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
  
 
binary visions
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · The D400


Makten wrote:
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.


Which I acknowledged in the next line of my post.

What you're saying here is speculation, and we simply differ on our opinions of subjects we have no evidence about . I think many DX shooters will stay with DX because it suits their needs, not because they have no alternative.

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

Features and build. I am not creating this distinction - I hate the use of those terms, but it's the reality of where Nikon differentiates their product lines. The D7100 is a great camera - I own one. However, it is clear that it's a "consumer" camera to Nikon. Features reserved for the "pro" cameras are usually: magnesium chassis, big buffer, higher FPS, 9-pin socket, flash sync terminal, AF-ON button (in addition to AE-L), better mode selectors/button stack on the top, and some minor handling quirks that I'm getting used to about the D7100 (e.g. lack of metering mode displayed in viewfinder - grrrrr...).

There's nothing "wrong" with the D7100, per se, but some of us used those features on the Dx00 cameras and were reluctant to walk away from them.



Apr 10, 2013 at 11:09 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · The D400


Makten wrote:
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.

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


**********************************
Makten, you are totally missing the point. FX is not the end all be all of photography. There are many people who do not want FX but do want DX for the advantages of the DX format given what they do. Sports and wildlife come to mind as has been mentioned ad nauseum. Also, when calculating costs, you cannot just consider the camera body but must include the supporting lenses as well ... again, advantage DX for the sports and wildlife come to mind as has been mentioned ad nauseum. Weight of the system comes to mind, again, including the lenses, sports and wildlife come to mind as has been mentioned ad nauseum. Finally, while the D600 is a great little camera, it lacks the performance specs in terms of frame rate and AF performance need for some applications, sports and wildlife come to mind as has been mentioned ad nauseum. Even the D800 lacks the frame rate and comes in at an extra 50% in cost just for the body.

The idea of a D400 is to provide high performance features in terms of frame rate, AF, buffer depth, build, and other features (e.g. 10 pin connector, control layout, etc.) in a DX body that can only be found in a much more expensive FX body (e.g. the D4 ) but still price it at or below the least expensive FX body (e.g. the D600). Those performance features have value and people want those features in a DX body.

Also, your GUESS of 90% of upgraders choosing FX over DX is just a GUESS and is not supported by the numbers I have seen in various polls and surveys. Thom Hogan's pro/enthusiast survey is a perfect example.



Apr 10, 2013 at 11:11 AM
ddjohns1
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · The D400


This link is relevant to this discussion. See the comments/discussion at the end of the article. I don't agree with everything in here, but I have to admit for most applications a D800 is better, but again, the cost is not insubstantial $2,800 + an ultrawide zoom + a normal zoom could entail a $5,000 upgrade, whereas a D400 would "only" entail a $1,600 upgrade for me. This is not trivial, and I find it a little insulting that these "experts" think $5k isn't a big deal for most people.

http://photographylife.com/dx-or-fx-for-sports-and-wildlife-photography#more-49564






Apr 10, 2013 at 07:34 PM
MercuryPhotog
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · The D400


Nikon has done this in the past: D3, D700; D300. D3s; D300s. I doubt they are gonna leave out a huge section of DX toting photojournalists and serious enthusiasts. Like me, I'm sure sure many of you can run controls on D3's, D300's in total darkness like it's second nature. We could also do that with D800's but hey, we want more FPS for dynamic subjects. Call it a quirk but I also want a full mag body-built like a tank. I also want a dedicated AF-on button as I've shot that way since I got my first F5.

Our local paper's photog's all shoot gripped D300's. I shoot alongside photog's at Div 1 sports in the Twin Cites who are still using D300's and D700's. The papers loved the quality and the price point. When publishers can get two pro bodies for the price of one FX pro body they are happy! Plus, they can still use all their accumulated Nikkor glass. These guys are all clamoring for the D400 - I hear it many times per week. And, all we are asking for is a modest jump in MPX's (we don't need or want 36) and low light/higher ISO performance. 8 FPS is fine but give us that AF-on button!
Will nikon sell a bunch of D400's? Yep, cause I'll order 2 and I know at least a dozen others who'll do the same.






Apr 10, 2013 at 10:54 PM
LMT1972
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · The D400


D400 is 2 years late already so they'll probably go straight to the D500 - 30mp, mirrorless, 20fps, ISO 50-102500, built in wifi, 102 point AF system with new 'Trenchmonkey mode" to replace the antiquated (and nigh on useless) 3D-tracking.

Cheers
Leigh



Apr 11, 2013 at 02:18 AM
thedruid
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · The D400


Newspaper "quality" I love when I read that one...I worked in the imaging department of a large newspaper all photos used the latest gear available, only ones using D300 type cameras were stringers. My friend works for a tiny newspaper in GA and even they are running a D3s/200F2VR for sports.


Apr 11, 2013 at 11:37 AM
DaveOls
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · The D400


I think that Nikon will bring out the D 400 also. The Yen/dollar conversion is very nigh right now, so the price might be lower than expected, like $ 1700 or so.
I was waiting for the D 400, but gave up and got a used D 300s less than a month ago. There are probably a lot of people like me who want to upgrade, but haven't seen the right camera yet.
I upgraded from a 5 year old D 80.



Apr 11, 2013 at 11:56 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · The D400


ddjohns1 wrote:
This link is relevant to this discussion. See the comments/discussion at the end of the article. I don't agree with everything in here, but I have to admit for most applications a D800 is better, but again, the cost is not insubstantial $2,800 + an ultrawide zoom + a normal zoom could entail a $5,000 upgrade, whereas a D400 would "only" entail a $1,600 upgrade for me. This is not trivial, and I find it a little insulting that these "experts" think $5k isn't a big deal for most people.

http://photographylife.com/dx-or-fx-for-sports-and-wildlife-photography#more-49564



You bring up a good point. I don't think anyone is saying DX is superior to FX. But that a pro DX body like the D400 is a value position. It serves people seeking as much performance per dollar as possible in all aspects but sensor size.



Apr 12, 2013 at 02:53 AM
MercuryPhotog
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · The D400


Quality of the camera bodies. I'm just repeating comments I've heard. Our local newspaper circulates to 300,000 and the 2 lead photogs have been using D300's w/14-24's, 24-70's, 80-200's, 70-200's and 300 AF-S I and II's on them. The largest circulating paper in MN has FF Nikon bodies in use many of which are D700's.

I was actually puzzled when I saw my local journalist friend with a D300 a few years back and I asked why no D3's? He stated that gripped D300's did all they needed for half the cost. This guy is a crack photog with 40 years under is photojournalism belt, too with a pile of awards to show for it. But, I suppose, like me he is a misguided photographer wanting a pro style DX body....



Apr 12, 2013 at 03:33 AM
firewireguy
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · The D400


So far everyone has missed the fact that Nikon is in the business of selling camera systems, not just cameras. They want to sell you big expensive lenses and a "pro" lineup consisting only of FX cameras does that very well.


Apr 12, 2013 at 04:10 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · The D400


firewireguy wrote:
So far everyone has missed the fact that Nikon is in the business of selling camera systems, not just cameras. They want to sell you big expensive lenses and a "pro" lineup consisting only of FX cameras does that very well.



Except for the fact that 95% of Nikon's DSLR camera sales are for DX format.

Combine that with poll #s like Thom's that indicated that the number of D300's sold exceeds the number of any of the FX bodies sold.

Yes, Nikon is in the business of selling systems and DX format is its primary DSLR system. It should flesh it out!



Apr 12, 2013 at 04:58 PM
MercuryPhotog
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · The D400


This right from Thom: "Believe it or not, there are ton of DX-using pros out there, even today. Far more than you might think, and it was the D3/D300 launch that really pulled them in. Why? Because while the D300 didn't have the D3's insane high ISO capabilities, it had pretty much everything else for US$3200 less. That buys a lot of useful glass or lets you shoot "pro" at an "affordable" cost, so it pulled more folk into the pro Nikon ranks than ever before. The same equation would still be true today if done right. Those D300 folk are chomping at the bit for another upgrade to their shooting abilities, and there's a new generation of not-so-rich who wouldn't mind trying their hand at going pro. Imagine this: come August Nikon launches a D4h and D400 simultaneously, both 24mp. Same thing would happen as happened in 2007: the Nikon faithful would be ecstatic." This is exactly what I tried to describe above. That's also why I embraced the D300's. Luckily, the venues I do sports work in are well lit and and 1600- 2500 ISO is normal. For wildlife (80% of my shooting) it's the ideal rig-fast enough frame rates for speeding teal and rutting deer.


Apr 13, 2013 at 12:23 AM
RRRoger
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · The D400


MercuryPhotog wrote:
Imagine this: come August Nikon launches a D4h and D400 simultaneously, both 24mp.


I think 18MP would work a lot better for both if the buffers, frame rates, and ISO were high enough.



Apr 13, 2013 at 12:59 AM
Chris Dees
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · The D400


Sony has a nice 20Mpx APS-C sensor in the new A58.
Most of the time Nikon squeezes a bit more out of the sensor then Sony can/do.



Apr 13, 2013 at 07:21 AM
MercuryPhotog
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · The D400


18 or 20 MPX's would be ideal! I'm confident Nikon will hit us with a D400 or maybe a fast frame rate pro upgrade to the FF D700 as the D600 lack many features and the D800 is slower than molasses in winter and a too high in MPX's for journalist types shooting for, at max 8.5 X 11 images save for the occasional full newsie cover image.

I will go out on a limb and predict an announcement of a new body by August......



Apr 13, 2013 at 04:22 PM
Kerry Pierce
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · The D400


I'm tempted to get a d7100 to pair with my d3s and d800. The updated AF is a huge plus to me. But, I'm going to continue to sit back and wait for the d400. I'd truly love a good performing DX sensor in the d800 body. It would be almost like the golden days of the d300/d700.

Indeed, if Nikon really wants to score a lot of my money, they'll also put the d600 24mp sensor into a d800 body and give us another pair of 8fps cameras. Sweet!

Kerry



Apr 13, 2013 at 08:23 PM
LarryBoy57
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · The D400


Kerry Pierce wrote:
Indeed, if Nikon really wants to score a lot of my money, they'll also put the d600 24mp sensor into a d800 body
Kerry


+1



Apr 14, 2013 at 01:33 AM
RRRoger
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · The D400


A D600 Sensor in a D800 body would cost the same as a D800,
Maybe more with the enhanced frame rate, you crave.
Why don't you just get a used D700?


I think you are more likely to see an 18 MegaPixel (DX) D400.



Apr 14, 2013 at 02:23 AM
brewercm
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · The D400


I get so confused reading "Pro Body" all the time. I thought the only thing that made a camera a pro body was the person behind it and if they are making money from it.

I've owned both "Pro grade" D700 and non-stop D600 and so far prefer the later. I don't need the burst rate the D700 gave me although its still a great camera.

Now I shoot with a D600 and D7000 combo depending on my needs.



Apr 14, 2013 at 05:55 AM
Frogfish
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · The D400


I currently shoot with a D600 and D800 but I'm considering switching the D600 for a D7100 simply for the AF alone however if a D400 comes along then that would replace the D600 in an instant because it's horses for horses and that would widen my options depending on what I'm shooting. I'm sure there are lots of shooters in the same boat, people who don't shoot just one specific genre of photography.

If Canon brings out a 7D Mk II and Nikon has no D400 to compete they will lose a lot of high paying customers (and I mean those paying for top quality glass not just cameras).



Apr 14, 2013 at 08:46 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