Nikon D4 overview

UPDATE: Click here to read our first impressions of shooting with a the D4 (including samples)

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

Comments

Total comments: 859
12345
Stanchung
By Stanchung (Jan 7, 2012)

Fantastic camera. Video function is very much improved. Can do so many things with it and better than it's rival[fro now]. Great news for those of us who were waiting to shoot quality video without spending 'new almost everything' & switch camps. Good for everybody with competition.
To those who want more MP-just interpolate your D3X pics & sharpen it in PS-nobody's going to notice. I make 4-6ft ft posters with my ex D90 and nobody whines about the quality of the pixels.

Fans will be fans because the stuff is good. So too bad if you don't like it.
"I AM A FAN of D4"

3 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (Jan 7, 2012)

24Mbps video is so 4 years ago. With 2012 storage prices and processing power, video on a $6k Pro DSLR should be at least 100Mbps.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Jan 7, 2012)

just get an external recorder and go up to 400mbps if you like. not sure what the point of it is since the output is 422 8bit and stuck at 1080p30

0 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (Jan 7, 2012)

What a hassle. There's no point not to make 100mbps 444 video capable without any expensive or goofy add ons on a 2012 $6k DSLR.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 8, 2012)

@shaocaholica 100mbps 444 files will be huge. This is a camera for press/photojournalists who need to produce multimedia news stories, and push them around over the network. But like Jogger said, if you want to shoot uncompressed video you can. That is huge. And if the D4 has the high ISO ability of the D3, this camera will be extremely popular with videographers.

0 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (Jan 8, 2012)

"100mbps 444 files will be huge" By who's standards? I didn't say that should be the only format it can shoot. I agree that 15-30mbps H.264 has its place but its really getting old on high end cameras like this.

0 upvotes
Pabloquiga
By Pabloquiga (Jan 7, 2012)

Really this chamber so that it is needed, to record videos, because you buy one sonu xd, for photo journalism, but cheap and even a beast d3s, is an enthusiastic one of nikon, but there are expenses….

0 upvotes
Pabloquiga
By Pabloquiga (Jan 7, 2012)

I understand that this D4 marks to a professional standard by capacity and design, but for my it is, my d7000 with some benefits but, 3700 Euros but expensive.

0 upvotes
AnHund
By AnHund (Jan 7, 2012)

Image quality will be leagues better than the D7000. The D4 is a professional grade camera aimed a professionals. The price for a professional is irrelevant.

4 upvotes
Cass_Rimportant
By Cass_Rimportant (Jan 7, 2012)

"price for a professional is irrelevant"
This depends on the market, and on where said professional lives. Awhile ago, I read about professional photographers in Africa and many other parts of the world using D40s and other entry level models. In more affluent countries, cost/benefit analysis should still be at the core of any business decisions. Even if it works out that the most expensive equipment is the most cost effective in the long run, it's misleading to say that "price is irrelevant." If price was truly "irrelevant," manufacturers could charge anything they wanted. Instead, they create pricing schemes and succeed or fail based on how well these prices reflect what people are willing to pay. I suspect a $25,000 D4 (apply Sigma's logic for SD1 pricing, whatever that may be...) would rule out all but the most affluent amateurs and professionals alike.

4 upvotes
Neil Morgan
By Neil Morgan (Jan 7, 2012)

Thank the Lord !
Finally an end to all the threads about when the D4 will be announced !

....what ...who said that... I'm sure i heard some ask when is the D5 gonna be released....ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

:)

10 upvotes
flattersplatter
By flattersplatter (Jan 7, 2012)

What? No D4x and D4$ first?

0 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 7, 2012)

I've more or less decided to find a good pre-owned D3X instead and go with that as a partner to my 2 D3s bodies, which I will keep.

May upgrade to D5 if it actually offers something I need - not just more pointless video baggage etc.

0 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Jan 7, 2012)

Why do camera companies keep putting make up on what they have already instead of creating new products you ask? Why don't they like moving in larger steps in other words? They fear that if they move too fast the flimsy thread that connects them to their loyal base my bust. This is therefore a camera you replace with a similar Nikon you have already. On its own it is a very average camera. It would be good if Nikon gods would start giving us technology they were handing over to the military for free forty years ago.

1 upvote
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Jan 7, 2012)

I'm not impressed.

The D4 should have had a 32mp sensor that utilized pixel binning, and optimized for 16mp shooting, so you can get all the speed, performance, and ISO benefits of a modestly sized sensor, but still have the option to shoot at high resolutions at lower ISO. To get the best of both worlds.

Sony managed to squeeze 24mp into an APS sized sensor, and retain very good ISO performance. I don't understand why Nikon couldn't incorporate hi-rez in a full frame and utilize pixel binning to give the sensor versatility.

No dust removal, no info about focus peaking for video, no dedicated ISO dial? Pro bodies should adapt to technological advances. Seriously, ISO performance is insane now, why doesn't it have a dedicated dial?

The reason the video is 29:59 min, is because of a European video camera tax. Nikon should have made a non-capped video version for the countries that don't have this restriction.

Nikon really thought inside the box with this one.

0 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Jan 7, 2012)

Also, why are cameras still exclusively shooting in proprietary RAW formats? All new gen cameras should have a DNG option.

Seriously, TIFF? Who the hell shoots in TIFF?

Furthermore, NX2? Just let it die already. We all know that nik is no longer Nikon's software developer, and there will never be a NX3 remotely similar, because Nik owns the software patents on control points.

No camera manufacture is making premium software. All manufactures should provide DNG option. Digital photography needs a universal RAW format!!!

Camera manufactures should worry about the cameras, and leave processing the files to the software companies!!!

4 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 7, 2012)

The camera makers should certainly stop making poor software and at least licence their proprietary code to anyone who wants to use it (e.g. Apple, Adobe etc).

1 upvote
gsum
By gsum (Jan 7, 2012)

Proprietary RAW has a huge advantage over DNG. Proprietary RAW software is able to take account of the noise characteristics of the camera for which it is designed and therefore provides better results than the 'general purpose' DNG.

Let NX2 die? Well I'll still be using it for the foreseeable future as it is far better for some operations (e.g. flare removal, D-lighting and low key) than Photoshop.

As for the D4, Nikon really need an innovative product. A gimmick-free, manual FX rangefinder would get my cash.

3 upvotes
AnHund
By AnHund (Jan 7, 2012)

The D4 is a professional grade camera with high end image quality and usability. Can't be compared to a consumer grade camera like the NEX7.

1 upvote
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Jan 7, 2012)

You can embed proprietary data into DNG. I'm saying to provide the option, not replace NEF.

Nx2 Lawlz...people still use that?

D4 is still using a film body design. Kodak went out of business, 35mm film is dead. Manufactures have to embrace digital or die with film.

Highend image quality? Pro bodies don't provide a substantial advancement of image quality except at high ISO. Sony probably manufactured the D4s sensor, I'm pretty sure they have a heads up I the sensor game over Nikon. The DxO mark scored the nex-7 sensor very well.

Oh well, it looks like the compacts are going to push the innovation after all.

I'm disappointed, I thought Nikon was really going to embrace the digital multimedia world in this generation of camera.

0 upvotes
GoodWords
By GoodWords (Jan 7, 2012)

AnHund, just because innovations are happening in the NEX7 and other lower grade cameras does not mean they're not worthy of a pro camera or that those innovations are therefore useless and dismissible. It seems to me that Sony is the one innovating the camera world, so much so that Nikon has to rely on them for all their great sensors. But why innovate if you're a monopoly and don't have to.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 8, 2012)

@nakeddork Who shoots TIFF? Professionals in publishing, magazine photographers, anyone who wants doesn't want to loose data when compressing an image. You think all those glossy magazines print from JPEGs?

0 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Jan 8, 2012)

You do know that you can uncompress a NEF into a TIFF with no quality losss right? It's the same for every RAW file actually.

Yeah, send out the TIFF for prints, but to shoot in TIFF, well that iss just silly.

0 upvotes
PhotoTechBlog
By PhotoTechBlog (Jan 7, 2012)

Great spec on this new body, nice to see Nikon finally release a model to compete with the Canon 1D X. Can't wait to get real-world reviews and high ISO sample images.

0 upvotes
Peter Mackey
By Peter Mackey (Jan 7, 2012)

Seems to me that Nikon has come up with a nice upgrade model. D3s owners really don't need to change anything unless they want to.
For pros D4 perfect when its new body time.
For money no object types you will do what you want anyway.
I never notice Nikon users wanting to go Canon, but Canon users are always that little bit apologetic that they don't have something better (like a Nikon).

0 upvotes
john d3s
By john d3s (Jan 8, 2012)

I agree..I just bought a new D3s because it will become unavailable, not interested in the D4 at additional $1,200 of what i paid for the D3s....what percentage of these bloggers will be able to see the difference in picture quality let alone to have a D4 in their hands?
D3s is still one of the best DSLRs and will be for a long time.
Unless you have unlimited funds you will go broke trying to stay current. I know a deal when I see one...D3s

0 upvotes
Lyteskrybe
By Lyteskrybe (Jan 7, 2012)

"We have become the tools of our tools." Who said that?!! Enough technological nincompoopery. What about the art?

2 upvotes
mark murphy
By mark murphy (Jan 7, 2012)

Henry David Thoreau

2 upvotes
Lyteskrybe
By Lyteskrybe (Jan 8, 2012)

Nice to know someone who knows Mr. T.

0 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Jan 8, 2012)

this is the digital preview web site. look elsewhere for the art

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
JoelHorn2008
By JoelHorn2008 (Jan 7, 2012)

I was on my Honda 750 sitting at a stoplight when a Harley came up alongside. We starting talking and I asked him why he rode a Harley, he sort of grunted "huh...what do you mean?" I said that my bike was faster, better looking, lighter, easier to ride, more stable, all around better." His answer "yeah but you're still on a honda, my bike is a Harley" and off he rode. I have always remembered that because that is how I feel about my many Nikons....I don't really care about all the numbers, I ride a Nikon. Canon folks just can't top that no matter what the facts say, sometimes the facts don't matter, Nikon is the king of cameras. Thanks for the D4 when do I get by D800?

5 upvotes
rdspear
By rdspear (Jan 7, 2012)

OK. I'd take the better gear that produces better results. You can feel better about yourself, despite that. I guess this is proof of the marketing-driven, fanboi culture we have become. Very odd.

6 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 7, 2012)

For most of us it comes down to the investment in glass.

I could not afford to simply replace my Nikon lenses with Canon ones unless I won Lotto!

2 upvotes
pacogwapo
By pacogwapo (Jan 7, 2012)

NIkon is to FERRARI, canon is to Honda,while leica is to mercedez :)

1 upvote
Fullframer
By Fullframer (Jan 7, 2012)

agreed. That is why even D700, now nearly 3.5 yrs old technology is still one of the best DSLR out there, esp at high ISO.

0 upvotes
xMichaelx
By xMichaelx (Jan 7, 2012)

Funny, when I had both my '81 Suzuki and my 2010 Triumph, Harley guys would ride up next to me and complement me all the time.

Sounds like you met one of those a-hole, know-nothing fanboys that give all Harley riders a bad name.

0 upvotes
pacogwapo
By pacogwapo (Jan 7, 2012)

Suzuki is to Pentax as Triumph is to Olympus ...

0 upvotes
bentwig
By bentwig (Feb 17, 2012)

soon we will have a sim card slot for the built in cell phone.

0 upvotes
Poss
By Poss (Jan 7, 2012)

Somehow my D3s still feels adequate... :-)
Thanks Nikon!

0 upvotes
iae aa eia
By iae aa eia (Jan 7, 2012)

Someone (I don't know if more) commented about being wrong saying this or that camera is better in this or that thing, like competing, but I think this competition makes sense and is no harm at all. Competing is what makes the companies to run to get better, to try to surpass in this or that characteristic their rivals, and everybody is involved. Of course, no need to kill, but a tug-of-war is fine, even among the costumers.

0 upvotes
pacogwapo
By pacogwapo (Jan 7, 2012)

COMPELLING!

0 upvotes
pacogwapo
By pacogwapo (Jan 7, 2012)

I AM DROOOLINGGGGGG!!!!!

0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (Jan 7, 2012)

Yes they are slow! An R1 focusses slower, agreed, but shutter lag is 6 times better than a 1Ds Mkii or D4 (almost) SIX TIMES FASTER. that is six times more likely to get exactly what YOU want WHEN you need it> If I had that crazy 200MM extension lens for my £200 s/h Sony R1 (the first "mirrorless" machine with an APS-C sized sensor) and used manual focus (DOF a lot greater with APS-C!), the chances I could equal a machine costing ten times the price the R1 combo did new in 2005 are very real. And the shutter is silent and there is no vibration.

WE need to remember that a car is more useful at the same price and that kids cost too, so, frankly how to justify the splurge? I'll write and ask Nikon to give me one if it has no banding or AF problems, and the video outdoes a 5D MkII at less than a third of the price.

UK strike to reduce price to match US price . It is £3890, oh yes!

0 upvotes
Peter Bendheim
By Peter Bendheim (Jan 7, 2012)

What have you been smoking?

5 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (Jan 7, 2012)

Freedom!

0 upvotes
Fullframer
By Fullframer (Jan 7, 2012)

Sorry but I had a Sony R1 brand new when it came out. It's focus in less than desirable light or indoors/no flash was very slow. It was a more of a landscape camera or fixed object. It was not good for action or sports. It was only usable to ISO800. After 800, it was too noisy without post processing. Even at the time it only matched DSLR's up to ISO400, after that it got noisier. The other issue is that by the time the R1 came out, (remember the R1 was the size of a small DSLR) there were affordable DSLR's that were the same price. Thats why the R1 didn't last long.

0 upvotes
Leonard Shepherd
By Leonard Shepherd (Jan 8, 2012)

The most extensive D4 summary I have yet seen is Rob Galbraith's.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-11673-12223
It clarifies many issues discussed at dpreview - and raises some issues not yet raised on this forum.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
munishkm
By munishkm (Jan 7, 2012)

lots of talking going on bout this megapixel race thingy.. but the fact is its just gonna go up and up... just look at the last 10 or 12 years when we had the cameras with 3 or 4 megapixels.. and look at now.. its goin up and will keep on goin.. :)

0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (Jan 7, 2012)

I am here!! A photojournalists dream. I want two. But then I start thinking. One does. I have a 1Ds MkII, and if I am not interested in video and have fast lenses, I do not need a D4. It has the same resolution and we do not know about noise levels yet, but unless I need more than 800 iso what is the point exactly?
I do not need 8,10,12 or 14 fps either, because the shots where I choose when to press the shutter ALWAYS improve on automated ones.
BUT, the lenses are better, and Nikon colour quality is more realistic for portraits and wildlife.

Will the AA filter be weak enough to match 1DsII results? the D3 was soft by comparison, and if you have to sharpen your images you lose the advantages of lower noise.No AA filter and software to get rid of moire?

BUT Too big! Too heavy! Compare Leica M9 full-frame 18MP. Compare to the D7000, a lot smaller and quite capable of housing a full-frame sensor.

An R1 prefocussed = 0.007 miliseconds, and the 1Ds2 =D4 at 40milliseconds (yawn)

4 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Jan 7, 2012)

So I guess getting your shots to the wire 10x faster doesn't matter.

Not to mention much better dynamic range.

And seriously... compare to Leica M9? M9 is not weather sealed, end of story... fail.

7 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 7, 2012)

An M9 also requires 20/20 vision to focus properly and some of the fast M lenses are now over USD$7,000!

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jan 7, 2012)

munro harrap:

Try shooting a football game (soccer or US) with a Leica M9. Try mounting a 300mm autofocus lens on an M9. This all is simply pointing to the M9 being a different type of camera.

The huge problem with the M9 is the poor high ISO performance.

2 upvotes
Le Kilt
By Le Kilt (Jan 8, 2012)

Yes, amazing, some people actually think, and manage to figure out that it is not the camera for them, and then tell us, many thanks.

;-)

0 upvotes
lukelee
By lukelee (Jan 7, 2012)

A great tool in the hands of a master creates a work of art. A great tool in the hands of an idiot creates junks. A master knows his tools and they free him to concentrate on his craft. A mediocre partitioner plays with his amazing tools, admires it and even worships it but will never work hard to hone his skill. He will never become a master. Everyone will forget the chiesel that created the statue of David, or the paint brush that painted the ceiling of Sinstine chapel, But no one will forget Michelangelo and his creations. A true master may be excited about his tool and even praise it, but the reason for his excitement is that of the anticipation of the art that he will create. Nikon and Canon are both great tools, but where is the master of the craft?

15 upvotes
munishkm
By munishkm (Jan 7, 2012)

look no further.. the master is here.. :)
anyways what was that all about?? lol

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
1 upvote
leoncius
By leoncius (Jan 7, 2012)

a real master doesn't need a nikon 4d, he shoot good photos eaven with an iphone

3 upvotes
Fearless_Photog
By Fearless_Photog (Jan 7, 2012)

Depends on what you shoot, sometimes you need the right tool. Even the best photographer isn't going to get consistent great bird in flight shots with an iPhone. If there were no photographers who actually had requirements for cameras like these they wouldn't be developed. Plenty who don't require them buy them anyway, but that's ok too, more money for them to continue developing great products.

9 upvotes
Tee1up
By Tee1up (Jan 7, 2012)

Leoncius, if you ever get hired to shoot a wedding, show up with an iphone and let me know what the bride thinks and how many albums you sell.

1 upvote
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 7, 2012)

I have a book of images produced by Magnum following 9/11 taken by some of their photographers who were in NY on the day. None were working - just there for meetings or visiting friends etc.

The photos are awesome. The best set are from one guy who did not have his own camera and had to borrow his friend's cheap compact. Technical pixel-peeping wieners would find much to complain about, but for sheer artistic impact and reportage skill they are amazing.

0 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Jan 7, 2012)

Good photos with an iPhone? iPhones are to photography what 2 minute noodles are to cooking. Just saying.

1 upvote
MashingTheGas
By MashingTheGas (Jan 7, 2012)

Great points, all. You left out one . . . some budding masters are inspired to focus when a tool beyond their dreams helps them visualize their future masterpieces.

0 upvotes
camerosity
By camerosity (Jan 7, 2012)

Hope Nikon will make a new battery holder for the MB-D10 to utilize the new EN-EL18 battery. With the end of production for the EN-EL3 series of batteries, this would help the users of the Nikon D300 and D700 keep their cameras longer, and not end up only being able to use AA batteries (or third party EN-EL3 batteries).

2 upvotes
harrysamuel
By harrysamuel (Jan 7, 2012)

WHAT that makes no sense. How can we fill up landfills if Nikon made the batteries backward compatible. I was thinking of buying Canon batteries just to throw them out.

1 upvote
Scottelly
By Scottelly (Jan 7, 2012)

No in-camera image stabilization? No GPS or Wireless N networking built-in? No USB 3.0? A new card format that really isn't necessary? No 16 bit color? Only 16 megapixels? Only 10 fps? (not much faster than the D3, which is a design many years old)

Nikon had the opportunity here to create a truly spectacular camera, with a bigger, fold-out touch-screen, better quality video than anything else. Something better than anything before (like the D3 was). Instead they made a new camera that can just barely keep up with the Canon 1Dx, and they made sure to price it a little less than the Canon.

It seems Nikon has gone back to playing catch-up with Canon. It's as if this is just the answer to the Canon 1Dx.

This new camera just reinforces my decision to buy a Sony A77. Of course, I guess I'm not in the target market for the new Nikon or Canon cameras anyway.

5 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 7, 2012)

Sony Alpha 77 is awful at ISOs past 1600. Not so with this Nikon D4, most likely.

Nikon hit it gold with this simple D4 strategy. Make a camera more or less on-par with the Canon 1D X, but price is around $1,000 less. A sure winner by that token.

Canon 1D X is still too iffy, anyhow. No pricing, heck, Canon does not even post the camera's weight in the specs, wow...

0 upvotes
mugupo
By mugupo (Jan 7, 2012)

you are joking, this take far better picture than a77 especially at low light.

3 upvotes
Jonathan F/2
By Jonathan F/2 (Jan 7, 2012)

Give me a break, you're comparing the A77 to the D4? People said the same thing about the D3 when Nikon stuck to 12mp and people thought they were crazy. This camera is going to wipe the floor of the competition. This is a real tool, not some souped up wannabe PS3 camera like the A77.

5 upvotes
Poss
By Poss (Jan 7, 2012)

If you're not in the market for one why taking the bandwidth here? Complain about a yet unavailable camera you'll never own?

1 upvote
Vegasus
By Vegasus (Jan 7, 2012)

Hi guys, It is always good to hear how SLR manufacture introduce new features but.. I think for such expensive camera, some features like "Built-In WIFI wireless n " and bluetooth, touchscreen monitor or an application for iPad/iPhone as a remote controller etc, are included with the price. So don't have to worry to buy extra. Also a memory card is included perhaps a 16gb or 32gb? Sometimes I think it is ridiculous for such high price and not include some of the features. What do you guys think? :)

0 upvotes
Poss
By Poss (Jan 7, 2012)

My D3s even came without a LCD screen protector... something that costs perhaps $1 to produce...

0 upvotes
javaone
By javaone (Jan 7, 2012)

High end is not always about the most features. Most people buying this are not looking for the most tricked out device.
They want a reliable workhorse that they can go into a war/press conference/sport event/wedding with.

If Nikon was smart they would offer the "D4e" edition for the rich people wanting the toy with "everything".

0 upvotes
Vegasus
By Vegasus (Jan 7, 2012)

I am just thinkin if Nikon making High End DSLR, Perhaps features that i mentioned could be all in one package for the price that u pay. I think buyers would satisfy..

0 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 7, 2012)

The D3s does not NEED a screen protector which is why it does not have one!!
It has toughened glass on the screen which so far I have failed to mark - and I do not treat mine lightly! I bounced it from 4 feet onto a stone track a few months ago. Scratched the paint but other than that still going strong.

0 upvotes
Paul D TV
By Paul D TV (Jan 6, 2012)

The D4's video functionality is potentially very significant. I have gone into more detail about this on my blog:
http://paul-d.tv/blog/2012/01/06/and-so-it-begins-nikon-d4-hdslr-announced/

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 7, 2012)

It is a waste of good money to buy an external video recorder just to record an 8-bit color depth video out of a $6,000 camera. I would never do that, anyhow.

Video features of the D4 are nothing new or worthy to write home about, really. Rolling shutter instead of global, low color fidelity, no professional audio interface, no 1080p slow-mo, and so on.

Regarding remotely controlling the Nikon D4, not everybody wants to spend 2x or 3x as much money for an Apple product just to do that, than if one could use a similar device (smart phone, tablet) that is not being made by Apple.

But on the positive side:

"Two Live View shooting modes
Photography Live View and Movie Live View modes add flexibility; exposure, white balance, monitor hue, histogram, focus mode, AF area mode and focusing accuracy are easily confirmed."

0 upvotes
Taikonaut
By Taikonaut (Jan 7, 2012)

"Two Live View shooting modes
Photography Live View and Movie Live View modes add flexibility; exposure, white balance, monitor hue, histogram, focus mode, AF area mode and focusing accuracy are easily confirmed."

Canon has that since 2007 with the 40D.

2 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 7, 2012)

I would be far happier with no video capability whatsoever, no TIFF option, built in GPS, higher eye point for glasses wearers and two CF slots.

We all need different things - but if I want a video camera, I will buy a video camera.

2 upvotes
Ernest M Aquilio
By Ernest M Aquilio (Jan 6, 2012)

A very good step in the next evolution of pro cameras from Nikon. It would be in Nikons best (and buyers) intentions to introduce the D800 with more resolution and a D300s replacement that falls in between these two models with a DX sensor. A logical upgrade indeed.

Those looking for more resolution need to really "NEED" more resolution. I am sure 16MP is sufficient for a majority of the pros out there IMO.

0 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 6, 2012)

Is the EN-EL 18 battery that is apparently supplied with the D4 compatible with the EN-EL4A battery and the EN-EL4 battery as used by the D3s/D3/D2Xs etc or will we be needing two chargers etc as well as new pointless memory cards and new memory card readers?

1 upvote
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 6, 2012)

OK - belay that - I found the answer in a photo caption above!

Looks like I will be sourcing another D3s when the price falls as all the rich dentists rush to the D4!

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
harrysamuel
By harrysamuel (Jan 7, 2012)

Keep the idea to yourself. How do you expect the price to drop if you spread the idea. You think it is the dentists who are going to sell, I think not, my dentist bought a D90. I wish he had a D3s, and would sell it to me.

0 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 7, 2012)

I decided a D3X probably.

0 upvotes
Dorje M
By Dorje M (Jan 6, 2012)

I'm a Canon user and think this looks like a great camera. I'll stick with Canon because I have the glass and I like their cameras too.

But I just hate this petty crap between some Nikonheads and some Canonheads. Canon stole an early march on FF and that pushed Nikon to work harder & innovate. More recently Nikon stole a march with high ISO IQ and pushed Canon to work harder and innovate. Kudos to them for that.

At the end of the day the photography is what matters, not this my-wiener's-bigger-than-yours type competition and carping comments! Grow up

39 upvotes
hansgu
By hansgu (Jan 8, 2012)

I could not agree more. For over thirty years now I have had Nikons. At the same time my oncle has had Canons. Sometime I envy him of his cameras and sometime he envy me of mine. But all the time we like our own cameras as well as each others. But most of all, we like the head to head competition of Canon and Nikon, which have produced better and better cameras every year. To day you can find amasing Canons as well fantastic Nikons. So what is the problem? The new D4 is a logical evolution of the fantastic D3. I´m convinced that the upcoming Canon 1D X will also be a fantastic camera. But with the investment in my glasses I will stick to my Nikon as well as my oncle will stick to his Canon because of his investment in the Canon lenses. The 6k price tag is what you would expect for a camera of this quality and ability. If you do not have use for what D4 has to offer, it would be a waste of money to buy one.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (Jan 6, 2012)

One thing I'd like to see is a better viewfinder information display. If Nikon is unwilling or unable to implement some kind of X100-style hybrid VF, then at least improve the LED information. One thing that doesn't seem outrageously difficult is to replace the fixed LED symbols with a dynamic LED grid strip, perhaps in the area of a relatively low-res 240 x 32 array (think something like those scrolling LED grids you see at train stations). This would be plenty to provide all needed info (two rows of text and symbols), including a small, live histogram display that would make exposure a lot easier to evaluate.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Jan 7, 2012)

This is an SLR, where on earth would you fit a hybrid VF in??

0 upvotes
a l b e r t
By a l b e r t (Jan 7, 2012)

Nikon have done that already. They have monochrome LCD overlay in D300/D300s/D90/D7000. Now just make that monochrome LCD in color and in full dot-matrix and viola, color heads-up display in the viewfinder!

0 upvotes
Dan Tong
By Dan Tong (Jan 6, 2012)

Congratulations to Nikon on making this new D4 a truly intelligent upgrade. Having full HDMI output will allow users to use any HD monitor for critical viewing of subject matter and manual focusing. The web interface will be incredibly useful for any remote control and viewing for nature photo and video shoots. The still photo features were mostly left alone, although face detection using optical finder, as well as 10 frames/sec with autofocus is quite an achievement.

2 upvotes
flattersplatter
By flattersplatter (Jan 6, 2012)

Still no 2-stop bracketing. There must be some ideological or religious reason that Nikon won't implement that.

5 upvotes
jhelms
By jhelms (Jan 7, 2012)

I know, right? I have it on my D7k, but not my D3, D3s's, or the D4's that I ordered.... frustrating (when, sometimes, I want to capture some -2/0/+2 brackets!)

0 upvotes
pcblade
By pcblade (Jan 6, 2012)

The best of both worlds : Nikon Camera + Canon Lenses !

1 upvote
maxz
By maxz (Jan 6, 2012)

Yeah then you will have an actually USABLE 85/1.2L (I own it and it sucks on canon bodies)

0 upvotes
five5pho
By five5pho (Jan 6, 2012)

my copy is very usable though.

0 upvotes
thanasaki
By thanasaki (Jan 6, 2012)

Kudos to Nikon! Offering a brilliant camera and simultaneously resisting to the absolutely stupid megapixel race.

6 upvotes
leoncius
By leoncius (Jan 6, 2012)

6000$ to much- im shooting photos since more than 20 years professional, at the moment i have a nikon d700 and the d5100 as a backup, i dont NEED more than that for the next few years... exept my largeframe and medium frames cameras, but there are only for studio or buildings...sorry my english

2 upvotes
harrysamuel
By harrysamuel (Jan 7, 2012)

But like me you really want it.

2 upvotes
leoncius
By leoncius (Jan 7, 2012)

of course :-) for not more than 3500 i would buy it ...LOL

0 upvotes
AnHund
By AnHund (Jan 7, 2012)

I would like it too, but have the excellent prosumer camera d700 so I don't really need it.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 6, 2012)

One of my favorite short stories of all time is Edgar Allan Poe's "The Premature Burial." Heck, I had no clue that he had actually wrote it about the Canon 1D X camera, phew....

0 upvotes
Scottelly
By Scottelly (Jan 7, 2012)

But the D4 just keeps up with the 1Dx (in fact, it doesn't even do that). Yes, it has a screen that matches. Yes, it almost keeps up with the canon in fps. But does it shoot super-high quality video, like the 1Dx? NO. Does it firmly plan the 1Dx in the ground? NO. It doesn't offer significant innovations (just little ones). I'd agree with you, if it included all sorts of cool innovations, like it should, such as a fold-out screen capable of full 1080x1920 resolution and wireless N networking built-in. It is SONY that is the true innovator, creating cameras with things like fold-out screens and built-in GPS (like many of the new point-and-shoots have). If a point-and-shoot camera can have these useful features, why can't Nikon put it in a professional camera? It seems silly that they leave out these useful innovations, in the name of "professional" equipment, while they make innovations, like larger review screens.

2 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 7, 2012)

Pro shooters usually don't fall the gimmicky stuff.

I am not sure why the Canon 1D X's video any more professional than the D4's video, can you elaborate on that a bit, pls? I mean, 1080p30 = 1080p30, right?

I saw the uncorrected video coming out of the new Sony SLT Alpha 65 & 77 cameras, and it is just awful looking, really. Like bad video.

0 upvotes
Fullframer
By Fullframer (Jan 7, 2012)

Your kidding right? Pro cameras dont have fold out screens. They are more prone to breaking. Good lick with those Sony cameras standing up to the rain/outdoor remote conditions like a D3 ornow D4.

1 upvote
PaulBearer
By PaulBearer (Jan 7, 2012)

Hey Scottelly - Will you loan out your 1Dx so we can see how bad our D4's are? My D4 won't be here for about 5 weeks, so maybe you could loan it out for a day sometime during that period so I'll have a real pro camera to compare the D4 against.

1 upvote
sandy b
By sandy b (Jan 7, 2012)

Hey Scottelly, on spec the d4 video is better than the 1Dx. Here is a nice one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCQ9ME2OLw8&feature=related

0 upvotes
Alexsfo
By Alexsfo (Jan 6, 2012)

New camera with the largest photosites. Finally, megapixel race is officially over. Waiting for the photosite size to become the next marketing thing (like DR, ISO, etc.)

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Jan 6, 2012)

Whats the best number of photo sites depends on needs and technology.

The main advantage with few photo sites is speed.

The main advantage with many photo sites is resolution.

If few photo sites results in better noise behaviour depends on technology trade offs. I dont thing 24 MP will result in visible more noise than 16 MP for a FF camera. It would surprise me greatly.

So, I think "only" 16 MP is mainly motivated by speed.

1 upvote
HiRez
By HiRez (Jan 6, 2012)

All else being equal, 24MP would HAVE to produce more noise than 16MP, and what should be a noticeable amount as the 24MP sensor would have 33% smaller photo sites. The tradeoff is physics, you can't get around it.

1 upvote
Scottelly
By Scottelly (Jan 7, 2012)

The 18 megapixel Canon 7 D produces better, lower-noise images than the 15 megapixel Canon 50 D. I guess all else being equal did not apply there. Maybe it doesn't here either. It may be that the new Canon 1Dx will produce less-noisy images than the new Nikon D4, even though the Canon will be producing images with 2 megapixels more than the Nikon. Certainly the Canon 7 D produces less noise than the lower-resolution Nikon D7000, even though the Nikon has a bigger sensor!

0 upvotes
Der Steppenwolf
By Der Steppenwolf (Jan 7, 2012)

7D produces less noise then D7000???!!
Not on this planet little one.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 7, 2012)

The 7D is an OK camera, but it's sensor is weak compared to the D7000. High ISO is worse, and DR is worse, by a lot.

Judging from past Canon DSLRs, I wouldn't want to bet that the 1Dx will produce less noise than the D4. If the D4 has even a little of the D3's DNA, it will be no contest, with Nikon trouncing the Canon 1Dx at high ISO and DR.

3 upvotes
PaulBearer
By PaulBearer (Jan 7, 2012)

D7000 has an edge when it comes to noise. 7D slightly sharper and 10% more expensive, worse autofocus and bracketing. Unless your zoom lens costs more than the body, the D7000 is the winner in my book, on all measures - more expensive zooms and it wins everything but resolution on very large prints, and then not missing by much. I can live with slightly soft more than slightly noisier.

0 upvotes
decoff
By decoff (Jan 7, 2012)

Blah Blah Blah... show me the samples and test it vs its predecessors. If it performs and measure's up to your needs as a tool. DONE. Honestly anyone that spends their time and breath comparing this camera to others outside of its family are just up for debates and love to troll. The chances of someone that has invested THOUSANDS on Glass are very unlikely to switch. The comparisons of DSLR to MF, RF, etc... are like comparing apples to oranges.

0 upvotes
daza
By daza (Jan 6, 2012)

16mp? the king of DSLR, im sorry but what the hell, i know that if you put more MP then you cant have such beatiful images at iso12800 and more, but what the hell, the 90% of my pics i made it below iso800, what i really wants is more detail at iso100 or iso200.

3 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Jan 6, 2012)

You can buy D3x or Canon 5DMK2 or 1DsMK3 or Sony A850/900. Or NEX-7 or A77.

Wheres problem?

And I havent even mentioned MF digital backs (ops I just did).

2 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 6, 2012)

"what i really wants is more detail at iso100 or iso200."

A Hasselblad MF camera with an 80MP sensor will surely give you that. This Nikon D4 is apparently not for you.

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Jan 6, 2012)

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Maybe its nice to have lots of resolution without 3 Kg of camera costing $15000.

As I said above - that Nikon dont have more pixels is probably because they want a fast camera.

And that you can extent it to ISO 200K is probably because some of the target for this camera dont care about image quality, only that it can be used hand held with long teles in dim lighting.

1 upvote
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jan 6, 2012)

IQ for sports/news use on line and in newspapers etc does not NEED to be as good as many pixel-peeping amateurs like it to be. Look at the size many of those kind of images are reproduced at - you can't see noise even if it is there because the images are often less than 3" across!
As I say to participants on my tours and workshops - if you see Bigfoot at dusk and get the picture of him, no one will moan that it is a bit noisy!

2 upvotes
daza
By daza (Jan 9, 2012)

No matter how good your machine is at very high iso configuration, you will always get better pics at lows iso, so compared a sony a77 at iso200 with this Nikon d4 at iso200 the sony will have more details, im sorry but 16mp in a $5000.00 camera its very disapointing. I have a $600.00 canon 500d 15mp and if i want better low light pics i just have to invest in faster lenses and it will be much more cheaper.

0 upvotes
Ruban E
By Ruban E (Jan 6, 2012)

This is the new king of DSLR cameras.
Beautiful full frame sensor.

1 upvote
Corrado Saurin
By Corrado Saurin (Jan 6, 2012)

I love (and dream...) it !!!

2 upvotes
Azfar
By Azfar (Jan 6, 2012)

why are they touting it as a 'multi-media DSLR' when it has got exact same videography features as that of 1Dx.

0 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Jan 6, 2012)

does it means multi-storage-card media? haha

0 upvotes
Marcelobtp
By Marcelobtp (Jan 6, 2012)

It streams uncompressed video directly?
Nope.

1 upvote
sic0048
By sic0048 (Jan 6, 2012)

They aren't claiming exclusivity to the "multi-media DLSR" idea. The fact is that any still camera with video capabilities could be call this. It's obvious however that Nikon really stepped up its game with regard to the video capabilities (basically matching what Canon offers in regards to video which is something that Nikon could not claim before) and they want to emphasis that to the market. Is that too hard to understand?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 6, 2012)

Bad, sad day for the Canon EOS 1D X product team, definitely. Nikon had smoked Canon -- yet again.

Notice also that the D4 has a list price, and also has its weight listed. Not so with the Canon 1D X. Maybe Canon still doesn't know these things? When will they?

0 upvotes
CriticalI
By CriticalI (Jan 6, 2012)

The only thing smoking around here is you. The two cameras are so closely specified its hard to tell them apart. Get a life.

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 7, 2012)

The Nikon will be about $1,000 cheaper, so why spend a thousand more for something that is not any better, anyhow?

Also, the Canon 1D X is supposed to come out in March? Wow, quick, somebody better tell Canon this. Because when it comes, for example, to the weight of the 1D X, all the Canon's spec state as of today is "TBD." When exactly?

0 upvotes
Xavier Leoty
By Xavier Leoty (Jan 6, 2012)

Does anybody know the size of the photosites ?
XL

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Jan 6, 2012)

Similar to Canon 1DsMK2 or tiny bit bigger, but difference really cant be much even with microlens.

0 upvotes
OutlawPhotoGuy
By OutlawPhotoGuy (Jan 6, 2012)

Ok, great improvements, but why, why, why didn't they improve the ISO performance and at least match the Canon 1D MkIV??? I was really hoping for ISO at least 25000 but very disappointed. And why not 2 identical card slots??? ONE CF and ONE XQD?? That's cool the they will use the new cards, but let's have twin slots of one or the other so I can shoot a whole wedding without going for more cards in my pocket. Ready to buy one now but I may wait for the next release.

2 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Jan 6, 2012)

yeah 2 different kind of memory cards makes no sense.

2 CF slots would be much better.

2 upvotes
harrysamuel
By harrysamuel (Jan 6, 2012)

I agree, but as video gets bigger it might have been needed.

1 upvote
ashwins
By ashwins (Jan 6, 2012)

Let's wait for the high ISO samples before judging its ISO performance. And because ISO specs are many times used for marketing purposes also, you can never reliably compare Nikons to Canons solely based on the specs.

3 upvotes
Marcelobtp
By Marcelobtp (Jan 6, 2012)

I don't understand your complain, if you have the two tipes of memory card you will do it the same way, they chose to use 2 diferent memory cards because one is much better than the other, but many already have compact flashes and the xqd is very expensive and not very easy to find or buy. So they made the best choice. I'm saying it thinking on the Olympics, probably the number one reason to buy this camera now.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
sic0048
By sic0048 (Jan 6, 2012)

I agree that we need to see both cameras in action before judging them. Nikon tends to be very accurate with their ISO claims while Canon has been know to exaggerate. Or perhaps they simply measure the results differently, I don't know. I do agree that the low light capabilities of these two cameras will likely be similar - regardless of what the specs are on paper.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
1 upvote
OutlawPhotoGuy
By OutlawPhotoGuy (Jan 6, 2012)

I do see your point on comparing ISO to another brand, BUT this one has the same ISO as the D3s, why didn't they improve it like they did FPS and MP?

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Jan 6, 2012)

Well, you didnt expect Sony to just "give" away sensor for nothing. Those XQDs are price for that..

And maybe something else like.. "we wont compete with you.. much". Who knows, but Im sure there is some agreement between Sony and Nikon and result is XQD cards in D4. I would love know for what it was traded for..

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 6, 2012)

D4's ISO is expandable to 204,800. For most folks, that should be sufficient. If it isn't -- just shine a light and strike a flash on your subject.

I just love how the die-hard Canoners are already belittling the Nikon D4 with their lame nitpicking. So typical.

0 upvotes
Scottelly
By Scottelly (Jan 7, 2012)

Canon FINALLY figured out that 2 CF card slots is better than one with a "different" second card slot. Now Nikon goes and repeats Canon's blunder. Weird.

0 upvotes
JargonTalk
By JargonTalk (Jan 6, 2012)

This new D4 looks on (digital) paper like everything we have been asking for, and then some. Looking forward to getting my hands on one to check it out in the near future.

4 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Jan 6, 2012)

looks like many will disagree....

4 upvotes
pacogwapo
By pacogwapo (Jan 9, 2012)

Henry troll

0 upvotes
harrysamuel
By harrysamuel (Jan 6, 2012)

Well I was really looking forward to the D4, but with the battery change I guess I will stick with the D700 and D3 series for a few more years. Or just wait for the D6 with the new battery. Hopefully one that powers itself and I never need a second one. How many batteries do we need to throw out? How many useless chargers do I need?

It looks like a great camera, but will wait for them to be on the rental shelves.

Anyone know if Nikon includes TWO batteries in the box?

I really don't need a new camera. The camera's I have use the same batteries I already have. I know it's just a battery, but AAA, AA, Quantum Turbo XXX, and three different Nikon types I really do not need another battery type in my bag. It is getting to ridiculous.

0 upvotes
Peter Bendheim
By Peter Bendheim (Jan 6, 2012)

It's just a battery! Would a battery prevent one buying a camera. Batteries are just disposable items; in the scheme of things they are sooooo trivial.

1 upvote
Blair N
By Blair N (Jan 6, 2012)

Batteries are hardly environmentally trivial. I agree the battery changes are annoying but I realise the EN-EL18 is 10.8 volts 2000 mAh, the increase from the 2 cell 7 or 7.4 volts to the 3 cell 10.8V probably is required for the 10fps shutter. plus I know the changes between the EN-EL3e in the D300/ D700 to the En-EL15 of the D7000 were far improved terminals for safety making it hard to have common chargers and camera bodies supporting both. Battery technology is ever changing I am more surprised its not a Li-Po being the best power to weight offering.

2 upvotes
Scottelly
By Scottelly (Jan 7, 2012)

If you have so many battery types already, why does it matter that there is just one more type? Besides, how many photos do you shoot? The battery in the D4 can shoot 2,500 photos! I bet you use two bodies. That would make you capable of shooting over 4,000 photos at a shoot with two bodies. Do you really shoot more than that in one day?

0 upvotes
harrysamuel
By harrysamuel (Jan 7, 2012)

At some events I do I have three or four photographers working for me. Most photographers I use do not have D700/D3 for indoor low light events so it is usually my equipment being used. And I am always over-prepared which means extra batteries ready to go. I really can not believe a new battery every two model updates is needed. And actually the D3s is all I need for a small portion of my events. And your right, rarely do we use the backup batteries. As with every new product I have my list. My two top items was keep the same battery and increase x-sync speed to 1/1000 of a second.

0 upvotes
Kiger
By Kiger (Jan 7, 2012)

Comments like this drive me nuts, I never post on online boards but this is too much to ignore, I am now a college student as my years in retail as a manager of a camera store are amounting to a waste as whiners like this gave lame excuses like this after wasting hours of my time, day after day, then ordering online to not pay taxes which I can't blame them for since I could not afford them either. If you can buy a $6000 CAMERA you can afford a $100 battery! This is the WORST reason anyone would give for not buying a professional photographic tool that costs $6000! Don't blame a battery as a reason you will not buy something you have no reason or ability to buy when true professionals could care less. Don't put yourself out as someone who really matters to nikon who is marketing this camera to true professionals!

2 upvotes
Rule 34
By Rule 34 (Jan 9, 2012)

@Kiger: The worst part, is that most of the people that are this anal-retentive are just pedophiles who are using these cameras to produce and distribute images of themselves doing unspeakable things to their own children. I ran into this too often when I was still on the force.

0 upvotes
Cariboou
By Cariboou (Jan 6, 2012)

Is on top of my dreams, when I win a lottery or when I found a job... not easy also here, anyway I hope here somebody win a lottery and the dream became realty

Happy New Year
Cariboou

0 upvotes
TomUW
By TomUW (Jan 6, 2012)

To me the 1Dx and D4's decision to go further to give identical controls to horizontal and vertical orientation is annoying for several reasons. I'd prefer that they invested in a square sensor instead (after all, the lenses ARE round), threw away the bottom part of the camera, and let me select which orientation I wanted with a single button. It would also be nice if I could additionally shoot square images with all of the sensor :). I'd then have a smaller, lighter camera (5D size) with better handling, and same D*/1D* IQ/speed. In other words, I'd rather my money went into the sensor than all those duplicated buttons, and just have a battery extension pack option for when I need extra juice.

8 upvotes
lutherfan
By lutherfan (Jan 6, 2012)

I was just think this, and I can't figure out why it hasn't been done (years ago!)

0 upvotes
Joesiv
By Joesiv (Jan 6, 2012)

Probably becuase the mirror would have to be taller to accomodate the taller sensor. Which would likely mean there wouldn't be room within the current registration distance of the lens mount to actually flip it up.

3 upvotes
AkinaC
By AkinaC (Jan 6, 2012)

Agree, I just hope they can go back to the last film era where cameras like 1V/F6 has choice not to include the battery grip which for non-professorial user like me have less weight to carry; so probably the D800/5DMk3 could fulfilled our wish.....

0 upvotes
Le Kilt
By Le Kilt (Jan 6, 2012)

Try something:
Draw a rectangle of the format of a 36x24 sensor.
Draw a circle round it.
Draw a square in the circle.
Draw a 36:24 format rectangle in that square.
You'll see the resolution you lose (or extra pixel density you need).
;-)

7 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Jan 6, 2012)

tomuw you are bad in math right?

i mean .... like le kilt wrote : that was discussed for years by noobs.
but everyone with a clue knows why they DON´T do it.

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Le Kilt
By Le Kilt (Jan 6, 2012)

Now now Henry, it's not obvious to most people with a clue until it's been pointed out or they have drawn rectangles and circles, no need to be rude.

2 upvotes
TomUW
By TomUW (Jan 6, 2012)

I think you are right about the lens registration distance being an issue, Joesiv.
Although I still would prefer the 1V/F6 design choice as AkinaC remarks.

0 upvotes
saunders77
By saunders77 (Jan 6, 2012)

You're all wrong; it should have used a round sensor.

5 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 6, 2012)

Real brain trust comments here, phew....

0 upvotes
TomUW
By TomUW (Jan 7, 2012)

I'm sorry, but to me putting the two sets of controls is like having a car that when you want to drive it in reverse you turn the seat around and use a completely different set of pedals and another steering wheel. Course the latest model car can only have one row of seats as an improvement so that both ways of driving are as similar as possible.

0 upvotes
harrysamuel
By harrysamuel (Jan 7, 2012)

I think he means a 36 x 36 size sensor. might be 30 x 30 I am not going to do the math, it will not happen anyway. Or a round sensor to match the lenses and crop later.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 7, 2012)

This thread takes the cake! Pure lunacy.

0 upvotes
Stanchung
By Stanchung (Jan 7, 2012)

It can happen when it becomes a mirrorless camera IMHO.

0 upvotes
Le Kilt
By Le Kilt (Jan 8, 2012)

Not a square sensor, just the usual one on a pivot so that you can rotate it instead of the body... along with the whole mirror assembly of course...
;-)

0 upvotes
mogens65
By mogens65 (Jan 6, 2012)

I Love it ;)

3 upvotes
Oscar CK
By Oscar CK (Jan 6, 2012)

Is there further details about the uncompressed video through HDMI, is it 4:4:4, is it raw data from the sensor, resolution, fps, audio codec???

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Jan 6, 2012)

4:2:2, 1080p30, I believe.

0 upvotes
Oscar CK
By Oscar CK (Jan 6, 2012)

If this is true I would be a lil bit dissapointed, lets hope for the best.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Jan 6, 2012)

4:2:2 is definitely correct:

http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25482/D4.html

I've seen nothing and heard nothing from Nikon to suggest the camera can capture above 30p in Full HD.

0 upvotes
Oscar CK
By Oscar CK (Jan 6, 2012)

Hope there will be some kind of firmware update about that, if it's not a hardware limitation.

0 upvotes
sic0048
By sic0048 (Jan 6, 2012)

@R Butler - 720p is full HD in case you didn't know. The camera has the ability to shoot 60fps at 720p and matches Canon in this regard - the 1dx won't shoot 60 fps at 1080p either.

0 upvotes
Almeida
By Almeida (Jan 6, 2012)

720p is not full hd.

4 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Jan 6, 2012)

@sic0048

As Almeida has pointed out, the industry uses 'Full HD' to mean 1920x1080. 720 is 'HD'

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 7, 2012)

HDMI output is 4:2:2 chroma subsampling, which is a heckuva lot better than 4:2:0. Unfortunately, color depth is only 8 bit per color (RGB 3x8=24-bit total), and that is less than sterling. Big mistake on the part of Nikon.

Max. video recording resolutions: 1080p30, 720p60, also 640x480 SD. So, this thing cannot do 1080p60 overcranking for slow-mo, dang...

"Hope there will be some kind of firmware update about that, if it's not a hardware limitation."

Probably not. This is it.

"720p is full HD in case you didn't know."

Usual nomenclature would entail 1080p being labeled "Full-HD" and 720p being labeled "Quasi-HD" or plain "HD."

0 upvotes
fastprime
By fastprime (Jan 6, 2012)

I'm gonna wait for the D5 ;-)

2 upvotes
AnHund
By AnHund (Jan 6, 2012)

Backlit buttons is also a welcome addition together with a LAN connector or WiFi for quick transferral of images. Would, however, have preferred built in WiFi.

0 upvotes
AnHund
By AnHund (Jan 6, 2012)

The author is missing the new AF capabilities with the Expeed-3 processor also found in Nikon 1 series.

Also I'm certain that the new CMOS sensor will give the best image quality ever seen from an FF camera.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Jan 6, 2012)

Expeed isn't a processor, it's a 'processing concept.' So far as we can tell (having asked repeatedly), it means the Nikon1 and D4 both have image processing up to the latest Nikon standard. There's no implication that they have the same chips in them.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Jan 6, 2012)

really.. that's vague

0 upvotes
AnHund
By AnHund (Jan 7, 2012)

Thanks for the correction.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 859
12345