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



## pedro (Feb 25, 2014)

Hi, now that the D4s is a fact, what is to be expected by Canon?
We are living in a crazy age. ISO 409600. Looking forward to see some RAW samples...
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d4s


----------



## J.R. (Feb 25, 2014)

This new camera is continuing with the same 16.2MP sensor and 11fps vs. 10fps. Apparently the other changes are also cosmetic in nature.

The ISO 409600 is expanded ISO, let's see what gives


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 25, 2014)

pedro said:


> Hi, now that the D4s is a fact, what is to be expected by Canon?
> We are living in a crazy age. ISO 409600. Looking forward to see some RAW samples...
> http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d4s



Wow I didn't know it was going to go up on the ISO capability. I must now sell all my Canon gear and buy Nikon! Seriously though, I like seeing that...I should read more. Thanks for posting it!

They claim the sensor is “newly designed”…hmm I should rent one of these with their 200 f/2, and see what it can do in the twilight…but I bet the body will cost $400 for just a 4 day rental! LR doesn’t list it as “pre-order” yet, I wonder which rental place will get it first?

The standard ISO range still stops at 25,600…so that sucks. 1DX has been up to 52k in the "normal range" for a long time now! 

The D4s has a “small raw size” of 8 megapixel…assuming that is a “crop”…again that’s something Canon might not ever do. Yet Nikon have done it since the D3, or earlier? Didn't the D4 also have it?

3020 shots per charge. What cells go into these batteries? I know the 1DX uses three 18650…I just assumed Nikon did the same. How are they getting so much more battery life? I know the 1DX probably consumes a lot more power, even than this new D4s…but I don’t know if Nikon use the same cells. (I could google it but I don't feel like it right now!)

The mirror has a shorter travel distance…interesting. And yet they didn't increase the fps, perhaps due to other factors such as processing, shutter...I don't know?

“Another small change is the camera’s ability to use the Auto ISO feature while in manual exposure mode.” But…but…but I thought all you “experts” had told me that was already available on the “old” D4…what’s up with that?

And what’s up with not being able to copy and paste dpreview’s text? I had to type that quote myself!!


----------



## expatinasia (Feb 25, 2014)

Reading in a lot of the Nikon forums that a lot were hoping for more of a bump in FPS. The 1D X is being praised a fair bit.

If I read it correctly what is important with regards to the ISO is that now a picture that was taken at 1,600 would look as if it was taken at 800 or something (over a D4). So the benefits are really lower down the ISO scale. I did not really get why they need 409600, but it is a Nikon!


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 25, 2014)

expatinasia said:


> Reading in a lot of the Nikon forums that a lot were hoping for more of a bump in FPS. The 1D X is being praised a fair bit.
> 
> If I read it correctly what is important with regards to the ISO is that now a picture that was taken at 1,600 would look as if it was taken at 800 or something (over a D4). So the benefits are really lower down the ISO scale. I did not really get why they need 409600, but it is a Nikon!



Probably true, but if the benefits are only below ISO 1600...well that kind of sucks too. Maybe I won't rent one after all!

Other things I am just now learning. The D4 and D4s had buttons with backlighting? That's a good idea. But the viewfinder...wow it's literally a hair larger than my 6D. That's no good, since it costs so much more.* I want a bigger viewfinder view than the 1DX! Not smaller...*

I suspect only the most well-healed Nikon pros will buy one of these early on. The rest might wait a bit longer, depending on how much they've used their D4 already.


----------



## Lightmaster (Feb 25, 2014)

the D4s is out and it´s..... meh!

canon has not to do much to make the 1D X Mk2 better at all points in the feature list.

so i expect a minor upgrade from canon.


----------



## Lightmaster (Feb 25, 2014)

J.R. said:


> This new camera is continuing with the same 16.2MP sensor and 11fps vs. 10fps. Apparently the other changes are also cosmetic in nature.
> 
> The ISO 409600 is expanded ISO, let's see what gives



nope nikon says it´s a new developed 16.2 MP sensor... whatever that means.
but it´s not the same.



CarlTN said:


> The mirror has a shorter travel distance…interesting. And yet they didn't increase the fps, perhaps due to other factors such as processing, shutter...I don't know?



actually they did. from 10 to 11fps.


----------



## Lightmaster (Feb 25, 2014)

expatinasia said:


> If I read it correctly what is important with regards to the ISO is that now a picture that was taken at 1,600 would look as if it was taken at 800 or something (over a D4). So the benefits are really lower down the ISO scale. I did not really get why they need 409600, but it is a Nikon!



well no.. i doubt that nikon has doubled ISO performance just so. ;D
if they really claim that im curious to check that in detail.

that the max native ISO is only 25600 speaks against it i think.


maybe JPG noise reduction.. a bit more smear... a bit less noise?


----------



## iron-t (Feb 25, 2014)

A truly yawn-worthy release by Nikon. Canon will feel zero pressure to respond.

I guess at a certain point, though, it's fair to ask how much better digital cameras are going to get. The innovations are bound to do as they've been doing, getting slower and more incremental. Let's say Canon takes a 1D X, pops in a 36 MP dual-pixel AF sensor and touch screen and crams it into a 5D-size body. Would you ever need to upgrade?


----------



## Northstar (Feb 25, 2014)

Will the screen still be green? 

This does nothing to the 1dx or Canon...it would piss me off if I was a Nikon guy and I had bought a D4 anytime in the past year. 

1DXii doesn't become available until late 2015.

also...it's a clear sign that the 1dX was the better camera...and Nikon had to do something to keep it's pros from switching, and to keep the first time buying a pro body "upgraders" from switching.


----------



## drjlo (Feb 25, 2014)

Lightmaster said:


> maybe JPG noise reduction.. a bit more smear... a bit less noise?



I suspect Nikon is talking about jpeg noise improvement, kind of like how Canon hyped jpeg improvement when 5D III came out. 

D4s is yawn city, but perhaps people who wanted D4 can get one cheaper now. 
Instead of D4s, the camera Canon needs to respond to is Nikon D5300, which really makes the current Rebels look embarrassing :-[


----------



## rs (Feb 25, 2014)

This looks like the higher ISO's are mostly down to a jpeg processing change, in other words stronger noise reduction. The 'new' 16.2 MP sensor is probably the mild refresh it received when it was dropped in the Df.

The frame rate merely halves the gap between the D4 and the 1D X - nothing to make Canon sweat. And the other changes seem fairly minor for an all new higher priced replacement. Auto ISO in manual? A free of charge firmware update did that on that Canon side.

Canon's flagship model announced way back in 2011 is looking pretty good right now with its higher MP, frame rate and more AF points. The D5 might eventually trump it, but Canon will no doubt have a new model out around then. Or will the D5 just bridge the gap to the 1D X a little more?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Feb 25, 2014)

so, shortly after the announcement, Here are some thoughts from 2 of my nikon shooting friends...

"-No jump in mp from D4. 20 would have been nice
-Can't stand XQD. Not so much because it's flawed but because two different kinds of cards in the same device is just stupid and illogical. Why not just stop dicking around and make both slots XQD if it's so great? Two kinds if cards. Two kinds if readers. Pain in the ass desk cluter. 
-$500 jump in price. 
-Might as well stick with D3s for action and buy a D800 for landscape and studio. 
D3s fullfills high ISO needs and speed needs.

Suck it, Nikon."

"Agreed wholeheartedly, and this probably is going to push a lot of people to jump ship to Canon too i bet. Nikon raising the price point for insignificant changes year after year, the market is only going to tolerate that for so long"


LOL...grass is always greener .....


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Feb 25, 2014)

Lightmaster said:


> the D4s is out and it´s..... meh!
> 
> canon has not to do much to make the 1D X Mk2 better at all points in the feature list.
> 
> so i expect a minor upgrade from canon.



why would you expect that? I can picture the canon imaging board room where they debate the future of each line. They have their plan that they'd rather stick too (which is not rush a new 1 series to market, take their time to make something truly awesome), and their emergency plan (reaction strategy, a less thought out more marginal refresh to compete if the competition does something that warrants reacting)

The d4s doesn't look much different from the d4. I'm sure people will buy it, butI think the 1dx stands in competition. We'll see, the proof is in the pudding - and as we know, you can't 100% judge a camera on a spec sheet. How will the early adopters feel and will the images from it rock the photography world, that will in the end determine what canon does.

Personally I think this will lead canon to staying the course...


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 26, 2014)

Lightmaster said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > This new camera is continuing with the same 16.2MP sensor and 11fps vs. 10fps. Apparently the other changes are also cosmetic in nature.
> ...



But the D4 could do 11 in crop mode couldn't it?


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 26, 2014)

drjlo said:


> Lightmaster said:
> 
> 
> > maybe JPG noise reduction.. a bit more smear... a bit less noise?
> ...



Good point.


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 26, 2014)

Northstar said:


> Will the screen still be green?
> 
> This does nothing to the 1dx or Canon...it would piss me off if I was a Nikon guy and I had bought a D4 anytime in the past year.
> 
> ...



Agree. I think they eventually fixed the green screen issue, but I doubt they ever officially admitted it was a problem.


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 26, 2014)

Canon will sell more cameras.


----------



## abcde12345 (Feb 26, 2014)

Canon replied with a 1200D!  It's still a shame honestly. Against D3300 and D5300, this is looking pretty lop-sided. Not just that, but prior to release of 70D, D7100 and D7000 pretty much whacked Canon's a$# for the prosumer's segment. Canon needs to buckle up with the beginner to intermediate segment and not release a flurry of 6XXD and 7XXD just to boost sales. 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! I personally think even 6D is crippled too much, which can definitely do with more cross-type sensors and other features like double SD's. We shouldn't just say it can do something but not the other; Nikon has been giving them so many AF points that Canon looks really shabby. =/



drjlo said:


> Lightmaster said:
> 
> 
> > maybe JPG noise reduction.. a bit more smear... a bit less noise?
> ...


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 26, 2014)

abcde12345 said:


> Canon replied with a 1200D!  It's still a shame honestly. Against D3300 and D5300, this is looking pretty lop-sided. Not just that, but prior to release of 70D, D7100 and D7000 pretty much whacked Canon's a$# for the prosumer's segment. Canon needs to buckle up with the beginner to intermediate segment and not release a flurry of 6XXD and 7XXD just to boost sales. 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! I personally think even 6D is crippled too much, which can definitely do with more cross-type sensors and other features like double SD's. We shouldn't just say it can do something but not the other; Nikon has been giving them so many AF points that Canon looks really shabby. =/
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're right, but that's Canon for you. Apparently they still sell more DSLR's than Nikon. As for the 6D's AF sensor...it won't be getting a good one until the 5D4 is introduced. And that 5D4 had better be able to do a dance or something!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 26, 2014)

abcde12345 said:


> 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. 



abcde12345 said:


> 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 (Feb 26, 2014)

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


----------



## BL (Feb 26, 2014)

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 (Feb 27, 2014)

BL said:


> 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 (Feb 27, 2014)

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


----------



## canon1dxman (Apr 1, 2014)

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 (Apr 1, 2014)

Why, the 1DX-W of course!


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 2, 2014)

canon1dxman said:


> 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 (Apr 2, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> canon1dxman said:
> 
> 
> > See the idiotic comment at the end. I sent in a comment 2 days ago but it is awaiting moderation............
> ...



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.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 2, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> ...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 (Apr 3, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > canon1dxman said:
> ...



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


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 3, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


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



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 (Apr 3, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



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 (Apr 3, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > sagittariansrock said:
> ...



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 (Apr 4, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> 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 (Apr 4, 2014)

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 (Apr 4, 2014)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > 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?
> ...



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


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 4, 2014)

ktatty said:


> 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 (Apr 4, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



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 (Apr 4, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > sagittariansrock said:
> ...



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.


----------



## ktatty (Apr 5, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> ktatty said:
> 
> 
> > i had the d4 from the time it came out until i moved to canon(more for the 5d than the 1d)
> ...



as opposed to your helpful observation?


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 5, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > Okay, maybe not the most appropriate example- I get your point.
> ...


agreed!
A lot of the improvements in processing power have come from using lower voltages (less heat waste) and finer lithography, making the electrical paths smaller and thereby speeding up the processors. Both of these advances decrease power consumption.... The next big factor is variable processing clock speeds, enabling chips to slow down and use less power when the demand is lower.... so in a way, you could say that increased computing power is linked to lower power consumption.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 5, 2014)

ktatty said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > ktatty said:
> ...



What are you referring to? Since you owned the D4, and I assume you used it a lot, I will defer to your expertise. I thought I was asking things about the D4s, rather than making observations. I don't disagree that it's not a vastly different camera from the D4...but they do claim better AF, improved ISO noise, etc...so I would like to know. I'd even like to try one at some point...and compare to my cousin's 1DX...but surely before then there will be a professional review comparison of the two posted somewhere. No need to get irked with me.


----------



## ktatty (Apr 5, 2014)

not irked. just trying to help. 
you are right- i have not seen a comparison of the d4s and 1dx.
Apologies if i came across wrong.


----------



## canon1dxman (Apr 5, 2014)

At least Nikon have now "moderated" my comment and allowed it to stay. 

Another comment from someone else...
“The quality of the RAW digital files is mind-blowing – the competition is invisible by comparison!”
This is a big claim, could you provide some evidence for this?

In the past, the name Bob Martin was only famous in the UK for dog biscuits....


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 5, 2014)

ktatty said:


> not irked. just trying to help.
> you are right- i have not seen a comparison of the d4s and 1dx.
> Apologies if i came across wrong.



No it's fine, but you did own the D4. Tell me more about that? I'm not wanting to switch camera systems, but I definitely would like to rent the D4s and a lens anyway, just for kicks. Hopefully sometime this summer.

The only real world test I can recall, that I liked watching...was a video done by two Canadian wedding photogs, where they compared a 1DX and a D4, both with 70-200 lens mounted...comparing the autofocus speed and accuracy...and comparing how many sharp shots they could get in a limited time...by holding the shutter button down and going back and forth between a close subject and a distant subject. They were on a rooftop. Not saying this was scientific, but it was an interesting real world comparison. I'd like to do a similar test against my cousin's 1DX, if he will cooperate...lol.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 5, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > sagittariansrock said:
> ...



Hmm, sounds like variable clock speed could be interesting.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 5, 2014)

canon1dxman said:


> At least Nikon have now "moderated" my comment and allowed it to stay.
> 
> Another comment from someone else...
> “The quality of the RAW digital files is mind-blowing – the competition is invisible by comparison!”
> ...



Um...lmfao!!


----------



## sagittariansrock (Apr 5, 2014)

canon1dxman said:


> At least Nikon have now "moderated" my comment and allowed it to stay.
> 
> Another comment from someone else...
> “The quality of the RAW digital files is mind-blowing – the competition is invisible by comparison!”
> ...



What I find really disturbing is that there aren't hundreds of Nikon fanboys commenting "ah-s" and "ooh's" on that page lauding a new Nikon flagship camera. Only a few very balanced and even critical comments. I wonder if Nikon can see the writing on the wall, or maybe I got it all wrong ???


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 5, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...


The variable clock timing has been around for a long time. For example, if you look at a PC, under normal use there is only a few percent use on the CPU, but if you run something that stresses the system you see the load jump up to 100 percent and you can watch the temperature rise. In the PC world you can slap on a bigger heat sink and add fans, but good luck trying to do that with a DSLR.....

I suspect that this is one of the reasons why Canon and Nikon are so conservative with their video performance.... You know that the camera has the power to do more, but if you ran the higher resolutions you would get into cooling problems.


----------



## Northstar (Apr 5, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> ktatty said:
> 
> 
> > not irked. just trying to help.
> ...



I agree that it would be fun to have each in hand with a 70-200 attached for a comparison test!


----------



## arbitrage (Apr 5, 2014)

pedro said:


> Hi, now that the D4s is a fact, what is to be expected by Canon?
> We are living in a crazy age. ISO 409600. Looking forward to see some RAW samples...
> http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d4s



Watch the DigitalRev review and you will see how useless the 409600 is (along with the 2 values beneath it). The D4s is a nice camera, not sure if it is a great upgrade from a D4 but for some it will be. Still I don't think it puts any pressure on a 1DX replacement. The 1DX is still IMHO the best DLSR out there. I think Canon are only pressured by the higher MP D800 but they've been under that pressure for 2 years now and it hasn't amounted to anything yet. Canon is still the only company making any money in this industry so they still don't feel much pressure from the others......yet


----------



## ktatty (Apr 5, 2014)

Northstar said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > ktatty said:
> ...


----------



## ktatty (Apr 5, 2014)

had the d4 and d800 set up for a while. I moved to canon because i wanted the 5d iii over the d800 for my travel camera, faster fps and better auto focus system. I got the 1dx a year later to shoot indoor sports, the 5d could do it, it just wasn't as fast as the d4. I bit the bullet and bought the 1dx- i couldn't believe the autofocus ability of it-really a step above the d4. 
I did watch the same review you metnitoned (very long) on tube by two photographers that were testing the d4 vs 1dx and at the end the long time nikon user decided to go with the 1dx because the autofocus speed was in a "different class" than the nikon.
I agree with him on that. I also think the 1dx does a better job with metering over the d4.
The canon rep was in our local camera shop a few weeks back and he told us canon updated the firmware in the 1dx and they did not plan to upgrade the body.
It will be interesting to see if the d4s' new autofocus system has caught up the 1dx.
I never really understood why nikon put the qxd card format on the camera. Both are great cameras, but i think the 1 dx has the edge right now.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 6, 2014)

ktatty said:


> had the d4 and d800 set up for a while. I moved to canon because i wanted the 5d iii over the d800 for my travel camera, faster fps and better auto focus system. I got the 1dx a year later to shoot indoor sports, the 5d could do it, it just wasn't as fast as the d4. I bit the bullet and bought the 1dx- i couldn't believe the autofocus ability of it-really a step above the d4.
> I did watch the same review you metnitoned (very long) on tube by two photographers that were testing the d4 vs 1dx and at the end the long time nikon user decided to go with the 1dx because the autofocus speed was in a "different class" than the nikon.
> I agree with him on that. I also think the 1dx does a better job with metering over the d4.
> The canon rep was in our local camera shop a few weeks back and he told us canon updated the firmware in the 1dx and they did not plan to upgrade the body.
> ...



Interesting, yours is obviously inline with a consensus opinion of 1DX and Canon owners...but definitely not of die hard Nikon fans (I don't know any personally). It's cool that you are a Canon convert!! 

In the test we both watched on youtube...I can't help but think that the respective lens's autofocus speeds played a major role (especially since they were depending on the elements going from close to distant focus, back and forth, over and over). Nikon...well they just can't make lenses like Canon, and I suspect really none of their lenses can make use of whatever AF speed ability the D4 or D4s, has. But unless someone, I don't know...tests an "identical" Sigma or Tamron lens on a D4s and a 1DX (that somehow also has consistent and "fast" AF...a tall order!), there's no getting around using a Nikon lens on the Nikon body. Obviously a third party lens is not a good way to test either camera's AF capability, so it's a bit of a conundrum. 

Unless of course, you are of the opinion that Nikon's 70-200 f/2.8, is in every way equal to Canon's current "version 2" 70-200. I doubt it is, but I really have no experience...yet.

I wonder why you would favor a 5D3 as a travel body over the D800? Unless when you travel you are only shooting sports action. Usually "travel" implies vacationing...and shooting scenery, landscapes, etc...which the D800 would be superior for doing (assuming you have really long, skinny fingers, for the Nikon ergonomics).

As for the Sony card, obviously it ties in with using image sensors designed by Sony (and possibly other components too, I don't know?). They claim the Sony card is faster than CF cards, but I have no idea.


----------



## ktatty (Apr 7, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> ktatty said:
> 
> 
> > had the d4 and d800 set up for a while. I moved to canon because i wanted the 5d iii over the d800 for my travel camera, faster fps and better auto focus system. I got the 1dx a year later to shoot indoor sports, the 5d could do it, it just wasn't as fast as the d4. I bit the bullet and bought the 1dx- i couldn't believe the autofocus ability of it-really a step above the d4.
> ...



I agree the d800 is a better landscape camera, but not as versatile as the 5d. traveling with kids so you may shoot scenery one day and the next day your trying to get shots of them on a ride at Disney;my kids are not in to sitting still for pictures.


----------

