Will there Be a Professional DX Body From Nikon?

snakebunk

Have you met any of these people? Where do they live?

They hang out on NRF

Tell me if you see one.

Ironheart

I'm actually waiting for the D410s :P

manhattanboy

Most people hope the D400 would be only just north of $2,000 putting it, at a similar price to the D750

There is no way it will be $2K unless it is waaaay better than the 7Dm2 or Nikon's management has gotten hooked on illicit drugs. Remember that the 7Dm2 is already hanging out at $1300.

retread

Let me introduce myself. I am one of "those people". I have spent enough on glass and other accessories to buy almost 2 D810's or almost 5 of the D7200 cameras in the last year. Both these look appealing to me. I do not have a SSS tree so have to slow down so have time to wait and save the $$$. I will look at what is available when the time comes and proceed from there. If no D400/d9300 (I hope there is) then it will be on to plan B, Maybe a D7x00 or a D8x0. I just like both DX and FX in there own place.

PB_PM

I'm actually waiting for the D410s :P

Bah, that's nothing. I'm waiting for the D500hsx

Ironheart

I'm actually waiting for the D410s :P

Bah, that's nothing. I'm waiting for the D500hsx

You forgot the "a" ;-)

PB_PM

I'm actually waiting for the D410s :P

Bah, that's nothing. I'm waiting for the D500hsx

You forgot the "a" ;-)

Nah, I don't do astrophotography enough to wait for the D500hsxa.

snakebunk

@retread: You have a plan b and I think you will be ok with either camera. The D810 looks really nice.

At least two times I have seen bird photographers switch between a D4s and a D810. They use the D4s for flying birds and the D810 for non action. Other people, like myself, thinks it is a little bit expensive two buy both these cameras. With a pro dx camera we could get both fps and pixel density in the same camera and it is hard not to think about it sometimes. But I would never ever wait for Nikon to do something.

I am not sure it is constructive to talk about price at this stage but I think a pro camera is always fairly expensive due to the high build quality and top specs.

My guess is that Nikon will not make a pro dx dslr, but we will eventually get a very great mirrorless dx camera.

manhattanboy

Thom's latest post has some cryptic language:

The irony is that Nikon is going to end 2015 with the strongest DSLR lineup they’ve ever had. Totally solid from bottom to top, with at least one missing model showing up, too (hint, hint).

Is the D400 on NDA out in the wild?
If yes, can someone reply that they can neither confirm nor deny

Sports

It's pretty certain that Thom knows more than the average Joe, but, obviously, less than Nikon HQ. And I'm sure he knows about the future D5.
A missing model could be a D4X (50 Mp), as well. Others? Surely, "the real D700 successor" can no longer be considered a missing model. Hasn't it had three successors so far? Well, perhaps not the REAL successor :-)

sevencrossing

Is the D400 on NDA out in the wild? If yes, can someone reply that they can neither confirm nor deny

I can confirm, I do not have a D400 on NDA

Sports

It's pretty certain that Thom knows more than the average Joe,..... And I'm sure he knows about the future D5.

I think there is every chance of a D5 on NDA

PB_PM

Surely, "the real D700 successor" can no longer be considered a missing model. Hasn't it had three successors so far? Well, perhaps not the REAL successor :-)

I've never got this, the D700 successor has been out for years, it was the D800/D800E, now the D810. I understood the reasoning, until I tried a D800, then I moved on with my life. I personally see the D750 as a much closer successor, in terms of it being a better general purpose camera, but that's just part of my feeling that Nikon is shifting to smaller, lighter weight cameras. Each generation of semi-pro bodies since the D700/D300 have been getting lighter, adding more plastic and carbon fibre to the build, and that is no coincidence. That's another topic altogether though.

On the topic of a semi-pro DX camera, the only camera in Nikon's lineup today that has never got a successor is the D300s (excluding the Df, which is likely a one time thing). At least not a successor in the sense of a similar sized body with similar features. I think the primary reasons so many people feel left out by this is that the D300s was the fourth camera in a line of successful cameras, aka D100, D200, D300, D300s. Nikon kind of left said users hanging. That said, I think the main reason behind the delay is that the majority of buyers of said cameras have moved to higher end gear, aka D8xx series. I'm speaking in terms of the professional users who used to promote and use that line of DX semi-pro cameras.

This is just my thought, but once the D700 came out I think the writing was on the wall for the Dxxx DX bodies, for better or for worse. I think this for two reasons, first because the D700 and successors have taken the body style of that semi-pro DX body and moved it up, and secondly because the price of making higher end cameras has gone up. Keep in mind that the D300 was not just a DX flagship camera for Nikon, but second only to the D3 at the time of it's release. Now we have a much larger range of cameras available, and even if there is a D400/D9300 it wouldn't really be a flagship model anymore. Nikon's flagship models today are the D4s and D810, all the other cameras are just sales by association in the minds of Nikon executives. I think that is the main reason that Nikon has focused so much DX attention on the former mid range, now high end D7xxxx bodies.

Lets look at it this way, Nikon has been slowly adding more semi-pro features and speed to these bodies since the D90/D7000 time frame. Then there was no D300s successor. Now we see a semi-cripplied D7200, and in the next year or two will likely see a D7300 with similar features, but with an even faster processor that can handle the buffer and speed needs that a D400 would have had. So by putting together Nikon's desire to make smaller and lighter cameras, along with the boosted specs of the former mid-range DX bodies, I think it is easy to see why there is no D300s successor, at least not yet.

I'm not trying to say Nikon should not release a "true" D300s successor, but I think even if they do it might not look like the camera that people are expecting. If there is, I doubt it will be a full magnesium alloy body, but rather a hybrid magnesium alloy, carbon fibre body like the D7200 and D750. For two reasons, first to reduce production costs, and secondly to keep the weight down. Nikon could then say, "hey, we have the light weight D400, yeah it weighs xxxg less than the 7D MKII, has better AF, it doesn't need all cross type points to actually get a subject in focus, has better metering, oh and yeah the sensor kicks butt! Now slap a 300mm F4E PF on there and your sports and birding kit weighs half as much as Canon's, so go out and shoot!"

sevencrossing

PB_PM An excellent summary on a semi Pro DX

You have also have given us a very good, hands on, review of the D750

Is there anything a Professional ( or semi pro) DX Body From Nikon, could have, that would make you seriously consider selling your D750 to buy one.

(Sorry I am not allowing you both )

PB_PM

Is there anything a Professional ( or semi pro) DX Body From Nikon, could have, that would make you seriously consider selling your D750 to buy one.

In my mind DX and FX are not mutually exclusive. I'll take your question and give you two answers, because it simply depends on what the focus of your shooting is.

First answer: Using a single camera, to shoot anything and everything, I would not trade an FX camera for high end DX camera. Why? Because all my glass is FX, making a semi-pro DX camera my only camera body impractical. Therefore I would not trade the D750 for a D400, because it would be like selling a D7200 to buy the Nikon 1 V3 and only using F-mount lenses on it. If I could only have one DSLR, under my current conditions, I'd pick the D750 over a semi-pro DX, no questions asked.

Second answer: This is the more complicated, and real answer to the question, based on my own usage and preferences. I've got to break your rule though, because I always have two DSLR's. I would very much like to have both a D750 and a D400, because they have different purposes. The D750 is, as I said before, a great general purpose camera, but it is a jack of all trades, not a master of any. The semi-pro DX body on the other hand would be a speciality camera, the master of sports and action for those who cannot justify a D4s. The reason I would go for both is because I do enjoy shooting the specialities that it would fulfill, but could never justify the price of a D4s for a hobby only activity. That and a D400 and a D750 together still costs less D4s.

A modern pro-DX would easily outshining my aging D700, that i use as a backup today, but then I just cannot seem to let that legend of camera go. If I got the semi-pro DX, or another FX camera for that matter, I think I would clean the D700 up and put it in a glass case, yes I like it that much. Kind of like how I cannot let go of my Dad's old Nikon FE, because it is a classic, and the D700 is one as well. I couldn't say that of any other DSLR I've owned, past or present.

sevencrossing

@ PB_PM Thank you. Brilliant comprehensive post

, but could never justify the price of a D4s

Same here. If Nikon could knock $4,000 off the price of D4s by simply fitting it with a dx sensor. I and a lot of others, would buy one too

but in order to get it to about $2,000, they would have reduced the spec in many other ways too

PB_PM I always have two DSLR's

Another question . What features, would Nikon have to add to a D750, to make you consider shooting with two of them ( no you are not allowed 3 DSLRs )

PB_PM

I highly doubt we'll see a D2X/D2H style DX camera, ever again. I for one do not have any desire for a DX sensor in a D4s body, since it is way to bulky. If someone really wants a fast daylight full pro style sports camera, with images for web/newsprint only use, grab a D2Hs for $400-500. No cropping room, but you could put your budget into glass instead. It wouldn't be any good for wildlife now days though.

The D300(s) has the perfect form factor for a modern, semi-compact, rugged sports/wildlife camera. The DX sensor will steal some performance in low light, but most sporting events that I've shot are in the daylight, and those that aren't could be handled by the D750 for the most part. A number of years ago I shot a tennis tournament (I was the lone official shooter) and most of the sessions were at dusk or after, with the D700 and D300 and didn't stuffer too much as a result of having a mix of bodies. People loved the shots, since most of them didn't think shots like that were possible after dark (no flash permitted). It knocked their socks off then, so I I showed up with a D750 and D400, I could easily do it again.

PB_PM I always have two DSLR's
Another question . What features, would Nikon have to add to a D750, to make you consider shooting with two of them ( no you are not allowed 3 DSLRs )

Always pushing the envelope eh? I actually have three DSLR's now, if you count my semi-retired D300 that is on loan to a family member, so...

To answer the question, as to what a D750 would need? A sensor with a 24MP DX crop mode. The same or better FPS, maybe a slightly deeper buffer for intense moments. That's about it. The question is, would I pay the price to have two identical bodies? Questionable. If I was a full time pro shooter? No questions asked, but as someone who shoots mostly for pleasure, and sometimes for profit, I just don't see the need. If the semi-pro DX was in the $1400-1899 price bracket I would easily pick one up as a backup over two $2k+ bodies.

manhattanboy

Thom posted another strong hint that the missing DSLR from Nikon this year will be the D400, with a fall launch date. http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-d400-in-2011.html
I am praying for Qc mode and wifi to make the cut.

PB_PM

Look at the date of that article, an edited post from 2011. Yeah that's how long Thom has being saying "it's coming soon."

I hope it does, but I'm really not holding my breath, or my cash for that matter.

manhattanboy

Look at the date of that article, an edited post from 2011. Yeah that's how long Thom has being saying "it's coming soon."

I hope it does, but I'm really not holding my breath, or my cash for that matter.

Predicting what companies do is hard, that's why even the wall street fat cats get it wrong and look foolish occasionally. There are differences between stating observations (e.g. there is currently a D400 prototype in the wild) and predictions (e.g. Nikon will launch such a camera in the fall). While I could speculate that Nikon is taking their time doing QC checks, after the latest 300PF VR errors to add onto the D750, D810, D610 etc. errors, it seems like this portion of the company has been downsized or cut out.

There is nothing in the current Nikon lineup that I would want over my D810 and D7100 at this moment. A D400 with QC mode and wifi along with buffer improvements would be a welcome replacement for the 7100 assuming Nikon doesn't price it too high. But honestly I would like to see Nikon push the envelope with DX rather than leaving it to Samsung, Sony, or Canon. Give us at least some wow factor or uniqueness. That is what is missing with DX. FX has more unique options. Want retro? Df. Want massive MP? 810. Want the fastest fps and deepest buffer? D4S. Want a good all-around? 750. On the DX side there really are no parallels. Want retro? Nothing. Want massive MP? Too bad its one size fits all. Want the fastest fps and deepest buffer? Too bad you are limited to 6fps and have been for years now. Only when it comes to a good all-around camera -probably the D7200 or D5500- is Nikon really selling a good product for DX. Think about what Nikon's DX cameras are differentiated on? The lack of features. They should be differentiated on their best use scenarios instead, and that in a nutshell is the Nikon DX problem.

snakebunk

@manhattanboy: I like how you think. The dx cameras need personality, not just price differentiation.

What if Nikon makes two pro dx cameras and release them at the same time? I am thinking one action monster with fps close to the D4s but with a high pixel density (16-20 mp in dx), and one reach monster with 36 mp and extreme pixel density. That would generate a wow from me .

Msmoto

My guess... the new full frame mirrorless...is what Nikon is bringing to the table, not a Pro DX camera body...

heartyfisher

My guess... the new full frame mirrorless...is what Nikon is bringing to the table, not a Pro DX camera body...

nothing to stop them from using the same tech for a Dx mirrorless too..

heartyfisher

When do you think the new 24mp 19fps sony sensors will find its way into the Dx cameras?
Maybe that will be the time frame for the D400?

Could be cool shooting at bursts of 19 fps with the mirror going up every 4-6 times per second to acquire focus. ie 3 or 4 shots every time the mirror flips. With the focus interpolation that we currently have anyway, focus would be great all the way !

PB_PM

When do you think the new 24mp 19fps sony sensors will find its way into the Dx cameras?
Maybe that will be the time frame for the D400?

It likely doesn't matter what the sensor is capable of, since Nikon still uses a physical shutter in DSLR cameras, at least for non-liveview shooting. As long as their is a mirror and physical shutter the limit is how quickly the mirror can move out of the way. If it's anything like the 1Dx from Canon that limit is around 11FPS. The cameras blackout time is too long for the camera to meter or use phase detect focus beyond that. So at speeds beyond 11fps AF is disabled and mirror is locked up.

heartyfisher

When do you think the new 24mp 19fps sony sensors will find its way into the Dx cameras?
Maybe that will be the time frame for the D400?

It likely doesn't matter what the sensor is capable of, since Nikon still uses a physical shutter in DSLR cameras, at least for non-liveview shooting. As long as their is a mirror and physical shutter the limit is how quickly the mirror can move out of the way. If it's anything like the 1Dx from Canon that limit is around 11FPS. The cameras blackout time is too long for the camera to meter or use phase detect focus beyond that. So at speeds beyond 11fps AF is disabled and mirror is locked up.

I think the multi frames in between mirror flip was suggested on this forum some time ago(cant remember who)

But lets just consider a good shutter that can go at 8 fps .. I dont think thats a huge stretch for nikon.
if you reduce that to say 4 fps you get half a second where you can shoot at the full frame rate that the sensor can manage. let say half of 19 = 9.5, add that to the 4 to get 13 to 14 FPS ie if you capture 3 or 4 frames every time the mirror flips. with no need to stretch the physical limits very far.

So you can either shoot at 8 fps or 14 fps with a skipped beat every 4th frame.