Nikon to announce new products on Sep. 1

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 10:14:55 +0200, (Philip
Homburg) wrote:

In article ,
David J Taylor wrote:
Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
The $64000 question (although I hope it retail for less than that)
is whether it will be FF or not.

I sincerely hope they do provide a full-frame camera at some point in the
near future - all this using large and bulky 35mm bodies and mounting toy
sensors in them which limit wide-angle capability has gone on for too
long! G (I don't think they will do that on September 1st, though).

I wonder how far the resolution of 1.5 crop sensors can be pushed without
seriously compromising dynamic range.

Suppose that Nikon creates a camera with interchangeable sensors: one
24 Mpixpel sensor that only works at ISO 200, and a 6 Mpixel sensor that
goes up to ISO 1600 or higher. (and a B/W sensor, and an IR sensor, etc.)

Wow. I still do film and I carry either two or three bodies, K64,
Ekta pushed to 3200 and a print film at 100 or 400. One of the
reasons for me to go digital is that I would need only one body. Now
I would need two!

I have to imagine that changing the sensor out in the (dusty) field is
a great way not to keep your sensor dust-free.

It's a nice idea, though, as long as the rest of the electronics is
upgrade able to accommodate larger files from future hi-res sensors.


Vater Kodak

That may be cost effective as long as full frame sensors remain at least
twice as expensive as APS-C sensors.

It would make for an interesting shoot out if Nikon announces a 12 Mpixel
D200 for less than $2000.

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 23:25:36 +0100, Tony Polson
wrote:

Gisle Hannemyr wrote:

Just saw an invitation to a press conference on Sep. 1 where
Nikon is going to announce several new products. No details
yet - just the assurance that this will be interesting.

Hence, the field is open for speculation, which is probably what
Nikon wants. Just a new flash, lens or yet another P&S after
Canon's 5D announcement would be lame - rather than interesting.
The D100 is overdue for a replacement, and the D2x is not, so my
money is on that the main event will be the D200.

The $64000 question (although I hope it retail for less than that)
is whether it will be FF or not.


No, it will not. Nikon has a full frame DSLR under development but it
will be in the pro series (D3?) and won't be announced until PMA 2006
at the earliest. Shipping won't be before Q3/2006.

Tony,

How do you know this? Do you go to same shabu-shabu restaurant as
some of the senior Nikon execs? Been there when they have all
been "singing" after drinking just a wee bit too much?

Pricing?

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 20:49:36 -0400, RichA wrote:


What some people need to do is try not to act like old fogies who for
whatever irrational reason can't seem to let go of the "35mm" film
size. It has NOTHING to do with digital sensors and legacy lenses do
not do justice to a full frame digital sensor anyway.

Rich,

Ignoring your "get a life" tone of voice, can you cite specific
examples? Which older Nikon lenses wouldn't do justice to a
full-frame digital sensor? the 43-86 zoom? Some of the series E
lenses? the 58 mm f1.4?

Abba Kodak

SMS wrote:

Gisle Hannemyr wrote:

If these are the specs, it sure looks as if it is positioned to
compete with the 20D. The only weird bit is 800 as the top ISO
sensitivity.

Not weird at all, if it really is 1.5x and 12.4 megapixel. Nikon's taken
a beating on the noise issues with the D2x at the higher ISOs

And Nikon has chosen not to accept the poor WA performance Canon FF cameras
have. I know you are obsessed with high ISO noise performance but people
that actually USE a camera rather than calculating the specs are more
impressed with good optical performace edge to edge.
--

Stacey

Rox-off wrote:

In article ,
says...

Not weird at all, if it really is 1.5x and 12.4 megapixel. Nikon's taken
a beating on the noise issues with the D2x at the higher ISOs--better to
just leave it out completely than to have to deal with comparisons with
the 20D.

What noise issues???



I love how these guys ignore the optical problems the FF canons have with WA
optics, but given they never actually USE their camera it doesn't matter?
--

Stacey

Father Kodak wrote:

Which older Nikon lenses wouldn't do justice to a
full-frame digital sensor?

You'll have to wait for a full frame camera to find out. Just look at the
examples from canon's wide zooms to see how poorly a digital FF sensor can
react to use with a "legacy" lens. At least the newer Nikon zooms are being
designed with a longer exit pupil distance so they at least have a good
chance of being FF friendly.

--

Stacey

Stacey wrote:

Father Kodak wrote:

Which older Nikon lenses wouldn't do justice to a
full-frame digital sensor?

You'll have to wait for a full frame camera to find out.



Kodak DCS 14n? Kodak DCS Pro/N?

Did I mention Kodak?

;-)

In article , Stacey wrote:
Father Kodak wrote:

Which older Nikon lenses wouldn't do justice to a
full-frame digital sensor?

You'll have to wait for a full frame camera to find out.

You can just get a Nikon-to-Canon mount adapter, and try those lenses
on a Canon full-frame body.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

In article ,
Bart van der Wolf wrote:

"Philip Homburg" wrote in message
q.phicoh.net...
SNIP
I wonder how far the resolution of 1.5 crop sensors can be pushed
without seriously compromising dynamic range.

Since Dynamic range is determined by potential well depth and noise,
the well depth limitation of/by small sensor elements seems to be the
issue to me (noise reduction can only be improved to a point). And
well depth is limited by design to roughly scale with sensel
size/area.

I know how it scales, but are current designs at the limit?

Another thing (I have no idea if that would work), as far as I understand,
you get photon shot noise when photons are turned into electrons. What
happens if you use the CMOS circuitry to store just 1 electron for
every 10 'photon-related' electrons?


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

Stacey wrote:

You'll have to wait for a full frame camera to find out. Just look at the
examples from canon's wide zooms to see how poorly a digital FF sensor can
react to use with a "legacy" lens. At least the newer Nikon zooms are being
designed with a longer exit pupil distance so they at least have a good
chance of being FF friendly.

It would be interesting, once the 5D is here, given the poor example Canon
posted, a test with that Canon zoom compared to the Nikon 17-35 mounted on
the 5D via an adapter. I for one would love to see how much of the problem
can be solved by the lens design. It would make it that much easier to see
how viable full-frame really is at the present time.

--
Jeremy |