< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon to respond to Sony A900?

I am getting some buzz that Nikon will be releasing some leaks/rumors/official news in the next few days as a response to the freshly released Sony A900. It makes sense to use the momentum of A900 and throw us some bones (Sony and Nikon are sharing sensor technology). Canon has already been teasing its fan base for the past few weeks.

Army of NR readers - keep your eyes open (I will do the same)!

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
  • Vola

    It’s the other way around. The D3 isn’t close to Sony in terms of ISO performance. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&thread=29264391

  • Pablov

    Right, I didn’t say it clearly:

    the Sony A900 doubles the ammount of pixels, 25% more in image size when printing at a given dpi (or viewing in a screen)

  • http://www.xanga.com/matthewsaville Matthew Saville Photography

    Sorry, I got started on the wrong foot: ACTUALLY, I jumped for joy when Nikon made the D3, D300 and D700 “only” 12 megapixels. It is overkill for 50% or more of the work I do, (I frequently output print files at 2.8 megapixels even…) and perfect for even the largest bridal portraits and wedding album spreads. I LOVE Nikon for NOT going past 12 megapixels. The 12 MP FX sensor is a pinnacle, and I will stock up on D700’s the day that Nikon decides to “leave” 12 and make a higher res the norm… I hate the megapixel bandwagon just as much as you do!

    However, I ALSO shoot landscapes. I’ve seen full-wall prints from 4×5 and 8×10 film, and the resolution is breathtaking. But sometimes you can’t pack a whole 4×5 setup, or a Hassy etc. into the crazy, far-away places… Up until today, people like Galen Rowell were limited to the resolution of 35mm film for their kind of photography… But now with new lenses that can easily resolve 24 megapixels on FX, we are stepping into a whole new world… If Nikon made a D700 sized camera with a 24 megapixel sensor, I’d buy one for my landscape photography as soon as I could afford it…

    =Matt=

  • isa

    FF for everyone sounds really good. But, will really everyone buy such a camera? This cameras are heavy and you have to carry a lot of huge an expensive lenses with you… I can’t imagine that everyone will do this.

  • isa

    Yeah, also in 2008 there a lot of people shooting with film. Buy the newest issue of «Monocle» and look at the photos. A lot of them are shot with film. Tyler Brulé himself approved that in an interview with the swiss weekly periodical «Das Magazin». He don’t like this soul- and characterless pixelcrap. And he is not alone: Take a look at magazines like «Paradis», «Purple» or «Fantastic Man».

    Here in Europe, especially in Switzerland, you have to shoot with MF if you are a serious lifestyle or fashion photographer. No one of them cares about these high-res Canons and upcoming Sonys and Nikons. Because the image quality of 35mm FF is miles behind of MF. If you can’t afford a Hassie or Phase One, rent one, enlarge your network and improve your skills to be a better photographer to stay easier in competition!

  • isa

    Sony A900:

    - Rescaled from 24 to 12 mp
    - NR is ON

    I don’t wondered about the result.

  • isa

    Yes and this professionals are working with medium or large format cameras – and not with 35mm FF! And this exactly is is the reason why Nikon and Leica are working on Rangefinder MF systems. How difficult is it for you to understand?

  • Anonymous

    ok… why is everyone panicking about buying d3 or d700 then feels stupid cause sony a900 have twice as much as the cameras they already have?

    nikon d300 d700 and d3 are perfect for dark condition shooting but not for insanely high resolution work so just use what you already have!

  • Vola

    According to the poster there is no NR. I don’t think having the image rescaled diminishes the result at all. That’s the only way to compare the two and as it stands the comparison would indicate that, at D700’s level, the A900 performs better.

  • ChrisL

    Not 25% (1.25) times either :) its square root of 2, ie around 1.4. Photographers are familiar with 1.4 (and 2.8, and 5.6) as the numbers between 1, 2, 4 and 8 right?

  • Adam

    LOL if Nikon use the A900’s sensor

    More rubbish NR from Nikon to come to fix all that horrible horrible noise.

  • MarkDphotoguy

    While I agree that if you shoot FF on FX (meaning no cropping) as I do 12Mp is more than enough to pull off a very large print. For wildlife shooters that may not have the luxury of getting as close as they need to be for their lenses focal length are forced to crop. Not a big deal if your not printing too big but as soon as you do even with the interpolation software out there you will still wind up with a compromised image (if viewed by pixel peepers or the image is displayed in the wrong location and someone is standing too close).
    I always try to shoot full frame (in terms of capture area) to maximize the smoothness of the across frame gradation so for the likes of you or I we’ll never get to a point where we need more MP but there are allot of folks who will (mostly wildlife and landscape pixel peeping shooters) which although we may not agree with them, they have a right to pursue the photography that turns their crank and Nikon will at some point make a camera to suit them. Hopefully in a future follow on to the D3 nikon will not go to too much of a higher MP count (I’m betting 18Mp post bayer design like Thom Hogan talks about) but if they do you can bet it will not be at the expense of high ISO quality. Not so for a future D700 or D800? type camera which is more towards the consumer end.

  • David Olsen

    Sony have just released a firmware update for the A700 so u´you can turn off the noise reduction .. the pictures from a A700 now look very , very similar to the D300 pics with it turned off.. turned on the A700 pics had less noise than D300 equivalent ..The NR in the D700/3 is by no means rubbish and requires the minimum of post sharpening to be crisp.

  • Anonymous

    Now this is weird math. 12*1.25=24. You’re talking about linear resolution, obviously, but still got the maths wrong (41% is the right number).

  • Daniel

    Canon 1Ds MkIII doesn’t have noise issues in low ISO, so it is possible. Just because the new Sony is not that good doesn’t mean it can’t be done.

  • Daniel

    I bet in Europe and USA everybody uses top of the line tools. Unfortunately I live in a third world country (Brazil). This means that I have to pay 2 times more for the equipment and that i get half the money for my pictures.
    Just as a reference, the D3 here costs about U$10.000. For the price of a Hassel H3D with just basic lenses I could buy a decent apartment.
    I am making good money with my new D700 (I used a D200 until few weeks ago) in advertising, but these cameras are just not enough. If I didn’t have 10 years of investment in Nikon glass I would already bought the 21MP Canon a long time ago.

  • Pablov

    bet it, I completely understand that situation…

    That’s why I said DSLRs should be cheaper at this time of growing expansion (and shorter time between new models releases)

  • Pablov

    Despite the near off-topic comments about high-res sensors, noise, etc., this blog received more attention than usual, I guess ?

    Many of us are really waiting to see what Nikon has to offer soon :)

    Some others are happy with what they already have, and that’s great too

    The most important: if someone know any new about upcoming DSLR, please share it :)

  • Daniel

    It’s not difficult at all for me to understand. I just don’t agree. If it is possible to make a good 24MP Nikon, with comfortable size, decent AF and relatively cheap glass (compared to MF) why the hell should I pay a small fortune for a MF System? I do rent one when I think i need it, but with a 24MP+ Nikon i think i wouldn’t need to do it anymore.
    Why would I have to jump from a U$5.000 camera to U$30.000 to get bigger pictures? I would love a U$8.000 option on the middle.
    MF Cameras a awful to use. F4-like AF, big, heavy ant terrible interface. Its not just the price.
    An I am one of these pros that should have a MF System. But I am also a third world citizen that struggles to buy very expensive equipment.

  • Blog Admin

    we are getting a lot of discussions here – should I add a forum to this blog?

  • Pablov

    I was observing and comparing the A900 sample images with some others taken by a D700

    The feature I love the most of the D700/D3 sensor is the purity of its image colors, total absence of noise at low ISO.
    I use to compare shots (or part of them) of a deep blue sky at ISO 200.

    In that situation the A900 shows a little noise, while the D700 does not.

    If Nikon can’t handle a 24MP sensor without that noise (or chroma noise) at ISO 200 I would prefer a lower resolution sensor, for instance 18 MP that could offer (hopefully) the same image quality of the actual D700/D3 in terms of noise.

    I also read somewhere that the sensors Nikon use in some DSLRs are made by Sony (D700, D3 ? )

  • Adam

    I find Nikon’s high ISO pictures to lack quite a bit of detail. Oh it might get rid of noise, but it’s too aggressive. Which confirms my suspisions it is just a marketing gimmick. They should’ve capped the D3/700 @ 3200, with two stops additional in options (so 12800 max)

  • David Olsen

    I use 12 800 for black and white street photography and find it perfect ..almost like an old hassey.
    agree 25 600 is gimmickey but even there marketing men need something to play with !!
    6400 with positive EV ( .3-.7 ) holds more than enough detail for 95% of needs.
    Interesting at the moment is a D300 + a D700 costs exactly the same as a D3 …
    The gap is so small between a D700 and a D3 .. what price for nikon coming with a D3X + sensor upgrade for present D3 owners ? maybe not but would be nice ….

  • Pingback: h10 hotels codes()

  • Pingback: Voucher Pug()

  • Back to top