If Nikon doesn't get their act together on DX...

Started Feb 7, 2013 | Discussions thread
jfriend00 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,314
Re: If Nikon doesn't get their act together on DX...

photoreddi wrote:

jfriend00 wrote:


What Nikon product shows that they can do 24MP at 8fps? I'm not ware of any.

I'm not saying it can now, I'm saying its quite possible to do given the performance of the newer cpu cores.

You said this problem was solved. I wonder where you get your info. I'm quite sure Nikon would have made the D800 go faster than 4fps at 36MP if this problem was as trivial as you say. It's the 4fps that limits the D800 market to people who don't primarily shoot action so I rather doubt they limited it to 4fps artificially.

Nikon's 1 Series sensors have incredibly high bandwidths, much higher than not only the D800 but also the D4. 36mp/s *4 == 144mp/s and somewhat faster for the D4, 16mp/s *11 == 176mp/s. The 10mp V1 and the 14mp V2 can shoot long bursts (40 frames for the V2, more for the V1) at 60fps, so the bandwidths for both cameras are 10mp/s *60 and 14mp*60 == 600mp/s and 840mp/s. I'm sure that Nikon's current DSLR sensor technology doesn't come close to this bandwidth but even if it could, the 11fps is probably limited by the mirror, not by the sensor's data bandwidth, which could explain why there was no urgency to create extremely high bandwidth DSLR sensors (if indeed they are much slower than 600mp/s).

But there is a good reason why the D800's frame rate is limited to 4fps if the sensor could allow much higher frame rates. If the D800 could shoot at 8fps, it would cannibalize many D4 sales, and that wouldn't be very good for Nikon's bottom line.

There's more to it than that.  If what you're saying is true, then why does the D800 go 5fps in crop mode, but only 4fps in FX mode.  The ONLY thing different there is how many bigs have to be processed.  Are you suggesting that Nikon has, built into the D800 the tech to go faster than 4fps in FX mode and they artificially limited it to 4fps?

One major thing holding the D800 back is the fps.  The sports/action shooter who bought the D700 in droves (and still largely shoots with it) isn't buying the D800 for action shooting.  Give it the fps of the D700 and it would be a no-compromise camera for many previous owners.  Of course, every camera below the D4 takes some share from it, but the D3s/D700 combo was very successful for Nikon so there's no reason for Nikon not to continue with their successful D700 line for action shooters unless they have a tech stumbling block at 24MP.

My guess is that the sensor readout tech works differently on the FX/DX sensors vs. the sensors used in the Nikon One line and getting low noise readout and getting 24MP processed at 8fps out of the FX/DX sensors is still being worked on.  Why else would Nikon go from three sports/action cameras in the previous generation (D3s/D700/D300s) to only one in the current generation (D4).  It's not like all sports/action shooters just suddenly decided they were happy with D800 or D600?  They aren't.

The ability to have a high FPS rate is addressable in a low cost FF. I'm not thinking a D4 is the answer. But I bet a FF EVF along the lines of the D600 or 6D with a higher frame rate and 7D type or D7000 type or OMD/GH3 type of AF will shortly exist.

Please share where you get the data that this product is coming soon. FYI, the D7000 type focus or OMD type focus is completely inadequate for a high-end camera optimized for action so if that's your target, then even this mythical camera you're predicting won't meet the needs of those who primarily shoot action as it doesn't even measure up to the D300 or D700 (two 4-5 year old cameras).

It should be obvious that I have no information about a future D400, but I think that if Nikon doesn't produce one it will be because a mirrorless EVF equivalent version is being designed that will have much better AF and tracking than even the 1 Series cameras in both good light and poor light. This would explain the dearth of new high performance DX telephoto and zoom lenses because resources would be better allocated developing a new line of DX lenses optimized for mirrorless still and video photography. Anyway that's my story, and I'm holding Nikon to it.

Maybe, but Nikon will have lost many, many loyal customers by the time they come out with that because its so late.  I don't know what you're talking about with DX teles.  There's little advantage to a DX tele so neither Nikon or Canon every made big DX teles.  The DX lenses that Thom speaks about are shorter focal lengths.

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow