SteB: As I've tried to explain on the forum, this is very uniform distribution, which is the opposite of random distribution.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomness
If this was just random dust it would not be distributed like this. It could be dust trapped in the sandwich covering the sensor, but there would have to be something in the manufacturing process causing it to be evenly distributed. This is why I'm guessing a fault in the manufacturing process, for it to cause this uniform distribution.
Anyone who has studied distribution, randomness, statistics and probability in depth, will be aware that it is very unlikely that such a uniform distribution like this would be caused by a random fault like dust falling onto something. It could be dust again, but it would be dust formed by part of a process.
I'm fairly certain this will be fixed, once they discover what part of the manufacturing process is causing it.
You can produce random numbers with uniform distribution.
Having a uniform or any other distribution does not mean it is not Random (exactly reverse, it means it is random with uniform distribution). You can of course have random with Normal, Poisson and other distributions too.
No one detected (or saw!) these dots on the sensor during assembly and QC?
That's quite interesting!
Heaven is for real: Boring, nothing spectacular, just another incremental upgrades!
Yes, because we buy a D4 camera to cure boredom!
Mikhail Tal: Yet another reason to prefer m4/3, where you can use a 35-100 lens instead of the failing 70-200 variety.
Go for point and shoot to avoid all these problems.
Peiasdf: My biggest problem with this phone is the low end hardware on the phone part. It uses virtually the same innards as the 920, an one year old phone that's pretty behind the time when it comes out.
WP has lower hardware requirements than Android. That's why a quad core has not practically been used for any WP. Besides the 2G RAM is very good.
Dynamic range FAIL?
wkay: why not jam a camera up someone's face at a funeral in America? Because the photographer's are just thrill seekers to see who can get the most dangerous shot. Cant beat ARABS killing each other.
The fact that the World (including Times magazine) starts to see things from Palestinians' aspect means something.
It is time for the world to awaken.
The land does not belong to you just because people from a same religion of you lived there several thousands of years ago. I would not be entitled for a piece as soon as I arrive there just because I am from the same religion.
Perhaps I don't get it.
Human perception of what? A printed photo at a specific size? How if I print it on a huge banner?
I guess a normalized MTBF (i.e. percentage of identifiable pixels) would be more effective and understandable.
For example a 55% normalized MTBF on a 20M camera would mean 11M pixels are identifiable. And the percentage is very easy to understand.
eddiephtgrphr: A bunch of wires attached to a few chips and covered with mostly plastic makes me wonder if it is worth more than two grand. I don't doubt the picture quality it produces but it should've been solid and robust enough if it's double the price of my D7000.
what is not robust and solid in that photo?
As an electronics engineer I see a very complicated and carefully designed machine in the photo.
Stephan Def: Overall I think there will have to be a convergence in Smartphones and Digital Cameras. So in the longer run of things this Camera is one of the last Dinosaurs.
Why am I saying that? Well, there is a whole Laundry list of reasons, too many to list here. The established Digital Camera Industry is just not getting it what the average consumer really needs. The average consumer wants many many really cool functions and features and a slim design, the established Industry is not going to give him that, there is not enough real creativity there. Much of it boils down to a software developement problem, and there needs to be a disrupting force, as it happened with smartphones.
DSLRs are big because they use big lenses and big sensors. It is a physical fact that bigger lenses and sensors will be better than smaller ones.
You cannot change physics rules.
pkruhl: No Image stabilization and it's not environmentally sealed. The Pentax K30 is looking like a better choice to me. BUT all my lenses are Nikon.
If you like in-body stabilization, Sony DSLRs might be good too (A580?).
Donnie G: Seems like a nice enough entry level DSLR. What I don't understand is why Nikon would offer a WI FI option that sticks out of the side of the camera in such a way that it interferes with hand holding it (the camera)? It's just dumb! Especially when EYE-FI cards already offer a much more elegant and user friendly solution for WI FI connectivity. What was Nikon thinking?
As if it is too big and cannot be accommodated inside! Even cheap and small phones have Wifi nowadays.
It is just a trap to get more money, even at the cost of discomfort for customers.
Sony will deal with this problem. They will make it default and force everyone else to do the same.
Demmos: I believe that ISO 12,800 on the D3200 is considered as Hi 1, and many would say that it should only be used as a last case scenario. As a concert shooter, I find these images excessively noisy and would be uncomfortable putting them in front of any artist. I think if the ISO was reduced to 6400 and the lens was opened to f5.6 the resulting images would be improved. Better still, use a lens like the 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, stop it down to f2.8 and drop the ISO to 1600 or 3200 the resulting images would probably be fantastic!
While at it, can you also suggest me a F1.8 medium range zoom lens for something under $500?
While you are suggesting me, I'll use my F3.5 kit lens zoom with ISO 6400 to get what I need.
Pixel Judge: The 16MP Panasonic G3 with a fixed pen lense may produce better results then this baby Nikon for nearly the same price.
No, it could not. Post a ISO 12800 of your GirlFriend 3rd for us to see.
jon404: Good for an entry-level DSLR. The ISO 3200 capability is impressive. But the lens isn't particularly sharp, more on a P&S quality level. Anyone moving up from a small-sensor camera would probably want something a good deal better than this, since you are sacrificing the portability of, say, an Olympus XZ-1.
Have you ever used the lens?
That kit lens is as sharp as 35mm-F.18 at 35mm F5.6.
Digitall: This camera deserves better lenses than comes with the kit. Good examples indeed.
The kit lens is very good at 35mm F5.6-8 (much better than Sony and even Canon kit lenses at any focal point).
keekimaru: Link : http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B007VGGFZU/tipfla-20
Don’t let the D3200’s compact size and price fool you—packed inside this easy to use HD-SLR is serious Nikon power: a 24.2 MP DX-format CMOS sensor that excels in any light, EXPEED 3 image-processing for fast operation and creative in-camera effects, Full HD (1080p) movie recording, in-camera tutorials and much more. What does this mean for you? Simply stunning photos and videos in any setting. And now, with Nikon’s optional Wireless Mobile Adapter, you can share those masterpieces instantly with your Smartphone or tablet easily!
More Detail : http://camera.babybi.com/detail.php?id_detail=16
Boeing uses Pratt & Whitney and Rolls-Royce engines. Does it make any difference? Do you care that much about the engine as long as it provides good specs?
This Sony sensor rants do not add any value, do not solve any problem.
lensberg: This 5D Mark III will blow the Nikon D800 away as far as high ISO goes... if i were to speculate, it would probably be by a 2 stop + margin... Dynamic range also greatly favours this new 22 MP sensor... Why is everybody complaining... if the tables were turned and Nikon was introducing this 22MP sensor in the D800 ... all these Nikon fanboys would have been drooling over the thing... making flamboyant predictions that it would destroy the competition... canon's days were numbered, etc. etc.. etc... Kudos to Canon for making IQ of prime importance... instead of hiking the MP count to ridiculous proportions... Just a couple of years ago everyone was saying 12 MP is more than enough for most peoples requirements... all of a sudden short of 30 + MP nothing will suffice to justify the $3500 price tag... The pixel quality of the 5D III will be fantastic... can't say the same for the Nikon based upon the sample images... and the video will probably be the best we've ever seen from a DSLR...
It still cannot beat D700 in ISO performance.
R Thornton: Camera makers are not striving to re-invent cameras (let alone photography), they are striving to re-invent their margins. That is why they are offering ever so pricier cameras with which the only discussion really is about what they cannot do!
The mirror is removed from DSLR. Isn't that re-inventing?