Nikon D4s

sevencrossing · February 2014

Just have to wait for the D5, .

out of interest; what would the D5 have to have, to make you raid the piggy bank

donaldejose · February 2014

Notice how the D4 essentially gave us everything the D3s gave us with about a 25% increase in resolution? Likely that will be about what a D5 will do: everything a D3s can do but with a 24mp sensor and Expeed 5. I would expect ISO 12,800 from a D5 to be very clean and very usable. But we will see. Technology may advance more rapidly and allow for even more improvements.

WestEndBoy · February 2014

Sometime I wonder how much better ISO can get. I wonder "what percent of the photons are being captured". If it is close to 100%, then improved ISO is only going to come from improved software.

Ironheart · February 2014

It is closer to 50% in the center and falls off even further as you get towards the edges. Look up QE (quantum efficiently) and also realize that not all of the photons actually reach the sensor. Might be a good topic for a new discussion...

Ade · February 2014

Sometime I wonder how much better ISO can get. I wonder "what percent of the photons are being captured". If it is close to 100%, then improved ISO is only going to come from improved software.

The measure you are looking for is called "quantum efficiency" (QE). The max QE of best DSLRs today is around the 55% mark. However, the efficiency of a sensor continuously varies with the frequency of light, and this max QE is only achieved around the frequency of green light. If you consider the QE on a more balanced spectrum (closer to daylight) then the QE falls to less than 20%.

The other factor, of course is, noise. Even without increasing QE, reducing noise will also improve ISO, without resorting to software.

One way to significantly increase QE is to get rid of the Bayer sensor array, which filters light at all frequencies. Hence monochrome sensors can potentially have much higher ISO performance vs. a CFA sensor.

Ironheart · February 2014

Ade, don't forget the bayer filter chops 2/3 of the light from reaching each pixel before it even his the sensor. The question was "what percentage of the photons are captured" vs how efficient is the sensor. I think there is room for improvement from the front element to the sensor micro-lens as well :-)

And the figures I've seen for CMOS are closer to 70% QE. I conservatively guessed 50% for the overall system. I agree SNR is an area for improvement.

Edit:just saw your comment on the bayer filter as well.

Ade · February 2014

Well, that was an excellent guess on your part

Sensorgen has QEs of popular cameras derived from DxO's raw measurements:

http://sensorgen.info

manhattanboy · February 2014

Well, that was an excellent guess on your part Sensorgen has QEs of popular cameras derived from DxO's raw measurements:

http://sensorgen.info

Thanks for the info on QE.
Would be so kind as to explain in lay terms how to comprehend the rest of their data, i.e. Read Noise (e-) Saturation (e-) DR (stops)

Ade · February 2014

Max Saturation is the number of electrons (e-) which can be captured in a pixel during an exposure before the pixel maxes out (overflows). Additional electrons arriving after this amount are lost. Generally speaking, physically larger pixels can hold more electrons than smaller ones (we say a larger pixel has a "deeper well").

Conceptually, Max Saturation is the brightest value that can be captured by the sensor before clipping. For the D4, the Max Saturation is listed as 117813 e-, which means each pixel on the D4 can hold around 117813 electrons before clipping. Max Saturation typically occurs at Base ISO (for the D4, ISO 100).

Minimum Read Noise is the minimum amount of noise (per pixel) associated with the sensor itself. Read Noise is actually comprised of several noise components, and therefore is expressed as the "average" number of electrons per pixel. (In more technical terms, as the "root mean squared" average of the underlying noise components).

Read Noise is also the darkest value which can be captured by the sensor. For the D4, the Minimum Read Noise is listed as 1.9 electrons per pixel. The Minimum Read Noise typically occurs at a High ISO setting (for the D4, the minimum 1.9 e- figure is for ISO 204800).

Knowing Max Saturation and Read Noise, we can define Dynamic Range (DR) as simply the ratio between the two numbers (max bright / min dark), at a given ISO setting. For photographers, we usually express DR as the number of f-stops (base2 logarithm) but it is sometimes listed in decibels as well.

E.g., for the D4, we already know Max Saturation is 117813 e- at ISO 100. The Read Noise at ISO 100 is listed as 18.6 e-. So at ISO 100, the D4's dynamic range is log2(177813/18.6) = log2(6334.03) = 12.62 stops. Or, in decibels, 10*log10(6334.03) = 38 dB.

Golf007sd · March 2014

A very nice video produced entirely by using he D4s.

SquamishPhoto · March 2014

Enter the Minds of the Well Funded is more like it. That video, despite being amazing in every way, is more of a display of cinematic vision and editing skills coupled with what would appear to be a nearly unlimited budget. The camera was perhaps the least important factor in achieving the end product and the film ends up being more about production value than about displaying the benefits of using their camera instead of someone elses to make your own films.

Ironheart · March 2014

Didn't you know every D4s comes with a gimble mount and a helicopter!

rbrylawski · March 2014

Yes, of course the minds of the well funded, but still pretty amazing results, none-the-less........

Golf007sd · March 2014

I would rather watch that video a few time vs the crap they shoot for Superbowl that cost milliton to make, not to mention the millions they spend for the 30 second slot to air it.

@Ironheart: Do you know if that holds true for us D4 owners as well? Because, I did not see the mail in coupon for it when mine was delivered :-?

But just in case you ever wanted to see how cameras can be really fun to use in shooting video...have a look at this and call me in the morning.

Ade · March 2014

http://petapixel.com/2014/03/05/photographer-takes-gofundme-raise-money-new-d4s-sparks-outrage/

Golf007sd · March 2014

Photobug · March 2014

Thanks Golf for posting the video. Very nice over view of the camera. Interesting tweaks to the D4s...such as holding the Function button in and using the shutter button when its set up to use with a remote trigger and the faster GB Internet connection speed. Nice useability improvements over the D4.

Love that Nikon DSLR moving on a robot behind the speaker. Very distracting.

Golf007sd · March 2014

Note: All image are JPEG's with a little tweaking in LR. Hence, not a RAW edit then exported.

D4s 24-70 2.8 1/100 ISO 26,500 @ f/3.5
Larger Image size

D4s 105 2.8 1/50 ISO 16,000 @ f/18
Larger image size.

D4s 105 2.8 1/125 ISO 3200 @ f/5.6
Larger image size

Very impressive performance....well done Nikon. \:D/ :-c =D>

Fritz · March 2014

Man, and I was just thinking what a revelation it was when ASA 1000 came out. Just look how far Nikon has come from the D3 is such a relatively short time. Kinda makes you wonder what the D5 will give us.

donaldejose · March 2014

Expeed 4 + new processing software which treats different parts of the image differently for noise reduction = DX sensor giving us clean ISO 6,400 and 12,800 in the D400?

I think this shows it is now possible.

D5 will be about one stop better but will do it with 24mp.

Fritz · March 2014

Please correct me in this, but low light noise is essentially an inability of the sensor to generate electrical output at the level of the pixel. So if I am correct in my simplistic understanding then a sensor field that is more reactive coupled with a processor that that has superior weak signal performance and the algorithms to properly weigh or balance the output through out the entire tonal range should be able to provide a cleaner output for color conversion. Am I on the right track here?

Ironheart · March 2014

Perhaps, but off topic. Think signal to noise ratio... Lets open a new thread if you want to continue.

Fritz · March 2014

My comment was a prelude to a question comparing the high ISO of performance of the D4 and D4s as was just illustrated. The wonder is just how acceptable the images of both are at high ISO. Essentially, how might the D4s process differently than the D4?

Golf007sd · March 2014

Nikon D4s and 800mm f/5.6E Field Test

Golf007sd · March 2014

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Who's Online (0)

Nikon D4s

Comments