Is there room for a Nikon D400?

With the introduction of the Nikon D7100, there has been both excitement and frustration from Nikon fans. Those who wanted to move up to a higher-end DX camera greeted the D7100 with fanfare, while many existing D300/D300s owners were disappointed with this update. Why? Well, for anyone moving up from an older generation or an entry-level DSLR, the D7100 is a significant upgrade, thanks to its high resolution sensor and top of the line autofocus system. However, for those that shoot sports and action with a D300/D300s, the small buffer of the D7100, lack of a dedicated AF-ON button, slower fps speed and a few other factors left them puzzled about the future of a high-end DX camera. As I initially stated in the Nikon D7100 announcement article, I feel like Nikon has merged the professional DX line (D300s) with the semi-professional (D7000) line into the D7100. A number of factors led me to make that conclusion. With the high-end autofocus system making it into the D7100, lack of an optical low-pass filter, full weather sealing and Nikon’s usage of words “flagship” and “high-end” in their press releases, it just felt like the D7100 killed the possibility of the D400 ever making it to the market. On top of that, both the D7000 and the D7100 were announced after the D300s, making the D300s over three years old and breaking it out of its typical 2 year update cycle (the D200 was released in 2005, D300 was released in 2007 and D300s was released in 2009). Will we ever see a D400 DX, or has the D7100 become the high-end DX?

Nikon D400

As I was compiling the data for my Nikon D7000 vs D7100 article, I realized that the D7100 has one major drawback that will immediately draw criticism from current D300/D300s owners – the small buffer size. Even compared to the existing Nikon D7000, the D7100 can only handle up to 9 images in compressed 12-bit RAW format (which is the smallest RAW file size) at full resolution and up to 14 images in the same format at 1.3x crop size, whereas the D7000 can handle 15 RAW files without the crop. Compare that to the D300s, which can take 45 compressed RAW images before the buffer gets full – that’s quite a difference.

Thinking about all this, I thought – would there be a room for the D400? I then went back and reviewed the D400 rumors from a while ago and compiled some data to see what a potential D400 would look like, and if it would appeal anyone given the features and price of the D7100 and D600 DSLRs. So here is what I came up with:

  1. Same 24 MP sensor as on the D7100
  2. Same 51 point Advanced Multi-CAM 3500DX as on the D7100
  3. 91K metering sensor from the D800
  4. Bigger buffer that is 2-3 times larger than on the D7100
  5. 8-9 fps continuous shooting speed
  6. Bigger and heavier full magnesium alloy body
  7. Same controls as on the D800
  8. $1,799 MSRP price

I doubt Nikon would release a better autofocus system on a DX camera first, so I am assuming it will be the Advanced Multi-CAM 3500DX. In summary, the same camera as the D7100 except a bigger buffer, better metering sensor, 2-3 fps faster speed and professional build. Now the big question is, would it sell for $1,799? As an existing D300/D300s owner, would you be interested in buying such a camera at $1,799 just for these features, knowing that the much cheaper D7100 has the same sensor and the same autofocus system? Or that the slightly more expensive D600 has a much better full-frame sensor? I think Nikon would struggle to sell the D400 with just these features, because it would only appeal two specific groups – sports and wildlife photographers. I still think that we will never see a D400, but I am curious to know what our readers think – please vote in the below poll and leave a comment about what you think in the comments section below.

Would you be interested in a Nikon D400 with the above specifications and price?

  • Yes, I would gladly pay $1,800 for such a camera (37%, 677 Votes)
  • Yes, but only if the price stays in the $1,500 range (26%, 483 Votes)
  • No, full-frame is the way to go (25%, 464 Votes)
  • No, the D7100 is more than plenty for me (12%, 217 Votes)

Total Voters: 1,841

Loading ... Loading ...

Comments

  1. 1
    ) vinayak
    February 21, 2013 at 10:53 pm

    Waiting for high end DX just as rumored D400 for more then a year now….thinking of switching to canon after this announcemnet…

    • February 21, 2013 at 11:02 pm

      It would be interesting to see what Canon does with the upcoming 7D Mark II. I don’t think we will see 10 fps as some people are speculating, but who knows :)

      • 27
        ) Adnan Khan
        February 22, 2013 at 2:27 am

        If Canon comes up with 10fps 7D2 then be ready for D400 :)

        Many models never go beyond prototype ,they are just sitting there for rivals :)
        It’s a very tough competition as Canon is a marketing giant and most newbies go for Canon as the salesman shows them the shiny very bright LCD :)

        • 60
          ) Avishek
          February 22, 2013 at 6:15 pm

          Its funny how I had a post on photo.net and 2 days later Nikon announces the D7100……as you mentioned, as a D300 user, I am only partly happy.

          I would have loved to see the camera in a D300 chassis with higher fps and buffer capacity. I do agree that a D400 would stick out like a sore thumb. That is sad given the fact the D600, quite honestly is a pointless camera. A great camera for folks lusting after FX, but is nothing more than the FX version of the D7000, effectively leaving us with 3 D7000 like cameras now….that is just plain stupid.

          • 100
            ) looking forward to leaving Nikon
            February 27, 2013 at 10:12 pm

            agree… this Nikon drama has left me feeling abandoned… wanted a D400 when I bought my D300… wish I had never purchased the D300… other Canon models are now well beyond my D300 capability for sports in low light… now Nikon abandons the D300 or in some retarded camera industry norm refuses to address whether our needs will be met???? Only one thing for sure… the high tech industry will eclipse the camera industry and its incredibly poor focus on the customer LT… MT it seems like we’re stuck waiting to see who comes up with the best buffering solution… based on how Nikon has treated my D300 purchase I’m switching all my camera gear if Canon can present reasonable equivalents

    • February 24, 2013 at 7:56 am

      I am where Aishek is on this. Most of my photographs are of birds and the buffer capacity is critcal. I love lots of what is n the d-7100 but I am going to have to stick with my 300s for now

    • 105
      ) Charles Tait
      March 14, 2013 at 3:19 am

      I would love to get a D400 for my wildlife work. The D800 is great but in cropped mode is only 15MP. I am not a blast away photographer, but buffer size is important. Having been brought up on film I tend to shoot with care rather than machinegunning. My hope is that the delay is due to Nikon planning on another game changer, a real leap ahead. The D7100 is already pretty good, and my main reason for not wanting one is that I want the buttons to be as on my D800 bodies. Try using a D800 and a D700 together….

      So i am waiting for a 36MP DX with a crop to about 18MP. It needs to go fast, have the latetset newest best autofocus. It also needs to improve futher the video, have a better back screen and cost no more than the D800. For me this would be a no brainer for birds, animals, sky objects, etc. Combined with the new 80-400 AFS and there you have a light and unbeatable field setup.

  2. February 21, 2013 at 10:59 pm

    I waited years for a D400 but decided to upgrade to full frame and get the D600 when it came out. I’m not a sports shooter. What mattered most to me was image quality. I figured the FX D600 would beat any DX camera in that department, thus my decision.

    One thing I was looking for in the D400 though was better noise at high ISOs. I believe that if Nikon were to release a D400 they’d need to make it a DX version of the D4. I don’t think it’d have the same sensor as the rest of the DX line, instead I wouldn’t be surprised to see a 16 MP sensor (allowing for that large buffer size and frame rate) with improved noise at high ISO (and maybe go a stop further than the rest of the DX line?). Thoughts?

    • February 21, 2013 at 11:01 pm

      Jason, you are right, DX will never match FX in image quality. Even if Nikon were to make the D400 with 16 MP, it would not have the same ISO characteristics as the D4 at pixel level, not even close…

      • 75
        ) Spy Black
        February 23, 2013 at 12:03 pm

        Although the camera may not match it for noise, I think the D7100 will surpass the D600 in real-world resolution and detail. Note that the pixel density on the D7100/D5200/D3200 is similar to that of the D800/E.

        Additionally, the lack of an AA filter, unlike the D800E which actually still has one, means more light reaches the sensor. So noise-wise, the D7100 may very well match, or be similar to, the noise of a D600 or a D800.

    • February 22, 2013 at 6:40 am

      16Mpx D400/D9000, with better high ISO than 24Mpx sensors is what I am waiting for.

    • 81
      ) Donz
      February 24, 2013 at 12:20 am

      Nice Jason. I’d be happy with 16MP also …IF we get the fps and much bigger buffer : )

  3. 5
    ) Steven P
    February 21, 2013 at 11:23 pm

    I think there is room, a DX equivalent to the D800 with a 36MP sensor for sports and wildlife photography. The D300 and D700 shared similar controls and layout, I could see the same so that professionals could have them both in their stable, but would not have to continually adjust to the variant controls.

    • February 21, 2013 at 11:30 pm

      Steven, given the size of files the D800 produces, I do not think it is possible to make a 36 MP DSLR that can shoot much faster than 4-5 fps. It would require a huge buffer and a very fast processor… I think a more realistic fast-action DSLR would have between 16 and 24 MP.

      • 12
        ) Steven P
        February 21, 2013 at 11:44 pm

        True, but I guess they could link the fps to the resolution they might do it…that is, 4-5fps for 36, but 8fps for 24 etc. Given the market it would justify the larger buffer size and increased costs. Lots of wildlife photographers like the reach of the DX…some separation from the D7100 is necessary.

  4. February 21, 2013 at 11:28 pm

    надо ее тогда с д600 сравнивать, чтобы цену прикинуть. все ждали, что д600 будет стоить в районе 1600 долл, но надежды разбились о чуровую реальность =)

    • February 21, 2013 at 11:32 pm

      Medvezhutka, yeshe pol goda i zena na D600 upadet na $1800. Seychas uje mojno kupit’ refurbished D600 za $1,600 i zeni dal’she budut tol’ko padat’ :)

      • February 22, 2013 at 12:09 am

        пусть скорее дешевеет, надо мне купить ФФ и положить на полку, главное, факт обладания ФФ =))
        думаешь д400 будеть по характеристикам лучше чем д600 ?

        • February 22, 2013 at 1:06 am

          Poka dumayu chto D400 voobshe ne budet :) A tak, yesli i budet, to vse ravno luchshe D600 pokupat’…razniza v kachestve bol’shaya.

          • 42
            ) Dmytro
            February 22, 2013 at 6:47 am

            Current D600 is a dusty camera (https://nikoneurope-ru.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55695) with poor focus (I mean focus spead and accuracy, frame coverage) for plenty bucks.
            It looks like d7000 aimed to replace D300s. Better sensor but worse ergonomics and yes, problems with quality (focus system and dust). Next iteration – D7100 have better focus than D7000 as well as other features, not just “I’am a good sensor” :)
            I think D600 is a first step on replacement of D700. Good sensor but poor focus and questionable quality control (I mean dust problem). Next step will be e.g. D610 with 3500FX focus system, 100% magnification at ok button, but perhaps with small buffer (yes, it will remain as advantage for next iteration ;)))) I remember that at the start of sales price of D7000 was even higher than d300s. I think that current price of D600 is significantly overstated and will decrease gradually. By annoncement of D7100 Nikon showed that they can provide their top focus system to amateur cameras. In view of this I lost any willing to buy D600 as it’s obvious that it artificially worsened while price is inadequate. Frankly speaking I’m waiting for tests of Nikon D7100 and if it is as good as its specs I will buy it for USD 1200 instead of D600 for USD2000. And then after couple of years, when nikon will propose to market D610 (or some other name of improved D600) I will go to FX.
            My equipment is NikonD50, Voigtlander 20 mm f/3.5, Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8, Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8.

            • 82
              ) Donz
              February 24, 2013 at 12:25 am

              hey Dmytro, the D50 is a great machine, huh.
              Mine goes real well with the 35-70 f2.8 and Tokina 11-16 f2.8

  5. 9
    ) SVRK Prabhakar
    February 21, 2013 at 11:39 pm

    Oh no, not another DX body! Please push for 300mm VR F4 lens!!!

    • February 21, 2013 at 11:41 pm

      Tell me about it! I want that lens baddd…and a lightweight 400mm f/5.6 VR would be icing on the cake :)

      • 11
        ) SVRK Prabhakar
        February 21, 2013 at 11:44 pm

        I think they will make it if you write a similar compelling article on these lenses:-)

      • 13
        ) Steven P
        February 21, 2013 at 11:46 pm

        I am sure that the f4 VR is on the planning table…it has to be, they have been adding f4 variants of the f2.8 lenses to compete with Canon’s similar range. Good plan, next could be the 24-70 f4 as well….

      • 28
        ) Adnan Khan
        February 22, 2013 at 2:29 am

        Umm yummy ;)

      • 61
        ) Avishek
        February 22, 2013 at 6:19 pm

        I find it ridiculous how the Canon 300 f4 with IS sells for the same price as the Nikon AFS 300 f4 without any VR…..in fact I have routinely found Canons price their lenses lower in the tele and super tele department….at least they can be had for cheaper used.

  6. 14
    ) Jake
    February 21, 2013 at 11:47 pm

    I would have paid around $1600 for a D400 with specs similar to these, but I couldn’t buy a camera that Nikon doesn’t make. So I spent my money on m43 gear that I am very happy with. I have had to change my technique some, but I am happy with where I’ve ended up.

  7. 16
    ) Robert
    February 22, 2013 at 12:11 am

    I’d buy a D400 with such specs – and wouldn’t complain about 18mp resolution either – in a heartbeat at that price for wildlife, Nasim. And, I think, many other action, sports and wildlife shooters would as well. It would be a perfect complement to my D800E.

    Actually, now that I think about it, I am almost certain we will see a D400. Because I have no faith Nixon will release it, I’m going back and forth over either a D4 or refurbished D3s, and since I could care less about video the D3s is in the lead ( right now, at least) . And, soon as I decide and make my purchase you can bet Nixon will announce the D400 the next day.

    • 62
      ) Avishek
      February 22, 2013 at 6:23 pm

      Robert…with you on this. I almost pulled the trigger on the D3 for my wildlife needs before this announcement (D3s and D4 are way out of my budget)….but the 12mp resolution (5 in DX mode) is a real bummer since I only go as far as a 300 2.8 with TCs.

      Now I have some hope that the D400 might see the light of day…….now I am going to pray Canon comes out with something that forces Nikon to release a D400.

      Avi

      • 71
        ) Robert
        February 22, 2013 at 10:00 pm

        Avi, until a month or so ago, both were not in my budget either, but I’ve been offered the purchase of one or the other as a gift. I’ve been holding out on it but it is starting to look more and more tempting every day. There’s a side of me that wants to wait it out, but seeing how wildly popular – and for great reasons – the D700 is and Nikon not expanding on it, can only lead me to believe that the wait would only end in disappointment.

        The 12mp of the D3 doesn’t bother me so much, but I see your point. I can still get great 19″ prints and go higher if I ever want to, but then, the D800E is there for that. Still, the little extra resolution offered by the D4 is a nice thing to have. But, in all items that matter to me, the D3s and the D4 are pretty much neck and neck.

        In the end, I think you may well be right in that it may well not be the consumers that Nikon reacts to but their competition.

        • 91
          ) Avi
          February 25, 2013 at 10:22 am

          Wow…..Robert…a D3S as a gift? You have some well-wishers in high places.:)

          I am still not entirely convinced that I may not be able to get “reasonable” 11×14 prints from the D3 (in crop mode)….will look further into that. A 19″ print at 12 MP seems to suggest that I maybe able to get away with 11×14 at 5MP…..

          The only issue is I usually crop my D300 12 MP shots….meaning I might end up “double cropping” with the D3 in DX mode.

          Avi

          • 111
            ) Avi
            April 6, 2013 at 1:38 pm

            I ended up getting the Nikon D3 after all. I don’t think I will be unhappy. My first FX camera….can’t wait for the camera to get here.

            If Nikon does come to their senses and release a D400, I will happily get rid of my D300 and get the D400.

            Avi

  8. 17
    ) SVRK Prabhakar
    February 22, 2013 at 12:15 am

    I think high mega pixel count is not necessary for birders, they just need excellent AF and good buffer for fast shoot.

    • 72
      ) Avi
      February 22, 2013 at 11:49 pm

      Well…I don’t care about native resolution as long as I can get my 11×14 or slightly larger print. Add in the fact that the D3 is a 5mp camera in DX mode, you have very little margin.
      This is of course no problem for a D300.
      I might still get the D3 come June if Nikon does not make an announcement by then.

  9. February 22, 2013 at 12:31 am

    Problem is here that the D300 is still the premier Nikon DX camera for wildlife, the D7000 was a turkey with to many inherent faults and awful image files. I’ve written quite a few posts on my blog to that effect. I’ve no reason to think the D7100 will be any better, how can it be a flagship Nikon with no full magnesium body?

    This post may be of interest;
    http://garyksmithphotography.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/d7100-replacement-for-d300.html

    So whether we get a D400 or not, we certainly need it!

  10. 19
    ) Richard
    February 22, 2013 at 12:32 am

    The vote depends on the candidates genre of photography largely. Wildlife and sports folks will want a D400 I think. Landscape, portrait and wedding folks a full frame. Some, like me will want both. For me it’s a D400.

    Richard

  11. 20
    ) Richard
    February 22, 2013 at 12:34 am

    PS. I should said I already have a full frame!

    Richard

  12. 21
    ) Max
    February 22, 2013 at 12:37 am

    As i have sold my D3200 due to metering/AF issues, i am not sure if i should step up to Canon 6D (500$ more then D7100), and get 3 times bigger pixels or chose in the advanced AF of the 7100 over pixel size.

    not sure why nikon choose 24mp on there flagship DX as they decided to go with 16mp on the D4. The d7100 is like a MFT on a pixel level.

    ROMANAS NARYŠKIN recommends D5200 over the D7000 due to weight and functions, wondering if it will old for the 7100 as well.

    • 36
      ) Adnan Khan
      February 22, 2013 at 5:13 am

      Max, there have been no issues with D3200 ,your sample might have fault in it or your firmware got corrupted due to not formatting cards after been through PC or card reader … many reasons … who knows.

      Before D7000 all models except D3x (in 2K loot price) were 12 MP and people were comparing megapixels with Canon’s 15 to 18 MP in APS-C size ,now Nikon has given MEGAPIXELS , again the complaint started WHY SO MANY ? ..LOL :)

      D3200 ,D5100 and D5200 are very good basic models for newbies and for ppl. who can shoot beyond Green Auto button D7000 and D7100 are very good, depending on budget and how much one knows about photography and spending on Camera or Lens ,a good photographer might go for D5100 and spend more money on good lens.

      Canon 6D or Nikon D600 ,your choice but D600 will cream out 6D in high ISO :)
      You just jumped from D3200 to Canon 6D … bypassing all good Nikon DX or the fantastic FX D600.

      First know your needs n requirements then buy the camera.

      If ROMANAS has recommended D5200 it is because it’s the best advanced basic DX camera with very high picture quality.

      good luck!

      • 44
        ) max
        February 22, 2013 at 6:51 am

        thanks, i will buy the 7100 as i just bought the tokina 11-16 dx2 with Expensive cpl.(+sb700)
        Nikon choose different metering/AF module in there DSLR range so u get what u paid for,

        I am sure i will not complain for the 7100 for playing with +-EV for metering while i got sick from it. (own in the past the D700 and sold it for it heavy weight)

        • March 14, 2013 at 4:15 am

          Hi Max ,
          Sorry I was busy and overlooked your reply.
          Good choice with D7100 ,happy shooting :)
          but …
          Can you please tell me why you bought an expensive CPL for an ultra wide zoom and how you intend to use it ?
          I’d get a 2 stop ND Grad. instead.

          Having owned the very best true DSLR D700 of it’s day and still compatible with any DX , and downgrading to DX ….. very strange :)
          If weight mattered D600 is a good choice too :)

          cheers!

  13. February 22, 2013 at 1:17 am

    The improved focusing, resolution, and build quality is very tempting, but that buffer size is a deal killer. I shoot sports and prefer to shoot RAW for best archival quality, more post-production leeway, and max. file quality for future sales. Even with the rather large file size of the D600 with fast SD cards I don’t run up against the limitations of the buffer even when shooting RAW, and that never happens with my D700. I’m not a big “spray and pray” machine gun shooter, but there were times when I had a D7K that the buffer filled at inopportune times.

    There is still no updated equivalent of the D700. Maybe that’s because that fabulous camera cannibalized sales of Nikon’s own flagship D3 and to some extent D3S bodies. A camera with the ergonomics, build quality and focusing/metering system of the D800 with the D600′s sensor would be an ideal replacement. But I’m not holding my breath.

  14. 24
    ) Daniel Vanden Broeck
    February 22, 2013 at 1:31 am

    D400 would be a nice upgrade coming from a D200.
    but actually i want to make the step to FX.
    had a look at the D600 and I’m dissappointed with that camera, lack of handy buttons, feels clumbsy in my hand at least.
    The D800 produces too big files, not necessary for me;
    i was actually hoping Nikon would bring out a D800 , 24MP files – more then enough, a lot faster, all the rest that on it suites me .

    thanks

    • 65
      ) KnightPhoto
      February 22, 2013 at 6:52 pm

      Don’t worry about the D800 files being too big. What’s important is that the files are awesome!

  15. 25
    ) Richard
    February 22, 2013 at 1:41 am

    Daniel. You don’t have to record images at the full file size, there are choices even RAW images have options. However. I tend to capture at highest and immediately downsize to 16Mb on export from Lightroom 4. Often, images benefit from downsizing especially in clarity and sharpness.

    Richard

  16. 26
    ) Colin Scott
    February 22, 2013 at 2:20 am

    The D300s is a great camera, period. As one of the target audience Nasim specifies, I would only consider the D4 (from the current line up) to be a true all-round upgrade at the moment and, it is simply too expensive.

    Speaking to other birders toting the 300/s and waiting for the D400, there is clearly a market for a true upgrade but, only Nikon can decide if it’s big enough for their buisiness plan.

    We are the Nikon: speculation is futile!

  17. 29
    ) Bailey
    February 22, 2013 at 2:32 am

    Sold my D300s hoping for a D400, still have the lenses for now. If Nikon does not produce a D400 this year I will go Canon and sell the Nikon lenses – simple answer.

    • 32
      ) Adnan Khan
      February 22, 2013 at 2:56 am

      So Bailey ,you sold the camera for a camera which does not exist even … hmm
      and what APS-C Canon body you will be getting ?
      beside full frame models Canon has no APs-C camera that can match D3200′s IQ …
      just wondering as might benefit from your choice if I had to switch too :)

      cheers!

    • Avatar of Romanas Naryškin
      33
      ) Romanas Naryškin
      February 22, 2013 at 2:58 am

      You find it worthwhile, switching systems? I’m not a very technical person and such an argument is rather meaningless to myself, but at this moment, Nikon has possibly the best DSLR cameras on the market in more or less each class. Other manufacturers are only getting ready to leapfrog. I would be curious to know reasons behind changing systems now. :)

  18. 30
    ) Lars
    February 22, 2013 at 2:34 am

    Close your eyes and imagine a D800s in DX mode..

  19. 31
    ) Bailey
    February 22, 2013 at 2:36 am

    Just to clarify the above, Nikon will do what they want to do, not what you or I would like them to do.
    There is lots of choice out there so move on and enjoy your work/hobby photography.

  20. Avatar of Romanas Naryškin
    34
    ) Romanas Naryškin
    February 22, 2013 at 3:00 am

    Personally, I do hope to see a D400. Can’t say if I’d buy one, but were I a sports photographer, that would be a possibility, especially if paired with something like a D4 or D3s for extra reach and resolution.

  21. 35
    ) Sebastiano
    February 22, 2013 at 3:34 am

    Hi Nasim,
    I agree with your thorough analysis and, quoting you, I’d add:

    <>

    that the D400 with the (required) “ingredients” you put to make it a DX flagship might kill D600, even if D600 is an FX.

    Just for a moment, forget the Dx o Fx format and only look at the photos those two cameras are able to make.
    A better metering system, better than D600′s and like the two big sisters (D800 and D4), with the aid of 14bit NEF would generate better tonal transitions than in D600. And this, I beleave, expecially because of the lack of low pass filter that always allows more light on each pixel.

    A better AF coverage than the D600 AF and the same algorithm as in D4/D800 (that the D7100 has already) will allow to better track any fast moving subject, better than D600.

    So what the D600 would make better? May be only making very low light shootings of subjects who don’t move so much. Yes, I read your article about D600 in wildlife but I guess that D4/D800 (and D700/D3) AF system is more reactive and better catchs the focus than the D600 AF module.

    Then the question would be: how many people really need, or are frequently used to, making a so low light shootings? I think only a few, except the one who like “fine art” photography.
    But these photographers haven’t the need for a high fps and they just have the D800.

    I don’t think D400 ever will be released. Anyway, we can ask why Nikon has decided to develop its DSLRs product line in the way we can now see. All the Dx except the D7000 have now 24Mp, but Dx users might have benefitted from having light bodies with high performances (for example, have a look at the Fuji X system: small bodies and top level sensors).
    The Fx line is a bit strange. Still now we haven’t a real successor of D700 and the D600 is having so many problems. D800 files are huge and the D4 is expensive for the most.
    IMHO If Nikon wants to sell more units it should have designed a totally different product line, both in Dx and Fx segment.

    Ciao, Sebastiano

    • 80
      ) Max
      February 23, 2013 at 9:24 pm

      Fantastic post

  22. 37
    ) MJohn
    February 22, 2013 at 6:14 am

    Glad with my D800. 40-50MB file sizes are no longer big for me now.

  23. 38
    ) Tony
    February 22, 2013 at 6:30 am

    Hi all,

    I would definitely like to see a D400, even if they use the 16MP sensor (which is excellent anyway) from the D7000 in order to maximize fps and buffer size. But, sadly, I just don’t think that Nikon will do it. It is clear (to me at least) that they are trying to move the “serious amateurs” to FX and they probably feel that a D400 will cannibalize D600 and high end lens sales.

    What I find most frustrating in Nikon’s strategy is that they had two excellent high fps bodies for action shooters (D300 and D700, I shoot the latter) and all the “replacements” (D800, D600, and D71000) have been a huge downgrade in that respect. To get similar performance to my D700 the only option I have is to get a D4. I’d be totally OK with 16MP. However, I can’t justify its price tag (how many non-professionals can?). And forcing all sport / action / bird / etc. shooters to shell out 2x (D700 users) and 3x (D300 users) more money for similar performance to what they’ve had for a while is totally and utterly unacceptable.

    Don’t get me wrong, Nikon do seem to have the bodies with the best IQ right now, which is commendable. However, I really don’t think they have been listening to their users (seriously, Nikon, are you listening? do you even read discussions like this one?). It’s sensible business for them that each new body is a true upgrade over the previous ones to make me go “Damn! I want one! Now!”. However, they have made too many compromises that made folks go “Well, nice image quality. But I lose fps. And the build quality is not quite as good. Hmmm…. Maybe, I’ll wait for a bit to see what they’ll do next.” And it seems a lot of us have been doing the latter recently. (And I won’t get into their stupid QA issues of late…)

    About the D400: as I said, I’d definitely be interested. Alternatively, I would also be happy with a “true” D700 replacement with the D4 sensor. But, again, that’d probably be similarly priced to the D800 and Nikon won’t go for such an overlap (I can see a pattern emerging…).

    Finally, to everyone who says “No D400? I’ll move to Canon”. You seriously going to do that based on a bunch of rumored specs (and, amusingly, have you actually seen 7D pictures close up? why do you think Canon will do better in the future)? You never know, but the specs are a bit hard to believe:

    - high end crop body being more expensive than their low end full frame body?
    - a $1,000 price gap between the 60D and the next body up?
    - ISO performance close to the 5DmkIII? (seriously?)

    Hmmm….

    BTW, I DID move two years ago. From Canon to Nikon. And I haven’t looked back…

    Thanks for your patience in reading this. Best regards and happy shooting,

    Tony

    • 66
      ) KnightPhoto
      February 22, 2013 at 6:57 pm

      Good points Tony.

    • 87
      ) Sebastiano
      February 24, 2013 at 3:51 am

      quoting you:
      “Alternatively, I would also be happy with a “true” D700 replacement with the D4 sensor. But, again, that’d probably be similarly priced to the D800 and Nikon won’t go for such an overlap”

      … or a D800H, with all of the D800 body and processing power but the D600 sensor. The fps could be up to 6 per second without BG, and, redesigning the power supply unit and the readout processing around the sensor, upt to 8fps with BG.

      This camera may have the same D800 price, or just slightly less, like -10%.
      I guess they will sell more D800H than D600 to those “advanced users” who don’t need a really so high fps like D4 but would be happy to buy a more expensive body that covers all the genres they do (and will explore) with a such high end camera.

      I think the winning strategy is differentiate products. IMHO D800 is a fantastic camera, but has too many pixel for many users, while D600 is too a compromise between being a “cheap” camera and the professional Fx plus (i.e. its poor AF coverage)

      A D800H would be then more then an “entry” Fx, leaving to the D600 the same target of D3200 in Dx.

  24. February 22, 2013 at 6:46 am

    Apologies in advance for going off on one but I’ve gotten a little annoyed over the last couple of days by question like, “why isn’t the D7100 enough”, “why are 6fps not enough” and so on.

    As a D300s user shooting 200mph Superbikes on public road circuits (plus a bit of MotoGP and BSB) the only current (new) upgrade available that fits my requirements is the D4 and that is way above my budget, as is the 500mm F4 I would need to buy to match my current set up of a D300s and 300mm f2.8. I should add I also have airline carry on weight limits to contend with (usually 10kg) when I travel to events. I am not a full time pro, more a serious hobbyist/semi-pro as I do generate a small amount of income from photography.

    For me (the sensor aside) the D7100 is not an upgrade from my current body as there are 3 important issues, no AF-On button (I use this 100% of the time), minimum of 8fps (my D300s delivers this) and the buffer. Nasim refers to the D7100 having better autofocus but that has yet to be proven, especially given the well documented issues with the AF system on the D4 and D800 bodies. A friend and colleague bought a D4 last year to replace a D3 and had serious AF tracking issues, I don’t know if he’s had it fixed yet.

    Are my requirements unique to me, some might be but not all, you just need to look at the amount of discussion the D7100 has generate to see there is a market for the D400. The D300s is a very common sight at the race tracks I’ve visited, I don’t see many of those guys switching to the D7100. The D400 on the other hand is another story.

    I know some people will read this and say I should buy this or I should buy that or why isn’t the D7100 enough. I am fully aware of the options available. If the D7100 ticks all the boxes for you then great, go buy it as it’s likely to be a great camera. However, it doesn’t tick all the boxes for me so why settle.

    I’m pretty certain the “mythical” D400 will deliver what I need but will it ever see the light of day, I hope so. If Canon deliver or get close to delivering on the rumoured specs of the Canon 7d MKII (I’ve read that the camera is coming but the specs aren’t confirmed) then I think we will see the D400. If we don’t then I have some decisions to make later in the year as I intend to update my cameras.

    Thom Hogan appears to have summed my feelings up pretty well. Rant over….

    • 54
      ) Colin Scott
      February 22, 2013 at 12:31 pm

      You have it in a nutshell, Tony. As a birder, I did break the bank on a 500f4 but, everything you say applies to me.

      To “move up” from a 300s, the replacement needs to tick more boxes than just more pixels. Just how well would the 7100 stand up to these heavy telephotos?

      The controls on the 300s mean I can perform most tasks as I’m shooting. It’s not a perfect camera (will there ever be such a beast) but, up to now, it’s my best option. Put Nasim’s specs in a 300 style body, and Mr Nikon can have my money even though I see no need for 24MP.

      • February 22, 2013 at 12:47 pm

        You and me both Colin.

        I’m looking forward to Nasim’s review of the D7100 as it should give us a good idea what the sensor will be like if the D400 does break cover.

        There is still hope based on this:

        http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50901841

        • 56
          ) Colin Scott
          February 22, 2013 at 1:11 pm

          I read it twice, Tony.

          Inscrutable devils, aren’t they. Still, better to travel hopefully than to arrive.

          At least we can thank Nasim for the chance to air our views. Who knows, perhaps someone at Nikon will be listening.

  25. 41
    ) ralittle2
    February 22, 2013 at 6:47 am

    I would buy a D400 in a heartbeat. I’d like to make one point and or ask everyone else. The D400 customer is usually lumped into the birder or sports category. I don’t discount that, but I wonder if the “soccer Dad’s” out there aren’t being factored in heavily enough?

    What I mean is a Dad (or Mom) who has children (probably teenagers) who wants to capture their sports, but has found the lower level bodies don’t hack it for focusing and buffer. Yes, the focusing has been addressed, but the buffer has not. This same customer probably is somewhat knowledgeable and while wanting to take good pictures needs the reach of DX, and doesn’t want the weight of FX and the lenses. So they aren’t in the market for a D600.

    I’ll wager that there are a number of “Soccer Dad’s” who also want a D400. Thoughts?

    • 43
      ) Tony
      February 22, 2013 at 6:50 am

      But Nikon has a great product for the soccer moms / dads who want high frame rate and fast AF: the Nikon 1 system. :-)

      Tony

      PS If it’s not obvious: I’m being very ironic.

      • 45
        ) ralittle2
        February 22, 2013 at 6:52 am

        LOL, thanks. A good laugh in the morning is a great way to get going.

    • 47
      ) Dave L
      February 22, 2013 at 7:42 am

      I completely agree with you on the “Soccer Dad” front. I’m in the same boat. I wanted a camera I’d be happy with for my photo hobby AND for my kid’s sports. D300 was great for its time with both. Now? D4? too $$$ for non-commercial work. D800 – too slow and files are too big for kid sport needs. D600 – 39 points all in the middle? 7100 – even less buffer than D300?

      My compromise upgrade looks like it will be the D600 but I still see myself using the D300 outdoors during the day for some sports. I can’t believe this generation of Nikons has great image quality (assuming 7100 continues trend) but an unsatisfying mix of features.

      Finally, no AF-On until a D800? Really??? They even dropped that? Minor – sure but, it’s insult to injury.

    • 89
      ) SteveP
      February 25, 2013 at 9:06 am

      Same here. I’ve been sitting on my D200 waiting for the D300s upgrade for years. I’ve got too much invested in Nikon glass to jump to Cannon and don’t want the lens and computer memory/storage upgrades I’ll have to make moving to FX. The D7100 announcement was a huge disappointment in that it looks far less likely that we’ll see the D400.

      These days my shooting revolves around kids activities, indoor shooting, and poorly lit plays and performances where the D200′s antiquated low light performance is killing me. I would gladly pay up to 2k for a D400, but with that unlikely, and my unwillingness to by three year old technology in the 300s, I’m taking the jump one step back and two ahead and pre ordering the 7100 and selling the D200 (for peanuts) as soon as it’s in hand.

      If Nikon comes around with a D400 then I’d likely move up and carry a second body. If the 7100 is a flat out disappointment, then I’d be all-in with the D800 and some new glass…and a well rehearsed rationale to soccer-mom how I gave the budget friendly D7100 a fair shake.

      And for those threatening to move to Canon, I just don’t see it. With the investment in lenses, flashs, and accessories, and the hit you take on the used equipment market, a knee jerk change of platform makes no sense unless money is no object or your employer is fine with throwing away money over small incremental differences. The other issue with a platform change is the learning curve. My hands have been wrapped around Nikons for 30 years and know exactly where controls are – The 7D I occasionally use at work feels foreign every time I pick the thing up. I’ll stick with Nikon as long as they are in the general technology ballpark as Canon.

  26. 46
    ) peter2
    February 22, 2013 at 7:31 am

    I think there is room for D400 (no, I shoot FX and don’t plan to buy a DX). Not because Nikon doesn’t know there is room, but because they will want to compete with Canon and their new 7D mkii on the horizon ;)

  27. 48
    ) ralittle2
    February 22, 2013 at 7:53 am

    Poll results?

    While there is no way of knowing, I’d suggest that the results of the poll are probably not representative of the target market. What I mean is that there are probably some voters who already own FX, and thus probably are skewing the results. I would suggest the target voters for a poll such as this are not FX owners, but rather upgraders. I also realize there isn’t really a way to achieve this.

    • 67
      ) KnightPhoto
      February 22, 2013 at 7:07 pm

      I own FX cameras and will buy the D400. I’m willing to bet there is a decent contingent of us like that too.

  28. 49
    ) D
    February 22, 2013 at 8:57 am

    I think the D600 and now the D7100 have killed the possibility of a D400.

    I was one waiting and waiting for the D400. I went with the D600. In spite of the missing/changed buttons and controls of the D300, I am EXTREMELY happy with the D600.

  29. 50
    ) Alan
    February 22, 2013 at 9:32 am

    I have been using the 300s since 2009 and have been quite pleased with it for wildlife photography. The only drawback that bothers me is excessive noise in low light at high ISO with bird photography. I am hoping the D400 would improve on this issue, if it ever shows its face. It will be interesting to see how noise quality will pan out with the 7100, and can’t wait for Nasim’s report when he gets his hands on one. If it is good I might purchase the 7100, not sure. The low buffer rate of the 7100 is certainly a drawback but with my bird photography technique I rely more on fairly rapid successive shots as the bird changes positions and poses, and not on a spray and pray technique, so maybe the buffer and fps issues would be liveable. I am skeptical we’ll ever see the D400 but I think it would result is good sales for Nikon and I remain hopeful. I think Nikon referring to the D7100 as the ‘flagship” DX very is worrisome.

  30. 51
    ) FC
    February 22, 2013 at 9:53 am

    Why is noone mentioning the pentax k5 11
    reviews are outstanding image quality is or was #1 beating out d7000 with the same sensor
    beautiful build maybe too small.
    I am aware of the focus issues but have read is is overstated.Also not sure if flash is up to nikon standards.Maybe,service issues? I have read in Pentax forum they are lamenting no full frame.
    Yet everyone touts the k5 cameras ,lenses maybe?

    Just asking

    • 59
      ) Jake
      February 22, 2013 at 5:41 pm

      I had a K5 for a few months last year. IMHO- the build and ergonomics are superb, the lenses not bad to mediocre but not definitely not excellent, autofocus really is bad, and I could never get white balance right. For some uses it is probably a good camera, but it didn’t meet my needs (nature and industrial photography). If Pentax could fix the autofocus I’d seriously consider buying another.

  31. 52
    ) FC
    February 22, 2013 at 9:55 am

    By the way I love my d300s and d300 beautiful images but I could live with d7100 if I had to.
    Just very curios about K5

  32. February 22, 2013 at 11:45 am

    Interesting post over on the DP Review forums about the future of the DX line.

    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50901841

  33. 57
    ) Tee
    February 22, 2013 at 2:27 pm

    I think you fail to realize how many D200, D300/D300s fans there really are. I have a D200 and have been waiting on the D400. I like what they have started with on the D7100 but I think this is the step they needed to jump to the D400. Your poll is somewhat flawed in that any full frame fan boys are going to hammer it. But many of us are vested in the FX professional lenses and it would be really painful to make the transition financially.

  34. 58
    ) Original UKIHOPper
    February 22, 2013 at 4:11 pm

    I went FX last year, but I voted for yes I would buy at $1800 (assuming I had the cash). And yes, I believe there is room for the “D400.” Nikon have almost deliberately left room, but whether they fill it will depend on all sorts of economic and market factors. I think they have to otherwise Canon will fill that gap and take that market segment from Nikon – and Nikon can ill afford that.

    However, I do wonder whether or not the “D400″ will be called the D400. I think it could be called the D8000, where the Dxxxx lines are a full set of DX products, the Dxxx products are full framers and the Dx (single digit) are the full-on big body pro products.

    You could have a D8xxx line of DX cameras that are descendants of the D300, and a D9xxx line of DX cameras that are descendants of the D2 series.

    So, in the future, we could see a D4xx as the entry level FX camera (just like the D40 was), a D5xx which is the FX equivalent of the D5xxx series i.e. with a swivel screen to complement the D6xx series which is based on the D7xxx DX “platform.”

    Does anyone like that as a potential roadmap?

    • 69
      ) StevenP
      February 22, 2013 at 8:10 pm

      The D300 was a professional series camera and it made sense to lump it in with the D700. I actually think that the D600 should be re-branded the D9000 to reflect that it is the top within that range.
      As bad as Nikon’s naming conventions are, Canons are a complete mess. I have to continually remind myself that the 5D is a FX camera, the 7D is not…but the 6D is….ay-ya-ya…

      • 70
        ) Adnan Khan
        February 22, 2013 at 8:18 pm

        LOL :)
        Maybe they throw both in A D400 and a D900 FX ;)

  35. 63
    ) KnightPhoto
    February 22, 2013 at 6:27 pm

    Not only will I buy a D400 at $1800, but the price is pretty much immaterial. It’s the features I want. I will be buying the camera and yes it is coming.

    Yes I am a birder and wildlife guy. And yes I have a ton of friends who will be doing likewise, buying the D400 when it comes out in June ;-)

    • 85
      ) Donz
      February 24, 2013 at 12:36 am

      Right on !
      Yip, we’re queuing up behind you KnightPhoto

  36. 64
    ) lars
    February 22, 2013 at 6:36 pm

    D400 is stillborn. There will be a D800s.With DX mode for fast capture. I think it is the most probable consequense of the latest Nikon strategy. And – If you consider you as a “pro”, you have the money for it ;)

  37. 68
    ) Andrew Ashley
    February 22, 2013 at 7:39 pm

    I had been waiting for a few years to replace by D200, I finally ended up with the D800 which I am exceedingly happy with and has provided me with a tool that will last me many years (I usually upgrade my bodies about every 5-7 years). I am glad I didn’t wait for this DX camera if it truly is the replacement for the D300s. It would have been quite a disappointment. For me it comes down to one thing, and that is user friendly controls. I don’t want to search through a menu for most of my settings that I’m used to sitting a finger-flick away while my eye is on my subject. When I saw that dial where the film crank used to sit with virtually no control. That was the deal breaker for me. Anyway, like I said, I’m just glad I went for the D800 when it came out, I have never been happier, and am sure I will not need an upgrade for another 5-7 years.

    Honestly, the last few years they have not made a lot of advancements worthy of upgrade. At least for me. The only thing that would make me think twice would be when they fit the tech of the D4 into the body of a F3HP… Now that I would have to make an exception to my body upgrade timeline!

  38. 73
    ) Thomas Carlberger
    February 23, 2013 at 12:21 am

    I believe there is a strong motivation for a DX premium system due to the possibility of cheaper and lighter lenses. If it only was the increased cost of the camera housing, this would be ok, but the massive increase in lense cost and weight are factors of real importance for many of us.

  39. February 23, 2013 at 8:32 am

    What would make this cameras stand out on its own would be to have an integrated battery grip just like as smaller version of the D4. Many sports photographers and wildlife photographers would be getting an extra battery grip anyway so why not make it a little smaller ( compared to the D4oo with extra grip) and there you have it. The perfect Dx pro camera. I would pay up to 2500 for this.
    Thanks
    Regards
    Iain

    • 93
      ) Tony
      February 26, 2013 at 6:20 am

      Adding an integrated battery grip to the D400 is a great idea, IMHO. This will be a great way to differentiate it from the D7100. I wonder whether Nikon will go with that though. Given the offensively high prices that they have been charging for their battery grips ($400 for the D800 one! $400? really?) I don’t think they will want to lose that revenue stream.

      Additionally, be careful what you wish for! If they use an integrated battery grip will they also use the high end batteries from the D3/D4? Those are pretty expensive, if you want to get spares. I suppose as long as the grip accepts AAs I’ll just go and buy more eneloops. :-)

      Tony

  40. 76
    ) Bernd
    February 23, 2013 at 2:25 pm

    I think, we will not see a 24 Mpix Pro DX camera with 8 fps,
    because this camera would need a much faster read out of the
    sensor, than it’s used in the D7100 to achieve 8-9 fps and
    much faster electronic to handle the amount of data. And nowadays
    you would need a new shutter for 200k or more actuations and
    new developed mechanics for the mirror. All that will be very expensive,
    because this camera will not sell in large quantities, maybe €/$ 2000-2500.
    And the low light capabilities will not be as good as those of the D600.
    So will anybody buy this camera? I would say no, because
    for that price you can (nearly) get a D800. And anyhow, you need the
    best FF lenses to benefit entirely from the IQ of this new 24 Mpix DX sensor.
    So, where is the advantage, if you have to carry FX lenses with your DX body?
    In my opinion a D400 should be a smaller, more lightweight D4: 14 Mpix, 8 fps
    and over all one stop slower than the D4, means ISO range up to 12800
    and Hi3 up to ISO 102000, price €1800. But we have never seen such a sensor.
    So this is only a dream. For all landscape and nature photographers, who
    in direction wants a more lightwheigt gear, the D7100 is a great camera.

    • 77
      ) Tony
      February 23, 2013 at 2:39 pm

      Can’t the Sony a77 do 12 fps at 24MPs?

      • 86
        ) Bernd
        February 24, 2013 at 1:34 am

        Yes – but then, why can’t the D800 do 8fps and the D600
        can only do 5.5fps? I assume that the mirror of the D800
        is as fast as that of the D700.
        I suppose, there’s a difference in the analog to digital
        conversion of the data. That’s maybe the reason, why Nikon
        SLR’s have often a better signal to noise ratio than Sony cameras
        with the same sensor, what results in a better IQ, especially
        at higher ISO’s.

        • 92
          ) Tony
          February 26, 2013 at 6:13 am

          Bernd, I was replying to your “and much faster electronic to handle the amount of data.” comment. I.e., I was making a point that it is possible to do 8-9 fps at 24MP from a data transfer point of view and that the a77 proves it. But, you’re absolutely right. Data transfer speed is not the only limitation. AF speed, shutter, etc. also play part.

          As for the Sony vs. Nikon ISO performance: the main reason why the a99 is behind the D600 (even though they use the same sensor) is its translucent mirror that sucks up some of the light. The RX-1, which does not have a translucent mirror, is much closer to Nikon in high ISO performance. It is the same story when comparing the NEX-7, a77, and D3200 (which again have the same sensor).

    • 79
      ) Rebecca
      February 23, 2013 at 7:40 pm

      Most, virtually all, people wanting a D400 will only use FX lenses with it (i.e. big ones) so that particular argument is not really an issue.

      • 84
        ) Donz
        February 24, 2013 at 12:32 am

        True Rebecca.
        And I’d be happy with 16-18 mp as long as fps and buffer are right up there

  41. 78
    ) Scott
    February 23, 2013 at 4:55 pm

    Why can Nikon not produce a DX with all the benefits of the D7100, but in a fully weather-sealed, fully magnesium body, ala D300s, with a 12/16mp sensor and 10-12 frames per second with a huge buffer size? And oh, make sure that it is USB3 compatible with built in GPS and wi-fi….

  42. 83
    ) Donz
    February 24, 2013 at 12:29 am

    Oh yeah, this is what a lot of us are waiting for!
    The D300/300s weren’t so cheap on release either, but there’s LOTS of wildlife/sports photogs waiting on this. Maybe Nikon is paused with their protype(s) waiting to see what Canon delivers with the 7D II ?

  43. 90
    ) Ray K.
    February 25, 2013 at 9:30 am

    There might still be hope for a high-end Nikon DX format dSLR. Have a look here,

    http://nikonrumors.com/2013/02/24/nikon-europe-the-d7100-is-not-positioned-to-replace-the-d300s.aspx/#more-54608

    If the letter is not a hoax, then everybody who yearns for a proper D300s replacement will be able to rest easy. Albeit, wait a little bit longer ;)

    Nasim, your site is a wealth of information and also a good and enjoyable read. Keep it up and many thanks for your efforts.

  44. 94
    ) Keith Taylor
    February 26, 2013 at 11:13 am

    I believe there will eventually be a D300 replacement,I think Nikon are waiting to see Canons 7D replacement.
    This would imo be a very important camera for Nikon to release and they would want to get it right, too many people own D300s for Nikon too ignore and will produce a camera we have been waiting for……….hopefully [now theres confidence :o]]

  45. 95
    ) Daniel
    February 26, 2013 at 11:55 am

    Well, it’s not easy to satisfty everyone but I really miss some buttons in the back of the d7100 as the mettering mode wheel for instance, better body (not so small). Overall, with a more profesional feeling when you take it. I come from a D200 and for sure the d7100 is not for me, and I think I don’t need a FX.

  46. February 26, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    There is a gap now for a sports shooter, D7000 is still lacking the buffer for sports, and you can assign the AE Lock as AF ON, The D300S is great, but I would not buy one now, as iy needs a little better dynamic range and better ISO, so that just leaves a D4, but thats far to expensive, D600/800 are not suitable for sports, so what is needed is a sports product that is lower spec and cost to the D4 and faster than D7100

    Nikon did have 3 Pro sports cameras, D300S, D700 and D3S, all price to siut each person each with a few mote tricks on each camera.

    What I would like would Be D400 9 frames per sec, AF-ON, better ISO , better dynamic range £1500 UK pounds

  47. 97
    ) MB
    February 27, 2013 at 3:14 pm

    I personally wouldn’t go for D400 but sport and wildlife shooters are obviously not so small group and it seems to me that pro build D400, if it is fast enough 9-10 fps and even more in this new 1.3 crop mode, would sell pretty well … if only it is coupled with couple of light and fast pro DX lenses …

  48. 98
    ) Henrik
    February 27, 2013 at 9:19 pm

    Nikon is putting half step cameras out there because people are jumping at them and Nikon makes lots of money while it incrementally improves. Nikon could easily hold off a couple of years and put out a body with real useful improvements but they’re not stupid. The people who buy these half improvements may be though. I will keep using my D700 (great camera) and wait till they produce some real improvements in one single body; i.e., 24MP, great I.Q. at 12800 ISO, 100 raw shot buffer, OLED viewfinder, twin processors, one of which controls an electronic shutter (so you can use flash at any shutter speed and in camera hdr many of your shots automatically). I’m half joking but not really, much of this technology already exists. The companies won’t put all of this into one body right away cause it’s just bad business.
    Why make real improvements when you can lure people once or twice a year with pitiful bait.

  49. 99
    ) Henrik
    February 27, 2013 at 9:25 pm

    I forgot to add Iris activated whole frame hybrid auto focus.

  50. 101
    ) stan
    February 28, 2013 at 6:45 am

    well i have bought D7000 for 900 usd with 18-105mm lens included. Considering the price of same kit with D7100 being around 1600usd, I doubt there is any reason to look for D7100 :)

  51. 102
    ) DanS
    March 2, 2013 at 6:52 pm

    In addition to the list presented by Nassim, there is plenty of room for other improvements in the future D400. They might summarize, without being limited, to:
    - Video – 60p, uncompressed
    - Real Wi-Fi capabilities wi-fi

    • 104
      ) Peter Boender
      March 5, 2013 at 12:22 pm

      May I add to Nasim’s list too?

      - 10 pin connector (something that D7000, D7100 and D600 don’t have!).
      - compatibility with MB-D12 (D800 battery grip).
      - lighted buttons (a la D4)
      - ethernet connector (a la D4)
      - dual card slot, with at least one of them SDXC

      To me, a D400 would make sense:
      - Nikon would have D7100/D600 as the DX/FX consumer couple and D400/D800 as the DX/FX pro couple.
      - Nikon will want to compete with Canon’s upcoming 7D MkII.
      - the current price gap between D7100 and D600 is too large a hole.

      I’m with KnightPhoto: looking for a June announcement (together with 300mm f/4.0 VR…)

  52. 103
    ) oldpro
    March 4, 2013 at 8:58 pm

    I think there is room for a D400. Nikon has offered a lot of new bodies over the last eight months and each of them seems to have missed the target in terms of lacking a feature of some sort.

    D800, to many pixcels
    D600, cheap body, over priced
    D3100, opening price body, more pixcels then it needs
    D5200, Same.
    D7100, small buffer

    Maybe they will consider making one body that has it all. The D300 is and was a great camera body that had everything going for it. It has a great following and hopefully they will top it.

  53. 107
    ) Haruo Chikamori
    March 21, 2013 at 2:48 pm

    I prefer to have a better buffer and better fps than what the D7100 can offer me. My D300s offers me 7fps without a grip whereas the D7100 only offers me between 5-6 fps. If they do not come out with a D300s replacement (the D400), I suppose I will be forced to upgrade directly up to a D4 (after I get my wildlife photography supertelephoto lens) to retain the fps rate.

  54. 108
    ) alwyn
    March 22, 2013 at 12:13 am

    I am ready to jump ship. I don’t need 24 mp & 6fps is enough. Just give me a bigger buffer. And the body? Either go full mag alloy or don’t. I’d rather they omit these gimmicks that they charge us extra for because to me 2 plates are just a marketing ploy. What further drives me away from Nikon is their sudden lack of quality control. I’m onto my 3rd D7000 & still there are problems which Nikon seems incapable of solving. As things stand now Canon doesn’t need to do anything to get new busines
    s, not with Nikon giving their customers to the competition. They should just remember, some customers will never return once they have left.

    • 114
      ) Larry L
      June 21, 2013 at 12:43 pm

      I went through a D70, 3, D90s, and on my second D300s all having issues. I also agree with less mps and higher frame rate. It’s almost impossible to shoot multi actions shots that are so well focused that you actually need to use more mps than 6 or 8.

  55. 109
    ) nektarios
    April 6, 2013 at 12:55 pm

    There is room for a D400.
    If the D400 would have a sensor with very good high iso performance (let’s say minimum 1600 iso) , dynamic range more than 14,0 Evs, color depth more than 24,5 bits, no low pass filter, reliable accurate and ultra fast 3D autofocus system, high memory capacity of at least 20 pics when shooting raw 14bit 24 mp files at 7 fps and with fast downloading to the two memory cards, AE/L-AF/L button and AF ON button both on the back of the camera and the battery grip, buttons that will have the same position and ergonomics to both the camera and the battery grip, then i would mind even borrowing the money to pay for a cost much much more than the D600.
    Imagine such a camera, reliable and fast, coupled for all around use with a nikkor 18-300 and for small depth of field and/or low light action-animal-bird photography with a nikon afs-vrii 70-200/2.8 or tamron 70-200/2.8 usd vc or sigma sport 120-300/2.8 hsm/os and for larger depth of field and/or good lighting with the nikon 80-400 afs-vrii.
    Yes, i mean a duplicate d3s/d4 but in dx mode.
    Well, i will wait.

    • 110
      ) nektarios
      April 6, 2013 at 1:05 pm

      please delete: …, then i would mind …
      correction: …, then i would not mind …

  56. 112
    ) Susan
    June 2, 2013 at 2:58 pm

    I am hoping the D400 will be something awesome, better then the D800 but for action photography. I have the D700 and I still love it but noticed it does much better for portraits, landscapes, macro etc. I have taken it with me to photograph wild horses but something just is lacking. Of course maybe it is my fault and I am just not setting the camera correctly. I was looking at the D800 but everyone has told me to not purchase it but wait for the D400 or even purchase the D4 especially since I will be using in in the field and more for action photography. The D4 looks great but I would have to win a small lottery to get it since it is so expensive. But then again, is any price to much for my love of photography? :)

    • 116
      ) Larry L
      July 8, 2013 at 9:05 am

      When you price the FX line up of zooms like the 14-24, 16 -35, 24 -70, 70- 200 it is hard to justify them unless you are a full time pro or just make a lot of money. Also for wild life and macro, the cropped DX sensor has a great advantage for the extra reach. So it is not like FX is always better but it is always more costly.
      Perhaps a “D800s” with an option for higher frame rate, bigger buffer in DX mode would be a perfect way to go for now. If you can afford it and it comes out. When using a D700 for macro or needing to crop down to a DX size frame you end up with a usable 5 megs of pixels. Still good for 8×10′s but not a lot larger. I have also noticed the consumer grade FX lenses are not as sharp as the DX equivalent. My 16-85 is very sharp at about all settings. I have a D300s and am really want better ISO performance and perhaps 18 meg along with better color depth and dynamic range, I am not convinced that 24 meg DX sensor is practical since that is the equivalent of 56 meg or so in FX. Can a lens really focus that well on each pixel? My test with a Sony 24meg did not fair well compared with my 12 meg Nikon using my 16-85, it was sharper. Both stopped down some yet the Sony’s 24 w/ kit lens gave about 6 bands of pixels gradients from a hard black and white edge. So why so many pixels?

  57. 113
    ) Michaela
    June 9, 2013 at 10:51 pm

    I’m just disappointed that the D7100 doesn’t have GPS/ Wifi capabilities. My three year old cell phone which cost $100 has those features, I’m not sure why a $1500 DSLR can’t include them. I know you can buy the bunky adaptor (just one more thing to lose at the bottom of a camera bag + attach for each and every shot – what a joke!).

    If the D400 had those capabilities (+compass direction would be nice as well), I’d buy it.

  58. 115
    ) Anonymous Maximus
    July 7, 2013 at 4:49 am

    D800 @ DX mode is already a hypothetical D400, except for

    * price tag

    * reduced viewfinder area

    * less fps

  59. 117
    ) The_Animal
    November 5, 2013 at 11:42 am

    I’ve been waiting on a D400 for a while now. Still no announcement and it’s now November. My 2 choices are this:

    1) upgrade to D4 – which will bust the bank (I’ve already broke the bank when I purchased my AF-S II 600/4 this June – still paying the lens off, but am seeing the results from that super-telephoto).
    2) or upgrade to a second D300s body and just wait it out.

    Nikon is ****ing me off by delaying the D400 (it seems like they won’t announce a true D300s replacement before the end of the decade) but hell will freeze over before I switch to ~cough~ Canon. The fps on the D7100 was the killer for me in terms of deciding whether to go with that body or stick with my D300s.

  60. 118
    ) LarryZee
    November 26, 2013 at 12:56 am

    For the first time in my over 50 years of owning Nikons, my mind shift to what’s available on the Canon market that could take the place of the much anticipated D400. I hate myself for that thought but I’ve got to admit that it’s surfaced. What will Nikon do about that.

Leave a Comment