One of the things that's been a real issue in trying to resolve whether any individual D800 focuses properly or not is the casual approach to testing a lot of people have. When someone complains to me about their camera having the problem, I've generally responded with "show me the images." (Put them on a Web site and send me the URL; downloads don't work for me, especially while traveling.)
About half the time, the images I get pointed to are not close to being proper tests, with very little control over the test itself. I've seen round bottles used as test targets, I've seen handheld tests, I've seen focus targets where there's little chance that focus sensors could clearly differentiate appropriate detail, I've seen cameras that are clearly not parallel to the test targets, I've seen...well, I've seen it all, basically. What I don't see nearly enough is a proper test done properly.
Out here in Alaska during the last week I came across several D800 users photographing the same landscapes as I was, so I was curious to their experience. I introduced myself to each and asked what they knew about the focus performance of their camera. Most didn't even know there was a problem. In all those cases, I noted that their camera was set to Single Servo, Single point AF using the center sensor, and most said that's what they always use. In two cases I was allowed to do a quick and dirty check of their cameras, and the end result was that in both cases I told them they needed to do a full check when they got home, as I think their cameras have the left sensor problem (it's not easy to do tests in random environments, as you can't easily control all the variables well enough, but there was certainly a variance on the left side of their cameras to what I was expecting in the quick tests I could do).
This brings up a conundrum. Very early in the transition from digital to film (D1 era) even pros were confused. Digital has quite a few differences from film, and all the new-fangled controls and options needed ferreting out. Try explaining white balance to someone who's only had two choices in the past (indoor or outdoor film). But pros being pros, they sought out sources to help them understand their new gear,, learned it, and moved back to "taking pictures" mode.
For awhile--I'll call it the D2 era, though it extended a bit into the D3 era as well--the cameras got better and they mostly attracted sophisticated users willing to learn.
What I'm seeing with the D800, though, is that a lot of people are picking up this camera who aren't ready for the experience. I've now taken to asking any D800 owner I encounter what they're using the camera for. I'm stunned by how often the answer is merely "to share images on the Web."
What I think we're seeing is the iPhone effect. As most of you know, I've long been writing that camera phones would change the camera market completely. But even I didn't quite see this new consequence clearly. What consequence is that, you ask? Simple: when a camera phone (or compact camera) user decides that their low-end camera can't capture some of the pictures they now want to take (usually has to do with low light, speed of focus or acquisition, sometimes detail, but rarely feature control), they look upwards. What I didn't expect is how far in the camera lineups they might look upwards toward. Many of these folk would be happy with a Nikon 1, a m4/3 camera, maybe a large sensor compact like the RX-100 or GX1 (but not these last ones if focus speed is the complaint). But they're buying higher than that. Considerably higher.
Here's the thing about the D800: it's clearly better than film, so that's a big plus in everyone's mind; it's got way more pixels than its nearest competitor, so it seems a bit future proof; people are raving about its image quality, so it must be good; it's the same format as film (FX), so the lenses in the closet (or dad's closet) all work; it's not out of their price range. Bingo, we have a winner.
Then along comes a slightly subtle but real problem that would take photographic sophistication to test for and see.
I'm not going to let Nikon off the hook here. I believe their silence on the left sensor focus problem was wrong and implies a "customer comes last" attitude that needs correction. Still, you almost can't blame Nikon when you see what happens when the problem does get written about on the Web by multiple influential sites: there are a lot of false positives being reported, and when I push for actual test results from people, I'm finding that for a number of them a false positive is coming directly from their test skills. Plenty of those requests for results have come back with real positive results, though, which is another reason why we can't let Nikon off the hook for their silence. But the false positives made it difficult to determine the exact number of problem cameras in the field, so this made it harder to figure out how big and how real this problem really was.
As I look around at the cameras that have come available in this year--D800, D3200, A77, NEX-7, OM-D, X-Pro1, GF5, RX-100, G1X, and more--what I see is a one heck of a lot of sophisticated, highly competent cameras. Cameras that, when used correctly, should produce excellent results. Maybe even superb results. As I use and review these cameras I'm finding that there's less and less of substance to talk about in terms of meaningful image quality (unless, I suppose, you photograph black cats in unlit coal mines and print them at 48"). Describing handling and feature issues is getting more into nit-picking, too.
What I saw in Alaska this week were a lot of cameras that were more sophisticated than their owner's photographic skills. Heck, I might even have to put myself in that category, as I didn't quite get "the image" I was looking for. This is an opportunity as well as a problem. The opportunity is to increase the imaging sophistication of users.
This is all is no more than a long essay leading to a simple conclusion on my part: I need to write more about how to test a new camera or lens. Most of you reading this are upgrading your equipment regularly, but the equipment is so good now we all need to upgrade our skill sets to keep up. Knowing exactly what your camera should do versus what it is doing is a useful piece of knowledge. Indeed, without it, you tend to drive your Ferrari only to church on Sunday on suburban streets with 25mph speed limits.