Home » Digital SLR Cameras » Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)

Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)

Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)
Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)


Product Added : March 29th, 2013
Category : Digital SLR Cameras

facebook
twitter
stumbleupon
Delicious
reddit
Digg
* Discount only for limited time, Buy it now!

"This Best Selling Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) Tends to SELL OUT VERY FAST! If this is a MUST HAVE product, be sure to Order Now to avoid disappointment!"

Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)


Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)

Hold in your hands an HD-DSLR able to capture images rivaled only by that produced by a medium-format camera: extremely low noise, incredible dynamic range, the most faithful colors, the broadest tonal range. Meet the Nikon D800, a 36.3 megapixel FX-format D-SLR for professional photographers who require end results of the highest quality; who demand superior performance, speed, handling and a fully integrated imaging system. For multimedia professionals, 36.3MP means true 1080p HD cinematic quality video. The essential tool for today’s still and video professional, every photo will astound, every video will dazzle.What’s in the box: Nikon D800 SLR Digital Camera (Body Only), EN-EL15 Lithium-Ion Battery (1900mAh) , MH-25 Quick Charger for EN-EL15 Battery 1 Year Warranty, DK-17 Finder Eyepiece (Replacement),UC-E14 USB Cable, USB Cable Clip, Camera Strap, BM-12 LCD Monitor Cover, BF-1B Body Cap, BS-1 Hot-Shoe Cover, ViewNX 2 CD-ROM and 1-Year Limited Warranty.

  • Extreme resolution 36.3-megapixel FX-format (35.9 x 24.0mm) CMOS sensor
  • Full 1080p HD broadcast quality video and minimized rolling shutter
  • View simultaneous Live View output on external monitors and record uncompressed video via HDMI terminal
  • Multi-Area Full HD D-Movie Video Recording Mode
  • Comprehensive high fidelity audio recording and playback control

We have searched the web to find the best prices available. Click Here to find out where to get the best deal on Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)


What customers say about Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)?

  1. 355 of 365 people found the following review helpful
    5.0 out of 5 stars
    A clear improvement over the already excellent D700, April 10, 2012
    By 
    M. Billon (France) –
    (REAL NAME)
      

    This review is from: Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (Electronics)

    I know that the D800 is not really the replacement model over the D700. Nevertheless, it did replace my old D700 and the D800 is, I believe, better suited for my photographic needs than the D700, i.e., studio, portraits, and landscape.

    The D700 was and still is an outstanding DSLR. The D800 is of course better, but in a very perceptible way, which was quite a surprise to me.
    I have done over 5000 shots since my purchase on 24 March. So far, no issues to report: no green cast from the LCD and no problems with the CLS system.
    Nikon has really outperformed with this new DSLR and the clear improvements are:
    - Much improved Dynamic Range, which was my main problem since my first DSLR
    - Better colors straight off the camera: deeper and richer
    - Better AF in low light
    - Highly detailed photographs at full res, 100% magnification and also when down-scaling the photos.
    Let’s not forget a proper and useable HD video feature at broadcasting quality.

    On the negative side (there has to be some):
    - The zoom in and zoom out buttons are reversed from the old models, which is now more logical, but I am used to the old wrong way! it’s a minor problem of course.
    - D4 has backlit buttons, why not on the D800? This can’t be that expensive to include.
    - Very expensive Battery pack, this is a major drawback for me. But yes, the D800 is well priced at $3000. I just hate ridiculously priced accessories.
    - still wonder the point of having 1 CF slot and 1 SD slot. 2 CF slots would have been superb. But I guess if you come from a SD card DSLR, that would be practical for you.

    One crucial point that has to be considered when acquiring a 36MP DSLR: storage will be an issue. I just purchased a 4TB ext hard drive. A 14-bit RAW file (uncompressed) coming from the D800 will average 75MB.

    I just shot a wedding, and I consider the D800 to be an excellent choice for the job. All the complains about shots being more blurry at 100% magnification are irrelevant. One has to be precise with his/her settings, at the right exposure and optimal shutter speed, results can be absolutely mind-blowing. And since most won’t need 36MP for wedding photographs, down-scaling images will certainly eliminate slight camera-shake or noise.

    One particular aspect that I appreciate is that my Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G is now tack-sharp at f/1.4. I had a front focusing issue with my old D700 even with the fine-tune option set to max. Since I’m no techie geek, I still don’t understand why the D700 gave me problems with the 85mm.

    Anyway, I used to be one of those people saying that digital photography will never replace film photography. The D800 has changed all that.

    Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

    Was this review helpful to you? Yes
    No

  2. 247 of 263 people found the following review helpful
    5.0 out of 5 stars
    Best in Class, April 26, 2012
    By 
    Emmanuel “ShutterMan” (Seattle, WA USA) –
    Amazon Verified Purchase(What’s this?)
    This review is from: Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (Electronics)


    See that my purchase is verified by Amazon. Below are my observations after one month of ownership.

    Pros:
    + Resolution: With the right lenses and on the right settings the detail is astonishing.
    + Dynamic Range: Incredible, when shooting in lower ISO’s it is near impossible to ruin a photo. Search the internet “fred miranda d800 review Yosemite” to see real life comparisons.
    + Color: Adobe profiles in LR and ACR are horrible, create custom profiles using a X-Rite ColorChecker Passport Software and then tweak it with Adobe DNG profiler for better colors.
    + AutoWB: Works well in about 70% of lighting scenarios, somewhat better than the D3/D700. *** See Tip Below ***
    + Low ISO: Having a true 100 ISO is godsend for on-location lighting setups.
    + High ISO: The D800 and LR4 do an excellent job in controlling noise. Using PS plugins a properly exposed image can print acceptable 6×9′s at 12800 ISO (max for D3/D700′s is 6400).
    + LiveView: The live exposure preview is a new and pleasant feature.
    + Build and Weatherproofing: I shot three weddings with this camera and all three had slight to heavy rain. The camera performed excellent in all occasions.
    + Tonality: With a good camera profile in LR4, the tonal range rivals Fujifilm 400H Film. This is incredibly useful on portraits with 4-1 or greater lighting ratios. Posterization in the shadows (DSLRs Achilles’ heel) is only noticeable on highly manipulated images.
    + Handling: The auto ISO is easy to engage and the new position of the ISO button is more intuitive when looking through the viewfinder than on the D700. Like the D700, the D800 is extremely customizable.
    + Autofocus modes: S(ingle) AF point is very good for stationary subjects at close and far distances; 9 point AF: works well with close range subjects that move, but in long distance shots it may select a contrasty pattern on the shoulder and throw the eyes a bit out of focus; 3-D: tries to follow the subject based on color and it works OK.

    Neutral:
    ~ Handling: I prefer the AF switches of the D700. The magnification + – are opposite from the D700, a small irritation.
    ~ Exposure: Better than D3/D700, but far from perfect. Contrary to Nikon’s literature, it struggles with backlit scenes.
    ~ Frames per second: I rarely shoot in continuous, and when I do, I have my D3/D700 set to CL (continuous low-speed) of 2 FPS.
    ~ Battery Performance: It can get me through a full day’s shoot if I avoid extensive LiveView or WiFi use, otherwise I need to use a backup battery.
    ~ Autofocus: The AF is very similar to the D3/D700, good but could have been better.

    Cons:
    - Software: Nikon software can produce excellent results, but it is clunky and slow.
    - Handling: The mode selector button is awkwardly placed. I prefer the D7000 U1/U2 style custom banks.
    - JPEG: Lacking when compared to Olympus, Panasonic, and Canon. ALWAYS SHOOT RAW!
    - Autofocus: 1.) All 51 points are still too centrally located 2.) No increase in cross-type sensors over the D3/D700 3.) All the cross-type AF sensors are in the middle. 4.) Like the D3/700, the outer sensors are near useless in low lit, low contrast situations.
    - LiveView: There is a well reported bug when using LiveView at 100% viewing, although I am still able to focus, I heard that is a deal-breaker for many landscape shooters. I have no idea how people survived 100 years of film or shoot $20k+ Hasselblad’s. <Sarcasm>

    *** TIP *** Remove the dreaded Nikon green cast by shifting the WB Fine-Tune (pg. 149) 1 or 2 points toward Magenta on each (AutoWB, Custom, Shade, Daylight, etc..) WB setting and get much better results short of using a QP Card 202/203 or X-Rite Passport for every scene change.

    Summary:
    Using proper technique, the images this camera produces are superior to any camera I ever shot. Would I jump systems for this camera? If I owned a large collection of top-tier gear, NO! Otherwise, I would consider it if I was not too invested. Does it equal or better Medium Format? There are differences in perspective, defraction limits, DOF, FOV, and CANNOT BE COMPARED.

    Having shot Canon (AE-1, 630, A2, Elan II, 20D, 40D, 5D mkI & mkII, 1D’s), Nikon (FM, F4, F100, D200, D300s, D7000, D700, D800, D3), Fuji (S3, S5), Mamiya (645, RB67), and Hasselblad (H4D-40), I know that they are excellent tools that are capable of creating amazing images. Pick the one that best fits your needs and go out and shoot.

    SEE COMMENTS SECTION FOR INFO ON ISSUES WITH SECOND D800.

    Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

    Was this review helpful to you? Yes
    No

  3. 819 of 914 people found the following review helpful
    5.0 out of 5 stars
    Unbiased Review of 5DmkIII vs D800, April 4, 2012
    By 
    se
    This review is from: Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (Electronics)

    I’m a Sony shooter with only a few lenses. I use to shoot Canon during the film days. I tested both the Canon 5D mkIII and the Nikon D800 and here are my results. I tested a 5DmkIII with a 24-70 f2.8 lens and a Nikon D800 (not D800e) with a 24-70 f2.8 lens.

    High ISO:
    About the same, except D800 has a lot more detail to work with. In Lightroom, I can save a higher percentage of ISO 6400 shots because the D800 has more detail. Canon seems cleaner initially in Lightroom but when the picture fits into a 24″ 1920×1080 monitor or a 64″ Samsung plasma TV, the Nikon looks a tad cleaner, noise less noticeable. I think the Canon looks cleaner in Lightroom because it is just a smaller picture. But displaying ISO 6400 shots on a monitor or TV, Nikon looks nicer in general. Both cameras at ISO 12,800 look awful and not recoverable in Lightroom. It might look acceptable as a really small pic but why the heck would you buy an expensive camera to display crappy looking pictures?

    Frames per second:
    Easy winner. Canon can shoot 6 FPS, Nikon 4 FPS. However, in practice I think 4 FPS is pretty good. None of these cameras are really Olympic style sports cameras.

    Resolution:
    Easy winner. Nikon’s RAW files are more detailed, almost 3D like. I can’t really explain it other than the pictures look more real. I can crop a photo to 1/3 it’s size (12 megapixels) and it still looks stunning. I wonder how much better the D800e version is. I’ll have to wait until my friend receives his to find out.

    JPEG:
    Easy winner. Out of the camera, the Canon JPEGs are phenomenal. The processing done is quite remarkable.

    RAW:
    Easy winner. If you shoot RAW, Nikon is it. Also there is an issue with the Canon with the color red. I think the color is overblown at times because all the details are loss and not recoverable in Lightroom. Not always but it has happened at least twice. The same photo on the Nikon kept all the details.

    Autofocus:
    About the same. Canon and Nikon have awesomely quick autofocus and I couldn’t determine a difference. The only caveat is that Nikon focuses better in lowlight (without the autofocus assist lamp) and also the Nikon focuses when there is almost no light (with the autofocus assist lamp). Why the heck doesn’t Canon include an autofocus assist lamp is beyond me. Also, Nikon’s face detection is extremely useful because it focuses right on the eyeballs.

    Flash:
    Easy winner. Canon doesn’t have built in flash. Nikon flash worked surprisingly well.

    Dynamic Range:
    Easy winner. Nikon knocked it out of the park. I got a lot less blown highlights with shots with white clothing and more realistic blue skys. Also, there is a lot more headroom on both the highlights and shadows on the Nikon when editing in Lightroom. How did Nikon have better shadows and highlights! They have to share some of that technology!

    Video:
    Suprisingly about the same. I would have thought that Canon’s lead in video would maintain. Surprisingly, the Nikon’s video was just as awesome as the Canon. Nikon’s video has a bit more detail and is definitely a little sharper than the Canon. I didn’t test Nikon’s uncompressed HDMI out, although it seems to be a useful feature (this is like RAW HDMI output for video). Canon should adopt uncompressed HDMI out also.

    Price:
    Easy winner. Why anyone (who doesn’t already have Nikon or Canon lenses) would buy this Canon for $500 more than the Nikon would need to think twice. I can see why the Nikon is selling so much better than the Canon, at least on Amazon.

    Comfort:
    Both about the same weight. Both feel nice in the hand. Canon possibly slightly more comfortable if you have bigger hands. Nikon maybe more comfortable with smaller hands. Both are fine though.

    USB transfer:
    Nikon wins with USB 3.0. Skipping the card reader altogether by just plugging in the camera to the computer is convenient. Also the transfer speed is much much faster than Canon’s older USB 2.0. This saves a lot of time.

    LCD Screen:
    Canon has slightly better screen in direct sunlight (LCD facing up towards the sun). Nikon is better when the LCD is not directly facing the sun. Nikon’s screen is crisper and more 3D like.

    Weatherproofing:
    My last day of shooting was in a light mist/drizzle. I was shooting both cameras again for about 20 minutes when the Canon 5D mkIII developed some fogging inside the viewfinder screen. I could not wipe it away as it seemed to be inside the camera. I could no longer take pictures normally without live view. Nikon didn’t have this problem and I continued to shoot the rest of the day with the Nikon in the same wet conditions without issue. I had planned to shoot at least 2 weeks with both cameras so this was definitely a bummer.

    Lenses:
    Both Canon and Nikon’s 24-70 2.8 lenses are great. I would say…

    Read more

    Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

    Was this review helpful to you? Yes
    No


Where to buy online is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program,
an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com