Another new Nikon

Most (not all) designers just don't have a clue. For an inkjet (we are talking print res of only 360dpi) display print job the other day, the client asked for a an image 3metre x 2metre@ 300"dpi", with the .tif to be sent via EMAIL. That would have been 2.34 GB file. ouch.

It as for a shop fit, high up on a 2-storey wall, with a minimum viewing distance of about 6 metres. Needless to say I ended up sending a much more sensible alternative, direct to the guy printing the job.

Quote "Silly rule? Seems like simple math to me.... yes, its easy to uprez any file to 50mb.. but which file will look better? thats the important thing here and the point of my original post."

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That was my point. As a quality control measure, a minimum files size requirement does nothing as anyone can up size anything to any size. In the end, someone with a trained eye has to look at the photo and decide if it's acceptable. File size requirements are just a waste of time and space.

Sorry everyone. It's entirely my fault. I knew I should not have bought the D200 set up. I haven't even got it wet yet (still flooding Fuji S2 s) nor got a housing for a D200. It was tempting fate that I should buy a new camera just before Nikon brought out a new one. I also put my money into stocks the day before Black Wednesday! I'm just that sort of guy.

As to file sizes, if we could dissuade art editors and production men from Photochopping the pictures it would go a long way to getting good quality into print. Why do they do it? Because they can!

Right... so here is the first pic.... of the new D80!!!

personally, i don't buy it.. another fake if you ask me..

Notice it has an integrated vertical grip... if you look closely at the Nikon teaser.. no vert grip!

That's definitely a fake, Mike!

OK Mike.

As you already picked...

For a start flash is the wrong shape - should be flat on the top. Camera has too much vertical elevation (too tall) and the mode dial should be angled rather than flat as it is in the picture above.

Looks good either way.

but anthony... will it fit in my housing?

I would not count out the vertical grip necessarily. Why couldn't the new camera be a D3H? Personally I cannot believe that Nikon is still selling a 4MP body. I think that the H series needs an MP jump much more than the D70 does.

I would not count out the vertical grip necessarily.  Why couldn't the new camera be a D3H?  Personally I cannot believe that Nikon is still selling a 4MP body.  I think that the H series needs an MP jump much more than the D70 does.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The wording on the teaser mentions "affordability" and "enthusiast" which I assume would preclude a new "pro" D3H. I wish it were so though. If my D2H had 10MP I would have little need for another upgrade.

there isn't going to be a D3H because the D2x combines the features of an H and an X. Its 7 megapixel, 8fps high speed crop feature takes care of that end.

the new one will be a D70 successor at the $1k price point.

there isn't going  to be a D3H because the D2x combines the features of an H and an X.  Its 7 megapixel, 8fps high speed crop feature takes care of that end.

 

the new one will be a D70 successor at the $1k price point.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I disagree. The camera that will be announced in a few days or so will in all likely-hood be the D70 replacement but I think there will be a D3H in the future. From everything I've read Nikon is continuing development of the LBCAST sensor and it's the sensor that sets the D2h apart from other DSLRs I've used. I would really like to see a 10-12MP LBCAST sensor and I'll be the first one in line if Nikon gives us one. I just don't think it's going to be this time.

I don't think there's room in between the D200 and the D2x for another camera. If they make a "pro" body 12 M pixels and 8 frames/sec camera, it'll completely replace the D2x.

The LBCAST sensor was the reason that they reduced the price of such a nice camera body to $2000. Of course they won't use that process in another camera unless they make lots of improvements.

The top reasons for a new Nikon Top-of-the-line body are:

Higher frame rate at the full ~12Mp resolution. ( I'll stick my neck out and predict they won't make a cropped sensor at higher resolution ).

Better high ISO noise and resolution.

Full Frame ( let's not get into this one )

All the above are possible with either CMOS or LBCAST, I'm not so sure about CCD. Why would a photographer care which one they choose if they can accomplish the above.

I quess I'm going against the grain here but Nikon has maintained the H and X designations with both the D1 and D2 versions and there's no reason to think there won't be a D3H as well as a D3X. The H and the X are targeted at different pro market segments. The H at PJ's and sports photo segment. The X at the studio/fashion/nature market.

I agree with Larry that the H might continue for sometime. Especially if the X goes to FF.

While the H gets a hard time from photo-enthusiasts and measurebators (and people like me for whom it is no-use) it is popular with those who work as PJs (photojournalists) and know their market. A local PJ I know has D2H and a D2Hs and is more than happy with their res because he shoots for newspapers. He has a D2X too - for certain jobs - but he is making so much money from his D2H images that he can buy a D2X for fun!

In our photographic world we don't meet that many photographers who do PJ stuff. But there are many out there and while I'd expect Nikon to bumb the D3H to 8MP these people aren't clamering for more megapixels (but would like better high ISO noise to match the Canon 1D Mk2n).

Alex

Another way to prove this 50mb minimum rule is stupid: you can take an image from a D100 or D70, save it as a 32-bit TIFF file, and there you have it, a 70mb file that's only 3000x2000 (6mp).  Aboslutely no added information, just takes more space  :glare:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think you'll find that they won't accept 32-bit files. 16bit files must be circa 5300x3500mb to meet submission guidelines = 50mb.

now, not to drag us back into a tangent, but quck comments:

The logic behind the 50mb requirement, as I understand it, is as a quality control guideline. Think about it from a photo buyers and agents perspective. If you were an agency attempting to get images from photographers and needed a fast way to move a tremendous volume of images through quality control, a strict set of guidelines would be the best way.

It might just be a size (file size) requirement, and it is counterintuitive, but frankly setting such a guideline is the best way to regulate quality. If all images are about 50mb 300dpi (just a standard) 16bit, you can open up any image, view it at 100%, and know pretty much immediately whether it is of high enough quality. That is a bar that the industry sets. And frankly, an image might look great at native output, but how will it hold up when you blow it up to xxx size? The buyer needs to know what he or she is getting and won't tolerate images of varying sizes. Remember, it's all about standards. A standard has to be somewhere, whether for editing, or output. 50mb is simply a representation of a quality standard in a method easily translated to both buyers and photographers.

Finally, regarding some of the prior comments, in my experience most agency personell are better versed in digital media than most of the photographers they represent. As a photographer, I appreciate this and what the agent does: sell my images.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/26/nikon-d80-pics-revealed/

*might fit* ? don't have my d70 infront to compare.

Looks like SD memory though

These are the leaked pictures, looks legit, but let's wait and see.

It looks smaller than the D70 and apparently takes SD cards.

That looks like it would fit in a d70... except maybe the buttons on the left...., but who needs those!

Mike,

I hate to really stuff up your world, but I’d be astonished if these two cameras could share a housing.

Just had a quick play in PS...

It does look like the D80 has dust on the sensor though! What were those turkeys thinking!!

As an aside though - the finder looks a lot more like the D200 than the D70...