New Nikon Camera, perhaps?
- Thread starter Nigel Meaby
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 20
- Views 3K
Shac
Well-known
Nikon D3X?
M. Valdemar
Well-known
It's already been published in a magazine:
Faintandfuzzy
Well-known
Been all over the photo forums today.
24mp FF sensor. Looks like it could very well be a nice machine.
24mp FF sensor. Looks like it could very well be a nice machine.
Pablito
coco frío
How long before the D700x ??? And will the high iso quality suffer from all those extra pixels???
nobbylon
Veteran
not long, about 6-9 months, good point about the high iso quality. I can't really see Nikon giving that up too easily though. maybe they'll run the d3x along side the d3. ultimate big picture quality for some and high iso capability for others?
the best thing to come out of it will be the drop in s/h D3 prices and maybe new D700 prices too.
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku?
sojournerphoto
Veteran
Yes it will be different at high iso than a D3
Yes it will be different at high iso than a D3
It seems likely that it will perform similarly to a 1Ds3 at high iso, or maybe as well as a 5D2 (which canon suggest is a bit better than the 1Ds3). That is the per pixel noise will be higher than the D3, but the pics will be fine. Even Nikon can't buck physics.
As for the article suggesting that there is no visible difference between a 12Mp camera and a 21Mp camera when assessed via a 13 by 19 print - if all else is fairly equal it's just not true. If the image needs resolution you can see the difference, which is not to say that the 12Mp output is anything but good or that clients can tell🙂
Mike
Yes it will be different at high iso than a D3
It seems likely that it will perform similarly to a 1Ds3 at high iso, or maybe as well as a 5D2 (which canon suggest is a bit better than the 1Ds3). That is the per pixel noise will be higher than the D3, but the pics will be fine. Even Nikon can't buck physics.
As for the article suggesting that there is no visible difference between a 12Mp camera and a 21Mp camera when assessed via a 13 by 19 print - if all else is fairly equal it's just not true. If the image needs resolution you can see the difference, which is not to say that the 12Mp output is anything but good or that clients can tell🙂
Mike
gavinlg
Veteran
Apparently its native ISO only goes to 1600, so no, I doubt it will be anywhere near as good as the high ISO cams. Word is it has a special kind of AA filter.
italy74
Well-known
Guys
not sure about it but it looks like it's the iq management to be different vs D3 or D700.. they talk about a 16 bit image data and an extra high active d-lighting or so..
Being mostly for studio or formals here super high sensitivity and other things typical of D3 and D700 may not be really useful
not sure about it but it looks like it's the iq management to be different vs D3 or D700.. they talk about a 16 bit image data and an extra high active d-lighting or so..
Being mostly for studio or formals here super high sensitivity and other things typical of D3 and D700 may not be really useful
sojournerphoto
Veteran
It will be interesting to see how many of those 16 bits are pure noise🙂 Current 14 bit pipelines contain several bits of noise already...
Mike
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
We in Italy say better late then never.
Now how long it takes to Nikon to put out an affordable version?
Years after Sony?
I understand all tastes. Myself, I use 100 ASA film and plan to go back to BW with Adox 20 ASA. But for some people 6400 ASA and tons of noise is night and day.
If one looks at the test in DP review Sony puts the other DSRL at shame. And if your goal is to print as large as possible it shows.
The other story I really cannot understand is lamenting file size. With scans of MF I work in everyday life with about 1 Gb files. PS, which I hate in many other respects, has never given me a glitch related to dimension of files.
Cheers
Now how long it takes to Nikon to put out an affordable version?
Years after Sony?
I understand all tastes. Myself, I use 100 ASA film and plan to go back to BW with Adox 20 ASA. But for some people 6400 ASA and tons of noise is night and day.
If one looks at the test in DP review Sony puts the other DSRL at shame. And if your goal is to print as large as possible it shows.
The other story I really cannot understand is lamenting file size. With scans of MF I work in everyday life with about 1 Gb files. PS, which I hate in many other respects, has never given me a glitch related to dimension of files.
Cheers
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
Indeed the rumor mill has it that the sensor is Sony's.
I don't remember the name of that Nikon expert speaking of Leicaization of Nikon....
I don't remember the name of that Nikon expert speaking of Leicaization of Nikon....
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku?
Of course the sensor is Sony's...
All of us here at RFF are diss-apointed it was a 24MP SLR, Goddamit, we wanted a 48MP Rangefinder...
Kiu
All of us here at RFF are diss-apointed it was a 24MP SLR, Goddamit, we wanted a 48MP Rangefinder...
Kiu
infrequent
Well-known
sure its a sony sensor but i bet nikon is prolly getting more out of it then the A900.
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
Will it be $5.000+ better than A900?
It is also humongous
Luminous landscape seems to be pleased by the A900. More by the weekend on it.
I feel nervous because I invested a lot in Nikon throughout my life. My first srl was a Nikkorex (1965), followed by a Nikon F in 1968 and a bunch of Nikkors. Even 2 ZF's recently. It will all remain film.
And I dislike the gadgetry attitude of Sony toward photography. If you want to laugh loud read the description of Sony' lenses at their Sony Style.
On the other hand I also have a Maxxum 9 and a bunch of Minolta lenses.
Cheers
It is also humongous
Luminous landscape seems to be pleased by the A900. More by the weekend on it.
I feel nervous because I invested a lot in Nikon throughout my life. My first srl was a Nikkorex (1965), followed by a Nikon F in 1968 and a bunch of Nikkors. Even 2 ZF's recently. It will all remain film.
And I dislike the gadgetry attitude of Sony toward photography. If you want to laugh loud read the description of Sony' lenses at their Sony Style.
On the other hand I also have a Maxxum 9 and a bunch of Minolta lenses.
Cheers
gavinlg
Veteran
That d3x is getting some serious tonal range and detail from it's files. To my eyes MUCH more than the a900, although don't get me wrong, the A900 is still a fine camera along with that zeiss 135 f1.8 sonnar.
Link to d3x samples - they look astounding at 100%.
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d3x/sample.htm
Link to d3x samples - they look astounding at 100%.
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d3x/sample.htm
photophorous
Registered User
I only had time to download one of those samples, the winter lake scene. Wow. It looks incredible.
Paul
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
I found this:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony-a900.shtml
an interesting reading. It seems to me competent and unbiased.
Anyway even pros seem to have a hard time justifying the price
http://www.bythom.com/nikond3xcomments.htm
Either I find the courage to start LF on film and wait for another generation or try the Sony.
I cannot justify 8000 (possibly 9000 euros here incl. vat) for body only.
BTW the samples of D3x download as a tiny portion of my 2 MP screen
Cheers
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony-a900.shtml
an interesting reading. It seems to me competent and unbiased.
Anyway even pros seem to have a hard time justifying the price
http://www.bythom.com/nikond3xcomments.htm
Either I find the courage to start LF on film and wait for another generation or try the Sony.
I cannot justify 8000 (possibly 9000 euros here incl. vat) for body only.
BTW the samples of D3x download as a tiny portion of my 2 MP screen
Cheers
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
wasnt the D3 just introduced?
Similar threads
