A few more tidbits that I didn't manage to report late last night when I was quickly finalizing what I had written earlier in the week (yes, my D3s and 85mm story, below, were prewritten and waiting for Nikon's official release):
- The D3s video is improved over Nikon's previous iterations. In particular, the rolling shutter effect is minimized by about half. Unfortunately, all CMOS-based sensors are going to have some rolling shutter artifacts, but at least the D3s has minimized the worst of the problem.
- The video user has control of aperture and shutter speed, and the ability to select an Auto ISO barrier. Moreover, the exposure flickering we sometimes see on previous Nikon DSLR video implementations seems to have improved (these flickers were caused by using the ISO to change exposure).
- Ignore the US$5199 price. NikonUSA is being clever. Most dealers are still going to (unofficially) price the D3s at US$4999 to their users, is my guess. That's because of the psychological barrier that exists at US$4999. What's really going to happen is that dealers are probably going to eat that US$200 difference. Both Canon and Nikon seem to be getting more creative at finding ways to push the pricing pressure onto the dealer, not themselves.
- The 85mm DX has one of the most impressive MTF curves for any Nikkor lens. If you get a copy of this lens that isn't edge-to-edge sharp wide open, then QC is the problem, not the lens design.
Most of the response that has appeared on the net and in my In Box so far all centers around one of four things:
- The D3s itself. While the camera was expected, most of the comments seem to be expressing disappointment in the video (720P 24 fps). Few are seeing that the still side of the camera has had a number of small irritants removed and its image quality pushed a bit higher in a very critical ISO range (3200-12,800). I'll repeat: the still portions of the update were welcome, well considered, and responded to some (but not all) user frustrations with the original D3. And being able to capture 9 fps still raw files for almost five seconds before filling the buffer is a large improvement (more than double). Heavy D3 users really need to look at whether the new still functions make it worth trading in the old model for the new. If I were a sports photographer, I would.
- The f/3.5 on the 85mm DX. Some seem to think that maybe this is a "portrait" lens for DX. It isn't, and it wouldn't be even if it were f/2.8. We'd need to get to f/2 at least at that focal length to really be a portrait lens. Thus, I don't see the f/3.5 versus f/2.8 a real issue. It appears that Nikon was looking for a way to provide a modest cost, low weight/size, consumer macro lens with decent working distance. They succeeded. The only real issue I have is that I don't see 85mm as where the heaviest demand is for new DX lenses. I worry a bit that someone at Nikon tried using the 60mm Micro-Nikkor on their DX body, discovered that the working distance wasn't large enough, and decided to invent the solution for that problem. But a better solution for that target user would have been to simply create a new 55-200mm with a macro capability.
- The "missing" D700x. Missing is in quotes because it really isn't missing yet. It's only missing in context of the Canon 5DII and the Sony A850/A900. But in that same context, the D700 was missing for quite some time while the Canon 5D ate up the 12mp FX audience. Put another way, Nikon has been last to market, but with the best. The more important question is whether Nikon goes D700s or D700x in their eventual offering. A D700s would get the same benefits the D3s did (better low ISO capability), a D700x the same benefits as the D3x (more pixels). Nikon won't do both, so which they do will tell us a lot about Nikon's priorities.
- The missing lenses. Let me state this up front: we pretty much know there's new 24mm and 85mm primes in the pipeline. Heck, so far into the pipeline that the specs are well known. But for some reason we're suddenly getting US patents filed for lenses prior to announcement. I think that indicates that Nikon has slowed putting lenses into production (more on that in a bit). I know of at least three other lenses that should be in production, as well, but that we've had no announcement for. The funny thing is, the great companies keep product cycles cranking through recessions. Indeed, they often introduce entirely new product lines (consider Apple introducing the iPod during the previous recession). So a message to Nikon: if you've got the goods, deliver them. The users are waiting. A new 85mm AF-S VR would sell out the first production run, so what's with the caution? So far this year, Nikon has announced fewer lenses than expected (5 announced, 7+ expected). This leads us to believe one of three scenarios is active: (a) there's another announcement coming late this year; (b) Nikon has slowed launches, probably due to economy-based cautiousness; or (c) Nikon's glass production is once again constrained, and putting sold-out lenses back into production has pushed back the introduction of new lenses. I personally think it's mostly C with a bit of B thrown in, which means we may actually see A late in the year.