2 New Nikon DSLR Rumours

[Alex_Mustard 0]

The crazy world at DPReview is full of seemingly reliable rumours of new Nikons DSLRs, that will be announced in 30 days and on sale in the "fall".

 

The source of these rumours is DPReview member Jeff-C - who has a long history of correctly predicting forthcoming Nikon DSLRs and he clearly has strong insider links with Nikon.

 

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...essage=24110549

 

The rumours are of two cameras. A pro body - D2X and or D2H replacement. And probably of more interest to underwater photographers a D200 replacement. Tantilisingly for underwater photographers the source speculates that:

 

There is another possibility of using an old D200 image: the new D200 replacement is exactly a D200 externally, just some of the internal parts are replaced, like the D40X to the D40 as someone speculated: different sensor, tweaked AF module, and improved image processing engine.

The D200X, for the lack of better name now, does surprised me as it's not up to refresh by Nikon's normal schedule. However, a rumored Canon 40D and a Sony A-10 are coming, a quick "facelift" to the D200 may be one the tricks from Nikon to keep its product portfolio competitive

 

Which means it might fit in existing D200/S5 housings.

 

Anyway, these speculation posts come up all the time. But this one does come from a source with an excellent track record.

 

Alex

[PRC 2]

Er - has any of these updated bodies ever fitted seamlessly into a housing ?

 

Maybe D70 / D70s, so I may have answered myself.......

[ATJ 1]

And D40/D40X.

[pmooney 6]

And D2H , D2X & D2X's.

 

Here's hoping we can keep this pattern up.

[Alex_Mustard 0]

And don't forget F90/F90x, and F801/F801s.

 

Fingers crossed for D200 owners.

 

Personally I think we should write to the camera manufacturers. Not asking for them to keep their camera bodies the same for our benefit. As if they care about underwater photographers. But instead explaining that by keeping camera bodies the same they will save lots of money and that they can use underwater photographers as an excuse!

 

Alex

[PRC 2]

And don't forget F90/F90x, and F801/F801s.

 

I had to look them up with Google !

 

Seems I may not be old ( OK - substitute 'experienced' - for those of a sensitive nature ) enough to remember them....

 

Paul C

[Phil Rudin 485]

Also known as the Nikon N8008, 8008s, N90, N90s in the U.S. market. I had the N8008/8008s in a Tussy housing for years. Great macro setup with a 105 mm.

 

Phil Rudin

[ssra30 0]

Well... I heard from my usual source to certainly start saving money. The official announcement is probably 30-60 days away at least and whatever new model it is, won't be available until end of the year or possibly early next year so Merry Chrismas or slightly late merry chrismas to some lucky people! Unconfirmed but it may be a good news for owner of D2X housing. Also expect some new nifty toys to accompany the new camera.

[Lndr 0]

I'm starting to believe the rumours ... a local camera store is selling the D2Xs for $5595 AUD and its $4200 AUD from HK ... the RRP here is $6800

[Alex_Mustard 0]

Unconfirmed but it may be a good news for owner of D2X housing.

 

My concern would be the prism size with some housings. Made tricker still if an optional action finder is offered.

 

Alex

[ssra30 0]

That's true. All I was told was that from a brief glance, it look identical to D2X but can't tell if it is the exact same body or not. Viewfinder however should definitely be bigger. hmmm.. may be just a new back for the housing?

[Marcelo Krause 1]

According to Thon Hogan, Nikon announcement shouldn’t be far away…

And a lot of new lenses too…

 

Check this:

http://bythom.com/2007comments.htm

 

 

 

Best regards,

Marcelo Krause

[Tom_Kline 143]

According to Thon Hogan, Nikon announcement shouldn’t be far away…

And a lot of new lenses too…

 

Check this:

http://bythom.com/2007comments.htm

Best regards,

Marcelo Krause

 

Better be good given Canon's announcement today, the bar just got higher!

[james 0]

It looks like Thom Hogan is back from his yearly vacation. He posted some of his musings about the upcoming Nikon announcement:

 

"Curiously, what we're about to get appears to be what photographers (other than me) asked for: ISO improvements. By taking the pro body to a full frame, improving the sensor technology, and not pushing the pixels too far upwards, high ISO noise should be relatively well controlled. Indeed, if rumors are correct, Nikon will be allowing you to go to ISOs you didn't know existed (couple that with some of the classic fast Nikkors and, well, so much for carrying the SB-800 with you). Personally, I'll be looking closely at the base ISO results, as that's what will drive my use of the camera. Likewise, the new autofocus system will get a lot of my attention, as it marks a dramatic change for Nikon."

 

He thinks they will be announced at the Osaka Games starting Aug 26th.

 

He also doesn't think it will be the pro body replacement but more like a D200 type camera - since Nikon was so successful w/ that one. Thom's aware of the Canon announcements this week and says that the Nikon announcement won't be comparable to the Canon announcement and people should not compare Nikon Dwhatever to the Canon 1DsIII

 

"Unfortunately, if I'm right about which prototype is being introduced this week, the Canon/Nikon pro user debates will continue unfettered. That's because Canon will up the 1DsII from 16mp to 21mp this week, and Nikon will be once again stuck facing the "fewer pixels" complaint from some users (because they're comparing the wrong camera with the wrong camera). But if you go back and read my roadmap, the high resolution follow up camera from Nikon isn't expected until the middle of next year (and the about-to-be-announced high-speed pro camera is following at about the predicted interval, especially if it doesn't ship until later this fall). Thus, the fireworks are probably not over yet--Nikon appears to be about six months behind Canon in announcing new pro cameras this time, but appears also to be clearly matching or exceeding them this time around (again, making some assumptions about image quality). I can wait six months."

 

Link here:

 

http://www.bythom.com/2007comments.htm

 

Cheers

James

[Alex_Mustard 0]

James, I think that the general consensus amongst Nikon folk including TH is that Nikon will announce 2 cameras - a FF D2H replacement and a APS-C D200 replacement.

 

I think both will have very good High ISO performance, although that is of limited use UW. Both should also have high frame rates. I personally suspect that the D200 replacement might have Sony's new CMOS APS-C sensor.

 

A D2X replacement is expected to appear next year, in a similar way to Canon doing the 1D before the 1DS.

 

Of course this all remains speculation. But there is a good chance that one or both might fit in existing housings.

 

Alex

[craig 0]

The Sony sensor has a 5.5 micron pitch and 12 bit ADC. Not sure how good the high ISO performance will be with that though it could be better than the existing D200. It sure does seem likely that the Sony sensor will be used considering the timing and the persistent rumors that the D200 successor will be bumped to D2x res.

 

What will be interesting is the frame rates of such a D300. TH says that the AF system will be shared between the D3h and D300 and the Sony sensor is capable of 10+ fps. It would be quite surprising to see such high frame rates in a body priced similar to the D200 (though that's a big assumption at this point).

 

It may be a bit disappointing that only the D3h version is announced and not the D3x. It's good to see the 1Ds3 but the specs for that camera are not at all surprising. If Nikon does go full frame with the D3h, it will be interesting to see how it compares to the 1D3 and how much resolution the D3x version offers when it is introduced later on. I hope Nikon goes 14 bit with these sensors; staying 12 bit is OK with DX as far as I'm concerned. The 40D has 14 bit now but I'll be surprised to see that it helps that sensor in any way. If Canon can exceed 12 stops at base ISO with a 10MP 1.6 sensor then they've made impressive progress.

 

I think the 14-24 f/2.8 lens rumor is intriguing. I've felt for a while that 13-14 on the wide end is enough and that I'd rather have that with f/2.8 than the existing 12-24. Sadly, I'd hoped for a 14-28 or longer on the long end, especially if it's not a DX lens. I've never been a fan of the 12-24. At least Nikon will finally add VR to their long primes.

[herbko 0]

The 40D has 14 bit now but I'll be surprised to see that it helps that sensor in any way. If Canon can exceed 12 stops at base ISO with a 10MP 1.6 sensor then they've made impressive progress.

 

The area of the 1.6x sensor is about 2/3 the area of the 1.3x sensor, so the signal-to-noise of the 40D should be within one stop of the 1DIII at the same exposure and ISO. Even if by the usual definition of dynamic range, max signal/noise level, the sensor is not quite 12 bits, there is still information below the RMS noise level and the extra resolution will still help. It'll make the parts below noise level fuzzy instead of banded.

 

Looking at it another way, with a 14-bit A/D the parts of a shot that are 2 stops under exposed will have the same sensor output as the same sensor with a 12-bit A/D set to 2 stops higher ISO. Assume the same sensor, the output of an ISO 100 shot with the 14-bit A/D will be no worst than an ISO 400 shot with 12-bit A/D. If nothing else, it will give you room for underexposure in cases where you want to really be sure to preserve the highlights.

 

I'm not surprised that Canon put the 14-bit A/D in the 40D. It probably cost them less to make just one Digic III and associate IO that process 14-bit and use it for all the camera than to make 2 versions. The only incremental cost is a little more memory for the same shot buffer.

[Marcelo Krause 1]

Sony has announced a new sensor, 12.5 mgpx and 10.4 fps, 12-bits.

I think this will likely be the sensor on the new D3H.

 

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082012sony12mpcmos.asp

 

Best regards,

 

Marcelo Krause.

[craig 0]

The area of the 1.6x sensor is about 2/3 the area of the 1.3x sensor, so the signal-to-noise of the 40D should be within one stop of the 1DIII at the same exposure and ISO. Even if by the usual definition of dynamic range, max signal/noise level, the sensor is not quite 12 bits, there is still information below the RMS noise level and the extra resolution will still help. It'll make the parts below noise level fuzzy instead of banded.

I'm not sure what the raw, base ISO capability if the 1D3 sensor is, so assuming 1 stop less doesn't tell me what the 40D sensor will be. We know that the D200 sensor can achieve 12 bits and not any more, the 40D is a newer design but has to make do with a slightly smaller pixel. If Clark is to be believed, the D200 has at least of a stop of improvement available, so I could see the 40D sensor offering 13 stops. I think that would be remarkable though.

 

Looking at it another way, with a 14-bit A/D the parts of a shot that are 2 stops under exposed will have the same sensor output as the same sensor with a 12-bit A/D set to 2 stops higher ISO. Assume the same sensor, the output of an ISO 100 shot with the 14-bit A/D will be no worst than an ISO 400 shot with 12-bit A/D. If nothing else, it will give you room for underexposure in cases where you want to really be sure to preserve the highlights.

If what you are saying is that 14-bit gives you a 2 stop improvement in ISO performance, as would be suggested by your explanation, then absolutely not. If that were the case, all we'd need for great high ISO would be 20 bit converters!

 

The output of the sensor, after amplification, is referenced to a set voltage which is the maximum voltage the ADC responds to. This is independent of the number of bits in the converter. The "extra" bits added in the 14 bit converter, therefore, aren't at the "top", they're at the "bottom". The analog voltage representing 2 stops below maximum will be 1/4 of maximum voltage regardless of bit depth or ISO. If a sensor has less than 12 stops of range, then both the 12 and 14 bit converters will be digitizing noise in their lowest bits.

 

Assuming the same sensor with substantially less than 12 stops of dynamic range, both the 12 bit and 14 bit converters are capable of delivering the full range of the sensor and the 14 bit converter does not offer better performance at ANY ISO. There may be qualitative differences in noise in cases where the sensor performance is very near 12 stops as is the case with most DSLR sensors today. 14 bit converters may offer potential advantages at lower ISOs in that case. I would like to see a demonstration of that, however.

 

I don't doubt that the 40D could benefit from better converters or that it is capable of slightly better than 12 stops, but I would just be surprised if the benefit is substantial. The proof will be in the testing, and that proof will probably NOT come from dpreview.

 

It should also be noted that 14 bit converters are harder to make and can also be noisier than 12 bit ones. I have no doubt that Canon has a handle on that, but it makes the situation murkier still as a 14 bit converter *could* result in worse performance theoretically.

 

I'm not surprised that Canon put the 14-bit A/D in the 40D. It probably cost them less to make just one Digic III and associate IO that process 14-bit and use it for all the camera than to make 2 versions. The only incremental cost is a little more memory for the same shot buffer.

I think that's right and, furthermore, Canon gets mileage out of the branding of 14 bit. Just as Canon has convinced people that they are better because of the "Digic" branding (much like the "L" branding), Canon will take marketing advantage of their 14 bit converters whether they offer performance benefits at 1.6x crops or not.

[Rocha 0]

Interesting rumors, I've been out for so long! A new D300 (or whatever it is called) with D2x focus capabilities would really tempt me...

[herbko 0]

If what you are saying is that 14-bit gives you a 2 stop improvement in ISO performance, as would be suggested by your explanation, then absolutely not. If that were the case, all we'd need for great high ISO would be 20 bit converters!

 

The output of the sensor, after amplification, is referenced to a set voltage which is the maximum voltage the ADC responds to. This is independent of the number of bits in the converter. The "extra" bits added in the 14 bit converter, therefore, aren't at the "top", they're at the "bottom".

 

Perhaps I didn't word that very well. I'm not saying that the 14-bit converter will give 2 stops better ISO performance, and I agree that the extra bits are at the "bottom" of the range. Let me try again with an example....

 

Set the 14-bit camera at ISO 100 and the 12-bit camera at ISO 400. If the exposure is correct for ISO 400, both cameras will give the same signal-to-noise raw outputs with the same number of useful quantization levels with the top two bit of the 14-bit camera always 00. However, the shot of the 14-bit camera will not be over exposed if the "correct" exposure happened to be ISO 100. So in effect you can shoot ISO 100-400 exposure at ISO 100 setting and get at least a good 12-bit output. If the exposure level is ISO 400, the 14-bit camera will not give a better output than the other one. If you happen to over expose what you thought was an ISO 400 exposure, you're protected by a couple of stops. I think the high dynamic range mode in the 1DIII is doing something like this.

 

What's more interesting is that you can think of exposing the bright parts of you image at ISO 100 ( the sunball for example ) and dark parts at ISO 400, and bring the ISO 400 parts up to ISO 100 in post processing. The signal-to-noise of the dark parts will be no better than an ISO 400 exposure, but it would not be limited by quantization problems.

 

The analog voltage representing 2 stops below maximum will be 1/4 of maximum voltage regardless of bit depth or ISO. If a sensor has less than 12 stops of range, then both the 12 and 14 bit converters will be digitizing noise in their lowest bits.

 

As I mentioned before even if the sensor has less than 12 stops of range as defined by the RMS noise level, there is still information below this level. It's better to record it than to cut it off, especially in cases where you have to bring up the darker levels for dynamic range reasons.

[craig 0]

OK, I get that. I certainly wasn't thinking in those terms before!

 

What you say, though, is predicated on the sensor delivering meaningful extra information beyond the capabilities of a 12 bit ADC. While I agree that there's some value to the extra bits even when a full two stops isn't available, it's value is diminished.

 

After reading Clark again and thinking about it more, I would not be surprised if the 14 bit converters do offer meaningful value in the 40D. I believe the 40D should be able to exceed 12 stops at base ISO. I doubt it will above base ISO but it doesn't need to be worth it. Prior to that, I didn't see the 40D as being meaningfully better than the D200. We still need to see tests, but I can see the 40D being a better UW camera than the D200. If the D200 successor comes in at 12.5MP like expected, it's not clear to me whether the extra resolution or the extra stop is more valuable.

 

I read from a generally knoledgable source that today's DSLR 14 bit converters are limited to 78dB which would be about 13 bits. If that's true (which would be a bit surprising to me) then the value of 14 bits is only one stop over 12, not two like it should be. Any idea whether that's the case?

[ssra30 0]

Well, I just heard that the official annoucnement will definitley be tomorrow (8/23rd). Little that I heard sounds promising. It won't compete with DsIII in certain aspects but otherwise it should hold up very well against anything else that Canon has to offer. It is a good thing I did not buy the 17-55mm yet either

[herbko 0]

I read from a generally knoledgable source that today's DSLR 14 bit converters are limited to 78dB which would be about 13 bits. If that's true (which would be a bit surprising to me) then the value of 14 bits is only one stop over 12, not two like it should be. Any idea whether that's the case?

 

That seems to be close to the state-of-the-art:

 

http://www.analog.com/IST/SelectionTable/?...on_table_id=203

 

The 12-bit A/D don't have 12 effect bits either, so the 14-bit ones are about 1.5 bits better.

 

 

Well, I just heard that the official annoucnement will definitley be tomorrow (8/23rd). Little that I heard sounds promising. It won't compete with DsIII in certain aspects but otherwise it should hold up very well against anything else that Canon has to offer. It is a good thing I did not buy the 17-55mm yet either

 

Has anybody checked amazon.com

[craig 0]

I have seen specs as high as 78dB for 12 bit converters as well. That would exceed their resolution though.

 

Assuming 12 bit converters can do 74dB or better and 14 bit converters do 78dB, a 14 bit converter only offers 2/3 stop over 12 bit. Julia Borg, the source of this information, claims that an engineer gave her these numbers and it corresponds to her observation that the 1D3 only offers a 2/3 stop improvement over the 5D.

 

Perhaps the reason we haven't seen 14 bit converters before now is that they have been impractical as well as unjustified in these systems. I would think this would improve with time, but for now expecting a 2 stop improvement with 14 bit is, perhaps, too optimistic.

 

FYI: Julia Borg is a knowledgeable photographer and contributor at the dpreview forums. Her father, Iliah Borg, is the author of Raw Magick, a well respected raw converter for Windows.