Nikon D800 Announced

majiktripp

Been looking forward to hearing this news for sometime, looks like a nice unit, 36 megapixels - Finally a Nikon with a high res count.

Might make my D3 my backup camera...

Front / Back:


Product Page

D800 Brochure - PDF

DaireQuinlan

majiktripp wrote: »

Been looking forward to hearing this news for sometime, looks like a nice unit, 36 megapixels - Finally a Nikon with a high res count.

At last ! I've been waiting for, like, FOREVER for those crucial extra 16 or so megapixels so that I can FINALLY make my 14 foot wide enlargements and sell each one for FIVE point three million clams.

So long as you're careful to protect it from x-ray damage going through airports of course, smaller photosites are of course much closer to the wavelength of XRays and form a resonant chamber, much higher chance of damage.

gloobag

Jesus, 36Mp seems like a bit of overkill in all fairness :eek:
I'm happy this has been announced though, as it means the 5DmkIII/5DX can't be far behind. There's no way Canon would let this thing enter the market uncontested :P

dirtyghettokid

saw it last night....36mp :eek:... mega overkill!

Kenny Logins

I don't know, I saw a Hasselblad 40mp demo video recently and the level of detail captured in the portrait shot was incredible. I think there is a lot to be said for photo re-touching at a molecular level.

Who knows what the future brings, maybe some day in post-processing we'll have the ability to alter individual strings of a model's DNA, making their appearance more visually appealing to the masses...

Kenny Logins

Doesn't even have a pop-up flash?

magicbastarder

AND the lens doesn't retract into the body.

gloobag

That's something to do with how the viewfinder is constructed for a full frame sensor as far as I know. There just wouldn't be enough room for the flash. Same as the 5D.

I could be very wrong about that though.

And I would imagine there's a lot more than just the 40Mp at play when it comes to a Hasselblad.

dirtyghettokid

looks nice, but think of the storage issues! you'd go through hard drives & storage cards like there's no tomorrow!

Kenny Logins

gloobag wrote: »

That's something to do with how the viewfinder is constructed for a full frame sensor as far as I know. There just wouldn't be enough room for the flash. Same as the 5D.

..or maybe it's because a pop-up flash just doesn't cut it on a ~€2.5k camera...?

pixbyjohn

Its really only a studio camera:rolleyes: It won't sell millions I bet.

mloc

It does have a popup flash.

pixbyjohn

mloc wrote: »

It does have a popup flash.

Like the D700 has

Kenny Logins

Are photographers always this serious?

artyeva

does it come in pink? with some fairy and pony decals maybe?

Kenny Logins

artyeva wrote: »

does it come in pink? with some fairy and pony decals maybe?

No. Just black.

artyeva

Kenny Logins wrote: »

No. Just black.

oh. i'll probably give it a miss then :rolleyes:

Kenny Logins

artyeva wrote: »

oh. i'll probably give it a miss then :rolleyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwZ_RleZ9Bw

the_djoker

The Hasslebad (sp?) has 40+ MP but a much bigger sensor then FF, is this D800 FF ?

I assume it is as the D700 is ..


Nice specs ....

the_doctor199

Was really looking forward to this announcement and was hoping the rumours were wrong. Had it been an improved d700 with video, I'd have bought one by now. Imo they should have went with a different name for this camera, it's not a continuation of the d700 as most would think.

the_djoker wrote: »

is this D800 FF?

Yeah.

magicbastarder

the_doctor199 wrote: »

Imo they should have went with a different name for this camera, it's not a continuation of the d700 as most would think

it's not a revision of the D700, it's 100 revisions up.

the_djoker

Indeed, should have been the D8X or something ...

artyeva

artyeva wrote: »

does it come in pink? with some fairy and pony decals maybe?

Only if you pre-order in Smyths. Gamestop are doing a green one with a free Incredible Hulk videogame.

Apparently it's only 18mp, and the rest is downloadable content.



Seriously though, I do think the MP count is a tad much. I'd be happier with an 18mp, but that said, they usually have the option of several image sizes anyway don't they (Large JPeg, Medium JPeg, etc.)?


Will be very interested in seeing a 5DIII/7DII/Etc. announcement from Canon. Puerly to see how it will affect the pricing of the current models (I'm a Canon user).


I think the reason cameras like this are made without pop up flash and tilt screens, etc. is to avoid moving parts and help make the camera body more durable. A moving part is just another piece that can be broken or damaged. That's my take on it anyway.

artyeva

the d800 has a pop up flash.

artyeva

artyeva wrote: »

the d800 has a pop up flash.

I see that. I'm just saying I think the reason many cameras forego the flash and other such accessories is down to durability.

CabanSail

Deleted User wrote: »

Seriously though, I do think the MP count is a tad much. I'd be happier with an 18mp, but that said, they usually have the option of several image sizes anyway don't they (Large JPeg, Medium JPeg, etc.)?

If you are quoting JPEG Specs then this probably isn't the camera for you.

There is different size images depending if it's Dx or Fx glass.

CabanSail

CabanSail wrote: »

If you are quoting JPEG Specs then this probably isn't the camera for you.

There is different size images depending if it's Dx or Fx glass.

You've confused me. I'm no Nikon shooter (though I'd imagine DSLRs are much the same these days) but on the 7D, for example, you have the option of compressing your jpg images further for smaller file sizes? Small, medium, large (this can be done with RAW files too).


I've never actually used it, but I'm under the impression this is the function of that particular setting.

grifter09

Really there should only be a complaint if more pixels compromises the ISO performance, and here that is the case.

Kenny Logins

Deleted User wrote: »

You've confused me. I'm no Nikon shooter (though I'd imagine DSLRs are much the same these days) but on the 7D, for example, you have the option of compressing your jpg images further for smaller file sizes? Small, medium, large (this can be done with RAW files too).


I've never actually used it, but I'm under the impression this is the function of that particular setting.

Are you sure? I thought a RAW file was a RAW file, and goes through no processing at all.
I do know on the D5100 you can set the jpeg size and quality but the RAW remains unchanged, even when shooting RAW+Jpeg.

Telchak

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Are you sure? I thought a RAW file was a RAW file, and goes through no processing at all.
I do know on the D5100 you can set the jpeg size and quality but the RAW remains unchanged, even when shooting RAW+Jpeg.

In the case of the raw files, it doesn't compress the information, it just lowers the resolution. You'll still get the full benefit of recovery in editing that you would with the full size raw.

Although it obviously leads to the loss of pixels, so I guess it's debatable whether or not you consider this "compression"...

Kenny Logins

7D File Sizes
JPEG
(1) Large: Approx. 17.90 Megapixels (5,184 x 3,456) = 6-12MB
(2) Medium: Approx. 8.00 Megapixels (3,456 x 2,304)
(3) Small: Approx. 4.50 Megapixels (2,592 x 1,728)
RAW
(4) RAW: Approx. 17.90 Megapixels (5,184 x 3,456) = 17-22MB*
(5) M-RAW: Approx. 10.10 Megapixels (3,888 x 2,592)
(6) S-RAW: Approx. 4.50 Megapixels (2,592 x 1,728)
RAW - Should be aprox. 17-22MB*
M-RAW - Should be aprox 1/2-2/3 the size of RAW
S-RAW - Should be aprox. 1/3-1/2 the size of RAW
Exact file sizes depend on the subject, ISO speed, Picture Style, etc.

From here;
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1019&message=32883544&changemode=1


Ahh, I see. Every day is a school day. Aplologies for doubting you KKV.

mehfesto

grifter09 wrote: »

Really there should only be a complaint if more pixels compromises the ISO performance, and here that is the case.

Are you saying more pixels affect ISO performance? Can you explain this to me, I'm not very technically minded, but It'd be interesting to know why that is.

Also, would the ISO performance be lesser on the d800 than the d700?

magicbastarder

mehfesto wrote: »

Are you saying more pixels affect ISO performance? Can you explain this to me, I'm not very technically minded, but It'd be interesting to know why that is.

the sensor is a fixed size, so sticking more megapixel capability on it naturally results in each 'pixel site' on the sensor being smaller.
going from a 12MP to a 36MP sensor would result in each individual pixel site shrinking to one third its size, and thus only being able to capture one third of the light.

obviously, increases in technology often make up for this.

mehfesto

Ah, that makes sense. Cheers!

I must say, this part of the forum has finally come to life in the last while. Finally makes sense for it to be on its own!