Cameras in the next 3 years

[ScottWy]

Technology is moving very fast these days. In some ways, that is making better products more affordable.

I was reading about the Nikon D700 the other day. Here is a full frame sensor camera that, while not exactly affordable at 3k, is dramatically lower in price than a D3. I do not know if that's true about other brands full sensor models.

What I am most interested in right now is high ISO capability.

Where do you see the market going in the next few years, especially in full frame models? The new lens development, at least in the case of Nikon, is not compatable with that array.

Also, is there more that can be done developing the smaller sensors ISO capabilities?

Perhaps other manufacturers are ahead of Nikon in this area. Any thoughts there?

 

[HeY iTs ScOTtY]

Where do you see the market going in the next few years, especially in full frame models? The new lens development, at least in the case of Nikon, is not compatable with that array.

what do you mean by this?

 

[Big Mike]

It's hard to know where they/we are headed. Case in point is the just-released Canon 7D. Discussions are going on all over the place about what is and what wasn't included...and if the technology level is where it should be....bla bla bla. :roll:

I that what Photographers have wanted for a long time, are cameras with an improved dynamic range and lower noise at higher ISO levels. These things are getting better, especially the ISO issue...but they are also fighting the MegaPixel wars...giving us more than we need, at the cost of ISO performance.

Personally, I think the D700 may be one of the best overall cameras available right now. It's not cheap, but it compares well to cameras that are much more expensive.

 

[ScottWy]

"Where do you see the market going in the next few years, especially in full frame models? The new lens development, at least in the case of Nikon, is not compatable with that array."


What I was getting at is the newest lenses are the DX format, and not compatable with a full frame sensor.

Also, I was wondering about price, and if something such as the D700 would ever be in my price range, which would be at least half of what they now cost.

Poor ISO performance with my D50 is what is limiting me now. I like the camera, and feel 6.1 mpx is adequate for my purposes right now. I have used it for 4 years, and doubt if I know how to get all it offers out of it yet.

I can't do anything about a new camera yet, and probably not for 3 years, hence the time frame I put up.

With what I know is now on the market the D90 would suit me right now. However, I know next to nothing about anything but the Nikon line.

 

[KmH]

Nikon is building the lenses that have the highest demand. They sell a ton more DX cameras than FX cameras. Just smart business.

It's the same reason drug companies haven't produced a new antibiotic in 40+ years. It's more profitable to develope a drug people take everyday for the rest of their lives, than a drug they take for one 2 week period.

 

[Derrel]

Sony's new a850 Full Frame d-slr is going to be priced at under $2,000, at $1899 if my information is correct. Canon's upcoming 7D, and 18MP crop-frame body is trying to undercut Nikon's D300s by being priced at $1699, which makes FF cameras look 'expensive' to those who have never had a FF body and have drunk the crop-body Kool-Aid for so long.

As far as Nikon's new lens development not supporting FF, you're totally,totally off on that. Nikon has introduced a number of lenses for FF over the last few years, probably ones you're unaware of, and they are all designed for FF. The professional Nikkor lenses you're unaware of will be in the lineup for a good number of years,because they are world-class lenses. 200-400 VR, 200 f/2 VR, 300,400,500,600 f/2.8 VR models,all superlative. The 105 VR Micro-Nikkor, the 60mm VR Micro-Nikkor, the new 50/1.4 AFS-G,oh,and let's not forget: Nikon has designed and built what most experts consider to be the single BEST wide zoom, the 14-24 AF-S. And there's also the 24-70 AF-S, and of course the newly-announced 70-200 AF-S VR-II model. THere are also something like 50 *additional* FF-capable Nikkor lenses, plus around 35 million manual focus Nikkors on the planet.

The idea that the newest lenses are DX lenses is quite simply not correct; the newest CHEAP lenses are for DX shooters. Nikon already has in place superlative,often class-leading, FX format Nikkors that are less than five years old, and which will be superlative performers for two decades or more. You just are not aware of that fact.

As far as the 3-year time frame on FX: I expect that in three years, you'll be able to buy used D700's and used D3's at very affordable prices,and that Sony and Canon will have an entry-level FF camera priced as low as $1699. I think Sony is pushing the boundaries on lowering prices. Canon has shown a willingness to slap a FF sensor in a cheap $350 class Elan body, with the 5D and 5D Mark II being great sensors in very cheap bodies (I own a 5D-it's a doggy body),whereas Nikon has built upon the F100-class body for its FF and better APS-C cameras,so I am not convinced that Nikon will go with the lowest price in the FF class, the way Sony is doing--but then Nikon doesn't have to cut prices to get people into its system, they already have a user base.

Right now the D700 is available for $2,400 from a few discount retailers and in three years, I expect the used price of a D700 will be $1,000--maybe even less.

 

[icassell]

It's the same reason drug companies haven't produced a new antibiotic in 40+ years.

Huh? Where did you get this information?

 

[ScottWy]

Wow, Derrel, I did not dig very deep about Nikons new lenses. I did realize there are millions of older ones floating around. Being able to use some of those to their full ability makes a body such as the D700 (as well as the D300) more attractive.

I had assumed they were concentrating on DX , because that's all I ever heard about. I did not go out looking for the info you present.

Thanks for clueing me in!!

 

[robertwsimpson]

you guys do realize that higher megapixels = less noise at higher ISOs, right? not that the total amount of noise is less, but when you have more pixels, the noise becomes so small that you can't see it.

 

[Garbz]

you guys do realize that higher megapixels = less noise at higher ISOs, right? not that the total amount of noise is less, but when you have more pixels, the noise becomes so small that you can't see it.

You are running the assumption that people view their files in a reasonable size. Say like a print. This definitely the wrong assumption in a world of pixel peeping people who get greater joy of ****ing at their low noise pictures than producing something with excellent composition. What you say is true, but there will always be people who zoom in then complain.

"Where do you see the market going in the next few years, especially in full frame models? The new lens development, at least in the case of Nikon, is not compatable with that array."

What I was getting at is the newest lenses are the DX format, and not compatable with a full frame sensor.

Also, I was wondering about price, and if something such as the D700 would ever be in my price range, which would be at least half of what they now cost.

You see what you want to see. You say DX sensors. I say they they just released new 50mm f/1.4, the new 70-200 f/2.8 VR II, the slightly less new 24-70mm f/2.8 or 14-24mm f/2.8. In lens terms these are all "new". Lenses are probably the slowest moving developement. Nothing has fundamentally changed in lenses ... ever, except for VR and silent wave motors, and neither of those concepts are new either.

The fact is there is a lens for everything right now. What will happen in 3 years? Nothing. Lenses will be the same. Maybe with slightly better VR, but optically what more can they do?



For the original question Of course! Every camera advance includes better noise. As for what will happen in 3 years? I estimate Nikon will release a camera that can shoot at ISO10000000, and Canon will have a 100mpx APS-C sensor.

 

[pharmakon]

It's the same reason drug companies haven't produced a new antibiotic in 40+ years.

Huh? Where did you get this information?

There hasn't been a new class of antibiotics in about 40 years, with one exception (cubicin, not really popular right now) but there have been plenty of "me too" antibiotics, where a company makes a slight change to an existing drug to create something "new" as far as patents are concerned. Sometimes the new drug has slightly better coverage or less frequent dosing, so it's a small advantage with minimal research on the part of the manufacturer.

Long story short you are both right, just in different ways.

Ok sorry for the interruption, now back to your regularly scheduled photographic discussion...

 

[robertwsimpson]

lol @ ISO onebillion

 

[Sleepy_Sentry]

I'd like to see full frame cameras get less expensive. Maybe in three years they will be available for under $1k.

 

[robertwsimpson]

lol doubtful. How about we wish for something more realistic like a decent crop sensor camera for under 1k in the next 3 years.

 

[KmH]

lol doubtful. How about we wish for something more realistic like a decent crop sensor camera for under 1k in the next 3 years.

Many think there already is one....the Nikon D90.