I'm a D7000 user. I like the camera, but don't love it. I almost ordered a D800 when it was announced, but didn't want to be an early adopter. With the focus, issue, that was a lucky call on my part. Since then, I've followed the reviews and waited for the D600. I'm somewhat disappointed with the D600. Particularly the autofocus being (possibly) less effective that the D7000. On the other hand, the autofocus issue on the D800's seems to have been addressed by Nikon, whether they have admitted it or not. So it seems like a good time to order the 800. I plan to keep this camera for a long time and will use it for all sorts of purposes, as I am an amateur. I'm inclined to go for the 800E, simply because of the resolution. I haven't hear of a lot of trouble with the feared moire problems, and have NX2 in any case if I need it. I'd like to know what real world users have found. I'm definetly not just a landscape shooter.
Sun 23-Sep-12 01:43 PM | edited Sun 23-Sep-12 01:44 PM by LMMiller9
Most of the comparison tests of the D800 and the E show virtually no difference in image quality. You have to really blow them up to find it. I also think the moire problem is overstated. I have, hanging on my wall now, several photos I took in Maine last month that are 30x20". Even though they were hand held and cropped (I have the D800) with the 24-120 lens, the detail is amazing. I very much doubt that there would be any greater detail with the E.
But, that is just my opinion. If $300 is not important, and you want to know you have the absolute highest possible resolution, go with the E. But, practically, I don't think it will matter in 99% of photos you are likely to shoot.
Have you ever bought one lens and wondering after if you would spent a little more on the better lens you would be happier? If you have the same logic buy D800e, if not, buy whatever is easier to get. I bought D800e because it was easier to get in April, believe it or not. While line at the store I bought was in hundreds for D800 I was 4th on D800e. Got it in 2 weeks including ground shipping across the country. People were paying $5K for D800 on Ebay at that time.
I'm not sure the "better lens" analogy works in this case - the D800E is not "better" (or "worse") than the D800 - they are simply distinct models with different strengths and weaknesses in some areas.
>I'm not sure the "better lens" analogy works in >this case - the D800E is not "better" (or >"worse") than the D800 - they are simply distinct >models with different strengths and weaknesses in some areas.
My point is that the two are different flavours of the same camera; a sensible buyer will go for whichever best matches his needs without worrying about which might be the "best camera".
Since you were applying lens-buying logic, I'd compare the D800/D800E question to choosing between the two versions of the 70-200mm f/2.8G VR Nikkor. The earlier model had corner softness and vignetting problems on FX, and whilst the newer model fixes that and brings better VR and AF, it introduces significant focus breathing. Neither is automatically "better" than the other for all situations.
But to answer your question... relative to each other, the "weakness" of the D800 that I referred to would be slightly lesser resolution and noise performance, whilst the "weakness" of the D800E would be an increased chance of seeing moire in some shots.
All this has been well covered in other threads, anyway
> >But to answer your question... relative to each other, the >"weakness" of the D800 that I referred to would be >slightly lesser resolution and noise performance, whilst the >"weakness" of the D800E would be an increased chance >of seeing moire in some shots.
The moire "problem" is not a problem at all. I have shot over 10K already and have not found a single shot with moire. Yet I have seen moire from the cameras with strong AA filter but at lower resolution. So it is possible that higher resolution actually prevents moire and a lot of MF sensors don't have AA either. So maybe it is not a weakness but a strength? Maybe we should not associate lack of AA filter to a moire on high resolution cameras?
I've seen several examples of D800E shots containing some moire - there is one further down this very thread. Is the D800E more likely than the D800 to show this effect? - yes. Is it a serious problem? - no. Is it a factor in trying to choose between the two cameras? - that's up to the chooser, but I think they should at least be aware of the possibility.
>So it is possible that higher resolution actually prevents moire?
It's true that higher-resolution sensors will produce moire with less subjects, because to get moire the frequency of repeating detail in the subject must be greater than the sensor resolution. But here we are comparing two cameras with identical pixel pitch, so that's really not a factor in the choice betwwen D800 and D800E.
Sun 30-Sep-12 09:22 PM | edited Sun 30-Sep-12 09:26 PM by InsaneO
Ah, but that example does not prove anything because the same picture was not taken with D800 for comparison. Like I said if you google "moire" you will find examples from most cameras with and without AA filter.
So, do you think Nikon spent time and effort in creating D800e if there is no difference in between them?
Mon 01-Oct-12 08:01 AM | edited Mon 01-Oct-12 08:04 AM by briantilley
Several comparative moire examples have been posted, here and elsewhere. One (Nikon's own) may be found in the D800-D800E Comparison by Mansurov. His conclusion is:
"So, which one should you buy? If you are a portrait/fashion/ studio/architectural/bird photographer, then get the Nikon D800 – you would be better off with an AA filter. If you are a landscape or a macro photographer, then you should get the Nikon D800E to get the maximum detail out of the high-quality 36.3 MP sensor."
There is a small difference in performance and target user base between the two versions; as I've tried to explain I see neither one as "better" - they are simply different.
Thanks for understanding about the appropriate use of quoting
You're right Brian, but I suspect Mansurov, whom I consider one of the best equipment critics out there, wouldn't claim that most landscape photographers are going to be working at f/4.5 or less, and bird photographers, if they're shooting birds on the wing at least, certainly aren't going to be operating at f/4.5. As soon as you get to about f/8 the difference disappears. Seems to me that the E is primarily a studio camera, a sitting bird camera, and possibly an architectural camera as long as you're not shooting brick buildings.
I think my original choice of words in this thread was not brilliant, and has led to an unnecessary debate. Sorry about that!
For the record, the only point I've been trying to make is to disagree with the suggestion that people who like having "the best" might regret choosing the D800 over the D800E. Because the two cameras are so similar and neither is really better, I think there is a similarly small chance of finding people who regret choosing the D800E over the D800
Right, Brian. There's nothing else out there like the D800/E. Here's an example of the incredible dynamic range and color accuracy the machine can produce. Unfortunately, when it's necessary to drop the file size below 300 k the result is seriously degraded and loses a lot of its color, but you can get a rough idea of what the actual photograph is like.
I am sorry but his conclusion is somewhat wrong. You need to do more search on moire to find out that most of the time you will get it in macro shots. Especially taking pictures of small insects. The pattern has to be very tight to see moire just like in the sample below on the hood of the exhaust. Flies, dragonflies eyes will create more moire than anything. But there is no concrete proof that D800 will not have the same problem just because it has AA filter. I have already taken over 11K shots mostly people in different attire, some birds, some architecture where Mansurov thinks I should get moire. About half of these shots are people. Yet not even a single shot with moire.
How do you explain that?
This is the reason I take most reviews with the grain of salt.
I agree with the other posts here. With a tiny bit of processing, nobody will be able to tell a D800 image apart from the D800E image, and the chance of moire in the D800E is just as tiny. The only practical difference between these bodies is $300.
As a side note, after using my D800 for a few months I had to step up my technique a bit (hand holding, focus, right shutter speeds etc) to get the optimum results from it, as 36MP will show every issue. The D800 vs D800E difference is just a rounding error in the scheme of things and way less important than the right technique.
>As a side note, after using my D800 for a few months I had to >step up my technique a bit (hand holding, focus, right shutter >speeds etc) to get the optimum results from it, as 36MP will >show every issue.
Yeah, it's a good thing Nikon got a little improvement in ISO performance in the D800, 'cause we'll need it --- if we really want all those pixels, we need to double shutter speed if the camera is not locked down hard on a tripod. (Otherwise, it's use a less favorable aperture.)
I can just imagine the number of people who haul their D800 out, take some snapshots, crank the Navigator in Photoshop up to 100% and say, "God this camera is terrible --- look at a that fuzz!"
>The only practical difference between these bodies is $300.
This is the conclusion I reached as well.
Ironically it was visible moiré in D800 (not D800e) images that convinced me The D800's AA filter was sufficiently weak to really minimize the difference between these cameras. Once it became clear that the rumors of a CNX2 license included with D800e were false, I shortened my wait by purchasing a D800 and never looked back.
Mon 24-Sep-12 11:58 PM | edited Tue 25-Sep-12 12:01 AM by JonK
I also agree. I went with the "e" but it is tough to see the "extra" sharpness. OTOH, I have not seen any moire either. But I like to crop — sometimes extreme cropping — so the tad to extra sharpness is still useful.
As Tom said, for best results at large (well, huge) image sizes, your technique has to raise its game. That said, your current technique will generate the results you are used to at "normal" image sizes.
A major PP adjustment I made was to lower my capture sharpening settings for almost all subjects compared to the settings I use with D3s images.
Jon Kandel A New York City Nikonian and Team Member Please visit my website and critique the images!
I am a real world user who went from a D7000 to and 800E. Basically, I felt the same way as you about the D7000. I am completley satisfied with the change to the 800E. What I have learned is that you just need to make sure the batteries are charged if you have not used the camera in a month or so. . That is the only downside I have seen. Moire is non-existent in my photos. FWIW the Digitutor on the Nikon web-site is an outstanding learning tool for the D800/D800E.
It was a uncomplicated decision because I sought state-of-the-art sharpness in a camera. After spending many hours on the internet, it was clear to me that the 800E is just a sharper camera. (That statement is not meant to start any conflict). That in no way demeans the D800.
I crop and/or use post processing with NIK software. The 800E does not require extra post-processing sharpness in many cases. It is stunning and a visual improvement from the D7000 that I still own. Also, I have no problems with the size or bulk of the camera because it is so ergonomic. With high end lenses the results have the potential to be spectacular. All the best. Good luck.
I have one of each. The differences are truly small. It's not hard to sharpen D800 images to get slightly better results (if you have good tools) and the little moire you get with the D800e is easy to clean up with a number of software packages. If a D800e makes you feel more comfortable with your purchase, that's as valid of reason as anything else. Both cameras work great in my experience.
At apertures below f/8 there seems to be a small differences but according to Thom Hogan by the time you reach f/8 diffraction starts to overcome the difference between the cameras. If you shoot mostly wide open a lot then the 800E may be for you. But if you're like me and you don't (landscapes, macro) then the 800 might be a better choice.
Whether you would be happy with the D800e or not is hard to guess. Given that you rejected the D7000 and D600, both top of their class cameras, you might be judging on criteria that is not related to image quality and might be just as disappointed with the D800e. Have you done AF tests on the D600? I have not read of one report that says it is not better than the D7000 and just the -1ev sensitivity sure indicates a different class of performance. If you could let us know what you are judging cameras on, how large you regularly print, the subjects and intended use we could give more meaningful answers. Is there a specific problem with the images you get now? Stan St Petersburg Russia
Fri 28-Sep-12 11:15 AM | edited Fri 28-Sep-12 11:16 AM by LMMiller9
There is an odd phenomena that is setting in with these cameras.
This happened with stereo equipment. The sound capability and dynamics of stereo equipment improved tremendously as technology progressed. It got to the point where 99% of people, in most rooms, and listening to most music, could not detect the difference between a $500-1000 stereo to that of a $5,000-$10,000 stereo. Digital technology had made the difference so slight that you could not hear the difference anymore. But, of course some will still spend $10,000 on stereo equipment because it just makes them feel better.
Same thing happens in cars. Ferrari and McClaren announce new sports cars that have 700+ horsepower, obviously much better than previous models that had 550 horsepower. Really? Driving on what roads will you use that?
In case you're wondering why several of your posts have been edited, it's the use of "reply with quote" when it's not necessary. That feature is intended for when one wishes to respond to or reference a particular part of a post. Quoting the whole post every time just wastes everyone's bandwidth and makes the thread harder to follow.
Sat 29-Sep-12 10:26 AM | edited Sat 29-Sep-12 10:27 AM by esantos
I decided to go with the D800 when they were regularly in stock at my local Best Buy. I researched the differences between the two and came to the conclusion that the D800 was the better choice for my applications (nature/architectural photography). The comments here on this forum as well as what can be read on Thom Hogan's site, and the tests done on DPReview indicated to me that the lenses and typical camera settings I use on a regular basis would not give me an edge using the D800e.
Ernesto Santos esartprints.comErnesto Santos Photography Get my new e-Book "Churches of Texas"
In my research (I haven't shot a D800 yet) the reduced amount of sharpening that the "E" requires could be an advantage. In my case an important use for this camera would be as camera #2 in Theatre (D4 is camera #1). These would be the wide shots encompassing the width of the stage and including the entire cast or larger portions of the cast). Generally I need clean ISO 2500-5000 for this role.
The E requiring less sharpening seems like an advantage to me since in my experience sharpening accentuates noise. And in general the additional detail over my D700 could be just what my NAS doctor ordered