The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Dust settled users of D800E!

D&A

Well-known member
Just as a counter point to the love fest, I sold mine. For travel where I want long exposure or high ISO I'm happy with the D600 and 24mp. Less glass issues and no weird focus problems.
From my experience, I agree completely with this assessment too. The D600 turned out to be the "little engine that could"! If I only had a need to shoot with it more often. As Graham mentioned, the D800 AF performance and attributes and overall layout has the edge over the D600.

If more resolution is required, like Graham, a MF digital will be substituted but the shooting circumstances must be appropriate. ie: no fast moving subjects under low light.

Dave (D&A)
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
From my experience, I agree completely with this assessment too. The D600 turned out to be the "little engine that could"! If I only had a need to shoot with it more often. As Graham mentioned, the D800 AF performance and attributes and overall layout has the edge over the D600.

If more resolution is required, like Graham, a MF digital will be substituted but the shooting circumstances must be appropriate. ie: no fast moving subjects under low light.

Dave (D&A)
Dave and Graham

I understand your logic but my experience has been different . I use my D800E s primarily for all purpose street and travel shooting ...where I expect to need ISO in the range of 800-3200 . The challenge in street photography(that I am concerned about) is getting a high enough shutter speed to stop the movement (camera and subject movement ) while having enough EV not lose the shadows into mush.

No question higher MP cameras produce more "visible blur" ..you can just see it . So you could argue that going to a lower MP file gives you an edge . This is of course the logic of keeping the D4 at 16MP ....a sweet spot between IQ and ability to get the shot .

Initially I was concerned that the large D800/E files would be just too darn difficult to get right and maybe not worth it . After almost a year shooting in a variety of situations ..I am finding that I can make the D800/E perform well beyond expectations . For example:

1. I shot POLO with the D800/E and my 600/4 lens . I found the shutter speeds to be close to what I would use on my D4 . Maybe one EV more . But the files were beautiful and could be easily worked .

2. I shot at Christmas in NYC ..mostly late afternoon and evening ..in the ISO range 800-6400. The files held up like nothing I have seen before .

Sorry if this appears as rambling ...but the trade off between the D600 and D800/E seems to be marginal (less than one EV) improvement in reducing "blur effects" verse having the larger MP file with better DR and color response . Thus I have concluded that given a choice ..the D800/E seems to have greater versatility .

Clearly concede that 23MP is enough for most all applications and that smaller size and lower cost favor the D600.
 
I'm not sure if anyone was actually suggesting this, but it's just mistaken to think that more pixels makes it harder to make sharp pictures. They just make it easier to see the blur. Viewing at 100% on screen is like looking at your image with a stronger loupe.

If you were to compare prints at the same size between two otherwise identical cameras, the one with more pixels would never be at a disadvantage.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Hi Jack,

Could you be more specific or an example as to where each one would excel?

Thanks,
Po
D800 for people/fabric/skin renders a generally smoother, more pleasing result with few moire issues.

D800E for landscape, architecture or reproduction.
 

jagsiva

Active member
After about a year with the D800E and a short period with a couple of D800's (one IR720nm and the other full spectrum), I think the D800 and E are all extremely mature platforms, and the IQ is very good.

I used Canon for the past 12 years, and just ventured into Nikon with the D800E. A few things worked better for me....and not necessarily just IQ. I liked the ergonomics a lot better, much more tactile. I liked the auto ISO implementation a lot better. Most importantly, I felt some of the glass in the 14-100mm range was stellar. Beyond this, I think it is a close call either way, with the exception of the Canon 135/F2 which really does not have a similar play in Nikon. I am hoping the new Zeiss will fill that gap, albeit in MF.

Minor quibbles -- green cast on the LCD, should have been addressed a long time ago. LV, marginally better on the 5DIII. Video, again, perhaps a little better for critical work, but not my thing.

So, I am very happy with the D800's and D800E. I also like the fact that Nikon has a more gradual semi-pro to pro line. I had the 5DII and IDSIII at one point, and these were two different animals. What a waste of a great sensor in the 5DII with the AF system that it had.

I still miss my 85/1.2 (the 85/1.4 Nikkor is still a stellar lens), the MP-E65, and then135F2. Otherwise, no complaints. The 24/25/85 1.4G are all very good, and I do feel I gained some IQ in these lenses. The 14-24 is fantastic as a single UWA. The 200F2 is in someways better ergonomically than my previous Canon 200F2. The recent addition of a Coastal Optics 60mm Macro has made my Nikon lens lineup even more exciting.

Sorry for the ramble....as for IQ, I still still reach for my other kit when I have the time to invest on being creative.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Dave and Graham

I understand your logic but my experience has been different . I use my D800E s primarily for all purpose street and travel shooting ...where I expect to need ISO in the range of 800-3200 . The challenge in street photography(that I am concerned about) is getting a high enough shutter speed to stop the movement (camera and subject movement ) while having enough EV not lose the shadows into mush.

No question higher MP cameras produce more "visible blur" ..you can just see it . So you could argue that going to a lower MP file gives you an edge . This is of course the logic of keeping the D4 at 16MP ....a sweet spot between IQ and ability to get the shot .

Initially I was concerned that the large D800/E files would be just too darn difficult to get right and maybe not worth it . After almost a year shooting in a variety of situations ..I am finding that I can make the D800/E perform well beyond expectations . For example:

1. I shot POLO with the D800/E and my 600/4 lens . I found the shutter speeds to be close to what I would use on my D4 . Maybe one EV more . But the files were beautiful and could be easily worked .

2. I shot at Christmas in NYC ..mostly late afternoon and evening ..in the ISO range 800-6400. The files held up like nothing I have seen before .

Sorry if this appears as rambling ...but the trade off between the D600 and D800/E seems to be marginal (less than one EV) improvement in reducing "blur effects" verse having the larger MP file with better DR and color response . Thus I have concluded that given a choice ..the D800/E seems to have greater versatility .

Clearly concede that 23MP is enough for most all applications and that smaller size and lower cost favor the D600.
Roger, in my opinion, the tradeoffs are relatively small when comparing the D600 and 800/e for most uses. I can cite exaples where one or the other might inch ahead and excell but the areas are few and far inbetween, having shot both. This is aside from the file size and resolution of each.

If I didn't have access to medium format, then having a 36MP camera for large format prints (in my case) would be a must. Since I do (have that access), I much prefer to use the smaller 24MP files size of the D600 when that resolution is adaquate or need the ability to shoot low light moving subjects (as opposed to the medium format camera, for obvious reasons. This is especially so when working with hundreds of images from single shoot...for obvious reasons.

Dave (D&A)
 

PeterA

Well-known member
:Genuine thumbs up from me too - one day I might read the manual and figure out all the u-beaut stuff all the buttons are supposed to do too - I wish it was made in a D3/D4 series type body though - the battery grip doesn't improve grip for large hands as well as it could. Probably teh best 'value' camera money can buy..
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Roger, in my opinion, the tradeoffs are relatively small when comparing the D600 and 800/e for most uses. I can cite exaples where one or the other might inch ahead and excell but the areas are few and far inbetween, having shot both. This is aside from the file size and resolution of each.

If I didn't have access to medium format, then having a 36MP camera for large format prints (in my case) would be a must. Since I do (have that access), I much prefer to use the smaller 24MP files size of the D600 when that resolution is adaquate or need the ability to shoot low light moving subjects (as opposed to the medium format camera, for obvious reasons. This is especially so when working with hundreds of images from single shoot...for obvious reasons.

Dave (D&A)
Dave

You are of course correct ..we are talking about small differences here . I find the size weight and handling of the D800E (without the grip) to be perfect to my hand . So if I can get a slightly bigger file ,slightly better features etc .. I would take the D800E .

I do feel if I were shooting events and some types of commercial work that even an APS C sized DSLR maybe enough and would have the benefits of smaller files and way less cost .
 

D&A

Well-known member
Dave

You are of course correct ..we are talking about small differences here . I find the size weight and handling of the D800E (without the grip) to be perfect to my hand . So if I can get a slightly bigger file ,slightly better features etc .. I would take the D800E .

I do feel if I were shooting events and some types of commercial work that even an APS C sized DSLR maybe enough and would have the benefits of smaller files and way less cost .
.

Agreed! Although I'm not implying that shooting with a D800 hand held at shutter speeds higherthan the reciprocal of the focal length can't be sharp (they most certainly can!)...for any number of reasons I sometimes found shooting the D600 this way lent itself to more predictable subject or "point of focus" shots being "in-focus", with the D600 as opposed to the D800 and ultiumately consistantly sharper photos as a result. Others I've spoken with and who have used both cameras felt that way too. I'm not speaking about what's observed on a monitor relative to the degree of viewing enlargement, but in large prints or test crops of images made into prints.

It's not simply due to the greater # of D800 pixels since hand held shooting with a 40MP DMF camera at similar effective focal lengths and shutter speeds didn't seem to have this attribute (or anomaly). What possibly could contribute to this phenominon (and observation) I can't definitely say, but some have suggested it may be partly due to the D800 AF system (maybe a function of internal programing)....which leads to occasional (and sometimes more than occasional misfocusing for reasons partly unknown. Hard to say why but unfortunately this trait is neither consistent nor predictable and may depend on multiple factors such as lighting, color temp, and overall camera set up and the particulars of the individual shooting situation. Not everyone has experienced this with their D800/e.

I've borrowed a D800e body that for landscape work nailed focus almost all of the time with all sensors ..but for some inexplicable reason did occasionally miss. Yet when I shot that same camera in a more dynamic situation, consistancy of accurate AF was more often (on occasion) hit or miss. This was not the case but when shooting with the D600 in the exact same shooting situation nor with other lower MP bodies. I have no explanation for these observations. Yet for all intent and purposes the D800/e is a tremedous value and a fabulous versitile camera.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:

Paratom

Well-known member
Bottom line it's getting the job done with very little issues. But like anything else I thrown good glass at it and it does well. My stable at the moment is a 2 kit setup. I need a PR type kit so the 24-70 is a given along with the 70-200f4 but I'm not a zoom fan outside this type of work . So than I have a Samyang 14mm, Zeiss 25 F2 which I think maybe the best wide there is among them all than the Sigma 35mm 1.4 which is rated the best in that focal length, just because its small and cheap 50 1.8g which is handy sometimes. 60 macro which is very good but people ignore it. 85 1.8g which I think extremely good than on the buy books is the Zeiss 135 f2. And like to get my 200 f2 back someday. I also need the 7100 for some specific work.

Right now I want something small with a zoom Maybe Nex 7 or Fuji ex-1 I think it's called but I need to analyze these as I have not been paying any attention to this size cam. Also It has to be able to process in C1 or I won't buy it.
Guy, I have owned Nex5n, Nex7 and X-Pro1 - the One I have kept I like best (from the small cameras) is the OMD with fav lenses (the new f2.8 Pana 12-35, 35-100 if you like zoom, and 25/1.4 and 75/1.8 if you like primes).
The IQ is surprizingly good for such small sensor, I really like the Oly-colors, and the AF is pretty fast, and its also good for movie.
Plus its weatherproof! Tom
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Depressing I played with the Nex 6 and 7. Nikon 7100 and the Sony Rx100. I bought nothing but the little Sony was damn cool. No Olys or Fuji in any models I wanted. The D7100 I could use but its not a travel toy.

Sorry this is OT. Maybe we need a help me decide forum just for people with serious GAS. We should induct 3 shrinks as leaders of the forum. 3 representatives from B&h just for balance. Lol
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Sorry this is OT. Maybe we need a help me decide forum just for people with serious GAS. We should induct 3 shrinks as leaders of the forum. 3 representatives from B&h just for balance. Lol
I believe that this exists over on the MF thread :D It also includes participation from some wealth management folks too (or mis-management?).
 

pophoto

New member
Just a quick question, throwing it out there:
Is the issue of the green LCD still there or has there been a fix?

Thanks
Po
 

cerett

Member
glenerrolrd;500755 "Focusing is a big issue with any DSLR than uses 36MP ..you can see the slightest miss . Standard DOF tables don t apply and hyperfocal techniques don t work." said:
Can you please elaborate further on the DOF issue and why standard hyperfocal techniques don't work. I experienced some recent issues in this area. Relied on a DOF table as well as the depth field scale on the lens, and was quite disappointed. Thanks.
 

Stan ROX

Member
Had a D600 before I finally sold this and got the D800e - just a few days before I went to Paris for some days.

The first evening, I always visit the Eiffel Tower. I had my D800E with the 24-70 2.8 with me. Handheld ...

Technical Data:

D800E, Nikkor 24-70 @ 40mm, f 5.0, 1/250 sec, ISO 220. NO sharpening: Can you read the Names in the middle of the building ?

I'm more than impressed.

Eiffeltower from the Trocadero. Full-Size: 6688x4464, 10.2 MB
 
Last edited:

ccroft

New member
Can you please elaborate further on the DOF issue and why standard hyperfocal techniques don't work. I experienced some recent issues in this area. Relied on a DOF table as well as the depth field scale on the lens, and was quite disappointed. Thanks.
Once I experienced the detail the D800 could deliver with a good lens I became much more aware of true focus. IE the difference between the point of focus and the margins of what was once the acceptable DOF. Before this camera I often used a zone focus approach based on tables and was generally happy with the results. Now I'm usually in manual live-view mode and checking critical focus on a laptop when I'm on a tripod, which is most of the time.

Likely has to do with resolving power and size of circle of confusion or some-such. I just think my personal taste for acceptable DOF got thinner. Maybe it's more like the point of focus got sharper and made the margins look softer.
 
Top