photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
All Cameras >> Nikon >> Nikon D800

Nikon D800 SLR Digital Camera Sample Photos

142635662.19fKdA4X.jpg142635669.eOdvwrAD.jpg142635661.Tn2Xm4UM.jpg142635666.Xflyxi4f.jpgmore photos
Marketed: 07-Feb-2012
Lens Mount: F
Megapixels: 36.3
Random Nikon D800 Samples from 169351 available Photos more
t9%2f93%2f329493%2f4%2f156992242.VtISOeAh.jpg t9%2f16%2f457916%2f4%2f152454976.IbFdeCPu.jpg t9%2f93%2f329493%2f4%2f156787747.0IQDn96q.jpg t1%2f58%2f851358%2f4%2f146261645.xoxl080j.jpg
t2%2f01%2f69801%2f4%2f148402926.9kd7k3UU.jpg t9%2f44%2f919144%2f4%2f157144692.osAUMh50.jpg t9%2f40%2f473440%2f4%2f153875043.rEgAYcjG.jpg t2%2f02%2f654702%2f4%2f149897305.tCZV3n1m.jpg
t9%2f01%2f12301%2f4%2f150377728.gSRcL7uB.jpg t4%2f92%2f322992%2f4%2f142574024.NXaVPU7m.jpg t9%2f40%2f1016140%2f4%2f154965585.vBTZ9mMd.jpg t9%2f93%2f329493%2f4%2f152939792.AGqZCeOf.jpg


Comments
JB23-Jun-2013 00:15
The only problem I've had with the D800, it is so good you'll want to re-shoot your entire library. :)
leo15-Sep-2012 13:55
I updated to use from D700 to D800 and with no regret to do so. D800 has great improvement in color and exposure accuracy, not to mention resolution. ISO noise control is at least as good as D700. The only thing I do not like is the grip of the D800 body. my fingers feel tired holding it for a while.
Lou Giroud19-Aug-2012 12:02
SiliconVoid is right there. All is about how many pixels you need for your work. If the amount of pixels where understood on constant picture size, it would change something. A 24 mpix chip in apsc, like the one the NEX-7 has, for example, has the same pixel density a 48 mpix FF would have. I have too much pixels with the NEX-7, I would have less. But, to get that in the same camera format, I had to step down to a C3 with 14 mpix or a 5N with 16 mpix, and here I have not the body specs and functions I look for. Now, Sony heard the cry from photographers and will, at Photokina, introduce the NEX-6, a NEX-7 body with a brand new 16 mpix chip and much better high ISO rating. On the NEX I fight quiet often with DOF, that, and it depends on the optics I use, is too much. DOF is a problem in most pictures I make, and i want a in depth sharpness for many of my shots. Wit a FF this will become a problem. Nikon will bring the 24 mpix D600 FF soon, this will be for me a step forward in FF for landscapes and portrait. But, still here the picture size is what it is and downsizing to reasonable album shots, like wedding albums becomes often a serious problem. I shoot RAW and open them in half size in Photoshop, this gives me the best results. In downsizing, there is no remedy to avoid quality loss. The only way is to shoot lower resolution with the camera, and for that, I do not need 36 mpix. So, give to God what God needs and to Caesar what he needs, to cite the Bible.
Fortunately, Nikon, as well as Sony, will fill the breach and offer cameras with different pixel counts, the best way to get what you need in any situation. Only black spot is that you need a lot of money and soon a donkey to carry all that. But, a couple of NEX bodies will not make you tired after a long day. I gave it up on this heavy Nikon boxes, and if Nikon will not start soon with a correct pro level mirrorless, I will stick to Sony's small wonders, and, they do well with Nikon glass. But, here, anyone has his opinion again and it will certainly often differ from mine.
SiliconVoid24-Jul-2012 04:00
@thang - I have read the DxO rating, yes.. However as many people need something other than an 8mp image output, the DxO rating does not quite mean what it implies. Don't get me wrong, I am not poking fun at you - I am not debating the value or performance of the D800 nor am I trashing the D800 or Nikon (I own several Nikon bodies including the legendary D700 which the D800 was 'supposed' to replace) - Heck I was not even looking at some rating, I was simply responding to your inquiry of another poster regarding the DPReview review of the 5DmkIII - where DPR clearly states in the 5DmkIII has better overall noise performance.. ;=)

In reference to DxO, you have to know how to interpret their rating along with the output you personally need for the rating to have any relevance. If you look at the DxO performance graph you will see that unless you limit your output to 8mp images (8x12 prints) and no higher than ISO ~320, you will not get the performance equal to the rating DxO awarded to the D800. Using the graph you will also see that across the remainder of the D800's operational range you can get better performance from many other cameras unless you absolutely need 36mp for something.. At the pixel level the D800 scores lower than a handful of other cameras.. =(
For me personally, I don't need the additional overhead and processing just to produce the same images I get from my D700 with almost no processing at all, heh.

As for factual information from reliable sources, the primary difference between DPReview and DxO is that DPR at least attempts to score across all performance and output settings the camera has been designed for. DxO evaluates the same operation range, as can be seen, but awards their rating based on the highest possible result delivered - even if the camera only produces those results at a certain ISO setting and falls short of other cameras at every other setting. DxO also derives this ratings data from an 8mp downsampled image, a methodology that awards a benefit to any camera with higher mp than its predecessor (Compare Nikon D3x vs the D3s for example). At the sensor level (per pixel) the noise performance of the D800 is sadly not all that impressive, however as I mentioned earlier the higher mp count 'can' provide a little more aggressive noise reduction while retaining comparable levels of detail versus lower mp bodies. This does unfortunately introduce additional post-processing not needed with a lower mp camera with lower per pixel noise to start with. Whether that provides a benefit to the photographer will ultimately depend on the individual photographer, it is not an absolute assessment as asserted by DxO..
Thang23-Jun-2012 04:48
@siliconvoid - might also want to check out DxO Mark rating buddy.
Thang23-Jun-2012 04:45
@siliconVoid - of course one is free to make any comment. Just like you and I did dude. Nothing beats fact from reliable source.
Lou Giroud02-Jun-2012 13:28
One need first to know if a full frame size sensor is what one looks for, best is to have a few formats, what is easy in the same brand today, then you need to see if the resolution and the resulting size of the picture is what you look for too. Seen at computer screen size, you will not encounter a better shot than with a 16 mpix apsc that has same pixel density. On the other side, an apsc with that density performs same in noise and compare noise ratios to a nex-5 for example and the go by pair since a 36 full is a double 18. I use the Nex-7 and am delighted by the shot, and here the D800 makes , maybe, a bitty better, but respect the pixel density, and for that density the NEX-7 is quiet good in managing Noise, despite it starts getting awful to my eyes at 800. Here my Fuji S5 makes better. But, also on the NEX-7 I hate the large picture I really don't need. So,except the picture size, if we consider the quality of the shot all over, a D700 performs far better. Now, remains the pixel fever and for that kinda brainwash there is no remedy anyway. I would like to see a better development of mid format sensors, between 12 and 14 mpix in Apsc and improved all over performance, and mainly in noise managing. Industry now just leaves that format fall down to the profit of high pixel sensors one really does not need. Some might, but most don't, and there is no doubt that all those developments are "among brands competitions" only.

Just hope the race to pixels will end soon and manufacturers turn to further improve and develop smaller sensors that can be used in all situations. D800 is a huge tool but limited in use, and, like all DSLR's, it is a bulky and heavy thing. For me the future resides in full frame and half frame mirror-less cameras. The NEX-7 is a good step in the right direction, hope that Sony will go full frame with a similar jewel. They have the sensors and an improvement of the D3x or A900 sensor would be a big deal for many that prefer that format. I expected the new FF from Sony to appear in 24 mpix, but as it seems it will be the 36 mpix chip they have sold to Nikon for the D800. So, another reason for me to not buy that camera when it comes, since i need a lozer size shot, a 18 to 20 would fit me for what I do. Nikon has made good choice in developing an 18 mpix FF, but here the price-tag is for most of us out of limits. So, what the world needs is affordable FF gear, and if produced at larger scale as they do with apsc models it could become affordable for all of us. We do not get the gear paid, and we are not making business with it, so every cent spent affects our wallet without any return, except pleasure.
SiliconVoid02-Jun-2012 05:33
(thang) Unless you value another persons commentary over your own eyes, you can easily see the noise performance in comparison. However in response to your inquiry - quoted from DPReview on the 5DmkIII review column.
- The 5D Mark III's raw noise levels are, compared to its predecessor 5D Mark II, and its most direct rival, the Nikon D800, lower across the ISO range.

It is certainly possible that the DPReview assessment was at the pixel level versus 'downsampling' a 36mp image to 8mp!! as DxO does in their testing/scoring. It is clear though that at full resolution (one of the reasons one would be buying a D800) their are several other cameras that have better overall noise performance - not bashing the D800, just an observation. However those 'other' cameras do not offer 36mp, and for many that may be a fair trade-off given the extra resolution can somewhat counter a more aggressive noise reduction without sacrificing too much detail.
thang10-May-2012 21:50
@Gordon Burns - have you read DPreview of the D800 to make such statement? "High ISO noise control is not bad, but has to be said the Canon 5DIII does win clearly on that score."
Gordon Burns07-May-2012 10:41
I had a back focus issue on mine, as others do as seen in the forums. Nikon did fix it and it seems OK now. Great resolution a lovely camera to use. High ISO noise control is not bad, but has to be said the Canon 5DIII does win clearly on that score. I have noticed that moire is not as controlled as I would have liked for the price tag (I have the D800).
JB06-May-2012 13:20
Amazing sensor, incredible images.
Martin Lamoon28-Apr-2012 06:55
Almost a month with the D800. Picked up by chance as normally a Canon Man but they didn't have a 5D111,
I an now converted and enjoying photography once again!

All photos are copyrighted and may not be used without permission from the photographer.
These photos are are a guide to what these cameras are capable of, but may not fully represent the camera due to post-processing, scanning, or photographic technique.
All brands are trademarked by their owners.
These pages are not sponsored or approved by the manufacturers.
Other content Copyright © 2003,2004,2005,2006, pbase.com LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Contact cameras@pbase.com to contribute data or photos of cameras.