Nikon D800 Serial Number Production Date
Hercules Montero
I haven't yet met anyone who has experienced the left AF point problem (or, indeed, the green cast LCD problem). I suspect the incidence of both is very low indeed in real life but, of course, those who are afflicted are obviously going to be the ones to come onto internet chat rooms like this (and others) mentioning their problems. That's human nature.
ages ago(permalink)
I bought a D800 last week. There are no production date on the box, but there is the serial number of the camera. So maybe if you can figure out when (if) Nikon stopped producing the cameras that might have had affected by the focus issue.
It looks like my LCD has a green cast. But I've been reading so much about green casts that I'm going to give it a while and see if it's just me seeing what I expect to see, if that makes sense.
ages ago(permalink)
I suspect sunny k in spot on. Probably most of the alledged problems are the result of people seeing what they expect to see
Originally posted ages ago. (permalink)
tvnewsbadge edited this topic ages ago.
I got my D800 the day it was released back in March, zero problems after 5000 plus clicks. I'm not one of those personality types that feels the need to run every benchmark test ever invented looking for a problem. In the real world if you don't see something that affects your photos, there is no problem.
ages ago(permalink)
If the camera has the latest version of the firmware installed (as mine did) then I'd expect it to be the newer stock. I do have a green cast on my LCD and noticed it before reading anything about it. I don't find it a big issue though. I'll get it fixed before the warranty runs out but I'm in no hurry.
ages ago(permalink)
Was it worth the wait? There has been a lot of buzz about the D800 before and after the camera was announced. One of the main reasons is the popularity of the existing Nikon D700 camera and the sheer number of people, especially part-time and full-time pros, who were dying to upgrade their aging cameras. In addition, the production delay further fueled the heat and spiked up the interest from the photography community that was getting rather impatient, wondering what Nikon would bring to the table for the next several years in the full-frame arena.
But wait, what about all those photographers that anticipated a camera with the same sensor as on the Nikon D4, the ones that do not particularly care for high resolution? Did Nikon leave them all out with the D800, forcing them to jump to the expensive D4? Before I answer this question, let me first give a brief history of the D800, along with my analysis of why Nikon decided to take a different route with its full-frame line this time.
I remember the day when I first read the rumor about the D800 and its 36 MP sensor. I quickly dismissed it, because it sounded completely unrealistic to me. With Nikon putting so much focus on image quality in its full-frame line with the D700, D3 and later D3s, and keeping the megapixel count low at just 12 MP (while the competition had been only increasing the number of megapixels in their new cameras), I only pictured the D700 replacement to be a very modest update in terms of resolution. Maybe something similar to the D7000, with a 16-18 MP sensor. Plus, a 36 MP full-frame sensor just did not fit in with the existing super expensive D3X that was specifically targeted for high-resolution applications.
In fact, it all depends on how you perform this comparison. When a high-resolution image is down-sampled to a lower resolution, its noise characteristics can actually improve dramatically (see my articles on down-sampling). So when comparing a 36 MP image to a 12 MP image, why would you look at both at 100%? Clearly, the 36 MP image would print much larger in size, so it is only fare to compare sensors at the same print size. See this example of just how much bigger the 36.3 MP image is from the D800 in comparison to the 12.1 MP image from the D700:
By down-sampling 36 MP to 12 MP, you would not only reduce the amount of noise, but you could also make the image appear sharper. As I reveal in the following pages of this review, the down-sampled Nikon D800 images look exceptionally good, even when compared to the high-end Nikon D4. There is a reason why the new sensor is rated as #1 by DXOMark among all sensors produced to date. In addition, a high-resolution image has a lot more room to work with for cropping and can produce exceptionally good-looking images at low ISO levels, perfectly suitable for huge prints. Hence, when looking at the Nikon D800, one has to be fully aware of the many advantages of a high-resolution sensor and the benefits of the down-sampling process.
While a detailed comparison specifications comparison between the D800 and D700 can be found in my Nikon D800 vs D700 article, there is not much info there about how both cameras compare side by side in terms of fps (frames per second) and camera buffer. In the below video, I show the performance of both cameras when shooting 14-bit Lossless Compressed RAW images with very fast SanDisk Extreme Pro 16GB compact flash memory:
Some people have been reporting memory compatibility issues with the D800. I have not seen any issues so far with any of the SanDisk & Lexar cards I have (I have been using SanDisk and Lexar cards for my cameras exclusively), so I believe memory card issues are happening with cheap third party memory cards only.
Nasim Mansurov is the author and founder of Photography Life, based out of Denver, Colorado. He is recognized as one of the leading educators in the photography industry, conducting workshops, producing educational videos and frequently writing content for Photography Life. You can follow him on Instagram and Facebook. Read more about Nasim here.
I did some poking around and came across this post from quite a while back:
-camera-forum/00Sku9
The last poster, who was (very) late to the party, pretty much establishes the very same problem as being something extremely common, at least in my view.
I've reviewed the manual, to which a link was kindly provided in the same thread, and came across something very interesting, right there on the first page:
"NOTE: After five to six years of normal use, however, LCD's contrast may deteriorate and display information may begin to fade. Should this occur, contact an authorized Nikon dealer or service facility to have the display replaced at a nominal charge."
How could they all have missed it? Or was that added later?
Is this for real? I mean, am I pretty much guaranteed to have to deal with this B.S. if I do decide to get this back? What are your thoughts on this and what are my options?
And another thing. Being able to imprint the date and time in between the frames is kind of cool but I don't really need it. The only other function with this back that would be useful to me is the ability of entering custom text for each of the exposures. That text can be recorded in the metadata, very much in the manner that the "Image Comment" behaves in my D800 (for example). There is, of course, other added functionality with this back, which would be nice to have, however, it is largely irrelevant, at least to my current situation.
My first choice is obviously the MF-28 but how about the MF-27? What I really need is the date and time. Does the MF-27 actually relay the information to the camera or is this back strictly for imprinting the date/time onto the film?
So.. What's the deal with the MF-28 and can I use the MF-27 instead, or does it also suffer from the same problem with its tiny LCD?
And by the way, what is the current "nominal charge" for replacing the LCD on the MF-28?
Thanks!
The imprinting on the film is in my opinion not done with LCD. The MF-28 is powered by 2x CR2025 battery, the quality of the battery may also have influence on the visibility of the LCD display ...
I do not know if all MF-28 backs suffered from the described problem. Long exposure to strong sunlight may have had influence as well. Reading your project plan, i would do this with a digital camera, way more possibilities to archive theimages with appropriate information, for instance with Adobe lightroom, and add tags to the images.
I had owned two F5's and had considered the MF-28 back, but decide to down load the data from the cameras metadata, which I don't believe is doable any more because the software for that was based on pre Windows 94.
Did some research and the MF-27 will only imprint the date between the frames. This can be a problem if you have your film developed by someone else and if you don't specify that film not be cut into 5 frame strips. The MF-28 will imprint date and time in differing sequences according to what type you want, in between the frame or within the image. On top of that it has a host of other options that I don't think are prurient to you'er need.
Just a suggestion, but why not pick up a used Nikon D1x or D2h for about $150.00(US) which will record what you need as far as date and time. Then for free download from Nikon's website the Capture NX-D editing software so can access the metadata which will have the date and time. Your going to spend as much on the data back as you would with ether of those two cameras.
I have a couple of MF-28's and have not experienced any bleed of the LCD. I am aware of the Nikon warning, but it hasn't affected mine and they are quite old. I think you will enjoy using it. I don't think you will enjoy the MF-27 as much.
Stephen:
I think that the LCD is largely affected by how long the unit is in actual use. If, for majority of its life the MF-28 is stored in some cool, dry and dark place, with no batteries in it, then it is likely to be operational for many years to come.
Given there is no way of getting a brand new (unused, unopened) MF-28 Data back, there's no telling how much hassle-free time is left on any particular MF-28 unit, when bought used. It may very well be at the end of its rope and the seller may even know it. However, if the MF-28 powers up right there and then but does not the very next day, technically, it becomes my problem..
So, really, I'm just trying to establish if there is a way of actually testing the MF-28 on the spot, in a way that would give me any kind of indication whether the unit is approaching the end of its life. Or better still: Was the issue with the LCD addressed and mitigated later in the production? When was the MF-28 discontinued and what serial number range should I be interested in?
Also, does Nikon still service this product? How much does it cost to replace the LCD?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MF-28 is very chunky. It would add considerable weight to the already hefty F5. Since all I really need is to enter the date and time into the "onboard computer", the MF-27 seems like an option I should definitely consider, if I knew for a fact that there is, indeed, communication between its clock and the camera's CPU. Can anyone confirm this? I would also need to know that the LCD on the MF-27 does not fade away in the same manner that it does on the MF-28.