D300s Successor-D400, what and when

heartyfisher

@ MSmoto said "Mmm... when I read the link on DxOMArk it said:"
Sorry i dont understand what you are saying .. please clarify. Thanks

donaldejose

Yes, I read that link to DxOMark also. The D7000 did outperform the D700 on dynamic range. If you are shooting a low ISO and not enlarging the image much the D7000 will outperform the D700 IF what you are looking at in the image is mostly the dynamic range. However, if you are shooting at high ISO the D700 vastly outperformed the D7000. In total DxOMark judged, all things considered, the D700 superior to the D7000 mostly on the basis of that vastly better high ISO performance.

heartyfisher

Err .. all the pro fx lenses are available to dx users .. what are you talking about ? the wide end ? there are several dedicated wide dx lenses .. both from nikon and third party..

Additionally some/most "pro" lenses perform better on DX due to the "sweet spot" eg the 70-200 which has a slight vignetting on FX

Any given lens performance, will be the same, regardless if it on CX, DX, FX or 35 mm, film

Yes, Fx glass can be used on a DX camera but you be "wasting" about half the usable image produced by the fx lens

An FX image can be easily cropped to Dx in post , but you cannot go the other way round

Nikon Dx cameras have one very big advantages over Nikon FX Cameras ,: They cheaper

I feel Nikon are no longer interested in producinga cheap professional camera

Re "wasting" : I never understood that logic.. the image circle of many FX lenses far exceed that which is required for FF sensors.. so you are "wasting" them on FF cameras as well ! .. no you are not and similarly you are not "wasting" them on DX cameras or m43 or CX or canon cameras. (well maybe canon is the exception.. :-))

Also look at all the RED cameras.. with the various sensor sizes. no one considers it a waste there !

The final image is what you want when you press the shutter. who cares what lens it came through and the image circle of the lens as long as it delivers an image that you want on the sensor of your choice.

heartyfisher

Yes, I read that link to DxOMark also. The D7000 did outperform the D700 on dynamic range. If you are shooting a low ISO and not enlarging the image much the D7000 will outperform the D700 IF what you are looking at in the image is mostly the dynamic range. However, if you are shooting at high ISO the D700 vastly outperformed the D7000. In total DxOMark judged, all things considered, the D700 superior to the D7000 mostly on the basis of that vastly better high ISO performance.

Not according to the article.. they are rated the same in the "overall" section. and now we have the D5200 sensor which was rated higher than the D7000.

So i stand by my assertion that the D7000 should perform better than the D700 if using the optimal setting for both cameras.

sevencrossing

the image circle of many FX lenses far exceed that which is required for FF sensors

O come come
you cannot complaine about vinyetting in one breath then say that, in the next

PB_PM

Yes, I read that link to DxOMark also. The D7000 did outperform the D700 on dynamic range. If you are shooting a low ISO and not enlarging the image much the D7000 will outperform the D700 IF what you are looking at in the image is mostly the dynamic range. However, if you are shooting at high ISO the D700 vastly outperformed the D7000. In total DxOMark judged, all things considered, the D700 superior to the D7000 mostly on the basis of that vastly better high ISO performance.

Not according to the article.. they are rated the same in the "overall" section. and now we have the D5200 sensor which was rated higher than the D7000.

So i stand by my assertion that the D7000 should perform better than the D700 if using the optimal setting for both cameras.

Let's put it this way hearty. I had a D7000, and a D700 both at the same time at one point... Now which one do I still have?

donaldejose

heartyfisher: yes and no. The overall rating numbers were the same but the accompanying text said the editors thought the D700 was about one stop ahead in ISO and that was a very significant advantage. I think your better argument will be the D5200 v the D700 where the D5200 scored 84 compared to the D700 score of 80. I also think your argument is premature. How will the D7200 and the D400 sensors compare to the D700? And then finally how will the D400 compare to the D600. There will be lots of comparisons to make. If you are going to print 3 feet by 5 feet or view your files at 100% the additional size of that FX sensor most likely always will win. The best chance for DX to be equal to FX is when you are printing 8x10 and viewing the files at 40% or lower. Look at it this way, the DxOMark D700 ISO rating is 2303. The D600 ISO rating is 2980, the D800 ISO rating is 2853, the D4 ISO rating is 2965. IF, and this may be a big IF, Nikon can get the D400 ISO rating (according to the same DxOMark test) up to near 3000 using the same technology Nikon put into the recent FX bodies (or even better technology) you will be able to say DX equals FX up to a certain size print. That is probably all we can hope for for DX but for many people that will be enough to justify buying a D400.

spraynpray

"IF, and this may be a big IF, Nikon can get the D400 ISO rating (according to the same DxOMark test) up to near 3000 using the same technology Nikon put into the recent FX bodies (or even better technology) you will be able to say DX equals FX up to a certain size print. That is probably all we can hope for for DX but for many people that will be enough to justify buying a D400."

A perhaps more realistic expectation from you Donald, though still probably not likely.

donaldejose

I wouldn't even call it an expectation of a result. I just think Nikon will try to put a native ISO of 12,800 into the D400 but that is not to say the DxOMark will rate the sensor at ISO-3000. After all, the D4 goes to 12,800 but DxOMark doesn't rate it at 3,000 ISO on their metric as to what is acceptable noise. The key to a "mini-D4" concept is really all in the viewing size. Equal or indistinguishable at 12,800 ISO when viewed at 8x10 or 40% is the key metric for most uses to which I and many others would put the DX D400 and would make it a good second body for the D4 shooter. I think meeting that metric is possible today. Maybe I am wrong. Hopefully, we all will see soon what Nikon is able to do.

Marktim

Hey, we've got a FX Pro body with less $3000 street price. Around the same price as D300 was. How much may cost any Pro DX Body? $2500? If I'm a pro so additional $500 neglible compared to FX benefitss. And D800 set the resolution point where DX has no benefits in "reach".

PB_PM

The D300 was $1899 on release, not $3000. The last pro DX bodies were the D2Xs and D2HS, both cost around $5000 IIRC.

heartyfisher

Yes, I read that link to DxOMark also. The D7000 did outperform the D700 on dynamic range. If you are shooting a low ISO and not enlarging the image much the D7000 will outperform the D700 IF what you are looking at in the image is mostly the dynamic range. However, if you are shooting at high ISO the D700 vastly outperformed the D7000. In total DxOMark judged, all things considered, the D700 superior to the D7000 mostly on the basis of that vastly better high ISO performance.

Not according to the article.. they are rated the same in the "overall" section. and now we have the D5200 sensor which was rated higher than the D7000.

So i stand by my assertion that the D7000 should perform better than the D700 if using the optimal setting for both cameras.

Let's put it this way hearty. I had a D7000, and a D700 both at the same time at one point... Now which one do I still have?

Lol that is your choice, not mine. When I was looking for my d200 replacement I picked the d7000 vs the d700 as my options. And guess which one I have now? :-)

PB_PM

Just because you made the wrong choice doesn't mean I have to.

In any case, we are getting nowhere with this debate. I'm going to let sleeping dogs lye until there are some new D400 rumors.

TaoTeJared

How about some eye food - I pull PopPhoto test results mainly just to keep a realistic view of how close these cameras really are. Unfortunately (for comparison) they changed their Noise tests and how they publish them around the D700 so I don't have the D300/s or D700.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/taotejared/8427070133/in/photostream/lightbox/

I consider the D800 @ iso 12000 to be the same as the D300 @ iso 2800 on most subjects or a little bit over a 3-stop difference but with tons more detail which doesn't equate in these tests but means the files are 10x more usable. I never really saw any real difference (maybe 1 stop) between the D7000 or the D300 but resolution.

On PopPhoto's noise tests, I found I could drop (from their scores) about 1 level in post on noise. I.e. 2.6 would become 1.6.

heartyfisher

the image circle of many FX lenses far exceed that which is required for FF sensors

O come come
you cannot complaine about vinyetting in one breath then say that, in the next

) well i can see how one could say that! but of course I meant that, some lenses vignette, therefore on DX it is better while others have a very large Image circle thus you are "wasting" them on FX. :-B

heartyfisher

How about some eye food - I pull PopPhoto test results mainly just to keep a realistic view of how close these cameras really are. Unfortunately (for comparison) they changed their Noise tests and how they publish them around the D700 so I don't have the D300/s or D700.
...

Nice info thanks!

heartyfisher

Just because you made the wrong choice doesn't mean I have to.

In any case, we are getting nowhere with this debate. I'm going to let sleeping dogs lye until there are some new D400 rumors.

) Good one !

ricochet

I agree, let's turn the thread back to those who take great joy in telling us we don't need the D400 or that we won't get it.

BrainBeat

After finally reading all of this thread (it is a long slog) I see some interesting points.

As someone who has been using a D5000 as my primary but have used a few others more pro cameras recently I am looking for a more pro body to take my photography a bit more seriously. I had been looking at possibly getting a D7000 but as it also has been likely to receive an update soon I am playing the waiting game to see what its replacement was going to be like. I mostly had not considered that a replacement for the D300 was would likely be coming as the impression I get from this and other websites that the lines are likely to be merged into the 7x00 anyway. Reading many of you comment I see at least most of you are a bit more hopeful that there will be at least 2 new DX models that are more capable than the 5200.

For my needs I want to stay DX as while I do not have many lenses all that I do have are DX so I would sooner stay DX for now.

My with list for a new body be it 7x00 or 400 is
*A higher ISO range than my D5000 which I have found at time I have had to use 3200 + for jobs but had a heap on noise and poor colour. If I could get that or higher and a lot cleaner it would be very useful.
*A small MP increase would be nice as 12 is good but that bit more cropping room would be better. 24MP would be cool but I would be happy if it was still 16 or somewhere in between
*A AF motor. This is the biggest push for a new body as it has limited the lenses I can borrow and so often needed me to borrow a body too (which is not all bad but does mean I a shooting with a camera I do not know).
*A vari-angle screen would be a nice feature to not lose from the 5000 as I do occasionally use it to shoot over crowds or line up shots at unusual angles. It is also good from a screen protection standpoint as it is always facing the camera body when not in use. I doubt this will be a feature in either body but it will be something I will miss.
*improved Video good constant AF with motion tracking with both external mic and headphones ports. Improved audio level settings and display would be very useful too which I hear cannon does well now.
*Faster and longer burst than I have now. 6fps would be around what I would like but more is cool too and for that to be able to take at least 100 photos before slowing. That way we could get a solid 10+ seconds of action.
*Decent AF system with more point the better.

spraynpray

with the exception of the screen and video sound requiring a decent mic, a D7000 sounds like it would do the trick for you at an unbeatable price.

TaoTeJared

From the Front Blog:

In addition to the D7000 successor, which most likely will replace also the D300s

Read more on NikonRumors.com: http://nikonrumors.com/2013/02/04/more-nikon-d4x-rumors.aspx/#ixzz2K6blOgl8

I'm not fully convinced they would combine the two due to the separation of prices between models. Maybe they will start pushing the lower models up in price and features and allow the mirrorless (V-series) to fill the D3xxx price point as it is almost there anyway.

spraynpray

"I'm not fully convinced they would combine the two due to the separation of prices between models. Maybe they will start pushing the lower models up in price and features and allow the mirrorless (V-series) to fill the D3xxx price point as it is almost there anyway."

That's the same sort of marketing model they use on cars. Seems plausible.

TaoTeJared

It's the same marketing they, Canon & Sony has done for years. 20-33% price jump for each model you move up. The "odd-man-out" has been the mirrorless cameras that perform almost as good as the lowest DSLR models. I think they if they dumped the lowest end model, keep the 5xxx, 7xxx, and D400, move the prices down about 10% I think you would see many jump up models, something many always want to do.

sevencrossing

Could the D7000 and the D300s merge ? it is difficult to see how
the D7000 is aimed at the consumer and part time professional
the D300 was aimed at the full time professional
at lot of professions, full time and part time, now use FX and that is exactly what Nikon want
if as suggested, the the D7200 comes out next with 24 mp , I think we cant forget a D300s replacement

Msmoto

This is the "mutuel complaint group" for those of us who are gradually getting more frustrated with Nikon and the apparent lack of response to consumer complaints with other bodies and the lack of a D300s replacement. However, if we can just hang on a few more months, they just might come along with the very nice replacement....who knows?

Meanwhile, some good information is being presented.