Nikon D700x expected announcement date Dec 20

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Tony the insider, Nov 15, 2008.

  1. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    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. :)
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    exactly. slightly different mix of features at different price points.
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    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...
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #23
  4. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    that would have been great, but unfortunately, it's impossible to make
    a digital back for just about all film slrs.
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #24
  5. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    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.
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #25
  6. Tony the insider

    Me Guest

    Not quite correct...
    It's not important to me at all.
    And I'll continue to ridicule it. Billions of minutes of movies of
    family dogs and grime-smeared rug-rats will be just as dreadful in HD as
    they were in 8mm format. The occasional maestros capable of shooting
    and editing acceptable video (even with the wrong tool) will still be a
    very small minority.
     
    Me, Nov 16, 2008
    #26
  7. Tony the insider

    Me Guest

    APS-c dslr cameras outsell 35mm format more than 10:1. That's not going
    to change in the forseeable future, so while "FF becoming the norm"
    might apply to you, it clearly doesn't for 90-95% of dslr users.
     
    Me, Nov 16, 2008
    #27
  8. Tony the insider

    Me Guest

    It's not very possible without compromises. There's not enough
    clearance between film-plane in the film camera and the shutter blades
    for a complete sensor assembly with low-pass filter etc.
    At best, you'd get a severely compromised system.
     
    Me, Nov 16, 2008
    #28
  9. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    it may not be 'impossible' but it requires a lot of work and it is no
    longer practical.
    that helps.
    sure, or put the electronics below the camera, as if it had a motor
    drive.
    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?
    it was fairly clear.
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #29
  10. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    APS-c dslr cameras outsell 35mm format more than 10:1. That's not going
    to change in the forseeable future, so while "FF becoming the norm"
    might apply to you, it clearly doesn't for 90-95% of dslr users.[/QUOTE]

    it's true right now, however, there are more full frame cameras than
    there used to be, and within a few years, prices will be even lower.
    it wasn't that long ago that the *cheapest* aps sized dslr was $5000
    (nikon d1).
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #30
  11. Tony the insider

    Me Guest

    The advantage of having their "own fab" only applied so long as they had
    a technical advantage.

    Now that advantage has gone, it could be seen as a disadvantage.
     
    Me, Nov 16, 2008
    #31
  12. Tony the insider

    Me Guest

    it's true right now, however, there are more full frame cameras than
    there used to be, and within a few years, prices will be even lower.
    it wasn't that long ago that the *cheapest* aps sized dslr was $5000
    (nikon d1).[/QUOTE]

    Sure, but for the time being, there's a premium of about US$1500 for a
    35mm sized sensor, then depending on needs, a significant additional
    cost for lenses. (well maybe none - but only if ie a 50mm prime is what
    really rocks your socks).
    That US$1500 /premium/ for a body is more than the average purchase
    price of the majority of complete dslr "kits" sold.
    I'm not sure how much cheaper systems will get in the short/medium term.
    WRT probably declining sales and certainly at present known massively
    declining profits at C&N, then something has to give. I'd ignore any
    present discounting - as that's just to sell committed production and
    stocks.
     
    Me, Nov 16, 2008
    #32
  13. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    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.
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #33
  14. Tony the insider

    Me Guest

    Then below you give examples of:
    E420 - surely a low end inexpensive dslr.
    Canon 5dII - used by some pros as was the Mk1, but feature-wise, surely
    only an "enthusiast" camera.
    Sony a900. Very limited potential for pro-use due to AF system and
    relatively inefficient (at longer f/l) in-body stabilisation.
    IMO there are only two pro 35mm format dslrs - the D3 and IDsIII. The
    others are compromised for cost reasons.
     
    Me, Nov 16, 2008
    #34
  15. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    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.
    so you lose the functionality of interchangeable screens, although i
    suppose a whole new set of screens could be released.
    it's now effectively a larger spot.
    does it look at the edges of the frame? those are no longer in the
    photo, but the meter still analyzes them.
    maybe, but you still have to set iso twice.
    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.
    preflash would be required.
    that's quite a compromise!
    it's not practical.
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #35
  16. Tony the insider

    Ray Fischer Guest

    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, Nov 16, 2008
    #36
  17. Tony the insider

    John Sheehy Guest

    That's ridiculous. They need to work with the image circle of existing
    lenses.
     
    John Sheehy, Nov 16, 2008
    #37
  18. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    the point is that sms claimed that nikon was 'struggling' to keep up
    with canon. they're not.
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #38
  19. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    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.
    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.
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #39
  20. Tony the insider

    Guest Guest

    not relevant; hasselblad was designed for interchangeable backs and
    doesn't have the limitations that a 35mm slr does.
     
    Guest, Nov 16, 2008
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.