So... D800 trying to compete with the medium format DSLRs?

[nickzou]

So if this 36mp thing happens, in terms of just resolution it's going to be on par with the Leica S2. As to colour depth and dynamic range... that remains to be seen, see what Nikon can do. I have long suspected that this sensor is just going to be the 24mp Sony sensor that is in the A77 but just cut larger so that it is full frame. With the same pixel density I suspect the ISO performance will be around that of the A77, probably slightly better because Nikon seems to be good at that (considering the A55 and the D7000 have the same sensor but the ISO performance is noticeably better on the Nikon). So... what now for medium format DSLRs? JUST shallower depth of field? Marginally better colour depth and dynamic range for more than 5 times the price? Or do you think those things will suffer with this new 36mp sensor?

 

[Kerbouchard]

I still don't think Nikon is going to abandon it's base and come out with a 36mp camera. And I just don't find the Nikon Rumors website credible. Heck, they've been predicting a new D800 every month for the last two years.

At this point, I am in a wait and see mode.

Someday, 36mp cameras will become the norm, but that doesn't mean I won't go kicking and screaming into that world. If that truly is what Nikon comes out with, I see myself with d700's and D3s's for a long time to come.

 

[Derrel]

36MP is just 50% added to the 24.6 million pixel count that Sony is already making in the FF sensel that was used in the Sony A900,A850,and the Nikon D3x. The image quality comparisons between the D3x and those two Sony bodies at elevated ISO settings showed just how MUCH better Nikon was able to get the 24.6 MP FF sensel to perform, with superb AA filtering, and superb electronics...but the cost was quite high, in terms of the camera. As we all know, the A900 was a $2,700 camera, and the A850 was an $1,899 camera, and the D3x was just under $8,000. There's probably very little market for a $7,995 D800-class Nikon. But yeah, it might be sooner rather than later that Nikon boosts MP count to 36 million pixels...again, that is only a 50% increase in MP count over what has already been on the market for going on three years now...

Medium format cameras are still rather slow and cumbersome for many types of work...MF cameras and lenses do NOT lend themselves to rapid action or sports or on-the-go types of work where focusing fast and accurately is absolutely critical to getting good photos. The majority of their use is in landscape, studio, and fashion/catalog work. 36 MP d-slr cameras would bring slightly higher resolving power to the d-slr-type cameras, but the thing is--fort "most" uses, and anything involving screen printed images, that many MP is not all that beneficial...the halftone screen neutralizes resolution.

You can bet that a 36-MP Nikon will also have one, or two, or even three, reduced-size capture options, in RAW mode. 36MP will be definite overkill for many,many scenarios.

 

[matthewo]

I vote for 16-18mp high iso version.

That would be the optimal compromise

 

[nickzou]

I vote for 16-18mp high iso version.

That would be the optimal compromise

This... this would be kinda good and kinda bad. I was thinking that at such a high mp I would only use the D800 as a studio camera, in all ways behaving like a medium format camera. But if it were just a 16-18mp camera, on one hand I wouldn't have a faux-medium format camera, but on the other hand I would have an incentive to just get a D700 at that point. This is what I'm so torn up about. I WANT to know what the D800 actually IS! If it is the this high mp camera that isn't good for much else but sitting in front of a bunch of strobes I would get that and keep my D7000. If it is just an update to the D700, I would sell my D7000 and just get a used D700 (now that I have my GF2, teehee soo fun!).

 

[unpopular]

As medium format digital sensors approach 60x45mm, I am wondering which of the small format manufacturers will break the 35mm barrier, and at what point. Will we start seeing active cooling in our DSLRs before abandoning small format? Larger than 35mm would be a brave new world for either and with substantial technological challenges for companies without any compatible lenses.

With Nikon's experience in sensor masking, I'd imagine it would be first. but 36mp is an awful lot to cram onto a 24x36mm.

 

[Patrice]

I would sell my D7000 and just get a used D700 (now that I have my GF2, teehee soo fun!).

"Not a fan of the D700 mainly due to its size. It's ridiculously big."


In an another thread you say the D700 is ridiculously big and thus not for you. What has changed your opinion?

 

[Nikon_Josh]

So if this 36mp thing happens, in terms of just resolution it's going to be on par with the Leica S2. As to colour depth and dynamic range... that remains to be seen, see what Nikon can do. I have long suspected that this sensor is just going to be the 24mp Sony sensor that is in the A77 but just cut larger so that it is full frame. With the same pixel density I suspect the ISO performance will be around that of the A77, probably slightly better because Nikon seems to be good at that (considering the A55 and the D7000 have the same sensor but the ISO performance is noticeably better on the Nikon). So... what now for medium format DSLRs? JUST shallower depth of field? Marginally better colour depth and dynamic range for more than 5 times the price? Or do you think those things will suffer with this new 36mp sensor?

Where does this theory come from??

One is a DX sensor and the other will be an FX sensor. They are very unlikely to be linked.

 

[unpopular]

Nick makes it sound like it's as easy as cutting brownies! Need a bigger sensor? Cut a bigger slice

 

[mjhoward]

You can bet that a 36-MP Nikon will also have one, or two, or even three, reduced-size capture options, in RAW mode. 36MP will be definite overkill for many,many scenarios.

The only problem with this is that the pixels are still the same small size so you're still going to have the same light gathering power and your glass is going to have to be excellent to resolve such small spots.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

Nick makes it sound like it's as easy as cutting brownies! Need a bigger sensor? Cut a bigger slice

I can imagine the conversations at the Sony sensor development factory.... 'Just cut that sensor a bit bigger mate... Ah yeah that one is going in the full frame camera mate.. just make a bit bigger and stick more pixels on the outside mate!'

I never knew sensor development was so straightforward!

 

[jake337]

So if this 36mp thing happens, in terms of just resolution it's going to be on par with the Leica S2. As to colour depth and dynamic range... that remains to be seen, see what Nikon can do. I have long suspected that this sensor is just going to be the 24mp Sony sensor that is in the A77 but just cut larger so that it is full frame. With the same pixel density I suspect the ISO performance will be around that of the A77, probably slightly better because Nikon seems to be good at that (considering the A55 and the D7000 have the same sensor but the ISO performance is noticeably better on the Nikon). So... what now for medium format DSLRs? JUST shallower depth of field? Marginally better colour depth and dynamic range for more than 5 times the price? Or do you think those things will suffer with this new 36mp sensor?

What does MP count have to do with size of the sensor/film. Still no comparison.

 

[RobertDarasz]

What does MP count have to do with size of the sensor/film. Still no comparison.

No, it doesn't have anything in common at all.
How about the density? Which results in the size of the pixels? Which can influence the image quality?



BTW let's face it MF and 35mm DSLR cameras are two different things for COMPLETELY different use. I don't think that the "D800" (if it comes out with 36Mpix) would be a big competition for Digital MF cameras (maybe except the price). We all remeber what happened after the D3x came out (it had 24Mpix! For it's time it was woooow). Everybody thought it will win over Digital Medium Format in studio use. I still can see a lot of Hasselblads being sold and used. (and I'm not talking digital only)

 

[unpopular]

When I think of medium format, I still think about sensor size and not resolution. "Medium Format" for me still refers to everything smaller than about 72 square centimeters (6x12) and larger than 24x36mm (35mm film).

 

[nickzou]

I can imagine the conversations at the Sony sensor development factory.... 'Just cut that sensor a bit bigger mate... Ah yeah that one is going in the full frame camera mate.. just make a bit bigger and stick more pixels on the outside mate!'

I never knew sensor development was so straightforward!

I remember reading somewhere that sensors are just large wafers sheets that they cut into individual DX and FX sized chips.

So 24x1.5 is 36. That's how I came to that conclusion.