D2Xs

[javabear90]

Nikon has today announced the D2Xs, a subtly upgraded D2X. The key points of improvement are a larger 2.5" LCD monitor, electronic masking of the focusing screen in high-speed crop mode, modified metering in high-speed crop mode, a longer lasting battery, black and white mode, Adobe RGB in all color modes, up to 3 custom tone curves, 1/3 step ISO boost options, in-camera trim function, image authentication system compatible and save/load settings between cameras.
Here is the DPreview link
Seems like a really small update for such an old camera to me. I was hoping for the D3X with a 20 megapixel sensor and a bunch of other nifty features.

-Ted

 

[GoCubsGo]

20 mp? hahaha
Otherwise, I'm right there with you. Nikon needs to step up. Though I have all the lenses and everything and my film cameras are nikons, I'm seriously considering canon these days.

 

[Silentwave]

Nikon has nothing to step up to.

Nikon makes some fantastic cameras. Really they do. I'm a bit of a nikon fanboy, but more than that i'm a photographer. I know what works for me. I don't need to be fickle about what brand I use. I know that Nikon has made, does make, and will continue to make fantastic cameras.

The D2Xs is to my eyes partly a cost cutter (LCD), partly a platform to extend the life of the D2 series a bit more with refinements, (D3H will come before a D3X replaces the D2Xs...same thing happened with D2H coming out well before the D2X so the D1X stayed out) and IMO partly to begin to roll out the features developed or being developed for the D3H.
I fully expect a D3H at Photokina in Sept. or announced in Nov. Like the D200. I hope it still uses the EN-El4 series batteries. the EL4 did not need improvement. I believe the 4A is a possible sign that a more power hungry camera will be coming out that will use them and Nikon wanted to maintain the stellar battery life we currently enjoy in the new model.
The more sensitive AF points may be indicative of the improvements that we'll eventually see in a D3 series. I think there may well be more of them as well as the improved sensitivity, and the sensitivity may well be better than this as well...but it never hurts to try them out.

 

[gamer2k]

Am I mistaken in assuming that the original D2X also had a 2.5" LCD?

 

[Silentwave]

Am I mistaken in assuming that the original D2X also had a 2.5" LCD?

It did. They are cutting their costs here by putting the wide viewing angle (170 degree viewing angle) 2.5" LCD from the D200 in it.

IMO the LCD was fine...the menus i'm glad to see have changed to D200 style. the old ones hurt my eyes.

they're putting the things they can change with firmware into an update for teh D2X available in fall-winter this year.

I hope they do the same for the D2HS but I doubt it

 

[ipacmm]

I was hoping for the D3X with a 20 megapixel sensor and a bunch of other nifty features.

I think you might see 20+ MP later this year on the new Canon Mark III (or whatever it is going to be called)

 

[pdpfilms]

Wasn't this announced yesterday?

(actually I'm sure of it.... i read the announcement yesterday on Nikon's website.) http://nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=2&productNr=25414

I'm not sure that these imporvements merit a new model... sure, it's an "s" model, but still.... and i definitely con't think it merits such a large price bump. Nevertheless, I'm happy with what Nikon's doing overall, and I think they're heading in a good general direction.

 

[Silentwave]

price bump, its still cheaper than the original D2X was when it came out isn't it?

The D2X dropped in price and had the systembuilder rebate on it to get the stock out of the way so they could get this on the market.

I don't expect it'll stay super expensive for long.

I won't be buying one....i'm saving my $$$ for the D3H I have all the MP i need in the D200. that won't stop me from getting a D3X or whatever they call it in 2007...but we're talking a year away.

 

[gamer2k]

Tempted to spring for a D200 eventually... but my D70 is still more camera than I can use as an amateur.

price bump, its still cheaper than the original D2X was when it came out isn't it?

The D2X dropped in price and had the systembuilder rebate on it to get the stock out of the way so they could get this on the market.

I don't expect it'll stay super expensive for long.

I won't be buying one....i'm saving my $$$ for the D3H I have all the MP i need in the D200. that won't stop me from getting a D3X or whatever they call it in 2007...but we're talking a year away.

 

[ksz]

I think you might see 20+ MP later this year on the new Canon Mark III (or whatever it is going to be called)

Although I own a Nikon D200, I am neither a Nikon nor Canon fanboy. I like to see companies continue to innovate and push the envelope. Canon is best-in-breed in the following:

1. Lowest per-pixel poise.
2. Highest per-pixel sharpness.

For an imaging sensor, these are extraordinarily important specifications. Similarly, I like Intel's recent focus on:

1. Performance per watt.
2. Efficiency per instruction.

If Canon does introduce a 1Ds Mark III with 20+ MP at the same or slightly better price point than the existing Mark II, then I'll be very excited (even if I won't be contemplating a purchase anytime soon, but who knows!).

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

I'm not sure that these imporvements merit a new model... sure, it's an "s" model, but still.... and i definitely con't think it merits such a large price bump. Nevertheless, I'm happy with what Nikon's doing overall, and I think they're heading in a good general direction.

Not really a price bump. The old D2X was $4500 before the rebate, and the new D2Xs is about $4500 without a rebate.

Would have been sweeter if the D2Xs was at the $4000 price point perhaps.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Canon is best-in-breed in the following:

1. Lowest per-pixel poise.
2. Highest per-pixel sharpness.

This may be true in pixel peeping tests, but in final prints there are those in both camps that are truly happy with the results from either company. And most end users will not see a difference in the prints they get from either camera system.

For an imaging sensor, these are extraordinarily important specifications. Similarly, I like Intel's recent focus on:

1. Performance per watt.
2. Efficiency per instruction.

Sorry, but only a "geek" cares IMO. The DSLR's of today give far better performance at the 3 fps or better IIRC than the pro 35mm film cameras form 15 to 30 years ago.

If Canon does introduce a 1Ds Mark III with 20+ MP at the same or slightly better price point than the existing Mark II, then I'll be very excited (even if I won't be contemplating a purchase anytime soon, but who knows!).

Doubt it would be at a better price point. In this segment of the market, better resolution and performance trumps anything else at this point. You may have to wait 2 to 4 years for the 1Ds pricing to truly fall IMO.

 

[ksz]

This may be true in pixel peeping tests, but in final prints there are those in both camps that are truly happy with the results from either company. And most end users will not see a difference in the prints they get from either camera system.

If that were true, companies would not be spending so much time and money to develop better sensors with lower noise characteristics, higher light sensitivity (increased dynamic range making them more comparable to film and then one day to the human eye), better sharpness, and higher pixel count.

There has been an inevitable march forward from 1 MP sensors to 16.7 MP sensors and on to 30+ MP sensors on medium format.

Despite all the claims that "you don't need more than this" the march has continued unabated.

Years ago, consumers were told "do don't need a computer faster than 32 MHz, then you didn't need one faster than 500 MHz, then you didn't need one faster than 1 GHz, then you didn't need one faster than 2 GHz, ..."

What computers are we buying today? Same thing with memory. Who needed more than 1 MB of memory? Now many of us can't live without 2 GB.

While this is not a perfect analogy because there's only so much information to be captured in an image, the point is clear:

We don't limit ourselves to what we think we "need" today and stop there forever. We always push forward.

Sorry, but only a "geek" cares IMO. The DSLR's of today give far better performance at the 3 fps or better IIRC than the pro 35mm film cameras form 15 to 30 years ago.

Sorry, I disagree for the reasons above. Even in the purchase of computers, people stop to consider:

1. How fast is it?
2. How long will it run on a charged battery?

Will I buy a laptop that runs extremely fast but stops after 1 hour? I don't think most consumers are quite as unsophisticated as that. I think most consumers check and double-check the specs before they spend such large sums of money.

Doubt it would be at a better price point. In this segment of the market, better resolution and performance trumps anything else at this point. You may have to wait 2 to 4 years for the 1Ds pricing to truly fall IMO.

I think the D200 precipitated a drop in price of the 5D (or at least a hearty rebate). If there is no competition in the high end segment, I would tend to agree with you. But if Nikon or Sony introduces a dSLR with 16+ MP at a much more competitive price point, Canon would have to think carefully.

I think there are no hard and fast rules in any competitive market.