Topic: Holly cows.. (Read 13268 times)

evgeny · « **on:** February 17, 2009, 10:20:02 am »

Will Nikon introduce medium digital format in 2009?

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?

BJNY · « **Reply #1 on:** February 17, 2009, 10:34:37 am »

Yes, I want a medium format 54x54
with live video and AF micro-adjustment.

Carsten W · « **Reply #2 on:** February 17, 2009, 10:54:09 am »

Quote from: BJNY

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.

Dustbak · « **Reply #3 on:** February 17, 2009, 11:14:53 am »

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...

free1000 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 17, 2009, 11:22:02 am »

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.

pss · « **Reply #5 on:** February 17, 2009, 11:32:02 am »

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).....

bcooter · « **Reply #6 on:** February 17, 2009, 11:33:48 am »

Quote from: evgeny

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.

Carsten W · « **Reply #7 on:** February 17, 2009, 12:03:59 pm »

Quote from: bcooter

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.

bcooter · « **Reply #8 on:** February 17, 2009, 12:49:48 pm »

Quote from: carstenw

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 . . .

BJNY · « **Reply #9 on:** February 17, 2009, 12:51:59 pm »

Quote from: bcooter

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.

feppe · « **Reply #10 on:** February 17, 2009, 01:03:43 pm »

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.

Carl Glover · « **Reply #11 on:** February 17, 2009, 02:11:11 pm »

I'd love to see a big, square sensor too!

Ben Rubinstein · « **Reply #12 on:** February 17, 2009, 03:11:10 pm »

Quote from: Carl Glover

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.

jimgolden · « **Reply #13 on:** February 17, 2009, 03:27:03 pm »

lets keep in mind this is a rumor. seems like it'd be financial suicide, but who knows...

rethmeier · « **Reply #14 on:** February 17, 2009, 04:43:11 pm »

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.

pss · « **Reply #15 on:** February 17, 2009, 04:56:27 pm »

Quote from: rethmeier

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.....

gss · « **Reply #16 on:** February 17, 2009, 05:16:43 pm »

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.

Carl Glover · « **Reply #17 on:** February 18, 2009, 02:40:41 am »

Quote from: pom

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.

Ben Rubinstein · « **Reply #18 on:** February 18, 2009, 03:07:36 am »

Quote from: Carl Glover

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.

Carl Glover · « **Reply #19 on:** February 18, 2009, 04:41:41 am »

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.

Author Topic: Holly cows.. (Read 13268 times)

bcooter

bcooter