A800 Rumor

[bakubo]

For those who like witty quotes, I just remembered another old Chinese proverb that I had on my office wall back in the 1980s:

Man who says, "I can't" and man who says, "I can" are both right.

[KevinBarrett]

Why don't we start our own rumors for the Japanese forum-crawlers to drool over?

Those specs sound amazing. If the rumor isn't true, I'd be happy with no other upgrade but a 12.24 MP Exmor "R" sensor...but if we're tinkering with the body anyway, a larger OVF and some GPS couldn't hurt.

[A1000]

A800 will be FF.

There will not be any EXMOR-R in APS-C or FF cameras anytime soon.

[alphaomega]

A1000 wrote:

A800 will be FF.
There will not be any EXMOR-R in APS-C or FF cameras anytime soon.

So I dare quote a specification rumoured on the Nikonrumour site:

Nikon D400 specs
By [NR] admin | December 10, 2008

I received this message anonymously (posted as a comment here):

Nikon D400
MSRP $1,999.00
Key Features:

* New 14.8 megapixel DX format CMOS sensor effective 14.3 megapixel
* Self-cleaning sensor unit (low-pass filter vibration)
* ISO 100 - 6400 (with boost up to ISO 25600 and down to ISO 50)
* 14-bit A/D conversion
* Movie capture at up to 1080p 24 fps with stereo sound
* Nikon EXPEED Plus image processor 30% faster than previous EXPEED image processor
* Super fast operation (power-up 13 ms, shutter lag 40 ms, black-out 90 ms)
* Kevlar / carbon fibre composite shutter with 200,000 exposure durability
* Multi-CAM3500DX Auto Focus sensor (51-point, 15 cross-type, more vertical coverage)
* Auto-focus tracking by color (using information from 1005-pixel AE sensor)
* Auto-focus calibration (fine-tuning) now available (fixed body or up to 20 separate lens settings)
* Vignetting control in-camera
* Automatic chromatic aberration correction
* Custom image parameters now support brightness as well as contrast
* Seven frames per second continuous shooting (nine frames per second with battery pack)
* 3.0″ 922,000 pixel LCD monitor
* Live View with either phase detect (mirror up/down) or contrast-detect AF, face detection
* ‘Active D-Lighting’ (adjusts metering as well as applying D-Lighting curve)
* Detailed ‘Control Panel’ type display on LCD monitor, changes color in darkness
* Buttons sealed against moisture
* Same ultra-fast startup and shutter lag as D700
* Scene Recognition System (uses AE sensor, AF sensor)
* Picture Control image parameter presets
* UDMA compatible single CF card slot
* Virtual horizon indicates if camera is level (like an aircraft cockpit display)
* Extensive in-camera retouching
* HDMI HD video output
* Magnesium alloy body with connections and buttons sealed against moisture

Could this be based on a new Sony sensor, assuming the rumour has any substance to it? (Much the same size as the A350 CCD sensor).
I do believe that Sony/Nikon are not going to let Canon remain alone in the +/- 15 Mp league for enthusiasts cameras (50D). Economic downturn or not I would expect a move with a CMOS sensor to equal or beat the 50D. After all a Sony 1.5 sensor at even 16 Mp would still have larger photo sites than the 1.6 50D.
One way or the other I expect a move in 2009 notwithstanding a potential A800 FF aimed at the 14-15 Mp market with lower noise at higher ISOs than the A900.

[Dusty]

A800 will be FF.

There will not be any EXMOR-R in APS-C or FF cameras anytime soon.

A 15 MP FF camera, without any new sensor technology? I don't get it. FF is, as David stated in his a900 review, almost a totally new system.

You have to have FF lenses, you lose 50% of your tele ability - although you get it back on the wide end - and you lose DOF. This camera doesn't have a lot to entice me to buy it over the a700. Yes, another 3 MPs, but look at the costs I'll incur for that. Why not make the plunge to the a900? If its a APS-C format, as an upgrade to the a700, that's a winner.

Since they're already getting 14 MP out of the a350 sensor, which, per David's a350 review, he would like to see in the a700 upgrade/replacement, why not an 18 or 20 MP FF sensor, priced to entice photogs to step up, or as a less expensive spare?

I think will have to wait for real specs to come out.

Dusty

[Dusty]

I will purchase a 15-16MP full frame body if it delivers outstanding noise performance. At this point I certainly don't need more than 15-16MP and that goes for most other shooters as well.

-Sonolta

You're an old time Minolta man, from what I gather in the postings. You no doubt have several older FF Minolta/KM lenses. I wonder what someone heavily invested in digital (APS-C) lenses would think.

Dusty

[bfitzgerald]

Hmm hard to say at this point, one thing is for sure DK will be happy, he loves his megapixels and res

[alexramos7]

How much is 130.000 Yen??

In a Chines web a user post about it price for a800...

[alexramos7]

Will be a good price...

[destrian]

man HELL no! It would more likely be a 12mp A700 with full frame no live view no wifi. price will probably be $1700.

[Dusty]

man HELL no! It would more likely be a 12mp A700 with full frame no live view no wifi. price will probably be $1700.

A 12 MP FF would be a step backwards. The 24 MP FF already has lower pixel density than the APS-C models, so what would be the advantage? If I but a 24MP camera and have to crop to APS-C size, I'm losing resolution. That means that I can't use my long lenses to an advantage over the smaller format. If I had 40 MP to work with on a FF, and had to crop to bring in my subject, I can do better than the APS-C and the 1.5 tele factor.

To get a 12MP FF a700, with no live view or wifi, for more money, I'm being stupid. To buy a FF model of the 700, you have to give me something, not subtract from what I have.

Dusty

[PhotoTraveler]

Some folks are perfectly fine with more Pixels, the Anti-Pixel people have to understand that not everyone is looking for super high ISO performance. I'm happy as a clam with any camera that does good through ISO800, then I don't care. I like pixels, and as long as they increase with a supporting improvements to keep ISO up, it's fine. The A900 more than achieves here.

People need to give up on a low res FF sony body. Not happening in a A900 like platform. If they were going to do a low res, we would have A900 and A950. The only chance of a lower res FF sensor is in a Pro High Speed Sports shooter body. But Sony might not be there for a year or even 2 years. By then, Both Nikon and Canon will have brought a D4 and 1DIV respectively, both FF and probably around 16MP. Sony might go 16-18MP when they do such a body. But in general camera makers don't go backwards on pixel counts. I don't know of any DSLR that has ever brought out less pixels than the camera it replaced. Sony has passed on to higher pixels.

We are going to see APS bodies into the 20s on MP before very long. It's just the way it is. It's not going to take long for Sony to wheel out a 30+MP A900 replacement.

Ignoring this rumor, but just looking at general A700 replacement/D400 type body. There is the issue for Sony that some of us will just keep our A700s and be going for an A900 or the replacement to the A900, not so much looking to buy another APS body. I will be more upset by what a new body has, that the A700 didn't that I wanted/expected in it. 100% view finder I wanted, and want in any new body, but won't buy a new body for by itself. If sony wants me to buy a new body, it needs built in GPS, or GPS support like Nikon does, and they need TS lens. That's pretty much it on the basic part of it. I could care less about LV, moving screens, WiFI, fps, High ISO performance and so forth. I just want a solid traditional body, great view finder, and the ability to do what cameras are suppose to do, record, and location is 1/3rd of the definition of record and Sony doesn't do that now. They get GPS in them, and brings some TS lenses, I'll start buying gear. As is, I've been selling off my Sony gear.

Sony needs to get an A700 replacement right. They won't get all the auto sales they had with A700. It came out in a world where people were using 7Ds that were 3 years old, 18 months obsolete and they were falling apart. My 7D never got super bad, but things like the battery retainer had failed from putting the battery in and out too many times. There was a market of people with worn out gear, like seeing car companies coming online after a war or big recession, everyone is in bad need of a new car. But even with that, the A700 by most reports was a sales flop. Now folks have an A700, and it works fine. Just missing features. Much harder sell to get folks to upgrade now. Sony will have to make one heck of a camera. They sure as heck have a good guess on the D400 specs and went down through the spec sheets making sure the Sony does everything the D400 does and a bit more.

[Dusty]

Check out this poll...55% of users looking for 12-16MP full frame...

http://www.dyxum.com/poll/arh_results.asp?PitanjeID=57" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

-Sonolta

Check out that poll date: What sensor resolution would you like to see in a full frame DSLR? (November 12, 2007 - January 7, 2008)

That's last year's poll, and last year's desire. Do that poll again, and I'll bet you find the numbers up. People wanted an affordable 12-16 MP camera when the affordable ones were 10 MP. Now that it's 12 - 14 MP, people will want 18 - 20 MP.

Don, you're an extreme shooter. Most cameras aren't sold to sports shooters who need high ISO and fast frame rates, they're sold to people who think that ISO 800 is super, and 2 - 3 FPS is all you need. That's why power winders always outsold motor drives.

While there is room for improvement on several fronts, for most people the ISOs don't have to go higher, nor do the frame rates. Noise and DR improvements would be good, as would GPS ability, either built in or added on via a cable hookup.

Dusty

[A1000]

24 MP is fine, because it can become a 4x as sensitive 6 MP system, by always combining output of 4 pixels, so with modern technology, where the supportive circutry is dense, you can achieve 6 MP low light performance from 24 MP sensor. It was not too long ago that folks wanted 6 MP - were against the MP race.

[Dusty]

Sorry, you don't have a clue. Great noise performance is not an *extreme* thing, and neither are frame rates above 2-3 FPS. I must say that you are living in yesteryear my friend!

-Sonolta

No, great NR isn't extreme, but ISOs above 800 are. As well as frame rates above 2-3 FPS. Why it may sound neat to say that "My camera shoots 8 FPS", I doubt that there are few outside of sports shooters who use fast frame rates for any real need. I've shot a lot of great action with a 2 FPS power winder.

And yes, I grew up in a time where we had to pay for film, developing and printing, so I learned to take good shots w/o taking 100 of the subject. My first 35mm was an Argus C3 - which I still have! Frame rates were pretty slow, cock the shutter, set the shutter speed on the front dial - there was no read-out in the viewfinder - set the aperture - you're either guessing on exposure or you've used your hand held Weston meter - focus using a split frame viewfinder, shoot and wind via a knob.

On my X series Minoltas, I could just focus, set the aperture or speed, and let the camera do the exposure thru the built in meter. Then a push of the shutter release and a quick flip of the thumb, and I was good to go again. Once I bought a power winder I was in high heaven!

We sure have come a long way from then, and I'm glad, but I don't need the ultra ISO and nor the ultra frame rates. Those who do should buy cameras with that in mind. I want a great, high resolution, medium cost system. Better DR, a bit lower noise above ISO400, and I'm fine.

Dusty