as d800 is already announced, please follow in this thread:
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=4860

Tao, as someone said under one of their videos, "But theses guys aren't reviewing anyting. They post videos (from what type of camera we don't know) and put titles on them. Anyone can post a video. These are the worlds two top cameras from Nikon and Canon. Anyone who really had a pre-production unit would be dying to show it to the world. They never show the cameras once...why? Because they don't have them. I wish they'd prove me wrong."

That's exactly my opinion.

zlik & Abhinav - Fake? Maybe you guys should look at these guys's site and the rest of the equipment they test. They have been getting the newest Canons and Nikons for a while now. How some "unknown guy somehow got a D4, shot a comparison against the D7000, uploaded it on youtube even though Nikon didn't allow that yet." I have been watching these guys for a while if you haven't seen them before- well you learned about someone new. I learned of them with the last couple of Canons released. As for now allowing it - I suppose Nikon doesn't track everyone, but the company does do professional (TV, Commercial, Insert footage for movies, etc.) and seem to get this stuff and post it. Now whether they get one again - who knows. Nikon can't force them to take it down.

Here is the info they posted:
Second video comparison between the upcoming Nikon D4 an the in 2010 released Nikon D7000. We used the crop mode of the D4 to get the same focal length. Same settings on both cameras! Lenses on both DSLRs: Nikon 35mm F/1.8 + Nikon 50mm F/1.8
Settings on both cameras: ISO 3200 Aperture F/2.8 Shutter speed 1/50s

I'm not sure what is so surprising about it.

zlik said:
4 fps isn't a problem for me when shooting weddings. Even with my D3s, I always prefer right timing instead of ending up with 14 shots instead of 3.

Yes, probably for weddings, 4fps won't be an issue. I don't shoot weddings, but I'm starting to shoot red carpet events, where the celebrity may look into your lens for literally less than a second (if you're lucky!). I would love a D800, but I'll probably have to buy another D3s as a second body instead.

studio460 said:
+1 to what Adam said. D800 for studio work; D4 for ceremony and reception. However, for the ceremony and reception, you'll need two FX bodies, plus a 24-70mm/70-200mm f/2.8 combo. Not sure if the D800 can service as a second body for event shooting due to its limited FPS rate--still trying to figure this one out myself. Nevertheless, I definitely wouldn't advise an FX/DX combo--the noise floor difference is just too great (believe me, I've tried it with a D3s and a D7000).

4 fps isn't a problem for me when shooting weddings. Even with my D3s, I always prefer right timing instead of ending up with 14 shots instead of 3.

adamz said:
d4 - reception and church
d800 - session

+1 to what Adam said. D800 for studio work; D4 for ceremony and reception. However, for the ceremony and reception, you'll need two FX bodies, plus a 24-70mm/70-200mm f/2.8 combo. Not sure if the D800 can service as a second body for event shooting due to its limited FPS rate--still trying to figure this one out myself. Nevertheless, I definitely wouldn't advise an FX/DX combo--the noise floor difference is just too great (believe me, I've tried it with a D3s and a D7000).

The comparison looks like what you would expect a comparison between a DX and FX camera to be like. But I do agree: no one is supposed to be allowed to show images of preproduction models (and they have a 1dX comparison too), so something feels a bit fishy. If the videos get taken down in a day or two, then they might be real.

TaoTeJared said:
If you guys do video check out this comparison of the D4 Vs D7000. Make sure to view it full screen at 1080 to see the difference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoWrr6ypiVk

Tao ,something is fishy (I mean looks fake )

see this video .
http://www.viduba.com/video:QhlT0VFVCtmYGpURjdUNpFGbahEVn1TP

So very soon I and I others will have decide order a D4 or a D800

For the moment, I have, and will keep my D700

I do a wide rang of work including, although I try to avoid them, weddings

Most stuff ends up on the web, but I do get asked for large prints, of landscapes

I do not have need for more than 6 fps

at the moment I dont do video but I can see a future need for it

the one area the D700 struggles is focusing on dancers in very low light levels

(the infrared on Nikon flashes does not work on continuous focusing)

Both the D4 and the D800 have improve focusing but does any one know which is likely to be better

mega pixels is not too much of an issue for hi resolution landscapes, I will stitch ~ 12 shots together

The difference in price, size and weight is obvious and no I dont want a D3s

yes one of each would be nice, but not at the moment

That's obviously a fake. I'm sure you will figure it out for yourself as well. Hint: sensor size, DoF, Iso and focal length. And I'm not even talking about the fact that this unknown guy somehow got a D4, shot a comparison against the D7000, uploaded it on youtube even though Nikon didn't allow that yet.

I bet he didn't even use two different bodies. There isn't one single sequence that shows the "two cameras" recording at the same time. The framing is exactly the same (of course, he used the same tripod, unmounted a small sized body (D7000), mounted a huge body with integrated grip (D4) and got the exact same framing. And with a different sensor size.). Just record one sequence with a D7000 at 800 iso, 1/200, pause, record again but with 3200 iso, 1/50. Pretend that the first one is the D4. Done

If you guys do video check out this comparison of the D4 Vs D7000. Make sure to view it full screen at 1080 to see the difference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoWrr6ypiVk

zlik said:
The graph shows that at low ISOs, the D4 will perform better than anything we've seen yet (even D3s and D3x) but at high ISOs, it will not be significantly better than the D3s. Now I don't know about the OP, but when I shoot weddings (think dim churches), I am not often at base iso. As I said, for low-light photography, I don't predict the D4 to be much better than the D3s (and that's because the D3s already is above the norm).

To come back to the original question, if money was not an argument, I would chose the D4 over the D800 for weddings. My style of weddings is photojournalistic, and I can't imagine working with thousands of 36mp photos per event. Now if the D800 comes out with an sRAW option........

I agree from the chart that the D3S and the D4 has similar DR at the higher ISO. but there are other charts that show that the Noise(as opposed to DR) at higher iso is better on the D4. So I think the charts show that there is really a pretty significant improvement in the IQ for images from a D4. and all this discussions does not include any information on the colour depth/skin tones that although we do not have any charts for yet, we have anecdotal comments from testers that say that these have improved significantly as well... to my eyes the sample images I have seen do show some sweet colours and tones.

Does anyone know whether the D4 AF being effective down to -2 EV will have a significant effect? It's all techno babble to me but if it has a significant advantage for low light autofocus then it is definitely a plus point for me!!

sRAW would be small RAW. Post-production advantages of RAW (DR, 12-14bit, white balance adjustments, etc), smaller resolution, when you don't need every pixel of the sensor. Like times lapses, pictures that you know will be used for the web only, etc. 4 pixels on the sensor -> 1 pixel in sRAW (9mp RAW on D800 for example). Canon BS, really ?

heartyfisher said:
I am not sure if you have seen but There are test results comparing the DR of the various
Nikon Cameras so its not conjecture like you seem to be suggesting.

I am referring to this diagram ..
http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/GeneralTopics/Sensors_&_Raw/FX_Read_Noise_Comparison.htm

I'm looking for the link I had with the same type of test charts that Nikon dumped out but I can't find it - It showed the D4 with 2 stops better on dynamic range from 1600-6400 and had links of to others testing the same. From what I have seen, the DR (color pop) is much better than the D3s and the noise is cleaner as well.
Disclaimer - that could have been with jpegs as well. I'll keep looking for the Nikon version but maybe someone else has the link as well.

And what is this "sRAW"? Is that the Canon BS make believe file type when their original RAW became so limited that they had to create a new type, and then so people wouldn't scream about yet another file type, they said "this is the real raw"?

There is a sucker born every minute.

The graph shows that at low ISOs, the D4 will perform better than anything we've seen yet (even D3s and D3x) but at high ISOs, it will not be significantly better than the D3s. Now I don't know about the OP, but when I shoot weddings (think dim churches), I am not often at base iso. As I said, for low-light photography, I don't predict the D4 to be much better than the D3s (and that's because the D3s already is above the norm).

To come back to the original question, if money was not an argument, I would chose the D4 over the D800 for weddings. My style of weddings is photojournalistic, and I can't imagine working with thousands of 36mp photos per event. Now if the D800 comes out with an sRAW option........

d8000 would be the cracker now hey!!??

heartyfisher said:
Nikon Cameras so its not conjecture like you seem to be suggesting.

Many thanks

It will be interesting when the results from the D800 are added

which might answer the original question D4 or D800

sevencrossing said:
I think the dynamic range of the D700 (at lower ISO values) is greater than the D3s
So it seems possible the dynamic range of D800 might be greater or equal to the D4
At high ISO values i think the D3s or D4 should be better
but as I have said the answerer has to be one of each
so I might just sell my D700 after all

love arguments about a camera that has yet to be released

I am not sure if you have seen but There are test results comparing the DR of the various
Nikon Cameras so its not conjecture like you seem to be suggesting.

I am referring to this diagram ..
http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/GeneralTopics/Sensors_&_Raw/FX_Read_Noise_Comparison.htm

D3s + D7000 is exactly what I have right now. Gets the job done!

i think the D3s+D7k combo makes a lot of sense..

D7k for the outdoor shooting, where you can maximize that ISO100 DR.

Low light/reception, the D3s is fine.

I'm still debating what to do, having sold my D3/700 combo a bit ago, and now sporting the D7000 for the light engagement shoots I'm doing prior to the season starting off, whether a D3s close to a D4.

But we won't know until we know, right?!

zlik said:
Yes, if money really isn't the factor, of course the D4 is the best camera. But unless you've got all the best glass and the money for 2 D4 bodies, money is a factor. As I said before, if you do shoot video, the D4 might be a great investment. If you don't shoot video, I don't think (based on the pictures I saw until now) that the D4 will be worth the difference from the D3s.

If I understood you right, you don't own a FX body yet. You borrow a D700 for your weddings and you seem to like it. I am pretty confident that there is more difference going from the D700 to the D3s than there will be from the D3s to the D4 (unless the production model of the D4 will produce better pictures than those we saw until now).

If you already had a FX body, then the D4 would be a good idea, and your "old" FX would become your backup body. You don't own a FX yet, that's why I suggest the idea of buying 2 bodies (D3s + D7000) instead of one D4.

@sevencrossing, yes, based on the DXOmark tests, the D700 has slightly more DR at base iso than the D3s. But the difference is really small and from 400iso and up the D3s is the clear winner. Plus, if you want great DR at base iso, the D7000 beats both hands down. The D4 will be like the D7000. It will have greater maximum DR mainly because base iso will be 100 instead of 200. If you compare the D7000 to the D90 it replaced, at 200 iso and up, the D7000 isn't much better. The huge 14ev it gets is from going down to 100 iso.

The D4 will have greater DR at 100 iso than the D3s at 200. But from 200 and up, I doubt there will be a relevant difference.

Everything at the moment, of course, is just speculation. Although I bought a D3s not long ago, I am really looking forward to the DXOmark tests of the D4.

Yes, if money really isn't the factor, of course the D4 is the best camera. But unless you've got all the best glass and the money for 2 D4 bodies, money is a factor. As I said before, if you do shoot video, the D4 might be a great investment. If you don't shoot video, I don't think (based on the pictures I saw until now) that the D4 will be worth the difference from the D3s.

If I understood you right, you don't own a FX body yet. You borrow a D700 for your weddings and you seem to like it. I am pretty confident that there is more difference going from the D700 to the D3s than there will be from the D3s to the D4 (unless the production model of the D4 will produce better pictures than those we saw until now).

If you already had a FX body, then the D4 would be a good idea, and your "old" FX would become your backup body. You don't own a FX yet, that's why I suggest the idea of buying 2 bodies (D3s + D7000) instead of one D4.

@sevencrossing, yes, based on the DXOmark tests, the D700 has slightly more DR at base iso than the D3s. But the difference is really small and from 400iso and up the D3s is the clear winner. Plus, if you want great DR at base iso, the D7000 beats both hands down. The D4 will be like the D7000. It will have greater maximum DR mainly because base iso will be 100 instead of 200. If you compare the D7000 to the D90 it replaced, at 200 iso and up, the D7000 isn't much better. The huge 14ev it gets is from going down to 100 iso.

The D4 will have greater DR at 100 iso than the D3s at 200. But from 200 and up, I doubt there will be a relevant difference.

Everything at the moment, of course, is just speculation. Although I bought a D3s not long ago, I am really looking forward to the DXOmark tests of the D4.

heartyfisher said:
Dynamic Range is very very significant and only the D4 can deliver that performance. .

I think the dynamic range of the D700 (at lower ISO values) is greater than the D3s
So it seems possible the dynamic range of D800 might be greater or equal to the D4
At high ISO values i think the D3s or D4 should be better
but as I have said the answerer has to be one of each
so I might just sell my D700 after all

love arguments about a camera that has yet to be released

@Zilk All very good points! but if money is not the factor as suggested in the original post then the D4 is the obvious choice. No matter how many D3s or D700 or D7000, for weddings Dynamic Range is very very significant and only the D4 can deliver that performance. But i think your suggestion of getting a d3s instead of a D700 now (instead of waiting for a D800) is a sweet choice. but i still think a D4, for wedding photographers, is the best choice. second best may be the D3X( had the highest DR until the D4).

And btw, if you don't plan to do videos, the D3s is more than enough. Or for the same price as a D4, you can get a D3s and a D7000. Or two D700s and a D7000. Or a D700, a D7000 and a pro lens. Or ...
You get the point. Is the D4 the solution ?