< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon rumors: what’s next

Nikon Rumors
This is an updated list on what to expect from Nikon in the next few months based on my previous post:

Nikon D5300

→ Coming soon, most likely to be announced at the CES show in early January. Rumored specifications:

  • 24MP
  • 39 AF points
  • EXPEED 4 (new)
  • Built-in Wi-Fi (new)
  • Built-in GPS (new)

Nikon D4x or similar

→ I think the release of the D610 will postpone tha plans for another full frame pro body. Nikon recently announced that they will concentrate on entry level models. There is still a possibility for a full frame pro body in early 2014 right before the Winter Olympics. I have no reliable intel on a potential release date or specifications.

Lenses

→ I only have information for two new lenses: Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4G VR lens and a new 16mm fisheye lens. There is also a very good chance for a new Nikon TC-14E III teleconverter and/or another tele lens to be announced before the Olympics.

Nikon D610

→ Already announced.

Underwater camera

→ Already announced, see detailed coverage here.

Other

→ There is still no word on Nikon D400.

→ I have not received any tips on that, but Aptina's VP mentioned that a new compact camera with 1" sensor is expected to be announced at the beginning of next year by one of "their current customers".

I will be back online with regular coverage on Monday.

This entry was posted in Nikon 1, Nikon D400, Nikon D5300, Nikon D610, Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Not waiting for D400 ..

    Sigh..everything but the mythical D400 or equivalent pro DX body ….

    • Andrew

      I guess it will be announced a year from now.

    • skaarj

      It will magically arrive at the same time as the 7D mark II

    • Plug

      I hope that the new Pentax exerts some pressure on Nikon, but…..:(

      • artgriffo

        The K3 is catching a lot of decent comments.

    • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

      Or a D700 successor and 5DIII competitor.

      • Ken Elliott

        As an owner of a pair of D700 and a pair of D800 bodies, I can assure you the D800 is indeed the successor to the D700, and beats the pants off the 5D mkIII.

        I was like you before I got my first D800, but I’ve changed my mind. They are pretty interchangeable, except for the damn reversal of the + and – buttons.

        • patto01

          Maybe for your photographic style and subject matter. I can’t see how anyone could say that if they were dependent on FPS and/or number of photos that will fit in the buffer.

          • Ken Elliott

            Yes, that’s a good point. I don’t spray-and-pray, so I’ve never hit those limitations. I only shoot slow sports like motocross, auto racing, bicycle and MTB racing, surfing, etc.

            So who would be dependent on FPS and the buffer?

            • Mike

              What did we do when we had 36 shots and it took us 30 seconds to clear the buffer I.e. change film. Haha. Fast FPS has it’s merits. But the D800 simply blows away the D700 and even my D3s in pure image quality…. in most situations. The transition and tonality from bright to dark is very palpable between the generations. If you need the speed, used D3s’s are approaching new D800 prices. Even D3′s are in the $2000′s now. The D700 is great and always will be. The D800 is a big step up in IQ. Period.

            • patto01

              What did you do before you got a camera? You draw as fast as you could with your crayons and ripped up the paper halfway through because you messed up.
              I’m not disagreeing about the importance of IQ but if you can’t get the shot, it doesn’t matter. I know, I know… you always get the shot ’cause you’re just that damn good!

            • itznfb

              Honestly your comment doesn’t hold water. Because in those days what did we do? Often times shots were missed or underexposed. The high FPS of todays cameras allow us to get shots we couldn’t before. If you don’t agree just look through Sports Illustrated of the 80′s compared to today. While the older issues had great shots from great photographers the results are pretty terrible compared to what you see in todays issues.

            • neversink

              I agree nearly 100 percent. And no no oil and dust issues on the sensor of a film camera. Oh, that’s right, no sensor to clean and accidentally scratch the AA filter. And no computer files and hard drives to worry about. Film was (is) definitely where it was (is) at!!! Wish my clients thought so.
              As far as gorgeous images go. The D800 is superb. I think the D4 has a bit more oomph to it…. but both are great cameras. If anyone prefers the D700, then just stay with it. There’s no need for a replacement. It is a great camera, but the IQ of the newer D800 and D4 can’t be touched by the D700.

            • patto01

              I “spay-and-pray!” ;-)
              Actually, last spring I was shooting at a Civil War Recreation and while I had no trouble getting a shot of someone, within a group of “soldiers,” mid-fire, I could never get the damn canons. I would either start shooting too early and run out of buffer before the fire shot out of the canon or wait too late and all I got was smoke!
              Also, when shooting a group of birds-in-flight, the more FPS and shots you can get in the buffer, the better chance you have of getting a shot with a majority of wings in an attractive orientation.
              I would mention other moving subjects but, apparently, you’re able to make do with the D800′s limitations. But then, maybe I’m pickier than you are. I don’t know so I won’t suggest that’s definitely the case.

            • Ken Elliott

              Interesting. The cannon is a use case that I would have trouble with. As a former racer, I can easily predict where the bikes will be, so 1-to-3 shots is all I need at a time. But I can see birds in flight being much less predictable.

              Thanks for sharing.

            • Ken Elliott

              Almost forgot – The Nikon V1 can be set to buffer shots while you half-press the shutter. After the cannon fires, you press the button to save everything in the buffer. I thought it was a gimmick I’d never use, but it’s handier that I expected and perfect for stuff like this. In this case, the V1 beats both the D700 and D800.

            • patto01

              As much as I would have liked to get that shot, I would NEVER, EVER have a mirrorless camera. Most of my photography is wildlife and landscapes and in all cases (including portraiture, industrial, just photographing my dogs, et al.), but especially wildlife, taking the shot is just as, or more, important than the resulting photo. Maybe it sounds strange but that direct line of sight, even being bounced off mirrors, makes me feel a connection to the subject that I just don’t get looking at an LED. It’s kinda like riding a motorcycle or a horse. I know people who think I’m crazy for refusing to wear a helmet but if I had to, I wouldn’t bother riding at all. I can download photos of just about anything but there’s only one way for me to get the experience of taking the photo. I dunno, maybe it’s a zen thing… :-)

            • Ken Elliott

              I understand. It sounds like you’ve never used a mirrorless camera you liked. But that doesn’t mean you won’t like the ones that get developed in the future. Early digital SLR were pretty bad, and I remember photographers saying they’d never own one. But that belief is based on what is available, not the unknown future. I know they’ll get there, because the video stuff drives it. I love my OVF, but EVFs can be darn good and will only get better.

              But no helmet? There are only two types of motorcyclists – those that have crashed and those who are going to crash. The only reason I’m here is high quality helmets. With all due respect, I’d encourage you to rethink this, especially if you have kids.

            • patto01

              I’ll still know it’s an EVF. Period. (Gee, I guess that was redundant…I ended the sentence with a period and then said period. And to top it off, I put a period after that, too – grin)
              I’ve known a lot of motorcyclists who retired from riding without crashing. I’m one of them. Getting too old for that sort of thing. I still ride horses, though. This is off subject but you brought it up! Everyone has to decide what level of risk is acceptable to them in life. People who refuse to leave the house may die of a heart attack while those who take risks that I would never take, sometimes live a very long time. Anyway, who wants to live forever? Well, at least here? In the movie Steel Magnolias, Julia Roberts’ character delivers the defining line of the movie: “I’d rather have 30 minutes of wonderful than a lifetime of nothing special.” I’ve had a whole lot more than 30 minutes and wouldn’t trade even one of them for safety’s sake. Life is dangerous…nobody gets out alive!

            • neversink

              Actually, it is off-topic, but you brought up the helmet issue, not Ken…. See my previous post…

            • patto01

              I brought up riding a horse or motorcycle without a helmet to compare the experience of riding with/without a helmet to MY experience of shooting with an OVF vs. an EVF. It was not my intent to argue the merits or folly of that, or any other, action.
              Since, as I said before, everyone has to decide what levels of risk are appropriate for themselves, it’s not really an issue open to debate.

            • Jorge

              Don’t argue with Patt. He knows everything…
              All I can say is Thank God he’s not my neighbor.

            • patto01

              No chance of that. I could never afford to live in your neighborhood. Or next to your summer home… ;-)

            • Jaap

              Wildlife photographer, who takes a shot, “more important than the resulting photo”. You’re a hunter dude!

            • patto01

              Except I could never kill anything. Well…maybe the people who disagree with me on this site! ;-)

            • Dpablo unfiltered

              Your mother shoots a Holga.

            • patto01

              Umm…. What? The difficulty in subtlety is not being so obscure that your audience never gets the point. I have no idea where you were going with that. Sorry.

            • Dpablo unfiltered

              I just wanted to disagree with you on this site! :<o

            • Dpablo unfiltered

              I just wanted to disagree with you on this site! :<o

            • patto01

              Oh. So, where do you live? ;-)

            • itznfb

              Well said.

            • neversink

              Off topic, because you wrote about it. You are crazy for not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle, and irresponsible. i suggest you talk to a brain surgeon about the consistency of the brain. When the brain cracks open after an injury, the consistency of your brain matter is like that of a soft boiled egg. You will not survive. A helmet gives you the only protection against life and death.
              I have lost too many friends on motorcycles over the years. That you want to subject your loved one to a potential loss of your life is selfish. To compare using a mirror-less camera to wearing a helmet is illogical and has nothing to do with the price of tea in Kenya.

            • patto01

              I won’t argue the point since I’m sure your intentions are good and it is off topic. I only replied so you didn’t think I was ignoring you.

            • neversink

              Sorry if I came on too strong, but it brought back too many sad memories. Stay safe!!!!

            • patto01

              Further up the thread, I wrote that I’m not riding anymore…too old. Not that that’ll guarantee my safety. :-)
              I do understand about sad memories though. My brother died in a motorcycle accident but he wasn’t riding. He was walking across the street and he was only 12 years old. He didn’t get out of the way because he was too busy warning me of the oncoming bike. I was 8.

            • YRaj

              Holy Shit!…would love to see a photo of this hero..

            • neversink

              Pole Sana!!! (“Extreme;y Sorry” in Swahili)

            • patto01

              ii desu yo. Anata no sei je nai.
              (“That’s okay. It’s not your fault.” in Japanese – I didn’t think Kanji would display properly)
              So, how do you know Swahili?

            • Guest

              BTW – The Nikon V1 can be set to buffer shots while you half-press the shutter. When the cannon fires, you press the button to save everything in the buffer. I thought it was a gimmick I’d never use, but it’s handier that I expected and perfect for stuff like this. In this case, the V1 beats both the D700 and D800.

            • WaltGalt

              Suggestion for your consideration. Instead of limiting your fps rate to what is available via the mechanical shutter, whether that’s 5 fps -11fps, try taking a quantum leap in fps to the 30 fps or 60 fps full HD readily available thru the electronic shutter, aka “Movie mode”. Then you can easily obtain that precise cannon fired moment or just the right wings orientation by either using the camera’s create a jpg function, or you can download the free Video to JPG software at http://www.dvdvideosoft.com/products/dvd/Free-Video-to-JPG-Converter.htm . Try it, you just might like it. The 1920 x 1080 format comes out looking great. There may be times when you’ll want to stay with the mechanical-shutter-limited-fps in order to have the larger 6000 x 4000 format photos. But when you don’t really need that large format, try the HD format and the 30 fps or 60 fps. You’ll definitely be more likely to capture that precise moment you’re after.

            • Anto de Chav

              A real man would use a view camera … ;-)

            • Ken Elliott

              Actually, I think I’ll try that. Might be interesting trying to shoot motocross with my 4×5 Sinar. Can’t say I’ve ever seen it done.

          • neversink

            Then buy the D4 if you want to be Machine Gun Kelly!!!!!
            I use both the D800 and D4 and the D700 as a backup (but am giving the D700 to my wife because I haven’t used it for more than a year, and I sold the D3s which was just a D700 on steroids….) There yo have it!!!!

    • http://www.davidkasman.com/ David Kasman

      Don’t wait for any new gear! Go take pictures with what you have or buy what is available now! When new gear comes, if you want it, buy it. Life is too short to wait.

      • Eric Calabros

        Your conment has a polarizer filter which is unnecessary. We take pictures and keep waiting for D400 at the same time

      • Global

        I know what’s happening.

        The D300S is “acceptable” from the previous generation, but this product is far too long in the tooth (its generation of products are all dead). Nikon made a critical error here:

        Nikon TRIED to be “strategic” — “skip a generation of D400…… sending HUGE numbers of buyers into FX with the D600.” But Nikon f’ed up. They f’ed up the D600.

        Now, to save their skin politically, they needed to push back the D400 by even 1 more year. The D610 is a great announcement for FX — but it is a red flag for DX users & FX users who wanted a D400 body:

        “You will not get it any time soon. You will wait AT LEAST 1 more year, because of our super-botched D600 abortion of a mistake. In the meantime, enjoy the D610, our brand new baby — and also, our dear D300 owners, have fun spending tons of your money on new lenses please.” – Nikon Execs.

        • twoomy

          Geeze, talk about hyperbole! All I know is that my of my Nikon shooter friends went with the D7200 and they are happy and I went with the D800 and I am happy. The D600 takes great images despite the fact that you have to clean the sensor on a regular basis–irritating but not the end of the world for working photographers. So if you’re still shooting 12mp DX because you’re holding out for the D400, I feel sad for you.

          • itznfb

            You mean the D7100? Sorry but the D7100 isn’t a replacement for my D300s. Not even close. I picked up a D7000 when it came out and had to return and did the same with the D7100. They just aren’t up to the task.

            • RC

              And what task is that?

      • Ben

        You are right David! Let’s play!

      • artgriffo

        Superb comment David.

        To much emphasis on buying the latest gear these days – just to look good in my opinion.
        Will the D400 make you a better photographer – in whose eyes – Yours or onlookers!
        The camera doesn’t make you any better as a photographer. Your eye, your skill, your interest in a subject and your knowledge of photography basics DOES!

        • McGraffix

          But…. Isn’t the whole point of Nikon Rumors and Rumor sites in general that they have rumors, i.e. information on stuff that we did not know about before, so new stuff? And as Nikon makes tangible things, it’s about gear, photography gear.

          It would be pretty hard if not pointless NOT to comment on new stuff at a site like this.
          Hence, people – who have and use their gear regardless of what (i)rumored(/i) stuff (i)might(/i) appear – will say their say, gearheads or not.

          If we didn’t, we’d all be waiting forever, because there always will be new toys to pay with… Doesn’t mean we don’t appreciate what’s there, just that you can wish :).

          And if skill was all and gear not that important, we’d all be shooting Holga’s from the hip. All good gear does or at least should do is assists you in getting as close as possible to the results you envisioned (so a Holga could just be your thing). A camera itself will never make you better. But a ‘better’ camera could just give you the opportunities to make yourself better.

          Oops… dropped my 2 cents….

          • Eagle1105

            Agreed!

        • Eagle1105

          I beg to differ with you Artgriffo. The D400 or whatever they call it would help my situation out immensely.
          I shoot high school football games at night. I imagine that the D400 would have 24 megapixels and a better sensor for shooting in low light, like every newer generation of cameras.
          I am shooting with a D800 and while it takes great shots (ISO at 6400), I do not get the fps, crop or lower megapixels a D400 type camera would afford.
          My D300S has too much noise at the high ISO needed to get the shutter high enough to get the action.
          I am shooting the same way, but the D300S CAMERA has limitations that the D400 type camera would not.

          • artgriffo

            I’m sorry Eagle1105, I think you have missed my point. The way things are looking I don’t think you are going to get a 300s upgrade. The move is now to full frame you have one the 800 which is a damn fine camera although it has it’s limitations for sport photography. It looks like to me that Nikon have finally woken up to the Nikon user needs and that the all talked about Nikon DF (full frame) is going to be the camera for you… I’m still of the opinion though that your 300s would take just as good an image as a new 400. I just don’t see the point in upgrading cameras every time a new one is developed and brought to the market.
            It’s not the camera that makes you a photographer it’s your skill and eye!

            • Eagle1105

              It would be nice to see Nikon realize that there is a demand for a Semi-Pro Quality DX camera. If you look around at all of the blogs, there are a lot of people that would like a 300s upgraded DX camera that is sturdy, has higher MP Camera with the same or higher FPS and better Noise reduction.
              I bought a used (2,000 clicks) D800, for a great price, with the understanding that the FPS would be lower and the file size larger as a tradeoff to better image quality and better noise reduction.
              In my opinion, my skill and eye are the same, but there is a definite difference between the D300s and D800 shooting football games at night. I would think if I upgraded my D300s with a new generation of camera like a D400, I would get sharper, clearer pictures with the same or higher FPS and better low light sensitivity and a manageable 24mp. If not, I wouldn’t buy it.
              I crop a lot of the sports pictures I take and at 12mp, the image suffers. Even at full size, there is a NOTICABLE difference in noise between the D800 and D300S (which there should be). The pictures out of the D300S at 3200 ISO are not acceptable, while my D800 at 6400 ISO are very useable.
              I am not familiar with the DF, but it sounds like the D610, which is 6 FPS and FX sensor. In which case, no need to change for me.

        • Juan Carlos Garcia Franco

          you´re right. absolutly. but what about dinamic range??

          • artgriffo

            sorry missed your reply Juan.. Dynamic range? agreed sensors are getting better but shooting raw and using editing programmes like Lightroom5 should help with that.
            I’m sorry I think a lot of photographers are being duped into buying something that they don’t really need… I think we are getting close to a water shed moment with cameras there is not a lot more that can be done to make them any better, we as photographers should learn to use our tools better. Only reason to change for me now from my X-E1 is if it broke! FLW.

      • itznfb

        My D300s is starting to die and looking for a replacement is tough. With the expensive accessories not compatible with the lower 7xxx models and the newer FF models having a significantly slower fps I’m basically stuck replacing my D300s with a D300s. While it’s not that big of a deal it’s still hard to pay $1300+ for a 4 year old camera in modern technological times.

        • RC

          I had to do that with my Fuji 4900. When I broke it, there was nothing else around good enough, so I ended up buying another brand new one.

    • Zord

      I just saw a Sasquatch fart one out.

    • Steve

      There will be no D400 or no pro DX anymore. In many Asian countries, DX market segments are being replaced gradually by mirrorless cameras.

      • Sports

        If you by “DX” mean DSLR then I believe that mirrorless is moving in from the low end of the segment. That’s exactly why Nikon should focus on D400 which would be more or less UNaffected by mirrorless. If your statement is true, then it’s all those low-end DSLRs that are facing a hard time. Well, isn’t it?

    • Jeroen Wijnands

      Get real. There will never be another “pro” DX body!

      • artgriffo

        right on!

      • Dpablo unfiltered

        Until they make the next one…

        P. S. the only difference between a “pro” camera and a regular one is the user.

        • Jeroen Wijnands

          Frequent users have less patience for menu options and vague automagic options. But I did put “pro” and not pro for a reason

      • Dpablo unfiltered

        Until they make the next one…

        P. S. the only difference between a “pro” camera and a regular one is the user.

  • Alex

    Looking for the 300mm f4 lens. Wish it is not too expensive!

    • Cyrille Berger

      I wonder about the weight too.

      • Mike

        It’s a 300mm lens with VR. What would you expect?

    • Sahaja

      Yes you can be sure the 300mm f4 with VR will be expensive ~ but EX+ copies of the 300mm f/4 AF-S are available for around $1K from KEH – and of the older AF model for only $500.

    • Jeroen Wijnands

      Your wish will not be granted. It will be excellent quality and work really well with the new 1.4 TC but the pricetag will be +30 % on the current 300mm

  • Andrew

    The D5300 and D3300 will give us Full HD video: 1080p @ 60 fps; the new EXPEED 4 image processor should make this possible.

    • Thom Hogan

      Right. Ever actually shot much 1080P/60? Got a lot of fast hard drives, do you?

      • Ken Elliott

        Ah, Snarky Thom has returned!

        1080p/60 (as you well know) is great for slo-mo. He doesn’t need much additional space for that. At least he won’t need to buy a second camera to do that on the occasion he needs it.

        • Roadrash

          This!!!! I’m not made of money!!

      • David Peterson

        60fps is quite a reasonable thing to ask, if anything it is surprising it isn’t the new normal, they should be pushing to reach 120fps instead….. is my dream the GH5 will have 120fps! Even if only at 720

        • Thom Hogan

          My iPhone does 120 fps and also allows me to change playback speeds during the clip itself.

          What I need from a DSLR, and what I’d argue that everyone needs from a DSLR, is something that can’t be done by my iPhone or my camcorder. If you start trying to equal what is being done in those other types of cameras and forget what your camera is supposed to do, you’re going to end up in a very bad place.

          The camera makers all jumped at video because they thought that they had a new growth factor that couldn’t be equaled (large sensor video). Oops. We’ve got plenty of that now, and better done by the video companies.

          The notion of “still+video” actually came from one of the few customers the camera companies listen to: photojournalism outlets. Early in this century there began this notion that newspapers needed video stories to survive. Thus, they wanted all their PJs to be able to do both (in some cases, some have tried to train their people to be reporters, photographers, AND videographers on a single story). Unfortunately, this was a wrong choice by the newspapers and thus a wrong demand of the camera companies.

          In the end, only two types of devices ever succeed in an area: completely converged devices, or dedicated devices. Smartphones are converged phone, computer, GPS, camera, camcorder, and more. A DSLR won’t dislodge smartphones by converging multiple tasks, too (though Samsung seems to think so given the Galaxy NX). A DSLR needs to take the opposite approach: dedicated to doing one thing as best as possible, so good that it can’t come close to being matched by a converged device.

          • Roadrash

            Wanting 1080/60 from my DSLR is a perfectly fine thing. Just because an iPhone does it doesn’t meaning wouldn’t want it on my DSLR too.

            Like I get it, you know the industry. Yes, you’re right about needing to put unique specialities to make a product special.

            But quite frankly, some people just want certain features. As an amateur videographer, I’d love 1080/60 in my DSLR.

            People just throwing out their wish lists in a forum shouldn’t be a cue for you to come in and correct them ever time you know.

          • David Peterson

            DSLRs are *huge* in video productions (well, for those who can’t afford a RED / Alexa / etc!).

            It isn’t just about large sensor video, but that DSLRs/MILCs have interchangeable lenses too.

            This makes for a bit step forward at a much lower price than what camcorders we had prior to Nikon D90 and Canon 5DmkII.

            Plus need to look at the cost / benefit ratio: what does it cost to implement video vs how many users do they need to gain? (or would they lose without it?)

            I’d say it is relatively low to implement vs the cost of not implementing it (could you just imagine a DSLR these days *WITHOUT* video? Would get a huge number of negative reviews and would be shunned).

            • Thom Hogan

              Large sensor video cameras are currently available from about US$1000 and up. I own three, and they’re not RED/Alexa. Even the cheapest one has better video quality than any of my DSLRs, though the D4 comes close if I record off the HDMI channel.

              At the time the D90 came out, the only way to get shallow, Hollywood feature film type DOF effects was with a very expensive lens modifier. It wasn’t a good solution, so all the serious video guys jumped on DSLRs when they came out. Today, however, they don’t have to, and they have better choices, frankly.

              You’d be surprised at how many emails I get that say “I’d rather have a camera without the video stuff.” It may be in the thousands at this point. Look at the responses on the Internet to Olympus’ leader saying they were going to concentrate on still features for the time being.

              I’m still trying to figure out how to do a reliable survey (can’t really use my Web site readers, as I know they’re biased on this), but my hypothesis is that if we polled every DSLR user about their actual usage of the video capabilities, we’d find very few actually doing it.

            • neversink

              Answer. 99.9 percent of the time I use my DSLRs for taking stills. I do some video, but find video cameras much more suited to the task, without having to buy all the extra equipment to shoot DSLR video. You can get some pretty good video quality from the D800 or even the D4, but their are better choices for video out their. Maybe future DSLRs will change all this….

  • NikonCEO

    I can’t wait for Sony’s full frame mirrorless cameras to come out.

    • SonyCEO

      I would stick to my Nikon FX, if were you.

    • Kazuo Hirai

      It’s good you can’t wait because we don’t have plans to release them in the short time, and when we do, they will suck anyway. Look at Nikon, they have better stuff than us.

    • KIRE

      Ever heard of RX1?

    • StarF

      You’re all funny. Haha

  • neversink

    I am sure we will have more dust and oil discussions…. Mahatma Gandhi said it best:
    “The seeker after truth should be humbler than the dust. The world crushes the dust under its feet, but the seeker after truth should so humble himself that even the dust could crush him. Only then, and not till then, will he have a glimpse of truth.”
    Hopefully Nikon will heed his words.

    • patto01

      You might consider them as well.

      • neversink

        And you???

        • patto01

          Oh no. I never take the advice of strangers! ;-)

    • neversink

      I love that Mahatma Gandhi received three down votes so far. Very revealing!

  • asdfa

    There will be no D400 guys! Because D90 and D300 lines has merged into D7000 line… Check prices for understanding the diversion of the lines. D7000 sits middle of it and check its specs… more expensive than d90, but less expensive than d300 (no need for full magnesium alloy body)

    • Plug

      You may be right but it means that Nikon will not get my several thousand dollars worth. With it I would definitely buy the 300 f4 and other new lenses. Without it I shall make do with what I have got. Can’t speak for anyone else but Nikon clearly intend that I do not buy their stuff. C’est la vie.

      • NRA Advocate

        The D400 is a mythical unicorn. It’s NEVER going to happen, and right now Nikon has FAR bigger issues to worry about than a single DX DSLR in a DSLR market that’s shrinking all around them. They don’t need 14 DSLRs right now, for example.

    • Andrew

      So you think the buffer size of the D7100 is ideal?

      • Smudger

        The D7100 buffer is c##p. Nikon knows that it’s c##p. It’s intended to be c~~p.
        Want to shoot action beit wildlife or sports? Nikon wants you to spend lots more $$$$ on a D4 + 800mm.
        No more reach on the cheap. High end DX is a liability in Nikon’s eyes now.
        Oh, but you can have a 20 shot NEF buffer in the base DX model……

        • Andrew

          The D7100 is a great camera with many high-end features at a reason price that most consumers can afford. But my point is that it is not a D400 replacement.

          • js200022

            You are missing the point. The D7100 is not the D300s replacement as you are trying to say.

            • Andrew

              Absolutely… for the record, all Nikon cameras starting with the D3200 on up are great (at their respective price points)! That does not mean that all of their cameras are perfect. Nikon makes more rugged cameras than Canon, period! Go to the International Space Station and see whose cameras are up there. Nikon processes high ISO pictures better than Canon, period! Though Canon generally has the edge with video, the D800′s video performance is stunning! If someone likes Canon, they should not hesitate to buy their products because they are a great company; but for me, Nikon is still the #1 camera brand.

              In terms of quality control, Nikon has had its recent hits, but none of the problems diminished the build quality, sophistication, and engineering of their products. Nikon’s lens and camera products are built to last and produce exceptional image quality. No Nikon camera has ever failed me going back to the mid 1980s’. Early manufacturing problems that are easily fixed as was the case with the D600 is no reason for me to change my respect for the company. Look at Canon, they had a light leak issue with their top end camera recently, does that diminish my view of Canon? Absolutely not.

              If you read my posts as a whole you will realize that I am not defending Nikon. All I am saying is that you guys should broaden your perspective on the issues. Thom Hogan is critical of Nikon in a constructive way and I learn from him. But if you elect to get personal, you are not adding anything to the debate.

            • Sahaja

              What cameras are on the International Space Station probably reflects decisions made at the time they put up the first modules.

              It costs an awful lot for every kilo they send up there. So, even if Canon were a little better, they’d never replace Nikon cameras in the International Space Station because they already have so many Nikon cameras and lenses up there.

        • Thom Hogan

          If that’s what Nikon thinks, then Nikon thinks wrong. Very wrong.

          Indeed, if @asdfa’s (and others’) assertion that consumer cameras are more important to Nikon than prosumer/pro cameras, then Nikon is in for a rude awakening when the market for consumer cameras keeps drying up. Moreover, the core of Nikon’s ability to withstand the same drop in sales of film cameras was due to the high-end enthusiast and pro markets.

          The “center” of Nikon’s interchangeable lens camera lineup in terms of longevity is the D7xxx, D3xx/D4xx, and D6xx. Below that it’s going to get very, very competitive soon as everyone moves towards removing the mirror. Above that, it’s a very small market.

          So let’s see how Nikon is doing with that center:

          * D7100 : crippled buffer, everything else fine
          * D300s: gasping for air, no replacement in sight
          * D610: hey, we didn’t make any camera with a problem, you must be mistaken

          It’s no wonder that the Nikon faithful continue to complain about something. The very core of the Nikon faithful isn’t getting served well.

          The problem with the lower end consumer DSLR market is that, unless you have a compelling lineup to move people to, purchases there are “one and done.”

          Frankly, I’m coming more and more to the conclusion that Nikon needs to do a giant reset, and rapidly.

          • Smudger

            Thom, I’ve said before that Nikon’s core strength has always been pro/top end enthusiast gear. But the guys running the shop have lost sight of that.

            The D3200 @24mp/20 shots NEF, has the buffer that the D7100 could, and should, have had. The decision on the D7100 buffer is key to understanding how they now see high end DX . They decided to cripple the D7100 for strategic reasons as seen from their perspective, not ours.

            Why else would the new top DX model have such a pathetically small buffer if not to protect, in Nikon’s view, revenues from FX and telephoto sales?

            The sales pitch from Nikon reps in the early days of Nikon digital often included points along the lines of “all your long lenses just got 50% longer” That is now an anathema to Nikon product managers.

            As for problems with Nikon gear, Nikon have always been extremely reluctant to acknowledge any failing. In the past they would quietly repair a fault under warranty and return the camera, now fully working, with a note that no fault was found. Now it’s “impact damage” along with a large bill!

            • Thom Hogan

              The simple fact is that Nikon has always coveted having a true consumer product line. They’ve tried a number of times, and various different things eventually curtailed each attempt. This time around they succeeded. In their next financial statement I expect them to proclaim that they’re the #1 company in terms of camera market share. It’ll be close, but I think they took that from Canon, because Canon’s compact camera sales have collapsed faster than Nikon’s.

              But Nikon is very ill suited as a consumer company, as recent events have just shown us once again: they have no real connection to their customers, and they continue to do things that irritate customers no end.

              Unfortunately, now they’re hooked on the consumer volume, and I don’t know what’s going to happen because of that. Cameras are 78% of their business, and Coolpix might be 20% of that. Consumer DSLRs are the biggest chunk. D300 and up can’t be more than 15% of the unit volume (though it is higher than that in terms of the dollar volume). But let’s say for a moment that D7100 and up is 50% of their dollar volume. See the problem? Yep, 39% of Nikon’s sales would be in that consumer camera business that’s rapidly collapsing. You can’t walk away from 40% of your sales without there being huge consequences for your company. Huge. So they’re trying to figure out ways to keep as much volume there as possible. That problem alone is probably all consuming right now for management: it’s the biggest problem on their plate, by far.

              Whatever happens, this is going to be a Harvard business school case study in the future.

            • Sahaja

              Thom, Looking at the recent K3, perhaps Pentax-Ricoh are reading your constructive criticisms of Nikon more closely than Nikon.

            • Thom Hogan

              Doubtful. The K3 looks like a logical progression from where Pentax currently had gotten to with DSLRs. Other than perhaps the shakeAA thing, which had been suggested years ago by HP when they came up with sensor-based IS, there aren’t any real surprises there. They needed to up their AF system, it appears they’ve addressed that (though by how much is uncertain). They needed to use a state-of-the-art sensor, and they’ve done that. And so on. A very no-nonsense update, IMHO. Exactly what the Pentax APS users want, I think.

          • Andrew

            I think Nikon’s decision on the D7100′s limited buffer is total intransigence. I think they are micromanaging features and do not realize that if a product is even a single key feature short, many consumers will postpone their purchase and at worst move to a competitor.

            I think the heart of Nikon’s management problem is the belief that if certain desired features are added to the D7100 it might cause some high-end customers to purchase the D7100 and thus lose the sales they would have gotten for the D600. Or if the D600′s video capability was similar to the D800′s then they would lose some potential D800 sales. Nikon is behaving as if they are operating in a field where there are no competent competitors that can steal sales away from them.

            The business realities are quite simple. Even if the D7100 matches the D600 feature for feature, the fact that at the same pixel level the D600 is a full frame camera is reason enough to buy the D600 if high ISO performance is critical to one’s needs. Many consumers would be willing to spend $100 to $150 more on a camera if certain desired features are included. This idea that a certain camera model must always hit a certain price point is a total marketing misconception.

            As for the D400, it really should have been released this year especially with the availability of the new EXPEED 4 image processor or at the latest by March 2014. I think beyond the recent natural disasters, Nikon has been distracted by the Nikon 1 initiative in more ways than most have realized. Developing the Nikon 1 must have taken a lot of their research and development resources.

            I hope Nikon’s executives make it their business to pay regular visits to this blog, maybe it would help them see things a little differently. There has no doubt been a lot of activities at Nikon in recent years – research, development, construction of new factories, recovering from nature, etc., but that should not be an excuse for giving consumers more value for their hard earned money. Give us the features we want or else we will for the most part hold on to our existing gear; after all, we do not need the latest tech to take great pictures!

            • Thom Hogan

              Unfortunately, I think it’s simpler than that. The reason why the D7100 buffer is what it is has to do with cost cutting. Nikon I think saw the profit margin hit that’s in play already and going to get worse. Rather than increase the memory in the D7100, they simply let the buffer be what it is.

              The problem I have is that they’re managing for their own needs and convenience, and not really understanding that it’s the core loyal base that has kept them in business. The more the loyal base gets upset with their decisions, the more those decisions are going to come back to haunt them. What Nikon needs to do is what Apple eventually did: go high, go quality, play to the base.

              Let me put it this way, there are two possibilities:

              1. The consumer market for cameras is real and will grow again. Unfortunately, that would be the race to the bottom I write about: basically you have to go lower and lower in price because in growing consumer markets you’ll always attract lots of players, and it becomes a game about costs. (That’s exactly what happened with compact cameras, by the way, and Nikon played that game to the bottom, but unfortunately their now #1 market share there is meaningless, as the market is collapsing 30-50% a year.

              2. The consumer market for cameras is basically over and is going to get smaller. Cost cutting doesn’t win the market segment that remains, as they are all going to be high-level users who demand quality and reliability.

              The right thing to do in a market that you know is going to mature–and I’d argue that I knew this market would mature ten years ago, even wrote about that and missed the peak sales year by only one year–is that you want to go upscale while everyone else is racing to the bottom. When Apple couldn’t win the market share game everyone thought they were dead. But look at them today, they’re thriving on <10% of the PC market share. People are now predicting that Android will wipe out iPhone, but it's the same game as Windows PCs were: a race to the bottom. As long as Apple goes the other way, they'll be fine.

              As for the D400, I suspect that the quake and flood made them miss their original launch window. If, for example, the D400 was designed to be a 24mp camera released before the D5200 and D7100, now that doesn't play so well (and worse if it was 16mp or 18mp). But jumping forward with sensors doesn't happen instantaneously. The lead time from sensor approval to shipping camera can be three years for a high-end product. A late 2010 or early 2011 launch that gets cancelled now becomes a 2013 launch at best if you're going to try to keep the camera at the front edge of the sensor market. I now believe that the D800 happened to take the D4x sensor (the original D800 that was scheduled to be launched in the quake year was, I believe 24mp). But there wasn't anything sitting around for a higher end DX camera that got cancelled.

              That said, there were interim things they could have tried, like putting the 16mp or 24mp sensor into the D300 body and calling it the D300sx.

            • Sahaja

              Sounds like what your suggesting, in so many words, is that Nikon’s camera division needs to downsize and concentrate on quality.

            • Thom Hogan

              Actually, I’m suggesting that if that doesn’t happen, I don’t know what happens with Nikon.

          • Robert

            A recent article in FP mentioned that Nikon and Canon are being severely battered by the rise of the smartphone.

            The smartphone market has eaten away sales of compact point & shoots, which will be — near as makes no difference — gone entirely within 3 years. But any photographer worth his or her salt understands the basic tenets of physics; you cannot get real quality out of a tiny sensor with tiny receptors … and a diminutive lens. You can only correct for that deficiency so far with processing power. Meanwhile, even as the smartphones get better, so, too, does the tech in the large, dedicated cameras (typically where the research is done and from where the technology trickles down).

            Will the DSLR market slow? Sure. But it’s not going to go away entirely. Another factor is the momentum in mirrorless cameras; smaller and lighter with overall operational performance that will soon rival higher-end DSLRs. That market will grow.

            There’s also a persistent rumour that both Nikon and Canon plan to enter the medium format market.

            Going up-market may become another strategy they employ.

            And there’s still some headway to be made in image resolution, too — as televisions move to 8K.

            Back in 1977, Nikon’s mainstay was SLRs for enthusiasts, advanced amateurs and pros. They made relatively few point & shoot cameras and did just fine. They also only made 5 SLR cameras: the FT3, EL2, FM, FE, and F3 series.

            Today they’re producing no fewer than 14 DSLRs! And way too many of those are at the bottom end of the spectrum.

            That many models simply isn’t necessary in the current marketplace. I would submit that Nikon needs no more than a maximum of 5 DSLR cameras, ranging from entry level full-frame to high-end full-frame.

            Then they need to introduce a proper mirrorless lineup, not unlike what Fuji has done with the X-Series…except better. Again, with perhaps three models of APS-C: entry, mid, and high end.

            Add to that the possibility of a medium format system, and it will form the basis of their camera manufacturing operations.

            No more multiple, entry-level DSLRs, no more point & shoots.

            • Sahaja

              I don’t know about the rumours of Nikon and Canon making medium format cameras. That market is small, and already crowded for its size.

              If they made MF DSLRs they’d probably be similar to the Leica S and people would have to buy a whole new set of larger and more expensive lenses for the cameras.

              MF mirrorless cameras Nikon and Canon might be attractive for some studio and landscape photographers ~ but they would still be expensive and require new lenses.

              Meanwhile developing such cameras and lenses would take resources away from FX camera and lens development.

              If Nikon scale up the D7100 sensor to FX (the way they scaled up the D7000 sensor for the D800) that would give them a 56mp FX camera (D4x ??) – combine that with some really high grade FX lenses (the new Zeiss 55 may show what can be done) and you are seriously competing with MF while retaining lens and system compatibility.

            • Thom Hogan

              Just to be clear, Sony now has a smartphone with a 1/2.3″ BSI sensor, same as in some high-end compact cameras. If you believe that smartphone cameras won’t get better or good enough to rival dedicated cameras, I believe you’re going to be proven wrong.

              That’s the real cause of concern for the camera companies. They’ve actually stared this beast in the face before: Polaroid and disposable cameras stole much of the compact film camera market for the same reasons: how much quality do you actually need, and what are you willing to pay for that difference?

              Again, I’ll point that the “momentum” of the mirrorless market is zero. As in “didn’t eat into DSLR sales this year at all.” Whether that will remain true is debatable, and I’ve gone on record to say that DSLR and mirrorless will eventually merge. It’s inevitable as the technology moves forward and cost cutting needs continue.

              I don’t disagree with you about the implied illogic of Nikon’s current camera lineup. I’ve written time and again about the fact that their product lineup is illogical in the face of the marketplace. That we have lingering D3000, D5000, and D90 inventories out there tells you just how much of a problem Nikon had in continuing their usual iteration tactics.

              If I could wave a wand and recreate Nikon’s lineup overnight, it would probably be something like this:

              1 Pro interchangeable lens camera: modular, programmable, communicating, allowing both DX and FX sensors as well as low pixel and high pixel count sensors, etc.
              2 Prosumer interchangeable lens cameras: one DX, one FX. Programmable and communicating.

              2 Consumer interchangeable lens cameras: one DX, one FX, and likely mirrorless/EVF. Communicating.

              Full lens sets for all of the above.

              2 or 3 really well thought out compact cameras (AW, pocket rocket, phone bridge), probably all 1″ or larger sensor.

              But, here’s the problem: those 8 cameras and however many lenses would have to total up to something like 20m unit sales a year. That’s a BHAG (big hairy ambitious goal). I’m not sure it’s possible to achieve now, even done absolutely perfectly. Assuming that 7m of those are lenses, 13m cameras is probably 20% or more of THIS year’s likely camera sales. It’s taking Nikon over three dozen camera models to achieve that right now. Dropping to 8 to achieve the same results would really tax their marketing skills, probably well beyond what they’re capable of.

            • Robert

              Regarding smartphones with larger sensors, yes, we now have a 1/2.3″ BSI sensor in a Sony. But I’m not sure how much farther than that you can go without beginning to scale up the size of everything … including the phone. I don’t think that’s something consumers will want. I think the very thing that makes the smartphone appealing creates a very real functional limitation for its use as anything beyond a casual photographic instrument.

              Consumer snap-shooters are going to continue to embrace the smartphone, though, that much is now clear.

              But I think camera enthusiasts, photography enthusiasts, serious amateurs, and professionals will always desire a dedicated photographic tool, and I expect system cameras will continue, albeit in a diminished capacity from what we’re seeing now. But will that really be any different from what we had in the 1970s? Snapshooters didn’t buy FT3s or EL2s or FM/FEs … and they certainly didn’t buy F2s. Nikon wasn’t worried about consumers for Polaroid SX70s or Kodak Instamatic 110s back then, because they were manufacturing SERIOUS photographic instruments.

              Perhaps that should be their focus once again.

              Perhaps they may have to reposition themselves back to the sort of company they were during that era.

              The way this comes out of the wash, of course, is that Nikon emerges as a smaller company, at least with respect to their photography products division.

            • Thom Hogan

              That’s what was said about compact cameras, too, but then someone tried “folded lenses” and suddenly we had wicked slim cameras. But at the current rate of sensor improvement, even a 1/2.3″ BSI is going to get better than it is, and the real question is how much quality is “enough.”

              One of the things that’s worrisome is that the DSLR makers may have gone too far. Each upward leap of quality has left a few more folk behind, still satisfied with what they have. And I’m now seeing some peel off backwards down to things like the OM-D cameras because they value small and light over more image quality.

              Unfortunately, those two things together are putting a real squeeze on players. The low-end compacts are already basically dead. The high-end DSLRs have a limited uptake, and we’ve now moved a very good 24mp down to even low DX. The “meat” of the market used to be mid-compact through high DX. It’s starting to be high compact through low or mid DX.

              I’m really hoping I’m wrong, that there’s still a large viable market between wherever the phones and their accessories (witness the Sony QX) end up and the remaining “buy anything with more” prosumers at the top.

    • Ned Gerblansky

      They forgot the buffer which is why I won’t buy a D7100.

    • Radek

      It does not sit in the middle.
      There is obvious gap between D7100 and D610 … $1500-1700 camera … like updated D300s!
      There is no way right now that FX sensor camera will get to $1500 range. My dSLR is dying and I need replacement. However, I have issues with each and every option I have: D300s (oldish); D7100 (crappy buffer); D600/D610 (af, bracketing). Plus I find ergonomics of both D600 and D7100 awkward; D300s fit much better in my hand … decisions!!!

      Peace, R>

  • Stef

    EXPEED4… hmmm… this could be the basis of a faster DX camera. More fps… In a pro DX body, this gives us the guts of a D400.

    • Brent

      Expeed is only for video purposes I thought.

      • Pablo Ricasso

        Well, you thought wrong, my friend.

      • Stef

        Isn’t the speed of the processor in the camera tied to its buffer speed/performance?

      • Ken Elliott

        Expeed is Nikon’s marketing term for the central processor. All digital cameras have one, still or video.

    • Jeroen Wijnands

      Personally I’d be happy with a D300s body and the D7100 sensor in it.

  • Ryan

    Do you think now would be a good time to pick up a D800? Need a backup to the D4 and as great as my body is, I’d love to have the resolution to make some huge prints. D610 is not an option as it’s AF system is a joke.

    • Ted

      My old D3s became my D4 backup.

      • jon

        +1

      • Neopulse

        Lucky bastard :-P

      • Neopulse

        Lucky bastard :-P

      • Drazen B

        Hope you didn’t have to sell a kidney when you decided to keep the D3s and get a new D4. :-)

      • Ryan

        If I had an old D3s then obviously that would be my backup as well… But I don’t, so it won’t….

  • Dyun27

    Maybe Nikon is waiting for Canon to pull the trigger on the replacement of the Canon 7D before they let anything on about development of an upcoming D400. That’s the way it was with the D600 and 6D and the 70D vs D7100.

    • MRGABE

      i believe you’re absolutely right. Want to know when the d400 will show up? Pay attention to 7D2 rumors. These camera companies are in cahoots. No doubt in my mind about that.

  • papap

    !!!!!!!!! why not a 35 f2 vr? canon have it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • tertius_decimus

      Ask guys from Canon camp if they’re happy with 35 mm replacement. Many of them are angry because Canon ripped them off for charging 3 times more.

  • Charly

    Seems Nikon and Canon are going trough the same path that mobil phone market. Every year a bigger screen and processor, every year a more MP, sometimes better processor, etc. Specifications race.

    What about real needs for photographers?
    This is getting boring

    • Funduro

      Conservative Japanese corporations are notorious for snail pace change. Too many decisions are based on outdated business model. Look at the pathetic admission, non in my estimation BTW, of the D600 sensor issue. Fujifilm, Sigma,Olympus, Pentax and Ricoh are advancing digital photography products with innovation and timely SW bug upgrades.

      I work in the medical device service field and many major manufactures have released lots of products to market with problems and issues. Thing is patient safety and reliability are federal issues not just end user concern. Items can be recalled and they must stop using the items till proper correction are performed. I think quality control, such as Nikon is failing on, is becoming a bigger issue when profits, market share and rush to release are primary factors. Even the products from really big Co’s quality are going the wrong direction, down.

      • Robert Ash

        Uh, hate to be the one to break the news to you, but those companies you’re saying are moving so much faster than Nikon…..are also Japanese companies :)

  • Charly

    I have another rumor!!! on april 2014 D7200!! Oooh O:
    And, wait for it… october 2014, the brand new D5400!! AWESOME!!

    ¬¬

  • Sonikon

    Hmm putting Expeed 4 into the D5300 and keeping everything else the same? What for?

    Maybe Nikon wants to tease dx users by putting in expeed4 giving it 10fps and but maintain the not so great 39AF system. And then throw in WIFI and GPS to make it current.

    I have a feeling they will make it competitive to the 70D. Hopefully it retains the almost moiré free sensor and gets a boost in High Iso Noise to take advantage of the new CPU

    • Mate Pilich

      “I have a feeling they will make it competitive to the 70D”

      No not really, as a product the D5x00 is placed one level below the 70D.
      D7100 on the other hand, is in the similar ‘product bracket’ as the 70D.

  • I am No No Nikon

    “There is absolutely no demand for a D300s replacement. That’s the 10th time I’ve said that today.”

    • apollo

      If you say that there’s no demand for D300s replacement, you don’t know damn about markets.

      • Photobug

        Apollo is correct. He knows nothing about marketing and the pent-up-demand for the D400.

        • apollo

          If Nikon doesn’t bring D400, they will be screwed since when Canon brings 7D Mark2, they don’t have anything that competes against it. D7100 isn’t even option.

    • Luis Diego Salas

      “10th” but “no demand” OK. Nice.

      • Ian Dangerzone

        What’s really funny is you just explained his joke, but didn’t seem to understand it.

        • Luis Diego Salas

          Well, at least I think I did! =) I was just stating the obvious, Ian. LOL.

          • Ian Dangerzone

            humor is odd. people receive it so differently.

            • Luis Diego Salas

              But I can tell you about somebody around here that clearly didn’t get it.

              V V V V

    • HiDefBob

      I know one professional sports photographer (who shoots pro hockey) who would disagree with you. Even though he shoots with 2 D4′s he would put money down for 2 D400′s in a second!

  • Art

    I’m looking forward to a new 24-70 with VRIII. Sigma has (apparently — not having looked at it) just released a new 24-70 so perhaps it will urge Nikon to do the same. I’d really love to be able to get a couple of stops for use in low light situations.

    • callibrator

      “…Sigma has (apparently — not having looked at it) just released a new 24-70…”

      What weed have you been smoking? Could I have some?

    • Pablo Ricasso

      New 24-70 Sigma is just a rumor, nothing more nothing less. Don’t believe everything you read especially not on the unreliable web site this was posted 2 days ago.

      • Ary

        Good to know the Sigma doesn’t exist (yet). Even so a 24-70 with VR would really be a nice upgrade.

  • noora

    why theres no place for the D400 in nikon house this year .. stupidly they announced the D610 for no reason theres nothing interesting in this cheap full frame model ! ok yay nikon you have a cheap full frame camera but there is no reason to have another one in this time its too early for the d600 replacement ! i dont know what i’m writing but i’m mad cause i’m waiting for the D300s replacment since 2010 my camera model is too old and i dont want to get a D300s or D7100 or even what nikon are happy with the D600 D610 … thanks nikon :)

    • Jeroen Wijnands

      There’s a D7100 which does almost anything better than the D300s. Then there’s a D600/610. Nikon does not see a niche for an affordable camera that handles well and is build to last.

  • Harv.!

    Hey Peter,

    Did you hear anything about a AF-S 24mm f/1.8G early next year ?

    • Mate Pilich

      Not with an already great AF-S 28mm f/1.8G released not that long ago.

      I spoke to our Nikon Australia distributor, the new 300mm f/4G is indeed closer than most would think ;-)
      It’s only after his ‘wink’ that I listed my old 300mm f/4D for sale.

      • Pablo Ricasso

        Wow, thanks for the info ‘from the horses mouth’…I have been saving for some time now for the new 300mm f/4, hope it won’t hit the +$1600 mark as that’s what I will eventually have to spend.

        • SteveHood

          It’ll be a lot more than that.

      • harv.!

        Hi Mate,

        It’s been longer than most think, the 28mm f/1.8G was released in April 2012…time flies, especially when you want to replace your AFD 24mm f/2.8 with a 24mm f/1.8G, lol.

  • Full_Slow

    What are the specs for Exspeed 4?

    • callibrator

      The ones most of the real photographers wouldn’t care about, anyway.

      • Drazen B

        Haha, so true.

      • Andrew

        Don’t you like better scene recognition? Don’t you like 1080p @ 60 fps video? Don’t you like auto everything :-)

    • RMJ

      some changes in Expeed 4 :
      http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/milbeaut-and-expeed.html

      - New optical correction capabilities.
      - Faster image processing (double the performance for stills).
      - Support for Dolby Labs’ JPEG-HDR encoder.
      - New video compression/decompression algorithms for 1080/30P and 1080/60i HD video.
      - 30% lower power consumption.

      • Full_Slow

        So with faster processing, better buffering/writing, no?

        • RMJ

          No.

          It depends more on data bandwidth. There’s many things you need to consider. Processing power alone doesn’t help. (of course, it does help!)

        • RMJ

          No.

          It depends more on data bandwidth. There’s many things you need to consider. Processing power alone doesn’t help. (of course, it does help!)

    • Thom Hogan

      Simple: more internal and external bandwidth with lower power consumption. That’s been the primary design goal for each generation so far. The dedicated image processing stuff is pretty well set at this point. Sure, maybe we’ll get some new video compression capabilities or some more RETOUCH items (or more RETOUCH items will become real time), but that’s not really as meaningful as bandwidth.

  • James Donahue

    We Welcome your back.. I don’t believe there will be a D400 in the future.

    • Thom Hogan

      I’m still a believer in the mythical D400. However, Nikon has missed the window, and each passing month it gets harder to see the window ;~).

      When a D400 does appear, unless it is completely disruptive in nature it won’t resonate like the D300 did in 2007. If it’s just another iteration, Nikon is going to find that a lot of their potential customers have already moved to something else.

      • Ken Elliott

        I suspect the next “flagship” DX will be a mirrorless design with features developed from the V1/V2. A DX version of the V2, but with D800-style controls might be pretty darn interesting.

        BTW – shouldn’t we be calling them e-cameras? As in all-electronic cameras? My film Leica, Sinar 4×5, compact camera and phone don’t have mirrors, so mirrorless doesn’t really say much. The real difference is some are mechanical, electro-mechanical, and some all-electronic. Anyone like e-Cam?

        • patto01

          I hope not. Maybe I’m the only person who’ll never buy a mirrorless camera but I don’t think so.

          • tertius_decimus

            You’re not alone.

            • patto01

              Really? Who’s here?? I thought I heard strange noises… ;-)

          • Neil

            Never is a very long time…

            • patto01

              I understand your point but I don’t think “never” can be quantified like, for instance, “a thousand years.” It’s kinda like cold, not really being a thing but rather the absence of something (heat).

              A little over 30 years ago, I started shooting with a Minolta SLR. Some years later, it broke and I couldn’t afford to repair or replace it. We never knew when we would even eat. Anyway, around 10 years ago, my wife bought a point and shoot which I would never use. When I wanted to buy a dSLR, a few years later, she didn’t understand since I never took pictures. I explained it to her and bought it. Now, I shoot every day.

              And so, I can confidently say, I will NEVER buy a mirrorless camera.

      • Photobug

        Tom, your right on target that Nikon missed the marketing window for the D400. Great engineering but sloppy marketing. People are dumping their D300′s for other DSLR’s.

      • BRYL

        I still agree with Thom….wouldn’t it make sense for Nikon to “wait” until Canon comes out with thier 7D replacement before releasing the D400?? I really don’t see Nikon having the D7100 be the comparable competition…and like Admin stated,,, Nikon “should” be concentrating on the “middle”line cameras for now… I would consider the D400 the middle of the line…( my silly opinion of course)..

      • Deep_Lurker

        I’m not sure about “disruptive;” I don’t see the D400 as needing anything new except, probably, EXPEED4 for flinging about 24MP at 8+ FPS. What the D400 needs to be, IMHO, is a distillation of all the good parts that already exist, brought into perfect balance. A “zen” camera, as it were, rather than a “wow!” camera.

        The D800 was a “wow!” camera, with 36MP. The D600 was intended as the “Someday you were going to upgrade to FX. This is someday” camera. The D7000 & D7100 were “you didn’t expect these features in a mere consumer model” cameras. The D400 I’m hoping for is a “Nikon did everything right with this one” camera.

        • Thom Hogan

          If the D300s replacement is a 24mp, 8 fps camera, that means that Nikon is only treading water. The Pentax K-3 is already there. Had Nikon done a D300sx as I describe elsewhere in this thread to tide themselves over, they’d have bought more time at the window. To do that now would be introduce a camera that just doesn’t have the zing to claim the prosumer crown. Moreover, you could just stick another memory chip in the D7100 and get (almost) there easier. And worse still, what lenses would you use on this 24mp camera? ;~). The coxswain missed a cadence and the rowers all missed the beat. Their next stroke needs to be a great one.

          • catinhat

            A camera is a camera. What Deep_Lurker described is what everyone has been asking for. Basically a D300 style all metal body with all the controls in the right place and a modern sensor. No one needs more than 24mp on DX (and 16 was probably fine too), no one asked for more than 8 fps, would 10 or 12 make a difference? What else can they do? — squeeze another half a stop of ISO over D7000/7100 — maybe, if this still doesn’t violate the laws of physics, I’m not sure. These are all little things really. I’m sure there is a lot of room for improving the video side of things, GPS, WiFi, and various other “geeky” stuff tangentially related to photography, but I doubt any of it would make a splash or much of a difference for the D300 crowd. It really boils down to the best currently available DX sensor and all the other specs and features of the D300, plus perhaps an improved AF if Nikon is still capable of it without screwing things up. And, last but not least, no QC debacles. That’s what most people have been asking for: an improved sensor, incrementally improved other specs over D300 (or at least not going back in any major specs), and a body quality with no compromises, as Nikon used to make when they released D300. The D300 is still the benchmark here. Put such a camera out at $1799 — there will be takers. I agree that releasing a D7200 with a bigger buffer is a simpler solution, but ergonomics, handling, and overall quality feel do matter.

            • Thom Hogan

              Let’s remember that the D300 was unique and a clear choice when it came out. The D3/D300 pairing was perhaps the best Nikon has ever done, essentially putting the same features and much of the same performance into an affordable and an all-out pro version.

              Today, the situation is a bit different. A 24mp D400 at 8 fps has to compete against a 24mp D7100 at 6fps, a 24mp D600 at 6 fps, and the 15mp D800 (in DX) at 6 fps. Nikon essentially has created competition against themselves (not a bad thing, but it reduces the potential for D400 sales, as a number of Nikon D300 faithful have already chosen to go D7100, D600, or D800).

              Would a 24mp 8fps D400 sell? Yes. But not in the kinds of quantities that the D300 did, and it would potentially find itself again quickly outdated as other cameras used newer sensors. The high-end lineups are especially tricky, as they have to live in the marketplace for far, far longer, typically as much as four years, but certainly at least two years. That means that if they come at the end of a sensor generation, they look out of date when the next sensor generation hits other models: exactly the D300s’s problem.

            • catinhat

              I think, barring there is some dramatically new sensor technology about to hit the market in the next couple of years, we’re actually in a fairly steady state right now, and upcoming consumer models might not be able to challenge a well made D400 for quite some time.
              Just look what we’ve got. The D800 uses essentially an FX version of the D7000 sensor, which is of 2010 vintage, while the current D7100 sensor, though has more pixels (and looks sharper due to no AA filter), doesn’t really outperform the D7000 sensor in a compelling way, if at all. At the top of the line, D4, still very current, is only marginally ahead of the 4 year old D3s, and some may dispute even that.
              There are new options now not present several years ago (especially D600/610), but apart from that, and assuming one concedes that D800 is indeed a D700 successor, there hasn’t been much excitement in years.
              So, suppose Nikon brings to the market a 24mp D400, and then a 32mp D7200 a year later. Is that going to ruin D400 prospects? I personally seriously doubt it. We’ve had D7000 and D7100, and plenty of folk still prefer to use their 5-6 year old D300′s because while sensor is a big part of a camera, there is clearly more to it than the sensor, and the die hard D300 followers are exactly the type of crowd who appreciate this fact more than most, and are indeed the target audience for the D400.

            • Thom Hogan

              Call it Photon’s Law or what you wish, but I’ve been tracking digital sensors for almost two decades now. There has been an almost straight line of improvement over that time that predicts that there is visible differential about every three years. We have at least five different technologies that are lab or real world tested that can advance sensors further on that line, and several others that show promise. At least until we hit the theoretical limit of counting every photon accurately.

              Here’s the thing, though: if you’re just making 8×10″ prints, that “visible differential” is getting more and more buried into something you won’t see. I’ve got a 30″ display. Full screen I’m getting about a 33% view of the D800′s pixels, which is where that visibility is going to be. The question is how many people are going to really need those additional gains? That’s one thing that prompted me to write my Last Camera Syndrome article quite some time ago. The answer is: not many.

              But in theory, a truly serious D400 user might be one of them. To put out a lower end camera (your D7200) that does better than the high-end camera is truly missing the mark when it comes to the serious, high-end user. A D7200 user would be better served by built-in WiFi that actually talked well with smartphones, not a bigger sensor. A D400 user is still likely to be looking at ultimate quality at high pixel densities.

              Essentially, we’re at the same stage PCs got to with CPU megahertz: if all you’re doing is word processing, email, and Web browsing, how fast does the CPU really need to be? But if you’re doing 3D modeling in real time, you don’t want to have to resort to a consumer PC to get the speed you need.

            • catinhat

              Of course D400 users will look for quality, but quality comes in many different shapes and forms. If one fails to get perfect focus, who cares about pixel counts. If you have to shoot at high ISO, you face degradation and detail loss. Why is D4 fine with only 16MP, — because it is not targeted at optimal conditions shooting, and extra pixels at some point become more of a burden than a boon. Same case with the D400. The target audience here is sports shooters and wildlife shooters, neither operates under optimal conditions, so this alone often entails certain sacrifice of quality. Meaningful ISO and AF improvements are very welcome, but pixel counts are marginal. Yes, of course once in a while extra pixels may help, but beyond certain point it is mostly academic for this type of shooting.
              On the other hand, shooting landscape, fine art, portrait, and such, where conditions are more controlled and one indeed may aspire for ultimate pixel level quality, — those folks went FX a while back. Ditto those who shoot in the dark, and I doubt any DX D400 would change that. But a DX D400 could occupy a sweet spot, being simply the best compromise for particular kinds of shooting conditions.
              I have a foot in both worlds, DX and FX, and use both the way it makes sense to me. Both formats have strengths and weaknesses and associated value. A D400 which would sit in a niche where it would have an advantage over all other choices is the D400 I would like to see. Whether this niche is still big enough to make Nikon actually take advantage of it — I have no idea.

          • Deep_Lurker

            You’ve admitted yourself that the Pentax does have some weak points. As for whether Pentax has a better lens selection, it depends on whether one belongs to your wide-angle warlock tribe, or to the telephotophile tribe.

            Anyway my point was that Nikon doesn’t necessarily need “zing” to claim the prosumer crown: It can claim the crown with a camera that has an “ahhhhh” factor, instead – a camera that is actually there in the sweet spot, rather than just “almost” there.

            OTOH, a new EXCEED system migh let Nikon pull a rabbit out of the hat with a D400. Maybe something like effortless automagical pixel binning in-camera, so that the D400 can be set to produce .NEF files that are “only” 6MP but that are low-noise even at ISO crazy-high.

          • Jeroen Wijnands

            I don’t need a bunch of megapixels in a D400. I need good high iso, decent enough video and a big comfortable body.

            At the moment my kit fulfils my photographic needs. However should I need to replace it I think I’d look long and hard at Canon instead. Only thing they don’t seem to have is something like the 16-85. However they do have that lovely 100-400.

            Brand loyalty went out the window for me about 2 years ago.

            • Thom Hogan

              As I hope people are starting to realize, on the larger sensors (DX and FX), more megapixels doesn’t mean more noise when you do an apples to apples comparison. Now that read noise is down and fill factor is up, you don’t get worse noise from more pixels. The D800 should have proved that to everyone. On the other hand, Nikon really needs to give people sRAW, so that they can take full advantage of that.

              Thus, a 16mp “high ISO” D400 would quickly get compared to the 24mp DX models and found to be “not substantially better,” much like the D4 and D800 pairing.

              That’s one of the reasons why I’ve written that the window has closed on Nikon. There’s a good chance that if they used current sensors in a D400 that future consumer models would simply outperform it. In theory a pro camera needs to stay state-of-the-art for a longer period of time or else it becomes marginalized. Just as the D7000 and D7100 marginalized the D300s.

              And lenses are another issue, both for Canon and Nikon. We simply need better lenses and more pro-caliber lenses to take advantage of any D400 when it does appear.

          • David Vella

            You are a such a hypocrite Thom Hogan. You told me the new Pentax K3 was yet another sub par Pentax that was not even as good as the Nikon 300s and Pentax had a lot of catching up to do just to match it. Now you seem to have changed tack both here and on you site and are implying Nikon need to catch up with the K3. WHICH IS THE TRUTH?
            Let’s face it Nikon have blown conventional pro DX out , they do not care, and have said they are concentrating on the lower end from here on in. No fast dedicated DX glass just underlines their limited interest in the cropped sensor DSLR as a pro/prosumer format . They want to push thIs demand into FX .
            I seem to remember that Nikon used to peddle the line that full frame Dslrs were not required back in the D1/D2 era and then they back tracked on that, pushed by Canon.

            Nikon’s future ,if they have one , with the cropped sensor would require a radical overhaul in tech/design supported by dedicated serious lenses to be worthy or relevant against the relentless forging ahead of the competition.

            • Thom Hogan

              As I noted in my last email reply to you after 93 emails from you this year, I was pushing your buttons. You seem to send me an email about this topic every time Nikon makes any announcement, even a Coolpix.

              I think I’ve been very clear on my sites that I believe Nikon has messed up with DX. Not just in cameras, but in lenses, as well.

            • David Vella

              I do not dispute that you have criticized Nikon in the past and more vehemently latterly.
              However you are missing the real point of my post above -’pushing my buttons’ again? Your initial reaction to the Pentax K3, which I dubbed the’ new D400′ in an email to you 24 hours before your piece, was extremely dismissive of the camera describing it as bringing nothing new, not even up to the level of the D300s, and being incorrect in some of your other assumptions on the 7th Oct. Subsequently, in public,you have changed tack on your site. An odd inconsistency.
              You cannot expect to blog /run sites without feedback and comments from others ,particularly from those with views not always totally in harmony with your commentary.

              I sometimes wonder why you are not running Nikon as you seem to know all the answers to their woes. Why do they not listen to you ,offer you a consultancy role? Perhaps you could write a piece about that strange dichotomy next.

      • Steve

        I’d like to share some info with you. My work is about market analysis in Asian. I’m very condident that there will be NO pro DX bodies. At present, the market segment of DX is much smaller than few years ago. On the other hand, the market sharing of mirrorless cameras is tremendously increased. Making a pro DX body demands a lot of effort, resouces, and invesment. This is a risk that makes Nikon re-consider their market strategy. In few years, they thus focus on entry-level DX and FX segment which generate higher profitability.

        • Thom Hogan

          As I’ve written elsewhere, we’re seeing regional differences in adoption. That makes the camera company’s plans even more fraught with danger.

          However, “mirrorless camera is tremendously increased” doesn’t actually line up with the facts. Mirrorless got to about 20% of DSLR sales fairly quickly, but has not been able to push higher. Moreover, in markets like the US, mirrorless has lower market share, about 14% in August in terms of units and only 11% in dollars. (And Nikon is the #2 seller of mirrorless in the US, by the way.)

  • Danny Eiserloh

    No 300s replacement. time to switch to Canon 7D!! I already sold my 70-200 Nikon lens.

    • umeshrw

      Are they coming out with 7d2? If not then your switching to 7d doesn’t make sense.

      • Danny Eiserloh

        7D Mark II

  • Tom Bruno

    What about a D800s? Or similar? I plan to get a D800, but am wondering if there is any advantage to waiting till, say, before the winter Olympics. If not an upgraded model, maybe a discount will be offered. Any thoughts?

  • http://1000wordpics.blogspot.ca/ 1000wordpics

    There have been D400′s and there will be no D400. To clarify: judging from the trickle of rumors and leaks, Nikon has continued to test D400 prototypes and concepts, but there’s no market space for it now. Just like last year, they need to let the D610 breath before giving people the option of spending less on a DX camera. In other words, what the D600/D610 episode really represents is lost time; lost time in cementing the affordable FX space, and lost time in regaining the stalled semi-pro DX space.

    • Deep_Lurker

      The D400 would not share the same market space as the D610, even if both are given the same price. The people who want a D400 are not willing to accept a D610 as a substitute, and the people who want a D610 are not willing to accept a D400 as a substitute.

      • patto01

        I got tired of waiting for the D400 and didn’t want the D600. A very well known photographer told me to get it and the deals, last December, cemented the decision. I still might get a D400 if it ever comes out but I’m very happy with the D600.

      • http://1000wordpics.blogspot.ca/ 1000wordpics

        On paper I would agree, but considering that despite the professional aspirations of the Dxxx cameras, the majority of the people who buy them aren’t pros…. it’s also reflected in the questions and comments that people tend to ask on forums. That’s not a knock, it’s hard to be a pro, it’s easier to be an enthusiast. I believe it’s a mistake that people are only one type of shooter or another… certainly there are those that, but product categories aren’t that limited. What is limited is the total amount of dollars that the aggregate consumer base is willing to spend. We say things like “DX shooters aren’t interested in having a smaller sensor,” but how people have given the E-M1 a serious look?

    • Thom Hogan

      I agree with the first part, disagree with the second. Nikon has indeed had D300 replacement prototypes floating about. Several, as far as I can tell.

      But “market space” is something you also have to test, too. I see no evidence that Nikon has surveyed customers to determine whether the market space is actually there or not. If they’re trying to do this by “guess,” that would be bad.

      • http://1000wordpics.blogspot.ca/ 1000wordpics

        Maybe “market message” is a better term than “market space.”

        I’m looking at it from a “tribes” point of view. Assuming that this past year has been a big headache for the D6xx “tribe”, you’d think that the D610 could delineate a fresh start for their people, or as good a mulligan as is possible under the circumstances. Just imagine the internal conversation going on if the DX tribe is pushing to have a D400 soon after all of this.

        If they haven’t done any meaningful surveys, I wouldn’t be surprised. Research is one of the first things to go when things get tough.

  • Dester

    D5300 completely canibalizes D7000. Now everything is 24MP, but the D4 is 16MP. ISO is cleaner than Canon but tops at 6400, while Canon toy cams are 25600+
    It’s getting strange.

  • AstonJ

    Is there no hint of anything on the D400 after it seems Canon is moving to a 7D MkII in Q2 next year? In one of your earlier posts you had said that Nikon would look to time a D400 with any Canon release. See – http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/10/eos-7d-mark-ii-talk-cr1/

    • Thom Hogan

      Here’s the thing: in terms of DSLR market share in the US in actual retail sales, Canon and Nikon have been averaging something like 97-98% this year, fairly closely split. The numbers might be a bit lower in some other parts of the world, but this is part of the reason why the two companies are so focused on each other and not so much on all the other players. Nikon is locked into a status quo fight with Canon, as they were at the end of the film SLR era.

      I personally think that’s the wrong course of action. By focusing on what you SHOULD be doing for your customers and what others can’t counter quickly or easily, you not only get a leg up on your main competitor (Canon) but also ward off all the smaller ones trying to nibble away at you (Sony and Pentax in DSLRs, but a whole slew in mirrorless).

      The D3/D300 combo was one of those forward looking actions that Canon had a tough time countering. One can only hope that Nikon can pull off a D4s/D400 combo that’s as differentiated, but it’s looking less likely. Oh well, maybe the D5/D500 ;~).

      • FredBear

        Sounds like a healthy dose of collusion could be at play between 2 companies that have 95% of the market?
        Might not be a case of one ‘keeping an eye on the other’ but if both companies decide not to do a “pro grade cropped sensor camera” they wouldn’t be affecting each other’s market share – one less product line with the same volume sales is always a good (and financially beneficial) idea.

        • Sahaja

          Canon are currently fighting with one hand tied because they use their own (outdated) sensor manufacturing plant – whereas Nikon use the latest sensnor technology from wherever it is available.

        • Business

          Japanese companies have always operated in a system of cooperative competition. What others might see as collusion, the Japanese see as balancing the needs of consumers for relentless innovation with corporate and social needs for stability, viability, and predictability of profits. Without it, we would only have just one Japanese camera maker (probably Canon) and the rest of the companies like Ricoh and Nikon would be long gone.

          • KnightPhoto

            Interesting background, cooperative competition… Thanks

  • RMJ

    But any news about Dee Four Hund… oh wait… didn’t finish the article…

  • Kynikos

    50 shades of “Meh” for me.

    If I wanted a 300mm f/4, I’d buy the one that’s on offer, which is perfectly fine.
    If I wanted a D5300, I’d buy a D7100.
    If I wanted a 1.4xTC, I’d buy the current offering, which is also perfectly fine.

    • FredBear

      300 F4 needs VR.
      I have one.

    • Sahaja

      A 300 f/4 with VR will cost a lot more – but good copies of the existing 300mm f/4 should become available at a good price.

  • WaitingForAD400

    Dear author, just wanted to leave a quick thank you here :) I really enjoy reading your news, I’m on this page practically every day and even though I’ll probably not buy a new Nikon anytime soon (especially since no D400 seems to be on the way) I’m always curious for the latest developments – you’re doing a perfect job here!! :)

    • FredBear

      +1

  • Philip

    Wanna know when will the 50/58 1.2G come out……

  • eugene

    Was looking forward to the D5300…now I still have to wait??

  • Ronald

    No D400 … that sucks!

  • Espen4u

    Nice with a new fisheye toy lens, hopefully it’ll be reasonably priced (in a year or two). But why not update your tilt/shifts Nikon? And why not a Pro grade 50-ish at 1.2?

  • numbnuts

    An article in the Financial Post yesterday quoted an IDC analyst who said Nikon will be dead in 5 years.

    • mardock

      I heard that, too. Sounds far-fetched to me. Just another reason for Canon fanboys to rejoice, I suppose.

      • NRA advocate

        What kind of irresponsible a-hole would make a proclamation like that?

        • Drazen B

          What kind of a-hole would answer his own post pretending to be a different person…like this “numbnuts” above?

          • JakeB

            Haha, you caught him red handed…what a douche bag.

          • NRA Advocate

            WTF are you talking about?

            • jakeB

              I’ll try to answer it if I may…your reply was showing incorrectly with ‘numbnuts’ name for some time. so it appeared as he answered his own post. Now it’s been corrected.
              Website issue, nothing to worry about.

            • callibrator

              I saw that too and was going to reply to numbnuts, glad I didn’t now :-)

  • spicynujac

    For someone who wants the dedicated manual controls of the D7100 and the flip LCD screen of the 5×00 line, what should I do? I’m awfully tempted by the D5300 which should be an amazing device, but frustrating to use without U1/U2 banks and dedicated buttons. D7100 is the camera I want, but I love street photography and shooting from waist level with tilted LCD screen will get you shots you will never otherwise have. I don’t care about compatibility with non AF-s lenses so that is not an issue (actually prefer the smaller lighter 5×00 bodies).
    Why was tilt LCD left off the 7100 line and how likely would this be included on a mythical D400?

    • Sahaja

      Yes, I used to like Rollei TLRs with their waist level finder for discrete shooting. Silent, and you could easily shoot them sideways too.

    • CooksAndShoots

      Tilt was probably left off of the D7100 and D600s because of all the whiners on sites like these who think a tilt screen isn’t “professional” whatever that means. It’s a shame because it would be such a useful feature, especially for professionals like me.

      • Nic

        Tilt screen was left off because they can’t be weather sealed, which the D7100 and D600 both are, and the D5300 is not.

  • WouterJ

    D5300 looks nice. However, a second control dial is a must imho..

  • Sahaja

    Make a D800s with Expeed 4, faster FPS (especially in crop mode) and a big buffer – and you have a D800 and 16mp D400 rolled into one.

    • KnightPhoto

      Yes exactly, a “D800s with Expeed 4, faster FPS (especially in crop mode) and a big buffer – and you have a D800 and 16mp D400 rolled into one.”

      A 6-8 fps D800S is a highly important model if Nikon can do it QUICKLY like next spring. Would be a D800/D400/D710 rolled up into one for many people as well as a stronger competitor to the 5Diii. Once EXPEED4 becomes available it’s going to be very interesting up and down the camera lineup (I hope).

    • BroncoBro

      Yeah, for $2,800! That does not give you a D400.

  • Tomherren

    So, nothing new on a successor for Capture NX2, now as Adobe’s move to the subscription mode would be an opportunity to offer an alternative to the enthusiast segment.

  • Nuno Guerreiro

    So, a new 610, FF body, doesn’t have Wifi and GPS integrated… but a consumer DSLR, may come with it…

    dumassess!!!!

  • artgriffo

    The D400 is dead it wont come to the market place! – It has no place in the Nikon line up.
    D3200, D5300, D7100 then D610 (FF)
    We all loved the D300 and 300s when they come to the market but Nikon (in their infinite wisdom) have left those users high and dry with no upgrade intended. That said I believe/read the D7100 is a great camera. It was reported when it (D7100) came out that this was the flag ship of DX range… (Later denied by Nikon but now seems to be the case).
    Oh Nikon what are you doing?

  • artgriffo

    I’ve spotted something whilst trawling through the post on this subject/rumour…
    There’s a gap in the Nikon line up!
    Yes there is look!
    D7100 (Dx) – D610 (Fx) – In the middle nothing!
    How about to fill the gap an even lower entry Fx model ‘Aperture priority’ only.
    Think about it before you scream at me, Nikon EM, FG and FG20 great small film cameras.
    The Nikon EM-D would be small enough. Same size as the V1 – check it out…

    Id buy back into Nikon if they did that!

    Nikon will just have to work on the name of the camera, though ‘coz the Oly. guys nicked it!

  • Nikkor

    wait for D400. What are you doing Nikon? Listen to customer demand!!!

  • Nikkor

    Will buy either D400 or Canon 7D2. As soon as which one launches first.

  • cookie

    Nikkor 18-140mm: Any experience with this lens ? Thanks in advance.

  • Jon Ingram

    I’ll wait for the D900 in early 2015 (or whenever it shoes up). I’m patient. Nothing too exciting for me right now, except maybe the new 300 f/4.

  • stormwatch

    Can anyone really explain me all this talk about D300/300s? IQ wise the D90 is better than him….???

  • HiDefBob

    I really don’t care what new camera is announced. I will be purchasing a D4 early in the new year. My D300 will become my backup/2nd body camera. I will be a very happy camper!

  • Rafa R

    OMG! I just bought my D4 and a D4x is probably coming.. Murphy´s Law.. oh well.. love my D4 anyways. I just hope the D4 comes with 36 mp sensor WITH an option for Small Raw files..

  • rawman

    its not right, need to s witch to canon, ive been waiting forever, I and many of my camera friends have been waiting for a camera that is good enough to shoot eagles, fast moving in low lite, the d300 was terrible in low light, I have one, the 7100 is alittle better, but buffer feels in about 2 to 3 secs,. we cant afford 6000, for a camera, (d4) the only one good enough, the light in shooting the birds in the winter is over castalmost all the time,

  • Mansgame

    What they need to do is say “We screwed up the D600. We screwed over our loyal customers by having a faulty problem, we again screwed them over by not admitting any problems with when we knew there was and we screwed them over a 3rd time by not fixing it and just coming out with the D610. Because we love our customers and know they have spent thousands of dollars on lenses, any unhappy D600 user can get a free D610 and return their D600. We’ll donate those to non-profit groups”.

  • V

    If my D300s dies I might as well switch to the Canon if there’s no D400:/ I want “pro” body – (ergonomy, durability, …) but I don’t want to spend tons of money on FX lenses. Right now I have just 2 which could be used on FX, so even if I wanted to go FX, I’d have to spend lots of money on new lenses. Why not spend the money on Canon lenses and avoid this bullshit every few years?

    • KnightPhoto

      It surprises me that people still think Canon has DX cameras that are ahead of (or even with) Nikon’s ;-) All of Canon’s DX cameras are badly outclassed by their Nikon counterparts, so a “switch to Canon” would result in lower quality not an upgrade! Canon has two sensors in the crop-cameras, the 18mp one is very much showing it’s age and is not great in noise management, and the new 20mp which did not move the IQ bar.

      If you haven’t done this before goto the DxOMark (independent tester) website and compare any of the Canon crop cameras to any of the Nikon ones, it is not a pretty outcome for Canon.

  • henk

    Ghaaaa! Just give us the D400 NOW!!!

  • Back to top