Nikon D5100 incoming?

I already mentioned that the Nikon D5100 will be the first DSLR announced in 2011 and according to the picture above, it seems that the camera is ready to be shipped. The D5100 will be the logical update of the Nikon D5000 (already discontinued) and will be placed between the D3100 and the D7000 models.

Here is a close up of the label - do you see any traces of PS manipulation?

For comparison, here is an image of the Nikon D3100 box.

Thanks to "Bro" for sending in this picture.

This entry was posted in Nikon D5100. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Mike

    “The D700 is a low-light monster and takes such beautiful images that it will never truly be outdated. You could pick it up 50 years from now and still produce the same beautiful images.”

    You probably said such things about the D1x and D70, then D2x. There will always be a new technology to show you how much the old one sucked. Digital isn’t fully mature yet, as in you can’t get near film quality in most cameras. Look at any decently taken, large print of a 35mm still, then compare it to a sub 20mp DX or FX sensor, and you’ll see the difference.

    Will you capture the same pictures with this camera in 20 years? Sure, if there’s no mechanical failures, and Nikon doesn’t run out of parts. Will you be taking the best pictures? Only time will tell, but I don’t see any award winners taken with D1x or D70’s recently.

    • Ruben

      From what i have read(Not experienced) a good 35mm film equals around 40-50MP res, and doesn’t have anti aliasing problem when photographing thin stripe patterns since the pixels aren’t perfectly aligned.
      And most importantly, film has a broader dynamic range, so it doesn’t blow out the sky that easy/kill details in the shadows.
      Pro. for Digital: Less noise, “no” long exposure problems, no 24p limit, freely adjust ISO, LCD screen..+

      • jack

        Worked as a printer in a professional photo lab… those comments just are not true. While print film may have a wider DR (b/w certainly does), slide film (which is the standard for many publications, including Nat Geo) isn’t even close in DR.

        There are no aliasing issues.

        People who continue to argue that 35mm outdoes a 12 MP d700 lose me all together. Film does not look better blown up. Want to know why? Because all the printing processes are digital anyway… they have to go through scanning process prior and unless you are drum scanning every “perfect image” before you make a print, you’re going to be losing quite a bit to internal processing. Frontier machines use batch settings for the most part and unless your printer is making changes for you (trust me, they’re not, unless minimal color/contrast correction), it’s not going to be ideal.

        The only thing I like better on film is the “character” of the grain in blow up vs the pixelation that can occur… and even then, it depends upon the subject (i.e. portraits may be more flattering, but detail in landscapes looks dumb). But even then, there are digital methods that do a pretty decent job.

        For me, the only thing I like about film better is how quick it CAN be… i.e. properly shot images on portra/velvia film will look great immediately when printed. With digital, you may need to make some small batch corrections.

        I maintain the d700 (although I sold it for financial reasons), is the FIRST camera I would be happy with for many years… does it compare to my Mamiya M7 or 4×5 for raw detail? No… but it kicks the butt out of any 35mm. It’s fast, shoots in the dark, has a respectable viewfinder, the DR is crazy–with a properly exposed image, you can do an HDR with one RAW file and pull everything back in–I’ll be buying another when all the people start unloading theirs for the latest and greatest.

        I stuck with film until the d200, and even then I was somewhat hesitant and disappointed, but that ship has sailed. 12 bucks a roll minimum (film and processing) for 36 exposure 35mmVelvia–you have to be loaded, have a ton of time on your hands, and really stubborn to still shoot it.

  • Mo

    Useless for me if it doesn’t have an AF motor.

  • PDXgeek

    High (pro) price points are more and more pointless when the technology advances as fast as it does. I can buy a $600 body every couple years and stay way ahead of the game economically and in terms of features. Why would anyone buy a pro camera in this day and age? Ask those D300 buyers if they got their money’s worth…it’s reality. In two years sensors in entry level bodies will far surpass anything they put in a $15000 package today. Be smart.

    • WoutK89

      I would say, sturdiness, size in hands, external controls and connections, compatibility with their old memory cards, making enough money to switch body twice a year, and so on.

  • ryjryhjrh

    Last chance for Nikon.
    If it’ll have AF motor I’ll take it…
    If not, I’ll stick with Canon rest of my life lol. (Because I’m planing buy a lot of lenses)

  • PhotoHop

    Small issue, but I want it to have the IR remote function

  • Back to top