The formatter threw an exception while trying to deserialize the message: Error in deserializing body of request message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (30720) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 2, position 31439.
The formatter threw an exception while trying to deserialize the message: Error in deserializing body of request message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (30720) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 32491.
NEW! Nikon D800 sample images!
The Nikon D800 is a full-frame 36 Megapixel DSLR with 1080p video capabilities. Announced in February 2012, it arrives three and a half years after the D700, Nikon's first 'affordable' full-frame DSLR. Three and a half years is a long time in the digital camera industry and to describe the D800 merely as highly-anticipated feels like an injustice. This is a camera which many people have been waiting a very long time for and Nikon has pulled-out all the stops.
The D800 features a brand new 36 Megapixel full-frame FX-format sensor, which makes it the highest resolution camera outside of the medium format world. That's one third more than Nikon's previous flagship, the D3x, more than a third higher than Canon's highest resolution sensor at the time of writing, and a whopping three times more than the D700. I'll go into much more detail later, but anyone with concerns over noise should find it reassuring the D800 shares essentially the same pixel density as the D7000 which bodes well for the quality and dynamic range.
The earlier D700 predated the video revolution on DSLRs, so it's not surprising to find the D800 making major upgrades in this respect - indeed the D800 shares almost exactly the same video specifications as the D4 which means you get 1080p and 720p at maximum frame rates of 30 and 60fps respectively, along with an external microphone input, headphone jack and uncompressed HDMI output. The D800 also inherits the 51-point AF system of the D4 along with its 91k metering sensor and 3.2in screen. The D800 is also available in a version with a modified low pass filter for those who want manage their own moiré and potentially unlock the maximum detail from the sensor. There's loads to discuss and digest so in my preview I'll explain the new features in detail and what impact they'll have in practice.
I will of course start with the sensor. Nikon has equipped the D800 with a brand new 36 Megapixel full-frame FX-format sensor. This represents a massive upgrade over the 12 Megapixel sensor in the D700, not to mention a significant boost over the 21 and 24 Megapixels delivered by Canon's EOS 5D Mark II and Nikon's D3x respectively; indeed the resolution is now within what's traditionally regarded as medium format territory, although pixel-fanatics should know that particular market is now pushing 80 Megapixels, and you can see example images in my Phase One IQ180 report. But let's not allow medium format to rain on the D800's parade as it represents a completely different market at a considerably different price point.
The D800's sensor delivers images with a maximum resolution of 7360x4912 pixels, which at 300dpi could be reproduced at 24.5x16.4in. Compare that to the 4256x2832 pixels of the D700 which at 300dpi could be reproduced at 14.2x9.4in. The 24 Megapixels of the D3x comes closer at 20x13.5in at 300dpi, but the D800 still represents a significant leap over the best of the existing DSLRs. I know I said I wouldn't mention medium format again, but place two D800 frames on top of each other and you're essentially matching the 10328x7760 resolution of the PhaseOne IQ180 and fast-approaching its sensor dimensions too). Of course the missing member of the party here is the long-awaited successor to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, but until its specifications are known, the D800 becomes the resolution leader in the DSLR category.
Boosting sensor resolution is all very well in theory, but in practice it can involve compromises in noise and dynamic range. At first glance the 36 Megapixels of the D800 might ring alarm bells, but the larger surface area of the FX sensor actually means the pixel-pitch is roughly the same as the D7000. Now of course the sensor itself is different, but it wouldn't be unfair to speculate the D800's noise and dynamic range performance could be similar to the D7000 and that would be no bad thing. It's certainly not as extreme as Sony squeezing 24 Megapixels into an APS-C sensor for the NEX-7 and SLT-A77.
Like previous Nikon FX bodies, the D800 also offers a DX-format crop mode which effectively reduces the field of view by 1.5 times. This was never all that compelling on earlier models as the subsequent resolution was low - just 5.1 Megapixels on the D700 - but with the considerable resolution of the D800, the DX crop mode actually still has 4800x3200 pixels (15.4 Megapixels) to play with. Compare that to the D7000 which captures 4928x3264 pixels and you'll realise they're almost exactly the same, and that's more than just a nice coincidence. It means the D800 actually represents a compelling upgrade path for D7000 owners as they'll be able to use all their existing lenses without any compromise in resolution, yet enjoy full-frame coverage with a whopping 36 Megapixels should they fit a lens which supports the FX frame.
Along with the 1.5x DX crop, the D800 also offers two additional cropped modes: a 1.2x format which captures 6144x4080 pixels (25 Megapixel / 30x20mm) and a 5:4 format which captures 6144x4912 pixels (30.2 Megapixel / 30x24mm). In both cases, along with the DX crop mode, a portion of the viewfinder is greyed-out to indicate the actual coverage, while in Live View, the image is scaled-up to fit the screen.
You may well be wondering what these formats are for. Most obviously the 5:4 aspect ratio matches that of the popular 10x8in print size, allowing you to frame precisely for it rather than taking risks with cropping later. The 1.2x crop is a little odder and reminiscent of the 1.3x crop of Canon's APS-H sensors. I agree with Cameralabs' forum moderator and Nikon-phile Thomas though who reckons it's a great option for enjoying 'bonus' coverage from the better DX-format lenses out there.
DX-format lenses may be officially corrected for a DX imaging circle, but many actually deliver decent performance a few mm beyond. Fit them to an FX body and you'll enjoy the coverage beyond the DX frame and while none will be sharp to the corners of an FX frame, they could come close given the 1.2x crop. So the 1.2x crop mode could actually unlock the potential from many above average DX lenses without the need to crop manually later - another great reason for DX body owners to upgrade. Conversely the 1.2x crop is also a more forgiving frame size for any FX lenses which suffer from vignetting or lack of sharpness in their extreme corners.
It should also be added the various crop modes are generating smaller file sizes which occupy less space (on the card and your hard disk) and require less processing muscle to work, all of which may be important to some. And in the case of the 1.2x and DX (1.5x) crop modes, the smaller files also allow the D800 to squeeze out a little extra continuous shooting speed, boosting the standard 4fps at the maximum resolution to 5fps, which itself can be boosted to 6fps for the DX mode alone if you're also using the optional battery grip (when coupled with with the equally optional EN-EL18 or set of AAs and their respective adapters).
Each of the D800's four image area options are available at two lower resolutions and can be recorded in a variety of formats: you can choose from three JPEG compression settings, RAW with 12 or 14 bits and the choice of lossy, lossless or no compression at all, or an 8-bit TIFF should you really want one.
The sensitivity runs between 100 and 6400 ISO, expandable to 50 and 25600 ISO. The top-end matches the extended option on the D700, although 50 ISO is half the lowest option on that model. Meanwhile the D4's sensitivity runs between 100 and 12800 ISO, expandable down to 50 ISO and all the way up to 204,800 ISO. This means the D4 boasts a maximum sensitivity that's three stops greater than the D800, and while its larger pixel pitch should mean lower noise levels, I suspect we're talking emergency use only at the very highest settings. For me, the important comparison will be across the standard ISO ranges of each camera and for that we'll have to wait for final production samples to be tested.
Before moving on it's worth giving a respectful nod to the updated Auto ISO setting which can now take lens focal length into account.
Nikon D800E - an alternative version
Before moving onto the next section, now's the right time to discuss the fact there's actually two versions of the D800. The alternative D800E version employs a modified optical low pass filter to essentially eliminate the anti-aliasing effect.
Now for the science: most digital camera sensors employ a grid of square pixels to capture the scene, but if the subject contains patterns which approach the same apparent size as the sensor grid then problems can occur. This could be triggered by distant fencing, vents, or most problematically, repeating patterns on textiles and clothing, and the result are shimmering interference artefacts known as moiré. It's the same effect you see when someone wears clothing with fine stripes on the TV.
Believe it or not, the common solution is to actually employ a filter in front of the sensor which slightly blurs this fine detail, thereby greatly reducing the risk of moiré, but also of course at the cost of losing the finest details. Frustratingly if your subject doesn't contain these troublesome patterns, you're effectively losing resolution for no reason.
So the D800E employs a modified filter system which effectively removes the part which blurred the image. The advantage is greater potential for fine details, although the downside is greater potential for visible moiré.
This may be a radical step for a DSLR, but it's not the first time the low pass filter has been removed from the equation by any means. Medium format cameras have long operated without low pass filters, as has Leica's M9. The typically high resolutions of medium format sensors mean most fine patterns are actually resolved, therefore making moiré a rarity, but interestingly Leica feels it could get away without one on the M9 which 'only' has 18.5 Megapixels.
So how big is the risk of moiré in reality? It of course depends on what you shoot. The biggest problem is with very fine repeating patterns, most commonly found in man-made textiles and clothing, so portrait and wedding photographers should probably beware. Likewise for architectural work where there could be fine vents or window frame details. But if the patterns are mostly natural, you should be okay.
I should also mention moiré can be greatly reduced or avoided by simply adjusting your distance from the subject even by a small amount. Nikon will also include moiré reduction options in its Capture NX software, so it may not be a big issue at all. Indeed it begs the question if moiré only affects some subjects and can be reduced in software, then why have a low pass filter at all? I put this to Nikon and they replied most users were not willing to spend time caring about negative side effects of a modified AA filter and while software can suppress the effects of moiré, it cannot fully remove it. I also asked about the impact of the D800E's filter system on movies but was assured there was none - the actual down-sampling of the full sensor resolution to a video frame is the bigger issue.
So assuming you're happy to pay the extra 10% or so for the D800E, the question of which model to go for seems to boil down to whether you mostly shoot natural or man-made subjects, and if you're willing to accommodate some additional processing where necessary. Ultimately it's something I'll need to put to the test with side-by-side comparisons, but you certainly don't hear of many medium format or Leica M9 owners complaining about moiré.
Nikon D800 design and controls
Three and a half years may have passed between the D800 and its predecessor, but at first glance they look pretty similar from the outside with only the curvier sloping shoulders of the new model giving the game away. Nikon quotes the D800 as sharing the same degree of toughness and weatherproofing as the D700, although in a nice upgrade the D800 now enjoys 100% coverage from its optical viewfinder compared to 95% on its predecessor.
Measuring 145x122x81mm, the D800 shares essentially the same dimensions as the 147x123x77mm of the D700. The D800 is however lighter, at least for the body alone: 900g vs 995g, both weights excluding their respective batteries. Annoyingly I can't find exact weights for their batteries, but they're roughly in the same ball-park, which makes the D800 lighter overall.
Sticking with the subject of batteries, Nikon's switched from the EN-EL3e of the D700 to the EN-EL15 for the D800, quoting 1000 and 900 shots for each camera respectively. So the battery life has reduced, but not by a significant amount. It is however worth noting the EN-EL15 is a slightly more expensive battery, but given it's the same pack used by the D7000 and V1, you may already own a spare, and of course the charger is also common across all three.
Those who want longer battery life can fit the optional MB-D12 battery grip which also offers portrait controls. The grip works with the standard EN-EL15, but with an adapter can accommodate the D4's EN-EL18 pack or a set of AA batteries. If you're using an EN-EL18 or set of AAs, you'll also enjoy a minor boost in continuous shooting speed for the DX crop mode from 5 to 6fps; note the type of battery has no impact on FX shooting speed.
The D800's control layout also shares many similarities with the D700, although there are of course some changes to accommodate the new movie mode. Where the AF area switch was located on the back of the D700 you'll now find one devoted to switching between movies and stills, with a live view button in the middle. Between the mode button and shutter release, Nikon's now squeezed-in a video record button. The large dial on the upper left side now also includes a fourth button to directly access bracketing. Round the front there's still two buttons to the left side of lens mount, but they're now closer together and can be used to finely adjust the aperture during the movie mode. And in a bizarre decision, the five buttons on the left side of the screen may share the same functions as before, but the zoom-in and out buttons have switched positions.
I'm pleased to report the popup flash still remains. Pleased because I personally find them really useful for basic fill-ins and the one on the D800 can also be used as a wireless flash controller without the need for an additional accessory. I know there's arguments against them for ultimate body toughness and integrity, but the lack of a built-in flash is one of my biggest bugbears about the Canon 5D series to date.
What you won't find in the D800 though is a built-in GPS. Nikon continues to offer this as an optional accessory, but like many photographers, I'd much prefer to simply have it built-in, not just to save money but for aesthetics and convenience. I realise getting GPS signals into a metal body like the D4 is tricky or even impossible, but the presence of a popup flash on the D800 means there's plastic up there which could in theory have accommodated some kind of receiver underneath. It's a missed opportunity in my view. You'll need to pay for Wifi connectivity too. I'd really like to see Wifi and GPS integrated into every higher-end camera where physically possible.
Round the back, the D800 sports the same 3.2in / 920k screen as the D4, both larger than the 3in screen on the D700, although the resolution and 4:3 aspect ratio remain the same. This means images are shifted to the top of the screen, leaving a black bar along the bottom for shooting information. On the one hand it's nice to have this separation of information, but it's worth noting Canon has been employing wider 3:2 shaped screens on its recent DSLRs which match the shape of their images. This means images fill the screen and maximise all the available resolution, while 16:9 movies will appear larger and more detailed too.
Offering some consolation though is the HDMI port which now outputs uncompressed video (8 bit, 4:2:2), allowing you to connect a larger and more detailed monitor, or capture the feed with a higher quality external recorder. The uncompressed HDMI output is inherited from the D4 alongside its microphone socket and headphone jack, all very welcome enhancements.
There is also of course a USB port, but unlike the D4 which employs USB 2, the D800 has made the leap to USB 3 offering potentially quicker transfer speeds, while maintaining compatibility with computers equipped with USB 2. The D4 does however feature a wired Ethernet port that's absent on the D800. For completeness I should also mention the D800 is lacking its predecessor's DC input; you'll need to buy the EP-5B power supply connector to gain access to the port.
In another welcome upgrade over the D700, the D800 sports not one but two memory cards slots: one for CF cards and the other for SD, and it's possible to configure the camera to record duplicate files to both cards, JPEGs to one and RAWs to the other, or images to one and movies to the other. The D800 also exploits the speed of the UDMA-7 Compact Flash and UHS-1 SD standards. The D4 also offers dual card slots, but instead of traditional Compact Flash, it supports the new XQD format. It's always nice to support the latest standards, but by equipping the D800 with both CF and SD slots, it will support your existing cards regardless of which Nikon (or indeed Canon) model you're upgrading from.
Nikon D800 Movie mode
Nikon may have been first to market with a DSLR that could record video (with the D90), but it's fair to say it's big rival Canon was the one which took the ball and really ran with it, not only coming out shortly afterwards with the far more compelling feature-set of the 5D Mark II, but gradually refining its offering with each subsequent release.
Nikon's slowly been clawing back ground and with the D4 introduced its most capable video-equipped DSLR yet. The good news is the D800 shares almost exactly the same movie options at half the price. This means the D800 can film 1080p at 24, 25 or 30fps, 720p at 25, 30, 50 or 60fps, offers full manual control over the exposure, sports an external microphone jack and headphone socket for monitoring and features uncompressed HDMI output (8 bit, 4:2:2), allowing you to connect a larger and more detailed monitor, or capture the feed with a higher quality external recorder. The screen on the rear also remains active when driving an HDMI accessory. Here's Nikon's promotional video filmed entirely with the D800 (and a professional film crew).
Nikon promotional video: "Joy Ride" by Sandro
The D800 also offers fine control over the aperture using two buttons to the side of the lens mount, although as I understand it, these aren't active when the camera itself is recording video. You can however use them while outputting video over HDMI to an external recorder. You can additionally trigger video recording via the remote socket.
The D800 also supports movies with the DX crop, effectively reducing the field of view by 1.5x without any loss of resolution, providing a handy boost in magnification. Interestingly the 1:1 crop mode of the D4 is missing here, but that's the only real difference between these two models in terms of movie feature sets. Sure, the sensors on both cameras sport different resolutions which may have an impact on the down-sampling quality to video, but to all intents and purposes the only movie feature the D4 has which the D800 hasn't is the 1:1 crop mode which on that model has a 2.7x field reduction- shame as the D800's higher resolution sensor would have delivered a huge 3.8x field reduction for 1080p at 1:1.
Nikon promotional video: "Joy Ride - Behind the Scenes" by Sandro
1:1 crop mode aside, this is a great marketing message for the D800: like the D4's movies? Get them for half the price with the D800! But while I appreciate the headphone jack, uncompressed HDMI output and fine aperture control, the actual movie resolutions and frame rates aren't any different to what Canon's been offering for years. I can't be the only one who's disappointed not to find 1080p at higher frame rates like 50 and 60p, allowing slow motion effects. The latest AVCHD standard supports 1080p at 50p and 60p with decent bit rates and has already been implemented for some time on Sony's SLT and NEX cameras, not to mention a number of compacts too, so it's a shame to find it missing on Nikon's flagship 2012 DSLRs. I would also be surprised if Canon doesn't take this opportunity to trump its rival in this regard by equipping the 5D Mark II's successor with 1080p at 50p and 60p.
Finally a note on the so-called continuous autofocusing capabilities of the D800's movie mode. The full-time AF-F mode has been inherited from recent Nikon consumer models, but if its performance is anything like them I wouldn't get too excited. On those models, the AF-F mode would simply perform a single contrast-based AF check every few seconds in an attempt to simulate continuous autofocusing, but the result was regular focus searching which was distracting both visually and audibly. I will give it the benefit of the doubt until I get to test it, but I suspect if you want effective and reasonably discreet continuous AF for movies, you'll be better off with a mirrorless CSC.
Nikon D800 metering and exposures
In yet another feature inherited from the D4, the D800 enjoys a powerful metering system with 91k pixels, a considerable boost from the 1005 pixels of its predecessor. This allows the new metering system to actually offer face detection and automatically meter for human subjects even when you're composing with the optical viewfinder (although you won't see frames around faces). This is very useful to compensate for strong back-lighting, and information from the sensor is also used to aid AF, flash control and white balance.
The shutter speed range remains the same as before though, from 30 seconds to 1/8000 with a 1/250 X-sync speed, although Nikon now quotes 200,000 frames for the block.
As always, Nikon delivers the goods for exposure bracketing and now proudly includes a dedicated bracketing button on the upper left side of the body. The D800 offers 2-9 frame exposure bracketing with increments up to 1EV apart, making it a fantastic choice for HDR fanatics. There's also exposure compensation of +/-5EV.
Continuous shooting is a little slower than its predecessor, but that's understandable given three times more pixels to shift per frame. The D800 can shoot at 4fps in the FX and 5:4 modes, or 5fps in the DX and 1.2x modes; the DX mode can also be boosted to 6fps with the optional battery grip, so long as you're also using the muscle of the D4's EN-EL18 pack or set of AAs, both also requiring their own adapters. The earlier D700 offered 5fps in its FX mode, boostable to 8fps with the battery grip, again when fitted with the more powerful battery options. Faster speeds are always nice to have, but I think it's churlish to complain about the 4fps of the D800 given its 36 Megapixel resolution - it's considerably quicker than any medium format body and if you want a quicker camera, there are lots of lower resolution options.
In terms of the buffer, Nikon quotes 16, 17 or 20 uncompressed, lossless or compressed RAW files respectively in the 36 Megapixel / 14 bit mode. JPEG shooters can capture up to 56 Large Fine 36 Megapixel JPEGs in a burst, and if you're willing to increase the compression or reduce the resolution, you can increase this to 100 frames.
Oh yes, and there's also a new Quiet shooting mode and an HDR option lifted from the consumer line where two exposures up to 3EV apart are combined into a single image in an attempt to boost dynamic range. That's nice, but anyone with more than a passing interest in HDR will do it manually using the excellent bracketing facilities.
Nikon D800 autofocus
The Nikon D800 also shares the same AF system as the higher-end D4: the 'Advanced' Multi-CAM 3500FX AF sensor, sporting the same 51 AF points (15 of which are cross-type sensors) as the plain Multi-CAM 3500FX in the earlier D700, but this time the advanced part refers to its ability to autofocus at slower apertures between f5.6 and f8, albeit with a reduced number of 11 AF points. This sounds like a minor tweak, but will be welcomed by anyone who uses tele-converters and previously found themselves limited to manual focus only.
Early reports with the D800 suggest its AF speed is also very responsive, but I can't comment until I've tested one.
Compared to Nikon D4
The D4 is Nikon's flagship professional sports DSLR and targets a completely different market to the D800; it's a completely different price point too, costing twice as much. But as you'll have discovered by now, the D800 shares a great deal of key technologies with the D4, which of course begs the question, what exactly sets them apart?
I'll start with what's in common: both the D4 and D800 are full-frame DSLRs with 100% viewfinder coverage and twin memory card slots. They share the same 51-point AF system, the same 91k metering system, the same 3.2in screen and almost exactly the same movie capabilities.
Now for what's different, starting with what's in the D4's favour. Most obviously it's physically larger and heavier which may not be seen as an advantage to some, but it is tougher and better weather-proofed overall. You also get a portrait grip and heftier battery pack as standard. The D4 is also equipped with a wired Ethernet port for fast tethered shooting, features a 2.7x 1:1 movie crop option and supports the new QXD memory card format in one of its twin card slots (the other being SD like the D800).
Inside the key difference is a lower resolution 16.2 Megapixel sensor with a higher maximum sensitivity of 204,800 ISO and much faster continuous shooting of 10fps (or 11fps if you lock the exposure and focus).
In the D800's favour, it's smaller and lighter, but can support a portrait grip with access to the D4's battery as an optional extra if you want it. It has a built-in flash, USB 3 instead of USB 2, and compatibility with the much more common Compact Flash format in addition to the SD slot both cameras have in common. Inside the key difference is a higher resolution 36 Megapixel sensor, albeit with a lower maximum sensitivity and slower continuous shooting speed. The D800 is also available in a version without the anti-aliasing filter effect.
So basically the D4 is tougher, faster and more sensitive, while featuring a portrait grip, longer standard battery life, Ethernet and XQD compatibility along with the 2.7x 1:1 movie crop. Conversely the D800 is smaller and lighter while featuring a higher resolution sensor, and compatibility with USB 3 and Compact Flash. The D4 is a pro sports camera, whereas the D800 is a semi-pro body with a focus on ultimate detail, although in the absence of a D4x sharing the same sensor, the D800 also becomes Nikon's best option for high resolution.
There is of course one other important difference: price. The D4 costs double that of the D800, and while most pro sports photographers expect to pay this kind of money, it doesn't half make the D800 look like great value considering its higher resolution sensor and just how much they share in common.
See my Nikon D4 preview for more details
Compared to Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Canon's EOS 5D Mark III represents the biggest competition for the D800. Both are high resolution semi-pro full-frame bodies with Full HD video and stacks of features including 100% viewfinder coverage, twin card slots and both microphone and headphone jacks - but refreshingly both companies have taken quite different approaches to headline specifications.
The biggest difference of course regards resolution: 36 Megapixels on the D800 versus 22.3 Megapixels on the 5D Mark III - that's 50% more pixels squeezed into the same surface area of the Nikon. In terms of linear resolution, the D800 records 7360x4912 pixels, which at 300dpi could be reproduced at 24.5x16.4in. The 5D Mark III records 5760x3840 pixels, which at 300dpi could be reproduced at 19.2x12.8in. So in terms of resolving power, the D800 enjoys a measurable advantage and greater latitude for cropping, but it's not a one-sided argument.
In theory the lower resolution of the 5D Mark III should allow it to deliver lower noise at higher sensitivities and a broader dynamic range too, but I'm reserving judgment until I've compared final production samples of both models. Lower resolutions do however mean smaller file sizes and less demands on storage and continuous shooting buffers, although the total number of RAW frames in a burst is actually roughly the same: 17 losslessly-compressed 14-bit RAW files on the Nikon versus 18 14-bit RAW files on the Canon.
Now for the firm differences in specifications. In its favour, the D800 has more sophisticated metering (91k sensor versus 63-zone), a faster flash sync speed (1/250 versus 1/200), a popup flash with wireless flash control, deeper bracketing (nine frames versus seven), a choice of crop modes including a 1.5x option for video, clean HDMI output (for feeding an external recorder), a shutter block rated for 200,000 versus 150,000 actuations, the ability to AF with a limited number of points at f5.6 to f8, support for both UDMA-7 CF and UHS-1 SD cards (only the former is exploited on the Canon), and a USB-3 port (versus USB-2 on the Canon).
In its favour, the Canon EOS 5D Mark III has a more sophisticated AF system (61-points with 41 cross-type sensors versus 51-point with 15 cross-type sensors), faster continuous shooting at the maximum resolution (6fps versus 4fps, although the Nikon can be boosted to 6fps in its 16 Megapixel DX mode with the battery grip), two stops higher maximum sensitivity (102,400 ISO versus 25,600 ISO), a wide screen which matches the shape of images, thereby maximising their displayed size and detail, silent control over aperture and other settings while filming video (the D800 only has aperture control buttons which become inactive when recording) and built-in HDR with three frames versus two; the 5D Mark III also supports multiple exposures, overlaying up to nine frames, although I'm confirming if the D800 has similar capabilities.
For photographers or videographers with very specific requirements there may be a specification difference up there which swings the decision between the models, but for many (who haven't already committed to a lens system), the choice will boil down to preferences on each camera's approach to sensor resolution. Once again I can't comment on noise and dynamic range until I've tested both side-by-side, but simple laws of physics suggest the D800 will enjoy a resolution advantage at lower ISOs and the 5D Mark III will enjoy a noise advantage at higher ISOs. That said, I'd be surprised if the image quality from either mode is in any way disappointing as each represents the pinnacle of general-purpose DSLRs (as the D4 and 1D X are specialist pro sports cameras).
Before moving on though, it's important to remember Nikon offers an alternative version of the D800 with the effect of the anti-aliasing filter removed: the D800E version unlocks the maximum resolution of the sensor and hands-over moire management to the photographer. This option, along with the high resolution of the sensor shows Nikon going after those who demand the maximum resolvable detail without investing in medium format equipment; indeed in this respect the D800 can be seen more as a medium format rival than a direct competitor to the 5D Mark III.
Oh yes and there's one final important difference to note: the RRP of the D800 is $500 USD less than the 5D Mark III- a not insignificant amount. Suffice it to say I can't wait to pitch both models head-to-head.
For more details see my Canon EOS 5D Mark III preview.
Nikon D800 final thoughts
Full-frame 36 Megapixels for $3000 USD? That may be all you need to know about the Nikon D800 - that it delivers a degree of resolution previously only enjoyed in the realm of medium format cameras at a considerably higher price. Throw in the same AF and metering systems as the D4, along with the same screen and almost exactly the same movie capabilities for half the price of Nikon's pro sports camera and the deal could be well and truly sealed for many.
Then there's the D800E which eliminates the effect of an anti-aliasing filter for those who wish to manage moiré themselves and potentially unlock the maximum resolution from what were already highly detailed files.
It is arguably the most exciting DSLR for a long time, and that's important in a market becoming increasingly jaded over ageing form factors and drawn to the onslaught of mirrorless CSCs. Here's a camera with truly high-end promise, embracing new technologies as much as a DSLR can while exploiting the handling and ergonomics of this classic form factor - and by cleverly incorporating many of the D4's features at half the price, Nikon has even pulled-off the marketing coup of making $3000 USD actually sound pretty affordable.
Gushing over, the D800 of course isn't perfect. The movie mode may sport the undeniable benefits of a headphone jack, fine aperture control and uncompressed HDMI output, but by only playing catch-up on frame rates all it'll take is for Canon to deliver 1080p at 50p and 60p for it to suddenly look dated. A risky move there Nikon.
In terms of connectivity I don't yearn for the D4's Ethernet port, but I continue to wonder why I'm paying three grand for a body which doesn't include Wifi and GPS receivers that are built into almost every phone nowadays. I appreciate there's technical issues incorporating radio devices into metal bodies like the D4, but the D800 sports a plastic popup flash, so there is an opportunity to accommodate receivers in there somewhere.
While it's nice to have a bigger 3.2in screen, I'd have been happier with a wider aspect ratio which matches recorded photos and shows a larger image when working with 16:9 video. Canon has used wider 3:2 shaped screens on its past few DSLRs and they really do make the image look large and detailed, exploiting every single pixel.
I'm also wondering what happened to the 1:1 crop mode for movies that's present on the D4. Surely this little feature wasn't left out to differentiate the two bodies? It would certainly would have been useful for anyone filming distant action as the higher resolution of the D800 would mean a 1:1 crop for a 1080p frame would result in a 3.8x field reduction rather than the 2.7x of the D4.
But if one thing is becoming obvious about these complaints it's that they're all pretty minor and for some people won't be an issue at all. There really is so much to like about the D800's specification that you're forced to nit-pick to criticise it. And let me tell you as someone who's long-believed mirrorless CSCs are the future for most people, it takes a lot for a DSLR to get me excited nowadays.
And to all those complaining about managing large files, I say don't buy an ultra-high-resolution camera! More pixels will always mean bigger files, which places greater demands on processing, storage, delivery and backup, but as a former PC magazine Editor, I'm confident processing, storage and connectivity are rarely a problem for long in the IT industry. But yes, if you have an ageing computer, you will probably want to upgrade it for the D800.
So it's all good for the D800, right? Well it is so long as we ignore the elephant in the corner that's Canon's successor to the 5D Mark II. There's so much conflicting rumour about this camera (or cameras) that I'm not even going to speculate what it could offer, but we do know it will go up against the D800 in the semi-pro full-frame movie-oriented market, and since Canon has also positioned the 1D X similarly to the D4, it's fair to say the new 5D should be the company's high resolution body. Given their track records I'm sure Nikon will enjoy more sophisticated AF, but that Canon will find some way to out-perform it on movies. Oh, but there I am, speculating when I promised not to.
The bottom line? Until we know what Canon has up its sleeve, Nikon has what's arguably the most exciting DSLR around and one which represents a fantastic upgrade-path for D700, D300(s) and D7000 owners alike who really value resolution; indeed even D3x owners may be tempted and I can't wait to put it through its paces. What do you think? Is there anything Nikon could have done better, or is this the last of the great traditional DSLRs before new form factors really take a real hold? Let me know in the Nikon D800 discussion in the Cameralabs forums!
NEW! Nikon D800 sample images!
View the original article here
HOME PORTFOLIO NIKON REVIEWS LEARN PRICES ABOUT
I will pre-ordered the Nikon D800 and look forward to receiving it. I will add more to this review and compare it to the D4 and previous D700. Check back frequently, or follow me on google+ or twitter. 
Nikon has published a technical guide for those interested in the new features of both the D800 and D800E. It is worth checking out, especially if you have already pre-ordered. However, I perceive the document as more of a precautionary from Nikon, informing amateurs of the likelihood of observing blur with its high resolution. 
