Nikon D4x

TaoTeJared

The 4 K Canon EOS1DC is £10,000
a Leaf 40mp back £15,000

The Canon EOS1D"C" was built specifically for Video 1st - it shouldn't even be in the discussion. A dedicated video Nikon D4 is not what any reasonable person is believing this will be. Many may want one, but that should be it's own thread.

EOS-1D"X" is Canon's offering @$6,700.

iNikon

Now I too have a D4.
Yesterday It came.
It is the best and only good.

Fritz

Are we expecting too much from the D3s/D4 platform? After all, these cameras were designed with an eye towards photojournalism; speed, ruggedness and all-around competency are of most value. The D800/800x serve a different niche. What would be the point of a "super camera" in the heavy, rugged, D4 platform where extreme resolution is almost superfluous?

donaldejose

If it will sell, they will build it. Doesn't matter if no one actually needs it.

PB_PM

@Fritz The pro line has been split since the beginning. A lower pixel camera targeted at PJ's and a high MP camera targeted at studio and landscape shooters.

D1 Series: D1 fast, and high pixel count for its time. Followed by the D1H fast, & D1X high MP
D2 series: D2H, D2Hs high speed, and D2X, D2Xs high MP.
D3 series: D3 & D3s high speed, and D3x high MP.

Do you notice a pattern? There is no reason to believe that there wont be a high MP D4 series camera.

Fritz

I don't disagree that the line has been split since the beginning but my feeling is that the D800 really was a "game changer" and lessens the rationale for a D4x. A D4s maybe.....

SquamishPhoto

Really? My feeling is that Nikon was probably really excited to get exposure from the use of the D800 on shows like Dexter, but were a probably just a little frustrated that the camera was only playing a supporting role to an ALEXA. I wouldn't be shocked to see Nikon release a studio behemoth for both stills and video, and if they've been paying any attention for the last few years they'll also have their own line of cine lenses to go with it. Considering how varied and saturated the market is for cine lenses Nikon could easily compete with the mid-to-upper tier market, say $1000-$5000 price range.

jackdavisphotoman

I don't see them having a D4x with a massive amount of MP but a jump up to 24MP or maybe 36MP but with 15 to 20 fps. Nikon has been upgrading there line backwards, the D5200 and the D7100, now what about the FX line?

Msmoto

The mirror cycle time in a Nikon D3s is about 80 ms. At 10 FOS this is requiring 800ms to cycle the mirror up and down. At 11FPS 880 ms. Thus, the FPS is limited by the mechanical action of getting the mirror up and down.

My guess is that the technology for this is most likely at the end of development. It is doubtful that there is any way to get the mirror faster. So, I doubt we will see DSLR bodies much quicker in FPS.

sevencrossing

As ever, I may be wrong but
fps seem to limed by two things. the mirror and the speed the Expeed processor can write the files to the buffer
The latter seems to be problem with larger files; eg 36 mp RAW files on the D800
So if the D4x had 24 or 36 mp, Nikon are to address the write speed problem, that seem to be limiting the fps on the D7100; D600 and D800

spraynpray

@Msmoto: Doesn't he top Canon beat the D4 in fps by some margin?

Msmoto

The Canon EOS-1D X Body will do 12 FPS (Raw and Jpeg) or 14 FPS...but at reduced resolution. As to how well it follows focus at 12 or 14, I do not know.

obajoba

The Canon EOS-1D X Body will do 12 FPS (Raw and Jpeg) or 14 FPS...but at reduced resolution. As to how well it follows focus at 12 or 14, I do not know.

I think the 1Dx handles it fairly well, maybe a 75% keeper rate? I've heard several sports guys point to the D4 having better AF but being invested in Canon glass keeps them shooting Canon because a marginal performance gain isn't worth the switch. At some point you have to think that shooting 4K at 24fps would enable stills to be grabbed from video more easily than trying to shoot individual photos. (Cheating?)

PB_PM

The Canon EOS-1D X Body will do 12 FPS (Raw and Jpeg) or 14 FPS...but at reduced resolution. As to how well it follows focus at 12 or 14, I do not know.

The 1D X will only do 14FPS, if the mirror is locked up (no AF). It will only do 12FPS at shutter speeds of 1/1000s or faster (kind of a given), F2.2 or faster aperture is set, and if the lens it set to manual focus. It is only 10FPS above ISO3200.

obajoba

The 1D X will only do 14FPS, if the mirror is locked up (no AF). It will only do 12FPS at shutter speeds of 1/1000s or faster (kind of a given), F2.2 or faster aperture is set, and if the lens it set to manual focus. It is only 10FPS above ISO3200.

Holy snikees that's a lot to remember!

Blinkingeye

A few observations.

1. We don't need more pixels, we need better pixels, i.e. better noise handling, less CA and more DR across an ever widening range of so-called "native" ISOs.

2. Nikon should concentrate on building relationships to bring a truly well implemented video side of the camera be. Nikon is continually missing the mark on the video side.

3. A huge on-board processing engine to chew on video and huge still files would be nice.

4. More resolution will test even the newest lenses.

5. Redesigning the GUI on the LED screen would be time and money well spent. It is not very intuitive.

6. Better, faster, more reliable AF should happen. I would pay for that.

7. The above items are not as sexy as the pixel race so they will happen in increments, I suppose.

8. And, to the poster who brought up the price of the MF back, there is no doubt Canon/Nikon are trying to chip away at that market but DSLR will never have the look of MF. Also, if you want to talk price a used Pentax 645D can be found for about $7,000US and it is a fantastic camera.

spraynpray

The Canon EOS-1D X Body will do 12 FPS (Raw and Jpeg) or 14 FPS...but at reduced resolution. As to how well it follows focus at 12 or 14, I do not know.

The 1D X will only do 14FPS, if the mirror is locked up (no AF). It will only do 12FPS at shutter speeds of 1/1000s or faster (kind of a given), F2.2 or faster aperture is set, and if the lens it set to manual focus. It is only 10FPS above ISO3200.

That Canon fanboy that 'compared' the D4 to the 1DX seemed to forget to mention all that too... L-)

DenverShooter

As someone who does catalogs covers and posters more pixels are just what the client and there ad agencies/design folks want. My D800E I use delivers it but to think the world won't want more resolution beyond what a D800E can provide isn't being very realistic.

And yes I want more resolution for this type of work and that equates to more pixels and bigger hard drives and faster computers..

Moore's Law is fully in play in the digital photography world.

Denver Shooter

KewlEugene

Dreaming of mirrorless with electronic shutter for the D4x.

Of course a scaling up of every other detail imaginable as well ;-)

Ade

As someone who does catalogs covers and posters more pixels are just what the client and there ad agencies/design folks want. My D800E I use delivers it but to think the world won't want more resolution beyond what a D800E can provide isn't being very realistic.

Agreed. Many high-end commercial & architectural photographers have been delivering 80mp files for a few years now.

Msmoto

Well, now I know why the Canon shooters won't talk to me.....LOL )

Elvishefer

I don't think the Nikon 'x' and Canon 'x' will be conceptually the same kinds of camera.

I think the Nikon x will be big and fat and slow but very, very pretty (if you like that kind of thing).

I would bet any innovations around speed and buffer to appear in an 's' model instead.

TaoTeJared

The mirror cycle time in a Nikon D3s is about 80 ms. At 10 FOS this is requiring 800ms to cycle the mirror up and down. At 11FPS 880 ms. Thus, the FPS is limited by the mechanical action of getting the mirror up and down.

My guess is that the technology for this is most likely at the end of development. It is doubtful that there is any way to get the mirror faster. So, I doubt we will see DSLR bodies much quicker in FPS.

I know there was a canon film camera that did 12+ frames - and as above the current Canon's go high. If I'm not mistaken there is actually 2-3 photos taken, mirror flap, 2-3, flap, 2-3, etc. So basically the AF tracking engages 3-6 times per second. I could be wrong though.

Sony's translucent mirror is one way around this. I have been surprised that they haven't made a in-body window/lens for AF only skipping the mirror. Add that to a mirrorless body, and a sensor with an electronic shutter (turns sensor on/off) that could handle that speed and that would be the new game changer.

Ade

The old Canon film cameras used pellicle mirrors, similar in concept to Sony's SLT. The Canon EOS-1N RS did 10 fps. The Canon F-1 HS did 14 fps. Nikon also introduced a couple pellicles, including the F3H which reached 13 fps but was a commercial flop. These pellicle film cameras had to be careful about quickly accelerating then stopping the 35mm film stock so there was still a mechanical limit even though the mirror was fixed.

The new Canons (well, the EOS 1D X) reaches 14 fps with the mirror locked up. 12 fps otherwise.

The Pentax K20D had a 21 fps burst mode but that was achieved in part by dropping the resolution from 14.6mp down to just 1.6mp. The speed at full resolution was a measly 3 fps.

Beso

I thought this thread was about a D4x. I am patiently waiting for an upgrade to the D4 before purchasing another body and was hoping for at least as good a sensor at the D800. The combination of upgraded pixels and speed is very attractive.