If Nikon made a DSLR with an interchangeable sensor system, would you want it ?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

If Nikon made a DSLR with an interchangeable sensor system, would you want it ?

(52 posts) (12 voices)

Tags:

No tags yet.

12 3 Next »

bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

Alright with all the Advantages of different kinds of sensors: High VS lower MP, even IR conversion and maybe even a dedicated B&W sensor, you could end up with 3 or more similar DSLR.

Alright what about this, and I'm just estimating cost of this system

You start with a D300I or D700I (I for interchangeable)at app couple hundred $ above normal pricing, this a future model so 16MP DX and 24MP FX

Then you can purchase sensor modules: app $500 DX, $ 1,000 FX

Lower MP(8DX,12FX), with very high ISO

IR sensor module

B&W module

All modules includes hardware/software that will the function in IR and B&W when these modules are in use

After installing a sensor module the camera will auto calibrate sensor location.

I think the module should be inserted from the side

The module would have a cover that it slides into for safe storage

The sensor should now also be easier to clean and inspect

Anyway what do you think

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
Demisthene Akatsuki

preferred member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 115
offline

Yes, who wouldn't want to be able to purchase one body, and with a single extra purchase or two, decide wether you want to be in FX or DX mode, not to mention different amount of MP's, B&W Sensor, IR Sensor, i mean come on, this would be totally awesome.
This might even mean you could use the same bodies as new sensors are developed.
However, from Nikon's side, im not sure if this would be benefecial economically?.

This would save having to buy several different bodies.
But, the only factor for me in it is, i always carry two bodies anyway, with 2 different lenses.
So, if i were to purchase such a body, it would be solely for the ability to have the IR and B&W sensor handy!, these 2 would be worth the whole purchase in my book anyway.

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

I think interchangeable sensor will be the future for many of the reasons mentioned here. Not the least additional reason is that the electronic parts of a DSLR will decline in price relative to the mechanical and optical parts over time. The electronic parts could be divided into two sub-systems - sensors and storage, processing and power management. The sensors could be slipped in from the bottom of the camera like the battery on my D90. Medium format digital camera have long had interchangeable backs, why not the same for DSLRs?

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

Demisthene Akatsuki said:

This might even mean you could use the same bodies as new sensors are developed.
However, from Nikon's side, im not sure if this would be benefecial economically?.

This would save having to buy several different bodies.
But, the only factor for me in it is, i always carry two bodies anyway, with 2 different lenses.
So, if i were to purchase such a body, it would be solely for the ability to have the IR and B&W sensor handy!, these 2 would be worth the whole purchase in my book anyway.

Nikon would actual do well with this, think about it, we now have lens loyalty to Nikon, I have their lenses and it would be make sense to stick with their bodies, however now you have their body and why not update the sensor, get that IR camera that always dreamed and it is all being made by Nikon

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
Demisthene Akatsuki

preferred member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 115
offline

Yeah, i see your point there, i did however say i would purchase it just for the IR and B&W itself, the rest is just a very welcomed bonus.

What i was thinking about, the sensor being cheaper, they would be selling sensors as upgrades over full bodies, but i guess maybe more people will be able to afford upgrading since the sensors going to be cheaper over a full body.

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

Demisthene Akatsuki said:
Yeah, i see your point there, i did however say i would purchase it just for the IR and B&W itself, the rest is just a very welcomed bonus.

What i was thinking about, the sensor being cheaper, they would be selling sensors as upgrades over full bodies, but i guess maybe more people will be able to afford upgrading since the sensors going to be cheaper over a full body.

In the end we have so much to spend on gear, this way I could actual afford to get IR and my body might be lasting longer. Also I think you have lets say XX MP sensor and a new Sensor is out, You might actual update the sensor and in no way would have thought about updating the whole camera

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
Demisthene Akatsuki

preferred member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 115
offline

Aye, what they must do tho is create a reliable system for this to work, which i have no doubt they will if they make one.
I prefer spending my money on good glass over a body aswell, so sometimes when new bodies come out i ignore it, but with this system one might tend to upgrade more often, not many of us can afford to spring for a d3, then a d700, then the d3x and then cuz the d3s is awesome in ISO, they get that aswell, sometimes i envy those who can do that =).

Posted 3 years ago #
mb

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,160
offline

I was hoping for such a camera body for some time.
I think that it would be more realistic to change the entire back rather than just a sensor, and I think it is feasible solution only for a pro body like D3 and maybe D300/D700 but I doubt we will ever see D90 with this feature.
The price should probably be about half the price of the new camera but it will have many benefits you people already mentioned. Some of us remember good old film system cameras with interchangeable everything and that could last a decade or more.

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

mb said:
I was hoping for such a camera body for some time.
I think that it would be more realistic to change the entire back rather than just a sensor, and I think it is feasible solution only for a pro body like D3 and maybe D300/D700 but I doubt we will ever see D90 with this feature.
The price should probably be about half the price of the new camera but it will have many benefits you people already mentioned. Some of us remember good old film system cameras with interchangeable everything and that could last a decade or more.

Yes I agree, I only think it is feasible on D300 and up bodies, because the body could last for 5 years+ for most people. For me this would finally allow me to get into IR, I just hate the idea of spending $400+ on an old body conversion. And I think pro's would love the quality a true B&W sensor could produce

Also I don't think there should be any problems of installing the sensor correctly, the sensor would self adjust, just like it has to do in Sony and Pentax bodies

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
bernard

preferred member
Joined: Aug '09
Posts: 309
offline

That would be neat ! But they'd better design a system that keeps dust away from the sensors ! It was a nightmare on my D100 and D70 and I wouldn't like to start cleaning sensors every day…

Posted 3 years ago #
mb

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,160
offline

Sometimes it is not just the sensor that has to be changed but the processor and chip-set too, and it would be nice if we could upgrade LCD as well, though I agree that it would be better solution if everything is modular and interchangable.

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

bernard said:
That would be neat ! But they'd better design a system that keeps dust away from the sensors ! It was a nightmare on my D100 and D70 and I wouldn't like to start cleaning sensors every day…

When the sensor is in place dust problem should be nothing worse that now, you would want to change sensor in a clean place right, and if they were something stuck on your sensor, now the sensor should be a lot easier to inspect and clean

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
Demisthene Akatsuki

preferred member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 115
offline

Yes, i agree with bernard about the dust issues this might add, however i also think with this system, as mentioned before, inspecting and cleaning the sensor might be easier.
I clean my sensor quite often, and by quite often, i mean i clean my sensor everytime ive changed my batteries around 5 times,give or take, unless dust spots show up before this, after every shoot i inspect my sensor with a sensor loupe by visible dust, if ive changed lenses or used TC's often.

I do that, because every night i clean my equipment anyway when ive been out all day,not extensively, but i do like to give all my gear a wipe with a cloth.

Posted 3 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

Hell's yeah I would!

Imagine a D40 with a D3s sensor?

Or a FM2 with a digital back?

That'd freaking awesome!

And you're right, you shouldn't need to throw out your D700 body 10 years from now. You should instead repurpose the body for something else.

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

NSXType-R said:
Hell's yeah I would!

Imagine a D40 with a D3s sensor?

Or a FM2 with a digital back?

That'd freaking awesome!

And you're right, you shouldn't need to throw out your D700 body 10 years from now. You should instead repurpose the body for something else.

10 years, more like 5 years and we feel like replacing, but this idea would only work on near pro cameras, I think the cost of the sensor module would be to high for the implementation in D40/60/3000 size cameras. You are not swapping shutter/mirror just the sensor assemply, so DX stays DX and who would downgrade FX to DX.

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

But to save money, one could purchase a used pro DSLR and just upgrade the sensor assembly and get a near modern camera,

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
Demisthene Akatsuki

preferred member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 115
offline

Seems like "There IS no end to the possibilities!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111oneone" hehe.
Certainly, if this would become common practice for Nikon Camera's in the future, i believe it would be a huge advantage for both Nikon and its customers,even more so if Nikon were the first manufacturer to implement this in their PRO DSLR Line.
Yes i know im contradicting myself now,compared to my previous posts, but ive been thinking this over quite alot since this thread started.

Posted 3 years ago #
Willis

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 1,123
offline

I don't think I'd be interested in that. I mean think about it: Would you want a car with an interchangeable engine? How about your computer (which is interchangeable). How many of us have actually upgraded the processor on a computer? I have... back in the 80's\early 90's (upgraded my 286 PC\AT to a 386 chip. Its never made much sense ever since.

By definition, you are going to have a substantially less weather resistant, and more prone to damage from being knocked around. I certainly wouldn't ever change sensor out in the field. Sometime I carry around two bodies just so I don't have to be bothered to change lenses. I'd rather have mutiple cameras rather than a multi purpose camera (B&W, IR, etc.)

So The question then becomes Would I be interested in an upgradeable camera? I guess i would, but I'm skeptical that I would see much in terms of savings. Ironoically, what intrigues me most about this possibility is the ability to use one sensor with several different form factors of camera (small D40 size for travel, all the way to D3 size for studio \ tripod work).

Posted 3 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

bmxdad said:
10 years, more like 5 years and we feel like replacing, but this idea would only work on near pro cameras, I think the cost of the sensor module would be to high for the implementation in D40/60/3000 size cameras. You are not swapping shutter/mirror just the sensor assemply, so DX stays DX and who would downgrade FX to DX.

Pete

It's not likely I'd upgrade within 5 years if I ever got my hands on a D700. The price would be too high for me. 10 years sounds just about right for me, but of course it'd be different for everyone.

Willis said:
I don't think I'd be interested in that. I mean think about it: Would you want a car with an interchangeable engine? How about your computer (which is interchangeable). How many of us have actually upgraded the processor on a computer? I have... back in the 80's\early 90's (upgraded my 286 PC\AT to a 386 chip. Its never made much sense ever since.

By definition, you are going to have a substantially less weather resistant, and more prone to damage from being knocked around. I certainly wouldn't ever change sensor out in the field. Sometime I carry around two bodies just so I don't have to be bothered to change lenses. I'd rather have mutiple cameras rather than a multi purpose camera (B&W, IR, etc.)

So The question then becomes Would I be interested in an upgradeable camera? I guess i would, but I'm skeptical that I would see much in terms of savings. Ironoically, what intrigues me most about this possibility is the ability to use one sensor with several different form factors of camera (small D40 size for travel, all the way to D3 size for studio \ tripod work).

Not necessarily- the film back door for film SLR's is pretty large. I haven't handled a pro film SLR, but I would imagine that the weather sealing was still enough to handle a brief downpour in a F6 or F5.

The thing that I hate the most is that you're camera will always be outmoded. How cool would it be to own a D2x, drop a FX sensor in and be running with the D3s, while at the same time swapping out the LCD and perhaps the viewfinder as well?

(Assuming everything fits, DX to FX is absolutely possible, etc.)

It wasn't really thought about film- the film always needed to be loaded, but we really can't load new sensors, right?

Posted 3 years ago #
soap

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 606
offline

While I love the ideas you have in your last paragraph, Willis, I think you're violating Marketing 101. ;)

What you are describing is allowing consumers to pick features a-la-carte. When consumers can pick and choose individual features, instead of being "forced" to pick from a limited number of packages, the consumer becomes empowered and profit margins fall.

Posted 3 years ago #
mb

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,160
offline

Swapping viewfinders or focusing ground glass is one of the things I really miss, and it was easily done on a 30 years old cameras.
Sad but true I really doubt any manufacturer will gladly go this way because it will mean loosing the money ... much better to sell a new and slightly improved body every year then investing in this technology

Posted 3 years ago #
Willis

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 1,123
offline

soap said:
While I love the ideas you have in your last paragraph, Willis, I think you're violating Marketing 101. ;)

What you are describing is allowing consumers to pick features a-la-carte. When consumers can pick and choose individual features, instead of being "forced" to pick from a limited number of packages, the consumer becomes empowered and profit margins fall.

... Maybe Soap... Maybe. It depends on how you price them. A brand new D40 costs about $430 right now. If I had a D700, I'd happily pay the same price if I could somehow jam my D700's sensor into the D40 (DX and FX concerns aside) for those times when I need a smaller footprint. So now Nikon is selling the smae camera body at the same price, only without any included sensor.

My guess is that a modular system would generate a little less revenue, but substantially higher profit margins.

Posted 3 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

Willis said:
... Maybe Soap... Maybe. It depends on how you price them. A brand new D40 costs about $430 right now. If I had a D700, I'd happily pay the same price if I could somehow jam my D700's sensor into the D40 (DX and FX concerns aside) for those times when I need a smaller footprint. So now Nikon is selling the smae camera body at the same price, only without any included sensor.

My guess is that a modular system would generate a little less revenue, but substantially higher profit margins.

Willis, just wondering, did you consider my thoughts about weather sealing on film cameras in my earlier post?

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

NSX weather sealing doesn't mean water proof!

And the idea of a digital back adapter for 35mm film cameras is a very old one. I remember when eFilm cartridges were going to revolutionize film cameras.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/9909/99090501siliconfilm.asp

It officially became a stupid idea and died a few years later.

Posted 3 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

Well the thing is, I'm not exactly sure how weather proof a F5 or F6 is. I mean, if they can reasonably weatherproof the door for film, they can reasonably weather proof the door for the sensor.

Posted 3 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12 3 Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.

If Nikon made a DSLR with an interchangeable sensor system, would you want it ?

Reply »