Yeah I don't either, it's not a huge deal and am actually glad they are included in case I wanted to shoot 8k video for example. As with most things, I'd rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it. Even without the extra video capabilities, I'd argue cameras like the Z8 are still worth their price based on their abilities for stills photography over other Nikon Z options (although $4k would be about my limit for such a camera).
The price of 2700 pounds (accidentally leaked by Wex UK) can only be explained by such a high specification sensor
These people think their cameras would somehow both be cheaper and have better photo features if they didn't have the video features. Of course, this is not how camera development works though.
It's $2500 USD whatever that equates to in pounds (might be 2700 but I haven't checked).
1 US$ = 0.78 GBP, so $2500 = 1970.13
I don't understand why its so much more expensive in the UK
Doesn't the UK price include the 20% VAT?
The only thing i can think of would be taxes perhaps (VAT maybe, unless that's already figured into the number given). I know in the US, tax is separate from the stated $2500 price (and can range from about 5% to 10% depending on where you live).
The British price by law has to include VAT at 20% for a consumer item, which makes it approx £2360 if it was priced the same as in the US… so it still costs more in the UK, but less of a difference.. of course if a professional purchase you can claim the VAT back if you are VAT registered.
IIRC UK prices include VAT, US prices do not. That's 20-25% right there.
That's still interestingly over a £300 difference between the two prices with the UK price seemingly going for £2699
So it turns out that this rumor was correct.
Yep, the R6 II has the same stills-mode readout speed as the Z6 III but without Nikon/Sony's "partial stacked sensor" marketing buzz words
Is there a schematic or diagram that explains this partial stacked sensor better? I'm trying to make sense of it: it sounds like they added stuff to the top and bottom borders of the sensor to help it read out faster?Yep, the R6 II has the same stills-mode readout speed as the Z6 III but without Nikon/Sony's "partial stacked sensor" marketing buzz words
Someone on FM posted a Nikon Thailand graphic:Is there a schematic or diagram that explains this partial stacked sensor better? I'm trying to make sense of it: it sounds like they added stuff to the top and bottom borders of the sensor to help it read out faster?Yep, the R6 II has the same stills-mode readout speed as the Z6 III but without Nikon/Sony's "partial stacked sensor" marketing buzz words
Thanks. This still seems opaque to me.
As far as I can tell, partially stacked means they don't have the second substrate behind the sensor that's approximately the size of the sensor that has processing logic proportional to the size of the sensor. Instead, it looks like they used some empty space above and below the sensor perhaps on the front side to hold some logic that helps them process the data coming off the sensor locally so they can do some things faster. Does that sound plausible?
www.instagram.com
Yep, sounds about right to me.Thanks. This still seems opaque to me.
The sensor itself was used as the stacking foundation for smaller chips used to process the outputs from the array. In the Z8/9 there's a lot more and larger specialized chips - called chiplets - tiled underneath the sensor chip that connect to it through interior through-connections via pads on the circuit (back) side of the sensor chip and matching pads on the top (circuit) side of the underlying chiplets. As opposed to the usual peripheral ring of pads. Much more complex, but also much faster data speeds.Yep, sounds about right to me.Thanks. This still seems opaque to me.
