Nikon Full Frame Sensor to Match Canon?

Canon announced a full frame digital camera. Any news on Nikon

coming out with one?

 

They usually match Canon, although a little later.

Why don't you ask Nikon?

Nikon have announced once, I'm not so sure when but think that when they dubut D2H, that Nikon will stick with DX format sensor.

 

If nothing changes, No full frame for Nikonian..

The D2X matches - and some say supersedes - the full frame Canons, sensor size is irrelevant.

I am more interested in getting a Nikon made digital back for a Bronica S2A to use with the medium format Nikkors.

 

If they make a 4x5 back just as quickly as they have done with a 24x36mm sized sensor, it will be better.

 

Those LF Nikkors are awesome performers.

 

Are there any Canon/Minolta/Olympus/Leica Large Format lens creations that come close to the Nikkors?

digital 4x5 backs have been around now for a decade. The one I use is a 35 Megapixel scan back. Its lens requirements are modest; the effective pixel size is 14 microns at the focus plane.

I was not referring to the cranky/squeaky Phase I scanning digital back, Kelly.

Assuming Nikon holds true to form, *if* there ever is a "full frame" Nikon dSLR (whatever that means), they'll announce it two months before it's available and not before. Considering the D50 leaks, which Nikon wasn't happy about, they'll be even more tight lipped in the future.

 

Just curious: How much are you willing to spend for a Nikon dSLR with a 24x36 sensor? What compromises are you willing to accept just to get that sensor?

As I recall, Nikon fairly recently said they were staying with their 1.5x sensors.

 

That probably means that they don't see any way then can get hold of full frame sensors and build a camera for a price that could compete with Canon rather than a philosophical point that 1.5x is good enough.

 

Nikon will probably eventually make a full frame camera when Canon have taken even more of their market share and someone can provide them with a FF sensor at a low enough cost. I doubt that Canon will sell them theirs!

Vivek; the Phase One 4x5 scan back has a lead screw. It doesnt squeak unless the screw is allowed to run dry. The one I have is not noisy. RENTAL units are often dirty; and have noisy operation and crud on the scan bar. This microcrud can make lines on an image. <BR><BR>The full frame Nikon debate is real old. The first Nikon digital had a FF response; and was marketed as such, The local newspaper bought them; it was about 1.2megapixel; and used relay optics. <BR><BR>Many folks are avoiding the removeable lens digital arena; and dumping their old film slrs; for high end P&S digitals.<BR><BR>removeable lens digitals have higher warranty cost; according to the camera engineers I have talked to. These customers "whine" more; is what a Japanese chap told me. The remapping of dead/noisy/hot pixels is more with a removeable lens digitals. The customers are more picky.

The 4x5 Phase One cost me over 20,000 US dollars used many years ago. Some of the older ones were over 50K when new long ago. These devices are for pro usage; and abit out of the range in pricing of the typical amateur budget. Most focus today is folks using MF digital backs for product shots and commercial work. The high end Canon FF digitals are also being used; since the "megapixel class level" is high today. The productivity is radically increased today compared to high end digital studio equipment of a decade ago.

Kelly, Thanks for your explanations! I brought up the 4x5 -your details on Phase 1 just illustrates it with added emphasis- how far things have come in the way of *affordable* technology.

"The D2X matches - and some say supersedes - the full frame Canons, sensor size is irrelevant."

 

You wish...unless you're trolling ?

 

Sensor size is most relevant! The larger the sensor, the larger the potential pixel size and thus pixel quality.

 

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=Sensor_Sizes

Oh, boy. Yes sensor size is relevant for two reasons: First, as stated above the larger then sensor the greater the distribution of pixels hence lower noise. Second, there's the whole "crop factor" to consider. Perhaps Nikon will become more dedicated to APS-C crop factor lenses, but as it stands there's no way to use traditional superwides effectively on Nikon bodies. Note, this is not some sort of knock on Nikon vs. Canon. I think the D2X is a great body, especially when you consider how much more the Canon 1D series costs in comparison.

I don't know what's worse, a flamer--insult first, don't worry if you have nothing to contribute--or a troll. In any case, pixel size is a trade-off between resolution and maximum signal handling capacity (a large pixel does not lower the noise, it only gives you a larger signal). As long as the signal intensity is adequate for 12-bit or 14-bit, a smaller pixel is better since it will improve the image resolution. Incidentally, any existing Nikon digital camera is technically 'full frame' since the captured image covers the entire sensor, and more...

For a given sensor technology; a larger sized pixel has a higher signal to noise ratio. The S/N ; signal to noise ratio increases directly with a greater pixel size; ie pitch.

Yes, with the caveat 'for a given technology'. Tons of progress has been made in reducing the amplifier noise, and SNR can be improved by either increasing the 'S' or decreasing the 'N'.

I know all about sensor size, I am not trolling. Unless, of course, you call citing professional magazines that do actual test by looking at printed pictures trolling.

 

Since when is noise the only measure of image quality?

Sensor size is most assuredly relevant. In addition to noise per pixel, which may or may not be better in the real world, the crop factor issue is certainly significant. In addition, the size of the sensor correlates directly to the size and quality of the viewfinder image. I don't know about the rest of you, but I can't recall EVER hearing someone complain that their DSLR's viewfinder was too big? OTOH, plenty of folks DO seem to complain that their viewfinder is too small. Full Frame sensors would greatly improve this issue.

Douglas, the crop certainly makes a difference as the D2X knocks the socks off the 1DsII when it comes to edge sharpness, so agree with you there.

 

Viewfinder size has, however, no influence on resolution or any other quality of the final image.

Bas, the DX format will make the 35mm format obsolete only when there is a 9mm f/2.8

rectilinear DX, a 14 or 18mm f/1.4 DX, a 12-24 f/2.8 DX, and a 16mm PC DX lens. Until

that time the DX format can be considered far from complete.

BTW, the only actual side by side that I saw between Nikon's 12 MP camera and the 1Ds II

was heavily weighted to favor the Nikon.

Andrew, which was that? There are a few users who have used both the D2X and 1Ds Mk II and all of them whom I know note that the corner quality of the images from the D2X is better. And it is obvious that the tele reach is better because of the higher pixel density. And I doubt that anyone can claim that the Canons produce as accurate colours as the Nikons. Based on testing that is. I am puzzled how people continue to get these orange-toned images throughout from the Canons and keep toting how great the cameras are.

 

Half a year ago Nikon said that they're researching FF sensors but not planning on bringing out a product with one within 3 years. However, later than that they have said that they're working on a FF body due to customer requests. SO, I'd say they'll have one pretty soon. Maybe 2 years is my guess. However, 35 mm lenses are in many cases so crappy on FF sensors that both Canon and Nikon will have to update their lens lines sooner or later.

<strong><em>Canon announced a FF DSLR?</em></strong><br>

<p>Hey.. they did that September 21, <strong>2002</strong> it was called the EOS 1Ds. Now 3 years later this is their 3rd FF camera.   Nikon... I would guess they will follow when they can buy such a sensor and have aquired a taste for crow, and they have a nice sauce to serve with it so their customers will come to dinner.

Nikon doesn't just "buy" sensors, they design them together with Sony.

 

Also, for Nikon a redesign of the lens line would do some good, for example they could finally put AF-S throughout the line of primes, which would be a most welcome change.