< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

MX may just mean Multi Format

I have to be very careful how I report this information, so here we go...
Somewhere, at some point of time, someone that works for an unidentified company talked about:
  • the bulk of the camera body, especially the vertical grip. The remark was that a certain company had considered a square sensor, so that the user would not need to rotate the body. Shots could be processed later to result in vertical or horizontal final images.
  • the fact that a pixel density and efficiency level would be reached in a roughly 6x4.5 sized chip of near 100 MP. When you look at some of the smaller pixel sized cameras, and how they perform, the capability is already there, though perhaps the failure rate has kept them off the market. Anyway, if you scale a roughly 100 MP 6x4.5 chip to nearer 36mm square, then somewhere in the realm of 40MP seems about the upper practical limit.
  • MX may just mean Multi Format
The above info may or may not be related to the Otoji project (more info on Otoji can be found here, here and here). Of course all this could be just a plain product discussion that will never hit the production line, but this information somehow got to me and I decided to share it.
This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
  • Anonymous

    *yawns* we shall ask joey for the confirmation for this ridiculous “MX” stuff

  • http://photo.solstices.ca Loa

    If I recall correctly, the sensor is the most expensive part of a DSLR. Having a third of that most expensive part not work when you shoot in standard 2*3 format seems hard to believe.

    Maybe they expect that most users will switch to a square format??? I find that hard to believe as well.

    Loa

  • http://dotcrimemanifesto.com/ PHB

    Yes but some folk do not want to shoot in 2×3 format. Medium format is usually 4×5 which enlarges to 8×10 (I know that they quote it as 6×4.5 but its actually 56×45).

    At 40MP, FX format would be limited to ISO 2000 unless they have found clever ways round the noise problem. I don’t see that as a problem, we used to shoot 200 ISO film and think it was fast. And it is always possible to apply smoothing to eliminate sensor noise.

    I don’t think 100MP is the ultimate limit for MX or that 40MP is the ultimate for FX. We don’t start hitting the quantum limits till 1000MP on MX and 320MP on FX. But absent new technology, every doubling of sensor resolution will cost an ISO stop. After folk have been spoiled with 6400 ISO they are going to be somewhat disappointed with 400 ISO for a 200MP FX camera. Going to MX format would allow a much more respectable 1200 or so.

    There is certainly demand for higher resolutions. But not necessarily if you have to give something up to get it.

    MX format looks like a logical move for Nikon. First and most important it completely changes the Nikon/Canon situation, Canon can respond to the D3x but they are unlikely to have an M1 killer at the ready. They would need to buy Mamiya to keep at parity. Second they serve notice that they will have a full pro-range available in the medium format as the limits are being reached in 35mm.

    Third, if they hit the $10K price point (with lens) they will sell a lot of bodies. Probably not as many as they have sold D3s but more than the rest of the medium format digital market by far.

    At $40K there are very few pro photographers who can afford the 40MP ‘blad. But the lower priced ($10K) medium format digital cameras don’t really deliver enough over and above what the D3/D3x do to make them worth while.

    A 40MP the M1 looks like it would outsell the rest of the medium format digital market put together if Nikon can hit a $10K price point.

  • Anonymous

    or we can just make multiple shots of the same location then stitch then voila! a 80+ megapixels?

    actually these sizes are the resolution for 6×6 scans at medium resolution

  • Chris P

    In the 1980’s I ran a small semi-pro, evenings and weekends by personal recommendation, portrait business using a Bronica SQ-A. It still remains, for me, the most comfortable camera I have ever used and I think that a lot of pro photographers would still prefer a square format to the 6 x 4.5 which they are now forced to use by Hassleblad in order to get medium format.

    If this rumour turns out to be correct, another very strong rumour starts to make sense. That is that Fuji are pulling out of dslr manufacture and are selling all their research into dslr sensors to a third party. Fuji’s niche has always been the wedding market because of the dynamic range of their sensor design. if Nikon produce a 36 x 36 square sensor based on Fuji’s sensor technology then there will be a camera which could well be the wedding photographers’ holy grail.

    To support the above thesis there is the fact that adverts have already appeared stating that Nikon will have something big to announce at the wedding professionals’ fair in February. If it is not something particularly of interest to them why announce it there?

    Chris P

  • Chris V

    From a studio shooter’s (fashion and beauty)point of few this may just be the dog’s b@ll@cks… Been seriously considering the new Phase One offer, but might just put that off till this becomes either less vaporware or is busted alltogether…
    Did a little mockup and the difference in image circle needed from 24×36 to 36×36 is not as big as you’d think. It could easily be done with ye good olde F-mount. Maybe some new primes that can accomodate it? I bet some wide angles can already, especially the new T&C’s
    Just imagine, you can shoot square to easily crop to any current page layout size with bleed, or go for 2/3, 4/5, any size you need.. any orientation. For commercial shooters it could be a ‘one in all’ solution? And be honest, for 95% of all apllications, 24mp in the 2/3 format is sufficient and the 40+ at 36x36mm is the icing on the cake.
    Yay! Cake!

  • Adrian

    MX might just mean Modular format – the F4 had modular power options and it and the F5 had modular viewfinders (standard,waist-level and sports) and different backs (standard and enhanced to emprint data on the film).
    No point throwing out that skill set just because we’re digital !!!

  • http://caffeineconsumer.deviantart.com Gard G

    I’d be pretty damn happy if they made such a thing – I’ve been using an Olympus OM-1 for a while now and love it to death for its interchangeable focusing screens, data backs, flash mounting brackets, motor drives and all of that. A digital, modular camera with F-mount would be bliss and heavens for me.

  • Pingback: The multi-camera system at the Tokyo Skytrree is powered by 12 Nikon D3S cameras | Nikon Cameras Blog()

  • Pingback: The multi-camera system at the Tokyo Skytree is powered by 12 Nikon D3S cameras | PhotoZ Press()

  • Pingback: What exactly is the new Nikon sRAW file format? | PhotoZ Press()

  • Back to top