D300s Successor-D400, what and when

ricochet

Correct me if I'm wrong but I see the D200 coming out in 2005, the D300 in 2007, and the D300s in 2009. Doesn't that mean the D400 or whatever the D300s replacement is, should have been out in 2011, coincidentally the same time En-el3 battery powered electronics became illegal to sell in Japan?

PB_PM

Last year was a year focused on FX, so Nikon put off major DX updates till this year. It makes sense considering the limited production capabilities Nikon has.

Chuckv

Please note folks, this is about the issues of the topic and not about becoming a forum of personal attacks.  We have a variety of photographic skills and experience on NRF.  

If the cross talk about skill levels could be diminished it would be more pleasant for all.  Let's all try to read an opinion and not take it personally.  

The topic is about what we would like in a "D400", what we think Nikon may give us, and when that might occur.

Well said!!!

Andrewz

This forum thread has been around so long now that we're rehashing a lot of old issues. The D400 is/was delayed because of the flood in Thailand that wiped out the production facility. This isn't new information, then I surmise, the Olympics put the emphasis on the D4/D800 release, then the Holiday buying season put the emphasis on a consumer camera D3200. Now the design for the D400 is to old to bring in to production. I believe what we will eventually see is what would have been the D500.

What I find very promising is every time Nikon releases a new DX camera they are pretty impressive, at least in the sensor arena. Look at the IQ score for the D5200 on the Nikon rumors front page (I know IQ isn't everything but a Dxomark score is the best we have for measuring image quality). The D5200 now has the best IQ of any DX camera, beating 3 older FX cameras, pretty impressive! I'd be happy putting that sensor in a D300 body and calling it a D400.

Msmoto

@ sevencrossing

I think you nailed it. I fully agree the future of professional digital is going to be in a mirrorless camera with hybrid viewfinder. And, when this comes along at the level of performance of the D4, it will be as big of a change as the introduction of the original "F" body.

If Canon grabs the spotlight it will be a disaster for Nikon and vice versa. My real suspicion is that Nikon and Canon have closed door meetings late at night (LOL) and actually discuss these things to avoid one or the other from being first. In other words, an announcement of the new full frame mirrorless by Nikon will be close to the same announcement by Canon. These companies are in some ways interdependent and if one gets too far behind it actually creates problems for both.

Some may not agree with me on this, but in many industries if a manufacturer comes out with something too far in the future it does not go well.

donaldejose

I think the great DxOMark test results of the new Toshiba sensor in the D5200 tells us one important thing: whatever sensor Nikon puts into the D7200 and the D400 will perform even better. The overall DxOMark score for the D5200 sensor is 84 compared to 82 for a D3s and 81 for a D3 and 80 for a D700. Even the D3200 at 81 equals the D3 and beats the D700 by one point. After the D7200 and the D400 sensors are tested and most likely will achieve even higher senor scores will there be any debate over the statement that the current generation of DX sensor are better than the last generation of FX sensors?

PB_PM

DxOMark scores, vs real life? Meh.

donaldejose

Well, DxOMark should be objective scores all measured the same way so in a sense they provide a common yardstick and the point stands on that. If you see something different in real life, than go with what you see for your use. For example, according to DxOMark scores the D600 is slightly better at high ISO (between 2,000 and 6,400) than the D800 but I have been preferring my D800 at high ISO over my D600 for some reason I don't yet understand. Perhaps I have to be sure both bodies are set up exactly the same and just work more with the D600. Maybe it is the added weight of the D800 which is making a difference. Don't know.

Thom Hogan makes a similar point today in stating that all higher level bodies are more than adequate and often the difference in ergonomics or feature set count for more in "real life" shooting than the difference in test scores. In a way KR has been saying that for a while also. Recently KR has been on a bit of a rant (his shtick) about Cannon ergonomics being so much better than Nikon ergonomics such that he prefers Canon: not because it has higher IQ but because it is easier to work with.

PB_PM

In some ways KR (I hate to agree with him) is right. Although from my viewpoint that is only that the WB and ISO buttons are better placed, so that you don't have to take your hands off the lens to change them. I still wouldn't trade my D700 for an equivalent Canon.

spraynpray

DxOMark scores, vs real life? Meh.

My take on this is that we must have a way of measuring the difference, but 83 vs 81 (for example) doesn't mean your 81 scoring camera has either stopped working or now produces rubbish images, or even that images made using an 83 scoring camera will be better than those taken with an 81 scoring camera.

However, my thanks to those who think it does matter for keeping Nikon in a position to be able to create all the new stuff so often so that when i upgrade there is a bigger jump. :P

sevencrossing

Recently KR has been on a bit of a rant

Sorry to a bit off topic *

It should be noted Ren shoots jpeg ( Not RAW) and does not use Lightroom

IMHO it is not possible to get the best out of something like a D800 shooting jpegs

is the DxOMark made using jpegs?

* Do we need another KR thread and may be one on DxOmarks

Msmoto

You guys can talk about Ren if you like...
DxOMark seems to be at least a more reliable source if one understands what they measure.
Dpreview has some worthwhile data as well.

Re: the D400??? Who knows...? 8-|

donaldejose

We don't yet know how the D7200 or D400 will rate on the DxOMark yardstick but I think we can safely say the odds are Nikon try to make them rate higher than the D5200s score of 84. There is a 3 point difference between the D3200s score of 81 and the D5200s score of 84. If Nikon is able to keep this margin for subsequent bodies the D7200 would rate 87 and the D400 would rate 90. The D4 rates 89. The DX D5200 is just 5 points lower than the D4 and we have two more DX bodies Nikon will produce this year which should get higher DxOMark scores than the D5200. It may be more possible than many people think to produce a D400 which is very similar to a D4 at least in the DxOMark overall metric and it seems quite certain that the D400 will perform better than the last generation of FX sensors. Once the D4 is here it will be interesting to see this debate: Should I buy a D400 or a D3x or D3s? The D3x DxOMark score is 88 and the D3s score is 82. The D5200 is already at a score of 84. The better camera may well be the D400 which would be quite an accomplishment!

PB_PM

Recently KR has been on a bit of a rant

It should be noted Ren shoots jpeg ( Not RAW) and does not use Lightroom
IMHO it is not possible to get the best out of something like a D800 shooting.

Yes, because the use of RAW and Lightroom are the measure of a photographer with skills.

Andrewz

Are we still talking about RAW vs. JPEG? Really..... Chose what ever you will but I can't image buying a high end DSLR and not shooting in RAW, it's like throwing any 1/2 your data. But this conversation is for another thread....

The D400 will save images in both jpeg and raw as well as capturing a little bit of the subject's Soul. Be careful who you photograph!

KnockKnock

I think there's a statistical range that pro's and very advanced eyes would notice. So this 2% of the population would appreciate a DxOMark +/- 2. Then there are the 10% of enthusiasts who would apreciate a +/- of 5. Then there's the general public would would have a hard time noticing (paying for) the difference between =/- 20. Feel free to opine a different set of scores/percentages.

PB_PM

Are we still talking about RAW vs. JPEG? Really..... Chose what ever you will but I can't image buying a high end DSLR and not shooting in RAW, it's like throwing any 1/2 your data. But this conversation is for another thread....

The D400 will save images in both jpeg and raw as well as capturing a little bit of the subject's Soul. Be careful who you photograph!

My point was that shooting RAW has nothing to do with the quality of images one produces, or whether one is a skilled photographer. There maybe be some loss in terms of the amount of data available in that image, but that is another subject.

heartyfisher

We don't yet know how the D7200 or D400 will rate on the DxOMark yardstick but I think we can safely say the odds are Nikon try to make them rate higher than the D5200s score of 84. There is a 3 point difference between the D3200s score of 81 and the D5200s score of 84. If Nikon is able to keep this margin for subsequent bodies the D7200 would rate 87 and the D400 would rate 90. The D4 rates 89. The DX D5200 is just 5 points lower than the D4 and we have two more DX bodies Nikon will produce this year which should get higher DxOMark scores than the D5200. It may be more possible than many people think to produce a D400 which is very similar to a D4 at least in the DxOMark overall metric and it seems quite certain that the D400 will perform better than the last generation of FX sensors. Once the D4 is here it will be interesting to see this debate: Should I buy a D400 or a D3x or D3s? The D3x DxOMark score is 88 and the D3s score is 82. The D5200 is already at a score of 84. The better camera may well be the D400 which would be quite an accomplishment!

The D7000 and the D5100 has identical sensors.. so it would be reasonable to expect the same for the new D7XXX. ie the same sensor as the D5200.. similarly the D90 and the D300 had the same sensor so we should probably expect that the 3 DX cameras(D5200,D7200, D400) will have the same toshiba sensor.

However, having a new Toshiba sensor appear in the D5200, shows that nikon can source sensors from a non Sony company. So who knows what will be in the D300S replacement. Hoping for a 16MP high FPS High ISO camera. ie a DX (or EX ! ) version of the D4 !

donaldejose

Yes, D5100 and D7000 had same sensor and both had DxOMark scores of 80. Maybe the D7000 will have a DxOMark score of 84 like the D5200. Any difference in DxOMark scores between the D5200 and the D7200 may be due to software tweaks. However, the D400 is quite likely to have a different sensor. But the point is well taken, if the D7200 scores equal to the D5200 that leaves a 5 point gap to fill for the D400 to equal the D4s score of 89.

shawnino

DxO numerical scores are worthless on an absolute basis. As they write on their own page: "Sensor Overall Score is open and it is not a percentage. This score has been computed so that the current set of cameras, from low-end DSCs up to professional DSLRs and medium-format cameras, show results within a range from 0 to 100. However, new technologies may well lead to higher performance models."

Scores can, if you believe in the DxO methodology, rank sensors of the same generation against one another. The second we start comparing generations against one another, DxO admits its numbers lose relevance. Further, even inside the same generation, they claim to use a logarithmic scale, not an arithmetic scale. At best, DxO can rank one generation of sensors. At worst, it's hogwash.

Analogously, Jesse Owens was thought to be a pretty dominant runner. His wind-aided 10.3 won gold at the infamous 1936 Olympics. Impressive, and we all remember his name. Last year, 10.3 doesn't get a guy into the top-24, semifinal round.

Dxo has its schtick. The methodology isn't awful, and it it helps them sell software, well, that's cool. I find that their vaunted rankings have very little use. I couldn't care less what score the D400 gets. If it offers D4 calibre low light performance, I'm interested. If not, I'll pass.

donaldejose

"D4 calibre low light performance" Yes, I and others think that is exactly what the D400 will need to offer in order to be attractive and successful in the market. If IQ at ISO 12,800 and 25,600 can almost equal the D4 but just in the smaller DX size a lot of people will purchase that body.

PB_PM

That just isn't logical from a marketing standpoint. Yes it would be nice, but there is no way Nikon is going to sell a DX body that matches their high end pro body in terms of performance. Nobody would buy the high end model if they did!

spraynpray

+1 PB. It would lose them some D4 sales.

It does seem pretty likely that they will come up with a delicate balancing act that gives great image quality, fps, ISO performance and pro robustness at the 'right' price, and just the 'right' difference in performance in all areas

heartyfisher

I cant see how the D400 can possibly equal the D4 high iso without a paradigm shift in sensor design. its always been clear that the same generation DX sensors will be at least 1 stop weaker than the FX counterpart.

Msmoto

One of the nice things about this thread is one gets to vote as many times as you like...LOL

I will take a stand and say if the next "pro" DX body does not have a native ISO of 12,800, I cannot imagine anyone buying it. Maybe this is the issue for Nikon. They will have to bring out a 50MP D4x with native ISO of 12,800 and then by using 22MP of this sensor they have the DX pro model. My thinking is sensor technology is rapidly advancing. And, within another year we are going to see another generation of high ISO, high MP sensors. And, it may be we will just jump into the mirrorless design for the next "pro" DX sensor....I do not think this is quite ready yet, but my strong suspicion is that before the end of 2014 we will see changes like never before.