Nikon entry level D3200 with 24 Mpix sensor announced

Nikon entry level D3200 with 24 Mpix sensor announced.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04...th-WiFi-Option

"Nikon has announced the D3200 24MP entry-level DSLR that can be used with
an optional WU-1a Wi-Fi module. The camera can now shoot up to 1080p30
video (rather than the D3100's 24p) and has a 920k dot LCD, up from 230k
dots. Beyond this, and improved continuous shoot rate despite the
pixel-count hike, the biggest change is the ability to add the Wi-Fi unit.
The WU-1a will sell for a recommended sale price of $59.95 and will be
able to broadcast to smartphones over a 49ft range. The D3200 is expected
in late April at an MSRP of $699.95."

Cheers,
David

In article
,
RichA wrote:

1. An attempt to keep people from flocking to mirrorless cameras
(even their own).

different market segment. many people will have both.

2. Proves the D3x was the most vastly-overpriced DSLR in history.

not at all. the d3x competed with the canon 1ds which cost about the
same amount. they're high end studio cameras.

as for the most overpriced, that goes to the sigma sd1. nobody else
comes close.

3. Will be funny asking D3100 owners to pony up for the lenses
they'll need to really do it justice!

not really. it will be better than what they had before.

So do we all need 24MP and never knew?
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:34:50 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

Nikon entry level D3200 with 24 Mpix sensor announced.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04...th-WiFi-Option

"Nikon has announced the D3200 24MP entry-level DSLR that can be used with
an optional WU-1a Wi-Fi module. The camera can now shoot up to 1080p30
video (rather than the D3100's 24p) and has a 920k dot LCD, up from 230k
dots. Beyond this, and improved continuous shoot rate despite the
pixel-count hike, the biggest change is the ability to add the Wi-Fi unit.
The WU-1a will sell for a recommended sale price of $59.95 and will be
able to broadcast to smartphones over a 49ft range. The D3200 is expected
in late April at an MSRP of $699.95."

Cheers,
David

I think it will be interesting to see what that sensor can do with
decent glass and when not suffering from the"NEX Handicap." I like
this cam.

In article d568419a-1ed3-4f54-8951-
, RichA says...
The funny thing is that this sensor will probably destroy Sony's in
their A77 and A65 DSLRs ($1500/$1100 each, resp) which are horribly,
horribly noisy.

Are you sure? ISO 800 on the A77 is quite clean:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta77/24
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bruce wrote:
It does make me wonder what the replacements for the D5100/7000/300s
will look like. Specifically, what sensor(s) will they use?

Yeah, I wonder what the successor to the D300s will be; nothing Nikon's
put out since then fits the same niche (pro-level DX body + controls),
and how it's going to compare price-wise to the D800.

Because at this point, the D800 (in DX crop mode) appears to trump the
D300s in every way but max frame rate...

- Solomon
--
Solomon Peachy pizza at shaftnet dot org
Melbourne, FL ^^ (mail/jabber/gtalk) ^^
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.

Stuffed Crust writes:

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bruce wrote:
It does make me wonder what the replacements for the D5100/7000/300s
will look like. Specifically, what sensor(s) will they use?

Yeah, I wonder what the successor to the D300s will be; nothing Nikon's
put out since then fits the same niche (pro-level DX body + controls),
and how it's going to compare price-wise to the D800.

Because at this point, the D800 (in DX crop mode) appears to trump the
D300s in every way but max frame rate...

Yeah, but most especially including price! (That is, much higher price
for the D800).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

In rec.photo.digital RichA wrote:
On Apr 19, 12:38*pm, Alfred Molon wrote:
So do we all need 24MP and never knew?
--

Doesn't hurt, especially for the person who can only afford a D3200-
class camera. They won't need quite as much expensive telephoto since
they'll be able to produce higher-resolution crops.
The funny thing is that this sensor will probably destroy Sony's in
their A77 and A65 DSLRs ($1500/$1100 each, resp) which are horribly,
horribly noisy.

At high ISOs. Why is everyone so obsessed with high ISO noise?

I was under the impression that sensor noise and image quality were a
trade off. If you made a sensor to get the best possible low ISO
quality it would be noisy at high ISOs. And if you made a sensor to
give the least noisy high ISOs low ISO image quality would suffer.

What's the low ISO image quality of this noisy sensor like?

--
Chris Malcolm

At high ISOs. Why is everyone so obsessed with high ISO noise?

I was under the impression that sensor noise and image quality were a
trade off. If you made a sensor to get the best possible low ISO
quality it would be noisy at high ISOs. And if you made a sensor to
give the least noisy high ISOs low ISO image quality would suffer.

What's the low ISO image quality of this noisy sensor like?

--
Chris Malcolm

For me, having the ability to work at higher ISO and get good images is
now more important than ever. Other than one specialist lens, most of my
lenses are f/3.5 or slower (they are zooms), and yet a proportion of my
photography is done indoors and with poor lighting. I may also be using
fast shutter speeds outdoors to freeze the action.

High ISOs allow me greater freedom in photography, and if a sensor is good
at ISO 1600 or 3200, it is likely to be more than good enough at lower
ISOs.

Cheers,
David

Chris Malcolm writes:

In rec.photo.digital RichA wrote:
On Apr 19, 12:38*pm, Alfred Molon wrote:
So do we all need 24MP and never knew?
--

Doesn't hurt, especially for the person who can only afford a D3200-
class camera. They won't need quite as much expensive telephoto since
they'll be able to produce higher-resolution crops.
The funny thing is that this sensor will probably destroy Sony's in
their A77 and A65 DSLRs ($1500/$1100 each, resp) which are horribly,
horribly noisy.

At high ISOs. Why is everyone so obsessed with high ISO noise?

Wouldn't care to speak for everybody.

I spent last weekend shooting at ISO 3200 and 6400, usually around 1/200
sec, at f/2.8 to f/4. Would have been nice to have a solid 1/250 and a
solid f/5.6 (partly because the action had depth, but also to cover
focus inaccuracy a bit more). But on balance, I don't feel the HI.1 and
up ISOs on my D700 are good enough to use except in severe necessity,
which this wasn't, quite. (Mostly I avoid 6400 also, but that may be
overly conservative; the difference is much more obvious pixel peeping
than looking at actual pictures.)

I'm going to spend a chunk of the weekend after that doing similar
shooting (though that arena is a bit better lit, at least).

Generally, I do a LOT of high ISO shooting. It's why I bought a D700 in
the first place.

I was under the impression that sensor noise and image quality were a
trade off. If you made a sensor to get the best possible low ISO
quality it would be noisy at high ISOs. And if you made a sensor to
give the least noisy high ISOs low ISO image quality would suffer.

What's the low ISO image quality of this noisy sensor like?

I don't think that's mostly true, though we don't seem to have a lot of
actual sensor designers to give expert opinions available.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info