The next set of rumors: Nikon D400 & Nikon D750

I would not put much faith in those rumors for now (D750?) but I still find them interesting, especially the Nikon D750 back image: FF with swivel display - now this will trigger some serious discussions here 🙂



What say you - do you like this D750 with the swivel display and how much would you pay for such a camera?


Via Digitalrev

This entry was posted in Nikon D400. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • please…………..

    please be real.

    • D400? Most likely, actually. Not sure about the 1080, but otherwise plausible. We’re close enough to announcement that I think even wild darts are going to hit the target on this.

      D750? 1080 vid? Pipe dream.

      • Musouka

        Why not? If Canon can do it with the 5DII, why can’t Nikon do it with D700x/D750/D800?

        The direction of the industry, it seems, is to include HD video in all but the top-tier models (D3x, 1D/1Ds).

        • Why not? Because a little mouse whispered to me that certain facilities required for such a venture were not installed in Sendai.

          Certainly not firsthand knowledge, but good enough for me for the time being. Not disagreeing that the industry’s direction seems to be going that way. Just saying that I’ve heard otherwise on what current capabilities are. As w/ all rumors, take that w/ a grain of salt.

    • Jürgen

      Nikon D400 – please!!

      I have Nikon D200 – and want to upgrade but Nikon D300 now not good because soon D400 – maybe in 5-9 Months.

      • Jon Paul

        I just lent my D300 to my sister and used her D200 for a week. I still think the D200 is a great camera. That said, I’m not saying I wouldn’t upgrade to the D400 from the D200 (I upgraded from a D100). I’m just saying that it will come sooner or later, and meanwhile there are plenty of pictures that your D200 can still capture just fine.

        • You’re right, I had the same progress, and I have the same question !

  • And since it’s still under the MP count for the 5DM2, I’d put it less as well. Maybe $2,699, but for Pete’s sake, make it available as soon as you advertise it. No waiting 6+ months like other releases.

    Hopefully this would knock the D700 down to about $1999

  • BJ

    I just popped a major woody. Not a fake one, an honest-to-goodness erection.

  • Alex

    Make it 24.5MP and i will take it. And if it’s going to be a cinematic tool, make sure it does 4K recording up to 60fps – progressive, with an optional shoulder mount kit, 2.40:1 aspect ratio, 1080p downconvert/AVCHD recording option, PCM audio at 96/24 or higher quality. It better have Auto Focus in cinematic mode, and have the ergonomics film-makers require through a shoulder mount kit, with zoom controls, white balance, audio controls, iris, shutter speed etc in the right places. If it’s just 1080p with 4 minute intervals and crappy audio, then I will probably never use the feature.

    • Dylan

      dude, if you want all those features, buy a red!

      • Placido

        If Red really wants to get into the photo business, maybe they should first start providing camera to the press for review.

    • Joshh

      4K recording? lol you’re joking right.
      you’d need like…a Intel Core 2 Quad as the image processor.

      • EB

        Or any MacPro with Final Cut studio or Adobe Premier

    • alan

      do you want fries with that too?

    • haha

      I have a feeling this was a joke, guys. I think he’s purposely being so over-the-top to show how silly a movie mode in a DSLR is. See's_Law

      • Silly? Sorry? So a still photgrapher, shooting something that turns into something newsworthy and amazing (and so switches to HD video)… is ‘silly’?

        I can see that being an incredible boon – on occasion – to shooters at news conferences (actually in many, many news-related shoots – like when a burning building collapses and myriad other times), in wildlife shoots with predator/prey interaction, when an assassination (attempt) suddenly occurs, in a car race or airshow switching to a crash, waiting for Mt. St. Helens to blow – then it does!… Heck, even in porn when… *ooops*!

        This seems like a no-brainer and so far from silly I’m astounded that you suggest it. To be able to capture any event where things are too slow to justify video but a change in the scenario means video is what’cha want, would be amazingly useful. “Silly”? Pffft! Now *that* suggestion is ‘silly’!

        • Alex

          Sorry Brett, AA is correct… people can’t say this is “cinematic” and better than every camcorder out there like the 5DMk2 fanboys do, and then when they get told it isn’t, defend it by saying “but it’s just a useful feature for when a building blows up” – either make it as good as people say it is, or shut up about it, and realize it’s no more useful at video than my Panasonic TZ5.

          • Chevypower

            Sorry Brett, i mean to write HAHA, but all the other things I wrote, i stand by, whether you have basic comprehension down or not. “cinematic” and “better than every other camcorder out there” are arguments used by 5DMk2 fanboys, and we are talking about a Nikon competitor to the 5DMk2. You are saying it is silly to say “it is silly to have video recording on dSLRs,” and I am saying, if it’s going to have movie mode, then make it worthwhile. You have to use cheap lines to help your case like “are you on drugs?” If you are trying to prove your level of intelligence, it worked!
            Brett…if you still don’t get it, post another dumb reply.

          • Chevypower

            B y the way Alex/Chevypower is same person – alternating between work computer and laptop.

    • Musouka

      If these were to be true, why would anyone buy the D3x, then?

      • uu

        yea… why..

  • Jay

    Other than being able to reverse the LCD to protect it, I don’t care for it. Likewise movie mode, although it has a respectable frame rate, at least. I don’t do video, but would prefer a dedicated camera for it if I did. As to the pixel count, that’s cool, but only if they don’t sacrifice the outstanding low-noise characteristics my D700 has.

  • rob

    I often wonder if there are any real photographers on this site or just dorks that want the D400 because the D300 is out already.

    Welcome to the digital world, its shit by the time you buy it.

    Stop wasting time and pick up your by now discontinued camera and start taking pictures. Its what they are make for!

    • eh??

      *raises hand* working photographer over here, working with outdated D70s and just picked up a used D300 off KEH for only $900 (just got it today and it works like new without any a scratch, 713 shutter clicks, that’s nothing). i pay more attention in nikkors and zeiss lenses and of course i use what nikon already have to offer. i n-e-v-e-r wait. about 3-4 days ago, i made a very beautiful 30″ x 20″ print with SIX megapixels D70!! that’s right, SIX megapixels.

      • Andy

        Here here! Way to go shooting with a D70 still! I’m on a D70s and love it still! It’s not about the camera, it’s about the photographer!

        • tegas

          oh yeahh….i’m still using D70s since 2006 :), and still working great…I agree with you
          the important thing is the photographer not the gun…:)

      • Jay

        Nicely done! I have a 2 ft x 6 ft pano that was made from 3 D100 jpgs. Yes at close range it does fall apart a bit, but from as lttle as 5 feet it looks great!

        You just keep shooting that D70.

        • S3 Shooter

          Depends upon what you are shooting. I am looking forward to an upgrade. Looking for faster Auto-focus, more FPS and less shutter lag. I agree that owning the latest camera won’t make you a photographer, but a sharper knife always cuts easier.

        • eh??

          real photographers know the proper viewing distance because only pixelpeelers will stand with nose against the print just to count pixels then jump into conclusion “it’s all pixely!”

          if you want to have a camera that have better FPS rate, longer battery life, better AF, etc etc, you can look at used D2Hs or D200 because they will last 10 years with good care.

          • monty11

            You don’t walk up close to most big art masterpieces either.

          • John

            >if you want to have a camera that have better FPS rate, longer battery life, better AF, etc etc, you can look at used D2Hs or D200 because they will last 10 years with good care.>

            D200? Come on, that thing eats battery like there is no tomorrow.

      • Same here, I’ve been shooting with my D50 since August ’06. My D90 arrived today from Cameta, so the D50 will now be my second body, primarily for fisheye (indoor) and telephoto (outdoor) use. My D90 arrived today from Cameta.

        While I’d love to move up to FX, it just didn’t make sense for me, at least not until after I start making money with what I already have.

        I’m glad to hear that you were able to make 30x20s off of your D70, I have to print some 16x20s for a show in June.

      • Only problem — KEH is selling D300’s for $1399-$1699. That’s even above NEW price on B&H! On eBay I just got outbid on a D300 that eventually sold going for $1275. I bought one off Craigslist for $1100, truly *is* “like new”.

        You’re either lying about the price or you got something much less than a “like new” camera. I say this based on KEH’s website alone.

    • MIKE

      still shooting with D70 but I would be pi£$ off if I would by D300 and in two weeks Nikon would announced D400. i kind of feel like to try the HD recording. As I have lots and lots of pro lenses, that could be interesting. Stuck somewhere my fish eye could be fun. don’t you think?

      • eh??

        who cares if you have D300? i use D70s and i make great prints and make great amount of money from it (for lenses and to spend on myself).

        if you want to buy a D300 now, go for it but expect to make more than what you paid for your D300 by selling prints to your clients.

      • cmuller13

        I also still have a D70! And would like the D400 to arrive just to get -200€ deals on my future D300 :-). I would choose the new one only if I can see outstanding feature but on this spec sheet, it would definitely be D300 (cheaper) for me: same hi-ISO (in the very best case), same autofocus module, same best viewfinder, 16Mpixels: not interested, that’s the Cannon way :-), video whatever modes: not interested.
        Well, let’s wait !

        • MIKE

          and that is why I would like to try video on DSLR. It is just future anyway. Check this video.

          Do you remember all those kung fu movies? Were hero is frozen in the sky and camera is panning. Well 30 DSLR did the job.

          I want to try it just for fun.

    • Nope. There are none.

  • I hope D400 is closer the the previously rumored 14 MP. I want the D400 to have “as good, or better” ISO performance when compared to the D300. If not, I will avoid it like the plague!

    The rumored D750 might be an option, depending on price and ISO performance. I’m just guessing that its DX Crop mode would be about 7-8 MP, so I would loose some ability to crop in for distant wildlife when compared to a D300, but not too much. If its ISO performance is noticably better that D300, it might be worth it.

  • The ‘wheel’ on the back looks awful canon-like

    • Joe Boston

      You obviously have no idea what recent Nikon DSLRs look like, then.

    • Lefty K. Monahan

      Not a wheel but a multi-selector joystick.

      • monty11

        Maybe he means the horizontal shutter-speed wheel 😀

  • tai

    Don’t believe it for a second, but that D750 would be all mine.

  • JasonH

    Doubt that they would put a flip screen on a high end model. That said I’d be happy with an 18MP FX body with the video if it kept cost down from dropping in the D3X sensor. The image is just a Photochop hack job on a D5000 press shot BTW, see a version of the orig here:

    • RThomas

      I actually would like to see a flip-screen option on a high end camera. I have a Nikon Coolpix 5400 that’s been converted to infrared, and I actually really like and use the swiveling screen. Beats the hell out of a waist level finder or a right-angle viewer, and I shoot enough low or high angle stuff that I could use this.

      If the D5000 impresses me once I can get my hands on one, I’ll probably just buy that body for those situations, but I would definitely consider a high end DX or FX camera with this feature, especially if the price is under $2000. I don’t care about the movie mode at all though – if I want that I’ll buy a video camera.

      • Flipscreen adds fragility and would suck for weather proofing. Cool to have some models with it, but I can imagine always making some truly sturdy cams without it.

      • alex

        Hi RThomas

        My Coolpix 5400 that’s been converted to infrared, however, can’t focus. can you advise?

  • DI92

    i don’t think that is the d400.
    looking from the design of the d5000 with an fx looking viewfinder the d400 would also have to have an updated design.

    just a thought.

    as for the d750 i just hope they launch it a bit later on. i just got my d700 in november of last year and looking for an updated version this quickly would just dissapoint

    • Anonymous

      i so agree
      they also would mess up a pro model with an unneeded swivel screen

    • MIKE

      Well D700 is a great camera, but compare it to Canon. Well Canon is pushing market quite fast,(LEICA, LUMIX) now in these days it feels like Nikon is Sleeping. What is the price hike from NIKON? What they want to achieve? I hate companies they try to push you to buy something now because in May it will be expensive. Hell NO. Stupid Nikon Packages are not interesting at all.

      New products. that could possibly happen. Nikon is late. 750 FX with HD recording looks quite real to me. I would actually hate the flipping LCD. But future is in FX and beyond. well what you think…

      • Canon is pushing the market? You must’ve just arrived and missed the fact that it’s Nikon that’s pushing AF & high ISO boundaries. Canon might be pushing video, but what else are they pushing? Megapixels? Might want to see the posts above by the D70 crowd about prints and megapixels. There *are* photographers that need the extra pixels (and I’m sure they own are are looking @ the D3x). Otherwise, who cares? I know I don’t want more megapixels!

        So let us in on this huge secret that Canon’s got that they’re using to push the market. For some reason, I’ve yet to see what it is.

        And good luck on your D750 w/ hi-def video. If what I’ve been told is true, you won’t be seeing that for some time to come.

        • MIKE

          you did not mention Leica, Sony. I’m sorry but I keep my version.

          Nikon is using 3d party parts and selling them for much higher price. You talk about ISO. Dude, check the Sony Alpha cameras. This week I’ve seen Sony FX Alpha 900. and we compared it with D700. ( No one has D3 yet, in this region) But I have to say. Sony has some amazing features and in ISO battle. Well both cameras are even. (maybe it is due that Nikon is using SONY’s sensors? You tell me.
          I see it as FX is investment into the future. I’m just not a rich guy, who can afford to switch all the time. I’m with nikon for 25 years. But last year I had some problems with Nikon service. I was not so happy about that. I don’t think a lot of people will hurry into switching from D300 to something else.

          • Maybe if you made jpegs with horrible in camera settings, but I’m going to have to call BS on this. I’ve compared raw files from both, and from the d3x and the Nikons have it.

            And to boot, Sony’s jpeg processing is wretched in terms of noise and detail. When the chips are down, Sony just doesn’t quite have it. Any pro could work with a Sony, but those who know don’t like to waste time in post, and that’s what you’ll get to get the same results with Sony gear.

            *my unsolicited $.02*

            Also, having worked with files from both, I’d dare you to get more detail than me in a 20″x30″ print with an a900 or 5dmkII. I’m only using an inferior d300/d90 but if you can’t tell the difference, you probably can’t get the results either.

  • Phoggy

    This would kick ass! I’m looking forward to the D400 and these are pretty much the features I’m hoping for, regardless of what they call it. I may never need another camera (although I will probably want for one). I do not need autofocus during movie mode. I work in broadcasting and there is no autofocus on any of our cameras. I’m used to it.

  • Joshh

    30fps on the D400 as well would be ace.

  • Manu

    Nothing but a D700X with the D3x sensor on it, please. Price around 2.5k that would be nice. Cameras with a lot of gadgets are OK, but don`t forget, Nikon, the Real Thing!

    • eh??

      wait 5 years until used D3X price drops to around D700’s price.

  • sshhhh

    HD or any type of video has no place in semi-pro still cameras, Nikon are just throwing in gimmicks for the consumer if this is true.

    • EB

      Given that the RED ONE uses similar technology (Progressive Scan CMOS) and is a hot item in feature film production proves that the quality of such “gimmicks” could be very high. And there is no degrading effect on your beloved still-image quality from the addition of movie mode.

      Does live-view have a place on semi-pro cameras? because movie mode is just live-view… that gets recorded.

  • jklofft

    Clearly fake. Where’s the mike?

  • Michael

    I don’t think the D750 is for real. I would imagine that Nikon will use the same sensor in the “D700x” (or whatever they call it) as they do in the D3x. Why? It is already developed, in production and working well. If they went with the lower that would require an entirely new design. Using the existing sensor from the D3x, gives them a return on investment for a product already in production. Just makes sense to me, but I could be wrong. It has happened before.

  • den

    who wants and or needs a dx cam with 18mpx….thats all bull!!! that means 36mpx for full frame pixel density….just insane!!! bet that even the new lenses wil have a problem with rendering a dencent quality! 15mpx would even be too much (see eos 50d). and who wants a swivel display? makes the cam even more bulky plus adds another fail option plus is unusable when mounted on a tripod in addition you look stoopid when shooting pictures.

    video i dont care as long as its implemented in a decent way. why do you want rolling shutter and thanx to automatic exposure seeable jumps in brightness levels.

    just crap….think i wil be forced to buy a d700.

    • Martin

      “….think i wil be forced to buy a d700”

      Yeah, I certainly see why this could be a really terrible and truly unthinkable option!

      I’d like to have your problems! The D700 is an amazing camera, which I couldn’t afford. If you can, lucky you!

      • den

        well i might have been a little to sarcastic. right now i´m still working with my venerable d200. it has everything i need, but unfortunatly it will break sooner than later (allready had some issues with AF and payed 200€ to keep it alive). so unless i want to work with my even older d70 i will soon have to buy a new cam although i don´t want (and my wife wil kill me). and for me the “only” option will be a d700 since i don´t need the extra pixels, don´t want the swivel and don´t want to sacrifice the good handling (compared to maybe a d90).

        but i also think these two are up until now fakes, but they are pointing in the future direction (or hopefully not).

        • Martin

          Well, if you need a new camera right now, you are limited – so to speak – to what’s available today. That would be the D300 or the D700. To be honest, I don’t see a problem with a D300 at the moment. As far as I can tell, the sensor of the D300 outperforms the one in the D200 in every way.

          I agree: I don’t need a swivel display or video either. On the other hand, I don’t see a real issue with both features. As always: if you don’t need a feature feel free to ignore it.
          You can also use some super glue to permanently attach a swivel display to the camera body if it seems too unstable to your liking.

          I think as well that, both cameras presented here are fakes. Esp. the D750.

          In order to satisfy everyone, it would be necessary to produce a completely customizable camera. And I mean really completely customizable. Like the Red One for example … but then everybody will complain about the price … and the size of that thing.

  • Anon

    It’s a FAKE! Follow the link to DigitalRev and then click on the ‘D750’ shot to enlarge… the file name is nikon_d5000_01big.jpg – oops…

    • NikoRyan

      He’s right. Please, let’s call this one BUSTED. I am waiting till the successor to he D700 comes out to buy. I will when it arrives, but this is not it. So let’s move on.

    • monty11

      Right … they would start shopping the D750 out of a D5000 and then forget to change the file name? Not that there are any cameras that would look slightly more like the proposed D750 (*cough* D700 *cough*),

  • Shooter McNikkor

    Cue the angelic choir…

  • eh??

    now, NR, why did you remove the post? too embarrassed to admit you’re a gearhead?

    • I guess you don’t know who this website belongs to – try to find out… or maybe you are that person himself looking for attention again… and don’t mention the site here please – I will delete it again.

  • fdhw

    I think, it is a fake.

    If real, the price must be under 2000 EUR.

  • anthony

    I agree with the above comment A 24 Meg Pixel prosumer is a must for Nikon. Both Sony and Canon have one.

    I am slowly loosing patience with Nikon, if it weren’t for the tremendous collection of Nikon glass that I regrettably own, I would have bought a Sony 900 at under $3000 months ago. I think the differences in image quality between the Sony 900 and the D3x are minimal and the Sony has built in vibration reduction.

    $8000 for a D3x camera is beyond obscene and the other models that Nikon has been introducing are a step back in technology and frankly leave me cold.

    PS I switched to Canon for my PS (G10) and I am very happy.

    • Jay

      Anthony, I’ll be more than happy to take your (regrettably owned?) tremendous collection of Nikon Glass off your hands, frreing you to devote you disposable incoome to whomever you want. 🙂

      Besides bragging rights, why do you “need” 24+ megapixels? Large prints can be made from nearly any reasonable sized sensor. A previous poster did a 20×30″ print from a D70s; I saw a 30×40 print done by a lab in Louisiana from a D70 that was FLAWLESS. So, what gives?

      I also use Canon P7S cams, as Nikon just hasn’t made one that has lit my fire yet. But, I keep hoping.

      • anthony

        I don’t ;need’ 24mega pixels any more than I need the medium format equipment that I own, and now never use. Honestly, I have made better prints using my Coolpix 6400 than I could could make with my 2 1/4 equipment.

        IMHO a 24 Meg pixel SLR is the equivalent of what medium format was to film. I have made beautiful 16×20 prints from my D200, but I think a 24 mega pixel SLR would in theory be the last SLR that I would need to buy.

        I don’t understand why both Nikon and Canon haven’t followed Sony’s led and incorporated VR into the body. It would help you to shoot at lower ISOs and hence lower the noise in these dense sensors.

        • WoutK89

          They haven’t put VR in the body for a few reasons: Steady image in the viewfinder is one of them, there are more in the support area on the Nikon site if I am right (the Dutch version has one).

          • There’s something about Sony’s sensor movement that softens things to my eye.. Moving parts also mean eventual failure. I’d rather have VR crap out, change lenses and keep shooting, than have a body crap out. Lenses are cheaper to repair. I have a backup, but I wouldn’t have one if it was off being repaired.

  • Whatever happened to the D400 being FX? Nikon really needs a true competitor to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II.

    Yes, the D700 is incredible at higher ISOs, but I’ve seen reviews where the high ISO image quality of the EOS 5D Mark II is comparable to the D700 when 5D Mark II’s 5616×3744 images are sized down to the D700’s 4256×2832.

    And the Mark II’s images at low ISO are superior to the D700. I want full-frame D400.

  • kurotsu-kun

    … this is not a fake (but of course also not real)!!
    It is just a marketing stunt by digitalrev! Just have a look at the article’s title:
    “…or Just Viral Marketing?”

    Get real, people.

    (Decent store by the way, I bought quite a few filters and other small stuff from them, up to my SB-400. So far I was even lucky with customs, which could add 30% to imported stuff here in Germany)

  • Ken Elliott

    The D400 looks like a nice upgrade to the D300. But the D750 is lacking for me. Compared to my D700, I like the flip out screen for some applications. The increase in pixels is OK, only if the low ISO performance doesn’t suffer. I like the idea of having movie mode, but no biggie. Nice HD camcorders range from the Flip at < $200 to Canon solid state HD at $600-1100. I’ll pay a small amount for the video feature, but not much. My primary focus is producing work that sells.

    I have been waiting for the D700x (D3x sensor) to arrive and this is not it. I’d have been willing to pay US$3000 to US$4000 for a D700x just to get the 24MP sensor for my landscape work, but frankly, I’d not pay that for the D750 as shown. I’d expect it to hit the current D700 price point, and I’ll strongly consider simply getting another D700. Having identical cameras is preferred, unless a substantiation advantage is gained to offset the differences in handling. I don’t see that advantage being very strong, if at all. If the high ISO performance is off, I’ll grab more D700s and plan for a D3x landscape camera for next year – or the year after.

    Summary: Nice updates, but short of my expectations on the D750.

  • Zoetmb

    I think these two cameras as portrayed are totally fake, but, as I’ve posted before, I don’t see why so many people “hate” the swivel. Obviously, if you’re doing studio photography, it wouldn’t be needed (and certainly is a potential failure point when open.) But for PJ and concert photography (shooting over heads), it could be very, very useful.

    And while I initially did not want Nikon to add video, once I saw it on the D90, I thought it was a good idea, although like others, I want it to be 1080p/24 and 30f.

    But when it really comes down to it, the only thing I REALLY NEED is high resolution, very low noise. Everything else can be exactly the same as my D200. Ultimately, I’d like to see about 28MP in FX (with low noise, of course) so that it would be about 12MP in crop mode. I think the next generation of whatever the D3x becomes next will hit that spec.

    • Jay

      Personally I don’t hate the swivel or the movie mode. I just don’t have a use for it. I have had a Canon P&S for years that has a swiveling LCD, and most of the time I just use it for LCD protection. I have rarely actually used the swing-out LCD for shooting. Likewise the movie mode. I think twice or so in the 5 years I’ve had it. It all comes down to what someone needs or even just wants, I guess.

    • den

      the swivel might even be a useful thing, but its implementation is just bollocks! the swivel makes most sense if you do macro work or any sort of work where you might need a tripod, but the joint is just placed in the wrong spot! good implementation can be found with olympus.

      • woble

        Most macro is done in a studio where the camera is placed above the subject. Meaning you can look at the screen very well. And even if you are doing field photography, swivel screen won’t be much of a use really.

      • alex

        also any normal person would tell you that you can’t remove the buttons on the left side, and the ports, just to have the lcd swivel to the left ’cause dpreview said so.

        you can only have it at the botton. no one really uses the brain these days?

        • marten

          Swivel makes a lot of sense for video – you have to focus from what you can see on the screen. And it is easier to hold the camera like a TLR , not high up, in front of your face.

          Like on all video cameras 🙂

  • Anonymous

    Why would it say “No Autofocus during Movie Recording” in an advertisement…? Something’s smelly.

    • Joshh

      because people want manual control when shooting video, i agree it looks odd in an advertisement, but it is a selling point.

  • mikko

    16-18 megapixels, please don’t let this be real!

  • Chad

    The rotating screen on a D700 just seems silly. That body is made out of magnesium for a reason.. and it isn’t so that it can have some fluffy rotating display that can be ripped off.

    I’m all for the camera getting video, I think it needs it to compete with the 5D MK2. It’s the one thing my D700 doesn’t do that I wish it did.

  • Rick

    Though the D750 name sounds far more realistic than D700x given the addition of video it seems highly suspicious that the specs for both cameras would be given as a range 0 16-18 MP. Wouldn’t it be one or the other? I suppose that there might be some technical reason why stills would be 18MP and video 16MP, but it seems odd.

  • Anonymous

    D750? A fake, obviously, but my god.
    I almost went to the dark side when considering my next investment.
    The movie mode was unbelievably tempting (along with some lenses, namely the 85/1.2 – but I couldn’t ever afford that anyway which rendered that argument void.)
    The more megapixels was actually a turn off for me. I never crop my images anyway so I didn’t need obscene files, and my macbook pro only has a 160gb harddrive. I’ve just bought a 1tb external, but it’s a real pain.

    if they release a d700 with video, a megapixel count that isn’t stupidly high, and similar/better iso, I’d sell mine in an instant, cut my losses and buy it.

  • kern.justin

    No new Nikon DSLRs will support CF Type II

    • woble

      My thoughts exactly. Type II has been dropped by Nikon long ago. As for D750 with a swivel screen… please no!

      • Really? My d300 has a Type II slot.

  • Gary L


    Due to the weak yen, Nikon will raise prices on the D400 and D750 effective immediately. The final features list and release dates remains on the drawing board for both models. Place your orders today before 1-2 more price hikes will go into effect. A 3rd is certainly not out of question, however, we are working hard on coming up with a new reason for the hokes since the Weak Yen is getting a bit long in the tooth.

    Again, place your orders ASAP, if not sooner.

    • woble

      Hahaha … suuuure dude.

  • Have anyone seen if the image in the rumored D750 can be flipped? It is nice to have the hinge on the bottom if you are gunna hold the camera over your head, but I’d rather have the image be visible and right side up if I were to look down at the screen.

  • Gary L

    hokes = hikes
    sawy …. i was in a hawy

  • Q

    My bet is same as poster, above, who said the D3x sensor would migrate down to a D800. Just makes sense from an ROI perspective. Why reinvent the wheel when you can refine it at a cheaper cost and still give consumers what you’re already producing in your highest end camera.

    My *wish* is still for the D400 to go full frame and get the D700 sensor. A sub-$2000 full frame to really shake things up with Canon.

    • Nikkorian

      Look at all those new DX lenses — the D300 series will stay DX!

      • PHB

        The D3x sensor will migrate down to BOTH the D400 and the D700x, that is why these are clearly fake.

        The DX cameras will use the die shrink on the FX sensors. Look at the Intel processor model – tick, tock. New design comes out, is shrunk to run on the finer resolution process, is replace by new design…

        There is no problem shrinking the feature size on the sensor. Nikon already have sensors with much finer pitch. The 10MP coolpix cameras have piddly little sensors that would be equivalent to a 50MP FX frame camera. The minimum feature sizes in chip manufacture are way smaller than the wavelength of visible light these days.

        The reason that camera resolution is limited is that you have to do something with all the data you collect. And that means cost and bulk. So expect the D3x to be replaced with a 50MP D4 in 18-24 months when faster Expeed processors are available.

        The lenses will easily support 50MP and better. Things do start to hit hard limits after that but we will probably see at least 50MP in the DX line and possibly as much as 150MP in the FX line, possibly up to 300MP. ISO will be back to film era levels when you use full resolution. But there will be patchup mechanism to push ISO.

        Who needs all those pixels? Well not for print, but print is going away. Electronic media are going to be increasingly greedy for pixels over time.

        In the past Nikon had a large number of sensors, 6MP, 10MP, 12MP. I don’t think they will continue to do that. Makes more sense to release flagship cameras infrequently and wait for a major resolution boost. In the 6MP days it made sense for everyone to move each time the resolution improved. These days, not so much. Most people are now in phase with the 12MP platform and 18MP is not enough to make the jump by itself.

        And to answer the question, who wants 24MP on a DX body, well anyone who shoots wildlife with long lenses for a start. The DX body is an automatic, lossless 1.5 teleconverter on your lens.Instead of honking about a 300mm f/2.8 ultra tele you can use a 70-200 zoom. Or if you have the cash you could go for the 200mm f/2.

        • NikonMan

          Actually . . .
          The 10MP coolpix’s (like P80) have pixel densities that would equate to 309MP on FX.
          The 12MP coolpix P90 has pixel density to equate to 370MP on FX.

          Problems with these MP counts would be :
          1. dynamic range (look at the coolpix’s)
          2. ISO proformance (look at the coolpix’s)
          3. image processing 300+MP

          keep on counting those pixels folks!

          • PHB

            I was thinking of the more expensive coolpix with the bigger chips. Yes, FX pixel densities of 300MP are possible in theory but you have a pixel that is only 2 wavelengths of light square. And that pretty much stops you getting any advantage from going any denser.

            And yes, at those densities you have compromised ISO and have a huge amount of data to move about.

            What you would need to do to make any use of such a large sensor is to have a heck of a lot more on chip processing.

            But to answer the other point about what you would use it for, you can’t see the whole picture at once, but you can pan and zoom in an imersive environment. Take a look at Microsoft photosynth for an example.

        • den

          not so sure about that!!! which electronic format needs a 150 or 300mpx file? i can´t think of a monitor that is able to display even ahlf of this resolution. the only reason to push mpx would be to get better prints! still think that most of the lenses will not resolve 24+ on dx format. but only time will tell.

          • eh??

            oh now we know who are pixelpeepers… the entire group of people above this comment 😛

  • Anonymous

    Like the looks of the D400

  • bb

    Would love the 750 only if it has a input for an external mic & full maual video control


    No thanks. Not enough new features for me. I’ll stick with my D300 and D700 for some time. Only thing I want is a 80-400mm AF-S VR II.

  • peter

    the d750, (althogh i think its fake), is the exact camera i want. flip screen, movie mode, 16mp and FX. its perfect. i dont want a 24mp sensor thanks. far too noisy for what i shoot. anyone who shoots above iso800 would be insane or juvenile to want 24mp.

    • Nikonville

      I agree in parts….The 12 megapixels of the D3 is the optimal range for LOW noise…More megapixels means more noise when using higher ISO….

      • peter

        yeah, i agree but its a good comprimise between some extra detail and not too much iso loss.

  • John

    If I want to shoot video, I’ll buy a camcorder. Leave that swivel display off too. In fact if a camera has this junk on it I would think twice before I would buy it. The only thing I want is a few more megapixels and some new lenses.

    • pete

      really ? do you have a RED system ? can you interchange lens’ ? can you get shallow dof ? can you shoot in iso 3200 conditions ? wow…youd be the only person on earth that has that video camera. you could make a fortune.

      to equate video from a camcorder to that of a dslr is like saying “if i want to take photos i’ll use my G9.”

      think and get the FACTS before you open your mouth.

      • Andrew

        Wow, that was rude. I thought this was a place people could state their views. If he wanted your view he’d have it?

      • Yeah dude. Ease up on the caffeine.

      • John

        Hello Pete, I’m very sorry that I upset you so much. I tend to like cameras that will give me the quality I need without a bunch of gimmicks that I don’t want. That’s why I like the D3. You take care and God bless.

  • sakaze

    D750 great~ ^^
    5DII file is abit too big to me, 16-18M is enough ~

  • No way a DX body is going to be 16-18 megs. And what’s with that 16-18 nonsense anyway? If they knew anything about the cameras, in terms of details, that would be the most sure, not the least.

  • Chase

    My opinion is that the people who think video in a semi-pro DSLR (or any DSLR for that matter) is a “gimmick” have never had to lug around both still and video equipment for multimedia shooting on a job. It really, really sucks. If I could carry just one camera that would allow short video clips (720p works fine!) and decent still shooting, and supplement it with an audio recorder, I would be plenty happy. I’ve got one month left until I join the “professional” world of photojournalism and multimedia is the way of the future. Anything to cut down on the amount of stuff we have to carry is a good thing. I couldn’t care less about the resolution on these things. I’m still shooting with a D50, which I prefer over my D80 (infrared!). Love both cameras. I just know I have to get something a bit more rugged, since I’m really tough on equipment. Bring on the D400 or whatever.

  • mufflon

    haha yes 16-18MP… if this was real why not put it straight?

  • Anonymous

    Let’s just all calm down come to our senses and wait for what the future will bring.

  • alex

    you can’t get a weather sealed camera with swivel display. i’m sure that any camera above d90 won’t have it.

    • pete

      ever heard of an E3 ? flip screen and probably the most superior weather sealing of any camera. that was 18 months ago aswell. the d400 WILL have a flip screen AND video. deal with it.

      there are far too many ignorant people opening their traps without any facts. you are one of them.

      • Anonymous

        So much hate 🙁 … this is your ultimate camera not his. You too must accept that there are other people not sharing your opinion.

        • peter

          saying that builiding a weathersealed body with a flip screen is impossible is not an OPINION. it is simply INCORRECT.

          by all means have an opinion but dont try and pass off your opinin as incorrect information.

          • Andrew

            Then state your opinion, with facts, and leave the attitude somewhere else.

          • peter

            obviously your tolerance of misinformation is far higher than mine. like i said, stating VIEWS and OPINIONS is one thing, but saying thats just flat out WRONG is quite another.

          • Weather sealing with a flip screen sure is possible. So it a 60mp sensor.

            I’m sorry, but you can claim all you want about an E-3, it wouldn’t stand the saladmaster test to my old d2x. Nor would any Olympus lenses. (ok, I wouldn’t try with most lenses of any brand) I can also say that my d2x saw torrential rain, snow, and several hot tubs. No problems.

            The E-3 has a flash built in. It is not a pro level weather proofed camera. It’s “splash proof”. Get over it. If you’re a pro and want to shoot in inclement weather, you don’t like getting zapped in the face when your camera gets soaked. Er at least I don’t.

            Olympus has done impressive things with very dense sensors. But they’re fighting a losing battle on the dslr front. Maybe this frustrated you because you’ve invested in it. So it goes.

            I will say I’m interested in the new micro 3/4th” system, but it’s not a dslr. I liked the prototype. Why isn’t it here yet?

            Olympus has made lots of stupid decisions: smart media, xd cards, 4/3rds, panoramic memory cards, never making a proper interchangeable lens 35mm AF SLR for film. I don’t want them to fail, but I expect it.

            Good lord, doesn’t anybody else the 4/3rds as a second generation PEN?

          • Andrew

            Yea, peter, that’s probably it. Sigh.

  • 9190

    If to read this rumor (about D400), I don’t like damned megapixels (again increase). I don’t like CompactFlash. I don’t like only 24 fps in video mode, still no choice between 24 and 30 fps. I don’t like missing Autofocus in Video Mode. But happily Panasonic DMC-GH1 coming in April 24. For many people it will be ideal camera, which they were waiting for so long time.

    • Anonymous

      I don’t like 24fps either.
      If D400 stays to that frame rate, then I’ll need a 5DmkII instead.

      • And of course that doesn’t make any sense, since the biggest criticism of the 5D Mark II (I use one at work) is that it’s not 24 fps, and thus it’s not like film.

    • Jeff

      so you want to wait on an SD card to buffer your video? good luck….
      unless you want a HDD attachment, that would be cool, but you should still have CF

  • Anonymous

    If some people here would have read a book called “Nathan the Wise”, we could have a by far more civilized discussion.

  • Back to top