• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Latest 36MP Nikon DSLR D800 and D800E is coming

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
I wouldn't pay the extra $500 for the D800E.

If I want sharper images, I simply run them through http://www.niksoftware.com/sharpenerpro/en/entry.php?

If you use the D800E for anything other than landscape photography, you'll be spending a lot of time on your computer removing Moiré patterns on clothing, table cloths, curtains.. anything with a repeated pattern.


OK, i will reconsider it, i think 800 and 800E is so close, it confuse the buyer, i think it is a bad idea, AA filter to remove the effect of AA filter, nikon are strange. Nobody do that, you either have AA filter or no AA filter like leica.
 

fukyuman

Alfrescian
Loyal
Moire issue is overblown. Got 2 D800E to shoot with, so far got moire when took picture of D800E user manual. On real life shoot, we scan chiobus (that why we bought the D800E), saw moire on her blouse where her twin cones stretched the fabric. In real life, diffraction, hand-blur, haze, multiple shots, changing focus all reduce or eliminate moire. BTW, the $500 small price to show off instead of wearing Rolex on wrists. Bunch of loud mouth Ah-Tiongs with 5DMkIII suddenly quiet down when they saw the D800E. Another guy couldn't believe his eyes and nearly tripped when he leaned closer to look. Back in film days, 10 Nikon F2 is equivalent buying a HDB 3 room flat. Now cannot smell smoke even. We have come a long way. Cameras including the D800E are cheap.


If you use the D800E for anything other than landscape photography, you'll be spending a lot of time on your computer removing Moiré patterns on clothing, table cloths, curtains.. anything with a repeated pattern.
 
Last edited:

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
Moire issue is overblown. Got 2 D800E to shoot with, so far got moire when took picture of D800E user manual. On real life shoot, we scan chiobus (that why we bought the D800E), saw moire on her blouse where her twin cones stretched the fabric. In real life, diffraction, hand-blur, haze, multiple shots, changing focus all reduce or eliminate moire. BTW, the $500 small price to show off instead of wearing Rolex on wrists. Bunch of loud mouth Ah-Tiongs with 5DMkIII suddenly quiet down when they saw the D800E. Another guy couldn't believe his eyes and nearly tripped when he leaned closer to look. Back in film days, 10 Nikon F2 is equivalent buying a HDB 3 room flat. Now cannot smell smoke even. We have come a long way. Cameras including the D800E are cheap.

I have Moire problems with my Medium Format camera when I shoot in the studio. I have to deal with the patterns at the raw conversion stage. If what you're shooting is slightly blurred for whatever reason, then moire won't be an issue. If you're shooting in a controlled environment where everything is razor sharp, it becomes more of a problem.
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Nikon D800 and D800E is flying off the shelf, when i saw it in store, i decide to hold it, feel it and then go back home to reconsider. When i am back in a few days, they are all gone. It is outselling canon 9 to 1 in that small store alone. Canon mk 3 is such a disgrace for the company. I guess i will keep using 5d2 until thing cool down.
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
http://blog.mingthein.com/2012/05/05/an-unfair-fight-nikon-d800e-vs-leica-s2-p/

An unfair fight? 35mm vs Medium Format: Nikon D800E and the Leica S2-P

Conclusion

What I find interesting is that we’re at a convergence point: my complaints of the S2 are because I’m treating it like a normal SLR; on the opposite hand, I’m expecting medium format quality from the D800E. This says a lot: both cameras have achieved and surpassed their design objectives. The Leica S2 was designed to make medium format easy and convenient; it does – to the point where we forget that we’re shooting with medium format. The D800E was supposed to raise 35mm-format DSLRs into the medium format realm; it does. I don’t think I’ll ever take the D800E with me on holiday; I’d certainly pack something lighter, smaller and less demanding to shoot. But I can offer my clients a new level of quality, but without the limitations of medium format (wireless TTL flash, magnification, focal length selection). By the same token, I’m quite happy walking around with the S2 and 70/2.5 (which is my favorite lens for the S system) and treating it as I would my M9-P. Both have a place in the photographer’s arsenal; however, you probably shouldn’t buy either unless you know you’re going to use the resolution – and in that case, the S2 wins on the quality its lens system.

You’ve probably read all the way to the end of this review hoping I’ll pronounce one better than the other; the reality isn’t that clear cut. The Leica S2 wins on lens quality (by a large margin), resolution (by a hair), dynamic range (though this may be debatable) and build; the D800E wins on color, practical usability (ISO 6,400 at medium format resolutions, anybody?), lens selection, speed and portability.

I honestly like both cameras and systems very much; I don’t think I could pick between the two if money weren’t an issue. The reality is that unless you’re going to torture your files and print them at enormous sizes, the D800E does deliver much better value for money. However, you’re going to have to spend a lot of money on lenses to do the sensor justice – that is if you can even find anything suitable; this lens selection is very, very small; and it’s also not cheap. I’d give the edge overall to the S2; because of the matched lenses, it feels like a more complete system, but you’ve got to climb a steep diminishing returns slope to get there. However, with the ever rising pixel densities of lower end cameras – 24MP APS-C, for instance – I’d be surprised if there wasn’t an even higher resolution D4x in the future, and given the undoubtedly huge investment for Leica, this is just the beginning of the S system. MT
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Grizzly Bear in USA, attack nikon camera on tripod. Hate having his picture taken

Blog-FB-4.jpg


Blog-FB-6.jpg


Blog-FB-8.jpg
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
I wouldn't pay the extra $500 for the D800E.

yeah after studying all information. If it is no low pass filter, then sure i get the D800E, but they have this strange filter than remove the effect of low pass filter, which means it is not as effective as having no low pass filter.
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
[video=youtube;0YnhJk4hoq8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YnhJk4hoq8&feature=share&list=UUuw8B6Uv0cMWtV5vbNpeH_A[/video]
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
intro.jpg



The worst-kept secret the photographic industry in recent memory (well, except for maybe the D800) is out. Nikon has officially announced the long-rumored and much-leaked D600 - a full-frame DSLR aimed at enthusiasts, with a price to match. At $2099/£1955 body only the 24MP D600 is significantly cheaper than its big brother the D800, and in fact every other current full-frame DSLR.

As such, the D600 - which offers similar build quality and operational ergonomics as the popular DX-format D7000 - is hugely significant. It's full frame, but not only that, it matches or exceeds the pixel count of every other full-frame DSLR bar one (the D800) at the sort of price point that up to now, has been the preserve of high-end APS-C cameras.

For those of us who've been covering the industry for a while, it's sobering to remember that the first full-frame DSLR, Canon's 1Ds, was announced almost a decade ago. It doesn't seem like so long ago that full-frame was the holy grail of consumer digital imaging, promising liberation from crop factors once and for all, and a return to a simpler time where a 24mm lens actually was a 24mm.

A lot has changed since the 1Ds went on sale though (at an eye-watering $7999) and these days, if you want a full-frame camera, you don't have to remortgage your home. Cameras like Nikon's D700 and Canon's EOS 5D brought full-frame sensors within reach of enthusiasts, and the more recent D800 and EOS 5D Mark III have continued that trend, offering more and more advanced specifications at prices much lower than top-flight equipment like the Nikon D3X and Canon's flagship, the 1DS Mark III, both of which are looking increasingly anachronistic. It's interesting to note, too, that with the D600, Nikon has significantly undercut Sony's recent full-frame offerings - the SLT-A99 and Cyber-shot RX1, not to mention presented a daunting challenge to arch-rival Canon.
Nikon D600: Key Specifications

24.3MP Full-frame CMOS sensor (10.5MP DX-format crop mode)
ISO 100-6400 (expandable to ISO 50-25,600 equivalent)
Maximum 5.5fps continuous shooting
39-point AF system with 9 cross-type AF points
3.2in 921k-dot LCD screen
1080p30 full HD video mode with stereo sound recording
Headphone jack for audio monitoring in movie mode
Uncompressed video recording via HDMI
Dimensions: 141mm x 113mm x 82mm (5.5 × 4.4 × 3.2 in).
Weight: 760 g (1.6 lbs) (camera body only, no battery)

A full-frame camera for the rest of us?

At its list price at launch of $2099 the D600 is the most affordable full-frame camera yet, and there's no doubt that it's a product which a huge number of photographers (not only Nikon users) have been waiting for. Although Nikon insists that there are still good reasons to buy the D300S, it seems very likely that the D600 will finally supplant the older DX-format model as the 'upgrade of choice' for users of the D3200, D5100 and D7000. But despite its relatively low cost the D600 is very far from a 'no frills' model. Features like 5.5fps shooting at full-resolution, 100% viewfinder coverage, full HD video capture with an option to record uncompressed footage via HDMI and a customizable 39-point AF system would be pretty impressive in a camera costing much more.

Nikon's last big DSLR release was the D800. The big news with that camera was its pixel count of 36MP, which when it was released, comfortably eclipsed everything else around (and at the time of writing still does). The D600 doesn't quite reach those dizzy heights, but at 24MP, it matches or exceeds the pixel count of every other full-frame system camera. It is also one of the most versatile, offering a useful 10.5MP DX crop mode and an in-body AF motor, which ensures AF compatibility with older, non-AF-S Nikkor lenses. These factors alone will give it serious appeal to two camps - D800 or D4 owners looking for a smaller, lower-cost second body, and D300S and D7000 owners who want to step up to full-frame but don't want (or can't afford) to replace all of their DX-format lenses.

Ergonomically, the D600 will be very familiar to both of these constituencis. The D600's UI is all but identical to the DX-format D7000, and It shares the same 39-point AF system. In terms of functionality though, the D600 also has a lot in common with its big brother the D800, particularly when it coms to video specification. Something that we didn't expect on the D600 was the ability to shoot uncompressed video footage via HDMI. This, plus a mic socket for an external microphone, and a headphone jack should make the D600 very appealing to videographers. The only real difference between the implementation of the D600's video mode compared to the D800 is that you can't adjust aperture during movie recording on the new model (unless you use an older manual focus lens with a mechanical aperture ring).
D600 versus D7000: Specification highlights

24.3MP Full-frame CMOS sensor (compared to 16.2MP DX-format CMOS)
Maximum 5.5fps continuous shooting (compared to 6fps)
3.2in 921k-dot LCD screen (compared to 3in)
D800-style combined movie/still live view mode button
Headphone jack for audio monitoring in movie mode
Uncompressed video recording via HDMI

D600 versus D800: Specification highlights

24.3MP Full-frame CMOS sensor (compared to 36.3MP CMOS)
10.5MP DX-format crop mode (compared to 15.3MP)
39-point AF system with 9 cross-type AF points (compared to 51-points, with 15 cross-type)
Autofocus sensitivity down to -1EV (compared to -2EV)
Maximum 5.5fps continuous shooting in FX mode (compared to 4fps in FX mode)
2,016-pixel RGB TTL exposure metering sensor (compared to 91,000 pixels)
2x SD slots (compared to CF+SD)
No 'Power Aperture' aperture control during movie shooting (offered by D800 using Fn + Preview buttons)
Shutter rated to 150,000 cycles (compared to 200,000 cycles)
Magnesium-alloy top and rear, polycarbonate front-plate (D800 is full mag-alloy except flash housing)
USB 2.0 interface (compared to USB 3.0)
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
I was taking a sports event on Saturday and decided I was not happy with the continuous auto focus on my aging D3. I missed a number of money shots because the focus simply didn't lock on at the crucial moment and the best shot of the sequence had to go to the trash can instead.

The problem was that there was lots of stationary clutter in the field of vision which confused the D3 focus "brain" so instead of tracking the moving object, it ended up taking a razor sharp image of a hurdle instead.

I'm "borrowing" a D4 from my favourite photography store today and I'm going to re shoot a similar event this weekend. If all goes well, my D3 will be on ebay next week and I'll be the proud owner of a brand new D4.

All the reviews I've read point to the fact that the auto focus of the D4 is far superior compared to the previous generation. I'll be able to confirm or refute this within the next few days.
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
I was taking a sports event on Saturday and decided I was not happy with the continuous auto focus on my aging D3. I missed a number of money shots because the focus simply didn't lock on at the crucial moment and the best shot of the sequence had to go to the trash can instead.

The problem was that there was lots of stationary clutter in the field of vision which confused the D3 focus "brain" so instead of tracking the moving object, it ended up taking a razor sharp image of a hurdle instead.

I'm "borrowing" a D4 from my favourite photography store today and I'm going to re shoot a similar event this weekend. If all goes well, my D3 will be on ebay next week and I'll be the proud owner of a brand new D4.

All the reviews I've read point to the fact that the auto focus of the D4 is far superior compared to the previous generation. I'll be able to confirm or refute this within the next few days.


D4 is only 10 frames per sec, even a pocket camera now have 10 frames, like sony rx-100.
Buy a camera for sport, canon 1X shoot 12 fps on raw and 14 on jpeg.
 
Last edited:

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
D4 is only 10 frames per sec, even a pocket camera now have 10 frames, like sony rx-100.
Buy a camera for sport, canon 1X shoot 12 fps on raw and 14 on jpeg.

It isn't the number of frames per second that matter. Anything above 7 or 8 is fine with me. It is the ability to nail the shots at the crucial moment.

If I shoot a one second burst, if 10/10 are razor sharp, I'm spoilt for choice.

If it starts pouring with rain, I need to be able to continue shooting without worrying about my camera. Can the sony rx-100 give me this peace of mind?
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
It isn't the number of frames per second that matter. Anything above 7 or 8 is fine with me. It is the ability to nail the shots at the crucial moment.

If I shoot a one second burst, if 10/10 are razor sharp, I'm spoilt for choice.

If it starts pouring with rain, I need to be able to continue shooting without worrying about my camera. Can the sony rx-100 give me this peace of mind?

no, i am trying not to ask you to replace your D3 with sony rx-100, but for you to jump ship to canon, you have to admit 14 fps is amazing cutting edge technology.
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
5917_d4_dance_02_preview.jpg


A few thoughts about the Nikon D4

Since picking up the D4 in March it has been my go-to camera for low light and high speed photography, supplementing a D800E that's now used for just about everything else. Here are a few observations about Nikon's flagship digital SLR.

In a January interview, Nikon engineer Toshiaki Akagi described the high ISO performance of the new camera as being very similar to its predecessor, the D3S. My own subsequent comparisons of the two cameras revealed this to be true, at least when looking at NEFs that have been put through the same RAW converter on comparable conversion settings.

This means that in all but the nastiest of light, ISO 12,800 will generate acceptable image quality from the D4, just as it does with the D3S, and beyond that you get into emergency-use-only territory with both cameras. That said, you can shoot all day long at ISO 12,800 and deliver good-looking files, as long as the exposure is right and the lighting conditions aren't overwhelmingly ugly. Also, as the dance photo above illustrates, ISO 3200 is a breeze for the D4, as it is for the D3S too.

The only other RAW-related difference is an obvious one: the D4's 16.16 million pixel NEFs have slightly more real resolution than the 12.05 million pixel NEFs captured by the D3S.

In-camera JPEGs are another matter, and in this category it's a solid win for the D4 over the D3S. JPEGs that emerge directly from the D4 have a slightly crisper look as well as more natural colour in shadow areas, throughout the standard ISO range. At moderately-high ISO settings the D4's JPEG advantage is more pronounced, thanks to revised noise reduction and other processing that doesn't smudge image detail or desaturate dark colours and shadows. In fact, the D4 creates the finest in-camera JPEGs I've ever seen when set to about ISO 1600-6400 (with High ISO Noise Reduction on Normal and Sharpening, within the Neutral Picture Control, on 3). The D3S can crank out good-quality JPEGs, but the D4's are better.

The rollovers below show how D3S and D4 JPEGs differ in their handling of colour in darker areas. The ISO 12,800 comparison is a 100% magnification crop of the upper right corner of the convocation scene. Both cameras were set to Normal High ISO Noise Reduction. The D3S version is drained of colour, whereas the D4 version shows the red carpet as red.

The ISO 200 comparison shows the same thing, though the difference is more subtle at lower sensitivities. Look closely at the tree branches, the walkway and the darker portions of the building and you'll spot truer reddish colour in the D4 version.

Autofocus

The D4's AF system will be immediately familiar to anyone who has spent time with a D3S. Not just because most of the configuration options are the same, but because the autofocus feels and acts so similar too. D4 autofocus, in my experience, is very much like that of the D3S, only it's faster to acquire focus when first engaged and it's better at acquiring focus in really low light. Overall, this means the D4's AF system provides a balanced level of autofocus performance: it's good for most things, great for some things, and not horrible at anything. Some of the key traits of the D4 AF system are:

Exceptional static subject focus. The D4 consistently gets the focus distance exactly right when the subject isn't moving.

Very good, and often excellent, tracking of moving athletes in overcast conditions or under artificial light.

Fast acquisition of proper focus in sports like volleyball. The D3S feels pokey by comparison.

Good, but rarely excellent, tracking of moving athletes in full sunlight. The D4, like the D3S before it, misses a few more frames than it ought to when the light is beautiful.

The best combination of speed and tracking accuracy comes when the D4 is set to use a 9-point configuration. There are times when a single AF point makes sense, and there are situations that will benefit from all 51 AF points as well. But, like the D3S, it doesn't take much testing to figure out the D4's AF system is at its overall best when 9 AF points are active.

All of the above assumes the use of lenses like the AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G, AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II, AF-S 400mm f/2.8G VR II and AF-S 200-400mm f/4G VR. What these all have in common is a maximum aperture of f/2.8 or slower. I've struggled to achieve the same level of autofocus performance with Nikon's f/1.4 lenses, including the AF-S 24mm f/1.4G, AF-S 50mm f/1.4G and AF-S 85mm f/1.4G. Even when the working aperture is f/2.8 and therefore shallower depth of field is not a factor.

As of this writing, I've not sorted out why f/1.4 lenses seem to bring about poorer AF system performance with the D4, or if there is a magic combination of AF settings that might alleviate the problem. With this camera, like the D3S before it, I've sidestepped the matter entirely by focusing in Live View instead. This has been a manageable workaround, at least for static subjects, but it's not much of a long term solution.

The D4's AF system can be summed up as a more responsive version of the very good AF system found in the D3S. Despite a couple of shortcomings, it's also my preferred AF system for most things. That said, I already know what I want in the D5: improved tracking in good light and more reliable autofocus with f/1.4 Nikkor glass.

Burst shooting and memory cards

Nikon has equipped the D4 with a fast CompactFlash slot, a really fast XQD slot and a large memory buffer. The data below gives an idea of how the speed of card or pair of cards you put into the camera dictates how many pictures can be shot in succession. The first number in each field represents how many frames the D4 rattled off before the buffer was full. The second number is the number of additional frames the camera was able to take after a five-second pause.

For the first table, one card was in use. For the second table, two cards were inserted and the camera was configured to either mirror all files to both cards simultaneously or write one format to the XQD card and another format to the CompactFlash card. The five cards tested represent a range of write speed potential, from really fast to moderately slow. The D4 was loaded with firmware A:1.01 B:1.01.

As you can see, the write speed capability of the card plays a big role in the number of frames that the D4 can capture in a burst. This is true, though not quite universally. With Auto Distortion Control enabled, for example, the primary factor limiting burst depth is the camera's internal processing and memory management, rather than the card. And, with both slots active, the burst depth differences between the fastest and slowest pairings become less significant, though they are still substantial.

The D4 can shoot and store a lot of pictures quickly, and a top-performing memory card can help with that, especially when only one slot is in use. If your photography requires that you blast through a lot of frames at a time, then you may want to keep Auto Distortion Control disabled (it's the only image processing-related option that so greatly impacts burst depth).

Wireless networking

I rarely head out to shoot pictures these days without an iPad, router and wireless-capable camera, so I was perhaps more excited than most when Nikon introduced Wireless Transmitter WT-5 alongside the D4 earlier this year. This dedicated Wi-Fi accessory is as small as it is expensive, but it has turned out to be money well spent. The WT-5's range and transmission speed have exceeded what I was expecting from something so tiny, its unobtrusiveness makes it practical to leave the unit attached to the camera most of the time, and it has reliably FTP'd thousands of JPEGs and NEFs to an iPad or a MacBook Air 11-inch since I got it in May.

I'd already been sending pictures wirelessly from the D4 for a couple of months before the WT-5 arrived. By connecting a Wi-Fi router to the D4's built-in Ethernet port you get all of the WT-5's key features, including the ability to file pictures to an FTP server and control the camera from a web browser. It's possible to slightly surpass the maximum wireless throughput of the WT-5 too. Plus, even a premium battery-operated router is a fraction of the cost of Nikon's wireless accessory.

The results of a round of D4 wireless speed tests are in the table below. The throughput was derived from timing how long it took to send 30 Large Fine JPEGs from the camera to the computer in FTP mode, with the wired and wireless gear described. In all tests, the separation between wireless sender and receiver for the first (or only) "wireless hop" was about 18ft/5.5m and there were no signal-blocking obstructions. For the "D4 wired" entries, an Ethernet cable linked the camera's built-in Ethernet port to the Ethernet port on the portable wired/wireless router (which sent the picture onwards, wirelessly, to the computer). Each test was performed three times and the results averaged.

The iPad throughput is an estimate of how fast ShutterSnitch's internal FTP server can take in new pictures when it doesn't also have a queue of already-received pictures to be processed for display.

For reference, the D4's built-in Ethernet can sustain a transfer rate of 5.4MB/s when sending the same batch of JPEGs to a computer across a wired Ethernet network.

The test reveals several useful things:

All three portable wired/wireless routers offer decent speed, but the d-link DAP-1350 is especially good for a unit of this type.

Given its size and low power draw, the WT-5's transmission speed is really good.

None of the options is speedy enough to handle more than moderate volumes of JPEGs, while a burst of a dozen NEFs will bog the link down for a minute or more. In other words, you have to give careful consideration to how you use the camera's networking capabilities so you can capitalize on the benefits while not overloading the connection.

As mentioned, before the WT-5 shipped I'd already converted the D4 into a wireless camera by attaching a router to it, either the Aluratek CDM530AM (because it has an internal, user-changeable battery) or d-link DAP-1350 (because it's the fastest portable router I've come across). With a short Ethernet cable running from the camera to the router, and the router in a belt pouch or backpack, you have a functional and reliable WT-5 alternative that's not overly cumbersome to use.

I covered several basketball games this way early on, where a DAP-1350 was wired to the D4 in my hand while simultaneously serving as a wireless router to a remote camera. JPEGs from both bodies streamed into ShutterSnitch on a third-generation iPad in my backpack, dependably and at a decent clip.

If the D4 Ethernet-to-router rig was working so well, you might be asking why I went ahead and shelled out for the WT-5. The answer is it provides a really enticing combination of speed and convenience. I'm a camera Wi-Fi addict, and when I discovered that the WT-5 was reliable, that its performance wasn't hobbled by its size, that I could stick it on the D4 and leave it there almost always and that I could be completely free of an Ethernet cable, I was sold. But, if the WT-5 hadn't come along, I would have been reasonably content with a portable router Ethernet-tethered to the camera.

Networking tip: If you have the WT-5 (or any other transmitter) set to ad hoc wireless networking and you're not getting the range, reliability or ease of connecting and reconnecting that you need, stop using ad hoc. Then, get yourself a router, wirelessly link the WT-5 and the destination device to it and experience a much more consistent and easy networking experience. I'd have long ago given up on sending pictures wirelessly from a camera if the only option were ad hoc.

Battery tip: Any decent battery pack with a USB output port should be able to power the d-link DAP-1350 for hours. I mainly use the Tekkeon TekCharge MP1860A, and it's good for six hours or more of semi-constant DAP-1350 activity.

Cable tip: If you'd like an Ethernet cable that exits from the camera and immediately makes a downward turn, check out networking accessories maker L-Com. Their cables feature a sturdy molded connector with a 90-degree bend and are available in black to match the D4. I have several, they're well-made and also inexpensive (though shipping outside the U.S. is not).

Either the 2ft or 3ft length is what you want if the router is to be on your belt or in your bag. The at-the-camera end of the cable should be a left-angle type (L-Com calls this "Right Angle Left Exit" in the product name) if you'd like it to bend downwards from the D4. A black 2ft cable with a standard straight connector at one end and left-angle connector at the other is here. The three foot version is here. Lengths from 1-100ft are listed here.
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
It isn't the number of frames per second that matter. Anything above 7 or 8 is fine with me. It is the ability to nail the shots at the crucial moment.

i guess you are never going to jump ship to canon, but reviewers are saying that canon 1X is better in focusing for moving object than D4. So, maybe you should just swallow your pride and get an 1X for testing, if it does not match your expectation, then by all means get a D4. I on the other hand have no brand loyalty, i would jump to nikon d800e from canon 5d2 without a sec thought. But recently i felt that DSLR are too heavy, still looking a lighter alternative.
 
Last edited:

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
article-2399898-1B6838DD000005DC-914_634x705.jpg


An owl hijacked a photoshoot when he flapped away a photographer and took position behind the lens of a camera.
Paul Kingston had been taking some pictures of a rare baby bird when the large five-year-old eagle owl called Splodge swooped down and pushed him to one-side.
It was a shock to both Paul and keeper Bryan Wintersgill because despite the Eurasian eagle owl's boldness in taking over the shoot he is a shy bird by nature.

article-2399898-1B683882000005DC-63_634x408.jpg

article-2399898-1B6836F2000005DC-805_634x471.jpg

article-2399898-1B683875000005DC-984_634x428.jpg

article-2399898-1B683617000005DC-949_634x426.jpg
 
Top