24 MP D3x firmware code spotted

[e_dawg]

Not sure if you guys already know about this yet, but in case you haven't, the v1.1 D3 firmware has elements of D3x code in there, including resolution settings unique to the D3x:


" dial. ÿ Ÿ Cancel Cannot delete file. ÿ Ÿ Cancel Done. Done. Å Back Paper low. ÿ Ÿ Done 6048 x 4032; 24.4 M 4544 x 3024; 13.7 M 3024 x 2016; 6.1 M 5056 x 4032; 20.4 M 3792 x 3024; 11.5 M 2528 x 2016; 5.1 M 3968 x 2640; 10.5 M 2976 x 1976; 5.9 M 1984 x 1320; 2.6 M Firmware can not be upgraded at current settings. Only NEF (RAW) and JPEG pictures created with D3X can be selected. NCD3X Å OK 2 - 3 4864x3240 4864x3648 4560x3648 RECENT SETTINGS >bÛ >b˙ >c >c"

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&thread=27581087&page=1

[Rooz]

havent seen that particulalr bit, but not sure the d3x is really that much of a secret and/ or surprise. what amazes me is how nikon still cant produce a decent P&S.

[XaiLo]

havent seen that particulalr bit, but not sure the d3x is really that much of a secret and/ or surprise. what amazes me is how nikon still cant produce a decent P&S.

That's funny!!! :D All the lil Nikon elves are too busy making D300's, D3's, D3x's oh and D40's Rooz :D :p



Mel wrote:
> Hummmm, then we are left with the previously mentioned scenario of
> the D3X code being there along with what was meant and applicable to
> the current firmware update. Extra baggage if you will for perhaps
> marketing purposes or simply missed?

I'll repeat what I said, only with more words ;~). It's likely that Nikon has some D3x prototypes in the field or is about to seed them into the field. They would be labeled and look exactly like a D3. From the outside you wouldn't know the difference. However, if the firmware for the two cameras is near identical, then by including the D3x stuff in the D3 update you'd likely be able to have all your field testers update as well. That's the best possible scenario. The worst possible scenario is that this is no more than the same thing we've seen on the Web site: someone coding stuff in anticipation of future products and forgetting to hide it. Either way would indicate a D3x announcement is not far off.

> BUT, would it be impossible to have our
> current D3's turned into D3X's with yet another update? Taken from
> the 1DsMKIII specs, we have 6.4 µm pixel pitch for roughly 21
> megapixels. I wonder what pixel pitch roughly 24MP would be on our
> current D3 sensors?

Go read the post with the math in it. But I'll summarize here: IF the D3 used binning ala the original D1, then you'd get DOUBLE the pixels in BOTH directions by un-binning. If the D3 used binning ala the D1x, then you'd get double the pixels in only one direction. Neither case matches the numbers now in the firmware; not even close. Moreover, the ADC would suddenly have to become 2x or 4x faster or the frame rates would have to go down by 2x or 4x.


--
Thom Hogan
editor, Nikon DSLR Report

author, Complete Guides: D40/D40x, D50, D70s, D80, D100, D200, D1 series, D2 series

http://www.bythom.com


Thom is rather involved in this thread.

[K1W1]

what amazes me is how nikon still cant produce a decent P&S.

Well said, Nikon should hang their heads in shame with the generally very ordinary P&S cameras they have produced over the last 5 years or so. I know that it's a market that they are not overly interested in but IMO they would be better to just either produce no P&S cameras or a limited range of decent P&S's rather than a complete range of what is available now.

[Rooz]

if nikon had only JUTS dropped the ball for P&S then i could almost understand given their recent focus on producing top end dslr's and the production/ R&D demands of the last couple of years. but like you said, they havent made a decent one in many a year which to me seems like a completely crazy business decision. not only ae you missing a piece of that pie, but you also miss the knock on effect of people upgrading from P&S to dslr who prefer to stick to the same brand.

it just doesnt make sense.

[XaiLo]

Hey, I still went with Nikon :confused: lol I don't know what up with Nikons P&S these days but my wife has an L10 got to admit the lil bugger seems to take some nice pictures. But I agree a stronger P&S line wouldn't hurt no reason to just give away market share. Maybe I should start an American camera company. Whoo wants to buy some stock. ;)

[e_dawg]

P&S is a cash cow for Nikon. Why would they want to stop making them or putting a great deal more R&D and money into it to be the leader? Think of it another way: there's little profit in the P&S market, so they're putting just enough money and effort into it so that they remain strong enough to keep cash flowing into their dSLR division to keep designing those profitable blockbuster D3 and D300 models.

[erichlund]

Actually, I think you meant loss leader. A lot of P&S cameras actually lose money, but funnel customers into more expensive products. A cash cow is more like that goose with the golden egg. The D40 is a cash cow.

[e_dawg]

No, if I meant loss leader, I would have said loss leader ;) I didn't think P&S lost money; I just thought they weren't profitable. A cash cow is not a profitable product; it's a mature, high volume product that they keep milking because it's reliable source of cash (and lots of it). They don't make much profit on it, but they don't have to put much development cost into it either even if they launch a "new model" based on it every year.

[K1W1]

The 50mm f1.8 is a cash cow to Nikon. Those things probably leave the factory in China owning Nikon less than US$10 per unit these days.