I'm a D700 and D300 owner and have gingerly contemplated the possibility of "upgrading" to a D800 and either retaining one or both of my other two bodies. As I've read in this forum much good information and candid comments on the functionality of the D800 and simplistically compared its specs to the other two bodies, I've found to my surprise (at least based on the stated measurements reported in DP Review) that the D800 is about 150 grams lighter than the D700 and, remarkably, with the D700. Lighter than the D300. Should this be a concern given the reputations of the D700 and D300 for structural integrity and just plain sturdiness?
#5. "RE: D800 Weight and Structural Strength" In response to Reply # 0 Thu 27-Jun-13 01:10 PM by agitater
Don't mess around with third-party sites for technical specs when you can go directly to Nikon.ca, Nikonusa.com, Nikon.co.uk, etc., etc.
Anyway, product weight is not a specific indicator of product quality or structural strength.
From Nikon USA:
D800 - 31.7 oz. (900 g) camera body only
D300s - 30 oz. (840 g) camera body only
D600 - 26.8 oz. (760 g) camera body only
D700 - 35 oz. (995 g) camera body only
The D700 is the heaviest. My conclusion is that it's about darn time that Nikon started focusing on weight reduction without compromising structural integrity, weather resistance and materials quality. The D800 is every bit as solid, weather resistant and well made as the D700 and all preceding DLSR bodies.
More to the point, weight and other technical specifications comparisons carry less importance than field use comparisons. I've used my D800 for over a year in exactly the same way I used my D700 - in every sort of wet, rainy, snowy, dusty, hot, cold, dry, humid and generally miserable conditions you can imagine. Not even the slightest problem. Not even a hint of a problem. My D800 has been dropped, booted, bumped, banged, scratched, abraded, grabbed, and carried on an UpStrap for a total of hundreds and hundreds of kilometers of walking, exploring and wandering. When not hanging on a strap from my shoulder, my D800 has been stowed in a Billingham f/Stop 1.4 shoulder bag and has travelled tens of thousands of miles with me. The bag (with the camera and other gear inside) has received the same use and abuse as the camera. Again, not even the slightest problem. Not even a hint of a problem. There's nothing more I can expect of a camera.
#6. "RE: D800 Weight and Structural Strength" In response to Reply # 0 Thu 27-Jun-13 01:14 PM by ajdooley
And I hope the D800's hot shoe is sturdier than that on the D700! I have two D700s and am en route to replacing a third hot shoe before I got smart enough to take the load off it and start using a flash bracket. FYI, I have been using SB-800 flashes. In my first two months with my D800, I have found no evidence it is not every bit as solid as the D700. I've never even had the opportunity to touch a D300 -- so no opinion.
Also FWIW, in addition to shedding the 95 grams on the D800 body, I am working on shedding several thousand on my own body!
Also -- the 95 grams compares to the weight of $1.95 in 5 gram American nickels -- almost half a roll of them -- so it's not a completely insignificant weight saving, especially at the end of a long day and if you are old!
#9. "RE: D800 Weight and Structural Strength" In response to Reply # 6
>And I hope the D800's hot shoe is sturdier than that on the >D700! I have two D700s and am en route to replacing a third >hot shoe before I got smart enough to take the load off it and >start using a flash bracket.
It is, all my flashes fit tighter in my D800 than my D700 and after thousands of flash photos I am yet to have the misfire problems I have had with my D700 (on 2nd hot shoe).