Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 25, 2006, 3:12 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,214
Default

Canon is going to produce cameras that can reduce the risk of their cameras from sensor dust. Evidently, it is an effort to come near with OM on that and a reaction to other manufacturers' attempt tosharpen the competitive edge of their cameras in today's heated competition for more market share.

You definitely would like to see that Nikon can come up witha good solution for solving the sensor dust problem.

So, thenhow do you like it to be done on Nikon's cameras? Shaking, ultra-sonic treatment or material improvement for the filter? When do you think the dust remover will be installed? And will it come along with a top model in which the full-frame will be incorporated?

By the way, is it really that effective as far as dust removing is concerned when a cleaning device is installed in front of the sensor? Many people say OM's is just excellent, except for an increase in noise. But some say thattheaddednoise has been the result of the small size of the 3/4 sensor compared to Nikon and Canon's. So, the scenario will be: if a little noise will be added to the image, do you like to have the device installed in the future Nikon cameras?

My choice is: anultra-sonic device will bethe best; theinstallationto come with the full-framefirst; the installation simultaneously use onthemiddle-end and low-end models; and a little noise is a reasonable sacrifice and I will take it.
wk7leung is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 25, 2006, 3:39 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Dust is not that big of a deal. i've spent maybe 20 minutes over the last 12 months cleaning my sensors and I change lenses all the time. If Nikon did incorporate it, I wouldn't be upset, but I would only want it to run when i wanted it too, not automatically at startup like some cameras. Also, automatic cleaning does not remove dust from inside the camera, only on the sensor...the dust will eventually find its way back onto the sensor unless it is blown out or removed some other way manually. Dust removal does not cause noise either...the excess noise on Oly cameras are a result of a smaller sensor.

Also, don't get to hung up waiting on a Full Frame camera from Nikon. "Full Frame" is a point of reference to compare field of view with 35 mm cameras. Nikon is busy developing more and more DX lenses, not 35mm lenses. 35 mm sized sensors are more expensive and wasteful to produce. As we move farther and farther away from film, the need for the "full frame" reference will disappear.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2006, 10:05 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,214
Default

"Full Frame" is a point of reference to compare field of view with 35 mm cameras.- rjseeney

In the first place, thanks for feedback which I fully agree with. However, for the full-frame, I am haunted by the quality of shots taken with the big-sensor DSLR.

Having seen the quality of images from the digital Hasselblad, I do feel that a full-frame DSLR will be my next choice when choosing a top-of-the-line model.

Admittedly, the D70 has been good enough. With the APS format, lenses become smaller and focal lengths much extended, yielding much advantage for telephotography (of course, at the expense of the wide-angle one). If sensor development keeps going strong, it is a system that willfurther excel in the years to come.

However, the fact is: itis hard for the sensor developer to break through the physical limitation that are inherent in a small sensor: e.g. temperature problems and loss in the fidelity of colour as a result ofthe increase in photosensitive cells.It is for this reason that I do not consider investing in the3/4 system a wise choicethough I was an OM fan in the SLR era. In some local photography magazines I read, the noise level inOM cameras do fail to live up to the standard achieved in Nikon andCanon's.

The full-frame and the APSare different developments that call fora difference in lense,sensorand batteryrequirement. Perhaps, Nikon has been launching projects on that and cameras will be put to the market very soon to compete with Canon's full frame models. If not, then there is a need for it to do so to provideNikon fans with a variety of choices when they are investing ingears.

It takes consumers much money to invest ina high-end APS Nikon DSLR and itwill serves for years.I would like to pay some more for the full frame to add to my pleasurewhen viewing images on the LCD television.
wk7leung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2006, 7:23 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Having seen the quality of images from the digital Hasselblad, I do feel that a full-frame DSLR will be my next choice when choosing a top-of-the-line model
I would hope these are spectacular images....that is a $30,000 investment.

I agree full frame would provide some benefits, notably being able to use your old lenses the way they were intended and even better noise performance and dynamic range. Most notably though is probably the ability to go even higher in the megapixel race to satisfy those counters who always need the biggest or most of something.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2006, 10:55 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
zygh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 531
Default

I agree, the dust issue is nothing to worry about. It would not matter to me when/if I picked up a new body. I've been using the D50 for some time now and allthough I change lenses only from time to time, I have no dust on the sensor as of yet.
So, don't make your decision based on that because in the long run won't matter one bit.
Cheers!
zygh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2006, 9:26 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Ronnie948's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 721
Default

All ya gotta do is turn the camera off when changing the lens and you won't get dust on the sensor in the first place.

You would not change film or a lenson a film camera in the wind on the beach so just use the same common sense and care when changing the lens on your Digital camera.

My D100 or D200 never got a single speck of dust on the sensor yet. I just make sure they are not on when changing a lens.

Ronnie
Ronnie948 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2006, 3:59 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Default

Hmmm.... I've heard about turning the camera off to avoid catching dust when changing lenses.

As an engineer/physicist it seems to me that the attractive force from the very low sensor voltages would be far toosmall to make a difference.

Does anyone have practical evidence one way or another?

Simon
D200 user.
SimonW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2006, 6:28 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

I have no "practical" evidence, but it certainly cannot hurt. Every source or reference I have seen on the subject recommends turning the camera off. This was also strongly recommended for film SLR's as well.

Even anti dust systems will require sensor cleaning at some point in time. Shaking the dust off the sensor does not remove the dust from the camera body. I've cleaned my sensors twice, and invested a total time of about 10 minutes in 18 months of DSLR ownership.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2006, 3:39 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Default

Agreed it cannot hurt - I always do (except the few times I forget) - but mainly it's cos I hate to think of all the random connections being made to the lens as I twist it off and the contacts rub over each other...

turning off to stop dust still seems to me a bit of an urban myth - but it would be interesting if anyone had found a differnece.

I nearly went the Olympus route because of fears of sensor dust. Glad I didn't, I've not yet had any dust issues and now think the fears are perhaps somewhat exaggerated in the photo press...

SW
SimonW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2006, 8:23 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,214
Default

Dust isa problem whenI step down the aperture to get a deeper depth of view, which happens mostly when I take close-ups.

Dust is a problem when Ihave to change lenses often in order to get a suitable focal length.

Dust is a problem when I know that there arelots of particulate mattersin the air and that I still have to change for a better lens for a certain purpose.

Dust is a problem when I amoutdoor and cannot find a place to clean the sensor whichhas been contaminated.

Sensor dust on the camera body is like the mould in the lens. Different people havedifferent views, some a big one while othersa small one. No matter how, it is stilla problem, and it is that that makes a top-of-the-line model not top of the line as it still has a basic problem not properly resolved.

I don't know why Nikon does not do anything about it having manufactured DSLRs for years. Perhaps, they also feel that it is not a problem at all! Or perhaps, they are thinking about it and have some techical problems somewhere somehow that make a good solution not possible for the time being.
wk7leung is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:41 PM.