Nikon D800 specs recap

This week I had three separate posts on the rumored Nikon D800 specs. Here is a quick recap.

This is the list of "confirmed" specs for the Nikon D800 (there are some new updates). My confidence on those is above 90%:

  • The name will be Nikon D800
  • 36MP sensor
  • 100% viewfinder coverage
  • Improved AF with face recognition – the D800 will still have 51 points AF point
  • Dual memory card slots (still not sure if they will be SD, CF or both)
  • USB 3.0
  • ISO range: 100 – 6400, ISO LO @ 50 and  ISO HI-2 @ 25600
  • The screen will be larger than 3 inches
  • The D800 will not have built-in GPS
  • Expeed 3 processor
  • There will be two different D800 versions/models, one with the antialiasing filter removed

This is the list of not confirmed specs from the initial D800 post (Google translation):

  • 4 fps continuous shooting, about 6 fps in DX mode with optional battery pack
  • Full HD video in 1920 × 1080/30p
  • Headphone jack, can input from an external device such as a PCM sound recorder, available also in new small wireless transmitter
  • 86K pixel split control, AF, exposure, white balance, etc. compatible
  • CF card and SD card slot
  • Shutter durability of 200,000 cycles
  • Market price is about 300,000 yen
  • Announcement on October 26, released on November 24
I still believe that Nikon will announce a new DX lens first and then the D800 with at least two other products.
This entry was posted in Nikon D800. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Segura


  • Chris

    The name will be Nikon D800
    36MP sensor (LIKE!)
    100% viewfinder coverage (LIKE!)
    Improved AF with face recognition – the D800 will still have 51 points AF point (LIKE!)
    Dual memory card slots (still not sure if they will be SD, CF or both) (LIKE!)
    USB 3.0 (LIKE!)
    ISO range: 100 – 6400, ISO LO @ 50 and ISO HI-2 @ 25600 (LIKE!)
    The screen will be larger than 3 inches (LIKE!)
    The D800 will not have built-in GPS (LIKE! GPS is unnecessary for me)
    Expeed 3 processor (LIKE!)
    There will be two different D800 versions/models, one with the antialiasing filter removed (They should just have one version without the AA filter.)

    • 36MP sensor (Dislike. With anything greater than 15-18Mpix I’d rather trade Mpixels for pixel site size and quality of recorded information)
      100% viewfinder coverage (LIKE! What’s there not to like…)
      Improved AF with face recognition – the D800 will still have 51 points AF point (Meh. Face recognition is for point-and-shoot, 51 AF points is overkill – again, give me fewer better points for the same price)
      Dual memory card slots (still not sure if they will be SD, CF or both) (LIKE! They better…)
      USB 3.0 (LIKE! Definitely, new standards must be followed)
      ISO range: 100 – 6400, ISO LO @ 50 and ISO HI-2 @ 25600 (Meh. Weak. I don’t need 6400 [nor the red line RPMs on my car] but higher limit means better performance further below.)
      The screen will be larger than 3 inches (LIKE! Definitely.)
      The D800 will not have built-in GPS (LIKE! GPS is unnecessary for me [and uses power…])
      Expeed 3 processor (LIKE!)
      There will be two different D800 versions/models, one with the antialiasing filter removed (They should just have one version without the AA filter.) [AA filter should be a must. If you understand how Bayer pattern sensor works… Experiment: Get 9Mpix (!) image where each pixel is of random color from the complete spectrum. Take picture of it with the imaginary D800 without AA filter filling up the screen with the image… Observe that not a single pixel site readout matches the color of the image taken… Simply said – image is 100% wrong, 36 useless Mpixs unable to capture 9Mpix image]

      • Eduardnic


      • Daniel Larsson

        Unless it is a black&white (monochrome) sensor! That would be incredible, 3 times as sensitive and much sharper.

        • Ben Hipple

          a black and white camera would be very interesting.
          2x the low light with out the color filters on each pixel.

          but 8 bit perchannel jpg gif, or png would not have the range yet to show off what the camera can do, and everyone would look at example images on the web. Web browsers dont work with anything better yet.

      • Moth Flopwell

        A entry level camera from Canon starts off with 18mp….I wish you girls would get it. A 700 dollar Canon has 18mp. I think Peter is right about this one….Nikon is thinking of the future. 36 MP is a lot. BUT i welcome it. Finally Nikon is playing this right….but My sources told me..this 36MP is str8 from Sony’s new full frame A99.

        IF this truly holds up…I am 100% glad. Nikon is finally on the right track.

      • Jim

        Thank god real life is not a 9mp image.

      • tub33

        You’re mostly right about taking pictures of random color data but I and most others do not take pictures of random color data. The AA filter is there to prevent moire and I’ve only seen moire in pictures of clothing and screen doors. For a landscape shooter than takes pictures of neither it would be great to remove the AA filter. Companies like Maxmax offer this service along with images showing the slight improvement in resolution.

  • SoftOnDemand

    Is it confirmed that this baby is not made in china or Thailand??

    Other than that….. ITS CUMMING!!!

    • Mark J.

      Highly doubt it would be made anywhere but Japan. This level of camera to date at least has always stayed in Japan. The fact were seeing a delayed D800 release date makes me think this is all the more likely as well. If it was being made in Thailand or China, the Quake/Tsunami wouldn’t of pushed dates back like it has.

      • Tonny

        sensor or some internal gear may be made in Japan and send over to Thailand or China for final assy. That’s why it delay.

  • Adde

    Can’t wait for this to push down the price on the second hand market for the D700.

    • Doug

      Everyone says that it’ll push the price down, but does anyone have any guesses on how far down it’ll go? New D300s price perhaps?

    • ArizonaSteve

      We will see how much it really drives down prices. If these specs turn out to be correct, the D700 and D800 seem to be somewhat different tools.

  • Rob

    I’m not so sure about the frame rate. You’d think in three and a half years they would have a larger increase in the throughput of the sensor and the chip, and could probably maintain the 8fps from before.

    I’m also hoping it’s combination sd/cf for both slots. It doesn’t seem like a step in the right direction going towards sd, and I’m annoyed that my D300s requires me to buy both in order to have protection from a card failure.

    • The slower fps might be a result of Nikon doing the same thing that they did with their D300 and D700 cameras. 1.) Produce more sales on the optional battery grip 2.) At least on paper, give pros another reason not to buy the lower end model camera, thereby justifying the higher costs of the pro body.

    • Psycho McCrazy

      if they maintain the 8fps with the grip, no-one would buy the D4.

      • PHB

        Nikon does not care about sales of the flagship cameras. They spent more on advertising the D3x than the revenues of the D3x. They are halo effect models. The money is made on the lower end cameras.

        One consequence of that is that the flagship cameras have to be designed with next gen consumer specs in mind.

        Another is that they don’t mind treading on an upmarket product. The D90 came out with almost the same specs as the D300 plus video for much less. The D700 was the D3 with very few changes. The D800 will be no different.

        • Psycho McCrazy

          I hope you are right and we get faster framerate with the battery grip and the larger battery (standard battery never boosts, IIRC).

          Even a pixel-binned 9MP high framerate mode would be GOOD!

  • dan

    The ISO is so disappointing. Why doesn’t it go up to 102,400? The D3S does, the 1DmIV does, and you can bet the 5D MkIII will. New crop cameras are pushing up to 25,600 so why oh why is their FX line not pushing to the limits too? So disappointing considering Nikon’s earlier approach of having damned untouchable low noise.
    And before people start sprouting on about not needing 102,400, I was regularly shooting 25,600 on my D700 @ f/1.2.
    It’s an absurd number, yes, but technology has advanced, why the hell are they screwing with us like this?

    • Brody

      i would rather it go to 6400 and be crystal clear than go to 102400. who cares about numbers its all about how it ACTUALLY works.

    • Roeder

      “Why doesn’t it go up to 102,400?”

      Does anyone ever shoot a usable picture at 102,400?

      • King of Swaziland

        Nobody really shoots a publishable picture at 102K because they kinda suck at that ISO, if there were good ISO 100K, people would use it. I’m sure that for specialty uses that ISO 100K is great for some people (camera traps biologists use, for example).

        • Monkey Nigh Mow

          Tabloid journalists would. A grainy picture of Brad Pitt doing Angelia is better than no pic at all. 😉

          • Sergio

            Yes, a grainy noisy picture is better than no picture at all. On the other hand, a one-stop under exposed is a picture edited to pull up the exposure is also better than no picture at all.

      • Martin H

        No, almost nobody shoots ISO 100k (I sometimes do, photo-jothurnalistic work, paparazzi work )
        BUT, the higher u have MAX ISO, the more usable ISO u have at lower numbers. With my current D3s I have no troubles going to 6400…

      • Moth Flopwell

        Who shoots that high? No One..why even have it…What am I missing here? Nothing…Move on Kiddies.

        • pavel

          If I could I would. So, you’re missing a lot 😉
          You know, shooting anything that moves fast in low light is in need of high ISO. And sometimes large aperture is not an option or is undesirable. In my case, dance competition where 1/200 is a limit and 1/500 and up is needed to really freeze the movement (they spin a lot) and f1.4 won’t get both partners in focus will profit from crazy high ISO a lot.

    • There are two possible explanations I can conceive of:

      Scenario 1) Nikon doesn’t want to cut into their market for the D4, and so they’re crippling the ISO capability of this camera to force photogs to choose, or better yet to be more inclined to buy both — aka “screwing with us”.

      Scenario 2) This camera is an evolutionary leap from the D3x in terms of resolution, and NOT a to be seen as a revolutionary leap from the D3s/D700 in terms of high-ISO. In this case, the main function of the camera is resolution, and not high-ISO, although 36mp @ 25k ISO is extraordinary, and probably pretty close to the equivalent of 102,000 ISO at 12mp.

      Either way, it’s pretty clear that, assuming this rumor is indeed true, Nikon has gone to a bottom up rollout, as opposed to the top down approach they’ve had in the past. Nikon used to make the top of the line pro cameras, and then the tech would filter down to the lower end bodies. The problem was that by making minor tweaks and improvements to the tech and features along the way, the lower-end bodies ended up being more capable than the aforementioned pro bodies, potentially leaving the early pro adopters feeling a bit ripped off. Some of these pros may have had a desire for the newer features, but having a bad taste in their mouth, may not have wanted to invest extra cash in the lower end gear as a matter of pride or principle.

      Let’s assume the D800 is the precursor to the D4x. Now pros have the chance to ‘downgrade’ build quality while ‘upgrading’ IQ/resolution specs, while those that have the budget for the full priced D4x can choose to afford that as well when it’s released later on down the road. This way, the D4x will have the same features as the D800, with slight or even significant improvements that only time and research can bring. It’s a true upgrade in every way (including price 🙂 ).

      People can whine about it or doubt it. But the more I see, the more I’m convinced that Nikon is trying something new, that being releasing the lower end prosumer bodies first, and letting the state of the art culminate in the top-of-the-line pro bodies.

      Sounds pretty smart, if you ask me.

      • Jabs


        That seems a part of Nikon’s new strategy – Bottom to Top instead of the top to bottom of the past.
        Digital cameras have now matured to the point where this is now necessary in my personal opinion.

        Well spoken!

        • AnoNemo

          I agree with the bottom up approach but I have a bit of different take on that.

          I think
          1) This is the end of the 8,000 USD cameras because if they hit that resolution then the difference can be marginal
          2) Due to tech development the need for tank sized cameras is no longer the case. They can make smaller and lighter. If that’s the case then the D4 will be much smaller
          3) If any of the above true (1 or 2) or both then they will provide more specific cameras. Under this I think they have a “small” high res (aka D800), a small low light lower res lower priced (maybe D8000 or D9000 at 18MP) and, a photo journalist D4 (this maybe 18MP but extreme low light and speed).

          Implementing #3 Nikon will address all segments of FX users

          • Jabs


            You forgot that Nikon also often moves sideways too – lol

            They introduce a new concept in a new camera and then these features are a test ground for newer tech – think Nikon FA in the film world and D3s in Pro digital and now the J1-V1 in their Nikon 1 system.

            D800 = completely new idea being released now before Canon ‘whomps’ them with an upcoming 5D MK3.

            Nothing hardly conventional but a new direction from a Nikon designed multi-pixel shifting sensor in a new body with removable sensors is how I am beginning to see it.

            A bigger Nikon 1 perhaps but with Expeed 3 unleashing great throughput.

          • Jabs


            NOT the end of the $8000.00 camera but the start of sticker shock when you see what a D4X will perhaps cost and can really do compared to a D3X.

            D3X was expensive mainly because of custom made IC’s (Integrated circuits) plus a 16bit internal pipeline (a first) and thus speed costs money as it was a one-off design by Nikon Engineers to say – LOOK at what we can do and produce ourselves with an ‘off the shelf sensor’!

            The results speak for themselves.

            Now that Nikon is introducing newer models, then the Research that led to the D3X will now filter down the line and get us better cameras in the mainstream but the barriers will still be pushed and thus I expect more expensive cameras at the higher end.

            Think of Expeed 3 coming from the D3X Research for example!

            Someone has to pay for all this outrageous new Tech being amortized over a few years and thus the D3X has paid for the new capabilities in Nikon’s future bodies as a real concept that works.

            Same thing in the D3S tech that Nikon designed themselves!

            Low light performance second to none plus clean high ISO unmatched in anything released so far!

            By the time the competition reverse Engineers the D3X’s 16bit pipeline and the D3S’s sensor to see what makes them ‘tick’, Nikon will have moved on – lol.

            Hello Nikon 1 and D800!

            Next D4 series to blow us away, perhaps!

            Research costs money, daring ideas/concepts and lots of thought is involved from your experience and thus you cannot fabricate or fake that!

      • SoftOnDemand


      • Carsten

        Don’t think it is a crippled D4 – why would they put this out before the D4 in this case.

        It is the evolution of the D3x, a pixel monster for studio/landscape work. The D4 class will be then reserved for ISO monsters, perhaps with a moderately increase resolution.

        I am disappointed that they didn’t include the on-sensor AF system here (the original post mentions 86 points). For the uses cases above some AF-points more off-center of the image would be useful.

        • mikycoud

          Totaly agree.
          On sensor AF would be really useful with regards to fixing lens AF miscalibrations and such.
          Also, more points, or equal amount of points but more spread out to cover as much of the FX frame as possible would be a fantastic addition, greatly speeding up composing…

          Not sure if we’ll see these innovations on this kind of (apprently studio/landscape focused) camera though, as these two disciplines do not require stellar AF performance (hence the succes of the 5DII, even though its AF is way worse than a D3000’s)

    • Brandon

      D800’s pixel determins it’s not “sports” camera. What I care is the purity of D800’s low ISO image. 4 me, iso1600 is engough. With today’s tech, the quality of iso102400 of 36mp image must be very terrible.

    • AS

      I bet you don’t shot at ISO 25000 and f/1,2, because you don’t have night vision in manual focus mode, so get a life. ISO 25000 downsized from 36 Mpix down to 12 will be cleaner than 25000 in D32, so again get a life!

      The only problem of tin camera will be the availability, it will be so good that you who’d find it easy…

    • @Dan,
      Naturally Nikon could push the sensor to 102K+, but what is the point. All of the magazines, forums, and blogs will write negatively about how that ISO setting isn’t even capable of returning decent results. I think Nikon would rather see positive write ups about how clear and useable the image is at 25,600 vs. negative comments. Having owned the D3, D700, D300 cameras over the last few years I definitely welcome the higher “usable” ISOs this gear brings, and I look forward to even higher numbers from future models. However, all three of those camera top ISO settings are less than ideal. Yes, the D3 and D700 go to ISO 6400, but IMHO the maximum you should push those cameras is 3200. Likewise, the D300 shouldn’t be pushed above 1600. So I will gladly take a D800 that delivers “usable” ISO at 12,800 and 36MP for cropping options. But me personally, I am holding out for the new D4 with a (hopefully) lower MP count (say 18-21 MP), and a two stop ISO gain over the D3. If you are really needing 102K, you should consider faster glass, or speedlights, or portable studio lighting, or possibly a tripod, or maybe even all of the above. 🙂

  • Ian

    If this is real I can use one immediately for studio and landscapes. High IOS would be great though. For me 1080p video seals the deal.

  • No GPS???
    That’s it…I’ll switch to Garmin 🙂

    • PlusOneGuy

      +1 =)

    • You made my day!

    • Yhannoby

      Ei garmin sucks! what about tomtom, lol!

    • I love it. Your hilarious!

    • Sports

      Been waiting for the Garmin D900 since 2006

    • best comment ever 😀
      thanks 😉

  • Sorry to be ignorant but what s split pixel control? Overall excited as I would like a second body especially for studio type work. Currently shooting D3.

  • asu

    36 mp??
    Reduced fps??

  • Can somebody articulate on what the pros and cons of removing anti-aliasing are? I know what AA is and it’s effect, but why is it a variable in this equation?
    Is it possible that, given the (large) size of the sensor, in order to make a second D800 version a little faster performing they remove the function from on board the camera (maybe to add it in their View NX/Capture NX SW’s?).

    • My understanding is that the higher a sensor reaches in resolution, the lower the need for an AA filter. They may have found techniques that allow them to remove the AA filter, which in turn would provide sharper files.

      • Greg

        The anti-aliasing filter prevents high frequency details from appearing like low frequency features in the image. It’s the old striped-tie-on-TV problem. You start getting moiré patterns and weird color color fringing as it fine details interact with the RGB pattern on the sensor.

        There’s really no way to solve this problem after the sensor, the whole problem with aliasing is that the sensor literally can’t tell whether you took a picture of a moire pattern, or if you took a picture of finely spaced lines.

        The best I can figure though is that most modern lenses are going to have a hard time resolving to the full resolution of that sensor. DP Review has some good lens test graphs showing how hard it is to reach Nyquist (the finest details the sensor can resolve) with current lenses and sensors. Bump that up to 36MP and there will be few, if any, lenses capable of resolving details to that level. In that case, the lens it self is acting as an anti-aliasing filter. Since the lens is incapable of passing high frequency detail, you won’t get aliasing at the sensor.

        If the lens is already filtering out the high frequencies, why add a redundant filter that will only reduce image quality, but not improve it.

        It’ll be interesting to see what the sharpness of the new lenses will be– can they come close to what’s necessary to fully utilize a sensor of this resolution?

        • Greg

          huh, went back to dpreview and it looks like they’ve taken the nyquist marking off their MTF graphs. Probably a result of bickering about whether Nyquist matters and that MTF shows attenuation of high frequency detail not elimination of it, etc… I don’t think that all matters much for this discussion– the AA filter isn’t a brick wall either, it attenuates higher frequencies, it doesn’t cut them off.

          As I see it, if you can tell that a lens is less than razor sharp, it’s acting as an anti-alias filter. If you could tell it was less than razor sharp on a D700, then it’s acting as an even stronger anti-alias filter on 36MP sensor.

          I’m guessing that the effect is strong enough for enough lens settings that Nikon feels comfortable stripping the AA filter off for people who want less stuff mucking with the image path.

          • WakkaWakkaFishTakka

            I’m confused. Why give people an option if there’s no reason to have one in a 36MP camera?

            • st r

              If people thinks they need it , they will buy it, regardless of whether it is actually useful or not.

              I think the nyquist frequency corresponds to about 2 pixels. I am not willing to work out the math, but I think that worrying about losing details of that size (I mean, the resulting size on a print at a normal viewing distance) is academic. In real life you will have much worse degradations, e.g., in printing, that will go unnoticed.

          • Patrik

            Its probably the other way around. There will be product/fashion photographers that want the high-res, but cannot tolerate any moir’e. They will use clinicaly sharp lenses (e.g. 85mm PC-E) and a tripod or flashes to get the detail, but do not want colour shifts caused by the fine patterns the lens is resolving, at least in the midle (Remember the AA filter is only there to help get good colour as it spreads out the light to hit all the RGB sensors of the Bayer pattern. A good filter has a controled spread to adjacent pixels, while a bad/cheap one offers less control.). Those photographers will opt for an AA filter, while the normal joe with a zoom could do without. Some lanscape shooters might also want to go ‘naked’ as there is less tendnacy for moir’e in nature (but at 36Mpix the filter won’t be that strong anyway…).

        • Eric

          Great explanation, thanks!

        • There is however a way to remove moiré from a picture: FFT analysis. The only problem is that you need special tools and skills for that (eg Image-Pro Plus, ImageJ etc)

          • Patrik

            Garbage in, garbage out. There are patterns that will look the SAME to a sensor without an AA filter. No amount of computing will be able to correctly regenerate the scene as there is ambiguity. This will be the great advantage of 36Mpix: it will take an extremely fine and well resolved pattern to cause moir’e.
            FFT analysis could better be used to control the noise though! When the frequency of noise is increased (by making the lattice spacing tighter) then the process of eliminating it from lower frequency signal is easier. Everybody seems to complain that noise will be increased, while in reality the noise will be easier to eliminate with tools that count on a high sampling rate (more pixels per unit area).
            I for one welcome the progress as it lets the user choose what they want: more detail with increased noise, OR less detail with smoother results gained through image processing (with high amplification you get more noise, increasing ISO is just ‘turning up the volume’ of the amplifiers…).
            I feed very excited by this progress and look forward to the challenge of using the added detail.

            • Greg

              This is actually a basic level engineering interview question: show a low pass filter and a digitizer and ask why we don’t just remove the analog filter and do the low pass filtering digitally. The answer is that you can’t because the information is already corrupt.

              It’s a little easier to think about these things in the audio domain: if you have a digitizer capable of resolving a 20kHz signal, and you present it with a 30kHz signal, the resulting digital representation will be indistinguishable from the representation of a 10kHz signal. The FFTs will look exactly the same.

              A picture is a 2D signal rather than 1D audio, and the spatial separation of RGB color channels further complicates things, but the same principle applies.

              You can use your knowledge of what the scene actually was to remove the aliasing, and I suppose you could selectively remove frequency bands that you, the human, knows were aliased down because you remember the scene, but that’s closer to painting than signal processing…
              You can use your knowledge of the

        • I thought that most MF digital sensors did not have an anti aliasing filter.

          • Kingyo

            They don’t. As it was explained to me, the higher you go in resolution moire becomes less of an issue.

  • WakkaWakkaFishTakka

    What exactly does the antialiasing filter do? What are the advantages of having it or not having it?

  • Does anyone care about a voice memo button? I need one!

    • Jabs

      I think that both the D3X and D3s have a voice memo function.

      Not sure about this new D800!

  • If that’s true, then D800 will target 5D2 or its replacement. In other words, D800 will be more like downsize of D3X rather than replacement of D700.

    • The D3X and 5D Mark II are in two completely different classes.

      • chris

        different classes but they compete directly…studio work, landscape, architecture….not too many photojournalists out there with a d3x

      • D3X the world is your studio.

        5D Mark II is home use only.

  • DX2FX

    Pls… Include the the pop up flash.. !
    So what is now the confidence level for the date of announcement this month ?

  • Image

    I really hope we see something that is more of a D700 replacement. I don’t want or need this D800. I still think that a FX D400 could be the D700/D300S replacement since DX crop modes can now achieve higher MP. If so, that will be the camera I buy for sure. There is no way on earth that Nikon means for this D800 to replace the D700. I’d bet my worn out D300s on it!

    On a side note…. instead of switching to Canon….I am enjoying my week old D7000 to hold me over.

    • @Image,
      Consumers, at least generally speaking, consider the higher numbered model to be the replacement for the previous generation. So a D400 would theoretically be the replacement for the D300 and not the D700. Likewise, the D800 would be the replacement for the D700. If Nikon were to deviate from their established model branding methodologies, they would confuse the masses. With this new D800 and its insane pixel densities, Nikon would have been better off branding it as a D800X and providing us with a lower pixel version called the D800 or D700s. I personally don’t like seeing a three fold increase in pixels from one model to the next; that kind of jump makes me think that high ISO settings will suffer. But, who knows, maybe Nikon’s R&D has made those technological advancements in pixel densities because their sales studies indicate that is what the consumer is demanding. I have heard that the D7000 was supposed to be the D300s replacement. If this is true, it may indicate that Nikon is moving away from creating high end magnesium DX camrea bodies because of the added manufacturing expenses. And if that is the case, then we may see a professional D400 FX body as you suggest; one with a higer pixel density, say 18MP, but one that provides astounding ISO as well, say 51,200. Eventually, Nikon may have to re-think their entire model naming conventions as they reach the end in their numbering schemes; but that is yet many years away for the single digit series like the D3, D3S, D3X, D4, etc, because of the long development cycles. I think everyone noticed that their product lineup with shorter development cycles had to jump digits (i.e. D90 goes to D7000, provided the D7000 was really the replacement for the D90). Maybe Nikon designates full bin updates to indicate a revolutionary change (i.e. D2X to D3), where they reserve letters for evolutionary improvements (i.e. S, X, H). I guess they may be trying to tell us that the D800 is a revolutionary improvement with its super high resolution.

  • Chad Lowe

    Well, all I see is that Nikon can STILL milk D700 sales for a coupke of more years – if not more. Nice strategy Nikon!!

  • Monkey Nigh Mow

    IF it allows you to take photos that ARE NOT 36MP if you choose (i.e. 24MP and 9MP “sRAW” files). Then I’d go for one. I do not need 36MP all the time.

    Especially attractive if the ISO noise at 24/12/9MP or whatever it is, is a lot better than at 36MP (Pixel binning).

    • durden

      yes ! It would be perfect if noise decrease if we use less pixels

  • SictransitgloriaD800

    I’m no where near as excited as i was for this camera. Unless some of these specs are wrong.

  • Tom

    Anyone care to briefly explain what AA does? Would it be a major make or break between the two versions?

    • Carsten

      The AA filter introduces a slight blur so that structures finer than the resolution limit (Nyquist limit) will not cause color-moiré.

      Of course this also reduces acuity, so no AA is preferable to achieve maximum sharpness. On the other hand moirés can ruin your shots by creating colored patterns on fabric. In landscapes such patterns are very unlikely to occur or being visible.

      It depends on the intended use if you want AA or not.

      Perhaps one day there will be a switchable AA filter based on electrotropic material…

      • st r

        > Of course this also reduces acuity

        How much?

        > It depends on the intended use if you want AA or not.

        How much blur does any filter introduce? How much blur does any dirt on your lens – or even traces of cleaning – introduce?

        Remember that the final format of most photos is JPEG, which, by design, introduces approximations in the high-frequency range in your image which are (I guess) much coarser than those by an AA filter.

  • nau

    Any news on lenses that will come out with this one?
    some good glass should be comming out to support MP like that…

    • Monkey Nigh Mow

      Personally I’m hoping for a 400 5.6 VR. Would be a nice lens for people who can’t afford f2.8 tele primes.

      • nau

        well it should be one consumer (kit) lens comming out with this one… Im hopping 24-70 replacement something more like 24 to~100 range 2.8 ! ! ! 🙂 give me give me give me

        • Monkey Nigh Mow

          Perhaps something like the Canon 24-105 f/4 IS?

          24-100 2.8 would be a massive lens…

        • @nau,
          A 24-100 f/2.8 wouldn’t be as practical as a 35-105mm f/2.8 VRII; it would go very nice with Nikon’s wide zoom, the 16-35mm f/4 VRII. While we are at it, let’s add a 120-270mm f/4 VRII to the mix as well, as it would also go extremely well with Nikon’s current 24-120mm f/4! That way, you can have either a 2 lens (24-120 f4 and 120-270 f4) or 3 lens (16-35 f4, 35-105 f2.8, 120-270 f4) combo which provides wide angle to super telephoto range at a weight/price index that your enthusiasts can afford, while being more sensible in the zoom ranges for the task at hand. What it comes down to, is what you are willing to pay, for the level of performance you seek, and what you are willing to carry. The f/2.8 zoom glass is big, heavy, and expensive. A 24-100 f/2.8 would be significantly larger than the current 24-70 f/2.8 and heavier to boot, not to mention more expensive. Pros and serious enthusiasts buy the f2.8 glass for the speed and versatility. Right now, it seems Nikon is trying to address the enthusiast market as well by creating lenses like the 16-35 f4, 24-120 f4, and the 28-300 f3.5-5.6. I wouldn’t be surprised if their next FX zoom for enthusiasts would be something like a 120-270 f4. In fact, numerous pros might even consider the trade off of speed for a lighter package, while maintaining decent optical performance.

      • Talkontar

        > Personally I’m hoping for a 400 5.6 VR

        I hope not! I think it’s a useless lens. I f I want something like this I’ll go with 300/4 with teleconverter. What I would like is 400/4 lens – gap between 300/4 and 500/4 is too huge.

        • Monkey Nigh Mow

          Its not about getting 400mm it’s about getting as much reach as possible.

          • Monkey Nigh Mow

            PS I’d prefer 400 f/4 too, but I know that would cost more than I want to spend. If they could price it $2000 or below I’d get it though.

            My 5.6 was just being realistic.

            • @Monkey Nigh Mow, 400mm f5.6 makes no sense. If you are looking for reach, the 300 f4 with TC1.4 will get you something like 420mm at f5.6 for about $2000. Not to mention, you get two useable focal lengths, 300 and 420. From the reading I have done on the 300 f4, it is very close in optical performance to the 300 f2.8, a real sleeper if you will, and at $1500 a real bargin to boot! Another option to consider would be the new 70-200 f2.8 VR II in conjuction with the new TC-20E III. I have read that this new combination is indeed useable, unlike the previous generation 70-200/TC-20 II combination was. With this setup, you would have a 140-400mm f5.6 capability and a 70-200 f2.8 for $2600. Lastly, you could just consider the 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 lens for $1850. I doubt Nikon will ever make a 400mm f5.6 prime as the audience which would consider purchasing it, would probably go for a zoom instead.

    • Gordon

      My bet is a 16/17mm PC-E lens will make an appearance, it would be a perfect companion lens for a high MP body targeted at landscape, architect and studio photographers.

      • @Gordon, a 16/17mm PC-E FX lens is like a 10mm lens in reality. Behind the shift movements, you have to have real optical glass. The 24mm PC lens gives you nearly the same FOV as the a 16mm lens does when you shift in both directions and stitch all three frames. With the avent of super insane MP camera bodies and the sensors ability to out resolve many lenses, I have my doubts that even the current 24mm PC could hold its own, let alone a 16mm PC. The only benefit I can see in landscape photography for such a lens, is the tilt movements you gain and the ability to capture in a single frame, a very wide FOV. Finally, such a lens would push the $3000 mark and probably wouldn’t sell very well. For archtitectural photography, your FOV on a 16mm PC would be so wide that you wouldn’t have enough degrees in the tilt movements to account for the vertical lines of objects at the extreme edges. But who knows, Nikon may do it anyway just to keep the pace with Canon.

  • MagicMonkey

    I am very disappointed by the 36 MP / 6,400 ISO spec. For me, the only reason to FX (with the extra weight & cost) is to get great high-ISO performance. Except for specialized landscape work, I can’t imagine ever needing a pixel more than 24 MP. What I would have liked to see: 24 MP / 25,600 max “std range” ISO (or at a minimum, ISO 12,800 as the max) . That would have given us the resolution of a D3x with the ISO performance of the D3s, and presumably would have been achievable given advances since those two cameras.

    • st r

      Pixel binning?

      • Patrik

        Even better: image processing! We get 3X the data. Well handled and you can more than make up for the increased pixel noise!

  • brian

    Finally a digital F6.

    I could see this as being the replacement for the D3x. With the AA filter for those that need it for fashion with an optional grip. Without the AA filter for those that want a landscape camera.

    What I could see them doing is also introducing a D700s as the budget full frame option once the D4 comes out and there is no use for the D3s sensor. It would just be a D700 with video and two cards slots like the D300s

    • arizonaSteve

      I would totally buy a D700s like that.

    • DavidB

      Why offer two different models? Make it switchable.

    • brian

      Because then there would be a gap in their pricing lineup. If the D800 is $4000 then the line up would jump there from say an $1800 d400.

      If they use the D3s sensor in a D700s using the same 95%(or whatever viewfinder and pop up flash) then when the D400 comes out the lineup would look something like this:

      D400 $1800 for sports and wildlife.
      D700s $2500 for photojournalists and those who only need/want 12mp.
      D800 $4000 for studio and landscape people.
      D4 $5500 for sports and the Olympics 18-20mp.

      This way they won’t allow a smaller less expensive body eat into D4 sales like the D700 perhaps did to the D3.

  • PM

    From this Chinese website, it seems like the camera is going cost us approx $4000 and Nikon will announce this on Oct 26, and it will be released on Nov 24.
    That’s really expensive, you can buy a d3. I shall buy a d7000 and save up.

    • they just repeat was was published here and on the digicam-info website

  • C

    Disappointed that it is still 51 AF, perhaps it is targeted for landscape which does not demand high for fast and accurate AF. Also, it prevents D800 from stealing D4’s market, because D4 must have more AF points.

    D800 is not a replacement for D700. I am still waiting for the real replacement of D700. It would be >51 AF, ISO200-25600, extended to 200K, 24MB, 6 fps, 100% VF, internal flash.

    But D800 is still a killer. There are too many peoples crying for high Mega pixel like 5D2. With this D800, it must kill their noise. However, here now we are waiting for the D4/D400 combo and the real replacement for D700, which should be the D900!

    • Monkey Nigh Mow

      You can always turn off some of those 51 points if you like.

    • JED

      How is 51 point AF a problem? The D3S has 51 points and last time I looked and it has the best AF of all.. More AF points does not automatically mean better AF.

    • Psycho McCrazy

      The earlier D800 bits and pieces post from NR said that it will NOT have the same 51 points system as the current flagships. This one says it will. I am confused.

      I just want some of the outer points (left and right) to be cross type, as the outer points of the F5 are!

      • The AF will be improved and it will not be the same as in the D3s/D700 but it will still have 51 points. Not sure if the location of the AF point will be the same.

        • Psycho McCrazy

          So all I gotta do now is keep my fingers crossed for cross type points on the horizontal extremes. SWEET!

    • andy

      51AF points are fine but they need to be more spread out to cover more of the frame

      • Walkthru


      • PeterT


      • Kingyo


  • Andy

    I REALLY, REALLY hope that this camera comes with a high ISO mode.
    Say downscaling to 34/4=8,5MP and double/quadrouple ISO sensitivity.
    Joining squares of four pixels, this should be possible, yes?

    I am kind of mourning from the ISO range here. I have been dreaming of astro-photo With a clean ISO 3200.
    ISO-wise now, all I get is a hard drive-hog with D700 ISO. Sad.


    • Monkey Nigh Mow


  • Garrie

    the big question is, does it come with Siri?

    • kulturindustrie

      Would be great.
      In Auto-mode: “Come on, you can do better, don’t you?”
      In the Menu: “Where the f*** is that AF-Assist light option, — ah thank you very much…”
      When having done a picture right: “Save these settings as C2”
      When next to a press photographer: “Sepia Filter on”

  • I think I’ll pass on it.
    I’m one of those NOT needing so many MPx if it means losing IQ at higher ISO.
    Price is NOT that bad, yet not my stuff.

  • to-mas

    Its not too long to wait, but anyway.
    The only things which are still to be answered for sure are FPS and the price.At least for me :).
    I think Nikon understand that 36mp are not needed most of the time,so will include some sort of SMALL RAW as Canon did, so I can live with that.
    But 4FPS?
    No deal. I still cant believe that they would leave all event photographers and mostly photojournalist without replacement for they d700 (either as the main or backup camera). D3/4 are not for every PJ. This is what Canon is missing. Fast smaller FX body.
    I just cant believe that.
    And the price…. we will see.
    But if D800 ends as a studio camera (36mp, slow FPS, high price) Nikon will loose many PJs.
    Many of them would stay (or buy) D700 (maybe secondhand D3s) for fast shooting.
    Like myself.

    • Monkey Nigh Mow

      Totally agree… well I don’t need the fast FPS myself, but for the rest I totally agree.

      If it can’t be used for a low light cam, I’m buying a D700 to go with my D3s (and D7000 I bought while waiting for the D800).

      I’m an event photographer FYI.

    • nikonlover

      yup, 4fps sounds suspiciously low…

  • colomba

    Too much MP and nothing special about other features…I have an old D80, and I watt a new camera but I don’t want to change my lenses or buy a new powerfull computer (to work on 36Mp raw files?!), this camera will not change my mind, I’m still waiting for a more versatile D400 with 60fps!!

    • Patrik

      You really should find a D700 and find out why there is such a fuss about its replacement. The D80 is a fine camera, but its no D700…

      • Foxfire

        So agree with Patrik, the D80 is great but can not hold a candle to the D700 or the D300s

  • nobody

    I would consider this D800 to be the quasi D700x that I would have liked to buy two years ago. No way will it substitute my D700, but it could compliment it very well.

    And now it’s sort of a D700XX 🙂

    • I agree with the last comment from Nobody. This looks like a new product line. The price point looks new, the concept of highest resolution in a small body looks new in relation to current Nikon SLRs. I don’t think this product – if it is real – will replace the D700: something else will do that. Personally, I can wait to see what else comes along in the next few months.

  • Well, i barely wait. And I hope it will at least an AF-S 50mm f/1.2 N G or AF-S 135mm f/2 N G. 8->

    • Charlie

      AF-S 50mm f/1.2 N G or AF-S 135mm f/2 N

      Yes please! They top my lens wish list as well (with the 135mm at the No1 position). Any camera with 36MP is going to require the best lenses possible to get the most out of the sensor.

  • How can anybody say ‘its a d700xx’ or whatever?
    How can u be dissapointed with its ISO?
    How can u be think its noise ratio will not be better than the d700 ?

    LETS SEE this camera first and test it, shall we, before jumping into any fast conclusions.
    If u see what they delivered with step-in models like the D3100 – D7000 , those camera’s deliver some neat images for their pricerange !
    1 thing i CAN BE SURE of, if its priced 4000$ or 3000€ its a big amount of money.
    My personal pain level is maxed out at 3400$ or 2500€ …maybe santa claus will lower the price for a new years present ?

  • Makkara

    I really can’t understand why you guys are constantly nagging about 36 Mp and whining about trading pixel to sensitivity. Haven’t you realized that perhaps megapixels are not tradable for ISO performance !?

    In other words you can get 36 Mp sensor with same amount of noise than 20 Mp sensor. Then we have real question: Which one you’d pick ? Would you still think that you could live better with less ???

    Don’t be stupid assuming that Nikon haven’t thought these up many times already.

    • Anon


      Low MP is the best for ISO myth. Not necessarily true or false, just wait and see.

  • happysnapper63

    No need for the speculations guys, if you want to know how your lenses are going to fair then borrow a D7000…..

    ” New crop cameras are pushing up to 25,600 so why oh why is their FX line not pushing to the limits too?” Geezs its really simple, the size of the sensor matters not, its the number of pixels for a given technology generation. This spec is the same as a D7000, the difference is how may pixels you get.

    Why do you want more focus points? the arguement around sports needing it is inverted. Nikon recommends you reduce the number of points as things speed up, the time I use 51 or 39 is to select the exact focus point I want in a scenic shot like a landscape.

    All these focus points,and focus area modes are mostly hot air. As are these extended ISO ranges Hi1 and Hi2, just allow photographers to play numbers games with each other.

  • D7000 Fan

    Come on. This will do a minimum of 6fps with grip.

  • Remi

    I’m sorry but for me these specs can’t be for the D800, it’s highly incoherent. I don’t doubt that those leaked specs correspond to a forthcoming nikon DSLR, but I really doubt it will be for the D800.
    if the D800 comes with a 36MPix sensor, what will the D4X come with ??? a 104MPix sensor ??? just impossible…

  • broxibear

    Just a bit of confirmation about the Nikon Plant in Thailand, it’s definitely been shutdown along with all the other factories in that industrial estate.
    “At least 269 people have been killed and 2.4 million displaced as a result of the seasonal monsoon rains that have hit the country since July 25, the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation said on its website today. About 30 of Thailand’s 77 provinces remain underwater, the agency said.
    Floodwaters that shut down factories operated by Honda Motor Co., Nikon Corp. and Canon Inc. over the weekend will reach Bangkok later this week, said Yingluck, who conceded that her two-month-old administration is struggling to respond to the crisis. The city of more than 6 million people is less than 2 meters above sea level, making its susceptible to flooding.”
    ““It’s a crisis there now,” Industry Minister Wannarat Charnnukul said yesterday by phone. “All 198 plants are closed. There is nothing we can do because the water level is higher than barriers.”
    Honda has already moved as many as 2,000 cars to Don Muang airport in Bangkok, where the government has set up its flood crisis center, Wannarat said. Flood barriers are still protecting the Hi-Tech and Bang Pa-In industrial estates in Ayutthaya, he said.
    “Though their plants are not yet flooded, they can’t operate because their staff can’t come to work and they can’t get raw materials,” said Tanit from the Federation of Thai Industries. “Raw materials imported from overseas are still at ports” because water has severed rail and road links, he said.”
    Any Nikon products coming from Thailand will no doubt be affected.

  • Kwartjuh

    Here’s my thought:

    2 D800 camera’s. A D800 and a D800x. The D800 will be around 18MP or so and the D800x 36mp.
    Now, recently, there have been patents of interchangable sensors registered by Nikon.
    Maybe they are giving users some kind of option to remove the AA filter themselves?

    36Mp is so insanely much that it becomes an incredible niche product. Thats why i think there must be 2 D800’s.

    Just my 2 cents

  • broxibear

    Here’s a Nikon image to cheer you up, * be warned it’s NSFW * (depending where you work)…

  • nuno santacana

    Still no word about if you think this is the D700 replacement or if we should wait for another FX camera with fewer megapixels?

    • Tetrasol

      So now the decision to see if the D800 will be considered enough of a lateral replacement for the D700, to knock the latter’s price down to around 2k . Or wait for the $2400-$2800USD FX I thought this camera would be.

      I know there is an effort to create a class of camera somewhere between the low professional and high midrange (D7k could have been on the low end of this class). But this body seems outside of that scope by a bit of a margin. It would make a great flagship addition to a line-up of bodies in this similar class, but I’m not sure why they didn’t just spice up the D700 as the next in-line after the D7k. And naturally, the D4 would have to follow soon after–you’ve now satisfied most photogs, leaving out only a cheaper body that would appeal to the filmmakers (ala 60D but with 1080p/60).

      Seems like the timing is off on this one–should have been added after a suitable d700 replacement was dropped. Lots of head scratching. =c>

      • Marcos M


        I’m one of those filmmakers that is awaiting for a 1080p/60fps DSLR. The timing of this announcement is actually not surprising, as RED and CANON both have major announcements on Nov 3rd aimed at the filmmakers; widely speculated that RED will announce their Scralett camera and that CANON will announce a video only camera with 4k sensor.

        I personally think Nikon has missed the boat on the video revolution, but was hoping that their next FF body would have true 1080p (meaning lossless compression, and NOT a 4/0/0) and 120FPS.

    • I believe the D800 will be the replacement for the D700

  • Anon

    My thought:

    36mp will be the standard resolution in the near future. For those enjoys the smaller resolution, Nikon (and other camera manufacturers) will provide the option of shooting RAW in the smaller sizes, such as the 24mp and 12mp.

    Technology has arrived at a level no advantage to be achieved by a native 12mp sensor over a 36mp sensor, ISO-wise. So Nikon will not be produce full frame 12mp sensor again.

    Accept it people, technology moves forward. What was 12mp yesterday is 36mp today.

  • broxibear

    As far as I can see the D800 will be the bells and whistles video camera that so many wanted (apparently it takes pictures too?), the D4 will be the stills focused camera for those who need high iso and speed.
    I’m still sure the D4 will be 18mp.

    • If so, it looks like Nikon new direction seem to be an overkill. As entry-level DX body owner, I’ll get D700. Hoping for price drop after D800 release. 36 MP is too far away from my needs. 🙁

    • Tetrasol

      If that’s true, then Nikon is behind the curve, since the Panasonic GH2 is already capable of 1080 60i. Doesn’t seem like it would appeal to many filmmakers given that price either.

    • Marcos M


      The initial rumored video specs are very disappointing. Nothing that filmmakers would rush to get given the other options. Also, RED is announcing their Scarlett DMSC (Digital Moving and Stills Camera) on Nov 3rd, which is rumored to start around 6K. Believe me, a filmmaker on a budget would not spend 4K for this Nikon body if it only does 1080p/24fps using 4/0/0 compression.

      • broxibear

        Hi Marcos M,
        I’m not a film maker, I don’t use video so I know next to nothing about video spec and if I’m being honest care about it even less.
        What I was suggesting was that Nikon would split the cameras so the D800 would be more suitable for those who wanted video features, and the D4 to those after fast stills. Maybe the rumoured video spec is wrong, as Peter/admin posted the video spec is “not confirmed”.
        Are RED users the same people who at the moment would use a Canon Mark II ?

  • Lawrence

    i bet 10 percent on the name that will be D4

  • Andy

    This is just looking so yummy! I love my D700 and these specs and the ability of going to ISO 50/100 for studio work is going to be great.. Definite upgrade for me! Fingers crossed this rumor is true

    • Tetrasol

      Kind of feel like I went to the dentist for a filling and awoke from anesthesia with a whole mouth full of gold. I mean it can replace the D700, but I’m not sure that the improvements would justify $1500 more if it were truly the D700’s replacement. Which makes me think/hope it’s not.

    • Patrik

      I’m with ya! Haven’t been so excited about a camera since the D200 rumours started. The D700 just happened, so the only issue was to find one. Now we get some warning. Really hope this happens! Will be saving up!

  • Markus

    Administrator: it was 99% Please also mention the release date again

    • Markus, it was 99% for the product name (D800) and the sensor size (36MP). I said that I still need to verify every single specs on the original list. I have no announcement date. I believe it will happen in the next 30-60 days.

  • Maybe a photo of D800.

    • Too small for D800. This is how my hands are looking when I hold D5000 (I’m 188 cm tall and thus have a huge hands).

      • MJr

        Prism too small and little square finder. And just really yeah too small.

    • no, not a D800, just an old trick – placing an iPhone on the back of a camera

    • EnPassant

      Very interesting! It looks like a real camera and is similar to previous leaks of other cameras and lenses. It doesn’t look like any existing DSLR, though it could be some kind of superzoom I don’t know about.

      The shape of the pop-up flash seem to be in style of Nikon, but could just as well be for a camera made by Sony or Canon. As to the smaller size compared to D700 one can just look at D5100 that despite having a bigger screen is clearly smaller in size than D5000. I don’t think it is unlikely Nikon will change the shape of the body as a a bigger screen anyway will force them to change the design. To make room for everything without making the body bigger, or even smaller Nikon may follow other cameraproducers and let the shoulders grow making the prism seem maller.

  • andy

    We want Cfast cards and thunderbolt!

  • Probably best way for Nikon, getting out semi-affordable hires FX while D700/D3/D3s are still low-noise kings. Next comes 18MP D4 and I’d expect updated D700 (with D4 or D3s sensor) next year.
    Btw. 36mp FX has exactly the same pixel density as 16mp DX (1,5×1,5) and we all know current D7000/D5100 sensor is a very acceptable trade-off between iso and resolution, so I’d expect D800 with 36mp being 1EV worse than D700/D3 like D7000/D5100 are and that’s ok. Also todays 36mp resized to 18/12mp, will have iso comparable to D700 (4+ years old sensor now) while having sharper image, a step better than D3x vs. D3 at 12mp was.

    • Tetrasol

      Interesting theory, so the D800 is a shot in the middle, to sate some D700 users and some D3 users. Then later they introduce two bodies on the “fringes” ie. D4 and the true D700 replacement. Makes sense if they make the announcements within the year–otherwise, it leaves a bit of a hole that some people might get antsy about and be tempted to court other brands.

      • Gordon

        The thing is, is that Nikon have had a hole in their line-up for at least 7 years. The D3X plugged it up a little but those who already jumped ship to Canon chasing MP did not return enmasse, especially those who shoot landscapes, architecture or fine-art where detail is king. The D800 is to help bridge this gap, I would not be surprised if a D700s was released the same day.

        As for the D3X, they actually may skip the D3Xs and head straight to a D4X with 48MP sensor to keep that particular pro body line at the pinnacle.

    • glenn

      I don’t think they’ll be selling a lot of these ‘d800’ for that price if the iso is 1stop worse than the d700. . .
      A lot of people will not buy, the mp alone do not make up for that 4000$.
      I expect 1 stop better than d700, why would it only perform like a d7000?
      Makes no sense at all, I’m definately not the only one not willing to cash out for a d7000 performance higher mp body…

      • Tetrasol

        Nothing in that $4000 price justifies such a large leap from the sweet-spot D700 to this. AF with face recognition? I expected the next line to laud the camera’s ability to automatically upload to Facebook and tag your photos for you. Personally, I’ve never experienced an issue of looking through my vf and not being able to determine the difference between a person’s face and the tree in the background. If it’s icing that’s inflating the price, then I will have to pass as well. Trust me, I would gladly “settle” for 16-18mp in this camera if the price was more reasonable/justifiable.

      • Ke

        I don’t think they’ll be selling a lot of these ‘d800′ for that price if the iso is 1stop worse than the d700. . .

        Whilst the ISO number might not be going up, I’ll bet the actual files are clearer.

        • glenn

          I’m not talking bout ISO6400 or whatever setting , I’m talking bout the actual performance on those iso settings.
          If the d800 on lets say ISO1600 is worse than the d700 … I aint bying. . .

  • Earl studios

    The 36mp scares me. Files at that size will kill my computer I’m sure. Excuse the stupid question but can I just shoot at size m or s to get a more manageable file size? But of course I probably cant do anything about that when shooting raw…

    • Tetrasol

      It would have to include an option to save the files as sRAW or mRAW (small and medium). Canon introduced sRAW with their 1D MIII and from what I understand is 1/2 the size of the full RAW file.

      • AS

        It who’d be a great Idea Tetrasol,
        – mRAW at 18 Mpis with one stop less noise and one stop + DR (than the original 36 Mpix file)
        – sRAW at 9 Mpix with two stops less noise and two stops + DR (than the original 36 Mpix file)
        With this the big file problem is no more, image quality who’d be superb, and diffraction irrelevant!

    • Jabs

      @Earl studios

      Look at these D3X specs

      Compressed 12/14-bit NEF (RAW, Compressed): approx. 45-60 percent
      Compressed 12/14-bit NEF (RAW, Lossless Compressed): approx. 60-80 percent
      JPEG: JPEG-Baseline Compliant; can be selected from Size Priority and Optimal Quality
      TIFF (RGB)
      Uncompressed 12/14-bit NEF (RAW)

      Already in the MENU system then???

    • Shoot RAW only when you really need it – with proper exposure and white balance you can do without RAW most of the time. Also shooting Jpeg+RAW then deleting RAW if not necessary might be a way to save space, backups, etc.

  • Back to top