70D, Nikon Df: Is this a tech plateau?

For a few years photo tech kept steadily improving, particularly in terms of ISO and dynamic range; it seems the current generation reflects product planning which is expecting fewer advances at least in those areas, in so far as the 70D offers plenty of interesting bits but less related to photos; and that Nikon would seemingly abandon the "pro" APS-C range in favour of a prettier camera with no actual tech advances.

This doesn't worry me one way or another as I still think the photographer makes a much bigger difference than his gear, but clearly some people would appreciate say the next 7D with better dynamic range and ISO. If however tech has plateaued this implies a different market for all brands, in which it will be much harder for them to differentiate each other, and soon one competitor starts charging less, shrinking profits, leading to a downward spiral and the eventual death of a few brands... Now that I wouldn't like. What do you think?

photosen said:

For a few years photo tech kept steadily improving, particularly in terms of ISO and dynamic range; it seems the current generation reflects product planning which is expecting fewer advances at least in those areas, in so far as the 70D offers plenty of interesting bits but less related to photos; and that Nikon would seemingly abandon the "pro" APS-C range in favour of a prettier camera with no actual tech advances.

Click to expand...

Technology was immature, now it's much more mature. The 70D offers more pixels, similar image quality, much more useful Liveview, and some other nice additions that can come in handy. I have no idea what you're talking about in relation to Nikon. They came out with a new FF body, that's all.

photosen said:

This doesn't worry me one way or another as I still think the photographer makes a much bigger difference than his gear, but clearly some people would appreciate say the next 7D with better dynamic range and ISO. If however tech has plateaued this implies a different market for all brands, in which it will be much harder for them to differentiate each other, and soon one competitor starts charging less, shrinking profits, leading to a downward spiral and the eventual death of a few brands... Now that I wouldn't like. What do you think?

Click to expand...

Technology will continue to improve, but the initial pace simply can not be maintained. The market has become much more complex, and therefore concnetrating effort in one area isn't possible any more. Canon can't concnetrate on their sensor technology optimized only for stills and leave video as a second thought because competition is too intense. They can't concentrate on a few market segments because now large sensor compact, crop and FF ILC, APS-C DSLR, FF DSLR area all over the place.

That new 70D DP PDAF system may not be just mind blowing for stills yet, but that mainly appears to be a constraint of processing power. As the AF tech improves and processing becomes faster and cheaper some very intelligent tracking algorithms that we've seen demonstrated over the years will be implimented and AF will be changed forever. Improving DR and resolution of sesnors while keeping noise down is very challenging, but we've seen that it can be done. Who knows what new innovations will develop to further improve image quality.

Nah. Be assured Moore's Law is still alive and well even at almost 50 years.

I think we'll continue to see tremendous "advances" myself. However the Purists out there may not be too happy IMHO. What will they say when we reach 100 megapixels, at 120 frames per second?

R2

I think "yes" (we have reached a technology plateau) in the sense that, especially for Nikon, it didn't have a new technical advance but wanted to take advantage of the retro craze. So as far as I can tell there's nothing new technologically on the Df. It has the sensor of one previous Nikon camera, the guts of another, and so on. The only new thing is the styling and combination of features from previous Nikon cameras, and I think the styling is nutty. To the degree that form follows function, Nikon has added a whole lot of form that harks to an earlier, now-irrelevant function: film. This still is a digital camera and all those dials just complicate the user interface. It makes no sense to me, and I'm in Nikon's target age group. So I'd have no interest in a Canon that mimicked the look and feel of say an AE1.

I think "no" (we have not reached a technology plateau) in the sense that the 70D does offer technology that hasn't been available on any previous Canon camera--certainly not on any APS-C camera--and yet, because the 70D is not Canon's top-of-the-line crop camera I would expect that if and when they come out with a new top crop camera, that will have even some more new technology. But at this stage, as long as it's a DSLR, I think we're looking at incremental technology advance. I think mirrorless and cell-phone cameras represent a disruption in the market and Canikon will have to deal with that if they are to remain market leaders in any area (clearly they already aren't in small, portable digital cameras, Samsung and Appple are).

FF

When I was a kid, they'd make a big deal about new cars every Autumn. New tail fins in yesterday's technology. This felt the same way.

I hope they sell alot though — nobody wants to pay 3,000USD for the next set of revised primes because Canon & Nikon can sell anymore cameras.

I hope Canon's gamble on security cameras pays off.

I would think that a 7D with some sort of variation of the 70D sensor and at least dual digit 5 or 6 would be a true twenty first century camera. Most computers now have at least two to eight processors working in parallel. Do we really need any more than 20 or 24 MP?

Flying Fish said:

I think "yes" (we have reached a technology plateau) in the sense that, especially for Nikon, it didn't have a new technical advance but wanted to take advantage of the retro craze. So as far as I can tell there's nothing new technologically on the Df. It has the sensor of one previous Nikon camera, the guts of another, and so on. The only new thing is the styling and combination of features from previous Nikon cameras, and I think the styling is nutty. To the degree that form follows function, Nikon has added a whole lot of form that harks to an earlier, now-irrelevant function: film. This still is a digital camera and all those dials just complicate the user interface. It makes no sense to me

Click to expand...

LOL. You gotta know Nikon owners! Methinks they'll flock to this camera in droves. Plus they're gonna be digging out every old manual focus lens they can find too.

R2

ps. Hey, if Canon does a Retro body, I'd really like to see a film advance lever on it to complete the look (which would serve as maybe the "Playback" button).

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

R2D2 said:

Nah. Be assured Moore's Law is still alive and well even at almost 50 years.

I think we'll continue to see tremendous "advances" myself. However the Purists out there may not be too happy IMHO. What will they say when we reach 100 megapixels, at 120 frames per second?

R2

Click to expand...

They already have 120 Mp APS-H, but only 10 fps. That is only 76 Mp 7D size, but I would settle for that. For a while.

R2D2 said:

Nah. Be assured Moore's Law is still alive and well even at almost 50 years.

I think we'll continue to see tremendous "advances" myself. However the Purists out there may not be too happy IMHO. What will they say when we reach 100 megapixels, at 120 frames per second?

Click to expand...

All the "big" camera makers are in trouble. That's Canon, Nikon, Sony and the rest. Canon spends the most on R&D with close to a billion dollars and Nikon is not too far behind.

The problem is that Apple spent 5.7 billions in R&D for photos, in fiscal 2012, all related to their iPhones. This is more money spent on R&D that Nikon sells camera + lenses. It's a little bit less than Canon's total cameras + lenses sales.

That's just Apple. Samsung is also spending big, big... Microsoft (the old Nokia) is investing billionS just on the camera side of their phones...

Eventually, in the near future, smartphones will have be better cameras than the cameras.

Flying Fish said:

To the degree that form follows function, Nikon has added a whole lot of form that harks to an earlier, now-irrelevant function: film.

Click to expand...

I don't get what you mean. If it had a film advance lever it would make sense... but what function do the dials perform that is irrelevant to digital shooting?

elfroggio said:

The problem is that Apple spent 5.7 billions in R&D for photos, in fiscal 2012, all related to their iPhones. This is more money spent on R&D that Nikon sells camera + lenses. It's a little bit less than Canon's total cameras + lenses sales.

That's just Apple. Samsung is also spending big, big... Microsoft (the old Nokia) is investing billionS just on the camera side of their phones...

Eventually, in the near future, smartphones will have be better cameras than the cameras.

Click to expand...

Yeah, (we) guys are in big trouble. What with the phones and all of the accessories coming out (I like those neat add-on lenses), we're gonna have to start carrying Man-Purses for all this stuff!

Hmmm. Now there's a marketing opportunity.

R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

rickyred said:

I would think that a 7D with some sort of variation of the 70D sensor and at least dual digit 5 or 6 would be a true twenty first century camera. Most computers now have at least two to eight processors working in parallel. Do we really need any more than 20 or 24 MP?

Click to expand...

I feel quite confident the current 7D is a true 21st century camera. Just because things get faster, new whiz-bang features are added, and things get cheaper doesn't affect in any way the great images I get from the 7D. I would love DP PDAF, WiFi, faster and more accurate traditional PDAF, higher frame rate, and more/better pixels, but if you compare the 7D to cameras coming out today it quickly becomes apparent that either it was ahead of its time or things are no longer accelerating at the same pace....probably both.

R2D2 said:

Flying Fish said:

I think "yes" (we have reached a technology plateau) in the sense that, especially for Nikon, it didn't have a new technical advance but wanted to take advantage of the retro craze. So as far as I can tell there's nothing new technologically on the Df. It has the sensor of one previous Nikon camera, the guts of another, and so on. The only new thing is the styling and combination of features from previous Nikon cameras, and I think the styling is nutty. To the degree that form follows function, Nikon has added a whole lot of form that harks to an earlier, now-irrelevant function: film. This still is a digital camera and all those dials just complicate the user interface. It makes no sense to me

Click to expand...

LOL. You gotta know Nikon owners! Methinks they'll flock to this camera in droves. Plus they're gonna be digging out every old manual focus lens they can find too.

Click to expand...

You think so? Not if the reaction to this product on the Nikon forum is anything to go by - most of them seem to hate it or complain that's it's far too expensive. (But then they are DPR readers too so what else is new?)

But I also suspect that when users do start putting on those old Nikkors that they were so desperate to use, that they will suddenly realise "Oh, this old lens really isn't very good is it?" As poor as most old lenses designed for film when used on digital. Then whatever romantic bubble there was will truly burst.

R2D2 said:

R2

ps. Hey, if Canon does a Retro body, I'd really like to see a film advance lever on it to complete the look (which would serve as maybe the "Playback" button).

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

Click to expand...

photosen said:

For a few years photo tech kept steadily improving, particularly in terms of ISO and dynamic range; it seems the current generation reflects product planning which is expecting fewer advances at least in those areas, in so far as the 70D offers plenty of interesting bits but less related to photos; and that Nikon would seemingly abandon the "pro" APS-C range in favour of a prettier camera with no actual tech advances.

This doesn't worry me one way or another as I still think the photographer makes a much bigger difference than his gear, but clearly some people would appreciate say the next 7D with better dynamic range and ISO. If however tech has plateaued this implies a different market for all brands, in which it will be much harder for them to differentiate each other, and soon one competitor starts charging less, shrinking profits, leading to a downward spiral and the eventual death of a few brands... Now that I wouldn't like. What do you think?

Click to expand...

Yes the tech is plateauing. Of course we will still see increasing MP, increased DR, etc., but in practice it will make very little difference to most people's results. And, perhaps more to the point, it may actually detract from our enjoyment of taking a photo. After all if the process becomes even more automated and even easier what is the pleasure in that?

You can perhaps draw a parallel with driving. Now, even as a crap driver I could jump in a Nissan GTR and blast around a circuit and achieve respectable lap times. The car with its myriad of electronic aids would overcome most of my deficiencies and possibly even stop me killing myself. But I know I would gain very little pleasure or satisfaction from it. Which is why I haven't bought one.

Or I could do the same in a 1600cc Caterham, with no traction control, ABS, or any other electronic aid and while I might not go very fast, I would certainly have a blast! Of course I freely admit I wouldn't want to drive a Caterham as my only car, it's too raw, too primitive and leaks too much in the rain to want to do that.

This Nikon is an attempt to return to the tactile pleasure many used to get from operating the shutter speed and aperture dials of mechanical cameras. It probably won't achieve that actually but it's tapping into a sense of dissatisfaction that many feel when operating our black, electronic, super blobs and is harking back to simpler and possibly happier times for some of us.

When viewed through our rose tinted spectacles anyway.

Well said!!!

I posted something similar on another forum. I still have these nostalgic feelings about my Nikon FE2 and how wonderful it was. Rose colored glasses, indeed. But the truth is, I got better pictures with the later N-80. I have no nostalgic feelings about the N-80, it was much more of an appliance than a love object; but a very functional appliance.

As to the new Nikon Df - I see it as rather conflicted. From the front and top it looks very FM or FE. But from the back, it looks very digital. In the other post I called it a photographic Chimera.

Nostalgic as I am about my FE2s (I had more than one) The Df has no attraction for me. First off, the cost to buy and equip one is way more than I can justify spending. Secondly, I'm pretty happy with the 60D and like the way it works. Much more like the N80.

canon has a bigger base of technology to draw on, and as a result, can afford to spend less. Apple must spend that much to minimize the limitations of small lens, small sensor along with integration into a complex phone operating system.

In the first place, just because "the next big thing" takes three years instead of one, it doesn't mean we've reached a plateau.

Researchers at UCSD announced that they've designed a camera with a lens the size of a marble, which can out-perform a 5D mIII with any L lens that Canon has. IOW, they claim its field beats a 6mm lens and it's resolution anywhere in that field beats a 500mm lens. I have no idea if it will be manufacturable.

Personally, I don't believe in plateaus. We seemed to reach a plateau with film cameras, and it took the digital era to change that. The specific market problems facing the camera industry are a recessionary economy and the smartphone camera. I don't think the pace of technical innovation is harming this industry.

The next trends seem to be better camera-smartphone integration, and mirror less. Canon's 70D appears to be the result of a sensor designed for mirrorless camera use, but sales of these cameras haven't been very good.

Nikon has a certain percentage of brand snobs among its users, and the company might be trying to tap into that. I know that I lusted after the Nikon F series when I was a kid happily snapping away with my Mamiya-Sekor 35mm SLR. If I had bought into Nikon rather than Canon digital, I would likely give the Df a view at my local store. Canon has not gone retro to the faux-AE. Its tiny travel DSLR is the SL1/100D APS-C , which looks like a modern digital camera.

Canon: the 70D dual-pixel AF technology is a new direction with room for development. For one thing, it would be wonderful if it could operate in continuous stills mode. Clearly Canon has a ways to go to improve its sensors' dynamic range, and it needs a 45 MP full frame camera to keep its landscape-shooting Canon camera owners from wandering off to the D800E.

Sigma's Foveon sensor really has some great potential. Fix the data bottlenecks for better writing speed, and make a FF Foveon sensor, and that camera could be a medium format-killer. Yes, you have to putz with a seriously different workflow. But I can tell you that the file quality of the APS-C Merrill cameras is simply amazing. Its measly 14.6 MP x 3 can beat out the full frames with the exception of the D800E, under optimal conditions, say those who have tested a large number of cameras.

There may indeed be a user skill plateau out there. If one remembers the old manual camera film days, the new gear is downright miraculous.

Canon 60D, Canon 6D, Sigma DP2 Merrill

MarshallG said:

In the first place, just because "the next big thing" takes three years instead of one, it doesn't mean we've reached a plateau.

Researchers at UCSD announced that they've designed a camera with a lens the size of a marble, which can out-perform a 5D mIII with any L lens that Canon has. IOW, they claim its field beats a 6mm lens and it's resolution anywhere in that field beats a 500mm lens. I have no idea if it will be manufacturable.

Click to expand...

Do you have a link to that? The Nokia 1020 has a lens smaller than a marble, but does fairly well:

http://evan-theelectricalengineer.blogspot.co.il/2013/10/nikon-d800e-vs-nokia-lumia-1020.html

Does not look like we've reached a plateau.

MarshallG said:

Personally, I don't believe in plateaus. We seemed to reach a plateau with film cameras, and it took the digital era to change that. The specific market problems facing the camera industry are a recessionary economy and the smartphone camera. I don't think the pace of technical innovation is harming this industry.

The next trends seem to be better camera-smartphone integration, and mirror less. Canon's 70D appears to be the result of a sensor designed for mirrorless camera use, but sales of these cameras haven't been very good.

Click to expand...

altair8800 said:

MarshallG said:

In the first place, just because "the next big thing" takes three years instead of one, it doesn't mean we've reached a plateau.

Researchers at UCSD announced that they've designed a camera with a lens the size of a marble, which can out-perform a 5D mIII with any L lens that Canon has. IOW, they claim its field beats a 6mm lens and it's resolution anywhere in that field beats a 500mm lens. I have no idea if it will be manufacturable.

Click to expand...

Do you have a link to that? The Nokia 1020 has a lens smaller than a marble, but does fairly well:

http://evan-theelectricalengineer.blogspot.co.il/2013/10/nikon-d800e-vs-nokia-lumia-1020.html

Does not look like we've reached a plateau.

altair8800 said:

Personally, I don't believe in plateaus. We seemed to reach a plateau with film cameras, and it took the digital era to change that. The specific market problems facing the camera industry are a recessionary economy and the smartphone camera. I don't think the pace of technical innovation is harming this industry.

The next trends seem to be better camera-smartphone integration, and mirror less. Canon's 70D appears to be the result of a sensor designed for mirrorless camera use, but sales of these cameras haven't been very good.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The technology is based on a monocentric lens:


To be honest, I hope it never takes off. I enjoy DSLR photography the way it is.