Nikon D3200 coming in April with a 24MP sensor and many new features

Nikon will soon announce the D3200 DSLR camera which will replace the current D3100 ($549). The expected specs are:

  • 24 MP sensor
  • 11 AF points
  • 4 fps
  • ISO range: 100-6400, with hi-ISO of 12800
  • Improved video functionality
  • The Nikon D3200 will have some kind of a Wi-Fi connection that is supposed to offer few very interesting new features
  • Announcement in April, 2012

Those specs basically confirmed my initial D3200 report from last month.

In addition to the D4 and D800, Nikon is expected to announce 3 more DSLR cameras in 2012. I understand that most of you are interested in the D300s replacement - at that point I do not have any reliable information worth sharing. I think it's safe to assume that the D400 (or whatever the name might be) will have a 24MP DX-format sensor. There is also a possibility for two different models - one with an anti-aliasing (AA) filter and one without (just like the D800/D800E).

I am still not sure if some of the expected Nikkor lenses (18-300mm f/3.5-5.6, 16-85mm f/4 and the full frame 28mm f/1.8) will be announced together with the D3200 next month.

Stay tuned for more details.

This entry was posted in Nikon D3200, Nikon D400. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

    lenses UPGRADE too, please (btw: yesterday I had a short chance to use the 105 mm f/2,0 DC – ooooh, that´s smthg worth thinking of imho) / again: lenses UPGRADE 🙂


    • CRB

      Thats the big problem with these cameras…i see no point in a small camera, if you dont have small fast lenses to go along…..NIKON, GIVE US that 35mm EQ DX lens……PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • MJr

        +1000 !

        Nikkor AF-S 24mm F/2.0 DX
        Nikkor AF-S 16mm F/2.8 DX

        With above average built please.

        • MJr

          *Make that 23mm.

          • Rob

            They’d still call it 24mm, since they “round.” They don’t call the 70-200mm a 72-186mm (or whatever it actually is).

            • Yusuf


    • NG42

      Is there any chance this camera will have the video capabilities of the D800- most importantly full manual control? That would be awesome.

      • derWalter

        they will cap it on the software side…

        • Anon

          Typical Nikon product differentiation strategy.

    • Nikon

      Oh, okay. I’ll get right on it.

  • Miha

    As a D5100 user I can say that 16MP is enough for me (and should be enough for most of photographers), only thing that Nikon should consider when deciding about new sensors should be usable hig ISO.

    And second thing Nikon please do not make 5200 camera smaller than 5100.

    It is almost impossible to hold D5100 with 18/105 or bigger lens if you are a men.

    • Cobby

      I wish Nikon would stop playing this megapixel game on an entry level camera and produce a camera that feels great in the hands and controls noise very well.

      • NG42

        “I wish Nikon would stop playing this megapixel game on an entry level camera”

        This is the best available sensor on the market. It’s in Sony’s top of the line A77. That Nikon will be putting this in a camera that costs less than $600 is awesome news!

        • Daryl

          +1 NG42

          Saying I don’t want more megapixels is like saying I don’t want more horespower at zero additional cost in fuel or initial price. Nikon is moving the IQ forward along with the megapixels, what is there not to like?

          • Gideon D

            +1 One of the biggest disappointments for me with the D3000 and even the D3100 was the inferior sensors to their big brothers, especially when it comes to Dynamic range. If this has (arguably) the best APS-C sensor yet, it could be the pocket dynamo I’ve been waiting for.

          • agniva_b

            surely,nikon wont be using its state-of-the-art noise cancellation and anti-aliasing features on an entry level model.and so,this quantum leap in terms of mp doesnt make a lot of sense.instead of a 24mp sensor,a 16mp (or the same) sensor with anti-glare coatings,gapless micro-lenses and likewise would’ve helped nikon’s if they trying to put it as a 5d mark III killer?? hell with it..

    • Gustavo

      Funny you should say that. I have no issues holding my D3100 + 300 F4 combo – actually, I really wish they keep the D3200 as small as the current D3100.

    • Shawn


      I am also a D5100 user. I have small hands and I still am not thrilled with the size of the D5100. I hope future models are at least the same size if not a little taller.

      I’m not really sure why Nikon thinks the target market of the D3200 is going to want 24 MPX. There are plenty of people in the D7000 target market who think the thing is defective because they can’t even hold 16 MPX steady enough.

      Might make a decent enough backup for those of us not made of money though, too bad they probably won’t sell it kit-less.

      • Since for the most part, this segment is geared towards women (specifically Japanese ones at that) it makes sense that the 3xxx and 5xxx series is going to be that small. It has always been assumed men will opt for the bigger D7xxx and above models.

        • derWalter

          u dont sound like someone who likes equality!

          • Jabs

            There is a big difference between Equality and Reality.

            Men and women are indeed different in size, tastes, thrusts and such things – GET over it, will ya.

            How many men want a ‘cute’ little purple camera, for example???

            See how Reality works -vs- silly claims!

            Celebrate our differences instead of falsely trying to make us one generic human!

            Femininity and Masculinity are two differing ways given to us by God at birth, so get real.

  • R!

    A nex 7/A77 sensor in a 500/600$…….?
    I want one,or two……………….!!

  • R!

    Bring on the D5200 D8000 & D400 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!§§

  • Josh

    Argh!!!! I just decided on upgrading to the D7000 (from a D100 I admit with embarrassment) !

    How long will I have to wait until the D7100 / D8000 upgrade gets here?

    24 megapixels in a d7000 body would be perfect 🙂

    Guess it’s back to waiting…

    • The Fantastic G

      Well, I dont know about you but 16MP has been treating me just fine.

      • Porky

        Yup, 16MP is the sweet spot for me also. No need to upgrade my D7000.

        • Che Ibarra

          I agree 16MP is the sweet spot….for months I was waiting on the announcement of the D800 to upgrade to FX…when it was announced at 36MP, Nikon forced my hand ordered the D4 and plan to sell the D7K.

          • Not my name

            Ah I remember when 12mpx was the sweet spot. Those were the days…

            • My name is the same.

              Ah I remember the days when 10mpx was the sweet spot. They just don’t make them like they used to…

            • iamlucky13

              I’m still shooting at 6 MP and seldom finding it a problem, since I’m usually not doing poster prints. Even if I were, I can still print 20″ x 30″ at 100 dpi, which looks fine as long as I’m not sticking my face right up against the print.

              I’d be happy to have a 12 MP camera, but beyond that point, I personally prefer improvements in high ISO performance over resolution.

              Of course, the upgrade plan is to get a D7000. 16 MP should work just as well for me as 12 MP. If the D7100 comes out before I’ve saved enough for my upgrade, and it has the same 24 MP sensor, then I may actually stick with the 16 MP camera, even if ISO performance is the same, because presumably at least, that will leave me a couple hundred dollars extra to save for a 300mm F/4.

              On another tangent, however, just wait to see future D3200 owners sharing their photos on tablets…”Sorry it’s taking so long. It wasn’t this slow with my old camera.”

            • ashwins

              Hey iamlucky13,

              Get a second hand D700 off on ebay and you’ll have those 12 MP and fabulous high ISO performance! There’s more and more D700 bodies floating and the price is going down…

            • Jabs


              That’s the problem with digital cameras and technology. By the time you save up for your released dream camera, it gets replaced and is now obsolete – now forcing you to save more money and then the same happens when its replacement is updated.

              Oh well, back to the drawing board of desires unmet – lol.

              Technology marches forward quicker than many can keep up too.

              Where’s my F5?

              Maybe an F7 will be here before I finally buy one – arrrrghh – HELP!!!

          • Denis

            You can be congratulated with all around inferior camera (with higher fps and slightly faster AF though) 😉

      • Simon

        I upgraded (just under a year ago) to a d7000 from a d50 (which I still have and like to use at times). 16mp is just fine for me and I am not going to worry about a megapixel size difference when the new version arrives. Though I imagine I would be interested in seeing what the shooting fps will be.

    • Merco

      Guys really, actualli 10mpx on my D3000 is enough for me.

      I wish they would make some good low light DX sensor instead of pumping up mpx

      • Porky

        Indeed, whilst I am happy with my D7K at 16MP, I would use a 10 or 12MP DX camera without concerns. Low light (ie high ISO) performance is of more concern to me than high megapixels. I would guess that is true for the majority of people reading this site. I wonder how many people would buy an 8MP DX body with the same high ISO performance as a D4. I’d certainly be tempted.

        • Sports

          Me, me, me.
          Well, it would have to shoot at least 8 fps and have good auto-focus, but then, THAT would be my new baby.

        • Jabs

          The problem today is perception by BUYERS!

          Imagine trying to tell people as a salesperson about how they need to upgrade their camera when their current Coolpix camera (for example Nikon L24 = 16 megs at less than $100 US retail), now at 16 megapixels has higher megapixels than the more expensive and larger 14 megapixel D3100.

          Upgrade to what – as they look at you funny or weird!

          Therefore as the lower end cameras and smartphones go up in megapixels, there is a need for DSLR’s to increase their resolution as consumers don’t want to be told about sensor size, FX, DX, CX formats and such. Megapixels for a certain cost, the look and features included sell to them often.

          You and I know that the sensor size and format makes a real difference but many know one thing – megapixels mainly. Bigger = better to many or more value for your dollar. Same in flat screen TV’s and such. Some awful 50 inch LCD televisions sell better than 36 inch HD 120hz LED ones, because size DOES matter to many – lol.

          It often is about the bragging rights among friends that drive sales of mediocre gear or cause people to shun better lower specced or sized gear.

          That is the perception Nikon is dealing with as digital cameras become a commodity due to their success and sales numbers.


    • I have a d7000 and i really like it, i prefer the handling of my d200 which is easier to hold and has better functionality.

      v interested in 16-85 f4. i expect it will be $1000+ compared to current list of $400?

  • Mike M

    I have to wonder, is Nikon releasing the highest volume potential version first to give them time to bin out the best sensors for a D400? Semi conductors despite tight tolerances have a wide range of performance from the best examples to the worst, if they binned for best light sensitivity performance they could use one sensor made in huge quantities to satisfy a much higher performance level in the top end camera. Downsampling a 24 megapixel camera that performs well to say, 12, would still give pretty good low light results, effectively giving you 2 cameras in one. The only other issue would be FPS, but Sony has already showed that 24 megapixels can be moved at more than sufficient speed, and there are plenty of 35mm sized cameras with a non-fixed mirror that have gone even faster than the fastest digitals so far, with a smaller APS-C mirror box 9 or 10 FPS wouldn’t be out of the question if they wanted to do it. I think the 7D needs an answer, I’m hoping Nikon will bring one.

    • PHB

      That sounds right to me.

      The ISO whiners are definitely in a minority of camera buyers. This camera would have the ISO rating of the D3 and the resolution of the D3x. So the new camera would outperform both of the flagships of three years ago at the same time.

      A D400 with this spec set would be completely acceptable to pretty much every potential buyer. So I doubt that the decision to launch the D3200 first would be binning. They could launch the D400 first, then the D3200 and then do a D400s. I suspect that the real cause is that their whole production schedule is still out of whack following the two disasters last year.

      I am really not in the market for a D3200, I use the features on my D300 and I have a V1 for portability so any upgrade would be to a D400 or D800, most likely a D800 as even though there are advantages to both crop and full sensors, the V1 beats a DX sensor in cases where a crop sensor is an advantage and the FX beats the V1 when it isn’t. But I can see it being very attractive for the target audience.

      • ACon

        The ISO sensitivity of the D3 and the resolution of the D3X??? I think you need to look at the D800.

      • Mike M

        That’s why they’d want to launch a D3200 first, to bin sensors for highest performance you have to make a LOT of sensors to choose the best ones out of. If you want to build up enough stock of sensors to have a reasonable launch of D400s you have to make a lot of sensors that can go into D3200s in the meantime, so launching it first gives them a place to put and make money from all the “not quite as good” sensors that won’t go in a D400.

        As for the ISO vs resolution, frankly the D800 is nearing the ISO of the D3S interpolated down from what I’ve seen test wise and has a resolution that is just without a parallel since it’s never been done. Frankly I don’t think the D800 has a low FPS because 36mpix was too much data, I think it has a low frame rate so it doesn’t cut into the D4.

      • Jabs


        Via perception ONLY, the 24meg D3200 would be above a D3 and equal a D3X in perceived resolution numbers. People now buy by megapixel count often.

        So far Nikon has been releasing the lower end bodies first at times to test the waters of new technology (D7000 for example before D4 and D800), then the higher specced ones later but don’t know what they will do next.

        D3100 is one of their best sellers too, but their Coolpix lineup just went to 16megs, so the D3100 looks dated specs-wise to potential BUYERS or comparison shoppers facing lots of choices!

        I expect next a D5200, D7100, then later a D400 Pro DX body after they release some Pro DX optics finally, maybe September/October in time for the holiday rush in sales.

        Maybe features, additional functions and new form factors will now differentiate Nikon’s DX cameras more so than resolution, as in the past.

  • Great post with lots of really good information!

  • Sander

    I hope that the upgraded video mode includes 720p 50/60fps.. 🙂

    • Anon

      Very unlikely, especially because it’s an entry level and it’s Nikon.

  • Sean

    i don’t know why…. this is just ODD to me. honestly, i really don’t know why. So suddenly Nikon decides to bring their mp to another level? even with camera like D3200? there’s gotta be a reason, cuz for years canon seems to be the one that cares more about the customer’s need, nikon just plays their own game, not saying they don’t care about the customer’s opinion, but it seems more like they got their very own plan, and this D3200……. really bothers me, i don’t see what game nikon is playing now.

    • Che Ibarra

      Why would it bother you? I would worry about where my son is paying attention in math class, or maybe slightly be concerned in the increase of gas prices……maaaayyybbeee even Iran’s nuclear aspirations….but why would a 24mp camera from Nikon that you probably aren’t buying disconcert you at all? imjustsaying

      • Sean

        well the funny thing is, i’m just talking about the camera, and it’s not gona be a world-wide problem. Thank you. and i’m pretty sure there are things in your life bother you for no reason as well. imjustsaying.

        • Toecutter

          Well said

      • musicmax

        Israel has 300 nukes and just kicked the UN Human Rights Council out of their country. Why shouldn’t any sovereign nation be able to develop their own military capabilities when they’re surrounded by hostile states (and about 49 US bases)?

        • Val Thor

          +1000 – Yes, Israel is the real terrorist nation.

  • MJr

    So a swivel screen is still exclusive to the 5K series then ?

    • Gpereir4

      I hope so. I think there is a tradeoff between having a swivel screen and changes in build quality/body design/price that i don’t care for in the least.

  • twoomy

    24mp is something I would expect from a D400-type camera, but wow. I think they’re trying to stand out as something more serious and high-res than mirrorless systems like m43 and NEX. If I can buy a tiny camera that does a decent 16mp, why buy a larger dSLR? Because it does *24 mp*. For better or for worse, I think that’s the logic.

  • Sebastian

    of course they were going to use the 24 MP sensor. it’s simply the latest sensor they developed with Sony. I’d say we’ll also see it in the next couple of DX cameras, which may include a D400.
    I’d say there will also be a D4x with the D800 sensor, but parallel processing, thus faster fps.
    as for a “low-end” FX: doesn’t the D700 do that job quite nicely for now?

    • twoomy

      The D700 does do that job quite nicely now, but it has no movie mode. It’s the last Nikon to not have it! Not that that means much to still photographers, but a new low-end FX would probably have a D4 sensor, movie mode, and dumbed down a bit from the D4. I bet they release this a year after the D4, similar to how they handled the D3->D700 releases.

    • GeoffK

      I dont want to spend money on old tech. If I am buying new, I want the newest tech in my camera. While the D700 is a great camera it does not have as many MP as I want and has older tech in it. I’ll pass on a D700 at any price short of insanity.

      • catinhat

        This is personal preference of course, but IMO not always a wise move. D7000 came with a newer AF system and yet the one D300 has is much more reliable. Sometimes it’s better not to fix what ain’t broken.

        • Amen-brother…auto-focus…on…d7k…is…abit…of…a…joke

          • Shawn

            That’s kind of disappointing to hear as I was hoping to have a D7000 or D7100 one day.

            I have a D5100 and I think the autofocus system is pretty good (same as D90), and I personally think that I push it to its limits: shooting action in low light (my 2 year old and her friends in our dim homes at all times of day/night using the 35 1.8). It took me a month or two to get used to how the AF system handles compared to my previous Nikon.

            I get plenty of misses, but I’m not sure that I could expect more in such low light that close to wide open. I get enough winners to know my technique is sound. I attribute the failures to “the nature of the beast”.

            I’d like to see if I can get my hands on a D300 and give it a try and see if there is a difference.

  • Gab

    4 fps makes no sense, unless they’ll ditch the d5100 forever.

  • mc

    I’d prefer they pay attention to that rocker panel placement!!!

    Having owned, and used the 3100 now for a few thousand shots, I must say, that the body is a touch too small for us gorilla-handed shooters. My only real complaint was the placement of the rocker panel. It changes settings, especially the AF point, causing my focus points to shift to the right. While shooting high-speed moving subjects, I usually don’t notice the issue till 3-4 shots after it moves.

    I’ve since purchased a $25 aftermarket grip, that makes the camera taller, and moves the battery to the bottom compartment. While certainly not optimum, it moves me away from that rocker panel, and makes the normal grip more usable. I don’t really use it for portrait. situations…

    Also, I have a question. Does this mean that Nikon think that small hands need small-cheap-basement-model cameras, and that giant-club-handed shooters need top of the line, normal sized bodies?

  • D400 will be FX, simply can’t be DX anymore, there is no market room for it squished between d7000 and d800, just think.

    • My thoughts exactly!

    • Che Ibarra

      Who’s to say there will be a D400?? Heck Nikon surprised everyone with the D3200….even admin was clueless. If there is a D400 it will most certainly be DX….and that’s pretty much 99% certainty bc I toured the Nikon factory just like you.

      • Gpereir4

        Admin wasn’t exactly clueless. This body was rumored a few months back, 24mp sensor and all. Feb 5th to be exact.

        • that’s correct, as we get closer to the announcement date, the information becomes more accurate

      • btdown

        D400 = D700s?

        iso = d800
        6fps (8fps w/ grip)
        no video

        This is winner…ALL DAY!

        • ashtwins

          Sorry btdown, but “no video” will never happen… …anymore!

        • Sports

          The specs you describe are between D800 and D4, so at 2000$, it could easily take away too much sales from the more expensive models. Nikon won’t have that.
          For Nikon to release a 1800-2000$ camera, it would have to be “worse” than D800 and D4 in some way. I see 3 ways of making such a camera now, positioned below their two great money making stars:
          1) slow & low MP FX = 16 MP at 4 fps
          2) DX sensor
          3) plastic body FX = 24 MP
          I don’t know which of the three options Nikon prefer to make, but what I need is high fps, so I’ll be hoping for the DX option.
          Ok, you could also wait 2 year. THEN, you can probably expect your great D700 successor.

          • John

            It won’t be FX if it even happens. It’ll be DX flagship with high ISO and probably 16mp, unless Nikon has a new 18mp sensor up their sleeve, which would blow me away.

    • TnT

      no room between d7000 and d800….are you kidding me? D7000 is light years away from the d300s! Doesn’t even come close other than mp count.

      • Jetfire

        “D7000 is light years away from the d300s!”
        What planet are you on. The problem is the D7000 is better in some areas than the D300s and where is falls short it’s not much. That’s why it’s one of the best bangs for the buck.

      • Spock

        TNT……have you used or even seen a D7000 …..? it smokes the d300s on almost every aspect.Instantly made the 300s obsolete when it came out.

        Jetfire is right.

      • ashwins

        Hi TnT, as a Nikon D7000 user (after making lots of research before upgrading from D5000) I can say that D7000 is far ahead of D300s in many ways. Where it really makes a difference is high ISO performance. At ISO3200 D7000 has much less noise than D300s and the difference is even bigger if you scale down the image from 16 MP to 12MP of a D300s.

        I personally feel that Nikon let everybody down with the average sensor of D300s.

  • Considering that d3200 will have a 24MP DX sensor does it still make sense the rumor the sensor of the new D400 will also be a 24MP DX? For me it’s another sign that the D400 might have a FX sensor.

    • Herege

      My opinion too, D400 might have a FX sensor.

      • Herege

        To fill the gap between D7000/8000 and D800

        • Exactly! Either that or a sub D800 model (which I doubt)

  • Sleeper

    Oh my dear FUCKING GOD.

    Wtf is this some kind of joke?

    @24mpx, the diffraction limitation kicks in so early it’s totally pointless to have that resolution. Unless you don’t shoot anything past f/5.6 or something (lol you srs?…)

    And lol @ nubs who’s getting excited. The 24mpx is just going to slow down your PP, eat up your storage and slow down the FPS + fill up the buffer for little to no noticeable gain in resolution.

    Seriously, been there, done that with Canon 7D. Not even remotely fking interested. Marketing gimmick bs at best.

    • D700guy

      I agree

    • R!

      The A77 is 24 mpx and more than10 FPS and better image quality than 16mpx DX sensor that is almost 2 yrs old now; what are you talking about!??????????

      • Jabs

        Sony A77 has 12 bit output, a 24 megapixel sensor and an analog pipeline.

        D7000 has 16 megapixels, 14 bit output plus an analog output in Expeed 2.

        New camera would have 24 megapixels, DIGITAL Expeed 3 and 14bit output thus much better than the awful A77 which gets the bragging rights in ‘neo-Tech’ but loses the image crown to the D7000.

        Look here and learn why Sony cameras are not great:

        Scroll down to Sony bodies, click on link and learn why perhaps!

        12 bit sucks!

  • Nothing embarrassing about sweating your assets to get the most value for money and then upgrading when you can actually see some real benefit.

  • nuno santacana

    Nikon (and Canon) are playing with us. They just increase the megapixel count in order to compromise image quality.

    Nowadays is easy to get cheap sensors with D3s quality, but which amateur or prosumer would be buying new cameras after that?

    As for pros it goes the same way. D4 is D3ss. There was more improvement from D3 –> D3s than D3s –>D4.

    Shame on every brand.

    • Jetfire

      “Nowadays is easy to get cheap sensors with D3s quality, but which amateur or prosumer would be buying new cameras after that?”

      Not in an FX size sensor. Sensor prices a mainly due to the number of pieces they can get out of a piece of silicon. Second is complexity.

    • Jabs


      Sorry but you are totally wrong.

      D3 to D3S was a sensor change and the adding of Video!

      D3S to D4 is a whole rethinking of the Nikon Pro body and the D4 can do in both stills and Video what no other camera can do on the Market – not even the D800.

      The LOOK of the D Series has changed little over the years, but the differences between a D3S and a D4 is like night and day in technology.

      Almost nothing is similar or a carryover in the D4 from either the D3, D3S or the D700.

      Names the same but items are totally different including the AF module.

      Perhaps you read a little more and hone your understanding of technology disguised by a clever Manufacturer to NOT upset their loyal buyers and users or create technological SHOCK to them from the myriad of advances.

      Anyone saying that a D4 is similar to any D3 Series, including the vaunted D3X, is technically naive and basically uninformed or clueless.

      They basically have nothing in common except the NIKON name – heck, even the red stripe is different (lol).

      Tell me a camera that can hook up to a smartphone with a browser, an iPad, any Tablet computer, any computer (portable and desktop) and then do that wirelessly and via Ethernet plus act as a Server because the D4 does have a Server built-in!!! Try running your D3 Series or D800 camera with the new wireless unit then!!!

      Show me a DSLR from any manufacturer that can output clean HDMI digital output at Broadcast resolutions without overlays?

      Show me any camera that has THREE formats – FX, DX and CX – plus can shoot HD Video in all three plus deliver video and stills at the same time in CX mode?

      Have you checked out the new Wireless controller that is exclusive to the D4?

      There is no way that I would choose a D3S over a D4 – maybe a D3X over it (tough choice too for Studio use), but not happening with a D3S, as nobody makes a camera anything like this new D4. The D800 is great and a different Product aimed at a different Market, but it is my intention to buy a D4 as soon as the dust settles and then also get a D800.

      Reality pal!

      • nuno santacana

        I care about image quality, and I insist the D4 is only a minor improvement over D3s. You just have to compare the samples that are around.

        I don’t care if D4 has a complete new technology if it produces only slighly better results.

        • Jabs

          To those with a discerning photographic eye, the D4 is light years ahead of the D3S in stills and no contest in Video or functionality.

          Being able to shoot at minus 2 EV (-2 EV) is nothing to sneeze at unless you don’t use cameras. AF with F8 and below lenses is also too much of an advantage plus better tonality is cream on top of cream while many are stuck in the past.

          Enjoy yourself while others move on as that is your choice!

          Love D3S but would not buy one over a D4 = my reality!

          Dynamic range and saturation levels are much better in a D4 than a D3S and noticeable too.

          • nuno santacana


            I appreciate your detailed information.

            I am not saying D4 is worst than D3s (of course I also would buy D4 over D3s). I’m saying D4 is only a bit better in image quality (I know it’s much better in video).

            The improvement has nothing to do with the revolution we saw from D2 to D3 (or even D3 to D3s in high ISO performance).

            I’m sure I’m not the only one who was expecting a D4 with an improvement of at least 2-stops in High ISO performance over D3s.

            By the way, D7000 has better dinamic range than D4…

            And talking about discerning photographic eyes, I think I also have got one (my photos appear in NatGeo, Geo, and many other big magazines with good photographic criteria).


    fck it. give me d700 sensor and functionalities with d800 body and video capabilities.

  • Steve Jones

    Is everyone missing the point here, I hear complaining about high MP. Nikon is proving (with the D800) that they can deliver higher MP cameras with great results, why is this a problem, I am happy they can do it, maybe they didn’t get involved in the MP race before because they didn’t want inferior cameras with high MP,
    We now have 36MP with ISO higher than any decent 35mm slide film every produced, and yet people complain.

    • RIK


    • Anonymous

      some just love to complain here… no matter what Nikon (or for that matter Canon, Sony, Oly etc etc) does, not everyone will be happy. So, those crybabies will moan and groan and bitch.

    • Marc W.

      What I’m complaining about is the lack of low ISO (slow) color negative film.

      • Jabs

        @Marc W

        LOL – yeah, I feel ya – get some ISO 25 Kodak Ektar Pro color print film (discontinued too, years ago) or some Fuji Reala color pint film and then TechPan B+W film and be happy.

        Where’s my Kodachrome ISO 25 slide film?

        Can we all go back in time and bring back the F3HP with that great MD-4 and MN-2 Ni-Cads to give us a great camera with removable heads, lots of focusing screens, a smaller body and reasonable BELOW $1,000 US dollar prices for camera and MD plus high speed batteries?

        8 fps too and a small LCD in the viewfinder to see your info while squinting with one eye – lol.

        Oh yeah – LOL.

        Who needs $6K or $8K bodies today when we had Fuji Velvia 50D Pro or 64T Pro in 36 exposure and real ‘manly metal gear’ bodies and lenses plus 250 exposure multi-exposure backs that took bulk film and were more expensive than the camera itself?

        Yeah right – hmmmm!

        Where’s my F3T or F3P – I feel like bashing someone in da head with it – serves them right fer looking at me funny likes dey was gonna rip me off – LOL.

        NikonHumorRumors is da place to be terday, right!

  • GaiaOverAll

    … next sensor Fx: 50Mpx.

  • Muhd Ridhwan

    I want a focus motor on this heaven

  • joe b low

    First nikon kills canon with the D4 and D800 vs 1DX/5DMK3, and now they’re going to own the amateur market aswell. Nikon is really on top of their game right now. Awesome.

  • sgts

    There’s googleable articles on d200 diffraction limits posted by the usual suspects – I really really don’t know what motivates people to come on here crying about it. Nobody is really that interested in a bunch of people that shoot pictures of sunsets and think they know more than Nikon/Sony sensor engineers – people that have years of experience in their field. It’s stunning how many nyquist limit bores populate this site. Away and chase some kids from your respective lawns people and let us enjoy the amazing new Nikon cameras.

  • With all these big sensors a lot of people are going to be buying new computers.

    I wonder if the D700 will become the poor man’s sports camera because with a grip it can shoot fast.

    • btdown

      Its already my sports camera….and I bet a lot of others as well..for me it has the highest utility value. I dont need video..but even if I did, I would buy a REAL video camera. The d700 did/does everything well, not like the one-trick d800…it just needs a mp/iso bump and its GOOD to GO out the door..and will sell (again) like crazy.

  • Catastrophile

    if true, this seems to suggest there won’t be a D400, or what?
    if true also, this will make D7000 owners feel p!ssed off!

    • Srini

      An entry level full frame or even a D800 should be the logical upgrade for D7000 owners. I know the price would be pretty steeper on D800 upgrade than a potential entry level full frame; but it is worth it.

    • Chase

      D7000 owners need not upgrade unless they have already purchased a lineup of good lense 24-70 2.8, 70-200 os/vr 2.8, and a handfull of fast primes. Its silly that some not all decide everytime their camera gets “outdated” that they need to upgrade but they still own sub-par entry level lenses.

  • David

    6.3 earthquake near Sendai yesterday. Apparently little damage, although a pretty strong quake.

  • Jabs

    A Sign of the FUTURE or what?

    Nikon offers cashback on D3100, D5100 and D7000 in the UK and Ireland

    • Srini

      well…well…D3200 in lieu of D3100…

      are we going to get D5200 and D7100?

  • NG42

    Please Admin, share more info about the video capabilities with us. Will there be a headphone jack, an HDMI port, a mic jack?

    • trying to get moer details, some of the information doesn’t match

      • NG42

        Thank you!

  • KT

    If Nikon is going to release three additional DSLRs this year and one of them is the D3200 mentioned above then presumably the second will be the D7100 upgrade with the same 24 Mpx sensor from the Sony alpha 77. What the 3rd body will be? My guess it could be one of two, either the much talked about but never speced D400 or even better a D700s with the D3s sensor migrating downward, unless Nikon decided to close the book on that 12 Mpx sensor and move on, sigh…..

  • Great stuff. 24mp in a DX body. Boy, those D3x units are gonna feel like a herd of black sheep pretty soon. Just remember, with 24mp in a DX sensor, you’re gonna be hitting the diffraction limit at just f/5.6. I wouldn’t count on shooting any landscapes with a unit like that, or anything else requiring serious DOF. It’s got me wondering, what is Nikon thinking?

  • Reality Check
  • treehaus

    D???? will be amateur and all dx
    D??? will be semi pro and all fx
    D? will be pro,

    I believe the next semi pro camera (probably named d400) will be a d300s and d700 replacement in one and be fx at 24mp-ish, same as 5DIII.

  • treehaus

    also, afew have made comments about getting a “real” video camera, unless you are spending a minimum of $20k on a sony f3 rig or similar then hdslrs are mopping up the video market, They have way better dynamic frange so dont reply on nd filters, awesome dof and the lens range is amazing. Sure the sound is an issue but external recorders can be incorporated into any decent rig and you are still a fraction of the cost of a the huge pro rigs. There are hundreds of speciaslist rigs now being developed specifically because hdslr IS the future of video.

  • @PatDownsPhotos

    24mp in a consumer cam? Silly … it’s the Pixel Wars. Does it have the same pixel pitch as the D800 chip? Ah, who cares, I will never buy one for myself.

    PLEASE Nikon, replace the D300s with a D400 that is also pro-build rugged (my D7000 is ok, but not as rugged, doesn’t feel quite right compared the the D700, and I hate the mode knob w/o a lock), with a superb DX chip in the 16-24mp range with exceptional low light capability. And while I am at it, while I understand the concept behind the D800, I am dying for the successor to my D700 and want it to offer what the 5D MkIII does only better. 16-24mp, AWESOME in low light, and good video ( if you must). PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.

    • PAG

      I’ve come to realize that this is a marketing issue. There are some who have posted that people won’t be able to hold their cameras still enough or that the files will be huge, but neither is an issue because the majority of people owning this camera will be shooting JPEGs. The output will be small downsampled files that will look great, and the fact that a huge amount of that 24MP potential was simply thrown into the bit bucket won’t matter to them in the least. In the meantime, serious photographers could pick up a 24MP lightweight vacation camera if they wanted one.

      Since I shoot raw I’m personally not thrilled about the entire DX line moving up to 24MP, but when the time comes to replace my D7000 I will buy one … along with more drive space, more RAM, a faster graphics card, etc.

  • PAG

    I’m baffled by the comments that the D400 will go FX. Why? What would the marketing advantage be to drop all the loyal D200 / D300 / D300s users waiting for an upgrade? Does Nikon really want to leave a Canon 7D upgrade completely unanswered? If so, they can say sayonara to a huge segment of the wildlife and sport photography markets.

    A pro-level DX camera (high fps, big buffer, high-end AF, tougher build) is a proven market for Nikon across years and 3 camera models. I see no reason why they would think it was smart to simply cut it free. I think the comments may be a desperate hope by D700 fans who fear that their favorite camera was a one and done.

    • Wublili

      TImes has changed.

      Only 1 of those 3 models co-incident with a FX pro body. That was D300, against D3. D100 and 200 was the light version of DX pro bodies (D1 & D2 and their all variations).

      D300 was released at the edge of the big change for Nikon, at the beginning of FX line. So there sure is chance that it would become the last of a kind. It might stay the last pro DX body.

      Although, I do still see markets for pro DX body. I’d be happy to have DX D400 (I had before D300 and loved it).

      But I do undersatnd if Nikon wants to make it the entry level FX body. But if they do that, they should also release more entry level FX lenses, too, since one of the reason to go for DX body is to save little bit in the lenses (not everyone has unlimited budget…).

      • PAG

        I understand an entry level FX body. I just can’t see any sense in jettisoning the highly successful and desired pro-level DX. I personally know 5 people looking for this camera, including 2 D200 owners, one D300 owner, one D7000 owner (me), and a D90 owner. We’re all waiting to hand our money to Nikon for an upgrade. The crop factor is a non-negotiable for all of us. The factors I noted above are the reasons we’re willing to shell out a premium over the cost of a D7x00. (Though none of us are crazy about having to jump up to 24MP.)

  • Baxter

    I do not really understand the complains about 24 MPX, when the storage units (HDD/SD/USB) are cheaper and cheaper everyday and the benefit of cropping is huge. It is not the main feature that has to drive the purchase but is better to have 24 option there, if it weights too much for you, you can choose M or S size.
    Some years ago everybody was happy recoding video at 480p with expensive videocams, but now shot at 1080p is below 200$, and everybody loves the quality.
    Lets be reasonable with technology evolution.

    • Sleeper

      Two words:

      Diffraction Limitation.

      Google that up.

      • Baxter

        Are you serious? D3200 buyers thinking about Diffraction limitation?
        For a Pro it can be important, but for a regular consumer or prosumer may be not.

  • burgerman

    Theres no point in making DX bodies anymore since pixel density is now so high on FX other than as a cheap plastic entry level camera for cheap light DX lenses.

    If I stick my old 18-200 vr lens on my D800 for eg I have a great 15+mp walk about/holiday snap camera. When I want more serious quality I just use my real FX lenses…

    Plus after playing with the D800 for a bit, I wish you luck with 24mp on a tiny sensor! You are going to need better lenses than mine, and they were about £6k in total.

    • Sahaja

      Too bad the D800 doesn’t magnify the image to fill the viewfinder when shooting in DX mode – then it would really be a DX/FX camera in a single body.

  • Nikonos

    Nobody expected the Nikon puts up a 36mp on D800 sensor, just near the launch is that it knew for sure. I admire that Nikon has a new sensor for the D400, superior to 24mp, and maybe would be a surprise for all.

  • Nik

    Almost certainly, the line up by November will be as follows:

    FX D4 @16 mp @10fps
    FX D800 @36 mp @4fps
    FX D400 @24 mp @6fps
    DX D7100@24 mp @7fps
    DX D5100@16 mp @4fps
    DX D3200@24 mp @4fps

  • Steve

    come on guys the D3000s always has lest gen sensor in them. I think it will have a 16 mp seser and D5200 will have the 24mp in it. Why would they put there best in there lowest they will want you to shell out more cash.

  • F

    “The Nikon D3200 will have some kind of a Wi-Fi connection that is supposed to offer few very interesting new features”

    This part sounds good…

  • MegaMo

    My bet for this summer:
    D5200 & D7100


    D300 replacement & D7100

    Going to be interesting !

  • Spencer Walker

    I bet this will look as “beautiful” as the A77 at high isos…. Such amazing pixel density… I bet its almost as clean as the D2H…. Is nikon the new canon now or something?

  • D400fx 16MP baby D4 8fps

    or a D400dx 24MP with 8fps

    now that would be a hard choice!

    • burgerman

      The 24mp DX is the same as a 48mp FX only in prints it needs to be enlarged 2x more. I wish you luck finding good enough glass, and in your technique. It will make a d800 look like an easy camera to use. And you need lenses better than mine for quality output at that pixel density…

      And an FX cheap D4 wont happen as they would eat their own D4… And in any case the ONLY advantage the D4 has over the 800 is speed. So if it is slower than the D4 whats the point.

  • juju

    Seems to me that D400 will be entry level FX similar in concept to D800 to allow to shoot DX format – making the transition smoother for DX lenses owners and give them time to get some more FX lenses while still being able to use their well beloved DX lenses – yes it’s possible 🙂

  • Stress Mike

    This $hit is stressing me out! I want my D400 now! Nikon stop teasing all of us and release the f#cker.

  • Believer

    Ok, we have to believe in something, even if that thing will not happen. But I believe that the D400 will be FX. There has to be an FX below the D800. It makes perfect sense now.

  • e_g

    Please Nikon be bold and daring and give us the option of a 8-12 Mpix D3200s with better DR and low light capability.

    These rumoured specs makes a used D3100 more suited as replacement for my D40 IMHO.

    • Sahaja

      Everyone was saying the D800 had too many megapixels when the specs were first rumored – now the majority of people seem to love all those megapixels.

      24 megapixels will probably be fantastic down sampled to 6 megapixels.

  • Back to top