54 mentions of video vs 32 of photos in Nikon D810 press release

[Damphousse]

 

Marketing is supposed to be like this, and I find it rather disappointing the author can't see past it. We all know press releases always stretch the truth don't we? The 5DMkIII press release surely didn't tell you about the soft video output. Yet do we blame canon as being deceptive? When sony released the A7R with the alleged 36MP sensor which didn't quite achieve the same still qualities of the D800, in particular in its inability to deliver true 14bit quality, were they lying? Where was the eoshd's article then?

 

Neon, the first casualty of an internet debate is nuance.  It's not a matter of did they lie or not.  It is a matter of degree.  I have no recollection of Canon putting out an ad like the Nikon ad in question.  I mean they have an entire Cinema line of cameras.  They have no need to hype the 5D mk III into the stratosphere.  Sure they probably left some stuff out and fudged on some things but not to the same degree.  Also Andrew was writing about a Nikon ad.  If you read the blog you know he has been equally hard on Canon.  I don't think anyone here thinks he is biased against Nikon.  At least not biased against them in favor of Canon.

 

 

 

Unlike the Author stills comes first to me so something like the sony A7s is immediately a non starter. I suspect that is where the Author's other camera's come in? but yet none of these really match the D800, or presumably the D810s, even if as the author puts it "it is the same old camera". Well the same old camera still better than all of those image quality wise. We've all seen the specs. Base 64ISO on top of the already legendary DR and color depth, and the removal of the AA filter should deliver quite simply the best stills seen in a full frame camera in the world. THIS is what Nikon is selling today while the other guys are still trying to catch up to them with sony being close but ultimately dropping the ball with the strangely crippled A7r sensor.

 

So why do you think the D800 sells for less than the Canon 5d mk III?  The market doesn't seem to think it is worth more.  Plenty of posts on photo forums of people complaining about the steep depreciation of the camera after only a short time on the market.  I haven't owned or used either camera but unless there is a mass psychosis going on I have to imagine that your post is not the final word on the D800. I know on the internet 36 MP >>>>> 22 MP but... in actual use individual experience may vary.

[tusoli5]

" I haven't owned or used either camera "

[Damphousse]

" I haven't owned or used either camera "

 

That doesn't mean I don't have an internet connection and common sense.

 

Point is I have my doubts about the D800 being the end all be all of photography for everyone.  I'm not telling anyone which camera to buy.

[dahlfors]

 

So why do you think the D800 sells for less than the Canon 5d mk III?  The market doesn't seem to think it is worth more.  Plenty of posts on photo forums of people complaining about the steep depreciation of the camera after only a short time on the market.  I haven't owned or used either camera but unless there is a mass psychosis going on I have to imagine that your post is not the final word on the D800. I know on the internet 36 MP >>>>> 22 MP but... in actual use individual experience may vary.

 

That answer is not as easy as "it's what the market and buyers think".

 

Canon has a lot more varied business: scanners, printers, professional range of video cameras = many sectors to make income on, which Nikon and a few other camera makers don't have. Nikon's business has been point & shoot cameras, aps-c & full format dslrs, in addition to lenses and accessories.

 

For Nikon point & shoot cameras were a major part of their total revenue and earning - and we all know what happened to that after cameras in phones became decent enough... 

 

If Nikon can lure APS-C users to upgrade to full frame, they can sell D800 and D610 bodies at lower prices while earning more in total since people buy lenses as well. This is the most likely reason to why D600 was introduced in the first place and why they've been dropping the price of D800 so quickly. 

 

Nikon and a few other manufacturers without a broad product range is in a bit of a tight spot due to changes in the market during the last few years: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/cipa-numbers-still-trending.html

 

...

 

To those who don't know how well D800/D810 performs for stills, I just say: try them. When you learn how to push that camera & sensor, you'll be amazed at what you can shoot that just isn't possible with most other cameras.

 

I recently shot without a fill flash in really harsh sunlight because I've used the D800 for 2 years now and I've learnt how the sensor performs. With 12-stop DR cameras that shoot had never been possible without losing info in highlights or shadows - fill flash had been a must, and therefore the look would not have been as natural.

 

Whatever camera you use - push it and learn the limits of its performance, to know the boundaries and how to use it as a tool.

 

If you've done that, and compare any of those bodies where you've learnt to take the most out of the dynamic range, how to push the sensor for low-light etc - and compare it to when you push the sensor of the D800 - you're surely doing something wrong if you can't comprehend the usefulness of its performance.

 

And no, I don't think you understand it by having an internet connection. By knowing the light at the capture and when you push the images in Lightroom - that's when the major surprise occurs, when you know how other sensors would have performed in the same light (or if you you compare it to another camera on the shoot). Seeing an exported image on the internet doesn't tell the full story.

[tusoli5]

I agree with Dahlfors

 

there are several things to compare to talk about good or less good cameras.

 

First what is your style? Publicity, nature, macro, portraits, fashion, journalism, art and museum printing? All of that? This will help you know if you look more towards APSC or full frame, full frame with 12mp, 24mp, 36mp or more...

 

Comparing high iso, for example, on a 5DmkIII I am at 3200 iso when I am at 800-1000 iso maximum on a nikon D800 for the same results. So, yes, for me the Nikon D800 is good enough comparing to a 5DmkIII, yes it behaves worst at 3200 iso than the 5D but if you know these two cameras and practiced them a lot you see that you have to compare a bit differently than just in the specs because in this precise example, the 3200 iso should be considered as having the same results than around 1000 iso on a D800.

 

About quality for stills on the internet, I confirm what dahlfors says, it will always look shitty on a 1080p screen compared to paper, wich gives you full potential and depth about color, contrast, etc, simply because it has muuuuuuuch more resolution than any screen available today, even in 4k.

Professional paper-print meets around 70mm  celluloïd résolution (around 12K resolution If I am not wrong, yes we will get it one day, no you can't really measure the depth of your colors on the internet with compressed picture from crappy jpeg, yes that is why all professional are obsessed with calibration to get the more they can of what they see on screen and it justifies great gammut screens to be sooo important).

 

Then, about what reason drives the megapixel run? Really, have you ever achieved a 2meter by 3.5 meters on a museum wall with a 24mp camera? Yes you can but you make an upscale of your print and drain a lot of quality away from it. It will simply never looks exactly like what you thought you had on a smaller scale. So if you make publicity for biiig brands, you had the following solution before the D800E: Hasselblad, mamiya, 70mm and 24x36 celluloïd.  Nikon changed this with the D800, so yes there is a way to see this camera as a real need if it fits certain domains of your work or creativity. Size does matter with the size of your prints and also it need to be done very well, wich is the precise improvement with d800, a 36mp that helps to skip completely hasselblad, leica, mamiya, and use all the lenses that you work with everyday on your other projects. If I shoot sport models for an event and then get the opportunity to print it on the town hall of the biggest cities of the world I don't mind anymore, I stay confident with it I have the strongest 8K stills possible and may not need any upscale.

 

Knowing your applications, knowing you creativity, knowing your market and fitting their needs is what makes you choose even some cameras that might look like not so good in everything, precisely because you need them for what they do so well.

Furthermore, why does everyone suggest that when you buy one brand you don't buy the others? I need canon for certain things like softness, very special bokeh,  I need nikon for other things, like more crispy images, more mechanical works, and I need leica for others, like dramatic nature, etc... But from my D800, I stopped completely using Leica, Hasselblad, Mamiya for my stills. 

And I still like canon for the easy picture styles they put in their cameras, really it is a full color station in a tiny body.

 

On the D800, the dynamic range is so big that even with 36mp you can recover low light very easily and shoot more instinctivly, is there a test or internet talks about going easily instinctive with a camera? Not really, they speak about buttons positions etc but never can make you picture it fully. For my experience, D800 sensor and its 36mp really made the trick for me, I simply don't mind anymore. Would I get a better view in low light with less resolution? Yes. Is it my style of concieving photography? No. As I realised that my choice was made.

 

So there is a limit to testing without touching, there is a limit to knowing all without using.  You have to know what you want to do with it to get what you need. 

 

There is a limit to see pictures without looking at them printed, celluloïd lost the battle for the source but today paper still wins the print and from good to very good, you'll see a lot of differences in the final result at an exhibition, for example. ;-) 

[tusoli5]

Of course I am not saying it is the best camera ever, no it has flaws, for sure, but what it does good is really not matched in that price-range until today.

I admit that a D810 is much more interesting for other forums than video forums like this one.

 

For sure, video is not the best but it wasn't intended to be a 2800€ camrecorder, it is a wonderful still camera with a video mode that uses crappy H264 1080P 24mb/s compression (and did you see what you can do with this poor 24mb/s? It is really powerful for such light video files).

What I hate about this is not the 36mp sensor, but much more the .H264 compression... 

[Wulf]

tusoli, dahlfors - could not agree more. For me it's not the resolution alone, it's this insane DR.

I stopped shooting analogue film the day I got the D800.

 

 

 

So why do you think the D800 sells for less than the Canon 5d mk III?  The market doesn't seem to think it is worth more. 

 

the body was allways cheaper as the canon; I think it's a mixed calculation - they hope to sell some lenses as well... :-)

[Michael1]

Of course I am not saying it is the best camera ever, no it has flaws, for sure, but what it does good is really not matched in that price-range until today.

I admit that a D810 is much more interesting for other forums than video forums like this one.

 

For sure, video is not the best but it wasn't intended to be a 2800€ camrecorder, it is a wonderful still camera with a video mode that uses crappy H264 1080P 24mb/s compression (and did you see what you can do with this poor 24mb/s? It is really powerful for such light video files).

What I hate about this is not the 36mp sensor, but much more the .H264 compression... 

How about using an external recorder with the uncompressed HDMI 4:2:2 out?

 

Internal D800 vs. Ninja with D800:

 

[Damphousse]

 

the body was allways cheaper as the canon; I think it's a mixed calculation - they hope to sell some lenses as well... :-)

 

Maybe.  But that still doesn't explain the 5D MK III's allegedly robust sales at the higher price and the D800s depreciation.  I don't claim to know what exactly is going on but when I see a relationship like that it gives me pause.  Doesn't mean the D800 isn't a fine tool or better than the 5D MK III in certain respects.  I just thought the assessment was a bit over the top.  What was being posted didn't reconcile with something I've seen since launch.  The 5D MK III can't be junk compared to the D800.

[tusoli5]

Maybe.  But that still doesn't explain the 5D MK III's allegedly robust sales at the higher price and the D800s depreciation.  I don't claim to know what exactly is going on but when I see a relationship like that it gives me pause.  Doesn't mean the D800 isn't a fine tool or better than the 5D MK III in certain respects.  I just thought the assessment was a bit over the top.  What was being posted didn't reconcile with something I've seen since launch.  The 5D MK III can't be junk compared to the D800.

 

Dear Dampphousse, just have a look at nikon prices strategy over the last ten years and you'll learn that they always have bigger price drop than canon for their semi-pro DSLRs. 

 

The 5D mkIII is definitely no junk, the problem you have is that considering D800 as a good oponent you think automaticaly that we say 5DmkIII is shitty. You understand whatever you want , I simply remind you that it is not what has been said. 

[tusoli5]

How about using an external recorder with the uncompressed HDMI 4:2:2 out?

 

Internal D800 vs. Ninja with D800:

 

>

 

Michael

[Nikkor]

Yeah, with the hack you can grade your videos, because the compression artifacts almost dissapear. Before you couldn't do anything because the ugly blocks would show with any minor adjustment. I finally came up with a workflow which gives me exactly the look I like (you just have to film with white balance off a little into the blues and remove it later with a curve, suddenly the color problems seem to be gone). The only thing I miss is detail on far subjects, but that's a thing for 4K.

 

I will keep the d800 until a 4K 10bit internal camera comes around which also offers the d800 stills quality (unless used phase one backs go under 3000€, I want that iq280 so badly).

 

btw, great work tusoli.

[tusoli5]

@araucaria

 

Thanks !

I agree with you.

 

 

A really good 1080P in 422 -444 10 bits at 24/30/60/120fps with h265 would be better than a blocky 4k or a burning processor all of it for not a very expensive price would make the trick for me.

;-)

[Danyyyel]

The level of ignorance and bias is terrible when you talk about Nikon here. So some people here are questioning Nikon some even hoping for there demise because they don't have 4k in the middle life small upgrade from the best ever photo camera the world has ever got. A camera that is at the top or near the top 5 in every category in terms of image quality. A camera that Nikon has put at a very competitive price and $ 500 below the rehash Canon 5Dmark 3 which is below in every senses. Most who are critisizing it here have never ever held it in there arms and have never shot with it. In the history of image making the D800 will be an iconic camera in the decades coming and most if not all of the camera discussed here will be long forgotten.

 

So Nikon should be shot because they put a good resolution 1080p video mode from 24 to 60p with 12 stop of DR, high bitrate codec with external recorder in the best ever photo camera mid-life update!!!!!!!!!!! Yes it still has some fault like some moire/aliasing (that can be eliminated with a filter) not the best low light, 8 bit, but it still produces great images. This is from a company that has zero prior knowledge about video. Now I have seen some patent where they had variable level low pass filter but they already have been doing amazing things with there 24 megapixel sensors in the D5200/D5300?d7100/D3300 camera with virtually zero aliasing moire. So I am quite confident that they will be drastically reducing or eliminate the aliasing moire in the next generation high resolution Nikon camera.

 

In fact, contrary to the negative slant of this article, I am really encouraged by the Nikon emphasis on the video side for the launch of the D810. If you follow them they have been constantly upgrading the video in their camera. The DX line id more a proof of it because model change much more than the FX line. Since the launch of the D800, they have uncompressed HDMI out of even their lowest consumer camera, they have got rid of Moire/aliasing since the D5200 and have added 60p since the D5300, both having fantastic low light. I fully expect 4k as from the next generation full frame camera in 1.5/2 years time. What I am afraid is that they forget about more important things like 10 bit and internal high bitrate codec. These are more important in my eyes than 4k and I expect it to at least come in the D7100 $ 1000 camera range. The D810 has a flat picture profile for video. I don't know if it is the same as the ones we have now or it can extract more of the 14 stop DR. At least they are aware that video people want DR. So I expect they will get a solid 2k/4k high bitrate (will be achievable by external recorder) with wide DR and 10 bit with 60P or more in the next two years. We will see how many will be complaining here.

[Danyyyel]

Just for the knowledge of some here. Nikon is still making profit compare that to the loss of the Panasonic and Sony of this world. If one or the other still continues to make losses, you might find yourself with a bunch of lens with no new camera to attach to it in the next few years. The cell phone are affecting more of the low/mid end camera sales with mirrorless taking a hit. At least Canikon has the upper mid to pro market that won't be affected by the cell phones. Nikon also forms part of the mitsubishi group of companies and they have the medical imaging and stepper business for semiconductor manufacturing. So to those that because of the inflated ego want an iconic imaging company that is nearly a century old to disappear. Just be prepared for the exact contrary, because in 2 years the whole Nikon line will have much better image quality than most can use. Then the question will be what will happen to the Sony and Panasonic camera of this world. Do I want that, certainly not because competition is the essence of innovation.

[Michael1]

If you look at the financial statements for Nikon, you'll see they are actually doing surprisingly well.  Their peak sales were last year, and this year's sales are only down 2%, but their profit is up 15%.  You would think by reading  posts on the web that Nikon is on the brink of bankruptcy.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

Michael

[Wulf]

and that's the problem - why should they change anything?

 

oh, I forget about this retro df thing... olle sensor, olle body, olle customers. A bit like Kodak, you see? Or more Leica? Hasselblad. Mamiya. Contax. Minolta. Voigtländer. Zeiss. Rollei. at least they left some glas for andy's thread, lol

 

At one time they were all gigants, state of the art... w/o the D3 sensor, Nikon would have been a thing of the past, too. Nowadays this could happen very quickly. I only shoot Nikon because used glasses/bodies were so f*** cheap when I was a poor teen, 'cause all profs were running to Canon early in the 90's.

 

Canon/Nikon are looking at each other, Canons got the sealings and more frames, Nikons got the higher resolution. Nikon's managers are a bit obsessed in term of maximal still quality, looking at medium format etc.

Fine, but historically  progress in photography was NOT driven by quality, but by availability. Large format -> medium format -> small format --> mobiles? The mass market.

 

it's the customers, who still associated Quality = DSLR. no wonder, if you looked at N's own mirrorless line... 

 

but the very day when DSLRs are as 'kewl' as LP-players or VHS-video, Nikon must have found a solution.

 

look at FlickR, what's the most used body? :-)

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

"Shooting movie footage on a camera as powerful as the D810 is an enriching and liberating experience. Surpassing the video quality of its predecessors, the D810 employs an entirely new method of video signal processing to record Full HD (1080p) movies at 50p/60p frame rates  with markedly reduced noise, moiré, and false colour. The camera’s EXPEED 4 image- processing engine delivers smoothly rendered exposure transitions and beautiful tones"

-Nikon  :rolleyes:

[Danyyyel]

and that's the problem - why should they change anything?

 

oh, I forget about this retro df thing... olle sensor, olle body, olle customers. A bit like Kodak, you see? Or more Leica? Hasselblad. Mamiya. Contax. Minolta. Voigtländer. Zeiss. Rollei. at least they left some glas for andy's thread, lol

 

At one time they were all gigants, state of the art... w/o the D3 sensor, Nikon would have been a thing of the past, too. Nowadays this could happen very quickly. I only shoot Nikon because used glasses/bodies were so f*** cheap when I was a poor teen, 'cause all profs were running to Canon early in the 90's.

 

Canon/Nikon are looking at each other, Canons got the sealings and more frames, Nikons got the higher resolution. Nikon's managers are a bit obsessed in term of maximal still quality, looking at medium format etc.

Fine, but historically  progress in photography was NOT driven by quality, but by availability. Large format -> medium format -> small format --> mobiles? The mass market.

 

it's the customers, who still associated Quality = DSLR. no wonder, if you looked at N's own mirrorless line... 

 

but the very day when DSLRs are as 'kewl' as LP-players or VHS-video, Nikon must have found a solution.

 

look at FlickR, what's the most used body? :-)

 

Remember that Nikon was the first to put video in a Dslr even if the implementation was not that good (People where doing all type of things until the 5d2 came out). They where also the first to offer clean uncompressed hdmi output that can be recorded at high bitrate. Since then they have offered alias/moire free image, super lowlight and 60p and best in class DR from their apsc line of camera. Unfortunately they are more incremental than revolutionary, The Uncompressed HDMI was supposed to be the big feature but no one could predict that Blackmagic would launch RAW cameras and that Magic lantern RAW hack of the Canon camera. If else they would have been at the top the last two years in the DSLR price point.

 

What you also forgot to add is that it is Nikon and Canon that more or less put all those companies on the side line by providing the best value to money cameras for more than half a century (Nikon will be a century old in 3 years). They suffered a lot at the start of the digital era from about 2002 to 2007 to the hand of Canon. But they rectified it as from 2007 with the D3/D300 which completely turned the table. Since then it has been a home run, they beat Canon in every possible way (image quality).

 

What this tells me is that they are the type of company that will bite their time if need be if they don't have the tech to compete now, but when they come it is usually with a bang. The fact that they are talking so much about video is a clear indication that it is important for them and that next generation will have improved video. They have implemented SRAW in D4s and the D810. For the D810 the SRAW is 9 megapixel, about exactly 4k!!!!!!! Now I am not saying that we will have 4k RAW in the next camera (it might be completely unmanageable), but it show that 4k is very feasible. The best or worst scenario depending on where you stand, will be when every Nikon will come out with 4k, 12+ stop DR, 10 bit + codec and 60+ fps and proper focusing in video/live view. This will happen in the next 2 to 4 years across the whole line and be prepared to see a lot of the smaller players pack their bag. Hopefully it will not be the case, but you will be able to get these spec in the $ 600/700 Nikon dslr that you can by across the globe and in every electronic shop at the corner of the road.

 

[Michael1]

 

"Shooting movie footage on a camera as powerful as the D810 is an enriching and liberating experience. Surpassing the video quality of its predecessors, the D810 employs an entirely new method of video signal processing to record Full HD (1080p) movies at 50p/60p frame rates  with markedly reduced noise, moiré, and false colour. The camera’s EXPEED 4 image- processing engine delivers smoothly rendered exposure transitions and beautiful tones"

-Nikon  :rolleyes:

 

I know you are rolling your eyes, BUT AFAIK, Nikon was the first to virtually eliminate moire', and aliasing while still retaining image detail using onboard camera image processing.

 

Michael