Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Are we going to see MF price decreases now that DSLRs reach 36 megapixels?  (Read 15075 times)
ondebanks
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 820



« Reply #20 on: February 07, 2012, 10:14:32 AM »
ReplyReply

I would remove DR from that list of MF advantages: my prediction is that DR will favor the D800 over DMF CCDs with their far worse read noise levels (now about five to ten times worse than good CMOS sensors).

 Does that just leave MF the market for those who need even more resolution, and the dilettantes who blindly believe that "the sensor is bigger, so the results must be better"? Hopefully not; if only because MF lens systems offer some continuing IQ advantages for some uses.

True, but don't forget that there are MF CMOS backs allegedly coming over the hill any day now! If (big if) that happens, it levels the noise/ISO/DR playing field, and then sensor size matters again.

Ray
Logged
EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2372



WWW
« Reply #21 on: February 07, 2012, 10:18:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Probably the majority of MFDB owners also own a DSLR too.   I'm betting these new high pixel count DSLR's won't cut into new MFDB sales, however many will also buy the DSLR.    I certainly might.  As far as pricing... if the sales volume goes down on the MFDB then prices will have to go up not down.
Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5121


« Reply #22 on: February 07, 2012, 10:26:19 AM »
ReplyReply

True, but don't forget that there are MF CMOS backs allegedly coming over the hill any day now! If (big if) that happens, it levels the noise/ISO/DR playing field, and then sensor size matters again.
Agreed, as I said in another thread on this topic:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=62244.msg500981#msg500981
Can you point to signs that such "big CMOS" is coming? I can vaguely see Fujiflm trying MF sensors again: the failure of its MF sized SuperCCD seemed to be due to "politics" like the inertia of MF back makers, despite its good promise of performance advantages over the traditional Full Frame CCD technology offers by Kodak and Dalsa. Maybe products like the D800 will wake DMF makers up to the commercial need to move on from CCDs.
Logged
ondebanks
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 820



« Reply #23 on: February 07, 2012, 10:47:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Agreed, as I said in another thread on this topic:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=62244.msg500981#msg500981
Can you point to signs that such "big CMOS" is coming? I can vaguely see Fujiflm trying MF sensors again: the failure of its MF sized SuperCCD seemed to be due to "politics" like the inertia of MF back makers, despite its good promise of performance advantages over the traditional Full Frame CCD technology offers by Kodak and Dalsa. Maybe products like the D800 will wake DMF makers up to the commercial need to move on from CCDs.

I'm afraid I can't - someone else posted that rumour originally, based on Phase One dealer chatter.
Logged
Martin Kristiansen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 166


WWW
« Reply #24 on: February 07, 2012, 01:31:15 PM »
ReplyReply

No way I am buying a 36 MP DSLR system. Currently I am in the middle of a 6 week catalogue shoot. Most images will print A5. Some going to A4 and a few to dps. A very few will make it to point do sale posters and such. I am shooting most of it, and all of the modeled clothing on the Aptus 12. I simply output the file size I need. Hardly any post on the files. Just not needed. Thousands of images and any time saving on post is a money saving for me. 

Sorry to say but the dslrs don't work out for me. I find I have to work harder to get the images my clients.

Friend of mine is a sponsored Nikon user on the local scene. He has tested the new Nikon and says that the image quality is fantastic. Not great at high iso and pretty hard on lenses. He also told me that he didn't think it a match for the Leaf Aptus 7, a back he is very familiar with. All in all he thinks it a great camera and exceptional value.

We will see no doubt.
Logged
MrSmith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 814



WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 07, 2012, 01:39:52 PM »
ReplyReply

in the uk the back alone is 30,000 you pays your money and you makes your choice  Roll Eyes
Logged
JV
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 548


« Reply #26 on: February 07, 2012, 02:08:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Friend of mine is a sponsored Nikon user on the local scene. He has tested the new Nikon and says that the image quality is fantastic. Not great at high iso and pretty hard on lenses. He also told me that he didn't think it a match for the Leaf Aptus 7, a back he is very familiar with. All in all he thinks it a great camera and exceptional value.

I am sure the Leaf Aptus-II 7 is better, has a more appealing and different look, etc but at the end of the day it is $3K versus $15K (back alone) and well, if the D800 is close enough... No doubt in my mind that the D800 and the unavoidable soon to come answer from Canon will further erode MFD sales and conseuently will make MFD more expensive. 
Logged
douglasboyd
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 31


WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 07, 2012, 03:25:01 PM »
ReplyReply

I already put in a pre-order for the Nikon 800E which will replace my Sony A900.  I expect the DR of the D800 to be equal or better than the DR in my Hasselblad H3DII-39. Certainly high ISO will be much better.   Depending on how good the IQ is of the D800 I will decide whether to sell my H3DII now or wait until the new Sony A99 with 48mp comes out.  I expect the price I can get for my H3DII will drop by about 30% over the next few months to $10K or less.  Fortunately I have full-frame lenses for both Sony and Nikon.
==Doug
Logged
bpepz
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


« Reply #28 on: February 07, 2012, 05:10:21 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been looking at the samples from the d800e and I am really not that impressed. Even my lowly 28mp leaf aptus-6 II on my rz67 produces much sharper results. I do not know if its the lenses or what but the d800e images just do not have very much snap or 3d to them.
Logged
Kagetsu
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 196


WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 07, 2012, 06:10:52 PM »
ReplyReply

I think there's a difference in quality compared to the LPF enhanced photo's... the 800E is certainly the right choice.

In any case, it'll come down to personally trying it and seeing how it responds.
Logged
JV
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 548


« Reply #30 on: February 07, 2012, 08:06:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I took a look at the photo gallery on Nikon's website as well.  Underwhelming is indeed the word... I am sure the camera is capable of doing much better.
Logged
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 586


« Reply #31 on: February 07, 2012, 08:29:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Price is determined by sensor size, primarily.

And image samples are usually crap, whether it's Canon, Nikon, Phase One, Leaf, whatever...
Logged
EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2372



WWW
« Reply #32 on: February 07, 2012, 09:01:35 PM »
ReplyReply

I took a look at the photo gallery on Nikon's website as well.  Underwhelming is indeed the word... I am sure the camera is capable of doing much better.

Maybe you still want to have a look at the AFi-ii 7 then?   Grin
Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
ondebanks
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 820



« Reply #33 on: February 08, 2012, 03:32:03 AM »
ReplyReply

I think that today's xkcd cartoon fits quite aptly with this thread!
(and don't forget to mouse-over the cartoon for the bonus punchline)

Ray
Logged
pjtn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 185


« Reply #34 on: February 08, 2012, 05:51:38 AM »
ReplyReply

The sample photographs are not very convincing. Yes it's a terrific DSLR, no it's not medium format quality. Compared to a Pentax 645D those files looks smudgy, lacking detail and sharpness. I don't believe for a minute it will make quality 40x50" prints anything like that from a 645D.

I remember when the Canon 7D came out and everyone was hyping up the image quality to be the equal of, or better than, the 5D MKII. Wait for the hype to die down and we can see some real tests.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7761



WWW
« Reply #35 on: February 08, 2012, 06:18:37 AM »
ReplyReply

The sample photographs are not very convincing. Yes it's a terrific DSLR, no it's not medium format quality. Compared to a Pentax 645D those files looks smudgy, lacking detail and sharpness. I don't believe for a minute it will make quality 40x50" prints anything like that from a 645D.

There is in fact zero theoretical reason why it wouldn't be every bit as good but it is true that the current samples are not as good as expertly processed 645D files.

The question is whether better lenses, technique and processing can close the gap or not.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Mr. Rib
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 831


« Reply #36 on: February 08, 2012, 08:01:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Anyone, once there are any reliable 800E tests (reliable = made by someone knowledgable, crafty and possibly unbiased  photographer), please post it here or at new LuLa thread. I'm very curious.. and I hope Canon follows the trend. It would be really nice if the gap between digibacks and DSLRs would shrink again significantly.
Logged
pjtn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 185


« Reply #37 on: February 08, 2012, 08:13:30 AM »
ReplyReply

It doesn't make sense for Nikon to post sub par images from the camera as samples but it is a possibility.

The smaller pixel pitch of the Nikon is a very possible limitation of this camera. The highly pixel packed sensor puts a lot of pressure on the lenses and the laws of physics may prevent the camera from achieving the theoretical image quality expected. Diffraction will be a big problem beginning to show at larger apertures.

In an interview between Michael Reichmann and Norman Koren they discussed all this and stated that 5 microns is about the tipping point and this camera has a 4.9 micron pixel size.

Theory aside, it would certainly be nice to think we can get medium format quality in a $3300 camera but I will need to see an exponential improvement in the D800 samples before I agree they are getting close.
Logged
ondebanks
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 820



« Reply #38 on: February 08, 2012, 08:15:27 AM »
ReplyReply

There is in fact zero theoretical reason why it wouldn't be every bit as good but it is true that the current samples are not as good as expertly processed 645D files.

There are theoretical reasons - diffraction and aberrations. The pixel count may be similar but the Nikon pixels are smaller, so to counter diffraction they must be shot ~ 2/3rd stops more open in aperture (this also more or less equalises the DOF). But then that is demanding a higher level of aberration correction in the Nikon lenses. In terms of optical design, that's a lose-lose situation: not only must the Nikon lenses be corrected to meet a tougher absolute aberration target (a smaller spot size corresponding to the smaller pixel), but they must hit these targets 2/3rd stops faster than the Pentax lenses, at all stops.

Ray
« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 10:40:23 AM by ondebanks » Logged
pjtn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 185


« Reply #39 on: February 08, 2012, 08:30:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Which makes me wonder if camera manufacturers have hit the limit with the Bayer pattern sensor...
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad