Will there Be a Professional DX Body From Nikon?

snakebunk

I hope they call it D400, it would be funny in a good way :-)

spraynpray

I don't think the D7200 is what Nikon are talking about as the 7D2 competitor because the spec on the blog page isn't good enough. 6fps and a buffer of only 16 raw+jpg just doesn't cut it for a pro DX or D300s replacement. The D7200 looks like an incremental upgrade of the D7100. The post does say 'new sensor' though which could mean even better hi ISO performance and that would be great.

It does feel like Nikon waited for Canon to launch the 7D2 and have checked it out before deciding the feature set for the D400.

One_Oh_Four

I don't think the D7200 is what Nikon are talking about as the 7D2 competitor because the spec on the blog page isn't good enough. 6fps and a buffer of only 16 raw+jpg just doesn't cut it for a pro DX or D300s replacement. The D7200 looks like an incremental upgrade of the D7100. The post does say 'new sensor' though which could mean even better hi ISO performance and that would be great.

It does feel like Nikon waited for Canon to launch the 7D2 and have checked it out before deciding the feature set for the D400.

Maybe that's why the D7200 wasn't announced at CP+, they ran out of time while changing the originally envisioned D7200 to match or cap the 7DMkII?....

spraynpray

I don't think that a tweak to a D7xxx will get you to or better than 10fps and 65 cross-type focus points, but hopefully we'll see soon.

The 7D has a reputation for being pretty indestructible (don't know about the 7D2 yet) and to be honest I don't see that coming out of a D750 type body either.

Terry7732

I agree with spraynpray, the proposed D7200 just doesn't cut it against the 7D2. I also agree that Nikon probably waited until after the launch of the 7D2. Nikon were soundly trounced last time with the 7d vs D300s and will want to be absolutely certain that doesn't happen again.

One_Oh_Four

Let's hope we'll be pleasantly surprised, then!!

Msmoto

The number one issue I have with the current DX lineup is the ergonomics are different than my D4 and D800E. So, when switching back and forth, as I occasionally do with my D90, I get confused whereas going from the D800 to D4 is relatively easy as controls tend to be very similar. Of course this could be an age factor

I really cannot understand why a D810 style body could not have the D7200 sensor in it and be sold with processing like the D4s so as to have a crop sensor bad which would bang out 8-9 FPS, hold maybe 40-50 in the buffer.....? Oh well. )

sevencrossing

One of the big advantages to Dx is cost ( I accept there are others)
My gut feeling. If Nikon try to beat the 7D2 it will be on price and IQ not features
They will attempt to give the birdies 8 - 10 fps, fast accurate focusing and high IQ from Expeed 4
but giving it the controls of a D800, would make production too expensive
Msmoto 0ccasionally do with my D90, I get confused
I did too, so I sold it

funtagraph

@Msmoto, I do understand your issue with different concepts of usabilty. I also have my problems with that. Coming orginally from D7000, I find the concept with a mode dial and user settings which remain saved although I can change them anytime. It's not consequent from Nikon to use the "pro"-configuration in D8x0 and in D700, but no more in D750 although it's the same model-identifiying number D7xx.

As this is also hardware depending, there's no easy solution. But Canon also uses a dial in their top-line, so it can't be that bad.

donaldejose

"but giving it the controls of a D800, would make production too expensive"- BUT, the D200 and the D300 and the D300s all had the pro-body style control layout and they were sold for under $2,000 so I would expect Nikon to be able to put pro-body style controls on a DX D400 and keep the cost under $2,000.

I think the hold up is not cost or processor but rather sensor technology. DX is inherently about one stop worse at high ISO than FX due simply to the size of the sensor (an FX sensor collects more light from any given source). Thus, you have to expect about an FX ISO 12,800 clean image to be attained at about 6,400 ISO in a DX sensor. The question becomes: "What does Nikon think is necessary high ISO clean image for a pro DX body?" If Nikon thinks being able to shoot clean at ISO 3200 is sufficient we are here now; if Nikon thinks being able to shoot clean at ISO 6,400 is needed are we there yet in DX? If Nikon thinks being able to shoot clean images at ISO 12,800 is necessary are we there yet? If the new sensor used in the D7200 can be tweaked sufficiently to satisfy Nikon's high ISO criteria Nikon may be able to announce a D400 this year. I don't think the hold-up has been about no one wanting the pro body type in DX or about the cost of such a body being too high or about forcing reluctant people to FX. I think it has been about DX sensor technology. Just my opinion.

spraynpray

I've been saying all along that Nikon should use a pro body that already exists as they have long since recovered the R&D costs and the very few extra electro-mechanical differences are neither here nor there. If they do use the D750 body I would be disappointed. IMHO they could easily beat the 7D2 in ISO and IQ, match it in other areas and match it in price. They are just making sure they do.

donaldejose

Hopefully, we will all know before this year is over because a D400 will be out. Certainly, a Nikon D400 sensors should be able to beat the Cannon 7D2 sensor even if Nikon uses the new sensor in the D7200 because I think all Nikon sensors beat the comparable Cannon sensor right down the line (but I have not checked each comparable sensor match).

spraynpray

I think that the D7100 beats the 7D2 let alone the D7200 which should be better. ;-)

snakebunk

I think we will get a D7200 that will be good enough to compete with the 7D2 and a D810w (as in wildlife) that will totally destroy it.

retread

D810w.....interesting. I like that in two sizes please. The big one (FX) would see my landscapes and portraits. The little one (DX) for my wildlife and sports. Same controls I would be in photo heaven.

donaldejose

Maybe some new body type designations for Nikon pro-bodied cameras?

s=model focused for sports (both 24mp DX and 24mp FX high fps models)(D400s and D5s)

st= model focused for studio (FX 54 megapixel model doesn't have to have great IQ at high ISO but should be the best dynamic range which can be obtained from the 54mp FX sensor)(D4st or D5st and D820st)

w = model focused for wildlife (36 mp FX sensor which is capable of better high ISO IQ than the 54 mp FX sensor)(D820w)

b = model focused for birding (24 mp DX sensor)(D400b or perhaps the D400s would work equally well for birding)

Crazy, would be like BMW and Mercedes nomenclature.

PB_PM

What Nikon really needs to do is hunker down and focus on fewer models, not more. Cameras are sitting the shelf unsold, and I doubt it is due to a lack of a birder or sports edition of each camera.

donaldejose

Maybe Nikon should give up on most of the coolpix line and focus on more DX and FX models targeted at specific uses? I think Tom Hogan argues for fewer models. However, a variety of pro-control models would be easy to produce at about the same cost as now. A DX sensor can be put into a D810 body with the fastest Expeed processor and lots of buffer and a fast mirror mechanism to create a high speed DX model. Those different parts should not cost much additional. When the new 54 mp FX sensor becomes available it can be put into the D4 body or the D5 body and the D810 body. Speed or high ISO isn't needed for a studio camera, just the best mix of dynamic range and megapixels. Mixing and matching parts shouldn't be too expensive.

Question, would Nikon sell more cameras if it had a large line of more focused cameras? Or would Nikon just increase the cost of stocking more different bodies without selling more cameras to make up for this additional stocking cost?

I don't know. I just hope Nikon finds a good way to earn a large profit so it can keep developing new products for all of us.

spraynpray

Yes. Phones are nearly there now.

donaldejose

Let's see some coolpix cameras with the Nikon 1 sensor and with a DX sensor but the price should be down in the range of $200 to $500 and not up near $1.000. In other words, the price should be cheap enough to attract a person who will spend a few hundred dollars to get a camera with Wi-Fi built in to transfer higher quality images to a cell phone or directly to a facebook page through a browser. I would focus especially on image quality in low light where cell phone cameras are bad. People must see an obvious difference between a photo they took on their cell phone in a restaurant and a photo a friend posted which was taken in a restaurant with a coolpix so the cell phone user says: "I want that" and can get it for a few hundred dollars. Coolpix bodies with Nikon 1 sensors should not sell for prices which compete with a D3300 or D5500. Not many DSLR users will say "I want that" because they can produce that with their current equipment. In my opinion Nikon priced the Nikon 1 V series and the Coolpix A way too high. They should be no more than $500.

NSXTypeR

I have to agree- there's no point in spending $800 for an advanced point and shoot when a Sony RX100 is about $500. It's not the newest, but still better than most phones. Nikon would be shooting themselves in the foot if they overprice things again.

They have to get a camera with a 1 inch sensor RX100 performance for about $400.

Sports

In 2014, Nikon focused on FX, and ended up with the best two DSLRs ever seen, D750 and D810.
And the D610 offered incredible IQ for the money. Maybe, the D4S and the DF were not as strong in their segments, but still, Nikon ruled.
At the end of the day, though. Nikon lost 3 % market share and Canon won 5 % (Sonyalpharumors quoting BCNRanking).
In other words, Nikon cannot just sit and wait for the world to go fullframe. It seems that FX is simply not the killer "feature" that Nikon (and many NR readers :-) ) think it is.
Nikon has two options, IMHO.
a) beat Canon directly on quality+features+price - hopefully all three - in the battleplaces that appear (such as pro DX)
or b) come up with something really different (disruptive) ... not just more expensive.

Ironheart

It does feel like Nikon waited for Canon to launch the 7D2 and have checked it out before deciding the feature set for the D400.

+1 They were waiting for canon to blink. What's amazing is the total lack of rumors or leaks.

Photobug

Maybe some new body type designations for Nikon pro-bodied cameras?

s=model focused for sports (both 24mp DX and 24mp FX high fps models)(D400s and D5s)

st= model focused for studio (FX 54 megapixel model doesn't have to have great IQ at high ISO but should be the best dynamic range which can be obtained from the 54mp FX sensor)(D4st or D5st and D820st)

w = model focused for wildlife (36 mp FX sensor which is capable of better high ISO IQ than the 54 mp FX sensor)(D820w)

b = model focused for birding (24 mp DX sensor)(D400b or perhaps the D400s would work equally well for birding)

Crazy, would be like BMW and Mercedes nomenclature.

With logic like that, they would have lots of winners. I guess my only question, is that spreading them out to too many bodies? Really logical @donaldejose.

@PB-PM said: What Nikon really needs to do is hunker down and focus on fewer models, not more. Cameras are sitting the shelf unsold, and I doubt it is due to a lack of a birder or sports edition of each camera.
Although I liked Donaldejose concept form models, I also agree with you. You want to reduce the number of DSLR's so they do more to reduce the number of DSLR's for higher volume and more profit.

WestEndFoto

OK, which models would you guys eliminate?

And if your favorite model has been eliminated by somebody, feel free to chime in.