Nikon D5100 box again

Here is another appearance of the Nikon D5100 camera box (see previous picture of the box). You can go to ed-oorklep's flickr stream for high resolution version of the images:

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

    Any hint about the sensor?

  • hope will see it first time in Bratislava
    😀 😀 😀

  • texasjoe

    Thats a nice box…

    • steve

      Indeed. Well worth posting box photos as it stops people posting ridiculous comments about the latest box technology as we can all see it has the same box tech as previous Nikons. Then again, it could be fake….yawn.

    • mwl

      Thats what HE said.

  • TBO

    Too fuzzy to read the specs… boo!

    • Global

      Intentionally, I assume. Otherwise it wouldn’t be soft advertising from clever Nikon.. 😉

  • I’m kind of surprised that they’re offering the 18-105 as a kit lens, that’s gotta’ up the price a little bit.

    • James

      Canon offers T2i/T3i kits with their 18-135mm lens, so this is expected (and welcome).

    • iamlucky13

      Only a little surprising. The 18-105 is a pretty logical upsell as a kit lens. It also creates a little more distinction between it and the D3100 standard kit, especially if it has the same sensor as the D3100.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s actually offered in two standard kits – one with the 18-105, and the other for $100-150 less with the 18-55.

    • Vandyu

      I’m glad they put the 18-105 with it. That, IMO, is a much more useful lens than the 18-55. I would think it would up the price a bit, but also attract more buyers. I could be interested in a body only box, however.

    • WoutK89

      Even logged in I get an error message, has the topic been pulled?

  • Sudheer

    No BIM I guess

  • if you look more closely you can see that it is robuster build than the D5000, there is the same setting handle as the D3100 and there seems to be an recording botton on the top and the D5100 sign isn’t any more right on the body, but is standing out just like the D7000, so, it wil be the build quality of the D7000, but with D3100 specs.

    I think this is a test print before the actually printing of the boxes themselves.

    • Global

      Or the designer/printer stole a copy. Or Nikon just had these made to promote soft advertising. Clearly specs were avoided. No spy would avoid specs.

      • mnene

        Either it is a test print what so ever, it is clear that there are some errors in this print. If you take a look at what the lens or camera body looks like, there’s a huge offset with lacquer.

  • MG

    sod that. give me a full frame d7000!

    • Joel

      You mean a D800? I think you’ll be waiting at least another 8-12 months for that my friend 🙂

      • MG

        no. d800 will be a d300 body, as was the d700.
        what I want is a d7000 with a FX sensor. smaller than the d700/d800
        but that’s just my wishful thinking. I don’t suppose nikon will produce such a camera within the next couple of years, but I would be thrilled if they did.

        • Cheick

          I totally agree with you on that one, it would definitely be nice. My only concern with this camera would be the size of the viewfinder which would be enormous compare to rest of the body.

          • MG

            look at the the f90/80, or the FM2.. great, bright viewfinders, but not bulky.
            no worries there.

        • Andy

          Not to mention the dispropotionality represented by a – say – 24-70 2.8 on a body much smaller than D700…..
          The whole point with FX is to use the pro lenses, right?


          • MG

            I use primes.

            • KnightPhoto

              I use the 24-70 pretty regularly with the D7000 – works well from a balance point of view for me in theatre.

              My other main D7000 use is on my 500+TC14E @ 700mm – again works very well.

            • KnightPhoto

              Having, said that, yes I TOTALLY agree the D3S sensor on a D9000 will be a super seller for Nikon – MAJOR home run I would think!

              We’ve got to make sure Nikon doesn’t retire that sensor.

          • MG

            BTW.. compare the d7000 +24-70

            with a d3 + 200-400

            it seems it’s not such a big of a problem, is it? ;]

          • nir.e

            wrong, lens has nothing to do with that
            you better of use good glass period.

            The whole point with FX is better dynamic range
            Shallower depth of field, (x2 than crop)
            clean picture at higher iso
            and bigger view finder

            • PHB

              There is really little point to FX unless you have worthy lenses and really little point unless you are big on wide angle shots.

              With a given lens, the DX sensor only captures half the light of the FX sensor. And that is why the ISO rating for FX is a stop better. But its really an artifact of the way we measure rather than being an intrinsic thing.

              The main practical benefit of the FX sensor is that the professional lenses are optimized for use on FX. So the 85 f/1.4 is still a terrific lens on my D300 but the efective focal length is essentially 135mm which is a bit long for portrait work.

              The other benefit is that there are much better ultra-wides and fast wides possible on the FX format.

              Its worthwhile, but I can’t see the point of FX at the consumer end of the DSLR line. The D7000 looks to me to be an attempt to create a new prosumer bracket at the top end of the consumer line. And a D9000 would sit very well there. Lots of people would pay for a 12MP FX camera with the D3s sensor.

              Might see such a body this year but it is more likely it would come out next year with the D800.

            • PHB


              Well maybe you can get good results out of your D700 and its Holga lens but most of us would consider that an eccentric choice.

              If you have a D300 with a professional f/2.8 zoom it will beat a D700 with an f/4.5-5.6 consumer job. The lens has a much greater impact on the result than the sensor.

              Noise is determined by three things and three things only: The amount of light coming in through the front of the lens, the proportion of that light that ends up hitting the sensor and the size of the sensor cell relative to the size of the sensor.

              A D300s with a 200 mm f/2 will give virtually identical performance to a D700 with a 300 mm f/2.8. The viewfinder will be as bright, the focusing will be as fast and the results almost identical.

              The same is not true at the wider end. I am not going to be buying f/1.4 wide primes until after I get an FX body.

              The D300 is now quite a few years old and pretty much every new Nikon out there is going to be faster because the DSPs are two generations ahead. The D700 had a faster DSP out of the gate and the D300s has only just caught up.

              As it happens I do have a full set of full frame lenses I used with my FG and N90s. They are all weak compared to the modern DX lenses. I was surprised to find that even the 20mm and 24mm primes do not do a very good job.

              The APS-C comparison is misleading because the chemistry of film stock is the same for every type of camera from instamatic through to medium format. A digital camera sensor has essentially the same performance regardless of how large it is. The difference in ISO performance from the system comes from the different amount of light falling on the sensor from the lens, not from difference in the performance of the sensor. The net result is that film camera performance really does degrade very badly for smaller sensor size in ways that are irrelevant for digital.

              There will of course be a point to switch from DX, but that is going to come when Nikon launches an affordable 24MP FX body with reasonable ISO performance. My expectation is that mirrorless will replace the low end DSLR market and 24MP FX will become a de-facto FX+DX in one body.

            • Segura


              Sorry I don’t shoot a D700 with a Holga lens. I shoot a D3s with my 35mm f/1.4, or one of my other lenses (24/50/85 f/1.4G or 14-24/24-70/70-200 f/2.8G), so no need to try to school me on lens quality.
              Again, you never refuted my impression that you have never shot full frame, so I would take what you say as a “guess” since you don’t know anything about FX.

              I have shot both DX and FX, with at least 30 different Nikon lenses.

              And setting up comparisons like using a 2.8 on DX and a 5.6 on FX is not the same. Apples to apples, the same lens on FX will blow away what is taken on a DX. Even compensating for crop a DX+17-55mm vs FX+28-70mm (both f/2.8), there will be noticeable results.

              Maybe getting usable ISO 800 is a big deal to you, while FX shooters can get the same results as yours with 3200 ISO. I say that makes a difference.

              And your fallacy:
              “The difference in ISO performance from the system comes from the different amount of light falling on the sensor from the lens, not from difference in the performance of the sensor. The net result is that film camera performance really does degrade very badly for smaller sensor size in ways that are irrelevant for digital.”

              Go back to school, this is absolutely wrong. The larger sensor has larger pixels, so it captures more light. A 12MP FX > 12MP DX > 12MP P&S.
              Think about the sensor as buckets, one twice as large as the other. You leave both outside during a rain. When you check on them later, both buckets will have 1″ of water in them, but since one bucket is twice as big, the volume of rainwater collected is twice as much.

              The rainwater = light photons in that analogy. And it is accurate. The FX will collect more rainwater/light than a DX. That is why the ISO performance is much better . . .

            • bob

              I’m with Segura–I have/had both D700 and D90, as well as other Nikons. Any claiming no difference between DX and FX has no experience, and is simply regurgitating the garbage that passes as wisdom on the net.

              PHB–f there was no difference between format sizes, why doesn’t everyone just shoot 43rd or m43rd? Or shoot P&S sized sensors–you maintain that it’s all the same. It is not, and you would know if you actually used any FX camera, whether Nikon or others.

          • SGN

            Having larger pixels, a 12MP FX sensor is LESS demanding of Lens resolution than, say a 16 MP, 18MP, or even a 12 MP DX sensor. Thus, other things being equal, the D7000 deserves, indeed, needs the ‘bestest lenses’ than say, a D700. Ofc no one denies a sharper lens will look better.

    • Vandyu

      Yeah. Small body FF for me.

  • judgeing by the shape its obviouse its a 24 MP fx sensor. no doubt!

    • KT

      Great point, I’m glad you were able to spot the sensor from that far but then it was quite expected from the beginning. I mean where else would they put the F3x sensor revision. I just hope they don’t go wild with the price

  • it will use the MH-24 battery charger

  • and if you turn the main picture you can see the swivel screen on the left side

  • niels

    barcode: 18208 88514

  • Sek

    Photos are taken with HTC Desire HD… 8 MP Camera! And the photo are uploaded just at 1024×612! That guy really doesn’t want to let us read some spec on the second pic!

  • niels

    it seems that there are 3 buttons + an AF-switch next to the D5100 sign

  • Joel

    I think it’s a pretty safe bet that it’ll use the 14mp sensor of the D3100 in a body with a few more features such as a higher fps shoot rate, larger buffer and a better LCD (probably that of the D7000). At a guess I’d say that it’ll probably still retain the 11 point af and penta-mirror view finder of the D3100.

    • niels

      I think that it’ll have about 4 or 4.5 FPS, not faster or slower, or it will cost potential custemors, that will choose a D3100 or D7000 instead. So just a slight upgrade of the D5000 (screen, build quality (slightly), sensor off course.

  • niels

    So someone would make so much effort to make a fake D5100? I have compared the photos with the D3100, the D5000 and the D7000 and it is none of them, and it would be difficult and cost a lot of time to adjust 4 pictures of a pre-printing box of a D3100/D5000/D7000.

  • J

    Annoucement is Monday 4th April

    • niels

      Is possible, but normaly all the primary specs are leaked 2 weeks before the announcement of it, for instants: the D7000. So Nikon has stopped a lot of the leaks or there is a later announcement date.

      We’ll se what the future will bring 🙂

  • emmkayfive

    Two buttons next to the logo, fn, and flash
    Three buttons behind the shutter, record, exp. comp. and info?
    Two buttons next to the control wheel (rear)

    No buttons to the left side of the screen – as I can see from these pics. That’s a lot of buttons that need relocation.

  • WoutK89

    Will Nikon announce a microphone? (in the first picture above/ right from the 35/1.8G on the box).

    • Sek

      I was tryng to understand what that was… And I think you got it! I’m really waiting for the spec… Maybe this will be my first DSLR, and if it has FullHD video and the external microphone I’m gonna probably keep this camera for a lot of time for what my needs are!

  • ConcreteSnowman

    I might be crazy, but it looks like there’s a top LCD present. . 60D has got its hands full.

    • James

      I think that’s the shooting mode lever you see. The D3100 has one, so it makes sense that the D5100 will too.

  • FredDog

    OK now zoom in. Enhance! Bingo, we got ’em.

  • alvix

    ther’s a strange accessory above the lens (maybe the 35mm dx) ..a stereo microphone or kinda? ..

    • WoutK89

      I said the same, yet no-one noticed :-S Is there anyone else seeing a microphone?

  • lurdwig

    doesn’t look like it is printed on a box. paper looks too thin. perhaps it is a proof? or fake?

    • PHB

      Many printing processes for boxes involve printing on paper and then gluing the paper to the card stock. Nikon uses expensive inks like gold which might be challenging to print directly onto card.

      It is clearly a proof though.

  • anon

    It’s a misprinted proof. Look at the difference between the gloss and the color pictures. A mistake that big would be thrown away in the commercial printing industry. Someone snuck this out of the trashcan (hense the creases, folds and wrinkles). Love the comment FredDog, you’ve been watching too much primetime crime drama.

    • patrick


  • This is a proof you can see the printers alignment marks in the corner.

  • Elmo

    I recognize some of the photo’s on his flickr site it must be a dutch guy

  • Rob

    In case anyone can’t read it, I believe it says:

    Supplied accessories:
    Rechargable Li-On battery EN-EL14
    Battery charger MH-24
    USB cable
    Audio video cable
    Body cap
    Eyepiece Cap
    Accessory shoe cover
    Lens cap
    Rear lens cap
    Software CD-ROM
    User’s manual
    Quick start guide

    Important notice: Autofocus is available with
    AF-S lenses.

    • Rob

      Crap…someone already posted this on the flickr page in the comments section.

    • Nhoj

      “Important notice: Autofocus is available with
      AF-S lenses.”

      So this really means, no AF Motor? :'(

      • malez

        fine by me. without being a lens freak, i think af-s pretty much covers everything these days. if u really want retro. you’ll be better off with mf lens anyway.

        what i really want is a high res. screen with cls

        the screen, maybe, but i dont think cls is possible.
        i’ll just skip this and wait for d7000 price drop

  • It’s just round the corner!

  • Dan

    Do you think they will offer the D5100 as a Body only in addition to this kit?

    • WoutK89

      In Holland any Nikon camera has been offered like that.

  • Guy

    Given that the D5100 is coupled with the 18-105mm it only strengthens my belief that:

    D3100 = D3000 and D5000 replacement
    D5100 = D90 replacement
    D7000 = D300s replacement
    D800 = will replace both the D300s and D700 and will be a full frame camera with the same sensor as the D4

    There is going to be a shift in the lineup this year…

    • JED

      I don’t think there are any tricks going on here. Everything has been moved up a notch but I don’t believe the lineup has changed.

      D3100 = D3000 replacement
      D5100 = D5000 replacement
      D7000 = D90 replacement
      D400/D9000 = D300 replacement

      I really don’t think Nikon is going to leave the D7000 as the top of the DX line. It does not have the pro style control setup and without a D400 they would be conceding an entire market segment without a fight. To make a D400 superfluous they would have to make a high MP cheap FF camera with D300 build and control setup.. i.e. expensive.

    • I call no way.

    • James

      The D5100 won’t be a suitable replacement for the D90 unless it has a focusing motor, pentaprism viewfinder, top panel lcd, more external controls than the D5000, etc. So I think this is probably a direct D5000 replacement, but with a better lens. It may need that lens to differentiate it from the D3100 kit in any significant way.

    • Vandyu

      That seems reasonable to me.

  • tom

    ok so the Nikon 5100 Komt eraan! post was on April 1st, the photos were taken on April 1st. On the original D5000 box they do list the same accessories but also add specific part numbers, plus this looks more like the D90 kit box. Also on the D90 kit box, which includes the same lens, it says the sensors size and features which is the only thing we don’t get to see in these pics.
    Someone is having some fun, what a tease.

  • Pete V

    Is this fake and another April fools joke? Why is the bar code in focus (clearly standing out) while everything else is out of focus? On a side point, why can’t spy shots ever be in focus? You’d think that a spy shot of a camera would at least be taken by a decent camera? WTF?

    • El Aura

      The Spanish text on the right is clearly sharper than the UK text on the left, this is simply a low DOF shot with the box not parallel to the sensor. And the barcode numbers are more legible than the Spanish text because they are in larger type.

  • Just a thought: why not to return to good old tradition to release cameras with prime lenses? I mean, Nikon has 35/1.8 G with outstanding performance just for $200. This is a big deal in comparsion with 18-55 and 18-105 zooms which are waste of consumer’s pockets and developer’s resources. If someday newbie or hobbyist-neophite will decide to expand his lens park, he’ll do that only by the case of crappiness of those zooms. So why releasing them? Even the worst camera ever, the jump-da-fuck-up-glorious Zenit was come with good prime lens which usually had a lifetime four or five times longer than the camera. Cameras were made with low or no precision and were dying so fast that now come and search the living, working example. You’ll barely find a such one. But Helios 44 lenses are still on the run and they are good choice for $30. I just willing to say that if someone will buy his first DSLR, he’ll get not better quality with 18-55 and 18-105 garbage over quality point-and-shoot camera. Sure, he will be able to expand his park with some better zooms or primes, which p&s can not offer, but if so he’ll quickly put that lens on a shell for dust to cover it. Since that point, just imagine costs of developing and producing such a lens that on the market will become obsolete in 5-10 months.

    Personally, I’ve bought a 105 VR macro and going to buy that cheap 35/1.8 G, so what am I going to do with 18-55? Who will buy it? Or am I going to kill it with hammer just for fun? Wasteness and uselessness.

    • Kestutis

      Have you seen sharpness of 18-55 ? I always take 18-55 with my D300s to travel, because it is small, sharp, VR and cost just 30Eur used in mint cond. Some buyers just need universal lens for seldom use in summer travel or parties in backyard and it is fabulous lens for that matter. Pixel peeping with fixes is for another category.
      And in case of ZENIT, have you used one ? I use it hard and it is very robust and reliable camera. So, wake up, Nikon marketing knows and considers far more needs of consumers than one lonely person in rumor forum with his special needs.

      • Yes, I have a 18-55 VR, use it very extensively and do not consider it to be any sharp. Only useful aperture is f5.6. The only good thing i’ve noticed is how 18-55 keeps against strong back light at 55 mm. It flares alot on the wide range and the maximum sharpness can be reached at 24-35 mm range. That is not the result I am aiming for.

        Yes, I had two Zenits: B and ET. The ‘B’ model died at the very first film (!) when the shutter went blocked and misaligned and it was impossible to return it at the same position. I screwed out lens and threw out camera body in the recycle bin at the railroad station. It truly deserved such agressive reaction. The ‘ET’ model had almost dead selenium meter and it shutter was leaking lot of light at 1/250 and 1/500. Don’t mind that I’m whining. No. If you ask of what I love, please, read the text below.

        The most durable camera I’ve used was my beloved all-plastic Canon EOS 300. It was so tough that I’ve bought one more and EOS 3000n. This Canon was abused by severe frost, heavy rain, awfully hot sun, it fell and roll down on the floor of riding at high speed bus and there were no situation on which camera showed some weakness. IT JUST NEVER FAILED.

      • Oh, and by the way, 18-55 VR tends to freeze at -5°C and lower temperature. Transfocator becomes so tight that one will fear to not to break internals.

        • Kestutis

          You have bad luck in your life :)))))) Use my Zenit 12XP heavy and it is OK, use 18-55 in travel and sharpness is high ( do not compare it to fix or 24-70 and etc.) try Canon crap kit lenses and then talk, 18-55 have crapy mechanics, but for the price… it is best to start DSLR photography with decent results, thats the market where entry level is targeted to and it works. Compare oranges to oranges and not oranges with apples just because both are round…

          • Okay, I’ve got your points. You have your truth and it is valid as looking from the angle of lightweight and travelling. I haven’t tried any version of Canon EF-S 18-55, so can’t say a word about them but i had two EF 28-80 on film cameras (which is the same in terms of angle of view). They were awful. If one can show the lens for SLR system that could be even worse, please wake me up. When I first looked at the pictures which I took with Nikon’s 18-55 VR, I fall in good mood, because expectations were much lower, remembering how freaking bad were two kit lens for EOS 300. In that case I can agree with you, in the ‘worst from the worst’ league 18-55 VR truly shines. But not that brightly, if one will mention the price tag of 35/1.8 G. Note also, that I didn’t compare starter kits with expensive constant f2.8 zooms like 17-55 or even 24-70 mentioned by you. 35 mm DX-prime IS in the league with 18-55 and 18-105 and IS better than both, excluding someone’s needs of variable focal length. If one wants to purchase DSLR to exceed his vision, take some experience and take good photographs itself, then he needs prime lens. If one wants to shoot drunk faces of his friends on the party at backyard, then he needs a p&s.

            During one year of using 18-55 VR i found that this lens is not encouraging item. I appreciate it only in macro mode at 55 mm, when you can get very close to your object. The only useful aperture is f5.6. Other settings are worse. Maybe I can live till f7.1, but road is closed when you want to go forward or backward (at focal lengths <55). Portrait? Bad choice. You simply can't control your bokeh. Landscape? Bad choice. Diffraction is here and you are not able to produce crisp images. All-around shooting? Depends on your needs and what you consider to be good.

    • I can only assume they sell dodgy kit zooms so they can extract more money from punters once they find out how limiting f/5.6 is at the long end . Also bear in mind with consumers having a fixed prime lens come with the camera might seem a bit anachronistic these days…

      Almost a bit baffling why they don’t just throw in 50 f/1.8’s with the FX bodies seeing as they are so cheap relative to the camera body come to think of it…

      @Kestutis – I did use the 18-55mm for quite a while on a D200 , quite capable of taking excellent pictures as is any lens – I think it’s pretty decent for a kit lens mostly.

      • Kestutis

        Thanks, thats what I am trying to say, 18-55 is very decent compared to competition, convenience and the price. I use it though I have 85fix, 35fix and 24-70, but in travel always use 18-55 for travel moments and video.

        • Vandyu

          I’d like to see Nikon revamp the 18-70 and add VR with a price around $350-400. Of course, that would undercut the 16-85, but that lens is over priced, IMO.

          • Soren

            I would like to see a new 18-70 mm too. Nikon must have learned something from the former 18-70 and from the current 16-85.
            I would though prefere it to maintain the 16 mm in the low end. Something like 16-75 at a reasonable price would be great.

          • +1 on a AF-S DX 16-70 f/4 VRII .Would pay about £500 for it if built properly.

    • James

      The main reason camera manufactures bundle cheap midrange zooms instead of primes is too keep third party manufactures out of that segment. As you’ll recall, resellers used to bundle manufacturer’s bodies with third-party zooms. Sigma sold a lot of lenses that way, for a while.

      • Maybe I am somewhat naive to think that if third-party manufacturers will enter the cheapo-prime room, first-party manufacturers would be forced to re-look their views? 🙂

      • WoutK89

        Media Markt in Holland still sells Nikon gear and Canon gear with Tamron and Sigma superzooms. Advertized as Nikon Dxxxx + 18-200mm, and in the small print/photo is only noticeable its not Nikon’s own 18-200

  • Bear

    Great! Will it come with a DX wide angle prime? 🙂

  • harvey

    the (new?) swivel LCD should be one of the biggest features of 5100
    why it is not even shown on the box?

    happy April Fools Day!

    • Sek

      You can see it clearly in the 4th picture! There’s only one fool it seems…

    • Sek

      You can see it clearly in the upper part of the 4th picture! There’s only one fool it seems…

  • @Admin: I find it a bit strange that, so close to launch (if 4th or 7th), we still don’t have the spec list, this is likely the first time this happens since the launch of the D3 (Aug 2007), which was kept in good secrecy until day of announcement.

    • broxibear

      Hi rhlpetrus,
      I think this is because of the events in Japan.
      Manufacturers themselves will “leak” certain information to build up press and excitement about an approaching release, but there’s little happening on that front because of the earthquake…which is perfectly understandable.
      The same thing is happening with Canon, they’re all waiting for the Mark III and haven’t heard anything new.

    • I will try to do a recap of the D5100 specs tomorrow.

  • bosbos

    can anyone tell me why is there a picture of a flash beside the lens in the second picture?

    • broxibear

      Hi bosbos,
      I wondered that, I reckon it’s just to do with Nikon encouraging owners to buy a SB-700 instead of just using their pop up ?

  • Phil

    I hope it doesn’t come in the ‘States with the 18-105. I’ve read that lens is not that great. Apparently the 18-55 is a sharper lens.

    I find these photos suspect. Why would the person shooting them not get the most obvious information off this sheet, mainly the body specs and the swivel screen. I call this bogus.

    • Merv

      The D3100 right now can be bought without any lenses; stores where I live usually offer a variety of kit zooms to go with a dSLR you purchase.

      The person shooting them could have used a camera phone

      • WoutK89

        He did, EXIF says HTC (Phone brand)

    • bosbos

      Actually I find the 18-105 very sharp and one of the best DX lenses. I based my opinion on resolution results. The person who took the pictures is probably a worker on the production line of the boxes and is using his cell phone camera.

  • JohnGG

    Check the first picture. The folding of the box is interrupted on the body of the camera. No buckling there… It’s a fake…

  • fushandsnap

    Lol, the persepctives are wrong, the shadows weird, a flash gun included, 5100 kitted with 18-105 VR and posted 1st of April. Come on guys…….lol

  • So another DX body drops while the D700 is almost 3 years old. I feel sorry for everyone in Japan, but for photographers things are a real mess, and it isn’t just Nikon shooters that are feeling this. There are auto workers in the US that are laid off because of this.

    • WoutK89

      Auto workers in the US are being laid off because Nikon can’t manufacture your dream camera?

  • Anyone know if there is an embargo set until tomorrow?

  • K

    is it being announced tomorrow? april 4th

  • I think they are just guessing (or copy&paste from here), I doubt Nikon will send info in advance to this site.

  • Guys, you can move the discussion of Ron Scubadiver’s images to his blog – this is why he has it online.

  • victorian squid

    The reason that this is very likely not faked is it’s really easy to tell this is a first print run. Nobody is going to have the “trimmings” that come off of the package in order to fake it – this is stuff that the end consumer never sees, and only people in the print business would be aware of.

    There are 2 things that can’t be faked by anybody without access to very expensive multi color lithography (why bother?). 1) is the gold spot color. It’s impossible to print metallic inks inexpensively. 2) the horribly out of register varnish spots. Those “shadows” appear on both the gold and black areas meant to highlight the products. Clear gloss inks again are pretty hard to fake. In #3 you can see the “half camera” varnish slipped into the gold areaThis is 6 color lithography.

    This is obviously a cast off of which there are usually hundreds when ramping up for a large printing job. Somebody just snagged some pre-proof sheets.

  • SV

    April 4 no announcement yet.

    • tonight, US Eastern time – see my latest posts

  • Back to top