I'm curious why SLR digital bodies cost so much.

It seems to me that I remember reading about CCDs not needing a mechanical shutter. This, and the reclamation of the space and components formerly needed to house the film and the film transport (motors, gears, spindles, etc.) would seem to leave a lot of space to put digital imaging stuff into. Also, the ability to ship it without a lens should make it somewhat cheaper as well.

I just don't see why a particular body might cost $1200 when set up for 35mm, but cost $5000 when set up for digital. Surely the CCD and LCD and the associated electronics don't cost THAT much? I mean, the 950 is going for well under $1000 now, and an F100 is about $1200. How come you can't just take the electronics from the 950, slap it into an F100 chassis, and sell it for $2000?

It would offer the ability to swap lenses, and people that shoot telephoto will love the focal range multiplier...

Anyways, if you could enlighten me, I'd appreciate it.

Chris

-- Chris Friesen (cfriesen@home.com), March 17, 2000

Answers

For the record-let me state that I do not work with the professional and advanced amateur SLR markets where the D1 is sold, so please understand that the best source for information on the D1 is either the Nikon web site-or from your local Nikon Professional Digital Products dealer (see the site for location of your nearest PDP dealer). I will answer to the best of my ability and the best of my knowledge.

Well some of the answers are right-some are partially right....

The sensor in a D1 is much larger than the 950 or 990-as are the pixel size. The cost of the CCD is a factor. The component cost of the D1 and labor costs are also a factor.

The D1 is built to a professional standard like the F5 and F100.

In order for the camera to meet the rugged usability requirements of a Nikon Professional, it must meet the highest quality standard.

The D1 is not a mass produced product-in the sense that an assembly line approach can be used. Nikon has the world's highest quality standard-and every step of the manufacture has to reflect that. That means your engineering costs, manufacturing costs, rejected parts costs, and quality control and the use of the most skilled workforce in the world (in terms of camera build) all add to a cost of US$5580 (List).

The D1 is a digital camera built and designed from the ground up-it is not a hybrid as suggested (like all competitive cameras). It shares some common components and acts and feels like a Nikon Professional camera-BECAUSE it IS a Nikon Professional camera. The one thing you will notice when you pick up a D1 (after using either an F100 or F5) is the "cameraness" of it. It is a camera first and foremost-and digital is it's recording method/medium.

This is not a consumer camera-it is designed for a working professional or an advanced amateur. A working professional either needs one or both of the obvious digital advantages-no film cost- instant images. For most professionals who spend an incredible amount on film and processing, digital lets them work more efficiently-and a camera like the D1 pays for itself in many instances many times over. The D1 is a sucess because it meets the needs of professionals.

-- Mike Rubin, Product Marketing Manager Nikon (web@imaging-resource.com), March 22, 2000.

The short answer is that the D1 uses a much higher quality CCD than consumer digicams, in addition to the CCD having to be much larger physically (and hence custom produced to professional standards) in the D1 so that SLR lenses' images can fit on it.

For more on this go to http://megamyth.homestead.com/

-- Jeff Lockwood (70505.336@compuserve.com), March 17, 2000.

Exactly. Not to mention if we're talking about the D1 in particular, the SLR body and internals are all custom. The D1 is not based upon any one existing SLR, instead it is a hybrid. Actually the D1 is priced amazingly low compare to other digital SLR's such as the Kodak Pro DCS series camers. The short of it is the camera manufacturers are putting a lot of money into R&D and custom low-production-volume cameras, someone has to pay for it all. :)

-- Mark P (digismurf@yahoo.com), March 19, 2000.

Sure, I realize that 1) the ccd in the D1 is much higher quality than most, 2) the chassis is custom, and 3) the D1 is much cheaper than the Kodak series.

My question is, however, how come you couldn't put a lower quality CCD (such as in the current consumer digicams) in a somewhat modified existing chassis, with electronics similar to an existing camera? Of course the image quality (in terms of noise and bit depth) wouldn't be as good as the D1 or DCS cameras, but I'm sure many people would love to have the picture quality of the 990 (for instance) but in a chassis that would take 35mm lenses. Even if the CCD isn't as big as the one in the D1, those people who shoot a lot of tele stuff would be overjoyed, as a (for instance) 2:1 or 3:1 focal range multiplier would mean that a 400mm or 600mm equivalent lens would be actually affordable.

Until this point all the bodies that can use removeable lenses have been aimed at the professional or moderately wealthy amateur. I think that a digital body aimed a bit lower (priced halfway between a 990 and a D1, for instance) could be very successful.

-- Chris Friesen (cfriesen@home.com), March 19, 2000.

Ah, I see. :)

The Fuji S1 is targeted for just such a price point. Canon's digital EOS is expected this fall to also compete for the same market share as the S1. Rumor has it Nikon may also have a new consumer oriented digital SLR ready for this fall to keep the Canon-Nikon rivalry alive and well...

-- Mark P (digismurf@yahoo.com), March 19, 2000.

Before you extole on the virtues of the D1, don't forget one major flaw the camera has: the exposed CCD. The point of this unit is to give you a higher quality digital image along with the flexibility of using existing lenses you might already have. With that said, if you remove the lens (depending on what you're shooting) you're exposing the CCD element, which means trouble. Get a speck of dust on that element, and it WILL show up on your image...so how do you get rid of it? Clean the CCD? Yes, but do you really want to risk scratching the piece of hardware?

Hey Nikon...wake up! For $5000 your engineers should have found a way to encase the CCD with optical glass just inside the lens mounting point to keep dust OUT.

Before you buy a digital with an SLR body, I'd ask to see if I could SEE the CCD inside the camera. If I can come close to touching it, the camera isn't worth its price tag, in my opinion.

-- Sue Bald (destiny3@ix.netcom.com), June 08, 2000.