D5200 Best in Class

Started Jan 18, 2013 | Discussions thread
stuntmonkey
Senior MemberPosts: 2,675
Like?
Re: Anything else would have been failure
In reply to Shunda77, Jan 20, 2013

Shunda77 wrote:

In one sense this is great news, the image quality is no worse than the sensor it replaces and indeed could be a smidgen better.

By that logic, the D80 was only a smidgen better than the D70. If you view both cameras at the pixel level, it's 'about the same'. Of course, never mind the increase in resolution. Same thing between the D5100 and the D5200. If extra resolution at no extra cost in noise or dynamic range is only a smidgen better, then a lot of us are impressed by small gains.

However, it is extremely difficult to feel too thrilled over why Nikon has gone for resolution as the be all and end all of sensor design while 'holding ground' in other areas.

See above. If you can produce similar levels of noise and dynamic range but with a smaller pixel well, that means that they made gains in read/dark current noise (copper fab), and probably in light gathering efficiency as well (lens, color filter array, photo substrate)

There are other more consistently usable aspects of camera/sensor design that would be of far more value to the enthusiast photographer that seem to be completely ignored, higher frames per second would be but one, better user interface would be another.

It seems premature to ask for higher frame rates when the camera in question is not an enthusiast level camera. Faster fps is an almost given with the D300s successor.

What could Nikon (Sony?) have done with a development of the current 16mp sensor? or even a 18mp version? (thus matching their most direct competition for marketing effect).

They would have added more pixels, and they did.  Sony's 16mp part is their second part. On their SLT and NEX lines, the 16mp cameras play second fiddle to the NEX-7 and SLT-77.

Nikon already has the image quality corner all stitched up, why don't they look at other aspects of camera design?

If you aren't moving forward, you're standing still. When we all said that 12mp was fine, anybody who actually believed that would have been dead and unable to sell their cameras in the following generation. Even if the D90 had been iterated to today's technology, a 12mp dSLR is not going to make a great case for itself against the OM-D and cameras of it's ilk. In a world where our phones are at least 8mp, you can't sell the greatest 6mp dSLR ever.

Besides, image quality is not all stitched up with modern technology. True, few of us are asking for more pixels, but more sampling is more sampling. More resolution matters if you are paying attention to detail lost in the reds and blues to the Bayer filter (flower and horticulture shoots). You know what a 24mp D5200 is? It's the equivalent of a 3-colour Foveon-esque 6mp dSLR. Some of us have been waiting (not anxiously) for 3-colour capture for low contrast detail. If we can't have that, then more sampling is more sampling.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow