Hi Jorge, yes, just focussing on photo Nikon is claiming an improvement in high ISO, I think even 1 stop over the D3s given the 16MP sensor size would be "major", but that is just my opinion. Since there are no production models at this time none of us really know how good the D4 is and not just in high ISO, but if it's not much better than the D3s and the only major improvements are in video, then I would have to agree with you. I'm hoping that is not the case.
wjmeyer wrote:
Hi Jorge, yes, just focussing on photo Nikon is claiming an improvement in high ISO, I think even 1 stop over the D3s given the 16MP sensor size would be "major", but that is just my opinion. Since there are no production models at this time none of us really know how good the D4 is and not just in high ISO, but if it's not much better than the D3s and the only major improvements are in video, then I would have to agree with you. I'm hoping that is not the case.
Someone on dpreview posted raws taken with the D4 vs D3 side by side and based on those samples and also raw sensor analysis over there the D4 is almost identical to the D3s in High ISO noise performance across most of the tonal range, at the image level. The analysis indicates much better dynamic range though, especially at base ISO.
Dave_EP wrote:
I'm holding off the next body purchase in the hope that Nikon will have a rationally priced model that can do as well as - or better then - the 5D2 for video.
Another thought for you Dave, the video on the new CSC cameras is really impressive. Instead of holding onto a 5DII, why not look at the Sony NEX-7, the Samsung NX200, the new Fuji's and even the MFT (micro four thirds) format as the new Olympus OM-D is rumored to have some of the best HD video yet. Just a thought for you as I have been playing around with the MFT stuff and love their lens lineup (I used the Nikon V1 for a while but ultimately did not like the limitations with the smaller sensor).
snapsy wrote:
Someone on dpreview posted raws taken with the D4 vs D3 side by side and based on those samples and also raw sensor analysis over there the D4 is almost identical to the D3s in High ISO noise performance across most of the tonal range, at the image level. The analysis indicates much better dynamic range though, especially at base ISO.
Thank you snapsy, I like to wait for production models because often times pre-production doesn't have all the kinks worked out yet, but if this test is accurate that would be a shame because Nikon is talking about how much better the high ISO is... I suppose we'll find out in a couple months
wjmeyer wrote:
Hi Jorge, yes, just focussing on photo Nikon is claiming an improvement in high ISO, I think even 1 stop over the D3s given the 16MP sensor size would be "major", but that is just my opinion. Since there are no production models at this time none of us really know how good the D4 is and not just in high ISO, but if it's not much better than the D3s and the only major improvements are in video, then I would have to agree with you. I'm hoping that is not the case.
I agree. Who cares about what they are claiming... even just a little better low light focusing and just 1 stop better high iso performance than a D3s will make this camera a BEAST! I'm probably going to pick up one of these and a D800 if it really is 36MP.
Personally I'm glad Nikon is stepping up their video game. The D4 will be a nice improvement but now they need to take it all the way and go crazy with one of their bodies. Even if it was a dedicated video body. They can do it. No line skipping, 1080p @ 120fps minimum, raw, etc...
wjmeyer wrote:
Thank you snapsy, I like to wait for production models because often times pre-production doesn't have all the kinks worked out yet, but if this test is accurate that would be a shame because Nikon is talking about how much better the high ISO is... I suppose we'll find out in a couple months
Waiting for production models is perfectly reasonable. I wouldn't expect to see any difference in the IQ though. These pro bodies go through long development and testing cycles and so it's unlikely they would be tweaking anything related to the sensor or even the JPEG engine this close to production.
wjmeyer wrote:
Another thought for you Dave, the video on the new CSC cameras is really impressive. Instead of holding onto a 5DII, why not look at the Sony NEX-7, the Samsung NX200, the new Fuji's and even the MFT (micro four thirds) format as the new Olympus OM-D is rumored to have some of the best HD video yet. Just a thought for you as I have been playing around with the MFT stuff and love their lens lineup (I used the Nikon V1 for a while but ultimately did not like the limitations with the smaller sensor).
Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm hesitant to look at other brands right now.
I'm often shooting at ISO1600 - ISO2500 and the 5D2 is clearly head and shoulders above anything else I've tried. Even the 7D can't keep up, so going to even smaller sensors is probably not a good idea.
The 5100/7000 are too noisy and have bugs in the aperture adjustment. If the D800 is the same pixel density at the D7000 then it's not looking good.
The D4 is perfect - great high ISO, 100% crop mode (exactly what I've been hoping for), great wireless remote control and monitoring etc, but is too expensive to justify on ROI terms - we'd need 3 of them with a 4th as a backup body. We'd need to jack prices so high no one would be booking any more!
A D700s with 12MP and great video and wireless remote (like the D4) would be awesome
Dave_EP wrote:
I'm often shooting at ISO1600 - ISO2500 and the 5D2 is clearly head and shoulders above anything else I've tried. Even the 7D can't keep up, so going to even smaller sensors is probably not a good idea.
If you don't need video, the D700 is unbeatable for the price. Especially if you find a nice used one.
edit: I guess I should also mention that it's head over heals better than the 5D2.
Dave_EP wrote:
I'm often shooting at ISO1600 - ISO2500 and the 5D2 is clearly head and shoulders above anything else I've tried. Even the 7D can't keep up, so going to even smaller sensors is probably not a good idea.
I see, then that makes sense because the 5DII does reign in high ISO video at least right now. I would imagine the 5DIII would be even better. I was really hoping for a D700s that used the D3 chip and mostly likely Nikon would bump the video to full 1080p, but a 36MP sensor regardless of video has other drawbacks for me. Maybe I'll be proved wrong but I have my doubts.
wjmeyer wrote:
Thank you snapsy, I like to wait for production models because often times pre-production doesn't have all the kinks worked out yet, but if this test is accurate that would be a shame because Nikon is talking about how much better the high ISO is... I suppose we'll find out in a couple months quote<<
Please email me on February 16th.
I want to rush over and get a picture of your jaw hitting the ground
when we review the High ISO test pictures of the newly announced D800 on your computer.
We will do it in an otherwise dark room so I can check out Hi ISO 25600 with my new D4. ...Show more →
kawasakiguy37 wrote:
Lets just hope they magically include 4k out. Dreams
For me personally... resolution is wayyyy less important than an extremely nice quality output. 10bit, no line skipping, big dynamic range, fast frame rates, nice flat color profiles (even better would be a log profile), and a long shot would be RAW. Long shot because there is soo much that goes into a raw workflow it would take a lot of work for them to implement properly.
RRRoger wrote:
Please email me on February 16th.
I want to rush over and get a picture of your jaw hitting the ground
when we review the High ISO test pictures of the newly announced D800 on your computer.
We will do it in an otherwise dark room so I can check out Hi ISO 25600 with my new D4.
Roger, if I still lived in CA that would be awesome, I truly hope you're right about high ISO, but still, I am not thrilled about having 36MP RAW files, unless they've figured out some new lossless compression that keeps them below 20MB each
wjmeyer wrote:
Roger, if I still lived in CA that would be awesome, I truly hope you're right about high ISO, but still, I am not thrilled about having 36MP RAW files, unless they've figured out some new lossless compression that keeps them below 20MB each
The D3x 24MP files are consistently around 20MB (+/- 0.1 or 0.2MB) using lossless compression, and the 12MP files from the D3s are almost exactly half of that, so I'd expect that 36MP will yield 30MB files.
being a surf photrographer... i wouldnt mind the extra resolution since i shoot in bright light anyways. 36 mp would give me a lot of creative control with cropping....
