DSLRUsers.com

Here we go again.

http://www.slashgear.com/nikon-d4-may-b ... ashGear%29

D4, plus a new 85mm f/1.8.

or maybe not.

Time will tell

Been seeing this on nikonrumours as well. Looks fairly believable so only a few days to wait. We'll see what Friday brings.

I thought the top-range cameras were generally released alongside top-tier lenses (thinking back to the D3 with the 24-70 & 14-24). I could be wrong - it has happened before.

Bring it! At least the D4 rumored specs, although less "certain" in the eyes of the rumor sites seem to be to be more believeable..and the timetable is about right as well!

I want a 60mm Micro lens with VR!

ATJ wrote:I want a 60mm Micro lens with VR!

They advise against using VR for macro work with the 105VR

Mr Darcy wrote:

ATJ wrote:I want a 60mm Micro lens with VR!

They advise against using VR for macro work with the 105VR

Why assume that's why I want it?

ATJ wrote:

Mr Darcy wrote:

ATJ wrote:I want a 60mm Micro lens with VR!

They advise against using VR for macro work with the 105VR

Why assume that's why I want it?

I'm not. Just making sure you are aware of the issue. Nikon also appear to be of the opinion that VR is not a great asset for wider lenses. At least that was their excuse for not adding VR to the 24-70 f/2.8. They also didn't add VR to the new 50 f/1.4G Nor even the 85. Though I think they slipped up here.

Mr Darcy wrote:

ATJ wrote:

Mr Darcy wrote:

ATJ wrote:I want a 60mm Micro lens with VR!

They advise against using VR for macro work with the 105VR

Why assume that's why I want it?

I'm not. Just making sure you are aware of the issue. Nikon also appear to be of the opinion that VR is not a great asset for wider lenses. At least that was their excuse for not adding VR to the 24-70 f/2.8. They also didn't add VR to the new 50 f/1.4G Nor even the 85. Though I think they slipped up here.

then nikon are a bunch is fools cos that's a complete nonsense. there is no issue.

Mr Darcy wrote:

ATJ wrote:

Mr Darcy wrote:

ATJ wrote:I want a 60mm Micro lens with VR!

They advise against using VR for macro work with the 105VR

Why assume that's why I want it?

I'm not. Just making sure you are aware of the issue. Nikon also appear to be of the opinion that VR is not a great asset for wider lenses. At least that was their excuse for not adding VR to the 24-70 f/2.8. They also didn't add VR to the new 50 f/1.4G Nor even the 85. Though I think they slipped up here.

But they added it to the 18-55mm lens and it is a great asset for shooting video (which is why I want it). They also added it to the DX Micro 85mm.

I just wish they would hurry up and announce it so all these threads about whats gonna appear will disappear..

So this is a rumour, not an announcement?

Give me my click back!

No, it's an announcement. Official Nikon announcement, tomorrow, around midday.

We just don't know what's being announced, and therefore, it's a rumour.

Oh.

And according to Nikon Rumors, an article about the D4 appeared online briefly.

Apparently, press release on Friday, public release Jan 10 (CES?? PMA???), camera available in February.

US$6K.

Apparently, rumour has it that there is a new 6-400mm F1.2 lens coming too, weighing only 400gms.

Seriously, being a non Nikon shooter, I am waiting for news of the upcoming (supposedly) Canon mirrorless offerings and 5D Mkiii, but nevertheless a 4D will be interesting.

Mr Darcy wrote:Nikon also appear to be of the opinion that VR is not a great asset for wider lenses. At least that was their excuse for not adding VR to the 24-70 f/2.8. They also didn't add VR to the new 50 f/1.4G Nor even the 85.

but they did add it to the 16-85VR and the 16-35VR (you wouldn't call this a non wide lens)

I wanna know by what logic VR would NOT be a good thing to have available on a lens.

Rooz wrote:then nikon are a bunch is fools cos that's a complete nonsense. there is no issue.

Sorry, Chris, but you're very wrong in this statement.

You should say Nikon is ...

gstark wrote:

Rooz wrote:then nikon are a bunch is fools cos that's a complete nonsense. there is no issue.

Sorry, Chris, but you're very wrong in this statement.

You should say Nikon is ...

The grammar police is/are back!

He said, "That that 'that' that that man used, was incorrect."

ozimax wrote:

gstark wrote:

Rooz wrote:then nikon are a bunch is fools cos that's a complete nonsense. there is no issue.

Sorry, Chris, but you're very wrong in this statement.

You should say Nikon is ...

The grammar police is/are back!

He said, "That that 'that' that that man used, was incorrect."

This is the kind of thing up with which I will not put.

And let's not forget capitalisation: Capitalisation is the difference between "I had to help my uncle Jack off a horse.." and "I had to help my uncle jack off a horse.."

Small iPhone keyboard, fat fingers and auto correction; that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it !

It's not a rumour anymore... http://nikonrumors.com/2012/01/04/nikon-d4-6000-nikkor-af-s-85mm-f1-8g-500.aspx/

Wink wrote:It's not a rumour anymore... http://nikonrumors.com/2012/01/04/nikon-d4-6000-nikkor-af-s-85mm-f1-8g-500.aspx/

No, that's the Nikon Rumors site, not the Nikon site.

Until we see that actual announcements from Nikon, then this would still be a rumored.

Meh, good enough for me. The thread was titled based on a rumour, so another rumour won't hurt.

gstark wrote:

Wink wrote:It's not a rumour anymore... http://nikonrumors.com/2012/01/04/nikon-d4-6000-nikkor-af-s-85mm-f1-8g-500.aspx/

No, that's the Nikon Rumors site, not the Nikon site.

Until we see that actual announcements from Nikon, then this would still be a rumored.

But, you still have to prove that Nikon exists in the real world and not just as a figment of your imagination.

Ho Hum. Face detection....bum detection......just more bloody gimmicks that get in the way. Listen carefully Mr Nikon....it's image quality....get that right and I'll buy it.

I just hope they release a cut-down version of the rumoured D800 at some point ... specs they've listed are fine, but with the same sensor size as the D4 looks like it will have... 36MP will give great ability to pixel peek, fill up hard drives, slowly kill Photoshop and load massive images in facebook... not sure what else it will be good for though!

Remorhaz wrote:

Mr Darcy wrote:Nikon also appear to be of the opinion that VR is not a great asset for wider lenses. At least that was their excuse for not adding VR to the 24-70 f/2.8. They also didn't add VR to the new 50 f/1.4G Nor even the 85.

but they did add it to the 16-85VR and the 16-35VR (you wouldn't call this a non wide lens)

No, but within the context of this forum I didn't think I needed to mention the other use of VR/IS. Viz. as a marketing gimmick to sell cheap lenses.

Andrew,
I am interested in your use with Video. Pray tell us more.

Mr Darcy wrote:No, but within the context of this forum I didn't think I needed to mention the other use of VR/IS. Viz. as a marketing gimmick to sell cheap lenses.

And I ask again. Greg, how is VR a marketing gimmick ?

Whilst VR has its uses under certain lighting conditions with certain lenses, it does add complexity and cost to a lens. Old day VR used to be called a tripod. I'm amazed that with a modern digital camera and VR or IS and a fast lens and a high ISO....I can take photographs where once a flashgun would have been required. It's almost no longer a challange.

Matt. K wrote:Whilst VR has its uses under certain lighting conditions with certain lenses, it does add complexity and cost to a lens. Old day VR used to be called a tripod. I'm amazed that with a modern digital camera and VR or IS and a fast lens and a high ISO....I can take photographs where once a flashgun would have been required. It's almost no longer a challange.

if it has its uses, and they are practical ones, then it is not a gimmick. a gimmick is something a marketing guy gives you the hard sell on that has some initial perceived benefit but very limited, or in fact no use/ benefit in the real world. that is simply not the case with stabilisation.

in the old days people used to manually focus lens and manually meter aswell. its not relevant to the use or not of VR.

and of course, using a tripod is the better alternative when possible but i take my camera out for say 200 days a year, my tripod comes with me 5 days a year...you do the math !!

adds complexity to a lens ? ahhh...so what ? AF added complexity, AFS added complexity. cameras added to phones added complexity. automatic gearboxes added complexity. built in PVR's added complexity. again...so what ? the failure rates of VR lens' are no more or less than lens' without VR.

cost ? some, although most evidence does not support this point of view.

Mr Darcy wrote:I am interested in your use with Video. Pray tell us more.

A few questions for you first....

Do you own any VR lenses? Have you looked through the viewfinder and seen what happens when you engage the VR (half depress the shutter)?

Do you watch David and Margaret ("At The Movies")? Have you noted David's dislike for handheld video work?

Now, think about what happens when you engage the VR while thinking about handheld video... It is pretty obvious that VR will significantly improve the stability of the video. It is also pretty obvious when looking at video shot with and without VR how much difference it makes.

Matt. K wrote:Whilst VR has its uses under certain lighting conditions with certain lenses, it does add complexity and cost to a lens. Old day VR used to be called a tripod. I'm amazed that with a modern digital camera and VR or IS and a fast lens and a high ISO....I can take photographs where once a flashgun would have been required. It's almost no longer a challange.

For me, VR is about stabilization of video. When I'm shooting video underwater, a flashgun is not going to help. I'm not taking a tripod on a dive with me. VR is the solution.

In 2007, I bought a Nikkor 18-55mm lens from Poon for $119. In October this year, I bought the VR version of this lens in Australia for $139. Given the passing of the years and the different sources, I don't see this as additional cost. The lens isn't any more complex. Last year I also bought a Nikkor 70-300mm for around $500. This is an incredible lens at a great price - it has VR.

Yes I own several VR lenses, and for long lenses it is extremely useful. However for wider lenses I find the usefulness tapers off. I am not sure if it the smaller image or just that the technology doesn't work as well with short focal lengths.
My anecdotal evidence accords with statements I have seen in the technology press that Image Stabilisation is of little or no use with wide lenses

Now we come to Nikon's lens lineup.
1. They do use VR on all their professional grade long lenses. Except the 85 f/1.4 as I noted above
2. The do NOT use VR on their professional grade wide lenses, citing that it is of little or no benefit at these focal lengths. I remember them explicitly saying so when they received flak for not including it on their 24-70 f/2.8
3. They DO use it on their wide consumer grade wide lenses. Given item 2 above, that indicates that their use of VR on consumer grade wide lenses is precisely a marketing gimmick. Either that or the techos who design their pro grade lenses don't know what they are doing. And my 24-70, 70-200 VRII, 105VR, 85 1.4, 50 1.4 all say that they do know what they are doing.

Sigh!

Lets face it, a pro wide is hardly a sports lens. 9 out of ten pro wide landscape shots will be with a tripod.

On the other hand, a consumer will need the buzzword compliant lens so that they don't feel short changed, 9 out of 10 landscape shots will be without a tripod, but the VR will probably make little difference anyway...

Mr Darcy wrote:I have seen in the technology press that Image Stabilisation is of little or no use with wide lenses.

lol Have you thought about this at all Greg ? What on earth does "little or no use mean". VR works the exact same way on any lens regardless of its focal length. It stabilizes shake and is good for 3 or 4 stops.

I think what is being lost in translation here is that VR is LESS valuable on shorter lens cos you can effectively handhold shorter focal lengths at slower shutter speeds with far less camera shake, but thats beside the point. At the end of the day, if I shoot my 16-35 at 1/20th, I'd prefer to have it stablised and I'm gonna get a sharper image with it available than not. And that's not to even touch on the video factor that Andrew has already addressed.

Rooz wrote:

Mr Darcy wrote:I have seen in the technology press that Image Stabilisation is of little or no use with wide lenses.

lol Have you thought about this at all Greg ? What on earth does "little or no use mean". VR works the exact same way on any lens regardless of its focal length. It stabilizes shake and is good for 3 or 4 stops.

The issue is that stabilisation takes a greater part, and is more noticeable, on lenses with a longer focal length. Grab a 400mm, point it at something, and see how easy it is to maintain a constant trajectory on your subject. The greater the focal length, the greater the problem.

With a wider lens, this "problem" is still there, but because there is less subject magnification, it's simply less noticeable. With a 16mm lens, probably impossible to notice.

Let's also go back to basics: one of the basic rules is that the slowest shutter speed in use, hand held, should be the reciprocal of the focal length in use. This basic rule automatically recognises what I've just explained, by suggesting that, if you're using a 400mm lens handheld, the slowest shutter speed you should use would be 1/400 sec, whereas for that 16mm lens, 1/16 sec would be hand holdable, all other things being equal.

Within that paradigm, stabilisation technologies have much to offer in lenses of longer focal lengths. There may still be a benefit in wider lenses, but any such benefit will not be as obvious.

Finally, for those who want to see just what VR can do ...

Take my first example (above) with the 400mm lens, and just compare what you see through the viewfinder, with, and without, VR/IS enabled.

Which is pretty much exactly what I said. Since when did LESS useful become a useless gimmick that doesn't work ? Af is also less useful on a uwa lens os your dof is so large. Its not a valid argument...Sorry, no sale.

To bring this back on topic

Here is a copy of a French magazine with the D4:
http://i.imgur.com/XOOOX.jpg

and a rough translation:


Pretty well just confirms what has been on Nikon Rumours. They did have a pre-release D4 to try out. FPS will be 10 fps with 11 fps but with AF only on first one. You can get 12fps with DX mode, ie 8MP.

The article does mention that it is not as much pixels as consumer cameras but do say that the aim is for speed and low-light, so not as important to get high megapixels.

Shutter count to 400K.

AF selection button has been simplified, similar do D7000.

AF is same as D3s but with greater sensitivity. It also has a new Expeed chip for AF, so AF is greatly improved.

Face detection is on there and functions well as tested.

They found the camera to be ergonomically more comfortable in the hand then the D3s.

It comes with Ethernet connection.

They conclude that the D4 is not really a revolution but an evolution from the D3s where Nikon has listened to pro's wish list in improving reliability and productivity.

That's pretty much it in a nutshell. Not much new from the Nikon Rumours site. Only a few hours to go and we'll get the real announcement. At least here in Australia, it will be in the afternoon

Cheers,

André

really, why would we expect this to ever stay on topic!

Mr Darcy wrote:for wider lenses I find the usefulness tapers off

Mr Darcy wrote: Image Stabilisation is of little or no use with wide lenses

Rooz wrote: VR is LESS valuable

ohh...wait...

i have just teh perfect image for this

radar wrote:To bring this back on topic

Here is a copy of a French magazine with the D4:

and a rough translation:

cheers radar, that is actually somewhat useful, even for someone liek me who does not even really care

by Mr Darcy on Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:49 pm

Just what time do you go to bed? Oh that's right, you think nothing of a sunrise shoot three hours from home.

And now it's official.

Pretty much as rumoured

thank god, i can breathe again...

http://www.nikon.com/news/2012/0106_flagship_01.htm

TOKYO - Nikon Corporation is pleased to announce the release of the Nikon D4, a Nikon FX-format camera that serves as the new flagship model in Nikon's lineup of digital-SLR cameras. Nikon will be exhibiting the D4 at the 2012 International CES, to be held Tuesday, January 10 through Friday, January 13 in Las Vegas, Nevada. This electronics exhibition is open to the public.

The D4 is equipped with a new Nikon FX-format CMOS image sensor (imaging size of 36.0 x 23.9 mm) and EXPEED 3, the latest image-processing engine specifically optimized for digital-SLR cameras, making it the next-generation flagship Nikon digital-SLR camera with the ultimate in versatility and functionality that offers superior image quality rich in detail along with excellent high-speed performance. It has an effective pixel count of 16.2-million pixels, and offers superior image quality under a broad range of lighting conditions with its image sensor supporting an incredible range of sensitivities from ISO 50 to ISO 204800

http://www.nikon.com/news/2012/0106_af-s_nikkor_85mm_f18g_01.htm

OKYO - Nikon Corporation is pleased to announce the release of the AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.8G, a fast, medium-telephoto fixed focal length lens with a focal length of 85 mm and a maximum aperture of f/1.8 compatible with the Nikon FX-format.

The AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.8G is the new addition to the FX-format lens lineup. It utilizes an all new optical design allowing users to enjoy shooting portraits with pleasing blur characteristics only possible through fixed focal length lenses. Even with a fast maximum aperture of f/1.8, the AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.8G is very lightweight at roughly 350 g, allowing users to easily carry their camera around with this lens mounted. The Silent Wave Motor (SWM) ensures not only quiet autofocus operations, but also makes autofocus shooting possible when the lens is used with entry-level Nikon DX-format digital-SLR cameras such as the D5100 and D3100, which are not equipped with an autofocus drive motor.

http://www.digital-photography-school.c ... -your-mind

If you have 30 minutes to watch him talking about his play with it... (never seen this guy before) I like his hair!

its got backlit buttons! man, I so want one now

biggerry wrote:its got backlit buttons! man, I so want one now

I'd actually really like that feature. There's plenty of times I'm out light painting and have to fumble around trying to find the right button.

Wink wrote:

biggerry wrote:its got backlit buttons! man, I so want one now

I'd actually really like that feature. There's plenty of times I'm out light painting and have to fumble around trying to find the right button.

I agree.

On the surface, it seems like it may be a nonsense feature, but if you're ever working in a dark environment, this will be a godsend.

I notice also that it has, for video, a 2.7 crop feature. Which is also the crop factor for the Nikon MILCs.

Mr Darcy wrote:

by Mr Darcy on Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:49 pm

Just what time do you go to bed? Oh that's right, you think nothing of a sunrise shoot three hours from home.

hehe more to do in bed then just sleep...like...read a book or.. (get ya minds outta the gutta)