Quick
Links & Comments
News and commentary of interest to Nikon and Nikon F-mount users
Tokina Updates 11-16mm
Jan 25 (news)--The Tokina 11-16mm gets a refresh with slight optical change (new aspherical element), new lens coating, and an internal focus motor. The AT-X 116 Pro DX II will be available in late March.
Discontinued in Japan
Jan 25 (news)--New regulations in Japan, along with the end of life cycle itself, have prompted Nikon to stop selling the D300s and D700 there, and these models have been moved to the Discontinued camera list on the Nikon Japan sites.
Given next week's big camera trade show in Japan, don't be surprised if new models get announced. Nikon isn't likely to leave a huge gap between the D7000 and D4 open for very long.
Snap Results
Jan 24 (commentary)--This commentary appears on both sites.
At the point where I had 1500 responses to my How Far We've Come survey (which happened in a few hours) I decided to take a peak at the results.
First, some background stats. 44% of respondents owned one DSLR, while 51% owned two or more (95% owned at least one DSLR). 24% of the respondents owned at least one mirrorless camera. This biases the results a bit, as it implies that many of the people taking the survey don't have experience with mirrorless. Nevertheless, I was going after people's impressions, not what they've discovered in shooting. The survey takers are a group that shoots a lot of images, though. Over 50% said they've taken more than a 1000 images in a single month some time in the last couple of years. Indeed, 14% of those said they had a month where they took more 10,000 images. I'm not sure I have had such a month in the last couple of years.
So here are the breakdowns of the head-to-head comparisons:
- 2002: 89% chose V1 (mirrorless), 11% chose D100 (DSLR)
- 2003: 92% chose E-P3 (mirrorless), 8% chose E-1 (DSLR)
- 2004: 96% chose NEX-7 (mirrorless), 4% chose Maxxum 7D (DSLR)
- 2007: 64% chose V1 (mirrorless), 36% chose D80 (DSLR)
- 2009: 83% chose D90 (DSLR), 17% chose V1 (mirrorless)
My comments in the article seem to be validated by the results (even though this wasn't a scientifically accurate poll, especially since I gave my answer before surveying): most of us would have indeed chosen a V1 over a D100 if we had been offered one in 2002. And it seems like most of you think that the high-consumer V1 mirrorless is about equivalent to the high-consumer DSLR of about 2008 (four years ago).
I'll leave you to make of that what you wish. My original article was intended to provoke people to really think about where we are versus where we've been.
Sensor Madness
Jan 24 (commentary)--It seems like every time that someone announces a non-Bayer sensor the Internet gets all abuzz with hyperbole and overfed expectations. The latest Sony story got picked up on 14 RSS feeds I monitor (and rising).
Sony's announcement was about an RGBW sensor. The W is "no filter." Besides the fact that it's a bit of a replay of the Kodak Monochrome arrangement announced a couple of years back, you don't abandon Bayer without having other implications. While a non-filtered photosite does give you more luminance data, that only helps when it doesn't clip ;~). In bright situations, it's likely to clip. Indeed, if you set your W exposure so it doesn't clip, then you have trouble with color, where there will be more noise (chroma noise, the worst kind).
Others were excited because they thought Sony's announcement would impact serious cameras. Not likely. What most didn't notice (because they got summaries of English translations) is that this new sensor is attempting to give 1.4 micron photosite performance in a 1.1 micron photosite. In other words, camera phones and compact camera sensors with more pixels, but "same" image quality. Only problem is, it won't be same image quality for reasons noted above.
Sensor progress is relatively constant. We get small gains in efficiency, read noise, light gates, photosite isolation, well capacity, microlenses, or any of the other elements that already exist in our sensors as we've got a huge number of organizations iterating those things.
To get a big bump instead of the small steps forward we're used to, I think it's going to take one of the disruptive technologies lurking in the background: quantum dots, full color photosites, light field microlenses, or perhaps moving from silicon to another more expensive and harder to work with material. Don't worry, you'll know it when it happens, as we'll likely make a bigger than D3 step forward when it occurs.
Let me flip that to another context more relevant to this site: what if the D4 is simply equivalent to the D3s sensor with 15% more resolution? In other words, very equivalent results, but a marginal move forward in number of pixels. That's the level of change we typically see in sensors in a two-to-four year stretch. Not a bad change at all, but not the over hyped type of change that gets stirred up every time we have a "new sensor design" announced on the Web.
How Far We've Come
Jan 23 (commentary)--This commentary appears on both sites.
I've been struck lately by the polarization in attitude about mirrorless cameras. There's one group that thinks they're the best things since sliced bread. There's another group that thinks they're simply not good enough and should be avoided like the plague.
I have a simple test to see whether you actually believe what you think you believe.
Let's teleport back to 2002. I'm going to offer you a free D100 with its then available lenses or a free Nikon V1 with its now available lenses plus FT1 adapter. I'm pretty confident that you'll pick the V1. It has faster and better AF, faster frame rates, better metering, 4 million more pixels, better high ISO capability, and a host of other improvements. Personally, I'd pick the V1.
Okay, fair enough, that was ten years ago, how about fast forwarding five years to 2007. Now I'll offer you a free D80 or a free V1. I'm still pretty confident that you'd take the V1. Okay, let's move a bit more forward, to 2009. You can have a free V1, D5000, or D90. Finally the choice gets a little more difficult, though I suspect that your answers would polarize towards the V1 and D90. (Let's check that. Here's a survey you can take to see if you agree.)
So here's a question: if today's smallest sensor mirrorless camera is better than all but the pro DSLRs of a few years ago, why would anyone construe them as being "not good enough?" Were the millions of DSLRs sold that year also not good enough? ;~)
We can play this same game with other brands, by the way. In 2003 I can offer you an Olympus E-1 or an E-P3; which do you take? It's a little tougher question, as the E-1 is a higher-end specification DSLR and the E-P3 is a rangefinder-style mirrorless. But if image quality is your game, I'm pretty sure you'll pick the E-P3.
If you're a Sony user, try this: we'll go back to 2004 and I'll offer you a Maxxum 7D or a NEX-7. I'm thinking most of you are going to pick the NEX-7.
I use the Nikon V1 versus D100 as my primary example in my testing for a reason: right now it's the only 10-year comparison where we have true DSLR versus DSLR-like mirrorless. But we're going to get more of these in the next few years, and I suspect the answer will remain the same.
So now I have to remind you that many pros were using and getting published with a D100 back in 2002. Has the image quality at your favorite magazine gone up significantly in 10 years? No, though they are now able to publish shots taken in lighting that their photographers couldn't shoot in 10 years ago. Would that have been true with a V1 ten years ago? Yes, I think it would have allowed shots you couldn't really take with a D100. Therefore a pro would have picked the V1, I think. (Ironically, both the D100 and V1 user would have had problems with truly wide angle lens options. Hey, Nikon, a lot of us use your equipment because of how great Nikon wide angle lenses are; where are the DX and CX wide primes?)
So just how bad are the mirrorless cameras? Uh, not bad at all, which has been my point for three years now.
DSLRs are now 16mp or more, with "a lot more pixels" coming right at our event horizon. We have shoot-in-the-dark pro models, plus more-pixels-than-most-actually-use prosumer and consumer models, all with more features than anyone really uses. If you had asked me back in 2002 what was the ultimate set of specifications and quality I needed in a DSLR, we're now passing that definition. For a lot of my shooting, the V1 is actually enough, and that's probably true of a lot of you, too. It's the same for m4/3 or NEX or NX or any of the other mirrorless cameras, too.
Don't get me wrong, I'll take any additional bit of quality, performance, or comfort I can get, but when I fail at something photographically today, it almost never is my camera that's the problem.
Note to camera manufacturers: You still don't get it, do you? One of the reasons why the mirrorless cameras are getting more popular is because they are as competent as DSLRs but are smaller and lighter--they're less trouble to carry. When a DSLR user decides it's time to upgrade and they have a choice of same-old-big-beast and a competent smaller choice, a lot of them are picking the smaller choice. Even more would do that if you'd just design the darned things for a serious user in the first place. That doesn't mean you have to stop building those entry models (GF3, E-PM1, J1, C3), it just means you need to make sure you have the upper end ready, too. The popularity of the NEX-7 and the likely popularity of the upcoming Fujifilm X-Pro1 and Olympus OM-D ought to get your attention. But just in case they don't: make more and better serious mirrorless cameras, please. I'm looking at you Nikon.
Just a Reminder--I remove all articles from this home page, usually once a week (on Monday mornings when I update). Previous week's articles are placed on the Archived 2011 link, below, as well as articles from earlier weeks in the year.
Archived Front Page News and Articles
Sansmirror news and views
Archived 2012 byThom comments and news
Archived 2011 byThom comments and news
Archived 2010 byThom comments and news
Archived 2009 byThom comments and news
Archived 2008 byThom comments and news
Archived
2007 byThom comments and news
Archived pre-2007 byThom comments and news
Nikon announcements summary 2001-2012
|
