D800E User Thread

[recap]

At f/7.1, the diffraction limit. The Nikon 24/1.4 performs superbly. This lens performs very very well across the frame on the D700 and I'm pleased to say that its performance also carries through to the D800/E. With two aspherical elements, it is in my opinion, just as good as the Leica M 24 Summilux-M f/1.4 lens, but the Leica has very beautiful bokeh to boot.

These two were taken at f/4.0:

I'd say the 24 and 85 perform very well with the D800E. The 35, not so much unless you stop down significantly.

 

[recap]

More Low Light!

I didn't pack my (travel) tripod (again). Lazy. So all hand held between 1/100s to 1/125s between f/2.0 and f/1.4.

The autofocus is BRILLIANT, it can focus AND track someone moving away from the camera in dim light! Like, after the sun has set in the evening kind of ambient lighting.

1/100s, f/1.8, ISO 2000, highlight recovery added:

1/125, f/1.4, ISO 2500. It can track the folks walking on the left at f/1.4 in dim light! Incredible! Even my D3S couldn't do that so well.

1/125s, f/2.0, ISO 4000 for both. Great dynamic range also at high ISO.

And after the sun had set completely, ISO 6400, f/2.0, 1/125s

I'd say, no need to worry about whatever ISO you will be shooting with. As long as its a real number in the display. It should work out just well. I am confident that these 36MP files could be downsized to 12 to match the low light performance of the D3S.

 

[recap]

While i regret being unable to share the files. After shooting under the controlled lighting conditions of a studio. The D800E does not beat either the Hasselblad H3/4D-31 or the Phase One P30/P30+ series - both which have a slightly lower resolution of 31.6MP and a 4:3 aspect ratio. So technically speaking if we crop the medium format image, its 28MP vs 36MP.

the medium format files just have much more detail at a per pixel level, much more micro contrast, as well as greater dynamic range along with the ultimate in skin tones.

 

[UncleFai]

While i regret being unable to share the files. After shooting under the controlled lighting conditions of a studio. The D800E does not beat either the Hasselblad H3/4D-31 or the Phase One P30/P30+ series - both which have a slightly lower resolution of 31.6MP and a 4:3 aspect ratio. So technically speaking if we crop the medium format image, its 28MP vs 36MP.

the medium format files just have much more detail at a per pixel level, much more micro contrast, as well as greater dynamic range along with the ultimate in skin tones.

Is it 10 times better? Coz the H3 and PhaseOne cost nearly 10 times more. And did you compare high ISO?

 

[recap]

Is it 10 times better? Coz the H3 and PhaseOne cost nearly 10 times more. And did you compare high ISO?

they are very different products made for very different markets. one is an easy all around shooting system that you can use hand held in almost all light conditions. the other one is best optimized when you can use it on a rock solid tripod, with the best technique or under a controlled lighting situation. In terms of pure image quality at their best, the medium format system still wins hands down. Don't forget the excellent accurate colors that are necessary for product, truly outstanding dynamic range, 16 bit raw files and the different "look" that a bigger sensor camera yields.

its also sort of not fair to compare high iso, as they are systems made with very different purposes in mind. especially the higher end medium format systems have no microlenses to aid in concentrating light. but on the other hand - they don't suffer from color fringing when tilt/shift is used. The H4D-50 only goes to ISO 200 officially on the sensor, anything else higher than that is just merely gain applied within the digital back itself.

the H3 as of today, is quite "cheap" - probably around 10k for the body alone, and a D800E at retail is around 5k. So its not a 10x price wise comparison. This is, the first gen H3D, not the H3Dii. Ultimately, the D800/E sensor is really a D7k sensor that has been scaled up in its physical size by 2.25x or thereabouts and while it is a GREAT sensor for the flexibility of the breadth of its shooting abilities, it does not come close to the ultimate quality on a medium format digital system.

So basically its a image quality vs shooting flexibility/adaptability thing. horses for courses. different tools for different jobs.

 

[recap]

Anyway, I had the chance to go shoot my classic 135 DC Nikon lens yesterday. This lens is really interesting. Everyone tells me since Day 1 that it is "sharp sharp sharp" but the truth is that for my case, its a pretty mixed bag. You'll need really good light to extract the qualities of this unique lens.

At f/2.0, the contrast is low, significantly lower than say the 85/1.4G. Plus it has a boatload of CA even under subdued lighting conditions - no sun, no clouds, setting light! I did get some shots that had a good amount of detail. But for the most part, its rendering is much more "classic" in nature so more suitable for portraits in the long run.

Comparing it in the studio stopped down, versus the 85G stopped down, there is a distinct different in detail rendering, sharpness and contrast between the lenses.

The classic "glow" when the Defocus Control feature is used. Push it too far and the lens becomes by default a soft focus lens.

Stopped down, its still acceptable in its more classic rendering performance.

And of course, you buy this lens for its beautiful bokeh - though I am told there are only 30k+ copies of this lens in global circulation, so it wasn't a stellar seller. Hopefully I'll get the chance to test it outdoors at a portrait level soon enough.

This is such a terrible picture aesthetically speaking, but at least you can tell its rendering.

Color remains great, even at ISO 4000 and with this old school lens design shot wide open.

 

[recap]

I recommend shooting the 135/2 lens at at least a shutter speed of 1/160s or 1/200s, because it does not have stabilization, and the demands of the 36MP reveal any mistake in focusing or hand holding like a hot knife through butter.

Very messy grassy background, so at f/2.8 here, not so fantastic.

Air Con grilles are usually good test subjects for moire, but because this lens cannot deliver peak resolution to the sensor. None present here.

Straight out of the camera - some contrast and vibrance added:

Very classic rendering:

As usual, you can right click to view through to the image to see the original files, I uploaded 6MP ones for these shots.

 

[recap]

Is it 10 times better? Coz the H3 and PhaseOne cost nearly 10 times more. And did you compare high ISO?

Also, regarding high ISO, it really depends. While I do show some examples of shooting at ISO 6400 here in this thread. Most of my work is below ISO 400. I've shot weddings hand held with the Hasselblad H4D-50, and can just barely scratch it through at f/2.2 @ 1/90s.

Likewise, as I shoot Leica for my other stuff, the camera is pure crap when it comes to high ISO - so I try my best not to go beyond 320, and pair it with the finest lenes in order to nail the shot.

This one was taken with the Leica Summilux-M 21/1.4 ASPH with the M9 at ISO 320 in a place lighted up only by candles. Its very nice to have ISO 6400 and a f/2.8 constant aperture zoom lens. But ultimately, I'm more concerned with what hangs on the wall, rather than the purchase decision.

 

[atvinyl]

A couple of D800E shots with a simple Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G today...

 

[tankahn]

Beautiful and timeless pictures you have there. I was leery of getting one, this lens changed hands in second hand shops so often back in film days. I better start looking for a good one.

Anyway, I had the chance to go shoot my classic 135 DC Nikon lens yesterday. This lens is really interesting. Everyone tells me since Day 1 that it is "sharp sharp sharp" but the truth is that for my case, its a pretty mixed bag. You'll need really good light to extract the qualities of this unique lens.

 

[recap]

I got mine new from a fellow CSer. Not that many going around anymore. I am told that Nikon only produces this lens in one batch once a year now, since demand for it is very low.

After shooting some portraits extensively with the 85/1.4G lens, I have to say that I PREFER the look the soft, lesser contrast, more background blur 135/2.0 as a much more suitable lens for portrait work on the D800/E.

 

[Zenten]

Is it 10 times better? Coz the H3 and PhaseOne cost nearly 10 times more. And did you compare high ISO?

....... I don't have the D800 yet but you can always tell a photo taken with a MF apart from another with a 35mm format

 

[LexuS79]

May i know All the photo is edited photo or original? Why no moire at all

 

[crazypaladin]

In the real world context, it's quite had to get moire...

 

[atvinyl]

May i know All the photo is edited photo or original? Why no moire at all

Not edited. No moire yet.

I do see it sometimes on the computer when zoomed out to a small image size or when viewed on the backscreen of the cam, but it will be gone when viewed at normal size. This doesn't count as a problem right? And is this unique to the D800E or is it the same for all cameras?

This is how I decide to go for the E:
1. EVERY single photo i take will in theory be sharper than the D800
2. Only one or two may give me problems with the moire. In that case the new Adobe CS6 could try to fix it. In the worst case, i will either just live with the one or two photos with moire, or I delete that one or two photos and still have 99% of my photos sharper.

That is assuming the cost of the E is not an issue. If it is, I think I will be just as happy with the D800 because the additional sharpness of the D800E will not be apparent unless you want to blow the images up big or do aggressive cropping all the time. I think aggressive cropping may be more common. In which case it is good value right? You can get a 500 mm shot from a 300 mm lens etc etc

 

[recap]

May i know All the photo is edited photo or original? Why no moire at all

Badly put, I've been shooting with cameras without AA filters for a long time now. The whole "moire" thing is seriously overblown. Its like this mythical, mystical beast that exists but shows its head once in a blue moon. I've done 3600+ frames on my D800E thus far in all most shooting situations - landscapes, cityscapes, portraits, studio fashion, some sports, street, one wedding, some product stuff, etc.

Guess what. 1 frame has moire on some air conditioner grilles, which are 100x96 pixels on a 36 megapixel file. Even if I printed the file natively, the dithering process of the typical inkjet will render it moot. For the 10% increase in price to get what seems like a 10-20% increase in detail rendering at the per pixel level. I will take it.

 

[Zenten]

...... the D800E has an AA filter .......... and another filter to "counter" the AA filter ................. that's probably why it costs 10% more. If Nikon had taken away the AA filter at the start, then it probably would have been priced lower than the D800 ......LPPL .......

 

[atvinyl]

Would love to see images with moire if anyone manages to take them

 

[natasastra]

Badly put, I've been shooting with cameras without AA filters for a long time now. The whole "moire" thing is seriously overblown. Its like this mythical, mystical beast that exists but shows its head once in a blue moon. I've done 3600+ frames on my D800E thus far in all most shooting situations - landscapes, cityscapes, portraits, studio fashion, some sports, street, one wedding, some product stuff, etc.

Guess what. 1 frame has moire on some air conditioner grilles, which are 100x96 pixels on a 36 megapixel file. Even if I printed the file natively, the dithering process of the typical inkjet will render it moot. For the 10% increase in price to get what seems like a 10-20% increase in detail rendering at the per pixel level. I will take it.

I saw a demon few days ago at Funan IT Mall. I hope it is just a mythical, mystical beast...

 

[Achim Reh]

Agree totally with recap, I was only able to "produce" some moire with the D800E while shooting very high resolution test sheets . Moire was clearly visible on test fields with geometrical pattern pattern smaller than 200lp/mm . So, that was my experience so far , no problem in the real world . Below a ultra high resolution test , enlarged to 400% ...there are some strange pattern, in fact very similar to the my Ricoh GXR with M module ( no AA filter as well) under the same condition , but this you probably never have in the real world .

[/url] moireD800E by AchimReh, on Flickr[/IMG]