Why would a pro go from a D800 to a D4?

[Ilovemycam]

Is there a benefit to the lower mp D4?

 

[gsgary]

It all depends what they are shooting
D4 is a much faster reacting but i have 2 friends that regret going from a D3s to a D4 they shoot wildlife and are seeing more noise in their shots

 

[pixmedic]

because the Pros know that megapixels aren't everything. D4 has 11 FPS, D800 has 4 FPS. the D4's viewfinder is also much better. it all depends on what you NEED out of a camera.

Nikon D4 vs D800 - Our Analysis

I would say the D800 is more than enough camera for most pros.

 

[KmH]

As mentioned, a professional grade camera is about a lot more than just how many MP it has.

Going online and comparing the technical specifications of each camera would tell a lot about the differences between the 2 cameras.

In fact, the D800 is only a prosumer camera, and it lacks many useful features that are standard with professional grade cameras.

The pro may be attracted by the up to 11 fps burst mode rate, the XQD memory card slot, ISO 204,800, the new mirror balance system, built-in vertical grip, or the D4's Voice Memo feature.

Perhaps the D800/D800E's new low pass filter performance relative to moiré is an issue.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

The D800 is my prosumer budget cam, and for the low price point works very well =)

 

[fjrabon]

At this point, I don't think the pro-sumer/pro camera designation holds. If you go into most new Nikon studios, if they have top of the line gear they recently bought, in studio they're not using D4s, they're using D800s. The D4 is a field pro's camera. The D800 is a studio pro's camera. And their features are apportioned accordingly. I think it was more than just marketing when Nikon stopped designating their various level cameras as pro, prosumer, etc.

Look at the exact features Keith mentioned, they're all features that would appeal to a field pro more than a studio pro. Whereas a studio pro will put the increased resolution to greater use.

Just my take on it anyway.

 

[thetrue]

11fps?!?!?!?! I think I NEED a D4 pronto!!

 

[jaomul]

If working in unsavoury areas the d4 is better at stopping the guy trying to mug you. Who would want a slap from one of them

 

[fjrabon]

If working in unsavoury areas the d4 is better at stopping the guy trying to mug you. Who would want a slap from one of them

A steel manfrotto monopod works well too. Also an SB910 full power zoomed to 200mm popped in their eyes (especially if dark) can work wonders.

 

[greybeard]

Is the d800 hurting D4 sales?

 

[pixmedic]

Is the d800 hurting D4 sales?

I wouldn't think so..not on any significant level anyway. I imagine that they cater to different shooting needs. the price gap between the two is probably based on the pro features that the D4 has not found on the D800. for people that really want, or need those features, they will go to the D4 if they can put out the money. depending on need, im sure there are people that are buying the older D3's even though the D800 is out.

 

[Derrel]

The D4 is built for speed. Speed in shooting. Speed in focusing. Speed in downloading to computer. Speed in transmitting the files across the wire. It's designed as a sports/action/news/event camera. It has plenty of resolution for most people; even at 15.9 MP, the D4 has more MP than most other Nikon bodies that came before it. For printed images, or web images, the halftone screen in publications, and the low resolution of most computer screens mean that roughly 16MP is plenty. The D800 does not offer a "small raw" option the way Canon has seen fit to offer, so for people who shoot a lot of frames in raw, the D800's file size quickly becomes a PITA, and actually, kind of a waste of space.

 

[fjrabon]

The D4 is built for speed. Speed in shooting. Speed in focusing. Speed in downloading to computer. Speed in transmitting the files across the wire. It's designed as a sports/action/news/event camera. It has plenty of resolution for most people; even at 15.9 MP, the D4 has more MP than most other Nikon bodies that came before it. For printed images, or web images, the halftone screen in publications, and the low resolution of most computer screens mean that roughly 16MP is plenty. The D800 does not offer a "small raw" option the way Canon has seen fit to offer, so for people who shoot a lot of frames in raw, the D800's file size quickly becomes a PITA, and actually, kind of a waste of space.

If I could convince Nikon to do one single thing it would be the small/medium/full raw offerings. There are times when I will literally go to change over to medium raw on my Nikon and then curse at the Nikon overlords for not offering it. Canon really nailed an extremely useful feature there and Nikon has been quiet as a mouse on it. For serious sports shooters in weird WB environments I think it's a HUGE advantage for Canon.

 

[unpopular]

why would a professional delivery driver choose a small compact delivery van over a full-size semi truck?

wouldn't it depend on what your delivering and where? choosing the right gear gets the job done, and saves money.

 

[Vautrin]

i hate the "prosumer" designation... face it, anything d7000 or up is used by pros... its all based on what you shoot and where... its ridiculous to say anything less than a d4 is not a pro camera because plenty of pros make their money with less...