D400 « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

D400

(862 posts) (98 voices)

Tags:

« Previous 1…293031…35 Next »

DaveyJ

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 452
offline

I used to think metal equipment was more durable. This is becoming one heck of lot less true today. My D90 has taken hits that were awfully rough on me and the camera and lens survived very nicely. I have busted up two lens hoods. I have looked at D800s very closely. Having come from a large format background I am never convinced that bigger gear is better. In fact I have had guys who make their living selling cameras say that it totally depends on what the buyers use is of the camera. But used in the field, DX Nikons have clear advantages. The D800 and D4 owners I personally know say that they would rather have a D7000 for a travel camera. Since I travel to places to take photos as much as anything, I'd rather have DX. Are DX buyers MORE SENSITIVE TO PRICE? YES!!

I guess I am going to buy a D7200 or a D400 (if the price doesn't go stupid) when the NEXT one comes out. Again because cases and other tactics can greatly add to the weatherproofing of a camera I think the issue of the heavily sealed camera starts to get pretty sketchy. We own both UW and sports housings that will fit a D7000 although they were built for a D90. I would like Expeed 3 Processing. I sure as heck DO NOT want over 24MP. The D7200 is certainly going to be enough camera for my purchase. Right now I am almost just going to go buy yet ANOTHER D7000 NIKON. If Nikon does get with this D400 I sure would be surprised if I thought the price was very compelling.

Posted 5 months ago #
shutterdancer

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 327
offline

I personally don't like the idea of turning the D400 into DX lite.If I wanted that I'd just buy a D7000.I say keep the same excellent build of the D300s,throw in updated electronics,a better sensor and higher base ISO,a good buffer with decent fps,and I'll buy one tomorrow!

Posted 5 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

when the D300 was intruded I suspect there was a big difference between the cost a Dx and a FX sensor. The D300 was for professionals who could not afford a D3

It was Nikon's succesful attempt to get professions, on a budget, to switch from film to digital

Since then Nikon have introduced quite a few Fx Camera's that are cheaper than a D3 including the "prosumer" D600

I don't think there is the same cost saving in making a Dx camera today, as there was when the D300 came out

I think if Nikon did produce a DX version of the D4, it would be beyond the budget of those who want it

in other words I don't think we are going to get a D400

Posted 5 months ago #
spraynpray

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,514
offline

Beyond the budget? One persons budget is anothers dream.

Posted 5 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

spraynpray said:
Beyond the budget? One persons budget is another's dream.

very true, but DSLRs are mass produced items and for a new product to be viable, a manufacturer needs to be fairly certain they are going to sell enough units to cover the R&D cost and if the retail cost is too high they may not sell enough cameras

May be Dell will enter the camera market and we can all have cameras built to own specification

Posted 5 months ago #
Rx4Photo

preferred member
Joined: Oct '10
Posts: 951
offline

sevencrossing said:
Maybe Dell will enter the camera market and we can all have cameras built to own specification

That would be awesoome. The turn around time would probably be no more than waiting for a pre-orderd new camera as long as they limited the options to a few choice things.

I chatted with a birder a few days ago who is convinced that Nikon will release a D400 in Janurary or February next year. She's submitted some of her video to "Animal Planet" that has been shown on TV so she might have a bit of knowledge yet I didn't ask where she gets her intel.

Posted 5 months ago #
spraynpray

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,514
offline

sevencrossing said:
....in other words I don't think we are going to get a D400

Providing you don't split hairs about the exact number, I'll take the bet there will be a D300s replacement.

Posted 5 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

so will people be happy if the D7200 has 24 MP, max ISO of 25,600 and 9 FPS

Posted 5 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

The biggest difference in the D300s and the other DX format bodies is the way one accesses the functions. The D300s is the same algorithm as the D4. D800. The other DX bodies require going into menus to make changes which can be directly accessed on the D300s.

Nikon will be bringing the D400 out, or a similar body to the D300s, as those who have/had a D200, D300, D300s and want to upgrade will not purchase a consumer body at any price. It is just too frustrating to shoot a consumer body after one is used to the pro configuration. The only error of judgment which Nikon may make is to not have the native ISO at 12,800. IMO this would be a fatal mistake in a Pro-Sumer body when the entry level body has 6,400.

Posted 5 months ago #
DaveyJ

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 452
offline

@sevencrossing: Nikon USA gets more questions about the D400 than almost any camera that is yet to be. As to your question about the D7200 making people happy, the answer here is YES! I even wonder about the 9FPS as the D300 and D300s had a very fast firing rate and it was not that high. I cannot speak for all the other D400 anticipating buyers. I do think prices over $2,000 US for the body would start slowing sales greatly. But as to sales volume, I happen to know that the D7000 volume exceeds the D600 including orders not yet filled by a substantial margin. I also believe the D7200 sales would exceed the D400 if we were to project price. However the requests to camera stores about D7200 (D7000 update with Expeed 3 processing, etc.) lags FAR behind questions about where is the D400. Another frequently commented prediction is that the D600 will get an update sooner than many Nikons as the centered focus grids are widely regarded as an engineering corner cutting and marketing decision that has not been met real well by buyers of the D600 coupled with a lot of scare over dusty sensors. I'd rather have a clean DX sensor than any dust laden FX sensor.

Posted 5 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

In the UK The D7000 is something of a bargain at the moment and the D600 is certainly suffering from the dust scaremongering so no surprise D7000 sales exceed the D600

but going to ms moto's point, about the D300s function ( more button and dials and less need to use menus

I suspect fitting more buttons and dials contributes more to the cost of a D800 or the D4 than having a FX sensor

in other words putting a DX sensor in a "pro" body will do very little to reduce cost

The great interest in the D400 is from people hoping for a Dx D4 or D800 at the price of a D3s

My experience in business tells me, there is a huge difference between what people want and what they are prepared to pay for

Posted 5 months ago #
poopa

junior member
Joined: May '12
Posts: 7
offline

I lived throug the mini-micro coputer industry evolution. I saw a long-gone company named DEC with an great micro processor get killed by a much-less capable micro compter for several reasons, but the most important reason was PRICE.

In NIKON wanted to take major market share, they could follow the compter industry and price the D400 as low as they could to still make a reasonable profit, say 5%. Nikon has the technology, the manufacturing capability, the marketing strength, they just need the marketing huspa.

Posted 5 months ago #
donaldejose

preferred member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 1,043
offline

msmoto is correct. There will be a DX D400 with the same controls as found on the D4 and D800. We will see it early in 2013 and it will sell for about $2,000 (maybe about equal to or just under the D600). Nikon will give those who like the "pro" configuration and build a DX alternative. Only if sales stall at the level of such a camera will Nikon abandon it. All my wishful thinking will not come to pass because it it too radical for Nikon. The only possible exception is that Nikon could put more plastic into the D400 body as it has done in the D600 body. But I think odds are we will see a metal body D7200 and a metal body D400 for one more generation. If the D600 plastic/metal body concept sells well Nikon may adopt it in the following generation of D7300 and D500. They have to have some feature to sell. Don't need more resolution, don't need higher ISO, so maybe the next thing will be to sell "our camera is lighter than their heavy old monster."

Posted 5 months ago #
spraynpray

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,514
offline

@seven, no I meant the D400 may be called a D300x or whatever but it would still be an updated D300s not a down rated version. I think there will also be a D7200 as it is the DX version of the D600.

Place your bets please ladies and gentlemen!

Posted 5 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

spraynpray said:
may be called a D300x

The D3x cost about twice the price of the D3s

So yes, may be we will get a D300x @ $3,300 a tad more than a D800

any takers at that price?

Posted 5 months ago #
Rx4Photo

preferred member
Joined: Oct '10
Posts: 951
offline

I think Nikon will leave the 300 and 7000 designations in the past.
My speculations:

D300 -----> D400, a DX with same body size as D700/800, which will shoot at 7 to 8 fps. But because Nikon dosen't want to lose D4 sales they'll cripple it in some way that will render it shy of the D4's awesome capabilities - which will piss some people off.

D7000 -----> D8000, a DX with same body size as D7K, which will shoot at 5 to 6 fps with grip. Probably more plastic to keep it light yet not as robust as the D400 will be.

I just get this feeling they're trying hard to make every camera totally totally exclusive.

Posted 5 months ago #
shutterdancer

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 327
offline

It doesn't matter if they put an X or even a Y after it,we all know that it won't cost $3300.00. Having said that,even if it did,I would buy it before I would a D600 or D800.It seems that too many folks just don't understand that birders and wildlife shooters that can't afford Nikon's long glass need a pro style DX body.Right now Nikon shooters have pretty much everything that they need.......except a pro style DX body!

Posted 5 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

Rx4Photo said:

D300 -----> D400, a DX with same body size as D700/800, which will shoot at 7 to 8 fps.

so if Nikon got the speed of the D800 up to 7 to 8 fps would you still want a D400

the slow fps for wildlife is the D800s biggest failing and one I think Nikon will address

Posted 5 months ago #
shutterdancer

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 327
offline

It wouldn't matter if Nikon made the D800 shoot 20fps,I would still buy a D400 if and when it's released!

Posted 5 months ago #
Ironheart

senior member
Joined: Sep '12
Posts: 91
offline

The D800 will never shoot more than 4 FPS. Its pretty simple math. The D4 clocks in at 162MP/s (that's megapixels per second) doing 10 FPS on a 16.2 MP sensor. This is the fastest EXPEED we know of (well, the Nikon 1 is faster but lets set that aside for a moment).

The next fastest is the D800 at 145MP/s. Even adding one more FPS would mean the EXPEED would have to run ~13% faster than the D4. That's enough of an uplift that they would probably need to redesign it.

So what does that say for the D400? If it runs at the same speed as the D4 with a 24MP sensor, you are looking at 6.75 FPS. Now, there are other factors; smaller sensors read faster, DX shutters and mirrors are easier to move faster. All things considered, I would be surprised if the D400 ran faster than 7 FPS.

Posted 5 months ago #
D300 user

member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 34
offline

Ironheart said:
So what does that say for the D400? If it runs at the same speed as the D4 with a 24MP sensor, you are looking at 6.75 FPS. Now, there are other factors; smaller sensors read faster, DX shutters and mirrors are easier to move faster. All things considered, I would be surprised if the D400 ran faster than 7 FPS.

I'd be very happy with 18MP at 8-9 fps, spot on autofocus between frames, and a buffer of at least 3-4 seconds at those fps. I'd rather have 8 fps with spot on AF and large buffer than 10 fps or 24 MP images. I think more MP's is only important to those who crop a lot. I'd say: spent more time on getting closer (especially for wild life, bird photography). Do we really, really need more than 8 fps?

And lets face it, if Canon is coming with a 7D II then Nikon must follow.. they would loose too much market share otherwise. Just my 2 cents..

Posted 5 months ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

D300 user said:
I think more MP's is only important to those who crop a lot. I'd say: spent more time on getting closer (especially for wild life, bird photography).

Have you done much wildlife photography? There are many times where it is simply not possible, or safe (for the animal or yourself), to get closer. Birds are particularly difficult because they have what I call a safe zone. If you enter that safe zone, the bird is gone.

Posted 5 months ago #
Ironheart

senior member
Joined: Sep '12
Posts: 91
offline

Yeah, I hear ya. I'm happy with 16MP, but I can't see Nikon going less than the D3200 and D5200 on this one. So if it is 24MP, then I'm saying 7FPS max. If the buffer and card writing can keep up, you'd have a mini-machine gun, worthy of the pro moniker. If they somehow pull off 8FPS they'll have a lot of people's money :-)

Posted 5 months ago #
D300 user

member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 34
offline

PB PM said:
Have you done much wildlife photography? There are many times where it is simply not possible, or safe (for the animal or yourself), to get closer. Birds are particularly difficult because they have what I call a safe zone. If you enter that safe zone, the bird is gone.

I did not take into account that most people don't have a +500mm :p. Point taken about the safety aspect. Birds are not difficult if you're at the right place at the right time. I'm spending most of my time figuring out those two last points and thus often get really close. How do you think FX guys take those awesome bird shots? Safe zone is no issue if the birds don't know you're there.

Posted 5 months ago #
shutterdancer

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 327
offline

D300 user said: How do you think FX guys take those awesome bird shots?

Lol....usually with long Nikon glass that an average joe such as myself can't afford ;-)

Posted 5 months ago #