I think when they moved up to 24.5 MP they just didn't have the processing power for the full framerate pushed through the 16 BIT image processor and put out as a 14 BIT file. It's like what you see with the D300. It might have something to do with pixel density. Who knows. I'm sure there is some technological reason for it though, since I don't think it's something Nikon wanted to do with either the D300 or the D3X.
Nick G Walker wrote:
To prevent any further arguments the frame rate is 1.8 in 14 bit.
http://66.102.9.100/
That "Nikon" website is being hosted by another website. It is not the actual one I don't believe. It is someone who has set a scam up to give people viruses. I wouldn't suggest visiting that page.
I don't see this as the camera of choice for high-speed shooting. If I were using it I would just concern myself with ultimate IQ and not worry about it's machine gun capabilities. I haven't worried about the same issue with the D300, so I doubt I would be too concerned on this camera.
Then again, after spending $8K on this body one might feel cheated. The D300 was just a wee bit less expensive.
Rob Galbraith updated his preview adding info on buffer and framerate:
FX Format, Lossless Compressed 14 bit NEF (1.8 fps): 28 frames
FX Format, Lossless Compressed 12 bit NEF (5 fps): 24 frames
FX Format, JPEG Fine (5 fps): 44 frames
DX Format, Lossless Compressed 14 bit NEF (2.6 fps): 52 frames
DX Format, Lossless Compressed 12 bit NEF (7 fps): 32 frames
DX Format, JPEG Fine (7 fps): 76 frames
The number of frames in NEF 14bit is higher than D3's without buffer upgrade, but at 1.8/2.6 fps instead of 9/11 fps it is understandable.
