Nikon clarifies full frame policy

"I don't think so, Sam. If you can, please name three models."

 

http://www.2mcctv.com/product_info-SecurityCameras-ColorDayNight-MeritLiLinPIH80.html

 

http://www.2mcctv.com/product_info---SurveiluxSVSC55.html

 

http://www.2mcctv.com/product_info-SecurityCameras-ColorDayNight-SamsungSHC721N.html

At the present stage of the market, there is no way that Sony would justify developing a full frame sensor to keep to itself. Maybe in ten years, when they have a fully fledged line of lenses that can compete with the Nikon and Canon offerings across the board things might be different. But for now, it would be vital to lower unit cost by diluting the fixed costs of R&D and the fabrication line over as large a production volume as possible in order for Sony (or their customers) to have cameras that can begin to compete with Canon's full frame offerings.

I wish fuji and nikon would get into bed together. Nikon bodies with FF fuji sensors would be sweet.

"I wish fuji and nikon would get into bed together. Nikon bodies with FF fuji sensors would be sweet."

 

In my office, we've had very similar discussions. Nikon needs to improve their standing relationship with either Fuji or Sony, put either Fuji or Sony sensors inside the Nikon pro-grade bodies. They can let Fuji or Sony, whichever, take the consumer-grade bodies and Nikon build the upper-end bodies so that there's not an overlap, provided of course that Fuji or Sony want to continue with their own dSLR line.

 

Bottom line is that, since Canon has the resources to develop their own sensors, if Nikon wants to continue to remain competitive and to continue depending on other companies to provide them with sensors, they really can't afford to depend on companies that they are also in direct competition with (as they are currently with Fuji and Sony). I don't want to see Nikon continue to lag behind, because outside of the sensor issue, Nikon continues to make some of the best photo gear on the market. But to survive, they need to establish a business relationship where they are in total cooperation with their partner, not competition.

To this I say, "who cares?" I don't care how big the sensor is, I care about performance. For that matter, I'm sick of everyone using lens lenth as a way of defining the field of view and magnification. Spotting scops and binocs give field of view @100yds and mag, i.e. 10x or 12x. These are products of optics, not "28mm" or "70mm" . We have become lazy in our references.

What we really want is quality! So think of this:

1) dynamic range greater than the human eye by 2 stops at each end.

2) more resolution; beat film scan at 4000 lines on any dimension.

3) less noise; ok, no noise at any iso.

4) better color

5) better white balance

6) more frames per second, like 8 at full resolution

 

So, if a sensor provided all of this, would you care what size it is? I would rather Nikon devote their R&D efforts to these areas than to making a sensor larger.

"",,,Nikon has never ruled out the development of a full-frame digital SLR, but has no

immediate launch plans.."

 

Nikon has been saying this since August 2004 when they did the NDA tour with the D2X.

"To this I say, 'who cares?'"

 

the more these companies compete with each other, the more we end users benefit.

<I>Translation: Sony is still working on a full frame sensor for us, but their R&D hasn't got

anything that works just yet.</I><P>Wrong. <P>Nikon execs didn't like the price point

they'd have to sell the camera at: They thought it was too high. This is according to my

conversations with Steve Heiner of Nikon USA in 2006.

Full frame OR tilt-shift lenses that are wide angle at whatever sensor size is what I need. I'd like a FF Nikon, but they don't have but one antique 28mm TS lens, and honestly, their camera controls suck compared to Canon. Hate to say it.

Aaron Dougherty;

 

That's purely a subjective assumption. That's like asking what the best color, or best car, or best musical group is. No definitive answer for all people. It's a choice.

Somebody should introduce something full-frame that you can stick in your camera and make captures, then replace with another when the previous one's full.

 

Accumulate these filled whatevers in your kit until you want to post process and make prints. Ideally these whatevers would cost less than $10 each and be available at Walmart.

 

Oh, and they should be usable in both Nikon and Canon.

 

:-)

And call it "silicon film" :)

<I>Translation: "We'd love to compete with Canon, but we just don't have the resources to do it".</I><P>Bob, Can you explain to us the subtle flavors of crow?

cruel.

Folks whined during the Nikon F era about having to remove the camera just to load film; then later the F2 was born. Much with Nikon is about the lenses. They studied alot of other designs before the F was born.

>>Translation: "We'd love to compete with Canon, but we just don't have the resources to do it".<<

 

"Bob, Can you explain to us the subtle flavors of crow?"

 

Ellis, can I assume you alerted Bob to your post to him in this four month old thread, or were you just attempting a cheap shot t his expense behind his back?

 

It's clear to most people that Nikon DIDN'T have the tevhnological resources for YEARS to compete with Canon, and they're still dependent on the technological prowess of others ... a fully-paid trip that Nikon provided to you notwithstanding.

And yet after 9 months its out with D3 which compete really well with MarkIII DS in IQ area. Further more 1 year after this discussion started it comes out with D700.

I am just waiting for someone to hand this to me or waiting for Fuji full frame version