A Owens
Senior Member
How the h* l can you determine that on the strength of this codswallop? Get a grip.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
D2X and F6 : OFFICIAL PRESENTATION to RESELLERS
- Thread starter daytontp
- Start date
maxz
Senior Member
As a matter of fact the R&D of F6 was finished more than two years ago. Nikon didn't put it into production for nothing. Yes D market is booming and film is 'dying', however as far as last year's figure digital camera sale is still behind film camera. Shrinking yes, still big YES. check out B&H website the F100 and N80 and elan 7ne are still among top sellers. I believe nikon has better knowledge about all the figures and they will do accordingly...
Anyway, the info regarding F6 is very accurate. like it or not it's coming... ;-)
Anyway, the info regarding F6 is very accurate. like it or not it's coming... ;-)
As far as I can see a new film camera is well...useless...maybe I
am wrong, maybe the massive transition to digital has left some
pockets for a good 5 year run on a film camera....but I doubt it.
So if Nikon indeed wasted R&D money they should have been pushing
into a D200 (for potentially much highier margin) on a film body,
then it's more ammo for those that believe the board of directors
are smoking some strong hallucination drug.
As for the dual mode thing on the D2x, what underwhelms me about
the rumor....
12.4mp (is this total or effective? either way why isn't it 13.5mp?)
ISO 800 (is this enough for the pro's that will be using the 2x for
indoor weddings?)
everything else sounds good, 15 NEF buffer in particular...but the
sensor specs aren't too impressive IMO.
Beyond all this, where the heck is the D200? If they don't release
it ...at least let's hope they announce it...that 20D is set to
clean up shop with it's cleanest of any non Canon DSLR IMO, ISO
1600 and 3200 modes. (there I said it)
I am hoping Nikon will be coming out to the ring with a bit more
fight than what we've heard here which is still a rumor until I we
official Nikon material on it....
Regards,
--
Abe
Forum Enthusiast
I love the idea of having in-camera processing that prevents blown out highlights. I've always believed that in the digital world, there's no reason a camera couldn't process individual portions of the image (i.e. highlights and shadows) to eliminate loss of detail. The image would appear exactly the same as it does now, but when opened with Capture you could retrieve the "lost" highlights or shadows selectively. This is where the promise of digital starts to truly leave film behind.
--Abe
http://www.abekleinfeld.com
--Abe
http://www.abekleinfeld.com
Scott Robertson
Member
I doubt that DXO will be integrated into the camera's DSP. However, I am intrigued by the possibility of increasing the imager's dynamic range by individually addressing photocells in an asynchronous manner. If this turns out to be a capability of the D2X's CMOS (or whatever) imager, this could trump the Fujifilm S3's HDR-like abilities. The S3 uses dedicated low sensitivity photocells to capture highlight detail, but adaptively gaining down the sensitivity of the D2X's primary photocells which are approaching saturation could, with a good tone-mapping algorithm, achieve the same effect without sacrificing imager surface area. In simple terms, this would be like being able to turn on a contrast mask, kind of like a split neutral density filter, for high dynamic range scenes. You can simulate this with any digital camera by taking multiple, bracketed exposures of such a scene - with a tripod - and blending them in various ways, but it would be great to be able to do this in one exposure, in-camera and without the need for a tripod.
--
Scott L. Robertson Photography
Travel, Editorial and Stock Photography + Travel Writing
http://www.slrobertson.com
--
Scott L. Robertson Photography
Travel, Editorial and Stock Photography + Travel Writing
http://www.slrobertson.com
ib1yysguy
Senior Member
And you work for Nikon, then? And you know all this somehow without being under a NDA?
hmm
hmm
D
David Martin
Guest
It certainly sounds interesting. Could be tricky, though , to get a good implemetation which is going to do the right job across arange of situations.
We'll have to wait for the pics, I guess.
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
We'll have to wait for the pics, I guess.
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
Scott Robertson
Member
I've been waiting for this kind of in-camera processing as well. At the very least, you could program the imager to respond to over-saturation in a more graceful, film-like manner: during exposure, the sensitivity of pixels or groups of pixels approaching saturation could be lowered, effecting the s-curve highlight shoulder of slide film.
With a few more bits per photocell, you could also store the timing or sensitivity gain per pixel to create a high dynamic range raw image with many more than the 7-9 stops common among current 12-bits per pixel DSLR raw files. Tone-mapping algorithms could remap these HDR images to 8-bit LDR images (ala Nikon/ASF's DEE) either in-camera or in your raw image software. If/when this technology comes to pass, we will need to start exposing for shadows again as if we were shooting negative film.
Scott Robertson
http://www.slrobertson.com
--
Scott L. Robertson Photography
Travel, Editorial and Stock Photography + Travel Writing
http://www.slrobertson.com
With a few more bits per photocell, you could also store the timing or sensitivity gain per pixel to create a high dynamic range raw image with many more than the 7-9 stops common among current 12-bits per pixel DSLR raw files. Tone-mapping algorithms could remap these HDR images to 8-bit LDR images (ala Nikon/ASF's DEE) either in-camera or in your raw image software. If/when this technology comes to pass, we will need to start exposing for shadows again as if we were shooting negative film.
Scott Robertson
http://www.slrobertson.com
--
--
Scott L. Robertson Photography
Travel, Editorial and Stock Photography + Travel Writing
http://www.slrobertson.com
Thomas Sapiano
Senior Member
...is that downsampling still requires you to read in all the data, so if the sensor or ADC chain is the limiting factor it wouldn't allow you to work at a higher frame rate. It would speed up card readout speed, however frame rate would remain the same as in high resolution mode.
With LBCAST or CMOS sensors you often see an XY-Addressable scheme so if you take a window-of-interest crop out of the grid you only have to read in the pixels you will use. As such, since you are skipping the extraneous pixels you can get a higher frame rate out of the camera.
However, I have to agree that I'm not sure about the utility of a 2.0x crop mode. If it were a full-frame sensor that could crop down to 1.5x then I could definately see it making sense, however that's just wishful thinking on my part. Naturally I can't speak for other people so if others could make use of it then more power to them
With LBCAST or CMOS sensors you often see an XY-Addressable scheme so if you take a window-of-interest crop out of the grid you only have to read in the pixels you will use. As such, since you are skipping the extraneous pixels you can get a higher frame rate out of the camera.
However, I have to agree that I'm not sure about the utility of a 2.0x crop mode. If it were a full-frame sensor that could crop down to 1.5x then I could definately see it making sense, however that's just wishful thinking on my part. Naturally I can't speak for other people so if others could make use of it then more power to them
UnderWater
Senior Member
Hey, there is nothing magically accurate about RAW.
The image already has to go from Bayer by interpolation to get out of RAW.
Another bit of processing in the pipeline to combine pixels is a breeze.
And you could reduce noise somewhat in the process too.
If done properly the result would look more smooth like a Foveon image.
I really like the idea of smaller image files without JPEG like blocking artifacts.
--len
--len
The image already has to go from Bayer by interpolation to get out of RAW.
Another bit of processing in the pipeline to combine pixels is a breeze.
And you could reduce noise somewhat in the process too.
If done properly the result would look more smooth like a Foveon image.
I really like the idea of smaller image files without JPEG like blocking artifacts.
--len
--
--len
Otel Garcia
Forum Enthusiast
I think by monobloc he refers to the construction of the F5, which only comes in 'large and heavy'. A one-piece body with 8 AA batteries, with no option for choosing a lighter power source since the design does not allow/need detachable battery packs. In previous Nikon F models (e.g. the F4), the battery pack can be changed resulting in a lighter camera (F4 with the 4-cell MB-20 pack) or really large and heavy (F4e). This is also true for the Canon EOS-1V which uses a detachable booster pack.
The lack of option for a smaller power source is often cited as a weakness of the F5 design, due to weight factor. Interestingly, all pro-level digital SLRs (D1/h/x, D2h, EOS-1D/1Ds/1D Mk2) are using the F5 approach of a one-piece body. The only digital SLRs using detachable anything (grip or battery pack or both) are the mid-level and entry level models (Nikon D100, Canon EOS-D30/60/10D). Maybe a 'monobloc' design is better for making pro-level rugged DSLRs?
The lack of option for a smaller power source is often cited as a weakness of the F5 design, due to weight factor. Interestingly, all pro-level digital SLRs (D1/h/x, D2h, EOS-1D/1Ds/1D Mk2) are using the F5 approach of a one-piece body. The only digital SLRs using detachable anything (grip or battery pack or both) are the mid-level and entry level models (Nikon D100, Canon EOS-D30/60/10D). Maybe a 'monobloc' design is better for making pro-level rugged DSLRs?
Scott Robertson
Member
Right. I've been using various tone-mapping algorithms and software packages for some time now and none can handle every high-dynamic range stack of images you feed it. I suspect that if Nikon attempts this sort of thing, they will limit the extra dynamic range that the imager and software attempts to capture and process so as not to generate artificial looking images. What would be nice, though, is storing the HDR image in a new raw format, perhaps even a floating-point radiance format, so that future developments in tone-mapping algorithms could be brought to bear on old raw files.
Scott Robertson
http://www.slrobertson.com
--
Scott L. Robertson Photography
Travel, Editorial and Stock Photography + Travel Writing
http://www.slrobertson.com
Scott Robertson
http://www.slrobertson.com
--
--
Scott L. Robertson Photography
Travel, Editorial and Stock Photography + Travel Writing
http://www.slrobertson.com
if these specs are accurate, then I say the camera will live or die pretty much on the noise it produces.
that Nikon can get pretty decent resolution, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. it would have a nice liitle niche, sort of a combo of the Mark II and the 1ds (assuming that the 1ds MkII isnt like some crazy 20MP+.)
REALLY: if the 1ds is approx. equivalent to medium format at 11MP, then quibling between the d2x at 12MP and a new Canon at say 14-16MP ISN'T a big deal, its like 645 versus 67, and 645 'handles' better, just as many of us 'feel' Nikon's 'handle' better than Canons (IMHO). the reason the 1ds was such an INNOVATION was bec. it LEAPFROGGED the 35mm form factor into Medium Format quality. Admittedly, I used to be a big full frame supporter, but if this darn thing can equal 1ds like quality at near half the price....
the 2x crop is an EXTRA feature people. dont like it, dont use it. but wouldnt it be nice to at least know u have the option to squeeze a few more frames out if need be?
Noise, noise noise! that's the bottom line. if they can squeeze more MP into a smaller sensor and not go crazy on noise (we pray), its an achievement. 'custom' 1600 does worry me a tad, that suggests some noise limitations, (ala the 14n's) but we'll have to wait and see.
seriously Nikon, turn that F6 into an interchangeable back D3 soon. if the D2x can output medium format quality like the 1ds, why would we want to be shooting 35 anymore? we've waited 2 YEARS for something with 1ds like quality, if the D2x can do it, they've better/or equalled the Mark II and allowed us to tide over till the D3/full framer, at which point the the D2x will nicely fill in at that time as our 1.5/2x crop backup cam.
that Nikon can get pretty decent resolution, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. it would have a nice liitle niche, sort of a combo of the Mark II and the 1ds (assuming that the 1ds MkII isnt like some crazy 20MP+.)
REALLY: if the 1ds is approx. equivalent to medium format at 11MP, then quibling between the d2x at 12MP and a new Canon at say 14-16MP ISN'T a big deal, its like 645 versus 67, and 645 'handles' better, just as many of us 'feel' Nikon's 'handle' better than Canons (IMHO). the reason the 1ds was such an INNOVATION was bec. it LEAPFROGGED the 35mm form factor into Medium Format quality. Admittedly, I used to be a big full frame supporter, but if this darn thing can equal 1ds like quality at near half the price....
the 2x crop is an EXTRA feature people. dont like it, dont use it. but wouldnt it be nice to at least know u have the option to squeeze a few more frames out if need be?
Noise, noise noise! that's the bottom line. if they can squeeze more MP into a smaller sensor and not go crazy on noise (we pray), its an achievement. 'custom' 1600 does worry me a tad, that suggests some noise limitations, (ala the 14n's) but we'll have to wait and see.
seriously Nikon, turn that F6 into an interchangeable back D3 soon. if the D2x can output medium format quality like the 1ds, why would we want to be shooting 35 anymore? we've waited 2 YEARS for something with 1ds like quality, if the D2x can do it, they've better/or equalled the Mark II and allowed us to tide over till the D3/full framer, at which point the the D2x will nicely fill in at that time as our 1.5/2x crop backup cam.
Similar threads
- User review
- User review
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum