Nikon full frame? No way!

[david_le1]

So i recently went to the store to see if anything new is out or not,

and I asked the guy, and he said at the end of this year, they say

that nikon is coming out w/ 2 new bodies, and 1 of them being a full

frame. Is this true? Also, how low do you think the d200 will go for

later after these cameras MAY come out? I'm very tempted to getting

the D200 as a permanent camera. Thanks

[daniel_taylor]

You would think that Canon users would be the ones obsessed with FF vs. DX sensors....

 

Nikon will introduce a FF body shortly after Sony or some other supplier provides them with FF sensors at a quantity and cost they like. It's that simple people. You haven't seen Sony announce a FF sensor for sale yet? Don't count on a FF body from Nikon then.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

I'm very happy with my D200. And the DX sensor is perfect for my uses - kids sports and such. I shoot medium format film also.

 

Just get a D200 and don't worry about waht *might* happen this year or next.

[ShunCheung]

Guys, this is the 3rd thread on Nikon Full Frame DSLRs today:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GBf5

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GC26

 

If you have too much time in your hands, I suggest to go shoot some pictures.

 

Why don't you ask that guy where his (her?) source is?

[curritch]

I really don't know much about the business side of this subject.

 

But Nikon has been near the front of the SLR line for as long as I can remember.

 

Are they now going to be just a second tier outfit behind Canon, Kodak and whoever else choses to produce a full frame DSLR? If so I don't think that is a good business decision for Nikon. Once you gain momentum going downhill it's kind of hard to stop.

 

On the other hand maybe they think that the more inexpensive smaller format sensor is really the future of DSLR photography. Sort of like 35mm film. If that is true then they are making the correct decision.

 

Either way they are kind of "betting the company".

 

Canon, on the other hand, is covering both possibilities.

 

So Canon will be around regardless of what happens but Nikon's future is probably 50/50 at this point.

 

Just my opinion.

[todd1664878707]

Daniel,

 

Maybe Sony hasn't announced a full frame sensor, but maybe it's not coming from Sony. Maybe it's coming from Fuji...

[larry n.]

I heard from a trustworthy source that Nikon was buying all Canon full frame DSLR's it can get its hands it (both retail and wholesale). Nikon's plan: they will take the sensor out of the Canon and put it into a D2X (which they will call D2FF. Clever marketing!). Evidently, the D2FF will sell at such a high margin that they will still make a profit! That way, Nikon doesn't need to wait for Sony (or Fuji) to get off their sorry little a**es and produce a full frame sensor.

[ellis_vener_photography]

<I>Maybe Sony hasn't announced a full frame sensor, but maybe it's not coming from Sony. Maybe it's coming from Fuji...</I><P>If it is true and they aren't commissioning Sony as the manufacturer of the CMOS or CCD, a likely manufacturing candidate would be Kodak or Dalsa.<P>On the other hand I wouldn't belieive anythinga salesman in a store ahs to say about this. He's getting his "info" from the same place most of you get it: rumors on the internet.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

The market for FF sensor DSLR's is tiny. So Nikon isn't really missing out on very much revenue by waiting. Besides, they don't have enough production capacity as it is - have you tried to find a D200 lately?

[ilkka_nissila]

The market for larger sensors than DX is very real, the only reason people like me buy DX cameras is that Nikon doesn't make anything better. People who buy high-end bodies also buy many expensive lenses (as opposed one or two). If Nikon can't get high-end users to buy their cameras they might as well just cut down their lens line to 5-6 lenses. Oh, that's how many DX lenses there are, how peculiar...

 

A 5D or 1Ds Mk II is generally speaking sold with a much larger investment in lenses. A D200 is bundled with either 17-55 and 70-200 or the 18-200. And the existence of the FF Canons converts many people over to their brand because they want a clear upgrade path to sensible sensor sizes.

 

Even with the latest viewfinders in the D200 and D2 series, manual focusing is often much harder and less reliable than it is on FF bodies. I won't even start on wide angles or fast lenses. Nikon is half-way of becoming a purely consumer camera maker with their DX sensor.

[ilkka_nissila]

Sony doesn't need to announce the availability of a FF sensor in public for Nikon to start using them. Not all Sony-made sensors in Nikon DSLRs are used by others. E.g. the D2X sensor isn't available for other brands because of Nikon's contribution and nobody else wants to use the D200 sensor because it's so complicated to operate(even Nikon had initial problems with it).

 

And yes, there are a few other manufacturers that could do the manufacturing of Nikon's FF sensor.

[bob_katz1]

"<i>A 5D or 1Ds Mk II is generally speaking sold with a much larger investment in lenses</i>"<p>

Yes, those Leica/Zeiss lenses and adapters are very expensive. Doesn't help Canon much, though... too bad they don't make many lenses with the optical quality needed for their full-frame sensors.

[ilkka_nissila]

Look, the adapters cost in the tens of dollars, and generally even the most fanatic optical quality freak would only get one or two Zeiss lenses for their EOS. Most of the EF lenses (including the big guns) work just fine. And a Zeiss 21 mm is much less expensive than many Canon lenses.

 

Nikon doesn't make many lenses that work well with DX either - same situation ... not really, Canon has much more useable variety in the lens line even if you choose a FF sensor.

[mike dixon]

Bob, have you done any actual shooting with a 5D or 1Ds and Canon lenses? I have no trouble getting outstanding results even with $300 to $400 Canon lenses on a 5D; there's also an extensive line of expensive L lenses which are better than the ones I have. Kind of amazing how much of the market Canon has managed to take over if, as you claim, most of their lenses aren't very good.

[ken dennis]

Have any of you ever heard of the old saying, "Necessity is the mother of invention" Nikon, not unlike any other company "Like GM or Ford", if they wanted FF sensors, would put the word out for them, and then choose what ever company offered to make them at Nikon's specs, and for the lowest cost!

 

If Nikon wanted Sony to make them, then Sony would be making them, its that simple!

 

Here's a thought, how about everyone sign a petition asking Nikon to make FF's, or simply write a request and send it to them!

 

As they are in the market to make money, they need to see a market for them first!

 

Ken

[ilkka_nissila]

I'm sure Nikon's marketing research is well aware for their customers' desire for a full-size sensor. They just want to do a good job of it and offer it for a reasonable price.

[wiseguyvisuals]

For all we know, Nikon has been turing down FF sensor deals for years. It would not surprise me to find that Nikon was holding out to 1)squeeze the maximum amount of revenue from the DX lineup of bodies and lenses, and 2)increase the hubub and demand for that full-frame system, so that when it does come out, we all have a feeding frenzy and they make even more profane sums of money off of the industry. Its simple business economics combined with consumer psychology - we always want what we don't have or doesn't yet exist. Many of us might do the same as Nikon.

 

Another thought I had was that Nikon may be holding back the release of one FF model in favor of an entire FF body line, which will somewhat resemble the current product line. That way they'll have a FF version of each model, thus appealing to even MORE demographics, and making EVEN MORE MONEY! mwuahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

 

But seriously does it even matter? The camera is just a tool. It remembers what you tell it to. Remember that.

 

humble and poking fun,

 

Jim

[arthuryeo]

Ellis,

 

>If it is true and they aren't commissioning Sony as the manufacturer of the CMOS or CCD, a likely manufacturing candidate would be Kodak or Dalsa.

 

Unlikely that Nikon (a large Japanese corporation) would use a non-Japanese supplier for such a critical component of their next flagship product.

[harvey_edelstein1]

I totally see it the way Ilkka does. The 5D has eliminate the price and results rap on FF and the people who order them are interested in more than slow wide range zoom lenses. They order more variety of lenses and since it is a full frame what they want has already been designed. Nikon needs some fast prime lenses like the Sigma 30 f1.4 maybe a 60mm f1.4 to fill in the gaps created by the crop factor.

 

I don't need a petition, I told Nikon Reps what my opinion is at the WPPI show in Vegas 2 weeks ago. I don't think it matters to them because they are selling D70s and D200 better then they ever sold film cameras. Nikon and Canon are the only big system camera companies left in the field. Pentax and OLY are lower end Fuji is stuck between product cycles and lacks a system. There is no longer a Contax, Minolta or alternative in the advanced and high end market. Maybe Pentax will get the P645 off the ground and we can get all the good cheap lenses we want since MF gear is dirt cheap these days.

[darrengold]

Nikon are just far more shrewd than Canon. As Canon have developed their digital APS-C and FF range at the same time two camps have developed. Those with FF using their film EOS 35mm EF lenses and those that moved all digital. Nikonistas have not had that choice. Many pro photographers, many of whom used MF gear, have bought D200's, D2x's with 17-55mm, and enthusiasts have done the same with the D200 and D70/50 with the 18-70 DX lenses etc. etc.

 

When the market has near saturated with DX lenses bring out the FF camera. They'll sell just like the D200. Only everyone will need to buy the 35mm equivalent lenses they sold last year on ebay for a song. Not to mention the new SB 36X24 flashgun, as you know somehow I don't think the SB800 will be quite compatible with the Creative Lighting System II that will be introduced at the same time.

 

And guess what, we'll all go out and buy all of it. Why? Because that's what Nikon knows we do.

 

It's not a matter of if. Only when.

 

Gotta go ring the bank manager for another loan :) Bye.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

"The market for larger sensors than DX is very real, the only reason people like me buy DX cameras is that Nikon doesn't make anything better. People who buy high-end bodies also buy many expensive lenses (as opposed one or two)."

 

Who cares if people who buy FF sensors also buy 6 lenses? Nikon is better off selling a single body and 1-2 lenses to the other 99.8% of users instead of pouring resources into the tiny FF segmant at this time. They'll come out with FF DSLR's eventually - when the price point is low enough to generate sufficient volume to recoup their investment.

[mike dixon]

<i>Nikon are just far more shrewd than Canon.</i><P>

Yeah, I guess it's just pure dumb luck that, as of 2004, Canon had over 64% market share of digital SLR buyers. If only they had been clever enough not to confuse people by offering larger sensors . . .

[pcm__]

Well truthfully I was all set to switch to Canon for the 5d until I realized how much of a hit

I'd take on my Nikon gear. I'm still thinking about it but I'm not going to be in the market

for a new DSLR for a year or

18 months so we'll see what Nikon does.

 

I don't really like the Canon controls, ergonomics, or metering system or flashes, but the L

glass is good glass and the image quality in the 5d is better as far as dynamic range and

noise. Plus a 24mm is a 24mm obviously.

 

For me the proof of Nikon's inability to adjust to the changing market and FF needs, is the

lack of "professional" DX lenses. By pro I'm referring to constant fast aperture. The

17-55 f2.8 is the only one, and it was only released to complement the high end bodies

like the D2X.

 

They should learn from GM that you can't walk the fence. Make a decision, and stay with it.

[ilkka_nissila]

Robert, I am not a venture capitalist and I couldn't care less about how much profit Nikon makes by selling consumer gear if the equipment doesn't meet my needs. I'm a photographer and interested in equipment which produces the highest possible photographic quality given my budget and time constraints. As has been pointed out by others, one of the reasons Canon has a dominant market position is because they offer a full line of products. Now, Canon isn't doing too badly financially either, although they make many specialist products from which it's uncertain how much profit they make directly. Seems like a successful business plan to me, as well as satisfying all levels of users.

[ecarter]

<p><i>Yeah, I guess it's just pure dumb luck that, as of 2004, Canon had over 64% market share of digital SLR buyers.</i> - Mike Dixon

<p>Given the comparative size of the companies themselves, it is actually surprising that Nikon is doing as well as it is against Canon and that they (Canon) is only holding on to 64% of the market. We're talking a David and Goliath battle in the marketplace here, to be honest and David is actually holding more than its own. Apple should be so lucky as Nikon - and Apple, from what I'm seeing, is doing pretty good against Microsoft.

<P>I'm just waiting to see what Sony will do now that its going to be throwing its hat into the DSLR ring. They are potentially a big spoiler and could take a lot of market away from either (or both) with their production and marketing clout. We'll see...