compare specs. Nikon D4S, D4 and Canon 1DX

This is an interesting comparison:

http://www.cameraegg.o​rg …os-1d-x-specs-comparison/

It shows that it takes an "s" to catch up with an "X".
The 1DX can store ten preset white balance settings, not five, by the way.

Maybe I'm crazy but D4S looks like a firmware update for the D4.

After looking at a few comparison photos, looks like they got rid of that annoying green cast too. I might be tempted to go back to Nikon if this upgrade is as compatible as D3->D3s

edit: that crazy high ISO and 1080p @60fps is just droolworthy

After reviewing this comparison, it looks like Canon is still the leader overall, and it has been out for 2 years.
I am sure that the Nikon is an amazing camera, both of them, but the Canon still seems to have the edge in most categories.

Must be why Scott Kelby changed.

Some High ISO samples:
http://www.clubsnap.co​m …/showthread.php​?t=1375310

This thing is amazing, can't wait to see high ISO comparisons with the 1Dx to see how it stacks up against it

So how does it compare to the 5D3 ISO 25600, straight from raw with no additional post processing? I am on the fence on how the D4s 25600 looks, the 1DX should beat it, considering it is better than the 5D3.

TeamSpeed, the 5DIII is looking good. That is the next camera I am wanting.

guntoter wrote in post #16717815
After reviewing this comparison, it looks like Canon is still the leader overall, and it has been out for 2 years.
I am sure that the Nikon is an amazing camera, both of them, but the Canon still seems to have the edge in most categories.

I really only see an edge for the 1DX in number of focus points (61 vs 51; more cross types as well), FPS (12 vs 11) and resolution (18 vs 16). Additionally, I think the 1DX is a little quicker to snap to initial focus, but I think the D4 does a better job maintaing focus while tracking a subject. I think the Canon LCD is a little more accurate and it is easier to scroll through pics on the 1DX than the D4. I really love that you can rate photos with stars on the 5D3 and 1DX.

The Nikon has advantages in weight, battery life, buffer, write speed, focus tracking, dynamic range (particularly at lower ISOs, at higher, they are similar) and color depth. I personally prefer the ergonomics of the D4 (better AF-ON button, better shutter button, have to move my fingers less for aperture and shutter adjustments.) I also prefer the playback of the images in a burst on the Nikon than the Canon. The Nikon D4 is also about 10% cheaper. The D4s is just slightly cheaper. The D4 also has an awesome intervalometer built in, which is great for time lapse photography. Canon's intervalometer is pretty much **** and is wired.

Both are about equal for noise, but Nikon does do a better job of pulling the details out of the shadows.

I'm sure the truckload of cash Canon gives him doesn't hurt.


---------------


Both are excellent cameras. I've owned both and actually prefer the D4 to the 1DX. The 1DX in particular is an astronomical leap forward from the dark days of the 1D3/1D4.

I guess on a mainly Canon forum it should be unsurprising that the posters think that Canon has a clear advantage. But I can tell you from owning both that that just isn't true. Both are excellent and both have a few clear advantages depending on what features are important to you. The cameras are pretty equal. I personally preferred the advantages that the Nikon gave me over the Canon, which is why the D4 is my main body for PJ work.

Thomas Campbell wrote in post #16719554
I really only see an edge for the 1DX in number of focus points (61 vs 51; more cross types as well), FPS (12 vs 11) and resolution (18 vs 16). Additionally, I think the 1DX is a little quicker to snap to initial focus, but I think the D4 does a better job maintaing focus while tracking a subject. I think the Canon LCD is a little more accurate and it is easier to scroll through pics on the 1DX than the D4. I really love that you can rate photos with stars on the 5D3 and 1DX.

The Nikon has advantages in weight, battery life, buffer, write speed, focus tracking, dynamic range (particularly at lower ISOs, at higher, they are similar) and color depth. I personally prefer the ergonomics of the D4 (better AF-ON button, better shutter button, have to move my fingers less for aperture and shutter adjustments.) I also prefer the playback of the images in a burst on the Nikon than the Canon. The Nikon D4 is also about 10% cheaper. The D4s is just slightly cheaper. The D4 also has an awesome intervalometer built in, which is great for time lapse photography. Canon's intervalometer is pretty much **** and is wired.

Both are about equal for noise, but Nikon does do a better job of pulling the details out of the shadows.

I'm sure the truckload of cash Canon gives him doesn't hurt.


---------------


Both are excellent cameras. I've owned both and actually prefer the D4 to the 1DX. The 1DX in particular is an astronomical leap forward from the dark days of the 1D3/1D4.

I guess on a mainly Canon forum it should be unsurprising that the posters think that Canon has a clear advantage. But I can tell you from owning both that that just isn't true. Both are excellent and both have a few clear advantages depending on what features are important to you. The cameras are pretty equal. I personally preferred the advantages that the Nikon gave me over the Canon, which is why the D4 is my main body for PJ work.

Having owned both and me owning neither, you have the advantage on me. My opinion was just based on going down the list of specs in the link and noticing that the Canon was ahead or even in most categories. I guess you have some categories that were not listed.

guntoter wrote in post #16720107
Having owned both and me owning neither, you have the advantage on me. My opinion was just based on going down the list of specs in the link and noticing that the Canon was ahead or even in most categories. I guess you have some categories that were not listed.

Specs are easy to make. Reality is the tough part.

1Dx 14fpps KO's D4s where it actually matters.

^ D4s' native ISO just KO's 1DXs, where it matters the most

Azathoth wrote in post #16720215
1Dx 14fpps KO's D4s where it actually matters.

Those are just specs. Bottom line, if you can't bring home the bacon with a D4, no 14fps is going to save your arse. If you need technology to get the photo...then you are just living on luck, not skill. Luck runs out, skill lasts forever.

Azathoth wrote in post #16720215
1Dx 14fpps KO's D4s where it actually matters.

Eh - not if the camera doesn't have enough buffer to keep it going. And the 1DX doesn't have enough buffer to keep it going. Just 35 RAW or 17 RAW+JPEG. Painfully poor. The D4 does over 70 in RAW and 53 in RAW+JPEG. The D4s was expanded to be even better.

So shoot for SI, who requires that you shoot in RAW+JPEG and put it on 14 fps. You get about 1.2 seconds worth of pics before the camera locks up to write files.

Or you can get over 5 seconds of pics with the D4 and even more than that with the D4s.

Big reason why every Sports Illustrated photographer except one shoots Nikon. That one is paid by Canon.