D800e or D4 (1 Viewer)

Duke Leto · Apr 12, 2013

Simple question if you had the choice which would you buy? Save money on the 800e get a superb sensor and slower frame rate or the D4 with excellent noise management higher frame rate and bomb proof build.

Keen to hear from owners of either and why they made a decision

Thanks

Helios · Apr 12, 2013

I you want to enter photography competitions these days, you really need the D800. The Kowa one here and the British Birds one are now both demanding that the largest dimension is 2600 pixels, and with my two 12MP cameras, this is very difficult to achieve. Infact there's hardly any of my images posted here that can meet this requirement as it allows no space for the bird to move around into.

My personal choice would be the D4 or D3s bacause I have a fast style. I would use that alongside a DX sensor camera.

ericbowles · Apr 13, 2013

I have the D800E. It's a wonderful camera with great detail. The detail provides increased ability to crop as well as better editing or larger prints.

I see the frame rate as a possible disadvantage if you shoot a lot of bursts. If your style is more instant of action, it won't matter as much. You can still fire off four frames per second with the D800/E.

The AF system on the D4 is a little better. I have not tested it, but Nat Geo photographer Dan Cox has a blog post that reported a pretty good test. The difference was small and the D800 was still very good.
http://www.naturalexposures.com/corkboard/testing-the-nikon-d4-d800-d600-in-predictive-auto-focus/

The D800 would be preferred over the D800E if you shoot video. Moire is more of a problem with video sized compression, and hard to remove. For stills, I find moire is a non-issue.

I'd choose the D4 for sports, weddings, reportage, and maybe portraits. I like the D800E for birding because of incredible feather detail. And the D800E would be better for macro/close ups and landscapes.

There have been some recent discounts on the D800. With a lower price, you can make the case for a D800 since the difference in image quality is very small.

RMWD · Apr 14, 2013

Hi Steve, I have the D800. I agree with Eric. Only addition is that that unless you shoot above iso 6400 when compared at the same output size the D800/e has similar high iso performance to the D4. You will also loose a lot of reach with a D4 unless always using TC's in which case any light advantage you might have is lost.

Duke Leto · Apr 14, 2013

RMWD said:
You will also loose a lot of reach with a D4 unless always using TC's in which case any light advantage you might have is lost.

Both are FX why would I be compromised on the D4, I don't reach for TC's with my D700 unless absolutely necessary?

Pasquier · Apr 14, 2013

I have neither, but the times I've had the opportunity to use the D4 have left me highly impressed - the IQ is superb and it handles well - the AF is blazingly fast - and there are times when you're glad to have the high frame rate.
If you really need DX reach, I would rather go for a dedicated DX body like the D7100, which I can highly recommend.

mpe · Apr 15, 2013

The D4. D800 can't compete in high-iso noise performance (yes, you can often down sample to mask the noise and then it looks good, but we want the reach for birding and ability to crop so a per-pixel noise is very important for us).

However, don't underestimate the cheap D600. The sensor is superb - it hash both reach (resolution) and high-iso performance. The only things you give up by going that route is a bit of build quality and (and number of AF points which I found is not an issue).

I would rate current Nikon offerings as:

D4 > D600 > D800

The funny thing is that the D600 offers extra res and DR even over the D4.

Pasquier · Apr 15, 2013

The D600 is indeed an underrated camera with very good IQ.

Rob Chace · Apr 15, 2013

Save the extra & go for the D4. Everything you could ever want in a wildlife camera. I have not suffered with lack of reach by going fx.

MarkEvan · Apr 28, 2013

mpe said:
The D4. D800 can't compete in high-iso noise performance (yes, you can often down sample to mask the noise and then it looks good, but we want the reach for birding and ability to crop so a per-pixel noise is very important for us).

However, don't underestimate the cheap D600. The sensor is superb - it hash both reach (resolution) and high-iso performance. The only things you give up by going that route is a bit of build quality and (and number of AF points which I found is not an issue).

I would rate current Nikon offerings as:

D4 > D600 > D800

The funny thing is that the D600 offers extra res and DR even over the D4.

For me that better build quality, improved DR over the D600 and a slightly better AF along with a body that sits better in the hand due to its larger size would mean....

D4 > D800 > D600

In the end it's all about what would be best for each individual.

As for the D4/D800 question, that would depend on what I primarily used the camera for and how much money I had. If we are talking solely wildlife then the D4 would probably pip the D800 due to the better AF and high ISO performance. However I don't think the ability to crop in to such a great degree and yet keep a good amount of IQ should be sniffed at.

RMWD · Jun 29, 2013

Duke Leto said:
Both are FX why would I be compromised on the D4, I don't reach for TC's with my D700 unless absolutely necessary?

Steve,
missed the follow up on this thread and spotted it today while reviewing D4 versus D800/E

To answer your question. The cropability of the D800 gives more effective reach. Or more pixels on the bird. A TC would equalise that but at a stop disadvantage.

BTW did you get a D4. If so how has it been for you?

Guidenet · Jul 2, 2013

Field Craft trumps Gear

MarkEvan said:
For me that better build quality, improved DR over the D600 and a slightly better AF along with a body that sits better in the hand due to its larger size would mean....

D4 > D800 > D600

The D600 is a nice camera, but it's a plastic D7000 with an FX sensor and the larger pentaprism. It also doesn't have the level of tactile controls the more professional grade models have or the much heavier duty build. It's a good inexpensive full frame though for many people.

My little comparison would be D800/E > D4 > D600. I'm willing to give up some framerates in trade for the pixel density. As far as how they are rated by DXO, it's, D800E, D800, D600 and then the D4 in sixth. Personally, I can't tell the difference between the D800 and D800E even at 100% crops.

I am a full time photographer for a living and like my cameras to have the controls in all the same exact places. I detest when Nikon upgades a model and moves a button or gets rid of it. My passion is Florida Wading Birds and their wetland habitat which I've spent the last few years documenting with both with images of the birds and the wetlands along with journal entrys on the conditions of my various patches.

My favorite two cameras for birding is my D800 and my D3S. I sometimes use one of my D700 models as well. I'm just about am no longer considering DX. If there's going to be a crop, I want to do that crop.

Good field craft and getting close trumps focal length all day here in the Florida wetlands. I just about no longer carry my 500 f/4 because of the size, my age, and my disabilities. I've pretty much replaced it with the new 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 and my 300 f/2.8 VR with and without various converters. For close work, a trusty 80-200 f/2.8 AFD 2 ring does a great job.

Take care, guys.

Frogfish · Jul 3, 2013

I like and agree with pretty much everything Craig said above.

I use the D800E and a 300/2.8 VRII with TCs. Lighter and yet still has the reach and is extremely sharp (even with the TCs) than a 500/600.

I have a D800E (had the D800 for a year) and a D600. The lack of a dedicated AF-on button on the D600 bugs me (even though I have remapped the buttons to give me one) though I've found the AF to be very good and hardly inferior to the D800/E since I also use that in 9 AF point mode.

Cropability with the D800/E is huge, especially important when shooting very small birds and the main reason I eventually benched my idea to sell the D600 for a D3s/D4 (I may still pick up a D3 for those rare moments I need high fps without cropability). In 1.2 mode with the D800/E you get 5.5 fps - not too awful.

jasonBKK · Aug 24, 2013

The D700 was fine and I would have upgraded to the D800 but when the spec was announced and the D800 had similar ISO to the then 4 year D700 I had to go for the D4. Which is a shame as its double the price but I'm shooting birds and the only thing I need is the low light capability.
Usually I shoot with TCs from a pop-up hide in rain forests. The Pittas i've been photographing are usually found hopping around the jungle floor in dark undergrowth and unless I use flash I need the best ISO I can get.
I'm using Wimberley II, Gitzo GT5541LS and a 500mm f4.
Aperture priority, VR Off with a cable release and Mirror-up.

ericbowles · Aug 24, 2013

DxOMark and other sources have rated the D800 low light capability better than the D700. The AF system is also rated better.

The larger number of small pixels mean that noise associated with smaller pixels is more than overcome by the large number of pixels. If you print or view both camera's images at the same output size, the D800 has much less noise.

Another big positive is dynamic range, but if you are shooting at high ISO levels you are loosing much of the dynamic range of any camera. DxOMark still rates the dynamic range of the D800 as better than the D700.

Duke Leto · Aug 24, 2013

Helios said:
I you want to enter photography competitions these days, you really need the D800. The Kowa one here and the British Birds one are now both demanding that the largest dimension is 2600 pixels, and with my two 12MP cameras, this is very difficult to achieve. Infact there's hardly any of my images posted here that can meet this requirement as it allows no space for the bird to move around into.

My personal choice would be the D4 or D3s bacause I have a fast style. I would use that alongside a DX sensor camera.

Phychic Helios. My first day out with it and I came 6th in the Kowa comp!!

Glad I bought it, it's surpassed my expectations and don't miss the lower FPS rate. Currently with a macro lens, I'm astounded by the detail, web images don't due it justice. Butterflies / Dragonflies etc in full frame are so detailed.
I've also switched to processing in NX2, seems that you can extract more from the NEF files than I could with photoshop. NX2 offers done very nice touches.
Not played with video yet. Only downside as with all newer models. Why do Nikon have to change batteries. I've 3 EL4's for my D700 and D300 but have 3 others for the D800 (and less battery life)

Helios · Aug 25, 2013

Congratulations Steve! My Red-Footed Falcon shots were too small to enter this sort of competitions. Infact I would say that any flight shot with a 12MP camera would be very difficult to achieve at 2600 pixels as your framing would almost have to be exact. To be honest though, photo competitions are definitely not my strong point, whether I have a 36MP camera or not.

Glad your enjoying your new camera. Given a choice though I would still go with the D4, not that I can afford either at the moment.

pe'rigin · Aug 27, 2013

Well done Steve,

Instead of NX2, can your budget stretch to Lightroom? Photoshop seemed to going off on a tangent now.

The only fault I've noticed with the D800, in harsh sunlight it does introduce an element of noise, not a problem easily solved and probably not noticeable on many monitors.

The FPS speed you won't notice, if you nail it, you'll get a pin sharp image full of detail and colour. If you're into insects photographed in a studio, then you'll get outstanding results.

The draw-back is the processing of files, but hey, that's what you do on winter nights.

ericbowles · Aug 27, 2013

Capture NX2 was largely designed by Nik Software. Nikon changed direction and did not want to fund the next version which woul drequire a complete rework of technology, so Capture may have a limited life. But it is a very good editor and seamlessly nicely integrates Color Efex 3.0 (not 4.0). Capture is a RAW converter designed specifically for Nikon, so it retains the camera settings, allows you to change those settings during post processing, and includes some proprietary capabilities such as Active D-Lighting and picture controls. For some purposes the WB function is very effective.

As an editor, it edits the pixels you have. The key functions are control points and selective editing for most edits. It's like combining the selection functions from Nik with a simplified version of Photoshop layers. And the edits are retained as essentially a list of steps (like Lightroom) but embedded in the file (so no XMP). The NEF file also includes a basic or medium JPEG that can be extracted and used for display or even web posting and printing.

The D800 has greater dynamic range than pretty much any camera on the market. If you are getting noise in scenes with wide dynamic range, its being created outside the camera. One source is post processing settings - they can be very different for a D800 than other smaller files like a D3 or D700.

It's a bit out of context here, but with Photoshop moving to the cloud, I find it quite possible LR could be next to move to a subscription model. It's an organizational strategy and the products will follow unless there is truly a compelling reason to do otherwise.

Nik is now owned by Google, and is likely to head further from Capture.

D800e or D4 (1 Viewer)

Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread