REVIEW: Nikon D7100–A Mini D800E?

Nikon D7100 (Kit lens shown, but not tested)

I was a big fan of the D7000 and the D600 was my 2012 DSLR of the Year, so when I got the news that D7100 was coming out I was very excited. When I heard it went the way of the D800E and it shipped without a low pass filter then I got even more excited. I was hoping this was going to be the usable resolution equivalent to the D800E, but it’s not. Don’t get me wrong, this is a good camera with excellent image detail. However, it’s not going to dethrone the D600 as my favorite Nikon camera.
For this test I got to spend some time with a D7100 using the AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED lens as the kit lens version was unavailable. Ergonomically it feels about identical to the D600 which is a good thing as that’s an excellent camera to use on a daily basis. Since the D7100 is NOT a full-frame camera it doesn’t suffer from the same compact AF point selection area as the D600 so that’s actually one thing that makes the D7100 better than the D600. The other thing that is in the favor of the D7100 is the fact that it’s about $800 cheaper (as of this writing) than the D600, so it’s a great value choice as well.

Nikon D7100 Rear View

Overall I loved the ergonomics of the camera body and it’s vast number of external buttons all within reach (and many are programmable). The rear LCD is supposed to be higher resolution than the D600 (1,229,000 dots vs – 921,000 both 3.2”), but it sure didn’t feel like it. The new info button comes in handy as well for learning more information about the vast features in the menu of this camera.
Overall, it’s a great body that think anyone would enjoy – especially after you get used to the features / quirks of the Nikon system.

Auto Focus Performance

I suck at shooting birds, but the D7100 doesn’t!
f/2.8 @ 70 mm, 1/1250,ISO 2000

One area where the D7100 really seemed to excel was in its Auto Focus performance. Simply put, it’s outstanding – one of the best that I’ve tested – and a lot easier to use than the D4 system. In fact I quickly got so used to how good it was that I found myself trying to find a way to make it fail, and it handled most tasks that I threw at it without any issue.
I’m a horrible bird shooter so when I coincidentally ran into a big group of birds I just upped my shutter speed in M(annual) and put the D7100 to the test. Even in AF-S mode it was nailing everything I threw at it. In AF-C it did a great job of not getting confused when obstructions approached like in the shot below (which honestly would trip my 1D Mark IV up):

This is scary good AF! I was looking the opposite direction when I heard something.
I turned, shot the frames and this bird was gone. It even didn’t get tripped up by the branches!
f/2.8 @ 62 mm, 1/2000,ISO 100

If you shoot sports or moving objects like birds, cars, etc… then you will REALLY enjoy the AF system on this camera. It’s by far the easiest system I’ve used and it gives my 1D X a run for its money. I can also say with confidence that the D7100 AF system performed significantly better than the D4 that I tested. I wasn’t expecting this when I was out testing this camera, but if I was a D4 owner I’d be demanding that Nikon put this mojo in a D4 firmware upgrade or in a new D4s.
The frames per second is useless unless you shoot JPEG only with fast SD card’s, but if given a choice I’d rather accurate AF than FPS any day.

Real World Sample Images

As always, these images ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (yes, even the lame ones <g>). You may not save, edit, print, redistribute or otherwise use them without expressed written permission.
The full set of images is available at http://www.ronmartinsen.com/nikon/d7100, but here’s a few noteworthy images. Click the image for the original and view using the gallery to see EXIF information. All major settings were camera defaults except Active D Lighting was set to Auto. I was using Auto ISO (full range) and typically AF-S with a single point on my intended subject.

I have lots of examples where the shadow detail like this is excellent
f/2.8 @ 24 mm, 1/125,ISO 100, No Flash, AWB (Warm)

Not bad, but the X20 shot of the same scene was just about as good!
f/4 @ 70 mm, 1/1250,ISO 100, No Flash

Curious about dynamic range? This pretty much exercises the whole gamut!
f/5.6 @ 38 mm, 1/200,ISO 800, No Flash, Shade WB

Curious about bokeh or depth of field? Here’s a start.
f/4.5 @ 28 mm, 1/400 (Windy),ISO 800, No Flash, AWB (Warm)

This is hard to appreciate small, but a letter size print of this has wonderful detail
f/6.3 @ 40 mm, 1/200,ISO 800, No Flash

I was happy with the in-camera color as a starting point in this shot
f/4 @ 27 mm, 1/500,ISO 100, No Flash, AWB (Warm)

f/2.8 @ 28 mm, 1/400,ISO 100, No Flash, AWB (Warm)
Good light? Gorgeous results

Really bad light? Still pretty darn good results!
f/2.8 @ 27 mm, 1/1250,ISO 100, No Flash, AWB (Warm)

I had to shoot –1 EV, and ended up with very nice reds here!
f/4 @ 70 mm, 1/320,ISO 100, No Flash

One of the many examples where the AF system
just did the right thing like it was reading my mind
f/2.8 @ 70 mm, 1/125,ISO 125, No Flash

Another example of excellent shadow detail, pleasing bokeh and neutral colors
f/4 @ 62 mm, 1/400,ISO 100, No Flash

The dynamic range is so good here that it feels exactly like it felt in real life
f/4.5 @ 24 mm, 1/125,ISO 110, No Flash

This is one of those impossible shots you know won’t work, but you take anyway.
I was actually pleased with how well it captured the scene.
f/6.3 @ 60 mm, 1/250,ISO 100, No Flash

About Real World Sample Images

I sometimes am asked, “what do you mean by ‘real world’ sample images?” Some have even taken a poke and said “does that mean photos that suck?”

The truth is that as a consumer one of the things that has always annoyed me is when I see the images from a camera on a web site that look fantastic, but when I get it home and use it under normal everyday conditions the photos just don’t have the same “oomph”. As a blogger  I began to investigate “why” there were these discrepancies and I discovered three things:

1. Some sites doctor their photos so what you are seeing is an edited image that used the camera in question, but that’s not an image you’ll really ever get out of the camera. To me this is useless.
2. Some sites only show you photos taken in beautiful surroundings and lighting conditions. While these may be real images, they aren’t the type of image the average person will be taking. This leads to massive disappointment when you get home and are shooting around the house in very difficult lighting and non-ideal locations and think “gosh, this camera sucks compared to what I saw on the web”.

All of the images I feature for all my camera reviews are only impacted by the in-camera processing which is also what you see on your camera’s LCD (even when you shoot RAW). There is NO post-processing and what you see is what you can expect to get. While I do try to get some images in nice settings so you can see what a nice photo will be like, I also work hard to stress the camera to see how it performs under difficult situations (i.e., backlight, mid-day sun highlights, tungsten lighting, indoors with high ISO, etc…).
It’s my opinion that real world shots really tell you what you want to know about a camera and keep you from being surprised when you get it home. It does mean that I have to take some criticism for shots that aren’t always cropped perfectly (what you see is EXACTLY what came out of the camera), and I show image failures. However, my goal is to be the place that you can trust for a REAL assessment of a camera and a place you can trust.

Video

I didn’t test video on this camera, so I have no comment.

Bookshelf Test

Bookshelf tests are conduction on a tripod with mirror lockup and camera default settings. I did turn D-lighting on and these are the actual in-camera JPEG’s (Fine) with no external modifications.
NOTE: Even though I had the lens set to the 24mm mark, all shots report as 26mm in this article.

f/2.8 @ 26 mm, 1s, ISO 200,No Flash

Excellent dynamic range is obvious – I was very impressed right out of the camera. Despite supporting ISO 100, I felt ISO 200 gave the best image quality. The overall best shot I got was at the 24-70’s sweet spot of 35mm @ f/5.6 and ISO 200:

f/5.6 @ 35 mm, 4s, ISO 200, No Flash

That, boys and girls, is goonie goo goo good! The resolution here rivals what I saw with my D800 and D600 testing, but I didn’t have an EXACT comparison so I will not show it here. I can certainly say that in terms of image quality, this is up there with the best of the best. This camera has insane amounts of resolution that you’ll only appreciate on your computer as the camera LCD (despite all of its megapixels) just doesn’t do it justice.

f/10 @ 26 mm, 1/13,ISO 25600

High ISO Performance

The high ISO performance that Nikon’s are legendary for just isn’t there with this camera, so I put it in the same camp as the D800 where you should try to avoid ISO’s above 3200 when possible. The High ISO modes (12,800 and up) are nasty useless to me.

Raw (Lightroom 4.4) vs In-camera JPEG Fine (camera default settings) Comparison

If you had to shoot in the higher ISO’s you’ll be a lot better off turning off the in-camera noise reduction and usingNoiseware to clean your image up. The higher ISO creates so much noise that Nikon’s noise reduction destroys the detail.

HDR Mode

D7100, f/8 @ 26 mm, 15s, ISO 100,No Flash, HDR High (in-camera HDR)
Mouse over to see non-HDR and mouse out to see in-camera HDR version

I was very satisfied with the HDR mode, but terribly disappointed with the fact that you only get a JPEG result of the HDR series. On my 5D Mark III I can still do HDR while shooting in RAW and all the intermediate files are kept so it makes it fun to use HDR to see what the camera will get, but you still have the real RAW files forPhotomatix or HDR Efex Pro 2. With the D7100 that is NOT the case, so people who are serious about HDR are going to have to either decide to go JPEG only and except the file the camera gives you OR ignore this feature and just shoot bracketed shots with RAW files (recommended).
With that disclaimer out of the way, I was very impressed with the in-camera results. Except for the HDR High* setting (example), all of the other settings seemed very realistic / natural feeling. What’s more, the Auto setting did a great job but is conservative to avoid that overdone HDR feeling. I can see this being a useful feature for casual consumer shooting when RAW files aren’t going to be needed or desired (rare).

Conclusion

This is a very good camera. It’s a worthy successor to the D7000 which it not only surpasses but literally obliterates in terms of overall image quality. While the in-camera noise levels are pretty good, I still feel like I prefer the higher ISO noise handling of the last generation of Nikon cameras. It just seems that Nikon pushed the megapixels so far on this camera that it followed the same pattern as the D800 where more resolution equals more noise.
For the price, this is a very nice camera for Nikon shooters – especially those who are interested in staying in theDX Format family. For bird hunters on a budget, I’d highly recommend it for the AF performance but the frames per second are going to drive you insane. Nikon advertises 6 fps, but that is only if you are shooting JPEG only I think as RAW felt like about 3 fps.
This camera didn’t capture my instant love like the D7000 or the D600 did, and I’m not sure why. Perhaps I’m just getting numb from the very good cameras I’ve been testing lately. I thought I might love this one so much that I’d get one, but I find myself being happy with the cameras I already own. I still highly recommend this camera for existing Nikon owners looking to upgrade (including D700 and D300s owners), and I think most will be very satisfied with its performance.

Where to order

Click here to order the Nikon D7100 on the B&H web site. Adorama may also still have some bodies (only) in stock here.

Other articles you may enjoy

If you enjoyed this article, you may also enjoy these reviews:

• Canon 6D
• Nikon D4
• Nikon D600 (vs Canon 5DM3 & 6D)
• Nikon D7000 & 24-120mm Lens
• Nikon D800
• COMPARISON: Nikon D600 vs Canon 5D Mark III using the latest 24-70 f/2.8 lenses
• Which camera should I buy?
• How do I get my kid to look at the darn camera?
• Things You Need AFTER You Buy Your New Camera - Must Have Photography Accessories
• Which Printer Should I Buy? Epson or Canon?
• Nik Complete Collection by Google now only $149 (save more with discount)

Disclosure

If you make a purchase using links found in this article, I may make a commission. It doesn’t cost you a penny more, but it does help to support future articles like this.

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by donating a dollar or saving several dollars by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!

REVIEW: Nikon D4

Nikon D4 Courtesy of LensRentals.com (discount)
Purchase from Adorama or B&H

Introduction

This article is a high level overview of my first impressions with the new Nikon D4. I’m a Canon shooter who has owned the 1D Mark III and currently own the 1D Mark IV, so I’m used to pro bodies. I also have hands on experience with the Nikon D3, D3s, D700 and D800 (as well as other Nikon bodies).
To be clear I like Nikon, Fuji, and Canon cameras. It is my best interest to say nothing good about Nikon so you’ll buy one using links found in this article. However, my blog has always been about providing my honest opinion based on real world use so that’s what I provide here. I also will compare it to what I’m used to which is the Canon platform, so if you are a seasoned Nikon shooter those comments are probably irrelevant to you. If you are a Canon shooter considering a platform switch, then I think you should pay close attention to them.

First Impressions

The build quality of the D4 is what you expect from a pro body, so it won’t disappoint. There’s also all the greatest features and do dads that are sure to keep you busy for months as you get used to mastering them all. However, the default settings are very good and honestly the AF system out of the box is much easier and foolproof than the Canon 1D Mark IV. I find that I can dial in the 1D Mark IV with greater accuracy (learn how), but the D4 is certainly more forgiving (like the 5D Mark III).
I think the Nikon faithful are going to love this camera, but I don’t think it’s the huge leap of improvements that we saw when the D3 arrived. I think the D3s is probably one of the best Nikon bodies ever made, so I think upgrading from that body only makes sense for those who want to stay current.
The burst mode is fantastic and 49 frames with full uncompressed raw and JPEG Fine was easily reproducible over and over again. It seems that Nikon is artificially limiting the upper boundary since it’s so predictable, but 49 at 10+ fps is probably enough for most people’s needs.
I wasn’t able to test the new XQD memory cards, but personally I’m satisfied with the CF performance. In fact I was bummed that there was no built-in SD card for use with my Eye-Fi. This left the D4 with only one usable slot for me which was a real bummer. XQD feels like a beta max or memory stick ploy all over again, so I’m disappointed that Nikon chose this route.  CF is certainly more economical and is plenty fast.
My only gripe is about the price, but it’s roughly $1k cheaper than Canon’s upcoming 1D X. When I added up the cost of my gear and some of the new stuff coming out, it was obvious that Nikon is the more affordable platform these days.
I loved the new programmable buttons and options! I have always loved how Nikon makes so many features available on the camera, so from this standpoint this camera is a joy to use. The rear display also didn’t strike me as extraordinary but it worked reasonably well.
I did hate that the sub selector wasn’t redundant by default with the multi selector as I frequently hit the sub selector by accident. The result was typically annoying as I’d lose my preview or something equally frustrating.
Overall though my impression was favorable and I liked the D4.

Compared to the Nikon D800

As one might expect given the feature (and price) differential, I had a preference for the D4. I’m used to pro bodies with lots of flexibility in the custom settings, and the D4 doesn’t disappoint here. I also appreciated the fewer megapixels which made hand holding telephoto shots much more forgiving and therefore offering more sharp and in-focus images.
Overall, if I were spending my money I’d go for the D4 over the D800 for numerous reasons. Sure there’s more megapixels in the D800, but the D4 images are big enough for practical use. The D4 has a noise advantage (although subjectively it feels noisier than the D3s I used a while back).

The Bookshelf Test

If you’ve followed my blog for a while, then you know that I like to take shots of a bookshelf to compare cameras. The reason for this is simple – I can see how the camera performs in the deep shadows as well as the hot reflective surfaces – all under long exposures (no flash used). I always use Mirror Lockup and Manual mode with the focus set once and locked in Manual mode. VR is off and the camera is in a tripod with no movement in the room during the entire exposure.
One interesting thing that I noticed between these two cameras – even when using the same lens (Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II) – is that the D4 was about a half stop brighter. I noticed this when shooting the exact same subject (the bookshelf) using the same identical metering modes (Active Matrix) in identical light. Here’ an example at ISO 100 where 25sec was needed to get the shot on the D4 versus 15 seconds on the D800.
You MUST view these images at 100% for a fair comparison. Thumbnails are included here merely for reference.

Nikon D4, ISO 100, 25sec at f/8 100mm, Auto White Balance – In-Camera JPG
This is the setting the D4 indicated a correct exposure

Nikon D800, ISO 100, 15sec at f/8 100mm, Auto White Balance – In-Camera JPG
This is the setting the D800 indicated a correct exposure
Note due to the greater pixel density of the D800, this image has more artifacts at this size

Nikon D4, ISO 100, 15sec (-1EV) at f/8 100mm, Auto White Balance – In-Camera JPG
The D4 indicated a one stop (-1) underexposure, but it’s a match of the D800 setting

Where you really notice the difference is on the pink book where it says “academic” and the top of the red book.

Here’s some ISO 6400 swatches from in-camera JPEG’s at 100% for comparison:

D800	D4 0EV
D4 -1EV	5D Mark III

To my eyes it looks like the D4 does the best job of retaining detail when under exposed by one stop, and the D800 has the most noise but the most noticeable wood grain detail.

To see more bookshelf images from each of the cameras use the links below:

• D4 images, visit http://ronmart.zenfolio.com/d4
• D800 images, visit http://ronmart.zenfolio.com/d800
• 5D Mark III images, visit http://ronmart.zenfolio.com/5dm3vsd800

The Live View Bug

While there was more static than I’d like (and a lot more than Canon cameras), the Live View bug found in the D800 isn’t as pronounced. You still need to back off two zoom stops off the max in low light to get the most usable result, but the noise wasn’t nearly as debilitating.

Compared to the Canon 5D Mark III in the Studio

By the time I did this review I no longer had access to the Nikon 800, so I couldn’t take the same portraits. However, the sensor of the 5D Mark III is allegedly very similar to the upcoming Canon 1D X so I did the next best thing. Besides, the 5D Mark III is my personal favorite DSLR on the market right now so I thought it would be fun to compare the two.
I should also note that I didn’t bother testing my 1D Mark IV against the D4 simply because it’s a model that is soon to be retired and a previous generation camera. I will draw some more comparisons between the two in a future article.

Testing Methodology

The way I compared these cameras was to use the default settings (with RAW+JPEG Fine added and in M mode) in identical lighting conditions. The Canon 70-200mm lens is brighter and has greater reach due (compared the rear focus design of the Nikkor) so I had to adjust the camera position and settings to accommodate for these differences.
I did have a major fail in that I thought I had the no smile shot of the model in the first take so I shot several more where she was smiling. When I did the comparison at my desk, the best D4 shot was of a non-smile so I ended up with a subject variation. We are pixel peeping here though, so I don’t think it’s going to make a huge difference. What does make a difference is that the Canon does more in-camera sharpening than the Nikon.
I don’t have  place to host the raw images and I wanted to exclude software errors so I’m using in-camera JPEG’s from both platforms.
The studio was set up like this for this test shot:

Room ConfigurationModel - Alessandra Mariella

The Images

Here’s an image taken with the Nikon D4 using the configuration shown above:

Nikon D4, Unedited In-Camera JPEG
1/40 sec at f/9, 200mm ISO 100, Auto White Balance

Canon 5D Mark III, Unedited In-Camera JPEG
1/60 sec at f/10, 200mm ISO 100, Auto White Balance

D4 Eye 100%

5D Mark III Eye

D4 Lips 100%

5D Mark III Lips 100% 

The Canon 5D Mark III over sharpens so it appears to have an edge, but when you look carefully at the two RAW’s I’d call them about the same. The D4 does seem to offer a little bit better detail at higher ISO’s, but it’s not the blow away leader that the D3 & D3s were when they were introduced. I think in the perfect lighting of the studio either camera will be sure to please.
I’d avoid shooting JPEG with the D4 as it seems to really benefit from RAW processing. I always urge people to shoot RAW on Canon, but if you shoot RAW+JPEG on Canon (when burst mode is not required) then you’ll find that the JPEG is usually usable most of the time. This is one place where I think the Nikon may be more of a time drain for event and wedding photographers. However, if you have your Nikon workflow down with your favorite actions then this is probably not an issue.

A word about AF accuracy

Settings for the shot below

Despite nailing the AF point, the shot was a miss
due to presumably a minimum focus distance issue

I’ve always said that if you photograph kids then you are a sports photographer, and my son gave the D4 a workout. I’ll talk more about that in a future article but note that about 40%+ of the images I took of my son were out of focus. As a former Canon 1D-Mark III owner, I felt like I was using that camera as I definitely get a higher percentage of in-focus shots with my 1D Mark IV and 5D Mark III. Some issues like the one above might be attributed to the horrible minimum focus distance of the Nikkor 70-200 lens, but I do think that some blame rest on the camera itself. However, I understand that this is a complex AF system just as those found in the Canon pro bodies, so it’s always possible that I didn’t have the perfect AF settings dialed in. I was shooting single AF point (and hitting my target) in AF-C when the subject was traveling and AF-S when the subject was stationary. In this case the subject was stationary and moving very slowly.

Unedited Real World Shots

The following are all shots uploaded from the in-camera JPEG’s with zero modifications. This is exactly how they came out of the camera with no cropping or edits. I don’t have a storage server for RAW’s but if there is a single image that you really want to see a RAW file then contact me and I can try to make it available to you viaDropbox.
For a full gallery of images click here.
Please note that I despise when photographers are showing nothing but a bunch of shots of their kids. I apologize for doing that here, but I got the D4 unexpectedly. I ended up having to review it during the course of normal family activities (often in non-ideal light) so this is the result. They are as real-world as it gets.

Spot focus is not as accurate as the 5D Mark III, but better than the 1D Mark IV

Swing test went very well

Random Dog

Dangle test – check!

Detail is good here at ISO 12,800

Great detail, but had to spot focus on the boat to get a correct exposure
Canon cameras would handle this best with Evaluate metering (similar to Active Matrix)

Dynamic range seemed pretty good, but I despise the white balance modes on Nikon’s

Evening flowers under tungsten (tungsten WB) at ISO 2000 (1/50 sec hand held)

ISO 12,800 under tungsten (f/13 for 1/50 sec handheld)

I never found a white balance mode outdoors that made me happy.
Auto white balance felt too yellow/orange

I settled on the too green and cold tone of Direct Sunlight (which I preferred to Shade & Cloudy)

I struggled with the D4 metering mode accuracy, but found spot to be my safest bet.

For this running series I got one of 10 shots in focus

This was handheld and with perfect light it does fine as a studio camera
Model - Alessandra Mariella

For Canon users who are considering switching platforms

As a camera body, you’ll enjoy the grip feel and all of the hard buttons. This is something that makes Nikons a joy to use. Many other things are about the same – just different so you’ll get used to it.
From a focusing standpoint I found the single point focusing to be similar to the 1D Mark IV’s single point focusing, but not as laser tight as the 5D Mark III and 1D X.
I’ll be blunt and say that I despise the Nikon metering system. It sounds amazing on paper, but in the real world it’s a total fail. Often times spot metering is required to get the desired result because center weighted is mostly useless (even with tweaking the size) and Active Matrix seems to enjoy silhouettes. On my Canon cameras I just set it to evaluate and maybe once a year I will hit a scenario where it fails so I’ll use spot or I’ll just use AE lock. On the D4 metering was a constant hassle – much more so than the D7000 and D800, so I often cursed it for missing the shot.
I have an equal disdain for the white balance modes of the Nikon which I admit are more accurate, but lack the warmth I enjoy from Canon. This is easily fixed in post-processing for RAW shooters, but I only use the RAW file as a emergency backup tool on the Canon platform because I like the in-camera JPEG’s so much. As a result, I found myself thinking traveling several years back in time where the in-camera JPEG was useless so being RAW only was required. This is something that’s just a difference from the platforms and Nikon would be nuts to change it, so this is where my comfort with the Canon platform shows.
As I mentioned in the D800 review, I’m also no fan of the rear focusing Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II. However, I found it much more forgiving than the D800 thanks to fewer megapixels. On the D800 with that much resolution the slightest movement causes motion blur but on the D4 in Normal or Active VR modes I had great success with hand holding the lens at low shutter speeds. It’s a darker lens with less reach than Canon’s new 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, so platform jumpers will be terminally ill when they experience the difference. It’s still a good lens though, so again this is just a platform difference.
In real-world use this isn’t the miracle camera that is going to blow you away. It’s a good camera, but everything I’ve seen from the new 5D Mark III (which shares a lot of technology with the 1D X) indicates that the Canon faithful will be rewarded for the their loyalty. With many great new lenses and cameras that allow you to focus more on composition, I think the reign of Nikon superiority for the last two generations has eroded. I thought of switching camps, but now I’m glad I didn’t.

If you liked this article…

You may also enjoy these articles as well:

• COMPARISION: Nikon D800 vs Canon 5D Mark III
• First Look: Nikon D800–Should Canon 5D-Mark III Users Switch?
• Parents Rejoice – No More Dark, Blurry and Out of Focus Pictures! (Canon 5D Mark III Real World Shots)
• Canon 5D Mark III Real World Shots–In-Camera HDR, High ISO, Flowers, Nature, People & Cars
• Canon 5D Mark III First Thoughts–WOW, Canon is BACK!!!! (REAL WORLD SHOTS)
• HANDS ON: Canon EOS-1D X (sample images and video)

More D4 articles coming soon!

Where to Buy or Rent

Click here to go to LensRentals.com (discount) to rent a Nikon D4 to help you decide if it’s the right camera for you. While you are at it you can pick up the same lens I used for this test here. Don’t forget that I have adiscount for you as well.
You can also pick up the Nikon D4 from Adorama or B&H.

You can also pick up the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II from Adorama or B&H.

Conclusion

I’ll add more after I’ve had more time to digest the nearly 4000 images I took with this camera, but for now I’m confident enough to say that this is a great camera for Nikon shooters. If you have a D3s then I’d call it an optional upgrade only if you have the bucks. If you have a D3 or D700, then I think it’s an upgrade you’ll really enjoy.
I’d also put this camera down as a better practical studio and every day use camera than the D800. Unless you need the megapixels this or even the D300s is going to serve you better than the D800 I think.
Don’t take my word for it though, click here to rent one and see of yourself using our exclusive discount.

Disclosure

If you make a purchase using links found in this article, I may make a commission. LensRentals.com provided the loaner Nikon D4 and 70-200 lens for this review.

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by donating a dollar or saving several dollars by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!
Click here to learn more about how this blog is funded.

First Look: Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II – Perhaps Canon’s greatest lens!

I had the good fortune today to get my hands on a pre-release copy of the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens. This lens features improved glass elements, faster auto focusing and amazing image stabilization improvements. It’s crazy here at the Olympics so I don’t have much time, but this is a case where a picture is indeed worth a thousand words.
I present to you images taken handheld from a man with carpal tunnel syndrome and tendonitis on my Canon 1D Mark IV using this amazing lens: (click for originals as these screen shots are low res samples with compression artifacts)

 
Screenshot of a 100% Crop (200mm @ 1/60 sec ISO 400 – no flash)

Screenshot of a 100% Crop (200mm @ 1/15 sec ISO 100 – no flash)

Screenshot of a 100% Crop (200mm @ 1/15 sec ISO 100 – no flash)

Screenshot of a 100% Crop (200mm @ 1/8 sec ISO 50 – no flash)

           These photos were shot as RAW and ZERO post-processing has been done on them. I simply exported them (without cropping or alignment) as JPEG from DPP (provided by Canon USA on site) from a Lenovo W700ds(replaced by the W701ds – the best photography computer in the world) and uploaded them to Smugmug. What you see is as raw as it gets, and the screenshots from Lightroom above shouldn’t be judged too harshly as they are low quality representatives of the originals.
In my online gallery, I’ve even included some shots where people were blinking to prove that these weren’t static subjects – they were indeed talking, breathing, blinking, etc… There are no monopods, tripods, or support used for these shots – simply freehand point and shoot in manual mode with auto ISO. IS was on and set to mode 1 and I used non-center AF points for most of these shots.
The 1/8 sec image probably impresses me the most given the fact this is nearly a 10 pound setup being hand held, and I have a result that can EASILY be sharpened to perfection. In fact, if I didn’t have to go down to ISO 50 (which is interpolated rather than a true ISO 50), I think the results would have been better. The images at 1/60 were clearly phenomenal and at least 2 stops better and several times sharper than what I would get with the original 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM.
More to come when things aren’t so crazy. Time to eat! :-)
While you are here, take a look at the great discount coupon codes and other great articles on this blog.

Update

If you have the 1D Mark IV then I recommend you check out my Canon 1D Mark IV New Users Guide / Shoppers Guide. I am still in love with my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM and feel it is the best lens Canon has made under the $5000 price point. It’s just an amazing piece of glass that was made to go with the Canon 1D Mark IV!

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by donating a dollar or saving several dollars by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!

Click here to learn more about how this blog is funded.