Maybe this hasn't been posted here yet so here are some information on it.
I don't think this is a rumor anymore.

Real D4 info with pics... [Page 1]: Nikon D3 - D1 / D700 Forum: Digital Photography Review (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&thread=40236558)

The article on the D4 in a french magazine;

http://i.imgur.com/XOOOX.jpg

It has, among other things, a headphone jack ;)

Preview at DPreview ;)

Nikon D4 overview: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7799914638/nikon-d4-overview/)

video tour;

Nikon D4 Product Tour - YouTube

"Uncompressed" output via HDMI !!! - sure like to know the details.

Also control of audio input and monitoring, much reduced rolling shutter, 2.7 crop mode at 1080p, full time AF in all modes, aperture control in 1/8th stop increments... with a 16mp full frame sensor it'll be killer in low light, it's looking good on paper.

Let's hope moire/aliasing is minimal.

Considering it does a debayer in camera, it won't have the characteristics of uncompressed footage.

Although I would be jumping for joy if you could point me to where it states 4:4:4 HDMI out. As long as it has a clean HDMI out, it will be useful in the field and will be utilized by many.

Considering it does a debayer in camera, it won't have the characteristics of uncompressed footage.

Right, while the press release states "users can stream an uncompressed full HD signal directly out of the camera" I take it they 're using the term very liberally, is 10bit 4:2:2 too much to hope for?

All HDMI video is uncompressed. Even the 5D2 when it is recording and downscales to 480i is uncompressed. HDMI doesn't apply MPEG-2, h.264, wavelet, M-JPEG or any other compression. Bits is bits.

What we want to know is:
1) Does the video output fill the 1920 x 1080 frame?
2) Is the 1920 x 1080 video clean with no line skipping?
3) Is the output available without overlays?
4) What is the bit depth?
5) What is the color space? Rec 709? x.y.Color?

Unfortunately, the word "uncompresssed" tells us nothing.

That said, I'm looking forward to learning much more about the camera!

Some details on the HDMI:
"Built-in HDMI lets you view footage on an external monitor or record uncompressed 8-bit 4.2.2 footage directly to an external recording device. "
&
"When the highest possible image quality is required, you can bypass memory cards and record uncompressed footage directly from the image sensor onto an external recording device."

From:
http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25482/D4.html

Video shot on D4 prototype:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dCQ9ME2OLw8

Less rolling shutter.

They even shot the interviews on stripped shirts ;)

looking like the c300 ;)

Nikon D4 DSLR Wireless Control Demonstration - YouTube

Nikon was always going to be the dark in this race, because unlike Panasonic, Canon & Sony they have no video division to protect (by crippling features like HDMI, audio levels, audio jacks etc).

About time they got in the game.

Video shot on D4 prototype:

Nikon D4 Trailer - WHY Athletes - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dCQ9ME2OLw8)


Now that's how to shoot a camera demo! Gorgeous shots, wonderful backdrops, captivating interviews - one gets lost in the material and forgets the serious business of pixel peeping. That solo rock climbing is madness!

Nikon release ( Josh's linked changed )

Nikon | News | Digital SLR camera Nikon D4 (http://www.nikon.com/news/2012/0106_flagship_01.htm)

I read the following in a tech radar article.
Nikon D4 DSLR announced | News | TechRadar (http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/nikon-introduces-d4-1052002)


"A new multi-area mode has been introduced, which means that videos can be recorded in both FX and DX based formats, as well as in native full HD (1920 x 1080 crop), meaning that the same lens can be used to capture the same scene with different crop factors."

If my calculations are right, this is something 2.7X FF which smaller than micro4/3 but bigger than 2/3inch ENG
If true, I find this feature awesome.

Video shot on D4 prototype:

Nikon D4 Trailer - WHY Athletes - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dCQ9ME2OLw8)

Less rolling shutter.

They even shot the interviews on stripped shirts ;)

Wonderful footage in the "WHY" video clip. The extra crop mode with full HD video will also come in handy for extra reach combined with super telephoto lenses for nature/sport/wildlife.

The crop mode of my T3i is so handy for run and gun that I have vowed not to buy a large format camera without it. For the type of shooting I do, I simply do not have time for lens changes most of the time.

"A new multi-area mode has been introduced, which means that videos can be recorded in both FX and DX based formats, as well as in native full HD (1920 x 1080 crop), meaning that the same lens can be used to capture the same scene with different crop factors."

Wow - looks like Nikon is reading the online community much better than canon...

If they can introduce a camera with an iFrame codec, clean HDMI 4:2:2 out, lossless crop factors, that doesn't do any unnecessary line skipping to introduce moire into the shot, I think Nikon is producing a winner in the video department. However, they are a little late to the game and a lot of people have bought EF glass already for doing DSLR video.

If they offer a package that is as good as it sounds though, its going to be hard to ignore...

D4 video features shown;

Dslrnewsshooter video: Nikon D4 - video feature run through on Vimeo

The signal from the HDMI Out is only 1080i at least according to the European literature.
Well it has become a tradition, each manufacturer to introduce a fine product with a major inexplicable blunder in their specs.

Let's hope is a typo or something will change until release or it is firmware upgradable.
Just wondering if 720 is also i ?

PS. Did a bit of research on the subject, visiting various sites and it seems there is a confusion about the subject. Can someone with ties to Nikon, give us a concrete answer?

Yeah, if the HD out isn't uncompressed in the professional sense of the term, it would have been a blunder to publicly announce it and then not deliver!

The signal from the HDMI Out is only 1080i at least according to the European literature. Well it has become a tradition, each manufacturer to introduce a fine product with a major inexplicable blunder in their specs.

That's not a blunder. It has to do with HDMI's standard features that offer the broadest compatibility. In 50i, you can combine neighboring fields to create 25p. In 60i, you can do an inverse 3:2 pulldown. The progressive signal is fully recoverable.

It's all good.

"In 50i, you can combine neighboring fields to create 25p. In 60i, you can do an inverse 3:2 pulldown. The progressive signal is fully recoverable."

Jon,
If it is progressive delivered as PSF you are correct. If it is true interlaced, during a camera or subject movement, the fields might not correspond to each other and create artifacts during recombination.

Personally I think (and wish) is a typo, because otherwise it means it can't output 720p 50/60. In interlace it would have been 100/120i which is not a standard.

What do you guys think about the price? It's listing for $6k at B&H pre-order. It looks like a great camera for sure but I'm not sure I'd spend $6k on a DSLR for video when you can get a real video camera with a clean HDMI out like the FS-100 for a $1k less. Granted the FS-100 isn't full frame but outside of that I'm not sure of the attraction here from a video perspective. Beautiful camera though and the demo video was excellent. Just wondering what everyone else thinks about that.

The FS100 is certainly a nice camera, but (provided the HDMI output on the Nikon is usable and moire/aliasing are controlled) I'm not sure if it's that much more of a "real" video camera. Not for me anyway.

Video ergonomics are not exactly a strong point of the FS100 either (both cameras benefit from some kind of rig), and as it doesn't have built in NDs it also requires either screw on faders or a matte box. The FS100 does have better onboard audio, but either way I'd use an external recorder like the PIX220 with superior preamps, 24bit audio, all nicely embedded alongside video in ProRes.

The FS100 will have greater tweakability/custom control, and we'll have to wait and see if the D4 has a useful flat profile. However, the D4 has the potential to deliver greater dynamic range, a cleaner image, better low light performance (I have to say the FS100 is pretty good already!), and of course full compatibility with Nikon Glass (with the FS100 you're reliant on adaptors).

What's most attractive for a guy like me though, is that I shoot quite a lot of stills for clients on the side; I expect a lot of videographers do. Being able to take one kit along for both tasks is very handy, especially when travelling.

The FS100 certainly is a "real" video camera. It shoots HD video, no stills. Here's where the FS100 is a real video camera:
This weekend, I shot a lacrosse tournament. That meant hours of almost continuous shooting, over an hour of video recorded, in the warm Florida sun. Nat sound all the way. No overheating, no shutdown. No moire, no aliasing. Try that with any DSLR.

I'm sure the D4 will be an excellent DSLR, with a very capable video function. But it is not a camcorder.

Hi Glen,

I'm not disputing the FS100's credentials... it's a great camera. The "real" inverted commas are directed at the notion a camera like the GH2 (which I do shoot with all day in the sun without any moire/aliasing to speak of) is somehow not a proper video camera.

I have an XF300 too, a camera indisputably in the "real" camp, but these days it takes a back seat on the majority of video jobs to the GH2. The latter performs video tasks very admirably indeed.

With the functionality of cameras like the GH2 and the D4 appearing at the same time as large chip video cameras with unconventional form factor (FS100, C300 et al) this space is converging, and terms like "real video camera" become redundant IMHO.

Note that Nikon is marketing the D4 as a "multi-media DSLR" : we'll have to wait and see if it delivers in areas like moire/aliasing/overheating, but I'm optimistic.

It looks like a great camera, it will interesting to see how it performs in low light. The noise from Nikon's I feel always looks better than from Canon's

It looks like a great camera, it will interesting to see how it performs in low light. The noise from Nikon's I feel always looks better than from Canon's

I thought this was changing with CANON DIGIC 5 release? The 1 dx samples, people mentioned the noise looked like film grain.

I just saw on another forum that the HDMI out is '8 bit 422 1080p24 or 29.97 but HDMI is 1080i so it's really PsF'

What do you guys think about the price? It's listing for $6k at B&H pre-order. It looks like a great camera for sure but I'm not sure I'd spend $6k on a DSLR for video when you can get a real video camera with a clean HDMI out like the FS-100 for a $1k less. Granted the FS-100 isn't full frame but outside of that I'm not sure of the attraction here from a video perspective. Beautiful camera though and the demo video was excellent. Just wondering what everyone else thinks about that.

4 years ago, when I picked up my D300 (my first digital SLR) to start shooting professionally, I had to laugh at the idea that $6000 was a reasonable price for a stills camera (the D3, 1DIII). But that you can now get a genuinely professional video camera thrown into the package for the same price? All of a sudden it hardly seems all that expensive.

Unless of course someone from Nikon is reading this, in which case it's outrageous and I won't purchase one until you lower the price.

What we want to know is:
1) Does the video output fill the 1920 x 1080 frame?
2) Is the 1920 x 1080 video clean with no line skipping?
3) Is the output available without overlays?
4) What is the bit depth?
5) What is the color space? Rec 709? x.y.Color?

Unfortunately, the word "uncompresssed" tells us nothing.
To the last sentence - exactly so. I very strongly suspect that reactions to this camera will go along with whether people see a pot as half full or half empty (ie "good" or "bad") rather than, well, 50% filled.

It already seems that the rumour mill is running away with what people want to believe - not what is actually certain. (Or likely to be technically possible.)

To take Jons point 2) above, then lets look at the history of video on DSLRs. It's my understanding that it started as a means of allowing the chip to simply generate a continuous moving image for viewfinding purposes on the LCD screen ("liveview"). As such, simplicity was first and foremost. For all sorts of reasons it was technically impossible (at the price/power consumption levels) to do a full read/deBayer of a 12/16 megapixel chip 60 times per second - and still is. It was also entirely unnecessary for the purposes of "liveview".

It was only a short step to then think "we could offer recording of the liveview in camera". A cheap added extra. At this point, the emphasis was still on simplicity, and the easiest way to do it was line-skipping - only reading one line, ignoring several etc.

I suspect the manufacturers were then surprised by just how popular the feature became, and the obvious question then was how to make it better - without too much expense. The best way I am aware of is fundamentally what Canon do with the C300 - read out direct R,G,B values from blocks of 2x2. But to do that really well means a chip of 3840x2160 - too small for serious stills use. Consequently, for 16 megapixel sensors, (12 when masked to 16:9) it's normal to only read every other block vertically AND horizontally, so only one block in four.

That then gives something in the order of 1200x675 blocks - roughly 720p resolution - which can be upconverted to 1080. The results will be good - but nowhere near as good as from the C300 or F3.

And there is also aliasing to consider. I'm pretty sure the AF101 does pretty much as described above - but with an optical low pass filter tuned to remove most of the fine detail that would cause aliasing. That's impossible with a DSLR - it would make it hopeless as a high res stills camera.

Some more info regarding the video out, at least according to an internet Q&A:

To activate 1080p HDMI at 8bit 4-2-2 you have to remove both cards from the camera. No simultaneous recording.
Nikon say that with cards inserted “HDMI is only suitable for monitoring purposes” – so no full HD 4-2-2 for monitoring?
No focus assist when connected to an HDMI monitor
Live view has proper exposure simulation in full manual mode but switches off after 60 minutes to cool the camera.

It's been a while since I last dropped by here, but I have a burning question. Now that Nikon is about to, or has, introduced the D4, I am seriously thinking of getting one. The main reason I've held out this long (i.e. not buying a Canon, etc.) is because of the large collection of Nikkor lenses I have - most new and some dating back to my F2.

My burning question- since I've never shot broadcast quality HD video with an SLR, I need input from those that have gone from "standard" camcorders to DSLRs. I'm used to looking into the view finder or just looking at a monitor when shooting; I'm used to holding the camcorder in a certain way; I've come to expect a certain balance when hand-holding; I'm used to using my shoulder when shooting; I've come to expect XLR connectors for mics, and great sound mono and stereo,and the list of what I am used to goes on and on.

I like the specs of the D4, but I have a choice between this DSLR for video, or a regular digital camcorder (too many to list). Any comments, suggestions, thoughts, will be most appreciated.

Thank you.

At the Nikon CES booth, I was told that the HDMI output is 720p when there is a card in either slot. Remove the cards and it delivers 1080. The spokesperson didn't say "i" or "p", and I believe that this was deliberate. I would guess that it's "p" over "i", but that can start a long discussion that has nothing to do with promoting the camera.

The menu has *many* resolution and frame rate modes, but not undercranking (22p, 20p...)

The camera can shoot timelapses and combine the frames into a video in-camera. Unfortunately, the timelapse mode does not prevent G lenses from opening and stopping down for each shot. That can cause flicker. No problem with Ai lenses.

When shooting video, you can press the shutter and it will extract one 2MP photo. I don't know about the format (JPEG?), but it would be extracted before the h.264 encoder.

When shooting with HDMI and using a G lens, you can control the aperture smoothly, without clicks. When using cards, the control will change aperture, but in fixed increments.

I just saw on another forum that the HDMI out is '8 bit 422 1080p24 or 29.97 but HDMI is 1080i so it's really PsF'

I'm pretty positive that HDMI is not 1080i per se and that the HDMI version matters.

... The spokesperson didn't say "i" or "p", and I believe that this was deliberate. I would guess that it's "p" over "i", but that can start a long discussion that has nothing to do with promoting the camera. ...

Expect that you need to have a way of dealing with the pulldown in post, which can be easy or a RPITA depending on the equipment you have and what you're trying to do.

Ozzie, I need both the stills and video in my professional work, so a DSLR is very important, such as the D4 or 5D etc., but if you only need video, then I would suggest that you look seriously at video cameras such as the Canon C300.

"My burning question- since I've never shot broadcast quality HD video with an SLR, I need input from those that have gone from "standard" camcorders to DSLRs."

Few thoughts -

- It likely won't be considered "broadcast quality," at least not by more stringent networks like the BBC or NatGeo as they require 50mbps or higher - something I doubt the D4 has (right now B&H's website is thin on stats). Of course, BBC has made exceptions in the past for at least 2 shows using the Canon Mark II...

- I come from a film/"real video camera" background. On the one hand, the small size and ease of use of DSLRs is incredibly freeing. Grab a small (when compared to a traditional cam anyway) camera with a nice zoom and you're out the door. Never miss a shot of a rainbow again.

Smaller cameras means smaller equipment and smaller crews, and their large sensors mean better low light sensitivity so fewer lights. Basically, your footprint shrinks by half at least.

- On the other hand, you need a tripod or "Franken-rig" to use these cameras properly. Can't really achieve usable results handheld. These are still cameras first (particularly the Canon lineup); video is either an afterthought, or a secondary function. That's changing of course, but I'd expect the D4 to remain a still camera first; video cam 2nd.

And you'll very quickly come to miss XLR ports. At least the new Nikon has a headphone jack - something somehow missing from the newly announced Canon 1Dx. Simply put, no matter good the video looks, these cameras will never be "true" video cameras.

So for me, the bottom line is that I have both styles. Sometime the small size/ease of use is king (say for recording your fav local band). But if you have Robert DeNiro on set, you'll prolly want something with a little more bells and whistles.

Being a stills based photographer, I must say, I like where technology is going today.About to phase through the last quarter of my career I have been shooting video this past year and expect to be shooting more of it as time goes on. If it wasn't for this digital explosion from film the past few years, I would probably not have gotten into motion. I got one assignment, and from there another, and so on, and now my video work is caching up with my stills . Half the fun is learning as you work. Being familiar with the ergonomics of a 35mm body it is easy to pick one up and shoot video. Yes, it does not have best technical specs of a dedicated video camera, but my work will never appear on the big screen. I've seen some incredible videos on various websites shot on canon, nikon, panasonic, right now these camera's make you shoot a certain way, but things are changing.I think it's the video based shooters that are putting the pressure on these company's to improve the video specs on their camera's cause they know what they want and expect, what do I know.
About the D4, like the specs, I presently shoot with aD3s. However, in the wings there is talk of a D800 coming. I think this camera would be better suited for me. If the video is the same, the big thing for me is that it would be a smaller and lighter camera. I once used a canon 5d mark 2 for a job and liked it very much. Much easier to use on stabilizers and rigs.I don't do sports or am in situations where I need a rapid fire camera, more megapixels, well that would give me a bigger file for stills. If the D800 doesn't pan out then I would get a D4 unless canon delivered a 5d Mark 3.

What would keep me away from the D4 is the lack of an articulating screen. Everything else I could live with.

- I come from a film/"real video camera" background
these cameras will never be "true" video cameras.

If you come from a film background then you should realize that these DSLR's are much closer to film cameras than video cameras. No audio in, every shot has to be thought through and handheld requires something of a rig.

Just like when doing s35mm.

I see that Nikon is about to announce the D800 camera. It sports a 36 megapixel still image and (we are told) 1080P at 30 fps.

Question: It will be available with and without the anti-aliasing filter.

What does that mean for video work?

Question: It will be available with and without the anti-aliasing filter.

What does that mean for video work?

More moire, worse for video without the filter, I would guess.

Had my hands on the D4 a couple of days ago, and my NanoFlash in my pocket, byt was not allowed to take a record:(
But it looks good:)

Dear friends:
I have added my day/nighttime footage plus impressions here:

24h in 25p-night Shot with Nikon D4 on Vimeo

24h in 25p-day Shot with Nikon D4 on Vimeo

Thanks!

Johnnie

Thanks for posting Johnnie. I see what you are saying about the detail level. While the images are very nice they have a certain lack of detail, or at least less than I was expecting.

Question about HDMI output recording. Is it possible to record 1080p through HDMI? You mentioned how the signal defaulted to 720p for recording. Just wanted to check.

Hey Tim.
Thanks for watching and commenting about the video!.

With the CF card inserted (for normal internal recording) apparently you can record 720p signal out of the HDMI output.
According to Nikon, if you take the CF card out of the camera and record to an external recorder, you get a full quality 1080 4:2:2 8 bit uncompressed signal.

I will try and get the camera again and do a test with an external recorder but it will take a while...

Thanks again.

Johnnie

Thanks for your reply.

Thanks for posting Johnnie,

Having looked at the videos from D800 and D4, I observed that the D4 due to its lower pixel count is better in lowlight and , just my hunch, better in handling moire and color aliasing.

Hi Ted.

I will try and put my hands on the D800 for a test. The price is more comfortable then the D4 and I'm very curios to see how/if the pixel count affected the picture quality.

Thanks!

Johnnie