Will there Be a Professional DX Body From Nikon?

sevencrossing

but I hope they make the D7300 a lot faster than the D7200.

+1

1/8000 is definitely too slow

spraynpray

Yes my window cleaner is of the same opinion ( but he also thought Ed would be Prime Minister )

Well then seven, as I knew Dave would be, it follows by your logic that there will be a pro crop coming later this year!

In my biased view Nikon has made two mistakes:
1. They should have continued the D300 product line and made a D400 and a D410 that where like siblings to the D800 and D810 (shared the same accessories and had similar bodies).
2. They should have mitigated mistake number one by making the D7200 faster.

What they will do I have no idea at all of course. I hope they make sure they don't discontinue any more product lines before there are good replacements. I think it is a little late to start working on a D420 to be released with the D820 (if they don't already have one under development) but I hope they make the D7300 a lot faster than the D7200.

1. You will not find many here who disagree.

2. I disagree - all the time the D7xxx's are buffer and fps limited, there is hope for a pro DX!

*Surely* they will not abandon the sport/wildlife sector to Canon. It would be a break from the established pattern if they did.

snakebunk

2. I disagree - all the time the D7xxx's are buffer and fps limited, there is hope for a pro DX!

Alright!

(hope we are not double bluffed)

Msmoto

Nikon is dancing to the beat of a different drummer. Why they bring out an astro body, when they could have introduced a pro DX body...who knows. All of the questions raised on this thread seem reasonable, yet only those inside of Nikon understand the motivating factors behind their actions.

My personal belief is most of the energy at Nikon in R & D, is focused on the mirrorless pro body. And, maybe this will be in both DX and FX formats.

Sports

most of the energy at Nikon in R & D is focused on the mirrorless pro body

At some point, it was suggested that Nikon R & D had an "A team" and a "B team", and that most of the new bodies were more or less just updates ... as in "created by the B team". Meaning that the "A team" was doing something a lot more innovative ... and secret.
Don't know if this is true or not, but surely, the mirrorless system must require some kind of "A team". But on the other hand, so does the D5 ... which cannot possibly be (??) of the new mirrorless system ... which does not yet exist, obviously.
Oh, all those unknowns.

PB_PM

What's more likely is that each camera gets a team. Now all teams are not going to be created equal. Cameras with higher priority (D5) would likely have more senior designers and a larger R&D budget, while lower end products (Coolpix) would likely have fewer experienced workers, and a small design budget.

Coastalconn

Well, from my POV now that it is changed and I kind of went all in with Canon (I just purchased a Canon 500 F4 first version IS) Nikon still has a glimmer of hope because Canon decided to keep their sensor design in house. If Canon had brought this camera to market with a Sony or Toshiba sensor in it, Nikon would have nothing left to worry about in the sports/wildlife segment. Since I have such a broad fan base on facebook (almost 14K) I have been fielding a ton of questions regarding the "should I switch" photographer. As you know I'm not one of those camera brand wars type of people. But there are many comments on my FB page about me switching to Canon. I think Nikon has and is making a huge mistake by not addressing the segment I am in the middle of.

retread

If Canon had brought this camera to market with a Sony or Toshiba sensor in it, Nikon would have nothing left to worry about in the sports/wildlife segment.

Would it then blow Nikon out of the water?

Sports

I have been fielding a ton of questions regarding the "should I switch" photographer

You know, it's only a small handful of NR members that are interested in this kind of camera. At least, this claim has been made more than once on this forum :-)
Personally, I still see hints and signs everywhere that many, many people love this segment, although it's fewer than two years ago.

IF Nikon has a product of this type on its way, one should think that it would be in their own best interest to announce it sooner rather than later, to stop people switching. Even a six-month pre-announcement would work. It's not as stupid as it sounds; Canon makes very early announcement, even some of those pre-announcements. But Nikon most often announce things fairly close to availability, don't they?

spraynpray

Well, from my POV now that it is changed and I kind of went all in with Nikon (I just purchased a Canon 500 F4 first version IS)

Don't you mean you went all in with Canon?

Coastalconn

First I must apologize as the Restaurant was very busy last night and I was falling asleep as I was typing.

@Spraynpray. oops, I fixed that one..

@Retread What I was trying to say is that if the sensor in the 7D mark II was as good as a Nikon, that many people that waffled about switching would have jumped must faster. I probably would have.

@Sports. I personally think this market segment is huge. The relatively inexpensive 150-600's have opened the door to many people that want to do bird/wildlife photography. I see it all the time when I am out shooting. If Nikon had countered 6 months ago and had actually said hey the D400 (whatever they call it) is coming I for one would have waited. For Savvy shoppers like me, the 7D Mark II was only $200 more than the D7200. Don't get me wrong I think the D71/72k cameras are great for their price point and offer tremendous value.

WestEndFoto

First I must apologize as the Restaurant was very busy last night and I was falling asleep as I was typing.

@Sports. I personally think this market segment is huge. The relatively inexpensive 150-600's have opened the door to many people that want to do bird/wildlife photography. I see it all the time when I am out shooting. If Nikon had countered 6 months ago and had actually said hey the D400 (whatever they call it) is coming I for one would have waited. For Savvy shoppers like me, the 7D Mark II was only $200 more than the D7200. Don't get me wrong I think the D71/72k cameras are great for their price point and offer tremendous value.

This may be the crux of the issue. Nikon wants to sell lens in addition to cameras. What brand of lenses will professional DX shooters be buying? When you think about this, a professional DX camera does not fit in Nikon's overall strategy.

The D300 was never really intended for BIF shooters. It was the D800 of its day (well, maybe a D750).

spraynpray

@WestEndFoto - can you explain that one a bit more?

kyoshinikon

It isnt that hard for nikon to even satisfy the Pro Dx shooters. Take the guts of a D7200 put it into a D810 body and sprinkle the buffer & Fps of the D4 in it.

Even better, take the sensor of the D7200 and put it in a D300s

retread

The D3000s was old when I came to digital photography so am not familiar with the controls so would prefer the D810 body. Then when (if) I acquire both the controls would be the same. It will be a long wait for the cash to do this.

WestEndFoto

@WestEndFoto - can you explain that one a bit more?

Hmmm.......I will try.

If money was no object and I was a BIF shooter, I predict that I would have an 800 5.6 with either a D810 or D4s strapped to it (and top of the line RRS gear). I would, however, give the D7200 a try to see how important the pixel density advantage was to me.

A little less money and I start making compromises. I might end up with a D7200 on a 400 2.8E with a D810 on standby for scenarios involving lower light..

And in that scenario, if Nikon came out with a D9000 that was a D7200 with 8-10 fps, I could see myself buying that.

I think that lots of people participating in this thread would end up in exactly the same place for similar reasons. However, I think that there is a significant portion, perhaps a majority, of the population that really wants a D4s attached to the 800 5.6, but for cost reasons, would buy a D9000 attached to something like the Sigma 150-600 and content themselves that they are close enough on image quality and reach. They would not buy into the pixel density argument as they are not "pixel peepers" and would content themselves that they had "reach" and fps that was as good as the D4s / 800 5.6 combo 80 to 90% of the time. They are really shopping on price, not narrow well thought out IQ considerations. And bye the way, I am sure that they would get some fantastic images with this "budget combo".

And they are not buying a Nikon lens in this scenario. As good as the new 300 is, I don't see this as an attractive option for this type of shooter. And Nikon does not make a 400 5.6 like Canon does. Everything else is around $10,000.

WestEndFoto

It isnt that hard for nikon to even satisfy the Pro Dx shooters. Take the guts of a D7200 put it into a D810 body and sprinkle the buffer & Fps of the D4 in it.

Even better, take the sensor of the D7200 and put it in a D300s

In which case it will only shoot at 4 fps because the early Expeed processor will get bogged down with the 24 megapixel (instead of 12 megapixel) files.

retread

If you take the guts our or a D7200 the processor is a part of the guts so goes along with the rest. The early processor is gone.

WestEndFoto

If you take the guts our or a D7200 the processor is a part of the guts so goes along with the rest. The early processor is gone.

Yes, if you read it in combination with the prior comment. I read it as an alternative to the prior comment.

PB_PM

The D300 was never really intended for BIF shooters. It was the D800 of its day (well, maybe a D750).

In many respect that is true, prior to the release of the D700, the D300 was second only to the D3. Kind of puts things into a different perspective when users demand a D400 when you keep that in mind. The D810 is the "D400" from that perspective.

kyoshinikon

But that is comparing Apples to oranges. The D3s/D700/D300s were very similar as to who they were targeted to as were the D2h/D2xs/D200. The D4s/D800/D750/610/D7200 are all over the place in terms of target market. The D800 wasn't really a replacement for the D700 as much as it was a 5dmk2 user magnet and a watered down continuation of the D2x/D3x legacy.

PB_PM

But that is comparing Apples to oranges.

Not really. The D810 fits into the lineup in the same space as the D700 and D300 before it, right in the spot under the top pro model (aka D4s). If there is a pro DX body, don't expect it to come in the form of a D2Xs MKII, or a D300 shell either. Most likely it will be called D7x00.

Coastalconn

@PB_PM I do agree with what your saying, but one thing that you haven't included in your equation is hand holdibility. My self and many of my fellow bird photographers prefer to shoot handheld. The 500 F4 is at that upper of limit at 8.5 pounds for the lens and my camera weighs three with the battery grip. It is a very hefty package and that extra 1.5# is substantial as you are hiking around. So with that being said the 800 F5.6 at over 10# is out of the picture. The 500 F4 is the perfect compromise of weight with long reach and stellar IQ.

Another part of your theory is correct in that many will start out with a 150-600 zoom, but a portion of those will upgrade to higher end glass. Some will buy new and a few will buy used. The ones that buy used are an important part of the equation as often the person selling the lens is upgrading to a new exotic. Canonikon corps benefit either way. And what would be so wrong if Canikon came out with a competitively priced super zoom?

Besides really high ISO, DX cameras still provide a good advantage for BIF. The review on PL about the D7200 shows this pretty well.. https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-d7200/2 And it was my experience as well when I had the D800 and D7100.

So IMHO I would rather have a high speed pro crop camera and a 500 F4 than a D4S and a 800 F5.6. Of course my perspective is entirely from a bird photographer's view point that really wanted a D400 to exist...

kyoshinikon

While I see what you are saying there isnt a linear progression of improvement fore every camera up the line you go. It is like saying the Toyota prius sits where the 2004 corolla sat. Sure it does but the Camry is not an improved progression of the prius, just like the D4s isnt a progression of the D810 but a step to the side.

I assume the pro dx if it is ever made will be either the D7300 or the D9000. The B&H catalog now claims that the D7200 sits on the top of the Dx lineup...

The D300s is the D100 of 2015. Remember the D70 was also a superior camera to the D100 even tho it sat below the D1x/D1 in the lineup

snakebunk

Nikon need not worry about people buying a Tamron or Sigma with their first Nikon camera, they need to worry about all those first time photographers that buy Canon. Good crop cameras that work well with third party lenses is the key. Once people are F mount users they will continue to buy Nikon gear, some the most expensive stuff. There is a huge market of bird watchers looking to add a camera to their equipment. Secondly Nikon should make a longer pf lense, it could be a success.