nikon d4s

Nikon D4s 33 Frames in 3 Seconds: Testing Group Area AF by Jared Polin

My D4s arrives today, whilst I would not upgrade from a D4 without compelling evidence that it is worthwhile, as a stable mate for my D800 it is going to rock.
Come on postie - shake your ass!
 
Guy's
I pick up my new D4s in 2 weeks time, my question is what would you guys reccomend as a 64GD XQD card................I already have plenty of CF cards but as we already know this puppy uses XQD as well..............I guess 64GB is the size to get???
 
Neil,

It depends how you shoot, and any limitations you might have on being able to change cards mid-shoot. I'm using 2 x 32GB cards and the 16GB I got in the box with my D4, and pairing them with CF cards as I always backup across cards in-camera.

You'll get about 800-900 images on a 32GB card, which for me is fine.

The cards haven't really come down much in price, and certainly for XQD and CF at the moment there isn't any price benefit in getting 1x64GB vs 2x32GB cards.
 
I have 4 16GB cards. Limits the chances of loosing too many images, should anything go wrong.
 
DXO have just updated Optics Pro 9 with D4S profiles so I thought I'd see how their PRIME noise reduction (the best NR you can get I reckon) worked with the 'normal' maximum of 25600 ISO. Excuse the rubbish image, the cat was sat in the dark under my desk a few mins ago! Nothing else done to this, straight out of camera with DXO PRIME noise reduction...

25600 ISO, Full image and 100%crop:

25600full.jpg
25600crop.jpg
 
Flashman said:
DXO have just updated Optics Pro 9 with D4S profiles so I thought I'd see how their PRIME noise reduction (the best NR you can get I reckon) worked with the 'normal' maximum of 25600 ISO. Excuse the rubbish image, the cat was sat in the dark under my desk a few mins ago! Nothing else done to this, straight out of camera with DXO PRIME noise reduction...

25600 ISO, Full image and 100%crop:

25600full.jpg



25600crop.jpg
Click to expand...
What did it look like without the noise reduction.It might be the noise reduction software is the real star here?
 
It still looks good.The NR software is very good I might have to have a look at getting it.

Is the focusing on the D4s any better than the D3s or D4.Thanks
 
kestral said:
It still looks good.The NR software is very good I might have to have a look at getting it.

Is the focusing on the D4s any better than the D3s or D4.Thanks
Click to expand...

DX0 have taken a different approach to noise reduction... a little blurb HERE. They claim a one stop advantage in NR over the best of the rest and I don't see any reason to doubt it. The two main drawbacks are firstly that it can take several minutes to process a single file (there's a lot of sums involved!)... some might think that's a reassuringly long time! Secondly, you can't use the PRIME NR as a standalone application, it needs the RAW data so you have to process your RAW file using Optics Pro 9 and export from there... not a great hardship though as it's a good processor that's worth spending some time trialling.

Focussing on the D4S...? I'm not sure... it's lightning fast, accurate and reliable for sure... but much better than the D4...? Couldn't say really, It didn't worry me enough to sit down and compare the two before I sold the D4 so I'm probably not the best person to ask. That group AF mode is a good addition though!
 
Thanks.There is an article in AP this week about the Optics pro 9 software I think. I had a quick look it rated it the best NR.
 
At this level, new models are about evolution not revolution. For me the D4 more than serves my needs, but if the extra stop, the 1 FPS, or the increased buffer for instance was something that was going to make the difference in getting the money shot then upgrading would make absolute sense. I haven't experienced the focusing issues of others but then I am not often taking "Rouse - esque" type pictures. I was disappointed when Andy ditched the D4 for Canon but I am sure he had his reasons. I suspect the additional focus modes added here are aimed at addressing the issues raised during that particular discussion and to prevent gravitation to the Canon system. AS for the dual XQD/CF slots, I am glad Nikon have stuck with XQD; it is fast. Its a pity it not being adopted by other manufacturers or even introduced into other cameras. I dodnt think its future is assured at this stage, which would be a pity. I can hold down the shutter on my D4 at 10 FPS and rarely do I hit the buffer experience write speed problems.
 
Gary is correct the 'gazillion' (geddit??) of settings for the 1Dx is plain crazy. There just far too many. I have read quite a few of the top pros who have done articles on it and at the end of the day it plain to see. They all say how it is fantastic to have so many choices and then they tell what you can alter BUT never ever do I read where they can say use these setting for this and that scenario.

They can't because the settings are just too complicated. Just give me a finite set that is easy peasy to understand and change.

And I really can't believe that Nikon users are switching to Canon because for the 1Dx over the 1D4. If they are high profile then it's because of money, plain and simple.

Forget the D4s what has the 1Dx got that is better than the D4 that would make people want to change?

If Canon has some lenses that Nikon do't have and they need then fair enough, but at least Nikon users (as I have read many times on here) don't have to MA their lenses to the bodies like us Canon uses.
 
It looks like some of the D4s have a fault with the rear screen image.
 
kestral said:
It looks like some of the D4s have a fault with the rear screen image.
Click to expand...

Fault? Really surely the rear screen isn't for editing. There looks like a bit of banding. Which I can sometimes also get on my £6000 TV
 
reminds me of many years ago, when there was an outrage about pixie dust in the Nikon 18-200mm vr. If you held it in a certain position, with a light shining inside the top element, you could see dust!! People demanded that Nikon came clean about it. Claiming it was a manufacturing fault. Too much time looking into the wrong end of the lens.
Turned out be nothing. Still produced decent images.
I think some people just like to try and be first to find a problem.

Kev.
 
I just got back from a birding trip using my new Nikon D4s, 300mm f2.8 and for the first time a new 2 x TC. I shot 900 plus shots and not one of them are usable, even the ones at ISO 2 to 500 are all crap......(gutted)
So you can imagine what crap was going through my head as I was going through the files, especially as it was the first time ever shooting with my brand new D4s and get this kind of result. I quickly took my camera out of the dry box and put the 300mm back on without the TC on and shot it in the house at ~ISO6400 and all images are sharp............thank %$%$ for that. I also tried it with my 14/24 and they were all fine as well.
So in short I will NEVER use a 2 x TC ever again. On my D3s with a 1.7 TC the files were all usable but really not sharp.
So going by what I have seen today, I will be reconsidering if I ever use TC's again
 
ndwgolf said:
So in short I will NEVER use a 2 x TC ever again. On my D3s with a 1.7 TC the files were all usable but really not sharp.
So going by what I have seen today, I will be reconsidering if I ever use TC's again
Click to expand...

Hmm, I find the new 2x to be extremely good ... okay not razor sharp but in no way unusable, IMO better than the 1.7x

D800
Nikon 300 f2.8 + TC 2.0
All taken at 600mm

9493825447_a4945fd55e.jpg



9496626894_4567ebb1a9.jpg



9496634980_767738385a.jpg
 
Hi Gramps
Maybe my expectations are too high but the pictures I took today are similar to the ones you are showing above and too me they are not sharp making them unusable.
At home without the TC and at ISO6400 the images are sharp and defiantly usable
 
gramps said:
Hmm, I find the new 2x to be extremely good ... okay not razor sharp but in no way unusable, IMO better than the 1.7x

D800
Nikon 300 f2.8 + TC 2.0
All taken at 600mm

9493825447_a4945fd55e.jpg



9496626894_4567ebb1a9.jpg



9496634980_767738385a.jpg
Click to expand...
Cant tell anything at that size, you could make anything look sharp that size, post some 100% crops or link to the original files
 
ndwgolf said:
Hi Gramps
Maybe my expectations are too high but the pictures I took today are similar to the ones you are showing above and too me they are not sharp making them unusable.
At home without the TC and at ISO6400 the images are sharp and defiantly usable
Click to expand...

Sorry your idea of unusable is different to mine then :)

Gary Coyle said:
Cant tell anything at that size, you could make anything look sharp that size, post some 100% crops or link to the original files
Click to expand...

Have you used Flickr recently? I haven't got the time or desire, it's just not that important ... the images are usable.
 
gramps said:
Have you used Flickr recently? I haven't got the time or desire, it's just not that important ... the images are usable.
Click to expand...
Nope, not used it, dont use it, but would gladly click through to these "useable" but youve not linked to them

Go on Gramps, give us a link
 
I can't work out how to link in the new Flickr format, need to fiddle, slice, cut & past to post the below 1024 image

9496626894_3f3508a824_o.jpg




It's not full size, the original is on backup, this is the max size I upload to Flickr and is a crop from the original full-size image.
I'm not claiming it as a mega-sharp image but I am claiming it as usable and no reason whatsoever to ditch the 2.0TC unless you've got money to throw at a 600mm.
 
Not being up to speed with tele convertors and stuff I would say that if I had a d4s and got the above pics I think I'd be a bit like Neil to be honest. I would expect them to look much sharper at these ISO's.

On the plus side that ISO1400 shot is pretty clean looking.
 
ndwgolf said:
I just got back from a birding trip using my new Nikon D4s, 300mm f2.8 and for the first time a new 2 x TC. I shot 900 plus shots and not one of them are usable, even the ones at ISO 2 to 500 are all crap......(gutted)
So you can imagine what crap was going through my head as I was going through the files, especially as it was the first time ever shooting with my brand new D4s and get this kind of result. I quickly took my camera out of the dry box and put the 300mm back on without the TC on and shot it in the house at ~ISO6400 and all images are sharp............thank %$%$ for that. I also tried it with my 14/24 and they were all fine as well.
So in short I will NEVER use a 2 x TC ever again. On my D3s with a 1.7 TC the files were all usable but really not sharp.
So going by what I have seen today, I will be reconsidering if I ever use TC's again
Click to expand...
But which TC is it Mk2 or Mk 3 Nikon?
 
Stevie- said:
Not being up to speed with tele convertors and stuff I would say that if I had a d4s and got the above pics I think I'd be a bit like Neil to be honest. I would expect them to look much sharper at these ISO's.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but there's more involved than ISO (as you know), I can't help thinking that with a brand new camera, brand new TC on a fairly hefty lens there could well be some need for practice both with settings and handling before judging the equipment as useless.
I'm not a young oil-rig worker but I can't imagine using that combo hand-held for 900 shots without my hold suffering for a start.
 
If those are hand held Neil, you simply must up your shutter speed until you get more used to the combo and improve your technique bud.

Edit..and get the thing off 11fps,slow it down a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top