Some fresh Nikon D400 rumors

Nasim Mansurov posted on his blog a list of Nikon D400 specifications that he received from a good source.

At that point I have no reliable information on the D400 and I am not sure if this camera will make sense if Nikon upgrades the D7000 and releases a low priced full frame DSLR (D600). Keep in mind that the D5100 is also due for a refresh, that means that Nikon will have to announce another four DSLR cameras by the end of the year (D400, D600, D7100 and D5200), in addition to the D4 and D800. I still believe that one of the DX DSLR lines will be discontinued, the question is which one. The D3200 already has a 24MP sensor and there are not many upgrade options left for another three DX models, unless we end up with four 24MP DX DSLRs which is highly unlikely (the D600 is also rumored to have a 24MP full frame sensor). We will have an interesting summer ahead of us.

Nikon D400 specs:

  • Sensor: 24.2 MP DX CMOS, 3.82µ pixel pitch (same as on the D3200)
  • Sensor Size: 23.2 x 15.4mm
  • Resolution: 6,016 × 4,000
  • Native ISO Sensitivity: 100-6,400
  • Boost Low ISO Sensitivity: 50
  • Boost High ISO Sensitivity: 12,800-25,600
  • Processor: EXPEED 3
  • Metering System: 3D Color Matrix Meter III with face recognition and a database of 30,000 images
  • Dust Reduction: Yes
  • Weather Sealing/Protection: Yes
  • Body Build: Full Magnesium Alloy
  • White Balance: New White Balance System
  • Shutter: Up to 1/8000 and 30 sec exposure
  • Shutter Durability: 200,000 cycles, self-diagnostic shutter
  • Camera Lag: 0.012 seconds
  • Storage: 1x CF slot and 1x SD slot
  • Viewfinder Coverage: 100%
  • Viewfinder Magnification: 0.94x Approx.
  • Speed: 8 FPS, 9 FPS with optional battery pack and Nikon D4 or alkaline batteries
  • Exposure Meter: 91,000 pixel RGB sensor
  • Built-in Flash: Yes, with Commander Mode, full CLS compatibility
  • Autofocus System: Advanced Multi-CAM 3500DX with 51 focus points and 15 cross-type sensors
  • AF Detection: Up to f/8 with 9 focus points (5 in the center, 2 on the left and right)
  • LCD Screen: 3.2 inch diagonal with 921,000 dots
  • Movie Modes: Full 1080p HD @ 30 fps max
  • Movie Exposure Control: Full
  • Movie Recording Limit: 30 minutes @ 30p, 20 minutes @ 24p
  • Movie Output: MOV, Compressed and Uncompressed
  • In-Camera HDR Capability: Yes
  • Two Live View Modes: One for photography and one for videography
  • Camera Editing: Lots of in-camera editing options with HDR capabilities
  • GPS: Not built-in, requires GP-1 GPS unit
  • Battery Type: EN-EL15
  • Battery Life: ~900 shots
  • USB Standard: 3.0
  • Weight: 800g (body only)
  • Price: $1,799 MSRP
This entry was posted in Nikon D400. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • WouterJ

    I will definately be in the market for a D400 with these rumored specs!

    • Geoff_K

      I would pull the trigger on this Camera and hold off on a D800. For what I shoot, it is a better fit I think.

      • Gjim

        OH NO! If they do this I’m afraid there won’t be a D600 or the D600 will be out of the price range of most consumers!

        • Ken Elliott

          I wonder if the D400 and D600 will be sisters. Much like the D300/D700 – same body, but DX vs. FX. If they are both 24MP, then the processor and data throughput would be about the same.

          • Good point. I’m hoping that’s the case.

          • Zograf

            D300 & D700 are not the same body – D700 is somewhat bulkier

            • Landscape Photo

              Almost… Difference is due to the viewfinder. The rest feels about the same, having used both of them.

              D300 has the optimum shape & weight for a dslr, imo.

          • iamlucky13

            I think more likely and personally hope the D600 will be a sibling to the D7000/D7100 than to the D400.

            That puts the D600 in a more reasonable price range for hobbyists like myself, and leaves Nikon free to make the D400 a truly top-of-the-line DX body – fully ruggedized and sealed, and sharing the D4’s new AF module.

    • Jonas


  • Chris

    Take out the video and you might have a decent camera.

    • Karl Berg

      So you can share it whit a dinosaur?

      • Goose

        HAHAHHHAH priceless

      • WouterJ

        pwnd 😀

    • Christoph Ohlrogge

      I guess about 3 people on this planet would buy a new DX DSLR that lacks video mode. Even for Nikon that’s too small a market.

      • StillsShooter

        Make that four. I don’t care about video, too. If I want video, I use a camcorder.

        • Make that 5. I really don’t give a ….about video mode in a DSLR

          • Brian

            Make the 6

            • Mattiask

              Make that 7

            • tonyc


            • Shokinen

              Make it 9.

            • 10

              all my cameras exept P1 now have video and i never used it

            • CE

              stills 95% of the time, video <5%!

            • warprints

              Wow – make me #12. I don’t care about video.

            • john


            • Tertius decimus is here too.

            • Marty

              I guess I’ll be nr 13 then. Have not even tried if it works on my D7000 in these last 15 months.

            • Ashwins

              Make that 100!

          • Michael

            Lol, since video generally don’t cost anything other than a firmware upgrade, I think there’s no reason to leave it out if it brings sales eh?

            • WSY

              Not really. Take the D800 for example. Due to the extra video record button, one prime button had to be dedicated for video recording. It really is a waste.

              Video is a plus for me, but not one which will make my purchase decision actually. 95% of my camera choice will depend on how well it functions as a camera, not a video camera.

            • Richard M

              I totally agree with WSY. I’ve had my D800 for 2 months and apart from trying a couple of short clips to see how it performed, I haven’t used the video.

            • ShaoLynx

              What?! My D800 has a video function/button?
              Geez, I should try it once…
              Aka: I haven’t used it either, but I assume it works as designed. You know, I just might use it some day…
              Anyway, the extra buttons don’t bother me at all.
              Live and let live is what I say…

            • Peter

              Video does cost something beside the firmware, the license for the video codex is not free. I don’t know if that is charged per device, but I asume so.

        • Christoph Ohlrogge

          That’s like saying “if I want pictures, I use a point-and-shoot”.

        • Tom

          LOL, a camcorder?? Do people still don’t know the difference between a DSLR with video and a camcorder? Not everyone uses it to make videos about their cat.
          I am a filmschool student and can not afford a professional videocamera but with a DSLR i can get the same image quality maybe with a few drawback but at allot cheaper price.
          With a DSLR i get manual control,(cheap) changeable lenses, great low light capability, shallow DOF. All those thing i can not get with a camcorder..

          • Maji

            You are saying what my friends in the indy film industry are saying. The low ISO capabilities enable them to skip expensive lighting equipment and long set up times also.

            Personally, I haven’t even tested the video mode of my D800. However, I don’t mind having it as it offers me a choice. It also ensures that Nikon has a bigger market share which results in more R&D and lower prices.

            Thank you for pointing it out to the selfish posters.

        • Mock Kenwell

          Great. 9 people stuck in the past.

          Adding video functions no longer add much cost to the camera. You’re not paying extra, it’s not in the way. You’re the same knuckleheads who don’t want a flash even though it adds little overall cost.

          • Daniel Pettersson

            Not much extra cost, ok.
            Not in the way? Have you ever used a NEX-7? Extreme example, but video is more (NEX-7) or less (D90) in the way. It’s getting more and more intrusive as features build up.
            The objection against flash isn’t cost, it’s the fact that the popup flash is fragile.

            • Christoph Ohlrogge

              An easy workaround would be to make the video record buttons programmable.

            • Ren Kockwell

              Pratter away grandpa. If you’re confused and obstructed by a video button, god bless your clients.

          • Discontinued

            No, there is another type of knucklehead and that’s me and I am not alone. I do want video in a DSLR. But I do not want a poop-up-flash. And this is not about costs. Poop-up-flashes are simply not professional and next to useless to me. And they do add weak points to a camera.

            • stepper

              I love having the pop up flash.
              I never use it as a “flash” though.
              Always commander mode.

            • Richard M

              absolutely. All cameras should have a built in flash commander.

            • Ren Kockwell

              If you’re using your camera as a football in the rain, then yes, a pop-up flash is not ideal. If you like to have a fill flash in a pinch, or a commander, then why the hell would you not want it? This whole “it’s not professional” bullshit line from people who are NOT professionals cracks me up every time.

            • mmh. a commander-only flash didn’t have to be a pop-up flash. That’d be perfect.

            • Big Eater

              Commander mode on the flash and CLS is THE reason I chose Nikon over Canon. It’s a great system for shooting indoors and to a certain extent outdoors.
              The beauty of the lighting effects you can achieve–all controlled from the back of the camera– is amazing. I have 3 pocket wizards that have sat unused in my bag for at least 9 months.

            • PHB

              This business about ‘professional’.

              By my mind a professional photographer is someone who makes as much money in a year with a camera as a doctor, lawyer, engineer or other professional.

              All you folk out there who work as taxi drivers during the week and fit in a dozen or so weddings a year on the weekends do not qualify as ‘professional photographers’ in my view.

              The demands of the typical commercial photographer are actually rather modest because they aren’t trying to be the next Ansel Adams. They are just looking to take a picture of a couple of hundred brats at the school or sporting event or whatever and sell overpriced prints that the parents feel obliged to pay for.

              Heck most times the photographs are taken by an assistant. It is all completely formula driven to make bucks.

              I don’t need their equipment because I have no interest in photography as a career. I am interested in art for arts sake, pictures of my kids, etc.

              I could probably do just as well commercially as the typical photographer. But I would take a big pay cut to do that and have to work a lot harder taking pictures of subjects that don’t interest me.

          • Pdf Ninja

            Have you used an NEX-5N? I constantly hit the video record button by accident. It’s in the way, and I’m not even sure it can be disabled. The video button is always in the way. It should be a programmable custom button, so you can program ISO, bracketing or AE-lock on it if you desire so.

            • Ren Kockwell

              Then go complain on a Sony rumors site. That’s what you get for buying that POS. A NEX is not a DSLR. What the hell is your point?

      • I don’t care if video is my camera as long as it is 100% secondary in every way.

        On the D800 they screwed this up in a major way by putting the record button where the shooting mode button should be. Why is it harder to change between manual and aperture priority than it is to press a record button I *virtually never* press?

    • derWalter

      and leave the market for canon….

      think twice tiger!

    • Whipper-snapper

      Get back in the nursing home.

    • trialcritic

      We are back to the video question. Having the video reduces the cost of the camera, it does not increase it. Adding the video to a camera comes at a very low cost increase to the manufacture of the camera, but increases the number of users. It is all supply and demand.

    • Foolishcfo

      What if they took out digital and put in film? Would that make it even more special?

    • Yes, because only still photographers use DSLRs. There’s no such thing as those “videographer” people at all. I shoot weddings, promotional, and commercial videos using Nikon DSLRs. If anything, I (and many many other people) actually want more video functionality in DSLRs. If you won’t want to use the video functionality, don’t use it… no one’s forcing you to use it and it’s really not in the way at all.

      Like it it not, buddy, the DSLR market isn’t strictly for photographers anymore.

      • Edit:
        ** Like it OR not

    • JorPet

      While I sort of agree with the sentiment, video can be a great thing. I shoot maybe 20 videos a year, all at one event (my son’s percussion concert). Other than that I never see any use in it. That said, I showed up to shoot team pictures for my son’s crew team and the coach asked if I had a video camera with me. He needed about 20 seconds of video of a rower and no one else had a video camera. I had both my D700 and D7000 with me, so I shot the team pics with the D700, then grabbed the D7000 and went out in a chase boat and shot two 10 second videos. It was actually a HUGE benefit. You never know when it might be something you really, really need.

      • Dyun

        Exactly. Although I don’t use video much, I really came to appreciate the fact that my D7000 has a video option. I went on a trip to see my family and shot video of some family get-togethers. I would not have been able to do that with my D40X or a D700. In the past I thought I didn’t really need video in a DSLR, but turns out it sure as hell came in handy. It would have been a hassle to have to carry a camera AND a video-camera around. This way I have two in one when I need them. Now if only they could figure out video image stabilization. Shooting hand-held produces some shaky results even with steady hands!

      • I used to be in the “video hate” camp until I actually decided to give it a try at a concert and it worked:

        I was like “I have a D800… let’s see if this works.” The craziest thing was the audio meter was clipping the whole time and I thought it would be junk. Imagine my surprise when it SOUNDED GREAT!

        • I should say that while I’m no longer in the “hate video” camp… I’m only merely in the “it’s fine as long as it’s 100% a secondary function and doesn’t interfere with stills,” which unfortunately is not the case on the D800. The record and shooting mode buttons are reversed.

      • Ren Kockwell

        And more and more, clients want it. You don’t NEED “professional” broadcast quality for 75% of video requests anyway. Interviews, set-up pans, b-roll—DSLRs are perfectly capable of shooting in TONS of situations.

        When I send out a crew to shoot stills primarily, they can get video as well without a shit ton of extra gear. This is a huge benefit when traveling, and the smaller size and low-light capability is great for tight quarters or iffy locations.

    • I used to be in the “video hate” camp until I actually decided to give it a try at a concert and it worked:

      I was like “I have a D800… let’s see if this works.” The craziest thing was the audio meter was clipping the whole time and I thought it would be junk. Imagine my surprise when it SOUNDED GREAT!

      You never know when you’ll be in a situation where video is nice to have… BUT I totally think it should be a 100% secondary function and not interfere with stills shooting. I really think Nikon needs to make a dedicated cinema camera, still.

      • “I really think Nikon needs to make a dedicated cinema camera, still.”
        + 1, call it the D800C

        Like you, I tried the video on my D4 and was like, “This is OK, but it shouldn’t get in the way of shooting stills.” Yes, pressing the video record button instead of the mode button happens on the D4 as well, but I usually realize my mistake instantly. I think after a few more months of shooting the D4, I won’t make the mistake as often.vfgb

        I just wonder how much better of a STILL camera we would have, if the R&D money for video features had only gone to developing better STILL capabilities. Why not make a D800C camera for those who want cine and charge accordingly? I know I wouldn’t have opted for “C” designated D4 had that been an option!! I wonder how many traditional SLR engineers at Nikon are saying, “I wish this video craze would end already so we can go back to concentrating on making the absolute best still cameras on the market!”

        • Kyle

          Last I checked they do make the best still cameras on the market and, guess what, it also has very respectable video capabilities. I don’t think it’s hindering them in the slightest bit.

        • Richard

          I very much agree that Nikon should have dedicated video cameras…one at the high end and one lower down…and not worry about it on the rest of the lineup. Canon are several generations ahead in the video field and it shows. I keep seeing Nikon shooters who do video with either a Canon or a Panasonic GH2 because Nikon’s video offerings do not meet their needs. The ones who are using Canon kit also frequently have a tilt/shift lens for it. Nikon really needs to completely redo their PC lenses and, while they are at it, make them fully functional so that you are not limited in the range of motion by the viewfinder prism as is all to often the case presently.

          I don’t think the video craze is going to end any time soon, if at all. It seems that more and more still photographers are getting into it.

        • Ren Kockwell

          Better stills capabilities??!! What more could you want? These cameras today are unbelievable in terms of low-light noise, sharpness and flexibility. Photogs from 20 years ago are laughing at us. Nikon leads the way in just about every category. Video is not getting in the way, it’s enhancing your offering. If you can’t take a decent pic with existing tech, hang it up.

          • I absoultely agree with you about how great the Nikon DSLRs are. With that said, I think they can be improved with things as simple as software enhancements in the camera. Having owned the D300, D700, D3 and now the D4, there hasn’t been significant changes in the menu systems for example. In many ways this has been great because I can pick up any model and feel at home. But there have been many features that the pros have requested and Nikon could have very easily implemented them in software.

            1.) For example, why are there only memory banks for “Custom Settings” and “Shooting Menu”? In some cases it would be very handy to have memory banks for the “Playback Menu”, the “My Menu” and the “Setup Menu”. Why can’t these banks be tied together so that if you choose bank “A” for example, then both “Custom Settings” and “Shooting Menu” would jump to bank “A” collectively.

            2.) AF Fine tune is another are that could use improvement.
            Why do we only get one AF Fine Tune offset per lens? Many lenses that require an AF fine tune adjustment are non-linear across the range. At the close focus distance it might be +5 while at infinity -10. Why can’t I store multiple AF fine tune adjustments for a single lens at multiple focusing distances? So for example if I set 3 AF fine tune points on a prime lens throughout the range from the closest focus to infinity, the camera could then mathmatically calculate all the points in between. What if you have a zoom lens? You could set AF Fine tune points for both various focus distances and various focal lengths. Then the camera could mathmatically calculate the rest.

            3.) Greater granular customization of the camera controls. Why on the D4 do I have a “Multi Selector”, a “Multi Selector Vertical” and a “Sub-Selector” that can ONLY do the exact same thing with the directional pad function? The newer “Sub-Selector” on the D4, which replaced the AE-L/AF-L button and added a directional pad capability that doesn’t provide any more value because you CAN’T program it to do something else.

            4.) We have PASM…why not PASIM (I for ISO priority)? Now before you laugh, let me explain. You could have an ISO priority mode which would then let you set maximum/minimum values for both aperture and shutter speed, to permit autoranging within those values, or you could set fixed values for your aperture and shutter speed, or full AUTO for aperture and shutter speed, or any combination of those (i.e. set aperture to autorange within a set of pre-specified values, while shutter speed would be fixed, or visa versa). It would be very much like what we have with the “ISO Sensitivity Settings” which let you specify MAX ISO and a minimum shutter speed, only ISO would have its own priority mode. Then these settings should be storable in their own customization banks which are nameable.

            5.) “AF-S Priority Selection”…why do I only get “Focus” or “Release”, why not the same options that “AF-C Priority Selection” has with the added options of “Focus + Release” and “Release + Focus”? These would be useful options. I mostly shoot in AF-S mode when photographing people at events in low light conditions, because I don’t like the back and forth focus hunting which quite often occurs with AF-C (even though it is lightening quick). Its as if AF-S is faster at aquiring focus then AF-C, and this can mean the difference between getting the moment in focus or not. With that said, there have been times where AF-S didn’t have focus and wouldn’t fire because I always have “Focus” priority set. This is where “Focus + Release” for AF-S would really come in handy. I would get the faster AF aquisition speed of AF-S, with priority given to focusing, but still able to release in a pinch.

            6.) 51 AF Points – Why is there such a time delay when moving around your AF selection point? The speed at which the AF selector moves, based on directional pad input from the multi selector should be configurable, very much like mouse movement speeds on a computer. I want mine to go a couple ticks faster when I am shooting sports/action, or slower when shooting macro/landscape.

            7.) Bracketing – Nikon has Canon beat here, but it could still use improvement. Why doesn’t the industry add “Bracketing Sets” to EXIF data? For example, you shoot a bracketed sequence of how many ever shots. In the EXIF data, you would get have the image number of the first in the bracket sequence (“BKT Seq. Start IMG_3466”), along with something like “BKT Seq. 1 of 9”, “BKT Seq. 2 of 9”, etc… Then your image management software (Lightroom, Bridge, Aperture) could keep those images together in image sets.

            8.) Focus Stacking – Why don’t we have a focus stacking option for bracketing focus distances? It would work like this… first you set the camera to focus stacking mode, you specify the number of frames you want to capture, then you manually focus on the closest point you want, push the shutter release (nothing happens, except the camera reads and records the focus value from the AF-S lens), then you set the furthest point you want and then push the shutter release again (nothing happens, except the camera now reads and records the second focus value from the AF-S lens); lastly, you fire the shutter release a third time and then the focus stacking sequence begins. The camera starts at the first AF location, takes an shot, and then it moves the AF-S motors at fractional distances equal to the number of frames selected for the AF Stacking Sequence, releasing the shutter at each location until it reaches the end of the sequence (i.e. the second focus point you set). Additionally, this focus stacking set would have “AF STACK 1 of 9” in the EXIF to assist programs like Photoshop put the images back together in proper sequence.

            These are only a few ideas where Nikon could really improve their DSLRs, there are many more out there too. So again, like I said originally, Nikon could make their gear even better.

            • Richard


              These things are just computers that do imaging, nice computers that do imaging, but just a computer nevertheless. There really is no excuse for Nikon not having developed the software/firmware for them to better utilize the hardware’s capabilities.

              Perhaps Nikon will “get an ear full” from the Pros at the London Olympics and go home with a list of things to work on like your comments.

  • Nice specs

  • Another option which I did not mention in the post – maybe the D400 will get a 16MP sensor with a very high ISO – similar to the D4, but this contradicts with the D400 specs posted above.

    • Mr. Dy

      Uh come on, it would be much better with 16mpx… 🙂 i don’t know anybody who needs 24mpx on DX sensor…

      • Nikonhotep

        Perhaps I should introduce myself… 😉

        (I photograph birds.)

        • I tried the bird phograph thing…too damned difficult! 🙂 But hey, now with the Nikon 1 and its FX adapter, you get 2.7 crop factor with 10 MP on the cheap. Plenty of reach for them tiny ass finches if you mount a 600mm f4 on the Nikon 1. 😉 Seriously though, 24MP on DX would be like 54MP on FX. If Nikon could pull off the same quality of pixels as they did on the D800, then yes 24MP on DX would be a birders dream.

          • Richard

            Yes indeed. When I was in the camera store a week ago I had an interesting conversation with a man who does digi-scoping of birds in the nest and various things that are not moving around like birds in flight. He was using a µ4/3 body (2X crop) and was looking at a 1 Series for its 2.7 crop factor and fine high ISO (low noise) performance. It could be quite a combination.

            • Ren Kockwell

              I’m not a birder and am legitimately confused. Unless money is the major obstacle, why would you not shoot FX and crop?

            • @ Ren Kockwell, “why would you not shoot FX and crop?” — A very valid question when one considers the resolution the D800 now provides. But at $3000 for the D800, you will be throwing away 20MP you paid for. If you set the D800 to DX mode for example, this is equal to 36MP/2.25 = 16MP. So 20MP get tossed in the crop. Alternately, you could buy a D7000 (or D7100 when it becomes available), with the same effective quantity and quality of pixels, all at a 1/2 to 1/3 of the price of a D800. 24 Million high quality pixels in a DX body will still give you a poor mans 1.5X teleconverter, while maintaing high resolution and detail, which can still be cropped in post! The Nikon 1 or CX sensor, took the crop factor to 2.7. Unfortunately, the Nikon 1 pixels aren’t as phenominal when ISO is pushed. If the Nikon 1 sensor was grown to FX size while keeping the same pixel density per square mm, it would be something like 72MP!!! (10MP * 2.7 ^2)

              The next time you are outside, try to take a picture of a 4-6 inch high bird at a distance of 30 feet, with your longest lens and FX camera. Then, go into post and crop until you get the bird to fill at least 1/3 of the frame you are left with. You will quickly realize that even 36MP the D800 provides won’t give you the detail you would prefer. The only exception might be if you had the 600mm f/4 on the D7000 or D800, giving you 900mm f/4 equiv @ 16MP.

            • Nikonhotep

              “I’m not a birder and am legitimately confused. Unless money is the major obstacle, why would you not shoot FX and crop?”

              Good question!

              If you need/want, say, an 11×14 print with a small, timid (i.e., not very approachable) bird taking up a good portion of the image, cropping alone just isn’t going to do it. A DX body (extending our the lenses) with more megapixels (allowing us to crop) is what we need. And I know plenty of bird photographs for whom even the Canon 7d, with its 18 megapixels, isn’t enough anymore.

              But I will probably switch from the D300 to the 7d if Nikon doesn’t come out with something like this hypothetical D400 (if for no other reason than to give me access to Canon’s more affordable 400mm lens).

    • sloma_p

      I’m curious about the proce – either D600 won’t be $1500 or it’ll be seriously crippled…I think we can expect D600 to cost at least $2200 if this is $1800…

      • pragjna

        I think that too, the prices will be calculated new.
        the price for the D600 might be up to $1000 more ( my guess approx. 2500)

        • mikils

          And who on earth would buy a D600 for 500 $ less than a D800? Please!

          • The same guy who would rather get the D600 with a kit lens and still have $500 left over for a Tamron, Sigma, or Tokina lens. The sales guy in the camera store will convince him of this logical purchase, because the D600 has a higher profit margin. Ask yourself this, what would you have rather had, a Nikon V1 with two lenses in a kit, or a D7000 with a kit lens. I think they were also only $500 or so apart in price on launch date of the Nikon 1. Today there is less than a $500 difference, but people are still buying the Nikon 1 over the D7000, despite the D7000 being far superior and more versitile.

            • Richard

              Entirely true, Dr. SCSI, but the 1 series is “near pocketable” which seems to be a large part of its appeal.

            • @Richard, true, and as you state that is probably its appeal. But I think the OP couldn’t figure out why anyone spending $2500 on a camera doesn’t just drop the other $500 and get the better camera. Hence my analogy of the price jump going from Nikon 1 to a D7000. I was just trying to make the point that a simple $500 price difference isn’t the only thing that influences ones purchasing decissions. What is logical for one, is illogical for another.

      • tifkat

        I think you’re talking out your posterior. Look at the rumored D600 specs. It’s a D7000 with a FF sensor. The D400 here is a fully Pro DX. FF sensors are bound to cost more to produce, that’s given, but the rest of the feature differences could make up for a very small price disparity.

        * The D600 is rumored to have the D7000 focus system.
        * The D400 rumored to have the D4 Focus system (plus new WB system)

        * The D600 is rumored to have low frame rate (like D7000)
        * The D400 is rumored to have a pro-level framerate

        *D600 rumored to do compressed video only
        *D400 rumored to do uncompressed video

        *D600 rumored to have weather sealed body (no mention of alloy body)
        *D400 rumored to have full magnesium alloy weather sealed body.

        *D600 rumored to have 2x SD cards (aimed at starters or amateurs – ie no investment in cards yet)
        *D400 rumored to have 1x SD + 1xCF (seems to keep Pros happy)

        So, you’re looking at basically a D7000 with a FF sensor for the D600, and a much upgraded D300S fully pro DX camera.

        D7000 price is currently around $1100US (Adorama)
        D300s price is $1700US (Adorama again)

        Why couldn’t a FF D7000 (aka D600) be made for around $1500-1600US?
        Why couldn’t a fully pro DX body cost more than that at $1700 – $2200?US

        It’s not all about (sensor) size. That’s just one of those ‘phallusies’ too many people choose believe.


    • Paulo G

      It would be icing on the cake!

    • nuno santacana

      NRadmin, which of the two options would you bet on?

    • Remco

      To get the high fps the sensor needs less MP in my opinion.

      Also, why keep people thinking that the D400 needs to be cheaper than the rumored D600 ?

      They both are serving different markets and have different specs. To me it seems perfectly logical that a high end pro DX camera would have a higer price tag than an entry level FX camera.

      • sloma_p

        Maybe because FX sensor is much more expensive (4x) than the DX one? If you consider Dx sensor ATM costs about $50, you have to pay about $200 for FX one. When you add 35% manufacturer margin, then another 30% for taxman and dealer/shop margin, you’re looking for at least $300 savings you’d need to make to put a FX-sensor in a body for it to be the at the same price level as the DX one. And on top of that you have more expensive shutter, mirror mechanism and the prism. And the market for such body will be much smaller than for say D5100 or even D7000, so you’re probably looking at $650-$750 price difference just by going FX. That means, the D600 would have to be at least the same price as D400 ($1700) if it’s to be a D7000 with FX sensor (D7000 + FX mark-up explained above). Then, compared to D7000 you would need more powerful ASIC (24MP vs 16) and slew other things (body would have to be bigger to accomodate bigger prism etc.) and I seriusly dobut the would be able to make it (D600) cheaper than $2000. Plus yen/dollar realtionship is “a bit” different than it was at the time D7000 had been released.

        Altogheter – either D600 will be $2000+ or it’ll have D5100 level body with FX sensor.

        • Michael

          I think your logic seriously has some flaws.

          First, FX is not 4x more expensive that DX. It’s just a myth.
          Second, the D7000 is $1200. Given that a FX sensor will cost us $400 (which is seriously unlikely), the D600 will be $1600. And as time passes, technology gets cheaper. Make it $1500 then.
          There are many other mistakes I don’t bother correcting.

          • sloma_p

            FX sensor IS 4x the price of DX one – it’s a fact, not “I think” or “I don’t think”. And please read again what I wrote. FX sensor costs around $200, but WITH manufacturer (Nikon) and dealer margin that grows to about $400 by the time it hits the shelves (of course it’s in the camera then). And you didn’t get into account you’d need more expensive shutter, prism, mirror mechanisms etc. – it isn’t just “let’s stick FX in there”. FX sensors still have to be stiched, yelds on them are significantly lower than DX. So please, do some research, before you start “correcting” others. Thom Hogan site is a good starting point…

            • thomas

              That’s just no true…why should it be 4x more expensive; there is 1,6 difference in size; so that’s probably also the difference in price but i think it actually is even less than that because scaling always is cheaper; and before you say anything yes the body elements of an fx make the price go up…

            • sloma_p

              Could you read what I wrote above? FX sensors are not made in one pass – they have to be stiched and that means lots of the are going to be disfunctional and only few form a wafer can actually be used in camera. Yelds are a lot lower on FX tahn DX, so the price is much higher. On top of that, if you have A/D converters on the chip, you need a lot more of them.

              So yes, it’s true – have a read on it here -> – they estimate cost difference to be 10-20x, not 4x (and few of ppl answering in that post do know a LOT about sensors) – I’ve taken into account, that $2000 FX camera would sell in larger numbers, thus reducing sensor price…

              Again, do your research – just writing what YOU thin doesn’t get any credit…

        • legion

          I look at the rumored D600 differently. Everyone talks about being “locked in” to a manufacturer because of the lenses they own. (“Switching to Brand X would be cost prohibitive because I have so much invested in glass.”) How did these folks end up “locked in”? They bought a body first.

          So use the razor blade model (so named because razor blade manufacturers are well-known for it, but Microsoft did it with the X-box): Make the body cheap, even a loss leader. Then charge a premium on lenses. Heck, even if Nikon didn’t charge a premium on lenses, they would likely make out ahead since they would have “locked in” a new FX user.

          These “new to Nikon FX” users, whether pre-existing Nikon DX users or new-to-Nikon altogether, now have an FX upgrade path, which is much more expensive. Psychologically, how many would be willing to go back to a crop sensor body?

          So I think that Nikon could gain a lot of sales over the long term with this strategy. Especially since anyone considering FX is likely to upgrade their body in 3-4 years anyway, and they will probably look to step up rather than get the newest “cheap” FX model.

        • Remco

          You are missing the point:

          People keep repeating that every DX camera should per definition be cheaper than any FX camera.

          Look at the car world. You can buy a Mercedes C Class that is much more expensive than a basic E Class. Does this prevent Mercedes from offering both ? No. So there is no reason Nikon could do the same.

          Also, most people also seem to asume that every DX shooter wants to go FX. That is simply not true. For many DX users the rumored D600 is simply not what they seek in a new camera. It is a different market. And Nikon should know and act on this.

          If you (and all the others making those remarks) can accept that, than there are much more possibilities. And I hope that Nikon sees it the same.

          It would be better even if Nikon would make a clear distinction between the different lines. For example to start DX camera’s with DXxxxx, and FX camera’s with FXxxxx. It would clear up all the confusion and nobody would comment about an DXxxxx camera being more expensive than an FXxxxx. There would also be no mistake about rumors about a camera if it would be FX or DX. The current numbering system is simply confusing and limiting.

        • Andrew

          The FX costing 20x DX sensor is an unsubstantiated claim; no authoritative reference is given; and besides, the cost sounds ridiculousness high – it is just not believable. If we stick with your 4x DX sensor cost, then as one “commenter” noted below, Nikon could incorporate that FX sensor at a loss, hoping to recover the cost with future sales of lenses, etc.

          In business, cost does not always dictate price. When Sony released the PS3 at $600, it was estimated that it cost them at least $850 to produce each unit. If you include the customary markup, the PS3 should have retailed for over $1,000. My point is that Nikon could easily sell the D600 at $1,500 if you take into consideration a business strategy to recover lost profit in the future.

    • photo-Jack

      I know that some of you guys have reservations about the Dpreview tests. But nevertheless they offer the opportunity to see the same image taken with different cameras. And judging by what I’ve seen there the image from the 16 MP Fuji X-Pro 1 looks better than the same image with the 16 MP D7000 and even more so than the image of the Canon 7D – especially at ISO 1600.
      Given that a 16 MP D400 would most likely utilize the sensor of the D7000 Nikon would have to finetune the image processing. But basically the same counts for the 24 MP sensor as is in the D3200. So this will be an exciting story.

      However, a DX in a D300s semi pro body with the latest 51 point AF would be very welcome. That said, in my opinion whether the immediate D5100 or the D7000 successor would be dispensable. As you said, four 24 MP DX bodies do not make much sense. But as the D600 appears to be just an FX version of the D7000, perhaps the D7000 is the one which has to go.

      • Andrew

        The D400 is likely to have a significantly larger and heavier body with superior weather sealing than the D7000 and a cost that is 30 to 40% higher. That is a significant difference in parameters to justify both cameras inheriting even the same 24MP sensor.

        The specs of the D3200 could never be considered as comparable to that of the D7100 when released. The D7100 will have a larger buffer, a built-in motor, and a magnesium alloy body with better weather sealing. So there is room for all these three DX cameras (D3200, D7100, and D400). The D5200 (i.e. the fourth DX camera) will retain some of the differentiating factors with the D3200 as currently exist between the D5100 and the D3100. And as usual, the D5200 will fill the price gap that will exist between the D3200 and the D7100.

        In all of my comparisons, I have not considered the D600 since it is an FX camera and as such should be viewed separately. The D600 should be compared with the D800 and the D4.

    • Wojciak

      A raw file on a cropped sensor (DX) is the same file size as an FX of the same resolution. So to think that it could be 24mp and nearly the same FPS as the D4 seems a bit off. 16mp is a sweet spot with 6-7 fps seems great. I really want to see nearly the same d300s body, to me it is the most comfortable, solid feeling camera.

      • Michael

        D4 is 192MP/s
        So, 24MP camera should be 8FPS then.

    • Bob the Builder

      Yep Correct.
      the high ISO capabilities is the same as D700

    • Dammer

      I dream about a high ISO, 8fps, quickly configurable Nikon DSLR with “rockin” autofocus and metering.

      Mmmm, sweet, sweet dreams.

      • Quit dreaming, it is the D3s or the D4, and you can have it now. If 16MP is the new 12MP from 2007, then I could easily see Nikon putting the D3S sensor in the new entry level D600. A VERY capable lightweight sports camera with great ISO capabilities. An INSTANT second or third camera in every PRO’s bag. It would also be the perfect compliment to a D800/D800E for serious enthusiasts, as well as a FX gateway camera for DX shooters. It could be without video, or offered in a D600C version for $300 more. Likewise, it could be called the D700S with all of the improvements found on the D800, with fewer pixels and a higher frame rate.

        • Richard

          I don’t know if this is “on the table” at Nikon or not, but I could see them installing D4 sensors that almost, but not quite passed qualification tests. There are bound to be a fair number of them that are an f stop shy of meeting the acceptance test. Doing that would turn what is otherwise waste into a marketable product. If priced right, I tend to doubt that the D600 buyers would carp a lot about the sensor’s performance being 1 or 1 1/2 f stops below that of the D4 in terms of high ISO noise performance.

          The D4 buyer, on the other hand, is paying a premium price for the best that Nikon can produce…and deserves it.


          • @Richard, that is the best damned logic I have read yet! Intel does it, AMD does it, why not Nikon?

    • Geoff_K

      If it has 16, I am less likely to buy this and would probably go for a D800.

    • Richard M

      Where has the photo come from? It obviously isn’t genuine (a D300?). Old style red slash.

    • bdeckert

      I think the only reason I would want a D400 is if it had 16 or 18mp. I have no desire for a 24mp DX. Now, a 24MP FX is a whole different story. That really is a sweet spot.

    • Dimitrii1130

      a high-iso 16-18mp sensor makes much more sense than using “D3200’s” sensor. Full 1080p HD @ 30 fps max ?! must be 60fps.. and stills just at 8fps? embarrassing for a d400. 9-10fps.

      i think if there came a d400, we will see d7100 next year with the same sensor and d5200 with d3200’s sensor.

  • Trent

    Once again, I don’t think, there will be a replacement for the D5100 this year due to the fact that the D5000 came in spring 2009 and the D5100 in spring 2011.
    Yes, the D5100 came a few months after the D3100, but when you look at the D3xxx-line, you will see, that there was always a gap of about one year between each. The D3200 came some months later because of the disasters last year and especially the flood in Thailand.

    So I think, there will only be three other DSLRs this year (or even two if Nikon scratches the D400 and makes the D7100 the new Top-DX-DSLR).

    • James

      Also could be that the D7100 doesn’t come this year at all if there is a D400.

      • Pedro

        Agree! the D300s is older and in bigger need of a refreshment than the D7000

  • d400wish

    Lets hope it’s released and soon! really need an upgrade from my d5000!!

    • AllForTeags

      I was in the same boat – wanted to go FX from my D5K. I got tired of waiting for mythical cameras to materialize and didn’t want to take any chances on being disappointed with yet-to-be-announced specs on a DWhatever.

      Get a D700. I did and I am loving the mess out of it. Now I can sit back and casually take in all the rumors and hearsay without it driving me crazy. 🙂

  • Macchese

    BTW, let’s hope this rumor is true. But native ISO at 6400 is still low…. A 16MP with high ISO would be much, much better, and a step above the D7xxx series

    • BartyL

      How is ISO 6400 “low”?

      • Marty McFly

        It’s 2012.

        • ewr

          Yeah, and in 2012 people started wearing black ninja suits and live in caves. Instead of going for a higher ISO camera, I bough my D700 a sigma 85 1.4, useable from 1.4, and i’ve gained 2 stops of ISO. How bout that ?

          • sloma_p

            You see, ppl are mostly spec reders, coz spec will let them “discuss” which camera is “better”. Had they actually been taking pictures, they’d have know, that when you NEED ISO 12800 with fast glass, the QUALITY of light is going to be really bad and resulting picture not interesting. But of course, on INternet it would be another thing to brag about.

            I challange everybody to find a subject, which you can’t realistically shoot at ISO6400 with 1.4 glass (and no, ninja in a cave behind 3 bends doesn’t count…)

            • @sloma_p, agree, 12800 ISO at 1.4 would typically indicate bad light when you first consider those numbers. But what if I told you I need 1/2000 or 1/4000 in order to stop action at an indoor sporting event at a distance of 30-50 feet (10-18 meters)? (Think High School Gym) The longest f/1.4 lens I know of is the 85mm f/1.4. Not really long enough in my scenario, so lets say I use the super exotic 200mm f/2 because I have money to burn. That 6400 ISO doesn’t look that impressive anymore, neither does 12800 with f/1.4 for that matter (even if you could get close enough with the 85 f/1.4, you would lose the ability to show environmental context, because your background went into a butterly bokeh wash).

          • Dammer

            I can find lots of situations where I don’t want to shoot with my 1.4 glass set to 1.4. Sometimes you don’t want a shallow depth of field.

          • catinhat


            Mostly agree with you as far as quality of light goes, but… there is a possibility that a camera with a max native ISO of 12800 is going to produce cleaner images at, say, ISO 1600 or 3200 than a camera with a max native ISO of 6400. Whether this would be a meaningful difference or just bragging rights is an open question of course.

        • JR

          Man the people on here are largly spec readers sloma_p is correct. Dammer, you are not understanding this. If you are at 12800 at an aperture of 1.4 to get a “correct” exposure, then your light quality sucks. So being able to double that ISO and shoot at f/2 to get that extra DOF is still meaningless.
          It’s time to realise that photography is “painting with light”, not darkness.
          Here is my newborn son, most shots are max ISO 1600 and window lit…would they have been decent if I just went into his room whilst sleeping and turned off all the lights?

          • Dammer

            Oh, I’m getting it. However, you don’t always get a choice about how much light is available. In these situations, higher ISO = more opportunities to choose the compromise that suits the subject. What compromises are reasonable depends on what you’re doing with the photo. If it’s going into a newspaper, a reasonably clean 12800 probably works great. Putting it on the Web, might not be a big deal. Probably not a banger for portraits though.

            Modern DSLR’s are getting clean images at ever higher ISO’s. It’s more than just a notch on a spec list. This camera would be targeted at pro users who will try to squeeze every last drop of performance out of it. If you build it into the camera, and it works reasonable well, they will use it.

          • @JR, high ISO and fast aperture doesn’t ALWAYS mean poor light. Wait to your newborn son grows up and starts playing High School sports. You, the proud dad, sitting in the bleachers trying desperatately to freeze the (basketball, wrestling, volleyball, etc) action in what is considered well lit for public viewing lighting conditions, may remember this discussion one day. You’ll only be able to flash then, as long as it is permitted that is.

            Cute kid by the way! Congratulations…

  • ffaabb

    This specifications look like a d7100 no?

    Cant wait to get this if it’s true.
    Hope it’s got headphone jack, histogram, and a clever way to compress the video file.
    Power aperture while recording video would be a must.
    I’m expecting to have this for Christmas.:)

    • enesunkie

      – 24 MP DX sensor
      – 51 point focus
      – Full magnesium body
      – 1 CF and 1 SD
      – 8 fps
      – 91 k RGB sensor
      – 200,000 cycle shutter

      Sounds like a D400 to me

  • Rob

    If they drop a DX camera, bags they drop the D5200 don’t think they could rationalise two entry level cameras below the D7100. Maybe the D3300 will get a flip screen?

    • enesunkie

      Canon can rationalize two Rebel bodies below the 60D. The 650D and 1100D.
      Nikon needs to offer bodies at a variety of price levels. A couple hundred bucks might not seem like a lot for some folk here, but it could make the difference whether a new buyer will skip past Nikon and just look at Canon or Sony for their DSLR.

  • Rob

    If I could, I’d preorder one of these D400s right away!

    • Mark J.

      You can.. Go into your local camera store and tell them you want to be first in line for a D400 if/when it gets released.. 99% of pro shops will do this. At most they will require a $200 deposit, which is totally refundable if you change your mind, or the camera never materializes. I know guys who had the D800 pre-ordered from my local camera shop a full year before it was announced.

  • NikonFanboy

    Hi ADmin,

    Just out of interest, Could the D400 be a mirrorless 24mp to directly compete against sony?

    • D600=$1499

      That could be a possibility. At this price point a DX DSLR is a folly unless it’s mirrorless. Fuji pro 1 comes to mind… Also, I bet D300s is a long forgone line.. IF they had any plans, it would have been leaked already. At best we can expect ahigh fps, best AF DX 7100.
      We could possibly see a DD500 all new mirror less!! If this is going to be true, then floods worked actually well for the Nikon R&D.

      PS: Just see how the admin sources, it is NOT from his sources.

    • I doubt that.

  • Landscape Photo

    Nikon may drop the D5xxx line for favor of D400. Imo, D3xxx & D5xxx were essentially the same entry-level dslr cameras. D7xxx is something in-between. A D400 has been missing for long.

    But the problem with high resolution DX is early diffraction & becoming lens limited. In practice, 18-xxx kit zooms won’t be sufficient for 24mp. You’d either have soft corners (not stopped enough) or general softness due to diffraction (stopped down past f/6.7).

    Anyone considering a D400 should better plan using FX primes or pro zooms to be used around f/4 or 5.6.

    Due to this reason, it is not anymore a good candidate for landscapes unlike D300(s). D800 is the ultimate solution…

    • Phil

      I pretty much concur with this. If Nikon were going to have a distinct Dx line-up, then it makes absolute sense to drop the D5***, with a D3*** range as entry level, D7*** as mid and D4** as high-end Dx.

      If you take a look at the pricing the recent D3200 release, then it would seem to suggest this since the price is closer to what the D5100 is than the D3100.

    • Joel

      Huh? *Facepalm*. Lens properties don’t magically change because you’ve placed it in front of a higher resolution sensor. The lens still diffracts in exactly the same way on a 12mp body as it would on a 24mp body at every aperture, by the 12mp sensor simply doesn’t have the resolution to show that until f16 or so. Wouldn’t you prefer to have a higher resolution image even if it is showing slight softness due to diffraction at f8/f11? At least you can then sharpen it up to produce a better large format print as opposed to trying interpolate detail from a 12mp to get the same print size. More data is always more useful than less data..

  • Sitha

    There is no way…I’m buying this…since the D600 is cheaper…and full frame…’s seem stupid for Nikon to come out with this… oh..well, then

    • Funduro

      “stupid for Nikon” – Nikon will male plenty of money while selling bought D600 and D400 for years to come. How stupid is that?

    • Geoff_K

      D600 FPS is slower and some of us want/need the faster FPS. I’d forgo FF for FPS, plus the extra reach that one gets from a crop sensor means I do not have to buy that 300mm lens.

      • Rikard

        I guess a lot of people will stick with DX, since that don’t (or can’t) update to FX due to the have to buy expensive FX lenses.

      • Jerry


        The idea that DX gives you the advantage of further reach for tele shooting is false. DX is essentially a cropped FX. So all FX shooters need to do is either shoot in DX mode or shoot in FX and crop in post processing, which is better because you can get the exact desired composition then. The other disadvantage to DX on the opposite side of this issue is of course a 20mm ultra wide angle lens on DX is 30mm or in other words a third less field of view.

        • Sky_walker

          And get low-res photos? Thanks, but no thanks.
          24MPx on APS-C == best reach you can get.

          • Mark J.

            Who needs more reach than FX can deliver? I’m shooting the Palouse this coming weekend with a D800 and will be reaching 680mm with a 400mm F 2.8 and a 1.7x tc.

            And if did indeed need more(which i won’t) i can just turn my FX into a DX by going into crop mode which still gives me image size high enough to print to 24×36.

            • ted

              I do. I own d800 and will buy this camera as listed.
              As for the other stuff you wrote, it makes my day to know your satisfied.

        • Geoff_K

          /sighs …. i hate hearing this

          If you take a FF camera and toss a 300mm lens on it and I take a DX with a 200mm lens … we will both fill the frame the same using all 24MP, you gain a slightly shallower DOF however

          if you shoot in DX mode on your FF you lose MP and are not at 24 anymore where i will be.

  • john

    Well well then, hopefully the D400 mythology will transpire into reality! If these rumours intensify I will no longer consider a D800 since it really isn’t what I need. This camera sounds like what I’ve been waiting for. I would hope that Nikon could have stuck with the 16 mp D7000 sensor and tweaked it like they tweaked the D3 to D3S, effectively doubling ISO, if at all possible?
    Perhaps they will call it a Nikon D7200 , D8000, D400, it doesn’t matter, so long as the legacy and core fundamentals of the D300 are improved and carried over.
    Excellent AF – 200,000 shutter life – Fully sealed body – etc etc.

  • rockland01

    This is what I have been waiting for! Already have D3, need the fast FPS for sports/wildlfe, D400 will have fast FPS and 1.5 crop factor to bring subject matter closer.

    When is release date? I would deposit $ now!

  • Mav

    Wouldn’t it make sense to consolidate the D7000 and D300 in to one camera – the D400? If you want the extra capabilities, you probably also want the stronger body too.

  • MegaMo

    D3xxx & D5xxx are too similar, no point in releasing D5200.
    D400 & D7100 are going to be similar, no point in releasing both.

    I think Nikon will release 1 FX and 2 DX max. (maybe even 1 DX ?).

    • enesunkie

      The D40 and D60 were “similar” and
      the D3000 and D5000 were “similar” and
      the D3100 and D5100 were “similar” and
      the D3200 and D5200 will be “similar” too.

  • Duke of Edinburgh

    Might get one of these for the old girl. Any news of the rumored new 16-85 VR?

  • Camera lag time? Battery life? Detailed AF layout specs? Overly specific details about a camera that is months away from supposedly being announced makes this smell more like wishful thinking than a viable rumor.

  • Clark Tanaka

    To be honest, I’m a Canon user (used to own the D300, now a 5D2 user) but if they are coming out with this, I am very much interested. The 7D in my opinion are good in specs but I’m not just feelin it.. (I know these are things that doesn’t matter to the final picture, but the shutter sound, design, etc,,, just sucks)

    I would prefer a lower Megapixel count for a cropped sensor but if it has great ISO noise up to 6400, I would want one for shooting night sport games.

    • Michael

      TBH, the 7D is more similar to D7000 than to D300s.

  • These are awesome specs! I’d be all over it!

    There’s probably a typo in max recording time, am I right? 24p should be longer than 30p, shouldn’t it?

  • CoolGuy

    FAKE!! The new nikon bodies doesn’t look like that anymore! Nice try on fooling us!

    • babola

      You should get some cool-aid, coolguy…the picture is a mockup of what the camera could potentially look like. No one has the real product picture yet.

  • Chocolate Sausage

    The Sausage is really torn between the rumoured D600 & the D400 now.

    The Sausage has roughly $2000 worth (2nd hand prices if I sell) of DX gear should he sell that off. Throw another $1200 at that, which The Sausage has set aside for an upgrade and he’s torn with what to do. Either $1200 plus trade in value of current body to go D400, or total of around $3200 to start on the FX ladder. The Sausage is a landscape man, he likes them wide, so Sausage would be aiming his Sausage rifle loaded with money bullets at the 16-35mm as a first and maybe only initial lens if the FX road is the road the Sausage takes.

    The Sausage is really torn…

    • Chocolate Sausage

      What would you do if you were The Sausage?

      Also, I guess this could be the D7200 specs, a pro-DX replacement for the D300s.

      The D5100 market will be dropped (as such) and replaced by a D5200, which will be the D7000 replacement. As others have said, it is a bit close to the D3XXX.

      i.e. The DXX line will be dropped numerically from the DX lineup, but physically it will shift denotion to DXXX.

      DX entry: D3XXX
      DX midrange: D5XXX (formally D7XXX)
      DX pro: D7xxx (formally DXX).

      Sausage out.

      • Mock Kenwell

        The sausage is starting to talk about himself in the third person. Bad sign.

    • @CS, buy a used D700 and a used 16-35 if landscape is your thing (~$3000). If you must have high resolution above 12MP for your work, wait for D600 but still buy a used 16-35mm f/4. Alternately, buy a used D7000 and a 10-24 DX or 12-24 DX (~$1800 to $2000). If you like the possibility of creative effects with shallow DoF for portraiture, then go with FX, if you are only doing landscape you can go DX route for less $$$.

  • Giovanni-bg

    No doubt if these specs are corrrect THIS is my next camera. Period.

    It have all that I need.

    – DX form factor that keep me light with lenses when travelling.
    – nice ISO performance (good step up form D300s)
    – good resolution (good enough to donwsample and improve the noise at higer ISO keeping enough resolution for large printing)
    – fantastic FPS for sports and wildilfe.
    – fantastic autofocus, perfect for any kind of application
    – right body specs (sealing, magnesium)
    – right dimension (no integrated grip)
    – right weight
    – right price target

    Then many other nice “plus” like HDR etc.. but it doesnt matter really for the decision.

    this is THE CAMERA.

    Hoping it will be true.

    • Giovanni-bg

      I forgot…

      You can also call it D7100 or D7200 or D8000…

      You can call it also Paul or Naomi if you prefer but this still remains MY CAMERA.

  • Drazen B.

    The D400 has passed the ‘only a rumor’ stage for sure. I have spoken to AUS/NZ Nikon distributor this morning who confirmed the D400 is about to be released end of August beginning of Sept time frame.

    However when I mentioned D600 I got the type of response “Wha…?”
    Not sure where the whole D600 rumor started but it must have been someone’s wishful thinking as there are apparently no plans by Nikon to released a low-cost FX DSLR at this stage.

    • By the experience I ve made with NR’s predictions, I can assure you that the d600 is no way a wishfull thinking in opposite to the d400.

      The main question remaining is of course the d600’s price, I doupt it will be under 1700$.

    • Right now, the D400 is just a rumor, but the D600 is fairly solid I think.

      Peter’s record speaks volumes – I don’t know of another rumor site (photography or otherwise) that comes close to [NR]’s record.

      • … and just few hours after your comment, the first picture of the D600 was leaked 🙂

    • BartyL

      They are the same camera. The model designator will be in a small window. When a DX lens is attached to the D600 it will automatically go into DX mode, and the model designator will roll-over to display ‘D400’.

  • babola

    Hmm, this just made the good ‘old’ D7000 so much more attractive proposition at 30% less $$.

    Decision for cramming 24mp in a DX sensor size is a bit disheartening, to say the least. Although judging by the first-look photographic tests of Nikon D3200, it could be OK. But only just.

    And as someone else mentioned above a good (pro) quality lens will be of paramount importance now more then ever on this and any other 16+ mp Nikon DX APS-C format cameras.

  • Smudger

    Hope I’m wrong, but I suspect Nikon has some other releases to get out first; like the F7 and a new Multiphot.

  • christoph

    It sounds interesting, BUT:

    I would rather have 10 FPS and 16 MP than 24 MP and 9 FPS. Especially because the DR of the 16 MP sensor is better than the 24 MP sensor. High ISO for both is equal (but only for the same viewing size)

    built in GPS would have been nice.

  • Donovan

    If this is apparently $1799, the d600 is definitely going to be over $2000

    • Sky_walker

      Or the D600 is in fact a D400 we see here.

  • Carlos

    If these specs are true, that would be (almost) exactly what I need for the replacement of my ageing D200.
    I would only change the sensor (with better IQ than the current 24Mp sensor of the D3200, even if that would mean lower resolution, like 18 or even 16Mp), and make it slightly lighter (around 700g).
    The rest seems perfect (although, as Brandon Bush noted, strangely too much detailed for a rumor …).
    I also considered switching to FX, but the D800 would be an overkill to my needs (and also too much heavy for my travel needs) and the D600 seems to have a crippled down AF system, at least compared to the D4/D800, and the AF is important for my use.

    • Mav

      When you say better IQ, what do you mean? It seems this sensor is getting tremendous results and, by DxO ratings, the second best APS-C sensor on the market

      • Carlos

        That’s true, I was surprised how good DxO rated the D3200 because I’ve seen some pictures from it and they seemed to show some noise even at low ISO.
        Nevertheless, there is still a big difference between ISO and Dynamic Range of the D800 and those of the D3200 (DxO ISO score 2853 vs 1131, DR 14,4 vs 13,2). If Nikon manages to scale down the D800 sensor to 18 or 16mp, it will probably have a similar response in DX, and that would be awesome.
        Of course if you scale down 24mp pictures to 18mp, you will reduce perceived noise and get the bonus of additional detail on low ISO situations, but will not get a better DR.

    • Solution:

      • Carlos

        Too big and heavy for my taste (body + travel lenses).
        And the D800 (and hopefully the D400) have an upgraded focusing system
        and Expeed 3, that could make a difference in low light situations .

  • The 1799 MSRP does not make sense since the rumored D6oo is somewhat in 1500 USD price range and its FX. I don’t believe this. Probably go with admin that an upgrade to the D7000 will be the new top DX body. All rumors now point to a cheaper FX body. Let wait and see.

    • replaceD700

      D600 will replace the D700 and have the same price point $2000~$2199.
      D700 will be discontinue and finally RIP

      Don’t tell me name doesn’t make sense. D7000 jump from D90 anyway

      2012 is the even model numbers year!

      • Sky_walker

        That makes more releases per year then Sony ever had!

  • I think they will discontinue the d5000-series and add the tiltable screen to the d7100.

    • Jamez

      I suspect Nikon has more $ sale volume for d5100 than the d7000…
      (at least that seem to be the case here in Norway)
      Not having the option between the d3200 and d7000 will give the sale to Canon 600D.

      And now they need the d5200 to keep people off the 650D …

  • @admin: I don’t expect Nikon to update any additional DX cameras this year, though I suppose it is possible to do one, maybe two updates in an absolute stretch. Let me outline my thoughts:

    * The most DSLRs they’ve ever launched in a year is four. In the years when they’ve done that they were really stretched to get all the subsidiaries up to speed and all the materials ready for worldwide launch. So doing five or more (seven as you suggest) is a real stretch, especially considering that we probably need to add the Nikon 1 into that mix.
    * Sendai didn’t get any production upgrades; it is still constrained to the same limits as before. Thailand got some production upgrades after the flood. China is set up for Nikon 1 and lenses only at the moment. So, all those new cameras you speculate on before the end of the year would all have to come out of Thailand. What you’re positing is that Thailand could continue to produce the best-selling D3200 while in just six months of the year produce new D5200, D7200, D400, and D600 models. Given what we know about how popular at least two of those models are likely to be, this would just add to Nikon’s “can’t deliver to demand” problems, and in a big way right in the heart of their lineup. My guess is that Thailand can’t turn more than two new models this year (note that the D7000 is still running short in supply).
    * There’s little reason to cut DX models. It’s the core of the DSLR sales. I believe the premise you’re operating on is that getting rid of the D300s replacement would reduce model overlap. But that model overlap is probably necessary. It’s a long leap from a US$1099 D7000 to a US$2999 D800. It’s a bit of a leap backwards from the D7000 to the presumed D600. A pair of near US$2000 DSLRs at 24mp, one DX and one FX, makes a lot of sense to me. Indeed, I can see a lot of non-pros being very happy with that twosome.
    * Shelf space wars are already upon us and they’ll get worse. Dealers, even Big Boxes, don’t have infinite shelf space. I’ve watched this strategy play out in consumer electronics market after market: as demand flattens or declines, the big companies squeeze out the little ones by putting more models into the market. The dealers can’t afford to let the major line go, so they push out some smaller ones to make room. This has already been deep in progress in the US: Pentax and Panasonic are mostly pushed out. Olympus and Fujifilm are getting reduced commitments. The next battle is between Canon, Nikon, and Sony. I don’t know of a dealer that wants to lower their Nikon commitment, mostly because NikonUSA is still managing to be the best of the bunch in terms of dealer handling (Sony is right up there, Canon has slipped dramatically). Bottom line, Nikon could squeeze another model into their lineup and it would hurt someone else because dealer dollars are relatively fixed.

    I believe I wrote late last year on my site about Nikon likely having a 3,4,3 lineup: 3 Nikon 1s, 4 DX, 3 FX. That still makes sense to me. What doesn’t make sense to me is that Nikon could essentially accomplish a full refresh and expansion in one year.

    Finally, the real issue isn’t cameras. The real issue is that Nikon simply has proven unable to fully deliver lenses (other than perhaps the ones made in China). An expansion of model lineup puts more pressure on lens demand. Given that virtually all of the DX models would be “kitted” with lenses, I just don’t see them being able to iterate the D3200, D5200, D7200, and D400 in a nine-month window. Not without further compromising their lens output.

    • Fred

      Agree with your summation other than Nikon were short on new products last year because of the problems in Japan and Thailand so might be playing ‘catch-up’.
      However, a ‘pigeon pair’ of cameras, one DX and one FX, at the same (or similar) price point certainly makes a lot of sense especially if they are similarly specced.
      I’ll take one of each, thank you very much.

    • PeterO

      “My guess is that Thailand can’t turn more than two new models this year (note that the D7000 is still running short in supply).”

      Thom, although much of what you say makes sense, was there not a lot of discussion about Nikon building new manufacturing facilities (Malaysia comes to mind and a second factory in Thailand)? I don’t know – just asking.

      As for the D7000, there is most certainly no shortage of them here in Canada where they regularly pop up on sale for less that $1K and they can easily be had on the shelf.

      Nikon seems to be on quite a roll these days. Introducing new models which cannot meet maket demand doesn’t seem to bother them much. Profits are up and they know that their customers will wait and wait and wait. If the D600 and D400 turn out to be true, the wait times for these will dwarf the D800.

      • The information I saw about the Thailand redo was that much of the equipment they installed was capable of producing more parts per hour. While that would certainly help, there’s so much hand assembly that I think they really would have to increase staff and overall space to make a huge gain in the number of products they can assemble. They may be indeed doing that, but I haven’t heard anything about that yet.

        Personally, I think Nikon needs to be more careful. I’ve seen a lot of D800 bodies now. On at least half of them I could find alignment or manufacturing issues, including on one of mine. The need to up their QC if they’re going to start jamming out cameras.

    • Vin

      I think we would have seen the D800 announced July/August 2011 and out October 2011, then the D4 announced October 2011m then out Dec 2011/ Jan 2012,. but these I think were not part of the full push to change, it really starts at the D3200 push, so because of the slow lens out put and battery out put from China this whole shift is subject to be slowed. the plan and the execution are two different things. I think Nikon has definitely ran into a few road blocks, some very unexpected.

      • Technically, using Nikon’s past release cycles:

        * D400 is overdue by one year at the moment
        * D3200 was one year late
        * D5200 would be expected in early 2013
        * D7200 would be expected in late 2012
        *D4 was late by six months
        * D800 can’t be estimated, as there’s no history to predict from (one previous camera, so we don’t know the design cycle, but from talks with Nikon, it too was six months or more late)

        So the D400 is the most overdue camera, and the D5200 and D7200 would still be in the future. If the quake/floods really pushed things back, then Nikon would be scrambling just to get the D5200 and D7200 iterated on time, let alone early as admin seems to be projecting.

        But beyond that, the Nikon 1 bodies also need updating and supplementing this year. That’s a heck of a lot of marketing and sales work to do in one year (D4, D800, D3200, J2, V2, D600, plus D400, D5200, D7200). Can be done, sure. Will it? Don’t know. That would be NEW for Nikon.

        • Vin

          I would think the big Marketing push would start at the 2012 Olympics, and go through 2012. it seems like the D3200, and a D600, and or D400, one more DX, and one more FX for 2012. The D4 and Nikon are the cameras for the Olympics, so they will push Nikon 1 also and the new cool picture stuff. but I think it depends on where the new FX is made? The idea that Sendai didn’t get any production upgrades; and can only produce D4 and D800, it makes me thnk they will not build a D600 there. then maybe Thailand will have D3200, and a higher end DX also, and maybe a D600? also?

          • Richard


            This is just my opinion, but I would think the marketing push, in the consumer market at least, would be post Olympics, possibly using some work that was done at the Olympics. I think this because just about everyone who is going to the Olympics, whether Pro or Amateur, probably has most of their gear in hand and ready to go. The exception might be the pros who are anxiously awaiting their second or third D4 body.

            • Vin

              yes, I agree, pro’s already know about what they need and want, the build up will be during and after to carry interest untill x-mas. prosumer, and lower end dslr’s. maybe we will see a D4X for 2014.

    • nuno santacana

      I kindly suggest you to go get readers somewhere else.

      • don

        I kindly suggest you add more value to your posts, as Mr. Hogan has done.

      • That’s some of the kindest Internet bullying I’ve seen. But it’s still bullying. Basically you’re saying your opinion is welcome here and mine is not. Exactly why is that?

        • nuno santacana

          Because my opinion has no link while yours (unlike most of NR commentators) carries a link to your money-maker website. Its like a free advertising, what you are doing.

          If your opinion were the only thing you were leaving here it would be as welcome as mine or anybody else’s.

          • der

            nuno, quit playing hall monitor. Thanks for sharing your thoughts Thom.

          • Somebody

            Only an idiot would think that Thom is posting on a Nikon forum for “free advertising”.

            Thanks for trying to inform us on all things Nikon Thom.

          • Sebastian

            and how you even know it’s Thom Hogan? I can link to the web site if I want to.
            Oh, I know how you know: because of the content in the post.
            Which is why I like to read it.

          • I simply fill out the comment fields that everyone here can. If you really feel the way you do (no links), then I suggest you tell the admin to remove that field. However, I’d argue that one of the huge benefits of the Internet is that it IS linked.

            Consider this: you’re trying to figure out whether or not someone has any idea of what they’re writing about and whether to value their opinion. With the link that appears with my name, you will quickly find that I’ve been documenting Nikon systems for over 15 years on the Internet. Gee, maybe I might know something. You, on the other hand, are just an anonymous, random commentator (and one who seems to think they’re the ultimate Internet police, at that).

            • nuno santacana

              Thom, this last comment of yours (the last paragraph) is pure advertissement. There was no need for you to say how wonderfull you are, but you did. I rest my case.

              PS: I agree with you that links are one of the best things of the Internet. But you know that this opens the door to a lot of spam too.

              PS2: Btw, all this messages of mine might seem a bit rude, but I assure you that I have nothing against you. No offense intended. Is just that there is some behaviour that is not well seen on the Internet. Like triying to feed on someone else’s audience. NR’s in that case.

            • Richard


              It is said that “there is one in every crowd” and this guy, nuno santacana, appears to be that one.

              I doubt that anyone knows what his problem is, but it is too bad that there is not an “ignore button”. I guess we will just have to do it the old fashioned way and ignore him manually. 😉

              I think the overwhelming majority of participants on NR enjoy and appreciate you taking the time to participate in the discussions here. I certainly do.

              Richard Briscoe

    • Richard


      I certainly agree that there are too many new bodies to be seen this year, but I do believe that this year can not be viewed in the historic context because, despite the production delays occasioned by the natural disasters, the design work almost certainly continued. This would lead me to believe that it is possible that we might see more products introduced this year than a historic model would suggest because Nikon is, in essence, playing catch up.

      Though Admin thinks the D600 rumors are more certain than the D400 rumors, it has been a long time since the D300S was released. It really does need to be replaced. It supposedly is still in production and so the D400 would simply replace it on the production line. The D7000 is still recent enough that it does not need a refresh quite yet. I also believe that it was something of a stop gap camera to begin with because of the number of features which were “dumbed down” so as not to encroach on the D300S’s domain.

      The most recent information I have read is that all of Japan’s nuclear power generation plants were off line. They are supposed to represent about 30% of the country’s electric generation capacity. Your sources probably have more recent information and greater details about what the government’s plans may be to return them to service. I doubt that the electric generation capacity shortfall is going to go away overnight.

      This situation alone suggests to me that production may need to be emphasized in Thailand or even elsewhere…it is hard to believe that Nikon does not have plans to open a facility somewhere in North or South America. Many other manufacturers are doing so.

      Nikon have consistently been unable to bring sufficient quantity of product to market to meet demand. This is not an isolated or unusual situation for the company. They truly do need new production/assembly facilities somewhere and it would make sense to spread things out.

      I am given to understand that Sony’s 300mm fab which was closed is supposed to be converted to production of imaging sensors as a part of the company’s plan to increase their production capacity (and market share). I have not heard whether the plant is presently online or is scheduled to be so shortly. In any event the availability of sensors, FX sensors in particular, should improve as that fab comes online. As I understand it, the inability of Sony to produce sufficient quantities of FX sensors has been a factor in the production shortfall of D3/D3S bodies and may well still be a factor in D4 & D800 availability at present.


      • I agree that design continued. Originally, 2011 was to be the “year of FX.” Unfortunately, events conspired to make that not happen. On top of that, further events conspired to postpone DX production, so we essentially get an offset in timing from originally planned.

        The question is whether Nikon will play ultimate catchup, modest catchup, or will just pipeline everything with the delays. My guess is the middle option. There are just too many moving parts. For instance, we have both the Olympics and Photokina this year. The Olympics is distracting, because Nikon supplements NPS with a lot of engineers and designers–it’s one of the places where they get the most user feedback on products. Photokina is also tough because you’re dealing with presenting all your new stuff AND trying to duck future product announcements from others. Nikon will have an enormous amount of new stuff at Photokina as it is (D4, D800, D600, D3200, probably Nikon 1 gear, this year’s lenses). You don’t want all that to get lost in yet another round of announcements (e.g. D5200, D7200, D400). Though I do admit it would be a powerful statement if they could: everything refreshed this year.

        Nikon’s new modus operandi seems to be spacing announcements. The two lenses announced today are an example. We’ve had announcements in Jan/Feb/Apr/Jun, so four months out of six so far. We’ll get the D600 announcement in July or August, probably August to precede Photokina. I could see July=Coolpix, August=D600/lenses. Come October, the ability to launch a big new product gets crunched by Christmas inventory/sale issues, so I really don’t expect a lot in the Oct-Dec time period, if anything. I do think Jan/Feb of 2013 will be very busy (and very DXey).

        As for power, yes, everyone is worried. More so this summer than last because all those nuclear plants are shut down (last year some were still operating). I sort of doubt that this will impact Sendai. My understanding is that they have installed power generation on site, and the nature of that plant is more adaptable to rotating power blackouts. What I worry about is the glass plant at Togichi. You can’t be cycling power when you’re trying to make, cure, and polish the big, exotic glass. You’ll note that this year’s lens announcements are ALL “made in China” or “made in Thailand” lenses. That’s a big signal. I think the reason we don’t have an 80-400mm replacement yet is due to power issues in Japan. Based upon what I’m hearing, Nikon (and Canon) are having troubles just keeping up with demand for existing glass out of their Japan plant. Power outages during the summer months aren’t going to help (I haven’t heard any reports of changes at the Nikon glass plant–anyone heard anything?).

        Semiconductors are also impacted strongly by power issues. There, however, I think that Nikon has some outs, as they don’t totally rely upon any one fab for sensors. Not sure about the EXPEED chip, though.

  • Gino

    I’m a hobby photographer, and only have shot with full frame cameras D700 and D800; what is the attraction to shooting with a high quality DX camera such as the D400, over a FF camera, and what do most people shoot when using a DX camera….sports, wildlife?


    • Not everyone, especially hobbyists can afford full frame bodies never mind the lenses, so therefore DX makes a lot of sense to some of us.

    • catinhat

      If I shoot a sporting event on a large field in daylight (e.g. soccer) I would take D300 over D700 any time. It gives you the reach due to higher pixel density which translates into higher resolution. Ditto for wildlife.

      • jamez

        …And that is also why d400 and d600 can and should coexist…
        D800 could do fine as it has enough density in dx mode (although less fps), but at twice the price, I’m sure most would agree two cameras for same price would be better!

        • However, with the D800 you get two cameras in one. 6fps in DX cropped mode is still very respectable.

      • Gino

        What lens are you using on your DX camera for sports…70-200 f/2.8 VRII…that is 100-300 focal length on DX, correct?

        I have the D800, which I bought primarily to shoot landscape and portrait, but I think using it in DX mode with a battery grip at 6 fps with and a 70-200 f/2.8 VRII would work o.k. for sports???

        • catinhat

          70-200 is way too short for soccer unless used with TC, but in this case I would prefer a plain Sigma 100-300 f4. For better reach, Sigma 120-300 + 1.4TC gives 420mm f4 lens, which is over 600mm in DX translation, with very good quality. I would argue that even that is not too long for soccer.

    • Giovanni-bg

      Probably you never travelled much around the world with your FX camera.

      Otherwise you will know the BIG advantage in terms of weight and dimensions of the lenses tthat DX format is able to give you.

      Try waliking up on mountains with your gear on the shoulders and you will feel the advantage of having a dx insterad of fx.

    • rs

      If you shoot a lot of telephoto then a DX gives you the extra 1.5 crop reach. 300mm is a 450mm and so on.

  • ano102

    there is an picture of an D400 on a french forum,
    I dont know if it is a fake or not, but this looks like very real picture,157336.0.html

    • Chocolate Sausage

      Chocolate Sausage saw that and thought “D800!”, but there are subtle differences. Namely the left hand side and the pop door for HDMI outputs etc. (as you look at it from the back). Sausage thinks this maybe belongs to a D700 or/and D300. From there, all around the front, it looks like a D800, with an 18-105mm on it, probably from the source D300 image. It’s interesting and could be real I suppose – but Sausage remains suspicious. I am by my very nature a suspicious sausage.

      The left hand grip (looking from the back) appears to be from the D700 as stated, because of the characteristics of that port door, but with a D300 front and a couple of mic. or speaker holes shopped on to but any none suspicious sausages off the scent.

      Decent photoshop, but Sausage is not convinced. He wants to be, but isn’t.

    • Richard M

      Very convincing. Looks a lot like a D800 with DX prism.

    • Richard M

      That picture has been at since May 10th or earlier.

      • Richard M

        Correction: since February 10th. So it seems most likely that it is a Photoshop merge of a D800 and D300.

    • EnPassant

      It’s a simple montage with the D800 grip and the rest is a D300s with the name changed to D400. Scroll down the page and you will see it explained with photos!

  • deeprock

    Come on, if you’ve been shooting with a D300s and waiting patiently for a new pro-body DX, i.e., a D400, and Nikon instead offers the choice of an entry level FX or a consumer DX like the D7000–I picked one up as an interim solution and, although a good camera, it will never feel right in my hands–then Nikon is going to have quite a few decidedly unhappy customers. A pro-body, pro-feature DX makes perfect sense–a lot more sense than a D-7000 upgrade (unless the upgrade means a pro-body) or an entry level FX

    • Paulo G

      + 1

  • Dan

    There is any logic in this codes? D70, D700, D7000?? or D4, D40, D400?
    what is the similar feature between them?
    D4 is full frame
    D40, D40X have DX sensor format. – D70 -DX format
    D4oo will have DX sensor format. – D700 FX format

    D3, D3s, D3X – full frame like D4

  • I’m affraid that D400 is nothing more than a wishful thinking. With price 0f cca $2000 it will be similar priced as D600 and interesting mostly for birders while D600 will atract much broader market segment.
    Also Nikon will soon introduce AF-S 24-85 F3.5-4.5 VR. I doubt it’s aimed for D800 users.

    Even last rumors from Canon suggests they will abandon 7D line and will fulfil that market segment with an ‘entry’ FF model.

    • PAG

      The D600 isn’t expected to be pro build camera. It should be a great general purpose camera, but there’s plenty of room for both the D400 and the D600 just as there was for the D300/D300s and the D700. I wouldn’t be surprised if there are more than a few people who would own both for different purposes. Think wedding photography. You could pack a D600 for portraits and set shots and a D400 for reception shots where you’d often be shooting long. And 70-200 on an FX sensor ain’t that long.

      As to the Canon 7D, I doubt they’ll abandon it. It’s still ranked #17 among DSLR sales on Amazon, despite being a bit dated and having both focus and noise issues. It’s been in the top 100 for over 1,000 days. Why would Canon dump a line that sells this well? Give it a better AF and improve high ISO performance and they’ll continue to sell.

    • bdeckert

      Where did you hear they are abandoning the 7D for FF???? I hear they are going to beef up the 60D replacement and merge the two lines, which makes more sense.

      For us Nikon folks, we currently don’t have a new DX camera that feels as solid as even a 60D…

      • Bare

        D7000 is better spec than 60D.

  • PAG

    I agree with the comments above that it’s the D5xxx line that’s going to get axed. If they add an articulating screen to the D3xxx line next year, they can drop the D5xxx line in a heartbeat. The D7xxx stays put (it sells great just like the D90 did) and the D400 becomes the top of the line DX. Toss in updates for the 300mm f/4 and the 80-400mm lenses and the amateur wildlife and sports markets are covered.

    I think the D600 for $1,500 is a pipe dream. It will probably be closer to $2,000 and it sounds like it won’t have a pro body. Comparing it to a suspected D400, a few hundred dollars difference and a big difference in build makes for two very different markets for these cameras.

  • Michael

    Don’t believe the specs for a second. Firstly the details are too detailed, it just sounds like someone is creating there perfect DX camera. Secondly I can’t see Nikon creating both a D600 and D400 at the same time. Nikon have been very aggressive recently and I a D600 would seem a much more logical choice, it wouldn’t compete with a D7000 update, and wouldn’t have the same sensor as the bottom of the line Nikon DSLR. Also, I doubt the D400 would have 8 FPS, 9 FPS with optional battery pack and Nikon D4 or alkaline batteries, too fast for a 24mp file size.

    I also don’t see Nikon dropping the D5*** series, which competes against the Canon 600/650D. The D3200 isn’t as featured as the D5100, even though it has more MP. Also the camera has only been out for a year, so its replacement isn’t due for a release until around April next year.

    I think that Nikon will upgrade the D7000 later this year and will probably do the same thing as they did with the D90 and move that down and have the new version above, at a similar price point as the D7000 is now.

  • Benjo

    Since it seems unlikely the D400 and D600 could both come to fruition, I’ll put my stock in the D600.

  • Vin

    I read a few years ago that Nikon planed to do a full court press and introduce 8 DSLRs in 12 months from June 2011-July 2012, Maybe some of you read this too? Due to 2 natural disasters, this seems to have been pushed forward, maybe now July 2012- Jan 2014, 18 months for 5 remaining cameras. in part this complete turn over was from the battery law changes that Nikon was late to get on board with.

  • Benjo

    Canon’s roadmap reportedly includes a lower priced FF body and the merging of the 60D and 7D lines…sounds a lot like the D600 and D7100.

    D5200 – moved a bit towards the D90 sweet spot minus focus motor
    D7100 – probably unchanged in form but higher FPS and larger buffer, perhaps 3500DX AF

    D600 – <$2000

  • CRB

    FINALLY…!!!!!…i believe the d5000 series will be the one to be discontinued (if there is really one that it will)

  • vitamin_s

    Can anybody please tell me if the problem of live view in D7000 is fixed or not. It doesnt change the brightness of the live view when you change the aperture and/or shutter speed.

  • I call BS on this rumor.

    I believe Nikon killed off the D300 line a while ago. They essentially merged the D90 and D300 product lines with the D7000. Look at the specs and it looks like they took both cameras and essentially combined them.

    There’s not really a market for the D400 as you would be paying close to $2000 for an APS-C format camera. The specs listed in this rumor make it essentially a heavier, much more expensive version of the D3200.

    The only reason you would buy this over a D3200 is for the ability to use legacy lenses.

  • Dave

    Since when does Nikon make DX cameras in Sendai. I thought all of the DX cameras including the D300 were made in Thailand.

  • ghj

    And with this the dream of an affordable full frame goes up in smoke. No way will the D600 be $1,500.

  • Apollo

    24 fps and 9fps!! I’m sold! One thing is “bit” disappointment is the ISO. I would love to have bit better ISO for camera, but to be honest, DX camera and ISO 25600 it’s pretty darn good. Although, I love to see if the camera can make pretty clean pictures at 6400. Then I would buy it.

    And thank you Nikon for replacing the bottom ISO from 200 to 100. I love the low-iso 50! It’s awesome and I love to have it back (instead of ISO 100 in my D300s)

  • Jason

    I think the D400 makes more sense than a D600 or D7100 right now. The D300s is overdue for an upgrade (more so than the D7000) and I believe there is a market for a pro-level DX camera. The D7000 is not a replacement for the D300s and current D300s users (myself included) would not be happy downgrading to the D7000.

    I’d really like the D400 to be the DX version of the D4. 16MP, fast FPS, high ISO, D4’s AF. For potential D400 buyers, the D800 is overkill and the D600 sounds out for the same reason the D7000 is out (missing pro-level features), and that’s assuming that these buyers would consider moving to the FX format at all.

    I have many FX lenses, but I still like the DX format for its smaller size and I’d like to stick with the pro-level features I’m used to in the D300s. A lot of pros had a D3s and a D300s as a second/backup camera. I don’t see why they couldn’t also want a D4 or D800 and a D400.

  • Back to top