In a post somewhere recently I saw a comment about Nikon producing a B&W only version of the D90. If only it could be true...Anybody else heard this rumor or know anything?
Regards.
D90 in B&W version only
(95 posts) (13 voices)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
It won't happen.... There just isn't any market for it. I could see a Samsung or a Sony giving it a try, but Nikon \ Cannon are too conservative to go out on a limb like that without somebody else trying it first.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I think D90 is already black only with a hint of white and red ;)
Posted 3 years ago # -
On a bit of a side note, isn't it weird that there's a red stripe on the Nikon cameras but red doesn't appear anywhere on the corporate logo- in fact, just yellow and black. Why is that?
Posted 3 years ago # -
The red slash is from Giorgetto Giugiaro design. He has been designing Nikon camera bodies since the 1980s. He's into sharp angles and edges so its kinda his fault and not really Nikon. Though it's now associated with Nikon.
Nikon's current logo was redesigned back in March 2003. This is what it represents:
"Design Concept
While preserving basic design elements that have supported the Nikon brand image in terms of quality and reliability, add fresh and innovative elements, including a new Nikon concept.
Symbol Design
Preserve the black Nikon logotype that has gained worldwide recognition for superior quality and reliability, as well as Nikon's identity color, yellow.Add a graphic element of sequential rays, to represent the future, and express Nikon's mission, will and future possibilities."
As for a dedicated B&W camera I think fuji use to offer one before? Or did I just have too many of Aunt Mary's cookies again? :^)
Posted 3 years ago # -
Fuji offered a IR only camera, rather, a few IR only cameras, but not an exclusively black and white one.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yeah that's right. Fuji makes the IS-1 and the IS Pro which was based on the D200. With the use of various filters you can get a dedicated B&W camera. They are very expensive though($2500-$5000USD)and are hard to get because perverts can use them to see through women's clothing, not joking!
Posted 3 years ago # -
The IS Pro is a really fun camera to use (my father has one). It has the S5's large dynamic range (though the rest of the industry has really caught up in the DR department since the S5 was released), plus good sensitivity for both UV and IR. Nikon mount means i can use my lenses (though almost all don't work right for UV). It's not black and white though, the sensor still has a color bayer pattern.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I remember that it could use different filters for various wavelengths of light tai. One of the filters was a B&W. Does your father work in a science lab, or is he in law enforcement? If it's his own camera then I'd be interested to hear what the application process is to obtain one. Maybe you could give us a review, that would be cool :^)
Posted 3 years ago # -
He uses it for testing reflection/absorption of UV light for cosmetics. When shooting in UV or IR we throw out the color information from the camera and process as black and white because the colors the sensor sees in these cases don't really correspond properly to what cones in our eyes see.
For UV there are visible light/IR filters that let only the UV through. The coating on modern lenses also blocks UV light, so you have to either polish it off or get a lens without coating. You can also get a quartz (instead of glass) lens which has much better transmission for frequencies outside of human sight.
It's not the filters that make the image black and white, we only display it as black and white because we're looking at colors humans can't see. If you saw a B&W filter, I don't really know what that would be. The only thing I can think of is the brand of filter's that's B+W.
Nikon, btw, makes a quartz lens for UV purposes that costs something like $8,000, and is said to be superb. My father uses a quartz lens from coastal optics, though.
Posted 3 years ago # -
LOL, I know what a B&W brand filter is. Since Fuji has various sample images at different wavelengths on it's IS Pro sample gallery, including a black & white image, I thought it was possible to get IR black & white images straight out of the camera.
Yeah I know about the UV Nikkor
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/special/105UVmm.htm
Posted 3 years ago # -
I could be wrong but aren't all digital cameras black and white? The ones and zeros only correspond to shades of dark and light. Its the internal software that interprets the shades and adds the concept of color. I think. But it could just be magic.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Welcome to the forum markly86!
No, digital cameras have specific sensors for red, green, and blue. A B&W would only have grayscale sensors (none RGB). Actually wouldn't a 12mp B&W camera have more resolution than a color one because of the bayer thing?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Alpha - I think you are wrong on that one. My understanding is that digital sensors are only coded in software as red green or blue. It then takes the reletive differences from the similar colored pixels around it to help figure out what the color image looks like.
Where's soap when you need him.
Posted 3 years ago # -
So then could I recode my software to "reverse" the bayer thing so where the greens should be there's actually reds or something? Or could I make the whole image in blue?
Ohhh, so-oap? :^D
Posted 3 years ago # -
alphanikonrex said:Actually wouldn't a 12mp B&W camera have more resolution than a color one because of the bayer thing?
Define "resolution". ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing is a complicated subject to get your head around.
A (for example) theoretical D300 sensor conversion to B/W by removing the Bayer filter would produce just as many "pixels" as a stock D300, but would have more resolving power, as each physical photosite would correlate to one image pixel. Today, through the magic of demosaicing, every pixel in your image file is made up of four (?) photosites, and every photosite gets used in the creation of four (?) different pixels.(?) - depends on what demosaic algorithms they're using, and I'm not sure what one(s) they are.
EDIT: astrophotographer has expressed better understanding of this than me. Where is he? ;)
Posted 3 years ago # -
soap said:
A (for example) theoretical D300 sensor conversion to B/W by removing the Bayer filter would produce just as many "pixels" as a stock D300, but would have more resolving power, as each physical photosite would correlate to one image pixel. Today, through the magic of demosaicing, every pixel in your image file is made up of four (?) photosites, and every photosite gets used in the creation of four (?) different pixels.Yeah, that's what I meant. Just like I thought—except a few sentences longer ;^)
So what about reprogramming the software to read the pixel values differently?
Posted 3 years ago # -
alphanikonrex said:
So what about reprogramming the software to read the pixel values differently?Which software? That on camera or your raw converter of choice?
If you mean your NEF converter of choice, it depends on how "raw" the raw file really is. I don't know how much (if any) of the demosaic process happens before the NEF is written. Again someone who groks this at a deeper level is needed.
If no demosic action happens in camera I would think you could convert a 12 MP raw to a 3 MP raw with greater color accuracy.Posted 3 years ago # -
I don't really know what I'm talking about soap, so I'll leave it at what I already said.
But from my understanding, all the sensors sense only how bright the light is (which they output as binary code). The "software" (whatever it is) then matches red, green, or blue to that percentage, to get the output color. Something like this:
Let's say my pixel gives us 0.3261 as the brightness value. I enter that in my color calculator and get multiple results depending on which color I match it to:
Posted 3 years ago # -
-
Well, when I have my brightness, usually the software that is displaying the images puts the appropriate tint on it from the bayer filter. However, I'm wondering if I'm able to customize my software so it puts the tint of my choice. For example, instead of having the bayer 4 pixel BGGR pattern, I'll use a BBRR pattern to customize my colors.
Posted 3 years ago # -
bayerfilters are painted with the mosaic,so you can't really tell it to reorganise a color pattern...
Posted 3 years ago # -
Blast it all, I forgot about that Chris. Fine, I "remove" my bayer filter and put in my own customized one, hehehe ;^)
Gosh, come to think of it, would it hypothetically be possible to replace the bayer filter with a CMYK one?
But let's consider that irrelevant. Because I'm going to be getting funky colors anyway buy having the software read the image differently, who care's what the filter has painted on it!
Posted 3 years ago # -
alphanikonrex said:
Well, when I have my brightness, usually the software that is displaying the images puts the appropriate tint on it from the bayer filter.This software you're talking about is after the demosaic process. It (the demosaic process) is not losslessly reversible. Even if it were, there is no point in /ignoring/ the fact that the light which hit photosite 5,673 previously passed through a green filter.
alphanikonrex said:
Gosh, come to think of it, would it hypothetically be possible to replace the bayer filter with a CMYK one?If it is physically possible is dependant on how the Bayer filter is attached above the photosites.
You wouldn't want to use CMYK, regardless, as CMYK is a subtractive color model appropriate for mixing pigments. You need to use your choice of additive color models when capturing light, as that is how light behaves. Using a subtractive model would give you an "interesting" effect, but only at a specific intensity level, it would go nuts otherwise.
EDIT: Crazy spellcheck s/losslessly/lovelessly/
Posted 3 years ago # -
Hmmm, I see what you're saying, no point is mucking around with the light that came through a specifically colored filter. Anyway, this was just one of my crazy ideas 8^D
So about the RGB and CMYK thing—they're called subtractive and additive because RGB is adding to black (which is why my monitors are black when not used) and CMYK is subtracting from white (which is the color of the paper I print on), right?
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
