Nikon d810 (Page 2): In the OP the poster states that he does landscapes. The higher pixel count could serve him well for landscapes. The difference between a 24 MP landscape photo and...

rcdovala

In the OP the poster states that he does landscapes. The higher pixel count could serve him well for landscapes. The difference between a 24 MP landscape photo and a 36 MP landscape photo is significant.

BebuLamar

ipstech wrote:

Stay with the D610 and learn how to use it. There is nothing to gain by an upgrade.

How do you know that the OP needs to learn how to use it? Although I am happy with a 16MP camera, more pixels is an advantage.

BebuLamar

bpulv wrote:

If it is refurbished by Nikon, I would say yes; otherwise no. At $2,000 it is over than $1,000 less than the D850 will cost, and at your level of knowledge you will probably not get the value in use for the additional $1,000 you will spend.

How do you which level of knowledge the OP has?

Haydon

rcdovala wrote:

Using that logic, I can make great photos with an 8 MP camera as well, so why bother getting anything better?

That's a valid point but falls very short when you want to make really large prints and the OP is interested in landscape work.

The D810 continues to be an amazing camera and will continue to prove making world class images in the years to come.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

rmorrison1116 wrote:

I'd hold off a bit longer until the D850 hits the street, driving down the cost of the D810 even more. But is money is not a consideration, go for it...

How sure are you/we that the 850 will replace the 810 rather than be another horse in the herd?
The 810 is a fantastic camera with wide market acceptance. How much more will Nikon need to drop the price and still maintain sales?

rcdovala

I agree with you. My comment was directed at the poster that stated the OP didn't need any more than what he already had. In landscape photography, generally, more is better. To some extent, I was being facetious.

Haydon wrote:

That's a valid point but falls very short when you want to make really large prints and the OP is interested in landscape work.

The D810 continues to be an amazing camera and will continue to prove making world class images in the years to come.

Haydon

rcdovala wrote:

I agree with you. My comment was directed at the poster that stated the OP didn't need any more than what he already had. In landscape photography, generally, more is better. To some extent, I was being facetious.

Pardon my own misled interpretation. Sometimes its difficult extracting when someone is facetious in text. Appreciate the response.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Fkaufman3 wrote:

Currently have d610 and d7100 and would like to upgrade to d810 which is currently $1998 refurb. Would that be a prudent move, I take landscape and events, sports. Trying to get into portrait. For sports I do use canon 7d mark 2

I thought my D800 was a great camera until I got a D810 a couple of weeks ago. It feels like everything that I was less than perfectly satisfied with was addressed - faster and better autofocus (including Group AF), faster frame rate, better rear LCD preview screen, and without the AA filter even more crazy fine detail capture. The also made it 100% ISO invariant, which makes it more resistant to noise in the shadows. ISO 64 is a nice touch, and being able to shoot at ISO 6400 and have it look as good as ISO 3200 on the D800 alone was worth it. I shoot lots of wildlife and birds, birds in flight, and other subjects, often in poor light and from just the first few weeks I can tell you there is no question in my mind - you will see a difference. I may just sell my other D800 and get another D810 I like it so much.

I don't do much portraiture, but it certainly is nice to have 36 mp, especially for hair, eyebrows, eyes (especially eyebrows), lips etc. Better to have the detail then massage the image to your (and your client's) liking, than to not have it at all in the first place. I don't buy the logic that you don't need 36 mp - the D8XX cameras are the first that have provided a true near-film experience in terms of image quality. Everything else is good, but these cameras are truly great.

Interestingly, I think those that are advising against getting a D810 haven't actually used one - so beware of the false prophets. (sorry guys, it's just my impression with no basis in fact - before you start the flame wars). If I am wrong, I stand corrected and would welcome a post that makes your point - two images, one taken with a D810 and another with just about anything else (other than a Canon 5D Mk IV or 5DS-R - as evidence that you won't benefit from more camera resolution. Oh, and use a decent lens - not a 28-300 for your comparison.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

The D810 will remain a viable camera for some time to come. It's my workhorse and at $2,000 it is a great buy. I don't see it going much below $1,995 anytime in the near future. I will be buying the D850 but I will keep using my D810.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Absolutely, and this is from someone who purchased a D810 refurb from Nikon for $1000 more.

That being said, to get the benefits of an Fx body, you need Fx lenses.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Gene51 wrote:

I thought my D800 was a great camera until I got a... (show quote)

I shoot primarily with an 800E. Your credible impression of the 810 compared to an 800 leaves me with painful GAS.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

As a recent D810 user who has been very happy for years with D200s and D300s, let me just say that apart from the pixel count, which can be a bit of a bother because of the really big file sizes, the D810 is just a dream and pleasure to set up and use. There are many new and useful options in the menus, and everything about it just feels and works and sounds "right" when shooting.
I'm sure that there will be some new things on the 850, but when reading and then trying to make deductions about details not specified, I decided that there was no overpowering reason to wait. Nothing that we "know" about what is coming is of interest to me. Who knows though...I may learn later that I need to have an 850, but in the meantime I'm getting to enjoy a whole host of benefits now.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Kmgw9v wrote:

I shoot primarily with an 800E. Your credible impression of the 810 compared to an 800 leaves me with painful GAS.

I am so sorry, but I did compare it to a D800 which I am most familiar with. Image quality is still extremely high with the D800, but the D810 just expands on that a little bit. I am not so sure I'd run out to replace a D800E, however.

Jim Bob

Gene51 wrote:

I thought my D800 was a great camera until I got a... (show quote)

Thanks for your insight.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Jim Bob wrote:

Thanks for your insight.

You bet!