Nikon D800......

Nawty said:
What speed memory card are you using? It might be that's it's taking the camera a little while to read the file.
Click to expand...

Could be that. Maybe worth checking the file settings. Shooting in Lossless Compressed NEF(RAW) with a Bit depth of 12 reduces file sizes appreciably.
 
It's a class 10 32GB SDHC 24MBs/sec

Should I be looking for faster? I shoot mostly 12 bit losless compressed, as I don't see any difference from shooting 14 bit uncompressed tbh.
 
Well, using rough approximations and assumptions the file size is 50mb and the card speed is 24mb/s so that's 2 seconds of reading before it can display the image.

On the D800 I would be looking at some mega fast CF cards.
 
Nawty said:
Well, using rough approximations and assumptions the file size is 50mb and the card speed is 24mb/s so that's 2 seconds of reading before it can display the image.

On the D800 I would be looking at some mega fast CF cards.
Click to expand...

I use SanDisk Extreme Pro cards (90MB/s) and at 14 bit RAW there is no noticeable delay at all... not even half a second, it seems effectively instantaneous.
 
Big heads up!

Theres £100 off at Jessops until midnight (sadly) on the D800 body putting it down to £2046.14

Offer code = 100OFFD800

Also, before you do that, sign up or into your quidco account and get an extra 2% cash back on that, saving you an extra £41.

Really annoyed I'll miss the deadline as I'm buying late next week, but this is by far the cheapest UK stock of a D800 due to that. Before the cashback its cheaper than Digitalrev and you get a full extra years warranty.

WINNING
 
Cagey75 said:
It's a class 10 32GB SDHC 24MBs/sec

Should I be looking for faster? I shoot mostly 12 bit losless compressed, as I don't see any difference from shooting 14 bit uncompressed tbh.
Click to expand...

I doubt if anyone does.

NEF RAW
14 bit gives 16,384 colours per channel
12 bit gives 4,096 colours per channel which is still a massive amount.

If you then save your file as a jpeg it will drop to an 8 bit file with 256 colours per channel so most of the colours are compressed or thrown away.
 
Last Friday in currys at stanstead, there were d800s for £1999.99 ...
 
I'm very tempted with the recent price drops to upgrade from my D700, I've not seen much mention of the left side AF issue - are new models fine now?

John
 
JohnMcL7 said:
I'm very tempted with the recent price drops to upgrade from my D700, I've not seen much mention of the left side AF issue - are new models fine now?

John
Click to expand...

Not sure, I guess they've resolved it on new ones. Since they adjusted/ fixed mine, it's fantastic. The af now no longer misses a beat and is probably better, atleast for me, then the d3s af. I'm sure Nikon have done other stuff as well they're not sharing
 
I bought mine recently and it has no AF issues, thankfully. It was the first thing I tested. The only niggle with my one is it tends to freeze up now and then when reviewing images. Though someone mentioned on here that it's possibly the card I use not being fast enough. I have a Sandisk ultra/90mb/s on order. I'll test that theory out whenever it arrives.
 
I'm seriously considering this now as its around the same price here in the UK than importing!

D800 with Nikon 24-85mm f3.5-4.5G Lens = £2493.

Amazon.
 
Can anyone please advise what the different battery setups do to the FPS count?

The normal D700 battery, D3s battery and rechargeables.
 
Sorry guys, I've entered this in the wrong thread. Wondered why there were so many posts about the D800
 
Last edited:
For the people who chose the D800 over the 5DMK3 what triggered your purchase?
I have no current investment in lenses so I am completely in the middle of the fence trying to chose.

The fantastic Amazon price, and the amzing DxOMark ranking has got me thinking more about the D800 as a viable solution.

Has anyone tried the Sigma 24-70 F2.8 IF EX DG Zoom lens on it? It might make a good first lens.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-24-70mm-Nikon-Digital-Cameras/dp/B001NEK2QO

What size RAW, JPEG Fine, files are produced at full res?

Hopefully your help will assist me with making this big decision.
 
Last edited:
Hi christurbo
I'm in the same situ as you....not tied to any lenses, and am looking at D800(maybe a D700) and 5DMK3.
Must admit the only thing stalling me is the files sizes in RAW, as it would probably be extra cost upgrading my computer. I've also read file sizes ranging from 50mb to 80 odd mb. Any info would be most useful.
Thanks
JohnyT
 
I just hope my MBA is fast enough for a D800 RAW file :confused:

Its the 13 inch 2011 model with a sandybridge i5, 4gb RAM (i know...) and 120gb SSD. Its the amount of RAM that will murder my processing compared to what I put through it now as its fine for 12mp stuff. It was also fine with the 21mp files from a canon 5D mk ii, being only a fraction slower!
 
What's the current difference between the D800 and 5DMkIII and would it leave enough to upgrade your computer? You've already got a monitor and graphics card and possibly even the MB and Ram so if may just be the processor and SSD could be enough to handle the larger files more efficiently?

The big cost I would fear is the CF cards if you need the speed - ouch!
 
The d800 files are large if set to uncompressed. As you stated between 50-80mb.But can be made smaller by using compression and 12 bit.

The 5dmk3 can use s and mRAW files but from what i uderstand they are not true raw. They allow more work post than a jpeg. but less than a standard raw.

I upgraded my laptop to a i7 15inch mac pro late 2011 and even then ive been getting some slowdown with the lightroom trial. not all the time but i do get the spinning symbol when i do somethings.All my files are uncompressed 14bit.

I had considered the 5dmk3 and still wonder if that would be better for me. But ive been using nikon for a few years and have a good selection of pro glass worth abit.
I would have lost a fair bit selling them and wouldnt be able to replace them with the canon ones.

I do like the d800 and thinks its better than the d700 I had in everyway.But for a few years ive had a feeling towards images from canons that i cant shake.
 
it really depends on what you want to use the camera for, for some things the 36mp D800 is overkill. I've got a D800, D700 and 2 D3s, the D800 is perfect for studio, commercial and landscape work, its not a great sports or events camera imho. I've shot several weddings and a good few thousand images with it and now gone back to using 2 D3s's. It is an awesome camera and I have no intention of selling it, but the 36mp is pure overhead in terms of storage space and speed that brings little or no benefit when the largest thing you are likely to print is four or five feet on the long edge. I would forgive all of that if the files blew the D700 and D3s away, but in real world shooting they don't - in fact I prefer the look of the 12mp D3s files. DXOmark may say its the greatest sensor ever, and in a controlled studio environment I'm sure it is.

12bit lossless compressed files are around 35mb each (so not too bad), the real killer is if you convert to tiff to process, they are 200+mb each! If you do decide to go with a D800, add a few hundred quid to your budget to allow for fast cards and an extra couple of hard disks, to not do so would be foolish.

If I were starting fresh now, I'd go with a 5dmkIII, no question - great all round camera and the ability to shoot smaller RAW files makes is really appealing. As I'm firmly entrenched in the Nikon camp, I'd say D800 for studio, D700/600 as an all-rounder, D4/3s for weddings, sports and events.
 
I could have gone either way. I cleared out all my Nikon DX gear and set out to have a look at the new FX offerings. I have to say, the 5DIII is a very nice body. Nice and chunky feel to it. But I have been using Nikon so long the D800 just felt so much better [to me]

When I first bought it I was running an intel i3 with 6GB RAM. Lightroom was handling the largest RAW files ok. It was struggling when I loaded up more than a few testers though. It will go, just sluggish.

I've since upgraded to an i7 with 8GB RAM, and it's blisteringly fast. I would say a good spec i5 with plenty of RAM would do the job. I'd recommend at least Intel HD 3000, 4000 preferably.

The file sizes are only gi-normous in 14 bit uncompressed, they can hit 75mb! But I shoot in 12 bit losless compressed and they drop to around 29mb on average. This thing has a 1TB HDD so no worries about room. I often export as processed jpegs and the file size drops dramatically. I'll delete all RAW files once I know they're not getting used again, unless they're very important, for a job/someone else or whatever. And then you should stick the original RAW files onto an external HDD or 2 for safe keeping, and delete from your main HDD.

On the camera itself, it's fantastic! Coming from a D90 it was just amazing to hold and use. I'm still finding new controls, after testing out the CLS with a few flashes, all the different RAW qualities, pushing the ISO, doing some time lapses and testing the HD video at various settings.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
... I'll delete all RAW files once I know they're not getting used again, unless they're very important, for a job/someone else or whatever. And then you should stick the original RAW files onto an external HDD or 2 for safe keeping, and delete from your main HDD...
Click to expand...

Another option is to export your RAW files from Lightroom 4 as lossy DNG's for archiving... they are about a third of the size as the original RAW without compromising image quality should you ever need to recall them.
 
Flashman said:
Another option is to export your RAW files from Lightroom 4 as lossy DNG's for archiving... they are about a third of the size as the original RAW without compromising image quality should you ever need to recall them.
Click to expand...

Surely any lossy compression could lose quality? :thinking:

If there was no chance of losing any data, all files would use a lossy compression. :shrug:

I mean, whatever works for you, but there are consequences to a lossy compression.
 
I wonder if there's somewhere where I can get some sample D800 raw files to test on my computer?
 
Cheers, I should have looked online first though as I've come across a few. Thanks anyway though!

Just out of interest, what computer setup are you using?
 
Last edited:
Heads up for people wanting to buy UK stock. Quidco sent me an email today about their latest cashback offers and PCworld has 10% cashback on all purchases. The D800 is £2149.99 with them meaning after around 2 months you'd get £215 cash back :D
 
I've downloaded a selection of D800 NEF files @ over 40MB per file and imported into LR. The standard previews generated at almost the same speed as my D3 ones and playing about with various settings on each raw files is instant just like my own files.

Opened the raw files in PS Camera Raw and it's the same deal, it loads up straight away, any raw adjustments have instant results. Then opening into PS most filters are instant as well, including liquidfy etc. The zoom blur effect took a while though but not much longer than my own files.

My PC isn't exactly cutting edge so I don't think post processing is something to worry about with the D800 files and even storage is mega cheap these days. I think the only real expense is going to be the CF cards, but are the 90MB/s ones absolutely essential?
 
Nope. Unless you want to print the size of a billboard ;)

I won't bother with the largest uncompressed files unless I'm shooting a fantastic landscape I know i will print large. otherwise, even at 100% viewing, I've yet to notice any significant difference between the 14bit/12bit compressed/non compressed files. All of them are just astoundingly detailed and sharp. I've pitted them against RAW files from the D90 ... and , well, that's a different story :D
 
Cagey75 said:
Nope. Unless you want to print the size of a billboard ;)

I won't bother with the largest uncompressed files unless I'm shooting a fantastic landscape I know i will print large. otherwise, even at 100% viewing, I've yet to notice any significant difference between the 14bit/12bit compressed/non compressed files. All of them are just astoundingly detailed and sharp. I've pitted them against RAW files from the D90 ... and , well, that's a different story :D
Click to expand...

I do not see any advantage in shooting Uncompressed files. If you shoot in Lossless Compressed there is zero loss in quality. All that happens is the .NEF file gets compressed to write it to the camera memory card. The algorithm used to compress the file is fully reversible and when the file is opened in the editting software on the PC the file is fully uncompressed with no data loss.
 
arclight said:
I do not see any advantage in shooting Uncompressed files. If you shoot in Lossless Compressed there is zero loss in quality. All that happens is the .NEF file gets compressed to write it to the camera memory card. The algorithm used to compress the file is fully reversible and when the file is opened in the editting software on the PC the file is fully uncompressed with no data loss.
Click to expand...

I've seen differing opinions on that subject. Apparently non-Nikon software (Lightroom/PS/etc) don't uncompress the loseless files fully, leading to lower quality than the uncompressed raws.

I have no idea if it's true though :shrug:
 
That sounds more techy than my little brain can understand :D I just go by eye. I've tried them side by side and there isn't any noticeable difference, that's the extent of my testing.

I've not tried TIFF though. Those things are gigantic! Does anyone use/need them?
 
redddraggon said:
I've seen differing opinions on that subject. Apparently non-Nikon software (Lightroom/PS/etc) don't uncompress the loseless files fully, leading to lower quality than the uncompressed raws.

I have no idea if it's true though :shrug:
Click to expand...

Not true.
 
Cagey75 said:
That sounds more techy than my little brain can understand :D I just go by eye. I've tried them side by side and there isn't any noticeable difference, that's the extent of my testing.

I've not tried TIFF though. Those things are gigantic! Does anyone use/need them?
Click to expand...

TIFFS are favoured for mags and books etc., but I think only for saving images after editting. If you shot a sequence in that format I fear the buffer would take ages to empty.
 
christurbo said:
...What size RAW, JPEG Fine, files are produced at full res? ....
Click to expand...

The manual says approximate sizes are: NEF 14-bit uncompressed = 74.4MB; JPEG Fine = 16.3MB.

In reality (depending on subject) they can go to: NEF 14-bit uncompressed = 77.7MB; JPEG Fine = 31.2MB.
 
James J said:
Heads up for people wanting to buy UK stock. Quidco sent me an email today about their latest cashback offers and PCworld has 10% cashback on all purchases. The D800 is £2149.99 with them meaning after around 2 months you'd get £215 cash back :D
Click to expand...

HI
Just been on the quidco site and can't see this offer...have you a link please
Thanks
JohnyT

Edit now I see it...thanks
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top