DX lenses will soon die :-)

Yes a new D700 will eventually come.

I think this thread has pretty much become pointless so I'm closing it now.

NikoDoby said:
+1 with rsadowsky! Die DX die! :^)

FX for the win!

ROTFL !!

You may have your wish if the Consumer FX is released.
But Cant see that really.. :-) heh!

+1 with rsadowsky! Die DX die! :^)

FX for the win!

@studio.. there is hope for a consumer based fx with what you need soon.

I have been using the D700 for 18 months now. Can't imagine ever going back to DX. Haven't touched my D40 in ages. I would get a Canon G11 before I got another DX SLR.

jonnyapple said:
Oh, I hope the D90 replacement sensor does outperform the D700 (though I doubt it). If it did, they'd be more likely to replace the D700 before the end of the year, so even those fanboys should be happy.

Well, the recent posts on the NR blog really kinda stunned me back into reality. The suggestion that a new D700 would follow only AFTER the introduction of a new flagship body, i.e., the "D4," sure makes sense. The wait for a new "D4" could be a long one. If that were to come out tomorrow, that's what I would buy. I was hoping to get away "cheap" and get a new, 1080p24-enabled, "D800" for only about $2,500, but since the D4 is likely to precede that announcement, I'd probably just go for it, and get the D4 instead. Don't really want to spend $5,200 on the current D3s in mid-product cycle with no 1080p24 capability.

Doesn't have to outperform the 700. I'll be perfectly happy as long as it significantly outperforms the 90.

Oh, I hope the D90 replacement sensor does outperform the D700 (though I doubt it). If it did, they'd be more likely to replace the D700 before the end of the year, so even those fanboys should be happy.

Jonny: you're probably right. At the risk of sounding like one of the D700 fanboys over on the blog, I'm really curious to see how the 90 replacement shapes up, though...

NikoDoby said:
Studio why are you going to buy a D3100? Just buy the new D90 it'll have video too. Or are you going to buy the D3100 and a few weeks later "upgrade" to the new D90?

Nah . . . the D3100 is pretty affordable, and I expect the new D90 to be hundreds more. Unless the new D90 turns out to be significantly faster (more sensitive) than the D3100, it won't be worth the added expense just for filmmaking applications, which is all I'd be using the D3100 for. Also, I really want to move to an FX body to shoot stills, so I gotta reserve some cash for a current-model D700, since a new FX body from Nikon maybe as much as a year away.

Also, I may have just courted my first commercial account, so I think I may really "need" an FX body . . . now! I hope I get it (the account)! It's a bikini company!

Is that a beer reference?

I'm in a great mood Jonny because my teleportation device had it's first successful Baboon teleport today. I think I'll try teleporting myself tonight after I finish getting drunk and put my name in the history books! What could possible go wrong?

Niko, you are in an incredibly good mood today. I think you have some info that you're not sharing. Feel free to email me and brighten my day.
ASD, I think the D3100 will kill D5000 sales. Not that that's a bad thing.

Remember though that 2mp cameras were once over $2000. Megapixel count keeps going up while prices keep falling or staying the same. The D70 was 6mp but the D90 sold for the same price at introduction and had twice the megapixels. Also the "same" 24mp Sony sensor from the A900 is used in the Nikon D3X. Nikon worked magic to get better ISO performance out of the "same" sensor as Sony's. The D3100 also uses the "same" sensor as the Sony NEX cameras.

Sure, Sony makes a FX at that price, but what I've seen of its images, I'm not impressed. Short answer: Because you get what you pay for.

A 32MP D3/700 replacement sounds nice, but a bit rich for my taste. :)

Studio why are you going to buy a D3100? Just buy the new D90 it'll have video too. Or are you going to buy the D3100 and a few weeks later "upgrade" to the new D90?

Aslightdelay that price (body only) is reasonable. Sony already has an FX camera at that price so why not Nikon? There will be a lot of new FX sensors coming. How does a 32mp D700/D3S replacement sound? :^)

Nikon's timing is excellent (for extracting the maximum revenue stream from me!). I will now be buying three bodies:

1. D3100 now, for 1080p24 filmmaking applications.
2. D700 now, for FX-sized still images.
3. D4 whenever it arrives (for D3s-like sensitivity for stills, and as my primary, FX-sized, 1080p24 filmmaking camera).

Later, the D3100 can be relegated to "crash cam" and B-roll video applications (i.e., vehicle mounts, etc.).

I'd brought up something similar over on the blog as to why I don't think a 700 refresh/replacement is due any time soon. I get the feeling that the reason they're keeping the 90 replacement relatively airtight is that they're trying to give newer models (the 3100 and 300s) the time to gain traction. With the hopeful announcement of the 95 (or whatever it's called) at Photokina, they end up doing a few things:

*You preserve the decent sales of a model that’s not due for a refresh any time soon (the 5000).
*If the rumors of an EVIL camera in Q1 2011 is in any way accurate (I'm thinking that'd be announced at PMA next year), they also have to give that time to get its footing.
*Then, sometime between Q2 and Q3 2011, I can see them doing one or both of the following: a D500 (though I think your pricing might be a tad too optimistic) and a D700x.

Then again, I don't have or pretend any kind of insider knowledge. It just seems like it might be a logical way for things to play out. And what's a rumor mill -- erm, forum -- without some wild speculation? :)

I'm not surprised. I never believed in the, "low end cameras can't out spec the higher end cameras" debate. Nikon's just trying to "protect" sales of DX cameras because if they release all of the FX bodies first then people wouldn't want a "D95" for example. Especially if they announce an $1899USD FX "D500" :^)

No new "D700" for 2010:

" . . . 16MP Nikon D90 replacement before Photokina, no other DSLR." --NR reporting on Nikon Denmark press conference transcript.

I just knew it.

Others posting to the press conference blog imply that the flagship FX models tend to be introduced first, then the lower-tier models (i.e., "D4" before a "D800").

The wait for the upgraded D700 version has been frustrating - hopefully, it is released well before the end of this year, especially now that the 28-300 lens has been announced. D700 is 2 years old, and although 2008 had alot to do with slowing things down, an upgrade is over due.

shivaswrath said:
Studio - you're being sarcastic right?

The D700 has dropped that low many times over the past 2 years . . . many times . . .

like last xmas . . .

I don't think it means anything. . .and I agree with the above poster, I was willing to drop that much on a body ($2k), but not on an older body with little incentive to be discounted . . . which drove me to the D3 used, and I've been pretty stoked since . . .

Not at all. I haven't been shopping for bodies in two years, so I'm completely ignorant of Nikon's pricing cycles. If I didn't also want to make movies, I would jump on a used D3s. I still may. I just want to see what Photokina brings, first. Unfortunately, I'm guessing it's highly unlikely that the D3s will be "upgraded" any time before 2011. If a D700 revision comes this September (which I also think is unlikely), I'd probably end up buying that instead.

shivaswrath said:
$2400 isn't much if you break even in one shoot, just a btw. . .

Ah, yes . . . but I don't shoot stills professionally. This is all "spent" money with zero ROI (unless I sell some stuff at a gallery later on).

studio460 said:
Wow! Congrats! If I didn't also need the video feature, I would've bought the D700 refurb I saw last month. Hmmm . . . a $100 price-reduction . . . that's gotta mean something! Doesn't it?

Studio - you're being sarcastic right?

The D700 has dropped that low many times over the past 2 years. . .many times. . .

like last xmas. . .

I don't think it means anything. . .and I agree with the above poster, I was willing to drop that much on a body ($2k), but not on an older body with little incentive to be discounted. . .which drove me to the D3 used, and I've been pretty stoked since. . .

Also gives me leverage to justify the D700s as a backup when it comes out this fall (if it does). . .

$2400 isn't much if you break even in one shoot, just a btw. . .

flexphotos said:
Can I ask why people are worrying about a new D-700, D-90 etc??? The Nikon D3 and D3s are cheap enough to buy and are Awesome camera for any situations...

"Cheap enough"? Really? You buyin'? In that case, I'll take two, 'cause I'm told it's a good idea to have a second body. :P

Not sure what kinda cash you're sitting on, but for a lot of us, $2,400 isn't something you just find under the couch cushions. If you're upgrading to FX from DX, you also have to take into consideration the cost of upgrading lenses. Sure, selling your old gear can defray that, but what if you want to keep your 90 or 300 either as a backup or because the added range is good for what you're shooting?

Just as much to the point -- and at the risk of sounding like a broken record -- for some people, a D3 is a lovely piece of kit, but it's just a bit too much camera for their needs. Would I LIKE a D3? Of course. Don't be silly. But I know the camera fairy isn't going to leave one under my pillow just 'cause I'm a nice guy. And besides, I'm not shooting giraffes by starlight. :)

flexphotos said:
Can I ask why people are worrying about a new D-700, D-90 etc??? The Nikon D3 and D3s are cheap enough to buy and are awesome camera for any situation . . . a D700 price isn't far off from the D3 so why not pay a little more for a better camera? If I'm wrong please explain . . .

A Nikon D700 is currently priced at about $2,400 USD; the Nikon D3s sells for $5,200 USD. That's a $2,800 price difference, an amount which many would consider, significant. Most would also prefer to buy expensive technology-based products, early in their product life-cycle, to maximize their benefit from recent technological advancements and improvements. The D700 has just passed its two-year life-cycle, and many believe, it's due for renewal.

As both a filmmaker and photographer, personally, the reason I'm waiting is that I don't want to buy an expensive Nikon FX body until they incorporate 1080p24 video capability with full-manual control. Especially since the next iteration of the D700 and D3s is likely to incorporate this capability. Photokina is only a few weeks away, and in my opinion, worth waiting to see if any of Nikon's new product offerings address these features.