The hell with All VR lenses. Why doesn't Nikon just make a stabilized sensor like Minolta or Sony? That would be the cure for the expectations of new VR lenses that don't come through.
PurplePix wrote:
Hope that 100-12800 are not pushed (or pulled iso settings). If that is the case, it comes out to native 200-6400 iso. D3 good but not as impressive as it originally sounds! Still, big improvement for a dx sized sensor.
I didn't think they even made sensors with native ISO100. I've always read they are ISO 200. I'm betting you are right on both ends. I'm now getting a bit excited to see what the D300 replacement is going to look like, spec wise. Surely it will gain at least a stop of ISO and add the AF video.
Two23 wrote:
I didn't think they even made sensors with native ISO100. I've always read they are ISO 200. I'm betting you are right on both ends. I'm now getting a bit excited to see what the D300 replacement is going to look like, spec wise. Surely it will gain at least a stop of ISO and add the AF video.
Kent in SD
Except for the D3x. That has native iso 100. Yes, exciting times ahead. Better buy lotto tickets.
PurplePix wrote:
Hope that 100-12800 are not pushed (or pulled iso settings). If that is the case, it comes out to native 200-6400 iso. D3 good but not as impressive as it originally sounds! Still, big improvement for a dx sized sensor.
I don't see why this isn't remarkably impressive to you! Think about it: The least expensive camera CURRENTLY AVAILABLE with a usable ISo 200-6400 range in the nikon lineup is the D700 ($2000ish used). This camera, if it indeed had a practical range of 200-6400 would theoretically achieve the same performance, or close to it for a SIGNIFICANTLY smaller price tag! Sounds great to me, especially since I was looking to get a DX body again for additional reach with my 70-200/2.8 VR.
So who here is going to be the first to sell their arm/leg/first born child to own the 24/1.4 + 50/1.4 + 85/1.4 AFS + 105/2.8 AFS VR + 200mm f/2 AFS VR prime kit? hahaha
Also keep in mind that just because a model (eg. D3100) has the capability to go up to ISO12,800 doesn't necessarily mean it will be USABLE at that setting. I would hate to see the results of ISO12,800 on a crop sensor....
Gary Clennan wrote:
Also keep in mind that just because a model (eg. D3100) has the capability to go up to ISO12,800 doesn't necessarily mean it will be USABLE at that setting. I would hate to see the results of ISO12,800 on a crop sensor....
Prior to the D3 you'd have said the same thing about an FX sensor. And while I agree that this sensor is likely not up to quality 12.8k images, I think the D400 will be.
Look at the size of the sensor-23.2 x 15.5 mm
APS-C is 25.1 × 16.7
So, 14 mega-pixels, on a smaller sensor, with higher ISO than the current APS-C camera's. Yea, I don't think so. I think it's a "pushed" iso. Wonder what the pixel density will be(not that good with math).
