, upgrade at that point, and IR convert my D800. I can start putting my daily coffee money aside now, and be ready in two years time.

    Now for what I really want from Nikon: A premium set of prime lenses that have the acuity to take advantage of this incredible sensor. Nikon has given us a stupendous high resolution camera. Now give us some lens that will take advantage of what the camera can do. Otherwise I will see a Zeiss Otus or Sigma Art series lens in my future. Nikon has already captured a high res oriented audience with the D8xx series cameras. We want the lens, and all you have to do is design and make them.

    • WDF

      They have, just put your sigmas away and try them

    • spike

      A slight deconvolution sharpening (photoNinja) on a file shot with an IR filter gives identical results to having the IR filter removed. Total waste of money, and risk of trashing a $3000 camera.

  • cowboycoffee

    i’d love to see some real video tests here. these are pretty bad. not to crap on the maker, but they look rushed and thrown together.

    I shoot a ton of video work with a D800 and an Atomos Blade. Would looooove to see some samples of video from the Uncompressed HDMI that aren’t ruined by YouTube compression.

  • j cortes

    This camera is a beast. I know the changes are incremental , but the D800/800e was already a stellar performer. It’s an amazing instrument, too bad I’m not in the market for a new camera.

  • Aaron Feinbrerg

    I’m most wondering if they finally fixed the LENR so the whole camera doesnt become useless while it’s processing an image (something my old 1Ds3 did 3 years ago)….

  • photoroto

    The D810 video examples are horrible, which I a hope has to do with the shooters more than the camera. In the hands of amateurs, the GH4 produces a video technical quality several times better, and that’s the truth!

    But I am buying the camera, primarily for the electronic shutter and not for video.

    I believe the side-by-side D810/5D3 video comparison is a fake. For instance, in the later shots the framing overlap is down to the pixel for both cameras. The the same person has produced other wildly obvious frauds.

  • Perplexed..

    It looks as if the still image quality actually got worse, by about one stop..
    As if Nikon simply slid the ISO range down to 64 from 100 and as a result 3200 now almost looks like 6400 did on the D800/E.
    Actually ISO64 looks like it is extended and not actual sensitivity, it is noticeably softer and appears to have less dr and lower contrast.
    Perhaps it is just the methodology used in taking the samples, but it is beginning to look more like marketing upgrade and less like technology upgrade.

  • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

    I ordered through a ad on this page to one of my local Swiss electronics chains (Interdiscount) and hopefully earned Peter a few bucks.

    Swiss people, check it out, Interdiscount has a special offer for less than CHF 3000. Best deal in Swizerland!

    This was the link I clicked:

    http://www.interdiscount.ch/idshop/__HYBRIS__/page/ID_Reservationen_08/detail.jsf?gclid=COaps-CxpL8CFdOhtAodtmwA2Q

    • BrianG

      Hell, what a price. If only I lived in Switzerland or Lichtenstein, you cannot order from other countries…But barely 2500 EUR…

  • fotomode
  • Back to top