Hi all, just trying to get some feedback from D4 users.

I am a canon user. I use a 1Dx and 5d mark iii and absolutely love them. Their AF is super fast, and they consistently produce tack sharp images in all situations. I saw this comparison online.

http://xerodigital.ca/canon-1dx-nikon-d4-compare-wedding-photographers/

Really made me wonder if this is true. I'm mainly talking about two things, the DETAIL and the AF speed.

If you go to the "autofocus consistency" section, you can see side by side shots done with 2 different lenses at similar settings. The 1dx just seems to have so much more detail/sharpness. To rule out a micro af adjustment issue, they did the test with two different lenses (85mm primes and 70-200 2.8s) and even shot it at f3.5 to get more depth of field. Still the difference to my eyes was drastic.

So for the D4 users out there, is this consistent with what you are finding? Sample outdoor portraits with focus on eyes are always welcome! I am just curious because I have a friend who is invested in the Nikon system (but not heavily), and is considering a D4...but he could easily switch systems if there is really that big of a difference in detail.

I always say stick with the system you are invested in, but when spending a whole lot of change for pro bodies I wouldn't be happy with such a drastic difference in performance. Thoughts on this? Or maybe sample people images in natural lighting at 100% to show that the issue was something specific to their D4...

**EDIT: I now have personally tried both cameras and there is NO difference in sharpness between the two cameras. I have good reason to believe that their testing was flawed, perhaps and issue with their particular lens. I also did not notice any green tint issue that they spoke of in the d4. Overall they are both comparable and I would be very happy to have either one. If I shot mostly in low light, I would in fact pick the d4 over the 1dx as it's ability to lock focus in continuous mode far exceeds the 1dx.

https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/54577

i thought nikon tweaked the green twinge in this fw update?

Yep, they did tweak the green screen issue I believe. But I was more so focusing on the image detail differences. I just am starting to think that they had a faulty D4? It's hard to believe that a pro body with good glass would not be able to produce "sharp" photos as their test is claiming.

That's why I was looking for some confirmation that this indeed is not the case. And if the detail differences really is there, then I would truly be disappointed with Nikon!

Photorph wrote:
To rule out a micro af adjustment issue, they did the test with two different lenses (85mm primes and 70-200 2.8s) and even shot it at f3.5 to get more depth of field..
That's not the way to do this, but just do a test and make AF fine tune. Maybe both lenses ot the cammera is not right.

hjanssen wrote:
Photorph wrote:
To rule out a micro af adjustment issue, they did the test with two different lenses (85mm primes and 70-200 2.8s) and even shot it at f3.5 to get more depth of field..
That's not the way to do this, but just do a test and make AF fine tune. Maybe both lenses ot the cammera is not right.

Yes I understand, but at f3.5.... could it be misfocusing by that much?? At f3.5 no camera should need micro adjustment due to the wider depth of field. I could understand at f1.4, but not 3.5. And the fact that it was two different lenses should also show it wasn't an af fine tune issue. They confirmed this later in their comments, that AF fine tune wasn't the issue. It was just the files lacked details.

no
http://www.pbase.com/crusader/image/143865967/original

i don't do wedding work

my life is full of inconsistent lighting and bad situations. just the way i like it.

everyone's got an opinion and the web is so full of them. with every new toy comes yet another barrage.

True everyone does have their opinion that they are entitled too. But I am looking at two aspects specifically and objectively, image detail and focusing speed. I think those can be beyond an opinion.

I am pretty confident that there was something wrong with their testing, but I just want to know for sure from other D4 users since I can't test out a D4.

My d4 has as much detail as their tests show from canon - probalby more. The images in their tests are clearly out of focus for the D4. And yes, even at f3.5 it's very possible the af micro adjust was out enough to soften the images.

http://www.ericmkleinphotography.com/blog/?attachment_id=216

The D4 is sharp. I tried the 1D-X with the new 24-70 II in good light and found the auto focus to be slightly faster than the D4, but not so much faster that I would want to switch systems. Both are excellent. The motors must be larger in the 1D-X. Everything else seems comparable except for the price. I got my D4 used for $700 under sticker and included the XQD card and reader. A 1D-X would cost me $1,700 more than the D4.

they are using lightroom, maby there pp could be a bit off optimal.

Steve Perry wrote:
My d4 has as much detail as their tests show from canon - probalby more. The images in their tests are clearly out of focus for the D4. And yes, even at f3.5 it's very possible the af micro adjust was out enough to soften the images.

+1 It would have been nice if they had check the lenses for the slightest focus issues.

For the record, my D4 works great, still have not done the update either.

Photorph wrote:
Hi all, just trying to get some feedback from D4 users.

I am a canon user. I use a 1Dx and 5d mark iii and absolutely love them. Their AF is super fast, and they consistently produce tack sharp images in all situations. I saw this comparison online.

http://xerodigital.ca/canon-1dx-nikon-d4-compare-wedding-photographers/

Really made me wonder if this is true. I'm mainly talking about two things, the DETAIL and the AF speed.

If you go to the "autofocus consistency" section, you can see side by side shots done with 2 different lenses at similar settings. The 1dx just seems to have so much more detail/sharpness. To rule out a micro af adjustment issue, they did the test with two different lenses (85mm primes and 70-200 2.8s) and even shot it at f3.5 to get more depth of field. Still the difference to my eyes was drastic.

So for the D4 users out there, is this consistent with what you are finding? Sample outdoor portraits with focus on eyes are always welcome! I am just curious because I have a friend who is invested in the Nikon system (but not heavily), and is considering a D4...but he could easily switch systems if there is really that big of a difference in detail.

I always say stick with the system you are invested in, but when spending a whole lot of change for pro bodies I wouldn't be happy with such a drastic difference in performance. Thoughts on this? Or maybe sample people images in natural lighting at 100% to show that the issue was something specific to their D4...

The D4 samples they show look like crap and nothing like what I get out of my D4's. I believe the 85 on their D4 needed some AF fine tuning. The D4 AF speed looked terrible in that comparison, but we have no idea how each of these cameras complicated AF settings were set, which makes a huge difference in speed vs accuracy for a given situation. The D4 set to factory settings for focus lock is a bit doggy but very accurate, and I suspect they did not mess around with focus tracking with lock-on, which has a huge impact on AF speed. I have my D4 set to "short" and I can use the 85 1.4 to shoot outdoor sports. Try that with a 85 1.2!

In summary, the results they show are not indicative of the performance I get with my D4's, and I believe the simple explanation is not having had a good working knowledge of both cameras at the time of the comparison. I would recommend renting both and comparing them yourself, taking the time to make sure each is set to give you the best performance for your needs, then make a decision. FYI, I left my Canon 1DsMKIII and 5DMKIII for Nikon.

311erin wrote:
Photorph wrote:
Hi all, just trying to get some feedback from D4 users.

I am a canon user. I use a 1Dx and 5d mark iii and absolutely love them. Their AF is super fast, and they consistently produce tack sharp images in all situations. I saw this comparison online.

http://xerodigital.ca/canon-1dx-nikon-d4-compare-wedding-photographers/

Really made me wonder if this is true. I'm mainly talking about two things, the DETAIL and the AF speed.

If you go to the "autofocus consistency" section, you can see side by side shots done with 2 different lenses at similar settings. The 1dx just seems to have so much more detail/sharpness. To rule out a micro af adjustment issue, they did the test with two different lenses (85mm primes and 70-200 2.8s) and even shot it at f3.5 to get more depth of field. Still the difference to my eyes was drastic.

So for the D4 users out there, is this consistent with what you are finding? Sample outdoor portraits with focus on eyes are always welcome! I am just curious because I have a friend who is invested in the Nikon system (but not heavily), and is considering a D4...but he could easily switch systems if there is really that big of a difference in detail.

I always say stick with the system you are invested in, but when spending a whole lot of change for pro bodies I wouldn't be happy with such a drastic difference in performance. Thoughts on this? Or maybe sample people images in natural lighting at 100% to show that the issue was something specific to their D4...

The D4 samples they show look like crap and nothing like what I get out of my D4's. I believe the 85 on their D4 needed some AF fine tuning. The D4 AF speed looked terrible in that comparison, but we have no idea how each of these cameras complicated AF settings were set, which makes a huge difference in speed vs accuracy for a given situation. The D4 set to factory settings for focus lock is a bit doggy but very accurate, and I suspect they did not mess around with focus tracking with lock-on, which has a huge impact on AF speed. I have my D4 set to "short" and I can use the 85 1.4 to shoot outdoor sports. Try that with a 85 1.2!

In summary, the results they show are not indicative of the performance I get with my D4's, and I believe the simple explanation is not having had a good working knowledge of both cameras at the time of the comparison. I would recommend renting both and comparing them yourself, taking the time to make sure each is set to give you the best performance for your needs, then make a decision. FYI, I left my Canon 1DsMKIII and 5DMKIII for Nikon.


Good reply! I hadn't thought about adjusting the af on the nikon to make it more responsive. Thanks for bringing that variable up.

thanks for the replies so far!

The question would be if you had a Nikon 85mm 1.4, 24-70 2.8, and an SB-900...would you get rid of that all and get the 1dx and canon glass? Or stick with what you have and get the D4. (cost is not an issue, yes the 1dx is more than the d4 but when spending that kind of money another grand or so isn't a big deal)

D4 is a great camera I am sure. But when making a recommendation to someone else if I want them to have the best of everything, I would suggest the best between the two. Is there anything the D4 has which the 1dx doesn't (keeping in mind with new firmware update 1dx can AF at f8 now).

I've been a Nikon shooter for over seven years - all professionally. I've had every pro body and even some of the prosumer bodies - not to mention all the glass. Never considered a switch until I got a D4. Simply put, I'm not happy with it at this point and time, and it's already at Nikon getting fixed after two weeks. Even the loaner I have is simply all over the place when it comes to the LCD, white balance (in general) and focusing.

Hard for me to say, but I shot side by side with my D3S yesterday and the D3S in everyday out performed the D4, aside from the file size.

Just my thought as of now. I'm this close to going to Canon for the 1DX.

patricksmith04 wrote:
Just my thought as of now. I'm this close to going to Canon for the 1DX.


I imagine you can't go wrong with a move to a 1Dx.

i would own one if $$ wasn't an issue.

i love my nikon stuff but the 1Dx appears to be "the" camera if money isn't an issue.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
Thom Hogan has a nice article you should read: "Are we analyzing small details too much?"



http://www.bythom.com/

I shoot action(snowboard, motorsports, etc) and have both Nikon and Canon equipment. Think twice before jumping ship to the 1Dx. In very low light, the D4 and D800(E) will focus where my 1Dx cannot. The AF, in good light, is a little bit faster the my D3s and my friend's D4, but you really need to use the right AF Case for the situation. My D3s was simplier to setup the AF. I am still learning to use the 1Dx AF system. The 1Dx has some pros and cons, but I really like it and is selling my D3s to one of my friend.

xtralight wrote:
I shoot action(snowboard, motorsports, etc) and have both Nikon and Canon equipment. Think twice before jumping ship to the 1Dx. In very low light, the D4 and D800(E) will focus where my 1Dx cannot. The AF, in good light, is a little bit faster the my D3s and my friend's D4, but you really need to use the right AF Case for the situation. My D3s was simplier to setup the AF. I am still learning to use the 1Dx AF system. The 1Dx has some pros and cons, but I really like it and is selling my D3s to one of my friend.


I have also heard that about the D4, in low light AF locks on easier. But that is only when comparing in extreme low light, and most won't be shooting in such low light conditions.

Any other advantages of D4?

D4 advantages thus far:
-locks focus in extremely low light where 1Dx cannot (not sure if it's a true advantage, as so few people shoot in extreme lighting conditions)
-better battery life

1dx advantages:
-better LCD
-Faster FPS
-larger view finder
-dual CF cards instead of 2 different formats
-more resolution (slightly)
-Faster and more responsive AF (this is the big one, the two or three comparisons I saw found more pictures to be in tack sharp focus with 1dx)

I still wouldn't feel comfortable recommending a D4 over 1dx if someone has to pick. The D4 can hold it's own, but in comparison I don't think it can keep up with it's competition based on what I have read online. Of course I haven't personally tested both, which is why I started this thread to see if there is really such gaps between the two bodies. Just like Xtralight in the previous post, it seems to me that anyone that uses a 1dx and d4/d3s decides to keep the 1dx or jump ship to over to canon. Did Nikon just drop the ball?