Have you considered joining the dark side?...

[FunkyCamera]

I too am testing the d800. As a very happy 5d II & III owner, along with a Pentax 645D system, the D800 is more than intriguing to me. 

Looking to dump the 645D as its processing time is unbelievably pathetic. 6+ seconds to see a preview... Clients get annoyed really quickly.

I did do a 3 camera test with the pentax 645D, 5D III, & D800. Nothing super fancy. Just checking sharpness at 100%.

They ranked in the order as listed above. Unfortunately. I really wanted to dump the 645D. The D 800 was soft. So soft I mounted the camera on a tripod, used mirror lock up, etc. the shots were at 160thof a second at f9. Clearly no need to use MU AT 160. But I had to rule it out.  I took the samples to my local shop, knowing my 20 year pro career, they were baffled as user error was not going to be an issue .  As they have seen strong results from the D800, they believe this is a "bad camera" as we swapped multiple lenses and copies of those lenses at the store. Same result. Soft!!!  Perfect.  On a camera you can not get your hands on, I need another copy to test. Ugh!!!

The 645D was sharp as sharp could be.  Reason enough to put up with its dog slow performance. Don't get me wrong the 5D III rocks.  I love it. It will remain in my bag. Hopefully making room for a 30+ MP camera from canon soon.

That's just how it is. High resolution smudges. Not that putting different 2nd rate glass in front of it would help either.

[charlesa]

Start to ponder the D800, then I look at the 400 mm f/2.8 glass sitting on my desk and I smile and all black thoughts evaporate 

[briansquibb]

I have bought a D60 so you wont know which side I am snapping for 

[psolberg]

I too am testing the d800. As a very happy 5d II & III owner, along with a Pentax 645D system, the D800 is more than intriguing to me. 

Looking to dump the 645D as its processing time is unbelievably pathetic. 6+ seconds to see a preview... Clients get annoyed really quickly.

I did do a 3 camera test with the pentax 645D, 5D III, & D800. Nothing super fancy. Just checking sharpness at 100%.

They ranked in the order as listed above. Unfortunately. I really wanted to dump the 645D. The D 800 was soft. So soft I mounted the camera on a tripod, used mirror lock up, etc. the shots were at 160thof a second at f9. Clearly no need to use MU AT 160. But I had to rule it out.  I took the samples to my local shop, knowing my 20 year pro career, they were baffled as user error was not going to be an issue .  As they have seen strong results from the D800, they believe this is a "bad camera" as we swapped multiple lenses and copies of those lenses at the store. Same result. Soft!!!  Perfect.  On a camera you can not get your hands on, I need another copy to test. Ugh!!!

The 645D was sharp as sharp could be.  Reason enough to put up with its dog slow performance. Don't get me wrong the 5D III rocks.  I love it. It will remain in my bag. Hopefully making room for a 30+ MP camera from canon soon.

I don't know about your experience but I'm finding the D800 fantastic. Seems nikon QA on the D800 has been less than stellar though. hopefully you'll get a good one to experience the bliss

Never. Nikon isn't a pro camera company any more, and no professional takes them seriously.

lol frustrated fanboy alert.    you need to look up stockholm syndrome. you got a bad case of canon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

i am soooo tempted to get d800! I used to have nikon but then 2 years ago i switched from d700 to mark ii and was SO happy - AF, controls, colors - everything was better on Mark ii!  i don't mind switching gears once in a while...i love how much detail you can get on d800...I mostly photograph kids and newborns (wouldn't it be great to see EVERY little detail on those little feet?), using natural light most of the time... So i need good AF, kids run run run....As i understand AF is better on Mark III....Colors are better in canon but it is fixable.....Should i think about switching? i can't decide!!


would you get d800E for portraits and people or just d800?

curious that you think the MKII's toy AF could beat the 51point AF on the D700, but regardless, the D800 focuses to f/8 which the 5DIII lost. The 5DIII has a few more cross points but lacks the sophisticated metering/face recognition. I'd say neither camera really beats the other AF wise.

the D800 has much better color depth and dynamic range. it is really not even a close contents on this area. but with so many software out there aimed at skin tones alone, the choice is really irrelevant in this day and age.

I'd only advise not switching if you need 6fps. but if you're happy with the 5dMKII then the D800 is actually faster than that camera.

ultimately the extra detail is worth it IMO. But you can always stick around with canon when they inevitably follow nikon with their own big MP body. 5Dmk4 or something.

If you shoot mostly kids and newborns, I just don't see why on earth you would use D800/E over 5D III.  You already see "every little detail on those little feet" with 5D III (or II).  If your kids are running, then 5D III's advantage in FPS is huge over D800. 

2ps is not HUGE. it is modest at best, if at all noticeable and will not really get you that much better results. For it to make a difference it would have to be 8fps+. Both cameras are "slow" and not really suited for fast action...not that newborns are that fast. Running kids should be extremely easy with even the slower 5DmkII. If you need speed on a budget, the D700 remains king at 8fps full frame.

As for detail, I think a 12MP still is enough for most people, but the question is, is the 5DIII better? the answer is no. so if OP wants the added versatility of crops or very big prints then the money is better spend on the D800 since there isn't anything that 22MP does that 36 can't, but having that extra 33% many pixels provides a lot more versatility than lacking them.

Potato - pot-ah-to. Both systems have advantages and disadvantages. After picking one system and learning how to deal with certain issues I wouldn't make a switch in either direction. Either company will always come out with something that looks desirable (like the D800e, or the new Canon speedlites). Usually the other competitor will follow soon after.

yup. both have pluses and cons and both systems are FAR from perfect. Canon lacks where nikon rules and vice versa. in my case, nikon had more pluses so it made sense for ME to switch. I don't get why people take this so seriously as if the fact I don't find a single canon dslr body to be on par with my D800's results means their camera is bad. I don't care about brands, I care about results and I'm loving my decision so far.

[julescar]

I own both the D800 and 5D mk III and they are both fantastic cameras, each has advantages depending on the type of photography you wish to do. The D800 has very good resolution and very good dynamic range especially in bringing out detail in shadow/darker areas. The 5D has a much better focus system (with the lenses i use) and it also has a far more natural default (AWB) colour balance. I use the D800 for product photograph/very large print jobs in a studio environment, it is as an alternative to a large format camera. If i leave the studio, I always take the 5D mkIII. I think the 5D mk iii is a much better all round camera (on the go) with a much better build quality, it feels more solid/robust. In the end this is only my opinion, I really think which ever camera you buy you won't be disappointed, if you wish to use them as camera's to take great photos or a tool for a specific purpose. There are plenty of good articles that compare the usefulness of both in a balanced way, the articles that are balanced are far more useful and much closer to reality that the various rants you will also find.

[RLPhoto]

I own both the D800 and 5D mk III and they are both fantastic cameras, each has advantages depending on the type of photography you wish to do. The D800 has very good resolution and very good dynamic range especially in bringing out detail in shadow/darker areas. The 5D has a much better focus system (with the lenses i use) and it also has a far more natural default (AWB) colour balance. I use the D800 for product photograph/very large print jobs in a studio environment, it is as an alternative to a large format camera. If i leave the studio, I always take the 5D mkIII. I think the 5D mk iii is a much better all round camera (on the go) with a much better build quality, it feels more solid/robust. In the end this is only my opinion, I really think which ever camera you buy you won't be disappointed, if you wish to use them as camera's to take great photos or a tool for a specific purpose. There are plenty of good articles that compare the usefulness of both in a balanced way, the articles that are balanced are far more useful and much closer to reality that the various rants you will also find.

I wouldn't consider the D800 as a replacement for Large format but definitely a change for low MP medium format backs.

[AprilForever]

Never thought about it. Makes me smile when Im out and loads of white glass and red camera straps shooting wildlife and nature. They outnumber the nikonians around 8 to 2 on a day out. The only time I see more nikon stuff is at weddings and I dont mean the photographer its the people with the D3100's and kit lens set on auto and pop up flash turned on for every shot.

I have no intention of switching at all well happy with my kit and looking forward to to buying more when I can afford it (5D3 is still the one for me)

Indeed...

[Aglet]

I've only shot a couple thousand images with my new Nikons so far but I can already form some strong subjective opinions about using them.

I've added (even more) Nikon gear to my collection and find I'm using it more often than Canon for the picky stuff I like to shoot. A D800 with old Nikkor MF primes gives me high detail shots I can process however I like without the dreadful red channel noise in the shadows that plagues Canon cameras.  This camera has the kind of features I want when working on macros, landscape or other slow-paced shooting.  An 800e is on the way and I'm wondering if I'll keep the standard D800 body or sell it.

2 D5100s have also taken over from most of my crop sensor Canons for similar slower paced work because, like the D800, their low ISO IQ blows the Canon results out of the water in difficult HDR scenes.  Some decent glass on them and they also do great IQ landscapes for small to moderate size prints.

I still like using my Canons for low HDR scenes, controlled lighting shoots where shadows aren't an issue and shooting when people are the subjects; possibly because I'm just still more familiar with being able to use the Canon gear very quickly in changing situations.  I also still prefer the "look" of Canon images and processing with DPP when it comes to skin tones and WB altho there's nothing stopping me from making custom color processing for the Nikons to match.  It's just easier for me to use the best camera for the scene and subject.

I'm finding overall handling of the D800 far superior to the older 5D2.  If I had the 5D3 this could be a different outcome but I didn't buy a 5D3 because I needed cameras with excellent low ISO performance, not more of the same IQ with features I wouldn't utilize.

One other thing I prefer over Canon equipment too.  Sensor dust is virtually a non-issue so far on my Nikon bodies.  They collect as much or more dust than than Canons, it seems, if you look at the AA filter surface.  But the dust is just not showing up on the images to the same extent as it does on my Canon cameras.  I think this may be because of the difference in spacing between the front AA filter surface and the sensor surface between the 2 company's products. 
The net effect is I can swap lenses much more comfortably on the Nikons without worrying I'm going to get a different pattern of sensor dust I'll have to PP out later.  That translates to taking few cameras and more lenses on a shoot instead of my usual tactic of dedicating a Canon body to a specific lens and leaving it attached so as not to have to hassle with sensor dust.
I can also stop-down somewhat farther for deeper DoF without worrying I'll be casting dust shadows on the sensor. 
My more recent Canon bodies, like the 7D and newer, don't suffer from sensor dust issues as badly as the older ones did but I find the Nikons have given me even fewer issues.

Once vexing thing I found about the D5100s tho, 4 out of 5 bodies I tested have an issue where their sensor and viewfinders are a bit rotated with respect to each other.  If I align a horizontal line across the outer AF points in the viewfinder, the resulting image is tilted CW nearly 1 degree! I don't like having to remember to recompose a shot to take this into account.  I'll likely be sending one of them in to Nikon to see if they can correct it.  Close examination of the optical components of the camera have not shown any one big "Ah-hah!" culprit but possibly minor misalignment of the sensor and the main mirror contributing to the overall tilt.

If I'm running out the door in a hurry tho, I still prefer to grab my Canon 60D with the 15-85mm zoom as an excellent all-rounder with great IQ and handling for quick and casual shooting.  Its metering and WB are nearly faultless; I can leave it on Evaluative and Auto and rarely have to tweak it in post. And its battery life is also fantastic, I can shoot all day unless I'm using live-view a lot.  Does a decent job of video too.

It's nice to have the options.  If I had to keep just ONE camera tho, no longer is it much of a contest.  D800 does most of what -I- need better than any DSLR I've used before.

YOUR mileage may vary.

[briansquibb]

Never thought about it. Makes me smile when Im out and loads of white glass and red camera straps shooting wildlife and nature. They outnumber the nikonians around 8 to 2 on a day out. The only time I see more nikon stuff is at weddings and I dont mean the photographer its the people with the D3100's and kit lens set on auto and pop up flash turned on for every shot.

I have no intention of switching at all well happy with my kit and looking forward to to buying more when I can afford it (5D3 is still the one for me)

Roll on the 1DX
Indeed...

[unfocused]

I never thought I'd consider switching brands, as I've been a Canon user for nearly 40 years.

But, if I ever switch it will not be because of bodies, but because of lens prices. I chose Canon many years ago because their prices were lower for comparable lenses. I am afraid they are losing that edge. Bodies will come and go, but lenses are the long-term and larger investment. If Canon cannot remain competitive in its lens pricing I may have to rethink my investment.

[Rocky]

Has any body compare the color  (in camera jpeg) between the newer Nikon and Canon. Two week ago, I have a chance to compare the pictures of D80 and 40D ( I know, both of them are out dated camera) by shooting an event side by side with a friend. This is my take: 1. 40D have a much better and more accurate color rendition. 2. People's facial color are a lot more pleasant. 3. picture of 40D has more "depth". D80 looks flat. 3. The white balance of D80 for tungsten light is slightly on the "cold' side, but it is much better than the 40D. The 40D is too"warm".

[preppyak]

I never thought I'd consider switching brands, as I've been a Canon user for nearly 40 years.

But, if I ever switch it will not be because of bodies, but because of lens prices. I chose Canon many years ago because their prices were lower for comparable lenses. I am afraid they are losing that edge. Bodies will come and go, but lenses are the long-term and larger investment. If Canon cannot remain competitive in its lens pricing I may have to rethink my investment.

I think part of what kept Canon competitive in lens pricing was the fact that many of their primes were older. Sure, they made them right and they are good, but, until the 24mm and 28mm, there wasn't a non-L prime that was made in the 2000's. It's easy to keep prices low when you aren't updating lenses for 20 years.

I think you have good reason to be worried for the future. The pancake 40mm is the only lens Canon has put out <$1000 that seems to match its price. Also, if Canon's non-L strategy is to go f/2.8 and IS, instead of f/1.8. Because Nikon and Canon's recent 28mm offerings are similarly priced, but Nikon does f/1.8, and Canon does f/2.8IS

[julescar]

I own both the D800 and 5D mk III and they are both fantastic cameras, each has advantages depending on the type of photography you wish to do. The D800 has very good resolution and very good dynamic range especially in bringing out detail in shadow/darker areas. The 5D has a much better focus system (with the lenses i use) and it also has a far more natural default (AWB) colour balance. I use the D800 for product photograph/very large print jobs in a studio environment, it is as an alternative to a large format camera. If i leave the studio, I always take the 5D mkIII. I think the 5D mk iii is a much better all round camera (on the go) with a much better build quality, it feels more solid/robust. In the end this is only my opinion, I really think which ever camera you buy you won't be disappointed, if you wish to use them as camera's to take great photos or a tool for a specific purpose. There are plenty of good articles that compare the usefulness of both in a balanced way, the articles that are balanced are far more useful and much closer to reality that the various rants you will also find.

I wouldn't consider the D800 as a replacement for Large format but definitely a change for low MP medium format backs.

I agree totally, as a replacement to a 25mp - 30 mp medium format.... Is what I specifically meant, thanks for clarifying my statement.

[adamdoesmovies]

I never thought I'd consider switching brands, as I've been a Canon user for nearly 40 years.

But, if I ever switch it will not be because of bodies, but because of lens prices. I chose Canon many years ago because their prices were lower for comparable lenses. I am afraid they are losing that edge. Bodies will come and go, but lenses are the long-term and larger investment. If Canon cannot remain competitive in its lens pricing I may have to rethink my investment.

I think part of what kept Canon competitive in lens pricing was the fact that many of their primes were older. Sure, they made them right and they are good, but, until the 24mm and 28mm, there wasn't a non-L prime that was made in the 2000's. It's easy to keep prices low when you aren't updating lenses for 20 years.

I think you have good reason to be worried for the future. The pancake 40mm is the only lens Canon has put out <$1000 that seems to match its price. Also, if Canon's non-L strategy is to go f/2.8 and IS, instead of f/1.8. Because Nikon and Canon's recent 28mm offerings are similarly priced, but Nikon does f/1.8, and Canon does f/2.8IS

I was really excited for the 24/28 until I found out their prices.  It's kind of pointless to spend 700+ on a non-L prime. Something tells me they could make them cheaper, but won't.

[Sycotek]

Assuming the d600 has a similar sensor to the d800 in terms of dr - i'll be adding that to my kit. Alternatively if Nikon wise up and add a sRaw and mRaw to the d800 then I'd just grab that for a studio camera. I don't need or want 36MP as it is 18 on my 1DX is plenty for most applications.

If canon actually release a large MP sensor then obviously my money will go there assuming it doesn't have any of the 5 series sensor flaws.