< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

My first wedding with the Nikon D810 by Michal Kriesch

_8101552-13
_8102638-16
_8100225-1
Michal Kriesch (www.michalkriesch.com) shares his first impressions of the Nikon D810 camera:

Last Saturday I took my new D810 for the first time to document a wedding. I have previously owned the D800 but I wasn’t a big fan of the mammoth files which was the main reason I returned it to Nikon. So when I heard about the sRaw option in D810, I was quite intrigued.

Being a wedding photographer, I need a camera that has fast and accurate autofocus, great metering, awesome ISO and is “work-flow” friendly. So except for the couples location shoot, I shot only in sRAW. After all who is going to be printing a 2x3 meter images from a church ceremony or a reception.

Reading the specs of the D810 got me slightly excited. But there is only so much you can read on, ultimately you have to put it to the test to see how it holds up.

So here is my first impression of the performance of this little beauty. Mind you this is my personal “feel” of the camera in real life.

Focusing

The speed and accuracy is on par if not better then the D4 which I’ve been using since released. Even in dim lit situation like church and reception hall it didn’t let me down. Please note I use prime lenses wide open in these situations which is even more impressive how accurate the focusing is. I remember I used to discard 3-4 out of 10 images on my D3. With the D810 I only discarded like 1 in 10 if that.

ISO

This is a tricky one. Shooting sRaw the ISO is not bad up until 6400. Not bad means that you can crank up noise reduction in LR up to 30 and have clean, still reasonable crisp image with minimal loss of details and sharpness. In full RAW however, 6400 was quite noisy. Again nothing LR can’t salvage, quite the opposite, due to the 36 megapixels there is so much detail that even at 50 points noise reduction in LR you are getting great results.

Metering

I shoot a lot in AUTO ISO in Aperture priority mode. It seems this camera can recognize face very well and as advertised it does expose for the face! This is a great feature for me cause there is a lot of changing scenarios during a wedding where exposure can fluctuate is a split of a moment but D810 is so fas and adjusts perfectly 90% at the time. Even in back lit situation I was getting nice exposure for the face.

Battery life

I did 1500 shots and still had 2 bars left on a battery… that's decent IMO.

Ergonomics

Soooo good, camera feels very well in my hand, well balanced, not heavy (compared to D4), buttons are placed as usual exempt for the Mode button but it only takes a minute to get used to.

Menu and Fn buttons

I hate Nikon for not allowing to set Fn button to swap between RAW and sRAW. Instead you need to set this as a first item in My MENU, which can be recalled by pressing one of the FN buttons…. arrrggg

Shooting with a 36 megapixel camera

This camera is so sharp, that even the slightest handshake, object movement, shutter/mirror tremble and you will see an in-perfect, blurred image. My recommendation is not to go below 1/250 on a shutter speed if shooting hand held, unless of course you don’t drink as much coffee and smoke 100 cigarettes like me…

If you are considering buying this camera, you will not be disappointed. It is awesome and straight away it has become my favorite camera which I’m pretty sure will become my “work-horse” during a wedding.

Here are some images for you guys to look at:

_8101784-15
_8101687-14
_8101467-12
_8101398-11
_8101384-9
_8101361-8
_8101313-7
_8101306-6
_8101289-5
_8101171-4
_8100976-3
_8100324-2
All the best guys. Take care.
MK

P.S. You can follow me on Instagram: michalkrieschstudios and see more images shot with Nikon equipment.

If you have an interesting idea for a guest post, you can contact me here.

This entry was posted in Nikon D810, [NR] Reviews and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • mileshartphotography

    I shot my first couple of weddings with the d810 last weekend. I agree with much of the above. Over my d700’s every aspect of the camera feels so much more refined, and the images (after a quick edit) really are strikingly sharp and detailed. As mentioned it really would be useful to have a quicker means of switching between raw and sraw though.

    • Allen_Wentz

      IMO just use compressed RAW and forget sRAW, which is not really RAW anyway.

  • sola

    Nikon’s sRAW is a joke. It’s 9mp in a weird format, and the files are still huge, the same sizes as 36mp 12 bit lossy compressed. Just use 36mp 12 bit lossy compressed, the files are 99% as good and pliable as the 14 bit uncompressed, and they’re “only” 30mb each.

    • nobody

      No. Not 99% as good. They are better.

      • drpeters

        How so?

  • Roger Kirby

    I am a very busy wedding photographer and use D600’s, I rented the old D800 to test it out and was miffed about camera shake affecting the image quality. Shooting everything on a tripod is not my style. Plus I do a lot of church weddings. Providing the church is not dungeon dark, will the D810 handle this, or is it a waste of money?

    • Doug Levy

      Camera shake isn’t the issue, it’s that the insane resolution shows every single error in handling, in focus technique, in lenses etc. etc. I’ve seen this with every camera I’ve used >24mp. Makes me slow down.

      • Roger Kirby

        First let me correct what I said, The concern I have is the unforgiving nature of the camera (showing every single error), not camera shake. Wrong choice of words by me. The lens I have are fine, the focus technique, I hope I have got down by now, plus I hear the auto focus w/group is a lot better than the 800. The handling I am encouraged by the better grip feel that others have said it has, However there is a fine line between pushing your limits and the limits of the camera. It is where that line is that I have to discover. Wish I could persuade my local camera rental camera company to invest in one of these

        • mkriesch

          what I tried to say, is that at 1/250 you can just shoot and not really think about the handling… Going slower, you need to “slow down”. This doesn’t mean every image shot at slower the 1/250 hand held is blurry… Just be steady and it is fine.

          • Roger Kirby

            Got you. Thank you for the clarification

    • Zee One

      No-one who shot film describes this as a problem. Stick to the reciprocals and you’ll be fine.

  • steve

    I never shot a wedding, so I must be missing something, but from the description of the camera you need (“I need a camera that has fast and accurate autofocus, great metering, awesome ISO and is “work-flow” friendly”) and the pictures you posted, it really seems that the camera for you would be the D4/D4s rather than the D810…

    • mkriesch

      Yes and no… I like how light the 810 is… and its better then D4 IMO

    • Allen_Wentz

      The D4s costs twice as much and is bigger and heavier.

      The need for hardware redundancy in wedding photography makes two $3k D810 cameras pretty attractive as compared to two $6k D4s.

      Personally I really like the ergonomics of the big Nikons but cannot afford $12k, so I go with a D3 and a D2x.

      • megadon357

        D2X…now that’s making an investment count!

  • Kynikos

    Useful commentary.
    Thanks very much for posting this.

    I have the D800E and it’s nice to read my own opinions about the sharpness thresholds are shared by somebody else :)

  • Doug Levy

    This totally ignore the fact that sraw isn’t really raw at all – http://www.dslrbodies.com/accessories/software-for-nikon-dslrs/software-news/the-sraw-myth.html

  • Steady hands

    I don’t get the Sraw, why is it fine and 12!bit compressed scary big when they are about the same size?

    Andy why do you need 1/250 shutter speed to shoot 9 mpix images?

  • Alpa Cino

    I still cannot comprehend why anyone would purchase a D810, a DSLR with outstanding image quality and then dumb it down with the sRAW option. Just buy either a D600 or D4S depending on your budget, frame rate or work-flow requirements. Also, my $1500, 4 year old laptop batch processes 50+ RAW D810 files without issue and decent brand 3TB HDD’s are $100, the argument about work-flow soltutions is a non-issue, just like it was with the original D800 in 2012.

    • Ms.KrystalMeth

      Yep. Let’s NOT take full advantage of all the key points of the D800/E/810. I want a Mercedes Benz, but please put a GM engine in it for me. Dummies.

      • mkriesch

        Well I disagree.
        If you are shooting 100+ weddings a year, with an average of 2000 images per wedding, the data starts to get annoying.
        The 36Mp is only useful for images you want to print in large format. I have no need to print a 2x3metre image of a groom putting on his tie.
        So you buy 810 if you have the “need” to step it up on location shooting images clients will potentially print and hang on their wall.
        sRaw gives me better manipulation options for white balance, noise reduction etc in post processing.
        Secondly the focusing of this camera and metering is better then any other camera Nikon released so far (except D4), which if you have one, and shoot it for 12-14 hours a day, 2-3 times a week is pretty heavy (plus size I can’t complaint about my biceps so thats a bonus I guess)

        • mkriesch

          Sorry D4s not D4, D810 is better then D4

        • Ms.KrystalMeth

          Let me introduce you to, Df, or a older but goody d700.

          • Slippery Pete

            I think he is aware of these. Judging by the time you spend online and posting comments(generally critical ones), you must be aware of the pros and cons of the various models and see why he has made these educated and informed choices and not your recommendations!!

      • Gavin

        I drive a Toyota Landcruiser 4WD. Yet sometimes I just use it for shopping. I wish my car had a function to reduce its size when not needed

        • Slippery Pete

          This is a logical and common sense way of thinking. I think people like Ms Meth above has been smoking too much of her namesake. Just because I buy a D800, doesn’t mean every photo I take needs to use the full capacity of the sensor. Does this mean I need to buy several cameras of different sensor resolution to match my work?

          It’s about having equipment to cover as many scenarios as possible. If this camera gives options to achieve this then great!!

    • Global

      Maybe this is why he wants to SWITCH back and forth — so he can make the decision when its needed and when not. I still cannot comprehend why anyone judges other people for how they use their tools.

  • Duncan Dimanche

    I never had a problem with my D800 and shooting under 1/250… Unless you are pixel peeping like mad I really don’t see how that would be a problem… and that say it doesn’t specify what focal length not to shoot 1/250 at…. I recently bought the nikon 35mm 1.8g dx and snapped it on my D800 and I’m in love with it !

    here is a shot a friend snapped with it. I don’t know how much he was shaking or if he even knew how to focus but the result is much better than with some of my other lens :) it’s a 100% crop at f2 iso 50 1/400 35mm.

    • Duncan Dimanche

      and the full image

      • Eric Calabros

        Great details, but using el cheapo dx lens on a 36mp FF camera seems odd to me

        • cmorrow

          The 35mm DX is known to not have too terrible vignetting on FX, and be pretty usable, especially for the price.

          • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

            The 35 1.8 DX most certainly does vignette quite “terribly” on FX, and depending on the f stop used can be all but uncorrectable in post. It is, however a very, very sharp lens given its rock bottom price. I picked up two on the s/h market for about 9500 yen (less than 100 bucks) each. If you want/need the vignetting and take it into account, it makes for some very powerful, subject-focussed (O_o) shots.

    • umeshrw

      +1. In fact the key for me is to not judge every picture at 100% zoom level. Just view it at slightly more magnification than you would actually use it and you get a fair idea whether the image is usable or not. In my early D800e days I have discarded many usable images by viewing them all at 100%. Not anymore.

  • aguest

    All these posts and only one person felt the need to attach an image to make his/her point. Another, a mere link. But the OP, on the other hand, posts “some” (a full dozen) for us to see. I know an advert when I see one and I think NR was gamed here. (and if the images were stolen for who knows why that copyright script on each image would be easily posed out, red and all. Faux news.

    • aguest

      What shoddy copy I submitted there! Pointless emotional investment in a disposable post…

      • mikeswitz

        ….said the “guest”

        • umeshrw

          Not THE guest. It is Aguest.

    • mkriesch

      I provided these images with my comments to peter myself – no copyright infringement took place…
      I did this cause like many other people out there, I like to read and hear about other photographers experiences from real life situation.
      I don’t get held up on “technical reviews” etc…
      Its only an article, take from it what you like and move on

      • neversink

        Don’t late the jealous ones get to you. Good work on or wedding……

  • Ed Hill

    impressive shots great job, and thank you for the tip on the shutter speed when shooting hand held. I shoot with the d800 but still have not been convinced the cost justifications are there, if my d800 is in perfect condition. I have test the d800 and do like the improvements and the quality of the build, but I think I will hold out for the 4k video and new features that will really make the jump worth it. I think had they had wifi and 4k video with all these improvements I would have thrown my d800 out

  • rg

    color doesn’t look great here.

    • mkriesch

      agreed
      Colour is something I’m still struggling with, ever since Nikon came out with D4 and later models… the colour is bit weird. I’m not sure if like me lots of us are used to the magic from D3/D700 but even to date, I still consider the D3 to have the most pleasing colour results

      • Duncan Dimanche

        All you need is a little boost in brightness
        in lightroom +1,25 brightness
        + 35 in vibrance

        I think that you are just under expose too much especially for a wedding and if you are shooting RAW then what you get is a raw image that needs to be touched up…

        I took the liberty to touch up your photo just to show my point.. i hope that you are fine with that

        ps love the shot in the car ! what a great moment captured

        • mkriesch

          nice
          I have a feeling (looking al last 2 wedding just done last weekend) that the camera is underexposing… Like the guys below said, 1/3 2/3 stops, He’s spot on.
          I believe Nikon is trying to preserve highlight bit too much (hint-hence the spot metering option for highlight prevention). It looks fine on the LCD but RAW files are under… I had the same issue w D4 when I got it first, one visit to Nikon NPS and it was fixed… Nothing we can’t adjust to :)

          • Stan Chung

            Beauty of RAW. :)

        • Guest

          Here an example… bit more retouched this time but will give you an idea what I mean about the highlight…

        • Guest

          BTW
          I just noticed the image (when uploaded here doesn’t actually look like the you are trying to upload… whatever compression this site has, is muting the colour… have a look if you can see the difference

          • Waah

            you’re not exporting an Adobe RGB image right? because if you are, and upload it, it might be converted by the browser to SRGB

            • mkriesch

              yeah its Adobe RGB

        • Eric Calabros

          much better, but I thought thats about WB, there is more red in their skin here

      • affinityseattle

        No no, My D4 blows my D3 away. I can say this after pulling over 200k images from D4/D3 as my primary rigs.

        • Allen_Wentz

          Agreed. I own a D3 but have tested D4, and color on the D4 is preferable to my eyes/brain.

      • Dr_Bonk7

        mkriesch, you’re right. Adobe¹s Standard Profile has real issues with almost all Nikon NEF files, in particular an overabundance of what Adobe calls ‘Orange’.

        I’ve struggled with this quite a bit and found the need to profile my camera and use that instead of Adobe¹s
        profile. Even then most NEF’s going through Light Room need some work as Duncan below describes. Cheers on a great post – thanks for that.

      • tobi

        I am the exact opposite. I found the colours a bit weird from D90 onwards until the D4 and the other new ones.

        I found that they had a slight unpleasant florescent tinge.

    • rt-photography

      color and exposure is off. some 1/3 off, some even 2/3 under. but the colors are distracting my eyes. seems flat to me.

  • Global

    Beautiful pictures made by the artist and his D810. Thanks for sharing.

  • guest

    I don’t know about the sRAW option on the D810. It could be the bad copy that you used or bad post-processing. At any rate, the skin tones look like shit with greenish/yellowish cast all over the place. Besides, people look like either dead walking or seriously ill. If I hired you, I would probably see you in court.

    • HF

      I would be ashamed to post a comment like this.

      • Eric Calabros

        Trolls have no clue what is shame

    • mikeswitz

      crawl back under the bridge!

    • Roger Kirby

      Nikon Rumors should remove the ability to comment without signing in

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

        I disabled posts by guests for now.

    • neversink

      Have you tried anger management sessions….

  • Matthew Saville

    Mike I hate to break the bad news to you, but you’ve been horribly misled by one of the biggest epic fails in Nikon history. Do yourself a favod and perform a filesize test between a 36 megapixel 12-bit compressed raw file, and a “small raw” file. Then cry and curse Nikon. Oh, and then try to do serious shadow recovery on those two files, and watch the sRAW start looking like a JPG.

    Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but hopefully the silver lining of all this might be tha you’ve never used 12-bit raw in the first place.

    IMO, if size is a concern it is FAR more useful to just throw the camera in DX crop mode.

    =Matt=

    • HF

      You are right. But SRAW isn’t so bad after all. Look here for a very good comparison regarding noise and WB recovery. If you know it’s pitfalls it is quite usable:
      http://photographylife.com/sraw-noise-vs-sampling
      http://photographylife.com/sraw-study-wb-and-recovery

      • Matthew Saville Baldon

        Yes but WHY USE IT, if it doesn’t actually save you any space? It’s entirely pointless. You’re throwing away tons of resolution and editability, for zero savings.

        Like I said, this is one of the biggest epic fails in the history of Nikon. It’s pathetic…

        • Pat Downs

          I was SO hoping for a smaller RAW mode that binned the pixels or used some method in order to get a 20-24mp RAW file that was full quality, just smaller. I totally agree with you. I can’t imagine why I would ever use sRAW.

          • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

            I don’t see how one could interpolate the pixels neatly at 24MP, thats 82% of the linear pixel count vs 36MP… meaning dropping roughly one in five pixels.
            I don’t see how the raw data could be retained for that kind of interpolation. Even dropping one in three pixels for an appr. 16MP image would need serious scaling calculations.
            Actually, with the law of squares, 9MP is only half the linear resolution anyway. Its not nearly as big a drop in quality as it may at first seem and is fine for anything less than about A4 printing.
            But by god, the file size! What were they thinking?

      • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

        I don’t get it… It’s binning four pixels into one, right? Then why isn’t it 1/4 the size? It’s ridiculous.

  • fjfjjj

    Stop underexposing.

    • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

      I thought the exposures were pretty good.

      • rt-photography

        Your eyes adjusted for it but its far from accurate. Quite underexposed and I think this is causi g the bad color shifts as well. They all look flat and very brown. And not only in their skin

        • umeshrw

          There is nothing called a perfect exposure just like there is no perfect light. What if he likes his images that way?

        • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

          My night time street scenes are dark.

          Or are they supposed to look like daylight?

          • rt-photography

            yes of course :)

    • ashwins

      Exposure looks pretty good. He has just left the shadows dark for greater contrast.

    • David Portass

      Why say that? That look is probably his chosen style, much I like to go for contrasty photos, and other togs I know like to go for the over exposed look. His clients will have picked him on that merit so what might be underexposed to you is perfect for him and his clients.

      • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

        I quite like the moody look. It’s very “magazine” It’s half way between HC black and white and standard low intensity colour.

  • Crawler

    @mkriesch:disqus

    which lens did you use for the shots?

    And which lens do you usually use for weddings….favourites…?

    • mkriesch

      Crawler
      The above images is a combination of 85mm 1.4G and 24-70 2.8G.
      I use mainly 14-24 2.8G and 24-70 2.8G for groom and brides preparations. I might use a 85mm for portraits and maybe a macro for details but thats rare.
      Church is 14-24 and 24-70 99% at the time. If it is too dark, I use a combo of 35 1.4 and 85 1.4 with a 24 1.4 on my belt if needed a wider shot.
      Location is mostly 14-24 24-70 and 70-200.
      Reception only primes, combining all 4 of them as needed.
      I always have 2 cameras on me with another 2 lenses on my belt.
      I used to have D4 D3 combo.
      Like I says before… D3 would always give me “nicer” images. Nicer to MY EYE, I’m sure others prefer the look of D4. Yes D4 is overall a better camera but that doesn’t really matter.
      I now use D810 & D4 combo but I use D810 90% at the time…
      I find it better then D4 for focusing and metering. ISO up to 3200 doesn’t matter in this case. (pixel peepers will disagree and thats OK)
      I spend 6 years of accumulating all and every PRO camera and lens there is, only to find myself buying a wheel-case where Id have 3 bodies, 7 lenses, 2 flashes, 2 LEDs and all that other shit that comes w it. I realised that the 30kg that I would carry from place to place really doesn’t make that much sense in the long run. However there wasn’t a camera that I would be able to merge all these item together.
      Now lets think about this for a second.
      D810 give me 36MP resolution, when I need it. Give me smaller files (weather compressed or sRaw which again doesn’t matter cause for what I need in post production there is no visible difference, WB and ISO post production is the same to the naked eye). D810 also gives you the crop options and with that kind of resolution the crop is something usable even if you find yourself having to print from.
      Imagine now having 2 D810s. One would have 24mm attached to it, the other 50mm. With that you can sort of make 24 into 35 and 50 into 85mm (I said sort of!!!) So this might give you a range I use 99% at the time, with only 2 bodies and 2 lenses… Now for me this is a dream! Shooting for 14-16 hours a day 2-3 times a week with only this weight is something I grab anytime.
      D4s, better then D810? Quite possible but in what aspect? Speed of burst? So what… I’m budget is no issue you look beyond that and D810 ticks all the boxes for me at this stage. Is it perfect? No way, and honestly I don’t think they will ever make a perfect camera, never. So I get and use what I like, how I like it.

      P.S. how many of you have the most memorable images they cherish like gold taken from an iPhone or Samsung etc??? Just a though…

  • http://www.amateurnikon.com/ AmateurNikon.com

    OK, I very rarely enter discussions of this style, but I cannot stay silent on this one.
    Envy is a very serious flaw, and my friendliest of advice to those who suspect they might be victims of it is this: Do yourselves a favor and realize that whatever some person on the other side of the town/country/planet did or not has nothing to do with you. Whether you like the photos someone took or not, you are still making the same photos. Your photos are equally good or bad (with the only one to say that being you, in the end).
    This piece of advice is directed neither to obvious trolls nor to people with fair observations to share. But the rest of you, you know who you are. You are the kind of people who prefer to find flaws on other people’s art so that you don’t have to face the fact that you are unhappy with your own. I know it, because I used to be like that too (I suspect there isn’t an artist who hasn’t passed from that stage). Nowadays though, considering myself a mature individual, I have come to realize two things:
    a) There are plenty of photographers who are more experienced and skillful than me.
    b) I enjoy many of the photos I take, and I am capable of learning something new every time
    The rest are meaningless.

    • Jorge

      Hear! Hear!

  • txnikonshooter

    Why anyone would agree to post a guest post with all the haters here is beyond me but kudos to all who have. I’ve enjoyed reading the posts and viewing your photos. Nice work, MK and beautiful photos that I’m sure the bride, groom and family will enjoy for years. Thanks for sharing in spite of the haters here and, it seems, on all forums.

    • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

      To be honest, good art can be considered that which significantly divides the audience, creating discussion and analysis and which polarises opinion. Photography often generates that kind of feeling in the viewer, i.e. awe and admiration in one person and the complete inability to grasp the “charm” or “value” of a work in another.

      Take that old Japanese chap Araki, for example. He is considered a base pornographer of mediocre talent by many, but a candid genius with a wicked sense of humour by others.
      I met him once some years back in a local bar, he lives not far from me. Nobody at the bar recognised him as a world (in)famous photog. We had a little chat, sank a few whiskeys and sours and sang a couple of karaoke songs. He was very personable and friendly and didn’t seem at all bitter and twisted by the hate, and according to some, actual death threat.

      TL/DR: Good artists and pros often don’t give a shit what unconnected, random, anonymous people think. They create their work for themselves and their paying (or otherwise) clients. If their clients are happy and recommend them to their friends, Job Done.

      • Nikos Skartsilas

        Very well said !

  • clifflwms

    Nice work. I own a D800/D4/and a D4s, and for event/wedding type of work, I would never trade either of the D4’s for the 800; my D800 can handle it, but not nearly as effortlessly. use the D800 mainly for portraits and formal shots, the D4’s handle almost everything else. I MAY try the D810, but it would need to be yards better than the D800 for me to change my mind! (I have no interest in sRAW). But I’m glad that it’s working well for you. Thanks for contributing.

    • mkriesch

      Of course, if you already have D4s, and you have D800, there is no need for D810.

    • Mike

      The D810 has the same effortlessness as the D4s. I finessed all I could out of the D800 over 2.5 years and the D810 is as easy and gets-out-of-your-way as the D3s & D4s are. The D800 gives great results but you had to work for it. The D810 is far more forgiving operationally, and AF wise.

  • http://www.gregbenzphotography.com/ Greg Benz

    Agreed, it’s awesome. I shot a wedding this weekend with the D810 and was blown away with the exposure/focus quality. One other really nice feature is that the shutter mechanism is super quiet – very nice for the ceremony!

    • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

      My iPhone shutter is real quiet…. No. Just kidding. I’ve yet to get my hands on a d810 to try. Is it really that different from other D series cameras, say the D4 and D600 and of course the previous D800…?

      • http://www.gregbenzphotography.com/ Greg Benz

        It’s MUCH more quiet than the D800. In the span of about 10 minutes, I found myself wanting to shoot with the D810 whenever I could. The quiet continuous drive mode is awesome.

        • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

          Thank you. I will head down to the Ginza showroom and take a look there. I played with it at Yodobashi Camera but the environment was far too noisy to judge.

  • rsmith4321

    I’m a wedding photographer as well and shooting sRAW and returning your D800 for the file size just seems weird to me. When I first got the D800 the file size was a bit of a pain, but now storage is so cheap I would never throw away information just to save a few cents on storage. It’s not just a matter of printing reception shots in a really large size, but having the full 36mp file makes noise reduction much more effective because there is a lot more info to work with in Lightroom. I just don’t get what you are saying at all, I shot thousands of pictures with the D800 just last weekend it’s no big deal.

    • mkriesch

      i have few mates who shoot exclusively on D800/E in full RAW and we have these discussion all the time…

      No one here said anything they would not find important or believe in in their opinion… And thats cool.

      The D800 at the time I got it, was secondary to my D4 and was lucking, in my opinion in few aspects, D4 was a better camera for me at the time and the file size just annoyed me. Then, i couldn’t justify the resolution vs everything else. Today, is not only resolution vs everything else.
      Like I said in my post, the the “other qualities” this camera has, that makes is so good for me.

      If you are a D800 user, I guarantee you that once you try D810, you will buy one.

      Let me know when you do :)

    • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

      Hear Hear! Well said…. There are 6TB hard disks on the market at the moment. With which you can make a back up of 3 fully loaded 2TB hard disks (no shit Sherlock;) and put it in a safe…. There is really not much excuse for complaining any more. Hell, It’s less that $40 a TB here in Japan for 2TB and 4TB drives. Surely you can fit at least a couple of jobs worth of RAW files on a 2TB HDD (LOL) and justify the cost, even WITH a backup.

  • Elton

    Anyone who is looking to D810 sRAW as the answer to any problem might want to read this: http://www.dslrbodies.com/accessories/software-for-nikon-dslrs/software-news/the-sraw-myth.html

  • Roger Evans

    Has anyone else noticed a recurrence of the green shift on the new D810? I’ve had to re-calibrate the camera’s white balance towards magenta because the cast was so noticeable on shadows and skin tones. Bit disappointed that Nikon has let this slip through yet again.

    • Roger Evans

      Forgot to add that, despite the cast, the D810 is an excellent camera. The shutter is absolutely superb.

  • 5DollarFootlong

    I don’t believe any of these reviews. To me they are just marketing gimmick.

    “I used to discard 3-4 images with the D3 but now with the D810 I discard maybe 1 out of 10″

    lulz maybe you’ve gained that much experience that you can now shoot at a professional level? Or maybe you just…

  • Ken Lewis

    Is any body else having problems with skin tones, blochy area and the whole temp has cooled down, hard to match temp with any other nikon.

  • Back to top