Nikon 8400 - going to be an awesome camera

This is going to be an absolute killer camera for both land and underwater.

Nikkor ED lens.
24mm/F2.6 wide end - this is awesome.
Huge 2/3" 8MP CCD.
3cm Macro - Nikons are know for their great macro.
RAW, WB fine tuning and braketing.
640x480 30fps unlimited video.

This seems almost too good to be true.
Check out the rest of the features here....
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/nikoncp8400/page2.asp

Suppose we'll have to wait for a Sea & Sea housing. But I think it will be worth my money for this beast - won't need another upgrade for a long while hopefully.

Hi,
I fully agree with your statements about the Nikon 8400.
I am shopping for a digital camera and don't want to spend a fortune. At least not yet.
Wide angle is the way to go everywhere over and under water.

At Digideep they are saying that Ikelite is offerring a housing for the 8400.
The housing number is 6194.84 wich correspond to the DC-501 serie wich sells for 600 USD. Unfortunatly, there is no confirmation on the Ikelite home page.
If this is true, that combo would be my dream come true

http://www.digideep.com/product.php?pType=housing&mID=17&pID=1068

640x480 30fps unlimited video

Click to expand...

Dpreview says 60 seconds max.

Rick

Yep looks very nice........thought it looked very much like a C5050 from behind.

We are hoping to include iTTL in the housing, so have been waiting to see when this project will be complete............

ike:

We are hoping to include iTTL in the housing, so have been waiting to see when this project will be complete............

Click to expand...

Cool I'm desperate to get this camera underwater.
Ike do you know if the camera in housing will be able to use external wet lenses?
Is the housing coming standard with a dome?

the features maybe great but the sensor is the same as the other 8 mp cameras on the market, which is disappointting to say the least. the biggest problem is noise as this is the same sensor that the manufactures were using a year ago for 5mp cameras but cramming a additional 3mp pixels.

the other one is the optics with so many more pixels the problems of CA will be magnified, as this is a common problem with such small lenses with the size of these sensors that are smaller then your your pinky nail.


i just wish the marketing departments would stop running technology advacnes then the engineers who are designing these cameras, as more (bigger) isnt always better and all of the 8mp consumer cameras (of this generation) prove this. realistically how many pixels is enough for all of you all? because im not willing to scarifice image quality for more pixels, so thats why my last P&S will be no more then 5mp because thats the limit at this time for decent quality without needing a DSLR.

FWIW

Tooth

Scubatooth:

the features maybe great but the sensor is the same as the other 8 mp cameras on the market, which is disappointting to say the least. the biggest problem is noise as this is the same sensor that the manufactures were using a year ago for 5mp cameras but cramming a additional 3mp pixels. (edit)
i just wish the marketing departments would stop running technology advacnes then the engineers who are designing these cameras, as more (bigger) isnt always better and all of the 8mp consumer cameras (of this generation) prove this.

FWIW

Tooth

Click to expand...

I've been saying the same thing forever; but pixel envy drives the market unfortunately :~( !

dave

i know the feeling, and everytime i walk in to a major electronics place is just cringe everytime i hear some pimpily faced kid saying XYZ is better then ABC because it has more pixels. then the other one that gets me is that when they say a cameras files can make a A by Z size print which normally the number is like a 20x30 from a 5mp camera which is total BS because its not possible with out major PS work and then this is assuming the file was shot in high jpeg (or RAW) to start.

<rant off>

FWIW

tooth


its ok the technology is starting to hit the blocks that will slow down the tech and for the engineers to refine the current sensors to work better then making new ones

Scubatooth:

the features maybe great but the sensor is the same as the other 8 mp cameras on the market, which is disappointting to say the least. the biggest problem is noise as this is the same sensor that the manufactures were using a year ago for 5mp cameras but cramming a additional 3mp pixels.

the other one is the optics with so many more pixels the problems of CA will be magnified, as this is a common problem with such small lenses with the size of these sensors that are smaller then your your pinky nail.


i just wish the marketing departments would stop running technology advacnes then the engineers who are designing these cameras, as more (bigger) isnt always better and all of the 8mp consumer cameras (of this generation) prove this. realistically how many pixels is enough for all of you all? because im not willing to scarifice image quality for more pixels, so thats why my last P&S will be no more then 5mp because thats the limit at this time for decent quality without needing a DSLR.

FWIW

Tooth

Click to expand...

I agree with you. It is optics which matter. I currently use a 3.2MP Canon A70. However unfortunatly companies want to sell next generation cameras. Most people are tricked into the MP count is all that matters. The same is true of computer processors (the reason AMD names there processors with reference to the intel counter part). Real world performance is what matters not high clock rates - similar to high MP counts.

However there is no other 24mm lenses avalible on digicams beside this one. I want a wider lens and most of the specs of the 8400 are exactly what I am looking for in a digicam. Also note that although this is the same sony 8MP being used in all other 8MP cameras, it is larger than the previous 5MP counter parts. The 8MP sensor is 2/3" and most 5MP are 1/1.8" . So the 5MP has a density of around 0.134 MP/mm and the 8MP has a density of 0.138 MP/mm.

My conclusion from this is that since chip density is similar, performance can be similar also. For the photos I have seen with this camera I think the results are pleasing. I don't mind noise that is uniform because it looks natural - random noise I guess is a problem. At high ISO my canon has shocking random noise so I don't use high ISO settings. Any consumer digicam is unfortunatly going to be limiting and there are tradeoffs - one of them is I can't afford a DSLR + Lenses + housing + etc!

Anyways I like you wish that more engineering efforts would go into improving the current systems before jamming more pixels on a sensor, but I don't run the market and am obviously a minority (like you). The masses dictate what we get - unfortunately that is high MP counts.