backtop


Print 18 comment(s) - last by EricMartello.. on Feb 27 at 7:08 PM

Nikon offers spec on its latest pro camera

Nikon has gone official with all the specification on the new D4S digital camera. The camera is aimed at the pro photographer and uses a new Nikon 16.2MP FX-format sensor that works in conjunction with an EXPEED 4 image processing engine.
 
The camera has a 51-point AF system and an ISO range that can go up to 409,600 on Hi-4 (the standard ISO range of that camera is 100-25600). Burst shooting at 11 frames per second is supported with auto focus and auto exposure during burst shooting.
 
Nikon also equips the D4S with a 91,000-pixel RGB 3D Color Matrix Metering III system. New RAW Size S files are supported along with JPEG, RAW NEF, and TIFF files.

 
The DS4 can record 1080p/60p video along with 30p or 24p full HD video depending on the needs of the shooter. The movies are stored in H.264/MPEG-4 format and can be up to 29:59 long per clip.
 
The camera promises faster transfer rates when offloading images to a computer thanks to an upgraded Gigabit Ethernet port. Images can be stored to CF cards and XQD cards with dual slots.
 
The DS4 uses a new EN-EL 18a battery good for up to 3,020 shots in single mode and 5,960 in continuous mode.
 
The D4S D-SLR camera will ship in March for $6,499.

Source: Nikon



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

A resolution bump wouldn't hurt
By EricMartello on 2/25/2014 6:36:22 PM , Rating: 2
The D4 is designed for speed, reliability and durability so while image quality matters it isn't top on the priorities list. The D4 should at least 24 MP resolution. That would have been a 50% improvement over the current model...while not at the D800's level, a solid point between high and low.

My guess is that they wanted the D4S to be able to crank up the ISO to keep its rapid-fire shot mode working in sub-par lighting conditions...but if you need 10-15 FPS rapid shooting to score a keeper you are just a crappy photographer. 6-8 FPS and photography skills beat out 10-15 FPS and no skill (which I'd say is a lot of people out there judging by the overwhelmingly high levels of garbage that people post to sites like flickr).




RE: A resolution bump wouldn't hurt
By SPOOFE on 2/25/2014 9:36:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The D4 should at least 24 MP resolution.

Nonsense.

quote:
My guess is that they wanted the D4S to be able to crank up the ISO to keep its rapid-fire shot mode working in sub-par lighting conditions

No need to guess about what is explicitly understood about the product: High ISO and rapid-fire is EXACTLY what Nikon has aimed for with roughly half of its professional DSLR's.

quote:
but if you need 10-15 FPS rapid shooting to score a keeper you are just a crappy photographer.

More nonsense. You don't know what you're talking about. Good photographers know what gear they need and how to best use it. Good photographers know the difference between sports/photojournalism and studio shoots. From this, Eric Martello, I can guess that you are not a very good judge of photography gear.


RE: A resolution bump wouldn't hurt
By EricMartello on 2/26/2014 5:32:55 PM , Rating: 2
He disagrees with me about bumping the resolution to 24 MP but can't say why. One has to wonder why spoofee trolls any posts about digital cameras with such vigor when he himself has a very limited knowledge of photography in general.

quote:
No need to guess about what is explicitly understood about the product: High ISO and rapid-fire is EXACTLY what Nikon has aimed for with roughly half of its professional DSLR's.


I like how you try to pretend you know what you're talking about when you don't. So "professional" = "rapid fire" and that's how we know? Now that's some 'nonsense'. I wonder if Nikon would stay in business long by making their cameras one-trick ponies with no versatility.

If you are a professional, it does not mean you are a good photographer. It just means you found someone somewhere to pay you for taking pictures. A willingness to travel a lot and be there, while taking rather dull pictures, can still get you paid.

quote:
More nonsense. You don't know what you're talking about. Good photographers know what gear they need and how to best use it. Good photographers know the difference between sports/photojournalism and studio shoots. From this, Eric Martello, I can guess that you are not a very good judge of photography gear.


Wrong again. Good photographers are a lot less concerned with gear and more about getting the shot. That means considering the scene, the framing, the lighting and such.

You are not a good photographer, so you don't know what does or does not constitute "good, great or excellent" in terms of photography. You probably take pictures of cats and flowers with a camera you spent $10K on and think that makes you "pro"...meanwhile the guy with a $500 camera and talent outshines you by taking well-thought out photos that make people stop and look.

Photography as a profession is definitely more hype than talent - but the truly talented few stand out from the droves of garbage with expensive cameras, a business card and a cookie-cutter portfolio. There are a lot of terrible snap-shooters out there calling themselves pros. No amount of gear is going to compensate for their lack of skill or talent - you should know.


RE: A resolution bump wouldn't hurt
By bsd228 on 2/26/2014 8:33:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You are not a good photographer, so you don't know what does or does not constitute "good, great or excellent" in terms of photography. You probably take pictures of cats and flowers with a camera you spent $10K on and think that makes you "pro"...meanwhile the guy with a $500 camera and talent outshines you by taking well-thought out photos that make people stop and look.


Exactly what I was thinking when you said "it needs 50% pixel count increase, for some reason I can't articulate" along with "no need for 10+ fps capability."

The logic you gave for the second 'point' suggests that a single shot camera is fine for people with any skill. But completely misses the market that the D4S (or Canon's 1Dx) targets.


By EricMartello on 2/27/2014 1:47:48 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Exactly what I was thinking when you said "it needs 50% pixel count increase, for some reason I can't articulate" along with "no need for 10+ fps capability."


Probably because you don't understand the benefits of higher resolution and no, 10+ FPS shooting capability is a "nice perk" but absolutely not necessary for any kind if professional work.

quote:
The logic you gave for the second 'point' suggests that a single shot camera is fine for people with any skill. But completely misses the market that the D4S (or Canon's 1Dx) targets.


The point is that higher rapid shooting modes are primarily desired by crappy photographers who rely on the law of averages to score something that would qualify as a "photo" from a trough of thousands of terrible snapshots.

The comment about a skilled photographer using a lesser camera means that if he knows how to take good pictures then he'll be able to assess the scene in his mind before looking through the viewfinder...so having 10-15 FPS and "hoping for the best" is unnecessary when you can take fewer pictures that are mostly usable "keepers".

In other words, rapid fire shooting is just as much a crutch for skill-less "pros" as is "scene mode" for people who are 'dabbling' in photography.


RE: A resolution bump wouldn't hurt
By SPOOFE on 2/26/2014 9:26:38 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
He disagrees with me about bumping the resolution to 24 MP but can't say why.

Huh? It was in the very next paragraph: this is a camera built for speed. More pixels per image means more data to move, which means fewer pictures per unit of time. Learn to parse, eh?

quote:
So "professional" = "rapid fire" and that's how we know?

YES, you ignorant git, there is a huge demand in the professional world for very high shot-to-shot rates. I DESCRIBED THEM IN THE VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH, YOU STUPID BUTTFUCK: sports and photojournalists. The other emphasis is on absolute image quality, with speed a secondary concern: studio shoots, where conditions are better controlled. THIS HAS BEEN NIKON'S EXPLICIT PRO LINE-UP FOR OVER A DECADE.

You do not know what you're talking about, nor can you read for fucking shit. If you can't retain information across two sentences I'm pretty sure that qualifies you as a shrub.


RE: A resolution bump wouldn't hurt
By EricMartello on 2/27/2014 2:00:48 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Huh? It was in the very next paragraph: this is a camera built for speed. More pixels per image means more data to move, which means fewer pictures per unit of time. Learn to parse, eh?


You're one with the stupid, aren't you? This is a NEW camera. Maybe that faux technical limitation was a real thing with the original D4 but with current technology there is no reason that going from 16 MP to 24 MP should pose any kind of bandwidth limitations. Learn to follow technology, bro.

Your 'argument' might have been valid in 1996...but it's 2014.

quote:
YES, you ignorant git, there is a huge demand in the professional world for very high shot-to-shot rates.


Nobody misses the point quite like you do, champ.

quote:
I DESCRIBED THEM IN THE VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH, YOU STUPID BUTTF0CK: sports and photojournalists.


Wow, really? What do you think this is, 1983? LOL. So not only is your information about data processing technology woefully obsolete....you are just out of touch with the modern era in general.

Whatever a photojournalist could do with 10 FPS could be done with 4 FPS if said "journalist" had any skill. If he's a beacon of failure like yourself then he may as well lug around a 4K video camera that shoots at 60 FPS and then pull frames.

quote:
The other emphasis is on absolute image quality, with speed a secondary concern: studio shoots, where conditions are better controlled. THIS HAS BEEN NIKON'S EXPLICIT PRO LINE-UP FOR OVER A DECADE.


Of the Nikon's current offerings the D800 is the better choice for most scenarios, especially in situations where lighting is controlled. None of this, however, justifies the lack of a bump in resolution on the sensor.

It should be 24 MP and no less, end of story...even better, the D800's quality with the D4's speed + low-light capabilities and I'd buy that.

quote:
You do not know what you're talking about, nor can you read for fucking shit. If you can't retain information across two sentences I'm pretty sure that qualifies you as a shrub.


A shrub? Does that mean you want to take snapshots of me with your stepdad's hasselblad?

Sidenote - do you ever get tired of being wrong all the time? Because I'm not getting tired of always making you look like an a55 each time you decide to spread misinformation about digital photography.


RE: A resolution bump wouldn't hurt
By SPOOFE on 2/27/2014 11:59:04 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
with current technology there is no reason that going from 16 MP to 24 MP should pose any kind of bandwidth limitations.

Except each picture now requires 50% more bandwidth.

Yeah, there's no point in even trying with you. "More data doesn't take up more data." Christ, you're fucking stupid.


By EricMartello on 2/27/2014 7:08:33 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Except each picture now requires 50% more bandwidth.

Yeah, there's no point in even trying with you. "More data doesn't take up more data." Christ, you're fucking stupid.


If by stupid you mean consistently right...

When you say it like that it sounds like so much, but with RAW files averaging around 1 megabyte per megapixel, going from 16 MP to 24 MP requires a mere 8 MB/s additional bandwidth.

A quality SD memory card can easily sustain 50 MB/s writes so there is no problem there.

A modern computer (which anyone buying a $6K camera should have) can easily handle the slightly larger 24 MP files.

Leaving us only to wonder why Nikon couldn't be bothered innovate the D4 and is essentially releasing an incremental update that doesn't improve much upon the older unit.

Face it, slugger, there is no valid argument against a modest resolution bump from 16 to 24 MP.


RE: A resolution bump wouldn't hurt
By Monkey's Uncle on 2/26/2014 10:21:27 AM , Rating: 2
OMG It has no built-in flash! And *GASP!* has no top-mounted LCD! It must be junk! What are those Nikon guys trying to foist off on us!

It is a professional-level camera, not a enthusiast's toy. Yes indeed, photojournalists & sports photographers would give their eye teeth to be able to to shoot at 1--15 fps in low light and still maintain a level of quality that doesn't make their pictures look as grainy as a tile mosaic.


By EricMartello on 2/26/2014 5:50:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
OMG It has no built-in flash! And *GASP!* has no top-mounted LCD! It must be junk! What are those Nikon guys trying to foist off on us!


If you were trying to be sarcastic about superfluous digital camera features, you may want to mention ones that are actually useless - like preset scene modes or "art filters". A pop-up flash is better than no flash at all - contrary to the assumption that anyone who buys a D4 will also be lugging around a full-size external flash every time.

The top mounted LCD is extremely useful in viewing all current settings at a glance, especially in a studio setting when the camera is on a tripod. Otherwise you have to peer through the viewfinder or use the rear LCD screen - both things that would interfere with "rapid snapshot taking".

quote:
It is a professional-level camera, not a enthusiast's toy. Yes indeed, photojournalists & sports photographers would give their eye teeth to be able to to shoot at 1--15 fps in low light and still maintain a level of quality that doesn't make their pictures look as grainy as a tile mosaic.


Pro photographers are there to do a job. They're not there to be artistic or to 'enjoy' their work. They're not making considerate framing or lighting decisions...they are really just snap-shooters getting paid to spam shots.

Suggesting that these drones are somehow a valid basis for stating what features a "professional" camera should and shouldn't have is pure fail, and in no way does this contradict my point that it should have 24 MP. Add to that your implication that Nikon's other models could not be used in a professional capacity and your ignorance on this subject is quite obvious.

The D4 is a great, fast camera and in capable hands it can do amazing things...the fact is that most hands that will hold the D4 are skill-less, talent-less snap-drones who point it in the general direction of their subject and hold the button down hoping to get one good shot out of 100s of crappy ones.


By redhaar on 2/25/2014 12:36:02 PM , Rating: 1
new flash, Samsung's s5 has the same resolution that a nikon d4s has!... at 10 percent of the cost! /sarcasm.




By zozzlhandler on 2/25/2014 1:18:39 PM , Rating: 2
That's for those who believe equal resolution means equal cameras.


By WalkingDead on 2/25/2014 1:23:38 PM , Rating: 2
How's the Samsung at ISO 409,600? Looks like Monet? Tuner? Cézanne?


By ExarKun333 on 2/25/2014 4:09:53 PM , Rating: 2
You sir, are an idiot! :)


By bug77 on 2/25/2014 4:42:13 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, these Nikon guys are clearly clueless. </sarcasm>


By Spuke on 2/25/2014 6:02:22 PM , Rating: 2
LMAO! What a stupid comment!


By Sivar on 2/25/2014 6:14:17 PM , Rating: 3
+1 to restore comment from score 0.
Whomever down-rated the OP, note the "/sarcasm" tag at the end. :)


“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki