Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon D4X wish list  (Read 8414 times)
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1245



WWW
« on: April 28, 2013, 12:38:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Dear Nikon,

If you are reading this here is my wish list for the new Nikon D4X camera.

56 to 60 megapixels
Global shutter
Nikon's patented ON/OFF optical low-pass filter (OLPF)
Built in WiFi.

Thank you

Simon

Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7975



WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 28, 2013, 01:13:25 AM »
ReplyReply

56 to 60 megapixels
Global shutter
Nikon's patented ON/OFF optical low-pass filter (OLPF)
Built in WiFi.

Dear Simon,

Not a problem.

- 1 and 4 are almost a given. They could opt for 15 bits DR at 36mp also, we would get the first real 16 bit camera,
- 2 would be unlikely for a still centric "landscape" camera.
- Considering that the D7100 doesn't an AA filter at all, I would consider 4 unlikely also. But I am convinced this is what they must have tried to do with the D800/D800E.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
bronica7
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 28, 2013, 06:36:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Global shutter would be outstanding as I need the same function like leaf shutter lenses for my DSLR Camera system requirements, for dance ,action and special style photography which you could only achieve with global shutter systems like in the old Nikon D40 camera. And 16 bit would be my second point for the wishlist, and a rotateable monitor for special angles like in the A99 Sony.
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2369


« Reply #3 on: April 28, 2013, 06:57:04 AM »
ReplyReply

I would like to have a finder like the F5, not only as big but also removable so I can use things like a DW30 finder.
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1795



WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 29, 2013, 01:40:02 PM »
ReplyReply

30-36mp @ 10-12 fps

Better high ISO performance

retaining the 10 pin connection

built in Arca-Swiss compatible dove tail QR "L" bracket

larger view finder diopter adjustment range

15+1  per channel bit depth.

Thunderbolt port

DNG option.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2693


WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2013, 03:39:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Will settle for one...huge dynamic range or miniscule noise at ISO 3200.

36mp's is just fine.  Would be nice to have a kit lens that can live up to even 24mp.

How about a never-come-down-until-asked mirror lock up?

How about automatic focus bracketing?

Unreasonable requests...

A built rotating mass synchronized to the mirror and shutter to cancel all camera induced vibrations at any shutter speed.  Or a digital viewfinder so good the mirror concept goes in the trash.

An indicator that immediately flags issues in the just-created image file such as motion blur, potentially missed focus, significant clipping, cat pictures, images of piers thrusting out towards the horizon, etc.





Logged
hasselbladfan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 407


« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2013, 04:35:29 PM »
ReplyReply

If this camera will be announced in Q3-Q4, I guess this wishlist comes a bit late.  Grin
Logged
Codger
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 74


« Reply #7 on: April 29, 2013, 05:19:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Lots of good ideas proposed in this particular thread.  After musing about what a D4x might offer us, I've simplified my wish-list for this Nikon.  First, a sweeping correction of all the issues from the PAST few FX models, including consistent/reliable auto focus, better color in the viewfinder and rear LCD, and alignment.  I don't want 48 or 56 (or whatever) megapixels crammed into this little sensor.  (You want medium format, get medium format.)  Having 30 to 36 MPs would be fine, and would add sufficient resolution for serious landscape/still photographers while serving wildlife/sports shooters.  There isn't an abundance of current lenses that would deliver results for 48 mps.  Wait until the NEXT update in a couple of years before going overboard with a jillion tiny photosites and see how sensors and lenses evolve.  Nikkor or Zeiss (or Sigma) will have a better lens array by then.  Step up the bit depth, make a provision for GPS, and I'm content.
Logged
bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2693


WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 29, 2013, 05:55:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I want a camera that will shoot lots of files of the same scene, such as a night skyscape/landscape.  It will save all the separate files, but also keep updating a single file that is the average or some other function of all the separate exposures.  The updated file will be visible on the LCD by clicking the IR remote thingy.  Will let me know early on if it's worth it to keep adding more exposures.  I could go on.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7975



WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 29, 2013, 07:23:02 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't want 48 or 56 (or whatever) megapixels crammed into this little sensor.  (You want medium format, get medium format.)  Having 30 to 36 MPs would be fine, and would add sufficient resolution for serious landscape/still photographers while serving wildlife/sports shooters.  There isn't an abundance of current lenses that would deliver results for 48 mps.  Wait until the NEXT update in a couple of years before going overboard with a jillion tiny photosites and see how sensors and lenses evolve.  

Well, the D5200/D7100 (2 APS cameras) have 2 stops more measured DR than the 5DIII (an FX camera) with a slightly higher resolution. Most Canon shooters seem to think that the 5DIII has enough DR for practical applications (or they are all lying to us which seems unlikely  Wink).

Assuming that Nikon is simply able to retain the same sensor characteristics when making it larger (which seems a very conservative view considering that the D4x would be coming 1.5 years later at 10+ times the cost), then you would have a 54mp camera with 2 stops more DR than the 5DIII.

I don't see any problem with that really.  Smiley

Lens wise, there are many options that are not really challenging the 36mp sensor of the D800: Nikon 24mm f1.4, 85mm f1.8 and f1.4, 45mm T/S, 85mm T/S, Nikon 70-200 f4, Nikon 70-200 f2.8, all the big guns even wide open, Sigma 35mm f1.4, Zeiss 25mm f2, Zeiss 50mm f2, Zeiss 100mm f2, Zeiss 135mm f2, Leica 180mm f2.8,...

And those are only the top performers I can think of now, many other lenses are performing very well in real world applications.

One thing that is not always well understood is that a higher resolution camera will still deliver a better image with an average lens than a lower megapixel camera.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2013, 06:26:11 AM »
ReplyReply

I've yet to see anything in the range of 14-21mm made by anyone that makes me want to buy the D800/E, let alone the  D4X.
Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1841


« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2013, 12:09:56 PM »
ReplyReply

F5/F4/F3hp viewfinder, along with high precision focusing screens.  The brightness, clarity and accuracy of those finders shames the D800.

I don't think there are really issues with AF that aren't QC related. 
Logged
Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1517


« Reply #12 on: April 30, 2013, 01:05:58 PM »
ReplyReply

I want an Ansel Adams program option, that scans the scene, alerts the photographer to a potential photo, then automatically frames, focuses & exposes the image, then tells the 'tog whether it's a keeper or not. Oh, and eleventy thousand million pixels. Or not.

A better system for manual focus than a dot & some arrows in the lower left hand side of the viewfinder.

Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1841


« Reply #13 on: April 30, 2013, 02:12:14 PM »
ReplyReply


A better system for manual focus than a dot & some arrows in the lower left hand side of the viewfinder.



Old style viewfinder with a split prism.  That would blow my mind.
Logged
Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1517


« Reply #14 on: April 30, 2013, 04:50:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Old style viewfinder with a split prism.  That would blow my mind.

That would do me
Logged
rethmeier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 780


WWW
« Reply #15 on: April 30, 2013, 08:43:02 PM »
ReplyReply

And a re-designed  PCE 24, a new PCE 35  and the PCE 17.

A D4x with 36 MP  would do me.
Logged

Willem Rethmeier
www.willemrethmeier.com
Sydney Australia
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 740


WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 30, 2013, 09:04:31 PM »
ReplyReply

the best optical view finder they can make

some features that come from their special V1 camera-
electronic- silent shutter ( 60 fps large buffer)
an (optional) very good EVF
the autofocus system on the sensor (no mistakes can be made)

Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #17 on: May 01, 2013, 03:09:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Old style viewfinder with a split prism.  That would blow my mind.


And with grid. That would be viewing heaven.

I still have an almost unused F3 and don't dare look through it anymore because I know the nervous reaction wouldn't do me any good. As I can't take its screens and stick them onto the digi bodies, what's the point of inflicting serious masochism?

Does anyone know of any reason why a split-image screen can't be employed on a digi camera? I didn't like the micro-prism surrounds some slit-image systems had, but a straight simple split was perfect: you could even split an eye with it (model's, not snapper's). What more can you ask in terms of getting sharp sharp?

Rob C
Logged

Petrus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 509


« Reply #18 on: May 01, 2013, 03:27:49 AM »
ReplyReply

One thing that is not always well understood is that a higher resolution camera will still deliver a better image with an average lens than a lower megapixel camera.

This can be mathematically easily explained with a throughput formula, where "perfect" unit "quality coefficient" is 1 and anything less than perfect is something less. We simply multiply the coefficients of each unit affecting the throughput. So if we have two cameras with sensor "quality coefficients" of 0.9 and 0.7,  and one lens with "quality coefficient" of 0.8, we get the end results of 0.72 and 0.56 even with the same lens.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5129


« Reply #19 on: May 01, 2013, 09:14:51 AM »
ReplyReply

One thing that is not always well understood is that a higher resolution camera will still deliver a better image with an average lens than a lower megapixel camera.
Indeed: and another often ignored or disputed fact is that in practically relevant comparisons (images of the same apparent size), there is almost no disadvantage in visible noise or the handling of scenes of high subject brightness range (so-called DR) to having somewhat more, smaller photosites on a sensor of the same size. So since increasing sensor resolution is far easier and cheaper than increasing the resolution of all one's lenses, the most cost-effective route to improving overall resolution is to aim for sensors that match or exceed the best resolution that the lens system can deliver: the sharpest lens as its optimum aperture. Ideally, sensors should become "invisible" to image quality.

The main downside of very high pixel counts is lower frame rates, but that would only be relevant if this thread were about "D4H" wish-lists.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad