D800: 1st photos

These photos were taken with my new D800 today, sorry DW you're gonna hate me even more.

These photos were not edited at all in post-processing from the RAW file taken, they were resized and converted to JPG in the Adobe RGB color profile. If you are using an internet browser that does not support Adobe RGB, then the photos will appear flat.
I didn't want to do any post-processing so that you can see more or less how the D800 performs in RAW converted to JPG.



Exif:
Lens: 24-70mm f/2.8
Focal length: 38mm
Aperture: f/8
Exposure time: 1/80
ISO: 100



Exif:
Lens: 24-70mm f/2.8
Focal length: 24mm
Aperture: f/8
Exposure time: 1/200
ISO: 100



Exif:
Lens: 24-70mm f/2.8
Focal length: 38mm
Aperture: f/8
Exposure time: 1/80
ISO: 100

Here's the 100% crop of the photograph above, again totally unedited:

Hey there Dr. D! Wow! Those images look just great - especially for just a straight conversion to JPG.

The detail and and colour is incredible. Can't wait to see more!

PS. Are you going to introduce us to these fine looking folks above?

I'm impressed with the sharpness and detail and colour. That is one impressive camera! It's still gonna take a lottery win to fund one of those for me! Nice shots, Dr. D

Very good images! There is so much talk about the D800, the imaging capability is being overlooked. I'm not sure I'll rush out and get one, but it is attracting.

Very nice, the detail is fantastic!

These are awesome - now that's what I call "real world testing & results" congrats on the D800 - and keep posting

Beautiful! And yes, I do hate you...thank you very much!

Guys thanks for the comments, and a lot of praises should go to this amazing camera. I feel that the D800 has huge potential for studio (controlled environment) and landscape work.

Below is the same type of settings to the 1st photo I uploaded above, with the same model. This time I applied a little post-processing, what I felt was needed to my personal taste. It is actually minimal, I find that if I go any further it would not be as natural as I normally like.



You will notice that I brought a little more color and details back to the girl's dress.

bluenoser said:

Hey there Dr. D! Wow! Those images look just great - especially for just a straight conversion to JPG.

The detail and and colour is incredible. Can't wait to see more!

PS. Are you going to introduce us to these fine looking folks above?

Click to expand...

James you are more than welcome in South Africa with your gear!

Last photo with minimal post processing done:


...and the 100% crop on the left eye:

Wow! The D800 is looking good. Nice shots, Dr. D.

Ok, below some photos from a Fashion Week. The D800 appears more and more to be an uncompromising camera, meaning that in low-light any bad settings from the photographer or wrong technique could lead into a bad shot. Coming from the D700, I find the D800 to be less versatile, it requires a lot more attention.



Exif:
Camera: Nikon D800
Lens: Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII
Exposure: 1/125
Aperture: f/4
Focal Length: 200mm
ISO: 1100



Exif:
Camera: Nikon D800
Lens: Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII
Exposure: 1/125
Aperture: f/4
Focal Length: 200mm
ISO: 1000

Dr Daniels said:

The D800 appears more and more to be an uncompromising camera, meaning that in low-light any bad settings from the photographer or wrong technique could lead into a bad shot. Coming from the D700, I find the D800 to be less versatile, it requires a lot more attention.

Click to expand...

You could definitely substitute D800 with D7000 and the comments would be equally true. I have the D40, D7000 and D700 and by far it's the D7000 that will punish you mercilessly if you screw up the exposure or if your technique is off or your shutter speed dips too low, etc. The D40 and the D700 have far more forgiving sensors.

Having said that, boy when you get it right (as you've done with these pictures) you've really knocked it out of the park!

So, overall, If you were recommending an FX camera out of the D800 and D700, would you then recommend the D700 instead?

jengajoh said:

So, overall, If you were recommending an FX camera out of the D800 and D700, would you then recommend the D700 instead?

Click to expand...

I would recommend the D800 simply because you would benefit from DSLRs' latest technology, and therefore better dynamic range (has to be digital cameras' main weakness for me), improved color rendition straight off the camera, and incredible details.

However, if your photography is very varied (portrait, wildlife, sport, landscape, wedding...) and you could not be bothered with video. The D700 is more than a handful and will never fail to deliver top quality images in capable hands.
If you do a lot of studio work and working in controlled environments, or if you are a pure landscape photographer, the D800 is hard to beat in the whole 35mm digital world today.

Thanks so much for your reviews! I know what I'm saving for now.

Dr Daniels said:

I would recommend the D800 simply because you would benefit from DSLRs' latest technology, and therefore better dynamic range (has to be digital cameras' main weakness for me), improved color rendition straight off the camera, and incredible details.

However, if your photography is very varied (portrait, wildlife, sport, landscape, wedding...) and you could not be bothered with video. The D700 is more than a handful and will never fail to deliver top quality images in capable hands.
If you do a lot of studio work and working in controlled environments, or if you are a pure landscape photographer, the D800 is hard to beat in the whole 35mm digital world today.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't count the D800 out when it comes to sports application. Check out some of the images using the D800 in volleyball and baseball.

FSU Sand Volleyball v Hawaii - PTFPhoto Archive

TU Baseball v LSU Alexandria - Apr 2012 - PTFPhoto Archive

I could never be a photographer at collegiate level sand volleyball events...just wouldn't ever be able to get a shot made...lol

If you want to see the image from the previous post without the distracting watermark, go here:

PTFPhoto Archive

Really great images! Amazing resolution.

Glenn, the 4 fps make it a little slow for sports, in my opinion. Baseball and Volleyball aren't Hockey or Football, where you need a good burst to capture as much of the critical action as you can. I think it will fall way short here.

Photowyzard said:

If you want to see the image from the previous post without the distracting watermark, go here:

PTFPhoto Archive

Really great images! Amazing resolution.

Glenn, the 4 fps make it a little slow for sports, in my opinion. Baseball and Volleyball aren't Hockey or Football, where you need a good burst to capture as much of the critical action as you can. I think it will fall way short here.

Click to expand...

I agree that the D800 is a little short with its 4fps for sport photography. But I think the real problem which makes the D800 'less' appropriate for that field of photography is its inferior buffer processing speed due to the huge amount of data recorded from the 36MP sensor.
However, since perhaps most sport photos will end up posted on the internet, we could easily reduce the files being recorded by shooting in JPG in low size and res which will increase the buffer capacity.