My brother and I have both been saving up and will buy the upgrades as soon as they are ready to ship. My brother will get the 5D Mark III and I will get the D800. Can't wait and I still have hope that it will be October 2011 and not at the PMA in January 2012.

rbid said:
Take in mind that the world of photography is divided into two groups:
- The ones that are loyal to the cameras they have (Nikon or C*n or whatever)
- The ones that will always look for the best in market to get a camera.

The first group stands for the ones that have a good camera and some gear (lenses, flashes, etc) and they will not run for the competitor even if the competitor camera is better, due that people like to stay happy with what they know and have. (80% of the photographers are in this group)

The second group is usually for the ones that don't have any thing to lose if the get this or that camera. Also the ones that are upset from their first cameras may come here.... or that have the enough lust for getting new gadgets :) (20% of the photograpers)

In what group are you?

Rumors notwithstanding, nobody knows what the D700 replacement or the 5D MKIII will actually offer in terms of auto-focus, fps, high ISO performance and so on. One tends to presume that each manufacturer's offerings will be an improvement over their prior products, but that still does not tell us much.

As you indicated, a great many people are constrained in their choice by what gear they already have. However, should one manufacturer or another offer something that is remarkably better than their competitors' products there will be a larger than usual group of people who will either add to their existing system or, perhaps, even change systems. "Freezing" the market is intended to make that segment of the market, however larger or small it might be, hesitate or wait and see what comes out.

Nikon is rumored to be prepared to announce the D800 this fall. Canon may have caused Nikon to accelerate its release to respond to their leaks. As a general rule, Canon have been shortening their product life cycles more than Nikon have which is one of the issues in the choice of the D700 replacement versus the 5D MK III. A second generation body versus a third generation product. If Canon can deliver on improved auto-focus, fps and do so with a significantly higher resolution sensor with good high ISO performance that would be one thing. Most Nikon users doubt that Canon can deliver on all those counts though.

Back on topic guys.

rbid said:
Take in mind that the world of photography is divided into two groups:
- The ones that are loyal to the cameras they have (Nikon or C*n or whatever)
- The ones that will always look for the best in market to get a camera.

The first group stands for the ones that have a good camera and some gear (lenses, flashes, etc) and they will not run for the competitor even if the competitor camera is better, due that people like to stay happy with what they know and have. (80% of the photographers are in this group)

The second group is usually for the ones that don't have any thing to lose if the get this or that camera. Also the ones that are upset from their first cameras may come here.... or that have the enough lust for getting new gadgets :) (20% of the photograpers)

In what group are you?

1 st group, today Nikon may be on top, and then tomorrow the competion will have something that's better, and then in the next year Nikon goes back on top and so on.

Therefore, as stated, investing in Glass will cause you to stick with that manufacturer, as it is too expensive to change .

Ronin.1 said:
It may be irrelevant to you, but it is a huge difference, not a little one and it does make a difference, a notable one, in landscape and wildlife images. Canon are dropping leaks left and right about the new sensors' high ISO performance as well as resolution. Obviously, they want potential customers to put off purchasing decisions that might not favor them. This is a fairly high risk game as, if Canon fails to deliver, the customers not only will not purchase their leaked products, but will not likely fall for this gambit in the future.

Take in mind that the world of photography is divided into two groups:
- The ones that are loyal to the cameras they have (Nikon or C*n or whatever)
- The ones that will always look for the best in market to get a camera.

The first group stands for the ones that have a good camera and some gear (lenses, flashes, etc) and they will not run for the competitor even if the competitor camera is better, due that people like to stay happy with what they know and have. (80% of the photographers are in this group)

The second group is usually for the ones that don't have any thing to lose if the get this or that camera. Also the ones that are upset from their first cameras may come here.... or that have the enough lust for getting new gadgets :) (20% of the photograpers)

In what group are you?

Godless said:
That little difference in pixel count is irrelevant for me. What I want to see is better sensor performance in the dark, better AF accuracy & speed, better detail resolution at high ISOs, better color rendition, less noise. Seems feasible if Pentax did it with K-5. Nikon can surely do better.

It may be irrelevant to you, but it is a huge difference, not a little one and it does make a difference, a notable one, in landscape and wildlife images. Canon are dropping leaks left and right about the new sensors' high ISO performance as well as resolution. Obviously, they want potential customers to put off purchasing decisions that might not favor them. This is a fairly high risk game as, if Canon fails to deliver, the customers not only will not purchase their leaked products, but will not likely fall for this gambit in the future.

There probably are quite a few of us watching to see what kind of video capability Nikon includes with the next full-frame body.

I've had a D700 for several years and bought the D7000 the first day it came out. The D7000 is exclusively for shooting video for network television. Even though I've been a diehard Nikon shooter since '71, I'd get a new Canon body for video if Nikon doesn't bring out a good option. I can still use the Nikon glass on a Canon body, and I'd still shoot the D700 for stills.

Just using the best tool for the job.

IndyGeoff said:
If the 5Dmk3 is nearly 26MP as the rumor is saying, Nikon better not try to push a 16 or 18MP camera at me when they replace the D700.

That little difference in pixel count is irrelevant for me. What I want to see is better sensor performance in the dark, better AF accuracy & speed, better detail resolution at high ISOs, better color rendition, less noise. Seems feasible if Pentax did it with K-5. Nikon can surely do better.

studio460 said:
I'm right there with you, buddy! (Welcome to NR!)

I'm sitting tight also. My new D7000 is still keeping me busy, and I'm continually impressed with the decent results it's producing at ultra-high ISOs. But, I'm definitely determined to shoot FX for stills someday (I bought the D7000 primarily for video, although, of course it's also my primary still camera for now).

I hope to shoot a large assignment this summer with a full-frame body. However, since the D4 is likely to precede the D800 (most likely, by many months), I may have some serious decisions ahead. A new D4 body, plus the four new AF-S f/1.4 lenses I want (24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm) will total $10K+ USD.

Studio - would probably be safe to say that the JUne 2008 release of the D700 will be followed up with a JUne 2012 announcement and subsequent release of it. . .
Looks like the D700 literally fell in the "Pro" camp for Nikon, so. . ..4 year update cycle FTL :-(

But good news is that it could get:
Either the D3s updates + 1080p video OR
D4 sensor, slower FPS, and 1080p video.

Either way, we win. . .I'm considering down sizing to the D700. . .

I'm hoping Nikon wised up since the release of the D7K in the video dept. They seem to be moving in the right direction with the D5100 release. I hope they release a firmware update for the D7K giving it at least 1080 30FPS(also 720 60FPS would be killer).

Whats so great about 30FPS? From what I understand very few people shoot in 30FPS. Almost every video you see is shot in 24FPS. 60FPS is good for slow motion, but otherwise Im pretty sure 24 is the standard. (TV broadcast is usually in 60i)

IndyGeoff said:
If the 5Dmk3 is nearly 26MP as the rumor is saying, Nikon better not try to push a 16 or 18MP camera at me when they replace the D700. I am still at the point where I could jump ship with the investment I have in 6 lenses and 1 body.

They do not need to meet or beat the rumored 26MP, but being 10 less is unacceptable IF that is what happens.

I see your point, but if more megapixels means more noise, Nikon shouldn't get cought up in that race. More MP doesnt mean better quality, just look at the image quailty of the current 5D MK2. Nikon is wise to stay out of the MP race and stick with having the best IQ in the industry.

The linear difference between a 26MP sensor and an 18MP sensor is "only" about 17%.

I.e., you'd get an image that's about 5200 pixels wide, instead of one that's about 6240 pixels wide. As a comparison, the image from a D700 today is about 4250 pixels wide.

For my use that's acceptable, if there are other benefits such as: superior noise handling, and greater dynamic range. In fact I much prefer a low-noise camera vs. a high megapixel camera.

Having said that, I know many commercial clients are asking photographers for more megapixels, so practically 18MP should be the minimum for a new professional-level DSLR.

If the 5Dmk3 is nearly 26MP as the rumor is saying, Nikon better not try to push a 16 or 18MP camera at me when they replace the D700. I am still at the point where I could jump ship with the investment I have in 6 lenses and 1 body.

They do not need to meet or beat the rumored 26MP, but being 10 less is unacceptable IF that is what happens.

Just an update on my situation. I decided to hold-off on the D700 and decided to buy another D7000 instead. I will wait for the D700 refresh and re-evaluate my system then. I'm also interested to see if Canon can actually release the 5D mk3 this year and before Nikon. I have a feeling it won't happen for either bodies this year (maybe by Christmas, if we're lucky). I can't wait that long, so another excellent D7000 it is!

I guess I can refresh my post on this excellent topic Niko posted originally. Looks like 2011 will not be like 2007 with exciting new releases afterall. 2011 will be significant and remembered for the natural disasters that hurt the Nikon corporation. I bet all the guys who were wanting the D700 last Christmas are kicking themselves for waiting even this long as it looks like the D700 refresh will not be coming anytime soon. I imagine the 5D Mark III will be delayed now as well. Both were due this summer and will be amazing cameras I'm sure...

Back on-topic guys

This is not personal, and not about what you can afford, don't really care one way or the other. This thread is about FX cameras, regardless of how my comment makes you feel.

PB PM said:
We have other threads for the D7k, this thread is for the D700 replacement and 5D MkIII. Move along DX users.

Don't be condescending. This was in refference to my original comment on the D700 & 5D Mk III with regards to video options. The reason the D7K got involved in the topic, is because it's the only real body Nikon makes that can come close to competing with Canon in the video dept. We don't need people like you pretending like a DX user's comments are not relevant, because we shoot DX. I can afford any camera I want. The "Move along DX users" comment was distasteful, offensive and has no place on this great forum.

Even if the post was off-topic, your comment was not needed.

We have other threads for the D7k, this thread is for the D700 replacement and 5D MkIII. Move along DX users.

darko26 said:
D7k is not a

D7k is not a Semi-Pro.. still d90's mid-level.

Let me guess, you shoot a D300s? Lol. The D7K is most certainly semi-pro, I dont care what class it's technically in. It's a much more pro body then the plastic, non-weather-sealed D90. Sorry. I shoot professionally with one all the time. It's body does not hinder my performance at all. Let's not even get into why the D7K destroys the D300s in the sensor performance catagory.

D7k is not a

CaryTheLabelGuy said:
We're currently shooting a D7000 and a D5000 and i desperately want to replace the D5000 with a D700 or it's replacement. I found a killer deal on a barely used D700 that I'm waiting to hear back on, but if that falls through, I'm probably going to just sit and wait for a D4 or D800. While I'm waiting, I'll keep saving. Nikon taking their time, might be the best option for them. I would rather Canon release the 5D MkIII first, followed by a one-two punch to Canon from Nikon with the D4 and D800 monsters.

I'm hoping Nikon wised up since the release of the D7K in the video dept. They seem to be moving in the right direction with the D5100 release. I hope they release a firmware update for the D7K giving it at least 1080 30FPS(also 720 60FPS would be killer). The D7K sensor is too special to be wasted like this. I hate to see people using Canon's inferior sensors, just because they have HDDSLR features that Nikon doesn't/won't offer. It just drives me crazy and I'm a still photographer who shoots very little video. Video is something i do want to get more familiar with. Been wanting to shoot a very short video with the D7K for awhile now.

I also wonder about the D400 and how this camera will stack up. I'm sure it will feature a D7k sensor as well, but with the amazing performance of the D7K and the semi-pro body of the D7K, I'm not sure Nikon is in a hurry to replace the D300s. I would love a D300s(for it's body), but the D7K out-performs it by a good bit.

Hell, if this keeps up, i might just get another D7000 and waive-off FX all-together(for now).

D7k is not a Semi-Pro.. still d90's mid-level.

We're currently shooting a D7000 and a D5000 and i desperately want to replace the D5000 with a D700 or it's replacement. I found a killer deal on a barely used D700 that I'm waiting to hear back on, but if that falls through, I'm probably going to just sit and wait for a D4 or D800. While I'm waiting, I'll keep saving. Nikon taking their time, might be the best option for them. I would rather Canon release the 5D MkIII first, followed by a one-two punch to Canon from Nikon with the D4 and D800 monsters.

I'm hoping Nikon wised up since the release of the D7K in the video dept. They seem to be moving in the right direction with the D5100 release. I hope they release a firmware update for the D7K giving it at least 1080 30FPS(also 720 60FPS would be killer). The D7K sensor is too special to be wasted like this. I hate to see people using Canon's inferior sensors, just because they have HDDSLR features that Nikon doesn't/won't offer. It just drives me crazy and I'm a still photographer who shoots very little video. Video is something i do want to get more familiar with. Been wanting to shoot a very short video with the D7K for awhile now.

I also wonder about the D400 and how this camera will stack up. I'm sure it will feature a D7k sensor as well, but with the amazing performance of the D7K and the semi-pro body of the D7K, I'm not sure Nikon is in a hurry to replace the D300s. I would love a D300s(for it's body), but the D7K out-performs it by a good bit.

Hell, if this keeps up, i might just get another D7000 and waive-off FX all-together(for now).

@mcobrien:

Philip Bloom used a Canon 5d mk2 to shoot 2nd camera for Red Tails, a major Hollywood motion picture to be released this year, written by George Lucas and starring Cuba Gooding Jr.

So yes, video from the 5dmk2 can stand up to the big screen. I believe Mr. Bloom had over 200 clips from his 5dmk2 included in the final movie (but don't quote me on that).

Sadly, Nikon is way behind in this realm. I was at a Philip Bloom workshop last year where he criticized the D7000 as being practically unusable (lacking basic things like metering during Live View). I bought the D7000 anyway, but he's 100% correct.

Additional pixels / resolution could complicate video processing.

HD 1080p frame at 16:9 is 1920x1080. If the entire width & height of a "full-frame" sensor is to be used (to avoid cropping effect) then pixels in excess of 1920x1080 must be processed or discarded somehow ("down converted"). Since DSLRs have limited image processing capacity, the down conversion is usually done by line skipping.

However, line skipping introduces visible artifacts such as aliasing, moire, etc. The higher the resolution, the more lines must be skipped, making aliasing & moire a bigger issue if not otherwise compensated.

Another problem is the so called "rolling shutter" issue. With CMOS sensors, each pixel line must be read one-by-one sequentially, while the sensor is still recording other pixel lines. If the camera panned, then the pixel lines within each frame will be vertically shifted in relation to each other. This issue is most noticeable for vertical lines (such as buildings) which will appear to "lean" sideways during panning moves.

On higher resolution sensors, more pixel lines must be sequentially scanned, and the more this rolling shutter issue becomes apparent.

Hi mcobrien,

And welcome...

If the thrust of your comments is that video is here to stay, I'm not sure anyone would argue, although some might want to try.

Canon does do video better, which is an itch in my crawl; I would prefer that Nikon fixed some issues in binning in the CMOS. It's almost like there was a spy working working in the Nikon engineering department from Canon. It's something that should have been fixed a long time ago.

The more/less MPs argument is new to me. I think there's a different fork for still/video processing so that the RAW processing would be photos and the video would be processed and handled differently - so that it really wouldn't impact video if additional pixels were added. I'm certainly not an engineer, so I could be very wrong. We have more than a handful of engineers here to chime in.

There are mountains of other processing features left out of the cameras, however, that you might want to consider. Video setups for curves, levels, black, and white, and RGB, not to mention sound processing. There are reasons a HD studio camera with an interchangeable lens mount costs more than a hundred grand.

The CODEC used in the cameras isn't as robust, either. It's thrifty (thankfully), so it can be used on the chips we have. But it's not in the same league as DVCPro or HDCAM.

There are a lot of reasons to get excited about the mobility of the DSLRs for video - I'm one of those who use them for that reason - but being 'eyes open' about it means being wiser with the pocketbook, too. They offer the opportunity to use nice lenses for good cinematic effect on a larger format, but they also present greater challenges in acquiring good sound and stable images in said format.

My best and we look forward to your contributions.

Mike