D300s Successor-D400, what and when

sevencrossing

guys - what You really need it to be a DX flagship, what's wrong with it apart from 6fps... and is this really such a tragedy for wildlifers?

What's wrong ? it's not called a D400 That whats wrong , apart from that; I cant see what there is to fault with it
The big advantage of Dx is bangs for your bucks and yet again like the D7000; The D7100 give a lot of bangs for not too many bucks

Msmoto

@ adamz

OK, I cannot really say about the wildlife's...I just do not shoot this that much. In motorsports, having 9-10 FPS can make a big difference as a biker, car, or whatever can be moving 60-180 mph (27-80 meters/sec) and to capture the incidents, 10 FPS gives one almost twice the potential...a car may flip at a rate of two-three rpm.

So, for someone intent on competing with the best....

I am still waiting. The D400 might get here, but one point is the price of the new D7100 is very attractive.

donaldejose

Yes, it is referred to as "the new DX flagship" and it is just that, until a D400 surfaces (with what additional features other than pro controls and more rugged build?).

I do think birders may like that new 1.3 DX crop in which the AF points fill the frame. A 70-200 becomes a 140-400 and a 300mm becomes a 600mm. While we could always crop ourselves with other sensors we now have 15.4mp in the cropped image.

Kuv

What's wrong with it is the body size and material. I would also like a CF slot and built-in WiFi.

ricochet

guys - what You really need it to be a DX flagship, what's wrong with it apart from 6fps... and is this really such a tragedy for wildlifers?

What's wrong ? it's not called a D400 That whats wrong , apart from that; I cant see what there is to fault with it
The big advantage of Dx is bangs for your bucks and yet again like the D7000; The D7100 give a lot of bangs for not too many bucks

I can't speak for all wildlife photographers, but for me, it does have some faults. I've been shooting a D300 with battery grip since 2007. I'm used to 8 fps. Slowing down to 6 is noticeable and frustrating. It appears the buffer is, like the D7000, inadequate. I wish the f8 focusing ability was at more than a single sensor. Look at the specs for the Canon 7D MKII, 10fps, 24 mp, 61 point autofocus, 5DIII build, do you think the D7100 can compete with that? The simple, obvious answer is no! If the D400 is not forthcoming, (as some of you seem to wish), is Nikon ready to hand the title of "Best crop sensor Camera" to Canon when the 7D MKII comes out this summer? If cost was the only consideration, wouldn't we all be shooting 3200's for our DX? People buy a top level DX for the features, not just to save a few bucks over purchasing a D600. The D7100 sounds like a great camera but when the D400 comes out in six months, many people will wish they'd kept their money in their pocket and waited for the camera they really wanted.

adamz

@kuv - seriously, You think there's a future for CF cards? there's really no speed difference between CF and SD and price wise the SD is more than twice cheaper

PB_PM

Why would people want CF card slots? Maybe because they have a bunch of high capacity CF cards, and don't see the need to buy new cards just to upgrade (or in this case downgrade to the D7100)?

Nikon Japan's website gives us hope. Translated it says "As a middle-class DX-format D-SLR." Not "Flagship" DX camera.

ricochet

The whole "flagship" designation is meaningless and always temporary. The D7100 is the top DX for now. That shall pass.

TaoTeJared

@kuv - seriously, You think there's a future for CF cards? there's really no speed difference between CF and SD and price wise the SD is more than twice cheaper

CF is still much faster, more robust and the next generation will be almost as fast as the XQD cards. As the file sizes get larger, the CF card size will be a plus as it has the designed "head room" to be able to handle them. SD has a limit due to it's design. (Granted we are years away from that and would have swapped out the cards by then.) Most of my experience with memory cards came from extreme industrial/commercial applications, and high end CF cards vs SD cards, there was no question, CF is hands down better.

Andrewz

I for one, am even more convinced we'll see a D400 this year. I really don't follow Canon at all, so I spent some time looking at the 7D and the speculation on the 7DII. The D7100 compares well against the 7D but the mark II probably not, and it just in a different category ( as many of you have already pointed out). Nikon will need to compete for that market sector and I think there's room for a Large semi-pro or full-pro DX camera at 2k point.

I don't think a D400 competes with a D600. If the D400 were to never arrive, I'd be seriously thinking about the D800. Hell I am still thinking about a D800 seriously!

sevencrossing

. If the D400 were to never arrive, I'd be seriously thinking about the D800. Hell I am still thinking about a D800 seriously!

This is exactly what Nikon is betting on and why we may never see a new Pro Dx camera

The good news is the D800 is a splendid camera, you will not be disappointed
wait a bit and you might see a D810 with a battery pack giving 8fps

PB_PM

This should bring an end to the debate on whether the D7100 is the D300s replacement. (A letter to a user on Dpreview from a Nikon Europe rep).

Ironheart

Heh, gotta love corporate double-speak. I love the way that Nikon Europe throws Nikon USA under the bus. I wonder what Japan thinks of all this :-)

PB_PM

The marketing department at Nikon USA is being fired by Nikon Japan as we type...

mk2pop

sounds good to me

adamz

the letter brings some hope

@tao - apart from extreme pro I had couple extreme cards in CF and SD format and after running some benchmarks I can't agree with You that the CF is faster. also can't agree with robustness, as You can submerge SD card and it will work w/o problems which can't be spoken about CF. though I agree with U about the madimum capacity as obviously there's much more space in CF.

scoobysmak

. If the D400 were to never arrive, I'd be seriously thinking about the D800. Hell I am still thinking about a D800 seriously!

This is exactly what Nikon is betting on and why we may never see a new Pro Dx camera

The good news is the D800 is a splendid camera, you will not be disappointed
wait a bit and you might see a D810 with a battery pack giving 8fps

If they made a D800 battery grip that gets 8fps or created a D800s that did that, I admit I probably would bite the bullet. Unless the D400 had 20 MP DX (or more) and the ISO capibilites blew the D800 out of the water I wouldn't see a reason for me to get a D400 Vs the D800.

donaldejose

I think we should consider the D7100 to be the latest body in this series: D70, D80, D90 and D7000. In 2004 Nikon introduced the 6 mp D70 for $999. It has 5 autofocus areas and native ISO from 200 to 1,600. The LCD was 1.8 inches with 130,000 pixels. The DxOMark sensor score was 50. Nine years later and for just $100 more we get a D7100 with 4 times more pixels, one stop lower and two stops higher native ISO for a three stop broader ISO range, 51 auto focus points, a 3.2 inch LCD with 1,300,000 pixels, DxOMark sensor score greater than 84 (most likely and remember the D3 DxOMark score was only 81) and HD video! Remarkable. Yet, it clearly does not have the "pro-control layout" of the D300, D300s, D700, D800, D3, D3s, D3x or D4. I think we will see a D400 this year with even higher specifications. Higher where? Buffer size, fps, ISO? It will be a DX body for photojournalists and sports shooters who don't have the budget for a D4.

sevencrossing

There seems to one thing missing for a photojournalists and sports shooters, who don't have the budget but wanting "professional" equipment and that is, a professional midrange DX zoom
something like a 18 -105 vr f 2.8 would do the trick

in the mean time they are better off with S/H D3s

spraynpray

I was just thinking exactly the same thing seven - the 18-105VR is a very good lens, but a pro 2.8 or minimum F4 VRIII version would be perfect.

C'mon Nikon - give some support to your DX customers!

donaldejose

Sure. Nikon should produce a "Holy Trinity" set of professional lenses in DX.

As it stands now you can use this one. 17-55 f2.8 DX. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1755.htm http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Camera-Lens-Database/Nikon/AF-S-DX-Zoom-Nikkor-17-55mm-f-2.8G-IF-ED/(camera)/680/(cameraname)/Nikon-D7000 http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/129/cat/13

You could also try the old 35-70 f2.6D lens. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/3570.htm While it is an old 35mm film era lens it is sharp and lightweight compared to the newer generation 28-70 or 24-70 f2.8 zooms so its size fits better with a DX body.

Perhaps Nikon will produce a D400 capable of very sharp photos and then turn their attention to a DX pro line of zooms to support it. After the D7100 is here a good thread topic would be finding good lenses which can get the most out of that sensor.

D300user

consider this:
IF Nikon would have merged the D7000 line and the D300 line they wouldn't have named it a D7100 right? They would have called it something like D8000 to clearly distinguish it from a D7000 and from a D300. The 7100 is clearly just an iteration.

And IF Nikon intended the D7100 as a flagship DX then the D300s would have been discontinued no? Or will be discontinued in the coming few weeks/months for inventory to clear. Why keep another product line open?

The D300s is stil listed as a PRO type body on all Nikon websites. D7100 is not. The only thing PRO about the D7100 is the AF and perhaps the sensor. But both are just logical iterations of a D7000. What would we have said if a D7100 would have had the same 39 point AF or a <20MP sensor? Indeed: BS! Hence the need for something better that some of us currently look at as 'PRO'. I for one, as does Thom, still think we'll see a D400 around August/September. It's also kind of strange that there was no lens announcement together with the D7100 (usually something this 'big' gets a lens announcement to with it right?).

Just my 2 cents.

PB_PM

The D300s was discontinued last summer/fall IIRC, since bodies with the EN-EL3e can no longer be sold in Japan (new battery laws from 2011). Whatever bodies are out there now and just store shelf stock.

D300user

The D300s was discontinued last summer/fall IIRC, since bodies with the EN-EL3e can no longer be sold in Japan (new battery laws from 2011). Whatever bodies are out there now and just store shelf stock.

Good point! Scratch that argument then . The D3000 is also still present on the Nikon website.. weird though.

spraynpray

@Donald: yeah, the 17-55 is good, but perfect would be the 16-85 done as an f2.8 or f4 with VRIII. 16 is a really good focal length for wide landscapes (and I do have my Tokina 11-16 f2.8). I never seem to use my 18-105 at 19-22, it is always down hard on 18 then 22 and up. Maybe I will get the 16-85 as it is but all the tests I read say it is at best no better than the 18-105.