It Has Begun!

[Overread]

people have been saying that ever since 6mp

 

[Derrel]

people have been saying that ever since 6mp

"Yeah, but now it's actually TRUE! "

 

[Overread]

Yeah agreed - heck I think they need to hold back for a few years at least to let the average computer processing power and tech advance up; in the mean while they can throw nice high ISOs and dynamic range at us

 

[Markw]

+1! People are doing great things with the MPx they have now. No need to have that many, really. No need for prints much larger than a billboard.

I'd GLADLY welcome the ISO and DR improvements. Maybe even better AF and VR. Those could both not be bad to implement.

Mark

 

[Derrel]

Mark...I was thinking..you could give Fro Knows PHO-TO a run for his money if you ever start your own internet photography blog!

 

[Overread]

But he ain't got no Fro!

 

[Markw]

Mark...I was thinking..you could give Fro Knows PHO-TO a run for his money if you ever start your own internet photography blog!

I'm not too sure if that was sarcasm or not.

Mark

 

[Markw]

But he ain't got no Fro!

You haven't seen my hair! If I brush that curly mess I have after it dries, I'd have a fro.

Mark

 

[Markw]

More info. If youre interested..

More Nikon D800 bits and pieces | Nikon Rumors

Mark

 

[Nikon_Josh]

More info. If youre interested..

More Nikon D800 bits and pieces | Nikon Rumors

Mark[/QUOTE

God I wish I could get excited about this, 36MP??? Improvements in noise and DR with 36MP? It makes me want to cry! Make the bleeding D4X 36MP, do not ruin the D800. I still cant believe they will do this.. make the D3S the state of art camera with 12MP.. then release some marketing gimmick camera with 36MP.

This guy wrote it best on NR--

'Nikon missed the sweet spot for a release — which hit peek interest end of last year.

All Nikon needed to satisfy this demand was a hybrid D3x and D3S in a D700 form factor. 18-24MP with D3S sensitivity, same shooting rate, 100% viewfinder, and it would be a smashing hit.
36MP with ISO from 4 years ago… at twice the cost we actually want…. enthusiasm officially killed (except for studio/landscape photogs).
I’m curious if wedding photographers, hand-holders, and non-studio lighting users like these pixels or not. I think ISO would have much been preferred.
Admin — its not appropriate to justify the 36MP as having to keep up with the next 4 years — because what Nikon did was sacrilege to the D700 crowd (so prideful of our ISOs) — which is that the MP jumped at the cost of ANY advance in ISO:
1 years ahead in MP — but 5 years BEHIND in ISO??
Bad deal.'

 

[Derrel]

I think some people who are commenting on the expected High-ISO performance of a DX-sized (apprx a 1.52x FOV crop) sensor in a new Nikon are basing their comments upon "old expectations" of how good High-ISO images can be; the VERY-newest Sony sensors, used in the Nikon D7000 and the new Pentax, have been put into cameras that have really,really,really low-noise electronics, and even better noise reduction, and higher resoluution, than cameras from just a couple of years back in time. The practical, meaning real-world, difference with the newest Sony sensor and the cameras using it, is that it is now possible to take an image and under-expose the living cvap out of it, such as shooting at ISO 200, but deliberately setting the camera to an exposure appropriate to an ISO value of 24,000 or 52,000, and shooting in RAW format, being able to LIGHTEN-UP a virtually BLACK FRAME, and having a pretty much usable image...I have seen several examples of this around the web...that type of ability is NOT found in earlier Nikon, or Canon, or Pentax cameras or the sensors they use...

At one time, back when the Canon 50D was hitting 15 megapixels, there was a certain level of disapproval of the then-high MP count being crammed onto such a small, 1.6x FOV sensor...not to sound brand-biased, but the newer 17.8 MP sensor Canon has put into the 7D is not in the same league as the new Sony sensor and the new cameras Pentax and Nikon have released...Canon is still one full sensor and electronics generation behind Sony at this current time, and I think a lot of Nikon shooters who are making web comments are they,themselves, a bit behind in their mental mindset as to just how good, or how bad, high-density sensors can be.

I'm not anxious to have a 36MP camera, and would rather have a smaller native MP capture size, BUT I think it's possible that it'll work great when capturing and down-sizing its images. Time will reveal what Nikon has up its sleeve.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

I think some people who are commenting on the expected High-ISO performance of a DX-sized (apprx a 1.52x FOV crop) sensor in a new Nikon are basing their comments upon "old expectations" of how good High-ISO images can be; the VERY-newest Sony sensors, used in the Nikon D7000 and the new Pentax, have been put into cameras that have really,really,really low-noise electronics, and even better noise reduction, and higher resoluution, than cameras from just a couple of years back in time. The practical, meaning real-world, difference with the newest Sony sensor and the cameras using it, is that it is now possible to take an image and under-expose the living cvap out of it, such as shooting at ISO 200, but deliberately setting the camera to an exposure appropriate to an ISO value of 24,000 or 52,000, and shooting in RAW format, being able to LIGHTEN-UP a virtually BLACK FRAME, and having a pretty much usable image...I have seen several examples of this around the web...that type of ability is NOT found in earlier Nikon, or Canon, or Pentax cameras or the sensors they use...

At one time, back when the Canon 50D was hitting 15 megapixels, there was a certain level of disapproval of the then-high MP count being crammed onto such a small, 1.6x FOV sensor...not to sound brand-biased, but the newer 17.8 MP sensor Canon has put into the 7D is not in the same league as the new Sony sensor and the new cameras Pentax and Nikon have released...Canon is still one full sensor and electronics generation behind Sony at this current time, and I think a lot of Nikon shooters who are making web comments are they,themselves, a bit behind in their mental mindset as to just how good, or how bad, high-density sensors can be.

I'm not anxious to have a 36MP camera, and would rather have a smaller native MP capture size, BUT I think it's possible that it'll work great when capturing and down-sizing its images. Time will reveal what Nikon has up its sleeve.

Good point Derrel, on the face of it this seems like a very worrying move. But at same time, you may well be right. I guess the thing that concerned me was Nikon losing their ability to keep those amazing High ISO levels, perhaps Nikon will provide us with a great new cam afterall. Lets hope the technology is spot on though, it will definitely need to be spot on!

The Canon 5D Mark II seemed to have worrying noise issues in some respects (banding at low ISO to name one) and I partly put this down to the High resolution sensor not being fully developed. I still feel 36 MP is completely pointless for most peoples needs, but it will be quite a feat I guess if Nikon really pulls it off.

 

[Kerbouchard]

I think some people who are commenting on the expected High-ISO performance of a DX-sized (apprx a 1.52x FOV crop) sensor in a new Nikon are basing their comments upon "old expectations" of how good High-ISO images can be; the VERY-newest Sony sensors, used in the Nikon D7000 and the new Pentax, have been put into cameras that have really,really,really low-noise electronics, and even better noise reduction, and higher resoluution, than cameras from just a couple of years back in time. The practical, meaning real-world, difference with the newest Sony sensor and the cameras using it, is that it is now possible to take an image and under-expose the living cvap out of it, such as shooting at ISO 200, but deliberately setting the camera to an exposure appropriate to an ISO value of 24,000 or 52,000, and shooting in RAW format, being able to LIGHTEN-UP a virtually BLACK FRAME, and having a pretty much usable image...I have seen several examples of this around the web...that type of ability is NOT found in earlier Nikon, or Canon, or Pentax cameras or the sensors they use...

At one time, back when the Canon 50D was hitting 15 megapixels, there was a certain level of disapproval of the then-high MP count being crammed onto such a small, 1.6x FOV sensor...not to sound brand-biased, but the newer 17.8 MP sensor Canon has put into the 7D is not in the same league as the new Sony sensor and the new cameras Pentax and Nikon have released...Canon is still one full sensor and electronics generation behind Sony at this current time, and I think a lot of Nikon shooters who are making web comments are they,themselves, a bit behind in their mental mindset as to just how good, or how bad, high-density sensors can be.

I'm not anxious to have a 36MP camera, and would rather have a smaller native MP capture size, BUT I think it's possible that it'll work great when capturing and down-sizing its images. Time will reveal what Nikon has up its sleeve.

Of course I am basing my comments on old expectations. When I shoot a RAW file with my 12 MP D700, I get a file around 24 megabytes. If that holds true, this new POS could be producing 64 megabyte pictures. That gets you about 30 pictures per 16 gig memory card. Even if you compress the RAW files and end up with a 32 meg file, you are still talking about 70 photos on a 16 gig card.

At an average wedding, I'll shoot around 700 photos. To support the reported specs, I would need to spend about $700 just in memory cards. Then it would take me 3 times longer to get the files to a computer, require 6 DVD's instead of 2 DVD's so I can get them to the main shooter. Then, if I want to process the files, I would probably have to buy a new computer, more external harddrives, and it would still take longer.

I don't know who the new 'specs' are marketed at, but it certainly isn't me. I don't want a bigger D7000 sensor. I want a better D3 sensor.

Like I said, if these specs are accurate, I will be shooting with used D3/D3s/D700's for the rest of my life.

 

[Infinite_Day]

Eh? Is there something I don't know about data storage on an SD card/digital camera? 64MB file - OK 1000MB/GB - 1000MB/64MB = 15.6 images/gigabyte * 16GB card = 250 images per 16 gigabyte card assuming a RAW file of 64MB.

 

[Kerbouchard]

Eh? Is there something I don't know about data storage on an SD card/digital camera? 64MB file - OK 1000MB/GB - 1000MB/64MB = 15.6 images/gigabyte * 16GB card = 250 images per 16 gigabyte card assuming a RAW file of 64MB.

My bad, I said 16 gig and used 2 gig for the math. I was on my first cup of coffee still trying to wake up.