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



## pedro (Jan 7, 2014)

Hi, there was some movement on the "dark side", so what's next for us "Canonites"?

http://nikonrumors.com/2014/01/06/nikon-announces-the-development-of-the-nikon-d4s-camera.aspx/#more-69908


----------



## Eldar (Jan 7, 2014)

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


----------



## BL (Jan 7, 2014)

So no mention of release date. What good is this information other than to stifle sales of the D4?


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Jan 7, 2014)

Looks like a sweet camera.


----------



## Northstar (Jan 7, 2014)

BL said:


> So no mention of release date. What good is this information other than to stifle sales of the D4?



Good point.

Canon's response could be. 

*Next gen revolutionary canon 1DX ii with improved AF, better IQ, and faster FPS....coming sometime in the future!*

:


----------



## BL (Jan 7, 2014)

hahaha

true that


----------



## rs (Jan 7, 2014)

RGomezPhotos said:


> Looks like a sweet camera.


The previous Nikon S versions have been very minor increments. Expect nothing more than a bigger buffer and faster processing to go with it. As far as I know there's never been a new sensor or an increase in frame rate introduced with an S version. 

By all accounts this won't bring Nikons flagship up to 1D X levels of performance.


----------



## Lawliet (Jan 7, 2014)

Eldar said:


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



That depends on what the D4s can do - if it just narrows the gap the pressure is more on emotional side. Even a slight edge wouldn't have much impact. And seriously surpassing the 1Dx would warrent a promotion to D5. not just the incremental s. As for video: 10[email protected] would be expected, but the 1Dc can do that too - it would require 4K with RGB readout and at a decent framerate to get folks seriously interested.
I'd say the D800 is a stronger "something has to happen"-factor


----------



## ewg963 (Jan 7, 2014)

BL said:


> So no mention of release date. What good is this information other than to stifle sales of the D4?


 +1


----------



## ewg963 (Jan 7, 2014)

Hmmmmm I wonder if this body will be of a higher MP form than the D4? Canon who knows?


----------



## ewg963 (Jan 7, 2014)

dilbert said:


> rs said:
> 
> 
> > RGomezPhotos said:
> ...


 +10000000!!!! That's a great question Dilbert......hmmmmmm!!!


----------



## Eldar (Jan 7, 2014)

ewg963 said:


> BL said:
> 
> 
> > So no mention of release date. What good is this information other than to stifle sales of the D4?
> ...


I would expect them to give a lot more detail at the actual announcement, in a few days time


----------



## xps (Jan 7, 2014)

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

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

The Nikon D3300 is another competitor. What will Canon do?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/01/07/new-nikon-d3300-gains-new-sensor-processor-and-kit-lens?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_1


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 7, 2014)

BL said:


> So no mention of release date. What good is this information other than to stifle sales of the D4?



It's a lot of information. "No new sensor", is the first thing I read in the announcement. Nothing about "high res". 
So it will be the same old 16MP D4 sensor , probably in the "improved" Df version. No increase in fps. Slightly tweaked AF algortihms (no new AF module). Slightly improved new "X peed" chip. Somewhat better video. Maybe, just maybe WiFi built in. Yawn. 

Instead of a kick-butt D4x based on the 36MP D800/E sensor plus revolutionary new dual-pixel AF. ;D
WiFi, NFC, GPS and radio wireless flash commander built-in. Along with 2 matching radio-controlled CLS/iTTL speedlites and transceivers for existing older speedlites, instead of continued stone-age optical triggering. ;D


----------



## xps (Jan 7, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> BL said:
> 
> 
> > So no mention of release date. What good is this information other than to stifle sales of the D4?
> ...



found @ dpreview: "Nikon has announced it is working on the D4S which, like the D4, it describes as an 'HD-SLR.' Details are extremely slight, with the company promising a new image-processing engine and improved autofocus performance."


----------



## eml58 (Jan 7, 2014)

Considering the previous iterations were D3s (12MP) & D3x (24MP), it's hard to see Nikon doing anything more with a D4s over the D4 than some minor tweaks, I find myself agreeing in this instance with AvTvM, a bit of a yawn, something like the D600 versus the D610 iteration. 

Would really liked to have seen Nikon drop a 36MP D4x into the Market, if for no other reason than it might (big might) have given Canon some extra incentive to get that 1Dxs into the 2014 Market @ 45MP, we live in hope.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 7, 2014)

xps said:


> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/01/07/nikon-announces-development-of-d4s-professional-hd-slr?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_2
> 
> Btw: Canon still has no competitor to the D800E. The 1D line is twice the price of the D800. Maybe Canon will be able meet our wishes in 2014 (high MP Cam @ moederate costs, 7DII,...)



Corrected Posting:

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

The point is, just because Nikon offers slightly different specs, it doesn't make it better. I much prefer what Canon did with the 5DIII to what Nikon did with the D800 and judging by the comparative sales figures, it seems like the market agrees. 

As for this new Nikon, I'm trying to figure out what's so different. Meet the new Nikon, same as the old Nikon? And, if high megapixels are so wonderful, why doesn't Nikon put a high megapixel sensor in its flagship?


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jan 7, 2014)

dilbert said:


> rs said:
> 
> 
> > RGomezPhotos said:
> ...




Does? All of the Nikon FF cameras best Canon *now*.


----------



## xps (Jan 7, 2014)

unfocused said:


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



Sorry, I meant that Canon has no big MP Camera and some friends of mine, working for an big Canon supplying company, told me, that Canon will release an big MP Cam - but in the price-region of the 1DX.
Some Nikonians say, that Nikon is developing an gamechanging high-end model... Maybe this is true. Maybe not. We will know in some years.

Fact is, that every company found its niche, where an special Camera-model is better then the competitors.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > And if it does or bests Canon, what then?
> ...



You're welcome to your own opinion, but that opinion obviously differs from that of the majority of people actually _buying_ Canon and Nikon FF cameras.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 7, 2014)

Sales of the D4 have been hurting, so a minor upgrade will put it on a competitive level. A better processor and improved autofocus. Both of these were weak points, but we have to see how much improvement there actually is. Nikon seems to be playing a game with gullible buyers, first the D620 and now the D4s. Mostly just a label change to get those with $$$ to buy the latest and greatest.


----------



## Quasimodo (Jan 7, 2014)

Eldar said:


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



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


----------



## Eldar (Jan 7, 2014)

Quasimodo said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > VERY interesting. Something has to happen in the Canon camp!
> ...


A 45MP 1D


----------



## mackguyver (Jan 7, 2014)

It's clearly a "protectionist" announcement to keep Nikon's Pro shooters from switching over to Canon. It only serves to let their shooters know that a better camera is coming. What a news flash...I'm sure no one was expecting Nikon to release an improved camera in...the future 

I suspect the heavy rebating/double dips, etc. on Canon's end put a dent in Nikon's sales over the last few months and they're trying to keep their market share.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Jan 7, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> It's clearly a "protectionist" announcement to keep Nikon's Pro shooters from switching over to Canon. It only serves to let their shooters know that a better camera is coming. What a news flash...I'm sure no one was expecting Nikon to release an improved camera in...the future
> 
> I suspect the heavy rebating/double dips, etc. on Canon's end put a dent in Nikon's sales over the last few months and they're trying to keep their market share.



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


----------



## slclick (Jan 7, 2014)

I expect for Canon to release whatever they have in the pipeline at their own pace and date.Tit for tat "they better hurry and parry with a better product" simply hasn't happened recently. Most folks seem to understand the development cycle for new products but when a competitor has a release (product or press) many still assume Canon will counter asap. 

2014, Year of the Lens. Unfortunately for Canon, that might be Sigma's slogan as well!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


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



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


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 7, 2014)

A few years ago Canon were is a very dominant position in the pro market, really very clearly dominant. This announcement, it seems to me, could push Canon's response two ways; first, it could make Canon relax on the next 1 series release as the 1Dx is clearly more than competitive against the D4/D4s; or Canon could see the blood in the water and come out with an aggresive release to put the Nikon pro market on the back foot again. It isn't hard to think of a modest list of additions to the 1Dx that would put it into the next generation of the 1Dx/D4 market and leapfrog the D4s completely.

I fear it will be the former.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2014)

dilbert said:


> You underestimate the importance of a good JPEG algorithm for professional sports photographers who shoot 1000s of pictures a day and don't have the time to do raw conversion.



So the JPG output from the D4 is subpar?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jan 7, 2014)

pedro said:


> Hi, there was some movement on the "dark side", so what's next for us "Canonites"?
> 
> http://nikonrumors.com/2014/01/06/nikon-announces-the-development-of-the-nikon-d4s-camera.aspx/#more-69908



not a whole lot of info there other than improved AF

I wonder what they mean by HD-SLR?


----------



## slclick (Jan 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > You underestimate the importance of a good JPEG algorithm for professional sports photographers who shoot 1000s of pictures a day and don't have the time to do raw conversion.
> ...




ZING!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> I wonder what they mean by HD-SLR?



HD-SLR = camera.  HD as in HD video. They call them all that, now (well, all of them except the Df - that's for 'pure photography'  ). The D4s HD-SLR is replacing the D4 HD-SLR. They also just announced the D3300 HD-SLR.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jan 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...




If one values dynamic range and cutting edge sensor technology, it's pretty clear who the leader is now. 
Who buys what is a red herring.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelHodges said:
> ...



Apparently those who value dynamic range and cutting edge sensor technology to the exclusion of other aspects of camera performance are in the minority. 

If one values overall camera and system performance, it's pretty clear who the leader is now...and for the past 10 years.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jan 7, 2014)

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


----------



## Eldar (Jan 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


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


Eehhh ... and that refers to which camera(s) ??


----------



## rs (Jan 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelHodges said:
> ...



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



MichaelHodges said:


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



And who uses a 1D X for facebook uploads using it's non-existent WiFi and GPS?

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


----------



## Lawliet (Jan 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> [
> If one values dynamic range and cutting edge sensor technology, it's pretty clear who the leader is now.


How many clients care about the sensor technology used? The closest I've been asked was "MF or small frame". In focus or not is also much higher on the priority, esp in sports, then some noise in pushed shadows, cue the colorblind AF in the Nikons and the red (induced) shift.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jan 7, 2014)

rs said:


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



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



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



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


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2014)

MikaelHodges said:


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



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

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

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

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

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


----------



## slclick (Jan 7, 2014)

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

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

Nikon strap on Canon camera 

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


----------



## rs (Jan 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


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



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

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

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



MichaelHodges said:


> > Just look at any major sporting event - how many more white lenses do you see there than black lenses?
> 
> 
> 
> This seems like a very lemming-like way to make decisions.



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


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jan 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


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



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

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

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


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 7, 2014)

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


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > MikaelHodges said:
> ...



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


----------



## KyleSTL (Jan 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


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


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


----------



## Quasimodo (Jan 7, 2014)

Eldar said:


> Quasimodo said:
> 
> 
> > Eldar said:
> ...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jan 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


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



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



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



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

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



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



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



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



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



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



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


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jan 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> All fair points except for the last one, which is a logical fallacy. You could apply that logic to the first implementation of auto focus, IS, etc:
> 
> "If we can't hold the lens still, shouldn't we find a new hobby/gig"?
> 
> "I we can't use manual focus quick enough, shouldn't we find a new hobby/gig?"



i would like to add these following:

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

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

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

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


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 7, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


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



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

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

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


----------



## unfocused (Jan 8, 2014)

Enough already!

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

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

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


----------



## Bruce Photography (Jan 8, 2014)

unfocused said:


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



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

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


----------



## BL (Jan 8, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> not a whole lot of info there other than improved AF
> 
> I wonder what they mean by HD-SLR?



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

Remember those "HD" night driving sunglasses? :


----------



## unfocused (Jan 8, 2014)

Bruce Photography said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > xps said:
> ...



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

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

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

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


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 8, 2014)

BL said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > not a whole lot of info there other than improved AF
> ...



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

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


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 8, 2014)

dilbert said:


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



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

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

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


----------



## sagittariansrock (Jan 8, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Enough already!
> 
> Look, the D4 and 1Dx markets are not really competitive. The products mirror one another and almost no one at that level is about to switch systems. The brand choice at that level is not driven by any of the things people are arguing about here.
> 
> A D4 buyer is already a Nikon user and isn't going to switch systems. A 1D user is already a Canon buyer and also isn't going to switch systems.




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


----------



## sandymandy (Jan 8, 2014)

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


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 8, 2014)

dilbert said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



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


----------



## Albi86 (Jan 8, 2014)

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

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


----------



## TomazK (Jan 8, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Enough already!
> ...




And how about Scott Kelby ... He shoots both, but mainly uses Canon now ...
http://scottkelby.com/gear/


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 8, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Enough already!
> ...



In fairness Matt Grainger isn't switching, he is a "teacher" and wants both systems. Likewise Fro isn't actually getting a Canon, not least because of their lack of a 14-24 (curse you Canon). But one very high profile shooter who switch from Nikon to Canon (after a very public and acrimonious move from Canon to Nikon several years ago) is the UK's top wildlife shooter, Andy Rouse, and he has some very interesting and totally non confrontational stuff to say about both systems and his reasons for switching, again, on is blog. http://www.andyrouse.co.uk/index.php?link=blog


----------



## Northstar (Jan 8, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



Also...whether it's Matt or Matt or Kai or Fro...they all acknowledge that it's a tough choice between the two as they are both excellent cameras, and it probably comes down to personal preference over one being better than the other. (By the way, I like Kai's comparison at digital rev the best) 

(Also, for what it's worth, Ken Rockwell also favors the 1dx over the D4. : : )


----------



## sanj (Jan 8, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


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



I agree with all except the last point.


----------



## Quasimodo (Jan 8, 2014)

Imho, this whole thread has become like the humorous article posted in Photography Life where there was a fictive discussion between the heart and the mind in regards to the Nikon Df camera. I have a hard time understanding why this should be such a heated discussion where people are getting agitated, and almost resort to namecalling. 

Is this not a really simple matter? Nikon is releasing a new camera to the joy, indifference, or agony of their existing base or potential users. Their success depends on if these people find it to be a worthy upgrade, and not other brand users who seem to be involving in heavy post-purchase rationalization.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jan 8, 2014)

You can expect canon to sell more cameras than nikon.


----------



## Niki (Jan 8, 2014)

BL said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > not a whole lot of info there other than improved AF
> ...




shot with both cameras too professionally …by far the canon and L lenses..are my choice


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jan 8, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


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



No, it's you building up everything anyone but Nikon doesn't do the best and minimizing, trivializing, and making fun of everything that Canon doesn't do 100% the best, as usual without letting ten seconds go by before the sacred honor of Canon is defended by yourself.

And once we are into 10-12-14fps range 2fps means a lot less than in the 1-8fps range. Of course more is always nicer, but it's funny that you make a HUGE deal out of 12fps vs 14fps and make fun of 1-3 stops more DR at low ISO.



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



perhaps, it remains to be seen what the D4s does. (and don't forget the 1D4 fix for the 1D3)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jan 8, 2014)

BL said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > not a whole lot of info there other than improved AF
> ...



hah I do!

and yeah these days the buzz is all UHD now

(can't wait for the UHD sunglasses )


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jan 8, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


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



If it was all fake why did the sidelines turn from white to dark gray around that time? Why did you read a lot of blogs pre-Beijing about fed up, big time PJs swapping to Nikon because they were sick of missing so many shots?

Yes, the color of the sidelines has reversed a good deal since then though, but don't pretend it didn't happen back then.

Why can like ZERO Canon users, on this forum far and away in particular, ever admit that anything about Canon that isn't the best matters at all and can never admit when people were going to Nikon but go crazy about every little thing Canon does better and whenever anyone switches back to Canon. What is the freaking big deal. Admitting when something in your system isn't the best is the fastest way to make sure that it soon will be the best, sticking your sand in the head and playing silly fanboy games helps nobody. They are just cameras. Just brands. Instead you just tease and make fun of anything brought up and anyone who does, like some kool-aid drinking gang. When Nikon sensors were falling behind way back when I seem to recall Nikon users not being afraid to admit it and getting on Nikon and soon enough they ended up with much better sensors. If everyone just praised the initial 1D3 and all the other Canon AF at that time as pefect I doubt we'd have had the 1DX/5D3 AF project.

Maybe some do make a bit too much of a big deal about things, but maybe that's because it's the only way to get past all the rabid fanboys and maybe some got sick of seeing people driven away for even the most delicately put and fair points early on an don't bother to put things delicately any more (and because making a huge deal is about the only way for enough notice to ever be taken for anything to change).

anwyay back on topic, who knows, since the D4s hints tells us nothing, a bit of an AF tweak? I don't see why that would make one expect anything in particular in response from Canon.


----------



## Eldar (Jan 8, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Why can like ZERO Canon users, on this forum far and away in particular, ever admit that anything about Canon that isn't the best matters at all and can never admit when people were going to Nikon but go crazy about every little thing Canon does better and whenever anyone switches back to Canon. What is the freaking big deal. Admitting when something in your system isn't the best is the fastest way to make sure that it soon will be the best, sticking your sand in the head and playing silly fanboy games helps nobody. They are just cameras. Just brands. Instead you just tease and make fun of anything brought up and anyone who does, like some kool-aid drinking gang. When Nikon sensors were falling behind way back when I seem to recall Nikon users not being afraid to admit it and getting on Nikon and soon enough they ended up with much better sensors. If everyone just praised the initial 1D3 and all the other Canon AF at that time as pefect I doubt we'd have had the 1DX/5D3 AF project.
> 
> Maybe some do make a bit too much of a big deal about things, but maybe that's because it's the only way to get past all the rabid fanboys and maybe some got sick of seeing people driven away for even the most delicately put and fair points early on an don't bother to put things delicately any more (and because making a huge deal is about the only way for enough notice to ever be taken for anything to change).
> 
> anwyay back on topic, who knows, since the D4s hints tells us nothing, a bit of an AF tweak? I don't see why that would make one expect anything in particular in response from Canon.


I bought my first Canon probably before the majority of this forum´s readers were born. I have been loyal to Canon all these years. Currently I am very happy with the performance of my 1DX and 5DIII. And I believe they represent the best 2 body combo for my shooting at the moment.

But to prove that it is not Zero Canon users (ref. above), I can confirm that I am really impatient to get my hands on the 800/800E trasher. I think Canon should have released a body with better low ISO DR a long time ago and it irritates me to see some of the low ISO/high DR/high resolution images my Nikon 800E buddy shows, shot with the 14-24 lens I can´t get. 

I don´t need everything in one body. I´d be happy to have a low ISO flagship next to my 1DX, especially after I got the Zeiss Otus. I think their initial 1D/1Ds concept was OK and I would welcome a 1DsX.

And for the record, I don´t have a clue what we will see with the D4s and I don´t think many others do either, so to see the number of posts grow towards a hundred on pure speculation is a bit ..... (fill in the blank)


----------



## mackguyver (Jan 8, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Maybe some do make a bit too much of a big deal about things, but maybe that's because it's the only way to get past all the rabid fanboys and maybe some got sick of seeing people driven away for even the most delicately put and fair points early on an don't bother to put things delicately any more (and because making a huge deal is about the only way for enough notice to ever be taken for anything to change).
> 
> anwyay back on topic, who knows, since the D4s hints tells us nothing, a bit of an AF tweak? I don't see why that would make one expect anything in particular in response from Canon.


Agreed, fanboys, Canon or otherwise, suck. I love my Canon products along with many other brands, but no camera, lens, or other product is perfect and what works best for you may not work best for someone else. If so much of your ego is wrapped up in a brand, you should really question your priorities and self-esteem, and seek some help for your insecurities. That kind of groupthink is gold to marketers, but sad for humanity.


----------



## Synkka (Jan 8, 2014)

Can't talk about swaps to Canon without mentioning Andy Rouse

http://www.arwpstore.com/index.php?mode=ipage&page=17


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 8, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



It wasn't all fake, some 1D MkIII's had AF issues in some situations. And we have come to demand ever more of our AF. Initially an awful lot of dissatisfaction with the MkIII was due to people not taking the time to set it up fully.

As for Canon's many other issues, I am no apologist, they have been stupid re a top class ultra wide angle zoom, the lack of a really world class 14/16-24/35 has cost them way more photographers than the years it took them to answer Nikon's 200-400 f4, sure the answer was demonstrative, but the wait was painful and the resources it used could have been directed to far more pressing lens issues. Their ideas on body updates has often had us gasping, how in the hell is a dial that goes all the way round, or locks, a new camera? Where is the answer for people who want more than 25MP? Where is the answer to other manufacturers improved sensors? Why did they shoot the 5D MkII in the foot with that AF when they could have slaughtered Nikon FF efforts?

Sure, as a system, Canon suits me best, and I can live with any perceived limitations for the sake of continuity and my personal ease and comfort, but were somebody else to make as compelling a system with "better" metrics, I'd certainly look at it. The trouble is, for photographers who do use a system, fast primes, flashes, unusual lenses, etc. it really is a two horse race, Sony will never invest in one system long enough to bring out everything many pros want or need, and at this point Nikon seem to be reeling from one miss-marketing blunder to another. Nikon have come out with some fine lenses in recent years, but they can only really be considered to be closing the gulf that was between them and Nikon rather than pulling ahead on that lens front, their body offerings are in complete disarray.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 8, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe some do make a bit too much of a big deal about things, but maybe that's because it's the only way to get past all the rabid fanboys and maybe some got sick of seeing people driven away for even the most delicately put and fair points early on an don't bother to put things delicately any more (and because making a huge deal is about the only way for enough notice to ever be taken for anything to change).
> ...



Agreed. But honestly, I think the criticism is a bit off the mark. 

Yes, there are a handful of outspoken persons on this forum who defend everything Canon does and denigrate anyone who says otherwise. But, honestly, I find most of the people here, while loyal to their brand of choice, not all that fanatical about it. 

I think some of this also comes from people reacting to the very tiny handful of people who insist on assigning personal motives to everything Canon does, as though the company is purposely trying to deny them a product they want. Often this translates into silly statements about how Canon better do this or do that or the company is going to go broke. Which always prompts more rational people to point out that the company is doing just fine in terms of profits and market share. 

Similarly we have the conspiracy theorists who are dead certain that Canon and/or Nikon have some perfect technology boxed away in a super secret location and are refusing to unveil it. `They are probably right, it is hidden away in that same storehouse where the fake moon landing set is kept, right next to the secret CIA papers that show John Kennedy was shot by multiple assassins and just down the hall from the black helicopters. 

I also find is discouraging that some people have been driven off this forum by being baited and ridiculed into extreme reactions that get them banned, while the ones who pushed them over the edge walk away and pretend innocence. Personally, I found some of the "crazies" on the forum kind of interesting if tiresome.

But, all in all, there are enough rational and knowledgeable persons on this forum to make it worthwhile (and addictive) to stick around.


----------



## Northstar (Jan 8, 2014)

> But, all in all, there are enough rational and knowledgeable persons on this forum to make it worthwhile (and addictive) to stick around.




Kind of like life...


----------



## BL (Jan 8, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


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



buy 2 "HD" D4s' fitted with yet to be revealed "U" ND filters, one for each eye!


----------



## sagittariansrock (Jan 9, 2014)

Both Canon and Nikon have their individual strengths and weaknesses. It might be that some people's efforts to portray Canon as inferior triggers the indignation and loyalty in some others to defend Canon, sometimes rationally, sometimes over zealously. I am sure hidden within Canon's successful bottom line is countless bad decisions, as will be whenever one has to second guess what the consumer will want.
It's unfortunate that sometimes these debates turn personal. I used to take offense earlier but now I've realized that anonymous online forums are great vehicles for people to vent the frustration of their day, so one shouldn't take these too seriously. At the end of the day, neither are we responsible for Canon's good or bad decisions, nor do we get anything by attacking or defending them.
Having said that, a super vague development announcement seems like a desperate move. Not that I am saying there's any reason for it- undoubtedly D4 and D800/E are exceptional cameras and I'd have loved to have one if I had the money (the D800 that is, I'm too weak for pro dSLRs  )


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 9, 2014)

It's funny when Nikon and Canon trolls go to war over announced cameras. I just sit back with some pop corn and watch the fire works...or I get out and do some shooting 
My first camera was a Canon AV-1 (manual focus, and Av only). I chose Canon becuase that's what my Dad used and I could borrow his lenses. I've stuck with the brand for my whole life and I've never looked back. For me operate a lecia, Sony or Nikon is like handling aline technology....I mean after all, their dials go the wrong way


----------



## ewg963 (Jan 15, 2014)

Synkka said:


> Can't talk about swaps to Canon without mentioning Andy Rouse
> 
> http://www.arwpstore.com/index.php?mode=ipage&page=17


+1 I did enjoy his review on the 1 DX...


----------



## ewg963 (Jan 15, 2014)

GMCPhotographics said:


> It's funny when Nikon and Canon trolls go to war over announced cameras. I just sit back with some pop corn and watch the fire works...or I get out and do some shooting
> My first camera was a Canon AV-1 (manual focus, and Av only). I chose Canon becuase that's what my Dad used and I could borrow his lenses. I've stuck with the brand for my whole life and I've never looked back. For me operate a lecia, Sony or Nikon is like handling aline technology....I mean after all, their dials go the wrong way


 +1


----------

