Nikon D3X

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Chris H, Nov 28, 2008.

  1. Chris H

    Chris H Guest

    Nikon as sort of announced the D3X.

    It wen up (and down again) on the Nikon US website

    It has a 4 page spread in the Nikon Pro magazine

    24.5 MP FX camera

    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
     
    Chris H, Nov 28, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Chris H

    David Guest

    "Chris H" <> wrote in message
    news:$pIZcLQb8$...
    >
    >
    > Nikon as sort of announced the D3X.
    >
    > It wen up (and down again) on the Nikon US website
    >
    > It has a 4 page spread in the Nikon Pro magazine
    >
    > 24.5 MP FX camera
    >
    > --
    > \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    > \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    > \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/


    So who is the next mug to waste their money on something which they will
    NEVER use to its full potential?

    I've had 8mp images blown up and used on the back of double deckers with no
    obvious loss of quality, remember such images are to be viewed at a distance
    and not from 6 inches away.

    Dont forget a computer upgrade would be necessary to view those massive RAW
    files let alone edit and store them, and a mass of memory cards.

    I'd say 10mp is more than enough for generally any applicable use and is
    workable on older PC's too.
     
    David, Nov 28, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Chris H

    Chris H Guest

    In message <49300d4f$>, David
    <nospam@please.?.invalid> writes
    >
    >"Chris H" <> wrote in message
    >news:$pIZcLQb8$...
    >>
    >>
    >> Nikon as sort of announced the D3X.
    >>
    >> It wen up (and down again) on the Nikon US website
    >>
    >> It has a 4 page spread in the Nikon Pro magazine
    >>
    >> 24.5 MP FX camera

    >So who is the next mug to waste their money on something which they
    >will NEVER use to its full potential?


    MF camera users? Also I know several people who will need this camera

    >I've had 8mp images blown up and used on the back of double deckers
    >with no obvious loss of quality, remember such images are to be viewed
    >at a distance and not from 6 inches away.


    Well I still use a 8MP camera.

    >Dont forget a computer upgrade would be necessary to view those massive
    >RAW files let alone edit and store them,


    No it won't.... I have plenty of disk space.

    >and a mass of memory cards.


    Well I can remember when 256Mb was a large memory card....

    >I'd say 10mp is more than enough for generally any applicable use


    Yes. I agree. I have 12MP and can't see any need to go high for my
    self.




    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
     
    Chris H, Nov 28, 2008
    #3
  4. Chris H

    Peter Guest

    "Chris H" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > In message <49300d4f$>, David
    > <nospam@please.?.invalid> writes
    >>
    >>"Chris H" <> wrote in message
    >>news:$pIZcLQb8$...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Nikon as sort of announced the D3X.
    >>>
    >>> It wen up (and down again) on the Nikon US website
    >>>
    >>> It has a 4 page spread in the Nikon Pro magazine
    >>>
    >>> 24.5 MP FX camera

    >>So who is the next mug to waste their money on something which they will
    >>NEVER use to its full potential?

    >
    > MF camera users? Also I know several people who will need this camera
    >
    >>I've had 8mp images blown up and used on the back of double deckers with
    >>no obvious loss of quality, remember such images are to be viewed at a
    >>distance and not from 6 inches away.

    >
    > Well I still use a 8MP camera.
    >
    >>Dont forget a computer upgrade would be necessary to view those massive
    >>RAW files let alone edit and store them,

    >
    > No it won't.... I have plenty of disk space.
    >
    >>and a mass of memory cards.

    >
    > Well I can remember when 256Mb was a large memory card....
    >
    >>I'd say 10mp is more than enough for generally any applicable use

    >
    > Yes. I agree. I have 12MP and can't see any need to go high for my self.
    >



    It wasn't that long ago when I told a salesman that I had no nee for a 5
    megabyte HD.


    --
    Peter
     
    Peter, Nov 28, 2008
    #4
  5. Chris H

    Chris H Guest

    In message <4930161b$0$31148$-secrets.com>, Peter
    <> writes
    >It wasn't that long ago when I told a salesman that I had no nee for a
    >5 megabyte HD.


    There was a time when everything ran from a floppy.... power users had
    two floppy drives.... "what's a hard disk?" :)

    Seriously, unless it becomes ridiculously cheap (eg like hard drives)
    I will stay with my 6 and 12MP cameras. I don't really need any more.

    However there are some serious pro's out there who will want the 24.5
    MP. Also I can see the 24MPDSLR taking over from the MF Cameras


    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
     
    Chris H, Nov 28, 2008
    #5
  6. Chris H wrote:

    > In message <4930161b$0$31148$-secrets.com>, Peter
    > <> writes
    >>It wasn't that long ago when I told a salesman that I had no nee for a
    >>5 megabyte HD.

    >
    > There was a time when everything ran from a floppy.... power users had
    > two floppy drives.... "what's a hard disk?" :)


    <flashing back to my Apple ][e with two floppies and no HD> :)


    --
    Blinky
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
    Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Nov 28, 2008
    #6
  7. Chris H

    David Guest

    "Chris H" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > In message <49300d4f$>, David
    > <nospam@please.?.invalid> writes
    >>
    >>"Chris H" <> wrote in message
    >>news:$pIZcLQb8$...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Nikon as sort of announced the D3X.
    >>>
    >>> It wen up (and down again) on the Nikon US website
    >>>
    >>> It has a 4 page spread in the Nikon Pro magazine
    >>>
    >>> 24.5 MP FX camera

    >>So who is the next mug to waste their money on something which they will
    >>NEVER use to its full potential?

    >
    > MF camera users? Also I know several people who will need this camera
    >
    >>I've had 8mp images blown up and used on the back of double deckers with
    >>no obvious loss of quality, remember such images are to be viewed at a
    >>distance and not from 6 inches away.

    >
    > Well I still use a 8MP camera.
    >
    >>Dont forget a computer upgrade would be necessary to view those massive
    >>RAW files let alone edit and store them,

    >
    > No it won't.... I have plenty of disk space.


    Not necessarily storage space but a powerful multitasking processor and a
    reasonably powerful fx card.
     
    David, Nov 29, 2008
    #7
  8. Chris H

    David Guest

    > Seriously, unless it becomes ridiculously cheap (eg like hard drives) I
    > will stay with my 6 and 12MP cameras. I don't really need any more.
    >
    > However there are some serious pro's out there who will want the 24.5 MP.
    > Also I can see the 24MPDSLR taking over from the MF Cameras


    Just looking at reviews of the sensor, it isnt anything much above the D3
    sensor in terms of resolution or quality.

    How many people out there think that their photos will become better just by
    using a higher res sensor?

    "I've got a Porshe so I must be a better driver than Hamilton."
     
    David, Nov 29, 2008
    #8
  9. Chris H

    David Guest

    "shiva das" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <4930161b$0$31148$-secrets.com>,
    > "Peter" <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> It wasn't that long ago when I told a salesman that I had no nee for a 5
    >> megabyte HD.

    >
    > Everything in perspective:
    >
    > IBM 5MB hard drive in 1956 U$50,000
    >
    > Apple 5MB hard drive in 1981 U$3,500
    >
    > After which they became downright cheap!


    LOL good post, the trouble is that the 5mb hard drive in 1981 hold no more
    info that the one in 1956. In terms of digital sensors I can see a cap on
    resolution in favour for in camera processing / hdr and other cheats of the
    like.
     
    David, Nov 29, 2008
    #9
  10. Chris H

    David Guest

    "D Lirious" <> wrote in message
    news:gaVXk.8737$...
    > The Sony 24mp sensor will find its way into Nikon, Pentax and perhaps
    > other OEM cameras, possibly Panasonic.
    > Canon has only itself as a customer but is doing the same thing with its
    > highest density sensor.
    > The sensor that is now in the Nikon "full frame" cameras will hit cameras
    > at APS-c sensor price points within a year.
    > The cost of developing these things is such that it cannot be recouped
    > until large volumes are sold.
    > Many now see around 12mps as a practical limit for dLSR sensors that are
    > going to retain the 35mm film camera format, which it appears that
    > consumers will not let go of because of the massive backlog of lens
    > investment and inability to adapt to new camera design paradigms.
    > It is a real shame that amateur and professional photographers will not
    > yet accept a camera that does not resemble a 1935 Exacta.
    > Above 12mps and you exceed the resolving power of most lenses as well as
    > face noise issues at moderately high ISOs that may have already hit the
    > wall of what technology can do to change them because of the physical
    > limits of sensor size.
    > Even at 12mps sensor size most photographers seem blissfully unaware of
    > the vast amount of data that is algorithmically stripped out when they are
    > viewing the image on a computer monitor, when a print is made or any other
    > practical use is made of the image data.
    > The biggest laugher is CS4 sending 16 bit data to the printer drivers of
    > OSx users.


    Dead right, for 'most' users 6mp is absolutely more than enough. Heck i've
    processed 1mp images up to beyond A4 with no obvious loss, unless viewing
    under 6 inches but who does that anyway?
     
    David, Nov 29, 2008
    #10
  11. Chris H

    Burgerman Guest

    "David" <nospam@please> wrote in message
    news:4931464e$...
    >> Seriously, unless it becomes ridiculously cheap (eg like hard drives) I
    >> will stay with my 6 and 12MP cameras. I don't really need any more.
    >>
    >> However there are some serious pro's out there who will want the 24.5 MP.
    >> Also I can see the 24MPDSLR taking over from the MF Cameras

    >
    > Just looking at reviews of the sensor, it isnt anything much above the D3
    > sensor in terms of resolution or quality.



    Where are you seeing a review?

    >
    > How many people out there think that their photos will become better just
    > by using a higher res sensor?



    Sensor resolution is double.
    Lens resolution (at least consumer/amateur sub 1k UK Pounds) Is already
    struggling and is below the 12 million sensor resolution.
    So having a higher sensor resolution of the same low resolution image does
    nothing useful at all other than make bigger files!

    EG a 50 million pixel image taken through a jam jar bottom is a high res but
    blurred pointless exercise!


    >
    > "I've got a Porshe so I must be a better driver than Hamilton."


    Obviously the number of pixels doesent improve anyones pictures, but it
    doesent improve resolution much either other than in a lab with xxxx dollar
    lenses at certain apertures only on test targets.
     
    Burgerman, Nov 29, 2008
    #11
  12. Chris H

    David Guest


    > Sensor resolution is double.


    Means nothing when capturing detail. The old pixel density saga, yes quality
    glass does pay a big part but at what cost and is really necessary for even
    the highest end users. Would they even been seen dead with a Sony, I mean I
    wouldn't as I cant be sure of the nexessary support let alone the processing
    power of the PC i'd need to use it sensibly. Why buy a camera which would
    throw the other 12mp away when it comes to printing!!!

    Whilst people get too involved in thinking that a high mega pixel count will
    benifit the average or even professional consumers, in reality the need for
    anything over 10 or 12mp is unrealistic and is simply a waste of money. If I
    had a pound the time people had to upgrade lenses, pc, memory cards to
    accomodate the extra mps, it must be said minimal overall quality gains.

    I certainly feel that new DSLRs are becoming gimmicky and the technology is
    forcing unnecessary over the top specs lists to people who wouldn't possibly
    need it, at a high cost too. Unfortunately people will always be suckered
    into this.
     
    David, Nov 29, 2008
    #12
  13. Chris H

    Peter Guest

    "David" <nospam@please> wrote in message
    news:4931464e$...
    >> Seriously, unless it becomes ridiculously cheap (eg like hard drives) I
    >> will stay with my 6 and 12MP cameras. I don't really need any more.
    >>
    >> However there are some serious pro's out there who will want the 24.5 MP.
    >> Also I can see the 24MPDSLR taking over from the MF Cameras

    >
    > Just looking at reviews of the sensor, it isnt anything much above the D3
    > sensor in terms of resolution or quality.
    >
    > How many people out there think that their photos will become better just
    > by using a higher res sensor?
    >
    > "I've got a Porshe so I must be a better driver than Hamilton."



    The higher pixel resolution lets you do more of what I call mining images.
    i.i. looking for images within images. When I blow up a small portion of my
    image to 12x18 the higher pixel count enables a better image. Genuine
    Fractals and the PS algorithms just don't seem to do it for me.


    --
    Peter
     
    Peter, Nov 29, 2008
    #13
  14. Chris H

    Peter Guest

    "David" <nospam@please> wrote in message
    news:493146d7$...
    >
    > "shiva das" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> In article <4930161b$0$31148$-secrets.com>,
    >> "Peter" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> It wasn't that long ago when I told a salesman that I had no nee for a 5
    >>> megabyte HD.

    >>
    >> Everything in perspective:
    >>
    >> IBM 5MB hard drive in 1956 U$50,000
    >>
    >> Apple 5MB hard drive in 1981 U$3,500
    >>
    >> After which they became downright cheap!

    >
    > LOL good post, the trouble is that the 5mb hard drive in 1981 hold no more
    > info that the one in 1956. In terms of digital sensors I can see a cap on
    > resolution in favour for in camera processing / hdr and other cheats of
    > the like.



    Hey, with 125 k memory we had to do a lot of overlays. I wonder how long
    until 10 terabytes, with 10 gig, 128bit memory becomes the standard.

    --
    Peter
     
    Peter, Nov 29, 2008
    #14
  15. Chris H

    David Guest

    "Peter" <> wrote in message
    news:4931573c$0$31159$-secrets.com...
    > "David" <nospam@please> wrote in message
    > news:493146d7$...
    >>
    >> "shiva das" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> In article <4930161b$0$31148$-secrets.com>,
    >>> "Peter" <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> It wasn't that long ago when I told a salesman that I had no nee for a
    >>>> 5
    >>>> megabyte HD.
    >>>
    >>> Everything in perspective:
    >>>
    >>> IBM 5MB hard drive in 1956 U$50,000
    >>>
    >>> Apple 5MB hard drive in 1981 U$3,500
    >>>
    >>> After which they became downright cheap!

    >>
    >> LOL good post, the trouble is that the 5mb hard drive in 1981 hold no
    >> more info that the one in 1956. In terms of digital sensors I can see a
    >> cap on resolution in favour for in camera processing / hdr and other
    >> cheats of the like.

    >
    >
    > Hey, with 125 k memory we had to do a lot of overlays. I wonder how long
    > until 10 terabytes, with 10 gig, 128bit memory becomes the standard.
    >
    > --
    > Peter


    Already i've seen motherboards which will hold 24 gig on a 64 bit system (I
    have 64bits and would never go back.)

    Currently I am seeing digital cameras needs overtaking the average
    affordable pc. Put it this way I binned my dinosaur old Athlon 3000+ after
    upgrading to a 12mp camera, it couldn't cope with the demands of another 4mp
    to edit the RAWs effectively and safely, I upgraded to a Quad2Core with
    meaty memory and fx and storage, about a grands worth, I think future
    proofing for another 4 years was on the cards!!!

    Upgrading further to 24mp would for many, many people a very unwise decision
    as the cost for a performance PC will outstrip the cost of the camera!!!

    It would be like using a film camera and not ever developing the film
    properly!!!
     
    David, Nov 29, 2008
    #15
  16. Chris H

    Chris H Guest

    In message <4931573c$0$31159$-secrets.com>, Peter
    <> writes
    >"David" <nospam@please> wrote in message
    >news:493146d7$...
    >>
    >> "shiva das" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>> In article <4930161b$0$31148$-secrets.com>,
    >>> "Peter" <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> It wasn't that long ago when I told a salesman that I had no nee for a 5
    >>>> megabyte HD.
    >>>
    >>> Everything in perspective:
    >>>
    >>> IBM 5MB hard drive in 1956 U$50,000
    >>>
    >>> Apple 5MB hard drive in 1981 U$3,500
    >>>
    >>> After which they became downright cheap!

    >>
    >> LOL good post, the trouble is that the 5mb hard drive in 1981 hold no
    >>more info that the one in 1956. In terms of digital sensors I can see
    >>a cap on resolution in favour for in camera processing / hdr and
    >>other cheats of the like.

    >
    >
    >Hey, with 125 k memory we had to do a lot of overlays. I wonder how
    >long until 10 terabytes, with 10 gig, 128bit memory becomes the
    >standard.


    Next week... :)


    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
     
    Chris H, Nov 29, 2008
    #16
  17. Chris H

    Chris H Guest

    In message <4931454f$>, David
    <nospam@please.?.invalid> writes
    >
    >"Chris H" <> wrote in message
    >news:p...
    >> In message <49300d4f$>, David
    >><nospam@please.?.invalid> writes
    >>>
    >>>"Chris H" <> wrote in message
    >>>news:$pIZcLQb8$...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Nikon as sort of announced the D3X.
    >>>>
    >>>> It wen up (and down again) on the Nikon US website
    >>>>
    >>>> It has a 4 page spread in the Nikon Pro magazine
    >>>>
    >>>> 24.5 MP FX camera
    >>>So who is the next mug to waste their money on something which they
    >>>will NEVER use to its full potential?

    >>
    >> MF camera users? Also I know several people who will need this camera
    >>
    >>>I've had 8mp images blown up and used on the back of double deckers
    >>>with no obvious loss of quality, remember such images are to be
    >>>viewed at a distance and not from 6 inches away.

    >>
    >> Well I still use a 8MP camera.
    >>
    >>>Dont forget a computer upgrade would be necessary to view those
    >>>massive RAW files let alone edit and store them,

    >>
    >> No it won't.... I have plenty of disk space.

    >
    >Not necessarily storage space but a powerful multitasking processor and
    >a reasonably powerful fx card.


    Twin PowerPC CPU's on a G5 on to a 22" monitor


    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
     
    Chris H, Nov 29, 2008
    #17
  18. Chris H

    David Guest

    "Peter" <> wrote in message
    news:4931563e$0$31214$-secrets.com...
    > "David" <nospam@please> wrote in message
    > news:4931464e$...
    >>> Seriously, unless it becomes ridiculously cheap (eg like hard drives) I
    >>> will stay with my 6 and 12MP cameras. I don't really need any more.
    >>>
    >>> However there are some serious pro's out there who will want the 24.5
    >>> MP. Also I can see the 24MPDSLR taking over from the MF Cameras

    >>
    >> Just looking at reviews of the sensor, it isnt anything much above the D3
    >> sensor in terms of resolution or quality.
    >>
    >> How many people out there think that their photos will become better just
    >> by using a higher res sensor?
    >>
    >> "I've got a Porshe so I must be a better driver than Hamilton."

    >
    >
    > The higher pixel resolution lets you do more of what I call mining images.
    > i.i. looking for images within images. When I blow up a small portion of
    > my image to 12x18 the higher pixel count enables a better image. Genuine
    > Fractals and the PS algorithms just don't seem to do it for me.
    >


    Ahhhh (breathing in)

    Thats called cheating, I prefer to get the image right in camera first.
    Joking, yes maybe that is one advantage of having a high mp count.
     
    David, Nov 29, 2008
    #18
  19. Chris H

    Bryon Lape Guest

    Chris H <> wrote in news:$pIZcLQb8$LJFAD3
    @phaedsys.demon.co.uk:

    >
    >
    > Nikon as sort of announced the D3X.
    >
    > It wen up (and down again) on the Nikon US website
    >
    > It has a 4 page spread in the Nikon Pro magazine
    >
    > 24.5 MP FX camera
    >


    It is not there now either.

    Here's to hoping the don't kill off the D3 and instead lower its price
    somewhere closer to where I can buy one.....
     
    Bryon Lape, Nov 29, 2008
    #19
  20. Chris H

    Bryon Lape Guest

    "David" <nospam@please> wrote in
    news:49300d4f$:

    >
    > "Chris H" <> wrote in message
    > news:$pIZcLQb8$...
    >>
    >>
    >> Nikon as sort of announced the D3X.
    >>
    >> It wen up (and down again) on the Nikon US website
    >>
    >> It has a 4 page spread in the Nikon Pro magazine
    >>
    >> 24.5 MP FX camera
    >>
    >> --
    >> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    >> \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    >> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

    >
    > So who is the next mug to waste their money on something which they
    > will NEVER use to its full potential?
    >
    > I've had 8mp images blown up and used on the back of double deckers
    > with no obvious loss of quality, remember such images are to be viewed
    > at a distance and not from 6 inches away.
    >
    > Dont forget a computer upgrade would be necessary to view those
    > massive RAW files let alone edit and store them, and a mass of memory
    > cards.
    >
    > I'd say 10mp is more than enough for generally any applicable use and
    > is workable on older PC's too.
    >


    Memory cards go up to 16GB, but newer formats will push beyond that.

    The 3.2GB limit of Windows 32bit is starting to get highly strained,
    even at the consumer market. The day of all 64bit OS'es will soon
    arrive, finally.

    The main issue is write speed to the cards. Cameras are MUCH slower
    than a typical card will do.
     
    Bryon Lape, Nov 29, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Leon Ritt

    Nikon D100 / D200 - D2x / D3x - D3

    Leon Ritt, May 5, 2005, in forum: Nikon
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    332
    Mark 007
    May 9, 2005
  2. leaker

    Nikon D3x - First News

    leaker, Nov 26, 2007, in forum: Nikon
    Replies:
    26
    Views:
    737
    RichA
    Nov 28, 2007
  3. frederick
    Replies:
    68
    Views:
    1,269
    Rita Berkowitz
    Apr 29, 2008
  4. Bob

    D3x upgrade ?

    Bob, May 13, 2008, in forum: 35mm Cameras
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    256
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    47
    Views:
    1,835
    Michael Benveniste
    Dec 16, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page