Quick question for D800 users.

D

Deezey

Senior Member
What would be a good starting point for a desktop?

I am deciding between a D610/800 but am unsure if my Computer will handle the files smoothly.


My stats are
Dell 660 with an i5 quad core
8 gigs of ram (easy and cheap to upgrade)
and so far a 1TB drive. (Another easy and fairly cheap upgrade/purchase.)

Both cameras are in my price range (body only for D800) and while I know I can easily do a D600 file...(buddy has one) I have not tried a D800 file. I haven't found an owner in my local clubs....so I can't bum a couple full res files...

Thanks for the help!
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
It should handle them fine, but it could be slower than with the D600 files. What software are you using? Import times for LR will be lengthened, and I strongly recommend creating 1:1 previews on import - takes a lot longer to bring 'em in, but it saves time reviewing them. The files are big and will chew up space rather quickly, so if you save everything plan on archiving stuff off the main disc fairly regularly.
 
D

Deezey

Senior Member
Editing software I run Lightroom 5.3 plus Nik Tools.
Also I have learned not to save everything. So that's a plus. Memory I will be upgrading to 12 plus gigs.

The reason I asked is because people have been saying nothing below the i7 will work well....

i figure as long as I don't try those 7 plus HDR images I should be ok. Comparing the D610 and 800 the D800 just seems to be the better camera. But that 36MP has me worried.
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
It really depends on what you're shooting. I have both the 600 and 800 and use them both. I use the D800 primarily for macro, wild life and studio work, and the D600 for pretty much everything else. The 24MP's is more than enough, and while supposed experts call the D800's sensor the best one ever, I find no shortcomings in the D600's - unless you're counting pixels.
 
D

Deezey

Senior Member
It's a close race BH. I have used a D600 and the only thing that it lacked was AF points. And that was really only evident when I was shooting smaller songbirds.

Other than that it is a great camera. And more than likely the one I will purchase. But I have just been running through all the pro's and con's. And the computer spec was the only thing I wasn't getting a straight answer on.

Either one will be a huge step up from the D90.
 
B

Bill16

Senior Member
I eager to hear what you end up getting my friend! Since I've never even held either Nikon, I can't make any suggestions. But from all I've heard, I'm rooting for the D800! Lol :D
Either way I can't wait to see the shots you come up with bud! :D

Deezey said:
It's a close race BH. I have used a D600 and the only thing that it lacked was AF points. And that was really only evident when I was shooting smaller songbirds.

Other than that it is a great camera. And more than likely the one I will purchase. But I have just been running through all the pro's and con's. And the computer spec was the only thing I wasn't getting a straight answer on.

Either one will be a huge step up from the D90.
Click to expand...
 
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
You can download samples off the web if you do a search. I had a 600 then 800 and didn't notice a big difference in processing time. I use an I5 and it's ok for the 800. I tend to take maybe 100 shots, get rid of 90 in Lightroom by previewing and work on the remaining ten

I only shoot raw and the speed is acceptable for me with the volumes I do as an amateur. If I was doing it all day long as a job I would want something faster.
 
D

Deezey

Senior Member
Geoffc said:
You can download samples off the web if you do a search. I had a 600 then 800 and didn't notice a big difference in processing time. I use an I5 and it's ok for the 800. I tend to take maybe 100 shots, get rid of 90 in Lightroom by previewing and work on the remaining ten

I only shoot raw and the speed is acceptable for me with the volumes I do as an amateur. If I was doing it all day long as a job I would want something faster.
Click to expand...

That's what I am worried about. When birding really sets in in my area...I can rack up huge numbers of shots. 600 to 800 usually on a good day.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2
 
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
I didn't realise it was for birding. A D7100 would be a much better tool for the job. Still 24 mp, but the pixels are where you need them. If you're only filling the DX part of the frame it will out resolve the D800. Even my D300 will out resolve the D600 in the DX part of the frame. The difference being that the D7100 can also shoot at reasonable ISOs unlike my 300. Not quite up to the 600/800 but good none the less. Have you already discounted this?
 
D

Deezey

Senior Member
It's not just for birding. Birding in Ohio tends to be just a spring and fall occasion with a couple of twitches thrown in during the summer. But landscape is my main love and the reason for going FX. I am going for the whole picture so to speak.

the D90 actually does a pretty good job in the birding department. And honestly I doubt I will ever part with the D90. The FX is for the landscape and the occasional bird that gets too close.
 
B

Bill16

Senior Member
Since your planning on keeping your D90(totally understandable), you could use it for birding and a D800 for the best landscape Nikon! I would think that would be a great combo, and you could upgrade the second Nikon for birding later if needed! :D

Then you wouldn't get overloaded with the D800 files, and would still have the easy to handle 12mp files for your high output birding shots! :D

Deezey said:
It's not just for birding. Birding in Ohio tends to be just a spring and fall occasion with a couple of twitches thrown in during the summer. But landscape is my main love and the reason for going FX. I am going for the whole picture so to speak.

the D90 actually does a pretty good job in the birding department. And honestly I doubt I will ever part with the D90. The FX is for the landscape and the occasional bird that gets too close.
Click to expand...
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Deezey said:
It's not just for birding. Birding in Ohio tends to be just a spring and fall occasion with a couple of twitches thrown in during the summer. But landscape is my main love and the reason for going FX. I am going for the whole picture so to speak.

the D90 actually does a pretty good job in the birding department. And honestly I doubt I will ever part with the D90. The FX is for the landscape and the occasional bird that gets too close.
Click to expand...

OK, so now that I know what you're shooting I'm going to shove you with great force at the D800e. The lack of an anti-aliasing filter will give you wonderful detail on your landscapes, and the extra pixels are a must for birding. I didn't go with the 'e' and while I don't regret it there are times I kick myself and wonder why when spending that much I didn't go the extra 10$? Not that I look at shots and say, "Man, that would have been so much better on the 800e", but I've read enough from photographers using both since I made the purchase to realize that there is a difference.

With regard to Geoff's recommendation of the D7100, it's something I strongly considered before adding the D800, but the small buffer size limits you to about 5-7 consecutive RAW shots before filling and slowing the camera down and that's not acceptable to me when I'm tracking a hawk or eagle. The D800 will give me 16MP's in DX mode and something like 28MP's in 1.2x crop mode, as well as around 16 shots before filling the buffer, which is a clear win. Plus shooting in cropped mode gives me smaller files to deal with, and since I am more than likely going to crop that's another win.
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Deezey said:
What would be a good starting point for a desktop?

My stats are
Dell 660 with an i5 quad core
8 gigs of ram (easy and cheap to upgrade)
and so far a 1TB drive. (Another easy and fairly cheap upgrade/purchase.)

Both cameras are in my price range (body only for D800) and while I know I can easily do a D600 file...(buddy has one) I have not tried a D800 file. I haven't found an owner in my local clubs....so I can't bum a couple full res files...

Thanks for the help!
Click to expand...

Doug - I have a mediocre desktop compared to the i7 processors.

My desktop is only a 2.7ghz AMD x6 Phenom processor, 12 gb DDR3 RAM, 180 gb SSD card C drive and a 2tb data drive which does a decent job in processing the RAW and video files using Adobe CS5.

If you know a good website that allows us to send larger files, I can send you some full resolution NEF files from my D800E and see how your computer can process it. This will give you a better idea if your computer is up to "speed". ;)
 
D

Deezey

Senior Member
gqtuazon said:
Doug - I have a mediocre desktop compared to the i7 processors.

My desktop is only a 2.7ghz AMD x6 Phenom processor, 12 gb DDR3 RAM, 180 gb SSD card C drive and a 2tb data drive which does a decent job in processing the RAW and video files using Adobe CS5.

If you know a good website that allows us to send larger files, I can send you some full resolution NEF files from my D800E and see how your computer can process it. This will give you a better idea if your computer is up to "speed". ;)
Click to expand...

I don't know of any site for moving large files. But thank you for the offer.

I am still hashing it out mentally over the choice between the D800/610. Everything says go D800. But then the D610 is a great camera too.
 
Top