Nikon D7100 available for pre-order *UPDATED*


I updated the Nikon D7100 for pre-order links with few more stores. Please scroll down for the latest blog posts.





Samy's camera

Nikon D7100 @ Amazon Germany:

Nikon D7100 @ Amazon UK:

Nikon D7100 @ Amazon France:

This entry was posted in Nikon D7100 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Can’t wait for some reviews …

  • Mr Kotku

    I used to joke that Nikon made the worlds best 12 MP cameras. Now it looks like they make the worlds best 24 MP cameras.

  • Jon McGuffin

    well shucks, I went ahead and preordered from the link above.. Hate the buffer issue, but this looks to be one sick camera.

    • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

      What buffer issue? Though it was 100 shots

      • Anonymous

        It is! But only for medium size jpg (or smaller!). For 14 bit RAW it hold an unbelievable SIX. 6 images. An entire second of shooting! WOW!

        • Poony

          nooo way… where did u get that info?? …That would literally ruining it from me…

          • VikingAesir

   scroll down near the bottom for the buffer capacities.

            • Poony

              Great… so much for wildlife and sport photography… 1 second of that and thats it you have to tell the wildlife to wait and dont fly way because the bloody buffer is full!

              Was going to get this as a second body… FAILED

            • Brian

              They out did the CRAPPY D7000 buffer by almost 4-5 shots..How could they go BACKWARDS. The buffer was one of the BAD things about the D7000 so they made it worse? WTF?

            • japanese business model…2 steps forward, 1.9 steps back…so now they have something to ‘improve’ on the d7200 and keep us clamoring for

            • Spacedog

              My D7000 can take 11-12 pics in RAW until the Buffer is full. I think 7 (technical) Frames are quite good at 24 Mpix for a cam in this price range. I love it, PREORDERED!

        • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

          Thats impossible!!!!!!

        • UnknownTransit

          They figure that most people who actually shoot sports on a budget and loves to burst would use JPEG instead. Which for normal use is understandable because bursting 24MP RAWs is just wasting space. Professionals, journalists and reporters would use D4s instead anyways.

          On the other hand, this prosumer DX line is always limited in buffer capacity. The D80/90/7000 all have this buffer cap. Nikon added more internal RAM to handle the 24MP with the same buffer capacity as the D7000 but refuses to add any more beyond that.

          • desmo

            I suspect the $1196 price will sell more body’s then more buffer at higher price

        • Bence

          it should be a mistake or a BIG FAIL again from the NIKON. These type of DX cameras are bought by wildlife photograpers or sport photographers. For them the big buffer size is a must. WTF?

  • Aldo

    WOW just wow… only 1599… holy grail of dx I predict folks. suicide rate is gonna go up 20 percent from all the recent d7000 buyers.

    • Except they got a $300 discount off a camera which does 99% of what a D7100 does. Soon to be even cheaper and therefore even more of a bargain.

      • Aldo

        hmmm I don’t know … not even my d800 can record 1080 60i.. I think recent d7000 buyers may be upset. Nikon’s secrecy was cool… but not cool for those people

        • Ruby Moukli

          Anyone who bought a D7000 in the past year has no reason to complain. Had they done their homework they would have seen, as I did, rampant rumours online regarding its anticipated successor. I held off on buying a D7000 until now – they could have too. Just wondering how longer I have to wait before I start seeing prices slashed. Debit card at the ready!

          • Aldo

            should def see at the very least a couple of hundred dollars off… but yeah I mean recently as in last month. Those people could have either saved more on a d7000 or have the d7100 option.

            • SAM

              I bought d7000 with 18 200 for 1500. I am happy as I am a newbie and do not understand everything. By the time I learn a few ins and out of photography I would be ready to upgrade to a better body like 600. P.S. D7000 is my first camera of any kind!!!

            • Aldo

              You chose well with a d7000. a very capable camera and will be an amazing tool for you. I hope sometime we could be of some guidance in benefit of your learning experience =] Enjoy shooting!

            • gr8fan

              Sam, you are smart! 😉

          • Fred Flintstone

            I for one bought one this time last year and have not regretted a bit, having moved up from a D5000 there’s no way I would have waited this long

  • desmo

    Nice price $1196 body only

  • Aldo

    imagine what the next d800 will have… enjoy your new dx guys congratz… I shall burn the shutter on my d800 and hopefully by then we should see a d900 maybe ? =]

  • Douglas Pavani

    no AA filter whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatt $1.199 whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat
    whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat wtf

  • Aldo

    full metal body? anyone knows?

    • nope. plastic.

      • Aldo

        i know the top and back are metal… just not sure about the rest

        • if you know the top and back are metal why are you asking? if the whole thing were metal they would tell you the whole thing was metal and probably have a promotional photo of the bare frame. but no, it is plastic. a veneer of magnesium foil on the top and back does not make a metal frame.

        • Jon McGuffin

          Isn’t it pretty obvious this is essentially identical to a D7000 but with a few changes? When it doubt, assume it to be the same. The body is the same price, it’s a refresh/update of this camera and as such it shouldn’t be expected to have a complete materials rebuild for the body.

          • Aldo

            actually no it isn’t obvious… or wasn’t…. with the previous speculation that nikon may merge the d300 with the d7000 line, we really didn’t know what to expect from the d7100, not to mention the full specs were more or less discovered with the announcement… I went to the nikon site to read on the overview of the camera and thought, if it has the 51 focusing point system from either the d800 or d300 it may well have a full metal body… pair that with the nikon wording thus no, it wasn’t obvious before searching and reading on the detailed specs.

            • No longer Pablo Ricasso

              It looks like the body is internally improved only a bit from the D7000. But then how many people have broke their 7000 in half? So who cares. It looks like the weather and dust sealing IS improved. It looks like the AF is exponentially improved. The buffer is probably also improved, but not enough to compensate for the increased data that comes from the rest of the processor that is also improved and the sensor which is as well.
              The viewfinder is also improved and this is an important feature that most are overlooking. The video is doubtlessly improved and I don’t care. The plastic in the body and the size of the buffer will leave room for a D400 so we all get to have our cake and eat it too. Film at 11. Or film at f5.6.

            • Aldo

              good points here mr Ricasso. I don’t know if we’ll see a d400, but then again nikon may surprise us.

  • Nikon Shooter

    What’s amazing is how Nikon was able to keep this camera a secret right up until the day of the announcement.

    Not even one leak! In this day and age it’s simply unheard of.

    • GlobalGuy

      That’s because everyone was looking for a D400. Only 1 guy wanted an AA-less D7000 redo. And he already bought the D800e. On the other hand…… the stark secrecy does bode well for the possibility that a High-ISO D400 could still be out there! Think about it — Nikon is still missing a high-ISO mid-end model!

      • RxGus

        This is a 7000 redo? Much improve AF and presumably better ISO and DR (based on the 5200) and the added flexibility of the crop mode… for the same price as the original 7000.

        There still exists the new 20MP DX sensor they could build around, but I doubt it has astronomical improvements on this 24MP in terms of DR and ISO.

        • Vin

          You can see in the naming D7100, its a slight improvement, its not a D8000, or D9000,. There is room for some newer improved DSLR’s

      • Blah

        On Amazon: “Meet the new flagship of Nikon’s outstanding DX-format HD-SLR line-up”. This is from the Manufacturer – you know, Nikon. As in there will be no D400. Quit your damn whining. There is nothing in the current line-up that can’t do what your vaporware camera “might have”.

      • Pro

        On Amazon: “Meet the new flagship of Nikon’s outstanding DX-format HD-SLR line-up”. This is from the Manufacturer – you know, Nikon. As in there will be no D400. Quit your whining. There is nothing in the current line-up that can’t do what your vaporware camera “might have”.

        • Mike

          Yes…but the rumoured 7d mark 2 will still put this camera to shame whit the buffer, FPS and build quality. So i think Nikon will have to response to the 7D mark 2 if Canon releases a camera whit those specs. But time will tell and i think the major set back for this camera is the buffer and FPS. But this camera should rival the 60d and from that aspect the d7100 is beyond what was expected!

          • Vin

            Exactly, if there is anything that the last year has shown us is Nikon realizes it has to try to meet and exceed its competitions cameras. In some cases Nikon needs to beat them to the punch.

      • Get over it, D400 is not likely to happen. If a D7x is not pro enough for you, look into the FX segment.

        I also wanted a D400, but after my camera died I needed quick replacement, so a D800e was it. Now after I re-collected my lens setupfor FX , Nikon brings out the camera I wanted (51 AF points was for me the decisive criterion) – grr. But not really unhappy, I found the D7x models too small, the D300 grip (even D90) felt better in my hands – stupid, but if you have to handle your main tool for hours it makes THE difference.

        AA – color-moiré depends on what you shoot, I am always happy to find some to assure myself than my lenses are sharp enough, so not having an AA is definitely a plus (for me)

        indeed, it is pathetic that they skimped on buffer memory (though actually expensive – $100-400), but when I compare my last group shot where a guy next to me did spray&pray with a 1dx and my single shots were chosen, I tend to value it more carefully

        • Vin

          It really does depend on what you want to shoot, this looks to be a very capable competent camera in those same hands. On the other hand when wanting to shoot baseball, football, soccer, skateboarding, track and field, tennis. ….. so…on.. 6 fps is nice for 30 + images, but 9 fps at at least 60 images would be better. I find it hard to believe that we will only find that in the D4.

    • iamlucky13

      Remarkable increase in secrecy indeed.

      I almost typed remarkable “improvement” in secrecy, but I’m not sure I’d call the secrecy an improvement. Had the improved autofocus system and equivalent release price leaked out, I probably would have waited, instead of snapping up a D7000 during the Christmas sales.

      Nikon could have wrested $300 more out of me if they hadn’t obsessed so much about secrecy.

      • chubbs

        You know, maybe they put this together at the last minute, that’s why there have been no leaks.

  • Reese

    Thank you Nikon! Everything I wanted at even a better price then I thought! I guess DX is not dead after all… 🙂

    • dan

      😉 Meet the new flagship of Nikon’s outstanding DX-format HD-SLR line-up

    • js200022

      If you own a D300s you know that the D7100 is not its replacement. There is still space for a real DX flagship camera, the D400.

      • reality

        For those in denial that their D300s is well and truly eclipsed by a much newer camera.

        • Lower fps and a very small buffer, both of which look like deliberate differentiators from a $1500 pro body. As things stand, to get to 10fps in DX your options are the D300s or the D4. From a price point perspective, there’s a huge gap between the D7100 and the D600. Nikon can stick the D7000 sensor with no AA filter in a D800 body with D4 firmware and collect a bunch of money.

          The D7100 also screams to me that the D600 will be replaced quickly.

          • o_joe

            I too would prefer a D400 but keep in mind that refurbished D600’s are selling for $1600.00 now so the pricing lineup is very, very tight between $1199 and $1600.

            • Well bear in mind the D7100 will stabilize at $900-1000 and the D600 is at $1700 not $1800. There’s room there — also bearing in mind that a D400 that can do 10fps and has a solid metal body doesn’t really compete with a D600.

      • RxGus

        Honestly, if I were Nikon…

        I would make a D400 the following way:
        New 20MP sensors, D300 body, D4 batteries and processing to boost FPS. There is no new R&D cost involved.

        Then I would charge $2100 and let everyone who keeps complaining about their damn d300 put their money where their mouth is. I would expect pretty small sales numbers, but what you sell makes a large profit margin (no R&D costs) and shuts up the 0.1% of all Nikon users who make up the squeaky wheel.

        Hell- I would only make 6k of them and then call it a “special edition”. Let the market drive the camera’s value even higher (if there is as big a market as NR forums make it seems… which I don’t think is actually the case).

        • js200022

          I can see that you are going to be upset very often on this website. There are plenty of D300s owners here looking for a true replacement for the camera. I am sorry if that offends you.

          Just because you don’t need a D400 does not mean that Nikon should not do it.

          • RxGus

            I am not offended nor upset. I just find great humor in the constant d400 discussions that take place here.

            My point is more that the d400 market is actually a lot smaller than the posting on this website would lead you to believe. There is a distribution bias (the type of people who want/need a d400 are also the type of people more likely to visit NR)

            I never said the Nikon shouldn’t make one- in fact I believe the opposite. They have all the tools to make one without any R&D. They already have a new sensor. They already have the body design. They already have the AF and the hardware to do high FPS.

            It would be a very low volume, high margin product which is a-ok. If for no other reason they should make it settle all the discontent in their customer base. But if we are being honest, the squeaky wheel would just become something else (lens updates? D710? 18-600 2.8 FX?)

            • Starfires

              How can you be so sure it would be low volume? As many here point out, the only other current sports-oriented camera is the D4. Other than that, you need to turn to (now) discontinued models like the D300S. With the added reach of DX, it’s well suited to amateur/prosumer/semi-pro sports and wildlife, which is a huge and growing market.

              Don’t forget Nikon also seemed at one point to be dismissing full-frame entirely, only to surprise the world with the D3. They keep upcoming projects secret to encourage sales… though a roadmap would be better for everyone and avoid these discussions IMHO.

            • Starfires

              How can you be so sure it would be low volume? As many here point out, the only other current sports-oriented camera is the D4. Other than that, you need to turn to (now) discontinued models like the D300S. With the added reach of DX, it’s well suited to amateur/prosumer/semi-pro sports and wildlife, which is a huge and growing market.

              Don’t forget Nikon also seemed at one point to be dismissing full-frame entirely, only to surprise the world with the D3. They keep upcoming projects secret to encourage sales… though a roadmap would be better for everyone and avoid these discussions IMHO.

    • gr8fan

      Right on!

  • Douglas Pavani
    • desmo

      neat point in Gordon’s preview is 1.3 crop mode, Dx cropped a further 1.3 equals 2x crop
      so you have both a 24mp Dx camera and a M4/3 camera in one
      this should really rock for those wanting to maximize the reach of their lenses

      • guy

        Why bother? I’d just crop in post and have a lot of safety room.

        • desmo

          its what I would do (in post not the camera unless you needed the FPS which I don’t)
          the camera feature shows you now have the megapixels to give a result equal to many existing cameras of the crop format
          whether you choose to do it in camera or in post

  • Ernesto Quintero

    Hey I’m a hypocrite ! I had stated I didn’t want to buy as soon as it was released. Well i just pre-ordered !

    Just became a beta tester or a happy customer.

    • Aldo

      its all good… new gear defies logic or reason… enjoy!

    • desmo

      enjoy your new camera, these QC issues are way over hyped–

      fellow beta tester

      (D600 early adopter)

      • Ernesto Quintero

        I have a D300s and D700. I have 3 DX and 3 FX lenses. I decided to buy the D7100 becasue the specs are too good to pass up. I look forward to using the 70-200 f2.8 VR2 and 105 f2.8 macro with the greater DR and no AA filter sensor.

    • You made a good choice, I am hesitating if I can justify a second body – my girl-friend will call names on me….

      I think Nikon learned from the D800/D600 issues, so be optimistic – anyway they will fix it

  • Now I hope Nikon will come out with a 24MP D900 FX to replace the D700 because that D800 with it’s 36MP is ridiculous.

    • gsum

      Why is 36mp ridiculous?

      • Aldo

        I know right? I would improve the auto white balance and jpeg processing… plus better video features etc… the mp count comes in handy and makes the camera super versatile.

        • gsum

          36mp is great for landscapes – bags of detail and scope for cropping. If you’re into sports photography, there’s no need to spend a fortune on a 600mm lens. The ultrasharp and close focussing 300mm f4 af-s is 600mm f4 equiv. when the image is cropped to a still healthy 9mp. So yes, the D800 is super versatile.

      • there are few laptops available which can process 36mp raw files quickly leaving sports, entertainment, and news photographers high and dry when trying to meet deadlines, for one…secondly there is absolutely no need for 36mp…i’ve seen billboards using 4mp files…i’ve had had full pages printed in magazines from heavily-cropped 12mp images….

        • umeshrw

          medium format and large format cameras are just a fancy for stupid people and are utterly non essential. Why one doesn’t need slr even. A point and shoot is enough for most serious jobs. For everything else there are i phones etc. And ofcourse We always use 5 year old laptops which use win98 and 512 mb ram as we never need to update them, just like our cameras.

          • Aldo

            there is a tool for every job… some tools are more versatile than others… doing most jobs with one tool will make you vulnerable to stiff competition… and you will be easily outgunned by a tool. So in a world full of tools, it never hurts to have a bigger wrench, especially if you get paid to buy new tools.

            • umeshrw

              I think you want to reply to christopher smith. I was being sarcastic.

            • Aldo

              ah! my sarcasm radar failed… in my defense it isn’t unusual to find such opinions here… but you got me 😛

        • Aldo

          seems like you have “seen much” but not done much. nobody needs anything… I can hire an artist and paint pictures for me. However, if you decide to buy an electronic piece of modern equipment… the d800 has many features including its large mp count which is very useful in real world photography. For instance event photography, which is my field of expertise. But of course you need to first own one and use one to have a remote idea of what a great asset this camera can be in your business.

          • Micah Goldstein

            Actually, for events, the D3s or D700 is a better tool today. High frame rates are necessary to catch the decisive moments reliably. 6fps and a meager buffer don’t cut it when you’re trying to get flattering freeze frames of sacks of flesh on sticks, which are dynamic and do things like move their mouths and blink.

            When you’re not being paid to get the decisive moment and flatter your clients, the D800 is adequate. And in a pinch, it can be used for events. But it’s more work than using the right tool, which is a camera with a high frame rate.

            • Aldo

              Well I don’t know how you shoot your events but I don’t have any issues whatsoever capturing candid photography with my d800, for anticipation and timing plays a much bigger role than fps. For example for weddings there are the true candid shots and the fake candid shots which you instruct (half of the wedding candid shots you see are posed, premeditated)The versatility of dx mode while still maintaining high res photos could mean not switching lenses or reaching for that other body. The incredible DR of the D800 will aid you in maintaining the white detail of that bride dress without even having to bracket. Group shots of 20+more people shot at 36mp there are just no competition, (d700, d3s can’t do this) everyone in my shots are super sharp from edge to edge. I can even isolate a certain group of people crop and zoom carefree for a particular page in a digital book. This can also be applied with candid expressions captured in one frame from different people in your frame at different places of the room (eg reception hall)… zoom in on on their faces, use for creative photo book composition … try that with a d700 or even a D4 never gonna happen even if you shoot and spray. Anyway I can go on and on because I have used many advantages of the d800 in practice… I don’t speculate (or just have seen or have read). A lot of the times with event photography you deal with flash recycling times, maybe your camera can fire fast, but your flash won’t. In the end I would NEVER trade my d800 for another camera based on fps… It will NOT certainly be a better tool for my shooting style, and my paying clients agree. But to each their own… d700, d3s are phenomenal cameras and just like I make the most out of the d800… there are those making the most of them.

            • Micah Goldstein


              Could you do this with a D800? Of course.

              As easily? Definitely not.

              I’ve printed these images up to 20×30, and they look great that big. Would a D800 give more detail? Maybe. But for action like this, probably not much.

              You’re thinking in creative ways, but the idea of cropping is nothing new. All you’re really saying is that you’d do fine with a zoom lens and less MP, since you’re not using the full resolution.

              I don’t dislike the D800, or even this new D7100 really. But they aren’t anything that will replace what I have. The D800 would augment my kit for resolution, but I don’t need that, so as a luxury, I don’t have one yet. I’ve rented one and it’s great gear. Really. Not what I need though.

            • Aldo

              good shots… however I don’t see how using a d800 would make it harder on you to capture this type of action. When the performer jumps… you can capture 7 frames with a d700 and up to five with the d800. I still roll back to what I said about anticipation and timing being key over fps most of the time. I don’t argue that 12 mp is enough resolution for a big print, what I said is that the d800 resolution cap gives you more versatility over your shooting. And when cropping isn’t a new concept as you mentioned, being able to crop from a 36mp nikon picture is. When I mention the versatility of dx mode… I refer to composing your picture right there and then. I shoot 600 -1000 shots per event sometimes using more than one camera. Going back to every picture to crop stuff isn’t always practical… also shooting with a post cropping mentality will turn the job rather boring. Being able to reach a bit more with the flip of a button enhances your creative side at the time of shooting. Some would really have to experience to really get a good grasp of what I mean. As for the type of events that I do, people sometimes expect to look their best they have ever looked during their entire lives! Meaning attention to detail is critical. Their favorite picture may not come from what I intended at the time of shooting, and having that piece of mind that they can pick any of my pictures and make a big print at nearly any range (full body, mid body, full body with landscape,close up, depending what coverage the file has) is priceless. I also deal with a little bit of everything in a event… from action to pose to candid to portraiture to landscaping photography. If I fix my mind to one style of shooting I may cripple the potential creativity. Keeping an open mind and thinking outside the box it’s always a great tool, pair that up with a great camera such as the d800 and you have yourself amazing coverage. If I was to roll back to 8 frames per second at 12mp as of now, it would definitely compromise the freedom of shooting I have now.

            • Micah Goldstein

              For action, coming from shooting film in 135, MF, and LF, I found that more capture pixels/resolution doesn’t do as much for subjects in motion than more frames per second. the difference from 4-8 is HUGE. Especially with humans, which, like I said, do things like blink and lick their lips and talk and have a different smile from second to second–even when posing statically.

              Looking back at a two hour performance that I haven’t edited yet: just shy of 4400 images. There’s the difference. Can’t do that with a D800 in the same time. Even in crop with the grip, you just plain can’t do that.

              Now, if you could hit 7-8 fps or more with a D800…well, I don’t shun resolution at all. I’m not knocking it. But I’m saying that for some things, I’ll take speed over resolution. The only upgrade for me in this way is a D3s or a D4. And there’s not enough difference there for what I need. Shame Nikon hasn’t much to offer over a camera they had build back in 2006 (the D700 was being field tested then. I think they almost launched it -instead- of the D3). I should hope that perspective gives some pause. That’s an eternity in the tech world.

            • Aldo

              I guess you just shoot differently… I wouldn’t machinegun portraits because of many reasons, I don’t think its practical or would be of any advantage toward my work. Say you have an idea for a certain pose. You have it in your head, now you just have to make it happen… you have to work with your subject. Your pose your subject to match your idea. you snap and review recompose and so on until you get a shot that is exactly what you wanted, or what you had in mind. every pose, every idea is a process of at least 4-5 pictures if you really want to work around your subject’s features to maker her/him/them look best, and at the same time make your idea happen. I see a lot of pictures with perfect lighting perfect background, everything done by the book. except the subject doesn’t look good or doesn’t look his/her best. I don’t always work with model-looking subjects. and being able to make most people look good in pictures is a true skill, it’s all done studying the pictures quickly as you are shooting. Now this concept is impossible if you machine gun your subject. …. Also there are other advantages of medium format other than pure res. We are talking a bigger negative… I’m sure you know the quality of the image over all goes up not just becuase of pixels, but because you have a bigger negative capturing light. Also, I don’t think renting the d800 a couple of times can give you enough time to truly master the advantages I mentioned… that’s why I keep rolling back to having to actually own the camera.

            • Micah Goldstein

              Oh, I agree, machine gunning isn’t always compatible with studio work. In fact, my studio strobes aren’t really compatible with it either! Unless I crank them way down, I don’t get more than a shot or two in succession. I can get about 8 frames in a row out of using the little Nikon flash guns wirelessly, but again only when cranked down. So no, for posed/slow studio stuff, using “motor drive” mode is not happening.

              I do some studio people/product shots, and for that, I would prefer the D800. But slow stuff like that is 1% of what I do. And my clients can’t/won’t appreciate the resolution. I’d probably be downsizing things for them anyway. In fact, I am sometimes downsizing 12mp files to 6.

              When you’re doing group shots at a wedding, you often have to hurry, since they’re usually post ceremony/pre eatin, and you don’t want to make you clients cranky by keeping them standing around hungry. Three or four shots in half a second is more likely to have one with no blinks than 2 shots I might get off at half the frame rate.

              Although the in between area is when you’re doing the more artsy shots of the bride and groom…having the option to “machine gun” isn’t incompatible with controlled lighting and posing in that case.
              In the moment, the bride and groom want to be done with it and go eat. In hind sight, they aren’t going to remember that, they’re just going to want the damn pictures. So far, working the way I do and “machine gunning”, it’s a win/win. I work quick, everybody’s happy in the short term, and when they get their shots, they’re happy with the quality.

              This discussion reminds me of my brother’s wedding years back. Nobody was “digital” yet. He did the posed shots with a Pentax 6×7. It’s a great camera! I used to borrow one from my school, and I’ve used them in the studio. But you can’t really hand hold with a portrait lens. At least use a monopod. The mirror slap is too much. I knew this. When I look at their album I still cringe at the slight softness from motion. They’re good shots, but damn…he should’ve used a monopod or tripod or even a damned SLR. But somewhere along the line he learned that “bigger negative is always better”. Except he was working with a hungry bride and groom who wanted to be done with pics and just go enjoy their reception. So, he hand held the wrong camera. No time for a tripod, maybe didn’t think he needed a monopod.

              Anyway, point is: right gear for the right job. Out of a studio, I find speed and consistency is important. My AF has gotta nail it every time, and I have to have a few frames to choose from, because the client always wants the shots, but also isn’t always going to wait for you to jack around with your camera to take them.

              In the studio, AF precision takes a back seat, since you can just use live view. And metering is unimportant since digital has the functional equivalent of a polaroid back built in. Resolution and DR at low ISO win in the studio. I think it’s the opposite in the field.

            • No longer Pablo Ricasso

              I think what sucked a lot of people into the spray and pray mode was the early adoption of digital technology. With film you knew you had it when you pressed. The early digital cameras all sucked in that you had to spend a lot of money to avoid a huge shutter lag and even then you still got some. This coupled with the fact that the exposures no longer cost anything to speak of really changed the game, and not so much for the better.

            • Aldo

              I held back from digital as much as I could until I had to jump to digital quality mainly because of photo books. A scanned negative even retouched couldn’t really compete with a digital file. My first camera was a full frame though… so in a way I never really experienced a limited camera in terms of image quality. But I can see how you say people got used to holding the shutter button. I myself don’t find use for it unless I’m called for a specialty shooting… for example bmx sporting and stuff like that.

            • Joseph

              Decisive moment? How about you watch and press the shutter at the correct time??? You know, like photographers have done forever.

              I shoot with a D700 + grip often – I shoot on single shot mode usually!

            • Aldo

              that’s what im talking about lol

            • Csaba Molnár

              I never felt the need for high fps at events, even really fast events… Try doing a pillow fight (International Pillow Fight day) haha 🙂 For me having large number of very similar frames is a post-processing nightmare. I do short bursts of 3-4 frames or from time to time, but not very often. The downside is that this needs concentration and spending quite a lot of time looking through the viewfinder. This can be exhausting – not to mention that I start sweating, even though I’m used to living in a tropical climate! I don’t sweat easily, and photography (especially events) is the only activity that brings out a level of concentration that makes me actually sweat 🙂 But the payoff is not having to deal with a dozen very similar frames and 1000+ photos for a 1 hour event.

              I think the people who really need the high FPS are sports shooters. And a d400 makes lots of sense for sports. Just think about it – the d7100 sensor (a likely candidate for a d400) is very likely to be on par with the d700 in terms of high ISO capabilities – especially for the same output. In fact pro DX could be a growing market, but Nikon wants to force people to go the FX route instead. I don’t think this is a good choice to grow it’s market share, but that’s another discussion. The point is that imagine you’re a successful sports shooter with your current gear (d700 plus FX glasses). What the d400 would offer is the same quality you’re getting now but half the size and less than half the price! I know I would be tempted. Hell, I’m tempted! OK, not really. I’m very happy with my d800 and d7000 as my backup. But I am thinking about mirror-less quite a lot as my next backup system. I could live well with some weight loss 🙂

            • Micah Goldstein

              I think it’s a tool that one doesn’t know they need until they have it. I never drove stick until I was 25. I’ll never go back! Same with high fps. I’ve rented/borrowed a D800 a couple times now and I see it’s potential. But it will never replace a higher fps camera for me.

              And I guess I’ve been at it a while, so I’ve manipulated and built my workflow around dealing with lots of files. I have about 400gb of cards and a fast desktop. When I don’t have the luxury of the desktop, even my laptop allows me to sort out the files I really want, very quickly. 4000 files becomes 400 very fast. But also, I know what I want from end to end, so there’s not a lot of time wasted choosing this or that.

              I got a pair of mirrorless cams for expanding into video, and I have to say they’re great cameras to take everywhere. I can fit a body and three primes in my jacket! The quality is not the same as my D700, but it’s still usable. Better than lugging my D700 everywhere! (which I used to do!) And the video ain’t bad either. Check out this montage of grab shots I took on a weekend on the Oregon coast:

        • No longer Pablo Ricasso

          You could always wait a week and a half for the next newer laptop. Or you could recommend the highway department sell their snowplows and have the personnel use shovels. They’re much more reliable, proven technology…

          • Aldo

            lol well put.

          • Allen_Wentz


        • whmitty

          I cannot speak for laptops but in general larger MP files seem to increase a computer’s burden significantly and it appears to be more than just a linear increase proportional to the larger file size. I use Lightroom 4 on an Alienware desktop gaming machine with considerable processing power and working my D600 raw files is noticeably slower than it was with my D7000 raw. I would assume a similar hit with the raw coming out of the D71000. BTW, the D7000 is a great camera and I’d bet the D7100 is even better but after moving to full frame I could never go back. Anyway by not going with the D800 I did dodge the 50% increase in disk space requirements along with the reduced processing time. I do landscapes and nature images. Of my concerns the D600’s buffer and other limitations pale next to the fact that I’m still using my Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G until I’ve saved enough for the AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4G ED VR. Of course I may need to die and be reincarnated with financial carry-over before that happens.

          • Micah Goldstein

            I haven’t had issues with PS CS6 on a Core i3 machine with 3gb ram. Opens and manipulated D800 and lesser files fine. They are three times the size of my D700 files, so they do take up 3 times more space.

            • whmitty

              After reading your comment I processed some images from the D600 to final image output and I indeed overstated the perceived load increase while processing image adjustments. I conflated the image processing procedures with the import phase. Of course importing time would be affected by file size.

            • Micah Goldstein

              Yeah, of course anything disk speed limited will suffer from the increase. But actually making adjustments to the files in ACR or LR, I didn’t see a lot of difference between platforms. Unless you start messing with the CA or moire adjustments, then I notice a big difference between my 8core 4ghz/32gb ram desktop and a wimpy core i3. But basic editing didn’t seem slow. Rendering a writing out jpegs is sure to be slower, but I always walk away and do something else during that time anyway.

            • Allen_Wentz

              I would suggest “opening” and actually running a volume workflow through an i3 box with just 3 GB RAM are very, very different.

            • Micah Goldstein

              As I commented elsewhere in the thread, opening and manipulating them was great. I’m certain you’re right in a way though, since I know the time spent chewing on them outputting jpegs is directly proportional to the megapixel size.

          • Aldo

            “after moving to full frame I could never go back” agreed

          • desmo

            the D600 didn’t outgun your laptop—
            it outgunned your 70-300 consumer lens

            • whmitty

              I agree although the 70-300mm acquits itself rather well considering how relatively dirt-cheap it is.

            • Micah Goldstein

              …which 70-300 are we talking about? The non-VR versions were lackluster in my opinion. The VR one is shockingly sharp.

            • whmitty

              The VRII version for sure. I did a lot of comparing on Flickr between pictures taken with both lenses under similar circumstances/settings. In the 70-200mm range I deemed the difference not worth a near quadruple increase in cash outlay for the f/2.8. Of course the low-light capability is far less with the Nikon 70-300mm VRII. For birding I’m now considering the AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D IF-ED which is by all accounts very sharp and remains reasonably so when used with the TC1.4II teleconverter.

            • Micah Goldstein

              That 300/4AFS is very good! It seems to be a dirty little secret. Everyone whines asking for a cheap 300/4, but they are looking at the non-AFS prices. A new one would probably be VR and 3-4x the used AFS prices.

              Anyway, good glass! I have the VR1 70-200 and the TC14E, and it’s not quite as sharp, but it’s close enough that I haven’t bothered with a slower 300.

            • whmitty

              Nikon submitted, last October if memory serves, a patent for a 300mm f/4.0 WITH VR and some other new feature that escapes me now. If it doesn’t add another $600 to the current AF-S price of ~$1400 I’ll be salamander’s uncle.

            • Micah Goldstein

              Exactly! I’m worried that the market for such a lens is the most vocal whiners. They won’t like the price of the lens they’ve been nagging for. However, it may drive used prices down, so they’ll end up happy. Although Nikon may not sell many if that happens.

          • umeshrw

            According to some rule the performance of computers and HDD capacity doubles every 2 years for same price. Compare this to our camera’s MP count increase cycle. Also by same idea we should be against using latest softwares, blue ray disks and of course latest microsoft windows.

        • Ralph

          If I were using my D800 for those purposes, I’d use it in cropped mode and get the extra reach as a bonus. Also if youre getting paid for your work spend $1,000 and you’ll get a laptop that easily exceeds any need for RAW conversion. You can also use jpeg.

        • Allen_Wentz

          Strong laptops are available. True “there are few [PC] laptops available which can process 36mp raw files quickly” but any top MacBook Pro since 2011 with 16 GB RAM should handle those files fine.

          Pro digital workflows require strong gear in post as well as strong capture hardware. Folks thinking of using a basic midrange computer for images work should rethink. Any weak link (like inadequate RAM that pages to disk, or less-than-the-best camera cards/readers, etc.) can bog the job. My MBP was paging out at 8 GB RAM with an Aperture/PS workflow but 16 GB RAM fixed the issue.

          Note RAM is finally cheap but only the best laptops have room for the RAM.

          Compromising on cards or readers or computer hardware does to workflow what compromising on lenses does to image quality.

    • Bence

      You dont have to use the D800 in 36 MP mode. there is lower MP modes as well.

      • js200022

        All Nikon cameras with 24MP sensor are consumer cameras. If you want a prosumer one you have to buy the D800.

        • Aldo

          d3200, d5200, d7100 are all consumer? I don’t know. I think the d600, d7100 and even the d5200 fall within prosumer range.. d3200 is where I would draw the line.

          • dude you have no idea what you are talking about

            • Aldo

              lol okay.

          • Micah Goldstein

            AF performance is really the delineation. FPS is a bit of a line too. The D300 was pro build, the D7000 is not. And it fans out from there.

            • Aldo

              I have used the d300 and was pleased with the focusing system. I haven’t used the d7000 in the field but I have in fact used cameras with slow and clumsy focusing systems. And where there is a way around bad focusing systems, the D7100 seems promising in this category, I wouldn’t discard it as inferior just yet.

            • Micah Goldstein

              I used to use Nikon film gear, and I’ve gone through a D70, D2x, D300, and a D90 before the gear I have today. Oh, and a D7000. Yes, you can fight with inferior gear and wrestle it to do what you want. But using better tools just makes it easier. And lets you concentrate on the important parts like framing, composition, and timing.

              Fewer focus points wasn’t a big issue to me with the D7000. The issue was its inconsistency in any light, and it was also not as good in low light as the cameras with 51 point AF. Or the D2 series for that matter.

            • Aldo

              I come from a film background as well.. with nikon manual cameras and rented hasselblad medium format for some events. I can almost tell you that my first blurry picture came from an autofocus camera. I can relate to the inconsistencies you had in low light focusing, at one point it happened to me.. and I didn’t even know why. But if this new system borrowed anything from the d800 or the d300 I think it will be pretty good.

            • Micah Goldstein

              The D2x really blew my mind in that the AF was better than I was. I briefly installed a split finder, but found that even just using focus/recompose, the D2x was faster and more accurate, AND worked off center better than I could manually. The D300 continued that trend. The D700 and D3 are the same, only a little faster/better in lower light. The little I’ve used a D800, it seems about the same to me–and it’s excellent. I was spoiled and beside the D7000 being weaker in low light, it is just a plain inconsistent system. It’s a poor match for the high resolution sensors it has been paired with. Very disappointing.

              Even though it’s not quite what I hoped for, I may pick up this D7100, if only for the AF, which I expect to be superb.

        • studor13

          Like CSmith says, you have no idea what you are talking about.

          So, tell us please. Where does the D4 with it’s only 16MP fit in?

          I have the D800 as well as the D300. There aren’t too many people – in fact, no one – who can tell which camera takes which images.

          • js200022

            1. CSmith was replying to Aldo, not to me.

            2. I am not sure how my comment ended up in this thread. I was trying to reply to Mr Kotku where he says that Nikon “make the worlds best 24 MP cameras.” I don’t necessary agree with that. Nikon cameras with 24 MP are usually consumers cameras: D3200, D7100 and D600. They make great pictures but they are not prosumer cameras.

            Nikon flagship and prosumers cameras (best built) are usually in the range:
            D4 – 16.2 MP
            D800 – 36 MP
            D300 – 12.3 MP

            • desmo

              the D600 and this camera are prosumer
              the D700 D800 d300s and its replacement(if ever)
              are more pro (even tho they lack vertical grip they have pro user interface and build quality)
              D600 competes quite well with 5dMkII and 5dmkIII
              which lack Canons pro build quality and user interface

            • desmo

              by this camera I’m refering to D7100
              probably should have spelled it out since thread has gotten hijacked into D400 D800 and whatever

            • Micah Goldstein

              …they at least have the option of the vertical grip. This was how Canon build it’s pro cameras until digital came along. The 1V had a removable grip.

      • Micah Goldstein

        It’s still not a full 8fps and you get a smaller view finder compared to a dedicated DX crop rig.

    • cuz she can’t afford one.

    • Did you miss the D600? OK it has the D7000 AF (=useless for any interesting composition), but do you think that Nikon will make a camera with 30% less pixels that shoots as fast as the D4?

      • Micah Goldstein

        Why not? 8 or even 9fps leave the D4 with an edge of 2-3 fps, a giant buffer, better high ISO, better battery system, faster card, better build…quite a bit.

  • Eric Calabos

    If their $1200 DX is this amazing body, how D400 will be?

    • RxGus

      Ask Manti Te’o

      • Micah Goldstein

        Oooh…it’s funny ’cause it hurts. I hope you’re wrong though!

  • kingkong

    I want a brand-new and impressive D400, not a D7000 successor…

    • VikingAesir

      Nikon kept this one quiet, they could have a D400 no one knows about yet.

    • Think of it as a budget D400.

  • Matthew

    NPS Pre-Order?

    • Not a professional product, so probably not.

  • Rhonbo

    At this price I am in. The kit lens adds almost $400 though. I think I will go for the body only for now.

  • Micah Goldstein

    Price wise, this makes me think there’s still room for a D400 with a couple more FPS. Or a D700s with more MP, same frame rate, and higher frame rate in crop (10-12fps).

    • waterengineer

      From a merchandizing standpoint I agree. The D7100 is $1,200US and the D600 is just under $2,000US. That is quite the gaping hole in price points. So what did Nikon leave out or how did they cripple the D7100 so there is “room” for the D400? Let us count the ways. 1. crippled video, no true high definition progressive scan in higher frame rates. 2. burst rate. 3. possibly buffer depth – I don’t see the value reported in any of the info I have read. 4. No direct access buttons on top of the camera like the D300s. 5. sound – nothing reported about improved sound capture or what jacks are available. 6. No CF card slot(s) for those invested in CF memory. 7. The D7100 does not have internal Wi-Fi. A big mistake in this day and age. I am sure there is more, but there are a few quick thoughts.

      • Mike M

        I think that may be a bit wishful thinking, the D600 realistically was selling for the equivalent of 1600-1650 during the “kit lens sale” and sooner or later I think we’ll see the body settle there, that’s awfully deep into a potential D400’s price zone.

        • o_joe

          Refurbished D600’s from B&H and Adorama are selling now at $1600. If Nikon waits until Fall the price of New D600’s may be at $1800. Not sure that leaves a big hole…

          • iamlucky13

            As has been pointed out before, the D400 does not need a price hole to be successful.

            Neither the D7100 nor the D600 give super high frame rates, and while the D600 may handily beat the DX bodies at noise performance, it’s still only a partially metal, the max shutter speed is 1/4000, max sync is 1/200, and it has no sync port.

            It could be exactly the same price as the D600 and there would be people who would happily choose it instead of the D600.

            The critical question, however, is whether the number of people who would do so would justify the expense of integrating all the features, maintaining an additional assembly line, etc.

      • Micah Goldstein

        Buffer is 9 frames in “full” DX, with lossy compressed raw. Worse in other modes, 14 when cropped further for the 2x crop size. I suspect it actually has the same amount of RAM as the D7000, which isn’t adequate for the increase in pixels.

        • The write throughput supposedly is higher, but you’re correct: more pixels + more write speed = same old buffer.

          • Fred Flintstone

            So is the buffer memory some super duper expensive component, or is this deliberate hobbling? The cynic in me says the latter

            • It’s just DRAM memory, basically, which is relatively cheap. But this is a consumer camera, not a pro camera, so you don’t just pile on more parts, as it starts to cut into margin. Since most people buying this camera are going to shoot JPEG and probably don’t even want to buy fast cards, it’s probably an okay decision on Nikon’s part.

              Again, this is a point I’ve been trying to make for some time: the D7000, and now the D7100, are consumer cameras, not pro cameras. The operative question still unanswered is whether Nikon will make another pro DX body, and if so, what do they see as the priorities for differentiation of that from their top-end consumer camera.

              With the D600/D800 combo, we can see some of what Nikon thinks that is: extra cropping options, dedicated buttons for ISO/QUAL/WB, aperture control in video, clean uncompressed video on the HDMI port, TIFF support, USB 3.0, 91k metering sensor with CPU upgrade, extended bracketing, higher-rated shutter, full metal chassis, different viewfinder with built-in shutter mechanism, PC Sync, 10-pin remote support, settings banks, and more. And of course, 12mp more ;~).

              A D400 needs to be a bit different than just the above list, I think. But that’s a story for another day.

            • Myrddin

              Actually a small increase in dram can have a huge effe t on cost

              Quite a lot of CPU chips come with a dram attached as one module. If you want more ram then it is a whole different circuit design

              Canons rumored d7100 slayer is some way off. I would not be surprised if it had a faster CPU and more memory. But. If it does then expect Nikon to reply pretty soon wih a D7100s

              Comparing a released model to rumored specs is nonsense. Might as well compare it to a D400 we don’t know exists

  • max flash sync 1/320th? that’s a nice surprise.

    • NRA Advocate

      That IS a nice surprise.

      Oh…but boo hoo hoo…it’s not a D400! Waahhhhh…I want my mommy!

      • i wish it was a d400 but hey, they sky isn’t falling!

        • No longer Pablo Ricasso

          Maybe that too (and every camera after) will have the faster flash sync.

    • xi8u

      Still not as good as the D70s 1/500th. I never understood why that was their only camera that had a flash sync that high.

    • Micah Goldstein

      No, you’re reading it incorrectly. The sync speed is 1/250th. The built in flash will sync to 1/320 in high speed FP sync mode (which is why it says power is reduced above 1/250th).

      If you dig a little, you’ll find that the D700, D300, and some others did this too. And they’ll all sync up to the max shutter in HS FP mode.

    • Allen_Wentz

      B&H specs show D7100 as 1/250.

  • Rick

    Who is going to pay $400 for a old trashy 18-105mm vr since the d90 12MP era? The 24 MP body is going to stress out that lens. The body is going to sell fast but who’s gonna pay for that lens you can ebay for like $200 or less. Does nikon even bother about professionals who use this cam with 400 f/2.8 or 600 f/4? where’s the rugged body and 10 fps! arrrrrgggg

    • Poony

      Its called the D4

      • clever except that the d4 in dx mode is what, 6 or 8 megapixels? that’s not of much use to people who need the crop factor.

        • Aldo

          nobody “needs” the crop factor unless you have dx lenses with your d4 which doesn’t make sense.

      • umeshrw

        You must be rich.

        • umeshrw

          Or american . No offence intended. Just that equipment is quite cheaper in USA .

          • Aldo

            I’m American and I can’t afford a D4… but I can afford a D300, d700, d3, d7000, d7100… and when I want more performance I rewind to my first thought … I can’t afford a D4

            • umeshrw

              Exactly my point. They are all old. Now D7100 has changed the equation. Even that has got small buffer.( I do not need it though as I shoot 1 frame at a time)

            • Aldo

              d7100 looks sexy… but of course haters are always gonna hate 😛

            • umeshrw

              I guess the images are gonna be even sexier.

      • Rick

        I do have a D4. It’s not cropped 24 mp…and the D800E is sluggish cropped at 10 MP

  • DT

    DPReview confirmed that the D7100 still cannot adjust Aperture in Live View or in Movie Mode. Must quit Live View and Re-Enter to see changes. Why Nikon? Why? D800 is the only that can do this. This is one of the main reason why many indie filmakers and videographers stick with Canon.

    • Discontinued

      Shame, really. I was hoping for a Nikon DSLR that shoots 1080 @ 60 fps AND allows to adjust aperture in Live View/Movie Mode. Unfortunately even my D800 can’t do both.

    • Guys, this is one of the reasons why I keep mentioning camera “platforms.” The D7000/D600/D7100 platform doesn’t have the part necessary to do smooth aperture changes in Live View. The “professional” bodies do (D800, D4 right now). Sometimes Nikon moves a part down from the pro ranks to the lower platforms, but they save some of those things up so they have something to iterate on the next version of the camera. The D7100 got the 51-sensor hand-me-down, but not the 91k-metering sensor one. Curiously, it got a special white stripe LCD we haven’t seen before instead of ambient light sensing LCDs. But Nikon tends to be pretty predictable on these updates. The D7100 is pretty much what one would have predicted from a D7000 and what other changes happened with the D600.

      • umeshrw

        If only they had given that LCD to D800. It needs it more than D7100.

  • Danonino

    Just one question, where is the fixed lens 28mm aps-c compact?

    • Hippo

      Camera hell.

  • Rad

    Any news about the fixed lens compact?

  • cxi8

    Yeah none of this 18mm fixed dx point and shoot bs. Please.

  • no instant zoom for AF fine tune = FAIL

    • desmo

      instant zoom for AF fine tune
      i have 2 Nikon models with AF fine tune
      never heard of “Instant Zoom”
      please enlighten us

  • Ghe

    No LCD protector attachment point. Means you have to use those stick on protector that peel off all the time and do not protect against knocks. Way to go nikon. Then again they would prefer it if you damaged the screen as that means repair money or damaging used sales of the camera. Nice

    • Ernesto Quintero

      Buy quality screen protector with quality adhesive. Move forward.

      • Mike

        Yeah, but that wont stop a knock out in the field. Polycarbonate thick protectors are great for that but now with no attachment point looks like we’ll have to glue them on or something. A small sticky protector wont stop damage no matter how much ‘quality adhesive’ it has

        • Ernesto Quintero

          Laminated glass are best. Screen protectors need proper application so the adhesive cures with out containment on surfaces. Yes the lower edge has no “lip” but the old ones had three sides without it. Screen protectors are meant to be sacrificial items.

        • Aldo

          I use the protector because it came with the camera, but honestly I get tired looking through it. The camera looks better without it and sometimes I think to myself: who am I taking care of the screen for ? the next owner? How about I enjoy it , scratch it , brake it, love it myself? anyway… just a thought. Of course my protector is still on 🙁

    • Allen_Wentz

      The screen protector on my D2x was a PITA so I took it off. That was almost a decade ago, I use my gear pretty hard and wear on the LCD is tolerable IMO; after all it does not affect IQ in any way.

  • waterengineer

    OK, so here is an interesting question. Nikon make a point of bragging about the OLED display. Is this way of Nikon easing their customer base into electronic viewfinders (for at least the DX bodies) and away from the expensive penta-prism, in a generation or two?

    • guy

      Oled is for the makings in the viewfinder. In other words, where nobody will notice. Strange place to put them to brag about it.

  • Max

    I don’t care i will buy a Hasselblad H4D-40

    • Di

      So fuck off.

    • John

      So why should we care about anything you are saying?

    • John

      So why should we care about anything you are saying?

  • waldorff

    yeah cool, more pixels,more afpoints, less noise etc.etc.

    But by now it should be time to release some DXprimes, Nikon is completly neglecting serious DX shooters.

    • Allen_Wentz

      DX 10.5mm, 12-24mm, 35mm and 40mm micro lenses service the DX wide end reasonably well. Now that the FX D600 is available at entry level pros wanting better wide IQ probably should use FX cameras and lenses to get there anyway.

      FX lenses work fine on DX cameras and normal range FX primes are not overly cumbersome on DX.

      Tele primes and fast zooms I agree Nikon is maltreating the serious DX market space. Carrying around a big FX tele just to hang it on a DX camera is inefficient. Maybe Nikon calculates that most of the consumer-level DX buyers will cope with kit tele zooms while the pros will just use heavy FX lenses; if so IMO that is wrong-headed thinking on Nikon’s part.

  • Will_Rickards

    So preorder D7100 or get D600 refurb? The limited raw buffer of the D7100 is a bit concerning.

  • Max

    Dear Admin, do you think we should wait for d400 release? What is the probability that there will be a new camera d400? And do you think will be a new camera at all?

    • Flub


    • I disagree with Admin on this. He’s on record that the D7100 is the “combo D7000/D300s update.” I believe the D7100 is just a D7000 update. If you look on the more sophisticated of the Nikon Web sites, you’ll see that the D7100 and D600 are both listed as “consumer,” the D300s and D800 are “professional.” I believe we’ll see a D400, and it will be a professional camera.

      The problem is “when will we see it?” With the camera market being what it is and many of the world economies being in recession, it’s very possible that Nikon could overshoot the window in which a D400 would be well received. They aren’t helping themselves by their marketing terminology (“DX flagship” for the D7100). That’s a bit like starting to close the window yourself, as it sends a signal to some of the faithful that are waiting that what they want won’t come.

      Still, Nikon is nothing if not predictable when it comes to SLR/DSLR product iteration. Remember that they iterated the pro film SLR long after everyone thought they wouldn’t ;~). Let’s hope a D400 is sooner in the cycles than that.

      • The information I received back in November ( suggested that the D7000 and D300s lines will merge – this is not my personal opinion. As you can see, the rest of the info was pretty accurate (except the fps rate), even the announcement timeframe. Of course this was just a tip and it doesn’t necessary mean that Nikon will do exactly that, but at that point I have not heard otherwise. Nikon may also change their 2013 plans after their bad Q3 financial results. The bottom line is this – the D400 is possible, but I have not heard anything confirming that this camera will be released.

        • I will say that at the moment I don’t expect a D400 in 2013. We get a D4x, I think, some Nikon 1 iteration, but not much else in interchangeable lens cameras that I’ve heard of is close to ready at the moment.

          The whole “flagship” thing is strange. The D7100 is not close to a flagship for DX, unless, of course, their older battleship sunk and they forgot to be ready to replace it ;~). “Hey, you sunk my battleship. Oh wait, I’ve still got a cruiser. I’m going to call it my battleship.”

          There are just far too many pros shooting with D300’s still for Nikon to abandon them like this. The D7100 won’t suffice for those folk, typically because of buffer, but for other reasons, as well.

          As I’ve pointed out elsewhere, we went through this same thing with the “Nikon will never do another pro film SLR” once the D1’s came out. Yet there it was AFTER the D2 came out.

          Nikon’s not one to leave money on the table. They fumble with the money on the table sometimes, but they eventually pick it up. There will be a D300s replacement. It’s just not going to be timely.

          • We have to watch for those “high end” DX lenses – if Nikon release them in 2013, there will be a D400.

      • Dave Johnson

        I am certain there will be a D400. I believe Nikon is not that oblivious!

  • Mr Kotku

    What every happened to the compact DX camera with the fixed 18mm f/2.8 lens?

  • Nikon_Boy

    7100 looks nice……There is NOT going to be a DX D400 people…..Nikon seems to be streamlining their products/bumbers.. All the DX cameras have 4 digits (5200, 7100, etc), all the FX models have 3 digits (600, 800, etc)…Pro FX have 1 digit (D4, D3x, etc)…..I’m just happy they are finally coming out with new cameras because its been a longtime coming.


    this will probably get buried, but can i get a show of hands of the people who would buy the D800 for $3000 if it had 24mp, 1080/60p, 6-8fps burst, and all the bells and whistles it already has?

    • Present!

      • MRGABE

        i personally have the money to purchase a D600, but it just isn’t everything I want in a camera. I could very well save the extra money for a D800, but it lacks some specs that its little brother has. i just don’t understand why Nikon won’t just pack everything into the D800, charge $3000 for it for 4 years without reducing the price until there’s better technology? It just doesn’t make sense. Crippling cameras isn’t the way to go about these things.

        • Aldo

          sometimes you can’t have it all.. but that doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy taking pictures with whats available. Its gonna be interesting seeing what the next full frame (below d4 line) has to offer.

          • MRGABE

            yeah, i know. it’s just so frustrating from this end. it’s not like Nikon CAN’T make the camera, they just want to play mind games because the consumer doesn’t really have a choice. I’d not asking for 400mp and 5k video with raw output, just a camera that’s better than its predecessor and better than the lower end models. putting certain video features and a faster burst rate in a camera that’s a third of the cost makes absolutely no sense. but if you buy the cheaper camera, you lose the big sensor.

      • MRGABE

        it should be, you get what you pay for. the D600 shouldn’t have ANY features that are better than the D800’s. I should be able to say “i want faster burst, guess I have to pay more for it”, not have to weigh my options and pick which features i could do without. it’s just frustrating and annoying and it makes me think about switching brands and i know some people will say “if you don’t like it, leave”, but damnit! brands with the consumers in mind just shouldn’t do things like this. the general consensus is that we’d like a camera that does it all. and most of the people here will pay the money for it. While Nikon COULD do that, they just don’t WANT to. How dare you put 1080/60i in the D7100 and not in the D600/800? You can’t tell me that the technology was developed yesterday. Just put the damn features in the camera and stop the nonsense!

        • Aldo

          Honestly I wish the d800 had 1080 60i… but the d7100 has it. I think many are overlooking this great feature.

  • Daniel Bliss

    Unacceptable raw buffer and no structural strenghtening to the front of the camera. What are they thinking? I suppose they have in mind yet another DX model slightly higher up, but boy, are they ever taking their time with it.

  • Nikon?

    along with the D800, this camera will sell much, not for me. I will be moving to another “C”?

    • Jib

      So fuck off already.

  • walston

    Waydaminnit! I can’t believe all this foolish miniscule think. Who gives a rip if the 7100 is a bogus POS? Have a stiff drink and buy another camera altogether if it’s that big a deal to you. This is without a doubt the biggest collection of adolescent hoohah I’ve ever run across on a single Web site. That is with the exception of the same bunch who whined endlessly about the D800, oh and the D7000 and that’s right, the D300, and…blah freakin’ blah! In fact go out and buy yourself a LIFE!

  • Leontin

    Where is the famous NIKON compact camera???????

    • It’s coming

      • Yeah. Nikon seems to be on the Launch-a-Month club plan now. We still have at least two more significant announcements prior to summer according to my sources.

        • Rick

          Are you the real Thom Hogan from bythom?

          • Fred Flintstone

            No he just buys his hats from the same shop :0)

  • peter2

    I think it’s a good camera, and makes sense for having a backup body or upgrade from low end DX’s.

    But I still think there is room for a D400, though at this point it’s more of a wishful thinking:

    – Price gap: between this D7100 and D600 leaving $1400 -1500 for another one

    – FPS/buffer: People who used to have D300, D300s don’t want to spend that much of dough for a D4 to get the same amount of FPS and buffer.

    – The 7DMkii is on the horizon, not that it’s any important, but Nikon may not want to lose that war.

    Other than that, this one maybe the one to take with me on hiking trips, leaving the FX for the actual work only.

    • desmo

      7DmkII is as far over the horizon as the D300s replacement
      Nikon and Canon are playing Mexican Sweat on this one—

      neither one wants to pull the trigger, but neither one wants to be unprepared so both are vapor ware til one company flinches

  • RR

    I hate the Sony style microphones on top of the D7100 body, as a Nikon user it disappoints me, to see Nikon copy Sony stuff.. as if Nikon needed that. Its seems to me the Nikon/Sony Alliance its ok in sensors but not in aesthetics! please..

  • Guest

    Nikon kicking so much Canon butt

    Where’s the D3300 with D5200 39AF points AF system?

  • iamlucky13

    Same price as the D7000 was released at – that’s a pleasant surprise.

    Width and height both increased by about 1/8″ – hopefully improving the ergonomics a bit.

    Same official ISO range, but no doubt some subtle improvements over the D7000 there.

    No AA filter – wasn’t expecting that, but at 24 MP, why not?

    Autofocus down to -2 EV and with F/8 lenses. Teleconverter users rejoice! In my opinion, this is the most substantial upgrade. Had Nikon been willing to let leak that this was going to be a feature, I probably would have waited instead of snapping up a D7000 during the Christmas sales.

    A few expected video mode upgrades, including a built-in stereo mic, but most of the rest is identical to the D7000. A welcome, but expected upgrade.

    Realistically, however, this is NOT a D300 replacement. I won’t try to guess whether Nikon will replace the D300, but with 6 fps and not a full-magnesium nor fully sealed body, this won’t satisfy those looking for a D400 any more than the D600 did.

    • Robert

      Nikon says the body is fully sealed like the D800.

      • iamlucky13

        I stumbled across that elsewhere after I posted. Thanks for the correction though.

        I missed the buffer issue though. That’s probably one of the bigger limitations.

  • d800

    what happened yo the fixed lens dx camera that was supposed to come out?
    I know it is over shadowed by the d7100 , but it sounded quite
    interesting for a small pocket camera

  • niels

    what’s this thing guys: you all use nikon, and i assume you are proud photographers, but most of you complain about every piece of good news nikon comes out with… d600, d7100, it seems all sh*t. c’mon, grow up, or maybe a canon?

    • Aldo

      I think its safer to assume we are proud on the arrogant side than we are photographers

    • Tib

      Most of the people here are just gear whores, not photographers.

  • Misho

    Wireless trigger for 600.oo ? don’t buy here is PERFECT for 21.oo. Works perfect with D800-D600-D700-D4 ………….

    • David K

      For 20 dollars you can get the ML-L3 Wireless Remote Control. The nikon site says its compatible with the 7100.

    • Fred Flintstone

      I think that the wireless controller does alot more than shutter release, not sure if the intended market for the D7100 is going to need all that though

  • rkas

    Why do you always just link to american sites and deals? This is kinda an international site you know…

    • Fran

      Because there are hundreds of countries and you won’t break your fingers using Google?

      • rkas

        Yeah, so why post any links at all?

        • sk

          rkas, they get a small referral % when people use their links & order something(think of it as something akin to advertising in newspapers/tv). & I imagine the links to the US locations are just going where their highest volume is. If they could make much $$ off other countries I’m sure they would put those links up 2.

          • rkas

            Aah, ofcourse..

        • Fran

          Cause the guy who runs this site won’t make money off of people whining about not having a D400?

  • jim

    A couple of comments:

    There is an article in the March/April 2013 Photo technique magazine by Lloyd L. Chambers ((turns out that is digilloyd – I’ve seen his website a couple of times). He posits that the DX (or Canon EF-S, etc.) models with their smaller sensors are a dying breed – to be replaced by cameras with even smaller sensors. Some seem interesting.

    On the D7100 – my initial entry to the digital word was the D70 – but it always seemed awkward to me – that dial on the left with those scene modes, etc. I came from the film world using a F100 and when the D200 was announced I could see the affinity that it had to my beloved F100 (still have them). And I immediately ordered one – it has served me faithfully even through some events that made me cringe. When the D300 arrived I thought it was not that much of an improvement nor did the D300S interest me much. But when the earthquake delayed the newer models I broke down and bought one. Then when the D800 was announced – it had my number again.

    But I would still consider a D400. The D7100 seems still have those D70 elements in it – sort of – D7n where “n” equals 10 squared in this case. Still not a DX pro.

  • BrainBeat

    What I would like to know is what will the Australian prices be as it seems we often have to pay way more for no reason and want to know how much I need to save to line whoevers pockets that rips us off. I have seen a few converted other currency prices but then do not seem all that likely and 1 from an unknown (to me) Local online retailer.

    • Fred Flintstone

      I reckon $1599 from Teds etc.

      • BrainBeat

        I do hope it might not be that high but fear you are likely right if not too low :(.
        As for the supposed hidden taxes I do not believe they do actually exist and that the at least as far as the government is concerned. I believe it is more likely that it is from Nikon and or their distributor that are both setting the price at a level they think we are prepared to pay, and not adjusting it when the dollar has gone up. I guess we will have to wait and see what prices they do actually set as Teds and diamonds do not ever seem to list preorder prices at least on their websites.

    • sk

      Dude, you all voted the people in that are responsible for your high tariff (plus all the other taxes) on “luxury” items.

      • Fred Flintstone

        Actually we didn’t vote in our current PM, she knifed that bloke to get the job 🙁

        • sk

          No dude, the commonwealth. Parliament craves more & more $$ so they just keep bumping the hidden taxes. Its painful for you all stuck at home. Now that I’m mostly overseas everthing is so much cheaper. But best of & take care!

        • sk

          No dude, the commonwealth. Parliament craves more & more $$ so they just keep bumping the hidden taxes. Its painful for you all stuck at home. Now that I’m mostly overseas everthing is so much cheaper. But best of & take care!

          • Fred Flintstone

            Gaah! The grass sounds much greener on your side

  • naimpressionz

    I’m still awaiting a suitable backup to my D800 for wedding photography purposes. I too was looking for a D300 upgrade. I guess the D400 still has a chance for a future release.

  • Douglas Pavani

    WEK UK is giving 2 16gb SDHC with all the pre orders.

    • Peter

      They are also charging full rrp. Not worth two cheap sd cards. Just wait for amazon etc to get it will be at least £150-200 cheaper. Or like last year with the d800 it went on special promotion after a couple if months on sale it was £470 cheaper than WEX. I’ve never found we’d to be good value for anything

  • Back to top