Nikon announces a new flagship model : D4s

[ricktas]

Nikon has just announced the Nikon D4s

http://www.nikon.com/news/2014/0225_dslr_01.htm

http://www.nikon.com.au/en_AU/produc...lr-cameras/d4s

[hectic3]

Here is a quick comparison guide to the old D4. Quite a few more changes than I thought it would have and quite a bit surrounding video. I wonder if the AF is better than the D4 as I have tracking issues at times...

[Cage]

Just had a look at the release page.

Wow, ISO expandable to ISO409,600. I'm still trying to justify going over about ISO800.

And 16.2 Megapixies. They must be very special megapixies. Is there something wrong with the 24Mp in my D600, or the 36.3Mp in the D800?

I'm a little underwhelmed and a tad confused. I guess I was expecting a modest quantum leap (I think that's an oxymoron) but just couldn't find it.

And do they honestly expect to be swamped with pre-release orders when they haven't nominated an asking price.

[MissionMan]

Just had a look at the release page.

Wow, ISO expandable to ISO409,600. I'm still trying to justify going over about ISO800.

And 16.2 Megapixies. They must be very special megapixies. Is there something wrong with the 24Mp in my D600, or the 36.3Mp in the D800?

I'm a little underwhelmed and a tad confused. I guess I was expecting a modest quantum leap (I think that's an oxymoron) but just couldn't find it.

And do they honestly expect to be swamped with pre-release orders when they haven't nominated an asking price.

Canon has consolidated their pro body into a single offering, I think Nikon is still intent on having two separate cameras so you can expect a high megapixel pro body.

[I @ M]

And 16.2 Megapixies. They must be very special megapixies. Is there something wrong with the 24Mp in my D600, or the 36.3Mp in the D800?

The "special" part of those 16.2 Megapickles is that they can be captured at twice the speed, 11 FPS in the D4s and 5.5 FPS in the D600, because the time spent moving data is heavily constrained by how much data needs to be moved.

[MissionMan]

In his defence, Canon has had a 18mp 12fps camera out since 2012 so you could argue Nikon are behind before they even start.

[arthurking83]

In his defence, Canon has had a 18mp 12fps camera out since 2012 so you could argue Nikon are behind before they even start.

Don't be fooled by pure numbers!

Canon's 12fps has limitations, in terms of AF, ISO settings, and internal temperatures.(that I've read about).

It's a moot point really, but the D4s in all round user terms, is slightly more advanced in frame rate speed with (as far as can be determined) no limitations on the camera settings when set to 11fps.

[k8ez]

I was on the verge of getting a D4 , but held off when I heard this was coming - that was back , ummm, ages ago. Glad I waited . Under $7000 sounds good whoever said that. We shall see what price is set here.

[Sar NOP]

The AF system of this new D4s is completely different from the one in the D4 : much much better !!!





D4s, 200/2 VRI, @f/2, 2200 ISO. AF-C & Group Area AF.




D4s, 200/2 VRI, @f/2, 5000 ISO. AF-C & Auto.

[ROA44]

Well those shots seem to speak for themselves SAR. but prices still out of my reach at the moment. But like the clarity and definition.

[fillum]

Great POV + metadata.

http://Nikon D4s - football TEST: ht...be/0icO3SSSDLE

Sent from my Nexus 5

Linky no worky...

I think this is what you were after...





Cheers.

[ricktas]

Cheers Phil.

Phone post via Tapatalk.

How do I edit my posts?

you can only edit posts for 60 minutes from the original post time. Then they are locked.

[snappysi]

That video above is crazy...... fps is almost at video speed... he must have taken 1000 pics during that 3 min clip.....capturing the action has never been easier it would seem....

[arthurking83]

...... fps is almost at video speed... he must have taken 1000 pics during that 3 min clip.....capturing the action has never been easier it would seem....

Not to mention the fact that it's now quicker for Nikon to test shutter durability too.

In less than 10 hours of continuous shooting, you could exceed the expected 300,000 duty cycle that shutter is rated for.

[MissionMan]

Just had a look at some of the high ISO samples and it is pretty amazing to see how these cameras progress with their handling of noise.

You can find some here:

http://nikonrumors.com/2014/03/10/nr...-cameras.aspx/

If you download some of the ISO51200, they really are pretty remarkable in terms of how good the noise levels are and how usable a ISO51200 photo can be. The ISO51200 eclipses my D700 ISO6400 by a substantial margin as my ISO6400 is probably on a par with the ISO102400.

[arthurking83]

LOL!

I'm not entirely convinced that the images via the NR links are the best way to see how good this camera's raw files can be.

Imaging Resource have posted up their D4s images and are a slightly better source for downloading comparative images.
That is, you can download images from a myriad of cameras you may be interested in comparing and seeing for yourself how good/bad each image looks to you.
I only downloaded ISO12800 and above raw files.

FIWIW: a couple of caveats too tho. You would expect that the images were shot on a scene, where the scene's lighting is maintained to be a consistent level for all cameras.
But of the images I downloaded(D4s, Df and D3s ... I didn't bother with D4 as they'd be technically similar to the Df anyhow!) there seems to be an anomaly, which explained in a few ways.

The issue: The D4s images available for download compared to the Df and D3s images are of a brighter overall Ev value, even tho a faster shutter speed was needed on the D4s!
All other setting being equal, the D4s images were shot at 1/3200s where the Df and D3s images were shot at 1/2500s .. and still, the D4s images were brighter.

possible reasons:
1. IR, had added light to the D4s scene(very bad on their part, and I'd expect .. or at least hope!... this explanation to be less likely)
2. D4s ISO settings are measured differently by Nikon compared to their respective Df and D3s ISO ratings.
3. D4s light meter is tweaked differently to the other cameras.

Either way, the images are slightly skewed on IR. Even tho the D4s images were shot with 1/3Ev less exposure, they are 1/3Ev brighter than both the D3s and Df images for each ISO rating.

But one thing I've noted on the images I downloaded from IR, the D4s is definitely slightly better than the Df in terms of high ISO IQ.
It's not by much, and it should be said I'm only looking at these images from Nikon's software point of view(LR is yet to support the D4s anyhow).

The one benefit in using Nikon's software to compare the raw files, is that you can visualise what NR settings Nikon use on the cameras at high ISO(even tho NR is set to off in camera! ).
The NR used in camera can be turned off in Nikon's CNX2 and CNX-D software(but not VNX2), so that you can determine more accurately the inherent noise in the sensor .. and D4s wins by a small margin.
Has to be said tho, the D3s still holds up very well considering how much older it is.
Manufacturers seem to have hit a bit of a wall in terms of improving sensor SNR levels.

If Nikon can't squeeze a 1Ev advantage in high ISO with the next generation of this camera(ie. D5, or whatever) as well as an increase in resolution ... they're going to struggle to sell them.

[MissionMan]

LOL!

I'm not entirely convinced that the images via the NR links are the best way to see how good this camera's raw files can be.

True, but it also depends on what you are comparing it to. If you have a D4, you're probably not going to have a compelling reason to jump. If you have a D3S, you might have a bigger reason, but coming from the D3, the jump become substantial and the difference becomes far more noticeable.

For me, comparing to what I have right now (D700), the jump becomes fairly major, much the same as my jump from the D50 (where ISO800 was noisy) was a major jump.

[arthurking83]

If you take the IR images as an example, and use Nikon's software to review them, you'll be surprised at how well the D700 still compares against the D4s.

Even at ISO12800(on both D700 and D4s) using IR's studio images(the images that have SL in the filename .. which I assume SL is referring to Studio Lighting), the D700 images still look quite good with minimal noise reduction settings.

The in camera NR setting is quite high compared to the D4s(as you'd expect), and via Nikon's software you can see that Nikon set NR at ISO12800 at:

Intensity 30, sharpness 5 on the D700
and
Intensity 6, sharpness 5 on the D4s

Using CNX-D, I set NR to off, and the D700 looks very noisy, both in terms of grain and colour noise.
I then set the Intensity to 5 on the D700 image and some noise is removed, but not enough.
I then set Intensity to 10 and maintained 5 for sharpness, and the image looked basically noise free to the point where you could make a large-ish print and still have a decent looking print.
It's not as good as the D4s(nor Df) at the same sized output .. but it's still quite usable.
This time tho, the D700 was set to 1/2000s for shutter speed, and the image is actually brighter than the D4s image .. which makes sense, and what you would expect.

D700 is still an extremely capable camera considering it's age.

Years ago, the step from D70s(same as D50 sensor) to say a D80 was a significant jump, both in terms of ISO, and importantly in terms of other abilities too.

Nowadays it seems that other capabilities of the camera make the most compelling reasons to update/upgrade .. for example the focusing is supposed to be on a new level with the D4s .. more so than just the ISO improvements.

[MissionMan]

Ignore my previous comment. I was looking at the website I posted instead of the one you were referring to.

[Sar NOP]

Nearly 5,000 photos with my D4s : this is a much better camera than the D4 (when I compare to the 6,000+ images I took with a D4). At high ISO (from 12,800), there is at least one stop advantage for the D4s i9n term of noise only. But the overall IQ of the D4s is much better than the D4. And I'm not talking about the AF performances here !
I have a few NEF files from a D3s, taken under artificial lights @6400 ISO : they look nearly as good as those of the D4s @25,600 ISO !!!

Look at this :

D4s, 200mm, f/5, 1/250", @102400 ISO.