# New Nikon D800s... Why?



## ahsanford (May 21, 2014)

Just saw this link going around the rumor sites:
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/05/21/nikon-800s-reported-replace-d800-d800e-june/

And I had a question. Why does Canon employ a longer lifecycle on the more flagship bodies like the 1D, 5D, 7D, etc. (in fairness, usually with larger functional upgrades when they _do_ rev those designs) when Nikon seems to put out somewhat watered down upgrades on a more regular basis? 

I've been reviewing Northlight's nice release timeline (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/rumours.html#nikon_timeline) and it looks like other than the D300S line, Nikon's been releasing the more premium bodies at a pretty steady 2-3 year clip while Canon guys are on a 3-5 year cycle.

I'm not calling one company's approach better than the other -- I was just curious. Why rev the D800 at this point in time? Is it deemed in desperate need of an upgrade compared to the 5D3 right now? A big AF upgrade would be great for Nikon users, but why not wait until the next super-duper FF sensor rolls out and make a bigger splash then?

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 21, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Why rev the D800 at this point in time? Is it deemed in desperate need of an upgrade compared to the 5D3 right now?



The 5DIII is selling better. Nikon is projecting much bigger 2014 losses than Canon. "Desparate" is probably a reasonable characterization...


----------



## jeffa4444 (May 22, 2014)

Canon is not projecting a loss in 2014.


----------



## hajiaru (May 22, 2014)

canon Sensors are behind the Sonys


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 22, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> Canon is not projecting a loss in 2014.



For cameras they are. 1Q14 had a 6.7% drop in revenue from camera sales. Projections for FY2014 are -1% / -20% for ILC / compact unit sales, respectively, and an 8.2% drop in revenue from camera sales.

Projected gains in their office and industrial divisions more than offset the projected losses from camera sales, so a modest overall company gain is projected for FY2014. 

Full details here: http://www.canon.com/ir/conference/pdf/conf2014q1e.pdf

Nikon is projecting a 6% loss in ILC sales, compared to Canon forecasted 1% drop.


----------



## Orangutan (May 22, 2014)

hajiaru said:


> canon Sensors are behind the Sonys



And...????


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 22, 2014)

Some buyers want the latest and greatest, even though there is little difference. The cost to produce a major upgrade is high, while putting a new badge on a camera and adding a few software features, as well as upgrading the processer is a cheap fix, and can generate a lot of sales from those who think they are getting the latest thing.

A good example od this is Canon and Nikon putting a new badge on the same entry level cameras each year, but adding little of substance. This is very effective for new entry buyers, presumably the more experienced camera users are more aware of what is happening.

That may not always be the case.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 22, 2014)

It may also be that Nikon wants to consolidate the current D800 and D800E into one camera. It really did not make sense for Nikon to have both the 800 and 800E and perhaps by coming out with a "new" D800S instead of producing two separate but almost identical bodies is cheaper and a better business decision. 

Very few people who currently have the D800 or D800 will be buying this new D800S unless they were already planning on getting another one. It just does not seem to be a good upgrade worth the money. Now if someone wants to move from a crop to a FF camera, going directly to the D800S makes sense. 

ONe of the biggest differences is the incorporation of Wi-Fi which is of interest to some photographers but not to others. It will be interesting to see how well the WiFi works pushing out 41mb data files. Thats a lotta data!


----------



## lintoni (May 22, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> It may also be that Nikon wants to consolidate the current D800 and D800E into one camera. It really did not make sense for Nikon to have both the 800 and 800E and perhaps by coming out with a "new" D800S instead of producing two separate but almost identical bodies is cheaper and a better business decision.
> 
> Very few people who currently have the D800 or D800 will be buying this new D800S unless they were already planning on getting another one. It just does not seem to be a good upgrade worth the money. Now if someone wants to move from a crop to a FF camera, going directly to the D800S makes sense.
> 
> ONe of the biggest differences is the incorporation of Wi-Fi which is of interest to some photographers but not to others. It will be interesting to see how well the WiFi works pushing out 41mb data files. Thats a lotta data!


The article explicitly states no new built in wifi, but the addition of GPS.

New Nikon D800s... Why (in a forum named EOS Bodies)?


----------



## ahsanford (May 22, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A good example od this is Canon and Nikon putting a new badge on the same entry level cameras each year, but adding little of substance. This is very effective for new entry buyers, presumably the more experienced camera users are more aware of what is happening.



Agree, but why does Nikon do that in such a performance-hungry space as the highest end APS-C and all their FF cameras? That end of the market is dominated by people in forums like these -- pros and (discerning) enthusiasts who put a ton of stock in testing and reviews. Those folks generally don't snap up gear because it's new, but because it has terrific upgrades:

1DX --> high framerate FF
5D3 --> comprehensive AF upgrade + a headphone jack
70D --> dual-pixel AF
7D2 --> presumed to have a much better sensor

Let me put this another way: when Canon does take so long to upgrade its segments, the areas to improve are more clearly defined and demand for those improvements is built up a bit. When is the last time Canon put out a higher-end body (say $1250+, $1500+) where people were scratching their heads at the announcement and wondering why it was happening?

- A


----------



## ahsanford (May 22, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> It may also be that Nikon wants to consolidate the current D800 and D800E into one camera. It really did not make sense for Nikon to have both the 800 and 800E and perhaps by coming out with a "new" D800S instead of producing two separate but almost identical bodies is cheaper and a better business decision.



Even carrying two lines for AA filtering reasons seems nutty. Is a hardware selectable 'AA filter defeat' feature not possible? _That's_ an upgrade some folks might actually jump for.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (May 22, 2014)

lintoni said:


> New Nikon D800s... Why (in a forum named EOS Bodies)?



It's a development pipeline discussion, not a Nikon discussion. 

- A


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 22, 2014)

lintoni said:


> The article explicitly states no new built in wifi, but the addition of GPS.



You are correct. I got the two confused.


----------



## drjlo (May 22, 2014)

The Nikon "S" models with incremental change must be kind of a bumber for those who own the pre-S models which are no longer latest and greatest (D800, D800E, D600, D4, etc). On the other hand, I would welcome the price drop I expect to see for Nikon D800E on fleeBay.


----------



## ahsanford (May 22, 2014)

drjlo said:


> The Nikon "S" models with incremental change must be kind of a bumber for those who own the pre-S models which are no longer latest and greatest (D800, D800E, D600, D4, etc). On the other hand, I would welcome the price drop I expect to see for Nikon D800E on fleeBay.



New means a newer latest and greatest, sure, but _if the new offering isn't super impactful_:

1) Does having latest and (just a little bit more) greatest really mean much in this near-top-end of the market? For these kind of bodies, for every 'look at me with the latest and greatest' enthusiast-in-a-forum shooter, there are likely a higher number of pros rolling their eyes at that mentality.

2) Do you really expect D800/D800E prices to plummet when those cameras may be 98% as powerful/useful as the new offering? We're not hearing of a new sensor or major upgrade to burst-rate, low-light performance, etc.

I don't mean to pick on drjlo here (and please forgive me if it felt that way). Asking the group now -- my primary question remains unanswered: on the pro end of bodies, why have a watered-down mini-upgrade when the pro community is _so_ on-top of performance data and reviews? Even if Nikon is hurting this quarter/year/etc., inefficiently churning out 3% better bodies surely won't help that, will it?

- A


----------



## sdsr (May 22, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Even carrying two lines for AA filtering reasons seems nutty. Is a hardware selectable 'AA filter defeat' feature not possible? _That's_ an upgrade some folks might actually jump for.
> 
> - A



I have no idea, but i'm pretty sure the newisih Pentax K3 has the reverse - it has no AA filter, but you can select an AA filter simulator if you want. Presumably reviews discuss whether it works....


----------



## MLfan3 (May 22, 2014)

it wont sell as well as the first D800E model since there is now A7R ,which has the better sensor and better video.
I sold my D800E for another A7R and 6D. the time for the high resolution D-SLR is over. for high resolution studio, landscape or architecture work, we do not need the D-SLR AF and we tend to use it on a tripod LV manual focus,etc. if we work slowly on a tripod, then there is no need for the annoying loud mirror. in other words , we will not see many wanna-be a MFDB kind of FF D-SLRs any more but many high resolution pro level mirrorless cameras like the A7R. I think only high ISO low light cameras still need the mirror (for the decent fast PDAF) at least the sensor based PD AF gets as fast as the pro level D-SLR AF. 
for anything else the mirror is not needed, in fact it is better without it. 

btw, Sony may not want to sell this new 36mp sensor to Nikon since Sony has already gained significant market share in Australia, China , HK , South Korea , UK and Japan, and it is expecting to become no2 in camera by end of this year. in fact , in HK, South Korea and Australia Sony is already no1 in digital camera. so Nikon has no chance gaining its market share but it will lose a lot of share in the rest of the world too.


----------



## drjlo (May 23, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> drjlo said:
> 
> 
> > The Nikon "S" models with incremental change must be kind of a bumber for those who own the pre-S models which are no longer latest and greatest (D800, D800E, D600, D4, etc). On the other hand, I would welcome the price drop I expect to see for Nikon D800E on fleeBay.
> ...



I think your point and my point are similar. I expect those must-have-latest "enthusiast-in-a-forum shooters" WILL indeed put their D800E on eBay, and regardless of what studio pro's do, there will be a lot more D800E's up for sale, and prices will surely drop. 

D800E isn't worth it to me at full/near-full price, but if I can pick up a used one at a very good price without the bidding war driving up auction prices, it's a different story. 8)


----------



## 9VIII (May 23, 2014)

GPS but no Wi-Fi? They have got to be kidding.

I would love a D800E for macro, but it needs to run remotely off a tablet. And not have live view that sucks.


----------



## ahsanford (May 23, 2014)

9VIII said:


> GPS but no Wi-Fi? They have got to be kidding.
> 
> I would love a D800E for macro, but it needs to run remotely off a tablet. And not have live view that sucks.



Yeah, I still don't get why GPS is prized so much over wifi. I presume pro-style magnesium bodies may have transmission / interference problems (possibly explaining why the more budget plastic bodies get wifi first), but that's not my area of engineering expertise so I'll await Neuro to give me the answer. 

- A


----------



## 9VIII (May 24, 2014)

That's just the it, Canon had to put a plastic top plate on the 6D to get a wireless signal through, and GPS isn't magic, the same will apply. The only reason to include one and not the other is to sell a stupid plug-in adapter.


----------



## gshocked (May 24, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> It may also be that Nikon wants to consolidate the current D800 and D800E into one camera. It really did not make sense for Nikon to have both the 800 and 800E and perhaps by coming out with a "new" D800S instead of producing two separate but almost identical bodies is cheaper and a better business decision.
> 
> Very few people who currently have the D800 or D800 will be buying this new D800S unless they were already planning on getting another one. It just does not seem to be a good upgrade worth the money. Now if someone wants to move from a crop to a FF camera, going directly to the D800S makes sense.
> 
> ONe of the biggest differences is the incorporation of Wi-Fi which is of interest to some photographers but not to others. It will be interesting to see how well the WiFi works pushing out 41mb data files. Thats a lotta data!



+1 

It never made sense to me why Nikon made a D800 and an D800e.
From a consumers point of view it doesn't inspire confidence in the brand. Considering this If you just purchased a new D800 at the start of the year, it makes you wonder why your top of the line camera was replaced. 
Is there something wrong with the current D800, is this like the D600 being replaced by the D610?

Or from a different perspective - it might put the D800 one up from the 5D3, as the the "newer"must have item.
It then repositions Nikon, to some consumers, as being the innovative company. While to others it screams new money machine.


----------



## ahsanford (May 26, 2014)

gshocked said:


> It never made sense to me why Nikon made a D800 and an D800e.
> From a consumers point of view it doesn't inspire confidence in the brand. Considering this If you just purchased a new D800 at the start of the year, it makes you wonder why your top of the line camera was replaced.
> Is there something wrong with the current D800, is this like the D600 being replaced by the D610?
> 
> ...



Or, maybe, Nikon is taking the iPhone approach of:

iPhone 4 = New body, new design, new screen
iPhone 4S = Same body, same design, same screen, better speed / better battery / Siri
iPhone 5 = New body, new design, new screen
iPhone 5S = Same body, same design, same screen, better speed / better battery / thumbprint ID feature

I say that as it's easy for us to tune out a new release with the same sensor as an older design, but if the 'mid-generation refresh' offers a ton of value, people might bite at the offer.

What if, in some alternate universe, Canon took on a similar approach:

*5D3 released at time zero: new sensor, new body, headphone jack, etc. but had the old 5D2 AF system
*5D4 released at 12 months with everything the same but now offering the 1DX AF system
5D5 released at 24 months with everything the same as the 5D4 but now with WiFi GPS built-in
5D6 released at 36 months with everything the same as the 5D5 but now with a much faster processor and much larger buffer for burst shooting, or a special/improved uncompressed video output
*5D7 released at 48 months with a fundamentally new body design and new sensor.*

I imagine less people would have opted in for the 5D3 if Canon did this, but everyone would have one by the end of the 5D3-5D6 body lifecycle.

Neither Canon nor Nikon's methods are right or wrong, they are just different approaches to commercialization. My gut is that Canon prefers making many more of the exact same body for a longer period of time for the following reasons:


Smaller excess/obsolescence than if they had a boatload of regular upgraded offerings
Total marketing dollars are smaller as they only have to launch the system once 
The chance to upcharge folks with bolt-on upgrades for Wifi, GPS, etc.

While Nikon -- at least in the higher end bodies -- would rather sprinkle a mix of new bodies and upgraded bodies with the same sensor. Again, I don't think either is right or wrong -- I just find the strategies fascinating.

- A


----------



## Sella174 (May 29, 2014)

I don't think the D800s is meant to be a new camera design, but rather (as some have said) an update model with new features added. You know, like we used to get with cars ...


----------



## rs (Jun 25, 2014)

It looks like it's going to be announced imminently, and named the D810:

http://nikonrumors.com/2014/06/24/nikon-d810-announcement-this-week.aspx/

Without meaning to repeat a question from earlier on in this thread - why?


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 25, 2014)

gshocked said:


> It never made sense to me why Nikon made a D800 and an D800e.



I don't think Nikon thought they would sell as many D800E's as they did. I think they expected the majority of the D800 buyers to buy the D800 and only a relatively few buy the D800E. I still think that Nikon sold more D800's than D800E's, but I also think the sales of the D800E was higher than expected.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 25, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> gshocked said:
> 
> 
> > It never made sense to me why Nikon made a D800 and an D800e.
> ...



So was this representative of the mix of still vs. video shooters they have, i.e. is Nikon's user base more concerned about sharpness than moire? Do they simply lack a large video user base?

I wonder if a 5D3_*E*_ -- a 5D3 without an AA filter -- was offered by Canon on day one alongside the 5D3, would we see all the videographers take the vanilla 5D3 and the still shooters all take the 5D3E?

Is it that simple a call? Are there downsides to pulling the AA filter other than moire? (Forgive me: the role of the AA filter is lost on me.)

- A


----------



## Bruce Photography (Jun 25, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> lintoni said:
> 
> 
> > New Nikon D800s... Why (in a forum named EOS Bodies)?
> ...



I would love it to be about a Canon release for a new high MP body (I do landscapes and seascapes), but from what I've read, 2015 will be the earliest that we can have that discussion. So I'm interested in the 810 because of the newer processor. I'm hoping for a larger buffer so I can finally get continuous shooting at the top frame rate of 6 fps. I know that doesn't mean much in the Canon lineup but to have 6 fps (with battery grip) and 36mp, that is a 50% improvement over what I have today. I don't use it very often at the top speed (birds), but then speed of shooting is important sometimes. Since the specs really haven't been released I suppose this is a premature discussion, but I like to have a general knowledge of what both (all) sides for upper end cameras are doing because that will be where the industry is heading. More dynamic range also seems to be the trend that I welcome even though I am quite pleased with what the D800 and D800E already have. The elimination of the AA filter on high MP cameras seems to be another trend that we'll see in future cameras. I have shot extensively with both the D800 and the D800E. I do see the difference in my large prints when I do everything right. Elimination of the AA filter on high MP cameras does seem like a good thing (be sure to do capture sharpening to see the effect, otherwise you'll miss it). If Canon comes up with this new 54 mp camera rumored to be a new Sony sensor this fall in Germany, then we can all talk about that.


----------



## Zv (Jun 25, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > gshocked said:
> ...



Moire can be found in various architechtural detail, certain clothing and in animal fur and feathers. It's not just video. It affects stills too. Although it's possible to reduce moire in post it can be tricky at best (well I certainly don't find it easy). It has to be removed selectively using a brush tool. Takes ages if all you want is a standard shot of say a brick house. Imagine de-moire-ing a hundred architectural shots. Two words. F--- that!

It's much easier to simply crank up the sharpness in post to compensate for the blurriness of the AA filter. RAW shooters do that anyway as part of their workflow.


----------



## MLfan3 (Jun 25, 2014)

it will be called D810, not D800s. it has the same sensor without AA filter. Native ISO range of 64-12800.
it shoots 6f/s and has the same AF used in the D4s. it is about 120g lighter than the current D800E. priced at US3200 or 312800yen. Oh and it will be more cheap plasticky , so I do not think it is a big enough update to the current D800E. In fact, it is an insult to us who have the D800E. this is just some nasty devious marketing decision to get back some lost money on the D610.


----------



## SiliconVoid (Jun 25, 2014)

Purely from a financial perspective it would make sense for Nikon to consolidate the line, as there is almost no functional difference between the two, and they have not sold anywhere close to the numbers anticipated to meet financial projections.

In that regard however, the proposed 'upgrades' would not be of of the significance many consumers would expect for a 'consolidated' model (ala 1Dx and D4). The upgrades are basically software and a badge, sans the processor - which in the end is technically still a software upgrade.. The new processor will provide the muscle needed for a different AF algorithm, noise reduction algorithm (the alleged ISO improvement), moire suppression algorithm, and sRAW (which if based on the D4 implementation will be a waste of processor cycles anyway..) oh, and let us not forget the crucial addition of GPS! (sic).
No.. What I see in this consolidation is simply an attempt to restore faith in the Nikon brand. Showing their base that when they see something wrong, or lacking in tangible benefit, they react - and decisively - to trim the fat and produce the lean mean product they should have released initially. (queue the I AM xxxxxxx theme music)

As for the 'new' model.. In my opinion they could gain back their D700 base (the ~790k they thought would upgrade) if they would take current tech in a lower mp sensor (akin to the D4) yielding better overall ISO, DR across the ISO range, color and tone across the ISO range (all without the unnecessary processing) faster fps, robust AF, 1080p video, and stuff it all into a body that is more comfortable to hold (they still have the D700 castings, heh) with truly needed ergonomic changes like moving ISO and AF mode selection to the right side so you do not have to transfer perch of the camera back and forth between your right and left hands. There is already a large hole in the body due to the flash for wireless communication, but not important either way there.
If they want to run a body like that along with a high-mp body that fewer people need/want, that would make multiple bodies more feasible all around.


----------

