Who would buy a Real D700 Successor? (16-18 MP, 8-9 FPS w. BG, high ISO)

geogre

i once read that someone compared cameras with cars. i think that may make it clear what i feel...

MP = how many people fit into that car (D700=3, D4=4, D800=9)
price = price
FPS = cars max. speed (D700=100mph, D4=125mph, D800=50mph)
ISO = comfort while driving maybe? (D700 comfortable, D4 extremely c., D800 very c.)
AF = safety? (will all the passengers reach the destination unharmed)
and so on...

i never need to transport more than 4 or 5 people, but i need to reach the destination as fast and comfortable and safe as possible. and... eh... i'm poor. but still, i'm in the transport business? anyway, just kidding... i think it's a good picture. and it's cool to transport 9 people. if you need to.

sevencrossing, you're right, a used D3s would be pretty close, i'll look for one from time to time at the camera shop.....

sevencrossing

FWIW, my D800 has no left AF issue, no green LCD, no oil on the sensor after almost 50,000 clicks, and my 10 pin socket doesn't budge an inch when used.

Good to know I am not alone

sevencrossing

i once read that someone compared cameras with cars.

I would liken the ISO and fps of a D800 to the horsepower of a Rolls Royce

donaldejose

George and other D700 lovers: I wouldn't give up on Nikon eventually using the D4 sensor in a D800 body; essentially replicating what they did with the D700. It is a niche they can easily fill once they feel it will not cannibalize D4 sales because those willing to pay for the "latest and greatest" can be sold a D4x or D4s. But you likely will have to wait about two more years until the D4x and/or D4s are out. I suspect 2013 will be the year of the best DX bodies Nikon has ever produced (D7100 and D400). Then Nikon will refocus on FX bodies in 2014. 2015 may be the year of Msmoto's mirrorless bodies and if she is right the end of all Nikon SLR bodies.

Msmoto

Wow, this topic got heated... But, it would appear that there are some folks who simply want what they want. And, I am probably one of these. The reality we all deal with is that the newer cameras simply perform better than the old ones. And, just like the fancy new cars with all the bells and whistles tend to be astronomically expensive to repair, may even use premium fuel, they are in a way like a more modern camera with a much higher resolution sensor... the demands for file space are going up.

Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, are all going to keep attempting to improve things and sell new cameras. It is highly unlikely they will produce a "D700" replacement which does not have more pixels, higher ISO, require more memory, and function at higher FPS. And, if they think certain features can not be had at a particular price point, it will not be produced. The marketing department, (some exceptions to their wisdom may be present, of course) is attempting to guess what is going to sell. And, markets tend to sell improved items, and the company who is ahead in this game tends to sell more.

Baby D4...yes, I would love one...guess it would be about $4,000....but what would they leave out?

adamz

quoting Thom Hogan:
"Which brings us to 8 fps. First, let's be clear here. The D700 is a 5 fps body (the D600 is 5.5 fps, the D800 is 4 fps). To get 8 fps on the D700 you need the vertical grip and the right batteries. But let's look just a little closer at the full set of numbers. The D600 remains 5.5 fps with or without the grip. The D800 can hit 6 fps in DX mode with the grip. Both the D600 and D800 have less shutter lag and lower viewfinder blackout times than the D700, by the way, which I think have to factor into this discussion.

So what the "Where's my D700 update" folk are really complaining about is this:

12mp, 8 fps
24mp, 5.5 fps (+12, -2.5), plus lower body build
15mp, 6 fps (+3, -2), plus better focus system
"
Challenging the D700 Replacement Logic, read the whole article @ http://www.bythom.com

I can't agree with him more. Don't expect to see D700 replacement - it's already here and in many different options.

kenadams

I guess the reason behind the discussion is that to some it seems the feature set is not as well compartmentalized as it possibly used to be - question is, to whom in here would it make sense to get some older, used equipment and wait til something more fitting comes along? A used D3 is as much as ~1500€, a used D700 goes for ~1100 +/-, that is 800/1200 € less than a D800 respectively. They're not bad cameras after all and give you the flexibility you seem to be missing for much less money that can be saved or spent on glass...

donaldejose

Baby D4, what would be left out?

A few options. Use the D600 style build quality to reduce cost, use a DX sensor to reduce cost (the D400 "D4-lite"), use the D800 body without battery grip to reduce cost, consider the developmental costs of D4 parts fully amortized over the life of the D4 and "recycle" or "reuse" or "re-purpose" them at pure production cost (minus developmental cost) as a way to keep getting more life out of existing parts almost ready for retirement, etc. I don't know how all the various options would all "shake out" to make the least expensive, yet marketable product.

Another option would be to put the D4 sensor into the D600 body to keep costs as low as possible and call that the D600s. I wonder if 16mp in a D600 would satisfy those wanting smaller file sizes? My preference would be for Nikon to use the mixed plastic/metal frame style of the D600 but include a D4 style built in vertical grip and D800 pro controls, use a DX sensor without an AA filter, improve the high ISO ability so you can have usable native ISO of 12,800 and that would be my ideal D400 (but not the D700 replacement some want). However, if this DX mini-D4 is to be marketed to wildlife photographers with a 24mp sensor and a 15 mp 1.3 crop mode perhaps it should have a metal front frame to better support those big telephoto lenses?

I don't know how cost would vary among the different options. Hopefully, this summer or fall we will all learn what Nikon has done with the D400.

I just don't think it would cost Nikon much to swap parts between their existing cameras to create new variations. Nikon has three FX bodies and three FX sensors. Swapping bodies and sensors would be easy. Put the D800 sensor into a D600 and you have the D600x. Put the D4 sensor into the D600 and you have the D600s. Put the D4 sensor into the D800 and you have the D800s. Put the D800 sensor into the D4 and you have the D4x. Develop a new 48 to 50 mp sensor for the D4x and also put it into the D800 to create the D800x. Nikon finds itself now with an abundance of easily developed FX options: not just the same FX sensor in two different bodies where it started.

Msmoto

I would not buy one if it used the D600 build in the body. I tend to drop things, or when I am shooting completely forget a camera is somewhere and so on. A "mini" means D300s construction.

But, we are going to go round and round on this thread as it must be therapeutic for those of us who are waiting.....

To bad I have to monitor my own language here.......I really want to say.... (

adamz

I'll say one more thing. Discussion closed.