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.
Very nice camera, I can see how the specs fit a niche, just not a camera for me at this time.
Too rich for my blood both spec & price.
A D300s replacement would be good for me and my shooting topics at present.
I think it will be a great camera. I do kind of wish Nikon had gone in a different direction and given it fewer megapixels and more frames per second. That way, there could be a camera for a person wanting to get into shooting sports without having to pull the trigger for a D4. But I guess Nikon figured since the barrier to enter sports was so expensive for all other equipment, they might as well capture some of that profit.
LOL….. I have to chuckle at the number of “photographers” that complain about the pixel size! That’s like saying, “I don’t want the 550hp BMW M5, why can’t they just make a slower one with only 250hp that has a smoother ride…. for the same price, because I don’t think I could handle the power and it’s less fuel efficient.”
In the M5, you don’t have to use all 550hp every time you give it throttle, there’s an “M” button whereby you can choose how much you’d like to use. Just the same, the D800 does not have to shoot 36mp on every shot. Shoot in a reduced resolution!! Here’s the listed image capture sizes available.
• FX format (36×24): 7,360 × 4,912 (L), 5,520 × 3,680 (M), 3,680 × 2,456 (S)
• 1.2× (30×20): 6,144 × 4,080 (L), 4,608 × 3,056 (M), 3,072 × 2,040 (S)
I am personally very excited for this camera. It is what I’ve been hoping for, and meets my needs exactly.
Mike
you cannot adjust the “size” of RAW. You can step down the compression, but you cannot adjust the RAWness of the file.
Cool video & other nice stuff with differentiation between D4,
Ditto, Nikon is lagging- it didn’t not catch up with Canon on making options for capturing RAW at smaller/multiple resolutions.
5MP – for internet pics.
12MP for sports
16MP for most print
>20 MP for landscape & studio
RAW is the life saver for night shots- shooting at 14bit-what appears dim can be saved on my D7000.
This D800 is unfortunately what I’m NOT saving for. D4 is way too expensive as I’m still collecting glass.
I like your comparison but my question is, would the RAW format be available to all sizes? or it would only be on the FX (36×24)? If it is then I’m totally sold with your rationale.
Shows you’re a “photographer” and have no idea what you’re talking about..
It’s not the number of pixels that’s the problem, it’s the density of them! And no matter how you crop or shoot in DX mode or whatever, pixel density remains the same!
Sure, 36Mpx on a MEDIUM format sensor is great, but on 35mm it’s a disaster! Why do you think the new flagship D4 has “only” 16Mpx?? Because people who buy it, don’t “need” more?? Year, right! Cos that’s the optimum number to retain max resolutions, sharpness, dynamic range and low light capabilities..
So D800 SUCKS!
I have D700 and wanted to upgrade due to stupid 96% viewfinder and I wanted video, now this thing..
I held off for almost 2 years, waiting for a D700 replacement so I could upgrade to a reasonably priced FX body with video. I couldn’t be more disappointed by the 36mp specs. I thought everyone was in agreement that ISO trumps MP? Nikon has left me without a camera to upgrade to. I won’t be purchasing a D800 and I’m having trouble justifying the cost of a D4 for my needs.
Well said. I’ve been waiting for a full frame to upgrade from the D300. The trick of having both a FX and a 15mpx DX in the same body is nice, but more than I need. The thought of managing all of those large files gives me the willies…
I want some more megapixels from the D700, the low light capability and don’t want to buy another DX body.
Wow what a camera! Has me wondering where/when I’m going to get $$$ together for one???