Forced Back to the Nikon D810

[Stany Buyle]

I can't help but wish that posters actually knew the equipment they talk about. Am I missing something? I have taken many thousands of shots with the D850. My takeaway is that either folks don't know how to use the D850 or, worse, have never even laid a hand on one. It makes me want to give up such discussions altogether. It seems that threads no longer have any intention of staying on topic.
It's not just this forum, but is ubiquitous. Often it seems like posters are filibustering to avoid buying the D850. Sorry folks, but not every opinion is considered... IMO. LOL.
 

Pretty pathetic... 

About D850 vs D500:

Captured through the viewfinder of MY D850 , the difference in view between D850 & D500:


( Please notice that the first image(D500 viewfinder) is a simulation based on the image taken with my Phone though the D850 viewfinder.)

And how you see the AF point coverage in your viewfinder makes the big difference for me when you compare D850-DX mode vs D500 for wildlife photography (Sorry, under while the bird was gone...):


( Please notice that the first image(D500 viewfinder) is a simulation based on the image taken with my Phone though the D850 viewfinder.)

About Focus point coverage and the way you see it in your viewfinder, D500 beats D850 & D5 hands down.

About D810 vs D850...

What's wrong to prefer a build in flash commander system over a bulky accessory, even for a professional user?

What's wrong to like the advantages a PUF provides on certain occasions, even for a professional user?
A sample taken handheld with my "prehistoric" D800e & 105 + 2xTCIIIe combo and the mighty PUF:

A screenshot of the AF area as seen in NikonViewNX:


And a 100% crop of the AF area:



My opinion about the D850 after more than 6 months shooting with it and approx 5500 images:
•   The best camera Nikon offers until today for studio photography.
•   The best camera Nikon offers until today for landscape photography.
•   The best camera Nikon offers until today for LV photography.
•   The best camera anybody offers at this moment for macro shooters who work with non moving subjects, intentionally undercooled or etherized insects, partly because of resolution and partly because of the stacking feature.
•   If you don't mind bulkyness and weight, while used WITH the battery grip and D5 battery and in good light, the best "all in one" wildlife camera anybody offers at this moment


TMHO, there are much better options for high iso photography though:
A D750 if your budget is limited. (D750 blows away D810 at iso 3200+ ànd is significantly better than D850 from iso 3200 upwards).
A D4s or D5 if you don't mind weight or price.

TMHO D500, -while used in good light-, is a MUCH better action camera because of the viewfinder & AF point coverage differences as mentioned above ànd -of course-, because of native 10 fps ànd 200 NEF buffer.

For people like me who prefer D810 in a combination with D500 over D850 because of the benefits it provides for my kind of photography, a very good friend of mine who is a professional photographer and teacher wrote me the following:
"The good thing about the D850? It reduced the price on the D810!
The D810 is good enough for 99.99% of the photographers out there!"

For the future though, with a Nikon FX mirrorless in my mind and if it will be as I would like it to be:
•   with F mount or "in-house" Nikon F mount adaptor,
•   with streaming magnification possibility in your viewfinder,
•   with PUF and flash commander on board,
•   even more resolution than D850 actually provide  (75MP?)
•   with very wide AF point coverage in viewfinder, like Sony pro FX cams.
•   .....

..., D500, D810 ànd D850 might become obsolete, and probably even sooner as we expect.

Just my thoughts...

Kindest regards to everybody!

Stany

[Ilkka Nissilä]

My D800 and D810 auto focused perfectly with my 105 AF-S + 2xTC while my D850 did not.

It seems the Multi-CAM 20k is optimized for fast lenses. If I recall correctly autofocus with 105 AF-S with converters is not promised to work.

Compared to D810, D850 is a rather loud operating DSLR again.

I agree; the D810 has a pleasing, soft sound even in S mode, whereas the D850 S mode sound is crispier; however, in Qc mode the D850 is quiet enough in my experience and this works well when photographing in situations where the camera sound might create a distraction. I use Qc instead of Q because the latter creates two sounds, but I don't hold the shutter button long enough in Qc to get the second exposure.

vibrations due to mirror Slap and Shutter Shock -which are much more present in D850 than in D810-, might cause more blur than with D810 while shooting handheld. I found my D850 images to be less sharp than what I get handheld with my D810, especially at relative slow shutter speeds. The D810 lack of vibration rules out the resolution advantage D850 should have.

This is strange, the D850 has a counterbalanced shutter specifically designed to minimize vibration. The D810 mirror movement is slower than the D850, the faster movement is necessary to make it possible to get high frame rates with good viewfinder visibility and AF. The D850 mirror might introduce more vibration than the D810's mirror but the shutter in the D850 should introduce less vibration than the D810's shutter. Furthermore the EFCS is available in the D850's Q and Qc modes which in my experience can dramatically improve hand-held sharpness at slow-ish speeds (i.e. 1/50s, 1/80s).  Furthermore the mirror movement is slowed down in Qc mode so it should lead to less mirror-induced vibration compared to S mode.

So for vibration I find the D850 to be better especially with lenses such as the 300 PF in Qc mode (with EFCS on), but I no longer have the D810 to compare mechanical shutter vibration between the two (in S mode). Any vibration issues I might have in S mode, Qc seems to rectify and I'm extremely happy with this aspect of the camera. Of course Qc has a slight delay compared to S mode but this delay is necessary to get the benefits in reducing vibration and I find that they've made an excellent compromise which still permits normal viewfinder use while activating the EFCS.

As for the sound of the camera, I admit the D810 was more pleasing in S mode and this characteristic of the camera fell victim to the necessity to provide higher frame rates and better AF tracking (shorter mirror blackout) which are saleable features. I think the D810 remains a classic but the AF improvements in the D850 are dramatic enough when used with fast lenses that the ugrade was worth it for me. And the EFCS in Qc mode is critical improvement for those situations I might want to use the 300 PF indoors at slowish speeds (in event photography, I felt D810 results with the 300 PF were a bit lacking in crispness at intermediate speeds though not bad, just not as crisp as the lens is capable of). Also for indoor architectural details I intend to use the 300 PF with the D850 in quiet continuous mode. For wildlife it might not be fast enough depending on how far ahead the photographer can predict the subject's behaviour in the immediate future. However if observing slow-speed softness with the 300 PF hand held, I would immediately recommend trying the Qc (EFCS ON) in the D850, provided it is available. You might be surprised with the improvement in outcome.

D500, D810 ànd D850 might become obsolete, and probably even sooner as we expect.

If this happens then the majority of autofocus lenses become obsolete too. I don't believe it is possible to implement competive AF with a mirrorless camera using screwdrive or most AF-S lenses; AF-P lenses are likely to work though. Furthermore there is the issue of optimizing the PDAF sensors for the exit pupil distance which means a mirrorless with a short flange distance will likely not focus as well with off-center points using F mount AF lenses than a DSLR will, though I suppose they can try to make a compromise.

Finally on-sensor PDAF points seem to cause banding in highlights if we are to believe dpreview's report.

https://www.dpreview.com/samples/9120111657/sony-a7-iii-sample-gallery

"In a couple of the photos you may notice striping, a problem we've found common to all cameras with masked phase detect AF pixels when shot a certain way: with very fast lenses wide open pointed directly at bright light sources to purposefully induce flare (e.g. here and here)."

If you look at the fifth image the highlights in the right top corner show this kind of banding. IMO this would be a major complaint if it occurred in a high end Nikon camera.

I do not find EVFs acceptable for my own use due to the artifacts (jaggies around high contrast edges, flickering) which compromise my shooting enjoyment and ability to focus on the subject's subtle emotional cues which permit me to select the right time for the shots, and also lead to reduced battery life and may in contrasty light show blocked shadows etc. An EVF is simply not an option I would be willing to consider because of these issues, and thus I am likely to stay with DSLRs as long as I live. I can't believe that there aren't others who are not similarly bothered by the EVF and thus I don't believe the DSLR will be universally replaced by mirrorless cameras.

I fully agree that the D5 and D500 are more practical to use for action photography because of the larger buffers, higher frame rates, more practical file sizes but the D850 does permit greater flexibility in post-process cropping than the other two. I consider this a "reserve zoom" feature and sometimes it is very practical. On my desktop, editing 45MP NEFs is not so much an issue, but on my laptop it is a royal pain to have to go through high frame rate captures with 45MP originals. I guess this is a problem that eventually goes away, but I generally avoid high frame rate shooting and prefer single shots where possible, to avoid accumulation of unnecessary data on my hard drives. Still, I do think that many people will find the flexibility of working with large files a valuable feature. I have a bit mixed feelings about it.

Finally regarding the use of a flash as a commander, there are many problems with this approach. First, the sync flash is included in the exposure and it can cause light pollution from the commander even when the flash output is set to zero. Second, the pop-up has a long recycle time which means one can not take fast paced shots which I find to be necessary in group shots when there are kids in the shot each image is different and I've had dismal failures trying to use the pop-up to trigger remotes in this case. Timing shots with the pop-up as commander also is difficult because of the increased delay from shutter button press to actual exposure. I find it is much better to use an SU-800 as optical commander (no visible light pollution, much faster recycle and less shutter delay) or the radio system in the new Nikons. I welcome the absence of the pop-up flash in the D850 and am very happy that they left it out, permitting the increased viewfinder size and free shift and rotatory movement of the 24mm PC. In fact now all my Nikons are free of the pop-up flash.  For me they are more valuable this way.

[Pistnbroke]

I don't understand these colour comments ..if you do raw then the colour is up to you ...I have mixed  D7100 D800 and D810 at weddings in JPEG and you cannot tell the difference between the shots ...

[Frank Fremerey]

I don't understand these colour comments ..if you do raw then the colour is up to you ...I have mixed  D7100 D800 and D810 at weddings in JPEG and you cannot tell the difference between the shots ...

The color character of a recording chip is a highly non linear feature with a kind of auto masking effect one cannot easily imitate in post if at all. Combined with the Exspeed 5 capabilites of analysing and optimising the recording chip's output (D5, D500, D850, I guess even in RAW) the situation gets even more complex. In the Exspeed 4 and earlier times the WB situation was much less satisfying, in mixed light with an orange or green "smear" all over the frame that was next to unfilterable.

The Israeli / Toshiba / Nikon / Sony design of the unique D850 recording chip creates unmatched color quality at base ISO. I have never seen such a color fidelity and differentiation undisturbed by any formerly known WB issues and combined with unmatched AF accuracy with fast and ultrafast optics.

That is the little difference of the D850 to the D500. If you want that and need that, get the D850. She deserves to be a bestselling camera.

[Pistnbroke]

Frank.....does that mean that if I use a D810 alongside a D850 in JPEG  that the colour of the D850 will not match the D810?
I have no interest in shooting RAW

[Michael Erlewine]

Frank.....does that mean that if I use a D810 alongside a D850 in JPEG  that the colour of the D850 will not match the D810?
I have no interest in shooting RAW

I'm not Frank, but I'll be frank and say: there is a very definite difference between the D810 and the D850, whether you use raw or JPG. The D850 is WAY better IMO.

[Frank Fremerey]

I'm not Frank, but I'll be frank and say: there is a very definite difference between the D810 and the D850, whether you use raw or JPG. The D850 is WAY better IMO.

+1

[Frank Fremerey]

I have no interest in shooting RAW

Then go, use you phone.

... joke ...

I shoot JPEG & RAW and if I am not happy with the JPEG for some reason I roll my own JPEG!

The RAW is what gives you full access to the camera. If the Chip produces 14 Bit RAW file information and you throw away everything but 8 Bit, you waste your money on these cameras.

[Pistnbroke]

If I shoot 1500 pics at a wedding with 3 cameras  I cannot have the pics from one looking different to the others....if that is what you are saying ....another reason to stick with my trio of D810...I am not going to buy problems ...

[Michael Erlewine]

If I shoot 1500 pics at a wedding with 3 cameras  I cannot have the pics from one looking different to the others....if that is what you are saying ....another reason to stick with my trio of D810...I am not going to buy problems ...

You can wrestle them in post to look the same, but it is a PITA.

[Michael Erlewine]

I received my Nikon D850 back from repair. I'm so happy to see it. The D850 really is an exceptional camera, one I got used to so quickly that when it was gone it was difficult to revert to the D810. I had felt the D810 and D850 were kind of the same until the D850 was gone. Then I found out how spoiled I had become.

It took so long because Nikon repair had to wait for parts, which took weeks. This after originally promising to return it in 7-10 days. Apparently, they break the camera down for repair and could not return it to me while waiting for parts. Anyway, the D850 is back. I, for one, am grateful for what  superb cameras Nikon is capable of producing. I have had, in the last two years, the Sony X1D, Fuji GFX, Pentax K3 and K1, sony A7R2 and A7R3 cameras and, IMO, none of them touch the D850. Probably just me, but that's how I experience it.

[Frank Fremerey]

If I shoot 1500 pics at a wedding with 3 cameras  I cannot have the pics from one looking different to the others....if that is what you are saying ....another reason to stick with my trio of D810...I am not going to buy problems ...

No problem to gain visual consistency if you stick to one generation of camera. So if you choose said three cameras from the collection of D500, D5 and D850 (All EXSPEED 5) you will be more than happy. On events I do not even use my display anymore: D500 and D850 are as reliable and consistent as my D3 was or my F4.