D300s Successor-D400, what and when

spraynpray

@sevencrossing: LOL! But there are no new film cameras being made by Nikon.

DaveyJ

The D400 market will be brisk. Nikon is already aware of that. This just might be their best sales offering in some time. Most of the pros I know (many are magazine and newspaper photographers) say to keep their jobs and to stay current they need a pro edge camera and FX is NOT required. But they are very familiar with the D7100 and just want some advances over that. Especially in buffer and video. I have followed the mirrorless camera development and have examined them and keep passing on them. I am not the only photo pro who has done that. For mirrorless to get really mainstream will require a real development investment on the part of manufacturers. With smart phone numbers up and P&S and mirrorless down I just am not clear what real advantage engineers and designers (& ultimately stockholders) would see.

donaldejose

Just a thought here: Many people tend to think of "mirrorless cameras" as something the size of the Nikon 1 or Fuji X100s with a DX or FX size sensor: i.e. a "rangefinder" like the old Leica M3. I suggest something a bit different as a future "mirrorless camera:" a DSLR without the R (no reflex so DSLML - Digital Single Lens MirrorLess?); i.e. without the mirror, pentaprism and optical viewfinder. Think of a D800 or D4 with all the adjustment buttons intact but without a mirror to flip. With no mirror you could make the body slimmer but that won't happen because people will want to use the existing lenses which have been designed to focus at a distance which included room for a moving mirror. The advantage will not really be in size since only a slightly smaller EVF will replace the OVF. The advantage will be in reduced moving parts, no time needed for a mirror to flip, no spots of oil or dirt thrown on the sensor from the moving mirror, and a daylight bright image in the EVF when shooting in very low light, etc. If technology advances rapidly enough this "missing mirror" EVF design could be found in the D5 and the D810 and the D410. Just don't think of "mirrorless" as only being small cameras.

PB_PM

@donaldejose You are basically talking about a larger sensor Panasonic GH3, not a new concept by any means.

The issue isn't taking away the mirror, it's the taking away the optical viewfinder. As noted before, EVF's have a long way to go before they can replace optical finders. Why do you think Fuji has opted for a hybrid system in their "Pro" model mirrorless camera? I'll tell you, seeing with your own eye, rather than through the delay of an EVF will always be a better experience. During daylight the EVF is fine, even with today's model, the problem comes about when you start talking about low light shooting. For any kind of low light work EVF's are useless and extremely laggy.

DaveyJ

The camera mirror serves far more than just to focus. I have yet to see a mirrorless camera which allowed the same degree of interaction (control, visualization, etc.) that a conventional DSLR camera has. Having come from a background where I used rangefinders, focus cloths, and various finders I have no interest in going to that lack of control and interaction again. There are I grant a whole new wave of photographers that are used to focusing on live view finders and I find them absolutely useless for high speed situations where you have to have a pretty good view of what is going on. A current D800 is a joy to use just without even taking a single picture as the view in the finder is marvelous. Are we forgetting that advantage.

A Nikon D5 without a mirrored finder would hardly be as useable for a lot of kinds of photography unless a focusing device is used that is substantially better than a peephole and despite my use of LCD screens I find them pretty bad in the field. We have at my place no less than 20 kinds of screens for operating drones, ROVs, and the like and we are using video cameras that require quite expensive monitors to operate. Compared to say a D4 or a D800 or D7100, hell even a D3200, all of these other tools are quite difficult to use to focus, compose or even to point in the proper direction. The soon to be released mirrorless FF cameras will be interesting to follow for their success both from the user standpoint and for their commercial success. The rippling effect of so many doomsday articles about smartphones is surely magnifying the problem.

snakebunk

I think a really good EVF would work for me, but it's hard to know before you try.

The sound of the mirror is very disturbing when you are close to wildlife, and there are lots of cool things you could do with a mirrorless camera, for example I would like to see the histogram in the view finder.

donaldejose

For an EVF to replace an OVF all the technical deficiencies will have to be solved so focus is just as fast and the time delay is unobservable. I believe they will be in time. How much time? Maybe within 5 years or so? Then the mirror can be taken out of the traditional DSLR and a new group of cameras can be designed from the ground up.

Photobug

MSmoto said:
That is why I have no high expectations from a D400 . If it ever comes out, it will be a D7100 in a D300 body ( + all previous D300 specs on the side )

You prediction for the D400...I buy it so quick your head would turn. Hope your right.

Excellent stuff you wrote earlier on Mirrorless camera. Makes sense to me.

Andrewz

O.k who changed the D400 forum to the EVIL(electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens) forum? Was that you Msmoto? Suggesting the D400 will be an EVIL camera (yes pun fully intended).

I don't think so.... Now I'll be the first to say and I think I have already that Nikon is missing a rangefinder i.e. Fuji X100 etc. camera iN their line up and I want one. But I don't think an EVIL camera will be replacing the DSLR just yet or ever. I think perhaps a hybrid at the D5/D500 level where you can turn off the mirror to get higher frame rates or quieter function. Other than that I don't see the big advantage. And I see one major disadvantage, my eye and brain are able to process a image fast with more dynamic range than any camera sensor and viewfinder combo. I will alway (well until my vision go out) be able to see in to shadows that electronic viewfinder lose and make exposure decisions. I could go on but there are some things that a camera can't do as good as an eye and brain.

Then there is the process of taking a photograph and the beauty of the image in my viewfinder. Electronic viewfinders just don't look that good.

I think our reflex camera will be with us for some time. I may have said the same thing about film too... :-(

Paperman

@Squamishphoto

" I love how you say this with such positive determination, and yet all the major camera companies are testing high megapixel bodies to the order 50+ MP. "

Which cameras are those based on what information Squamishphoto ?

All I see is 5D Mark being stuck at 21 Mp after 4 years ; Canon APS-C's going from 18 to only 20Mp in same period. Even if there is a 50Mp FF on the drawing board, it can hardly be considered a breakthrough as the pixel density to give 50 Mp FF has already been reached - the sensor wafer is already there ( = 22 Mp @ APS-C )

By the way, we are only expressing opinions here - not dictating. There have been over 1000 comments on this subject with maybe a hundred radical opinions/guesses ....So no need to get harsh . I know you like it but we are merely "throwing" opinions here ... and mostly having fun.

scoobysmak

Just saw an add tonight for a 41 MP smart phone, wonder who designed the lens for that and what ISO it has to use? (Think its made by Nokia and its a windows based phone for anyone looking for it)

I am still just wishing for a full size (D300 size or bigger) DX camera with a bigger buffer than the D7100.

sevencrossing

.....I think our reflex camera will be with us for some time. I may have said the same thing about film too... :-(

LOL

One advantage of getting rid of the mirror box, is removing the need for wide and ultra wide lenses to be retrofocus , making them a bit smaller and may be cheaper

Yes, if the distance between the lens flange and the focal plane is reduced, we will all have to buy new lenses
Now that really could help Nikons Sales

Am I the only person who wants a full frame, compact camera, with a 24 mm f 1.4 lens and blisteringly fast focusing ?

snakebunk

And I see one major disadvantage, my eye and brain are able to process a image fast with more dynamic range than any camera sensor and viewfinder combo. I will alway (well until my vision go out) be able to see in to shadows that electronic viewfinder lose and make exposure decisions. I could go on but there are some things that a camera can't do as good as an eye and brain.

To me it sounds like a good thing to see exactly what will be captured rather than the great dynamics that your eyes can provide. The more I think about mirrorless cameras the more I like them. In theory, I haven't tried one yet

PB_PM

@Squamishphoto

" I love how you say this with such positive determination, and yet all the major camera companies are testing high megapixel bodies to the order 50+ MP. "

Which cameras are those based on what information Squamishphoto ?

All I see is 5D Mark being stuck at 21 Mp after 4 years ; Canon APS-C's going from 18 to only 20Mp in same period. Even if there is a 50Mp FF on the drawing board, it can hardly be considered a breakthrough as the pixel density to give 50 Mp FF has already been reached - the sensor wafer is already there ( = 22 Mp @ APS-C )

By the way, we are only expressing opinions here - not dictating. There have been over 1000 comments on this subject with maybe a hundred radical opinions/guesses ....So no need to get harsh . I know you like it but we are merely "throwing" opinions here ... and mostly having fun.

Guess you missed the rumors of the 75MP Canon 1D series camera that is said to be coming late this year or early next...

Daira

Just a thought here: Many people tend to think of "mirrorless cameras" as something the size of the Nikon 1 or Fuji X100s with a DX or FX size sensor: i.e. a "rangefinder" like the old Leica M3. I suggest something a bit different as a future "mirrorless camera:" a DSLR without the R (no reflex so DSLML - Digital Single Lens MirrorLess?); i.e. without the mirror, pentaprism and optical viewfinder.

Can we please stop to find a name using a part that a camera does NOT have? I mean today it seam logical, but as soon as there are no DSLR anymore, this reference to an outdated camera design becomes pretty silly. It's like the good old "horseless carriage"

I for my part would like to see a D400 where I can plainly fix the mirror in the upper position and use a hybrid view finder, but I guess this won't happen.

And maybe when the mirror one day becomes obsolete we just call these cameras DSCs

donaldejose

Paperman and SquamishPhoto: It does seem to me that Nikon is making all DX sensors 24mp and will soon introduce a 48 or 50mp FX sensor in a D4x. I would be surprised if the D400 sensor was less than 24mp. Perhaps the advantages in more megapixels include increased dynamic range, increased efficiency in capturing a higher percentage of the light falling on the sensor, etc? Yes, more data captured means more data to process. But that can be handled in two ways: in the computer or in the camera with faster processor in each. Also, look at the Adobe DNG converter which can convert larger files to smaller files. Such software could be in the camera body if that body had sufficient processing power to handle it. Photo binning could be used to reduce file sizes. I think of Ken Rockwell's comment here that he uses JPEG normal or basic for family snapshots to keep file sizes down when he knows they will never be printed larger than 8x10. It could be possible that a high mp sensor body includes some software menu settings to let you direct it to produce the full 24mp RAW file or to output a 16mp RAW file to the removable media card. Thus one could have the full mp RAW file when needed for work which will or might be printed large and also have a reduced mp file RAW file for "snapshots" which are not going to be printed large. This ia a possible direction the D400 or D4x might go in if Nikon is able to put sufficient processing power in them (perhaps an Expeed 4 processor will appear in them to handle data with speed?).

Nikon's strategy to overtake Cannon? Well, as Paperman says it does seem Cannon has been keeping sensor mp lower than Nikon or put another way Nikon has been "winning" the mp race in the most recent round of new bodies. Why is Nikon going in this direction? Just for the bragging rights in advertizing? Consider DxOMark sensor ratings. Notice how Nikon consistently tops Cannon. Even the base D5200's DX 24mp sensor rating of 84 tops the Canon EOS 1Dx's FX 18mp sensor rating of 82 and the D3's FX 12mp sensor rating of 81. The gain seems to be in increased dynamic range. Image that, DX better than FX in dynamic range. My point simply is that there may be many advantages to increased mp which Nikon is exploiting in an effort to produce images superior to those from Canon bodies. True, we don't need high mp to produce sharp prints, especially at reasonable sizes, but perhaps those high megapixels offer other advantages we do want to have.

Photobug

I love the acronym....EVIL(electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens)
Thanks Andrewz.

DaveyJ

@Snakebunk: I have been around some spooky wildlife in my day. Yes even TODAY. An Impala's reaction or a Whitetail fawn go bouncing off with speed that would make any football player look slow. And having spent quite a bit of my life in track and field some wildlife speeds are quite remarkable. Yet it is NOT mirror noise now that alarms them. And since I have been taking these photos for years I would say it was never mirror noise that spooked them. Scent from a human or motion is the reason they bolt. IT IS NOT NOISE.

I will not be sharing some tricks I have learned in years of doing underwater and land wildlife shots but if you think it is noise, guess again. I will simply say that noise attracts them often. Wildlife which have never seen humans tend to walk right up to them. So a camera mirror is not much more than a disturbance. When you are shooting wildlife video often our gear can reduce the quality of a recording to the point of making it either useless or needing to add music of some other sound track that was taken at another time as the live sound was polluted by our own gear. Some of these digital cameras are quite quiet. Our D7100 has been able to get some footage that I have never seen of specific events.

Yet my biggest negative reaction to no mirror viewfinder comes from CURRENT use of other devices to focus and or track, and from the days when the truly fine cameras of much larger format did not have the luxury of a mirrored finder. If I had to race a car with an LCD finder I am going to guess things would go poorly by the first turn.

And finally I will state with great personal certainty that the D400 will have a sensor of AT LEAST 24MP. Recent Nikon introductions not only hint that but clearly announce this. I fail to see any reason higher MPs are that useful. I do not see any compelling reason for them to go higher. Yet to sell the darn things Nikon seems to think more is more marketable.

DaveyJ

@msmoto: VIewing an image on ground glass on a 8x10 is quite wonderful and quite good for getting composition. Yet view camera focusing is quite slow and requires darkness to view. However the impression I got and can clearly remember Ansel Adams commentary on such a view is that it is almost an abstraction and less like really seeing the scene. I have never seen any viewfinder better than some of the current Nikon offerings say like the D800 viewfinder.

This ability to sense the real scene I believe is vital. I have looked at fast moving or critical scenes through other devices (some very expensive) and have found them more detached from the real deal than a mirrored finder. If a Nikon D5 is going to sport a non-mirrored finder they are going to have to come up with some viewfinder the like of which I HAVE NEVER SEEN MYSELF. Maybe some of you out there have?

All this futuristic speculation is quite appropriate but for a D400 to be announced on September 21st, 2013 seems very doubtful. Right now Nikon is at the Grand Prix of market competition and the upcoming heat is the one that Nikon and both Canon have their "vehicles" in. They have to "Run what they Brung!"

donaldejose

Yes DaveyJ, few people expect something revolutionary in the D400 anymore. Just make it a D800-like pro style body with a DX sensor which is a bit better than the one in the D7100 plus add a large buffer and most people will be happy to buy one. The technological revolution (such as eliminating the mirror) may be in the next generation of pro bodies from Nikon.

PB_PM

Just make it a D800-like pro style body with a DX sensor which is a bit better than the one in the D7100 plus add a large buffer and most people will be happy to buy one.

Which is what it was always rumored to be. The only people expecting anything else were, limited in number to a small group of people here.

donaldejose

Maybe more than just a few people here wished for the D400 to be more than an normal evolution of the D300s. I don't know about all the expectations of all the people and cannot speak for them but you are correct that a few people here, me included, did wish for some things such as a usable ISO of 12,800 and a built-in motor drive which are not a "normal" evolution of the DXXX series. Hopefully, soon we will see and even more hopefully it would be nice if we would be surprised about some new features Nikon was able to add.

snakebunk

I also would like a normal evolution replacement to my D300s. It's strange that Nikon has had such a successful camera and rather risk customers than take the opurtunity to sell upgrades. I think this is why we speculate so much; is there a reason or are Nikon just being plain stupid? Do they think that D7100 is good enough or do they think that D800 is fast enough? Or do they have some kind of supercamera coming up? The only thing we know is that there are (or has been) lots of people who wants an updated D300s.

donaldejose

I think it will be here soon. Why the long delay? Just busy with other stuff or set back due to floods or waiting for the maturity of some new technology? No one outside of Nikon knows. Nikon surely will replace the D300s with a similarly priced camera which is better. Obviously, they could take the D300s body and simply put in new parts such as the sensor/video from the D7100 and the Expeed 3 processor and sell it for about $1,800. Maybe that is all they will do. Some of us hope for more and have speculated as to what that more may be. Now we just have to wait and see.

sevencrossing

.....Which is what it was always rumored to be. The only people expecting anything else were, limited in number to a small group of people here.

If the D400 is announced in 2013, then yes it will just be an up graded D300s
but some of us think the D400 is several years away and if /when it comes out it might well be be revolutionary