< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

The next Nikon product announcement will be on February 7th, 2012

Nikon will have a new product announcement on February 7th, 2012. Expect new Coolpix cameras and probably the Nikon D800 to be revealed. At that point I am not sure if there will be also a new lens announced on that date.

This is a good timing since the CP+ Camera and Photo Imaging shows start on February 9th, 2012 in Japan.

This entry was posted in Nikon D800, Nikon Point and Shoot. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • KL

    Does Capture NX2 v2.3.0 support the D4 picture formats, or do I need to wait for Capture NX3? Read on another blog that Nikon may plan to end support for Capture NX, any truth to that?

    • neversink

      Wouldn’t it be great if Capture NX were sold to Adobe, Apple or Phase One . Then we would probably get a program that was not equivalent to watching turtle races…..

  • WoutK89

    I am pretty sure Nikon will just release a CNX 2.3.1 for D4 and D800 when they are released/announced. As long as they aren’t released, no need to update yet because no one uses them (officially).
    Did you read Capture NX, or NX2 will not be supported anymore? I can imagine NX was already not supported anymore.

    • WoutK89

      Was @KL…

      Admin, is there a way to just get a pop-up when you forget to fill in the required fields, like this no need to look up who you tried to reply on after reloading the previous page.

    • KL

      Capture NX. Another post confirmed Capture NX 2.3.0 is not able to open D4 RAW file, however ViewNX 2 will.

  • Boing Wronkwell

    Ah yes… More Coolpox cameras to add to the thousands of pointless P&S cameras on the market to help Aunty chop off arms and legs in photos of grandchildren.

    All good stuff.

    We all know that this is where Nikon’s profit and R&D funds come from so woo-hoo.

    As far as those of us that bring a little bit more skill to the task of taking pictures, then we should set our expectations for $3k to get a D7000 with an FX size sensor?

    • KAmi

      It is spelt Coolpix for one thing and to your comment: I didn’t realize that photography is only for self-centric “professionals” rather than for everyone wishing to take pictures… Please elaborate; I will be happy to hear how the art of photography is a domain of a few chosen ones (including you of course).

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

        The reality is sales of compact cameras are dropping and “everyone wishing to take pictures” has moved to using their mobile phones for photography. The average person is quite happy with the 5 or 8 mp sensors in their phones for grabbing snaps without the need to carry yet another device.

  • broxibear

    I get the feeling the D800 is going to be the same as the D4 in respect to changes from the previous model, slightly better in stills but vastly better in video.
    If you’re a video/ film-making user and want to stay with Nikon you’ll be happy, if what you wanted was the D3s stills capability in a D700 sized body you’ll be dissapointed. Nikon seem to be chasing video features with these cameras to try and dispel the idea that Canon are the video kings.
    Compared to the Canon 1Dx the D4 has the video edge, but that’s really not the market for video/film-making users…these cameras will be primarly bought by sports photographers and photojournalists, the vast majority of these people don’t shoot video. Nikon released a video for the D4 launch where a photographer from AFP talked about how he was really happy with the video on the D4, and it was what he really wanted as AFP photographers are required to shoot video. What he didn’t tell you was that not all AFP photographers actually shoot video, not all AFP photographers use Nikon and worldwide AFP only employs around 230 photographers.
    The real fight for dslr video will be the D800 v the 5D Mark III, this is the price bracket that appeals to all those buyers that made the 5D Mark II such a success. That commercial filmed in Chicago is to sell the D800′s video features to this video/film-making market.
    There’s definitely a feeling across various forums/blogs that Nikon have pushed aside the stills photographers in favour of video users, if the Canon 5D Mark III is better than the D4 and D800 for video (which I think it will) and will still be favoured by the film-making community a lot of questions will be asked from Nikon users.
    Look around, all companies make mistakes…I think jumping head first into video while leaving stills photographers towards one side is a mistake.
    I’m sure plenty will disagree with what I’ve posted and that’s cool, just don’t post marketing talk as a rebuttal…post a personal opinion, not something that sounds as if you’re posting from the marketing dept of Nikon Inc.

    • BenCK

      You make it sound as if the stills capability of the D4 are inferior or a disappointment. I guess what were you expecting? For what the D4 was designed to be (a sports/wedding/photojournalism camera), I think it’s going to be perfect. Yeah, they seem to have put a lot of time into the video aspect, but has it really hurt the stills part? Doesn’t seem like it to me. The autofocus in the D3s is already almost perfect, so if the face tracking really works at high speeds in the D4, then it really will be perfection. More resolution, clean(er) high ISO, great autofocus, what else were you expecting out of this camera? You just make it sound like the D4 can’t take still photos anymore or that they somehow downgraded it from the D3s.

      • broxibear

        Hi BenCK,
        What I posted was “the D4 in respect to changes from the previous model, slightly better in stills but vastly better in video.” not inferior.
        If you take the D4 and take out all the features and improvements that are connected with video, what you’re left with is a D3s Mark II…it”s like the D3 to the D3s, slightly better.
        From a purely selfish stills pov I would have liked Nikon to have put all that R&D time (and money) into the D4′s image taking ability. Instead of high iso noise being a stop better after 3200 I think they could have had low 50 iso noise all the way to 1600.
        You asked “Yeah, they seem to have put a lot of time into the video aspect, but has it really hurt the stills part?, the only way to get a true answer to that would be if Nikon offered the D4 with and without video, and with the relevent price difference…that isn’t going to happen, but it would tell you straight away how many people rreally needed video that’s for sure. One of the reasons cameras like the FM2, 501CM and M9 are so revered amongst photographers is their simplicity, there’s less to go wrong in them. One of my concerns about so much video technology being put into the D4 is it’s reliablilty.
        Nikon have taken a strategic choice to go after a particular market, they want a piece of all those film-makers who have been buying the 5D Mark II. I just think the camera to do it with wasn’t the D4 but the D800.
        It’ll be an interesting discussion to come back to when the dust settles and the D800 and 5D mark III are in the shops.

        • BenCK

          I know you didn’t say it was inferior, I just said you make it sound that way. You sound disappointed in the D4′s still photography capabilities. You mention they should have taken video R&D and instead used it on stills R&D. How do you know they didn’t have two different R&D departments working on both at the same time? What if sensor technology is at a wall as far as high ISO performance goes. I mean the D4 has 4,000,000 more pixels PLUS as good if not better high ISO performance than the D3s?! If the D4 still only had 12MP, I’d agree with you, but I mean the D4 seems to have nailed just about every wish list item from the sports/photojournalism/wedding shooters. I think it’s great that the D4 is now native at ISO 100 instead of 200 like the D3s. I just really don’t quite understand what else you could have realistically expected from Nikon on this camera. I guess if the Canon 1D-X has better high ISO performance at full resolution than the D4, then I’ll reconsider my opinion. As an owner of the D3s, I’m thrilled with the improvements (on paper) in the D4.

          • broxibear

            Hi BenCK,
            I’m not dissapointed in the D4, I just think Nikon have gone down a particular route that that’s involved massive video changes but little in stills, Personally I would have liked more stills focussed camera and less video but that’s just me.
            If you only shot stills and bought the D4 wouldn’t there be a nagging question in your head saying “I wonder how much of the £4800 I paid for this is lying dormant in this camera?”
            As I said below it’s an interesting discussion and that’s what I lkie about this blog…different views from all over the globe.

            • BenCK

              I basically only shoot stills, but I’m not concerned about the price as it relates to video capabilities at all. The price of the D4 is basically in line with the introduction prices of previous flagship cameras, right? OK, so it’s $800 more than the D3s right now. Even if it had no video capability at all I’d still pay its $6k price with no complaints because it’s reasonably close to the price of a D3s and it has improvements over it.

              If the price of the D4 was significantly different from the D3s (say closer to $7k), then yes, I’d probably be concerned over how much I’m paying for video capabilities. However, since the price is reasonably in line with previous flagship cameras, I just think of it as getting free (and well made) video features in my photography camera.

            • Frank

              I agree with boxibear. a lot photographers still focus on still shooting, not video. what do you say if you paid $6000 and you don’t shoot video at all, you will have some amount of disappointment feel for the dollare you paid off, even though you are able to pay off that amount. On the other side, this disappointment feel will affect those who has tight budget, make them a difficult to decide invest on this camera or not, it also affects the market share to Canon vs. Nikon, which is big deal for them. For me, I shoot still only, I would like to pay less dollar for a body, which doesn’t have a limited video function, but strong and power still function. Why would I invest on function that I almost do not use??

            • broxibear

              @ BenCK,
              The price difference is a great deal more here in the UK, as always ?
              The D4 is £1400 more expensive than the D3s…that’s the price of a 24-70mm f/2.8G.

              @Frank,
              Hypothetically if they made two D4 models, one with video and a cheaper one without, then we’d really find out how many people needed video ? But they won’t be doing that for sure.

            • Ren Kockwell

              Broxi, as has been said, I think we’re seeing a technological wall in the stills department. N&C have gotten about as good as you can get there, with regard to low-light, DR, etc., and it will take a whole new way of thinking to make a huge leap versus an incremental improvement at this point. Yes, spreading the AF points would have been welcome, as would XLR inputs and the like, but if you’re in the market and know how to make money with it, the D4 is a great buy.

              But since video is a burgeoning feature on these cameras, a growth area, and especially since it’s a relatively new field to Nikon, there’s plenty of room to grow and catch up there. Frankly, they’re not as far behind as many folks here would infer. The biggest misstep to me was the market strategy. I’m a broken record, but no D700s meant that Canon was allowed to run unchallenged through a growth niche for three years. The 5D is a capable camera, but not one that inspires loyalty. However, time is giving them a continued edge there. Affordable FX with quality video and capable low-light from Nikon? I’d have purchased 8.

              The thing about video, it hasn’t increased camera size, I see no compelling argument to say it has increased cost, and it has opened up Nikon to a whole new buying segment. I don’t see why people get so uptight about the inclusion of it. It’s super easy to ignore if you don’t want it. Its inclusion does not hinder other features as far as I can tell. Yes, you can argue that every moment spent on R&D for video is yet another moment NOT spent on R&D for stills, but I still think that if there were a better way to make a still camera, Nikon would be persuing it. The next big leap will be some sort of overhaul.

            • broxibear

              Hi Ren Kockwell,
              “The next big leap will be some sort of overhaul.”
              Yeah, you’re probably right…the death of the dslr and rise of the Nikon 1, I feel sick just thinking about it lol.
              I still think when the dust settles, when Nikon and Canon have their new cameras out, the Nikons will be the better stills camera and the Canons the better video camera…Everything changes but stays the same lol.

            • Andrew

              The D4 is Nikon’s flagship camera, and video is here to stay regardless of which way you slice it. It therefore will not make sense for Nikon’s flagship camera to be deficient in it’s video performance or lack video. I think the problem many people are having is that the D4′s video performance is so much beyond their expectations, and the camera – so desirable, and the cost – so nearly out of reach, that they are unconsciously looking for a scapegoat for the reason why the camera cost so much. But had Nikon dropped the price by $1,000 and left out its video features, a lot of people would have complained why the camera is so expensive and yet not include video. This, it appears is a no win situation.

              I believe Nikon made the right decisions with this (D4) camera and gave it their best in every possible area. Nikon may possibly come out with a cheaper D4 in about a year’s time, but we will never know until that day arrives.

            • jodjac

              I think part of the problem is the ubiquitousness of video. It’s in every camera, every phone. How can you make a flagship camera and strip out function that every other camera has? And once you put it in, it has to be the pinnicale of achievement if it’s in the flagship.
              Also, video is powerful, much more powerful than stills. Those that don’t use it should spend some time getting to know how. Look at those short 1 second slow motion portraits on the Nikon J1, they are beautiful.
              Video is powerful, more powerful than stills- how often do you sit for hours flipping through picture books? Mostly people do that only when video is not available, for example, at the doctors office.
              Video so powerful because the scene moves and it has sound. You have to get the sound right. There is a lot to learn if you are just staring out.
              I’d love a D4. And a D800 (and probably a D400 or D7100). Mostly to shoot stills. I shoot stills, but I am trying to get a handle on the video. I’m not going to let this new, exciting feature go to waste.

        • rhlpetrus

          @broxibear:

          you wrote: “From a purely selfish stills pov I would have liked Nikon to have put all that R&D time (and money) into the D4′s image taking ability. Instead of high iso noise being a stop better after 3200 I think they could have had low 50 iso noise all the way to 1600.”

          The D3s has already a 57% QE. Any improvement in SNR would be incremental, and that’s it from now on. They have been pushing the RAW engine and in-sensor tech to make DR and noise not degrade as fast as expected (shoulder in the DxO Mark graphs as ISO goes up), but that certainly involves some tricks with NR, there’s no magic.

          So, forget it, if the D4 is 1/3 better in DR and SNR as ISO goes up compoared to the D3s it’s already a miracle. Don’t expect more than that, from D4, D4s, D5, ….

    • Graham

      Your points are taken and this is not to refute them. However, Joe McNally has a new blog post where he extolls the D4′s new high ISO feature for stills. Although not all of us need it, he believes that the D4 provides gains that even some D3s shooters might truly require. (I won’t regurgitate what he has taken the time to explain so well).

      You may enjoy what I found to be a balance opinion: http://www.joemcnally.com/blog/

      • broxibear

        Hi Graham,
        I did read Joe’s comments about the D4, but you’ve got to remember Joe is employed by Nikon.
        The comments that were far more interesting were the ones on the Imaging resource Q&A with Steve Heiner (Senior Technical Manager, Nikon Inc.)
        Q. Is there any improvement over the D3s in terms of ISO in the range of 3200-12800?
        A. I can’t tell you quantitatively that it’s better by a given amount, but based on what I’ve seen from a pre-production camera it’s every bit as good as what we’ve seen from our D3S camera, and possibly even better. The processing in this camera is the most sophisticated we’ve had in a camera to date. Based on the input from the photographers who shot our brochure, they were really impressed with all aspects of the camera, including shooting in low light at high ISO.

        • Graham

          Touché…

          To your point, Joe is one of the photographers that shot the Nikon brochure… ;)

        • KT

          Translated into plain english: We really couldn’t see any difference above and beyond the D3s but hope the glowing reviews and marketing hype will convince people it’s actually better.

        • broxibear

          Here’s more from the Q&A with Nikon D4 engineer Toshiaki Akagi from robgalbraith http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-11673-12267
          Q. How would you compare the high ISO image quality of the D4 to the D3S?
          A.Overall, D4 high ISO noise levels are very similar to the D3S, though photos shot with the D4 will have reduced colour noise (thanks mainly to noise reduction improvements in the D4′s EXPEED 3 processing hardware). The main difference you’ll see in pictures from the two cameras at high sensitivities is in the fine detail: D4 photos are noticeably better in this way.
          (Akagi then showed several 13 x 19-inch prints of the same scene, captured as NEFs with the D3S and D4 at ISO 12,800, in which the overall colour, tonality, visibility of noise and shadow rendering couldn’t have been more similar. But, the D4 photos looked sharper and more detailed. The D4′s crispness advantage in Nikon’s comparisons was significant, suggesting that we were seeing the effect of more than just the new camera’s higher pixel count.)
          Q. Among the image quality improvements cited for the D4 is better skin tones. What difference would we notice in a portrait shot with the D3S and then the D4?
          A.You will notice better tonality. We have reshaped the tone curve to give more natural-looking shadows and shadow transitions in faces.
          Interesting comments about the new card format XQD…
          Q. Both SanDisk and Lexar have told us that XQD is not on their product roadmap currently. Have any companies other than Sony told you they will be making XQD cards?
          A. At this moment we don’t know which companies will be making XQD, other than Sony.

    • http://www.jimprisching.com Chicago Photographer

      Totally agree. What I really wonder is how much extra are we paying for all the video thrills in these pro cameras. I agree that the D3/D4 and Canon’s Mark 4 and 1Dx are all geared toward the news/sports side of the business. I could care less about having video on a camera that I am using in the studio a good majority of the time. I believe if the trend continues and prices keep rising, pros that are using these cameras for portraits and advertising/studio shoots will finally make the leap to medium format, especially that the price gap keeps shrinking. Buy a D4 with a 50mm 1.4 and extra battery and it’s not that far off from the price of a Mamiya/Phase setup that is actually a bit more modular as you can always just add a back for more pixels.

      • h

        You guys kind of sound like the dinosaurs who didn’t want to switch to digital from film.

        Video is the next big thing, time to jump on board and take advantage of it to get a head of the game. Or play catch up later. Either way, it’s not going anywhere. Yes, Still’s will still be widely popular but this is about growing. If you don’t grow you die. So grow already and embrace it.

        • RondoX

          No. We are not dinosaurs. “Stills will still be widely popular.” What?? The sole purpose of this camera IS stills. If we wanted video, we would buy a video camera.

          • zoetmb

            No. The purpose of a camera is to be a tool to capture visual moments, memories and commercial statements. Professional photographers want a tool that enables them to capture what their clients want. And I think it’s fair to say that most clients, especially wedding clients, event clients and clients who need media for websites want both stills and video.

            To say that Nikon’s cameras should only capture stills is sort of like the mistake the railroad industry made after World War II. They thought they were in the railroad business, but they weren’t – they were in the transportation business. Had they understood that, they would have owned the airlines and would have developed physical connections between airports and train stations.

            The movie studios initially made the same mistake in the 1950s: they thought they were only in the movie business and not the entertainment business and initially refused to get involved in television production.

            While I personally prefer the aesthetics of still photography to video capture, any pro who ignores video does so at their own peril. And I don’t happen to see any compromises in Nikon’s cameras made for still photography in order to incorporate video.

            Shooting stills at high frame rates is practically video anyway. I love when I hear photographers say they don’t want video, but that they shoot 7000 frames per day. They’re already shooting video, they just don’t realize it.

            • Matt

              I have YET to see ANY DSLR that works as well as a video camera for doing video. I enjoy doing some video on a DSLR, but there are many functions that are neccesarry to a good video camera that lets be honest a DSLR isnt designed for.

              Whatever happened to “the right tool for the right job?”.

            • Matt

              7000 frames a day is like video? Please.

            • John

              That was a great reply. Very nice analogies.

              I have a D700 because I didn’t care about video on my DSLR. My video camera is a Canon XL2, not even HD. I am now really excited about the D4 to do everything. I am willing to finally accept the future.

              (Please don’t make me give up an optical viewfinder for stills though)

            • PJS

              We want a video camera that can capture full frame stills at 90fps or so. That way there will finally be absolutely NO need for composition or skill. We’re just about there, judging by the quality of photos I’m seeing at most sites and in magazines. <>
              I’m figuring my D700 is the last body I’ll need, just like my F5.

            • Ren Kockwell

              The D700 is a stills only camera. If you need that, that is what you should buy. It’s likely a better camera than you are a photographer. If it was all I needed, I would have bought a bunch and never looked back for years. Well-shot images from that camera can make you cry.

              I had clients that needed stills, and clients that needed video. Now, every stills client I have wants video, too. And I am able to provide it. Without the added cost and upkeep, and most importantly for us, without the added bulk and expense. If you want Hollywood cinematic quality, you still need a ton of add-ons to your camera as well as the requisite lighting, etc. But if you want solid, quality video for commercial purposes, which is what 90% of the demand is out there, a sturdy tripod, the occasional steadicam, a quality DSLR, an intelligent producer and decent cameraman can get that for you. And at a significant cost savings. Overseas travel with DSLRs is a flipping dream in comparison.

              We sold all of our XL2s, Betacams and Avid editors four years ago and have never looked back. Those who didn’t are mostly out of business.

            • RondoX

              No. I said the main purpose of this camera was to take photos. Which it is. Period. No videographer in their right mind would replace real video equipment with a D4.
              Now, I’m not saying that in a negative. It’s great that the D4 has video capabilities. But its just bells and whistles.

            • Ren Kockwell

              Hmm. Perhaps I’m not in my right mind then. Nor are my shooters, or my dozens of clients. Or the producers of House. Or the umpteen award winning directors and cinematographers now shooting with DSLRs. Call me crazy then. We’re surviving while everyone else is dying. Just because you haven’t figured out why it’s revolutionary doesn’t mean it’s still not revolutionary.

          • OsoSolitario

            Anyone would say today that a modern mobile phone is just for call? NO!!! 99% of owners who buy them is because their 99%other Apps they have inside!
            World is changing, we can’t spect a modern multimedia tool (like a DSLR are), to stay just attached in the past!

        • Don

          I’m confused? Landscapes & portraits are not going away yet Nikon put that capability in a separate camera. Is it really more differt from sports and photojournalism than video?

        • broxibear

          Hi h,
          Have to disagree with what you’ve posted.
          It’s got nothing to do with being “dinosaurs”, I don’t know what field of photography you work in but very, very few photographers I know use video. I work in music, editorial/commercial portraits and fetish photography, I have good friends who work in F1, news and advertising…none of them shoot video. I don’t have the rights to shoot video at music events, my friend is not allowed to take video at F1 races, it can’t just be a camera for wedding photographers ?(no disrepect to wedding photographers).There’s a myth that all these photographers are shooting hours of video. A few years ago many in the industry thought photography was headed towards video, that magazines and newspapers would all be viewed in a video format, or on special tablets akin to the Daily Prophet from Harry Potter with moving images…it didn’t happen. The reason it didn’t happen is because people still prefer looking at still images, those working for tv were always cameramen, they’re not photographers who shoot video.
          Video is not the next big thing as you put it, it’s just another thing.

          • D700guy

            I shoot glamour and sports. (Weird combo I know). So I am interested in this D4 for my sports, but am keenly interested in the D800 high mp and video for my glamour content. However, honestly, if I were a true videotographer I would be looking into a camera that was truly designated for just that; video.

          • Ren Kockwell

            Well, being in the publishing industry I can tell you. Video is the next big thing. My mantra was always, “print isn’t dying, it’s just changing and adopting a different role.” But it’s not. Right now, it’s dying. And video demand has skyrocketed. Stills aren’t obsolete by any stretch, but the iPad is getting to be about as close to the Daily Prophet as you can get. Every magazine is dedicating more and more resources to their online version. Print ad revenue is down catastrophically. Time (video takes longer to watch) and bandwidth (increasing everyday) are the only two barriers to that happening. Cost, previously the biggest obstacle, is almost no longer a factor.

            • broxibear

              Hi Ren Kockwell,
              I know that the print media are moving online but that’s not what I was pointing out. There are plenty of images on various sites, those images are not being replaced by video. The video you see are usually interviews, press conferences the material you see on 24 hour news.
              The video on these sites are not shot by photographers who use video on their dslrs as well as taking images, most of it’s coming from trained cameramen filming for new organizations.
              The reason print revenue, magazine sales and newspaper circulation is down has nothing to do with video, people are just getting their information on the net and mostly for free. Until they work out a different way to make money online for the content it’ll continue to go down.
              You said “video demand has skyrocketed” which online publications has that happened for that would normally be asking for images ?

            • Mock Kenwell

              Broxi, I never said video was replacing stills, I was merely stating that stills demand has stayed steady or declined slightly (it’s the institution) while the number of channels which use video has increased pretty markedly. Online pubs, which really did not even exist in a meaningful way prior to 2003, now make wide use of video, while stills either remain the same or have been slightly eroded by that move. Video demonstrates a growth market, while still photography represents a mature market.

        • nirofo.

          I can’t agree that video is the next big thing for photographers, how many moving landscape or portrait photos do you see, how do you present a moving advert in a glossy magazine? The list for still images where video doesn’t cut it is endless, come on get realistic, a stills camera with video included is hardly necessary for most professional and serious amateur photographers. I for one would like the option to buy a top quality still photos only camera without video attached, whether that comes from Nikon or not is up to them.

      • http://www.flickr.com/ob1ne ob1

        so what’s wrong with using an old camera like a D3 if you don’t care for video? do you really need the crazy ISO of the D4?

        • Don

          So what are saying, ob1, If you don’t shoot video you should not want for improvements in still camera technology?

          • Ren Kockwell

            If you want improvements, buy the D4. Don’t use the video. What’s the problem? Do you think that if Nikon was focused on stills and not video for the last four years that the D4 would be taking pictures 100m deep in the pitch black ocean with 50% enhanced DR and 800,000,000,000 ISO? Come on.

          • http://www.flickr.com/ob1ne ob1

            How much more improvement can there be? If you really want to see a jump in image quality get medium format.

            and btw was replying to ‘chicago photographer’ who was saying that if the prices keep going up, pro’s (that shoot portraits) will just get medium format. But the question is do pros really need to buy the latest camera for portraiture? please.

      • Andrew

        Can the price increase be attributed to any one factor, or is it a combination of different factors including the value of the dollar (i.e. exchange rate), the component cost (sensor and other parts), higher energy cost to operate the factors, and multiple major disasters in 2011. But I understand, as consumers we really don’t care to know the reasons, be simply want cheaper goods.

    • http://mike.heller.ca/blog Mike

      @broxibear:

      “If you’re a video/ film-making user and want to stay with Nikon you’ll be happy, if what you wanted was the D3s stills capability in a D700 sized body you’ll be dissapointed.”

      I agree, but Nikon is clearly not going in that direction for the D800. If you want D3s performance buy a D3s.

      “There’s definitely a feeling across various forums/blogs that Nikon have pushed aside the stills photographers in favour of video users, if the Canon 5D Mark III is better than the D4 and D800 for video (which I think it will) and will still be favoured by the film-making community a lot of questions will be asked from Nikon users.”

      I don’t agree with this at all. I think Nikon is making improvements in stills in both bodies, D800 still to be determined. My biggest indicator for this is the 36mp sensor. If they were targeting video and forgetting stills you certainly don’t need 36mp for HD video, not anything close. So the big res sensor is for still shooters that need it. I for one, am happy with that decision.

      • broxibear

        Hi Mike,
        The 36mp sensor is an interesting one, of all the rumoured specs this is the one people are surprised about the most…I don’t have an answer beyond what has been talked about it replacing the D3x.
        It’ll be interesting to see how much of the D4 video capability is inside the D800 and how that affects people’s decision on whether to buy a D4 or D800 ?
        At the moment I’m very happy with my D3, but all this makes for an interesing discussion, which is why I asked the questions and posted my thoughts in the first place…isn’t that what the internet’s about ? (apart from porn but we won’t go there lol)

        • D700guy

          My hunch is that the D4x (if there is one) will concentrate on stills, and most likely forgo the video altogether.

          • Andrew

            I am certain that removing video functionality will only save pennies. The biggest factor driving cost is likely the research and development cost of incorporating enhanced video features. Once these video technologies have been developed, nothing is gained by removing video from these cameras.

        • D700guy

          …and, another hunch I have is that the D4 isn’t the replacement for the D3s, it’s the replacement for the D3. That there will be a D4s, and a D4x to replace their respective predecessors.

          This is just the beginning

          • cpm5280

            Yes. This seems obvious to me, and yet all I hear is anything but this picture.

        • ericnl

          @Broxibear: “which is why I asked the questions and posted my thoughts in the first place…isn’t that what the internet’s about ? (apart from porn but we won’t go there lol)”

          . . the D4 will be awesome to shoot porn videos with!!

      • StickingZoom

        “If you want D3s performance buy a D3s.”

        Ok, and if I want the D3s stills performance in the D700 package size (which is technically possible)? Then I do what? Buy the D800 with 36Mega-noises? Or spend 3 times the money for the big lump of a D4?

        • http://mike.heller.ca/blog Mike

          I don’t get what the big deal is about the size of the body. The D3s is bigger and heavier than a D700, but only 0.36 pounds more. You really can’t carry 0.36 pounds extra? If you are from Canada, like me, it’s only 166grams more. That is about the weight of an iphone 4, do you struggle to carry a cell phone? I carry my cell phone around all day, and I don’t get tired doing so.

          A 24-70 f/2.8 lens is 2 pounds, or 5.5x the weight difference of the two bodies. Do you complain about big lenses too that they are too big and heavy? Do you only use the smallest and lightest primes?

          • Ren Kockwell

            +4

          • Sticking Zoom

            It doesn’t make a difference when the weight hangs say on your belt. But the camera hangs around your neck, and here it makes a huge difference when you carring it for many hours. Just check the web about pros explaining their neck and shoulder problems because of the weight of pro camera gear.
            Or why do you think Karl Grobl switched to a holster?

            http://karlgrobl.com/blog/

            • Mock Kenwell

              This is utter nonsense. Hit the gym.

            • http://mike.heller.ca/blog Mike

              I agree, 0.36 pounds doesn’t make a difference. Pro lenses are heavy, pro bodies are heavy. If you can’t wear them around your neck find a different way to carry it. The difference in weight between the bodies is insignificant.

    • http://frisianphotography.wordpress.com FrisianPhotography

      Hi Broxibear,

      Keep in mind that Nikon was quite a bit behind other brands (Canon) with respect to video with the D3s, while for stills it was truly a top-end camera. This inherently made it easier to make a big jump in video quality, while the still department only saw incremental upgrades.

      That said, I also did hope for some more substantial upgrades, with some truly innovative new features. I feel like Nikon (and Canon) sort of played it (too) safe. In terms of R&D costs it makes sense to have revolutionary models followed by smaller upgrades.
      Unfortunately for manufacturers, consumers are not very appreciative: Whether realistic or not, they take small upgrades for granted. If product 1 had feature A, then the second generations should have feature A+1, at least. To really get hearts beating, manufacturers should also add a new feature B.
      The latter isn’t really the case with the D4, it’s just an extremely decent follow-up – good enough to keep their market share, but it won’t have many switching.

      • broxibear

        Hi FrisianPhotography,
        It’s interesting you mention Canon and the fact that Nikon had to play catch up as far as video was concerned. What Canon has decided to do is seperate the video and stills somewhat in different models. They’ve got the 1Dx coming out in March and the Canon EOS C dslr http://photorumors.com/2011/11/03/new-canon-eos-c-dslr-camera-under-development/
        The jump Canon had over Nikon in video I think will show up in the 5D Mark III, Canon have had a massive knowledge base with their 5D Mark II film-makers to dip into.

    • Eskimo Macinoid

      I think what it really boils down to is the D3 was a true game changer. It was a massive improvement for still imaging in terms of IQ, dynamic range and high ISO. Everything since then has represented only incremental improvements, especially considering how marketing pressure to increase megapixel count will obviate any gains in micro lens technology, sensor design and digital signal processing.
      Currently, a factory refurbished D3 is $3,200 at B & H. The release of the D4 has seen the price of this camera drop, and I think I will jump on it. I will be able to buy a like new, vertical gripped, 9 fps, rugged camera and continue shooting video on my AF100.

      • broxibear

        Hi Eskimo Macinoid,
        I think you’re right, the D3 was a real jump…it also asked the photographer if they really needed another stop on top of what the D3 provided.
        I’d love to be able to swap the sensor in my D3 for the latest D4 sensor…all the extra buttons, video features and XQD slots they could keep lol.

        • Eskimo Macinoid

          Thanks broxibear.
          What would really be something would be a D4h…a full-frame camera at, say, 10 or even 8 megapixels. With pixels at 10 or 12 microns each, it could shoot pretty clean images up to iso 25,600 (which is great for fast-moving indoor sports). It could also shoot at 12-13 fps. It would be a boon for us photojournalist types who don’t need large prints and prefer small file sizes for transmittal oner the wire. But, alas, the market isn’t there.

    • tonyc123

      I agree with Broxibear. As an extremely busy commercial photographer I don’t have time to develop video as a profit centre for my business and for that reason, I am not interested in the current crop of new models from Nikon. Why pay for something I won’t use. Shame really, as have gotten used to rewarding myself with a new Nikon every 3 years or so, something I’ve done since way back in analogue era. Not any more apparently!
      I seems crazy to me that many photographers be forced to look to medium format to get a tool that suits the way they work. I take my feature rich D3 & D3s out on location several times a week shooting thousands of frames all on manual setting with single point AF..
      So Just for arguments sake, How much would a stripped back Dslr version of Leica’s M9 cost and would it sell?

    • NikNik

      Hi broxibear,
      I think you are absolutely right. NIKON is obviously heading for video improvement. And leaving us stills photographers behind.
      The problem about improvement of sensors is pixelpitch. 6 micrometers are the limit, to keep noise low. That means 10 MPx for Dx and 16 MPx for Fx and that’s it. Higher resolution brings noise problems. The still DSLR cameras have reached the rubicon. The D7000 already crossed that line.

      • broxibear

        Hi NikNik,
        As a stills photographer I see all the extra this and that for video as something I could do without. As I posted before I’d have been happy with the new D4 sensor inside the D3 body without all the changing of buttons, added joysticks and QXD slot. And from what I’m reading many would have liked the D3s sensor in the D700 body…but alas Nikon have gone a different way ?
        Each to their own I guess…can’t wait for all those amazing un-boxing videos on youtube shot using the D4′s astounding video capability, whoopee !

    • http://www.Azety.fr Azety

      i hope the D800 will not be a video toy like canon cameras are.

      it would kill my love for nikon.

    • photdog

      @ broxi
      I agree with you!
      A phenomenon that’s interesting to me is, that video cams were loosing a lot of ground in the market in the past years. Sales and prices went down with the exception of the upper class like Canon XL2 for instance.
      Now that video came up in still cameras apparently a new hype was born. There are some out there who are fire and flame for video. And that’s all right. But I assume, that this will cool down in 3 to 5 years when a lot of people will have discovered, that they can’t even come close to a clip like WHY (presented in this forum) by just buying a D4 or a D800. It needs a whole set of different skills plus a whole lot of more equipment. Hell, yeah, I know that some will go this avenue and will make money with it. And there are certain tasks in which video will bring a decisive plus. But on the other hand I would be more than exited to see, what results all those who defame more conservative commenters as backward come up with. I bet that only a comparable small percentage of the D4 and D800 owners will make money on video out of these cameras.
      I’m sure no video hater (got to hear that too) but I simply try to calculate for myself how much effort (and extra expenses) it would need, to take me to pro results in video. And that makes me tend to surpass it.

      When I do a search in LR for ISO the percentage of images that I’ve shot above 3200 ISO decline to Zero. Thus also in this concern I have to agree with Broxi. The changes that we have seen in the recent past have been very incremental: from a D300 to a D300s, from a D3 to a D3s whereby there still is the D700. What I’m saying is, that the well praised advantages from a D3/D700 to a D3s aren’t so much in use as many make it seem. (Of course there are some “experts” out there boasting, that they’d do a whole wedding at ISO 10,000. Well, one should give a note to consumer protection…)
      So from my point of view, it is more than understandable, that a lot of us had hoped for some larger steps concerning stills as the next generation of cameras knocked at the door. A D3x boiled down into a D700 body and including the Exspeed 3 would have been something to me – but now I don’t see it happen. A D800 with the same sensor like the D4 is out of the question too since it would cannibalize the D4 sales.
      As for the D400 I don’t see it being FX as it would disturb the FX line up (being set in place by then) too much. Furthermore, why would Nikon bring out more DX primes if they’d intend to chop of the head of their DX line bodies?
      So I’ll wait until the D800 makes its entrance on the stage and most likely go for it, probably trying out the one without anti-aliasing filter.

      • broxibear

        Hi photdog,
        You make some interesting points, what you say about who actually uses the video features in a dslr, and equally as important, why they use it is central to the discussion.
        The reason the dslr as video camera took off was due to the Canon 5D attracting the attention of film-makers. Before that they were using video cameras and renting out equipment because it was so expensive. The video features in dslrs were never driven by photographers who suddenly started asking for video capability, it was driven by film-makers, film colleges and video production companies…not photographers.
        You’ve got photographers who’ll rarely use the video on their dslr, and film-makers who’ll rarely take still images on their dslr…Canon have realised this and that’s why they’ve started to seperate them with the introduction of their EOS C dslr.
        As I said to another poster, it’s an interesting discussion and judging by the number of posts I’m having to reply to it’s a discussion people want to have.

        • photdog

          @broxi
          Again I agree
          However, what I think to see is a misbalance between the enthusiasm about new opportunities and the factual application of it in practice. I’m not saying that there won’t be application, I’m just saying that the number of those being (overly) enthusiastic right now probably is far higher than the number of those who will actually use it in a pro sense.
          And to take the thoughts even further, it seems as if the makers are out for something new – at almost any costs. Maybe driven by the idea that someone could do something similar to an iPad or the like in the realm of cameras. The Nikon 1 and the words with which it was presented fuels this assumption. And as we could observe the Nikon 1 was (is) dividing the community; basically in those who are plain enthusiastic about technical progress in some features and the ones who expected something different from Nikon. And to my amazement, just the one maker who recently had turned his back to DSLRs is now the one who have got the most acceptance and affirmation for his Fuji X100 and now for the Fuji X Pro 1, while both come with a high price tag. Since you and I probably will never get the numbers and calculations neither for the Fuji X series nor for the Nikon 1 it is hard to tell which strategy was better businesswise. However, picking up the appreciation or disaffirmation, what Fuji did could not have been quite wrong. Interestingly, beside a quite different sensor format (and technology in the X Pro 1) Fuji chose to put video clearly on a lower pedestal than the Nikon 1. Now, one may interfere, that Fuji’s X line is more targeted to a pro market than the Nikon 1. But both approaches are in a high price segment, into which the typical P&S customer won’t go. As of now it is still fun to have such a variety of offers to choose from – but wait until the owners of the accordingly system have invested in glass too…
          The reason why I watch this entire development less relaxed than some other bloggers is, that I figure the potential next step of the makers. And that is hooking the cameras up with the internet.
          Some called me already paranoid because I dared to see and speak about the flip side of the potential advantages that this step would come with. But hey, there are always two sides of a coin. And I simply take the right to skip particular advantages for avoiding certain disadvantages. And that’s the whole story right there.

  • http://bustitaway.toile-libre.org/index.html Malkolm
    • dursi

      i have preordered it! it tell me on 16 feb is available, 3000$

  • Greg

    Any new news on the d400? :( My d80 is in need of an update.

    • Graham

      +1
      This is the price point that I live in and I can’t wait to see its incremental improvements over the D300s. Based on the D7000′s features and performance, my expectations are high!

      • Graham

        I should add that the D7000 probably does more than I’ll ever need compared to the D70s I own but, having waited this long, there is no harm in waiting to see the D400. My D70s is only now starting to physically fail on me.

        • Greg

          Exactly, I’ve waited this long when I coulda got the 7000, I might as well wait the extra few months for a top of the line DX, right?

          • WoutK89

            +1, same story for me, need something that performs better in low light and is faster than my D80.

          • GEB

            +1 Exactly in the same boat as you guys. The D70s has been showing issues for a couple of years now but keeps on ticking and I have a D50 for backup, so I’m waiting.

            • Vlad

              +1! :-) I’m looking for a replacement for my D70, because it has serious out of focus problems, especially in low light conditions, and its low light performance sucks anyway (compared to current cameras, of cause!) That out of focus problem gets worse with the time and it drives me crazy! I’m missing too many shots because of it. :-( And the worst part of it is that I can’t see the problem on the camera display. Last week I was photographing a dancing event, and 70% of Photos were garbage because they were out of focus. :-(

              I was seriously considering buying a D7000 now (mostly because of its good low light performance and quite high fps for that price), but if a D400 will be announced in next few months, it’s probably worth to wait for it. If it will beat both D7000′s low light performance and D300s’ speed, it would be perfect!

            • Me too need D400

              +1 Guys,
              My D70s too needs a replacement!!

              BTW, Why ain’t they bring out an 18/20mm 1.8/2.8 DX prime??

            • Greg

              Yeah, I’ve been doing local photography for a social league, and with my indoor events I’ve been working underneath low light, fast action sports without the ability to use a flash. Often I have to shoot in Hi-3, and let’s just say although when shrunk down it’s not bad, it’s still cringeworthy (to me at least), and I’m still shooting at a moderately slow shutterspeed with an f/2.8 lens (like 200fps). It hurts! To have something with a semi-clear shot up to 6.4k would be amazing.

    • Eskimo Macinoid

      I really hope the D400 really is ruggedized, high fps, high feature D7000, with the same low noise 16 MP sensor. If it is 24 MP, I will certainly skip it.
      A slight possibility (and I’m really just hoping here), is the D400 will be a full-frame camera with the D3s 12.1 MP sensor. I think this is a possibility due to the D800 taking the D3X’s place in terms of pixel count, though not by price. Add to that how the D7000 replaced the plastic D90 with a magnesium body, and there is a slight possibility the D7000 is the APS-C top dog, with the D400 becoming an entry level full frame. Besides, I can’t believe Nikon won’t field a competitor for the Canon 5D MkIII…a lighter pro body with the sensor of a D3s and the video capabilities of the D4 would be perfect.

      • Shaun tucker

        Eskimo- seriously, right? I mean, if Canon is selling more 5d mark ii’s than anything else an it is their best seller then why wouldn’t Nikon want to do the same thing? D700 style with better sensor like d3s and add video. It would sell like crazy. Just like the d700 and 5d. Not complaining though, I’m still getting the D4. Just curious ya know?

      • Me too need D400

        It makes some sense on the new naming convention..
        Dxxxx for all DXs, Dxxx for FFs and Dx for flagships..

  • CRB

    Primes for DX please…………35mm and 28mm Eq…for the love of g….

    • Don

      What’s wrong with the 35 DX that’s out there right now? Nice lens. Great price.

      • Phill

        The 35mm DX is roughly 53mm equivelant. He talks about 35mm and 28mm equivelant= a 24mm prime and a 18mm prime for DX.

    • http://www.flickr.com/ob1ne ob1

      +1

  • http://www.maurotandoi.it Tanduà

    if D800 come with 32 Mega Pixel….we don’t need a D900. …with 64!…or more in the future….not?

    p.s
    (imho) capture nx 2.3 is not ready to manage 32 megapixel size photos

    • FM2Fan

      We need a D1000 with 128 MP – just out make a statement …
      … do we need it? Can’t we use any cam since D700 for many situations in still imaging? If you can’t, let me know. I’m happy to take your old gear …

    • tonyc123

      The 64 bit version is very fast (with a bit of ram)

  • http://www.thunderkissphotography.com Trey Campbell

    I still don’t think it will be 36MP. Just doesn’t make sense to me. But maybe that’s based on all hope. I want ISO performance.

    • http://mike.heller.ca/blog Mike

      Why not buy a D3s? You can get one used for less money than a new D800 and have the low iso you want.

      • StickingZoom

        “Why not buy a D3s?”

        Because it’s big and heavy, and I don’t need the extra stuff that requires the extra weight/size. The D700 has the right size (for me)

        • http://mike.heller.ca/blog Mike

          I’ll re-post my comment from above:

          I don’t get what the big deal is about the size of the body. The D3s is bigger and heavier than a D700, but only 0.36 pounds more. You really can’t carry 0.36 pounds extra? If you are from Canada, like me, it’s only 166grams more. That is about the weight of an iphone 4, do you struggle to carry a cell phone? I carry my cell phone around all day, and I don’t get tired doing so.

          A 24-70 f/2.8 lens is 2 pounds, or 5.5x the weight difference of the two bodies. Do you complain about big lenses too that they are too big and heavy? Do you only use the smallest and lightest primes?

          • Sticking Zoom

            I won’t repeat mine, it’s waste of resource.

          • broxibear

            Hi Mike,
            I think the size/weight issue partly comes from what you’ve been used to using. If you started off with lower level cameras/dslrs and moved up then the size can become a problem, next to a D3 series the D700 is small http://j.mp/tWgGrs
            I know a lot of photojournalists prefer D700/5D sized bodies as do travel photographers, fortunately I don’t have to walk around so much as those guys carrying all my gear.
            Personally I’m used to using hefty cameras like RBs and 501′s and I like the size of the D3 in my hands, but I can understand why many find it cumbersome. Someone made a throw away comment about going to the gym, I do and I’m in good shape, but after a long shoot my wrists do ache.
            Hold your camera with lens attached to your eye and move around a bit as if you were taking images, now take the battery out and do exactly same movements…there’s a marked difference in how it feels.
            As I said I can understand the desire for a lighter body, how they would achieve I don’t know ?

            • http://mike.heller.ca/blog Mike

              There is some merit to that, however I don’t think the balance is as good on a small body with a big lens. Even the ‘medium’ lenses like a 24-70, 70-200 feel much more balanced on a big body than a small one.

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

    Yet another Coolpix, ugh. D800, now that would be interesting. Has anyone taken a look at the Lightroom 4 beta? It seems to do a better job with the Nikon V4 color profiles than Lightroom 3 and ACR 6. I think it is a fair bet that ACR 7 will look a lot like the Lightroom 4 beta, but we will not see it until Photoshop CS 6 drops.

  • Steve

    A lot of folks in this thread are discussing upcoming bodies for this February event. That’s cool. I think Nikon has a pretty regular routine of upgrades for their bodies. What I don’t understand is how little attention is given to lens.

    I understand that lens “rumors” are a lot more difficult to put ones arms around, that’s fine but where is the dialog on [NR] for lens updates? This thread has a few mentions at best.

    Are folks here just not in need of a lens because they already have what they need? I am a prosumer (I guess) who does a lot of bird/wildlife photography and I cannot afford the $4k and up lenses. Am I under the assumption that buying a $7k beast is a no brainer for folks?

    The 300mm f/4 with a 1.4 x is a great matchup for about $2k. The 300mm f/4 needs VR. Do people even think about using such “mundane” set ups or do they just buy the 400mm f/2.8 and move on?

    I have been using Nikon products for over 25 years. I love them. It just seems to me that they cater to the consumer and the pro (from a lens perspective). Lots of lens in the $500 to $1k range, some incredible yet not too affordable in the >$4k range, yet nothing to bridge the gap from $1k to $4k.

    I appreciate folks thoughts on this. I truly love my D7k and would love to have similar prosumer lenses to go with it. Thanks

    • PAG

      Steve, I agree that this is an area where Nikon is falling short. I shoot with the 300mm and TC1.4 as well, but I would love to have VR. Many bird photographers love the Canon 400mm f/5.6 because it’s fast focusing and lightweight, but Nikon has no direct answer to this lens. And the 80-400mm needs an update badly. It seems that the world of non-wealthy amateur nature and sports photographers (i.e. sub-$2000 or so lenses) is a demographic that Nikon has little interest in and I’m not sure why.

      BTW, I don’t think you can really expect a bridge between $2K to $5K (not really $1K to $4K). An updated 300mm f/4 with VR will probably go for close to $2K. The 300mm f/2.8 is $5,700. That one extra stop simply causes prices (and weight) to leap and I don’t think there’s anything that can be done about it.

      • Steve

        Thank PAG.

        My thinking is that folks who are part of [NR] can drop 4k here and there without due consideration.

        I personally don’t have the $$$ to do that. Friends have suggested I switch to Canon. I love the D7k so much. What are your thoughts?

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/subhrashis busynbored

          Exactly! I love the D7000 output.I convinced my Father to buy it over getting a Canon body and 100 400… because I figured the 80-400VR AF-S wouldn’t be long in coming. Now, almost a year later, we are still stuck at 300 mm, and he gives me accusing looks!

          We definitely can’t “drop” 4k$ for a lens!

    • http://www.andygural.com Andy

      I expect that the 135 mm will be updated soon. It’s a logical choice given the age of the current 135 mm and (1990 design will a 1995 refresh on the autofocus if my memory isn’t failing me).

      As much as I love the 35mm G, and would love the 85mm G for my DX camera, I shan’t be replacing my 85 mm 1.8D. Instead, I shall be waiting for a D700 replacement and, one hopes, a 135mm G stovepipe with it.

    • Suzan

      I feel exactly the same way. Except I hope that getting some reach for around $2500 or so can be done without having to use a teleconverter. Ideally my dream lens would be the 120-450mm f4-5.6 they patented awhile back. An update to the 80-400 would be most welcome also.

  • jorg

    @broxi
    i dont see a “mistake” by nikon, i rather see the lack of know-how and resources. canon has built videocameras for years, ofc they have the lead in DSLR-video. that nikon managed to get the first video-DSLR was quite a stunt!
    now nikon catches up, my video-friends all tell me they would loooove nikons new video-specs…but they got canon-glass now…

    ofc nikon is harping too much about their video-specs and too little about the stills-capabilities. in a few weeks we will see whether they really “wasted” too much r&d and $$$ on video and actually neglected the stills-improvement of the sensor ( i dont think so). hopefully some people with real knowledge about sensor-tech will comment on that somewhere.

    • broxibear

      Hi jorg,
      I don’t think you’ll see much switching between brands, and we’ll never know how much of the costs go into video as opposed to stills.
      You pay your money and take your choice ?

      • Yagion

        D3 was $5000 when announced. Considering inflation, I say we’re paying about $500 for video in D4

    • Ren Kockwell

      Have you shot video with the D3s and 5D MkII? I have. I would challenge you to tell the difference. It’s hilarious to hear people talk about how far Nikon is off. They’re right there.

  • The Manatee

    Whar throws me off is this motorcycle commercial, which implies a high speed low light camera. My guess is that as some people have speculated that video will be the real emphasis for this camera. Although the fact that the motorocycle video was shot at night gives me hope that ISO will be as good if not better than the D700.

  • lampolli

    on march we see the nikon D1M an Mx medium format camera with 16 mp same made sensor of D4 only bigger can reach iso 819200 start from 1600

  • Zim

    Sure like to see a D400, unless the D800 could be in the $2500 range.

  • FX DX

    D700 is half the price of D3S. D800 will be half the price of D4, i.e., $2,995.95.

  • sgts

    IT HAS BEGUN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    OK NIKON I’M COMING BACK I’M SORRY I LEFT YOU FOR SONY

    • JB

      I am thinking the same thing.

      • StickingZoom

        Just because there is a rumor of an announcement? Cheesus, on what do you guys base your buying decisions …?

        • looney

          not a lot by the sounds of it. why else would you leave nikon for sony in the first place :-\

  • http://www.del-uks.com De-Uks

    When we take a look at the Nikon vs D700 body and and grip comparison, the hand grip looks smaller on the D800.

    :-(

    Hopefully it’s not as small as D7000′s handgrip…

  • hq

    Oh god! They’ll announce the P7110 (!!)

  • kyoshinikon

    All I hope for is that they release a 10mm f/4 aspherical this year (which I doubt they will) Let the “It ain’t gunna happen” comments occur…

  • http://www.isn.co.il Aaron C

    I am a 20 year old living alone making 1500$ a month, and am a budding sports shooter. I have quickly outgrown my first dslr the d5100 and find myself shooting at iso 3200 at 1/200 at night games with the sigma 70-200 2.8. The grain is hardly acceptable, and I was wondering how much the d3s would drop to if at all, or should I wait for a newer full frame speed monster (the d800 seems to shoot max 5fps if Im not mistaken?) is a fast lower rez d800 in the works? Im trying to shy away from dx bodies due to the grain issue… thoughts?

    • neversink

      We know nothing about the D800 – You must mean the D700. You can always buy the external motor drive, like I did, for the D700. I hardly use it, but when I do, it is great, and when I don’t need it, I don’t have to carry around the extra weight. I have pre ordered the D4, but wish it had an external motor drive rather than a built-in job.

      You know what you can afford. I am sure the D700 will come down in price once the D800 is announced and on the shelves. I’d get that with the motor drive, sell the crappy sigma and buy a Nikon 2.8 70-200. I’d also get a Nikon f4 500 or 600 if I were you. I prefer the 500 because of its lighter weight.

      • Dormant

        You should know that they are battery packs, not motor drives.

        • neversink

          Absolutely correct…

          My brain is still hanging on to those old motor drives I used for the F2 and F3 (the MD 2 and MD 4) — You are correct… They are now battery packs..

          My error…

          PS I still miss Panatomic X 32 and Kodachrome 25

      • Sports

        Aaron C is on a budget so his Sigma f/2.8 makes perfect sense. You chose a great lense for your purpose! The Nikon is a lot more expensive, and VR is useless for shooting sports anyway. The proposed Nikon 500 or 600 will just make low light problems worse.
        D4 is too expensive, and the rumoured D800 is also costly, and not at all optimized for your pupose. D700 is your only good option right now, Aaron. Or you could wait and see if Nikon replaces the D300S or D700 soon.

    • broxibear

      Hi Aaron C,
      If you can wait then wait…who knows what the D800 will bring and the effect on prices of older equipment, you will get people selling their little used D3 series cameras because they want a D4.
      Hang on and see what happens.

  • henry

    I would be surprised if D800 is announced so soon after D4. Despite being different from D4, D800 with its specifications would take thunder away from D4 itself. Seeing how things are. I suspect release a later this year in time for Thanksgiving sales after enough D4′s have been sold. Just my guess.

    I hope I am wrong because I want D800 as bad as anyone here. But that’s what seems logical.

    • Royster

      The D800 is aimed at a completely different market than the D4 so it shouldn’t impact the sales much if at all.

      • http://www.Del-Uks.com Del-Uks

        Well… for now, I’m not so sure wich one I will get… but if the D800 is not announced in february, I’ll order a D4…

      • neversink

        They may be aimed at different markets. But I use both D3 and D700 and D7000 — all supposedly aimed at different markets. I can’t afford not to have back-up bodies…. So I imagine I will also pre-order a D800 like I did the D4…

        Time to sell some old bodies….

  • Nigela Merkozy

    Didn’t someone post on NR’s facebook page that Nikon employees at CES confirmed that the ‘product launch’ in Feb is NOT going to have a different sensor from D4? doesn’t that quash the 36mp claims? Any confirmation on this? NIkon is not making friends with us landscape guys by not even giving us 20 mp to work with….I’m still holding out hope!

    • Zeke

      The D3x has 24mp.

      • Nigela Merkozy

        Yes, it does. BUT, it’s a $8,000 price tag for 2008 technology. I’m looking to upgrade from a D90 and D3x makes little sense, unfortunately.

    • WoutK89

      Nikon employees at CES know as much as the toilet lady at CES about future launches. I wouldnt read too much into it.

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

        exactly – they don’t know, and if they do, they won’t risk their job

  • http://www.joeythephotographer.com Joey

    Still no DX wide angle prime? anything from 10mm – 16mm. Seriously any focal length, even if it’s F/4.

    • d70

      not for nothing but they think that if you can afford a wide prime (even a DX one), you can certainly afford an FX body. Just buy a used D700 next month and a wide prime with it. You won’t regret a thing.

      • neversink

        I couldn’t agree more. I love the f1.4 24. However I would just go for the 14-24 zoom. It is incredible….. As good as any of my primes, but it is a heavy heavy heavy beast.

    • Dave

      I’m really happy with my Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 DX lens. I sure do wish that Nikon would make a nice 24mm in f/1.8 or f/2.0 for DX.

  • D

    would like to see a 300/4 VR or 80-400 AFS VR II. Long over do.

    • Michelle

      x2

  • Top E

    Royster posted “The D800 is aimed at a completely different market than the D4 so it shouldn’t impact the sales much if at all.”

    I think the different market is one of affordability. $6k and up?

    • http://three-blocks.com Tangfish

      I don’t think they’re aimed at different markets completely. I have a D4 on order and am waiting to see the D800 specs confirmed before making the final call. Since I always have double bodies for backup, it’s a big investment.

  • Rick 808

    “The sole purpose of this camera IS stills. If we wanted video, we would buy a video camera.”

    As someone who does both stills and video at a high level and owns separate rigs for both, I am thrilled to finally be able replace my dedicated video cameras with a couple D4s. Yes, in some ways video cameras are better than using a DSLR. But once you factor in the HUGE benefit of having ONE rig with all your lens options available on any project, it makes it–for me–a beautiful day.

  • broxibear

    Sigma’s new lens goes missing in Vegas…
    “A new Sigma lens, believed to be one of only two pre-production models in the world, has gone missing from the firm’s stand at CES.
    Sigma staff said they were mystified when the lens, one of three lenses the firm showcased in Vegas, was nowhere to be found the next morning.”
    http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Sigmas_new_lens_goes_missing_in_Vegas_news_311096.html

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

      it wasn’t me :) I returned it back after taking a picture of it for my post

  • Sven

    please please please let it be the D800…i’m tired of waiting

  • broxibear

    Anyone know what this Nikon patent http://www.freepatentsonline.com/WO2012005157A1.pdf published today is… some sort of new dslr ?

    • KL

      Lists some Canon documents – could it be a filing for patent infringement by Canon?

  • st

    Question?If Canon is selling more 5d mark ii’s than anything else an it is their best seller then why wouldn’t Nikon want to do the same thing? D700 style with better sensor like d3s and add video. It would sell like crazy. Just like the d700 and 5d. Not complaining though, I’m still getting the D4. Just curious ya know?

  • jen

    I have the d700 and d7000 for a backup. I pre ordered the D4 . For starters I feel like i have to have the grip on my d700 when shooting w/ 70-200 vr2 + tele. It balances the camera better. With the grip attached it is larger and Heavier than the D3! This is one reason I may just go with the D4- grip built in. Im basically selling off some of my equip to get the D4. Was thinking about getting a used d3s but technology is tweaked in so many ways. Besides, the value of any FX camera holds it own if you want to re-sell a few yrs down the road..Just my random thoughts :)

  • Ray Justice

    You can always pre-order the d4, which will not be shipping until late February, then see what is announced in Feb. If the d800 is announced, check out the specs and determine if you want to keep you spot in line for the D4 or cancel and pre-order the D800. Win-Win…..

  • Flex

    Well, let’s hope that the D800 is announced on 2/7. That means the 5DIII announcement won’t be far behind. Sorry but I’ve got a bag full of L glass and I need to see the 5DIII specs before I preorder 1DX. Competition is great for both camps so I say go Nikon!!!!

  • Magnus

    Many people seem upset with the strong focus on video for the D4 – and believe that we would have gotten a better and cheaper D4 if Nikon had skipped video.
    I have pre-ordered a D4 – and although I don’t think I will hardly ever use the video functionality (I am after the low light capability and speed, and the 16Mp gives me a chance to use my 2.8 DX glass, shooting 7 Mp)
    - I actually think a D4 without video would have been even more expensive…

    A more specialized camera would have sold in less numbers and thus would have had to have a higher price in order to pay for R&D + advertising etc.
    Kinda like how a car with two seats often is more expensive than a four seated one.
    Also, a video-enabled D4 probably has a higher resell value in a few years than a non-video would have had.

    Would I have bought a D4 variant without video if such a camera existed?
    If it was $1000USD less? – yes.
    If it was same price (or even higher) – probably not.

    One part of being a photographer is facing the constant change – and video might be fun to explore in the future – so having that feature in my D4 might come in handy.

    This said (and back on the right rumor topic), if Nikon reveals a D800S (with D4 sensor) without video, web server, remote functionality etc. I’ll probably cancel my D4 order and go for the “new D700″ instead. Having D4-specs in a smaller, lighter and cheaper body would have been nice.

    • Yagion

      +1. I like your analysis

    • http://www.robertash.com Robert Ash

      Excellent points. Well said.

  • MarkH

    First, there are over 330 comments to this rumour in such a short period of time. This must be a record for NR.

    Second, Admin has such a great track record and his judgment appears solid, I am loathe to say this, but, the 36mp rumour seems odd. Wouldn’t a 36mp FF body attract people away from the more expensive D4 and D3x? I expect the D3x to be replaced with a D4x.

    Surely, a D800 with 24mp and an upgraded focus and ISO system from the D700 would be more logical.

    I’m clearly missing the plot on this one, I’m ashamed to say.

    MarkH

    • J0rge

      I think the D800 will be an extraordinary camera. This is the way I see it:
      Nikon is finally correcting a mistake they made before, which caused many pros to jump to the other side and get the 5d2 for high res at a sub 8k price (which Nikon didn’t have). To make things worse, the d700 was correctly perceived as a smaller and cheaper D3 for some purposes, so D3 sales suffered too.
      Now Nikon seems to have learned from those mistakes and their cameras will be more specialized to meet the requirements of each field.
      D4 and D800 are very different cameras that will not compete with each other, they are clearly aimed at different people. I can’t wait to buy the D800 as soon as it becomes available, hopefully on 2/7.

  • KL

    Anonymously posted on B&H blog that D4 will be available on Feb 16,2012.

  • Lorne Leufven

    I am happy with what I am seeing and the changes that Nikon is bringing to the table are very organic and logical extensions of the previous generation of cameras.
    I feel that every one is right that the future of cameras will go a different direction from the DSLR but the direction of the N1? I don’t think that will be the direction.. I would hazard a guess to a body style more akin to a medium format camera if nothing else than the space to have larger or thicker sensors and the ability to use it as a video camera with very minor modifications.
    These are fun times to be a light stalker in deed.

  • Bernard

    “Expect new Coolpix cameras and probably the Nikon D800 to be revealed”

    I would expect a D400 instead since the D300s has been unavailable for some time now.

    • http://mike.heller.ca/blog Mike

      D700: July 1, 2008
      D300s: July 30, 2009

      • Bernard

        Yes, but the D700 is still available and production of the D300s has been stopped several weeks ago. Don’t forget that the “s” was not a new camera, just an evolution of the D300.

        In addition, I cannot afford a D4 or a D800 !… :)

        • http://mike.heller.ca/blog Mike

          Don’t forget, the D700 wasn’t a new camera. It was just an old sensor stuck in a new body ;)

          • Bernard

            :) :) :)

  • camerafan

    Nikon, any plans to come out with a camera with interchangeable sensor and interchangeable lens? GXR has it, but the lens is tied with the sensor together. If Nikon or any other brands can come out with interchangeable sensor and interchangeable sensor independently, that would be great. I means it’s like I have the option to use micro4/3, aps-c or full frame sensor. I think this is the way to go in future. Why no company is doing this??? If d800 is a interchangeable sensor camera with interchangeble lens, that would be awesome. If any company is reading this, please design and manufacurer one such camera, i think the sales will be good. If they can make it even interchangeable mounts, that would be even more fantastic! I think most people would say I am an idiot, but everything start with a dream in technology and design.

    • John

      Medium Format is already set up that way, but has had interchangeable backs from the time of film too. There would be difficulty in film plane alignment that would be tough to overcome.

    • broxibear

      Hi camerafan,
      I think the interchangable sensor would be fantastic.
      Wouldn’t it be great if you could keep your current body and when a new model came out you could just buy the sensor alone ? You could just slot the new sensor into your existing body in the same easy way as you do your CF or SD card.
      Instead of buying two bodies, one for high iso and one high res, you could just buy two different sensors and switch whenever you wanted.
      So many possibilities could open up if camera manufacturers developed a single standard, a Nikon D5 body with a Canon 6D sensor ?

  • R R

    if you get a 36MB D800.. you better be ready to spend on a powerful computer, I think. (and lots of storage devices) And to me I rather put that extra money (computer and hard drives) in to a D4 ..

    My thoughts.

    • James

      Time to upgrade that Commodore 64 of yours :) Seriously any modern computer can easily handle 36MP files.

      • PeterO

        What? When did they upgrade the Commodore to a 64???

        • shay

          He’s not talking about the Nintendo 64…

          • PeterO

            I was kidding shay. I remember very clearly when a pimply faced teenager was demonstrating the Commodore 32 in our local mall many, many, many years ago. :-) I never was interested in computer games so I don’t know much about Playstations et al. I think I played pong once.

            • Magnus

              I think your memory is somewhat clouded, before the C=64 it was the “VIC20″.

              VIC20
              C=64
              C=128
              Amiga

  • Zoron

    D800….4k movie 30fps….not guessing……i know it…

  • Paul

    If Nikon is releasing another dslr in February, I doubt it will be another full-frame.

    Likely to be a D400 next month, and perhaps a D800 announcement in September?

    • Bernard

      +1

    • Any Anon

      -1

      D800 more overdue than D400.

      • Bernard

        Let’s settle it on a D600 then :) ;) ;)

        • RobertKrasser

          Yes, I belive as well it wil be a D600. It would be absolutely stupid to release a D800 short after thw D4 with more then double mpx for the half Price.
          I am sure there will be a D800 this year but not February. A lot of People want a 16mpx, iso like d3, FF camera for a chep price arround 2000€. This will be a mega seller. I just hope d600 will have the IPTC options like D4

    • Jamy

      There’s no sign of a D400. If a DSLR is released it will be the D800 otherwise you would have had some leaks.. The one that appeared on Nikon Europe was most likely the D800!!..

      D800 is also expected by those still waiting to replace their D700 by.. a D3S :)

      • Bernard

        Only 24 days to go and then we’ll know any way :)

    • James

      The D800 has already been leaked, the D400 has not. Therefore the D800 will be announced very soon. My guess is there will never be a D400 just as there will never be a D4X.

      • http://mike.heller.ca/blog Mike

        There will be a D400 because there is a huge gap between a D7000 and the upcoming D800 both in terms of price and features. Canon, Sony, and others will be filling that gap and Nikon will lose market share. There will be something between those models.

      • A.T.M.

        Yeah James your probably right, Nikon will stop building and improving their camera line after the D800…. please…

  • Landscape Photo

    Nikon already served for the ultra high-iso & video group. Look at D4, D3, D3s, D700 and even D7000 at a stretch. Now it’s the time, they must fill this gap with 36mp D800.

    There IS a need for a reasonably priced & sized high-resolution camera. And there IS a need for a compact quality walkabout zoom to compliment this landscape oriented product. 24-120mm f/4 VR is the nearest available one fitting the definition, yet it will quite bulky along with D800.

    Same logic applies here with the new Nikkors; most are low-light oriented. They must now try the opposite way, and offer a ultra-compact 28-105mm f4.5-5.6 VR. Variable aperture & the 28-105mm optical design is a proven way where quality & compactness meet. Fast aperture is not a priority in landscape photography since most photos are exposed between f/5.6 to f/11.

    • Landscape Photo

      Walkabout lens example: http://i.imgur.com/jehnB.jpg

      It should’t be past this size & weight to be carried on the neck for long hours. That’s a 28-200mm G, a sharp & contrasty lens at all focals if stopped down enough. Lack of VR and strong pincushion distortion are the downsides to name.

      Why carry the load of a f/2.8 zoom in the field if it’s going to be used mostly at around f/8 anyway… Look at the LF lenses, they are pocketable but cover an image circle bigger than a DVD ! It shouldn’t be too difficult to manufacture a decent compact zoom for 35mm image circle.

  • fixemon

    So d800 will be 24 mp?

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/56807042@N06/ wolfdale13

      not sure about it, the rumor said that this camera will equipped with 36 megapixel camera sensor, check this out

  • ken popwell

    I want a d800 and maybe a d4! So bad they will cost a lot…… going for pentax!

  • bekia

    D4s will rule them all

    • Any Anon

      There won’t be any D4s or D4x model, there’s no need.

      • A.T.M.

        I need one…. so your wrong…

  • Olive

    For me i buy a D800 (when it arrived !) and a 24/70 Nikon !

    Come on Nikon i’ve got money for you !!! Hurry up !!

  • http://n.a. Bert Dol

    *is secretly hoping everybody is wrong and the announcement is all about the D400*

  • http://www.truphotos.com gnohz

    This sounds great Admin! It’s a little unbelievable that Nikon chose to make another announcement so soon though :D
    Did this happen in the past?

  • Back to top