Official Nikon Store in Sweden sells only 5 DSLR models


Just another confirmation on the previous reports that the D60 and D300 are being discontinued (link).

This entry was posted in Nikon D3100, Nikon D400. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Bonetti

    Nikon USA have 9 models

  • albert

    Nice one, NR admin.

    D400 is becoming more & more “real” now.

    • I don’t know if we are going to see one D400.
      D90 came before the D80 went away, same with the D5000 over the D40/60.
      The specs we got for a D400 are still all over the place, I guess there is nothing firm about it yet. And although I shoot a D300 and like DX, my guess us that the line will stay like that.

      • Tomas

        In my opinion D400 makes sense. D5000 and D90 are too similar, so D90 should make some space.

        my 2p

  • low

    this is it!

  • Yeah, I’m going to have to join int the chorus of “this is a pointless post”.

    A pointless one once in a while isn’t so bad. But you’ve had a string lately, admin.

    • Micah, I will take your feedback seriously – you have been regular here for a while. I am in the process of implementing a rating system for each post – that way I can get an instant feedback in order to make correction when necessary. I just thought that this post confirms the previous rumor from Sweden about the D300 and D60 being discontinued.

      • Twoomy

        Admin – I thank you for posting stuff like this. It DOES confirm the state of things and the things yet to come. If a D400 appears in the next month, all of these little hints would have pointed right at it, so keep ’em coming! BTW — I DO like the new ratings system as well. Keep up the good work.

      • Zoetmb

        I don’t think the post is completely pointless, but I disagree with the interpretation. All it means is that one particular Nikon region has decided not to sell certain older Nikon bodies -or- it means that Nikon has limited distribution in certain regions because the camera is near its end-of-life and they have somewhat limited quantities on hand -or- they’re pushing cameras to the markets where it can make the most margin, also considering currency translation values. And it stands to reason that smaller markets will have less in their catalogs than larger markets.

        There have been times in the past where Nikon products have been removed from a particular country’s “official” Nikon catalog, which led us to believe that Nikon had discontinued the product which turned out not to be the case. This is especially true for lenses. (The 80-200 is on the international site, the U.S. site, the Japan site, but not the UK site, for example.)

        As I’ve posted in another thread, you can still go to B&H and buy an F65, F80D, F100 or FM10 film body, even though all are supposedly discontinued.

        The issue isn’t whether the D400 is coming – of course it’s coming. The question is when and what will it contain. The photo business, like the computer business, is becoming more like the auto business: new models almost every year, but with only basically cosmetic differences and slight upgrades to the technology. Nikon could take the D300, add a slightly upgraded sensor, a swing-out LCD and video and call that the D400. Without a substantial improvement in IQ, that would be somewhat of a disappointment, but it’s certainly within the realm of possibility.

        So IMO, while it’s okay to post that the DXXX has been removed from a Nikon catalog in Cameralandia, it’s a bit silly to then claim that this means that the Nikon DYYY is imminent.

    • heartyfisher

      I have to respectfully disagree.. Its these post that gives a “feeling” as to the state of the play… good find NR admin.

      • As you can all see, no matter how hard I try – I cannot adjust this blog to the taste of every reader. This is why I think a new post rating system would be great – it will eliminate the need of discussing the quality of the post here and concentrate on Nikon gear – all you’ll have to do is click “like” or “dislike” on each post, no needs for comments. As the time goes, I will be making adjustments based on the feedback. I will try to complete the implementation this weekend.

        • Zoetmb

          I’d be careful on the rating posts functionality. Some of the Apple rumor sites have this and IMO, it’s ludicrous for several reasons:
          1. Many people simply click “negative” for the hell of it, just like you see user ratings of movies that have been released or previewed yet.
          2. Clicking “Positive” or “Negative” doesn’t mean anything because people interpret the intention differently: some use it to rate the quality of the post and some use it to rate the substance of the post. For example, if you got specific advance info on the D400, the post could be great, but people might be disappointed as to what the D400 is. But you couldn’t tell that from the ratings because many would rate the post “negative” based upon the latter instead of the former.

          I think there needs to be two ratings (if implemented at all): one for the post, one for the substance. And I don ‘t think you should let people rate if they don’t make a comment. It’s too subject to abuse.

          • Zoetmb

            Typo above: I should have written, “…movies that HAVEN’T been released yet.”

        • Rogan Thomson

          I think these posts are very valid and allow the reader to make an informed decision of what the details you find mean. Your site posts rumours – and rumours are usually going to be are just that! People cannot expect them all to be correct.

          If you do feel the need to please everyone (as there seem to be posters on here who complain about anything not 99.999% likely) then how about a welcome page with two buttons:
          1) leads to a version of the site as it is with all related material you find posted, and…
          2) directs to a version of the site with only the most reliable sources posted.
          Maybe a lot of work? I don’t mind because i love the site as it is, and people constantly commenting that they are not happy doesn’t help anyone – i think your recent poll showed that the majority are in favor of your current approach!

  • Jack

    I think this is a valid post – the more little things like this are found, the more it seems a D300 replacement is coming. This seems to happen with every new Nikon release.

    • Do you really question that a d300 replacement is coming? The question of whether it is coming is not interesting, since the answer is obvious.

      The interesting questions from my perspective are: what will it spec out like? And will it have compelling new features?

      • Bibz

        But a post like give the perspective of “How soon will it be out ?”

        Sure I can already tell that a D4 is coming to replace the D3, but we don’t see that coming very soon.

  • Stephen

    Hey, I call this post good. It is yet another nail in the D300 coffin.

    However, this does lead me to wonder a few things. Why are they discontinuing without a replacement. This seems very out of character for Nikon. Or at least I don’t recall them doing that in the recent past. I’ve started tossing around the idea that there will be no D400. Maybe the D700 is where Nikon wants the pros to go, that or better. Really, the D90 doesn’t give them a lot of room to grow.

    As a pro (well I get paid and it’s %70 of my income), I bought a D90 as my backup camera. I’m can’t prove it, but I think it takes better pictures than my old D300. I know people say the body is more durable, but I’m not out in the dirt. So it really doesn’t matter.

    I know there is room for a higher MP count DX crop camera, but I’m not convinced it would be enough to get people to move. I bought a D700 the month after it was released. It seemed like a good logical step. Some people claim the movie stuff is what they would add, but I think that’s just too little.

    The last issue I see is why would they want to up the MP count above the D700 and the D3. I understand that FX is a big draw, it was for me, but why would you want to up it so much.

    To me, it would make more sense to do a D700x with the same sensor as the D3x. Price it a little above the D3, lower the D3 and the D700. That seems like a better product spread. I know people say DX isn’t dead, and that is not what I’m saying. I think the D700 has shown Nikon that pros will flock to an FX sensor if the price is right.

    Okay, everyone can eat me alive.

    • monty11

      Nah … I don’t think you’d taste that good 😉

      There could be a point to creating this void. This will definitely increase the demand of the D400 once it reaches the stores. The drawback is that the more they wait the more people might choose a competitor’s model instead of waiting for the new one.

      • Stephen

        I’m not sure that they would want to create a void like this just to create some demand. That’s not what logical companies do. The more you leave people hanging, the more likely you are to have them go elsewhere.

        The real question is, where can they go. I’m sorry, but 16MP is the not the answer. I would love more MP, but that would eat into the D700. Many people, including pros, still have the more MPs is better attitude. Those that doe need more MPs are going to the D3x.

        If the move is going to be more MPs then it is likely to come in the form of a D700x. It makes too much sense. Just do exactly what you did with the D700. It would be easy.

        Now as for where those fit price wise, I’m not sure. I don’t think a D700x should be cheaper than a D3. Frankly, they are the same camera, just a smaller form factor. To price it less would just destroy any market for a D3. So I would see it being priced at the D3 and then cascading down from there to the D90.

        I don’t know. I just don’t think it all that rational to do what they are doing, unless there was going to be a price shift to make room from something else.

  • Phoggy

    This post could mean nothing, but it could also be a subtle clue as to what’s next to come. Good work Admin!

  • Steve

    If you follow the link, scroll down the main body of the website and you will see they still list the d60, just no d300

  • Anon

    Stephen – I agree with you. There are essentially two options to fill the D300 price bracket. The time is right for both: 1)incremental update: D400 – more MP, movie mode – but what else can it really offer? Swivel screen is a no-no as not durable enough. I don’t think they have the technology for a lower noise higher MP DX sensor. So not very many selling points for the D400. We’re on the 2-year life cycle of the D300 so time is right for that.

    However, it’s time for the FX sensor to trickle down to the D300 price point. But, how do they release a cut-down D700? I’m not sure if an FX sensor in a D90 body would appeal to me, I want a metal chassis. But if the essential features of the D300 – build and control interface quality – are maintained, why would anyone buy a D700? And I think Nikon has affirmed its commitment to DX as amateur line with its recent lens releases.

    Another option: release the D700x in the D700’s price bracket, and allow D700 price to come down. No easy choices here for Nikon, and whatever they do someone will be able to complain…

    • Nikkorian

      I don’t think swivel screen is a no-no. You can leave it at the camera if you’re afraid it might get pulled off in action. Then again, they should really improve contrast-detect AF, so LV mode becomes usable at all. Swivel screen could help in portrait shooting, street photography, macro work, etc.

    • Nikkorian

      Of course it would be nice to have FX sensor cheaper, but the market is not pushing into this direction at all (5D2 is even above D700 price point). People who can afford FX lenses with 2.8 aperture don’t think twice about 2000 euros for an FX body — and only with those lenses FX plays out its strengths!

    • Stephen

      I’m not sure I see a good reason to even have a D300 body anymore. In reality, most pros who want or need a sealed and metal case are likely to go for a D700, while those who don’t care are just as likely to pick a D90. Frankly my D90 does a fine job. If I were starting out again, I would never spend the money on a D300 when the D90 exists.

      The problem is there is a “Gap” between the D90 and the D700. Frankly, I’m not sure there really is a gap. Each as 12 MPs. Each uses the Exspeed processor. The D90 has amazing noise reduction abilities. The next logical step is a D700.

      I understand the Nikon has reaffirmed its commitment to the DX as a amateur lens. However, the D300 isn’t an amateur camera. At the very least, it’s a prosumer camera, and really it’s just a low end pro camera. I know journalist who use it.

      So in reality, the only real gap is a price gap. It’s a long jump to go from a D90 to a D700, price wise. That is why a D700x, and a price shift would make sense. The D700 would fill the void nicely if there was a D700x. I know a lot of people think that anyone who would be willing to spend the money on lenses would be willing to spend the money on a camera. That really isn’t true. It’s the razor and blades argument. How, do you get more people to spend more money on lenses, you get them to buy a FX body and then commit to buying FX lenses. It makes a whole lot more sense to me than a lot of other things out there.

      Anyway. This is a good discussion .

  • Anon

    And furthermore, very useful post admin, this is why I come here.

  • Anon

    The D60 (and the F6) are still sold on, as can be seen if you follow the link in the original post.


    • Paul

      I think it’s more about the D300 being no where to be found on the site. We all know the D60 is being discontinued.

  • Martin

    I have waited to long for this baby!!!


    Ooh please let it be a d400 soon!!!

  • James

    D400 FX? Why not. But i guess Nikon will release two bodies? Make everyone happy eh?

    But maybe they did not list it to push other models now while waiting for supplies instead of going to the competition.

    • monty11

      I must be blind … I can’t say where it says that D400 will be an FX.

      • Zoetmb

        The D400 will not be FX. I believe there will be a D800 and a D900, both FX, in Nikon’s future in the next few years. I also believe that there will be a D400, D500 and D600 before we see the end of DX in the mid-line (if ever).

        The FX line has to get up to at least 28.5MP to have a crop mode that is 12.3MP, equivalent to today’s best DX. But it also has to do that with low-noise at high ISO and we’re not quite there yet. Once Nikon can accomplish that at reasonable cost, the midline DX line will probably disappear as it will no longer be necessary. But today, crop mode on the D700 is only a max of 5.14MP and it’s the DX line that’s selling the most bodies, so I think we’re going to see midline DX for at least another three years. And Nikon’s recent lens announcements demonstrate a continued commitment to that format.

        • Stephen Foster

          Beg to differ on the “end of the DX Line”question.

          I believe there will always be a market for a Mid Range DX. Aside from the price point, it’s the Form Factor. DX Lenses are smaller and more suitable for Travel. Ideally, I would like to see a DX Body, D300 Size with a sensor similar in performance to the D3 albeit with less resolution.
          This would make a perfect Road Trip Camera for Low Light situations. Whilst I love my D3 and the FX f/2,8 and below lenses that go with it, It is big, heavy, clumbsy and a burden when travelling abroad.

          My 2 cents.

          • Stephen

            I think the D90 fills that void very well.

  • Digitalux

    And why not an “incremental” D400 at whatever 16-18MP DX sensor with all the gizmos (video, swivel…) together with the same sensor in a D3 body new camera with large buffer, full-speed 14-bits and whatever in the current D3.

    (I know, I am dreaming… but I still want a D3 with a DX sensor 🙂 )

    • Stephen Foster

      Who needs 16MP… Would much prefer less noise and higher ISO options. 12MP is more than enough for midrange If you need more, shoot film. Far better Value for Money.

      • Twoomy

        I hate when people think their own desires are the only correct why and then they state “If you need more, just (shoot film, switch to medium format, switch to Canon, etc.).” etc. Some of us want and need more megapixels and want to see a higher-res DX camera, thank you very much! You might not, and that’s fine.

        Now to turn your own words on you, if you want less noise, just buy a D700!

        • Stephen Foster

          Already have a D3…..

          I struggle to see why you may need more Megapixels, but I am not you. Personally, unless you are Making Extremely large prints or struggle with composure in the view finder, the quest for megapixels is yesterdays news.

          But then again, I am not you so what am I to know.

          • Twoomy

            I do “fine art photography” and print up to 20×30 for clients. 12mp is okay, but more would be better. I am NOT just a snapshot shooter taking snaps of my cats to print at 4×6. Of course a snotty stock answer would be “Well if you need more resolution, just buy a D3x or a medium format camera!” And my response would be “Sure, you give me the money and I would be happy to take your advise.” 🙂 But in reality, I just want to squeeze a little more resolution out of the camera system that I can afford.

            It’s funny as resolution and noise increase, some always have the sentiment of “why do we need more”? Back when the D100 came out, people were whining that 6mp was too much and anything more was a waste of time. Can you imagine if all high-res cameras today were still only 6mp? (OK, well maybe some D2H shooters would still be happy, ha ha.)

  • Lies, D60 is still being sold (allthough not in stock)
    But D300 has been removed from the list.

  • I want a D400 with a DX sensor to replace my good old D200. (i skipped the D300 because the difference was too small). I hope Nikon isn’t going to go FX with this one because for DX there are a lot of versatile lenses for underwaterphotography like the Tokina 10-17 mm Fisheye. And i like my Macrolenses the way they perform on a DX sensor. Actually i highly doubt the need for most photographers for FX sensors. IMO it’s an overkill for most of them. With DX lenses and sensors it’s possible for me to shoot covershots for magazines and even billboards, and for me that’s a fair quality. The main reason for my to have replacement for the D200 is the lousy focus sensor, noisy >400 ISO performance and i’d appreciate the ability to do filming (if it’s comes extra without the sacrifice of quality)

    cheers, udo

    • Having used both, I can tell you the difference is huge! 8 fps vs less than 5 fps, an incredible new focusing system, lower noise from ISO 400 up, and just plain better IQ and color. Shall I go on? It was worth it for me to replace my D2x with the D300–it’s that good!

      • udo

        I’m sure i’ll be able to notice the difference as well, but for me, as an underwaterphotographer i also would have had to replace my underwaterhousing too, which is nearly twice the price of a D300 body. All together it would have costed me >6000 euro, only because my housingmanufacturer refused to make a conversion kit to fit the D300 in a D200 housing.
        I hope that the D400 is bringing more improvements over the D200, so it’s more justified for me to jump in in this next round, because i like to spend money on expensive toys as well….

  • Dragos

    Well, I am currently using Canon, but am looking with great anticipation what the next gen Nikon D400 will offer as compared to the next gen 60D. I hope that Nikon can do it again and NOT fall into the trap of more megapixels, but rather have the same sensor as the D300 with an even better DR and less noise. That’s what could and should have been done by Canon in the case of 5D/5d2, and they missed on that. Nikon, teach them a lesson here and let me see the benefits.

    To those who ask what a D400 could improve on D300, my take is exactly that: no bells and wistles but rather an even better (measurably better, like 1 or 2-stop better) performance with essentially the same hardware. I hope that will be the future field for competition.

  • Looks like my D300 is now history!

  • Dragos

    One more thing which the D400 could bring and which would be REALLY serious improvement: make it to store info. on micro-lens AF adjustment not just for one focal length per lens as now, but for as many stops throughout the zoom range for each lens, even if one wishes to save info. for such adjustment for each mm of the range (OK, that may be overkill, perhaps every 3mm for shorter lenses and 10mm for longer ones).

  • rob_md

    It’s still there? With several kits? Or am I looking in the wrong place?

  • Soap

    When have they ever released a Dx00 before the Dx?
    The D700 is the only example and it was a new product line, not just a new product.
    If they release a D400 before a D4 it will be a first.

    This, and this alone, leads me to rather suspect the D700 will move down to the D300’s place until that point in time at which a D4 and a D400 come out, with a D90 replacement to follow.

    Remember, this period of seven DSLRs is an abnormality on the timeline. Five models is much more consistent with their history.

    D3X, D3, D700, D90, D5000 is the lineup I expect until that point in time the D4 generation comes around

    • Soap

      In fact, if there is a hole anywhere in their lineup it is below the D5000. Shocked not to see a budget replacement for the D40.
      I had expected the D60 to drop down to this position. Its hybrid tech (older sensor “improved” through the use of the newer processing engine) is exactly the kind of compromises you expect to see in the budget line.

    • Nikkorian

      I think the abnormality will become normal 🙂

      Look at the mobile phone sector — which is so much more diversified now than it was 10 years ago. Together with the product, the plant is developed to accomodate for quicker adjustments and more diversity, as production knowledge grows.

      • Soap

        Oh let me count the ways that the mobile phone market is not comparable to the DSLR market. 😉
        1 – You don’t have Nikon and Canon selling through three or four different providers, each with their own demands.
        2 – Mobile phone providers tend to sell a moderate number of models based on a smaller number of actual components.
        3 – The turnover rate for mobile phones is well over twice that of DSLRs.
        4 – The support costs for mobile phones are a fraction of that of DSLRs. If you have a broken 2007 phone in 2009 they’ll replace, not repair, your phone. If you have a broken 2007 DSLR in 2009 they’ll repair, not replace, your camera. The more cameras your techs need to be trained on, the more expense. The more cameras you must provide firmware support for, the more expense. Mobile phone manufacturers avoid some of this by replacing rather than servicing/
        5 – The mobile phone market is nearing saturation in the “Western” world, and the majority of sales are to existing customers looking for the latest new thing. The DSLR market is nowhere near saturation, and therefore there is much less need to waste valuable money marketing to every niche and cranny.

        My point in a nutshell is that while 7 concurrent models is a possibility (wasn’t even the crux of my argument), it is unlikely enough. Taken with the historical precedent of where the Dx00 models fall in relation to the Dx models and the case becomes more compelling.

        As for manufacturing abilities improving to the point where making multiple lines simultaneously is cost effective – we’ve been there for decades. The issue continues to be one of R&D and support. Manufacturing ability has long since stopped becoming a factor in these types of decisions.

        • Nikkorian

          1 – no, but many more than 4 users have even more different demands

          2 – same could and will be true for dslr’s

          3 – which would make us arrive at half the number of models. so?

          4 – that will all be optimized further. a modular constuction does and will provide ease of service.

          5 – You are right about the situation now. Theme of my post was the prediction that this will change, since any market will near saturation some time and so also for DSLR we will get there. I haven’t stated any time, but I see a decade as realistic. Of course part of the market will go to large sensor / electronic viewfinder comos without reflex mirror.

          • Soap

            1 – End-users do not have nearly the same level of direct control over manufacturing decisions as do the mobile phone carriers. This is the thrust of that argument and one which you appear to dismiss w/o counter.
            2 – Again, this is a matter of degree. The modularization of cell phones is orders of magnitude greater than the modularization of DSLRs, and leads to efficiencies of scale untouchable by others. To deny the crossing of a threshold due to similarities in the qualitative is to ignore the differences brought forth by orders of magnitude in the quantitative.
            3 – The math is not so simple. Once again I see this as a disagreement between us on the difference between qualitative and quantitative.
            4 – You’re ignoring the thrust of my argument that mobile phones just don’t get serviced, by and large, they get replaced. And even those which do get serviced get serviced for a significantly shorter period of time than DSLRs. If a camera company was to have as many models as a mobile phone producer out at any given point in time, AND keep up with their current warranty periods, the demands on their service department would be many times that on a mobile phone provider’s service department. This while dealing with drastically lower volumes and significantly lower sales (in $) as well. Nikon/Canon would be spending more money on service and less on R&D if this were the result.
            5 – I can’t seriously believe you think the DSLR market is within three, much less one, decades of saturation.

            Don’t get me wrong, I’m not arguing against your conclusion (more models than historically) so much as the comparison to a non-equatable market.

  • Quash

    Of course this is a relevant post. This is a rumour site about Nikon gear. Pointing to a Nikon store’s new product line-up to give weight to a possible direction Nikon may be taking is fair game and complements “a source told me” post. Anyone speak Swedish want to call the store to tease this rumour out?

    A thumbs up/down would be useful NR Admin. But, I’d like to see a simpler Rating system. Perhaps a 1/5 scale or 1/10 scale rather than a 1-100% system which is overkill. 1/5 would be better, imho, as it is simpler for people.

    1 – Trusted Source Who is Always Right
    2 – Reliable Source Who is Often Right
    3 – Source + my intuition + other similar rumours I’m hearing.
    4 – Untested Source but reasonable sounding rumour.
    5 – Take it with a Grain of Salt.

    Or something like that. Keep up the great work, Admin.

    • Anonymous


    • I don’t know – for me it is much easier in %, I guess I think like a machine 🙂

  • To be sad I am using D60 hope They will keep service

  • Stephen Foster

    Recommendation for Admin.

    Set up a Nikon Buyers Guide. Similar to the one on This is where this kind of info would be useful. It will help people better understand the Nikon product release and pricing cycles and will become more accurate as we all get atuned to the behaviour of Nikon.

    IMAO D400 is close. They still need a product at this level for DX. My gut tells me the focus will be on sensor speed and noise rather than Resolution but I could be wrong. Also High MP D700x/800 should be close too. (once they recoup the R&D on the D3x.). FX is where they will push the MP boundary.

  • Misora

    Actually, I really do appreciate this post because I’ve been looking forward to the D400 myself. It helps me see that an official source has discontinued the D300.

    Thanks for the site.

    If only I could have the D400 in my hands before my trip at the beginning of July…

  • Rogan Thomson

    I think these posts are very valid and allow the reader to make an informed decision of what the details you find mean. Your site posts rumours – and rumours are usually going to be are just that! People cannot expect them all to be correct.
    If you do feel the need to please everyone (as there seem to be posters on here who complain about anything not 99.999% likely) then how about a welcome page with two buttons:
    1) leads to a version of the site as it is with all related material you find posted, and…
    2) directs to a version of the site with only the most reliable sources posted.
    Maybe a lot of work? I don’t mind because i love the site as it is, and people constantly commenting that they are not happy doesn’t help anyone – i think your recent poll showed that the majority are in favor of your current approach!

  • Jim

    My response to the original post: so what? That doesn’t mean anything.

    This isn’t even a rumor. This is nothing.

  • Remington

    Warning – pretending to be more technical than i really am.. but, is there the possibility of a new DX type sensor that is slightly larger and 1.3x crop which would allow an increase to 16-18MP AND offer lower noise at higher ISO????

    And now back to our regular programming…

    • Soap

      It would be entirely possible, but highly unlikely.
      Said new sensor would be larger than the image circle on enough DX lenses that you could not simply say to yourself “I have a DX camera.”
      This means you (as Nikon now) either have to deal with the fact you have a confused consumer (never good) who can buy some DX lenses, but not all, and must use FX lenses in other situations.
      Else, you could market said new sensor as a FX, but who would your target market be? Pros would know they were being sold a “fake” FX, and amateurs would be forced to buy larger, heavier, and more expensive FX lenses.

  • Peter

    stupid nikon

  • Back to top