En Trance: Also, if I rest my camera on a good tripod at the beach, 1/4000 does not cut it due to the wind alone. (Especially with a tele lens) After that, I begin to think of exposure. Why is Nikon limiting their shutter speed so severely?
Beaches were invented in 1989 so there wasn't really an opportunity to shoot them.
Nikon really needs to come up with a medium-format system so that we have the best of both worlds - high-resolution & dynamic range of medium-format with the speed and handling of a camera like the D4s.
The handling of medium format systems are generally terrible, especially when clients want more selection from their photos as they're used to dSLRs.
What a lot of the high-end studio photographers do now is they just shoot 6k video with their RED cameras and just take stills from those videos, using continuous HMI lighting instead of strobes.
As nice as these systems are and their terrific dynamic range, I really don't see them lasting much longer now that both dSLRs and RED cameras are encroaching on their territory. Once dSLRs reach 50 megapixels and 16-bit raw depth, combined with ultra-sharp lenses, it'll be game-over.
Brian OReilly: Guys
Enjoyed the Review/PreviewBut one item I found curious.This is a commercial web site, reviewing a named product.So, why, in the interview at the end was there a most distracting piece of black tape over the logo of the laptop (A MacBook I presume) used to present the images?
You do have legal rights to those brands on video if it's used for an editorial purpose.
You just can't have them if it's in a commercial.
And you can't use any copyrighted materials, but brand logo trademarks aren't copyrighted materials.
Marcelobtp: I can see it been used in professional bodys in few years. A99II probably will have it. For 4k or 8k use primarily. I can envision a new generation of sports cameras that will have 30 fps or more. The limitation would be file size basicaly 30 raw files per second is just too much, to make the camera cheaper they could use a smaller buffer and let the card be "the buffer". They make you pay more and you think about the cost of the card afterwards.
^^ lol compressed video
Michael Ma: Apple users think that there are no benefits of 4K video because everyone still uses 1080p monitors. This in a nutshell is the mentality of die hard Apple users today. They can see things like how 4K looks significantly better on their 1080p monitors, but they try to erase from their minds what they've seen, and never research things like why 4K video significantly looks better on 1080p monitors.
Nobody cares about 4k.
It does not matter.
vFunct: Specialized video cameras are always going to win over dSLRs for video.
dSLRs for video are complete garbage that only amateurs and Craigslist wedding photographers do.
In the professional world, most directors have figured out how horrible dSLRs are for video after the initial impressions with them, perhaps by shooting a few experimental episodes.
Nobody uses dSLRs anymore.
Basically the problem with dSLR video is that they do not have the handling and interfacing requirements for video, and so by the time you add all the expensive video accessories on your rig, you end up with a dSLR setup that costs more than a dedicated video camera.
Additionally, the low depth-of-field for full-frame cameras causes everything to be out-of-focus, especially in handheld situations. Editors are ALWAYS complaining about how bad dSLRs are for video because of that.
A smaller sensor is much better for video than a larger sensor.
Specialized video cameras are always going to win over dSLRs for video.
vFunct: Get a REAL video camera.
The Sony NEX-FS700 is so much better, at about the same price range.
@brendon1000 Yah, and the NEVER shot with it ever again, because they figured out exactly how horrible it was after testing it.
most broadcast productions that try to use dSLRs for video eventually give up after a few episodes.
Again, dSLRs are absolute garbage for videos.
This is something pros have figured out already.
Bhima78: This looks good for professionals that are already shooting with lots of Canon glass... to the budding professional, this price point puts it squarely against the A7S with the 4K addon. Pretty sure the A7S with that addon will absolutely mop the floor with this though. Of course, maybe the A7S has more rolling shutter and this has none. Someone that is actually a videographer, chime in as to why you would buy this other than owning Canon glass already, over the alternatives (especially the A7S with the add-on).
No pro would use an A7 for video.
Get a real video camera like the Sony NEX-FS700R or GTFO.
And, no, dSLRs are complete garbage for video.
You can tell who's an amateur videographer if they shoot with a dSLR for video. Completely horrible.
I feel sorry for any editor that has to deal with all their shaky-cam and out-of-focus photos that plague's dSLR videography.
Get a REAL video camera.
Joe Ogiba: No 4K is a showstopper for me. I might get the new waterproof 4K Verizon Sony Xperia Z3v when my 2 year contract expires for my HTC Droid DNA in January. It also has wireless charging and 128GB Micro SDXC support.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oevRDwKJbKE
4K is for the poors.
Real men are on 5K.
if it had 4k, I wouldn't buy it. That would be a showstopper for me.
I don't want a device that is wasteful in battery life. I would much rather have a device that is optimized for real use, not for specs. Designing for specs is bad engineering.
Also, 5k is where Apple is headed, per Retina iMac, so 4k is outdated anyways..
vFunct: lol reviewing a product 2 months later that absolutely no one bought.
So you're saying only sports photographers need large sensor cameras and you don't?
It matters because since you're not a sports photographer, you have no need for a large sensor camera.
Yah, because you're a pro sports photographer.. =^D
Are you a pro sports photographer?
Is that why you need a large sensor?
If not, what's your excuse?
Who cares about the sensor size?
Image quality is the LEAST important aspect about being a photographer.
You amateurs don't know this, but absolutely NO ONE gives a crap about a high quality photo that has terrible art direction or a boring shot.
The most important part about a camera is that IT TAKES THE SHOT, and for that, the phone camera is FAR superior to dedicated cameras like dSLRs, because phone cameras are always with you and available.
As an editor, this is something I keep telling photographers, who often don't understand that editors would MUCH rather have a shot that conveys the message, instead of something useless like a shot that has wide dynamic range.
Again, a small sensor camera is MUCH better than a large sensor camera.
Once you become an expert photographer, you will know this.
lol reviewing a product 2 months later that absolutely no one bought.
4k should only be done on a professional cinema camera.
It should NOT be in any dSLR.
In fact, dSLR for video is useless. A real cinema camera is always better than dSLRs. The dSLR body is not designed for video, since the mount points are always near the center of gravity, causing it to be unstable and shaky.
Additionally, the full-frame sensor causes everything to be out-of-focus. Professional editors constantly complain how horribly unfocused dSLR videos are. You end up with much better shots with a smaller sensor, like super-35mm.
At this point, only amateur photographers shoot video with dSLR videos. I never hire dSLRs videographers and always choose cinematographers with real video cameras for jobs.
Once you add all the cinema accessories to a dSLR rig, you're just better off with a real video camera, for better quality results.
I hope Nikon comes up with a separate cinema system, like what Canon did.
The first Nikon 70-200mm VR was really optimized for DX in the D2x, even though it could cover a full 35mm frame.