Nikon D4 overview

By R Butler | Published Jan 6, 2012 | Technology

Like its predecessor, the Nikon D4 looks as if it’s going to be an incredibly impressive camera. Nikon has looked to its professional user-base and tried to work out what it needed to add or adjust on a camera that just a couple of years ago represented the best they were capable of. The result is a camera with few big changes but a extensive series of small improvements.

The biggest change is, of course, the improvement in video capabilities. Given the increasing demand for video footage from professional photographers, and the incredible success of Canon’s 5D Mark II in the professional video market, it was inevitable that Nikon’s pro flagship would need to offer a more compelling feature set than the existing models.

Beyond this, the changes to the stills-shooting specifications are relatively modest – there’s a higher-resolution, 16.2MP, full-frame CMOS sensor and the ability to shoot at 10 frames per second with autofocus, but that’s about it. The new chip's capability has prompted Nikon to offer an ISO range from 100-12,800 that can then be extended to 50 – 204,800 (Hi4). The significant changes, beyond video, are a profusion of smaller tweaks, additions and improvements to what was already a well worked-out camera. These include a carbon fiber shutter rated to 400,000 actuations that can fire at up to 1/8000th of a second.

The biggest technical changes are the addition of a 91,000 pixel ‘metering’ sensor, replacing the 1005 pixel example used up until now. This sensor is used for much more than just metering, playing a key role in subject tracking, white balance and 'Active D-lighting' (a trick Canon seems impressed with, given the appearance of a similar system in the 1DX). The higher-resolution sensor allows the camera to offer face detection when shooting through the optical viewfinder.

Then there are the ergonomic changes to the camera’s body. Again like Canon’s 1DX, moves have been made to make the ergonomics of portrait-orientation shooting more closely resemble those of shooting in landscape format. The camera no longer features a dedicated AFL button, instead gaining push-button joysticks for both the vertical and landscape shooting orientations. An additional rubberized lump has also been added to provide a better grip in the vertical orientation and an additional function button added next to the vertical shutter button.

Key Specifications:

16.2 effective megapixel, full-frame sensor (16.6MP total)
10fps shooting with AF and AE, 11fps with focus and exposure locked, 24fps 2.5MP grabs
91,000 pixel sensor for metering, white balance, flash exposure, face detection and active d-lighting
ISO Range 100-12,800 (extendable from 50 – 204,800)
MultiCAM 3500FX Autofocus sensor works in lower light and with smaller apertures
Two sub-selector joystick/buttons for shooting orientation
1080p30 HD video at up to 24Mbps with uncompressed video output
New EN-EL18 battery (21.6Wh capacity, CIPA-rated at 2600 shots)
Twin card slots - one Compact Flash and one XQD

Click here to read page 2 of our Nikon D4 Overview

LIKE 38

Flag as inappropriate

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by dpreview.com or any affiliated companies.

Pin It

Print view

Comments

Total comments: 837

Does anyone know why Nikon have posted 20+ MB sample images for D800 and 120kB samples for the D4? I can't make sense of it, and this makes me wary that they are trying to hide something in terms of the D4 IQ.

Hello Nikon?

0 upvotes

Why Did NIKON put USB 3.0 ON D800 and USB 2.0 on D4. Also, the D4 has an ETHERNET PORT but why? NIKON seems confused as to what it's for! The camera is 802.11b,g & n compatible, but that is not what the ethernet port is for. The WT-5 transmitter adds $1,000.00 to the D4. They weren't very forthcoming with that information either. They don't say if the WT-4 unit is backward compatible as that would have been quite a cost saving measure. And as far as uploading your images without a computer, sure you can with the Transmitter and an IPHONE. By the way, IPHONE can upload it's own photos as well, and has been for some time now. Making the camera "WI-FI" CARD compatible would have cut the cost. One other thing-NIKON says since they are a Global company, they may be built in any of the NIKON plants. That may be fine until the FIRMWARE UPDATES need to be done, that will be done by serial number & BUILT-IN PLANT And by the way, this is no "fire sale" there's no reason to rush. .. JOE PRETE

0 upvotes

My two cents:

Now that we have seen the D800..

The D4 should be perfect for me. My studio is seeing a huge increase in the demand for cinematography. The file size for stills is prefered, the 75mb NEF's from the D800 would be insane to manage in quanities we pull down at weddings. I need rock solid AF in the dark, clean hi-iso, and a meter that can handle highly dynamic shooting environments. Lastly the new wifi setup is killer.

That being said i have a D800E on order for my portriat, commercial, and video work, it will be the perfect companion for the D4.

Now on to the bad list....

Only USB 2, top iso is HI-4 (wtf), no built in GPS (mostly a D800 complaint), different card slots (im cool with XQD but just put in two slots).

And there you have it.

Forrest

0 upvotes

Hello,

I'd like to pre-order a Nikon D4.
Do you know if I have a chance to receive it before June (if ordered today)?
I suppose there are too much pre-orders by well-known stores like Adorama, BH or Amazon. Your advices are welcome.

Thank you,

Marc.

0 upvotes

I think you'll get a more firm answer from the store you are buying the camera. Like with anything else there are no guarantees but the longer you wait the lesser the chance you will get it on the day you need it.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Nikon's website states that the D800 incorporates technology borrowerd from the flagship D4. D800 has 36.3MP compared with 16.2MP on D4. Does this mean that D800 has better IQ?

1 upvote

You know that MP count does not equate to image quality, so why are you even asking that question?

2 upvotes

edit: I saw you post the same question in the D800 preview comments, it's clearly a troll question.

1 upvote

more pixels does not automatically translate into higher quality but very likely D800 will have better IQ in every aspect, finer details, wider range, better tone, and less noise. let's wait and see.

1 upvote

@kayone - It was an innocuous question from someone who obviously does not know that much about camera technology as you do, so not sure why you felt compelled to attack. Moreover, this was not a troll question as I was hoping to get a insightful reply from one place or the other.
@yabokkie - thanks!

1 upvote

a simple answer is that more pixels wil get us more resolution and other qualities won't be affected.

in real world, more pixels may result in drop of SNR by a small, practically negligible difference, a small gain of dynamic range, and better tone than larger pixels.

coming back to noise, if we do smart noise reduction instead of simple resize only, we can get far better SNR more than enough to cancel the small fraction of performance drop.

so a simpler answer should be: more MPs, better IQ.

many people mistake PQ (pixel quality) for IQ , they are different things.

1 upvote

> coming back to noise, if we do smart noise reduction ...

effectively this means that more pixels itself can translate into lower noise levels for human eyes. amazing isn't it.

0 upvotes

My work get's to have a 'hands-on' demo in a couple weeks; I cannot wait till then!

0 upvotes

Looks liike it will be HOT HARDWARE. cant wait for the full review

0 upvotes

its been a while, DPreview is expected to post full review by now.....

0 upvotes

Not until the camera is officially released, as always.

0 upvotes

Relax, like Rashkae says, how about wait until the camera is actually released? Why are people so impatient on the internet?

0 upvotes

With more pixels is it going have more noise over the D3s at high ISO.
I have my doughts. Who cares about pixie count, noise is what degrades the image quality.
Dunno if I should grab a D3s while I can or wait till I see true evidence
That the d4 has improved noise levels.

0 upvotes

More pixels, does not mean more noise. MP's have continued to steadily increase since the kodak AP, yet noise levels have continued to drop. I wish people here would get beyond that myth.

3 upvotes

It's hard when there are still lots of cases of stuffing MP and the outcome is noise and lower-quality MP than the predecessor.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

> With more pixels is it going have more noise

depends on what noise. if you compare pixel to pixel, yes more pixels mean more noise at pixel level, but not necessarily at image level (same area on the sensor).

actually smaller pixels can provide better per area performance that in the future, we may have way more pixels on the sensor far beyond any lens can resolute, not for resolution but for better performance like DR or SNR (per area).

0 upvotes

The D800 will have better image quality (IQ) in good light.
The D4 will have better IQ in poor light.

1 upvote

＞ The D4 will have better IQ in poor light.

may be and may be not.
there are good chances that D4 losses in every front.

0 upvotes

Mamma mia!

2 upvotes

Dpreview, you have a backlog of reviews that we eagerlay await!

Please post these quick as many of us are holding back purchase. I for one, am keen to buy either the D4 or 1D-X, or even the D800 if released this month, but wouldn't dare put my money where my mouth is until I have read the indepth review on this site.

1 upvote

Когда уже появится средний формат!??

2 upvotes

Тогда когда ты научишся писать по английски :)

0 upvotes

Applies to both of you - русскому языку также не мешало бы поучиться. В оригинальной заметке должно быть "когда же" (а не "когда уже"), а в ответной - запятая после "тогда" и "по-английски" (с черточкой), вместо "по английски". Just my two cents :)
Looks like a great camera, though - although I'd agree with the medium format comment in the original post. Cheers to both of you from a non-native Russian speaker :)

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Тогда и про мягкий знак в слове "научишься" вспомнить не мешало бы. ;))

1 upvote

Глаз мой возрадовался увидеть русский говор на сем иноплеменном ресурсе! %)

0 upvotes

Thanks Ron007. I am actually familiar with the difference between public & private ip addresses. Would you happen to know if it is a public ip, or is the statement "in principle you could operate it from a different continent" from an author who doesn't know the ramifications?

Thanks,
Phil

0 upvotes

Here are several preview videos covering the new D4 camera:

Nikon D4 Hands On - The Best DSLR?
http://shrt.fm/wqLf8A

Nikon D4 Guided Tour Part 1 (HD)
http://shrt.fm/y0uD3Z

Nikon D4 Guided Tour Part 2 (HD)
http://shrt.fm/wTtuS7

WHY - Nikon D4 Release Video
http://shrt.fm/xawm34

0 upvotes

We should start charging for posting a comment - that way the nonsense will be filtered out.

0 upvotes

Lighten up. Some people, including myself, are having a little fun.

1 upvote

WILL THE WT-5 TRANSMIT VIDEO FILES?
i am DYING to know this. thanks for any info.

0 upvotes

"Because this is all web-based, you don't have to physically close to the camera either - in principle you could operate it from a different continent."

Really? It has a public ip? v4 or v6?

0 upvotes

You don't seem to know how these things work. If every device with such a capability stared to ship with a public IP address, we will need IPV8 within a year. That's not how things are supposed to work. Do some reading on basics of networking.

0 upvotes

@Ron007
340282366920938463463374607431768211456 addresses in IPv6 should be enough.

1 upvote

The knowledge of IP seems to be quite limited.

Devices typically use DHCP, so IP addresses get assigned dynamically, optionally dependent on the MAC address. The dynamically assigned IP could be RFC1918 (private) or public.

Even private IP addresses can be accessed worldwide, if desired, by using NAT, tunneling, proxying etc.

Especially the idea of one poster is funny: devices are not shipped with preassigned IP addresses. Since IPs, netmask and gateway must match the network they are being used on. Routing needs to be considered.

And yes, IPv6 solves the problem of limited address space. Asigning IPs to every thinkable device is no longer a problem as far as available IPs are concerned.

Does that help?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

I have been shooting with film SLR cameras for many years, and just recently purchased my first digital (Canon Powershot S100) and really enjoying the convenience and range of options/utilities.
I am keen to graduate to APSC or FF DSLR (maybe the D4 or 1D-X if budget permits), and will really appreciate if someone could tell me what softwares I should have for processing RAW, and what is the best hardware configuration to go for in order to support these softwares?

0 upvotes

I highly recommend Adobe photoshop Lightroom. If you are interested in trying it out, there is a public beta right now that a simple google search should find for you. If you are on a mac, you can try out aperture but honestly I have no preference and would take either of the two.

As to the best hardware configuration, you will find that you want a solid multicore processor and a fast hard drive. A raid array if you can. I also recommend that you put some money into your graphics card, seeing as a lot of features these days are GPU accelerated.

2 upvotes

RAID is so 90s when it comes to speed. SSD is what OP must have in his computer to get the best use of todays CPUs and memory.

0 upvotes

When can we expect reviews of Nikon D4 and Canon 1D X?

0 upvotes

I await the images eagerly. More realistically, I await the arrival of the D800 with even more enthusiasm. Thanks for the heads-up. Excellent overview.

0 upvotes

a typo in your D4 specs, exposure bracketing should be 2-9 (not 2-7) frames. to me, this is one of the biggest advantages Nikon has over Canon, in both the range and number of shots.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

I'll wait for the upgraded version, lets say D4z, with strip-out video capabilities...

1 upvote

the God made us with two video cameras and I bet you will never want to strip them out.

1 upvote

Unfortunately.., the company will never give us something for free.

I got DSLR with one of the best video capabilities and I never try to use it. I bought it because it meet my expectation on still picture taking. I'll be more than happy without it.

1 upvote

Maybe you should try it? What has better video quality, a $1000 video camera or a $1000 DSLR? Why carry 2 devices?

2 upvotes

Idiots wait for a review first then argue about things you have no idea anyway

5 upvotes

I'm surprised no one commented on the fact the D4 requires a new kind of battery. Besides that, it took Nikon long enough! Anyone with a D3, who tried out a D7000 would find a lot to like about this smaller, lighter body with better low light. I hope the D4 is even better. I am also surprised the D4 stuck with CF cards. Most computers come with slots for SD cards now. I'll wait a bit, when the price comes down. I sold my D3 and D3x in anticipation.

0 upvotes

The D7000 does not match the lowlight performance of the D3s and doesn't come real close to D3 either.

The weight of the D4 is nearly the same as the D3s.

The D7000 is a nice APSc sensor prosumer camera. Like the D300 and D300s.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

The D4 requires a new battery because of new Japanese regulations. The D3 is better in low light than the pro-sumer D7000. Size and weight of D3S/D4 are about the same. D4 also has the all new card format.

0 upvotes

CF cards are easier to deal with. You don't have to worry about exposed contact elements like an SD card. It makes it easy to throw the full card in your pocket. I'll take one less thing to worry about on the job over a slight convenience while working in the office any day. I'm not familiar with the xqd yet.

0 upvotes

On the other hand, you don't have to worry about bent pins in SD card slots, and SD card contacts are much easier to clean if they ever get dirty. If dirt gets into the little holes on a CF card, cleaning looks like a nightmare.

0 upvotes

I've been shooting for several years and have never had either of those as an issue. Are these common problems?

3 upvotes

That's what people do when they must talk about something. Like what kinda cards can take most abuse.

1 upvote

actually, yes,
it is common problems on CF for clumsy people, problem ussually at the card reader, even branded like Sandisk,
never happen with me but seen some cases around

anyway, after using SD, I prefer on using SD as it is smaller
and easy to connect anywhere

0 upvotes

haha the d7000 matches d3 low light capabilities? a d7000 owner i guess, that read too many reviews and watched too many pixels hehe

0 upvotes

Maybe its just me, but why are we putting video on DSLr's ? For one the video isnt good at all and the sound is garbage, yeah it might be good if there was somehting you really wanted to get a video of, but why wouldnt you just take a picture instead ? I feel like its only going to make the cost of the camera more expensive for something that is obsolete. If i want to spend 6k+ on a camera thats going to shoot video then im going to buy a video camera, not a DSLR.

Please correct me if i am wrong. If the camera is recording video then the sensor is constantly working. Over the life time of the camera will this have more wear on the camera than just taking pictures ?

Finally, I am currently a nikon user and have been for a while. But does it seem like nikon is playing catchup with the MP ? I know nikon has amazing metereing and color realization but seeing as a shoot sports its would be nice to be able to crop a shot i wasnt perfectly framed on and not decrease my image qual as much.

4 upvotes

Buy a Nikon D3x if you feel you need higher MP count and want to stick with Nikon.

No, Nikon is not playing DSLR MP catchup.

1 upvote

> Nikon is not playing DSLR MP catchup.

simply because it doesn't have good enough technology for that, same to Canon.

0 upvotes

yabokkie:

Has Canon matched the lowlight performance and dynamic range of the D3s? No Canon hasn't.

Live with that fact. The new unshipped Canon may; also an 18MP Camera.

1 upvote

calm down, I said neither Nikon or Canon have the technology (it looks that onchip parallel ADC is required for fast readout), and I won't take side with either Nikon or Canon (or Sony who has the technology) because I am only a user.

0 upvotes

Lots of photojournalists are now having to shoot stills and video. That's a major market for this camera. So how convenient would that be to only have to carry one camera? I personally don't use video on my camera and find it useless, but that's not the case with everyone.

The MP battle is more marketing than anything. I personnaly wouldn't want anything larger than 16MP and would be just fine with 12. I prefer to shoot RAW for certain things and don't like massive files to consume my card memory.

Anyway, that's my two cents from a different perspective. Hope it helps

3 upvotes

...because paying customers sometimes ask for some video to be produced with the shots - especially with architectural work. This basically saves me from having to carry two devices, which is more than welcome by a lot of shooters. I used to agree with you - UNTIL I started having to turn away work.

0 upvotes

The video is good enough for TV. Several shows use DSLR video. They love it!

0 upvotes

Shooting videos is VERY different from shooting stills at professional level. I doubt a professional will really use it as a still + video camera. At that level equipments tend to be specialized, not generic.

0 upvotes

Hi Shockrr - Video capability on DSLRs is the logical thing to do. I agree with you that if you were spending 6k on a video camera, you wouldn't buy a dslr - but the 5d mk ii is only 2 grand. It shoots full HD from a full-frame sensor with access to a massive array of beautiful lenses. Whilst it may never (yet) have the same footage quality as a film camera, it produces remarkable results. Nikon have never released a DSLR of the capability AND price point of the mark ii, and given this recent release I don't think they ever will.

Just search vimeo for 5d mark ii and you'll see some great results.

Sound is always garbage on inbuilt microphones. If you want good sound that requires external equipment, regardless of the camera.

Your comment about 'why wouldn't you just take a picture instead' is ridiculous and you should think that through a bit further next time.

1 upvote

It can only be a good thing. If the professional video market is threatened by still cameras, then that should see improvments in both fields. I would like to see exactly how much this feature costs to the consumer, Im sure it will be an insignificant % of the to total R&D of this camera.

@CADIGITAL I agree with your comment on resolution. Anyone needed to print massive for a living should really consider MF.

0 upvotes

DSLR's will all have video from now on out.

1. How much does it cost to put video into a camera? Nothing, because cameras already have the fastest processor the body and current state of tech will allow. R&D is basically the only thing that the money goes into, which is void if 100 people buy the camera

2. Option #2, for those who feel that they are paying for video: Manufacturer starts creating two different processors (increase mftg cost), to create one unit that sells at the base price with no video and another that sells for $100? more? This is not practical as it would decrease margin on both units resulting in less profitability.

3. While there are a few benefits to having a camcorder, most consumer to prosumer level audiences get more "bang for the buck" with a DSLR. Moreover, with increasing tech and processor speed, any deficits DSLRs have now is likely to become marginal in the near future.

Anyone agree?

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

first of all, video is a thing thats just possible now, you cant manufacture it cheaper because its lack of video functions. because its implemented with software, the sensor readout is fast enough, the cpu is fast enough and the cards of course

and secondly, you are right, its just you :)

i dont know ANY reason why i should deactivate functions that a product would be capable of^^ thats sony/panasonic style

when the d4 has the cpu/sensor power to theoretically do video, then i want it .. for 6k i want everything implemented thats possible :)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

PHOTOboy73, what planet are you on? Voice control for a professional camera? I'd like to see how that would work at a wedding, or business presentation, or photographing wildlife to mention just a few photography applications. Do you actually shoot in the real world, or just sit on forums dreaming up stupid ideas?

1 upvote

"[V]oice control...and photographing wildlife."

I rest my case.

1 upvote

voice control sounds good, and it could be even better if the camera can read the mind of the photographer.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

yabokkie:

Or control the mind of the user (irony), though a feature some iPhone users seem to unconsciously turn on.

4 upvotes

I think he got the point,
in my place, we are using that voice control recognition on camera

we hire a photographer,
we tell him what to do, if we want him to take photos,
we call him and he come,
if we want him to re-take the shots,
we tell him and he will recognize my voice as I am the one
who pay him
and if I think pictures already enough, I can easily said some command
and he will shutdown from taking pictures

cool, huh ?
bet photoboy don't has it on his cool iPhone

0 upvotes

Voice control? Hahaha.. I rather have a thinking voice control "Photo Printer" that can print what's on my mind.... Dream on yeah.......!!!

0 upvotes

I just wanna know which comes out on top of the high iso. Canon 1D X or this D4

0 upvotes

1DX is said to be better but it will be very difficult to judge because both cameras cook their RAW files. Nikon cooks more and it's almost well-done, handy for photojournalists though.

0 upvotes

yabokkie:

Have you got RAW files from either camera you'd care to share, including extraction software?

0 upvotes

becasue the RAW files are cooked differently, you won't be able to tell even you have them (or read DxO reports). the test will need two cameras shooting through the same lens (like 50/1.4S) at well controlled conditions and the result is, again, only a word.

0 upvotes

yabokkie:

Right it's only the word on the street.

There are duplicate Japanese Zeiss lenses for both Canon Nikon, so those would be a good place to start.

I don't trust what DXO has to say.

Shoot in the real world, then print at 300 dpi.

1 upvote

you don't need a Cosina but you can use it. I guess the image quality may be hardly distinguishable for real life shots, only that 1DX's AF and frame rate are better and more attractive for pros.

0 upvotes

Well, with a Nikon D700 and the 85mm 1.4 Nikon I've shot really lowlight.

And then I've also used a D3s with the Zeiss (Cosina if you will) 85mm 1.4, and the Zeiss is significantly better in lowlight than the Nikon lens, yes I realize it's different cameras.

I have not done the test of using the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 on the D700.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I think it's D4 as seen in nikond4price.com pros and cons reviews.

0 upvotes

for me I don't think it give me much over my current D3 and D3x combination as a widlife photogapher, it seems to me is more biased towards moving image capture...... at that price i will not be buying one..

0 upvotes

Chris Horsley:

You have a point, but I'd guess you're mostly shooting in daylight.

Also the D4 may have a less audible shutter.

0 upvotes

> Also the D4 may have a less audible shutter.

the shutter is completely silent if you read the specs, when shooting at an amazingly fast 30 fps, at 1080 resolution.

0 upvotes

yabokkie:

You mean the shutter and mirror don't move when shooting video. No, news there.

That has nothing to do with how audible a shutter/mirror is during still shooting.

1 upvote

i dont think that this camera is meant to attract d3 owners, its just an upgrade.
same with the d700

ok, both have video ... thats it, the d3 and the d700 are perfect cameras, i cant imagine one single feature thats missing, besides video of course.

i think this model is more for upgraders, or if the d3 breaks, you will be happy that there is a new model out and you dont have to buy a 3year old model

0 upvotes

Face and Nipple recognition?! I did not see that, that is pure genius. If a camera had that mode I would be first in the line. I agree with these guys in London it is underwhelming and has no inovation.

Sorry that makes no sense, here is the link:
www.photography-factory.co.uk/photographyreviews/2012/01/nikon-d4-review-the-wrong-camera-too-late-16mp-1080p-30-hd-video-iso-12000-xqd-is-that-it-v-canon-5d-hasselblad-h4d-pentax-d645/

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

What is this obsession with "innovation".

Much of so called "innovation" is full of crap. Do you really think Nikon would dare to screw up (another term for much "innovation") the D3 and the D3s?

Sorry: I'll be blunt, these guys in London are morons for saying that this camera, D4, should have 30MP.

They don't appear to understand that the D4 is not a replacement for the D3x.

0 upvotes

@HowaboutRAW - How can you not see they are clearly saying that Nikon are holding back technology for profit? It is obvious that we no longer need two Cameras (D4 and D4x) to do the job when one chip could easily do both tasks , Hasselblad and others have accomplished this by having a large chip with a reduced quality stetting for low light/low noise/high speed. Plus I am convinced that voice control would be very useful to me. There is no room on the modern DSLR body for more buttons. Nikon took off the AE button. To me the idea of saying ""lock exposure"" with your eye up to the viewfinder would be amazingly useful. My iPhone can understand voice already with 100% accuracy, why not my camera? Nikon are they best out there. I can remember when the F4 came out it was a revelation, filled with great ideas and new tech, the D4 is a joke by comparison. I do not care how much technology is used to convey my ideas into the camera, what I personally dislike is excessive automation.

0 upvotes

PHOTOboy73:

If you care about low light, you can't use some 35mm full frame 36MP sensor.

Get over it. If the tech exists, in only exists somewhere like 100 miles north of CES.

So in other words, you're wrong.

Stick with your iPhone for combat photos, or stadium shots done with a screaming crowd in the background, then see how much voice control gets in the way.

I also don't want my car to drive via voice control--funny that.

1 upvote

The primary market for this camera is photojournalists. This a professional-working photographers rig. These photogs typically prefer low-light capabilities over high rez. This camera has enough resolving power for web, newspaper and magazine work. You can even make a nice 16x20 print (easy) for an exhibition.

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

The camera has a computer inside with a webserver, that can be used to remotely take and see the pictures from the Internet. I'm not sure that's something the D3s has, but for some that's a valuable feature, furthermore multiple of them can be sync, and one can be the Master over other cameras. This means taking shots from different sides at exactly the same time.

Looks to me like an interesting feature (that of course many here will trash and complain about). If this is hackable or Nikon plays their cards right, for sure that computer will mean the development of a larger set of features!

0 upvotes

post removed

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

> D4, should have 30MP.

maybe 40MP, 50MP, or more (a lot more hundreds of MPs). there is no proof smaller pixel sizes affect picture quality, except at highest ISO settings. actually the 1.x micron pixel sensors in point-and-shoots outperform D3S on per area basis, in both SNR and dynamic range (but it will be very costly to make the sensors as large as 35mm FF).

there are several reasons Canon and Nikon chose less pixels. one is neither company have the technology to readout at high speed with low noise (Sony has it). another is for sports and photojournalism, there are always subject blurs which make high resolution exposure very difficult.

the result? we will see one day 8K (30MP) video cameras kick these shame "flagship cameras" out of the market, in 10 years time.

0 upvotes

yabokkie:

Heat is the proof.

Why on earth are you making silly comments like high pixel counts don't affect quality?

Do you work for Canon?

The 24 MP sensor in the Sony A77 and Nex 7 has big problems over 800 ASA.

And irony so does the Sony A900's 24 MP sensor, something Nikon avoids with the D3x, which uses the same Sony sensor.

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting

1 upvote

> high pixel counts don't affect quality?

smaller pixel, less pixel quality, no problem with that. the image quality (or SNR at the same resolution) is another story. D3X is better than D3 if you do some NR (as D3 does on camera) and resize it to 12MP. D3X's problem is not image quality but something else like frame rate.

0 upvotes

yabokkie:

Really the D3x (a plenty good camera) can shoot noise free at ISO 10,000? No, it' can't.

I'm not disputing that you can get better studio images with D3x at ISO 100 than the D3s shooting in the same conditions. But the D3s and the D4 are not studio cameras.

0 upvotes

not offending but you obviously have no knowledge about camera nor image quality. do some study man.

0 upvotes

I think the D4 should have had a 30mp sensor but optimized the sensor for pixel binning at 15mp. That way the camera could have have the performance and ISO for the photojournalists and sports photographers, and also have the resolution for studio photographers.

Camera's with more advanced sensors have been binning pixels for years.

I'm actually disappointed in the D4. Seriously, internet shooting? What the point of that? A $6,000 security camera?

0 upvotes

nakeddork:

The Yen is up against the US dollar because of the earthquake.

A 30 MP sensor binned to 15 MP would still have 30 MP sized receptors. So there may less heat generated but there are still some other 30PM sensor problems.

If you can find one, a D3x is still 8000usd.

0 upvotes

yabokkie:

Again, since you didn't bother to pay attention: "Heat".

Not really offended that you can't wrap your head around the idea pixel size matters, no matter what everyone else tells you and independently verifiable data states.

It ain't all simply analog to digital conversion speed. Quality matters too.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

"what I personally dislike is excessive automation."

Says the person who is asking to drive a camera with voice and thoughts.

0 upvotes

When someone start talking about "profits" you know where they come from. You want to talk technical specs, talk about it here. Your liberal cacophony on "profits" - there is a moronic blog in huffingtonpost. Feel "free" to go there.
It is counter intuitive to say a lower technology will be sold to make "profit" if there is a competition which can deliver a better spec.

0 upvotes

Stunning features to lure pros to upgrade.

0 upvotes

I have a D3s, and shoot in low light. It will take some convincing to make me believe this is better. Echoing some of the comments - the 2 different card types and lower battery life are definite minus'. While the D4 seems -video capability - conspiculously absent is it real time auto focus? Or the quasi-autofocus of the D3S? What I expected - the auto bracketing - let me set the auto bracketing to automatically use the continuous high or low shutter release to take the photos. (action sequences). I will want to see a serious Pro sport photog review of its performance. What does a low light action event shooter want to be able to do? preset as much as he can then focus, compose and shoot, otherwise he misses the action. Let me state a min shutter, and aperature range, and say where the guidelines should be for shutter. It picks within the range to capture at the lowest ISO in can preserving guidelines. Some - but not all is possible with the D3s. we are almost there.

0 upvotes

You have a point the D4 may not matter that much, like moving from a D3 to a D3s.

However noise free shooting at ISO 12000 could very much matter to some, and if Nikon has done some thing about the very audible shutter/mirror on the D3 (s and x) then many will make the upgrade.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

The parts I found genuinely fascinating were their suggestions for very sensible future features that are not even being considered at all by existing camera manufactures.
a)voice recognition, while shooting.
b)the idea that the LCD could use facial recognition to tell if you were looking at it and turn on or brighten up (i think this is genius not just for cameras)
c)the camera should take two frames in the same one shutter actuation to make a HDR type wide latitude image.
d) huge rear LCD – touch screen.
These guys are smarter than the whole camera industry put together. I wish they could make that camera!

1 upvote

PHOTOboy73:

Get over the voice recognition and touch "suggestions".

0 upvotes

Sorry the D4, just like the D3S as good as they are, are not noise free at ISO 12,000.

1 upvote

Fullframer:

Yes, they pretty much are. Now if you look at 6 pixels at a time maybe you'll find noise.

However, print 12"by18" at 300 dpi and you'll have a hard time seeing noise.

0 upvotes

is this camera hackproof??..
if it is connected through Internet, it can get hacked too right?..
so isn't that a big problem??..
btw..nice Camera Nikon..a serious competitor to its peers..

0 upvotes

What a lot of heat based on speculations...

I look so much forward to real reviews of the D4 - real images will tell us if this camera is a worthy replacement for the D3s.

Disapointed, not at chance - Keep up the good work Nikon.

0 upvotes

For me it is unintelligible to switch from a D70 to a D4.
And why will the D700 better than the new D800 in low light ? Is that logic ?

0 upvotes

dicidi +nyphotos:

Are you guys joking?

Let me see. The "D800" has not been announced. And the D700 already vastly outperforms the D70. (Even if Nikon ships a 30MP "D800", Nikon is very likely to also ship a D700 replacement designed for lowlight say the "D700s".)

Last, nyphotos:

Okay then, from below, about going to medium format. Tell me how you like the Leica S2? It's not particularly good in lowlight, which you claim to shoot.

And it be a wee bit more pricey than the D70. The Leica sure has good dynamic range though. Better glass than Nikon too.

0 upvotes

I have an old D70. It works great, but I really need to upgrade. Personally, looking at the D4, the only downfall was putting in the two different card slots. I liked the D3 and 3s where you could duplicate one CF to the other in case one went down.
I love it, and will probably buy one once I have enough saved up (in about 6 months). I'm happy they kept it out of the 20's as far as MP goes. The more MP doesn't mean the better.
Another GREAT review is here:
http://www.bythom.com/d4intro.htm
I understand cbaphoto about the video stuff, but I'm ok with that. EVERYONE is doing video and still now, it's just something we have to live with.
I'm interested to see what the upcoming D800 has to offer, but I believe it won't be as good as the D700 in low light (which I do a lot of) and I think the D4 will kick it's ass and for another 2K, there's going to be quite the difference. Although the D800 will reportedly have MP in the 30's, if I wanted that many MP, I'd go to a medium format.
Cheers!

1 upvote

I had D3s and wait for this for a long time. When it is out, there is not much improvement and it is very expensive. Only 16.2 MP compare to previous 12.1 MP. what is the selling point of this D4 compare now only its video is good. What a disappointment from Nikon. Worse is that we still need to buy accessories for wireless transfer for such a top range and expensive camera. Is it time to jump ship to canon...

0 upvotes

Go right ahead and get the 18MP Canon then. Report back on what you like and dislike about that Canon though.

Based on my experience with the D3s shooting and printing at 12,000ASA with next to no noise, the D4 will probably double that. (D3s RAW extraction done with ACR in Photoshop CS 5.5--lens Zeiss.)

That high ASA performance is something the Canon 1ds Mark IV may or may not do.

4 upvotes

I switched side to Canon for the 5DMKII, and got disappointed. The focusing is terrible, and noisy, my friend's D700 totally trashed my 5DMKII on 100% crop's nosies.
Personally I believe that more pixel a camera has, if the pixel cannot be process properly by manufacturer's technology , it means "more nosies".
I was very happy with my D300s, although 12mp, and now I am sad with my 21mp 5DMKII.
When I have enough money I would get a D4 for sure (and you can see 1DX actually drop down to 16mp as well)

1 upvote

@Ben Tomohiku :

Although I dislike the ancient 5DMKII focusing system, the noise performance should not be that bad.

Anyway, the D700 is for sure a mid-level king of darkness.

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Ben Tomohiku:

Wouldn't getting a D700 be cheaper than a D4, and still much better in lowlight than the Canon 5D MII?

0 upvotes

The D700 is marginally better than the 5D Mark 2. 1/3 of a stop better. The only camera with any sort of significant upgrade in low light to the 5D Mark II is the D3s, which is 4/5ths of a stop better. As for the focusing system, it isn't the best for sports that's true, but the center focus point is just fine for all other photography.

0 upvotes

treepop:

Have you shot and printed from say 6400 ASA RAW files shot with both the Canon 5D MK II and the D700? (The test photos must have large areas of dark shadow.)

I'll rely on that kind of testing, not assertions about how many stops one camera does in comparison to another.

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

1D4's sensor is better, but not good enough to overcome the gap between APS-H and FF and still beat D3S. that's why they have to go FF, too, and competing with D4 become a lot easier.

0 upvotes

I've had money set aside for this release for a damn long time, and I'm just not impressed enough to spend it now. I've loved Nikon products since I was a kid. I was expecting something a lot grander out of the D4. Not sure what exactly, but I know I'm not seeing it. Frankly, I couldn't give less of a sh!+ about video. They should release two cameras when they do these things; A great camera for videographers who wannabe photographers but they're too lazy to capture the damn shot the right way, and a great camera for still photographers who already know what they're doing behind the lens. The D4 reminds of working on my '77 Chevy versus my '00 Chevy: I'll bet they could really do something great if they ripped out all that extra crap and put in something truly useful to compliment the drive train rather than bogging it down. I'm sure the D5 will have a pretty ridiculous price tag on it, but maybe it'll be worth it. My money will just have to keep gathering dust for the time being.

3 upvotes

"I was expecting something grander NOT sure what exactly"

This comment sums up many ppls rants here, when u work out what is missing from this camera that doesn't warrant your money, come back and tell us.

3 upvotes

I'm always so impressed that some people can place a negative verdict about a camera they have never seen, held, or seen results from it.
If you look at the quality of the camera's of today then it's very hard if not impossible to make huge improvements.
Take 5 top camera's, make the same picture and print it on 1x1,5 meter and I dare every "specialist" to see the difference at a distance of 1 meter. I'm sure that no one can tell with picture comes from with camera.
We all have preferences for one brand or another, but that doesn't mean that "not my brand" can't be good as well.

4 upvotes

cbaphoto

Um, a 2000 Chevy or '77. Neither, stick with a Chevy from 1970, unless you must have power windows.

0 upvotes

Kryten and Sjakie - Yes, you're right. I should have been very specific about the things I would like to see from the D4, now the D5, so that Nikon could ignore me and somebody with a bloated sense of self-worth could come in here and tell me how wrong I am. Brilliant. I wish I had thought of that.

0 upvotes

@cbaphoto: so you think youre elite because youre to cool to shoot video, and video is only for guys that cant take a photo? ^^

and youre serious with that?

get over with, there are people that do both, and are good in both, if you want to make a film and own a bunch of nikon glass, why should you make a photo story out of it, when your intention was to make a film ?

0 upvotes

Not much an upgrade from D3x or anything innovative. Will see what 1Dx, A99 or D800 can offer....

0 upvotes

It's an upgrade for the D3s, not the D3x.

The rumored "A99" is still going to have the mirror problem. And Sony got caught telling too many lies about the A77, for example "noise free at ISO 6400".

Now imagine if Sony did a 14MP replacement for the A900--that could be something. Though still not as tough as the Nikon D3 and D4.

0 upvotes

Sony's have good price points. I too look forward to possible updates from Nikon and Sony... the D700 and SLT-A99.

0 upvotes

"the Wrong Camera Too late!" These guys from London pull no punches in their black ops review, but I am amazed by their suggested improvements, Nikon should hire them:

http://www.photography-factory.co.uk/photographyreviews/2012/01/nikon-d4-review-the-wrong-camera-too-late-16mp-1080p-30-hd-video-iso-12000-xqd-is-that-it-v-canon-5d-hasselblad-h4d-pentax-d645/

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

Um, any idea if those guys in London shot in RAW, I see no reference to RAW.

And they appear to be Nikon D3(sx) haters; they spend a good deal of time defending Canons. Sounding like those who think an Audi R8 is the same as Veyron. (Yes, I know the two cars have the same basic parent company, unlike the DSLRs.)

Look the D4 could be some disaster, though it's very unlikely. Much more is that the new Canon will have yet again serious deficiencies.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

4 upvotes

what improvements? a higher megapixel sensor? senseless article, waste of time

1 upvote

mike kobal :

These London Lads just don't like the D3 bodies. Like you, they lost me when they started complaining about low pixel count.

1 upvote

I am going to summarize the suggested improvements for those who can't be bothered to read that:
1. in addition to face recognition the D4 should also have had nipple recognition which would've come handy for the paparazzi (yes, they really do say that)
2. they should get rid of the buttons and replace them with a touch screen (yes, they do seriously suggest that too)
3. err.. I stopped reading after that so those will have to suffice

photoboy73 I was going to accuse you of wasting 10 mins of my time, but you actually taught me something useful today: never visit photography-factory again.

2 upvotes

I read the article. It seems that they are very favorable. ,,Best AF in the world, Best skin tones, Best 16MP quality ever, Best video,,
They gently critique a few things but that's it.

So it's clear who is the blind fanboy. It's not them, it's you guys.

0 upvotes

d3xmeister:

Did they post RAWs or Tiffs extracted from RAW, or even shot directly into Tiff?

Damn! I missed the nipple recognition request.

0 upvotes

Let's say, at their spelling of "C moss wowes" just cracks me up ;)

0 upvotes

Does the WT-5 Wireless Transmitter allow for programmed bulb exposures remotely? Anyone knows?

0 upvotes

Where is AE-Lock button?
Why P/S/A/M modes are still in button?

So, all other things are perfect :)

0 upvotes

I am not a pro photog, but after inheriting a slew of Nikkor lenses from my father, and taking a few photography classes in NYC, I decided in 2008 to invest in the Nikon D3 and have been shooting with it ever since. I paid no attention when the D3x and D3s came out b/c I knew the D3 is all I ever needed. Now, comes the Nikon D4 and a few features over my D3 intrigue me, as follows:

1) The D4 sensor has better light gathering capability into each of the 16.2 million pixels, which I understand will greatly enhance my photos over the D3s (I see Joe McNally's photos and they look fantastic);

2) The metering system is more accurate - this ability to ability to correctly expose my human subject w/o having to point and hold down the A/E lock to me is gold (if it works like advertised); and

3) The autofocus tracks subjects better b/c of the more points on the 3-D tracking matrix.

To me, these 3 added features plus the addition of full HD video really makes this a worthy upgrade for me.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

You'd actually pay $6000 for those 3 features? This is a professional camera for a working pro. That money would be better spent on pro instruction.

0 upvotes

I doubt we see actually too many improvements in image quality compared to D3s, but in the most difficult situations. Maybe much better DR though?

All this High iso hype is sometimes too much. The actual High iso differences between modern pro to prosumer cameras are after all quite minimal.

What is the ability to gather light two times more? You get to shoot 800 ISO instead of 400 ISO, that's +1 aperture, not that much. Or you get to shoot 1/125 instead of 1/60, not that much.

(monster size) D3s has only something like +1,3 F-stop better light gathering ability than (nice to carry around) D7000 has, and so far D7000 has had better DR and that's at least what I need much more than High iso or super duper tracking ability and other nonsense like that ;)))

D3s 3253 ISO vs. D7000 1167 ISO / DxO

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Rage Joe:

Where are you getting the D7000 dynamic range comparison to the D3 and D3s?

0 upvotes

HowaboutRAW,

You can check the DRfigures here:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/(type)/usecase_landscape

And the DR of D7000 feels really good in real life too. Really happy with that.

0 upvotes

Thank you for the link.

Now, I don't trust what DXO publishes.

Glad you like the D7000.

0 upvotes

Ok, as a general rule I agree with you, better to be sceptical what you read on different sites, but my experience supports their measurements at least to a certain extent.

0 upvotes

@howaboutraw: perfect comment haha

0 upvotes

Wow that is an impressive bit of machinery! Love it.

1 upvote

I bet the owners manual is as big as a telephone book lol. Wow, this thing is a dream camera for sure. Well done Nikon!!

7 upvotes

The release of Canon 1DX tells us the life cycle of APS-H ends. We can see that high end DSLR product lines have been gradually migrating to FF/FX leaving APS-C as the middle/entry level products.

While D4 is a real update of the D3 (I don’t think it’s a D3Sx or D3Si), it’s nice to see the megapixel war has been slowed down. A 16MP FX sensor (or 18MP FF of 1DX) is a balance between quality and quantity. As a D700 user, if weight does not matter, I would get a D4. But 1340g is really a bit too much (for me).

3 upvotes

1340g? Nikonusa.com lists it as 1080. Your D700 weighs 995g without a grip so it's actually heavier than the D4 gripped.

0 upvotes

ph0enix2012:

B&H in New York lists the weight as 1340g, with battery and card.

On the BH website the D3s is listed as 1240g, battery and card not specified.

The D3s and the D4 are very close in weight because the bodies are very similar.

Whereas the D700 is a good bit smaller than the D3s--I've used both.

1 upvote

@ph0enix2012: as HowaboutRAW says, 1340g is including the battery. But well, D700 is heavy.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Having read the intro. review [which was nicely done] and most all the following comments, I think I will continue to stay with my M6. These cameras do too much thinking for you, plus I never attended MIT.

3 upvotes

How's that M6 shooting at ISO 10,000, even with a Noctilux?

D4 sure has manual settings and focus. No the shutter and mirror are not likely to be as quiet as the M6's cloth shutter alone. Then of course you can't mount a 400mm lens on that M6.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Though I don't own an M6, I generally agree with your sentiments. This camera is probably a technological wonder, but I prefer something with basic controls and no on board AI. Also, I generally have no need for much over ISO400, so the amplification values available here would be wasted on me. Small size and weight, big sensor, and direct manual controls for me please.

0 upvotes

So don't buy a D4 or even a DSLR. Who said you have to squander all your dollars on camera?

Modern pro 135 dslr has clearly different user/usage segment than Leica M. I own and use rangefinder and I love them. But that does not stop me picking up my 1-ton bag of Nikon for various assignments.

They are just apple and orange.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

> Modern pro 135 dslr has clearly different user/usage segment than Leica M.

DSLR or not, Leica can't be called pro camera.

0 upvotes

@yabokkie - Yes it can, and will be. Quality is there, the rest is photographer. Pick the right tool for the JOB. Circumstances are always the most important consideration. Look at Helmut Newton. He used to do a shoot with a blad, ser up the shot, took his readings, shot 3 of 12 frames and packed up. Pro.

0 upvotes

if you cause a nikon f6 you can use a d4 too , its a nikon, man! :)

0 upvotes

This is exactly what I wanted (obviously, I don't need anything more than a D3). I don't want very high mega pixel. I want subtle improvements to the D3's AF module and I want improvement on high ISO performance of D3 (I am not referring to D3s but D3). I think, I get all of the 3. So, I am sold. Now it depends on how quickly B&H can fulfill my order ;-).

0 upvotes

This is D3Si

2 upvotes

No USB 3.0? Would be nice to use with new XQD card.

1 upvote

professionals don't plug their cameras into their computers they use dedicated readers.

2 upvotes

Clearly you're not a professional.

1 upvote

@mailman30: In our studios (4 or them) all photographers shoot with cameras connected to a computer. This way they can see the shot right away in a full magazine spread size. Quite clearly you have never visited a professional photo studio.

7 upvotes

I think your find Mailman30 meant if you shoot on a card a pro most of the time will take the card out and put it into a card reader as there is less chance of data loss. Shooting tethered is totally different and that the D4 already has covered.

2 upvotes

It seems to me, pulling a card out of a camera and putting it into a card reader would increase the chance of some sort of corruption happening.

1 upvote

there is no data loss when using a card reader or a cable ..... how did data corruption got here ? :)
tethered shooting doesn't need usb 3.0 and yes, for bulk transfer I think most people use a card reader, i do and i am no professional. it is just that spitting X GB of JPEG+RAW from the camera is not very practical because you can't use the camera, you discharge the battery and it is slower

1 upvote

Sorry Missimo for the pretentious replys and obviously you are not a pro or obviously you are a pro... I don't see in which point you say that you were one or not. But obviously some of the replyers are not proffetionals, because proffetionals don't write this way. Back to the cable...Yes proffetionals use cables from the camera to the computer, actually proffetionals had use all possible ways to transfer... Why?: because things go south more often that pros will like.
In any case, yes it will be nice to have a fast USB connection, you have no idea how many times a card reader fail or the wireless connection don't work if you have one. So you are left with the on camera wired connection. Ad violins you are to a professional.... Hahahhaa that was funny.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Sorry last part is an auto spelling mess!!!

0 upvotes

Not all pros work in a studio.

4 upvotes

I take lots of pictures with the D700, 55K so far. I use USB to download the images from the camera to the computer. This puts a lot less wear and tear on the CF card having to remove and install after using a card reader to download images.

0 upvotes

When I need to upload images fast for a newspaper, I do not use the in camera connection. Using an external reader works much faster.

1 upvote

My cards download at 65-74 megabyte per second from a FW800 reader and around 40/s in my $10 express card reader in my laptop. Why would I waste time or wear and tear on batteries to use the slot in the camera?

I've worked with professional in studios who shot tethered. Whenever I did the same work they were doing, I never wasted my time tethering. My results were the same or better, but I spent less time at it. YMMV.

The only professional I worked with who I consider a skilled professional with work I respect, only shot tethered when he was using a betterlight back (no choice there!)

I've been using DSLRs professionally for 8 years and I have never had an issue with the pins in card reader or a CF card. They are designed for repeated insertion and removal. I've seen people break them, but I've also seen people destroy a manual transmission. I don't think the issue is the gear in either case. Mini USB ports are notoriously flimsy, but only because they are subject to...

1 upvote

...catastrophic failure that comes from user error (see: "I tripped over the cord!").

I've noticed a trend of users who shoot Canon in the studio like tethering and Nikon users don't. Nikon has always had a great UI for reviewing and inspecting images in camera. Canon's UI has historically been incredibly laggy, even on their top end models.

With 3" screens and current camera speeds (Canon's playback has come a long way and is at parity in my opinion) there's really no need for tethering anymore. Some old timers still insist on it, but that's a shortcoming on their part, not good technique or a shortcoming of the gear.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

to shaocaholica: I am a professional, in fact I shoot for the new york times so I am surprised by your comment. Every single professional I know uses card readers so why by my comment would you assume I am not?

to petka: although I am a newpaper photographer I do have studio experience and have shot tethered myself. I just don't see usb 3 as an important upgrade, even shooting raw with a 1ds mk iii the photos pop up almost instantly over usb 2.0.

There were some good comments made about shooting tethered and I suppose usb 3 could help there but I would personally use the ethernet connection to shoot tethered but usb 2.0 would also be more than enough for speed.

In the end a card reader is many times faster than using the camera, I would rather put wear and tear on a card reader then a 6000 dollar camera, and there is battery life to think about as well.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

1 upvote

As always giving us the very best advise for both our jobs and pockets. Just wondering??? how much better!! than D3s on high ISO, i shoot birds in Costa Rica's rainforest, therefore low light in comes in the package on my country. Could you please advise over this matter. ( by the way hope i made myself understood, since its not my first language.
Gracias
Randall Ortega Chaves

0 upvotes

I have a D3s and will probably rent a D4 to check the performance difference in low light. Do not buy until you know there is improvement.

0 upvotes

Total comments: 837