New rumors: Nikon D820 with 46MP


Here is one possible scenario for the Nikon D810 replacement: a new D820 with a 46MP sensor. This is the only interesting rumor I heard recently worth sharing online. I am still not 100% confident with that information since it is coming from a single source. Hopefully this blog post will trigger some more tips and additional info on what's coming next from Nikon.


Nikon is getting ready for the CP+ show in Japan at the end of the month - see the new Nikon booth in the picture above. Any potential announcement should happen before the start of the show (February 23rd, 2017).

This entry was posted in Nikon D820, Nikon D850 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Nikon needs to focus more on “user enjoyment” and less on MP. Things like Eye AF (or just better facial AF that does better focusing on the eye depth (and not the ‘chest peak’ of women), focus peaking for manual focus, faster live view experience, and flip screen LCD (one that is usable for vertical photos will probably never happen from Nikon but would be nice. Example: Sony a99II) are the type of improvements Nikon needs to deliver. Add all of these with FF 4K 60p and two of the same types of memory cards and Nikon would have a great D810 replacement, even if it was ‘only’ 36MP.
    They should also come out with a nice small FF for the people that bought into mirrorless for the “smaller” reason. A D5500 body with a FF sensor would be a dream camera for me. Even if it didn’t have the best AF, Video (at all), or even HSS capabilities. I love using my D5500 but not so much my D810. The ergonomics on the D5500 are perfection. If you own a D5200/D5300 the comfort of the grip is enough reason alone to upgrade.

    • Dino Brusco

      exactly what is “chest peak” ? I’ve never heard of this.

      • peter w

        This must be a language thingummy. I guess you are Italian, your former premier Berlusconi is known for his high interest in chest peak. He wouldn’t mind the focus to be ten inches or more in front of the eyes.

    • Allen_Wentz

      Wishing for an FX D5500 makes no sense. A) FX is much larger and B) FX sensors cost a _lot_ more.

  • Bob Thane

    If it’s 46MP, we might get 6 fps. The D810 and D4 pushed the same number of megapixels per second (at 5fps for the D810 and 11 for the D4), so if the D820 pushes the same number of pixels as the D5 at 14 fps we might just get lucky…

  • 24×36

    I would HATE the Canon ergonomics. What do you do, use your middle finger for the shutter release?? Otherwise, your index finger has to move back and forth searching for button vs. dial, time consuming and awkward compared with index finger on shutter release and middle finger on front command dial.

    • RC Jenkins

      I am not advocating for Canon ergonomics–I like Nikon’s philosophy, but I’m disappointed in their execution and sharp angles.

      For example, I don’t mind supporting the camera with my palm, pinky, and ring fingers while using my thumb, index, and middle fingers to manipulate controls. The problem is that my palm, pinky and ring finger are squeezing together, while my ring and index fingers are forced in the opposite direction but steeply curved back to reach controls.

      Like make a ‘gun’ out of your right hand (index + middle finger as the barrel), but then bend your index+middle fingers at the middle knuckle–that’s an exaggerated version of this grip.

      I’d rather have a more relaxed grip where the base of my fingers (which are naturally parallel to one another) stay more parallel to each other–and the body shape should drive this.

  • Without other significant changes to the D820, a simple resolution bump from 36 to 46 is unlikely to make me pull the trigger on an upgrade. I did move from a D800 to a D810 and that had NO resolution advantage. They did however make the D810 significantly better, in my mind. My major reasons for upgrading were: no AA filter (I didn’t buy the D800E), higher frame rates, better AF (I had the dreaded left AF issue), better bracketing, EFC, ISO 64, and a drastically improved live view image.

    What can they do now to tempt me with a D820? Snapbridge isn’t going to cut it. Some options:
    – Even higher fps, ok if only DX mode?
    – Articulating LCD
    – Dual SD card slots (I hate having different cards). Though they might just go with dual XQD.
    – Metering and AF from D5
    – Better AF point spread
    – In-body image stabilization and pixel shift for massive megapixels. This is a stretch but has been done.

    • Spilt

      Doesn’t anybody require a better/good communication with mobile devices? A sorted out wifi pairing method for image transfer, geotagging, server upload? It seems to me that implementing (if not designing) such a thing would be technically much easier than eking out even more performance out of a camera body, yet I see no one else requesting it…

      • I don’t need it, no. I would like the ability to wirelessly trigger my cam with my phone, but I don’t really need to transfer images.

        First, I certainly can’t imagine editing big D820 raw files on my iPhone. My overclocked desktop struggles with D810 files so can’t imagine what a full resolution file would do to a phone. So transfer a smaller file? Lose many benefits of the big file, why not just take a photo with the phone? I realize that isn’t the same but it’s at least fast.

        Second, I don’t shoot anything that requires me to post it online immediately. It can wait until I get home, have a beer, and edit on a proper screen.

        Finally, the tools available on an iPhone are limited compared to the full Adobe suite and various plugins.

        So if the “feature” lets me edit a lower quality file with substandard tools while chewing my batteries, I’ll pass 🙂

        I can see how some people might want this, I personally don’t.

      • Miguel Lecuona

        I want it. D500’s solution is not there. I don’t need to edit major files on iPhone but there are plenty of times when I have shots that are high quality, and timely for Live Events from DSLR that are way superior to mobile phone and I just need to get them on the air or to the client immediately. And there is also a sales opportunity with immediate delivery for some photos to some people.

      • Tom Bruno

        Is that not amazing? Aside from size, the single biggest factor that has cell phones killing cameras is their easy, quick, intuitive online abilities. EVERYBODY wants this — EXCEPT, as you’ve noticed, the geeky nerdy 8xx fanboys! All they want is megapixels! Not ease of use. Not connecting with the rest of the world. Not GPS. Sheesh!

    • Allen_Wentz

      Agreed having two different slots is absurd. However, no way a modern Nikon should have SD slots, which are totally lame.

      Having an SD slot with the XQD is the only serious flaw in the D500. Dual XQD is the only way to go.

  • bulip1

    Hopefully it has full frame 4k video readout like the 42MP Sony sensor in A7R II.

    • KnightPhoto

      I would still like the option for cropped 4k when I need that for wildlife

      • bulip1

        You can get almost exactly the same sized crop from D500 today. I would prefer using the whole lens, as using FX lenses for crop factor of ~2.4 seems quite a waste.

  • JJSS

    No matter what, it’s going to beat 5d IV

  • Bill Ferris

    The quality that made the D810 the best DSLR in the world was the combination of high resolution and excellent dynamic range. If the D820 delivers 46 MP resolution without compromising on dynamic range, that will be one bodacious camera.

    • Miguel Lecuona

      And if it picks up on the D5/D500 AF system, Bingo. I love looking thru the D500 viewfinder and selecting any focus point full-width. Going back to D810 or D750, lacking that, is now a constraint!

  • Jim Huang

    Honest question for all the viewers at NR:
    What is your reason for you to still buying/invest into Nikon apart from “I can’t leave because I’ve already invested so much into it”?

    I’m not dissing Nikon in anyway, and it really is a great photography camera brand. However, I really just feel like that is the only thing it can do well, but most other brands can do just as good.

    • Michiel953

      Hi Jim!

      • Jim Huang

        hi!

    • maxx

      Jim it is simple… because here, we are Nikon fans!!!!!! We love Nikon! We have already made the choice a long time ago… at the moment for example… the best camera, in my opinon, is Nikon D810!

      • Jim Huang

        Haha, of course.
        I like Nikon as well, but I just don’t think Nikon is a “young people” friendly camera company. I’m in my mid 20s, and most of my friends coming to photography with a smart phone. For us, touch screen, GPS, Live View with good AF, 4K, flexible software support…etc, we got really confused when you spend thousand of dollars on cameras and realized the hardware is very limited. Nikon also seems to bottle neck on the software as well.
        I started with Nikon D80>D7000>D3200>D7100, now a D4S at work. As far as innovation is concerned, as a young person, it really is rather “meh” even compared to what cellphone cameras are doing.

        To be honest, I’m really surprised Samsung NX1 didn’t take off back in 2015. It seems to tick a lot of boxes.

        • masterac

          Jim, you can’t compare dslr and smartphone.
          4k on smartphone will never be has good has dslr, starting with noise, the d500 (which i own) go up to 1.6 million, even if that is unusable it still can shoot great around 100 000-200 000, you wont find a smartphone capable of same.
          Also even in video, slaming 4k….8k or what not on it doesnt work,you need f/s and bitrate (thats why gopro 120 fps in 1080p look more like 720p…and also why gopro aknowledge that the hero 5 black wasnt a new camera but barely a hero 4.1, and why they will release a hero 6 that should finaly has a better bitrate.

          • Jim Huang

            Totally, you cant beat physics. However, I’m not comparing image quality here, but as a single purposed machine, shouldn’t it has more features and innovation than a multi role device?

            For example, some phone has infrared laser to help camera focus, while Nikon uses a lamp that only works with center focus point.
            With a free 3rd party camera app, my phone has zebra, focus peaking. Nikon only has zebra with their latest model cameras
            The list goes on…

            If you send hundreds or thousands of dollars on a camera, shouldn’t you expect more than just a bigger sensor?

            Anyways, we are going off topic here.
            If we put emotion, the bother to learn a new system, then what will be the reason to stay with Nikon apart from the cost of changing the system?

            • masterac

              Personnaly i always felt that canon look more like a plastic kids toy

            • Jim Huang

              Hahahaha~ so its the look that keeps you in Nikon land then? XP

            • masterac

              No its just when i take one in my hand i got more control, canon lack button everywhere.
              When i travel i put some brown tape on the camera to make people think its damage so there is les chance they steal it

            • Tom Bruno

              “If you send hundreds or thousands of dollars on a camera, shouldn’t you expect more than just a bigger sensor?”
              Of course, you are right. But you’d never know that from reading comments here. More mp! More mp! That’s the cry. Connectivity? Huh? What’s that? No, the D8xx crowd seems to be an insular group, kind of like water buffalo. The bigger the better, no matter how dumb it is.

        • Bill Ferris

          So, yours is more a comment on the state of dedicated cameras than on Nikon. Nikon isn’t alone. Canon, Sony, etc.; no manufacturer of dedicated cameras makes a product with a user interface or tools that match the experience provided by the smartphone. It’s why the point & shoot market has been decimated. It’s why the entry level ILC market is in decline.

          All that acknowledged, it’s pretty irrelevant to the photographer who shoots with a dedicated camera. That person isn’t intimidated by or uncomfortable with the interface of a dedicated camera. They do have preferences (which can contribute to choosing one brands over another) but an ILC interface isn’t going to stop them from making images with their Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc. camera.

          • Jim Huang

            Hi Bill, thanks for your reply.
            I wasn’t planning to compare Nikon to smartphone, but rather just Nikon to other camera brands, but I guess it got develop into that. As I have mentioned, I got a bit off topic.

            I’m just not sure what the Nikon’s unique selling point is. I mean, I know, with enough skills, you don’t need all those functions, but why make your life extra difficult?
            While Canon is slow with making new functions, but duel pixel AF is honestly very cool, and I like how Canon execute their functions as well. I was shooting a short film with my Nikon camera. I had to use a shoulder rig, focus puller, external monitor…etc to get the effect I want. My friend just tap and shoot away with his Canon 70D.
            Sony is known for feature rich for with E mount line. The recent A99II looks pretty impressive on paper as well. It ticks almost all the boxes.
            Pentax is known for its ruggedness, price and very featured rich as well.

            So yeah, Why Nikon?

        • Miguel Lecuona

          Interesting on the Samsung NX1 I bought it and loved it but sold it because the post workflow was cumbersome and incompatible (final cut pro) and juggling huge files between different editors was costing me time. Loved the camera in the field. But didn’t invest in the glass because of the workflow issues. The D500 has solved some of those camera deficiencies in terms of touch screen and 4K.

          I grew up with Apple products. At times they are the best at other times they lag. Same with Nikon. The deficits usually don’t last too long and as far as presenting work to the client, I find myself still way out in font of most opportunities.

          My own limitations are greater than Nikon’s.

          I have a lot of different clients – advertising, interior design, portraits, events, real estate, fine art. Rarely is there any issue for lack of resolution (I have D810, D750, D500).

          Two deficits — Nikon’s implementation of bluetooth and wifi on D500 is terrible. And from a revenue standpoint, I feel the biggest deficit right now for me is actually Drones — I do aerials with helicopters, but Drones are also important, so I have scheduled courses so I can fly and present a legal bill and be insured.

          While I will spend on Nikon (hello 19MM F/4 Tilt-Shift!), I do have a lot of products outside the Nikon brand, but they have to support that system – Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, iPhone, DJI. All are solutions that solve client problems.

    • KnightPhoto

      Well you just said it yourself right there “really is a great photography camera brand”- that part is really super important. Do you ever use your tools to “get the shot” under pressure and at high speed? When I miss, it’s not the camera/lens it’s usually me 😉 However the camera/lens usually allows me not to miss and for that I am grateful, but sure I have to do my part.

      So given the above and your other comments below:
      – 4K we have it now in D5/D500;
      – touch screen got it in the D500;
      – GPS – got it with SnapBridge;
      – Live View with good AF – requires OSPDAF. It is beyond me why Nikon 1’s groundbreaking and still industry leading continuous focus capability wasn’t included in all Nikon DSLRs since. However Thom writes on this frequently regarding the limitations of the geometry. Why Nikon has not moved with even partially good solutions here are still a mystery, but yes this is an important area for improvement.
      – flexible software support – Thom has written on this extensively. Management failure. In one day I could re-design the features of SnapBridge that need to be improved – they aren’t bugs, they are design flaws.

      From the above feature list there are things to improve in each of those areas for sure but that doesn’t mean they don’t make tools I can use to get the shot. I’ve been doing a little 4K with the D500 and also the 1080P and very much like the output. Now mind you when you shoot video, it is hugely demanding on the user, and I make a lot more mistakes than in stills. So yes I agree we can use all the more tools there, but it is still going to be down to me – video is quite hard to capture, a range of different skills and tools are required.

      Finally look at the alternatives. Myself I am never going Canon (they’ve had their own pig headed foibles all the way along too until Nikon pushed them hard). Sony – cool tools but not a failsafe shooting platform for action so am not interested. What equipment do YOU use? I would think that most users of multiple Nikons and let’s say a 24-70/70-200 core kit are getting the shots. And expand out from there… flash, specialty lenses, primes, you name it there are tools in the system that we have bought into.

    • mark meerdam

      I don’t own a d810, but i have owned a a7rii (sold it) and i own a 5d3 and 5dsr. My perfect cam would be a a7rii sensor in a 5d4 body with ibis and tilt flip screen. That’s not going to happen 😛 So my hopes are Nikon will deliver something like this. Everytime i shoot my own cam’s i’m missing the MF quality of the d810. It’s just the perfect mix of resolution, dynamic range, reliabillty and robustness. I’m invested in Canon so i’m waiting for Nikon the hit a homerun to jump. I should have before but didn’t and then the d810 got to a point where it needs to be updated. I do worry a bit about the long term prognoses with Nikon (video/mirrorless).
      I’m also eying a gfx50s, but the a7rii was so close to the iq250 i’m expecting a new Nikon to be 90-95% as good for my purposes.

    • Dino Brusco

      Jim, I think you’re basically asking two separate things:
      1) why a camera in a period ruled by smartphones that are adding more and more useful features and technically improving much faster than camera hardware and

      2) why Nikon

      1) Camera has only one purpose and gives you much more fun from it – sure smartphones are even faster to SHARE images just captured but you don’t have any of the deep personal involvment and improvement that you have with a camera. You don’t have the same tools, usually, either. Camera isn’t just to take photos. It’s there to make you being involved in a certain process which ALSO ends taking photos-

      2) Nikon ? I find its body, command layout and overall engagement better than Canon or anything else.

      • Jim Huang

        Thanks Dion, yes, pretty much. I wasn’t planning to compare Nikon with smart phone, but only with other camera brands, but we got slightly off topic.

        1.
        I don’t think smart phone is only good for sharing photos online, software support is another big advantage too. I could dial in exactly the length of exposure, do time-laps, focus bracketing via 3rd party camera apps. Whereas you get stuck with what you’ve got with most dslr.
        For me, cellphone cameras are very innovative and DSLR are very refined.
        You may ask why does my camera needs to have Infrared laser to help me when my AF module at see at -4EV? True, but why not remove that annoying AF assist lamp to a laser that only camera can see?
        While a lot of camera companies are adding in new features, Nikon seems to be at the same position since…..god knows how long.

        2.
        I’m with you on that one. I just like the Nikon’s button layout. It feels very natural in my hand. So may I assume you are willing give up other functions for ergonomics?

    • Carlo

      Simple … 25 years ago I bought my first camera, a Nikon. Since then I always have been happy with the brand and my system has grown. I also had issues with my lenses and bodies … But Nikon always fixed them pretty quickly. I am happy with the equipment and the services … That’s why I stay with Nikon. My next investment will be the D5S …

    • Allen_Wentz

      Why? Because I _prefer_ Nikon cameras and their image captures, and Nikon cameras have 40+ years of successfully tolerating the kind of abuse I shamelessly put them through.

      Nikon’s best lenses perform at or near state-of-the-art. The D810 (although now getting a bit old for modern DSLR) is arguably the best all-around pro-level FX DSLR and the D500 is arguably the best all-around pro-level DX DSLR. The D1-2-3-4-5 series all led the world.

      Did I mention that pro Nikons are the most reliable under difficult usages? By a lot? In my real-usage world “…most other brands can[NOT] do just as good.”

      • Jim Huang

        Totally.
        Correct me if I’m wrong, so it seems like the difference between your and mine statement is that you think Nikon still has a big edge in terms of photography capabilities compared to other brands.

        May I assume that you care more about having the ultimate photography tool that will last forever. Something simple, refined and already proven itself? Basically a device that “just works”, rather than trying to be fancy with customization, connectivity, ease of use for LV/video…etc?

        • Allen_Wentz

          Actually no, you may not assume that. I do want Nikon to give us “customization, connectivity, ease of use for LV/video…etc.” and I do complain when Nikon does a poor job of providing those things.

          And I do not need a “photography tool that will last forever.” I need a tool that will tolerate extreme abuse (humidity, rain, snow, wind, sand, salt, vibration) with excellent operational reliability during its useful life.

  • Bo Dez

    I think more and more, the Nikon D810 successor is the camera and system to invest in. It’s the only one that make sense from a future proofing point of view and also lens range that no other medium format will ever be able to compete with. I’ve watched countless people down their medium format for it, it’s not quite as good a medium format but very close. I am likely to jump into this system as a first time Nikon buyer when it arrives.

    • Michiel953

      D810 is the camera to invest in now.

      • Carlo

        Nope … Just wait for its successor to be out. D810 price will drop

        • Michiel953

          It’s dropping now…

      • Allen_Wentz

        The D800/810 body never felt quite right to me, whereas the D500 does. If a new D8xx gets the ergonomics of the D500 down it could reduce the desirability of the D810 as a choice.

        • Michiel953

          Hmm. D500 is D750 size? The D750 didn’t feel comfortable in my glove size 9 hands; right hand pinky hanging off. D810 feels almost perfect for me; could lose 50 grs though.

          • HD10

            No, the D500 is slightly bigger than the D750 and further improves on the D750 in terms of a better grip. The D500 grip is better than the D810 grip.

            • Michiel953

              Ok; I’ll try the D500 on for size in my local shop!

  • masterac

    Any idea on price ? 810a is at 3700 dollars at the bhv, i am hoping max : 3500

    • Dino Brusco

      Sorry, I’m expecting much more, STARTING at 3999 $ but possibly up to 4499$ (given the latest Nikon trend)

      • masterac

        4499 is too close to the d5, i can find at 5500 and friend in japan can get it for me new (in shop rebate) for around 4000 euro

        • Allen_Wentz

          You are correct, for many of us the decision will be D8xx vs. D5 vs. (in a year) D5s, but we first need to see and _handle_ a new D8xx to have a clue.

  • Michiel953

    I find the tattoos slightly distracting. They diminish the Mp count.

  • Maria

    RGBW or bust! Hehehe

  • eric

    i love my d810. great camera. i think it surpasses the resolution of 35mm film cameras. But i also think 36mp is enough, maybe even too much. The stuff the d810 can pick up is just ridiculous. I do a lot of traveling and i find i can easily pick up micro-dust when shooting a street scene. Thats how good the camera is. I get less of that when shooting with a fx 24mp camera. So while in theory more megapixels may seem good it can also expose somethings that dont really need to be captured. Do you need to see every wrinkle on someones face? or every crack in a building? how much detail is enough before photos start looking weird. I think the consumer market is really hungry for smaller, more compact cameras, with great resolution. I wish nikon focused more on that and less on just throwing updates in an already near-perfect camera like the d810. Just my opinion.

    • Allen_Wentz

      Sometimes (often actually) we _do_ “need to see every wrinkle on someones face? or every crack in a building?” Not always of course, but that is what filters and/or post-processing Blur have always been for.

      All that said, 30-36 MP of FX in a D500 body would be enough pixels for me personally.

      • eric

        yeah, everyone wants different specs. my point was there seems to be a general market consensus around 24mp being enough for most things. People seem to want more megapixels to justify buying a new model but not because they cant already create great images with a 24mp sensor. There are downsides to more megapixels in my mind, that people havent thought about. But maybe a lot of people are into cropping photos, something i rarely do. I think 24-36mp is plenty for anybody good to create awesome photos that can be printed both small or large.

  • RJ

    Well for portrait and windy landscapes, sure there is a need for more megapixels. But for almost everything else photo merge in lightroom is now mature enough to create flawless photos up to 160 megapixels. The software isn’t ready for 200+ yet and neither are any file formats but it is maturing faster that physical sensor development. I think what matters more from now is how clean the pixels are.

    • masterac

      Spending more time treating the raw on a pc than the time it take to take the picture is too strange.
      Otherwise you can do all the pic with an iphone and combine the picture.

      Having more pixel is importante to get detail, its the purpose of the d8×× serie, thats why the d5 is only 21

      • A-Sign

        D5 and D810 are cameras for different purpose. If you want to have buffer and in-camera processing fast you don’t put in a sensor that has a high megapixel count. The D500 is a sports/action camera while the D810 is great for landscapes. There is no camera that can be everything…

        • masterac

          But thx to progress you can, otherwise we would still be with 12m pixel camera that can do 20 raw before buffer is full

          • A-Sign

            Yeah and still there is no camera that is professional at all levels in video, super high-speed and ultimate resolution. Or do you shoot sports/action with medium format? All cameras are specialists.

    • Max

      Windy?

  • I wish nikon would upgrade the 135 f2 lens. It’s a dinosaur and there is a real need for fast glass at this focal length.

    • Carleton Foxx

      True. I own that lens and it’s really sharp and makes people look really beautiful. It is also outstanding as a cinema lens.
      But, the purple and green fringing are a little bit annoying. I’m not sure I would want it any sharper, however since it is a portrait lens.

  • Carleton Foxx

    Let’s do it.

    • Allen_Wentz

      XQD cards are already less than $2 per GB for ~400 MB/s read/write speeds, and XQD performance still has room to improve. We all should lobby Nikon to only use XQD on all high end cameras.

      CF cards with 1/3 the speed are only a small bit cheaper than XQD. Wanting lesser performance really, really makes no sense, particularly on any camera capturing images larger than 12 MP.

      SD cards are at best about 1/4 the speed of XQD. In my D500 having an SD card slot means I have to eject the SD card (disabling capture redundancy) if I want to get full performance out of the camera. That is absurd.

      Just let older slower cards live with older slower cameras. And never again should Nikon puy two different-speed cards in one camera like they did in the D500.

      • masterac

        I think its a good idea, i got top of the line sd card, i dont see the point of getting 200 euro xqd card of 32g, i am still waiting for better price ration on them.
        Nothing stop you to put raw on the xqd and jpeg on sd card

        • Allen_Wentz

          RAW on XQD and JPG on SD still reduces the performance of the D500 – solely because of the lame SD card. Plus the point of workflow redundancy, and one reason we pay more for cameras with two cards, is to have a maximum-image-data RAW file in multiple places.

          Yes I too buy the fastest cards a given camera can benefit from, but the world’s best SD card still slows the D500. Wanting such slow cards just to save a few dollars makes no sense to me. Heck, if compromised performance is what one wants, one could save even more money just by buying a slower camera…

          There are lots more reasons D500 and above should have dual XQD, including the reality that two different cards in one camera is a PITA. But the biggest reason is the far superior XQD performance. And even faster XQD cards will be available in the future.

      • RC Jenkins

        I won’t be lobbying for this.

        Yes, XQD cards themselves are faster; but most UHS-II SD cards read & write between 200 & 300 MB/s. So it is incorrect to say that SD cards are at best about 1/4 the speed of XQD. I’m not sure where the ‘at best 1/4th speed’ number comes from…

        But SD cards also require one less adapter for computers that have built-in SD card slots. If you travel frequently and don’t buffer performance or if you swap cards between multiple cameras, then the convenience of SD cards can be more important than the speed of XQD.

        For the transfer process, most of the current card readers are slower than the XQD cards.

        I’d much rather have modular memory card slots so that I could pick what works for me when it works for me. That way, if I’m going for max buffer performance (…on a D8xx…), I use XQD; while if I’m traveling, I could stick to SD cards.

        • Allen_Wentz

          Sorry, I was estimating from older SD cards. You are correct: on the D500 the SD specs at 280 MB/s and the XQD specs at 440 MB/s; I did correct my comment above. Future XQD are forecast to reach 1,000 MB/s or more, and I don’t know about SD.

          However the bottom line is the same. Even using the best SD cards made, the usage of SD compromises the performance of the D500 and to me that is not acceptable.

          D8xx cameras have much larger file sizes than the D500, so relatively slow SD would compromise file transfers there too. SD is just a bad idea, except for really small bodies already compromised a bunch of different ways.

          Intentionally compromising the performance of a $3,000+ state-of-the-art pro camera just for the convenience of some old consumer-grade laptop port does not make sense to me.

          • RC Jenkins

            I think you’re underselling the capabilities of some of these laptops and overstating the degree of the ‘speed issue’.

            For example, I wouldn’t consider my the 500GB SSD, i7 Retina Macbook Pro w/16GB RAM that I travel with to be an old, consumer grade laptop. I travel frequently for weeks at a time and take shots all over the world; and I don’t plan on hauling my desktop computers with me. I also frequently carry multiple camera bodies. Having a standard with one less thing to carry & lose offers significant benefits.

            Also, remember that USB 3.0 is capped at about 625 MB/sec, so even a faster card wouldn’t transfer faster than this without a different interface and a different adapter.

            I don’t need XQD speed for transfer because I’m not often shooting long bursts with D8xx series, and the difference in times doesn’t slow me down. I don’t usually transfer thousands of images in one go–but even then, the transfer times aren’t bad.

            To put things in perspective, a full 64 GB @ 280 MB/sec transfer (approx. 1600 D810 RAW files) takes about 3:48. 440 MB/sec takes 2:25. That minute or so that I would save one-time per card isn’t worth all of that hassle to me. Max USB 3.0 speeds of 625 MB/sec gets me to 1:42: 2 minutes saved. Still not worth the hassle. We’re not talking terabyte transfers here.

            Yes, there are speed benefits to XQD today, but there are also other benefits of SD cards. That’s why I’d prefer to have the option instead of being locked in to one format–particularly if they made it easily modular. Different strokes for different folks.

            • Allen_Wentz

              Already with last year’s camera (D500) I find having an SD slot limits performance. It is just wrong on a brand new state-of-the-art camera to have a lame SD card slot when better-in-every-way XQD is available.

              SD cards are comparatively slow and forecast to get comparatively slower
              as XQD matures and gets faster. I buy pro grade cameras and use them
              for many years; I do not want last year’s tech in a new camera!

              Also please advise what the “other benefits of SD cards” are. I find them nothing but a PITA, mostly because they are so tiny and hard for me to safely handle.

            • KnightPhoto

              Agreed, XQD are the greatest. Been using them since D4 in 2012 and now in my D500’s. So glad to have gotten rid of CF now at least!

              But don’t ya just know it the D820 is going to come with one XQD and one SD ;-0

            • RC Jenkins

              The D500 is designed for use cases where one is shooting in bursts and speed matters more–it’s a very different camera than the D810. It’s like comparing a car designed for raw speed to a car designed for luxurious ride quality.

              Nobody is arguing that XQD isn’t faster than SD, nor is anyone advocating that the camera should not offer XQD. You seem to be confused or struggling to understand this point since you continue to center your argument that XQD is faster.

              Not everyone who uses the D8xx series needs long continuous bursts, since it’s already one of the slowest high-grade Nikons to begin with. In particular, for things like portraits and landscapes, most photographers don’t just pray & spray shots until the buffer fills up on the D8xx. A more direct improvement to the burst performance would be to simply increase the size of the buffer regardless of card type.

              But you seem to be advocating that Nikon should only design a camera to meet your specific needs with only speed in mind for a D8xx series, instead of providing people with options like a modular card slot which would allow the camera to keep up with card technologies.

              The “other benefits” of SD cards are the ones I listed and described in detail: compatibility & price while offering adequate performance. Sorry if this was tough to follow.

              XQD is not yet the industry standard, and sometimes the ‘faster’ system doesn’t win–for example, the latest Canons (which dominate the market) use CFast & SD. But both XQD and CFast may be ‘stepping stone’ formats that become obsolete within a few years just like many other formats have in the past.

              Because they’re already developing the next-generation CFExpress cards for up to 8 GB/sec for release within a few years. I’d love to be able to buy a simple replacement module to be able to use faster cards at will if that happens instead of being locked only to XQD cards.

              It’s also unfortunate that you are unable to handle the dangerous SD cards without safety concerns. I’d suggest that you also be careful when handling XQD cards–their corners are sharper than SD cards.

            • Allen_Wentz

              1) I am not advocating that Nikon design just to my needs. I am advocating that Nikon design to the faster more modern tech.

              The fact is that I almost never need the max buffer and hence need to eject the SD card from my D500. But just the fact that the performance limitation _unnecessarily_ exists and I have to plan for SD card removal to max the buffer irritates me.

              2) My complaint about SD: “so tiny and hard for me to safely handle” referred to the difficulty my large fingers have handling tiny SD cards without dropping them. Also the ease of misplacing the tiny SD cards during routine backup, but not fears of the cards themselves being safety hazards.

      • pedantic_brit

        I totally agree.
        I would rather buy more XQD cards for my D500 than UHS II SD cards as my Fx body – a D800 – can’t take advantage of UHS II. Backwards compatibibility is nice in theory but the performance hit is too great – especially as the raison d’etre of the D500 is performance.

  • KellyVanRijn

    Nikon is a marketing company. Canon makes cameras.

    • masterac

      Nikon announce a new model, just like any company its normal to get news about it.
      If nikon was so bad i don’t think nasa would use it

    • A-Sign

      Thanks for your outing to be a Canon fanboy.

    • Mike D

      Hilarious. Indications of that falsehood is Nikon’s failure at marketing. Let’s hope they’re not a marketing company.

    • m0r3px1s

      Nikon makes sense. Canon makes objects.

  • Jon Winkleman

    I have a D800e and am in love with the IQ. Nikon’s insane dynamic range and color depth are what makea the D800 & D810 viable alternatives to mwdium format. I would not go Canon for a 50 megapixel sensor with so so dynamic range. I hope Nikon does not increase sensor resolution for it’s own sake if they cannot maintain or increase the current dynamic range of the D810.

  • Gabriel Schwartz

    If this is true Nikon has lost it completely.
    46MP is outdated by Sony and Canon.
    Time to switch has arrived.

    • masterac

      If you judge a camera by the number of pixel i got to say you are the one that is lost already

      • Gabriel Schwartz

        I bet you’re buying a 12MP right?
        You really don’t think higher MP is better?

        • Max

          I must say, if the bigger pixels made it a lot better in low light, I would buy a 12MP camera.
          Unfortunately the Sony A7S or Nikon DF does not have a big enough advantage to really justify it.
          But it makes sense that Nikon would compromise between resolution and good SNR properties.

          • Gabriel Schwartz

            Do not compare today’s MP with the MP from 2.5 years ago.
            Low light is getting better and better with higher resolution.
            In terms of marketing this would be a poor decision.
            I lost my camera bag (D700) with all of my gear and lenses.
            I am waiting for new higher resolution camera and didn’t get D810 but as I am starting from scratch Sony and Canon look much more attractive to me.
            I am waiting patiently since I still love Nikon but this may drive me away.

            • A-Sign

              Haha, if Canon or Sony would be better… Canon? High ISO and Dynamic Range? Not really. Sony lenses? Not really.

            • Max

              If you would take the Canon because of 50mp over 46mp you really need to start learning to frame with your viewfinder and stop cropping to compose.
              At this high resolution and the small difference between the two DR would be way more important.

            • Politics_Nerd

              The only advantage Canon has is arguable at best. That being the ergonomics. I’d take the DR and IQ of Nikon over ergonomics any day. Once you are used to a button/control layout the ergonomics becomes a side issue.

        • masterac

          If you dont have the auto focus to aim it in a instant whats the point if the pic is blurry ?

  • A-Sign

    This whole discussion of people about higher resolution are amusing me. Today these cameras like D610, D750, D810, D5, D500 deliver amazing picture quality and outstanding performance. Instead of buying a new body every year i would recommend to buy high-end lenses. It is like the Hi-Fi industry: Instead of replacing your power amp from each year great and expensive speakers (which are the lenses on cameras) would make much more sense.

    • m0r3px1s

      Yes. Good lenses are for keeping and what really should be the center of interest. Camera bodies (which is what everybody seems to be obsessed with) are replaceable. Invest carefully in high-end glass, and replace the camera bodies as required.

      • A-Sign

        That’s exactly how i see it, too!

  • 46Mp, I am happy with my D5 and 4s thank you

  • Tieu Ngao

    I think it should have 54Mp and 3 other modes for 36, 24 and 16Mp. At each mode the lens focal length will be adjusted accordingly. That way a prime lens will work like a zoom lens without any quality compromise.

    • Arcmor

      You can do that simple by cropping, Why do you need a “mode” to do it?

      • Tieu Ngao

        With the “mode” button you’d do the composition on the spot and you’d know the trade-off between reach and resolution right away. That’s the reason why D810 has the DX mode, but it’s much more convenient with a button instead of the menu.

        • Arcmor

          OK. I can see it. Thanks.

  • PabloNY

    36mp is double the resolution of 9mp
    So let’s at least double the 9mp to 18mp and get a d820 at 72mp!

    • Arcmor

      What is the reason you want 72mp crammed into a FF sensor?

  • mhammon

    What a bummer; PM Abe had a news conference today at the White House and no one asked him when the D810 successor would be announced? 🙂

  • Hans

    I think when it really get released it will be a 48MP rather than a 46MP sensor. Well lets see!

  • C-M

    No the D500 is build like the D600 with magnesium top and the main part in plastic.
    The D8xx has a magnesium body

    • HD10

      The D800/D800E has a magnesium body but the D810 has in part magnesium and part carbon fiber just like the D500.

      This part magnesium part carbon fiber body is actually a good thing as tolerances such the lens mount and AF module is tighter resulting in a more consistent and accurate AF.

      In a bad fall, the carbon fiber breaking or shearing off will likely ensure than more expensive parts like a long lens will survive a bad fall. The broken section of the carbon fiber section of the canera body is more easily replaced and at a considerably lower cost.

      • C-M

        Well that’s wrong again
        The lens mount is fastened into a plastic part on the D810 but the rest is magnesium vs the whole middle section of the D500 is made of polymer.

        • HD10

          Woke up on the wrong side of the bed? Suit yourself and wait for Nikon full magnesium only camera.

  • Champ Davis

    been a nikon shooter for over 40 years, at this point it is like NIKON doesnt want to be the leader anymore, they truly drag their asses when it comes to innovations, 4k in their DLSR etc etc etc , production issues, qaulityu issues , focus issues with sensors I.E, D800 excuses didn’nt help me, sigma is kicking the crap out of Nikon Glass, D820 i will wait a year before i sink anymore cash into NIkon, for the simple reason is will i buy more problems, im sick of NIKON problems, its old it just bums me out.

  • RC Jenkins

    Nikon DL’s have been cancelled!

    http://www.nikon.com/news/2017/0213_dl.htm

  • Pablo And-Jennifer Gabetta

    two days….

  • Daniel Rotila

    Unfortunately, Nikon did not understand anything.

    We do not want 50 Mp sensor. We want DSLRs with full frame sensors 20 … 25 Mp with high sensitivity in low light and we want to render all colors with accurately, all at a reasonable price. You should peek at Canon. They understood!

    • Mauro Schramm

      How about D750?

      • Daniel Rotila

        D750 has some colors that give me stomach pains. I don’t kile people skin colored like bricks …

      • Daniel Rotila

        Better D700…

  • Daniel Rotila

    Unfortunately, Nikon did not understand anything.

    We do not want 50 Mp sensor. We want DSLRs with full frame sensors 20 … 25 Mp with high sensitivity in low light and we want to render all colors with accurately, all at a reasonable price. Should peek… at Canon. They
    understood!

  • KellyVanRijn

    Yawn, nothing truly new from Nikon, just tweaks to a slew of plastiky bodied cameras each as boring as the next. There is a reason Canon has twice the photo market share as Nikon- better bodies and lenses.

  • Michael Pawlowski

    I’m not buying another body, regardless of the specs, if it doesn’t have GPS and WiFi. I’m just tired of hanging dongles off the camera.

  • Michael Pawlowski

    Why hasn’t Nikon developed a medium format line? I understand that means more than just the body – new lens for the format. But, why compete in a saturated mirrorless market, when they can rather show their technical prowess.

  • Derek Cheung

    i love to see more fps and and xq-d card and better low iso not more pixels and small raw and small jpg

  • Vipul Patel

    Nikon need to change its rubber for the camera and lens both….

  • Fred França

    4k 30p? 4K 60p?

  • Back to top