Nikon D4 is coming....

[NIKON KIU]

...in a couple of days.

How do you like a high ISO of 204,800?

Anyone interested?

Kiu

 

[bhop73]

I'm hoping it pushes the prices down on D3s, but other than that.. meh. I think if I was a pro I might feel different.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

What, no ISO 409,600? Outrageous. Actually, I am so gob-smacked by what is technically possible that jesting is the only recourse. Is it true that at a high enough ISO you can move photons into the correct shape by force of will alone?

P.S. the D3 changed the way I take photos forever. So much so that it is hard to see how to improve it. But Nikon manages somehow.

 

[swoop]

Really wanted to switch to Nikon. But when I finally had the cash to purchase new gear after all my Canon equipment was stolen, the Japan quake happened and I couldn't find a D700 anywhere in the U.S. Ended up getting another 5D mk2 for $200 more than I paid for my first one.

Based on the D3s. Any improvements made in the D4 should allow the thing to see in the dark.

 

[splitimageview]

I think ISO is done for, if only because there are too many digits for the display. Time for DIN. 🙂

 

[FrankS]

Damn, and Joe just bought a dSLR!

 

[dogberryjr]

Based on the D3s. Any improvements made in the D4 should allow the thing to see in the FUTURE.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Nikon Bob]

Not too terribly excited after about a year of delays and never ending speculation. Not really a camera that I need or want or can afford for what I do. Even the replacement for the D700 will have to be a huge improvement over the one I have now to even think about changing. It also better cost similar to what the D700 cost when introduced. With digital the expectation has been more for the same or less cost than the model it is replacing. A bit of a yawn so far but I am prepared to be dazzled if and when.

Bob

 

[Snacks]

Brilliant! Though I will not be able to afford it for a decade or two, every advance makes better quality equipment more affordable for casual shooters like me.

 

[fbf]

I think d700 is a perfect camera, period.

 

[Travis L.]

I think d700 is a perfect camera, period.

Seconded..

 

[Mackinaw]

I'm quite happy with shooting Tri-X at an ISO of 400 in my Leica.

Jim B.

 

[mervynyan]

have d700 but rarely use it. i think the films are here for at least another decade, so films are still good.

 

[happy]

I think d700 is a perfect camera, period.

pretty close... but some more pixels and resolving power would be nice. Also higher framerate and some video capability. But that's just in a perfect world 🙂

 

[johne]

D80, do not have to worry about bad movies. [Also cheaper].
john

 

[TXForester]

Any improvements made in the D4 should allow the thing to see in the dark.

...and focus in a cave during a solar eclipse.

 

[AlexanderR]

I'm sure it will be awesome. I wouldn't trade my D3s for anything else--just for the ability to shoot anywhere/anytime with solid results. If the D4 is better (which I'm sure it will be) it'll be worth every cent.

For my purposes, the D3s is enough and doesn't require an 'upgrade' to the next best thing. But for those that don't already have a D3s, the D4 will be very nice.

 

[neelin]

What, no ISO 409,600? Outrageous.

At some point the concept of ISO falls apart. What good is 1/5000 of a second of exposure on a sensor that capable of recording a single photon landing on it every couple of minutes? 😉

Robert

 

[SolaresLarrave]

To me, the only big and significant difference between the D3 and the D700 is the built-in sensor duster feature. I'm not sure whether the D3 has a dual card slot too... but the dust shaker is a big nice addition to the D700.

Which is, by the way, a better than excellent camera. 🙂 I don't use mine often, but when it gets used, it goes places and takes it well.

 

[jsrockit]

I think ISO is done for, if only because there are too many digits for the display. Time for DIN. 🙂

Nah, soon you just won't have to deal with ISO since the camera will just magically perform perfectly in all lighting situations.