What is the benefit of a D4 against a D800

shawnino

@DEJ: It's a deduction. Nikon's financials discussion said the high-end didn't sell well. Given how long it took D800/800E to come into stock, which would imply they were selling those as fast as they could make them, the implication is that the D4, which was not a massive improvement over D3s, didn't sell well.

Now that's still deduction and not fact, and here's why: D4 sales would be a very small part of both of Nikon's top and bottom lines. Anyone trying to slough off Nikon's bad string of quarters on slow D4 sales, well, that's not realistic. IMO, they've been crushed on P&S and, outside Asia, the 1-series only sells when it is offered at break-even/loss.

So make of it what you want. I've ranted in other threads about how I think Nikon management are either completely deceitful or completely idiotic, so I won't go on at length about that here. But the deduction stems from Nikon's own claim that the high end revenue has been underwhelming.

Minispud

I'm not made of money and can only afford one body. Are you suggesting I rent a body for my trips. Is this not false economy as after a few times I could have paid for a body and or lens for what I've paid to rent.

Juergen

I'm not made of money and can only afford one body. Are you suggesting I rent a body for my trips. Is this not false economy as after a few times I could have paid for a body and or lens for what I've paid to rent.

This would be difficult to answer for us. We do not know your budget, we do not know the level of (financial) pain you are willing to take for the "once in a life-time" safari experience.

Regarding the camera bodies, which this thread is about, you have been given a lot of good advises.
They range from "get a D4 as a single body" up to "keep the D800 and buy a used D3s as a second body.
Also regarding lenses you got a lot of good options.

The question for wrong or right economy is now for you to answer. It requires to obtain rental rates you would be able to get for the duration of your trip(s).

Sorry, I did not mean to shut you question down :-) I am really looking forward to learn what you have decided on and why. And I am very much looking forward to see your safari photos on PAD.

Jürgen

donaldejose

Does anyone have any take on how many people who were shooting a D3 or D3s elected to keep shooting those bodies and not upgrade to a D4? I would think all pros would want the extra 4 megapixels in case their work was enlarged. Now if you were just taking photos of your kids playing soccer sure you could stay with a D3 but you are not a professional shooter. I would have thought most pros don't consider the cost of the body to be a serious factor. They just take the best they can get currently and amortize the cost as a capitol equipment cost. I wish I were in a position to do so.

obajoba

I haven't shot a D800 but I can promise that a D4 will handle the abuse of a safari better than a D800. If I had a D800 would I "trade up" to a D4? Not sure. Would I trade my D4 for anything else on the market? No.

As for 70-200VRII+1.7TC for safari? Here is an example from South Africa, my D4+70-200/2.8VR+TC-17e III (note that my lens is the original VR, not the VRII)

http://www.obajoba.com/Safari/i-tQ5sBd8/XL (larger view)

Ade

@donaldejose

Hard to tell. Remember that the D3/s came at a time we had some major changes in camera technology, and so had wide appeal beyond the dedicated sports shooter.

In the pro-body line, the D3 was the first to have an FX sensor. Compared to its predecessor (D2H/s), resolution tripled from 4mp to 12mp. Nikon finally let go of LBCAST in favor of a superior CMOS sensor. High-ISO performance took a huge leap from ISO 1600 to 12800 in the D3s. An all-new 51-point AF system was introduced to replace the aging 11-point system. The imaging pipeline was improved from 12-bits to 14-bits. And with the D3s, HD Video was introduced for the first time.

Those were all huge changes, and if you were a pro of any kind, the D3/s was the clear go-to camera, and the price can easily be justified.

By the time the D4 came around, the revolution was over and the improvements were modest. You get marginally higher resolution (4mp equates to only ~300 additional pixels on each horizontal side). The ISO performance is about the same, or even a bit less per pixel. You get 1 extra fps. You get subtle improvements in AF. The biggest change was actually going from 720p to 1080p video, but most photographers didn't care.

No doubt, the full-time sports shooter would benefit from upgrading to the D4. But the decision isn't so clear for all those other pro photographers who bought into the D3/s world. $6000 is a lot to pay for modest improvements. Plus, while the D3/s was the clear choice at the time, today there are plenty of alternatives to the D4, as the subject of this own thread indicates.

Photobug

I haven't shot a D800 but I can promise that a D4 will handle the abuse of a safari better than a D800. If I had a D800 would I "trade up" to a D4? Not sure. Would I trade my D4 for anything else on the market? No.

As for 70-200VRII+1.7TC for safari? Here is an example from South Africa, my D4+70-200/2.8VR+TC-17e III (note that my lens is the original VR, not the VRII)

First great picture from the safari. I also have the older 70-200/2.8 and 2 years ago finally got the TC-17e. Should have done that a long time ago. It's very impressive how sharp these two are but then again they were designed to work together. I am supper happy with the combination and have nailed some great bird shots with this combo. Thanks again for posting the picture.

donaldejose

Ade: Yes, the consensus was that if you were shooting a D3s the upgrade to a D4 was minor and it might be better to wait for the D4s. But if you were shooting a D3 the upgrade was significant and if you were shooting a D3x the upgrade in ISO was significant even though you lost some megapixels. So I thought many D3s shooters did not upgrade, but I don't know for sure. I thought most D3 shooters did buy a D4. Don't know if D3x shooters were more enamored of the extra megapixels over the new features of the D4. It was really just the D3s group I thought had few D4 takers.

Ade

Yea it's difficult to tell without hard data. Anecdotally lots of people with the D3 upgraded to the D3S. Did most of them upgraded again to the D4? I have no idea. Also, back then, many would-be D3 owners purchased a D700 instead. Chances are most in this group upgraded to the D800 instead of the D4 (me included).

I doubt that many D3X shooters purchased a D4, especially after the D800 came out. Those who didn't buy a D800 probably just stayed with the D3X or converted to medium format.

Ade

I haven't shot a D800 but I can promise that a D4 will handle the abuse of a safari better than a D800. If I had a D800 would I "trade up" to a D4? Not sure. Would I trade my D4 for anything else on the market? No.

You know what can handle even more abuse than a D4? Two D800s. Cheaper, too.

WestEndBoy

And more redundant, flexible and almost 5 times as many pixels.

paulr

Ade, I doubt that many D3X shooters purchased a D4, especially after the D800 came out. Those who didn't buy a D800 probably just stayed with the D3X or converted to medium format. - See more at: http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/2044/what-is-the-benefit-of-a-d4-against-a-d800/p2#sthash.gRuBmCz1.dpuf

I did come from a D3X to the D4,and now the D3X seems like an old camera in comparison, The dynamic range of the d4 is in a different stratosphere , The difference 4 years makes in technology is truly amazing and Medium format cannot handle the FPS that the D4 can shoot at. If the D4X comes out, the cost will very high like the D3x was, so in real terms you would have to wait a year before prices became realistic. These days, even Pro shooters do not have bottomless pockets.

Photobug

Just wait for the D4x to hit the market next year and all those D3X and D3S, and D4 hit the used market on eBay and camera stores. I expect the demand for used D4 will be high.

ChasCS

@Golf007sd
What would you do with this stack? Smile ;-)




Michael Marcovici has created an artwork worth a billion dollars, out of a billion dollars.

In the words of the artist “One Billion Dollars is stacked on 12 standard pallets, altogether 10 Million 100 USD Notes. One Billion Dollar is not so much about what you see but what you could do or not do with the money. Besides this it is the most expensive piece of art ever made.”

The final product is nothing exceptional except that one can see real hard cash stacked up together in one place. According to Artbase, there is a strategy currently being employed to physically realise this project…

However Michael Marcovici points out that “actually no bank has this amount of cash, there are several cash handling facilities where the old money gets exchanged to new notes and where money from large retailers is handled, places like those have sufficient amounts of cash for such an action, the problem is just that it is expensive to do it because timing is very tight already in these places (and security too)…”

“for now its a concept and maybe it will stay one… thats fine, it was mainly to draw attention to the part that value and pricing plays in art and everything else…”

But again, to house such an expensive work of art, Safe Vault is the only option!


I would buy all the new Nikon lens collection... Hahaha, and build a house to store them in...

FreezeAction

I've been debating myself for hours on end between the D800/D800E and the D4. I've come to the conclusion that only having both tethered to me will suffice some days. As said earlier in a post these two bodies complement each other. Neither can accomplish what the other does according to Nikon published specs. So my take is for now being I have the original nearly ten year old action body I'm leaning the D800E for landscape knowing, at least hoping, for a price break on the D4 when that infamous D4X makes a day view. Having 2 bodies with the appropriate glass on them just makes sense for some of the events I get myself into. I've needed those 36 MP with a 24x70 one moment and the D4 with a 70-200 the next.

So an imaginary if I was going on a safari and wanted even larger poster size prints on my wall I'd have to opt for the D4. It is beyond a once in a life time trip, it is maybe a once in a life time shot to make. How often will anyone get on one safari a chance to capture a cheetah and gazelle in the same frame and print it to 24x48? My money is on the D4 hands down. I'd put money on the 200-400 lens most app to get the job done. Wish I could speak from experience but I can't. If the op was going to shoot equestrian, rodeo, etc I could chew the fat but safari has only been a dream since the 70's.

Ade

It's virtually certain we'll see a D4X or a D4S (or both) in 2014, so I don't see a big rush for a D800 owner to buy a D4 now.

Let's face it, the D4 was a disappointment for Nikon in terms of sales. Nikon also placed questionable bets on a couple technologies (XQD, which is proving to be a dog compared to CFast2, and an old wired Ethernet port that's actually slower than USB3).

So Nikon has incentive to come out with different or improved model(s) as soon as possible. Personally, I'd wait to see what comes out vs. buying a D4 now.

According to the main blog the D4S seems very likely now. Any guesses on specs?

Also what's the real chance we'll see both a D4S and a D4X in the same year?

Juergen

I actually was thinking the D4X would be coming out first. The media attention of the winter olympics is overrated in my opinion, and maybe Mr. Nikon sees it the same way.
I am having difficulties to see with what kind of spec Nikon would want to lure the sports and action shooter into a new camera with.
Two XQD's would be a welcomed change, but no reason to spent a couple of thousands for an upgraded camera body. I at least have made my peace with the two different slots.
USB 3, yep, buys you a couple of seconds quality life time after uploading your pics. If you are doing it directly from the camera. Most people I know are loading their pics with the USB 3.0 card reader.
Upgrade the 16MB to 24 MB at the same frame rate would be ok, but no reason to spend a lot of cash.
Enhancing the battery life with a new Expeed from 2600 pics to 3000 pics? Fine, but would that make you carry less spare batteries to a sports shooting? Don't think so.
So whom would Nikon try to attract with a D4S? Maybe the sports shooters which are still using their D3s (there are a lot of them out there).

I have been to the Nikon Service Center a couple of month ago when they just received a new shipment of D3x's. I was surprised that people are still buying those, but Nikon people told me it is still a well sold camera.

So in essence I believe Nikon does not give anything about the winter olympics and brings out the D4x with an insane megapixel count, great high ISO performance and dynamic range, onboard WIFI for studio work.

Jürgen

challydeano

The D4 is quite simply a photojournalism camera. And the d800 is an illustrative camera. Nikon wants you to buy both.

paulr

I did, but found I was using the D810 more and with the grip it's slightly heaver.

haroldp

I actually make the majority of my money shooting sports, though I am a bit of a generalist and work in fashion, as well. That being said, I shoot sports not for newspapers, but for clients who want image quality. I've found that I MUCH prefer 4 fps at 36mp to nearly three times that at 16mp. My clients, including the covers of many magazines, are constantly amazed at how much better my image quality and framing is compared to other shooters. My secret is simple. I crop the image to perfection, I do a ton of post work, and I'm careful about the shots I take.

Well said.

.... H

challydeano

It's hard to beat that image size.