D300s Successor-D400, what and when

donaldejose

I don't think Nikon has any devious or product protective motives. They recognize the gap in the line-up and will fill it with a similar priced ($1900-$2,000) camera as soon as they can produce one which meets the needed specifications.

1skully

@ Sevencrossing with those specs and a D2xs BODY bring it. I and I think a lot of other photographers would buy it at the 2000 price range.

ricochet

I think there is a big difference between being negative, and realistic. The D300s was released over 4 years ago, and there are no signs of replacement coming. If looking at the facts is negative in your eyes, so be it. Don't get me wrong, I was a D300 shooter (I still have one with 110,000 actions), but I realized earlier this year that there is no D400 coming and moved on.

I'm not a pro wildlife/bird shooter, yet somehow as an FX user I manage to get decent bird/wildlife shots with the 300mm F4 + TC14E. I guess must be doing something wrong if I don't need a D400 and 600mm F4. Would I like that combo? Sure. I'm I ever going to have that combo? Most likely not.

I never said anyone couldn't get good shots without a D400, I didn't even say I needed a D400, I merely said I WANTED a D400. I wished for a motorcycle for Christmas when I was young. I didn't get it. Life goes on. Why does it matter to anyone else if I want a D400?
By the way, I hope you do get that 600mm F4, I've got one and they are sweet! Realistically, you probably won't get one, (said so yourself), but I hope you do. Sometimes being hopeful just feels better than being realistic.

ricochet

That still doesn't mean I wouldn't rather have a D400. .

If I knew what Nikon needed to build to make a profit, I'd be working for them, and they'd be glad to have me.

Photobug

ricochet said
So my experience is that a lot of long glass is being used with DX cameras. Its not like the DX camera users have a choice, its FX glass or nothing when you go big.
I knew there'd be disagreement with my previous post, not all of us live in the same part of the world, or travel with the same crowd, or shoot the same subjects. I haven't given up hope that Nikon will build the camera that I desire, in the mean time, I'm one of those guys who'll "use my D300 until it dies", and also a guy who's moved on to a D7100. That still doesn't mean I wouldn't rather have a D400. If you believe I should be using a D800, then send me one. I'll continue to have positive thoughts about the D400, if being negative floats your boat, have at it.

I am also one of those that moved on/up to a D7100. I got my D300 early (November when they were released) and loved it. I hated to sell it but got tired of waiting and wanted to take advantage of the new features and technology. I was really pleased that the buyer appreciated my D300 and I sold it for more than I had expected. If a D400 comes along I will buy it and make the D7100 my backup. If the pro DX camera body is dead, that is fine. I got the best new DX body available now. Tired of beating a dead horse and spending more time learning my new camera.

My experience also mirrors yours; a lot of FX long glass is being used with DX cameras. I saw lots of 80-400, 300, 500, 600 and a few 800mm lens when we were in Florida 2 years ago. These were amateurs, not professionals.

Msmoto

@sevencrossing

This thread is simply one which IMO has become so extremely long as a result of our missed expectations.... The unfortunate part is there is actually no highly useful information, but the opinions of those who would like a DX body with more pro like features is heard and respected.

The D400 thread on the old forum was started over two years ago as best I can tell.....

I do agree....this is more of a group psychotherapy thread than anything which has useful information...while I thought I had something from some informers....I have been incorrect in every prediction I have made on the D400.

So, I suspect we will continue for awhile more providing a place to come over and whimper..... (

sevencrossing

@sevencrossing


So, I suspect we will continue for awhile more providing a place to come over and whimper..... (

I can only suggest it is renamed

Someone new to NRF wondering about the D400 cannot be expected to read all 60 pages

commando961

There are a few possible reasons why the D400 has not shown. Could be that Nikon have decided to delay in order in incorporate some new technology coming through. Sony's rumored A7 will have a new 32MP APS-C sensor and it is likely, IMO, that Nikon will use this sensor with their own tweeks. One tweek could be their patent-applied switchable AA filter. Then there is EXPEED 4. How far away is that? One other thing: Toshiba has announced UHS-II SD cards which are significantly faster than the current fastest UHS-I SD cards. These are to be released in October, according to one report I saw. It would seem likely to me that a state-of-the-art D400 would have UHS-II card slots, which if so, would require a delay so that the cards are actually available.

How about pixel-binning on the 32MP APS-C sensor? Effectively an 8MP sensor with noise performance rivalling the D3S or better. Combined with the switchable AA filter - off for 8MP, on for 32MP.

Then there is the new advanced AF Nikon are developing. Wouldn't that be a camera worth waiting for? This is all just speculation, but within the bounds of possibility.

Sports

The 32 MP option is actually another reason for the D400 to become a reality, even though it's not on my wishlist. But it's something that could really put it as THE flagship DX seen from Nikon Marketing.
Note that pixel binning cannot necessarily reduce noise better than software postprocessing (be it firmware or an external program). Smaller RAW files would be a real advantage, though, in some cases. (Just my pov.)

sevencrossing

The D400 might just be the first camera to have the Nikons interchangeable sensor, ( see main BLOG) it will be supplied with Dx sensor which could be change for an Fx

DaveyJ

THe D7100 is the best DX camera I have ever used. Fact is there are a number who have NEVER posted on Nikon Rumors who THINK a D400 is vital to their next move. I called several after reading your post about ONLY those on Nikon Rumors about wanting a D400. The response and no where near a very large number as I do just not have the time to do this, was that the D400 is a greatly anticipated camera. My actual position (in writing to Nikon USA is that I would like to see a D400 but if the price is way out there......I'd rather just use my D7100 and other Nikon DX cameras. So I agree in practicality that the D7100 or whatever replaces that is "good enough". Still feel that DX cameras MUST be lower in price or what us the purpose. I still hold off on a D800 which I am impressed with, and the D600 which I would not buy. The D610 might be a good reason to switch to FX. But the switch to FX is still crippled by lens cost, weight and size, and depth of field issues that I am not attracted to.

donaldejose

As soon as all the needed pieces are available at a reasonable price (Expeed 4 - soon to be here, best DX sensor a step above the D7100 sensor - near or not?, sufficient RAM - here, fast focus module - here, etc?) Nikon will put them together to produce a D400. It should be soon and the cost will be around $2,000.

spraynpray

@DaveyJ said "The D610 might be a good reason to switch to FX. But the switch to FX is still crippled by lens cost, weight and size, and depth of field issues that I am not attracted to."

Spoken like a true DX afficionado Davey. :P I agree with all of your points.

I also look forward to going FX but I will be using DX crop mode for some subjects to take advantage of good ol' DX attributes.

PB_PM

I've never bought into the argument that DX lenses are much different weight wise. I shot DX for many years, and the gear is still heavy, unless you are using variable aperture lenses (18-55mm/18-105mm/16-85mm/18-200mm). There simply isn't a huge difference if you are using higher end glass (F2.8 and F4 range), even purpose made DX glass.

DaveyJ

I admit I have begun to AVOID wider aperture lens as it means extra weight. Recently I bought a highly rated f 1.8 prime Nikon lens and hardly use it. For the current uses I have for DSLR cameras I almost first look for sharp, nice color, and wide depth of field. There are those who lust for shallow depth of field, I am not one of them. So many times I see purposely shot shallow depth of field photos, ones that if YOU were there it is NOT what your eye would see assuming you have good eye sight. That is not what I am searching for or willing to pay big bucks for.

However when you start seeing a loss of sharpness penalty for less expensive glass.....that is a real problem. I am using variable aperture lens including all of the above (on various cameras) and find myself using the very modest D3200 and the 18-55 Kit lens a lot in higher risk field settings. If I were stuck on the sidelines at a organized game it would be a different story.

I did find even the 55-300VR Nikkor lens very good up close and when it comes to more distant shots with the same modest D3200 I switch to the 70-300VR which handles distance better. Often I might bring along a D300 if that can be in a car or a truck and pulled out when needed. If I were distance backpacking I would stick with the D3200 and light lens. Is there a difference in weight. YES! WHn I pick up my D7100 and bigger lens now I am like WOW! Again a limiting factor for me is price to as the D800E and maybe a new 80-400VR lens are pretty pricey to purchase in "retirement" for me now. Not that I have really retired as I work way more than I recreate.

Recently I went to Acadia National Park and was impressed with my friend's Nikon P510 images which she alternated with her D3200 and the 18-55VR and the 70-300VR she owns. However I felt that some of her wider scenery shots were clearly a little divergent from the D3200, etc. I also took along my trusty D90 and 12-24DX Nikkor for stills and that is still a nice setup. When I pull out my Nikon F5 and the big lens I am like WOW! This is BIG and HEAVY! A lot too is based on how close you can get to your subject. Up close and personal in good lighting is a tough combination to beat. All of this still is dependent on good enough gear as I did get to put up some supposedly great Apple iPhone photos and found them off the pace by a country mile.

DaveyJ

Need to add that the cell phone images i put up on a big screen later from a Kittery to Bar Harbor. Maine trip were NOT my own images as I do not own a cell phone. I am way to used to living where their is NO cell phone signal.

donaldejose

DaveyJ: I think KR would agree with what you said about the "lowly" D3200 and kit lenses being enough camera for most practical uses for most people and the images from them virtually indistinguishable (if you know what you are doing) from those taken by the top of the line FX cameras with this important qualifier when you are viewing the images on a monitor or HD TV or printed to the largest size common inkjet printers can print! I agree also. People who ridicule KR's broad statements often fail to mention the qualifiers. If you know you can shoot at f8 and above 125th of a second from ISO 100 thorough ISO 400, the D3100, D5100, D90 and all their replacements with lightweight plastic bodied kit lenses can produce excellent images. The lightness of such combinations can be wonderful as can the fact that one can afford to lose them in an accident and be able to replace them without too much financial pain. They definitely have a place and serve a purpose.

heartyfisher

I have come to that conclusion too.. just got a V1 and 10-30. .. I think I will be happy with it for a while :-) yup totally given up on this D400 thing.. My lowly V1 seem fine.. plan to get an attachment and stick my old 50mm ais on it and see how that goes :-)

Andrewz

It's been quite here for a few days and I've been losing faith but now...

Today on Petapixel.com there's a post about the Pentax K-3
24MP APS-C
8.3 frames/sec
ISO 100-51200
And other stuff...

These spec beat the D7100 (I know they're just specs), this at least says that Pentax sees a market for a high end APS-C camera. And typically where one manufacture goes others will follow. I still think there's a market for a Pro DX camera.

ano

more détails here
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http://digicame-info.com/

The official Web site of Ricoh Imaging of North America, Pentax K-3 has already been published.
PENTAX K-3 (page ※ This seems to be deleted now)
-24 million pixel APS-C CMOS sensor Effective
-8.3 frames / sec Continuous shooting (22 shots at RAW, up to 60 sheets JPEG)
-Can be selected ON / OFF of the low-pass filter
-H.264 video professional
-SAFOX11 AF module, 27-point AF sensor (25 point cross),-3EV ~ +18 EV
-RGB metering sensor. 86000 pixels
-Dual SD card slot
-100% viewfinder field of view, magnification of 0.95 times
-Dust drip which gave the body of magnesium alloy and stainless steel, the ceiling of 92 points

great specs !
a dreaming fps and buffer for "Desperate D400 buyers ..."

sevencrossing

Pentax do not and never have, made a Pro quality camera
Yes they have made very high quality consumer products
David Baily used an ES and I used to have an S1a, terrific value for money , but nothing close to a Nikon F
I would be amazed if the K3 comes close to the D7100
may be on spec but not in a head to head

PB_PM

The build quality of the K-5, and likely the K3 is easily superior to the D7xxx line, more in line with the D300s. One area where Pentax has always fallen short is auto focus performance, but it has been noted that the K-5II was a big improvement in that area.

sevencrossing

One area where Pentax has always fallen short is auto focus performance,

yup; and a lot of people wanting a D400 are wild life photographers so auto focus performance is fairly important

donaldejose

Looks very good.
http://www.adorama.com/ALC/BlogArticle.aspx?googleid=0014326&alias=Pentax-K-3-First-Look&utm_source=RSYS&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Email100713PentaxNPA&j=Email100713PentaxNPA

Photobug

sevencrossing said:
Pentax do not and never have, made a Pro quality camera
Yes they have made very high quality consumer products
David Baily used an ES and I used to have an S1a, terrific value for money , but nothing close to a Nikon F
I would be amazed if the K3 comes close to the D7100
may be on spec but not in a head to head -

Spoken as a true Nikon man. From my experienced using my Dad's Pentax film and a friends digital cameras, they are not pro quality cameras and definitely a cut above many DSLR cameras.