D300s Successor-D400, what and when

Msmoto

On Scott Kelby's video, I think the results may be a bit deceptive. The images are different and the conditions are not necesarily identical, speed of player may be different, and in my final opinion, the only way to compare the D4/80-400 combo with the D7100/80-400 combo is with a much more controlled shooting venue. Like in a studio. And, the question is whether to take the lens at a fixed focal length, mount on the D4 and then D7100 and compare the image created this way, or to compare the identical image which on the D7100 would be shot at a shorter focal length.

So, the important point from my perspective is to understand that Scott liked both the D7100 and the new 80-400 lens. And that is about all I could get from this review.

donaldejose

PB_PM: Because I had thought the differences which existed would have been more hidden by all that downsizing process and small display size. Msmoto also makes a good point in that the "identical" comparison photos really were susceptible to many differences. Some of the visual differences may be more due to the differences in the photos rather than to the differences in the sensors. When Imaging Resources publishes its D7100 photos, we will be able to view studio photos side by side and judge the differences. That may be a more accurate comparison.

PB_PM

@Msmoto You cannot make a true comparison between the D4 and D7100, because the framing is different, due to the crop factor. Regardless, the D4 had better be out performing the D7100, considering the price. If that wasn't the case, nobody would buy a D4. In other words, Nikon would be shooting themselves in the foot if they made a DX body that could match it.

Regardless the noise of the D7100 is far more apparent. There are signs of smudging as well.

In any case this is the D400 thread, not the D7100 vs D4, so I guess I'll drop this now, for the sake of staying on topic.

JJ_SO

...well it will take a while until D400 arrives, so let's keep entertained...

sevencrossing

Scott Kelby is replacing his D300s with the new D7100. He states it is the best DX camera Nikon has made.
.

Given that Scott Kelby seems to get Nikon Gear, to test, before it is released
he might have an inkling, if the a D400 is coming out soon
and if it was I don't think he would have replaced his D300s with a D7100
(just my though for the day )

Msmoto

@Seven... I certainly can see this logic.....or, he is boosting the new D7100 because he receives other "perks" from Nikon. And, by giving praise to the D7100, they sell more, then in a couple months he gets the D400 and just goes wild with praise.

I really think his evaluation of the new 80-400 was good in that he was using it and commenting on the use, but as to resolution, shooting moving targets is not exactly the way I would have done this. The various uncontrolled parameters set any conclusions up for criticism.

JJ_SO

Did he conclude that much? He was praising and seemed to be happy with what he could do. He also compared "incomparable" consumer with pro body, but to me it appeared a personal decision, like "for internet publication use a D7100 is enough" - that goes for a lot of cheaper models and smartphones as well. And he pointed out how close the results are. I really think he put so many other aspects neither into his "hands-on-review" nor mentioned them that I felt more entertained than informed. He reminded me a bit on this video sets, when somebody wants to sell better brushes for wall paints in supermarkets, but in a nice way.

PB_PM

@Seven... I certainly can see this logic.....or, he is boosting the new D7100 because he receives other "perks" from Nikon. And, by giving praise to the D7100, they sell more, then in a couple months he gets the D400 and just goes wild with praise.

I really think his evaluation of the new 80-400 was good in that he was using it and commenting on the use, but as to resolution, shooting moving targets is not exactly the way I would have done this. The various uncontrolled parameters set any conclusions up for criticism.

I think Kelby must be getting kickbacks, I recall him giving a similarly glowing review of the D5000 a few years ago...

spraynpray

The D5000 was a great camera at the time.

donaldejose

As the tests of the D7100 sensor come in what do they tell you about the likely sensor Nikon will put into the D400? I would expect Nikon to want to point to some ways in which the D400 sensor is better than the D7100 sensor and not just equal to it. If if they use the identical sensor they may be able to improve its performance by software changes. So what tweaks are almost certain, likely or possible?

1. No AA filter? I would think this is almost certain. Wouldn't using an AA filter in the D400 just reduce sharpness compared to the "lesser" D7100?

2. 24mp with much larger buffer to boost the fps? I would think quite likely. As long as you don't exceed the rate data can be read from the sensor adding cash and other memory should be cheap. Perhaps even the processor speed can be boosted. Does a high mp sensors ability to capture more detail trump any other aspects such that Nikon won't be producing lower mp sensors anymore (other than the D4)?

3. Native ISO of 12,800? I would think possible based upon the few ISO 6400 images I have seen. Might it be possible to make a small increase in high ISO noise above that produced by the D7100 senser such that 12,800 can be listed as native for a selling point?

Those are my thoughts as to what the D7100 sensor suggests is almost certain, likely and possible in a D400 sensor. What are yours?

sevencrossing

the D7100 will be going head to head with the Canon D7D repalcement
the 7D allredy beats the D7100 on fps
so if nikon could have uped the fps . I would have thought they would have do so on the D7100

tc88

D7100 will compete against 70D. The 7D2 will have a much higher fps and buffer and sell close to $2k. D400 will compete against 7D2.

Sensor wise, I would expect D7100/D400 to share the same sensor. They may save the best of the bunch to be used on D400. Rather I think D400 will just have more bells and whistles such as fps and buffer and other things. AF wise, I'm not sure Nikon will be able to put up another newer one either, though there is a small difference of the f/8 points between D7100 and D800 which Nikon may have purposely disabled in D7100 and enable in D400 later.

donaldejose

Of course the D400 will have the pro body build like the D800 as the D300 had a pro body build like the D700 (unless they add a built-in vertical grip). But I am suggesting in addition to the pro body and control features Nikon will try to achieve a better sensor performance from the sensor in the D400 as compared to the D7100 even if they use the same sensor with just some software tweaks. If that assumption is correct, and it may not be - Nikon my not strive for any sensor improvement, then I am suggesting the sensor in the D7100 sort of narrows our speculations as to what sensor may be in the D400. D7100 sensor performance plus. That's all. But what would the plus be?

heartyfisher

I can see several options for a "plus"

1) lower the MP to 16 MP like the D4 and thus up the High ISO and/or DR and/or colour depth.
2) use my speculated EX sized sensor at 24MP, DX crop of 16MP.
3) Same 24MP like the D7100 but increase buffer and throughput and AF response by using a better/faster CPU and data bus (like they did with the D300 vs D90)

Photobug

Heartyfisher said:
I can see several options for a "plus"

1) lower the MP to 16 MP like the D4 and thus up the High ISO and/or DR and/or colour depth.
2) use my speculated EX sized sensor at 24MP, DX crop of 16MP.
3) Same 24MP like the D7100 but increase buffer and throughput and AF response by using a better/faster CPU and data bus (like they did with the D300 vs D90)

I like options number 2 and 3. Especially the tweaks to the AF, increased buffer, and throughput.

TaoTeJared

I'm just going to trow this out just to churn peoples guts again - 16mp sensor -
Check out the Coolpix A Noise tests (16mp sensor) - http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_coolpix_a_review/image_quality/

There is no noise to 1600, 3200 has a slight softening of the image, but almost no noise, 6400 little noise. The noise we are used to isn't hit until 12,800 and 25,600 would be usable in a pinch. Vs the D300s/D7000 I would say that is 4-5 stops better. D700 - 1-2 stops. From sample images from both the Coolpix A and the D7100 I would say the Coolpix A has the advantage.

Slap that sensor in a DSLR with room to run, we could get the High iso DX sports camera many have been hoping for.

-As a side note on Scott Kelby - if you don't quite know, he is really big in photography, and not as a photographer - as one of the larges learning photo businesses in the world. And he uses Nikon. When he writes posts, it goes to millions of people - Of course Nikon stops buy and let's him get to try stuff when it is released. I have seen his videos with the D4, D3, D3s, D7000, SB-900, 70-200vr II etc. When you are that big, Nikon will show up at your door too. I've never heard him having any inside info though.
Oh and of course he grabbed a D7100, if you had that deep of pockets you would too.

PB_PM

Kelby is Mr.Photoshop, not someone I'd put down as a trusted technical reviewer. On the other hand, I do think he gives good reviews of the practical usability of equipment. I think there is a place for both types of reviews, and to be honest I prefer the latter.

Kuv

Those are heavily noise-reduced and they are too small samples to tell anything. They're also very soft. The sensor is nothing revolutionary and that review sux.

donaldejose

It is good to see Nikon has two sensor choices: one at 24mp and the other at 16mp. No doubt some improvements can be made in each of them for use in a D400 or Nikon could design an entirely new sensor using all the technology which has been put into these two sensors for a better D400 sensor. The early photos I have seen from the D7100 do show remarkable resolution with no AA filter.

Kuv

I really don't need anything above 16MP. I imagine other more serious photographers don't either.
I would gladly trade those 8MP for any DR or high ISO performance or speed or wireless connectivity.

shadowlands

16MP would be awesome!!! I don't need 24MP either...

Kuv

The D7100 falls short in high ISO. Matches D700 and barely betters the D300s by 1 stop.

Link to the studio tool

shadowlands

Hey, if the DX D7100 matches the D700, I'm happy.

Kuv

Hey, if the DX D7100 matches the D700, I'm happy.

They are 4.5 years apart. It's only reasonable that technology should pick up.

PB_PM

It did. The fact that a 24MP DX sensor can match a last gen FX sensor is a big leap in and of itself. If it gained another stop it would match the D4, which just doesn't seem likely.