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

Nikon D700 replacement rumours

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.
Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    GavinPitts
    5 Dec 2011 - 9:17 AM

    I currently shoot with a D700 and have been keeping an eye on the rumours regarding the D700 replacement. At the moment it is looking like the new camera will have 30 odd megapixels. I can't believe this to be true, especially since Nikon even said themselves in the latest news update that the megapixel war ended years ago with the D3s.

    I wouldn't mind more mps, but not at the expense if low light/high iso performance. I'm wondering if someone has got hold of the specs for the D3x replacement and the rumours have spread from there.

    If anyone has any info on this, id love to hear about it!

    Gavin

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    5 Dec 2011 - 9:17 AM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    kodachrome
    5 Dec 2011 - 11:22 AM

    Gavin

    I second that re the Nikon comment about pixels. In a comment made a couple of years ago by Nikon, one spokesman [unofficially] suggested that 12 mp is where the high quality pictures are at and that is seen in the stunning picture quality of the D90 and D5000 to name two models. I personally think the D5100 at 16mp is no better, but that's subjective.
    If they are going beyond 16mp then I hope its for a sensible and good reason rather than just keeping up with Canon and Sony. Getting left behind in the pixel race is suicide in the cut throat market of digital cameras regardless if more pixels are of benifit or not.

    Olympus are on record for saying that there was little point going higher than 12mp [obviously fore the state of technology at that time] and of course the 4thirds format.

    Peter

    thatmanbrian
    5 Dec 2011 - 11:28 AM

    My D7000 is 16Mp and I downgraded from a D300 just to get those extra pixels because I tend to crop in post processing and wanted the extra leeway. Although it might be seen as bad practice, cropping is a fact of life for me, so for that reason, the more pixels the better. But I totally agree that more pixels mustn't be at the expense of noise at high ISOs. So I think that cropping is an argument for more pixels that should be considered more often.

    Nick_w
    Nick_w e2 Member 63723 forum postsNick_w vcard England98 Constructive Critique Points
    5 Dec 2011 - 11:31 AM

    Remember there's more scope for more pixels in a D700 replacement - as it's full frame. The D5100 is a 1.5x crop sensor with more pixels than the D700. I can't be bothered to work out pixel densitys (academic, and no you don't just x by 1.5) but a full frame with the same pixel density will be ca 30mp

    I won't be rushing out to replace the D700, it's still a superb camera.

    Carabosse
    Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
    5 Dec 2011 - 11:33 AM

    Perhaps the D700 replacement will have fewer pixels - Canon may be setting a trend with the 1D X! Wink

    thewilliam
    5 Dec 2011 - 11:34 AM

    It really depends on the use of the final image. In the good old days, although 35mm Kodachrome was pretty good, serious advertising photographer would always use 10x8 because it did give noticeably better results. This was a hard-nosed business decision rather than vanity.

    For high-end work, the 12MP of a D3S is hopelessly inadequate. Why else would professionals spend a small fortune on the 40 or 60MP medium-format cameras?

    One important factor is pixel density and for "35mm" full frame, 12MP is as much as will work well for high ISO and 24MP for lower ISO. Why else would Leica abandon the successful R series and use a much bigger sensor for the S2?

    Fashion shots on an A4 page size do look better when shot with more than 12MP.

    Carabosse
    Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
    5 Dec 2011 - 11:59 AM

    One wonders how professionals, including high-end commercials togs, managed with a mere 11Mp on the Canon 1Ds Mk I. Wink

    peterjones
    peterjones e2 Member 123785 forum postspeterjones vcard United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
    5 Dec 2011 - 1:08 PM

    I somehow scrape by with my D3S Wink

    Railcam
    Railcam  7447 forum posts Scotland
    5 Dec 2011 - 1:15 PM

    I certainly won't be changing my D700. I need high ISOs for my railway photography in order to use action stopping shutter speeds in low light and still produce noise free A3+ prints. It does everything I need so "if it ain't broke, I won't be fixing it".

    thewilliam
    5 Dec 2011 - 2:03 PM

    CB, when the best Canon had just 11MP, those in search of high quality used medium format digiback - or film!

    Back in the days when the Nikon D1X was king, the Phase One rep showed a side by side test of the 6MP back. The digiback actually had fewer pixels than the Nikon but the image quality was way ahead. This test brought home the importance of pixel size.

    Also the image qualiy of my old Kodak DCS760 bodies was way ahead of the Nikon D1X, mainly due to the superior firmware.

    It's not just the number of pixels, it's the way they're used!

    Last Modified By thewilliam at 5 Dec 2011 - 2:06 PM
    Carabosse
    Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
    5 Dec 2011 - 2:05 PM

    And the early digibacks produced a great deal of digital noise, as I recall! And, then as now, were very expensive indeed.

    thewilliam
    5 Dec 2011 - 2:07 PM

    I still have a Kodak 16MP Proback Plus and it's good enough for regular use on a V series Hasselblad.

    Last Modified By thewilliam at 5 Dec 2011 - 2:08 PM
    cameracat
    cameracat  108574 forum posts Norfolk Island61 Constructive Critique Points
    5 Dec 2011 - 6:37 PM


    Quote: replacement rumours

    Thats all they are pure speculation, If and or when Nikon decide to leak some real details, The camera in your hand is the only real deal.......Grin

    On that note, The D700 is so good, That I have no intention of changing/upgrading to its immidiate successor, Chances are the only totally new add-on will be " Video ", Something I could well live without personally......Smile

    Now the replacement for the D700's replacement, That might be worth a look because at the very least the technology will have moved on enough, To make some " Real World " differences....!!!

    Whatever the next new camera might be, It is unlikely to make your photography and better than it is at the moment, Might even get worse as whatever you are unhappy about is revealed in even greater resolution.......LOL.....Grin

    Prattling on about the next must have camera model is almost as interesting as watching paint dry.....Wink

    LenShepherd
    LenShepherd e2 Member 62359 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
    6 Dec 2011 - 3:42 PM

    In the unlikely event of 36 MP being true - who is making the sensor?
    It is unlikely to be Nikon or Sigma - which seems to leave only the Kodak company recently sold by Kodak to raise cash.

    Leif
    Leif  9722 forum posts
    7 Dec 2011 - 11:20 AM


    Quote:
    One important factor is pixel density and for "35mm" full frame, 12MP is as much as will work well for high ISO and 24MP for lower ISO. Why else would Leica abandon the successful R series and use a much bigger sensor for the S2?


    Quote: "By ISO 640 there are definite signs of noise, but depending on the subject you are shooting this is not a deal breaker. The maximum ISO setting of ISO 1250 is too noisy, in our opinion, for professional-publication quality results."

    From the following Leica S2 review:

    http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/digital-slrs-hyb...

    Whatever reasons Leica had for a larger sensor, it wasn't noise. I suspect it is the lenses i.e. large image circle and shallower depth of field. I may well be mistaken. Alternatively they were not able to source a 35mm sensor with the required pixel count.

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    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.