2 thoughts on “Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) Reviews”

1. 372 of 383 people found the following review helpful

   
   A clear improvement over the already excellent D700, April 10, 2012

   By 

   M. Billon (France) –
   
     

   This review is from: Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (Electronics)

   I know that the D800 is not really the replacement model over the D700. Nevertheless, it did replace my old D700 and the D800 is, I believe, better suited for my photographic needs than the D700, i.e., studio, portraits, and landscape.

   The D700 was and still is an outstanding DSLR. The D800 is of course better, but in a very perceptible way, which was quite a surprise to me.
   I have done over 5000 shots since my purchase on 24 March. So far, no issues to report: no green cast from the LCD and no problems with the CLS system.
   Nikon has really outperformed with this new DSLR and the clear improvements are:
   – Much improved Dynamic Range, which was my main problem since my first DSLR
   – Better colors straight off the camera: deeper and richer
   – Better AF in low light ***UPDATE*** After comparing with older Nikon DSLRs, this improvement is minor and only perceptible on cross-type AF points.
   – Highly detailed photographs at full res, 100% magnification and also when down-scaling the photos.
   Let’s not forget a proper and useable HD video feature at broadcasting quality. ***UPDATE*** Perhaps not broadcasting quality, but close enough.

   On the negative side (there has to be some):
   – The zoom in and zoom out buttons are reversed from the old models, which is now more logical, but I am used to the old wrong way! it’s a minor problem of course.
   – D4 has backlit buttons, why not on the D800? This can’t be that expensive to include.
   – Very expensive Battery pack, this is a major drawback for me. But yes, the D800 is well priced at $3000. I just hate ridiculously priced accessories.
   – still wonder the point of having 1 CF slot and 1 SD slot. 2 CF slots would have been superb. But I guess if you come from a SD card DSLR, that would be practical for you.
   – Left AF points can suffer from front/back focusing issues on wide angle lenses, but this can be fixed at a Nikon repair center under warranty ***UPDATE***

   One crucial point that has to be considered when acquiring a 36MP DSLR: storage will be an issue. I just purchased a 4TB ext hard drive. A 14-bit RAW file (uncompressed) coming from the D800 will average 75MB.

   I just shot a wedding, and I consider the D800 to be an excellent choice for the job. All the complains about shots being more blurry at 100% magnification are irrelevant. One has to be precise with his/her settings, at the right exposure and optimal shutter speed, results can be absolutely mind-blowing. And since most won’t need 36MP for wedding photographs, down-scaling images will certainly eliminate slight camera-shake or noise.

   One particular aspect that I appreciate is that my Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G is now tack-sharp at f/1.4. I had a front focusing issue with my old D700 even with the fine-tune option set to max. Since I’m no techie geek, I still don’t understand why the D700 gave me problems with the 85mm.

   Anyway, I used to be one of those people saying that digital photography will never replace film photography. The D800 has changed all that.

   Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

   Was this review helpful to you? 
   

    Comments (24)

   Reply ↓
2. 276 of 299 people found the following review helpful

   
   Best Landscape DSLR, April 26, 2012

   By 

   Emmanuel “ShutterMan” (Seattle, WA USA) –

   Amazon Verified Purchase(What’s this?)

   This review is from: Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (Electronics)

   …

   ********* Update 04/15/2013 *********

   After a year of ownership with two bodies, here are my final thoughts:

   This is the best landscape or studio DSLR in the market. Other than not having custom User Settings (U1, U2, U3) like the D600, D7000, and Canon DSLRs, this camera has the great ergonomics, the camera has buttons to control the most used functions and the DOF, AE Lock, Cust Func, are highly customizable.

   For wedding, amateur sports, or anything that requires accurate consistent AF look elsewhere. I have had both bodies and a replacement body (serial 3041XXX) “fixed” by Nikon and they feel the latest fixes are good enough. Good enough, I did not invest $18,000 in to a system for good enough! Without getting into the whole Left Side AF saga, which is readily available on other reviews and websites, the continuous AF (FW A: 1.01/B:1.02 and using the center AF sensor) is horribly inconsistent. If shooting in the F/1.4 -2.0 range expect 1 out of 10 perfectly focused, 2 out of 10 acceptable, and 7 out of 10 throwaways with a person walking towards the camera at a slow or medium pace.

   I switched to Canon and took a huge hit financially by selling my entire Nikon collection and buying new Canon equipment, however, my Canon 5dMkIIIs get 6 out 10 perfectly focused, 3 out of 10 acceptable, and 1 throwaway.

   Nikon did many things better than Canon, spot metering is based on AF point and not just the center, AF points are always illuminated, buttons have more customization options available, Auto ISO is more intelligent, superior dynamic range, and the AF selecting wheel is not as finicky. And obviously Nikon’s megapixel advantage is nice for cropping, although 12 MP is more than enough for 99.5% of printing, it is nice being able to crop heavily in post. I really wanted this camera to work, in fact my cameras made over ten trips to Nikon service centers in CA and NY, and they never got them to work, their CS is beyond atrocious and incompetent.

   The Canon’s sensor seems like 2008 tech, but as I mentioned the AF performance is amazing. I would rather have a focused image taken by an average sensor, than a blurred image taken by a sensor with all the dynamic range and megapixels in the world. Average in today’s terms is still amazing, I just have to be more careful and ensure accurate exposure.

   BOTTOM LINE:
   If you are a photographer that uses Zeiss lenses for landscape, or only use the center AF in the aperture range of 5.6-16 and then recompose in a studio or controlled environment, this camera will amaze you. However, if you shoot wide open with fast primes and not getting the “shot” puts yourself or company at risk, look into another camera (i.e. D4, D3s, Canon 1 Series, 5D MK3).

   ********* ********* ********* *********

   …
   See that my purchase is verified by Amazon. Below are my observations after one month of ownership.

   Pros:
   + Resolution: With the right lenses and on the right settings the detail is astonishing.
   + Dynamic Range: Incredible, when shooting in lower ISO’s it is near impossible to ruin a photo. Search the internet “fred miranda d800 review Yosemite” to see real life comparisons.
   + Color: Adobe profiles in LR and ACR are horrible, create custom profiles using a X-Rite ColorChecker Passport Software and then tweak it with Adobe DNG profiler for better colors.
   + AutoWB: Works well in about 70% of lighting scenarios, somewhat better than the D3/D700. *** See Tip Below ***
   + Low ISO: Having a true 100 ISO is godsend for on-location lighting setups.
   + High ISO: The D800 and LR4 do an excellent job in controlling noise. Using PS plugins a properly exposed image can print acceptable 6×9’s at 12800 ISO (max for D3/D700’s is 6400).
   + Tonality: With a good camera profile in LR4, the tonal range rivals Fujifilm 400H Film. This is incredibly useful on portraits with 4-1 or greater lighting ratios. Posterization in the shadows (DSLRs Achilles’ heel) is only noticeable on highly manipulated images.
   + Handling: The auto ISO is easy to engage and the new position of the ISO button is more intuitive when looking through the viewfinder than on the D700. Like the D700, the D800 is extremely customizable.

   Neutral:
   ~ Handling: I prefer the AF switches of the D700. The magnification + – are opposite from the D700, a small irritation.
   ~ Exposure: Better than D3/D700, but far from perfect. Contrary to Nikon’s literature, it struggles with backlit scenes.
   ~ Frames per second: I rarely shoot in continuous, and when I do, I have my D3/D700 set to CL (continuous low-speed) of 2 FPS.
   ~ Battery Performance: It can get me through a full day’s shoot…

   Read more

   Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

   Was this review helpful to you? 
   

    Comments (19)

   Reply ↓