< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon Europe: “the D7100 is not positioned to replace the D300s”

Nikon D7100 flagship DX camera

Nikon D7100 described as "flagship" DX camera on Nikon USA website

Nikon D7100  enthusiast DX camera

Nikon D7100 described as "enthusiast" DX camera on Nikon Europe website

A dpreview forum member contacted Nikon Europe and asked them about the new D7100 being described as the "new flagship of Nikon's DX-format HD-SLR lineup" on Nikon USA website (the D7100 is described as "enthusiast-level DX format camera" in Europe). This is Nikon's answer:

"I can assure you that the D7100 is not positioned to replace the D300s as Nikon's flagship DX-format camera - such is the information received from Nikon Japan on the matter."

Nikon-D7100-is-not-D300s-replacement

Nikon Sweden also corrected their previous statement - the D7100 is not a pro camera and will not qualify for NPS.

There are also some new high ISO snapshots taken with the D7100.

Via Nikon Rumors Forum

This entry was posted in Nikon D7100. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Spy Black

    I see everyone here is speechless…

    • Eric Calabos

      Now they say “I knew that”

      • chubbs

        LOL I hope they’ll be quiet for a few minutes first. We should remind them about their “DX is dead” comments at every turn.

  • Brian

    I don’t buy it. Do you think Nikon USA Just misspoke calling this the flagship?

    • VikingAesir

      Why not? It would hardly be the first time someone in marketing exaggerated about a product.

    • Matt

      Of COURSE the D7100 is the DX flagship! How do I know? Because it is the best DX camera that Nikon has released… so far. When the D400 is announced in a few months, then the D7100 will no longer be the flagship. :-P

    • PeterT

      Nikon Germany describes the D7100 as “the new flagship within the class of DSLR with DX sensors – designed for enthusiats. With its professional feature set the D7100 is described as a special offer for enthusiasts”.

      I think, they obviously try to find a balance between enthusiast camera and professional feature set without putting the D7100 into the class of professional cameras.

    • http://www.twitter.com/tsayguy tsayguy

      It’s the flagship. For now.

  • Brian

    Building on the acclaimed autofocus system from the D300s?

  • Hugo Chikamori

    Well, that’s a freakin’ relief. I’d hope to hell the D300s was being replaced with a D400.

    • vFunct

      Not going to happen. The NIkon European guy is wrong – there is absolutely nothing the D300s is supposed to do better than the D7100, so not sure why he says the D300s is still their flagship DX camera?

      • Steve

        Spoken like somebody that doesn’t know anything. Try again

      • Phil

        Uh, did you read the letter above the comment you posted?

      • Phil

        Uh, did you read the letter above the comment you posted?

      • Smudger

        19 shot RAW buffer.
        8fps
        build quality
        superior controls
        blah
        blah………..

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sylvain-Larive/534034693 Sylvain Larive

          So the D800/e who has lower buffer size and FPS isn’t a pro camera? What pro features are required changes for everybody. For many, higher DR and lower Noise might be more pro than a PC Sync port and high FPS. And lets not forget this isn’t a static field. The profession changes, the accessories change (wireless triggers) and technique change.

          To each his own camera I’ll say.

          • DonD

            Don’t know where you got your info, but the D800 has a hugh buffer. I can shoot 16 36mp at 14 bit depth files before the buffer fills. That’s a lot of buffer. oh, I bet you don’t have a D800.

          • vFunct

            Indeed, there is absolutely no pro advantage to the D300s at this point. None of the above features matter (high-speed sports shooters don’t shoot RAW, for example)

            If Nikon does anything with DX it will be in the D4 class, with a big body, for high-speed sports shooters at 11+ FPS or studio product shooters that need lower DoF and high-resolution.

            There’s won’t be a D400 class product.

      • Jason

        d7100 does not even have studio flash sync ports…. likely not pro body. We can be optimistic, that if non-pro D7100 gets 51 points of focus, will D400 get a new focusing system… 95 points, beating canon?

        • RMJ

          D400 might indeed have a new AF system as an experiment for Nikon. I don’t think they would have given D7100 the AF it now has unless something better is coming out soon.

        • s.dunn

          Stuff normally bleeds down from above; likely still a 51 f8 but with the higher metering at 91k instead of 3k. There is nothing wrong with the 51 point AF except the coverage could be wider on FX; on DX it’s much less of an issue.

          For the record and I hope Im wrong, but I don’t see a D300s replacement coming. I think they will disco the line.

        • http://twitter.com/intensitystudio Antonio Carrasco

          everybody uses a hotshoe connector for studio flash work. your argument is invalid.

        • http://twitter.com/intensitystudio Antonio Carrasco

          everybody uses a hotshoe connector for studio flash work. your argument is invalid.

        • Northerntrumpeter

          The D7100 has inherited the ‘Advanced’ Multi-CAM 3500DX of the D4. This is NOT the 51 point system used in the D300/s. So basically it is top of the range. If there was going to be leap forward technologically we would more than likely see it first in the D4 line.

      • No longer Pablo Ricassso

        You’re right. There will be no D400.
        It will be called the D9000.

  • JLK

    Why would the D7100 be given the 51 point auto focus if a D400 is in the works?

    • parrot

      Because there are many other aspects that could differentiate a D400 from the D7100.

      • asdf

        The d7100 is so close that only a small amount of people, i.e. the very small vocal minority that constantly posts here, would care to spend more on a D400.

        Can everyone please get over this D400 madness? If you want a pro-level camera, they’re available and called D800 and D4. No, Nikon won’t make you a DX D4 for $1000, now please please go away.

        • patto01

          In the face of overwhelming evidence, you cling to stubborn beliefs that don’t serve you in any way. Dork!

        • NRA Advocate

          Agreed. Mark my words, there’ll be NO D400. Were Nikon interested in producing one, they’d have done so by now.

          What Nikon REALLY mean when they say “enthusiast-level DX format camera” is “DX is an enthusiast-level format”.

          • patto01

            Marked and recorded. But why would you open yourself to future ridicule when you receive no possible benefit from doing so?

            • NRA Advocate

              Because I have a thicker skin than you…?

              Oh yeah, and because I’m right.

            • Jer

              I doubt an advocate for the gun industry could be right about anything.

            • Jer

              I meant to say gun lobby industry.

            • patto01

              I disagree with “NRA Advocate” on this topic but your statement is completely irrelevant!

            • anonymous

              Because the internet is anonymous. He can just never post under that user name after the D400 is announced. Whereas if he’s correct he has bragging rights. There’s no possible loss (unless he values that user name), but a possible benefit.

            • NRA Advocate

              Yep, ya got me figured out. ;)

              Way I see it, if I’m right [when, actually], I’m just right, plain and simple.

          • anonymous

            Want to put money on that? Not inclusive of it being called a D400, since the naming may change, of course. But would you put money behind your belief there will not be a higher-end DX body before the D7200?

            I can’t count the number of people on here using phrases like “mark my words” before their blatantly incorrect predictions. Of course nobody would take me up on my bet that the D600 would be more than $1500 (or my incorrect guess that the D800 would be more than $3000 – too bad for them).

            • Jon McGuffin

              It’s interesting, despite the predictions here that the D600 would be $1,500, I knew it would cost more and turned out right. I was gambling $1899. Not too far off. Honestly “anonymous” this is really all just fun speculation and I don’t think anybody here should take this too seriously. I may be right, I may be wrong but I honestly tend to have a pretty good track record with these things because, in all reality, I just follow the path of supply/demand and basic economic sense. All things point to NIkon having a little hole here and about to have a severe disadvantage to Canon when they (assuredly) release the 7DM2. Nikon is an camera company first and foremost, they cannot afford to allow a body with the popularity of the 7D (and 300s) to go unchecked.

              Yes, it’s taken them a LONG time to address this, but so has Canon. They’re coming this year, I would actually put money on it. :)

          • Jon McGuffin

            Yeah, I’m sorry but I believe you’re going to be wrong here. There is *plenty* of room for a D400 and it’s clear D7100 is not a “professional” level body/camera. D300s has been a great camera for Nikon and they’ll assuredly be replacing it with a “D400″ and I’ll bet it’s this year. The fact the 7100 got a little bump does nothing but keep pace of the 7000 series of camera to maintain it’s position as a very good enthusiast camera coming in at an affordable price (priced same as D7000 at release).

            D400 will get
            – Faster frame rate (probably 7/8 frames/sec)
            – Better RAW buffer (probably 20-30 frames before full)
            – D4/D800 like build quality in the body
            – Dedicated AF-ON button

            Most all other elements will remain similar to the D7100 likely including the 24Mp, etc. It’ll cost $400 – $500 more and this will be easy to stomach for the vast majority of us here. Nikon’s cost to produce such a camera will be nominal over the D7100 so that premium will likely come at a premium profit margin for Nikon.

            The release of that body will complete their SLR lineup from bottom to top and most importantly give the consumers very tough choices to pick their body. Many will jump to a higher level of body than they need. The internet will be flooded with “Do I get a D400 or a D600″. “Do I get a D7100 or a D400″. That’s the kind of free chatter/publicity Nikon wants and needs.

            Also note, the D400 will compete head to head with the eventual 7D M2 and I expect both will be available by the end of the summer. The 7D is a popular camera for very good reason and Nikon will need to offer a direct competitor to that body. The D400 with the majority of the 7100 spec’s plus the D400 spec’s I mentioned above will be such a camera. It’ll make many of D7100 users wish they had waited.

            It’s clear as day to me this would be in the best interest of Nikon. Now, if they see it that way is of course unknown, but I’m pretty confident with the “mixed” messages we’ve seen come out of Nikon the past few days in regards to the “flashship” statement, that tells us what we need to know. Summer of 2013 is going to be good.

            • http://twitter.com/dahlfors Johan Dahlfors

              Is it a coincidence that 5DMk3 & D800 were released fairly close to each other, similar to how D600 and 6D were announced and released very close to each other?

              Canon and Nikon are surely aware of each other’s doings. From a business perspective it makes a lot of sense to release cameras that will compete in same market segments in roughly the same timeframe.

              According to latest Canon rumors, a 7D Mk II is about to be released around late summer (August). From Nikon’s perspective, it would be logical to release their competitor in that price segment around the same timeframe with similar/better specs & handling.

              Personally I’d be surprised if Nikon doesn’t respond to Canon’s release with a competing camera around July-September.

            • Greg Heller

              I think you are correct Johan — Nikon isn’t going to give up all that top of the line DX market share to Canon without a fight, if they do then they deserve what happens to the corporate bottom line.

            • Jon McGuffin

              Johan, I completely share your comment here and that’s why we will (finally) see the D400 in the Summer. Now after that release, what the heck will Nikon release over the next 12-18 months? I’m guessing it’ll be lenses… Hopefully some good DX lenses…

            • http://twitter.com/dahlfors Johan Dahlfors

              Is it a coincidence that 5DMk3 & D800 were released fairly close to each other, similar to how D600 and 6D were announced and released very close to each other?

              Canon and Nikon are surely aware of each other’s doings. From a business perspective it makes a lot of sense to release cameras that will compete in same market segments in roughly the same timeframe.

              According to latest Canon rumors, a 7D Mk II is about to be released around late summer (August). From Nikon’s perspective, it would be logical to release their competitor in that price segment around the same timeframe with similar/better specs & handling.

              Personally I’d be surprised if Nikon doesn’t respond to Canon’s release with a competing camera around July-September.

            • M

              +1

              I think we will see a replacement for the d300s when Canon replaces the 7d (if they do)(the rumours suggest they will). They left out some very important things in the d7100 (FPS & Buffer) things that mattered for the d300s/7d users. The 7d has a buffer of +/- 27 pictures (at 8 fps) and the camera is still today the unbeaten buy competitors. The only competition for the 7d is the d300s and both cameras are 3 years old. Both models are lacking the new generation imagine quality but other than that there isn’t a crop camera in the same class!

          • Joe

            Exactly. Well, I don’t doubt the usefulness of a D400, seeing the ongoing discussion there seems to be enough demand for such a camera, putting the D7100 into a pro body with pro controls and bigger buffer memory doesn’t seem like a too big deal to me development wise, and everybody would be happy. But obviously someone at Nikon has made the decision that Pro = FX. And as I pointed out below, there are very useful alternatives to a D400, but apparently many don’t accept that.

        • http://twitter.com/DaddysSS Richard Luse

          I disagree, the D7100 could be the foundation. Add an all magnesium body, AF button, larger buffer, 9 pin, tether, 300s type controls and Nikon could easily produce the D400

          • Brian

            At what price point?

            • am-expat

              Since there is very little difference between the imagined d400 and d4 except grip and sensor size it would need to $2,500.
              With so many people saying they can’t shoot without a pro d400 Nikon can price it for as much as they want.

            • DonD

              Your arguement is so flawed. There would be about as much difference as the difference between the D300s and the D3s. The two biggest differences would be FX vs DX and ISO cap… not to mention up to 11 fps. The D400 will not have 10/11 fps and it will not shoot 12k ISO well, but it will have an AFON button, you can count on it.

            • Nikonhead

              Canon 7DMII is rumored to have 10 fps. I don’t see why the D400 can’t have it as well.

            • DonD

              Probably about $1699, right in between the D7100 and the D600. The D600 is not there for the pro, it’s there for the hobbiest that wants full frame, so there would be no incentive to move to the D600. Looks to me like there is plenty of room in the pricing for a D400.

            • Nikonhead

              With Nikons market shares falling they will most likely keep prices as low as possible. I agree, $1,699 just like the D300s

            • No longer Pablo Ricasso

              At that of the D300s.

            • Greg Heller

              I believe it would enter the market right around the D600 price point give or take $100, given it is the top of the line DX and Nikon will want to differentiate between the DX and FX products, that is that FX products are superior to all other models regardless of features.

            • No longer Pablo Ricasso

              At exactly that of the D300s, just like the D7100 is now introduced at the same price the camera it is replacing was. Maybe if they do a really good job they can charge a hundred more. The 7D2 is said to cost 2200, or much more than their full frame cheapie will be costing by the time they have it ready.

    • Brian

      Exactly, what will the D400 be a D7100 with a frame more per second and a bigger buffer?

      • DonD

        Actually, if you could read, there is a whole long list above. One thing it will have is an AF ON button. How do you ask a pro that shoots by using the AF ON button with his thumb, to shoot differently when he picks up his “pro” DX camera? You can’t.
        If you do, he won’t buy it…. for that little button alone! Even though you think it is not a big deal.

        • Palombasso

          Actual question: Those who use a AF ON button also need a dedicated AE/AF Lock button?

          Even a D5000 can be configured to use the AE/AF Lock button (by the thumb) as an AF ON. I assume the D7100 can also. Is that not an option?

      • Greg Heller

        Nikon will put out a camera that will hold it’s own against the rumored Canon 7D Mark II otherwise they shouldn’t bring it out at all.

    • http://www.facebook.com/vsevolodzh Vsevolod Zhovtenko

      because d5100 was given af system of d7000

    • Nikonhead

      Why did they give the D700 the same 51 point AF as the D3 ?

  • BenS

    Even Thom Hogan mentioned that Nikon Japan website did not name the D7100 as the flagship DX. And he thinks Nikon will eventually bring a the D300s replacement.

    • BenS

      Thom Hogan mentioned

      “”As a middle-class DX-format D-SLR.” Well, apparently the
      Japanese disagree with the American Nikon marketers. The previous quote is from the US site, this quote is from the Japanese site. So who are we to believe? This contradiction in statements makes my comments about “oops” need some emphasis: OOPS!””

      “There’s room for a D400 should Nikon decide to follow
      through with one. I’m on record saying they should, and on record saying they eventually will.”

      “Nikon should create a D400 followup to the D300s. To not do so is to leave money (and users) on the table.”

      • Julio

        If you go to Nikon USA website and double click on “press room” they clearly say (about D7100) for the experienced shooter and photo enthusiast.

    • Nikonhead

      That’s because in Japanese Flagship means death. Hehe.

    • http://twitter.com/prevedovich Prevedovich

      I think they will not release it. Look here:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Nikon_DSLR_cameras
      D300s was released back in 2009 (4 years ago). According to the timeline PRO DX models were released with top models (D3 – D300, D3s-D300s). D600 was released the same year D4 did and it tells us that Nikon did the change in its line.

      Even if Nikon will actually release D400 it will be another 24 MP monster with noise equal to micro4/3 (as it appears to be for now) and low fps. And I do not want to wait for another 5 years to buy next gen ProDX. I’ve wrote already that Panasonic GH3 with the best video in range of $0-$12000 camera, 20 fps (at low MP), katana-sharp contrast focusing system (fast as a hell) with constant firmware update and model renewal every 1.5 – 2 years… and muuuuch cheaper.
      Do not get me wrong, but Nikon does not care about Pro photographers, they care only about sales of their compact cameras because they make more money there.

  • kyoshinikon

    Odd as the D7000 was part of NPS’es coverage

    • NRA Advocate

      I don’t think the D7000 was ever covered by NPS, was it?

      • bruan

        Yes it is. And not to include it’s upgrade is strange.

        • NRA Advocate

          Ahhh, now I see — Nikon counted it as a qualifying “secondary” body…but only if you had primary pro body as well. D7000 by itself does not qualify you for NPS.

          Didn’t think it would.

      • umeshrw

        As per nps india qualifications it is not . Only 300 and 300s in dx.

    • King of Swaziland

      Guy who posted that was from Sweden. Different regions have different NPS organizations with differing requirements.

  • khaled tolba

    I can see the need to include the 51 point AF system from the D300S to differentiate it from the D7000 or D5200 but I’m quite puzzled by the decision to remove AA filter if it’s not going to be the flagship DX model. So now what are they going to add to the D7100 to justify an $600-800 price hike for the D400 if one to believe that camera is truly coming by the end of the year. There certainly won’t be a new 91 point AF system nor a 36 MP DX sensor either. Are they just going to juice up the buffer and FPS rate and call it a day??? It’s also hard to imagine the Sony 20 MP sensor just released in the Alpha 58 making it to the D400 if the D7100 already has a 24 MP without the AA filter.

    • NRA Advocate

      Very well said. There’s just not enough you can add to a D400 – beyond one or two additional features – to differentiate it from the D7100. I don’t see a business case for it…especially with FX prices now beginning to fall, and Nikon venturing into APS-C mirrorless cameras.

      • No longer Pablo Ricasso

        Full magnesium body
        Buffer
        better cards
        a further improvement in the focus/metering system?
        yet another sensor?
        af on off switch
        controls
        frame rate
        increased ISO?
        etc…

        Don’t think the company is just going to stop developing.

      • DonD

        NRA, do you accept input or are you output only.

        Several people have given you a long list of simple things that the D400 will have (only a few of which would be worth the extra $500) And while I’m on the topic, why do people think the 51AF points will have to be upgraded for the D400. It’s ok if the D7100 and the D400 both have AF51. D7100 users, consider yourself lucky.

    • http://twitter.com/_thelonius_ christopher smith

      bigger body, better autofocus, bigger buffer, faster frame rate, fewer megapixels with better low light performance, do i have to go on? basically things that don’t matter to ‘enthusiasts’ but a pro will pay for. if nikon used your logic they never would have made the d300s in the first place claiming that the d90 was good enough!

    • DonD

      khaled, think about what you just said, and then compare the D800 with the D4. D800, 36mp, D4 – 16mp… D800E – no AA, you can’t get a D4 with no AA. Which one is the flagship? Think before you speak.

      • Greg Heller

        They are all designed for different applications, but I will guarantee you that the camera that sells for $6000 will always be the flagship

  • JhnW

    Technically, the D7100 is the Dx flagship since the D300s has been discontinued, but that doesn’t mean a D400 can’t be released to take over that title. I think there we will see a Pro spec DX body from Nikon before the end of the year.

    • patto01

      Huh? Is there any relevancy to this statement? At all??

      • anonymous

        Yes. Logically you could say the D7000 was the DX flagship until this week, since it was the top DX camera in production. Now the D7100 is the DX flagship. The D300S was the DX flagship until it went out of production. If the D4 went out of production before a D4s/x/h or D5 came out, then the D800/E would become the flagship FX camera (if it was still in production). Understand the logic? A camera has to be in production to be the flagship.

        • patto01

          I see. He was commenting on Nikon USA’s statement. I got so caught up in the D400 hating, I forgot that little tidbit. Gomenasai…

        • Nikonhead

          D300s is still on the USA website

  • SoftonDemand

    The myth is true, the D400 still alive. Let’s all rejoice

    • http://twitter.com/bythom Thom Hogan

      Yes, it is. I just shot bigfoot with it.

      • No longer Pablo Ricasso

        I don’t condone brutality against animals.

        • Bratislav ILIC

          Thom was referring to one of his bigfeet …

      • mrterrabyte

        lol…I think Nikon pretty much shot themselves in the foot…
        I’d actually be interested as to your thoughts on D4x Thom…specs/likelihood…

      • Vin

        Ha ha, nice

  • fred

    Looks like Thom Hogan was right..the D400 is still coming.
    Nikon USA marketing guys got a bit over-excited. I’ll wait till Sept for the D400 announcement.
    The D7100 looks nice for birding but the buffer capacity is lame. The D400 will fix that. Maybe D7100 with 24MP + no AA, vs D400 20MP no AA, high FPS + BIG buffer.
    D400 for christmas, thanks Santa!
    Then a new DX wide lens to follow?

    • Hmmm

      I think you guys are wrong. Right now, the D7100 is the de facto Flagship DX cameras. There is no other Flagship DX camera. The D7100 is simply better in enough ways to call it the Flagship. The D300s has its own merits. If the D400 is released, then it will be the Flagship. Until then…. D7100.

      • http://twitter.com/bythom Thom Hogan

        Depends upon what the ship needs to do, as to whether you think it’s the flagship or not. But most of the admirals in the DX fleet are still using D300’s.

        • Swade

          If only they were still producing the D300s. You can’t have a flagship that isn’t being produced.

    • http://twitter.com/bythom Thom Hogan

      No, “flagship” is a mistranslation as far as I can tell. It was also in some of the Nikon Europe sites for awhile, too.

  • Jonathan

    Let me clear my throat… BOOOOOOYAAAAAA!!!!!. Ahem…

  • Jonathan

    I think one thing many people dismissing the need for a D400 are forgetting is the Pro build quality and controls of the D300. It isn’t just about the sensor or frame rate, or buffer, the ergonomics and build are important too. Combine these things together and there is enough to justify a D400: Full magnesium body, weather sealing, 8fps+, large buffer, external controls like D300, better low light performance, D4/D800 metering system & white balance. Who knows what else Nikon would include. (sorry, I doubt integrated GPS or WiFi – that would mean they couldn’t charge $650 for accessories). It may be too much to ask, but what about USB 3.0?

    • anonymous

      And XQD (or at least CF)! And of course 10-pin, and pc-sync, etc. And how about a re-programmable record button, like on the D4? I use my cameras to take photos.

      • Kuv

        3.5mm instead of pc-sync?

  • sapoviejo

    Im starting to become very tires of this stupid company policy of secret and mistery.

    • http://twitter.com/podperson Tonio Loewald

      Secrecy works. Let’s suppose Nikon planned to release the D400 late last year before the floods in Thailand and told everyone six months in advance… They’d have lost or delayed millions of sales and been a laughingstock. Osborne all over again.

      Nikon does have a problem — it doesn’t seem to understand what its users want (or be ahead of them) or how to do PR or customer service. But secrecy is not Nikon’s problem.

  • anonymous

    No one has mentioned that the term “HD-SLR” may have some significance in the statement? While unlikely, it’s possible Nikon doesn’t consider all of its DSLRs to be HD-SLRs even though they have HD video. Perhaps build quality and intended, primary function plays into their terminology. Why would you get a D400 for video when a D7100 has all the same video functions? The D4 and D300S are never called HD-SLRs on the Nikon site.

    Realistically I think was either a misstatement on Nikon USA’s part, or it has to do with it being the top DX camera IN PRODUCTION. But I was just presenting another possibility.

    • anonymous

      Oh, and obviously the D7100 has the best HD video functionality of all of Nikon’s DX cameras, including the D300S. So even including out-of-production cameras, the D7100 is the top DX HD-SLR.

  • http://www.facebook.com/butterflyskies3 Oskar Pettersson

    Well, I told you people. D7100 is as much of a replacement to the D300s as the D7000 was.

  • Aldo

    if a d400 comes out… what would be the price difference from the d7100 200-300 bucks? I just don’t see much sense. I think we have more chances of seeing an improved d800.

    • anonymous

      $500-$600. The D400 should be in the same price range as the D300 and the D300S originally were.

      • Aldo

        So many out there are willing to pay 1700-1800 for the d400? If so then maybe there is a change to see it.

        • AdV

          The only alternatives at this moment are a D800 or a D4 plus a new set of lenses to replace my DX lenses. That would cost me 5000 or more. Easy choice…

    • http://twitter.com/_thelonius_ christopher smith

      the d400 could be more than the d600 or even d800. if it were truly a pro body specialty camera for birders and sports/news shooters price isn’t really an issue is it? i know a lot of people who would pay anything for the right camera.

      • Aldo

        If price wasn’t an issue… everyone would have a D4. DX itself started because the price of FX was an issue. The d400 has to fall within a reasonable price range if it is to be a success or even happen.

        • patto01

          umm, I’m pretty sure DX came first.

          • Aldo

            newp canon had fx before nikon did

            • patto01

              Nope! Canon calls their full frame cameras “Full-frame;” “FX” and “DX” are Nikon terms. The only Canon FX camera was a specific model that shot film.

              Canon had a full frame camera before Nikon but the APS-C sensor, regardless of manufacturer, came before the full frame sensor. Look it up…

            • Aldo

              when i say fx i just mean full frame. And yes i know nikon had dx first… thats why i bought canon… but in general ff is more expensive than cropped frame and more difficult to developh. That is why nikon only had cropped frame when canon already had full frame which is what i mean.

            • No longer Pablo Ricasso

              Oh, please. You know he knew what you meant.
              He just wanted to lecture someone.

            • Aldo

              Either that or just some people are more perceptive than others.

            • patto01

              Actually, (and this is to Pablo Ricasso as well) I didn’t realize at first. After I figured it out, I decided to ride the horse ’till I got thrown. I’m equal parts impatient and stubborn (I get thrown a lot).
              However, and this is not to excuse my error, I don’t think cost is as much a factor for somebody wanting a D400 as you think. A lot of people buying that camera will pay, or have paid, a whole lot more for lenses than the typical D600 user has/will.

            • Aldo

              Well you see.. you bring another interesting topic to the table… how are these dx lenses gonna hold with the increased resolutions of the newer dx bodies. How far are the dx users willing to push their old lenses? There is talk of new dx lenses designed for larger resolutions. Would the dx users buy these lenses… invest even more on dx? Why not just buy a full frame camera and use their dx lenses? If you don’t like the d600… maybe a pro build version of it will turn up in the near future (assuming you don’t want d800). Wouldn’t that be more appealing? I would only stick to dx because of what pablo mentioned… overall size and weight (lens+body)… should this was a huge factor to me.

            • patto01

              You missed my point. That’s the problem with blogs: you have a point in mind but you don’t want to belabor it so, sometimes, that results in the reader not getting it.
              I meant that most D300/D300S shooters already have big, expensive FX glass. If you need a camera for birding/small wildlife, there aren’t any DX lenses that’ll go along with it. As for using a D800 or D4, instead, the D800 doesn’t have the speed or reach and the D4 doesn’t have the reach. People can argue cropping all they want but, at the end of the day, if you want a high resolution photo, with the specs required for birding/small wildlife, from a distance, nothing will beat a D400! Even the D800 will have much lower resolution, in DX mode, than the proverbial D400.

            • Aldo

              I commented somewhere about what you are implying here. If the people you refer to with their expensive fx lens buy the d400… it would be a second body… assuming they have an fx camera otherwise why would they have fx lenses (unless they are carry overs from film). I can see how the bird shooters/wildlife would benefit from the 20-24 dx res over the 15+mp that the d800 offers. However my initial point is that this may be a focused group. For more broad photography or a more general photographer, (single body owner) It would be more convenient to have an FX camera and just switch to dx mode. Why does this matter? Because price wise the d400 would be in par with the d600 and close to a d600 pro body replacement (or d800 replacement w/more fps). This is why I question the d400 happening altogether. I’m not against the d400… Frankly I love nikon cameras… I’m just not sure the demand would be there… despite this forum full of people dying for it.

            • patto01

              I guess I was thinking more in terms of people looking to replace their existing D100-D300S or those interested in getting into brid/wildlife photography. Those people would have bought, or will buy, FX lenses for their DX cameras because they don’t make a DX 400+mm lens or even any kind of fast Tele DX lens.

              And, I don’t see a Pro DX camera as being inferior to an FX camera, just different. You never hear anyone arguing that Full Frame shooters would rather have medium or large format cameras, so why does everyone assume that DX shooters would all rather have FX?

              I already have an FX camera and several FX lenses but I’ll probably buy the D400 at any price. NOT because I’m rich. I’m not. Because it’s a much cheaper and more practical way to get past the 300mm f4. 300mm + 1.4x tele + DX capabable of wildlife photography = 630mm f 5.4 at 24+ MP ($3700+/-) vs any combination you can think of including an FX camera which won’t be nearly that resolution (DX mode) or much more expensive in FX mode.

            • Aldo

              Keyword here is second body… you yourself are considering buying it as an additional tool to your arsenal, just like many in this forum. Think about single body owners… the ones with one camera. one d300… the ones who haven’t experienced FX because they just couldn’t afford it.. I can assure you these people are at least considering FX if they haven’t switched already. You can’t compare FF with medium format as you are comparing dx to FF because FF has been the standard since film. DX is not a standard (neither is medium format)… it has only been a lapse in digital photography, initially thought of as a stepping stone to FF. Most people want whats better if it’s within their budget. Why are single body owners so important? because they are the majority. And in the end nikon gives priority to the majority. you don’t believe me look at all the coolpix out there, you can fill and army uniform with them and still need more room. If they came out with a d7100 it’s because there is a lot of market for it. The question will remain the same… whether there is a big enough market for the d400, because its existence depends on it… and of course, this remains to be seen.

            • patto01

              Have you noticed that you see pretty much the same posters here, over and over? Nikon Rumors isn’t the extent of photographers, Nikon or otherwise. If you go to blogs that concentrate on bird photography and/or wildlife photography, you’ll find a lot of people using full frame lenses on APS-C cameras. Maybe they also have a FF camera but that’s not important. The important factor is someone who’s willing to spend money on a professional level APS-C camera. Most of the people who bought the D300S, and earlier models, fit into that same category.
              It’s been very interesting discussing this with you but I have to go now…

            • Aldo

              One can seek any photographic field and find good numbers of people, but a lot doesn’t mean majority. There are also vast numbers of people/photographers who bought the d300 or earlier model d200 because it was the best they could afford, not because they shoot birds. Anyway, I aint holding yah… go on your marry way =]

            • Aldo

              had posted something here and didn’t show up…anyway… I made a comment somewhere here relating to what you are saying…expensive FX lens owners buying the d400 are doing so as a second body. My initial idea was that the d400 seems to have a very focused group of photographers… (wildlife, birds). In the more general photographic world, it makes more sense to have an FX body (given you only have 1 camera) and then switch it to dx mode whenever needed. I see how these photographers you mention would benefit with 20-24mp instead of 15 (by the way 15mp is still a lot) that the d800 gives. But even if even some photographers need high fps they are better off waiting for a pro body d600 or a lower pixel count d800 with higher fps. I’m not against the d400. I love nikon cameras.. but the price margin seems to close with fx. I’m not sure there will be the demand for it… even though this forum is dying for it.

          • No longer Pablo Ricasso

            Been shooting FX ever since I had my first roll of film.

            • patto01

              “FX” or 35mm film? The term “FX,” regarding this discussion, only applies to Nikon digital sensors, equal to the size of 35mm film; not 35mm film and not any sensor, of any size, by any other manufacturer.
              My first camera was a Minolta SLR (forget the model number) in 1979. It recorded to 35mm film; not anything in any way related to the term “FX.”

            • No longer Pablo Ricasso

              Been using the whole frame the whole time. Skipped APS. Have a Kodak. Still use film too…

        • No longer Pablo Ricasso

          What part of “birders and sports shooters” did you not understand?

          • Aldo

            The part where birders and sports shooters with no limit budget are eager to buy s d400 instead of the superior d4

            • No longer Pablo Ricasso

              * OOps. I failed to note the “cost no object” portion of your statement.

              However, cost is an object, I can get the new 800 lens and a D4 to shoot 16 mpix or I can get the D7100 or a “D400″ and a 500 lens for what is still too much for most and shoot 24 mpix and get essentially the same picture. Or I could use a lowly 300 lens and get the same reach the 500 would give on the better camera.

              And if I was walking about in the bush then there are many costs that aren’t necessarily measured financially. The 300 lens weighs as much as your 70-200 and the 500 weighs about twice as much. The 800, with all it’s superior magnesium construction, weighs about twice that and is sort of bulky. The better camera has a speed advantage, but the difference in weight and length of the better lens would still stop many from using them without a support system. A support system means even MORE weight and a reduction in the photographer’s ability to take pictures quickly while on the run.

              So until we have full frame sensors testing the limits of diffraction as well as the lens, I feel that there will be a need for quality cropped sensor cameras. Maybe ten more years…

            • Aldo

              Yeah I mean of course cost is an object… That’s why my original statement was directed at price… This camera has to be priced right, otherwise it will only attract people seeking for a second body or those seeking to cut corners with lens, weight and size as you mentioned. Because if its priced too close to the D600, it seems to me it will be a very focused market. I see more success for a pro build version of the d600 than I see for the d400.

  • Brian

    Let me ask this of all those that believe a D400 is coming. What reason would Nikon have to not have released the D400 already if they were in fact intended on making one?

    • anonymous

      Canon hasn’t released a 7DII.

    • JonB

      I’m not one of those who believe a D400 is coming… I’m on the fence but leaning to the “it’s not” side. But one possible explanation for delay is that the D400 is slated to include some new technology that has been delayed in the R&D lab. What that might be, I don’t know. Perhaps a new AF technology. The inclusion of the Multi-CAM 3500 system in the D7100 suggests that something better may be coming for the top-end bodies. And that system is over 5 years old, although it has been tweaked a bit since its inception, so perhaps it’s time.

    • EnPassant

      I already answered that in my separate post!

  • Jon McGuffin

    D400 is coming. Take that to the bank (see my other comment). The camera body that is NOT coming is the “true” D700 replacement. D600/D800 is too tight around those spec’s, it’s just not happening. As time moves along, the D800’s disadvantage of those huge 36MP file sizes are just going to become more and more insignificant, particularly when the SLR market is flooded with bodies that all have higher than 20Mp (even the cheapest of cheap entry level bodies).

    Nikon’s biggest challenge will be the next generation of bodies to replace everything we have here that will give us a compelling reason to purchase those. It’s time to get really serious about not only integrated Wi-Fi, GPS, etc but really bring the usability factors of their cameras up in terms of moving images in/around the .net, working hard on the operating systems to improve ease of use, etc.

    • http://twitter.com/_thelonius_ christopher smith

      agreed…and as the computers and memory cards catch up the large files will no longer be an issue.

    • NRA Advocate

      Nope. Not coming.

      Ask yourself: when was the last time [since the advent of digital] that Nikon waited 6 YEARS to refresh a model?

      They haven’t. D300 successor is dead. Accept it.

      • Arkasai

        I don’t think it’s been six years since the D300s.

      • MacManX

        Did you even read the answer from Nikon above? The D7100 is NOT replacing D300s. Period. That we know for a fact.
        .. and by the way, D300s was announced in July 2009 – not even four years ago.

      • Nikonhead

        Didn’t the Canon 7D come out around the same time?

  • enchanted

    Finally, good news!

  • Douglas Pavani

    i don’t care about the D400 cause im waiting for the D500

  • DonD

    I told you, I told you , I told you. Now all of you that have benn proclaiming that for so long, Keep your lame thoughts to yourself from now on.

  • DonD

    Im really going to laugh at all of you when the 400 comes out with 36mps. HOr maybe 32. Half of you will not want it.

  • NikonGreg

    Rest assured if Nikon had a D400 in the works (and I believe they do), the general public would be the last to know. We have to remember that selling cameras is the most important thing for Nikon…so telling users a D400 is on the horizon will only hurt current D7100 sales because a large % of users will opt to wait-and-see. Being deliberately vague and arguably misleading (Nikon USA), will likely encourage users to buy now, and for some of those hopeful D400 users to possibly buy twice… D7100 now because its the new flagship, and a D400 later when they’re surprised a NEW flagship is announced!

    I think a D400 is in the works but it has been slow-tracked or delayed because of the poor sales numbers from the last quarterly fiscal report. Lower sales will mean a revised operating budget, which will naturally affect new product releases too. A Q2 scheduled release could be postponed until Q3 or Q4.

    On the otherhand, the D7100 does have a lot of unexpected features, like 51-point AF & weather sealing. So could Nikon be using this time to gauge consumer reaction to a D7100 flagship concept?

    • No longer Pablo Ricasso

      Well, they’ve just refreshed (replaced) every other camera in the system, save the D700 and introduced one.
      What else would they develop?

      Of course there will be the “D400″ (D9000).
      There will probably be a D710 at some point after that, at the approximate time they feel that there aren’t enough D4 sales to worry about cutting into them…
      And then wait a few months and watch the cycle go again with petty upgrades to the D3200. It’s not like they are going to lay off their engineers.

  • Phil

    I don’t understand all the hate for the D400. If Nikon decides to produce the D400, why are the haters so against it? Nikon already produces 3 FX cameras so its not like Nikon hasn’t put in any resources into FX. If another DX camera adds to Nikon profit margins, it will only strengthen the company and enable them to invest more into R&D.

    • Arkasai

      I’m pretty certain the negativity toward a possible D400 is just a knee jerk reaction to the people who have been begging incessantly for it. You’ve seen the posts in all caps, the writer probably foaming at the mouth with rage threatening to sell their gear and switch brands – then the next post down is virtually identical in every way. There can only be so much of that before there is an equally vocal backlash.

      • chubbs

        This, listening to people moan on every rumor about the lack of a D400 is annoying.

        Nikon won’t suddenly and magically create a camera because they complain loudly on a rumors forum.

        • Greg Heller

          If it is so annoying then why are you so actively involved in the discussion? Why don’t you just ignore this forum topic – If in fact it does bother you so much do us a favor and please stay off the topic.

          • Arkasai

            See the problem with those comments is that it’s spam masquerading as discussion. If you come here to repeat the same drivel over and over in all caps, you’re not engaging in or adding to the discussion, you’re degrading and derailing it. Hard to ignore this phenomenon when it’s voted to the top of every article, forcing you to skim down the page to find on-topic and articulate discussion. It should be the other way around.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dacian.groza Dacian Groza

    The fact that the D7100 is not replacing the D300s does not mean there will be a direct replacement for the D300s. Remember how the D800 was not replacing the D700? And then neither is the D600.

  • malchick743

    Shame on NikonUSA for the bad copy writing.

    But why D7100 is not qualified for NPS coverage when the D7000 was? It will probably be preferred as secondary bodies among the pros, so it should be covered too IMO…

    Hopefully the D400 will materialize someday. The D7100 has some decent specs but ergonomics-wise it’s still not pro enough. Not to mention the LHS mode dial with amateurish scene selection BS and the lack of dedicated AF-On button, which is a real PIA.

  • http://www.facebook.com/vsevolodzh Vsevolod Zhovtenko

    It is obvious, becuase d7100 still doesn’t have pro buffer and metering system

  • EnPassant

    More and more signs for the D400 coming!:

    Canon D7II rumors.

    Empty space in Nikon’s line-up of professional cameras:

    More and more signs for the D400 coming!:

    Canon D7II rumors.

    Empty space in Nikon’s line-up of professional cameras:

    http://www.nikon.de/de_DE/products/category_pages/digital_cameras/category_SLR.page?sParamValueLbl=Digitale%20Kameras&sParam1ValueLbl=Spiegelreflex&ParamValue=Digital+Cameras&Subnav1Param=SLR&Subnav2Param=0&Subnav3Param=0&RunQuery=0&ID=0

    The low fps and buffer in D7100, which appear to be just a D7000 replacement and not a merger between the D7000 and D300 lines.

    And now the latest statements from Nikon.

    I am confident we will see a D400 this year!

    The interesting question is: Why did it take so long?

    I think there are several reasons.

    First: The tsunami in Japan and flooding in Thailand delayed all DSLR production and announcement.

    Second: Nikon didn’t want to make some small upgrade like putting the 16MP sensor in the D300s body. 4MP more would just not make a significant upgrade.

    Third: Nikon plan to use the D800 body construction (with smaller prism for DX) for the D300s replacement. But as D700 came already 2008 and had no video while D300s with video was presented in 2009 D700 was the most important to update.

    Fourth: With five other new DSLR being presented 2012 there was simply not place for another camera release from Nikon last year as it would be to much for the market to swallow and surely Nikon would anyway not have recources to produce yet another camera. Besides the consumer DSLRs selling in much higher numbers had the priority.

    Fifth: Nikon really want the D300s replacement to stand out from its predecessor. Development takes time and they may need to wait for key technology, like chips, new sensor and parts for a faster mirror and shutter mechanism, coming into production.

    The low fps and buffer in D7100, which appear to be just a D7000 replacement and not a merger between the D7000 and D300 lines.

    And now the latest statements from Nikon.

    I am confident we will see a D400 this year!

    The interesting question is: Why did it take so long?

    I think there are several reasons.

    First: The tsunami in Japan and flooding in Thailand delayed all DSLR production and announcement.

    Second: Nikon didn’t want to make some small upgrade like putting the 16MP sensor in the D300s body. 4MP more would just not make a significant upgrade.

    Third: Nikon plan to use the D800 body construction (with smaller prism for DX) for the D300s replacement. But as D700 came already 2008 and had no video while D300s with video was presented in 2009 D700 was the most important to update.

    Fourth: With five other new DSLR being presented 2012 there was simply not place for another camera release from Nikon last year as it would be to much for the market to swallow and surely Nikon would anyway not have recources to produce yet another camera. Besides the consumer DSLRs selling in much higher numbers had the priority.

    Fifth: Nikon really want the D300s replacement to stand out from its predecessor. Development takes time and they may need to wait for key technology, like chips, new sensor and parts for a faster mirror and shutter mechanism, coming into production.

  • Joe

    The D800 is the “Pro” replacement of the D300. It does everything anybody wishes on DX, except “only” 6 fps, and not yet at everybody’s desired price point. If Nikon was to continue the “professional” DX line, they had done so with a major upgrade of the D300 since its introduction in 2007. Also remember that there is only one pro-grade DX lens, the 17-55/2.8. DX is not a “pro” format any more since FX became doable, it is the “enthusiast” format.

    • Eric Duminil

      To me, the pro-grade “DX” lenses are FX prime 1.4 and 1.8 lenses.
      They cost less than the 17-55, are smaller and are way better optically.

    • NRA Advocate

      Precisely.

    • patto01

      Even though you can shoot in DX mode on an FX camera, it’s not the same. Your nice big viewfinder becomes a teeny tiny viewfinder within a big window. It’s more difficult to compose or manually focus.
      Also, DX and FX lenses are defined by their specific design to accommodate certain sized sensors but some of the best DX lenses were designed to accommodate FX sensors, as well as DX sensors. In fact, a lot of full frame capable lenses’ descriptions state that they are for FX and DX sensors.

      I think it would be better to compare the relative strengths and weaknesses of bodies without obsessing over sensor size.

      My wife always tells me, “Don’t worry, dear, size isn’t that important…”
      :-)

      • Joe

        When using the D800 in DX mode I think more of a “150% viewfinder” which allows to see many things around the frame. Actually I like it. Maybe I would think different if I wanted to use the D800 as DX camera 100% of the time.

    • DonD

      Joe thinks only DX lenses work on DX bodies. Think about it Joe, any pro owning a D300, would probably own another body or two and one of them would probably be FX. So… why wouldn’t they also buy lenses that would work on all of their bodies, DX and FX.

      • Joe

        Err, no, I don’t think that “only DX lenses work on DX”. I just said that there are almost no dedicated pro-grade DX lenses, and especially the wide zoom/prime options for a “pro” DX system around a “pro” DX camera are not exaclty overwhelming, are they?

  • Eric Duminil

    Stupid question : if JPG’s are good enough from the D7100 with good shadows and highlights, what about shooting 12 or 16 MPIX jpg’s and getting a much bigger buffer?
    To me, the biggest problem concerning D800 & D7100 is not framerate or buffer, but the lack of sRAW.

    • umeshrw

      Seems that you have never shot raw before. Do it and you will never go back to jpeg.

      • Eric Duminil

        Ahah. I have enough experience with RAW, thank you very much.

        All I’m saying is that I’d rather have a JPG on my card that a non-existing RAW in my full buffer.

        Also, a properly exposed JPG with correct white balance and good histogram really doesn’t lack anything in comparison to RAW.

        • peterw

          Nothing, except for 4 to 6 bit extra colordepth a 12 or 14bit RAW gives to 8bit JPEG. Comes in handy for processing.
          and the possibility to correct minor errors light color temperature with one mouseclick, and the possibility to control difficult light (strong contrasts) – trusting on camera D-ligthing on the back of the camera isn’t always bringing what you want. That’s all.
          Better set the camera to a lower frame rate to avoid buffer problems. Good for autofocus.
          what is sRAW?

          • Eric Duminil

            sRAW has been offered by Canon cameras for quite a while.

            It basically is a downsized RAW file : it takes 4 RAW pixels and merge them into one.

            So D800 sRAW would be 9 MPix with crazy DR, High ISO and small size.

            http://dougkerr.net/Pumpkin/articles/sRaw.pdf

            • No longer Pablo Ricasso

              I think we can all guess what the “s” stands for…

            • peterw

              thanks Eric

    • DonD

      Go crawl back in your canon hole. There is no such thing as sRAW. If it’s anything other than RAW, it’s not RAW.

  • Distanted

    The D7000 marks the first time Nikon didn’t match it’s enthusiast DX flagship with a pro body DX camera. If they introduce a D400 now, it seems like it would indicate a big reversal on Nikon’s views on the FX and DX markets. Four years is a long gap between models in the digital camera arena. I can certainly see where a pro body/bigger buffer version of the D7100 would appeal to some professional photographers, I just wonder if there’s enough out there not moving up to FX to catch Nikon’s interest.

    • DonD

      Pleaszzzzze. Why do you all think it’s DX OR FX for pros. They do shoot FX!!! and DX. It’s a different tool for a different job. EVERY pro has 2 bodies, and I’ll bet most have 3 or 4, that they currently use or use for back up.

      • Distanted

        My point was that Nikon has ignored the D#00 series for 4 years, about the time they began producing FX bodies. That suggests to me that in THEIR business model, they weren’t looking at DX for the ‘pro’ market during that time. They may have reconsidered, but none of us knows for certain, yet. I understand perfectly well that many professionals may use more than one format, especially as a backup. Some may choose DX because of the crop factor, others may simply have an older DX body sitting around, but I don’t think Nikon sits around saying ‘how can we make a cheaper camera that pros will buy?’ That doesn’t mean I don’t want to see a D400, just that I’ve seen little indication of Nikon’s intent to produce one.

  • j v

    For me, it looks like the D7100 offers what I was waiting for… So I’m just following the D400 news for fun (I doubt the added cost of it – if it comes – is worth it for me).

    But I can see room for a D400… For the simple reasons that Nikon has no DX pro camera anymore in their range.

    But I would guess it more to be in a D4 like body: built-in portrait grip, sync terminal, no internal flash (or only commander); newer AF engine (more cross sensors?), higher framerate, 4K video, … Plenty of features that they can add.

  • http://twitter.com/JDennisThomas J. Dennis Thomas

    This discussion is getting so old. I find it odd that people spend so much time arguing over something as inconsequential as what camera models are going to be released.

    Doing research on stuff like this is part of my job, but I really can’t imagine sitting around arguing about mythical cameras for FUN.

    • anonymous

      Yet belittling others for enjoying things that you do not enjoy isn’t beyond you. Very mature.

      Insert “STOP LIKING WHAT I DON’T LIKE!” image macro.

    • anonymous

      Yet belittling others for enjoying things that you do not enjoy isn’t beyond you. Very mature.

      Insert “STOP LIKING WHAT I DON’T LIKE!” image macro.

      • http://twitter.com/JDennisThomas J. Dennis Thomas

        Haha, it’s only “belittling” because YOU took it that way. Persecution complex, I suspect.

        I said that “I” can’t imagine that it would be fun. I never said it wasn’t fun for YOU. I was simply making a personal observation.

        PLEASE continue arguing and hiding behind your “anonymous” posts. That’s “Very mature”.

        Seriously, not everything on the internet is a derogatory remark aimed directly at you (whoever you may be…)

  • Sports

    The real flagship will be the .. ta-dah … the D7200.

  • hendrik

    If i was Nikon, I will design unibody camera (with vertical grip) small enough to kick OMD @rse (better ergonomic, better viewfinder, only slightly larger than OMD, very fast burst rate, complete weather sealing, WIFI built in)

  • lapolo
  • Camaman

    Lol Nikon are playing the waiting game like true pro’s!
    Now everybody’s gonna wait and look at Nikon to release the “D400″

    Good free internet exposure, if you ask me.

    The only thing I can’t really understand what is that killer feature D300s still has that D7100 lacks.

    It may not be a replacement in the naming scheme of things but it sure is 2 generations in almost everything else…

    • http://500px.com/yoan_mitov/ Yoan

      “The only thing I can’t really understand what is that killer feature D300s still has that D7100 lacks.”
      It’s not just one feature:
      – pro body
      – big buffer (which doesn’t fill after a second of shooting like the D7100)
      – better controls

    • DonD

      I’ll say this again, most pros would buy it for the AF ON button alone!, esp if it’s only $500 more. Otherwise they would have the change the method in which they shoot… that is so ingrained that it is second nature. The AF ON button is not a trivial feature. Niether is a buffer larger than 1 sec for RAW. How much difference are you looking for. The price will be about $500 to $700 more. controls, buffer, build… worth every penny of it to a pro.

    • Greg Heller

      it lacks the ability to Kill the Canon 7D Mark II, that is exactly what it lacks. Don’t believe it? Compare the D600 vs the 6D feature for feature — Nikon will not give up market share.

  • Douglas Pavani

    D400 wannabe owners bitch even more than Fuji, Sony and Sigma owners combined.

    • RMJ

      Propably because there is more Nikon D300 users than Fuji, Sony and Sigma users combined.

      • rob s.

        LOL. And I’m a Sony user.

        • Bob

          We’re all Sony users…Nikon uses a Sony sensor..

  • Willy

    This is a slap in the face of all evil persons that dont want me to have the gear i need! SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP

    • No longer Pablo Ricasso

      No. That’s your mirror. Take your finger off the shutter release.

  • btdown

    How about someone ask them about the D700 replacement?

  • Maykungth

    They remove word “new flagship dx format” from
    D7100 page in nikon.co.th (Nikon thailand)

    From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Nikon_DSLR_cameras
    On few day ago D300s line will be repleaced by D600 line but in present D300s comeback to professional line again.

    Sorry for my english

    • Tommy

      Just yesterday the D600 was next to D300s, thanks for that!

  • Mike

    The D300 is so 90’s. Do people still actuallyshoot with them?

    • sapoviejo

      Absolutely YES.

      A good photographer can use any camera

  • One More Thought

    There seems to be this hunt for a D400 like the hunt for a mythical unicorn.

    As many have noted, there may not be that great of an addressable market for a D400. The pro’s already have what they need in a D4. Most enthusiasts will find something suitable for them, either the D7100, the D600, or even the D800.

    The D300s did not sell very well, and that surely sent a very strong signal to Nikon management. We may still see a D400…but I wouldn’t hold your breath.

    Re the Nikon vs Canon competition, you can rest assured that both companies know exactly what the other company is planning. There’s no surprises…no incident of Canon releasing a camera, and then Nikon going, holy moses, we have to release our version of that. C and N both have their strategies in place.

  • MRGABE

    if the D400 has a D800-like body and better burst rate, this might be the best camera that Nikon has to offer.

  • northernxposure

    If there is going to be a D300s replacement, and it’s still going to be DX, would it not make more sense to call it a D9000. So that we have D3200, D5200, D7100 and D9000 for the DX range, with D600 and D800 in the FX range?

  • 103David

    Memo: DX/FX clarification

    Dear Fanboys,
    The D7000/7100 are beautiful and fine instruments as were the D300/300S, D90, D70 and all the DX format cameras before them…as well as all the DX format cameras the future may hold.
    But you need to understand the sole reason there even is a DX format is that a decade ago DX was the largest sensor size that could be manufactured at a price consumers were (possibly) willing to pay.
    As attractive and (pretty-sparkly) the numbers appear to be, Nikon (and all the other makers) are trying to tell you there’s a world of difference between an “enthusiast” grade instrument and a “professional” grade item.
    Hard truth time: There is no such thing as a professional grade DX camera. It’s FX and up.
    Get over it and get on with it.

    Love, your uncle David (Don’t forget to write when you get work)

  • Tommy

    Well, duh! Should I really remind some of you that Nikon’s pro DSLRs have an odd number of digits in their names and consumer models have even? Getting rid of a pro 1.5 crop factor Dxxx camera in Nikon’s lineup would be just plain stupid considering how many people bought them in the past lineups.

  • Ke

    Nikon previously said the D800 is not a replacement of the D700. They also said the D7000 does not replace the D90. What Nikon says & what actually happens don’t always match up.

  • Marc P.

    One thing that hasn’t been mentioned… and that will have an impact on whether or not Nikon releases a “high end” DX camera… is the other guy in the room… namely Canon. They will introduce a high end APS-C camera in the third quarter (end of summer 2013). I highly doubt Nikon will stay on the sidelines of this market segment, no matter how “niche” it has become.

  • Back to top