Andre Labonte wrote:
^^^ My real wish was that the D300 was a D3h (i.e. a D300 but in a D3 body). Now that would have been sweet!
But, I don't think we will ever see that again. Nikon will maintain a pro-level DX body for many years (decades) but not with a built-in grip. That will be reserved for FX.
On the other hand, the D300 is likely quite a bit cheaper than I would expect a D3H to be priced. I get what you are saying, but would it really make that much of a difference? At $2500 -$3000, maybe. Otherwise I'd prefer to keep the D300 the way it is. Just my 2 cents worth.
Andre Labonte wrote:
^^^ My real wish was that the D300 was a D3h (i.e. a D300 but in a D3 body). Now that would have been sweet!
But, I don't think we will ever see that again. Nikon will maintain a pro-level DX body for many years (decades) but not with a built-in grip. That will be reserved for FX.
eaglewolf wrote:
On the other hand, the D300 is likely quite a bit cheaper than I would expect a D3H to be priced. I get what you are saying, but would it really make that much of a difference? At $2500 -$3000, maybe. Otherwise I'd prefer to keep the D300 the way it is. Just my 2 cents worth.
David
No doubt it would have been a more expensive camera. In fact I was expecting it to come out at around $3000 ... boy, was the D300 + grip at $2100 quite the pleasant surprise ... Nikon actually did something for less money than people expected on that one!!! My how times change.
I never take the grip off other than to change the internal battery, and after playing with a D3, I fell in love with the greater comfort and ergonomics of the built-in grip. After all, the only reasons I chose Nikon over Canon are the ergonomics and the flash system. For the extra comfort, I would have gladly paid a few hundred more the a unibody. But about $500 more would have been my limit.
I too, like you am glad for the D300's price. I hope Nikon keeps the pro-end DX body in that range in the years to come. I figure in another 5-10 years it will be time for me to upgrade.
Andre Labonte wrote:
I never take the grip off other than to change the internal battery, and after playing with a D3, I fell in love with the greater comfort and ergonomics of the built-in grip.
True, but my God do I miss the additional multi-selector on the vertical side of the MB-D10. The single selector on the D3-series bodies is too far away from my thumb for a comfortable reach, and just under my right cheekbone, so trying to change something (like an AF point) screws up my shooting.
Re the new bodies, I would expect Nikon to do a D700s pretty quickly as an update. Use the D3s sensor, add video... same kind of changes and improvements they made on the D3s as far as technology inside, and same kind of changes and improvements they made on the D300s as far as body outside. This would overall reduce unit costs and allow them to maintain their price point by updating the camera and making it a better competitor against the other brands' offerings.
^^^ I had not thought about that fact of the D3 ... I guess I did not get an chance to use it long enough. The easy solution would be to put two mullti-selectors on the unibody .... you are right though, going to a unitbody would not be worth it if I lost the extra multi-selector. Good call Rodolfo.
NR has a silly comment about a new 24-120 f/4. Maybe later this year but not at the PMA and I'd say a 50/50 chance that it is fixed f/4 ... but I'd be surprised.
I really want to see a few DSLR bodies with 1080p video. We're totally mad that the current DSLRs have 720 and Nikon has a point and shoot with 1080!!! I 1080 body under $3000 would be great - maybe a d700s and a d90 replacement with high def?
TRReichman wrote:
I really want to see a few DSLR bodies with 1080p video. We're totally mad that the current DSLRs have 720 and Nikon has a point and shoot with 1080!!! I 1080 body under $3000 would be great - maybe a d700s and a d90 replacement with high def?
- trr
Ughh... I'd prefer to see Nikon abandoning video to Canon... because they cann't compete with Canon in this area, and rather spend more in developing better and better photo cameras...
I dream for a digital rangefinder with F mount, including a D700 sensor... I don't want multifunctional gadgets but better and cheaper cameras...
Mishu01 wrote:
Ughh... I'd prefer to see Nikon abandoning video to Canon... because they cann't compete with Canon in this area, and rather spend more in developing better and better photo cameras...
I dream for a digital rangefinder with F mount, including a D700 sensor... I don't want multifunctional gadgets but better and cheaper cameras...
Abandoning a feature to a competitor is a surefire way to LOOSE!
IMHO, if Nikon will redirect the funds that are spent to develop the video technology towards developing better sensors and cameras, also will replace the costs for "built in video" towards a better camera, for sure 5 to 10% of people will leave dissapointed for Canon or other brands but 50% from other brands will migrate to Nikon... those PJ, wedding photogs, sport photogs, wildlife photogs, studio photogs... they will love to have better cameras without video... D700 is a huge success for Nikon and people still buy it after two years... and nobody complaints about the lack of video capabilities.
Be serious... nobody buy D3s because it has video.... but because its great specifications, its low light abilities, its unbelievable ISO, its frame rate, etc...
No doubt it would have been a more expensive camera. In fact I was expecting it to come out at around $3000 ... boy, was the D300 + grip at $2100 quite the pleasant surprise ... Nikon actually did something for less money than people expected on that one!!! My how times change. 
.... you are right though, going to a unitbody would not be worth it if I lost the extra multi-selector. Good call Rodolfo.