Nikon D4x

WestEndBoy

Ade, when the price of an FX sensor is $100 (it will be someday) and the price of an MF sensor is $500 (it will be someday), I think the market for a format superior to FX will be a little bigger than 5,000 units annually.

I will be in line when Nikon makes an MF. Something that looks like the Fuji 6X9 line strikes my fancy.

We should change the subject back to the D4, or Msmoto is going to kick our buts over to a new thread...........sorry Msmoto.

scoobysmak

Everyone seems to think this is a MP camera Vs speed, so far I don't have a clue if any version D4/D5 would be released much less knowing if its an "x" or "s", but say they crossed the two in a since. Say they were able to keep the ISO and fps of the current camera but put in the 24 MP sensor they have and tweaked it? Maybe a few other things like wifi or something of that nature. I think it would depend on the price if it was going to help the financial area they have been lacking in.

Msmoto

NikonD4x….how on earth did medium format get in the discussion. The development costs for a new MF body, lenses, accessories would be beyond any possible profit. And the current MF market, as pointed out by Ade, is small.

In the 1960's I had the Nikon MF camera and it was called Zenza Bronica. Nikkor optics, but the early models had some film transport issues. It was sold to a friend who was a pro, Joel Strasser, and he used it for years and had no problems.

As to the D4x, if they could give us the same or better ISO, same FPS, a buffer for up to 100 images, and 36MP, this might be highly desirable….and no AA filter.

And, in all seriousness, I am quite tolerant of the "fantasy thread content"…..discussion of something we know nothing about... )

henrik1963

Not long ago all we had was 12MP cameras. The dream was 16MP maybe 20. Enter the D800. Now everybody wants 56MP. Funny how things can change so fast. If a 56MP camera comes I think Apple will sell a few of the new Mac Pros to handle the load :-) A bundle?

My 3 yr. old iMac is working hard when I dump 64GB worth of D800 pictures after a vacation. I can't imagine how it will handle a 56MP camera doing 10+ frames a sec. But bring it on :-o

donaldejose

Yes, bring it on. Give us all that technology is capable of producing at a reasonable cost and we will enjoy it: even if we really don't need it! I do hope Nikon produces a D4x in the range of 50mp. Then Nikon will also have to develop a new line of better lenses in the mold of the new Leica line for high mp sensor cameras. But, since this new pro body is coming out just before the Olympics it may more likely be a D4s than a D4x for better high ISO performance to freeze moving objects. They don't really need higher ISOs; just cleaner IQ at the high ISOs the D4 already produces; maybe a one stop improvement.

WestEndBoy

And, in all seriousness, I am quite tolerant of the "fantasy thread content"…..discussion of something we know nothing about... )

We wre providing feedback to Nikon, who is certain to be reading this, regarding what we want. Just like the D400 thread but much farther in the future.

Ade

I can see myself having two cameras in the future: a dedicated "studio" camera (medium format), and a lightweight location/travel camera (mirrorless).

It would be interesting if a Nikon would be part of that future.

WestEndBoy

For me it would be three:
-Pocket camera with great IQ (already have it with my Coolpix A)
-A Neica (think Leica complete with good selection of lens and optimized mount (shorter flange to focal plane distance etc.), but with auto-focus and made by Nikon
-The best and baddest all round DSLR $10,000 or less can buy. I bought my D800 over the D4 because of IQ. But if the D4x was out at the time and had the D800 sensor, I would have picked that. In fact, if it had the D800 sensor, shot 10 frames a second, could hold 100 raw images in the buffer and cost $10,000 I would have bought that.

I wonder if Nikon could do that for a D4x for less than $10,000. It would really serve notice to Canon, excite the market, build Nikon's image and I doubt it would conflict with the D800 market much.

Fritz

I agree with jshickele as to DSLR specs but I would add a body that's "armored" with an elastomer, switches and buttons recessed and fully waterproofed and a method of sealing the bayonet mount. All of course in a smaller lighter package akin to the D700/800. Its about time we had a PJ camera that's truly Mil Spec.

sevencrossing

In fact, if it had the D800 sensor, shot 10 frames a second, could hold 100 raw images in the buffer and cost $10,000 I would have bought that.

I wonder if Nikon could do that for a D4x for less than $10,000. It would really serve notice to Canon, excite the market, build Nikon's image and I doubt it would conflict with the D800 market much.

I think they can and to keep every one happy it will Mirrorless and be called the D4'oo

WestEndBoy

In fact, if it had the D800 sensor, shot 10 frames a second, could hold 100 raw images in the buffer and cost $10,000 I would have bought that.

I wonder if Nikon could do that for a D4x for less than $10,000. It would really serve notice to Canon, excite the market, build Nikon's image and I doubt it would conflict with the D800 market much.

I think they can and to keep every one happy it will Mirrorless and be called the D4'oo

I think it would be a mistake for Nikon to go mirrorless. There are many photographers that buy the D4 level because of superior auto-focus, especially at longer focal lengths or narrower depth of field or actions shots. To these photographers where auto-focus is everything, mirrorless doesn't cut the auto-focus mustard and may never.

I think mirrorless is a good idea and will be good for not so narrow depths of field shorter than 100mm. I think Nikon should introduce it in a mid-range body first where it has the greatest opportunity for market success - think as a competitor to the new Sonys.

The decline in mirrorless sales in North America and Europe this past year should also give us "mirrorless advocates" pause for consideration.

Ade

I think it would be a mistake for Nikon to go mirrorless. There are many photographers that buy the D4 level because of superior auto-focus, especially at longer focal lengths or narrower depth of field or actions shots. To these photographers where auto-focus is everything, mirrorless doesn't cut the auto-focus mustard and may never.

"Superior auto-focus" is a subjective term.

Do you want a fast AF or an accurate AF?

DSLR cameras and lenses are designed for PDAF. Very fast, but not very accurate. It's great for sports with moving subjects. Not so great for shooting portraits with narrow DoF.

Mirrorless cameras and lenses are designed for contrast-detect AF. Not as fast, but much more accurate. Great for shooting portraits with narrow DoF, not so great for sports.

So the irony is, from a pure AF perspective, a D4X might be better designed as a mirrorless system, except that Nikon lenses are all optimized for PDAF.

(Yes I know you can put DSLRs in LiveView, and there are mirrorless cameras with PDAF-on-sensor. But DSLR LiveView is lousy compared to a good mirrorless AF, and PDAF-on-sensor today has a ton of issues.)

sevencrossing

Please do not take my posts too seriously
but if and when Nikon do produce a Mirrorless D4. I suspect it will focus better and faster than the current DSLR

rmp

I just played with an Olympus OM-D E-M1, and I think the D4x and the D400 have some competition, especially as a travel camera == light weight is good!

donaldejose

Prediction: 2014 will be the year of the approximately 50mp D4x AND the year Nikon starts a new line of high resolution lenses designed for high megapixel sensors such as the D800 and the D4x.

Photobug

Great prediction Donaldejose. Expect your right about the D4x and would be pleasantly surprised if they started a line of new glass for those high megapixel bodies.

Oh, great picture of you and your wife. Happy New Years.

donaldejose

I am counting on Nikon seeing a market for the Zeiss Otus line of lenses and wanting to capture that market. Why build high megapixel sensor bodies and not sell lenses for them because people are buying Otus? Nikon should be able to make comparable optics for half the price.

Photobug

If Nikon could get their cost to half of the Zeiss Otus lens, that would sell lots of glass.
We heard it here first. ">

donaldejose

Design and construction of a Nikon HMS (high megapixel sensor) series of primes shouldn't be much more complex than Nikon's 35mm f1.4, 58mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4, 105mm f2 DC and 135mm f2 DC; all of which sell for less than 2k.

Golf007sd

I like his idea @ 2:03 minutes in the video.

Video link for those that cannot see the video here.

Msmoto

All I see on the video is "This Video is private"

ChasCS

I get the following message when I tap the arrow.

This video is currently unavailable.

But you can copy paste the video code to youtube
2pcqBxAKaKQ

Beso

I just clicked on the video and it played fine. And I agree with Jared, the release of a "development announcement" with virtually no information is not worth much and a questionable marketing tactic.

Ade

Well we have official confirmation that there's a D4S soon, that alone is significant for those considering a D4 purchase.

It's actually smart for them not to announce during CES, and maybe the D4S specs are not yet finalized.

Photobug

When I saw the announcement that there was a D4 shortage, I knew we had to see the D4X soon. Peter has done a great job in updating the main blog.

My hunch is that specs are finalized and that key Nikon Pros will have them at the Olympics. This evening I saw the information that at CES 2014: Lexar Announced "World's Fastest Memory Card": 3333x CFast 2.0. Bet the D4x will handle this new speed.

Any way its great to see Nikon updating the D4. I know there will be a lot of happy D4 owners reading this forum. My prediction, the price will be $500 above the existing D4. Hope we have some members who will be at CES to fill in the gaps.