1bwana1 wrote:
I see no reason Sony wouldn't sell Nikon such a sensor. Below is a link to Sony Semi's current open to order sensor list. You will recognize many of the sensors available on the cameras used by the different brands.
Noticeably absent are the 50mp BI Stacked sensor from the A1, and the BI Stacked GS sensor from the A9III
Also missing is the 45.7mp BI Stacked sensor used in the Z8/9 (although many think it is an A1 variant modified to Nikon specifications.
Also interestingly there are available approx 24mp fBI Stacked sensors suitable for the rumored high speed Z6III sensor. So that is a likely thing for Nikon to have used.
There is no 80mp FF sensor in the available list. But Sony may have such a sensor not on the open list that they would sell Nikon. However, if Nikon has done their own design 80mp sensor I believe Sony would absolutely fab it for Nikon. Nikon is a very good Sony Semi customer, and would likely be serviced in such a way. If the Z7III does have such a sensor it would go a long way towards giving great credibility to Sony's sensor design capabilities, and relationship with Sony Semi independent of Sony's own camera division.
bernardl wrote:
Sony semi-conductor did it with the D800 though, didn’t they?
Yep and that sensor raised the bar for the whole industry to follow.
bernardl wrote:
Recently Fuji released an APS-C camera with a stacked sensor before Sony imaging did.
Yes but that sensor is on Sony Semi's open to order list. So, presumably Sony is just not that interested in that market segment.
bernardl wrote:
Sony Semi-conductors is a separate business entity with their own objectives. Besides Sony imaging has been rumored to go small MF for years. Even if they had their say in what sensors Nikon can use, which I think they don’t, their strategy may not compete with a 80mp Z7III.
Sony Imaging does have input into what Sony Semi makes available for other companies. This is usually a time limited thing. We know because Sony has said just this publically and used the A9 as an example. I was with Sony executives earlier this week. That is the current situation with more than one Sony Imaging sensors.
bernardl wrote:
The reasons why Sony Semi will not want to slow down Nikon’s progress are the following btw:
1. They need to make money
2. They don’t want Nikon to fund the sensor development of a competitor
3. They are Japanese and folllow the directions “proposed” by the gov in terms of preserving a diverse photographic industry which implies a thriving Nikon.
Cheers,
Bernard
Yep all that is very true, including the Government part. My experience is that Japanese Government is much more active in such things than here in the U.S.. That includes foreign ownership of economically significant Companies like Nikon.
The GFX and Hasselblad sensors work as well as they do because they're pushed onto a bigger sensor. If 80mp full frame sensor is just slower readout and more noise at iso 100 I don't want it to be honest. bernardl wrote:
I had a 7rIV and didn’t like what Sony imaging made of that sensor either but I like the way Fuji and Hasselblad used the exact same sensor tech in their cameras so this says nothing about how good a 80mp Nikon may be.
Sure it would be limited to 10+ fps but sports cameras used at the Olympics didn’t do much more 15 years ago…
Another element impacting all this is the combined market share of team Sony/Nikon vs Canon.
It’s in Sony’s best interest to help Nikon fight Canon.
More are more people, like myself, will own a mix of Nikon and Sony gear IMHO. The absence of attempts by Sony and Nikon to kill the excellent lens adapters fully support this theory. It’s in the interest of both companies.
JadedWriter wrote:
The GFX and Hasselblad sensors work as well as they do because they're pushed onto a bigger sensor. If 80mp full frame sensor is just slower readout and more noise at iso 100 I don't want it to be honest.
The pixel size is what matters and it’s the same btwn 60mp FF and 100mp small medium format (and 150mp P1).
I expect my imaginary 80mp sensor to have a base ISO of 32 or 40.
Jawnathin wrote:
I think there is room for a Z7III in the product line but the pricing between the Z6III and Z8 will be tricky. The Z7III could have all of the rumored Z6III updates but higher resolution and lower frame rates.
The main difference from the Z8 would be a non-stacked sensor, lower frame rates, and a smaller/lighter body. The benefit over the Z6III is the higher resolution sensor. For landscape or portrait photographers where weight and resolution is more important than speed, it would be a solid alternative from either the Z8 or Z6III.
I think the pricing also largely depends on the resolution and partly on the body features. For example If it's 45mp I can't see it going for more than 3,500 or people will move up to the Z8, unless the body size is so much smaller that size becomes a determing factor to them. Now lets say it has a 60mp + and close to a Z8 build I can see it going for closer if not a full 4,000.
My guess is a z6iii will probably be 2,500 or under, and I don't see the z8 in it's life time getting a perminent price reduction of more then 200. So that leaves at least a gap from 2,500 - 3,800 to fill. Which you can probably plug nicely Around 3,200 with a 45mp body. Then if Nikon want's to compete with a high res 60mp + sensor they could put it in a z8 and make a z8r.
Nikon’s next gen high res sensor could indeed shown up in a Z8 form factor also.
The size of the Z8 was probably driven by 3 main factors:
- heat dissipation when shooting video
- the space needed for the direct stream components
- the desire to offer a UI fully compatible with that of the Z9
- bonus candidate: appeal to D850 owners
Those would not be mandatory for a non stacked sensor based camera focused on landscape.
So using a more compact Z6III body makes more sense to me.
I figure they either have to make the Z7III 60+ MP or get rid of it. With how 'cheap' the Z8 is (relative to the market), there just isn't much of a gap there for evenly spaced product segmentation. Once you're within ~$1,000 or so of the Z8, a Z7III would be a tough sell without a more niche headline feature such as a huge resolution bump. I also don't get the sense the existing 60MP bodies are very popular (A7R 4/5) but I could be wrong about that - just my subjective impression.
Also, the better they make the Z6III, the closer in price it will be to a hypothetical Z7III or Z8, again making product segmentation a challenge.
We all know the Z6III is coming but I'm very curious to see what they do with the Z7 line. If they leave it at 45MP but with the same updates as the Z6III, I can't imagine very many customers would go that route over a Z8.
If the rumors are true that the Z6III will cost $3000, then Nikon will be making a huge mistake. The Z6III needs to compete with the R6II and draw photographers to it. The Z6III=$2000, Z7III=$3000, Z8=$4000 and Z9=$5500 makes sense to me.
If the Z6III is a huge technological jump over the R6II then maybe $2500, but why would Nikon camera division do this?
The R6II is currently priced at $2300, probably in anticipation of the Z6III.
If the z6iii is $3k it means they plan on killing the Z7.
With how conservative Nikon is and how little they change their model lines I would surprised if they did this. Maaaybe if it was stacked they could justify that cost. But I don’t think the Zf can be the only mainstream camera. With the existence of the Zf I see a $2500ish z6 pretty easily. Nikon has been very aggressive with pricing on bodies lately so I would be surprised if they go higher than that, especially for a mainstream get-people-into-the-system camera.
I agree that the z7 can’t be another 45mp camera (Athough I’m fine with that. The nonstacked d850 is still my favorite sensor, I just want that coupled with a 120fps viewfinder).
I am still of the opinion that Nikon will make a z7iii. I think the landscape user is still there and the z8 is quite big for that and has a lot of unnecessary tech for that usage. I personally hope it doesn’t have the 60MP Sony sensor because I find it a step backward from the Nikon 45MP which leaves ? for a sensor?
CanadaMark wrote:
I figure they either have to make the Z7III 60+ MP or get rid of it. With how 'cheap' the Z8 is (relative to the market), there just isn't much of a gap there for evenly spaced product segmentation. Once you're within ~$1,000 or so of the Z8, a Z7III would be a tough sell without a more niche headline feature such as a huge resolution bump. I also don't get the sense the existing 60MP bodies are very popular (A7R 4/5) but I could be wrong about that - just my subjective impression.
Also, the better they make the Z6III, the closer in price it will be to a hypothetical Z7III or Z8, again making product segmentation a challenge.
We all know the Z6III is coming but I'm very curious to see what they do with the Z7 line. If they leave it at 45MP but with the same updates as the Z6III, I can't imagine very many customers would go that route over a Z8....Show more →
The Z8 looks cheap because it's the cheapest stacked sensor camera out there. But we also forgot the a7cr is also there at $3k. The a7cii is $2k. The a7iv is $2.5k. The a7cr is $3k. The a7Rv is $4k. Even if it's just $500, there's enough to fit something there. Especially more so with a $1000 gap. Even if they keep the 45MP sensor, the fact that it's quite a bit cheaper than the Z8 allows people to consider it over the Z8. I know how we can be desensitised at that kind prices, but $500 to $1000 is still not chump change. $500 of $4000 is 12.5%. $1000 of $4000 is 25%. Those are not small numbers. And most people have budget as a key priority. If we can get away with spending less, we will.
Nikon can easily do the same. Zf at $2k, Z6iii at $2.5k, Z7iii at $3.4k, and the Z8 at $4k. Doesn't look that impossible when you think about it.
cope07 wrote:
I personally hope it doesn’t have the 60MP Sony sensor because I find it a step backward from the Nikon 45MP which leaves ? for a sensor?
How is the Sony BSI CMOS 60mp sensor a step back from the Sony/Nikon BSI CMOS 45mp sensor?
Don't bring up the SOC color BS. That is the processor and the profile applied on import to your editor, not the sensor.
That 60mp Sony sensor is magic on the Leica cameras. No reason it shouldn't be on the Nikon implementation as well.
Yes, I think that some people really underestimate the importance of the implementation of a sensor, starting with micro lenses, color filtration, in camera raw data manipulation (NR,…).
cope07 wrote:
If the z6iii is $3k it means they plan on killing the Z7.
With how conservative Nikon is and how little they change their model lines I would surprised if they did this. Maaaybe if it was stacked they could justify that cost. But I don’t think the Zf can be the only mainstream camera. With the existence of the Zf I see a $2500ish z6 pretty easily. Nikon has been very aggressive with pricing on bodies lately so I would be surprised if they go higher than that, especially for a mainstream get-people-into-the-system camera.
I agree that the z7 can’t be another 45mp camera (Athough I’m fine with that. The nonstacked d850 is still my favorite sensor, I just want that coupled with a 120fps viewfinder).
I am still of the opinion that Nikon will make a z7iii. I think the landscape user is still there and the z8 is quite big for that and has a lot of unnecessary tech for that usage. I personally hope it doesn’t have the 60MP Sony sensor because I find it a step backward from the Nikon 45MP which leaves ? for a sensor?...Show more →
Maybe I‘m also in the minority, but 45MP is plenty, don‘t mind even less. But the sub MP cameras are getting faster and faster, with lots of video specs (swivel screen ), that I don‘t need at all.
Maybe I‘m a fool, but isn‘t 60-100MP more a niche?
The Z8 is to heavy and big for my taste and also has speed that I don‘t need.
For me a z6 and z7 with a lag free EVF, little better AF and a two way tilt screen, that could even be a little lighter would be pure gold. Rest can stay the same.
I find that the A7r iv/v has a light grain to the base iso images that I don’t see in a d850. I find this grain also affects color fidelity when pulling up shadows. Don’t get me wrong it’s not massive, but I know which sensor I would take every day of the week. I haven’t used the Leica version of that sensor but I have seen on some Leica forums that not everyone is in love with it.
To you point, I would also expect the nikon variant of that sensor to be more pleasing to me and perhaps technically better (like they did on the d810 vs the A7r iii).
Lastly and most whiny is I’m also not super excited about the z7iii potentially getting a sensor that is already 2 camera generations old for Sony. I hope for and actually expect a bit more from Nikon.
1bwana1 wrote:
How is the Sony BSI CMOS 60mp sensor a step back from the Sony/Nikon BSI CMOS 45mp sensor?
There is always a tradeoff between the size of the sensor and other factors. Frame rate, EVF refresh rate, buffer depth, and video all are linked to sensor resolution.
I have a Z8 and just sold my Z7ii in anticipation of getting the Z6iii. A standard resolution camera with 24+ megapixels is just fine with me. The benefits of a very fast frame rate, smaller file, and related enhancements to Pre-release and Auto-Capture make it attractive.
I'm expecting a nice update to the Z8 via firmware over the next month or so. It will buy some time for a Z6iii release in April. Nikon tends to ship new models after their fiscal year end, so while we might see an announcement, I don't expect to see shipping until April or May.
I could see a high resolution camera like the Z7iii at 60 megapixels or higher. Right now there is an opening for a high resolution camera since the Z9 and Z8 occupy the same space. 46 megapixels is not that high any more. But with high resolution comes some limitations in frame rate and buffer limits since the files are much larger.
I'm also looking for a high end DX camera this year. Nikon's financial reporting is calling for much more growth than they will get from a Z8 and Z6iii alone. They still need a high volume camera - and DX has a lot of room. With it would come some higher end wide to medium DX lenses. The long end is largely in place already.
bernardl wrote:
Yes, I think that some people really underestimate the importance of the implementation of a sensor, starting with micro lenses, color filtration, in camera raw data manipulation (NR,…).
Cheers,
Bernard
Absolutely. When Nikon first released the D800 with a Sony sensor their DR and noise performance exceeded that of Sony cameras with the nominally very same sensor.
GroovyGeek wrote:
Absolutely. When Nikon first released the D800 with a Sony sensor their DR and noise performance exceeded that of Sony cameras with the nominally very same sensor.
Actually that is very much not true. The A7R released at just a few months after the D800 matched it almost exactly in DR performance. AS the first mirrorless FF cameras it changed the World of photography completely. The next Sony iteration, the A7MR3 sensor was more advanced in some important ways. The A7M3 bested the D800 in DR measurements over almost the entire range of ISO. That same pattern exists today between the current models. In both cases the differences are small and likely insignificant in actual IQ produced, but they are measurable. The A7RM3 mostly bested the D800 because of its more advanced dual gain architecture which the D800 and the D850 lacked and wouldn't get until the Z family of sensors.
This is just something the Nikon guys tend to repeat to each other so often that most believe it and accept it without doing the research that is so easily available. Sort of a real life demonstration of "The Big Lie" from Mein Kampf in action.
Look they are are sensors the are based on the same core architecture, being built on the same manufacturing line, by the same Company that owns that technology. In the end this adds up to sensors that perform so closely that any differences just don't matter. Yes, proprietary implementations of things like cover glass, and processors can tweek things a bit but this in nor showing up in DR at this point.
Errr.. not sure bout others but doing my own research is kinda where I get my impression of Nikon's ISO 64 implementation with regards to real world DR results.
I completely respect Bill Claff's PDR within its definition for DR and is one very good source of info. But it's best to have multiple sources to form a complete picture.
Sony and Nikon have been very close in DR for years. Until the a7s3/a1/... the main difference per my own experience was in color filtration but Sony has improved a lot on this too.
I still prefer Nikon colors comparing a9III to Z8 but the gap is now much closer as well.
The big loser throughout the years in sensor quality was Canon as has been well demonstrated.
? for a sensor?
), that I don‘t need at all.