MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Photography Discussion => Topic started by: luissantos84 on January 05, 2012, 12:14
-
looks like its for real
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/01/05/nikon-d4-leaked-in-french-magazine.aspx/ (http://nikonrumors.com/2012/01/05/nikon-d4-leaked-in-french-magazine.aspx/)
-
5D mark II is still better for stock and a third of the price.
-
5D mark II is still better for stock and a third of the price.
my first camera was a D60 (1 year and 3 months), then got the D90 (1year and half now), last summer got a 24-70 so I believe I will stick with Nikon for a few time, D90 will be my camera for a little longer, perhaps the D800 for summer or later, no announcement yet
Holgs kind of talked with me to get a 5D once but it was a lot of money, will see how things go in stock and Canon too, always open
-
As an exclusive the sales from XXXL files are pretty nice, it's like an EL at SS (although probably just as rare). As a nonexclusive I would imagine the benefits are a little less since DT upsize all their images don't they and SS sells any size the same price.
-
right basically bigger files are worth in IS and FT.. ok some other small agencies but not worth the expense
-
5D mark II is still better for stock and a third of the price.
Been with Nikon since the beginning. But...I agree. if I want more..I'll go back to med format. way to much Money for what it is.
-
You know... I love my D700, but at some point an upgrade is called for, and quite frankly I also need to upgrade my video pretty bad as well.... given the price of it, I'm more inclined to keep on looking at a Scarlet - not a massive jump in resolution, but I know it'll do both stills and video without compromise. Nikon and Canon DSLR's can't shoot video worth crap, especially if you like to move the camera around.... or avoid artifacts galore.
-
Canon DSLR's can't shoot video worth crap, especially if you like to move the camera around.... or avoid artifacts galore.
Interesting I haven't heard that before.
-
Canon DSLR's can't shoot video worth crap, especially if you like to move the camera around.... or avoid artifacts galore.
Interesting I haven't heard that before.
Keep in mind I've worked with professional video camera systems. Everything from BetaCams to VariCam and now Red One systems. If you come from my background shooting and color correcting footage from those types of systems, you won't be terribly impressed with DSLR video, and even less impressed with ergonomics.
Take a DSLR camera and try to shake it from side to side and see how squishy the image becomes. Terrible.
-
Canon DSLR's can't shoot video worth crap, especially if you like to move the camera around.... or avoid artifacts galore.
Interesting I haven't heard that before.
Keep in mind I've worked with professional video camera systems. Everything from BetaCams to VariCam and now Red One systems. If you come from my background shooting and color correcting footage from those types of systems, you won't be terribly impressed with DSLR video, and even less impressed with ergonomics.
Take a DSLR camera and try to shake it from side to side and see how squisy the image becomes. Terrible.
Are you comparing $100,000 systems to $500 dollar cameras though?
-
Canon DSLR's can't shoot video worth crap, especially if you like to move the camera around.... or avoid artifacts galore.
Interesting I haven't heard that before.
Keep in mind I've worked with professional video camera systems. Everything from BetaCams to VariCam and now Red One systems. If you come from my background shooting and color correcting footage from those types of systems, you won't be terribly impressed with DSLR video, and even less impressed with ergonomics.
Take a DSLR camera and try to shake it from side to side and see how squisy the image becomes. Terrible.
Are you comparing $100,000 systems to $500 dollar cameras though?
Yes and no. None of those cameras I listed specifically will cost you $100K - even with a decent lens included, but I've used plenty of lower priced video cameras as well in the $1k-5k range that I would prefer over video DSLR's in the exact same price range.
I see they are listing this as a 1080P camera, but I have my doubts it will look good. DSLR's don't downres a full sensor capture, they skip lines (line sampling if I remember right) and it looks terrible, especially with high detail scenes. They also use slow rolling shutters, so the images wobble when you move the camera. If they can fix those issues, I'll be a bit more interested, but I don't think they will be recording with a very good format. H.264 is not a production worthy format, it's a distribution quicktime codec.
-
Just found a screen shot of a press release posted on Peta Pixel:
http://i.imgur.com/CBI5O.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/CBI5O.jpg)
-
Nikon and Canon DSLR's can't shoot video worth crap, especially if you like to move the camera around.... or avoid artifacts galore.
sorry but thats an incredible (not to say ridiculous) thing to say, don´t know if you ever seen creativelive workshops (from Seattle who is owned by Chase Jarvis) which are for free during the live session.. A few time ago (July 11) there was a genius regarding film making/footage on the 5D and he said he even shoot footage for House MD serie, he is working there as one of the directors for 4 or 5 years.. his name is Gale Tattersall
HDDSLR Filmmaking
For the first time in history a camera that costs roughly $2,500 can shoot material good enough to hold its own weight on the highest professional levels. Gale Tattersall, renowned Director of Photography, has been at the forefront of pushing HDDSLR’s in Hollywood. He shot the season finale of House entirely on a Canon 5DMII last year.
-
Flagship??? Not for my dollars. And i agree about DSLR video. Good for B-roll and some applications. to many good Dedicated Video cameras now as compared to the big DSLR video rush a few years ago with a good pricepoint, A lot more versatility and ergonomics. I just did the still work on a new comedy film. The cinematographer used the Sony P3. I want That camera. or the new canon EOS 300C. I saw some footage from the canon at Paramount a month ago....OMG!!!!!!!!!
If your gonna do 15 sec stock clips a $1000 Panasonic Hs900 is Just fine.
-
Flagship??? Not for my dollars. And i agree about DSLR video. Good for B-roll and some applications. to many good Dedicated Video cameras now as compared to the big DSLR video rush a few years ago with a good pricepoint, A lot more versatility and ergonomics. I just did the still work on a new comedy film. The cinematographer used the Sony P3. I want That camera. or the new canon EOS 300C. I saw some footage from the canon at Paramount a month ago....OMG!!!!!!!!!
If your gonna do 15 sec stock clips a $1000 Panasonic Hs900 is Just fine. But Like they say any camera in the hands of a pro.
-
Nikon and Canon DSLR's can't shoot video worth crap, especially if you like to move the camera around.... or avoid artifacts galore.
sorry but thats an incredible (not to say ridiculous) thing to say, don´t know if you ever seen creativelive workshops (from Seattle who is owned by Chase Jarvis) which are for free during the live session.. A few time ago (July 11) there was a genius regarding film making/footage on the 5D and he said he even shoot footage for House MD serie, he is working there as one of the directors for 4 or 5 years.. his name is Gale Tattersall
HDDSLR Filmmaking
For the first time in history a camera that costs roughly $2,500 can shoot material good enough to hold its own weight on the highest professional levels. Gale Tattersall, renowned Director of Photography, has been at the forefront of pushing HDDSLR’s in Hollywood. He shot the season finale of House entirely on a Canon 5DMII last year.
I'm aware of the House season finale, etc... Here's my big point. To get those cameras to perform well, you end up doing a ton of stuff you wouldn't normally need to do and you also loose a ton of flexibility in post because of the compressed formats used... Just because someone pulled a great image out of the camera does not mean it's a good camera.
Visit my website and look at my demo reel. A lot of those clips were shot using a DVX100A standard def camera.... yet I pulled 10bit uncompressed 720P footage out of it. It was modified, and quite frankly, a PITA to operate since it had to be tethered to a Mac Mini in a pelican case, all files needed to be rendered before I could view them, sound had to be synced in post, and the sensitivity of that system was practically 100 ISO, not very filmmaking friendly.
That system has issues galore - but I still pulled great images from it. Doesn't mean it's a great camera. I'm just a good DP ;)
I've learned over the years to not base my opinion of a camera on footage anymore - any camera can produce a great - or lousy - image in the right hands. I'm way more focused on the actual tech specs because those represent the real tools I have to work with.
PS: There is a sensor filter on the market specifically designed to reduce artifacts produced by HDSLR cameras. In my opinion, you shouldn't need to buy an accessory like that.
-
I don´t know a single thing about making footage in a DSLR but after watching that workshop and looking of what they produce there I got the feeling it was a powerfull camera to do some nice video, he also talked and said what were the best options in camera to get the most of the video too, and of course tons of equipment like you see on a behind scene of a movie, really cool tripods, dollies, rolling systems, fancy stuff :D
-
That is correct. You get major filmaking talent behind anything and a 100K worth of equip and there ya go. Everything Is just another tool in the box and like everything Visual. it is subject specific.
-
That is correct. You get major filmaking talent behind anything and a 100K worth of equip and there ya go. Everything Is just another tool in the box and like everything Visual. it is subject specific. But I wouldn't buy a D4 because of video function.
-
Hi this is torrestheresa.
Actually all the information are above share that are huge.
Thankyou
-
As an exclusive the sales from XXXL files are pretty nice, it's like an EL at SS (although probably just as rare). As a nonexclusive I would imagine the benefits are a little less since DT upsize all their images don't they and SS sells any size the same price.
But there are still more then enough agencies that sell large sized photos. But it's true, like you said, those happen rarely at IS, besides I've never seen so many XS and S sales anywhere else. Although they're still far too frequent for my taste :D
-
As an exclusive the sales from XXXL files are pretty nice, it's like an EL at SS (although probably just as rare). As a nonexclusive I would imagine the benefits are a little less since DT upsize all their images don't they and SS sells any size the same price.
But there are still more then enough agencies that sell large sized photos. But it's true, like you said, those happen rarely at IS, besides I've never seen so many XS and S sales anywhere else. Although they're still far too frequent for my taste :D
from the top 5 agencies there is only IS and FT, of course the buyer can look into a size and go there because of that
-
As an exclusive the sales from XXXL files are pretty nice, it's like an EL at SS (although probably just as rare). As a nonexclusive I would imagine the benefits are a little less since DT upsize all their images don't they and SS sells any size the same price.
But there are still more then enough agencies that sell large sized photos. But it's true, like you said, those happen rarely at IS, besides I've never seen so many XS and S sales anywhere else. Although they're still far too frequent for my taste :D
Yep other sites do sell large sized photos. Problem is they are all subscription sales for 25-35 cents. It takes 90 of those sales to equal one on IS. And XS sales get over 2 dollars so I could sell 6 XXXL's on SS or one XS on IS to be even.
-
As an exclusive the sales from XXXL files are pretty nice, it's like an EL at SS (although probably just as rare). As a nonexclusive I would imagine the benefits are a little less since DT upsize all their images don't they and SS sells any size the same price.
But there are still more then enough agencies that sell large sized photos. But it's true, like you said, those happen rarely at IS, besides I've never seen so many XS and S sales anywhere else. Although they're still far too frequent for my taste :D
Yep other sites do sell large sized photos. Problem is they are all subscription sales for 25-35 cents. It takes 90 of those sales to equal one on IS. And XS sales get over 2 dollars so I could sell 6 XXXL's on SS or one XS on IS to be even.
Oh you exclusives and the subs :) . I just got this at DT for instance and it's only a medium sized DL 12 credits (2010) $4.07 medium . It would have to be a P+ XL for me to get as much at IS. Well If you can get over 2$ for S sized DLs, then you, as an exclusive, could match that. And since you like to talk so much about SS, many contributors earn more with ODs over there than with subs (I'm not amongst them unfortunately, but the ratio is moving in that direction), then there are SODs and EL of course. Of course I'm not saying the grass is greener at our side, it's user dependant and yes, there are still to many sub sales on every site. But at least no site pays me as low for subs as IS. Or credit sales for that matter (got a 7c/credit sale and dozens of 10c/credit sales, they're usually XS subs)
-
As an exclusive the sales from XXXL files are pretty nice, it's like an EL at SS (although probably just as rare). As a nonexclusive I would imagine the benefits are a little less since DT upsize all their images don't they and SS sells any size the same price.
But there are still more then enough agencies that sell large sized photos. But it's true, like you said, those happen rarely at IS, besides I've never seen so many XS and S sales anywhere else. Although they're still far too frequent for my taste :D
Yep other sites do sell large sized photos. Problem is they are all subscription sales for 25-35 cents. It takes 90 of those sales to equal one on IS. And XS sales get over 2 dollars so I could sell 6 XXXL's on SS or one XS on IS to be even.
Oh you exclusives and the subs :) . I just got this at DT for instance and it's only a medium sized DL 12 credits (2010) $4.07 medium . It would have to be a P+ XL for me to get as much at IS. Well If you can get over 2$ for S sized DLs, then you, as an exclusive, could match that. And since you like to talk so much about SS, many contributors earn more with ODs over there than with subs (I'm not amongst them unfortunately, but the ratio is moving in that direction), then there are SODs and EL of course. Of course I'm not saying the grass is greener at our side, it's user dependant and yes, there are still to many sub sales on every site. But at least no site pays me as low for subs as IS. Or credit sales for that matter (got a 7c/credit sale and dozens of 10c/credit sales, they're usually XS subs)
I think the point that was being made was whether its worth spending the extra, or prioritising a camera that shoots 21MP (ie. XXXL) over one that only does 16MP. If you're exclusive on IS the difference is significant. On SS there is no difference - a buyer won't know if an image was natively shot at a higher resolution or upsized until they download it.
FWIW a $4 download on Dreamstime is a medium level 2 image - as an exclusive, most of my images that have been downloaded more than a handful of times are in the E+ collection, which ends up being more like an $8-12 commission for the photographer. An XXXL E+ image will be about $20-25 in commission, which on DT will get you a maximum of $11.88 at level 5 - there the difference to a medium size ($10) isn't so significant.
-
Here you go: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7799914638/nikon-d4-overview/ (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7799914638/nikon-d4-overview/)
-
"Movies can also be shot at three different crops from the sensor, which Nikon is describing as FX, DX and 2.7X (native 1920x1080). This makes it easy to vary the field-of-view for grabbing footage, even if you’ve got a prime lens mounted. However, the ‘FX’ size is a significantly cropped version of the full sensor (it’s 91% of the sensor’s width), so the field-of-view will be a little narrower than you’d expect for any given focal length. Also the native 1920x1080 video will be higher quality than the FX and DX versions, since it hasn't been downsized. This difference is likely to be incredibly small (almost certainly irrelevant for most users), but is a consideration for high-end video users."
A windowed capture for video option is a step in the right direction! Too bad it will ruin you're ability to shoot anything wide angle :X
No word on how bad, or good, the shutter actually is. I'm still predicting super jell-o since they are not touting something like "global shutter" or "ultra fast rolling shutter" etc....
-
Now the D4 is officially announced on the Nikon site: http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/product/digital-cameras/slr/professional/d4 (http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/product/digital-cameras/slr/professional/d4)
-
FWIW a $4 download on Dreamstime is a medium level 2 image - as an exclusive, most of my images that have been downloaded more than a handful of times are in the E+ collection, which ends up being more like an $8-12 commission for the photographer. An XXXL E+ image will be about $20-25 in commission, which on DT will get you a maximum of $11.88 at level 5 - there the difference to a medium size ($10) isn't so significant.
What you're forgetting (or skipping on purpose) is that you can only have a small percentage of photos in E+ ;). Taking that into account you actually make less if the average level of photos in a certain port is 3 or even 2 if you're a low level exclusive. I bet averaging level 2 or even 3 is a peace of cake for top contributors.
-
And let me add. I used to review cameras back in 1999 on my website and for others until it became apparent that it was about banner ads and wasn't about the cameras at all
http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/Nikon_d2x_rinder/Nikon_d2x_review_note.html (http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/Nikon_d2x_rinder/Nikon_d2x_review_note.html) .
I beat out all the other reviews about this camera. I am also fortunate to get to process images and work on footage now from all of them for students as part of my one on One classes. I get to see all the cameras in a controlled environment. One of my good friends is the western US Rep for nikon and I get to see and get hands on, on everything Before the public does.
Im a major fan of Nikon and always have been in that format Only from the early 60's.
My feeling is nikon Dropped the ball with there ego Plain and simple and have been playing catch up for 3 years. canon has dominated the market since the MK2, Nikon thought 720P Video was the way to go. ...It wasn't and isn't. We are on to 4K now. DSLR video was a very cool thing. It's over. In 2 years The makers have made Camcorders in the $1,000 range that are much better and have much better options. Heres The theory of Nikon.
"Your gonna like it, because you have to like it"
Im not buying it anymore like I have for 20 years. The D2X was a Milestone, The D3 was a Flagship. And Im personally disappointed with the D4 specs. I expected more. I still get amazing images with my D3 all things being Equal and when a student comes in with a Mk2 All things being equal That is also a very fine camera. I don't do sports, I do studio portraiture and if I need to upgrade and spend another 5/6 thousand like I did on the D2x and D3? sorry... Like said i'll go back to med format and blow all these silly cameras away.And spend the money I can see on the screen and use a dedicated video system.
Just my Opinion.
And let me add one some of the best images i've seen were from a Doctor student a few weeks ago with a original 5D with adapted Leica glass. WOW. blew my old eyes away. very close to med format. it truly is about the optics.
-
i'm completely against video in a DSLR !
photo and video are two worlds apart.
and i'm also against video on the web !
the actual video trend is booming everywhere, 90% of the posts i see on FB are youtube videos.
and in online newspapers they're sticking videos everywhere leaving just a few lines of text.
now, if i wanted to see video i would switch on my TV rather than watching a sloppy lowres video.
it's all getting down the drain.
they can't write decent text so they put videos, and links to more useless unrelated articles, and then tons of untargeted and therefore useless advertising and Flash animations.
it's so bad that nowadays the only useful site left is wikipedia.
-
My feeling is nikon Dropped the ball with there ego Plain and simple and have been playing catch up for 3 years. canon has dominated the market since the MK2, Nikon thought 720P Video was the way to go. ...It wasn't and isn't. We are on to 4K now. DSLR video was a very cool thing. It's over. In 2 years The makers have made Camcorders in the $1,000 range that are much better and have much better options. Heres The theory of Nikon.
"Your gonna like it, because you have to like it"
people buy nikon because of the ergonomics.
canon cameras are gay and simply feel like a toy in my hand.
all the females shooters i've seen so far use Canon.
the MK2 is popular because it's a lot cheaper than a D700 + FX lens, as simple as that, not to mention the higher MPixels !
i don't blame people for using the MK2 .. pricewise it's a winner, but so is Sony Alpha if that matters, and D7000, and ...
-
i'm completely against video in a DSLR !
photo and video are two worlds apart.
and i'm also against video on the web !
the actual video trend is booming everywhere, 90% of the posts i see on FB are youtube videos.
and in online newspapers they're sticking videos everywhere leaving just a few lines of text.
now, if i wanted to see video i would switch on my TV rather than watching a sloppy lowres video.
it's all getting down the drain.
they can't write decent text so they put videos, and links to more useless unrelated articles, and then tons of untargeted and therefore useless advertising and Flash animations.
it's so bad that nowadays the only useful site left is wikipedia.
LOL
-
My feeling is nikon Dropped the ball with there ego Plain and simple and have been playing catch up for 3 years. canon has dominated the market since the MK2, Nikon thought 720P Video was the way to go. ...It wasn't and isn't. We are on to 4K now. DSLR video was a very cool thing. It's over. In 2 years The makers have made Camcorders in the $1,000 range that are much better and have much better options. Heres The theory of Nikon.
"Your gonna like it, because you have to like it"
people buy nikon because of the ergonomics.
canon cameras are gay and simply feel like a toy in my hand.
all the females shooters i've seen so far use Canon.
the MK2 is popular because it's a lot cheaper than a D700 + FX lens, as simple as that, not to mention the higher MPixels !
i don't blame people for using the MK2 .. pricewise it's a winner, but so is Sony Alpha if that matters, and D7000, and ...
Funny you said that. Im not saying this as sexist in any way but In all my Workshops and One on One classes { Over 220} the overwhelming users of canon in every instance was women. and the same for men and nikon.??? never figured that out. LOL
-
Just for those people who want to look at prices and specs. $5999.95 at BH
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=d4+nikon&N=0&InitialSearch=yes (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=d4+nikon&N=0&InitialSearch=yes)
As for size and all that. I'm still happy with the 40D but I want something newer for when the shutter decides to become too old. On the 10D the camera was on it's third time around the numbers one year. That's what? 30,000 images? And I think I turned over the 40D two or three times in 2011. Reminds me I need to reset to zero for the new year.
Anyway, what's the shutter life? New D4 will last longer and has some benefits. (but none for me I shoot Canon) Same as the 1Dx which I don't need either.
How big do we really need the images in MP to equal film? And then larger and larger file sizes to process, means bigger computers with more power and memory. Where does it end?
-
My feeling is nikon Dropped the ball with there ego Plain and simple and have been playing catch up for 3 years. canon has dominated the market since the MK2, Nikon thought 720P Video was the way to go. ...It wasn't and isn't. We are on to 4K now. DSLR video was a very cool thing. It's over. In 2 years The makers have made Camcorders in the $1,000 range that are much better and have much better options. Heres The theory of Nikon.
"Your gonna like it, because you have to like it"
people buy nikon because of the ergonomics.
canon cameras are gay and simply feel like a toy in my hand.
all the females shooters i've seen so far use Canon.
the MK2 is popular because it's a lot cheaper than a D700 + FX lens, as simple as that, not to mention the higher MPixels !
i don't blame people for using the MK2 .. pricewise it's a winner, but so is Sony Alpha if that matters, and D7000, and ...
Yep, every sports event I see on TV always shows pro Canon equipment with a female behind it.
And yes, that Nikon stuff is manly. The moment I picked up a Nikon for the first time I suddenly grew hair on my hand and had the strong desire to start doing high-fives and fist-bumps.
ETA: Almost forgot... [Fist-bump]
-
Funny you said that. Im not saying this as sexist in any way but In all my Workshops and One on One classes { Over 220} the overwhelming users of canon in every instance was women. and the same for men and nikon.??? never figured that out. LOL
of course.
canon is gay par excellence.
it's designed for girls, especially the low-end models.
-
Canon for girls and Nikon for boys? I demand a poll! :D
I have no idea how to create one though. Would somebody be so kind? :)
-
i'm completely against video in a DSLR !
photo and video are two worlds apart.
and i'm also against video on the web !
the actual video trend is booming everywhere, 90% of the posts i see on FB are youtube videos.
and in online newspapers they're sticking videos everywhere leaving just a few lines of text.
now, if i wanted to see video i would switch on my TV rather than watching a sloppy lowres video.
it's all getting down the drain.
they can't write decent text so they put videos, and links to more useless unrelated articles, and then tons of untargeted and therefore useless advertising and Flash animations.
it's so bad that nowadays the only useful site left is wikipedia.
thats called evolution and believe you are a minority thinking that way.. youtube gotta be one of the most visited websites.. myself have it open all day long perhaps that why I keep tons of pictures pending :P
-
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4R6axRwT5V8[/youtube]
LOOOL
-
Canon for girls and Nikon for boys? I demand a poll! :D
I have no idea how to create one though. Would somebody be so kind? :)
Yeah... we need another poll. ;D
The never-ending-debate will never end.
:P
PS: I have one of each. Buying the T2i must be my sensitive side showing. :o ;D
-
;D
It's always good to keep your options open. ;)
I can (very happily) live without the poll if no-one wants to do it. I just hadn't heard that assertion before and it made me curious to see if it would stand up to scrutiny among MSG bods.
-
Nikon D4 vs Canon 1D-X
http://www.digitalrev.com/article/nikon-d4-vs-canon-1d/NTQ1Mzg4Mw_A_A (http://www.digitalrev.com/article/nikon-d4-vs-canon-1d/NTQ1Mzg4Mw_A_A)
-
I shoot D3X and I'm a girl.....Nikon was simply my first camera. when it came to going full frame, I considered switching, but I've just never connected with Canon. If I had switched, I'd have started with the 5DMKII....it's a solid full frame camera.
as for the D4....to me it's of little interest. but for pro shooters using the D3S I think it will be attractive. HD video and higher MP will be a big draw for editorial video shooters
-
Nikon D4 vs Canon 1D-X
[url]http://www.digitalrev.com/article/nikon-d4-vs-canon-1d/NTQ1Mzg4Mw_A_A[/url] ([url]http://www.digitalrev.com/article/nikon-d4-vs-canon-1d/NTQ1Mzg4Mw_A_A[/url])
Thanks, but doesn't highlight anything different to what we already heard earlier last week.
I'm looking forward to reading the Ken Rockwell review once done on the D4 (and maybe the Canon 1DX too - he does do other reviews other than Nikon). It was his review last year on the D700 that swayed me from buying the D3 as our main studio camera. A few people are guessing that the D800 (rumour only at the moment) might well cannibalise sales of the D4 in the same way - and at less than half the price assuming it follows the same pattern of the D700/D3. It'll be an exciting year in regard to seeing what happens.
ETA.
Bless my socks Ken's already posted the review. Time for a small beer now as I read it. You can see it here.
http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/d4.htm (http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/d4.htm)
ETA (again)
Mr Rockwell has a link for the rumoured D800 as well. He appears to suggest it will cannibalise sales of the over-priced D3X
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d800.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d800.htm)
-
[youtube][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4R6axRwT5V8[/url][/youtube]
LOOOL
It's far too big for her small hands!
-
making the camera even bigger, I enjoy the awkward mouth moves too :D
-
And let me add one some of the best images i've seen were from a Doctor student a few weeks ago with a original 5D with adapted Leica glass. WOW. blew my old eyes away. very close to med format. it truly is about the optics.
That is the biggest thing for me when I change from Nikon to Canon............the ability to use others lenses with adapter which is not possible with Nikon.
I know it's not fast to work with but for studio stills it is appealing.
-
I think one things clear - the pixel race is over.
-
[youtube][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4R6axRwT5V8[/url][/youtube]
LOOOL
It's far too big for her small hands!
Yeah, Nikon would be better off putting it in a sumo wrestler's hands ;D . At least the camera wouldn't almost look bigger than the person holding it
-
How much better do you think this new breed will be compared to my D2X for stock work? Noise is probably the biggest complaint from that sensor. I've used a D3 and found that pretty incredible noise wise.
Will the upgrade be worthwhile for my 2 generation old body?