Will there Be a Professional DX Body From Nikon?

snakebunk

Nikon already have. It is called the D750 and is by all accounts, a very big improvement on the D300s

The D750 is not as fast as the D300s, it is has a lower pixel density, it doesn't take cf cards and I don't think the build quality is quite as good as the D300s. I think the D810 is a much better replacement for the D300s. It is not as fast but otherwise better on everything I believe. It depends of course on what you think is important but I would not call the D750 a D300s replacement.

sevencrossing

The D750 is not as fast

Not only does it depends on what you mean by "replacement" and "Pro", it also depends on what you mean by fast
D300s ISO 200 - 3,200
D750 100 ~ 12,800
I would guess most most pros would prefer the higher ISO to an extra 1 or 2 fps

sevencrossing

The D750 is not as fast

Not only does it depends on what you mean by "replacement" and "Pro", it also depends on what you mean by fast
D300s ISO 200 - 3,200
D750 100 ~ 12,800
I would guess most most pros would prefer the higher ISO to an extra 1 or 2 fps
In all honesty if your D300s was stolen and your insurance company offed you a reconditioned D300s or a reconditioned D750 which would you choose ?
( taking the D750 then trading it for a D800 is cheating )

snakebunk

By fast I mean more frames per second. The D300s has 7 fps without grip and I think a replacement/update should have at least 8 fps.

I like CF cards, have never had any problems with them.

The D750 is a very different camera from the D300s and I think it is strange to say that it is the D300s replacement. It was just a little remark from me to keep the thread going .

@sevencrossing: Like you say, I would choose the D750 because of the better handling of high ISO, the D300s is pretty outdated when it comes to that. And I would cheat if I could...

sevencrossing

. And I would cheat if I could...

:-\"

PB_PM

I think we need to step back and think about this beyond the scope of, "I would like" and think about what is likely. I have watched a lot of sports and wildlife shooters over the last 8 years, and in that time they have changed systems in a way that many of you "D400/D9300" wanters might find shocking. When I started 8 years ago a lot of them were shooting D2H's, D3's and D300's. What are they shooting with now? Very few with a D4/D4s, the vast majority a D7xxx series camera, and others like me a D800 or D810. Yeah, shocking right? All those slow cameras with small buffers. Gosh how do those poor pros make a living with such "slow" cameras? Somehow they do, maybe they learned how to be better photographers rather than relying on buffer space? Could be...

In any case, even if Nikon makes a D400 or D9300 is still won't please everyone. Why? No camera ever does, period. Can Nikon make a camera that fires 11FPS with a DX sensor and a 20-25 frame buffer, sure. That is if they resort to a 16MP sensor. Will that be enough for you D400/D9300 people? I doubt it would have a full mag alloy body like the D300/D300s, Nikon is moving towards lighter cameras. I suspect that even the next generation of Pro bodies will be a mix of carbon fibre and mag alloy like the D7xxx and D750. Why, more and more photographers want smaller lighter cameras, and Nikon will answer that demand in that way, along with more lenses like the 300mm F4E PF.

WestEndFoto

Well said PB_PM.

Photobug

+1 @PB_PM said: Nikon is moving towards lighter cameras. I suspect that even the next generation of Pro bodies will be a mix of carbon fibre and mag alloy like the D7xxx and D750. Why, more and more photographers want smaller lighter cameras, and Nikon will answer that demand in that way, along with more lenses like the 300mm F4E PF.

I really see the future as more compact and lighter cameras as well.

snakebunk

Can Nikon make a camera that fires 11FPS with a DX sensor and a 20-25 frame buffer, sure. That is if they resort to a 16MP sensor. Will that be enough for you D400/D9300 people?

I don't think I am D400/D9300 people, but it sounds like a nice camera. It will have roughly the same pixel density as the D800/D810 and almost twice the speed.

Completely off topic: Do we need to give each other -1? I don't think it adds anything positive to the discussion.

donaldejose

"there is no evidence that it exists" is a true statement. It is also a true statement that there is no evidence it will never exist in the future or is in various prototypes undergoing lab testing as I type this. So all we have now is speculation, opinion and reasoned arguments for and against. It is surprising how one Nikon body which does not exist can generate so much ink on NR.

manhattanboy

What nikon really should do is give us the next generation SD card standard so we can finally move beyond 95mbs. In that manner I'd take CF cards right now as they are faster at clearing the buffer than the current 95 cards Nikon limits us to. But in general I would prefer the next gen SD cards if Nikon would follow Fuji and others and give us hardware compatible with the new cards. Can the new 7200 use them?

The 750 is not the d300s replacement. The controls are a different style with the 750 resembling the consumer controls.
Right now the closest Nikon comes to a true D300s replacement is the D810. With battery grip the d810 matches the d7200 with 7 fps. I think that's probably why many D400 folks have just gone FX.

haroldp

When I was shooting polo a lot more, I used to think that I wanted a DX camera for the reach. Then I realized that I had as many MP in the crop area of the D800 as I had on the 1D MkIV or the D4. I already knew that I shot a LOT fewer frames than most other shooters since I knew the game well. As a bonus, you also had wider shots available, and the ability to crop to the right framing where with DX I would have a horse's nose missing or something like that. I think the D810 is great if you can handle the lower frame rate and the image quality really is better than that of a DX camera. I had a D7100 and got rid of it because the inferior image quality just made my ass twitch and I am too much of a stickler to let it go.

This is exactly where I landed, using a D810 for BIF.
Looking at the Canon 7DII, we should remember that Canon's crop format lenses will simply not mount on a FF Canon body, where Nikon's DX will mount on FX bodies and the default being to switch the body to DX mode. One could therefore mount DX lenses onto a D800/810 and have a 16mp DX camera.

The D300 is not smaller or lighter than a D810, and a D400 ?? as discussed here likely also will not be, which is why I sold mine and kept my DX lenses.

I would rather see a 54mp FX with 24mp DX crop.

If I were still pro, that would be much more valuable to me than a DX body.

.... H

donaldejose

A 54mp FX D8xx body with a 24mp DX crop mode would be very welcome. As long as DX remains at 24mp you could not get more "reach" with a DX body.

heartyfisher

@PB_PM "...a lot of sports and wildlife shooters ... the vast majority a D7xxx series camera" - now clearly that is where the majority of Pro-DX market will come from.


Re: "impossibility of proving a negative" LOL ! so you have no arguments for why there will not be a Pro-DX? Its obvious there is a market for a Pro-Dx its obvious there are products that are Pro-Dx I know your Faith that there will not be a Pro-DX is strong but you are talking about unicorns to distract from the facts. The existence of Pro-DX products are facts. Admit it, there is no logical reason for not having a Pro-Dx camera.

Re:Comparing a Pro-DX with all kinds of cameras like the D4S and D750, D7200 etc.. is just not logical, not to mention the totally unfounded 54MP fx. and even If that exists its still in a different market space from the Pro-Dx. I am not sure where this obviously false logic comes from. Are you guys just falling for the "grasping at straws" logic you attribute to the pro ProDx advocates?

PB_PM

@PB_PM "...a lot of sports and wildlife shooters ... the vast majority a D7xxx series camera" - now clearly that is where the majority of Pro-DX market will come from.

Kind of twisting the point I was making, which is the exact opposite. Most of those people could afford a D4s if they needed a big pro body with tons of speed. The point is, they no longer see the need for it. This is why Nikon is not making a D300s replacement.

manhattanboy

This is exactly where I landed, using a D810 for BIF.

I really like the 810 but I think the metering is very different from the 7100 that I was used to.
I'm not sure if it's a different module or what but sometimes I get surprises in high contrast situations.
Are you using spot metering? I moved away from that because of the group AF but may have to go back.

Part of the question I have been asking lately is if you have an 810 is a pro DX worth it anymore?
I am almost hoping more for a true DSLR-like 1v4 to give reach capability when the 810 falls short instead of a pro DX.
That is until Nikon surprises us with D400 greatness and I change my mind LOL.

heartyfisher

@PB_PM "...a lot of sports and wildlife shooters ... the vast majority a D7xxx series camera" - now clearly that is where the majority of Pro-DX market will come from.

Kind of twisting the point I was making, which is the exact opposite. Most of those people could afford a D4s if they needed a big pro body with tons of speed. The point is, they no longer see the need for it. This is why Nikon is not making a D300s replacement.

I know .. sorry ;-) its just that I thought the alternate interpretation of your data is more accurate especially most of the canon versions of Photogs use their ProDx version :-)

sevencrossing

Voltaire If the D400 does not exist, it would be necessary to invent one.

snakebunk

@PitchBlack: I have read all your volumes and I can only remember one argument for why there will not be a pro-dx camera. Can you please state your top arguments as concise as possible?

spraynpray

I would rather see a 54mp FX with 24mp DX crop.

If I were still pro, that would be much more valuable to me than a DX body.

.... H

Sounds ideal - so long as it is the same price the D400 would be,, I'll have two please.

sevencrossing

so long as it is the same price the D400 would be

This really sums why this is indeed an inane thread
We have not got the foggiest idea what the specification of a "Pro Dx" might be
We have no idea if, or when Nikon might make one
We have no idea what it might be called
We certainly have no idea of its price

We do Know with 100% certainly

What ever its specification or price. A lot of people on NRF will not consider it a true D300s replacement
and this thread will never ever end

snakebunk

Nope. I'm done. This inane thread is a waste of my time, and everyone else's as well. Go ahead, believe in what is not real. I have a plane to catch to Scotland. I'm going to take pictures of the Loch Ness monster.

Have fun, and watch out for that avalanche of evidence!

proudgeek

No, and here's why:
Who's the primary market for a D300s replacement? Amateur birders (like me) who can't afford or don't want to spend the $$ on a D4, but who want reach and high FPS. A D400 as it's been described here would be the perfect camera. You get decent but not D4-level ISO performance, probably excellent image quality, good AF capabilities, robust build, etc. And here's the kicker, you can get away with "shorter" lenses. So why should Nikon make it easier for people to get by with less expensive glass? I think they believe that if you want to shoot wildlife and are serious about it, you'll pony up for the best glass Nikon has available.

sevencrossing

@proudgeek
At this time of year, a band of photographers will gather at the Avon Gorge Bristol, to photograph the peregrine falcons. There will every make and combination of camera and lens there, including top end Canon's and Nikon's complete with super telephoto lenses and wembly heads
Every year, some of the best pictures are taken by a young man with a D700.
Why are his among the best ? Like the late Eric Hosking, he has the knack of being in the right place and taking a single shot, at the right time
Yes 10 fps makes bif easier but they are not essential
I sure the young man would love a D400 but $2000 is completely out of his budget. My point. The D400 is likly to be outside the budget of many amateur birders who are quite happy with their D7xxx

heartyfisher

@sevencrossing said "We have not got the foggiest idea what the specification of a "Pro Dx" might be"

?? of course we do.. see the 7dm2 and the Pentax K3 and the olympus OMD EM1. Also look at the Samsung NX1 and Fujifilm X-pro1 and XT1. Just average out those specs and we have it.. .. I am sure everyone knows of these cameras. Why do the non Pro-Dx people seem to deny the existence of these cameras? Its almost like looking at the blue dress and saying its white!