< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

I think I know

Nikon will have only one press conference on February 3rd, 2010 (the actual announcement could be on February 2nd, depending on your time zone). I never got any information about a second press conference (like they did last year). It is now also too late to schedule one. This could only mean that Nikon doesn't have much to show. They will never announce a major DSLR product together with the Coolpix cameras. Look back at previous Nikon announcements - when was the last time they announced a DSLR body (FX), several lenses (FX), few Coolpix cameras and maybe even teleconverters all at the same time? I've said that few times before in the comments section and now I will say it on the main page:

No new Nikon DSLR prior to PMA!

I really hope I am wrong this time. If they pull one out, I can assure you that nobody outside Nikon's headquarter knows about it. There is just no information out there, nothing, zilch.

This is my final word on what we will get next week based on the information I have so far (unless I get something new in the last moment):

That's it. I can say that this announcement has been the most difficult to gather information for, maybe because the expectations were very high.

I also do believe that Bob Krist was shooting with the new Nikkor 24mm f/1.4 lens, so expect to see some promotional photos from Miami when this lens is announced next week. That's about the only real leak we got so far.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

    Remember what Nikon product manager from Spain said back in November?

    http://nikonrumors.com/2009/11/05/nikon-d700-replacement-timeframe.aspx

    Count 6-8 months from November for a D700 replacement.

    • rhlpetrus

      But a D900 is not necessarily a D700 replacement. Thom has said he sees a 4-body FF line at the end of 2010: D700s, D900, D3s, D3x, so the D700s would be the one that would follow the 6-8 mo delay, the D900 is a new camera altogether.

      If that’s the actual name of new camera, it means the body is not the same as the D700′s, Nikon does not use a different name for just a change of sensors. Michel has stated clearly that the new FF body will not be an entry-level FF body.

      I’m seeing maybe an F6 type body, full-featured FF pro body w/o vertical holder, 100% VF, no in-camera flash, etc.

    • Dr SCSI

      [NR] admin, “I think I know”….I think the announcement will be about the EVIL camera and the new MX(?) sensor and two introductory MX lenses to match, 5x and 10x zooms. You are right, this won’t be a DSLR introduction, but I don’t think it will be a CoolPix either. This will be a mirrorless, pentaprisim-less, 10MP (maybe 12MP) 17mm diagonal sensor, 1600 max ISO, EVF, single memory card (non CF), which has been purpose built to carve out a niche market just below 4/3rds. Why don’t you establish a survey about the EVIL specifications, so we can see how close your readers are at guessing the specs, prior to the 3 Feb announcement? Thanks for the hard work….Doc.

  • Anonymous

    I was hoping for new flash (SB-700 ???), I guess I’m stuck to go with the SB-900.

    • Anonymous

      Which is an amazing flash. I wish i had another

    • http://micahmedia.com Micah

      Why? Seriously I keep on seeing this question with no clear reason.

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

        Perhaps because the 900 is the size of a barge? Just a guess, tho’. I only have a 600 & 800.

        • http://micahmedia.com Micah

          Me too. Which is why I don’t get it. If you want something smaller than a 900, you get an 800. If you want something smaller than an 800 you get a 600. If you want something smaller than a 600 you get a 400.

          That’s three sizes of flash (four if you count the 800). Seriously what are you looking for that’s not offered? What feature are you looking for that doesn’t exist in the line up already?

    • http://www.rembrandtphoto.com Michael

      I’ve given up on Nikon flashes or at least I-TTL. Too inconsistent especially for weddings. You’ve got black tuxes & white dresses with a sophisticated focusing system. I try to use available light when I can, my Lumidynes or the SB800 on manual and set the distance myself.

      • http://micahmedia.com Micah

        I-ttl works great…if you know how to use it. It’s part of the reason I upgraded from the D2x to the 300/700. On the D2x it didn’t work with auto-iso. Most of the time I’m on manual exposure and ttl flash, but outdoors i-ttl does wonders for fill.

  • twoomy

    Well F’in A! Dissapointing, but thank you admin for all of your work and efforts at keeping us informed.

    I actually blame TH, ML, and a few other “pundits” at DPreview for spending far too much of their time spewing their predictions/timelines/estimates/guesses trying to stir up excitement about impending announcements. Hey guys… I know you have some sources, but there is obviously more going on than you know of, so can it already with your coy time predictions. The D700x didn’t come out last year before the D3x, it didn’t come out in July, or November, or February 3. When one of you finally predict the day of an announcement correctly, I’ll buy you some new tea leaves. :)

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      Please, let’s keep this discussion for next week, because I could be wrong too. As I said, I am looking for certain paterns before a new DLSR is announced and this time I have NOTHING!

      • twoomy

        Sorry, I wasn’t directing my little rant at you, I appreciate what you do. But yeah, let’s see what happens next week.

    • http://www.bythom.com Thom

      “I actually blame TH”

      Okay, I’ll take some blame. Sometimes it’s difficult to sort through what you hear from sources and get a strong sense of timing. I was wrong on this one. As I’ve written elsewhere in the last week, I can’t find any of the clues that usually precede an impending DSLR launch, so I’m pretty sure at this point that we won’t get one.

      On the other hand, it’s clear that an FX product is being readied.

      “trying to stir up excitement”

      Not sure I’ll cop to that. There’s nothing in it for me to “stir up excitement” and a lot to lose (when I’m wrong). Much of what I’ve written on dpreview has been in response to direct questions to me. I simply share what I think at the time. And what I think at the time is based upon somewhat sparse, but often correct, information I get from sources out of Asia.

      As for Nikon, they’re not the only one that seems to be taking a low-key attitude towards PMA this year. As far as I can tell there now looks like there will very little DSLR announcement activity at PMA this year and a lot of energy has shifted towards late summer and Photokina instead. This could be because the companies finally realize what the numbers tell them: DSLR sales are down when you subtract out mirrorless. That means that previous assumptions about product cycles at the low end are wrong. You wouldn’t think that would impact a high-end camera, but when you realize you have wrong assumptions at one end of your product line, it is wise to take the time to re-rationalize the WHOLE product line.

      But that brings out a curious anomaly: the Japanese makers are predicting 11% more DSLR/Mirrorless sales in 2010 than 2009. But it appears that there is very little new camera activity going to hit in this first quarter! That means that they expect the growth for 2010 to be back-loaded.

      • Richard

        @Thom

        If Nikon is “inflexibly wedded” to such a lengthy product replacement schedule it raises the question of whether the company is simply unable to cycle products at a faster rate or shorter interval or simply does not believe that it matters. Their primary competition, Canon, seems to be able to release products on a shorter cycle, but they have problems of their own, most notably autofocus problems and high ISO noise. If the rumored new releases by Canon actually come to pass and they are without significant problems Nikon may be left behind in the market place.

        While I have come to think that the Leica M-9′s Kodak supplied sensor may well define the present state-of-the-art middle ground in terms of IQ and resolution over a broad spectrum of conditions it remains to be seen what Nikon is capable of producing in the way of a response to the Canon 5D MKII/7D lineup. By the time Nikon does respond Canon may well be on the verge of releasing their replacements leaving Nikon even further behind.

        Things just do not look that good for Nikon despite the runaway success of the D3 because of its superb high ISO and autofocus performance. There are only so many people who will purchase a product at the price point of the D3x and a lot more who are potential customers at the price point of the 5D MKII.

        Regards

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

          “Their primary competition, Canon, seems to be able to release products on a shorter cycle, but they have problems of their own”

          I think you may have answered your own statement right there. What if Nikon’s taking the longer route attempting to make sure (as best is possible) that EVERYthing is ready before release? What if the marketing gurus at Canon are pushing for faster releases since they’re seeing exactly what you see? Who cares if you have a few unironed wrinkles if you can get your product out the door before the competition? That’s what firmware updates are for, right? I can imagine that (if that’s the case), there are some engineers over there that are furious that no one is listening to them. That’s one scenario that comes to mind, anyway.

          Another point in the Canon-Can-Why-Can’t-Nikon is the fact that Canon’s a huge, diversified company. They can funnel money around if necessary. Nikon’s a little more specialized and much smaller, so they don’t have the same massive resources that Canon does. Along with that, I do believe the stepper division isn’t doing as well as they’d like it to be, so there may be some belt-tightening going on company-wide that could be affecting the product cycles.

          And we can’t forget the economic depression. The cameras we are using now were mapped out before the crash. Sales are down, so perhaps they’re thinking that the cameras need to stay in the market a little longer. I personally don’t know- just a few guesses.

          I live an hour & a half by bullet train south of Sendai. Am thinking about trying to put together a tour of the Sendai plant, if possible. If I can make that happen, I’ll see if I can’t pump some information out :D This being Japan, I figure my chance of success will be somewhere around 1~2% in getting any pertinent information. But hey, never hurts to try. I’ve tried pumping the engineers at Yokohama for info, but have gotten nowhere :P Apparently I don’t buy enough gear ;)

          • Richard

            @Fried Toast

            Please report back on your trip. It sounds very interesting!

            The area of camera development that I most see as being slower than it should be is both in the image sensor and the digital signal processor area, which is not to completely ignore lenses and such. The current state of manufacturing for CPUs and such is in the 32 to 40 nm area. DSPs tend to lag a bit in process. Anyway, advanced process chips allow for both more efficient (power management) DSPs and greater processing power for a given physical size. The other process area is the sensors themselves. Nikon seems to have been stuck at the 12 MP size for quite some time now. If “all” Nikon were to do is take a given camera body and update the sensor and DSPs in it I believe that the market would be just fine with that. Although I think the market would like to se an F6 size pro body I think it unlikely that the complaints would be too severe if the technology in an existing body were offered. If Nikon is at an impasse in sensor development they should simply purchase the best available technology, for at least a portion of the product line, until such time as they resolve their issues. I find it difficult to believe that Kodak, for example, would not be pleased to sell sensors to Nikon. We could do much worse than to have NIkon put the sensor used in, for example, the M9 into something or other. A D300 size combination like that would be very interesting indeed, at least to me and I believe a lot of other people.

            Regards

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

            “If “all” Nikon were to do is take a given camera body and update the sensor and DSPs in it I believe that the market would be just fine with that.”

            I know I’d be fine with that. If I could send my D700 in and get an updated sensor, life would be good. Cut out some of the associated costs w/ the body, etc.

            Give us the Dx body strength in the Dxxx size and make the sensors interchangeable (even if it has to be sent to the factory to do so). How many people would keep their bodies? I’m sure more than a few would warm up to that idea. I don’t know how plausible it is from an engineering standpoint, but it’s a good idea, nonetheless.

            Something I think Nikon could do to stir up the market would be to release a Dx-sized FX cam. There are pros of all sizes. I’m sure some of the smaller people out there (especially gals) might not enjoy lugging around Dx-sized bodies. People with disabilities might want Dx quality, but unable to cope with the weight issues. Give ‘em a pro-build body in a smaller form factor.

            Problem there is that I don’t know if there’s enough market there to recoup the engineering costs. Regardless, I think it’d definitely shake up the market!

    • Anonymous

      “I actually blame TH, ML, and a few other “pundits” at DPreview for spending far too much of their time spewing their predictions/timelines/estimates/guesses trying to stir up excitement about impending announcements.”

      Why are you blaming someone for sharing some information that’s come across their desk? Sounds like you are so impatient for products that you probably don’t need that you’ve become irrational.

      Think about what you just wrote for a second lol

      • rhlpetrus

        Indeed, ridiculous. And Thos said recently launch would be in March, Michel was still hoping for Feb but it seems that it’ll be March after all. No big deal IMO. Michel has posted, after this post at NR, that one should wait and see what’s coming. He has always said it’ll be something big in terms of quality and features.

        The 16-35 f/4, if coming, is very big news, it means Nikon is serious about bringing FX to the masses, next I hope for a 24-105 f/4, then for the longer zoom as well.

        • Vladi

          exactly, Nikon needs f/4 zooms big time, Canon’s 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 zooms are very popular both for FX and DX. Especially for 70-200 Canon got 4 offerings here while Nikon got only 1.

          • WoutK89

            If YOU NEED them so bad, why dont you switch? Just do with what Nikon does have! Otherwise you might just be waiting forever

        • alex

          The f/4 range is a bad idea only cheap canon fanboys seem to love. You really need either 2.8 or a cheaper variable aperture zoom with slow aperture curve just like 16-85 which reaches 5.6 only above 70mm.

          • http://micahmedia.com Micah

            +10

      • twoomy

        Maybe you misunderstood my post. I don’t blame them for the D700x/D900 not arriving next week, I blame them for blowing a lot of hot air and making such a big deal about what little information they have… day after day… post after post after post after post. It’s one thing to share the info that crosses your desk. It’s another thing to be spewing grandiose predictions over and over again. You think that they aren’t responsible for stirring up excitement and disappointment in the Nikon community? Think again. When you predict specific dates and you’re wrong over and over again, maybe it’s time to just take a break and stop predicting for a bit. Now I’m going back to the studio to enjoy work with my current camera. And whenever a new high-res FX model actually appears, then I’ll start paying attention again.

  • rg

    i wanted sb 700 too, and 85 1.8 af-s vr

    • http://micahmedia.com Micah

      Why? If you have a d300 or above, then I highly recommend the 85/1.8.

  • Willis

    I’d be OK with a bunch of new lenses… I’m actually pretty happy with Nikon’s current DSLR lineup.

    Besides, I won’t have money for a new one anyway :)

  • http://www.d800.com The invisible man.

    The new lenses are DX or FX ?

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      FX

      • http://www.d800.com The invisible man.

        I don’t understand Nikon.
        Who need a 24mm f/1.4 AF-S ?
        The actual 24mm f/2.8 is fine, don’t need AF-S focusing with a wide angle lens.
        Why f/1.4 on a 24mm ? To have a nice broken and little D.O.F ?
        The only time I use a 24mm for portrait is when I shoot an elephant at the zoo !

        What about a 85mm f/1.4 AF-S VR ? Make more sens to me.

        • John M

          Clearly you’ve not seen the used pricing on the 28mm f/1.4D. There is enough demand for this lens that people are willing to pay $3800+ US for it.

          • Chris_M

            I don’t think people are buying it for the extra f-stops. Maybe because it has better sharpness, better build quality, less chromatic aberrations and less barrel distortion than the 2.8 AF-D?

          • dB

            Of course they’re buying it for the f-stops! These lenses are great for low-light street photography, plus they can give the very difficult to achieve low depth-of-field-wideangle look.

          • Dr SCSI

            @Chris_M, of course they are paying for the extra f stops, everybody is! You either pay for it up front in the DSLR body, or continuously down the road for each lens, or in my case, BOTH! Low light photography is booming, the DSLR has brought about something that just wasn’t possible in film. I can hardly wait for the D4S with a 3 stop ISO advantage over my D3. Buy a lens like a 28 f/1.4 and mate it to the D4S, you now have a 4 stop advantage; it is like having the D5. Also, don’t forget that low light isn’t your only advantage, you can increase your shutter speeds even further, for action stopping wide angle fun!

        • Eric

          Probably to ensure that you’ll get perfect sharpness at f/4?
          So on FX at f/4, you get :
          - decent DOF
          - perfect sharpness
          - decent brightness

          Seems good enough for me!
          Plus, on DX, you get a really good stand-up portrait lens and can separate subject & background pretty easily.

          • Chris_M

            I agree with The invisible man. I’d rather buy a f/3.5 or f/2.8 24mm, even DX, without AF-S. It would be also cheaper. And the 24mm AF-D is fine for FX. But that’s just me…

        • Mike

          I need one. I have 2 lenses that cover 24mm that stop at 2.8. I can’t make my 50 1.4 wider. So a 24 1.4 fills that gap. I’m not looking to shoot an elephant at 24 1.4. I’m looking at how different the shot will look vs a 24 @ 2.8 of a bride and groom dancing or the recessional. The idea of getting up close at 1.4 is very attractive vs stepping back 10 feet with my 50 1.4.

          • Ernst

            I would certainly buy one for the extra f-stops.

            One of the worst fictions being perpetrated out there is that somehow the high-ISO capabilities of new DSLRs mean that fast glass doesn’t matter.

            Why does fast glass matter?

            1) Shallow DOF. Especially hard to come by on wideangles.

            2) Low noise. There is a profound improvement in image quality between ISO6400@f/2.8 and ISO1600@f/1.4.

            3) More accurate autofocus and a brighter viewfinder. The finder image is always at max aperture unless you activate DOF-preview. Fast glass is significantly brighter in low light, and this benefits the autofocus system as well.

            Also: VR that’s allegedly worth “2 stops” isn’t, because it cannot stabilize a moving SUBJECT. 2 stops more aperture, on the other hand, really does allow shorter exposures and therefore less subject motion blur.

        • dB

          I have been waiting for this lens for years! A wide-angle that lets in 4-times as much light as my 17-35 f/2.8, that’s also presumably smaller? Many people have been waiting for a lens like this…. Nikon currently has ZERO fast, wide, AF primes available (unless you count the 35mm f/2, which isn’t that fast and doesn’t perform too great)

          • Nico in China

            hoping very much for a 24 and a 35 F1.4 as well, unfortunately i doubt they will be as compact as the current primes… that lens on the recent helicopter picture seems quite big and fat actually.
            My current favorites are the 17-35 and the 35 F2.0, one for wide angle and one for “a bit wide” with shallower DoF than you’d expect for this kind of pics.

            I’d love to see them being compact and having an aperture ring, and ultra-fast AF-D, but i bet they will be super big and super heavy and won’t work on my FM3A :-(

        • GlobalGuy

          It should be a 28mm — 24mm is too WIDE. 24mm already exists with the shift lens. Why oh WHY would we want a 24mm?? It distorts and makes people and things look all stretched out.

          28 is the perfect length. Kudos to Nikon for having already made a 28 — and BOO to them for discontinuing it. We need a faster 28 or 30mm for FX. 24 is kind of wasteful. 35 would be too long, because we have a 35/2 which is OK. We need a 28 1.4!! The other lenses are slow and older models.

          • b

            agree 100%

          • WoutK89

            My thoughts exactly, 24mm is covered on the PC-E lens (apparently very sharp already), the 14-24 AND the 24-70, the 28mm would only be covered by the 24-70, and bring also a wider aperture.

          • Anonomice

            A 28mm f/1.4 would get exactly zero sales to DX users. Less than zero, probably, as it would convince DX users that no useful prime lenses will ever come their way from Nikon.

            A 24mm f/1.4 gives you the equivalent of the classic 35mm f/1.4 on DX. DX users will snap it up if it comes in under $1800.

          • WoutK89

            I am DX user, and have no intention to buy it if its 1.4, not 24 nor 28mm. I just want something small and light and affordable, f/2 or a remake of the 2.8′s would do it for me!

            Regarding your 24/1.4 (on DX) = 35/1.4 (on FX) is not true, 24/1.2 would be more exactly the equivalent ;-)

          • Jabs

            Hey Globalguy and others here,
            ONE simple word – OLYMPICS!
            Nikon and Canon are both focused on trouncing each other at the upcoming Olympics, so perhaps all the movement in PRO bodies and lens, are focused on that.
            Canon took a real beating at Beijing and the D3s has again sideswiped them (their Mk4) with better high ISO files and much better focusing. NOW, they need a few lens and teleconverters to complete the ‘hat-trick’ over Canon AGAIN.

            It is trickle down strategy – PROS first, then consumers later – for Nikon. They sell more consumer photography stuff but make less money per unit and since Nikon is smaller than Canon, guess what?
            Nikon is about catering to the professional market right now and Canon is focused on consumerism with some seriously flawed and hyped products.

            Nikon is focused on the Olympics!

            VOLUME -vs- QUALITY!

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

          Buy an 85mm instead of a 24mm? Afraid I don’t see the logic there. Completely different focal lengths. Personally, I’m not a fan of 85mm on FX. My 85mm f1.8 sits collecting dust (exactly what happened w/ my 50mm while using my D300).

          24mm 1.4? I’d take that :) Take it over an 85mm *any* day.

        • ledon

          There’s lots of excellent zooms that cover 24mm f/2.8. What’s the point of buying such a prime?

  • Dan

    It does make sense to not have any DSLR’s to be announced.
    I doubt Nikon will launch a new FX cam while the D3s is still relatively new, as for a DX cam, it’s only the D90 that seems to be on its way out and I believe a replacement won’t come up until September so it would be too early to announce one.

    Though I do find it interesting that Nikon is launching a wide prime with a wide zoom. I think there maybe one more lens, perhaps another out of the bloom DX prime to follow the 35 1.8 and 85 3.5?

  • http://www.benjamingolub.com/ Benjamin Golub

    How do you know the 16-35mm f/4 will be announced? Did I miss something?

    I’ve been waiting patiently for this lens for quite some time now. I don’t want to pay for the 14-24 nor carry it. An f/4 lens in that range would work just fine for me and be cheaper/lighter.

    I will buy it ASAP.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      if you follow the link, this Japanese source has a pretty accurate history. He/she was wrong on the timing of this lens, but I think Nikon changed their mind in the last moment and decided to released the update 300mm f/2.8 VRII instead of the 16-34 zoom (because of the Olympics). It also makes sense to have this combo – fast prime and zoom, both wide angle lenses, both FX.

      • http://www.benjamingolub.com/ Benjamin Golub

        I hope you’re right!

  • 16-35 f/4 for real?

    To NR admin: How certain are you with the 16-35 f/4? with NR rating of 95% it gotta be pretty solid.

    I’ve purchased, returned, and eventually hold off re-purchasing the 17-35 AND 14-24 once NR posted the 16-35 f/4 rumor, for 16-35/4 is fits my need perfectly. I lost a lot of photo oppotunity this half a year and , you better be right this time!

    • John M

      Why would you make purchasing decisions based on rumors?

      If you have the need, and the lens you need is available at real (and not scalper) prices, just buy it. If something new comes out you can sell it. It might cost you a little more in the long run, but you get better pictures with a lens you have than with one you don’t.

      • 16-35 f/4 for real?

        US$1829 for a copy of 14-24 is not a small sum of money. I have a hard time justifying that even to myself… any hint of a $1200-$1300 lens of (assumingly) comparable quality at f/8 would push me to wait.

    • Anonymous

      Look, the NR admin is pretty damn kick ass for what he’s doing, but I don’t think he advises us sell to our equipment on behalf of a rumor that he heard from some source.

      In fact, good on you for being a tool and losing photo opportunities for a year. You obviously put having the newest and best equipment ahead of photo opportunities that come once in a lifetime.

      Congratulations on being a tard.

      • Richard

        Yea, there’s a reason it’s called a RUMOR.

        • SBGrad

          A rumor is a premature fact.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

            A rumor is premature knowledge that could *possibly* become a fact.

    • Anonymous

      Look, the NR admin is pretty damn kick ass for what he’s doing, but I don’t think he advises us sell to our equipment on behalf of a rumor that he heard from some source.

      In fact, good on you for being a tool and losing photo opportunities for a year. You obviously put having the newest and best equipment ahead of photo opportunities that come once in a lifetime.

      Congratulations on being a tard.

      • 16-35 f/4 for real?

        Neither 14-24 nor 17-35 fit my bill perfectly at $1700+ a piece. A 16-35/4 would most likely do. And we are in a major recession. sell it at on the bay and you lose at least $200-300. I did have 24-70/2.8 and other wide lenses to cover. So I still had those pictures taken, on less performing lenses.

        The same US$2000 during that same period could give you 30-50% gain on almost any kind of stock investment. Enough to buy you another lens. I wouldn’t call that a tard.

        • WoutK89

          “So I still had those pictures taken, on less performing lenses.”

          How do you know, when the lens is not even released yet, what its performance will be?

          • 16-35 f/4 for real?

            I meant I took those pictures with lenses less performing than the 14-24. in the 18-24mm range on FX, all nikon wide lenses (even 12-24/4 DX) look pretty much the same at f/8.

          • Broken Gonad

            Christ on a bike! The whining on this forum……it’s too heavy, it’s too expensive, I want it now!

            Get in the gym if it’s too heavy you lightweights. I personally hope it weighs a ton and is built like a tank.

            If you don’t have the $$, get a second job.

            And you’ll get it when it arrives.

        • Henry Nikon Fan

          I could not agree with you more. I assume that a lot of people that post here are professional, but I am not. I photograph for a hobby. About a year ago I purchased the 12-24mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm lenses and had almost $5,000.00 invested in these lenses. I was not comfortable carrying this type of investment around for a hobby and I was able to sell them on EBay just when after the Nikon prices all went up so I was able to sell all of them for a bit of a profit even as used. I then purchased several less expensive higher end DX lenses for a little less than one of the other lenses.

          The bottom line is that each person must decide for themselves what works best for them financially and what they are using their equipment for.

          • Richard

            It is not just a matter of amateur vs. pro, but a matter of the use of the lens. For landscape work, a 16-35 that is sharp even wide open would be popular indeed. It would have to be lighter and more compact than my 17-35 f/2.8 (which I like a very great deal). When you are hauling everything on your back the weight matters. If it is going on a tripod, as most landscape work is done, the slower speed of the lens is not likely to be an issue most of the time. If you are including water, especially moving water, in the image you are most likely stopping the lens down to whatever the diffraction limit is and using ND/grad or polarizing filters to slow the shutter speed anyway.

            The real issue will be whether it delivers image quality, sharpness and contrast at a pro level.

  • Bob

    Well I hope you are wrong

  • Tim

    “I’ve said that few times before in the comments section and now I will say it on the main page: no new Nikon DSLR for PMA! I really hope I am wrong this time”. Wow, thanks NR. So much speculation for such a modest reward. Guess we’ll just have to wait a few days and see. That’s quite a few new lenses, but the 85/1.4 and 80-400 replacement don’t look like they made the grade. Surprised there’s NO dslr in there, not that it’s really my priority. Or the surfacing of the EVIL system. Now, what were we predicting for Photokina later this year…

  • AaronFoto

    This is very interesting stuff. BTW, the link to the 24 f1.4 info is going to the post about a mirrorless slr patent.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      that’s correct – the first entry is the 24mm 1.4 patent application:

      “The first interesting patent appears to be for a 24mm f/1.4 (application 20090185293) – look for this: f = 24.70 FNO = 1.44 2.omega. = 82.34, the 2.omega is field of view, which calculates to an FX circle (thanks for the clarification b). Here is another pattent (20090086340) for a wide angle lens.”

      Sorry, I will update the post to make it clear.

  • RumpelHund

    This is how to keep customers happy!

    With a successor announced my D700 would still keep taking great pictures, but lose in status and value. Nikon has spared me this. Thanks!

    Wide lenses is what a Nikon FF user really needs, having invested the whole budget in the camera.

    Wide prime is EXCELLENT but will be very expensive I fear. Will it be sexy enought to open my pocket? Looking forward to it…

    Wide angle zoom VR and 4 is EXCELLENT and hopefully affordable. Sold my 17-35 long before going FF and the 12-24 for FF, both for much too low price.

    I like these news!

    • Henry Nikon Fan

      I would also be interested in the AF-S 24mm for use on my D300 and for my wife to use on her D60. A fast wide prime to use on DX would be nice, wider than the AF-S 35mm.

      My fear is also how much this lens will cost being AF-S and not to mention F/1.4.

  • tim

    ARRRG!! Paaiiin! I dunno, should I just buy the D700? Or wait? Some advice pls!

    (on D2h, need replacement, on a budget, shoot sports… i know i know get the D3s.. i said a bit of a budget! :) )

    • Gustaf

      Wait another week! if nothing happens, go for the d700 and the grip.

      • tim

        That seems like the best bet yes! ARG! Its horrible! I need a camera soon! And now it seem i have to go for the D700, and get an update in the face 4-6 months later. :( Its still a hard decision!

        • Gustaf

          I know! I was in this situation three weeks ago, waiting for the upgrade to come out to replace my old D2h. then spoke to a client that needed some photographs taken this month, so i went and bought the D700 and trust me, I couldn’t be happier.
          If the d700x/s/800/900 is announced next week, how long are you gonna have to wait till it’s in the stores?

          • tim

            That is true as well… I need it in 2-3 months time. So i guess if they would announce it now, i think it would be in stores in time. I gave it a thought today, and i think im going for the D700 if no new camera is announced in 2-3 weeks. I have a good price on it as well.

    • Anonymous

      Tim- i picked up my D3 as a factory demo. 3500. Better then buying a new D700 with a grip for 2700. 700 more for a d3 that lasts twice as long. and has better fps.

      • SZRimaging

        Got a link to where I can find those? I am interested as I think the form factor of the pro body is better than that of the D700 + grip.

      • tim

        Thanks for the advice. I can get the D700 for 1900, and free grip. What is your opinion with this situation?

    • RumpelHund

      Get the D700 for what it delivers now (and won’t stop no matter what): outstandingly clear and crisp images that won’t leave any need unfulfilled.

      Sure the D700 will be less sexy and valuable when a successor comes up, but at least for me this camera has settled the urge for an upgrade for the next two generations of upgrades.

    • Dr SCSI

      @Tim, go buy a reburbished or demo model D700. You will have 30% and when D700S is released, you won’t be kicking yourself. I bought my D3 (refurbished at Nikon – 3 month warranty) back in May 09 timeframe for $3500 and never regretted it a bit.

  • Alex

    Oh crap! It hasn’t begun!

  • Gustaf

    a bit disapointed about the DSLR, but that 16-35 f/4 would be a great announcement and will make many people (myself included) very very happy.
    thanks for your efforts admin!

  • John M

    If a 24mm AF-S f/1.4 does show up, I will be watching the eBay listings for the old 28mm f/1.4 AF-D with great amusement.

    • Mike

      My thoughts exactly!

      • b

        we’ll have to fight over the 28′s

  • ven

    Hi,
    i am very dissapointed.Really wanted a new DSLR from NIKON.I still have my D200 from 4 years, but thought of upgrading it.
    I have thoughts of buying the new expected canon I D S Mark IV now

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      Don’t be disappointed yet – this is still a rumor, wait till next week.

    • bla

      Wow, you must have very little money invested in lenses…

      And a very logical upgrade too from the D200. If you consider an EOS 1Ds IV which does not exist yet, why not get a D3x? You really make no sense at all.

    • shivas

      what exactly is wrong with your D200 that you need a new body so badly?

      I have a D200 as well, and albeit I miss a lot of low light shots, it’s nothing a fast lens and some post-processing can’t handle. . .

      I would recommend buying lenses and let the body thing shake out. . . .or get the D3s if you can afford it!

      I think the 16-35 f/4 + D3s would make a great light weight combo, and I’m sure they are going to position the 16-35 with VR2 and pair it with the new D700s/D800/D900 whatever semi-pro body that’ll come out. . .

    • Dr SCSI

      @ven, D200 is very capable in everything but low light. I guess it is a personal preference thing, but I love the ergonomics of Nikon cameras. I can pick up any one and know intuitively where the controls are. My Canon friends can’t say the same thing for the Canon line. I would be hard pressed to switch to Canon, even if they made a much better product, after using Nikons. As I do much low light, I can now wield my buttons, knobs, dials, etc. in the dark. My best advice, wait till Nikon’s next big bad pro DSLR comes out, then go pick up a reburbished D3S or D3X that was given to journalists to test and write reviews about ‘em. You will save a ton of money, and also save yourself the pain (should you buy bleeding edge) of watching your camera’s value plumit faster than your car.

  • Highlights

    Yes, I know just the Coolpix and a little unexpected surprice. No big deal anyway…

  • http://www.lukeesh.com Luke Eshleman

    I’m pumped about the 24mm 1.4, but I’m dying for Nikon to release a 35mm 1.4 as well. It kills me that Nikon hasn’t released either one of these lenses before now given the fact that Canon carries both.

    Any idea on the MSRP of the 24 1.4? I’m assuming we’re dealing with a $1,000-2,000 lens here?

  • D40-owner

    Damn! If that AF-S 16-35mm f/4G ED VR is true, it will sell like hot cakes!!! Being f/4, it should be reasonably priced. If it is a fair price, and it’s sharp with low distortion, it will be the new standard for landscape shooters, a great budget wide for weddings, and it even doubles as a pro normal zoom for DX!!

  • http://www.janneheimonen.net fr0z

    hey [NR] admin!

    You forgot the 80-400vr replacement =))

  • Johan

    Aww, would be nice with a D700x/D800/D900.

    I’m not sure about the 16-35/4 VR, seem weird with VR but you never know really.. :) The timing is great, I just sold my 17-35/2.8 cause.. well, I didn’t like it much and am in the market for a new one (waiting for the 16-35/4, please let it be real!). Would be an excellent addition for landscapes, and hopefully a lot smaller than the 14-24/2.8 (which is a bit too heavy from time to time, I do love it tho).

    An 24/1.4 would also be cool but that’d probably be too expensive right now heeh.. still need to save up some cash for a used D700, common Nikon release an upgrade so people dump the “old” D700 so I can buy one cheap ;p

    <3 NR

    :)

  • morphez

    estimate price for 16-35/4? :D I really want that lens…

  • merkuree

    I am a Nikon shooter and will continue to be one. However, whatever advantage and goodwill which Nikon built up recently is slowly ebbing. The more time goes by, the higher expectations that we have for the D700 replacement.

  • hybris

    holy cr@p
    hope admin is wrong

    ill keep my faith in th and lammekøllen

  • low

    i think admin is on the money with this one. theres no need to a new dslr to be announced this soon after the d3s. im sure we will get a fx lens here or two, but from what im gathering, no super fast primes, probably a 1.8 prime(s) and we’re looking at a decent zoom, 18 – whatever, f3.5 to whatever.

  • http://www.lostinbids.com lostinbids

    I am disappointed that there will not be a new fx dslr. The d700 and the d3x are getting too old to invest in. I will have to stick to the d300 a bit longer. Every month the sony a900/850 looks more tempting.

    Come on nikon some of us need the MPs for stock photography.

  • Tom

    This exactly what I wantedto hear from Nikon. I am 100% happy with my D700, so no need for a new body. The 16-35 sounds awesome. I debated the 14-24, but ultimately decided it was too wide with not enough zoom range. And it’s too big with no filters. Putting VR on a wide zoom is brilliant. The f4 max aperature will reduce the size. Excellent. And the 24mm 1.4 is awesome. You can never get too much light or narrow DOF. I just hope they’re not priced like the new 70-200.

  • SZRimaging

    Well, if you are right about no DSLRs, looks like I’ll be ordering a D300s and that 16-35 f4. Now, if only there was a 28-70 f4, or something similar….

    • Tom

      Buy the 24-70 2.8. It’s awesome. The size has never been an issue for me and having 2.8 is great.

      • http://www.cesarkoot.nl Cesar

        Ok, what about the price of that huh?

        • SZRimaging

          Ding Ding DIng, we have a winner. Same reason I haven’t gotten the 14-24 yet. And honestly, I don’t need the top of the line in zooms under my 70-200. I use primes for portraits and the likes. Like the feel of it better.

  • John

    What about the 100-500mm?!?!?! or something around that. I’ve been waiting a long time for a good hand held fast focusing 400mm+ zoom. Come on Nikon. Any word anyone???

  • Dweeb

    There has been a lot of action recently on P&S in advance of PMA. I feel thay’s the deal. But Nikon do whatever they feel like and anything could happen even another paper announcement (PR) a week later closer to the show. Some rumours pan out but others (new WA primes predicted all last year) are just pipe dreams from the fanboys. I predict Apple will announce a new tablet device in two hours.

    • WoutK89

      Or they will just show prototypes, making the rumor mill spin even more ;-)

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

        Yes, this is possible – they may just announce it “on paper”, like some other manufacturers, and the availability will be few months later. This will ensure that nobody will switch to Canon and they will have few more months to work out the details.

        • b

          isn’t that the story of the 70-200vr2?

          • WoutK89

            Do you know any serious photographer, that switched to Canon, because of the 70-200VR-I, in other words, owning one, FX came, and then waited forever (less than 2 years) for a revised version?

          • b

            odd reply. you must not get what i was saying.
            if i remember right the 70-200vr2 was announced july 30 and after 4 month became available. i’m talking about an early announcement several month before it hit the shelfs.
            you with me?
            no switching to canon or lenses. simply about “time”

  • http://www.sergevancauwenbergh.com Serge

    A few weeks ago I mailed some questions to a Nikon NPS manager about the possible release of new Nikon primes (24/35/85) this year. He replied that he only had news about the confirmed AF-S 24mm f/1.4. A few minutes later he called me that he made a mistake and that he meant the AF-D 24mm f/2.8. Strange typo if you ask me. Maybe he meant the already released AF-S 50mm f/1.4. Still, I’m waiting for official news because a new 24mm or 35mm interest me very strongly.

  • photonut

    I hope you’re right with the AF-S 16-35mm f/4G ED VR !!!

  • Tim

    Dang! No 85/1.4, no 80-400 VR II, no high power zoom and no D900.
    I was good this year dammit! Why nothing on my shopping list? Grrrrr….

  • MM

    Sure D700 is a great camera BUT havent it been around for 2 years now? or even more maybe? Feels like its really time for a new high end DSLR from Nikon. Disappointing.

    • nobody

      About 18 months. Really disappointing that there’s no new entertainment for you!

      • WoutK89

        hehe, true :-P He is even too bored to look at the announcement/release dates :-P

  • Jay A

    From past NR posts and after talking to a Nikon Rep a few months ago at my local brick and mortar – 24mm and 85 1.4s in late Feb and some zoom update (don’t remember cause I’m not interested). Probably a 35mm 1.4 later in the year.

    Sold my 28 1.4. All I need is the announment and a vendor wating list.

    • Jay A

      sold my 85mm 1.4 also

  • thedude

    A summer release of the D700s sounds plausible … so i’m gonna have to wait until then.
    Wondering what the D900 labels on certian equipment was all about.

    Next week we all will know.

    • WoutK89

      it is assumed to be around before the D300s was announced already

  • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

    Let me also clarify one more thing – there are basically two types of posts here on NikonRumors. The first one is when I find something interesting online that is easily accessible to everyone. Those posts don’t get any probability rating, because I know as match as you on that particular topic. The second type of post (like the one above) is based on information that I cannot disclose its source (it could be a website) and this is why I rate its probability based on few different factors.

  • Ubiquitous

    The rumored 16-35 f/4 is too slow for me. If I had to buy the lens today, I would opt for the 17-35 instead of the 14-24. Firstly, I do not use the wide end as much as I need the 35mm in the long end. In Secondly, the 14-24 does not take filters and the 17-35 does. Lastly, the 17-35 is much lighter (1.6 lbs compared to 2.2 lbs.) Having said that, you need to walk over my dead body to take the 14-24 away from me – it is that good. I have no regrets and extremely glad that I did not make the decision, today.

    The 24mm f/1.4 lens is what I have been waiting for the last two year. A fast 24mm is indispensable. However, too late Nikon. I got the ZF 25 and it is not going anywhere. I have been a Zeiss fanatic since my days with the Zeiss-Ikon Supercontaflex and the Tessar 50mm f/2.8. I now have the ZF 25, ZF 35, and ZF 50 Planar and they are my pride and joy! Not to mention the Voigtlander 58mm Nokton. My next lens will be the Tokina 11-16 DX II. Again, too late Nikon. I follow my own timetable and not yours. Better luck, next time.

    • santela

      what? You don’t seem to make sense to me… so you have the 14-24, yet u are gonna get the tokina 11-16? for what? you said you don’t use the wide end much right?

  • johnny

    I’m keeping my D90 for many years, so lens-only announcements make me the happiest :D

  • roko

    No EVIL? Nikon helloooo! Olympus overpriced ep-1, ep-2 sale rocket into the sky, …does that ring the bell?

  • PHB

    Bob Krist is not shooting with a 24 f/1.4 in that shot, in fact he is not even shooting with a Nikon lens at all. The blue label on the lens makes it clear that the lens is a Zeiss and the camera is therefore a Sony.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      You could be right PHB, I just have a very hard time to believe that he will take a contract from Sony – he is part of the Nikon clique. This is the same as Joe McNally or Moose Peterson to shoot an ad for Sony – I think this will never happen. They just have too much in stake with Nikon.
      Let’s continue this conversation next week – again, all this here is just rumors.

    • Bagel

      PHB,
      That Sony claim I think was busted. Take another look at that lens close up and you will notice two distict areas of writing where you “think” the Zeiss label is located. Zeiss is one word. Nikon uses two phrases where the switch for Manual & M/A is located. Now consider the blue glow from the lights/sky reflecting off the lens lettering.
      Food for thought.

  • Geoff

    I was really hoping for an 18MP FF dslr for under/at 3k$ maybe 5-6 fps iso6400 with a high 1 and maybe 2

    I would have probably bitten the bullet upsold myself.

    Now, if the light side corrects an ancient focus system in their fairly inexpensive FF 21MP camera I would at least ponder jumping. My lens collection is small at this time, so it would not be overly costly to change.

    I was really looking forward to upgrading to some nice Nikon glass.

  • Richard

    Any news on a newer 200 f2 AFS VRII?
    I’d bet my hat one’s coming soon.

    • nikkor_2

      I’d be interested in an update here, too.

  • zen-tao

    Actually, I can’t believe that Nikon is going to pull out a 24mm. f:1’4 . It’s an insanity.Only to increase the price. No more.
    That kind of lens would work perfectly without AF, I have one old f:2,8 non AF and It’s very good (not as good as 20 mm). Besides, the output at such aperture would be very poor even with aspherical parts.

  • Zorro

    So no D40s then?

    • Ubiquitous

      :) :) :)

    • Lolly

      Ken R. might know the answer :D

  • Ron Scubadiver

    Time for me to break out the crying towel.

  • low

    lets see all the people who are going over to canon! :D syonara!!!

  • Dmitry

    I do not know anything, but somehow really doubt the 16-35mm and even 24mm f1.4, it is more plausible of the two. Hope I am very wrong.

  • Back to top