But all D800 reveal other AF problems merciless. In particular, two points I want to mention:
1. Adjustment of Lenses
I'd say about half of my (several) AF lenses covers the D800 defects in the AF adjustment on.
No problem, there is also the peer-reviewed 24-120 VR or at 16-35 and probably none at AF-S 80-400. All are at least as good in focus with the normal phase AF that Live View is not already showing in the monitor potential for improvement.
Repeatable problems especially at close range show an AF-S 1.8 / 85, my AF-D 2,8 / 80-200 (rotary push rods with AF) and unfortunately also a 4/600 VR. If one it at close range (Abb.maßstab 1: 10-1: 20) with normal AF sharp and then switched without changing the setting, a Live View, you can easily see that the focus is insufficient - a small twist of the focus ring , and the image is visible sharper. Comparing then LiveView-friendly and 'normal' images on the screen, the difference is enormous. The lenses must be affected all adjusted to the individual correction in the D800. It works.
2. AF in low light conditions (see my review of the 24-120 VR)
In low light, the AF is less accurate (this applies to all cameras). Even with one of my favorite subjects, nocturnal cityscapes where the normal phase AF actually willing and seemingly effortless remote illuminated building focuses, can be seen in the Live View or the clear value creation potential screen. This have to use, the D800 just has the potential to differentiate between "sufficient" and "good"!
These points must be kept in mind if you want with the D800 inspiring images under all circumstances. Of course, you go easily. Wenns but is critical - Lenses and fine-tune where possible LiveView. Somewhere I read that all the current phase AF solutions of whom are also always remained at a level sufficient for approximately 8 MP. I mean, there's something in that. The often-mentioned factor "diffraction at small apertures" confronts the focusing influences far into the background! (I think the latter debate about the supposedly excessive pixel density completely ridiculous: all DX Cameras> 16MP have smaller pixel distances, not to mention MFT or even compact snapping).
Everything else on the D800 is simply perfect for me: stunning picture quality, incredible reserves when using the Shadows / Highlights control in Lightroom. The max. Recording rate of 4 frames / sec is enough for me by far - I mean, where are we? We photograph daily greyhound racing or what? I would like the D800 faster close I hold temporarily the format and Scan DX format.
At some other problem or ailment I had with the D800 never. Of course I would have for improvement, for example, built-in GPS and WiFi to the camera control via smartphone as the CamRanger ...
Last week I had a few days off. I have used among other things for one of my favorite subjects, evening cityscapes. For comparison I have made virtually identical recording series with my very esteemed little Olympus OM-D (16 MP), everything from stand / without VR. Although I find it among other things class that Olympus can expose more than 30 seconds without "bulb" ... BUT: the recordings with the D800 are faced with the MFT-like images from an entirely different class. From 2-300m Distance with KB-equivalent focal length 40mm approximately twice the same consumption at the D800, the name of an inn jumps downright eye. In the OM-D you can guess it, because you saw him walking down the D800 recording ....
The D800 is quite simply the best camera for> 90% of cases. A Diva? Yes, depending on already, but the raciest and powerful that you can imagine.
