Nikon D7000 replacement before April, more Coolpix cameras including a P310 replacement


I received some new information from a good source:

  • The Nikon D7000 replacement should be announced before April, 2013 with a 24MP sensor, 100-6400 ISO range and a form factor similar to the D600, but in a smaller body.
  • Nikon will announce more new Coolpix cameras, including a P310 replacement that will add RAW files and WU-1a support for wireless transfer. The P310 was announced in January 2012 and currently sells for a little over $200. In addition to the P7700, the P310 is the only hope for a "serious" Nikon Coolpix compact camera.
This entry was posted in Nikon D7100, Nikon Point and Shoot. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Kasponaut

    Finally!!! Any news on the Nikon D7000 replacements name?

    • Mr. Kotku

      try D700000000

    • No, but I am sure we will start getting leaks soon.

  • Scott Thomas

    I see…so a D300s replacement is still wishful thinking on my part. Wish Nikon would just say the D300s is the last Pro DX camera and be done with it.

    • js200022

      The replacement of the D300s has been announced already, is the 7D Mark II.

      • Arkasai
        • KnightPhoto

          Holy mackerel, no Canon 7Dii ?? What about all those CRs?
          Hard to believe either Canon or Nikon would leave that market!!
          I smell an opening for a D400 😉

          • After all, this is what I posted few months ago – the D7000 and D300s lines will merge. Of course, I could be wrong.

            • Arkasai

              I’m pretty sure you’re right on, cause we’ve pretty much got confirmation of a 70D “some time in the future” and rumblings of a D7000 replacement very soon. So now the question becomes, can these new cameras fill the very large shoes left behind by the 7D and D300s.

            • Brian

              Doesn’t sound like the D7000 replacement is anywhere near a D300 replacement so doesn’t sound like a merge.

          • 7D MKII will be announce last of this month and will be on market after april.

        • js200022

          @Arkasai – Nikon and Canon are competing each other. If there will be a D400, there will be a 7D Mark II as well. But the profit drives business, that is will ultimately decide the fate of both cameras.

          The Admin has been very accurate on most of his predictions, I also agree that right now the odds are not good for any of those cameras, which is a pity.

          But thanks for the link.

      • desmo

        don’t hold your breath waiting for 7D mk II

  • jm


  • BM

    Leave complaints in the field below.

  • Mr Kotku

    Smaller body?

    • smaller than the D600

      • Niladri

        Aren’t D600 and D7000 sporting same body? Then smaller than D600 means smaller than D7000 as well.

        • I think the D600 is closer to the D300s size.

          • St.
          • Doug B

            When I tried a D600, it felt smaller than a D300s. I owned a D7000 for one weekend, but it was too damn small, and I had to go back to shooting D300s for my DX. I don’t want another small DX body. I also own a D800 and D700, but there are times I prefer DX, and I want one with full specs and a full size body, even the D7000 was TOO SMALL.

      • St.

        but d600 was same size (almost) as d7000. Does it mean that new D7k will be in smaller body – size between d7000 and D5200?

        • Deep_Lurker

          No, the D600 is bigger than the D7000. (And the D600 and D300s are actually pretty close to the same size.)

          D300s:147mm wide, 114mm high, 74mm deep
          D600: 141mm wide, 113mm high, 82mm deep
          D7000:132mm wide, 103mm high, 77mm deep

    • Ron Woody

      Full Metal or half plastic

  • Radek

    So I suppose it’s still not a true D300s replacement. Rats!

    • St.

      It will come before Christmas…

      • I don’t believe that any more…I’m afraid we’ll never see the D300s real replacement, in terms of true pro-featured DX body with high fps rate. The more I think of it, I’m more sure that NIKON rearranged its whole line in construct that begins to show itself. FX is pro, DX is consumer, with one fancier model – D7000 that surrogates some of the pro features. One level above that is entry FX. Simple as that…

        So, it’s like this:

        Pro (FX)
        D800(E) and the rumored model with D4 sensor for sports (D800s?)

        D600 (entry)

        Consumer (DX)

        Additionally, you have 16MB D300 DX replacement in D800 in croped mode (as well as 1,2x crop). Only thing you loose is D300’s 8 fps..but D800 is not far from that..

        If it wasn’t for Thom Hogan that kind of convinced me otherwise, I would come to this conclusion much earlier…Chapeau to those who did…

        BTW, there was NO explicit confirmation that Canon 7D MKII would eventually arrive (which would imply a response from Nikon). It was just said that it’s definitely not gonna happen in close term (if ever). Even if it does, it still doesn’t mean that Nikon will copy the offer in that segment…We are aware that Nikon makes most of their sales in DX arena, but it would be interesting to see how much of that is picked by D300 model, especially in period after D7000 arrival. I guess we would be surprised…

        • js200022

          @Tomo – I couldn’t agree more with you. I would only do a change on your list and include the D600 in the consumer group. The prosumer cameras left are only the D4 and the D800/E.

          • You’re probably right…let’s consider a middle transition level for the time being…So:

            Professional (FX)
            D800(E) and the rumored model with D4 sensor for sports (D800s?)

            Transition (prosumer):

            D600/D7100, with only difference being size of sensor ant pentaprism (which would bring the size diference that admin talks about, leaving everithing else the same, including specs, technical info, AF, memory slots, Meter..etc..)

            Consumer (DX)

            Ad acta… 🙁

          • Brian

            I told everyone 2 years ago the D300 line was done.

          • desmo

            you’ve just mortified all the D4 owners by calling it

            hope that doesn’t cause a mass exodus to Canon

            • js200022

              You are right.

              (Updated) The current Nikon FX lineup is:

              Flagship: D4
              Prosumer: D800/E


          • Pat Mann

            And the D300s

          • Pat Mann

            And the D300s

        • MS

          I was holding out hope for a D400, but I have to reluctantly agree with you now. 2 D7000 refreshes before a D300 refresh has got to mean the end of that line. Too bad!

        • Robert

          D300 replacement is thoroughly and utterly redundant.

          Think about it. The gap between the forthcoming D7000 refresh and the new D600 is already vanishingly small. There’s simply no business case for a DX camera in between these two models.

          The hairsplitting between the two doesn’t equate to a legitimate business case for such a camera – not by a long shot.

          And with FX sensor cameras gradually starting to come down in price now, my guess is that Nikon will see the differential between the two going forward as the difference between the professional/prosumer market and the amateur/serious hobby market, with the D7000+ and D600 both overlapping that new line a bit.

          • omrx

            I feel the new D7000 replacement will cover the D300s gap, The D5200 now have 39 AF point, Im thinking we will see the 51 AF points in the new D7000 with 8 fps with a new redisigned body. Only That

          • Pat Mann

            I hate to belabor this point, but It’s the gap between the D7000 and the D800 or D4 that’s relevant. D300s users like me don’t look at the D600 as an upgrade – it’s not, in many relevant characteristics.

          • Pat Mann

            I hate to belabor this point, but It’s the gap between the D7000 and the D800 or D4 that’s relevant. D300s users like me don’t look at the D600 as an upgrade – it’s not, in many relevant characteristics.

        • j v

          I did not know about the 1.2 crop… Any thoughts on how the 17-55 f/2.8 lens performs on FX, or the 1.2 crop? I read somewhere that it experiences some vignetting on FX between 17-24. What is it like on 1.2 crop?
          Does the D600 have the 1.2 crop?
          (I was holding out for the D300 replacement, but it seems unlikely. Come summer, I’ll buy a body, and I suspect it will be between D600 and D7x00 replacement, given my budget and the lenses I have…

          • You can even shoot FX from about 22mm. I the D800 with my 17-55 for a while. If I remember correctly, 1.2 crop is not without vignetting, but not totally black either.

            Here is FX at 22mm f4.5:

            • j v

              Thanks for posting! Nice to see it works so well on FX!

              I also have the AF 24-85 f/2.8-4 which I used as main lens before the 17-55…On FX, that gives me quite an overlap (shooting in DX crop mode at 17 or in FX mode at 24 is similar as far as coverage is concerned). One reason why I would prefer to go one more generation with DX.

      • Foolishcfo

        Christmas in what year? The D300s is more stale than the D7000 and is tracting more flies.

  • I hope it has high speed sync for it’s flash

  • So they are not going to consolidate the high end DX line? I thought that was a rumor a while back.

  • NknShooter

    Finally! Can’t wait to pick up my new D7100!!!!! So stoked!!!!!!

    • Brian

      Why? Doesn’t seem to be much different then the 7000

  • Why is the ISO range of the D7000 replacement highlighted? isn’t that the same range of the current D7000? in other words..if it is not an enhancement, why is it being mentioned?

    • To show that the range is not more then 100-6400. This is the only info I got.

      • I see, thanks “Admin”. Then I hope they bring more enhancements ..other than more pixels.

        • Graham

          Nikon will enhance the price. 🙂

          • spicynujac

            I was hoping for improved low light performance. More MPs does not interest me. Hoping for improved AF, movable screen like D5200, and it will have Exspeed 3 of course. If upgrade is not that huge, price should be not that huge…

  • D600

    People, this is your D300s replacement; now stfu!

    • christopher smith

      no, you shut the f up.

      • RamesesThe2nd

        He asked first.

    • Doug B

      NO, it is not, not even close. It sounds like another TOY DX body. We want a REAL full spec, full size D300s replacement.

      • remedy

        Glad to see more and more people who know that this shrinking idea was retarded in first place. I want comfortable to hold camera, not small camera. D300 is by far the most comfortable “gripless” camera to hold in my opinion. It just perfectly fits in your hands. Even better is D3/D4, why? Because it’s small? No, because it’s comfortable and this means it fits perfectly in hands, not 10 years old kids hands, or metrosexual 50kg, skinny hipster, but in average mans hands. Cut the fking crap with downsizing Nikon.

      • UnknownTransit

        Well, if you consider the D7000 a toy DX, then you would probably consider the D600 a toy FX. Nikon won’t release a pro camera between two toys!

    • twoomy

      Break it up, kids! But some people need to face the possibility that there is no D400 coming. The DX D2H became the FX D3, the DX D2X became the FX D3X, and the D300 became the FX D600/D800.

      Yes, I know that the D600 and the D800 aren’t the direct upgrade for the D300, but Nikon often does sideways upgrades. I just don’t see any signs that there will ever be a D400.

      • UnknownTransit

        There’s no real replacement for the D700 either. The D800 is its own league. The D600 is a consumer FX.

  • Doug B

    Sounds like Nikon is STILL ABANDONING their photographers who want a professional DX body. Smaller than the D600, WHY do they keep doing this?? WHY can’t they give us what we want ??

    • john

      true, i have the Nikon D7000 and it’s not that much smaller than the Nikon D600

    • Dave Ingram

      I think that they may be trying to segment the market and drive photographers with larger hands to FX.

      • Doug B

        I own two FX bodies (and not a D600), but for my sports and wildlife, I still want a pro-spec DX body that isn’t kid-sized.

        • d800

          d800 in dx crop is still 16mp a pro spec dx body

          • Smudger

            The viewfinder is crippled in DX mode.

            • d800

              I disagree you can see what is directly outside the frame. It is handy for moving subjects

          • but it costs quite a lot more than a dx body

            • d800

              true…but worth it

            • Micah Goldstein

              Not worth it. I picked up a D300s again to pick up the slack. Just because you don’t see it, doesn’t mean there isn’t a gap. Glad you like your D800, but it’s not the perfect camera for everybody.

            • DaveyJ


            • DaveyJ

              Quite a few photo pros PREFER DX over FX. Every wildlife and newspaper guy I talk to look at DX 300s replacement as very worth looking at and maybe buying.

          • Micah Goldstein

            Under 15mp and considering crop, the magnification is horrible. And it’s only 6fps.

        • Foolishcfo

          A’m with you. I own two D800 bodies but still want a high-end DX camera for my underwater shots as shooting macro with the D800 is tough.

        • Brian

          I own D4 and D800 and would welcome a pro DX body as well. Surely not the D7000 replacement.

  • I hope it has Multi-CAM3500FX 51afpoints with 91.000Pixel RGB Metering sensor, otherwise I am not going to spend money on it

    • Micah Goldstein


      Any word on this Admin?

      • I don’t any more info – hopefully I will get some updates in the next few weeks.

        • Micah Goldstein

          Thanks admin!

  • Amir

    Thanks admin for that recent news.As I told previously,the D7XXX will be in Feb, and the new D400 will be announced in August.After that,the line will completely change to new style as it going right now!

    • McPIX

      What kind of new style??

      • brian

        I’d guess mirrorless to compete with/supersede the olympus e-m5 type camera. It will be called the EX mount (see, it goes from CX to DX to EX to FX).
        Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think one of the problems with DX cameras is that they essentially are required to have a mirrorbox deep enough for an FX sized mirror (to accommodate 50 yrs worth of Nikon FX lenses). It doesn’t make much sense wasting all that space when everyone is trying to make cameras smaller and smaller. It’s limiting their development having that deep mirrorbox. DX cameras aren’t that much smaller than FX cameras when they have a lens on.

        They probably just need to make sure they have a really great autofocus system, which the CX cameras seem to be pretty close to.

        • McPIX

          I’d love to see a great mirrorless Nikon! I mean, a Nikon, not the “1” with mini-sensor!

    • cgw

      No reason to think there will be replacements for both DX cameras. Suspect we’ll see an upgraded D7000 that quiets the buffer size/fps complaints and that adds a PC+10 pin connection. A bigger better sensor is a given. Nikon still doesn’t “get” MILCs–the teensy-sensored Nikon 1 series isn’t even close to where Sony’s NEX APS-C cameras were three years ago. Doubt you’ll see Nikon ditch SLRs any time soon, Amir. You owe yourself a look at Thom Hogan’s site, bro.

      • Arkasai

        What I don’t get is all the hate for small sensors around here, Nikon 1 outsells a lot of the competition and was #1 in Japan last year. Sensor size has little bearing on success in that market, because the majority of people buying them don’t care, they just want a step up from their point and shoot.

        It can also be argued that the m4/3 and APS-C mirrorless markets are very saturated at this point, even more now that Canon has entered with the EOS-M. I think Nikon saw this whole scenario coming and decided to go another direction to avoid looking like every other camera on the market.

        • cgw

          Could just be that CX is a dead end for Nikon. Sony’s already playing with FF MILCs. Not sure the IQ of the Nikon 1 series is that much better than many p&s models. It’s reminiscent of the ill-fated Nuvis APS interchangeable lens cameras. A Nikon APS-C MILC would steal sales from DX SLRs. The same thing is obviously spooking Canon, judging from their equally goofy MILC. Neither will cause Sony, Olympus, Fuji, Pentax or Panasonic to lose any sleep.

          • Arkasai

            Nuvis/Pronea have very little in common with the small cameras of today, because they all shot special film and required special developers. Even if they had been a huge success, it wouldn’t have mattered because every point and shoot film camera disappeared once digital came about.

            I think you should read these:

            While you’re right, larger sensors have better image quality there’s a diminishing return on the size of that sensor vs the gain in perceived image quality. Basically there’s no linear relationship between sensor size and image quality. They’re also being improved at an astounding rate, so you can’t really go wrong with any sensor these days. The author mentions in the article that if you were able to solder an array of 20 Canon S90 sensors together, they’d be the same size as the D3S’ sensor, but a whopping 200MP and with better noise performance.

            Also for reference:

            • cgw

              Think you missed the Nuvis/Pronea analogy completely. APS was a dead end but it didn’t stop Nikon/Canon/Minolta from developing poor-selling and pricey ILC systems parallel with their APS and 35mm p&s models. CX seems to be a re-run of the same errors. The DXO article from LL is informative but not definitive. Still lots of brand new noisy small sensor p&s models on the market that are utter crap–bad cameras are still easy to buy. As for image quality, convince me a D7000 doesn’t out-resolve a D300.

            • Arkasai

              I’ll be more clear, m4/3 has more in common with Nuvis/Pronea than CX does. Every manufacturer is pushing m4/3, while Nikon’s doing their own thing. The small sensor is all they have in common with APS film and the comparison ends there because the size of the frame isn’t what killed that standard.

              There were half frame cameras, most using fixed lenses and auto exposure, which were quite popular despite having a single lens and small frame. People used them because they could cram 72 exposures on a roll of 36, and develop them at their local drug store or at home.

              APS died because you had to buy film that kept your negatives locked up inside the roll and required an automated machine to develop the cartridges. It killed the DIY aspect of photography, labs didn’t invest in the automated developers and that’s why it failed. But that’s just the opinion of the greater photographic community, feel free to believe the frame size killed APS film.

              Modern camera’s have none of this to worry about so they can make the sensor any size they want, increasingly so as sensors get better. Just look at smart phones, the first few with cameras were terrible, now they rival and sometimes best small dedicated cameras.

            • cgw

              Who was into DIY C-41/E-6 processing a decade ago??? Not sure where you were locked up then but APS processing/printing was nearly ubiquitous in the US and Canada at the zillions of the now-vanished mini-labs equipped by Noritsu and Fuji. Pull the other one, mate.

              One persistent complaint about APS processing was utter uncertainty about the cost since labs charged different prices for the multi-format sized prints.

              Nikon’s long-running deep discounting on CX screams desperation–along with the kawaii pink bodies. Maybe they’ll wise up and give us an APS-C MILC someday. So far, CX is DOA. Spare me the fanboy blather, OK?

            • Arkasai

              I just gave you the real reason APS died. (once again and in more detail) It didn’t fail because the frame was smaller, it failed because you couldn’t develop the film yourself, no local drug stores bought the expensive automated developers, and all the negatives were sealed inside the cartridges. Add this all up and you’ve got a recipe for failure no matter how many manufacturers and billions are invested in it (remember 3D TV?)

              The frame size was the least offensive of APS’ problems. So to assume “small frame = bad idea” is an overly simplistic analysis of APS’ failure. It’s like saying 3D failed because the TVs were too expensive. 3D TV failed (like APS) due to poor implementation, despite billions invested in making it the next big thing. In the end it was harder to watch 3D than 2D, you needed to be at a set distance, wearing special glasses, be perfectly still and parallel to the screen for the magic to happen. Photographers are the same way, if you aren’t making it faster/better/easier to use they won’t buy it.

  • McPIX

    Just an upgrade like D5100 -> 5200.

    New Toshiba Sensor and some minor performance improvements, nothing spectecular.

    Just my guess!

    • You’re absolutely on the right track my friend…After D600 came about everything was clear to me…There just won’t be any D400. Period. And D7000’s replacement – exactly as you said…New Toshiba sensor…IQ probably on par with d5200 (like D90 and D300, or D5100 and D7000), same AF CAM 4800, ISO as stated above…dual card slots, and a notch smaller body than D600.

      When you think of it – it never happened that NIKON camera from lower category had better specs than the upper level camera (of course D4 sensor vs D3x sensor is not what I’m talking about). In that regard, there’s no chance that D7xxx will sport better AF system than D600. Never happened! D300s was damn good (and still is!) but it had not a single spec above D700 except for slightly faster fps (due to the smaller mirror and shutter curtain, no doubt). The same applies for body – no chance that it will have full magnesium body!

      My predicament is as follows:


      size on par with D7000, just little more curved like D600

      24 MP (toshiba sensor)
      AF CAM 4800 39 AF focus points – 9 cross
      dual SD card slot,
      6-7 fps, better buffer than D7000

      magnesium body – top and behind plates, rest is plastic
      AF coupling screw for older lenses
      Better video with 1080 60p
      stereo Mic inputs on top like D5200
      mode dial like D600
      LCD screen like D600
      Price 1200 USD body


  • cgw

    Despite the tears over the D300s, a D7000 replacement would really only need a bigger buffer and a few small gasketing/seal upgrades to address the main complaints. It out-resolved the D300 and bettered it at high ISO settings. I’d like to see an integrated grip on the D7XXX to beef it it up and do away with the over-priced MB D-11. An improved 24mp(Sony?)sensor seems certain. Reasonable pricing would help, too. Does Nikon know it sells way more DX DSLRs than FX???

    • Doug B

      Are you sure? My biggest problem with the D7000 was that it was too small. I know others who feel the same. The lesser AF, FPS, buffer, no pc sync, no 10-pin, those made it worse, but the small consumer body was a failing that even better specs will NOT overcome.

      • Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

        There was no problem with the D7000, its always been user problem.
        Because some people STILL think D7000 is the D300s replacment. You can’t buy a consumer camera and expect it to do all the pro work you do.
        I might as well buy a D5200 and start complaining about random stuff because it dosn’t kick the D4’s ass.

        • Micah Goldstein

          No, I shoot for a living and I would like an update to the D300. I sold mine when I went full frame, but I found I missed it. I tried the D7000, and after much back and forth with Nikon about it’s AF accuracy (or utter lack thereof) I sold it and bought a D300s. The sensor in the D7000 was pretty darned good for DX, but if it can’t focus to put a sharp image on the sensor, it doesn’t matter how good the sensor is.

          Also consider that the CAM3500 has a wider spread/gets closer to the edge of the frame than CAM4800. Couple CAM3500 with a DX format and you have excellent frame coverage. It’s a joy to use.

          In fact, I’m happy with what I’ve got. I’m just a keen observer hoping that the camera system I’ve invested in continues to be improved. I don’t like to be lying to clients when I tell them I’m using top of the line gear. If Nikon stops making competitive gear, then I’m not using the best (even if it’s good enough for the client’s needs, it’s a waste of time to try to explain this to every single client).

          Starting to get it yet?

          • zag1

            You need to look at the specs.

            The D7000 has 39 AF points but it’ll only use 9 of those 39 points.

            The D300S has 51 AF points (so a lot more) and it will use 15 of those AF points.

            So you can’t figure out why the D300S AF better than the D7000, it’s because the D300S has more points plus uses a much larger area to AF with.

            Your complaining wouldn’t have gone far with Nikon when Nikon already know the above.

            But the sensor in the D7000 blows away the D300S on paper so it is trade off’s with what you want to do.

            So I agree with Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ when people are getting cameras but get confused with what they can or can’t do and then complain bitterly.

            • Micah Goldstein

              You haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. Depending on the mode, they can both use any and all the points with my lenses, the slowest of which are 2.8. The 3500 has more cross type points, yes. But even the non-cross areas grab better on my cameras with CAM3500. CAM4800 wasn’t up to my expectations or standards for use (or I just never got a working unit?).

              All I was saying is that the CAM3500 is better. It’s good and they should make another DX camera with it. End of story.

      • Spy Black

        Read my comment above about camera bodies. You people can’t be serious.

        • Arkasai

          It used to be people bought a camera because it accepted the lenses they liked, had good flash metering, or got an extra frame on a roll of 36. Now if it’s 3/4 of a millimeter smaller they shit themselves and complain their dream camera will never be made.

        • preston

          The shape of the grip plays a big part as well. I always liked the feel of the D300/700 more than my D90 but couldn’t justify the price at the time, but my new D600 feels MUCH better than the D90. The D600 is exactly inbetween the weight of the D7000 and the D300s but I would always choose the weight savings of the D600 body (obviously not considering the sensor differences).

    • Micah Goldstein

      The only issues I had with mine were AF performance and frame rate. Those are both easy to fix: CAM3500 and shutter/mirror from the D300.

      • Brian

        The buffer didn’t bother you? You had a camera that shot 6fps with a 10 frame buffer. Shooting a bird in flight your buffer was full a few seconds into the sequence.

        • Micah Goldstein

          Actually at 6fps with my fastest cards my buffer was more like 16 frames. Yes, in raw. 12-bit/lossy compressed. It may have been more. But more than that, it cleared about 2-3 times faster than my D700 or D300, so it didn’t feel so small.

          Of course, I’m sure it would feel quite small if it were 2fps faster. But simply doubling the ram doubles the buffer. No software R&D needed, and ram gets cheaper every year.

        • Micah Goldstein

          Also, at 6fps, no, I only ever tried birds in flight once. The AF sucked, and I got disgusted and immediately switched to my D700. Even though it had less “reach”. It tracked focus better. The D300 is the best tool so far for BIF. The high ISO doesn’t matter and all it’s other strengths become apparent.

    • Robert

      Agree with all of what you said. D7000 replacement doesn’t need much improvement to push it well ahead of the D300s on all counts.

      As to sales volume, Nikon also MAKES far more DX cameras than FX cameras, which undoubtedly skews sales higher for DX cameras…largely because they better service the consumer/amateur market (which is bigger than the professional market).

  • Mike

    Some of you are complaining about it being smaller than a D600. Some are complaining that it’s not a semi-pro DX. See what Nikon is dealing with? A schizophrenic customer base. The Canon CEO is promising a 7DII, so you can bet Nikon won’t conceede that market to them. It’s just a question whether the D7000 mk2 will have AF and FPS similar or better than the D300.

    • Doug B

      No, AF and FPS are only PART of the equation. There is NOTHING schizo about wanting an adult-sized pro spec body, like the D300s is. It is not rocket science. Does not sound “pro” in any way…. Nikon, thanks again, FOR NOTHING.

    • ChrisC

      As you said, “The Canon CEO is promising a 7DII”. Why can’t Nikon be as transparent about their intentions? It doesn’t feel like they care about their user base needs. Given that the D300s was not much of an update (don’t care about video), if a D400 is announced next autumn, Nikon will have been offering essentially the same semi-pro body for 6 years. Can you be called a leader when you show such an inertia in updating your technology?

      • Capricorn

        Bullshit! He only Talks about 70 d

    • Could you please offer any reference to what you said…Who exactly promised Canon 7D officially? I know CEO didn’t…

  • D200GUY

    If it has a normal Flash Sync at 1/250, I’ll buy it. No question. A decent skin tone dynamic range would be great too! (I didn’t much like the skin tones out of the D7000).

    The slower sync of the D600 was a deal breaker for me. I shoot 90% of my work with flash, outside, and I need all the help I can get to combat the sun.

  • Richard

    “in a smaller body”? are you serious? D7000 and D600 are small enough! get any smaller you turn it into a consumer toy like the d3200….then it will literally become a D5200 with more buttons and no flip screen? What’s nikon thinking. Get the D400 rolling already

    • Whatever

      You mis-read. The D7000 is smaller than the D600, but it is like the D600. Therefore, the D7000 replacement will be also slightly smaller than the D600, but like the D7000. It will not be as small as the D5200, so don’t worry.

      • I’m afraid he read it right…And I read it same way…It clearly implies that D7000’s replacement will be smaller than D7000 itself…Definitely not the D5200 size…but I believe there has been cameras size in between these…Like D40, D60….

        Maybe admin will shed some more light on this dilemma?

        • Steve

          Good, I don’t mind the smaller size as long as it has the same utility and functionality.

        • It will be smaller than the D600, with a similar design and form.

          • Thanks Admin, but I’m still confused…D7000 is exactly what you described – smaller than D600 with similar design and form…Why not say – D7000-like?

            • The D600 (like all 2012-Nikons) has a much more roundish design than the D7000, I guess that’s what the admin meant.

        • Robert

          Why is this so complicated for everyone?

          What this means is that it will be the same SIZE as the D7000, but with a similar body style to the D600, which itself has greater aesthetic similarity to the D800 than the D7000.

    • jake

      they just want to sell you guys more FX cameras , they don’d want to release any serious DX that may compete against the D800/the D600,etc.

      • timon_comment

        So, Nikon will merely get result to do speedup to die their DX cameras, with 24MP DX DSLRs.

        Nikon d5100, ISO 84 measured, (4.8μm sensor)
        SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.012%, SNR 44.5dB, Gray Scale 100%,
        Nikon d5200, ISO 69 measured, (3.89μm sensor)
        SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.012%, SNR 41.9dB, Gray Scale 100%,
        Nikon d3200, ISO 71 measured, (3.85μm sensor)
        SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.018%, SNR 42.2dB, Gray Scale 100%,

        Olympus OM-D E-M5, ISO 107 measured, (3.7μm sensor)
        SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.028%, SNR 42.2dB, Gray Scale 100%,

        Nikon d4 is the best highlight range SNR. Nikon d600 has a very excellent sensor.
        the d5100 has a quite well APS-c sensor, the highlight area have higher SNR, not only for shadow area.

        a smaller pixel pitch always gets worse,
        a smaller pixel pitch always has even harder of the imaging quality of the Border and Corners, it could only turn into worse but not better. The sensor micro-lenses will be continued at next 5 years or longer.
        (you can observe Photozone and get a comparison of the pixel pitch and the imaging quality of the Border and Corners).

        • “Smaller pixel pitch always gets worse” that’s BS. By that logic, in terms of picture quality, the D100 should be better than the D200 which should be better than the D300 which should be better than the D7000 which should be better than what’s next (I hear the D3200 has better image quality than the D7000). So there.

          • timon_comment

            with the d100 vs. the d7000? full stupid one.
            do a comparison in between a very old sensor and a newly sensor? and then say Smaller pixel pitch to be better?

            “the D3200 has better image quality than the D7000”? you hear that from DxOmark Overall score? DxO Overall score is heroin, it can kill your brain, especially is like you one Overall score fanboy.

          • DaveyJ

            I have shot a lot with D3200 and D7000. The D7000 is superior to the D3200. However I rate the D3200 as the best light DSLR camera to send up on a drone for aerial shots or when you want ultra light. The D3200 is NOT superior to the D7000 in any other way!

          • Sensor

            Keep in your mind —- from the d100 had come to the d7000, which is in sensor and processor relating the technology advancing, rather than the Smaller pixel pitch makes sensor to be better. In the same period the same sensor technology it is a slightly larger pixel pitch certain to be easily doing better.

            Casually imagine a smaller pixel pitch is better that is very foolish.

        • timon_comment

          Not only in the highlight range SNR the d5100 is better than the d5200, so that the d5100 highlight range DR is also better than the d5200.
          People should not blind worship the DxOmark Overall scores and the 8MP print mode, it is DxO Heroin.

          You ought to carefully observe the pixel-level imaging quality.
          Maybe you seen DxO DR is even ‘higher’ under the 8MP print mode, in fact it is fake.
          In fact the highlight range the DR is impossibility to get “optimized” from the “8MP print mode”. The 8MP print mode DR is artificial to change the shadow area’s visual noise and is equivalent to post-process, (non directly measured value).
          Actually the highlight range there once the overexposure is impossibility to get “normalization” from the “8MP print mode”.
          DxOmark Overall scores and the 8MP print mode are pseudoscience juggling.

          Also, people ought to carefully observe the imaging quality of the Border and Corners relating the Camera Sensor.
          you can observe through from Photozone and get a comparison of the pixel pitch and the imaging quality of the Border and Corners. It is very important, but DxOmark would never tell you.

          For examples, The imaging quality of the Border and Corners

          one lens, Nikkor 12-24mm f4G DX
          mounted on the d200 (6.0μm sensor)
          MTF50 LW/PH, @f4.0, (12mm)
          Center ———– 2181.5
          Extreme ——— 1501
          CAs ————— 1.62 (max) pix
          Extreme/Center = 69%

          mounted on the d7000 (4.8μm sensor)
          MTF50 LW/PH, @f4.0, (12mm)
          Center ———– 2718
          Extreme ——— 1591
          CAs —————- 2.06, (2.24@16mm f5.6) pix
          Extreme/Center = 59%

          Note, the 4.8μm 16MP DX sensor is not very bad imaging in Corners, in tolerable, despite it is somewhat worsened. However, the 3.8μm 24MP DX sensor is worse visible.

          One lens, Planar T 85mm f1.4 ZA,
          mounted on the 5.5μm 12MP APS-c sensor,
          MTF50 LW/PH, @f1.4,
          Center ———– 2091.5
          Border ———– 2006.5
          CAs ————— 0.54 (pix)
          Border/Center = 96%

          mounted on the 3.85μm 24MP APS-c sensor,
          MTF50 LW/PH, @f1.4,
          Center ———– 2783
          Border ———– 2084
          CAs ————— 0.90 (pix)
          Border/Center = 75% (that is worse visible)

          Note, if a large aperture wide-angle lens mounted on the 3.85μm 24MP sensor will get worse.

          • timon_comment

            Within next 3 or 5 years,
            35mm format camera —– with a 6μm 24MP sensor is optimum selection.
            APS-c camera —— with a 4.8μm 16MP sensor is optimum selection.

            Until the new sensor technology succeeded into market and removed of the sensor micro-lenses.

            • Where’s my…

              D800 vs D800E seems to point in the other direction – the AA filter is becoming a significant hindrance to IQ. So – simple fix is to have sufficiently small pixel size to outresolve the lens and have no aliasing – or need for an AA filter. Combine this with already shipping ‘backlit’ sensor tech, supersampling and ever growing image processor power and maybe optimum pixel count for APS-C range turns out to be between 64MP and 256MP, in like 5 years. Unless in 5 years all cameras have like 10 tiny high density sensors each with their own lenses and traditional lens effects are made with software. Or light field photography in some other form takes off, and again is used to emulate current lenses.

      • Sunburst

        How would it be competing when they’re all Nikon camera’s and it’s Nikon getting paid for them? Please explain that to me.

        • Millzee

          Well… if you’re selling products, it is generally good to have a variety of different products which appeal to different customer. Result: more sales overall. However, if you have several products which become a bit similar to each other (in price, quality etc), then you start to lose that advantage and there is now less point in having such a variety. Your products are now ‘competing’ with each other in the same market place, where previously they were complementing each other. Their individual cost effectiveness is reduced. If one is more profitable than the other, then there is less incentive in continuing with the other product (however many customers prefer that product.)
          In this case, I think Jake (not me) is suggesting that the D800/600 etc is more profitable to Nikon than a high end DX camera and using this argument to suggest that there won’t be a new high end DX model.

          Personally, I don’t agree, as I think that there are too many advantages to having a high end DX camera in the line up and I am looking forward to the D300/7000 replacement.

    • Spy Black

      Unless you have humongous hands, I don’t see the point of a camera the size of a D800, D4, etc. I’ve shot for years with my old F and F2 bodies, once considered state of the art pro bodies. Nobody ever complained those bodies were small, it was actually two of the largest 35mm cameras of their day, and the D600 is nearly identical to the F2. I would love to have a camera with the resolution of a D800, but I want the handle-ability of the F2, so for me the D600 will be my next camera.

      • Agreed. I like the size of the Nikon FA which is actually smaller in most dimensions than my D5000.

      • iamlucky13

        Ironically, when I upgraded from the D40 to the D7000, I found the D7000 just a little bit too small.

        Or rather, exactly the wrong size.

        With the D40, my pinkie sits below the grip. With the D7000, my pinkie sits half-on, half-off the grip.

        If it was 3/8″ shorter or 3/8″ taller, I don’t think I’d have a problem as my pinkie would either be completely on or completely off the grip. As is, my hand cramps a bit after holding it for a few minutes.

        It’s not bad, and on the whole, I’m overwhelmingly happy with the D7000, but I thought it was interesting how for my hands, it just isn’t quite the right size.

        • Asinus

          I had the same issue when I moved from my D70 to a D80. I had to get the grip fro the D80 to shoot it comfortably without my pinkie left with nothing to hold on to.

          Now that I’m considering new glass or a new body and between the D7000 or going up to a D600 (I started my lens collection for 35mm and only have 2 dedicated DX lenses at the moment), that body size is a major concern. Based on the price of the D7k’s grip, I’m seriously thinking it might be worth it (for a number of reasons) to spend the extra money on the 600. Ugh, but the 7K just dropped in price!

      • `/1nc3nt

        Buddy, D800 is not big and it’s a bit heavy. I owned F2, F3 and so forth.
        I think we don’t justifiy our girlfriends based on their dimensions only.

        • Spy Black

          No, but that’s always the starting point, now isn’t it?

      • But the F2 didn’t need to have room for a display and multiple buttons and controls on the back. The things that make DSLR size important are not just size and handling, but also the number of buttons/controls and the separation between them. The D4 has dedicated controls and an additional display that the smaller bodies lack. Important? To some people it is, to others it isn’t.

    • kotozafy

      In a smaller body ? So we have to buy another different grip !!! (and maybe different battery ?) The D700 / D300s pair was such a brilliant idea!.

    • The Other Richard

      Nikon have compromised ergonomics for size on many of the recent releases. While the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive, at some point Nikon needs to wake up and focus on the ergonomics which make the camera useable. Shutter release positioning on the D7000 is poor. (Try a D4 or a big Canon if you doubt this.) This matters more than many realize because of its effect on slow shutter speed sharpness as well as simply not coming readily to hand. Many of the other controls are poorly located or not located where they should be. Because the controls are electronic, the constraints imposed upon film cameras because of the mechanical controls are no longer relevant. The camera should fit your hand like the proverbial glove and the major controls should fall readily to hand without the user having to hunt for them.

      A lot of people are going to be very upset with Nikon if they “cheap out” on the buffer, number of auto-bracket/HDR frames available on this camera. The better designed the camera, the easier it will be to use and the greater the customer satisfaction. If Nikon are not careful, they can lose the gains accumulated because of the better auto-focus systems that caused many Canon users to abandon their equipment.

      Both Nikon and Canon need to step up their customer service (and drop the attitude) or they will both be ripe for someone else to step into the arena against them.

      While I am commenting on service, Nikon’s NPS restrictions have been the subject of discussion because of the great difference from those of Canon which are more in tune with simply recognizing people who have a substantial financial commitment to the company’s equipment regardless of whether they earn a certain percentage of their income from photography.

  • asdf

    So it’s like a D600 but smaller… So you’re saying it’s like a D7000 but more plasticky?

    Wow I hope nobody was seriously actually waiting for this to come out.

  • NoFunBen

    The first true rumor this year! Nikon is keeping a tight lid on leaks. Or not many new cameras are coming.

  • Vinman

    Crap, picked up a P310 just before Christmas! It’s a great little p/s, but RAW is missed as its high ISO performance is mediocre. The wireless module would be nice, but the camera has built in eye-fi compatibility, so that’s a “meh”.

    What I’d like to see most is a more intuitive menu where one can dig a little deeper a little easier. I have yet to find an auto ISO limit, for example. There may not be one? I dunno.

    That said, it’s a nice little camera that allows me to leave the D700 at home far more often!

    • Spy Black

      I liked it too, but it died on me 5 days into owning it. I brought it back and got a Canon S110. The Canon cost a lot more, but it turned out to be a much better camera photographically (video sucks on it). Hopefully Nikon with use something like the 1 series sensor on a P310-style body, give it a control ring like the S110, and raw. Then it’ll really be a great pocket camera.

    • rev

      I’m surprised you don’t find the menus to be intuitive- that was one of my favorite parts of the P300 when shopping around in Jan 2012. There’s less flexibility for setting ISO limits than with some cameras, but you can set ISO to Auto, Fixed Range160-400, Fixed Range160-800, and manual ISO at each individual setting.

      It’s very easy to set- hit Menu, go to “ISO Sensitivity”, select “Fixed range auto” and then select either 160-400 or 160-800. No way to select an arbitrary max ISO like on the S100, but this would seem to cover most scenarios given the P3x0’s ISO performance.

  • Olaf Hoyer

    Thoughts on that: Seems that there is a true D7000 successor as Prosumer Body that is distinctively not semi-pro like a D300. For me, as a Canon 7D Mk2 is in the rumors, Nikon will continue their consumer-DX line with a new top model, and probably wait for Canon to make its move. I bet that plans and prototypes for a D400, a D7100 and probably a merged type between both are prepared for some time now (around the floods/nuclear issues in Japan/Thailand), and they keep upgrading it continuously, up to the point where Canon decides to make a move- meanwhile they squeeze money out of the cash cows as long as its possible.

    And these specs are IMHO clear signs for being consumer grade- simply take the body of the D7000, make minor improvements that can be done in software, perhaps fine-tune the 39-point AF module a bit, make video a bit better and be done with it. Oh, perhaps add the new 24MP-Sensor from the D5200, too. So hopefully accessoires from the D7000 can also be used like battery grips etc.

    For a true merged Model in a DX world I would fancy some chassis like D300, two card slots (perhaps both SDHC only), the old 51-point AF-Module to distinguish from the new system in the D4/D800, and the 24MP-Sensor like in the D5200. Rip off the P/C-Flash connector, castrate some minor things in the menus, give the people 6 pics/sec, with BG 8 pics, and off we go.

    So there is still hope for a D400 some day…

  • Dileep Anthikad

    Many of us patiently waited so long for a Pro DX body with modern sensor and AF from Nikon.
    Enough is enough. I think it’s time to jump the ship.
    I’m gonna go for a Canon body and Canon 800mm IS combo for my bird photography. And dispose my D800 or D4.
    Best of luck to Nikon.

    • Eric Calabos

      Really? So where is their pro-crop?

    • IdahoJim

      What pro crop sensor camera does Canon have that you feel is superior to the D300(s)?

  • timon_comment

    a smaller pixel pitch always gets worse,

    Nikon d4, ISO 75 measured, (7.2μm sensor)
    SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.016%, SNR 47.4dB, Gray Scale 100%,
    Nikon d600, ISO 79 measured, (6.0μm sensor)
    SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.010%, SNR 46.0dB, Gray Scale 100%,
    Nikon d800, ISO 74 measured, (4.8μm sensor)
    SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.010%, SNR 43.3dB, Gray Scale 100%,

    Nikon d5100, ISO 84 measured, (4.8μm sensor)
    SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.012%, SNR 44.5dB, Gray Scale 100%,
    Nikon d5200, ISO 69 measured, (3.89μm sensor)
    SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.012%, SNR 41.9dB, Gray Scale 100%,
    Nikon d3200, ISO 71 measured, (3.85μm sensor)
    SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.018%, SNR 42.2dB, Gray Scale 100%,

    Olympus OM-D E-M5, ISO 107 measured, (3.7μm sensor)
    SNR 0dB, Gray Scale 0.028%, SNR 42.2dB, Gray Scale 100%,

    Nikon d4 is the best highlight range SNR. Nikon d600 has a very excellent sensor.
    the d5100 has a quite well APS-c sensor, the highlight area have higher SNR, not only for shadow area.

    a smaller pixel pitch always gets worse,
    a smaller pixel pitch always has even harder of the imaging quality of the Border and Corners, it could only turn into worse but not better. The sensor micro-lenses will be continued at next 5 years or longer.
    (you can observe Photozone and get a comparison of the pixel pitch and the imaging quality of the Border and Corners).

    • timon_comment

      Nikon 24MP DX sensor = 4/3 camera 16MP sensor

      What reasons for People to buy Nikon DX 24MP?

      • Spy Black

        Optical depth of field. Same reason people still shoot with 2-1/4 and larger format cameras.

    • Micah Goldstein

      You missed the D3s.

  • Olli

    Why do people with a D800 still wait for a D400? Does the approximately 2 fps difference in burst rate really make such a difference? D800 makes great 16 mpix DX photos.

    • El Aura

      One could argue that the price of the D800 is a bit hard to swallow coming from a D300.

      • Olli

        That’s why I was talking about people who already have a D800, but still want a D400. No point if you ask me.

    • 5DollarFootlong

      2 fps is huge!

    • umeshrw

      Price apart you will know why when you use it handheld for fast work. And I know as I am using D800e now and I miss my D300 more times than I would care to admit.

  • jake

    I heard there won’t be any real D7000 successor , in fact the D600 is the D7000 and D700 replacement.
    I hope I am wrong but I heard it from Nikon service guy.

    • cgw

      Your “service guy” doesn’t seem to know that DX cameras pay his salary. FX is at best 20% of Nikon’s DSLR sales–tops and probably a bit less. FX bodies in the $1200-$1500 range would only start to tip the balance.

      • UnknownTransit

        A FX body in the $1200-1500 range? Nikon will make you a FX in a D5200 body. If not, what about a FX in a D3200 body?

  • rhlpetrus


    1. AF
    2. fps
    3. Buffer

    Any news on those? They will determine if a D400 is more or less likely.

  • fmfm

    Well, I’ve waited this long. I can wait longer.

    • fred

      Yes, I have been waiting for a D400 too. While I wait I have been buying long glass. The money is sitting in bank waiting…..still using my D300 for birding. D600 is slow shutter, slow flash sync, prosumer slow. Maybe the new D7XXX will be quicker than D600..

      • fmfm

        Actually, I was referring to the fact that I have to wait a few extra months before the “D7XXX” gets released. But yeah, quite a few people in your boat too.

      • Unless they have a new, faster processer then the transfer speed for 24 MP DX will be the same as 24 MP FX.

      • grant torres

        Birders use flash to shoot with their long glass? I have to buy one of those flash you’re using to pair with my bigma.

  • ph

    This sucks. How long do we have to wait for a D400?

    • PeterO

      I’ve been waiting for one too ph, but honestly, I don’t see it happening. Personally, I am now taking the approach of spending the least amount of money on bodies that will get the job done for me. Sure there are compromises, but I’ve learned to work around them. The money has been there for a long time for the D400, but if they don’t put one out, I’ll go for the D7X00, and buy a third party grip. Less money in their pocket – more in mine. Also, I’ve only been buying used or non Nikon lenses for my needs. Obviously this niche has been the lowest on their totem pole. I’ve said it before: until sales start to suffer and there’s red ink, Nikon could care less about their current customers.

  • ben

    7d mark ii here I come

  • 5DollarFootlong

    There will be a D400. There is no way in hell Nikon will allow Canon to release a 7dII without competition.

    • PeterO

      Check out Chairman Canon’s statement: there’s no 7D replacement coming soon. The Canon boys aren’t too happy.

      • If Canon doesn’t release a 7D replacement, Nikon will not introduce a D300s replacement. Both companies have been releasing the same products for years.

        • KnightPhoto

          Hoping you will confirm in the coming weeks if the D7000 replacement has the 51pt AF, f8 focussing, and large buffer. If it does, and Canon is really not coming with the 7Dii, that could mean no D400 (I still find that hard to believe though).

        • PeterO

          My point exactly Admin.

        • Brian

          Thought the 7D replacement was a given?

  • Bord81

    Okay, Nikon, you’re pushing me to buy future D5 or D6 to replace my D300s, but just don’t make ’em with so bad colors, bad QC and compressed highlights as the D4.
    Thanks for paying attention to my opinion.

  • allan

    Get the $300 discount offered by B&H (until tomorrow, Feb 2) or wait for this replacement?

    • SAM

      Same issue dont know if should get d7000 or wait for upgrade?

      • I’m compelled to go for D7000 when prices drop now…It has all I need for second body.

  • morg

    getting tired of this! My D200 is long in the tooth I want to decide between a D400 (if it ever comes),D600 and a D7200 so just bring them all out.I dont want to wait till August or later to see what the D400 looks like !

  • alvix

    …..I’d like to see some pics with D5200 paired with a optimal lenses, like macro 100mm Zeiss..or 85 1.8G and see how they perform, because until now I didnt see a nice microcontrast on D5200 and D3200 ‘ images.. maybe nikon think that 24mp for “pro” work require new and better lenses…and so keep the “highly packed “sensors for semi pro & consumer..and for FX they can be a little more ..relaxed ..and design lenses below a certain price…

  • SAM

    I am new to photography and wanted d7xoo but i have already waited for one year. I am traveling next month and can’t wait. Should I buy d7000 with VRII from costco for 1500 or go for newer d5200? plz give me some suggestions!! Go worst case still wait.

    • D7000 is a nice camera and you’d probably be happy with it.
      However, as with most things, it’s always worth waiting for the ‘Mark II’ version if you can because they will probably have ironed out some of the wrinkles in the original version.
      If the D7000 MkII comes in at 24 MP you should at least find the ISO/DR etc at least as good as the original D7000 with the benefit of the extra pixels.
      Obviously though the price of the newer model will be higher in the short term than the D7000 (which will have additional discounts before the D7000 MkII arrives).

      • SAM

        Thanks for the reply I am think of buying D7000 on discount play with it for sometime and see if I am really into photography or it is just a phase. Do you have any idea which lens I should go for. I plan on shooting travel photography included people.

        • There lies the rub “see if I’m really interested in photography” is a loaded weapon.
          Keep the len price low so as not to invest to heavily and risk the photogrpahs being ‘meh’. or
          Invest in a good lens (or lenses) and see what you’re capable of.
          Most would opt for a zoom but the lower cost ones are not that good.
          I would suggest the 35mm DX and 85 mm FX 1.8 lenses rather than a zoom.
          If you can’t get good shots out of these 2 with the D7000 then you’re not going to like photography.
          Both are reasonably priced and ‘sort of’ cover travel and portrait.
          If a zoom, chose a zoom with the shortest range (i.e. say 18-55 rather than 18-300) as the quality suffers in the more extended range (as one would expect). Judge based on affordable price for the shortest range.

        • Neopulse

          For travel, the 35mm DX is nice for wide angle shots and the 55-300 VRII is good for certain wildlife and sports. For people the 50mm 1.8G is nice and won’t make a hole in the wallet. (I’m primarily a prime user though, my 2 cents)

  • UnknownTransit

    A D7000 replacement needs more than a 24MP sensor to be impressive. Through the D5200 sensor is pretty nice.

    I don’t see Nikon moving the 51 point CAM-3500DX AF to the D7000 replacement considering the D600 uses the 39 point AF.

    Nikon can through in Wi-Fi and GPS and even a full magnesium body (but that’s not likely). XQD cards? 7-8fps? It can make up for some of the lost features in the D300s.

    • nawab

      I see your point for not incorporating 51 point CAM-3500DX AF to the D7000 replacement, but the D600 is in the FX league…..totally different than the DX format! Still the possibilities are open when we are optimistic…………..all plays down to marketing and competitive policies of the players

      • UnknownTransit

        Nikon just needs to answer the Canon 70D. The D7000 replacement is meant to compete with the 70D. Unless NIkon thinks Canon will move it’s superior 61 point AF from the pro line to the 70D, Nikon won’t have to stick the 51 point AF in the D7000 replacement. Although there is still a chance since Nikon brought the 39 point AF to the D5200. Nikon can consider a complete magnesium alloy body too, but I doubt it considering the size of the current body.

        The D5200 actually looks pretty good with a number of pro features. The 24MP sensor, high ISO, 39 point AF, 14 bit RAW and the 2016 pixel metering. The D7000 replacement needs a lot of improvement to make it stand out.

        Nikon and Canon are reaching a maturity point where they cannot improve the cameras much more that what the consumer market needs. Canon already went sideways with the touchscreens, wifi and gps. It’s only a matter of time before Nikon goes sideways too.

      • UnknownTransit

        Nikon just needs to answer the Canon 70D. The D7000 replacement is meant to compete with the 70D. Unless NIkon thinks Canon will move it’s superior 61 point AF from the pro line to the 70D, Nikon won’t have to stick the 51 point AF in the D7000 replacement. Although there is still a chance since Nikon brought the 39 point AF to the D5200. Nikon can consider a complete magnesium alloy body too, but I doubt it considering the size of the current body.

        The D5200 actually looks pretty good with a number of pro features. The 24MP sensor, high ISO, 39 point AF, 14 bit RAW and the 2016 pixel metering. The D7000 replacement needs a lot of improvement to make it stand out.

        Nikon and Canon are reaching a maturity point where they cannot improve the cameras much more that what the consumer market needs. Canon already went sideways with the touchscreens, wifi and gps. It’s only a matter of time before Nikon goes sideways too.

  • Vin

    I have a D800E, love it, just bought a Fuji X-E1, still waiting for a D400 at 8-9fps, in D800 build quality.

  • WahWahWah

    Idiots. Why don’t you all go over to the canon site and find the same people complaining and just swap equipment. Seems they feel the same way. Idiots…..

  • Lhem Dee

    This is a great! Hope to see more updates and information. Cheers!

  • nawab

    At last a d7000 replacement! I reckon half of the world is waiting for its announcement. I know the other half are waiting for the d300 replacement. And what if both are replaced with a merged model? eh Admin?

  • Why replacing the jounger D7000 and not the D300s?

    • umeshrw

      Please read the whole thread right from top.

  • dolge

    Any APS size cameras beyond 16MP look awful pixel by pixel, just as any full size camera beyond 24MP is meaningless. I think they have to reduce the pixels and work more on the basics to avoid mechanical issues.

  • Please make it have a detachable screen like the d5200!

    • Spy Black

      I’m with that. People just don’t realize how useful a detachable screen is, such as when you’re shooting over a crowd, doing waist-level shots, or have the camera in some awkward position, whether on or off a tripod.

  • Oliver

    Man i just saved up for a D7000, and now i’am confused of i should wait to buy it to i see the new Nikon DSLR

    • dude same here!! think will buy D7000 only. 24mp doesn’t make much difference to me on a DX body. Update will be at least $1299 for body and D7000 is available around 900 at most places…

  • vwking

    I love my D7000. Use it all the time. Not sure I need 24MP. Nor I think the form factor needs to be smaller. I would however, like higher ISO and 10 or 12 fps.

  • bigbear

    Great. It sounds like I’ll have to buy another battery grip and RRS L-brackets to fit the new “form factor.” As long as I have to do that to upgrade from the D7000, I might as well continue waiting (and hoping) for a D400.

  • Aldo

    I get amazing images with my d800 I don’t think I will ever consider DX. I guess if you have a ton of glass it’s worth looking into it.

  • Aldo

    I don’t get why if you guys are so in love with cameras like the d700 and the d300s you want replacements for them.

  • Back to top