Nikon D4 video demo

The above video from shows some of the new Nikon D4 features - worth watching.

Nikon D4 with WT-5 wireless transmitter demonstration:

See also the previously published videos here and here.

This entry was posted in Nikon D4. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • I was also thinking to add this video to the post:

    poor girl 🙂

    • broxibear

      I have a question for the people out there who use their dslrs for film making and video (I don’t mean shooting some video at a wedding), there’s something about using the D4 for film making I don’t understand.
      One of the reasons, apart from price, the Mark II has been so succesful in film making is it’s size (here it is next to the D4 ). The rigs I’ve seen used for the Mark II to shoot films have involved lots of extra components as in this image but isn’t a setup like this going to be even more cumbersome and difficult if the body you’re starting with is a D4, which is massive compared to the Mark II ?
      I thought part of the attraction of the Mark II for filming things like House was the size ?
      Considering what I’ve posted do you think the D800 will be even more video rich than the D4 because it is a smaller size ?

      • While the D4 is substantially larger than the 5dMkII, it is still puny compared to the film cameras they use on TV sets where they’re shooting film:

        Realize, too, that although most rigs will have the girth similar to the one you’ve linked to, they don’t NEED to for shots where size matters. In certain cases, they can keep rigs to an absolute minimum, and shoot in really tight places (inside ovens or car dashboards, attached to vehicles (quickly and stably), in corners, or in tight spaces like halls or bathrooms where the film magazine would make it almost certainly impossible to squeeze into.

        With the HDMI out, and the other features that seem to be pretty novel, I can see the D4 taking hold in the industry. It does depend on a lot of factors, including IQ, but I know I’m champing at the bit to get one in my hands for both photo and film work.

        • broxibear

          Thanks Ron,
          Do you think those people who have been using the Canon Mark IIs are likely to change to Nikon even if it has better IQ ?
          I was talking to a Nikon Pro dealer here in the UK and he said no because to switch you’d have to change most, if not all, of your lenses, accessories etc and the cost would be prohibitive.
          Personally I think the success of the D4 in the film making and video field will have more to do with the Canon Mark III and how good it is, rather than how good the D4 is.
          As I pointed out I’m a pure stills photographer, but from what I’m reading and hearing is that although the D4 is going to be very good for video, the fact that Nikon joined the party so late compared to Canon is going to be a real issue.

          • Bob Your Thing

            Its not just the IQ that D4 excels.

            Its the superior AF of the D4 compare to the 5Dmk2 that Film producers will want to use. Expecially in low light situation!

            I know a few commercial video shooters that swears they will use Nikon to shoot video due to the superior AF as soon as it supports a wider video format which now the D4 matches up wholely.

            • Drew

              I’m a pro primarily shooting with a D3, but also a 5DII (primarily for video). The main reason I added the 5DII was Nikon didn’t offer a 1080p DSLR with a full frame sensor.

              When Canon announced the 1DX I had my mind made up that I was going to do a full switch as I need a camera that can do both stills and video well (the 5DII isn’t the best tool for still shooting for me).

              With the D4, unless Canon makes some big changes to the 1Dx, it looks like Nikon may have passed Canon in video (clean HDMI out; FX,DX,2.7x shooting) and as long as it performs as well as the D3 in AF and noise there really isn’t anything the 1DX has that makes it a vastly superior camera.

            • Jake

              exactly, I shoot some video with my 5D2 but it is all manual focus and it is quite difficult without an assistant guy helping me out nailing it right.

              so, I mostly use my D7000 for causal video because it ‘s got AF in video (and it is actually not bad).

              with the killer Af of D4 , the D4 video will kill many many DSLR video cameras and even some of Sony pro video cameras.

          • I think you’re absolutely right that Nikon has a steep uphill battle in the video field. They have always had a great aesthetic quality to their video images, but they have had little things keep them from being the cream of the crop: 720p, more pronounced compression schemes, no manual controls (for lower-end bodies), etc. I think some of the issues raised are just people whining or bashing, but some are legitimate. Also, Canon is a HUGE marketing machine, and they are very good at positioning, no doubt about it. That said, they were extremely smart to listen to their customers and improve the 5DMkII through firmware upgrades. That is Nikon’s single biggest downfall, and had they adopted that sort of an attitude around their video functionality, I imagine they would have had some tremendous reciprocation from the community.

            Now, it’s not all gray skies: Many Canon shooters use Nikon lenses, both the older manual lenses as well as newer models. Switching bodies would in fact help them. Also, the features Nikon is promoting in the D4 are indeed significant, and by introducing clean HDMI out as well as the various crop modes (including straight 1:1 pixel recording, which would in turn eliminate moire and extend reach, etc) and then taking into account the significant price advantage, I can see many folks taking a serious look at the Nikon. It’ll be very interesting. At any rate, I’m excited to see what the market does with the new camera, as we’re sure to see some incredible stuff produced on this and the D800 in the months/years to come.

          • Komalkumar

            Broxibear – Nikon or even Canon does not manufacture equipment for people who shift from one system to another…that is or might be only a small or reasonable percentage always…..What Nikon has done is that it has acknowledged that Dslr video is a growing market and they need to develop their equipment around it….if they prove to be good…certainly all those who are starting with Dslr video might start buying Nikon more than Canon and off course some % of canon users might migrate but this can also the other way !!….

          • Jabs


            Good questions and comments.
            To me, the biggest gain to be realised by Nikon is the Broadcast ready HDMI output as standard and that is one huge improvement and probably will drive people towards Nikon’s D4 in droves. It also removes the data like the F-stop/Shutter speed and such from the output and thus a very significant advantage over any other released DSLR so far.

            There are two different price ranges between the 5Dmk2 and the D4 by over a factor of two – price wise, but then the D4 has features missing from the Canon that are more important to Video Producers plus Live TV/Production use with say a Newtek TriCaster –

            The new problem for Nikon is accessories made by third party suppliers and how soon they can bring these to Market.

            The D4 gains from:
            Low light shooting (goes to EV -2) as well as High ISO response wherein you can use a faster shutter speed to stop action or isolate your subject, as compared to the Canon 5DMK2.
            The D4 has Ethernet
            The D4 can focus faster plus has face recognition – huge for Video
            The D4 can change aperture and F-stop easier in Video
            The D4 can Preview shots easier via HDMI as well as shoot stills at low res to check lighting setup or shot angles while doing Videos – a huge plus
            The D4 has the horizon controls and some Video-centric controls and measuring tools built-in

            Time will tell, but the Video from the D3s at 720p was to me cleaner and clearer than the 5DMK2, so with the D4 offering 60fps at 720p, then that is a clear advantage. The D4 also has 24, 25 and 30 fps. The next overlooked advantage is the D4 can shoot 16:9 at different megapixels or in FX, DX and basically CX, so a sort of Video cam with multiple resolutions that change the focal lengths of the attached lens plus maintains 16:9 at the same time. Attach a 200mm F2.0 and see!

            As a long time Video gear user, I see the D4 as a new Era and only in time will we see how significant it really is. Accessories for both input and output will probably determine its worth!

            You are also wrong about the still improvements, as I see them as significant and it is the placement of controls and such which seem evolutionary. Reread the specs and then digest them to see significant improvements, especially the new RGB metering and face recognition. Anything that beats a D3s by a mile, is not a mere upgrade. People forget the 16bit digital pipeline of the D4 via Expeed 3 Processors and thus like the Nikon 1’s, it outpaces the D3 Series by a mile in photo plus video response and throughput. Look at the RAW photo output speed and number of files it can do at no reduced shutter speed burst.

          • broxibear

            Thanks for all the replies, as I said I’m don’t use video so it’s interesting to hear the different views.
            I was looking through the D4 brochure today and a thought went through my mind which would’ve answered a few questions, and caused heart attacks in the Nikon marketing dept. If only all those phorographers, like Mr McNally, who shot images for the D4 brochure had a D3s next to them, and after taking the image on the D4 swapped to the D3s and took the exact same image with the exact same settings…I wonder how different they would have really looked printed next to each other in the brochure ? I think they’d be identical.

            • Jabs


              Alas, we are almost at the point of splitting hairs about digital image files but there is a distinct difference if you look for it between cameras.

              The D4 appears to surpass the D3s just from casual looking at its files and appears to my eyes to have a better bit structure (smoothness, richness or whatever you want to call it) even in my limited viewing of some example files, so far. The D3X and the Nikon 1 deliver a really great graduation and since I look at large 3D generated graphic files often, then the differences are maybe easier for me to see.

              I really think that the main differences between the D4 and the previous generations of Pro Nikon’s, will probably be in that hard to define usability, feel and response areas. The digital pipeline and increased processing power will allow substantial improvements in usage especially as the action get faster. Therefore one needs to use the D4 in my opinion to really appreciate it just like the Nikon 1.

              Specs tell you much but fluidity in use is to be experienced and this camera has taken things to a new level to me. The D4 will probably have a much cleaner output than the previous generation too due to the digital pipeline, as that allows greater precision in tonality and a resulting image richness. It already is quite obvious to me that there are substantial differences plus improvements but now we probably have to wait on the Test results to confirm this. My eyes are trained to see minute differences from years of slide shooting plus viewing with loupes, so I can only speak for myself.

      • Another benefit of the DSLRs being used for film work is the price. Typically an Indie Producer would need to rent a camera in order to shoot, but the DSLRs, even the D4, are still at a reasonable price that makes them desirable for Producers to own themselves or higher an operator who may own one.

        I’ve shot with rigs before and they have become too cumbersome and I eventually ditch them to go handheld. My biggest complaint about using DSLRs for video work is the AF lenses. They are stil considerably inexpensive, but if I need to shoot moving subjects at a wide aperture, keeping them in focus can be a pain. It takes an immense amount of patience to be a DSLR operator with moving subjects.

        The video quality coming out of these tiny, and relatively priced, bodies keeps getting better. And having amazing still images to boot helps tremendously. I will capture a still when I set up for a video shot. It helps me preserve the memory and do some self-advertisement at the same time.

        The D4 has some great features that I wish my D7000 came with- uncompressed video recording through the HDMI port, headphone port and 1080/30p (as well as FX sensor), but for the price I paid, I have an amazing tool to accomplish anything I need to.

        • broxibear

          Hi Jeff,
          Thanks for the information.
          I think Nikon have taken a big risk with the D4, the stills improvemnets have been very, very small but they’ve added all these video features…it’s starting to look like a video camera that can take images rather than the other way round.
          If Canon’s Mark III is as good as, or better than the D4 as far as video goes Nikon are in trouble. Why?, because of the price, the Mark III will be nowhere near the cost of the D4, it’ll probably be less than half.
          That then brings into play the D800, if it has the same video features of the D4 then why would you want the extra price and size of the D4 over the D800 ?
          I’m not sure if Nikon have got this right…we’ll find out soon I guess when the D800 and Mark III appear.

          • Bob Your Thing

            You are forgetting the ISO advantage and supeior AF of the D4 against the D800 and other competitors.

            In terms of execution even if the video quality format is the same quality the D4 will still execls because it can perform in a wider range of situation. Thats what pros need!

          • iamlucky13

            I don’t think it’s a big risk. I think it’s a reality of the fact that both Nikon and Canon are stuck with diminishing returns from increased investments in still imge quality.

            Still quality from both the D3s and the 1D Mark IV is amazing. But just like computer processors (processor improvements have been similar magnitude each generation, and about the same length of time between generations over the last several decades, but while Intel spent $620 million in annual R&D to achieve that in 1992, they will spend around $7 billion on it this year), improving the basic image quality of SLR’s is becoming increasingly difficult.

            However, with modest effort, they can take the existing image quality, and extend it to video. Most people may have minimal use for it, but it generates sales without huge investments.

            And if they’re developing it for the D800, much of the same work also applies to the D4.

      • Thank you very much for the link! I have never heard of it before and it will come into use in the future.

        • broxibear

          No problem dwight,
          It’s a very cool little site, only when you see certain cameras side by side do you realise how big or small some really are.
          Only when you see a Leica M9 next to something like the new D4 do you understand what people mean by a stealthy street camera

      • Tom White

        You’re right that a main advantage of the HD-DSLR’s is the size. I worked on a project where we were using the 5D Mk II (and as this is Nikon Rumours I should add we used mostly nikon lenses…!). At one point I asked the director why he chose the 5D when I knew he had access to more dedicated and expensive video cameras. He answered that the SLR was more versatile and customisable. Which is true, especially if your budget is tight.

        The D4 is aimed mainly at journalists, sports, wildlife shooters (though for freelance journalists like myself who don’t have our equipment provided by an employer the price tag is a cause for pause!). Having excellent video options is now the standard. Many people in these professions will use these features on this particular camera to capture short clips on the fly or in what they call run-and-gun situations without mounting them on the ridiculous rigs you might find on a more complex production. cameras with built in grips are a bit more awkward to handle on a rig – hence the correctly identified popularity of the 5D – but it can be done of course, and they’re still much smaller than dedicated video cameras.

        The D4 looks fantastic, which as a flagship it should be, packed with technology as it is. But, if, as it seems, the D800 retains the video features from the D4 then I will be more than happy with that. A headphone jack, adjustable audio levels and HDMI out? yes please. however, we’ll have to see how this rumoured 36 megapixel sensor compares with the D4’s 16mp. have to admit, I’m more than a little concerned that might be overkill…

    • broxibear

      Oops, sorry Peter that wasn’t supposed to be a reply to you post…don’t know what happened there ?

    • Mike

      She probably has a “you break, you buy” clause in her contract. She looks petrified!

    • Paul

      She should replace Ashton.
      Also, the whole “I Am” campaign.

    • T.I.M

      Hard to concentrate on the camera (and you know how much I like Asian girls).

      • Sade

        always the same attitude when handling big things 😉

    • Travelati

      Bad day to be an IT show girl: She has to hold and rotate a ~1.5kg brick, and if she drops it there goes her annual salary.

    • diego

      poor girl? I she is so cute!!!! so white!!

    • John Richardson

      Dang the camera was a big as her head!
      She’s probably thinking “Ok, I have two built in lenses, a brain that records and remembers stuff for years, I am completely mobile and I can think and talk plus I am cute…so how come these guys are interested in the brick I am holding? Must be a geek-guy thing.”
      Collects paycheck.

    • jake

      I really want a D4 ASAP for video use and I think this camera is a steal , much cheaper than the D3X and much better and much more versatile than that camera.

      I am selling all my Sony A900 kit and Zeiss primes , to get this camera I already have Nikon lenses and D7000 and so I just get the body.

      Thanks Nikon.

      If the D800 or whatever replaces the D700 uses this D4 sensor , I might get it but I dont think it uses the same sensor as the D4 Renasus sensor.
      So, it seemed a bit too big and too expensive for what I really like but I pre-ordered it.

  • frAnk

    Pope and D4 has the same ability…turn people into a believer

  • broxibear

    Camerasize have got the D4 in their database now so you can accurately compare the sizes to other cameras, here it is next to the D3s

  • Not Surprised

    One of the first things he says in the first video, “The interesting thing about this camera — is the ports in the side.”

    Enough said. He isn’t kidding and you should take it seriously. Nikon has decided to make a new camera every 8 years, rather than 4.

    • For a 10-minute video which mainly covers only the ports on the side, I’d say that illustrates how extraordinary the D4 really is. Every feature they discussed made me more ready to throw down for the camera, rather than less. It looks like a solid machine!

    • P.S. That Atomos Ninja looks like the perfect compliment to the D4’s new HDMI out!

  • Rob Bannister

    Has anyone heard yet if you can turn off the liveview on the camera to save batteries etc if you are using a data recorder or external monitor?

    • Rob Bannister

      during recording that is…

      • I can’t provide you with a reference right now, but I’m pretty sure I heard/read somewhere you can turn it off during recording.

  • T.I.M

    Is the video made with a D4 ?
    He knockout the camera three times, is it also a durability test ?

    • Paul

      No, it was not shot with a D4.

    • The camera seems to be equiped with a quick release plate, which seems to cause the camera to tumble. Silly that they didn’t take that off for this video (especially since it’s a third party product anyway).

  • Gareth

    about time they made movie recording assignable to the shutter button, makes it easy to remotely trigger video recording.

  • ennan

    The iPhone/iPad feature sounds interesting although I’d like them to add similar functions for Android since I’m not an apple user.

    • Paul

      The built-in wireless function is not only for Apple products. It’s accessible through a web browser.

      Mobile apps will obviously have to be made for the different operating systems out there.

      • Indeed, that will be very interesting due to the popularity of Linux based Android systems. Currently Nikon ignores Linux and has never ported any of their software to it. The have also never divulged enough information to allow a third party app to control the camera for tethered operation.

        Android may change that. Good for Linux for sure, but even better for Nikon in the future!

      • @Paul, I suspect that the Nikon remote control app is all web based. i.e. all of the controls are java appelets tied together through HTML. This would permit you to control your D4 through any device which can render HTML! Not to mention, it is less of a hassle for Nikon to upgrade the app. No need to port it to every possible platform, no need to agree to the stupid Apple licensing agreements, and the list goes on. Basically, the D4 is now also a web server!

    • John Richardson

      Though it is important to note, that “BAM” right out of the gate they immediately bundle their presentations up with the iPad and iPhone, with a caveat “oh yah and for Android etc.” But the presentations are with the iPad. So maybe you aren’t an Apple user, but clearly Nikon not only uses but approves and in a backhanded way advertises Apple.
      Remember popularity due to low price is one thing, but popularity due to stability and quality are another. I think I would stick with the iPad as it appears it is exactly what Nikon uses. I know not sound thinking for you non-Apple guys. The other third-party products i.e. Ninja were addressed in person also, that does say a loth about Nikon’s preferences “officially”

      Well, the video did not give me a “woody” for video, but it was a good presentation and did explain much. Perhaps it all comes down to personal preference.

      • @JR, I think the reason Nikon touted the Apple iPad is because of the popularity of Apple devices among the visual artists, and the high demand for this feature. Additionally, there was that iPad app from onOne that permitted tethered shooting, so I think Nikon is just capitalizing on that popularity. Due to several comments in promotional materials made by Nikon, (i.e. “The app is built into the camera and not reliant on the Apple iOS”, “The app also works with android devices, but the base resolution is set for Apple iOS devices”) I suspect the mini tethering app that Nikon made is ALL web based, and the HTML pages have resolutions which match the Apple devices. This is a huge paradigm shift! Not to mention, you get remote wireless LiveView displayed on your iPad, something that wasn’t feasible without an additional intermediate server and USB/FireWire cable to the camera! Although in their demos they show remote control of the D4, they don’t show the images being downloaded onto the Apple device to the built in Photos Album on the iOS (Although you could theoretically save one photo at a time by holding down on the image until the pop up option “Save Image” appears; just don’t expect this to happen automagically). This suggests to me, on launch, we may only see device control with their web based app. Which means, Nikon will still sell you their optional tethering software “Camera Control Pro 3.0” for an additional $199 so that you can actually download the images directly to your MAC/PC. This limitation isn’t Nikon’s fault, Apple is the culprit, due to the I/O restrictions of the device and access to the photos database on the iOS. If you are willing to crack your iPad’s/iPhone’s iOS, you can install a third party FTP server (based on OpenSource) and have the WT-4 and WT-5 upload pics via FTP to your iPad/iPhone (can you say RAW too). The problem is, the photos won’t show up in the photos database of the iOS, even if shot in JPEG; for that you will need another Apple iOS app that takes the photos from the FTP directory and moves them into the photos database. And if you shot RAW only, you would need yet another iOS app which converts RAW to JPEG to import the photos into your “Photos” area of your iOS. Basically, what makes Apple products so desirable by many professionals is their reliability. They work as prescribed and very seldom do they crash. That reliability comes at a cost however; it is called proprietary and restricted system access. All Apple iOS developers have to agree to do things the Apple way, or not at all. Although stable, this mentality hinders innovation in app development and forces developers to incorporate an ancillary device in order to achieve a given goal; a perfect example of this is found in the onOne DSLR Camera Remote Server application which has to be used in conjunction with the onOne DSLR Camera Remote application running on your iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch. Maybe we will all get lucky and EyeFi will finally give us native CF support and/or XQD support. In the meantime, I think that many will still be disappointed in their tethering options once they realized the limitations of the current technology.

        • John Richardson

          Thanks Dr!!

        • photo-Jack

          @ Dr SCSI
          Wow, that really goes into deep…
          I like the appeal of the iPad and thinking about buying one – one without SIM-Card.
          But doing stuff with the iPad seems to be troublesome – not even a support for an external device like a mobile hard-drive. One dealer told me to do a “jail-break” and then the support were a given. But meanwhile I think this a step further: Do you think it would be possible to drive the iPad with another OS altogether (like WIN 7)?

          • @photo-Jack,
            The iPad is a nice little device which is much more capable than Apple allows it to be. From my understanding, the Apple iOS has more in common with the MAC OS than with any flavor of Windows, it is basically OpenSource Linux Kernel behind the scene for the iOS. I have an iPad, and I use it strictly for surfing the internet from the couch or reading eBooks; it does these two tasks very well. I also have an iPhone, which I “Jail-Broke” to delve into the dark side of Cydia Apps. My original intent for Jail-Breaking my iPhone was to get My-Wi installed with Wi-Fi tethering for my laptop; I didn’t like the idea of paying Telekom $8 a month just to tether my laptop to my phone for internet access. Once I opened that door, I entertained the idea of using Eye-Fi cards and a open source FTP server on my iPhone for receiving the photos from the Eye-Fi card. If you are a hacker, and you feel at home with the various Linux kernels, then Jail-Breaking your Apple iOS on your iPhone or iPad is no big deal. If you are frustrated by computing technologies and just want the device to do its job reliably, don’t Jail-Break it! As for another OS altogether, I am certain it is feasible, but not financially worthy for the development efforts involved. Windows 7 is too much of a resource hog. Microsoft is used to the hardware community upgrading every 10 months to close the gaps on their inefficient programming techniques, where as the Linux community is more concearned about efficiencies. For the price of an iPad 2 with 64GB of memory, you can get a very capable computing device which runs the Android OS and is yet very expandable. As for external mobile hard-drive useage with the iPad, I wouldn’t waste my time. If this is what your are looking to do, consider an Android device instead. I have the HyperDrive 750GB backup device which was designed to tether to the iPad and upload photos to the user database on the iOS. It works, but who knows for how much longer. Unfortunately Apple reserves the right to change the Apple iOS and behaviour of your iPad any time they please, with every upgrade you perform. The last upgrade of the iOS had numerous camera owners outraged because Apple decided to lower the mA power to the USB dongle that plugged into the iPad for easy uploading of JPEGs from your camera to the photos database. Well, the lower current settings for the USB port now made the iPad incompatible with numerous cameras which previously worked with the dongle. Apple said, “Suck it up!” Personally, I think the online community should have started a Class Action Lawsuit against Apple and forced them to buy back all of the $50 USB/Camera adapters they sold! (Rant Over)

            • photo-Jack

              Thank you for your reply Dr.

              I think you brought it to the point: whether you deliver yourself to the world’s greatest user tamer: Apple. Or you have that “products ripe at the user” banana republic of windows.
              Well, I’m basically a user not a programmer or hacker. My heart beats for photography and it’s already a lot of effort to learn all the software for that including the handling and maintenance for the computer itself. I sure don’t want to open up another construction site.
              I was attracted to the iPad because of its nice design, the comparable long battery life and the possibility to present photos and slideshows to potential customers. But you did somehow confirm that this device comes with a lot of caveats and restrictions that are hard to overcome. Your reply made me sure that the iPad is not for me. However, I’m also not sure about Android. It has the name to be one of the best agents for the data mining of the industry.

  • F

    So now that the D4 is out, is there any word on when or where we might see this high-speed motorcycle through-Chicago video commercial that we heard about? I know it was mentioned that it was being done for Nikon’s flagship I thought they would show it while announcing the camera no?

    • Admin has said multiple times it was for D800 to the best of his knowledge.

  • one more video added to the post – WT-5 wireless transmitter demonstration:

    • The video does not appear to be demonstrating the wireless WT-5 unit, and instead appears to show a tethered operation using a wired connection to the Ethernet connector.

      It’s a demo of the Camera Control application.

      From an operational point of view the functionality of the software being demonstrated is of course exactly the same, so it makes little difference as such. But a demo of the WT-5 would or should show the advantages of being wireless. E.g., wandering through a crowd where a CAT5 cable would not work well. Ideally might be a sports/event shooter wandering at will while an assistant sits at a concession table downloading, displaying, and selling prints virtually in real time!

  • Eric Lam

    Let’s put the last video on the high frame rate + high buffer into perspective (if it hasn’t already been done so)…

    10sec + some….

    You can catch Usain bolt right off the smoke/blocks till he chests the ribbon and raises his arms in celebration…. all in that 80++ frames.

  • Tim

    Watched this to find out what’s new on the D4. After nine minutes of going on about the superb video capabilities Nikon UK’s rep finally says ‘and aside from that it is a terrific stills camera to boot.’

    It’s almost like the designers were so involved with producing a great video camera that they forgot this thing comes from a great tradition of stills cameras, which is what I’m guessing most people will use them for principally.

    • Zeke

      This presentation was specifically about the D4’s video features. There are plenty of reviews of its still-camera features all over the place.

      In what sense did the designers forget that the D4 comes from a great tradition of still cameras? I keep reading grumblings like that posted here, but I don’t see any evidence of it.

      If anything, the video improvements make it a _better_ still camera. For example: the ability to take pictures by remote control with a live preview is a big advance for a sports/photojournalism still camera (which is what the D4 is). Ditto the ability to take stills in total silence, with the mirror locked up and the focal-plane shutter locked open.

  • R!


    • you mean 3 years later and for 4k more?

      • Zach

        Hahaha and you forgot the triple size of D4…

  • Emilien

    Simply love the video of the D4 video demo! I can’t wait to shoot with it! BAM!

    • ffaabb

      So do I !

      Finally nikon was listening to us.

      This camera is perfect for what i want to do in video.

  • WB

    Put the same video feature in D800!! and I buy two!
    (don’t need high ISO and Hi Speed FPS “D4”)

  • photo-Jack

    When I got a D90 back then video in a DSLR was WOW. However, I tried it out and was so disappointed that I never touched video again, even not on my other DSLRs. But technology apparently has vastly improved.
    Now that I have betrayed that I’m a rookie concerning video, allow me 2 serious questions to you video experienced guys:

    1. Full HD means 1920 x 1080 in other word about 2 MP, right? So what makes a D4 apart from some more plugs and direct HDMI out so much better compared to, say, a Nikon V1? If it is just 2 MP it seems the sensor capacity (16.2 MP or 10 MP) doesn’t matter much?
    I understand that the V1 have a smaller pixel size since the sensor is far smaller and also have more DOF (what would actually serve my purposes better). But what is the real quality advantage in the video of a top of the line DSLR compared to a compact with interchangeable lenses or a smaller DSLR like the D7000?

    2. Maybe you’ve also watched the clip WHY presented here on NR. I liked it a lot. But can someone tell me, what extra equipment one would have to buy to do something like this? I mean the name of the items and an approx. figure in $

    • initialsbb

      Actually the smaller the sensor, the less depth of field you have. An FX sensor + fast lens has much much much more depth of field than a v1.

      • geoffoz

        Bah! Smaller sensor = wider angle lens to keep field of view the same. Wider angle lens = more DOF.

      • Zeke

        You’ve got it exactly backwards.

        For the same FOV and aperture, the bigger imager will have less DOF.

        • Photo-Jack

          Hey guys
          I didn’t intend to start a discussion about DOF. This is what I know already from doing stills. My question was about video. Perhaps I can get an answer on this ones. Or are they too difficult for those who always defended video in DSLRs like lions their prey?

          • Zeke

            “Perhaps I can get an answer on this ones. Or are they too difficult for those who always defended video in DSLRs like lions their prey?” It sounds like you’ve already made up your mind.

            Regardless, every advantage that a larger sensor and better glass has over a smaller sensor and worse glass applies to video as well as stills.

            The big ones being lower noise in low light and the ability to isolate a subject through a shallower DOF (at the same FOV), which can be an essential cinematographic technique.

            • Photo-Jack

              Well, yeah, I know that from stills where I use all pixels the sensor offers. But here we are talking about 2 MP which are not the whole sensor area obviously…
              Furthermore, all tests published so far assert that the Nikon V1 comes with good glass, apparently good enough for 2 MP.
              The obvious is what I know already, so give me some meat…

      • Just try focussing an old school 10×8 camera and try to get any more than 1mm DoF wide open. That is why large format cameras have movements for the lens and back. Bigger sensitive area = less DoF. For the same reason camera phones took so long before they had AF. They didn’t need it as the sensors are tiny and the apertures quite small.

  • Dweeb

    Love the way he runs down the pre-rehearsed talking points. Our best video camera LOL. That was decided by a committee.

  • Back to top