Nikon D850 vs. D810 comparison guide


Here is another (more visual) comparison between the new Nikon D850 and D810 cameras (see the specifications comparison here, another comparison is available in the D850 brochure):









D850 pre-orders: B&H | Adorama | Amazon | BuyDig | WEX | Jessops
Facebook: Nikon D850 Page | Nikon D850 Group
Additional coverage: Nikon D850 directory

This entry was posted in Nikon D850 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Mike Gregory

    Your trying very hard to get my wallet open
    When Nikon Australia removes the Aussy surcharge i will be in

    • Sergiu Zboras

      exactly my thoughts.

    • Amir

      Come to mama U.S and get one,you won’t be charged Aussy tariff when getting back to kangaroo land and you won’t be charged U.S tax as well.It is a win-win!

      • Mike Gregory

        tempting but the plane trip is far too long for me hhahahaha
        I would like the Aussy guarantee so i will wait.
        Most of the other Nikon products translate with the dollar plus tax but seems the fast moving things get the extra levy. Some products are actually cheaper here than at B&H, strange

    • sickheadache

      But…one more time…can you NOT…buy a camera from let’s say B and H or others…and they can send to u…I went on their website..and they do send. OR just send me $3,600.00…I will be glad to send you a nice new fluffy Nikon D850.

      • Mike Gregory

        I think at the moment if somebody got thier hands on it then i wouldn’t get it back untill it had 20,000 clicks on it hhahahahaahahaha

    • Randolf Sack

      It’s not much of a surcharge really $US3600 is $AUD4800 using a realistic bank credit card exchange rate. I ordered my D850 from Michaels in Melbourne for $4997.

      • Daniel Shortt

        the D850 is 3,296.95 at B&H, or $4,158.70 Australian.
        In Australia the RRP is $5299.
        That’s $1140.30 of fuck you because we can Australia.

        • Randolf Sack

          You’re comparing street price with RRP, the difference is already $300 just in that and US discounts are usually better than Australia because of their volumes. 10% of the RRP is GST, which is $480 in tax. So the difference is only $360 for the cheapest Oz I could find against the B&H price after taking off GST. I can live with that given Australia’s higher cost of doing business. I’m guessing the average sales guy at B&H isn’t getting paid the same as an Oz on our minimum wage rate. Also the current 80c currency conversion is quite high and I’m guessing they’ve based prices on closer to 70-75c

          • Daniel Shortt

            Ok some facts,
            US rrp is 3300.
            B and H is $3 off that
            George’s camera is selling it for $5218
            Do you think there is no sales tax on B&H prices?
            It’s still over $1100 more expensive in oz. I can get a return ticket to New York plus have an amazing time shooting in NYC with a new camera for that.

            • Matt Williams

              Georges is a rip off go down the road to Nikon Broadway they’re pre ordering with no deposit for $4975

            • Daniel Shortt

              That’s a nice chunk cheaper, but it’s still $900AUD less at B&H. That isn’t an insignificant amount.

            • Daniel Shortt

              Yeah thats still 1k more than the US price

    • Daniel Shortt

      Yeah an extra $1700 on the 810, even with the 810 being the same price as the 850 in the US… You’d be nuts to not grey import. How many times would it have to break for you to spend $1700 in repairs.

    • Daniel Shortt

      yeah the $1140 OZ tax is nuts.

  • HD10

    Thank you for this.

    • TheInfinityPoint

      Yes that electronic shutter feature for time lapse is a huge thing for me. My D800 has ~75K actuations and most of them (~2/3?) were for time lapse, though I’m sure that is pretty light usage (partly because I run multiple sequences at the same time with other bodies).

      • HD10

        I only hope that any penalty to the image quality from using solely the electronic shutter will be minimal.

  • ja_1410

    Somehow they missed to show build in flash. There would be x in the 850 column.

    • Eric Calabros

      Nikon thinks its Pros in entry-level bodies and Cons in pro cams.

      • ITN

        I think so too. A pop-up flash would have made the camera less desirable to me. A new (by all accounts fantastic) viewfinder is made possible in part by ditching the built in flash.

        • ZoetMB

          I don’t see how the new viewfinder has anything to do with the flash. I know it’s larger, but not enough to have any real impact. I never use the built-in flash as a flash, but I have used it as a remote commander. It would have been nice to preserve that which perhaps could have been done with just a tiny flash (like a smartphone flash) built into the body somewhere.

          • ITN

            The D850 prism is a bit larger. The pop up flash and its housing, and electronics take up some space. I use radio to trigger flashes and consider the pop up worthless both as a light source and as a commander. It works extremely poorly in either task.

            • Wade Marks

              Thank you fora dose of reality. A built in flash takes up space…space that is precious to an engineer sweating over every fraction of a millimeter to get into the device what they want to include.

              Yes, the larger VF takes up more space, and yes the price one pays for that is no built in flash. I’ll take the bigger VF any day.

            • captaindash

              The pop up flashes are perfect for an optical trigger. That’s why it pisses me off so much they don’t have them on the upper models. It’s funny how everyone used to hate the tilt screens too. Sooooo much hate initially, then people realized how useful they were and people stopped bitching.

            • ITN

              It is a poor quality light source, can’t be bounced, is too close to the optical axis, causes people to look like caricatures if used as a light source. When used as a trigger it still emits some unwanted light into the picture, causes long delays between shots where the camera will not to fire if the flash is not fully charged, it has low reliability as a trigger, and works only in confined environments with reflective surfaces and remote flash in close proximity to the camera. In group shots the pop up is almost guaranteed to cause a lot of closed or half closed eyes. Radio triggers work in and out of doors and have much greater range, they do not require line of sight, they don’t spoil the picture with their sync flash light, do not cause eye closure reflex and can be used at a fast pace of shooting if needed.

            • captaindash

              Thanks, tips. I know how to work flash. A pop up flash absolutely does not have to show up in the photos (they are adjustable), and nobody said it was superior to radio triggers. I just think it’s moronic for people to get cranky about something that absolutely can have a useful function. Photographers love nothing more than to get angry over nothing though. Tilting screens is exhibit A.

            • ITN

              Even when set to commander only with M — as the output, it still emits the sync flash to trigger the remotes and this can affect subject exposure at close range.

              Plenty of cameras have built in flashes. I don’t want it and will pay extra to be rid of it.

      • Kob12

        So why did they include it in the D810? I hardly believe that thoughts in this regard has turned around 180 degrees in 3 years.
        I suspect that they left the flash out due to lack of space and to save on costs.

        • ITN

          The reason is that Nikon didn’t have their own radio flash triggering system when the D810 was introduced.

      • ja_1410

        I consider 850 as a camera for advanced amateurs. The truly pro buys D5. I wonder how many of 800 or 810 users never ever found it beneficial to have access to quick low power flash. I did found having pop-up flash to be sometimes a blessing. Especially in a bright sunny settings to have quick flash fill instead trying to dig out, mount and set regular flash. I do recognize the advantages of removing it to provide for bigger and brighter viewfinder though.

        But wider point is that they omitted this in comparison so their chart looks like everything is better. Pure marketing old, bad trick. Not having an option is never better. You might be one that never uses it but there might be some who do use this option from time to time.

        • ZoetMB

          That’s what Nikon wants pros to think, but it’s not reality and one must take into consideration the kind of work the pro is doing. If one needs the most robust camera possible because you’re dragging the thing into war zones or whatever, then yes, a pro would want the more robust D5 (although a D5 is heavier, a disadvantage) or if they’re shooting sports, they want the speed (although I would contend that any of these cameras are fast enough). But other than that, I see few reasons how a D5 would earn a pro more money than a D850 and in the end, that’s what counts, unless one could make the case that a D850 would be less reliable or need more shop maintenance.

          One of the only other reason to own a D5 over a D850 is appearances. When a pro shows up to a gig, if their camera looks like one that an average person might own, people think they didn’t need the pro, even though the camera has little to do with the quality of the work. Back in the day, my (pro) father resisted shooting 35mm for many years for that reason. When he showed up with an 8×10, 4×5 or medium format camera, there was no mistaking that he was a pro. He finally started shooting 35mm when he had to photograph the rock in water tunnels, just to lighten the load.

          • Allan

            ” … when he had to photograph the rock in water tunnels”

            I don’t understand; I’m curious.

            • ZoetMB

              As I remember it, the Urban Development Corporation was responsible for building new water tunnels for bringing water from the reservoirs in New York State into the City, a project that is still going on today, 50 years later. For some reason, the UDC needed photographs of the rock. I don’t remember whether the rock was the tunnel or whether they were creating tunnels where the bedrock existed. My father always claimed that he had to go down so deep, his ears would bleed (although he exaggerated everything). In any case, he wasn’t dragging big cameras or even MF down there, and so that’s when he started shooting 35mm, not that a Rollei was so much larger or heavier than a Nikon F. I think this was around 1966.

            • Allan

              Thanks.

        • ITN

          No the D850 is the real flagship of the Nikon system and where they make their best effort. The D5 is a specialist, low-volume camera for sports, wildlife and photojournalism and most of the professional photographers in those fields would actually prefer the D850. The D5 is the high speed camera, the D850 the high image quality model. Lots of professionals actually prefer the best image quality and instead of compromised image quality and a bit higher speed.

          • ja_1410

            Somehow I’m yet to see professional with D810.

            • Alexander Gray

              Try looking in seattle. I sell 810s to pros all the time.

            • ja_1410

              So what your split? How many you sell to pros and how many to enthusiasts? Again. I wonder how many of 800 and 810 users never ever had any need for built in flash. I actually have found it useful numerous times. I’m not pro though.

            • Alexander Gray

              It depends on what you want to call a pro. There are a lot of real estate agents and small business owners that I’ve sold to. They aren’t professional photographers but they use the camera professionally for their business.

              Of course there are also the wedding and event photographers that buy as well.

              In all it’s a 60-70 /40-30 split with the higher being for pro or business use.

        • peter w

          There are no pro cameras, only pro-photographers.

          A pro is someone who makes his living with our hobby. Nobody is telling a pro which gear he has to use, except his boss, if he has one.
          There are professional photographers that use point-and-shoots, phones and entry level cameras like D3000. Mostly you wouldn’t tell from the pictures.

        • captaindash

          A “real” pro would use a D5 over a D850 in a studio setting where they had access to unlimited amounts of lighting?

    • Hans Ernst

      How dare you say something like that 😉
      No X allowed in any spot for the D850,
      forget the rubbish D810 (and sell it to me for a small price)

    • Wade Marks

      Lack of built in flash is a positive. More weather sealing, one less part to break, and allows for that bigger viewfinder. I’ll take the bigger VF anyday. Engineering is about tradeoffs and the built in flash is not important on a high end camera.

      The users of a D850 do not need a built in flash. A built in flash is like those kit lenses that come with lower end DX cameras. They are nice, work well for what they are intended to do, but in no way are meant for higher end equipment.

      • ja_1410

        If that is your justification, then lack of many other features would be a benefit too. Why have all the buttons that create places for water leaks? Just remove the buttons and replace them with touch screen menus. Pros don’t use programs, remove them. Set camera to full manual mode. The “real” pros use manual mode. Why they made replaceable memory card? Another place for water to leak. Build the memory card into the camera so there are no stupid rubber doors.

        • Wade Marks

          Your argument is weak. A built in flash is not used often enough by high end users to justify its placement on a high end camera. That may not mean it is never used at all but so infrequently by so few users that it is not a worthwhile investment in such a camera.

          Those other features you mention are all used very frequently by high end users. The physical buttons are quicker to get to than electronic menus, which are important to someone working hard to get just the right shot. I’d say the buttons are used more frequently by high end users. As for the memory card…all I can say to you is LOL.

          • ja_1410

            How come Nikon discovered this right now? The have had built in flash in 800 and 810 for years. I would rather see them adding image stabilization to sensor instead of removing features that were present in the previous model.

          • ja_1410

            So you do use “P” program?

          • ja_1410

            Why would you “LOL” on the build in card? SanDisk just released 400 GB micro SD card. That is good enough to store about 8000 RAW images on a single card. In fact with build in flash memory one can easily had 1 TB for 20,000 images. How many “professionals” are going to make 20,000 pictures in one session without downloading them into the computer? There will be very few, just like your argument is about build in flash that very few ever need it.

  • Nika

    Great Job

  • Eric Calabros

    Some stupid limitations:
    – no focus peaking in 4k (if sub $1000 mirrorless can do that, how Expeed 5 can’t?)
    – Interval timer supports only 9999 frames. (Why not capped by storage free space?)
    – its 2017 and Nikon still use IEEE 802.11g component which is limited to max 54mbs (How much they hoped to save? 0.5 cent per body?)

    • ITN

      WT-7 description: “This compact, high-performance transmitter allows communication between
      the camera and a wireless network over a distance of up to 200 m, at
      speeds of up to 866.7 Mbps. It supports wireless LAN IEEE 802.11ac.”

      My guess is focus peaking is not supported in 4K because either there isn’t enough time to process the data and calculate the focus peaking (starting from 45MP going down to 8MP takes more processing than when using a smaller original sensor pixel count to obtain 4K) or they think focus peaking isn’t precise enough for focus in 4K.

      Those frame count limitations are there to prevent accidentally wearing out your camera (by some mistake).

      • Eric Calabros

        I don’t need a 200m range transmitter. I need a wireless connectivity fast enough to send 45MP images to my smartphone right beside the camera.

        Have you seen Samsung focus peaking in NX1? And that beast wasn’t even stacked sensor. If they could do that back then, why Nikon couldn’t for its flagship?

        With electronic shutter even tens of thousands of frames doesn’t wear out the camera. People already use it that way, a 3 hours 60fps FullHD video is near 650,000 frames.

        • akkual

          Why do you want to send 45MP images to your smartphone? Alas, I assume that built-in WLAN works like D750, and is pretty useless for anything else than making quick instagram updates. It doesn’t even support changing the settings. WT-x is way to go, if you want to use WLAN tethering on your camera. I find that disturbing too, but I also understand the limitations of WLAN you can build into a body with 75% magnesium housing. G is much easier to get through than N or AC to that matter, especially 5GHz. I’d have preferred full magnesium body and no wireless stuff inside.

          • Amir

            Why does he want to send 45MP images to your smartphone?Simple! People like to make impossible things!He also wants to print out a 40×60 inches sample on glossy paper right from his cellphone!

            • John Mackay

              Well my ipad pro is basically a big smart phone, and lightroom mobile is on there. I would very much like to be able to transfer 45mpix raws without remembering a cable. He also might want to be able to email full res files straight to a colleague from his phone.

            • Allan

              It continues to be unclear to me what are the reasons that Nikon doesn’t put the technology in high-end cameras to transfer large files wirelessly to smart devices and computers.

        • ITN

          You could try eye-fi cards in the SD card slot, or Camranger which may do what you need (not sure how slow it would be, probably quite slow).

          No I haven’t used NX1. Samsung obviously have different expertise from Nikon.

          True but the electronic shutter may not give exactly the best image quality.

      • Antonio

        And why not making it also compatible with WT-6 that it’s also 802.11ac?

        Compatibility being a software solution wouldn’t it be possible to offer both as menu options?

        • ITN

          WT-6 needs a camera where most of the network functionality (ftp, http server, ethernet) is already built into the camera (which is the case with the D5). I imagine this can not be fit into the D850 housing. To use WT-5 on the D810 you needed the UT-1 module, but UT-1 doesn’t work with the new WT-6. I would guess Nikon would come out with a “UT-2” that would allow WT-6 use on the D850, but such a product doesn’t exist yet.

          • Antonio

            You’ve a good point there but Nikon could very well get a WT-6 solution as they did with WT-5.
            Tks Vm for trferring the built in hardware and body room necessary to accommodate it if we consider a direct connection for WT-6.

    • PhilK

      I don’t necessarily dispute these very specific points, but personally I think you’re really nitpicking in at least 2 out of the 3.

      Nikon users have been clamoring for focus peaking for YEARS, Nikon finally releases their first implementation and ya’ll have to nitpick about it not being usable in a brand-new video mode that many people (like me) will never even use.

      Same goes for the interval timer thing. Of all things to nitpick.

      Re: the WiFi – this is a bit more of a real issue but ITN could be right that RF-blocking body material could be a factor here. It’s also one of those areas that Nikon has always lagged-behind on: modern electronic communication standards. (However the WT-7 is always going to be a more robust option here anyway)

      That said, Nikon has finally addressed a LOT of longtime missing features in this model, I think on balance we should be very grateful for those things, rather than nitpicking esoteric aspects of the camera.

  • Eric Calabros

    Bill Claff updated his D850 data. At high ISO, its better than D810 and slightly worse than A7Rm2. Which is good news.

    • HD10

      Bill’s current chart for the D850 shows that it would perform at the same level as the D810 at Base ISO, and at the same level of the D800E at ISO 400.

      A comparison of the D500 with the D810(DX) and D800E(DX) however shows that the D500 surpasses the D800E(DX) at ISO 400. From this, I expect the D850 to substantially do better than the D810/D800E at above ISO 400.

      Bill’s current chart for the D850 is preliminary and it will change as more sample points become available.

      • Eric Calabros

        D850 is not supposed to perform exactly like D500, because of higher data bandwidth in D850.

        • HD10

          There will be some difference specially at Base ISO but I do not expect substantial deviation.

  • mok

    The representation for Iso is misleading. It can be read that for D850 you need more sun, so that Iso is worse. While D810 you can do longer after sun set. Unless D810 will remain better at high iso

    • Eric Calabros

      They mean you can shoot in the dark but image looks like it was in daylight 🙂

  • BlackRipleyDog

    I want of one these, but I can’t afford it just yet. My day will come.

  • MB

    D850 is better camera than D810 but there is no need to exaggerate …
    Resolution is meaningful only in horizontal and vertical lines, or pixels, and although D850 has about 25% more photo diodes resolution is hardly 12% better, and bars suggests something like 33% …
    Also someone has gone wild with LCD screen resolution and it looks like D850 has 4 times more pixels and that is just not correct … and same is true for metering sensor …

    • Amir

      Right now,people seem to act like zombies whose brains have been affected by Nikon new virus called D850(kidding)!

    • John Mackay

      What are you talking about with resolution? 3×2 is a fairly normal aspect ratio, and most crops are close to that ratio. You will only see a 12% gain in resolution if you make crop with one of the sides just a few pixels long, which no one ever does as it barely forms an image. My guess is that that for 90% of photos there would be a gain of at least 18-20% resolution.

    • doobster

      Yeah the diagrams are graphically very misleading, what does a four-fifths yellow sun mean next to a one-fifth grey sun? The whole thing screams marketing overdrive, probably meant to draw people in (rather than convince them to buy it).

      • TheInfinityPoint

        Very much agree. Especially the table where the D850 has all the yellow dots (yellow…Nikon…lol) and the D810 has all of the grey X’s. Like…really… lol.

  • Flemming Jensen

    At the moment I have difficulties finding Nikon lenses that matches my D810. I do not dare thinking what it would cost to add lenses to the purchase of a D850. By the way, the D850 is priced at appx. US$ 4700 in Denmark where I live.

    • MB

      With only moderate increase in resolution you really dont have to worry about out resolving your lenses …
      By the way that price is with our without VAT?

      • Amir

        VAT is higher in Norway,Denmark,and Swweden among Europe countries.That price includes VAT and tariff as well.

      • Flemming Jensen

        It is with 25% VAT, but anyway it is a lot more than in the US.
        You are right about the moderate resolution increase, but anyway it must be somewhat more demanding than the already highly critical lens quality requirement of the D810, or what?
        My best lenses for the D810 is 85mm f/1.4 and 24mm f/1.4 My 50mm f/1.4 is really bad egen compaired to these 2.

    • akkual

      The real question is: how often do you need 1:1 pixel level sharpness? In reality, very few photographers print over A2 size, and those who do, use medium formats. The more megapixels are basically for the oversampling theorem, which provides you more DR and better detail retention on higher ISOs. Compare cameras on the size you use for publishing, not on the 1:1 level. I am 100% sure your current optics are 99.9% of the time enough sharp for your publisihing sizes.

      • Flemming Jensen

        You are probably right, but I love to crop (photos from the air). I am also very pleased with the 70-200mm f/4, I should say.

        • akkual

          Of course you are probably fine with D810 and resolution wise you do not need to update the camera if D810 already out resolves your lenses. But if you want to update, you should not hold yourself back due to your lenses not being enough sharp. You will always (assuming the sensor matches old one at 1:1) get at least the same result, if the optics are the bottleneck. More megapixels won’t make the end result worse, even if it looks worse at 1:1 comparison.

      • eric

        Thank you for this comment. If only more photographers spoke out about reality vs. technical information. I would add too that sharpness becomes even less of a factor at a basic distance between your eyes and the print hanging on a wall. Very few people if any will look at prints inches from their eyes like people do on screens.

      • Michiel953

        Don’t know about you, but I can see where I missed intended focus (or sharpness); 1:1 or otherwise, and it bothers me. The upgrade form 36Mp (D810) to 46Mp will only make that worse. Hence my appreciation for the much improved AF and the now (hopefully) absent shutter shock.

        • Flemming Jensen

          I am not takling about out of focus issues at all.

          • Michiel953

            So what áre you talking about? You’ve not fallen into the old “there’s no lens that matches the resolution of my sensor” trap, have you?

            • Flemming Jensen

              I know that this is going nowhere, but in my posts above I have indicated that I am satisfied with 3 out of 4 lenses on my D810. Why should I have fallen into any trap?
              If you don’t own the equipment, you will never know.
              If, and only if, your main focus is on image quality, then you should be very carefull about choise of lenses, I guess my point is here. This is my first and only post on this site, and thank you the positive response from more users.

            • Michiel953

              Flemming, I didn’t want to step on your toes. Are you Danish? Give my regards to Kurt Thorsen!

      • James Michael

        I sometimes publish my pictures on Flickr and other sites in full res. The idea of paper size is horse and buggy stuff.

  • Michiel953

    The visuals are very helpful; thanks Peter!

  • Ivan

    To save you the long read:
    D850 – yes /D810 – no

    • eric

      I wonder how long the sugar high will last? 1 month? 3 months? maybe til 2018 when Nikon comes out with an awesome mirrorless? the digital era will be remembered for g.a.s. (gear acquisition syndrome).

      • MB

        Hm … you do realize that mirror-less cameras are also digital so era will continue and gas will expand as always ;o)

        • eric

          Obviously, I included it in my comment above. Its just interesting to compare the analog days vs the digital era. The constant need for new gear was never a thing back in the day but the camera makers have turned it into one today. The irony of all this is a lot of photographers are turning to 35mm film and medium format to get out of the upgrading lifestyle. Digital has been a boon to Nikon and other companies but not to the consumer. The shelf life of camera today is like 6mo.

          • MB

            In film era the IQ was solely the result of lens and film used, body was only a holder … so one could use the same camera for years …
            At the beginning of digital era the camera development was pretty fast and every new camera produced significantly better results in terms of resolution, noise, DR, color … so there was an unprecedented increase in camera sales … and GAS was released …
            But that is not the case any more … D800 kind of reached the level when the improvements are only evolutionary at best … compact cameras have been replaced with cell phones … and the GAS will gradually but irreversibly evaporate … hence seems to me that camera manufacturers will need to shrink down both in size and expectations … to levels before digital … maybe a bit more …

            • eric

              True, a film body is more like a holder but to use certain lenses, you’ll need the body that matches up with that, and of course bodies have different designs, some require batteries, some are mechanical, etc. The type of film arguably is the essence of analog photography.

              I think your view of g.a.s. is very optimistic. I hope you’re right but I don’t see it as something that can be turned off so easily. Yes, the consumer may choose alternative methods, like a smartphone etc., but the camera makers are heavily reliant on constant upgrades, and with marketing, they do a good job of convincing people they need a new something. I think they will continue to push higher end cameras, try to eek out profit on the top as much as possible, because that’s where the remaining profit is. I don’t see how they compete with the lower end market with smartphones unless they start making there own smartphone

          • Claude Mayonnaise

            Marketing and consumerism rules our planet. There is only a constant need to upgrade if you allow the marketing and internet to coerce you into doing so. Any professional who truly believes they need a D850 to improve their photography and business is lying to themselves. Sure, it’s a better camera but does your business really benefit from dropping this amount of cash so easily on a piece of gear? I’m sure there are just as many excellent photographers making a living off of gear far further down the chain than this camera. That being said, the camera looks badass and It’s an amazing tool. You can walk through life and look at any subject and it’s all the same. Do I really need a $4000 custom guitar to make great music. Not really. Etc. etc.

            • eric

              Yes I agree. I think it’s healthy to have some collective push back though and not just blindly accept the next new thing. Im sure the d850 is a nice camera but it always seems like these models are made to make older models look less capable which is a indeed all marketing lies. I found it hard to overcome the endless bombardment until I discovered other photographers with similar views like my own. I feel less of a dissenter nowadays and more a part of an alternative movement to get away from g.a.s. and get back to just taking good pictures again.

          • PhilK

            Hipsters buy retro stuff just because other hipsters think it’s cool to buy retro stuff. I sincerely doubt they buy it “to get out of the upgrading lifestyle”. When you ride around on a $2000 one-speed bicycle, I don’t think the objective is to avoid conspicuous consumption or g.a.s.

            • eric

              Well I am speaking from experience. I actually know people who ditched digital and now shoot mainly 35mm film. So my comment is not conjecture about so called hipsters, it’s people I know. I don’t know anybody who rides around on a $2k bicycle but you’re free to assume people that are into film are just rich kids. Maybe get out in the world and meet real people instead of stereotyping.

      • ZoetMB

        The 35mm era had gear acquisition syndrome as well. Go back to an old Nikon catalog from the film era and I think you’ll find that the system charts were larger with far more accessory gear than there is today. And B&H and a few other physical dealers aside, chain photo stores were far larger back then, Peerless-Willoughby in New York being the prime example.

        The prime difference between then and now is that back then, people kept a camera for many years. Today, everyone wants the latest thing every year or two, even if they don’t personally buy it. Although many body variations were released during the intervening years (F, F Photomic, F Photomic T, F Photomic FTN), it was 12 years between the release of the original Nikon F and the F2, 8.5 years between the F2 and F3, 8.5 years between the F3 and F4, almost 8 years between the F4 and F5 and 8 years between the F5 and F6 (and 13 years since the F6 was released).

        • eric

          Yes, I’m not old enough to remember the height of the film days, im sure there was lots of gear available too. But like you said, people held on to their bodies for a decade or more. With digital it seems to be a year or two.

          • PhilK

            You should be thanking your lucky stars that you don’t have to spend thousands and thousands a year on film and processing like we did in the film era.

            In reality, you have saved a ton of money during the digital era.

            • eric

              Ive spent over $10k on digital bodies over the last two years. Yes I’m really saving a lot of money by shooting digital. That logic only makes sense if you’re shooting an iPhone etc and also never developing any photos. My printing costs were well into thousands the last two years also. Simply a myth digital is cheaper.

          • silmasan

            As long as the camera is still in good working condition, basically you can use it for as long as the imaging sensor works, maybe replace the shutter when it goes, plus some routine cleaning. Then it can easily last more than 5 years.

  • eric

    Interesting that the sensor size is the same in both the d850 and d810. I wonder how much more noticeable the increased MP’s really is? My guess is the final image is probably identical.

    • ITN

      The sensor size is the largest that is supported by FX (F mount) lenses. If they increased it, there would be some vignetting. The dynamic range at and upwards of ISO 400 is significantly improved in the D850 over the D810

      • eric

        I see. I never shoot above 400 ISO so doesn’t bother me. Maybe they will get into medium format in the next few years.

    • Michiel953

      It won’t be identical, but is seems entirely likely that you will not see any difference.

  • silmasan

    Mentos. The Differencemaker.

  • animalsbybarry

    There is no question the D850 is a worthwhile upgrade

  • dimitrisservis

    Who buys Nikon stuff within the first year from release? (actually this should be true for all equipment)

    • BVS

      People who want to enjoy it a year earlier.

      There have been no recalls on the last seven(!) DSLRs Nikon has released.

  • Bernt-Olov Hellström

    I also wan’t D850 but do i need one??? Noooo!
    Will i buy one? Most likely…

  • Originaru

    That is some good marketing. Finally a camera worth considering.

  • low

    D850 is a winner. Now where is my Df2 nikon?

  • Overall a great upgrade from the 810. I would have liked to see Nikon add a timer so the built in intervalometer would work on exposures longer than 30 sec. I bit short sighted as it was added to the 810A. I guess Nikon has a limited understanding of the actual needs for astrophotography/timelaspe as the 30 second limit is a shortfall. They briefly understood this need as they added it for the 810A. I guess they plan a 850A. Back to the external intervalometer.

  • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

    Looks like a really strong winner by Nikon and be interested to see what Nikon brings to table in their Aps/FF Mirrorless camera and what they then do to the coolpix, serious compact cameras ? and lower – mid end DSLR Aps

  • Raphael Bruckner

    I am going to wait a year and see the real world test…..until then my D800 works out fantastically

  • LCD screen resolution diagram is extremely misleading. You showed 2x the pixels as 4x the resolution.

    • ZoetMB

      1920×1080=2.07 million pixels. 3840×2160=8.3 million pixels. That’s four times the resolution assuming the LCD is the same size.

      • MB

        Where did you get this data?

        • ZoetMB

          Those are the standard resolutions for HD and UHD. They’re just examples, but it works for any numbers that are doubled in both the horizontal and vertical planes: For a 1.5:1 stills aspect ratio, 15 pixels x 10 pixels = 150 pixels. 30 pixels x 20 pixels = 600 pixels. That’s four times the resolution. It doesn’t matter what numbers you use. Double the resolution in each plane and you have 4x the number of pixels.

          But having said that, a 2.36MP LCD in a 1.5:1 aspect ratio is only 1882 x 1254 pixels.

          • MB

            No offense but that has nothing to do with LCD screen resolution of 8.3MP you suggested…

            • ZoetMB

              I can’t argue with someone who doesn’t understand math.

            • MB

              I see … you are being in denial …
              The facts are, according to Nikon
              D810 LCD has exactly 1229kDots, about 1.23MP
              D810 LCD has exactly 2359kDots, about 2.36MP
              You are claiming:
              D810 2.07MP
              D850 8.30MP
              And are trying to hide the fact that you are absolutely wrong by using some unrelated facts in some kind of calculation you are calling “math”…
              That is just pathetic …

            • paige4o4

              No, they’re saying it /would/ be 8.3mp if it was 4x resolution.

              But I’d say casually referencing “resolution” isn’t a good idea, since nobody can tell if you’re specifically talking about linear or total resolution.

            • MB

              Than it must be my fault, I thought we are talking about LCD screens…

            • ZoetMB

              I’m not claiming that at all. What part of “They’re just examples, but it works for any numbers that are doubled in both the horizontal and vertical planes” do you not understand?

            • MB

              1920×1080=2.07 million pixels. 3840×2160=8.3 million pixels. That’s four times the resolution assuming the LCD is the same size.

              What part of your post are you referring to?

      • silmasan

        No, “twice the resolution” is 2x the samples on each axis, so 2H x 2W = 4HW.

        “four times the resolution” would be 4H x 4W = 16HW

        • ZoetMB

          If you have 4x the number of pixels in the same space, that’s 4x the resolution.

          • silmasan

            No, that’s 4x the pixel count.

            • ZoetMB

              Let’s say you nave a 1″ x 1″ square. It has 1 pixel. Now in that same 1″ x 1″ square you have 4 pixels (2×2, twice in each plane what you had before). Is that not 4x the resolution?

            • silmasan

              Resolution is defined as the ability to discern between two lines along a single (one-dimensional) axis. In your example, 2160p would be twice the resolution of 1080p.

    • silmasan

      Actually, they showed 2x the pixel count as 2x the resolution (which is still wrong). The more accurate diagram would be about 1.4x the resolution (1.4x length and 1.4x width).

  • Fernando Gimenez

    Spec wise is easy to compare. I’ll really appreciate sensor wise comparison from Bill claff “photons to photos”when he got the “right” nefs(I don’t know the requisites). And it would be great how it transforms in my raw developer (capture one). I got now a d800 and it took me quite a bit to get the colors I expected(not good the icc profiles you get with the program, too brown skin tones)

  • Schrute

    Does flash sync speed become irrelevant in Silent Photography mode? There wouldn’t be any banding if the shutter is constantly open, right? It would be great to use extreme high shutter speeds without having to drain your flash or wait forever for recycles…

  • n11

    120fps at 1080 is sweet. I don’t see any info about it shooting slow-mo at 720p, guessing no option to shoot at 240fps?

  • HOLY CRAP! 12800 iso looks amazing! specially if you down size it, to 36mp i bet you wont see any noise. wow nikon!, now i really cant wait to get my hands on it and i ordered 2! good buy.

    • Originaru

  • stephen mccloud

    Flicker detection as in D500?

  • Back to top