ultimatum

[Ger Bee]

........ it has been seen, Nikon have a new product or had a new product, but the whole camera needs a re-design.

I often called the D1x a “soulless” brick of a machine, lacking in character, very functional for all that but it was not sensuous, seductive or ergonometric.

My wife’s comments had nothing to say on the D1x but the 1D she says is “feminine, very lady like, attractive!”

I still have a sweet spot for the F4 and have one lying around and I’ll probably keep it, I love the ruggedness, manly characteristic’s with a no nonsense and a mean business attitude along with its fantastic and unbeatable one handed control settings – today the F5 needs two hands to use and change settings etc, quite a backward step for a professional camera IMO – Nikon are obviously not alone in this design and are actually not the worst, but I think the D-SLR could physically be re-designed to suit a digital workflow better.

 

[alfred_schiele]

Hi!

It would be nice if Nikon actually launched that F6 this year.

Yes, I am waiting too for the new all in one hybrid nikon that can shoot film and digital simultanuously, the new 24MP sensor is integrated in the prism, you will have live preview and mirror dark phase occurs only if you want an additional film shot too...

LOL...

Regards, A. SChiele

 

[Jimbob111]

Why do you need full frame? I'm not a professional, just a hobbyiest and not even a serious one at that. I do try to keep up with different cameras in case I find something that meets my needs more than my current equipment...and the only lenses I own are Minolta 35mm, my dSLR is an E20.

Is there something specific to full frame that you need? If this is a stupid question then please excuse it. Or is it just that the crop factor is unacceptable on something less than FF?
Thanks,
JB

What I'm dealing with is what is here and what is now. I'm also
comparing what Nikon and Canon have been doing the past 30 years.

Canon decided to break backwards compatibility, move on with better
lenses all the way around, while Nikon is just now releasing their
first VR lenses and have environmental seals at the mount.

I'll probably make the move at the end of the year. I'll be
putting an end to my commercial photography and move into move
aggressive environments that will require good seals and design,
which is something I feel Nikon can't offer, especially in the lens
department.

The only case I see of a leap-frog pattern was with the DSLRs - and
I really don't care about the camera as much as I do the lenses, at
least where I want to be two years from now, which is outside of a
studio or a bright sunny day.

Times change, tools change to meet the demand.

I'll need something that's full frame and has a great line of
environmentally sealed lenses that can take the abuse of rain,
snow, etc.

hmm....seems like someone here is not happy with Nikon?

smilez it is always the case,right? When Canon releases something
new, Nikon Users will rants on and on till they get their new toys
then the Canon ppl will rant....the cycle never stops.

Take Nikon and Canon to be different car branding for example.
Canon would like the Mitsubishi or Toyota, who releases many new
cars over a short time span. True, they have good cars too amongst
these Such as the Lancer Evolution, FTO, Celica,etc...etc....This
is especially true in the Asia aspects....

While Nikon is on the track of more like Ferrari and likes,
Releasing a new car every other year or longer......

Does that means that Ferrari is losing money?? On the contrary
Ferrari is making money and so is Nikon. While every one seems to
see Nikon as Camera's only company, the company has a lot of other
products such as Steppers Machines for Fabrication of IC Chips,
microscopes, binoculars and even glasses.

All of these revolves around Optics, while Canon, has move towards
a different approach by making Calculaters(??!?!!), Photocopiers,
Printers, amongst others. it is also not surprising that Canon
could be using Nikon's Steppers to make those chips used inside
Canon's Cameras and other equipments.

in reality there is no winner in each case as each draws from a
different approach to the market..

and remember the Tortoise and Hare race?....I wonder which is
which....Nikon=Tortoise or is it Canon?

--

If you ever find yourself saying 'I'm not crazy', you probably need to rethink your position.

 

[Jono Slack]

Hi Joe
You are, of course right - I actually meant
"on the Nikon"

I hope it was clear from the context though.

kind regards
jono

Hi Doug

Do remember that your 70-200 will give you the reach of a 300mm on
the 1DS.

Actually, a 70-200 will give him a 70-200 on the 1Ds as it is full
frame and therefore not subject to the multiplication factor of the
smaller sensors.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Dick-]

They are not keeping anyone guessing...they have made it plain..."no 35mm sensor plans for the future"...there are sound economic and technical reasons for that position. There are other ways to solve a percieved wide angle problem with new lenses and software processing. I have been publishing wide angle real estate images from the Canon 70 thru the D1X...it is really a non issue. If you really have an emotional hangup for a 35mm sensor...then by all means go to the 1Ds or the Contax..you might get the elusive Pulitzer!!..or learn a few tricks and do it for half the cost..

It would be nice to know what the heck Nikon is planning to do with
their sensor size rather than keeping people guessing.

I am betting that Nikon will go full frame but that they don't want
to upset their 12-24 offering BUT they really wouldn't if they
offereed the lens for a reasonable price. I would pay $400-500 for
the lens because I could use the D100 as a second body even after a
full frame is released but now it's just a WAY too expensive lens
that has everyone scratching their heads.

I just focus on taking pictures but when it comes to a lens
upgrade, I can't think wide angle for my digital until I know what
Nikon's plans are and the price for the DX lens is in a range that
makes sense.

you won´t impress Nikon with your ultimatum.

I'm not here to impress Nikon. Nikon is here to create photography
tools that impress me, so that I buy them. So far this is only
half the case.

I want a solid answer from Nikon whether or not they are going full
frame - since they are the only ones who seem to be going the 1.5
route - while everyone elses just watches and shakes their head.

If they are going 1.5 crop, I want a solution from them - AKA 12-24
f2.8 ED and a 9mm f2.8 ED, that would in essence make up for the
14mm f2.8 and 17-35mm f2.8 -- otherwise I've wasted my money on
these lenses and system.

See where I'm coming from?

Nikon doesn't offer a solution to their problem -- although I
suspect when they release the next D1 series camera they will have
to address this issue, either through actions or words. If the
next D1 is 1.5 cropped without supporting lenses, like I mentioned
above (the current 12-24mm won't cut it - it's a consumer lens),
then Nikon has basically told the professional users to take a
hike. I don't want to wait 2 more years for Nikon to catch up -
their system isn't worth the wait - and I can afford to lose $2000
selling my equipment and spending the extra for the 1Ds - because I
can at least buy what I need now.

Only the D2X can tell.

--
****

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

i hate the crop factor, which nearly renders current lenses useless. this becomes this and that becomes that - it's never a case of where a 17mm is a 17mm - it's a 27mm or whatever.

also full frame is very nice in the viewfinder - if you used to use 35mm film you know what i mean - the view is HUGE - 1.5 is like looking through a pinhole. you lose half the information.

the resolution is key as well - i do very very large prints and this could only help.

What I'm dealing with is what is here and what is now. I'm also
comparing what Nikon and Canon have been doing the past 30 years.

Canon decided to break backwards compatibility, move on with better
lenses all the way around, while Nikon is just now releasing their
first VR lenses and have environmental seals at the mount.

I'll probably make the move at the end of the year. I'll be
putting an end to my commercial photography and move into move
aggressive environments that will require good seals and design,
which is something I feel Nikon can't offer, especially in the lens
department.

The only case I see of a leap-frog pattern was with the DSLRs - and
I really don't care about the camera as much as I do the lenses, at
least where I want to be two years from now, which is outside of a
studio or a bright sunny day.

Times change, tools change to meet the demand.

I'll need something that's full frame and has a great line of
environmentally sealed lenses that can take the abuse of rain,
snow, etc.

hmm....seems like someone here is not happy with Nikon?

smilez it is always the case,right? When Canon releases something
new, Nikon Users will rants on and on till they get their new toys
then the Canon ppl will rant....the cycle never stops.

Take Nikon and Canon to be different car branding for example.
Canon would like the Mitsubishi or Toyota, who releases many new
cars over a short time span. True, they have good cars too amongst
these Such as the Lancer Evolution, FTO, Celica,etc...etc....This
is especially true in the Asia aspects....

While Nikon is on the track of more like Ferrari and likes,
Releasing a new car every other year or longer......

Does that means that Ferrari is losing money?? On the contrary
Ferrari is making money and so is Nikon. While every one seems to
see Nikon as Camera's only company, the company has a lot of other
products such as Steppers Machines for Fabrication of IC Chips,
microscopes, binoculars and even glasses.

All of these revolves around Optics, while Canon, has move towards
a different approach by making Calculaters(??!?!!), Photocopiers,
Printers, amongst others. it is also not surprising that Canon
could be using Nikon's Steppers to make those chips used inside
Canon's Cameras and other equipments.

in reality there is no winner in each case as each draws from a
different approach to the market..

and remember the Tortoise and Hare race?....I wonder which is
which....Nikon=Tortoise or is it Canon?

--
If you ever find yourself saying 'I'm not crazy', you probably need
to rethink your position.

 

[tony field]

the resolution is key as well - i do very very large prints and
this could only help.

Possibly your photographic needs are better filled with 6x7cm or possibly 4x5inch camera systems - assuming that final print quality is the requirment??

More pixels would certainly help but it is not difficult to make pretty good "large" images in the 16x20 / 20x24 inch range from a Nikon D1 or a Canon 1D. Thank heavens that digital process makes this possible. However, it still does not compare with the same sized images printed from my Linhoff or even the RB67.

tony

 

[JoeCA]

Youre likely to see more difference within the brands (Nikon, Canon) than between the brands as far as quality is concerned.

 

[snowwrestler]

It will save you a lot of heart ache, since everyone and their dog knows that the d2 series will not be full-frame.

It will save Nikon's president a lot of pressure and stress, since I'm sure that by now he's read your ultimatum and is worrying about how you'll react to their new line of products. Meanwhile dealers can't keep the D1 series or D100 in stock, and the original D1 still sells on eBay for the cost of a new Canon 10D.

Mostly importantly it will save us a lot of groaning (and Phil a lot of bandwidth) by eliminating one more self-important pontificator of camera competition from the Nikon forum. If you have such grave doubts about Nikon, just make the move. It's a tool, not a life decision. Get one you won't complain about and go take some pictures.

 

[snowwrestler]

I'll probably make the move at the end of the year. I'll be
putting an end to my commercial photography and move into move
aggressive environments that will require good seals and design,
which is something I feel Nikon can't offer, especially in the lens
department.

I'll need something that's full frame and has a great line of
environmentally sealed lenses that can take the abuse of rain,
snow, etc.

You're so committed to that Canon ad copy! Hilarious.

Just because something isn't trumpeted to the world, doesn't mean it is there. Nikon cameras and lenses have certainly been tough enough for shooters like National Geographic, Galen Rowell, or Blue Pixel (covered the 2002 Eco Challenge). Sure, Nikon doesn't spend thousands of dollars trumpeting their weather proofing--but it's been there all along. Heck I've shot in the rain and snow dozens of times with my N6006 film SLR since I bought it in 1993, and never had any issues.

And just because something is trumpeted to the world, doesn't mean it is worth anything. Those rubber seals on the Canon lens bayonets always cracked me up. It's an autofocus lens! There are at least 2 seams on each lens that can't be sealed (4 on a zoom), so why bother with a gasket on the one seam that is a tight fit--the bayonet?

Perhaps you could try talking to people with experience shooting in outdoor conditions, rather than relying on ad copy to make all your equipment decisions. Both Nikon and Canon pro models have more than adequate weatherproofing, lenses or bodies.

 

[peripheralfocus]

I'll probably make the move at the end of the year. I'll be
putting an end to my commercial photography and move into move
aggressive environments that will require good seals and design,
which is something I feel Nikon can't offer, especially in the lens
department.

I'll need something that's full frame and has a great line of
environmentally sealed lenses that can take the abuse of rain,
snow, etc.

You're so committed to that Canon ad copy! Hilarious.

Just because something isn't trumpeted to the world, doesn't mean
it is there. Nikon cameras and lenses have certainly been tough
enough for shooters like National Geographic, Galen Rowell, or Blue
Pixel (covered the 2002 Eco Challenge). Sure, Nikon doesn't spend
thousands of dollars trumpeting their weather proofing--but it's
been there all along.

Nikon has been putting gaskets and rubber bellows in their high end cameras and some of their lenses since the 1970s. They made a version of the F3 that was practically submersible. There's tons of weather seals in an F5 or a D1-series camera.

But it should be pointed out that Canon deserves a lot of credit, from a purely business point of view, for creating this urban myth that somehow their cameras and lenses are a lot better in inclement weather than similarly spec'd products from Nikon (or Leica or Contax or Olympus or Minolta, for that matter.) Pointing out a specific seal, and hammering home that point, was smart advertising. It may not mean anything in the real world, but communicating nuanced truth is not the purpose of advertising. All's fair in love, war, and business, I guess.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

I was shooting inside a cavern, crawling about on my stomache. I had a 50mm lens attached to my D1H. Since the 50mm lens didn't have the rubber gasket on the bayonet, somehow a little bit of moisture got it and a drip of water was inside the camera and even fogged up the mirror.

I have a feeling this wouldn't have happned if I had a rubber gasket on the bayonet.

I was shooting wildlife with my 70-200mm (which has a rubber gasket on the bayonet) and I never had this problem - and it was pouring rain and my gear was completely soaked.

I'll probably make the move at the end of the year. I'll be
putting an end to my commercial photography and move into move
aggressive environments that will require good seals and design,
which is something I feel Nikon can't offer, especially in the lens
department.

I'll need something that's full frame and has a great line of
environmentally sealed lenses that can take the abuse of rain,
snow, etc.

You're so committed to that Canon ad copy! Hilarious.

Just because something isn't trumpeted to the world, doesn't mean
it is there. Nikon cameras and lenses have certainly been tough
enough for shooters like National Geographic, Galen Rowell, or Blue
Pixel (covered the 2002 Eco Challenge). Sure, Nikon doesn't spend
thousands of dollars trumpeting their weather proofing--but it's
been there all along.

Nikon has been putting gaskets and rubber bellows in their high end
cameras and some of their lenses since the 1970s. They made a
version of the F3 that was practically submersible. There's tons of
weather seals in an F5 or a D1-series camera.

But it should be pointed out that Canon deserves a lot of credit,
from a purely business point of view, for creating this urban myth
that somehow their cameras and lenses are a lot better in inclement
weather than similarly spec'd products from Nikon (or Leica or
Contax or Olympus or Minolta, for that matter.) Pointing out a
specific seal, and hammering home that point, was smart
advertising. It may not mean anything in the real world, but
communicating nuanced truth is not the purpose of advertising.
All's fair in love, war, and business, I guess.

 

[tony field]

I was shooting wildlife with my 70-200mm (which has a rubber gasket
on the bayonet) and I never had this problem - and it was pouring
rain and my gear was completely soaked.

I assume this was from your Canon system which you have yet to acquire ???

out of curiosity, are you and Ger Bee related???

tony

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

No, the new Nikon 70-200mm has a rubber gasket at the bayonet.

I was shooting wildlife with my 70-200mm (which has a rubber gasket
on the bayonet) and I never had this problem - and it was pouring
rain and my gear was completely soaked.

I assume this was from your Canon system which you have yet to
acquire ???

out of curiosity, are you and Ger Bee related???

tony

 

[Thom Hogan]

i hate the crop factor, which nearly renders current lenses
useless. this becomes this and that becomes that - it's never a
case of where a 17mm is a 17mm - it's a 27mm or whatever.

That's funny (and inconsistent). In your original post you lust after long lenses that Nikon doesn't make. Yet with the crop factor, you'd have a 100-300mm f/2.8 VR from Nikon, wouldn't you? And it produces superb results with the TC-14E, so you'd also have a 140-420mm f/4 VR.

also full frame is very nice in the viewfinder - if you used to use
35mm film you know what i mean - the view is HUGE - 1.5 is like
looking through a pinhole. you lose half the information.

Uh, no. I just looked through an N80 and D100 to confirm my suspicions, but this simply isn't true. The D100 viewfinder width is very close to the 35mm viewfinder, though it is admitedly a slight bit smaller. Now the S2 viewfinder (notice that I'm trying to compare apples and apples here by sticking to the same body) is measurably smaller, since they use a crop. There IS a brightness difference, though I don't have any tools at the moment that can measure that.

the resolution is key as well - i do very very large prints and
this could only help.

11 megapixels across a full frame or 11 megapixels across a 1.5x frame (or 11 megapixels on a MF back) is, well, 11 megapixels. Granted, Nikon doesn't yet have an 11mp camera, but resolution wise, when they do, full frame or not isn't the issue. Perhaps (and that's a big perhaps) the size of the photosites may play a role in image noise, but we're a long way from the itsy-bitsy photosites of the consumer cameras even at 11mp and 1.5x.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Nikon Field Guide & Nikon Flash Guide
author, Complete Guides to the Nikon D100, D1, D1h, & D1x and Fujifilm S2
http://www.bythom.com

 

[Michael S.]

hi!

actually nikon has really problems with their financial status...

thats the main reason...

so, what to do?

hmm, maybe changing back to Olympus and his 4/3 system...
superb lenses cause especially designed for digital cameras,
a bit smaller, lighter...we'll see...

I am waiting before I am going to invest more into nikon...

regards,

--
Michael S.
Austria/EUROPE
http://www.pbase.com/bountyhunter
pbase-supporter

D-100 fw 2.0, 18-35 nikkor, 24-85 2,8-4,0 D nikkor,
80-200 2,8 AFS nikkor, 80-400 4,5-5,6 AF D nikkor,
MB-100, SB-80DX, Image-Tank 20GB
Olympus E-100rs, B-300 (1,7x), Olympus C-50z

 

[JoeCA]

How does the D100 viewfinder compare to that of the F5? Im thinking smaller and dimmer.

11mp is not uniform. Youll get a lot better image off a 11mp MF digital back than a DSLR and more off the DSLR than a p&s. Megapixels are only one part of the equation, the other is the actual physical size of the sensor.

 

[Dick-]

You can't seem to get it thru your head that the D1X is NOT a 35 anything camera...it is a digital camera with a specific size CCD...it is clear that you are a gadget dweeb and not a photographer...a photographer works within the parameters of his equipment whether it is a 35mm, 4 by 5 or 8 by 10 view without concerns as how it relates to other formats...forget the damn formulas and learn some photography...

I am not shure, with the crop factor the lenses are lighter and
cheaper. Do you understand the advantage of the smaller CCD?

What lenses? The 12-24mm? What a joke. Where are the other
lenses? The 12-24mm isn't lighter. And it certainly isn't cheap.
Give me a break.

I don't want to do FOV conversations -- I want a camera and a lens
to be just that, not a mathematical equation. The math isn't hard,
but it's distracting to the moment, especially going between my F5
and my D1X. It's just absurd.

Then comes along the full frame, mega resolution 1Ds. It was
basiclly a red herring for Nikon users, but if you look more
closely it's everything I've always wanted.

With the next generation, your whishes will change again?

What generation? I'm trying to stick with the "generation" that's
been around for YEARS - it's called film AKA full frame in the
digital world. I want a DSLR that acts just like a film camera.
That's all I ask.

I also expect to see some new telephotos on the marke with VR and
perhaps even a TS -- but no one wants to wait a year before they're

Haeh? a 400 VR PC ?? Why do you want to have the tilt shift
posibility on a tele?

Read that again - says nothing about a PC tele. Said I would like
to see a tele with VR and perhaps even a TS - i.e. see a tele with
VR AND a new TS lens.

--
****

 

[squash]

It's really too bad to see your time taken up responding to another user apoplectic about full frame.

Your intentions are good, I'm sure, but I don't think you'll make any more headway this time than in the past.

I hope Nikon makes its intentions 100% clear. 90% isn't enough for a guy like Doug Hanks. Only 100% will clear the field of this ilk.

Then we can get on with enjoying the benefits of 1.5FF.

i hate the crop factor, which nearly renders current lenses
useless. this becomes this and that becomes that - it's never a
case of where a 17mm is a 17mm - it's a 27mm or whatever.

That's funny (and inconsistent). In your original post you lust
after long lenses that Nikon doesn't make. Yet with the crop
factor, you'd have a 100-300mm f/2.8 VR from Nikon, wouldn't you?
And it produces superb results with the TC-14E, so you'd also have
a 140-420mm f/4 VR.

also full frame is very nice in the viewfinder - if you used to use
35mm film you know what i mean - the view is HUGE - 1.5 is like
looking through a pinhole. you lose half the information.

Uh, no. I just looked through an N80 and D100 to confirm my
suspicions, but this simply isn't true. The D100 viewfinder width
is very close to the 35mm viewfinder, though it is admitedly a
slight bit smaller. Now the S2 viewfinder (notice that I'm trying
to compare apples and apples here by sticking to the same body) is
measurably smaller, since they use a crop. There IS a brightness
difference, though I don't have any tools at the moment that can
measure that.

the resolution is key as well - i do very very large prints and
this could only help.

11 megapixels across a full frame or 11 megapixels across a 1.5x
frame (or 11 megapixels on a MF back) is, well, 11 megapixels.
Granted, Nikon doesn't yet have an 11mp camera, but resolution
wise, when they do, full frame or not isn't the issue. Perhaps (and
that's a big perhaps) the size of the photosites may play a role in
image noise, but we're a long way from the itsy-bitsy photosites of
the consumer cameras even at 11mp and 1.5x.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Nikon Field Guide & Nikon Flash Guide
author, Complete Guides to the Nikon D100, D1, D1h, & D1x and
Fujifilm S2
http://www.bythom.com

 

[squash]

It's not an "ultimatum" to make a threat to a party already committed to a course of action.
Instead, it's just grand-standing.

It reveals the size of your ego, not the extent of your determination or your judgment.

I WILL wait until the D2X and D2H (or whatever is next after the
D1X) have been announced, and if they are not on par with the 1Ds
-- full frame is a must, or Nikon has commited suicide on its
entire line of lenses -- I'm prepared to sell my gear, and take the
loss and invest into a system that already has what I want.