# My D800 Review



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 17, 2012)

Having used Canon SLRs since about 1968, and having owned the 5D MK II and 5D MK III and currently, the 7D and 1D MK IV, I thought i'd give the D800 a try. There was nothing to lose, I can sell it used for more than I paid new.

So, I have a collection of many old film cameras, and a couple or three nikon AF lenses which I did not think would standup too well with the new body. I picked up a few lenses locally off Craigslist during the 3 weeks I've been waiting, so I had my od 50mm f/1.8D, a 80-200mm f/2.8D, a 500mm ReflexC, a 24-70mm f/2.8G, and a 200-400mm f/4 AIS ready for it to arrive, which it did last night.


I played with it today, deciding the 50mm wasn't that good while the 24-70 was excellent, and the 80-200mm was very good. The 200-400mm AIS had a difficult to use stiff focus ring, so I returned it to the seller for repair, and I haven't tried the 500mm Reflex yet. I'll be spending the evening taking low light photos of a play rehearsal, I used my 1D MK IV last night. It will be interesting to see what the difference, if any is to me. 

My first impression was of the flimsy memory door and even worse battery door. Makes my 5D MK II door look like a battle tank. Then, the left half of the camera.. well, there wasn't one. no real issue inless you wanted to hold the camera with your left hand. The eye cup... Oops, it doesn't come with a eye cup either, a $20 or 30 after marked product is all there is. 

I'm learning to use the controls, no problems there, just a matter lo learning something new. You can set a minimum shutter speed and that was one thing I set right away. Formatting your card is easy too.


I did attempt to disprove the high DR talk, only to find out that its all true, I could not blow out one area while retaining detail in the shadows, I was suprised to say the least. 

High ISO images showed a lot of noise when viewed at 100%, also as expected. There is enough detail that a lot of NR can be used, and still have a very good image, but I need to see what happens tonight.

I haven't sold the ton of Canon lenses and bodies I own, but, I just might get a 14-24mm lens for the D800 if it works out, and it is off to a good start. Like Canon, I had to AFMA my 24-70mm zoom at -10. Thats just par for the course. My FoCal software will work with it, but I haven't had time to set it up yet.

There are some things I like better about the 5D MK III, but I'll have a better idea after a few thousand shots.


----------



## Orion (May 18, 2012)

Well, with all yur other gear, I would lveo to have the D800 JUST FOR studio and landscape. Leave the rest for mkIII . .. otherwise the mkIII will do it all, INCLUDING studio and landscape.

It will be interesting to see what you will do when Canon comes out with a MEGA res camera  Going to have to wait for the side by side field reviews 

Thanks for sharing, and keep us informed!


----------



## sarangiman (May 18, 2012)

Mt. Spokane Photography: You will not regret purchasing the 14-24. I recently adapted it to my 5D Mark III with a Novoflex adapter, & with Canon's awesome Live View implementation, have no problem getting edge-to-edge sharp images at f/4. Gone are the days of shooting f/18 w/ Canon ultra-wide zooms & still getting one side partially soft. 

As for the DR, yeah, 2-3 stops extra DR is no joke. I followed up my quantitative DR tests between the D7000 & the 5D Mark III with real world shots of scenes with DR greater than the camera, and, wow... those sensors starting with the D7000 are game changers.

I anxiously await my D800... though I find it hard to give up Canon b/c of its amazing AF system (I really like having cross-type AF points all over the field).


----------



## JR (May 18, 2012)

Keep us updated Mt Spokane. I did the same as you: I decided to give the D800 a try but am still waiting for mine. Already got a few lens for it but I am still also waiting for the 1DX! I have a fealing my final setup will be composed of the 1DX and the D800. Cant wait to try mine!


----------



## dirtcastle (May 18, 2012)

It's great to get a review from someone, who like most of us, is just looking for unbiased, no-BS info. Thanks!


----------



## Orion (May 18, 2012)

dirtcastle said:


> It's great to get a review from someone, who like most of us, is just looking for unbiased, no-BS info. Thanks!



. . . well a few of those reviews have already been posted by pro stills and video users. There is also the 3 part series between the mkIII and the D800 in real world situations all the way to the studio. You can find them on this forum.

anyhoot,

as for the D800, I don't need such res, but I'll have another look once Canon decides to make one. MkIII and 1Dx are all anyone really needs for a killer combo.


----------



## V8Beast (May 18, 2012)

Thanks for the review, and please keep us posted on your findings. I don't, for a second, regret cancelling my D800 pre-order, but I do plan on renting one just to give it a go. Quite frankly, I have no need for 36 megapixels, and while the extra DR is welcome, it's more of a luxury than a necessity for what I shoot. In the meantime, I'm trying to think up ways to incorporate scenarios that require a ton of DR into my typical shooting routine. I might as well get my money's worth while I have rented out.


----------



## briansquibb (May 18, 2012)

Orion said:


> dirtcastle said:
> 
> 
> > It's great to get a review from someone, who like most of us, is just looking for unbiased, no-BS info. Thanks!
> ...




.... and then there will be the 3Dx ......


----------



## psolberg (May 23, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Having used Canon SLRs since about 1968, and having owned the 5D MK II and 5D MK III and currently, the 7D and 1D MK IV, I thought i'd give the D800 a try. There was nothing to lose, I can sell it used for more than I paid new.
> 
> So, I have a collection of many old film cameras, and a couple or three nikon AF lenses which I did not think would standup too well with the new body. I picked up a few lenses locally off Craigslist during the 3 weeks I've been waiting, so I had my od 50mm f/1.8D, a 80-200mm f/2.8D, a 500mm ReflexC, a 24-70mm f/2.8G, and a 200-400mm f/4 AIS ready for it to arrive, which it did last night.
> 
> ...



nice to see somebody else actually create opinions while using one. I wish more people here tried that method. I had a similar exprience. DR just blew my socks off. But not as much as ISO100 shadow detail. I was able to recover incredible amounts of detail from what I thought were clipped shadows with very little noise. No canon DSLR even remotely approaches this capability. What canon bodies do is either clip the shadow or make it too noisy to want to recover it. The D800 is as close as 1 shot HDR camera as I've ever seen.

Like you, I find high ISO capabilities to be excellent because as you say, the extra detail allows for more NR not to mention after you cleaned things up a little you can resample to ~20 and results are often better than the 5DmkIII anywhere south of the ridiculous HI ISO boosted modes....which I never use in any camera as they are beyond my eye pain tolerance.

I've been loving the 14-24. definitively recommended as it does fantastic with the 36MP sensor. The nikon 70-200II also needed AF tuning. -10 in my case.


----------



## akclimber (May 23, 2012)

Thanks for the write-up, Spokane. Looking forward to reading more about your experiences. I thought buying a 5D3 would satisfy my lust for a D800. Hasn't worked out that way tho  I'm pretty sure I'll be a 5D3 + D800 user before too long.

As for the 14-24, I've used a rented, adapted one on my 5D2 and it is one terrific lens! I do wish that the Nikon 24 PC-E was a match for Canon's 24 TS-E MK II (my favorite Canon lens) but from what I've read, it's close enough.

Cheers!


----------



## psolberg (May 24, 2012)

akclimber said:


> Thanks for the write-up, Spokane. Looking forward to reading more about your experiences. I thought buying a 5D3 would satisfy my lust for a D800. Hasn't worked out that way tho  I'm pretty sure I'll be a 5D3 + D800 user before too long.
> 
> As for the 14-24, I've used a rented, adapted one on my 5D2 and it is one terrific lens! I do wish that the Nikon 24 PC-E was a match for Canon's 24 TS-E MK II (my favorite Canon lens) but from what I've read, it's close enough.
> 
> Cheers!



the 24 PC-E is indeed very close except for the independent tilt and shift axis adjustment. I think nikon is the last TS OEM who hasn't made these axis independant so it is only a matter of time. it is a bit clumsy mounted because of the flash trigger but I'm letting that go because of the added capability to trigger speedlights without a hotshoe transmitter. 

I used it to great results.


----------



## akclimber (May 24, 2012)

psolberg said:


> the 24 PC-E is indeed very close except for the independent tilt and shift axis adjustment. I think nikon is the last TS OEM who hasn't made these axis independant so it is only a matter of time. it is a bit clumsy mounted because of the flash trigger but I'm letting that go because of the added capability to trigger speedlights without a hotshoe transmitter.
> 
> I used it to great results.



Thanks for the info. I've decided to buy a D800 so all the info on Nikon lenses I can get is helpful 

Cheers!


----------



## briansquibb (May 24, 2012)

akclimber said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > the 24 PC-E is indeed very close except for the independent tilt and shift axis adjustment. I think nikon is the last TS OEM who hasn't made these axis independant so it is only a matter of time. it is a bit clumsy mounted because of the flash trigger but I'm letting that go because of the added capability to trigger speedlights without a hotshoe transmitter.
> ...



Here is a great site for Nikon infomation:

www.nikonrumors.com


----------



## Tov (May 24, 2012)

Lol @ briansquibb


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 24, 2012)

I've been busy using the D800 and 1D MK IV, so I do not yet have much of a a update. One think I can say, is that it takes a lot more time to edit, due to lengthy processing time for a large number of files, but it is not so much that spending $3K on a new computer wouldn't fix  

The other thing, is that it makes Nikons lesser lenses look like rubbish, and their best ones look none too good. Without extreme care, images are no better than the 5D MK III and the kit lens. There are a few other quirks that bother me, and some features that really shine. 

So far, I'm not in any hurry to dump my Canon stuff and switch to Nikon. I tried video the other night, but was not impressed with the autofocus. However, it will autofocus slowly while taking a video, but it loses focus and ends up with fuzzy video. (Even though the Green focus indicator shows its in focus)

To be fair, I've only used it for a few thousand shots over a 1 week period, but I can now operate it in the dark, even changing most settings, so I've become pretty proficient with it.

I do not have a equivalent of the 35mmL or 135mmL to use with it, in fact, I have stopped using all lenses but the 24-70mm G, its very good, but not up to the 35mmL or 135mm L.


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

Videoing on the 1D4 gives good results


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 25, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Videoing on the 1D4 gives good results


 
I haven't tried it but for a few seconds on my 1D MK IV, I'm not really into heavy duty video, I only tried it on the d800 at a rehearsal of a musical play that had some pretty fantastic sound and costumes, and only then because it supposedly will autofocus while doing video, but that is questionable. Singers and dancers moving about the stage fairly rapidly is not for HDDSLR video unless you get way back and do everything at a hyperfocal distance. Then, it will be boring. 

I'd post some short video clips, but I was asked to not post them buy the director, and I'll respect his wishes.


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

There are plenty of 5DII videos around but I haven't seen one from a 1D4. The AF button works very quickly (but not smoothly). 

I have some potential places where a video would be good (for animals) and the 1D4 does 720p at 60fps so slomo would be smooth. I am looking for 1D4 video settings too (like shutter speeds) as I am a noob at video.

It would be interesting to see the potential of the 1D4 for video, certainly compared with the 5DIII. I was going to shoot with the 200/f2 hooked on.


----------



## Kernuak (May 28, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The other thing, is that it makes Nikons lesser lenses look like rubbish, and their best ones look none too good.


I was seeing that in the sample images, even with the well regarded 14-24 and it was my biggest concern with a 36+ MP camera. It was why I am happy that Canon kept the 5D MkIII to 22 MP. I'm sure that recent and future lenses will cope fine, but I don't want to think about how my 24-105 and 17-40 would cope with a high resolution sensor, especially in the corners.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 31, 2012)

I saw a bird at our feeder today, it was tame and I grabbed the D800 with my 80-200mm f/2.8D lens. I stopped it down a bit to f/4, but even then I only got one keeper out of almost a dozen, and even then, my 7D and 100-400mm L would have been better.

This is a only slightly cropped image, it should have been better. Its just that the camera demands the best glass, and the 10 year old lens doesn't measure up. Even a old Canon lens like the 100-400mmL is much better.


----------



## Tammy (Jun 6, 2012)

consider renting some top end Nikkor glass for a weekend/week?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 6, 2012)

Tammy said:


> consider renting some top end Nikkor glass for a weekend/week?


 
Like what? Isn't the 24-70mm f/2.8G glass I own top end? Its certainly priced like it. I'm not going to try a 200mm f/2, because I couldn't afford it, and the focal lenght is not one I use. 

Nikon's top lenses are very sharp, but no different from Canon when it comes to AF variabiliity. And, many of the top ones, like the 24-70 f/2.8G have excessive CA's. 

Then, they have nothing comparable to my Canon 100-400mm L, or my 135mm L.!


----------



## V8Beast (Jun 6, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Tammy said:
> 
> 
> > consider renting some top end Nikkor glass for a weekend/week?
> ...



Yeah, but check out that dynamic range ;D


----------



## Tammy (Jun 6, 2012)

yes, the 24-70 G is a great lens. their 35mm F/1.4 is sharper across the entire frame etc. the 105mm F/2.8 macro is also some great glass. but the D800 will still magnify the CA on any of them.


----------



## Albi86 (Jun 9, 2012)

Thank you for the amazing review, Mr Spotkane. I loved every word of it.


----------



## psolberg (Jun 12, 2012)

Kernuak said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > The other thing, is that it makes Nikons lesser lenses look like rubbish, and their best ones look none too good.
> ...



36MP is just 16MP equivalent on APSC. so if you shoot with a rebel at 18MP, you're already outresolving the D800 and pushing your lenses much harder. Say nothing of the D3200 with it's 24MP APSC sensor which would be nearly a 60MP sensor if it was full frame. In conclusion, the D800 doesn't really push lenses all that hard. That's a web myth. It is just that until now, nothing pushed the edges and center in a way that would reveal the difference. Yet you're still resolving more even if the center still outresolves the D800 and the edges just keep up. Ultimately ask yourself two questions:

1) You can only capture a better quality version of the image projected by the lens, but never worse as you can always chose a level of detail confortable to you. So why fear MP? It's just flexibility IMO.
2) if you invested big money in glass, why are you not pushing that glass to the max? It's like Keeping a 5DmkI just because of fear the 5DmkII may reveal flaws in some glass while missing out on all the rest.

From my experience, all the f2.8 and f1.4 glass from nikon I've tested has been really good on the D800. 14-24,24-70,70-200 all hold up. Fast primes wide open, as expected need to be stopped down for a truly superb image, yet even wide open, they hold up well and the shallow DOF makes edge detail somewhat irrelevant since it is often out of focus with the subject isolated near the middle. There is more detail to squeeze out of these lenses. I guess the D4X may do it?

And no I would not trade down resolution because I'm getting a few things out of it which regardless of the lens used benefit me thanks to the high sample rate.
1) color graduations. the more pixels the smoother the graduations. particularly evident in landscapes.
2) reduction in demosaic/AA induced softness. more pixels minimizes the degradation due to the bayer pattern as perceived in very fine detail.
3) less aliasing stair casing effect on fine detail. Even with AA filters, I'm finding that just like with AA in video games, downsampling yields slightly better looking images.

I think we're going to see 30-40MP become the new baseline for any competitive full frame DSLR with the boundaries being pushed much further since there are benefits beyond just detail when you ovesample an image
http://diglloyd.com/blog/2012/20120524_1-Nikon-D3200.html

You guys worry now but I'm sure once canon has done the inevitable jump to 30-40 MP, EVERYBODY is going to be saying the same thing: It was silly to fear the pixels. 8) This was the same fear we had when the 20MP canon DSLRs came out and nobody even thinks twice to question that move today.


----------



## JR (Jun 12, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I've been busy using the D800 and 1D MK IV, so I do not yet have much of a a update. One think I can say, is that it takes a lot more time to edit, due to lengthy processing time for a large number of files, but it is not so much that spending $3K on a new computer wouldn't fix
> 
> The other thing, is that it makes Nikons lesser lenses look like rubbish, and their best ones look none too good. Without extreme care, images are no better than the 5D MK III and the kit lens. There are a few other quirks that bother me, and some features that really shine.
> 
> ...



I found a lot of your comments really interesting Mt. Spokane. I currently shoot with both system as well, however while I tried the D800 I actually have a D4 while I await for my 1DX. On the video AF I noticed the same as you which is the D800 is a bit slow. On the D4 however the AF in video is really fast to the point we can actually use it because it does not search for ever and make the video useless!

Now where I was most interested as well was around your comment about your keep rate using the D800, which shares the same AF system as the D4. Using the latest Nikon glass from their 1.4G series or even the 70-200 2.8 VR II zoom, I too found my keep rate to be low. I even compared some session I did with a 5D mkIII with my dauther playing and running. With the 5D mkIII new AF my keep rate even at f2.8 was over 90%. Doing the same type of shooting with the D4 stopped down at f4 gives me a 50% keep at best.

Am sure there are some user error on part in there, but I just found it interesting that you noted your keep rate as well. WHile you are using an older Nikkor lens on your side, I get the same conclusion with the latest Nikon glass!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 12, 2012)

JR said:


> I found a lot of your comments really interesting Mt. Spokane. I currently shoot with both system as well, however while I tried the D800 I actually have a D4 while I await for my 1DX. On the video AF I noticed the same as you which is the D800 is a bit slow. On the D4 however the AF in video is really fast to the point we can actually use it because it does not search for ever and make the video useless!
> 
> Now where I was most interested as well was around your comment about your keep rate using the D800, which shares the same AF system as the D4. Using the latest Nikon glass from their 1.4G series or even the 70-200 2.8 VR II zoom, I too found my keep rate to be low. I even compared some session I did with a 5D mkIII with my dauther playing and running. With the 5D mkIII new AF my keep rate even at f2.8 was over 90%. Doing the same type of shooting with the D4 stopped down at f4 gives me a 50% keep at best.
> 
> Am sure there are some user error on part in there, but I just found it interesting that you noted your keep rate as well. WHile you are using an older Nikkor lens on your side, I get the same conclusion with the latest Nikon glass!


 
I never did figure out the keep rate, but even in bright light, when I was trying to do a AFMA, no matter which lens, a lot of them were mis focused. I think it is a lens issue, and its just that the Nikon lenses I was adjusting had a lot of accuracy variation in the focus.

It wasn't horrible, about 80%. The 5D MK III focusing in very low light is extremely accurate, but a bit slow in very low light. If only I could see the selected AF point in difficult lighting conditions.


----------



## Jettatore (Jun 12, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Tammy said:
> 
> 
> > consider renting some top end Nikkor glass for a weekend/week?
> ...



Why not rent the 14-24mm? You said you were interested in even purchasing that if you end up keeping the D800. While you have the thing, it would seem to be worth the small investment to rent at least that lens, if not also some of the highest end primes available from Nikon, even if you feel the Canon equivalents are simply better. You could even try adapting a Canon lens to the system for some Manual Focus sensor comparisons.


----------



## sarangiman (Jun 12, 2012)

> I was seeing that in the sample images, even with the well regarded 14-24 and it was my biggest concern with a 36+ MP camera. It was why I am happy that Canon kept the 5D MkIII to 22 MP. I'm sure that recent and future lenses will cope fine, but I don't want to think about how my 24-105 and 17-40 would cope with a high resolution sensor, especially in the corners.



My Nikon 14-24 is sharp edge to edge by f/5.6 on a D800... but, yes, before I got rid of my Canon 16-35 & 17-40, I would be very worried about how they would hold up to a 30+ MP sensor. In fact, I was worried about how they _didn't_ hold up to a 22MP sensor, even at f/11, which is why I got rid of them.


----------



## helpful (Jun 12, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I just might get a 14-24mm lens for the D800 if it works out, and it is off to a good start.



Do it. The Nikon 14-24mm lens will blow your socks off unless you have experienced something similar before. I went ahead and purchased it for my Nikons back before the tsunami (thankfully!), and it's a rock star. I would own it even if I didn't need the extreme wide angle capability. The only bad thing is that I am used to lenses that go to f/1.4. People brag about lenses like the 16-35mm II or the 10-22mm, and they don't even live in the same world as the Nikon 14-24mm.


----------



## ChrisAnderson (Jun 12, 2012)

helpful said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I just might get a 14-24mm lens for the D800 if it works out, and it is off to a good start.
> ...



I'd be interested in seeing how the famed Zeiss Distagon 21mm stands up to the 14-24


----------



## Kernuak (Jun 12, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > I was seeing that in the sample images, even with the well regarded 14-24 and it was my biggest concern with a 36+ MP camera. It was why I am happy that Canon kept the 5D MkIII to 22 MP. I'm sure that recent and future lenses will cope fine, but I don't want to think about how my 24-105 and 17-40 would cope with a high resolution sensor, especially in the corners.
> 
> 
> 
> My Nikon 14-24 is sharp edge to edge by f/5.6 on a D800... but, yes, before I got rid of my Canon 16-35 & 17-40, I would be very worried about how they would hold up to a 30+ MP sensor. In fact, I was worried about how they _didn't_ hold up to a 22MP sensor, even at f/11, which is why I got rid of them.


On the sample images (granted Canon's samples weren't a good representation, so it may not be the best comparison), I was noticing softness in the corners of the landscapes, all of which were taken using the 14-24 at f/8. There was insufficient depth of field, which likely exacerbated the corner softness, but it was certainly there.
I rarely use my 17-40 now, except for some extreme looks from the distortion, due to the corner softness at 21 MP. That said, it is probably sharper than the 24-105 between around 24-30mm.


----------



## Kernuak (Jun 12, 2012)

ChrisAnderson said:


> helpful said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...


From what I've seen from the Zeiss, it's not a very fair comparison. It's as sharp or maybe sharper than the Canon 24 f/1.4 MkII (I haven't seen many direct comparisons), which is sharp right to the corners at around f/5.6 to f/11.


----------



## Albi86 (Jun 12, 2012)

ChrisAnderson said:


> helpful said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



Look also at the very cheap Samyang 14mm f/2.8 
A surprise indeed


----------



## akclimber (Jun 12, 2012)

ChrisAnderson said:


> I'd be interested in seeing how the famed Zeiss Distagon 21mm stands up to the 14-24



Lloyd Chambers (www.diglloyd.com) has tested them head to head. His site is payed subscription only but I guess I can say that generally the 14-24 compares pretty favorably with the Zeiss, especially when stopped down a bit. I've got a D800E on order as well as a Zeiss 21/ f.2.8 on its way. I hope to borrow a 14-24 from a friend and compare them myself. I'll report back (but who knows when I'll get my D800e?).

Cheers!


----------



## preppyak (Jun 12, 2012)

dilbert said:


> Over at Luminous Landscape, they went with the Tamron 70-300 VC and the Sigma 120-300/2.8.
> 
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/nikon_d800__e_initial_impressions.shtml


The Sigma I can believe...the Tamron 70-300? That I think would be a big mistake. It produced decent results on a crop camera (my 60D), but on a 36mp full-frame, I can't imagine it holding up. Especially not at the long end.


----------



## Invertalon (Jun 12, 2012)

The samyang is incredible... I get blown away just how sharp text and such is at the very edge of the frame with this lens. And to think I got it for brand new at like $329. Best value out there, IMO. You don't need AF with this lens due to the incredible focus depth.

I highly recommend it for somebody who wants an ultra-wide for FF.


----------



## Jettatore (Jun 13, 2012)

helpful said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I just might get a 14-24mm lens for the D800 if it works out, and it is off to a good start.
> ...



'Helpful' to be fair about it, the Nikon 14-24 is not without it's downsides. It's big, it's heavy, it has a protruding front element that can't be protected with a filter, and it's focal range is not nearly as useful for most styles of photo-journalism or walk around photography as a 16-35 focal range which can give you ultra wide angle, to a normal to life view depending on what end of the zoom you put it on and how close you get. Aside from that, it's expensive, and one might well consider a 14mm prime (Canon's of which I hear is superior to the 14mm end of the 14-24 Nikon as well as the regular 14mm Nikon prime) along with a 24mm prime which would be much faster than the max aperture of the 14-24 on the 24 end. So you get a good, but very arguably not the best, large, heavy, expensive 14mm with a high quality but slow 24mm prime built in for some extra utility/convenience. I'd rather have the 16-35 or a 14mm Prime.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 13, 2012)

I may still go for a D800E, but I want to sell the D800 first. I will also want a faster computer, and to do that will not be a minor upgrade, since my 64 bit i7 with SSD is pretty fast already. I'll need everything new and upgraded to get the power to efficiently handle those huge files. They are 100-200mb when uncompressed.

My 24-70G lens is sold, I found f/2.8 to be too slow for my low light usage, even f/2 and f/1.4 is marginal.


----------

