CES 2014. Nikon D4s is a fact. What can be expected from Canon?

[slclick]

So all those DR and DxO score 'discussions' on the introns were for naught?

Why can't we all just get along and take a cue from Kai at Digital Rev?

Nikon strap on Canon camera

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7078/7269787600_f29ad7673b_h.jpg

 

[rs]

If the only component of a camera that you place any value on whatsoever is the sensor, then why are you worshiping Nikon? They didn't even make the sensor!

I never said that's the only aspect I value. But, since this is a device that takes images, I think the quality of the image sensor should be placed at the top of the list.

It is a certainly one of the many components that go into making the image. For scenes that don't move and photographers that are happy doing everything manual, it's pretty much all down to the senor and lens. But most people don't buy a camera like the D4 or the 1D X for landscape shots. There are cheaper cameras out there with lessor frame rates, AF and greater MP.

The D4 and the 1D X sacrifice sensor resolution solely to be able to capture the money shots - in other words, the decisive moments in non repeatable situations. Who's going to ask Usain Bolt to re-run the race because the AF was slightly off or the frame rate wasn't quite high enough to capture the moment. I'm not saying the D4 isn't a fantastic tool, or the 1D X is perfection. But I am saying its a better tool for the job than the D4.

A good camera helps the photographer get the money shot. Timing and focus are much more important than DR.

Just look at any major sporting event - how many more white lenses do you see there than black lenses?

This seems like a very lemming-like way to make decisions.

So you'd say that those working professionals are ill-informed, and your escape from Nikon fanboy land into here is proof that the majority of them are wrong?

 

[MichaelHodges]

If you can't recover highlights, who cares if you have two extra FPS and built in GPS with Insta-Facebook upload?

If you are shooting at ISO 3200, does the D4 still have better DR?

If your autofocus gives you a blurry image, who cares if you have an extra stop or two of dynamic range?

If you miss a key moment because your frame rate was too slow, who cares if you can't recover a blown highlight?

If you need a 17mm TS/PC lens, or a hand-holdable 600mm f/4 lens, how useful is a sensor with better low ISO DR?

If you can't expose to preserve highlights when you need to, should you find a new hobby/job?

All fair points except for the last one, which is a logical fallacy. You could apply that logic to the first implementation of auto focus, IS, etc:

"If we can't hold the lens still, shouldn't we find a new hobby/gig"?

"I we can't use manual focus quick enough, shouldn't we find a new hobby/gig?"

 

[9VIII]

Hmm. I was going to say that the buffer depth on the 1Dx is better, but I just looked at some test videos and they look pretty much the same, the memory card seems to be the real bottleneck.
At this point I don't think there's any reason to take one over the other.

 

[Loswr]

If you can't recover highlights, who cares if you have two extra FPS and built in GPS with Insta-Facebook upload?

If you are shooting at ISO 3200, does the D4 still have better DR?

If your autofocus gives you a blurry image, who cares if you have an extra stop or two of dynamic range?

If you miss a key moment because your frame rate was too slow, who cares if you can't recover a blown highlight?

If you need a 17mm TS/PC lens, or a hand-holdable 600mm f/4 lens, how useful is a sensor with better low ISO DR?

If you can't expose to preserve highlights when you need to, should you find a new hobby/job?

All fair points except for the last one, which is a logical fallacy. You could apply that logic to the first implementation of auto focus, IS, etc:

"If we can't hold the lens still, shouldn't we find a new hobby/gig"?

"I we can't use manual focus quick enough, shouldn't we find a new hobby/gig?"

Logical fallacy or not, I have a strong suspicion that that exact issue is the reason the 1DX seems to routinely underexposed by about half a stop when using evaluative metering, compared to many other cameras. Kevin wants to save us from ourselves, or something like that.

 

[KyleSTL]

That's what I was thinking too. "Don't go guys... we have something GREAT in store for you. Have faith!"

Yep, we have the D4s - it has a new Expeed processor that will really make your jpg images pop, because we know none of you out there shoot NEF files. Oh, and better AF. Better how? Just better. Trust us.

The same happened with the D70s. 'Modest' would be a stretch to describe the difference between the two. Granted that camera was nearly 9 years ago and is at least 3 rungs below the D4 in the hierarchical ladder, but it does show a history of claims and results.

 

[Quasimodo]

VERY interesting. Something has to happen in the Canon camp!

How so for you? You have pretty much all of the goodies Canon has to offer and then some. If you want to develop further, I would expect you to turn your attention towards Hasselblad? and not bother what Nikon does... imho

A 45MP 1D

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If you can't recover highlights, who cares if you have two extra FPS and built in GPS with Insta-Facebook upload?

If you are shooting at ISO 3200, does the D4 still have better DR?

Actually probably yes. Unless you have a 1DX or 6D then yeah as it has better DR than other Canon bodies at ISO3200 (and about the same as the 1DX/6D, maybe a trace more but it doesn't really matter).

If your autofocus gives you a blurry image, who cares if you have an extra stop or two of dynamic range?

I don't know that the Nikon AF is so bad as Canon users think though (during the Beijing Olympics era, a number of pros were slamming Canon and saying they were forced to go to Nikon since they simple were sick of missing too many shots from Canon AF, and we are talking really big time shooters, ones with high level press passes for the Beijing games and all). And for lots of landscape stuff I doubt there is a problem using it compared to Canon. And BTW at ISO100 the Exmor stuff is not an extra 1 or 2 stops but closer to 3 in reality.

As a whole, has the Canon lineup really had better AF overall than the Nikon to where you can toss off a statement like that? The 1DX,5D3,1D2,1D4 were pretty solid, most of the rest weren't anything even close to special when it came to AF and many were downright pretty bad, even the 7D tended to struggle for soccer/football.

If you miss a key moment because your frame rate was too slow, who cares if you can't recover a blown highlight?

Nikon has cameras with fast fps and in fact they had a FF camera with fast fps before Canon ever got around to it.

If you need a 17mm TS/PC lens, or a hand-holdable 600mm f/4 lens, how useful is a sensor with better low ISO DR?

It depends, if the shot taken with 17mm would be a super high DR scene where you couldn't combine shots, then it's a judgement call as to whether the DR or T&S are more important. Anyway I do like the Canon lens line-up better. And their video (although it's really Magic Lantern that saved them in this regard, because marketing radically crippled the 5D3's actual hardware capabilities when it came to video quality and usability) and UI better.

If you can't expose to preserve highlights when you need to, should you find a new hobby/job?

Who said they couldn't expose to preserve highlights? It's laughable how you keep going to the old sneaky insults about the DR crowd, in the end, simply not knowing how to take a shot, despite the fact that you DO know better, but you still pull out this cheap trick every time in one way or another.

 

[ishdakuteb]

All fair points except for the last one, which is a logical fallacy. You could apply that logic to the first implementation of auto focus, IS, etc:

"If we can't hold the lens still, shouldn't we find a new hobby/gig"?

"I we can't use manual focus quick enough, shouldn't we find a new hobby/gig?"

i would like to add these following:

1. if you cannot determine what kind of light you are shooting in (aka, not being able to get your decent exposure), and keep thinking about leaning on post software to fix your WAY under/over exposed image, FIND ANOTHER HOBBY? OR LOOK FOR ANOTHER CAREER? OR BUY A CAMERA WITH EVF WITH HOPE FOR HELP LOL?

2. if you refuse to use auto-focus, why spend money to buy auto-focus lens? ton of cheap non-auto focus lens out there... in this digital era, we all want fast response. if you prefer low response, BUY OLD NON AUTO-FOCUS LENS?

ergonomics, auto-focus, low light performance, image color quality, dynamic range are most importance... and keep in mind that i am listing them in order from top to bottom and a wide dynamic range is good feature to have, but nothing compare to others...

ummm... have another question. are you shooting still subject(s) LOL

 

[Loswr]

Unless you have a 1DX or 6D then yeah as it has better DR than other Canon bodies at ISO3200 (and about the same as the 1DX/6D, maybe a trace more but it doesn't really matter).

I have no idea what camera MichaelHodges was referring to with, "...two extra FPS (vs. D4) and built in GPS with Insta-Facebook upload," but until he blended the 1D X with the PowerShot N, we were talking about the 1D X.

If you want to compare all Canon bodies to all Nikon bodies over the past 10 years...oh, wait, we've done that - and more people chose Canon, every one of those years. The rest is just DRoning.

Back to the topic at hand: "Nikon D4s is a fact. What can be expected from Canon?" Well, Canon could follow Nikon's lead with a 1D XN, where the main 'upgrade' is improved AF algorithms. Oh, wait - they're giving that to us for free with the v.2 firmware. 8)

 

[unfocused]

Enough already!

Look, the D4 and 1Dx markets are not really competitive. The products mirror one another and almost no one at that level is about to switch systems. The brand choice at that level is not driven by any of the things people are arguing about here.

A D4 buyer is already a Nikon user and isn't going to switch systems. A 1D user is already a Canon buyer and also isn't going to switch systems. Chances are they've been using one system or another for decades. If it's their own business investment they have thousands and thousands tied up in lenses. If it's their employer's investment, that employer has already locked into one system or the other.

Those two flagships are designed to keep a professional base contented and to market the rest of the product line. That's one reason why they tend to be very conservative offerings. The people who need (not the hobbyists who just want to buy the most expensive camera there is) these cameras put a premium on reliability and predictability, they don't want to be Guinea Pigs for new technology and Canon and Nikon will never risk that.

 

[Bruce Photography]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/01/07/nikon-announces-development-of-d4s-professional-hd-slr?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_2

Btw: Canon still has no competitor to the D800E. The 1D line is twice the price of the D800. Maybe Canon will be able meet our wishes in 2014 (high MP Cam @ moederate costs, 7DII,...)

Corrected Posting:

BTW: Nikon still has no competitor to the 5DIII. The D4 line is twice the price of the 5DIII. Maybe Nikon will be able to meet its customers wishes in 2014 (high ISO, Low-Noise Camera at fair price, D400...)

And, if high megapixels are so wonderful, why doesn't Nikon put a high megapixel sensor in its flagship?

Since you are prefering the Canon 5D3 to the D800E I assume you have shot with the D800E for about a year and compared it to the 5D3. I have the 5D3, D800, and D800E and put these cameras on a horizontal bar and tested them side by side of the same subject at the same time. I've also tried to move the Nikon glass to the Canon camera but I couldn't quantify the aperture because Novoflex doesn't put F stops on their lens converters.

If you make small prints I could see why you might like Canon better if that is what you've been shooting. However I shoot landscapes doing 3 foot by 2 boot wall prints for commercial spaces and galleries. The original poster has it right, Canon doesn't compete in the large MP area with Nikon. The Nikon's dynamic range is great. I shoot outside on a tripod and keep my ISO low. I can shoot either brand on any day. I choose to shoot Nikon's now even though I'm waiting for Canon to produce a high MP camera so I can use Canon's 17 and 24 tilt shift lenses which are superior to Nikons. Nikon 14-24, however is a joy to use. We would all benefit if Canon felt some pressure to compete with Nikon. Even my D7100 is able to produce excellent large prints due to the lack of an AA filter. I'm waiting for Canon to give me something to buy. So far no luck.

 

[BL]

not a whole lot of info there other than improved AF

I wonder what they mean by HD-SLR?

geez, the "HD" buzzword is so dated, why even go there? re-reading the announcement reminds me of all those products featured in the 00's that were "HD".

Remember those "HD" night driving sunglasses? :

 

[unfocused]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/01/07/nikon-announces-development-of-d4s-professional-hd-slr?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_2

Btw: Canon still has no competitor to the D800E. The 1D line is twice the price of the D800. Maybe Canon will be able meet our wishes in 2014 (high MP Cam @ moederate costs, 7DII,...)

Corrected Posting:

BTW: Nikon still has no competitor to the 5DIII. The D4 line is twice the price of the 5DIII. Maybe Nikon will be able to meet its customers wishes in 2014 (high ISO, Low-Noise Camera at fair price, D400...)

And, if high megapixels are so wonderful, why doesn't Nikon put a high megapixel sensor in its flagship?

Since you are prefering the Canon 5D3 to the D800E I assume you have shot with the D800E for about a year and compared it to the 5D3...The original poster has it right, Canon doesn't compete in the large MP area with Nikon. The Nikon's dynamic range is great. I shoot outside on a tripod and keep my ISO low...I'm waiting for Canon to give me something to buy. So far no luck.

I'm trying to figure out what your point is. If you prefer the D800 then use the D800.

My post should have been pretty simple to grasp – The D800 and the 5DIII are different cameras targeted to different audiences. Given the volume of sales Canon is scoring with the 5DIII they seem to have found the larger market and are meeting the desires of more customers.

I just think it's silly to pick two cameras and list the differences and then arbitrarily say one company is somehow behind or failing because there are differences between the two cameras. As I illustrated, you can just as easily say Nikon is failing because they don't offer a camera with the same specs as the 5DIII.

Frankly, for the purpose of this thread, the more significant point is that Nikon's new flagship camera has less resolution than any Canon full frame, which speaks volumes.

 

[StudentOfLight]

not a whole lot of info there other than improved AF

I wonder what they mean by HD-SLR?

geez, the "HD" buzzword is so dated, why even go there? re-reading the announcement reminds me of all those products featured in the 00's that were "HD".

Remember those "HD" night driving sunglasses? :

Exactly. HDSLR is such a marketing term. DSLR is useful as it distinguishes Digital-SLR from film-SLR but what does the H stand for??? I used to work for a marketing run business and the use of marketing lingo used to drive me up the wall.

A great man once said: "Call a spade a spade, not an ergonomically optomized digging and lifting implement!"

 

[privatebydesign]

If the autofocus gives you a blurry image, isn't that the fault of the shooter? Or was there some other problem that explained why Rob Gilbraith was reporting lots of issues with the Canon 1D3 AF that Canon never seemed to be able to fix?

Canon couldn't repeat Galbraith's "issue", not really surprising when Galbraith couldn't repeat his issues when Canon sent factory staff to work with him either, they even went to Mexico or somewhere because he said he could only get it to do it at certain temperatures, so they took him to the temperature he said, and he still couldn't get consistent repeatable "issues".

And where is Mr Galbraith in the photo world now? Ah yes, no longer a pro photographer, no updated website, but a teacher in Canada.

In sharp contrast (pun intended) to the D800 AF issues that were 100% verifiable, and repeatable, in any temperature, by a chimpanzee.

 

[sagittariansrock]

Enough already!

Look, the D4 and 1Dx markets are not really competitive. The products mirror one another and almost no one at that level is about to switch systems. The brand choice at that level is not driven by any of the things people are arguing about here.

A D4 buyer is already a Nikon user and isn't going to switch systems. A 1D user is already a Canon buyer and also isn't going to switch systems.

On the contrary, I can give two examples from the internet alone where long-term Nikon users have switched to Canon just for the 1Dx (coincidentally both guys' names are Matt) and another has been "debating":
http://xerodigital.ca/canon-1dx-nikon-d4-compare-wedding-photographers/
http://mattgranger.com/gear-talk/item/430-unboxing-my-d4-replacement-the-canon-1dx
http://froknowsphoto.com/nikond4vscanon1dx/
Just sayin'...

 

[sandymandy]

I guess nothing happens. Perhaps a 750D with 0.02% better improvements compared to 700D

 

[GMCPhotographics]

If the autofocus gives you a blurry image, isn't that the fault of the shooter? Or was there some other problem that explained why Rob Gilbraith was reporting lots of issues with the Canon 1D3 AF that Canon never seemed to be able to fix?

Canon couldn't repeat Galbraith's "issue", not really surprising when Galbraith couldn't repeat his issues when Canon sent factory staff to work with him either, they even went to Mexico or somewhere because he said he could only get it to do it at certain temperatures, so they took him to the temperature he said, and he still couldn't get consistent repeatable "issues".

And where is Mr Galbraith in the photo world now? Ah yes, no longer a pro photographer, no updated website, but a teacher in Canada.

Which is exactly the point: issues with AF in a pro level camera are far more likely to be the shooter than the equipment.

In sharp contrast (pun intended) to the D800 AF issues that were 100% verifiable, and repeatable, in any temperature, by a chimpanzee.

Since we're talking about the D4s and not the D800, this point is of no consequence to this discussion unless you'd like to use the 5D Mark II's AF as the means by which to judge the successor to the 1DX. Just saying.

It's interesting that no one here has mentioned the D4 lock ups...there's a number of uk pros who have been so frustrated with their D4's and had to switch to a D800 back up camera because their D4 units are so unreliable. I think this is the most likely reason that Nikon have pushed out the D4s so quickly. I dare say that a lot of pros will have their Nikon D4 cams swapped out under warrenty by Nikon. In the mean time, there's a growing user base for the 1Dx which are delighted by their cameras.

 

[Albi86]

I'm sorry for Nikon for not realizing that what they need is a D700s, not a D4s.

Basically D610's sensor with D800's features in a body built and working as reliably as the D700's.