when does newer DX outperform older FX?

[Derrel]

Some interesting numbers to be found here. Clarkvision: Digital Camera Sensor Performance Summary

I think that stating that the increased HIGH ISO performance we've seen recently has, "primarily been accomplished with camera image processor software," is a little bit misleading. Sure, it's part of the puzzle, yes, and a good part of the improvement yes, but I think there are also simply sensors coming out now that have MUCH lower read noise, higher quantum efficiency, better microlenses and higher fill-factor, and of course, there have also been advances in signal processing, but I do not think the advances are "primarily" just due to image processing software.

Depends how far back we're comparing from; if the point we're comparing from is 2007 and the introduction of the original D3, I think attributing the improvement in the D600 and D800 "primarily" to the software processing is giving too little emphasis to other parts of the entire imaging system.

 

[Tailgunner]

I'm new to a lot of this but this is my thought on the subject.

When I think about DX over taking older FX gear, I think about how my D7100 uses the same Image processor as the D3. So it only stands to reason that you will see some similarities. Thus it only stands to reason to me that the next DX generation (especially a Semi/Pro unit like a D400) could contend if not outrun the D3.

 

[Garbz]

When I think about DX over taking older FX gear, I think about how my D7100 uses the same Image processor as the D3. So it only stands to reason that you will see some similarities. Thus it only stands to reason to me that the next DX generation (especially a Semi/Pro unit like a D400) could contend if not outrun the D3.

That is only a small determination of image quality these days. One of the key differences between CCDs and CMOS sensors are that CMOS are effectively all digital devices. They have amplifiers and ADC components on the same silicon as the sensor itself. This means that with modern cameras there's less of a quality impact with the components other than the sensor (powersupply is the notable exception). On CCDs the associated electronics are far more important and the difference in quality is astounding like I said in my upgrade from D200 -> D800 -> camera with same sensor as D200.

 

[Tailgunner]

When I think about DX over taking older FX gear, I think about how my D7100 uses the same Image processor as the D3. So it only stands to reason that you will see some similarities. Thus it only stands to reason to me that the next DX generation (especially a Semi/Pro unit like a D400) could contend if not outrun the D3.

That is only a small determination of image quality these days. One of the key differences between CCDs and CMOS sensors are that CMOS are effectively all digital devices. They have amplifiers and ADC components on the same silicon as the sensor itself. This means that with modern cameras there's less of a quality impact with the components other than the sensor (powersupply is the notable exception). On CCDs the associated electronics are far more important and the difference in quality is astounding like I said in my upgrade from D200 -> D800 -> camera with same sensor as D200.

The difference between a D200 and a D800 in a thread titled " When does newer DX outperform older FX" is mute. My understanding is we're talking about older FX systems such as the D3. I understand and agree with you that there is more going on internally than just an image processor and power supply. I'm simply saying that Nikon has already started installing FX electronics in DX cameras and if they continue, we could see a DX camera easily over take the D3...we're not that far from it now.

 

[pixmedic]

My larger interest was not just older pro bodies like the D3, but also other older FX bodies like the D700.

I am mostly speaking in terms of direct image quality, color rendering, and noise levels. Not so much on DOF or FOV differences.

 

[KmH]

The D3 and the D700 use the same image senor and processor. The D700 lacks a built-in vertical grip and a few other features, but from an image quality standpoint the 2 are the same camera.

my D7100 uses the same Image processor as the D3.

Your D7100 uses the 2 generations newer EXPEED 3 image processor.

The D3 uses the EXPEED 1 image processor.

 

[Derrel]

Here is a screen cap I just made, comparing the D5200, D7000, and D700; so, two DX cameras and one older FX from Nikon.

 

[Tailgunner]

The D3 and the D700 use the same image senor and processor. The D700 lacks a built-in vertical grip and a few other features, but from an image quality standpoint the 2 are the same camera.

my D7100 uses the same Image processor as the D3.

Your D7100 uses the 2 generations newer EXPEED 3 image processor.

The D3 uses the EXPEED 1 image processor.

Oops, I'm getting my cameras mixed, the EXPEED 3 was first seen in the D4 not the D3.

 

[Garbz]

The difference between a D200 and a D800 in a thread titled " When does newer DX outperform older FX" is mute.

You totally missed the point I was trying to make. Focus on the bit where I said that in the old days image processing and associated technology was king (which is why a camera with the same sensor as the D200 out performs my D800 in some scenarios, and hence the comparison), but in new cameras the sensor is mostly king as the important electronics are now integrated in the sensor.