The Next Nikon - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

12/13/2006 09:29:45 AM · #1

I have been waiting and waiting for Nikon to come out with a full-frame D-SLR. I'm not a pro, and shouldn't justify the added expense of such a camera, but I love taking landscapes and really miss the oppertunity to go super-wide on those photos. Does anyone have information on if/when something like that will actually be released? I have been looking online, and it seems there is some talk about a Nikon D3 full-frame camera, but most of the postings I read were from 2005 and 2004. Is there anything legitimate out there?

DjFenzl

12/13/2006 09:31:37 AM · #2

Nikon has said in the past that they won't make a "full frame" sensor and I personally believe them.

I Enjoy Ham

Canon EOS-30D

12/13/2006 09:32:11 AM · #3

didnt nikon announce a while ago (2003?) that were not going to ever come out with a FF sensor or is that old news?

they said something about the quality being better or something idk, it was a while a ago, ill try ggoling it :)

thegrandwazoo

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/13/2006 09:32:39 AM · #4

Originally posted by Megatherian:

Nikon has said in the past that they won't make a "full frame" sensor and I personally believe them.

Agreed!

Here is the Rockwell's take on it.

MAK

Leica M Monochrom

Voigtlander Ultron 21mm f1.8

12/13/2006 09:37:17 AM · #5

Im happy about them not making a FF sensor, after all, it's a new format DX and it's working fine.

kirbic

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

12/13/2006 09:38:27 AM · #6

Nikon may not want to go with a FF 35mm body, but they may not have much choice. Well, of course they have a choice, but only if they want to give away a significant chunk of market share. I believe that they will go there, eventually, but given their mindset, I would not even begin to predict when. It might be next year, it might not be for two years or more.

12/13/2006 09:39:36 AM · #7

Originally posted by MAK:

Im happy about them not making a FF sensor, after all, it's a new format DX and it's working fine.

Quality is not necessarily the issue. It's how wide you can go. If they don't release one, then they will never be able to compete with Canon on all levels of photography, right? Or am I just crazy?

12/13/2006 09:40:53 AM · #8

Personally, I will sell all of my Nikon stuff by early 2008 if they have not come out with one, and buy a Canon.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/13/2006 09:43:58 AM · #9

I haven't studied the Nikon lens lineup to know the answer to this, but do they have anything similar to Canon's EF-S lenses? If so, I'd see that as a good reason to not go FF.

That is one of Canon's biggest mistakes IMO, marketing EF-S lenses and then having the 5D (FF sensor) as the logical upgrade from 20/30D. What do users do when they have bought in to an EF-S lens system and then have to go FF.

Ofcourse, my argument is moot, if all Nikon's lenses would work on FF sensor cams.

thegrandwazoo

Nikon D750

12/13/2006 09:47:10 AM · #10

No issue like that with Nikon. Except with the DX lenses. So I guess it's the same :-P But it's not the mount or the problem with the shutter it's the crop.

Message edited by author 2006-12-13 14:49:35.

DjFenzl

12/13/2006 09:52:55 AM · #11

"Full Frame" sensors are not perfect by any means. There are advantages to APS-C sized sensors as well. The argument that "bigger is better" is an over simplification of the issue much like the argument that how many megapixels a camera has determines it's quality - it doesn't.

The main argument I've heard for Nikon's "need" to go to a larger sensor is the pixel density on the sensor. As the number of megapixels get higher there won't be enough room on the APS-C sensor. Who says megapixels need to get higher though? Is there really that high of a demand for 30, 40, 50MP sensors?

I believe the future holds more dynamic range and better color rendition - and that has nothing to do with how big your sensor is.

jfriesen

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

12/13/2006 09:53:52 AM · #12

Originally posted by Megatherian:

WELL SAID!

JeffryZ

Nikon D80

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5- 5.6G ED DX

12/13/2006 10:03:02 AM · #13

The quality of sensors these days makes the size issue of pretty small importance as far as image quality goes. Differences in lens quality can have more of an impact on the final image than DX vs full frame sensors. One benefit of a smaller sensor is that you can use a smaller lens to get the same reach which means less weight for the photographer to carry around and lower manufacturing costs. You also get a closer minimum focusing distance but depth of field will be wider. This does create some problems at the wider end of the scale though. In the DX range, an 18mm lens only gives you about the same width as a 24mm lens. The widest non- fisheye DX lens Nikon makes is the 12- 24mm f/4.0 zoom. This gets you down to about 18mm. There are not presently any fast wide angle primes that will work with a DX camera. Sigma has the widest zoom at 10- 20mm. Except for at the wide angle, the DX size sensor has quite a few benefits over the full frame sensor when it comes to lenses.
[/url]

12/13/2006 10:09:22 AM · #14

My biggest hangup with the whole thing is still the desire to go super-wide. That's it. And, as has been said in this thread already, that is one of the major down-sides to a DX censor. Sure, it's nice to have your 200 mm lens become 300 mm, but you could, if you had to, purchase a 300 on a FF camera. However, to as has been said you can get a 10 or 12 mm lens, which equates to 15 to 18. So, what do you do except go full frame and wide?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

12/13/2006 10:10:10 AM · #15

Originally posted by Megatherian:

Is there really that high of a demand for 30, 40, 50MP sensors?

Not when the physical limitations of a 35mm lens system can only resolve to about 20MP.

silverfoxx

Canon EOS-5D

12/13/2006 10:13:18 AM · #16

I am sorry, I have been reading this thread and I am completely lost.
I have a d50 now - "a beginner's dslr" as they call it.
are 6 mpxl really not bad? I look at others photos and at mine - I miss a lot: my photos are not sharp enough, not bright enough, not "clear" enough. I was quite comfortable with the idea that it's my camera that is not perfect:) will you send me to learn sharpening in ps and good lighting tecnique? or do I really have to buy at least a better lens to get those "clear" photos I want? I want to learn to make good portraits.
is it all really only about good ideas or good equipment can also help?
thank you so much!

Svetlana

breadfan35

Nikon D3

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

12/13/2006 10:14:34 AM · #17

I believe that eventually Nikon will be forced to go Full Frame. Think about it, over time FF sensored camera will become more affordable just as everything always does. Canon will produce more of them, other brands will begin making them, and eventually Nikon will have to do so also. However, it will not happen anytime soon and Nikon's DX lens series works just fine for their 1.5 crop sensors.

But one day, they will go FF. Mark my words...

thegrandwazoo

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/13/2006 10:16:24 AM · #18

Your camera is great silverfoxx! But there are allot of great lenses for Nikon. One of the sharpest is the 50mm 1.8 it is very inexpensive for the quality. About $120 USD. It also makes a great portrait lens. The next really good prime is the 85mm 1.8 again not to expensive and it is a fantastic, sharp portrait lens.

Message edited by author 2006-12-13 15:16:40.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

12/13/2006 10:19:55 AM · #19

Originally posted by silverfoxx:

I think the problems you are describing have more to do with the lens you are using than the camera. 6MP is actually NOT bad, nor is the D50. I shoot weddings with a 6MP camera and is plenty for me to give customers a 16x20 print that is acceptible.

A sharper, faster lens would suit you well.

Message edited by author 2006-12-13 15:20:40.

silverfoxx

Canon EOS-5D

12/13/2006 10:36:08 AM · #20

thank you so much

thegrandwazoo and

fotomann_forever! I was thinking about alamy:) I was trying to resize my photos and they look ugly.
I got wonderful replies on this thread
and was thinking about that tamron lens. thank you for your answers!

Azrifel

Nikon Coolpix P340

12/13/2006 10:41:40 AM · #21

I wish people would stop claiming that Nikon said they will never make fullframe. Nikon has said that they did not see a market for their fullframe cameras at the time of the interview this all originated from. That was about two years ago. At that time Nikon was not in a position to economically produce its own fullframe sensor or buy it from Sony at a cost that the market could bear.
Nikon has the knowhow to do it.
Nikon has the technical capalility to do it (they make the lenses that are used in the machines that produce sensors for example).
Nikon has the money to do it (Nikon is having a very good year).
The Nikon F mount is good enough to be used with it.
Nikon intends to do it. But Nikon will only do it when the cost of production matches what they think the market can bear. That time is near.

2007 Nikon 35mm USD6000 lotsa megapixels, great body.

Late 2007, early 2008 expect Sony to follow.