1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

When Will A FX Prosumer Body Come?

Discussion in 'Nikon DX DSLR Forum' started by onefear, Jul 29, 2008.

  1. When, if ever, will Nikon market a FX prosumer body? Is it impossible that the D80 replacement would be FX (i.e., certain that Nikon would want to keep FX at or above the Dxxx line)?

    (Just trying to begin to get an idea of future lens and body purchases. With 5th child coming in September (and assuming gradual, steady skill improvement), I think the tentative "5-year" line up is (1) AF-S prime (35mm) [September, crossed fingers], (2) 16-85 VR replacing 18-55 VR [Christmas Money], [wait a year and take lots of pics] (3) Body or 70-200 VR, (4) body or 24-70 (replacing 16-85?).)

    Who knows, but I am interested in your thoughts of FX trickle down.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 30, 2008
  2. cotdt

    cotdt

    Jul 14, 2007
    Bay Area, USA
    i agree!
     
  3. the advancement in sensor technology can't really be linked with the development of consumer electronics in the way you imply because an imaging sensor is a very analog device. the theoretical maximum performance is directly related to the size of the pixels. instead expect improvements in semiconductor manufacturing to bring down the costs of making large sensors cheaper. there are ways to drastically improve the light sensing abilities of current sensors but the additional procedures required make it unfeasible for consumer cameras. <- my D3 is still a consumer camera BTW.
     
  4. I knew it in my heart, but didn't want to admit it in my (empty) hip pocket! :Sad:

    Realistically, it will be more than 5 years before I will be able to afford/justify the purchase of a D300-class camera. If FX were to trickle down to the D70/80 class within that time, it would affect my lense purchases now more directly (e.g., if no FX in that class, then the 17-55 would remain a viable, intermediate/long-term lens). One man's prosumer is another man's consumer, I guess, as it should be!
     
  5. "Smaller" is kind of an interesting issue in the American consumption of digital electronics. The really tiny cell phones (e.g., penphones) that penetrated Asian markets, never really caught on here, because American's perceive these as non-durable and tend to want rugged, larger form factors. Cars too, until recently, I guess. Heh.
     
  6. pforsell

    pforsell

    Jan 15, 2008
    Hi,
    I think that the main hindrance for a FX body in D80 class is the price. Nikon will introduce one when they can manufacture and sell it within the D80 class price bracket.

    The D700 internals cost a lot currently and even using a smaller plastic body and slower FPS might still set total price at least twice as high as the current D80. Things might look very different in 12 to 18 months and a D95 may be possible in the $1000 range.
     
  7. mood

    mood

    Jun 27, 2007
    So Fla
    I just want one in the $2k range :cool: 
     
  8. Leif

    Leif

    Feb 12, 2006
    England
    I think the next step is to upgrade reality to match the cameras we use to capture it.
     
  9. Leif

    Leif

    Feb 12, 2006
    England
    Yes, the main cost is the sensor which precludes a D80 class FX camera. But, if the Sony sensor rumours are true, it might be that a $2000 FX camera could be a reality soon.
     
  10. Smaller is not always better due to the laws of Physics. In this case diffraction is the limiting factor. Smaller sensors need smaller lenses with smaller apertures and hence more diffraction.

    Actually another factor is ergonomics. I'd much rather shoot with a D200 than a small compact.

    Oh and the FX "prosumer" camera is already here.

    Ronnie
     
  11. because fundamentally, its not about the electronics. there is noise floor due to the number of photons collected.
     
  12. Edward - As they improve the performance of the smaller pixels, I think that it is safe to say that they will also improve the performance of the larger pixels on full frame sensors. I'm not an engineer, but I think that it is likely that the larger pixels will always have superior light handling capabilities. In addition, cameras like the top-of-the-line Canon will probably always have the edge on pixel density. Somewhat better light handling combined with pixel density should keep FF sensors around for studio and landscape work for a long time. With that said, I'm planning on getting the replacement for the D300 when it comes out. I like the crop factor on the DX sensor a lot.
     
  13. marioni

    marioni

    808
    Jan 22, 2006
    Assuming that D300 replacement will be crop camera, of course..

    As for the original question, affordable FF is already here. But, if you want FF in a 1,000$ camera, keep waiting..
     
  14. scooptdoo

    scooptdoo Guest

    Olympus and Leica Panasonic are doing the smaller thing.3/4
     
  15. Nuteshack

    Nuteshack Guest

    sure they will ...what nikon did with the d300/d3 is just the beggining. my gosh, look at the d700. basically the same camera as the d3 for 2k less in just what, 8 months?

    just watch them roll em out. better, smaller, cheaper!!!
    ..and hey, rumor has it canon is working on 3 new chips as we speak. and we're talkin ultra LOW noise!

    exciting times folks
    ;-)))
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.