She's Dead, Jim. DX with a fork in it:

So Thomas tell us what you and your ex-girlfriend shared, since your brains stopped working.

I'll bet neither you nor your ex-girlfriend has photographed any wildlife like birds. If you had then you both would have known the reach advantage the DX format has compared to the FX format, and if you crop the FX pictures to the same FOV, you are left with a picture size and details from the ancient past.

You are right at some point the FX sensors will have the same pixel density as the current DX cameras, but then the FX format has lost one of its main advantages, the lower high ISO noise. You have one free guess, which format then still would be more attractive to a lot of people.

Regards
Ole Thorsen
http://www.pbase.com/ole_thorsen

• OMNISCIENCE

Knowing what
thou knowest not
is in a sense
omniscience.
(Grook by Piet Hein)

Actually, the DX format is definately here to stay.

Nikon will invent magnetic lens technology that, using high powered superconducting electromagnets (cooled by liquid hydrogen and powered by methanol fuel cell batteries) will compress the light photons into smaller diameters and using miniature particle accelerators speed them up to 2x the speed of light. This will enable the future of 100mp DX format sensors and with the increased photon velocity, give with superb ISO3200 quality with good saturation. As a side benefit, with the 2x e=mc2 technology, you will never miss a shot! It actually takes the photo before you depress the shutter button. Function e3 on the menue will enable a shutter release delay function to compensate, allowing real time picture taking.

For backwards compatability, Nikon will also sell an adapter for current DX lenses that gives them this compatability. Sadly, it will reduce aperature by 1 f-stop, and is only compatable with AF-S and AF-I lenses.

--



http://www.flickr.com/photos/_pete/

My new 17-55 is worthless then? I might aswell just throw it in the bin now rather than use it for the next 2-3 years which is probably how long I will keep my D200 before upgrading.

If by then DX is dead, i'll sell it for next to nothing having had only 3 years use of it!

--
http://www.antonyward.com

ThomasMiller said:

But make no mistake about it. DX is toast. It's dead, Jim.

Click to expand...

Nah, DX isn't going anywhere. Smaller sensors and smaller glass will always be cheaper than larger sensors and larger glass. The day will come when dSLRs with FX size sensors cost under $999. But so what? By then, DX sized cameras will cost you $299 and there will always be a market for cheaper dSLRs.

One thing I will say though: The days of high-end, espensive DX lenses are numbered. There's not going to be a market for $1200 lenses useable only with $299 cameras. I think that high end DX lenses like the 17-55 and 12-24 will go the way of dodo birds. But superzooms and cheap lenses like the 55-200 VR will always be around.

Captain's log 20.10.2055

I was having a discussion earlier today with my cat; I know she can't talk, I'm not mad, we communicate telepathically. We were reminiscing about the death of the DX, FX and FXXX formats. Now that we have direct brain to printer interface format systems (dBTPIX) it makes it so much easier. I mean, thesedays 2TB Can-Nik intraoccular sensors have a dynamic range which can capture the visual spectra of all known mammals (and even some of those that haven't been discovered yet). It's so easy to express ones art. And the CAM 600000000001 infinite AF system is simply fantastic. Owl mode makes low light shooting a breeze. And 100fps with reverse time capacity makes action shooting so simple.

We've read in the history books about all the Neanderthals and their FX fixations in the first half of the 21st century. It's frankly laughable that people could get so preoccupied with primitive technology. It's not like they reinvented the wheel.

The camera died a long time ago. Long live the future.

--
Hamish

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://theflyingpie.zenfolio.com

I'd mock you but the challenge is gone.

that this thread will continue for at least 100 postings.

There will ALWAYS be the 'need' for small sensors. phones, blackberries, bluetooth, greentoe, whatever. The small camera-enabled thing.

There will ALWAYS be the people using those cheap things at weddings and bar mitzvahs and claim their photos are as good as the Pro Photographer's pictures.

Don't rule out the DX format yet. I remember when Atari and Apple were saying the Intel chip was doomed because of the page-swap limitation. A few thousand bytes and the CPU would have to write that to memory and pull up another "page" of data.
http://web52.smugmug.com

ThomasMiller said:

D300 final DX based high end camera from Nikon to be replaced by a FX
based camera (D400) that will be like a D3 but probably back down to
5 FPS. It will use a further refined version of the D3 sensor. About
1500.00 US and we'll see this in about 2 years.

Click to expand...

Not unless they have a D4 ready to roll. Who would buy a D3 with this out?

ThomasMiller said:

D2Hs to be replaced by a D3H. This camera will be a slower version of
the current D3 and probably come out a year before the D400, or
perhaps quite soon. At about 3500.00, they'll sell a lot of these
The D3 will be replaced by the D4 which will have to be even faster
than the D3 and probably go to 16 or even 20 MP. That will be a
logical end spec for the FX sensor.

Click to expand...

Isn't the D3 the D2Hs replacement? Aren't we expecting the D3X soon? I may be wrong but I don't think you've been paying enough attention.

I think DX may be dead in high end bodies but I think it will be a long time before we pronounce it dead. By that time we'll be talking about the successor to FX well.

I'll respond to those who were able to make intelligent comments on a thread that drew quite a few trolls.

1) Someone said that NIkon would always have a market for cheaper sensors like DX based ones. That's essentially like saying there would always be a market for 486 DX2 processors in PC's. The DSLR wars just can't allow for the DX sensor, it's design optimized to it's size limits now, to continue. Even cheap cameras will get FX sensors in time. But let me refine that statement: FX sensors will appear in ALL DSLRS. Smaller sensors, like the ones in our current D300 and D200's will find thier way to P&S models in time. Frankly, that will be great!

2) DX lenses work on the D3, so I don't know why everyone is acting like the DX glass is unusable. In cropped DX mode the D3 is about 5 MP and probably still better in many respects to a D2Hs or D200. Once the sensors get larger, the crop factor will enjoy more resolution on DX lenses of course. Still, I think the value of a lens like the 17-55 DX will drop hard. My expensive glass is non-DX. My DX stuff is the cheap stuff...70-300VR, Tokina 12-24 and bordering on pricey...the 18-200VR. I seriously doubt Nikon will develop more than a few DX lenses now. They're plan is obvious.

3) There's no logic to keeping the DX format. Of course FX sensors will become the standard. Cropped sensors will keep the "old" DX glass usable so if Nikon is unable to come out with a full frame 18-200VR type lens fast enough, the DX version will still be the go-to walk around for plenty of folks.

4) Today there is only one FX based Nikon. Onwards and upwards...or die on the DSLR vine. It will be interesting to see who comes out with the first sub-1000 dollar full frame camera. I have a feeling Canon will draw first blood.

5) There are three camps of people when it comes to discussions like this. The 1st camp is open minded and not threatened enough to talk about. A 2nd camp is annoyed by just about anyone's conjecture and makes that clear. A 3rd ever present camp sees such discussions as a threat to what they own currently and are angry that they lack the resources to keep up with the trends in camera technology. I guess we'll see quite soon if any of my predictions are correct. I know for a fact that they are.

The reactions are always funny. In other words; "How dare you think you know what's going on." But better still and leading by a nose is still, "How dare you know!"

Cheers,

Thomas

ThomasMiller said:

3) There's no logic to keeping the DX format. Of course FX sensors
will become the standard.

Click to expand...

Isn't this exactly like saying I am right because I deem mine as being the only logical answer?

--
Equipment Brokerage for the Working Pro http://www.chadmarekphoto.com/ta/
My Latest Show - http://www.chadmarekphoto.com/gallery/shows/atcw2007/index.htm

I have 2 medium format TLR's, specifically a Mamiya C-220 and C-330, with a collection of 65, 80, and 135mm lenses. So, I have a pretty good idea of what a really good 11x17 inch print looks like. I also have a D70. You know what, I am stunned at how close the 11x17 inch prints from my D70 come to the results from my TLR's. So I am quite certain that when I get my D300 I will find that it delivers everything that I could want in a small format camera. In fact, I expect that the D300 could deliver dye sub 16x20 prints that matched the quality of analog prints from my TLR. My only question is does anyone know where you can get dye sub prints that large? So, for most of us, there really is no need at all to get an FX format camera.

Do that mean that I won't ever want one? Nah, I am just as dumb and tweaked about the potential of the format as everyone here. Plus, I have a fine collection of FF lenses acquired thru over 30 years of shooting with Nikons. So, I may get the D400 when it comes out, even though in my heart I know that I don't need one.

However, I do expect that the DX format will be around for a very long time. I expect that Nikon will be developing this market for those consumers who want a smaller, lighter DSLR. Most likely, we will see the consumer line of Nikon's approach the form factor of the Pronea series, which was killed by a combination of poor film and lousy timing. So, the DX format isn't dead, it will just evolve into a camera that is a bit smaller and easier to carry than it is now. They may even get real clever and build a collapsing zoom that tells the camera to swing up the mirror for the collapse, producing a DSLR as compact to carry as the current compact digitals. I just hope they are smart enough to keep the viewfinder because it's the instant response that is a real selling point for DSLR's with many typical consumers.

Isn't this exactly like saying I am right because I deem mine as being the only logical answer?> > >

It is logical and Nikon's path is like all camera makers. They want you to buy MORE.

You say you prefer DX (outside of cost, WHY?) and you don't want to have to buy more lenses. Nikon's plans do not involve trying to create products that will stop you from buying from them in the future. This has been the way for a long time, only with DSLRS the process is painfully fast. I have 7K in camera bodies on order and another 2.7K in new glass on the way. Good lord! 3 times that amount and you can buy a pretty good car! But my investment has short lived technological value.

The FX technology is better. DX lenses will still work on them. Most shooters will own FX cameras and non DX lenses, just like most now own at least some AF/S lenses.

Nikon is in a race for their lives with companies like Canon. This is not likely to change. They cannot afford to overly support older formats down the road.

It's an interesting age we live in. What exactly do we own these days that we keep more than 5-10 years?

RIPDX

Thomas

--
Marabou Muddler
http://mmuddler.smugmug.com/

All he does is figure out how to push peoples buttons and then write a long, drawn out, super-inflated hypothisis about it. He has already been kicked off of this site once (as CaptRob (sp?) ), and many thought he was actually kicked off as "Thomas" a few weeks back for stirring poop. All he wants to do is start controversy. Please stop indulging him or next he'll be arguing that his "yacht" size, his home theatre system and his self recognized position of knowing more about photog than anyone else is evidence of his clearly superior position in the universe. I apologize in advance for my rant, but this guy just gets under my skin. And I am not alone, I assure you.
--
Matthew Scott

And yet some continue to pay over $1200 for DX lenses. Every FF lens I've bought has held its value... selling for almost exactly what I paid for it. DX lenses have a future that isn't quite so rosy, IMO. Someday manual focus lenses will sell for more.

Then again, if you need the DX lens and can get that much use out of it before then, it may still be right. After all, nobody balks at paying $5000 for a camera that will be worth $2000 in two years. We're just not used to seeing this kind of depreciation in lenses. Get ready, though.

LOL.

I was at the photography show - looking at both the D3 and D300. Both great cameras. However, what I needed to know, was the cost of going to FF. The camera body was $4,000 more, which is fine, but that is just the beginning. The cost difference of the body alone is just a small piece of the puzzle.

I have a substantial investment in lenses that now shrink in reach. So to compare apples to apples, I was going to have to factor in the cost of getting my reach back. That means replacing my 300/2.8 with a 500. etc, etc. ($$$$$$$)

Then you hear the salesman tell you that you can crop the FF picture and still get the photo you would have taken with the D300. Really?

D300 resolution 4288 x 2848
D3 resolution 4256 x 2832

The D3 starts out with a lower resolution, and then you crop it, and are supposed to come up with a better photo than a higher resolution photo before you did the crop? In the end you still end up comparing a 5MP photo to a 12MP photo. This is the same as setting the D3 to DX mode.

There are some photographers who only shoot wideangle, and think everyone shoots just like them. So they cannot grasp the needs of others. Even if the bodies were the same price - I would choose the D300. I love the reach of the DX format ...

If Nikon does stop producing DX models, I will then have to choose between keeping the latest model DX body and replacing all my lenses for bigger bulkier costlier ones to do the same job. But this flies in the face of technology - getting smaller and lighter - not the opposite.

Nikon has many DX models but only 1 FF model for those who need it. They know that there are many different types of photographers and will offer models to suit the needs of all of them - not just one of them.

Only those with tunnel vision will not see that there are different needs.

DX rules.

--
'Let my heart be broken by the things that break the heart of God.'
===============
Nikon D200 - MB-D200 - SB800 - TC-20EII - TC-17EII
Nikon 17-55(2.8), 105VR(2.8), 70-200 VR(2.8), 300(2.8)

All he wants to do is start controversy.> > >

Exactly what controversy are you talking about? A prediction about the future of sensors or one about high ISO's?

I've not been kicked off this forum and I'm doing nothing more than posting opinions that do not include attacking anyone for having one that differs from mine.

If you're jealous about the attention some of my topics generate, how about starting an interesting one of your own? There's a lot to discuss here.
For example:

What about larger than FX sensors with a new set of lenses in an SLR style body?

Thomas

DX lenses have a future that isn't quite so rosy, IMO. Someday manual focus lenses will sell for more.> > >

What remains to be seen is how will a 17-55X work on a 20 MP FX sensor Nikon, working at aprox 10 MP. If the pro market isn't badly caught up in the MP race, the that sort of lens will hold pretty good value. It'll still be good, fast glass in a zoom. My total cost for DX lenses now is only 2 grand or so. Hardly a lot of money these days for glass. With my lenses costing much more I feel that I can hang on to the DX stuff and take a wait-and-see approach without big concern of selling off th DX glass with my Coleco Adam computer.

Cheers,

Thomas

LOL.

Nikon announces one FF body (not even released yet) and DX is now suddenly dead. Yet, Canon (and Kodak previously) has had a FF body out for 5 years now yet continues to release high end 1.5x and 1.3x bodies.

The only thing that is dead is your credibility.

-- http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=25081321

Matthew Scott