Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: D800 / D800E price question  (Read 1162 times)
PeterAit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1582



WWW
« on: February 26, 2013, 07:26:26 PM »
ReplyReply

As I understand it, the D800 and D800E are identical except for lack of an antialiasing filter in the 800E. Why then does it cost ~$300 more?
Logged

Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my photos at http://www.peteraitken.com
Jim Kasson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 526


WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 26, 2013, 07:36:26 PM »
ReplyReply

As I understand it, the D800 and D800E are identical except for lack of an antialiasing filter in the 800E. Why then does it cost ~$300 more?

First off, they have replaced the AA filter with something else, so it isn't just a matter of taking a piece of glass and throwing it over your left shoulder. Second, I think they've probably been taking their cue from the people who price Porsche options. Take out some sound deadening? Ka-ching! Remove the power windows? Pay us. On some of the stripped down racing models you can add back the A/C that you paid money to have them remove, but you don't get the money back.
Logged

Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1147


« Reply #2 on: February 26, 2013, 07:38:21 PM »
ReplyReply

As I understand it, the D800 and D800E are identical except for lack of an antialiasing filter in the 800E.
D800E actually has the same two slices of birefringent ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birefringent ) material, just orientation of the one closest to sensor is not to further split the rays (effectively quadrupling the image), but combine split rays back (almost, I doubt it is that precise) to one .
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7523



WWW
« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2013, 07:48:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Expectation from Nikon about respective volumes.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
hasselbladfan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #4 on: February 27, 2013, 01:23:55 AM »
ReplyReply

This is just "normal" profit maximization by Nikon.

Pricing is no longer linked to production cost, but to what consumers are ready to pay for it. They must have tested the price elasticity before setting this price.

"Are you ready to pay 300 dollar (10%) more, for having (noticeably) sharper pictures (with some higher risk of moiré)?

I am sure most of us have said YES !  Grin
« Last Edit: February 27, 2013, 02:58:53 AM by hasselbladfan » Logged
PhotoEcosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545



« Reply #5 on: February 27, 2013, 05:56:12 AM »
ReplyReply

This is just "normal" profit maximization by Nikon.

Pricing is no longer linked to production cost, but to what consumers are ready to pay for it. They must have tested the price elasticity before setting this price.

"Are you ready to pay 300 dollar (10%) more, for having (noticeably) sharper pictures (with some higher risk of moiré)?

I am sure most of us have said YES !  Grin

I am sure that you are correct that pricing is based upon an analysis of what the market will pay, rather than on production costs.

As the owner of both a D800 and a D800E, I was happy to pay the premium for the sharper performance of the D800E for some genres of photograph. Often I carry the D800E with the 14-24mm lens attached and the D800 with either the 24-70mm or the 70-200mm. I put off buying the D800E for a long time on account of the supposed moiré issue - but, in reality, it just hasn't materialised. (no pun intended)
Logged

************************************
"Reality is an illusion caused by lack of alcohol."
Alternatively, "Life begins at the far end of your comfort zone."
hasselbladfan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #6 on: February 27, 2013, 06:28:03 AM »
ReplyReply

And as of which size prints, do you see sharper images (in blind test)?
Logged
arlon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



WWW
« Reply #7 on: February 27, 2013, 07:31:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Because it's image quality is worth $300 more.. (-:}
Logged

Honey, did you bring an extra battery?
PhotoEcosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545



« Reply #8 on: February 27, 2013, 11:42:38 AM »
ReplyReply

As I have tried to explain before on a different thread, the advantages of the high resolution have very little to do with ultimate print size. (I am not saying it is of no use to someone wanting jumbo-sized prints, although this can be over-stated as the larger the print, the greater the distance at which it should be viewed).

No - the immense advantage of the D800/800E is the 45Mb lossless compressed Raw file. Only a luddite would deny that modern photo-processing is data processing, pure and simple. So the more data you have available, the greater your photo-processing options.

Personally I never print larger than A3+ (I only use an Epson R3000 printer) but I might print that size from less than 10% of the image file. Another huge advantage of the D800/D800E is that you can create much wider panoramas without the tedium of stitching, simply by shooting with an uw/a lens and top- and tailing the image.

It is only when you get into that level of processing that the enhanced detail of the D800E over the D800 becomes obvious - but when it does, it is very impressive.

For me (and others will have different needs/views), the big bonus I get from those cameras is a much higher level of flexibility. It is now not unusual for me to create half a dozen quite different images from a single exposure. Before switching to those cameras I would have said that photography was 80% science and 20% art. Now I would suggest 60% science and 40% art (because they have made me less scientific and more artistic in my approach.

But, of course, everyone is different and it is very much horses for courses, strokes for folks, or whatever other inane cliché you might favour.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2013, 11:44:38 AM by PhotoEcosse » Logged

************************************
"Reality is an illusion caused by lack of alcohol."
Alternatively, "Life begins at the far end of your comfort zone."
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6906


WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 27, 2013, 12:17:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

An OLP filtered image needs more capture sharpening than a nonfiltered image. With correct sharpening there should be little difference. With same sharpening the non OLP filtered image will always be more crisp. A non filtered image will have some fake detail.

Best regards
Erik
And as of which size prints, do you see sharper images (in blind test)?
Logged

AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1100



« Reply #10 on: February 27, 2013, 01:04:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

An OLP filtered image needs more capture sharpening than a nonfiltered image. With correct sharpening there should be little difference. With same sharpening the non OLP filtered image will always be more crisp. A non filtered image will have some fake detail.

Best regards
Erik

From what I see on the pixel-peeping sites, the D800E shows more detail than the D800 after sharpening tailored to each sensor, but the difference is less than beween unsharpended files.

As to hasselbladfan's question as to how big you would have to be printing to see a difference on the print, that's an entirely different question.

But hey, if people are willing to pay thousands of $$ for a red dot, paying $300 for a white E is a bargain   Grin
Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #11 on: February 27, 2013, 01:35:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I have an E.  I don't really feel the need to sharpen my files coming from LR4. That to me is worth $300 bucks. 
Logged
orchidblooms
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 160


« Reply #12 on: March 01, 2013, 06:18:41 PM »
ReplyReply

i found a d800 march 22 day they went on sale at bb MOA...

my d800e arrived first week of may...

i mostly use cp1 7 and do not spend much time with any sort of sharpening -

the d800 was a different story - however - images rendered were very sharp - and crops from the main image - WOW

hare are 4 samples i just pulled from another site where i had them posted - these are from the d800 last the e

3rd is 50% crop 1/2 of the frame -

bottom is d800e difficult panno

Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2737



WWW
« Reply #13 on: March 01, 2013, 11:48:46 PM »
ReplyReply

As I understand it, the D800 and D800E are identical except for lack of an antialiasing filter in the 800E. Why then does it cost ~$300 more?

As has been mentioned, the 800e isn't a case of just removing the AA filter, but instead it uses some type of filter to bend the light back to the original path.  From what I have been told (and who knows if that's correct but this makes sense)  is the filters are incorporated as part of the manufacturing process, and due to volume discounts the 800e sensors are more expensive.  If everyone wanted the 800e and only a few wanted the 800, possibly the prices would be flipped.  Probably just someone trying to justify it ... but I'll go with it Smiley

I sense some "positioning" on Nikon's part as well - this is the "higher end" camera, makes sense from a marketing perspective. I personally have no problem with that, Nikon priced this camera very aggressively and their margins are pretty thin.  Getting a little more out of some of them is probably something they counted on to justify the aggressive price point.

 I have the e, and with my zeiss 35, 50 or 100 macro I think the e offers some advantages on very high frequency subject matter ... but I've personally never compared it to the standard 800.  There are many who state the 800 with a slight amount of sharpening matches the e, but it could be the combination of the lens they use as well as subject matter may be such to not show a possible advantage.  This implies that for the majority of what people want to do the e might not offer anything most of the time.  I prefer to think of things the other way, if it helps at least some of the time, it's worth it to me.
Logged

Petrus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 458


« Reply #14 on: March 02, 2013, 06:37:41 AM »
ReplyReply

We are really not buying material things anymore, only, but a service/product a machine provides. Pricing follows this idea; if somebody is willing to pay $300 more for better IQ, what does it matter if the manufacturing costs are identical or not. This idea has been carried to the maximum with large outboard engines, where 225, 250, 275 and 300 HP models are totally identical, except that the engine control electronics have different parameters in software. Still the more powerfully programmed models are much more expensive. Needless to say the software has been made hackproof...
Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1608



WWW
« Reply #15 on: March 02, 2013, 06:51:57 AM »
ReplyReply

If you look at the cameras the D800/E is now competing with then $300 is but a pee in the ocean.
Logged

Derry
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61


WWW
« Reply #16 on: March 02, 2013, 12:32:33 PM »
ReplyReply

since purchasing my 800E I have never given thought to the extra $300 and if it was justified,,

all I know is I love the cam and will enjoy for many a year,,

the quality will be enjoyed long after the price is forgotten,,

Derry
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad