Nikon D800 via B&H
Here’s some highlighted specs:
_36.3 megapixel, full-frame sensor (FX)
_up to 5fps still image shooting
_1080pHD video 24 or 30fps
_ISO Range 100-6400 (extendable from 25,600)
_Live View + External Monitor viewing for professional video applications
_Built in external microphone with audio monitoring capabilities via external headphones
_Twin card slots – one Compact Flash and one SD
_weight = 2 pounds 3 oz
The curve balls for me? The megapixels. There’s a lot of em. Also, this is geared a lot more toward video than I would have anticipated. But beyond that… Please note I HAVE NOT touched one of these cameras, and like the D4, NO I didn’t shoot the campaign. I haven’t yet spent time with the camera to tell you any gory details, although I’m assuming I’ll be able to chat more soon.
Aesthetics? Click thru a range of images of the camera via the above tabs.
So.. I (we) knew this was coming, but rather than me spouting off about having played with the system (I can’t – although some of you journalist types have I’m sure), or telling you what your feelings about this system should be (I won’t), I’m turning the tables on you.
What’s your take? Love, hate, indifferent? Insights?
[Reminder that Nikon plays close attention to this blog, so your comments on this post – glowing or otherwise – might help inform Nikon about what your thinking.]Link to all the Nikon D800 details and/or purchase here via B&H.
You kidding me, this is a no brainer. In with the new out with the old. I’m keeping my D700, but as soon as I get the funds for an 800 this will be my new toy. I just got rid of my Sony trinitron for a 60 inch LED, technolgy rocks!
I’m a little confused. So…what is the purpose of the D3x now?
Wasnt that the superduper crazy detail camera for studio/landscapes? Now the D800 is better and cheaper? Or is there something I am missing?
Also if Nikon is listening they should be making the D400 a full frame ~$2k camera and have the D9000 pick up the D300s legacy.
I’ve read a lot of comments about how the D800 is not really the upgrade the the D700 and I would agree. Nikon had a huge hit with the D700 since it was such a versatile camera. I think that a lot of photographers just wanted a D700 with a few minor upgrades like the addition of video, dual memory card slots, and maybe a higher megapixel count like around 18 or 22 and maybe throw in a couple other features that could set it apart from the D700. But now with 36mp, a slower fps rate, and the potential reduction in low-light ability (haven’t seen any high ISO comparisons yet) I think people are going to question whether or not they should buy the D800.
Maybe when it becomes available the D800 will win over the masses but for now you can sense a lot of reluctance. I suppose time will tell. I’m kind of eager to see what the 5d Mark III (or 5DX) has to offer.
It IS a worthy successor of the D700.
Why?
– It improves 1 stop on the high ISO
– It improves 2 stops on the D-range
– It has 3 times the number of pixels, IF YOU LIKE
– It has 20 mpixels if you think the 5D has it right with the pixel count
– It added professional crop modes like 4:5 and 16:9 for film stills
– It is a better D300 too: bird enthusiasts can use a D800 in crop mode, and mix it with FX landscapes
– It is still 4fps: the theoretical 7fps of the D700 is hardly used in my case. Don’t forget, this is a reporter camera, not a sports beast that should team with a 3kg tele lens.
– It adds video
– You still get the useful built in Flash (people underestimate its usefulness! I flash container ships with my D700 flash at 50meters).
– You get the best all time DXO mark sensor score
– It has better high iso than its competitor (5DmkIII), even though Nikon is shy on paper (mentioning just 6400 iso).
So it is the best upgrade possible to the D700. They even invite MF users to grab a bunch of D800’s.
And don’t be a sissy about the FPS. A good photographer has to do just 1 thing: press the shutter release at the right moment. Then fps don’t matter.
It’s very sexy, nice feeling when touch.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thanatham/6834733141/
I’ll just wait for money to grow on trees… or rather buy something that’s not a slow 5fps for the cost. Good to see Nikon sort out the filming options – headphone socket, audio control (I think), mic socket and 60fps in 720p but again for the price, you could get a very good broadcast camcorder. It doesn’t scream “the next best thing” as far as I’m concerned. It’s not perfect and adding tons of megapixels doesn’t impress me when each raw photo is considered to be around 70mb in size which will make you fork out for extra hard drives costing yet more money. It seems rushed and Nikon’s usual approach in considering the market and consumer seems to have gotten carried away with one idea – more megapixels. Saying that, with the right glass and scene, I expect it takes one hell of a photo.