NikoDoby said:
My thoughts exactly jonny. Nikon can't afford to sit around for another year or year and a half to increase MP to 14mp :^(

Come to think of it the rumor of the D3000/D5000 replacement showing up this year makes sense now doesn't it. Imagine the D7000 and D9000 with more mp and ISO performance equal to the D3! That would be sweet!

It is sweet, you were right on Niko.
should change your name to " Nikodamus"

Canon aren't sitting on the 5D2 replacement they are actually speeding it up. It might be out as early as September of this year. Canon already knows what Nikon's next model are going to be.

I don't think the T2i/550 will cannibalize 7D sales as much as the rumored 50D (60D) replacement will.

Canon never said they are developing an EVIL camera. The recent quote of a quote from a "canon officer" just said they are monitoring the EVIL market.

"Japanese trade journal Pen News Weekly quotes an article published in Photo Trade Express in which an unnamed 'Canon officer' is reported as saying: 'Ratio of mirror-less models in the domestic market is estimated at about 15% in quantity. In Europe it takes about 5% though it varies from nation to nation and the American market is apparently indifferent to the mirror-less system."

Canon are supposedly sitting on the 5D MK III waiting to see just what Nikon releases to replace the D700. You have to wonder what they have "up their sleve" for the D90 and D300(s) replacements. Nikon is overdue for the D90 replacement (when the D90 was released all the comments were that it was late at two years instead of the usual 18 month schedule) and may well lose sales to Canon with the 550D if they dawdle. Actually, the 550D could canabalize 7D sales if people "read specs", although I have seen one set of comparison images which gave a very slight edge to the 550D when compared to the 7D. There are, of course, other performance items which the 7D has the advantage over the 550D.

Canon are starting to "leak" information about their EVIL camera, probably to "freeze" sales of mu4/3s and other cameras.

I'm sure you have all heard a previous rant of mine but compare the "useful IQ" and the Release dates the cameras are in 2 different classes. The 2007 Honda civic isn't in the same class as an 1991 Mercedes just because it has a radio too...

P6000 - G11
D40/D3000 - Rebel XTI
D60/D5000 - Rebel T1i/T2i
D80/D90 - 40D/50D
D300/D300s- 7D
D700 - 5D/5D mII
D3/D3s - Eos D mIII/mIV
D3x - Eos Ds mIII

As a sidenote mostly only camera stores and Best buys carry D90's where I am (Best Buy also sells the D300/D300s in store). The D3000 and D5000 are what is in Cosco, Target, Walmart, K-mart, Sears, Frys and every other consumer store in between... the D90 is not.

Point taken Niko !

After I post it I noticed that ti was one month ago.

I only post to those threads that are related to video so I think I am not stirring that much as you mention.

But any way since you are the moderator I have to respect you're comment.

It's just that you revive a thread that's over a month old only to point out what you've already mentioned in just about every other single post you make. I don't have a problem with HD in DSLRs. I have a problem with you "stirring" things up repeatedly on the very same topic.

Your business is renting out these cameras correct? So Nikon cameras don't get rented out as often as your canon gear right? OK enough already. Stay to one thread on the topic and please avoid repeat responses in various post.

It seem like every body wants more in this forum my friend. Why is this blog open to start with? It is fine for people to talk about things related to photographs but not for video.
I just don't understand? If I want to make a point about something that I am not happy I thing I ma not hurting any one by expressing my self. People here are talking about all sorts of thinks about their cameras and I don't see anybody complaining.

Every time I respond to a thread which is related to video every body seem to get upset about it?

As far as trolling goes I think is unfair of you to say just because I keep talking about video. At the end of the day if Nikon has put the D-move mode in our cameras I have every right to talk about it if I am not happy.

Regards

Valonqe, why do you have to cry about how Nikon isn't meeting your needs TODAY in every single post you make? I'm starting to suspect you of trolling. Seriously. We all get it. You are not happy with Nikon's line up. You want more...more...more. OK we get it.

foofiebeast said:
i don't mind the 24fps though more options would obviously be nice, it's just the controls that need to be updated, i want full manual control in video mode, and obviously auto focus would be nice as well.

I have been waiting for that sort of camera for few months now. I could do with just the manual control on my d300s.

what worries me is the increase in MP for an entry level in the 550D. I mean, it's got more than a D90, AND the D300. does this mean all the manufacturers would increase the MP's for their DSLRs'? or is it only happening in Canon since they're a big company? whatever it is, Nikon has to move fast!!

Ronin.1 the 1Dmk4 doesn't come near the D3S in AF or ISO. It has all ready been seen.

evilcruze said:
I think Nikon is loosing the market share coz they are slow to react. Canon is already out with its 18MP 550D within a year of launching 500D.Its sometimes a good idea to come out with a new model after your competitor," second mouse gets the cheese" but if you wait too long then you are bound to loose the race.

I hope D90 replacement is just around the corner.

+1

Nikon seems to be slower and slower at responding to market challenges. At the top end, for PJ/Sports work where high ISO performance and auto-focus are king and resolution needs are not as great their offerings are, for the moment anyway, more than competitive. It remains to be seen to what extent Canon have resolved their auto-focus and high ISO noise issues with the 1D MKIV and the yet-to-be-released 1Ds MKIV in the PJ/Sports market, but it seems that they are moving along at quite a clip in their other offerings and are bound to "get it right" sooner than later. If the expected to be released soon 60D lives up the the rumored specifications it could, potentially, take a lot of market share from Nikon.

I know I would find an 18 MP APS-C sensor with good performance up to ISO 3200 or even 6400 to be very tempting indeed. Especially if Nikon were to offer it.

I believe Nikon have got to work on shortening their product development cycle. Although this especially applies to camera bodies, it is also true of their lenses, many of which are in need of being updated. What may have been sufficient in the past will leave them in the dust of the competition in the future.

There is an interesting write (with images) up of the newly released Nikon lenses on Bob Krist's blog.
http://www.bobkrist.com/blog/

I hope the rest are as good as these two seem to be.

yeah pretty much the only differences between this and the 17-35 are the nano coating and VR. . . .and I really don't think those elements justify it's $1259, which isn't too bad, but would sell A LOT better at $999. . .I think it'll drop a little. .

I also hope that D90 replacement will be able to compete with Canon 550D. I'm a little disappointed with Nikon firmware development for D90. As I wrote few times on this forum, maybe for Nikon company D90 is very good and does not need any improvements but users have some requests and company should try to satisfy them.

Movie modes in 550D beats completly D90 or D5000 or even D300s. As DPreview says This canon over-specifies D50 in many aspects.
I would not expect Nikon to build 18Mpx camera but in my opinion they should tweak the low light performance and White balance metering in D90 repleacement. The 12 Mpx is for me enough. The movi mode and codec should be as in Canon 550D :)

kyoshinkon - c-z it gives You Nano coating and VR, and it's suitable for FX not DX... did I mentioned You can add filters to it.

I almost never shoot slower than a F/3.5 which brings on the question why the hell would I buy the 16-35 f/4 when the 17-35mm f/2.8 does what I want...

i don't mind the 24fps though more options would obviously be nice, it's just the controls that need to be updated, i want full manual control in video mode, and obviously auto focus would be nice as well.

16-35 is actually very usable size, I would only prefer a larger aperture instead of VR.
As for new 24 I wonder how pleasing that blur characteristics really is to justify astronomical price

Yup, Nikon needs to do something, well two things. A) Increase the MP, to 14MP Sony sensor, and 1080p video at 30FPS, in a better encoding format.

evilcruze said:
I agree, its gonna take more of D90's market then D5000's.
I have my fingers crossed, waiting to get a D90 replacement soon from Nikon

chinese_ys said:
Pray for the D90 replacement will surprisingly come soon.

I agree, hopefully this pushes nikon to revamp the d90, because boy would I love a d90 with comparable video features to this.

evilcruze said:
I agree, its gonna take more of D90's market then D5000's.
I have my fingers crossed, waiting to get a D90 replacement soon from Nikon

Pray for the D90 replacement will surprisingly come soon.

shivaswrath said:
Makes no sense, unless they start coupling it with the D700 in a kit, or introduce an entry level FX body (which is where I see it making sense).

It's priced over $1000 and has a pro metal finish and weather proofing. It will never be part of a kit. Especially on an entry level camera.

adamz said:
Niko, the new 300/2.8 VR is also labeled VR not VR II, my 105/2.8 micro also has VR label on it not VR II - for me it makes sense, as there is no need to complicate the labels - imagine VR XXX

Yes none of the lenses say VRII on the lens barrels but the 300/2.8 is listed as "AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II" while the 16-35 is listed as "AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR". They both are then said to have VRII in the press releases. Why not just be consistent?

shivaswrath said:
Makes no sense, unless they start coupling it with the D700 in a kit, or introduce an entry level FX body (which is where I see it making sense).

It's priced over $1000 and has a pro metal finish and weather proofing. It will never be part of a kit. Especially on an entry level camera.

I think the 16-35/4 is priced WAYYYY too high; I can get a 17-35 2.8 for $1700, why would I "save" $500 for a significantly slower lens? Makes no sense, unless they start coupling it with the D700 in a kit, or introduce an entry level FX body (which is where I see it making sense).

On DX it's useless.

The 24 1.4 looks great, esp the MTF's. . .but for the price, I'm not sure. . .they went in A LOT HIGHER, than I suspect, $400 more than the venerable 14-24 2.8. . .not sure how long/well this lens will sell/last. . .might end up like the 28 1.4 . . .I'll buy one in 5 years just before Nikon discontinues it, if not only to have a gem of a FX WA prime. . .for now, the 24 2.8 will suit, despite it's tendency to flare and ghost in low light (sigh), at $359 new (~$200-250 used), you get a great prime that works 90% of the time as well as the new one in well-lit conditions. . .

I am a big fan of zooms (after hating the original 80-200/4.5-AI New). I love the ability to compose exactly as I want in situations where my feet can't do the zooming. I also love not having to change lenses as frequently. On the other hand, I rarely shoot at any apertures faster than 5.6 and usually 8-11, so speed matters less than smaller size and portability.