hhahahah. Well said Kyoshi !

I said it before and I'll say it again... that not fully unergonomic "D4x" looks like a lazer printer and a maymia ZD had a baby...

lets name it TONY!!! :^D

In case you missed it on the main page, this is what a modular "D4X" would look like...a monstrosity - YUCK!

http://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/original_260324_chTT8C8KWU5BvWYIEq_7gBB6N.jpg

"Add-ons" or "modules" Nikon dropped them from production for a good reason, no market and no profit.

I think those are more like add-ons or accessories rather than modular units. The prism and motor drives were useful but you could buy the camera as a single "unit" and not worry about ever having to buy separate pieces to make it work. My D70 can take more photos then that film cassette ever could. Other than the CF card and the camera, I didn't have to buy anything else. Why would I want to?

Also those "add-ons" were pretty expensive and only a very small group of photographers actually bought and used them. Now we have all the features those items provided straight out of the single modern camera body. I can imagine modern versions of those big bulky accessories would not be profitable because to the building cost and low unit numbers.

Nikon F was more modular than later models, you could choose from couple of prisms, motor drives, backs and film cassettes so the maturity has nothing to do with modularity, on a contrary (F5 for example has only LED back as an add on). This is an example of Nikon F with replacement prism and motor:

And here is a totally different set:

Ok, have to disagree that computers have become more modular over time. As they have matured they have become less modular and more designed to purpose.

If you doubt that, when was the last time you re-timed and reset the 0 track on a hard drive? When was the last time you swapped out a bad capacitor on the mother board? I used to do all of that for a bank I worked for a few decades ago. Now you just buy a laptop or an iPad and it is what it is. When it becomes obsolete you move on.

While tinkering with modules on a camera might seem fun to the .01% of the users, it would never be a profitable segment unless you could sell all those same parts to camera builders that just built finished units.

jonnyapple said:
I love it, hearty!

LOL! I was in my "Subtle humour" mood. Glad it wasn't wasted :-)

Only 3rd party manufactures seem to take advantage of the "standard" hotshoe...

My cheesy Sunpak auto 2000 DZ works great on Nikon, Sony, Minolta, Pentax, Canon, Olympus, Sigma, and Leica cameras with no modification... Plus It holds strobe "transceivers" up pretty well too like the pocketwizard.

I still see what you mean about incompatibility especially because the SB-800 (or any SB-3 digit for that matter) does a much better job at strobing than any 3rd party could do...

If only everyone shot Nikon, Hearty... If only :^)

jonnyapple said:
I love it, hearty!

I'm not going to disagree with you about modularity in general, but in my opinion DSLRs are already modular in the most important ways (standard memory cards, standard lens mount, standard hotshoe)..

LOL! Standard Hotshoe ! I wanted to lend my friend my Flash, SB-800, and he could not use it.. "ITS A SONY!"

heartyfisher said:
Shelving.

I love it, hearty!

I'm not going to disagree with you about modularity in general, but in my opinion DSLRs are already modular in the most important ways (standard memory cards, standard lens mount, standard hotshoe). As much as I would love to have a modular camera, I don't think most of the market would like one. Not every photographer likes to know as much about their cameras as the people on this forum do. Most just want a reliable machine that will do what they want, the same way most people just want to buy a complete computer system and forget about specs and components—some of my favorite people can't even be bothered to find out which cables plug in where in their computer, let alone to find out anything about what's happening "under the hood." I can't see a modular Nikon being a commercial success.

kyoshinikon said:
The cost essentially being a designers salary who I'm are sure are prone to procrastinate.

LOL I think "designers", like absent minded professors, tend to be a bit less than "commercial" in their use of time. Thats not to say that they are procrastinating! I am sure they are working as efficiently as possible, its just that something in the brain cannot be seen by anyone else :-)

Look, I think we can all agree that generally modular systems are much more efficient and agile to changing environments. Most modular systems occur in mature product lines. eg The Old film SLR, Cars, PC, Shelving. The thing is, the DSLR has not been a Mature Product and hence the lack of true modularization. But it is getting mature fast and we will likely see modularization within 10 years.

And computers...

heartyfisher said:
Maybe not Merc and Audi.. (dont know them well ) but Fords use mazda engines and frames and a few other korean manufacturers. and they all have pretty much interchangeable parts.

That's because Ford owns Mazda. Well they own less of it now but that's why you see Ford parts on Mazdas and Mazda parts on Fords. Plus many parts are built by third companies that often times manufacture cheap parts and sell them to multiple car manufacturers.

If Nikon were to make a modular camera they wouldn't allow others to build parts for it. Nikon would be the sole manufacturer. So it's not a good analogy at all. Car companies are owned by other car companies. Very few actually build their own parts that aren't shared.

Expeed is not a CPU, it is a software that runs on a couple of CPUs, Nikon does not have a resources to build a dedicated CPU.
And there will never be a camera with upgradable CPU, ever ...

Maybe not Merc and Audi.. (dont know them well ) but Fords use mazda engines and frames and a few other korean manufacturers. and they all have pretty much interchangeable parts.

heartyfisher said:
Hi all , in a bit of a hurry so I am going to be a bit brief(and terse :-))

Expeed is just a CPU , Its tuned by the software. so if you add a bit more memory you can load up versions for each Sensor.

True, but you can bet that the Expeed CPU is clocked differently (physically) depending on the camera that it is installed in. I doubt the D3000 uses the same Expeed processor that the D3s does.

NikoDoby said:
Spoken like someone who's never customized a car before. So I'm sure you are going to buy your next Subaru in pieces and build it yourself so that it'll cost you 50% of the original price for the same car?!? Alrighty then...

LOL most people wont do that.. but I was going to upgrade my engine and suspension..just to get a bit of grunt. And Yes I am sure I could do it.. I have tinked a bit in my school days in the workshop :-) And I have looked at prices for engines and frames etc :-) its really just like putting a PC together. May not look preety but will do what I need better than a bought one :-)

Redneck all the way!!! Many mutants have already showed up on this forum anyway such as the 3D camera... Which would make the modular system more useful for a few.

As noted above... Hasselblad anyone?

The problem lies within the cost... A modular camera from Nikon wouldn't be a technological marvel, It is just that Nikon builds upon what it has to keep costs down.

The cost essentially being a designers salary who I'm are sure are prone to procrastinate.

^

Easy! You MacGuyver it!

heartyfisher said:
Hi all , in a bit of a hurry so I am going to be a bit brief(and terse :-))

Expeed is just a CPU , Its tuned by the software. so if you add a bit more memory you can load up versions for each Sensor.

Cars are modular, Just check out just about any episode of Junkyard wars (or similar). Its expensive to customise only becaue you pay to have it customised. If you buy the parts from the manufactures directly you can get a nice ride for about half the price.

It will take a small player with a great design to break the non modular monopoly. Best chance of this would be some one like olympus or pentax or sigma(most likely) they should just give up on the faveon or modularise it ! :-) As I mentioned before the 4/3 companies has the agreements between companies that could make a modular system work. I am not saying it will be a 4/3 I am saying the companies that make up the 4/3 could agree on a modular design and together they can rival and beat the big 2.

Not exactly true on the cars analogy- I'd like to see you fit a part from a Mercedes onto an Audi, but I get your point.

I think that you guys should just petition to have Nikon sell model kits of their DSLRs, then you can customize everything.

haha

heartyfisher said:
Cars are modular, Just check out just about any episode of Junkyard wars (or similar). Its expensive to customise only becaue you pay to have it customised. If you buy the parts from the manufactures directly you can get a nice ride for about half the price.

Spoken like someone who's never customized a car before. So I'm sure you are going to buy your next Subaru in pieces and build it yourself so that it'll cost you 50% of the original price for the same car?!? Alrighty then...

It's a MODULAR camera! Just because they've only released two modules with fixed lenses so far doesn't mean they can't in the future do a module with a sensor and just a lens mount.

In fact at a Ricoh show booth they had a module with a Leica lens mount and also a mount for Hasselblad lenses!