The D800 has Landed!

[chris00nj]

I have to say that the high-ISO thing has become more than an obsession...it's an absurdity. Like every other GAS-infected person out there, I drooled over the ISO capabilities of the D700 (and subsequently got one; 3.5 years later it's never let me down) when it was released. But at some point it just gets absurd. I sometimes get sucked into the clamor for more and more ISO power, until I return to film.

It's when I go back to shooting 400-800 speed film that I realize that ISO 25k or whatever we have now is totally unnecessary. The 6400 files on my D700 are usable, but what would I ever need that for? I capped the Auto ISO on the D700 at 3200. We are spoiled by this ever-increasing ISO ceiling. Who has ever been out shooting film and thought "man, I really wish I had brought that roll of ISO 51,600 with me"?

Agreed. I think good images at 3200 are more than anyone needs. ISO 3200, 1/30, f/1.4 will render proper exposure at light value of 1, which is very very dark.

You can boost the D4 to ISO 204800. When will this be necessary?

 

[nobbylon]

I have to say that the high-ISO thing has become more than an obsession...it's an absurdity. Like every other GAS-infected person out there, I drooled over the ISO capabilities of the D700 (and subsequently got one; 3.5 years later it's never let me down) when it was released. But at some point it just gets absurd. I sometimes get sucked into the clamor for more and more ISO power, until I return to film.

It's when I go back to shooting 400-800 speed film that I realize that ISO 25k or whatever we have now is totally unnecessary. The 6400 files on my D700 are usable, but what would I ever need that for? I capped the Auto ISO on the D700 at 3200. We are spoiled by this ever-increasing ISO ceiling. Who has ever been out shooting film and thought "man, I really wish I had brought that roll of ISO 51,600 with me"?

I shot a corporate event yesterday and have another to do tomorrow. I want to try as much as I can to be invisible to the people around me and also to the client that pays the bill. I don't want any complaints from speakers regarding flash going off in their face etc. Because of the light in the room I needed up to 3200 iso as I'm using f5.6/6.3 to get the focus I need. The D700 with a combo of 24-70 and 70-200 allows me to achieve that. I shot the same rooms a few weeks ago on the Leicaflex with 400 tri-x and can tell you that the Nikon was easier to get the shots with. Yes I like the film results a little more but the keeper ratio is much higher with the Nikon.
I'm sure that ths D800 is the dogs knackers and if I don't end up with a D3s or D4 it will definately be on my shopping list.
High iso capability just makes it a little easier😀

 

[celluloidprop]

Agreed. I think good images at 3200 are more than anyone needs.

Yeah. And 6 megapixels are more than enough! And who needs lenses faster than f/2.8? Let's all start prescribing exactly what other people "need" in their cameras, it should be fun.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

Canon JUST started releasing updates for the wide primes at 2.8 with a hefty price ($849? $799? Really?), which I'm not happy about. They turned all Hollywood and became obsessed with video development since they changed marketing strategy with the Canon EOS 5D Mark II.

But, Canon did add IS to these lenses, didn't they? They're not cheap, but it does represent a pretty significant jump in engineering/tech.

Even though i'm envious, re: the new Nikon, i'm still pretty well planted in the Canon camp. Just because of the lenses. Even though i use a couple of Nikons, i'm firmly convinced the Canon glass is better for what i want to do. Specifically OOF/bokeh. Sharpness is a wash. I just haven't seen any AF lenses that beat Canon's Ls.

I hope Canon counters with a high MP option. I want to be able to make huge prints, and i want the detail (in skin textures) to eliminate the vinyl skin thing - so i'll never think fondly again of medium format film.

 

[celluloidprop]

I'm actually very interested in the performance of the new f/2.8 wide primes, just because it's nice to see an alternative to the 24L at half the price.

 

[jsrockit]

Agreed. I think good images at 3200 are more than anyone needs. ISO 3200, 1/30, f/1.4 will render proper exposure at light value of 1, which is very very dark.

You can boost the D4 to ISO 204800. When will this be necessary?

When you want to be at 1/125th and f/2.8? 😀

 

[celluloidprop]

I get why some people are ambivalent toward more and more megapixels - diminishing returns, storage costs, processing speed, etc. can be real concerns. (I also get the joy of more megapixels - printing large is so easy these days.)

But higher ISOs? If you don't need them, don't use them. They have no effect on you. But there are obviously a lot of photographers out there who do want, if not need, them.

 

[dallard]

DPReview has a graphic explaining this:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond800/page3.asp

Both the 800 and 800E have filters, they just do different things.

Ah, now I see.

 

[dallard]

More megapixels is better. As digital technology gets better, the more megapixels there are, the less the images have that 'smooth' digital looks everyone seems to hate.

Seriously - it's not a bad thing.

Digital would be much better if it was worse.

 

[nobbylon]

I get why some people are ambivalent toward more and more megapixels - diminishing returns, storage costs, processing speed, etc. can be real concerns. (I also get the joy of more megapixels - printing large is so easy these days.)

But higher ISOs? If you don't need them, don't use them. They have no effect on you. But there are obviously a lot of photographers out there who do want, if not need, them.

well said, and personally the D700 does what I need MOST of the time. Occasionally I could do with a couple of extra stops. I don't need the pixels but I could do with a camera that allows me to use 160th at 5.6 wherever I am.

 

[robbeiflex]

I don't need to pixel peep, I can look at my own eresults. As for Hipstamatic, did I offend you? Awwww. Don't be so agro dude. Take a chill pill and settle for the camera that rocks your boat, whether it's D800, M9 or Hipstamatic 😉

You asked for samples, I gave you them.
The Hipstamatic was a joke man. I thought you were funny. I think you're the one getting too defensive.

I think you should read his post again. Phantomas is all right, although I don't know where he stands on Hipstamatic and he makes typos sometimes. Perhaps there is a reason why Phantomas doesn't need samples. 🙄

Phantomas, how do your own "eresults" look?

Cheers,
Rob

 

[Moriturii]

Agreed. I think good images at 3200 are more than anyone needs. ISO 3200, 1/30, f/1.4 will render proper exposure at light value of 1, which is very very dark.

You can boost the D4 to ISO 204800. When will this be necessary?

Sports photography, 1/4000+ in indoor light, that what these ISO features are for, not so you can take pictures of kids carrying whine bottles and baguettes in Paris in an afternoon.

 

[Archlich]

Nikon's pretty clever. They don't install an AA filter then charge you more for not installing it. The profits on the E are going to be sweet.

So is Leica (always the smartest). They charge more for NOT engraving those letters on a a-la-carte body! The profits must be sweet.

 

[Viktor Sebastian]

More megapixels is better. As digital technology gets better, the more megapixels there are, the less the images have that 'smooth' digital looks everyone seems to hate.

Seriously - it's not a bad thing.

Damn straight.

I totally applaud Nikon for this effort, especially after what happened last time regarding D700 vs 5D MKII.

All this is great for us, we get more versatile tools for our $€¥

 

[Leigh Youdale]

I haven't read any of the posts above as the camera doesn't interest me.
What caught me attention is that on a forum predominantly about rangefinder cameras, in 16 hours there have been 96 posts since the OP's. Just saying', as the saying goes.

 

[3rdtrick]

I have one on order at my local store...

 

[gavinlg]

I'm wondering if any of you are the same as me in that you find nikon DSLRs increasingly... unattractive as their line evolves? Not that it matters in the grand functional scale of things, but I just can't help thinking that the d700 was a little bit sharper in the looks department, like the d3 compared to the d4. Just find the new models a little 'blobby'.

Looks like an amazing camera anyway, can't wait to see some real-world shots by photographers in darker conditions! Canons 5dX needs to be pretty damn good or more people are going to shift to the dark side with this thing..

 

[Archlich]

I haven't read any of the posts above as the camera doesn't interest me.
What caught me attention is that on a forum predominantly about rangefinder cameras, in 16 hours there have been 96 posts since the OP's. Just saying', as the saying goes.

Because there is nothing new rangefinderish today (as usual) for the folks to get excited about.

Think about the X100 thread, in which people post a lot more than in this one. I guarantee you the M10 thread will at least triple that count. 😎

 

[Ronald_H]

It's when I go back to shooting 400-800 speed film that I realize that ISO 25k or whatever we have now is totally unnecessary. The 6400 files on my D700 are usable, but what would I ever need that for? I capped the Auto ISO on the D700 at 3200. We are spoiled by this ever-increasing ISO ceiling. Who has ever been out shooting film and thought "man, I really wish I had brought that roll of ISO 51,600 with me"?

Well... last week. I had my Sony NEX-3 with me, and my Nikon FM with Tri-X in it. I could simply not use the FM. Shot below is done at ISO 12800 + 2/3rds of a stop push in the raw converter. It needed lots of TLC in PP, but there IS a picture. If I'd only had film, or even my 2004 Nikon D70, I would have had... nothing.


Concert photography by Ronald_H, on Flickr

 

[Ronald_H]

Btw, I know that the heavy noise reduction shows, but the subject is deliriously happy with this shot. Drummers are notoriously hard to photograph. I'm sure she is going to hug and kiss me next time we meet. She is pretty and half my age 😀 How much more reason for hysterically high ISO performance do you need? 😉