D810 Build quality - Warning

[simsurace]

You have to have realistic expectations about how severe an impact a camera can be expected to survive.  A camera is a box with very fragile contents (not all that different from a human head, and we know a lot about head injuries that we can apply to cameras).  A 2kg camera+lens dropped from 1.5 m - lens changing height - hits the ground at 20 kph and with a kinetic energy of 30N - like dropping a 10kg weight on the camera from a third of a meter.  Your brain will not survive that fall uninjured, and it is just not realistic to think that a digital camera could be designed to reliably survive it unscathed. 

To the extent that construction makes a difference, it is a common mistake, for both the brain and the camera, to suppose that the contents are better protected if the container is stronger and more rigid.  On the contrary: the contents are better protected if the container deforms so as to absorb some of the impact.  When a camera or a human head comes to an abrupt stop the kinetic energy has to go somewhere, and if it is not dissipated deforming the container it is dissipated on the contents rattling around inside.  If protecting the contents from impact is the issue, polycarbonate is a much better choice for the camera shell than metal - small children suffer much less severe brain injuries from falls because their skulls are flexible.

I remember a presentation by one local photographer who is very experienced with drones. Experienced in his case means that he has had dozens of crashes. Even falling from 10m or more or hitting a pole at 50km/h, the Sony A7R aluminium body was most of the time only slightly dented, but the sensor was almost always shattered because of the large accelerations involved. Also LCD displays, the lens mount, etc. were in very bad shape.

It is not clear what makes more sense -- to save the body but shatter the innards or to save the innards and totally deform the body.
Anyway, big falls are likely not part of the equation. For big drops you better have a good insurance since the repair will always be quite expensive.

[Akira]

Les, what you are saying makes sense completely and I am all for flexible materials taking care of our camera bodies.
I cannot help myself but asking a simple question: Why is the D5 all metal then? If as you say: "polycarbonate is a much better choice for the camera shell than metal."

I think this is for the better shielding against the electro-magnetic interference.  Nikon high-end cameras are used by Japan Self-Defence Fources, and have to function flawlessly even on the Aegis ships in which the storm of the electro magnetic interference is a big problem for any digital equipments.

Nikon D-single-digit cameras are also used in the space like in ISS.  The strong shielding should be prerequisite for such environment, too.

[Erik Lund]

I was referring to 'normal use' for me that is; A Pro body with flash and a 28-70mm, 70-200mm  or 24-70mm 2.8 AFS -  Hitting a door way with camera and or lens, slinging the camera over the shoulder, bumping into people, putting down the camera and lens hard onto a table, letting the camera bag drop to the floor from low height, leaving the camera bag with gear in the rear of the car and driving like I stole the car

These things a 'normal' magnesium camera shell body can survive, mine has done since 1990; F4, F5, D1, D1X, D2x, D3, D3X,,, except the old plastic flash shoes where ripped off the SB28 Speedlight's a couple of times,,,

Dropping something from 1 meter onto the floor is not what I call 'normal use'

[Erik Lund]

Akira, correct - these 'shields' are also several places inside the magnesium bodies

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I imagine the D5 and D810 material choices reflect the priorities made in their design.

D5 requirements and priorities
+ high fps rate (the main and submirror must move quickly between frames and settle in their final position as quickly as possible, so that the AF system has good data to work with in the short time between frames in a high fps sequence); this probably is reflected in how the mirror box is constructed and the materials used
- moderate resolution (vibration minimization is important but not to the extent as with the D810; this is not to say the D5 doesn't achieve it)
+ high environmental resistance and ruggedness (not necessarily towards actual drops but smaller bumps, extreme temperatures, extreme humidity) in my experience at least the D3/D3X achieve the environmental resistance better than D700/D800/D810

D810 requirements and priorities
+ highest image quality
- no requirement for high speed, so mirror speed of movement and settling time may not be as critical
+ quietness
+ minimized vibrations during exposure
+ compactness and light weight
+ good ruggedness as long as other priorities are not compromised

Material choices should reflect the different requirements of the different cameras.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Dropping something from 1 meter onto the floor is not what I call 'normal use'

I agree completely. A camera should be able to withstand small bumps as you describe, but not a drop on a hard surface from waist level or higher. Insurance is for such cases.

What I like about the single digit bodies is they feel firm in hand, there is no vertical grip mounting knob to keep tightening, the buttons and dials are in optimal positions for both vertical and horizontal use, and the camera just keeps working even in extreme cold and high humidity, the battery lasts forever etc.

[Akira]

I was referring to 'normal use' for me that is; A Pro body with flash and a 28-70mm, 70-200mm  or 24-70mm 2.8 AFS -  Hitting a door way with camera and or lens, slinging the camera over the shoulder, bumping into people, putting down the camera and lens hard onto a table, letting the camera bag drop to the floor from low height, leaving the camera bag with gear in the rear of the car and driving like I stole the car

These things a 'normal' magnesium camera shell body can survive, mine has done since 1990; F4, F5, D1, D1X, D2x, D3, D3X,,, except the old plastic flash shoes where ripped off the SB28 Speedlight's a couple of times,,,

Dropping something from 1 meter onto the floor is not what I call 'normal use'

Erik, a small correction...F4 was the only Nikon 1-digit body with the plastic outer shell...

[Erik Lund]

True there was plastic bottom and prism for the outer shell on the F4 - but for sure the whole chassis was magnesium!

I think you misunderstand, I actually see the benefit of a outer shell in plastic and rubber to protect the inner magnesium chassis the lenses work really well with that design as well!

What I'm trying to say is that it is super important the lens stays on the camera no matter what happens, more or less, otherwise you will have to switch to the back up camera, not always easy for a PJ, event type shooting situation where your running around,,,

I was shooting the F4E,,, BTW A true picture machine - I don't think I ever had a bad image with that camera,,,

What could be a way to use plastic in a safe way for the case of the D810 design, could be if they changed the screw design: Beef up the design with a larger diameter screw, double the diameter to 5mm or something, so the screws really could connect the F-mount to the mirror-box - A slight change to the screw holes in the mount would be needed nothing else,,,

It looks like they ignored this and just used same size as for magnesium, just like they do on the plastic lenses,,, It is the initial rip out of the first screw that cascades into a total failure,,,,

[Erik Lund]

F4 Chassis,,, and sample of 'normal use' of Nikon camera

[Hermann]

On the contrary: the contents are better protected if the container deforms so as to absorb some of the impact.  When a camera or a human head comes to an abrupt stop the kinetic energy has to go somewhere, and if it is not dissipated deforming the container it is dissipated on the contents rattling around inside.  If protecting the contents from impact is the issue, polycarbonate is a much better choice for the camera shell than metal - small children suffer much less severe brain injuries from falls because their skulls are flexible.

That's actually the reason why binoculars meant for use in tough conditions are armoured, for instance those used by the military. There's nothing quite like a thickish rubber or foam armour when it comes to protecting the optics from impacts. However, such armour adds to the weight. In some cases it can be as much as 20% of the weight.

Hermann

[Peter Connan]

Perhaps I have merely been lucky, but I often pick up my camera and lens (500 f4) merely by the camera grip. This is with the camera pointing down, and on "plastic" bodies (D7000, D610, D750). So far it has not caused me any problems.

I am not sure how else to alter the focus point selection when shooting hand-held with this lens?

[Akira]

True there was plastic bottom and prism for the outer shell on the F4 - but for sure the whole chassis was magnesium!

I think you misunderstand, I actually see the benefit of a outer shell in plastic and rubber to protect the inner magnesium chassis the lenses work really well with that design as well!

What I'm trying to say is that it is super important the lens stays on the camera no matter what happens, more or less, otherwise you will have to switch to the back up camera, not always easy for a PJ, event type shooting situation where your running around,,,

I was shooting the F4E,,, BTW A true picture machine - I don't think I ever had a bad image with that camera,,,

What could be a way to use plastic in a safe way for the case of the D810 design, could be if they changed the screw design: Beef up the design with a larger diameter screw, double the diameter to 5mm or something, so the screws really could connect the F-mount to the mirror-box - A slight change to the screw holes in the mount would be needed nothing else,,,

It looks like they ignored this and just used same size as for magnesium, just like they do on the plastic lenses,,, It is the initial rip out of the first screw that cascades into a total failure,,,,

I didn't mean the plastic outer shell is bad.  Rather, I prefer it.  The plastic can absorb the shock better than magnesium, which will contribute to protect the camera.  I prefer plastic lens hoods to the metal ones for the same reason.  Also, plastic won't get as cold as the metal under lower temperature, which will contribute to the user comfort.  Even in Tokyo, the cold camera body in winter is uncomfortable.

Perhaps the Achilles heel of F4 would be the shutter unit which is the only one in a single-digit body that didn't boast 150k actuation.

F4 Chassis,,, and sample of 'normal use' of Nikon camera

Oh, I didn't know you were the model for the early logo of Jamiroquai...

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Perhaps I have merely been lucky, but I often pick up my camera and lens (500 f4) merely by the camera grip. This is with the camera pointing down, and on "plastic" bodies (D7000, D610, D750). So far it has not caused me any problems.

Well, I don't know what to say.   

I am not sure how else to alter the focus point selection when shooting hand-held with this lens?

You could hang the lens strap (not the camera strap)  around your neck and let the weight rest on the strap. Then make the adjustment to focus settings. Alternatively, you can put the lens on the ground so that the lens hood contacts the ground. Finally there is a custom setting which changes the way the button+dial controls work, allowing one to first press the button with one hand and without holding it down, rotate the dial, finally press the button again to end the setting.

[bjornthun]

I didn't mean the plastic outer shell is bad.  Rather, I prefer it.  The plastic can absorb the shock better than magnesium, which will contribute to protect the camera.  I prefer plastic lens hoods to the metal ones for the same reason.  Also, plastic won't get as cold as the metal under lower temperature, which will contribute to the user comfort.  Even in Tokyo, the cold camera body in winter is uncomfortable.

Perhaps the Achilles heel of F4 would be the shutter unit which is the only one in a single-digit body that didn't boast 150k actuation.

Oh, I didn't know you were the model for the early logo of Jamiroquai...

Erik just tries to combine our Scandinavian Viking heritage with digital photography... 

[John Koerner]

Breaking news: D500 is also plastic mount. Just checked per Erik's suggestion.

Surprised: no, not really.

Disappointed: yes, definitively.

Can you cite your references?