Comments on: Nikon’s D4 proves megapixels aren’t everything

By: School Ball Photographer

School Ball Photographer — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:15:00 +0000

As an event photographer often in very low light situations ( awards, school balls, etc) I can wait to get my hands on the D4. Yes I am paying for the extra video functionality – which I won’t use. But my work will be 10 x better.

By: Guest

Guest — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 15:21:00 +0000

In theory about 10.000 photons need to hit a pixel cell to achieve 40dB signal/noise ratio. For that, the pixel needs to be slightly over 3µm in size. The simple rule is: larger pixel size=less noise. Special tricks in the sensors and postprocessing done by the image processor cleans the noise a bit improving the S/N ratio from the theoretical level determined by the pixel size, but starting the post-processing with less noise gives better results. Each pixel on D4 sensor is 7.3 µm which gives it an excellent raw S/N ratio, further improved by the trickery of the sensor circuitry and the post-ADC processing by the camera image processor. Canon 7D pixel size is 4.3µm but uses microlenses to pull more light into each pixel.
D4 uses 14-bit Analog to Digital Converter which gives it 16384 distinct levels of light that can be distinguished by the camera. Still far from film and what human eye can see, but better than 4096 levels from 12 bit ADCs in most cameras. More levels=smaller quantization error.
Those levels represent tonal values per pixel. More tonal values=better representation of the photographed subject. It appears Canon high end cameras also use 14 bit ADC.
Number of pixels translates into the size of the smallest detail the sensor can distinguish. That is why landscape and art repro photographers like high MP count and the really serious ones use scanning sensors that produce 144MP images.

So what is the best camera? To me it is the one you have in your hand to capture that special moment that will never repeat again…

By: Matterak

Matterak — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 01:36:00 +0000

Other than your sheer arrogance and dismissive, a-hole-ish behavior, I call b.s. on you being a pro. As someone who actually actually earns their living from photography(not Walmart photo), no pros in my large circle of photographer friends, cares or even wants video capability. The overwhelming majority of pros have no use for it and don’t care about it. The only people who do care about it are anonymous trolls, like yourself, who post this drivel on message boards. There are people in film who like to push the boundaries in trying to shoot films with DSLR’s, but it’s a very small minority currently.

Again, I wouldn’t have replied to anything, but your posts just screamed out what a total and complete plonker you are. You can debate something with someone without being a self-righteous a-hole.

P.S. All the pros I know use their first and last names when posting replies, in debating, etc. Why don’t you do that and also post a detailed list of your experience, job history, and what makes you such an informed expert? Seems fair. If you can’t back it up then go back to troll land.

By: John Cassan

John Cassan — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:57:00 +0000

Cannot compare it with the T31. Compare it with the 1DX. Nikon at 16 mp has been rated higher than Canon at 16 mp in the past. D7000 to T3i.I would worry more about Fuji if the new technologies in sesors are fulfilled and are what they are tauted as. They have a new sensor which competes with 21mp FF according to them. If this turn out to be that their 16mp APSC trans sensor is what they say, both Canon and Nikon have a lot to worry about. Then there is their new organic sensor which they have not used yet. Nikon can always buy sensors, but Canon makes their own. Sony and Fuji have been very busy trying to make better and less expensive solutions. Behind them is Samsung. Who knows where all this is going but for sure Leica has a lot to worry about now.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:59:00 +0000

as Chris said, he only brought up the T3i to illustrate his point, which is clearly stated in the title of the article, megapixels aren’t everything.
also, you point out the 20 min video limit per clip, which is partly true, but it is only the lower limit. it can actually create video files up to 29min59s depending on the video settings. the canon 1Dx also has time limits to its video recording. furthermore, the D4 has uncompressed HDMI out, where as the 1Dx doesn’t. this is most likely due to the fact that canon also makes video cameras, and doesn’t want to cannibalize into those sales.

By: WillieG

WillieG — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 00:11:00 +0000

This is a Pro-level camera. Most seasoned Pros’s don’t want a camera that’s a compromise between a video camera and a stills camera. Serious Pro’s want a dedicated stills camera. Nikon knows this and that’s why little effort is put into perfecting video. Nikon listens to their customers. Most of the people posting comments aren’t even in the price range for this camera. If I were buying a $6K stills camera I’d want the majority of that money to be spent on making a better stills camera.

By: Chris Davies

Chris Davies — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 10:29:00 +0000

snickers,

As I said above, this isn’t a review. I certainly wouldn’t be the SlashGear guy to test the D4; I’m very aware that it falls outside of my area of expertise. You can always tell which are our reviews, because a) there’s a big “REVIEW” label up by the title, and b) we generally have lots of live photos of the device, not a single press shot.

btw, I love your chocolate bar, one of my favorites.

By: Chris Davies

Chris Davies — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 10:27:00 +0000

This isn’t a review. I picked the Rebel because it’s a cheap DSLR with more megapixels than the D4 – it makes for a good example of how there’s more to photography than megapixels.

By: snickers

snickers — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:44:00 +0000

Chris,

Stick to consumer tire kicker markets that you know. You’re out of your league review a tool like this. Most of the specs went right over your head and clearly you have no take on how this fits within the market as a pro calibre tool.

By: snickers

snickers — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:44:00 +0000

Chris,

By: snickers

snickers — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:41:00 +0000

Jeez these guys are so out of it regarding reviews. What a bunch of Johnny come Lately’s. Comparing Nikon’s flagship with a Canon Rebel….Really? I personnaly have long history with Nikon as a pro user, analyst and consultant and Nikon product developer, but I think NIkon’s product marketing team has missed market reqirements, again by not providing better video capabilities. Only 20 minutes per grab, really? Canon is eating your lunch Nikon regarding the cross-over to HD video. A $6k camera these days should support both mediums as a professional tool. Nikon falls well short of this.

By: snickers

snickers — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:41:00 +0000

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:36:00 +0000

I agree. Only gear junkies complain about how many mega-pixels and other bells and whistles. Higher mega-pixels won’t make you more creative or talented.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:36:00 +0000

I agree. Only gear junkies complain about how many mega-pixels and other bells and whistles. Higher mega-pixels won’t make you more creative or talented.

By: Obliterator

Obliterator — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 19:38:00 +0000

“The company’s own sample images certainly look impressive.”
Did you notice that “All images are resized to 700 x 465 pixels.” Shall I repeat that?
“All images are resized to 700 x 465 pixels.”
You can’t draw ANY conclusions on image quality from such small sample images, lol.

By: Chris Davies

Chris Davies — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 19:33:00 +0000

Ha, well, we cover more than just phones, but my point was that the D4 is a great – if extreme – example of why people should look beyond megapixels in all cameras, not just $6k DSLRs ;)

By: Bruce Sutherland

Bruce Sutherland — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 19:27:00 +0000

I am literally in the exact same boat. I have the D40 and love it. I’m constantly trying to dig through the features and settings so I can separate its images from what you can get from a point and shoot. I’d love to be able to do video on it, but for the most part, we can handle that on our phones or our daughter’s $50 kodak. If I ever get a new camera, I will likely not part with the D40 because it still does great work, as long as I don’t plan to blow up the picture to a 20×24 print. If I ever replace it, it will be for lens compatibility reasons as it does not support all the features on newer Nikon lenses.

By: Bruce Sutherland

Bruce Sutherland — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 19:26:00 +0000

By: Shim2020

Shim2020 — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 19:25:00 +0000

Hurr, I don’t think anyone who is going to pay $6000 for a Nikon D4 needs to be lectured about megapixels by a cell phone website.

By: gomle69

gomle69 — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:42:00 +0000

I agree. I still use a Nikon D40 (6MP) and the only reason I feel the urge to upgrade is that it does not shoot video.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:34:00 +0000

higher Megapixels is like $100 hdmi cables from best buy.
If you’re that big of a sucker then go ahead and spend your cash.

By: gomle69

gomle69 — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:23:00 +0000

*droooool*