 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / April 2007No new semiprofessional Nikon DSLR for now?
The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody has heard anything about something new in this area? MAL No, but you can guarantee there will be something new withing six months if you buy now, Murphy's Law. Basicly though, the sooner you buy the longer it will be till you replace it anyway so just do it. > The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I > am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody > has heard anything about something new in this area? > > MAL >The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I am >going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody has >heard anything about something new in this area? Only speculation. The rumors were flying before the PMA show about a Nikon D3 with near-full-frame sensor. I guess it wasn't quite ready. Look for it to be announced later this year. The successor to the D200, I think, will come out *after* the D3. It, too, will probably be full-frame. Maybe by the middle of 2008. >> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I am >> going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody has [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The successor to the D200, I think, will come out *after* the D3. It, > too, will probably be full-frame. Maybe by the middle of 2008. Nikon's mount and mirror won't allow a 24x36mm 35mm film sized sensor. Damn those Nikon engineers who didn't look 50 years into the future. The full-frame Canons aren't exactly flying off the shelves, the most popular dSLR in the market is the Rebel XT/XTi, second is the Nikon D50. >>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like >>> that. I am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> > Nikon's mount and mirror won't allow a 24x36mm 35mm film sized sensor. So how is it that Nikon's mount and mirror allow 35mm film? > Damn those Nikon engineers who didn't look 50 years into the future. > > The full-frame Canons aren't exactly flying off the shelves, the most > popular dSLR in the market is the Rebel XT/XTi, second is the Nikon > D50.  Signature-- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) >>>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like >>>> that. I am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > So how is it that Nikon's mount and mirror allow 35mm film? 35mm film doesn't have edge connectors on 4 sides. > >>> The successor to the D200, I think, will come out *after* the D3. It, > >>> too, will probably be full-frame. Maybe by the middle of 2008. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > > 35mm film doesn't have edge connectors on 4 sides. digital sensors don't have sprocket holes. your point? >> >>> The successor to the D200, I think, will come out *after* the D3. It, >> >>> too, will probably be full-frame. Maybe by the middle of 2008. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > digital sensors don't have sprocket holes. your point? Whats a sprocket Grandpa?? ;-) >>>>>> The successor to the D200, I think, will come out *after* the >>>>>> D3. It, too, will probably be full-frame. Maybe by the middle of [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Whats a sprocket Grandpa?? ;-) Oh, you kids. Everbody knows that it's what George Jetson made on those gruelling days when he had to push the button. And it's something like a cog because that's what Spacely Sprockets' chief competitor made. Signature-- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) >Whats a sprocket Grandpa?? ;-) It's those things the chain on your 25-speed bicycle wraps around, Sonny. :-) SignatureBill Clinton said Tuesday the New York Times has been unfair to Hillary and too soft on Barack Obama. Hillary can see it coming. For the second time in her life she is going to be pushed to the background by America's first black president. >>>>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like >>>>> that. I am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> > 35mm film doesn't have edge connectors on 4 sides. And this is an issue because? Hint--those connectors are in or behind the film plane--if they weren't then a focal-plane shutter wouldn't work. Sorry, but your argument doesn't make any sense at all. Signature-- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) >>>>>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like >>>>>> that. I am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Sorry, but your argument doesn't make any sense at all. It was an argument bandied about to explain why retro-fitting a 35mm film camera with a 35mm size sensor would be difficult - ie a "Digital Back" for a Nikon f*. > >>>> Nikon's mount and mirror won't allow a 24x36mm 35mm film sized > >>>> sensor. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > film camera with a 35mm size sensor would be difficult - ie a "Digital > Back" for a Nikon f*. but the claim makes no sense. nikon has been making full frame slr cameras for 50 years, and kodak made two full frame digital slrs that used nikon mount lenses. According to frederick <lost@sea.com>: [ ... ] > >>>> Nikon's mount and mirror won't allow a 24x36mm 35mm film sized > >>>> sensor. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > film camera with a 35mm size sensor would be difficult - ie a "Digital > Back" for a Nikon f*. *That* is true. The sensor needs some border area for the connection pads for the wire bonds, plus the actual lead frame allowing connections off frame. And since the sensor has a layer of protective glass (anti-aliasing filter and perhaps IR blocking filter), it needs to be thicker than the film. What this means when retrofitting to a Nikon F (or the like) is the milling off of the metal film guide rails and the metal where the sprocket protrudes -- along with removal of the sprocket, or if it is needed to transfer rotation between parts (such as the exposure counter), turning the sprocket teeth off of the assembly. Whether this would leave sufficient thickness for the mechanism which guides the focal plane shutter's leaves remains to be seen. I think that the leaves are about 2mm in front of the film plane, so there *might* be sufficient. However, this does on apply to either the lens mount or the mirror, which were what was originally stated to be the limiting factors, and which *I* do not believe to be so. For that matter -- the limitations described above would apply to any 35mm focal plane shutter SLR -- not just the Nikons. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > >>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like > >>> that. I am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > So how is it that Nikon's mount and mirror allow 35mm film? Surely the point is that the DSLR mirror is smaller and as a result the digital lenses can intrude further back into the camera body. if you put some of these lenses on a 35mm film camera (or 24x26mm sensor digital SLR) the mirror would hit the rearmost lens element. Also, the digital lenses are presumably optimised for an image area the size of the sensor. Robert > Surely the point is that the DSLR mirror is smaller and as a result > the digital lenses can intrude further back into the camera body. if > you put some of these lenses on a 35mm film camera (or 24x26mm sensor > digital SLR) the mirror would hit the rearmost lens element. that's true for canon and that's why the ef-s lenses won't physically mount on a full frame canon camera. nikon dx lenses can mount on a full frame body, and depending on the lens, may even cover the full frame at some focal lengths. > Also, the digital lenses are presumably optimised for an image area > the size of the sensor. yes, and it is quite possible that a fullframe nikon camera would sense that a dx lens was attached and automatically switch to crop mode. ... > Surely the point is that the DSLR mirror is smaller and as a result > the digital lenses can intrude further back into the camera body. if > you put some of these lenses on a 35mm film camera (or 24x26mm sensor > digital SLR) the mirror would hit the rearmost lens element. Most people forget about development cost. The cost to produce a sensor increases exponentially with area. The cost to produce a sensor at higher resolution tends to increase linearly up to some limit of the technology... its simple economics. > Also, the digital lenses are presumably optimised for an image area > the size of the sensor. What is the argument (other than a no longer relevant legacy) for a 35mm sensor? There are many sound arguments against it now, including a new DX format legacy. John >> Surely the point is that the DSLR mirror is smaller and as a result >> the digital lenses can intrude further back into the camera body. if [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > 35mm sensor? There are many sound arguments against it now, > including a new DX format legacy. Depends on what one is doing. One certainly has more wide-angle choices with a 35mm sensor at the moment, while APS-C has the edge at the long end. Signature-- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) > Nikon's mount and mirror won't allow a 24x36mm 35mm film sized sensor. > Damn those Nikon engineers who didn't look 50 years into the future. of course it will. it worked with film for 50 years, and it worked with the kodak 14n and slr/n, both fullframe nikon digital slrs. > The full-frame Canons aren't exactly flying off the shelves, the most > popular dSLR in the market is the Rebel XT/XTi, second is the Nikon D50. which is why nikon is taking its time in developing one. and the d80 is 2nd most popular, followed by the d40 and d200. >Nikon's mount and mirror won't allow a 24x36mm 35mm film sized sensor. >Damn those Nikon engineers who didn't look 50 years into the future. Like that Kodak 14n that never existed? Or the Nikon lenses that work fine on Canon full-frame bodies? SignatureThat was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency > >The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I am > >going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody has [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The successor to the D200, I think, will come out *after* the D3. It, > too, will probably be full-frame. Maybe by the middle of 2008. Would these hypothetical full frame DSLRs from Nikon have a new family of lenses to go with them? or the belief that the digital lenses so far released been cleverly designed to actually give an optimised image over a 24x26mm area like the older 35mm film lenses? Robert > Would these hypothetical full frame DSLRs from Nikon have a new family > of lenses to go with them? or the belief that the digital lenses so > far released been cleverly designed to actually give an optimised > image over a 24x26mm area like the older 35mm film lenses? just about all nikon lenses (other than the cropped dx series) will work fine. that's not to say there won't be some new lenses coming. the 80-400vr could use an update, for example. >>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like >>> that. I am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > far released been cleverly designed to actually give an optimised > image over a 24x26mm area like the older 35mm film lenses? Huh? What do lenses optimized for APS-C have to do with anything? Canon makes lenses optimized for the APS-C format but that doesn't stop them from making the 5D. While Nikon does make lenses optimized for the smaller sensor, that doesn't mean that _all_ of their lenses are so optimized. Geez. Signature-- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) >>>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like >>>> that. I am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >Canon makes lenses optimized for the APS-C format but that doesn't stop >them from making the 5D. Canon's EF-S lenses won't mount on the 5D. Does Nikon have lenses like the EF-S lenses that are optimized for their APS-C format cameras such that their image circle won't fill a 24x36mm frame? >While Nikon does make lenses optimized for the smaller sensor, that >doesn't mean that _all_ of their lenses are so optimized. > >Geez. SignatureBill Clinton said Tuesday the New York Times has been unfair to Hillary and too soft on Barack Obama. Hillary can see it coming. For the second time in her life she is going to be pushed to the background by America's first black president. >>>>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like >>>>> that. I am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > their APS-C format cameras such that their image circle won't fill a > 24x36mm frame? What does that have to do with anything? If Nikon does not make such lenses then their lens design would not preclude their producing a 35mm format DSLR. If Nikon does make such lenses their existence does not preclude their manufacturing a 35mm format DSLR any more than their existence in the Canon product line prevents Canon from doing so. In neither case is Nikon precluded from producing a 35mm format DSLR. >> While Nikon does make lenses optimized for the smaller sensor, that >> doesn't mean that _all_ of their lenses are so optimized. >> >> Geez. >> >> -- Signature-- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) > The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I am > going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody has > heard anything about something new in this area? > > MAL Not for now. The day after you buy your D200, though, they will introduce the D300x, a 22 megapixel full frame sensor semi-pro camera that takes pictures at 25 shots per second, has live preview, anti-dust, and a small nuclear device that vaporizes people who stand in your way -- all for $499. It will come standard with a 10-400mm f/2.8 lens. :-) SignatureWaddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor >> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I am >> going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody has [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >in your way -- all for $499. It will come standard with a 10-400mm >f/2.8 lens. :-) Yeah!, but it will be made of plastic so RichA will keep on whining. >> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. >> I am [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > and a small nuclear device that vaporizes people who stand in your way > -- all for $499. It will come standard with a 10-400mm f/2.8 lens. :-) You mean the D800 with 8-800mm f/0.8-f/8 AF-S VR. >>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I am >>> going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody has [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > You mean the D800 with 8-800mm f/0.8-f/8 AF-S VR. Yeah. The one that weighs only three ounces. SignatureWaddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor >>> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. >>> I am [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > You mean the D800 with 8-800mm f/0.8-f/8 AF-S VR. No thank you, constant speed or die... SignatureRandy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw > Not for now. The day after you buy your D200, though, they will > introduce the D300x, a 22 megapixel full frame sensor semi-pro camera > that takes pictures at 25 shots per second, has live preview, > anti-dust, and a small nuclear device that vaporizes people who stand > in your way -- all for $499. It will come standard with a 10-400mm > f/2.8 lens. :-) Yeah, but without VR/IS I'll wait for the D300xs and the accompanying lens. >> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I am >> going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody has [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > in your way -- all for $499. It will come standard with a 10-400mm > f/2.8 lens. :-) I'll take two. Where do I sign? SignatureRandy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw > The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I am > going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody has > heard anything about something new in this area? Nah, I got my D200 when it first came out & was somewhat upset when the D80 came out... then the D40 version with the same sensor! But Nikon is generally a slow mover & the D200 is a fine tool built to last. Look at how long Canon's 20D held a similar place and the D200 has a lot to offer above that (not everything, calm down Canon folks). The D40/D80 have been spot on target for the consumer end and I'm pretty sure their next offering will be a pro level model we can't afford. >> The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I >> am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > spot on target for the consumer end and I'm pretty sure their next > offering will be a pro level model we can't afford. Yes but they did do a bit of a touch up on the D2X and upped it to D2Xs so I don't think it to far off the planet to think that the D200 could be in for a little bit of a massage, it is what they do. >>>The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I >>>am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > don't think it to far off the planet to think that the D200 could be in for > a little bit of a massage, it is what they do. Well I was surprised when the 5D came out so who knows. >>>>The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I >>>>am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Well I was surprised when the 5D came out so who knows. Mind you Nikon did not have a lot of input with the 5D. > The PMA did not show a new Nikon D200s or D300 or something like that. I > am going to buy a D200 in near future, but just wanted to ask, if anybody > has heard anything about something new in this area? > > MAL A new revolutionary DSLR every 3 months isn't needed. Sit down, take a deep breath, and give your wallet to your wife for safe-keeping. A least she'll buy something that doesn't immediately become "obsolete", perhaps a sofa or a new dishwasher. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.