Nikon D600 is coming soon, no news on the D300s and D7000 replacements

Another realistic (photoshopped) D600 image from Outdoormac

The Nikon D600 full frame DSLR camera is coming soon. I have already posted the D600 detailed specs and we already know how the camera will look, we are just missing the announcement date. There is some talk about a scheduled Nikon announcement on or around September 13th, but nothing is confirmed at that point. Maybe Nikon will wait until they sell all of their 24MP D3x camera which will be very difficult with the current discounted price of $6,899.

I have no reliable intel on the potential Nikon D7000 and D300s replacements. Since Photokina is less then a month away, I doubt that we will see any new DX cameras at the show.

This entry was posted in Nikon D400, Nikon D600, Nikon D7100 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Winfried

    Well strong buy for me. I am waiting for this baby.

    • Baked bananas

      This is good.. by this time next year I will either have this d600 or a d800…… and I can throw my d7000 in the garbage.

  • Subhasis

    Hi Admin:

    Thank you for the update. It will be great if you can find the photo of the back side of the D600 – I am very curious if Nikon changed any of the control layouts at the back from the D7000 – especially, if they have added a dedicated AF-ON button.

    Thanks again.

    • I am working on it.

      • Subhasis

        Thank you so much, Admin! In case you cannot get a photo of the back side of the D600, can you please try to find out if there is a dedicated AF-ON button. The AE-L/AF-L button on the D7000 (that can be configured as AF-ON button) is just too hard to reach. By looking at the D600 image that shows the top of the camera, I can tell from the very small protrusion to the left of the viewfinder that the position of the AE-L/AF-L button is pretty much the same on the D600 as it is on the D7000.

        • you can program most of the buttons including the aperture priority to control af/ae lock…

    • You can call the AF-ON button whatever you like, I changed mine on my D4 back to AF-L.
      I suspect Nikon is doing this for video reasons.

  • happy happy joy joy

    nice, the ff sensor is 1/4 the size of the camera body.

  • Ex

    Looks like a full frame D3200. No?

    • Yes, probably just slightly bigger.

    • theobjectivesea

      You should probably look at a D3200 before making those kinds of comments… It looks like a D7000 with a giant sensor/FX badge

      • Luke

        hmm he probably don’t know how it looks like (the D3200) , -_-

        • noo


      • eb

        Neither of you have an attention to detail ๐Ÿ™‚ it has elements of both but looks like neither if you do a side by side (by side).

    • Travis

      This is obviously photoshop mockup of the camera. Someone just blended d3200 and d7000. No front dial, no mode dial lock etc etc. The real d600 will a little different but perhaps not too different.

  • Pro Camera

    I hope the D600 might be at least a little bigger than D7000.

    • +10000000000

      went to a store to feel the D3200 and D7000 the other day. I hate to say it, but they feel like toys compared to the 300s, 7D and FF cameras out currently.

      • Allen W.

        Agreed. I figure the extra battery pack will live on the camera except when traveling really light, like backpacking.

      • St.,7,188,290,ha,f

        I would say they increase the size gradually…

      • anon

        i hate to say it, but i own the d800 and the d300 and the 800 feels more toyish than the d300 also. Though probably nothing like a d300 compared to 7000 or 3200. the d300 is a nice, solid, completely metal feeling body. The d800 feels slightly more plasticky in the grip and lighter, so with that being said.. i can’t imagine how toyish this d600 will feel.

      • gabbro

        I have both D300 and D7k. Other than the weight and size difference, I really don’t think anyone can tell the difference by how they feel in hand. They both solid cameras. Now D3200 may be different that I won’t know.

        • Happy Hands

          No offense, but you must not have feeling in your hands. It is night and day difference. I even have small hands and the D7000 STILL feels like a little plastic toy. The D300(s) with grip is nearly perfect in the hands. Anyone who cries about wanting a tiny plastic dslr should join a gym or just buy a p&s if they want to put it in their purse.

    • iamlucky13

      I’m also hoping for it to be a little bigger than the D7000. Small size is an ergonomic tradeoff, and while it works for the lightweight entry-level SLR’s, the heavier D7000, which also has more controls to squeeze into the body, feels somewhat cramped in my hands.

      I haven’t personally yet decided between the D600 or the D7100 (assuming the latter is also coming soon). I’ve realized recently cameras have gotten so good that I will seldom need the benefits of a full-frame sensor, so I’m tempted to compromise just a hair on image quality to save a little bit of money on the body, a bit more money on lenses, and a decent amount of weight on the lenses to carry when I hike with it.

      On the other hand, I might instead go with an M4/3 for most hiking…

      • Adam Maas

        I’m hoping for significantly smaller than the D7000. Think F80 sized at the small end, or Maxxum 7 sized ideally. The D7000 is already portly (the cramped controls issue is a layout problem, not a body size issue) and Nikon’s FX models are just bricks.

        Pentax nailed the size with the K-7/K-5. That’s about right for a camera unless you are constantly using it with big f2.8 zooms. A compact D600 would be better suited to Nikon’s lovely set of f1.8 AF-S primes (or some classic AI glass) and thus should be noticeably more compact than the D800 and D700.

        • scurvy hesh


          I have a hard time understanding why these guys feel the need to have these big honkin’ magnesium SLRs. Other than status its just useless weight. I really am skeptical of the need to have everything heavier and cast in magnesium. I have seen many cameras tumble in my day and if it falls just right it will be a total loss regardless the construction material.

          Also I have seen plastic cameras literally bounce on impact an keep shooting . My D90 did that. Fell of a pick table in our warehouse right onto concrete. Got a nick on the strap lug and the top plate by the command dial. but the bugger kept shooting. It was a great camera. I still have it, languishing away in a drawer.

          • Reilly Diefenbach

            Maybe they need to pound nails.

          • Walkthru

            Totally agree.

            It’s surely a matter of different horses for different courses. This model will surely be a great compromise for those guys who do a lot of trekking/camping where weight becomes a significant issue.

            If I were wealthy enough, I’d probably buy both the D600 and the D800, and get the best of both worlds.

            As they say, you can please some of the people some of the time…………

    • georg

      I hope it is smaller and lighter than D300 or even D7000. If you want a bigger camera buy a battery pack or a D800 or D4?

      I hope we get smaller and lighter FX bodies. And I hope we get DX and FX mirrorless cameras asap.

      • PHB

        What we need is fast lenses for the CX format.

        The point of having a full sized sensor on F-mount is that it is the sensor size that the format was designed for. The DX sensors are fine at telephoto lengths but at the wide end they get a double dose of the mirror sweep constraint that makes all SLR wide lenses less satisfactory than the corresponding rangefinder or EVIL design.

        For a completely new format like EVIL all that matters is that the sensor is big enough to support the resolution. CX format is good for maybe as much as 50MP at a stretch.

        There really is no point at all in going to a DX sensor size in an EVIL format. An FX EVIL camera might well make sense but it would be a Phase One / Hassy killer built to deliver up to 200MP in a studio type setting.

        I think we are at least 5 years out from an EVIL FX format because right now the EVIL technology is only really good enough for landscape type photography and the CX format (with the right lenses) is actually pretty damn good at that game. It is not up to sports photography and a bigger sensor would only make that problem worse.

        Give the tech some time to develop and a big sensor EVIL camera would make some sense. But you need a completely new set of wide lenses for it to be worth having anyway.

  • Joe

    @NR: any reliable information on definite FPS? thx

  • TJ

    The image in the post doesn’t have the front wheel present. The previous pictures posted of the D600 did have a front wheel. My guess is that the above image is shopped. Is that correct?

    • St.

      looks like.
      see the sensor is not centered in the F-mount, but sits unnaturally to the top, top-right side.

      • Pablo Ricasso

        Consider the angle the camera is being photographed from…
        (below and slightly to the right)

        • eb

          Hence the fact we can see the bottom of the camera. details peoples ๐Ÿ™‚

      • Cyclop20

        Because its a mirror, not sensor.. Bro.

        • St.

          well, I know that, but don’t you think that the mirror covers the sensor???

    • Ben Rogan

      also noticed the shutter button is the older silver one.

      • Cyclop20

        I just a photoshoped image, don’t be so serious pal.

    • MB

      Well spotted, this is definitely not the real thing …

  • Me

    Enter 700 comments asking where the D400 is…and how Nikon has somehow dropped the ball.


    • KnightPhoto

      I’ll take you up on that ‘Me’… I still think the D400 is coming. Maybe with on sensor PDAF for use in LiveView and regular PDAF for use in the normal way…

  • Theresa Brown

    Any news on frames per second?

  • rockland01

    Hopefully it will have at least 5-6fps, maybe 8fps with with an MB-XX battery pack like the D700 did, and clean iso up to 6400, and max at 25,000.

    Plus the same hybrid AF system like the D4/D800, and this will help with sports/birds in flight, etxc..shooters!


  • Jonathan

    Darn it, still no D400 news. It seems like the D700 is now in my sights, but of course now I have to find it used… If only this camera was a pro built body with a cf card, I would snatch it up right away.

    • fjfjjj

      Don’t you get it? Full-frame is now available at entry-level. This means that professional DX bodies are history. The D400 will be FX and replace the D700.

      • I really doubt that this will be true! The high end DX market is something Nikon would be foolish to ignore. Whether they introduce a D400 or a well improved D7100 or both is definitely subject to speculation but for them to drop this area is not likely. There are many of us that want that 1.5x “pseudo” reach that the DX line provides, yet also want a pro level camera. So, I expect both an entry level FX, like the D600 as well as a pro DX camera will come.

        • This concept of extra reach is hilarious, it REALLY doesn’t exist – the D600 will be 24.7MP. Crop away! Sell me why a crop sensor is a requirement for reach over a full frame lens with more MP?

          • Nikon John

            I always wondered about that, too. I would buy D600 to replace my D80, which is 10 mp. If I use my FX zoom on the D600 and crop, I’ll still have more resolution than I do now.

          • umesh

            Cropping is fine but when one is in a hurry and light is low or subject is moving it is actually difficult to always remember about crop marks. Not using crop marks ( using ff and crop later ) is not ok for some people. Although I do it a lot of times. Beats forgetting to remember about crop marks and getting heads cut off or such .

      • Plug

        Define professional. There are professional wildlife/bird shooters out there for whom a DX D400 with solid build, high fps and the extra telephoto reach, would be highly desirable.

        • fjfjjj

          Professional = full size magnesium body with good sealing, large buffer, easy handling with gloves, only 4 shooting modes, only 2 autofocus modes, only 3 metering modes, exhaustive custom functions, qualifies for NPS registration.

          • What about studio photographers, product photographers, wedding photographers, trekkers, nature photographers? Do they ALL have to wear gloves and pretend they pack heat between their legs? Are all professional photographers male and built like woolly mammoths?

            • fjfjjj

              All wooly mammoth photographers are birds which have as much heat between their legs as any warm-blooded creature. Most do not wear gloves, but insist that their wooly subjects wear gloves, or at least sign model releases. Most are members of the National Parrot Society.

  • luke

    What happened to the front wheel under the shutter button? where is?

    • St.

      whoever photoshopped this he took the left side from D3200/5100 and the right side from D7000.

  • Do you know about video specifications? Adjustable audio level, aperture control, 60 and 50fps?

    • iamlucky13

      My guess would be:

      1080p 24/30
      720p 60

      No adjustable audio or a simple +/- compensation
      Stereo mic port
      Manual aperture control, but probably without the D800’s smooth aperture adjustment.

  • luke

    very bad photoshopped!

  • I bought 2x D800 already but man, I would be happy to trade one and get a couple of these… the super high resolution on the D800 isn’t for the feint of heart to deal with on a large scale when you shoot every other day. :-/

  • Robert Daniels

    With the economy the way it is now and a defunct D300 and an aging D700, and the onslaught of being able to capture some video, This badboy will fit right into the slot of my dead D300 as backup to D700. I will get my D700 cleaned and refurbed for the next 4 years. The sensor is THAT good!. Thank You Nikon. However, I hope the D600 is as least as good as the D700 in low ISO at 24 MP. I know the build quality may not be there more like d3200 maybe. But at 24mp at 6 fps and please five it fast low light autofucus that is even better that D700. We want to hit a sweet spot Nikon!! Remember with the future inmpending economic collapse. I will need a good camera to capture it all for years to come. Ready to pull the trigger on this camera!. :p

  • OMR

    Like the waiting feelings when the Dark Night Rises.

  • Looks like I sold my D300 at just the right time. Hope they keep dual SD cards like the D7000.

  • willy

    I just wet my pants

  • Joe

    Would the 24Mb sensor have any phase detection pixel on it? Just like the rumor on the A99 24Mb sensor? I think they probably share the same sensor.

    I wonder if the iso performance will be better than D800 when viewed at the same image size and same distance.

    It’s gonna be a hard choice between D800 and D600 if all turns out to be true.

    • PAG

      Just buy both. It’s only money. And you don’t really want to ever retire anyway, do you?

      • Justin

        camera’s don’t cost money, they make money. ๐Ÿ˜›

  • Anonymous

    If they announce it 9/13, when will it ship?

    • ffggg

      Good question… ideas?

    • Pablo Ricasso

      Probably some time right before they announce the D710…

  • Colin

    D90 called, wants its camera back.

    Seriously… the chrome colored shutter button? Yeah not happening. Not to mention the big plasticy mode dial on top. yuck

    • Tom Mason

      Personally i think this is a fake image…The original leaked photos show it having a black shutter button for the semi pro look…This camera just doesn’t look to the same quality as those original leaked images

  • ano102

    admin : have you something about new lenses ?

  • JonMcG

    Hmm.. Curiously nobody in here is talking price and taking it for granted that admins reported $1500 is correct. I still am a doubter when it comes to that. They can (and should) market this at the $1899 point and it would still sell quite well, particularly off the build quality is slightly more robust than the D7000…

    • The most expensive part of the D600 will be its sensor, everything else in terms of build is likely to be a bit of a plastic and size compromise. So in my view the predicted price is very dooable in todays terms…

  • Foolishcfo

    Its disappointing we haven’t heard of either a D300s or D7000 successor. And Nikon’s investors wonder why their earnings are heading south?

  • Good source

    I know at almost 100% the final specifications of D600.

    The good: 24mp with D700 per-pixel noise (Aptina sensor, not Sony!), great video with full manual controls (and noticeably less moire than D800), features like the new AutoISO, double SD card slot.

    The bad: smaller (but 100%, though) viewfinder, cheaper construction and shorter buffer than D700 (similar to D7000 but a bit better), not clean HDMI output.

    The neutral: 5fps (6fps with same D700 grip), same 39-point AF system as D7000.

    It will be a FX muscle-enhanced D7000. Prices will be: $1500 body only, $2000 with 24-85 VR, $2250 with 24-120 VR. Not bad, eh?

    • Pablo Ricasso

      Sounds GRRRRREAT! If that’s right, I’ll either get this or the D800 before this time next year.

    • ashwins

      If the D600 will have the D7000 AF it will definitely be “The bad”โ€”not “The neutral” (when will you get this, guys!)

    • Justin

      $750 for the 24-120 VR…? sign me up!

    • ericnl

      I hope that you are wrong about the HDMI output, or that Nikon miraculously found a way to make their in camera video compression not suck…

    • If the viewfinder is as small/dim as the D7000, I’ll probably wait to upgrade to some mirrorless with ff. Viewfinder on my D200 is very similar in size to the D7000 and I hate it. Everything else is fine with the spec.

  • Stelian

    Don’t worry guys . The image is fake . I noticed from the first sight but I still analized it with a special software.Fail !

    • St.

      you don’t need a special software to analyze it. Just increase the exposure with 2-3 stops and you’ll see all imperfections, cuts, blurs, etc…

    • Notice that the original leak had a front subcommand dial. This doesn’t. The earlier leak is much more believable to me.

  • Doyle Hargraves

    At what “net” price difference would you consider replacing your D700 with a D600? If you can sell a clean D700 for $1400 USD and pick up a new D600 for $1799, would you do that deal? Just curious. That’s assuming performance is similar (ISO, AF, etc.) but adding video and 12 more mp, maybe lighter and smaller

    • St.

      Admin said before he expects price range around $1500 for D600.

      And yes – I would!

  • SloncePeru-MistrzBaj

    Love to here it. I am waiting for years for budget FX body. Superb info for me. /Regards / SloncePeru-MistrzBajeru

  • JonathanRphoto

    You can tell they used a D3200 body and photoshoped it. Look at the Dial on the left side if the camera. Pretty poorly blended. Also compare to a D3200 and D7000. FYI…NO WAY a full frame sensor would fit in that body.

    • Also a bad blend over the focus illuminator. Also, no front subcommand dial like the original leak.

  • philippe

    I have a D300 for 4 years now (very pleased of it).
    I think I am ready to move to FF, but that won’t happen until there is a real successor to the D700
    – D800 : I do need/want 36mp (even though my main focus is landscape photography)
    – D600 : I do not want to want to downgrade to a D7000 like body (size, focus,frame rate)

    • Reilly Diefenbach

      >D800 : I do need/want 36mp (even though my main focus is landscape photography
      You bet!

  • jw48335

    It’s too bad the new kit lens seems pretty rough on FX. Looks amazingly sharp on crop sensor though. I want VR for video, so having ruled out the 24-85mm I guess I gotta go with the Tammy 24-70mm.

    • Actually, the new 24-85mm VR is a very good performing lens, much better than expected and MUCH better than the older 24-85 f/2.8-4.

    • Reilly Diefenbach

      It’s plenty sharp through most of its range.

      • jw48335

        Central sharpness, yes, but I need good corners. Based on the slrgear results, that’s not gonna be this lens- it hits 8 on their blur meter at 24mm/f3.5. Camera Labs- Bad points: Needs stopping down to f8 to produce good FX-corners.

        I’m perfectly fine with the Tammy 24-70mm though. Performance looks comparable to the Nikon, and it has VR. I expect by the time the D600 ships, the Tammy will be supported by dxo as well.

  • It’s a fake, the mirror is far to high.

  • Don Jose

    I compared it to my D7000 body and it basically looks like Nikon fit an FX sensor into the D7000 body. That could work well. 24mp FX in a compact DX size body. We will see that the IQ is but surely it must be much better than the D7000 (which was good) and when you downsize the 24mp to 16mp D4 file sizes it may be quite usable at ISO 6,4000 just like the D800 is. Could be a winner for a lot of people. I think I will purchase one.

  • der

    Are there any plans for an affordable 35mm f1.8 for full frame to be released anytime soon?

  • ThomasH

    I really dislike the wheel on the left.
    In addition to 2 wheels on the right its outright a waste and a wrong choice.

    This looks like the D7000 setup. I wish, we would have had modal buttons. This function selection wheel sadly can also be found on Canon’s incl. 5D and 7D. On my 7D this wheel turned during lens change over and over, and I spoiled quite a number of shots by not noticing it in the hurry. Canon was offering the $120 lock button as an add-on to the 7D.

    The D7000 wheel is stiffer, and does not make such problems for me, but I still cannot see it at dusk. Sometimes I illuminate the camera to turn this stupid wheel, not to talk about this horrible, horrible lower wheel, dating back to F100 and F5. I wonder why stubbornness rules over ergonomics.

    We lost modal buttons, which we used to have on both Nikon and Canon semi-pro bodies (e.g F90 and EOS-3). They were safe against inadvertent switch, feedback in viewfinder allowed operation in the dark, and with gloves. Why to abandon a superior and mechanically simpler cheaper solution, I will never understand the Japanese engineers.

  • Camaman

    Nikon should have really put out a memo about D7000 being a replacement for D300 and D300s, or at least a paradigm shift.
    At least 8-9 months into its production.

    Imagine how many pointless hours was lost in thought and internet forums by the poor bastards waiting and wishing for D400

    Nikon is Really cruel…

  • Anonymous Maximus

    The lack of D400 rumors sounds like we must accept the demise of legendary D300 & D700 type bodies, by transcending into unfortunate D7000 & D600 types.

  • Chase

    Great! If I order within five minutes of pre-orders becoming available, I should have it by the end of February.

    • BartyL

      Or if you just wait ’til February you will be able to walk into a camera store and buy one off the shelf. It will probably already have had its first firmware update. Maybe other bugs will have been found, discussed to death and possibly even addressed and you won’t have waited any greater length of time to get it.

  • per

    There will not be a D7000 replacement. The D600 is the D7000 replacement.

  • Bye D700 D300s

    People buy DX because it’s CHEAPER than FF.
    If D600 is AS CHEAP AS what a DX camera is, there is no reason to make a flag ship DX at the same price point.

    • Anonymous Maximus


      • Agreed. And Nikon have shown they are still committed to DX lenses so there is a future DX body coming too, it’s just a matter of when.

  • AllForTeags

    Any info on new lenses? Perhaps a 24-70 2.8 update… VR? I am itching to pull the trigger on the current 24-70, but trying my best to wait for Photokina to see if there will be any updates that may warrant more patience. Thanks!

    • Justin

      24-70 2.8 VR would kill, ignore the haters.

      80-400 4-5.6 VR would kill even more.

      • Kim

        Doesn’t 80-400 4-5.6VR already exist???

  • Finalty……..i been waiting so much for this camera

    • Funduro

      LOL calm down. They first have to officially announce it, then the release date and then good luck being in the front of the pre-order list at your retailer. Yea you and several thousand other will get on multiple pre-order list.

      I can just see the B&H(or Best Buy, Amazon, Adorama) where’s my D600 whinnying.

      • BartyL

        Yes, here comes the whinnying. My personal challenge is not to whine about the whinnying. I will fail.

  • Kim

    I’m definately buying one of these! Simply because it’s gonna be just as good as the D800 , and much more portable ๐Ÿ™‚

  • Emilio

    Well .. looking at it, it’s not any bigger then a D7000, which to me is a small camera, very uncomfortable to be honest. I have a D300 and I’m very pleased with the size and materials used. If Nikon do not release any replacement of the D300s it will be like raping the customers to buy an FF camera, and so buying some FF lenses too .. which will suck ๐Ÿ™ Not all of us are wealthy peepz, you know .. ๐Ÿ™
    The DX cameras has their own place in the industry and denying this will only show incompetence.

  • NR Enthusiast

    Day made!

  • scurvy hesh

    Nikon I love everything about it as long as you keep the black shutter release like the prototypes we have seen here.

    Whatever you do don’t make it chrome! I hated that about the D90. I know its just cosmetic but it really bothered me.

  • Sebastian

    D600 is the true (and only) successor to D7000?

    at first i thought, no way, but it makes some sense:
    -if the D7100 is not announced this September, it would break the chain of 3 or 4 generations of that camera type being redone every two years in fall. No way, unless the whole dynasty is dead.
    -Nikon is giving up DX as a prosumer segment. This is clear. Otherwise we’d already have a wide DX prime. any wide DX prime. We don’t, and it makes sense, because sensor sizes are moving up in general. Nikon misses the trend with the “1” POS, but they are going to lead it with the D600.

    on the other hand, a D7100 would be so simple to do: stuff the 24MP sensor into the 7k body. A few little other things here and there, like AF from some higher-end model, done.
    OK, so there may be one DX prosomer model. But definitely not two, like 7100 and 400. I think the lens announcements of the last years really say it all.

    • Calibrator

      If there will be a direct D7000 replacement (=upper end consumer DX line) then it won’t be technically better than the upcoming D600. Especially not a better AF module.
      There is a bigger likelihood of a D400 with faster framerates, better AF (than the D7000/D600).

      That being said I don’t see a D400 coming right now – and I think you are dead-on with the lens situation.
      Nikon doesn’t produce DX bodies only to support third party lens makers like Sigma but sell their own lenses – and see what we got here apart from what already exists:
      A 40 mm macro and a 18-300 superzoom…

      No, Nikon gives a damn about the “professional DX market” right now – they have seen the success of the D800 line and want to repeat or better that with an inexpensive FX body (which they will). Hence the introduction of several cheapo FX lenses as entry drugs and to ease the pain for people upgrading from DX.

      They already covered their professional and semi-pro bodies and lenses pretty well (except for a wide angle tilt-shift lens…) but they expect DX owners to play around with zooms because they know that people that won’t carry heavy equipment won’t walk around with expensive primes, either! ๐Ÿ˜‰

      However, I believe there will be a direct D7000 successor in performance – it will be called D5200, have 24 MP, the same 39 point MultiCAM of the D7000 and with luck more than 4 frames/second – but a fully plastic body, a single SD slot, no top LCD and possible not even a pentaprism viewfinder (-> pentamirror).
      It will also be cheaper (around $750) and may sway first-time buyers to buy it instead of the D3200.
      It won’t, however, be of much interest to people desiring FX.

      The price range will be $750 (D7x00), $1500 (D600), $3000 (D800) and $6000 (D4). This makes much more sense than what they have now.

      Any by the way: Forget those Nikon year schedules for “body dynasties” – they were always way too irregular to prove anything!
      See here (at the bottom):

  • Pablo

    This camera, should not be nearly as good as the D800 if is going to be 1/2 the money.
    Who would buy a D800 then?
    Can just a sensor cost 1500 dollars extra?
    I don’t understand, something has to give… I would have not replaced my D7000 by the D800…

    • BartyL

      I think you are right, but remember that the D700 provided the IQ of the D3 (or near enough) for considerably less money. Unlike some, I don’t think Nikon made a ‘mistake’ in doing that. Anything that enables a camera company to sell more cameras at profit is a success, not a mistake.

      • Pablo

        I though the “Rule Of Thumb” was:
        Never compete with your own products.
        Thats like Apple building a Mac Mini that is almost as fast as their Mac Pro at a 1/4 of the price.

        • shadowfoto

          about apple and rules and stuff:
          โ€œIf you donโ€™t cannibalize yourself, someone else will.โ€

          imho that’s what will happen with nikon if they don’t change their minds.

          • Pablo

            CANNIBALS! lol
            Very interesting shadowfoto, I guess I was blind to the cannibalism done by Apple.
            I guess the sensor is worth 1500 dollars… since that might be the only difference…
            If the D600 is any faster than 4fps, bring that difference down to 1200 dollars probably.

        • Andrew

          Not quite, the Mac Pro is expandable, the Mac Mini is not! But I get your point. The issue here is the size of the market. Look at Intel, they make new generation of processors that are nearly as fast as their high-end, then they sell their high-end processor for three times as much. Some people really do care about that 20% increase in performance. Also remember, there are many professionals who want a D800 size body and will not settle for the D600 in a D7000 size body.

          Also realize that Nikon may greatly expand its market share with the introduction of the D600. Any loss of sales for the D800 will be “more than” made up by all the people switching from other camera manufacturers to buy the D600. And by the time those other companies come out with a competing model, the game may be over!

          • Andrew

            This reply is for Pablo

            • Pablo

              Yes, I agree now…
              I remember a while back looking for speakers for the house, one was 1400, the next model up was more than double, the difference was about 10-20% clearer…
              You guys are right.

  • EK

    I used to be a manager of a camera retailer. Just before the D7000 was released I was told by a nikon rep that the successor to the d300s (i.e. same body style) had been postponed indefinitely. He said the d90 replacement (d7000) would combine some of the features from the d300 like user custom programmable modes but would be similar in body style to the d90. He said the strategy was to see how unit sales went with that as the top end option with a dx format sensor. I have since left the business so I have no idea what strategy nikon is moving toward but I wouldn’t hold my breath for a d400 unfortunately. With the (I hope soon) arrival of the d600 at a low price point it may not leave room in the line up for a d400 dx camera. I would love all the options we can have but it may just not be viable.

    • Nikonnut

      I am a very satisfied D7000 user but i do believe the future for nikon dslrs is full frame.

      Besides the “mass market all in one lenses” nikon hasnt released an enthuisast level and above DX lens for a while now and on the other hand been releasing more affordable FX lenses.

      Seems the way forward is quite clear.

      But we can still use our dx cameras for years to come just as long as we dont need to have the latest greatest features and such.

      on another note,

      D600 has 50% less pixels compared to D800. Does that mean 50% better high iso seeing that the pixel sizes are much larger per photo site? hehe im just prodding here but no harm in wishing!

      • MB

        D600 will have 33% less pixels than D800 and about 18% less resolution, not very much really.
        As for DX yes Nikon does not believe in DX for professionals anymore, so no pro camera and no pro DX lenses, though I really see no point in making zillion similar consumer mid range zooms either.

        Something not entirely related I remember back in the days we had perfect couple D300 and D700, perfect for me at least. Real flexible system, interchangeable lenses and accessories, cameras complementing each other.
        Today Nikon is discontinuing D700, D300 line is more or less dead …
        On the other hand Nikon is launching D600 that may be a couple for D7000 but the problem is these are consumer cameras and I am not so sure how many consumers will need two bodies.

        • D300 and D700

          I’m with you on this one. I still have and very much enjoy D300 and D700, both are great, solid, reliable in every way, and as you said, they compliment each other nicely. If I travel, I travel with both: teles on the D300, wide and normal lenses on D700. I also occasionally use D7000, I find niche applications for it, and it is good for those, but if it got lost or crushed under a rock, I’m not sure I would rush to replace it, — no love affair there. I’m sure D800 is a great body too, I just feel it is not for me, I don’t have the shooting habits required to take full advantage of 36Mp, so it would just be a burden for me to deal with the huge files. Also, based on the samples from D800 I’ve seen, I think it renders tones and colors similarly to D7000. I expect the same rendering from D600, I think it is Nikon’s new palette. And I hate to admit, but I do like the colors coming from the older Nikon bodies better. (No offense to anyone). So, when my D300 and D700 finally die, I think I’ll find good used ones at a decent price, and will be set up for another five years. And then perhaps Nikon will come with something new that will be really appealing to me.

          • Vertigo

            I agree on the color change from D300 to D7000. I love the colors from my good old D300, but the D7000 tends to produce weird yellowish-orange cast in highlight zones. Not in all pictures, but in some at least.
            I hope that if there is a D400 someday, it will have a Nikon sensor, not Sony.

            • Dr Motmot

              oh good, I’m glad I’m not the only one experiencing weird ‘beige’ colours with my D7000 – really don’t like the skin tones. Now have D700 and am really pleased with the colours. Will sell D7000 to make space for D600 (depending on skin tones).

            • rhlpetrus

              That’s just WB at work, adjust it a little and you’ll see big differences. Also, use Portrait mode profile, available for CNX2, ACR or LR, it is much better for portraits.

              Re D400, it’s looking more and more that Nikon will improve D7000 a little (possibly PDAF off-sensor + 51AF points) and let it replace D300s.

            • bert

              The weird colours seem to be a result of the extreme D-range. The D800 suffers from this too. You can turn it down by adding more contrast with an S-curve.

        • Hmm….

          What if the D600 and the D7000 replacement were the same pixel count and shared common accessories like battery grip model and batteries?
          Another natural combination?

        • Ronan

          17-55 2.8 is all the pro glass you need + 70-200 2.8

          Shot with those for years.

          • rhlpetrus

            You need a pro-level UWA and WA primes as well, and those are not there for DX. A 24mm is alreay 36mm in DX, not reall WA these days. Nikon has really forgotten DX as a pro alternative. Maybe they are right, the world will move ML for most lower level gear and FF for the advanced and pro markets. But the 7D is selling very well, if Canon puts the new 61pt AF on the 7D2 it’ll be a killer camera.

            • DxUWA

              The nikkor 12-24 F4 is the pro DX UWA the 10-24 3.5-5.6 is normal. Build quality isn’t quite the same, mine still works perfectly despite breaking the UV filter from a trip to the floor.

          • Brent

            Yes, it is very hard to beat those two lenses. Excellent choices! In fact, the best choices.

      • Rob

        The D600 has 33% fewer pixels (36-24=12 12/36 = .33) than the D800. The high ISO noise should be less PER PIXEL, but we don’t know what that will translate into for equivalent sized prints.

        And once again, the future is not full frame. It will always be several times more expensive to make a full frame sensor than a crop sensor. It will always be more expensive to make a full frame lens than a crop lens. Perhaps companies will discontinue high end crop bodies, but entry-level will always use crop sensors. Imagine Nikon trying to compete with the T3 with a full frame body – the cost of the full frame sensor alone would be about what it costs Canon to make their whole camera.

        • umesh

          In case of technology one should never use the word NEVER.

          • Rob

            I didn’t.

            • Anonymous Coward

              Always = never

        • wublili

          My 25 years old full frame lens doesn’t cost any more than 1 year old… in fact, a lot less… so what’s the problem ?

      • Sahaja

        I too think Nikon’s current “strategy” is to push all pro and as many serious enthusiast users as they can to FX. As others have pointed out, their lens releases seem to point to that.

        A D7000 level camera will be their top DX offering and then the D600.

        Who knows, maybe they plan to introduce a DX mirrorless (nearly everyone else has) with an F-mount adapter and slowly fade out DX SLRs altogether.

    • Think for a moment what that “strategy” implies. Two to three years earlier (depending exactly on when you had that conversation) Nikon made a huge marketing push with the D300, going so far as to launch it with the D3 and inviting most of the world photographic press to Tokyo for the announcement. They were quite successful at this, selling out D300 cameras for quite some time. Yet, they decide they don’t want to update it and not offer an update for all those users? Oh, right, just upgrade to FX. That would imply that they doubly missed the point, and did so ignoring evidence right in front of their eyes.

      Short version: you don’t follow up successful products by discontinuing them and pointing customers to lesser products or products that are 2x the price and don’t solve the same problem. Because if you do, every time you have a successful product, you kill it.

      • EK

        I hope that they release a d400 he did just say postponed and that was a long time ago (pre d7000 release I don’t remember more exact time sorry) possible we are just still seeing delay from damage to the factories?

      • Zeke

        The only reason to put a cropped-frame sensor in a DSLR with an F-mount is to reduce cost. If the FX sensor were the same price, you’d always use that instead. The mirror box doesn’t get any bigger.

        FX sensors cost a lot more, of course, silicon area being what it is. But at some price point, it becomes such a small percentage of the camera MSRP that the demand may just not be there.

        Right now, the D800 sets the absolute upper limit – there is no justification for a DX camera that exceeds the price of a D800, because you could have had a D800 instead and turned on DX crop mode.

        Of course, a D800 is over $3K. But what if the D600 comes in under $2K? Suddenly a D400 makes less and less sense.

        • Rob

          I’m pretty sure the sensor, mirror box, and pentaprism are all bigger on full frame Nikon DSLRs. You don’t own both DX and FX bodies do you?

          • Zeke

            Nikon mirror box dimensions are fixed by the width and flange-to-focus distance of the F-mount. Without redesigning the mount there is no opportunity to miniaturize the box.

            A Nikon FG is a full-frame camera and it’s as small as the smallest DX DSLR.

            • Rob

              Only the flange-to-sensor and mirror-to-focusing-screen distances are fixed. FX mirror box assemblies extend farther down below the midpoint of the mirror (probably to incorporate the larger mirror), and extend further above the focusing screen (to incorporate the larger pentaprism and viewfinder). The assembly takes up more space on the sides of the mirror too. This allows DX cameras to be less tall and less wide than FX cameras. The depth cannot really be reduced because of the mount.

              Comparing an SLR to a DSLR is silly because the sensor/film size isn’t the only factor in determining the size – the lcd, electronics, and other internals are different between film and digital. If you made a DX SLR (not digital) with the same magnification and viewfinder coverage as the FG, it could be made smaller than the FG. The FG is also wider than many Nikon DSLRs (but this is a moot point because it has nothing to do with sensor/film size).

          • Kevin

            For wildlife photography you do. My uncle who shoots for nat geo owns all three sized sensors for canon mounts. It gives optimal cropping options in post and utilization of a 400L/500L/600L/800L

        • don

          “The only reason to put a cropped-frame sensor in a DSLR with an F-mount is to reduce cost. If the FX sensor were the same price, youโ€™d always use that instead.”

          I may be misunderstanding your point, but you seem to imply that if cost wasn’t an issue then there would be no market for crop sensor/DX cameras. If that’s your point, then I would say you are wrong. There are many (sports, nature) shooters who prefer a crop sensor to a full frame camera.

          • PHB

            DX cameras are just a tool, there are advantages and disadvantages to the crop sensor format just as there are pros and cons of DSLR vs EVIL design.

            Most people who blather on here don’t get the fact that a camera is simply a tool and owning an expensive one does not make you a better or a cleverer person. It is not even as if even Nikons top of the line lenses and bodies are expensive compared to what people spend on a car.

            The D600 might mean the end for the DX pro body in that a 24MP FX sensor is also a 10MP DX sensor. So a 12MP Pro DX body like the D300s won’t cut it any more but a 24MP Pro DX body would.

            What we don’t know from the D600 specs is what sort of handling features it will support. The D600 moniker suggests its a full pro feature set but that is not a guarantee.

            Since I have a D300, a smaller lighter D600 would suit me quite well.

        • Just a couple thoughts and I will say up front I am not a career photographer.

          There seems to be a lot of emphasis/wishing that the D600 be a ‘entry’ level camera as low of a price as possible. I get that concept, but consider that the D800 is quite a value leap ahead in more resolution and half the cost of the previous generation D3x, I dont see the need for the D600 to get to a wildly lower price. It should be a little lower price to differentiate it from the D800, but I hope they dont take too much out of it as far as using plastic parts, I hope Nikon maintains a good level of weather sealing and use of a quality frame and base construction. I would not mind paying $2000 to $2500 for a body that is at least as well built as the D7000, pro controls, current generation technology sensor and just firmware capped at ISO 6400.

          I am just ultimately saying that I would hate to see the body construction look more like a D3100 than a D7000 regardless of image/sensor capabilities.

          Lets not wish to ‘too’ cheap of a camera all around

          • Thomas

            I agree, weather sealing and at least a poly-whatever body would suit me (they do make rifles and other gear which receive abuse out of the fiberglass reinforced plastic).

            • Misericorde

              As i’ve read before “If polycarbonate is good enough for the canopy of an F16, it’s good enough for your camera”

              After lugging around an Nikon F4 the last couple weeks, a small light D600 would be nice. Also then most people who complain about the plastic bodies never watched DigitalRev’s torture test…

        • I agree with Leroy 100%. Additionally, the market for a DX camera with pro level AF is limited to bird shooters if one can buy an FX camera for roughly the same price.

        • > The only reason to put a cropped-frame sensor in a DSLR with an F-mount is to reduce cost. If the FX sensor were the same price, youโ€™d always use that instead. The mirror box doesnโ€™t get any bigger.

          Sorry, but that’s incorrect on both counts. Could you make the mirror box smaller? Yes. Depth would still be the same, if that’s what you mean, but you can make the mirror box smaller in height and width. In other words, you could make a smaller camera.

          As for the “only reason is cost” assertion, I really hope that Nikon themselves doesn’t think this way. Because if they do, they’ve just missed a fairly large group of shooters, ones that are interested in pixel density. Even a 36mp FX body (the D800) doesn’t have more pixel density than a 16mp DX body (the D7000). At the moment, the champ at that is the D3200 (24mp DX). Unfortunately, the body and features of the D3200 are absolutely NOT what the crowd that wants a D300 replacement wants.

          • Zeke

            Not height above the lens centerline – the distance to the focusing screen is fixed by the mount geometry as well. It’s true you can nip off a little on the edges (though Nikon doesn’t in practice) and the pentaprism ends up a little shorter but that doesn’t change the main point: camera geometry is so constrained by the F-mount that DX offers negligible opportunity for miniaturization.

            Pixel density: in an ideal world, pixel density really should be independent of sensor size, just as the grain size of a given emulsion has nothing to do with the size of the film. Medium format had more resolving power than 35mm. That’s why you went to the bother of schlepping a Hasselblad instead of a Leica.

            If, say, a 4 micron photosite is developed that meets all the performance criteria, you’d use more of them in an FX sensor and fewer of them in a DX sensor. This, in fact, is exactly how pixel processes are implemented in the mobile space. A company develops a 1.4um pixel and then launches several sensors of different sizes based on that design.

            Right now pixel density is held hostage by practical limitations of readout speed and file size, but these are limitations of implementation – not desirable features in themselves. The ideal DSLR would be equipped with a sensor capable of recording the full image circle of the large and expensive F-mount lenses you bought, with options to crop in-camera (DX mode) and bin in-camera to control effective pixel density. What advantage – other than cost – would a DX-only camera have over that?

            • Zeke

              P.S. And of course, cost _does_ matter, and Nikon is unlikely to come out with a 48MP FX sensor that can bin on-chip and support 8fps tomorrow, so I am not arguing that they shouldn’t release a 24MP D400.

            • Rob

              I like how several people have pointed out how you were completely wrong yet you keep trying to defend your incorrect statement. You were wrong; accept it and move on.

            • Zeke

              Which “incorrect statement,” Rob?

      • umesh

        I guess their sales strategy is to make people buy more things(fx) instead of work with current(dx) and make them buy more expensive fx lenses if they are serious. If lower end there are 3200 and 5100 in dx and 600 in fx. For serious pgs they have 800 and D4. As it is you need good glass for higher mp be it fx or dx. In long run for serious photography fx works out better . Atleast thats what I told myself when I got my 800e recently upgrading from D200.

      • bd

        So are you suggsting there will be a D300 replacement or that Nikon will be stupid?

      • One More Thought

        Sometimes you do end a successful product line voluntarily…that’s what Apple has did with the iPod mini when it introduced the nano.

        Nikon is changing with the times; they are realizing the ever shifting space in what the buying public wants, along with the competition, along with the evolving technology.

        There’s not as much of a need for a D300 successor; you have the D7000 series; you will have the D600, you will even have the D800, all in the same market space of prosumer/high end hobbyist/pro gear with much lower price tag than the top of the line D4.. Remember when the D300 came out there was no D700, and it was the only pro style Nikon body for less than the D3. Things have changed since then. Look at the fact that the d300s didn’t sell so well.

        • Nikonnut


          • > Sometimes you do end a successful product line voluntarily

            True. But not without first making sure that you’re serving your customers correctly. Also, you can get away with a lot more with low cost consumer products (iPods, Coolpix) than you can with things that people buy into as a long-term investment including accessories (Macs, DSLRs).

            Essentially, Nikon discontinuing the D300 line is a bit like discontinuing, oh, the MacBook Pro 17″. While Apple did just that, they also introduced something even higher end in a number of respects (MacBook Pro Retina 15″). While that doesn’t perfectly solve the 17″ users needs on the face, it actually does when you analyze it carefully.

            So the question here is would discontinuing the D300 and introducing a low cost D600 FX do the same thing? No, it wouldn’t. The folk that are still shooting with D300’s and want a replacement are not served by either the D7000 or the D600. Not even close. Thus, you’re saying sayonara to some of your customers. Customers you spent lots of money acquiring.

            As I noted in an article this week on my site, I see a lack of clear strategy on Nikon’s part. Clear strategy would be a line of tightly focused common consumer (iPod, Coolpix), performance consumer (iPad/Air, Nikon 1), prosumer (MacBook, DX DSLRs), and pro (MacBook Pro, FX DSLRs).

            Could you clearly serve all camera buyers with 6 Coolpix, 3 Nikon 1, 3 DX, and 3 FX DSLRs? I believe you could. Nikon unfortunately have got themselves into thinking more SKUs = more sales. Ironically, they then seem to get THAT wrong by not introducing certain SKUs that are wanted by customers.

            • Timo

              Unfortunately the strategy might be clearer than you think: judging by the latest moves, likeliness is high, that they sat themselves specialists into the nest, one being in charge for just one segment each. Consequently the race of plain number begins: if we can sell x of D7000 and y of the D600 but only z of a D400, then the D400 has to go. What I suggest is a plain body count not even considering the future market chances for lenses and accessories. I think most of us would agree, that typical mass-product customers buy less Nikon lenses and accessories than an average pro customer would.
              I like seeing the cameras as tools, each one for their particular purpose. And doing so, there is no replacement for the D300s neither the D7000 is nor will the D600 be. Basically the same counts for the D700. Small size may sure be an advantage to some. A robust pro body will be indispensable to others. To provide makes the difference of a plain money-oriented maker to a customer-oriented maker. As Apple was drawn several time for comparison: I only hope that Nikon does not go the route of customer education towards their goal and arbitrary like Apple does.

            • D300 and D700


              I agree with you but not entirely. I don’t think Nikon will lose its D300 customers, at least not in the long run. I have a lot of good glass, some fairly old, some fairly new, that I really love for quality and workmanship. It is a big investment, and it just doesn’t make sense to me to sell it all and go shopping for Canon or Sony. So, I may skip their current generation of products, but I’m not gonna forsake the Nikon brand because of all the good stuff they had made in the past. I’m sure there are many other folks like me. Their last generation of products was golden, and not everyone needs the latest and greatest. Sometimes latest and greatest simply reflects a strategy of planned obsolescence. But no one is forced to participate in this game unless they choose to.

      • The Runes Say

        It’s not about bodies, it’s about lenses.

        Nikon is fed up with DX users buying, say, 300mm for the reach when they could/should be paying a premium for the same field of view on FX.

        Hi end DX is a liability now as far as Nikon marketing is concerned.

        • bossa

          This is exactly the reason why I still have a Pentax K-5 and an FA*300 telephoto as I get that ‘reach’ and VR via the K-5 shake reduction at a fraction of the cost of a Nikon telephoto. That camera and lens cost just a tad more then the Nikkor 300/4 alone and I still wouldn’t have VR with that lens on my D800E. Not to mention the Pentax is actually sharper. I’m so used to that angle of view with a 300mm now that on FF I wouldn’t really be happy unless I got a 400/2.8 and they cost over 10 grand where I live.

      • philippe

        Full agree with you Thom.

        I now have a D300 (which I am very pleased).
        I am ready to accept that “pro-Dx” is discontinued by Nikon and move to FF.
        But on the other, I would expect from Nikon a clear and acceptable upgrade path.

        As far as I am concerned, this path does not exist at this moment :
        – however good the D800 is, I consider it as specialized (and expensive) tool, mainly because of its huge resolution, which I do not need (nor want)
        – having enjoyed for several years a D300 like body, I do not want to downgrade to a D7000 like body (probable D600 body)

      • Sahaja

        Does anyone understand the thinking of Nikon? Sometimes they are more difficult to fathom than the mind of a woman.

        • Just a question: do you have your flak suit on? ;~)

          • BartyL

            I don’t know that he has much to worry about – this site’s a bit of a ‘sausage-fest’.

      • rhlpetrus

        Agree, I think Nikon is missing a large part of the market, lots of pros use DX for their daily work, like school’s PJ and sports shooters, local newspaper reprotiers, etc. I rarely see thse people with FFs and large bodies, most use D300 and 7D.

    • Andrew

      As far as Im concerned,I would loev to have a D400 DX for my zoom kit,and a D600 or D800 FX for my primes and standard zoom

  • Back to top