Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Printer-friendly copy Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby MULTILINGUAL NIKONIANS English Café (Public) topic #87137
View in linear mode

Subject: "Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price ran..." Previous topic | Next topic
AZ Nikon Silver Member Nikonian since 02nd May 2004Fri 22-Feb-13 10:23 PM
110 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"


Oro Valley, US
          

Maybe this isn't the right forum for this question (sorry) but I sure would like to see something like the 7100 in an FX format. Maybe a cheaper version of the D600?

AZ Nikon

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
walkerr Administrator
22nd Feb 2013
1
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
kentak Silver Member
22nd Feb 2013
2
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
jbloom Gold Member
22nd Feb 2013
3
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
Ray B Gold Member
23rd Feb 2013
4
     Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
km6xz Moderator
23rd Feb 2013
5
          Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
blw Moderator
23rd Feb 2013
7
               Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
jbloom Gold Member
24th Feb 2013
8
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
blw Moderator
23rd Feb 2013
6
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
MEMcD Moderator
25th Feb 2013
9
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
agitater Gold Member
25th Feb 2013
10
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
jbloom Gold Member
25th Feb 2013
11
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
Ray B Gold Member
25th Feb 2013
12
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
agitater Gold Member
26th Feb 2013
14
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
blw Moderator
25th Feb 2013
13
     Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
jbloom Gold Member
26th Feb 2013
15
     Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
agitater Gold Member
26th Feb 2013
17
          Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
jbloom Gold Member
26th Feb 2013
18
               Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
agitater Gold Member
26th Feb 2013
19
     Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
agitater Gold Member
26th Feb 2013
16
Reply message RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price...
grizzly200
08th Mar 2013
20

walkerr Administrator Awarded for his con tributed articles published at the Resources Awarded for his in-depth knowledge in multiple areas Nikonian since 05th May 2002Fri 22-Feb-13 11:11 PM
14461 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#1. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 0


Colorado Springs, US
          

The camera you're talking about is the D600. Prices have trended down for both FX and DX bodies over the years, but I don't know if we'll see a $1200 price point anytime soon.

Rick Walker

My photos:
GeoVista Photography

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

kentak Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Jul 2010Fri 22-Feb-13 11:49 PM
919 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

>Maybe this isn't the right forum for this question (sorry)
>but I sure would like to see something like the 7100 in an FX
>format. Maybe a cheaper version of the D600?

There are folks with expertise in this area, but my understanding is that the cost of producing a FX sensor is considerable, and a big reason for the price differential.

Kent

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

jbloom Gold Member Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments in several forums. Nikonian since 15th Jul 2004Fri 22-Feb-13 11:59 PM
6166 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 0


Wethersfield, US
          

The D7100 has aspects of both the D600 and D800, so I think if an FX equivalent were made it would be more expensive than the D600, not less.

If you want to postulate a cheaper FX camera, I think you would be better off starting with the D600 and asking what could be removed or made less expensive in order to reduce the ultimate cost. But the FX sensor is probably going to dominate the cost analysis for some years to come. (And probably better discussed in an FX forum or the Cafe.)

-- Jon
Wethersfield, CT, USA
Connecticut High School Sports Photos

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Ray B Gold Member Nikonian since 17th Dec 2008Sat 23-Feb-13 09:10 AM
210 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 3


Worthing, GB
          

>The D7100 has aspects of both the D600 and D800, so I think
>if an FX equivalent were made it would be more expensive than
>the D600, not less.
>
I tend to agree. I think there is room for a D600 sensor in a D800 style body with higher frame rates etc, for example (a D750 if you will), but I just don't see a lower spec/price body than the D600 as likely..

When you factor in the greater cost of FX lenses it makes less sense still. Really the budget option for a system, by default, is surely DX?


Regards, Ray

Visit: My Nikonians Gallery

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
km6xz Moderator Awarded for his in-depth knowledge in various areas, including Portraits and Urban Photography Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2009Sat 23-Feb-13 03:15 PM
3301 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 4


St Petersburg, RU
          

It really seems like a misplaced priority, sort of like wishing for tires to come down to $25 before moving to a Ferrari. The cheapest part of FX now is already the camera body, which is a fraction of the commitment in pricy lens costs to get the advantages of the low cost FX camera. I usually tell people who are stretching budget to get a body, before they have appropriate lenses, that FX is not going to be the cure-all for they assume it to be unless they are commited to investing much more that. Dx is getting just too good to abandon without a serious reward in FX.
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Sat 23-Feb-13 06:44 PM
26593 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#7. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 5


Richmond, US
          

Great point, Stan. The camera is just the tip of the iceberg! The OP's profile shows an 18-70DX and 18-200VR lenses, in addition to 70-200/f2.8 and 70-300VR FX lenses. To replace the functionality of the 18-200VR, one would typically go for the 28-300VR, which goes for about $1050. The obvious replacement for the 18-70DX is the 24-85VR, another $500 or so. In the latter case, the FX lens is probably a better lens outright in addition to being slightly wider and with VR. Still, the $2400 for a D600 also implies probably a $500 and possibly $1500 worth of lens upgrades.

And since the OP shows "mostly shoot sports" it's also possible that a lens longer than 300mm is necessary given the change from DX to FX. That 70-300VR almost requires a 150-500 or 50-500 just to keep even in effective focal length. That's another $1000-$1700, and I'm assuming that we aren't going into any of the exotic lenses (eg 500/f4 AFS VR-II).

So switching from a D7000 to a D600 in this context could easily mean $2400 for the body, $500 for a new (and better) mid-range lens, and $1000 to keep even on the long distance sports focal length - and that's even assuming that replacing the 18-200VR isn't necessary.

And all we've done is go to the larger sensor size. If that's necessary for low-light ISO reasons, fine.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
jbloom Gold Member Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments in several forums. Nikonian since 15th Jul 2004Sun 24-Feb-13 10:52 AM
6166 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#8. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 7


Wethersfield, US
          

>So switching from a D7000 to a D600 in this context could
>easily mean $2400 for the body, $500 for a new (and better)
>mid-range lens, and $1000 to keep even on the long distance
>sports focal length - and that's even assuming that replacing
>the 18-200VR isn't necessary.

Not speaking for the OP, of course, but he didn't say anything about switching. If I were shooting sports with a D300 as the top body, as his profile suggests, I'd be thinking about adding an FX body and the necessary lenses for low-light use.

>And all we've done is go to the larger sensor size. If that's
>necessary for low-light ISO reasons, fine.

Exactly. In a dark gym or on a dark football field, FX rules. The problem, though, is that the cheapest available FX body is unlikely to have autofocus performance that makes a sports shooter happy. That's the case right now with the D600, and I imagine it would be no better, perhaps worse, with a hypothetical cheaper FX body.

-- Jon
Wethersfield, CT, USA
Connecticut High School Sports Photos

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Sat 23-Feb-13 06:33 PM
26593 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#6. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 0


Richmond, US
          

A D600 is a D7000 with an FX sensor, focusing screen, prism and mirror. A D7100 version of the D600 would cost... more. Or probably about the same, since it has some higher-end bits like the 51-point AF system. And after a while (obviously it's not coming this week), the price would come down a bit.

But FX at $1200 isn't going to happen that soon. For one thing, the cost of producing sensors is proportional to the square of the area. By definition, FX's area is 848 sq mm, while DX is about 350 sq mm (DX sensors aren't all the same size, as it happens). So FX's area is 2.4x greater than DX's, which means that the FX sensor fabrication cost is going to be about 5-6x greater. Since the sensor is already the most expensive single part of even a DX camera, there are simply barriers to reducing cost of FX. Of course, the other consideration is profit - the bigger, more diversified companies - like Sony - who need to and can afford to buy market share can settle for lower margins. Nikon is almost completely a photography company these days, and going for lower margins isn't part of the program. So while we might see a full-frame Sony for maybe $1700 or so in the relatively near future, I think it will be a while before the D600 comes down to that price.

Mostly we're going to have to wait for the silicon fab industry to drive down the price of fabrication - which is happening, just not as quickly as lots of us would like.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

MEMcD Moderator In depth knowledge in various areas Nikonian since 24th Dec 2007Mon 25-Feb-13 02:36 AM
25743 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#9. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

Hi Stan,

The best chance of an FX body in the $1200.00 price range within the not too distant future is a well used D700.
Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!

Best Regards,
Marty

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Mon 25-Feb-13 03:01 PM
3984 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#10. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 0


Toronto, CA
          

I think Sony just finished squeezing a full-frame, 24mp sensor into a smaller form factor body. $2800 as-is, or $3500, total, if you also want a viewfinder. And all it's got is a fixed, 35mm Zeiss lens - nice but limiting. Sony has created another wonderful oddball.

Things will change with time, as they always do, but I agree with other posters in that the cost of sensor manufacturing and the need to preserve a certain margin mean that Nikon (and other makers) could only consider using a cheaper, lower quality sensor in such a design. Either that or bring out a lower priced full-frame model with an older (and much lower cost) 12mp sensor. A D700 in D500 clothing (or whatever 'sequential' model number is appropriate) perhaps?

It's highly unlikely that any DSLR maker is going to release a $1200 body that offers technical image quality, processing speed or AF that even approaches a D600 or any other FX body currently in the lineup. I mean, why would any maker undercut itself in that way? All the R&D and development and manufacturing costs put into the current FX lineup only to undercut that investment? In the quest for more affordable prices, I think we have to ask what we're willing to give up in image quality and functionality, AF systems speed and other fundamentals.

I think it will happen - a true entry-level, scene mode laden, highly automated FX body - but not until sensor costs in the 16-24mp range come down to a fraction of what they are now. Three years? Five years? Longer? Who knows.

One of the interesting effects of megapixel churn in the sensor fabrication business is that the economies of scale only kick in partially. A five year long, high volume run rate of any quality sensor has never occured. As a result, the cost of manufacturing never drops below a certain level. The quest for better quality, higher density sensors every year keeps costs higher than they would otherwise be. The camera makers long ago started the megapixel advertising and marketing war, and it's most noticeable effect from my perspective is that it has kept sensor costs too high.

I think that as long as computer makers, camera makers and other technology makers continue to insistently advertise faster, smaller, higher resolution and so on above all else, they're essentially trying to push us into thinking about artificial 'needs' which don't translate into anything other than new products offering diminishing returns for the money being asked for them.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
jbloom Gold Member Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments in several forums. Nikonian since 15th Jul 2004Mon 25-Feb-13 04:43 PM
6166 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#11. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 10


Wethersfield, US
          

>One of the interesting effects of megapixel churn in the
>sensor fabrication business is that the economies of scale
>only kick in partially. A five year long, high volume run rate
>of any quality sensor has never occured. As a result, the cost
>of manufacturing never drops below a certain level. The quest
>for better quality, higher density sensors every year keeps
>costs higher than they would otherwise be. The camera makers
>long ago started the megapixel advertising and marketing war,
>and it's most noticeable effect from my perspective is that it
>has kept sensor costs too high.

But which effort has kept them redesigning sensors: better quality, or more megapixels? Probably it's a little of both, but I suspect it's the "better quality" factor that is mostly responsible. That is, manufacturers are chasing a moving target when it comes to sensor performance. When they retool to start making a sensor with newer, better technology, they also can increase the resolution. The costs imposed by the higher resolution are less on the sensor than they are in the processing chain. It's worth noting that the least expensive Nikon DSLR, the D3200, has a 24-MP sensor. Clearly, yields of such devices are good enough to keep the cost reasonable.

>I think that as long as computer makers, camera makers and
>other technology makers continue to insistently advertise
>faster, smaller, higher resolution and so on above all else,
>they're essentially trying to push us into thinking about
>artificial 'needs' which don't translate into anything other
>than new products offering diminishing returns for the money
>being asked for them.

So far, the technology has kept advancing to make each generation of DSLR demonstrably better than the previous one. That's why even the D3200's image quality blows away that of the D300S, which had the best Nikon DX sensor made not so long ago. But that won't continue indefinitely, and I would agree that the incremental improvement from generation to generation is slowing. Once sensor technology matures and fully stabilizes, the situation you describe will probably be the case, as manufacturers get ever more desperate to sell units to customers who don't see a reason to upgrade. We are already seeing that in the P&S market, where sensor quality doesn't dominate the buying decisions. Right now, though, I don't think that's the case in the DSLR market, especially for those who wait two generations between upgrades.

-- Jon
Wethersfield, CT, USA
Connecticut High School Sports Photos

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Ray B Gold Member Nikonian since 17th Dec 2008Mon 25-Feb-13 09:11 PM
210 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#12. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 10


Worthing, GB
          

Hi Howard,

A well thought out and reasoned viewpoint. But by concentrating on the economics, market forces and lifecycles of sensors in isolation we don't address the fact that decent FX sensors need physically bigger and more often therefore more expensive lenses to get the benefits of said sensor.

Everything you say makes sense but I can't see anything other than lenses being the real separation between FX and DX systems and entry points regardless of sensor economics?





Regards, Ray

Visit: My Nikonians Gallery

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Tue 26-Feb-13 02:41 AM
3984 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#14. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 12


Toronto, CA
          

>Everything you say makes sense but I can't see anything other
>than lenses being the real separation between FX and DX
>systems and entry points regardless of sensor economics?

I sense that except for the needs of retouchers, unavoidable heavy cropping, large format printing at high resolution, medium format printing at high resolution intended for viewing at unusually short distances, and just plain pixel peeping, we reached the point of rapidly diminishing returns with the release of the 16mp D4 sensor. Frankly, for my purposes, the D700 was all the resolution I needed when it came out and nothing has changed for me.

What I'm doing with a D7000 and a D800 is pursuing gear with a higher technical specification purely for its own sake.

So maybe the answer to the OP's query has more to do with offering him an oblique response about considering a used D700 (as another poster suggested) and reworking his current lens collection (trading, selling, etc.) to improve its quality (as you've suggested)?

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Mon 25-Feb-13 10:00 PM
26593 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#13. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 10


Richmond, US
          

Lots of great points here. A couple of additional items:

1) Sensors cost roughly the same if their area is the same, regardless of their pixel count, within reason. A 16mp FX is going to cost fairly close to a 24mp FX, since it's the FX that's the dominant cost. 36mp or 60mp may be a different story, although I don't really think so unless one of them crosses one of the technology lines used to create the masks.

2) "A five year long, high volume run rate of any quality sensor has never occured." This is 100% true, but for several of the reasons that you just mentioned, it might be about to happen. For example, Nikon is in the process of standardizing its DX families on 24mp sensors. If they were to standardize on a 36mp sensor for the next entire generation of FX cameras, or at least all of the volume models (the D5 won't count, with only 60-100k per year), AND if Nikon can figure out how to make that sensor last, say, two generations with only output changes, such a sensor could potentially take over the majority of Nikon's DSLR production for several years - and then we might see the benefits of the volume curve. Right now FX is still (STILL!) under 10% of volume, and as Howard points out, that's just not enough to drive economies of scale. This hasn't happened yet because nobody knows how to make a sensor last more than part of a generation. But with lots of things hitting the point of diminishing returns, perhaps it will be possible in the next couple of years.

Of course, if this happens, and the vendors are forced to acknowledge the point of diminishing returns, they will have to be attracting buyers with some other value proposition. And who knows what that might be...

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
jbloom Gold Member Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments in several forums. Nikonian since 15th Jul 2004Tue 26-Feb-13 01:02 PM
6166 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#15. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 13


Wethersfield, US
          

>Of course, if this happens, and the vendors are forced to
>acknowledge the point of diminishing returns, they will have
>to be attracting buyers with some other value proposition.
>And who knows what that might be...

Not me, but I have a suggestion for them, or at least for Nikon: Lots more lens choices. I think they are leaving a lot of money on the table for Sigma, Tamron and Tokina to pick up. And overall unit sales could increase if lens choices existed that don't exist now, such as good DX primes (and updated FX primes) and the long-awaited updates such as the 300/4 with VR and the 80-400 with AF-S, just to name a few.

Consider that once the technology of digital sensors calms down, we will be back to the situation that existed in the film era. People won't need to update their bodies to get better image quality, only to get additional picture-taking technology, and that infrequently. Lenses, however (and other accessories as well) will continue to be needed, no differently than they were before the D1 appeared on the scene. If Nikon could operate successfully in that environment then, why couldn't it operate successfully in a similar environment in the future?

-- Jon
Wethersfield, CT, USA
Connecticut High School Sports Photos

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Tue 26-Feb-13 01:57 PM
3984 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#17. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 15


Toronto, CA
          

>Consider that once the technology of digital sensors calms
>down, we will be back to the situation that existed in the
>film era. People won't need to update their bodies to get
>better image quality, only to get additional picture-taking
>technology, and that infrequently. Lenses, however (and other
>accessories as well) will continue to be needed, no
>differently than they were before the D1 appeared on the
>scene. If Nikon could operate successfully in that environment
>then, why couldn't it operate successfully in a similar
>environment in the future?

Great points, but I don't think sensor technology is going to quiet anytime soon. I see a not-too-distant future in which lenses are eliminated from the photography process altogether. Imagine a flexible optical sensor mounted on the exterior front of the camera. It could do two things: a) feed a 2K, high-refresh-rate EVF, and b) feed the main image processing sensor. The design would eliminate all the aggravations inherent in the mechanical design and optical engineering of the current state-of-the-art lenses.

I'd say that in eight years or so, the first such cameras will appear in a professional usable form factor and optical glass lenses will then begin to go the way of the 35mm film.

If I'm right, it's another reason the sensor wars are going to continue.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
jbloom Gold Member Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments in several forums. Nikonian since 15th Jul 2004Tue 26-Feb-13 03:49 PM
6166 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#18. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 17


Wethersfield, US
          

>I'd say that in eight years or so, the first such cameras will
>appear in a professional usable form factor and optical glass
>lenses will then begin to go the way of the 35mm film.

I'm from Missouri on that one, Howard. I'm leery of jumping on the bandwagon of exciting new technologies until the hard R&D and engineering is done to make them commercially viable. (Anybody bought any bubble memory lately?) Maybe what you describe will come to be, but we're a long way from that right now, and there are many pitfalls between the lab and the production line.

-- Jon
Wethersfield, CT, USA
Connecticut High School Sports Photos

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Tue 26-Feb-13 10:33 PM
3984 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#19. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 18


Toronto, CA
          

>>I'd say that in eight years or so, the first such cameras
>will
>>appear in a professional usable form factor and optical
>glass
>>lenses will then begin to go the way of the 35mm film.
>
>I'm from Missouri on that one, Howard.

And I'm from a place even more skeptical than that. The point is that the optical foil sensor technologies being proposed for practical use right now are being actively pursued. You might say that I think different than you. But like the proverbial Apple a day that keeps the doctor away, the scalability of the technology needs something more than the usual product development process.

>I'm leery of jumping on
>the bandwagon of exciting new technologies until the hard
>R&D and engineering is done to make them commercially
>viable. (Anybody bought any bubble memory lately?)

No bandwagons in sight over here. Can't speak for Connecticut, but apparently you can't see any either. No sir - not a bandwagon, just a mention about R&D directions I'm seeing. I happen to like the tech, so I'm interested in seeing some prototype products.

>Maybe what
>you describe will come to be, but we're a long way from that
>right now, and there are many pitfalls between the lab and the
>production line.

Pitfalls as always, but if the subject is partly about economies of scale, production efficiencies and the application of technologies which end up providing a profitably marketable sub-$1200 FX camera, for now (at least) I think the conversation has to lean toward a more thorough rethink of the image capture chain.

I can also see a future with liquid lens technology - a controllable membrane that is filled with aqueous optical liquid. The key is not the lens itself, but rather the electronic control interface. Somebody is working on it.

As you implied, many such technologies will disappear without a trace, no doubt - 80% of all such things go sideways and die. But since the OP expressed an interest in something that is not profitably producible right now (not as far as I know anyway), I'm ranging farther afield. Hard production costs are a bear, and wishing for something at a price point that is probably unrealistic given current hard costs makes me think about which technologies in the labs and in the R&D pipelines might help make the OP's interest a reality.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Tue 26-Feb-13 01:47 PM
3984 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#16. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 13


Toronto, CA
          

>Lots of great points here. A couple of additional items:
>
>1) Sensors cost roughly the same if their area is the same,
>regardless of their pixel count, within reason. A 16mp FX is
>going to cost fairly close to a 24mp FX, since it's the FX
>that's the dominant cost. 36mp or 60mp may be a different
>story, although I don't really think so unless one of them
>crosses one of the technology lines used to create the masks.

Sensor mnufacturing cost is tied to density, efficiency of the fab and supply chain, and the overhead of the maker. Rejection rates get higher as pixel densities increase. As new fabrication methods are brought on-stream, rejection rates decrease at the lower densities, but at the same time as rejection rates decrease for every higher densities at the top end of the business. So the average rejection/spoilage rate has only trended v-e-r-y slowly downward over the years, and there doesn't appear to be a more favorable trend at this time. The same is true in the TV panel making business.

>2) "A five year long, high volume run rate of any quality
>sensor has never occured." This is 100% true, but for
>several of the reasons that you just mentioned, it might be
>about to happen. For example, Nikon is in the process of
>standardizing its DX families on 24mp sensors. If they were
>to standardize on a 36mp sensor for the next entire generation
>of FX cameras, or at least all of the volume models (the D5
>won't count, with only 60-100k per year), AND if Nikon can
>figure out how to make that sensor last, say, two generations
>with only output changes, such a sensor could potentially take
>over the majority of Nikon's DSLR production for several years
>- and then we might see the benefits of the volume curve.
>Right now FX is still (STILL!) under 10% of volume, and as
>Howard points out, that's just not enough to drive economies
>of scale. This hasn't happened yet because nobody knows how
>to make a sensor last more than part of a generation. But
>with lots of things hitting the point of diminishing returns,
>perhaps it will be possible in the next couple of years.

It's good theory Brian, if only the camera makers would make a deal with a sensor supplier and stick with that supplier across all of the camera maker's model lines for several years. Then, there's the problem of standardization on a particular sensor density. It's not happening - at least not for any longer than Nikon stuck with 10mp for a few years, then 12mp for a few years, etc., etc. Nikon, Canon and all the other camera makers opened a can of expensive, margin-lowering worms when they all decided to engage in megapixel wars.

I agree with your line of thinking, and I think it's possible to standardize now for some significant number of years. The camera makers would all have to then tacitly agree to concentrate on improve the data processing chain. But then one of them would develop, in partnership with a sensor fab, some new engineering which reduced noise yet again and the whole mp/pixel density battle would restart.

>Of course, if this happens, and the vendors are forced to
>acknowledge the point of diminishing returns, they will have
>to be attracting buyers with some other value proposition.
>And who knows what that might be...

Wise words. We could hope for even better quality glass, more powerful CPUs, and more refined processing of the sensor data stream.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

grizzly200 Registered since 18th Dec 2011Fri 08-Mar-13 12:50 AM
707 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#20. "RE: Any chance of a Nikon FX camera in the $1200 price range?"
In response to Reply # 0


Solano County, California, US
          

Sounds like it might be an inferior camera with a big, expensive sensor.
How about a good used D700?

James

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Forums Lobby MULTILINGUAL NIKONIANS English Café (Public) topic #87137 Previous topic | Next topic


Take the Nikonians Tour and learn more about being a Nikonian Wiki /FAQ /Help Listen to our MP3 photography radio channels Find anything on Nikon and imaging technology - fast!

Copyright © Nikonians 2000, 2014
All Rights Reserved

Nikonians®, NikoScope® and NikoniansAcademy™ are trademarks owned by Nikonians.org.
Nikon®, Nikonos® and Nikkor® are registered trademarks of Nikon Corporation.