Would it be safe to assume this D700 will be primarily a studio camera, with a slow shooting burst (ie 3.5 fps)? Because if it inherits the D300's 6.0 fps burst, this camera would seriously cannibalize the Nikon D3 sales.
Rubber Soul wrote:
Would it be safe to assume this D700 will be primarily a studio camera, with a slow shooting burst (ie 3.5 fps)? Because if it inherits the D300's 6.0 fps burst, this camera would seriously cannibalize the Nikon D3 sales.
I think all bets are off until any announcement is made. Data to be processed would be pretty much the same as on the D300, so anything slower would be an artificial limitation.
Slug69 wrote:
I would say that the printer has just lost his job. Nikon will make sure they never deal with that publisher.
(...) It looks like the real deal to me.
Thats true by the "old standards", but even Nikon must have learned by now that nothing gives better publicity, excitement and attention as an apparently "accidental", or even better then that: "illegal leak".
Within 3 hours, the news spreads around the entire globe, finding it's way in to the forums etc. No company could pay this type of publicity :-) So to the attention of the actual official announcment, the company gets - for free - 1-2 weeks of excitement, attention and guessing.
I had quick look through USPTO couldn't find Nikon registering D700 as a trademark unless I didnt look close enough. One would assume that a trademark would be filed first before making all the marketing materials.
alba63 wrote:
Thats true by the "old standards", but even Nikon must have learned by now that nothing gives better publicity, excitement and attention as an apparently "accidental", or even better then that: "illegal leak".
Within 3 hours, the news spreads around the entire globe, finding it's way in to the forums etc. No company could pay this type of publicity :-) So to the attention of the actual official announcment, the company gets - for free - 1-2 weeks of excitement, attention and guessing.
Think clever, think leak....
the company with the best experience in such tricks is probably Apple
I would still be surprised to see the D700 and no D90, as it would imply that Nikon decided that he successor of the current D80 would then be , either the D60, or the D300... or no successor at all.
I might go for a D300 at the end to replace my D70 as the price for this gem might drop significantly with the release of the D700.
I think I have been waiting long enough to replace my good old D70, so Nikon hurry up, my credit card is getting warm
veeral wrote:
I had quick look through USPTO couldn't find Nikon registering D700 as a trademark unless I didnt look close enough. One would assume that a trademark would be filed first before making all the marketing materials.
one has to consider that there might be a 6-12 months delay between the filing date and the date where you are granted for the usage of a trademark. In addition the product is not officially launched!!
veeral wrote:
I had quick look through USPTO couldn't find Nikon registering D700 as a trademark unless I didnt look close enough. One would assume that a trademark would be filed first before making all the marketing materials.
The model number is not usually trademarked. This is why you can have a Nikon and a Canon D60 for example.
I have a totally off-topic observation. We've seen dozens of these rumors come and go. They are always met with skepticism and suspicion of fabrication. This one seems credible (to me too) because it was printed on paper. Even in this new age of information delivery where paper is all but eliminated, we still trust it above any electronic format. Food for thought.
Elan II wrote:
The model number is not usually trademarked. This is why you can have a Nikon and a Canon D60 for example.
I have a totally off-topic observation. We've seen dozens of these rumors come and go. They are always met with skepticism and suspicion of fabrication. This one seems credible (to me too) because it was printed on paper. Even in this new age of information delivery where paper is all but eliminated, we still trust it above any electronic format. Food for thought.
Good point Elan. I believe the same thing happened with the D300 and D3 before it was released back. I think there was printed materials and a couple of days later it came out.
danjacquitaylo wrote:
Great. I may have to return or trade my newly purchased Cub Cadet i 1046 and let the grass/weed grow 10 feet high. Instead of mowing it down I'll just shoot some pictures of the tall grass/weed.
Edited by danjacquitaylo on Jun 17, 2008 at 02:20 PM GMT
Yep and when you shoot the pics of the tall grass, you can make it shorter so much faster in Photoshop anyway and hell, you can plant some trees while you're at it
kipkeston wrote:
How is that logical? It sounds like a complete replacement
A complete replacement to the D300? Why would that be?
First off, it's going to be in an entirely different price range.
Secondly, considering how quickly this release is coming, I'm going to speculate that it'll be using the D3 sensor, or a very similar one. That means pixel density is still going to skew heavily in favor of the D300. Wildlife photographers won't switch unless they shoot in low light a lot (and the low light is an overriding concern vs. effective reach).
Thirdly, I virtually guarantee there will be a carefully selected spec to allow the D300 to still thrive. It's too new and too popular for Nikon to supplant it entirely.
...you never know who'd buy it...