Comments on: Leaked Nikon roadmap poll

By: Landscape Photo

Landscape Photo — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 13:48:40 +0000

D700x kitted with 24-135mm VR… How about the lens performance? Nikon cannot be stupid; they know the sensor’s demands better than anyone Price? I’ll buy it the day available, if sold below $5000.

By: Adam123

Adam123 — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 03:09:50 +0000

If it was a joke between friends, why would he mention that now? What would be the incentive? Rather, you’d expect him to be getting a kick out of all the fuss he’s created. It’s probably real. But we’ll find out soon enough!

By: Jeff

Jeff — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:58:14 +0000

Chase does not strike me as particularly technically competent. at all, read his staff list, it seems to me that his assistant sets it all up and chase presses the shutter, then the digital tech spends 4 hours in post for each shot….

By: eyrieowl

eyrieowl — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:53:40 +0000

I see people speculating that there should be a d90 replacement…why? Unless they are going to do a d90s, I don’t see what they would be replacing. Until there is a new DX sensor (read, a d400), I would not expect a d90 replacement. Think about it: it’s not about how long the d90 has been around, it’s about the trickle-down from the top end. The dXX models have almost always been around 1 year after the dXXX model. So unless there’s a d90s about 6 months after the d300s (smaller upgrade), I wouldn’t expect a d90 replacement until 1 year after the d400…and who knows for sure when that will be.

By: Daf

Daf — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:59:52 +0000

Ah. gotcha. Thanks.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:18:33 +0000

Actually the roadmap can’t be true as there is no mention of Nikon MX format as all, must be fake

By: Lukas

Lukas — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:11:25 +0000

The roadmap is a joke. It is written in the source discussion few posts below by the autor. I can read Czech so I know what there is…

By: regular

regular — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:22:36 +0000

I think those people just dont want to be involved in something smelling fishy.

If you make a bad joke about George Bush or about Wallmart, would you feel confortable with TV reporting your little joke as a fact and so on? You would certainly fear prosecutions, etc. … especially if you work in the same business.

By: jtra

jtra — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:52:33 +0000

It was not. It was in English originally. The guy on the Czech forum has translated it to Czech. He did not want to publish it fully as there were some delicate information like names of people.

By: STJ

STJ — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:50:51 +0000

He he! These are exactly the points I noted as well – just much better written. Thanks for sharing your ideas jtra! In case this stuff is real several people will try to cover it up for sure. On dpreview they seems to have been somewhat successful…

By: Daf

Daf — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:46:19 +0000

One thing I thought of today – why would such a sensitive document (if it’s true) be in Czech ?

Such a document wouldn’t get spread around too much because of it’s sensitivity so I would expect it would be limited distribution – and so most likely to be in Japanese or English.

By: STJ

STJ — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:38:31 +0000

What’s wrong with plastic? Today you can but up to 60% (by volume) carbon fibres into plastic – guess what – it looks like plastic, but it is not the plastic used for coka-cola bottles!

By: jtra

jtra — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 06:44:01 +0000

Hm, the Sigma is not 2.8-4 but 2.8-4.5.
I remembered it wrong. So it is not as similar. The rumored 17-65/3.2-4 is to have 72mm filter thread. The Sigma has 72mm too. Current pro lens 17-55/2.8 has 77mm.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 06:39:17 +0000

Exactly!

By: jtra

jtra — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 05:50:41 +0000

BTW, Sigma makes 17-70/2.8-4 (no stabilization) so that validates the lens parameters even more. Anyway we will see soon.

By: jtra

jtra — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 05:48:17 +0000

Enver John: I think that 17-65mm f/3.2-4 DX VR makes excellent sense. It is better lens for those who don’t need longer range. It can be surely better than current 18-55/3.5-5.6 DX VR. A full stop on longer end better. It is worse in aperture than current pro lens 17-55/2.8 DX, but once you shoot at a bit closed aperture you will be happy that it has VR which the current pro lens does not have. It will be fine choice for many people.

By: eyrieowl

eyrieowl — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 02:47:23 +0000

I’m wondering which of those lenses you think would be plasticy? The lowest spec lens looked to be the 17-65 or maybe the 24-135. Every other lens looked to be targeted at serious shooters and/or pros. I’m sure that they won’t be all-metal circa 1970 lenses, but unless you’re buying zeiss, those days are past.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 02:46:22 +0000

Even John,

You are making a very serious effort trying to disprove this roadmap all over the web. I agree with NRAdmin — the work you’re doing casts doubt that the information is fake. I mean, who would bother with such a futile exercise as going around the web trying to bottle up a rumor if it were all fake?

Sounds fishy….

By: Nau

Nau — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:46:34 +0000

the only issue I have with it, its not presented as Nikon would… aka very unprofessional

By: Ziggy2

Ziggy2 — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:20:54 +0000

“I’m quite doubtful someone would spend so much time just making something like this up. It’s too detailed and specific to be ignored”

Really??? Look at the time people spend analyzing the details. Still don’t believe someone would do it for fun??? Lots of us obviously love this stuff.