Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: evgeny on February 17, 2009, 10:20:02 am
-
Will Nikon introduce medium digital format in 2009?
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/mx.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/mx.htm)
Edited to add: will this seriously affect all current MFDB manufacturers and our current investments?
If Nikon will implement all their advanced electronic functions in M1, Nikon may seriously compete in the MFDB market.
Carl Zeiss already makes lenses for the Nikon 35mm, and so CZ may do for a large M1 sensor. What do you think?
-
Yes, I want a medium format 54x54
with live video and AF micro-adjustment.
-
Yes, I want a medium format 54x54
with live video and AF micro-adjustment.
Nikon would possibly make more money, and certainly with less effort, if they would just dump the sensor in a normal back, and provide adapters for Hasselblad V, Mamiya RB/RZ and Hy6. If the price was reasonable and the quality up to snuff, I would pick one up.
-
I think it simply doesn't make any sense unless Nikon wants to have a prestige project. Otherwise, what is the point of trying to grab a microscopic market which isn't even a drop on a glowing plate for Nikons annual turn-over. Besides that, it will probably only hurt their net results.
I see them making cellphone cameras before medium format. Than again I might be wrong...
-
I think Leica are a spoiler for this.
They will release the s2 because they are a millionaires hobby project.
There ain't room for more than one product like this coming onto market at the beginning of 'the greater depression'.
At the moment Canon can't even ship an f**ing battery for a 5DII, so I don't see this as being economically realistic.
-
if this is true, some people will be even more pissed then when they heard the price of the 3Dx....especially if they bought it....this is the same market....
or nikon prices this in MF or S2 territory....which would be completely pointless....
i think this is a logical step for nikon and canon, but since nikon is a year behind canon in releasing their flagship, it would make much more sense that canon takes this step first.....a larger chip is the logical step up from the dsIII (which is over a year and a half old).....
-
What do you think?
I think we are now at the saturation point of digital capture where anything past 20 something megapixels will do for 99.999% of all use.
A 54mm square Nikon will produce a 116 mb file, native 8 bit file which is more than overkill for any standard page size from 11x14 to U.S. 8.5x11.
In fact a Canon 1ds3, or Nikon d3x shot horizontal and processed in it's native format will crop a full page vertical with room for bleed and some slight cropping at 300 dpi, so this just takes it another step.
Whether Nikon goes this route or not, is all rumor, but if it happens and it has the useability of a D3 or D3x with the resolution stated and the price is not astronomical then who knows how this effects the current medium format backs. Once again it all depends on price. If it comes out at $20,000 then probably it's just another niche player, $10,000 then it's a game breaker, less than $10,000 then it's a world beater.
You know that if it does happen that it changes the face of medium format because obviously Nikon will produce an excellent lcd, probably good medium to high iso, and excellent auto focus.
It all depends on price and usability. Right now in today's economy if you have an investment in Nikon lenses a D3x makes more sense, if you don't or your moving from Canon or thinking about your first medium format purchase then it probably will be a hard option to pass on.
Still, it's interesting how far Nikon has come in the last few years. If they do make this camera they will pretty much cover the professional area, from pj and sports all the way to high end advertising.
If Nikon does this, it will be smart as most companies right now are only looking at sort term goals, short term fixes. This type of system is a long term investment but would put Nikon in a place to completely cover the market and don't forget that Nikon already has a huge dealer network and installed user base.
If it does happen there is one thing you can be sure of and that is the forums will light up with more brand comparisions than ever, claiming ccd is better than cmos, etc. etc. etc.
-
You know that if it does happen that it changes the face of medium format because obviously Nikon will produce an excellent lcd, probably good medium to high iso, and excellent auto focus.
On the other hand, it will probably have some pretty questionable boke. As much as I admire Nikon as a company, and Nikon cameras, their lenses mostly leave me cold. The exception would be if you want sharpness front-to-back.
-
On the other hand, it will probably have some pretty questionable boke. As much as I admire Nikon as a company, and Nikon cameras, their lenses mostly leave me cold. The exception would be if you want sharpness front-to-back.
This is where it starts. Somebody is going to say the Nikon lenses just don't have that magic of my old Pentax 6x7, a Mamiya 645, A zeiss, Schneider, or Leica lens etc. etc. etc .
In the world of compelling imagery, I can promise you that usability, decent color, moveable iso, lcd previews, reliability, fast lenses and accurate focus account for much more than anything else.
You can take a razor sharp ziess shot at f 11 and give it the look of an old ektar just in the post processing.
Regardless, if this camera happens it will fill holes, huge holes I might add, in the world of medium format that has been neglected since digital has come of age.
This really is the next logical step.
Now will I buy it, don't know, it depends. Right now I find a d3x or a 1ds3 to cover more territory than any other advertising/editorial camera. I also have an investment in phase backs for studio work, so since I'm already invested in certain sysems, it makes no sense to run out and buy something just because it's new.
What does make sense is if the camera absolutley does something I just cannot do without or covers more territotry.
Will an M-1 be a 35mm to medim format camera and work as well as those two systems combined? If so then it's worth thinking about, if not . . .
-
I'm already invested in certain sysems, it makes no sense to run out and buy something just because it's new.
Leave that up to me, Big.
-
I used to shoot 6x6 film, and loved the fact that I didn't have to worry about aspect ratio, and could do most of the cropping in post. Been waiting for a square format dSLR but am pretty sure I'm in the minority and it will never happen.
But a Nikon MFDB would probably bring some price sanity to the medium format market, along with the S2.
-
I'd love to see a big, square sensor too!
-
I'd love to see a big, square sensor too!
Given that the vast majority of the buyers will be shooting for a format other than square just due to clients/outout requirements I'm not sure why Nikon would do this for a few hobbyists who like the square format, they ain't going to be the ones buying it and certainly not the ones financing it. I can't see many people wanting to pay for a large proportion of megapixels thrown away everytime the file is actually used for something.
-
lets keep in mind this is a rumor. seems like it'd be financial suicide, but who knows...
-
Just got myself a D3x and loving it!
I also had no issues paying the current price for it,especially coming from MFDB.
What I will know is that I can sell my D3x in 2 years and still get $5k for it.
A lot better than dropping $15K on a MFDB body/back in 2 years.
Also the notion that files are needed at 300 dpi is old had.
Even a top coffee-table book doesn't require 300 dpi.
Most mags are 150 dpi or less.
Regards,
Willem.
-
Just got myself a D3x and loving it!
I also had no issues paying the current price for it,especially coming from MFDB.
What I will know is that I can sell my D3x in 2 years and still get $5k for it.
A lot better than dropping $15K on a MFDB body/back in 2 years.
Also the notion that files are needed at 300 dpi is old had.
Even a top coffee-table book doesn't require 300 dpi.
Most mags are 150 dpi or less.
Regards,
Willem.
glad to hear you are loving the d3x willem!
the question is how much would you love it if nikon came out with this M system in 2 weeks?
the only reason for nikon to come out with something like this is to mix up the market, so the body really can't be more then 10000....which would make the 3dx look overpriced....
i do not doubt for one second that both nikon and canon can build a larger then SLR sensor camera and keep the AF, color, handling, speed, high iso,.....exactly the same (actually just a little better of course...)....it just comes down to when and if they think the time is right...that is when people will not just buy the new body, but a whole new system.....
-
I hate to give credence to anything KennyRock says, but there was one interesting bit. If indeed they keep to just 40 Megapixels in a 54x54 mm^2 sensor, as he claims, then the pixel pitch will be 8.46 microns - the same as that of the D3. It would really be something to have such resolution with the D3's noise qualities. Maybe Nikon would also be able to remove the AA altogether and we would have a juicy but sharp camera with fairly decent resolution.
-
Given that the vast majority of the buyers will be shooting for a format other than square just due to clients/outout requirements I'm not sure why Nikon would do this for a few hobbyists who like the square format, they ain't going to be the ones buying it and certainly not the ones financing it. I can't see many people wanting to pay for a large proportion of megapixels thrown away everytime the file is actually used for something.
I'm not a hobbyist - I've been doing LP and CD covers since 1986.
I miss the square - fact.
-
I'm not a hobbyist - I've been doing LP and CD covers since 1986.
I miss the square - fact.
Given that the CD industry is on its last legs I doubt that my phrase 'vast majority' can be denied. Nikon would not market to the extreme niche sector unless it has a deathwish. As such I still can't see how it would make sense to release a square sensor when the industry has moved even further towards 3:2.
-
I still miss the square whether it's viable or not.
By the way LPs are doing rather well at the moment, most of the CD packages I work on are special editions - some in hardback-book type packages with up to 120 pages. They tend to sell out quite quickly.
-
I don't believe in those specs.
Considering that the D3x sensor already equal MF quality in terms of DR, why on earth would Nikon release a MF body with much larger photosites than those of the D3x?
Extrapolating the resolution from the D3x (24x36mm) to this supposed M1 sensor size (54x54mm), you would get a 82 MP sensor.
If the resolution where to be only less than 40MP, they could probably squeeze yet an extra stop of DR out of those and have extremely clean ISO 6400 and totally noiseless ISO 1600...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Given that the vast majority of the buyers will be shooting for a format other than square just due to clients/outout requirements I'm not sure why Nikon would do this for a few hobbyists who like the square format, they ain't going to be the ones buying it and certainly not the ones financing it. I can't see many people wanting to pay for a large proportion of megapixels thrown away everytime the file is actually used for something.
33% is not a few.
I feel that if larger sensors are employed, they will not be square. All market data shows that rectangular sensors are preferred, typically by 2 to 1 margins. However, the 30% who argue for the square sensor are more passionate...
-
Wasn't this a rumor that started a couple of years ago by a few internet Nikon maniac that were frustrated of Nikon not even having a FF camera?
On the other hand, it will probably have some pretty questionable boke. As much as I admire Nikon as a company, and Nikon cameras, their lenses mostly leave me cold. The exception would be if you want sharpness front-to-back.
exactly....
unless they reinvented themselves I'm afraid that is what is going to happens if this camera exists. then a list of 6 new lenses in one batch?
In any case it should not cost more than 15 grands body only.
-
Wasn't this a rumor that started a couple of years ago by a few internet Nikon maniac that were frustrated of Nikon not even having a FF camera?
Yes, this rumour has indeed been around for some time now. Michael even commented on it a few months back in this very forum saying that this "was not much of a secret in the industry".
You've got to wonder why KenR is relaunching the rumor? Generating traffic on his site is probably the main reason.
But anyway, a Nikon sticker on a piece of equipment seems to be generate extremely strong allergic reactions in you, so I would advise that you stay away from Nikon MF even if it ends up being released.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Yes, this rumour has indeed been around for some time now. Michael even commented on it a few months back in this very forum saying that this "was not much of a secret in the industry".
Michael,
Would you be so kind to either confirm the MX system,
or put this rumor to rest, please?
Thank you,
Billy
-
Since so many of you have complained (and still continue to complain) about the high price of both Nikon's and Canon's flagship models, the D3X and 1Ds3, it seems to me a logical marketing move for both these companies to offer something of even better quality to distinguish their flagship models from the cheaper FF models such as the 5D MkII and the upgrade to the D700.
Such a move would not be merely an attempt to compete in the small MFDB market, but a move to expand the existing market for their current flagship DSLR models. If these two companies were to move in this direction, they would presumably still retain the 3 categories of DSLR, but instead of being (1) cropped format, (2) prosumer, budget full frame 35mm, (3) professional full frame 35mm of similar image quality to prosumer full frame but more sturdy; category (3) would be replaced by "professional MF DSLR, of better image quality than prosumer full frame 35mm, as well as being as sturdy and as waterproof as their current flagship models".
Makes sense to me .
-
Will Nikon introduce medium digital format in 2009?
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/mx.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/mx.htm)
Edited to add: will this seriously affect all current MFDB manufacturers and our current investments?
If Nikon will implement all their advanced electronic functions in M1, Nikon may seriously compete in the MFDB market.
Carl Zeiss already makes lenses for the Nikon 35mm, and so CZ may do for a large M1 sensor. What do you think?
it is hard to believe a guy who says stuff like this
"Leica named its upcoming S2 medium format camera after Nikon's S2 rangefinder camera of 1954. The S2 was Nikon's last amateur camera made before Nikon's first professional camera, the SP rangefinder of 1956. This was Leica's way of saying "We've always owned the pro market; you people at Nikon are a bunch of amateurs; we will most assuredly defeat you this time" and "You think the S2 is cool? Just wait for us to show you what's next!"
how many of you think Leica named the S2 after the old nikon RF? .. yeah that's what I thought.
-
it is hard to believe a guy who says stuff like this
"Leica named its upcoming S2 medium format camera after Nikon's S2 rangefinder camera of 1954. The S2 was Nikon's last amateur camera made before Nikon's first professional camera, the SP rangefinder of 1956. This was Leica's way of saying "We've always owned the pro market; you people at Nikon are a bunch of amateurs; we will most assuredly defeat you this time" and "You think the S2 is cool? Just wait for us to show you what's next!"
how many of you think Leica named the S2 after the old nikon RF? .. yeah that's what I thought.
Ken Rockhead is a flake. He invents rumours/"facts" every year.
-
Ken Rockhead is a flake. He invents rumours/"facts" every year.
I was thinking of trying to start a rumor that KR is a gifted photographer and an intelligent human being, but I'm afraid only a complete loony would believe it.
-
I don't believe in those specs.
Considering that the D3x sensor already equal MF quality in terms of DR, why on earth would Nikon release a MF body with much larger photosites than those of the D3x?
Extrapolating the resolution from the D3x (24x36mm) to this supposed M1 sensor size (54x54mm), you would get a 82 MP sensor.
If the resolution where to be only less than 40MP, they could probably squeeze yet an extra stop of DR out of those and have extremely clean ISO 6400 and totally noiseless ISO 1600...
Cheers,
Bernard
It's interesting that the performance of the 8mp 20D is very similar to the performance of the 5D2, at the pixel level, according to the DXOmark charts for DR, SNR etc. In other words, from a purely image quality perspective, the 5D2 is a 20D sensor of 2.6x the area.
This suggests that it's becoming increasingly difficult to extract more quality from the individual pixel at this pixel pitch. The next logical increase in pixel count for Canon full frame will be a 15mp 50D sensor extrapolated to the full frame size, ie. 39mp. The increase in image quality would be comparable to the difference betweeen the 20D and 50D, ie. little improvement in noise and DR.
In order to provide a sufficiently attractive increase in image quality in order to justify the 2-3x increase in price, compared with a 5D Mk III of similar pixel count, there might be no alternative but for both Nikon and Canon to increase the sensor size in their flagship models.
-
Ken Rockhead is a flake. He invents rumours/"facts" every year.
I do not know how many pennies per clicks he gets, but he may have got quite a few for those articles he writes. some are really funny though.
it is not about the rumors, it is just about the clicks.
-
well, now that alls the shows are over, guess that one is a myth...not that most doubted it...
-
Ken Rockwell is mostly full of shit, but I'd buy a Nikon MF system site-unseen. Only Canon and Nikon have the sensor-tech and IS tech to make this kind of ideal 'tween' format camera a reality that's usable in a manner approximating the convenience of 35mm. The S2 will be gorgeous, but madly expensive and of dubious lineage on the noise front.
Could be interesting times.
Of course, it could all just be smoke.....
- N.
-
We will probably see Nikkors like this one NIKKOR - H 50mm for a 6 x 6 BRONICA
(http://www.kundrotas.com/0808/lens2/IMG_2608.jpg)
There was an entire fleet of Nikkors for the 6 x 6 (and they are ironical "S2"). My father had a Bronica so I grew up with them .. nice to see them come back. Also it may not be such a crazy idea after all...
-
well, now that alls the shows are over, guess that one is a myth...not that most doubted it...
I don't know if MX is real, but Nikon not having announced it at the PMA has not much meaning:
- The last 3 major releases by Nikon D700, D90 and D3x were announced away from photo equipment shows,
- Nikon has not made any significant annoucement in PMA for at least 4 years.
Really, what is the value for the big guys to make announcements during shows? The press will cover them in depth anyway, and they get a lot higher signal to noise ratio when there are no competing annoucements being made.
Shows are a pre internet age thing... that still have values for smaller players without the marketing power or the dealers network.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
And please don't forget Nikon also makes large format lenses.
Eduardo
We will probably see Nikkors like this one NIKKOR - H 50mm for a 6 x 6 BRONICA
(http://www.kundrotas.com/0808/lens2/IMG_2608.jpg)
There was an entire fleet of Nikkors for the 6 x 6 (and they are ironical "S2"). My father had a Bronica so I grew up with them .. nice to see them come back. Also it may not be such a crazy idea after all...
-
Ken Rockwell is mostly full of shit, but I'd buy a Nikon MF system site-unseen. Only Canon and Nikon have the sensor-tech and IS tech to make this kind of ideal 'tween' format camera a reality that's usable in a manner approximating the convenience of 35mm. The S2 will be gorgeous, but madly expensive and of dubious lineage on the noise front.
- N.
I wonder who would make the sensor for nikon.
-
I don't know if MX is real, but Nikon not having announced it at the PMA has not much meaning:
- The last 3 major releases by Nikon D700, D90 and D3x were announced away from photo equipment shows,
- Nikon has not made any significant annoucement in PMA for at least 4 years.
Really, what is the value for the big guys to make announcements during shows? The press will cover them in depth anyway, and they get a lot higher signal to noise ratio when there are no competing annoucements being made.
Shows are a pre internet age thing... that still have values for smaller players without the marketing power or the dealers network.
Cheers,
Bernard
Rumor is a rumor. But if it is true, it is a good news, and if Canon also enter into this market, it is also a good news. Nikon and Canon both make beautiful optics, some of the best in the world, and selling at price not less than some Leica and Zeiss optics as the case for some cinematic lenses.
As a photographer, my royalty is with the quality, what deliver qualify that is good to me and the client and it is a good system to own. As a whole industry, competition is good, although we may see some good company, often very nice niche operator, been pushed out of business but this is all a part of life.
Pentax has been offering such wide range of format in those days, and proved a certain level of success with their 6X7, 6X4.5 and the beautiful LX, and the beautiful Contax line of G, RTS and later with N, ND and 645. I think eventually a good and selective of excellent optics that eventually can go into 2-3 different formats of camera body will be more than welcome to us the end users. Likewise, may be the day we see a 24X36 Hasselblad is also not far away? Or eventually Zeiss really caught up our imagination and bring the beautiful Contax N and 645 back in digital package?
In any case, I still believe the move Leica move with their S2 is bold and smart. It is focus on the quality easily meet most of the demand, and focus on a compact, truly mobile package, and not to attack much larger sensor to have to build larger lens and larger body. With a camera size as is, lens as is, and cost smartly, I will be one of the buyers, and many among us I believe. And I thought S2 was name after Leica's own S1, a high end digital system although a scanning system, rather than naming it after Nikon. And why a company such as Nikon has to find an ancient Leica to name after? If it indeed happen and called M1, I think it is the right logic and a perfect name with it.
Regards, K
-
I wonder who would make the sensor for nikon.
I don't think they'd get any grief from their current supply chain, since there would be no direct competition. What I meant by 'sensor tech' is the ability to take a sensor and actually get a high quality image out of the other end after inserting into a camera. This is what Leica struggled with on the M8, likely because they just don't have the R&D muscle of the big-boys. The S2 will be interesting, as I gather they've pretty much handed that responsibility to Phase, who definitely have the know-how (the Phase family resemblance is pretty apparent on the rear layout of the S2 as well).
- N.
-
Dear N., FYI:
The digital part and electronics in the M8 have been made by Jenoptik for Leica.
This is what Leica struggled with on the M8, likely because they just don't have the R&D muscle of the big-boys.
As far as my information goes, the S2 is a 100% Leica development.
Best regards,
Thierry
The S2 will be interesting, as I gather they've pretty much handed that responsibility to Phase, who definitely have the know-how (the Phase family resemblance is pretty apparent on the rear layout of the S2 as well).
- N.
-
Dear N., FYI:
The digital part and electronics in the M8 have been made by Jenoptik for Leica.
As far as my information goes, the S2 is a 100% Leica development.
Best regards,
Thierry
Hey,
I may have misunderstood the announcement of the partnership between Leica and Phase that was announced at the same time as the S2. You are certainly better placed than I to know these things, but you must admit the back of the S2 bears more than a passing resemblance to the Phase interface, no?
- N. (Nick)
-
hi Nick,
I honestly couldn't say, for not having seen or hold it. So you must be right concerning the resemblance.
Best regards,
Thierry
..., but you must admit the back of the S2 bears more than a passing resemblance to the Phase interface, no?
- N. (Nick)
-
Hey,
I may have misunderstood the announcement of the partnership between Leica and Phase that was announced at the same time as the S2. You are certainly better placed than I to know these things, but you must admit the back of the S2 bears more than a passing resemblance to the Phase interface, no?
- N. (Nick)
Looks just like it. I just played with it at PMA and did a demo of the S2 . Really it is a overgrown DSLR and it is quite nice and very solid but like anything Leica which i am very familiar with your going to have to reach deep in those pockets. Yes it is 100 percent Leica . The Phase equation is still a question mark and still in high level talks.
-
Hey,
I may have misunderstood the announcement of the partnership between Leica and Phase that was announced at the same time as the S2. You are certainly better placed than I to know these things, but you must admit the back of the S2 bears more than a passing resemblance to the Phase interface, no?
- N. (Nick)
Nick,
The S2 is 100% Leica. Phase One had no involvement in the R&D, design, or production of the camera at all. Phase One will also have nothing to do with distribution, sales, marketing, support, or service. All of these aspects are to be handled 100% by Leica and select Leica dealers. At most, Leica is working with Phase to integrate the S2 with Capture One. As it is, I believe that Leica is Phase One's number one customer from a software licensing standpoint. All M8s, M8.2s, and D-Lux 4s ship with a C1 license. We are talking tens of thousands of units here. So, I believe this is what is meant by "continuing strategic partnership".
As far as the four button interface surrounding the rear LCD.... perhaps Guy (as a current Phase user who has handled the S2) can attest to the fact that the menu system and the interface, beyond the four button approach is simple, fast, intuitive, and purely Leica.
David
-
Nick,
The S2 is 100% Leica. Phase One had no involvement in the R&D, design, or production of the camera at all. Phase One will also have nothing to do with distribution, sales, marketing, support, or service. All of these aspects are to be handled 100% by Leica and select Leica dealers. At most, Leica is working with Phase to integrate the S2 with Capture One. As it is, I believe that Leica is Phase One's number one customer from a software licensing standpoint. All M8s, M8.2s, and D-Lux 4s ship with a C1 license. We are talking tens of thousands of units here. So, I believe this is what is meant by "continuing strategic partnership".
As far as the four button interface surrounding the rear LCD.... perhaps Guy (as a current Phase user who has handled the S2) can attest to the fact that the menu system and the interface, beyond the four button approach is simple, fast, intuitive, and purely Leica.
David
Is there a joypad somewhere on this thing? Joypads may be a recent invention, but they sure are useful for selecting a focus point, and also for scrolling through a display. The Phase interface shows what can be done with 4 buttons, but it also shows what cannot be done with four buttons. And no, the Leica doesn't have a Phase interface.
Edmund
-
It's very similar to the Phase as far as layout is concerned , obviously the menu's and such are much different. The top left button acts in the same way to get to the main menu but from there the setup is different and unique. It's also very fast on review , zooming and getting around. You shoot the review is up so it is quick. The processing engine of the S2 has a lot of power and mostly the main reason the camera can shoot fast for a MF and do all the other stuff as fast as a Nikon or Canon. The only slow part compared to a Nikon or Canon is the shooting speed and obviously stuffing 37mpx down a pipeline is different than a 24 mpx . This part of the camera is avery welcome plus to the MF shooter. If you took the shooting speed at 1.5 fps and put it into the way Phase calculate the shooting speed at least the way it is described you need a Phase back to go.7 seconds. They word this differently so it is confusing but the bottom line for a Phase to match the shooting speed it would have to be .7. The Phase 21 back does .8 but that is a 18mpx back. Really the fastest big back at the moment is the P65 plus at 1 second. I expect this to change in the future . Newer faster image processors are now available so as new entrants come to market they will hopefully be faster and also make use of bigger LCD which need more power and create more heat in the past and reason you don't see them. This will change but as much as some say the Leica is old already it is actually ahead on the curve in these area's .