The new Nikon D4

Hidef1080 said:
I can only speak for myself but two cameras in one works for some things. I do both stills and video.
Plus I actually like the IQ of my 7D over my EX1-R overall. The EX is sharper and has more rez no doubt but the 7D just appeals to me.

At 6K this is more geared to classic photogs who are getting video as a plus.
Later we should get cheaper HDSLR's that some people may look at as a better bang for the buck video camera.
Again these are not for all but they work for many.
Click to expand...

as i say, i think it's a very attractive camera. i want one. i don't think i'll be spending $6k on a stills camera, though if i did it would be great that it could do this kind of video, too. but, for a mere $6k, and a hybrid camera, i still think it's barking up the wrong tree to expect things like log recording, 10 bit color and higher bit rates. as you say, the ex1 has better rez and sharpness at 35Mbps.

a dslr will always be a compromise as far as video. if you don't want those compromises, pony up for a proper video camera.
 
MPB said:
a dslr will always be a compromise as far as video. if you don't want those compromises, pony up for a proper video camera.
Click to expand...
Depends on the application... for narrative application, music videos, and commercials... small sensor cameras will be more of a compromise aesthetically. I think DSLRs have more in common with traditional cinema cameras than video cameras do. To me "video cameras" mean ENG, news, and sports.
 
I red the specs and can't find 25p - will the european version have it?

Another thought: what about using the crop mode like a digital zoom? With a fast and wide prime, let's say a 28mm f1,8, you could also shoot at about 40mm and 75mm (it has a 2,7 crop right?) That would open up new possibilities for extreme low light documentaries...
 
I'm surprised to say I actually agree with GH2user. I think people don't give dslr's enough credit. In fact I actually prefer a dslr's form factor and ability to do stills and video, over a "proper video camera" Its expanded my business into doing more stills as well as video. You won't see me shooting stills with a af-100 any day soon.
 
joe 1008 said:
I red the specs and can't find 25p - will the european version have it?

Another thought: what about using the crop mode like a digital zoom? With a fast and wide prime, let's say a 28mm f1,8, you could also shoot at about 40mm and 75mm (it has a 2,7 crop right?) That would open up new possibilities for extreme low light documentaries...
Click to expand...

At DPreview spec sheet it mentions it does 1080 25p /720 50/25P , since they previewed it, it must be there.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7799914638/nikon-d4-overview/2
 
GH2user said:
Depends on the application... for narrative application, music videos, and commercials... small sensor cameras will be more of a compromise aesthetically. I think DSLRs have more in common with traditional cinema cameras than video cameras do. To me "video cameras" mean ENG, news, and sports.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.
 
24Mbit/s AVCHD with B frames actually looks quite good. I expect image wise it will blow every other DSLR and sub $10,000 video camera away. It could even give the $15,000+ cameras a run for their money. The 5D MKIII can't be too far away now and it will have a price, size, and weight advantage over the D4 but I think the D4 will probably produce a nicer image. Now do I build a bunker or buy a new camera? "Buy more. Buy more now. Buy. And be happy. " OMM THX1138.
 
First. Allow me to acknowledge the amazing job my buddy Phil has done over at DPreviews. We are in overlapping businesses (technology evaluations) and phil has defined and benchmarked this practice for us still shooters.
Next, the Hybrid vs dedicated Vid camera Quandray.
Well, as a pro Studio still shooter, it never bothered us a whit to own 1/2 dozen cameras from Polaroid 195's to 8X10 view cameras and everything else in between. I mean to say that the concept of One multipurpose camera was very unusual in my day. In pro circles today, it's still an odd concept.
So if you are in the business of actually making money today, it's a non issue- you will likely own what puts gas in the Bentley.. today ;)
If you're on an amateur's budget and are one of those 'forward looking' aspirational shooters, then maybe the Nikon D4 is the ticket. I've been secretly hoping Nikon would come through. long time Nikon shooters have had to sit on the sidelines as Canon gets all the hybrid glory. No more it seems. Arigato Nikon!
So where does my story fit into all this? I shoot stills for bread and butter every week. you don't want to know what i use (you'll laugh) because I'm the quintessential Mid/Late adopter, i wait patiently for what we call the tech convergence that intersects our business plan, never jumping the gun to buy today's 'game changer'
So having spent 5 years noodling around with my canon HV20 (laugh some more) I sense the convergence arriving. I now need a Hybrid DSlR AND a more dedicated video camera, for HD over the net. For everything else, that's what rentals are for.
I am now getting more paying video and as a technologist, have developed a pretty clear picture of what's happening 'paradigm' wise. It's all gonna be about palmtops > 60" + Hi DEF OLED and NOT movie projection from film stock. And oh by the way, print mags are now as good as dead.
The bottom line is I do not intend to buy a camera that will do 4K or that has to capture uncompressed 10bit because it will, in my judgment, have no bearing on my perception of street reality. I am 100% computer screen dedicated. No Movie screens in my future.
However, i think that the DSLR form-factor is NOT for me either. Eventually, all camera's will have the boxy, fore/aft, configuration and the 'SLR' look will vanish.
in truth, i always preferred HOLDING my Hassy over the Nikon film cameras- just easier to hold IMHO.
I believe therefore that such a camera is the Canon C300
A Nikon D4 DSLR would be great if Nat Geo or Discovery sent me out to cover a story ( I can do that solo ) and they wanted stills and vid for multi-channel netcasting.
I don't believe shooters do as well when they have to switch production and thinking between stills and vids. Two shooters are ALWAYS better for that than one.
I'm going to get Nikon to send me a test D4 and it may be my first and last DSLR review ever.
otherwise.... have a good read here friends....
http://thebuibrothers.com
 
Last edited:
GH2user said:
Depends on the application... for narrative application, music videos, and commercials... small sensor cameras will be more of a compromise aesthetically. I think DSLRs have more in common with traditional cinema cameras than video cameras do. To me "video cameras" mean ENG, news, and sports.
Click to expand...

i think you're offering a false dichotomy. it isn't small sensors vs large, but cameras designed for video vs those designed for stills.

willardjackson said:
I'm surprised to say I actually agree with GH2user. I think people don't give dslr's enough credit. In fact I actually prefer a dslr's form factor and ability to do stills and video, over a "proper video camera" Its expanded my business into doing more stills as well as video. You won't see me shooting stills with a af-100 any day soon.
Click to expand...

with respect, that looks like another red herring to me. credit? i'll offer as much as you like. this camera looks great! it's amazing what it can do. it doesn't offend me that people have managed to get great results out of a camera that is (by definition, pretty much, as it's a hybrid) a compromise. kudos.

i appreciate the distinction regarding tripod work vs handheld. if you only ever work on sticks, design is far less of a concern. that's also true if not getting the shot the first time isn't really an issue. not everyone has to be able to respond, more or less instantly, to some dynamic situation unfolding before their lens. if missing a shot isn't a problem, who cares if the thing is shaped like a food processor?

but what i was asking about was why, if dslr's are sufficient unto themselves, their own justification, why would anyone want them to have all those features that are only found on mid- to high-end, dedicated video cameras. i mean, if that's what you really want (and i know that's what i really want), well...?
 
joe 1008 said:
Another thought: what about using the crop mode like a digital zoom? With a fast and wide prime, let's say a 28mm f1,8, you could also shoot at about 40mm and 75mm (it has a 2,7 crop right?) That would open up new possibilities for extreme low light documentaries...
Click to expand...
This seems like an awesome feature. One prime now basically acts like three. Or am I missing something?
 
Searcher said:
This seems like an awesome feature. One prime now basically acts like three. Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Nope, you aren't...it truly is an amazing feature....you can get incredible extra range from your lenses, all without losing resolution. There's another really cool feature I haven't seen mentioned a lot. It of course does time lapse, the difference with the D4 though, is that once you have taken your shots....you can then tell the D4 to make a 1080 video file out of them, which to me is really cool stuff. Sure, the same thing can be done in post...but being able to do that right on camera is super cool. There is one other thing as well which I'm not to clear on, I saw it on a video run down by the "Fro knows photo" guy. He mentioned a completely silent mode that can take 24 photos per second....of course they are limited to jpegs and I believe at a much lower resolution....but if they are even 2 MP....that sounds pretty interesting as well for video applications. I could be wrong about that...I'd have to watch his video again.
 
I am sure in some ways those hybrid dslr will have compromise, but on the other side I will like to know which eng camera will shoot at the low light level of these hdslr. Yes there are compromise but on both side. These dslr bring another set of form factor and functionality which bring it sets of advantages and disadvantages. I see something like the Nikon d4 killing the eng cameras in extreme condition like war zone etc. For low light, portability and ... extreme condition shooting as I don't even know if you have weather seal video camera.

This camera is not meant primarily for the indie filmmaker user. It is meant at first for the photo journalist crowd as a hybrid, first photo then second video, but both very close. For this only it represents incredible value and will fly out of the shelf. This camera will have a profound effect on the pj world because of the mix media world we live in now (paper,tv and internet). These people have been buying the d3 and Canon 1d4 in the $5000/5500 new, so they are literally getting a video camera for free. The only error I think is the on-board codec. They should have implemented at least the broadcast 50 mbit 422, so that the camera is standard compliant. The footage will find it place in many newsroom but the 1dx will feature this 50 mbit 422.

Now as a tool for indie shooters, for me the resolution/sharpness for now is unknown and I think that we will find many more less costly Nikon alternative camera in the near future that will have a lot of the d4 feature.
 
I would love to Know at how many bites and color space you can shoot on a cf card and with the hdmi output.
If it does shoot in 10bytes and 4.2.2 it just kills all large sensor cameras other than the Alexa or the Red....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top