Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

New DX !!!!

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

55% OFF new PortraitPro 12 - use code EPHZROS414.
Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
20 Sep 2012 - 1:44 PM


Quote: Haven't Sony just brought out a full-frame Compact that uses the same 24.3Mp sensor as in their latest dSLR?


Quote: What does that prove? They also brought out Betamax! Wink

Rotfl! Nice one, Pete! Grin

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
20 Sep 2012 - 1:44 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

thewilliam
20 Sep 2012 - 2:37 PM


Quote: Haven't Sony just brought out a full-frame Compact that uses the same 24.3Mp sensor as in their latest dSLR?
What does that prove? They also brought out Betamax! Wink

Betamax always seemed a better system than VHS. The failure was marketing rather than technical!

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
20 Sep 2012 - 2:41 PM


Quote: Betamax always seemed a better system than VHS

I think that's pretty much what we are saying. There was nothing technically wrong with Betamax. But nobody wanted to buy it. Smile

Sony seem to have an (unfortunate) talent for this type of thing.

They make excellent sensors and, in theory, could be top of the heap. But they always seem to just miss the mark.

Last Modified By Carabosse at 20 Sep 2012 - 2:46 PM
User_Removed
20 Sep 2012 - 4:55 PM


Quote: Haven't Sony just brought out a full-frame Compact that uses the same 24.3Mp sensor as in their latest dSLR?
What does that prove? They also brought out Betamax!

You really should learn to read before you attempt to write.

The Sony mention was part of a train of contributions wondering if DX was going to be phased out in dSLRs and compacts phased out altogether, leaving a hierarchy of smaller sensors being used in phone cameras, higher-end compacts being replaced by CSCs and dSLRs being FX.

So I wasn't trying to prove anything - merely suggesting that current evidence does not necessarily support the emerging hypothesis.

Why do you always have to be so sarky and nasty, Pete?

Pete
Pete Site Moderator 1218416 forum postsPete vcard ePz Advertiser England96 Constructive Critique Points
20 Sep 2012 - 5:18 PM


Quote: Why do you always have to be so sarky and nasty, Pete?

I wasn't being sarcastic...or rude ...unlike you telling me I need to learn to read.
If you look back and read you will see that your post was as a result of what I said...or at least that's what it appeared to be. If it wasn't what I'd said why quote me? So I was just responding to that trail and highlighting that just because Sony do something doesn't mean that's right. I love Sony btw - I have plenty of their products in the house...and had a Betamax!

Last Modified By Pete at 20 Sep 2012 - 5:23 PM
peterjones
peterjones e2 Member 123785 forum postspeterjones vcard United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
21 Sep 2012 - 8:46 AM

and I thought that I had the sole right to be sarky and rude however I am a Peter not a Pete Grin

I do also wonder that the end is nigh for Nikon DX; I have recently bought a s/h D800 though I note that the new price is dipping below what I paid lol; I can use my DX lenses with the D800 and still squeeze 18Mpx out of it; somewhere I read that with the new D600 10Mpx can be squeezed out with DX lenses; though using DX lenses with the D800 or 600 could be viewed as pointless however it is handy if you have some of the lenses within your armoury.

Peter ........ not the irrepressible Pete Grin Grin

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62359 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
21 Sep 2012 - 9:37 AM


Quote: wondering if DX was going to be phased out in dSLRs and compacts phased out altogether, leaving a hierarchy of smaller sensors being used in phone cameras, higher-end compacts being replaced by CSCs and dSLRs being FX.


Trying to get the thread back on topic the OP did not speculate as widely as above, but it is an interesting observation.
Compact sales are in fast decline, except that Nikon are increasing the number of units sold, part by bringing out models of little interest to the generation that does not own an iPOD - but of great interest to a fast expanding market.
Many compact CSC's are now as good as DX was 3-4 years ago, DX is as good or better than FX was 3-4 years ago, and FX is starting to compete with part of the medium format market.
"We" as in photographers who consider composition, depth of field and may even make prints Grin are a declining part of the overall market.
Nikon seem to be pushing FX to quality CSC's cannot currently achieve, and are likely to improve DX (90% of Nikon DSLR body sales by volume) next year.
Whether "our" type of photography becomes a smaller niche market, with Canon and Nikon DSLR products market share declining significantly over say 5-7 years remains to be seen.
Sony DSLR's with no mirror have some disadvantages - and some important advantages traditional DSLR's cannot match.
In the short term back to my earlier point - DX is still 90% of Nikon's DSLR sales by number (Canon over 90%), so DX is around for several years.
As FX becomes more affordable, over time Canon and Nikon may concentrate more on FX to stay ahead of CSC's, and become more active in the CSC market. Whether Sony spoil the party remains to be seen.

thewilliam
21 Sep 2012 - 9:52 AM

Mirrorless "DSLRs" are able to use lens designs previously restricted to rangefinder cameras because there's no need for retrofocus.

On the Zeiss website they answer the question, "which lenses are sharper, 35mm or medium format?"and they compare typical resolution figures for 3 families of lenses. Typically, Zeiss rangefinder lenses are sharper than their DSLR counterparts by about 100 lppm and medium format lenses lag behind DSLR by a similar margin. And we always thought our Hasselblad lenses were sharp!

strawman
strawman  1021991 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
21 Sep 2012 - 10:29 AM

As William has taken us in a direction, I read recently an article which questioned what was more important, contrast and sharpness or resolution in final images. Not made up my mind but it is an interesting thought.

So You Say You Want a 'Sharp' Lens You will find it in that page. Its interesting. Also the stuff on dynamic range in the real world makes for an interesting read. Not made up my mind myself Smile

Jestertheclown
21 Sep 2012 - 10:44 AM

Some interesting stuff in that link John.

I shall be revisiting that site.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62359 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
21 Sep 2012 - 1:32 PM

[quote]what was more important, contrast and sharpness or resolution in final images. [/quo
Ideally a lens should have plenty of both Smile
It is fairly well known good contrast images often look sharpest - even when they have less resolution.
In the early days of AF SLR cameras manufacturers concentrated on good contrast because phase detect AF is contrast based.
Without modern multi coating many current optically complex lenses would have too little contrast to be usable.
As with DSLR's there is constant progress.

steevo46
steevo46  1 Australia
18 Nov 2012 - 6:35 AM

Yes, I still use a D300 (my old D80 is back-up) and I'm waiting for a D400 too.
The D600 has paltry 200th sec flash sync speed and only 4000th sec shutter speed. My D300 still does better than that with a faster frame rate.
I generally take stationary bird and 'bird in flight' pics but usually shooting from a small drifting boat using a telephoto where I need decent frame rate/shutter speed and flash sync.

If Nikon want my money they'll have to come up with something like a fast and tough " D3200 on steroids"!

Newdevonian
18 Nov 2012 - 9:58 AM


Quote: The problem with the D3/D3s if you have shaky hands is the sheer bulk and weight of the beasts. That was one of the (minor) reasons that I "downgraded" from the D3s to a D800 - that, and the fact that the transaction left me with 500 to spend on beer.

I am sure 500 worth of beer(that's about 20 pints in todays money) would cause me to shake even more. Seriously though, given my D100 with a battery grip and a 80-200 F2.8, tends to damp my shakes, whereas on my Canon s95 I need to rest my camera / hands / arms on something to get a steady platform. I an not sure that weight in my case is the cause of shakes. But there again I have never handheld a D3X and say a 300mm F2.8 all day.

thewilliam
18 Nov 2012 - 1:11 PM

When I did a lot of shooting with a pistol, 40 something years back, a barrel weight that doubled the mass of the weapon gave a noticeable increase in score.

I find heavier cameras are a lot easier to hold steady.

Last Modified By thewilliam at 18 Nov 2012 - 1:12 PM
LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62359 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
18 Nov 2012 - 5:37 PM

Since the thread started the D5200 has been announced, and Nikon have confirmed they are making about 7,500,000 DSLR's a year.
Based on serial numbers posted D800/e numbers seem to be about 6000-7000 a month - less than 100,000 a year.
If D600 outsells D800 5 times that is about 400,000 a year. Other FX sales numbers are not huge Smile
DX "cannot be dead" while it accounts for around 90% of body unit sales Smile
It is not long since Nikon lost around 100% of DX body production and 90% of DSLR lens production for 3 months in the Thailand floods - no doubt playing havoc with pre Thailand planned launches.
My guess is a 24 MP D7200 and D400 early in 2013.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.