allstarimaging wrote:
I may have set the wrong tone in my last post to TWO23 I did not mean it to be hostile. I guess my point was that to dismiss nikonrumors entirely would be a mistake. They often have the right info on upcoming Nikon gear releases. For someone like myself who is looking at various Nikon full frame options it can be helpful. I'm not shooting a ton right now so if something is going to be released and I can wait a few months it's good info.
By the way domdog..what's the difference between spending time here on FM or clicking on Nikonrumors every now and then? Either way I'm not out shooting?
Jack...Show more →
Refer to my last post - Something always will be updated eventually - stop chasing and live for now was my point. Those sites aggrevate me.
allstarimaging wrote:
I may have set the wrong tone in my last post to TWO23 I did not mean it to be hostile. I guess my point was that to dismiss nikonrumors entirely would be a mistake. They often have the right info on upcoming Nikon gear releases.
I didn't take you to be hostile. As for N-rumors, based on their past I just can't give them any credibility. Sure, some of what gets put on there might be true from time to time, but the majority of it is just background noise. The way I look at it, since none of it is known fact, it's not very useful to base decisions on anything written there. I rarely buy the first batch of a new product anyway. The price is always at its highest, and there have been bugs to resolve in some models. I usually wait half a year after something is released. And as to 36mp, I keep wondering, exactly what lenses does Nikon have that will stand up to that? Already we see some current production lenses showing problems when used on a D7000 with less than half that resolution.
Two23 wrote:
And as to 36mp, I keep wondering, exactly what lenses does Nikon have that will stand up to that? Already we see some current production lenses showing problems when used on a D7000 with less than half that resolution.
Kent in SD
If you scale the D7000 sensor up to FF and keep the pixel size the same I believe it comes out to about 36mp. The resolution will not change as the amount of pixels in a given area will remain the same.
az-dave wrote:
If you scale the D7000 sensor up to FF and keep the pixel size the same I believe it comes out to about 36mp. The resolution will not change as the amount of pixels in a given area will remain the same.
While math isn't my best subject, wouldn't the formula be: 16.2mp x 1.4 = 22.7mp? At 22mp, I would have less trouble believing it. Why would Nikon put a "bigger" sensor in one of their non-pro bodies before putting it into a pro body? Wouldn't anything more than 20mp kill the sales on their D3x? Since my background is sales & marketing, that's how I tend to look at these things.
Two23 wrote:
While math isn't my best subject, wouldn't the formula be: 16.2mp x 1.4 = 22.7mp? At 22mp, I would have less trouble believing it. Why would Nikon put a "bigger" sensor in one of their non-pro bodies before putting it into a pro body? Wouldn't anything more than 20mp kill the sales on their D3x? Since my background is sales & marketing, that's how I tend to look at these things.
Kent in SD
You have to square the crop factor. 1.5x1.5 = 2.25, 16mp x 2.25 = 36mp
Two23 wrote:
I didn't take you to be hostile. As for N-rumors, based on their past I just can't give them any credibility. Sure, some of what gets put on there might be true from time to time, but the majority of it is just background noise. The way I look at it, since none of it is known fact, it's not very useful to base decisions on anything written there. I rarely buy the first batch of a new product anyway. The price is always at its highest, and there have been bugs to resolve in some models. I usually wait half a year after something is released. And as to 36mp, I keep wondering, exactly what lenses does Nikon have that will stand up to that? Already we see some current production lenses showing problems when used on a D7000 with less than half that resolution.
Kent the d3x demands good glass and perfect tequnique. 36 mp camera wold have Internet swirl from those who do not have the best glass or sound tequnique on how soft the camera is. Those who can handle it will praise it.
Chris Ventura wrote:
So here we are talking about a D700 replacement.. that is going to *most likely* cost $3000-$4000, an attach it to lenses that cost thousands of dollars, and the biggest gripe about 36MP is that nobody wants to upgrade their Pentium to an i5 or i7 for a measly $500? With all the expenses involved with photography, I find the PC end of it the least expensive.
:o) yep i kinda fancy changing my d700 for a d800 but the cost of lenses if the 16-35 isnt good enough might put me off, not my percived lack of computer power. i did up res a few files to well over 40mp file size and my c2d imac was fine processing them in nx2. i think i'd only have to change my 70-300vr for a 300 of some varity to be 39mp ready, and use my tripod more...
Do you think they will have a DX mode or half the resolution on FX? I would do that on RAW just to get video and some ISO increase. Use the 36 MP for times of need and 18 MP for most everyday things. I also hope the grip adds 1-2 FPS like the D700 did.
Im going to get the D800 first then D4 sometime after that!
Sure I would like to have midpriced a 36 Mp Nikon. However I was at their PMA booth. it is a whole lot of expense for huge exposure. i can't imagine that Nikon would not have had a D800 protype there if their announcement was only a few days away. Also why would Nikon obsolete their 24Mp flagship body by a half priced model without even having announced a replacement??
SoundHound wrote:
Sure I would like to have midpriced a 36 Mp Nikon. However I was at their PMA booth. it is a whole lot of expense for huge exposure. i can't imagine that Nikon would not have had a D800 protype there if their announcement was only a few days away. Also why would Nikon obsolete their 24Mp flagship body by a half priced model without even having announced a replacement??
Because everyone would flock to that instead of the D4...
SoundHound wrote:
Sure I would like to have midpriced a 36 Mp Nikon. However I was at their PMA booth. it is a whole lot of expense for huge exposure. i can't imagine that Nikon would not have had a D800 protype there if their announcement was only a few days away. Also why would Nikon obsolete their 24Mp flagship body by a half priced model without even having announced a replacement??
there a big show in japan the week after the 7th, they had a bad year last year and i'd imagine they would like a few show stoppers at there home show. usa is not the only place in the world...
kawasakiguy37 wrote:
Anybody else think its odd that the one WITHOUT the AA filter will supposedly cost 900 more?
There must be some other video additions. With the release of the D4 its obvious nikon is making a big push towards video
Personally Im still hoping for 3 x 12mp D3 sensors for great 4:2:2 HDMI out.....4k HDMI out that is!
And then one 36 mp sensor for the stills optimized one
But that is likely a dream
Not odd at all - if something is perceived to be better, then it's perceived to be worth more $$ even if there is less cost in making it (though in this case there is likely additional costs in the engineering, separate part accounting, marketing, etc. over the standard D800 with likely far fewer AA-less models to be sold).
Exactly domdog31, why make an expensive D4 (and keep the D3x in inventory) and spend lots to promote it if you are going to make a better camera-at half the price-to be introduced 4 weeks later? Obviously there is no business reason-as much as all of use would rather spend $3000 instead of $6000 for a new camera.
Jammy Straub wrote:
Yes, that would be silly if it were true. Unless say the AA less camera is a low production run part.
Really though I doubt we'll see much need for an AA filter at a resolution that high.
would there really be a percivable 900 buck difference between an aa flitered 36mp and a non aa filtered 36mp considering how weak the aa filter is going to be for a 36mp fx camera?
If the D700 sales continue to be good, I speculate that it will be continued for a while,
because the D800 specs are so radically different, that it is not really a replacement camera.
So, we may see a D700s this summer after the D3s is discontinued just to fill the gap between the D4, D400, & D800
