Thinking about getting a d800

[hakka]

I've been thinking about upgrading to a d800 and nikkor 14-24 with the lee sw150 system. I have a few concerns about the lee system though.

I'm currently using a d7000 and nikkor 10-24, along with the lee filter system. For most of my seascape shots i'll have maybe a 0.9 gnd on the sky, and one or two nd filters from 0.6 to 1.2.

The sw150 flters are not available in a 1.2, 0.9 is the strongest. The holder also has only 2 slots, my current holder has 3. I'm not sure if its possible to add a 3rd slot to the holder and zoom the lens in a bit to avoid vignetting. I'm not sure if this would even work due to the way the filters sit out in front of the lens allowing light in from the sides.

So at the moment i can go up to 8 stops of nds if needed (also have big stopper but i can do without that), with the sw150 i would be limited to 3 stops. The d800 can do iso50 so i can get one stop back with that, and as i understand it i will be able to stop down the aperture more before diffraction kicks in due to the larger sensor. I'm not how big the difference will be with this though, currently i try not to go past f11.

I just wanted to get some opinions from d800 owners, particularly anyone that also has the 14-24 and sw150. I'm also not sure if its worth the extra money to get the d800e over the d800.

Thanks.

[arthurking83]

For landscape shots, I wouldn't worry too much about diffraction.

The difference in image detail between f/16 and f/22 is insignificant enough not to warrant a mention.

ie. if you're looking for it, yes you will see the difference. But the reality is that if it's an issue, then you're looking at pixels, and not the image in it's entirety.

If your concern was for macro photography, where image detail is the point of the exercise, then it makes sense to worry about diffraction. But not for landscape photography.

FWIW: I'm going to end up getting the 16-35 as my primary UWA lens, and maybe the Sigma 12-24 for r-e-a-l-l-y wide shots, or maybe the Samyang 14mm prime or even the Nikon 14-24(if funds allow for it one day). But my primary concern is the ability to use filters easily .. not so much just getting as much into the shot as possible.
My thinking is that usually where I want to go really wide is in tight confinements and usually those situations don't require filtering ... for landscapes the extra 2mm between 14 and 16mm maybe isn't so important.

[Feg]

I got the 800E over the 800.I figured you might as well go for the sharpest image available from the two.I shoot birds a lot with fine feather detail and havent had any problems with moire but did notice it on a horizontal book in a wide shot I took at home.Can't help with the lenses but personally I'd go for the 16-35.I use the 17-35 and would love to get the 16-35.Thats my two cents worth.

[RRRoger]

The D800 has so many adjustment available including EV that I very rarely see any need for a filter especially on my 14-24.
If I did need a filter I would use my 17-35 that I kept when I sent the 16-35 back because I use f/2.8 much more than VR.

[hakka]

Thanks for the feedback, decided to pull the trigger on a D800E and 14-24 f 2.8.

I just ordered the Lee SW150 system with 0.6 hard, 0.9 hard, 0.9 soft and 0.9 ND. I found some hitech NDs that suit the sw150, they range from 1 stop to 10 stops so if I need more than the lee 0.9 i'll grab one of those, also ordered the mb-d12 grip and a bunch of CF cards.

I'll go for a drive to melbourne in the next few days and see what sort of deal I can find on the cam and lens.

I really hope all this fits in my camera bag that I got last week (lowepro magnum 200aw).

[ricktas]

The D800 has so many adjustment available including EV that I very rarely see any need for a filter especially on my 14-24.
If I did need a filter I would use my 17-35 that I kept when I sent the 16-35 back because I use f/2.8 much more than VR.

HUH? Do you shoot landscapes at all? Use of graduated filters is something landscapers undertake quite a bit. Yes you can take photos without them, but as the dynamic range of the D800/e is around 14 stops, and the human eye is estimated to be around 25 stops, there is still a long way to go before things like graduated filters may not be needed by the photographer.

The 14-24 has the added issue of needing the specialised holder due to its bulbous front element. Which makes it a rather costly exercise to get filters for it. But the fact that Lee etc have done the work to create these filters means that even they believe there is a decent market for them.

So I complete disagree with your view on the D800 not needing filters.

[RRRoger]

[QUOTE=

I'll go for a drive to melbourne in the next few days and see what sort of deal I can find on the cam and lens.

I really hope all this fits in my camera bag that I got last week (lowepro magnum 200aw). QUOTE<<<


No problem. That is the expandable one with the motorized wheels isn't it?
There is no limit to NAS. If I had the money, I would need to hire a caddy to carry all the stuff I would buy.

[arthurking83]

The D800 has so many adjustment available including EV that I very rarely see any need for a filter especially on my 14-24.
.....

Yeah, as Rick said.

I can't see how this is a relevant point of discussion.
Using exposure compensation in camera has nothing to do with either dynamic range, nor the use of neutral density filters to effect the correct shutter speed or aperture value.

Just because you have no need for a filter on your 14-24, doesn't mean that the need for their use is unnecessary.

And FWIW, I don't know of any DSLR that doesn't have Ev compensation as a feature, so how is the D800's feature set any different to any other DSLR.
The OP's D7000 is just as capable in its Ev configuration feature set as is the D800, so the topic is irrelevant.


If the D800 has some special feature compared to other DSLRs that you know of, please let us know what it is.

[RRRoger]

And FWIW, I don't know of any DSLR that doesn't have Ev compensation as a feature, so how is the D800's feature set any different to any other DSLR.
The OP's D7000 is just as capable in its Ev configuration feature set as is the D800, so the topic is irrelevant.
If the D800 has some special feature compared to other DSLRs that you know of, please let us know what it is.QUOTE<<<

To start with the D7000 does not have an AF-ON button to me that is an important "feature".
The D800 features a 36MP FX Sensor that has multiple capabilities above those of the D7000.
51Pt AF, faster processor, many more menu items bigger ISO range, etc., etc. etc.
Just Google and you will find many more.

But, let's not get in a pissing match!
I concede that the the D7000 is an exceptional camera, "good enough" for you and most photographers.
I also concede that many photographers make better use of filters than I do.
Being an Event Photographer I try to satisfy 99.9% of my customers that want me to "capture the moment" not produce "Art".
Perhaps when done phasing out my business that can change. Only then would I start experimenting with filters again.
In the mean time adjusting my D800 settings is enough for my work.

[ricktas]

The OP's D7000 is just as capable in its Ev configuration feature set as is the D800, so the topic is irrelevant.

Ummm yes, but it was YOU who raised the EV configuration as being the reason for not needing filters. So I am confused, do you think it is relevant or irrelevant in relation to the OP's questions?

[hakka]

D7000 buttons are assignable, so it does have af-on.

[zollo]

I have a lot of experience with using the 14-24 with filters. I use http://lucroit.com filters holders with hitech 165 mm filters. They are very expensive, very big and a pita, but, the 14-24 is worth it.

You will have some troubles depending on what you want to shoot, in my experience here are some : - strong wind will cause camera shake, because of the size of the filters - stacking filters is not a good idea, I get all sorts of internal lens reflections - at 14 the lens is so wide, that nd filters vignette very heavily on the edges, and you will even get uneven exposure (the middle of the lens gathers more light than the edges).

In some ways I agree with an above poster that you don't need filters quite as much as some will tell you. I will happily use exposure blended images instead of filters with the 14-24. There are also times during a day that will contains much less than 14 stops of contrasting light.

Anyway, have fun.

The d800 will work very well with 14-24

[AmPhot]

I'm very close to getting a D800. Now is a good time as Nikon has a promotion on where you can trade in any camera and get $300 off the price.

[RRRoger]

Prices are coming down on the D600 too.

I see myself getting in a lot of trouble with this topic even though I intended to be helpful, so I am trying to unsubscribe

[I @ M]

But, let's not get in a pissing match!

Totally concur.

Being an Event Photographer I try to satisfy 99.9% of my customers that want me to "capture the moment" not produce "Art".

So how did the other customer that wasn't satisfied react?

[arthurking83]

......

I see myself getting in a lot of trouble with this topic even though I intended to be helpful, so ......

I'm a bit unsure of your grasp of the points raised in the thread Roger!!

The (main)topic of discussion is about the relevance and ease of use of filters on the rather large 14-24mm lens, which you added too was about this point.

The feature set of the D800 hasn't really come up as a question(yet?.. or did I miss something?)

I'm fully aware of the differences in features between most Nikon bodies, and those features you mention have no significance nor relevance to the topic of filtration with the 14-24 lens.

Hakka: I'd say considering that the vast majority of the shots you seem to concentrate on, go for the E model, but don't expect a great deal more image oomph(or whatever you want to call it) just because of the difference in low pass filtration between the two cameras.
My reasoning for going with the D800E was simple... less work in post production for most of the types of photos I have a preference for.

That is(quite simple) the need for sharpening is reduced with the D800E during PP... BUT!! if you do find yourself capturing too much detail, then the opposite is true and you may have to do more PP work in trying to remove moire if it's present in the image.
For landscapes, this is very rare, but you may find it manifests itself in high frequency repeated patterns such as fences, or something like flyscreens or window grilles on bulidings(if you also do that kind of stuff).

If I were a portrait photographer or fashion photographer, I'd go the other way and get the D800(no E) because the likelyhood of moire is higher on clothing and other material with intricate detail.

From the tests I've done with the many sample images available for comparison, I've found that the difference in detail between the two cameras was quite simple and mild in it's application.
To get a D800 image with the same image detail quality(where the detail was actually captured),as with the D800E image set to zero sharpening, the D800 file required a very mild(insignificant) USM step of about 10, 5, 5 using CaptureNX2. Setting ViewNX2 with a sharpening step of 1(out of 10) produces a more sharpened looking image from the D800 file.
But also note about this detail too: it has to be said that in the grand scheme of things it's pretty much insignificant in 99.99999% of images, unless the images are for scientific purposes.
The difference is something like reading the 1 point font that is the fine print on a legal contract from 100 meters away captured with a 14mm lens(or close to this level of insane detail rendering).

I must have downloaded about 50 images or so from various sources, and only in one image have I noticed that the D800E rendered a bit more detail where the D800 missed some(Rob Galbraith's first couple of sample images).

If you were seriously into macro, or producing detail images for forensic purposes, then the slightly greater power of resolving you would see from the E makes sense.

For me like I already said .. it simply means no added sharpening to my PP process now .... 1 less step to do.
And the only reason I actually got the E was that it was in stock. Had it not been in stock, and only the D800 been in, I'd have happily got the standard D800 too, with $300 more to spend on another lens or filter or two.

[hakka]

Just had a read of Thom Hogans review.

"Okay, so what about the AA (D800) or lack of an AA (D800E)? Does that make a difference. At f/8 and above, not really. Diffraction is a worse sin than anti-aliasing, at least when you use the "visible" criteria. Technically, I measure a bit more resolution on the E than the non-E in these mid-range diffracted apertures. But looking at pixel views of images, the diffraction kills the edge acuity that the E normally provides you. I'm not convinced there's enough gain to warrant the difference if you're shooting at f/5.6 or above all the time. That shouldn't surprise anyone, considering that I concluded the same thing with a D3x (24mp) with and without an AA filter. In that case, the "without" was optical glass, with no fuzz/defuzz system like the D800E has."

The only time i'm below f8 is for milky way shots (and startrails but i'll mostly use my d7000s for those).

[arthurking83]

Hopefully this coming weekend I'll get an opportunity to compare the D800 against the D800E.

Some time next week I can post an image or two so that you can visualise any differences between the two.

At this stage tho, have the E allocated as the preferred camera to get, but don't sweat on it.(as I've already recommended). If the E is going to force you to wait, or cost a huge premium, then just get the non E model as you will get as much satisfaction from either.

[hakka]

At this stage tho, have the E allocated as the preferred camera to get, but don't sweat on it.(as I've already recommended). If the E is going to force you to wait, or cost a huge premium, then just get the non E model as you will get as much satisfaction from either.

Going to melbourne tomorrow, I emailed a guy from Michaels in elizabeth st and he's given me a very good price on the E, but they don't have any in stock at the moment (not sure about the non E, I didn't ask). So I can wait for the E or possibly grab the non E tomorrow (and put the difference towards the grip). I'm not sure when I'll get a chance to go to melbourne again, might be a while. I suppose I could get them to post it to me when they get it, although they haven't given me an ETA.

[arthurking83]

If you're coming to Melb also try Vanbar too .. in Fitzroy now(and parking is much much easier there than in the CBD).
Can't remember the exact address, but a search will find them for 'ya.

Their atmosphere is nicer than Michaels and most of the staff have more knowledge.

I got mine there, and they had a few in stock two or three weeks back.

This isn't a plug for Vanbar by any means, as I think they're overpriced, but considering the overheads and their service, I'm fine with that, and above all else, I wanted a locally sourced D800 as a priority .. considering this camera's reputation

To save a couple of hundred dollars on a multi thousand dollar item that will get used heavily, is an exercise in lunacy(IMO).

I don't know of any other stores that carry the D800/E in stock, at reasonable pricing.