Nikon D800......

Just to confuse things even more :)


I'm sure I just read that if you write to both cards at the same time, your speed is restricted to that of the slower card, is this really correct?
If you have a 95mb/s sd cards recording the raw, surely a 45mb/s cf would keep up if you are writing jpegs to that slot, on the basis the jpegs are about half the size of the raw?
I'm not sure i really care what the answer is, as like said, you don't buy a d800 for speed, which I haven't. Reliability is cool of course, and if the 'wasted' £10 difference saves me 2 mins when transferring pic to my comp, it's not really wasted :)
 
Last edited:
The difference between a 16gb extreme and extreme pro, is about £10.

I guessed my statement above was correct, but trying to say/ask that if you naturally record jpeg to the slower, and raw to the faster card, there ain't much difference , cos the Jpegs are smaller.
 
idigitize said:
The difference between a 16gb extreme and extreme pro, is about £10.

I guessed my statement above was correct, but trying to say/ask that if you naturally record jpeg to the slower, and raw to the faster card, there ain't much difference , cos the Jpegs are smaller.
Click to expand...


Yep.. that's true. The JPEG recording to the SD not be holding back the CF writing.


As for price... it must widen between the two as size increases, because there was around £40 difference when I bought my last cards, but they were 32GB CD cards.

Current Prices.
Extreme = £66 an Amazon
Extreme Pro = £104 on Amazon.

I wouldn't by memory cards from anywhere else.. to many fakes kicking around. I'd certainly not buy them from any Ebay store.
 
Some interesting comments and reviews on the D800. Apologies if its been mentioned previously but what are people's thoughts on the iso? Does anyone here use it for shooting gigs?

Jim
 
IMHO it is good to 3200 ISO. Usable at 6400 ISO.

But as stated here and elsewhere, and in my current experience, you probably need 1/(2 x focal length) rather then 1/focal length to get sharp images because of the pixel density when shooting hand-held.
 
jimnomad said:
Some interesting comments and reviews on the D800. Apologies if its been mentioned previously but what are people's thoughts on the iso? Does anyone here use it for shooting gigs?

Jim
Click to expand...

Pretty decent, I've used it for a few. No more clean up needed than I would have done with my D90 at 800-1600

ISO 2000: 1/200@ 200mm

Brother Shabo & the soul rebels by Cagey75, on Flickr




ISO 6400, 1/200 @ 50mm - view large for ze noize

Y&T live at the Village, Dublin by Cagey75, on Flickr
 
Thanks guys, that's really helpfull. Mike that's interesting reef the focal length. Cagey, thank for the examples, that really helps me out and puts my mind at ease (great examples btw!)

Thanks again guys.

Jim
 
Last edited:
jimnomad said:
Thanks guys, that's really helpfull. Mike that's interesting reef the focal length. Cagey, thank for the examples, that really helps me out and puts my mind at ease (great examples btw!)

Thanks again guys.

Jim
Click to expand...

No science, just IMHO - and of course I'll expect plenty of people to say that they get sharp images at 1/focal length (as can I) but as a rule I'll go for a little more safety than I would with a 12MP/16MP body.
 
Interesting comparisons ... but it loses £20 above ISO 100 :D
 
gramps said:
Interesting comparisons ... but it loses £20 above ISO 100 :D
Click to expand...

LOL.. edited. That was from another set comparing D7000 to D800.
 
Mine had very little NR in post as it happens. Your library still shows how decent it is at 6400 anyhow
 
Cagey75 said:
Mine had very little NR in post as it happens. Your library still shows how decent it is at 6400 anyhow
Click to expand...


It's not too shabby :) Cleaned up, ISO 6400 is not only usable.. it's perfectly viable.
 
I had a 10k ISO from that same gig, not on flickr though, see if I can root it out
 
Aha, knew I had posted it up on here, hosted on imgur or someplece:
Cagey75 said:
10K ISO
SI5dv.jpg


100%
xfenH.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Ok... here's ISO12800 with NR applied in LR4.

ISO 12800
 
If you are planning on a lot of gigs or high ISO work consider a D3S or D4. I usually keep the D800 roughly below ISO 1600 to retain quality.
 
This wasn't my motivation for buying it. ISO100 and a tripod for me :) However... it was a pleasant surprise when I realised just how good it was.

I'd take the slight noise increase and 36MP over slightly less noise and 16MP any day.
 
If I was getting paid enough I'd certainly get a D4!

Gig shots don't have to be crisp and clean though, just clear. The shooter for Pearl Jam, one of my old fav bands, still uses a D700, and shoots a lot at 6400. Though they play large arenas that have SOTA lighting rigs. Bands/fans/general music fans certainly don't mind a little noise ;) What they do mind, is if you start using strong flash.

Grainy but clear is fine. But because of the crappy blue and red lights used at these venues , a lot of photographers convert to B&W. In fact, some of the better gig photographs I've ever seen have been B&W.
 
I'm really liking the examples and appreciate the feedback. I've had a years sabbatical from photography due to finances and other reasons but looking to start shooting again soon. I've done a few gigs and burlesque shows and this is what I'm looking to do again. I agree with the comments ref the D3s and D4. I had to get rid of my D3 and D3s last year and just now there's no way I could afford a D4! I'm thinking of the D800 to get back into it and will take things from there.

Thanks again for the input.

Jim
 
No worries. The thing you may miss more than slightly better ISO performance is the heft and grip of the D3s over the D800 and faster fps, if you ever made use of that?. Apart from that, there is nothing your older camera has that this doesn't ;)

My new macro lens arrived today. And after the disaster with the Sigma 35mm 1.4, I'm pleased to say I seem to have got a very nice copy of Sigma's 150mm 2.8 OS macro. Phew!! I was a little worried as I've had trouble with 3 sigma lenses to date. Really disappointed over the 35, which has gone back for exchange - this one will at least ensure me that they do get it right at times!

That's just going on straight out the box early tests, but it's fast, and so far seems very accurate, which is good ... since I intend to use it for macro!
 
Cagey75 said:
Phew!! I was a little worried as I've had trouble with 3 sigma lenses to date. This one will at least ensure me that they do get it right at times!
Click to expand...

We have the same dud Sigma to good Sigma ratio, lol.
 
Ha, the first for me was actually Sony mount. On my old A200 I bought a Sigma 70-300 "macro" - Sony's IS system didn't seem to like it and busted the AF. I used it as a manual lens for months before selling it, as an MF only lens for cheap. The next was the 70-200 2.8 HSM II I bought for the D90. My copy was soft [IMO] wide open, and suffered terrible purple fringing at the 200mm end. I didn't fancy shipping it back to Holland, so put it up on a local site, and explained how I felt on it. A guy came to look at it, and agreed to swap his old 80-200 Nikon for it plus cash - suited me! He was happy with it from f/4, and the fact it had a tripod collar which his 80-200 didn't.

And now, just yesterday, the new 35mm 1.4 - really looked forward to that one, and I tried many tests, trying to convince myself it was ok, when it was badly off. No micro adjustment was going to cut it. Fingers crossed they send me a gem in it's place!

So here I have this 150mm, I was half afraid to test it :D But it seems bang on[usual kitchen tests, and a bird in the garden through the window, nothing technical] but it's focusing where I tell it to, that's a good start :D
 
Last edited:
Oh, you mean 3 in total! I had 3x dud 50mm Sigmas (4th is good), 3 dud 70-200 HSM Macros (1 calibrated fine), 2x 70-200 OS (both excellent).

I really want a 85mm 1.4 but concerned about more duds, I still believe in the brand though (when I eventually get a good copy!).

Strangely out of all the main branded lenses Ive used Ive never had a bad copy (quite a lot in all mounts). Touch Wood!!!
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah, 3 total. If I had that many duds I'd quit buying them!

How do you mean never had a bad copy? when you had so many duds? :/

I have to say, this 150mm feels just f'ing lovely to hold. It's nice and neat considering the focal length + OS. With the tripod collar off it's very nicely balanced on the D800.

I know I'm going to really like this one. I don't think I'll be missing the 105 at all!
 
Main brands like Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panny, Oly, not 3rd party brands like Sigma, Tamron etc.

I hate the duds as its a waste of time and sometimes money but when I get a good copy my faith is restored... till I get another dud.
 
Ah yes, I read it wrong, sorry.

Same here I think, never had a bad Nikon lens. Tough I have sold on loads, it was more because I just wasn't using them or wanted to try something else. Just one Nikon lens I was never happy with fully, that was the 55-200 VR. Mine had iffy fringing at 200mm, just as the sigma 70-200 did.
 
I have asked before and never got an answer...how do you set d800 to face detect and auto exposure for them ??
 
and finally have done left AF test and I think I do have it :(
time to call Nikon :(
 
I decided to sit and do some testing a few days ago and think mine does as well.
Had been mainly using the centre focus point but noticed focus was abit hit and miss using the left side, especially.

set the tripod and charts, with defocusing between shots centre and right were sharp each time out of 3 tries, left was totaly out on 2 and 3rd wasnt as sharp as the others.

Phoned nikon today and they just said to go online and go through there site... so save yourself the call.
 
pmac said:
I decided to sit and do some testing a few days ago and think mine does as well.
Had been mainly using the centre focus point but noticed focus was abit hit and miss using the left side, especially.

set the tripod and charts, with defocusing between shots centre and right were sharp each time out of 3 tries, left was totaly out on 2 and 3rd wasnt as sharp as the others.

Phoned nikon today and they just said to go online and go through there site... so save yourself the call.
Click to expand...

??
go through site ??
I have sent them an msg so I hope that's what they meant
 
They said you had to contact them via the web site and fill in a form. If they accept it they will give you postage stamps for it to be sent in.
Theres a one and a half to two weeks turn around as well.
 
pmac said:
They said you had to contact them via the web site and fill in a form. If they accept it they will give you postage stamps for it to be sent in.
Theres a one and a half to two weeks turn around as well.
Click to expand...

how long???

Hugh gave his to Nikon at Kingstone and it took them one day...
and stamps ????????send camera work bags of money using only normal post ???
 
Nikon says that it may take 2 to 4 weeks to get AF issue fixed...

I do hope I will find my receipt for camera as they need to see it ...bought it from Jacobs and not long ago I have found that they went bust...
 
Last edited:
So is the left focus issue now fixed in manufacturing or are there dealers out there who are selling the D800 which need to be sent back to Nikon to get this fixed?? Also, what happens in that case with Bodies purchased from the likes of Panamoz? Will Nikon fix that?

I am looking to go FF and was thinking of selling all my Nikon stuff (D300s, D5100, Nikon 18-200, Nikon 10-24. Nion 35mm f1.8, Nikon 50mm f1.4, Sigma 150-500 and SB600). I was going to move to Canon 5DMK3 and a 650D... however, I can't justify taking a hit on my other DX stuff as my son can use it.. so I am looking to get D800 and hence this question.:|
 
Why were you going to move to Canon, out of interest? Outside of shooting sports/action, in pretty much every meaningful way the D800 beats the 5D3, and the D700 pretty much matches the 5D3 for stills short of making huge prints and video. I prefer the Canon lens lineup in some areas, but the 5D3's image quality is barely up to scratch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top