Your Move Nikon..50 MP?

sevencrossing

I think this thread proves, yet again. No matter how many different cameras nikon bring out, they are never going to please all of the people, all of time

The feature I would like is, more dynamic range and lower noise, at the mid ISO values
Even with landscapes, there is often subject movement. At dawn I sometimes need ISO 400
I dont know if this is dependant on mp, but better IQ at ISO 400 -800 gets my vote

I would vote a bigger buffer rather than more fps ( but I think the D810 has this )

kenadams

I guess it is inevitable in the end. I'm fairly sure though that imaging pipelines will be developed so they can keep up. About lenses.. Thom Hogan stated back in 2006 that with the new D80, sensors were starting to boast more potential than the available lenses were capable of using.

16 bit raw, now there's a thing. This could be cool, but only when someone puts a lid on the venerable jpeg as it is today, since most of us don't print anyway to standards that require this.

rmp

When it comes to actual use, I use the D810 when the subject is not moving and the light is good or controllable. I use the D4 when the subject is moving or the light is poor or uncontrollable. If I had to use only one camera, it would be the D4: without question. The low light capability of the D4 makes it the king of cameras. More pixels would be fun for large prints, but count me in the more dynamic rage, low noise group.

sevencrossing

Hopefully we will see a camera that combines the advantages of the D4(s) and D8xx
may be the D4x that does not cost the earth

Msmoto

OK, RMP may wish to comment on this image...a 4.3 MB jpeg is shown here:



See a bit larger here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/15940695348/sizes/o/

This was captured with a D800E, 24-70mm f/2.8 Nikkor, 16 seconds, f/14, ISO 100, lighting was "painting" with three LED flashlights. The final image is printed on aluminum at 65 inches by 30 inches from a Tiff file of 1.4GB. LR took more than five minutes to export. When viewed from a couple feet it remains and incredibly sharp image. I cannot see how more pixels would have improved the image.

Is the megapixel thing just a marketing issue? I have no idea, but for me, I would have no idea as to how to utilize a better body than the D8XX series.....

Of course i can always learn, I suppose.

donaldejose

How do you get a 4.3 mb jpeg from a D800e? Extensive cropping? Set to jpeg basic?

Also, maybe Nikon needs Expeed 5 before it can go to 50mp? Apparently Cannon can simply use more than one processor in a body but Nikon cannot.

Ironheart

...Also, maybe Nikon needs Expeed 5 before it can go to 50mp? Apparently Cannon can simply use more than one processor in a body but Nikon cannot.

I saw Hearty and Seven comment on this earlier as well. The nikon 1 series shows how easily copious amounts of data can be handled by expeed (60 fps at 18mp) The reason Canon has to resort to multiple engines is that they can't figure out how to make one go fast enough. Nikon (along with Fujitsu) have the ability to pump up the expeed as far as they need to go, both by turing up the clock, as well as by having multiple pipelines and channels within the architecture.

This is of no concern, nothing to see here, move along :-)

henrik1963

In the end only one thing is important: Image Quality.

With the D8xx + good glass we are at a point now where most people do not need more image quality. They may want better AF and better metering. A few will want to take pictures in the dark so they want better low light capability. In my view making more of the same is a dead end for Nikon. Only a few will buy.

When we get rid of the shutter and read from the sensor new things will happen - you can in theory have different iso values in the same picture = better DR. You can have build in ND grad filter.

I think the real push will come from software. Trying to get better image quality from glass = pay Leica prices = no go. Software will deal with less than perfect data.

In the end we will have better than D8xx/D4 image quality out of a pocket camera - or maybe a mirror less camera - and it may have 100 MP. And Apple like software will deal with the crappy data and make perfect pictures - what style do you want? What size do you want to print? Do you want it glossy? Then push the red button.

Photobug

@kanuck: Canon is taking a much needed step here....the are having many of their die-hard shooters, jumping ship and getting the D810 and loving it.

Now, as far as megapixels goes...fine by me, BUT, I would much rather have better dynamic range with the added bonus of 16-bit RAW files. This is the area that will really make your images come alive. Medium format image quality @ D-SLR pricing. That to me is the winning ticket for Nikon (or Canon).

As for lenses, I have a strong belief that all my lenses will be able to handle the added MP.

+1 Golf007sd - give me the improved dynamic range. Really don't care about the number of MegaPixels. If I was Canon the design criteria should be to match or exceed the D810 specs. Canon could match the number of megapixels or leap frog over Nikon. It will be interesting to watch.

rmp

In response to a posting by msmoto --
donaldejose said "How do you get a 4.3 mb jpeg from a D800e? Extensive cropping? Set to jpeg basic?

The actual picture was shot as a raw file. The raw file was post processed in Lightroom then exported as a tiff file for printing. That tiff file was huge: 1.4GB. Msmoto converted it to jpg to make it small enough to post on the web.

Many people have said the picture of the statue of O. Henry looks better that the statue itself.

WestEndFoto

henrik1963, I agree with everything that you say except the last paragraph.

Lenses are close to possible technical limits now. For example, assuming a constant f-stop, the only way to get more sharpness at f/16 is to go to a larger format, not smaller. Most other image quality factors face similar tradeoffs. It is why the Sigma Arts are so big.

Sure, with engineering advances, additional IQ will come, but the improvement will be marginal, perhaps double. What you are talking about is an order of magnitude and efforts to achieve that will run smack into the laws of physics

henrik1963

@WestEndFoto: In the film days we had a few very good small cameras using 35mm film. I dont see why we can't have FF pocket cameras in the future. Sony has a smallish FF sort-of-pocket-camera out now. Leica has a smaller than DSLR mirror less camera out. I think it should be possible to shrink that some and add way more features.

Making larger sensors may be a cheaper way to increase image quality than to make better glass.

donaldejose

If Nikon can "pump up the Expeed as fast as they need to go" then it should not be hard to get many more fps out of any of the Nikon bodies.

Ironheart

I know we've covered this here before, so I'll quickly summarize, otherwise we will have to go off thread :-)
The elaborate dance between the autofocus grabbing at something, the mirror raising, the shutter curtains rolling, and mirror quickly closing so that the autofocus can "see" again, is the main culprit. I bet they can make that dance go at 20 fps, but the autofocus will be starved for moments of light, and the resultant shake from the mass of the mirror moving that quickly makes for blurry pictures. Hence the canon counterbalance motor. My lowly nikon 1 can do 20 fps with full autofocus because of no mirror and electronic shutter.

retread

I will weigh the plusses and minuses when it comes and then decide. Pixels count for me especially when the telephoto is not long enough. In a D8XX body is good in a F4 not so much. Priced out of my range.

WestEndFoto

@WestEndFoto: In the film days we had a few very good small cameras using 35mm film. I dont see why we can't have FF pocket cameras in the future. Sony has a smallish FF sort-of-pocket-camera out now. Leica has a smaller than DSLR mirror less camera out. I think it should be possible to shrink that some and add way more features.

Making larger sensors may be a cheaper way to increase image quality than to make better glass.

I don't think the camera is the issue. They should be able to make an FX DSLR 12mm wider and 8mm taller than a D3300.

The lenses are the issue.

WestEndFoto

I know we've covered this here before, so I'll quickly summarize, otherwise we will have to go off thread :-)
The elaborate dance between the autofocus grabbing at something, the mirror raising, the shutter curtains rolling, and mirror quickly closing so that the autofocus can "see" again, is the main culprit. I bet they can make that dance go at 20 fps, but the autofocus will be starved for moments of light, and the resultant shake from the mass of the mirror moving that quickly makes for blurry pictures. Hence the canon counterbalance motor. My lowly nikon 1 can do 20 fps with full autofocus because of no mirror and electronic shutter.

That is the issue. It is why the Canon 1DX stops auto-focussing at its top FPS.

kanuck

I agree although I don't think the D800 line will be refreshed. They will probably release a different model but not for another year at least as the D810 is not even a year old yet.

FrenchRiviera

50 MP ... what for ?

Less moiré ... yes but how much less moiré ?
Resolution , what for ? I already printed a 160x240 frame with D800E , it was perfect .

But ...

Don' t forget bigger resolution would affect homogeneity with worse performances at the periphery ( especially with wide angles ) , less dynamique with increasing sensibility , slower FPS , more space on cards .

I'm very happy with the 36MP of D800E , I really don't need more resolution , I would prefer NIKON to concentrate on even better colors ( Bayer array has light weakness ) , hybrid shutter for X-sync reasons , in camera stabilization for every lenses , get rid of AF fine-tuning need ...

spraynpray

I can't see how moiré would be improved. The fabrics that cause it may change, the area of a garment that shows the effect may change or the distance at which they cause the effect may change, but there will still be moiré. If you put a filter back on, that would improve moiré, but then it would negate the point of such a high resolution sensor.

Perhaps this is set to be a triumph of marketing over reality. I mean, if 24 is better than 12, and 36 is better than 24, then well, 54 or whatever MUST be better than 36 mustn't it? I think it is a case of it being easier/cheaper to develop a higher pixel count than to improve noise/dynamic range/colours etc. etc.

Canon already have a problem where their wide/mid zooms will be totally out-resolved by even 36mp so they must have a cunning plan to release a lot of new glass too.

donaldejose

If and when Nikon or Cannon produce a 50+ mp body and it is tested we will be able to see if there are any advantages and if so, what they are. I think there will be many advantages but only time will tell.

WestEndFoto

I agree with Pitchblack. There will always be a use for more resolution and you can never have too much. I would love to be able to take full body shots and always know that the eyelashes will be sharp.

All I am saying is that improving resolution in camera is pointless if it already exceeds or will exceed the lens being used and with the D800 we are already seeing that issue.

I am also saying that improvements in lens resolution will be hard won and slow.

manhattanboy

I agree with Pitchblack. There will always be a use for more resolution and you can never have too much. I would love to be able to take full body shots and always know that the eyelashes will be sharp.

All I am saying is that improving resolution in camera is pointless if it already exceeds or will exceed the lens being used and with the D800 we are already seeing that issue.

I am also saying that improvements in lens resolution will be hard won and slow.

I agree with West End. More MP will help, but even on super sharp lenses with the current 24mp DX sensor, I can't get the same zoom to 200% and everything looks good like I can with a 24mp FX sensor (I top out at ~125% if anyone cares). The real point is that we need Zeiss quality lenses at "kit lens" prices before pumping up the megapixels will have a noticeable effect on the masses. For the amazing NR forum members, obviously that is not the case as they have the lenses and skill to use make use of higher res sensors... but the members here are really in a minority of users.

WestEndFoto

Well said Manhattanboy.

Golf007sd

....The real point is that we need Zeiss quality lenses at "kit lens" prices before pumping up the megapixels will have a noticeable effect on the masses. For the amazing NR forum members, obviously that is not the case as they have the lenses and skill to use make use of higher res sensors... but the members here are really in a minority of users.

With all due respect, lets be realisticL: "kit lenses" that is just not going to happen. These bodies alone will be priced well above the $3300. It is targeted at a specific user group and those that are willing to make the investment in order to take full advantage of its features. Hence, the end user are in the minority.