I was referring to the size of the "bandwidth" coming from the sensor and not the "storage" size jonny. Regardless of how you "calculate" it there's a lot of data coming from a sensor that size.

That's right that each pixel has 3 colors, but you're thinking too much like a photographer, hearty. ;-)

When you say 2MP, it's already assumed that there are data for all three channels at every pixel. That's not true in raw, which is why a lossless raw file can be 3 times smaller than a lossless tiff—there's no interpolation in the raw to get RGB values for each pixel.

Nikon doesn't offer raw video...yet.

jonnyapple said:
Regardless of sensor resolution, 1080 video is 2MP, Niko. The 1080 refers to vertical lines of resolution and the aspect ratio is 16:9, so it's 1080x(1080x16/9) = 1080x1920 = 2MP. File size is essentially the same for any 1080 video at the same frame rate, same interlace method (p or i), and same codec.

I have been thinking about this.. and .. I am not certain it is 2MP.. isnt each pixel 3 colours on the TV? wont that mean that the camera needs to have "raw/native" 2MP? ie each raw pixel is made up of 4 pixels on a digital camera. so it needs to be at least an 8MP(probably at least 10MP to account for the dimensions) camera to do 1080p?

Notice the 1percent probability rating on that rumor though

Now the very latest on rumors says 24mp and iso 100-3200 with H1 L1 etc. Is this a big enough improvement on the D3X which goes to iso 1600? I think it might have more megapixels because late this year and all next year, I believe we will see an explosion in the MP wars. I know, I know megapixels don't matter..

shivaswrath said:
doubt it's a heat thing - I'm no physicist or engineer, but I would imagine a larger sensor would be able to dissipate the heat more rapidly?

I'm pretty sure that's right. More area to sink it from and smaller power generated/area.(?)

Regardless of sensor resolution, 1080 video is 2MP, Niko. The 1080 refers to vertical lines of resolution and the aspect ratio is 16:9, so it's 1080x(1080x16/9) = 1080x1920 = 2MP. File size is essentially the same for any 1080 video at the same frame rate, same interlace method (p or i), and same codec.

But I think you're right about no video on a 30+ MP camera at least for now because you still do have to read out from the entire sensor 24 or 30 times per second, and that is a huge bandwidth requirement. This site claims 1080p at 60Hz requires 125Mb/s of bandwidth, so that would put 30MP at 30Hz around 1Gb/s! But someday it will probably happen in a camera that doesn't cost you a year's salary like those 6k/9k RED epics do.

I don't think it'll have video because of the "evidence" I've seen coming from Sony. The a900 replacement will have a 30 plus megapixel Super HAD CCD (II?) sensor which will probably NOT have video capability. The D3X is mainly a studio camera. Studio/portrait photographers don't need 30 megapixels of 720 or 1080 video. Imagine the size of those video files!!!! Those types of photographers need high resolution, high dynamic range, and high color clarity. A D3XS would improve in those areas against the D3X.

Those who want/need video need a camera for mobility and versatility like the D90,D300, and D3S. So those are the cameras that will see HD video. I think the D90 replacement will be the first Nikon with 1080 video. Maybe Nikon will go back to a CCD on that camera too?

doubt it's a heat thing - I'm no physicist or engineer, but I would imagine a larger sensor would be able to dissipate the heat more rapidly?

I'll put strong money on it having video - Nikon is notorious for mid-cylce upgrades, so besides tweaks to the processor, buffer, sensor, and menu layout (to align with D3s), they'll add video similar to the D3s.

Question of size will be key.

I suspect 720p.

Why?

Because the D4/D4x/D400 will *hopefully* bear the 1080p mark and differentiate product lines. . .

Maybe is about heat, shortening the life of the sensor??

NikoDoby said:
I really don't think the D3XS will have video of any kind. Just more megapixels and improved ISO performance.

Why do you think that Niko? Video is something that it is buried into the menu with a possibility of an extra outside button to activate the video, so I don't see any problem or time consuming for Nikon to do that because Nikon has the formula already and know what to do.

What I am trying to say is that the video in DSLR is not a problem and since it is a menu activation it makes it easy for people to decide if they want to use it or not.

If occasion arises then it is there for you to record that moment as well as having the pictures.

Processors are getting faster and ram memory cheaper nowadays, so Nikon can make use of it at its maximum power.

Why not ad another EXPEED processor for double the speed on everything and increase the internal ram memory to make room for future firmware updates.

I really don't think the D3XS will have video of any kind. Just more megapixels and improved ISO performance.

NikoDoby said:
I've heard one rumor that said the D3XS could possibly have a totally new sensor. A new Nikon sensor design to replace the current Sony based one. I don't think 720p is a bad thing despite what many here say.

720p video in a 24mpx camera is weird and would make me wonder why Nikon is playing this game... 720p is like 1megapixel, I mean cmon...

If Nikon makes another 720p camera it shows that they have no interest in video... that wouldn't surprise me, they make DSLR...

NSXType-R said:
Do you want to switch to the Alpha mount though?

Heck I've considered it! That a900 is one awesome body and defiantly a better shooter than the 5D mII (D700 still tops all but the D3ees)

Sounds like it is going to have the best of both worlds judging by the rumors board today May 19th. The D3S Iso skills and the D3X resolution! Can you imagine in the same camera? You would have to believe it would 720p and not 1080p because Nikon would never give its customer the best of everything on the market in one body. Still this would one incredible camera! Images of the D4X that must be fake, but look very cool. It looks like a digital back camera like a Hassy. I think the new D4 will be a monster for resolution and ISO at least 39mp...

Well that Zeiss 135mm f1.8 has been tempting me...

NikoDoby said:
Wow here's a shocker but the more I think about it the less it shocks me. As you all know, or should know, the Sony a900 (Yes this is another Sony rumor that directly relates to Nikon so keep reading) has been discontinued. A Chinese website is claiming that the next pro Sony will have a 34mp CCD sensor!

Bad news is that it won't have any video capabilities. As others have pointed out the cameras in this medium format range of megapixels are used for studio work so HD video would be pointless. Although canon's 1DsMk4 might actually have video. And don't forget that above 24mp all other cameras, medium format etc., use CCDs and not CMOS sensors.

The D3X currently uses the "same" 24mp Sony sensor from the a900. So perhaps the D3XS will get this new 34mp CCD sensor to compete against the rumored canon 1DsMk4 with it's rumored 30 plus megapixels.

What if Sony keeps the price of the next "a950" at about $3000USD AND offers 34mp!!! That would be crazy!

Do you want to switch to the Alpha mount though?

Wow here's a shocker but the more I think about it the less it shocks me. As you all know, or should know, the Sony a900 (Yes this is another Sony rumor that directly relates to Nikon so keep reading) has been discontinued. A Chinese website is claiming that the next pro Sony will have a 34mp CCD sensor!

Bad news is that it won't have any video capabilities. As others have pointed out the cameras in this medium format range of megapixels are used for studio work so HD video would be pointless. Although canon's 1DsMk4 might actually have video. And don't forget that above 24mp all other cameras, medium format etc., use CCDs and not CMOS sensors.

The D3X currently uses the "same" 24mp Sony sensor from the a900. So perhaps the D3XS will get this new 34mp CCD sensor to compete against the rumored canon 1DsMk4 with it's rumored 30 plus megapixels.

What if Sony keeps the price of the next "a950" at about $3000USD AND offers 34mp!!! That would be crazy!

i think we'd def need a better processer to handle any level of video from that sensor; the amount of data captured would literally DOUBLE compared to the D3s.

I hope the video option becomes realistic, I'll have to admit I was a strong nay-sayer at first, but have come to love have clips I can allow my clients to see when I'm on a shoot to just capture their awkward commentary, stupid bloopers, and "cute" moments. . .things I wouldn't otherwise be able to capture (thank god smugmug allows videos though, otherwise it wouldn't be possible!)

Maybe
no
no
yes

and I would love to see one more expeed processor in it, this would help to play with this big files, also better iso performance is a must IMHO, don't care about video

Hearty, I think I'd agree with you about processing the huge amounts of data with 24MP, but I think currently the way the video works is to decimate the data to resize it instead of something more complex. I'm saying they just keep a small fraction of the pixels and throw the rest away. I've never gotten around to checking that, but I guess someone could do it with the right pattern of dots and a sharp enough lens. Maybe someday I'll get around to testing. I guess even if that's the way they do it, you may be right that they have to read the data from all the photosites whether or not they throw it away downstream.

edit: If I'm right about, this is actually one place that video has lots of room to improve, and all that's required is more processing power to average more than one pixel to improve the already-impressive low light capabilities.

The D3x could use a better buffer... But I wouldn't argue with much more than that because it probably would have a tie in with the video...

Yeah what would be the point of a D3XS if it didn't have better ISO, DR, and video? Like I said an "S" version would have a totally new sensor design and I agree with solid_liq that adding video wouldn't be a major feat. It was pretty "easy" thing to add with the D3 and D300 so why not the D3X?

The D2XS had a bigger buffer, better ISO range, better metering, and a lot of software/menu improvements.

I doubt that the D3XS will have video. Doesn't fit the target market. and due to the amount of data needed to be drained from the sensor its likely that any video would be stretching to reach 24 FPS if it is even possible. It would probably need a whole new sensor design to get video from a D3X. So probably the D4X will have video but I would guess that we wont have a D3XS.

I don't know why everyone complains about video features on DSLR's... The technology is already developed. All they do is enable the resolution and frame rate that the hardware can handle. It's not like it's actually decreasing other capabilities/features that otherwise would be added.

(engineer who formerly worked developing digital video systems)