I personally consider that the two lenses announced are good news, even though I'm not sure if I'll ever purchase any of these.
What I mean by my words is that Nikon is sending to us a good signal:
1. that they did not abandoned fast primes and we should expect some others to come in future
2. that they will produce f4 zooms with VR for full frame, a product that's highly required by many people
Of course the price tag is outrageous high, but at least we don't have to think that we have to switch to Canon because they don't produce lenses that are demanded.
I don't know, at first I was thinking a D700X with a 24MP sensor at $4K, but I'm thinking that's less likely at the PMA and more likely later in the year.
Jammy Straub wrote:
Yes, that's needed to happen for a while. They need consistent interfaces across the range.
Hmmm that's is a good one. I've been expecting something like an SB700 to come in at around $250 with the same interface as the SB900 but the specs of the SB600. Not sure that will be at the PMA or later in the year. Of course I was expecting the flash last year ... so who know.
Andre Labonte wrote:
I don't know, at first I was thinking a D700X with a 24MP sensor at $4K, but I'm thinking that's less likely at the PMA and more likely later in the year.
I guess the question I have is if we really even need a new camera right now. D300s, D700, D3s, D3X - I'm not sure a $4000 D700 is the smartest move for Nikon right now, though I suppose it is possible. An update to the D700? I can hear people crying about how it isn't much of an upgrade already. For those that already have a D700, I doubt that there would be enough incentive for q D700S - there certainly isn't for me and I bought it a D700 when it came out. Everyone is different though, so you never know.
The real question is if Nikon could sell enough D700s or D700X cameras to make it worth the cost of producing one. Even the 24 f/1.4 - how many of us are actually going to go out and buy one at $2200? What about a 50 f/1.2 or a 85 f/1.2 - are we willing to part with over $2000 for each of those? Though f/1.2 and f/1.4 lenses sound great, but the cost can bury one very quickly.
I love that Nikon has been filling some holes in their lineup lately, but time will tell how well they do with those lenses. As for cameras, I don't really see a lot of holes. Trying to pace Canon camera for camera doesn't seem like a good business model to me. Sticking with innovation and intelligent upgrades makes more sense in my book.
I think the truth of the matter is it could be cheaper for Nikon to update the D700 to the D700s spec so that it can share parts with the D300s and D3s. Right now they have 4 high end sensor units that are all different. D300s, D700, D3s, D3x. If they could cut that down to 3 it might be good for them. Things like the CF/SD card circuitry should be very similar to the D300s. I really don't know much about all that jazz though.
I'd think of the update to the D700(s) as just that, and update. Not a reason to upgrade or the next model. Just breathing some new life into an established model to bring it up to parity with the rest of their offerings.
I doubt we'll see it by PMA, but from patent fillings I'd bet we see 50 f/1.2 AF-S in the next year or two. I don't know about an 85 f/1.2, I'm not sure the F-mount could support that, anyone know the required size of the rear element for that to happen?
Jimmy - you make a good point. Like you said, it would be an update only. I would be glad to see things keep improving, as someday I may buy another camera.
For the most part, I'm not sure what to think about a 24mp D700 though. I you run the price up to nearly $4000, that's putting it in rarefied air price-wise that is generally reserved for all out pro models. Of course, if you put enough pro features into a camera built like the D700, you pretty much have a pro camera anyways. Still, I was not ecstatic about paying $3000 for my D700 as it was - I just happened to get a bonus that allowed me to buy it and figured it was exactly what I wanted anyways. But $4000 - man that extra resolution would definitely have to knock my socks off to part with that much cash!
I think gear prices are insane, and Nikon is not helping me. I know that many folks claim that pro gear is "pro" and thus expensive but high quality, etc. but of course price is not necessarily related to performance directly -- but to what they think they can get, plus other factors. Nikon should be helping folks come along and move up rather than leaving them behind. Besides, many pros still can't afford the high prices, especially as they are starting out. Instead of the 24mm 1.4 I'd rather get a second D700 body!
What I'd love to see is a D700s with double CF card slots, audio recording, and perhaps 1080p video. The video is not super necessary, but for social documentary work and photojournalism -- indeed for "technography" this could come in very handy as the primary rig. I'd love to see it for $3000 or less. Of course I'd love to see great ISO, but most importantly great AF.
That body with a 17-35mm 2.8, or a 24-70mm 2.8 would be quite handy for PJ and documentary work. Carry an SB-900 in a lumbar bag with extra batteries, cards, backup body, lens cloth... and voila!
Also, I've shot Nikon since 1975. Their prices have always been higher than all the other manufactures. I think Nikon has better inovations than the others - the D3 series confirms that.
luminosity wrote:
Remember, Nikon is a much smaller company than Canon. That has some bearing on prices.
This comment made me think of Apple all of a sudden. Smaller company (though only slightly at this point), higher prices, and "higher quality" products that are hotly debated all over the world and have a very loyal customer base
Not trying to start any debates here, as I am a fanboy of both Apple and Nikon
Guoseph wrote:
This comment made me think of Apple all of a sudden. Smaller company (though only slightly at this point), higher prices, and "higher quality" products that are hotly debated all over the world and have a very loyal customer base
Not trying to start any debates here, as I am a fanboy of both Apple and Nikon
Funny, because I like my Nikon gear, but I can't stand Apple ... but let's not run this thread down that rat hole.
It's funny for years I couldn't care less about Apple, then I got their Iphone. The best phone/smart device I've ever owned. It amazes me every day what it is capable of, and fills the gap of not having a laptop with me all the time. A very intelligent product to say the least. I have no doubt their computers are well thought out as well, just don't offer the flexibility of software/hardware choices as a good PC, so I'm not likely to change there. Let's also not forget the D700 is currently featured as one of their Professional line of DSLR's. They have stated this quite plainly so it's not my wanting to label it so. The D300 never got that claim to fame.
As for any new models, I'd love to see a D700x with 23-23mp resolution and maintain the basic same level of S/N they have established with the current model. Slap in a 2nd CF high speed slot, a 100% viewfinder, 1080P Video with it's own switch and they'll have a super product to compete with again. Now as for price? You can bet the farm it will cost at least $3500.00 if not that unfortunate $4000. If they can at least bring it in at $3500 it will appear more affordable for a larger segment of the marketplace. Otherwise as has been stated before, most of us won't pony up for it. I'll find something to sell if it comes in at the $3500 level though
^^^ 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.
Nikon seems to get there second but usually best. There are exceptions, like with the D1 and the D90's video, but for the most part, Canon quickly assumed dominance even in those cases. Nikon took awhile to get a full frame DSLR out the door, but the D3 was a magnificent and game-changing success. Arguably, Canon still has not found a counter for it. I expect the D4 to slam Canon pretty hard with regard to video.
Funny, because I like my Nikon gear, but I can't stand Apple ... but let's not run this thread down that rat hole. 