Nikon D4 Specs Revealed? 1D X Has Competition.

K

kirillica

Guest
If these cameras (like 1DX and D4) are designed for Olympics, I wonder which sports they are planning to shoot at 51K ISO and higher? :eek:
 

whatta

EOS 90D
Mar 12, 2011
189
0
If these cameras (like 1DX and D4) are designed for Olympics, I wonder which sports they are planning to shoot at 51K ISO and higher? :eek:
especially with their superfast primes :p

but they will appreciate the new AF for sure (except the absence of F8)

Btw I wonder how people did action and wildlife photography before AF..
 

Blaze

EOS M6 Mark II
Mar 27, 2011
71
0
kirillica said:
If these cameras (like 1DX and D4) are designed for Olympics, I wonder which sports they are planning to shoot at 51K ISO and higher? :eek:
I'd imaging they would only use 51K if absolutely necessary. Clean 12,800 ISO would be useful for shooting gymnastics with a zoom lens. Indoors, the lighting often isn't the best and for events like vault a shutter speed of 1/800 sec. is pretty much a bare minimum to freeze the motion adequately. I've definitely had underexposed vault photos at 1/800 sec, f/2.8, ISO 6400 before.
 

Stuart

Hi, Welcome from an ePhotozine fan, & 6D user.
Jul 22, 2010
365
118
London & Woking
www.ephotozine.com
alipaulphotography said:
A direct 1DX competitor.
So nikon are going for:-
D4 - Low MP, big FPS, High ISO
D800 - High MP, low FPS, average ISO.

So the 5DMKIII will be high MP to compete?
And new canon lenses to resolve detail at these higher MP's ?
 

crazyrunner33

EOS RP
Nov 4, 2011
299
116
Darn, if the clean HDMI is true I'll have to jump ship unless if Canon puts it in the 5D Mark III. Please Canon, give us clean HDMI output!
 

Mark D5 TEAM II

Proud N0ink 0wnz0r / crApple iFruitcake H4t3r
Mar 5, 2013
1,385
138
Tleilax, Thalim Star System
t.linn said:
The focus points working down to f/8 caught my eye and lead me to believe this is fake. That's one of the few gripes about the 1DX. Seems highly unlikely that Nikon just happens to add 9 of them as Canon eliminates this capability.
Not only that, but Nikon has *never* published their AF specs like that before (f/8 & f/5.6-sensitive AF sensors are only found in Canon spec sheets), in the same way they have never published very detailed white papers like Canon routinely does for every new model they release. This rumor is just Noink fanboi wishful thinking BS. Heck, the D800 hasn't even been announced yet and they are already inventing stuff about the D4. :p
 

NormanBates

www.similaar.com
Aug 31, 2010
487
0
Madrid, Spain
www.similaar.com
Mark D5 TEAM II said:
Not only that, but Nikon has *never* published their AF specs like that before (f/8 & f/5.6-sensitive AF sensors are only found in Canon spec sheets), in the same way they have never published very detailed white papers like Canon routinely does for every new model they release. This rumor is just Noink fanboi wishful thinking BS. Heck, the D800 hasn't even been announced yet and they are already inventing stuff about the D4. :p
I think you're absolutely right
 

Mark D5 TEAM II

Proud N0ink 0wnz0r / crApple iFruitcake H4t3r
Mar 5, 2013
1,385
138
Tleilax, Thalim Star System
What most people who invent specs don't realize is if the D4 was already intended to be released in time for London 2012 then it is already pretty much feature-complete by the time Canon announced the 1Dx, that's why they pre-announced it 5 months in advance, they already have a good idea what the other guys would be releasing and they know it would be too late to add features at the last minute just to keep up with the competition. And we're not even talking about the effect of the earthquake, tsunami and flooding on Nikon's manufacturing...

And just to correct the historical record, the D90 was rushed to market only because Canon was talking up video for DSLRs a few years before that, thus tipping their 5D2 hand, and Nikon decided to pip them to get the "first video DSLR" tag, even if the specs were obviously rushed and inferior to what the 5D2 would bring a short time later. So maybe they were first to market on paper, but Canon evidently made theirs first in their dev labs, only it took a bit longer to release.
 
O

obnoxiousmime

Guest
Edwin Herdman said:
To be sure, the D90 came first with DSLR video, but Canon's been out there trying to solidify their core competency by designing and producing their own sensors. This has been, and remains, a shaky part of Nikon's business model (though not as bad as all the MF manufacturers who were apparently reliant on Kodak sensors).
I have some Zeiss ZF.2 lenses. Does this mean they will not be optimal on future Nikon bodies with the Sony sensor?
 
Apr 19, 2011
4,761
1
traveller said:
If this rumour did turn out to be true, it'd make you wonder if Canon and Nikon had signed a cooperation agreement. Apparently, quite a lot of that goes on in Japan anyway...
Hah, it sure is interesting how they all seem to add just the same particular little things each at times. Either behind the scenes they have agreed to various things to some extent or they have lots of corporate spies (corporate espionage is pretty huge, way more than people think). Reminds me when the newsmags sometimes always decided to run the exact same subjects for in depth looks or covers etc. each week even when there were plenty of such stories that really weren't 100% obvious to have to tie in with that week.

With full RAW video out it seems Nikon didn't have to cripple their camera because of their video division squawking because they have no video division (or do they?).
I see they also ADD in f/8 AF and for multiple points.
The reach would be even a bit weaker still than for the 1DX though. Seems surprisingly they didn't at least hit 18MP themselves.
 

NormanBates

www.similaar.com
Aug 31, 2010
487
0
Madrid, Spain
www.similaar.com
"Uncompressed video out through the HDMI port" doesn't mean RAW
it can mean anything between 4:2:0 8bit uncompressed to 4:4:4 10bit uncompressed (I think no HDMI external recorder goes beyond that)
even that higher standard is not RAW: it needs to have a picture style baked in (but on 4:4:4 10bit it can be so flat that in practice it's the nearly as good)
 
C

Canon-F1

Guest
ironie on/

wtf ... ONLY 16 MEGAPIXELS.... :(

hey i can´t crop with only 16 MEGAPIXELS.... :mad:


/ironie off
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2011
16,378
1,388
Interesting that no companies are yet licensed to make XQF cards muchless products that use them. They do expect to license card manufacturers starting next year.

Nikon Rumors has not been too accurate as of late with their predictions, datas that were a sure thing have come and gone at least three times.

I would expect that the general info 16mp, etc is about right for a D4, but a XQD Card slot implies a camera that won't be available soon.
 

Edwin Herdman

EOS RP
May 6, 2011
541
0
obnoxiousmime said:
Edwin Herdman said:
To be sure, the D90 came first with DSLR video, but Canon's been out there trying to solidify their core competency by designing and producing their own sensors. This has been, and remains, a shaky part of Nikon's business model (though not as bad as all the MF manufacturers who were apparently reliant on Kodak sensors).
I have some Zeiss ZF.2 lenses. Does this mean they will not be optimal on future Nikon bodies with the Sony sensor?
Is that an honest question? I don't get it. Your lenses should be good on any compatible body. It's Nikon's business strategy I'm worried about (for their sake).
 

DarkKnightNine

The best camera is the one that's with you.
Jul 1, 2011
174
0
56
Yokohama, Japan
www.marvenpayne.com
JR said:
wickidwombat said:
at such high iso i doubt there will be a whole lot of difference between the 2 to be honest, I would expect great things from iso 100,000. I think we might see usability of images hit the ceiling in the 25k range
but noise tollerance is such a subjective thing as has been previously discussed. I think it will be spec bragging rights and thats about it.
I agree with you on the 25k range. The point for me will not be so much how high each machine goes in terms of ISO (like 51k versus 102k) but how clean they each are at ISO 12,800 and ISO 25,600. Being somewhat limited to a usable ISO 3200 currently with my 5D, hell a clean ISO 12k or 25k seem like heaven! I really hope this new sensor Canon has delivers !
I would have to agree. Most of these spec numbers are marketing hype and mean very little in actual usage. My 1D Mark IV can shoot in the 100,000 range but I hate the images that come out of it. I rarely push it past 6400 ISO and those would be extremely rare cases where I absolutely have to come back with an image and flash was prohibited.
 
Apr 19, 2011
4,761
1
NormanBates said:
"Uncompressed video out through the HDMI port" doesn't mean RAW
it can mean anything between 4:2:0 8bit uncompressed to 4:4:4 10bit uncompressed (I think no HDMI external recorder goes beyond that)
even that higher standard is not RAW: it needs to have a picture style baked in (but on 4:4:4 10bit it can be so flat that in practice it's the nearly as good)
yes, good to point out, I was way, way too sloppy in my usage, I meant what you wrote and shouldn't have used term RAW
 
Apr 19, 2011
4,761
1
DarkKnightNine said:
JR said:
wickidwombat said:
at such high iso i doubt there will be a whole lot of difference between the 2 to be honest, I would expect great things from iso 100,000. I think we might see usability of images hit the ceiling in the 25k range
but noise tollerance is such a subjective thing as has been previously discussed. I think it will be spec bragging rights and thats about it.
I agree with you on the 25k range. The point for me will not be so much how high each machine goes in terms of ISO (like 51k versus 102k) but how clean they each are at ISO 12,800 and ISO 25,600. Being somewhat limited to a usable ISO 3200 currently with my 5D, hell a clean ISO 12k or 25k seem like heaven! I really hope this new sensor Canon has delivers !
I would have to agree. Most of these spec numbers are marketing hype and mean very little in actual usage. My 1D Mark IV can shoot in the 100,000 range but I hate the images that come out of it. I rarely push it past 6400 ISO and those would be extremely rare cases where I absolutely have to come back with an image and flash was prohibited.
Yeah those numbers are in good part just a game. Sometimes you might glean a little about how things might differ compared to previous models, but even then you can't be sure. Heck Nikon had an ISO6400 camera back in the pre-20D days I think and we know Nikon could barely, if even, handle ISO800 in a usable fashion then and even Canon got rough at ISO1600 and yet they said they had an ISO6400 cam and what one person thinks is a good point another may differ on by a stop or two. Canon used to be a bit more conservative as to claims in the past then but then switched gears, probably to not sound bad on paper in comparison to other marketing blurbs.
 
J

Joe J7771

Guest
LetTheRightLensIn said:
DarkKnightNine said:
JR said:
wickidwombat said:
at such high iso i doubt there will be a whole lot of difference between the 2 to be honest, I would expect great things from iso 100,000. I think we might see usability of images hit the ceiling in the 25k range
but noise tollerance is such a subjective thing as has been previously discussed. I think it will be spec bragging rights and thats about it.
I agree with you on the 25k range. The point for me will not be so much how high each machine goes in terms of ISO (like 51k versus 102k) but how clean they each are at ISO 12,800 and ISO 25,600. Being somewhat limited to a usable ISO 3200 currently with my 5D, hell a clean ISO 12k or 25k seem like heaven! I really hope this new sensor Canon has delivers !
I would have to agree. Most of these spec numbers are marketing hype and mean very little in actual usage. My 1D Mark IV can shoot in the 100,000 range but I hate the images that come out of it. I rarely push it past 6400 ISO and those would be extremely rare cases where I absolutely have to come back with an image and flash was prohibited.
Yeah those numbers are in good part just a game. Sometimes you might glean a little about how things might differ compared to previous models, but even then you can't be sure. Heck Nikon had an ISO6400 camera back in the pre-20D days I think and we know Nikon could barely, if even, handle ISO800 in a usable fashion then and even Canon got rough at ISO1600 and yet they said they had an ISO6400 cam and what one person thinks is a good point another may differ on by a stop or two. Canon used to be a bit more conservative as to claims in the past then but then switched gears, probably to not sound bad on paper in comparison to other marketing blurbs.
I saw the 1DX at Photoplus, and on the LCD screen, ISO25k images were stunning. I'd say they are on par with ISO400-800 from a 1DS MKII. I'm not one to blow smoke up a company's ass, in fact I feel that Canon has severely dropped the ball on anything made post-1D MKII (with the exception of the 1DS MKIII). I still use 1D MKII and 1DS MKII's, and have yet to feel the need to invest in anything newer, that would take care of both in one (and FF).
Until now. After fully examining it at Photoplus, the 1DX answers all my qualms with a DSLR about still photos, other than faster flash sync speed. Well done, Canon.
 

JR

EOS R
Sep 22, 2011
1,229
0
Canada
Joe J7771 said:
I saw the 1DX at Photoplus, and on the LCD screen, ISO25k images were stunning. I'd say they are on par with ISO400-800 from a 1DS MKII. I'm not one to blow smoke up a company's ass, in fact I feel that Canon has severely dropped the ball on anything made post-1D MKII (with the exception of the 1DS MKIII). I still use 1D MKII and 1DS MKII's, and have yet to feel the need to invest in anything newer, that would take care of both in one (and FF).
Until now. After fully examining it at Photoplus, the 1DX answers all my qualms with a DSLR about still photos, other than faster flash sync speed. Well done, Canon.
Wow! Were you able to take sots with a memory card in by any chance? Ok ok am dreaming now! I so cant wait to see real RAW image from this puppy! Looks promissing indeed...