Nikon is rumored to announce five new Nikkor lenses in 2017


In addition to the D820 and D7300 Nikon is rumored to announce five new Nikkor lenses this year (as of today Nikon still has two camera models that have already been registered with various government agencies but are not yet announced: N1546 and N1610).

The Nikon D750 replacement is rumored for late 2017 or early 2018.


It is still not clear what will be Nikon's future mirrorless solution and when it will be announced, but there is a good chance that nothing will happen anytime soon - at least not in 2017 (the pictures above are just design concepts by broxibear).

The future of the Nikon 1 is also not clear.

I still would like to think that Nikon will do something big for their 100th anniversary, but there is a possibility that we will only see the Nikon D5 and D500 limited editions sets.

Nikon is going through a major restructuring and I just think it will be a while until we see the results of it. Nikon even canceled their lens-only rebates they have been doing for years during the February-March timeframe.

Here again are some of the key points Nikon made regarding their future plans:

  • This is a quote: "bringing in multiple mirrorless cameras at an early stage"
  • In the future Nikon will concentrate their resources on mid-to-high-end DSLR and mirrorless cameras and lenses.
  • Nikon will have fewer models in the future.
  • Nikon still wants to develop a high-end compact camera.
This entry was posted in Nikon D7500, Nikon D820, Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • More FL lenses please. I will pre-order a 300/2.8 FL or 400/4 FL day one.

    • Thom Hogan

      Two more coming that I know of, but the FL glass is low in production capacity.

      • Thom, thanks for input. Any clue on which one? I assume they are super teles. No reason to make shorter PF lenses. A zoom (200-400 may be)?

        • We can expect more Nikkor tele-lenses to be refreshed with E/FL. Several patents have already been filed. A new 300mm f/2.8 lens was specifically mentioned to me:

          https://nikonrumors.com/2016/09/06/nikon-300mm-f2-8-fl-vr-lens-patent.aspx/

          • Peter. Thanks for your comment. I meant to say 300/2.8 PF (not FL). FL version is given I believe. However I doubt we will see a 2.8 PF version though. I’m not sure if there’s any technical issue with that. Neither Canon or Nikon ever talked about it. But any talk on a 400/4 PF?

            • ITN

              No issue, but the weight savings would be less significant with a faster lens, and most buyers of fast supertele primes expect the best possible quality which is not what you get with PF.

            • vwking

              A lightweight hand-holdable 400mm! f/4 will be really nice, especially if they can pair it to the TC-14E as well as the 300mm f/2.8 does. I’ll take a f/5.6 if that’s what it takes to keep it light and affordable. Dare I ask for f/2.8??

        • Thom Hogan

          If I were a betting man, the 300mm is next for the FL treatment.

          • I was wondering if there’s any room for improvement in that lens except weight saving which can be significant by looking at Canon version. I expect at least a pound and half less than current version which will make slightly lighter than Canon version (like 500mm)

      • Oops, I meant to say “I will pre-order a 300/2.8 PF or 400/4 PF day one.”

        • manattan

          LOL. I thought that is what you meant, but perhaps you knew that there was some amazing benefit to FL that I was missing.

          • I used to be Pixel peeper. Now I will be very happy with any ‘serious’ lens from any manufacturer. They all produce great images for me. I don’t care about FL at all. But lighter weight is important. It happened to be the new FL series lenses are lighter may be not because of FL element. Will get a serious glass this year, something below 5LB would be great.

            • El Aura

              When the first Nikon FL lenses were announced, the very low colour dispersion of the FL glass was credited with enabling a more compact and lighter design since fewer lens elements were needed to achieve the desired colour correction.

            • Anjitha Senarath

              Then wait for canon 600mm f4 DO 😀

            • If I become serious again, I might.But it should be significantly lighter than 400/2.8. If not D500 + 400mm will have almost same effect as 1DX + 600mm for double the money

      • Max Dallas

        They need flouride ? They cam have my toothpaste and precious bodily fluids.

    • James Fennessy

      Exactly wildbirdimages. I would also gladly pre-order a new lightweight 300/2.8 FL or 400/4 FL to carry alongside my 600 f4 (I cant carry the 600 and the 400 f2.8, and that would require 2 heavy tripods).

      • I understand. I shot with 500mm f/4 and tripod for around 10 years. I still can do it. But now I’m looking for freedom of moving around easier/faster. I’m sure I missed shots because I could not turn around fast enough with Gimbal mounted lens. If I were a pro that would be a different story.

        • Nice images Joseph(I guess that’s your name?). Always wanted to get more into wildlife but its a tricky passion, early mornings and expensive gear! I’m sticking to my poor mans 70-300 until I can prove to myself Iv got the skills to warrant splashing the cash! Have flowed your 500 account.

          • Thank you for kind words Mark. Joseph is my last name. Anyway…
            You are right, it’s an early morning hobby. Also expensive. Digital helped to bring the expense part little down. For me if it’s not for wildlife I don’t even care about camera. It’s not easy to make money out of it. I made some money, but not even half of what I spent :). Good luck to you.

  • Yach

    More PF lenses maybe ?
    400 PF. Or (is it possible ?) 200-500 f/4-5.6 PF zoom for 2k 😉

    • Virindi

      400 F4 PF would be around 7000$ (See Canon 400 F4 lens)

      • manattan

        That fits with Nikon’s move “upstream” in pricing as they slowly migrate back to being a specialty camera company.

        • Sawyerspadre

          Maybe specialty means they are dropping Coolpix. It seems every camera that is not integral to your smartphone, now qualifies as “specialty”.

        • animalsbybarry

          There is a limit to how much prices can increase in response to decreased demand
          This simply goes contrary to the law of supply and demand, an is a risky path for the camera industry.

          • Thom Hogan

            It may go against supply and demand as you’ve been taught it. But the Japanese are definitely going to be testing the price elasticity of demand in the coming couple of years. I know of multiple >$5000 camera bodies coming.

            • animalsbybarry

              Higher prices may very well be a death spiral for an industry in decline

            • EcoR1

              I don’t mind $5000 cameras existing as long as I can still buy a bit cheaper ones.

            • animalsbybarry

              I agree

            • Chris

              It’s a dying consumer market that makes a dying industry in this case.

            • Sawyerspadre

              Will that be Sony or Canon? 😉

            • harvey

              remember what the price was of the D3x when it was introduced and yet people bought them?

            • Thom Hogan

              Yes I do. I also noted that Nikon sold fewer D3x cameras than any of their other FX models ;~).

              However, if you look at the timing of the D3x, it’s clear that Nikon was right at the front edge of the 24mp FX sensor production. They had to be hit by low yields and low volume.

            • harvey

              I know a lot of people who bought them at the time.

            • KnightPhoto

              Yikes sure hope the D820H isn’t > $5K! And if it is maybe I’ll find a way to get the D5 or D5S after all.

              Multiple hmmm: D5X 72mp monster, what the heck else… Nikon medium format, K, I’ve only come up with two and they’re both low volume. Hope it’s something ground breaking for that money in which case I’m in 😉

              BTW surprised to see FujiFilm GFX is CDAF (and slow) – yuck didn’t expect that one – for me CDAF is a no-go!

            • Troy Phillips

              If Nikon does a MF like the Fuji GFX it (has to) have Phase Dectection …. has too.
              I’d just like Nikon to do PD in live view on a dslr and come out with a FF mirrorless dslr style body with the easy access dials like Fuji. And the famous Nikon grip on the right hand side of the camera. I like a small light camera but it needs to be easy to carry like the d500 or d810. I have both and love the grip. When I get out my old FE film body I realize how hard it is to hold even though it’s smaller and lighter.

            • Chris

              Hmm, yen raised against usd for about 15% in the last six month alone. It’s not to different from what people used to experience during economy turmoil, price for a bag of sugar suddenly skyrocketed.

      • Which won’t be too bad. It should be similar to 300/2.8+1.4 TC. I’m sure new 300mm will be more than the current price.

    • manattan

      The only PF that I think they patented was a 70-300 zoom. That would still be an awesome zoom and hopefully they release it.

      • Thom Hogan

        I think they (and Canon) are a bit worried about fresnel-type lenses as general purpose lenses due to the issues that can arise in backlit situations.

        • Plug

          Yes, I have a 300 f4 PF but if a lightweight f2.8 FL appears I will upgrade. But I am getting older, it needs to be portable enough. The PF version can be irritating into the light.

          • Did you ever see an issue? I’m still watching and looking. So far I can’t produce the issue. Just curious

            • Plug

              Into the light over water with lots of bright highlights. I see lots of tiny little bright circles. Otherwise no issue. I am into birds so it happens quite often. I am probably just being fussy, I used to have a 2.8G, heavy but super sharp, and miss its picture quality but not its bulk.

            • KnightPhoto

              Likewise, never noticed a 300PF problem…

        • manattan

          PF could be strategically very important for Nikon. To counter Nikon’s lack of strong mirrorless options, Nikon could introduce a DX zoom lens with PF elements together with a downsized DX camera. This would be the “small and light” option that actually plays well to Nikon’s core strengths in DSLR and lens design and questions the need for a mirrorless camera based on size alone.

          They could also copy Fuji and do DSLR vs Retro bodies by introducing a shrunken Df in DX size, and combine that with a couple DX pancake primes. Just as the Df was made to help scale the sensor for the D4, a smaller DX version of the Df to help scale the sensor production and supply chain for the D500 might work.

          These moves seem like natural responses to the market and play to Nikon’s strengths, but I am not holding my breath though.

    • animalsbybarry

      200-400 F5.6 or 300-600 F5.6 would be nice as a PF lens

  • T.I.M

    My 500mm f/4E PF VR ?

    • animalsbybarry

      That would be a nice lens !!!!

    • KnightPhoto

      One would expect the future PFs to be a stop slower than their corresponding FLs. How about take it a bit longer – a 600mm f/5.6 PF?

      • El Aura

        Exactly, Nikon won’t be be having two lenses with the same specs (f-stop and focal length) with one being PF and the other FL.

  • manattan

    I do not put much faith in the N1546 and N1610. A lot of registered components Nikon never released and just canceled (e.g. all the stuff for the DLs). At least if the 5 lens rumor is true, Nikon is concentrating on their core strength in lens making. Maybe if they have thrown in the towel on cameras, they could start making lenses for others like Sony’s E mount or Canon LOL.

    • Semaphore

      They still sell several times more cameras than Sony. The brainless Nikon-bashing gets so ridiculous here.

      • manattan

        I’m only bashing Nikon’s lack of clarity in their future directions, not the actual products. Why not release a roadmap from the “restructured” Nikon? Companies like Fuji do this and it is helpful to see what lenses are coming.

        • Sawyerspadre

          Remember, a road map that would be worth talking about would take at least six months to develop after the restructuring. I don’t think Nikon has released a roadmap before, and I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for one.

        • Thom Hogan

          We’re not going to see any official statements from Nikon until they’ve reported their fiscal year results, I think. Maybe simultaneously with them, but not sooner.

          • manattan

            I think strategically they should release a road map along with one major product introduction BEFORE the financial results are reported. This is because everyone knows the results are going to be garbage, so for internal board room PR they need to be confident in their plan for turning the company around. Give the good news first as once the bad hits it colors everyone’s thinking.
            The same could really be said for the DL fiasco. They had nothing positive to even point to, and as a result only the bad news is what people remember.

            • Thom Hogan

              Historically, Nikon announces financials first, cameras second. What you want isn’t likely to be something Nikon management is going to do ;~).

              However, Nikon does have a “story problem” right now, and they’ll have to address it very quickly after the financials, I think. I’ve outlined what the Nikon user base is thinking at the moment (and continue to get lots of additional input in my In Box), and it’s not what I’d call a positive perception of Nikon.

              Problem is, I don’t think they’re ready to do anything except iterate a couple of expected DSLRs and drop some lenses. That doesn’t really tell a different story, and they need a different story moving forward.

            • jonebize

              “Story” is a great word here. Cool thought. They need to -position- themselves to the market, articulately and forward-looking

            • Thom Hogan

              I think I was lucky. In MBA school I had one professor who emphasized story in every aspect. Leadership is about storytelling (building the cultural story). Marketing is about storytelling (building the customer perception). Even the financial reporting requires a form of storytelling around it (building the investor perception).

              Thus, I’ve always tried to build stories at the companies I’ve started or worked for, and I looked very closely at the stories that my competitors were telling.

              Note that the 100th anniversary thing is a tough story to get right. Technically, the past 100 years are the cultural story of the company, not a product. You can do a product on a big anniversary, but it’s tricky to get that right, because it has to incorporate both the past and forward story simultaneously. Even Apple has failed at this several times.

            • Do Nikon need to take a leaf out of Fuji’s book and release a lens and camera road map? At least then the people who are thinking about jumping ship might hesitate, if the camera/lens combo they want is about to come out, or is scheduled for release they might stick about a little longer. If I was Nikon I would be concerned about the number of people who seem very willing to jump ship. Loosing the beginner photogs who are now happy to use their smart phones is obviously bad on the market, but loosing the more passionate photographers is worse in my opinion, not financially but in terms of esteem and brand.

            • Thom Hogan

              In terms of DSLR cameras, no. If they come out with a new line of mirrorless cameras I think that will speak for itself.

              But lenses are a different story:

              FX: no real road map necessary, but it would be nice to know that replacements for certain lenses are in the works (e.g. 200mm Micro-Nikkor).

              DX: Nikon needs to tell customers that they’ll have a full line of lenses, either by producing them or by providing a road map.

              Mirrorless: Any new system absolutely would require a road map, otherwise people will just go to the “known” or wait to see what Nikon actually produces. Considering that CX seems to be another lens lineup that fails (the old APS lenses were the first), Nikon has a big gap they need to close in terms of perception. A road map would go a long way to doing so.

            • That’s why I have I always thought that they should use exiting mounts for mirrorless. S mount for small rangefinder style camera- Fuji style retro market, F mount large body mirrorless for pro size large mirrorless for press, professional photogs who would appreciate aspects of mirrorless tech but want long battery life and good ergonomics.
              I’ve asked you this before Thom, but if Nikon could create an S mount camera would they be able to make smaller FF glass?
              People want small cameras but then generally FF glass is huge, but the old rangefinders had tiny wide angle lenses – I believe due to removing the retro focus design you need for the mirror box, my guess was that the flange is so small on sony(and other mirrorless) that its actually a disadvantage in terms of creating small lenses. Surely space between the rear element and the sensor is an advantage for lens design? A mirror box or the sensor itself being in the way must limit how much they can extend the rear element.
              I’m guessing here and I’m certainly no optic engineer.
              A FF frame from rangefinder type body would surely be a massive hit for Nikon? The old S range of rangefinders are beautiful in looks, what a perfect 100 year anniversary gift to the fans. Put a D4s sensor in it and bring out a new 50mm lens with aperture ring on the lens with an old school Nikkor build quality to it. Yes I like the modern G lenses and don’t mind plastic at all, but I could see so many people emptying their wallet to buy that. I don’t know how many s mount lenses are still out there, no where near as many as F mount I guess, but at least they wouldn’t be starting from total scratch. A few ebay buys and people could have an arsenal of small lenses for their retro camera.

            • Thom Hogan

              As a general rule using older and current lens design techniques, once you hit telephoto there’s no advantage to short flange distances. Thus, most of the advantage of using a shorter space between mount and sensor would fall on wide angle lens designs.

              This is a tricky thing. You can make a smaller camera and end up for some purposes having same-sized lenses (e.g. Sony A7 versus Nikon DSLR). The smaller buttons and controls on the smaller camera then become a bit of a detriment, not a benefit, and the overall mass center of gravity shifts forward into the lens more.

              So, could Nikon make an S rangefinder that’s small? Sure. And if all you want with it are a set of small primes from say 20mm to 85mm, the entire product would stay small, like a Leica.

            • And I’m sure a Nikon rangefinder camera would sell a whole tonne. Especially street photogs or people who care about what their camera looks like, personally I’m not that bothered as long as it works well and has good IQ, but that’s just me. For a quick easy win to get more money in the bank it seems a no brainer to me.
              Later they can consider the more Pro angle of mirrorless, will they ever consider removing the mirror from all their cameras or will the market move that way without them? I don’t think they want that decision to be made by other people. If they have a pro based body with F mount but without a mirror box, with all the best video and photo tech they can put in it then surely they have a better chance of survival?
              Mind you some times markets just go against you, Sony had way better headphones, sound quality, size and construction of their music players but the IPod totally smashed them for sales, even though it was terrible in terms of sound quality, those tinny crappy headphones were everywhere.

      • I agree

      • ZoetMB

        That may be true, but as documented many times before, Nikon is losing share. You can’t blame smartphones or other market factors when you lose share – that means your competition is beating you at your own game. While they still do produce some great cameras, it’s also easy to see the major flaws in their floundering product strategy, their lack of quality customer support and their seeming lack of ideas on how to attract customers other than the “old guys” who inhabit sites like this one. They only seem capable of incremental improvements and nothing for younger consumers with a completely different mindset. It should be obvious how incredibly inept they are at software.

        And after the failure of the Nikon1 line, the seeming failure of the KeyMission line and the cancellation of the DL line, Nikon appears to be running scared. They don’t seem to know what to do. They also don’t understand the market, because they haven’t made an accurate projection in years. They didn’t even make their 2/13 projection when the fiscal ended just six weeks later. How could they not know what their sales were going to be? Their revenue projection was 21% off! I’ve worked for three big corporations and you got fired for crap like that.

        And their insistence on constant price increases (in the form of new higher-priced models) or lack of discounts (by not offering the usual rebates) is a recipe for failure. While it increases the margin on each unit they do sell, it severely limits the units. They should be doing quite the opposite. They’ve got 24 lenses in the current lineup that are more than 10 years old plus the 8 AI-S manual focus lenses. Why don’t they reduce the price on all of those and push out all the inventory they’re probably sitting on?

        I paid $1450 for the 70-200 2.8 in 2004. That’s $1864 in 2017 U.S. dollars. But the new 70-200 is $2800. That’s a really big increment and the dollar is about 9% higher than it was in 2004. If it were $1900, I’d probably buy it tomorrow. Same for several other of my lenses.

      • CommonPleas

        Camera sales numbers should not determine how ‘good’ a camera is.

        Sony and Canon are good cameras. But I was simply not a good fit for them. I chose Nikon because Nikon’s view finder was positioned a bit more to the left and my left eye is my dominant eye.

        I have my FM, and my D700, and lenses for each. They have handled well through university and during my career, and they handle especially well in Canada’s winters.

        I expect to have a new Nikon in my hands within 12 months.

        Until the Nikon-bashers build their own camera manufacturing company, and produce something better, I have every confidence that Nikon know what they are doing and I wish them a good restructuring. After all, we consumers will be the ultimate beneficiaries of those changes.

      • Thinkpad_T60

        It’s actually very reasonable. The rainless Nikon apologists on the other hand…

    • Thom Hogan

      Five lenses in a year would be an average year for Nikon in the digital era.

      • ZoetMB

        Based on availability in U.S. retail (and not on announce date), since 2010, it’s been 8, 5, 5, 6, 6, 8, 7.

        By my counts (and not including the AI-S manual focus lenses), they released 48 lenses from 1992-1999 (13 still current), 53 from 2000 to 2009 (26 still current) and 45 from 2010 to 2016 (all still current).

        I’m not including lenses as current that Nikon still has on their website, but aren’t available anywhere.

        • Abiatha Swelter

          So that’s 84 lenses you can buy now? That’s not enough?

          • ZoetMB

            I never said those weren’t enough. One viewpoint says it’s way more than enough because the average number of lenses sold per body for the entire industry is only around 1.6 and 93 lenses (including the AI-S manual focus lenses from the 1980’s) should be enough for anyone, but the opposite argument maintains that there are many holes, including a big lack of DX primes (there’s only a 10.5 and a 35mm) and higher resolving modern lenses that haven’t been done yet to replace the older versions.

            The 200 f2 is due for replacement as there’s no electronic shutter, either phase fresnel or fluoride version as yet and there are for the longer lenses and the recently released 105mm, although some rumors claim a 200 f4 is coming first (which is probably a good idea considering that the current 200 f2 is $5700). An E-version of the 70-200mm f4 is another possibility. Rumored on this site is a 16mm FX lens and another fast DX zoom and other people have guessed below what the next lenses will be. Besides, from a marketing standpoint, consumers always want the newest thing.

            Nikon also needs lenses that work better for video. They need zooms that maintain focus end-to-end, have gearing, focus quickly and silently. (The AF-S lenses were marketed as being “silent waveform”, but my microphone picks up the lens focus chattering). They’ve released an 18-55 AF-P with and without VR and a 70-300 AF-P (P=stepping motor) with and without VR for that purpose, but they’re slow, low-end built and don’t have gearing.

            And none of that counts lenses Nikon would have to produce if they did indeed release a DX or FX mirrorless with the expectation that customers would want physically smaller and lighter lenses. If they didn’t keep the F-mount, they would need an entirely new lens line (unless it was CX like the Nikon1 line). If they did keep the F-mount, they’d need smaller, lighter versions of F-mount lenses. One way to do that is to put VR in the camera and get it out of the lens.

      • Spy Black

        Yes, and they’re all 18-xxx 🙂

      • T.I.M

        I think Peter is talking about 5 PRO lenses.

  • Semaphore

    14-24mm, the f4 zoom line, and a 135mm like the new 105 1.4?

    • paige4o4

      Whats wrong with 14-24? I can’t see what compelling benefit a version II would bring to the table.

      With the f/4 line, all we really need is an update to the 24-120. The 16-35 and 70-200 are pretty great.

      • Semaphore

        There’s nothing “wrong” with it, but Nikon doesn’t need a reason to prove they are a great lens company. Since the other two lenses in the trinity has been refreshed, 14-24 is a logical next step.

        • paige4o4

          That’s a fair point. But if you think about it, all three lenses had their own “issues” upon release. The 70-200 had focus breathing. The 24-70 didn’t have VR. But the only controversy with the 14-24 was that it couldn’t take filters.

          Nowadays, there tons of filter holder options available, plus it’s kinda expected that this sort of lens won’t take filters.

        • Jon S

          making it 10-20mm would make more sense.

          • Spy Black

            When was the last time Nikon made sense? He’s right about the 14-24 tho.

        • Eledeuh

          I mean, lots of people on the web like to shit on the Nikkor 14-24 ever since it got serious competition from Tamron and the like, so I guess they *do* have to upgrade it just to put things back in order.

      • Pat Mann

        The 16-35 needs a lot better across-the-field resolution and some distortion management to be acceptable to me. It’s a key lens, needs to be better.

    • Eledeuh

      The 16-35 f/4 would really benefit from an upgrade. I feel like the 70-200 f/4G should still be good for the next generation of cameras.

  • Etzio Aldetori

    we need raw video thats all .

    • Lubos

      no, we don’t.

      • ZoetMB

        You may not, but it’s ridiculous to make that assumption for all photographers. Clients demand more and my clients want me to shoot both stills and video with more and more of an emphasis on video because that’s what they post to social media to market themselves. And consumers certainly want to shoot video.

        Now you can say, “if you want video, buy a video camera”, but when I’m working alone, which is most of the time since clients don’t want to pay much these days (since everyone with a digital camera thinks they’re a photographer), I need one body to do everything.

        So while I never thought I’d be shooting video, I do want Raw video and I also want 4K, lenses more suited to shooting video and far faster and more accurate focus.

        If you want Nikon to split the models and have the same camera with a video and no-video option, that’s fine, although the incremental costs for including video are probably very small.

        I don’t need medium format for the work that I do, but if someone posted “we need medium format”, I would not reply, “no, we don’t”. I just wouldn’t buy that camera.

        • Thom Hogan

          Raw video produces enormous amounts of data. It’s turning out to be a key issue for a project that I’m getting ready to do: I’m not sure how I manage the data flood in a way that protects data integrity without having to mortgage the house.

          • ZoetMB

            Lost my original response, but… that might be a good reason for Nikon not to do video raw in the near term, but that’s a far cry from “no, we don’t [need it]”.

            Also, I’ve been looking at the specs for the new Blackmagic URSA Mini Pro video camera. Being Super-35, it’s basically DX sized and only 12MP, but it generates 4608×2592 Cinema DNG Raw at 513MB/s onto CFast 2.0 cards. Street price ($6K and $5K for the older model) is less than a D5.

            Sensor size aside, it looks to me like there’s far more tech in that camera than in a DSLR. Imagine if they did a consumer version with easily interchangeable lens mounts (including F-mount, although for the Pro they only offer EF or PL mount) that also took decent stills. I might be all over that. Imagine if the Mini Pro came from Nikon instead of Blackmagic. Is that a place where Nikon should have been headed?

            • Thom Hogan

              If you look carefully at the video models, including Sony’s, they’re almost all what we call Super35 in size, which is very close to APS/DX. Technically you need at least 33mp Bayer to do a best case full sample 4K. BMD is cheating by scaling, as are many others.

              513MBs a second is a ton of data, which was my point. At 60 fps 4K, a 256GB CFast card in the Mini Pro will be filled in 5 minutes. I’m working on a long-form project and expect to generate many hours of raw material. The NatGeo filmmakers I know probably have more storage in their vehicles than food and water.

            • Eric Calabros

              So one hour of video needs 3TB storage. a 3TB HDD is only $100 these days. Still seems way cheaper than film.

            • Thom Hogan

              Well, not exactly. For someone working for the networks–which is what I hope my next project will get to–one hour of capture is a minimum of 9TB of storage, and likely more like 15TB, of which at least 3TB has to be very fast, and 3TB has to CFast cards.

              How do I get there?
              3TB = clone archive of the card
              6TB = ingested and backed up video
              3TB = ProRes for editing
              3TB = original cards

              256GB of Cfast is US$650, so US$7800 for 3TB.
              3TB clone is US$100
              6TB RAID is US$500
              3TB fast is probably another US$400 (because you’ll want RAID 0 to get the speed on 7200 rpm drives)

              So, that hour of recording now cost US$8800.

              Now, consider that I’m out in the wild for two weeks at a time and start thinking about the implications.

              There’s a big difference between doing some casual, personal video project with no real serious output intentions and doing something professionally. Big difference. It’s why Nikon need not apply any more: the best I can do with the DSLRs is a compromised 4K at 10-bit 4:2:2, or maybe ProRes, and that’s via a third party accessory that no longer can control the camera (starting with the D5/D500).

            • Eric Calabros

              Fair enough, but the super fast storage you need for recording can be used many many times. so its not like $8k cost for “every” hour.
              Why not use SSD? Samsung has 2TB drives with near 500MP/s write speed for $700.

            • Thom Hogan

              The folks using REDs are generally using SSDs, though REDs official SSDs are more expensive than the consumer Samsung stuff.

              Again, the point I was trying to make is that I’ll be as much as two weeks away from base, relying only on what’s in my vehicle. When you capture stuff that almost never happens–as I did with the leopard getting into the mudhole to get catfish a couple of years ago–you don’t reformat that card just because you brought it over to a hard drive that night. The risk of failures out in the field where I’m working is very, very high. So you wait until you’ve gotten back to town and made sure everything was duped, backed up, archived, and transcoded for editing before you reformat that original card/SSD/whatever.

            • Horshack

              If you plan to use a camera the Atomos Shogun has 4K SDI raw support on (click Atomos Camera Support, select “SDI Raw” in center drop-down and “4K DCI” in right drop-down), you can use much cheaper SSDs as your first-line storage ($1k/3TB vs the $7800k you quoted for Cfast).

            • Thom Hogan

              I’m aware of that. But when you start rigging outbound gear you start increasing your complexity and making the rig far less small and portable. In Botswana, for instance, we’re shooting on custom cradle positions mounted where the doors were (mostly), and leaving the camera mounted while following an animal at times. That means outbound gear is getting hammered at the joints as we bounce through the wilds. In Kenya, I know of one videographer that’s on a platform at the front of the vehicle where they need absolute minimum gear due to their low, exposed position.

              There’s a big difference between doing a Hollywood music video off tripods and with roll up cabinets and more all while being a few miles from a service center and being in the middle of nowhere by yourself having to maintain absolutely everything.

            • Horshack

              SDI has a robust interconnect and you could also keep the Atomos off camera/in the vehicle if the camera rig and platform aren’t amenable to mounting it there.

            • Thom Hogan

              True. But the scatter of gear is a problem for me in the way the vehicle I will be driving is designed.

            • ZoetMB

              And what are the NatGeo filmmakers shooting with in those tough environments?

            • Thom Hogan

              All the NatGeo filmmakers in Southern Africa (e.g. Botswana, where I also shoot and film) are using RED, typically with Canon lenses.

            • Eric Calabros

              How they manage the focus?

            • Thom Hogan

              The way it’s almost always done in video: manual.

            • Eric Calabros

              I can’t even imagine manually tracking a bird or a wolf.

            • Spy Black

              “Technically you need at least 33mp Bayer to do a best case full sample 4K.”

              Don’t you mean 8k?

            • Thom Hogan

              You need 7680 x 4320 Bayer photosites in order to build a 3840 x 2160 image without doing scaling of some sort. That’s 33.2mp.

            • Spy Black

              I can’t say I’m following your math. So Panasonic is working on scaled 8k?
              http://photorumors.com/2017/03/10/olympus-is-working-on-8k-video-for-their-micro-four-thirds-cameras/

            • EnPassant

              For every color point with a sensor using a Bayer filter four pixels are needed, two green, one blue and one red.
              That is why 4x as many pixels (or photosites) are needed to avoid scaling, just as Thom says.

            • Spy Black

              So you’re implying that isn’t happening with, say, the 16 Meg chips used today for 4k?

            • EnPassant

              4K is 3840×2160 pixels. That is also what Panasonic uses, so without any scaling. However the FourThree 16MP sensor have 4592×3448 pixels. That means 17% of the pixels on the short sides are not being used, making wide angle lenses less wide with a crop factor of 1.2x.

              Sony A7sII with 4240×2832 sensor is better with 10% loss and 1.1x crop factor. Even better for 4K would be a modern FT 4000×3000 sensor with an almost negligible 1.04x crop factor.

              However as the MP increases on sensors the 4K part of the sensor gets smaller and smaller. And next step for (very high quality) 4K video is the 8K resolution 7680×4320.

              To achieve 8K video a FF sensor need to have at least 39.3 MP. So that explains why Sony decided to use a 42MP sensor with an almost not notable crop factor of 1.03x.
              A FT sensor capable of 8K would however need a sensor with at least 44.2MP pixels! Propably a 48MP, 8000×6000 sensor.

            • Spy Black

              I find it odd that, by yours and Thom’s explanation, everyone is apparently interpolating their video data and no one is batting an eye at this. Here is an example:
              http://photorumors.com/2017/03/10/olympus-is-working-on-8k-video-for-their-micro-four-thirds-cameras/

            • EnPassant

              8K video is the goal as that is the highest resolution that makes sense for most practical uses and therefore is more future proof than 4K of today.

              Presently there are no affordable screens and graphic cards I know of that can handle 8K resolution as 4K barely is the common standard yet. And 8K broadcasting will propably not be common in my lifetime. But 8K screens will propably be common within ten years.

              For use today it is however easy to downsample 8K to 4K video without any loss of quality and that make 8K a kind of dual use format.

              Although 8K video may already be more than we need and our eyes can dissolve that haven’t stopped some from already doing 10K an 12K video timelapse moves with Phase One cameras:
              https://vimeo.com/scientifantastic

            • Thom Hogan

              If you use 7680 x 4320 to do 8K video, then each photosite is being interpolated (getting color data from adjacent sites). When you do that, you don’t get 8K “resolution,” you get 50% lower due to the interpolation that goes on during the demosaic.

              If you use 7680 x 4320 to do 4K video, then you have color data for every pixel directly (green binned and averaged) and you have a true 4K resolution.

              But it gets much more complicated than that very, very quickly. Video output generally is not an RGB pixel, it’s adjacent RGBW dots these days, and they’re not square! Thus, if you’re interpolating up front and out back, you can get results that are not approaching what you would get if you killed some of that interpolation/scaling/remapping.

              Videographers and filmmakers argue over this stuff like you wouldn’t believe. That argument for digital started back in the 80’s when the HD TV standards first started to come together and haven’t stopped since. Right now the fixation is on Color Space and dynamic range in the 4K output, but I’m sure we’ll be back to the resolution arguments soon as we move on to higher K.

            • Spy Black

              So then everyone is interpolating with present gear, as will Panasonic with their proposed 8k camera. Wouldn’t this be obvious to professionals who work with this stuff?

            • Thom Hogan

              Yes, it is. We debate the various pixel management schemes on all the various so-called 4K variations that are out there. The good news is that they’re generally better than the 1080P variations, but the bad news is that we don’t have a lot of what we’d call true 4K choices.

            • Spy Black

              What do you believe are true 4k cameras? Given enough light, wouldn’t these interpolating cameras be able to make full resolution use of the luminosity data of, say, one green array and simply interpolate the color data?

            • Thom Hogan

              This is no different than the discussion of Bayer versus Foveon, though with one important difference.

              In still photography I’ve long written that “more resolution is better.” Even if you’re not using that resolution (e.g. printing larger), there are benefits (e.g. edge acuity). More sampling always results in better underlying digital data.

              In video, the same is true.

              Now for the important difference: with stills, the size requirements of a photo have been going DOWN. No one shares 36mp JPEGs on Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/et.al. With video, the size requirements are going up and will continue to go up: 480P->1080P->4K->8K->more K (using US standards).

              So buying anything that’s not maxed out means that you soon run out of true resolution as the output devices pass you by.

            • Eric Calabros

              “then you have color data for every pixel directly”… I’d like to see that kind of file. It should be bigger that ordinary 4k raw, right?

            • Thom Hogan

              Well raw files will be larger than compressed video files, sure. Same as raw still files are larger than JPEGs. I’m not sure what your point here is, though. If you’re collecting 33mp of actual data from which you can build RGB 8K pixels, yes, that would be a larger file than collecting faux 4K information that’s either sub-sampled or interploated.

              The issue for many right now is planning for the future. We’re going to have 8K displays by the 2020 Olympics, I’d guess that we start seeing wall panels for homes sometime shortly after. As the resolution of the output device continues to push up, throwing old lower resolution data to it is going to look progressively worse.

              Even those of us outputting in 1080P today for the final project tend to be shooting in 4K. Not only does that give us cropping ability, but it also means that our projects can survive a switch from 480P streaming to something far higher.

              But, here’s the thing I learned in the 70’s: never bet against bandwidth or capacity. Both increase at a regular and predictable rate. Yes, you may be at the front edge trying to record 4K raw, but it’ll become affordable over time.

            • Eric Calabros

              I asked that because Sigma dp2 Quattro raw files were bigger than expected, 53MB for 29 million pixels.

            • Thom Hogan

              Foveon sensors need to save three data points for every photosite, so 29m * 3 data points. A 29mp Bayer sensor stores only 29m data points.

    • paige4o4

      You misspelled log video. Thats what we actually need.

  • Jeremy Allen

    I am guessing a 200 f2E FL, and 300 f2.8E FL are next to certain. They are also likely to put out a 135 f2E. The 14-24mm is also due for an update.

    • Thom Hogan

      Pretty good guesses.

      • Captain Megaton

        Unless Nikon doesn’t have f-mount lenses in mind.

    • MB

      Current 200mm f/2 is already using Super ED glass, that is pretty much the same thing as a synthetic fluoro crown used in FL lenses …

      • Jeremy Allen

        True about the SED lens element, but this is marketed as a “sports” lens so they will want the electronic diaphragm for the D5, and they might try to work in the FL elements to have it lose weight. They will also want to market the fluorine coating. Frankly, I have the 200 F2 VR and it’s my favorite Nikkor for IQ and rendering, and I’m not sure how much they can improve it overall. They might get the MTF graphs higher and flatter, but I suspect it will lose it’s magic if they do that.

        • MB

          There is one common misconception about fluorite that it is lighter than glass when in fact it is heavier than most glasses and roughly the same specific gravity as ED glass. The weight reduction is due to the fact that you need less fluorite for the same results but that wouldn’t be the case when compared with Super ED which is actually synthetic fluorite, exactly the same thing later advertised as FL due to “popular” demand …
          On the other hand you do have a point about E diaphragm and fluorine coating, but 200mm VR2 is relatively new lens and new version would be dependent on how many current lenses Nikon has in stock …

          • Jeremy Allen

            Good to know about the FL elements. IIRC, there are 3 ED and 1 SED elements in the current lens. Could they eliminate one or more of the ED elements by using FL glass, reducing it’s weight? They might also use a bit more plastic in the housing. It might just end up being a marketing thing more than actual increase in quality. My speculation (and it’s just that) is a continuation of the trend to re-work their pro-grade telephotos with the new kind of glass, outer coating, and aperture control. I can’t see upgrading my current 200 f2, no matter what they put in there. I always thought it strange that the SED only found its way into 2 lenses that I know of. I don’t know enough about optical design to know why this is the case.

    • Jon S

      hoping Nikon goes wider and makes it a 10-24mm!

    • Davo

      Personally I’d like to see a 28/1.4 too but I don’t think there’s been any hints they’re redoing this.
      But a 72mp D850 with a 28/1.4 lens is also:
      42mp 1.3X crop 36mm f1.8
      32mp 1.5X crop 42mm f2.1
      18MP 2X crop 56mm f2.8
      And the 20mp E-M1 II sensor (as a reference) is pretty good so if you can accept cropping, the one lens can cover a lot of wide-normal FL needs.

      • Jeremy Allen

        The 28mm f1.4G or E would be the next logical step in the 1.4 prime lineup. If they did that, the prices on the 28mm f1.4D would likely drop, even if it didn’t have the ground aspheric element.

  • Piooof

    All things considered, there’s no reason for Nikon to do something big for the 100th anniversary.
    If a company can get a groundbreaking (or just excellent) product to the market, it’ll do it whenever this coincides with a “great time” or not (situation A).
    And if they can’t, they have two options: B1) go ahead with a just-ok product and pray for a good marketing strategy; B2) scrap it and go back to the drawing board.

    I suspect Nikon is in situation B1 for DSLR and B2 for mirrorless, and that this year will be absolutely nonspecial.

    • Piooof

      (I’m not Nikon-bashing: personally I’d be happy with a 2017-spec’ed D7300, and I’m confident they’ll deliver it)

  • Lloyd

    shouldn’t we be hearing about the EN-EL18b today? Any news on that?

  • Wish for a 16-35/4 VR update. Well distortion corrected, keeping 77mm filter threat!

    • Thom Hogan

      Not likely.

    • zorwick

      17-35. That is really old. For reportage, wedding, general wide angle. Really outdates lens. I would sell my 14-24 and the the old 17-35 for it.

      • Matthew Steinhoff

        The 17-35, my bread and butter lense, is a wonderful. Still, I wish it was modernized. On the D700, it was fantastic. On the D810, I can feel it struggling.

        With just the 17-35 and 70-200, I can shoot pretty much everything I need.

        The 14-24, which I also own, is technically a much better lens but not nearly as flexible. I love the images but it really is a special-purpose lens. I’d part with the 14-24 long before I’d let go of the 17-35.

        Cheers,
        Matt

    • pami

      I would also like to see a new 16-35 but f2.8 in the size and weight of the new Canon 16-35 III !

  • Tom Gloor

    Why D750 replacement early 2018 🙁
    I was really hoping for July

    • I think there will be two new DSLRs: D820 and D7300

      • Adam Brown

        Those would be satisfactory for 100th anniversary.. but only if they present major upgrades and some new technology. Not just snapbridge.
        -Time for OSPDAF live view.
        -4k video
        -BSI sensors

      • T.I.M

        could you add 80 to that D820 ?
        :o)

      • Spy Black

        Wasn’t there supposed to be a Df update as well? I’d be surprised if something unique isn’t done for their 100th anniversary.

        • T.I.M

          Hello ?
          The Df update came out a while ago, I think they called it Nikon FM2

        • EnPassant

          Df was released very late in the year. Therefore a Df2 would be expected about the same time this year and not yet be registrated.
          D820 and D7300 on the other hand are expected for a spring and summer release and are therefore already registrated.

  • FountainHead

    18-55 dx
    18-105 dx
    18-140 dx
    18-200 dx
    18-300 dx

    Five lenses, we’re done here.

    • Eno

      We can expect at least two versions of the 18-55mm DX, one with stabilization and another whiteout. The same for a new 55-200mm DX and probably another super zoom. And we have 5. 🙂

      • Sawyerspadre

        I know you are poking at Nikon, but is there really anything that really should be re-done about these? To me the 18-140 is the new 18-105. The 18-55s were recently redone.

        • Eno

          No, I don’t think there is more to be done about those kit lenses but hey, this didn’t stooped Nikon in the past to constantly iterate them, over and over, and over again. 🙂

          • Sawyerspadre

            Maybe they have a “kit-lens cost reduction” group, and their only task is to constantly reduce the cost of kit lenses. They are the brains behind the plastic mounts that my daughter keeps breaking off the 18-55s. They save $2.00 on the mount and the entire lens is shot when the mount breaks, because you can buy a replacement for less than the cost to fix the mount.

          • BVS

            True, but it’s not completely without reason though. The 18-55 VRI wasn’t that great of a lens overall. The VRII was much better but weak/flawed at 35mm. Haven’t seen tests of the 18-55 AF-P yet, but hopefully they further improved the image quality, and it’s got that sweet new stepper motor as well.

          • Viktor

            I think that there is a thing that can be done about these kit lenses…. stop producing them 😀

        • BVS

          Also, the new 70-300s are likely replacements for both the 55-200s and 55-300, and the 18-300 6.3 is fairly new.

          I think the only one getting long in the tooth is the 18-200, although Nikon might consider the 18-300 6.3 as a replacement for that one too.

          Maybe they’ll do an AF-P version of the 18-140 next.

        • RC Jenkins

          I would say a high-quality, reasonably sized & priced multicoated 18-70 F/2 or F/2.8 would be a great DX addition.

          …and should be the *only* type of DX addition. Skip these slow, cheap lenses.

        • Spy Black

          The 18-140 has hideous distortion.

    • Ineedmy Bobo

      Well I’m really hoping for an updated 18-135 dx. (kidding)

    • T.I.M

      what’s a DX lens ?

      • Allan

        The thing you can put on your D7200.

        • T.I.M

          The only lens I use on my D7200 is my AF-i 400mm f/2.8 (I do have to put the battery grip + SB900+TC20E III to get it balance)

      • MB

        Diminished eXpectations … 🙂

    • RC Jenkins

      LOL! All F/3.5 – 5.6.

      Then the consumers who buy these wonder why their phones take pictures that are just as good, and disillusioned by photography, and stop buying things, collapsing the inflated market.

      Oh wait…are we talking about 2017 or what Nikon’s been doing the past 10 years…? 🙂

      • Jon S

        They should all be consistent f3 at minimum

        • RC Jenkins

          I’m not sure if you realize this or not, but these are jokes about how Nikon keeps releasing entry-level dx lenses and cameras that most capable enthusiast photographers don’t want. See “all of the other comments below.” Everyone is mocking Nikon. (And the word you’re looking for is “constant,” not “consistent.”)

          That just ruined the joke. But here’s a clip that may explain the situation we currently find ourselves in:

          https://youtu.be/EMTbkfgT_jc

          • Jon S

            I knew he was joking… but he’s right about making the kit lenses better, Fuji has done so great with the f2 lenses they make.

    • Viktor

      Maybe Nikkor will go even further:
      1. 18-400 dx
      2. 18-500 dx
      3. 18-600 dx
      4. Pin hole dx
      5. Pin hole fx
      Actually last two will be the most expenssive ones out of these as the will give the best results 😀

  • animalsbybarry

    It is important for Nikon to release something good to restore consumer confidence
    2 cameras that I believe would accomplish that and be a financial success are

    D810 replacement with faster focus and faster burst rate

    And Nikon should build a new 1″ sensor with thier new 2 layer PD sensor and 7.4-600 F2.8-6.3 lens ( 20-820mm equivalent)…both if which Nikon recently patented

    • Sawyerspadre

      Sounds like a DL updated.

    • T.I.M

      For a turtle, you do write fast…

    • Markus

      I don’t get this, all, the D750, D810 and D500 set the tone. What else can you do as a company. Sure the missed the mirrorless train right now but I’m quite sure Nikon would get a lot of critics ift they released products equal to the most Sony cams.

      • animalsbybarry

        Nikon could easily get away with building a mirrorless camera equal to Sony…. because Nikon has the lenses

    • paige4o4

      > D810 replacement with faster focus and faster burst rate

      If thats all they do I’ll abandon Nikon on principal.

      They need to throw more features in that machine: IBIS, tilting LCDs, wifi, a body with built in Arca Swiss rails, multiple, multiple 3/4 inch mounting points. Theres SO MANY options other camera manufacturers are thinking of that CaNikon are ignoring.

      Also what I’d like to see are some software features. Custom crop modes, automatic focus bracketing/stacking, and full communication with a smartphone app (like all the consumer cameras have already).

      Theres SO MANY options other camera manufacturers are thinking of that CaNikon are ignoring. Thats gotta stop.

  • Thom Hogan

    No “bringing in multiple mirrorless cameras” is not a quote. It’s a speculative statement by the Japanese article author after talking to Kimura-san. Indeed, most of what you highlight in your bullet points is hearsay speculation, and translated at that.

    • br0xibear

      I put that article through 5 different Japanese to English online translators, and they all came out different. I’m not sure what that article really said or who said it.

      • Captain Megaton

        I read it in Japanese. There really isn’t much there, just a basic acknowledgement really that the plan was not going as planned, and they have new plans plans to fix the old plan.

        The only hard fact is Nikon is doubling down on mirrorless from now on together with midrange and high end dSLRs. The rest in inference.

      • RC Jenkins
        • Nimloth

          Base ISO? 😉

  • doge

    A company going through major restructuring and significant contraction doesn’t start releasing brand new products at the same time. Nothing groundbreaking is going to come out of Nikon this year.

    • animalsbybarry

      New cameras are constantly in development
      New models were and still are in development since before the restructuring
      Delaying the new products means they will not be new when they are realeased because the competition is not standing still
      That would be a significant waste of money that Nikon cannot afford to waste
      Furthermore people only buy new camera models when they upgrade
      Lack of new models would be very harmful to sales

      • ZoetMB

        By your logic, they would have released the DL line.

        • animalsbybarry

          No, the DL cameras would not have sold
          The cameras I am suggesting would be popular

          • T.I.M

            Do you get pay for each comment you post ?

            • I hope he does 🙂

    • This is how I feel too, they have put pretty much everything on hold.

      • Fly Moon

        “put pretty much everything on hold”

        That’s their 100th Anniversary banner 🙂

        • ZoetMB

          “We’re old, slow, don’t really understand what we’re doing anymore and don’t understand the current world. Damned smartphone cameras, GET OFF MY LAWN! and here’s the latest projection that I know we won’t make, but it saves face. I told you I only wanted to celebrate my birthday and not to have to work on it. I put those painted cameras and lenses in a box, now leave me alone — I have to design the logo for the D7300 and decide which D7200 functions to leave out of it and how much I’m going to increase the price and I also have to create another 18-55mm lens because we don’t have enough – can’t you see I’m busy?”

          • Allan

            LOL.

            So, you’re saying Nikon is not nimble? 🙂

          • Sawyerspadre

            I hope the D7300 is a blockbuster release, for the sake of your mood 😉

        • Ineedmy Bobo

          “I AM… ON HOLD.” That’s rather catchy.

          • Sebastian

            I AM RESTRUCTURING.

        • MB
        • T.I.M

          what movie are you ?

        • Sebastian

          I AM ON HOLD.
          Oh I just see someone already came up with this one.

      • Andrew

        Nikon has put everything on hold? I don’t think so!

        I think that the mood is more dour than it needs to be. The DL cameras not shipping is a major disappointment I must admit. But we are acting as if Nikon all of a sudden has stopped existing. The fact that they released a disappointing low-end “360” consumer camera and then decided to move away from their other low-end cameras (likely the lower-end CoolPIX line) does not affect many of us. Everything else should remain the same.

        The D500 gave us a lot of what we can expect in a future product. The D7300 and D820 have a lot they can inherit from the D500 to make they stellar cameras. And I am surprised you did not mention the replacement to the P900 (93x Optical) which is an amazing camera with a high quality lens that really delivers. All of these cameras which should be released this 2017 year would interest me greatly.

        And finally, I would not want to guess about Nikon’s future plans for the D610 and D750 replacements. Maybe these will come in 2018 to fill the low and mid price range for professional photographers everywhere.

        • They did not announce anything at the CES and CP+ shows, they canceled their rebates and DL cameras – they have not been doing all of those things for a very long time.

          • Sawyerspadre

            One way to raise prices is to cancel rebates. It’s interesting, because it always seemed the rebates were used to move units that they had a good supply or oversupply. Seems like, with the wide offering it would still make sense to use the rebates to balance inventory.

    • Paul H.

      I would tend to agree, doge, but any bodes and lenses (scheduled to be released/updated in 2017) have been in their R&D phases and should be ready to go. It would be ‘leaving money on the table’ to not release these, not to mention further upsetting shareholders.
      Problems manifest recently at Nikon will have greater reverberations downstream, I think…

    • T.I.M

      doge,
      Nikon products that will be release this year were planed several years ago, you don’t want to waste the R&D $$$$ already spent.
      Nikon need to get rid of crap like coolpix cameras, but products innovation could be the only way for Nikon to avoid bankruptcy

    • Davo

      If you mean brand new line of products, then I agree. I think their confidence is a bit shot and am likely to retreat to what they know best – enthusiast and above DSLRs.
      So the updates for the higher end DSLRs are still coming I’m sure.
      Hence agreeing with Peter that the D810 and D7200 successors are surely coming and the couple of high end lenses that Jeremy Allen guessed (200FL, 300FL, 14-24E, 135E) also all fall in line.

      Everything else is probably put on ice. But some might still get the green light, maybe the special anniversary product that Thom hinted about.

      • doge

        Yes. What I’m saying is; at this point, if it’s not on the trucks ready to be shipped don’t expect it from Nikon this year.

  • Adam Brown

    5 new lenses would be good…… good vote of confidence, but you can’t stand still in camera bodies.
    Of the 2 unannounced cameras.. 1 of them is a dSLR made in Thailand. It could be the D820 or D7300. The other camera is made in China, it is likely not a dSLR or serious mirrorless.

    D750 replacement for last 2017 or early 2018 would be fine.. it would make sense. (3 – 3/12 year cycle).

    And I will say this for the thousandth time — Nikon is OUT of time when it comes to mirrorless. Sony ILCs are now competitive with dSLRs in performance, IQ and lens lineups. Canon is now releasing enthusiast level aps-c mirrorless.
    It is too late to be competitive with a first generation mirrorless, new mount, etc..
    Nikon has to now jump a few spots ahead…. The only way to catch up is to release a high performing F-mount mirrorless (or new mount with perfect adapter capability with F-mount).

    Wait until 2018 or 2019 for serious mirrorless… by then Canon will be a major mirrorless player and will likely have mirrorless full frame and APS-C. By then, Sony mirrorless will likely be complete dSLR substitutes.

    • Markus

      So you suggest Nikon to shut down the business?

      • Adam Brown

        Where did I say that?

        • Markus

          You expect them to be more than superior because the market is set. Basicly that’s impossible, all manufacturers are on such a high level. I don’t see one to sprit away technologically. Canon relies on marketing and Sony on the hype.

          • Adam Brown

            Canon and Sony rely on some great products.
            I’m not expecting Nikon to suddenly sprint far ahead — I’m saying they desperately need to catch up before it’s too late.

            • D700s

              Nikon beat Canon to the market with both the D800 and D500. Canon played catch up. Why can’t Nikon sprint ahead again?

            • Adam Brown

              I wouldn’t say they beat anybody to the market with the d500 — a Canon fan would say that the 7dii beat the d500 to the market.
              But yes… Nikon was the first to go over 30mp in resolution… going back further, they were the first to include video.
              There is no reason Nikon can’t “sprint ahead”

  • Bill Ferris

    I’ve just been sent the text of Nikon’s next lens announcement: “Nikon would like to remind folks that we introduced the 70-200mm f/2.8E, last year. Thank you.”

    • zorwick

      Which is an excellent piece! Really, really excellent.

      • Bob Thane

        The best! Other 70-200 lenses are just sad, sad. Sick lenses. The Nikon is tremendous, just tremendous. We have the best lenses, don’t we folks?

        • Sebastian

          I’ll not sure everybody here will get this.

          • Bill Ferris

            Grab ’em by the TC.

  • James Fennessy

    Nikon needs to make a lightweight hand holdable 400mm f/4 or a new FL 300 f2.8 (which will be the lighter 420mm f4 with a 1.4 tc). Every time I see my buddies with their great light cannon 400mm f4s, I wish I had joined that other team. Nikon makes a great (but heavy) 600mm f4 for the tripod, and a good 70-200 f2.8 at the other end of the wildlife spectrum. But in that mid-range between 200 and 600mm, the only decent glass is the 400 f2.8, which also requires a tripod, and is just too heavy and cumbersome to carry alongside the 600mm (forcing users to choose between the 400 and the 600, rather than utilize both). If Nikon will not satisfy this market, I hope that sigma steps up their game with a lightweight 400mm alternative for handheld wildlife shooting.

    • I agree on 400/4 PF lens. But if the weight of 300/2.8 is close, I don’t mind getting that because you will have two lenses one faster.

    • Allen_Wentz

      Why do you exclude the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 from inclusion?

      • James Fennessy

        The Nikon 200-500 f5.6 is better than Tamron and is a decent lens when shooting with plenty of light. But lots of wildlife shots require a faster low light lens for those quick moving dawn & dusk shots.

    • DaveyJ

      I think the Nikon mount Tamron G2 150-600 is a way better field lens, the fixed focal length lens is a noose around the outdoor photographer’s neck! I have been in the field with guys and gals with the huge mega lens, their results were often not as impressive as mine overall since I used between 16 and 70 or 80 too..sometimes long becomes too damn long. I do not need to do dental exams on wild Brown Bears. The video practical camera in the field for us is the RED. Not with Canon lens!

  • Geoffrey Baker

    Would love a refresh on 180mm F/2.8.

    • T.I.M

      200mm f/2.8E ED PF VR

      • Bob Thane

        For $2000, of course.

        • T.I.M

          plus taxes (free shipping)

      • Keith Calvin Leong

        I will definately have this one in my bag, hopfully a kg less your copy.

      • Davo

        1:2 macro too?

        • T.I.M

          I have the 300 PF (excellent) and it does 1:4 macro so 1:2 macro for a 200mm PF is not impossible.

  • MonkeySpanner

    I don’t see any new DSLR bodies on the horizon that will be worth selling current gear to get. Will d820 be anything more than D810 with a racing stripe and Bluetooth? Probably not.

    • Sawyerspadre

      Would 70 MP and 500 focus points, with 20 fps make you jump? What would it take?

      I think we can expect 40-50 MP and more focus points, and some of the other goodies that the D5 and D500 introduced. Flippy screen with touchscreen, maybe a better, brighter screen, backlit buttons, focus joystick.

      Yes, I would imagine that Snapbridge would be in it. Might actually be nice, if Snapbridge was in and worked flawlessly.

      • MonkeySpanner

        I expect the 42MP Sony sensor in the d820. Slight upgrade in AF (maybe) and snapbridge. None of that excites me over the d810.

          • animalsbybarry

            How many fps ?
            D5/D500 AF ?
            How soon ?

          • MonkeySpanner

            Really? I would not expect Sony to develop a 46MP sensor for Nikon when they have a 42 ready to go.

            • Sony doesn’t have a 20MP sensor either (inside the D500 and D5).

            • MonkeySpanner

              Agreed, they don’t.

            • I think Nikon doesn’t want to only depend on Sony for sensors.

            • Spy Black

              Which is important.

            • Davo

              Tough though until another supplier emerges with comparable or better technology. It’ll happen but currently as the customer, Nikon should pick the one with the best tech which appears to be Sony.

            • The D5 and D500 results are pretty good and as far as I know they are not from Sony.

            • Eric Calabros

              I thought D500 sensor is made by Toshiba fab, whch is now part of Sony.

            • Aldo

              No wonder they have inferior DN.. (covers head)

            • Davo

              They are indeed very good but I was under the impression the D500 has a Sony based sensor. And perhaps where some of the ~46MP D820 sensor rumours originated as that would be a FX scaled D500 sensor.
              And being the D810 where DR reigns supreme, the current state of the art is Sony tech.

          • NikonFanboy

            i hear the same
            D900
            46mp
            6fps
            xqd

            buffer seems abysmal…they r testing in africa for sept/oct release

  • audio

    Funny that the mock ups are fujis in disguise…

    • one of them is based on a Leica Q I think

    • br0xibear

      Few different cameras were used as inspiration…Leica,Fuji, Panasonic, Df

      • RC Jenkins

        Still, they look gorgeous. I’d buy them just to take pictures of them with other cameras.

        Those look like exactly the (only) type of full-frame mirrorless I’d go for right now.

        Great job!

      • Sean Parchem

        Br0xi, I’ll take one! Really nice Nice mockups. Give me PDAF w …. my wish list is so long. Just make it FF and either 28mm like the coolpix A or 35mm with great low light capability and killer AF.

        • RC Jenkins

          I’d want an ILC with a handful of primes instead of fixed-lens.

          Maybe something like: 20 (sharp), 28 (street), 43 (pancake street), 58 (street), 90 (portrait). Keep the 28-58 lenses simple & compact.

          Or 20, 35, 50, 85.

          • eric

            the current 20mm nikkor is already a fabulous lens. i love it. the copy i have is verg sharp edge to edge.

            • RC Jenkins

              I have it as well, and yes it’s great. Above, I’m referring to lenses designed for a thinner (shorter flange distance) mirrorless mount.

              I wouldn’t want a rangefinder-style camera to be as thick as a dslr, so they’d need a new mount and lenses to go along with them.

        • br0xibear
  • I would think they will do their best to keep the 1 system – the lenses they have developed for them are good, they clearly put in a ton of R&D creating other 1 lenses that weren’t released. If the multiple mirrorless cameras bit is for real I can’t see scenario where an updated N1 body is not released. A lot of the DL features and development can migrate, and it wouldn’t be difficult to snag a newer gen 1 inch sensor from Sony.

    I know it’s on the rocks but steering that ship away from doom should not be overly challenging or expensive.

  • Michiel953

    Five new lenses? Forgot something?

  • Citizen Kang

    I thought it was VERY clear as to to the future of the Nikon 1. In other words, I’m pretty sure it has none. The fate of the DL pretty much sank any near-term mirrorless options that Nikon had left. if they hadn’t pretty much told everyone that the Nikon 1 was no more, they could have fallen back on that and tried to salvage the line, but nobody wants to feel like they’re buying into something that, frankly, has no future support.

    • RC Jenkins

      I still have my Nikon 1, but I got an MFT last year to supplement my full-frame Nikon DSLRs.

      Look into the Panasonic GM1 or GM5 because they’re even smaller than the Nikon 1 J’s but larger sensor. Also, better lenses: plenty of tiny, fast lenses in the F/1.7 range.

      My MFT + 20mm F/1.7 is actually smaller than my Nikon 1 + 18.5mm F/1.8, and it cost about the same and provides superior image quality. Same with fast prime portrait lenses: one on MFT costs about 2.5x less and is smaller than Nikon’s. The only thing Nikon has going for it is its on-sensor PDAF.

      No brainer for me.

      If Nikon had actually taken advantage of the 1 mount & made fast, compact, inexpensive lenses instead of slow consumer zooms, they could have made a lot of progress.

      But it’s too late now that the 1″ compacts with fast lenses are around. (From other manufacturers, since Nikon aborted the DL).

    • Spy Black

      The one thing N1 still has going for it is an existing production line. DL didn’t have that. The main thing that’s been missing from N1 since it’s inception is production focus. A D5/D500-capable N1 body with updated sensor and processor and the missing lenses could revitalize the N1 system. There’s certainly professionals and semi pros that want a truly capable compact system. N1 may very well be dead, but everyone thought a high-end DX would never happen again either.

  • Ok, I predict they will announce 5 new cameras and three new lenses in 2018 DUH………………………

  • Ralph Vieux

    I’d love to see a VR/FL update to the 14-24 F2.8. Since Tamron arguably beat it with the 15-30 SP.

  • Michiel953

    Df2 for July 25. It would be stupid no to.

  • Eric Calabros

    14-24 needs a focal length update too. With very well performing Tamron 15-30 in the market, they shouldn’t stop at 24mm. Why not make it 14-28? Yes just 2mm, but its like adding another wide prime into the coverage.

    • zorwick

      I would like to see real 14mm on the lower end. At the moment the 17-35 @17mm is pretty close to that 14mm. So if they would have a new 16/17 – 35mm 2.8 I would sell the 14-24mm because the longer end is not that much plus the bulky huge structure over the 16/17-35mm is not really make it an easy lens.

      • Bob Thane

        The 14-24 is a true 14mm, or as close to it as you’d expect. It frames the same as the 14mm f2.8 prime, and wider than the Tamron 15-30. But going wider’s not unwelcome, if it’s still optically good and not a huge cost.

        • Jon S

          24mm to 28mm is nothing, just walk 1 foot closer, now 10mm to 14mm is like 5 feet back. The new lens should be 10-24mm

          • Bob Thane

            For close up subjects, yeah. For landscapes, it makes a difference. And yeah, you can just crop, but I find that being able to see the field of view properly makes a difference in terms of spotting the right images.

            10mm is very cool to have, but personally I’d find that more reach would be more useful than more width. I own the previous version of the Sigma 12-24, and even 12mm is just too wide for good photos of 99% of subjects, even mountains. Very often I found that 20-30mm was the sweet spot for landscapes.

          • paige4o4

            IMO 10-24 is too extreme as product. It’ll end up being very large, heavy and expensive.

            A 12-24 is more reasonable. Allows them to keep the price and weight down, and maybe even maintain the same shape of the lens hood so people can use their old filter sets.

            • Jon S

              how about 10-20mm then? just want them to beat the Canon 11-24 f4 lens.

            • DaveyJ

              I use the Nikon 12-24 in DX and also the 10-20 DX Sigma, both have proven their worth to me!

  • Whyvote

    “I still would like to think……..”
    Not much of a rumor there is there?

  • SammySVK

    Should I buy DF now or wait?

    • MB

      Depends what you are buying camera for … if you are after taking pictures sure, but if you are after latest, greatest and never seen before …. then you probably do not need a camera after all …

      • SammySVK

        I have D700 still, but I’m looking for more walk-around camera than D700 is and that’s why I’m thinking about buying DF. I’m usually shooting with prime lenses 14/2.8, 35/1.4, 58/1.4 and 85/1.4.

        • MB

          Df is more compact and has better sensor and probably much cheaper than Df2 will be, so if you want one go for it. On the other hand I would go for D750, it is only slightly larger than Df but much better IMHO, and costs less …

    • Captain Megaton

      If you wait any longer you won’t want it anymore.

      • Aldo

        I think he should wait until he doesnt want it anymore…

  • MB

    I am mostly a “normal” person … I mean I mostly use boring normal 50mm lens to shoot interesting things (interesting that is) … so what I would really like is that one of these 5 lenses would be remake of good old 35-70 but faster at f/2 and not larger than Sigma 50mm Art … it would give me some flexibility, will fit my current setup perfectly and I would use it 90% of time … and it seems to me that I am not the only one, also seems something perfectly doable, nobody makes such a lens and it could be something new and interesting on the market … unfortunately it is way more likely that Sigma would make such a lens …

    • Captain Megaton

      But isn’t the whole point of a 50mm walkabout lens is that its small?

      A 35-70/2 would be enormous. Look at the size of even the old Ai Nikkor 35-70/3.5. For a rough modern estimate the Sigma 50-100/1.8 is a good bet, or the Nikkor 24-70/2.8 plus a bit.

      • MB

        The whole point is that it should be very fast and sharp … Sigma 50mm is not small lens and Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 was pretty compact in comparison .., 24-70 zooms are huge because they go down to 24mm, but yes I presume 35-70 f/2 would be large, roughly the size similar to Sigma 24-35 … fine by me…

        • paige4o4

          A 35-70 would be twice as large as the 24-35. Look at the zoom ratio, the current sigma is 1.5x. A 35-70 would be 2x.

    • paige4o4

      A full frame f/2 lens isn’t going to have a 2x zoom ration. Look at the the sigma 24-35 as an example. Given that weight restraint, you can either have a 35-50 or 50-75.

  • decisivemoment

    Given the demise of rebates, I wish I’d bought a D500 on discount with the grip when I had the chance….let’s hope the D820 retains the same baseplate as the D810 and D800 so that it will work with existing accessories.

    Overall, this at least sounds like a sound plan. But it’s only a start.

    As for the lenses, I know what I’d do…..300/2.8FL, 400/5.6 PF, a 24-120 update, a 70-300 FX update, and a DX 16/2 wide angle. As it is I am leaning towards Sigma’s new 100-400 67mm filtered zoom for a replacement for my 70-300. And if they’re looking for a sixth, replace the 24 PC-E with a new independent axis tilt-and-shift version that matches the feature set of the 19mm. But there’s also a case for them to update some more compact, smaller lenses. As electronics have shrunk, it has become possible to make FX digital camera bodies as small as some of the 1980s film models and therefore as small as some of the competition’s mirrorless products, and if they go that route and give the D750 some compact company, maybe starting with a simplified Df replacement, they would do well to update some of the old classics like the 24/2.8, 50/1.8 and 105/2.5 with high-quality new models with well-damped focus and improved optics along with a fair bit of the old AIS feel instead of continuing to produce ever bulkier gear. Not everyone needs f1.4 primes and f2.8 zooms for everything, but produce an ergonomically and optically improved 24/2.8 prime that’s more or less the same size as the existing one and people will gladly pay a $200 or more premium over the current model.

    And while we’re at it, a film camera that supports E lenses, please. Let’s make this a SYSTEM again, Nikon.

    • That’s a lot of work for a restructuring company :D. I would be glad if they only do the DX 16/2… and perhaps a 16mm F/2 for DX mount also. 😀

      • Sawyerspadre

        A 16 f2 that covers FX, would also work for DX. Seems smarter to just do the FX. If it was F2.8 and much smaller and lighter, as well as more affordable, that might actually be a better seller.

        Sharp, small and light, affordable, would be preferable to me over big and expensive, and fast.

        • Agreed on the F/2.8 being smaller than a F/2 as a FX but still a dedicated DX would even be much smaller (look at the Fuji 16mm F/1.4 !!) and for the moment Nikon is selling much more DX cameras than FX (for the moment ;)). So not sure about your conclusions. Anyway, more seriously, plans are really doubtful at this point.

          • KnightPhoto

            Can’t use the Fuji, for a true idea of size and weight look at the Rokinon 16/2 APS-C lens – it’s pretty big and heavy and doesn’t have AF.

            • Ok. I agree f/2.8 won’t be that big anyway. The 16-80 is a zoom with F/2.8 at wider end and it’s not really that big and heavy. We can easily imagine that a fixed 16mm f/2.8 can be much smaller and lighter than the FX version. So yes it would be very interesting to have.

        • Pat Mann

          A 16mm FX f/2 would be a monster to cover the 107-degree diagonal defining the image circle at f/2. It would look something like the current 14mm f/2.8. Of course it would also work on DX, but the idea of DX is light and compact and reasonably priced. A 16mm DX f/2 that would fit that DX design objective, could be quite modest in size by comparison, covering a much more reasonable 84-degree diagonal. At 16mm, DX needs a lens designed for the DX format. Similarly at 12mm.

  • eric

    hopefully the d820 will have 72mp’s. 36 is just not large enough for detailed prints of whales.

  • Aldo

    I picked up a used rx100 V for 650 bucks. I wanted to give my money to nikon but they didnt want to take it. I hope nikon makes good decisions in the future so that they can thrive.

    • saywhatuwill

      I think that rx100 V was a good purchase. I’d buy that camera in front of any other.

      • Aldo

        So far Im blown away by the auto focus… never recorded videos so easily.

        • Spy Black

          Wish my RX100 III could do that. Don’t drop it however. All metal design. Fragile as an egg.

          • Aldo

            Thats the one thing that has me worried… last night at Disneyland my son pushed me and I lost grip of the camera… if it hadnt been for the hand strap (or if I had forgotten to put my hand through it like I often do) it would have been a gonner.

            When I had the DL on preorder I had it all figured out. I also purchased Adoramas new leaf warranty, which is only 60 bucks for 5 years! It protects against drops and spills. Cheapest warranty for that kind of coverage. However with this camers since I purchased it used Im on my own. I know I can buy insurance for it… but it wont be as cheap.

    • Fly Moon

      I was waiting for the DL as well. I got a Fuji X-T20+(18-55mm) this week. Very nice so far.

  • gridstopper

    New Lenses????
    I need a body.
    I jumped from Canon to Nikon for the D90 in 2008, and was happy as a clam.
    I was elated when the D600 was announced, and made arrangements to get one of the first in Southern California. And wow, that full frame goodess was just sooo sweet!

    But the honeymoon ended quickly.
    I soon realized the green tint on the display was a serious distraction.

    Nikon defenders on photography blogs insulted those observing
    the condition stating “real photographers don’t use the display for color
    balance”, and that the problem didn’t affect the actual images.

    Perhaps, but each time I viewed the display I questioned whether I had an incorrect setting, and triple checking all of the settings on the camera is very disruptive to the creative process.

    I sent the camera back to Nikon. Nikon cleaned and returned
    the camera quickly, but did not perform any service affecting the green cast.

    I contacted Nikon service to discuss the issue.
    Nikon never denied that the display had a green cast.
    In fact they claimed the green cast was more accurate than the real world……. They were less successful in explaining why the digital image stored on the card does not also contain this green cast………

    So instead of taking a conciliatory tone and admitting that this was an unfortunate shortcoming, they took an offensive position based on dishonesty and faulty logic.

    I was heartbroken. My hero had just served me a dog-dirt sandwich and told me it was caviar.

    I have owned the camera ever since, yet it has rarely come out of the
    closet. Each time I see the green cast I get the taste of dog-dirt in my
    mouth, and I am heartbroken all over again.

    But I kept the faith, and am willing to forgive. I nearly pulled the trigger on a D750, but have since become involved in video and think there are already better alternatives on the market.

    I sold the D600 last December in anticipation of what Nikon would
    announce early in their 100th anniversary year. I am ready to buy in the sub $3k range immediately.

    But their announcements lead me to believe that not only will Nikon not be delivering competitive products any time soon, they may not be a serious player in the affordable camera business much longer.
    Karma perhaps??

    I have since begun entertaining the idea of departing to another platform, and am very impressed with the Panasonic GH4 & 5, however going back to a small imager and limited glass selection is distasteful.

    Sony on the other hand is coming of age in the camera business, and has an attractive offering in the a7Sii. Their glass selection is limited, (but growing), and the fact that they are the imager manufacturer ensures they will always have the latest technology, and will likely be around quite a while.

    I have decided to wait until May, or until Sony’s announcement of the follow-up to the a7Sii. If Nikon hasn’t revealed a roadmap by then I think I will pull the trigger on a Sony. (even typing that feels wrong. Even though Nikon and Sony are both Japanese companies, I feel they are different. Sony, a faceless conglomerate, and Nikon, the imaging specialist)

    I really hope Nikon comes through, I’m invested in glass and really like their ergonomics. But time waits for no one, and they are running to catch a train already on its way.

    • Sawyerspadre

      So what makes you want to avoid the D750?

      • RC Jenkins

        Got out of photography and into writing memoirs.

        • KnightPhoto

          Trying to reply to Gridstopper… I don’t see what in his narrative justifies an A7S, I guess what he is saying is low-light video? A7S is very specialized rig… for stills a D5 sensor prob competes very well indeed.

          Only thing I can project is MAYBE a D820H (D5 sensor in a D800 body) will compete in that arena at a lower price than D5?

          • Keith M

            @gridstopper The D750 met my budget back in late 2015 for a camera that was equally great at photography as it was at video shooting. The biggest drawback to video capabilities has not been the lack of 4K but rather the slow speed and hunting of its autofocus when filming. The Canon 80D’s autofocus is a dream, but the micro jitters are terrible. Newer cameras such as Sony’s mirrorless line have terrific autofocus. Even their latest RX100 MKV has superb autofocus, which can be seen in one of the recent videos by The Art of Photography when Ted explains his new setup. But alas, after holding several other make and models Nikon just feels great to get a hold of. On the photography side of things the D750 is wonderful. If Nikon decides to incorporate the video features of their competitors into the next iteration of the camera I will be more than happy to remain married to their line. If anything it’s an exciting time for photography and tech, so much going on.

        • Michiel953

          Rambling narratives are good for memoirs.

  • Adam

    I’m just wondering if I should pick up a D7200 now or wait for the D7300? I’m heading to canyon lands in may and just don’t think the D7300 will be shipping before that.

    • Sawyerspadre

      The D7200 is a great camera, and who knows, maybe the WMU app works better than Snapbridge.

      • Adam

        Exactly what I’m thinking

        • Sawyerspadre

          And if you pair it with a D750 you have the same app on your devices.

          • RC Jenkins

            I haven’t used them both, but if WMU is better, then Snapbridge must really be horrible.

            To put things into perspective, the only way to exit WMU on some Android phones is to use Android to force close the application…

            WMU is literally 2 giant buttons that say “Take Photos” or “View Photos.”

            • Adam

              I want to be clear, I’m not gonna buy a camera to get a friggn app. If it has one, cool. And if it sucks, delete the app and turn wifi/bt off and take great photos.

            • Sawyerspadre

              I have a D750 that has WMU. Haven’t tried it. I use the iPad SD reader to share to social media while traveling. It used to only work on iPad but now also works on iPhone.

          • Adam

            The only feature I would use from snap ridge is the location feed. And really with that mostly the date/time sync from that. But my mom just got a d3400 and I helped her with it on our latest trip and snapbridge worked fine. Is it a “pro” tool? No, but it works just fine for the location and date time. Also to pull a few photos for sharing it was great. Not that i

          • Adam

            Probably won’t go to a D750…FX lenses aren’t really worth the extra weight. Kind of the reason I’m not going mirrorless, the body is smaller and lighter but the lenses are about the same. Plus by the time you add the extra batteries…

            The only Snapbridge feature I want is date/time sync with the phone. But we just got back from a trip where I helped my mom with her d3400 and snapbridge worked fine. Is it perfect? No. Is it a “pro” tool to count on for a money making shoot? No. But is it really good for consumer/travel use? Absolutely! Worked great for setting date/time/location on the camera and for pulling a few shots for sharing. I really don’t think it’s much better or worse than anyone else’s app for a camera

  • CommonPleas

    As to the Nikon restructuring, I count 14 DSLRs on Nikon’s Canada site, 3 Nikon 1s, 13 Coolpix, and 2 beloved film cameras.

    Is there really a need for 14 different DSLRs and what about 13 Coolpixes, at any one time? This seems a case of ‘more is less’.

    My recollection and reading shows Nikon did have a more coherent scheme in the 1970s and into the early 1980s. (e.g., F2 or FM; F3 or FM2, and so on.)

    Today they have:

    5 entry-level DSLRs
    6 enthusiast DSLRs and
    3 professional DSLRs.

    And this does not take into account the Coolpixes.

    In reality, (setting aside the pros) 11 cameras may lead simply to analysis paralysis for most buyers, not to mention cost and profit concerns given so many different assembly runs.

    Let there be a D5, D5a (akin to a D700), a D820, a D500, and an entry level camera, and an F7! : )

    • Jon S

      I’ve been saying the same thing!

    • RC Jenkins

      …so all pro DSLRs (including a new one), and no enthusiast cameras?

      No D750 or D7x00?

      I think that would be a bad move. You’d be left with only fast/low-res sports shooters or slow/high-res landscape cameras with nothing balanced in-between. And very high price tags across the board. That list is putting cost of entry of FF (body only) into the $3K-$4k range; and the cost of any serious DX camera into the $2k range…

      • Allen_Wentz

        1) The cost of serious DX is not “$2k range.” Costco pimps existing D3400 and D7200 at low prices. Heck even B&H has the D7200 at $1k. Those cameras are hardly defunct.

        2) FX entry D610 is ~US$1.5k not “$3K-$4k range.” That said, I personally dislike the D6xx, think the D7xxx is a better camera and agree D7xx should be the entry to FX. Because IMO it is not really “entry” so much as it is “shift from or add to DX Nikon already owned” and D6xx is (IMO) a step down from D7xxx rather than a step up.

        3) Also it sounds like you consider the ~21 MP D5/D500 cameras only good for sports because they happen to be fast. Not true IMO. They are both spectacular pro bodies that allow one to “get the shot” better than any other cameras made.

        Yes there is a place for D8xx and I will likely buy one, but IMO D5/D500 are great _all-around_ cameras, not special-purpose cameras.

        • RC Jenkins

          The poster I replied to edited & changed his/her post after I replied. But it ends in a similar conclusion. The post I replied to said that Nikon should get rid of everything except the D5, ‘D5a’, D500, D820, and an entry level camera.

          For #1, please re-read my note in this context.

          What I am saying is that if Nikon gets rid of the D7x00 series, the only DX cameras left are the D3x00 & D500. I don’t consider the D3x00 ‘serious’ or ‘enthusiast’ simply because of the lack of controls (it’s image quality is fine). That leaves the D500, in the $2k range as the only DX option, but I think Nikon needs a $1k enthusiast DX camera. I never said that the D7x00 is in the $2k range; quite the opposite.

          For #2, once again re-read my note, with the same logic. The D6xx & D7xx are not included in the note that I was replying to. Again, what I am saying is “Nikon should NOT get rid of these enthusiast cameras because then consumers are left only with pro options in the $3k – $4k range like the D8xx & up.”

          For #3, that’s not what I consider–you’re putting words into my mouth. Re-read what I wrote. The D5 & D500 are not the best landscape cameras for scenes with lots of minute details and high dynamic range. In fact, the D5 has the worst base ISO dynamic range of any Nikon camera, and its abilities to push shadows even at low ISO’s are terrible when compared to cameras like the D6xx-D8xx. The D5 & D500 are not balanced with respect to price and image quality–they are purpose built for higher speed & higher ISO shooting in scenes with lower dynamic range, which comes with a price. Nikon’s enthusiast cameras provide a better across the board balance than these cameras.

          See here for more details:
          https://www.dpreview.com/news/9402203921/nikon-d5-shows-drop-in-dynamic-range

    • Adam

      This is a bit of a unfair evaluation.

      Nikon’s CURRENT product line is:

      2 – Entry level (D3400,D5600)
      4 – Enthusiast level (D750,D610,D7200,Df)
      3 – Pro leve (D5,D810,D500)

      All other models just haven’t been retired yet to hit price points and clean out inventory. I know Nikon defines the D500 as enthusiast but it should be pro level IMO.

      There isn’t a space in this lineup where product wise Nikon doesn’t equal or better their competition. Sure some product features are different, but they are by no means “way behind” their competitors. Why are they losing market share? I don’t know, but it is NOT because of product or innovation. I think the current lineup is great. Sure a couple of models need refreshing but image quality from ANY of the current models is incredible and basically unmatched by any competitor.

      • Sawyerspadre

        You could include the D610 in your list of non-current cameras if you consider the D750 as its replacement.

      • Spy Black

        I think how people define what a pro camera is defines how they’ll make their revision list. FYI, plenty of professionals work with D750s and D7200s. I work professionally with a D600. There goes your enthusiast list.

        • Adam

          My comment was to defend nikon’s product line, not really define the classes. I just organized by control layout using Nikon’s classifications. So many people state Nikon should drop bodies from the lineup, but outside the D750/D610 where is there duplication? Also, where is their product line not mirrored by Canon? Df and that’s about it and with the 77d isn’t Canon’s lineup more complex?

          • Spy Black

            I wouldn’t consider the D750/D610 duplication. While they may share some components, there is a significant set of differences between the bodies that put them in separate classes, and separate price points.

            What Nikon really needs to cut out is the Coolpix line. There’s no place for 99% of Coolpix’s in this day and age, other than perhaps keeping ONE megazoom, and the underwater model. Pretty much everything else can go. Get rid of the D3xxx and make the D5xxx the starter DSLR and price it somewhere between the present D3xxxand the D5xxx models.

            • Allen_Wentz

              I agree with almost all you said, but I strongly think the D3xxx should stay. It reaches a lot of buyers and allows a lot of entry marketing as an entry to DSLR and to Nikon (critical!) where every dime of price matters. Plus I betcha Nikon sells way more than enough to justify the line.

        • Allen_Wentz

          A “pro” camera body is defined by body quality and ergonomics, not by whether or not the photog gets paid. And certainly not by Nikon’s grossly incompetent marketing schemes.

          Just my 0.02 of course.

          • Spy Black

            I rest my case.

        • Pat Mann

          Pros have often used the enthusiast cameras as their second/third body and backup from the time Nikon first introduced them with the Nikkormat. Before that, entry shooters, enthusiasts and pros used the same equipment, because that’s all there was, or entry shooters used other less expensive brands to get started. Doing that meant a wholesale shift of bodies and lenses agt some point to move up to the most capable system – a huge barrier that the major brands addressed with models targeted at different price points.

          To me, each format has its benefits and can effectively market entry, enthusiast and pro models. Those who are willing to give up a stop or a stop and a half for portability and price of the overall system can choose APS-C (if there’s a complete APS-C system available including a wide range of lenses). Pro models can include an action-oriented version and a studio version with higher resolution but less demanding speed, ruggedness and weatherproofing requirements and more attention to mounting and flash. Perhaps based on cost, a format that’s inherently more expensive doesn’t get an entry-level model, because too few people enter at that price point.

          It looks to me like the small-format system should pay more attention to video in the pro models – perhaps a separate pro video version built primarily as a video camera or more adaptable to mount systems, power and volume data storage. That seems like the format where most video is headed.

          Independent of the interchangeable-lens group, each format can also use a compact fixed-lens version (small zoom or prime) for those who want the smallest possible size for the format. Other than familiar ergonomics and possibly some accessories, there’s not as much reason to keep to brand for this version.

    • saywhatuwill

      In the early 1980s it was FE, EM, FM, F3. When the L35 was released that started the trend of point and shoots.

  • Leonardo Baraldi

    Admin

    First of all I apologize for my bad English!

    Remembering that in recent rumors Sony would be in negotiation to buy Nikon!

    I’m afraid that Nikon is facing problems in its commercial partnership with Sony in the agreement to supply new sensors.

    This may have been why nikon canceled the DL series cameras, which supposedly would use Sony’s sensors.

    This may also be the big reason Nikon has not made any camera launches at the CP show.

    If this is really happening, Nikon will face major problems updating FF series like D8XX, D75X, D6XX and several DX series as well.

    I hope I’m wrong!

    • Allen_Wentz

      Your English is quite fine, no apologies are necessary.

      • Fly Moon

        I second that

        • T.I.M

          I third that

    • sickheadache

      Sony has their own problems…and buying Nikon is not one of them. That is not happening. IT was not a sensor problem with the DL…it was NOT going to be a profit in the DL products. This is why at the very last moment…Nikon announced they would not produce DL. I believe if Tony is right…Sony has first rights to the new Sensors…54mp? and 70mp plus? Sony will announce two new high end cameras. Nikon will announce soon afterwards D820/50 with 54mp?

      Nikon is fine and a ok. Everything is a ok in Mayberry. lo

    • I do not know why we are still discussing this, Sony did not and will not buy Nikon. All this was a made up fake story by a website known for their clickbait and nothing else.

    • Tom

      Your English is better than my bad Italian. 🙂

    • MY OB

      If SONY owned Nikon, I would dump my gear and buy FUJI. I can’t stand SONY. Worthless company with the worst customer service. After years of ONLY buying SONY, my home is now 100% SONY free and will remain that way.

  • saywhatuwill

    I like that old time Nikon logo on that mirrorless.

  • Davo

    Given the rise of smartphones and the resultant demise of Coolpix compacts and Nikon’s intention to focus on mid-high end equipment, the question is what will the new entry level Nikon be?
    Will it be a second go at high end compacts?
    Relaunched Nikon 1 with larger sensor?
    Mirrorless DX?

  • Espen4u

    One or two FL, so maybe there’s room for a dx 35 (eqv)?

  • Adam

    Let’s hope we get a 24mm version of the 35 f/1.8 DX. Maybe a 12 f/2 as well!

    • BVS

      I’ve always imagined the announcement going something like this:

      “Nikon is pleased to announce the long awaited 24 1.8 DX…”

      and then:

      “Coming next month, Nikon will introduce it’s first mirrorless DX camera. Unfortunately, all F mount lenses will not be compatible.”

      • Pat Mann

        I hope they have the sense to adopt a new mount but provide an adapter. A mirrorless APS-C in particular designed to take the F mount directly will be noncompetitive for size from the get-go.

  • T.I.M

    To keep FX sensor sized to 24MP in DX we need a 56MP FX sensor. (FX=DX x2.36 )
    If the D810 replacement is only 46MP there is no point to upgrade (D800 36MP for landscapes & portraits, D7200 24MP for telephoto)

    • Wesley

      What makes you think it needs to be 24mp…?

    • paige4o4

      At this point the megapixels wars are over. After 40MP going higher isn’t that compelling.

      What Nikon needs to add are features: IBIS, adjustable LCDs, and smartphone connectivity to name the obvious ones.

      • Pat Mann

        Going higher is compelling to me, and I agree that about 1.5x the pixels is required to make a meaningful difference, or there need to be other aspects of the camera (e.g. global shutter) to make the upgrade worthwhile. Somewhere in the 50-60 range needs to be the next step, or leap over all of them to 72. And DX could use a 36mp D500x. If the lenses are there, that’s probably the camera I would get rather than a 40-something mp 820. No more lenses, and Nikon APS-C dies except as a specialized attachment to long lenses, and in a Fujifilm (which DOES have the lenses) for everyday shooting.

        • Allen_Wentz

          DX pixels are already tiny at 21 MP. And the D500 rocks at 21 MP. Moving to 36 MP DX would introduce all kinds of undesirable physics. I don’t think we are there yet with the pixel pitch of 36 MP DX.

          That said, no doubt it will happen. I just hope not soon. Heck IMO 36 MP FX totally rocks and does not need to increase except for marketing…

  • KnightPhoto

    Your 70-200 example fails because you are attempting to hop 2 model releases and 13 years in which a LOT has happened (including that your VR1 model isn’t very good across the FX frame). A 70-200 VRII to 70-200E isn’t an impossible financial upgrade to make – I intend to do it at some point as this is a key lens in my arsenal. Call it a grand and change for the upgrade, worth it at some point to me.

    And… the higher prices have been expected for several years now, for the reasons we have all been discussing (smaller market etc.). Not a surprise.

    • ZoetMB

      I disagree. The price of technology should drive prices down (or prices the same, but far better tech, as with computers). Furthermore, although this lens is probably still made in Japan, a lot of Nikon’s line is made in Thailand or China where labor costs are far less.

      • Sebastian

        Every new lens model Canon has put out has been more expensive than its predecessor. That has not kept them from gaining market share.
        The kind of technology needed to make lenses has not become cheaper like say computational cost. Instead, sensor resolution has increased, requiring more complex designs to make use of all that resolution, and AF module speed has increased, requiring better motors and again more complex lens designs to make use of this capability. And now all these costs cannot be distributed across an ever-growing market anymore, so it’s clear that prices will go up.

      • Sawyerspadre

        Your argument about technology driving down prices is mostly true when sales numbers are rapidly growing. They are not. Second, materials (glass elements) in this product are not likely going down. Third, it is still more expensive to build in Japan.

        If you like the idea of going into a shop and seeing Nikon gear, you should hope that they keep the UMRP policy. Dealers will be gone if vendors do away with it.

        Remember, 25 years ago, you could have a very nice business in film processing, and you could give away the cameras. I worked in a shop, and the lower limit for price was our cost. We had good film processing, and we knew that we had the annuity of hundreds of rolls, from the 8008s or N90 buyer.

  • innerdave

    I wonder why they’d replace the D750 before replacing the D610, which is 2 years older (considering it’s a D600 for all intents and purposes). Also, they seriously need to refresh their medium telephoto range, especially the 135 f/2.

    • Tom

      I’m betting they combine the D610 and D750. And I also wish they would refresh their 135mm, 180mm & 200mm, preferably with VR

      • Allen_Wentz

        The D610 should just fade away and be fully replaced by D7xx as the low end of FX. It seems to me that DX D3xxx/D5xxx are the entry devices to Nikon ILC.

        I do not think Nikon really needs entry-level FX, and FX sensor costs make meeting an entry price point challenging.

        But then again I am not privy to D6xx sales data.

    • EnPassant

      Maybe because D750 actually IS the D610 successor?
      Nikon just keep selling D610 as the budget alternative, just as they do with several older DX DSLRs.

  • trialcritic

    I am using a D800, I guess I should move to the D820. Any thoughts on this?

    • RC Jenkins

      I’m thinking it doesn’t exist yet, so there’s that…

    • T.I.M

      If the D820 have super clean ISO 800 and 46MP I may upgrade (GPS will be a +)

  • Keith M

    What are the chances that the D750 replacement will be their big step forward into mirrorless? I have the D750 and it’s such a fantastic camera. If they were to incorporate GH5-like video capabilities and switch to a mirrorless​ form factor that would be… Well, in a perfect world.

    • RC Jenkins

      I’d say “low” to “quite low.”

      What do you mean “mirrorless form factor?” Like they take out the mirror, OVF & AF module, but keep it just as thick and keep everything else the same?

      The D750 is a DSLR, and its successor will likely be a DSLR.

      What you seem to want is a completely different camera.

      • Keith M

        Yes that is probably the case. If I get my wishes I would like a smaller body lighter in weight, but the same tough durable build quality. Although I suppose that can be said about any piece of tech. I feel like it’s only a matter of time before all DSLRs undergo a conversion somewhere down the line and turn into mirrorless cameras. The 750 has this feeling about it that it’s a ballsy product willing to try new things. Maybe because it’s so good at so much, but just a little behind the times with its capabilities, mostly in the video realm.

        • RC Jenkins

          I wouldn’t hold my breath. To really take advantage of mirrorless capabilities, Nikon would need to develop a new mount & new lenses.

          For example, to make the body thinner, they’d need a reduced flange distance (which is inherently tied to mount). To support well-performing IBIS, they’d need a mount with a much larger diameter relative to sensor size (ask Sony about that one).

          So this isn’t as simple as a new camera body–it’s a whole new system & ecosystem.

          The D750 is a great camera (I have one as well), but because of its balance. It’s always had plenty of limits, even on the video & build quality side. It’s a prosumer stills DSLR that doesn’t take very high resolution stills like the D810 or very fast photos like the D5.

          Want a mirrorless video camera from Nikon? Be prepared for a whole new system & investment in lenses.

    • KnightPhoto

      How about a D760 that had all the advantages of the D750, PLUS on-sensor PDAF for use in LiveView and video, electronic silent shutter capability, and other mirrorless features. This would give it all the advantages of a mirrorless camera when the mirror is up and all the advantages of a DSLR when the mirror is down.

      I’d love a model anywhere in the lineup that can do this. Don’t know why Nikon has never attempted this, guessing maybe the OSPDAF in a full-frame sensor is a technical challenge.

      Best of both worlds camera in my books. DSLR for when I need it 80% of the time, mirrorless features for when I need it 20% of the time.

  • Webdomi

    Hi, an announce for 5 new lenses without any informations about the concerned lenses is not an announce..;

    • Sawyerspadre

      That’s why this site is called Nikon Rumors….

    • This is not an announcement.

  • Doug Laurent

    Nikon, just release a D810 with removed mirror and added viewfinder plus the 4K video of the D500, label it D820 and the world is a better place tomorrow!!!

    We are not waiting for cameras developed from scratch or new mounts, we just want the good old products with the best new features on the market added!!!

    Nevertheless it’s welcome if you add the other 100 features of your competitors in future products as well. But before that takes you 3 more years, we will all have switched to a Sony A9RIII already, so please come up with some useful D820 ASAP – it’s FIVE years since the D800 soon!!!

  • onthedot

    As a portrait shooter, I bought the newest 24-70mm f/2.8. It is a beautiful lens, but I would like something more useable, like a 45-135 f/2, or even 2.8. The 24-70 is always just a tad short for me, and I tend not to use the 24-35mm part of the range. I know Nikon doesnt do odd focal lengtus, so maybe 35-135mm or 50-150mm.

    • Aldo

      Why not just use a 70-200mm?

      • Eric Calabros

        Because its not odd

        • Aldo

          He can always just use it from 71-199

      • Bukakke Comet

        Just came back from a portrait session with my 70-200mm. Yeah, he should just grab that one. 35mm to 135mm doesn’t seem practical when he has the 24-70mm but doesn’t tend to use the 24-35mm?

        But yes Aldo he should just get a 70-200mm.

      • onthedot

        The 70 is sometimes too long. I find that 70 to 85 is where I have to swap lenses with the 70-200

        • Aldo

          I would advice getting something cheaper instead of the 24-70… like the 24-120 for example… then you can use a 70-200mm for the portrait shots… the ‘money’ shots will happen beyond 100mm anyway

          • onthedot

            Im not going to settle on the loom. I had a 16-85 that was a good lens, but just not a terrific lens like the 24-70mm.

    • paige4o4

      A 50 – 150 that’s sharp corner to corner would be perfect for me.

    • Spy Black

      Get a 24-120.

      • onthedot

        I had that lens, but its not in the same league as the 24-70.

        • Spy Black

          You’re correct about that, but it covers the range you’re looking for. 😉

    • Michiel953

      You think primes are unsuitable for portraits then?

      • onthedot

        Not at all. I use primes often, and plan to buy the 105 f/1.4, but the zoom is mainly convenience to me instead of moving my shooting rig back and forth.

    • Davo

      I always thought the constant f2.8 trio were great but often felt they could also do a duo too.
      Perhaps 28-50/f2 and 80-130/f2
      It won’t be light but it can pair well with one another or another f1.4 prime.

      • onthedot

        Except it puts the lenses at the sweet spot of where I shoot most, again causing me to have to switch lenses.

        • Davo

          Ahhh.. ic. Just thinking outside the box. Have you looked into the Sigma 50-100/1.8? It’s for APS-C but has a larger image circle and supppsedly works relatively well with a minor crop of around 1.2X to 1.3X from FF.

          • onthedot

            Not gonna fly on my fx bodies.

    • Pat Mann

      Either of those ranges would be perfect for a DX pro zoom for event shooting.

      • onthedot

        I shoot FX though.

  • Back to top