An epiphany to the DX lens/FF DSLR issue (very long)

Watcher · 14th September 2003

While having a late lunch of "One egg, one kosong" this afternoon

, I had an epipany on the Nikon vs Canon FF DSLR controversy. Please note that it is VERY long... Thanks in advance for your patience

Before I go any further with my thoughts, let me establish some basis first.

0) Why are there critisism on the APS-sized DSLR by the pros?
1) Why aren't Nikon releasing a FF DSLR?
2) Why are so many Nikonians, especially pros not going crazy over the DX series of lenses?
3) What happens when we mount a DX lens on a future FF DSLR from Nikon?
4) Why are DX lenses still listed by the FF/35mm focal length, even though the it is meant only for APS-sized DSLR?
5) What's next with Nikon's D2x, D200 and so on.

I will not repeat in details the dogma that has been brought up many times here, but to summerize:

Because with APS-size sensors, WA is difficult, there is a physical limit on how many mpixels that a smaller sensor can cram in before the quality deteriorates and when (no if) Nikon releases a FF DSLR, the DX lenses will give significant issues.

Right now, on the D100, it has the following features:

A grid that can be enabled in the options
The grid can light up
Multiple resolution selectable for JPG
The type of lens used is detected and recorded in the photos taken

The reason why only Canon's 1Ds and the Kodak 14n are the only FF DSLR is because of the cost of the sensor as the yield is low and cost very high. Therefore, few companies are willing to invest and build a FF DSLR if the returns is moderatly low (bragging rights) but the risk extremely high due to low volume and high cost

So the talk is that Nikon will eventually have a FF DSLR but only after a few years (around 5) after the yield has gone up, the cost comes down. This would then make the DX lenses obsolete and is seen as a stop-gap, short term solution to be discarded once Nikon releases a FF DSLR.

But what if you don't need to discard it?

To solve the whole problem and questions raised above, I have a solution that is simple to implement, and makes all the issue more or less moot.

The epipany is this one word: firmware.

Imagine a new DSLR from Nikon say D3x. It is a full frame DSLR using the LABCAST technology for its sensor. Since Nikon owns the patent and would by then have 3 years plus millions of sensor produced of experience, the manufacturing of this FF sensor should be by then, much cheaper.

When you put in a standard F-Mount lens, it gives you the full 35mm image. If a DX lens is mounted, the image on the sensor will be vignetted. The photographer will then need to crop out the image later, right?

What if... What if all these can be done via the firmware? Imagine this solution. When a standard lens is mounted, the system will take the image from the entire sensor when the shutter is release. But, if a DX lens is mounted, the system automatically crops the image so that the vignetted area is left out. The view finder? It can indicate the area cropped when a DX lens is mounted by greying out or just simply putting a red box around the recorded image.

This solution will then give 2 selectable image size (like the JPG sizing in D100 but it should be extended when taking RAW images) when using a normal F-mount lens (ie FF or APS) while only APS (or slightly larger) is enabled when a DX lens is mount. Since the system (ie body) knows what lens is mounted, this can be done automatically. That could also be why the DX lenses are still using the measurement for the focal length even though it is not meant to be used on a 35mm camera.

This solution gives the best of both worlds:
A FF DSLR that can use both standard and DX F-mount lenses. Hey, the Nikon Capture v5 can even have an option to interpolate to the full FF image if need be!

If Nikon is using this strategy, then Canon will be in deep poo. The reason why Canon cannot do this is because the EF-S mount lenses physically cannot be mounted on a non EF-S mount camera. The extension tubes will increase the effective focal length, right? Even if you force it in, it would damage both the lens and the body as a EF-S mount body physically needs to have its mirror move back. On a EF-mount body, the mirror will hit the back of the lens.

Canon will then have a schism between the prosumer using the EF-S mount (10D, 300D category of DSLR) with lenses that cannot be used on the professional system using the EF mount (1Ds, 1D). There is then no upgrade path for users moving from prosumer to pro nor will there be cheaper lenses for the pros to use if they don't want to do so. This makes financial sense as Canon can then release only L lenses on the EF-mount. This would force all the pros to stick with the EF-mount bodies and can keep the margins high on the lenses, strong-arming the users into paying higher margins.

What do you guys think of this solution? If Nikon adopts my idea, I think they should give me any lens or body I want for the rest of my life

erwinx · 14th September 2003

"DSLRs will have full frame 16Mp+ 35mm sensors BUT:

They will have an option to go into 1.5x DX lens compatible mode. In this mode only the cropped 1.5x image is captured and sent to memory card, thus speeding up write times and frame rates. Multi-pattern metering is also adjusted to take into account the smaller image circle.

So in the studio (or the Zoo), weddings, etc, you can use full frame CCD with your big heavy 35mm glass. In this case, the DSLR replaces the medium format camera.

But when you go out hiking, sports photography, you bring along your 500 f/2.8 DO DX IS VR USM AF-S superlight lens with camera set to '1.5x mode', since you don't really need medium format quality...."

been there, said that

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthrea...9&page=2&pp=20

linse · 15th September 2003

Originally Posted by Watcher

That could also be why the DX lenses are still using the measurement for the focal length even though it is not meant to be used on a 35mm camera.

The last time a checked, the focal length is still the distance from a lens to its focus. It has nothing to do with the size of the sensor.

Quote:

This solution gives the best of both worlds:
A FF DSLR that can use both standard and DX F-mount lenses. Hey, the Nikon Capture v5 can even have an option to interpolate to the full FF image if need be!

Well, Nikon Capture 3.5 already has Automatic Vignette Control for the NEFs from Nikon dSLRs with the upgraded firmware and a D or G type lens. It might be possible for future versions of Capture to correct the vignetting from a DX lens with a FF sensor with the disadvantage of added noise.

Watcher · 15th September 2003

Originally Posted by linse

The last time a checked, the focal length is still the distance from a lens to its focus. It has nothing to do with the size of the sensor.

Correct, but when comparing the angle of view, it is not the same as a FF. In any case, since the angle itself when focused on the image surface is less than a FF coverage, it may give a wrong impression. This is not a big issue though.

Originally Posted by linse

Well, Nikon Capture 3.5 already has Automatic Vignette Control for the NEFs from Nikon dSLRs with the upgraded firmware and a D or G type lens. It might be possible for future versions of Capture to correct the vignetting from a DX lens with a FF sensor with the disadvantage of added noise.

I wanted to put in the same view on Capture in my original article

. However, I don't want to complicate the issue and instead, leave the function on the camera to do instead as it IS, IMO, the better way out.

Watcher · 15th September 2003

Originally Posted by erwinx

been there, said that
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthrea...9&page=2&pp=20

Quite close

, but I have no hope that the DX lenses are significantly lighter than the 35mm lenses.

There should not be a "compatible" mode rather an outright "APS" or "FF" mode. Metering is not a issue, the view finder will automatically indicate the captured area.

The other significant issue is that Canon releasing both body and lens for the EF-S mount. This will then split the Canon market and prevent an upgrade of users from prosumer using a 300D (and most likely, a 10D successor) to the pro range of DSLRS like 1D and 1Ds using the EF mount since the lenses are physically not compatible. There is a possibility that Canon intend to make ALL future DSLR use the EF-S mount since the bodies are compatible with the existing EF mount lenses...

A new mount...

jasonpgc · 15th September 2003

I agree that your idea of have a firmware to crop a image for a 35mm DSLR with a DX lens is technically possible.

But if you were the CEO of Nikon, what makes you think anyone who own both ( $XXXXX ) 35mm DSLR and ( $XXXX ) Nikon APS DSLR would invest all his money on the DX range lenses, and let the 35mm DSLR's firmware cropped the picture?

Naturally, I believe that this person would invest on the 35mm Nikon D series lenses, then let the APS DSLR do the normal cropping.

In the REAL world, I believe that a Person who has Upgraded from a APS DSLR to a 35mm DSLR wanted to shoot at 35mm Full Frame. I think he would rather get a 14mm f/2.8D ED instead, if he need such wide angle. Most probably, he would find a way to sell off or trade in all his DX Lenses for 35mm Lenses. As such, why would Nikon bother to code it into their future 35mm DSLR firmware at all?

agape01 · 17th December 2004

A super old thread, but it is worth commenting. After all, I was not around during the time of this thread.

Overall, I would give Watcher a

for giving a very logical POV. After all, everyone has got different POVs in regards to this issue.

Overall, I do agree that there are only certain applicatiosn for DX lenses on DSLR cameras. The greatest disadvantage for 1.5X FLM sensors is shooting wide angle... that is why there is the 10.5mm Fisheye, 12-24, 17-55 and 18-70. As for the rest of the ranges like 17-35, 28-70 the rest can be used on future FF cameras. Case in point... I'm sure you guys would notice that the AFS 200 f/2 IF-ED lens is a full frame one? I have to admit that Nikon is real innovative by taking this kind of approach. They will be able to capture a larger market share in the camera market world wide.

As for Canon, I am not sure whether are they seperating their cameras into 2 different markets. One for amateur use and the second one for the Pros. Most pros find the 1.3X FLM a workable range and are willing to compromise, but those who are willing to spend more than there is the 1DsII and the 1Ds.

That said it just shows that the two companies have got two different approaches to selling their equipment. But ultimately, it is up to each individual on which POV they think is a better one. If I had known this right from the start and I will Watcher

agape01 for not posting this article when he joined CS, I would most likely have chosen Nikon to be my choice for DSLRs.

Dennis · 17th December 2004

Bravo, that was exactly what I was thinking about and already realised on the D2X. The D2X used as a 6mp with fast speed is exectly usable with a DX lens concept.

You do not have to throw away DX and in fact Nikon can next time manufacture super tele that is smaller for those who do not need high mp but speed.

Spectrum · 3rd September 2005

May God poured His blessings upon you Nikon & all Nikon users out there.

agape01 · 4th September 2005

Originally Posted by Spectrum

May God poured His blessings upon you Nikon & all Nikon users out there.

DO NOT USE THE NAME OF GOD IN VAIN...

Spectrum · 4th September 2005

Originally Posted by agape01

DO NOT USE THE NAME OF GOD IN VAIN...

Oops... Sorry God.

smallaperture · 5th September 2005

Originally Posted by jasonpgc

I agree that your idea of have a firmware to crop a image for a 35mm DSLR with a DX lens is technically possible.

But if you were the CEO of Nikon, what makes you think anyone who own both ( $XXXXX ) 35mm DSLR and ( $XXXX ) Nikon APS DSLR would invest all his money on the DX range lenses, and let the 35mm DSLR's firmware cropped the picture?

Naturally, I believe that this person would invest on the 35mm Nikon D series lenses, then let the APS DSLR do the normal cropping.

In the REAL world, I believe that a Person who has Upgraded from a APS DSLR to a 35mm DSLR wanted to shoot at 35mm Full Frame. I think he would rather get a 14mm f/2.8D ED instead, if he need such wide angle. Most probably, he would find a way to sell off or trade in all his DX Lenses for 35mm Lenses. As such, why would Nikon bother to code it into their future 35mm DSLR firmware at all?

Or you can have both - the FF gear for serious money making work and the DX gear for some fun and travel use. This reminds me of Ken Rockwell - using his MF gear for serious work and carries a D70 for some casual shooting. Or keep the DX body as back-up. The F-mount works wonders - what a fabulous system we have here.

Watcher · 5th September 2005

Originally Posted by smallaperture

Or you can have both - the FF gear for serious money making work and the DX gear for some fun and travel use. This reminds me of Ken Rockwell - using his MF gear for serious work and carries a D70 for some casual shooting. Or keep the DX body as back-up. The F-mount works wonders - what a fabulous system we have here.

I agree... Both can be used at the same time. As a photographer, your mind don't have to "switch" between the different FOV with different body on the same lens and you need only 1 set of lenses instead of extra lenses to cover either (or both) end.

Scenario: 1 FF body with autocrop, 1 DX body. The DX body will be cheaper than the FF body, so it is more affordable or that when you travel, you don't have to bring the more expensive one along. Also if you bring the DX body as a spare, the lenses have the same FOV across both bodies. The last point cannot be underestimated...

Idworks · 6th September 2005

Excellent write-up for reading

Amazingly it was first written 2 years ago, that was even before I fell in love with photography. Anyway the rest of the threads are also just as entertaining, hope to catch up with you guys soon.

tao · 6th September 2005

same concept as the current D2X in crop mode just that Nikon need to introduce FF with DX crop factor.

Spectrum · 6th September 2005

Originally Posted by tao

same concept as the current D2X in crop mode just that Nikon need to introduce FF with DX crop factor.

Only time will tell dude.

Happy shooting.

14th September 2003	#1
Watcher Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: The heart of the Abyss Posts: 2,319	An epiphany to the DX lens/FF DSLR issue (very long) While having a late lunch of "One egg, one kosong" this afternoon , I had an epipany on the Nikon vs Canon FF DSLR controversy. Please note that it is VERY long... Thanks in advance for your patience Before I go any further with my thoughts, let me establish some basis first. 0) Why are there critisism on the APS-sized DSLR by the pros? 1) Why aren't Nikon releasing a FF DSLR? 2) Why are so many Nikonians, especially pros not going crazy over the DX series of lenses? 3) What happens when we mount a DX lens on a future FF DSLR from Nikon? 4) Why are DX lenses still listed by the FF/35mm focal length, even though the it is meant only for APS-sized DSLR? 5) What's next with Nikon's D2x, D200 and so on. I will not repeat in details the dogma that has been brought up many times here, but to summerize: Because with APS-size sensors, WA is difficult, there is a physical limit on how many mpixels that a smaller sensor can cram in before the quality deteriorates and when (no if) Nikon releases a FF DSLR, the DX lenses will give significant issues. Right now, on the D100, it has the following features: A grid that can be enabled in the options The grid can light up Multiple resolution selectable for JPG The type of lens used is detected and recorded in the photos taken The reason why only Canon's 1Ds and the Kodak 14n are the only FF DSLR is because of the cost of the sensor as the yield is low and cost very high. Therefore, few companies are willing to invest and build a FF DSLR if the returns is moderatly low (bragging rights) but the risk extremely high due to low volume and high cost So the talk is that Nikon will eventually have a FF DSLR but only after a few years (around 5) after the yield has gone up, the cost comes down. This would then make the DX lenses obsolete and is seen as a stop-gap, short term solution to be discarded once Nikon releases a FF DSLR. But what if you don't need to discard it? To solve the whole problem and questions raised above, I have a solution that is simple to implement, and makes all the issue more or less moot. The epipany is this one word: firmware. Imagine a new DSLR from Nikon say D3x. It is a full frame DSLR using the LABCAST technology for its sensor. Since Nikon owns the patent and would by then have 3 years plus millions of sensor produced of experience, the manufacturing of this FF sensor should be by then, much cheaper. When you put in a standard F-Mount lens, it gives you the full 35mm image. If a DX lens is mounted, the image on the sensor will be vignetted. The photographer will then need to crop out the image later, right? What if... What if all these can be done via the firmware? Imagine this solution. When a standard lens is mounted, the system will take the image from the entire sensor when the shutter is release. But, if a DX lens is mounted, the system automatically crops the image so that the vignetted area is left out. The view finder? It can indicate the area cropped when a DX lens is mounted by greying out or just simply putting a red box around the recorded image. This solution will then give 2 selectable image size (like the JPG sizing in D100 but it should be extended when taking RAW images) when using a normal F-mount lens (ie FF or APS) while only APS (or slightly larger) is enabled when a DX lens is mount. Since the system (ie body) knows what lens is mounted, this can be done automatically. That could also be why the DX lenses are still using the measurement for the focal length even though it is not meant to be used on a 35mm camera. This solution gives the best of both worlds: A FF DSLR that can use both standard and DX F-mount lenses. Hey, the Nikon Capture v5 can even have an option to interpolate to the full FF image if need be! If Nikon is using this strategy, then Canon will be in deep poo. The reason why Canon cannot do this is because the EF-S mount lenses physically cannot be mounted on a non EF-S mount camera. The extension tubes will increase the effective focal length, right? Even if you force it in, it would damage both the lens and the body as a EF-S mount body physically needs to have its mirror move back. On a EF-mount body, the mirror will hit the back of the lens. Canon will then have a schism between the prosumer using the EF-S mount (10D, 300D category of DSLR) with lenses that cannot be used on the professional system using the EF mount (1Ds, 1D). There is then no upgrade path for users moving from prosumer to pro nor will there be cheaper lenses for the pros to use if they don't want to do so. This makes financial sense as Canon can then release only L lenses on the EF-mount. This would force all the pros to stick with the EF-mount bodies and can keep the margins high on the lenses, strong-arming the users into paying higher margins. What do you guys think of this solution? If Nikon adopts my idea, I think they should give me any lens or body I want for the rest of my life Last edited by Watcher; 14th September 2003 at 03:59 PM.

3rd September 2005	#9
Spectrum Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Here Posts: 3,702	Re: An epiphany to the DX lens/FF DSLR issue (very long) May God poured His blessings upon you Nikon & all Nikon users out there.

6th September 2005	#14
Idworks New Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 47	Re: An epiphany to the DX lens/FF DSLR issue (very long) Excellent write-up for reading Amazingly it was first written 2 years ago, that was even before I fell in love with photography. Anyway the rest of the threads are also just as entertaining, hope to catch up with you guys soon.

6th September 2005	#15
tao Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Land of the Vegetables Posts: 3,015	Re: An epiphany to the DX lens/FF DSLR issue (very long) same concept as the current D2X in crop mode just that Nikon need to introduce FF with DX crop factor.

14th September 2003	#2
erwinx Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,492	"DSLRs will have full frame 16Mp+ 35mm sensors BUT: They will have an option to go into 1.5x DX lens compatible mode. In this mode only the cropped 1.5x image is captured and sent to memory card, thus speeding up write times and frame rates. Multi-pattern metering is also adjusted to take into account the smaller image circle. So in the studio (or the Zoo), weddings, etc, you can use full frame CCD with your big heavy 35mm glass. In this case, the DSLR replaces the medium format camera. But when you go out hiking, sports photography, you bring along your 500 f/2.8 DO DX IS VR USM AF-S superlight lens with camera set to '1.5x mode', since you don't really need medium format quality...." been there, said that http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthrea...9&page=2&pp=20

15th September 2003	#6
jasonpgc Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 487	I agree that your idea of have a firmware to crop a image for a 35mm DSLR with a DX lens is technically possible. But if you were the CEO of Nikon, what makes you think anyone who own both ( $XXXXX ) 35mm DSLR and ( $XXXX ) Nikon APS DSLR would invest all his money on the DX range lenses, and let the 35mm DSLR's firmware cropped the picture? Naturally, I believe that this person would invest on the 35mm Nikon D series lenses, then let the APS DSLR do the normal cropping. In the REAL world, I believe that a Person who has Upgraded from a APS DSLR to a 35mm DSLR wanted to shoot at 35mm Full Frame. I think he would rather get a 14mm f/2.8D ED instead, if he need such wide angle. Most probably, he would find a way to sell off or trade in all his DX Lenses for 35mm Lenses. As such, why would Nikon bother to code it into their future 35mm DSLR firmware at all?

17th December 2004	#7
agape01 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Somewhere Out There Posts: 2,314	A super old thread, but it is worth commenting. After all, I was not around during the time of this thread. Overall, I would give Watcher a for giving a very logical POV. After all, everyone has got different POVs in regards to this issue. Overall, I do agree that there are only certain applicatiosn for DX lenses on DSLR cameras. The greatest disadvantage for 1.5X FLM sensors is shooting wide angle... that is why there is the 10.5mm Fisheye, 12-24, 17-55 and 18-70. As for the rest of the ranges like 17-35, 28-70 the rest can be used on future FF cameras. Case in point... I'm sure you guys would notice that the AFS 200 f/2 IF-ED lens is a full frame one? I have to admit that Nikon is real innovative by taking this kind of approach. They will be able to capture a larger market share in the camera market world wide. As for Canon, I am not sure whether are they seperating their cameras into 2 different markets. One for amateur use and the second one for the Pros. Most pros find the 1.3X FLM a workable range and are willing to compromise, but those who are willing to spend more than there is the 1DsII and the 1Ds. That said it just shows that the two companies have got two different approaches to selling their equipment. But ultimately, it is up to each individual on which POV they think is a better one. If I had known this right from the start and I will Watcher agape01 for not posting this article when he joined CS, I would most likely have chosen Nikon to be my choice for DSLRs.

17th December 2004	#8
Dennis Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 3,864	Bravo, that was exactly what I was thinking about and already realised on the D2X. The D2X used as a 6mp with fast speed is exectly usable with a DX lens concept. You do not have to throw away DX and in fact Nikon can next time manufacture super tele that is smaller for those who do not need high mp but speed.