HE-llo! Whole new ballgame!

[adan]

Nikon D3, Full-Frame, previewed: Digital Photography Review

"Only" 12 Mpixels - but at 9 fps it's moving as much data as the 21 Mpixel, 5fps Canon 1DsIII - AND those big juicy pixels offer ISO 25600 (!). And at $5000

maybe Leica can hitch a ride on the sensor?

[sdai]

Originally Posted by adan

maybe Leica can hitch a ride on the sensor?

The D3 sensor won't match the resolution that Leica R lenses can provide, it'll be a major letdown.

[john_f]

sdai raises a very good point. The large pixel pitch of the (otherwise incredible!) D3 is a two-edged sword. While it does have the potential for far greater dynamic range, it also means that the D3 sensor's resolution will require a "robust" anti-alias filter in order to prevent moire artefacts when using very sharp lenses.

P.S. AFAIK, I am not aware of any Nikon to Leica adapters. There are however Leica to Canon EOS adapters ... Can't wait to see what an APO Leica-R lens can do with a 1Ds MkIII.

[sdai]

You're right, John. Adaptation of R lenses to a F body is impossible but you can modify a F body to fit the R lens.

I won't get too excited about these new Nikons, think about it ... Canon will only need to release the 5D upgrade ...

16MP FF CMOS
6-9fps
ISO 50-6400
14 bit A/D
45 AF points with 19 cross type sensors

Then all Nikons will become dead fishes again. It's a friendly competition between these companies, Nikon needs a break ... and Canon gives.

[adan]

Well, by "hitch a ride" I meant "buy Nikon's (in-house-made, CMOS) sensors to install in the R10" - not kludge up a mount adapter.

ISO 6400 vs. ISO 25,600 is not real close - and it's a straight trade-off under the laws of physics: big pixels = more sensitivity but less resolution; smaller pixels = more resolution but less sensitibity (more noise in the signal). A Nikor f/1.2 50 at iso 25,600 is 3 stops beyond a Noctilux at 2500 on an M8.

So let's see - the M8 and DMR are wonderful at 10 Mpixels - but the Nikon's 12 Mpixels aren't enough....?

Personally - I'm still mostly an observer. But the possibility of putting a nice old Q-Nikkor from 1978 on the D3 (something Canon can't do with THEIR 1978 lenses) gives me the same kind of kick as putting my 1978 Tele-Elmarit on an M8.

[EH21]

Yeah the first thing I checked too was if my R glass would fit on the new nikon. Higher ISO, full frame, and live view are all appealing things. Looks like there is a big prism in the new nikon...maybe a nice viewfinder? That would be a nice thing to have too. I sure hope to hear from Leica just even if they will be coming out with a R10. There is a lot of life left in my DMR.

[sdai]

Originally Posted by adan

So let's see - the M8 and DMR are wonderful at 10 Mpixels - but the Nikon's 12 Mpixels aren't enough....?

Keep in mind that the sensors for M8/DMR have a cropping factor of 1.33 so given the same pixel pitch, they can only be matched by a FF sensor of 18.22 MP in theory.

Leica already beat the D3 more than 2 years ago and they can only do better from now on ... so why bother with these Nikons?

If you're in the Nikon camp, then you should go for the D300 instead of the D3 ... again in theory, the D300 sensor should have an equivalent resolution of a 28.125MP FF sensor given the same pixel pitch.

[adan]

I'm not sure I buy that. The important resolution is how many pixels the final PICTURE contains, not how many pixels are crammed into any given square mm of the sensor (or else tiny 10Mpixel P&S's would rule the world, because they cram about 4x as many pixels into each mm^2 as the DMR)

Unless you are going to stitch together two DMR or M8 shots, a picture or print that is 2600 pixels wide from a cropped sensor will look generally indistinguishable (so far as the digital part of the imagery is concerned) as a picture or print that is 2600 pixels wide that comes from a full-frame sensor.

As to whether the D3 has an extra-strong AA filter - we shall see. Based on the D70 and D200, Nikon has been moving more and more in the weak-AA direction, having discovered (as Leica presumed all along) that most folks except fashion/glamour types are far more concerned with detail than with occasional alias artifacts.

Hey - both Nikon and Canon have shown terrific new machines this week. I'm excited.

[carstenw]

The D3 isn't an answer to the 1Ds3 or the DMR. This is the interesting part: the D3 is aimed almost directly at (actually slightly above) the 1D3. This is a new tack for Nikon, and it still leaves the option for a D3x open, should they decide that they need to answer the 1Ds3. The 1D-series is Canon's bread-n-butter in the pro market, so the D3 is aimed extremely well. More MP, equivalent speed, higher-res screen (>900000 pixels!), more AF sensors, the ability to track focus by colour, and on and on. This is a really potent move by Nikon.

The 5D and its successor won't compete succefully with the D3 since it isn't a pro camera with weather sealing and the robustness. It also won't compete successfully with the D300 since it will be significantly more expensive, just like the last generation. It is all on its own there, and will steal just a few customers here and there.

Canon has their lineup set up in such a way that the only place they can really go wild on the specs is in the pro line. Every other camera is contrained by having to not compete with its next-up model, and so the Canon specs often feel like there is something missing, something which could easily have been there but has been left out. As an example, the D300 can do 9-exposure bracketing, whereas the 5D can only do 3, something which bothered me a lot when I still owned the 5D. Canon is always removing stuff from the specs to differentiate their high-end models, whereas with Nikon one gets the feeling that they are trying to give as much as they can.

[adan]

Let me expand a bit...When it comes time for Leica to build a "full-frame" (24x36mm) sensor, they can, of course, simply keep Kodak's CCD architecture as used in the M8 and DMR, and just put more of the same pixels on a bigger sensor. And as sdai says, this will get them to about an 18 Mpixel camera - with about the same noise performance as the M8.

Alternatively, they could use a sensor with larger pixels, only a small increase in total pixel count (to 12 or 13 Mpixels) but a big increase in low-light noise performance, a la Canon 5D (and presumably, but we shall see, the Nikon D3).

Or they can go somewhere in between, with subtle improvements in both resolution and noise.

I just hope Leica does not have blinders on, and looks at all the possibilities before making that decision.

A big sensor, of course, has other aspects than pixel count and pixel performance. Less (or more creative) DOF for a given field of view, for example. Corner performance, especially with wide lenses, for another. It will be interesting to see how a Nikon 17-35 or 14-24 or 20mm prime performs on the D3, as regards vignetting or CA. Has Nikon borrowed from Leica/Kodak and offset the microlenses?

Carsten: Good points - although at this point I still sort of feel that ALL DSLRs seem to have something missing. Practically any of them, from the D80 up through the D3 (and including the 40D and 5D) could win me over today if they just included a) an SD card option, and b) optional OEM split-image focus screens for manual focus.

Alternatively, the pro Canons (which already offer a and b) could get to me by lopping off about 25% of their height and weight.

Although as I mentioned before, I'd still have a tilt to Nikon simply because of their backward compatibility to pre-AF non-plastic lenses.

I do think both Canon and Nikon have turned a significant corner this week - and Leica is no doubt reviewing their own working specs for the R10 in light of these events (or at least I hope so!)

[guy_mancuso]

Not sure anyone noticed the D300 which is still the DX format but it can shoot 14 bit, i did not see 14 bit option in the D3. i would lean more towards the D300 if i was a nikon guy. Not unless i missed something there but it looks the D300 has more DR.

[guywalder]

Guy,
according to Nikon's pdf files both save 12 or 14 bit NEFs (user selectable, Leica please note...), so I would have thought that the 'bigger' pixels of the D3 would give better DR. All depends how the sensor chip works, Nikon's last self designed chip was not quite up to the highest standards....
Shame the D3 doesnt have the self cleaning sensor though.
Guy

[guy_mancuso]

Originally Posted by adan

Let me expand a bit...When it comes time for Leica to build a "full-frame" (24x36mm) sensor, they can, of course, simply keep Kodak's CCD architecture as used in the M8 and DMR, and just put more of the same pixels on a bigger sensor. And as sdai says, this will get them to about an 18 Mpixel camera - with about the same noise performance as the M8.

Andy your reading a lot of minds here and it is what i expect just a bigger Kodak CCD in both a R10 and M9. i want Leica to keep the Kodak CCD sensors , i do like them better than any CMOS sensor i have used

Alternatively, they could use a sensor with larger pixels, only a small increase in total pixel count (to 12 or 13 Mpixels) but a big increase in low-light noise performance, a la Canon 5D (and presumably, but we shall see, the Nikon D3).

My bet it is 18mpx or More for Leica

Or they can go somewhere in between, with subtle improvements in both resolution and noise.

I think by the time of release they will figure a way with CCD sensors to be clean at 1250 as it is today at 320 or at LEAST gain one stop more

I just hope Leica does not have blinders on, and looks at all the possibilities before making that decision.

Eye's wide open

A big sensor, of course, has other aspects than pixel count and pixel performance. Less (or more creative) DOF for a given field of view, for example. Corner performance, especially with wide lenses, for another. It will be interesting to see how a Nikon 17-35 or 14-24 or 20mm prime performs on the D3, as regards vignetting or CA. Has Nikon borrowed from Leica/Kodak and offset the microlenses?

I agree this is were Nikon may have it's issues just like Canon doe's today. You just simply can't introduce FF without regard to your glass that can handle that image circle correctly

Carsten: Good points - although at this point I still sort of feel that ALL DSLRs seem to have something missing. Practically any of them, from the D80 up through the D3 (and including the 40D and 5D) could win me over today if they just included a) an SD card option, and b) optional OEM split-image focus screens for manual focus.

The biggest thing there missing is Dyanmic range and they still can't satisfy that need for MF quality with just a lower pixel count. This is the biggest area of image issues. Leica and the Fuji S5 seem to be the only ones trying harder here

Alternatively, the pro Canons (which already offer a and b) could get to me by lopping off about 25% of their height and weight.

reason we are shooting M8's at least part of it


Although as I mentioned before, I'd still have a tilt to Nikon simply because of their backward compatibility to pre-AF non-plastic lenses.

There edge over Canon in big way

I do think both Canon and Nikon have turned a significant corner this week - and Leica is no doubt reviewing their own working specs for the R10 in light of these events (or at least I hope so!)

Completely agree as a industry they have turned a corner , now it it is up to leica to come out with a R10 at 18mpx , 16 bit, FF, CCD, No AA, Faster processor, Smaller camera like a 5D , Focus confirmation, maybe 3 AF zoom lenses and actually go out and kick some royal ass against the bigger companies. i am standing in line waiting

[guy_mancuso]

Originally Posted by guywalder

Guy,
according to Nikon's pdf files both save 12 or 14 bit NEFs (user selectable, Leica please note...), so I would have thought that the 'bigger' pixels of the D3 would give better DR. All depends how the sensor chip works, Nikon's last self designed chip was not quite up to the highest standards....
Shame the D3 doesnt have the self cleaning sensor though.
Guy

Thanks Guy i did not see the PDF this morning, it's 4:30 in the morning and something woke me up . Must have been the crystal ball ringing. LOL

[guywalder]

Originally Posted by adan

A big sensor, of course, has other aspects than pixel count and pixel performance. Less (or more creative) DOF for a given field of view, for example. Corner performance, especially with wide lenses, for another. It will be interesting to see how a Nikon 17-35 or 14-24 or 20mm prime performs on the D3, as regards vignetting or CA. Has Nikon borrowed from Leica/Kodak and offset the microlenses?

thats probably why they have also launched new 14-24 and 24-70 f2.8 lenses!

[hankg]

Originally Posted by carstenw

The D3 isn't an answer to the 1Ds3 or the DMR. This is the interesting part: the D3 is aimed almost directly at (actually slightly above) the 1D3. This is a new tack for Nikon, and it still leaves the option for a D3x open, should they decide that they need to answer the 1Ds3. The 1D-series is Canon's bread-n-butter in the pro market, so the D3 is aimed extremely well. More MP, equivalent speed, higher-res screen (>900000 pixels!), more AF sensors, the ability to track focus by colour, and on and on. This is a really potent move by Nikon.

I think that's absolutely correct. The 1D is the pro workhorse. The 1Ds is more of a studio photographers camera. Many of the medium format shooters who had adopted the original 1Ds have now moved to medium format digital. Many of the 35mm shooters who want hi-res full frame have opted for the 5D. I think the 1Ds market as a result is much reduced.

[sdai]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

Completely agree as a industry they have turned a corner , now it it is up to leica to come out with a R10 at 18mpx , 16 bit, FF, CCD, No AA, Faster processor, Smaller camera like a 5D , Focus confirmation, maybe 3 AF zoom lenses and actually go out and kick some royal ass against the bigger companies. i am standing in line waiting

Guy, the Blackfin BF561 dual core processor used in both the DMR and M8 is already fast enough ... 16-18MP FF 16bit is bottomline anything less than that is simply NOT enough.

You could go fishing or golfing, come back in two months (earliest) ... and look at these new Nikon sample images, heavily smeared off images, softer than your toilet paper, super strong AA filters ... LOL

[guy_mancuso]

Go on vacation until Photokinia 2008 and this one i am going too