Nikon to come up with a new camera soon.

[Deadtrees]

This guy who I can trust 99.9% on Nikon rumors said the following:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nikon will come out with a new camera that has at least 24MP and really high image quality.
It seems like Nikon is redirecting what was considered to be D3X or D4.
It could be D900 level of camera.
It'd excel in portrait shootings...
There might be big changes in the image sensor and Xspeed.
As always, it's still a rumor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If so:
Though Nikon made great cameras, its nasty JPEG image processing problems left serious doubts. I'm glad that Nikon is making "big changes in the image sensor and Xspeed."

 

[angry hampster]

Gotta compete with the 5DII.

 

[ElFenix]

i'm guessing that's the announcement at the wedding photographers thing that was advertised in rangefinder magazine

 

[virtuamike]

Originally posted by: Deadtrees
This guy who I can trust 99.9% on Nikon rumors said the following:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nikon will come out with a new camera that has at least 24MP and really high image quality.
It seems like Nikon is redirecting what was considered to be D3X or D4.
It could be D900 level of camera.
It'd excel in portrait shootings...
There might be big changes in the image sensor and Xspeed.
As always, it's still a rumor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If so:
Though Nikon made great cameras, its nasty JPEG image processing problems left serious doubts. I'm glad that Nikon is making "big changes in the image sensor and Xspeed."

Hrm, I don't really consider jpeg processing a priority in a camera that's targeted for portrait shooting.

 

[996GT2]

Sounds awesome...now Nikon will have something to compete with Canon and Sony on the high MP full frame front.

On an off topic note:

When Nikon releases their next consumer camera, what are they possibly going to name it? The D40, D50, D60, D70, D80, D90, and D100 are already taken, so if they release another entry or mid level consumer camera then they couldn't possibly follow their previous naming scheme, could they?

 

[andylawcc]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
On an off topic note:
When Nikon releases their next consumer camera, what are they possibly going to name it? The D40, D50, D60, D70, D80, D90, and D100 are already taken, so if they release another entry or mid level consumer camera then they couldn't possibly follow their previous naming scheme, could they?

start all over again from D10?

 

[ElFenix]

D60x?

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
D60x?

That would just confuse consumers like the D40x did. Plus, with the D60 already being a 10 MP camera, the "x" makes less sense on the D60.

And then there's the D90...they can't move it up into triple digits since that's reserved for their consumer-professional bridge cameras, so they don't really have anywhere to go there.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

D60GT KO Superclocked

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
Sounds awesome...now Nikon will have something to compete with Canon and Sony on the high MP full frame front.

any bets that it's a derivative of the Sony sensor in the A900?

 

[Aharami]

D90 FTW

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Aharami
D90 FTW

wha?

 

[foghorn67]

DWROON (D We Ran Out of Numbers)

 

[Munky]

What are these "nasty JPEG image processing problems" Nikon cameras supposedly have? I haven't noticed any such thing with mine.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: munky
What are these "nasty JPEG image processing problems" Nikon cameras supposedly have? I haven't noticed any such thing with mine.

Where have you heard this? I'm not a Nikon user, so maybe I'm missing something, but I interact with enough online photogs who use Nikon that I figured I would have come across this issue at some point...

 

[soydios]

Originally posted by: munky
What are these "nasty JPEG image processing problems" Nikon cameras supposedly have? I haven't noticed any such thing with mine.

Agreed, Nikon's JPEG processing has always been fine. Perhaps the OP was thinking of the Panasonic Venus engine?

 

[Deadtrees]

Originally posted by: soydios

Originally posted by: munky
What are these "nasty JPEG image processing problems" Nikon cameras supposedly have? I haven't noticed any such thing with mine.

Agreed, Nikon's JPEG processing has always been fine. Perhaps the OP was thinking of the Panasonic Venus engine?

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39631


http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=40023

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=40091

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39982

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39840

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39711

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39604


http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=40250


If that's not a problem, I don't know what'd be a problem.

There're tons of user submitted pictures showing so called 'gray cast' problems. This guy who is regarded as the Nikon fanboi is even gathering user resources demanding Nikon fix the problem. Nikon does know that the problem exists as they've been getting chain letters from users but haven't come up with any answers.

So far, the only solution to avoid this problem is to shoot in RAW and NOT use Nikon's RAW processing programs.

 

[troytime]

Originally posted by: Deadtrees

Originally posted by: soydios

Originally posted by: munky
What are these "nasty JPEG image processing problems" Nikon cameras supposedly have? I haven't noticed any such thing with mine.

Agreed, Nikon's JPEG processing has always been fine. Perhaps the OP was thinking of the Panasonic Venus engine?

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39631


http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=40023

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=40091

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39982

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39840

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39711

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39604


http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=40250


If that's not a problem, I don't know what'd be a problem.

That doesn't mean much to me.
Hand me a canon, or any other brand and i'm sure i can take a bunch of shitty pictures and post them here with a "look at XXXXXXXXX's nasty JPG processing!!!"

Seems like you're trolling IMO

Now, if those pics are exact settings RAW+JPG, then i would like to see the untouched RAW files to see how they were processed.

 

[Deadtrees]

Originally posted by: troytime

Originally posted by: Deadtrees

Originally posted by: soydios

Originally posted by: munky
What are these "nasty JPEG image processing problems" Nikon cameras supposedly have? I haven't noticed any such thing with mine.

Agreed, Nikon's JPEG processing has always been fine. Perhaps the OP was thinking of the Panasonic Venus engine?

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39631


http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=40023

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=40091

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39982

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39840

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39711

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39604


http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=40250


If that's not a problem, I don't know what'd be a problem.

That doesn't mean much to me.
Hand me a canon, or any other brand and i'm sure i can take a bunch of shitty pictures and post them here with a "look at XXXXXXXXX's nasty JPG processing!!!"

Seems like you're trolling IMO

Now, if those pics are exact settings RAW+JPG, then i would like to see the untouched RAW files to see how they were processed.

Yes, any cameras can produce shitty images but the problem like that is simply a problem. Look at the 2nd link and see the comparison between Olympus E420 and D300. Don't you get it? So many Nikon users have been reporting this problem and do you think they're all trolling? Yeah, people spend some thousands of dollars so that they can troll. Look, there's a problem and attitude like yours don't benefit anyone. Think about the Canon 1D MK3 AF problem, when users pointed out the obivious problem that they're experiencing, a person like you had nothing better to say but what you've said here.

Above links are only small portion of reported problems. If you care to see thousands of more, below is the link. Some are people discussing this problem, some are people gatering resources and thoughts, but you'll see more pictures as you go through the posts there.

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/zbo...ord=%C0%FA%C3%A4%B5%B5


http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/zbo...ord=%C0%FA%C3%A4%B5%B5

 

[soydios]

Explain the problem to me. I don't see anything that can't be corrected by simply setting your camera correctly. I find that Adobe's RAW converters are more flat and gray than out-of-camera JPEGs, at least with my D50.

 

[Deadtrees]

D50 does not have gray cast problem. Only D3/D300/D700/D90 suffers from this problem.
Simply put, the problem is about loss of color information. Contax ND also have similar problem as this one.

One expert argues that this problem is caused by Nikon's aggresive CMOS gain control. Using Nikon's own adjustment application, he changed the value of Gain control and the problem no longer appeared. (http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...num&desc=asc&no=37519)

The other expert argues that the problem is about image processing algorithms.


http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=39763

Look at the sample above. The color of leaves are brown yet D300 shows them as gray/black whereas D200 shows them as brown.

 

[troytime]

Can you link to a resource that all of us can read and understand?
Maybe on a site like dpreview, photo.net, fredmiranda.com?

I don't read these sites daily, but i check them all semi regularly...
I have yet to see the thousands of people complaining.

I don't have an attitude. I'm just tired of seeing you bash nikon for something that isn't as major as you make it seem.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

The first slrclub links don't convince me there is an issue. A lot of it appears to be lighting (the face one there is a camera lens just to the right of the face that looks like it could cast a shadow there easily). I am not saying there isn't an issue, but those pics don't prove there is one.

Show me the raw (unedited or processed) and jpeg at the same time for a picture. These different picture stuff doesn't entirely convince me, although I could see that there at least needs to be more investigation.

 

[Munky]

Anyone can post shitty pics on a forum and blame it on the camera. Not to mention that I can't read what was written, and can't tell what the settings were for each camera, with things like white balance, exposure, and about a dozen other ways you can adjust the image parameters on each camera. To tell you one thing, I've done my share of pixel-peeping, comparing RAW files to JPEGs on my D40, and concluded that the differences were small enough that it wouldn't matter.

 

[soydios]

I have a D90. Give me a test to run on it, and I will. Though I can't open RAW files at the moment, because Adobe has stopped updating Lightroom 1.4. :frown:

EDIT: Now I can do RAW D90 files, since I just bought Lightroom v2.1. It works just as well as Lightroom 1 did, FWIW. Except Collections became harder to use: you can now only put folders OR pictures in a Collection, instead of both. So you have to do more nesting. :frown: