SkintBrit said:
What's Mega Pixels got to do with flagship? Why does the top model have to have the most MP's? Sorry, don't follow the logic of that one.

Isn't the "Flagship" supposed to be the BEST product the company has to offer? I guess I'm wrong here.

What's Mega Pixels got to do with flagship? Why does the top model have to have the most MP's? Sorry, don't follow the logic of that one.

Yup bang on sevencrossing this is an easy one to answer. The D4 is all about action in different lighting and high FPS. The D800 is a high resolution landscape and studio workhorse. Therefore, the D800 is for me. I sold my D700 for $1700 this afternoon and will shoot with my Leica until the D800 bodies begin shipping. I wanted to get as much $$$$ as I could for my D700 because I can't afford both a D700 and D800.

Small pixels, as required by large numbers capture less "photons" of light, thus have lower ISO rating. Kinda like the grain in the old Panatomic-X vs Tri-X Film. The small grain in the Pan-X gave low "ASA" and the large grain in the Tri-X gave higher "ASA". FYI, "ASA" was what we used in the old days and is nearly an identical number to ISO.

At least this is what they tell me.... And it would seem that the file size shooting RAW with 30+ Mp... at 10 frames per second... the buffer would have to be huge. Maybe some expert can enlighten us here.

I guess it's due to the technology limitations. If they build D4 that HIGH pixels, it will end up like D800 which does not have a desired burst rate and perfect ISO performance.I bet we'll see one with 36mp,8fps,1080p 60fps in the future.Maybe D900

The D4 is for sports and news were very high ISOs are demanded
lots of Megawhatnots and very high ISO do not go together

I would say the big issue is frames per second, the D800 is a little on the slow side for most sports. To back that up, I am sure a news editor does not need the resolution the D800 has. Half the resolution would be "trashed", so why have a big file when your going to trash half of it. Now that you reduced the resolution you can gain better low light ablity and get faster frames per second.

I shot for a local online news source last year with my D700, the images had to be cropped and reduced in quality before he wanted them.

Looking at the specs not he D800 and D4, why didn't Nikon up the MP on the D4? If this is supposed to be the "Flagship" camera for Nikon for the next few years,..why does a camera 1/2 the price have more MP?

I know there are some other differences between the D4 and D800 as far as ISO and other minor features, but WOW.