Comments on: New Preview

By: Paul Smith Shoes

Paul Smith Shoes — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:27:49 +0000

Many people have alos become fans of Paul Smith Shoes since they came into the market. I also one of them , I very like Paul Smith Wallets and Paul Smith Belts,It designs very good.

By: Curious

Curious — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 05:13:58 +0000

It would seem that the ultra high ISO shots (> ISO 3200) were lacking when it came to the 1D4. I can’t see how this can be expected to improve dramatically in the next 2 months as full production cameras make their way out.

I’m led to wondering about whether the 1D4 release was timed a week after the Nikon D3s as a way of saying “don’t forget about us.”

I am curious about what the output of the sRAW (3.9MP) and mRAW (8.9MP) modes will be like when it comes to ISO > 3200.

But most of all, I get the feeling that this camera might be targeted to take some of the video production heat off the 5DMK2. It does 1080p video, in the various frame rates required and in addition, the 1.3x crop factor will change the depth of field (there have been comments that with the 5D2, the large f-stop lenses produce a depth of field that is too shallow on the 5D2.) Although it is almost twice the price of the 5D2, the differences might make that unimportant.

By: Julio

Julio — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:57:06 +0000

I saw the images, and as amazing as they were, comparing to the D3s images in the same ISO range, the Nikon has a clear advantage.

A few years (maybe 4 or 6 only), Canon was ahead of the competition in the DSLR market, and it was not long ago that I read in a camera review site “that Canon was the indisputable king of low ISO image”. Maybe now it’s Nikon.

I will not change my lenses because of this, thought. The camera may not be the best of them all, but is still better than most. And in time, Canon will probably catch up, this things are ciclical.

I will not buy a 1DIV, not because it is not desirable, but because I am an amateur, and can’t justify such expense on a camera. Nikon may have better image quality, pixel peeping, but this seems to be the hell of a camera.

Only hope the focus really got better, ’cause the focus problem of the 1DMIII seems to have really screwd things up. And as a friend once joked, the focus of the D3 is amazing for a Nikon, it is just like the 1DMII…

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:44:20 +0000

I’m going to assume Canon has asked the galleries to be pulled down since the sample images we are seeing thus far do not compare to the D3s. Really it’s Canon’s own fault for making it a 1.3 crop sensor. Had this been a full frame I’m willing to bet the quality would be really comparable.

So now when Nikon releases the Nikon D4 in Q1 or Q2 of next year you’ll expect Canon to trail in market share significantly. There are some reports already stating the Nikon D3/D3x now control as much as 63% of the market segment upon professional DSLR photographers.

I still don’t think Canon will have an answer for D3x and I am not even sure if the 1Ds Mark IV will be able to compete with it. All they are going to do is throw a 32 megapixel sensor on the 1Ds Mark IV and once again they market the camera as just being 32 megapixels instead of working on the quality aspect.

Just when Canon thinks they are ahead Nikon releases two new cameras that are better. The Nikon D4 and D4x will almost certainly be superior to the 1D Mark IV and 1Ds Mark IV.

The one question I have is if Canon will release a Canon 3D camera with similar specs to the 1D Mark IV, just in a full frame version.

By: me

me — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:00:07 +0000

THanks, that was funny as hell

By: Tyson

Tyson — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:54:18 +0000

Good point. So as always one needs to just weigh all the pros and cons (ISO performance vs megapixels etc.) of any purchase and pick one that best suits the photographer. Similar advise can be said to the 1.3X crop whiners. If someone doesn’t want 1.3x crop, then clearly they’re not forced to buy it.

By: Ciprian Trofin

Ciprian Trofin — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:18:01 +0000

The gallery was removed.

The reason? The author says only: “I’m pretty sure experienced photographers/readers would know why”.

Fake Chuck said it best: http://fakechuckwestfall.wordpress.com/2009/10/21/on-canon-taking-down-nocturne/

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 04:47:11 +0000

err I meant to say the pixel size on the D3s is nearly 40% larger than 1D Mark IV. It makes a noticeable difference. You wouldn’t expect the 1D Mark IV to out perform the D3s in terms of ISO quality due to this alone.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 04:46:24 +0000

The Nikon D3s image quality at ISO 3200 6400 12800 etc etc etc is significantly better than the 1D Mark IV. Granted the pixel size on the D3s is roughly 40% smaller on the 1D Mark IV so you would expect to see less noise on the D3s simply because of that alone.

By: calbot

calbot — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 04:31:06 +0000

Women have more important things to worry about, as do real men… but complaining about noise in “expanded” ISO settings … I’m going to stand by the Governator on this.

By: denz

denz — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:10:16 +0000

i mean Nikon shots

By: denz

denz — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:09:24 +0000

D3s shots
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D3S/D3SA7.HTM
http://ganref.jp/magazines/index/1/0/340
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review/20091020_322884.html

By: gwac

gwac — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:54:55 +0000

Oh my, but I’m a man… and I cook… what a confusing world we live in!!

By: Tyson

Tyson — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 23:30:04 +0000

I’m very impressed with the images! 6400 and 12k are amazing! Now I’ll be able to shot indoor lightening anytime. To be able to just lock the camera on 3200 or 6400 and shoot with natural light! Fantastic. I’m super happy. Does anyone know if Nikon D3s shots look like this at similar ISO?