If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
A local camera sales person told me Nikon is about to release a 12+MP
SLR this month. It will sell for under $1000. Has anyone heard similar rumors? Still Shopping |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
Dave Lotek wrote:
A local camera sales person told me Nikon is about to release a 12+MP SLR this month. It will sell for under $1000. Has anyone heard similar rumors? Still Shopping Rumors aplenty. Just wait a month and see. Want a huge pixel count at affordable prices today? Get a 2nd hand film camera and a slide scanner. You'd have to shoot A LOT of film to make up the price difference between that and for example a Nikon D2Xs set. You'll get 12MP easily out of good slide film combined with decent glass and a tripod. IMHO there's way too much emphasis on questionable metrics like pixel count. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
Dave Lotek wrote:
A local camera sales person told me Nikon is about to release a 12+MP SLR this month. It will sell for under $1000. Has anyone heard similar rumors? Haven't heard any rumors but the Sept camera show is coming up when many new product announcement are made and, because the 12 Mpix sensor in the D2x is the same size as the lower pixel count sensors in the consumer models it makes sense Nikon could put it in a cheaper 1.5x body and still make a lot of money. Bill |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
In article ,
Dave Lotek wrote: A local camera sales person told me Nikon is about to release a 12+MP SLR this month. It will sell for under $1000. Has anyone heard similar rumors? Still Shopping Its on Nikon's website, at least a teaser is....word is its a Nikon D80..10.2mp to replace the Nikon D50. If the speculation is correct, then it'll be a 10 mp sensor in the D50 body. It will use SD cards not CF cards and it will be under $1000. JR |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
In article , Bas v.d. Wiel
says... Rumors aplenty. Just wait a month and see. Want a huge pixel count at affordable prices today? Get a 2nd hand film camera and a slide scanner. You'd have to shoot A LOT of film to make up the price difference between that and for example a Nikon D2Xs set. You'll get 12MP easily out of good slide film combined with decent glass and a tripod. IMHO there's way too much emphasis on questionable metrics like pixel count. Well no, you'll get something like the equivalent of decent 6MP (the rest will simply drown in all that grain and noise; not to mention the extra effort required to scan the negative). But feel free to disagree with me, as this is a discussed-to-death non-agreeable issue and I'm not in the mode of having a long discussion about this. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E300, E330 and E500 forum at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ Olympus E330 resource - http://myolympus.org/E330/ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
On 3 Aug 2006 09:14:15 -0700, "Bill Hilton"
wrote: Dave Lotek wrote: A local camera sales person told me Nikon is about to release a 12+MP SLR this month. It will sell for under $1000. Has anyone heard similar rumors? Haven't heard any rumors but the Sept camera show is coming up when many new product announcement are made and, because the 12 Mpix sensor in the D2x is the same size as the lower pixel count sensors in the consumer models it makes sense Nikon could put it in a cheaper 1.5x body and still make a lot of money. Bill Immediately, yes. But what would they do next year, after Canon puts the 5D's sensor into the Rebel XT? Canon still has someplace to go, but Nikon couldn't follow there. Marketing is about more than making money NOW! In the DSLR market, there has to be a plan for upgrading. -- Bill Funk replace "g" with "a" |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
That's technically correct, but digital cameras provide much more flexibility and better quality than equivalent film cameras.That's why everybody has switched to digital;include in film cameras a wet darkroom and that puts the last nail in the coffin for film.The (large) pixel count is important for making big blow-ups, the least of most film users want to do, there are also the processor of the camera,its technology, glass and sensor nature beyond pure pixel count.With film you would get the same apparent pixel count, but you wouldn't get auto white balance correction, erasure of not-so-good shots, storage of hundreds of photos on a stamp-sized card, no need for expensive developing (just before I switched to digital, one of my last transparency films processing cost 10 euros...I used to pay 1000 drachmas3 euros)and easily distribution of the originals on cds or dvds or even email for a few, and easy print with a 136 euros printer or at a digital lab. -- Tzortzakakis Dimitrios You're totally right here. Just the way I see it, to get your huge pixel count you can buy a used Nikon F100 + basic glass for $300 these days, slap in a Coolscan V and you're set. Compare that to a D2Xs that'll get the same pixel count and you have a heck of a price difference. The difference in quality simply isn't there in digital, as far as I'm concerned. I own two Nikons, an F90X and a D70. Just a week or so ago I bought a coolscan to sort of rejuvenate the F90X. I went through all of my old negatives and slides and the quality is awesome! The scans the Coolscan produces run circles around the D70 both in terms of resolution and image quality. Slide film, notorious for blowing out highlights, does so much more gracefully than the D70's sensor. On my digital shots small sparkling highlights often look as if they were burned into the sensor with a really nasty colour fringe around them. This fringe is not there when I put the exact same glass on my F90X and shoot a slide of the same scene. So for anything that has to look good and be blown up big, I use my F90X. I also had the opportunity to take a Canon EOS 1D Mark II for a short spin. Now that's what I call a monster digicam, blows my D70 straight out of the water. Admittedly: no nasty fringing in the highlights but at that price.. I'll stick with my F90X for now. I'm not a professional, this is a hobby for me. Those thousands of $$$ are better spent on actually taking great pictures than on a camera body that will probably be completely obsolete in 5 years. Bas |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , Bas v.d. Wiel says... Rumors aplenty. Just wait a month and see. Want a huge pixel count at affordable prices today? Get a 2nd hand film camera and a slide scanner. You'd have to shoot A LOT of film to make up the price difference between that and for example a Nikon D2Xs set. You'll get 12MP easily out of good slide film combined with decent glass and a tripod. IMHO there's way too much emphasis on questionable metrics like pixel count. Well no, you'll get something like the equivalent of decent 6MP (the rest will simply drown in all that grain and noise; not to mention the extra effort required to scan the negative). But feel free to disagree with me, as this is a discussed-to-death non-agreeable issue and I'm not in the mode of having a long discussion about this. I have a shot from my scanner right here that's way above the 6MP resolution that I get from my D70. And that's not just pixel count, I mean real detail that's actually there. Not noise and grain. It's a 5MB JPEG file raw from the scanner, all I did was convert the TIFF to JPEG to save you a 145MB download: http://www.kompasmedia.nl/fileadmin/crop0004.jpg As far as I'm concerned, this closes the discussion indeed. Regards, Bas |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
Bas van de Wiel wrote:
Alfred Molon wrote: In article , Bas v.d. Wiel says... Rumors aplenty. Just wait a month and see. Want a huge pixel count at affordable prices today? Get a 2nd hand film camera and a slide scanner. You'd have to shoot A LOT of film to make up the price difference between that and for example a Nikon D2Xs set. You'll get 12MP easily out of good slide film combined with decent glass and a tripod. IMHO there's way too much emphasis on questionable metrics like pixel count. Well no, you'll get something like the equivalent of decent 6MP (the rest will simply drown in all that grain and noise; not to mention the extra effort required to scan the negative). But feel free to disagree with me, as this is a discussed-to-death non-agreeable issue and I'm not in the mode of having a long discussion about this. I have a shot from my scanner right here that's way above the 6MP resolution that I get from my D70. And that's not just pixel count, I mean real detail that's actually there. Not noise and grain. It's a 5MB JPEG file raw from the scanner, all I did was convert the TIFF to JPEG to save you a 145MB download: http://www.kompasmedia.nl/fileadmin/crop0004.jpg How long did it take you from the time you took that picture until the time you could mail it? How much work? You get the resolution and corresponding detail at the expense of per shot money and time [you pay up front for a digital camera where you pay as you go for film]. My point is that there is a place for both and that discussion is probably far from over. -- Thomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon 12+MP SLR for under $1000?
http://www.kompasmedia.nl/fileadmin/crop0004.jpg
How long did it take you from the time you took that picture until the time you could mail it? How much work? You get the resolution and corresponding detail at the expense of per shot money and time [you pay up front for a digital camera where you pay as you go for film]. My point is that there is a place for both and that discussion is probably far from over. In this instance it actually took me 4 years. The shot's from 2002 and I only scanned it today. ;-) If I had to actually measure the time I'd say the loading of the film, preview, crop and scan took a little less than 5 minutes. Not counting the actual upload and conversion to JPEG because I usually don't do that. I agree with you totally that there's a time and place for both film and digital. Right now however there's an enormous price gap between exceptionally good film bodies (in the lower hundreds of $$) and the top of the line digitals (ten to twenty times the price of a film body). I'd say you'd save around $7000 if not more. That's a whole lot of cash to get parity with slide film. I'm certain this will improve and digital cameras will overtake film. Just not anytime soon. I'm pretty convinced that my F90X will still be around and in active use after I replace the replacement of my D70. Everybody seems so hung up on pixel count that it's sad. The CCD still suffers from noise, why not reduce that first? I'll take a D70 with a noise-free ISO 1600 over the current top of the line any day. Bas PS. Had that 2002 shot been taken digitally 4 years ago, it would have been with a D1 (which I couldn't afford at the time, but that aside). And a D1 is *CRAP* compared to decent film, so in the end I'm glad I had film in there at the time.. ;-)) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
For Sale: 7 Nikon lenses + 8x10 papers + some accessories. | Henry Peña | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 2 | April 9th 04 04:17 PM |
FS: 8 Nikon lenses including 80-200 Nikkor 2.8 zoom and accessories | Henry Peña | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 2 | November 12th 03 02:56 PM |
FS: 8 Nikon lenses including 80-200 Nikkor 2.8 zoom and accessories | Henry Peña | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | November 11th 03 06:20 PM |
FS: Nikon F3 | OF | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | September 25th 03 04:13 PM |
Subject: FS: Nikon F4, Nikkor Lens and accessories. | FocaIPoint | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | August 29th 03 03:59 PM |