Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
D2X
Next spring at the earliest for anyone not connected to Nikon directly (famous photographers, etc.) IMO, but I will be saving up some cash MUH-NEH for this puppy. I may even forgo my new 23" ACD to get this first. The G5 of cameras has arrived. ...into the light of a dark black night. Last edited by Moogs : 2004-09-16 at 13:21. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
|
Your image is broked son.
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Fixed...
...and make that the "F5 of Digital Cameras". Last edited by Moogs : 2004-09-16 at 13:22. |
quote |
Antimatter Man
Join Date: May 2004
Location: that interweb thing
|
ARTHUR: Go and tell your master that we have been charged by God with a sacred quest. If he will give us food and shelter for the night he can join us in our quest for the Holy Grail.
GUARD: Well, I'll ask him, but I don't think he'll be very keen... Uh, he's already got one, you see? ARTHUR: What? GALAHAD: He says they've already got one! ARTHUR: Are you sure he's got one? GUARD: Oh, yes, it's very nice-a [To Other Guards] I told him we already got one. OTHER GUARDS: [Laughing] ARTHUR: Well, um, can we come up and have a look? GUARD: Of course not! You are English types-a! ARTHUR: Well, what are you then? GUARD: I'm French! Why do think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king! GALAHAD: What are you doing in England? GUARD: Mind your own business! ARTHUR: If you will not show us the Grail, we shall take your castle by force! GUARD: You don't frighten us, English pig-dogs! Go and boil your bottoms, sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you, so-called Arthur-king, you and all your silly English kaniggets. Thppppt! GALAHAD: What a strange person. ARTHUR: Now look here, my good man! GUARD: I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough whopper! I fart in your general direction! You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of eldeberries. GALAHAD: Is there someone else up there we could talk to? GUARD: No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time-a! ARTHUR: Now, this is your last chance. I've been more than reasonable. GUARD: (Fetchez la vache.) wha? GUARD: (Fetchez la vache!) [moo] ARTHUR: If you do not agree to my commands, then I shall-- [twong] [mooooooo] Jesus Christ! Right! Charge! ALL: Charge! [mayhem] GUARD: Ah, this one is for your mother! [twong] ALL: Run away! Last edited by curiousuburb : 2004-09-16 at 22:55. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Hmm, I was just told by the head photo tech here that the D2 was pretty crap and that the Mark II EOS is much better. Apparently the D2 does some unsavory color shifting and some other undesirable stuff, so we don't use them. Opinions?
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
There is an existing camera called the D2H (what you tech is referring to). It is primarily a high frame rate photo-J camera designed for sports photography and the like. However, it is NOT a bad camera by any stretch of the imagination. I've seen many beautifully rendered landscapes and other outdoor shots from this camera, so if your so tech guy says it's "crap", I might consider getting a new tech guy. Either way, he will have seen no images from the D2X, as Nikon kept a tight lid on it until today (tighter even than what Apple does with new stuff usually).
The Canon 1Ds MkII was - until today - the absolute best specced camera on the market and a very good performer in most respects. It also costs about $3000 MORE than the D2H. He probably forgot to mention that. So, if an extra 4MP per camera is worth an extra $3000 to your dept., then I'd say that's a wise move. Otherwise, not. Also I personally believe Canon glass is still not as crisp and color neutral as the best Nikkor glass, but that's very subjective. Regardless, the D2X will become the best camera on the market by a decent margin if it makes good on the color rendition (which is always a question with any new sensor and color algorithm), and I wager even at 12MP, it will still cost less than the 1Ds MkII. Probably about $5000. And that's 12 million native pixels, not the Fuji kind. Curiousuburb, you son of a silly person... bring me the holy hand-grenade of Antioch! ...into the light of a dark black night. Last edited by Moogs : 2004-09-16 at 14:21. |
quote |
Antimatter Man
Join Date: May 2004
Location: that interweb thing
|
Quote:
|
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Three is the number of the counting... and the number of the counting shall be three. Thou shalt not count four, nor shall thou count two... excepting that thou then proceed to... three. Five is right out....
...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Blast it, I misread the title as "An lo... the Holy Grail of Digital Photography was Porn." and got all excited.
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
But really, this is almost as good... :smokey:
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
|
Well, you can use it to shoot porn. Very, very detailed porn. 12MP porn.
Once you go 12MP, you'll never go back |
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Poster-sized porn if you make prints.
I think 16x20 will be a snap without any interpolation for a sharp image, and with a little bit of Bicubic sharper, 20x24 should be be no problem. Maybe larger. Of course there are already the people who today claim they can make 20x24 prints from 4MP cameras "with ease". ...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Quote:
|
|
quote |
Antimatter Man
Join Date: May 2004
Location: that interweb thing
|
Quote:
12MP + Zoom = Pornparazzi |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
|
Quote:
The human body disgusts me Please note that the above is a joke, if you don't know the definition of joke please look it up before jumping down my throat for being a "stupid American Pig-dog" This public service announcement brought to you in part by the Americans for more nudity counsel. A non-for-profit organization. Come waste your time with me |
|
quote |
Sucker for shiny objects
|
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
It's gonna be nasty when HD porn starts getting produced - hell, *regular* actors/actresses are unhappy with the amount of detail it shows... every blemish, every wrinkle...
|
quote |
Selfish Heathen
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Zone of Pain
|
Where's Eugene when you need him? He always seemed to be on top of all the digital camera imaging stuff...
|
quote |
careful with axes
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
|
The only thing that worries me is ISO 1600 (HI1) and 3200 (HI2) probably having waaay too much noise to be useful. In addition, it's not even going to start shipping until next year so who knows what the competition has up its sleeve.
There's not much else to say since this isn't some sort of revolutionary new camera... --- And it's the F6 of digital cameras... |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
I think until the benefits of digital vastly outweigh the benefits of chemical film, we'll still have a place for chemical film. That's going to require digital resolutions on the order of the resolution of molecules though... :P At that point, you can modify the data to emulate any grain type you want in addition to the normal manipulations.
|
quote |
Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Quote:
Resolution is one thing, noise and color quality is another. Digital photography still has a looong way to go. |
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
I think the consumer film will dissappear completely except for the availability of disposable PAS cameras at Walgreens and such. Those will always have some utility to a certain demographic or in an emergency, or even weddings.
Specialty film (low ISO E6, BW negative film, infared, etc) will take a small hit but will continue to exist for the many, many purists out there and those who shoot digital but still like to shoot film for special shots, etc. 120 film will be around for a LONG time IMO because the percentage of medium format photographers who can afford to just drop $20-$30,000 on a digital back is very small. Especially if that back is obsolete three or four years after you buy it and no one will want it on the resale market for more than a few thousand bucks. When digital backs drop down to about $10,000, 120 film will start to go away for all except those same special purpose films noted above. Nikon themselves is supposed to announce a new flagship film camera (they may have actually done this already, I haven't checked) called teh F6. It will replace the venerable F5, although, short of making it lighter and adding a better meter (nearly impossible on the latter count), I have no idea what things about the F5 anyone would want changed. It's been by far the best film camera on the market for roughly ten years. BTW, the D2X is geared towards Fine Art photography (portraiture, still-lifes, landscape, architecture, macro, tabletop, etc.), as its resolution is not only way up there, but its ISO is different than most digital SLRs. 100-800, rather than 200-1600/3200. This was done in a way that the sensor is apparently less able to handle high ISO, but more able to feed the processors and software a set of data that is easier to interpret pure color and remove noise from. At least in layman's terms that's what I understand to be the case. IOW, shooting a bed of flowers at ISO 400 on the D2X, will result in a more pleasing and noise-free image than shooting that same bed with a D70 or D2H at ISO 400. Quite possibly shooting it at ISO 800 on a D2X will be more pleasing than ISO 400 on either of the other cameras. However there will obviously be some low-light limitations. BTW, price seems to be in the vicinity of $5000. *cringe* Might be a year or more before i can afford one. ...into the light of a dark black night. Last edited by Moogs : 2004-09-17 at 09:06. |
quote |
Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Quote:
I'm no real expert, but in the professional world I think the Imacon or similar digital camera backs are far superior to the D2X and the only digital camera equipment a real fine arts photographer would consider using. 1984 is 20 years late. |
|
quote |
Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Like I said, I'm no expert, but I guess you can say it's a digital back that replaces the film house (edit: film holder) of a professional camera.
Like this on a medium format hasselblad: 1984 is 20 years late. Last edited by Jonas : 2004-09-17 at 16:16. |
quote |
Which way is up?
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
|
Quote:
|
|
quote |
Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
um, hehe, yeah... But they are very, very professional.
A large format camera, 4x5" film, will be even more. And then there is the light equipment. |
quote |
Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
hehe...
What is interesting is with the D2X is that nikon has finally caved into the CMOS sensor technology. Canon has used this technology since 2000 and is considered to have the edge on nikon. Maybe they already have something up their sleeve to compete with the D2X...? 1984 is 20 years late. |
quote |
Posting Rules | Navigation |
|
Thread Tools | |