Nikon lets 24.4mp D3x out of the bag

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by frederick, Apr 16, 2008.

  1. frederick

    frederick Guest

    The Nikon D3 latest firmware release has clear reference to 6048x4032
    pixel size option, and "D3X" name in the code.
    Of course it could just be Nikon's programmers version of a practical
    joke ;-0
    Note to Rita B:
    Revise 18 month rule to 6 month rule in future. Your D3 looks like it's
    destined for the back of the broom cupboard
     
    frederick, Apr 16, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. frederick

    Steve Guest

    Cool. Another few months and I can get a D3 for under 2 grand.

    Steve
     
    Steve, Apr 16, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. frederick

    C J Campbell Guest

    If Nikon follows their usual release schedule the D3X could be
    *announced* as early as August. It probably would not be available in
    any quantity until December or even February, unless the thing is
    already in production (entirely possible).

    24mp would be in keeping with the rumored 12mp crop mode. The big
    question is not whether there will be a D3X, but when it will be
    released. I think the D3X will be announced shortly before Photokina
    2008.
     
    C J Campbell, Apr 16, 2008
    #3
  4. frederick

    C J Campbell Guest

    Not likely. The D3X will probably run $8,000.
     
    C J Campbell, Apr 16, 2008
    #4
  5. frederick

    frederick Guest

    heh.
    There are a lot of D3 users who have indicated that they have a big
    *chip on their shoulder when faced with the reality that for resolving
    power, their cameras are matched by Canon 5ds selling for less than half
    the price, seriously outgunned by the 1dsII and III,let alone for many
    practical purposes - matched by the much derided "crop sensor" cameras
    affordable by the unwashed masses.

    *No pun intended. By indicated, I mean endless posts on forums like
    DPReview comparing D3 resolution to Canon and other models by users in
    total denial of reality. If that was a defining point for them, then
    they should have done their homework better and waited. The D3x was an
    inevitable and fully expected development - in name and resolution.

    Anyway, it could still be a year away from delivery - but I doubt it.
    D3s are now sitting on the shelf at my local store, so the Japanese
    factory has caught up with initial demand, and they will want to keep
    production ramped up on the same line.
     
    frederick, Apr 16, 2008
    #5
  6. frederick

    Father Kodak Guest

    Where? How did someone figure this out?


    Perhaps, but only if people bought the camera not understanding its
    purpose in life. For me, a camera with the combination of 9 fps,
    excellent image quality at ISO 3200, with sort-of images in light that
    I can't even read in, plus FX plus using all my existing lenses, that
    is what the D3 is for.

    I didn't get it for mega-mega-pixels that matter to the
    studio/landscape crowd, because I never do studio shots and my
    landscapes will never be printed at 40 x 60.


    The laws of physics mean that as nice as the D3X will be, it won't
    have the ISO range/image quality of the D3. And unless Nikon really
    advances the state of the art in data transfer rates, you won't have
    the 9 fps either, even with the fastest CF cards on the market today
    or in the near future.
    Of course, if you're a fanboy, then yes, you'll spend maybe 8 grand on
    the D3X.
    Of course, this is an age of camera specialization. What else do you
    expect?

    Father Kodak
     
    Father Kodak, Apr 16, 2008
    #6
  7. frederick

    frederick Guest

    By opening the firmware binary file in a hex editor.
    (Yes I know - some people have too much time on their hands)
    No they don't. The laws of physics are misinterpreted by people
    comparing pixels. On a whole image or sensor area basis, there's no
    reason to believe it will be worse than the D3. The dx crop mode should
    be similar to the D300.
    As far as transfer rates go, there's two obvious options. A larger
    buffer, or a fast "DX crop" mode. Option 2 would be quite appealing -
    10mp crops have a lot going for them over 5mp crops from the D3.
    Sure. Fanboys subsidise pros. Nothing new there.
    More - I expect more. I'm looking forward to the D4.
     
    frederick, Apr 16, 2008
    #7
  8. frederick

    Alienjones Guest

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    frederick wrote:
    | Steve wrote:
    |>
    |>> The Nikon D3 latest firmware release has clear reference to 6048x4032
    |>> pixel size option, and "D3X" name in the code.
    |>> Of course it could just be Nikon's programmers version of a practical
    |>> joke ;-0
    |>> Note to Rita B:
    |>> Revise 18 month rule to 6 month rule in future. Your D3 looks like
    |>> it's destined for the back of the broom cupboard
    |>
    |> Cool. Another few months and I can get a D3 for under 2 grand.
    |>
    | heh.
    | There are a lot of D3 users who have indicated that they have a big
    | *chip on their shoulder when faced with the reality that for resolving
    | power, their cameras are matched by Canon 5ds selling for less than half
    | the price, seriously outgunned by the 1dsII and III,let alone for many
    | practical purposes - matched by the much derided "crop sensor" cameras
    | affordable by the unwashed masses.
    |
    | *No pun intended. By indicated, I mean endless posts on forums like
    | DPReview comparing D3 resolution to Canon and other models by users in
    | total denial of reality. If that was a defining point for them, then
    | they should have done their homework better and waited. The D3x was an
    | inevitable and fully expected development - in name and resolution.
    |
    | Anyway, it could still be a year away from delivery - but I doubt it.
    | D3s are now sitting on the shelf at my local store, so the Japanese
    | factory has caught up with initial demand, and they will want to keep
    | production ramped up on the same line.

    Given that *any* Nikon DSLR image is infinitely more recoverable from
    under exposure than *any* Canon DSLR image and that Journalists are the
    principal target of Nikon's Pro cameras, I'd say the noise being made on
    DP review is just that... Noise.

    I sold 3, 20Ds 2, 5Ds and 4 Panasonic FZ50s along with a plethora of
    lenses, flash guns and other Canon accessories to buy 1, D3, 2, D300s
    and (so far) 1, D60 with the intention of buying many more when my
    concessions materialize in June. The cost of the bodies paled into
    insignificance compared to the cost of lenses and accessories.

    I could have bought a new luxury class car with the money it cost me.
    Since the changeover, I've shot 6 weddings and done a lot of landscapes.

    Without doubt, the Nikon speedlite system is 2 classes above anything
    from Canon. The metering system is more accurate and the images more
    manipulatable than Canon's. The image failure rate from a D300 is less
    than the failure rate from a 5D. I have only had two image failures from
    the D3.

    The interesting thing is that the little D60 I bought last week, hoping
    it would be OK for my Santa shoots and corporate ID shots is a stellar
    performer with a basic 18 -70 consumer lens. Canon's "Rival" (cough,
    cough) lens is quite frankly a piece of shit.

    Chromatic aberrations, maybe it will maybe it won't focus and barrel
    distortion like you wouldn't believe sees you shelling out serious money
    for DxO Optics pro (Elite) to fix the errors their ($800AUD) lens
    produces. Total garbage.

    If resolution is the only gripe, I'll fly with that. At an interpolated
    size of 36" x 48", the D3 images look as good as any from a Canon "Pro"
    camera. The real big plus is the detail you can pull from near black
    shadows... Something Canon pulls with artifacts and a horrible hatch
    pattern of noise.

    Sorry to let the cat out of the bag but Nikon has it all over Canon as
    far as professional users go. The whole idea is that you can get the job
    done with the least amount of drama. The prima-donna's who want 30 Mp
    images and everyone noticing their glaring white lenses will probably
    never know what they are missing.

    In the mean time I'll happily factor in 3 year replacements instead of
    annual ones. I'll happily charge my clients a 18% surcharge to cover the
    cost of going back to Nikon after 5 years and 4 warranty claims with Canon.

    Now can we talk about photography?

    - --

    from Douglas,
    If my PGP key is missing, the
    post is a forgery. Ignore it.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

    iD8DBQFIBZ7bhuxzk5D6V14RAncQAJ4xeSgxT2c4WkyfeLe9rHjhFf3xbQCeMzZw
    RMwceCQ4dw2iSfRsi80UgV0=
    =yMxm
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Alienjones, Apr 16, 2008
    #8
  9. frederick

    Steve Guest

    I've been to a *lot* of wedding, maybe 30/year, and I take note of
    what the photographers are using. I don't ever remember seeing the
    white lenes. Yes, I've seen plenty of Canon cameras doing weddings,
    but no white lenses.

    I'm not familiar with Canon's full line, but are there any white
    lenses a wedding photographer might normally use? Or are they all
    super telephotos for the sports crowd?

    Steve
     
    Steve, Apr 16, 2008
    #9
  10. frederick

    Tony Polson Guest


    I use Canon zoom lenses for wedding photography. The 24-105mm f/4L is
    no-nonsense black, but the 70-200mm f/2.8L and f/4L are white. I wish
    they weren't.

    The Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM II seems popular among
    wedding shooters. Perhaps that is because it is black? More likely
    because it is cheap, yet performs reasonably well.
     
    Tony Polson, Apr 16, 2008
    #10
  11. I've read the posts about this firmware find, but I don't think it is a
    factor that is going to impact the 18-month rule. If it does anything to
    the rule it will add a few months to it. Even if Nikon introduces a 24MP
    monster not everyone will want or need it. The other issue is Nikon will
    price this beast at an MSRP of $5,000 USD to drive the final nail into
    Canon's coffin. Just like the 18-month rule, Nikon strictly follows their
    rules to the letter, that's why they are so successful.





    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Apr 16, 2008
    #11
  12. Wrong! Nikon doesn't and never will price a pro dSLR above the traditional
    $5,000 USD MSRP. Nikon strictly adheres to family oriented traditions and
    business practices and isn't interested in gouging. They see the folly of
    Canon's white elephant, the overpriced and severely crippled 1Ds Mk III and
    refuse to subject their customers to that.





    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Apr 16, 2008
    #12
  13. I think the 12MP crop mode might be cool for some people, but it still is a
    waste of time. Even the 5MP crop mode on the D3 isn't something I use.
    It's a total waste of time throwing a DX lens on the D3, or any camera for
    that matter. Shoot FF and crop in post if that's something you want to do.
    It's senseless to not take advantage of the full resolution of the sensor.




    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Apr 16, 2008
    #13
  14. frederick

    Guest Guest

    really? infinitely more recoverable?? on what do you base this crazy
    idea?
     
    Guest, Apr 16, 2008
    #14
  15. frederick

    C J Campbell Guest

    Some very famous wildlife photographers like the crop mode because of
    its faster frame rate.
     
    C J Campbell, Apr 16, 2008
    #15
  16. frederick

    C J Campbell Guest

    I saw an awful lot of 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses at WPPI. Among Canon
    shooters, this has to be one of the most popular wedding lenses of all
    time. It appeared that wedding and portrait photography was about
    evenly split between Canon and Nikon. The funny thing was that the
    Nikon users tended to sit on the left hand side of the room, while the
    Canon shooters sat on the right! I was one of the first to notice this,
    and by the end of the convention it had almost become satire.

    Come to think of it, I spend most of my time with the 70-200mm f/2.8
    Nikkor, so it isn't just Canon.

    The Nikon cropped sensor crowd also like the 17-55mm f/2.8 DX. I like
    this lens, although I wish it had slightly more reach, so I am
    replacing it with the FX mid-range zoom.

    I was surprised at the number of people who use fish eyes for wedding
    photography. I had thought I was one of the only people to do this.

    I don't think the color of the lens matters much to most subjects.

    Famed wedding photographer Dennis Orchards was a Nikon guy for years;
    in fact, he was one of the oldest members of Nikon Professional
    Services. But he had a camera break down somewhere and he had to dash
    into a camera shop for a replacement. The only thing they had was
    Canon, so he grabbed a 1D Mark III. He never went back to Nikon, so we
    have lost him to the dark side. The funny thing was, the week after he
    switched, Nikon called him asking for an endorsement, and he had to
    tell them he was now using Canon. <Click>

    Well, Nikon might have hung up on him and he says he will never switch
    back, but he spent a lot of time looking at D3s and D300s in the
    classroom. Not that it matters to me, as long as Dennis keeps churning
    out the great stuff he does. He is amazing.
     
    C J Campbell, Apr 16, 2008
    #16
  17. frederick

    Andrew Haley Guest

    That sounds right. I'm already considering going to Photokina, and
    this makes it more likely. I handled a D2x a couple of Photokinas
    ago, and I just had to have one. I can see history repeating
    itself...

    Andrew.
     
    Andrew Haley, Apr 16, 2008
    #17
  18. frederick

    pickled Guest

    Nikon is into family pricing like fish that wait around to eat their young
    as soon as they hatch.
    Nikon is in business and in business you charge the most the market will
    bear for your product.
    If Nikon thinks they can get $8k they will not hesitate to charge $8k.
    As to "the laws of physics": if you read the postings from the butt headed
    morons on this newsgroup from just 6 months ago then the noise levels in the
    Nikon D300 are physically impossible to achieve. And yet the camera is
    available on store shelves today . . .
     
    pickled, Apr 16, 2008
    #18
  19. frederick

    Alienjones Guest

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Tony Polson wrote:
    |
    |> On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:38:19 +1000, Alienjones
    |>
    |>> Sorry to let the cat out of the bag but Nikon has it all over Canon as
    |>> far as professional users go. The whole idea is that you can get the job
    |>> done with the least amount of drama. The prima-donna's who want 30 Mp
    |>> images and everyone noticing their glaring white lenses will probably
    |>> never know what they are missing.
    |> I've been to a *lot* of wedding, maybe 30/year, and I take note of
    |> what the photographers are using. I don't ever remember seeing the
    |> white lenes. Yes, I've seen plenty of Canon cameras doing weddings,
    |> but no white lenses.
    |
    | The Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM II seems popular among
    | wedding shooters. Perhaps that is because it is black? More likely
    | because it is cheap, yet performs reasonably well.
    |

    The Sigma lens is a stellar performer. Quiet, razor sharp (perhaps too
    sharp) and the right colour.!

    - --

    from Douglas,
    If my PGP key is missing, the
    post is a forgery. Ignore it.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

    iD8DBQFIBnJ/huxzk5D6V14RApjZAJ4rjbHOfyAcGB5bkYECwP/GWS+3/gCaA71W
    zDgOk5AimBe9Rn9ugI+aCdo=
    =6R5H
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Alienjones, Apr 16, 2008
    #19
  20. frederick

    frederick Guest

    Ummm... interesting opinion Sherlock. Use of logic to support that
    theory would be nice.
    LOL - not everyone needs more than 640 x 480 and 16 colours, or a car in
    any colour other than black.
    This will be the most lusted after dslr ever (for a little while anyway
    - until it gets superseded by something better)
    The number of users (not "pros" - many weekend shooters) who showed that
    they were willing to fork out the ~US$10k for a kit of D3 and the 3 pro
    Nikkor zooms from 14-200mm, apparently without blinking an eye, now
    buying up expensive 200-400 and long VR telephotos, leads me to believe
    that even if the D3x was priced above the 1DsIII, there's a ready
    market itching for it. Forget the fact that many of them mainly use
    this gear to post photos on DPReview of their cats taken with $5,000 lenses.
    I'll wager you that it costs significantly more than a D3, but still
    sell like hot cakes
     
    frederick, Apr 16, 2008
    #20
    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.