I think its a fake. Read the grammar. It seems like a translation, not as would be written by an original speaker of proper english. It is simply a different concept to a forgery.
The two housings in the pictures don't have the same proportions and I somehow don't think that Nikon would put a square viewfinder opening in a higher level camera. At least they never have.
Lastly, the name? Since when does NIkon draw a number out of a hat? This would be a non-sensical departure from nikons naming pattern.
But when we really want something ... its easy to be sold.
Don't they put a bullet in the back of your head for an infraction like that in china?
Pavel wrote:
Lastly, the name? Since when does NIkon draw a number out of a hat? This would be a non-sensical departure from nikons naming pattern.
I agree that it could easily be a fake, but I don't think the naming convention is too far off at all. It's a departure from their current crop bodies, so they need to remove it from the D200/300, but it is not in the large pro body so it would make sense to stick with a Dxxx number.
it looks pretty legit to me. The frame looks about right with some of the lower images too.
It'll be interesting to see how this turns out... This could very well be what Canon has been waiting for... There's no doubt though, if Canon DID announce the 5D replacement at photokina, and Nikon did bring this to the show... It would be one VERY exciting show!
Pavel wrote:
I think its a fake. Read the grammar. It seems like a translation, not as would be written by an original speaker of proper english. It is simply a different concept to a forgery.
The two housings in the pictures don't have the same proportions and I somehow don't think that Nikon would put a square viewfinder opening in a higher level camera. At least they never have.
Lastly, the name? Since when does NIkon draw a number out of a hat? This would be a non-sensical departure from nikons naming pattern.
But when we really want something ... its easy to be sold.
Don't they put a bullet in the back of your head for an infraction like that in china?...Show more →
The dark clouds come and it starts to rain just as the party is getting started
Me--I don't see it as a D3 or D300 substitute. A complement perhaps. Not everyone who wants FF wants a pro type body. I think it's a great idea to have yet another option for those who want FF, but would prefer it in the D300 size. The model does make me wonder though--my first thoughts were Sony when I saw D700.
OK--enough with the bodies--bring out the affordable ( ) primes with AF-S
Steen Bondo wrote:
Yup, like the OP said: "the poster was deleted by that forum"
This usually is a sign that it was a real piece of information... now that forum can also act this way to even strengthen the hoax.
regarding the naming quoted by Steen, I guess there is not much space remaining in the Dx0, so it has to be Dx00. let's see how it evolves, but I would like to have a new body before this summer
Wow, as a Canon shooter, it just amazes me how Canon seems to do everything in its power to screw up in the dSLR market. If the 5D II had come out last year or even in April as rumored, this Nikon camera would have been an also ran. Now it looks like Nikon might beat the 5DmkII to the market. Add in autofocus issues and Canon seems to be losing its edge in technology and marketing.
I mean, gear is not everything, one of my favorite cameras to shoot is a meterless Zorki rangefinder. But I have some serious cash in Canon glass, and while the EOS gear shoots well, if I see that I could have had it better......
I was at a Curcuit City a few months ago and a Sony rep was there and he said that their FF pro-sumer body was on its way soon. (I know it totally sounds made up, I did find it odd that the Sony rep went into detail about their dSLR plans with a guy in a tshirt and crappy shorts (me) on a Tuesday afternoon.)
Canon will respond. The market always changes in waves.
Nikon has been playing catchup for a while, which started to end with the release of the D200. A couple bodies later, and now it's Canon's turn to play catchup. Soon enough, Nikon will find itself behind again and will have to work to get back in the lead.
Any market works like this. Companies lack the resources and motivation to maintain a position as technology leader forever. You Canon folk will get your toys, too.
poisonpill wrote:
Also how many people out there can swing $2500-$3000 on a new camera? This isn't chump change anymore. At least not for me.
I'll not swing it till they up up the stock of new FF lenses
Why does it appear to have a flash assist lamp ? If it's FF with a larger VF (and therefore no on-board flash), isn't that a waste of space? (i.e. is this a hoax?)
Photoniks wrote:
Why does it appear to have a flash assist lamp ? If it's FF with a larger VF (and therefore no on-board flash), isn't that a waste of space? (i.e. is this a hoax?)
My "Full Frame" N80 had a focus assist lamp. It also had a Pop-Up flash.
Photoniks wrote:
Why does it appear to have a flash assist lamp ? If it's FF with a larger VF (and therefore no on-board flash), isn't that a waste of space? (i.e. is this a hoax?)
Why would a focus assist lamp require an on-board flash?
And since when have FF cameras not been able to accommodate on-board flashes? A lot of 35mm camera owners are going to be severely disillusioned.
binary visions wrote:
Why would a focus assist lamp require an on-board flash?
And since when have FF cameras not been able to accommodate on-board flashes? A lot of 35mm camera owners are going to be severely disillusioned.
It's a good point, but I thought that the lamp only ever fired when light was so bad that flash (on-board) was needed. It just looks a bit odd to me, especially since the D700 is squeezed in so tightly on the other side (cf D3).
Not sure, just a thought. (and I kind of meant to write flash assist lamp [redeye?], but put focus instead)
Photoniks wrote:
It's a good point, but I thought that the lamp only ever fired when light was so bad that flash (on-board) was needed. It just looks a bit odd to me, especially since the D700 is squeezed in so tightly on the other side (cf D3).
Not sure, just a thought. (and I kind of meant to write flash assist lamp [redeye?], but put focus instead)
I can't remember, it's been so long, but I think that on the N80, it acted as both af assist and red eye reducer..whatever it's function, it was annoying as hell.
If that hump of the prism box is what this new body would have - it would be a sad day, to have such a poor viewfinder on a new FF camera. The size of the prism box dictates several charecteristics - all which seem essential on a body of this level.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like being the guy with the glum face, trying to wreck a party for a bunch of happy campers, all decked out with party hats and champagne ... but at the same time, it's generally better to wait for the guest of honor before popping corks. It stops "red face" syndrome.
Side's .... another body? Sheesh. We all think we need more, more more. It will still take years to really get the most out of todays bodies.
Lenses? Now that's the thing. PRIMES! PLEASE! Or do I have to go back to Canon?
Looks like it has a pretty good size VF box to me. In the one shot from the front, the camera is tilted back so the VF box looks small, but it the other shots it looks appropriately sized for 35mm. It appears that the VF box slopes down quite a bit from the back to front, so I would expect it to look small from the front with the camera tilted back.
