Nikon D4 and D400 announced in August...apparently - Page 6

ElBeasto · 28th September 2011, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lardman

I'm still on the fence about it. Dunno :\

Might just keep investing in DX stuff till Nikon get their act together and release a APS-C capable of doing 60p video.

60fps?

Yeah like there's no reason to not keep your DX system once you've got an FX body.

Lardman · 30th September 2011, 12:45 AM

Yeah, 60fps. I'm not really into it enough (nor make enough) to go splashing that much money on a FX, even though I'd want to. TBH I'd want to be making money out of the hobby first. Which I don't really do, I just do this out of personal interest.

60FPS would be godly though. Why, D7k. Why!?!

SyN · 30th September 2011, 11:04 AM

cost of FX is almost a paradox in my eyes.

FX body may cost more in the initial outlay, but you could use cheaper lenses to go with it.
1. the less pixel density means you need less lens acuity/sharpness
2. due to larger sensor you can use smaller aperture lenses to achieve the same depth of field or low light performance. F2.8 lenses cost much more than F4s.
3. higher resale value in the body, and probably in the FF lenses too

so for a complete system with say 3 lenses, the FX would probably cost less if you put up with consumer grade stuff vs DX with 2.8 glass

bubblegoose · 30th September 2011, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SyN

2. due to larger sensor you can use smaller aperture lenses to achieve the same depth of field or low light performance. F2.8 lenses cost much more than F4s.

WTF? Stop trolling... You master bater

hippyhippy · 4th October 2011, 11:47 AM

D800 36 mp. Wtf lol .. Nikonrumors.. They are usually on the money

Sili · 4th October 2011, 11:52 AM

36mp... geez you'd kill some memory card space pretty quickly.

Gaidin · 4th October 2011, 1:38 PM

Yeah I saw that rumour before....36MP is crazy! I hope theyve got the naming wrong and that is actually the D4x instead for the studio and landscapes. I doubt they can handle decent ISO performance with such a large resolution jump...plus I can only think of a handful of my lenses that are going to produce nice clean images at 36MP

SyN · 4th October 2011, 1:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaidin

Yeah I saw that rumour before....36MP is crazy! I hope theyve got the naming wrong and that is actually the D4x instead for the studio and landscapes. I doubt they can handle decent ISO performance with such a large resolution jump...plus I can only think of a handful of my lenses that are going to produce nice clean images at 36MP

yeah usually the Dx line gets the new flashy sensors first...
36MP not that crazy for FF. pixel pitch would be alike to a 18MP DX

Trysaeder · 4th October 2011, 3:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SyN

36MP not that crazy for FF. pixel pitch would be alike to a 18MP DX

16mp actually. 36/(1.5^2). Sounds a bit like the d7000 sensor cut larger. It's probably [s]cheaper[/s] faster for them to cut larger rather than design a new sensor.

nakey · 4th October 2011, 6:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trysaeder

16mp actually. 36/(1.5^2). Sounds a bit like the d7000 sensor cut larger. It's probably [s]cheaper[/s] faster for them to cut larger rather than design a new sensor.

Except that the D7000's Sensor is from Sony (the same one as the A55 and Pentax K5), not like the Nikon derived 12MP FF sensors in the D700/D3/D3S

And given what Sony are doing with the NEX and A mount, i can't see Sony making this (no Flippy mirror Alpha cameras, can't exactly see a FF SLT in the works as a replacement to the A850/A900)

ElBeasto · 4th October 2011, 9:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nakey

Except that the D7000's Sensor is from Sony (the same one as the A55 and Pentax K5), not like the Nikon derived 12MP FF sensors in the D700/D3/D3S

And given what Sony are doing with the NEX and A mount, i can't see Sony making this (no Flippy mirror Alpha cameras, can't exactly see a FF SLT in the works as a replacement to the A850/A900)

I thought all Nikon sensors were made by Sony, is that not the case?

methd · 4th October 2011, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElBeasto

I thought all Nikon sensors were made by Sony, is that not the case?

no one knows for sure; it's really just speculation. i think the real answer would be more that the sensors are a "derivative" of the sony made ones, with a lot of R&D of their own.

berek · 4th October 2011, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nakey

i can't see Sony making this (no Flippy mirror Alpha cameras, can't exactly see a FF SLT in the works as a replacement to the A850/A900)

Try reading the sony rumour sites

Next year will be very interesting for FF releases.

SyN · 5th October 2011, 12:52 PM

nikonrumors is 99% certain D800 will be 36MP
http://nikonrumors.com/2011/10/03/th...bability.aspx/

triggerpeg · 5th October 2011, 1:08 PM

ARgh..

Anyway. http://digicame-info.com/2011/09/d800d7003600.html are Sony users...lol

30th September 2011, 12:45 AM	#77
Lardman Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: ACT 2607 Posts: 4,138	Yeah, 60fps. I'm not really into it enough (nor make enough) to go splashing that much money on a FX, even though I'd want to. TBH I'd want to be making money out of the hobby first. Which I don't really do, I just do this out of personal interest. 60FPS would be godly though. Why, D7k. Why!?! __________________ Blogrant! \| 30+Trades \| Steam: reijin.au \| PC: i7920 /7970 / Xonar D2X / P183 Audio: Fostex HP-A7 W3000ANV \| Perreaux 6200B + Mission 796SE

30th September 2011, 11:04 AM	#78
SyN Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 6,977	cost of FX is almost a paradox in my eyes. FX body may cost more in the initial outlay, but you could use cheaper lenses to go with it. 1. the less pixel density means you need less lens acuity/sharpness 2. due to larger sensor you can use smaller aperture lenses to achieve the same depth of field or low light performance. F2.8 lenses cost much more than F4s. 3. higher resale value in the body, and probably in the FF lenses too so for a complete system with say 3 lenses, the FX would probably cost less if you put up with consumer grade stuff vs DX with 2.8 glass __________________ You are now conscious of your breathing pattern. The one hundredth member of OCAU Camera Club Mark II Non-existant Fujifilm Finepix X100 club member #100

4th October 2011, 11:52 AM	#81
Sili Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 276	36mp... geez you'd kill some memory card space pretty quickly. __________________ Recent OCAU Trading Swapped / Traded successfully with: scottyw45, icontact Bought successfully from: =XTG=, r3sist4nce, dche5390, Heikoli, jerry7, Hardboiled, ddjj181, sheezymaneezy, ekeane, cavanor Sold successfully to: isaaus, leyton01, ikonz0r, allmightyvictor, liljimmy, aussie-revhead, frogduck

5th October 2011, 12:52 PM	#89
SyN Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 6,977	nikonrumors is 99% certain D800 will be 36MP http://nikonrumors.com/2011/10/03/th...bability.aspx/ __________________ You are now conscious of your breathing pattern. The one hundredth member of OCAU Camera Club Mark II Non-existant Fujifilm Finepix X100 club member #100

5th October 2011, 1:08 PM	#90
triggerpeg Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Sydney Posts: 2,337	ARgh.. Anyway. http://digicame-info.com/2011/09/d800d7003600.html are Sony users...lol __________________ My salvation and my honor depend on God; he is my mighty rock, my refuge -Psalm 62:7 Sydney Based Wedding Photographer >> Ministry of Imagery Facebook Profile - LIKE!

4th October 2011, 11:47 AM	#80
hippyhippy Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Sydney Posts: 4,480	D800 36 mp. Wtf lol .. Nikonrumors.. They are usually on the money

4th October 2011, 1:38 PM	#82
Gaidin Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Vic Posts: 1,713	Yeah I saw that rumour before....36MP is crazy! I hope theyve got the naming wrong and that is actually the D4x instead for the studio and landscapes. I doubt they can handle decent ISO performance with such a large resolution jump...plus I can only think of a handful of my lenses that are going to produce nice clean images at 36MP