Options

Nikon D4S flagship dSLR

ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,830 moderator
edited February 27, 2014 in Cameras
http://www.nikon.com/news/2014/0225_dslr_01.htm

This is a worthy upgrade to the Nikon D4, a professional grade dSLR. Notable improvements:
  • 5 AF-area modes, including a new "new Group-area AF" mode.
  • New image processor, EXPEED 4, 30 percent faster than the EXPEED 3 in the D4.
  • Standard sensitivities from ISO 100 to ISO 25600, vs standard sensitivities from ISO 100 to ISO 12800 for the D4. (Max ISO 409600, Hi-4)
  • RAW S Small* (12-bit uncompressed) image size option, approx 4 MPix, 2464 x 1640.
  • Improved battery life (shots).
  • Improved video, 1080p60.
  • 3 - video acquisition formats: FX-based movie format, DX-based movie format, and 1920 x 1080 crop. (1920 x 1080 crop mode has no image interpolation.)
  • You can simultaneously record H.264 video to the flash card, and output uncompressed HDMI.
  • Up to 6 WB custom presets.
  • Spot WB (One source says this is in Live View only.)
  • Shorter viewfinder blackout time.
  • Full AF/AE at up to 11fps.
  • Gigabit Ethernet, capable of 185Mbps transfer.
  • The D4S can generate IPTC data in-camera.
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums

Comments

  • Options
    HelvegrHelvegr Registered Users Posts: 246 Major grins
    edited February 25, 2014
    Great upgrades no doubt, but I'm glad in some ways they didn't make the change that would have me longing to trade up my current D4.. Dual XQD cards. Everything else is great, but not $6500 great, at least for me. I'm sure there is debate on this, but fingers crossed, that maybe "some" of these are firmware and we'd see some sort of upgrade on the existing model. One can hope anyway.
    Camera: Nikon D4
    Lenses: Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR II | Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 | Nikon 50mm f/1.4
    Lighting: SB-910 | SU-800
  • Options
    lifeinfocuslifeinfocus Registered Users Posts: 1,461 Major grins
    edited February 25, 2014
    I am assuming gigabit Ethernet is primarily for tethered photography. Correct?

    Ziggy, I am trying to find reference to 185Mbps in your bullet list. Where did you find that?
    http://www.PhilsImaging.com
    "You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
    Phil
  • Options
    FergusonFerguson Registered Users Posts: 1,339 Major grins
    edited February 25, 2014
    Personally as a D4 owner who needs another sports body (I use a D800 now), I'm disappointed, and will probably wait for a D5.

    Taking that list a few specific comments:

    >>New image processor, EXPEED 4, 30 percent faster than the EXPEED 3 in the D4.

    OK, about 2 years - in 2 years you expect about more than that in any other computer system, wouldn't you?

    >> Standard sensitivities from ISO 100 to ISO 25600

    Now if that translates into a full stop improvement in ISO performance all along the way, that might be a significant one.

    >> Video changes

    Ok, some people care -- I don't. I never talk to anyone who does video, but I'm sure it is done.

    >> Shorter viewfinder blackout time.

    Useful only if it translates into better AF precision.

    >> Full AF/AE at up to 11fps.

    No increase? Well, a pseudo increase? With no sensor size increase, that's a bit of a letdown. I'd have thought they at least tried to match the 1DX.

    >> Gigabit Ethernet, capable of 185Mbps transfer.

    And what -- the 12 people in the world who tether by ethernet (vs. USB) now get to run faster, but still need a RJ45 wire instead of a built in wifi?

    I'm sorry, I love my D4, really I do. I've got probably 130,000 images on it now. And I'll eventually buy another sports body. But to me this is all very under-whelming.
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,830 moderator
    edited February 25, 2014
    I am assuming gigabit Ethernet is primarily for tethered photography. Correct? ...

    It's also for people wanting to transfer files during an event. I believe that you can make the camera's storage look like common storage to an external computer, using software on the computer to copy and process image files on the computer.
    ... Ziggy, I am trying to find reference to 185Mbps in your bullet list. Where did you find that?

    Look at this page at about 25 percent down the page and under the "Workflow" heading.

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d4s/nikon-d4sA.HTM
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    thegridrunnerthegridrunner Registered Users Posts: 235 Major grins
    edited February 25, 2014
    video???
    After seeing how soft the video was in the D4, I will hold judgement until I see an actual video clip from the D4s. It seems panasonic is the only DSLR that give true 1080p video resolution so far. Even the Nikon D800 doesn't do that (around 800p, canon 5D series even less).
  • Options
    NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms Registered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited February 25, 2014
    Ferguson wrote: »
    >> Shorter viewfinder blackout time.

    Useful only if it translates into better AF precision.

    >> Full AF/AE at up to 11fps.

    No increase? Well, a pseudo increase? With no sensor size increase, that's a bit of a letdown. I'd have thought they at least tried to match the 1DX.

    The shorter viewfinder (and AF) blackout time allows AF @ 11 FPS, the D4 can only shoot 10 FPS with AF.
  • Options
    FergusonFerguson Registered Users Posts: 1,339 Major grins
    edited February 26, 2014
    The shorter viewfinder (and AF) blackout time allows AF @ 11 FPS, the D4 can only shoot 10 FPS with AF.

    Understood. But with no increase in the no-AF speed, it's not exactly something to write home about (that's why I said a "pseudo increase").

    One of the issues I find with the D4 is that during bursts while focusing, it is a bit erratic about the focus. Even on a relatively stable target, in a burst of 5, you might find 1 or 2 pretty grossly out of focus, as though it grabbed focus incorrectly (mirror still moving, whatever). It's not very precise, in other words. It is quite accurate (very accurate indeed) when it does focus, but enough times it misses to be hopeful that the shorter blackout time may result in fewer of these bad frames.

    But I guess only time and a bunch of users will tell.

    For me and what I'm reading the biggest news may be (if it holds up) the higher ISO performance. No matter the glass, I still end up in venues (for sports) where the light is just not adequate, and every stop of improvement is really big.
  • Options
    perronefordperroneford Registered Users Posts: 550 Major grins
    edited February 26, 2014
    From what I've heard (and seen second hand) this is much improved. That was an issue I believe with the SI guys and accounts for why some never moved forward with the D4. I'll have to ask if they will move forward now.


    Ferguson wrote: »
    One of the issues I find with the D4 is that during bursts while focusing, it is a bit erratic about the focus. Even on a relatively stable target, in a burst of 5, you might find 1 or 2 pretty grossly out of focus, as though it grabbed focus incorrectly (mirror still moving, whatever). It's not very precise, in other words. It is quite accurate (very accurate indeed) when it does focus, but enough times it misses to be hopeful that the shorter blackout time may result in fewer of these bad frames.
  • Options
    MGRPhotoMGRPhoto Registered Users Posts: 55 Big grins
    edited February 26, 2014
    Ferguson wrote: »
    >>New image processor, EXPEED 4, 30 percent faster than the EXPEED 3 in the D4.

    OK, about 2 years - in 2 years you expect about more than that in any other computer system, wouldn't you?

    Well Intel for example has traditionally increased their processing power about 10% overall from year to year. So that would be 20% over 2 years. More recently they've only been hitting about a 5% increase. So a 30% increase in 2 years is quite significant. It's somewhat of an apples to oranges comparison though.
    Ferguson wrote: »
    >> Standard sensitivities from ISO 100 to ISO 25600

    Now if that translates into a full stop improvement in ISO performance all along the way, that might be a significant one.

    Typically an increase in the upper native limit equates to cleaner imaging in the lower ISO range as well. Most people appreciate the lower ISO improvement over the increase at the top end.
  • Options
    jheftijhefti Registered Users Posts: 734 Major grins
    edited February 26, 2014
    MGRPhoto wrote: »
    Typically an increase in the upper native limit equates to cleaner imaging in the lower ISO range as well. Most people appreciate the lower ISO improvement over the increase at the top end.

    I don't know about Nikon, but Canon has grossly exaggerated their high-ISO range for the past two generations of 1D bodies. The Mark III has a high ISO of 6400, which no one expects to be decent. Still, shooting at 2000 or a little above gives reasonable results. Then the Mark IV came along with a high ISO of 102,400, but anything above 3200 gets pretty noisy. Now we have the 1DX, which goes up to 204,800. I can shoot up to 6400 with decent results, but again things start to get ugly above that.

    Again, don't know about Nikon, but I wouldn't take upper limit of ISO to mean very much about the high ISO capabilities of a given camera.
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,830 moderator
    edited February 26, 2014
    Supposedly, there are a few images circulating of the Nikon D4S at Sochi:

    Nikon_D4s_gracie-gold-celebration.jpg

    usatsi_7725107.jpg

    usatsi_7724878.jpg

    usatsi_7721615.jpg
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    FergusonFerguson Registered Users Posts: 1,339 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2014
    MGRPhoto wrote: »
    Well Intel for example has traditionally increased their processing power about 10% overall from year to year. So that would be 20% over 2 years. More recently they've only been hitting about a 5% increase. So a 30% increase in 2 years is quite significant. It's somewhat of an apples to oranges comparison though.

    That's a surprising number (5-10% per year). And in some brief searching it seems surprisingly hard to find, since clock speeds have been down while core count up, and how to compare.

    I did find a CS5, 2010 benchmark and a CS6 2013 benchmark, where processing time went from 73 seconds for the then fastest desktop CPU to 47 seconds. That comes out to be just under 17% per year, which surprises me if representative, I would have thought it was more.

    But it's interestingly close to the 30% for two years.

    Guess I'm still living in the 80s when it increased faster.
  • Options
    NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms Registered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2014
    Ferguson wrote: »
    That's a surprising number (5-10% per year). And in some brief searching it seems surprisingly hard to find, since clock speeds have been down while core count up, and how to compare.

    I did find a CS5, 2010 benchmark and a CS6 2013 benchmark, where processing time went from 73 seconds for the then fastest desktop CPU to 47 seconds. That comes out to be just under 17% per year, which surprises me if representative, I would have thought it was more.

    But it's interestingly close to the 30% for two years.

    Guess I'm still living in the 80s when it increased faster.

    It's faster than that, the current equivalent CPU's benchmark 80-100% faster than my W3540 from 2010.
  • Options
    perronefordperroneford Registered Users Posts: 550 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2014
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    Supposedly, there are a few images circulating of the Nikon D4S at Sochi:


    There are many images from the D4s at Sochi. My friend shot it for weeks. His images showed about a half stop (by my estimation) improvement over what I'd seen with the D4. And the D4 was very slightly better than the D3s.
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,830 moderator
    edited February 27, 2014
    There are many images from the D4s at Sochi. My friend shot it for weeks. His images showed about a half stop (by my estimation) improvement over what I'd seen with the D4. And the D4 was very slightly better than the D3s.

    Considering how good the Nikon D3S and D4 are, that's pretty high praise.

    WTG Nikon! thumb.gifclap

    I'm hoping that the high-ISO improvements also translate into a slight improvement in dynamic range.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Sign In or Register to comment.