Nikon to respond to Sony A900?

I am getting some buzz that Nikon will be releasing some leaks/rumors/official news in the next few days as a response to the freshly released Sony A900. It makes sense to use the momentum of A900 and throw us some bones (Sony and Nikon are sharing sensor technology). Canon has already been teasing its fan base for the past few weeks.

Army of NR readers - keep your eyes open (I will do the same)!

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
  • Blog Admin

    those are heavy

  • maxus

    Can they trow us cameras instead of bones? i’m not a dog…

  • Manu
  • I look forward to seeing Nikon’s responses(s) to the Sony A900. Hopefully there will be two cameras forthcoming. A D3x or D4 and a D?00. I like the fact that Sony did not integrate the battery pack into the A900. I really do not like the large professional model cameras that leave you no choice but to lug that extra size and weight around even when you don’t need it. . . I am much more of a D300 D700 kind of guy.

    I thought the whole point of the 35mm film format was to provide a relatively compact camera. Today’s top level professional cameras are anything but compact or lightweight. Even the D300 is a tad larger than I would prefer to have to handle. I guess I am really a Nikon D90 or Pentax K20D kind of guy in the end. 😉

  • Pablov

    Yeah, I was wondering the same thing…
    I read some details in DPReview’s hands-Preview of the new Sony 24 MP A900 DSLR

    They also put some photo samples, and look Really nice at 6048 x 4032!!

    It’s Worth to mention that the NEW (AND FIRST in the World at this moment) 24,6 MP FULL Frame DSLR Camera estimated price is (just) USD 3,000.
    Much cheaper than some Nikon with less resolution FX sensors, although they have different features, sure, but this Sony DSLR doubles (at least) the resolution of EVERY Nikon until today..

    THIS IS for Nikon:
    Review your Prices when releasing cameras..
    It IS time to get DSLRs more affordable to people. Specially because the market is growing up Fast, (competition too), and times between new models are getting shorter
    (that’s my point of view, as it’s being happening with every electronic device since many years ago)

    Besides the high-tech behind a camera, and there are also some people who can pay it, it has no sense/need for a DSLR to be at $5.000 wheter it is the “most Pro” DSLR or not.

    I know the 1st “Pro” DSLR was much more expensive, but MANY Years has passed, Millions of people use digital cameras today, and Now It’s almost 2009…

  • Blog Admin

    yes, the rumor is 3 new DSLRs from Canon
    “Nikon have already said there coming with a spin-off of sony´s 25 megapixel sensor” – where? I don’t think Nikon have said something like that. NikonRumors has said it many times, but not Nikon.
    I could be wrong.

  • Bambino

    $3000 for a 25 megapixel slr with a growing stable of good quality glass and good performance at iso 800 to 1600 – forget Nikon’s pricing – If I’m Mamiya or Phase One, I’d be pretty concerned right now.

  • Joe

    yes, i shoot with nikon, but could really use some larger images. lets see a D400 with 18mp, or something like that. I understand it might be a year off, but I hope nikon moves in that direction.

    Also, with the whole DX,FX,MX format mystery, I wish Nikon would give us some clue as to which glass to invest in if we want to shoot Nikon in 5-10 years. I bought a FX lens to stay ahead of the curve. If I have to sell that for MX in 2 years I’ll be very disappointed.

  • Pablov

    That’s the point. Despite it’s high-tech, the electronic world becomes “obsolete” faster and faster with time, so the “investment” of people in new DSLRs should be lower.

    I have some Nikkor zoom lenses for my 35mm film Nikon SLR (thus, “Full frame” lenses).

    But if a different brand offered a Good DSLR with high Resolution sensor, low noise, etc, with good lenses, at a more reasonable price than Nikon, I would consider it SERIOUSLY.

    – People get bothered and dissapointed spending thousands of dollars in a camera that is seccessed soon with another model with better specs. and features

    So it would be more logical to sell cameras at a lower price.

    Then people would buy them, and replace with new models more Often too, without so high impact in their budgets.
    (Unfortunately, or not, it is how electronic marketplace is doing today)

    Well, I hope a D800 is released soon, as “response” to Canon and Sony High Res Sensors, at a Good Logical price (I know I am asking a lot to bussiness men..but it has sense what I said)

    I don’t consider a D3x or D4 due to the reasons I wrote above.

  • Blog Admin

    no, I listen to it already – they don’t even mention the D90… old

  • Blog Admin

    I think Canon will soon have 3 new FF DSLR

  • Whoknows

    You should all know by now that Nikon has never been one to let others influence their product releases. Think about the gap between the F3 and F4 and F5, between D1 and D2 and D3. Even when they finally announced the D3 it was not what everyone expected. Nikon will do what they think is best when they think it is good and ready. What Canon does will not have much influence. If they really were that concerned, there would’ve peen a high MP FF DSLR 2 years ago. But I’m sure that when they do come out with the next surprise, it will be a good one.

  • rumor reader

    Don’t forget that Canon is on the verge of announcing at least one new full frame model too. These are exciting times for dSLR shooters. This added competition, including rumors of a possible Samsung / Pentax full frame, will benefit us all.

  • David Olsen

    canon should come with two and hints of a third maybe ( 3D , 7D and 1Ds iV ).
    Nikon have already said there coming with a spin-off of sony´s 25 megapixel sensor so it is logical to put it in a D3 body and call it D3X or D4( possible D900 aswell ) ..only worrying thing here is the increased noise levels if the sample pictures from the A900 are anything to go by..The A700 had cleaner images than the D300 .
    In short I do not think nikon are being influenced by it , it is just the correct timing for them to release there high-end unit/s.

  • David Olsen

    Japan 2007 August ..will try to find the link

  • Blog Admin

    thanks – I will try to look for it too

  • Ads reveal Sony’s 24.6 megapixel A900 full-frame DSLR {Engadget}
    Sep 4th 2008 12:13PM
    “Sony designs and makes all sensors in Nikon dSLRs with the exception of the D700/D3 sensors (which are Nikon designed but likely Sony fabricated). Also, Nikon uses LCDs and image processors for Sony as well (their Expeed is a rebranded Bionz). This 24.6MP sensor is also rumored to be in the Nikon D3x as well,but this Alpha-900 should be priced closer rival to the Canon 5D/Nikon D700.”

    found that while searching for link to nikon /journalist quote

  • Blog Admin
  • David Olsen

    bythom also states :
    ” Using a variant of Sony’s new CMOS sensor”
    “So my comments here are based solely on released information from the press conference and a few brief conversations with those who were invited to the announcement in Japan.”
    the dates fit 23rd august 2007 so it seems he has also had this info from sindai

  • David Olsen
  • David Olsen
  • Toolman Tim Taylor


  • MarkDphotoguy

    Be careful for what you wish for.
    Nikon may have to drop prices to keep up with competition but then say goodbye to cameras assembled by hand (D3/D700), say goodbye to the cameras even being manufactured in Japan (not that China and the Philippines are bad but there IS more sample variation in products from those countries.
    I like the thought of the D3 and D700 being manufactured and assembled (by hand) in Japan.
    I’m not sure how I would feel spending more than 2K on a body not made in Japan. I used to work in camera repairs (as a manager not a tech) and have a good sense for repair rates.

  • Joe

    I think the big question is: Will Nikon’s spin off be anywhere near the same price range as Sony’s A900? An equal camera at twice the price (say a D3x) is a really poor alternative.

  • No all the sample images I saw are quite moderate — and the lens struggles to keep up with the hi-res sensor at near the edges. They are no comparison to, say, the Phase One P45/P45+’s excellent files with full pixel level details — remember the P45/P45+ has no AA filters and no microlenses as well. So Mamiya/Phase One has nothing to worry about, seriously.

    Also check out the Luminous Landscape review — the 1DsIII’s 21MP sensor resolves more details than the Sony 25MP.

  • Douglas

    honestly, i know its enevetable, but i sincerely hope Nikon AVOIDS the 24mp sensor! honestly! WHY??? what use does ANYBODY really have for more than 12? at some point it just starts to degrade the image quality! didn’t Canon learn their Lesson once with the Mk III’s? when you put too much emphasis on MP the camera and image quality suffer! this is why Nikon has managed to stay successfull with the D3 over the more expencive 1DsMk III!

    Nikon doesn’t need to “go after” anybody else’s sensors! no, they need to put emphasis on Processor! the EXPeed processor was a GREAT start for Nikon! but it can still be improved!

  • I cant believe how many MP suckers are there, I am sure samsung will release a cell phone with 14-18 MP this year, SOOOO WHAT???? I dont think the new sony is close to the D3 in terms of ISO performance, maybe Nikon needs to release a sucker camera with 40MP to please you, but anything pro with lesser IQ and dynamic range for the sake of PIXEL suckers is not acceptable…. if you need a 24 MP camera than go buy a medium format or something for now and blow the pictures on your big plasma, seriously if you need so much pixels then you must be shooting wall to wall posters for living and you need something else other than a sucker enhanced nikon….

  • Glenn

    I read a full hands on review of the A900 and the reviewer said that above ISO200 the noise was noticeable, as such I really, really hope that Nikon are using their own designs for the FX camera that everyone is hoping for because as such the D700 and D3 are well out performing the A900 for image quality at high ISO’s.
    If the next FX from Nikon does have 24 plus pixels then as long as they are of the same high quality as the current FX cameras that will be fine.

    Douglas, the run of the mill consumer does not need more than 12 MP, but there are many, many semi pro and pro photographers whose work benefits from the higher MP otherwise no one would need or buy a MF camera from Phase One or Leaf etc.
    Here in the UK it is known as “horses for courses” or to be in plain english,the best tool for the particular job.

  • dfgdfgdfg

    Sony cameras are the ugliest things ever!


    Really, Dpreview has a picture comparing the 3 full frames D-SLRs, d700, 5d, and this “camera” the a900.

  • Douglas

    i fully agree with your top statement… but i cant believe your bottom statement directed at my original post…

    5 years ago professional’s where making billboard images out of 5 and 6 mp camera’s. i am a professional photographer and am quite happy with the size of my 10mp D200’s files. i can easily interpilate them to a 20×30 poster size if i like and with the right software i can take them WELL beyond that if needed. i will Fully concede the point that the MF camera’s like the Mamiya or Phase One’s do hold a distinct advantage, but that is for portrait photographers and the detail that the physically larger sensor can capture, not the in the resolution! i repeat my above statement, there is NO need for ANYBODY to have larger than 12mp is a 35mm format body.

  • Mal

    I think you are confusing some terms. First of all the last time I checked 24 was twice 12 or a doubling of the mathematical number. Here is where I think you confusiion comes from.
    In real terms, sharpness and resolution are different items. Resolution is a one dimentional parameter and sharpness is a two dimentional parameter. Twice the picture forming elements (all other things being equal) yields twice the sharpness to the observer’s eye (given the proper size of the photo and ability of the lens to outresolve the sensor). You couldn’t tell any difference in a postage size print but large prints show the differences. You have to remember resolution and viewing sharpness are not interchangeable terms or concepts. In this case there is a doubling of the pixels and that will yield the quality of twice the sharpness when looking at the photo. A 24 MP sensor is inheritantly 4 times as sharp as a 6 MP sensor in final prints.
    To prove that point figure how many sharp 6 MP photos you could squeeze onto a 24 MP sensor. So twice the resolution yields 4 times the sharpness – meaning that a full 6mp image could be reproduced 4 times from a 24 MP sensor.
    Its time to dispell with the old wives tales and stop parroting the misconceptions of others.
    It is amazing to me how few people get the resolution/sharpness concept correct. Those misconceptions are mainly touted by people who want to justify not upgrading.

  • dfgdfgdfg

    I was thinking about this, 7d, 5d mk II, 3d? Full frame for everyone, right?

    I want the D700, it’s out of my budget, hopefully it comes down.

  • Daniel

    Do you think everybody has the same needs that you do in a camera? Advertising photographers do need lots of pixels and not all of them can afford a $40.000 MF camera. I’m tired of these so called “advanced amaterus” thinking the if they don’t need something nobody will. I know plenty professionals that doesn’t care about high ISO and do care about being able to crop a picture so he can use it on several different media.
    Sorry for the awful english, not my native language.

  • Daniel

    Some people do shoot wall to wall posters for living you know… They are called “Professionals”
    There are other photography fields beyond sports and weddings. Realy!

  • Douglas

    im sorry, but im a 10 year professional photographer! and i shoot mostly sports where i DO crop into an image quite a bit of the time because i cant afford a 300mm 2.8 Lens! i am FAR from an “Advanced Amature” as i am a former Brooks Institute of Photography student and again, have been a professional Photographer for 10 years! i understand that not everyone can afford a MF camera, Hell, i CANT afford one! and if i did… honestly i’d get a FILM MF camera to shoot just Studio with! and why in the hell do people keep comparing images from a 25mp camera to that of a MF camera? thats LUDICRIS!

  • Daniel

    Being a pro you should know that not everyone soot sports and need high ISO and 10fps. If Canon users have a great 21mp camera why the hell couldn’t Nikon? Try doing a double page magazine spread from a cropped 12mp image and tell me what you got. There are cameras for every class of professional and I can’t see how a high MP version of the D3 would hurt anyone.
    And come on… Buying a film MF??? Are you nuts? It’s 2008 you know…
    I would be a very happy buyer of a 25mp nikon.
    MF digital cameras are not only expensive, but heavy, slow, have a terrible user interface and an AF that remembers me th F4 era (i do use a rented Hasselblad H3D from time to time and apart from the great IQ, it’s an awful camera).

  • Douglas

    what did i just get done saying… i crop into my 10mp D200 images all the time and make Great 11×14 prints, and that isn’t even using true interpilation software! please tell me that you people have learned SOMETHING from Canon’s Mistakes with rediculously high MP counts!

    i understand that some people’s needs are different than my own… and i still dont see where ANYONE’s needs will outperform the performance of a 12mp D3… how many sports photographers used a D2Hs 4MP camera and made the images cover a section of an outfield wall in Baseball? or a Freeway Billboard? seriously people!

  • Pablov

    I understand your point of view, and I share it mostly.

    I have a Canon made in japan, and is solid. Also have a Nikon made in japan.
    We all trust more in japan-made electronics than those made somewhere else..
    I didn’t know D3/D700 were made by hand

    In that case I guess I would trust more if made by robots, and checked by robots, And by humans.
    I suppose humans hands have more chances to make a mistake assembling than a robot 🙂

    But I still prefer a “made in japan” camera, of course…

  • Pablov

    I’m one of those who doesn’t care too much in High-iso but Do care about more pixels, as I don’t shoot sports.
    I also DO care about noise..

    As you said, lot of “Pro” or “Prosumer” (I don’t like that term) need different features, cause they work in different situations.

    And IF I CROP a 10MP image, well.. I won’t be able to print at the size I need (not brochures, nor magazines, btw)

    I need low noise, of course, but also high MP and Image Quality.

    I print large, large images… But I can not afford a Mamiya or whatever in such category (and I wouldn’t like to carry it on when shooting outside either..)

    If we check DSLR history, we can clearly see that noise has been lowered a LOT in the sensors, and the resolution has grew up a LOT too.

    So BOTH things are possible, it’s just a matter of Balance according on what technology allows at the moment…

  • Pablov

    I respect your oponnion, but I don’t agree with your last statement.

    Many photographers could need or take benefits of higher resolutions in a FX sensor, if (of course) the Image Quality and Noise level is kept.

    As I said, resolution & noise level has been managed in balance over the DSLR history. And has been improved a LOT, so they could keep doing so a bit more in FX size, thee is “room” for it.

    I love FX 12MP quality, but would like higher resolution at the lowest possible expense of noise increments, OF COURSE.

    If I check CAREFULLY an image shot by D300 and D700, both taken at ISO 200, there are noise differences, that’s why I like FX sensor, even when I don’t shoot at high ISO, but I DO need more detailed images, not interpolation.

  • It’s called landscape photography. And when you can’t pack a MF / 4×5+ system, it’s called adventure photography. 24 megapixels would be a dream…


  • Douglas

    yes, technology grows steadily… but not with a leap that doubles! if you read the review on the A900 you can see that there is noticible grain as low as ISO 200! seriously… a jump that big without a significant advance in the processor will not end with a clean image.

    and again, with my D200 i can crop into 1/4 of the total image and still make a good 8×10 and probably push it to an 11×14 if i needed to with only processing in Photoshop not using any other Interpelation software!

  • Pablov

    Nikon is not ouf the marketplace, nor the planet, and not isolated from what other brands do…

    Despite “they don’t have to do anything”, they need, sooner or later.

    Business are business…

    What we can get in our benefit from this competition is High quality DSLRs at better prices.

    We all hope the IQ, and Camera’s quality will not be compromised in this path.

    At least, until now Nikon has kept its quality very well.

    Photokina will be an important event for the companies.
    Hopefully we can get good news too 🙂

    I’m sure Nikon will do something, they don’t like to “keep behind” anybody

  • Douglas

    im sorry to say, but you have missed entirely what Resolution is… Resolution is ALL interpolation… higher resolution =/= more detail… it just means a larger file size… you cant capture more detail untill you have more surface space to capture more detail! this is what made the 5D such an AMAZING portrait camera, not the resolution, but the FF sensor…

  • Douglas

    ugh… im tired of fighting the MP bandwaggon wars here… when you people finally figure out exactly what a pixel is and what it does for your image, ill talk… untill then, i lurk…

  • Pablov

    the weird thing is that the page says:
    “Posted on September 9, 2008 11:00 AM”
    ( how could it be? )

  • Pablov

    The problem of MP and large or huge prints, is when you get closer.

    Low resolution (and/or interpolation) are really different from High resolution images.

    For a wall or freeway bilboard it could make no difference, no body get close to them, nor stop to appreciate any kind of details

    But for Artistic world, the details can make a huge difference in big prints, when people get much closer to see them than usual in wall or similar prints.

    Is not “war”, it’s just different use of digital images, in different jobs.

  • Pablov

    Ok, I have no intentions to a discussion.
    But I guess, and do know, that it’s a matter of balance, both things matters: Size of sensor, and Number of pixels capable to receive light and transform it to a color dot.

    If it wasn’t that way, then a FF sensor with just 1 MP would be enough, and all would be really happy 🙂

  • Klaus

    Keep in mind that a FF sensor with 24 megapixels has LARGER photosites than a D300.

    If you were to use those dinky D300 photosites, you could fit 28 million of them on an FF sensor.

  • You realize that a 24mp sensor is only a 25% increase in megapixels over a 12, and is NOT double as you suggest. double the amount of MPs would be 48.

  • Back to top