D4S ….can see in the dark!

[Theodoros]

This never interests me because whatever the camera can do here a PC with software can do better later.

Tell all that to the pros that buy these cameras….  …...they'll laugh till next model appears.   Never the less, sensors can be improved if they where not up to their optimum performance in the first place.

[robdickinson]

Why would the pro's care what interests me?

Sure sensors can improve, but we cannot get another doubling of improvement without a major change in tech.

As for the in camera jpg this could easily be done with a firmware patch to a D4 yes?

[allegretto]

that was about the line "can see in the dark", not about the competition of course... no, it is not, it was a misguiding statement... clearly the AF system that has spec 3 stops from what the current state of art in the consumer level camera has can't be called like that... that's it... otherwise it is a fine camera to shoot moving targets under a good light, that what it is.

 

you clearly have never used a D4 but you keep speaking as though you know. you do not if this is what you have to say. I have used a D4 and it is superb under LOW light. I have pictures that reflect this. As I stated elsewhere, you quote from a spec sheet, not experience. Your Oly OM-D 1 is a very good camera. But it cannot deliver what a D4 can, much less a D4s

[Theodoros]

you clearly have never used a D4 but you keep speaking as though you know. you do not if this is what you have to say. I have used a D4 and it is superb under LOW light. I have pictures that reflect this. As I stated elsewhere, you quote from a spec sheet, not experience. Your Oly OM-D 1 is a very good camera. But it cannot deliver what a D4 can, much less a D4s

IMO… (I own a D4) the superb thing with it, is not that it is the best LL camera around (which it is), but rather that (unlike the D3S) it's fantastic with good light! ….clearly better than D3X without lacking anything (even) in detail at equal size prints although sensor resolution is lower… fan-ta-stic camera!

[jduncan]

> D4S ….can see in the dark!

I doubt that it can... Canon 6D has one primitive central AF point that can focus @ -3EV w/o focus assist lamp, Panasonic GH4 (or any latest gen of m43 cameras) can focus @ -4EV in any point of the frame w/o a focus assist lamp and w/o any BF/FF with AF lenses... can D4s focus @ -5EV ? now where D4s can focus it will focus fast - but not in the dark, do not mix high ISO capability w/ AF system ability to do it in the real dark situation... Nikon official spec state that it can only focus @ -1 to +19 EV.... that is 3 EV lighter illumination than some m43 camera that costs $500...

Canon 6D :

Center AF Point: EV -3 to 18
Other AF points: EV +0.5 to 18
Metering Range EV 1-20

Nikon D4s

AF : -1 to +19 EV (points not specified)
Spot metering: 2 to 20 EV
Matrix or center-weighted metering: -1 to 20 EV

Panasonic GX1

http://www.panasonic.com/us/consumer/cameras-camcorders/compact-system-cameras-ilc/dmc-gx7sbody.specs.html

AF detective range EV -4 - 18
Metering range    EV 0 - 18


dSLRs PDAF tracking speed is the last bastion... but focusing in the dark ? not anymore and it is for a long time already

Your numbers for the D4s are proper, in the sense that they are taken from Nikon's page, but they imply that the D4s is two times less sensitive than the D4:
Detection range
-2 to +19 EV (ISO 100, 20°C/68°F)

Vesus D4s :
Detection range   -1 to +19 EV (ISO 100, 20°C/68°F)

I  will not be surprised if that is so taking into account the thinks that Nikon have been doing.
It's also clear that they did not truly invest in the autofocus system  (is the same sensor), but that been say I will expected that the detection range will be the same.

Maybe they down the light sensibility to make it faster in good light or something?

I hope is a mistake (Nikon's)

Best regards,
J. Duncan

[allegretto]

IMO… (I own a D4) the superb thing with it, is not that it is the best LL camera around (which it is), but rather that (unlike the D3S) it's fantastic with good light! ….clearly better than D3X without lacking anything (even) in detail at equal size prints although sensor resolution is lower… fan-ta-stic camera!

Very true. "Only" 16 MP or so, but oh what MP's they are!

Caught a bit of ribbing from the D800 crowd and indeed at low ISO with enough pixel peeping the D800 will look better. But at any reasonable size, the D4 will hold it's own with anything on the Market. It well surpasses cameras with more MP's in terms of clarity and brilliance. Just a winner of a camera.

A true brick to carry however…!

[Theodoros]

Very true. "Only" 16 MP or so, but oh what MP's they are!

Caught a bit of ribbing from the D800 crowd and indeed at low ISO with enough pixel peeping the D800 will look better. But at any reasonable size, the D4 will hold it's own with anything on the Market. It well surpasses cameras with more MP's in terms of clarity and brilliance. Just a winner of a camera.

A true brick to carry however…!

Despite the resolution difference between D4 & D800E (I have both cameras), I also find that D4 has better colour and it has more usable DR even at base Iso... If I was to explain that, I would say that D800 may appear with a (slight) advantage in DR (up to 200 Iso) when one opens the Raw files, but unless he wants a dull and worthless look on a print, there is no way that he can "keep" the printable DR extension of D4… as for higher ISO than 400, the difference exaggerates the more the Iso… IMO (since it depends on how much one values resolution as such), D4's sensor delivers the best Dslr IQ out of DSLRs ever with D800 being close at lower Iso, but no quite up there….

As for the bulk (with 1DX also)…., I guess that it wouldn't be able to deliver the advantages it has to action pros if it wouldn't be what it is… There is always the DF alternative for amateurs…. For my use, I do find the current design of D4 an overkill, but OTOH, I find DF not sufficient, I think (current) D4's in D800 body sensor would be the perfect camera for me, ….but again, I know too many that think of the same…. It may well be that D4's sensor in D800 body is the most wanted Dslr currently.
Lets just hope that now that the D4s will appeal even more to action pros and there is less reason for one camera cannibalising the other, Nikon will come up with such a product (a d880s), which I think they will…. 

[kers]

... It may well be that D4's sensor in D800 body is the most wanted Dslr currently....

Nikon Df?

[Theodoros]

Nikon Df?

Most people that have tried and consider Nikon's 16.2mp sensor as being a perfect balance for IQ, file size & resolution, find D4's functions to be a (pricey) overkill and DF to be a (again pricey) "underkill"… ideally, what they want is a modern D700 replacement which means a modern (up today) sensor, with modest file size but great performance, robust build, fast enough, reliable, with modern ergonomics and "manageable" size…. In other words a "scale down" version of the D4, the way that D700 was a scale down version of the D3… Obviously DF doesn't fulfil these criteria other than the sensor, if it had dual and better specified cards, better AF, better build, power pack ability and video like D800 body has, it could provide an alternative despite the different ergonomics, as it is, DF aims to different (body) users than D800, despite the similar price and having the 16mp sensor… A possible D800S wouldn't affect DF sales IMO… just my 2 Cs…. 

[jjj]

you clearly have never used a D4 but you keep speaking as though you know. you do not if this is what you have to say. I have used a D4 and it is superb under LOW light. I have pictures that reflect this. As I stated elsewhere, you quote from a spec sheet, not experience. Your Oly OM-D 1 is a very good camera. But it cannot deliver what a D4 can, much less a D4s

Can you show us this proof?

[BJL]

There seems to be a confusion in this thread, between
(a) the ability to take decent photos with very little light (low noise at high exposure index)
and
(b) the ability to autofocus on low light (minimum EV at which AF works).

[jjj]

Indeed there is. But then not properly reading posts before commenting is sadly the norm online

[allegretto]

There seems to be a confusion in this thread, between
(a) the ability to take decent photos with very little light (low noise at high exposure index)
and
(b) the ability to autofocus on low light (minimum EV at which AF works).

yes. "a" is my point. This is easily proven

that "b" may be optimistic is secondary, but very possible. However, not my point

the thread is about the D4s, a very fine camera no doubt. not about Olympus' offerings

[Vladimirovich]

the thread is about the D4s, a very fine camera no doubt. not about Olympus' offerings

absolutetely, so it is a good idea to refrain from incorrect statements about seeing in the dark... ever try to use OVF @ -4EV vs EVF with brighness boost ? using LV @ LCD ? good luck focusing PDAF lenses w/ that.

[Theodoros]

absolutetely, so it is a good idea to refrain from incorrect statements about seeing in the dark... ever try to use OVF @ -4EV vs EVF with brighness boost ? using LV @ LCD ? good luck focusing PDAF lenses w/ that.

Yes, you told us before! Yet pros (either if they use D4 or 1DX) know how to use a lens with MF and don't buy Olympus or other… Now if one focuses his camera and presses the shutter, …I guess that the D4s will see in the dark, …won't it? 

[jjj]

Yes, you told us before! Yet pros (either if they use D4 or 1DX) know how to use a lens with MF and don't buy Olympus or other…

So pros do not buy Olympus cameras!! I better not buy one then if it then invalidates my standing amongst proper photographers. 

[allegretto]

Can you show us this proof?

sure

just go to dpreview and compare the D4 at high ISO to pretty much anything they have tested… RAW.

Pretty amazing.

What is it that you question? Where do you think, as an image sampling device it falls short?

[allegretto]

So pros do not buy Olympus cameras!! I better not buy one then if it then invalidates my standing amongst proper photographers. 

you know… this is a curious response, clearly not what is being said.

anyway, we are talking about the D4s. If you think an Oly is just as good (or better), that's fine but not what the thread is about.

why are you being so defensive about Oly?

[Theodoros]

you know… this is a curious response, clearly not what is being said.

anyway, we are talking about the D4s. If you think an Oly is just as good (or better), that's fine but not what the thread is about.

why are you being so defensive about Oly?

It's obvious that Nikon's aim is to gain a clear advantage from D4's only competitor… which of course is the 1DX only! …The question is what will follow now that internal cannibalisation seems less possible, will they move D4's sensor to lower models? (with its "previous" performance of course)

[jjj]

you know… this is a curious response, clearly not what is being said.

Except that is how it reads.

anyway, we are talking about the D4s. If you think an Oly is just as good (or better), that's fine but not what the thread is about.

why are you being so defensive about Oly?

Not being defensive at all. I simply thought your put down of Olympus not being pro kit was ridiculous. People are professional, not their equipment.