Let’s talk about 2013

A quick look at what to expect from Nikon in 2013:

Nikon D300s/D7000 fusion

One of the possible scenarios is that in 2013 Nikon will merge the D7000 and D300s product lines. There is a good chance that only one high end DX DSLR camera will be announced (D400 or D8000?) that will replace both D7000 and D300s models. The camera will have a "pro" body similar to the D300s and most likely come with a 24MP sensor and 8fps. The D3200 and D5200 should be sufficient to cover the entry level needs. The new DX camera will be the "transition model" to the full frame category (D600). Expected announcement: January/February 2013.

Nikon D4x

The Nikon D4x (not sure about the name) will not be a direct replacement of the D4 and is expected to have a high MP sensor - either the 36MP from the D800 or a new 52MP with 4 fps. Expected announcement: end of 2013.


Some recent tips suggested that Nikon was waiting for the latest VR technology that offers up to five stops of image stabilization and will implement it in the long-awaited 80-400mm lens (which may have a slightly different focal length). I don't have information on other lenses at that point.

Please note that it is still too early to put any high probability ratings on those rumors. I expect to have more details on the new DX camera in early January, 2013. Similar to this year, around February I will hopefully have more information on all upcoming Nikon products for 2013.

This entry was posted in Nikon D4, Nikon D400 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • catinhat

    Any hope of D4 coming out in D700 style body?

    • Neil

      Don’t count on it. It would cannibalize the D4 sales like the D700 did the D3. From a product point of view the D600 is really the successor to the D700.

      • chubby brunette

        I would prefer a d700 with the dynamic range of the d800. That’s would be the perfect camera!

        • ben johnson

          While I agree with this statement, I think that unfortunately we are well past the point of having hope for such a thing. If I was going to have hope for something extremely unlikely, I would ask for a……………………………
          FF MIRRORLESS in 2013!!!!!

          • MyrddinWilt

            Another rather pointless idea. Nikon needs to finish delivering lenses for their existing mirrorless before starting a whole new system.

            The focusing system on the mirrorless does not compete with the DSLR focusing. So the market for FX mirrorless would be limited to landscape.

            I think Nikon can give far more bang for the buck by offering interesting toys for the CX line. For example a tilt/shift adapter that takes F-mount lenses.

      • Mike

        Canibalize? A Nikon sale is still a sale to Nikon. 50,000 D700’s or 5000 D3’s still go to Nikon. The alternative would have been 6000 D3’s and 100,00 5D mkII’s.
        I would buy a D800H (D4 in a D800 body) in a heart beat.

      • MyrddinWilt

        I don’t think Nikon worry about cannibalizing the flagship sales. The margins on them are likely rather small. Its a hand made camera built in the highest cost country to make it and the volume is tiny.

        • MyrddinWilt

          Reason to exclude it is that the D4 is designed for newspaper type photojournalists who need the high FPS and will pay what it takes.

      • jaygreen55

        The D800 is the replacement for the D700 Same body type and features at a similar price point. I’m sure a D4s is on the horizon as well. The D600 is an FX D7000

    • They never did that with the Nikon D3s and the D700 – I doubt they will do it with the D800.

      • catinhat

        It seems there would be quite a few potential customers who could/would splurge on a baby D4 in a D800 body but would never drop 6G for a real D4. This group is more likely to go for a used D3s once its price drops a bit more within the next year or so. By then most people who want/need/can afford a D4 will have bought one. So, the failure to release a baby D4 looks to me like a net loss for Nikon, especially if they have a D4s in the pipeline.

    • Richard M

      Seems very unlikely. Why would Nikon compete with their own flagship product? In any case, the smaller body would limit the battery capacity needed for a high fps camera and adding an optional grip would make the exercise pointless.

      • shadowfoto

        …yet canon does this with 5d3/1dx combo.

        • khaled tolba

          where did that come from? the 5D mark III and 1DX have totally different sensors. YOu might be thinking of the 5D mark II and 1D IIIs that shared a 21 MP sensor but that was a generation ago.

  • Aldo

    there you go dx lovers… just wait a little

  • Bob

    24-70mm f2.8 VR would be nice…..

    • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

      Yeah, nice to dream about ever having enough $$$$$$$$ to buy one . . . . =D

      • Price would be 70-200 vr2 style I think, which I own and love, only price WAS the dissadvantage :D.

      • ewm19


    • HotDuckZ

      If it 77mm filter size, it’s my dream came true.

  • AlphaTed

    I’m waiting …

  • That D7000/D400 fusion sounds appealing to me for long-range sports and wildlife shooting.

    • The biggest problem I see with this is they will loose the non-pro DX customer. Those who want the features of a D7000 but in a non-pro body. Many hobbist will not want to pay for the D7000 replacement if it is more due to the pro body/shutter reliability, etc.

      • Hm… When you spin the argument around looking at it from the low-end-up, your argument makes a lot of sense. I guess that comes down to price. What do you think? Somewhere halfway between today’s D7000 and D600 on price?

        • MyrddinWilt

          I think that it would be no more than a couple hundred bucks more than the D7000 at launch, $1400 and drop fairly quickly when the D7000 was phased out (which might be after a year).

          The D90 slot is one of the most profitable in the line so it is going to be filled and going to be a decent model. Unless they decided to go back to the all-plastic shell for a D7100, the D7000 is going to have a D600 body. So why not give the replacement a D400 badge and a D7000 price?

      • chrischrischris

        I dont think so – its the same like the D700 and the D800. Ok, both cameras are pro models. The D300 is old, and they need an pro replacement. Or Nikon brings a normal replacement for the D7000 and cancel the D400. So if the consumers want a pro DSLR, they must change to FX – thats mean the pro-DX is dead – long live the FX ….

      • I have been speculating that with Nikon the issue could be more about encouraging users to move up the product “food chain”.

        I have a D7000 (and D80 before), and would have bought 1 step down the product line in both cases (then D40x, now D5x00) except for a) the expanded lens compatibility [desired when I first purchased], and b) the built-in flash commander mode [supporting off-camera flash I have grown to love]. I don’t want to go higher up the product food chain. aka I don’t want a higher price point

        … Unless I change my mind and decide I want full-frame for my landscape photos. Or other coming cool features.

  • Paulo G

    Will we finally see a replacement for nikon d300? I’m waiting for it since 5 years. I hope the wait was worth it!

  • D300s/D7000 fusion is logical

    • PeterO

      I don’t think so Nikola. The price gap between the D5200 and the D600 is too great. Nikon has said that they want to be No. 1 and in order to do that, they have to cover all the bases. My guess: D7200 and D9000. The 7200 will get 24MP and a few more gee-wiz features like gps while the 9000 will be a successor to the D300s (now that the rumours about a 7D Mark II are out).

      • Looking at the D5200 and the D600, it will be hard to fit two new DX products in between in terms of features and functionality. When you look at the price points, it does make sense, because there is a big gap between the price of the D5200 and the D600. It will be interesting to see how Nikon will fill this gap.

        • RMJ

          I really don’t see a problem there. D7100 will be the little brother of D600. D400 (or whatever it’s gonna be called) will be little brother of D800.

          Pro line : D400 -> D800 -> D4
          Consumer line : D3200 -> D5200 -> D7100 -> D600

          D400 doesn’t need to fit in any gap because it’s the lowest level pro body. D600 is clearly not a pro body and doesn’t fit above D300s/D400.

          • Captain Megaton

            The market for a “pro” DX body that costs more than a full frame alternative is essentially nil. That’s the “problem”, if you will.

            Since we are making predictions:

            A D6000, bringing back a “D90” style camera, perhaps with an articulating LCD, is certainly a possibility, to replace the D5200 and go a little upmarket to compete with the Pentax K30.

            Then a D8000 (remember we are on even numbers now starting with the D4) is the D7100/D300 hybrid.

            That actually makes a perverse logic, now I’ve written it out.

            • RMJ

              Well, obviously no one would pay more fod DX pro body than FX pro body. But the scenario above that I said doesn’t conflict with that at all. D600 is NOT pro body! Not even close. It is nothing but oversized D7000 with FX sensor inside. It lacks several important features that can be found in pro bodies such as D300s, D700 and D800 (and obviously D4 and so on). D600 is clearly a consumer camera, or a enthuastic camera if you wish. But definitely not a pro body. D600 is an entry level camera for a shooter that wants to try out the FX world but otherwise would be still quite happy with D7000.

              D400, even with a DX sensor would sell a lot even if it would costs more than D600 (D300/D300s was actually cheaper, so why should D400 cost more?). They are not even competing products, so their price is not really an issue. Could be even an advantage as with about the same price you can choose what is more important for you, a large FX sensor with a body missing some key features lacking, or a smaller DX sensor in a body that packs the latest technology and features that professional shooters (sometimes) need.

              DX sensor is not a no-go for many people. It has it’s place in birding, sports photography and in many other situation. Sometimes it is and advantage over a bigger sensor.

            • Captain Megaton

              Will a 24 MP Nikon DX body priced above the D600 be successful? I don’t think so. Not a chance.

            • RMJ

              Why it should be priced over D600?

              D300 was 1500e when released, D600 was over 2000e. Why would D400 has to be more than D600 when it clearly replaces D300?

              D400 will be sub 2000 euros pro body with a DX sensor.

            • Gavin

              I waited so long to upgrade my D300 I eventually looked at Canons offering and realized that the 7d old technology and bought a 1dx after Canon Provided an evaluation Unit and lenses to shoot with for two weeks.

            • David Kruse

              Absolutely, if it has better speed in focusing, ISO, FPS then I will be in. I don’t see a big price difference, but there is more to photography than just frame size.

            • MyrddinWilt

              I just don’t see the ‘pro body’ being half as much of an advantage as you seem to.

              I have the D300 and it is great. But it would be even more great if it weighed less. I don’t use my cameras for hand to hand combat, I take care of them. My D50 is still perfectly fine despite getting a lot of use.

              I don’t think that real pros are any different. Even the guy who uses the camera every day of the week is not going to ‘use up’ a D7000 or a D600 before it becomes obsolete.

              For the folk who go on arctic expeditions and such, well there is the D800.

            • RMJ

              Well, everyone has their personal preferences, of course. But there are people who do prefer so called pro bodies. I’m one of them. I did have D300 in the past (before it got stolen) and I miss it very much. D7000 is not clearly as good in hand as my D300 was. I don’t mind the tiny increase in weight, it even makes it steadier in some cases.

              What comes to build quality, I have nothing against chearper bodies either. My camera is still in one piece even though I abuse it like any other tool I own. I don’t have mercy for my tools, they are made for working and to get job done not for petting with silk gloves.

            • namvet

              I bought a D7000 but went back to my D300s for wildlife and sports. I prefer the larger body, the WB/ISO/QUAL buttons up top, instant zoom for review, and the better AF system of the older body. I don’t see much difference in IQ with 16MP vs. 12MP.

              My old D700 is fine for grandkids and scenes. I’ve thought about getting a D800E, but will wait for a D400. Take your time, Nikon, just get it right.

          • PhotoSME

            RML you are right on.

            I like the Pro Line D400->D800–>D4

            Now that they are catching up after the weather issues last year hopefully we will see the D400.

          • NEOMOVIE

            I think Nikon shoud stop d7k, and go back to “d90”, it needs one d90 successor, if nikon really introduce d400 as d400 successor.
            Pro line: d400->d800->d4 or d4x
            Consumer line:d3200->d5200->d92->d600

            • RMJ

              It can be closer to D90 successor but it won’t be named D92 for sure. The two digit line has reached it’s end already. It’s either D7100 or D8000 and the first one is much better guess as Nikon is reserving the even numbers for future use.

          • Donz

            yes, wouldn’t really want Canon to be any different, vice versa. lol (Are they REALLY both owned by the same parent company? lol)

        • Deep_Lurker

          I don’t see how the D600 and D400 need to have well-separated price points. In fact, I’d say that both would sell well even if they both had the same MSRP. There are plenty of people saying “why get a D600 if you could get a D400” and also lots of people saying “why get a D400 if you could get a D600.”

          Anyway, how many extra sales would it take for it to be economically worthwhile for Nikon to come out with both a D7100 and D400? If the D400 will sell “only” as well as the D800, should that be enough to kill it?

        • MyrddinWilt

          I think the D600 and D800 prices will both drop a little. D800 looks like it should be more like $2600 and D600 should be more like $1800.

          The D7000 was $1200 on launch, that could rise to $1300 or even $1400 if it was called a D400.

          But the main reason to think that they are going to fuse is that the D600 uses the D7000 style chassis. And while I still think the DX format has more legs than people here recon, the D800 is a fine DX camera as well as being a great FX camera.

          So bottom line is that I can’t see room for a DX camera with a D800 body. The only real advantage of DX over FX is size and weight. And yes, those are a big deal for many female pro photographers who don’t need freudian sized lenses. So why put a pro DX sensor in a body that is overbuilt for 90% of users?

          So put that all together and I see the most likely outcome is a new body called the D400 that is rather closer to the D7000 price wise but has the full unrestricted D300 feature set in addition to whatever consumer dumbed down modes are there. And if those dumbed down modes can be programmed, well better still.

        • tao

          2 issues with that prediction: 1) is the price gap. Will people be willing to jump 500-1000 over a D5200 – I doubt that. 2) What will Canon do? If Canon stays, Nikon will. The ole D300/D50 Nikon and Canon miss-match always caused problems for people choosing between the two and created a bad “either this or that” option for even reviewers to write about. Those two things together = two bodies for both for another round at least.

        • desmo

          could itbe D5200 body with FX sensor the $1500 no AF motor 11 point AF option in original D600 rumour

          just a thought

      • John Tangney

        I agree with PeterO in that I prefer two separate lines, one to replace the D7000 and another to replace the D300/D300s. The D7000 upgrade can get a 24 MP and a few more minor improvements (like locking mode dial). The D300/D300s replacement could be aimed at higher ISO, faster FPS and further focusing improvements. This could mean a 14-18 MP sensor instead of the 24 MP, and I believe that would be very well accepted for this line.

        • Captain Megaton

          A D300 replacement with 14-18 MP is just the D7000 again, no?

          • John Tangney

            No, the D300 replacement would have better ISO, faster FPS, bigger buffer, better focusing, more buttons for direct access to choices, and a more rugged build. That is NOT a D7000. Note that Nikon made their top of the line FX camera only 16 MP, and they could do the same for DX!

    • iamlucky13

      Either option is logical – fusing or keeping separate.

      I’m biased against fusion because the D7000 line fits my budget and needs.

      But my bias aside, there is a big gap between the D7000 and the D800. I compare the D800 because despite what a great camera it appears to be, the D600 does not truly fill the gap. I really think a 24 MP, 9+ FPS, full magnesium body, and the top end AF module could be successful even if priced about the same as the D600, but it’s not like anyone will complain if it’s below $2000.

      If they do fuse, almost certainly the result will be 1/2 step up from the D7000, which widens the gap to the D5100.

      In my opinion, that makes a direct replacement for the D90 seem pretty logical – plastic body, but with in-body AF motor, bigger viewfinder than the D5100, and modest dose of external controls.

      And this in turn would beg the question of whether to keep both the D5xxx and D3xxx, or merge them and push the lowest end customers towards the 1 system, which should have lower manufacturing costs for Nikon to work with anyways.

      • thomasverbeke

        why not (D600 not filling the gap)

    • Ljn71

      I agree,and very appealing too. Sounds like a perfect camera for me.

    • ralittle2

      I don’t know why folks think Nikon can’t produce both a D7000 & a D300s successor. Nikon already makes a bazillion point and shoot variants. The bodies exist for both a D7200 & a different D400 body, insert the proper chip and there you go. The cameras are aimed at different markets and there would be at least a $300 dollar difference in the price. Variety is the spice of life. Make mine a D400 with 8+fps/ 51 pt. AF/ D800 body and native ISO to 12,800. I’ve only been waiting 18 months and the money is there.

      • One good reason: they have not done it yet.

      • Captain Megaton

        Do not confuse capability with economic viability.

      • PhotoSME

        Excellent Point. Bring me a D400 or what ever you want to call it but lets get “the lead out and show us the Camera”

    • rkas

      Since the D7000 is a D300s/D90 fusion, I dont really see why they should fuse it even more. The only thing the D7000 needs is 24mpix, a bit higher fps and better buffer and its done.
      What I miss is the real D90 successor that should be sold for the price of a D5200. That would be logical to me.

      • desmo

        are you going to complain if they replace the 39point AF with 51point AF


        I think D5200 being given 39 pt AF was the tell
        D7000 replacement needs to one up it with 51pt
        a D7x00 with 51 pt AF mens no need for D3oos replacement thus they merge

      • Hawkeye

        Also get rid of that stupid mode selection dial…

  • Neil

    It would be odd for Nikon to wait for VRIII for the 80-400. They would have lost MANY sales if it was ready but waiting. But if they do finally add it, and it gets a little more length than 400, I may buy it and get rid of my Sigma 150-500.

    • Pat

      After releasing this new version of 80-400 I guess Nikon wouldn’t want to touch it for another 12 years at least, that’s why they want to make sure this lens have all the latest tech.

    • MyrddinWilt

      The designer of the 80-400 died of cancer shortly before it launched.

      Being the company that Nikon is, they launched the lens without any further modifications not authorized by the designer. Not even the mods suggested from the field trials.

      Its like buying an Aston or a Lamborghini, what you are paying for is the best there is but there is a little dose of lunacy added in.

  • MrOzMan

    54 megapixels would work nicely for aerial photographers

    • 40mp and up is already dominated by medium format, would be very very hard to shoot that on a dslr.

      • shadowfoto

        MF lenses cannot into VR, so there’s at least one area where 35mm BIG_MP cameras would fit.

        also telephoto and supertele lenses.

      • MyrddinWilt

        40MP is not ‘dominated’ by medium format, thats just the only game in town right now.

        There was a time when 30MP was a medium format only game, oh yes that would be last year.

        Medium format is dead, it just hasn’t stopped moving. Making the sensors is ridiculously expensive as the volumes are tiny. The technology they are using is five years out of date at least and so beating them is not too hard.

        • Robert

          no friend, medium format quality is not related exclusively to mega-pixels, so neither D800 nor Nokia will replace them.

          • MyrddinWilt

            The last guy who used to call everyone ‘my friend’ was Mitt Romney while he was giving someone a patronizing answer.

            The Medium Format cameras have some goodies like a shutter in the lens which gives them a high flash sync capability. But that is going to be obsolete as sensors with electronic shutters provide flash sync at even higher speeds than a mechanical shutter is capable of.

            Medium Format had advantage in the film days as we all used the same sensor (film!). But the phase one is only 80 MP and even though the sensor sites are bigger than on a D50 the ISO performance is only 800. My Nikon V1 beats it in low light.

            We went through exactly the same process when the microcomputer killed the mainframe in the early 1990s. The mainframe guys just could not understand that their technology just would not have a place in the market ten years on. You can still buy computers that will run the mainframe operating systems but they are microcomputer processors emulating the mainframe instruction sets either as virtualization or in microcode.

            When I was working at DESY, the head of the computer division that had just spent $20 million on an IBM 9000 could not understand that the $20K workstation on my desk actually ran faster. Today my iPhone is faster than either of them.

            Newtonian optics are guage invariant. Unless you are at the point where quantum effects play a role then you can scale every aspect of a camera system up or down by the same amount and it will still give the exact same results. The only variable that does not scale is the photon which has a wavelength and a finite amount of energy. So make the lens bigger and you collect more photons and get more electrons knocked out at the sensor and that improves low light performance. But only if you are using a state of the art sensor process which Phase One can’t afford even at close to $50K per camera.

        • Anjitha

          I am leaving Nikon. I am tired of waiting. I waited 1year until Nikon release 100-500mm as rumours. I hate D600’s auto focus points. All are in the middle.Does anyone want 39 point in center ? I love D200 body and I need D400 but the same time I need Nikon to produce 400mm f/5.6 VR II or non VR for fare price like canon does (Canon 400mm L f/5.6). I cant wait any more… I respect Nikon but they are too slow for wildlife photographers. bye bye Nikon I bought Canon 400mm f/5.6 and again waiting for Canon 7D mark II 🙂

  • leopoldo

    mccurry shot with nikon here the new pirelli’s calendar 2013 http://www.gqitalia.it/show/lifestyle/2012/11/calendario-pirelli-2013-foto-di-steve-mccurry

  • Pat

    Admin: As for Nikon waiting for the latest 5-stop VR for the 80-400…. I think the fact that Nikon patented the lens twice , in 2011 and 2012 respectively, with only very minor change – which happens to be number of lens elements – between the two patents might verify this claim.

    I am no insider but my gut feeling is we will see this lens real soon, likely with the D7000/D300-successor.

    Personally I prefer the 55-300 f/2.8-4.

  • Richard M

    I’ve thought there would be a single DX replacement for the D300s/D7000 for sometime and with the spec mentioned. I still think it will be called D7100 although D8000 might be used to differentiate it from D7000. I don’t think it will be D400 as Nikon will most likely want to keep this and any other 3 digit names, for future FX cameras.

    • Torben Christiansen

      My money is on D400 being an entry model FX in late 2013 or 2014

      • The Nikon D600 is the entry level DSLR. Don’t expect another entry level FX body.

        • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

          What about a super stripped down FX body? Digital FE? For $950?
          (No autofocus, basic metering, compact body)
          I am curious, how many readers would buy such a camera?

          • Nikon doesn’t like to take any risk, otherwise I like the idea.

          • You say NO AUTOFOCUS?? That means no af-confirmation and no frikkin AUTOFOCUS.

            Sorry, but that would suck… And impossible to make for 950$ :D.

          • I like the idea of a classic FE, or even rangefinder style, but it has to have autofocus and full compatibility with AF-S lenses at least.

    • Why do some have to separate the pro vs non-pro lines with FX vs DX. This is a need for a PRO DX, unless you just use the DX setting on the FX camera.
      Also, Nikon has ALREADY introduce the entry level FX, it’s the D600.

    • Good point on the three digits model names – Nikon will probably keep the 3 digits for FX, 4 digits for DX.

    • Vin

      I am wounding if we will see one new new DX model at $1500-$1750. It still seems that that could leave still a large gaping in the $1000-$1500. Could it be we Will see one model with 2 variants. Maybe one with out an AA filter. Or one oriented to more HD movie application. I do not think Nikon is protecting or cannibalizing there sales if people moved brands to get what they really want or need. Nikon needs to try to please as many photographers at as many different aspects as they can. Photographers Will just by Canon, Pentax, Fuji,, or Sony. Especially if you are a true enthusiastic photographer or professional.Nikon needs to keep us brand loyal. My bet is Nikon will bring out whatever it takes, we may see one higher end DX beginning of the year and then another in the fall just below it for the 2013 Xmas season in the $1200 price.

  • tony5787

    I’m hoping to see either a 105mm 1.8G VR or 135mm 1.8G VR. Maybe the 58mm 1.2G but I probably won’t be able to afford that anyway.

  • Reina

    I have a few coins burning a hole in my pocket, I was going to buy a d7000 with the 24-70 lens, but I knew I should wait, I’m really glad I did

  • catinhat

    OK, let’s play devil’s advocate. 24mp DX equals about 54mp FX. Remember all the recent noise about the difficulty to get the most out of a 36mp sensor, and Nikon’s own warnings about shooting technique required for taking advantage of 36mp. Now imagine a 54mp one in its DX incarnation. This pretty much tells me: get a tripod or else… Of course for sports shooting you need very high shutter speeds to begin with, so this is probably less of an issue, assuming you can nail your focus on a moving target to the extent that will make these 24mp look any better than 12 or 16.

    Now, I know everyone will tell me “when viewed at the same size it won’t be any worse than [insert your obsolete model here]”. This may all be true, but it means that I won’t really take any advantage of all these pixels because as soon as I try to crop or print large all the flaws will become quite obvious.

    • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

      DX24 does not = FX54.
      When you get an FX body, you either use a longer lens, or move closer to the subject, so the effective pixel density, for purposes of camera blur, is greater.

    • sebas

      personally I don’t want 56mp in a 35mm sensor – I’m happy with my digital MF. but it will be curious to see what happens. wouldn’t put it past Nikon at the moment.

    • cjparedes

      Not really. The 1/focal_length rule still applies. Yes, somebody may
      need 1/3X for a sharp enough picture… well, such same person would need 1/4.2X in a sensor with twice the pixels (4.2 = 3 * sqrt(2)). It is overrated the need for stabilization with high resolution cameras.

      • catinhat

        OK, you might be right here, as blur is probably only influenced by the linear dimension differences, so it would be sqrt(2.25) = 1.5. So, the blur capacity of 24mp DX would be comparable to 36mp FX, i.e. D800.

    • Ralph

      Haven’t checked your math but assume you are correct. Then the same comments apply to all the 24MP DX cameras. In any case a tripod allows optimum sharpness to be attained, all else being the same. Most pictures don’t require optimum sharpness. I use a tripod because I want my landscapes sharp. If I shoot a portrait I don’t need 36MP.

  • Micah Goldstein


    How about a D700s? You know, a D700 with a D3s sensor?

    • Hm. I’d take one of those too.

    • maggy

      Yeah! and fine movie technology at last !

    • rkas

      Then go get yourself a D600, thats the closest you will ever come to a “D700s”.

  • Evan

    Is it likely that the D8000 would be announced at CES? Why the Feburary date?

    • Maybe in February, the CES show is in the US and they still have to announce the D5200 for the US market.

  • Where is baby D4, D800 body with D4 sensor?

    • MyrddinWilt

      I think your chances of that are between zero and nil.

      Nikon already has three FX bodies and there is a hole in their range at the very top end, not at the bottom.

      I have been predicting a 48+MP Nikon or Canon in 2013 or 2014 for a couple of years now. The F-mount is more than capable of resolving 50MP and that is a the highest resolution demanded by glossy magazines like Vogue, Arizona Highways, etc.

      A 48MP D4x at $10K would blast the Medium Format cameras out of the water. It would still be a better deal at $20 since the Hassy and Phase one lenses cost so much. The bodies are also massive and limited to studio work and outdoor work with huge numbers of helpers.

      The reason I think Nikon and Canon are both going to push for that is that 50MP is the last point where there is an existing demand for high MP so its the end point for the Megapixel war.

      I would also suggest that Nikon are likely to want to launch such a camera at the same time they complete their AFS lens lineup. A 50mm f/1.2 would be a logical companion.

      • Robert

        never was and never will be so. quality, beauty image shows today who is d4 Nikon, Canon 1dx and Mk3, or medium formats. ask your customers if you are a professional photographer. and the rest of their megapixels serve for a job well constrained, and commercial appeal.

  • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

    I think the DX fusion theory is nonsense. D300 = $2000 with all the pro titbits from the D800, D7000 = $1000 – $1200 enthusiast, for people who want motor drive. If they fuse these models, there will be a gap in the market, no matter which way they cut and slice it.
    D600 does not fill in the gap at $2000. Bad autofocus point implementation, low framerate, non-pro build, general cutting of features everywhere to keep the price down. D400 is a totally different animal.

    • The D600 is already $2000. I don’t think Nikon will sell a DX body for the same price.

      • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

        I think that the D400 would be so different to the D600 that there would be markets for both, even if they were at a similar price.

    • I think they should take the smaller DX sensor in the size of today’s D600 and give it a full magnesium body with weather sealing at 8-10 FPS. It seems there are several sensors that would fit, though I would prefer better ISO. That leaves the shutter first of all. I hope it’s quiet like the D7000.
      The major wildcard I see is the focusing system. I don’t think the D600 (tweaked D7000) is quite good enough, but there is no current offering between the D600 and D800/D4. That’s what I’m worried about.

  • Jon

    D4x?? They should instead try to fix AF-C issue on the current D4!!!

  • balsinuts

    I just want a new pro body with matching card slots. I don’t care if they are xqd, CF or whatever!! Just matching! I will upgrade my cards accordingly. This is the only reason I am not getting the D4 and hanging onto my D3s’s!!! Carry enough equipment let alone extra cards and more hassle.

    D4 costs way to much too have a memory identity crisis.

    • I have a D4 and really love the performance of the XQD card. It’s not that much better than CF on paper but real world results are worlds apart. I realize a lot of people have spare CF cards so I understand why they retained the CF card, and I would not let that hold you back from buying the D4, which is a fantastic camera. I just use dual 64GB cards and rarely need to swap them out.

  • Disappointed

    Bah! A transitional model to FX? What happened to Nikon’s commitment to continued DX excellence? A true d300 upgrade is needed. Combining that with the d7000 upgrade seems like a stupid move to me. They’ll soon have more FX models than DX, completely ignoring the fact that the vast majority of their users are DX users. They may want users to move to FX, spend even more money, but if they don’t offer good DX bodies, they’ll lose existing customers to Canon. Brilliant……

  • A 16-35mm f/2.8 would also be great

    • ben johnson

      YESSSS! This is all I want from Nikon in 2013! The old 16-35 is toooo old for me to consider spending 1500 dollars on it! Please Nikon!!!!!!!!!!

      • A new 16-35mm f4 with the VR that’s suppose to to ship with the 70-200 f4 would be sweet

        • neversink

          Tell me why in the world do you need any VR on a 16-35???? or any wide angle lens….

          • You don’t “need” it as in a tele, but it’s a nice to have for low-light street photography

    • HotDuckZ

      But I want smaller 16-35 with VR. 😛

      • rezwan

        in that range, you wouldn’t need VR 🙂

        • HotDuckZ

          Video with no rig. 🙁

          • rezwan

            oh, i see! :/

        • HotDuckZ

          And some people reported the 16-35 f/4G VR can take a sharp photo at 1/2 sec. this awesome for some type of photography. 🙂

          • A sharp photo at 1/2 sec for street photography would be sweeeeeeet

          • vsevolod

            a this speed mirror vibration will ruin your picture no matter how good is VR

            • HotDuckZ

              “EXPOSURE DELAY MODE”. Please read the manual, don’t waste my time. 🙁

            • HotDuckZ

              And at 1/4 I have a lot of sharp photo from AF 20 f/2.8 from film age with F5 & F3. 🙂

            • Kevin

              Absolutely correct

  • NikonFanBoy

    Hi Admin, Are you sure about that D4x? having a 50MP crammed into FX sensor takes lot of re-design. I bet it will be powered by 2 expeed processors. It will be a considerable challenge for Nikon engineers. Looking forward for 2013!!!

    • No, I am not sure – those releases are too far ahead to put any credibility to them.

  • Bernard

    And a V3 in November to correct the V2 problems !… 🙂

  • This are my “Zoltan”s 😛

  • psv

    Strange rummors on Nikon. In europe D 600 cost around 2800 usd, D 7000 cost around 1200 usd.
    If a merger d7000 d300 is true, all the nikon expert users will stay with no nikon camera adress to them. D 90 is still the best option for a lot of amateurs.
    A Dx expert camera is necessary at a maximum price of 1200 usd

  • psv

    Dx cameras are a very nice option for all long lenses fans
    sports and animal photografers will prefer a dx camera.

    • Spy Black

      Only if you don’t crop the image. If the image is cropped, then it won’t matter if it’s shot on a FX or a DX camera.

  • Rock Kenwell

    Just put the 24 MP DX sensor in a D600 body and call it a D7200. The optional battery grip could then be interchangeable with the D600.

    If there was a D400, I’d expect a 16 MP, high-fps DX sensor in a D800 body.

    It’d be cheaper for Nikon to use as many existing parts as possible.

    • I don’t think we will see a 16MP DX body from Nikon at that point.

  • C_QQ_C

    >>The camera will have a “pro” body similar to the D300s and most likely come with a 24MP sensor and 8fps.<<

    MM High res and high speed seem not to combine well till now.. Therefore D4 is limited to 16.2 Mp, and the d600 / d800 are limited to framerate of 4/5 f/s ( slower than a D700 or D300S) …..

  • Aldryn Estacio

    So is this new camera going to be above or below the D600? Are you saying it’s going to be FX or DX?

  • JimP

    51 point autofocus? A pro camera needs that and a pro body. Don’t screw it up Nikon!

  • robert

    If Nikon does not throw a real substitute for the d700 will be solely for convenience shopping. The switch to Canon is more than deserving

  • btdown

    D710 please…Stop fooling around Nikon…

  • Robert

    photographers who use d300 and D700 are orphans.

    those who adopt?

  • Stu

    52mp? c’mon now

  • ogotaj

    D4x? What for? There is D800 to already fill in this spot

  • Parampreet Dhatt

    Although I may be pipe dreaming, but I wish Nikon comes up with 2 models, both with pro-bodies, dual card slots, 51-point AF system etc. One model would have a 12-16 MP sensor, with ISO range upto 51200 or even 102400, 10-12 fps, and the other one using the 24 MP sensor from the D5100 with 6 fps and ISO range upto 25600. Something like D3S and D3X.

  • RondoX

    I’ve shot with a D100,D200, and a D300 for the last 10 years.

    There must be other people out there like me….

    I’ve gotten use to the outstanding ergonomics, build quality, and the
    $1699 price tag. If you shot with a D200 and D300 all day, I can’t
    imagine that you downgraded to a D7000 or will pay $300 more to
    downgrade to a D600 (in terms of camera, not tech or sensors.) As of
    now, the only camera that exists that compares in terms of quality costs
    TWICE as much.

    There HAS to be a market for a D400….

    There HAS to be other Nikon customers like me out there….

    People who want the best built camera for their money, not just the
    best technology in them, because they don’t shoot for a living.

    If not…. I’ll just shoot my D300 into the ground for this generation, and hope a gently used D3s will me in this price range in four more years…

    • Southie

      RondoX, I agree, I shoot a D300 and would not downgrade to the ergonomics of the D90/D7000/D600. It has to be D300.D700/D800 layout. I am too used to it. If Nikon doesn’t do a pro D400, then it will have to be D800 for me.

      • Captain Megaton

        Which would suit Nikon just fine…

    • PhotoSME

      RondoX, I agree. I had a D200 for 18 months and then jumped and never turned back with my D300. I have the $$$$ and am just sitting waiting for that D400.

      Two weeks ago I spent 30 minutes playing with a D600 and a week later spent 20 minutes talking to the Nikon Representative for this area. I decided NOT to buy that entry level D600. That small grip on the right side, slow AF, and the narrow spacing of the AF points won’t cut it for me.

      Lets hope if they do fold the D300s and D7000 into one body they better go with the larger D300 body style. And please provide the U1 & U2 Settings on top of the body so we DO NOT have to go into the menus. They did that correct on the D600.

      We need a D400….Please Nikon listen to your buyers.

    • zoetmb

      I agree with you. I want a true D400 with D200/D300 body quality and controls, not D7000 controls and body. That’s why I won’t buy a D600 – every time I check it out in a store, I can’t get used to the cruddier controls and the missing buttons.

      If they’re really just getting rid of the D7000 equivalent, fine. But if they’re going to downgrade the D300 replacement, then I’m really going to be pissed. Since I’m not a full-time pro, I don’t want to spend the $3K for the D800 and I need the reach anyway (and even if I were willing to spend the money, there’s the issue of the ginormous data files and left-side focus issue). I hate when people say they’re going to switch brands, but my D200 isn’t long for this world and if Nikon can’t come out with a suitable replacement, I really don’t know what I’m going to do. Maybe I’ll go back to shooting film for a few years until the camera makers smarten up.

    • I want a Nikon D400!

    • JM

      I still have my D300 (though one of my kids uses it more than me) It’s was, and still is an awesome camera! I now shoot with a D700 (2009) and a D800 (2012) However, That D300, with over 90,000 actuations still functions flawlessly!

    • thomasverbeke

      Pro body blah blah blah; that’s all you D400 users care about. What I find important is image quality all the rest if over rated!

    • Hugh

      I fully agree – came from a D80, bough a second hand D300 and love it, do not need 36 Mpix, just a good pro level body with good controls (e.g. AF-On button). Would love to have a better SNR for low light and maybe 16 Mpix (on Dx that is or 24 on Fx). Until that time I’ll keep my money in my wallet 🙂

  • Noor

    Since we’re all picking our wish lists, A mid-length prime with a full 2/3-stop-wider f/1.2 aperture, and make it N glass with AP-S. I want this more than anything. Hell, even gelded would be fine, which I would assume anyway.

  • bossa

    A ‘pro’ 24MP APS-C camera would probably put a dent in Nikon’s Super Telephoto sales figures I feel. My D800E’s have an APS-C crop size of just over 15MP so a 24MP APS-C sensor is definitely digging in further as far as Tele’s go. I’d have to seriously weigh up that 24MP APS-C camera against the cost of an expensive longer lens if I was in the market. 24 /15 is 1.6, a substantial increase in APS-C resolution if all other factors are equal (lens quality/diffraction/DR). Maybe we need to start calculating ‘reach’ (magnification factor at 100%) as well as FOV because sensor resolution is adding that extra dimension that seems to be overlooked.

    • That’s another reason why we will not see a 16MP DX camera from Nikon.

      • bossa

        If your suggesting that a 24MP DX format is still valid in spite of the D800 then I’d have to agree with you. I’ve recently come across from a few Pentax K-5 and a whole bunch of their best lenses and the biggest thing I miss is the sensor based Shake Reduction, the ergonomics and a few Limited Lenses. I would have preferred my AF-S 300/4 had VR as it’s putting pressure on ISO to get shutter speeds up in hand held situations where I’ve never had to worry before. And I keep wondering if keeping my K-5 and my FA*300 would have been a better way to go than the AF-S 300/4 along with my two D800E.

        Is there a projected price for the D5200 yet?

        • bossa

          Just to be clear: I love my D800E but when you get used to every single lens having VR it’s a hard feature to give up.

    • MyrddinWilt

      One factor a lot of folk overlook with respect to the Nikon1 line is that it is actually the best camera in the Nikon range right now for microscopy work.

      I have the bellows and a 50 f/1.8 on a reverser. Mount that on a V1 and you can get some really nice results that are pretty much on the edge of what is possible with visible light. Then mount the whole thing on a platform with a stepper motor positioner and you can take stacked shots.

  • Noor

    Since we’re all picking our wish lists, A mid-length prime with a full 2/3-stop-wider f/1.2 aperture, and make it N glass with AP-S. I want this more than anything. Hell, even gelded would be fine, which I would assume anyway.

  • Noor

    Since we’re all picking our wish lists, A mid-length prime with a full 2/3-stop-wider f/1.2 aperture, and make it N glass with AP-S. I want this more than anything. Hell, even gelded would be fine, which I would assume anyway.

  • Noor

    Since we’re all picking our wish lists, A mid-length prime with a full 2/3-stop-wider f/1.2 aperture, and make it N glass with AP-S. I want this more than anything. Heck, even gelded would be fine, which I would assume anyway.

  • I think a 300mm f/4G with 3rd gen VR is on the horizon. Most likely later in the year. Obviously it will not be announced with the ~80-400mm VR, which should be first.

    • Donz

      bring it on

  • HotDuckZ

    I want rebirth of D2Xs!! 🙂

  • I think that the 2013 MUST be D400 year. I am actually waiting for it some years ago.

  • Mike

    This line-up of only 3 DX cameras is a marketing impossibility, considering DX makes up for 90% of Nikons ILC sales, and the fierce competition from Fuji X, OM-D and Sony NEX.

    I find it more likely that Nikon will split the D7000 line in a D6000 (video) and D8000 (photo) line. Nikon needs more advanced enthusiasts cameras to compete with the Fuji X-E1 and the OM-D. I cannot imagine Nikon allowing it’s cash cow to slip away. That’s why I think 2013 will be a DX year.

    Also, Nikon will need to compete on the DX lens front, if not it will lose a lot of market share to Fuji. Considering the m43 and Fuji X systems have a very nice selection of primes, I think Nikon will be forced to finally release some DX primes.

    • MyrddinWilt

      I really can’t see a point to mid range DSLR video.

      Either you are a serious, serious professional and you go with a D4 or a D800 and some really serious lenses or you go with the CX lineup.

      Whatever you think of the CX stuff for stills, it knocks the stuffing out of any of the pro camcorders out there right now. The camcorder people could see that they were going to lose the market to the DSLR crowd and stopped development about 5 years back.

      Most of the so-called ‘professional’ camcorders still use tape! OK so its magnetic not paper but it s just as obsolete.

      A CX camcorder would make a lot of sense. Give it a couple of XLR mic inputs and some decent ergonomics and it could beat anything out there.

      Since weight is a much bigger issue for video than low light, the CX format is much more logical.

  • Davide Casamento

    24mpx, MOTOR focus for old lenses, DX format… only this is that’s really need the market

  • Robert

    ideal, in the name of quality, the D400 would come with an improved sensor 12mpix, iso 100-104000, 9fps and superb video …

    but for those selling well ta a camera with a stupidity mpix … nothing but a mirage

  • Back to top