D300s Successor-D400, what and when

sevencrossing

For the wildlife photographers
the BLOG has a nice guest post
http://nikonrumors.com/2013/08/24/guest-post-nikon-d800-goes-wild-in-africa.aspx/
by Roie Galitz

He has used the D300, D3s, D4 and the D800
despite its lack of fps the D800 comes out on top
so may be fps is not that important

D300user

He has used the D300, D3s, D4 and the D800
despite its lack of fps the D800 comes out on top
so may be fps is not that important

I also went from a D300 to a D800 and haven't touched my D300 since. I do very much miss the fps of the D300 even though I've taken some amazing action shots with the D800. Can't help but wonder how many more I could have taken were I to have 8 fps on the D800 (I always shoot action shots at 1.2x setting). Even the 24MP 1.2x photos of the D800 fill up the buffer rather quickly.. to wildlife photographers, speed is everything. 16MP FX often just doesn't cut it when it comes to birding, not even when you have 500mm or more.

What I find interesting is that Thom truly seems to believe that there will be a D400 but Nikonrumors hasn't heard of anything on the horizon. I for one think Nikon is making a serious mistake by not creating a true DX flagship as there is an obvious market there. Just look at this thread! (please don't reply with: the D7100 is a DX flagship blabla cause it's not...). But if canon is making a 7D2 (early 2014 or so...), Nikon will (must) follow.

sevencrossing

Can't help but wonder how many more I could have taken were I to have 8 fps on the D800

Plus 1

BUT

The solution is a D800HS , which, with a battery pack, would do just that

I would not give up my D800 for Dx no matter how many fps

Msmoto

@sevencrossing

Mmmm...the Canon was to start shipping in late September, but that was a day or so ago.....B&H also showing the Canon EOS 70D shipping at the end of August....so....I am firing my sources...LOL

Photobug

The clock is ticking and I am headed toward a D7100 the end of the first week in September. My D300 found a a new owner that appreciates what it can do and was elated with the condition.

Come on Nikon, don't walk away from the big group of users who want a top of the line DX camera.

catfish

Not that I don't want to see the D400, but I wonder if the used price for D300/s will increase up to were it should be if the D400 doesn't materialize? I have to believe that the D300/s should be valued at approximately $1100 with no successor. Maybe it's just wishful thinking.

Photobug

I like Catfish's comment on the price but think it's too high. It would not surprise me if they increased to the $750 ~$800 price point.

1skully

Wow!!! New rumors but still not of a D400. How can Nikon walk away from what I feel is a large part of there market. Nikon talks of profit, just read this thread and many others like it then produce the camera we have been desiring and your profit may return.

shawnino

I remain convinced there's no D400 coming, and the longer we go the more certain I feel. Aside from the march of time, which is perhaps the strongest reason, the eventual price point and Nikon's new focus on higher margin items to make profit raises an interesting conundrum:

Suppose, by the time the D400 can arrive, it winds up costing roughly as much as the D800. D800 has already had one price drop to $2800. Suppose it's $2200-$2300 when the D400 would be set to launch at the same price, give or take $100.

Some people would buy the D400, sure. People who need FPS and (presumably) bigger buffer, people who want the (presumably) smaller form factor. But would enough people buy it when:

--D800 has a 16 MP DX mode
--D800 had a reasonably clean launch (please don't count left-focus)
--Nikon's last $2K camera, D600 had significant launch issues (my copy didn't, thankfully) and fairly or unfairly people might worry that D400 might have issues--while whatever D800 birthing pains there were have been well worked through.

You're a bean counter at Nikon. The pressure is on. Yes, some people would buy D400... will ENOUGH, if price point was at/near D800's eventual price point at projected D400 launch? I'm betting no.

Photobug

Just read the news on the expected announcement of the D5300 and D610. Could Shawnino be right " new focus on higher margin items to make profit raises". This is sad, in my opinion, they have walked away from those users who want a great top of the line DX body. The financial people at both Canon and Nikon are focused on the entry level cameras, both DX and FX.

After thinking about this for the past month and in reading all post in this forum I have reached this conclusion "I think that Nikon realized these is a market for a D400 and they would probably sell 60 to 75% of the volume they sold in D300/D300s but this is a specialty market and not large enough to generate the sales they could make in upgrading the D5200 and D600.

It looks like Nikon wants to "force" the D300 & D300S users into one of three choices:
#1 Upgrade to FX (D610) or D800 or D4
#2 Upgrade to the D7100 which in my opinion is not what I want. Not the number of FPS, not a big enough buffer, and not the larger camera body I was looking for.
#3 Upgrade to the D800 and keep those DX lens and run in DX mode and get 16 MP.

I now agree with several others, Nikon has no plans for a D300 replacement. Hate to say it but the hand writing is on the wall.

Been a photographer for more than 63 years and have owned lots of Nikon's since 1966. There has always been a path for me as I developed my skills to upgrade to better cameras. I don't see that in a prosumer DX camera body. I just don't consider the D7100 a prosumer DX body.

Guess I need to look at the D800 as a DX tool and not a FX tool and decide if that is what I should buy or lower my expectations and buy then D7100. My stash of cash is large enough to buy the D800, so the price is not going to stop me. But even the D800 does not get me everything that was on my list of expectations for the D300 replacement. I am tired of waiting and want to move on.

Golf007sd

@Photobug: If you get the D4 all your needs will be meet.

catfish

@Photobug: If you get the D4 all your needs will be meet.

Except for the most important one -- financial. I tend to shy away from debtor's prison, I don't know, it's just me.

Photophun

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, well, it must be a D400.

Golf007sd

@catfish: I totally agree on the financial point.

The features a photographer wants have a great impact which direction he or she will have to take. The reality is having the funds that will accommodate the purchase.

spraynpray

So now we know why the D400 is late - they were putting right the errors in the D600.

The D400 will come or I'm a Dutchman (I like the Dutch anyway so that's not so bad...) :P

sevencrossing

sorry but by the time it come out it will be the D410

Sports

Does it make sense when we quote Nikon's own change to "more profitable products" and then have to swallow more consumer products?
To me, the consumer market is where the the price is under a lot of pressure. They can NOT always charge a reasonable price for the Dxxxx because then consumers will buy a Canon/Sony/Samsung/Panasonic/whatever instead.
High-end products are where the profits are. If the right D400 is there, we will NOT go and buy a Canon/Sony/whatever instead. The competition is much less hard. Obviously, they'll sell fewer (and that's why Nikon hesitates), but each one will actually provide a profit ... where a consumer product simply has to be sold at a competitive price, even with a loss.

scoobysmak

I admit, I don't have much faith in the D400 but would really like one. I know people mention that if you need speed and a big buffer the answer is pretty much the D4. The problem with the D4 is I want the extra reach that the DX format provides. Maybe Nikon looks at this as selling more pro lenses, the cheapest birding solution that reaches to 450mm is a DX camera and the 300mm f4. On an FX camera you need to add a teleconverter and your still just shy of 450mm and lost a bit of quality (but admit this loss is probably not noticeable unless you print wall sized pictures). I know the FX cameras have better low light abilities but the fact you made an f4 lens a f5.6, this won't help the auto focus what so ever. I might be able to see a picture Vs a dark screen but not being in focus won't help my portfolio.

The closest quality combination in my mind (dangerous statement) is a 500mm f4, the new 80-400 with a teleconverter might be close but I not a fan of teleconverters on a zoom lens. Needless to say the cost difference is significant along with the weight and packing requirements (Gimble head, stronger tripod ect ect). Now if you can use this long lens effectively you can get better results in lower light and the keeper ratio would be better, of course this is at the cost of being portable. What good is a $8k lens that is still in the bag because you didn't have the time to get it out and use it.

Just a thought for now, I really hope the D400 is so revolutionary that its G-14 classified and Nikon wants to totally trump the competition. But in all reality I just don't see it.

Ironheart

High-end products are where the profits are.

Notsomuch. Nikon makes it up in volume (think millions) on the low-end The reason they sell high-end is to have the cache in the marketplace so that everyone who buys a coolpix will think they are getting a great name and some of that high-end quality. Which is to a certain extent true.

PB_PM

Exactly, entry level products like the D3200 earns Nikon more profit than all other DSLR sales combined. How? Volume. Nikon might only make $50 a unit, but if they sell 5 million of them it doesn't matter (that's $25 million in profits).

sevencrossing

I the cheapest birding solution that reaches to 450mm is a DX camera and the 300mm f4. .

I am very new to birding but the best results I have seen by local photographers are from a young chap who has a D7000 and the 300m f4

His results are in a miles better than guys with very expensive cameras and very big lenses

even if he could afford one, would he getter better results with a D400? I doubt it

Birding seem to be about field craft, not equipment

but as I said I very new to BIF

PB_PM

I the cheapest birding solution that reaches to 450mm is a DX camera and the 300mm f4. .

Birding seem to be about field craft, not equipment

That and being in the right place at the right time.

proudgeek

I the cheapest birding solution that reaches to 450mm is a DX camera and the 300mm f4. .

His results are in a miles better than guys with very expensive cameras and very big lenses

even if he could afford one, would he getter better results with a D400? I doubt it

Birding seem to be about field craft, not equipment

but as I said I very new to BIF

Like CoastalConn. He's shooting with a D300 and a Tamron 300 f/2.8. That said, expensive gear can make up for a lack of technique to a certain extent.

Golf007sd

All of Nikon bodies (or any D-SLR) are cable to getting a shot a photographer is seeking. With the right skill level, gear, and conditions the shooters imagination is the only limiting factor.

dissent

This is encouraging to hear, since my next desired lens was going to be the 300 f/4. Unless I hit the lotto, then all bets are off.