< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon D3000 and D5000 to be discontinued

Nikon D3000 and D5000

I got multiple reports from different countries that the Nikon D3000 and D5000 DSLR cameras are being phased out and will soon be discontinued. Some retailers were already told that there will be no future shipments of those models. The Nikon D90 and D300s will continue to be sold throughout the holiday season.

It is not clear if Nikon will introduce a new camera to replace the D5000 (it should basically be a D3100 with a swivel LCD display). Maybe Nikon will remove one of its DSLR models all together in order to free up some production capacity for a potential new model (EVIL?).

The D3000 was released in July of 2009, three months after the D5000.

This entry was posted in Nikon D3000, Nikon D3100, Nikon D5000, Nikon D5100 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://www.AlmondButterscotch.com/home Almond Butterscotch

    First!

    The 3000 is understandable, but the 5000? Are we expecting something soon?

    • http://www.AlmondButterscotch.com/home Almond Butterscotch

      Rephrase: is there a possibility of a replacement sometime soon, then?

      • LGO

        It would be interesting to see whether Nikon will release a D5000-replacement before Christmas.

        If Nikon releases a 16-70mm f/2.8 VR lens with that, the DX line will be quite attractive. :-D

        • LGO

          If Nikon releases a 16-70mm f/2.8 VR DX lens with that, the DX line will be quite attractive. :-D

          • Steve

            Nikon have only ever released 2 pro-grade DX lenses – the 17-55 and 12-24, and they are now many years old. It’s pretty clear they don’t think there is a market for pro dx glass. We can only hope they change their mind…

            • Cold Hands Luke

              And the 10.5 fisheye. And I think they count the 35/1.8 as well.

              Which is not to say I don’t agree with you.

            • PHB

              They have released quite a few more Dx lenses with hefty price tags.

              I think it is more a function of the design constraints. If a lens is telephoto then there is little advantage to making it Dx only unless it is a macro lens.

              For the wide angle, it is much harder to make a Dx lens for a given equivalent focal length.

              How many pro zooms does the world need?

              A dx 24 mm prime would be nice and maybe an update to the zoom.

          • D(l)eight

            It’s pretty clear they don’t think there is a market for pro dx glass. We can only hope they change their mind…

            If you take into account the release of the two f4 FX lenses it seems to me that nikon sees a FX future not only for the D3x and D3s flagship camera’s but also for cheaper FX bodies.

            • RMPossible

              The logic is just not there. If DX can work with the standard(read that as FX capable) lenses, why make DX lenses that mirror the FX? Nikon is just being thrifty. They only make Pro level lenses at the wide end to supplement the pro lens lineup which supports both DX and FX. The fact that there are so many DX consumer lenses (which continue to be made) only supports the future of DX cameras both pro, consumer and in-between.

            • LGO

              Because DX-only lenses can be made lighter and less expensive than for an equivalent FX lens.

          • Michael

            Here in England “legendary” Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 costs about £1000. New 16-70mm f/2.8 VR would cost about £1400 i think. Who would buy it for this money????

            • LGO

              I would.

            • LGO

              An FX-sized 24-105mm f/2.8 VR would be overly big and heavy (think 70-200mm f/2.8 near-size) and very expensive. It is unlikely that Nikon will ever make one.

              A DX-sized 35mm-equivalent 24-105mm f/2.8 VR on the other hand will not be as big nor as heavy. It will be expensive, yes, but there will be buyers for this lens.

    • Richard

      I think it fair to conclude that Nikon will not abandon a particular market segment and that they have something ready to go, probably already in production, to fill the price points of the discontinued products.

    • Jim

      DX lineup: D3100, D90, D7000, D300s

      • http://www.AlmondButterscotch.com/home Almond Butterscotch

        Which you can effectively cut down to

        D3100, D7000, and D300s. (since the D7000 replaces the D90).

        Basically, it’s back to the old formula- D40, D80, D200/300.

        • Thoppa

          Body prices
          D3100 US$525
          D90 US$675
          and then there’s quite a jump to the D7000, so I’d expect Nikon to plug that price gap with another model (a downgraded D7000 ?). However, previous comments from Nikon suggested the D90 would die off after Christmas, so I imagine we won’t see the middle model until at least the D90 is withdrawn.

          What happens then might be very interesting. It seems possible that we will either get a D3100 upgrade or a downgraded D7000 instead. Indeed, if sales pick up, we might get both, although that seems unlikely if the D400 appears after Christmas too.

          • hah

            the D700 IS the D90 replacement. The D90 was 999 at introduction so you cannot go by what prices it holds today. The D90 will be no more after the year’s end since they made a lot of them and need to be sold.

            The D5000 was always a strange camera. neither an entry level nor a more advanced model. Likely the line will simply be killed and we’ll go back to the waythings have always been:

            entry level body (D50/40/40x/60/3000/3100
            mid level D70/80/90/7000
            DX pro D100/200/300/300s
            FX advanced D700
            FX pro (speed) D#/s line
            FX pro (resolution) D#x

            Clearly the D5000 was just a test. If there is a sucessor, the D5100 will likely be exactly what the admin says: A D3100 with a swivel display and maybe slightly faster FPS.

            • bonzo

              DX is where the money is – very likely Nikon want DX models at about $500, $750, $1000, and $1250.

            • Nicola

              Haha,so you do think that D100/200/300/300s are better than the D7000?
              Older sensor,worse noise,less resolution,older DSP,older exposure meter…and only the s00s is rugged like the D7000.
              So do you still believe the marketing segmentation?
              In economy there is a segment of potential buyers called(actual technical name,no joking) “cash cows” which rather explains by itself.
              The so-called-“upper”-DX range has always been specifically tailored to that segment.

          • hah

            typo
            meant D7000 as D90 replacment, not D700.

            • Steve

              Nikon themselves have stated the D7000 is NOT a D90 replacement and the D90 is and will continue to be available.

              Nikon will release a camera between the D7000 and D3100 in time because of the huge price gap between the two. If they don’t they’ll lose sales to others who have models in the mid price range.

              I’d bet we see a model with 4.5fps, CLS, AEB, and direct access buttons once sales for the D7000 cool off.

            • PHB

              I suspect that this means that they still have stocks of the D90 and will sell those at the D5000 price point till they run out.

              Then there will be a D5100 that costs less to make.

            • spidercrown

              D90 is old. D7k is obviously its replacement, whether they admit it or not. Besides, D90 is going obsolete end of this year, they leave it in the market because it is still sell-able at this point of time.

    • Ant

      My thinking is that the D90 will effectively play the role of the D5000, until that is run out. Then I guess there will be a D5100 or D6000.

      • Thoppa

        +1

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

      The D3000 sells like hot cake everywhere because of price. If true, Nikon needs a quick release of D5100 and drop D3100 price or they will launch the mirrorless camera to fill the gap. Only problem with that is pricing. Mirrorless cameras have been launched at higher prices than entry-level dslrs.

  • alfredo

    And i was gonna buy a d3000 to replace my d300s :S

    • http://leafloose.org/ T1T4N1UM

      replace?
      i think you have the wrong word there.
      either that or i need to upgrade my bs detector.

      • st r

        > either that or i need to upgrade my bs detector.

        I suggest the second option

  • NikonFF&DxUser

    The introduction of the D7000 clearly made this two dslr a thing of the past.

  • Julio

    A D5000 does not look very appealing when the D90 is starting to be discounted heavily everywhere (less than 700€ for body-only). So current DX line up may soon look like: D3100 < D90 < D300S < D7000 . I expect prices of the D300S to sink after the first proper reviews of the D7000 are online… most people will then realize D300S is obsolete despite a two or three 'pro' perks that don't make any actual difference.

    • http://loewald.com/blog/ Tonio Loewald

      I agree completely. So basically Nikon is “saying” that the product line includes the D90 and D300s simply because they have inventory they need to offload. So expect some very nice D90 deals at, say, Costco or similar. I don’t know how many D300s’s Nikon has lying around.

      It’s hard to imagine a potential, well-informed D300s buyer who doesn’t already have a D300s and would buy one over a D7000 right now rather than simply waiting for the D400 (or whatever). The D300s basically has slightly faster continuous shooting and arguably better focusing. That’s it. If that’s crucial to you then you probably already own one.

  • Rabi

    This sort of makes sense. The D5000 never made sense to me; it is a new range.

    • Pdf Ninja

      The D5000 has excellent high ISO capabilities with the same sized body as the D3000. Of course now that we have a D3100, it is less important, although some people liked the articulating display, and the D3100 still doesn’t have a bracketing feature.

      • LGO

        One way by which the D3100 can be “upgraded” to a D5100 level is by providing the D5100 with manual controls for video, high-resolution articulating LCD screen (230k dot resolution is too low) , a bit more focusing points, higher fps, and possibly other features like bracketing.

        But if Nikon continues its early practice with the D90/D5000 and equips the D5100 with the 16mp sensor of teh D7000 and this has a one-stop improvement over the D3100 sensor, then the D5100 would be quite a compelling camera model for anyone who does not need the built-in focusing motor.

    • http://www.AlmondButterscotch.com/home Almond Butterscotch

      The difference in specs between the D3000 and D5000 was quite big- D90/300’s sensor = much better ISO performance in the 5000 than the 3000. The 3000 was like the baby of the family and the 5000 the 5 year old who learned how to make farting sounds.

      • WoutK89

        D5000 = D90/D300 sensor
        AND
        D3000 was D80/D40x/D60 sensor = Older sensor design than D5000

        • hah

          not to mention CCD

      • Discontinued

        “The 3000 was like the baby of the family and the 5000 the 5 year old who learned how to make farting sounds.”

        This comment made my day.

        • http://www.AlmondButterscotch.com/home Almond Butterscotch

          =D

    • http://loewald.com/blog/ Tonio Loewald

      The D5000 is a smaller, lighter, cheaper D90 with a smaller tiltable display. I bought one over the D90 because the second control dial is of little use to me (I generally shoot in A or P, what do I need a second dial for?) and the tiltable display lets me shoot very nice angles.

      The tiltable display is actually the most compelling feature of the 60D, which is essentially a T2i with D90 build quality and a tiltable display OR a 7D with D90 build quality, no microfocus, and a tiltable display depending on how you look at it.

      Seriously: live view by itself is basically useless. But live view with a tiltable display is like having a whole extra camera.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/shigzeo/ shigzeo

    My wife wants the D3100 which isn’t yet available here in Korea – or at least I’ve not seen it. I truly hope that it performs well especially as the weight savings some with a lot of sacrifices. THe D5000 I too, never really say the point of, but then I am a different market segment with my D200.

  • http://www.jennykphotography.com Jenny

    This actually surprises me. I can see the D3000 being discontinued… but not the D5000. At first I thought the D3100 would be better and replace the D5000, but last week I got a chance to borrow a D3100 and shoot both cameras side by side. While the D3100 is a nice camera, it in no way competes with the D5000 at all. The D7000 and D90 are a higher pricepoint than the D5000… if they discontinue it, it seems they’ll leave a mighty big price gap in their lineup.

    • Joe Boston

      Better image quality, lighter, comparable high ISO and WAY better ergonomics and viewfinder on the D3100…how can you say they don’t compare?

      No swivel screen? Pfft.

      • LGO

        The D3100 LCD screen is of lower resolution and non-articulating.

        I cannot see how a D5000 can possibly get a better image quality than the D3100.

        • http://www.jennykphotography.com Jenny

          I am not saying that the image quality wasn’t up to par. (I should have clarified!) I’m more talking about the options and the way the camera felt. The menu was much more dumbed-down and simplified, and I just felt a little stunted using it.

          As far as image quality, though, it absolutely compares! The high-ISO test shots I did were very impressive, but the D3100’s NR was a bit much.

          All I’m saying is that they are leave a big gap. They need to come out with a D5100 or something to fill it.

  • Merv

    The price difference between the D3100 and the D7000 will be quite large
    In Canada: $570 for the D3100 and $1250 for the D7000

    I always thought the D5000 was meant to create a price choice between the D90 and D60/D3000 which was quite large too

  • Chuck

    Both were fine for stills but no go vidoe or crap video needed to go.

  • Erik

    Still using my D40 as a backup body and I’m very happy with the results. So, there’s lot of life for a camera even after discontinuation…

    • st r

      The fact that the D40 was still on the market after the D40X had been retired (and D60 almost so) must mean something.

      Between simplification and “featurism” there are sweet spots, and the d40 was (is) exactly in one of these. It still has some useless features (e.g., two lateral AF points instead of 10 or none, either of which would have been better; or in-camera editing, or H1 ISO), but they do not detract from clean simplicity, which allows you to think about the image, not the camera.

      • hah

        it means 99.9% of cameras today are better than 99.9% of photographers.

        • st r

          > it means 99.9% of cameras today are better than 99.9% of photographers.

          Out of strictly personal experience, I would tend to agree.
          My camera is certainly better than me.

          • http://dundermifflin.com michael scott

            I used to own a D40 and I loved it. I wish more entry-levels are like it. It proved that 6 megapixels is enough for most people’s uses. The D40 even had a 1/500 flash sync speed!

  • Anubis

    I have a niggling suspicion that the D5100 when launched will use the D3100 sensor. This 14MP DX sensor is very capable within its price segment and there should be no reason why Nikon wouldn’t re-use it for the D5100. This generates more economies of scale and higher margins for them. The 16MP DX sensor from the d7000 will be re-used in the D400. This then makes for a very neat family of cameras in the DX family, ie.D3100, D5100 at 14MP, D7000, D400 at 16MP. Don’t discount the possibility of Nikon renaming the D400 as D9000. This will make their naming conventions neater for future development too. As usual, for the D5100, the tilt screen feature should make an appearance as an option for those who want such a feature. The EVIL cam is likely to be an entirely new line and probably would not slot into the DSLR range.

    • hah

      I was thinking it would make more sense to put the D7000 sensor in a plastic shell and slap a swivel screen then call it D5100.

      The canon 60D got blow out of the water by the D7000 and it is only 100 bucks cheaper. canon w/o doubt will have to drop the price. A D5100 priced 100-200 bucks cheaper would easily nail the 60D.

      • Il Fenomeno

        Here in Europe Canon 60D is same price ad Nikon D7000. You must be a moron here in europe to buy 60D,

        • Phoenix

          Well the 60D just dropped down to £899, a couple of weeks in after it’s introduction price. Expect the same when the D7000 comes out and whoops the 60D big time! Be around £1099 to start with then drop to around £899

          • Il Fenomeno

            You guys from UK are not in European market.

      • SGN

        +1, stripping down the D7000 for D5100 makes perfect sense…. especially in budget markets, that you are getting the innerds of an awesome camera (hence the image quality) carries a lot of sales, because many people who cant afford D7000 will brave control limitation, missing features to get it.

        I know we did that for our D5000. And I LOVE it!!!!

      • D(l)eight

        When the D5100 is a downgraded P7000 then that probably tells us something about the D400 having a different sensor…..

        if the D5100 is an upgraded D3100, I would start thinking that the D400 will be an upgraded D7000…….

        • PHB

          Exactly.

          I cant see a D5100 being based on a lower end sensor. But it could easily be a D7000 with a swivel screen but missing the AF motor magnesium chasis and some other options.

          Then the D400 will come out with a new sensor that will appear in the D7100 a year or so later.

          One constant in the Nikon line is that prices trend up. The D300 started at a much higher price than the D7000. I can see any possibility of the pro Dx line being phased out until they can sell a 24mp+ Fx body for about the same. And we are years off that happening.

          • Anubis

            I wouldn’t bank on Nikon producing more than 4 sensor types to equip their range of cameras. Remember, Nikon is a commercial enterprise. If you look at things from their point of view, making more units of one particular sensor lowers the cost for them while making less naturally brings up the cost. The game is about generating maximum margins. Time will tell but I would lower my expectations a little on the D400/D9000 sensor being a totally new part. More likely it will be a D7000 sensor with improved circuitry to produce images with less noise.

            • PHB

              If they were worried about the number of sensors, they would not have made separate 14MP and 16MP sensors for the D3100 and D7000.

              At the moment, Nikon have a different sensor in all three of their FX bodies and those volumes are tiny compared to FX.

              Whatever design that they come out with for the D400 will find its way down-range in the future anyway. Most likely in a D7100 in 2012.

    • http://loewald.com/blog/ Tonio Loewald

      I hope you’re wrong because the D5000 was compelling precisely because it was as good a camera as the D90 in a smaller package with a tiltable screen. If they give it an inferior sensor, they’re going to lose the segment (especially if the 60D drops a bit in price, which it probably will).

      It’s interesting that the camera companies used not to sell cameras based on the “sensor” (film) but on the stuff that got the light on it. It’s very annoying for camera companies to basically screw your IQ because they can just to slot products into segments. I very much doubt a 14MP sensor costs significantly less than a 16MP sensor, and it would almost certainly be much cheaper if they just built 16MP sensors and used them for everything.

      Heck, my old FM10 cost $250 new and has an awesome pentaprism viewfinder; why do I need to put up with a tiny pentamirror in a $1000 DSLR? Did they forget how to make them for next to nothing, or did it simply occur to them they could gouge us by market segmentation?

  • JED

    I suspect the D5100 will be along fairly shortly.
    Will have the D3100 sensor with an articulating screen, better than D3100 video, and will otherwise have the feature set of the D90 without the focus motor.
    This will provide a smooth progression of features from D3100, D5100 and D7000 and allow the D90 to bow out gracefully.

  • http://www.zanettifoto.it Giorgio Zanetti

    I always tought the D5000 and D90 combo was an experiment: new cutting edge features (swivel LCD, no top info LCD, no AF motor) versus a legacy approach (AF motor, top LCD display): eventually the latter won and the D7000 came out, with D5000 to die.

    • http://www.zhovtenko.net Vsevolod

      you made my day, most hilarious comment I’ve ever read about photocamers

      >”new cutting edge features (swivel LCD, no top info LCD, no AF motor)”

      • http://www.zanettifoto.it Giorgio Zanetti

        Ok, i meant “exotic”, “strange”, “never-seen-before” ;)

  • Raze

    Once the d3100’s price gets lowered, i think there is room for a d5100, definitely!

  • Nikki

    hmmm, interesting – the d3000 was a really cheap entry model – and has it’s rights as such. without it, the d3100 should become a lot cheaper… there’s 200 euros in between them at the moment!

    and the d5000? well a friend of mine bought it, b e c a u s e of the swivel…. otherwise she’d bought canon… and canon now has the 60d with swivel – so nikon should not lose that feature in their lineup. i think d3100 with swivel would make sense. but then, they could just keep the d5000!

  • Jack

    I read on another forum where a random poster claimed that Nikon planned to only have 2 DX DSLRs – The D3100 and D7000. I sure hope that this is not true. I would like my next body to be a step above the D3100, at least with the swivel screen and IR sensor, and I cant spend the cash on a D7000.

    • PHB

      Lots of know nothings who think owning a D700 is like owning a Ferrari prattle on about their gear. The fact that a D700 costs less than a ferrari hubcap and a d3x is less than the first garage bill misses them.

      Dx is where the money is. The Fx sales combined probably dont equal the number of D300/D300s bodies sold.

      There will be a D5100 as soon as the D90 inventory is sold and a D400 with its own sensor. Quite likely at 20mp or more. Few D300 owners are going to upgrade to the D7000. It just isnt enough of an advance and comes at the cost of losing other features.

      • http://loewald.com/blog/ Tonio Loewald

        True, but I think FX is going to be where the money is. Sony sells a $2k FX body but no-one cares because its range of lenses is a joke and its low light performance is nearly as bad. But if Nikon or Canon hit the $1500-2000 price point with an FX body they could easily dominate the segment and then sell a ton of new glass.

        They’re not going to sell any of us a second 18-200, but I bet they’ll sell one 28-300 for every other FX body they sell.

        There’s a reason Nikon released a boatload of new FX lenses this year. It’s also interesting that Nikon has been bundling FX lenses (e.g. the 70-300) with D90s at Costco.

        • PHB

          I think FX makes very little sense for me until they come out with an affordable (<$2000) 24MP body. There are so many pro lenses available that are going to have a much bigger impact than changing my D300 for an FX body.

          Going to 24MP means that you have all the advantages of FX and DX format in one body. I think that the logic of a professional DX camera will largely disappear at that point. The mirrorless format will have a major weight and cost advantage and the FX format will have the high ISO format in addition to being able to make large prints from shots taken in DX mode.

          There is certainly going to be a point where DX is no longer attractive, but we won't reach it till the D5 cycle at the earliest.

          Whatever happens, there will never be an FX camera called the D400.

  • Barbie Rokwel

    It is not clear if Nikon will introduce a new camera to replace the D5000 (it should basically be a D3100 with a swivel LCD display). Maybe Nikon will remove one of its DSLR models all together in order to free up some production capacity for a potential new model (EVIL?).

    Depends on how Nikon sees (and what the market tells them about) an EVIL product: either as the bridge between P&S and DSLR or as a seperate productline (which could consists of more than 1 body).

    Getting rid of the D5x00 might cause a problem: current user wanting to replace their D5000 would have to move up to the D3100 or switch over to an EVIL.

    Getting D5000 user onto the EVIL product might not be a big problem as this segment of the market probably has a very limited investment in glass. However that same aspect could also lead that those customers switch to a different brand alltogehther.

    Getting user to upgrade to D3100 might also be an issue as the customer might not wan’t to pay the extra $$ involved.

    I place my bet on (when and if it appears) that the Nikon Evil will be first and foremost a new productline (not DX and f-mount based). Depending on how the market response they’ll take it from there further or not. Most likely we’ll also see a D5000 successor at least one more time.

    • Barbie Rokwel

      utter rubbish if I say so myself about my remark of D5000 users and upgrading to D3100. Ey….mondaymornings….no clear thinking.

  • BenS

    Off topic … why doesnt the 50 mm prime have a GOLD ring around it. The 24, 35 and 85 have a gold ring ? Does anyone have an idea ?

    • hah

      check their price and you’ll know why.

      The 50G is like your 18-55 zoom. not worthy of gold ring.

      • BenS

        Yes i know the price low. But why has nikon not made any 50mm with Nano coat, etc, to make it worthy of having a gold ring …

        • The invisible man

          The gold ring is for lenses with ED lens inside, a 50mm does not need ED glasses to deliver good pictures.
          ED is the most usefull for telephoto lenses.

          • PHB

            No.

            The gold ring is for lenses that surpass certain design criteria as measured by an internal test team.

            There are lenses with ed glass and no gold band and viceversa.

            • st r

              I knew about in-lens vibration reduction and internal focusing, but having an internal test team is certainly a “cutting edge feature”, deserving a gold ring outside.

            • PHB

              In this case the standard is set by the 55 mm noctilux f/1.2

              The 50 afs is good, but not in that class. It does not exceed the state of the art.

              Only about half the lenses tested for it achieve the gold band. Those that dont are much less likely to make it to production.

    • DX2FX

      Nikon might come up with a new 50mm f1.2, with gold ring, and made in Japan.

  • http://www.ronaldzimmerman.nl Serpiente

    Maybe something like the Sony A33/A55.. Swiffel display, continuous AF during filming, 14mp (like 3100), aperture control during filming. A model that is more focussed on filming. So you have the 3100 as the cheap photo camera and the 5100 as the cheap film based photo camera. It would also be a good competitor to the Canon 60D.

    An EVIL camera would have the same price tag as the D3100. But if this one is good at filming and it has a swiffel display this might replace the D5000.

  • Ant

    “Maybe Nikon will remove one of its DSLR models all together in order to free up some production capacity for a potential new model (EVIL?).”

    I’m not sure that Nikon would reduce SLR capacity for the sake of EVIL. The point of EVIL is that it offers potential for additional sales between P&S and DSLR, which is pointless if they have to reduce their DSLR output to do it.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

    I really doubt it, the D3000 sells very well because of price, unless D5100 is around the corner and D3100’s price will be reduced drastically.

  • D(l)eight

    Pricing, current retail/msrp price, body only, including 19% VAT, euro’s:

    D3100 : 479/549
    D5000: 439/799
    D7000: 1189/1189
    (D90: 619/1049)

    More then likely Nikon has to introduce a follow-up to the D5000 to plug the pricing gap between D3100 and D7000.

    The shop were I took these prices from already no longer lists the D3000.

    If nikon manages it to do by this year it can dedicated whole of 2011 to pro updates.

    • D(l)eight

      It probably takes relatively little to churn out a 5100….take a 3100 sensor and electronics, stick it in a different body with swivel display and tweak the firmware to make it spec’wise somewhere between D3100 and D7000.

  • Fredbare

    My take, for what it’s worth:
    D700 has been placed between the D90 and D300 so it will replace both.
    Thus the lineup becomes:
    Evil/D3100/D5100/D7000 for small frame (i.e. ‘DX’)
    D400 (FX in D7000 body)/D800/D4/D4X for FX
    To me this is a logical range. Could anyone need more?

    • Fredbare

      Sorry ‘D7000 replaces D90/D300″

    • D(l)eight

      D400 (FX in D7000 body)/D800/D4/D4X for FX

      D400 going FX it could be the case as a D700/D800 alone might sell in to low numbers to support the recently introduced f4 Pro lenses…..

      f2.8 pro lenses targeted at current D3 & D700 and future D4 & D800) users
      f4 pro lenses targeted at current D700 user but future D800/D400 users……

      as D400 goes FX

      also maybe a clue why no new pro DX glass

  • IndyGeoff

    I am tempted by the D7000, however plan to hold onto my D90 a little longer to see what Nikon has in store for us in 2011.

    I may decide to change to FF if they introduce a ~20MP version at a less than heart stopping price. Since I do this just as a hobby, my personal limit for a camera body is 3k$.

    I agree with PHB on the 24mm lens. I find that focal length to be just right on my D90 (when I did a test with my 18-135 kit lens) as far as a general indoor length.

  • hexx

    they could replace d90 with d7000 minus video features and i’d buy it straight away :)

    • hexx

      forgot to add… just to reduce price, so it could sell for £700-800

  • http://www.truphotos.com gnohz

    I hope the 24MP for the D700 replacement rumour will come true…planning to go FX instead of going for a D400 if that happens :p

  • Phil

    Considering the recent development of the Canon 60D, I would be surprised if there is no D5000 replacement. A swivel screen is more useful than you might think. I shoot with an older Fuji S9000 which also has a swivel screen and it’s been very handy for me. People who have never used one don’t realize how useful it can be. In awkward shooting conditions like over a crowd, waist-level, and tripod mounted in certain positions, it’s very handy indeed.

    Granted, Fuji’s implementation of a swivel screen was more intelligent than Nikon’s, but a swivel screen is better than none. I was hoping there would be a D5000 replacement as I’ve been wanting to have a Nikon body with an updated sensor. If there is no D5000 replacement, that will really suck for me.

  • PAG

    I’m in agreement with the posters above that there will probably be a camera in between the D3100 and D7000 price points.

    It also gives you a basic and an advanced camera in each class. The D3100/D5100 would be the low/hi of the consumer class. I think the lack of a top LCD display is a perfect obvious and visible differentiator from the next class up, with other real world differences (high ISO, AF, no lens motor, etc.) being below the surface.

    As pointed out by many above, the D7000/D400 are the advanced DX cameras, the D800/D4 are the FX pair, and the D3x is … well, kinda’ special.

    The upgrade path from camera to camera should be well marked for the consumer, even as models change. This lineup would be perfect. Want an entry level camera but with a bit more oomph? Get the D5100. Want to step up to the next DX class? No problem. Want to then skip out of that class to an FX? You got it. It’s smart marketing.

  • DaveyJ

    Agree with PAG here. Nikon does NEED the D5100. Swivel screen does detract from that market some, and adds value to other users. I dislike it. I think swivel screens may inherently be fuzzier. After using D300 and D700 LCD D5000 screens are very bad. The D400 or D900 FX models would be great selling cameras I believe. I totally agree with PHB in an early post on this topic that DX is where the money is in DSLR cameras. FX sales volumes or total net to Canon or Nikon is not that great. Just look at 2010 intros to confirm this. That doesn’t mean though that I as a photo enthusiast will abandon FX. But in terms of DSLR video, I have little interest (also not enough knowledge) about FX video. I think DSLR video in terms of APS sensor size. Would be nice though to see a modest priced D700 (FX Nikon) with video features to allow people like myself to use FX and not be locked out of video. Many photo enthusiasts boycott the “pro” nikon line due to sky high prices. If assembly line and bigger volume builds were directed at a D700 replacement the price would be not much higher than a D700 now. But any quick examination of the DX line indicates the D5100 is needed. When the inventory of D90s is sold, expect the D5100!

    • Richard

      In today’s blog entry, Thom Hogan says that Nikon is “production constrained”. In other words they simply do not have the production capacity to produce all the current lineup of cameras and so they must drop some lines in order to be able to produce some of the new ones. This is consistent with Nikon’s pattern of releasing dribs and drabs of products and ongoing shortages of virtually everything. Sadly, it also means that Nikon almost certainly lacks the capacity to ever benefit from additional economies of scale of increased sales volume of products. It is said that the sensor cost is the largest cost item in a camera body and largely determines the price of the camera. Without the ability to sell more cameras I do not see how Nikon can ever spread their R&D costs to more units. I find it a very discouraging conclusion with unfortunate implications for Nikon’s future.

      • PHB

        Nikon certainly seems to be operating at full capacity, which is good. But modern production lines are pretty flexible. There wont be a separate line per camera, the same line will switchfrom one model to another running campaigns of several months for the mass market models.

        I suspect the reason for no D5100 goes back to earlier this year. The D3000 and D5000 were clearly obsolete. The parts for the replacement models were not yet in. The only model it would make sense to make in volume would be the D90. Once you do a run of those it is clear that you cant bring out the D5100 till they are gone.

      • Fredbare

        Anyone who has run a production facility knows that if you can just one product continuously then your efficiency increases as there is no need for ‘change overs’. Added to this you have a lower inventory ‘parts list’, get better volume ‘parts’ purchases, lower inventory costs etc, etc.
        One can never ever meet the full gambit of requirements from customers at the desired price point – unless you have modular cameras similar to Tom Hogan’s articles.
        Thus it makes sense for Nikon to redue their product line and try and coerce people to buy a ‘bridge camera’ that fits in between models and that’s where I feel the D7000 fits in and, if I’m right, we might see more rationalisation from Nikon.
        BTW, anyone know if Nikon’s factories just run 8 hrs/day or 3 by 8 hour shifts?

        • D(l)eight

          A local car assembly factory build for a long time two different brands and multiple models per brand in a total mixture on the same assembly line all brand/models where mixed, no batch production or setup/takedown all was planned and build to customer order.

          I guess nikon probably is also capable of mixing and matching build runs on the same assembly line with low overhead on switching, of course if you build to inventory you run batches and do not switch every other camera to a different model, but they should be fairly flexible to change the model mix every day if they want.

          • PHB

            Cars are a rather different product because there is a high degree of customization of each one. But cars have a much higher ASP to justify the cost.

            For a given production run, the first body that rolls off the line will usually be identical in every respect to the last except for the serial number.

            The differences that there are come in the packaging. Whether the body is sold by itself, with one or two kit lenses. But even there Nikon does much less than a typical electronics manufacturer. The bulk of their product isn’t even in localized to market packaging.

            The information we are missing here is how long it takes to switch a production line from one model to another. Japanese companies tend to be big advocates of JIT, but Nikon is a rather unusual Japanese company. Changing from one camera model to another should not take them very long. But changing from one lens model to another likely involves a great deal more.

            Given that Nikon’s suppliers are all required to support JIT customers, it should not be necessary for Nikon to keep a huge inventory of parts on hand – at least as far as the D700 and smaller bodies are concerned. The minimum order quantities for the D3x and D3s sensors may well be several months production.

            The other wrinkle on the production schedules is that Xmas creates a huge seasonal factor in demand. The D3100 and D7000 launches were clearly timed to allow Nikon to go to the Xmas market with the latest technology while still giving the factories enough time to build up the inventory.

            Losing a day of production to switch models in the Xmas period would be a huge cost. Losing a week of production in January or February probably does not matter at all.

            Even though the D90 spec is only sufficient to justify a position as a D5000 substitute at the moment, the cost of manufacture is going to be way higher than a D5100 would be. So a D5100 is pretty much inevitable in my view.

      • Catastrophile

        “It is said that the sensor cost is the largest cost item in a camera body and largely determines the price of the camera”

        the prices of the D300-D90-D5000-D300S suggest that the sensor was not a big deal.

    • Ant

      The D5000 LCD would seem worse than that on the D300/D700, because it only has a QVGA resolution vs. VGA for D300/D700. That’s 4 times fewer dots in a similar sized screen. It’s not because of the tilt-swivel mechanism. Although with a standard TTL interface the slightly longer signal route might cause a small deterioration in image quality, but not enough to be noticed in normal use I suspect.

  • Anonymous

    D3000 to be discontinued. Well, good riddance !
    D5000, never mind ;)

    Btw, waiting for the D800…

  • ukj

    Black friday sales

    Do on-line stores have crazy sales like the walk-in stores on Black Friday? Because I live in Vancouver BC, I’m looking to buy some lenses and wanted to know if B&H or which other online camera stores will have sales?

    • Rick

      I wonder exactly the same thing.
      Could anybody comment about this? B&H ?

  • jhnw

    Once the D90 inventory is gone we will see a D5100. Nikon needs a model to fill the price gap between the D3100 and the D7000. The D5100 will keep the articulating screen so Nikon has a model to appeal to those who want that feature, and get the 14 mp sensor but with some D7000 features.
    I expect the D400 will use the 16 mp sensor with all the D300s features. I have heard nothing about a higher mp DX sensor being available for Nikon to use, and with Nikon’s conservative stance on mp’s vs image quality, I doubt we will see a higher mp DX sensor from Nikon for many years.

    • human tripod

      D400 will be entry-level FF. D7000 will be top-of-the line DX.

      • rogger

        “D7000 will be top-of-the line DX”

        Sorry, I have to say it… anyone who has used a D300/D300s knows it is absolutely imposible! ;-)

        • PHB

          Why does anyone think an FX D400 makes the slightest bit of sense?

          Any new FX camera that Nikon comes out with is either going to be superior to the D700 (video, faster ISO, more MP) and thus have a higher model number or it is going to be a consumer model and use the D9000 number that appears to be reserved for an eventual FX consumer model. Calling a new FX camera the D400 would be stupid.

          Most people who own a D300 know enough about photography to know that moving to FX format will require purchase of at least one very large, heavy and expensive lens or there is no point to it. A D300 with good DX glass is better than a D700 with mediocre glass.

          And as for this ‘ I have heard nothing about a higher mp DX sensor being available for Nikon to use’, well what makes you think they would tell you about it if they did? Nobody had heard anything about the 14 or 16MP sensors in advance of the launch.

          Nikon themselves may not have made their final decision on the sensor at this point. There is really no difficulty to making a 24MP sensor, the unknown is whether they can pull the information off the chip fast enough to handle well.

          It all really depends on whether they feel the need to chase Canon on MP and what they think they need to do to persuade the D200 and D300 owners to upgrade.

          If people want an ‘affordable’ FX camera, their best hope for the next year or two may well be that Nikon will fill out their FX range by dropping the price on the D700 when they introduce the D800, just like they dropped the price on the D90 to make it the D5000 replacement.

          • Fredbare

            Well, some of us migrated from 35mm to DX cameras but kept using, and buying, FX glass, which, arguably, performs as well as, or better than, DX glass. So, the ‘additional glass’ FX requirement is not really pertinent.
            I looked at buying a D300 or D700 earlier this year. I compared to the D90 (and a D3 for fun). There’s no way I want to have to lugg around a D700 for any length of time thank you. It’s just too heavy compared with the D90 in particular.
            A Pro who needs an FX backup for his D3/D3X will almost certainly take the weight into consideration.
            An FX sensor in a D7000 type body (i.e. mass) makes a whole lot of sense – even if it isn’t that cheap. I don’t need anything better than that and the ‘general public’ who just want FX without the bomb proof casing do too.

          • http://www.shortfingerphoto.com Nubz

            I’ve never shot anything but DX but never considered buying DX glass with the exception of my 10-24mm DX because I didn’t want to limit my choices down the road. I do want to move to FX with in the next year, whether it’s a D700, D800, D3, D3s, or D4 remains to be seen. Once I make that move, I’ll still use my D300s quite often as it will always be better at doing some things.

            I have no feelings on the discontinuation of the two cameras. My girlfriend got a fantastic deal on the D5000 and it takes great photos but I find it complicated to use. It’s not intuitive like the D300s. I’d like to see them make these stripped down models have the same easy -to-use basic functions (like having two command dials).

          • Segura

            Dumbest thing I heard all week

            “A D300 with good DX glass is better than a D700 with mediocre glass.”

            I find that a D700 with mediocre glass still smokes a D300 with a DX lens . . .

            • http://www.zanettifoto.it Giorgio Zanetti

              There are many DX lenses with very good performance. Take a 12-24 (either Tokina or Nikon) for example.

          • Catastrophile

            if there is going to be a DX D400, then we’ll have two DX cameras with 100% OVF, weatherseals, …etc. these pro features usually exist only in one camera, the flagship of the line. this has led some to believe D7000 is meant to be the DX flagship.

            • human tripod

              Precisely. Nikon included features in the D7000 that weren’t necessary if it was just replacing the D90. Nikon does not need four DX SLRs.

              D400 will be entry-level FF at a $1600 price point. D800 will be the next step up at $2600.

            • PHB

              Nikon does not actually need the FX line at all as far as its profits go. Nikon spends far more advertising the D3x than the D3x makes in revenue. They are halo models.

              The D7000 is not a substitute for the D300s. While it has some magnesium in the frame it weighs 1lb 8oz as opposed to 1lb 14oz. That suggests that the stiffness and weather resistance are not up to the same standard. And most importantly the controls are set for consumers, not professionals.

              The D7000 is designated as a consumer camera, the D300 is designated as a professional camera.

              If Nikon was going to come out with a new FX body they would either designate it as a consumer body and call it the D9000 or they would designate it as a professional body and call it the D800, D900 or possibly the D600.

              At the moment, Nikon has three FX bodies and four DX bodies. They represent about 3% and 97% of sales volume by number.

              So you guys think that it would be a smart move for Nikon to axe one of their three DX bodies to bring out a fourth FX model, right?

              As Thom points out, the chances of a sub-$2000 FX body in the near term are very small. There was a $1250 difference in the initial RRP of the D700 and the D300. The D700 still costs $2400 and the chance that you are going to get a brand new model for $1600 in the next year are pretty small.

          • human tripod

            “Most people who own a D300 know enough about photography to know that moving to FX format will require purchase of at least one very large, heavy and expensive lens or there is no point to it. A D300 with good DX glass is better than a D700 with mediocre glass.”

            You get the award for the two most ignorant statements in this thread. Are you angry or just drunk?

  • P

    I hope they will keep at least one model will swivel. It is very useful when working with macro. A D800 would be a great choice…

  • DaveyJ

    I am very certain Thom Hogan is right about Nikon’s production lines. I have heard the same thing from my most reliable source. Just producing the number of D7000 cameras pre-ordered I hear is going to be a BIG step. So the D5100 may be ready to be introduced but with production lines swamped why would they do that. My guess is that they will be cranking out what seems just about pre-sold rather than producing for a maybe market. That does serve notice I believe for those waiting for a D5100 say over a D3100 or a D7000. This is all kind of bad news to me as it may mean the D700 replacement may get held up even more. My guess that is the D800??

    • DX2FX

      Don’t worry, the D800 will be made in Japan, whereas the Dxxx and Dxxxx series are made in Thailand plant.

    • lolcatmaster FTW

      Or they are simply restructuring and scrapping older models, keep in mind that the D3100 does what both the D5000 and D3000 do but in a much better way so these 2 older models are now redundant in their line up, it is only natural this happens =).

      I don´t mean to disrespect Thom at all but sometimes his opinions are a bit off and go in to KR land (in terms of how off they are and not the content itself), however if his opinion here is actually right it would mean it would contradict his claims that Nikon isn´t selling as much as they should ;)…

      • D(l)eight

        Or they are simply restructuring and scrapping older models, keep in mind that the D3100 does what both the D5000 and D3000 do but in a much better way so these 2 older models are now redundant in their line up, it is only natural this happens =).

        If nikon would scrap 1 model and stick with D3100 and D7000 that would create a huge pricing gap a lot of competitors would jump into.

        D3100 : 479 Euro’s (already discounted against msrp)
        D7000: 1189 Euro’s (stil at msrp)

        Price of D700 will come down to approx 990-1050 but still a huge gap exists at or around the 700/750 euro’s mark.

  • ja

    D3100 D7000 D400 thats the future of the Dx line-up

    • Rob

      Yep no way D400 to be FX, dream on people. Sorry no Santa Claus either.

  • ja

    not sure what you guys think about this but i’m of the thinking that any pro camera in the nikon line-up should not have an add-on battery grip pro-line pro- body thats what draws the line between pro-kit from consumer-kit

    • PHB

      Well that is a rather peculiar statement since there is a grip for both the D300/D300s and the D700 bodies and they are both designated as being ‘professional’ bodies in the Nikon catalog.

      One of the main reasons that Nikon produces the compact pro bodies is that there are quite a few photographers who simply don’t want to handle the weight. But when you are using some of the larger lenses you need the extra weight and grip area that the grip gives you.

  • Phoenix

    While the D3000 is already discontinued, the problem I see is that D5000 should not be discontinued yet because this will no doubt be one of Nikon’s best sellers for Christmas, it was last year. While no doubt the appeal of the D3100 will be tempting for many consumers, they need the D5000 there as a model to go to, discontinuing the D5000 is pulling a Canon with them not replacing the 450D and leaving a huge gap between the 1000D and 500D with their solution being to bring out an IS and non-IS version to compensate. The D5000 is the camera has the 450D gap covered on top of even owning the 500D somewhat, Nikon needs that going into Christmas.

    Of course, this is me saying this before the D7000 has come out, and I expect the landscape to shift once that bad boy comes out.

  • Dormant

    Nikon really need to sort out their model names. They confuse me to hell, and I’m a bit of an enthusiast.

    What must newcomers think?

    • DX2FX

      Newcomers should think of their budget limits, how much they can spend. Camera models are designed into different price points.., and needs I think.

    • lolcatmaster FTW

      Simple solution: read the specs.

    • D(l)eight

      c’mon!

      Obviously Nikon is cleaning up the scheme with the D7000/D3100(D5100)

      Dx –> Flagship
      Dxx –> ?????? (future Pro only?)
      Dxxx –> Pro & Prosumer (future Prosumer only?)
      Dxxxx –> Consumer

      • Dormant3

        But with the D7000 and D700, they’re not leaving themselves many numbers to use, assuming they always increase the number for a new model.

        • D(l)eight

          Well it is not said that they only will increment the 1st digit, look at D3000 –> D3100 en probably D5000->D5100.

          So future D7000 and D700 could be D7100 and D710.

          Only for the D3 series they have no other option, but as it probably takes at least four years, so they still have 6×4 = at least 24 years.

        • D(l)eight

          By the way, now the Dxx spot has fallen free……i would not be surprised if that spot is taken by the D700 successor so the Dxxx range remains for DX pro and Dxx for FX pro.

          Return of the D40? :-)

      • John

        The D7000 belonging to your DXXXX line is labeled as a “Consumer” body does not make sense.
        The D7K is certainly a pro-sumer body with all the advanced features that the typical D3000 user would not/does not want.

        • PHB

          The D7000 is designated as ‘consumer’ by Nikon in the catalog.

          Nikon does not have a ‘prosumer’ designation. The D300, D700 and D3 series are all designated professional, the D90 and the D7000 and the rest are designated consumer.

          Under the new scheme it looks like the consumer body numbers will be D3x00, D5x00 and D7x00 for the next five or so models. And I would expect an FX consumer model to turn up eventually as a D9x00.

          The use of a magnesium body in the D7000 might mean that the carbon fiber rumor was correct and the D400 (and possibly D4) are going that route.

        • D(l)eight

          Who cares how Nikon chops up the market?

          I hope that the majority of buyers just looks at price & specs and their needs/wants & budget and based on that decides what camera to buy.

          Just to remove a D7000 from the shortlist because it is not ‘Pro’ would be silly.

          • PHB

            Why are ‘Pro’ photographers the standard?

            I certainly wouldn’t want to have either a truck or a race car as my everyday transport. My car has certain features that are derived from race models and a sports version has been successful in rallying. But I certainly would not want to drive a full sports model as a daily drive.

            The Pro equipment is designed for use by people who use a camera every single day and aren’t necessarily able to take best care of them at all times.

  • Chester B. Tan

    D3000 + D5000 – Swivel Display = D3100

    I think D3100 is sufficient to cover the entry level market.

  • Yianni

    The D5000 was removed from my local store’s website and price list along with the D3000 last week and I wasn’t sure as to why.

    I guess they are both been discontinued like this rumor says.

    The thing is the D3100 isn’t cheap enough to compete with other entry level DSLR’s right now so I’m not sure if it’s a good move to get rid of the D3000 so fast.

    • D(l)eight

      Too some extend manufacturers where able to deliver better camera’s at lower prices, but it is not said/proven that it is always the case.

      Increased R&D costs, faster ROI targets, higher raw material and labor costs, exchange rate changes, higher margins to meet profitability targets could attribute to increased cost of new camera’s.

  • Mr. V

    Life cycles have gotten really short even on DSLR markets. Think how long D40 was in the line up! And it still has a feature none of the much more expensive models after it has had: fast flash sync. Rest in peace D40. Still got mine though working. :)

    • st r

      Mine has passed the 45000 actuations mark and still going strong. The time to rest has not come yet.

      But, as I suggested earlier, this is not because in 2006 or 2007 life cycles were longer: the d40x lasted 1 year. I think it is because some models deserve a longer life than others. The d60 lasted longer than the d40x.

      • Catastrophile

        most probably, D40 continued for a long time only because the 6MP sensor was much cheaper than the 10MP or higher, maybe Sony had too many unwanted 6MP and Nikon bought them cheap.

  • FIRST!

    It always amazes me that grown adults can manage to get a rush out of being the first poster on a random thread on a random internet site. I can just picture the idiots getting all excited about it. Pretty sad.

  • Tonny

    I badly need D7000 with articulate screen, whenever it release I will change from D80 then. or D800 with articulate is fine for me

  • anon99

    It’s good news. Tried the 5000 at work and never like it, ergonomically it sucks and has given me endless trouble.
    The 5000 is already very barebones, so don’t know why the 3000 was even added to the lineup…
    IMO the 3xxx series should just go and let the 5xxx series be the lowest-ranked. The 3100 is also a mistake just because the 3000 was made existent.
    Nikon has made too many redundant camera models in the linup based on different price range, this I never understand how that works.

  • Robin

    I think D3100 es better that D5000 and cost nearly the same. So why keeping the D5000 when the average smart person will quicky find out that for a few more bucks can have a better DSLR.

  • Back to top