pdxflint
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.6 #1 · what'll this mean for future FX cameras? | |
Hlavo..., I'm just not really sure why you keep wanting to "strip down" the top-level DX pro-oriented camera body... to wit: "the natural extension of the D100/D200/D300 line is a stripped down, semi-pro D400..."
Are you saying the D300s's successor won't sell unless it's "stripped" down? How would you "strip" it down? Make it a D90? Take away the best performing Nikon AF module? Take away the dual-slots? The durability and shutter life? Drop the fps? Make it out of molded plastic? Add a cheap kit lens? What? They already have that, it's called a D90/Dxx. So you're saying Nikon should take the D400 and "strip" it? I wouldn't want one, and wouldn't buy it, most likely. I think if Nikon did this, they'd simply be targeting the same people who already buy less expensive, easier to use, more automated bodies, and they'd be abandoning the pro-sumers, advanced amateurs and pros, all who the current D300 series camera slots right into as a very viable market. This market will not automatically 'convert' to the Nikon FX models for at least a couple of reasons: FX doesn't meet their needs; FX requires a substantial re-investment that the photographer may not see a real-world benefit from...i.e. more published/sold images, bigger profits. Without those last two actually penciling out, lots of pros would prefer to not spend the money to "switch" to FX just because Nikon abandoned the pro segment with their top-line DX camera. It might make some folks simply switch to Canon, if you want to know the truth. Canon's 7D is no slouch, and it's crop sensor. If there's no D300s upgrade/evolution, maybe more than a few folks give the Canon a real look-- not in Nikon's best interests... methinks.
BTW, we're sort of on the same track with the "divisions" of dSLR categories for Nikon, but I don't think it has anything to do with sensor size... the "groups" are already in place-- the Dxxx group (entry level,) the Dxx group (advanced/experienced photographer,) the Dxxx/Dx group (expert/pro.) These classifications have nothing to do with sensor size. Let's face it, there are bigger sensors out there in medium format land, but not all professional jobs call for them. The D300 12.3mp DX sensor already can do anything 35mm used to do, and that was a hell of a lot. Just ask National Geographic, or any major newspaper or magazine.
The need for FX is a bit overstated, although it certainly does help with high ISO performance as long as the pixel density is not compromised. For many photographers, pro or otherwise, the characteristics of lenses on a full-frame body is like the going back to the old 35mm days, so clearly it's attractive in that sense. It's familiar territory-- a 135mm lens acts like a 135mm lens on 35mm film. A 50mm is a "normal." All the old paradigms can be maintained, especially for older photographers who grew up with 35mm. But, what the heck does "full-frame" even mean, in the real world? In a few years when there isn't a single new photographer who has ever experienced 35mm, "full-frame" won't even make sense. There will be no way to really relate to it... "full-frame of what?" There is no reason to stop at "full-frame" either, other than current optics were largely inherited from 35mm, so FX becomes the upper limit, sizewise, without designing an entirely new system from the ground up, lenses and all. As sensor technology advances and computing power continues its miniaturization/low power needs/high performance path, the need for FX/full-frame concept might become irrelevant anyway. So, in the meantime... I want my pro-oriented camera available in both DX and FX sensor for some time to come. Are you listening, Nikon?
Who knows what the long term future will shake out like. Once there are no longer any old concepts/ideas to cling to (35mm SLRs,) cameras could take any form and size. But as long as we're still living in a world where dSLRs have evolved from their 35mm predecessors the idea of full-frame sensors will hold some real sway, even if the actual benefits don't necessarily turn into additional profits. That's why I want my D400 to be top-level all the way high tech DX format. And I want a D700s, too. 
|
You could look at it that way, or you could look at it as an exchange of ideas. Despite my 180 degree view from hlavo, I think he made some interesting points and defended his ideas well. It got me thinking. And obviously it got others thinking as well as they chimed with with alternative points of view. That's all good if you ask me.