The latest rumors on the Nikon D3s specs:
- Better ISO-performance (ISO 200-12800 probably)
- New 1.2 crop mode
- Bigger buffer
- Motion-Jpeg 720p (no 1080p!)
- Improved AF-ON button
- Improved multi-dial
- No 14 fps, I repeat no 14 fps
There is also a chance that only the Nikon D3s will be released – no new lenses. This one is still very hard for me to believe, but those are the latest rumors folks.
Warning: let’s don’t turn this into a “Nikon sucks thread” – this time I will be closely monitoring the comments and there will be some censorship. Those are just rumors and may or may not turn out to be true – no reason to complain on information that is not final yet. Please, let’s have a constructive conversation and keep the whining for after the product is officially announced.
Related posts:
231 Comments
How on earth could the same sensor get better ISO performance? Makes no sense. Seems like that would be an admission that there’s a new sensor, but all the rumors just hand out crazy ISO figures without any support (i.e. a new sensor along with it).
D300, D90, and D5000 all share a sensor, but the D90’s high ISO performance is noticeably better than the D300, and the D5000’s is even a bit better than the D90.
i don’t have d5000 but i taht true that low light is better in d5000 than in d90?
dxo mark labs stated d90 is better.
http://dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/%28appareil1%29/320|0/%28appareil2%29/294|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Nikon/%28brand2%29/Nikon
Hm, you’re right. I’ve not actually touched a D5000, but I had heard the high ISO performance was better. The D90 is certainly better than the D300, though.
Actually the D90 HIGH ISO algorythm are harder on photo’s which means less noise but everything is a LOT less sharp. Hence why the D90 is an amateur camera and the D300 a semi-pro/pro.
Any pro can easily work around the little noise the D300 produce. Working around less sharp images on the other hand…
No, the D90’s raw files come out better at High ISOs than the D300. I’ve shot both of them, it’s pretty clear. DXO mark’s tests confirm this.
No, one has to take consider the margin of error for the measurements and sample variation. DxO Mark says it’s about 6 points for the overall score and 1/3 stop for the high ISO mark, so, they are all about tied. The D90/D5000 advantage in the final score is related to DR mostly and there are tests that show that Nikon corrects the black point for the D90/D5000 and not for the D300, which is good, D300 has a cleaner RAW file.
I’m not sure that the D90 and D300 have the same exact sensor. because they both have different bit depths. the D300 is 14bit while the D90 is 12bit.
I do agree though with the D90 having better ISO performance than the D300.
if I am right, they both have 16 bit, just not read out…
The processing is what has a bit depth, not the sensor.
+1
The ADC is not the sensor.
It’s possible that’s what has gotten better is Nikon’s ability to handle the data that comes off the sensor, not the sensor itself. Nikon has a history of using minor tweaks to their image processing pipeline to get better and better performance from the same sensor. That definitely happened with the 6MP sensor used in the D70/D50/D40 series and also with the 10MP sensor originally used in the D200. They may be able to get enough tweaks from that kind of process to get acceptable results from ISO 12800. Or they may just boost the amplification and live with the noise in order to be able to get a better looking spec than the other guy.
Wouldn’t this be the perfect time to release the awaited 1,4-stop-lenses.
Awaited by??????
I know some folks like the Fast Fixed lenses, but…
As a Pro with 25 years in the filed, with today’s Superb Zooms, NONE of the folks that work in my area ever use the Fixed Lenses, unless you mean the 200 f/2 and Above!! Every ne of my fellow Nikon and Canon Shooters use Zooms.
The only two Fixed Lenses I use are the 60 f/2.8G AF-S and my 85 f/2.8 PC-E, the rest are Zooms, and in my case, I wouldn’t spend money on a Fixed Focal Lens, even if it was 1.4.
Reasons???
1- Space, I have already filled up a Think Tank Airport Security and a Urban Disguise 50, I can only bring so much on a plane.
2- If I needed more light on Location, I would bring ALL my Speedotron Packs!!
3- Rarely do I have an assignment that requires the DOF from a 1.4 Lens. If I did, I would either rent one of the existing Lenses or Make do!!
This might sound stupid to some here,but in this economy, I only buy what I use on a daily basis and use a whole lot!! If I don’t use it at all, I don’t buy it.
Y
What about video? I’m starting to shoot video alongside my photography and the 1.2 50mm and 1.4 lenses really help. Infact, just yesterday I was comparing the video off my d300 to that off the pro video guys camera and mine was awesome and bright…his was black with just highlights from the band. However, I’m sure a 24mm 1.4 lens would be way to expensive to seriously consider just for video. I have the sigma 30 1.4 and it’s pretty good for wide angle video.
For images you are right though. Just use one of the 3 pro zooms with speedlights and high iso and you should be fine
My above post is about wedding photography and vdeo, mainly at the reception in low light
That is cool,
I’m a commercial Studio and I do some Sports too, so Video is something I would never use! When I was hire to shoot Video along Still on a sporting event, I brought my daughter to shoot some YouTube Videos for this client, we used a $200 Canon Video Camera!!
why dont we stop putting people into such cut and dry categories……….. this is as dumb as saying all my friends eat with a fork and using it as an argument against chopsticks….
yrsued,
You seem to be assuming everybody is like you. Sales of primes, even below 200mm is quite brisk.
<>
Where on earth do you live?
my point is why not have the option in the camera? I bet you really aren’t being charged for it anyways. The D300 was still $1799 before the ’s’ version, and now the D300s is also $1800. I don’t see why people get all up in arms about it HAVING video, they should still pull for Nikon to outdo Canon if for nothing more than knowing Nikon has a competitive edge over other brands…heck I don’t use more than 3 fps but it’s nice knowing the D300 and D700 flies if I need it.
I agree, most pros don’t use primes, except the specialists (architecture, interiors). I’d bet the sales rate zoom/primes for Nikon is the reason they release a zoom every 2-3 mos and one prime per year.
I’m really hopeful for the 16-35 f/4, that’s one great lens to use with the D700. The 14-24 f/2.8 may be the best zoom man ever made, but it’s bulky, doesn’t take filters and has a very short long end, making it less flexible for those who travel and like to use mostly one lens, like me. The 17-35 f/2.8 is still bulky and likely a bit outdated for digital. And I hope a 24-120mm f/4 is next, then a short tele f/4 zoom.
I agree that the modern zooms are fantastic. But even so, they are heavy. The main lens type I am missing in my current collection is a portrait lens with good to superb bokeh. A 70-200 zoom would fit that need, but a 85mm f/1.4 would fit it much better for about half the cost.
Given that Nikon has an absolutely stunning set of f/2.8 FX zooms it is reasonable to expect the next pro level releases to be of primes.
Oddly enough, it is the high ISO performance of the CMOS sensors that makes the fast lenses so desirable. I can’t use flash inside a conference, but with my D300 and a 50mm f/1.2 I don’t need it.
When we get to really high resolution sensors (50MP and above), the performance of the zooms is not going to be enough to do the sensor justice. Nikons zooms are as good as they are due to state of the art computer aided design. Their line of primes was designed by hand. So they are really not worth very much, in fact my DX 10-24mm lens does better than my 20mm prime. So no wonder pros have little use for them. What folk are after is a newly designed ultra-prime that outperforms the zoom.
I shoot video, but I use a video camera to do so at the moment. I am not really very interested in having a DSLR that doubles as a video camera. But I am really interested in having a video body that can use my F-mount lenses.
In time I expect to see Nikon produce a dedicated video body. I think we will also see the shutter go electronic on DSLR sensors in the near future.
But that is the whole point of the Nikon system, you are not just buying gear for your current needs, you expect it to work with the gear that comes out later.
2,8-lenses will allways sell many times more than 1,4-lenses, but there is demand for 1,4-stop primes.
I use two Canon 5D Mark II with 24/1,4 35/1,4 85/1,2 and 70-200/2,8 IS as my basic pack. No to heavy.
When I talked to Nikon about 1,4-AFS-lenses they clearly said: – They will come, but we don’t know when.
I agree with all of this. I regard myself as an advanced amateur and travel a lot, particularly enjoying wildlife photography, so need to keep weight in check. The new zooms are superb, what I want is an updated 300 f4 with VR etc for my D700, the compromise between weight and speed, but with superior optical properties.
I really hope this is wrong because if Nikon doesn’t start getting 1080p into their cameras, there’s a big big problem.
and I’d be going over canon… nooo i don’t want to be stuck with the 5d2.
Agree, Nikon better get the act together and press release of cameras with 1080p/24. They got first dslr with video but seem to be getting behind quickly. Not so important for D3s at the moment, but hope they do it faster with D400, D800 and D4.
go buy a video camera.
video is neat and all, but i didn’t buy a dslr for video. i bought it to shoot photos.
Not a personal issue, market trend, and Nikon started it.
So if Canon jumps of a bridge, Nikon should follow?
@ WoutK89:
No, but if Canon does something smart, Nikon should follow.
Seriously, that was one of the stupidest comments I’ve ever seen on this site.
well thank you, but before me was said, it is marketing, and marketing was MP race, and Nikon still hasnt gone above 12MP for a long time, so why should they bother upping the resolution in HD Video if they dont think the quality is good enough to do so?
I’m so bored of the ignorant and close minded people like you.
What can’t you understand in bigger sensor = better low light capability and shallower DOF. you are a photographer aren’t you? Don’t you understand that basic concept? Well guess what, if it applies to still images, it applies to video and there’s no friggen sub-5000$ video cameras that does it or than DSLRs. Why do you think people all around the world are using 5Dmk2 as their main VIDEO camera in a professional context? Because it’s the best sub 4000$ video camera, simple as this. I can’t believe 1 year after the release of the 5d2 people are still that ignorant, if you only make family pics/videos and don’t need the bigger sensor, what the hell are you doing in this D3s thread?
wow… people these days… makes you wonder if everyone is born with a brain…
Maybe it’s hard to understand, anyway…
Here we go: I’m a photographer, I want to buy a photo camera…
Really, if you want to understand, it’s not that difficult…
I know a lot about cameras but nothing about video and I’m pretty sure other people don’t know as well. if we liked video we would have gotten into video. So just relax. besides,
I think that canon has something going for them for the price but to think that The 5D2 will ever surpass the Panasonic HVX or DVX they got something coming.
>I’m so bored of the ignorant and close minded people like you.
<3
Understood, but if it’s going to have video at the D3 level, it’s GOT to be 1080p or they’d be better off not including it at all. They will get more criticism for including only 720p than if they didn’t include it at all, which they could rationalize as “we’re not putting video in a pro camera until it’s pro video.”
I wholeheartedly disagree. Give the pro the same level of features or better that can be found in the lower priced bodies, especially with a big feature like video. The difference in sharpness, quality, etc between 720p and 1080p is virtually indistinguishable. Yes, more is more, but truth is that 720 looks great. Let’s just say it’s not a big enough difference to leave it off a camera. After all the jump from 720p to 1080p is not even close to the difference between 0p and 720p, right?
Further, your statement is telling, that you’re not in the market for a D3, with or without video. How can one tell? Because you say you’d rather not have the feature at all if not 1080. If you’re looking to buy the latest camera at ~$5k, why in the world would you WANT Nikon to leave a $1k+ feature out, especially when you’re whining that you need 1080p. Makes zero sense, unless you are just whining about specs on paper.
Pissing contents aren’t as important to real producers. They’re too busy finding ways to use the tools already on the gear they own.
Well a GOOD detailed 720 video mode would be OK if it were implemented like Pentax’s lowly K-7 or the GH1. The problem with Nikon’s (or Canon’s) 720 mode is that it uses a coarse sampling routine to get it. On the Canons you can at least take the 1080 image and downsample it to 720 and have a noticeably better video than what you get out of the Nikons. But I am VERY suspicious of this rumored 720 spec since the Live View on the D3 went to 1080, they’d be crazy not to offer it.
All I know is the D300s offers very clean 720. The details of the video compression is beyond me, I’m sure, but it looks loads better than the D90.
Them sentence should be more ..So if Canon climbs a mountain, Nikon should follow?
Nikon started it with D90 …
sure, nikon need not follow, but the sad fact is they will follow…because marketing is a very powerful tool and canon is extremely good at it
AMEN!!
If I needed to shoot Video, I would hire a Video Guy!! I’m a Still Shooter, I shoot Stills!! I know Video is a reality in the future of DSLR’s, but I don’t buy a DSLR for the Video Features I would never use, nor would I never see myself needing.
And thats probably why you make 50 grande a year while the other photographers that follow the trends are making 3 times more, like me.
Buh bye.
Every damn company save perhaps Leica is making cameras with video. Its the way of the future, get used to it.
This is such a dumb statement. My d300 video is out performing pro videographers at weddings because of the high iso capability and fast 1.4 lenses!
Ronan and EB, how much Video do you shoot??
I have produced over 10 Commercial Videos, for the past 10 years, but I don’t do video!! I couldn’t really care about the Trends!! It’s a marketing gimmick!!
I’m reading your posts again, and the both of you sound like you are both Video Pros!! Are you??
How many Telly Awards have you won?? Emmy’s??
A Video I worked on back in 1997 won a Telly, I did the Lighting!! Given that you are insulting the fact that I don’t need video on my Still camera tells me that you both have won countless awards!! Have you??
I honestly don’t get it!!
Seems that expressing your opinions is not allowed here, if it doesn’t follow the Corporate marketing mandate or what the Fanboys want to hear!!
Trust me, little or none of the shooters I work with want or even need Video on their Still cameras!! They all agree, it’s a marketing gimmick!!
I don’t understand either of you, I would think that you would appreciate the opinion and point of view from a working pro!! I guess not… I guess you would rather listen to a Fanboy making 1080p videos of their Kittys, like the guys on DPR!!
BTW Ronan, it’s 50 GRAND, not 50 Grande!!
And not many of us in the Local ASMP Chapter care much about Video, and Video is not going to make a Commercial Studio Shooter like use make any more money, not Double, nor triple our income!! It sis going to be another button that we never press, because we don’t need it!!
Yeah, I just switched to canon. I was looking to get a new body and it was down to the Canon 7D or the D300s… needless to say I sold all of my Nikon gear and got the 7D with a set of L lenses. I like the ergonomics and menus of the Nikon better, but I’m glad I switched. I wish I could have stayed with Nikon, but Canon is making the better product. I’m currently shooting half video and stills, the Canon 7D’s video is worlds above the D300s. If Nikon is going to stay competitive, it’s going to seriously catch up with what people are needing.
What made you switch? Honest question, it seems an expensive thing to do, and the d300s video is definitely going to be GOOD ENOUGH for all but the most sophisticated shots (and then you’d probably be better off with a REAL prosumer/pro video gig?).
Nikon used all their money for R&D on Ashton Kutcher
Gooooooo to canon already JBL, LOL just teasing you buddy, but really just switch already
lol…
Did you use a 5D mk2? Do you know how horrible this body is?
+1
Look people – it’s really not that difficult. There are technical limitations to what has been achieved in the VSLR realm. They are using different sensors, with different sizes, while interpolating on the fly, from color (bayer data to rgb), to size (12mp to 720p), to bit depth (16bit to 8bit), to data type (raw to motion jpeg). This is much more processing than is happening with the current prosumer video cameras. It’s mindblowing. It’s incredible. And, it’s not perfect yet.
If you can’t be patient while this tech gets figured out, then seriously, move to Canon so we can have some peace and productivity here. Or become a monk and learn patience. Or go out and get an engineering degree and beat the system with your brilliance. Do SOMETHING more productive than piss and moan about something out of your control.
1080p isn’t as important as fixing the rolling shutter quality issues. I’d take 720p minus the jello cam over 1080p with a crappy refresh rate.
Same. Then again software fixes any problems. We have software for our still photo’s…. and now we will have software for our video’s.
So where is Nikon Capture VX?
I shoot both video and stills. I have a D3 and a Red One. I use the same nikon lenses on both cameras. The problem with the Red is that it weighs 20 lbs fully rigged for hand held and it takes awhile to set up. My D3 is light and quick. So it make sense for me and thousands others to want pro video as a feature in a D3 body. The small compact form factor would make a great b unit camera and prefect to fly on a steadiCam or for gyro/aerial shoots..
Video in a dslr is a feature and nikon needs to get it right and lead the pack with their pro camera. If the d3s only records 720p with a crappy jpeg codec then they total have missed the point to be pro. Any feature in a pro camera should work at a pro level.
People that don’t want video should just chill and not use it. What’s the point of trying to tear it down the importance of a feature that you have no use for.
People that need video in the camera just want it done right.
But I doubt canon or nikon will get it together anytime soon… what with the epic FF shooting 6k @ 100 fps in a 16bit RAW format…
Hmm, I am hoping for a little more, but it’ll still be a cool camera. Any rumors/guessing of price?
Price will be as the D3
Thank you Nikon!
I currently have a D3, and if the original rumors were true, I would have been really angry that I can’t afford the upgrade right now. If this spec list is true, I’m not quite as disturbed. Also, a 24mm 1.4 would have made me sell my kidney.
Thom has hinted the 24mm f/1.4 is coming, let’s see. I also hope they release the firs=rst f/4 zoom, said to be 16-35mm. That will make me want to move to FF faster.
F/4 and zoom is already, 12-24 DX, 200-400…
So it will not be a first
FF and where it’s most needed for the D700.
Thom also hinted that a D700X was coming about now too but he is quickly back peddling away from that now.
You have a D3, but can’t afford another one (if the sh*t hits the fan)… what kind of pro are you? You would be better off with a D700, or two of them.
What? How on earth does not being able to afford a $6k camera “right now” make a quality statement about somebody’s status as a pro? I know plenty of pro photographers who still shoot older cameras like D200s because they don’t have the money to upgrade (or more accurately would rather spend it elsewhere, which is my case).
As it is, however, I’m not a pro, I’m a photography student… and I bought my camera before the D700 came out.
iso 12800 — that’d be a neat trick
Well, they can have 25600 too, if the base iso is 400
I love Nikon, the best camera maker ever, I like the way the cameras are updated and also the perfect 12MP sensor, do not forget all the extraordinary (did I spell that right ?) lenses, seriously, Nikon is and will stay the best.
I can’t wait thursday to see the new D700s, D700x, D3sx, D90x and all the new pro lenses !
I’m so excited !
yes, you did spell it right, though there is huge smell of sarcasm in your comment
Why is everyone screaming about video on more pixels?
What I would like to see in a new upgraded D3 is increased Color Depth and Dynamic Range.
Maybe as good as the D3X? Then I really would want the new camera.
+1
Spot on comment; I wish for additional color depth — e.g., 16 bits — and increased dynamic range, too; these two changes would be just fantastic in a D3.
What about FPS ? if they get 14 on FF it will be a winner anyway. But is that true?
Wow, Tuesday is going to be a painful day for a lot of you isn’t it?
Not me. I don’t have the cash for a D3s right now, and even if I did, I’d be thrilled to own the D3, so the D3s would be a happy upgrade. As it stands, the D700 is just as capable of a camera, and a much more affordable price. Either way, Nikon was lauded (as they should be) for presenting such great options to both high end and low end photogs. You won’t catch me whining over such trivial things!
nope already ordered the d700, monday is the sweet day for me..
I am hoping nikon does something competetive–if only to drive down prices on the d700.
If not, I might buy a Canon. I’m in the position that I’m not tied to any Dale system right now. And the 5D2, for all it’s faults, offers more than the d700 for a nearly identical price.
*DSLR, not Dale–silly spell checker
http://www.adorama.com/ICA5D.html
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001G5ZTLS/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=3596818885&ref=pd_sl_52extcmpk5_e
http://www.calumetphoto.com/store/canon_5D_cameras?a=CA01&t=CA01&ctc=Calumet_US_Google_Adwords_Dig-Cameras_Digital_Camera_-_Canon_5D_II
Don’t let it hit you in the butt…
LOL! I was like ‘dale system wtf??’
offtopic:
this will be a good week:
new imacs and d3s!
And maybe even more, that’s an even better thought
imacs? who cares about those pieces of crap? oh yeah, people who got marketing-raped into believeng it’s the best thing since written language.
Amen.
Just like Canon cameras.
canon = windows PC
nikon = apple mac
nikon cost more with fewer options but more thought in design and better build quality….
if d3s is iso 200-6400, no 14fps but 1.2x crop..then isn’t d3 still superior??
no.
The 1.2x crop would be an optional aspect ratio (like how when you attach a DX lens to the D3, it automatically changes to a 1.5x crop and you lose some megapixels). Normal sensor would still be full frame.
ic..then for fx lenses owners, the gain is only better low iso..
Better high ISO I hope you mean?
That means they will have pretty much the same sensor from the mighty D5000 all the way to the D3s. That will say something about their ability to customize the same sensor for multiple levels of users.
There’s a typo here, I meant the D300S not D3S. The point, they can get a lot out of the same sensor, so let’s see what they can do on Tuesday
Why 1.2x mode crop? Continued full frame is a future… why don’t have the iso 100?
Why the Nikon wait more the 3-4 months for announced Nikon D4?
Is poor deal….for nikon.
It seems that ISO 100 doesn’t offer any benefit over 200 other than speed. Nikon Noise algorithms are very stable and I haven’t had any issues printing 20×30 from ISO 200 on my D90. except for the slight bit of fussy ness from blowing it up but that is normal. haha.
Each chip has a “sweet spot” as far as ISO is concerned. By engineering these to offer best performance at base ISO of 200, that allows an effective extra full stop of low noise performance at the high ISO range. The down side – on both Nikon and Canon side – is that when use the “low” settings (e.g. 50iso or 100iso), then you also cut your dynamic range by a few stops. As an example, by shooting the D3/D700 at ISO 100, you get about the same dynamic range as with the D2x/D200. Not bad performance, just not the full potential of the new bodies.
Personally, I prefer the 200 ISO base, as it helps out with such killer high ISO performance.
For my needs, I prefer high iso as well as long as base is not too high. I wouldn’t want to go any higher than iso200 as base – don’t want to grab the nd filter when shooting in blazing sun.
Just to show the other side – studio photogs prefer lower base iso – like 50 or even 25. That way you can shoot with wider aperatures, have most of the light come from the controlled lighting (strobes), and not have to work in darkness. I have done studio (and love it!), but that isn’t what I need a camera for at the moment.
The reason for the limit on low ISO because the sensor has a saturation limit.
Setting the ISO lower will blow out the highlights.
The force with Nikon at full frame!
I guess old jedi mind trick is Nikon playing with us?
I know this one will end …. “dude – you do not need 24MP …. I do not need 24MP … This is the camera you’ve been waiting for …. This the camera I’ve been waiting for….”
For one thing, the D90 has better ISO performance than any present crop sensor DSLR. Any more MP in a camera will make the ISO performance suffer. This is why in my Buisness (Concert Photography) the D3 is worlds better than the D3X in ISO performance. Also, the D3S will be the new super ISO camera, because if newer hardware algorithms to support better reading of the sensor.
In my opinion, if you want video, get a video camera. When you have a $5,000 DSLR, the sensor is exposed as the mirror flips up to record video. Focusing, zooming, shake etc, dislodged debris, and circulates air into the camera. Whatever is in the air, will stick on your sensor causing reduced sensor life. Simply put, it’s cool to have it if you need it, I would not base any purchase of a DSLR, especially a PRO DSLR off of video performance. I would rather see the price come down and ditch the video. The D3s will likely be insanely overpriced, just because non professional techies with money, want a camera that will do anything! These are meant to take pictures, and I stead of increasing video performance, they need to upgrade lens design for airflow, and create a more cleaning friendly model for those who actually will use the video on a clunky DSLR.
Please excuse spelling. (iPhone)
Dear Taylor,
I fully agreed to your comments. Nowadays, DSLR manufacturers is taking video into a serious consideration for their boost in marketing strategy. Video recording became a point of comparison tools VS price (since ISO, sensors and fps.. etc is quite competitive amongst camera manufacturers).
Price should be reduced on larger sensors (taking away the video recording features) to make higher qualities DSLR more affordable.
A DSLR is 90% of the way to being a great motion picture camera.
This “buy a video camera” nonsense totally misses the mark – no “video camera” short of a $250,000 Panavision can compare to what’s possible with a DSLR’s optical finder, huge sensor and selection of spectacular lenses.
What Nikon and Canon are doing is essentially enabling use of the capability of a system we’re ALREADY hauling around with us. It won’t be long before DSLR video equals or surpasses the quality of movie cameras used in feature films (the still capability always has). Things are about to change radically.
The D3s is the ideal camera for video because it’s mission in life is not fine arts stills but rough-and-tumble professional photojournalism in the field – recording an EVENT. That’s why it’s got the fastest autofocus, quickest frame rate, and all those weather seals. These cameras are about capturing the story under less-than-ideal conditions quickly and making the customer happy. The ability to record video fits in perfectly with that mission.
if no 14fps, so what fps?
9 fps (FX)- just like the D3
Maybe 11 or more fps at the medium crop (1.2x)? That would mean it would best the new 1d mkiii/mkiv for fps at resolution.
May be 14fps is reserved for d4
This… This is really f… This really sucks…
According a research done with Pentax via ephotozine, this year 2009, people are looking for
1. price
2. resolution
3.anti-blur
4. function
5. size and weight
D3s seems like does not fit in majority of what consumer wants.
price, will be lower than a D3x, so who is complaining?
resolution, 12 MP is still high resolution, the pixels are only bigger.
anti-blur, what better way to anti-blur than a usable very high-ISO?
function, if all the rumors are true, this camera will have almost all that is possible in terms of stills photography and then some more
size and weight, one word: rugged
Even if the poll is for consumers, it could apply to pro or enthusiasts in some degree too.
trend shows that people are expecting D700x more than D3s. Why? because they like : price, size/weight, resolution and function (video mode).
as cheap as D3s, it won’t be cheaper than D3 which is $5000+ right now. Pros concerns about Return of investment especially after global recession hit. Rich enthusiasts and fan boys might be more lee away with their spending.
But when Mr. Ken Rockwell switch to Leica system as his main outing gears, you know Nikon has problem. Big problem if they think they can get away with disastrous decision like this.
D300s is the sample of bad decision, look at the sales chart, Canon 7D and D300s? D300s just basically plunged into the toilet. I just received info that Nikon has to cut D300s price so sharply below Canon 7D.
When I read that Nikon Germany hinted at no D700x, and instead Nikon will do D3s instead, I am astonished. Nikon thinks they can milk Nikon fans with D3s and then after a year release D700x/s like they did before.
This won’t work anymore. Many fans has reach their limit after the outrageous D3x price.
I find it bizarre when people opine that ‘Nikon missed it with the D300s’. The fact is that Nikon has pretty close to sold more D300 bodies than it has all FX bodies put together.
Anyone who expects the D700x to come out before the D3x has come down to a reasonable price, is going to be disappointed. Nikon would no doubt like to sell a D700x even more than folk on this board would like to buy it. But the fact is that at the moment they are unable to make that camera for their traditional flagship price point.
Ken Rockwell is an ass. Only he could write a review of a camera and fail to mention the three main drawbacks to the Leica system up front. First it is manual focus, second the range finder design means you are not seeing what you are shooting, third the body costs $7000 and the lenses run you $1200 for the normal and $2500-$5000 for your other primes – forget zooms.
And then I overlooked the word consumer, LOL, you know this camera is not really aimed at the consumer market I hope?
It’s not a consumer model camera, it’s a pro camera.
When was the d3 a “volume consumer” product?
D3 is not a “consumer” model, is it?
This specs looks more realistic.
I hope we will se some lenses.
Would a 1.2 crop mode on a FF camera let you shoot DX lenses
without dropping to 5 megapixels?
Hmmm
Probably with a few lenses, yes, it is already possible to shoot some on complete full frame, just very soft corners
Ilford HP4 is awsome ! , lets go out and shoot people .
why does Nikon continue to release all of these camera bodies? they need some glass updates. that 24mm f1.4 would be great. and a pro 50mm f1.2 and a 35mm 1.4 would be great as well. nikon knows primes. the 85mm and the 28mm will never be beaten.
I love all the D3 systems. mainly for the in camera crop mode. as a retail photographer that really helps. and the speed is unmatched. depending on the price of this unit we’ll have to see if it’s worth it or not. Nikon doesn’t usually make dumb choices. they would be under by now if that were the case.
Regarding SLR video … JOURNALISTS (D3’s target market) are clamoring for good video and multimedia capabilities. Consumers generally don’t buy the D3, so who cares what they want in their sub-$1000 camera? Commercial shooters? Plenty of them want to start doing video too, the 5D2 is great for them. There are plenty who don’t care, and they’ll probably buy a D3x instead of a digital MF back.
Personally, I could live with 720p (max Vimeo can host anyway) if they had audio inputs and better audio control. Don’t really need 14 fps, even for sports, but I’d be happy if they gave me AF @ 11.
Sensibility. I like it!
I’m a canon user, i’ve been wanting to swap & hanging out for the d700x for nearly a year now. Well all know the d700 is relatively new, but out of the 4 photographers I speak to regularly 3 of them (including me) are waiting for the d700x. I’ve used both d3 and d700. D3 is too darn big and heavy for what I do, you could stick 50mp and a Jacuzzi in it and I still wouldn’t buy it. I won t buy the 700 either; I want that video (and it might as well be 1080p, eh?). Hurry up Nikon! I want to buy lots of your lenses, but your cameras are letting you down!
Nikon seems to be a bit asleep at the wheel at present with this particular segment of the market. Not all cameras are suited for all styles of photography and Nikon’s lack of options for high megapixel bodies makes them seem a little reticent on addressing this issue.
It’s all very well to applaud Nikon on the success of the D3, D3X, D700 and D300(s) but this range is only as strong as their weekest link and currently that is the lack of a D3X alternative.
If Nikon were to announce a D700X tomorrow then they would have a winning body on their hand with a few defections from other brands to Nikon. Unfortunately it seems Nikon has slipped back into past habits and not anticipating the changes in the market enough.
a D3 with D90 video…
just let me absorb this for a while…
motion jpeg is a poit n shoot soccer mom format. it has no business in nikkon’s flagship. I’m glad there is no d700x if nikkon cant put h264.
The significance is that Nikon puts video in FX. In this implementation it may be limited but it is a big step forward.
Why would anyone want video in a Camera??? Let Nikon put time and effort into making the DSLR even more awesome. If you want VIDEO go buy a VIDEO camera
Ahh another teen amateur.
Video in DSLR is what the market is demanding. Wedding/Journalist photographers are demanding it now.
Unlike you, they make a living out of photography, and being able to do more with their tools (yes tool not toy) is a big bonus for them (especially in a ~$5,000 camera).
A video camera that does the same as the D300s/5Dmkii will run you around ~$10,000 also.
Now thats all i’m going to say, go use that little brain of yours to do more research kiddo.
Not 10,000. way more than that. That is the reason, RED is getting so popular among indies
whoever doesnt care about video –and there are many of those– will find almost nothing to be excited about in this camera as a new model. D3 vs D3` look hard to find the invisible difference. censor me or not but can you deny it is a low mp sensor. this is a resolution censorship.
Don’t know about you, but for me, many times an extra stop is all the difference in the shot. The ISO 12800 low noise performance will be plenty excitement for me.
Nikon’s been making some stupid moves lately. As if anyone is going to use this over the 5DMKII. And i’m a Nikonian.
Agreed, thats why their doing MUCH better than Canon.
5DmkII is flawed and has a lot of bugs (like a lot of Canon product). You would know this if you knew anything about Canon.
Canon is like Apple, they attract their customers with fancy specs and tech and once you bite on to it you go ‘EWWWWWW’.
Well, 5D II may be flawed without whatever features people ask for, but the reality is it is still in high demand
AHHHHHHHHHHHHH.. I swear, if Nikon does not come out with something other than another 12 MP cam.. imma switch to Canon…
….and buy new lenses and learn to edit again. So, by all means, switch! have any good lenses? I am always in the market
Nikon are stuck in Groundhog Day mode sensor wise.
Hehe, lets hope they snap out of it next year
Why 1.2x crop?
For those prevoiously shooting with Canon 1D Mark III (1,26x), or if you stuck on a fix point with a fix focal telelens and need to send the picture without editing. Then it’s nice to chose between 1,2x and 1,5x to get the perfect croping.
My 2c.
1) Panasonic and Canon have been producing professional video cameras for years. It is therefore not surprising that they are currently the leading brands when it comes to implementing this feature in their still cameras.
2) 14 fps, ISO 102,400, etc., would be nice, but I wouldn’t count on it. How about a touch of realism ? Expect evolution, not revolution.
3) Where is Nikon’s 5DMkII ? Where is Canon’s D700 ?
4) So because (supposedly) most professionals do not use fast primes anymore, Nikon shouldn’t produce them ? Now there’s a thought.
Stop thinking pixels. Shoot a D700 and you quickly realize it ain’t just the numbers; size matters (of the pixels, that is). And this is all only rumor anyway….
Pixels doesnt matter, but problem is that you get teased by D3x, that means, as cool (lowlight) or better (dynamics) then D3 and yet twice co many resolution (for those who prints big, is a plus).
So, you shoot at low iso most of the time, you want all dynamics you can those days, you end up with MF cams. With D3x you can shift half of your actual MF assignments to more convenient DSLR
tell to a midget that size does not matter….
the only way i can overlook the low 12mp problem is if it has a sacnning oscillating sensor that cleans itself like a cat and does shift sttabilization.
From what I know an 85mm DX 1:1 macro lens with VR will also be launched
I said once before, in that previous rumor post saying D3s will have a 14fps rate that will beat 1D mark IV to its knees, don’t put your hope too high so cause your disappointment even bigger than necessary. No one seems to listened.
14fps would disappoint, since the res is low, we’d like to shoot @ 24fps full 12MP super-ultra HD. HDMI port outputs full12MP live view to a special 42″ screen 22nd century stuff in the beginning of the 21st.
Oh Nooo…no lens? I was really hoping 16-35/4 is true…Don’t really care about D3s as it’s relly out of my price range…but there’s still hope…till 15 Oct.
I recall the rumors around the D300s that thought it would be a 14.3 megapixel camera. What if we combine that rumor along with the idea of a new crop factor and we can see how DX lenses would get a 12.3 megapixel image on a 14.3 megapixel sensor with a 1.3 crop factor. Interesting stuff.
dp
suck day will come by on Thursday
It’s so funny to see everyone talk about video when I still clearly remember when almost everybody said NO to flickr when they were going to do video..
amateurs talk about video. There is no pro who needs pro camera like D3 is with amateur video quality like it will offer.
Professional Photographer
* Now book us for amateur video too! Yet better we can use same camera for it!
How do you know about the quality of the movie?
There’s a huge demand for video in a pro-body among photographers working with news.
source?
not that i dont believe you, just interested. Nowadays they post even from youtube videos if it is something unique so i would not be surprised.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/no_video/
Pros don’t use fast primes. Listen to me, i’ve been a pro for 20 years.
I’ve been a pro for 23 years, and i’ve used fast primes a lot more than i have used zoom lenses. You should trust me.
pfft
So is the new crop mode available as well as the original 1.5x mode? So you can select either?
I suppose the 1.2x crop mode MAY be used on DX lenses, with only a small loss around the edges.
Anyone remember those long gone days when Nikon announced the D3 and D300? What was THE biggest thing? Low noise ad high ISO. The competition was almost blown out of the water and pro’s jumped ship in droves.
In short: picture quality!
Nikon announcing a new a D3s with even better picture quality, will be fine by me. Then I know that, if I need to replace my current bodies, there will be a D4/D400 line-up of great quality to go for and continue with my job.
i think its time to make a count down on a blog : )
D3s are gone at many places including: ritz camera’s website, B&H, and Adorama.
I still hold out a small glimmer of hope for a replacement or cousin for the D700.
Still think Nikon should have a $1999 D700 and a D700x (D800?) for $2899 with a few extra megapixels.
Just a thought to stir up a bit of pro-video/anti-video controversy. The only difference in HARDWARE between a dSLR with video and one without should be the microphone – everything else is firmware. So Nikon (or anyone else for that matter) could offer a model with an option to record audio memos with each shot using that same microphone, thus justifying its existence to people who don’t want video on their dSLR by making it a “professional” feature
[The difference between a professional camera and an amateur camera is that you earn 50% or more of your income with a professional camera]
hi everyone, D3s means the same type of upgrade like they did with D300s – “s” means amateur video plus nothing – in two of the most important pro bodies! Nikon went crazy and are desperately filling up the time gap until they are able to present real innovations – poor and arrogant in my opinion. Since I have a number of Nikon lenses, I will wait for D400 and D4 avoiding the rubbish they are trying to sell us for premium money. But I will totally review my future investment startegy.
BTW, has anyone a D3 (without “s”) for sale?
Quote “imacs? who cares about those pieces of crap? oh yeah, people who got marketing-raped into believeng it’s the best thing since written language”
As someone who uses an imac I still think I am better off than those who got “marketing-raped” into believing that Microsoft’s Vista was a decent piece of software. A thought, since Microsoft are calling their Vista replacement Windows 7, does it mean that they think that they have finally got to the point where Windows is as good as the Mac System 7 which was introduced in the early 1990’s?
All Nikon are doing is introducing ’s’ upgrades to their existing D300/D3 cameras, with some other improvements, to include a video function which they perceive to be necessary to stay competitive in the marketplace. They are not new cameras, for that you will have to wait until next year when you will see a new D700x/D800 which will sit above the D700s as the D3x sits above the D3.
I bought a laptop when Vista was introduced. Really hated it and went back to XP.
Hopefully, next year I can afford to buy an iMac with Final Cut Pro.
If you hated vista.. you will love window 7. NO kidding. it is an excellent op system.
It’s OK. I’ve been running it at work for a few weeks. It’s more like Vista SP 3, though. Some minor window dressing, fewer nags and annoyances, slightly faster networking.
how can Nikon make Ken Rockwell to be right? Look what Leica did the past year: S2, M9, X1 – any of these bodies should have been launched by Nikon. That’s marketing, guys. Leica was so dead as one can be – and now? Phoenix, great effort. Of course, looking at the price tags of those cameras, it’s also crazy, but the quality you get, wow – and if Leica should launch an R10 with a M9 sensor and the appropriate lenses, farewell Nikon.
Honestly, I don’t care about the D3s, simply because I have a D700. I hope the 24 mm rumor is true. Next: 35 mm? Now I use a 35 mm/1.8 DX on full format and that’s a nice compromise – for now.
My next camera: definitely with HD video. I love it and it opens a new market for me.
LOVE YOU BOB
720p seems a lot more credible than 1080p. VSLRs don’t use their full resolution for video (they skip lines), I think a 12MP uses only around 800 lines when doing 16/9 video.
So 1080p would mean a lot of interpolation. Panasonic does it with the GH1, but I think they are the only one (and they start with 60 fps to achieve this).
it actually doesn’t matter. the image is scaled down using far more sophisticated ways. panasonic, canon, sony, all do it. The only reason nikon didn’t do it on their other cameras has probably more to do with a very foolish tactical decision to have only their flagships do 1080p. Obviously nikon has it’s head in the sand and hasn’t realized 1080p should be standard across every single dlsr camera they ever make from now on, just like their competition will do.
if they want to remain competitive, I hope for their own sake this motion jpeg at 1080p is a joke. absolutely nobody is going to even take that seriously when cameras for far less money blow it out of the water.
video is going to become a feature nobody will buy a camera system without just like auto focus. nikon should learn from the past and not ignore emergin industry trends. the last time they did it, they lost the pro market to the ammateur brand canon. I’m affraid that if they ignore the trends again they’ll just end up being aquired by sony after posting horrible loses and losing even more market share.
I think all the addition of Video is just a stop-gap from Nikon. Extending the life of existing bodies/systems with minimal R&D costs.
They are a business after all.
D3s I can understand as it’s not that old – D300s I was a little surprised at since the 300 has been around for quite a while.
Although I’m not interested Video myself – I can see where it would be very useful for some e.g.
-Press togs – with plumeting costs even journalists are being asked to photograph things instead of togs. The odd piece of video here and there would be good for their websites – especially if newspapers are moving to a pay-service for their online content.
-Weddings : Obviously won’t replace a full-time video operator – but snippets would be great for the odd moment here + there e.g. throwing the confetti / bride’s bouqet where movement is important. Would give a 1-person team a slight edge over others in the same price bracket.
Ok, good news for photojournalists. The next move must be D700x, and a good walkabout lens like the rumored 24-135mm VR, asap !
next Camera is a cheaper but Plastic bodied D700.
Possible to be be called: D500 or D600…………………
The Dxxx range have always had metal bodies AFAIK.
Canon Sucks…?
I have the champagne in the fridge for thursday in case Nikon annouce the D700x, if not, I still open the champ, but to get drunk
(
Champagne!
LOL – I’m ging to need all my money to A buy it, then B replace all my DX lenses!
Rule # 1: Always leave room for chanpagne….
Please tell me this 1.2 crop is just a mode and not the default sensor. It is still full frame isn’t (please say it is).
The ISO is the main attraction for me so I’m really hoping it’s improved!
The crop is like it says, CROP, so yes it is still FX
Seriously…
If you are a good photographer, you can shoot great pictures with a Canon or Nikon camera (or any other brand actually). Its a preference for which brand to use. Comparing is for people who don’t make enough money and is ignorant to the fact that their skills is lame.
I have friends who just started photography as a pro (for which means you actually make money from photos), and they always argue which is better, what camera is better…blah blah. Problem is, I always put them to shame with a D700 while one uses a D3 and the other a Canon 1D. Take this as a truth, unless you are in the field for at least 5-10 years, you would HAVE NO IDEA what camera I had used judging from just my pictures.
Quit the bashing.
Get better at taking pictures.
Its like you are a bad driver, and drive a ferrari. On the streets, you just look a showoff with no skills. People who are good drivers will just laugh.
As for video in a dslr…maybe handy. Where I work, we use seperate HD-video cameras that costs way more than you could expect. And yes, its used at weddings (as one example). Plus we use cranes and tripods that are triple the size bigger than any dslr compatible tripod. We are professionals. Real professionals. We don’t USE video from a dslr. We use the cameras that reporters use for a TV station. Thats the quality necessary to create satisfactory end products in the country I live in.
Stop complaining about video in a dslr being crap or what not so you’ll switch brands.
It just says, you are TRYING to just get a camera with the best features to brag about. UNLESS, you are a private contractor that arranges for functions and events that needs the feature for flexibility. Or, you work single and the client does not need such high quality (or can’t tell the difference). However, all those that do fall under this category, understand that even a handicam shooting at 1080p is way smoother and a dslr still has a long time to catch up to this level.
Oh, I live in Japan. I am Japanese. We make those cameras. I worked in an OEM that created certain parts for Nikon until I changed to a job taking photos. I understand my field. Yes, video in a dslr marketing scheme and is used here to attract people from the point-and-shoot camera field to the dslr field. Its not a gimmick, its a marketing scheme to keep companies up and running. Whether or not a camera has the feature, does not decide how well the camera takes beautiful pictures.
Less the bad mouthing. Lets just shoot great pictures. And instead of bragging, teach the less-proficient how to get better at it.
And, there is a reason why Japanese makers create video-cameras and photo-cameras. Video cameras can shoot still-pictures at an unbelievable quality and vice versa. But each product is used for what it is made. The other sub-fuctions is just the cherry on top…
I totaly agree with you, I have a friend who is a cameraman, when we do wedding together, I can tell you that I prefer to be the photographer, his camrea weight 5 tons (at least) and when he get back home he spend hours (or days) to edit the movie.
Photography is much easier than video. I don’t understand why Nikon put video in a D3 or D700, professionals will not use a photo camera to make videos, you can get better results with a $500 HD camecorder.
I prefer a larger buffer in my DSLR than a crapy video.
Er… i’m a professional … and I use a DSLR for video … for web clients, for arts clients, even TV advertising. While there are a lot of crap things about using a DSLR for video there are also some unique things you can’t do ona $500 camcorder – like use exactly the same pro optics and tilt-shift lens etc that you use on stills cameras – and the film look with shallow DOF is far better – then there’s low light – FF sensor on 5d2 better than any camcorder.
So while it’s not for everyone it is still useful – but keep bithing about how no-one uses it by all means – the more birching an dcomplaining the less people who take it up and the more easy work I get! Perfect!
PS had to get a crappy 5d2 cause Nikon has nothing like it….
Thats great.
Here’s something that will help you even more:
http://cweb.canon.jp/prodv/lineup/xlh1s/features.html
Sorry, its in Japanese, but look at the pictures and numbers, you’ll get the drift.
Its a canon product, its a camcorder. Its made for semi-professionals. It will make the 5d2 videos look like child’s play.
You should seriously use this, it has HD lens, made for HD video. You may get even more business.
Professional grade ones are even more expensive and can only be ordered via appointment. Hope this helps.
PS: 5ds is not crappy. Its an amazing camera that takes magnificent photos. Video is still new in the dslr field, that is why Canon releases firmware that mainly updates the video function of 5ds. I know, I have one, but I don’t use it for work.
Ha. The only thing I disagree with Polvo is that the 5d is a better decision than the Nikon offerings. But I’ll admit it was a more difficult decision before the 300s came out.
Still, your sentiments mirror mine really well. I have shot stills for over 16 years. Still, video has always been a passion of mine. The key things keeping me from going with a prosumer camcorder were
A) The cost (for a dedicated piece of equip that did only video)
B) I hate tapes
C) No native SLR Lens support, only stock lenses
D) Tiny sensors with hugely limited depth of field
E) Color sucks on most of them
All of those issues are addressed with the VSLR’s. While there are other issues that present themselves with VSLR’s, I have decided the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. I pay less, I get far better image quality, I don’t need adapters to use my SLR lenses, I can transfer recorded data faster than real time…Sure, I have to be careful how I handle the camera when I’m shooting, and sure I have to cut some footage that would be otherwise fine if not for the jello issue.
For my needs, the VSLR solution is the best one so far. That is, until the RED Scarlet or EPIC ships later this month.
$500 HD camcorders won’t have the lens choice and low light performance of a VDSLR. As your friend well knows (and his camera is more than 500 bucks) current video cameras for professional purposes are very heavy and expensive. VDSLRs are the future and nikon is letting the future pass them by. In other word you validated the reason VDSLRs exist and have a huge future.
the choice of video is important for all manufacturers even if photographers who don’t care whine and kick. For all that’s been said about video, I wonder how many people realize that you don’t have to use it if you don’t need it. Yet for those that do need it, it SHOULD be there. This is how you grow a company. Nikon is in the business of making money and growing before they are in the business of silly “we’re no video company” arguments.
The future is merged, like it or not, that’s the future. Get used to it.
VDSLRs is what they are called? Thanks, I didn’t know that.
I’ll take it from a different approach. Its just point-and-shoot cameras, most of them now contain 1080i video (at least in Japan), but it will never replace handicams/camcorders. Cell-phones are capable of photos/videos, but it will replace point-and-shoot cameras.
I think Nikon will slowly add it on (video capabilities) to DSLRs. Don’t forget Canon has a much stronger expertise in video than Canon, since they have been selling video cameras for a long time. But Canon is not stupid enough to make DSLRs with super video capabilities that will do the same as their camcorders. Thats shooting yourself in the foot. DSLR video taking will always be inferior to camcorders. Nikon will just take a longer time to perfect it since they need 3rd party expertise. Just like Sony is an ODM and needs 3rd party OEM on most products.
Its not easy being a technician for Nikon, its hard to write coding/firmwares for video since they are competing against Canon who has a strong video department.
Never say never, I imagine in 5 years most cameras you go in and buy at Best Buy or any other Very Big Chain Store of your choice will basically be hybrids. Already Canon and Sony have small-sensor fixed lens models that pretty much double up as both and offer pretty nice 1080 video with smooth long stabilized zoom lenses and AF. This will become the norm. Mid to high end consumer camcorders may still linger for a few years but the days of the average Joe owning separate video and still cams are numbered
From a consumer’s perspective it makes sense: why pay twice (or carry around twice as much) for something you can get in one package? The camera companies are forced to go along because if their company doesn’t do it another one will. Look for Panasonic, Sony and Canon to lead the charge.
As for VD-SLRs (eww), they’re coming too. But except at the low end like the d5000 or most notably the upcoming Pentax K-x, I think they’ll also be trying other things with the technology that comes along with video: high-speed burst modes, easier in-camera HDR, maybe a reimplementation of the best shot feature, etc. Things that the average consumer might not appreciate much less use.
And it can’t be THAT hard doing video, if tiny Pentax with their much more limited budget can do 1024/30p on an $1100 camera then why should Nikon not be able to offer at least 1080/24 on a camera nearly 5 times the price? The d3 already has 1080 built into the live view; really, how much easier can it get???!!!!! Some people have knocked Nikon et al for offering only motion jpeg but it IS the easiest to do and doesn’t require elaborate encoding, with quality that can be excellent if you set the bandwidth high enough. Memory is getting cheaper, so if I were them I’d stick with mjpeg for now and focus on getting their specs more in line with the competition’s.
>>Alex:
Nikon put video in the dslr (this is my opinion as a professional), for sales reason. In Japan, dslr with video options is not big (every knows about it, but no one cares). People who want to take great photos, use a dslr. If they want to take videos (non-professions or pro-sumers) they use a HD handicam that is cheap and only costs around 200,000 yen (approx US$2,000) for the best model. You can get a great handicam that shoots HD better than any dslr/video-mode for around US$500 in Japan. Cameras sell like hot cakes in Japan. This is how the market works, point-and-shoot is directed to the girls market because its easy, requires no skill and takes satisfactory photos for them to put on their blog pages. Its light, fancy and if they lose it, they’ll buy another one. Plus, Japanese consumers are the biggest waists in the entire world, they change their point-and-shoot practically at any announcement of a new model. Its a fashion statement and part-tool. Although, our cell-phones already support up to 10megapixel cameras on some brands…and can even adjust the shutter speed. Still, the photos are horrible in the eyes of a professional. DSLR in the entry range, are directed towards photography students, consumers who want better quality than point-and-shoot and girls with a bit more experience (hence the lighter and smaller body). The middle range DSLR are for small self-owned photo studios that do passport/portrait photos, companies that require photo taking (including insurance companies, road surveyers, some police departments etc) and richer families or individuals that like to take a lot of quality photos. Full framed DSLRs are used by rich individuals (or serious photo hobby people), journalists, professionals that use it for a living. Note this, NIKON in Japan, especially full frames is considered for SERIOUS PROFESSIONALS ONLY in the consumer market. Canon on the other hand, is “thought” to be more user friendly and LESS PROFESSIONAL in the consumer market, including their full frames. This is the Japanese market, thats how the consumer mind works here. Video functions for all the dslr companies put this on, to get the attention of the market and increase sales…don’t forget we are in a recession here. You needn’t tell me about market researching firms, I have so many contacts with friends in those fields, I could write a report, or sell the data.
I’m not sure about multi-taskers, however, I did start the job as a video-camera man and that video camera weighed a lot, it costs for than 2,000,000 yen (or approx US $20,000) for our cheap units and the concept is totally different than to taking photos. Editing the video making end-roll movies is part of the job, but these days there is using a specialist doing the that. Making the live productions is even more demanding. The other day at a wedding, which this particular one was considered small by Japanese standards, there was 80+ guests, and our crew included 3 sub video cameraman, 1 live video cameraman and 2 photographers, 1 sound producer, 1 lighting effects person. This is for a 2 and a half hour wedding reception.
I changed from video cameraman to photo-cameraman for personal reasons. Video cameraman in our field (well, at least in Japan) are paid by what we call “location”. Hence, one wedding reception is considered as one “location”. The pay is fixed, unless you get really good and start handling crane-jobs or live shoots (for the people who don’t understand this, it means you shoot in HD, 1080p, edit on dual 4 core computers with 32gigs ram and most operators use Edius to compile a video with over 30 HD tapes within a 2 hour 15minute time frame. This needs to me completed with NO mistakes and burnt on blu-ray 5 minutes before the groom/bride return for their final speech to the guests…this is intense pressure). But once you display the presentation, the oohs and laughs from the guests always calms our blood-pressure. (oh, any mistakes…even a tiny one, your pay is halved)
However, as a cameraman, you get paid by the amount of acceptable professional photographs that are to be used in photo montages, photo albums and even used in end roll movies itself. If you are good….you can make 1.5 times more pay than a video cameraman because most of your photos are used in the single one session or “location”. We get paid per photo / and post editing is also near zero.
This is my job, I use a D700. I make more money than most friends that work behind a desk. Get better, photography can make a good living. I want more people and friends to understand this and join me… its fun and when you see the smiles of your clients, it just motivates you.
You don’t really need a D3x, you’re not that good…you don’t work for National Geographic (unless you are a SERIOUS perfectionist that uses a post-editing program to zoom into 100% pixels and check for chrominance noise for every single picture you take). If you really want to get good, buy a dslr in your price range, and RENT all the lens (I’m sorry that I don’t know about other countries, but in Japan we can rent professional lens from a specialized camera store). Shoot at a subject with a defined objective with different lens. You’ll understand the behavior of the camera to the lens, where the light angles are useful and a lot more other stuff. Then, if you really like it… come join others that do it for a living.
Hope this information can inspire some people.
+1
Very Interesting about “Reality” (not rumor) in Japan as a wedding photographer.
Thanks!
Everything about an HD Handicam is inferior to a DSLR for video recording except the back-end electronics, and that can be remedied in one generation. In theory, a DSLR should blow them away, and I’m certain future DSLRs will.
If I send a PJ to cover a story and he comes back with beautiful stills AND compelling video, that’s a good thing. He’s already there. And why should he lug around another piece of equipment?
These are like the same arguments one made favoring a trunk full of primes instead of two zooms. That’s a fine-arts photographer talking. A sports/news pro needs whatever gets out of their way so they can capture the story and make the customer happy. And the capability to record video is becoming part of that.
—>>”If you are a good photographer, you can shoot great pictures with a Canon or Nikon camera (or any other brand actually). Its a preference for which brand to use. Comparing is for people who don’t make enough money and is ignorant to the fact that their skills is lame.
I have friends who just started photography as a pro (for which means you actually make money from photos), and they always argue which is better, what camera is better…blah blah. Problem is, I always put them to shame with a D700 while one uses a D3 and the other a Canon 1D. Take this as a truth, unless you are in the field for at least 5-10 years, you would HAVE NO IDEA what camera I had used judging from just my pictures.
Quit the bashing.
Get better at taking pictures.”<<—
That part, I totally agree with. Thanks for sounding the trumpet. As I have said before here, I suspect that many of the people here that are whining about the D3/D3x and even the D700x/s are folks that either can't afford or wouldn't benefit from that great of a camera. I say this because any true professional would see how far the tech has come, and what incredible opportunities are available now with the cameras today compared with ten years ago. Pros are too busy trying to use even 1/10 of the new features and capabilities to complain.
I remember using the Kodak DCS760, and getting far better results than those using the Canon 1Ds. People laughed when I told them I was using the 760 because the ISO range was only 80-400 ISO. In reality, you could only shoot up to 160 ISO before noise was overpowering. Still, when shooting at 80 ISO (which I could do in 90% of my shooting scenarios), I was getting phenomenal results that were rivaling medium format film prints. In addition, photographers always asked me what kind of film I was shooting, a complement I took very well considering the other cameras at the time had strong "digital" characteristics.
Of course, the 760 wouldn't work for everyone. That's fine. But other pros that couldn't use the 760 weren't whining that Kodak didn't hold their hand, wipe their butt, and offer more this or that. The real pro's simply went out and found the best solution for their needs, made it work, and made lots of money. Pretty simple equation, folks. Productive pros are almost always too busy counting their money to complain about trivialities.
Soo… video but not even 1080p! That sucks man! And what about those lenses then? I need lenses!!!
The real question about the D3s is: does it have sensor cleaning? If it doesn’t I’m switching to Canon!!!!
(just kidding of course….)
the d3s needs a joke of the day feature…
I hope these “new” specs are a joke.
I would be shocked if Nikon does not got to 1080. But if I could get 720p with no jello , rolling shutter I’d be happy.
The main reason for a DSLR is still but times are changing and people want video too. It is time Nikon does it.
I will have to wait for a D700s or a D400.
About the new lens. a 24mm ƒ/1.4 will probably cost over 1300$ Too bad that’s too much for me considering what else I’m interested in.
I’d rather have a 28mm ƒ/1.4 for FX.
My dream FX combo would be the 14-24mm ƒ/2.8 + 28mm ƒ/1.4
I think it is funny no-one has mentioned the improved multi dial, what is up with that, what to improve?
My 24-70 and 17-35 aren’t small lenses but provide pretty good (though not excellent) performance @ 24 (unlike my behemoth 14-24 that rocks but weighs a TON). A fast prime would be nice but at $1300-1500 could I live without it? I shoot with the D700, so probably. Had they not neglected this part of the market, I would likely have stuck to primes in the first place instead of the 1 kg + zooms. I won’t be running to buy one now, that’s for sure.
Isn’t this entire website predicated on complaining about information that isn’t final yet?
So there is still hope for my D700x ?
Thanks, you made my day !
seriously….
Whatever they release, it’s not good enough. I want more than i can handle…yesterday.
nikon.ca has the specs up
Where? I don’t see anything…
its in the slr bodies tab
nope, nothing there – got a link?
emailed to you
direct link:
http://nikon.ca/en/pdf/brochures/D300s_En.pdf
http://nikon.ca/en/Product.aspx?m=17350&disp=Overview
That says D300s
wtf you smoking man??????????
I don’t see the D3s listed in the Nikon.ca website anywhere – just the D3.
I was hoping that Nikon would release a body that would cover a double page spread RAW (16MP), have good clarity up to 1000 ISO with FX sensor and HD video for $2,000 – $5,000. Alas, will this ever happen?
I’m just come from my trip in Africa and don’t want my 1D3 and 1Ds3 anymore. The 1D3 isn’t really reliable in focussing even after the hardware patch and the 1Ds3 will be updated soon. A friend of mine uses the D300 and I fell in love with the handling and the philosophy of the Nikon.
Now at home I would like to switch, even I have a bunch of L-lenses. But here I see that it isn’t easy to switch to Nikon. I am pro enough to know, that MP isn’t anything, but with the right lenses it counts a lot!
Nikon is a whole new world to me and I was surprised to see, that Nikon only has ONE model, which has more than 12MP! WHAT?? Are they nuts?
I am using Canon’s top model and – Ladies and Gentlemen – you can see the difference between 12 and 21 MP even when it is downsized to screen resolution.
So NIKON – I would come to you – if you are able to deliver a “D800″ (a D700 with more pixels). Buying a D3x is no option because I have to spend a huge amount of money for changing the lenses.
Video does not really matter to me, but if it’s there I would use it in occasion.
If you were able to buy both a 1d3 and a 1ds3, how come you can’t buy a D3x? Plus a D700 for the lowligh/light shooting situations? Both together are about 9,200USD, not that much for a working pro these days.
>>
Nikon is a whole new world to me and I was surprised to see, that Nikon only has ONE model, which has more than 12MP! WHAT?? Are they nuts?
<<
Obviously you are not that pro if you really meant what you wrote there…
I'm not going to bother teaching you why Nikon only keeps 12MP with only one higher mega pixel full frame camera. You have no idea about cameras.
please disregard my posts, I’m on a lack of sleep
There’s one simple question: What will a new camera change here? What do you expect – features, price/performance, realiability, weight, usability?
Step aside for a moment: are the current cameras that bad in any of these criteria? I suppose not otherwise there would be no market for such equipment.
Regards
PF
Ugh… please Nikon, don’t put video in your top-line cameras unless it’s worthy of being on your top-line camera (e.g. 1080p). I’d prefer them not to have video at all but if you’re going to do it, do it right.
totally agree…. pro camera needs pro video (1080p @ 24,30 fps) and a decent codec for capture….
Professional video is 720p/50 converted to 720p/25 in the computer.
Motion-Jpeg is not optimal, but the advantages is that Nikon can use the same picture settings and processing as with the stills. AND you can more easily take out still from the movie.
Motion-Jpeg with 1080p would cause hugh files.
all this people saying “I don’t need video, thus nikon shouldn’t bother with it” follow the same logic that somebody saying “I don’t need 12MP, nikon should stick to 2MP”.
Like it or not, it isn’t about what you need, it is about what the market and competition demands. video is the next big thing. take it and quit complaining. You may as well demand decent video if they wish to avoid the bad press associated with the fact that your top of the line flagship has inferior video quality than a point and shoot and every single camera your competition makes. how’s that for some reputation.
Hell yeah !
yes, video and compact size will help in the tough competition landscape (Nikon has plenty of challengers, they need to pay attention not only for Canon, Nikon need to pay attention to Sony, Panasonic, and Samsung as well.
It is more important to delay a product rather than launched with so so improvement/quality. If the damage is done, it is hard to recover.
also.. low price or at least the same as its predecessor will help.
NO NEW LENSES….wtf that cant be right.
Same sensor? seems like Nikon in-camera Noise Reduction technology has improved another milestone, if it’s true we will be getting heavily processed photos before even have a chance to do it in capture nx or acr.
I just don’t see how the iso can get better
i see a frame rate jump more than another stop of iso…