Now that the D4s is introduced, what's next at Canon?

[Loswr]

Not just that, but prior to release of 70D, D7100 and D7000 pretty much whacked Canon's a$# for the prosumer's segment.

Perhaps it depends on how you define the segment, but the 'prosumer' 7D was a better choice than the D7000, and despite its age the 7D remains competitive with the D7100. Did Nikon just abandon the D300s? It wasn't much competition for the 7D anyway.

I don't see any need to upgrade from my previous 550D to 700D, which is a really sad thing. Three cameras since then and not much change!

Nor should there be – at the consumer level, people want this year's model (or last year's model at a discount), so vendors feed that by releasing a new model every year, each one a minor improvement over the last. The 650D got the xxD's AF system, a significant improvement. The 7D's AF sensor is now in the xxD line, and will eventually make it to the xxxD series.

Fundamentally, though, the Rebel/xxxD line will remain what it is...Canon wants you to think 'upgrade' means an xxD or xD body.

 

[Ivar]

As already covered in previous threads I think there is no threat to the 1Dx.

 

[BL]

but if video is your thing, the D4s is very attractive with 1080/60p for slowmo and headphone monitoring.

i take better video with my phone than SLR ;D

 

[CarlTN]

but if video is your thing, the D4s is very attractive with 1080/60p for slowmo and headphone monitoring.

i take better video with my phone than SLR ;D

I didn't realize the 1DX couldn't do 1080/60p...but I guess that's why they want you to buy their cinema cameras.

 

[BL]

I think they leave out those things to upsell folks to the 1DC

 

[canon1dxman]

See the idiotic comment at the end. I sent in a comment 2 days ago but it is awaiting moderation............

http://blog.iamnikon.com/en_GB/product-news/nikon-d4s-review-experts-verdict-bob-martin/

 

[slclick]

Why, the 1DX-W of course!

 

[CarlTN]

See the idiotic comment at the end. I sent in a comment 2 days ago but it is awaiting moderation............

http://blog.iamnikon.com/en_GB/product-news/nikon-d4s-review-experts-verdict-bob-martin/

I agree, the guy is very biased. Never mentions how it compares to the 1DX, or even mentions the 1DX. Could that be because he's never used one? I can only guess that he has not. Obviously he's a committed Nikon and Ashton Kutcher lover.

Have any of you...anyone on Canon Rumors' forum...seen an unbiased test of the D4s, or better yet, a comparison of it and the 1DX?

I suspect there are things it might do better than the 1DX, but I doubt it can autofocus better...and it certainly still can't shoot as many fps. Seems like the only definite thing it can do better, is last longer on a battery. And why is that? Does it not use the same 18650 tri-cell pack? If so...it seems to me that a camera would last longer, if its digital processing used less energy. And that could at least partly be because, it has less processing power...It needs less for one basic reason. It has 16 MP vs. 18 MP...but also, the processor that controls autofocus, very likely uses a lot less power than the 1DX's autofocus processor (it's a "Digic 4").

I suspect that the 1DX replacement, probably still won't last as long on a charge, as the D4s, even if it has more efficient processing and better batteries...because Canon will still opt for the maximum processing they can cram in there!

 

[sagittariansrock]

See the idiotic comment at the end. I sent in a comment 2 days ago but it is awaiting moderation............

http://blog.iamnikon.com/en_GB/product-news/nikon-d4s-review-experts-verdict-bob-martin/

I agree, the guy is very biased. Never mentions how it compares to the 1DX, or even mentions the 1DX. Could that be because he's never used one? I can only guess that he has not. Obviously he's a committed Nikon and Ashton Kutcher lover.

Have any of you...anyone on Canon Rumors' forum...seen an unbiased test of the D4s, or better yet, a comparison of it and the 1DX?

I suspect there are things it might do better than the 1DX, but I doubt it can autofocus better...and it certainly still can't shoot as many fps. Seems like the only definite thing it can do better, is last longer on a battery. And why is that? Does it not use the same 18650 tri-cell pack? If so...it seems to me that a camera would last longer, if its digital processing used less energy. And that could at least partly be because, it has less processing power...It needs less for one basic reason. It has 16 MP vs. 18 MP...but also, the processor that controls autofocus, very likely uses a lot less power than the 1DX's autofocus processor (it's a "Digic 4").

I suspect that the 1DX replacement, probably still won't last as long on a charge, as the D4s, even if it has more efficient processing and better batteries...because Canon will still opt for the maximum processing they can cram in there!

Efficiency does not necessarily have to compromise processing power. If you notice, successive generations of Intel processors have gotten more powerful AND more energy-efficient.

 

[Loswr]

...the processor that controls autofocus, very likely uses a lot less power than the 1DX's autofocus processor (it's a "Digic 4")

The Digic4 chip in the 1D X processes only data from the 100,000-pixel RGB metering sensor. The Digic4 chip is not the AF processor, although it does feed data to the AF processor to support 'intelligent tracking and recognition' (iTR, which uses size/shape/color for AI Servo tracking).

 

[CarlTN]

See the idiotic comment at the end. I sent in a comment 2 days ago but it is awaiting moderation............

http://blog.iamnikon.com/en_GB/product-news/nikon-d4s-review-experts-verdict-bob-martin/

I agree, the guy is very biased. Never mentions how it compares to the 1DX, or even mentions the 1DX. Could that be because he's never used one? I can only guess that he has not. Obviously he's a committed Nikon and Ashton Kutcher lover.

Have any of you...anyone on Canon Rumors' forum...seen an unbiased test of the D4s, or better yet, a comparison of it and the 1DX?

I suspect there are things it might do better than the 1DX, but I doubt it can autofocus better...and it certainly still can't shoot as many fps. Seems like the only definite thing it can do better, is last longer on a battery. And why is that? Does it not use the same 18650 tri-cell pack? If so...it seems to me that a camera would last longer, if its digital processing used less energy. And that could at least partly be because, it has less processing power...It needs less for one basic reason. It has 16 MP vs. 18 MP...but also, the processor that controls autofocus, very likely uses a lot less power than the 1DX's autofocus processor (it's a "Digic 4").

I suspect that the 1DX replacement, probably still won't last as long on a charge, as the D4s, even if it has more efficient processing and better batteries...because Canon will still opt for the maximum processing they can cram in there!

Efficiency does not necessarily have to compromise processing power. If you notice, successive generations of Intel processors have gotten more powerful AND more energy-efficient.

Kind of an apples and oranges comparison there, though. Canon aren't manufacturing the processors, are they?

 

[CarlTN]

...the processor that controls autofocus, very likely uses a lot less power than the 1DX's autofocus processor (it's a "Digic 4")

The Digic4 chip in the 1D X processes only data from the 100,000-pixel RGB metering sensor. The Digic4 chip is not the AF processor, although it does feed data to the AF processor to support 'intelligent tracking and recognition' (iTR, which uses size/shape/color for AI Servo tracking).

Interesting. In any case, it seems to me the 1DX requires more processing power than the D4 or D4s. It's possible that just running that extra Digic4 processor uses up a lot of power. Unless you think the power is being sucked up elsewhere...by the shutter and reflex mirror motors or something. The LCD screen surely does not use any more power than the one Nikon uses...they might even be the same screen, I forget.

 

[sagittariansrock]

See the idiotic comment at the end. I sent in a comment 2 days ago but it is awaiting moderation............

http://blog.iamnikon.com/en_GB/product-news/nikon-d4s-review-experts-verdict-bob-martin/

I agree, the guy is very biased. Never mentions how it compares to the 1DX, or even mentions the 1DX. Could that be because he's never used one? I can only guess that he has not. Obviously he's a committed Nikon and Ashton Kutcher lover.

Have any of you...anyone on Canon Rumors' forum...seen an unbiased test of the D4s, or better yet, a comparison of it and the 1DX?

I suspect there are things it might do better than the 1DX, but I doubt it can autofocus better...and it certainly still can't shoot as many fps. Seems like the only definite thing it can do better, is last longer on a battery. And why is that? Does it not use the same 18650 tri-cell pack? If so...it seems to me that a camera would last longer, if its digital processing used less energy. And that could at least partly be because, it has less processing power...It needs less for one basic reason. It has 16 MP vs. 18 MP...but also, the processor that controls autofocus, very likely uses a lot less power than the 1DX's autofocus processor (it's a "Digic 4").

I suspect that the 1DX replacement, probably still won't last as long on a charge, as the D4s, even if it has more efficient processing and better batteries...because Canon will still opt for the maximum processing they can cram in there!

Efficiency does not necessarily have to compromise processing power. If you notice, successive generations of Intel processors have gotten more powerful AND more energy-efficient.

Kind of an apples and oranges comparison there, though. Canon aren't manufacturing the processors, are they?

Why is that relevant? Neither is Intel using (the bulk of) the processors they make.
While I agree that Canon will opt for as much processing power as they can get, poorer battery life than 1Dx, however unimportant in real life, will look bad for marketing.
Note how Macbooks have gone more powerful but Apple has tried to maintain, if not increase, the battery life. (more apples to apples, pun not intended, this time?)

 

[CarlTN]

See the idiotic comment at the end. I sent in a comment 2 days ago but it is awaiting moderation............

http://blog.iamnikon.com/en_GB/product-news/nikon-d4s-review-experts-verdict-bob-martin/

I agree, the guy is very biased. Never mentions how it compares to the 1DX, or even mentions the 1DX. Could that be because he's never used one? I can only guess that he has not. Obviously he's a committed Nikon and Ashton Kutcher lover.

Have any of you...anyone on Canon Rumors' forum...seen an unbiased test of the D4s, or better yet, a comparison of it and the 1DX?

I suspect there are things it might do better than the 1DX, but I doubt it can autofocus better...and it certainly still can't shoot as many fps. Seems like the only definite thing it can do better, is last longer on a battery. And why is that? Does it not use the same 18650 tri-cell pack? If so...it seems to me that a camera would last longer, if its digital processing used less energy. And that could at least partly be because, it has less processing power...It needs less for one basic reason. It has 16 MP vs. 18 MP...but also, the processor that controls autofocus, very likely uses a lot less power than the 1DX's autofocus processor (it's a "Digic 4").

I suspect that the 1DX replacement, probably still won't last as long on a charge, as the D4s, even if it has more efficient processing and better batteries...because Canon will still opt for the maximum processing they can cram in there!

Efficiency does not necessarily have to compromise processing power. If you notice, successive generations of Intel processors have gotten more powerful AND more energy-efficient.

Kind of an apples and oranges comparison there, though. Canon aren't manufacturing the processors, are they?

Why is that relevant? Neither is Intel using (the bulk of) the processors they make.
While I agree that Canon will opt for as much processing power as they can get, poorer battery life than 1Dx, however unimportant in real life, will look bad for marketing.
Note how Macbooks have gone more powerful but Apple has tried to maintain, if not increase, the battery life. (more apples to apples, pun not intended, this time?)

Forgive my simplemindedness, then. I just didn't see it as a relevant comparison. Pro cameras are not glorified toys, like most Apple products. But you are right...cameras are not using the latest battery technology, it seems to me. The 18650 battery is kind of old tech...and yet for its weight, it does seem to produce a lot of power, and last a long time. Also doesn't operate at a high temperature like those flat batteries the laptops and iPads use. They also have forced air fan cooling...

I still would like to know, exactly how much power the D4s consumes, on average...is it less than what the 1DX consumes, on average? And for that matter, are the cells in the D4s battery pack, made of 18650 batteries, or not?

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Have any of you...anyone on Canon Rumors' forum...seen an unbiased test of the D4s, or better yet, a comparison of it and the 1DX?

I have 2 friends locally who just snagged the D4s. No, this isn't a comparison of the 1dx, more just about the d4s. Ok, one of the guys was upgrading from the D3 so he is absolutely in love with it. the other upgraded from a D4, and he likes it but isn't blown away by it (this guy has serious GAS though, he bought a d800, didn't like it, sold it for the d4, then sold the d4 for the d4s --- while all the while and still even saying he may buy a 5d3....lol)

So take that as you want ...again, not a comparison to the 1dx at all (I only personally know 1 shooter with a 1dx, he's one of the older more established guys in town). so there just aren't any out there to do the full comparison and I'm not renting one just to compare...!!!!)

 

[ktatty]

i had the d4 from the time it came out until i moved to canon(more for the 5d than the 1d)
the d4s is basically the same camera as the d4- it is supposed to focus a little better, have less of a viewfinder blackout in rapid shooting(which i never noticed on the d4), and have less shutter noise.
nothing significant- but a higher price

 

[CarlTN]

Have any of you...anyone on Canon Rumors' forum...seen an unbiased test of the D4s, or better yet, a comparison of it and the 1DX?

I have 2 friends locally who just snagged the D4s. No, this isn't a comparison of the 1dx, more just about the d4s. Ok, one of the guys was upgrading from the D3 so he is absolutely in love with it. the other upgraded from a D4, and he likes it but isn't blown away by it (this guy has serious GAS though, he bought a d800, didn't like it, sold it for the d4, then sold the d4 for the d4s --- while all the while and still even saying he may buy a 5d3....lol)

So take that as you want ...again, not a comparison to the 1dx at all (I only personally know 1 shooter with a 1dx, he's one of the older more established guys in town). so there just aren't any out there to do the full comparison and I'm not renting one just to compare...!!!!)

Thanks for the anecdote, and I didn't ask you to rent one, lol.

 

[CarlTN]

i had the d4 from the time it came out until i moved to canon(more for the 5d than the 1d)
the d4s is basically the same camera as the d4- it is supposed to focus a little better, have less of a viewfinder blackout in rapid shooting(which i never noticed on the d4), and have less shutter noise.
nothing significant- but a higher price

Everybody who has looked at the D4s info page could say this much.

 

[sagittariansrock]

See the idiotic comment at the end. I sent in a comment 2 days ago but it is awaiting moderation............

http://blog.iamnikon.com/en_GB/product-news/nikon-d4s-review-experts-verdict-bob-martin/

I agree, the guy is very biased. Never mentions how it compares to the 1DX, or even mentions the 1DX. Could that be because he's never used one? I can only guess that he has not. Obviously he's a committed Nikon and Ashton Kutcher lover.

Have any of you...anyone on Canon Rumors' forum...seen an unbiased test of the D4s, or better yet, a comparison of it and the 1DX?

I suspect there are things it might do better than the 1DX, but I doubt it can autofocus better...and it certainly still can't shoot as many fps. Seems like the only definite thing it can do better, is last longer on a battery. And why is that? Does it not use the same 18650 tri-cell pack? If so...it seems to me that a camera would last longer, if its digital processing used less energy. And that could at least partly be because, it has less processing power...It needs less for one basic reason. It has 16 MP vs. 18 MP...but also, the processor that controls autofocus, very likely uses a lot less power than the 1DX's autofocus processor (it's a "Digic 4").

I suspect that the 1DX replacement, probably still won't last as long on a charge, as the D4s, even if it has more efficient processing and better batteries...because Canon will still opt for the maximum processing they can cram in there!

Efficiency does not necessarily have to compromise processing power. If you notice, successive generations of Intel processors have gotten more powerful AND more energy-efficient.

Kind of an apples and oranges comparison there, though. Canon aren't manufacturing the processors, are they?

Why is that relevant? Neither is Intel using (the bulk of) the processors they make.
While I agree that Canon will opt for as much processing power as they can get, poorer battery life than 1Dx, however unimportant in real life, will look bad for marketing.
Note how Macbooks have gone more powerful but Apple has tried to maintain, if not increase, the battery life. (more apples to apples, pun not intended, this time?)

Forgive my simplemindedness, then. I just didn't see it as a relevant comparison. Pro cameras are not glorified toys, like most Apple products. But you are right...cameras are not using the latest battery technology, it seems to me. The 18650 battery is kind of old tech...and yet for its weight, it does seem to produce a lot of power, and last a long time. Also doesn't operate at a high temperature like those flat batteries the laptops and iPads use. They also have forced air fan cooling...

I still would like to know, exactly how much power the D4s consumes, on average...is it less than what the 1DX consumes, on average? And for that matter, are the cells in the D4s battery pack, made of 18650 batteries, or not?

Okay, maybe not the most appropriate example- I get your point.
What I said was processing power doesn't need to compromise efficiency.
An example closer to home: 5D III vs 5D II- 950 shots vs 850, using the same battery.

In any case why am I even discussing D4s and 1D X. I won't ever be able to afford any of those. Okay, peace... :-X

 

[CarlTN]

See the idiotic comment at the end. I sent in a comment 2 days ago but it is awaiting moderation............

http://blog.iamnikon.com/en_GB/product-news/nikon-d4s-review-experts-verdict-bob-martin/

I agree, the guy is very biased. Never mentions how it compares to the 1DX, or even mentions the 1DX. Could that be because he's never used one? I can only guess that he has not. Obviously he's a committed Nikon and Ashton Kutcher lover.

Have any of you...anyone on Canon Rumors' forum...seen an unbiased test of the D4s, or better yet, a comparison of it and the 1DX?

I suspect there are things it might do better than the 1DX, but I doubt it can autofocus better...and it certainly still can't shoot as many fps. Seems like the only definite thing it can do better, is last longer on a battery. And why is that? Does it not use the same 18650 tri-cell pack? If so...it seems to me that a camera would last longer, if its digital processing used less energy. And that could at least partly be because, it has less processing power...It needs less for one basic reason. It has 16 MP vs. 18 MP...but also, the processor that controls autofocus, very likely uses a lot less power than the 1DX's autofocus processor (it's a "Digic 4").

I suspect that the 1DX replacement, probably still won't last as long on a charge, as the D4s, even if it has more efficient processing and better batteries...because Canon will still opt for the maximum processing they can cram in there!

Efficiency does not necessarily have to compromise processing power. If you notice, successive generations of Intel processors have gotten more powerful AND more energy-efficient.

Kind of an apples and oranges comparison there, though. Canon aren't manufacturing the processors, are they?

Why is that relevant? Neither is Intel using (the bulk of) the processors they make.
While I agree that Canon will opt for as much processing power as they can get, poorer battery life than 1Dx, however unimportant in real life, will look bad for marketing.
Note how Macbooks have gone more powerful but Apple has tried to maintain, if not increase, the battery life. (more apples to apples, pun not intended, this time?)

Forgive my simplemindedness, then. I just didn't see it as a relevant comparison. Pro cameras are not glorified toys, like most Apple products. But you are right...cameras are not using the latest battery technology, it seems to me. The 18650 battery is kind of old tech...and yet for its weight, it does seem to produce a lot of power, and last a long time. Also doesn't operate at a high temperature like those flat batteries the laptops and iPads use. They also have forced air fan cooling...

I still would like to know, exactly how much power the D4s consumes, on average...is it less than what the 1DX consumes, on average? And for that matter, are the cells in the D4s battery pack, made of 18650 batteries, or not?

Okay, maybe not the most appropriate example- I get your point.
What I said was processing power doesn't need to compromise efficiency.
An example closer to home: 5D III vs 5D II- 950 shots vs 850, using the same battery.

In any case why am I even discussing D4s and 1D X. I won't ever be able to afford any of those. Okay, peace... :-X

Haha, never say never! I agree, power efficiency does not always factor in. If a processor is designed to better make use of the power it consumes, then it could obviously peform more computing tasks with the same or less power consumption.