Toronto Photography Meetup Group

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/12/11/nikon ... z1gHgDQ7ki

apparently 90% true.... so they say. We'll see.

less than half the resolution of the D800 90% rumours?

otherwise, 204k ISO? Yikes, shooting in caves with a glow in the dark sticker!

don't forget that ISO 204K is just 1 stop faster than 102K, which is 1 stop faster than 65k etc...

I never believe these things until the ACTUAL announcement from Nikon comes out.

Which is six or seven stops faster than I shoot my Canon 40D (800ISO max)

Drooooool, would have liked to see slightly higher MP (18-20), But.. I'll trust the guys at Nikon and assume this is ideal.

It is interesting that the flagships, 1DX & D4, are both in the sub-20MP arena and the rumoured 5D3 & D800 are slated to be the MP kings. It will be interesting to see the ISO performance of the D4 when it is released.

more megapixels doesn't necessarily equate to better image quality..... we have learned this!

absolutely true, but hopefully a company like Nikon is able to keep things balanced without sacrificing IQ for just more MPs. The D7000 was a big jump up in MPs and the IQ is quite good and high ISO works great. Crossed fingers.

Yes indeed -- love the output I get from my D7000, and the ability to crop with little image quality loss, just great. Frankly, I'd love to see a D700 with a similar 16mp sensor .... I don't need 24 or higher. If I want big files, I'll send my 4x5 negs out for drum scanning

I think the camera manufacturers realize that the 20+MP cameras need that much more computer processing horsepower, and for most pros, they can't afford both the camera and the new computer that goes with it.

Guys, The D4 is not designed for the regular photography community ..... the flagship models from Nikon that appear with similar designations are photojournalism camera's.

Looking back at history ...

D1h, 2.7 megapixels

D2h, 4 megapixels

D2Hs, 4 megapixels

D3, 12 megapixels

D3s, 12 megapixels

Photojournalists usually shoot sRGB Jpeg images - they want relatively LOW size files so they can file images quickly - sometimes on the fly. At the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver, many of the camera's were tethered and sending images in real time to the image banks where editors were bringing them up in Lightroom minutes later and sending them for publication on the wire services.

So a D4 with 16 megapixels is completely logical given the purpose. That being said, if Nikon is planning to release a D700s / D700x or D800 .... I'd like it to have 16 megapixels and 1080p video, and if they release it in March, PERFECT -- then I'll sell my D700 and upgrade.

never met a photojournalist who shot sRGB, they all shoot Adobe RGB as that's the work flow newspapers have. They also only send low rez (small files under 1 mb for example) if they've got slow/sketchy access, otherwise they're moving 3 mb + files.

as for the D4, I'm taking it as gospel

Thom Hogan has an interesting take on the megapixels race and the difference between the lower MP of the Pro cameras and the high MP of the enthusiast cameras and his theory of why the amateurs are all about the MPs .

http://www.bythom.com/

DG

If you want better image quality you need a bigger sensor.
We're now processing the shit out of the light/files.
There is going to come a point where we can only cram better quality into a camera if it has a bigger sensor.
I think that is one of the reasons why the D7000 excels at its price point. They didn't go crazy with it as it is a whole 12Mp. The ratio of sensor size to pixels is much better than the average bear these days aside from the 16mp Full framers, they equate to roughly the same ratio.

When digital cameras first burst into our lives, the cameras were big, the sensors were small. Since then the sensors (aside from phone cameras) have gotten larger, as the camera's shrunk. If the body stays the same, and the sensor stays the same, we can't expect images to get much more gigantic without changing some hardware

D7000 has 16.2 MP.

While I agree with you generally for sure, let's not lose sight that technology does advance, letting more pixels on the same size sensor with less corruption, noise, and rendering, etc. I remember similar things being said about the microchip in computers. They said you couldn't fit anymore 'transistors' on the same chips, and they keep getting better at adding way more on each wafer. There are some clever scientist out there. So long as they dont push it too far and degrade performance, i figure they will be able to keep improving pixel density without sacrificing quality.

OH for sure, there is still improvement to be made. We are into technical unknowns. Damn scientists stop trying to force the same sized transistors and made smaller ones.
I'm sure they'll figure out how to make the senors smaller and better in some way, shape or form.

the key thing is pixel density vs quality .... but let's not loose sight of the fact that the D4 is only a beggining, as there will most certainly be a D4x in the future which will meet the needs of the studio photographers, delivering larger file sizes. But at some point ... FX can only deliver so much before its time to move into digital medium format.

at this point, the biggest improvements consumers really need is on the prices!

I wish cameras were like the evolving market for big screen tvs or computers. All the super features you want and lots of power at amazingly low prices.

D4 market is news photographers

I'm with Rhommel on this one.
Keeping the quality out of everyone's paws helps keep some definition between the markets.
Markets which are flooded as is.
IT also helps prevent some of the "legal examples" people have posted on the site where "professionals" don't provide professional service/results.

interesting point being made about using price to keep the masses from obtaining the high level Nikon/Canon equipment. Not sure how i feel about that. Maybe it will simply bring down the costs of the Medium Format cameras (Hassleblad, etc.) from the 40k range into the 10k ranges and open those up to working photogrpahers?

I also want that MIT camera that takes super super slow motion video at the speed of light!!

Are you sure there will be a D4x given what Canon has done to its flagship series (merged the news/sports line with the hi-res studio line - 1Ds and 1D into the 1Dx series)?

From the rumored price and specs of the D800 - it seems that Nikon wants to promote the D800 into the hi-res studio line and retire the D#x line...

Of course this means they have to have something in the $2,200-$2,700 market space if they promote the D800 up in the price bracket.

I think that cameras in the $20K+ range are rented by the pros.

Non-pros like to own their cameras while pros seem to have no issues with renting stuff as needed...from my non-scientific survey of what I have seen.

from what i've read in tons of articles, all the big fashion shooters have medium format cameras in their collections as needed. Except maybe Terry Richardson, of course, who seems to be using a point and shoot every time LOL

Even some of the portrait and wedding shooters in town have medium format cameras in their collection as well. When i was searching for a good pro to take the office corproate shots, most had MF cameras to use for large 'group shots'.