Nikon D3: The beginning of the end for APS-C / Crop DSLRs!

[GTaudiophile]

I was reading this article on Nikon's D3 and learned something I did not know about it:

The D3 is, of course, Nikon?s first full frame digital. But Nikon have been very smart. You can setup the camera so that when you mount a full-frame capable lens the camera will use the whole sensor but when you mount a DX lens, the camera will only use the part of the sensor that is appropriate. You can choose for this to happen automatically or you can set it to be always one way or the other. You get a lower resolution file with DX lenses, but this is a nice touch.

So Nikon has figured out a way, in Canon speak, to use both EF and EFS lenses on a Full-Frame camera. Cool!

I bet this is only a temporary bridge / stop-gap measure until such time that FF sensors are as cheap to design and manufacture as their smaller APS-C counterparts. This will probably be the case as more companies start rolling out CMOS and FF sensors (Sony, Nikon, etc.). I bet in less than a decade, APSC and EFS lenses will be a thing of the past.

 

[magomago]

We'll see.... even a decade is a long time as far as cameras are concerned ~ especially in the digital age!

And Crop FTW Its a MUCH cheaper alternative and still produces great results, and it doesn't look like anyone is trying to move away from APS-C anytime soon. Ultimately if technology gets good I'd want 3 inch squared sensors that easily fit in current DSLR housing...talk about low noise! Of course then we can go on forever and talk about stuff we'd want..

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

I agree. This feature is above and beyond really really cool. Although 12MP cropped to 1.5x is not that great. Once Nikon gets into the 16MP+ FF sensors with this feature it'd be absolutely awesome. Add in-body IS, weathersealing, and a fast frame rate, and I would call it God.

 

[ElFenix]

i think we're going to need much bigger wafers before 35 mm sensors become accessible for the average person. everything i've seen tells me they're still using the 8" wafers that intel and amd ditched years ago. it's a closely guarded secret how much these things cost, but if you can only get a couple good sensors from a $2000 wafer then something major will need to change.


and again, i haven't seen any benefit from EF-S.

 

[tdawg]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
I agree. This feature is above and beyond really really cool. Although 12MP cropped to 1.5x is not that great. Once Nikon gets into the 16MP+ FF sensors with this feature it'd be absolutely awesome. Add in-body IS, weathersealing, and a fast frame rate, and I would call it God.

The D3 is already weathersealed (it's their top-end pro camera after all) and a 9 or 11 fps rate isn't too sluggish either. I guess all that's missing is in-body IS, though I'm not sure it's better than in-lens solutions. The 5+ MP that you get in DX mode is still pretty handy, considering a ton of people are doing great with the 4.1MP of the D2H.

I definitely can't wait to play with a D3 and if I had $5000 burning a hole in my pocket, I'd be so tempted to get one (barring the performance failing live up to the paper specs).

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: tdawg

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
I agree. This feature is above and beyond really really cool. Although 12MP cropped to 1.5x is not that great. Once Nikon gets into the 16MP+ FF sensors with this feature it'd be absolutely awesome. Add in-body IS, weathersealing, and a fast frame rate, and I would call it God.

The D3 is already weathersealed (it's their top-end pro camera after all) and a 9 or 11 fps rate isn't too sluggish either. I guess all that's missing is in-body IS, though I'm not sure it's better than in-lens solutions. The 5+ MP that you get in DX mode is still pretty handy, considering a ton of people are doing great with the 4.1MP of the D2H.

I definitely can't wait to play with a D3 and if I had $5000 burning a hole in my pocket, I'd be so tempted to get one (barring the performance failing live up to the paper specs).

I'm really crossing my fingers for someone to release a body with the above characteristics rolled all up in one.

Bah, this is entirely moot for all the lenses without IS, which is a LOT. I seriously don't see why people argue over which IS is better (not saying you're arguing, I'm just ranting).

A 70-200mm with IS is better than a 70-200mm with in-body IS. Hey, great. Too bad I can't afford the 70-200mm IS! And even if I could, I would just use the IS on the lens and guess what? Use the in-body IS for, uhhh... all my other lenses that don't have IS?

It's not like the IS inside your lens is suddenly going to vanish into thin air the moment you slap it onto a body with IS...

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Once Nikon gets into the 16MP+ FF sensors with this feature it'd be absolutely awesome. Add in-body IS, weathersealing, and a fast frame rate, and I would call it God.

or Sony Axxx
Sony is rumoured to have an FF sensor (who knows it may even be that the D3 sensor is a Sony, it'almost a cert. that the D300 & A700 share the same sensor same as the A100, D40X & D80 do on the 10.2).

 

[GTaudiophile]

Fuzzy: Canon is a company. Its goal is to maximize profits for its share holders.

They don't want in-body IS for that very reason that you won't spend $1800 on their 70-200 F2.8L IS.

Canon will NEVER go in-body IS. But they will develop more lenses with IS, hence the new EFS 18-55 IS and EFS 55-250 IS.

 

[tdawg]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Once Nikon gets into the 16MP+ FF sensors with this feature it'd be absolutely awesome. Add in-body IS, weathersealing, and a fast frame rate, and I would call it God.

or Sony Axxx
Sony is rumoured to have an FF sensor (who knows it may even be that the D3 sensor is a Sony, it'almost a cert. that the D300 & A700 share the same sensor same as the A100, D40X & D80 do on the 10.2).

I'm pretty sure all the reports state that this is definitely not the case. The new Nikon sensors were designed in-house and fabbed at some unknown plant. No Sony inside.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Once Nikon gets into the 16MP+ FF sensors with this feature it'd be absolutely awesome. Add in-body IS, weathersealing, and a fast frame rate, and I would call it God.

or Sony Axxx
Sony is rumoured to have an FF sensor (who knows it may even be that the D3 sensor is a Sony, it'almost a cert. that the D300 & A700 share the same sensor same as the A100, D40X & D80 do on the 10.2).

D3 sensor is nikon from the ground up. the D300 and A700 share the same sensor. sony doesn't yet need a pro camera but they do need something to replace the D7D and as a step up from the A100. so, maybe they're currently producing a 35 mm sensor, maybe not.

 

[dug777]

Nikon

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Once Nikon gets into the 16MP+ FF sensors with this feature it'd be absolutely awesome. Add in-body IS, weathersealing, and a fast frame rate, and I would call it God.

or Sony Axxx
Sony is rumoured to have an FF sensor (who knows it may even be that the D3 sensor is a Sony, it'almost a cert. that the D300 & A700 share the same sensor same as the A100, D40X & D80 do on the 10.2).

D3 sensor is nikon from the ground up. the D300 and A700 share the same sensor. sony doesn't yet need a pro camera but they do need something to replace the D7D and as a step up from the A100. so, maybe they're currently producing a 35 mm sensor, maybe not.

I still haven't read anywhere that state that. If you look at the nikon spec, it's a different size than the sony press announcement for their 12MP CMOS (unless they have more than one.... which wouldn't make any sense).

or, those specs were wrong

 

[tdawg]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Once Nikon gets into the 16MP+ FF sensors with this feature it'd be absolutely awesome. Add in-body IS, weathersealing, and a fast frame rate, and I would call it God.

or Sony Axxx
Sony is rumoured to have an FF sensor (who knows it may even be that the D3 sensor is a Sony, it'almost a cert. that the D300 & A700 share the same sensor same as the A100, D40X & D80 do on the 10.2).

D3 sensor is nikon from the ground up. the D300 and A700 share the same sensor. sony doesn't yet need a pro camera but they do need something to replace the D7D and as a step up from the A100. so, maybe they're currently producing a 35 mm sensor, maybe not.

Looks like you're right. D300 sensor is sony design. At least that's what robgalbraith.com is reporting: [The D300] uses a Sony-made, self-cleaning, DX-size sensor that delivers 12.21 million pixel photos.

 

[virtuamike]

About damn time. Maybe now they'll get around to making a better body (specifically, the viewfinders could use some work, and it'd be nice to see pro build in a small body).

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Once Nikon gets into the 16MP+ FF sensors with this feature it'd be absolutely awesome. Add in-body IS, weathersealing, and a fast frame rate, and I would call it God.

or Sony Axxx
Sony is rumoured to have an FF sensor (who knows it may even be that the D3 sensor is a Sony, it'almost a cert. that the D300 & A700 share the same sensor same as the A100, D40X & D80 do on the 10.2).

D3 sensor is nikon from the ground up. the D300 and A700 share the same sensor. sony doesn't yet need a pro camera but they do need something to replace the D7D and as a step up from the A100. so, maybe they're currently producing a 35 mm sensor, maybe not.

I still haven't read anywhere that state that. If you look at the nikon spec, it's a different size than the sony press announcement for their 12MP CMOS (unless they have more than one.... which wouldn't make any sense).

or, those specs were wrong

The consensus that I've read so far is that the D300 and the A700 sensors share a common ancestor perhaps. The A700 sensor has the A/D converter built directly into the chip, which the D300 does not so there are differences.

 

[corkyg]

Originally posted by: AndrewR
The A700 sensor has the A/D converter built directly into the chip, which the D300 does not so there are differences.

That is not exactly correct. Solid state imagers ARE A to D converters - always have been. They convert analog scenes to digital format just by "seeing them." Pixels are digital.

 

[tdawg]

Originally posted by: virtuamike
About damn time. Maybe now they'll get around to making a better body (specifically, the viewfinders could use some work, and it'd be nice to see pro build in a small body).

What camera are you talking about here? Just curious.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: corkyg

Originally posted by: AndrewR
The A700 sensor has the A/D converter built directly into the chip, which the D300 does not so there are differences.

That is not exactly correct. Solid state imagers ARE A to D converters - always have been. They convert analog scenes to digital format just by "seeing them." Pixels are digital.

Regardless of the terminology, Sony has done something different with the sensor in the A700 which eliminates a potential noise issue, and it is not implemented in the Nikon (or any other camera). I think the Imaging Resource has a good description of what it is.