Nikon DX and an idea why.....

[nick]

With all this talk of the Nikon DX lens, I finally got motivated

enough to actually post somehting here instead of just lurking.

There are numerous people who are wondering if this is a "stop gap"

proposition, and it very well could be. But let me give you my

perspective on it.

 

First, I bought an N80 about a year ago. My first SLR. In July, I

decided to get the D100 after spending way too much on film

developing. At that point in time I had a 50mm 1.8 (and a cheap

sigma lens that has since been donated). I decided to get a mid

zoom, so i got the 24-80 when it came out. Added on an SB 80 flash,

then a used 80-200 2.8. For everything from the D100 on, I have

spent less than any 2 of the AFS 2.8 pro lenses. Once the 12-24

comes out, i will have the entire range for my digital, and will

likely leave film all together. 18-300 in 3 lenses, 2 (possibly all

3) of those lenses having amazingly sharp optics for less than

$1500.

 

If Nikon does come out with a full frame will I get it? No. I have

no need to print anything larger than 16x20. I prefer having the

battery life of the D100 over the weight of the D1x. I have no need

for a 20 frame buffer. I will have lenses that cover any range that

I need, and I will have spent around the same price as just the D1x

body. If I do decide to upgrade, guess what, the DX lens will still

be great for that body, and they can both go on their merry way

together. Nikon is marketing themselves to a position to have a

variety of camera options.

 

Why are there so many variations within the 35mm of format? Because

each one has its own advantage. Some people love SLRs. Others love

rangefinders. Still others dont want to deal with any settings, and

thats why there are PS cameras. Digital is evolving the same way.

There are the PS digitals (Coolpix line), the advanced amature/ semi

pro digitals (D100, and CP5700 for that matter), and the

professional D1x. Asking why Nikon is making the DX lens is like

asking why they make so may variations of a zoom lens. Different

lenses for different purposes. I don't know of many professionals

that would shoot with a 70-300 4-5.6 G, but i know of even fewer

amatures willing to spend $1700 (70-200 2.8 AFS VR) for their first

telephto lens. Instead nikon is giving them an option to get a full

range of lenses with the most modern AFS technology (which really is

very fast at focusing) for a fraction of the cost. They are

offering a wider range (12mm-24) than their pro lenses (17-35 AFS)

to compensate, and again they cost significantly less. I cant

afford $4000 for the entire AFS 2.8 line, but i can afford $1500 for

the entire equivilent, less one stop (Which i can adjust for by

increasing the ISO).

 

Just my two cents on this whole topic,

NB

[craig_bridge]

Said another way, to make my 14mm to get a wide angle for my D1X an expensive stop gap with a 2 year life span.

[ShunCheung]

The DX line of lenses are not stop gaps. The 27x15mm sensors are here to stay. They are sufficient for a lot of people such as Nick. Well known Canon-sponsored bird photographer Arthur Morris has just switched to all digital with the EOS 1D (not 1Ds). That is a 4MP DSLR. For a lot of work, you don't have to have >10MP or full 35mm frame. Large sensors will always be expensive to produce, making it too expensive for a lot of consumers.

 

While the smaller sensors are here to stay, it doesn't mean that it is necessarily the only format. Nikon may still make full-35mm-frame DSLRs for people with other needs, such as portrait, landscape, etc. In fact, Kodak is already doing that for Nikon users with the 14n.

 

We Nikon users are getting the best of both worlds.

[chuck]

"We Nikon users are getting the best of both worlds."<p>

No, we Nikon users are being cut off at the knees, and the lower halves of our legs are being sent to the other world.

[dave_cheney]

I agree with Chuck, I don't want higher resolution sensors, I want full frame. Sensors that work with my current lenses and have large enough pixels to reach into realms of photography that digital can't reach yet (ie, low light concert, pj, etc). And I want them foveon x3.

 

I think Nikon is selling itself short by sticking with the APS sensors. Pro's and amatures want full frame sensors. Sure you have a 12mm (read 18mm) zoom now, but that kind of lens brings you closer to that plastic, all nearly in focus type of imagery that consumer digital has been shoving down peoples' throats for the last few years.

 

Make it full frame, 10mpx foveon x3 and you've got my dosh. Oh yeah, it has to support MF lenses.

 

Dave

[ShunCheung]

If you want full-frame sensors, then only buy those cameras. Full-frame sensors will always be expensive to manufacture and not everybody can afford them. For a lot of people, the smaller sensor delivers more than sufficient quality and/or is their only way to get into digital SLRs. Currently, Contax is the only manufacturer that exclusively makes full-frame DSLRs but they are hardly selling any.