http://www.quidco.com/pc-world/
10% cashback on all orders over £599 (expires in 2 days though!)
Enjoy
Nikon D800......
- Thread starter cowasaki
- Start date
http://www.quidco.com/pc-world/
10% cashback on all orders over £599 (expires in 2 days though!)
Enjoy
- Messages
- 16,889
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I shot a gig with the D800 last night, using a 50mm 1.8 and the 24-70. I was lucky to get the camera in, pity I didn't have a 70-200 though, as I was up in the balcony shooting. I'm impressed by the performance I got at ISO 4000-6400, and was able to crop the images down significantly and maintain good quality. I tried some shots at the higher non-native ISO settings too. Grainy obviously, but very usable:
10K ISO
100%
I shot these purely for testing, ripped off a few shots at various ISO levels. You can see I was able to stop down to f/5.6 on this one, anyone who shoots gigs knows you shoot 2.8 99% of the night. Most of the time I was at 2.8, ISO between 200 - 6400 and I'm very happy with the results.
10K ISO
100%
I shot these purely for testing, ripped off a few shots at various ISO levels. You can see I was able to stop down to f/5.6 on this one, anyone who shoots gigs knows you shoot 2.8 99% of the night. Most of the time I was at 2.8, ISO between 200 - 6400 and I'm very happy with the results.
Last edited:
I shot a gig with the D800 last night, using a 50mm 1.8 and the 24-70. I was lucky to get the camera in, pity I didn't have a 70-200 though, as I was up in the balcony shooting. I'm impressed by the performance I got at ISO 4000-6400, and was able to crop the images down significantly and maintain good quality. I tried some shots at the higher non-native ISO settings too. Grainy obviously, but very usable:
10K ISO
100%
I shot these purely for testing, ripped off a few shots at various ISO levels. You can see I was able to stop down to f/5.6 on this one, anyone who shoots gigs knows you shoot 2.8 99% of the night. Most of the time I was at 2.8, ISO between 200 - 6400 and I'm very happy with the results.
great shots, ive not tried many high iso shots yet, but that last picture looks great to say the iso is that high (it looks better than the d90 at iso 400
)
- Messages
- 16,889
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
The second one is at 100%, same image as the first It certainly is impressive for 10K, considering the amount of goodness already packed into the sensor. I've shot gigs with the D90 and was always nervous going past ISO 1600, I knew it would take a lot of cleaning up. I would rarely ever need 10K, but it's nice to know it's very usable if needed. I'll never go beyond that but might test some higher level later.
It certainly is impressive for 10K, considering the amount of goodness already packed into the sensor. I've shot gigs with the D90 and was always nervous going past ISO 1600, I knew it would take a lot of cleaning up. I would rarely ever need 10K, but it's nice to know it's very usable if needed. I'll never go beyond that but might test some higher level later.
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Under £2000 at Mifsuds
finally have a weekend sort of free and can check if I have left focus point issue...can someone please explain what it was all about?
90% of times Im using centre point so not sure what to look for
The far left point is the one in question. It's unlikely to be as sharp as the centre point because most (if not all) lenses are softer at the edges anyway. So here's what to look for:
- Is the far left point as sharp as the far right point.
- Comparing AF (viewfinder) focussing to LV (LCD) focussing - is the far left point as sharp in AF as it is in LV. If not, is the difference any greater than it is for the far right point.
Lengthy explanation here - http://www.bythom.com/D800autofocus.htm
PS. Even if your camera does have the left AF issue :thumbsdown: it won't affect the centre point.
Last edited:
arclight
Oooh that burglar's a cutie
- Messages
- 11,577
- Name
- Doug
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ozei wrote in #1494:-
PS. Even if your camera does have the left AF issue it won't affect the centre point.
I eventually came to the conclusion that since (a) I will not be selling the camera, and (b) my style of shooting involves always using the centre point (with the AF-ON button having sole focussing control) and re-composing if need be before shooting the left point focus is is an irrelevance for me.
PS. Even if your camera does have the left AF issue it won't affect the centre point.
I eventually came to the conclusion that since (a) I will not be selling the camera, and (b) my style of shooting involves always using the centre point (with the AF-ON button having sole focussing control) and re-composing if need be before shooting the left point focus is is an irrelevance for me.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Fortunately, mine is without the left AF issue.. but if it wasn't, I'd not be too concerned. I can't remember the last time I used anything other than the centre point. For those that shoot sports, then perhaps.. but Nikon will fix it under warranty it would seem.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
One thing I have found is that you have to be very careful with what lens you use with this camera. It is lens limited, and shows up every lens flaw spectacularly. That isn't the best lens to partner with the D800. This camera needs the best lens you can afford, and that 24-85 is noticeably soft in the corners even at f8 on a D800.
[edit]
Ooops! Double post, sorry.
arclight
Oooh that burglar's a cutie
- Messages
- 11,577
- Name
- Doug
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have not had an issue with any of my lenses so far, but my 18 - 35 Nikkor is under suspicion. I want to have another go with it before deciding whether it is producing slightly soft images.
What I have found is that you had better watch out for camera shake showing up. If I don't have a tripod with me I find it pays to rest the camera on a dyke, fence post or whatever there is.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Agreed wholeheartedly. Everything is now as critical as shooting with a Phase One back! Kind of goes against the grain with using a DSLR like that, but this is what people fail to understand about the D800. It's not meant to replace any other camera, and nor is it an update to the D700. It's clearly designed for studio or serious location use. It is clearly not designed for sports, reportage, weddings or anything else where working fast is a priority.
If I needed speed I'd have bought a D3. I need quality, and the D800 gives it in spades if you give a decent lens.
I've ditched most of my lenses and need to replace. I'm currently down to 14-24 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 50 f1.8G and a 70-300. I'm giving the 70-300 sideways glances at the moment too. I think i'll unload that too and get a 70-200 2.8G VRII.. although a use long lenses the least.. so no rush for that.
So far the only lenses that seem to get close to the sensor's capabilities are the 14-24 and the 50. The 50 1.8 and 1.4G lenses are awesome. I wish I could shoot everything on a a g series 50.
- Messages
- 16,889
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I have the 24-70 and a 50mm 1.G, both excellent with the D800, but neither are as sharp with it as the 105mm micro So, so good on this body. I thought it was sharp enough already on my D90. I have the 70-200 VRII on the way. This is the class of glass anyone with a D800 should be using. I have no need for the 14-24, I'm sure it's excellent too, but I never really shoot that wide.
And yup, you have to be very accurate with this baby. But I have captured sharp shots of the kids running about with it too, so I don't really agree it's not suitable for the likes of weddings. Once you get used to it, it would be ideal.
And yup, you have to be very accurate with this baby. But I have captured sharp shots of the kids running about with it too, so I don't really agree it's not suitable for the likes of weddings. Once you get used to it, it would be ideal.
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
Yep -I dont get why people say that. I suspect they don't, for the most part, shoot weddings.
. I've been giving serious though to getting a second and just using 2 x d800 for weddings
- Messages
- 1,069
- Name
- Scott
- Edit My Images
- No
I needed to upgrade the PC. My set up now is Intel Core i7 3.5Ghz with 16Gb of RAM all socketed to a Gigabyte Z68XP-UD4 motherboard which manages everything fine.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Oh yes, that's a nice lens too! The top prize for me goes to the 85mm f1.4G. That thing is one of the sharpest lenses you can buy.
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/606-nikkorafs8514ff?start=1
That lens is just outrageously sharp.
The D800 is 36mp, yes... but even a FF sensor is still very small compared to MF offerings, and as a result, extreme care must be taken to get the best from it. This is why I suggest it's not ideal for weddings. Once you know it intimately though, it will be fine, but I can kind of see why D700 owners hate it almost universally though. It is a learning curve. I also think D700 owners feel hard done by because they were expecting the D800 to be a D700 replacement, and it's just not.
Yep.. it;s like upgrading the engine in your car... everything else suddenly isn;t up to the job anymore, so you need new brakes, rims, tyres etc. Got a i7-3960X here running at 4.7GHz and it still sometimes has to work quite a bit when doing a batch process on the 200MB TIFFS!
Last edited:
If you want the best quality from the sensor the top Zeiss lenses are what I'd be looking at. The Nikon lenses seem to lack the micro contrast of the Zeiss. If you like a 50mm you won't find much better than the Zeiss 50mm f/2 if you don't need autofocus. Treating it like a medium format camera is a good idea though. Sturdy tripod, low ISO, good sharp prime and relatively static subject and the camera really does sing. It wouldn't be my first choice for weddings though.
I'm looking at maybe a 24G/50 Zeiss/85G or 21 Zeiss/35G/100 Zeiss as a set up. The Leica R glass really interests me too for its rendering.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
They're very good indeed, of course, but really do not deserve the rep they get. I'm assuming you are referring to the Makro Planar-T f2? These aren't real Zeiss lenses. Made by Cosina.
I have almost OCD like obsession with quality, hence why I'll probably never fully give up 5x4. Out of all lens test sites out there the one I trust the most as it always matched my own findings perfectly is the Photozone site.
Zeiss 50mm F2
Nikkor 50mm 1.8G is pretty much as good and is only £160 compared to the Zeiss lens.
They're basically no better than the latest G series of Nikkors so far as I can tell. I've only used the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 and I wasn't impressed compared to the Nikkor G series 50s... in fact, that's an understatement. I though it was pretty terrible actually. Wide open it was next to useless.
This test seems to back me up too. Zeiss 50mm 1.4
Last edited:
The Zeiss lenses do deserve the rep they get, no matter who makes them. Optical glass doesn't change properties because it is made in Japan compared to Germany. It's more a snobbery thing. Photozone is alright, but it can't tell you much about the contrast of the lens which is where the Zeiss shines. The Nikon 50mm f/1.8 I wouldn't go near compared to the Zeiss 50mm f/2. That Zeiss look is something that most Nikon lenses just don't match and worth paying extra for to me.
Zeiss are bringing out their 135mm f/2 APO lens which supposedly has a better MTF graph than the Zeiss 100mm f/2, so that should be interesting.
Zeiss are bringing out their 135mm f/2 APO lens which supposedly has a better MTF graph than the Zeiss 100mm f/2, so that should be interesting.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
I'll wait and see. So far, my experience tells me otherwise. I thought the 50mm 1.4 was a terrible lens. Optical glass may be optical glass, but there's more to a lens than what KIND of glass it's made of, it's about how that glass is formed into the refractive surfaces. Anything made by Cosina I'll treat with suspicion. It's not even made by Zeiss.. Cosina have just licensed the name to stick on their own designs.
It's what it's NOT got that makes the difference. The 800E has it's anti-aliasing filter removed. The AA filter smooths out the aliasing, or jaggies of the pixels and this helps to remove moiré effects in tight, repeated patterns like the fabric of a man's suit, but has a very slight softening effect as result. We're talking very slight differences now though.
The D800 is slightly sharper as a result. Is it worth the extra? I'd say no. I borrowed both from my workplace to test extensively and the differences are slight. It's not worth the extra cash IMO. It IS sharper though... marginally, but it's a few hundred more that you can spend on lenses
If I have a good month I may trade up one day, but seriously... the D800 is lens limited as it is. The D800E isn't going to make much of a difference.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 16,889
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I went for the 800E, I like sharpness. I had the extra money, so why not. I felt all 'Exclusive' going for that one
I've actually tried to produce moiré pattern with it, and failed. I'm happy enough with that. The D90 was far worse for it, I was constantly getting it when shooting people wearing shirts/suits/certain fabric dresses and Tees.
On lenses: The 105mm micro scores a whopping 35 on DXO when tested on a D4. It is now the highest rated lens on there. I'm sure it'll score the same if not better on the D800.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Camera-Lens-Ratings
I've actually tried to produce moiré pattern with it, and failed. I'm happy enough with that. The D90 was far worse for it, I was constantly getting it when shooting people wearing shirts/suits/certain fabric dresses and Tees.
On lenses: The 105mm micro scores a whopping 35 on DXO when tested on a D4. It is now the highest rated lens on there. I'm sure it'll score the same if not better on the D800.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Camera-Lens-Ratings
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Yep.. like I said, if I have a good month I'll trade up. If you have the money to burn, sure... go for it. Sharper is sharper after all, but be honest, you can't kid me as I've used them both.. it's not THAT much sharper and on some shots you gotta look quite hard. However... I'm with you all the way. No such thing as too sharp
They are testing the 85mm 1.4 soon! A tenner says it beats the 105
They are testing the 85mm 1.4 soon! A tenner says it beats the 105
Last edited:
- Messages
- 16,889
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I would have been very happy with the standard 800, no bothers. As I said, only got the E because I could. I waited years to be able to move to FX, so why not get that extra letter on there
I almost bought a D4. But, I don't need fast fps, it might become a bit of a burden to carry about as I have a bad back and neck problems, and paired with say, the 70-200 ... heavy for hand holding all day. But I would have liked the better ISO performance and that beautiful full size body.
In the end, for the same money, I got the D800E, a new i7 laptop, and the 24-70 2.8. I think i made the right choice. I already had the 105mm, sold off an 80-200, a 17-50 2.8 and my D90 has just been confirmed sold. I have some other bits and bobs to sell, might justify my expensive purchases recently to the missus
Oh, but I also just bought a fuji X10 on here ... whoops
I almost bought a D4. But, I don't need fast fps, it might become a bit of a burden to carry about as I have a bad back and neck problems, and paired with say, the 70-200 ... heavy for hand holding all day. But I would have liked the better ISO performance and that beautiful full size body.
In the end, for the same money, I got the D800E, a new i7 laptop, and the 24-70 2.8. I think i made the right choice. I already had the 105mm, sold off an 80-200, a 17-50 2.8 and my D90 has just been confirmed sold. I have some other bits and bobs to sell, might justify my expensive purchases recently to the missus
Oh, but I also just bought a fuji X10 on here ... whoops
The lenses are designed in Germany and made under Zeiss quality control, which partly accounts for the higher prices. I used to shoot a Leica M9 and the Zeiss glass was highly regarded by just about the most discerning owners out there. It didn't match the Leica glass for me, but it was close. The Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 isn't known for being great wide open, but stopped down to f/4 or f/5.6 it's impressive. The really top Zeiss lenses do speak for themselves.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Wide open or otherwise, it was distinctly underwhelming and the Nikkor 50mm 1.4G I had at the time wiped the floor with it.
- Messages
- 16,889
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I came across a 50mm VS test somewhere before. Can't remember if it was in a magazine, or online. Anyway, they had all the usual suspects. The Zeiss versions, the Nikon 1.8G, the older D, the 1.4, again both versions and some others like the Sigma 1.4 ... anyway. The 1.8G came out tops. Just saying.
It may be light as a feather, feels very cheap and plasticy, but it's end results that really matter. And the 1.8G is as sharp as you'll get in a nifty fifty.
It may be light as a feather, feels very cheap and plasticy, but it's end results that really matter. And the 1.8G is as sharp as you'll get in a nifty fifty.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
That pretty much confirms what I thought. I love the 1.8G. A superb, simple design that just works beautifully optically. Sure, it ain't German ( edit: but neither are most Zeiss lenses now) and has no "pedigree" but so far as I'm concerned, the sensor in my D800 is now the arbiter of all things lens, as it's a fussy so and so, and takes no prisoners, and it's very happy with the 50mm 1.8G. Even my crop sensor D7000 revealed shortcomings with the Zeiss 50 1.4 so I shudder think how bad it would be now. Stopped down it wasn't too bad, but the whole point of a 50mm 1.4 is low light work, and wide open it was just ******. Sorry... it just was. It's just made me question ANY Zeiss lens made by Cosina very carefully and I will never assume Zeiss means excellent ever again. From now on Zeiss have to prove themselves so far as I'm concerned.
Last edited:
I wouldn't get too obsessed with German made or Japanese made, Leica made lenses in Canada and Germany, it's only relevant to collectors. Your camera doesn't care where it was made. The Nikon 1.4G I liked better than the 1.8G, but I still didn't buy it, not really what I was looking for. I don't think Zeiss have much to prove though, go on any big Nikon site and they are highly acclaimed.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
That's the problem. Stick "Carl Zeiss" on anything and people will sell their organs to own it without so much as testing it. Well.. I came, I tested, I went "meh" and bought a Nikkor lens. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
I'd test a few more of the expensive higher end lenses before I drew too many conclusions. The new Zeiss line including the 55mm f/1.4 look to be a match made in heaven with the D800 sensor. I had the 70-200mm VR II and sold it, again not really what I was looking for, the 135mm APO looks more like what I'm after.
- Messages
- 16,889
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I doubt anyone would say no to that one. Lenses like that are ideal for thos who just don't use zooms much, so they won't have the likes of the 24-70. And if it's a case that this 55mm will be on your camera 99% of the time, then it's certainly worth paying the extra for - if it is really that good. For me though, a 50mm is something I only stick on occasionally. I used to be a mostly prime user, now I prefer the flexibility of decent zooms. The 24-70, and 70-200, when it arrives [hopefully soon!] will be pretty much 50-50 for me for general use. I love a 70-200 for portraits and landscape. And I love the 24-70 for indoor use, also landscape and street/casual shooting. The 105 only comes out when I want to do .. macro.
[edit] The size of it!!
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/42536736
As the guy on there says, the reason he avoids zooms is because of the weight and size. That's a bit of a silly size for a 50mm!
[edit] The size of it!!
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/42536736
As the guy on there says, the reason he avoids zooms is because of the weight and size. That's a bit of a silly size for a 50mm!
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
It would have to be phenomenally good to get me interested. By that I mean instantly visibly better, not just measurable on a lens resolution chart test. That's a stupid size for a standard lens.