p.2 #1 · UPDATE! Impressed with my $6k expenditure...
I know a few people who are not happy generally with the AF on the D4, and feel the D3 was better. I can't say I agree from my experience, but shows people have differing expectations, needs, wants etc.
I think using examples of 'failures' against other types of equipment is irrelevant though. Especially audio gear (having owned a Hi-Fi business I can say that ).
However, there is no such thing as a zero failure rate. Sometimes it happens.
If this is indeed the issue,send it in, get it calibrated.
p.2 #2 · UPDATE! Impressed with my $6k expenditure...
I have come to think that gear, cameras in particular, are SO overhyped on internet forums that we have unrealistic expectations of them. Yes, I agree that if you spend $6k on a camera, it should work out of the box. However, every new camera I've ever bought was ultimately a disappointment at some level.
p.2 #3 · UPDATE! Impressed with my $6k expenditure...
Not sure what you mean. Does it routinely miss focus? Or is it slow to focus? Have you ruled out calibration issues with the lenses?
No camera manufacturer has a 100% QC. I shot Leica for years and there were complaints about QC issue with those expensive cameras. To my knowledge, the D4 has been relatively problem free compared to other new Nikon releases, such as the D600, D800, and D3. The OC on the D3s was pretty good.
p.2 #4 · UPDATE! Impressed with my $6k expenditure...
Two23 wrote:
I have come to think that gear, cameras in particular, are SO overhyped on internet forums that we have unrealistic expectations of them. Yes, I agree that if you spend $6k on a camera, it should work out of the box. However, every new camera I've ever bought was ultimately a disappointment at some level.
Kent in SD
I agree. but most of my disappointments have been with cameras with a C in their name.
p.2 #6 · UPDATE! Impressed with my $6k expenditure...
James R wrote:
Not sure what you mean. Does it routinely miss focus? Or is it slow to focus? Have you ruled out calibration issues with the lenses?
No camera manufacturer has a 100% QC. I shot Leica for years and there were complaints about QC issue with those expensive cameras. To my knowledge, the D4 has been relatively problem free compared to other new Nikon releases, such as the D600, D800, and D3. The OC on the D3s was pretty good.
I also previously suggested that the OP be a little more specific with the problem he's having. Saying its nit sharp at f5.6 isn't really helping. Is he saying its just producing sharp images? Is he saying its missing focus but can produce sharp images under controlled conditions?
Missing focus, that's one thing. Taking a shot of a still object on a table, with the camera in a fixed position and using live view and the images are still not sharp, well that's another thing.
We dot have enough info to go on to suggest its either an AF micro adjustment issue with a lens he's using, or if his AF system is faulty or if he's not using the AF system correctly. My guess is its not the latter since he's been using cameras before I was alive, but I know my D4 is the mutts nuts at focusing and I've only been using cameras properly for a few years.
I previously stated that sometimes it feels like cheating when I use the D4, and I meant it. I find hitting focus very easy, but totally agree that you need to understand the AF options and use the most appropriate type.
These are all D4. Focus was exactly where I told it to be. Sharp enough for you OP?
My guess is you've got a pup if you really can't achieve sharp focus, I completely agree 100% with other previous comments that your expectations are unrealistic when talking about electronic products. Regardless of the price you will always have items that are faulty.
I work for a manufacturing company and we produce almost 1 million products a year. Our QC is the absolute best in the business, proven, but we still see around a 2% return of products which become defective within the first year. Electronic items unfortunately have the potential to fail and you have to remember that many of the parts that make up your D4 are supplied by other component manufacturers. Whilst those parts may pass initial test and inspect processes once your camera is built, they may have an underlying issue that surfaces once the camera hits the consumer.
Anyway, I hope you get the situation sorted because its an incredible camera. The 1Dx is too however.
I will say the D4 is a great camera, but try the 1dx You may change your mind once you try that out.
Other people have had AF issues with D4, but when I tried out someone elses D4 there were no AF issues. It was focusing great, but comparitively speaking it felt much slower to me compared to my 1dx, the screen wasn't nearly as good for viewing images, and the colors looked flatter. The photos straight out of camera from 1dx are always tack sharp with amazing colors, I barely have to do any post processing...while with the Nikon I felt you had to do more work in post to get the colors the way you would want them.
If you live anywhere near south eastern Michigan, you are welcome to try my 1dx out and compare it with your D4 directly.
With all that said, if the 1dx didn't exist... I'd own a D4.
I never knew what the actual number was, but, we were not selling $6000 items (much higher).
Customers came back for repeat business, somebody was doing something right.
Our division had sales of over $1 billion. That was a nest egg the company wanted to protect.
Nikon should be concerned with their sales, by providing quality.
Yep, but returns rates of 2% average and manufacturing defects statistically recorded at final testing are 2 completely different things altogether. We are also a company that aspires to six sigma and we have six sigma black belts green belts and whatever belts you like charging around our business. I even went on a six sigma introductory course myself about 4 years ago. Very interesting.
I've never had to consider our manufacturing final test pass statistics as my customers have never asked, but I'm guessing ours are easily close to 100%, but we both know 3.4 units in 1 million is nonsense when you are manufacturing devices made up of several hundreds of electronic and mechanical components. Whist you can test the integrity of each electronic component, which we do of course, you can't ever know if a slight static discharge during the shipping, manufacturing, building, packing, handling process has caused internal damage to a tiny resistor or capacitor that may cause the unit to fail 6 months later. Equally, our products are installed by contract engineers who aren't exactly overly gentle with our products. Amazing how many people plug mains into a 10v input channel.
p.2 #12 · UPDATE! Impressed with my $6k expenditure...
well let me tell you if you post an image on the web it will have to be stomped down to a web usable size. you cannot be critical of a webshot. its the final full sized image that is either used or printed.
now that being said show him something you think is sharper and of higher detail.
p.2 #14 · UPDATE! Impressed with my $6k expenditure...
RJKphoto wrote:
CT, the eye photo on my camera would NOT flook that sharp. In my opinion the other two are nothing to write home about as an example of sharpness
I'm still not sure why people here post web sized images as examples of sharpness (or noise).
p.2 #15 · UPDATE! Impressed with my $6k expenditure...
RJKphoto wrote:
When I bought Macintosh audio gear, I paid a premium price, and the equipment delivered premium performance.
We're talking about statistical failure rates. "I once bought gear that didn't have a problem" is not evidence of anything.
All I'm saying is that everything in manufacturing has failure rates. In some very small instances where manufacturing runs are highly limited, margins are high enough, and the gear is simple enough, items can be tested individually. In all other cases, statistically significant sample testing is done, which means almost by definition that there will be gear that makes it out the door with problems.
I know you think $6k is a lot of money, but if they did individual testing of all of their gear, you can bet it'd be a whole lot more. You found a problem with the AF, but it's not like they'd only have to test the AF. What about metering? What about exposure timing? What about the menus and settings? What about all the buttons? Lens compatibility? Can you imagine how long it'd take to test everything?
Archive 2013 · UPDATE! Impressed with my $6k expenditure...
).
