Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
  

Archive 2013 · The D400
  
 
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · The D400


Interesting comments by Thom

http://www.bythom.com/

I can live with late summer; even fall would work.



Apr 09, 2013 at 04:18 PM
NathanHamler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · The D400


I may be wrong, but i just dont see it happening....


Apr 09, 2013 at 04:32 PM
afm901
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · The D400


NathanHamler wrote:
I may be wrong, but i just dont see it happening....


So you have a said a few times now. Why? Explain why Nikon would leave such a huge hole in the DX lineup when they sell far more DX cameras than FX.

Scott



Apr 09, 2013 at 04:44 PM
sb in ak
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · The D400


IMO they'll wait until Canon releases the 7D II, which the rumor mills think will be out later this year.


Apr 09, 2013 at 05:32 PM
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · The D400


afm901 wrote:
Explain why Nikon would leave such a huge hole in the DX lineup when they sell far more DX cameras than FX.


They only sell more DX because DX is cheaper than FX. An expensive DX camera is of course gonna sell less than a cheap one. The "hole" is not a hole, just a tiny pit for a few shooters that prefer a smaller sensor (or rather higher pixel density).



Apr 09, 2013 at 05:33 PM
binary visions
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · The D400


Makten wrote:
They only sell more DX because DX is cheaper than FX. An expensive DX camera is of course gonna sell less than a cheap one. The "hole" is not a hole, just a tiny pit for a few shooters that prefer a smaller sensor (or rather higher pixel density).


The D200/D300/s price was $1,700. That's a 40% increase over the D7100, and they sold a ton of those. I'm not sure the DX market is as price sensitive as you believe.

Now, I understand that this was prior to the D600 release, but there's still a differentiation there since the D600 is a consumer body, and a D400 would theoretically be a pro body (with pro features), which is going to provide more value for the dollar for those who can use the smaller sensor.

I understand your point, I just think there's a pretty strong case for enthusiasts and many wildlife shooters to stick with DX, and a lot of those people don't want to downgrade to the consumer body/buffer/FPS/features.



Apr 09, 2013 at 05:59 PM
M Lucca
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · The D400


It's quite easy for Nikon to make the D400. Move a bunch of innards from the D4 and shove into the D800 size body. Yell "Expecto Patronum!". Boom! D400 and a 7d killer.

Maybe squeezing 10fps @24mp is still unattainable?



Apr 09, 2013 at 07:29 PM
NathanHamler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · The D400


The market just doesn't demand it......the D7k was so well received, and the 7100 is gonna be the same way......D800 focus system, 24mp? Clean HDMI video out? D800 level weather sealing??.....for $1,200!! That's a 7dII killer right there....only missing the build quality, which, i'm sure Nikon feels is good enough.....the D600 is $2k now, i just dont see them releasing another DX body somewhere in the middle (lets be honest, it'd be indro'd at $2k...), for only a few people who want smaller sensors still.....i sure could be wrong......i feel like they'd be introducing more pro DX glass if they were serious about pro level DX still.....but they're not.....


Apr 09, 2013 at 07:56 PM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · The D400


NathanHamler wrote:
The market just doesn't demand it......the D7k was so well received, and the 7100 is gonna be the same way......D800 focus system, 24mp? Clean HDMI video out? D800 level weather sealing??.....for $1,200!! That's a 7dII killer right there....only missing the build quality, which, i'm sure Nikon feels is good enough.....the D600 is $2k now, i just dont see them releasing another DX body somewhere in the middle (lets be honest, it'd be indro'd at $2k...), for only a few people who want smaller sensors still.....i sure could be wrong......i feel like they'd be introducing more pro DX glass if they
...Show more

**************************

The market does not demand it! I would beg to differ. Look for instance at Thom's survey results from a few weeks back. D300 ownership is the highest among the pro boides, including being higher than the D800! Imagine what a D400 would pull in, expecially among sports & wildlife photographers. I'd be willing to bet a D400 at $1800 would sell better than the CX bodies and the D600.

And yes, Nikon should be introducing more DX glass designed for pro/enthusists.




Apr 09, 2013 at 08:16 PM
ddjohns1
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · The D400


I'd like to think Thom is right and Nikon is cooking up some new features like and electronic shutter with the higher frame per second rate. Perhaps the D400 is requiring more engineering time to design and produce.

If money was not an object, I would probably go for D800, and live with the lower FPS for sports, otherwise its a great camera for me. But a $3,000 camera plus the ultra wide and normal lens purchases I'd make to replace my DX lenses (I have all FX for 50mm and above) would set me back another $1200- 2000. Not going to happen for me, and for most people I think.

When the D300 came out, it was almost a no brainer-- Better than a D2X for less than half the price. Hopefully we'll get a camera with the same kind of no-compomises spec in the same price range as the D300. The analogy with the D3X doesn't work because it's too old now, but you get the idea. 24MP sensor, no AA filter, 7+ fps, D800 AF, metal body, 7+ shot bracketing, crop modes, dedicated buttons etc...

In the meantime, Nikon is losing sales I think. A good chunk of D300 users are stuck-- because its too much money to upgrade to FX and if you're on the fence on DX/FX you might wait to buy lenses until Nikon decides what it is going to do with pro DX. This year I bought a mirrorless system (Fuji X-E1) rather than upgrade anything in my Nikon system while I wait yet another year for the roadmap to materialize.... more lost revenue for Nikon...



Apr 09, 2013 at 08:39 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · The D400


While y'all are waitin' for one...I'm happily shootin' with the best DX you can actually HAVE, to date. Just sayin'...only $1200 ta steal one
D7.1K naked 300 f4 Handheld & SOOC



riversbendphotography




Apr 09, 2013 at 08:51 PM
M635_Guy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · The D400


NathanHamler wrote:
The market just doesn't demand it......the D7k was so well received, and the 7100 is gonna be the same way......D800 focus system, 24mp? Clean HDMI video out? D800 level weather sealing??.....for $1,200!! That's a 7dII killer right there....only missing the build quality, which, i'm sure Nikon feels is good enough.....the D600 is $2k now, i just dont see them releasing another DX body somewhere in the middle (lets be honest, it'd be indro'd at $2k...), for only a few people who want smaller sensors still.....i sure could be wrong......i feel like they'd be introducing more pro DX glass if they
...Show more

I respectfully disagree. You guys focusing on the price point vs. FX (especially a D600) are missing the bigger point for what this product slot really is, but it has been thrashed to death so I won't thrash it more.

Tim's experience with the D7100 notwithstanding, I'm not going back to the D90/D7000 handling. I like what I'm getting out of my D300s. I could buy a D7100 today, but I'm perfectly content waiting to see where Nikon goes. If no D400 emerges, I guess I'll decide what to do in 2-3 years.

As for "they are waiting for the 7D MkII" - there is no reason to do that. Development cycles on these things is easily a year, possibly more depending on the regulatory hurdles they have to pass. They'll announce one or they won't - it is already in the pipeline or it isn't. The fact that they haven't communicated explicitly that they aren't going to continue the pro-build DX would indicated to me that something is coming.

The cool thing is I'm less likely to upgrade now than I was a few months ago.



Apr 09, 2013 at 09:32 PM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · The D400


trenchmonkey wrote:
While y'all are waitin' for one...I'm happily shootin' with the best DX you can actually HAVE, to date. Just sayin'...only $1200 ta steal one
D7.1K naked 300 f4 Handheld & SOOC



Beautiful shot Will.

I agree with you that it's better to have the best DX camera you can get today than to have nothing at all or have a sub-par camera. I love my D300, I get great results with it, and I have no NEED to upgrade.

Part of it is budget and approach to gear and ultimately purpose. If I were making money doing this, like you are, I would iterate my gear more often. But, in my position as enthusiast with 5 college educations to pay for, I upgrade my camera bodies when I have to or preferably when I can make a major leap in performance and not sacrifice anything.

So, waiting for a D400 is a no brainer for me provided my D300 keeps clicking away in good order. If something were to happen to my D300 today, I'd have a D7100 tomorrow!



Apr 09, 2013 at 10:01 PM
fsiagian
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · The D400


I don't see Nikon introducing professional DX lens (other than the old 17-55mm 2.8). That what makes me think there may not be a D400. I may be wrong


Apr 09, 2013 at 10:14 PM
MarcG19
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · The D400


I'd agree with what Thom's said, either in that article or previously, on the subject. Most compelling points in favor:

- NIkon exists to make people buy cameras

- they need to introduce at least one new camera this year, beyond a D3200 iteration, that will sell in reasonably high numbers.

- they want to sell the most DSLRs of any company this year (i.e. beat Canon)

- they make most of their money off of DX, because sales volume even today is way higher than FX.

- the existing "pro" DX camera is ancient in comparison to the rest of the line (pro = a DX camera Nikon will support in NPS. I personally think other distinctions are meaningless)

- some recent Nikon iterations have been confused and seem to reflect internal company dynamics - especially uncreative, even odd iteration to grab market share and get old customers to repurchase updated versions of what they have - rather than any sense of what customers want

- Nikon could just give a D7100 with the "pro" features listed in Thom's article, a larger buffer, and higher FPS, and I think they think it would sell well at $1700 (it'd scratch an itch many people have).

Only thing IMO left to see is:

- obvious iteration or something more inventive? I would prefer the latter, with an integrated grip, some of the other features we've seen in other cameras (Thom mentions some, particularly some things from the V1/2) trickling in, perhaps even a good video implementation. Even though I don't shoot video, I would be very interested in such a camera.

- how much? $1600-1700 is reasonable given past practice and the D7100 and D600. But, since the D600 became effectively a $1700 camera over the holidays, maybe they'll lower the prices on that and establish the D300s replacement as the $2000 or so camera. If it had good features (i.e. more than just a pro D7100), I think many people would pay that price (and keep D600 sales high).

In the meantime, I'm waiting. If it comes and I like it, I'll get it. If not, I'm keeping my D7000 until next Black Friday, when I presume the D7100 will have a nice discount.

Edited on Apr 10, 2013 at 04:18 AM · View previous versions



Apr 10, 2013 at 12:55 AM
MercuryPhotog
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · The D400


I'm sure Nikon won't leave us serious wildlife/sports shooters behind by not producing a D400-the demand is there. Heck, there may even be a demand for a FF D700s type camera.

I'll take your D7100 mallard and raise it with a rooster pheasant captured with a clunker pro body DX D300









Apr 10, 2013 at 03:11 AM
Catfur
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · The D400


afm901 wrote:
So you have a said a few times now. Why? Explain why Nikon would leave such a huge hole in the DX lineup when they sell far more DX cameras than FX.

Scott


Because Nikon, despite being staffed by some of the smartest people in the world, makes strange/dumb decisions.

These are the people who managed to lose their #1 (or #2 forget which) position as manufacturer of steppers to a Dutch startup by being jackasses to their customers.

These are the people who have iterated their 1 series cameras so oddly and quickly (and pointlessly) that no industry watcher has a clue what the heck they are doing.



Apr 10, 2013 at 03:38 AM
RRRoger
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · The D400


fsiagian wrote:
I don't see Nikon introducing professional DX lens (other than the old 17-55mm 2.8). That what makes me think there may not be a D400. I may be wrong


And what kind of lens were they developing for the Pro D1-D2 series cameras?
Were those DX lens? No!
I do not think lens releases are any indication whether there will be a D400.

The DX lens were developed to sell more D40-90 cameras.
Most are cheap introductory "kit" lens.
Some are quite good, but
the only "Pro" DX lens I know of (17-55) cost twice as much as the equivalent (24-85) FX lens.
If it cost that much to produce a Pro DX lens, why not produce a lens that can also be used on FX instead?





Apr 10, 2013 at 05:26 AM
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · The D400


binary visions wrote:
The D200/D300/s price was $1,700. That's a 40% increase over the D7100, and they sold a ton of those.


That was before there was a cheap (well...) FX body. I guess 90% of the D200 buyers would have chosen a similarly priced FX camera if there was one back then. Just like I think that more than 90% of the upgraders would choose a D600 over a D400 if the price is similar.

So, why would Nikon listen to them instead of making more money? Edit: By the way, Canon has a similar lineup.

I understand your point, I just think there's a pretty strong case for enthusiasts and many wildlife shooters to stick with DX, and a lot of those people don't want to downgrade to the consumer body/buffer/FPS/features.

Sure, but what's wrong with the D7100 then? I really don't understand the distinction between "pro" and "consumer".



Apr 10, 2013 at 09:58 AM
VinnieJ
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · The D400


Makten wrote:
Sure, but what's wrong with the D7100 then? I really don't understand the distinction between "pro" and "consumer".


Marketing terms.

For all....
The D400 has as good of chance to be released as the 7D Mark II from Canon. Really think Nikon wouldn't have a similarly spec'ed body to compete with them? It will probably sell for $2K-$2.5K and then the marketing guys will use terms like "flagship" and "pro" to justify the price.

The D7100 will be nearly half the price but people will want the D400 because it will be labeled as "pro" and will justify the need for faster FPS and more buffer because for every bird they want to shoot they want to make sure they captured every wing position possible from their subject.

I know I'll fall for it.



Apr 10, 2013 at 10:04 AM
1
       2       3       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password