Nikon - full frame sensor camera available soon?

Expect an announcment from Nikon within the next month because I just ordered two Nikon D200 bodies today!!! I'm thinking rather than just call them D200 #1 and D200 #2 that I might just name these bodies "Brad & Angelina"...or maybe "Alba & Jolie".

Anyway, I anticipate that about one month after these new babies are delivered next week, Nikon will finally reveal that a full frame sensor Nikon camera will be released just before Christmas.

Ahhh well...I'll just have to be content with the D200's for a few years. My lovely wife is thrilled that I purchased the D200's since she will now inherit one of my D70 cameras (don't feel bad for her as there is not a scratch on the D70). The other D70 will remain in the Sealux housing for macro work.

Are we having fun yet? Digital photography gave us the promise of not having to splurge $$$ on film...but we seem to have merely transferred the funds we're saving into a seemingly never-ending escalation of digital camera upgrades... Argghhhhh!

Cheers mates, Jett

Hey Jett,

Stu

Jett,

I would add that they will announce a D3X FF which includes interchangeable viewfinders "à la F5" priced $ 100 below the D200.

Then Aquatica will come out with a housing for it at less than $ 500 including all ports which will prompt Ike to price his at $ 400 and others will follow suit.

[This is what happens when you brain has seen too much Nitrox!]

Michel

Geetings, Michel

Yup, a NIKON DX3 would trump a D200 hahaha. Now, how many years before Nikon and Canon announce that they are merging thier Photo R&D Departments in order to gain new synergies and thus achieve critical mass in market share by developing a "NikCan", or "CanNik" Triple layered Titanium, 50 megipixel, full frame, solar powered, waterproof to 200 feet, DSLR camera!

All the best,

Jett

Whatever you guys are drinking I think I want one......

Paul C

Whatever you guys are drinking I think I want one......

 

Paul C

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Make mine a double.

I wish they would come out with a FF. Then perhaps it would be possible to have a rational discussion on the merits of different sensor sizes.

I wouldn't mind checking out a full frame sensor camera from Nikon.

But then what am i going to do with all of these DX (digital only) lenses

i need to win the lottery........

Will the full frame advocates have to argue in favour of 6x4.5cm or 2¼ square format once we get a full frame Nikon?

Personally, I’ve always thought that it’s not how big it is that matters – it’s what you do with it that matters!

Shame on me for prolonging this silly thread.

Will the full frame advocates have to argue in favour of 6x4.5cm or 2¼ square format once we get a full frame Nikon?

 

Personally, I’ve always thought that it’s not how big it is that matters – it’s what you do with it that matters!    

 

Shame on me for prolonging this silly thread. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You think you would be happy with a coolpix size sensor inside your D2X.

Like I said above, it's very hard to have a rational discussion on the implications of sensor size until Nikon comes out with a FF.

On the contrary… I have seen some images here on wetpixel.com that are absolutely stunning and shot with “only†a Coolpix.

The D2X purchase was predicated primarily on the increased autofocus capabilities, and battery life in cold weather conditions of the camera. My previous camera was a Fuji S2 Pro. Sensor size was a consideration residing near the bottom of the list.

As far as I’m concerned, I heard this argument 20 years ago with film format sizes. It’s just a re-hash of specifications and statistics as far as I’m concerned. It’s an endless argument that essentially goes nowhere.

I have always believed that the most important part of a camera system is what resides between your ears.

What this thread makes me wonder is, what did Louis Daguerre and William Henry Fox-Talbot had to argue about?

Yes, contrary to estimations of no-value from Anglesey, I traded my Hasselblads for a D200. However, I reflect that I bought my first 500C in 1966 and it was still working for me in 1992 when I finally gave up being a professional advertising photographer and did my last job for a Toyota ad (CDP London). Someone suggested I get a digital back for it but that cost £17000.

Although I have the D200 I am still using my brace of Fuji S2 Pro and getting just as good pics as I did before I bought the D200!

Yes, the better viewfinder and larger LCD will make my life slightly nicer. However, I have to question if the larger file size of the D200 will improve things, because the 12mb RAW file of the Fuji seemed to be good enough. If it was good enough last week, why not next week?

Half the problem is getting wound up by others on this web-site into spending unnecessarily !!!

It reminds me of the time I went to the Solomon Islands and found myself sitting next to a car-salesman on the plane who was doing the same trip. He had a much better outfit than me (2 Nikonos RS etc) and I felt a bit insecure. He was going to do an article for a rival diving magazine in the UK. Luckily, his pictures were not that good!!

So, as usual the rule seems to be, if you want good pictures, get a good photographer!

So, as usual the rule seems to be, if you want good pictures, get a good photographer!

I totally agree with our fellow Commonwealth resident. U/W photographers, and photographers in general spend too much time in the equipment/technique world rather than the imagination and dream realm.

Mr. Ernest Brooks II (photographer extraordinaire and author of "Silver Seas" a b&w u/w coffe table book) shot for decades with the same Hasseblad SWC, mostly in the same area, and MADE pictures.

The megapixel and FF vs DX race happen to be and for some images, yes equipment A might be better than equipment B. However, in the end, what matters is what you do with your equipment and the "brains" that you put in your images.

I have dreamed for years (in the film era) about shooting the SWC in a housing. Whenever I felt tempted, I picked an issue of National Geographic and then said to myself: if 35mm is good enough for them, it should suit you.

Now, look at the December issue of Nat Geo and remember that McNally shot the plane story with a D1X AND a D100... yes sir, a D100...

Having said that, I wouldn't mind bringing a Hasssy H2 u/w in a suitable housing.... just to see... Maybe we can convince Paul Allen to invest into such an endeavour?

Respectfully yours, with special salute to Jett who enjoys the Emerald sea,

Michel Gilbert