I'm going to pass on the D800 for now

Before I start, this is not a knocking the D800 thread. I have posted because I was surprised that I couldn't convince myself to get one at the moment, and I'm the sort of person that would normally find that easy.

The other day I was in Jessops and noticed that the Nikon D800 had dropped to £2100. The technical me wanted one as it would obviously improve my photography with all those pixies. I rushed home and did my usual thing; I put everything in a spreadsheet and calculated the cost of change (From my D300s with a mix of DX and FX glass). By the time I'd bought the body, changed various lenses and upgraded my PC to handle the images I would be looking at around £5000. This would put me in a similar position lens wise, and allow me to post process / view the images as I can now I know this is a lot of money, but heck my art would be sooo much better as a result of the increased dynamic range, high ISO low noise, lots of pixies etc etc

Having looked at the financial impact I then looked at the pros and cons (the D800 is not all pros). I scored the features and issues of the D800 against my D300s. In my very subjective test the D800 only just won in terms of what I want out of a camera. For example, going from 7 to 4 frames per second would cause me an issue. Not being able to import large images into my IPAD for review would really hurt (I would like to confirm this point, maybe someone here can confirm if it's possible to imort and view RAW files). If I didn't get more disciplined (Tripod more often) would I see a degradation in some images? Even if all of these issues went away, would it improve my images to the tune of five grand? My conclusion is that I'll stick with the D300s for now as it's a fine camera and concentrate on my composition /discipline. I'm not saying that I won't upgrade in the future, possibly even next year, but it certainly wasn't the cut and dry case that I expected. In reality Nikon don't currently make a camera that meets what I want. I'm sure many people are getting fantastic results with the D800, but what I probably want is a 24 megapixel D400 (A pro body / feature set DX) and Nikon may never make that I even looked at Canon (Don't tell anyone) but they didn't seem to have what I was looking for either.

Please don't try to counter this post with the image quality arguments as I know them and considered them in my scoring. I just know that I have not approached what my D300s can do so the problem is probably not the sensor

Have to agree with this totally....

The D800 never did interest me but he D600 did. After considering what the total cost would be between the camera and new lenses that I would need I just could not justify the amount of money involved with the upgrade. Using a DX lens on the D600 would drop it down to 10MP and defeat the purpose for getting the camera. Jeff

At the moment the D600 and 800 is only a few hundred pounds different in the UK. If you then take advantage of the lens rebates it's a no brainer.

The DX on the 800 is about 15mp, but I think you need FX flenses for most of your shooting to justify it. I was going to keep the 18-200 for walkabout purposes rather than rush to get the 28-300.

Anyway, it's all a bit academic for now!

I don't know what your background is or what you like to shoot but it is quite obvious that faster fps is important to you including the total overall cost. You did well with your assessment since all of the things that you've mentioned adds up. You didn't mention what made you consider going to FX. I think the D600 is a good compromise but in honesty, I think the D700 with a battery grip is best suited for your style. I know so since I use to own one and the IQ is much better than the D300s.

We only live once so make the most out of it. I love photography and I've spent a lot of money already with this hobby. The images that I take with it especially with my family are priceless. Some people spend a lot of money on clothes, jewelries, guns and/or cars. Whatever makes you happy and if you are willing to spend the money, why not?

This site does the comparisons for you.

Nikon D800 vs D300S - Our Analysis

ah the power of rationalization, because that is what we all do,, weigh off the advantages of each, and weigh it against the all mighty cash flow, or payment plan.

I think the real debate for you is the FX versus DX world. Even when I shot with the D300, I focused on buying FX lens to eliminate that variable for when the FX affordable camera came out,, let out a whoop of hurray when the D700 came out.

So, I would recommend you slowly sell off your DX lens (while the prices still hold up), phasing in FX lens that will work great on the D300 (FX lens have a real nice sweet spot on a DX sensors (often FX lens will core better on a DX sensor versus the FX sensor due to the edges of the lens). And once you have a sufficient FX lens collection switch to the right FX camera based of course on your own personal rationalization plan/needs.

I think people get way too hung up on the large pixel count and miss the truly revolutionary, or should I say "evolutionary" aspects of the D800. Above and beyond the MP count the real value of this camera is the awesome dynamic resolution, better than any existing camera on the market, the astounding IQ thanks in large part to the new EXPEED-3 chip, it's low light abilities that surpass all but the D4 and D3s, and HD video potential that you may or may not use right away but is there nevertheless. To judge this camera only on its megapixel output is to miss the forest for the trees.

Granted, the D800 is not for everyone and as we all know it's not the camera that takes the photo, it's the photographer. A camera is merely a tool, kinda like a Swiss Army knife. Some knifes have more tools than others. While D800 has the most tools, if the only tool you know how to use is the saw blade, then all the other tools will just get in your way.

A minimum change over of $2295 if I got $700 for my D300....Would I make any more $s with a D800, I don't think so, so why bother...

I think my point may have been lost judging by some of the responses. Firstly, I do recognise the improved dynamic range and image quality of the D800, however I see people producing stunning images with a D300 as well, unfortunately not me as regularly as I might like.

Secondly, I would like to move to FX at some point and I have very little doubt I will end up there. If need be I'll just buy the body and a couple of wider lenses to go with the 70-200vrii and I'll be near where I am now. I don't feel compelled to build a collection to ease the transition.

Thirdly, the money is not an issue. Whilst I'm no millionaire, my wife (also a keen photog and D300 user) had already encouraged me to do the upgrade if I wanted to. The only question regarding money was would I see a great improvement in my pictures for the outlay. My conclusion was that I can't buy great composition or technique so probably not.

As for fps, yes I do need/want it sometimes. If that ends up being the only stumbling block in the future I may just keep the 300 for those occasions.

I guess this post wasn't even specifically about the D800 which is undoubtedly a fine camera. I was just highlighting that on this occasion, rather than rushing into something, I questioned what I was trying to achieve and the answer was not as expected or hoped for. Let's face it, I would look like the cat who got the creme if I'd just picked up my new D800. I would also be writing a long post justifying the purchase