Jump to content


Photo

Nikon and a Full-Frame 35mm sized sensor


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

Poll: Would you be happier with a FF sensor in your D2x? (30 member(s) have cast votes)

Would you be happier with a FF sensor in your D2x?

  1. Yes (3 votes [10.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.00%

  2. No (24 votes [80.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 80.00%

  3. No opinion (3 votes [10.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 DigitalDarrell

DigitalDarrell

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 October 2005 - 01:11 AM

In our D2X cameras Nikon provided us with a DX sized sensor, which is equivalent to an APS sized film frame. Would you have been happier if Nikon had given us a 35mm sized "full-frame" sensor instead? Attached File  lbcast_sensor.jpg   4.02KB   76 downloads DX-Sized Sensor
Best regards,
Darrell Young (Digital Darrell)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Better too many words than not enough understanding." - Darrell Young
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bodies
: Nikon D810, D800, D750, D600, D2X, COOLPIX A, D100, F80, FM, EM, Olympus OM-D E-M1, Olympus OM-D E-M10
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lenses
: AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED, AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G, AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Special Edition (for Df), AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G VR (x2), AF-S Nikkor DX 16-85mm f/3.5-4.5G VR, AF Nikkor 80-400 f/4.5-5.6D ED VR, AF Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8, AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR, AF-S Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR, AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8D, AI Nikkor 35mm f/2, AI Nikkor 50mm 5/1.8, AI Nikkor 50mm 5/1.8 Series E, AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5, AI Nikkor 200mm f/4, Non-AI Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 10-20mm EX f/3.5-5.6, M.Zuiko 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, M.Zuiko PRO 12-40mm f/2.8 ED
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accessories:
Nikon SB-910 Speedlight, Nikon SB-900 Speedlight, Nikon GP-1 GPS, Nikon ME-1 Microphone, Eye-Fi Wireless Cards, Atomos Ninja Blade External HDMI Video Recorder, Atomos Ninja-2 External HDMI Video Recorder, Atomos Samurai Blade External Video Recorder, Manfrotto Tripods, Markins M-10 Ballhead, Lots of camera bags, Metz 24 AF-1 Flash, Olympus FL-600R Flash, Olympus HLD-7 Battery Grip
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of:

Nikon Professional Services (NPS), Professional Photographers of America (PPA), North American Nature Photography Association (NANPA), Founding Member of Nikonians Writers' Guild (www.Nikonians.org), Charter Member (year 2000) of Nikonians.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#2 DigitalBrenda

DigitalBrenda

    Planet Basic Member

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 October 2005 - 01:27 AM

Why do we need one? I read that a FF sensor causes light falloff on the edges with a 35mm lens. Read this:

http://www.digitalda...SizedSensor.asp

#3 Gary Poole

Gary Poole

    Planet Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 672 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SE Michigan, USA

Posted 13 December 2006 - 10:55 AM

Even though I have not yet joined the DSLR world, I can't see the need for a 35mm sized sensor. The results from the current DX sensors are amazing so why change. I rather see engineering investment in increased dynamic range rather than larger sensors. Now with film I'd like to have a longer lens, but the cost is prohibitive. The weight of a longer telephote is intimidating too. As a result I look forward to the 1.5X DX crop factor giving me more telephote reach. I'd much rather add a much less expensive and smaller wide angle to recover the lost wide angle range when I make the switch.
Gary in SE Michigan, USA
D4, D810, D300 (720nm IR), D90, F6, FM3a (black), FM2n (chrome)
YashicaMat 124, Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5

#4 Dave Whiteley

Dave Whiteley

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6183 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nottingham, United Kingdom
  • Interests:Plant, close-up and macrophotography.

Posted 13 December 2006 - 11:27 AM

I suppose for a top of the range camera aimed at professionals the answer is YES, all the D2 range ought to have full frame 35mm sensors. For the lower ranges like the D200 and below aimed at amateurs, the APS sized sensor is better as it means lighter cameras with smaller lenses. Brenda, there are still rumours of a curved sensor being developed to overcome the vignetting with conventional 35mm lenses on a full frame sensored camera. However, the larger sizes of flat sensors are hard enough to manufacture now, so how much harder would a dished one be? Maybe it would even be cheaper to use a flat full frame 35mm sensor and bring out a new range of lenses for it with a wider image circle and a collimating lens as the rear element. What is certain is that if Nikon wants to claw back the majority of the professional market again it will have to eventually bring out a 35mm full frame sensored professional camera in order to compete with Canon. Maybe this will not replace the D2 range but be in an even higher, more expensive professional range above the D2 cameras? Dave Whiteley
Nikon D200
AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70 mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
60mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor
70mm-180mm AF ED f4.5-f5.6 D Micro-Nikkor
Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF)
Nikon PB6 belows, Nikon Tubes.
2X Nikon SB600 flash guns
Manfrotto dual flash bracket

#5 Virgil

Virgil

    Galactic Hero Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vienna / Austria
  • Interests:my family, photography, everything that´s fast, my Triumph bike

Posted 13 December 2006 - 11:28 AM

I second Gary´s point of view concerning dynamic range. I´d add improved noise behaviour of the sensor (and i mean improved hardware not applying more noise-reduction in the processing). Additionally Nikon should consider quality details (rubber :) ) as well as improvement of handling (eg. why we´ve this odd switch for changing between C/S/M or the other one to change metering mode - instead of buttons?)
Cheers

Virgil

#6 Dave Whiteley

Dave Whiteley

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6183 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nottingham, United Kingdom
  • Interests:Plant, close-up and macrophotography.

Posted 13 December 2006 - 11:34 AM

I did just find this link that may be of interest. It is a little dated because these were his predictions in 2002 but some have already come true like a full frame Canon camera:-

http://photo.net/ope...full_frame.html

Dave Whiteley
Nikon D200
AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70 mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
60mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor
70mm-180mm AF ED f4.5-f5.6 D Micro-Nikkor
Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF)
Nikon PB6 belows, Nikon Tubes.
2X Nikon SB600 flash guns
Manfrotto dual flash bracket

#7 james23p

james23p

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis TN
  • Interests:I am an avid film user and digital user. I enjoy both formats and firmly believe they can live side by side.

    Right Jazz! :D

Posted 13 December 2006 - 01:05 PM

For me the DX sensor has not held me back one bit. I'd rather have a superior DX sensor than a average full frame sensor. From what I have read the two Canon full frame cameras have not been big sellers. Last what is full frame hmmm. Before 35mm was it medium format, large format etc. Full frame is just a state of mind it means different things to different people. My Dad considers FF medium format. Besides the trend in todays world is for smaller not larger and from what I've seen canon has a couple of sizes at least Nikon has one solid entry. I have seen some awsome pictures taken with the Olympus E-1 and its smaller than Nikons so just keep making great DX sensors the rest will sort out. Jim

God bless all those in harms way and Go Navy!




D700 w/MB-D10, D605 w/MB-D14, D200 w/MB-D200, D50, Coolpix P330.

Nikon 1 stuff: Nikon V1, Nikkor 10mm f2.8 pancake w/HN-N101 & HC-N101, Nikkor 10-30mm f3.5-5.6 w/HB-N101 Aspherical VR,, Nikkor 18.5mm f1.8 w/HB-N104, Nikon 1 FT-1, SB-N5 w/Polaroid Diffuser .

F100 w MB-15, N80, FM3a, FE2(Black and Silver) and EM.

Nikkor 24-85G ED AF-S VR, 70-300G ED AF-S VR, 28-105 3.5-4.5 AF-D, 50 1.8 AF-D, Nikkor 18-35 f3.5-4.5 AF-D ED.

Nikon Series E lens, 28mm, 100mm, 135mm, 75-150mm, 70-210 f4.

MF Nikkor's 50 f2 Ai, 500 f4 ED Ai-P.

 

MF Rokinon 14mm f2.8 ED AE UMC(Ai-P)

MF Rokinon 85mm f1.4 ASP AE UMC(Ai-P)

Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG HSM, Tamron's SP 70-200 f2.8 LD Di IF/Macro BIM, Kenko Pro 300 1.4 TC DGX, Tokina 100 f2.8D Macro At-X.

Pro Manfrotto 055XV with Markins M10 ,Sirui P-326 6-Section Carbon Fiber Monopod with Markins Q3 Emille, Manfrotto Compact MKC3-H01M with Combo Head, 3Pod PTT1H Table Top Tripod with Giottos MH1304 Ballhead.


#8 Dave Whiteley

Dave Whiteley

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6183 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nottingham, United Kingdom
  • Interests:Plant, close-up and macrophotography.

Posted 13 December 2006 - 04:40 PM

It's really a case of Megapixels sell Jim. We are about at the sensible limit of the APS sized sensor with 10-12 Megapixels with forseeable tecnology. To get more Megapixels in order to attract the punters to keep upgrading you now need a larger sensor because making the pixel sites smaller will seriously degrade the image so even amateurs will notice. Why do we need more Megapixels? We don't but the punters will not upgrade their cameras unless they see a constant increase in Megapixel numbers. Does that matter? It does for camera firms because if we all are so satisfied with our present cameras we don't upgrade they will have no repeat orders and go broke. Therefore planned obsolescence is always built into goods these days to ensure you must have the new and better model even if it takes no better pictures and is not so well constructed as the old one. I used a camera for 30 years with only two lenses before I upgraded so I am not the type of user the camera makers want to encourage. If all Nikon's and Canon's customers had behaved as I did they would have gone bankrupt years ago. The camera firms cannot keep going on lens sales alone, because people do not change their lenses as often as their cameras. Extra Megapixels, or a larger sensor therefore is the only bait camera manufacturers now have to keep selling cameras and stay in business. It's not a case of what you need, it's a case of making you want what they want to sell you. As you see they have got Darrell hooked because he has to have each new Nikon as soon as it comes out, though the pictures it takes are probably no better than the ones he took 5 years ago and he has still not worn the old camera out, though he probably does not tell Brenda that! :o :lol: Dave Whiteley
Nikon D200
AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70 mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
60mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor
70mm-180mm AF ED f4.5-f5.6 D Micro-Nikkor
Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF)
Nikon PB6 belows, Nikon Tubes.
2X Nikon SB600 flash guns
Manfrotto dual flash bracket

#9 Rebel

Rebel

    Planet Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 899 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 13 December 2006 - 05:27 PM

I guess this FF debate is always going to be around because it is perceived as being superior by many people. A lot of people have got it in their heads that the Canon 1DS MkII is the most advanced and superior camera, probably because it costs so much.

When I was at the Nikon Olympia show in London the man leading one of the conferences asked who would like to see Nikon make a "full-frame" camera. Half the room put up their hands. Then he asked; "Who here is dissatisfied with the performance of their Nikon DSLRs." Not a hand was raised.

He mentioned the problems with installing a full-frame sensor in a Nikon body and the compromises that would have to be made. He did mention the Kodak full-frame camera (that used Nikon lens) as an example that it is possible but that it's not necessarily the way forward.

The problems that Canon FF cameras have is that you have to use only the most expensive large lens and not all digital lens are compatible with them. There is light fall off at the edges because of the way light falls on the sensor. There is vignetting with many lens and the resolving power of the sensor isn't even as good as the D2X with a pro lens (which is cheaper and can be fitted with any Nikon lens ever made).

http://www.naturfoto...6.html#top_page

There may be breakthroughs in sensor technology that make a larger sensor more feasible in the future but this guy reckoned that with the current technology we'd be looking at bigger cameras, bigger lens, higher prices, less backwards compatibility for an item that might only have prestige value.

He reckoned that to get the kind of quality Nikon would be happy with using the current sensor technology they might have to create a whole new line of cameras and lenses alongside the existing models. This would be a kind of super large, super expensive elite range for professionals with deep pockets. Kind of like the Mamiya and Hasselblad I guess.

I have on my computer pictures taken at the same venue by two different photographers. One used a D70 with an SB800 flash and an 18-70mm f3.5/4.5 lens. The other used a Canon EOS 1DS MkII with a mid range zoom - I think it was the 24-105mm - and a 580 flash. Considering the vast price difference and size of both the camera and lens you would expect a far superior image but there's not much in it. Certainly nothing that the customer noticed, only the expert eye of photographers can tell the difference. Yes the Canon 1Ds full frame camera with a pro lens on it is slightly better than the D70 with the kit lens, but not by much.

Not a very scientific comparison but here's a crop of the same subject shot at the same distance at the same time. There's a difference in focal length because of the crop factor and the Canon was set at ISO800. The D70 at ISO400. Both were shot as JPEG with more or less standard setting in camera and saved in Photoshop. Yes I know that this isn't a "proper" comparison but for somebody scanning through a bunch of pictures trying to chose which they want to use for their newsletter there's nothing in it.

Posted Image
Who we are, shapes what we see ~ Chris Orwig

Ask yourself what makes you come alive and go and do that. For what the world needs, is people who have come fully alive ~ Gil Bailie

#10 jbear

jbear

    Planet Basic Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 07:34 PM

The only reason that I would like to have FF sensor is that using my lenses has become intuitive to me over the years; now I have to think more about my lens choices. I've had a D200 for about four months now and I am enjoying it greatly, but I always shoot film along side. I have to be conscious of the differences and I'd rather not have to be. I'm sure over time this will become intuitive as well, so either way...I'm happy.

Edited by jbear, 14 December 2006 - 07:35 PM.


#11 Luis V.

Luis V.

    Planet Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1813 posts
  • Location:Miami, Florida

Posted 14 December 2006 - 09:28 PM

FF superiority is a myth. When I see a FF shot that is better than what my DX sensor produces, I'll worry about it.
Luis V.Nikon D800/D2X/D200/D100Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 AFS | 24-70mm f/2.8 AFS | 70-200mm f/2.8 AFS VR-II | 200-400mm f/4 AFS | 50mm f/1.4D | 85mm f/1.4D | 105mm f/2.8 Macro

#12 Dave Whiteley

Dave Whiteley

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6183 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nottingham, United Kingdom
  • Interests:Plant, close-up and macrophotography.

Posted 15 December 2006 - 02:59 AM

I would not have thought that using a kit lens against a pro lens a fair test of difference. Whether we like it or not, and though manufacturers may claim otherwise, kit lenses are designed down to a price to be affordable for first time buyers and those on a budget, pro lenses are of a much higher optical specification. OK, the differences may never show in normal photography and the kit lens is more than good enough for most of us, but if you are going to do minute crops of part of an image then blow them up they will show the difference. Dave Whiteley
Nikon D200
AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70 mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
60mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor
70mm-180mm AF ED f4.5-f5.6 D Micro-Nikkor
Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF)
Nikon PB6 belows, Nikon Tubes.
2X Nikon SB600 flash guns
Manfrotto dual flash bracket

#13 Frosty

Frosty

    Planet Basic Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Location:California Central Valley
  • Interests:My wife and kids are #!, Photography is my complete joy, Landscaping,<br />HVAC and Refrigeration work.

Posted 02 March 2007 - 11:08 AM

Do I need FF sensor? I can't really say I do, however, I would like to see Nikon take care of the noise/high iso 800+ issue. IMHO this would take a great deal of fire away from the competition. I'm really tired of seing all those white lenses at most of the major sporting events.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users