New Nikon Camera

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Ockham's Razor, Nov 8, 2006.

  1. For a while it was the D60, then the D40. anything for real?

    --
    There are two ways to spell Ockham/Occam. Britannica prefers the former.
    Ockham's Razor, Nov 8, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ockham's Razor

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    Sure looks like it; even DP Review has posted links to the "rumors." Looks
    like another 6.1MP budget SLR. This is a shame, because it means we're even
    further from filling what I see as a gaping hole in the marketplace: a
    high-end compact that does RAW, movies, and IR. If the Sony F828 had been
    "fixed" it would have been near perfect, although a little large. But I'd
    love to see something that's a swiss army knife type cam to use as an
    adjunct to my SLR outfit.

    "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > For a while it was the D60, then the D40. anything for real?
    >
    > --
    > There are two ways to spell Ockham/Occam. Britannica prefers the former.
    Kinon O'Cann, Nov 8, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ockham's Razor

    JohnR66 Guest

    "Kinon O'Cann" <> wrote in message
    news:8on4h.19$...
    > Sure looks like it; even DP Review has posted links to the "rumors." Looks
    > like another 6.1MP budget SLR. This is a shame, because it means we're
    > even further from filling what I see as a gaping hole in the marketplace:
    > a high-end compact that does RAW, movies, and IR. If the Sony F828 had
    > been "fixed" it would have been near perfect, although a little large. But
    > I'd love to see something that's a swiss army knife type cam to use as an
    > adjunct to my SLR outfit.
    >
    > "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> For a while it was the D60, then the D40. anything for real?
    >>
    >> --
    >> There are two ways to spell Ockham/Occam. Britannica prefers the former.

    >
    >

    Like the $450 Pentax 6MP SLR, the Nikon D40 will likely street at this price
    and the D50 gets phased out for a entry level 10MP body to compete with the
    XTi.
    John
    JohnR66, Nov 8, 2006
    #3
  4. Ockham's Razor

    Bill Guest

    "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > For a while it was the D60, then the D40. anything for real?



    Nothing official.
    Bill, Nov 9, 2006
    #4
  5. Ockham's Razor

    Bill Guest

    "Kinon O'Cann" <> wrote in message
    news:8on4h.19$...
    > Sure looks like it; even DP Review has posted links to the "rumors."


    Note that DPreview specifically states they don't want to be left in
    the lurch if the camera turns out to be a real body. Just because they
    posted about it too, do NOT mean anything official - they're just
    going along for the ride.

    > further from filling what I see as a gaping hole in the marketplace:
    > a


    What gaping hole?

    There is the D50 entry model, D70s with more features, D80 that's a
    nice step up for enthusiasts, D200 for serious shooters and pros, and
    then pro models.

    I don't really see a need for anything else.

    > high-end compact that does RAW, movies, and IR.


    Why would anyone want to use a DSLR for movies?

    > If the Sony F828 had been "fixed" it would have been near perfect,
    > although a little large. But I'd love to see something that's a
    > swiss army knife type cam to use as an adjunct to my SLR outfit.


    The D40, if it exists, happens to be a DSLR. If you want a "swiss
    army" camera, buy a P&S with all the toys. There are plenty to choose
    from out there in the market right now.
    Bill, Nov 9, 2006
    #5
  6. Bill wrote:
    []
    > Why would anyone want to use a DSLR for movies?


    Because, to minimise weight and bulk, you want to take one camera with you
    not two or three.

    David
    David J Taylor, Nov 9, 2006
    #6
  7. Ockham's Razor

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    "Bill" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Kinon O'Cann" <> wrote in message
    > news:8on4h.19$...
    >> Sure looks like it; even DP Review has posted links to the "rumors."

    >
    > Note that DPreview specifically states they don't want to be left in the
    > lurch if the camera turns out to be a real body. Just because they posted
    > about it too, do NOT mean anything official - they're just going along for
    > the ride.
    >
    >> further from filling what I see as a gaping hole in the marketplace: a

    >
    > What gaping hole?


    The one I describe in the text below.

    >
    > There is the D50 entry model, D70s with more features, D80 that's a nice
    > step up for enthusiasts, D200 for serious shooters and pros, and then pro
    > models.
    >
    > I don't really see a need for anything else.


    Yeah, for you. Many, many of us do see a need for something else.

    >
    >> high-end compact that does RAW, movies, and IR.

    >
    > Why would anyone want to use a DSLR for movies?


    Sigh...

    Sometimes I don't want to carry a SLR and a movie camera, just a single
    solution. But I don't want a step down too far in image quality, so I want,
    essentially, a Sony 828 with improved image quality. That's it. I'd bet good
    money that I'm not the only one. And the failure of the R1 seems to indicate
    that Sony really blew it on that score, as well.

    >
    >> If the Sony F828 had been "fixed" it would have been near perfect,
    >> although a little large. But I'd love to see something that's a swiss
    >> army knife type cam to use as an adjunct to my SLR outfit.

    >
    > The D40, if it exists, happens to be a DSLR. If you want a "swiss army"
    > camera, buy a P&S with all the toys. There are plenty to choose from out
    > there in the market right now.


    Read this again: I want a camera to use as an adjunct to my SLR. And the
    current crop of P&S cams with the pixel stuffed sensors are utter crap, and
    not worth their wrist straps.

    >
    Kinon O'Cann, Nov 9, 2006
    #7
  8. Ockham's Razor

    tomm42 Guest


    > >> high-end compact that does RAW, movies, and IR.

    >
    > > Why would anyone want to use a DSLR for movies?Sigh...


    > And the failure of the R1 seems to indicate
    > that Sony really blew it on that score, as well.
    >


    When ever you try to put everything into a device the overall
    functionality suffers. Yes, Sony has a habit of shooting themselves in
    the foot on every camera. The R-1 for the enthusiast was missing
    effective RAW capture, sorry waiting 10 seconds between photos is not
    acceptable. For you no movie mode, that also could be because the
    sensor is large and compression would make a time lag, true video
    sensors are 2/3 inch diagonal. With DSLRs giving proven results using
    modified existing designs why redesign the camera from the ground up.
    Yes more modern, but the R-1 shows what the acceptance of such a camera
    would be. If you want video just get a mini DV camera, you will be
    better off.

    Tom
    tomm42, Nov 9, 2006
    #8
  9. Ockham's Razor

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    "tomm42" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    >
    >
    >> >> high-end compact that does RAW, movies, and IR.

    >>
    >> > Why would anyone want to use a DSLR for movies?Sigh...

    >
    >> And the failure of the R1 seems to indicate
    >> that Sony really blew it on that score, as well.
    >>

    >
    > When ever you try to put everything into a device the overall
    > functionality suffers. Yes, Sony has a habit of shooting themselves in
    > the foot on every camera. The R-1 for the enthusiast was missing
    > effective RAW capture, sorry waiting 10 seconds between photos is not
    > acceptable. For you no movie mode, that also could be because the
    > sensor is large and compression would make a time lag, true video
    > sensors are 2/3 inch diagonal. With DSLRs giving proven results using
    > modified existing designs why redesign the camera from the ground up.
    > Yes more modern, but the R-1 shows what the acceptance of such a camera
    > would be. If you want video just get a mini DV camera, you will be
    > better off.


    I hike and bike, and want to take one camera that does everything well. As
    I've said before, the Sony 828 with lower noise and less fringing would be
    ideal. Based on conversations with other users, I'm not alone.

    >
    > Tom
    >
    Kinon O'Cann, Nov 9, 2006
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Miro T Wikgren

    Nikon external flash on a non-Nikon camera?

    Miro T Wikgren, Jan 2, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    747
    Bob Barker
    Jan 30, 2004
  2. Replies:
    10
    Views:
    876
    Joseph Miller
    Jun 7, 2005
  3. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    392
  4. nathantw
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    384
    Pete D
    Aug 15, 2007
  5. Replies:
    8
    Views:
    2,062
    Paul Furman
    Jan 15, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page