Fujifilm has just announced several new digital cameras, with much higher resolution. One has a 4.3 million pixel resolution, reportedly below US$1000. Another Pro camera has a resolution of over 6 million pixels (about 3 times the currently marketed cameras), and sells for around US$4000 without the lens. It is a true SLR, with a Nikon F mount. Check the link for more details. Start at the home page, then select ‘Press Releases.‘ Read the link ‘Fujifilm Announces First Consumer And Professional Digital Cameras With New Super CCD Image Sensor Technology‘.

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on January 31, 2000 at 22:34:33:

Ohhhhhh. Now why did you have to tell me that? I can get a digital camera that will accept my superb Nikon F lenses! Now there's something else to drool over and compete for budget $ with all the other cool tools I should really try to do without.

(Along with a portable computer projector; a PDA and a full function handheld; a new vehicle; that 24v Dewalt hammer drill JPS put us onto; and..........)

Reply to post by Scott Cullen, on January 31, 2000 at 22:34:33:

This is finally on the way to what we've looking for- a high resolution camera that accepts interchangeable lenses, SLR, with picture quality that matches film. Now if only the price would come down....

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on February 01, 2000 at 05:55:06:

Indeed! I guess that one advantage of being in a larger company rather than a sole practitioner is that several people can share a device... maybe we're all destined to wind up in group practices like doctors... or maybe we just need to make a lot more money.

Seriously, I think you noted a $4k tag which sounds like a lot. But my old Nikon F2A with the 55mm Micro and 28mm f1.8 Nikkor lenses and a few trinkets was over $1k in 1980. So adjusted for time the investment does not seem out of line.

My computer and net connection were being cranky and I gave up waiting for the Fujifilm Catalogue to download, so I didn't get all the details. But the two upper end pro cameras both clearly had Nikor lenses on them. One of them actually said Fujifilm on the body but Nikon on the prism housing. I wonder if this is a JV or if Nikon is making the hardware for them?

Did you get enough detail to tell if the lense mount is backward compatible to all the Nikon F mounts or if it wants the newer AF series?

For anybody who's interested the Nikkor lenses are pricey but be sure to check out third party lense makers who supply in various mounts including Nikon F.

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on January 31, 2000 at 22:34:33:

Nikon also has a digital SLR, the E3/E3s. 1.3 mil pixels. Uses Nikkor F mount lenses (with some limitations). Now given the higher resolution of the Fuji line one might guess the price on this one would get driven down UNLESS Nikon and Fuji have set this up together with the two units pointed at different price points. That's a potential explanation of the Nikon name on the body of the new Fuji. Neither of the sites lists any pricing.

Reply to post by Scott, on February 02, 2000 at 02:07:37:

Re: lens mount- All I read was 'Nikon F' mount. I suspect Nikon built the housing, Fujifilm developed the innards. The key on this is a whole new method of Super CCD, 1.1 inch with over 6 million pixels. The camera has adjustable shutter and aperature settins, and a few selectable ISO ratings. So it becomes the first real "digital film camera", in the traditional sense.

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on February 02, 2000 at 05:48:54:

I was able to download the material finally, only to have the printer go low on ink and the text did not print well! But from what I could read:

There are two equally interesting main features here. 1) is the true SLR, lens system capability. It appears that the Nikon F mount will accept the newer AF or auto-focus Nikkors and the older AI (or auto indexing) F mount Nikkors but with some limitations (???). It also appears that the lenses will only stop down to f4.8 so you can't take advantage of the wider aperture settings of some lenses I guess. (My Nikor 28mm is f2.8; 55mm is f2.8; 50mm is f1.8 for example). So you'll have some lack of performance in depth of field as compared to the same lenses on a film camera. This could be a concern in your close up work, but f4.8 is still not bad.

2) is the Super CCD. Apparently the previous technology was developed for digital video and the chip merely adapted for still image work. Fuji developed a new dedicated still image chip that does not really have more base capacity it just packs it all into one still image... the result is effectively more pixel resolution.

See my post above on the Nikon E3 which has the interchangable F mount lens capability but only 1.3 mega pixels with older chip technology. It would be interesting to see what the price is and we might find 1.3mp acceptable but get the lens flexibility at a lower price that the $4k fuji. BTW the camera you profiled at that price is NOT Fuji's top end digital offering.

There's also apparently a Nikon D1 but I've so far only found passing reference. It's not on Nikon's web site.

Another issue seem to be power usage. These babies are hungry and use expensive Lith-ion rechargeables which take an hour to charge. Some of them will run direct dc off the charger which is OK in the office but little use in the field. So by the time you add the price of an extra battery or two and charger and cables you might add a few hundered $ to the package.

And, finally the on-line discounters of photo stuff seem to top off at the high end consumer models and don't necessarily have the pro lines. It would be worth querying them I suppose to see if they can special order or maybe just don't have them up on the web pages.

Reply to post by Scott, on February 02, 2000 at 23:36:42:

Here's the 2.74mp Nikon D1 which accepts most Nikkor F mount lenses.

http://www.nikonusa.com/products/new0218/d1/d1_camera.html

Reply to post by Scott, on February 03, 2000 at 07:17:28:

MSRP $5,580US. No lens but you do get a shoulder strap and battery charger.

Reply to post by Scott, on February 02, 2000 at 23:36:42:

Rebuttal-

1) The depth of field is not the issue, since a smaller aperature (larger denominator, eg. 1/16) gives greater depth of field. So opening wide to the 2.8 setting means a shorter depth of field, especially in closeup work. You want to stop-down as much as possible for greater depth.

What the limited aperature range will mean is less light coming through the lens. Since the CCDs are notoriously good at low lux situations, this shouldn't be a problem. Just means more enhancement with electronics at the low lux situations.

2) There are the 1.3 megapixels, and 2.4 mp, now the 6+ mp. More to choose from. The choice should be based first on the end use of the photos. As we discussed in an earlier thread, you have to match the input (digital camera) to the output: how much enlargement, capabilities of the printer device, etc. No sense getting a 6 mp camera and using a 300 dpi printer.

I know the one listed is not the top of the line. But at $4000, it may be within reach of the serious specialist who needs the quality. It is in that no-man's land between consumer and true pro versions.

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on January 31, 2000 at 22:34:33:

Here's a few more announcements from the digital world:

Sony's UP-DP10 [http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/000203/ny_sony_pr_1.html] is a "photo printer" that produces "photo-lab-quality" images up to
4x6 inches. It's due at $389 in the "Spring" with USB support. "Media will be
offered at a suggested list price below $15 for packs of 25 prints."

Epson today announced new "digital photo lab" [http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/000203/ca_epson_2.html] printers that promise photo-like fade
resistance and image quality through the use of new inks and paper. Prices start at
$299 for the Stylus Photo 870.

HP introduced new PhotoSmart [http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/000203/nv_hewlett_2.html] digital cameras due by fall (pricing is not yet
available).

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on February 03, 2000 at 07:17:28:

We agree... smaller aperture means less light. The smaller the f number the smaller the aperture. And smaller apertures give greater depth of field. Less light coming in through x aperture can be compensated for by longer exposure times or supplemental light. Pretty straight forward technical stuff.

NOW did I read the specs wrong? I took the f4.8 rating to mean that's the lowest effective f stop these new cameras are capable of. So, if you mount an f1.8 or f 2.8 lens on this body that would mean it will not stop down to the lense's smaller apertures, but only to f 4.8. If that's the case you won't get as much depth of field out of the same lense as you would with film.

Let me know if you have a differeng interpretation of the f4.8 spec.

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on January 31, 2000 at 22:34:33:

Well doing some web research I've found that there have been earlier digital SLRs. You need to be pretty careful reading the material that will come up in a search. Be sure to look at dates. Nikon and Fuji have collaborated before. So have Nikon and Kodak. Then Kodak dumped Nikon in favor of Cannon. Both Nikon and Cannon bodies have been used on the Kodak digitals with the attendant lens compatibility. It seems that the Nikon E3 and E3s may be the same camera as the Kodak DCS560... which sounds very much like the model # on the new top of the line Fuji-Nikons. Over this time the pixel ratings have been creeping up.

BOTTOM LINE. Do your research very carefully. But one may well find some of these not too old digitals with SLR lens capability showing up used as the pros upgrade to the new stuff. If the lens flexibility is what you want and 1.3 or 2.4mp are good enough for you then you might jump in well below the $4k you'd have to pay for the newest and bestest (for now) 6mp models.