Page 4 of 5

D1x – 15th anniversary

D1xOn 5th of February, 2001 Nikon announced the D1h and D1x models as successor of the revolutionary D1 from 1999. The D1h was an evolutionary (but significant) improvement over the original D1. With the D1x however, Nikon offered for the first time a DSLR in the 6 MP class, which could potentially replace film in a few use cases.

  • Improvements versus the original D1

The second generation of D1 cameras were improved significantly regarding the user interface. The custom functions, which could be addressed by a numeric code on the D1, were now accessible via a graphic menu on the main monitor. Many buttons had been moved around, most notably the ISO button, which finds its place now on the top of the mode dial for the first and last time on the high end models.

Another very welcome improvement versus the original D1 was the incorporation of standard color modes. The D1 was plagued by funky colors, partly result of being Nikon’s first steps into DSLR and partly result of using NTSC and PAL as color modes. Adobe RGB and sRGB now become standard.

The biggest news however, was the – at that time – rather generous resolution of 5,47 MP. Other 6 MP cameras were introduced before by Kodak, so this was not record breaking at all. But it was the first camera of this resolution in a body made by the original manufacturer.

  • D1x color filter and pixel dimension

The D1x was a really awkward camera in the way the resolution was achieved. Many question marks of contemporary reviewers would have disappeared, if all the facts about the sensor of the D1 family would have been known at the time.

In reality the D1 from 1999 already was a 10 MP camera. For undisclosed reasons Nikon decided to perform pixel binning to create a 2,7 MP picture from the 10 MP sensor. For that, larger squares with 4 adjacent individual pixels were grouped for one color filter array position, creating one big pixel that spread across four “real” light sensitive pixels on the sensor.

Probably because of the signal to noise ratio or to improve color this setup was chosen. Would the D1 have been 10 MP from the start in 1999, it would have taken the market by storm, even at much higher prices. Contrary to that, Nikon had the possibility to create an upgrade to higher resolution at a later point in time pretty easily.

The most obvious way to create a high resolution version of the D1 would have been to create a 1 pixel color filter array, releasing the complete capabilities of the sensor. Once again, Nikon decided to design the sensor layout completely different. And this time, there is no obvious reason at hand why they decided to go with the most unusual pixel layout a digital camera has ever seen.

In horizontal direction, all 4 pixel groups were cut in half, leading to a 1 px wise and 2 px tall color filter pixel. This doubles the resolution in horizontal direction, while it stays the same in vertical direction. A picture is now recorded as a flat stretched image at 4028 x 1324 px , which has to be interpolated internally to the target resolution of 3008 x 1960. By doing this, not only the vertical resolution gets interpolated, also the horizontal resolution is slightly reduced.

D1 color array

Looking at the market conditions of 2001, the explanation for this might be a simple product roadmap decision. 10 or 12 MP cameras were not expected for two more years and also the competition was settled mostly on the 6 MP class. Nikon must have deliberately decided for the resolution offered at 5,47 MP. Enough to satisfy film users and not too much to block future product iterations and upgrade sales.

Official argument for the strange resolution difference between vertical and horizontal was, that the signal readout was still limited to the original 1324 rows in vertical direction. This should increase the speed of readout and make it easier to process the data quick enough to achieve a sufficient fps rate.

Knowing that the sensor was in reality a 10 MP one, this clearly can be seen as a faux argument to hide the true, physical resolution.

  • 10 MP output and image quality

Nevertheless, there was a way to achieve 10 MP files from the D1x. Nikon’s own RAW editing application Capture (version 3.5 to NX2) provide the possibility to export unaltered RAW files as 10 MP JPEG. In my opinion the effect is rather limited:

D1x samle 6 MP

D1x sample 10 MP

DSC_1845_crop

100 % crop of D1x image (click on picture for 1:1 view)

Based on this unusual sensor concept, the camera performed quite well in terms of image quality. It has to be kept in mind that we are talking about the infancy of digital photography here. Therefore, things like white balance, noise at long exposures and especially dynamic range do not really satisfy today’s standards. Also 1:1, pixel for pixel sharpness is not comparable to modern DSLRs. However, the D1x might be the first Nikon DSLR which produces acceptable and usable pictures, even today.

 

  • Build quality and D1x buffer upgrade

Build quality was the same as with the D1: robust, heavy, durable. A real brick compared to cameras that came before and after. Unfortunately also the charger MH-16 and the EN-4 batteries were bricks. Due to the fact that the EN-4s were Ni-MH batteries instead of Li-Ion, there was always the need to carry a few spares around.

Towards the end of the production cycle in September 2003, an upgraded version of the D1x was sold as “D1x Powered Up” until the D1x was finally replaced by the D2x in October of 2004. The upgrade provided expanded internal buffer memory, which could handle up to 14 RAWs or 21 JPEGs.

Overall the D1x is not a milestone in the DSLR history, but a very important step for Nikon at the border between first steps into digital photography and the start of the digital era.

Digital photography was kicked off for professionals with the introduction of the D1 two years earlier, but the D1x mitigated the most important shortfalls in the area of resolution and color reproduction. On top of that the D1x was the biggest seller in the D1 family.

Nikons product lineup after the D5/D500 launch

Sometimes it is fun to travel back in time. Apparently, Nikon did the same and re-visited the success formula of 2007. A FX flagship accompanied by a DX equivalent of the same resolution and almost the same speed in a smaller body.

Let’s hope that Nikon finally found back to the success formula of 2007-2011. So, what will be the product mix for the next few years, especially if the D500 sells in sufficient quantities? Let’s see first, what we have today:

  • D5 – top of the line build, speed, ISO in FX. Midterm refresh in 2018 possible.
  • D810 – pro build FX body, slower, landscape camera. The affordable pro-body for most professionals and serious hobbyists. Refresh in 2017 possible.
  • D500 – pro build, speed and best ISO for DX. Pro-style body for the masses. Future refresh cycle unclear. I could imagine a longer cycle before any refresh or replacement happens.
  • D750 – Highend consumer body FX. Compromise in speed, ISO, AF. Direct successor unclear (see below).
  • D610 – midrange consumer body FX for most price sensitive hobbyists. Replacement in 2016 already rumored.
  • D7200 and future replacements – serious amateur standard DX. Entry class for cameras with built in AF motor and metering for manual lenses. Refresh in 2017 likely.
  • D5500 and below – camera for hobby travelers interested in DSLR, but not necessarily amateur photographers. Eye-catching features to get attention on the store shelf like swiveling LCDs or connection options.

That’s a pretty crowded product stack. But still, something is missing. Depending on whom to ask, different cameras might be seen as missing:

  • A lower FX resolution alternative to the D810 in a pro body.
  • A high resolution D5x alternative.

I do not see a D5x coming. It has to be even more expensive than the D5. The price would be too much of a stretch, as it was before with the D3x.

The first could happen. But not as additional product. As I have written before, the theory that D700 took away sales from the D3 is nonsense. The original D3 still has the most highest serial numbers known of any pro-style single digit body.

But where should the speed FX in the small pro body sit within this product family? Looking closely at the different models, the D750 seems a bit out of place. It is not a pro body (round viewfinder, 10 pin terminal), but is stretching towards the big cameras based on feature set.

Changing the body style of the D750 to a pro body does not work at this price point, as it would kill the D500 immediately. Still, a lower resolution alternative for the possible D810 successor would sell well.

How about this:

  • D5 – the same as today – 7000 €
  • D810 successor – still the MP king, as today in a pro body FX – 3300 €
  • D750 successor – Speed, pro body FX – 2800 €
  • D500 – the same as today. Pro body DX – 2300 €
  • D610 successor – consumer body FX – 1600 €
  • D7200 successor – consumer body DX. 1100 €
  • D5500 and below – mass market up to 700 €

The D750 would be upgraded to a pro body, together with a fitting price increase. The schematics of numbering would make more sense than today and everybody would be able to find the camera fitting to the needs. Except the D5x.

Let’s see what happens in Nikon’s roadmap.

What a day for Nikon enthusiasts! D5 and D500 announced.

The D5 was already pre-announced and leaks during the last few weeks provided enough information already. Therefore the actual specification do not come as a big surprise.

The D500 will hit many people as a very big surprise. Most of us had given up hope for a pro-DX body long time ago. I published an editorial complaining about the lack of a D300s successor in 2013, latest in 2014  I also had given up hope.

The D500 comes in a “real” body (at least that is what press pictures indicate), provides an AF-ON button, offers 10 fps frame rate without completely breaking the bank for the first time in years, provides a moderate resolution at 20 MP and even comes with a rounded eyepiece! To provide one XQD slot is – in my opinion – also a very wise decision.

I was all set to drool over the D5 tonight, but the D500 steals the show absolutely. Today many people waiting for a D300/s replacement will be very, very happy.

D5 at Nikon.com

D500 at Nikon.com

40th anniversary of digital photography – a Kodak moment

On the 8th of December 1975 the Kodak engineer Steven Sasson created the first digital image from a CCD sensor. The picture had a resolution of 100×100 pixel and was stored on a cassette.

So, it’s time to say happy birthday today 🙂

The fact that digital photography was invented by Kodak, but not utilized to the fullest potential by its inventor is an often told fairytale. The short story always is: digital killed film and that killed Kodak. Things are not that simple.

Many seem to simply ignore that Kodak not only invented digital photography, but also was looking for ways to turn this into a successful business.

In my opinion they were in a way trapped, because they have been for a very long time not only in the film, but also in the camera business. However, they only produced simple and cheap cameras to fuel sales of their film in the mass market. The more sophisitcated cameras always came from other companies and never from Kodak.

When digital photography started, there was no way to produce cheap cameras due to the high costs involved. Kodak had no experience how do build a DSLR, which would be needed to sell a digital sensor of the early days. Nobody would have bought a simple point and shoot with fixed optics for several thousand dollars.

For a long time, Kodak bought Canon and Nikon film bodies and equipped them with a digital sensor plus the needed electronics in a fancy (read: ugly) attachment at the camera bottom. As a matter of fact, the first DSLRs from the two  big camera makers  came from Kodak. They were also market leader in this area until 1999, when Nikon introduced the D1.

What killed off Kodak was not digital photography per se, but the problem that they simply were not a camera company or a leading silicone manufacturer (production and refinement of sensors). As soon as the camera companies started to produce their own digital cameras, Kodak was doomed.

By the way: Which was the first full frame Nikon DSLR? You might have guessed: Kodak 14n, 14 MP full frame announced at Photokina 2002. Full five years before the Nikon D3.

Once again: Happy birthday to digital photography!

Lens designer – a horrible job?

On the Nikkor.com page an article has been published some month ago about the core pro-range lens set, known to many as the “Holy Trinity” and called the “Three Big Dragons” by Nikon.

I do not fully agree on the definition of the second generation set. From my point of view the AF-S 80-200mm 2,8 belongs to this generation and not the 70-200mm 2,8 VR 1.

However, thre is a very remarkable sentence contained about the designer of the 35-70mm 28 lens, who might have had a very hard job, leading to other hard consequences:

“We’ll start with the AF Zoom NIKKOR 35-70mm f/2.8 standard zoom lens, which was developed in 1987 by the hard-drinking optic designer Kiyotaka Inadome. “

Which employee does not dream about being mentioned decades later on the corporate website in such a honorable way?

 

© 2024 Dennis Saßmannshausen Photography

Based on an theme by Anders NorenUp ↑