-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Nikon D810 Successor
- Thread starter sushanth1988
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nikon d810 sony a99 ii
Escaping
Senior Member
ohhh, I love to see a digital SP ... may be we can call it the SP-D ? ... of course, that model will be "mirrorless" as the rangefinder does not have any mirror like in a DSLR. So, this SP-D is like a FX mirrorless in a square RF like box (similar to a Fuji X-E more or less) .... but while I love seeing something like this speculative SP-D, thinking about how it can be and how it would look makes my head hurt ! ... but, yes, Nikon, bring one on, and I will start saving my pennies for it.
Cheers.
It's already two years old. At least. By the time the 820 is announced and shipping Sony will have announced a replacement or at least not much later
Some people are replacing things just for the energy savings. I replaced a four year old TV with a bigger one and the reduction in my electrical bill paid for the new TV over three years. About that.
But the tax isn't the issue with repairs. Many repairs cost more then the replacement even without tax.
But the tax isn't the issue with repairs. Many repairs cost more then the replacement even without tax.
bobn2
Forum Pro
Yxa
Senior Member
That's not the question either.
During the expected lifetime of the 820 will that sensor be the best? Or will it quickly be beaten?
I can't believe Nikon will be shipping the D820 with only the present in mind. They'll want something that they can keep selling for a number of years.
During the expected lifetime of the 820 will that sensor be the best? Or will it quickly be beaten?
I can't believe Nikon will be shipping the D820 with only the present in mind. They'll want something that they can keep selling for a number of years.
Yxa
Senior Member
Says a lot about how little we know :-D
Thom Hogan suggests 72 MP as a logical move for the D810 successor, doubling the resolution.
IMO it can't be less than circa 50 MP, i.e. matching the Canon high res 5D at least. Resolution is still one yardstick by which a camera is judged. It is also the D8xx series landmark feature. Nikon captured then lost the HR crown. It makes sense that it tries to recover that crown and even put some distance with Canon as the sensor has to hold the competition back for 4 years or so until the following generation comes.
Point taken about the 42 MP sensor: IMO it's not a "dinosaur" as there is still nothing better. Plus a high FPS 42 MP camera would be more useful for most than a not so fast 72 MP D820. But Nikon's decisions are often about how to position itself better compared to its competition more than anything else. The 42 MP is just too much of a "me too".
Thom Hogan suggests 72 MP as a logical move for the D810 successor, doubling the resolution.
IMO it can't be less than circa 50 MP, i.e. matching the Canon high res 5D at least. Resolution is still one yardstick by which a camera is judged. It is also the D8xx series landmark feature. Nikon captured then lost the HR crown. It makes sense that it tries to recover that crown and even put some distance with Canon as the sensor has to hold the competition back for 4 years or so until the following generation comes.
Point taken about the 42 MP sensor: IMO it's not a "dinosaur" as there is still nothing better. Plus a high FPS 42 MP camera would be more useful for most than a not so fast 72 MP D820. But Nikon's decisions are often about how to position itself better compared to its competition more than anything else. The 42 MP is just too much of a "me too".
bobn2
Forum Pro
bobn2
Forum Pro
Very possibly. Where do you think that Nikon will get something better?
Sure, but where are they going to get this new sensor? They have already developed or had developed two completely new sensors, that will have drawn down a good part of their R&D budget, so where will the next come from.
f bass
Forum Enthusiast
No, I didn't.
Yup, the list of 'excepts' is mainly down to it being a DX camera, against the D7200 it would be a much shorter list
Let's go back to your list:and you still missed out the built-in flash
Like the D750, not the D5
Like the D750, not the D5
Like the D750, not the D5
Like the D5
Like the D5
Sure, but on that basis the D7100 (styled like a D4) isn't 'like' a D7000 (styled like a D3).
In the beginning, there was the D2 (the D1 being a hacked F100 and the D100 a hacked F80). The D2 begat the D200 and the D3 which begat the D4 which begat the D5. The D200 begat the D300. The D3 begat the D700. The D4 begat the D800 which begat the D810 after an illicit relationship with a Canon 5D.
Nikon looked at the D100 and saw that it was good, but too expensive to build to allow it to be sold to the masses, so Nikon made the D70 from a sensor it took from the D100. The D70 begat the D50 and D80, which begat the D90, which begat the D7000, which begat the D7100 and D600. The D600 begat the D610 which begat the D750. The D7100 begat the D7200 which begat the D500.
Nikon Looked at the D50, and decided it could be taken no further, so it made the D40, which begat the D40X, which begat the D60, which begat the D3000 and D5000. The D3000 begat the D3100, which begat the D3200, which begat the D3300, which begat the D3400. The D5000 begat the D5100, which begat the D5200, which begat the D5300 which begat the D5500.
The D500 is of the House of D70, not the House of D2.
bobn2
Forum Pro
Not for the first time I've disagreed with Thom on these matters. Our record is about 50-50.
Actually, I think that's a misunderstanding of what the D800 and its successors is and was about. These cameras have never solely been about high resolution as was the 5Ds and D3X. Their crop modes, particularly the 1.2x and the increased speeds available (Canon's 5Ds crop mode doesn't speed the camera up and only works in JPEG). So, the D8x0 end up being about the best all around cameras available, for people who want just one body. They have available high resolution and they can match the competition for speed in crop modes. It's that which allowed the D800 to compete effectively against the 5DIII
I think it's a different crown, though it does depend on how they see the D760. One real possibility is that the D750 and D820 replacements are pretty much the same camera, with different sensor resolutions in which case the D820, or D760X would be more than 42MP.
On reflection I think that Nikon might have different ideas what to do with this space than simply continue with the D8x0 and D7x0 lines as they are. They still might call the resulting cameras D820 and D760, but in truth it's very likely that they are essentially the same camera (although AF and controls might vary). Logically, you'd expect the D5 AF, it that's one of the ingredients in play, to go with the lower res version, since that is more likely to be used for action photography.
--
Thierry - posted as regular forum member
--
Tinkety tonk old fruit, & down with the Nazis!
Bob
Last edited:
Leonard Shepherd
Forum Pro
36 to 72 MP does not double resolution
72 MP (subject to a precise specification) would increase the D810 long dimension pixels of 7,360 to around 10,451 which, with no other improvements, is a 1.42 resolution increase.
Other improvements are always possible (as with D810 64 ISO) so if a 72 MP comes maybe a 1.5 resolution increase.
To double 36 MP resolution (all other things being equal) needs 144 MP. We are not likely to see this in a 24x36 format sensor soon, though 100 MP medium format is already in production.
Yes it does if one expresses the resolution as overall number of pixels. Given the context my statement is correct.36 to 72 MP does not double resolution
rubank
Senior Member
Samsung?
A FF version of their excellent (BSI) 28 Mp aps-c sensor would give ~63 Mp.
Now that would be something!
Leonard Shepherd
Forum Pro
You are talking about doubling the number of pixels in an "inverse square law" situation.
The maths and physics are simple.
To double the number of pixels you just double them. There we agree.
To double the resolution (detail recording ability) multiply by four. We do not agree - but physics sets out the appropriate answer.
True if what is referred to is linear resolution, but at the same time highly unnecessary nitpicking in this context.36 to 72 MP does not double resolution
The issue here is linguistics, not physics. That is, if you really insist on involving some sort of science in this kind of debate...
bobn2
Forum Pro
Sony could do it too. Capability is not the problem. You think that Samsung is just going to give Nikon a sensor? Whatever the source, if it's a special for Nikon, they will have to pay for the R&D, one way or another. Companies are in business to make profit, Samsung, Sony, whoever will not just develop a sensor for Nikon because they like them. So, the point is, this generation Nikon has already paid for the development of two bespoke sensors. That's as much as they have ever done.Samsung?
A FF version of their excellent (BSI) 28 Mp aps-c sensor would give ~63 Mp.
Now that would be something!
--
Tinkety tonk old fruit, & down with the Nazis!
Bob
Last edited:
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum