Nikon D700x expected announcement date Dec 20
Tony the insider
everything the D700 has, except the shooting rate at full resolution.
The sensor is 24+ MP - while Nikon isn't officially admitting this,
it is the one used in the Sony alpha-900. The D700 will be officially
discontinued then, as by shooting at 12 MP the D700x will match its
burst speed so the D700 is redundant. Price is a big question but
expect the USD price to be well above that of the D700.
Personally, I am surprised, I expected first a D3x aka D4. Given that
the high-dollar market is with the Hassies, EOS-1DS MkIII and the 37
MP Leica vaporcam, and the global downturn, perhaps Tokyo decided that
sector is overcrowded?
Any event, D700 was just as good as the D3 in construction, only speed
was a difference. Did I forget to say D700x has the 25.6K ISO setting?
Source of the news is 100% reliable, my buddy in Nikon Japan. Read
more on http://nikonrumors.com when they eventually wake up. :)
Tony (Nikon fan since the S3)
RichA
"Tony the insider" <dontm...@nikonusa.com> wrote in message
news:E3X0GU063976...@reece.net.au...
Alan Browne
> Nikon needs to step up more. 40 megapixels on a 45mm sensor.
Don't top post.
They need a 36x24 at 20 Mpix or more first. I don't suppose it occurs
to you that their DSLR market is Nikon lens owners?
It would be nice if they made an MF system, but it would take them a
long time to establish themselves. At least they would likely be less
costly than Hass and Leica. But v. Mamiya?
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
Me Here
"RichA" <ob...@haslittletime.com> wrote in message
news:mIidnXgLJvrnwYPU...@giganews.com...
> Nikon needs to step up more. 40 megapixels on a 45mm sensor.
>
Alan Browne
Lucrative that. And as a by-product you make lenses for the Hassy's
(which use Fujinon lenses); Mamiya's, Leaf's, Phase One, Leica S2, ... etc.
I don't see Nikon doing this, but you never know...
Paul Furman
> The expected announcement date for the D700x is Dec. 20. D700x has
> everything the D700 has, except the shooting rate at full resolution.
> The sensor is 24+ MP - while Nikon isn't officially admitting this,
> it is the one used in the Sony alpha-900. The D700 will be officially
> discontinued then, as by shooting at 12 MP the D700x will match its
> burst speed so the D700 is redundant.
Would that be a DX crop mode or resample?
> Price is a big question but
> expect the USD price to be well above that of the D700.
Sounds more like a replacement for the D3 than the D700.
> Personally, I am surprised, I expected first a D3x aka D4. Given that
> the high-dollar market is with the Hassies, EOS-1DS MkIII and the 37
> MP Leica vaporcam, and the global downturn, perhaps Tokyo decided that
> sector is overcrowded?
> Any event, D700 was just as good as the D3 in construction, only speed
> was a difference. Did I forget to say D700x has the 25.6K ISO setting?
> Source of the news is 100% reliable, my buddy in Nikon Japan. Read
> more on http://nikonrumors.com when they eventually wake up. :)
> Tony (Nikon fan since the S3)
--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com
all google groups messages filtered due to spam
..
not be available that long and now they are discontinuing it and replacing
it with an upgrade, D700X. They did the same with the D40X introduced it and
then 4 months later discontinued it.
I was looking at a D90 but if there is a chance it could be discontinued in
6 months maybe I should wait?
SMS
Because of the 5D Mark II, Nikon needs to rush out a rev to the D700 or
risk losing a lot of new body sales, and a lot of long term lens sales.
Most new models are merely evolutionary, but the 5D Mark II, despite
it's name, is revolutionary. Similarly, they need a new prosumer model
to (catch up with the 50D), since the D300 is a year old already.
The D90 is likely not going to be upgraded too soon as it's got the
video advantage over its Canon XSi competition. It's Canon that needs to
rush out an upgrade to the XSi that adds video.
N
news:GLMTk.1784$V71...@newsfe10.iad...
Do you use the same logic when buying clothes or a car?
nospam
wrote:
> Nikon brings out a new DSLR only to update it 6 months later. The D700 has
> not be available that long and now they are discontinuing it and replacing
> it with an upgrade, D700X.
where in the world did you get that idea?
> They did the same with the D40X introduced it and
> then 4 months later discontinued it.
wrong again. the d40x was sold alongside the d40.
> I was looking at a D90 but if there is a chance it could be discontinued in
> 6 months maybe I should wait?
buy a camera that fits your needs. it will be replaced at some point.
nospam
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Because of the 5D Mark II, Nikon needs to rush out a rev to the D700 or
> risk losing a lot of new body sales, and a lot of long term lens sales.
nonsense. the d700 is doing quite well.
> Most new models are merely evolutionary, but the 5D Mark II, despite
> it's name, is revolutionary. Similarly, they need a new prosumer model
> to (catch up with the 50D), since the D300 is a year old already.
canon added movie capability and upped the number of pixels. nothing
'revolutionary' about it.
> The D90 is likely not going to be upgraded too soon as it's got the
> video advantage over its Canon XSi competition. It's Canon that needs to
> rush out an upgrade to the XSi that adds video.
nikon's next move is update the d60 (which was a stopgap) and/or a high
end dslr.
RichA
forcing a line to operate faster than normal, ends up with a sub-standard
product.
"Rita Berkowitz" <ritabe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:co-dnUBnPo5JO4PU...@supernews.com...
> RichA wrote:
>
>> Nikon needs to step up more. 40 megapixels on a 45mm sensor.
>
> No, Nikon need to step up production on the 600/4. Bastards!!!
>
>
>
> Rita
RichA
"Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:lfCdnYc24rXHRYPU...@giganews.com...
> RichA wrote:
>> Nikon needs to step up more. 40 megapixels on a 45mm sensor.
>
> Don't top post.
>
> They need a 36x24 at 20 Mpix or more first. I don't suppose it occurs to
> you that their DSLR market is Nikon lens owners?
No, because they all aren't. I know 3 people who recently bought into Nikon
that hadn't to that point owned anything of theirs. They buy in because
right now, it's the top system.
> It would be nice if they made an MF system, but it would take them a long
> time to establish themselves. At least they would likely be less costly
> than Hass and Leica. But v. Mamiya?
Can we get away from this idea of "medium format" and "FF?" There IS no
more FF, it's a 70 year old construct. In five years, what is now a 35mm
sensor could be the entry level, with larger sensors representing the
"professional norm."
RichA
Pros are systematically replacing their old film lenses with better ones,
designed for sensors, so why not a different size? P.S. that Leica is sized
between a 1DsMkIII and a 5D, forever crushing the silly idea that larger
sensored DSLRs need to be the size of the average cow.
"Me Here" <no-...@here.ca> wrote in message news:gfmpop$9ri$1...@aioe.org...
RichA
".." <Ginn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:GLMTk.1784$V71...@newsfe10.iad...
I don't think so. Everyone else's 20+ megapixel is a noise box, they won't
kill the D700.
SMS
Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part of that
strategy. Look for a D300 upgrade very soon as well, so they can
compete with the 50D. Canon is still the leading system, but Nikon has
finally got its act together in sensors, an is giving Canon a run for
its money, in least in bodies. Nikon still lags Canon badly in terms of
lenses.
Probably not worth waiting on the D90. The upgrade to the Canon XSi will
add HD video with stero audio to leapfrog the D90, then the D90x (or
whatever they call it) will go from mono to stereo.
nospam
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part of that
> strategy.
struggling? nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year. a
bigger issue is the economy.
> Look for a D300 upgrade very soon as well, so they can
> compete with the 50D. Canon is still the leading system, but Nikon has
> finally got its act together in sensors, an is giving Canon a run for
> its money, in least in bodies. Nikon still lags Canon badly in terms of
> lenses.
nonsense. the d300 is doing well and both canon and nikon have
excellent lenses.
> Probably not worth waiting on the D90. The upgrade to the Canon XSi will
> add HD video with stero audio to leapfrog the D90, then the D90x (or
> whatever they call it) will go from mono to stereo.
so canon has disclosed to you what the xsi will have? or are you
making shit up again?
nospam
<cl...@griswold.com> wrote:
> DSLRs need to be made modular. If you can have interchangeable film backs
> you can have interchangeable sensors.
making it modular will make the camera bigger and more expensive, not
to mention that pretty much everything other than the shell will need
to be replaced.
John McWilliams
> In message news:GLMTk.1784$V71...@newsfe10.iad, ".."
> you can have interchangeable sensors.
We already have that. You get excellent lenses, then from time to time
get a new sensor wrapped in a new body.....changing is quicker this way.
--
john mcwilliams
Alfred Molon
> The upgrade to the Canon XSi will
> add HD video with stero audio to leapfrog the D90, then the D90x (or
> whatever they call it) will go from mono to stereo.
<grin> Just one year ago people here were ridiculing video in a DLSR
("real" photographers not needing that). Now it's one of the most
important features. Go figure.
The same happened with live preview, also ridiculed as something no real
photographer would ever meed or want, and now it's a must-have feature.
And as soon as Canon launches a camera with a full-colour-per-pixel
sensor, suddenly all cameras will have to have this feature.
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
Alfred Molon
> making it modular will make the camera bigger and more expensive, not
> to mention that pretty much everything other than the shell will need
> to be replaced.
Also, improvements are made all the time to all systems in a camera, not
just in one.
John McWilliams
> In article <5bWTk.11745$Ws1....@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com>, SMS
> <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part of that
>> strategy.
>
> struggling? nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year. a
> bigger issue is the economy.
Agreed on the economy. Where are sales figures available for Canon and
Nikon? I would have thought only estimates were published by third
parties. And please don't mention Google!
--
john mcwilliams
measekite
I do not think that video is all that important for a DSLR shooter. Maybe
a nice addon but not a gotta have. Besides, the D90 implementation leaves
a lot to be desired and certainly is not a must have.
Paul Furman
Red (the cine camera maker) has annouced a modular still/HD system. It
is huge and expensive.
measekite
People seem to be comparing the D90 with the Canon 50D. Then they
comparete the D300 with the Canon 50D and say it needs to be upgraded to
compete. Then they say that the D700 compares to the new Canon 5D MkII
but they need the 700x to really compare and it still won't.
But the real truth is when you look at price points most of the Nikon
models do not compete head on with Canon models but they appear to
interleave with them falling between them in price point and many times in
features.
As far as price it goes something like this.
D40
1000D
D60
XSi *
D90
50D *
D300
D700
5DMkII *
DX3
1DsMkIII
The ones with the * appear to be more desirable at this point except for
the last 2. The Canon is more desirable for certain stills but the DX3
may be more desirable for sports and high ISO stuff.
measekite
> In message news:GLMTk.1784$V71...@newsfe10.iad, ".."
> <Ginn...@hotmail.com> done wrote:
>
> DSLRs need to be made modular. If you can have interchangeable film backs
> you can have interchangeable sensors.
That is already here. Some medium format film cameras with
interchangeable backs can now add an interchangeable sensor back. The
fact they approach $40,000 is another story.
measekite
Maybe he does not drive and does not wear clothes. Maybe he lives on an
island.
nospam
McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part of that
> >> strategy.
> >
> > struggling? nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year. a
> > bigger issue is the economy.
>
> Agreed on the economy. Where are sales figures available for Canon and
> Nikon? I would have thought only estimates were published by third
> parties.
nikon and canon report their sales and they're both very close to each
other. i was slightly off in timings, however. in 2007, although
nikon was still #2 in market share, nikon gained while canon slipped:
<http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1207604859.html>
and in the first half 2008, nikon was slightly ahead of canon, 40.7 v.
40.6:
<http://bcnranking.jp/news/0807/080724_11351.html>
in any event, it's not what i'd call struggling. if anyone is
struggling, it's pentax and olympus. oh, and sigma. :)
nospam
<inkys...@oem.com> wrote:
> But the real truth is when you look at price points most of the Nikon
> models do not compete head on with Canon models but they appear to
> interleave with them falling between them in price point and many times in
> features.
exactly. slightly different mix of features at different price points.
John McWilliams
> In article <ZKydnVSv2YYL273U...@comcast.com>, John
> McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>>> Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part of that
>>>> strategy.
>>> struggling? nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year. a
>>> bigger issue is the economy.
>> Agreed on the economy. Where are sales figures available for Canon and
>> Nikon? I would have thought only estimates were published by third
>> parties.
>
> nikon and canon report their sales and they're both very close to each
> other. i was slightly off in timings, however. in 2007, although
> nikon was still #2 in market share, nikon gained while canon slipped:
> <http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1207604859.html>
>
> and in the first half 2008, nikon was slightly ahead of canon, 40.7 v.
> 40.6:
> <http://bcnranking.jp/news/0807/080724_11351.html>
>
> in any event, it's not what i'd call struggling. if anyone is
> struggling, it's pentax and olympus. oh, and sigma. :)
Overall sales, and some categories within this figure would be published
by both companies, but I doubt they make available figures by model.
Here's as fine a detail as I could find that Canon publishes:
Cameras
Digital cameras 75% 76% 77% 75% 76% 76%
Video cameras 7% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8%
Interchangeable lenses and others 18% 16% 15% 17% 16% 16%
From: <http://www.canon.com/ir/results/2008/rslt2008q1e.pdf>
I am surmising that Canon and Nikon release slightly more detailed info
to a trade association, so that DSLR sales can be broken out of "digital
camera" sales, a slightly broad category...
--
john mcwilliams
nospam
McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Overall sales, and some categories within this figure would be published
> by both companies, but I doubt they make available figures by model.
i don't think they break it down by model. as i said, nikon is not
'struggling' to keep up. both nikon and canon make great cameras, and
you can't really go wrong with either one. the real question is what
will happen to pentax and olympus...
Alan Browne
> "Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:lfCdnYc24rXHRYPU...@giganews.com...
>> RichA wrote:
>>> Nikon needs to step up more. 40 megapixels on a 45mm sensor.
>> Don't top post.
>>
>> They need a 36x24 at 20 Mpix or more first. I don't suppose it occurs to
>> you that their DSLR market is Nikon lens owners?
>
> No, because they all aren't. I know 3 people who recently bought into Nikon
> that hadn't to that point owned anything of theirs. They buy in because
> right now, it's the top system.
Of course there are new customers. But Nikon's base is its existing
customers (as it is for most businesses).
Nikon is the top system? Don't think so. Canon is ahead of Nikon in
most respects and have the advantage of their own fab.
Nikon has legend inertia that overcomes some of that. Very good of
course, but Canon is the top dog.
>> It would be nice if they made an MF system, but it would take them a long
>> time to establish themselves. At least they would likely be less costly
>> than Hass and Leica. But v. Mamiya?
>
> Can we get away from this idea of "medium format" and "FF?" There IS no
> more FF, it's a 70 year old construct. In five years, what is now a 35mm
> sensor could be the entry level, with larger sensors representing the
> "professional norm."
No we can't get away from it.
Lenses, not bodies, are what this is all about. And there are a
mountain load of 35mm lenses out there. Image quality at 35mm FF is
often better than the MF (6x6, 645, 6x7) that were the mainstay of
professionals over the last 30 - 40 years. And the gear is certainly
less cumbersome and more flexible as a system.
The more limited market for MF digital will always be there, but a thick
tier of pros will not go MF 'cause they won't need to to achieve quality
requirements.
Olympus took the approach that APS (ish) was good enough and designed
their entire system including lenses around it. I'm sure they are
regretting that strategy as FF is becoming the norm. This is likely why
they're focusing on the micro-4/3 system to make it truly distinct.
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
Alan Browne
> In message news:GLMTk.1784$V71...@newsfe10.iad, ".."
> <Ginn...@hotmail.com> done wrote:
>
>> has not be available that long and now they are discontinuing it and
>> replacing it with an upgrade, D700X. They did the same with the D40X
>> introduced it and then 4 months later discontinued it.
>> I was looking at a D90 but if there is a chance it could be
>> discontinued in 6 months maybe I should wait?
>
> you can have interchangeable sensors.
This was our great hope 10 years ago, that we could get digital backs
for our somewhat expensive SLR's.
Didn't happen. But I would still love a FF back for my Maxxum 9.
Even if it had no display. Just an ISO setting and raw memory. Nothing
else.
nospam
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> > DSLRs need to be made modular. If you can have interchangeable film backs
> > you can have interchangeable sensors.
>
> This was our great hope 10 years ago, that we could get digital backs
> for our somewhat expensive SLR's.
>
> Didn't happen. But I would still love a FF back for my Maxxum 9.
>
> Even if it had no display. Just an ISO setting and raw memory. Nothing
> else.
that would have been great, but unfortunately, it's impossible to make
a digital back for just about all film slrs.
Alan Browne
> The more limited market for MF digital will always be there, but a
> thick tier of pros will not go MF 'cause they won't need to to
> achieve that level of image detail.
Re-write of above para.
RichA
"Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
But it isn't good enough in some cases, hence larger sensors and their
cameras do exist. We got rid of film, old formats will die to.
RichA
"nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:161120081037184397%nos...@nospam.invalid...
Not as long as the Japs run the show...
John McWilliams
Agreed on those points. Especially when a new model is released and
folks use terms such as one company "dominating" or "kicking ass" or
"blowing away" the other company---- sophomoric at best.
I do hope that the other companies will find ways to stay in the hunt.
--
john mcwilliams
nospam
McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
> I do hope that the other companies will find ways to stay in the hunt.
agreed. pentax made some great cameras and it would sad to see them go
away, although the name might live on somehow. olympus might manage to
stay alive with micro 4/3rds since it has its own niche.
Alan Browne
Of course it isn't impossible and I never said "just about all slrs".
I'm talking about SLR's such as the F-5, EOS-1v and Maxxum 9. All of
these film cameras have user removable film doors.
The volume occupied by film can easily accommodate power source and
processing. The 'door' can be a bit thicker to accommodate the sensor
and supporting electronics.
These cameras have sync connections and that can be used to trigger the
sensor to 'take' the shot. (May defeat the rear-sync, however). Or
optical sensors in the back could 'read' the mechanics of the film
transport (and stimulate the film advance reader). Minor changes might
need to be made to the camera, hopefully not at the expense of being
able to shoot film as well as digital).
Indeed the above is quite possible. The camera makers have done what is
likely best, however, integrated cameras that function very well for the
price. But that was not clear in the early days of DSLR's.
nospam
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> >> This was our great hope 10 years ago, that we could get digital backs
> >> for our somewhat expensive SLR's.
> >>
> >> Didn't happen. But I would still love a FF back for my Maxxum 9.
> >>
> >> Even if it had no display. Just an ISO setting and raw memory. Nothing
> >> else.
> >
> > that would have been great, but unfortunately, it's impossible to make
> > a digital back for just about all film slrs.
>
> Of course it isn't impossible and I never said "just about all slrs".
it may not be 'impossible' but it requires a lot of work and it is no
longer practical.
> I'm talking about SLR's such as the F-5, EOS-1v and Maxxum 9. All of
> these film cameras have user removable film doors.
that helps.
> The volume occupied by film can easily accommodate power source and
> processing. The 'door' can be a bit thicker to accommodate the sensor
> and supporting electronics.
sure, or put the electronics below the camera, as if it had a motor
drive.
> These cameras have sync connections and that can be used to trigger the
> sensor to 'take' the shot. (May defeat the rear-sync, however). Or
> optical sensors in the back could 'read' the mechanics of the film
> transport (and stimulate the film advance reader). Minor changes might
> need to be made to the camera, hopefully not at the expense of being
> able to shoot film as well as digital).
here's where it gets interesting, and it's anything but minor...
the light sensitive part of the sensor is behind an anti-alias filter
and infrared cut filter and perhaps a glass protective layer, whereas
the light sensitive part of film is on the surface. thus, to maintain
focus, the sensor would have to protrude *into* the camera for it to
line up properly. that means that either the sensor will be limited to
a cropped size (so it can fit into the film gate), or the film gate
would need to be cut to accommodate a full frame sensor. complicating
this is that the shutter mechanism is close to where the film plane is,
and to get the proper alignment, it might also require moving the
shutter assembly inward.
if you go with a cropped sensor (to avoid cutting the film gate) and
assuming the shutter is already far enough forward (which eliminates
most slrs), you now have a viewfinder that no longer matches the
sensor. the solution there is to crop off the excess in the viewfinder
(a.k.a. the 'sports finder' that sigma used on the sd-9). this becomes
even more of a headache with interchangeable screens.
then there's metering. you would need to set the iso *twice*, once on
the camera and again on the sensor assembly, as the camera has no way
to tell the sensor the iso (why would it? film never changed). since
the sensor is cropped, the metering bias is no longer accurate. what
the meter sees in the middle of the image (because the camera thinks
it's still full frame film) is really at the edge of the cropped sensor
(and likely less important) and what it sees at the edge isn't even
captured. also, sensors reflect differently than film so any off the
film metering (e.g., flash) may be adversely affected as well.
and then there's the issue of the memory buffer. the camera will
happily shoot many frames per second for as long as you hold down the
shutter button. meanwhile, can the sensor keep up? in the event the
buffer fills, how will it tell the camera to stop?
> Indeed the above is quite possible. The camera makers have done what is
> likely best, however, integrated cameras that function very well for the
> price. But that was not clear in the early days of DSLR's.
it was fairly clear.
Alan Browne
DSLR's have been around for quite a while now. Only three things have
happened to format:
a) it got cut down to make it affordable in the early days
b) One company bet its fortunes on a new locked in format (Oly).
c) Three companies (ignoring Red One for now) have put out FF cameras.
And why is that? Because most DSLR owners are former FSLR owners and
they have lenses they want to keep. That sets the upper bound.
Typical of you to snip out the part of my reply that addressed this:
"" The more limited market for MF digital will always be there, but a
thick tier of pros will not go MF 'cause they won't need to to achieve
[that level of] quality. "" ..minor editing for clarity.
nospam
> >> Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part of that
> >> strategy.
> >
> > struggling? nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year. a
> > bigger issue is the economy.
>
> Agreed on the economy. Where are sales figures available for Canon and
> Nikon? I would have thought only estimates were published by third
> parties. And please don't mention Google!
here's another report -- september 2008 sales, reported by popular
photography:
<http://flash.popphoto.com/blog/2008/11/top-selling-cameras-for-septembe
r-2008.html>
although canon has the #1 spot, nikon has the #2, #3 *and* #4 spot.
Alan Browne
See my reply to "Me".
>
> if you go with a cropped sensor (to avoid cutting the film gate) and
> assuming the shutter is already far enough forward (which eliminates
> most slrs), you now have a viewfinder that no longer matches the
> sensor. the solution there is to crop off the excess in the viewfinder
> (a.k.a. the 'sports finder' that sigma used on the sd-9). this becomes
> even more of a headache with interchangeable screens.
Just change the screen once. The new screen has prominent crop marks.
> then there's metering. you would need to set the iso *twice*, once on
> the camera and again on the sensor assembly, as the camera has no way
> to tell the sensor the iso (why would it? film never changed). since
> the sensor is cropped, the metering bias is no longer accurate. what
> the meter sees in the middle of the image (because the camera thinks
> it's still full frame film) is really at the edge of the cropped sensor
> (and likely less important) and what it sees at the edge isn't even
> captured. also, sensors reflect differently than film so any off the
> film metering (e.g., flash) may be adversely affected as well.
In the Maxxum system there is a honeycomb matrix meter sensor.
Spot: no difference
Weighted: Horizontal matrix over full matrix
Scene: all matrix points.
So cropping the exposed area based on those meters would have little if
any effect.
See my other reply to "Me". There is a film door to camera data path to
support data recording option on the Maxxum 9. (Would likely require a
firmware change in the body ... but there it is).
Later Maxxum cameras (Maxxum 9 and 7, maybe more) use pre-flash as well
as OTF flash metering.
> and then there's the issue of the memory buffer. the camera will
> happily shoot many frames per second for as long as you hold down the
> shutter button. meanwhile, can the sensor keep up? in the event the
> buffer fills, how will it tell the camera to stop?
There are always compromises. For this an audible beep to tell the
shooter to stop as nothing is getting recorded...
>> Indeed the above is quite possible. The camera makers have done what is
>> likely best, however, integrated cameras that function very well for the
>> price. But that was not clear in the early days of DSLR's.
>
> it was fairly clear.
Not to everyone discussing it. There was also the notion of maintaining
film capability, although that desire has completely waned in the great
majority of shooters.
nospam
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> > the light sensitive part of the sensor is behind an anti-alias filter
> > and infrared cut filter and perhaps a glass protective layer, whereas
> > the light sensitive part of film is on the surface. thus, to maintain
> > focus, the sensor would have to protrude *into* the camera for it to
> > line up properly. that means that either the sensor will be limited to
> > a cropped size (so it can fit into the film gate), or the film gate
> > would need to be cut to accommodate a full frame sensor. complicating
> > this is that the shutter mechanism is close to where the film plane is,
> > and to get the proper alignment, it might also require moving the
> > shutter assembly inward.
>
> See my reply to "Me".
in that post, you mentioned a 3mm clearance. i don't know offhand if
that's sufficient or not but it's certainly cutting it *very* close if
it is. most cameras will require moving the shutter, which basically
means it's no longer practical to bother adapting it.
> > if you go with a cropped sensor (to avoid cutting the film gate) and
> > assuming the shutter is already far enough forward (which eliminates
> > most slrs), you now have a viewfinder that no longer matches the
> > sensor. the solution there is to crop off the excess in the viewfinder
> > (a.k.a. the 'sports finder' that sigma used on the sd-9). this becomes
> > even more of a headache with interchangeable screens.
>
> Just change the screen once. The new screen has prominent crop marks.
so you lose the functionality of interchangeable screens, although i
suppose a whole new set of screens could be released.
> > then there's metering. you would need to set the iso *twice*, once on
> > the camera and again on the sensor assembly, as the camera has no way
> > to tell the sensor the iso (why would it? film never changed). since
> > the sensor is cropped, the metering bias is no longer accurate. what
> > the meter sees in the middle of the image (because the camera thinks
> > it's still full frame film) is really at the edge of the cropped sensor
> > (and likely less important) and what it sees at the edge isn't even
> > captured. also, sensors reflect differently than film so any off the
> > film metering (e.g., flash) may be adversely affected as well.
>
> In the Maxxum system there is a honeycomb matrix meter sensor.
>
> Spot: no difference
it's now effectively a larger spot.
> Weighted: Horizontal matrix over full matrix
> Scene: all matrix points.
does it look at the edges of the frame? those are no longer in the
photo, but the meter still analyzes them.
> So cropping the exposed area based on those meters would have little if
> any effect.
maybe, but you still have to set iso twice.
> See my other reply to "Me". There is a film door to camera data path to
> support data recording option on the Maxxum 9. (Would likely require a
> firmware change in the body ... but there it is).
and a firmware change means you no longer can have a module that the
user can drop in. they'd have to send the camera out for updating.
and since new functionality is being added to the camera's firmware
(namely, sending shooting information to the sensor), there may not be
enough room in the existing rom chip to hold it all, which would
require a larger capacity chip and quite possibly, changing quite a bit
more.
> Later Maxxum cameras (Maxxum 9 and 7, maybe more) use pre-flash as well
> as OTF flash metering.
preflash would be required.
> > and then there's the issue of the memory buffer. the camera will
> > happily shoot many frames per second for as long as you hold down the
> > shutter button. meanwhile, can the sensor keep up? in the event the
> > buffer fills, how will it tell the camera to stop?
>
> There are always compromises. For this an audible beep to tell the
> shooter to stop as nothing is getting recorded...
that's quite a compromise!
> >> Indeed the above is quite possible. The camera makers have done what is
> >> likely best, however, integrated cameras that function very well for the
> >> price. But that was not clear in the early days of DSLR's.
> >
> > it was fairly clear.
>
> Not to everyone discussing it. There was also the notion of maintaining
> film capability, although that desire has completely waned in the great
> majority of shooters.
it's not practical.
Ray Fischer
>In article <ZKydnVSv2YYL273U...@comcast.com>, John
>McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> >> Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part of that
>> >> strategy.
>> >
>> > struggling? nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year. a
>> > bigger issue is the economy.
>>
>> Agreed on the economy. Where are sales figures available for Canon and
>> Nikon? I would have thought only estimates were published by third
>> parties. And please don't mention Google!
>
>here's another report -- september 2008 sales, reported by popular
>photography:
Get real. One month's data means almost nothing. Pick another month
and Canon could hold the top spots, depending on what cameras were
recently released.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
John McWilliams
Yes, and I have no quarrel with a month's, quarter or even 12 month's
sales units, only with broad interpretation of these results, especially
as the sources are unconfirmed (the above article refers to NPD, a
subscription $$ service).
Thanks for the link. I tried to fix the break, but who know what server
or E-mail client will do what. ....
--
John McWilliams
Alan Browne
So what? The spot area is in the VF. If you have to move to fill it,
so be it. For the same lenses it is absolutely no difference.
>
>> Weighted: Horizontal matrix over full matrix
>> Scene: all matrix points.
>
> does it look at the edges of the frame? those are no longer in the
> photo, but the meter still analyzes them.
Spot: 0 effect.
Weighted: effect but on average about the same as what's in the rest of
the frame.
Full frame: averaged even more.
>> So cropping the exposed area based on those meters would have little if
>> any effect.
>
> maybe, but you still have to set iso twice.
No. See below.
>
>> See my other reply to "Me". There is a film door to camera data path to
>> support data recording option on the Maxxum 9. (Would likely require a
>> firmware change in the body ... but there it is).
>
> and a firmware change means you no longer can have a module that the
> user can drop in. they'd have to send the camera out for updating.
> and since new functionality is being added to the camera's firmware
> (namely, sending shooting information to the sensor), there may not be
> enough room in the existing rom chip to hold it all, which would
> require a larger capacity chip and quite possibly, changing quite a bit
> more.
For the functionality, people would be willing to send in their DSLR.
When K-M had to have cameras back to fix a flash issue the turn around
was about 1 week.
Minimal f-w change such as sending the data (including ISO setting)
before a shot is taken rather than immediately afterwards.
>> Later Maxxum cameras (Maxxum 9 and 7, maybe more) use pre-flash as well
>> as OTF flash metering.
>
> preflash would be required.
What part of "use pre-flash" confused you?
>>> and then there's the issue of the memory buffer. the camera will
>>> happily shoot many frames per second for as long as you hold down the
>>> shutter button. meanwhile, can the sensor keep up? in the event the
>>> buffer fills, how will it tell the camera to stop?
>> There are always compromises. For this an audible beep to tell the
>> shooter to stop as nothing is getting recorded...
>
> that's quite a compromise!
Why? Whether the camera stops shooting or a beep tells you the same,
nothing of import has happened. Both systems did not get the next shot.
>>>> Indeed the above is quite possible. The camera makers have done what is
>>>> likely best, however, integrated cameras that function very well for the
>>>> price. But that was not clear in the early days of DSLR's.
>>> it was fairly clear.
>> Not to everyone discussing it. There was also the notion of maintaining
>> film capability, although that desire has completely waned in the great
>> majority of shooters.
>
> it's not practical.
Better not tell Hasselblad.
Anyway, have your inevitable last words, I'm done.
John Sheehy
news:mIidnXgLJvrnwYPU...@giganews.com:
> Nikon needs to step up more. 40 megapixels on a 45mm sensor.
That's ridiculous. They need to work with the image circle of existing
lenses.
nospam
<rfis...@sonic.net> wrote:
> Get real. One month's data means almost nothing. Pick another month
> and Canon could hold the top spots, depending on what cameras were
> recently released.
the point is that sms claimed that nikon was 'struggling' to keep up
with canon. they're not.
nospam
McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
> <http://flash.popphoto.com/blog/2008/11/top-selling-cameras-for-september-2008.
> html>
> >
> > although canon has the #1 spot, nikon has the #2, #3 *and* #4 spot.
>
> Yes, and I have no quarrel with a month's, quarter or even 12 month's
> sales units, only with broad interpretation of these results, especially
> as the sources are unconfirmed (the above article refers to NPD, a
> subscription $$ service).
that, and it is unit sales, not dollar revenue. there are lots of ways
to spin the numbers. in any event, nikon is not struggling.
> Thanks for the link. I tried to fix the break, but who know what server
> or E-mail client will do what. ....
you need a better client that honors <> delimiters. on mine, the url
is automatically highlighted as a clickable link, regardless of how
many lines are used.
nospam
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> > it's not practical.
>
> Better not tell Hasselblad.
not relevant; hasselblad was designed for interchangeable backs and
doesn't have the limitations that a 35mm slr does.
John McWilliams
> In article <KIydnXG5g6_WMb3U...@comcast.com>, John
> McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> <http://flash.popphoto.com/blog/2008/11/top-selling-cameras-for-september-2008.
>> html>
>>> although canon has the #1 spot, nikon has the #2, #3 *and* #4 spot.
>> Yes, and I have no quarrel with a month's, quarter or even 12 month's
>> sales units, only with broad interpretation of these results, especially
>> as the sources are unconfirmed (the above article refers to NPD, a
>> subscription $$ service).
>
> that, and it is unit sales, not dollar revenue. there are lots of ways
> to spin the numbers. in any event, nikon is not struggling.
Perhaps I didn't make it clear enough: I never said they were, don't
believe they are, and hope they continue to do very well.
>> Thanks for the link. I tried to fix the break, but who know what server
>> or E-mail client will do what. ....
>
> you need a better client that honors <> delimiters. on mine, the url
> is automatically highlighted as a clickable link, regardless of how
> many lines are used.
Better than Toth? Impossible! <s>
In any event, the link you posted, which was broken when I clicked on
it, is the one I fixed, and works now.
So, I wonder if others could say which link works, and which doesn't.
It's possible, of course, that Toth and others can put back together a
link broken only by line breaks, but it appears that Toth broke it on
the sending? It's probably academic, as Toth is no longer in
development, or has it arisen from the graveyard?
--
John McWilliams
P&S_Fan
Oh? Are you claiming that DSLR lenses are flawed? Say it can't be so.
LOL
(I'm not objecting, I'm sarcastically claiming that you are 100% correct.)
nospam
McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
> It's possible, of course, that Toth and others can put back together a
> link broken only by line breaks, but it appears that Toth broke it on
> the sending?
sometimes thoth adds a space when wrapping and i guess it handles
spaces if a url wraps. that must have been one of those times.
> It's probably academic, as Toth is no longer in
> development, or has it arisen from the graveyard?
it hasn't.
Paul Furman
> nospam wrote:
>> In article <KIydnXG5g6_WMb3U...@comcast.com>, John
>> McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> <http://flash.popphoto.com/blog/2008/11/top-selling-cameras-for-september-2008.
>>>
>>> html>
>>>> although canon has the #1 spot, nikon has the #2, #3 *and* #4 spot.
>>> Yes, and I have no quarrel with a month's, quarter or even 12 month's
>>> sales units, only with broad interpretation of these results, especially
>>> as the sources are unconfirmed (the above article refers to NPD, a
>>> subscription $$ service).
>>
>> that, and it is unit sales, not dollar revenue. there are lots of ways
>> to spin the numbers. in any event, nikon is not struggling.
>
> Perhaps I didn't make it clear enough: I never said they were, don't
> believe they are, and hope they continue to do very well.
>
>>> Thanks for the link. I tried to fix the break, but who know what server
>>> or E-mail client will do what. ....
>>
>> you need a better client that honors <> delimiters. on mine, the url
>> is automatically highlighted as a clickable link, regardless of how
>> many lines are used.
>
> Better than Toth? Impossible! <s>
>
> In any event, the link you posted, which was broken when I clicked on
> it, is the one I fixed, and works now.
>
> So, I wonder if others could say which link works, and which doesn't.
Thunderbird broke on the first, worked on the second. With the old
Mozilla I had to use the angle brackets but not t-bird when sending.
Wrapped links actually working would be nice :-)
> It's possible, of course, that Toth and others can put back together a
> link broken only by line breaks, but it appears that Toth broke it on
> the sending? It's probably academic, as Toth is no longer in
> development, or has it arisen from the graveyard?
>
--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com
all google groups messages filtered due to spam
SMS
Canon sold far, far, more cameras than Nikon last year. However in
D-SLRs, Canon sold more than Nikon in 2007 but not far more. Canon was
at 42%, Nikon was at 40%.
For 2008, it's likely that Nikon sold more D-SLRs than Canon, thanks to
the D40, though Canon will still lead in $ value of D-SLRs sold. Of
course Canon still sold far more cameras than Nikon when you include P&S
models.
Nikon wasn't even in the top 3 in terms of total units sold in 2007.
nospam
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> However in
> D-SLRs, Canon sold more than Nikon in 2007 but not far more. Canon was
> at 42%, Nikon was at 40%.
so your own numbers show that isn't struggling like you said they were.
Me Here
"N" <N...@onyx.com> wrote in message
news:491f990c$0$7570$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> ".." <Ginn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:GLMTk.1784$V71...@newsfe10.iad...
>> Nikon brings out a new DSLR only to update it 6 months later. The D700
>> has
>> not be available that long and now they are discontinuing it and
>> replacing
>> it with an upgrade, D700X. They did the same with the D40X introduced it
>> and
>> then 4 months later discontinued it.
>> I was looking at a D90 but if there is a chance it could be discontinued
>> in
>> 6 months maybe I should wait?
>>
>
>
> Do you use the same logic when buying clothes or a car?
No, but in consumer electronics buyers are merely sheep led around by the
marketing weasels, Cars normally run a 12 month cycle, not withstanding the
2008 1/2 models.
Get with the program!!!
Resistance is futile.
SMS
> No, but in consumer electronics buyers are merely sheep led around by the
> marketing weasels, Cars normally run a 12 month cycle, not withstanding the
> 2008 1/2 models.
Cars are a much more mature product. More importantly, if you buy a
Toyota one year, and buy a Honda 5 years later, you don't have to throw
away a bunch of stuff that works only on the Toyota. I.e., I've used my
Thule racks on a succession of vehicles from VW, Honda, and Toyota (2),
with only minor outlays for some vehicle specific roof mounting. I can't
use my Canon lenses on a Nikon D-SLR (the opposite is possible but not
desirable).
In reality, in this case, it's the electronics's buyers that are leading
the consumer electronics companies around. If you buy a Nikon camera and
several lenses, and a flash, you're pretty much committed to Nikon for a
very very long time, which is how Nikon wants it. Ditto for Canon. So
it's vitally important to these companies that their products don't lack
some key feature that the competition has, because of the long-term
implications. Nikon _must_ quickly upgrade the D700 to avoid the long
term loss of customers to Canon, because of Canon's introduction of the
5D Mark II. Conversely, Canon's at a disadvantage with their XSi versue
the D90, since the D90 does video and the XSi does not, and in a segment
that is geared toward those upgrading from a video-capable P&S, the D90
has a compelling advantage to those that don't like hauling both a D-SLR
and a camcorder around. Ditto for the D300 versus the 50D. Nikon will
almost certainly introduce a D300 replacement with greater resolution,
and may add video to leapfrog the 50D. The cost won't go up, but the
features will.
The most minor feature can tip a buying decision. I remember seeing a
story about Honda on TV. Many years ago, when the Accord/Camry battle
first started, Honda introduced cup holders in the Accord, and the Camry
didn't yet have them. There were customers that felt the two vehicles
were equal in quality and price, and were basing their final selection
of the Accord over the Camry on the presence of cup holders.
John Sheehy
news:30o1i41favc66fe17...@4ax.com:
> (I'm not objecting, I'm sarcastically claiming that you are 100%
> correct.)
Even with your explanation of sarcasm; I have no idea what you're saying.
My reference to the image circle is about vignetting which would occur with
35mm format lenses with a bigger sensor.
Alan Browne
I don't accept the limitations other than the slightly reduced (still
larger than APS-C) and cost per back. That's all that did it in.
Chris H
<scharf...@geemail.com> writes
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article <ZKydnVSv2YYL273U...@comcast.com>, John
>>> McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part
>>>>>>of that strategy.
>>>>> struggling? nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year. a
>>>>> bigger issue is the economy.
>>>> Agreed on the economy. Where are sales figures available for Canon
>>>>and Nikon? I would have thought only estimates were published by
>>>>third parties. And please don't mention Google!
>>> here's another report -- september 2008 sales, reported by popular
>>> photography:
>> Get real. One month's data means almost nothing. Pick another
>>month
>> and Canon could hold the top spots, depending on what cameras were
>> recently released.
>
>Canon sold far, far, more cameras than Nikon last year. However in
>D-SLRs, Canon sold more than Nikon in 2007 but not far more. Canon was
>at 42%, Nikon was at 40%.
2% is bugger all difference when both are at the 40% mark. Also it means
that al the rest put together only have 8% of the market.
>For 2008, it's likely that Nikon sold more D-SLRs than Canon,
That is the market we were discussing?
>thanks to the D40,
And the D300, D700 and D3
>though Canon will still lead in $ value of D-SLRs sold.
Over priced? :-)
>Of course Canon still sold far more cameras than Nikon when you include
>P&S models.
Possibly
>Nikon wasn't even in the top 3 in terms of total units sold in 2007.
So Cannon lead in DSLR's by a long way
Cannon sell more P&S by a long way.
Total units shipped Nikon is not in top three (though the third
company has less than 8% of the market to Nikons 40%)
Yet Nikon is only 2% Cannon.... your numbers don't add up.
I note that Digital Photo and Practical Photography voted Nikon Best
across the board fro 2008
Best Pro DSLR D3
Best Advanced DSLR D300
Product of the Year D3
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
SMS
> In message <j67Uk.7253$yr3....@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>, SMS
> <scharf...@geemail.com> writes
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>> In article <ZKydnVSv2YYL273U...@comcast.com>, John
>>>> McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Nikon is struggling to keep up with Canon, and the D700X is part
>>>>>>> of that strategy.
>>>>>> struggling? nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year. a
>>>>>> bigger issue is the economy.
>>>>> Agreed on the economy. Where are sales figures available for Canon
>>>>> and Nikon? I would have thought only estimates were published by
>>>>> third parties. And please don't mention Google!
>>>> here's another report -- september 2008 sales, reported by popular
>>>> photography:
>>> Get real. One month's data means almost nothing. Pick another month
>>> and Canon could hold the top spots, depending on what cameras were
>>> recently released.
>>
>> Canon sold far, far, more cameras than Nikon last year. However in
>> D-SLRs, Canon sold more than Nikon in 2007 but not far more. Canon was
>> at 42%, Nikon was at 40%.
>
> 2% is bugger all difference when both are at the 40% mark. Also it means
> that al the rest put together only have 8% of the market.
Your arithmetic skills need some help.
Actually for 2007 D-SLR sales it was:
Canon 43%
Nikon 40%
Sony 6%
Olympus 6%
Others 5%
>> For 2008, it's likely that Nikon sold more D-SLRs than Canon,
> That is the market we were discussing?
No, someone wrote "nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year".
It's not true of course, Canon sold far more total cameras than Nikon
did last year, and slightly more D-SLRs, though Canon lost a lot of
market share in D-SLRs to Nikon, who introduced a slew of new models
into the market, competing in segments of the D-SLR market for the first
time.
>> thanks to the D40,
>
> And the D300, D700 and D3
>
>> though Canon will still lead in $ value of D-SLRs sold.
> Over priced? :-)
Canon doesn't have a mass-market entry at the extreme low end like the
D40. That's where the big volumes are.
>> Of course Canon still sold far more cameras than Nikon when you
>> include P&S models.
> Possibly
No, not possible. Certainly.
Canon 18.8%
Sony 16.0%
Kodak 9.6%
Samsung 9.0%
Nikon 8.4%
Olympus 8.3%
>> Nikon wasn't even in the top 3 in terms of total units sold in 2007.
>
> So Cannon lead in DSLR's by a long way
No such company as Cannon, but Canon did outsell Nikon slightly in 2007
in D-SLRs. For 2008, when the data comes out, Nikon will likely have a
slight advantage.
> Cannon sell more P&S by a long way.
Again, no such company as Canon, but yes, Canon outsells every other
manufacturer by quite a wide margin.
> Yet Nikon is only 2% Cannon.... your numbers don't add up.
Canon outsells every manufacturer in total units. In D-SLR units, Canon
was slightly ahead on Nikon in 2007, but when the numbers come in for
2008, Nikon will likely lead Canon slightly.
> I note that Digital Photo and Practical Photography voted Nikon Best
> across the board fro 2008
>
> Best Pro DSLR D3
> Best Advanced DSLR D300
> Product of the Year D3
I guess Nikon placed more ads than Canon. To claim that the D3 is a
better pro camera than the 1Ds Mark II is ludicrous.
Chris H
<scharf...@geemail.com> writes
>
>> I note that Digital Photo and Practical Photography voted Nikon Best
>>across the board fro 2008
>> Best Pro DSLR D3
>> Best Advanced DSLR D300
>> Product of the Year D3
>
>I guess Nikon placed more ads than Canon. To claim that the D3 is a
>better pro camera than the 1Ds Mark II is ludicrous.
Strangely DXO also place the D3 above the 1D
They are very good at testing optics.
Never mind you are the only one who is right.
Steve
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:27:00 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:
>Chris H wrote:
>> In message <j67Uk.7253$yr3....@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>, SMS
>> I note that Digital Photo and Practical Photography voted Nikon Best
>> across the board fro 2008
>>
>> Best Pro DSLR D3
>> Best Advanced DSLR D300
>> Product of the Year D3
>
>I guess Nikon placed more ads than Canon. To claim that the D3 is a
>better pro camera than the 1Ds Mark II is ludicrous.
That depends on what the pro is shooting. For fast action or low
light, the D3 is a much better camera than the 1Ds. For studio
photography, maybe/maybe not. A good pro will use the right tool for
the job, which could be either depending on the job.
But for general purpose all around shooting if you could only have one
camera and had to make a choice between the D3 and 1DsMkII, those
magazines got it right. As we all know, megapixels isn't everything
and 16.7 MP isn't all that much more than 12.1 MP when it comes to
real world photography. Even compared to a 1DsMkIII, I'd take the D3
if I could only have one.
Steve
nospam
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> No, someone wrote "nikon sold more cameras than canon did last year".
> It's not true of course, Canon sold far more total cameras than Nikon
> did last year, and slightly more D-SLRs, though Canon lost a lot of
> market share in D-SLRs to Nikon, who introduced a slew of new models
> into the market, competing in segments of the D-SLR market for the first
> time.
that was me who said that, and perhaps i was a little off in my timing
as it was 2008 when nikon moved ahead.
..snip..
then you go on to say:
> Canon outsells every manufacturer in total units. In D-SLR units, Canon
> was slightly ahead on Nikon in 2007, but when the numbers come in for
> 2008, Nikon will likely lead Canon slightly.
the discussion was about dslrs, not all digital cameras, and you even
agree with it. it was spawned by your statement that nikon is *forced*
to update the d700 and d300 because they're struggling and losing
market share to canon, yet you now say that nikon sold more dslrs than
canon did.
> > I note that Digital Photo and Practical Photography voted Nikon Best
> > across the board fro 2008
> >
> > Best Pro DSLR D3
> > Best Advanced DSLR D300
> > Product of the Year D3
>
> I guess Nikon placed more ads than Canon. To claim that the D3 is a
> better pro camera than the 1Ds Mark II is ludicrous.
so the 1ds can do 10 frames per second? how about high iso?
Eric Stevens
<shiv...@kashmir-hindu.org> wrote:
>In article <rhd8i4lpebmguc91d...@4ax.com>,
> Steve <st...@example.com> wrote:
>
>> A good pro will use the right tool for
>> the job, which could be either depending on the job.
>
>This is the correct answer to _every_ "which is better...", "which is
>best...", "is Nykon better than Cannen..." question.
>
>The right tool for the right job, and how well does it fit your hands.
>No one wants to hear these answers though.
>
>>
>> But for general purpose all around shooting if you could only have one
>> camera and had to make a choice between the D3 and 1DsMkII
>
>Oh dear, I'm afraid I'd have to give up photography if faced with that
>choice. Neither one of those cameras is compatible with this new-fangled
>stuff called "film" that I use :-)
>
You should consider using dry glass plates. I find they are much more
convenient than the wet collodion process I have been using up till
now.
Eric Stevens
Alan Browne
> In message <j67Uk.7253$yr3....@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>, SMS
>> Canon sold far, far, more cameras than Nikon last year. However in
>> D-SLRs, Canon sold more than Nikon in 2007 but not far more. Canon was
>> at 42%, Nikon was at 40%.
>
> 2% is bugger all difference when both are at the 40% mark. Also it means
> that al the rest put together only have 8% of the market.
Want to check your 'rithmetic?
Eric Stevens
<shiv...@kashmir-hindu.org> wrote:
>In article <s2u8i4t4lcvnim9gs...@4ax.com>,
>Actually, I have a dry-plate camera which I use as a convenient point
>'n' shoot since it takes so little time and expense compared to my "pro"
>Daguerreotype setup... It's also a nice break from breathing mercury
>fumes all day.
LOL :-)
Eric Stevens
RichA
"John Sheehy" <J...@no.komm> wrote in message
news:Xns9B58BF2B8...@199.45.49.11...
Nonsense. Leica doesn't seem to need to.
John McWilliams
> In article <s2u8i4t4lcvnim9gs...@4ax.com>,
> Eric Stevens <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
>
> 'n' shoot since it takes so little time and expense compared to my "pro"
> Daguerreotype setup... It's also a nice break from breathing mercury
> fumes all day.
How maddening!
You can save a bit of weight, though, by using rigid but thin sheets of
plexiglass instead of glass for the plates. You do coat your own, no?
--
john mcwilliams
John McWilliams
> In article <yrydnX8LWNGzS7nU...@comcast.com>,
> Ozzie, and Kiwi friends]! My mum and dad used to make us get up at four
> o'clock in the morning and steal panes of glass from the mill, then coat
> them before the sun came up, before sending us to school barefoot with
> nowt but two lumps of coal for lunch.
>
> And you try telling kids today ...
Aaaarrrrr, me laddie, aaaarrrrr! Yousben lucky in-deed: Moi four
brudders and tree sisters 'adda share but one lump amongst us, walkin'
up hill both ways, four mile, ina freezin coldt.
--
john mcwilliams
tony cooper
<shiv...@kashmir-hindu.org> wrote:
>In article <yrydnX8LWNGzS7nU...@comcast.com>,
>Luxury! We used to DREAM of using Plexiglas ["Perspex" to our British,
>Ozzie, and Kiwi friends]! My mum and dad used to make us get up at four
>o'clock in the morning and steal panes of glass from the mill, then coat
>them before the sun came up, before sending us to school barefoot with
>nowt but two lumps of coal for lunch.
>
>And you try telling kids today ...
There was glass to steal in your neighborhood? Oh, to live in such
luxurious surroundings! When I were a lad we had to rub sand and
ashes between our palms until it formed into glass. Kept our hands
warm, though, so on snowy days we walked to school on our hands 'cause
we had no shoes. We'd fed those to baby brother long ago.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Ken Hart1
"Shiva Das" <shiv...@kashmir-hindu.org> wrote in message
news:K9adnYmGUsUbZ7nU...@bway.net...
> In article <yrydnX8LWNGzS7nU...@comcast.com>,
> Ozzie, and Kiwi friends]! My mum and dad used to make us get up at four
> o'clock in the morning and steal panes of glass from the mill, then coat
> them before the sun came up, before sending us to school barefoot with
> nowt but two lumps of coal for lunch.
>
> And you try telling kids today ...
This parrot is dead. If you hadn't nailed his feet to the perch, he'd be
pushing up daisies.
J. Clarke
Well, o'course it was nailed there! If I hadn't nailed that bird down,
it would have nuzzled up to those bars, bent 'em apart with its beak,
and VOOM! Feeweeweewee!
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Paul Furman
> The expected announcement date for the D700x is Dec. 20. D700x has
> everything the D700 has, except the shooting rate at full resolution.
> The sensor is 24+ MP - while Nikon isn't officially admitting this,
> it is the one used in the Sony alpha-900. The D700 will be officially
> discontinued then, as by shooting at 12 MP the D700x will match its
> burst speed so the D700 is redundant. Price is a big question but
> expect the USD price to be well above that of the D700.
> Personally, I am surprised, I expected first a D3x aka D4. Given that
> the high-dollar market is with the Hassies, EOS-1DS MkIII and the 37
> MP Leica vaporcam, and the global downturn, perhaps Tokyo decided that
> sector is overcrowded?
> Any event, D700 was just as good as the D3 in construction, only speed
> was a difference. Did I forget to say D700x has the 25.6K ISO setting?
> Source of the news is 100% reliable, my buddy in Nikon Japan. Read
> more on http://nikonrumors.com when they eventually wake up. :)
> Tony (Nikon fan since the S3)
D3x at that link now.
Paul Furman
> Tony the insider wrote:
>>
>> http://nikonrumors.com
> D3x at that link now.
"The D3x has ...unique OLPF (optical low pas filter)"
What would be unique about that?
IMAGE PROCESSING
The D3x’s 16-bit EXPEED engine ... is also tuned to minimise the effects
of colour fringing with older F-mount Nikkor lenses, and to minimise the
effect of unnatural-looking (digital) noise patterns. Vignette
(peripheral fall-off) can also be controlled for creative effect.
ACTIVE D-LIGHTING
The D3x features a new Extra High Active D-Lighting setting, designed to
better manage extremely high-contrast scenes, especially tonal gradation
in highlights.
ISO 100-1600 native.
No dust shaker.
Lens rumors:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=30122545
80-400 AF-S version
35mm 1.8 AF-S
135mm 1.8 AF-S
David Kilpatrick
> Paul Furman wrote:
>> Tony the insider wrote:
>>>
>>> http://nikonrumors.com
>>
>> D3x at that link now.
>
> "The D3x has ...unique OLPF (optical low pas filter)"
> What would be unique about that?
Maybe the same uniqueness as the Sony Alpha 900 using a similar sensor -
a wider gap between the filter and the sensor, meaning a lower value can
be used, and it is less sensitive to different apertures and lenses, and
also reduces the impact of sensor dust.
David
Paul Furman
Nice. Thanks. Almost surely the Sony sensor, with a little different
processing usually.