It's Official: Nikon announces the D2X

Here's the link to Nikon's official press release announcing the new D2X:

http://nikonimaging.com/global/news/2004/0916_01.htm

And here's the link to the D2X's official product page:

http://nikonimaging.com/global/produ.../d2x/index.htm


- Peter

In article ,
says...
Hmmm, 12,4 Mpx, 1,5x crop, 12 bit RAW/NEF, CMOS.

No price yet, but rumour says that it will be around $4000.
If they're able to keep the noise down, it challenges the
11,4 MPx EOS 1Ds at roughly half the price.

I'd say it'll probably come in closer to $5000-5500, which seems to be
the price point Nikon aims for in their pro dSLRs.

Another good question: when will people actually be able to buy one?

That would be very interesting if I had the money to buy a pro body
in this league. The Nikon DX-line of lenses is now good enough to
make 1.5x crop factor a non-issue if the sensor measure up noise-wise.

I also find the high-speed 6.8 Mx 2x crop shooting mode very
attractive. 6.8 Mpx is plenty for sports and photojournalism.

It's an interesting method around the FPS limitation caused by large
amounts of data, but I don't know how useful it will be day to day.
Certainly a nice feature to have for the rare occasion you might need
it.

Unfortunately it is out of my league price-wise.

I had hoped that Nikon had rolled out a 8 Mpx D200 with at a price
giving the 20D some serious competition. There is a huge void between
the D70 and the D2X in Nikon's current lineup (which the aging D100
doesn't fill as it is not much better than the D70).

I think right now Nikon is struggling to play catch up, so the D2X will
probably be their big push for the coming year.

The question looms: who is making the CMOS sensor? We saw the problems
Kodak had with their Fill Factory CMOS sensors in the DCS 14n and SLR/c,
hopefully Nikon hasn't chosen the same route.

Now we just have to wait and see if Canon will pull a rabbit out of the
hat, ala the 1D Mark II.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

In article ,
says...
Hmmm, 12,4 Mpx, 1,5x crop, 12 bit RAW/NEF, CMOS.

No price yet, but rumour says that it will be around $4000.
If they're able to keep the noise down, it challenges the
11,4 MPx EOS 1Ds at roughly half the price.

I'd say it'll probably come in closer to $5000-5500, which seems to be
the price point Nikon aims for in their pro dSLRs.

Another good question: when will people actually be able to buy one?

That would be very interesting if I had the money to buy a pro body
in this league. The Nikon DX-line of lenses is now good enough to
make 1.5x crop factor a non-issue if the sensor measure up noise-wise.

I also find the high-speed 6.8 Mx 2x crop shooting mode very
attractive. 6.8 Mpx is plenty for sports and photojournalism.

It's an interesting method around the FPS limitation caused by large
amounts of data, but I don't know how useful it will be day to day.
Certainly a nice feature to have for the rare occasion you might need
it.

Unfortunately it is out of my league price-wise.

I had hoped that Nikon had rolled out a 8 Mpx D200 with at a price
giving the 20D some serious competition. There is a huge void between
the D70 and the D2X in Nikon's current lineup (which the aging D100
doesn't fill as it is not much better than the D70).

I think right now Nikon is struggling to play catch up, so the D2X will
probably be their big push for the coming year.

The question looms: who is making the CMOS sensor? We saw the problems
Kodak had with their Fill Factory CMOS sensors in the DCS 14n and SLR/c,
hopefully Nikon hasn't chosen the same route.

Now we just have to wait and see if Canon will pull a rabbit out of the
hat, ala the 1D Mark II.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

Catch-up? I don't think so. Canon must be breathing a huge sigh of
relief since Nikon remains a poor second in the DSLR department.

I suppose there is still a chance Nikon will announce a full framer at
Photokina, but right now the Kodak slr/n stock has risen dramatically.
Of course, strategically Nikon might be trying to rely on the slr/n
to maintain a market for its (nikon's) very expensive pro quality
lenses. I would think it puzzling for someone who is considering
buying more than one of those lenses not to switch and buy the Canon
version given the mediocre offering of DSLRs from Nikon.

In article , =20
says...
Now we just have to wait and see if Canon will pull a rabbit out of
the hat, ala the 1D Mark II.
=20
This french site, which is quite reliable, says in its =ABrumours=BB
column that Canon will announce the (presumably full frame) EOS 2D
with 22 Mpx at September 27:
http://www.photim.com/Arrive/Sommaire.asp

I've heard other similar rumblings from some of the better spooks on the=20
dPreview forums. Should be interesting.
--=20
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

In article ,
says...
but there is no
doubt in my mind that the Nikon D2X is a EOS 1Ds-killer.

It is and it isn't. What really is killing the 1Ds is time - it's old
by digital standards. However, without any sample images from the D2X
it'll be hard to say what will swing people. Certainly D2X lacking
full-frame is an issue to those wishing to go superwide.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

In article ,
says...
but there is no
doubt in my mind that the Nikon D2X is a EOS 1Ds-killer.

It is and it isn't. What really is killing the 1Ds is time - it's old
by digital standards. However, without any sample images from the D2X
it'll be hard to say what will swing people. Certainly D2X lacking
full-frame is an issue to those wishing to go superwide.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

john chapman wrote:

Catch-up? I don't think so. Canon must be breathing a huge sigh of
relief since Nikon remains a poor second in the DSLR department.

Only if you actually care whether your camera is full-frame for some
strange reason.

I actually prefer that it's not. It would cost a lot more, and there
are issues to worry about like angle of incidence on the sensor. Plus,
I quite like what the 1.5 factor does to lenses.

--
Jeremy |

john chapman wrote:

Catch-up? I don't think so. Canon must be breathing a huge sigh of
relief since Nikon remains a poor second in the DSLR department.

Only if you actually care whether your camera is full-frame for some
strange reason.

I actually prefer that it's not. It would cost a lot more, and there
are issues to worry about like angle of incidence on the sensor. Plus,
I quite like what the 1.5 factor does to lenses.

--
Jeremy |

"Jeremy Nixon" wrote in message
...
john chapman wrote:

Catch-up? I don't think so. Canon must be breathing a huge sigh of
relief since Nikon remains a poor second in the DSLR department.

Only if you actually care whether your camera is full-frame for some
strange reason.

I actually prefer that it's not. It would cost a lot more, and there
are issues to worry about like angle of incidence on the sensor. Plus,
I quite like what the 1.5 factor does to lenses.

--
Jeremy |

I agree with you. And since I own the 12-24/4 Nikkor, I have wide angle
pretty well covered. My new 70-300D Nikkor (now equivalent to a 105-450) is
a heck of a lot lighter than a full frame equivalent.

The only need for a full frame sensor is if you lack sufficient
testosterone.

Tom