Nikon D850 vs everything

[Kisaha]

I just wish Nikon will go all in with their mirrorless, and give them some extra video features.

Their arrogant view of how they are far superior and more pro orientated than the rest of the industry (except Canon) is based in their 60 years of excellence, and they do perform,

We can say whatever we want about the Canonikon, but they certainly make things work. Less bitrate, less features, more expensive, but their images deliver the goods.

Nikon did some QC mistakes as of late (something that Canon didn't), so I wouldn't be a first adaptor, but if they are careful, they can deliver the mirrorless to rule them all; and push Canon to do the same, and then we are all happy with incredible hybrid cameras!

[Antonis]

Colours look gorgeous. And full frame is <3

How is the rolling shutter in 4K?
 

[Andrew Reid]

RS is similar to all the other cameras. GH5 still king for minimal rolling shutter.

You know, until now there hasn't been a camera like this... It is a 1D C image in a body with much better video features... articulated screen, fast FPS live-view, small file sizes... It fixes all of the 1D C problems and even the 1.3x crop is gone.

For that reason alone it gets my respect.

Sure, a Sony or Panasonic mirrorless camera is going to be better for certain tasks, especially handheld video shooting (5 axis) or VFX (10bit codec on GH5)

But the D850 is that rare mix of full frame pro-level stills and cinematic 4K quality with no real issues.

It is a full frame and pro-level stills camera with 50 years of colour science behind it.

Is this offered elsewhere? Fuji? No. Panasonic? No. Canon? 1D C and 1D X II are closest. Sony? Close but no cigar.

At the very most basic level I wanted a 1D C with flippy screen and smaller file sizes and now I have it

38 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Nikon did some QC mistakes as of late (something that Canon didn't), so I wouldn't be a first adaptor, but if they are careful, they can deliver the mirrorless to rule them all; and push Canon to do the same, and then we are all happy with incredible hybrid cameras!

Of course if Nikon did put this technology into a mirrorless system it would be a big rival to the A7R II and A7S II or whatever Sony brings out next, but I don't trust them not to fuck it up. The first casualty of shoehorning the D850 into a mirrorless body would be the D5 autofocus system for stills. They would need a new sensor, one with Dual Pixel AF. Not even the GH5 has video AF to match Canon and in stills it's better but still not D5-good.

I also think that an investment in Nikon mirrorless glass, the probable small selection at launch and the cost is quite off-putting just to get AF, when you can manually adapt a bunch of other nice stuff to a mirrorless mount - but then you are back to manually focussing not just in videos, but in stills as well which is a real deal-breaker for me.

Sometimes it's a case of 'be careful what you wish for'.

The best thing Nikon could do is collaborate with Metabones and make a EF adapter giving Dual Pixel AF level performance in live-view and video for their mirrorless camera, as live-view is critical on such a system, without an OVF, relying on only EVF / LCD.... Then make the entry-level Nikon mirrorless lenses affordable enough for the layman to switch over relatively quickly (a cheap fast 50, a decent zoom and a fast 35 or 28). This of course is about as likely to happen as Leica going into the sub $2000 camera market

[ND64]

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

 

Of course if Nikon did put this technology into a mirrorless system it would be a big rival to the A7R II and A7S II or whatever Sony brings out next, but I don't trust them not to fuck it up. The first casualty of shoehorning the D850 into a mirrorless body would be the D5 autofocus system for stills. They would need a new sensor, one with Dual Pixel AF. Not even the GH5 has video AF to match Canon and in stills it's better but still not D5-good.

I also think that an investment in Nikon mirrorless glass, the probable small selection at launch and the cost is quite off-putting just to get AF, when you can manually adapt a bunch of other nice stuff to a mirrorless mount - but then you are back to manually focussing not just in videos, but in stills as well which is a real deal-breaker for me.

 

If the patents they're filling is an indication, they will certainly go the Dual Pixel way. The big question is if they let it work with EF lenses. I think it will, with or without Nikon's help. 

BTW, that clock frame is lovely. Applied a quick effect in Snapseed and became even lovelier :-)

[Andrew Reid]

That clock one is the only one I didn't grade, straight out of the camera to show the dynamic range, so grade-away...

[Kisaha]

@Andrew Reid

all I'm afraid is Nikon to be afraid of "killing" their own dSLR line. For me mirrorless is a certainty, I can not see myself buying a dSLr for any reason, in the near future or later.

I am not sure they can bring dual pixel AF, but I am pretty confident that they will have the second best AF in business. Depending their other features, second best can be good enough (I am a Canon dual pixel AF believer myself!) to produce the best full frame mirrorless to date (I am a super 35mm guy, but with a S35 crop mode, Imwouldn't say no).

The other thing I am most certain, is that a Nikon mirrorless will be Nikon compatible from day one, even offering the adaptor included with the camera. The rumors are talking about a very "sophisticated"(sic) one, and Nikon is well known for their lens mount continuity. I am also a native lens believer, I want native lenses for whatever camer I use, so their mirrorless offerings will be very important. From rumors and patents we have seen, they are up for some very original stuff.

I always admired my photographer's friends Nikon color science and lenses, maybe we will have a chance soon! I really hope so, but I am expecting Canon to knock back, but Canon has more lines to protect, so they may not knock back hard enough!

 

 

[Mattias Burling]

I've been offered a pretty decent deal on a d500 and this thread is making pushing me to pull the trigger

[trifin]

I am asking from a stills perspective. I have been holding off buying a new Nikon stills cam for some time - waiting for this cam. Now not entirely sure between the 850 or the 810. 

Thinking about shooting solely in natural daylight with excellent glass. I just want good colours and clean images at base iso; lack of noise with high DR and colour depth.

I like to shoot in the rain so weather sealing is a must or a 600 would be a consideration. It is not a cost issue but rather is the 850 worth £1000 more (or even £1500 if I got decent used 810). Buying slightly used seems to make me feel slightly better about buying stuff.

So what do you think? Would like to hear your opinion. Sometimes a cam just takes 'nicer' pictures than others but most of the time it is just the newest kid on the block and people can get excited and/or protective. Picture quality is hard to see in charts & reviews that's where I like to hear real opinions. Thanks.

(After writing this I am leaning towards a used 810 but when I started writing I was set on a 850. FFS..)  

 

 

[Nikkor]

The usability on the d850 is much better from what I heard. My biggest concern with the d810 is autofocus and the lack of a tiltable screen. I think those two things plus better liveview are worth the extra money.

[Andrew Reid]

7 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

I've been offered a pretty decent deal on a d500 and this thread is making pushing me to pull the trigger

Don't do it The crop is murder. The image is decent in 4K but it's overpriced for what it is.

The D850 runs rings around it for both stills and video. Full frame is something else.

[Andrew Reid]

1 hour ago, Nikkor said:

The usability on the d850 is much better from what I heard. My biggest concern with the d810 is autofocus and the lack of a tiltable screen. I think those two things plus better liveview are worth the extra money.

D810... You may as well get the D750... It does the same video quality and the stills aren't far off. Same mojo with colour. Handling maybe even a little bit more straight forward.

In fact for just 1080p the D750 has always been nice. I'd use it over the D500.

[Geoff CB]

4 hours ago, trifin said:

I am asking from a stills perspective. I have been holding off buying a new Nikon stills cam for some time - waiting for this cam. Now not entirely sure between the 850 or the 810. 

Thinking about shooting solely in natural daylight with excellent glass. I just want good colours and clean images at base iso; lack of noise with high DR and colour depth.

I like to shoot in the rain so weather sealing is a must or a 600 would be a consideration. It is not a cost issue but rather is the 850 worth £1000 more (or even £1500 if I got decent used 810). Buying slightly used seems to make me feel slightly better about buying stuff.

So what do you think? Would like to hear your opinion. Sometimes a cam just takes 'nicer' pictures than others but most of the time it is just the newest kid on the block and people can get excited and/or protective. Picture quality is hard to see in charts & reviews that's where I like to hear real opinions. Thanks.

(After writing this I am leaning towards a used 810 but when I started writing I was set on a 850. FFS..)  

 

 

I second Andrew, I would take a serious look at the D750. Love that camera.

[Rodolfo Fernandes]

I currently own a D810 and a D750, the D750 is an all-round camera and i really really love the colours, the D810 is a whole other level of camera regarding resolution & detail, with that being said i would always choose the D750 because i know i can do everything with it and with the D810 there are some things i will struggle with, low light and low light focusing

[IronFilm]

On 10/13/2017 at 1:03 AM, Andrew Reid said:

The best thing Nikon could do is collaborate with Metabones and make a EF adapter giving Dual Pixel AF level performance in live-view and video for their mirrorless camera, as live-view is critical on such a system, without an OVF, relying on only EVF / LCD.... Then make the entry-level Nikon mirrorless lenses affordable enough for the layman to switch over relatively quickly (a cheap fast 50, a decent zoom and a fast 35 or 28). This of course is about as likely to happen as Leica going into the sub $2000 camera market

Hell no!!! Would be battsh*t insane (from a business perspective) for Nikon to collaborate with a third party to make EF lenses work well on their cameras. 

Be much better if they cooperate with third parties for making Nikon F mount lenses work on their new mirrorless cameras. 

On 10/13/2017 at 9:46 AM, Kisaha said:

The other thing I am most certain, is that a Nikon mirrorless will be Nikon compatible from day one, even offering the adaptor included with the camera. The rumors are talking about a very "sophisticated"(sic) one, and Nikon is well known for their lens mount continuity. I am also a native lens believer, I want native lenses for whatever camer I use, so their mirrorless offerings will be very important. From rumors and patents we have seen, they are up for some very original stuff.

Indeed, this is very likely. 

On 10/13/2017 at 6:20 PM, Mattias Burling said:

I've been offered a pretty decent deal on a d500 and this thread is making pushing me to pull the trigger

The feature film I recently worked on, had the Nikon D500 as one of the cameras used on every shoot.

[Mattias Burling]

It would be 90% stills for me and some online video for my employer. But its good to know it swings in the big league as well

[Nikkor]

I was wondering if active D-lighting works in 4K;could give some serious dynamic range.

[CanonTheBarbarian]

how can we take nikon seriously if they use sony sensor ... , what is left of that  once proud company... ? F3 was their pinnacle  really

it's seems that only canon and leica have charisma (and perhaps fuji) 

CTB APPROVED

[Gianluca]

Resolution it's meh, rolling shutter it's massive, autofocus it's unusable... 

 https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=nikon_d850&attr29_1=sony_a9&attr72_0=4k&attr72_1=4k&normalization=full&widget=555&x=-0.372378099670222&y=-0.08682754223469541

 

 

 

https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=sony_a6300&attr29_1=nikon_d850&attr72_0=4k&attr72_1=4k&normalization=full&widget=555&x=0.3232698933740121&y=0.6230321774140561

[Don Kotlos]

1 hour ago, Gianluca said:

Resolution it's meh, rolling shutter it's massive, autofocus it's unusable... 

Yeah thats what I see as well. Aliasing is even worse than the 4K FF from A7rii which many people don't like. 

Really hope Nikon can do something better with their mirrorless. 

[Andrew Reid]

1 hour ago, Gianluca said:

Resolution it's meh, rolling shutter it's massive, autofocus it's unusable... 

 https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=nikon_d850&attr29_1=sony_a9&attr72_0=4k&attr72_1=4k&normalization=full&widget=555&x=-0.372378099670222&y=-0.08682754223469541

https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=sony_a6300&attr29_1=nikon_d850&attr72_0=4k&attr72_1=4k&normalization=full&widget=555&x=0.3232698933740121&y=0.6230321774140561

Dude, the resolution in 4K of the D850 is as good as the 1D X Mark II / 1D C...

https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=nikon_d850&attr29_1=canon_eos1dxii&attr72_0=4k&attr72_1=c4k&normalization=full&widget=555&x=-0.585179526355997&y=0.08446496469310162

What's not to like.

I don't tend to quibble over small resolution differences at 4K on charts anyway....Why? At this level, resolution is already so more than you really need even for cinema screenings, yes, and even in 2017. I don't care whether it is effectively 4K or 3.8K or even 3K. At 1080p, I can quibble all I like! (Oh and 1080 on the D850 is superb by the way).

The D850's 4K resolution is nothing to be sniffed at. There's some purple false colour on the D850 chart (like ALL the other Nikon cameras, funnily enough) but the actual level of detail and especially real-world detail is a match to the 1D C. Yet on the Nikon you are getting more for your money and fixing the lovely 1D C's biggest downsides (lack of articulated screen and unworkably large file sizes). The colour and white balance are superb and the image pipeline, processing and codec are top notch, as good looking as the Canon. You're getting a smaller form factor, lighter body, better stills, articulated screen, cheaper price and 4K file sizes that are actually practical... The 1D X Mark II only has two advantages and certainly not the codec - it is less rolling shutter and of course Dual Pixel AF yet films have been shot with manual focus since the start to the present day and there's a reason for that. AF still isn't bullet proof or organic looking enough... It's nice to have, it's practical and convenient for run & gun, but it isn't cinema and you don't actually need it for most cinematography.

What's more you need to put chart tests into context. If there's some purple false colour on very fine black and white circles and lines at DPReview, but these things never occur outside of charts, then what is more important is that A) it looks nice when you point it at REAL STUFF and B) it does 4K from an 8K sensor!! - a huge technical achievement and gives you the benefit of 46MP stills, which the Sony A9 and 1D C simply cannot compete with.

Then there is the Nikon flat profile and colour science, which is superior to Sony, and even superior to Canon in terms of some subjects.

A9 does not have a C-LOG-like profile nor can you add one. No S-LOG. No EOSHD Pro Color. Just the standard crap Sony colour.

The codec is also very good on the D850... Higher bitrate than the Sonys and cleaner shadows, smoother to edit and better looking grain.

There is also the fact that low light performance is excellent considering the 46MP count sensor and superior ergonomics to all the Sony cameras, superior to the A99 II as well, which I actually liked more than the A9. The D850 is a much better stills camera than both of them.

Oh and it is full frame... So that look, in the real world, trumps anything minor that appears on a fucking chart.