«

On Apr 19, 4:34*am, "David J Taylor" <david-
tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> Nikon entry level D3200 with 24 Mpix sensor announced.
>
> *http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04...th-WiFi-Option
>
> "Nikon has announced the D3200 24MP entry-level DSLR that can be used with
> an optional WU-1a Wi-Fi module. The camera can now shoot up to 1080p30
> video (rather than the D3100's 24p) and has a 920k dot LCD, up from 230k
> dots. Beyond this, and improved continuous shoot rate despite the
> pixel-count hike, the biggest change is the ability to add the Wi-Fi unit..
> The WU-1a will sell for a recommended sale price of $59.95 and will be
> able to broadcast to smartphones over a 49ft range. The D3200 is expected
> in late April at an MSRP of $699.95."
>
> Cheers,
> David

1. An attempt to keep people from flocking to mirrorless cameras
(even their own).
2. Proves the D3x was the most vastly-overpriced DSLR in history.
3. Will be funny asking D3100 owners to pony up for the lenses
they'll need to really do it justice!

RichA <> wrote:
>On Apr 19, 4:34*am, "David J Taylor" <david-
>tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>> Nikon entry level D3200 with 24 Mpix sensor announced.
>
>1. An attempt to keep people from flocking to mirrorless cameras
>(even their own).


The Nikon J1 and V1 are selling well after some very heavy discounting
in Europe and some very heavy advertising in the USA.


>2. Proves the D3x was the most vastly-overpriced DSLR in history.


It proves nothing of the sort. It might be an indication that Sony is
having to offer the extremely noisy 24 MP APS-C sensor at extremely
low prices for other manufacturers to take it.


>3. Will be funny asking D3100 owners to pony up for the lenses
>they'll need to really do it justice!


No, they might know how to count pixels but it is unlikely they care
too much about real image quality.

It does make me wonder what the replacements for the D5100/7000/300s
will look like. Specifically, what sensor(s) will they use?

In article
<5fb587a4-7fd5-42ec-b49d->,
RichA <> wrote:

> 1. An attempt to keep people from flocking to mirrorless cameras
> (even their own).

different market segment. many people will have both.

> 2. Proves the D3x was the most vastly-overpriced DSLR in history.

not at all. the d3x competed with the canon 1ds which cost about the
same amount. they're high end studio cameras.

as for the most overpriced, that goes to the sigma sd1. nobody else
comes close.

> 3. Will be funny asking D3100 owners to pony up for the lenses
> they'll need to really do it justice!

not really. it will be better than what they had before.

On Apr 19, 12:38*pm, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So do we all need 24MP and never knew?
> --

Doesn't hurt, especially for the person who can only afford a D3200-
class camera. They won't need quite as much expensive telephoto since
they'll be able to produce higher-resolution crops.
The funny thing is that this sensor will probably destroy Sony's in
their A77 and A65 DSLRs ($1500/$1100 each, resp) which are horribly,
horribly noisy.

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bruce <> wrote:
> It does make me wonder what the replacements for the D5100/7000/300s
> will look like. Specifically, what sensor(s) will they use?

Yeah, I wonder what the successor to the D300s will be; nothing Nikon's
put out since then fits the same niche (pro-level DX body + controls),
and how it's going to compare price-wise to the D800.

Because at this point, the D800 (in DX crop mode) appears to trump the
D300s in every way but max frame rate...

- Solomon
--
Solomon Peachy pizza at shaftnet dot org
Melbourne, FL ^^ (mail/jabber/gtalk) ^^
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.

Stuffed Crust <> wrote:
>In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bruce <> wrote:
>> It does make me wonder what the replacements for the D5100/7000/300s
>> will look like. Specifically, what sensor(s) will they use?
>
>Yeah, I wonder what the successor to the D300s will be; nothing Nikon's
>put out since then fits the same niche (pro-level DX body + controls),
>and how it's going to compare price-wise to the D800.
>
>Because at this point, the D800 (in DX crop mode) appears to trump the
>D300s in every way but max frame rate...


Yes, but only at a price. I would expect a D300s replacement to cost
not too much more than half the price of a D800.

If I worked for Nikon I would be concerned that the Sony 24 MP APS-C
sensor is nowhere near good enough for the D300s replacement. Its use
in the D3200 is a surprise, and places the sensor at a much lower
level in the market than expected.

Stuffed Crust <> writes:

> In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bruce <> wrote:
>> It does make me wonder what the replacements for the D5100/7000/300s
>> will look like. Specifically, what sensor(s) will they use?
>
> Yeah, I wonder what the successor to the D300s will be; nothing Nikon's
> put out since then fits the same niche (pro-level DX body + controls),
> and how it's going to compare price-wise to the D800.
>
> Because at this point, the D800 (in DX crop mode) appears to trump the
> D300s in every way but max frame rate...

Yeah, but most especially including price! (That is, much higher price
for the D800).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

In rec.photo.digital RichA <> wrote:
> On Apr 19, 12:38*pm, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> So do we all need 24MP and never knew?
>> --

> Doesn't hurt, especially for the person who can only afford a D3200-
> class camera. They won't need quite as much expensive telephoto since
> they'll be able to produce higher-resolution crops.
> The funny thing is that this sensor will probably destroy Sony's in
> their A77 and A65 DSLRs ($1500/$1100 each, resp) which are horribly,
> horribly noisy.

At high ISOs. Why is everyone so obsessed with high ISO noise?

I was under the impression that sensor noise and image quality were a
trade off. If you made a sensor to get the best possible low ISO
quality it would be noisy at high ISOs. And if you made a sensor to
give the least noisy high ISOs low ISO image quality would suffer.

What's the low ISO image quality of this noisy sensor like?

--
Chris Malcolm

On Apr 20, 6:22*am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> In rec.photo.digital RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 19, 12:38*pm, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> So do we all need 24MP and never knew?
> >> --
> > Doesn't hurt, especially for the person who can only afford a D3200-
> > class camera. *They won't need quite as much expensive telephoto since
> > they'll be able to produce higher-resolution crops.
> > The funny thing is that this sensor will probably destroy Sony's in
> > their A77 and A65 DSLRs ($1500/$1100 each, resp) which are horribly,
> > horribly noisy.
>
> At high ISOs. Why is everyone so obsessed with high ISO noise?
>
> I was under the impression that sensor noise and image quality were a
> trade off. *If you made a sensor to get the best possible low ISO
> quality it would be noisy at high ISOs. And if you made a sensor to
> give the least noisy high ISOs low ISO image quality would suffer.
>
> What's the low ISO image quality of this noisy sensor like?
>
> --
> Chris Malcolm

Noisy. At 100 ISO, you can still detect noise in some situations.
To give you an idea, the NEX-7 sensor is less noisy, yet it itself is
noisy compared to say the sensor in the D7000. The A77 and A65 sensor
IMO, is very noisy. Go to this page, check the noise at 100 (you'll
see it in the Sony A77 images) and then dial it up to 3200 and look at
how it compares to the default cameras in the group.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta77/14

Chris Malcolm <> writes:

> In rec.photo.digital RichA <> wrote:
>> On Apr 19, 12:38*pm, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> So do we all need 24MP and never knew?
>>> --
>
>> Doesn't hurt, especially for the person who can only afford a D3200-
>> class camera. They won't need quite as much expensive telephoto since
>> they'll be able to produce higher-resolution crops.
>> The funny thing is that this sensor will probably destroy Sony's in
>> their A77 and A65 DSLRs ($1500/$1100 each, resp) which are horribly,
>> horribly noisy.
>
> At high ISOs. Why is everyone so obsessed with high ISO noise?

Wouldn't care to speak for everybody.

I spent last weekend shooting at ISO 3200 and 6400, usually around 1/200
sec, at f/2.8 to f/4. Would have been nice to have a solid 1/250 and a
solid f/5.6 (partly because the action had depth, but also to cover
focus inaccuracy a bit more). But on balance, I don't feel the HI.1 and
up ISOs on my D700 are good enough to use except in severe necessity,
which this wasn't, quite. (Mostly I avoid 6400 also, but that may be
overly conservative; the difference is much more obvious pixel peeping
than looking at actual pictures.)

I'm going to spend a chunk of the weekend after that doing similar
shooting (though that arena is a bit better lit, at least).

Generally, I do a LOT of high ISO shooting. It's why I bought a D700 in
the first place.

> I was under the impression that sensor noise and image quality were a
> trade off. If you made a sensor to get the best possible low ISO
> quality it would be noisy at high ISOs. And if you made a sensor to
> give the least noisy high ISOs low ISO image quality would suffer.
>
> What's the low ISO image quality of this noisy sensor like?

I don't think that's mostly true, though we don't seem to have a lot of
actual sensor designers to give expert opinions available.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info