Death of F-mount DX Challenge

WestEndFoto

I am of the personal view that DX will be phased out as I have stated in various other threads.

I will pay $500 CDN (as I live in Canada) to the person who most closely guesses the "Date of DX Death" and wins the "Death of DX Challenge". The metric will be calculated for each participant and will be the absolute difference in number of days between their prediction and the actual date. If there is a tie, the first person who made the prediction wins. If you enter more than once, you are disqualified.

You can enter the contest by posting your predicted date, which must include the day, month and year in no particular order but with no ambiguity, in this thread. Periodically, I will update a list of entrants with the predicted dates in the order that they made the prediction in this thread. As the "Date of DX Death" approaches, the prediction will become easier, so in the interest of fairness, the contest is open to entrants until December 31, 2016 as defined by the date of their post in this thread.

Definition of DX:
The current F-Mount camera (DSLR or not) with a DX or smaller sensor, as measured by area, which is basically the current system. If Nikon replaces it with a similar but non-compatible camera (probably because the mount is different), then DX is dead.

Definition of Death of DX:
Certain products, though still manufactured by Nikon, are basically dead even if they remain as niche products. As much as I love them, AIS lenses are an example. Therefore, DX shall be deemed dead when there is no longer a DX camera listed on the nikon.ca website, even if they are still listed on other websites such as nikonusa.com. The logic is simple, if it is not popular enough to market to a market of 40 million consumers, it is dead. By this definition, all the AIS lenses except the 50mm 1.2 are dead, as this one is the only one available on the Nikon.ca website, even though six are still available on the NikonUSA website. And even the 50mm 1.2 is mortally wounded as it is only available by special order.

If the Nikon.ca website is no longer operational, then I will pick another website but in the interests of impartiality, disqualify myself from the contest. If there is any ambiguity over who the winner is, I shall disqualify myself, make a judgement and my judgement will be considered final.

My prediction is September 13, 2025.

Good luck!!!

August 25, 2015 revision:
The original title of this thread was “Death of DX Challenge”. I am now changing it to “Death of F-mount DX Challenge”. This is not a substantive change as the new title merely better reflects the terms of the challenge in this OP.

PB_PM

I think Nikon is more likely to die as a brand, than they are to drop the DX format in interchange lens cameras. Enough said.

WestEndFoto

I think Nikon is more likely to die as a brand, than they are to drop the DX format in interchange lens cameras. Enough said.

Fair enough, so enter the contest and we will see.

BVS

Definition of DX:
The current F-Mount camera (DSLR or not) with a DX or smaller sensor, as measured by area, which is basically the current system. If Nikon replaces it with a similar but non-compatible camera (probably because the mount is different), then DX is dead.

In the previous thread you seemed to be saying that DX would be dead in 10 years because FX/Full Frame sensors would become so cheap and have such high megapixels that DX/APS-C would become irrelevant. Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but now it sounds like your saying DX is dead if the mount simply changes.

If Nikon were to switch DX cameras to a new mount in the future that would simply be the death of the F mount and the evolution of DX, not the death of it. Rather, wouldn't death of DX mean no more SLR style cameras using APS-C sensors from Nikon?

Snowleopard

For me, DX died with my D70 that sits in mint condition in a glass case in my living room. It has been FX and 6x7 ever since then.....

WestEndFoto

Definition of DX:
The current F-Mount camera (DSLR or not) with a DX or smaller sensor, as measured by area, which is basically the current system. If Nikon replaces it with a similar but non-compatible camera (probably because the mount is different), then DX is dead.

In the previous thread you seemed to be saying that DX would be dead in 10 years because FX/Full Frame sensors would become so cheap and have such high megapixels that DX/APS-C would become irrelevant. Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but now it sounds like your saying DX is dead if the mount simply changes.

If Nikon were to switch DX cameras to a new mount in the future that would simply be the death of the F mount and the evolution of DX, not the death of it. Rather, wouldn't death of DX mean no more SLR style cameras using APS-C sensors from Nikon?

Well that is the rub. There are many ways to interpret this. This is why I have come out with a very specific definition. Someone could certainly come out with a different definition and that would be valid too - just like yours.

Personally, I would love to see a DX sized sensor with a lens system and mount optimized for that sensor. I have nothing against DX per say. I love my Coolpix A. I just think that current form's days are numbered for various reasons that I have described. I don't even think it is Nikon's choice, but the market's. I already think that the Fuji system is superior to the Nikon "DX system" and Nikon will not be able to exploit the market that Fuji is exploiting until they redesign the system. I don't necessarily think that current Fuji cameras are superior to current Nikon DX cameras, but I think that Fuji can grow and Nikon is limited by their design choice.

Plus, I think it is now clear what I mean as I can refer people to this thread.

heartyfisher

I am fully aware that my D7200 may be the last DX camera (by your definition) I own. The mirrorless systems are upon us. My next camera will probably be Mirrorless. But I expect it to mount my Fmount lenses .. with an adapter.. so How would that fit in your definition?

DX and FX are going together !!

WestEndFoto

I am fully aware that my D7200 may be the last DX camera (by your definition) I own. The mirrorless systems are upon us. My next camera will probably be Mirrorless. But I expect it to mount my Fmount lenses .. with an adapter.. so How would that fit in your definition?

DX and FX are going together !!

If it requires an adapter, it would not be DX per my definition.

spraynpray

The whole basis of DX is the sensor so I don't agree that the end of DX would be because they change the mount. Full frame is FX, APS-C is DX - those terms relate to the sensors. The lenses are made to suit the sensors, the mount is irrelevant. All comments about DX IQ haven't been at DX sensors coupled to DX lenses, they have been at the smaller sensor so 'DX ending' should be the end of APS-C sized sensor?

Gjesdal

Respect @WestEndFoto ! You're putting your money where your mouth is :-)
I do believe Nikon will end DX and make cheaper and simpler FX models
First I thought, it will take longer than 10 years, but then I thought back what the world was 10 years ago, all the things that have happened in the last 10 years with electronics and the current global economy ...

15th September 2023

WestEndFoto

The whole basis of DX is the sensor so I don't agree that the end of DX would be because they change the mount. Full frame is FX, APS-C is DX - those terms relate to the sensors. The lenses are made to suit the sensors, the mount is irrelevant. All comments about DX IQ haven't been at DX sensors coupled to DX lenses, they have been at the smaller sensor so 'DX ending' should be the end of APS-C sized sensor?

I would never bet against the sensor size. I am betting against the current system marketed, as DX, by Nikon today.

I think that it is hard to say "what all comments have been about". Mine apparently have been about something different than some others, and it took a fairly lengthy post and $500 to make it clear what I was talking about. For example, as you can see above, Heartyfisher had his own idea, which could also be the basis of a defineable and therefore valid definition. Now that I know what Heartyfisher means, DX could include adapters, it is possible to have a debate.

WestEndFoto

Respect @WestEndFoto ! You're putting your money where your mouth is :-)
I do believe Nikon will end DX and make cheaper and simpler FX models
First I thought, it will take longer than 10 years, but then I thought back what the world was 10 years ago, all the things that have happened in the last 10 years with electronics and the current global economy ...

15th September 2023

Bravo! We have our first bet!

snakebunk

What time zone is used for the switch to 2017?

WestEndFoto

What time zone is used for the switch to 2017?

Whatever zone Nikon Rumours is on at that time.

snakebunk

What time zone is used for the switch to 2017?

Whatever zone Nikon Rumours is on at that time.

Ok! I'll be back.

HockeyMan

Ok, you guys peaked my interest. April 5, 2026. No reasons, no explanation, just a WILD guess. It costs me nothing

Ironheart

The canikon duopoly have found a sweet spot in low and medium DX (APS-C) camera kits. This sweet spot isn't ever going away.
The entry level cameras are below the $500 threshold with a kit lens that doesn't' stick out too far and weigh a ton, and gives good enough images to crush the best cell phone. If you suddenly decide you want to put a FX (35mm full frame) sensor in there, the camera has to get a bit bigger, but more importantly that 18-55, that costs $200 and weighs 6.88 oz (195 g) is replaced with a 24-85 that costs $600 and weighs 1.02 lb (465 g), its also roughly 1" bigger in both length and height. Oh, and they sell 10's of millions of these things, so somebody must like them ;-)
Mirrorless won't change this, as there will be DX and FX mirrorless just like there are today, and DX will be optimized for cost and size, just like it is today.
So I guess my answer is infinity )
Your belief that FX will ever be the same or lower cost than DX is based upon a false assumption that Moore's law applies to sensors. It never has, in fact, the cost per square mm of die (chip) has gone up over the last decade, precisely because Moore's law has made that real estate more valuable. DX ain't going anywhere. Ever. Of course, just IMHO!

PB_PM

Not to mention that FX glass is never magically going to be cheaper than DX glass. DX glass uses, well less glass, so it's cheaper.

DaveyJ

I think this thread is as potentially destructive to Nikon Rumors as it is anything. WestEndPhoto has decided to make a "Chicken Little" proclamation that The Sky is Falling. Let us take sweeping assessments that the USA will come to a great and terminal disaster on September 13,2015. That is pretty widely circulating right now. Pretty foolish and it does though play into the realm of "Bad News Travels Fast". I fail to see any intelligent reason to make such dire predictions. Many of the movies out there are about the possibility of impending doom and our land and farms will be taken away from us. It is perhaps ironic that your prediction for the end of DX is EXACTLY 9 years after the USA fails by many who can see the future.. You have wagered $500. That is a drop in the bucket. I spent more money on farm equipment today than that.

A few posters have noted that you have "put your money where your mouth is". I would say it is nothing but a cheap shot. I bet more on Nikon's new 16-80 DX lens than you did on your offensive prediction and "bet". One reason I am as frosted by this prediction is the raft of September 13th predictions rattling around out there. I can tell you the banking world worries about such predictions as we should remember from the y2k flap.


Sensationalism and yellow journalism. Both have started wars. Nikon has recently bet so much more on the future of DX than your maneuver that is pretty incredible. Many of us regard the D7200 as about the best bang for the buck in photography. I asked salesman in a huge camera store today (guess where) what the best purchase of a camera was today. He thought for awhile and said probably a D7200 and a zoom lens. Nikon Rumors has had a wonderful live and let live vibe. As a Nikon "Rumor" this is a attempt at a self fulfilling prophecy. This wager would be more understandable to me in a bar or pub. I do like ironheart's prediction of infinity.

The Internet has a way of hurtling us a lot quicker to a future that for one will see my death and yours. I see no joy or wisdom in predicting the ruin of anyone's hopes and dreams. My D7000 camera series have been a source of great joy and a valuable tool. I have seen a series of changes that has far fewer people using a shovel. I see no reason to predict it's death.

WestEndFoto

The only thing I am predicting for September 13th is that I am getting a birthday cake. Winning the bet is too much of a long shot to form the basis of a prediction.

Besides, if DX dies, it will probably be because it is replaced by something better. Perhaps a DX sized sensor with a smaller flange diameter that will enable a smaller lens and body for those that want it - likely mirrorless. To me this is a bright, cheery and positive future, not the coming of the apocalypse. Current users would have their DX at the click of a button with full backward lens compatibility on FX if they chose to use it.

I never could find a way to relate to anything other than a glass half full perspective on life. Personally, I think that Nikon will thrive and continue to offer great products for a broad cross section of users.

BVS

Besides, if DX dies, it will probably be because it is replaced by something better. Perhaps a DX sized sensor with a smaller flange diameter that will enable a smaller lens and body for those that want it - likely mirrorless.

I don't get why the current size of the flange/opening would prevent Nikon from making DX lenses smaller. Couldn't they make the barrel of the lens smaller but keep the ring that attaches to the body the same size?

WestEndFoto

The mount will be bigger then the lens needs to be in many cases, so it does impose an artificially high lens diameter. Plus the body of the camera could be smaller if the flange diametre/area is 33%/50% smaller.

I also think that in this space we will see a mirrorless mount, which suggests a shorter flange to focal distance.

All this suggests a new system, designed from scratch, and an evolution of DSLRs to FX.

So let's have a little fun and civil discussion and I will finance it.

PB_PM

I don't get why the current size of the flange/opening would prevent Nikon from making DX lenses smaller. Couldn't they make the barrel of the lens smaller but keep the ring that attaches to the body the same size?

Where do you think the auto focus motor goes? It's around the lens elements that move for focus, so unlike AF-D lenses, which use old school gears, the barrels need to be larger to accommodate the ring focus motors.

CaMeRaQuEsT

There are 2 main reasons why it is very hard to drive FF chip prices lower, both of which are entirely related to the large size of the sensor itself:

1. High percentage of manufacturing flaws. Currently, of 100 FF chips etched, only about 33 go on into cameras. Why is it? A FF sensor is among the largest single piece of silicon chip currently made, and the larger they are the easier they are affected by manufacturing flaws . Compare that to about 75 chips making it into cameras per 100 etched for APS-C sensors.

2. Low yield per wafer. FF chips just use way more silicon than APS-C chips and leave more blank spaces around a wafer's circumference. You can fit 3-4 times as many APS-C chips in a single wafer compared to FF chips.

These somehow all add up to about 20 times the cost to make a FF chip compared to an APS-C chip, and these numbers are pretty constant no matter how much improvement you get from manufacturing, as the same improvement done to a FF process just multiplies accordingly for an APS-C process. So it's pretty much impossible to somehow sometime in the future for FF sensors to ever reach price parity to an APS-C sensor. Size, my friend, does matter when etching silicon.

WestEndFoto

Then bet against me my friend and make me eat humble pie when I send you $500.

DaveyJ

To WestEndFoto: OK so it is your birthday. I do think that the real basis of wagers is each of our purchases. The trend I see from my exposure to cameras and imagery seems to be to smaller more convenient cameras. I almost have seen far smaller cameras and devices. It seems easier to fore see the near disappearance of DX and FX as others here have noted. I do know that the reason I use DX cameras so much is that they can convey aspects of a site and current conditions very quickly. And they are higher detailed and more informative than a cell phone picture. When the image industry embraces a particular format it involves a lot more of a collective decision than just one companies election.