Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorian Gray
I've stated something similar in the past, but am wondering if my resolve will hold.  What happens if the D700 replacement is 18 megapixels and strictly $3300? The D700 might hold its value for ages. If the replacement is 24 megapixels and $2500, D700 prices will fall quickly. But I think $2500 is unrealistically low, especially when everyone is raising prices (Canon has further price increases coming in February).
Your $2000 hope is downright forlorn.  |
I wonder though...
My guess is that because full-frame sensors cost a bit more, camera makers are now addicted to the giant margins they can charge, they'll want to keep prices high for these models. Judging by what I see in class (I bit the bullet and decided to take some formal classes) current gen crop sensors equal or surpass 35mm film at common print sizes in many scenarios. I interject this bit, only because it points to how I expect future full frame DSLRs to be marketted:
1.) Super low light sensitivity, high speed action cameras, like the 1D and D3s
2.) Super high resolution (medium format level file sizes), high dynamic range at base ISO, like D3x, A900
This way, they can keep charging big $$$ for them, but to do so in the latter case, resolution will have to jump dramatically, into the 30-40MP range. In the former, you get whatever you get when all the advances applied to the denser photosites of high resolution sensors get scaled back. So instead of ISO 100-12800 ranges, you get ISOs in the 100,000 range. Neat...
A couple of things that bolster this. Sony basically told the camera press that their upcoming A77 will have a 24MP APSC and ISO into the 100K range. Sony supplies a lot of sensors, if they're making this sensor, Nikon and Pentax will be using it too. Some people scoff at the notion of 24MP crop sensors, but we already have 16 and 18MP and good lenses are still pulling more detail, so we'll get 24 APSC and more over the next 4 years.
And that more anything tells you where the floor lies for next generation full frame.
The 12MP FX launched alongside a 12MP DX. The differences between the two were clear. But we're three years on now. Even at high ISO, a 24MP DX with up to date technology is going to be awfully close (in print) to the 3 year old 12MP FX in the D700. If they handle the noise naturally and don't try to smear it out, yes, there will be 'texture/grain/noise', but there will be 2X the aerial density and more fine detail as well... The choice between an old D700 and a new (24MP APSC) D400 will come down to which lenses you need. I expect APSC to at least equal it in most circumstances where equivalent FOV lenses are available. And that's going to affect D700 prices.
If you apply the 24MP APSC densities to FX, you get 50+MP sensors. That's a whole lot of data, and a little unlikely, but rumored 28-42MP high resolution sensors start to seem very plausible...
All signs point to a D400 and D800 tandem in the spring. Both with new 24MP sensors: one DX, one FX. Both new designs, but otherwise operationally the same. They'll discount the D3x over the next year untill it's replaced by a really high res camera at the end of the year CLiQ show (formerly PMA).
My guess on price? $1800 and $2800.