Comments on: Is that it?

By: Dee Tee

Dee Tee — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 03:37:35 +0000

fooling around with the contrast on that inside-the-helicopter pic it seems to me that that camera is wearing “clothes.” It looks like something black knitted garment that has been strapped around the camera so that nobody will actually see what it is. This is most likely the reason why the lens-flare protector is put backwards as well. This is why the size also seems to be a bit bigger than it is.

The Sony would be much more well defined as it shows in this pic:
http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/2346220671-f08cf846c0-o.jpg

What is Nikon UP to?!?!?!

By: Steve Meddle

Steve Meddle — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:21:05 +0000

Just found this link while sifting around the net for Nikon D800/900

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/277348758/_UNLOCK_Original_Nikon_D90_Nikon.html

There are so many references to D900/800 that I’m going dizzy…I want to buy a D700 but keep being told to wait…

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:31:23 +0000

“6. The switch appears to be in the middle of the lens, but if this were a zoom lens we would expect to see this more towards the body. Thus it is a prime lens as there is not enough room in the front for the focus and the zoom (unless it is a push pull – not likely)”

Not sure about that one. Placement of this switch in the middle could qualify this lens as the 17-35 or something replacing it. Most of Nikon’s consumer-type zooms w/ AF-S have the M/A M switch closer to the body, while most of their more pro-level wide zooms w/ AF-S have the switch nearer the center of the lens.

One thing that is curious to me is that the shape of the hood *seems* to more closely resemble that of the 24-120 or the 18-70 DX. That doesn’t indicate anything about the sensor size, but might, quite possibly, indicate something about the length of the zoom – if it’s a zoom lens. The shape of the lens (the stepped narrowing from front to back) and the placement of the M/A – M switch, seem to point to something like the 17-35. The shape of the hood *might*, if I’m right, indicate something like the 24-120, 18-70, 18-200, etc – but the shape of the lens, the placement of the switch don’t mesh with that. So, I’m thinking I’m wrong about the hood and *possibly* right about the shape and switch placement. In that case, I’m betting this is a 17-35ish replacement.

As far as body goes – it’s got the strap lugs of a D300 or above. It’s got the large viewfinder (apparently) of a FF body. It’s tough to discern whethere there’s a battery grip, an integrated grip or something else below it. Bob, as it has been pointed out, tends toward lighter kit. So, I’m going with that and guessing it’s not a big, professional body, but something of the size (or smaller) of the D700 and it’s FF (35mm sensor size).

So – with all that – no idea what it all is. None at all. Zilch.

By: Bostjan

Bostjan — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:12:00 +0000

The lens on the picture looks quite big. From the shape of the hood it’s most likely a WA lens.

These three sentences are most likely written on purpose:
a) We’re shooting aerials of Miami…at twilight.
b) As Paris Hilton might say, “That’s huge.”
c) I’ll find out in early February.

Now think… is D700 or D90 replacement huge? Would Bob write this for a D700 or D90 replacement? And we know that nothing in the form od D3s/D3x is coming.

There must be a reason for shooting hand-held in twilight…. D3, D700 and D3 are already capable to do this without a problem… but is it possible to use any known MF format camera on the market for handheld shooting at twilight?

Now think!

By: noexani

noexani — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 20:02:46 +0000

To me what’s interesting about the lens here, is: If it is a FF Nikkor then this is very interesting indeed. The hood looks identical to the fairly unique HB-28, and not much like HB-25 (24-120mm VR). Is he using a 24-85mm AF-S? Not likely. It’s far too big.

Okay so I’m a bit over hopeful for a 24mm f/1.4 but I can hope…

By: Lolly

Lolly — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:33:23 +0000

Look carefully at the photo and perhaps you can see a round button, similar to Zeiss (Sony) lens, right under the blue mark … as for the body, your guess is as good as mine.

By: getanalogue

getanalogue — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:25:19 +0000

Now I know: It’s a MF Nikon plus Zeiss glass

By: Chris Lilley

Chris Lilley — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:04:47 +0000

I would agree with that, its a fairly obvious distinguishing mark of the Sony Zeiss lenses.

By: getanalogue

getanalogue — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:44:27 +0000

Kristen says “no one of us can afford it”. A D4 with 36 MP? An MF Nikon? Size of lens could match. Competitor to Leica S2 (this truly a competitor for Nikon)? With a Kodak sensor? We’ll see, I am patient, will not need such gear, don’t have to earn my living as photographer anymore, fortunately. Spending 5 digit amounts for new bodies every other year – painful.

By: Adam

Adam — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 01:36:20 +0000

totally agree, it also makes life much easier to just take out the flash gun from the hotshoe and place it somewhere and use the built in flash to trigger it.

By: wow!

wow! — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:10:37 +0000

Wow, are you people really that “perfect’ where you never find a need…ever…for a pop-up flash? Geez, I didn’t think I’d ever use it either, but I swear, it sure has come in handy when my sb600 or sb900 isn’t available or I just need a quick, immediate flash.

By: Micke

Micke — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:24:30 +0000

I have no idea what’s been said or has not been said. But I can’t recall any Nikkor FX-lenses which uses such a hood…. Looks like the 18-200 hood.

And to the dude who said it was a Sony. The camera has a Nikon strap mount.

By: Micah

Micah — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:26:09 +0000

Everybody seem to be on about a new prism housing hump…but there’s a left thumb place along it. The darkly colored glove makes it look like it’s part of the body. But really, there’s the same general shape of a body that has a non-integral battery grip.

That’s where I stop, since the rest is guessing.

By: WoutK89

WoutK89 — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:22:29 +0000

“it would canibalise the sales of d3x and d3s”

Add the word not, and you are right!

And they added the s version of the D3, to give people something new, within the life cycle, not because they havent got a new sensor yet. The sensor is probably already there for the D4.

By: Micah

Micah — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:21:21 +0000

If a helicopter is in the air, it is indeed flying.

Hovering is a form of (quite active) flying.

There are a heck of a lot of vibrations going on in a operating helicopter. VR could help. But seriously quit making up unrealistic lenses.

By: WoutK89

WoutK89 — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:19:13 +0000

Not taking pictures of you, that’s for sure then

By: b

Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:16:48 +0000

i say prime. i can not really see two rings to focus and zoom. i guess the focus ring is behind the hood. judging from the hood 24/1.4!

By: zeeGerman

zeeGerman — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:49:55 +0000

The noise levels of the D3 and the D3x are actually not that far apart from each other. It’s less than a fifth of a stop.
So a 18mp FX sensor could clearly produce a quite decent picture (at least) at ISO6400 with a 24mm f/1.4 in a low light situation.

By: Speculatius

Speculatius — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:49:21 +0000

No need to be hysteric

The new camera will be a 12 mp sensor type with 720p video the same as d3s in a d700 body. Everything else would be unlogical because it would canibalise the sales of d3x and d3s.

The fact that Nikon introduced a modified D3 and called it d3s instead of introducing a d4 with a higher pixelcount shows that Nikon has not jet developed a new Sensor . Therefor it is to assume that the next new Nikon will be a D700s.

Sorry to burst bubbles.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:48:54 +0000

No need to be hysteric

The new camera will be a 12 mp sensor type with 720p video the same as d3s in a d700 body. Everything else would be unlogical because it would canibalise the sales of d3x and d3s.

Sorry to burst bubbles.