#3. "RE: It is Official: NIKON releases 24.2 Meg Nikon D3200 plus new lens" In response to Reply # 2 Fri 20-Apr-12 01:53 PM by spootdad
This came to my mind as well. After the initial rash of "something must be wrong with the D7000" messages, things settled down, but Nikon has seemed to take note, as evidenced by their release of things to do and not do for the D800, which, due to price, would seem to be aimed at a more well-heeled and so possibly more experienced clientele. Since the D3200 is aimed directly at the hobbyist, won't they have to make a more intense campaign to get the word out? It seems like they are trying to set themselves up for some early bad PR.
Edited to add: I am not implying there were systematic problems with the D7000 or D800, nor am I expecting any with this new camera. From the rocking of the cradle to the rolling of the hearse, the going up was worth the coming down
#5. "RE: It is Official: NIKON releases 24.2 Meg Nikon D3200 plus new lens" In response to Reply # 4
This makes me less satisfied with my D7000 now Oh, well! At least it was 8 months, not 3-4 when I got my D80, before the D90 came out!
Still the D7000 has 2 SD Slots where the D3200 has 1. The D3200 appears to not have the autofocus motor connector. The RAW is less: 12-bit compressed only. The AF system has many less points (11 to D7k's 39). Half the battery life of the D7k.
OK, now I feel a bit better: many of the key features seem to be removed from the camera. Still... it's a nice body, but with those deficits wouldn't trade my D7000.
#6. "RE: It is Official: NIKON releases 24.2 Meg Nikon D3200 plus new lens" In response to Reply # 2
San Diego, US
>Will there be panic in the streets over the resolution of our >lenses? This is like an FX that's 60mp.
I think it might be time to panic. Well not really panic but a focus (no pun) on how much resolution a lens provides. For instance the 18-55m DX VR kit lens might only provide 20 meg resolution, and any resolution greater than that provided by the sensor is wasted with that lens. I know there are more informative metrics like MTF curves (which I don't really understand), but nice easy number, resolution expressed in pixel count, for lenses, might be useful.
#8. "RE: It is Official: NIKON releases 24.2 Meg Nikon D3200 plus new lens" In response to Reply # 2
Upper Coomera, AU
Hi Brian, The lens issue will be interesting. We will have to wait and see how the pro DX lenses 10-24,12-24 & 17-55 perform on this camera. Will the consumer/prosumer lenses be able to perform on a sensor this big? Will we need to go to FX lenses to realise the resolving power of this sensor?
#9. "RE: It is Official: NIKON releases 24.2 Meg Nikon D3200 plus new lens" In response to Reply # 0 Tue 24-Apr-12 02:19 PM by nrothschild
Regarding entry level lens resolution...
System resolution has been traditionally been modeled by the following formula:
1/s^N = 1/a^N + 1/b^N
s = system resolution a = component 1 (sensor) b = component 2 (lens) N = some constant between 1 and 2; pick the one you like best
That formula is empirical, not theoretical. It was basically developed to model what was observed by testing lenses and film. I've never seen any research into the applicability of this formula on digital. And because it is empirical there is a huge assumption here.
Because reasonable and knowledgeable people can endlessly argue the value of N and there is no hard established value, we can only make certain observations about the general behavior of the formula...
Given equal resolution of the components (sensor and lens), if N=1 then the system resolution will be 1/2 the resolution of the components. As N trends toward 2 the resolution heads to about 70%.
Where the resolution is unequal, which is the most likely event, the system resolution will always be less than the weakest component, and the higher the value of N the closer the resolution will approach that weaker component.
The formula makes no distinction between the lens and the film (sensor).
The upshot of all this is that if you increase the resolution of one of the components the system resolution will always increase. How much it increases depends on the specific resolutions and the value of N, which could debated forever until some research lab revisits this formula.
This all suggests that the D3200 will provide improved resolution, compared to the predecessor 12 and 16 mpx cameras, with any fully functional modern Nikkor, even the least expensive 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses.
It also suggests that the performance improvement will not be nearly as good as what would be obtained with high end lenses that are presumably sharper.
Some discussions in the D800 forum support the validity of this formula, at least in the general way I phrased it. Many D800 users report surprisingly good results from lenses that were less than stellar on lower res sensors.
I would suggest that the purpose of the D3200 is to blow that Digital Rebel out of the water and make huge money for Nikon after capturing the entire entry level camera business, so that Nikon can throw more R&D at the D400 project
Everyone is happy except the spouses of the D3200 buyers, who need to suffer through the NAS that causes the entry level buyer to pursue those high end lenses and the new D400
Edit: because a strict interpretation of diffraction forumlas puts the diffraction limit of the D3200 between f/5.6 and f/6, any lens shot around f/5.6 - f/8 is going to have, by definition, a resolution that is actually quite close to the D3200 sensor.
And the typical bundled lenses are already at f/5.6 wide open over some or most of their range. In order to truly optimize the results from that sensor the lens will not only need to be shot at wider apertures but also be diffraction limited at those wider apertures, especially in the f/4 area.
As has been discussed here in depth, there is a lot of wiggle room in the diffraction computations, to the extent of a stop or two, but I think the effect is to tend to more or less equalize the component resolutions from about f/5.6 out to f/8-f/11.