When I wrote about Nikon's new D3X (two posts below this one), I had an inkling that I'd be among the first to break the news. After all, a quick Google revealed... well, not very much.
But I didn't realise that i'd be pretty much exactly the first, anywhere, to post confirmed specs and pictures. Or, for that matter, that the traffic to my blog would increase by more than a couple of orders of magnitude (that's a factor of 100, in case your high school maths is a bit rusty). The east coast has only come online in the past couple of hours or so, and there's still the west coast to come. So it ain't over yet.
See that spike over to the right? That's been causing me a few headaches today.
In the meantime, this humble little corner of the web is front page news. Oh, and here too. And here. And, um, all over the web, in fact. Who'd have thunk, eh?
My guess is someone at Nikon Europe is getting their ear chewed off right now...
For what they're worth, my opinions of the spec / price issues raised by the D3X are here. Feel free to pitch in...
Scans in my original post were playing havoc with my bandwidth, so they've been removed. However, you can find scans of the Nikon Pro mag here and here. Thanks to Lutz for the links.
Welcome to my little corner of the web. News of the D3X follows; but first, a little background. This site was the first blog or news site to break the news of the new camera's specs (although I was pipped to the post by postings on a couple of forums and discussion groups, including this one). This was a big surprise, not least to me. I'm not a professional blogger; I'm a professional cycling photographer based in the UK and this is my personal blog. I have a few hundred regular readers scattered throughout the world who share an interest in bikes and / or photography. I only mention this because the response to my D3X post has been astonishing - I've received as much traffic in 24 hours as I normally do in a year.
This massive surge in traffic hasn't been without its problems, and I've had to make some changes to prevent the blog from wilting under the strain. You're most welcome here (and please feel free to browse around ;-)), but please understand that bandwidth restrictions have forced the removal of some images from this post.
Thanks for reading...
The rumours surrounding Nikon's launch of its much-anticipated high-res follow-up to the D3 have reached the usual intensity on the web in the past few days, as we approach the 1st December launch date. Well, the wait is over: it's here. My copy of Nikon Pro magazine dropped on the doormat this morning with an unexpected surprise on page 6 - full details of the new flagship dSLR, days ahead of the official launch.
Here's the deal:
- same body design, AF, metering and main functions as D3
- 24.5mp FX sensor
- 5:4 and DX crops
- 5fps at full resolution; DX crop shoots 10mp images at up to 7fps
- ISO 100-1600, extendable down to 50 and up to 6400
- 16 bit EXPEED processor
What's surprising about this spec list is, perhaps, that there are no big surprises. The conservative ISO range hints at the levels to which Nikon have gone to squeeze as much image quality as possible out of the new camera, but photographers expecting a modular design, brave new format or at least built-in video are going to be disappointed.
More importantly, it's late to the party. Canon's venerable 1DSIII has offered 21mp and 5fps for over a year, and the new 5DII and Sony's range-topping Alpha both skew the bucks-per-megapixel ratio in favour of the photogapher. The new Nikon, whilst subtly 'better' in all sorts of subtle ways (a few more pixels, crop modes, higher shooting speed in DX crop, better screen) is going to have to offer visible benefits over the Canon to persuade anyone to switch.
There is, of course, one more potential ace up Nikon's sleeve, and that's price. Canon has had the high res 35mm frame market to itself for far too long, allowing the 1DS series to sell at prices that, to these photograher's eyes at least, have always looked rather ludicrous. Nikon has long had a policy of delaying 'full frame' until they felt able to do so without compromise and at a price equal to or below the original D1 price - which, here in the UK, was £4000.
Now that the D3 has dropped in price, the question is whether the D3X will retail under £4000? If it does, and it betters the 1DSIII in output, there's still a chance that Nikon will get away with their tardiness. If it doesn't, and it isn't... hey, let's not go there.
Here are shots of the Nikon Pro feature (prize for originality in headline choice not pictured...).
If you're the kind of person who notices these things (I am), you may have spotted that the last post appears to have different line spacing from all the others. That's in spite of the fact that the font, point size and everything else hasn't changed.
I don't know why, I've tried to change it, but frankly the whole thing took too long for me to want to start the whole lot from scratch again. If the jump in spacing from post to post offends your eye... sorry, I have no idea what caused it!
27th November: updated with 2006 Kendal 48 hour marathon film and comments.
Last week, for the third time in as many years, I helped shoot a short film for the Kendal Mountain Festival's 48 hour film marathon. My co-writer, lead actor and co-editor was Bikemagic.com's Mike Davis.
As has become traditional on these occasions, our efforts singularly failed to impress the judges (although a handful of TV and film pros said some very nice things about the camera work). Still, it's mostly about the taking part, and I can think of no other events that combine fear, anticipation, sleeplessness and creative highs in quite such concentrated doses. Yes, that's a good thing. I think. I'll probably be back for more next year.
Shot on a Sony VX1000 (which, in case you're wondering, is roughly the video equivalent of a first generation dSLR) and edited in Final Cut Pro. Thanks to Brucie's Bike Shop in Kendal for the last-minute loan of their workshop. Not surprisingly, our request to spend four hours filming a bike build was met initially with bemused consternation...
By way of comparison (and because the original link to it appears to be broken), here's the film I shot with What Mountain Bike's Matt Skinner for the 2006 competition:
Shot on a Canon XL1 (Canon's answer, in some ways, to the Sony VX1000 - and another relic from the mid '90s) and edited in Final Cut Express. One of the things that I learned from this film is the importance of good audio; it doesn't take a particularly critical ear to hear a whole load of unwanted background noise accompanying the voiceover on this video. That's why we put a lot more time and energy into this year's audio (I'm particularly proud of the noise of the cassette being tightened in the workshop...)
Video has, of course, become very fashionable in stills circles with the arrival of the Nikon D90 and Canon's updated 5D, both with HD capability. And RED were quick to jump on the bandwagon with another flurry of pre-release announcements which, whilst visually stunning and technically simultaneously plausible and impressive, are of course - in true RED style - little more at this stage than wish-lists and mock-ups.
Still (pun intended)... a new age of combined still and video cameras (or video and still, depending on which way you approach it) is clearly upon us. Which begs the question, are we all videographers now?
The answer, I think, is no. The new breed of dSLRs is, in the right hands, capable of superb results that stand apart from regular HD cam footage, as (for example), the Guardian's Dan Chung has demonstrated. There's no doubt that a dSLR's large sensor provides depth of field isolation and low light performance that puts most dedicated video cameras in the shade.
But.
There are a bunch of issues that get in the way of producing an all-singing, all-dancing, all-in-one camera that'll suit the needs of both high-end stills photographers AND high-end videographers. Some of these - like ergonomic (1) and technical (2) issues - can probably be at least partly addressed, although that leaves the possibility that a combo camera could be compromised on either the stills or video side (or both) in the name of all-in-oneness. For the mass market that probably won't matter, but for pros who care about the quality of their output it most definitely will.
But even if the practical problems inherent in combining two parallel but essentially different technologies in one tool can be overcome, my (albeit limited) experience of film-making leaves another niggling doubt in my mind. Because stills are more than just individual frames from a continuous piece of footage, and video is more than a sequence of stills stitched together.
Not only are the technical requirements frequently at odds (movement on video isn't always best captured with high shutter speeds, for example, and flash is clearly not an option) but the way that great stills and great video are seen is often different, too. I realise that sounds terribly arty (dahling), but I'm convinced that it's true. There are some conventions of framing and shot composition that carry over, but the way that movement and narrative in video help to construct the story fundamentally alters the way that it's shot.
Which renders the musings of some pro photographers on discussion groups around the web kinda funny, really. A stills snapper muttering about the lack of XLR inputs on Canon's new 5D is, in the end, about as relevant as a videographer wondering if they can take a few grabs out of their travel documentary footage to stick up on Alamy. We're not there yet, folks.
And yet, we've also been here before. Mobile phones have become so all-in-one that you'd think, on the face of it, that sales of still cameras, video cameras and GPS devices would all have died. Clearly, that's not the case. The last research I saw (a few days ago) indicated that, far from carrying fewer devices thanks to all-in-oneness, people are tending to buy, carry and use more gadgets. So much for simplification.
(1) I'm no great fan of video camera ergonomics, on the whole, although my limited experience suggests they've got much better over the years. But one example - and it is just one - of where dSLR design falls short in this area is that they're designed to be held to the eye. Wobbling a camera around at arm's length is normal to the Flickr generation, but it's not conducive to great video. The hand grip's in the wrong place, the screen doesn't tilt, there's no viewfinder option... see what I mean? RED's tackling the problem from the other end, but I'm equally unconvinced that a great video camera will necessarily make more than a passable stills device.
(2) Where to start on the technical stuff? Both Canon and Nikon's liveview recording systems (for that is what they really are) rely on a rolling shutter, which can make moving or panned subjects look as though they're falling over (no, I'm not kidding). There's little control over exposure, and - in Nikon's case at least - some fairly intractable mount design issues preventing big changes here. Audio is a potential headache, with on-camera mics clearly inadequate and XLR inputs likely far too bulky to consider building into a dSLR. And so on, and on.
Regular readers will have noticed a drop in the number of postings recently. There's a reason for that - I've been kinda busy. Shipping framed prints, completing shoots in spite of the weather, planning what I'm going to be doing in '09... and this week I'm off to the Kendal Mountain Film Festival.
Phew.
Still, that means there's a ton of stuff I've been meaning to write about that'll hopefully find its way onto the blog over the next few weeks. Don't go away...
Nikon D3, 17-35mm f/2.8, 1/250sec f/8 @ ISO200, two radio slaves
This is, as far as I can work out, my last cover of 2008. Yes, I know there's however-many-shopping-days-til-Christmas and then (last time I looked) another week or so of the year to go beyond that, but in magazine publishing world the first of 2009's covers are already being firmed up to go to the printers. Won't be long before I'm asked to come up with warm, sunny, spring-like pics to go on April and May edition covers. Try shooting to that brief in February...
Anyhoo, that's then and this is now. This was actually one of the smoothest cover shoots of the year - the easy one of the two recent cover experiences I wrote about recently. We turned up, identified the five yards or so of trail we wanted for the shot immediately, bashed off a few test shots to get the lighting dialled and had it in the can before lunch. Marvellous.
I particularly like the way the sky's been left alone in the final cover version, complete with little fluffy clouds and all...
Nikon D3, 17-35mm f/2.8, 1/320sec f/7.1 @ ISO200, two radio slaves
And if anyone's still in any doubt that the details on cover shoots really are sweated, here's the shot to prove that Doddy brought along a complete change of kit for a different look. We shot both outfits with and without Camelbak (and with sun and without, though that particular element wasn't entirely under out control).
You know it's time to pack up and head home when...
- you're shooting a (static) packshot at 1/13sec and f/4.5. At ISO1600. Handheld (OK, with a little help from a moss-covered treestump, but definitely no three-legged friend involved)*
and
- having switched to the last-ditch option of flash, flash and more flash, your camera is then having trouble focussing. Even with all that fancy beam-assist AF gadgetry.
Oh yes. The days are definitely getting shorter...
* on the plus side, those clean D3 high ISOs bought me at least an extra 30 minutes of shooting time. I would've called it much earlier a year ago...
Christmas ordering: please see here for latest ordering info.
What do you buy for the mountain biker who has everything? How about a signed, limited edition Seb Rogers print?
Well I would suggest that, wouldn't I? But hear me out.
I've put together four exclusive triptychs, each one featuring a series of three themed images beautifully mounted, framed, signed and individually numbered. The 20x60cm (approx. 8"x24") frames sit well on even the most limited wall space, and the deep black surround matches most decor. I'll only be making a maximum of 10 (yep, ten) of each.
Not much wall space? No problem...
Individually signed and numbered. I'll only be making 10 of each...
Oh, the themes? Here they are (the framed versions obviously won't be watermarked):
Mountain:
Sky:
Water:
Trail:(please note these images are presented in a vertically orientated frame)
I don't think you'll find anything like these prints anywhere else. And the best bit is the price: £99.00, delivered to your door. Yep, less than £100 for a framed, signed, limited edition print.
Go on, put a bit of riding magic on the wall of someone who'd rather be out on their bike...
You can pay by Paypal (prints@sebrogers.co.uk), or email me if you'd prefer to pay by cheque or direct bank transfer. I'll need to know which print you'd like and your delivery address. Please allow at least 14 days for delivery. For last-minute Christmas orders, please contact me before sending payment.
FAQs
- can you deliver outside the UK?
Sorry, no. I've had boxes specially made for the frames, but the glass is too fragile to send overseas.
- how big are the prints?
Each print is roughly 9.5x14cm (3.75"x5.5"). The frames are 20x60cm (8"x24").
- how long will the prints last?
Print longevity depends on a lot of factors including temperature, humidity and exposure to light. I've used the highest quality inks and paper and a professional printer to ensure that my prints are as resistant to fading as possible. With a little care in handling, display and storage they should last decades.
- can I choose which three pictures to put in the frame?
I've put a lot of time into matching each series of three images, so the answer is no, I'm afraid.
- where were the images taken?
From British Columbia and Nepal to the South Downs and Exmoor, via the French Alps and mid Wales. Each frame will have full captions on the rear.
SNAFU
If you're the kind of person who notices these things (I am), you may have spotted that the last post appears to have different line spacing from all the others. That's in spite of the fact that the font, point size and everything else hasn't changed.
Posted at 03:51 PM in Comment | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)
| Digg This | |