# Off Brand: Nikon Announces the D4S



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 25, 2014)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/02/off-brand-nikon-announced-the-d4s/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/02/off-brand-nikon-announced-the-d4s/">Tweet</a></div>
<p>Nikon has officially announced the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1024081-REG/nikon_d4s_digital_slr_camera.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">D4S flagship camera body</a>. There have been a lot of performance boosts as compared to the D4, such as a “newly designed” 16.2mp sensor, a new EXPEED processor, the ability to get to ISO 409600. There have also been tweaks to video, workflow and autofocus settings, though the AF system has remained the same.</p>
<p><strong>Product Highlights</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>16.2MP FX-Format CMOS Sensor</li>
<li>EXPEED 4 Image Processor</li>
<li>3.2″ LCD Monitor</li>
<li>Full HD 1080p Video Recording at 60 fps</li>
<li>Multi-CAM 3500FX 51-Point AF Sensor</li>
<li>Native ISO 25600, Extended to ISO 409600</li>
<li>11 fps Shooting for 200 Shots with AE/AF</li>
<li>91k-Pixel RGB Sensor and Group Area AF</li>
<li>14-Bit RAW Files and 12-Bit RAW S Format</li>
<li>1000 Base-T Gigabit Wired LAN Support</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>EOS-1D X Replacement?

</strong>Not this year, though I wouldn’t be surprised to see an EOS-1D C replacement. I think the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/827036-REG/Canon_5253B002_EOS_1D_X_EOS_Digital.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">EOS-1D X</a> is still a world class capable body and Canon should be in no rush to replace it. Most people I talk to don’t want incremental updates, such as the perception with D4 to the D4S (again, image quality may change that opinion). The EOS-1D X should remain current well into 2015.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1024081-REG/nikon_d4s_digital_slr_camera.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">Nikon D4S</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/827036-REG/Canon_5253B002_EOS_1D_X_EOS_Digital.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Canon EOS-1D X</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 25, 2014)

To those who say "Canon is not innovative," can now boast of Nikon innovation with ISO 409600. I do not know what use it but the marketing arrange one.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 25, 2014)

After two years or whatever and everything updated, except for some video rubbish, it's still a step or two behind the 1dx, well done Canon. When they go all in, it's simply epic...


----------



## tiger82 (Feb 25, 2014)

I'm disappointed that the Nikon D4S is only 16.1MP. I was hoping it would exceed the 1DX with 24MP and put pressure on Canon which would in turn put price pressure on the 1Dx to make it more affordable and certainly downward pressure on the 5D3 and 1D4. Right now, it still looks like Nikon is still playing catch up.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 25, 2014)

tiger82 said:


> I'm disappointed that the Nikon D4S is only 16.1MP. I was hoping it would exceed the 1DX with 24MP and put pressure on Canon which would in turn put price pressure on the 1Dx to make it more affordable and certainly downward pressure on the 5D3 and 1D4. Right now, it still looks like Nikon is still playing catch up.


I do not criticize the fact that "only" 16 megapixels, which is sufficient for the intended use in journalism. In fact, I wish 7D Mark ii had 16 megapixel, and without DPAF to make the most improved noise at ISO 3200.


----------



## docsmith (Feb 25, 2014)

From what I can see the "big" improvement is in the 1080p @ 60 fps video. 

People that can afford to buy the D4S will know that it is how clean the image is at that ISO setting that matters. 

...and...of course, we'll have to see what the "new" sensor can do....

I'll be interested in what others see, but I read through this and am mostly "meh"....I mean if someone gave it to me, I'd be happy, but I don't see this one upping the 1DX.


----------



## dstppy (Feb 25, 2014)

That's it! I'm moving to Nik . . . wait a tick . . . where's the anti-Canon outrage here? 

Y'all abandon ship to complain on the Nikon forums? ;D


----------



## scyrene (Feb 25, 2014)

I seem to be in the minority of people who still get excited by increasing maximum ISO speeds. But can someone explain, why/how is it possible that the difference between maximum base ISO (25600) and extended is 4 stops, whereas in Canon cameras (the 1DX/5D3 at least) it is just 2? Does it make a practical difference? Is it just another means of notating it? In my experience (300D->50D->5D3) the highest usable ISO is 1 stop below maximum base ISO (depending on what you're using it for). So extra extended settings would be irrelevant. Is Nikon different?


----------



## AG (Feb 25, 2014)

The Hi4 ISO level is not really much more than a gimmick at this stage in the game. 
What next? ISO 1Million?

Neither will mean bugger all if they don't have super clean iso above say 1600-3200

But if nothing else we can rest assure that this camera will get a perfect DXOMark score no matter how poorly it performs in real life usage. ???


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 25, 2014)

scyrene said:


> I seem to be in the minority of people who still get excited by increasing maximum ISO speeds. But can someone explain, why/how is it possible that the difference between maximum base ISO (25600) and extended is 4 stops, whereas in Canon cameras (the 1DX/5D3 at least) it is just 2? Does it make a practical difference? Is it just another means of notating it? In my experience (300D->50D->5D3) the highest usable ISO is 1 stop below maximum base ISO (depending on what you're using it for). So extra extended settings would be irrelevant. Is Nikon different?


The range of standard ISO uses real analog signal amplifiers in each stage (100, 200, 400, etc.). The expanded ISO range is the same as Photoshop / Lightroom just pulls exposure digitally generating artifacts and random noise difficult to clean.


----------



## canonvoir (Feb 25, 2014)

Nikon just gave Canon another 3 years of 1DX ii development. 

I read the specs this morning of the Nikon and was very surprised to see I thought my 1DX was still king.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 25, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > I seem to be in the minority of people who still get excited by increasing maximum ISO speeds. But can someone explain, why/how is it possible that the difference between maximum base ISO (25600) and extended is 4 stops, whereas in Canon cameras (the 1DX/5D3 at least) it is just 2? Does it make a practical difference? Is it just another means of notating it? In my experience (300D->50D->5D3) the highest usable ISO is 1 stop below maximum base ISO (depending on what you're using it for). So extra extended settings would be irrelevant. Is Nikon different?
> ...



I've heard conflicting reports on this - some people say digital amplification is sometimes used within the non-extended range. But if you're correct, there's no advantage to having 4 extended stops over 2, right?


----------



## polarhannes (Feb 25, 2014)

I'm not really impressed by this announcement.
The 1DX is still far superior.
As other have said, I would have liked to see some pressure on Canon but this announcement is nothing to worry about for them.


----------



## poias (Feb 25, 2014)

All this fuss about a camera that was made obsolete by 1DX 2 years ago. Nikon will be out of business soon so that all remaining people will be joining the Canon camp and taking pictures with our cameras. I am so proud of our engineers who have given us epic cameras and put these nikonians in their place. By the way, have you seen any pulitzer picture taken with the D4? Yeah, thought so.


----------



## Corvi (Feb 25, 2014)

poias said:


> All this fuss about a camera that was made obsolete by 1DX 2 years ago. Nikon will be out of business soon so that all remaining people will be joining the Canon camp and taking pictures with our cameras. I am so proud of our engineers who have given us epic cameras and put these nikonians in their place. By the way, have you seen any pulitzer picture taken with the D4? Yeah, thought so.



Oh boy, thats all it takes to win a pulitzer ? Im off buying a 1DX right now, you can check out my picture later this year when i wont the price ..

Na seriously, do you have an idea how many pulitzers where won with cameras that only had a focus ring, aperture ring and shutter speed dial ?


----------



## mackguyver (Feb 25, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> To those who say "Canon is not innovative," can now boast of Nikon innovation with ISO 409600. I do not know what use it but the marketing arrange one.


That's what caught my eye, too, and as someone who uses ISO 102400 on my 5DIII all the time, I might have to sell all of my Canon gear to get the D4S. I think it will really help with my upcoming series - _Coal Mines by Matchlight_. If I accidentally run into some methane, this might be my last post


----------



## tiger82 (Feb 25, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> That's what caught my eye, too, and as someone who uses ISO 102400 on my 5DIII all the time, I might have to sell all of my Canon gear to get the D4S. I think it will really help with my upcoming series - _Coal Mines by Matchlight_. If I accidentally run into some methane, this might be my last post



I thought you were doing A Bat's Eye View series


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 25, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> To those who say "Canon is not innovative," can now boast of Nikon innovation with ISO 409600. I do not know what use it but the marketing arrange one.


What's the use of ISO 409600 when you can't AF at the light conditions (call it darkness) you want to use that ISO in?
And I don't believe that MF is possible there either, except you have a cat's eyes.


----------



## bseitz234 (Feb 25, 2014)

tiger82 said:


> I thought you were doing A Bat's Eye View series





mackguyver said:


> That's what caught my eye, too, and as someone who uses ISO 102400 on my 5DIII all the time, I might have to sell all of my Canon gear to get the D4S. I think it will really help with my upcoming series - _Coal Mines by Matchlight_. If I accidentally run into some methane, this might be my last post



Both of these posts made my day, and it's not even noon yet. going to be a good day...


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 25, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> 14-Bit RAW Files and 12-Bit RAW S Format


Let's see if DxO can make some 16 steps of DR out of that 
(No, I won't take any bets on that)


----------



## Northstar (Feb 25, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > To those who say "Canon is not innovative," can now boast of Nikon innovation with ISO 409600. I do not know what use it but the marketing arrange one.
> ...



lol


----------



## bdeutsch (Feb 25, 2014)

bseitz234 said:


> tiger82 said:
> 
> 
> > I thought you were doing A Bat's Eye View series
> ...



I agree ... who knew someone could actually be funny in a forum post?! (Particularly in _another_ Canon vs. Nikon thread.) 

Thanks! ;D


Actor Headshots NYC | Gotham Family Photos | NY Wedding Photographer


----------



## Famateur (Feb 25, 2014)

tiger82 said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > That's what caught my eye, too, and as someone who uses ISO 102400 on my 5DIII all the time, I might have to sell all of my Canon gear to get the D4S. I think it will really help with my upcoming series - _Coal Mines by Matchlight_. If I accidentally run into some methane, this might be my last post
> ...



LOL...I see a new gallery thread for showing off super high ISO: BIF - Bats In Flight 

"What, noise? No, that's the swarm of bugs the bats are feeding on..."


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Feb 25, 2014)

If I'm not wrong, Nikon is the only company that went back on their Megapixel count in their flagship cameras and went nuts on increasing MP count on their "second best" cameras.

*In the year 2008*
Nikon released a 24.4 Megapixel Full Frame D3X Camera (at that time it was their flagship camera)
While their second best camera D700 only had 12.1 Megapixel

*In the year 2012*
Nikon decreased the megapixel count on their flagship camera D4 (replacing D3X) by over 65% to only 16.2 MP.
But their "second best" camera D800 (replacing the D700) got a 300% increase to a whopping 36 MP

During this period, (after all this crazy increase/decrease business), they screwed up their flagship speedlite SB900 and "third best" DSLR D600.

As much as I like using some of their products, their logic baffles me ... so I stayed away from their 36 Megapixel business and bought the D610 instead.

After having used a few brands, I feel the Canon 5D MK III is the most balanced camera of any manufacturer ... for me it is the PERFECT all rounder DSLR.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 25, 2014)

scyrene said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...


Indeed 1DX Canon camera is the one that has individual analog amplifiers for the intermediate ISO (ISO 125, 160, 250, 320, etc.). In all others, the ISO intermediaries are also digitally pulled or pushed. So ISO 125 ​​on the 1DX has much cleaner image than ISO 125 ​​on 5D Mark iii, even at ISO 100 noise is the same for both cameras.


----------



## pdirestajr (Feb 25, 2014)

All the talk about the Canon 1Dx vs the D4/s , and referring to one as "king" is just silly. These are cameras made for professionals that use their system of lenses. Talking about "Canon Camp" just sounds like geek fanboys with lots of disposable income that graduated from arguing over Marvel vs DC and Xbox vs Playstation.


----------



## thepancakeman (Feb 25, 2014)

pdirestajr said:


> All the talk about the Canon 1Dx vs the D4/s , and referring to one as "king" is just silly. These are cameras made for professionals that use their system of lenses. Talking about "Canon Camp" just sounds like geek fanboys with lots of disposable income that graduated from arguing over Marvel vs DC and Xbox vs Playstation.



You're right, it's silly to argue, because clearly Canon, Marvel and Playstation are the best. ;D


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Feb 25, 2014)

pdirestajr said:


> All the talk about the Canon 1Dx vs the D4/s , and referring to one as "king" is just silly. These are cameras made for professionals that use their system of lenses. Talking about "Canon Camp" just sounds like geek fanboys with lots of disposable income that graduated from arguing over Marvel vs DC and Xbox vs Playstation.


I always find it funny when people come up with words like "lots of disposable income" etc ... the "lots of disposable money" did not grow on trees, it is hard earned money that people spend on the gear they like ... nothing wrong if they "argue" about their gear of choice ... but reducing/comparing it to some "Marvel vs DC" comics shows little or no understanding of why like minded people come to forums such as CR ... if anything those kind of words show a lame/false attitude of "I'm better than everybody else".


----------



## Maui5150 (Feb 25, 2014)

scyrene said:


> I seem to be in the minority of people who still get excited by increasing maximum ISO speeds. But can someone explain, why/how is it possible that the difference between maximum base ISO (25600) and extended is 4 stops, whereas in Canon cameras (the 1DX/5D3 at least) it is just 2? Does it make a practical difference? Is it just another means of notating it? In my experience (300D->50D->5D3) the highest usable ISO is 1 stop below maximum base ISO (depending on what you're using it for). So extra extended settings would be irrelevant. Is Nikon different?



They could extend it 100 stops if they want. Big question is... how useable / how noisy is it?

Just because the camera says it can do 409600 ISO does not mean you would be happy with it. Until we see what it looks like at these high ISO, only then can we judge what is useable. 

From what I have seen out of the 1Dx, some of the high ISO images are actually quite good. 

Would be interesting to see if the Nikon can capture anything close to this at 25600


----------



## canon1dxman (Feb 25, 2014)

There's a £400 off special offer on the D1X from one UK retailer until Saturday. Nikon did this with the D4.....I wonder......?


----------



## tron (Feb 25, 2014)

thepancakeman said:


> pdirestajr said:
> 
> 
> > All the talk about the Canon 1Dx vs the D4/s , and referring to one as "king" is just silly. These are cameras made for professionals that use their system of lenses. Talking about "Canon Camp" just sounds like geek fanboys with lots of disposable income that graduated from arguing over Marvel vs DC and Xbox vs Playstation.
> ...


 ;D ;D ;D The only comparison that would be hard for me is Warner Bros vs Disney (Looney Tunes vs. Mickey, Donald, etc) ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Feb 25, 2014)

canon1dxman said:


> There's a £400 off special offer on the D1X from one UK retailer until Saturday. Nikon did this with the D4.....I wonder......?


I wonder if £400 makes any big difference in stopping people from jumping ship (from Canon to Nikon) ... I mean people who buy such an expensive camera usually have bag full of L glass and assuming if Nikon did come up with a superior camera, I don't think people with that kind of investment would jump ship ... and I don't think £400 discount will make any difference in such a scenario.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Feb 25, 2014)

It was a major let-down from the rumored specs. They upgraded the image processor for an extra ISO stop. Sounds like a firmware upgrade could've done that....

1DX is still King.... And won't be replaced until 2015 at the earliest....


----------



## Aglet (Feb 25, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > To those who say "Canon is not innovative," can now boast of Nikon innovation with ISO 409600. I do not know what use it but the marketing arrange one.
> ...



if you have G.A.S. ...


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Feb 25, 2014)

tron said:


> ;D ;D ;D The only comparison that would be hard for me is Warner Bros vs Disney (Looney Tunes vs. Mickey, Donald, etc) ;D ;D ;D


Why so hard? Mickey is better/smarter then Donald ;D ;D ;D


----------



## tron (Feb 25, 2014)

Rienzphotoz said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > ;D ;D ;D The only comparison that would be hard for me is Warner Bros vs Disney (Looney Tunes vs. Mickey, Donald, etc) ;D ;D ;D
> ...


They are both Disney so no comparison! The comparison I mentioned was Warner Bros vs Disney!


----------



## canon1dxman (Feb 25, 2014)

Rienzphotoz said:


> canon1dxman said:
> 
> 
> > There's a £400 off special offer on the D1X from one UK retailer until Saturday. Nikon did this with the D4.....I wonder......?
> ...



I totally agree. What I was getting at was that many UK dealers were offering £400 trade in against the D4, just before the D4S was outed by Nikon so I wondered if this was something to confirm that an announcement was coming in March.


----------



## cellomaster27 (Feb 25, 2014)

The D4s is an upgrade from the D4.. I think enough for people to sell their D4 to get the D4s. But I must say/agree that the 1Dx is still on top. I never doubted that the 1Dx was lacking and it shows that Nikon isn't up to snuff with Canon's flagship. 8) But I'm really wondering what the ISO capabilities are.. a new sensor! not from the D4 and Df! 400k is RIDICULOUS. Doubt that'll be flattering but 100k iso?? or even 50k iso might be really good. and DR.


----------



## tron (Feb 25, 2014)

cellomaster27 said:


> The D4s is an upgrade from the D4.. I think enough for people to sell their D4 to get the D4s. But I must say/agree that the 1Dx is still on top. I never doubted that the 1Dx was lacking and it shows that Nikon isn't up to snuff with Canon's flagship. 8) But I'm really wondering what the ISO capabilities are.. a new sensor! not from the D4 and Df! 400k is RIDICULOUS. Doubt that'll be flattering but 100k iso?? or even 50k iso might be really good. and DR.


We will have to see RAW comparisons. Plus, the max native ISO of 1Dx is 50K and D4s' is 25K...


----------



## abouho (Feb 25, 2014)

tron said:


> cellomaster27 said:
> 
> 
> > The D4s is an upgrade from the D4.. I think enough for people to sell their D4 to get the D4s. But I must say/agree that the 1Dx is still on top. I never doubted that the 1Dx was lacking and it shows that Nikon isn't up to snuff with Canon's flagship. 8) But I'm really wondering what the ISO capabilities are.. a new sensor! not from the D4 and Df! 400k is RIDICULOUS. Doubt that'll be flattering but 100k iso?? or even 50k iso might be really good. and DR.
> ...



I can provide RAW comparisons between the 1DX and D4 if anyone is interested.

As a person who owns both, I find the Nikon to be far superior in terms of noise performance at high ISO settings and focus tracking during high speed bursts, among other things. 

The fact that Nikon improved ISO performance and auto focus should be putting Canon under pressure but unfortunately, the 1DX looks better on paper, and that's what most people seem to care about more than anything.


----------



## lycan (Feb 25, 2014)

abouho said:


> As a person who owns both, I find the Nikon to be far superior in terms of noise performance at high ISO settings and focus tracking during high speed bursts, among other things.
> .




hmmmm that's why the large majority of sports photographers use Canon 1DX, right? They all must be stupid to use an inferior machine...... come on!


----------



## abouho (Feb 25, 2014)

lycan said:


> abouho said:
> 
> 
> > As a person who owns both, I find the Nikon to be far superior in terms of noise performance at high ISO settings and focus tracking during high speed bursts, among other things.
> ...



Most of them use the inferior machine because their lens collection will not attach to the superior one.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 25, 2014)

Maui5150 said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > I seem to be in the minority of people who still get excited by increasing maximum ISO speeds. But can someone explain, why/how is it possible that the difference between maximum base ISO (25600) and extended is 4 stops, whereas in Canon cameras (the 1DX/5D3 at least) it is just 2? Does it make a practical difference? Is it just another means of notating it? In my experience (300D->50D->5D3) the highest usable ISO is 1 stop below maximum base ISO (depending on what you're using it for). So extra extended settings would be irrelevant. Is Nikon different?
> ...



That kind of backs up my rule of thumb, being shot 1 stop below the maximum native ISO (although for that sort of shot, more noise is probably acceptable than a bird portrait, for instance).


----------



## cellomaster27 (Feb 25, 2014)

lycan said:


> abouho said:
> 
> 
> > As a person who owns both, I find the Nikon to be far superior in terms of noise performance at high ISO settings and focus tracking during high speed bursts, among other things.
> ...



The 1Dx is superior in most things except for, and I agree with the ISO. but fps is faster, tracking is really good... I thought focus tracking on the D4 was worse than the 1Dx.


----------



## DIABLO (Feb 25, 2014)

tron said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...




Warner Bros hands down! I'll take that wascally wabbit and Wile E. Coyote over any disney character any day of the week.


----------



## abouho (Feb 25, 2014)

cellomaster27 said:


> lycan said:
> 
> 
> > abouho said:
> ...



If you set second shot priority to focus on both cameras, the D4 will only shoot when something (literally anything behind your focus point, including infinity) is in focus while the 1DX seems to take tons of shots where nothing in the frame seems to be in focus. Also, if you set the D4 to 3D tracking, it avoids jumping from close distances to infinity, seeing as how people are unlikely to travel that fast.


----------



## MovingViolations (Feb 25, 2014)

I wouldn't mind having a 1DX on one hip and a D4s on the other. One thing I fault Canon on is there lack of images for us to tinker with from the 1DX. All this time and they seem to think we all are going to be shooting a great white all the time. Canon touted the 1DX as the all purpose body so why didn't they put up some images with a 17 t/s and a 24 t/s lens for landscape shooters? And why the portrait photos taken down with nothing put up to replace them? I have no doubts as to the 1DX being a great all around body but I'd still like to see what it can do on paper from my large format printer from the kind of glass I'd like to use. Canon has the glass for great landscapes and architectural work but for the very large prints Nikon (aka Sony) has the sensor. Nikon dust & oil problems bother me. Pins falling into the bodies from cable connections don't speak well for Nikon either. There is a reason the 5D MIII is still priced higher than the 36mp Nikon/Sony D800 and I think it is body quality. For now I'm still going to shoot my decade old 1D MII. 2015 will get here and maybe Canon will leap frog the D4s in a big way. Now they are not that far apart. Just give us a clean shot @ ISO 6400 Canon.... I much preferred Canon's old marketing of a studio/landscape model with full frame sensor and then the 1D with the APS-H sensor for high speed sports. 20 MP on the H and 24 on a full frame would suit me fine. I don't see any incentive to jump ship to a D4S for those with a 1DX. On the other hand if one has limited glass and a 7D then after the pundits make their rounds and some real world images are available to critique the D4S could steal a few 1DX sales.........


----------



## Niki (Feb 25, 2014)

Viggo said:


> After two years or whatever and everything updated, except for some video rubbish, it's still a step or two behind the 1dx, well done Canon. When they go all in, it's simply epic...




+1

Im also getting the 1Dc (if there is an update this year)


----------



## Robert Welch (Feb 25, 2014)

tron said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



Well, Bugs Bunny is clearly smarter than Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck put together. Actually, putting Donald Duck with Mickey Mouse just makes Mickey dumber...so I guess that was dumb anyway.


----------



## Rowbear (Feb 25, 2014)

Robert Welch said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Rienzphotoz said:
> ...



Maybe, but Mickey does it with Minnie...Grrrrr


----------



## Viggo (Feb 25, 2014)

I'm going to say something about the D4, the AF system for tracking is superb, there, I said it. If you spend time learning the 1dx AF, it will perform better in complex situations, but both out of the box just tracking , the D4 works better by default, seriously good. Shot loads of bursts of cyclists dodging cars in traffic, and don't think I had one single shot oof, and I kept the button down. I was shooting the 85 1.8.

But, with erratic subjects and backlit and with things suddenly appears and pretty much any crazy movement the 1dx, with a little fiddling , the 1dx is sooo fast and accurate and just gets more keepers for me.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 25, 2014)

Viggo said:


> I'm going to say something about the D4, the AF system for tracking is superb, there, I said it. If you spend time learning the 1dx AF, it will perform better in complex situations, but both out of the box just tracking , the D4 works better by default, seriously good. Shot loads of bursts of cyclists dodging cars in traffic, and don't think I had one single shot oof, and I kept the button down. I was shooting the 85 1.8.
> 
> But, with erratic subjects and backlit and with things suddenly appears and pretty much any crazy movement the 1dx, with a little fiddling , the 1dx is sooo fast and accurate and just gets more keepers for me.



The AF system wasn't the issue with the D4...it was the constant lockups and other issues, which generally point out that it was rushed to market without the proper R&D that a top tier camera needs. It's a pity Nikon have sullied their brand with a lot of pros and there's a number of quite bitter guys out there who are very dissapointed and feel let down bu Nikon after such high hopes after the D700/D3. 
While it's nice to see the D4s fix these vices...it's got a price hike and I really hope for Nikon that it's an improvement in reliability. As far as its specs....it looks to be worse on paper than a 1DX in almost every measurable metric, which is a pity. 
While it's a nice camera for those already on a Nikon mount, i'm not so sure it'll attract new buyers and i'm pretty certain that there will be almost zero cross over from the Canon 1Dx.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Feb 26, 2014)

scyrene said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...


Whenever you want a clean image, you wouln't ever use the ISO expansion. My experience is that usable images can only be obtained 1-stop of ISO below the maximum native ISO range.


----------



## pedro (Feb 26, 2014)

*Whenever you want a clean image, you wouln't ever use the ISO expansion. My experience is that usable images can only be obtained 1-stop of ISO below the maximum native ISO range.*
[/quote]


Thank you for this statement. Never heard of that before. Altough I like it a lot to fiddle with my extended ISOs, I will consider it sometime further down the road if I have the chance to "replace" my current cam. However, it remains the finest cam I've ever had for quite some time.


----------



## canonvoir (Feb 26, 2014)

The real pity is that Canon doesn't have to raise their game that much to keep their lead. That is a loss for all consumers.


----------



## mackguyver (Feb 26, 2014)

I was right, ISO 409600 is going to revolutionize shooting! Look at the fine details and complete lack of artifacts on this shot! Coal mines, Mammoth caves, and Marianas Trench here I come!






Full comparison here: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1375310&p=8784844&viewfull=1#post8784844

It's a funny one, BTW, because the guy with the D4 has every shot in focus, and the guy shooting the D4S...not so much...


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 26, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> I was right, ISO 409600 is going to revolutionize shooting! Look at the fine details and complete lack of artifacts on this shot! Coal mines, Mammoth caves, and Marianas Trench here I come!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To me it seems a "special defect". Should serve to make photo identity document at night with the lights off. Ah Nikon marketing.


----------



## tron (Feb 26, 2014)

The difference in focusing is so much that they should repeat the shooting. This is not an advertisement for D4s. It is the opposite!

Having said that it is obviously better than D4 at high ISO...

P.S Does it support AFMA? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Orangutan (Feb 26, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> I was right, ISO 409600 is going to revolutionize shooting! Look at the fine details and complete lack of artifacts on this shot! Coal mines, Mammoth caves, and Marianas Trench here I come!



What's interesting is that ISO 409600 isn't labeled the way other high-ISO modes are, it's labeled "P" for "paparazzo." Quality needs to be just good enough to sell to a tabloid.


----------



## Woody (Feb 26, 2014)

Nikon's timing is pretty awful: to release the D600 product advisory so soon after announcement of D4s? Sigh...


----------



## dstppy (Feb 26, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> I was right, ISO 409600 is going to revolutionize shooting! Look at the fine details and complete lack of artifacts on this shot! Coal mines, Mammoth caves, and Marianas Trench here I come!



Send me your vacation shots of Barad-dûr ;D


----------



## weixing (Feb 26, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> I was right, ISO 409600 is going to revolutionize shooting! Look at the fine details and complete lack of artifacts on this shot! Coal mines, Mammoth caves, and Marianas Trench here I come!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Look like a mosaic... may be Nikon should call this the "mosaic mode". ;D

Have a nice day.


----------



## pedro (Feb 26, 2014)

Well, I am looking forward to Canon's improvement in high ISO IQ in the next 6 to 7 years. Hoping that it pays off well for a next 5D allrounder cam. A 5DV in my case...

Wish they reduced pixel count back to 20 MP like the 6D in their next 5D bodies. 

As I am neither a pro nor do have the budget for 1Dx ish bodies. 

Alernate Track: If Canon keep the MPs at 20 for their next 6D outings I could swap my 5D for one of these, as I don't do sports, mostly low light without fast movement (nightscapes).

I'd like to see a Canon FF body with higly usable "native" ISO 51k or even 102k in the 5D and 6D segment within the next 7 years. But anyway, as I've learned by experts here, even 1/2 to 1 stop of improvement in RAW will be a great achievement. We'll see. The 409600k look intriguing to me... I just dare to think what it looks like 7 years from now... Canon, do you read me? ;-)


----------



## sdsr (Feb 26, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> I was right, ISO 409600 is going to revolutionize shooting! Look at the fine details and complete lack of artifacts on this shot! Coal mines, Mammoth caves, and Marianas Trench here I come!
> 
> It's a funny one, BTW, because the guy with the D4 has every shot in focus, and the guy shooting the D4S...not so much...



Aside from that, what struck me most in these photos was the horrible greenish patches on the model's skin (far worse on the D4 than the D4S), like an exaggeration of the green bias seen on many JPEGs, camera monitors and viewfinders in recent FF Nikon dslrs. I hope the RAW files aren't similarly infected.


----------



## willis (Feb 26, 2014)

And most likely Nikon had to fix that backfocus issue what they had with D4.


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 27, 2014)

weixing said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > I was right, ISO 409600 is going to revolutionize shooting! Look at the fine details and complete lack of artifacts on this shot! Coal mines, Mammoth caves, and Marianas Trench here I come!
> ...



Just a minute here...that's not bad at all considering it's a 100% crop at ISO 400k. I simply must try this camera now!!


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 27, 2014)

Nalle Puh said:


> exactly
> 
> "let's assume that the sensitivity has increased by a half stop compared to the old D4, it means that Nikon has higher low light sensitivity than the Canon 1dx and if the cameras are exposed equally in terms of time and aperture/ f-stop the results is closer to 1 stop compared to 1DX if the brightness is meassured from the two cameras"



I'm not so sure how the D4s would perform at various ISO levels...just saying this one shot looks better than I recall seeing of what the D4 and 1DX could do at ISO 200k. It's possible this is a jpeg and has various trickery done to it in-camera or something... I don't know. I may be recalling what the RAW ISO 200k images looked like. My cousin has a 1DX, but I've not seen anything out of it over ISO 25k. I need to try it and see. He always wants the best shots and isn't interested in experimenting at the periphery of the performance envelope, but I am.

I really do hate to spend a ton of money renting a D4s and a Nikon lens or two this spring or summer, but this makes me want to. I still STRONGLY dislike Nikon's ergonomics, and pretty much the company itself (for various reasons)...and I still definitely think Canon is and probably always will be the better company, the better camera system...the more successful company...better at designing products...etc...You name it. But if I have to wait til 2016 to try the 1DX successor, trying this D4s would be fun in the mean time, it seems.


----------



## David Hull (Feb 27, 2014)

With regard to the 400k ISO, IMO the real question should be "where does the ability of the AF to work crap out?" Super high ISO isn't of much use if you can't focus clearly.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 27, 2014)

David Hull said:


> With regard to the 400k ISO, IMO the real question should be "where does the ability of the AF to work crap out?" Super high ISO isn't of much use if you can't focus clearly.



I've seen this comment by others also and one answer could be, and this goes for me, it's not about the pitch black use of it, it's about shutter speeds. I often use ISO 5000 outdoor in not too low light to get my 1/1000s-1/4000s shutters. When shooting sports indoors and you want some dof for example, it makes sense to have a very high iso. Have I ever needed above 51k on my 1dx, no, but I like to shoot with the widest of apertures.


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 28, 2014)

Viggo said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > With regard to the 400k ISO, IMO the real question should be "where does the ability of the AF to work crap out?" Super high ISO isn't of much use if you can't focus clearly.
> ...



Well said. I'm really just curious how the rest of the ISO noise levels compare to the 1DX, which I assume we will see in the coming weeks when the tests start getting posted. It's entirely possible the D4S could pull ahead, even though its normal range still does not extend to 52k like the 1DX's. Time will tell. 

I personally could make use of, and have used, ISO 102k with my 6D...but of course the noise is not good, and this was with positive exposure compensation. Not sure it would work at all with no compensation.

But yes, you could not use the D4S for say a 1/5 second exposure at ISO 400k, with a fast aperture lens. Its autofocus wouldn't work, in any case...neither would the 6D's. Although just recently I was able to get my 6D to AF with live view in very dark outdoor conditions, with my Sigma 24mm f/1.8...where the phase AF would not work at all. Obviously this is not a technique that would be useful/reliable for servo tracking, though. But then there are those that think servo AF can't even be done with the 6D in bright noontime.


----------

