The Future of Nikon DSLRs

Nikon digital SLRs fall into four broad categories

• Pro, such as the D3. Clearly aimed at pros, big, heavy, and emphasis on image quality
• Prosumer, such as the D200 and D300. Suitable for some pros, well built, very good image quality
• Advanced amateur, Currently the aging D80. Not as well built, fewer features than the prosumer, but pretty much the same image quality
• Amateur, D40 and D60. Entry level to slightly better, aimed at people who want to take good pictures without an excessive amount of effort.

Here is where I see it going. In general, I expect the number of megapixels on digital cameras to creep up, regardless of the segment. Hopefully sensors and image processing will increase at the same rate so we will have a net win.

On the pro level I think Nikon will stick with full-frame (FF or as Nikon calls it, FX). The increase in image quality is too much to give up on. I think they will have two cameras, one lower megapixel, with large photos-sites, fast, great image quality, great for sports and low light. This is where the D3 is now. The second camera will be an answer to Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III, Full frame, smaller photosites, high resolution. Aimed at pros who aren't doing low light or action. Nikon doesn't currently have a camera in this segment, but I would expect them to have one soon, probably using a sensor based on the new Sony 25mp sensor. Prices will be $3,000-6,000 on introduction.

Prosumer cameras are aimed at less demanding pros, as backup cameras for pros and people who have photography as a serious hobby. the Dx00 cameras fill this segment, the D300 being the current one. I think Nikon will stick with the APS-C (1.5 crop factor) sensors here. There is a huge cost advantage that isn't going away. Since the sensor size is fixed, you don't get the Moore's law curve bringing prices down. Build quality won't be up to the pro line, but will be very good, with metal chassis and weather sealing. Great for the amateur who takes the camera out regardless of the weather. Prices will be $1,600-1,800 on introduction.

Advanced Amateur. Still for people who really like photography. lesser build than the Prosumer cameras, fewer features, but still more than most people use, image quality on par with the prosumer cameras, but about a year behind. The D80 currently is in this segment, but will probably be refreshed with a D90 that has the same sensor as the D300 by the end of the year.

Amateur. People who want good quality pictures, but don't want to spend a huge amount of time learning photography and fiddling with settings. People who are stepping up from a point and shoot, or people who are on a limited budget. Currently both the D40 and D60 are in this segment, but it is a big segment with diverse needs Nikon could introduce even more cameras here, in the film days they had 5 or 6 on the market with slightly different feature sets (but the same image quality, since it was film). I expect a camera at a cheaper price point than the D40 (either a D30, or continued price reductions on the D40).

Sensors in the next few years.

Sensors are a specialty product, expensive to design, a limited useful lifetime,and relatively low volume, Thus, outside the pro line, Nikon will leverage the same sensor across many products. Cameras with price differences of hundreds of dollars will have the same sensor. Remember, in the film days, all cameras used the same sensor (the film), so the low-end $250 camera could take the same quality pictures as the $1000+ pro body, the only difference was features. It worked then, no reason to think it wouldn't work now. At any given time I expect the lineup to look roughly like this:

• Pro: FX high megapixel sensor
• Pro: FX low megapixel sensor
• Prosumer: high MP DX
• Advanced Amateur: same sensor as prosumer
• Amateur: at the high end, same sensor as prosumer, at the low end, an older generation, slightly lower MP sensor

You could easily have 5 different bodies targeted at different market segments and only have two sensors different sensors. Of course, since Nikon doesn't refresh all the cameras at the same time, you will see the new sensors come in on the prosumer line and trickle down over the course of a year or two to the other segments.

Megapixel predictions

As the number of megapixels goes up, they noise goes up (given a similar generation process, new generations often are slightly better for the same number of megapixels). The value of each pixel goes down too. going from 6MP to 8MP is a one third increase in the number of pixels, but the increase in the printable image you get goes up much more slowly. A 6MP camera is 3000x2000 pixels, at 300dpi you can print it at a size of 10x6.7 inches, an 8MP camera is 3456x2304, at 300dpi you get 11.5x7.7 inches. That's it, only an inch and a half wider. As the megapixels go up, the increase is even less impressive. A 12MP camera has 4288x2848 pixels, the Pentax K20 has 14.5 MP which gives it a resolution of 4672x3104. That is only 384 pixels wider, or about an inch and a quarter at 300dpi.

This won't stop them from slowly increasing the MP and people getting excited. I expect on the DX front that they will increase the number of MP by 2 or 2.5 MP every other year.

Model number predictions.

Nikon is running out of model numbers. for the pro line, they have DN where N is a single digit, at the D3 they still have a ways to go. The Prosumer line is DN00, again where N is a single number. At D300 they still have room there too. At the Advanced Amateur and Amateur level they are really in trouble. They have already used the D40, D50, D60, D70, and D80. Most people expect the D90 to come out this year. The D50, and D70 aren't available anymore, and the D80 is on the way out. They could come out with a new low-end model and call it the D30, but they really need to either change their numbering scheme or stop giving them a new number every time they bring out a new camera.

Lean Cuisine: Deep Dish margharita pizza

Part of Stouffer's Lean Cusine casual eating classics menu. A single serving pizza with chunky tomatoes, garlic, basil, and tomato sauce with extra virgin olive oil. Pizza usually has lots of cheese, thus, lots of fat. Doing pizza the low-fat way is tough. If you look at the picture on the box, the pizza shows lots of cheese. That is deceptive, there isn't very much cheese on the pizza, and what cheese there was, wasn't evenly spread out. There is lots of crust (it is deep dish afterall) a reasonable amount of tomato sauce and diced tomatos, aand a little bit of cheese. The box said to put it in for 2:30 to 3:30, but for an extra crispy crust, put it in for an extra 30 seconds. I like crispy, so I cooked it for 3:30, which ended up drying the crust out (but it was crispy) I probably should have cooked it a little less. (lesson learned). The pizza itself was decent, you wouldn't confuse it for pizza parlor pizza, or even pizza delivery, it still has lots of calories for what you get, with a 25% coming from fat. If you really crave pizza, this could fit the bill, but I wouldn't make it part of my regular menu. (320 calories; 9g fat; 48g carbs; 14g protein; 23% sodium; 6 weight watchers points)

Mauna Loa: Maui Onion and Garlic Macadamias

Macadamia nuts coated with a garlic and onion seasoning. I like macadamia nuts, however, they have a fairly subtle flavor that is easily overwhelmed by whatever they are paired with. Garlic and onion can both be strong, so I was worried that I wouldn't be able to taste the Macadamias at all. Suprisingly, they the garlic and onion doesn't quite overwhelm the macadamia taste. I can't decide if I like them or not, but I do know that I like the unflavored macadamia nuts better. If you really like garlic or just want to try something unique, then give these a shot, otherwise, I would stay with normal macadamia nuts. (200 calories; 4g carb; 2g protein; 7% sodium; per quarter cup serving [28g])

So that's how they got bent

moar funny pictures

Lean Cuisine: Grilled chicken caesar

One of Stouffer's Lean Cuisine cafe classics bowl. Grilled white meat chicken with broccoli and garlic flavored radiatore pasta in a parmesan-ceasar sauce. Different than most because it comes in a bowl, not a tray, but it cooks like any other tv dinner. The chicken is good, tender and very chickeny. The sauce complements but doesn't overpower it. The pasta was right to the edge of overcooked, but wasn't. Again, the light sauce goes well with it. Broccoli came out crisp, not overdone or soggy. All the part came together well. Overall, a nice microwave meal. (240 calories; 7g fat; 25g carbs; 18g protein 29% sodium)

Glad Corn: A-Maizing Corn Snack (original flavor)

It isn't often you find a snack that is simple (only three ingredients) but still has a unique and interesting flavor. It is even less often that you like that flavor. This snack fits the bill. It is partially popped corn kernels that have been cooked in oil. That isn't the most flattering description, I know, but it really tastes good. I'm not the type of person that picks through the unpopped popcorn at the bottom of the bowl either. I also don't care for corn-nuts. Each bite is salty and crunchy without being too hard. The only real downside is the corn shells can get caught in your teeth, much like popcorn. Glad Corn makes other flaovors too but I haven't tried them yet. (140 calories; 6g fat; 2g protein; 19g carbs; 7% sodium; per 1 ounce [one third cup] serving)

Snyder's: Jalapeno Cheddar Pretzel Sandwiches

Thin cicular pumpernickel pretzels with Jalapeno Cheddar cheese spread, By Snyder's of Hanover. The pretzels are great, the thin strands of pretzel are crisp, without being hard. the pumpernickel is a nice change from your normal pretzel. If they sold these pretzel wafers on their own I would probably get them. The cheese spread is about hte same as what you get in any snack, nothing distinctive, but pretyt good. There is just the slightest bit if spiciness, I would prefer more. Overall, good, because of the pretzel, it would be better if it were a bit spicier. (140 calories; 7g fat; 17g carbs; 3g protien; 8% sodium; per 1 ounce, or eight sandwiches)

Eating Right: Chicken with creamy mushroom sauce

Eating Right is Safeway's house brand of healthier food. This microwave meal has white meat chicken and pasta with a creamy mushroom sauce and bits of red bell pepper mixed in. There wasn't enough chicken in the dish, and although it had a good flavor, I found it every so slightly tough. The noodles game out good, not overcooked or stuck together. The sauce was a bit thin and didn't have much flavor and the mushrooms tasted like standard canned mushrooms. Mix all this together and you get a bland and forgettable entree, though not one with any glaring problems. Not a tv dinner I would get again. (290 calories; 7g fat; 36g carbs; 21g protein; 18% sodium; 6 weight watchers points)

Smart Ones: Angel Hair marinara

One of Weight Watcher's Smart Ones "classic favorites" microwave meals. Lots of thin angel hair pasta with tomato sauce (or as they call it delicious marinara sauce, emphasis theirs) with spinach and yellow and green zucchini. Cooking went smoothly, you have to stir it part way through. The chunks of squash are good-sized and athough more would be nice, there was a minimally sufficient number of them. As is often the case with tv dinners, the squash was overcooked. Not totally mushy, but nowhere near crisp. There is lots of pasta, it is nice and thin, and didn't come out overcooked or hopelessly stuck together. The tomato sauce was good, it had good tomato flavor and wasn't acidic tasting like you sometimes find. Overall the separate elements went well together and the dish was better than just the sum of its parts. It only has 4 weight watchers points which is suprising given the amount of pasta it has in it. (230 calories; 4g fat; 40g carbs; 9g protein; 27% sodium; 4 weight watchers points)

Diet Pepsi Jazz: Caramel Cream

I don't really care for diet sodas, however, I don't care for the the empty calories of regular soda, so I am willing to try diets in hope that I find ones that taste good and don't have an aftertaste. My first drink of Diet Pepsi Caramel Cream left me with two impressions 1: its pepsi; 2: with a different aftertaste. The caramel flavor doesn't really come through as you are drinking it, but afterwards, you can taste it. It is very light and not unplesant. The good part is that it covers up the usual diet drink taste. I can't say that I am a huge fan of it, but given the choice between regular diet pepsi and this flavor, I would choose this one every time. (0 calories; 0g fat; 0g carbs; 0g protein; 2% sodium)