< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon D400 rumors are back

Nikon-D400

Obviously a "fake" Nikon D400

Nasim Mansurov posted a new article on his blog regarding the mythical Nikon D400 camera. According to his source, who initially predicted the D400 announcement last year, the camera is supposed to be out around September this year:

"Apparently, the Nikon D400 has been pushed back at least twice now for several reasons. First, Nikon had some serious trouble with the supply chain when the floods devastated its Thailand plants. Most of the DX equipment was manufactured there (and many parts for the DX cameras and lenses were supplied by smaller companies in Thailand, which were severely impacted as well), so Nikon had to quickly move high-demand items off to other plants.

Nikon was on schedule for an early D400 announcement in 2012/2013 time frame, but it pulled the plug and decided to focus on the D7100 instead (and the current focus is to push as many D7100 sales as possible). It turns out that the camera went through several iterations and the earlier features did not fly with the upper management of the company."

As of today, I have not received a single reliable piece of information indicating that the D400 even exists. In my 2013 predictions, I mentioned that the 7000 and D300 product lines could merge. After the D7100 announcement we have been getting conflicting reports from Nikon in terms of the future of the high-end DX camera line.

This entry was posted in Nikon D400. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

    Kind of looking forward to this after scowling with crossed arms from the back of the room during the last few Nikon launches.

    • Fred

      You mean drumming up web site hits to support advertisers whilst not exactly setting the world on fire with photography.

      A classic case of marketing, no more, no less.

  • Frodo

    ..Nahhhhh

  • BryanL

    $1,699.99 (D400) in “September-2013 or January 2014 with D4S

    • Neopulse

      Amazing, makes sense that assumption.

  • Plug

    Better AF, EXPEED 4, + general upgrades. Please be true!

  • Owen

    Is the future not full frame, though? Of course, this camera could be great for people who are already deep into a DX lens system, but otherwise it’s sort of boring. Unless, of course, they come out with a camera that is a beast with video. Then I could see it being something I’d look at.

    • Pablo Ricasso returned

      Well if you would rather carry a 500 lens than a 300 you’re right. The future is anything other than DX but there is a vocal and serious segment of the market that does need this camera. And also Canon will have something sort of like it, so…

    • Kevin Purcell

      Ah, not a wildlife photog?

      Thom Hogan has written a lot on why a pro DX body isn’t dead especially for wildlife folks

      Even with the two crop modes on the D800 … expect a similar extra crop mode on the D400 if it has “loadsapixels”?

  • Stef

    At 12pm today I was about to pull the trigger on a d7100, but didnt.
    Now I see this! Wait, don’t wait… Ughhh.

    • BlueBomberTurbo

      Just do it. Unless you’re coming from full frame, you’ll be impressed with the body and image quality.

      • Stef

        I’m coming from a d90

        • umeshrw

          Features are good . Mp are very good . Coming from D90 noise may be slightly disappointing in 7100.

          • http://www.flickr.com/jaybie Jay Donahue

            what? the D7100 is way better with noise than the D90.

  • Nilrem

    With a graphene sensor…?

    • Remedy

      Black silicone will do for now. It’s about 100 times more sensitive to light. Imagine that.

      • fjfjjj

        I used black silicone to seal my bathtub. Should I apply some of it to my sensor?

    • wheremyD400nikonsan

      With a graphene shutter, = 1/16,000th sec!

  • Owen

    Or… a burst rate as high as the D4… that would be badass.

  • Skaarj

    I would like to see the D400 in a pro D4 body with at least 12 fps.

  • garykn808

    I loved my D300 as a great camera for photography. The D7000 I purchased is also very good as a photographic tool but I’m not loving video. Although it is there as a feature on my camera I rarely if ever use it. I wish Nikon produced cameras for photographers and videographers as separate lines. I was hoping to see an updated D300(D400) or D700.

  • Richard Hart

    ooh! is this full frame? want a pro body with proper af, full frame and not over 24.6mp!

    • Jimmy

      Erm no. It’s DX you massive weapon.

      • Richard Hart

        How do you know?

        • Pablo Ricasso returned

          The article referenced the 7100 and not the 800 or 600. Also, a full frame like you want would be called a 710.

        • Jimmy

          Have you been following this “death of DX” thing for the past few years? Obviously not. Wake up, and try to keep up.

    • Maji

      Nikon already has a pro body with proper af, ff and not over 24.6 mp… it is called the D4 (16MP < 24.6MP). There is also the D3S (12MP < 24.6MP). Both meet all your criteria.

      • Richard Hart

        well some pros would rather spend $5k on better things like children and may prefer a smaller body to save their neck and arm muscles when shooting 8hrs a day. that makes the d3 & 4 not an option

        • Pablo Ricasso returned

          D700 for now then…

        • Aldo

          meh…

        • Mike

          Most “professionals” that own their own business are willing to pay the costs to buy the equipment their business needs. And photography is still one of the cheapest businesses one can buy the equipment to be in.

        • Maji

          Well, did you say you want it for less than $2k and in a smaller body in your Original Post to which I replied?

        • Volchesta Jfr

          “well some pros would rather spend $5k on better things like children” … I think Professional Photographers would rather spend their money on cameras because buying children is illegal. :-P

    • EJP

      See D3x ;)

  • earthrokk

    D7100 is the flagship. D400 seems pointless for APS-C. Only thing I can see is a body between the D800 and D600 @ FF 24mp

  • earthrokk

    D7100 is the flagship. D400 seems pointless for APS-C. Only thing I can see is a body between the D800 and D600 @ FF 24mp

    • Pablo Ricasso returned

      I suppose the 7100 is flagship… for most of a year.

      • Kevin Purcell

        The 7100 is not in the NPS. The D300 is. So the 7100 is not the “flagship”.

        Nikon pulled back on the “flagship” comment after the 7100 launch.

        Clearly they expect a “D400″ in the future.

        • Pablo Ricasso returned

          Clearly I agree.

          But I doubt they are still actually producing the 300. So, until they …

        • NRA Advocate

          Nope.

          The 7100 is not in NPS because Nikon no longer considers DX format to be “professional.”

          Read the tea leaves, folks.

          They drew a clear distinction on that when the D2 series (which WAS a pro-level body) became FX with the D3 series, and the D300 wasn’t updated.

          Look at what they’ve been doing recently:

          – FX coming down in price

          – DX lens introductions slowing down

          – D7100 being well-specified sans buffer size (but it even has the D800’s weather sealing capability)

          Sad to say it, but the market is not evolving towards DX sized pro DSLRs…it just isn’t.

          Smart phones are fast replacing compact cameras.

          Compact cameras are getting bigger sensors, from M4/3 to APS-C (witness the Coolpix A).

          And full-frame sensor tech is getting cheaper.

          Advanced mirrorless cameras will be the new bastion of APS-C/DX format cameras.

          See what’s happening here?

          D400 is a pipe dream.

    • Martin Brooks

      D400 is pointless for amateurs, but not for serious photographers who want to maintain “reach” and want a better made, but smaller body. I wanted the D400 to replace my D200, but I couldn’t wait anymore and bought the D800. I didn’t go for the D600 because I couldn’t stand the controls. Although I won’t buy the D400 now because I already bought the D800, I think it’s a camera that Nikon needs to have. If I ever want a second body, it would be the D400 (assuming they release it and it’s what I think it’s going to be).

      From a price standpoint, something between the D600 and D800 makes sense at around $2400. But from a feature/function/body quality standpoint, I’m not sure what that would comprise of: D600 sensor in a D800 body? I’m not sure the market would recognize the distinction easily enough and it would probably take sales away from the D800, although if you think like Apple, you never worry about cannibalization of your own products by yourself.

      • MyrddinWilt

        +1

        I bought the D800 for much the same reason. I have my V1 for cases where I really need reach and now I am getting a 14-24 for the wide end. I think that covers most needs -)

        If Nikon does a D400 I think they need to crank up the MP to make it a better choice than a D600. 36MP would be about right and make it the same as the D800.

        Then come out with a D4x with the same sensor pitch! That would make it 80MP and put Phase One out of business. Nah, not going to happen. But 48MP is quite likely as ~50MP is the standard for mags like Vogue and Architectural Digest.

        • patto01

          36MP on an APS-C sensor? That necessarily reduces speed while handicapping low-light capabilities. Doesn’t make any sense.
          Putting the D800 in DX mode gives you the extra reach but doesn’t solve the speed problem. Also, I don’t like shooting in DX mode…too difficult to compose in the cropped viewfinder.

        • Reese

          Now way! Nikon hardly has any DX lenses that out resolve the DX 24MP sensors. More MP are not going to add any benefits to the DX camera line. They need better DX lenses and the cameras will do fine with other enhancements beside more MP.

      • Swade

        Put your camera in DX mode. Problem solved.

  • kg

    A D400 is what a lot of people really want. They like the DX for wildlife & sports. I haqve a D300 and I’ve looked long & hard at the D600 & D7100. The D600 just doesn’t cut it. Limited bracketing & such. If you are going with a consumer body, for me, the D7100 is a better choice. To me the choice today is between the D7100 (better for sports) & the D800 (better for landscape). I think a D400 is what a lot of people really want. Look at how many D300 are out there & are still being used.

    • Debopriyo Datta

      Absolutely! Even the used ones are being snapped up. B&H has no stock of preowned D300 or the D300s. Whenever a few show up, the next day they are gone.

      • Mike

        What is the most surreal is that Nikon does not have a decent & affordable 35mm equivalent prime, neither for DX, nor for FX.

        This while micro four thirds has a 17mm f/2.8, 17mm f/1.8, 20mm f/1.7; and Fuji has a 24mm f/1.4 coming.

        Nikon’s DX 35mm f/1.8 needs a 24mm buddy.

        • itznfb

          Lens prices have doubled over the last 2~3 years so I wouldn’t expect to see “decent” and “affordable” ever enter the same sentence when referring to lenses again.

        • Connor Ross

          50mm f/1.8G? 28mm 2.8D?

        • Bryan

          The 35D is both affordable and decent.

          • Carl

            The 35d is not a lens.

            • CV

              Yes it is

              He means the Nikon AF-D 35mm f2

            • Carl

              Ahhhh. OK, thanks. Thought we meant the Canon 35D. The comment makes much better sense now. :)

    • EJP

      6 frame RAW buffer of the 7100 is a complete non starter for action wildlife shooters.

      • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

        The buffer is actually 7@24mp and 10-12@15mp crop, if you set it correctly. That’s as tested with a Sandisk Extreme 128gb 45mb/s. And the buffer clears in about three seconds.

        However, yeah, I’d like more than that and an extra 2fps in either mode. Imagine double the buffer size and clearing that fast…that alone makes a D400 for me!

        • EJP

          In my testing I could never get more than 6 14bit RAWs even with a 95MB/s card and 1/2000 sec shutter speeds. But who cares if it’s 6 or 7 ;) , it needs to be at minimum double that and even that is relatively weak. An 18 shot buffer would make it a pretty viable BIF and wildlife camera.

          • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

            Ah, you’re shooting 14-bit, that’s why. I don’t bother. And here’s why: http://blog.micahmedia.com/?p=26

            http://blog.micahmedia.com/?p=34

            …although, I’ll have to repeat this with the D7100 to see if it holds true still. But before testing, I’m doubtful–the D7100 looks noisier to me at base ISO than the D700. Noise limits DR and the usefulness of higher bit rates.

        • joe

          if you can’t get it right with 3 fps you will not get better with 6 or 8 fps :P

          • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

            You’re absolutely right. The best sports action photos are still shot on 30cm lenses and wet collodion.

            • patto01

              As good as you and joe are, you should be able to paint a scene with oils on canvas. Or, maybe scratch it on the side of a cave wall with berry juice. Dorks!

          • Jeroen Wijnands

            Ah, what birds do you photograph?

        • Jeroen Wijnands

          That’s useless. Don’t know if you ever shoot fishing terns or mating deer but with those things 3 seconds is the difference between getting the shot and “might as well pack up and go home”. With a D300 I can burst 15 frames and have enough room to shoot another burst in a little under a second.

          • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

            …and you’d be waiting longer for your buffer to clear with the D300. I know this. Same with my D700. It’s a trade off faster dumping speed vs. more shots in a row. The D700/300 can take more pictures in a three seconds. But the D7100 can take more pictures in 10. The buffer on my D700 takes 12 seconds to dump a full buffer to a 60mb/s card. I could shoot about 40 pictures with the D7100 in the time it takes the D700 buffer to dump.

            And one more thing the D7100 has going for it is the shutter and aperture arm are much quieter than the D300 or D700. If a D400 comes along, I’ll certainly snatch one up, but I think I’ll hold onto the D7100 either way. It’s good for close work when I need to be a little quieter.

        • kk123

          With Sandisk 90mb/s the buffer is cleared extremely fast. But I want a D7100 like camera with 10-12 fps, all magnesium body and much bigger buffer.

      • Brent Busch

        Or people like me that like to photograph drag racing. One second worth of buffer is pretty much useless.

    • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

      I sold my D7000 a year ago and replaced it with a D300s. But then I missed the 1080p video so I sold the D300 and got the D7100. I didn’t lose a penny on that D300s! But I know I’m going to lose money selling the D7100 when the D400 comes out. Oh well. Oh, and the price of the grip is a ripoff!

      The D7100 has actually exceeded my expectations.

      • Jorge

        On my 2008 D300 I use a Zeikos grip for #75.00 The same grip fits my D700. Also, Zeikos also has one out now for my D800 which I’ve yet to get… Soon

      • CV

        Yeah, the price on the MB-D10 has gone crazy

    • AM

      Yeah right. More bracketing steps is what sports and wildlife shooters need. LOL.

      • Cheetah Bracketed to Death

        Bracket that running Cheetah

      • patto01

        Yep. Everyone know you have to buy a different body for different subjects…I can’t believe he wants to use his sports/wildlife camera for landscapes! Dork!

        • Sports

          ;-)

        • AM

          That’s even stupider than the original post. LOL.

    • R!

      The truth ,if we admit it,is that we were waiting for a D800 like body with the D600 specs;and a D400 with the D800 like body and the D7100 specs !!!!!!! for serious photographer in the field ,not those ok fine hightechgeek toyz that we have !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!DAMN!!!!!!!

      • Pat Mann

        Not at all. What I and many other D300 and D300s diehards are seeking is a D300s with a state-of-the art sensor. The fact that it will probably also come with Nikon’s best video to date will make the market slightly larger, but most of us don’t care much about the video.

        I would also like them to throw in some other upgrades (like the high-end finder accessories of the D4 and D800 without a slip-off adapter, locks on c/s/m and meter mode, more ability to use multiple accessories simultaneously such as GPS and remote, perhaps all through wireless, now limited by the single 10-pin adapter), but none of those are deal killers.

        • Jeroen Wijnands

          Let me have my D300 with it’s AF system and meter and buffer even but with the noise of the current top of the range DX sensors. Add video if you want to make me smile. Whatever you do don’t mess with the shape of the camera or the build quality!
          I’ve spent 4 years now with mine in truly horrible weather and the only problem I have is some rubber comming unglued!

          • Remedy

            The sad thing is they are gonna mess up with the body. they are gonna make it smaller and more retarded like it is with D800 vs D700. Nobody (no one reasonable at least) asks for it but they know better.

        • wheremyD400nikonsan

          Those people still shooting with their D300 (me) don’t care about video. I’m waiting for the D400 but if it isn’t here by Christmas 2013 I’ll buy a D7100.

      • fjfjjj

        I really want a D10 with an FM2A body and D800 specs, a D20 with an F4 body and D4 specs, and a D25 with Holga body and PhaseOne specs.

        • wheremyD400nikonsan

          The ancient D1 (DX) had a shutter speed of 1/16,000th of a second, double the current 8000th sec or 4 times faster than the slooooow D600 1/4000 sec.
          See if Nikon can bring that shutter speed back up. Would go nicely with a new updated 50mm f1.2 !!

    • Ron

      I’m glad i kept my D700 :-)

  • Rayman 1

    I heard that Nikon is also working on cameras like the V1 and V2 just with a bigger sensor…..dont know when and if those products will hit the shelves…. The Series 1 was just the very beginning of mirrorless Nikons..
    but Nikon is NOT droppping the mount….
    thats better then the rumored D400 !

    • EJP

      Irrelevant to the discussion

      • Rayman 1

        not if its called D400 !

        • EJP

          They are never going to call a V like camera a DXXX.

          • Rayman 1

            you will see what happens the next few years ! ;)

  • http://www.naturalvolo.it/ michele perillo

    As I said in the other post, I would like to believe, but

    1-this looks too good to be true (expeed 4 launched for a dx camera? nah…)

    2-Mr Mansurov has trumpeted the imminent launch of a D400 too many times for my taste… see his post.

    In the meantime, that is, for all 2013 at the very least, my D7100 will be a fine complement to my trusty D3s.

    • Plug

      Point 1 : Was not expeed 3 launched with the Nikon 1 range?

      • http://www.naturalvolo.it/ michele perillo

        yes, and what line has been hyped more by Nikon in recent times, 1 or Dx?

        • Plug

          I am not sure which, but DX is where they rake in the money. The lack of wide DX primes is consequently puzzling.

          • http://www.naturalvolo.it/ michele perillo

            The place where they rake in their money is (gulp!) coolpix range :-)

            • Plug

              Ugh! Yes of course!

            • Martin Brooks

              In terms of units, yes, but not in terms of margin. On most of those cameras, they only make a few bucks each and that market is going away anyway. Nikon sold 17 million Coolpix in fiscal 2013 and they’re projecting 14 million for fiscal 2014 but they probably won’t achieve it. Cameras in phones have gotten too good and are too convenient. The high end Coolpix cameras will be around for a bit, but the low end is going to disappear.

            • umeshrw

              True that . Also nowadays consumers consider it fashionable to tote dslr everywhere so dslr sales are going up and compacts coming down.

            • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

              I thought the whole “Coolpix brings in the money” meme has been long since debunked.

        • Rayman 1

          a mirrorless Dx with expeed and 15fps and large buffer and silent electronic shutter makes sense !
          AF wise the series 1 is superior to everything else that Nikon makes….. the only drawback of the series 1 is its small sensor and its limited camera controls.and limited flash . but the system is very modern….

  • chuzpe

    DX needs new lenses, not bodies.

    • n11

      Seems like Sigma’s got that covered pretty well with their new line-up, and that interesting 18-35 F1.8!

    • Pablo Ricasso returned

      What? They just gave you an 800. Shut up and be happy.

      • chuzpe

        That’s a designated FF lens you clown. Shut up and read s l o w l y.

        • Aldo

          (sarcasm radar : fail ) (stupidity: active)

          • JakeB

            His comment may may have failed reached the mind of simple people like you.

            • Aldo

              I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt…

            • Aldo

              It’s not fair to make fun of you because you clearly have no idea what’s going on.

  • photo-Jack

    Its really a strange game with the D400, likewise with Canon’s 7D: rumors even book anouncements and then silence again. If Nikon has in mind to skip the D400, it would have been a better marketing policy to have a clear word: everybody wanting the DX flagship would settle for the D7100. Now many are on hold. And taking the new 80-400 handhold, you’d know that there is a good reason for hoping for a bigger body.
    Companies like Fuji provide a roadmap of what they gonna do. Nikon gets us tons of patents if and what lenses will get build respectively renewed. So far all my lenses are from Nikon but by the time I’ll start looking elsewhere.

  • Aldo

    I don’t think nikon plans to get into many more high end DX lenses… They figured you can always rely on FF pro lenses… I hope the D400 happens though.

  • AlphaTed

    When Nikon mentioned the D7100 as the new flagship DX camera, it’s the truth. It’s a fact. It’s the best DX format camera at that time hands down. But it doesn’t mean there won’t be any other DX body that will replace it as the flagship DX camera. They have to sell the D7100, and keep the inventories moving.
    Mentioning or even a slight hint that there will be a D300 replacement will be a marketing suicide. They’re doing and saying the right things.

    • Foolishcfo

      My understanding is that Nikon USA, and not Nikon, labeled the D7100 as Nikon’s flagship DX camera. Nikon Europe has never called it Nikon’s flagship camera but rather the top camera for enthusiasts.

      • Brian

        A flagship camera with that buffer is laughable!

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

        That’s correct. I have the feeling that Nikon is pushing people to full frame. You want to have a large buffer? Get the D4. For the past few months they have been releasing only FX lenses.

        • coloretric

          Ideally it would be nice to go back to the old days and have a 35mm sensor appear in compacts. Much like that Nikon patent released a while back that called on a ’35mm like compact with digital internals’. I presume that will be once all this 1″ and 4/3rds sensor starts to die down.

          It would make sense that more returns are made from the larger sensors, hence the drive/push with the D600. The D7100 would probably be making up for the D400 delay and to use up remaining AF sensor arrays. I presume that is perhaps why is may have been labeled ‘flagship’ to keep some questions at bay. Alternatively it could have been a massive marketing slip up. Either way it is the best single shot (Nikon) DX camera out at the moment.

          I agree with the original poster – keeping the public guessing with what is next will keep sales steady and predictable. As a large corporation things are planned out years in advance. Introducing a killer new camera body before a certain amount of sales are sold would hurt current and future prospects for the company.

          In regards to professional shooters – Nikon squarely aims it’s sights on them using a D4 or D800 and enrolling you into the NPS program. Next up is your previous pro’s with the D3/S and D700/D300S market and Nikon trying to convince that the D4 is the next step. The advanced amateurs then follow with the D7000/D7100/D300S mixup and so forth all the way down to the Nikon J line.

          I would think it would be in Nikon’s best interest to release a D400 that satisfies all those (and I’m sure Nikon is aware of them) that are hanging out for a D300S replacement.

          I do however think that Nikon have somewhat cocked it up a bit with the D600 and should have used that as D400/D700 replacement, so that we didn’t have the current ambiguity of “where the hell is the middle ground camera”.

          Of course this ‘buffer’ issue is the big killer in all of Nikon’s line (seen in the D600, D7000, D7100) – could it be a technological roadblock…i.e. is EXPEEED 3 not enough? Perhaps so. I would fathom that the upcoming EXPEED’4′ would fix this issue.

        • Brian

          I have a D4 and 2 D800’s. What does that have to do with the buffer on the D7100?

          • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

            Hehe, he’s talking about Nikon telling them “you” not you “you”.

          • An anonimous Photographer

            He did not mention you, he talks about what Nikon is doing, and that is a correct explanation.
            Who needs a fast fps camera with a large enough buffer has to go FF.

            The D400 will be released in September and it will be the competitor for the 7D II

            • http://www.flickr.com/jaybie Jay Donahue

              how do you know?

        • fred

          D600 is hobbled. Nikon Can’t push D300 owners THAT way. The D7100 is tempting (as is the overpriced D800E) but as I said a few months ago I’m waiting till Sept for the D400 announcement.

          Santa knows what I want for christmas!

          • Spy Black

            Depends on how you shoot. I shoot fashion, and nature and general photography with me D600. Nothing about it gets in my way.

    • EJP

      As I stated above “6 frame RAW buffer of the 7100 is a complete non starter for action wildlife shooters.” The D7100 is not a pro grade DX body. Nikon needs one badly.

    • mikeswitz

      I take it all back

    • babola

      “Mentioning or even a slight hint that there will be a D300 replacement will be a marketing suicide. They’re doing and saying the right things.”

      Not at all. You somehow forgot the D7100 is a DSLR targeting the consumer photogs and DX00 line of DX cameras targeting semi-pros and pros. Apples and oranges.

  • Alan

    Ah, thank god… Can we make this post keep floating to the top of NR? Maybe it will act like fly paper and keep the D400 fetishists out of other threads…

    • Pablo Ricasso returned

      Oh, but they’re so much fun.

  • J. Dennis Thomas

    News is slow and someone is looking for hits. What better way to generate buzz than to yell out D400!

    • M!

      absolutely agree. his blog on the D400 is nothing but logical predictions. Expeed 4, of course. Faster this and that, of course. What he forgot to mention is that Nikon always love to announce a new pro body D_ around the olympics. Given the 2014 Winter Olympics is around the corner in Feb 2014, he should have predicted that a new D4s/D4x will be announced in December 2013.

      • J. Dennis Thomas

        The D4X will have EXPEED 4, a 91K pixel RGB metering sensor, 61 focus points, and a 36 MP sensor with no AA filter. It will have a 3.2″ RGBW LCD and OLED viewfinder display. It may also be called the D5. It will be announced sometime in the future.

        Take existing features from the newest models, add some natural progression (EXPEED 4 of course and 61 AF points like the 1DX to keep up with Canon) and there you have it. I relatively plausible “rumor” that I got from a “secret source”. That secret source being my own common sense.

      • R!

        You are warming me up darling with this prediction !!!! ;)-

    • Pablo Ricasso returned

      Mansurov’s blog isn’t a hive of activity and discussions it used to be few months back. There’s hardly any traffic at all there.

      These unfounded rumors are a good way to sway some naive and novice towards his site.

      • J. Dennis Thomas

        Well, let’s be honest here. A few years ago this guy was posting re-hashed how-tos and reviews. A lot of his “photography basics” articles were rife with error.

        What are the chances that he actually has an “insider” source? I’ve been writing Nikon Digital Field Guides for over 8 years an I work with Nikon reps regularly. Even with our years of trust, not ONE of them has ever tipped me off. It would be too easy to trace and professional suicide.

        One of the new ways to make money in photography these days is to create a website that lures novices into the fold by looking professional and having a lot a banal content such as lens reviews co-opted from other sources. Ken Rockwell pioneered this in the late 90’s and the early part of the decade, but it seems others have picked up where he left off.

  • NRA Advocate

    Three words: Not. Gonna. Happen.

    That is all.

    • RondoX

      Three words: Keep. On. Trollin’.

      Nikon D400
      “I Believe.”

      • NRA Advocate

        Three words: Keep. On. Dreamin’.

    • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

      We. Can. Hope.

    • Malik Tintilinich

      Four words: learn how to count.

      • NRA Advocate

        They’re called separate paragraphs. You know, where one thought ends and ANOTHER one begins.

        Look into it.

        On the other hand, perhaps Engerish isn’t your first langruage.

    • Kerry Wallace

      You mean 6 words NRA, you bozo….?!

      Counting isn’t one of your strengths, is it?

      LOL!

      • Sibun

        Hahaha…good one, mate.

      • Aldo

        nop check his posts on the Tokyo 360 camera system.

      • NRA Advocate

        “Not. Gonna. Happen.”

        That’s 6 words to you, huh? Where’d YOU learn to count?

        Here’s three more words for you: Dumb. Ass. Clown.

  • Brent Busch

    If Nikon hadn’t cheaped out on the D7100 buffer I would have bought one, I wanted to finally upgrade from my D90.

    • KnightPhoto

      Which is exactly why Nikon cheaped out on the D7100 1-second buffer. So you and I did not purchase one. And yeah, we’ll both end up with D400’s someday won’t we ;-)

      • Brent Busch

        Yeah, if Nikon get off of their collective butts and releases a D400 for under $1700 I’ll be all over it.

    • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

      Well then don’t cheap out yourself–buy one! It’s definitely superior to your D90 in every way. And it’s a steal, even at list price. Unless you’re a hobbyist…in which case, stick around here and whine some more.

  • BryanL

    Admin.,,,,maybe like the D7100 (that basically came out of no where without much warning…the D400 is so “hush-hush”..you have no one with any “solid” leads..??? Even when we saw that “earlier” D600 picture on that counter…most people thought it to be fake..I think the D400 will happen but I think cuz it’s been pushed back for so long…they may be adding “current up to date technology ” and maybe their “special DX lens( to compete with Sigmas new 1.8 18-35).. is not ready yet..we all know they need “more” DX lenses..I think “late” 2013 to all of 2014 will bring back the DX …(personal opinion of course)..

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      I think there were plenty of D600 and D7100 leaks/rumors prior to the announcement.

  • morg

    oh well one more summer with my D200!

  • Spy Black

    What if the “D400″ winds up being Nikon’s first DSLR-ish DX mirrorless? If it offers all the goodies you’re hoping to see in your mythical D400,sans mirror, would you bite?

    • AlphaTed

      DX, mirrorless, magnesium body, F-mount, at least 8fps, at least 3 (or 4) seconds worth of buffer …. bring it on!

    • Neopulse

      Would be ridiculously amazing that. Would it help reduce pricing of it including a longer lifespan?

    • Matt

      NO! I want a viewfinder – to feel more connected to the subject :-)

  • Neopulse

    So far, you can tell that Canon and Nikon are working together somewhat, The 7D Mark II got hyped up for awhile especially with it being closely anticipated that 7D prices dropped for a bit then went back up (unfortunately). In my opinion if Canon wanted to bring out the their top cropped sensor line, they would have done it already with time to spare. But obviously, there is the off chance that Canon is waiting to see what Nikon cooked up in order to best them. I think a Baby 1DX will be great, let’s hope that the baby D4 will be astonishing in this category.

    • Martin Brooks

      Don’t be absurd. Canon and Nikon are not working together.

      • Allen_Wentz

        Many times over the decades it has seemed that at the highest level Nikon/Canon conspire, intentionally choosing slightly different market segments.

    • Pablo Ricasso returned

      “…Canon and Nikon are working together ”

      Say what !?!?!

      • Neopulse

        Yeah I know :S But still gives that impression every now and then. Maybe not same company, but shareholders yeah.

  • DaveyJ

    If Nikon DOES NOT build and market the D400 then it is a huge mistake on their part. Regardless what a few FX fixated posters think there is a very serious market and interest in the D400. A number of us own and use the D7000 and the D7100 and still eagerly await the D400. Price the D400 though too high and the target would be missed. This most awaited camera ever better be priced LOWER than the D600 which in my mind cut a lot of corners engineering wise. It should be possible to build a camera with a way better buffer and fix some of the less than perfect areas of the D7100 and still keep the price at a point where Nikon stands to make the most money on this LONG awaited camera.

    • http://kyleclements.com/ Kyle Clements

      From what I’ve read, a single DX sensor costs about $50 each, while an FX sensor costs about $500 each.

      $500 can by you a lot of buffer and weather sealing and metal.

      I would love a DX camera that fires like a machine gun and is built like a tank.
      And has a 100% preview button…

      • Remedy

        You heard wrong.

    • Pat Mann

      I suspect the D400 will come in around $2000, at least if it has a 24mp sensor and adequate buffer for sports and other action shooters – it also needs more throughput than than the D4 if it’s to support that sensor and the FPS for action shooting – equal to or a little better than the D300s.

  • quaqsing

    there is no real replacement for d300s and even not for d700.. i’m still waiting and keeping my old and trusty d300s and d700.. go Nikon go.. I want to pull trigger on new body, but those d7100 and d600 or d800 aren’t for me.. those are for hobbyist and studio photographers.. thanks!

    • Pablo Ricasso returned

      Another one who calls D800 a “studio photog” camera.

      Rent one for few days, go shoot landscape, wild life, outdoor portraiture, architecture…shall I go on? Then come back here and apologize – LOL!

      • Aldo

        I still shoot with the F4… digital slr’s are the devil!

        • Toby

          have fun upgrading in 100years

          • nc_mike

            Well, I shoot a D800 and also still shoot my Nikon F2as – you can have the best of both worlds :-)

      • Marcel Speta

        This is exactly what I did … and purchased D3s :-)

        • JakeB

          D800 isn’t for everyone, and clearly not for you. There are many a folk still content with the older D3 and D700 – if that’s what fullfils your shooting style and needs – no reaon for an upgrade.

      • PitchBlack

        I’m a pro shooter, one of the best in my field, and I use the D800 to shoot sports because of the great image quality and the amazing ability to crop. I’ve found that I’d rather get four great shots at 36mp than 10 less amazing ones at 16.7mp on a D4. I LOVE my D800s.

        • patto01

          What are you doing with 36mp that you can’t do with 16.7? Do you have a D4 and, if not, how do you know the pictures would be less amazing? I don’t know who you are but Joe McNally and Moose Peterson, who are easily among the best in their fields, both prefer the D4. I’m not trying to be a jerk; I really want to know!
          I’m a semi-pro shooter and one of those in my field ;-) and oftentimes shooting several hundred photos per session, all of which have to be stored for documentation, I’m concerned about 24mp photos from my D600. I can’t imagine dealing with 36mp/photo.
          You know…I just can’t get away from your “one of the best in my field,” comment. I’ve never met anyone, among the best in their field, who would say that.

          • PitchBlack

            I think I mentioned I did a lot of cropping. You can crop away half the photo and have something very usable. Joe and Moose and the luxury of thinking about and composing their shots, sport photographers don’t. As for insulting your sensibilities… sorry?

            • patto01

              Oh. So you’re a sports photographer. I can see the benefit of using a D800 and being able to crop later. I thought your use of the “amazing” referred to the quality of the photo, not the composition. Again, and I’m really interested, wouldn’t the D4s much larger buffer be a big advantage for sports? Sometimes I run out of buffer, leading the shot, before the action even starts.

              And you didn’t insult my sensibilities, you only denigrated yours. No need to apologize. We all have those moments.

        • KnightPhoto

          Wait’ll Nikon comes out with a 10fps 36mp monster – this would make a great deal of marketing sense in a D4 style body.

          Myself, for indoor low-light Theatre I still prefer the D4 images over D800E though. The super-high ISO images are “better” coming outta the D4 (e.g. ISO5000 and above).

          Ironic, in MY low-light camera (D4), 4fps would be plenty for Theatre. Whereas yeah, if I had 10fps with my D800E sensor, that would be useful for birding.

          • PitchBlack

            The basic problem is that 10fps at 36mp requires the processor to push through 360 mp/sec. Even the 1Dx is only pushing through 216 mp/sec, and that’s with three processors!

  • dbltax

    We’re all secretly praying for a D4 sensor in a D800 body.

    • Snype1

      That’s what I’ve been waiting for! A D4 or D600 sensor in a D800 body!!!

  • BroncoBro

    I got tired of waiting to upgrade from my D90 and picked up a super clean D300s on ebay for $750. <5000 shutter actuations. It's a fabulous piece of machinery…very well thought out. ROCK solid. I shouldn't have waited so long. The way most people use cameras and present their work, FF is overkill. I occasionally need it for something I'm doing and just rent what I need. Otherwise, for the web, most printed material and display prints up to 16 X 20 or a bit more, DX is more than OK.

    • Pablo Ricasso returned

      …so say most of the peeps who cannot afford the FF camera…

      • Kari Yu

        Spot on!

        • Steve

          I guess if YOUR customers can’t see a difference then that’s fine……
          If web is what your are shooting for why not just use a point and shoot ;-)

          • Allen_Wentz

            Times are a-changin. The Chicago Sun-Times just fired all 28 of their pro photogs and told their reporters to shoot with their iPhones. Seriously.

            • Jorge

              The Chicago Sun are a bunch of money grubbing fools. Wait and see… They will file for bankruptcy soon enough

            • wheremyD400nikonsan

              Next they will sack all reporters. Just hire random bloggers.

      • BroncoBro

        The way your rationale plays out, if you can’t afford to shoot with a gold plated Leica with ocelot trim then you must be inadequate. I’m a business man as well as a photographer. I spend only what I need to satisfy the requirements of my audience. I shoot for web, magazine and brochure. Once in a while I shoot retail displays. I rent what I need for that. I see no reason to tie up $25-30K in gear that I only need once in a while when $6-7K gets it done.

        • Eskimo Micronian

          I recently made the switch from Nikon full frame to micro four thirds. The photos I take are every bit as good, because I have learned how to leverage the system with Panasonic bodies and fast Olympus primes. Sold my D700 and will sell my D3 soon. Full-frame zealots who feel superior to APS-C and MFT users should in turn feel inferior to medium format users. I take more pictures now with the smaller camera that is always with me. That being said, I still enjoy using my D3x and 24-70mm for studio work when I want the extra pixels. Pros who can afford it shoot full frame. But enthusiasts and working photographers on a budget can make amazing photos with DX cameras. I hope Nikon makes a D400…I know it would be an amazing camera for wildlife/outdoor sports and other photographers.

          • RichMy

            I think its more probable that the hoped for features of a D400 (larger frame buffer for sports fans) will be included in a D7200 when it arrives. I just can’t see Nikon bringing out a DX or FX-based D400 – where would that leave the D600?

            • wheremyD400nikonsan

              “where would that leave the D600″

              In the dust.

    • zeum

      Uh, your joking right? I love my FX and would never go back to DX. Waaaay better grain control. 3 times better in low light and 2x the dynamic range. like that other guy said though, if you can’t see the differencethen more power to you.

      • Mikey

        zeum, joking? The only real laughter I see here is generated by a small contingent of FX elitists. Get thee to a MF site, then you’ll be the one with the small thingy. I’ll gladly and enthusiastically add a full frame Nikon to my arsenal when they offer one that will fire >6 fps at a cost of under $4K. Right now, nothing under $6K is fast enough for flying ducks, diving pelicans, jumping marlin or swinging batters. I’d even consider picking up a D600 to play with just for the low light capability if it had an AF-ON button, but the lack of that feature is a 100% deal-breaker for me, just as it is with the D7100. My D300 is old and beat up, has over a quarter million shots (~60,000 of them on its second shutter), has endured a couple of unimpeded “on the rocks” drops from 4 to 5 feet up, has loose rubber, shiny-smooth body corners, a pure black AF-ON button… and it hasn’t lost a step. Give me the same camera build and performance with a modern (i.e. low-noise) DX sensor of 16 – 24 MP and I’ll smile as I hand you my $2,000. And if Nikon ever DOES come up with a sub-$4K full frame camera that meets my shooting needs, I’m all over that too – seven of my nine lenses are FX, just waiting for something new to hang on the small end.

  • TK

    A.B.O.U.T T.I.M.E

  • BroncoBro

    What we REALLY need are some good DX primes: 14mm f/2, 16mm f/2, 23/24mm f/1.4, 135mm f/2, 200mm f/2.8.

    • http://www.flickr.com/jaybie Jay Donahue

      don’t forget about a good portrait 58mm f/1.4 or f/1.2.

      • BroncoBro

        Well, there already are some good options like 50mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.8 (this is what I use and it’s awesome). But, I’d welcome a 60mm f/1.4 or f/2 (or 58).

        • http://www.flickr.com/jaybie Jay Donahue

          yeah i have the 50mm f/1.4. 58mm would give the same FOV on crop as an 85mm on FF though. and the faster the better there.

  • nawab

    I AM better late than never!

    • AlphaTed

      LOL.

      D400: I AM | Late

    • Marcel Speta

      i got enough by waiting and purchased D3s to my D700 and D300. Having crop is great, but honestly D300 needs some more light than others (D7100). D400 with 18Mpx and low ISO + at least 28 RAW buffer would be perfect together with D300 style Body…
      But it’s too late for me, i am not going spend any cent in Nikon gear for next couple of years. I am equiped pretty well and as hobyist I can’t afford pushing all $ in this way ….

  • ewasUP

    One of the BIGGEST reasons Nikon should continue with the 400 is for the fact that there are many pro photographers out there that like the extra reach without tele-converters. Perfect for weddings and wildlife situations! Another benefit to continuing the line is simple physics. Ever try using a 24-70 f/2.8 or 70-200 f/2.8 on a D7000? Pretty impossible really. The weight always balanced better with a larger body. Nikon also need to realize that if people are paying several thousand for a body alone, it had better have at least 51 AF points. This basically renders the D600 a moot point for me. If Nikon releases a D400, and if it has at least 24MP and 51 AF with around 7fps, I’m instantly picking one up! It would be the best compromise between ISO and high res.

    • nc_mike

      Sooo, with my D800 I have DX cropped mode…what’s the difference?

      • BroncoBro

        About $2,000.

        • nc_mike

          So you are thinking a D400 will cost at or under $1000?

          • Eskimo Micronian

            For outdoor sports photographers, at least three frames per second (assuming same frame rate as D300s with battery grip) and probably more with the D400.

          • BroncoBro

            First, there is no D400 at this point. I’m talking about what you CAN buy…a D300s. So, you’re thinking a D800 is $2,000? Look at it this way; now that the D7100 is out, you can pick up a very clean D300s for under $800. There’s a line of them on ebay going in that range. The few D800s that I see are going for $2,300-2,400. So, I stand corrected. If you’re looking for a D300s new, the price is about $1,700 vs. a D800 at $2,800. Remember, though, that you have to put lenses on them. In your case maybe that’s moot, but who would buy a D800 and ONLY use the DX option? So, my point is that you’re looking at a substantial increase in cost to make photographs using FF. If you’re a hobbyist the only thing that matters is rationalizing the purchase to your spouse. I take pictures for a living and It’s difficult for me (living in a small city that is not a media center) to justify spending many thousands of dollars on gear that my clients won’t foot the bill for. I assembled my whole kit for about $3,500. Two bodies, 5 lenses, a couple strobes and various light modifiers, backdrops and the like. To duplicate what I have in full frame would run me around $10-12K. I started my business when the economy tanked and I’ve made it work because I didn’t go out and spend a lot of money on stuff that wasn’t going to make a difference for me. All my clients are thrilled with what I produce for them. My business is growing and I was just won an award from the press club that reviews journalism in our state. Things are picking up and my business is increasingly profitable. But, I have to really wonder if, from a business point of view, FF is worth it. I rent it from time to time, and I see some differences for some types of work. But honestly, some of what I do using my D90 looks sharper than what I’ve done with the same lens on a D800. A friend of mine explained about how it has to do with pixel density but lost me after he said “So…”

            • nc_mike

              First off, the discussion was about the (possible) D400, not a D300/D300s – so your response makes no sense and appears to trying to change the original subject. That said, I owned a D300 – with the D800 I DO use the DX crop mode occasionally for a number of reasons. I sold my D300 (it was a great camera) and upgraded to a a D800 for $2,999. Used D800’s can be had for a lot less as you noted – about $2400. OK, so that would make the delta around $500-$600 between a new D400 (if.when) and a used D800. Heck, Nikon has already been offering even better deals on D800’s in the past few months. A D400 will likely be AT LEAST around $1800 – so why not just go for a D800 and get far more bang for the buck?

        • lock

          And a peeping hole against a real viewfinder

      • ewasUP

        The difference my friend is you can’t go past 800 ISO on a D800 without there being problems with noise. The D800 was meant to be a studio type camera, hence there are inherent limitations to the camera. Not to mention, would you really want a DX crop mode which doesn’t utilize all the MP you have? A D400 if it comes out will give you the 1.5X crop WITHOUT losing resolution. That right there is important for people who shoot weddings and wildlife!

        • nc_mike

          You obviously don’t own a D800; there isn’t any problem with noise at 1600 and still low at 3200 – geeze – total misinformation!

    • zeum

      So 2x the dynamic range, 2x depth of field, 3x the low light performance 1/4 the noise are moot? Lol. people that cant afford FX will say anything to make themselves feel better about it.

      • GoLong

        That’s not true. I have FX and I understand what he is talking about. Learn about pixel density. In well-lit areas, using bright lenses, you don’t need FX at all, unless you want to go a bit wider. In those cases, if you prefer reach, then DX is better for the sheer number of pixels (using FX crop mode will severely reduces your pixels). Now, if this was a very dark event, then of course FX can help.

      • BroncoBro

        Other than to troll for reasons to put down DX users, in what seems an attempt to justify the money you’ve spent on FX equipment, why are you here? This is an article about a potential new DX camera. If you’re such a fan of FX why do you bother coming on here? To leave a trail of nonsense about how something is 3X this and a 1/4 that? By what methods have you come up with these assertions? What exactly do you mean by 1/4 the noise? TWO TIMES the dynamic range? Two times what? People who spend 3X to buy an FX system to take pictures of their cats will say anything to justify it.

        • zeum

          Lol. Poor fella, your broke and angry. Clearly thinking isn’t your strong point cause your to busy knee jerk reacting. My D600 was a whopping $200 more than a D300s (that’s like 1/4×3+4×-1/2!!!). Your just jealous you cant afford a nicer camera for your cat pics(or your awesome Jerry Garcia finger collection). Fyi, you used “troll” improperly. But its nice to see the weak minded reactionaries get sucked right in. Hahaha. I’m done with this thread so don’t bother replying :)

          • BroncoBro

            $200 wasn’t what was between me and a D600. I’ve borrowed a D600 from a fellow photographer in town and can tell you it ain’t a D4, D3_, D800 or even a D300s. It’s an amateur camera. It’s fine and makes nice pictures, but you wouldn’t buy it to make your living with. So, go ahead and enjoy your KoolAid now that you’ve spent all your money on cameras instead of English lessons; it’s you’re, not your.

    • badburro

      The common misconception is that DX provides more reach, which it does not. DX fills the frame as if you had a 300mm lens when using your 200mm lens, but it does not magnify the image to 300mm. If you put your 200mm lens on your FX body and cropped out the DX equivalent size image from your print, you will see that the magnification is exactly the same.

      • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

        Right, with less pixels to describe that magnification. If the information is there to be described (aka, the lens isn’t garbage and there tends to be more resolution at a lens’ center anyway) then you get more detail than cropping a lower density sensor. Works great with my D7100. I definitely get more detail than cropping and enlarging from a D800 that way.

  • Fotoplay

    The D200 then D300 and 300s lines were the most successful camera lines in terms of sales Nikon has had. Do you really think they would leave all those shooters without an option to upgrade to?

    • digitaltech

      Well Nikon surprised us with D600 FX….i don’t think they will be d400……the price point is not there…D7100 $1200 and D600 $1999 (approx)…..if t he upcoming d400 price at $1500, would probably D7100 killer which suicide for Nikon…

      • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

        There will be D300 and D700 successors. They need to get their processing speed up to cope with the 24mp files. Quality is there, so speed shouldn’t be a big deal. With speed, they’ll have some quite competitive gear.

  • Jeroen Wijnands

    Even if it is true, and I don’t believe it is until I see one.

    It turns out that the camera went through several iterations and the
    earlier features did not fly with the upper management of the company.”

    That’s the part that has me very worried. What has changed? Is this a D400, i.e. a D300s with a modern sensor and video? Or has it lost features?

  • Pablo Ricasso returned

    Nasim should stick to things he does well, and leave the camera rumors to others…

    • JakeB

      Couldn’t agree more…it must be slow traffic to his site he’s been experiencing recently.

    • Aldo

      sometimes bad rumors are better than no rumors at all!

      • Gloria Maric

        Are they really?

        Come on…not everyone has a privilege of time-wasting on rumor sites, like you do.

        • Aldo

          too funny! re-read what you typed and you will laugh too =]

  • Capri Corny

    Looking at Nikon’s financial forecast for this year, there certainly has to be high end releases in the not too distant future. As for the silence, Nikon of course doesn’t want to reduce D7100 sales, and the constrained buffer is the only sign clearly pointing to a higher specified model. Furthermore, as time has passed, D400 should now be synced with D4s and D800s, which may imply quite a lot technically re new features. Which is another reason for keeping tight about the project.

    As for the lack of “pro DX” glass, just look at the resolution properties of recent pro/semi pro full frame Nikon glass. (Plus the 1.8 primes) It is only wide angle primes and zooms, like the Tokina 11-16/2.8 that are missing in an essential way. Nikon says the we should go full frame if we want to go wide, and there are quite a few arguments in favor of that. But with or after a D400 release, I think it would be unwise not to update the 17-55/2.8, and release the 16-85/4 they have patented (or an update of that design).

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      Nikon is supposed to announce a new D4 body this year.

      • Capri Corny

        Sure, but is that enough to explain the forecast? A D800s might help, though..

  • mark

    The Quest is for lenses, not for bodies. Current Nikon line of lenses hardly usable for pro DX shooting. While amateurs had 16-85, 10-24 and 70-300 (FX!), using pro FX zoom very unsuitable for paid work.
    Sigma made 17-50 f/2.8 OS and 50-150 f/2,8 OS. Tokina announced 12-28 f/4. But Nikkor choice for such zooms is neglible.

    Nikon DX line can return to a pro gear only with 12-30 reportage zoom, new 16-70 f/4, and quality and compact AF-S pancake 28 f/2.0 (for true normal lens).
    All with nanocoating and strong contralight ability. And at least 30% cheaper that FX pro lenses (less $1000 each)

    Until that DX still is semi-pro cheaper alternative to FX monsters.

    • J. Dennis Thomas

      This is pretty much true.

      Nikon’s pro DX lenses can barely resolve well enough for the D7100. Until they announce an update to the 10 year old 17-55 f/2.8G I don’t see a “pro” DX camera on the horizon anytime soon.

      • patto01

        Hmm… I thought the D300S was aimed at wildlife/sports photographers. Why would they care about an updated 17-55?

        • J. Dennis Thomas

          You think Nikon makes cameras specifically for wildlife/sports photographers? And furthermore you think that wildlife/sports photographers ONLY use telephoto lenses?

          The D300s was aimed at semi-professionals across all genres as well as an inexpensive backup to the D3/s for for pros.

          Why would they care about an updated 17-55? Because. It’s the STANDARD pro DX lens.

          • patto01

            Well, regardless of Nikon’s target market, it seemed like most of the talk regarding the D300S and possible D400 referenced wildlife and sports. Obviously anyone could use it for whatever they like. My bad.
            As for the 17-55, I’ve never used one but the reviews I’ve read have been mixed, with quite a few people saying it wasn’t worth the price and weight, unlike the 24-70 which receives almost universal accolades.

            • J. Dennis Thomas

              Most of the talk surrounds wildlife and sports photographers because the the amateur wildlife and sports photographers are the ones who keep crying for this camera. Pro wildlife and sports photographers are using a D4.

              As far as the 17-55 goes, it was a fine lens on all DX cameras until they hit 24MP. Even on the D5200 when shot wide open the 17-55 os showing softness. On the D7100 the the results are even more apparent due to lack of AA filter.

              The 17-55 lens design is over 10 years old. It was designed in conjunction with the 4MP D2H. The 17-55 simply can’t resolve the detail needed to keep up with a high-res sensor. If Nikon ever decided to release a D400 it will by necessity be 24MP or more.

              I spoke with Nikon yesterday and they are certainly aware that the 17-55 isn’t keeping up with standard DX resolution. They aren’t going to release a high-res pro camera without a good standard zoom to go along with it.

              In any case, I’m done talking about this “ghost of camera-future”.

            • patto01

              Nikon is a person? Did you speak to the official spokesperson for Nikon? The CEO? You must be really important! ;-)

            • J. Dennis Thomas

              No, actually I had a conversation with three of their top reps. The reason for our meeting was to discuss a firmware glitch in the D600 and D7100 and obviously we talk about other things as well, like lens design.

              Important? Maybe not in the grand scheme of things, but they do take meetings with me to talk shop because I have a pretty good knowledge of the camera systems .

              Maybe English isn’t your first language, but in the common vernacular of American English we often refer to the collective noun that is a faceless corporation in the singular for brevity. All clear?

            • patto01

              Actually, I am still learning English; sad to say it is my first language. I am, however, familiar with the practice you refer to, having seen multiple episodes of Gilligan’s Island and most of The Three Stooges movies. It was intended to highlight the improbability of speaking to someone who represents Nikons point of view on, well, anything. I have worked in five man shops and corporations employing thousands of personnel and the larger the company, the more difficult it is to get a definitive answer to anything. My second language is Japanese and in my admittedly limited experience, Japanese corporations are much more difficult to pin down than their Anglo counterparts. Maybe your Elton John sunglasses allow you special status!?
              Sorry…I haven’t been getting enough sleep lately.

            • J. Dennis Thomas

              Oh. A nameless faceless troll making exaggerated claims and attempting to be humorous on Nikon Rumors? How surprising.

              Keep on dreaming about the perfect non-existent camera and trolling the forums. I bet your life is very exciting.

              I won’t be responding to anymore of your drivel. So you can move along…

            • patto01

              I haven’t claimed anything unusual, like being some kind of special advisor to Nikon because of my “pretty good knowledge of the camera systems”, but I admit to making poor attempts at humor from time to time. I guess I should be thankful to have someone of your “superior intellect and education” [i]~shameless reference to Three Amigos[/i] to guide Nikon since the rest of us (collectively known as “nameless faceless troll”) clearly don’t!

      • Anonymous Maximus

        17-55mm DX is a fabulous lens with great contrast & resolution. Did you try stopping down to f/5.6, likely the sweet spot for 24mp, between lens aberrations vs diffraction.

        Still not happy, you may crop or downsample to about 16mp, depending on your need.

  • disqus_LSIRGT5iob

    I would probably go for FX too if I was a pro or printing my money in the basement myself. However, I believe in real world most people will still be served best with DX. A D400 would sell like sliced bread. I also still hope for an AF-S 24/1.8 DX.

  • Jon McGuffin

    I’ve said this over and over again here, the D400 *will* be here, it MUST because Canon will be releasing a 7DM2 and at this time, Nikon has no competitor to that. Just look at the competition and you can see what Nikon will do. Canon and Nikon follow one another so closely. D400 has plenty of price room plus features (better buffer, more rugged build, higher frame rate). D400 will be here likely within 6 weeks +/- when the 7DM2 comes.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      This is true, but I have not seen any signs that Canon will release this camera.

  • joe

    don’t think it’s gonna happen with the d800, d600 an d7100 – seriously, who needs this body? i think nikon needs to be careful not to flood its camera line with a body in every niche that compete against each other.

  • Mike

    D400 together with DX lenses: 24mm f/1.8, 16mm f/1.8 and 16-85mm f/2.8.

  • OMAR MAGED

    NIKON D400 (DX)

    # NOT MORE THAN 2000$
    # NEW ENHANCED 61 AF POINTS
    # BUILT IN GRIP
    # NEW SENSOR THAT CAN COPE WITH HIGHT ISO SETTINGS
    # 9 PHOTOS PER SECOND
    # WEATHER SEALING
    # BOTTONS AND MENUE LIKE THE D800
    # NO LOW PASS FILTER

    #THATS GOING TO BE A GAME CHANGER !!!

  • Tags

    Obviously nasim is just capitalizing on d400 fever and driving traffic to his website… Come on guys don’t support this clown

    • PeterO

      Right, not at all like this website that drives traffic to itself by publishing rumours? Does that make Admin here a clown too?

  • Abel

    First to apologize for using a translator to give my opinion, but if there is someone who wants to come out to light the D400, that’s me, so I can buy the d300 and d300s to laughter prices. Nikon please hurry and need another body!!

    • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

      D300s is already going for a meager $700 or less. I wouldn’t expect much more of a sale.

      • Abel

        I just bought a d300 for 450 € in Spain, on Ebay, with less than 40,000 shots, believe me even I have to buy another one d300 to d200 price when it comes to light the d400.

      • KnightPhoto

        I already sold my D300 for $575 more than a year ago. Sure mine was well-used at 72K actuations but yes there are deals out there if one is prepared to look.

        • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

          Oh, I meant new. Yeah, used, expect some crazy prices once the D400 comes ’round.

          After using a D7100, I’m convinced it supersedes the D300/s, even with the shortcomings in specs. And the spec shortcomings are only a big deal on paper–I think using one can change a lot of minds.

          • Reese

            I agree with that! My d7100 blows my mind every time I use it. It is perfect for weddings, landscapes and everything else that I do with it. Nikon just needs some more high resolving DX lenses to pair with that camera for those that don’t want to pay the FF prices.

            A larger buffer would be nice but machine gun shooting is not needed for most types of photography. The few times I have needed it I have turned on the crop mode and jpeg only. It gets the shot every time and shoots forever. The only thing a larger buffer would do is give the raw shots for the trigger happy shooter, which I respect some people ‘need’ but most certainly don’t. Of course if you really ‘need’ that often then you probably already own a D4 or something like that. Don’t have a D7100? Rent one. It’s good.

            • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

              I can’t do without it for some performances/events. For most of what I do though, it does what I need. For everything else, there’s my D700. Actually, I think it may have been too much detail for some models lately–it exposes blemishes! But, in the long term that might mean extra money for retouching…so, it all works out.

            • Reese

              Haha, on my last couples shoot I had with me my Nikon 85mm 1.8g lens. Wow, every pore on their skin was clearly visible.

  • Swade

    All you need to know is in this sentence: “According to his source, who initially predicted the D400 announcement last year, the camera is supposed to be out around September this year:”

  • J. Dennis Thomas

    I just came from an expo sale at the largest professional camera store in Texas. All of the manufacturers were there. Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Fuji,Tamron, Etc. I spoke to THREE Nikon high level Nikon reps. I ask them about new lens releases or updates. They said, “we can’t really discus any future plans about the lens line right now.”

    Then I asked them what about the D400, I got a laugh and, I quote, “there are no plans for a D400 right now.”

    The fact that they could even SAY the name “D400″ means that there will be NO D400 in the near future.

    • J. Dennis Thomas

      Oh and Sigma did NOT have a copy of the 18-35 f/1.8 :(

    • EnPassant

      Reason to the laughter is propably because “D400″ will have another name, like D9000, to put it in line with the other DX-cameras.

  • Back to top