Will there Be a Professional DX Body From Nikon?

Andrewz

haroldp +1

Where's my Nikon DX range finder camera with interchangable lenses and hybrid viewfinder?

That's the DX camera I want.

sevencrossing

for the past few years there seems to be a move to DSLR's that are lighter, smaller and still very capable. With of course the exception of the 2 full on pro cameras with a full on pro price.

A excellent and new perspective

The true pro is not too interested in weight or size, He is not going to take all his gear on holiday, he simply wants a tough, reliable, high quality camera that going to get the job done. That said does not want to spend a fortune or carry more weight than necessary. The D810 and D4s meets these requirements

The consumer does want to take his camera on holiday but also want a High IQ. The D7100 and the D750 meets these requirements

haroldp The place I am seeing pro glass in DX format is Fuji
Non F mount lenses are of little interest to Nikon users

sevencrossing

Where's my Nikon DX range finder camera with interchangable lenses and hybrid viewfinder?

That's the DX camera I want.

Another excellent reason for no D400
even if Nikon did bring out a Dx D4 for the price of a D750
No one is going to buy it. They would tell us they are waiting for the mirrorless version

Sports

I think the cost of making the D400 before the flood in Thailand that destroyed the DX plant would have been nominal. But now it's no longer just an upgrade but a complete retooling and rebuilding a production line for a camera which may have limited appeal.

D810 is made in Thailand, and the plant should be perfectly capable of making a D400 as well, without any rebuilding.

.... no D400 .... No one is going to buy it.

Yeah, right, one person asking for a range finder mirrorless is suddenly an "excellent" and convincing argument.

They would tell us they are waiting for the mirrorless version.

Why on earth would they do that when they've spent years on NR telling they want a D400?

But IF mirrorless is actually getting better than DSLR, then this thread could just as well cover mirrorless. It hasn't happened yet, but if viewfinder, AF, and battery life improve, then, fine, if there'll be a mirrorless pro-DX from Nikon.

sevencrossing

Why on earth would they do that when they've spent years on NR telling they want a D400?

Because most of them have now bought something else

Ironheart

Why on earth would they do that when they've spent years on NR telling they want a D400?

Because most of them have now bought something else

Yeah, I bought a N1V3 and I'm going to upgrade my D7000 to a D7200. I also have a D3xxx and a D5xxx so no way I would ever buy a D400, ever, 'cause why would I want a 5th camera...

sevencrossing

@ Ironheart You clearly have a bad case of NAS. A 5th Camera is inevitable

proudgeek

Have put down a deposit for a trip to Alaska this summer, for which I'll buy a second body to complement my D800. So the clock is ticking. I either buy something like a refurbed D810/D800 (or a new D810 I suppose), or a D400 if it becomes available. Given the lead time between product announcements and products becoming available (not to mention the expected demand for the product), I'm guessing Nikon has about 2 months to make the announcement before I have to fish or cut bait.

spraynpray

@Spraynpray

Why not? who know's? Nikon does crazy things like the Df.

But here are my thoughts.....
So first off I think there would have been a D400 in 2011/2012 but there was the tsunami and flood that destroyed the DX plant, then there was the earthquake in Japan, then the death of the point and shoot market. The Digital camera world has had some major shifts since the D300 first came out. Oh yes and profits have fallen.

I think the cost of making the D400 before the flood in Thailand that destroyed the DX plant would have been nominal. But now it's no longer just an upgrade but a complete retooling and rebuilding a production line for a camera which may have limited appeal.

Again just my perception but from watching Nikon for the past few years there seems to be a move to DSLR's that are lighter, smaller and still very capable. With of course the exception of the 2 full on pro cameras with a full on pro price.

Yes the D7100/D7200 are not replacements for the D300. I still think there will be another DX camera to fill the gap but it won't have the full magnessium chassis, that would just cost to much.

I'm one of the guys who wanted a D400, I just don't see it happening now.

At last somebody with a thoughtfully constructed argument for why there will be no D400. Thanks for not trotting out the usual nonsense Andrewz.

I don't agree of course, because 'pro' cameras are bought by far more enthusiasts than pros and once launched, NAS would kick in with everybody whether they have D90's or D7100 and then oops, it's on backorder and a legendary camera. I just hope we get to find out. BIG shame if we don't.

WestEndFoto

If Nikon made a small DX sensor camera with a true DX sized mount and primes to match, I would buy it. But what I really want is a true medium format (not the Pentax-lite version). In another five years, sensors will come down enough for Canon or Nikon to buy into it. That would get me excited. I will carry the above mentioned DX when I want to take snapshots and use medium format for serious work.

sevencrossing

..... 'pro' cameras are bought by far more enthusiasts than pros.

Pros also use enthusiasts cameras

and here is the big problem. Everyone ( including the OED) has different definitions of the word Pro

donaldejose

Sure, but just look at the hole in the line-up at the old D300s price point. Surely Nikon is going to fill that hole as soon as they are satisfied with the product. Many people will shoot with a DX D400 and an FX D810 if given that choice.

Photobug

Have put down a deposit for a trip to Alaska this summer, for which I'll buy a second body to complement my D800. So the clock is ticking. I either buy something like a refurbed D810/D800 (or a new D810 I suppose), or a D400 if it becomes available. Given the lead time between product announcements and products becoming available (not to mention the expected demand for the product), I'm guessing Nikon has about 2 months to make the announcement before I have to fish or cut bait.

I'll send you a PM regarding Alaska.

Coastalconn

In a few weeks it will be April 1st again, so we can ramp up the rumors of a pro DX just like last year and the D9300

proudgeek

I'll send you a PM regarding Alaska.

Any advice would be most welcome.

snakebunk

There is a REASON why if you do the math (megapixels time fps), the numbers tend to max out in the same area. You are NOT going to shoot 10fps at 24mp with the current processors unless Nikon does a hell of a lot of tweaking, and that doesn't come cheap or easy.

Do you think Nikon has hit a wall and cannot raise the throughput? If that is the case I think they simply must work on it in order to stay competitive. I, for example, hope for 6 fps in the D820.

Maybe Nikon is working on this and that the new pro dx camera is the first one with a new technology for high throughput?

spraynpray

I can see the product range has changed since the D3/D300s, but (as I keep saying) for sure they could produce the D400 for a market that is aching for it if they can make a D810a for a literal handful of specialised users. Remember the D810a is no good for anything else whereas the D400 would be a brilliant all round camera as well as the birders delight. Why this perspective that if you could get an FX for the same price or less why buy a DX?

More windmills... more self-delusion and wishful thinking.

Aching for it? Really? Don't confuse the loudness of a few passionate people for a widespread market. The D810a comparison is deeply, deeply flawed. The D810a is an extremely minor modification of an existing product with an extremely production low risk. A D400 would require a major effort and lots of redesign, especially if they wanted to up the FPS with existing processors. There is a REASON why if you do the math (megapixels time fps), the numbers tend to max out in the same area. You are NOT going to shoot 10fps at 24mp with the current processors unless Nikon does a hell of a lot of tweaking, and that doesn't come cheap or easy.

Go buy a D7200. Seriously. Get over it.

I am no better qualified than you or anybody in this instance to know what Nikon can and can't do or when they are going to spring the next step in fps or whatever. We are guessing. Writing your guesses more assertively than everybody else doesn't make you actually know anything more than they do Mark. What I do actually know, is resources are resources and IHMO if they have the resources to spend on a camera that I doubt they will sell a hundred units of in this country, then resources aren't their problem - and that was put up as a reason before the D810a came out.

Look at the D4/D4s - 16mp. The D400 could be a 20mp sensor which would do 10 fps (I 'did the math'), or Nikon could be about to debut a new processor or whatever. Who knows?

As to me buying a D7200, ain't gonna happen - I have the D7100/D750 which I'm happy with and I don't even need a D400 either. I just hate to see a market sector go unsupplied when it apparently exists in greater numbers than making any 'one trip pony' star camera will ever serve. You can look at the 7D2 to see how many canon sells for comparison it may not be as many as a D5500 will sell, but the profit margin should reflect that. Look at the price of the D4s - it isn't worth that price for the majority of owners because they don't need it but that doesn't stop them buying it.

If this thread irritates you, you don't have to read it or contribute to it. Personally, I find contributing to it fun which is why I do. NR would be diminished without threads like this.

Sports

Well said, Spraynpray.
A *nice* *contribution* to the discussion.

heartyfisher

I hope Nikon separates the 2 lines of cameras and treat DX like its own business unit. Let it compete properly with the other DX systems out there... ie make DX cameras the best they can be and have a set of PRO models.

sevencrossing

Many people will shoot with a DX D400 and an FX D810 if given that choice.

The D810 has 3 disadvantages it is relatively big , heavy and expensive
If I bought a second camera to my D800, I want something lighter, smaller and cheaper.
The D7100 and D7200, not a D400, fits the above criteria

just look at the hole in the line-up at the old D300s price point
there is always going a hole between Dx and Fx because of the cost of glass

sevencrossing

NR would be diminished without threads like this.

And as there will never be a Pro DX from Nikon this thread will never end


( and don't take this comment seriously)

Msmoto

Of course, there is one way a thread like this could end....especially if I fall out of bed on the wrong side.
) :-(( )

snakebunk

Maybe it is time to sumarize. What facts do we have to base our guesses on?

Facts not in favor of a pro dx camera:
* If Nikon follows the regular release cycle there should have been a D300s replacement long ago.
* Nikon seems to be focusing on inexpensive dx products.
* The D610, D750 and Df cameras indicates that Nikon has its mind on other things than a new pro dx camera.

Facts in favor of a pro dx camera:
* Nikon has a product line of pro dx cameras, and the current model (D300s) has not been discontinued.
* The Canon 7D Mark II.
* There is a customer interest for a new pro dx camera.

Are these facts correct? What facts am I missing?

sevencrossing

My summery

Against
The advantages of a Pro Dx are being eroded

1) Cost
The price difference between a DX and FX sensor has diminished
Nikon have introduced several budget FX cameras
2) Reach
this might disappear if Nikon increase the number of MPs in the D820
3) fps
is there any reason for this to better than a FX camera in Dx mode ?

For
7D2 - Is there any evidence Nikon are losing significant sales to this camera?
Customer interest Interest - yes but many potential customers have changed to FX
D300s has not been discontinued- A few dealers still have stock, which they are clearly trying to off load
http://www.photographyblog.com/news/nikon_d700_and_d300s_discontinued/

snakebunk

3) fps
is there any reason for this to better than a FX camera in Dx mode ?

This is a great point! If the D8xx cameras could shoot at 10 fps in dx mode, I would stop thinking about a pro dx camera. I would have the pro dx camera inside my fx camera.