The cost difference is not significant. I have no idea which to get. Either way, I will need a few more Gazillion Teribybes of storage.

David

Per ordered the E.

David

It depends and finally it is all about compromise. Such is life.

I decided on the E version as I will get the most out of what the sensor can resolve in sharpness. Finally this camera is about resolution, isn't it?

My workflow incorporates Capture NX for RAW conversion and it's a click of a button to get rid of Moiré. Lightroom 4 has a dedicated slider as well. It will only be visible in rare circumstances but you have to check for it. Again, as this is not a P&S camera you will likely spend a few seconds in the RAW converter of your choice anyway.

Medium Format shooters, even in the most critical situation when shooting fabrics or architecture for a living, didn't find it to cumbersome to deal with that possible extra step in post production and would never ask for a blur filter just to be on the safe side. But a mainstream manufacturer with a wide range of possible customers like Nikon has to offer a camera version that keeps shooters without any knowledge in PP happy.

As far as I'm concerened a 36MP camera with an additional AA-filter should be the special edition and not the other way round...


Frank

www.fskphotography.de

I have pre-ordered both versions before I decide on which one I'll actually purchase. I am now leaning towards the non-E model. One big reason is the video function of the camera. Although I have never shot video, I plan to try it out with my grandchildren and it seems it will be nearly impossible to get rid of moire and false color in movies with post processing. Also, at this point in time, I am not yet convinced that Capture NX2 will effectively get rid of moire. From what I've read, it is difficult in post-processing to remove it and the results are not as good as having an anti-aliasing filter.

Larry

Frank:

I am completely with you. Knowing Japanese photographer market, contemplating IQ is critical. Blurring filter to retain current Nikon user (D700) is one thing and gaining migration of MF user (or IQ ultimator) is another, who gets used to deal with problems like moire. I believe this is why there are two versions. Plus, price range of D700 / 800 attracts beginner to pro photographers. I am convinced that IQ ultimators should go for E version and brush up your skills.

I know some claims in which there might be no big differences for both versions. That might be true if you reproduce photos on web or current small print outs. But you should see the trend where out-put imaging industry is pushing larger outputs in affordable price.

www.hitoshiujiie.com/photography.html

To a large degree it depends what you shoot. For general, all-around subjects the E is probably fine — you get a bit more acuity and occasionally have to de-moire (and CNX and Lightroom can do that).

If you shoot a lot of fabric, fashion, or home interiors (fabric furniture), then with the E version you might go nuts — most of your images would need de-moire.

Jon Kandel
A New York City Nikonian and Team Member
Please visit my website and critique the images!

>To a large degree it depends what you shoot. For general,
>all-around subjects the E is probably fine — you get a bit
>more acuity and occasionally have to de-moire (and CNX and
>Lightroom can do that).
>
>If you shoot a lot of fabric, fashion, or home interiors
>(fabric furniture), then with the E version you might go nuts
>— most of your images would need de-moire.


^This^ Not an easy question at first glance, but in the end Landscape shooters should prefer the E, fashion or architectural shooters the non-E.

I had some worries regarding moiré in bird feathers & animal fur, but given this isn't a speed camera, wildlife probably isn't the top priority for this camera for me.

FWIW I pre-ordered the E.

Larry - a Bay Area Nikonian
My Nikonians gallery

www.tempered-light.com

I am currently pre-ordered for the non-E version.

I expect my main use of the camera to be outdoor macro. As such, I expect to come across a fair amount of repetitive patterns which could cause problems. Also, at typical macro apertures I will often be diffraction limited at 36Mp, so I might as well have the filter.

At least that is my thinking at this point.

Brian

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I got the non E as the primary target for the new camera will be portrait and people.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Non-E here. For my workflow and subjects i think its the safer bet.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

According to DigiLloyd, who I consider an expert on both diffraction and moire, stopping down to induce some diffraction will eliminate the moire. Who knew there was a use for diffraction?

BTW for you E owners, please keep us posted regarding your video experiences.

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

I'm probably not getting an 800 at all, but I cannot imagine trying to pick between them without having seen the files produced. There's a well understood belief about the value of avoiding the AA filter, but it isn't obvious that it's as simple as it appears. Secondly, why is Nikon going to the trouble of offering the non-E if there isn't some fairly major justification for carrying a separate model? That's expensive, so they must have some compelling reason - but we don't really know what it is yet.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

Before the camera was officially announced I was dead set on getting the non-AA filter version. After the announcement I was looking at the samples that Nikon posted and truthfully I think I'm going to get the AA filtered version. There really isn't much of a difference that I can see.

I pre-orded the non E because for my shooting I have never seen moire in my photos, and I always pre-sharpen in in ACR, which you also can tweak if there is noise. I have read that there is no difference in images between the non E and the E once the appropriate sharpening is done. Maybe later on once we see multiple photos and if it can be demonstrated that there is a definite advantage with the E, then I will consider a second camera and that would then be the E.

Juan

I've pre-ordered a non-E, but since I have a "hard" deadline in late June, I've indicated that I'll take an 800E if the supply and demand makes it easier to get that model. My guess is that the E will actually be harder to get.

Since 36 megapixels is overkill for the "stuff" I do, this was a fairly easy call for me.

If you want to photograph a man spinning, give some thought to why he spins. Understanding for a photographer is as important as the equipment he uses. - Margaret Bourke-White

I just pre-ordered the "E", as landscape photos are the majority of my photos.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I pre-ordered the E version.
Acuity and detail is more important to me...
I intend to use the D800E as my landscape and macro camera.
I really don't see me using it on my family events and family vacation due to the file size. For those, I will go back to my D7000 and have a manageable file size with decent image quality.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I have pre-ordered the E version as well.

I had decided and was about ready to order, when I saw a post by Moose Peterson--he too said he would go with the E.

Hmm...know April 12 is the release date. Does B & H let you know where you are in line? Wondering when I will really get it based on demand?

Happy shooting!
Laura

>I have pre-ordered the E version as well.
>
>I had decided and was about ready to order, when I saw a post
>by Moose Peterson--he too said he would go with the E.
>
>Hmm...know April 12 is the release date. Does B & H let
>you know where you are in line? Wondering when I will really
>get it based on demand?
>
>Happy shooting!
>Laura

You will almost certainly get it quicker thru your local camera store.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

> You will almost certainly get it quicker thru your local camera store.

Just so. I ordered mine (E) through my local dealer. Since there won't be any discounts for a long while on this camera, it comes down to sales tax vs. shipping costs for me, and since I'm happy to support my local, independent camera shop, they got my order. I paid no more than I would have elsewhere, and I'm in the first couple they get.

---
Chris Maytag
Boulder, Colorado, USA, Earth, Milky Way

I will get the "E" version. I love the files I get from my Leica M8.2. Some of that is from the CCD sensor, some the Leica glass, and some the lack of an AA filter. The images require very little sharpening because of the lack of the softening introduced by the AA filter. I like the notion of not having to restore something the body took away during capture.

Places We Have Been

www.peppermill-multimedia.com

I just read a good series of posts on the D800 vs the D800E and the Moire issue at the following link: http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d800-vs-d800e

Regards

Jim

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>I just read a good series of posts on the D800 vs the D800E
>and the Moire issue at the following link:
>http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d800-vs-d800e
>
>Regards
>
>Jim
Is it my eyes or computer? I cannot see a difference in the sharpness samples but easily see the difference in the moire sample.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>Is it my eyes or computer? I cannot see a difference in the
>sharpness samples but easily see the difference in the moire
>sample.

The 800 sharpness sample seems slightly underexposed compared to the 800E sharpness sample - so it's difficult to tell either way. If there is a difference in sharpness it's only very small.

The moire on the other hand is very obvious indeed - could be a real nightmare on architecture and fabrics etc.

I am going non-E version. I do mainly landscape and nature but here is my rationale.

If Nikon did not release this E version, having the AA filter removed is not something I would have ever considered. It is much easier to sharpen in post processing than it is to remove moire.....and in some cases it might cause throw aways. After post processing of files from the d800/d800e, the differences will likely be negligible to all but the pixel peepers or those that look at prints with their nose inches from the picture. The D800 will become my go to camera for general shooting. I don't want moire to even be a thought on my mind.

At the end of the day if for some unlikely reason I decide that I need the E, I would likely be able to easily sell the non-E version. It might not be the same the other way around.

Is my reasoning not logical or flawed? Maybe, but it has gotten me comfortable with my decision.

I just switched from Canon and am currently camera less. I also have a D4 on order which I will be keeping along with the D800. At this point I just want a camera in my hands.

________________________________________
Frank

My Web Page

My Nikonians gallery

I have preordered the E version. I shoot alot more landscape, nature, studio, and macro than moire producing subjects. I want uber sharp, like the difference I see when I use my 70-180mm Micro-Nikkor compared to other Nikkors I have in the same mm range.


Equipment and technique are important,
Vision is supreme,
Passion the reason...

CarolinaSmith.com

Agree with your logic. That's where my head is.

--------------------------
Rick Paul
The Photo Professors

Saguaro Shadows Photography
Tucson, Arizona

My Nikonians Gallery

My Nikonians Blog

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I ordered the non-E version. To truly exploit the potentially marginal increase in resolution offered by the E version, you would need to be printing at very large sizes, approaching 30" x 20" at 240dpi to start seeing the benefits. Form most output, you will be downsampling images and doing output sharpening. I see a tremendous benefit potential in having all of those extra pixels in the original then downsampling to more conventional print sizes or screen, in terms of percieved sharpness and overall noise reduction.

I was initially hoping for more of a D700s low-light machine akin to the D3s, and skeptical about a mega pixel monster, but I'm warning up to the creative potential that this camera seems to offer. Except for the file sizes that is!

I will be keeping my D700 for high frame rate stuff like sports.

I think 36MP in a 24x36mm sensor is pretty much as far as we should take it. We're already hitting diffraction around F/9 and need lenses that give us 2456 LP/PH (about 100 LP/MM) or higher resolution.

For instance:

The Nikon 24-70 F/2.8 exceeds this in almost every focal length even wide open (extreme corners at 40mm being where it falls only a tad below). So you should see quite a difference between a D700 and a D800 image shot with this lens (all other things being equal).

However, the D800 simply has more resolution than a Nikon 28-300 F/3.5-5.6 can deliver in some configurations, even when stopped down. At 28mm you'll need to go to F/5.6 to bring the borders in line and then to F/8 to bring the extreme borders in line. Don't misunderstand - you'll still see more detail in the D800 versus D700 shot since the D700 isn't capturing all of the information the lens can deliver, but the D800 sensor is simply out-performing the lens at times, whereas the D700 sensor does not, so a different lens ( e.g. the 24-70 ) will produce sharper results over the 28-300 in some situations (again, all other things being equal).

Basically, the D700 does let you shoot with a wide variety of Nikon and Third Party glass and get really good results, however this won't be the case when you go to the D800/D800E. You might need to do a lens arsenal upgrade to get the most out of it, not to mention a stricter shooting technique. This is the same issue we encountered with the D7000.

Luis Gonzalez
Everlasting Photography, Inc.

The AF-S 28-300 at 28mm is extremely sharp wide open on my D7000.
The pixel density of the D800 is slightly better (larger), so I see no problem at all.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

ordered an 'E" used to dealing with moire on my M9, not a big deal

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

How do you deal with it, is it just occasional selective processing like brushing an area? It sounds like the outcomes are good?

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

Depends on the software.

For example, Adobe LightRoom 4 Beta has a selective moire reducing brush.

Some moire can't always be 100% eliminated in post but alot can.

Alot of the decision on whether to go with the E will depend on what you are typically shooting and how much time you want to spend in post potentially cleaning it up. The primarily landscape photographer isn't going to care much and will do the E, but the photographer doing 100s to 1000s of frames a day or architecture or of products with alot of potentially moire inducing patterns is going to care alot and probably not want to have to spend the time in post.

Luis Gonzalez
Everlasting Photography, Inc.

>ordered an 'E" used to dealing with moire on my M9, not
>a big deal

Yes, but the Leica M9 has signal processing firmware to deal with moire. Nikon has not said that the 800E has any such thing.

On the D7000 you are using a smaller part of the lens' image circle, where it is inherently sharper. When you put it on an FX body and use the entire frame then the edges/borders diminish in quality. We usually refer to using FX lenses on DX bodies as using the "sweet spot" of the lens.


Luis Gonzalez
Everlasting Photography, Inc.

Thanks Luis, I very much like the idea of my 24-70 being even sharper than it already is! I will keep this 100 lp/mm metric in mind. Do you have any similar info regarding the 70-200 II (or 1)?

On the main topic, I am getting a D4 so I have to stay out of the D800 arena for a year if I want to remain married

But looking ahead I was thinking E except for:

- video moire has me pondering. I expect my D4 to be my main video camera so on the one hand I'm not too worried about the D800 for video. But it could be an issue if I want to press the D800 into service as a second video unit on a rare occasion or use it for travel video. So I'm really keen to see folks video experience with the E - there is so much complicated image processing and compression going on to get a video-frame from 36mp down to 2mp that the actual results may be far more software and processing based than anything to do with the AA filter or not.

- Or if my D800 does become my eventual main travel camera, I do tend to do a lot of architecture work whilst on vacation. This year I expect (hope!) to have my D4 by the time of our main vacation in June, so I'll get a chance to try the D4 out as a travel camera. I use a Black-Rapid strap, so that really helps with making heavy gear feel lightweight.

- I have this notion, maybe, of trying to scare up some 2nd shooter work. In this case though, one would think a non-E is the only and best option. If I get enough semi-pro work in theatre with my D4 and related head shots though, I really won't need to go the wedding route, so we'll have to see how this evolves. I want income to, partially offset future purchases. For example on the face of it, it would be very difficult for me to justify a 200mm f2, PC-Es, 135mm f2G because things like that are the right tool for particular needs but won't get tons of work unlike my 24-70/70-200. Whereas if I self-finance these specialized tools through semi-pro work, well then the sky's the limit depending on semi-pro income of course.

Re-reading the above the E is more of a specialized tool isn't it.

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

One thing to keep in mind, that even though the sensor might have more resolution than the lens, it doesn't mean it's a bad image, just that you aren't utilizing the potential of the camera. If whatever you had been shooting with a D700 provided the quality you needed then you will get at least that on the D800. It's not like you're taking a step backward, it's just that you have more possible steps forward.

I have the 70-200 II right now. I used to have the 70-200 I. On the D700 I didn't really see much of a difference between the two wide open at most focal lengths. The II was a bit sharper from F/4+. Things might be different on the D800, but given the resolving power of both lenses I would expect them to hold up quite well. The I "in general" has "slightly" softer borders and corners over the II, but on the D700 I really didn't see much of a difference. Maybe we'll notice that difference more on the D800.

I think one thing that people may not be as happy with is using the I with a 1.4X, 1.7X or 2X on a D800. A 1.4X was doable on the D700, especially at F/5.6+, but that won't be the case on the D800. You'll need F/8 to meet the D800 sensor res. Not saying that wide open it will be horrible, just not much better than you already get with the D700 Better in the center but the edges/corners won't improve much, if any. And if you don't care about the edges and corners being softer then it does't really matter. We're just talking overall across the frame performance.

I haven't done much video but I have a friend that does. He's more concerned about moire than I am, but until we start seeing some video from D800E's against moire inducing fabrics and such we won't really know how big an issue it is.

Luis Gonzalez
Everlasting Photography, Inc.

How about the II though (70-200), do you happen to know if it reaches that 100 lp/mm threshold you refer to?

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

The II version should exceed those resolution levels at all focal lengths through F8. I'm not sure what it will look like at F/11. It was fine at 24MP but with diffraction starting around F/9 on the D800 things will start to go softer at F/11 than they did on a D700 and I have no idea what that will look like.

The I version also holds it's own. Only at F/2.8 does it look like the extreme corners flirt around the threshold.

I want to stress that we're talking about all conditions being perfect. Things on an optical test bench aren't the same as things in the real world. Even though the I and II versions both are technically providing good resolution, I do think that my II version is performing a bit better than my I version on the edges and corners even on a D700. Then there are lens sample variations, temperature variations, etc. The bottom line is if you start with lens A that yields much higher resolution than is required versus lens B that starts off as "just barely good enough", lens B will more easily shift into less desirable performance than lens A.

I will guess that to achieve the best out of a D800 you'll need to really cut down the camera shake/mirror slap vibration, use a hefty tripod if not using VR within it's capabilities.

Once I get a D800 in here I'll have my buddy come over - he has the 70-200 I version, and we'll do some direct test shots against my 70-200 II version and see how they compare out in the wild.

Luis Gonzalez
Everlasting Photography, Inc.

I downloaded high res samples of an 800 and 800e landscape shot and imported them into Lightroom 4. the samples are from Nikon which are RAW files converted to JPEG with no adjustments. zoomed in at 1:1, there is slight noticeable improvement in sharpness which may be noticeable when printing a poster size print. After applying some basic sharpening to the 800 file, I am hard pressed to see the difference between the two.

I have one of each on order but I am leaning towards to the 800. I posted my rationale above however over the next month I am going to do all I can to make the right decision for me. I am thinking it all comes down to what you want to do in post processing.

My guess is that the 800e will be harder to get and that more photographers than Nikon anticipated are ordering the 800e.

I like that Nikon is giving us choices but I feel that this is leaving a lot of unanswered questions. It would be nice of versions of each camera show up in the wild prior to release for some real world tests. It would certainly help make a more educated decision.

________________________________________
Frank

My Web Page

My Nikonians gallery

I have both on preorder at the moment but will probably cancel the E and keep the regular D800. The largest I have printed so far is 16x20, and it will probably be difficult to see an improvement over my D700 in the first place, let alone D800 E vs non-E. I doubt we will see much if any impact of the AA filter even in prints larger than 16x20, provided the files are properly sharpened. But I'm sure before long somebody will test this. Leica cameras don't come in two versions, so we don't have such comparisons yet.

I'm shooting mostly birds, insects and my kids, and I believe that artifacts and moire can appear in any of these situations, in bird feather detail, insect eyes or my kid's cloth fabric. Leica folks don't complain much about moire, but they also rarely shoot wildlife or macro which are very impractical with a rangefinder camera.

Tom
Bay Area Nikonian

http://www.tkphoto.me/

I'm so glad to see someone mention bug eyes.
I've read a few blogs where they seemed to lump landscape and macro together when recommending the E version because they are both "nature". But, my experience of looking through a 200mm micro is that the macro world has quite a bit of repetitive patterns. Very often those patterns are what I want to photograph.
If I get the non-E, then I see the worst case as having to print say 10% smaller, whereas, with the E I might have to toss it out.
If I wanted to maximize print size, I would choose differently.


Brian

Quote>>But I'm sure before long somebody will test this.<Quote<<

I've heard of D3x users removing the filters.
Hopefully one of them can show before and after pictures.

The D800 samples I've seen so far have just confused me so far.
But, I am sure more are to come.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I have an D800 non E on pre order , I believe the E unit its just bragging rights for non- post processing types . IMHO I can make any RAW file 5% sharper than out of the camera .
I like to edit images one at a time ....... Its 36 MP how much difference can there be in sharpness . There are no claims of huge gains .

Hans K.

My Gallery

Visit my Nikonians gallery. nikonus@nikonians.org

I pre-oredered the "non E" version. The way I see it is, I've had a AA filter on all my previous Nikons so why not this one? I know that's a bit of an ignorant statement considering the jump in mega pixels but I don't intend changing my work flow.
The word "moire" wasn't even mentioned on these forums until a week ago and now it's in every thread. My main interest in photography is models, macro, landscape and Bald Eagles, in that order. I can see the benefits to no AA filter for macro and landscape but for the models, where skin softening is often used, I really don't have the need for extra sharpness out of the camera. I understand that the moire is only caused in certain situations and can be eliminated with a change of distance or angle but I'd rather not even see it, plus I already know how to sharpen my images after they are captured, I have no clue how to repair a image with moire or even if it can be "completely" repaired.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.
Visit my web site.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.