Current Nikon Camera Naming Strategy

kanuck

Does anyone else disagree with the current Nikon camera naming strategy? I mean it is getting a bit out of hand I think with s, e, x, 1000, 100, 50, 10, etc. It must be impossible for a layman switching over to Nikon or picking up the hobby. I realize that Nikon is trying to maximize profits by extending the D line, but it seems kind of like amateur hour these days. Don't get me wrong they are releasing some exciting new products like the D4s, D810 and soon the D750 and D7200, but compared to Canon they have gone a bit overboard with all these different names. I know Sony, Olympus, Fuji and others have gone this same route and that Nikon has done it in the past with their film bodies. Any thoughts?

spraynpray

For anybody coming into photography right now it, I think it is pretty straightforward with the progression going entry level to top pro the way it does. They are unlikely to have to trouble themselves with the e or x variants (mainly old models) and it as seems resolution is up on all models, AA filters are off on all models and the 's' variants are just for the speedy Dx end ATM (due to less options with there only being one number to play with - I suppose they could have done a D4.1 instead of a D4s). In all honesty I can't see a significant difference between Nikon and Canon on this, and with the swap to Dx10,Dx20 or Dx100, Dx200 etc., I think their numbering system is pretty clear and will most likely outlast the DSLR format.

The question will be what are they going to do after that?

Bokeh_Hunter

I think Nikon's is the most straight forward naming strategy out of all of them. Italics I'm using as place holders that would line up.

•Single digit - top end
D-x("blank"s,x) = Photojournalist/sports/top line (S=speed/sports low iso, X=resolution.)

•Triple digit - FX
D-8xx = High advanced/high resolution/high build quality
D-7xx = Advanced amateur/Normal resolution/high build quality
D-6xx = Consumer full frame entry level
D-5xx = Placeholder Consumer full frame entry level
D-4xx = Placeholder Consumer full frame entry level? I think this name will be abandoned

•Quad digit - DX
D-8xxx/9xxx = If it ever comes open to high advanced Dx.
D-7xxx = Advanced amateur/high build quality
D-5xxx = Consumer Mid level
D-3xxx = Consumer Entry level

Two digit has been used and abandoned as has the D100,200,300. Outside of that, (which all of those bodies are over 6 years old) I don't find it confusing.

Nikon had to re-set the naming and did with the 4-digit DX bodies. If you think about it, they only released 6 major film bodies in 50 years! Digital they are on their 4th in less than 15. I don't think in 1999 they were assuming what the current speed of releases would be like 15 years later. With the current naming system, they have 12 years left of unused DX numbers (min with not using the last two digits), and at least 15 years of the FX line. And they also have 24 letters left to use Past that, (that would be like 360 years) who knows what everything will be like

What they really should have done was make the D600 series the D500 series than the numbers would have better aligned. Honestly I don't get Canon's consumer naming at all - XTixiixi WTH! The "Mk" is a good inner gen marker though.

sevencrossing

Parke1953

That was great. Still laughing. )

kanuck

hahaha that video is definitely classic! He barely made it a crossed the table though, but it added suspense that way B-)

I wonder what Nikon is planning to do when their D line really does exhaust itself. Perhaps a new sensor will make way for a new lineup and product numbering scheme. Nikon already has denied getting into medium format sized sensors and I don't think releasing a full frame A7 type body would force them to change their current naming lineup. An all new sensor concept would have to do it I guess. However. we will have the D5 in a few more years so it could take decades as long as Nikon stays in the digital game. They cranked out F bodies for nearly 50 years right?

manhattanboy

a bit out of hand I think with s, e, x,

Those Japanese guys can get a bit out of control when it comes to s,e,x

NSXTypeR

Certainly beats Rebel T3i, Rebel SL1, 70D, 7D, 5D MkIII, 6D and whatever the heck they have on the high end.

Is the 6D better than the 5D?

kanuck

Which brings us back to the video clip up above. I wonder who really is naming these models and do they have marketing backgrounds I wonder? This question is directed at Camera manufacturers in general.

WestEndBoy

It does strike me as odd that they would name the upcoming camera a D750 instead of a D710. They might be creating an awkward situation when they need to upgrade the D790. Of course, they can delay by using D750s, D760s etc....

Postman

With the odd exception of the soon to be D750 (rather than D710), I think they've actually tidied it up quiet nicely, assume the much drempt about D400, should it materialise, is actually a D9000, or D9300 - it's by far easier to work out what's what versus Canon for example.

For the record, I believe the D9300 will come about, given Canon's soon to be 7D2.

I think Nikon actually ballsed up somewhat early doors - 2003ish. What should of been the D2 came out as a D2h, and what should of, could of or may have been a D10 came out as the D70 in '04 - it all got messy from there on in. I think Canon forced Nikon to panic by releasing a D10 themselves, before reverting to number letter format, rather than letter number format.

If they had planned ahead, the D2h would have been the D2, the D100 would have been the D9000 and the D40 would have been the D3000. It would of been plain sailing from there. Perhaps the D700 would have then been launched as a D100, or D800.

Yes, I have given this an unhealthy amount of thought.

Msmoto

@sevencrossing

Yup….

PB_PM

I think Nikon actually ballsed up somewhat early doors - 2003ish. What should of been the D2 came out as a D2h, and what should of, could of or may have been a D10 came out as the D70 in '04 - it all got messy from there on in. I think Canon forced Nikon to panic by releasing a D10 themselves, before reverting to number letter format, rather than letter number format.

If they had planned ahead, the D2h would have been the D2, the D100 would have been the D9000 and the D40 would have been the D3000. It would of been plain sailing from there. Perhaps the D700 would have then been launched as a D100, or D800.

Yes, I have given this an unhealthy amount of thought.

Yes I think Canon using the Dxx name for a few early mid range EOS products threw off Nikon's naming scheme. Had Canon not done so I'm sure the D70 would have been the D10. That said Nikon still used the name D60 (2008), even though there was a Canon EOS D60 (2002).

The D100 was the first "semi-pro" Nikon body, and was a logical name for that product. It fit into the price point of the F100, although it was based off of a hybrid of the F80 and F100. Not to mention that at the time, nobody knew how fast these cameras would be iterated. I think Nikon's marketing department at the time was still thinking in terms of film cameras, which had a life cycle of 5-10 years, not 1-3 years as in the digital era.

kanuck

Yes the D100 started it all hence the D for digital and I guess the Nikon F was from their F-mount design. Seeing as how digital is clearly here to stay I don't think the D will ever be dropped. They might add another letter perhaps? The Nikon DD lol )

PB_PM

The D1 was the first Nikon DSLR, not the D100. Very logical really. )

kanuck

Ah yes of course you are right! Back when things were much more simpler ^^