< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon D5200 DSLR camera to be announced next

DX is next: the fifth DSLR camera I promised you for 2012 will be the Nikon D5200 that will replace the D5100 in the next few weeks. At  that point I am not sure if there will be any other products announced together with the D5200 - maybe the Nikon WR-T10 wireless remote controller?

The new Nikon D5200 will have slightly different specs than the D3200:

  • It will use the same 24MP DX-format CMOS sensor
  • EXPEED 3 processor (same as in the D3200)
  • ISO range: 100-6,400 (expandable up to 25,600, D3200 could go only up to 12,800)
  • 2,016 pixel RGB metering sensor (same as the D600, the D3200 had a 420 pixel RGB sensor)
  • Continuous shooting speed: 5fps (the D3200 could do only 4 fps)
  • Vari-angle LCD screen (3", 921k dots)
This entry was posted in Nikon D5200. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://www.photoratox.photodeck.com Jari Varpenius

    Yes, it would be nice to have different colour for every day :)

    Well, don’t care about the colour. Long as it’s black ;D

    • timon

      5fps, 24MP DX sensor,
      undoubted, that is easier vibrations and image-blurring as a camera itself, like the d5200.
      If people who wanted a d5200, you ought to select a d5100.

      Mr. Nikon,
      To take back that your Nikon own nose, do not follow Canon tricks, no blind faster fps, no wildly high ISO, no plastic mirror box in a camera and it pricing US $ 2,000.

      • Dud

        learn to speak before you rant

        • timon

          Cher Dud,
          Sache que je m’exprime plutôt bien en français, y que puedo hablar un poco de espanol tambien. Ik kun sprek een of twee woordens van netherlands and my english is not so bad when I take some time to write it properly.

          Not everybody on this little planet had the chance “being a bit sarcastic here” to come to life in an english “or american for instance” speaking country and thus master the language as you do.

          • MJr

            Being born American wouldn’t exactly be my preference tho.

          • James

            Hahahaha @ Dud.

            You just got owned in 4 languages.

          • mikils

            while the comment stank of usa jingoism indeed, it must also be noted that the original post was far less intelligible than the learned and polyglot successive answer, to the point that I’d beg to be illuminated on its meaning.

            please be forgiving with regard to my command of the english language, since I’m a foreigner myself

  • photofoto

    If this is true, It’ll probably mean that Nikons entire DX range will be: “Nikon D3200, D5200 and D7100 “. I’ve suspected that for a while… With the price of the D600 being so low, I’ve started to doubt that they’d introduce a “semi-pro FX-body”, if there is such a thing. I loved my D200 and D300, but I did’nt quite realize how “not pro” they were untill i started using a D700, D3 and now the D800. I think Nikon are setting a clearer line between whats pro and not. And it makes sence to have three DX bodys, and three FX-bodys. With a slight gap between them. Just look at what the price for the D600 is now, and look at what the price for the D7000 was when it was new….

    • RC

      What did you find non-pro about the D200/D300? That would leave a huge price gap between the highest DX and lowest FX.

      • http://thecoog.wordpress.com Arie

        Once you look at the huge FX viewfinder, there is no going back.
        I think DX is toast because the D5000 had the D90/D300’s sensor. D5100 had D7000’s sensor (no more D400), and D5200 is standalone. I’d find it hard to believe that they would have another DX sensor hidden away for a D400.

        • http://flickr.com/photos/realname/ André

          The D300 was about speed and its focus points cover a larger area of the frame. There is a market for this.
          I’m coming from a D300 and am using a D800 now. The size of the finder doesn’t impressed me much…maybe it depends on the age of the user?

          • Aldo

            size of the viewfinder helps a ton btw… especially when you are shooting people.

            • Ronan

              Shot plenty of sports with my D300 (when i had it), never had any issues with the VF.

          • Tooma

            Try using a D3x, D4, or D3X and tell me if you notice a difference. Especially for any MF work.

            • RC

              I just got a D600, and I notice no significant difference between its viewfinder and the one in the D300.

          • Axel

            Arie ++

            Actually, going from a D300 to a D3S didn’t make me going nuts … Everything was better : better AF, better high-ISO, better viewfinder and so on … But I mean I wasn’t sent down my chair … Until a few weeks ago, when I picked up my D300 again … Ho man this viewfinder is narrow … But why is this taking so long before acquiring focus ? Man these 6400 ISO pictures look like crap …

            For the viewfinder, as for the rest, upgrading is not THAT impressive … Until you look back …

            • Victor Hassleblood

              @Axel,

              “For the viewfinder, as for the rest, upgrading is not THAT impressive … Until you look back …”

              Well said ! ! !
              I sold my D300 without much hesitation, as soon as I had received my D800E. Whereas my D7000 stayed as second unit. I still would choose a D7000 over a D300 any day because IQ and the VF matters to me. The VF of the D300 was crap, not just compared to FX but also and even compared to the superior VF of the cheap D7000.

              Nonetheless I recently have discovered the lust for a D400. I suppose (if there will ever be one), that a D400 will come with a similar or identical layout to D800. That will stop confusion and search for vital functions.

              The biggest plus (at least for my style of work) for D300 was how far focus points stretch into the corners. I really liked it. No FX can compete with that.

          • http://www.intersiteimaging.com BrettA

            Re: “I’m coming from a D300 and am using a D800 now. The size of the finder doesn’t impressed me much…”

            Did you miss: “there is no going back”? Try being with only FX viewfinders for a year or two and then go back to DX – just a thought. Maybe it depends on the age of the user to understand the difference between these ;-)?

            • Patrick

              Read the whole post before commenting, please.

            • http://www.intersiteimaging.com BrettA

              BTDT, thx :-).

          • Patrik

            With the D800 (and DK17M) you can finally focus with the viewfinder. Even with the D700 it was tough, and the D300 next to impossible. I still prefer my FM2 though! They have come a way, but still have not reached the level of the old pro film cameras. I think we are now at the level of an F90x. Just look at it this way, there is room to improve!

            • http://www.intersiteimaging.com BrettA

              Never comment at all, please.

            • Pablo Ricasso

              Unlike bretta, some people understand that even the best viewfinder is barely good enough. My favorite is the F2, by a longshot.

        • iamlucky13

          Why do people continue to dismiss high end cameras based on sensor commonality?

          You do realize that just over 10 years ago, every camera had the exact SAME sensors, even cameras of different brands? But there was basically every price point available that we see today, and an even larger number of brands.

          DX isn’t leaving anytime soon. I don’t even expect Nikon to abandon the D300 heritage, because even if they price the D300 at exactly the same price as the D600, it will still be less expensive once you start pricing lenses, but it will be more ruggedly built and almost certainly have a higher framerate.

          • Aldo

            who needs full frame… I shoot with a toaster and produce great photos!

            • nawab

              who thought of the CX sensor?

          • Victor Hassleblood

            “Why do people continue to dismiss high end cameras based on sensor commonality?”

            Very good question. Almost a riddle. Back in the days of 35mm film nobody would have dismissed what SLR ever for taking the same film as another (cheaper) SLR …

            I would probably buy a D400 with the D3200/D5200’s sensor if there was one.

            • http://micahmedia.com Micah

              +1

              …I’d take any of the current DX sensors with CAM3500. In fact, if a D300 successor is not out by December, I may just get a D300 again.

        • Aaron Shepard

          Once I looked at the FX viewfinder on the D600, I went screaming back to DX. The things I wanted to shoot were off in the distance and looked tiny. My D7000 brings them much closer.

          • Aldo

            LOL God I hope you are kidding…

          • James

            Time to change that fisheye lens. Try using a different focal length.

            • AlphaOne

              If you think 600mm in FX is enough, then you don’t understand what other people need. You don’t have a right to be sarcastic.

              Yes, time to go to bed with your FX, and have fun with it.

            • http://www.intersiteimaging.com BrettA

              I don’t have anything DX-ish at all so I’m not trying to be snarky, but using your 600mm in FX example, don’t you just set the crop to shoot DX (or whatever the terminology is to ‘fake DX’) and get the same thing?

            • http://www.wildlifethailand.com Paul W

              @Brett,

              for long lens users who are shooting small (i.e. birds) or macro field shooters that 1.5 crop makes all the difference. Its part of the file that is filled with the subject rather than pixels to be trashed.

              You are correct, we can do it with what we have now but we want improvements just as the FX users are getting. 24 mp and a decent body would just make our lives so much easier and produce better images we believe.

        • Tim

          huge FX viewfinder? Do you own one? FX is 70% magnification
          It’s only a little bigger than the D300S 100% DX.

          You notice it but it hardly makes a big leap.

        • Mike

          “Once you look at the huge FX viewfinder, there is no going back.”

          What are you talking about? D600 has 0.7x magnification, D7000 0.94x which is equivalent to 0.63x on FX. That’s almost the same.

          I’ve tried holding a D600 on one eye and a D7000 on the other eye, and the difference in viewfinder size is ridiculously small.

        • tnt

          what the hell large fx viewfinder has anything to do with a d300-equivalent replacement??? dude the speed (fps) of the d800 is way too slow comparign to the d300!!!

      • Josh

        Not really. The D5200 will probably go for around a $1000 and the D7000/D300 replacement will probably be around $1500. That will only be around a $500-$600 price gap between it and the D600. You forget that the D300 used to be going for $1300-$1500 when the lowest price FX camera was going for $2300-$2500. If anything the price gap between the highest DX and lowest FX is getting smaller.

        • PHB

          +1

          I think they will kill the D7000 slowly. Just rename the successor D400, make it using the D600 combi plastic/magnesium body. Like the D600, give the D400 all the consumer type functions plus all the professional functions.

          If I was price sensitive I would go for a D400 as an upgrade on my D300. But I am not so I am more likely to go for a D800. But at this point I am so swamped with work I don’t have time to play with a new camera.

          • treehaus

            my thoughts exactly.. and I did get the d800, not for the 36mp but for the control I am used to and it was the only fx.

            But now that I have 36 mp…WOW the versatilely of that thing is amazing.

      • Rich

        I would be a little surprised to see a pro-sumer DX body ever again. Seems Nikon has drawn the line at FF vs DX now.

        • enesunkie

          The line is still a little fuzzy with the D600 in the ranks of the “pro” FX bodies.

    • KnightPhoto

      I am surprised to see the 2,016 RGB metering sensor on a D5200 as that was one of the distinguishing points between D5100 and D7000.

      Fewer distinguishing features means fewer DX models?

      The DX model line up is in an odd situation with few distinguishing features. Whereas the 3 FX models are hugely differentiated. Odd situation.

    • AlphaOne

      Wildlife shooters are not pro?
      There’s a need for a Pro DX body.

      I think Nikon will stay on course, with 4 DX bodies. But they are doing it right this time, as far as release schedules. They messed it right before by releasing top of the line first, then releasing lower spec’d camera, albeit better image quality.

      So it’ll be D3200, D5200, D7100, and eventually the long awaited (gulp) D400. Priced like $300 apart, (body only) US$600, US$900, US$1200, then US$1500. As Thom said, they need to upsell customers to the next higher level body. If priced too far, it would be hard to convince them to upgrade to the more expensive body.

      Nikon will not abandon DX, it’s their bread and butter. They’re selling more of these than FX. Well, eventually FX will take over no doubt about that, and I’m sure they hope about that.

      • http://www.intersiteimaging.com BrettA

        “Nikon will not abandon DX”
        v.
        “Well, eventually FX will take over no doubt about that”

        What’s “take over” mean, please?

        • AlphaOne

          In terms of sales volume.

          • Sahaja

            Sales volume? That will take a long time, unless most DX purchasers move to mirrorless.

            Sensor yields still decline dramatically as sensor size increases – until they solve that problem, there will always be a substantial price difference between DX and FX.

            Not that many people want to spend more than $1,500
            on a camera body plus more costly FX lenses.

            When most photographs are viewed on screen, how many people want or need more than what a 24mp DX sensor and a decent lens can give them?

    • Tooma

      There will be a D400! Trust me, it will be 24mp, shoot at 8-9fps, have better build quality and a better Vf than the D7000. 2 card slots, a bigger buffer, same Af as the D800. There are so many DX user that loved the D300/300s, there is no way they won’t release a high end DX cam for those loyal DX users. A lot of ppl want a crop’d sensor and a FF sensor.

      • PHB

        I agree, main reason I am thinking of an FX is that I already have a DX that works just fine. I want an FX so I can get some really good wide angle lenses. DX will always be so-so at the wide end.

        I think the DX-hater crowd are folk who still haven’t moved from film.

        • umesh

          And snobs who shoot to showoff their gear .

      • no sugar in my coffe

        Nikon needs a new DX flagship. Something that has the same build quality and AF performance as the D800. The D7000 was never good enough.

    • rubbishrain

      what’ nonsense about having 4 DXes?

      • enesunkie

        There has been 4 DX bodies for a while, each with clear price points and features. How would continuing that be nonsense?

  • stormwatch

    The only real changes which D5100 needs are the Manual video controls with 50/60i in 1080 and slightly better ISO noise performance at ISO3200. That is completely enough for this range.

  • Pablo Ricasso

    I can’t believe you all complaining about too many megapixels. I’d guess that if you downsampled them all to the same size you would find the high ISO fairly comparable or even slightly better with the D3200 than it is with the 16 megapixels. The new camera might also be able to get a bit more out of the sensor.
    And quit being scared that somebody forgot to make a new DX with a focus motor. They just want to get that one really good. In the meantime there is that 16 megapixel sensor so many of you are raving about…

    • Young Boy

      Ah, dear Simplicito! Tell me how many people buying 24 mp entry level will buy lenses matching that performance, and how many will simply stick to plastic kit lens which was ideal when we lived in 10 mp era! My friend, there is difference in taking bad low-light RAW image and down-sample it (for example in camera as jpg), and take relatively superior low-light RAW image without need of post-processing or camera down-sampling. And then – do you think that these “facebook people” really need more all that megapixels or better low-light for their evening party shots?

      • Pablo Ricasso

        Who cares what facebook people need? And now that you mention it, they need the latest thing. The 3200 isn’t expensive enough and the 5100 is SO yesterday! And sooner or later you will need to down sample whatever you take, unless you only make wall sized prints.
        Let Nikon squeeze a little more out of this new sensor. At some point they will played around with it enough to use it in a metal body.

        • RC

          Who cares what Facebook people need? Well, they’re the ones that shoot the most pictures! Duh! That’s where the money’s at!

      • Joel

        More megapixels sell more bodies at the low end. Plain and simple.

        • http://www.intersiteimaging.com BrettA

          Yeah, too bad the ones with the most megapixels – you know, the ones at the high end like D3x and the D800s – sell like sh!t. Yep, only at the low end ;-). Plain and simple.

      • umesh

        The lenses you are talking about give the best but common lenses do work and give decent results if you do not pixel peep. Besides these facebook people do not use dslrs because they want to be good PGs. They shoot jpegs preferably at low sizes so they would not have to change the cards . So mp size would not be an issue. The only one left hanging in all this is serious amateur.

        • RC

          I’m a “Facebook shooter,” and I have nice stuff. You people that don’t get it need to open up your minds. You can clearly see a difference, even on Facebook!

  • Twaddler Belafonte

    When Nikon offers non-black colors, why are they always super-ugly metallic-like crap? So lame.

  • http://newsphotoseurope.com Lord Beau

    The thing is, the price of the D400 would be nearly that of the D800 or D600. The D800 has come down from £2,599 to under £2000 and the £600 is £1500 now, having already gone down by a quarter. Yes, I’d much rather have a D400 than a D600 just as I much prefer the D300s to the D7000 but I don’t think it’s going to happen. It will have to be the D800 (but it neeeds to come down more!).

    • learning

      The “D400″ will not be called that but will exist. All metal body, everything except the sensor inherited from the D4. The relationship will be a bit like that of a D300 to that of a D3. It will sell well above the price of a D600. The D600 is an entry level camera with an FX sensor.

  • learning

    I am not surprised that the D5100 is next since the D3200 has eclipsed the D5000 amongst the buyers of the lower models in the D lineup. I would expect that the D5000 replacement to also be a development of the D7000 to some extent since the D3200 was such a large increment in functionality. Nikon only needs 3 DX models thanks to the D3200 performance being so high. The upgrade path from the D7000 is going to be either a downmarket FX model (the D600) or the D300/D300s replacement (D8000?/D9000?) .

  • Daniel

    Please please please let it have a Pentaprism… true D90 successor if it does. D7000 offers 14-bit lossless, the D5100 only 14-bit compressed… having that would be a nice addition too to try and maximise DR.

  • NoName

    …I hope that A/D convertor will be 14-bit (not 12-bit like D3200)! This is only important!

    • gsum

      Why? Even FF sensors with their larger pixel sites don’t capture 14 bits of DR. The D700 captures about 10 to 11 bits at its optimum sensitivity of ISO 200. The D800 might be slightly better but I haven’t done the analysis as yet. This is easy to check if you use a spreadsheet to statistically analyse image data that has been extracted from a 16 bit tiff. The 14 bit processing that many cameras offer is nothing more than a marketing ploy.

      • Daniel

        Fair enough, but I’m pretty certain I can see the improvement vs 12-bit… seems to have more shadow detail for instance. Placebo?

      • MB

        D700 sensor actually captures a bit over 12 (12.2), D800 14.3 and small DX D3200 13.2 so yes there is a need for more bits in a RAW NEF file to accommodate this.
        I of course bow before you and your ultimate Excel skills but how exactly do you easily load and statistically analyze image data in a spreadsheet?

        • Rob

          You’re getting EVs confused with bits. You could capture 14.3 EVs in 8 bit RAW files if you wanted. The number of bits is a limit on the number of individual values you can have, NOT the range of those values. Higher bit count means just means the difference between values is smaller (greater precision).

          There’s a good quote here (www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=19927): “Think of dynamic range as a staircase of a fixed height and bit depth as the number of steps in that staircase.” With 14 bit RAW, you have 4 times the number of “steps” as with 12 bit RAW, yet the top and bottom steps are in the same place for each.

          • umesh

            Perfect. Nice analogy.

          • MB

            You could get indefinite EV range with just a single bit if you declare 1 to represent zillion EV but that is not the point because you will end up with only two levels on dynamic range.
            The point is that 1 bit is exactly the information quantum to you need to represent 1EV of image data.

            • Rob

              No it’s not. D800: 14bit. D800 dynamic range: 14.4EV

              14 < 14.4

              You can use 64 bits to cover 1EV, or 8 bits to cover 24EV. 1 bit per EV works out pretty well for the DR of modern DSLRs, but it doesn't mean they all use that.

              I'll also point out your misuse of the word "indefinite," and the fact that zillion is not a number. But I'll assume English is not your first language based on your wording of "information quantum."

            • MB

              You are right, English is not my first language (or second for that matter) and I should have probably used the word infinite.
              I also happen to know that zillion is not a number and I used it just to try to illustrate that you could use any number to represent some light level if you decide to.
              To represent twice as much of something and be accurate about it you have to multiply that something by 2 and that is a single bit. Numbers do not capture anything they represent something that was captured by some device (photo diodes on imaging sensor in this case).
              You could use representation of real data that uses fewer levels then the source but you actually compress it by doing so and you also distort the resulting representation.
              You could also expand the source RAW data in conversion and get higher dynamic, JPEG uses 8 bits but dynamic range of a JPEG image is much higher with some lose of information and quality.
              So my point you could use a single bit to represent any EV (0=0EV and 1=24EV for example if you don’t like zillion and there you have it you have 24EV dynamic range represented by a singe bit) but to be able to accurately represent all of intermediate values of source data you will have to use more bits.

  • burgerman

    >>> What did you find non-pro about the D200/D300?

    Small screen, noise, dynamic range, focus speed on 51 point, lack of that ff depth of field look, small viewfinder, etc. All the stuff you get with DX. Once you (go back) to 35mm real sized film or ff as its now called 35mm photography is back to normal. Gone is that point and shoot look.

    Theres never an advantage to fitting smaller “film” unless the body is proportionally smaller. And its not…

  • Faun

    And what about video mode? The Nikon D5200 can be ultimate video recording machine whit that vari-angle LCD screen. We need better compresion codec than 3200 and, of course, to change aperture in Live View mode!

  • timon

    5fps, 24MP DX sensor,
    undoubted, that is easier vibrations and image-blurring as a camera itself, like the d5200.
    If people who wanted a d5200, you ought to select a d5100.

    Mr. Nikon,
    To take back that your Nikon own nose, do not follow Canon tricks, no blind faster fps, no wildly high ISO, no plastic mirror box in a camera and it pricing US $ 2,000.

    • Big J

      Stop posting the same thing :P (bustin’ your chops)

    • Tern

      go back to sony rumors you inarticulate double troll

    • John Richardson

      Dude, your Google translate skills suck.

  • Big J

    Changing the subject a bit. I think the D5200 will be a nice upgrade to the D5K line. Maybe it’ll have great video capabilities and even a TOUCHSCREEN feature that is needed for videographers. Or maybe it will be saved for the D7000 successor to be a jack of all trades of sorts with great video for the serious prosumer crowd and the D400 a high-fps, robustly weather-sealed body mini-D4. In the end I think the D400 will be better suited AFTER TAX SEASON where it helps sell the most and people most likely save up for it/them. 2012 has been a great year for Nikon and 2013 I doubt will be any less.

    • fifi

      And why is touchscreen needed for videographers?????

      • Big J

        To tweak audio levels for example on the fly when looking at the LiveView like on the Canon models.

        • fifi

          touchscreen is BS! if you need serious audio you need sound guy and buy youself a video camera….

  • Aldo

    fantasy football, fantasy nikon plus beer all you need.

  • http://heng.lu heng

    I wish they would make the WU-1b for the D5100 !

  • getoutandshoot

    D5200: Yawn. I’ll keep waiting for a true D300 upgrade. Quite a few of us bird photographers feel the same way. We don’t need or want full frame. I want maximum fps, high ISO performance and noise control in a professional metal/weather-sealed DX body that matches well with heavy professional telephoto lenses. Someday Nikon will finally release the body I’m waiting for. Its fine with me if they go small/mirrorless as long as they keep it serious, performance-wise.

    • Sahaja

      The Pentax KII looks like a nice weather sealed body with a modern sensor – and they say they have fixed the AF. That, and their 300mm or 500mm lens, might be a decent option for birders if the D400 doesn’t materialize.

  • treehaus

    The only camera missing is the dx24mp sensor in the d600 fx chassis, ala d300-d700. That will be the highest spec dx will get. The d800 has more in common handling and body wise with the d700-d300 whereas the d600 shares a similar architecture with the d7000, therefore the d7100 will be the top dx in the line up. There will be no “pro” dx i.e dx in a d800 body, they may call it a d400 but it will be in the d600 chassis. which is fine because the body of the d600 is more than up to the job required by those who have predominantly dx lenses.

    • AlphaOne

      If you’re out in the wild, where most D400 hopefuls are, then it needs to handle the elements. Rugged body, and weather-sealed.

      • treehaus

        Agreed I used a d300 for years and it was.. still is superb..I now use a d800 and a friend went to the d4 instead. He gets the bird in flight more reliably and I get the fine details in feathers and also can crop a bit more aggressively when I need to.
        I dont mean to suggest that a d300 successor is not needed, I just think it will be in the d600 body. Also we found that the the shift to FX made very little difference in terms of being close to subject when we looked the results. In fact as the D800 has such a high resolution over the whole frame, when I am trying for BIF i get way more keepers, no more wing tips and tail cut off. its amazingly good at wildlife..

        • AlphaOne

          But not everyone would like to spend 3000+ on a body that will get obsolete in a few years. The extra savings are better of putting it in the 400 2.8 fund. :)
          I just like taking BIF shots in 8 fps, as you can choose the best wing position.
          No matter how careful you are, the camera once in a while takes a beating. I’m not sure the D7000 can handle the elements well. Maybe it can, but it won’t last as long as the D300s-type bodies.
          People will say just put the D800 in crop DX mode. I think that’s a waste of an excellent camera for those who mainly needs it for wildlife.

  • Remedy

    I AM FACEPALM. :/

    • Roberto

      Me too!

    • boing wronkwell

      HAHAHAHA … Nice…

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

    I think a D7000 upgrade would be more interesting, but what do I know?

  • Foolishcfo

    Really? A D5200? That’s it? Nikon doesn’t have a clue. Their tagline should be “I am clueless when it comes to DX”.

    • RC

      They are here to make money, and they’ve invested where the money is.

  • Doug B

    Nikon, you’re sickening me !!!

    Stop abandoning Pro DX shooters or I’m going to have to change to Canon.

    Sick of waiting for our camera body that is LONG overdue.

    • treehaus

      Go ahead and jump.. see if anyone cares, whiners like you deserve a Canon…

      Get with the programme and go FX and stop flogging a dead horse. DX is will never again be a “pro” choice. We have evolved!

      • Remedy

        Really? You have evolved? By the utter retardness of your comment I would say You are still on an ape level.

        I am not gonna fking pay 5k for D4 and D600 is a joke compared to D300-like body. You also have absolutely no clue what pro is and means, that’s why you make retarded comments thinking FX=pro. Only a true idiot would come up with something like that. For instance I love how pro was AF on Canon 5D MkII, my old D70s was more reliable. I love how pro was RAW processing in 5D… oh wait, there was none. I love how pro is 5fps of D800. Get a brain you brainless imbecile.

        • treehaus

          Well you certainly have have emotional stability of one that is less evolved, me thinks not well toilet trained in that area.

          Nikon knows it, Canon knows even Sony knows, the future of PRO or what ever you want to call it, is not going to be dx so why invest thousand making a camera for a very small market of people who are too tight to move on. I am sorry that you are unable to get decent shots from your d300, I could pretty easily from mine and others might give you some tips if you are a bit nicer to them than you are to me.

          It is true that fx does not = pro, its just that they wont make any more of them. The new pro range will be FX .

          Now dry your eyes, wipe your bum and take of your training wheels

          • Foolishcfo

            Its amazing how enlightened you are.Why is it rumored that Nikon is coming out with more DX lenses if cropped sensors are dead?

            • RC

              Most pros do not shoot DX. If they do, they have plans to upgrade to FX when they can afford it.

          • Rob

            Kind of amusing that the idiot calling other people immature is the one acting 12 (Hint: it’s you).

      • Foolishcfo

        Take a chill pill. I have two D800’s and still want a successor to the D300S to shoot macro. Just because you don’t want one doesn’t mean there aren’t photogs who could use one. Maybe you’re the whiner?

        • treehouse

          and you will get it but, in a d600 body

          • Craig

            No he won’t. If you think the top of the line DX camera will be in a D600 body you haven’t been paying attention.

            Nikon’s executive in his dpreview interview clearly stated that the D600 is ‘enthusiast’ whereas the D300 is ‘semi-pro’. He didn’t even have to be pressed on it – raised the difference himself. Clearly drawing a comparison and putting the D300 upgrade in a separate category.

            But to be honest, FX vs DX really shouldn’t be something to be insulting each other over – it’s 2 different types of camera, not a c**k measuring contest.

    • luxlynx

      Maybe you should consider changing to Pentax if you want to change. As I understand some people here, what they are screaming for is a Pentax K-5II with the name Nikon on it…

      • FF

        +1

  • Vin

    This is the expected evolution and delivery schedule. I would also expect the D7000 replacement to have a slightly different feel. It seems the D7000 was fairly successful and polished for what it is.

  • Neillthevet

    Didn’t someone comment on seeing a tilt screen body with a top LCD a couple of weeks back at a Muse gig? Think this is it or the 7100?
    Can Admin confirm the AF package? My D5000 is getting creaky and I’d like more than one cross-type point. Greatly looking forward to doubling pixel counts as I almost always print at A4 and the resolution’s hanging on by its fingernails at A3.

  • Impatient user

    Is it just me or are the users of this website (myself included) never happy? I find myself refreshing this websites every day in hope of some new Nikon release and yet every time a new product is announced I immediately feel disappointed that they updated the wrong product, the price is to high or the specs are just not what I was hoping for.

    Oh well, D5200? What a disappointment! I was hoping for everything but that when a new DX body was rumored. Still looking forward to being disappointed by the new DX lenses though…

    • Rob

      The D800 was pretty exciting.

    • dx

      my thoughts exactly. i am so bored with nikon.

  • No Kidding?

    “The new Nikon D5200 will have slightly different specs than the D3200:”

    Wow!

    Really?

    You mean they’ll be different cameras?

    • Bavid Daily

      “Slightly Different” … A different shade of metallic pink?

  • Ryan

    I will continue being happy shooting with my D7k

    • BartyL

      At least you’re happy. Congratulations on not adding to the storm of whining above.

    • Mike

      I’m also incredibly happy with my D7000.

      I’m completely in love with my 17-55 f/2.8 and really looking forward to the 70-200 f/4.

      Can’t be bothered with FX at its current price, can’t be bothered with a more pro body than a D7000 because it is the perfect size to me and I don’t want a bigger camera. The viewfinder looks great to me when I compare it to a D600.

      I’m just hoping for a D7100 with a nice increase in sensor performance. Given how far sensor technology has come, they could really surprise us..

  • Joel

    Well I think it’s time that I ate my hat.. I certainly wasnt expecting another D5xxx

  • http://www.inepec.com Léon Avenue

    I’m thinking, if NIKON continuous to using SONY produced sensors, the image will be more and more similar to CANON styles. I can see some photos in D7000.
    In fact, I’m expecting another DX camera: D7100 – D5200 will has a lower focusing system, plastic body, low ISO; and D400 will has a tiny price difference to D600.

  • Nokin

    This camera is going to kick Canon 6D in the balls and it’s going to hurt.

  • Myra Price

    I am a Nikon loyalist (hence why I am on this website)
    I use a D300 (Still going Strong)

    This announcement disappoints, I am not in the market for another DX in particular, nor do the options of the FX entice me. (d600=missing features, d800=too many mp d4= saving for the 3 lens I need to go full frame)

    But these lower end DX models are starting to piss me off, these models are for people who just want a new camera. They really are not making the leaps and bounds I expected at this point in the game.

    Give me a d400 (focused on photography)
    18 mega pixels
    9 fps (without grip)
    51 points
    rugged body
    250/sec flash sync
    pc cable port

    or will this canabilize your D4/FX sales and if this is so then that should tell users a lot about Nikons marketing right now. Merry Xmas heres a d5200

    • desmo

      myra ,
      the sensor for what you want does not yet exist,
      from what you say you wouldn’t be happy with d3200 sensor in D300 body.

      I agree with you’re assessment of what D400 sensor should be, but may need tech improvement to get that performance squeezed int DX chip.

      P.S,
      Merry Xmas
      a lot of new Nikonians
      (what D5200 represents)

      • Myra Price

        Yes new nikonians, but not new Photographers. I see these DX models as Dad’s functional video camcorder before I see them as a pure-bred camera.

        This same new consumer is not going to go out and by an arsenal of glass to go with this purchase either.

        My D400 specs are a little ahead of the time, but that’s what we should be expecting something advance vs a current technology stripped of features that are scattered across various models.

    • Fred

      Myra,
      I think your D400 spec is what you will see – but probably called the D9000.
      Lower MP with better ISO noise and faster FPS in a rugged body.
      D3XXX to D7XXX will be itterations on the 24 MP sensor.
      Highly unlikely that Nikon will drop the D300 line, and DX in general, for the next 5 years or so.
      Eventually the DX line will be mirrorless – but I think Nikon will still keep a ‘pro’ DX SLR on the range for a longer time.

      • D400, I hope

        This isn’t directed specifically at you Fred but, what difference does the name make? Why D9000 and not D400? Why not Bill? Or George? Anything but Sue!

      • burgerman

        >>> Lower MP with better ISO noise

        LESS PIXELS does NOT mean less noise or better high ISO! When will this myth die?

        Although on DX once you move beyond about 16 mp then the image quality does not improve unless using extrordinary lenses and perfect technique/lighting/correct optimum ISO.

        So you may as well use the rest of the sensor and get a d800. Or a “faster” d800 in the future. So DX pro is still pointless. A D400 may as well be a FF camera with a d800 sensor…

        • kuay

          D3s(12 mp) has better high ISO than D4(16 mp).
          D4 has better high ISO than D600 ( 24 mp).
          An ofcourse D600 has better high ISO than D800(36 mp).

          isn’t this obvious enough?

      • Myra Price

        Hopefully my d400 spec (aside from the fps in my forecast, but with a grip should be able to do 9fps)

        By the time DSLR goes to mirror less I will be full frame (far from that disaster)

        I am just a bitter woman because I am being forced to a D800 by nikon’s marketing strategy.

    • Rob

      9 FPS without a grip is unlikely. There is a voltage limitation on the FPS. This is why you not only need the grip, but a higher voltage battery to increase the FPS on the D700/D300.

      It’s possible they’ve increased efficiency enough to make it happen with less voltage, but I doubt it.

      • VJ

        Is that still the case? Back in the old days, yes, as the higher voltage was needed to speed up the film advance motor. But does there still need to be a higher voltage in digital cameras?
        What is the difference between recording 1080p@60 fps (equals roughly 2 MP image, 60 times per second) and recording a 10 MP image, 12 times per second)? It is the same data rate even, just different processing.

        • Rob

          We’re talking still images. The difference is the sustained movement of a physical shutter + mirror. Obviously video is unaffected by these limitations since the shutter and mirror do not move.

          • VJ

            Thanks!
            I wouldn’t have expected the shutter and mirror to require a higher voltage, but yes, might well be. :-)

      • Myra Price

        Thanks Rob, you did set me straight on the voltage.

        So I will reword (9fps with grip)
        My d300 goes 8fps with grip.

        When nikon does make a d400 or d300 replacement if the mb-d10 isn’t compatiable and they introduce a different model that model should achieve a slightly higher fps

  • Steve K.

    Well….I will choose a top mirrorless camera over an entry-level DX body any day.
    We don’t want another amatuer DX body. Now we need pro one with superb noise performance like D3S, fps like D4, superb focus and tellar details like D800.

    • burgerman

      >>> superb noise performance like D3S

      So you need a full frame sensor then.

      • RC

        +1

        You can only get significatly better performance by capturing more light.

  • Andrew

    Well seeing these specs shows promise for the upgrade of the d7000/d400 (be they combined or other wise)
    A d5xxx series camera with 5fps, to me, means they’re gonna put a huge boost on the fps in the d7xxx/d400 series(again, combined or otherwise in upgrade) I’m excited to see where this leads. Maybe 8 fps+ to compete with the radical success the canon 7d has had for all these years. In the ski photography world, fps is everything. I’ve had friends jump ship to canon because the 7d was shooting 8 without a bat pack when the d7000 shot 6 and d300s shot 8 w/ a battery pack. I hope to see something with 8-9 fps and 16 megapixel and d3 level noise. (Notice I said d3, not d3s. That’s asking too much)

    • Myra Price

      Agreed,

      I shoot skateboarding so fps is huge, I would like a boost in resolution (from my d300)

      16-18 mega pixels, 8-9fps, I do not care about video features.

  • johnny stanfet

    what a bad choice MP over quality. Nikon does trap newbie with high MP for more quality, why on earth we need to speculate the mega MP for more quality but really2 sucks in ISO range. do we often shoot just by using moonlight? personally if i were the CEO of Nikon, push the R&D to study about microlens and light gathering as well as Signal to Noise ratio to improve and solve noise problem in high ISO, spend the money more to R&D rather than sport same sensor and change the algorithm.

    • burgerman

      More pixels does NOT equal more high iso noise… D800e is at least as good as D4 here, tested to death on actual large prints.

      And as shown by dxomark…

      When will this daft myth die. SENSOR AREA is all that matters everything else remaining equal. So DX with about HALF the area will always be worse, and be more critical of lens quality, (resolution) and technique at the same MP level. Since pixel pitch is reduced.

      • AlphaOne

        “So DX with about HALF the area will always be worse, and be more critical of lens quality, (resolution) and technique at the same MP level. Since pixel pitch is reduced.”

        By your logic, the D300s with a larger pixel size than the D800 takes better images?
        Ok, let’s compare apples to apples: D600 better than D800?

  • Bernard

    I also own a D300 which is a beauty, and I admit that a D400 would be nice, but people need to realize that after the disasters Nikon (And many others) had to suffer, they need to build up the financial strength they had before these, and selling to the public at large is the only way. It’s too bad that the DX format had to come last, but you can trust Nikon to give us some good surprises in the not-too-distant future :)

    • Myra Price

      Yes, but these big corporations should have disaster insurance for one. Second you can make quality products to get back on your feet. Thirdly the marketing and strategy is very pro shareholders/anti loyal consumer.

      Examples D600= missing a pc port and missing a flash-sync stop 1/200 instead of 1/250. Lack of DX specific glass.

      I do not like when consumers make excuses for corporations. Hold them accountable!

      • RC

        Virtually all photographers have no need for the “missing” items on the D600.

  • http://www.d5200.org jbayston

    Surely this is good news for Dxers. The D3200 has been a massive improvement on the D3100 and I know a few people who have been tempted by it, but held off in the hope that the D5200 would be even better. DX may not be the future in the long term, but it is where the money is at the moment. Nikon need to dominate the DX entry-level market and they can do that with an exciting D3xxx, D5xxx and D7xxx range. That gives the cheap and cheerful option through to the almost Pro. And we can’t ignore consumer interest in video anymore…..

  • Troll Prozac

    See you guys. I’m switching to Canon.

    Love Nikon, just moving more and more into video and Canon have the C100 coming soon. D800’s a great camera, but a 1Dx will have to do (along with a C100 later… and maybe a 5Diii as backup). :D

    Brand wars SUCK. Both are good and only Sony sucks. :P

    • Michael

      What does this have to do with a D5200?

      • Andrew

        1+

      • Troll Prozac

        Thanks for your kind words. I’ll miss you the most.

        The d5100 sucks and Nikon sucks, I’m moving to Canon now.

        That make you feel better about my post? Sheesh.

  • Rock Me Amadeus

    Well, here’s one super happy camper totally excited with the D5200 announcement.

    Why I prefer the D5200 over any other DX camera is mainly because of the perfectly sized body (D3200 too small & D7000 too big) and the swivel screen perfect for videos.
    So if they manage to up the picture quality of the D5100 (which was already superb) add a better (faster) autofocus system and full manual for video l’m aboard my friends :)

    Just so I have something to complain about they probably didn’t weather seal the body. Well lucky me I don’t live in the desert or the amazon.

    And regarding FX….eehhh….no. A cheap body doesn’t mean FX is all of a sudden affordable. It’s the FX lenses that will empty your pockets – do the math people.

    • burgerman

      If its a d800 type sensor your DX lenses will give you 16mp images… So you do the maths.

      It makes no sense NOT to buy cheap FX if it has the pixels because its equally good for DX and later FX when you realise how much better it is. It simply gives CHOICE!

      • Myra Price

        Why would you buy the highest mega pixel nikon, to use cheap DX glass on a cropped FF?

        I guess in between saving for a high end FF/FX glass. But I would make sure that when I was going to full frame especially high mega pixel d800 I would be purchasing high end glass at the same time to get the most of my purchase.

        I see his point and I see your point, his is just better.

        • Pablo Ricasso

          There’s plenty of very inexpensive glass that works about as good as anything out there. There’s a whole array of 50 primes. There is the old and new version of the 85 f1.8. There is the old 35-70 f2.8. There is the 70-210 f4 and many tweaks of the 80-200 f2.8 And now there is the 70-200 f4, which is probably as good as you can get. Put any of those on a 36 megapixel camera and then talk about your DX.

  • http://www.wildlifethailand.com Paul W

    I know a few FX shooters don’t get why some of us DX shooters are so adamant about another DX that is up to some abuse. I wrote some spurious thoughts on trying to convert to the D800 from a D7000 for my particular field of photography here… Shakespear it is not… but its shows why one small area of photography would benefit from an advanced DX camera

    http://www.wildlifethailand.com/blog/articles-2/18-general-photography/201-nikon-d800e-an-experiment

    • Plug

      The blog makes interesting reading. You reinforce my point that it is horses for courses. I own both a D300s and a D800 with a variety of lenses. Both cameras have their strong points but which is better depends, as you cleary demonstrate, on circumstance. The D300s is long in the tooth and I would like an upgrade. That’s all.
      Your pics are fantastic, by the way.

      • Myra Price

        1+

        His blog is pretty cool.

  • Toonie

    Conspiracy: what if the d400 is going to be that $1,500 fullframe camera ppl been talking about, not the D600.

    • AlphaOne

      It’s kind of hard to imagine a lesser body (less/crippled features) than the D600, it’s so entry-level.
      But if ever it comes out, I’ll try it just for kicks, and maybe replace my D700.

  • LesM

    What a shame! I am a 40+ year Nikon user, and I am now seriously rethinking and I believe I am about to change.

    I have had Nikon F’s in the 1970s (still have two of them and their lenses). I had a D70 early in the days of DSLRs, and I bought a D200 within days of its announcement. When it was stolen less than a year later, I bought another.

    I didn’t think the D300 was a big enough leap forward to upgrade at the time and the D300S likewise did not seem a major upgrade (actually, the D200 is still a great camera if low light performance is not considered). I remain convinced that a D400 was on the drawing boards before floods, etc. forced delays and changed to the Nikon plans.

    I now have a stock of DX lenses, along with my eight AI lenses from the Nikon F’s (I still have two of them). My wife has a D3100 and a number of lenses. We have so much Nikon gear I have trouble finding where to store it all.

    I woulod like to upgrade but I simple do not regard anything in the D5100 line as an upgrade. I refuse to buy Nikon FX because (1) the cost, (2) I remain happy with the the image quality I get from DX, and (3) I simply don’t trust Nikon any more.

    A change to FX would require me to replace nearly all of my lenses at the same time as a camera upgrade (why buy an FX camera, only to use a lower resolution than I have now?).

    I will carefully evaluate the alternatives (I’m not sure that Canon is the right way to go, perhaps there are better choices to be made), but If Nikon has let me down this badly, then I surely will not trust them again!

    So, a forty year Nikon year Nikon user, I will shortly begin moving all my Nikon gear, including bothe DX and FX lenses, on eBay, and will, sometime in the next few months decide on my new supplier.

    Sad, but true.

    • bjrichus

      Let us know when, you might find some willing buyers on here…

    • John Richardson

      So, then, where do you stand on the D7000 as an alternative for you?

      • LesM

        I’ll concede that the D7000 has better specs than the D200, and would be my most obvious choice if I were to stay with Nikon. But it hasn’t won me over to the point where I’d drop the D200 and go for the D7000.

        I don’t know why, and I’m probably a little irrational here, but I wanted my next step to keep me in a range that was not the “Nikon professional range”, but close to it.

        The D7000, with its many scene selections, etc. looks very good to the newcomer not brave enough to work with shutter speeds and aperture settings, but – for that very reason – seems to be not really what I was hoping for.

        Sorry if my answer doesn’t satisfy you, but it’s a genuine feeling, and one that I feel is shared by many people.

    • Mike

      Dude, just be patient. Nikon first needed to get their (dinosaur) FX cameras out on the market. This D5200 is just the beginning of their DX-line update.

      Shortly after this D5200 there will be D7000 and D300 replacements.

      Either go for a cheap D7000 now (it’s an incredible camera), or be patient and wait for Nikon to unveil all their new DX models.

    • treehaus

      Given your history with 35mm and some of those great Ais lenses, I really think the shift to fx is not to be outright dismissed. If you go Canon then you have to buy new ALL new lenses anyway and they make nothing to compare to those legacy lenses you have from the 70’s. I also had (have) the d200-d300 and dont like the d7000 from a handling point of view either,it just doesnt fit, but I have friends who use it and they think it is superb and prefer it over the d300 of handling as ” you get used to it”. I took the plunge and went d800, I can t reccomend it highly enough… amazing machine!

    • Myra Price

      If in 40+ years you have not found a niche in equipment/brand then you are slacking buddy.

      What are you shooting, that would have you stumped about where you need to go now?

  • cobby64

    Is Nikon listening?

    • No…

      No…

  • cooks

    thats it cant wait anymore, tomorrow ill buy d7000, been waiting for d7100 ..

  • anon

    why is everyone arguing that fx is better than dx or vice versa? they are completely different and play to different strengths. FX is better for wide angle, landscapes, portraits. DX is better for wildlife, some sports (minus extreme low light), etc. Many of your will disagree with that reasoning, but with DX you get further distance while keeping a your max aperture and essentially one stop less of bokeh (give or take). for example. a 400f2.8 is a 600 f2.8 light wise but with the plane of focus like a 600 f4. you get the light intake as given by the lens but keep a little more room in your plane of focus. its focus is little more forgiving for things that may be moving fast. sure use dx mode on fx, you lose detail compared to the current lowest end dx cameras, or use a teleconverter to get the distance and the same plane of focus, but also lose the stop of light. no substitute.

    the mechanics are all smaller and less expensive to produce in dx which leads to it’s “cheap consumer” stereotype, but smaller components move more easily and potentially faster than larger ones. DX COULD be made to shoot much faster or at least as fast the pro FX, but Nikon won’t do it because so many people think “FX means better and more professional.”

    I’m know i’m talking up DX format here, but keep in mind I love FX as well. I have a D800 that does everything better than my d300 and i freaking love it. That doesn’t mean that if i had a choice between d300 replacement and d800 that i’d take the d800 every time. If they made a d300 replacement keeping dx format, with 8 or 9 frames a second and better iso capability (doesn’t have to match d800), for wildlife, there is no question i’d take that over FX. Yes FX viewfinders are better bigger brighter and no way to make DX superior in this area, but way too many people are seem to determine which format is “superior” based on one or MAYBE two aspects about the entire camera. Be more open minded, people. A pro DX camera can go a long way for a lot of people. Keep in mind, in order for FX to have a 24mpx DX portion, the FX resolution would have to be ~60 mpx. I don’t plan on seeing that soon or for less than a ton of money, and when we do the frame rate will likely be low like the d800. so FX isn’t a good replacement for a great DX camera. It’s a complement…

    • burgerman

      >>> DX is better for wildlife, some sports (minus extreme low light), etc. Many of your will disagree with that reasoning, but with DX you get further distance while keeping a your max aperture and essentially one stop less of bokeh (give or take).

      Read more on NikonRumors.com: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/10/29/nikon-d5200-dslr-camera-to-be-announced-next.aspx/#ixzz2AnZ0BJKr

      NO YOU JUST GET A SENSOR WITH THE EDGES CUT OFF… IF You want crop, do it afterwards.

      • AlphaOne

        They way you reason out, clearly state you don’t understand the need for a DX by those who need it. There’s a need for a D300/s replacement.
        D3200 and the old D7000 are not tough enough.
        Cropping FX unfortunately is not the best alternative solution yet. Maybe someday, but I guess it’s still a long way to go.
        The pieces for the solution are available now: 24mp DX sensor, and parts from D800. All Nikon needs to do is to put them all together, and the willingness to make it happen.

        • burgerman

          24MP on DX will NOT give more detail than say 16mp will (and you get that NOW from the d800 sensor after crop to DX.

          Because its beyond what eisting lenses are capable of unless at lowest ISO, the best F stop (say around f4 to f5.6 on a 2.8 lens) and with good lighting and a tripod. Because pixel pitch is too high.

          I get the same detail at 100 percent (cropped or otherwise on my D800E as I can with an entry level 24mp DX nikon. Tested many times. 24 is a step further than the lenses are capable of. So once you get your 24mp DX sensor “D400″ you will gain zero resolution in real world files over a cropped D800 for eg. All you did really was throw out the rest of the picture…

          Even the D800e shows no more actual detail than the D600 in 95 percent of shots. And its hard to get that extra bit! Even with the holy trinity lens trio. Only with MUCH care can the difference in detail be seen. In ideal planned studio circumstances. So going to a smaller pixel pitch than the D800 and expecting any real gain is ludicrous.

          • AlphaOne

            As I just mentioned from an earlier post, it’s a waste to use the D800/e (which is an excellent camera) if you mainly need it for wildlife.
            D7000 is an ok stop gap alternative, but it’s not as rugged as the D300s/D800. Aside from not being capable of 8fps, etc.

            Again, it’s the extra “reach” of DX that’s being sought after. You gain an extra reach without losing any light while using a TC.

            http://www.robsphotography.co.nz/Nikon-D800-vs-Nikon-D3200.html

  • alwyn

    That’s right dumbasses, cram even more mp into that small sensor why don’t you. 24mp on a crop?

    • Pablo Ricasso

      Looking forward to 40+.

  • Dolan

    Nikon sucks, they bring out absurd cameras all the time that Canon destroy. The exception perhaps is the D600 but even that has AF coverage of an ant on your moms tits.

    Nikon can suck my dick, I am switching to Fuji.

    • Pablo Ricasso

      Switching to HOLGA!!!

    • GeorgyPorgy

      Nurse – he’s out of bed again!

  • FF

    It seems that all complaints on this website are from two major groups:

    1. Those who are still waiting for the D700S with 24MP sensor, pro built body.
    2. And those waiting for the  D400 with 24MP sensor, pro built body.

    If we are paying more than $2000 dollars for a DSLR we are expecting a professional built camera and not a consumer camera like the D600. That is a lot of money to spend on a camera that only has entry level specifications.

    If I want a consumer camera I don’t want to pay more than $1000 dollars. It is a consumer camera after all!

    But Nikon marketing team doesn’t get it. They think they were “genius” releasing the D600 when everybody else was waiting for a true D700 replacement with 24MP.  (The D800 is NOT the D700 replacement, it is in a different category).

    And they were surprised by the number of people complaining about the D600? Sheesh.

    The only group that is not complaining is those who have a D800, but everybody else seems to be very unhappy with the latest releases.

    The new D5200 is welcomed but is not the answer that most of us are waiting for.

    IMO, it is time for the CEO of Nikon to do a major shake-up on the marketing team.

    • anon

      1 you will not see. i firmly believe the highest level fx cameras will now be low light high speed d#s and high mpx low speed d###. i don’t think you are going to see a high speed highest quality d### ever again.

      2 i agree with. i would like to replace my d300

      However if nikon got it wrong with the d600, why are there 80 reviews on amazon 4.5/5 avg. 20 reviews on bh 5/5 avg in the short amount of time it’s been around. if it were a bust the reviews would be bad. i would never buy the d600 and i have a d800. I want the higher end features, but that doesn’t mean nikon got it wrong. it might still be 2100, but it’s 900 hundred dollars less than the next FF. that’s a decent chunk of money toward a pricey FX lens if the additional features aren’t that necessary to you. I’m sure if a d700s was released, the price would be 2999, and a lot of the people who bought a d600 would still not have an FX camera.

      • anon

        sorry.. added to point 1. high speed, highest quality d### “FX.” I hope we still see DX Highest level.

    • Myra Price

      Agreed Nikon CEO needs to come up with a better plan for the next two years.

      I mean after the average joe buys a 5200, where does he go?

      He doesn’t go full frame. He’s not spending $1000 on glass.

      • Pablo Ricasso

        There is a lot more average than you care to concede.
        Also… Don’t flatter yourself. You don’t sound extraordinary over here.
        Furthermore, since all the new glass is AFS, there’s nothing stopping someone from spending a ton on glass. Is there? Nikon should make a hefty profit on every one of these they sell, and sell they will. Would choices get better for you in the next couple years if “the average Joe” had bought a Canon instead?

  • http://www.myirishhealth.com Photon

    The whole point of D600 was to bridge the gap between the DX and the FX. There will be no D400! It has no place anymore. There will be a very decent D7100 or 7200 or whatever they choose to replace the D7000, but no pro DX anymore. Pro’s should go FX now, using D600 as a stepping stone. The future will go more towards FX now. FX will be coming down in price more and more and DX will become more amateur. You want a pro 24MP DX? Well it’s already out folks! It’s called D800 DX crop mode! Now stop this silly argument will you?

    • AlphaOne

      Do your research.
      DX mode in D800/E is only 15m+ megapixels.

      • burgerman

        Nearer 16. And you can choose the crop, so any size you wish! And the difference between 16 and 24 is extremely hard to see since pixel pitch is at the limits of what lenses are actually capable of. Even the D800 struggles for good enough glass. The real resolution gain will be little to non.

        • AlphaOne

          Being a bird photographer, I pixel peep most of the time.
          There’s a big difference between between 12mp and 16mp images, so I’m sure there’s something to be gained from having 16mp to 24mp. Every pixels help in post-processing.

          Granted that 24mp will show the lens limitations (especially on kit lenses), but 300mm and 500mm lenses are no slouches.

          • treehaus

            From my basic testing 24mp will annoy you, I borrowed a d3200 to see how the resolution would aid bird photography, for the test I used a 300 f4 (a very sharp lens) and an easy subject, a red billed gull while I was eating takeaways. Close subject well lit and easy to focus as subject was stationary.My consensus was that when you peeped the results were only OK. never the OMG that has some detail.. which I get with the d800.

            For 24mp the AA filter will need to be different…..A d400E…makes sense, and I doubt they would put that in the 7000/600 body. That would be worth a look at least…

    • DX owner

      There is a place for a high fps D400E. I would buy it for birding.

  • ThomasH

    Well, I am for once more upset. I claim that the users of D300 should be FIRST
    in getting a new technology. Its the nature of DSLR that the sensor and demosaic
    processor determine the quality of the image. It is absurd to give the new technology
    to entry level bodies for such a long time, to people who often make a few snapshots
    or 6×4 prints from jpegs and do not even grasp the 24Mpix resolution. No one else
    upsets its own customers as much as Nikon does.

    For me in my body replacement cycle the D300 is an “ancient history.” I even used to
    have EOS-7D after it for close to 2 years. Even my 7D was already sold for the D7000,
    but that body never was a match to the D300 in terms of speed and controls. Now
    I am really angry with Nikon. I think I will migrate to Canon for good.

    Re. FX let me state clearly: No way, no how. Even for (rumored) $1500 I would be
    thinking hard if I even would like to take the D600. I grew accustom to the new
    effective focal length of the lenses, the new 10mm is the old 15-17mm and I am
    all done with this. The 300mm acts like 450mm, I love it. FX gives me nothing,
    I do not print billboard size images or sell in an art gallery. DX is super.
    I will rather go to m43, than to FX.

  • Mariusz

    I believe than IT won’t be d5200 but d7200 or something like than – there are none price drops OF d5000 while d7000 Is discounted in many countries … After total dissapointment OF d600 price i am expecting d7000 replacement ….

  • http://www.photoratox.photodeck.com Jari Varpenius

    What kind of pro wants to start from D600??

    Well anyways, there has been good opinions and arguments why there should be both series. Serious users know what they want and need, like we’ve heard.

    Personally, I start to be pistoff about waiting for highend DX.

  • Back to top