< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon D5100 updates

Pin It


  • Short movie shot with the Nikon D5100:

  • Another Nikon D5100 promotional video:

This entry was posted in Nikon D5100. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

    I just noticed that the D5100 moved down to #6 at Amazon, it was at #3 spot few hours ago when I wrote this post.

    • RH22

      Kit is #6 on Amazon, Body Only is #8.

      • RR22

        HA YOU ARE WRONG

  • jerl

    Noisy but not too bad. What else would expect from a <$1000 crop frame camera?

    • Global

      TOTALLY usable for online and in critical moments.

      Excellent job Nikon.

    • Chase

      If that’s what they’re getting from a consumer level camera with an APS-C sensor, I can’t wait to see their next pro model. Credit card is standing by.

      • Arthur

        Exactly my thoughts! I’m assuming the D400 won’t get the same sensor, so it will be a bit better. And if the sensor of the D800 compared to the D400 will be the same as the D700-D300 difference, I think it will be killer! :D

        • http://www.photo.graphy.ro MC

          I have serious doubts we will ever see a Nikon D400. According the new trends we will probably see Nikon D9000 as successor of DXXX series. So the new line of crop cameras for Nikon is, according my logic, like this: D3x00, D5x00, D7x00 and the coming D9x00.

          • Ronan

            MC is wrong.

      • sensor

        I am waiting for a d4 or d800 (patiently I might add) but if they came out with a d400 right now I would buy it; especially with the given circumstances going on in Japan.
        …………..if the D4 or D800 were assembled in Taiwan, I would buy them.

  • Son of FE

    Not bad for 25600. About like my old D200 at 1600. Oh how far we’ve come. Just waiting for the next shoe to drop. :(

    • Craig Houdeshell

      OK, better, sure. However, those 25,600 photos are still not acceptable or usable for the “work” I do.

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/kev_ksquared/ Photography?

        But expanded ISO’s were never acceptable or usable no matter the situation…any “real photographer” knows that.

        P.S – By “real photographer” I meant one who knows how to use a DSLR in Manual mode, nothing offensive intended.

        • ball

          I am curious as to what camera’s super high iso is acceptable? sure there is a time and place where it is usable and acceptable but for the most part where is it acceptable and usable?

          • Global

            It still looks better than a lot of phone cameras at their base ISO, so good job, Nikon.

            • Johnny Candy

              Comparing a DSLR to a phone camera? Seriously? Come on….its like comparing a Harley Davidson to a twelve speed bicycle…”even in lowest gear, its still is faster than a bicycle in top gear, good job Harley Davidson”….no sh*t sherlock.

            • Phil

              Yeah, come on, that’s like comparing a Ninja 1000 to a Harley Davidson. Even in lowest gear, its still is faster than the Harley in top gear…

            • PHB

              Hey, if a phone camera is the only one on hand, it is the best you have.

              I took one of my best shots with a phone camera. I was outside the Guinness Brewery in Dublin and the sun was setting directly above the famous brewery gate. Just happened to be there at the right time of day.

              I didn’t have my DSLR because I was off to a party inside the brewery and didn’t really want to have to think about an expensive camera all night.

            • Phil is a fool

              Yeah come on that’s like comparing a professional photographer to an amateur. Good Job Phil!

            • Alec Djodic

              PHB, did you subit the photo to National Geographic? I think the point Johnny Candy (not his real name I’m sure) is trying to make is that a camera phone can capture a shot but will never be acceptable to submit for a commissioned job by a magazine or ad agency.

      • Johnny Candy

        What professional photographer would be shooting anything with this camera besides family snapshots, if that.

        • nabia

          Sure this is not a professional camera and can’t be compared to such, but I think in terms of IQ it is a very good one.

        • Bill

          I’m a professional and I would.

          • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

            +1 This camera is a pleasant surprise. And as a companion to the D7000, it looks like a killer deal.

          • PHB

            I am sure that Ken Rockwell will love it as well. He likes small light cameras like his D40x.

            Looks like a very capable camera. If you don’t have AF lenses and you don’t need ultra-wide, its at least as good as anything else Nikon has at present at a reasonable price point.

            Most pros I know who are on limited budgets buy lenses rather than the latest body.

        • busynbored

          Think Galen Rowell….

        • hybris

          im a pro as well
          im buying one

          • Frankie

            Wow, let me know what happens when you show up to a client site to shoot a national campaign with this camera…I’d love to hear how it goes….

        • twoomy

          I’m a pro and I would buy it as well. Some of us know how to use tools to their advantage, rather than wasting our time classifying them as “pro” or “consumer.”

          • Arthur

            Right… I work in a camera store, and not one pro ever buys such a camera. Only the D200/D300, and I can’t even remember someone buying a D90/D7000.

            A point & shoot on the other hand is popular. But that’s something different.

            • Sarge

              Since I’m not in the habit of announcing “I’m a Pro” when I walk into a camera store, you’d never know whether I was or not.

              While I use a D3 for paid work, I also had a D90 as a ‘pocket’ camera (ski jacket). I used it all the time for family/friends and vacation type use. I ebayed it a while back in anticipation of the D7000 being a suitable replacement, but as yet I’ve been underwhelmed with the options.

              The thought that professional photographers are required to identify themselves as such to every camera store employee is a joke, right? Pros know what they want, and they either get it from the manufacturer, buy it online, or walk into the store and buy it. They don’t come in and say “I’m a professional photographer, Arthur, so what camera do you think would be best for me?”

              LOL. Seriously. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

      • mwl

        I don’t think Nikons intention was to cater to your “work” with a perfect 25,000 ISO camera. Seriously, does ANY camera do that right now? It’s an entry level used for parties and indoor stuff for consumers.

  • The invisible man

    Even with a 256.000 ISO sensor you still can’t get a picture of me.
    :)

    • CamaJan

      LOL!
      Good one!:-)

    • nabia

      Give it time.. =D

    • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com/ Slow Gin

      Oh, I can screw-in my beloved B+W 093 infrared filter and voila! :D

  • PiXLPeeper

    Will probably be a big seller in six months, during the holiday season especially if price drops by then!
    Microphone is awkward, needs an external cable and is way overpriced :-(

  • http://ronscubadiver.wordpress.com Ron Scubadiver

    Considering that so much of Japan has been laid to waste, this seems surreal. Ok, I know it is assembled in Thailand and the shipments were on the way before the catastrophe, but still.

    • Stephen

      It’s not like they went from R&D to design to market in the last 4 weeks…

  • longzoom

    That little piece of plastic at iso 6400 is better than my $5000 D2xs at iso 800 just 4 years ago… Can’t even say what gonna be in the next 4 years.

    • iamlucky13

      I’m pretty sure progress is starting to level off. Who knows, maybe we’ll get lucky and they’ll surprise me and keep running useful ISO’s up by a stop every 2 years, but at some point you simply run out of photons to knock electrons off of bits of silicon.

      • Henrik

        I would think that point is still pretty far in the future. Following a couple of ballpark estimates and guesses that problem will become obvious for much higher ISOs than these… or around the time Nikon markets a 3.5 terapixel camera :)

        • PHB

          Light has a fixed wavelength and that limits what can be done with a sensor.

          Many phone camera sensors are already at the pixel limit, but they make the pixels smaller even so.

          Limit for DX is around 150MP and for FX 300MP. But to make use of that without hitting diffraction you would need perfect, diffraction limited f/1.4 lenses wide open! It is possible to post-process to correct for diffraction, but like everything else it has a cost.

          I doubt we will quite there, but we should get to 50MP on FX fairly soon which is where the medium format cameras are at. I have no idea where the large format cameras are because the film resolution is not limiting.

  • Seshan

    Wow, so the dealer buys it for 719 and sells it for 800, that’s not a lot of profit.

    • Global

      Plus free shipping. =P

    • ZoetMB

      Yeah, 10% really sucks. I’m not even sure why anyone bothers for such a low markup. With markups like that, physical retail will disappear. Will that make the manufacturers happy?

      • iamlucky13

        It’s true that is not a lot of markup for a proper camera shop that hires people with a decent amount of knowledge of photography, rather than just an ability to memorize basic specs. I’m sure these aren’t a compelling product to carry for them, but they’ll do it to keep people coming in.

        For places like Best Buy, however, where the customer needs maybe 10 minutes of an associate’s time before they’ve learned everything the associate knows about the product including a few things they either made up or misread on the internet, plus 5 minutes of the cashier’s time explaining the extended warranty they offer, plus a 1.5 minutes to ring up the transaction, it’s healthy margin.

        Which, of course, is why we’re running out of specialized businesses that offer excellent knowledge and service – most customers neither want nor need nor even have the competence to make use of the level of service the more specialized places provide.

    • Vandyu

      My thoughts exactly. Looks like we’re not going to see much of a price drop with so little profit built in, unless Nikon decides to do something about dealer cost.

    • Stephen

      Actually for high ticket items like that, that’s HUGE! Most retail stores buy iPod for, say $248, and sell them for $249.99. Game consoles are the same. So ya, 10% mark up on something like that is huge. They make the money on all the accessories sold, like memory cards, back packs, tripods, etc.

      • http://www.amanochocolate.com Art

        Soda (west coast) Pop (East Coast) has an even worse markup. A two liter bottle of generic soda/pop costs the store $1.20 (or so) and they sell it for $1.00. The store makes up for it with all your other groceries. Also, fwiw, the average markup for a grocery store is 3%. They make up for it in volume.

        Trivia: The largest drink company in the United States is … Not Cocoa Cola. It is Shasta! (Shasta makes the majority of the store brand and private label drinks.)

        • Artur Kozłowski

          A two liter bottle of generic soda/pop costs the store $1.20 (or so) and they sell it for $1.00.

          I guess it should be called – markDOWN…. 8^)

        • chris

          im from the east coast and never have heard anyone call it pop…sounds like something from the 50s!

    • Humanonymous

      It’s a bit like cars and video games, you want to make the price low enough so people buy them and then make your real markup on parts (cars), games and accessories (video games) and lenses (cameras) once you’ve got a captive audience. Cameras get obsolete real fast, not lenses.

      My $0.02 anyhow :)

  • http://robin-P.com Robin P

    Thank you for the link to my Flickr :)

    • http://ml.cs.colorado.edu/~ben/gallery Ben

      Hi Robin, and thanks for the shots!

      Are those downsampled? In-camera or after? Or are they cropped?

      Cheers,
      -Ben

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

      very welcome!

  • d200

    6 years ago i was cool at iso ratings.

    • Son of FE

      You may have been cool at 100, but not so hot at 1600.:)
      What happened to your right eye after all these years?

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

    I seriously hope that they sell a billion of them and use some of the profits on R&D for the D400,D800,and D4 :>) not that they haven’t finalized these designs already….but a little extra tweaking money and a new plant outside Japan ,couldn’tt hurt ;>)

    • Stephen

      A new plant would take at least 5 years to get going so… not really conceivable.

      And yea, R&D on the next gen pro cameras is probably complete with just tweaks left over at this point.

  • http://ml.cs.colorado.edu/~ben/gallery Ben

    Some comparison shots at iso1600 here:

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1301976065.html

    I think that those images make it look like the d5100 is about the worst camera currently made! They were using different lenses (!) so the comparison isn’t fair, but I’d love to hear some other impressions of their tests. Pre-production sample? What do you think? Can anyone tell me for real whether or not the d5100 can get results as good as the d7000 at 1600 or 3200 or so? I’m guessing nobody except Nikon will know the real answer for another 2 weeks, but here’s hoping someone does…

    Those 25600 shots look about as crappy as my d40 at 3200, which I’d actually use quite a bit (for milongas!) if they were cleaner. I suppose it’s finally time to play the upgrade game. *sigh*? *yay*?

  • http://eleventhphotograph.com elph

    Nice short! Enjoyed it. I gotta get me workin’ on some more D7000 vids.

  • CHAD

    Those images are resized too small to really tell anything.. the sexond 25600 is offered in its “original size” of 795 x 1200. The real original is four times this size at 3264 x 4928.. so, thenoise in the image is shrunken down to a quarter the size it actually is, making it appear much cleaner. Bah.. no valuable insight here.

    • jerl

      It’s true that the reduction in resolution will hide some of the noise that you would see at 100%, but the reality is that most of the time, the image isn’t viewed at that magnification most of the time- for web use you will down size to this size (or smaller) and for small prints, you would view them at roughly the same size.

      Look at all the noise you can see at this size- it will be much worse at 100% when we get it. Still, I don’t think anyone is surprised, 25600 is not what you would call typical shooting ISO.

    • http://robin-P.com Robin P

      RAW were unreadable. The only solution and the only software that has given me the JPEG is Nikon View 6 by exporting images to Mail …
      The D5100 is all very very good!

  • Rob

    The images look so good but the camera doesn’t seem “professional” too bad for nikon if only they could have made it “professional” I bet they would have sold heaps of them. Now were all going to have to save up another $1200 for a “professional” body and another $10,000 for “professional” lenses. Pity cause I’m sure it does take good shots (with the standard lens).

  • Simon

    The smart money is still with the 600D.

    • James

      Nice try. ;)

    • Ant

      I disagree with that, especially with regards to images, and for video I don’t really care. The 600D is quite an underwhelming update to the excellent 550D. D5100 only loses out on 2mp, but adds better high ISO performance and wider dynamic range.

  • That’s me

    I read comments and feel like here there are too many blind people or just fanatics. The pictures at very high ISO just terrible and unusable. So they can put any numerals for ISO. But I don’t care, because those pictures will be just unusable.

    • Sek

      You’re right… Except that now they are unusable at 25600 ISO, yesterday they were unusable at 3200! In some case now 3200 IS usable… But maybe as you said “You don’t care”

      LongZoom just said it: “That little piece of plastic at iso 6400 is better than my $5000 D2xs at iso 800 just 4 years ago… Can’t even say what gonna be in the next 4 years.”

    • Phil

      When those “unusable” images become the ONLY images you can have under a given set of conditions, then they won’t seem so “unusable” anymore, now will they?

      Besides, when you have a camera that can let you shoot at that ISO, what you reallyhave a is a camera that gives you something really usable on a regular basis at a lower-but-still-high ISO, and I say 1600 looks like the usable high speed top end for the D5100. Not bad. Think back to what 1600 film used to look like, and have a look at those images made by the D5100. I’ll take it, thank you.

    • That’s me

      Can you guys explain me what improvement can you see in new sensor? Look at this please:

      http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/7824/20110405160318000002.jpg

      That’s why I can’t understand all your delight. This is worst than D5000.

      • Ant

        You can’t compare these two images, because the D5100 is a much tighter crop. Of course it’s going to show more noise.

        However, judging by the high ISO performance of my D7000 (which uses essentially the same imaging engine as D5100), whilst some of the higher ISO raw files have visable noise, they do retain good detail, which gives much more room to add noise reduction in post production if you need to.

  • Burnt Ice

    Well, the boundary separating usable and unusable ISO is hardly set in stone.
    It depends on each individual, scenario, purpose and need.

    Those of us who shoot for work will probably find ISOs in the 1600, 3200 or 6400 range (depending on generation of camera), the uppermost threshold we’re comfortable with.

    But for the majority of the market this camera is targetted at, an ISO 25600 image is still quite usable, for most simply need it to capture family and friends moments and upload them on Facebook or personal blogs, etc.

    And, with no offence meant, a lot of these consumers are not as particular or demanding about image quality and noise as many of us here, are. They simply want a camera they can carry everywhere and shoot pictures. And with most of them never having an external flash, a high ISO-capable camera like this could be quite handy.

    But I must say, the noise levels of these new generation of sensors is amazing. Having took the plunge with a D7000, I can only imagine what the rumored D800 or D4 is capable of.

  • UA

    Nice, ISO6400 totally usable and will most likely look nice up to A4 print sizes. Similar to D7000. Apparently, above that and D5100 is worse than D7000.. propably just worse/”cheaper” software, since these most likely have the same sensor.

    However, I still prefer my D700. These D7000/5100 images are OK, when scaled small for interwebs. But what I like about my D700 is that I can crop 6mpix image from 12mpix ISO6400 original and it will still look good and detailed, when printed on A4 or larger. This ain’t gonna happen on these crop-sensors yet.

    • longzoom

      Yeah, the shooting habbits with that DX sensors should be way stronger – you have no room for real crop. Indeed.

  • andy

    ummm….no, #3 is Canon EOS 60D, D5100 @ 5th

  • D700guy

    Well it aint no D3s, but the 6400 ISO shots arent too bad. Certainly better than my D300 @ ISO 3200

  • brewme

    If you search for the d5100 on Amazon it does not come up in the results.

  • http://photoartbymark.zenfolio.com photoartbymark

    here we go again another quake hope all people are well
    wonder what will happen to the plants and the employees this time

  • fjdklajf

    Can someone please verify if this is compatible with the D3100? On the nikonusa site it places the me-1 microphone in the compatible accessories. I think this is a mistake since the d3100 only has an a/v jack. If this is true then I will surely be picking up this mic on launch.

  • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

    Finally, Nikon produces a short for a product release that is worth watching.

    To whomever was responsible for that production: great job. Very engaging.

  • Joe Bodego

    Who cares about the d5100, come on release something thats serious. There are so many updates due this is hardly news. I started out saving for the D700 replacement now I have enough for the D3 replacement. Sure it’s nice but I want a new Nikon.

    • Jeremy

      D3 replacement is available now?

  • Pf330ci

    I just put in a order on Amazon for mine. I’m excited because I am wanting to get into amateur photography/video, and I think this camera will get me started. I just hope I don’t have to wait 3 months for it to get to me.

  • Nam

    Not bad at all at high ISO! for an entry level…

  • Henrik

    Since the D5100 uses the same sensor and the same processor (?) as the D7000, do you think there will be a software update with nightvision and maybe better noise profile for the D7000?

    • Mark V

      I was also wondering if they might update the D7000 to 30 fps since the 5100 will support it and its the same sensor.

    • Reynard

      They are not necessarily the same processor. Using the name of Expeed 2 only indicates that they are using similar image processing technology, at least in same generation, but there still could be minor differences between them.

  • http://photoartbymark.zenfolio.com photoartbymark

    i hope the new nikon rumors are true and glass will still be made in japan and not outsourced to china

  • daspope

    Amazon is now displaying my order to have an estimated delivery date between April 22nd – May 16th.

  • D400?

    This camera looks interesting, but I’ll keep my D7000 until the D400 comes out.

  • Back to top