D800 is here..

[reaction]

One thing about the D800E and AA, you may be able to take out moire easily in RAW files, but doing the same for video will probably be a PITA if not impossible. I think that's why Nikon is pushing people to go D800 unless they know what they're doing.

[arthurking83]

(I'm talking Nikon Aus here)
But back in the early days of D700, Nikon Aus had it initially listed for something like $4K initially, and it was about $5K with the 24-120 f/3.5-5.6 VR lens back then.. not the newer constant f/4 lens that have now.
This was when the Aussie dollar was struggling to achieve US0.70c to our dollar, so it was harder for them to maintain a level of parity.. for sure.. but even taking that into account, you could get an import at US$3k, + 300GST, and $50 shipping landed here in Aus!! Nikon Aus's pricing policy simply didn't add up .. and surely they are getting it cheaper than the HK based shops!(not wholesalers in HK, but the camera shops).

Completely unacceptable, as it reeked of price gouging.

About 6 months after the camera became available for actual sale(which was months after announcement), prices dropped significantly, where my cousin(who recently got his D800 also) purchased his D700 for $2400, from a local based grey importer.

I can't see the D800 dropping in price too far from the RRP of US$3K even in the long term as it's already a pretty good price in relative terms compared to the rest of the world.
But it will drop! .... once the excitement has abated a bit as those who were desperate to get theirs, prices will probably stabilise at the US$2500-2400 mark in the long term, as has happened in the past.

happens with all Nikon gear.. lenses that initially started at $2200, now have street prices of $1700.. etc, etc.. ad infinitum .

Are you prepared to wait until the prices drop by this expected $500?

It's a matter of personal priority whether you do or don't. Having the extra features that the D800 offers over your current camera may be worth $500.
I've been waiting for ever and a day for a proper Nikon body with decent video features, and now it's come.
I've had a few video based projects running amok in my head for well over a year now, and in a sense time is running out(my elderly mother who may not survive more than another year).

Family want video of mum, for posterity, and I want to do it as best as I can .. and can afford.
The $500 price premium is not an issue for me, as it wasn't when I got my D300 four and a bit years back.

My current issue is the $2K shortfall I have for a D800, but in a few months, I should be set to go(hopefully), and I'm happy to wait and more so, to see if the E model's moire issue is going to be a long term problem.

[Chris G]

Personally I think its just rude for some retailers to be charging that 3.8 to 4k+ price and being advertising at 6FPS Oo

Honestly I was excepting the D800 to be around 4-5k as it was but when I seen it for that of 3.4k non grey and still with a 2 year Aust warranty , I was all over that in a flash lol

I agree though with the E model and the video without a AA filter will be interesting to see how that is handled in the real world. But from what I've seen from a modded version of a 5Dmk II or III with the AA filter removed it did produce a much sharper HD video..

[rodw]

Personally I think its just rude for some retailers to be charging that 3.8 to 4k+ price and being advertising at 6FPS Oo

Honestly I was excepting the D800 to be around 4-5k as it was but when I seen it for that of 3.4k non grey and still with a 2 year Aust warranty , I was all over that in a flash lol

I agree though with the E model and the video without a AA filter will be interesting to see how that is handled in the real world. But from what I've seen from a modded version of a 5Dmk II or III with the AA filter removed it did produce a much sharper HD video..

I really don't think history is all that relevant when the D800 is creating a new market niche where supply vastly exceeds damand and the competitor from Canon is priced higher. Nikon originally quoted a RRP on their .au web site but it has now gone. Official prices in other markets have been increased. The US is 10 times the size of the .au market and for this reason, the US prices are the cheapest in the world.

I happened to be down the Gold Coast today and had a few spare minutes at lunch time so I wandered into Teds Cameras. I was going to pick their brains about availability but before I did, I overheard one of their staff fielding a phone call about the same topic. I heard him say that all orders were being handled through Nikon for NPS members only and if you wanted to get one, you needed do put yourself on the NPS list and then explained that they needed an ABN and Nikon would ask for a body of work to establish eligibility because of the overwhelming demand for the D800. They had no interest in taking a deposit from the guy on the phone. I'm a body or two short of making the NPS cut, so I guess it might take some time before mine arrives.

So guys, if you think prices will fall in the next 12 months in the face of this demand without some other external factor that forces Nikon's hand while it has to refill the coffers after two terrible natural disasters, you must be dreaming!

[arthurking83]

I think people need to get a bit of perspective here too at some point.

Yeah, the D800 looks great and is good and etc, but Nikon didn't create the market niche that the D800 now has entered into!

Sony did that with their A900 and later A800 a few years back.

24Mp full frame cameras for less than the D800 is currently selling at .. back then!
And all that Nikon could dream up with that sensor, was the close to useless D3x(useless in that it wasn't readily or easily obtainable by the broader community).

That the D800 currently has the largest number of pixels is true, but if taken into real context, Nikon have not created a market segment here, or a niche.
It's niche or specific new market to us Nikon users only .. and about bloody time!

Sony created the market, Nikon have finally followed 3 years later!

I'm usually more prone to sing to the same tune of 'all hail to Nikon', but have been reluctant to do so for many years now.
Lets see what Sony have up their sleeve with this same sensor huh?
(although in saying that, they have been well known for not getting the best out of their own sensor's technology, as their customers have been able too .. ie. Pentax/Nikon with the 15Mp sensor, and Nikon with the 24Mp ff sensor).

I'm curious as to what Nikon (Aus) has listed for RRP on the D800?

[rodw]

I'm curious as to what Nikon (Aus) has listed for RRP on the D800?

On 15 Feb my dealer said in an email to me

[QUOTE=Camerapro]
"Thank you very much for your recent order with us for the Nikon D800.

We are excited to announce the pricing has officially been released on these by Nikon Australia.

The RRP has come in at $3899 incl GST, with our own pricing advertised at $3425 incl GST"
[QUOTE]

At that time the RRP quoted to me above was shown on the Nikon product listing for the D800. Today, the price has been removed from Nikon's web site. Probably in preparation for a price rise is my take on it.

Its not about who created the market but simply about Supply and demand for this camera.

[Redgum]

Agreed we will pay more for GST by 10%. Personally, I thought the Aussie pricing is not too bad compared with US pricing even when exchange rates are taken into account. Our street price is still below that in Japan and well under British and European prices.

All in all the $3400 I will pay is close to the US price after deductiong GST. It is unusual for the US and Aussie prices on any technology to be so close together which to me indicates that Nikon has decided it has to brice more fairly accross the globe. I guess that is one advantage from them taking over distribution directly in this country rather than going through a Distributor (which was Maxwells).

Just to clarify a couple of things, Rod. GST has nothing to do with pricing. The US has both federal and state taxes almost double those in Oz. Keep in mind that Nikon Australia is simply a local distributor and is in no way related to Nikon International other than by distribution contract. If the market was a little larger it would be great to see two distributors in Oz for Nikon and then we would see great local prices. Monopolies never serve the buyer.

[Xebadir]

Just to clarify a couple of things, Rod. GST has nothing to do with pricing. The US has both federal and state taxes almost double those in Oz. Keep in mind that Nikon Australia is simply a local distributor and is in no way related to Nikon International other than by distribution contract. If the market was a little larger it would be great to see two distributors in Oz for Nikon and then we would see great local prices. Monopolies never serve the buyer.

Given that Nikon USA as far as I am aware is a single distributor that makes absolutely no sense ? We get screwed in Australia for most things because:
1) Australians don't tend to complain and tend to put up with high prices without shopping with their feet - until the advent of online shopping this was near total.
2) Pan-global companies price things higher for what is perceived as a sucker market who want to make excuses for the level of demand as to the reasoning for the higher prices. It may have been true in the past, but we are as big as a number of European countries, and our demand levels thanks to our income are disproportionately high.

I am actually please to see for this camera that the price has been kept fairly close to the international level, but our retailers have high prices because of their own margins, and the margins of the middle man. Its true for nearly everything Australia - our prices are double or treble for most things compared to say the United states, and parts of Europe.

[rodw]

Nikon Australia is a wholly owned sales and service subsidiary (of the parent company) established in Sydney in 2006. Read Nikon's web site or conduct a company search.

As such, Nikon can decide the transfer price between its subsidiary and the parent in Japan. They need to ensure there is at least enough profit left in Australia to cover operational costs but they can choose to leave as much or as little in our country as they like by varying the prices and or other management charges levied on the subsidiary. And yes, they can choose the price they sell in this market to be whatever they like. The cost of doing business varies from country to country so prices do vary to account for this (and why my bookkeeper lives in India).

I think the good thing for consumers is that thee move from a 30% sales tax to a 10% GST has faded into the past and Nikon have adjusted prices downwards accordingly to address the impact of the global economy and channel more product through their official distribution channel so they have a greater understanding of the market size and dynamics.

[arthurking83]

Nikon Australia is a wholly owned sales and service subsidiary (of the parent company) established in Sydney in 2006. Read Nikon's web site or conduct a company search.

....

That's what I thought too.

I remember the transition from Maxwell's to Nikon Aus way back when.... and that they were wholly owned by Nikon Inc!

[Xebadir]

Interesting Comparison and Review.

[rodw]

Interesting Comparison and Review.

Thanks for that, I've been waiting for their 3rd D800 video and you found it for me!

[rodw]

Just got another email about my order

The good news is that given the shipment earlier this month, we have managed to fulfill a number of orders, which has in turn moved your order up in queue.

Based on the volume of bodies received so far, and given your position in queue, we are confident that we will be able to fulfill your order in the first half of May.

Nice to know some are arriving in the country and we are not forgotten about. Few more weeks won't hurt I guess!

[Chris G]

Just got another email about my order



Nice to know some are arriving in the country and we are not forgotten about. Few more weeks won't hurt I guess!

Haha nice one, mine says second half.. Here's to hoping before Sydney Vivid show lol.

Also Cheers for vid X

[Chris G]

Here's a interesting read regarding the D800e and moire, though to how accurate this is, its kinda mmm..

Link Here

Thought I'd share it anyway as I know some of you are interested in the D00e

[arthurking83]

Here's a interesting read regarding the D800e and moire, though to how accurate this is, its kinda mmm..

......

Luminous Landscape is a well respected photography related site, so it can be trusted as accurate.
Just be mindful tho, that this is his version of the camera and any lenses, others folks may find differing results in their testing and comparisons.

Interesting that he couldn't induce moire in any of his test shots, and I'm sure he's clever enough to have pulled out any article of fine grained clothing to test on.
LOL! I should give him my D70s to play with!

The one thing in LL's testing that I found to be curious, is his 'sharpening' test.
Yeah, you can sharpen an non filtered image as much as you can an image from a filtered camera, but the point is that you shoudl be able to sharpen the non filtered image MORE!!

The important operative word there is 'more'!!
He said it himself, that the theory is that you sharpen an unfiltered image more due to the effects of the AA filter .. yet he didn't' do this, or show any samples of the differences in IQ with different levels of sharpening applied.

My experience is that the ability to sharpen more in decreased as the size of the photosite on a sensor is decreasd.
That is, D70s images can be sharpened more aggressively than a D300's image can.
I barely use half the sharpening on D300 images that I used to use on D70s images.
It seemed to me that the more detail there was already in the image, the more haloing was produced with increasing sharpening levels.

The point is, can the D800 images be sharpened to the point that they look exactly as they do from the D800E(or close enough to it) to warrant the E model as theoretically unnecessary?


But this is kind'a good news .. if the filtering that Nikon have used in place of the standard AA filter can minimise moire in some way, then maybe the E is the version to go for.
That is, if moire is harder to induce that initially expected then if it does happen, it may happen only in very extreme instances and in very small subtle amounts.

It should be noted that there is a difference between removing the AA filter, and substituting another filter arrangement in it's place.
Most other manufacturers that have models without AA filter have simply chosen not to fit a filter full stop!
What Nikon have done tho, is to fit a filter, and then fit another filter to undo the effects of the first filter.
There may be a subsequent loss of some super fine detail, but the sample images in that LL article seems to follow conventional wisdom and the difference between E and standard D800's is what one would expect.

So far it looks good .. E model may be the way to go(even for Mongo and his appetite for finely detailed birds!).

[Chris G]

Yeah, you can sharpen an non filtered image as much as you can an image from a filtered camera, but the point is that you shoudl be able to sharpen the non filtered image MORE!!

Thats what I thought due the fact that there is suppose to be / is alot more detail within a AA filter removed camera.. I don't understand why it would be backwards or remain the same even if up or down scaling is used.

Though I'm pretty sure the moire will only show up on certain lenes aswell, more so on some, less on others with focal and everything else playing factor to effect the end result as the light passes through the lens onto the sensor.

[arthurking83]

OOH! I said that wrong .. sorry early morning dyslexia!

That was supposed to read a filtered image should allow the possibility to sharpen more than the non filtered image.

That is, you should be able to sharpen up a D800 image to match(or closely match) that of the D800E by using more USM on the D800 image.

Once you achieve a specific amount of detail, the sensor simply won't allow you to reveal more detail in the image.
(that's supposed to be the theory .. image detail is tied to pixel sizes and amounts for any given sensor type, design or manufacture).

The AA filter is simply a blurring filter. The blurring is to eliminate image detail artefacts that aren't really there. This happens with moire. Fine repetitive line detail is eventually rendered into a coloured pattern, as the lines get closer. The AA filter blurs the fine line detail a bit to eliminate or minimise the possibility of these coloured details that aren't there.
That blurring is supposed to be reversible with the use of USM, or other sharpening tools(eg. high pass sharpening).

I've seen it work, and not at different levels of success.

I'm hoping that DPR do a test session soon between the two D800's.
While their testing can be dubious sometimes .. I can't remember specifics .. they do have a reasonable set of base line testing methods that help to highlight differences between sensors and their strengths and weaknesses.
(have you seen DPR's test of the Sigma SD-1? .. good test and one to have a look at, and how well it performs against it's 'competitors')
I'm waiting to see their sample images of the resolution chart taken with the D800's.

People claim that these are not real tests, and not real world .. etc, etc.. but they are controlled conditions which is all that's important. The ability to compare different devices in as good as 'like for like situation'.

[Chris G]

So without the AA filter in place you are already gaining that almost maximum level of detail per mega pixel, hence why you can't really sharpen it any further then it already is to some respect.

So its basicly bit mapping an image without the support of the AA filter.. Thus crisper results but with a increase chance of moire as there's nothing there to blend the 2 mapping layers.. How am I doing? lol

its interesting to me..

[arthurking83]

.....

So its basicly bit mapping an image without the support of the AA filter.. Thus crisper results but with a increase chance of moire as there's nothing there to blend the 2 mapping layers.. How am I doing? lol

....

LOL??? .... mate!! .... you lost me at the "bit mapping" part!

The only interest I have(and have had) in the moire discussion is that once you get in 'ya images, it's hard to remove.
I researched quite a bit into this issue years back when I got lots of images affected by moire from the D70s.
D70/70s had the same sensor as the D100, but obviously at a cheaper price, but it also had a weaker AA filter than the D100.
Images were supposedly more detailed from the D70's compared to D100 images, but many folks that had both cameras posted good images with various levels of sharpening on the test images.
These comparative images showed that the D100 image was more accommodating of more post process sharpening than the D70's was.

At this point in time, the D200 was quite new and it showed better image detail in it's images compared to both, but again, using the same level of sharpening on the D200 images produced more artefacts(haloing) when compared to the D70 and D100 images.
But this also assumed that the images were shot with super sharp lenses to begin with and that the lens didn't produce any detail degradation.

What I'm more interested in for now with respect to D800E is if the moire can be processed out of an image, and if so how well does each software effect this removal.

In the old days, I converted to Nikon Capture and then CaptureNX(version 1) for it's simpler to use processing.(from PS version .. earlybird) CS 1 or 2 .. can't remember).

I found that neither software could totally remove moire in most situations, while it did help a little.

Haven't used that tool in CNX2 to see if it works, and I reckon I've almost certainly deleted any D70 images that had been affected .. but I have too many images to search through individually.
Also, I haven't yet seen any D800E raw files for download to play with myself.