Reading mode: Light Dark

D2X and F6 : OFFICIAL PRESENTATION to RESELLERS

Go to last post
Why change the viewfinder? Why not just put a grid on the viewfinder showing where the 2.0x crop is. Then you get to see around the image while you are framing.

This is very similar to me trying to shoot birds at a distance. I simply want to set the frame up right but I don't need to block it from my view.

Also, I shoot RAW. RAW data is RAW and you can't reduce it in camera. Now, if the 2x crop saves a smaller RAW, which it should, then I have a large 12.5 mp RAW file and a small 6.9 mp RAW file. I get more RAW images on a card and like I said, if I'm planning to crop anyway, it simply saves me a step later and allows me to shoot more before I have to stop.

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m
ib1yysguy said:
What I'm saying is: Why would they have to have a 2.0x crop as
opposed to having the camera just shrink the filesize? With less
data it could process the images twice as fast, in theory, and
shoot more quickly, without having to engineer a double-purpose
viewfinder for the thing. Just a straight 1.5x crop with dual frame
rates.

Al
Click to expand...
 
ib1yysguy said:
I've got a hat and plenty of salt and pepper. But I don't think I'm
going to need it.

We know at least half of his post is incorrect - the F6. If that
half is misinformed, it's likely the other half is no more accurate.
Click to expand...
--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
 
If you think about it, you can get the same shot by shooting the 1.5x at 12.4mp as you would at 2x/ 6.9mp just by croping the shot later on. The in-camera crop just saves space and allows a higher fps. This is assuming that this rumored feature is real anyway.

Paul
 
ib1yysguy said:
How about a 1.5x crop where the camera chooses to throw out the
data form the sensor to give you a smaller image, but with less
data to process allowing it to shoot at a higher speed? That way
you dont lose your sharpness (it would be similar to downsampling
the image in photoshop) and don't have to have a silly 2.0x
viewfinder or the extra mechanics/expense that would no doubt be
involved in such a venture. My solution could be acchieved almost
entirely in the firmware,
Click to expand...
More precisely, a hardware algorithm as you wouldn't want software on the path from the imager to the internal ram (too slow). Although from a 30000 ft engineering standpoint this would seem like a better approach (IMHO) you would be putting less pixels on a larger area than if the 2x crop was actually used. Hence you would lose the resolution advantage of good lenses etc. Typically cameras dump raw data directly from the sensor into RAM and then process the images in a queue as they head towards the persistent storage (Flash). It doesn’t mean they have to though.
ib1yysguy said:
assuming the shutter drive motor is
capable of the higher speeds (they could re-issue the same engine
in the D2h).

Al
daytontp said:
????
ib1yysguy said:
ib1yysguy said:
I just did the number math below and a 2.0x crop of FF is equal to
a 1.3333x crop of a 1.5x sensor. So, with the 2.0x crop setting it
is almost like putting a 1.4x TC on any lens you mount on the
camera. Now, how many people use a 1.4x TC on long primes to get a
little extra reach???
Click to expand...
The difference is that you'd end up with an even smaller viewfinder
than the tiny one we're already forced to use. Remember the good
ole'days when we had big, bright viewfinders when film was still in
vogue? I do, and I miss my big viewfinder.
--
Al
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
Click to expand...
--
Dayton in SC USA - PBase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/daytontp/ -- More Than 181,051 Views
Click to expand...
--
Al
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
Click to expand...
 
.. the gaps between the pixel could cause image data lose. Just a thought. Did you every think that maybe the viewfinder does not get smaller. Maybe a red gridline box appears on the viewfinder screen to show you where the 2.0x crop is. The D100 and D70 have on demand gridlines. I would rather have the crop.

Plus, all the Digital SLR on the market already down size as you are mentioning.
ib1yysguy said:
Al
daytontp said:
????
ib1yysguy said:
ib1yysguy said:
I just did the number math below and a 2.0x crop of FF is equal to
a 1.3333x crop of a 1.5x sensor. So, with the 2.0x crop setting it
is almost like putting a 1.4x TC on any lens you mount on the
camera. Now, how many people use a 1.4x TC on long primes to get a
little extra reach???
Click to expand...
The difference is that you'd end up with an even smaller viewfinder
than the tiny one we're already forced to use. Remember the good
ole'days when we had big, bright viewfinders when film was still in
vogue? I do, and I miss my big viewfinder.
--
Al
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
Click to expand...
--
Dayton in SC USA - PBase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/daytontp/ -- More Than 181,051 Views
Click to expand...
--
Al
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
Click to expand...
--
Dayton in SC USA - PBase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/daytontp/ -- More Than 181,051 Views
 
I see what you are saying but it "still" should be more than enough. Have you tried this with a D2H and a D1X or MKII? Others have and the problem doesn't exist for sport shooting "generally". When you need an 11 X 14 or larger and this happens, you bet, it may take it's toll. But for the large majority of sport shooting, this is not a problem.

People simply want the camera to do everything and it wasn't designed to do this. The MKII was in fact designed to be more than a sports camera. The D2h is likely not to change as far as the CCD goes with more MP. This would be a major undertaking and I don't see Nikon doing it. Just my opinion mind you.

The D2X specs are just coming out and already someone has said it is in the same price range as the 1Ds. It isn't, unless they have found some great deal. But no matter, it is a more advanced machine now. My point, no matter what happens here, there will be whining and moaning. It is just the nature of people. But for those of us who use these tools everyday and realize that there deosn't exist a perfect DSLR, the D2H, D1X, D100 and now D2X will be just fine. People aren't flowing to the others side as has been reported either. This is just frustration manifesting itself in their posts.
Jonathan F/2 said:
The guy with the 1Dmark2 was in the same exact situation, except
with the extra megapixels he is able to crop into the image and
pull something out that is acceptable for print. You try doing the
same thing, unfortunately with only 4mp you are unable to salvage
such a detailed image. You loose the shot and you loose the sale.

This is a real life work situation. The ability to crop into an
image can make the difference if you make a sale or not.

I don't need to print large, I just need more reassurance to
guarantee the shot. More megapixels is that reassurance.
Mel said:
Jason Milliron said:
Jonathan F/2 said:
I still think Canon's line-up seems more effective. There seems to
be overlap between the D2H and the D2X.
Click to expand...
Yeah, a lot of overlap between the D2h and D2x and a huge gap
between the D70 and D2h. Maybe a major price drop for the D2h?

-jason m

--
http://milliron.org/photo
Click to expand...
--
Mel
Click to expand...
--
got banned?

http://www.inhousephoto.com
Click to expand...
--
Mel
 
daytontp said:
D2X and F6 : OFFICIAL PRESENTATION to RESELLERS.

(Please excuse my english, I know it sucks. Thank you !)

Yesterday at Nikon France, product presentation :
D2X, F6 and AF-s VR 300/2.8. Nothing else.

D2X : 12.4 MP, 5 fps, 15 NEF picts buffer. -- Crop x2 = 8fps / 6.9
MP (I don't remember how many pictures in the buffer then)
ISO 100 to 800, then only 1600 and 3200 accessible by custom settings.
Faster Wi-Fi and in two ways : the camera can be remotely operated
from a computer.
DXO integrated : each lens is recognised and corrected by DXO in
the camera...
Special setting : individual treatment of bright groups of pixels
to avoid or delay overexposure and improve dynamic response.
Same body as D2H, except a minor improvement on the vertical grip.
Improved (!) 3D metering system - still 1005 rvb pixels but new
algorythm.
Price in France : 5200 € - VAT included

Dave --> I don't know how they address the 2x mode in the
viewfinder, sorry ! I'll ask my friend tomorrow. By the way : this
person is the biggest Nikon reseller in France. I fully trust him :
these are NOT rumors. I only wish I could have been there with him.
But I'm "just" a pro photographer, not a reseller...

F6 : replaces F5 and F100. As big as F100. Unlike the F5, it is not
monobloc (do you say "monobloc" in english ?) External battery pack
available.
Without it, it needs lithium batteries (!?!) and reaches 5fps. With
the MB-something, it uses either 8 AA standard batteries or the
same EN-EL4 as D2 series. It then reaches 8fps.
Improved 3D metering system over the F5, i-TTL also available.
D2-like AF, adapted to 24x36mm.
100 % viewfinder. Not interchangeable.
Construction quality is F5/D2 like. Much better than the plastic
F100 (my friend said).
Price in France : 2200 € - VAT included. => this is good news...

Availability : I don't know !!! I forgot to ask ! Sorry !

Taken from:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/112358/39

--
Dayton in SC USA - PBase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/daytontp/ -- More Than 181,051 Views
Click to expand...
 
Gavin Cato said:
daytontp said:
D2X and F6 : OFFICIAL PRESENTATION to RESELLERS.

(Please excuse my english, I know it sucks. Thank you !)

Yesterday at Nikon France, product presentation :
D2X, F6 and AF-s VR 300/2.8. Nothing else.

D2X : 12.4 MP, 5 fps, 15 NEF picts buffer. -- Crop x2 = 8fps / 6.9
MP (I don't remember how many pictures in the buffer then)
ISO 100 to 800, then only 1600 and 3200 accessible by custom settings.
Faster Wi-Fi and in two ways : the camera can be remotely operated
from a computer.
DXO integrated : each lens is recognised and corrected by DXO in
the camera...
Special setting : individual treatment of bright groups of pixels
to avoid or delay overexposure and improve dynamic response.
Same body as D2H, except a minor improvement on the vertical grip.
Improved (!) 3D metering system - still 1005 rvb pixels but new
algorythm.
Price in France : 5200 € - VAT included

Dave --> I don't know how they address the 2x mode in the
viewfinder, sorry ! I'll ask my friend tomorrow. By the way : this
person is the biggest Nikon reseller in France. I fully trust him :
these are NOT rumors. I only wish I could have been there with him.
But I'm "just" a pro photographer, not a reseller...

F6 : replaces F5 and F100. As big as F100. Unlike the F5, it is not
monobloc (do you say "monobloc" in english ?) External battery pack
available.
Without it, it needs lithium batteries (!?!) and reaches 5fps. With
the MB-something, it uses either 8 AA standard batteries or the
same EN-EL4 as D2 series. It then reaches 8fps.
Improved 3D metering system over the F5, i-TTL also available.
D2-like AF, adapted to 24x36mm.
100 % viewfinder. Not interchangeable.
Construction quality is F5/D2 like. Much better than the plastic
F100 (my friend said).
Price in France : 2200 € - VAT included. => this is good news...

Availability : I don't know !!! I forgot to ask ! Sorry !

Taken from:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/112358/39

--
Dayton in SC USA - PBase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/daytontp/ -- More Than 181,051 Views
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
David Lane said:
because of the bayer method. What pixles would you throw out? If it
is rgbg style sensor, it would not work. If it were Foveon, it
would work.
Click to expand...
I think it could work, a template of pixels that support the bayer algorithm could be choosen, and some tricks could per performed. I think a lot of thinking would have to go into think before someone could say "it wouldn't work".
David Lane said:
--
Dave
The only problem with my camera is it has a loose nut behind the
viewfinder.

http://www.occasionsphoto.com

http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=2058

Click to expand...
 
But if I'm planning on cropping 100 images, then it saves me a BUNCH of post process time too.

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m
Paul Johnson said:
If you think about it, you can get the same shot by shooting the
1.5x at 12.4mp as you would at 2x/ 6.9mp just by croping the shot
later on. The in-camera crop just saves space and allows a higher
fps. This is assuming that this rumored feature is real anyway.

Paul
Click to expand...
 
ib1yysguy said:
I'm irritated enough by my incy-wincy 1.5x viewfinder. A 2.0x
finder would be even smaller. It just seems silly. It would make
more sense, wouldn't it, to just use the 1.5x and have the camera
throw out half the data to give it a smaller file to process and,
in turn, allowing it to shoot twice as fast. The whole idea of an
EXTRA crop just really turns me off.
Click to expand...
Yes - the small view would be a sacrifice for using this mode. Perhaps they intend for you to use a DG-2 (or similar) viewfinder accessory in that case?

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
Very good point. To be honest, I never thought of this one. It would make the entire 2x thing A LOT more simple...

Dave
---
ib1yysguy said:
Al
daytontp said:
????
ib1yysguy said:
ib1yysguy said:
I just did the number math below and a 2.0x crop of FF is equal to
a 1.3333x crop of a 1.5x sensor. So, with the 2.0x crop setting it
is almost like putting a 1.4x TC on any lens you mount on the
camera. Now, how many people use a 1.4x TC on long primes to get a
little extra reach???
Click to expand...
The difference is that you'd end up with an even smaller viewfinder
than the tiny one we're already forced to use. Remember the good
ole'days when we had big, bright viewfinders when film was still in
vogue? I do, and I miss my big viewfinder.
--
Al
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
Click to expand...
--
Dayton in SC USA - PBase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/daytontp/ -- More Than 181,051 Views
Click to expand...
--
Al
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
Click to expand...
 
Except if you shoot raw and process with C1 PRO then cropping 100 images takes about 1 second. Plus if you want 2.2x crop or 1.7x crop or anything else, you can decide that at that time. :)
Anthony Medici said:
--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m
Paul Johnson said:
If you think about it, you can get the same shot by shooting the
1.5x at 12.4mp as you would at 2x/ 6.9mp just by croping the shot
later on. The in-camera crop just saves space and allows a higher
fps. This is assuming that this rumored feature is real anyway.

Paul
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I'm sure some people will like the feature(if it's real), but I hope Nikon hasn't sacrifised anything else (including additional cost) in order to provide that feature.

Paul
Paul Johnson said:
Anthony Medici said:
--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m
Paul Johnson said:
If you think about it, you can get the same shot by shooting the
1.5x at 12.4mp as you would at 2x/ 6.9mp just by croping the shot
later on. The in-camera crop just saves space and allows a higher
fps. This is assuming that this rumored feature is real anyway.

Paul
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Anthony Medici said:
No, it's 6.9 mp. I did the math. It will be confirm when Nikon
makes its press release. As for whether Nikon is dumb doing it,
they are not. It allows for flexability in situations where you
can't get close enough. Great for Wildlife and Bird photography,
assuming the ISO 800 is usuable.
Click to expand...
I can do that in Photoshop in two seconds flat. Why would I want Nikon to waste firmware on a feature as simple-minded as that?
--
FJP
 
Paul Johnson said:
Except if you shoot raw and process with C1 PRO then cropping 100
images takes about 1 second. Plus if you want 2.2x crop or 1.7x
crop or anything else, you can decide that at that time. :)
Click to expand...
Which is precisely why I call this such a bonehead feature. My jaws will drop to the floor if Nikon put such a lame, amateurish feature in their $5,000, flagship camera.
--
FJP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MJ_Photo38
  • User review User review
Definitely challenging to use
Replies
17
Views
1K
Simon Stuart
Simon Stuart
MJ_Photo38
  • User review User review
Still the value king : a Nikon D300 review in 2024
2
Replies
21
Views
14K
MJ_Photo38
MJ_Photo38
MJ_Photo38
  • User review User review
Still one of the best, in my humble opinion [Fujifilm X-T2 long term review]
2
Replies
26
Views
16K
barkleytom
B
J
  • For sale For sale
SOLD - Nikon D2X + fisheye, 3 - SB-800s and Double Charger
Replies
0
Views
1
jlav
J
Digiman69
from D2H to D2Hs: a valuable step ahead
Replies
7
Views
8
Digiman69
Digiman69

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top