As you know it is the Sony 36 Megapixel Full Frame sensor that powers the current Nikon D800 topseller camera (Click here to see the ranking). And as far as I know Nikon has a (one year?) exclusivity on that sensor. DxOmark just tested the sensor quality (Click here). It beats all current FF sensors and “is comparable to the best medium-format sensor, and in fact does even better — much better — as ISO increases.” It shows that Sony sensor technology greatly improved during the last couple of years. Even Canon has to worry.
My guess is that the Canon 5DmarkIII is loosing his war against the Nikon D800. This may be a chance for Sony if they don’t wait to much. A double SLT FF camera announcement (24 and 36 Megapixels) would probably be the right thing to do!
122 Responses
Holy smoke. A NEX FF with this would be… *drool*
sucks its on a Nikon tho ughhhhhh
No it does not!!!
First, as much as I like Sony sensor technology, Nikon are able to improve the end result dramatically. And it’s not only in sensor performance, but overall satisfaction with the camera.
I think the cooperation between Son and Nikon is very useful for both sides.
As much as Nikon gets what they paid for, Sony couldn’t have better advertisement than those scores. Which I think will finally make Sony to BELIEVE in what they can do on this market and step up for strong position!
I love NEX-7, but for DSLR type of camera I’ll still prefer Nikon.
Doesn’t Nikon’s exclusivity deal come from the fact that they designed this sensor? There may well be some Sony tricks included but I was under the impression that it was a Nikon sensor manufactured by Sony? It would at least make for a logical explanation as to why Sony can’t put it to immediate use.
No, they use the same wordings as for the D7000, which had a sensor which at that time had already appeared in the A55 and A580.
And the D7000 doesn’t perform better than the A580 (a hair better in some areas, worse in others) with that sensor either, which puts the theory above you to bed for being outdated) aswell. 😉
Are you sure ? I thought Nikon had on-sensor 14-bit adc and that is why the D5100/D7000 have much better high iso RAWS than A55. Check out the comparison tools at dpreview. What do you think ?
I’m certain Nikon do indeed design their own sensor but of course that has to be done in co-operation with Sony because Sony fab them.
I’d love to know the details of their partnership. It certainly is good news for both I think. I’m looking forward to a Sonikon !
Yes I am sure, Chipworks gave us the visual proof too when they opened up the D7000.
The only difference is that Sony doesn’t use the 14bit capabilities and uses thicker color filters for better color separation (their own toppings). The high ISO performance of the A580 and D7000 is within sample variance/measuring error. The D7000 scores better DR, mostly due to the 14 bit mode, the A580 shows better color separation and sensitivity due to the different CFA’s that I mentioned. Same overall score. The A55 is half a stop behind both due to the mirror ofcourse.
The Dpreview tool as usual has to be taken with a grain of salt as it doesn’t correct for different nominal ISO ratings between cameras (cameras usually receive different amounts of light in their setups at equal ISO’s, Imaging Resource tends to be closer here) and the Adobe converter doesn’t give every camera equal treatment (according to themselves too), even with all settings turned to zero.
Not too shabby. Put those same sensels onto a 36×36 sensor with stabilisation, and we’ll talk.
Yea I think same, if Sony would really did their square sensor camera “now”, then it would be pure win..
And with Sony colors.. mmm.
“Sony colors” I agree are top notch. I prefer the “colors” of the 5d2 but the Sony is a very close second. Nikon colors I never particularly cared for….
“This may be a chance for Sony if they don’t wait to much” LOL sony has not a chance to rise in slt-dslr will be the 3° maybe 2° forever and canon will rule them all! 😉 fool
Nikon is where it is at, not Canon. I would never switch to Canon from Sony, but have considered Nikon (better focus and color).
+1
That’s the first time I think someone praise Nikon color. I would switch to Nikon, since I’m not bound by any brand, because they are good at optimizing the Sony sensor, has Zeiss MF, blistering fast AF, killer flash system, and decent lens system (though over-priced). Canon has more specialty selection and cheaper in the range that I shoot. Canon can also adapt vintage lens easier. But in the end, I’m stuck here with Sony in hope that they can release the damn full frame mirrorrless. To me, I can’t never go back to the OVF.
Sony should have funded Conurus project in adapting Canon EF and Nikon AF-S mount on NEX with full AF capability. They would see much more NEX sale.
Buying a Nikon for its colour is like buying a Tata Nano for its high performance. It has its own strengths, but that’s not one of them.
What? Did you not check the post in question here? Do you exclusively shoot JPG? If you shoot RAW like most folks, color balance is a very minor problem. I NEVER touch the WB button. Its so easy to get the proper adjustment in post. The auto adjustment in PS is dead on 95% of the time and when its off, its a 10 second adjustment in Camera RAW.
As long as the camera has good color depth and shoot RAW, why do you really care how the “colors” look. Thanks to their cooperation with Sony, the D800 is the third highest camera as far as color depth is ocncerned, only being beat by MF cameras.
If you shoot JPG then you may be in for a bit of trouble but heh, just don’t shoot JPG, that’s the mistake to begin with…
Metamerism errors are like lateral chromatic aberrations; sure you can remove them in post, but why bother if you can afford gear that doesn’t have the problem in the first place? Photoshop’s Auto Color option rarely changes anything on my photos, as they’re right straight out of the camera.
But if you simply don’t care how RAW colours look, then why are you even bothering to comment on it?
If you want to switch from Sony to Nikon, then I suggest that you seriously work on your PP skills, cause Sony is superior in color to everything. (1DsMK3 and 1DMK3 are second place so Canon isnt bad either, if you can buy it).
Nikon is good in SNR/DR. If you wish to have Nikon look on Sony, just use Nikon lens (manual focus ofc, but they still have Nikon colors, sometimes actually more then new ones). You will actually get better “Nikon” colors than with Nikon dSLR. 😀
Olympus colors are better than sony
You’re probably taking about JPEG engines. Sony has the best color separation usually, thanks to its CFA’s.
Olympus, Sony and recent Pentax cameras all have good colour, and there’s a degree of subjectivity as to which are better. I have a mild preference for Olympus over Sony and Sony over Pentax, but certainly not enough that it would make me consider m4/3 over a full frame Sony.
Canon have stronger filters on blue and red than on green, which results in a magenta cast if you don’t process the colours, giving a strange pink cast to skin colour. Nikon just use light colour filters all round, resulting in a rather drab look.
Olympus has nice colors, due good profiling and nicely covered sRGB gamut. Similar to KM-7D approach. Tho it doesnt have “good” colors in terms of accuracy, none of m4/3s or 4/3s does.
Sony, and especially A900 paired with Capture One or Silkypix has both, accurate and pleasant colors. DxO SW might be good too.. never tried much tho.
JPEGs are bit off discussion as shooting JPEGs only with m4/3s or 4/3s is suicidal (except OM-D) due very limited dynamic range and AWB isnt exactly perfect. Not mentioning that on some m4/3 cameras you would loose quite a bit of detail, some of them have really amazing per-pixel sharpness from RAW files.
@bah
Is that the sound your girlfriend makes when you have her back legs dropped down the rubber boot you wear??
😉
@bah,
seems like your IQ has dropped since you last posted. I was going to say that you are a retarded troll… But you have dropped out of that category…
Still, I had to think about that one …
Do you think the 24mp FF will have a similar operating sensor minus the extra mp’s? Or is it Nikon engineering that tweaks the sensor to give that little extra in photographic performance? I am holding on to Sony and hoping it can deliver a comparable product. I am too invested in Sony glass.
D4= 16mp, 2965 ISO value, 89 total. Nikon sensor, Nikon tweaks.
D800=36mp, 2853 ISO value, 95 total. Sony sensor, Nikon tweaks.
I don’t think Nikon tweaks can even start to compare with Sony expertise in these.
sony is also making a sensor for the new leicas, now that kodak is bankrupt
leica >>> nikon >>> canon
Kodak sold their sensor business to a private equity firm a while back, so it’s still around.
So the big question is: what does it take for Sony to put such a sensor in a competitive A-mount FF body? Are they really going to be that happy selling it to Nikon and watching them rule the market? Damn!!!
This is what I would consider their testbed: let the competition get the beta versions and work the kinks out that way. Once they are sure the sensor is good, then they’ll roll it out their way (see D3000/K-5/A77).
It really is quite sad/pathetic that Nikon consistently seems to know how to better tweak these sensors that Sony!
It is very impressive, and it is last years technology.
Sony has to respond to this in 2012, else there future in fullframe marked is lost
I never understand that mentality. So nobody buys a 7D, 5D, D7000, D700 etc now? I mean yes some of those models have just been replaced, but people were still buying them like they are the 7D and D7000.
Hope Sony will be the first one to hit 100 overall score
Not going to happen, because of the fixed mirror.
Mirrorless? 😉
Mirrorless 36×36, possible. And then I woke up. 😉
Mirror in SLTs is removable, so it is possible. If they make it, it will on 99% have focus peaking. So you will be able to remove mirror, use manual focus lens with focus peaking and have.. well, mirrorless 36×36.
Could be pretty sweet with some medium format Zeiss lens..
how stupid is sony really to sell the sensor to nikon and dont use it for own ff camera????
$$$. They have separate R&D for sensor and camera.
Nope, they will sell it to Nikon and then use it in own camera (which will be probably cheaper then D800). 😀 Thats called double-win. 😀
They make all sensors for Nikon anyway, except Nikon 1 series.
stupid? i think not. This is a multi-billion dollar company here. Things they do have calculated risk in them. The d800 will out sell new Sony FF by a long shot. They will surely make a lot more money by selling thousands and thousands of sensor and their new FF than just selling their FF alone.
That is if it is really Sony’s sensor design. If it was Nikon’s design than Sony would lose all that profits of making Nikon’s sensor.
I’ts losing, not loosing.
is’t lsooing, nto lsoonig itz’!!
I generally don’t care much about DXO scores, but Holy F*ck that is an impressive sensor. Make a square version of this sensor for the rumored A1S and sell some cameras Sony!
To be realistic, Bionz is still 2-4 years behind Expeed. Sony 36MP camera image quality will be inferior to the D800.
Ah, that’s why the A580 (Bionz) and the Nikon D7000 (Expeed), which both have the same sensor, have exactly the same score at dxomark.
Gotta love the myth debunking. 😉
Pre-A77, Bionz was indeed a capable imaging processor. But with A77, Bionz actually took a step back with all those issues coming with supposedly good semi-pro body.
Sony is incompetent . I say this as I’m leaving out the door to nikon . I recently bought an a580, but I totally regret it now. NOW LISTEN, what’s wrong with sony’s cameras IS NOT THE SENSOR BUT BIONZ…BIONZ!!! Look at how much better images look from nikon D7000 (sony sensor), they’re sharp, high resolution, crystal clarity, clean beautifully rendered stills and video. Sony’s stills are fine but the video is soft, grainy, muddled, murky, lo-fi KRAP!!! no sharpness, no fine detail, no firm outlines or embossment…if you sony’s video looks good, you clearly haven’t seen the stuff coming from competing DSLRs these days. Canon 60D whups on the a55 so bad it’s actually sad. THE D7000 OWNS every camera sony makes under $4000. EXPEED and DIGIC SMASH THE BIONZ LIKE IT’S NOT FUNNY! BIONZ SUCKS!!! And look here’s sony dividing it’s energies, like it always does, developing a medium format sensor, THEY HAVEN’T EVEN GOT A GOOD IMAGE CHIP!!! I initially liked sony’s cameras for the stills and the zeiss lenses but after months of research I’m gone. D800 seals the deal. Sony is out of touch, they do no user feedback, they’re a joke. THEIR SENSORS DO BETTER IN COMPETING BRAND’S CAMERAS! So what that they’re sensors are great, overall their cameras are a fail. FAIL!!! Someone needs to get a grip at this out of touch company. SONY GET THE BASICS RIGHT!!!
Or you could learn to use RAW and get better quality images all around, even with a Nikon.
Actually, I prefer the look of video off my a580 to video from Canon’s T3i (which uses the same 18 MP sensor as the 60D). The Canon’s video just looks oversharpened with noticeable artifacts (without additional detail), while the a580’s video looked more natural and artifact free.
Also, if you process raw images, you’ll probably find that Sony isn’t behind. The a580 is up there with the best APS-C cameras for high ISO shooting, provided that you process the raw files. DxOMark scores are based on raw data only, by the way.
Sorry to say but your (Mike’s) comment doesn’t hold. The Sensor ranking has little to do with processing. Granted, Pentax got a slightly better score by applying some NR on their RAW files but for the large majority of cameras, the processing engine does little to improve their DXOScore.
Nikon IMHO profits more from this cooperation than Sony as far as technology goes. They concentrate their efforts in optimization and in processing which serves them well.
For a small(er) company that was severely hit by both the Tsunami (their plant was in Sendai) and the Thailand flood, Nikon deserves some respect for their quick turnaround.
Sony’s partner with Nikon against Canon is a clever move.
+1 just like the Romance of the Three Kingdoms 😉
😛 The A850 A900 sensor feels outdated in comparison… keep waiting for the new A99. Paul Genge said u will not be disappointed waiting for A99. I do believe Sony do have something up their sleeves that’s comparable or exceed D800.
I dont think for one second that Sony will top this!
Nikon always managed to get a product better than Sony with the same sensor.
I do hope that sony releases a cracking camera able to at least compete with that D800.
I am genuinely impressed by those scores, if sony can get a cam that sits between this and the 5D mkIII they are garanteed to get a winner. Sony will be cheaper. we know they design cracking bodies, cracking sensors, cracking lenses etc…
now to the people at sony, please move your ass and get an other serious cam out!
the D800 will get you out of business if you dont!
@albin
Some very knowledgeable pro-photographers who used both cameras extensively said the colour rendition on the A900 was better than Nikon’s D3X, although the latter had a bit less noise at higher ISOs. So it is not that Nikon did better with the same sensor – but that they optimized the processing in a different way. If colour rendition is more important to you than high ISO, then Sony’s implementation was “better” than Nikon’s. (Not to speak of the *huge* difference in price between the D3x and the D900)
I can’t get rid of idea that Sony plans to slowly quit the SLR/SLT market and concentrate on sensors and NEX line. Otherwise, there is no explanation why on earth to give your direct competitor not just the best, but really outstanding sensor.
Imagine Sony A950 with 95 score and Nikon D800 without Sony sensor below D4’s 89 and Canon 5D mark III even lower!
But now…. Sony have nothing to offer against this monster. Nice customer for sensors though.
Either that or Sony’s business model is to make Nikon pay the bulk of the sensor development costs, enabling Sony to put out a cheaper camera 6-18 months down the line.
This is great advertisement for Sony.
@Rurik,
Sony has been one of the leaders in the sensor business longer than it’s been in the DSLR/SLT business. So, it may be the relationships with their current customers existed before selling any DSLRs/SLTs.
Yeah, only because Nikon knows what they’re doing. I doubt Sony will get anywhere near 95 with the a99.
Sony does too, see A580 vs D7000. Sure, you have to subtract 3 to 6 points because it will be an SLT, but that doesn’t take a genius to realize that. 😉
Hey genius, what about the a900 and the D3X?
Welcome back to 2012, genius²! 😉
The days you’re referring to have been behind us for quite some time. In fact, those are the only 2 cameras of the 2 brands sharing sensors yet with a difference like that in low light score (*ignoring 2 cameras using RAW NR here, since I’m talking sensor performance).
Difference between D3X and A900 was cause CFA and AA filter, plus tiny bit of electronics around. Nikon prefers SNR and DR over everything, so its tuned to that. Sony prefer colors and detail over everything, so CFA/AA is tuned for that.
All things considered, most ppl bought D700, D3 or later D3s, cause D3x is as usefull in low light as A900 (and no in reality that EV difference doesnt make any real difference). And cause it was bloody expensive.. (tho today it can be bought second-hand for price of new 5DMK3 kit :D).
Hey idiot, and the price difference between the a900 and d3x? Is it worth it ? No. Dumbass.
Of course the prices are different because of how much more camera you get with the D3X and how much more Nikon put into that sensor. But Sony just made 2 identical cameras with the same sensor…which is pointless. Why didn’t they tweak the a900 over the a850? But keep on calling people dumbass and you will be flying SOLO for life.
Is that why the A900 gets more praise in the Nikon forums for its color accuracy than the D3X, because of all that extra effort Nikon put into it? 😉
Very impressive performance in all areas. It beats out the Nikon D3x in all three categories (i.e. Color Depth, Dynamic Range & Low Light ISO Noise) and is not so far behind the Nikon D3s in the Low Light ISO Noise category (2853 vs. 3253). In fact the D800 actually matches the low noise performance of the D3s right up ISO 6400! It seems that the only reason it received a significantly lower noise score was because the D3s ISO rating continues 2 f stops beyond that of the D800 which cuts off at ISO 12800.
Bravo Nikon!
Who can ask for better than this for $3000?
According to DxOMark, the difference between d3s and d800 is 1/3 a stop. Incredible. The difference between d3s and d4 is 0.15 (1/6th of a stop)
Actually the D800’s low noise performance is pretty pretty much identical to that of the D3s right up to ISO6400 and, according to DxOMark, it has slightly better color depth at high ISOs.
Yes, if you downsize to 8 mpix. Pay attention that some of those scores are calculated after downsize to 8 mpix (cause 8 mpix is roughly A4 print).
Per-pixel noise difference between D3s and D800 is like between day and night.
Downsize to 8mp or downsize/upsize to any given resolution and the low light score will be within 1/3 of a stop.
canon 5d3 has 4x the native iso of nikon d800
From what I have seen, D800 has better ISO6400 (more details) and about the same crappy ISO12800 compared with 5d mk iii.
impossible!! how can 1x be better than 4x ???
It will not be king for long, it will deposed by the 800e 🙂 I would like to see Sony use this sensor soon but I’m afraid its not likely to happen until next year, but hey you never know they could upscale the A77 sensor and then you have a 54MP senor!
The 800e may be slightly noisier, due to the AA setup.
Well, at least all of the “high res = high noise” people can finally shut up now!
The performance is seriously impressive, and the d800 is the best bang-for-buck pro-level dSLR on the market now.
By far. . .
It’s probable that the sensor will be in an slt rather than a dslr – but I would still appreciate the option to have the mirror lock up for ultimate IQ.
Why do you doubt!!? They will have improved the 24MP sensor enough over the 36MP sensor that even with the SLT mirror we should see some incredible figures. When will you trolling w***ers learn! You said the D800 high ISO would suck…oh look.. You said the 5D III focus would suck…oh look. Don’t you realise these companies employ people with intelligence many times that of yours! While they may not get it 100% on all of the time, they will not release a new model that is not a significant upgrade on their last. As the A9/8 series already rocks you WILL see Dxo scores ISO 2500-3000, DR of 14-14.5 and Color of 25-26bits.
Correction…best of any class
Holy cow, image how good the high iso pics of peoples cats & mailboxes will be when they put this sensor in an NEX, and then you mount a huge lens on it to make it umbalanced as well. I cannot wait.
At only 3000 USD, it’s a steal. I am very impressed with Nikon’s offering. Although there are many things to make any particular camera appealing to a photographer, Nikon is smart to start with record setting sensor performance.
When interviewed by TechRadar about the D800, Paul Genge was very complimentary of Nikon, “I think when it comes to the market and when people are using it, people will be impressed by the increased resolution, of course on a full-frame sensor you’ve got room to provide for it so, all credit to them, they’ve chosen to keep pushing the boundaries.” http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/sony-nikon-d800-pushes-the-boundaries-1071249
I think, perhaps, Genge may have hinted at something when TechRadar reported: “It’s a good thing,” Genge continued, “36 megapixels will be improved upon in years to come still….”
Although he was probably speaking generically about technology improvements, his confidence that appeared to be shown in that statement *might* be indicative of some firsthand knowledge of their own development pipeline. Note, this is purely speculation on my part.
Everyone that says the test is a good advert for SONY should continue to dream on.
While all of us Alpha users highly suspect it’s a Sony manufactured sensor on the D800, Nikon themselves never ever acknowledge that.
I read everyone here is convinced so. Unlike Pentax who openly acknowledges using SONY’s sensor, Nikon never did.
Maybe because like some said it’s a Nikon design built in SONY facility. For me that’s the ONLY common thing that the D800 sensor have with the upcoming SONY FF sensor.
I’m not that enthusiastic as some of you.
Well, you dont need to be, but except JFET sensor in ancient history of Nikon, they never made sensor. D800 sensor is not Nikon design. If you want to see how Nikon design look like, then its D4.
D700, D3, D3s and D4 are Nikon designed sensors made by Sony. D3x, D300, D5100, D7000, D800 are Sony designed and made sensors. D90 is I think Nikon design. Only Nikon 1 series isnt made by Sony.
Difference between Nikon and Sony designed sensors is quite visible.
Otherwise when in doubt, you can ask yourself why would Nikon want QXD card slot in D4. 😀
The D3\D700, J1/V1, D3S and likely the D4 sensors have the Aptina handwriting in them.
Oh and the D90 just had an adaption of the Sony 12mp sensor. RAW NR was the biggest difference. 😉
Yes and thats why D4 has QXD card slot. Cause its made by Aptina. 😀
Nikon 1 series is confirmed Aptina, rest. I strongly doubt that. Biggest Aptina offers is APS-C (1,77″ which means its similar size as Nikon 1 sensor.. which it probably is).
On some of the Aptina test facility shots you see Nikon FF bodies being used. That and the fact the D4 shows very similar behavior (curves) to the Nikon 1 sensor does hint at my earlier statement. The new card format has little to do with the sensor used.
You are quite wrong with your info.
The D300 and the D90 have the exact same sensor thus your statement is null and void.
I believe every sensor nikon has used is Nikon designed.
The 12mp sensor used in the D5000, D300, D300s, D90 is exactly the same and I do not believe that it has been used in any sony cameras.
The D3x sensor is designed by nikon. The sensor used in the A900 has the exact same megapixels but thats where the similarity ends.
http://nikonrumors.com/2008/12/02/nikon-d3x-sensor-made-by-sony-designed-by-nikon.aspx/
Tell me another camera besides the D7000 and D5100 of which sony uses the same sensor in their cameras.
It will take something like this for me to upgrade my 5N
Just got my 50mm 1.8 WOOT!!!
damn you my 50mm is coming in 6 weeks =(
my wishlist FF SLT camera:
– full frame image sensor with no AA filter
– PDAF with translucent mirror for high speed shooting
– CDAF option for normal shooting (translucent mirror flips up)
Guys guys guys… It is a Sony sensor alright… But it is a Nikon camera…it is like saying that a computer is Intel or Nvidia just for having a component inside. While you all argue be happy for me and my new D800 from NIKON, greetings…
Where may I sell a A55 with a bunch of equipment, ready to sell it fast…
That’s what Sony needs to do.
When they contract out sensors to Nikon part of the agreement is that Nikon have to place a NON removable label on their cameras that says “SONY Inside”
😉
Question: if Sony announces the camera now but only ships it after the contract period, does that consider as breaking the contract? 😀
Daemonius,
Still, it’s an educated guess on our part. Simply because D800 DXOmark is great, does not equate to similar IQ on the upcoming A99.
We need to aim our expectation lower, guys. If not, it will be one of a hell of a dissappointment.
Luis,
Intel makes CPU and Nvidia is better known for GPU. There isn’t an Intel PC or Nvidia PC ever. I build my own PC from all of these parts. I know.
Anyway, enjoy your D800. I’ll wait for my Sony FF DSLT, invested in a couple of SONY G and CZ glass to jump ship.
My guess is between 85 and 89 points IF Sony uses the 36 MP sensor. Slightly less, say 82 to 86 if they use a 24MP sensor first (a hair less DR at low ISO for example). But I don’t care much for the arbitrary index numbers. The graphs will be more interesting.
Who claim you that camera use Sony sensor?
+1
Nikon designed sensor possibly fabricated by Sony.
Besides that everything else is designed by Nikon.
Impressive show! It looks like this will even overtake the D70 (the first mass produced DSLR from Nikon) sales for Nikon!
It’s very much the same design as the D7000 sensor, also shown by the “on screen” results (graphs comparing pixel level measurements) which are like the D7000 measurements.
And I very much doubt Nikon designed a sensor that first appeared in the A580 and A55, only with a different filter array (toppings), despite their marketing blurbs. 😉
Sony semi conductors is one of the largest sensor designers with lots of expertise, ranging from cellphone sensors to ultra sensitive high end video/cinema camera sensors and everything inbetween. With their excellent on chip ADC (Exmor) designs, they have already proven they don’t need much help to begin with.
Regardless of all the blah, blah, Nikon are sprinting and Sony is a no show on the FF front. Fact.
Don’t get all emotional now. No one will hate you if you get a Nikon D800 now. 😉
Spoon: The whole premise of this thread is that somehow Sony (camera division) has something to do with Nikon cameras. It is exactly the opposite. Sony’s semiconductor division may have a (small, very small) hand in helping Nikon to be a major player.
So, the chip division is working against the camera division? Very good if you are a Sony shareholder. It does not do anything for alpha users at all.
Lol, I think most ppl dont get it. Sony isnt helping Nikon win, they help themselves win, by making biggest opponent “addicted” to their help with making sensors.
They sell most of their sensors two or even three times (sometimes actually five times).
16 mpix APS-C used in own Sony cameras (a lot of them), then in D5100, D7000. Then in Pentax K-5 and in Fuji X-Pro 1. In time it should be in updated Ricoh M-mount module. So they made 1 sensor and sold it to 4 different buyers. I would say thats really good job and way to own market.
Everything these guys sell will give money to Sony. Only real opponent left to Sony is Canon. And lets face it, they dont do exactly great job being opponent.
Sony doesnt need to be n1 in dSLR, dSLTs or mirrorless. They already won.
Exactly right Vivek.
Ofcourse it helps Alpha users. It helps reduce the cost of sensors, they jointly define the specs and last but not least, Sony makes a lot of money from selling sensors. Yes it’s the semi conductor division, but that breathes life into the camera division, indirectly by earning money for Sony, directly through R&D. I’m convinced the developments in large CMOS sensors from Sony would have been a lot slower had it not been for other makers buying the bulk of them. And besides, competition in general always leads to better products.
Sony also supplies camera sensors to Iphone
every iphone has sony rear camera
and apple is planning to get front cam from sony toooo
genius Sony, i’m sure they had a deal that Sony would delay its FF in return make D800 accept XQD cards. XQD cards = more revenue than selling full frame cameras.
If XQD cards were established in all cameras think about all the royalties all the companies would have to pay.
Im not sure what was cost of XQD (sigh.. I mixed it up with QXD) but Im sure it was kinda “political” decision, like “you will have QXD card in your camera and we will give you something in exchange”. Quid-pro-quo, cause theres absolutely no sense why would Nikon support his opponent with adding XQD cards into their own camera. 😀
You realize that Nikon was one of the initiators of the new XQD format (along with Sandik and Sony)? 😉
They are supporting their own format really. It’s just that Sony was the first to make them.
I will be waiting till october for a solid alpha FF news. There seems few reason not to buy a D800 if you can afford it. I wish D800 shooting speed was higher, but it is not a show stopper.
Sony alpha pros:
* I do make a lot use of sensor stabilisation. Even 40 year old rokkors are stabilised.
* SLR/SLT bodies are cheaper.
Cons:
* Sony lenses are more expensive than counterparts even when counterpart lenses are stabilised which would increase their production costs. And lens stabilisation is better than sensor stabilisation when available, period.
* Firmwares are not coming when there is an obvious need. That is maybe because Sony changes SLR/SLT/NEX models too frequently. Photography is not about state of the art technology, they do not get it. Some people take better pictures with their cell phones than I do with my SLR.
* User communities of Canon and Nikon are more dedicated and demanding. And they get what they demand. They are spoiled brats and reasonably so.
All in all, Sony is a well run company. I wish they did not prioritise profit against comsumer satisfaction.
Check the prices of all the newly announced/released L lenses from Canon. Way more expensive than the Sony equivalents.
@Spoon:
> Check the prices of all the newly announced/released L lenses
> from Canon. Way more expensive than the Sony equivalents.
Erm… SAL 500/4 G ???
Really, we need to see recently-revised versions of comparable-spec lenses, before we can be sure how things will stack up this way. For example, the SAL 70-200/2.8 G is an ancient Minolta design from (iirc) the late 1980’s… Hardly shocking for a brand-new Canon design to be more-expensive!
Although honestly, I’m not sure that way of looking at things matters: really, people don’t buy based on careful cost-per-date-of-development comparisons, they buy what’s available (if it *IS* available… c’mon, Sony!) at the time they make the purchase; or (given that most don’t buy their choice of Sony “G” vs Canon “L” but whatever lens(es) fit their system) when selecting a system they choose the total cost of bodies+initial lens(es).
In general, Sony G & ZA has seemed to run a bit more than the CaNikon glass of similar specification… on the other hand, new designs for top-spec CaNikon glass seems to be yet more expensive still… On the third hand, there *IS* the new 500/4 from Sony… OMFG!!!?!_$$$!_!?!?
– Steve S.
This sensor, in a body like the NEX7 but full frame, along with some really good Zeiss primes, could blow every other mirrorless camera away.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/d-resolution-tests
BTW I think it would be criminal to put an SLT mirror in front of this
So you expect them to create a brand new line of FF e-mount lenses, when they even don’t have a proper DT line? And still, can we hear a final word about e-mount being adequate or not to support full frame format?
A great score from Sony sensor inside D800.
Unfortunately DxO measurments don’t tell everything, for example they measure DR but don’t tell how much of DR is in shadows and how much is in highlits. If this sensor would follow the pattern it has a mediocre highlit recovery potential and excellnt shadow recovery. On the other side Nikon designed snsors(D700/D3, D3s, D4) are better in highlit recovery and with D4 it seems they reduced tha gap to Sony for shadows recovery and clearly bettered Canon.
One more thing is not mesured by DxO. They did not measure a true low-light capabilities, what they measure is mid grey noise with daylight color temperature. Things would be much different in the real low light conditions and D4 sensor would have a near 1Ev advantage to D800 in noise department.