D1000 - Anyone interested?

brownie314

I saw a rumor about a D1000 - a body similar to the Canon SL1. It popped up in the main blog. Not much talk anywhere about it. The blog post was worded like the D1000 was not even a rumor - like Nikon had pretty much confirmed that it was coming. So 2 questions:
1. Does anyone have a feel if the D1000 is going to happen.
2. Is anyone else besides me really interested in a smaller bodied dslr with potentially the new 24mp sensor.

If it is similar in size to the SL1 - I would be very interested. Canon has that sweet 40mm f/2.8 pancake to put on the SL1 that makes the whole package really small and good looking. Hope Nikon does the same.

kyoshinikon

I've wanted a small DSLR for funsies. Id buy one if they made it... The possibility of it actually happening is slim. Nikon doesnt care much about their dx lineup. While my interests lie in the pro bodies I am interested in this to use as a "fun camera"

PB_PM

I don't know about a new D1000, but I wouldn't be surprised if the D3xxx line of cameras saw a body shrink.

TaoTeJared

I have not seen anything but people's desires. I seriously doubt that anyone knows anything about one. As a pure guess, or prediction it probably wouldn't be a bad one. Name would be wrong, much more likely a D2000.

Many have made assumptions on a news release from Nikon that they were going to focus on consumer higher end (D3200, P7800, 1 system). A bunch of people have read into the comments and say Nikon is going to release "(insert wish name system here)" system with "(insert more dreams here)" along with "(insert the dreams from an acid trip here)" and all for cheaper than any other system they have released to date.

5 systems that Nikon has not delivered on that people have been pining over or other companies have created that Nikon has yet to match:
D400 - pro DX (Canon hasn't released theirs yet - Pentax just upgraded theirs)
Mini DX Dslr (Canon's)
DX Mirrorless system (Canon, Sony)
FX mirrorless system or high end compact with FX (Sony)
Retro styled DX or FX system (Every single company but Canon and Nikon)

JakesGT

I think a smaller body camera would be loved by moms, and that's it. I'm built like a typical guy and hated that my hand hung off the bottom of my D3100, and I wasn't completely happy with my D7100 until I got a grip the other day, so now I can comfortably hold it. But I wouldn't be surprised if nikon added a small bodied dslr just to compete with canon

NSXTypeR

I don't know, if you shrink a body way too small it becomes a little unwieldy. Plus, Nikon doesn't really have small lenses. It makes no sense.

Maybe they'll make a new pancake lens just for it?

A D3100 is plenty small enough for me.

shawnino

Not bagging on the D3x00 series at all, but when I'm helping friends leave "Professional" Mode and showing them how to play with settings, my hands are so big that I'm pretty clumsy with those bodies. Furthermore my left hand leaves much to be desired. I can't imagine I'd be able to work a smaller full-fledged DSLR.

brownie314

I think most of you are thinking of how you can use this camera as a pro, or advanced amateur (like me). You can't think of it that way. You have to think of it more like competition for the Fuji, Oly/Pani, Sony mirrorless. Those bodies are very small, but people seem to like them. I have a D7000 if I want lots of external controls (which I do most of the time). But I would like a smaller body to carry around when the occasion is more social and less photography intense - but you still has stellar image quality.

So, back to the question - will it happen?

Yes, Nikon has some gaps to fill, but since Canon has already done this, it seems like Nikon could follow.

TaoTeJared

You have to think of it more like competition for the Fuji, Oly/Pani, Sony mirrorless. Those bodies are very small, but people seem to like them.

A body like that is not in competition with Fuji, Oly/pani, or sony - just Canon. You mashed together different markets of shooters - most of which do not want a body like this at all. Being smaller, isn't a market, but just a subset of others.

Market: Retro: Fuji/Oly/Pani (gx7) - Retro is the competition along with being able to use manual focus lenses from companies like Leica. Their short flange distances is what makes this possible.

Market: Cheap & Pocketable: Oly/Pani/Sony - A small ILC that is much, much smaller and costs $400-600 with a lens or two.

Market: Small ILC DSLR style - full featured: Panasonic had this wrapped up (LUMIX GH3) and now Oly has entered it with the EM-1. Full featured ILC DSLR camera and way beyond a D3200 and would be better compared to a D7200 and 70D from Canon. It is a very nice system that many wildlife videographers carry. 2x crop sensor allows for more working distance and smaller lenses. Most prefer it's video encoding over Nikon, Canon, and Sony as well.

Market: Small DSLR: Canon created this market and not to much fanfare at all. D3200 sized body - Driving factor is price not size. I have never met anyone who buys this size of a DSLR because it is small but because it is $200 less and they can get 2 lenses with it.

The smaller DSLR like Canon's - I just don't see the desire for it or being successful. I have seen Canon's and any lens attached to it makes it really front heavy and awkward. It's not pocketable at all, and really not all that lighter. Stripped down in features as well. The D3200 is already tiny. I think a better play would be an all-in-one with a big lens and the DX sensor for the market it is targeted too.

brownie314

Well, I tend to disagree, sort of.

In all of those other "markets" you mentioned - not one camera can do anything that a dslr can not do. All of them have cameras that take fine pictures. All of them have cameras in the lineup that have plenty of external controls. The only thing that really differentiates mirrorless from dslr is size (leaving aside the internal workings). . We could argue till the cows come home about which is "cooler" looking, or more retro - I don't really care about that, as I don't see a camera as a fashion accessory. Lets face it, if Canon had excluded the hand grip from the SL1, it would not look very different from bodies in the "retro" camera market you mentioned. So we are only talking about slight external differences. Not really any performance differences.
On another note, I have handled many of the mirrorless cameras in the markets you mentioned. And have owned a few. I have also handled, on a few occasions the SL1. To me, the SL1 is a very snappy camera, much like its larger dslr cousins. It has very fast focus. It takes great images. There is really nothing not to like. If I wasn't already invested in Nikon lenses, I might own one. To me the SL1 was a much more practical photographers camera than the other mirrorless I have been exposed to. So I am hoping Nikon sees an opportunity to make a smaller dslr. I don't even care if they omit the hand grip and call it retro.

TaoTeJared

Actually the one thing that many of the camera's can do is fit in your pocket - that was one of the points you must have overlooked. Lenses are smaller, batteries are smaller, accessories are smaller, and then there are the lens lineup that the other brands have. They have full lens lineups with many high end glass for them. Nikon DX DSLRs are seriously lacking in primes or any high end glass and always have. Even the old 2.8s don't work since they are still screw driven. For that you have to go to FX and a 24mm 1.4 weighs probably more than one of these would.

You asked the question: If anyone thought it would happen. I'm just lining up what is selling and why. Be careful not to personalize the discussion. You may not care what a camera looks like, but for the general consumer market, they are for consumers. Consumers do care - It's about looks, price, and brand for most (single camera consumers) and about availability of lenses for others who have primary systems.

Most reviews I have read on the SL1 is that it is a much lesser of a camera than their TiXXX counterparts. If Nikon follows suit, I seriously doubt it would be any different. Every review I have read has been anything but glowing.

I'm not saying there wouldn't be one, with Canon & Nikon usually matching each other's line-up. No one is asking for it - that is the point I was making. A D3200 is already cheaper than the SL1 is as well. I don't get Canon's logic with it as well. It is not selling well, there are hoards of used ones on Amazon and Ebay for sale which is really rare for a new system that is barely 6 months old. That tells me people have decided for some reason it doesn't work for them.

I'm also pulling from reading for the last two years that Nikon maybe dropping/merging lines; D3200 & D5200 and D7000 and D300. The Nikon One system is catching hell for being overpriced as well (being priced at basically the D5200 price point.) I'm just not sure how a system like this really fits in.

DaveyJ

I agree with TaoTeJared. I did go out a buy a D3200 and three lens as I had recommended it so often and frankly I was so tired of checking so many days for a D400 and am most happy with my D7100. I recently had friends getting into a little more serious photography buy Nikon Coolpix lower end model as BestBuy pushed it in a bundle. Both thought their Apple iPhone 5 images were way better. Since these same two owned Nikon D90s and were VERY happy with them I think the lesson here is that you can cut corners just so much and this shirt pocket camera that MANY want (which personally leaves me cold) is being owned more and more by cell phones and NOT P&S cameras. Myself I believe that at a certain point making something SMALL is costly. We are not talking spy cams here, we are talking convenience.

The D3200 is about as small a camera as I want or need. I do not believe that Nikon said they were going to make a D1000. I have reread their statements many times. But it is easier to figure out what they may do on this Nikon Rumors website than to ask Nikon. When I D3300 camera come out I figure it will be amazing. I also believe the D5300 that just came out is maybe worth the money. But when I use the D3200 I am frequently running a chainsaw doing a precision cut in a building timber or some work task and I think the women I know want a camera they can take along when they are exercise walking. My style is much closer to bring mine to the workplace and put it to work. If Nikon had employes who dod that there would be much more up to date info but Nikon and Canon require and demand secrecy so there are websites like this one.

I conclude I hope Nikon doesn't do a D1000. I cannot see the purpose. But I sure as hell do not intend to take photos with a cell phone. Yet many of the total photos taken today are taken just that way.

kyoshinikon

When working I need my big beefy cameras and even my D7000 seems a tad small. However on a day off I dont use my cellphone or an p&s to take pictures but a DSLR (usually my D90). While I have heavily considered a D3200 I kind have wanted something a bit smaller. Why not a P7000? Interchangable Lenses are a must and I want a camera that can be used on the job as a "planted body" If I need more cameras....

NSXTypeR

Like I said earlier, Nikon's lens lineup does not offer small enough lenses to allow you to take advantage of a smaller body, even if it's drastically smaller.

The smallest lens that will AF would probably be the 35mm 1.8.

I don't see the need of such a camera- just get a Nikon 1.

Personally, I wouldn't buy a camera with changeable lenses if I wanted something small. I'd get a Sony RX100.

Photobug

I have no interest in a small DSLR body. There maybe some people moving up from a P&S (point & shoot) model looking for a small DSLR boy with kit lens. But as others have said, the D3200 and D3100 pricing is very low, don't see the logic for the D1000.

brownie314

Well, I have gotten a variety of responses to this post. It has been interesting. But I think my questions have been answered. I can tell that everyone felt the same way I did - they read the Nikon post that originated this D1000 rumor and were as puzzled as me that the post said a camera like the D1000 wasn't just a rumor - it was pretty much confirmed. I didn't read it that way either.
As far as if other people wanted this smaller body. Well many of you pointed out a few things I did not think of. Most important is that the D3200 is about the same size as the SL1. I had not thought of that. Good point.
I still think this could be an interesting body. But now a new rumor has popped up about a possible retro FM2-like full frame that is about to drop. So forget this stupid D1000 talk - that is much more interesting.

rbrylawski

I think most of us here think like photographers. We want the camera to be big enough to comfortably fit our hands. We want more control, not less, and we don't want to have to hunt through menus to change something as simple as White Balance. I bought my new D7100 yesterday. I bought it at Best Buy. It's completely different to hang around a store where people who don't think like photographers shop.

While I was playing with my D7100, my partner was playing with the Canon SL1. He's never wanted a DSLR. He says they're too big and he wouldn't want something like a D7100 hanging around his neck. But he loved the SL1. He thought it was the perfect size and he does understand a DSLR will for the most part, take a better picture than the average P&S. Oh, he does have a Panasonic ILC. I don't care for it all. He likes the size, but there are absolutely no controls outside of menu driven ones. It's really for putting in full Auto mode and taking pictures. Which it does nicely, but eliminates any human creativity infused in the process.

We may not think there's a market for itty bitty DSLR's, but in the hour I was there yesterday, they sold one and now I have a partner who wants one. So, I'd be happy to see Nikon come out with one. It would likely have better IQ and take better pictures than the Canon and if we became a two DSLR household, it would be nicer if we didn't have competing systems, requiring glass from both the Canon and Nikon camps.

kyoshinikon

If they paired it with a 45mm pancake (retooled the original too) it would work) I already own 5 dslrs so getting one as a workhorse would have no value to me... I like the idea of having a more than point and shoot with the basic control and user interface of a Dslr. Ill put a pro lens on my D90 for a funsie/family day.


I wonder if the response here would be different if Nikon announced a D400 with an expeed 4 processer a week ago. Mose of us here are serious photographers and we talk about serious gear. Gear that fulfills our passion/profession of getting the best photographs possible. Our dream tools are midrange up. How many coolpix threads do we have? Even myself would have a hard time not demanding that nikon makes a D400 or a decent D700 (performance over resolution) replacement (the latter which probably will never happen). I love the photograph and the tool so much that I always carry a dslr on me, even to personal things. It is part of my nature. I like the rumor of the "digital" F2 because if that is what it sounds like it will be it will be compact and have the manual control most of us demand.

With that said, sometimes I have become lost in the tool and often for no good reason. I like the idea of having a "toy" version of my workhorses for those "off" times so I dont lose the whole tool (like using a cellphone) but with a reduced presence of what I am accustomed to. It is not in my nature to let the camera determine what exposure to use or not be able to manually focus...

spraynpray

Why would they make a camera that is closer to the P&S cameras that are going out of fashion? Nah, I don't believe it myself. The Canon 1000 is a horrid thing IMHO so I really hope Nikon don't emulate it.

If they aren't going to do a D400, they definitely shouldn't do a D1000!

DaveyJ

As always I agree with spraynpray! I have noticed that when I am photographing with the D3200 (a wonderful camera!) that it actually is so small that the ability to see around the camera and its lack of weight is a handicap compared to say a D7100. Once a camera is up to your eye (I do not like focusing with a LCD screen held out way in front of my face) some size is actually needed for several reasons. P&S cameras are going out of fashion as cell phones are too close to their quality and size and can't make calls, etc. The Canon 1000 is awful in my opinion. The camera that Nikon needs to make to boost sales and image is a D400 or even a D7200 (which they certainly will at some point). When I used 8x10 and 4x5 I had the advantage of swings and tilts. Still I'd take a D800E today over the bigger formats. But I am by far the happiest with DX DSLR. But make it too small and it is
severely constrained. Nikon better have done their ergonomics and buyer markets before introducing a D1000 as it would look to me like a no go. Better by far to have a D3300! And I still expect the D5300 to win some respect. Not that I would buy one.

brownie314

2 things.
I don't understand all the hatred from people about the SL1. What surprises me the most is that is comes from people who love the D3200. Aren't they pretty close to the same size? I get it, it is Canon, but still, not a lot separating the SL1 and the D3200. If you hate the form factor of the SL1, then you should hate the form factor of the D3200.
Second, again about the size. I am hearing a lot of people say they would not like anything smaller than a D7xxx, or a D5xxx and extrapolating that to the rest of the consumer population. Well it seem pretty obvious to me that there is a spectrum of camera sizes that consumers are willing to buy and carry. Everything from tiny P&S all the way up to the largest pro body. I mean really, the central idea behind the whole mirrorless market is size reduction. So unless all of this size reduction pursuit by oly/pany/sony (and even canon and nikon to a lesser extent) is just companies trying to create a product that people don't want - then there really is a market for smaller, better image quality devices. The real question is what is the right size (or for a company what is the right mixture of sizes, and do we have a gap). So then the question for Nikon is - is there an opportunity between the 1 system and the D3200 for something that is smaller than the D3200, larger than the 1 system, but has the IQ of the DX line. Many of you think no. I am on the fence.

PB_PM

@brownie314 This is a Nikon forum, do you really expect users here to embrace a Canon camera???

Most of us wouldn't use a D3200 either, just so you know.

shawnino

The thread title was 'D1000 - anyone interested?'
The reply was pretty much 'no'.
The goalposts got moved to 'Do you think it'll happen?'
The reply was pretty much 'no'.

It's further been pointed out that the D3200 isn't much bigger than SL-1 (B&H implies difference is three ounces). I guess soccer moms might buy them. Personally I hope Nikon is spending R&D resources on other things than adding another bottom-end DX body.

If OP wants an SL-1, by all means OP should buy one. In these parts, most of us are hot to trot for other things (D4s/x, digital FM2, D400 with special WB to optimize taking images of unicorns, new glass...). It's not like Canon's bottom end (SL-1, that mirrorless thing that struggles to focus...) is blowing anyone away.

kyoshinikon

Nobody here cares about anything less than a D7100 and we all want a D400... nothing (except maybe a D4x) will sound good to anyone here until there is an answer for the D300s...

DaveyJ

Usually I find myself agreeing with kyoshinikon but I disagree about the D3200 in terms of Nobody. Most would have been better wording? Also in terms of the D400, which I along with you WANT, but if I would BUY it is another matter. You are COMPLETELY right about the needed update for the D300s. The D300 and D300s were two of the best cameras Nikon ever made. I own a D300 and would never sell it. But the 300s is a clear improvement just as the D400 would be way above the D300 and D300s with Expeed 4 processor and other logical improvements. Actually my ONLY reservation about the D400 is PRICE. So I guess we should ask for a rename of NR to the D400 or Bust site? There are many I know that are at that point on the whole D400 thing.

Lastly I better say to kyroshinikon that the D3200 ain't no D7100. However I have less and less money to spend on things I don't absolutely need and using a D3200 on a dangerous job site while my D7100 sits home in a safe does make sense to me. Still you are right the D3200 and all those lesser cameras are not D7100s and up.
Yet Nikon MUST pay attention to the vast majority of buyers who will not shell out D7100 body and lens money. The almost no posts to this thread may indeed be the answer to the D1000-Anyone interested? My guess here the decided answer is NO!!

TaoTeJared's post on this I think sums up the wisest path for Nikon to take here. Concentrate on D3200 and up refreshs and the D400 is the camera MOST in need of that step forward. Good Luck to You ALL!!

brownie314

Wow, turned nasty over the past few posts.
- Yes this is a Nikon forum, I am not asking you to embrace a Canon camera. Just compare.
- Most of you would not use a D3200 - that is why I posted it in the D3000/D3100/D3200 forum - if you are not interested in this line of product then leave
- Yes I know most of you want a D400 - has nothing to do with this thread. Go thread jack another thread (or every thread, as usual)

I know most of you don't mind carrying 15 lbs of camera equipment around most of the time - I am not talking to you people because you would obviously have no use for a smaller body. But some of us want a smaller camera so we don't look like idiots when we are out with family and friends that we do have and want a few good quality images.