Nikon D400 Announcement This Fall?

I am getting some information from our readers about a potential Nikon D400 announcement this fall (during Photokina in September, shipping in October). I was not going to post anything when I first got some speculative information about the D400, but when the same person that sent me some details earlier this year on the D800 (which turned out to be 100% true) confirmed the D400 specs, I decided to post what I have regarding the upcoming DSLR. I am still a little skeptical about some of this, since it could contradict the potential announcement of the Nikon D600 that I wrote about a couple of weeks ago. If Nikon does indeed release the D600 at a ~$1,500 price point, it would have to severely handicap many of its features, if the below specifications turn out to be true. Otherwise, Nikon will have a hard time selling the D400 in my opinion. Nikon is apparently already working on D400 production in its Sendai plant in Japan.

Nikon D400

Here is a summary of the Nikon D400 specifications that I have received from multiple sources:

  1. Sensor: 24.2 MP DX CMOS, 3.82µ pixel pitch (same as on the D3200)
  2. Sensor Size: 23.2 x 15.4mm
  3. Resolution: 6,016 × 4,000
  4. Native ISO Sensitivity: 100-6,400
  5. Boost Low ISO Sensitivity: 50
  6. Boost High ISO Sensitivity: 12,800-25,600
  7. Processor: EXPEED 3
  8. Metering System: 3D Color Matrix Meter III with face recognition and a database of 30,000 images
  9. Dust Reduction: Yes
  10. Weather Sealing/Protection: Yes
  11. Body Build: Full Magnesium Alloy
  12. White Balance: New White Balance System
  13. Shutter: Up to 1/8000 and 30 sec exposure
  14. Shutter Durability: 200,000 cycles, self-diagnostic shutter
  15. Camera Lag: 0.012 seconds
  16. Storage: 1x CF slot and 1x SD slot
  17. Viewfinder Coverage: 100%
  18. Viewfinder Magnification: 0.94x Approx.
  19. Speed: 8 FPS, 9 FPS with optional battery pack and Nikon D4 or alkaline batteries
  20. Exposure Meter: 91,000 pixel RGB sensor
  21. Built-in Flash: Yes, with Commander Mode, full CLS compatibility
  22. Autofocus System: Advanced Multi-CAM 3500DX with 51 focus points and 15 cross-type sensors
  23. AF Detection: Up to f/8 with 9 focus points (5 in the center, 2 on the left and right)
  24. LCD Screen: 3.2 inch diagonal with 921,000 dots
  25. Movie Modes: Full 1080p HD @ 30 fps max
  26. Movie Exposure Control: Full
  27. Movie Recording Limit: 30 minutes @ 30p, 20 minutes @ 24p
  28. Movie Output: MOV, Compressed and Uncompressed
  29. In-Camera HDR Capability: Yes
  30. Two Live View Modes: One for photography and one for videography
  31. Camera Editing: Lots of in-camera editing options with HDR capabilities
  32. GPS: Not built-in, requires GP-1 GPS unit
  33. Battery Type: EN-EL15
  34. Battery Life: ~900 shots
  35. USB Standard: 3.0
  36. Weight: 800g (body only)
  37. Price: $1,799 MSRP

Clearly, the Nikon D400 would be targeted at budget sports and wildlife shooters with its 8+ fps shooting speeds and the DX version of the new Advanced Multi-CAM 3500 system. Those two features would certainly sound attractive to many photographers that want a high speed camera and do not feel like getting the D800 (for its slow speed) or the D4 (for its high price). While it might sound strange that Nikon would use the same 24.2 MP on the entry-level D3200, it actually makes sense, because this Sony-made sensor is truly superb. As DxOMark has recently reported, it is the second best sensor on the market today (after the Pentax K-5 sensor) with impressive colors, dynamic range and resolution. Many other features on the D400 are very comparable to the Nikon D800 (video, build, shutter durability, LCD screen, battery, card slots, etc), which also makes sense. The only puzzling piece for me is the price – at $1,799 MSRP, it could potentially be priced close to or higher than the rumored D600. Or maybe the D600 rumor is just a myth…

What do you think? Will we see the D400, the D600, or perhaps even both?


Support Photography Life!

We constantly work hard on adding unique content, gear reviews and up-to-date photography news, in addition to continuously expanding the site with new sections and useful content. However, we need your continuous support to deliver the best content and allow our website to expand its reach. If you would like to help us out, please consider purchasing gear from our links to our trusted partners like B&H Photo Video and Adorama. It won't cost you anything, but it will help us pay our contributors, hosting and other expenses to run this website. In addition, if you feel like we do a good job, you can pledge one-time or monthly. We do not run any advertising at Photography Life to keep it clean for your viewing pleasure, so your support is extremely important for us to keep it that way.

Please see the Support Us page for our partner links and a donation form. Also, don't forget to follow us on Facebook and Twitter!
Avatar of Nasim Mansurov About Nasim Mansurov

is a professional photographer based out of Denver, Colorado. He is the author and founder of Photography Life, along with a number of other online resources. Read more about Nasim here.

Comments

  1. 1
    ) John Richardson

    Looks like a solid replacement for the D300s.
    I would be surprised to see a D600 with the current rumors that are out.

    With the D3100 refreshed (D3200), we only lack information for a refresh of the D5100 … and the eventual fate of the D7000 which appears to be the orphan of the line.

    • John, if the D400 has the same sensor as the D3200, then the D5100 and the D7000 will most likely have either the same, or a very similar sensor. Then it is all about feature differences between the cameras.

      • 15
        ) John Richardson

        True.
        It does/will make for an interesting mix of DX choices.

        • 29
          ) Ed Green

          One of the current DX lines has to fall away if you ask me, likely the D5*** line; I feel this is just too close to the D3xxx line.

          What we could see I suppose, numerical denotions as a side issue, but if Nikon wanted to clean them up:

          D3***: entry level DX.
          D5***: new D5200 as a mid range DX, D7000 replacement. Existing line philosophy falls away.
          D7***: pro DX replacement for the D300s, what we’re seeing here.
          D**: FX cameras.

          • 37
            ) Richard

            I agree with this except don’t you mean D*** for FX cameras (800, 600). I came to the same conclusion about Nikon’s numbering strategy a while ago and I think the D7000 upgrade will be the D300 replacement.

            So how sure is anyone about the D400 name for this spec ?

            • 39
              ) Ed Green

              Yep, you’re right, although I’m sort of half right, in that the *’s replace 0′s. I just didn’t put a 6, 7 or 8 in there in front – but you get the jist of it. It kind of makes sense no?

              We shall see…

            • 43
              ) Richard

              I’d go further and say Nikon’s future numbering strategy could be

              4 digit starting with odd number – DX cameras,
              3 digit starting with even number – FX (and possibly a pro DX),

              with the second digit indicating the model revision.

              And of course,
              1 (and later 2 digit) – flagship model

      • 62
        ) Richard

        I think you’re right that the DX cameras could all have the same sensor. In 35mm film SLRs, it was the features and build quality of the cameras that differentiated them. They could all use the same film. 24Mp DX sensor is about as good as any consumer camera needs. It would economy of scale to fit all DX cameras with the same sensor.

      • 144
        ) Howard

        Despite the age of the sensor, I bought my D300s for the autofocus system. The same will go for the D400 if it is ever released. I also want the 8 fps. You just need that speed when a bird is taking flight. In the D300s, the shutter is so loud that it can cause the bird to take flight unless it is on quiet mode. I actually wish the future D400 had less megapixels because now I’m going to have to deal with increasing my storage capacity. I find my D300s a great all around camera to use. But I use it mostly for birding. The D400 will be for this unique market. I’m hoping that market is big enough for Nikon to continue to support.

        John – Thanks for your article. It is nice to hear that potentially we may have a D400 down the road.

        • 183
          ) RC

          Increasing your storage capacity? That’s not a con. You also don’t have to shoot at full resolution if you don’t want to.

    • 147
      ) Jason

      I have no idea how accurate these predicted specs are, but in my mind it makes good sense for Nikon to stay leaders of the DX market. If they introduce the D600, so be it. I have a D700 and am not tempted to but the D800 for it’s cropping ability – especially since it has a slow frame rate and shallow buffer. I’d rather have a fast shooting DX for sports (and reach) than buy big expensive FF glass. This means I can use my 70-200 + TC20iii to get 600mm equivalent, rather than shell out $10K for a true 600mm that has no zoom and I will barely use. My only concern is that the 70-200 VR2 focuses well on a D400 and gives relatively sharp images.

      Does anyone have an idea how sharp and fast focusing the 70-200 & TC20iii combo are on the D7000?

      I’d happily pay $1800 for a pro DX for sport, rather than getting a lens for full frame…I don’t shoot sports that often.

      • I agree with you — I am eagerly awaiting the D400. I have never used the 70-200 with the tele extender but with out it, the 7000 focuses the 70-200 very fast. The real problem is the embarrassingly tiny buffer on the 7000! I just hope Nikon will address this Achilles Heal on the 400!

      • 154
        ) Erik

        The 70-200 f/2.8 VRII is marvellous on the D7000. High speed AF and very accurate. I have used the TC1.7 II(?) with the 70-200 when photographing jet aircraft. The photo’s turned out to be almost all soft. However, I think I made a mistake with the AF-settings, so most of that would have been pilot-error ;) Taking experimental pictures later with thiis combo of a white wall with black stripes showed that the lens does lose some of it’s crispness with the extender. I also spotted chromatic aberration in the aircraft pics. I don’t know if that can also be traced back to my “mis-setting” of the AF? Anyhow, when taking pics on an airshow later with Sigma’s 80-400 showed none of the above. I’ll have to put the 70-200 + TC1.7 through it’s paces again to be totally sure of the results.

  2. 2
    ) Srini

    I hope they release D600 without crippling many of the features as it is rumoured to be a full frame. If that turns to be true at $1500 or £1200 – £1500, why would I buy a D400, which won’t be a full frame.

    What are the chances the D400 would turn out to be a full frame and D600 won’t see the light of the day for another year?

    • 5
      ) Wilfred

      converge of the two…
      ya i would prefer that too….
      better compare to DX, but not head up completely with all other FX
      i would wish for D600 than a D400

    • Srini, that’s exactly my point! To be honest, I doubt the D600 would be priced at $1,500 range if the D400 comes out – more like $2K at least.

      • 20
        ) Srini

        Agree Nasim!

        A full frame $1500 and another DX at $2K do not make sense.

        The FX is the space Nikon should concentrate. I can see them sweeping the market, in my personal opinion, more in FX than DX. Let’s say, an entry level FX D600 (or FX D400) at $1500, a mid-level FX D400 (FX D600) at $2k-$2.2K, and upper levels D800 and D4 families. They would not be a perfect fit for all FX aspirants.

      • 78
        ) ogotaj

        Why not? An entry level, crippled FX for $1500 and a pro grade DX for $1800. The choice is up to you. It seems to be taken for granted that all DX users are having sleepless nights because they want FX cameras so badly but I don’t think it’s true. Some people are very happy with DX body packed with features to the max. Some even would prefer it as it was mentioned here – sport and wildlife photographers to name a few.

        • 103
          ) john

          Right. There are many reasons to prefer the dx size sensor over the fx size. Size of lens, cost of lense, weight of lens, ditto for the body. Plus, unless you print 20×30 or larger, the quality is of dx is professional in every way. For many the 1.5x crop saves huge $ when you need a 400mm to 600mm lens. and some people don’t print but use monitors for viewing and sharing pictures. Why would they benefit from a fx?

        • 136
          ) buddy moran

          I agree. I was one of those waiting for the D600 FF entry level, until I saw the rumors of the D400 specs and the leaked photos of the D600. Now I’m leaning toward the D400. I’m just glad (or I just hope) I have the two options soon.

    • 33
      ) rico

      A lot of people have invested in DX lenses and don’t have the desire to part with them. I for one, don’t mind staying with DX.

  3. Hi Nasim.
    How sure are you about this “D400 already in production” rumours? If they can make a D600 (FX) that’s profitible at $1500 it’ll be the best response to the competition. Canon and the rest have nothing in that category. The D80/D90/D7000 has been heading upmarket, leaving awfully little room for a premium DX.

    E.g. I own a D7000 and wouldn’t upgrade to a more expensive DX. I would like to have FX though, and if I can have it for < $2000 that might just make it irresistable. I think that is where the market is.

    • Francois, I received this information from multiple sources. If the camera is supposed to be available in October, then you can safely assume that it is already in production.

      • 139
        ) RRRoger

        The D300 is made in Thailand not Sendai Japan.
        They may be working on design and production details in Japan but I really doubt it will be made there.

        On the other hand, if the only difference between the D800 and D400 is the Sensor, it might make sense to make the top of the line DX camera at home.

    • 41
      ) TimR

      It wont be under 2k because of the high cost of full frame sensors.

      • The Sony A850 had a MSRP of $2000, and that was 3 years ago when 24MP full-frame was much more cutting edge than today. The cost of a FF sensor may have come down in the mean time.
        So I don’t think a Nikon FX camera at or below $2k is *impossible*.

  4. 4
    ) David B

    I think the purported D600 price of $1500 is a myth. I see a MSRP of $2000-2200 for D600. I am interested in D600 and will be even at $2K. I think 24MP Full Frame sensor will be better than D800, better in low light for sure. $1600-1700 is a logical price for D400. D400 if released would make it real crowded for Nikon, because they are definitely releasing D7100 or D7200 this fall with the same 24MP.

    • David, I agree – a full-frame sensor at $1,500 sounds too good to be true. Maybe the D600 will be around $2,200 with the D400 priced at $1,800? But with a $400 difference, the D600 should be a pretty crippled camera, otherwise it is still too darn close.

      • 88
        ) Luis C.

        This rumor was exciting but a bit heartbreaking as I began to think that the D600 could perhaps be true. Judging by the comment that you made about these sources being a 100% correct about the D800, I can see the D400 rumor here to be a very logical and safe step for Nikon, whereas the D600 is far more risky.

        I am in the agonizing search for my first semi/Pro DSLR and the D7000 has all the right bells and whistles except for the fact that the DX line of lenses is not very exciting. I have a quote that includes the D7000, 16-35 F4, 50 1.8, 100 2.8 Micro as months of research and test driving boil down to price, so as to not make this first purchase too ambitious.

        That being said, my choice of lenses above is a good compromise in order to be FX-Ready. When the D600 rumor surfaced I put everything on hold… Wait till September seems to be the best self-advice, whatever the announcement may be.

    • 54
      ) Mike

      A 24mp cam won’t be better than the D800 when the files are scaled to the same size. The D800 has already shown it retains detail better in low light and high ISO shooting than a 12mp D3s. It also has better noise characteristics up to ISO 6400 than even the D4 so I don’t see a D400 or D600 doing any better. All those pixels do make a difference.

      • 59
        ) David B

        I stromgly disagree. D600 will have a new SONY 24 mp sensor that nobody has seen. We dont know what its capabilities are. It will be a newer sensor that the one in d800. It very well may have better chRacteristics than the sensor in D4 or d800. Dont forget sony 24mp sensor in nex7 is noisier than sonys older 16mp sensor in nex5n even when 24mp sensor is scaled don to 16mp. Its been proven And shown. I know people dont like to hear thT their precious d800 might be challenged but with each generation Nikon improves on things.

        • 61
          ) Mike

          It is certainly true that each generation is better than the last, but 36mp down sampled to 24 is still going to look good. Also, the rumour is that the D600 won’t even have Sony sensor, but an Aptina sensor. Aptina developed the V1/J1 sensor and Nikon may be looking to them for an entry level FX sensor. My bet is that the D800 will have better IQ than a D600, but it remains to be seen.

          I don’t really care if a new cam has better IQ, a camera is a tool and I know that the D800 won’t be at the top of the heap for long. Better cams are just around the corner.

          • 70
            ) David B

            Oh, I did not know it was not a Sony EXMOR sensor, that may change everything for D600.
            I personally just sold my D800 after 2 and a half months of use, because over these 2.5 months I discovered that it was not a camera for me; meaning with my use, i would not be exploring its full potential and i dont really print large often, and I don’t shoot landscapes. As much as I loved my D700, I have not fallen in love with D800 and it had to go. So i am very interested in the new D600, as with a smaller 24MP, cheaper price, more fps, and (potentially) better low light performance, it might be a camera for me.

            On the other hand, I have zero interest in D400, but I can see how birders with investment in Nikon glass, and not willing to accept only 15.2MP on D800′s crop mode and its 4fps, can be interested

            • 81
              ) Emanuele

              David: +1
              I have the same story. I have sell my D800, and Im very interested in the D600 and I have ZERO interest in the D400 or others DX cameras. I just want a “standard” FF!

        • 173
          ) Tom

          The latest news indicates that the sensor in the D3200 is not made by Sony….it is a Nikon sensor.
          http://nikonrumors.com/2012/06/22/the-sensor-inside-the-d3200-is-made-by-nikon.aspx/

          Some rumours indicate that the manufacturer of the 24 MP sensor for the D600 may be Aptina.
          http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/30/rumor-aptina-developing-a-new-full-frame-cmos-sensor-for-nikon.aspx/

    • 199
      ) paradox

      now it proves your prediction is absolutely right.

  5. 6
    ) Diego

    “the Nikon D400 would be targeted at budget sports and wildlife shooters”
    If I were a “budget wildlife shooter” I would get the D3200.

    • Diego, agreed, but you are talking about the low end of the spectrum. If I were shooting birds every day and did not have $6K to spend on the D4, a fast DX camera with great AF like the D400 would be a good alternative. There are lots of D300/D300s sports/wildlife shooters out there that are desperately waiting for an upgrade. The D7000 is a good alternative, but it does not have the same 51-point AF as the D300s.

      • 18
        ) Diego

        True, and especially the f/8 AF points.

      • 45
        ) Michael Clark

        Regarding photographing birds, it is more complicated than that. Dx bodies provide a cost savings not just over a pro Fxbody, but aalso over the lens used. for example, the top of th eline Nikon boig glass (600 f4 VRII) is $10,000. A Dx body provides a way to downgrade that choice to a less expensive mid-range lens (e.g., 200-400), or to a 300mm with a TC. The D4, while outstanding (and I know because I have one), is still limited for birding without the 600 f4. A Dx with 24mp and high fps (8-10) provides a much cheaper alternative when combined with the additional lens options if opens up. Something that the slower D800 and lower mp D4 just cannot match. Maybe its not the absolute best alternative for birding, but it is far less expensive.

      • 90
        ) Steven Parks

        so would they discontinue the D7000? I think the D400 would gut the market, especially if they release the D5200 with a 24mp sensor.
        I thought with the rumours of the D600 that the D400 would not be released in favour of an upgrade for the D7000 to increase the gap between it and the D5200.
        Nikon is a flurry of activity these days.

  6. I for one will be delighted if the D400 materialises. I have a D700, so to me the D600 has no appeal. As a wildlife shooter I need a high fps camera with true pro build to replace my D7000. Please don’t dash my hopes Nikon!

    • Richard, there are many more like you, who would rather have a fast pro DX camera instead of an entry-level FX.

      • Yes Nasim and it would also secure a future for DX shooters at a pro level perhaps. That said I have no DX lenses, but it would guarantee the future of “extra reach” for my FX lenses. Time will tell.

    • 27
      ) Chris Perkins

      I am in the same situation as Richard in having a D700 and, having a 80-200 2.8 AF-S with the TCIII x2 converter which I find excellent, buying a D400 to obtain an effective 600 mm is going to be a lot cheaper than buying a 300 2.8.

  7. 14
    ) gianpaolo

    flash sync speed is missing from your list…
    I find it an important parameter, and it is often is worse on new cameras.
    the D40 had 1/500 sync, and it was very useful for flash fill.
    anyway, I have a D700 and I am still amazed at the quality of the shots I get from it…
    full frame with fast lenses is something different!

    • Gianpaolo, considering that many specifications look very similar to those of D800, I would say it is still limited to 1/250 and 1/320 (Auto FP).

    • I think the flash syncro X is not a costraint if you use an Sb-800 or a superior flash. They have the Auto FP mode of use that overcome the 1/250sec limit of the body and allows you to use faster shutter speeds using flash also.
      It’s a strobe based technique.

      Of course, you are limited to X if you use an Sb-600 or lower ….

  8. 19
    ) francisco abuyuan

    i don’t see any problem with D400 co-existing with D600… it actually complements each other…

    the D600 is FX with slower FPS or a low cost FX, while the D400 will satisfy those who wants to keep on shooting in DX whilst having the speed and pro body, i.e. high-end DX, these bodies will complete the Nikon line-up as per shooting requirements.

    D4 – for everything including the sink, fast FPS, high-ISO- absolute high-end FX
    D800 – for studio, weddings, and those not requiring fast FPS, want big print-out- mid-end FX
    D600 – shoot anything- low-end FX
    D400 – far fast FPS, shoot anything- high-end DX
    D7000 – for shoot anything- mid-end DX
    D3200 – beginners and what have ya, all the rest- low-end DX,

    Anyone wanting a Nikon DSLR can fit in in any of these bodies…

    Now if only the 50 1.2 will have AF-S and the 24-70 2.8 will have a VR, that will really complete the Nikon line-up!

    • 69
      ) Tim Behuniak

      totally agreeed!

    • 114
      ) Henrique Baldwin

      I agree with these comments that I would much prefer a very robust DX pro sytle camera than a low end FX camera without the features I need.

    • Hi guys, I totally agree with you.

      At Nikon Italy official Forum we are talking about the possibile new D600 and the meaning in Nikon market would have a Pro Dx body like a D400.

      I think Nikon entered a new market with D800 but that, until the D600 will be announced, this step is not clear enough. I think Nikon wants to tickle users who would benefit from a medium format digital back at weddings or studios, but cannot efford the expense for an Hasselblad or Mamyia lens set.

      I think Nikon’s strategy for the next future would be to enrich the qualities of its Dx bodies (the 5xxx series have a small body, I wouldn’t buy it) and to better differentiate its Fx lines. Nowadays Fx has meant only professional photographers, but there are still many of us who came from the “film full frame”. Why not to allow Nikon users to have a wider choice on bodies and lenses without sacrificing quality or weight?

      What do you think about?
      Sebastiano

  9. 21
    ) Mark de Vrij

    Hi Nasim,
    Are you aiming to put Nikon rumours out of business? :-)

    I think the Nikon line-up can work with a D400 and D600, especially as it rumoured the D600 will have a cut-down AF system (only 31 points vs 51 in the D400 and who knows what other short-cuts) so making the D400 much more suited for the wildlife & sports crowd, while the benefits of the FF sensor will attract people wanting the better IQ not trying to shoot moving targets.
    Not to mention the number of people who seem to have a D3 / D3s and a D300s as a backup who would I imagine love this D400 as a D4 backup body.
    I assume that Nikon learnt their commercial lesson from the D700 of course.

    Kind regards,
    Mark.

    • 94
      ) francisco

      its already posted in NR! :)

  10. 22
    ) Nikonastic!

    Hi Nasim,

    Thanks for the update. Just out of interest have you heard anything about the Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 VR lens which was patented recently?

    thanks in advance.

  11. the only part of this that doesn’t make sense to me is the location of the manufacturing point. the Dx00 series have traditionally been manufactured in Thailand and not Sendai, which is reserved for ‘pro’ and ‘fx’ bodies. if it’s really being made in Sendai, i would think that it would have a LOT more bells n whistles, such as a vertical grip (a la some older rumors) to make it a full-fledged ‘pro DX’ and set it along side the ‘pro FX’ D4 and co.

    • 133
      ) Nick

      Don’t forget about the flooding in Thailand last year and the millions of dollars in repair work required for Nikon’s plants. They may have shifted production to Sendai due to the non-availability of production facilities in Thailand.

  12. There’s a lot of people wondering where this camera sits in the line-up and don’t understand why you would spend the money on this rather than a d7000. Well if you’ve ever tried to use both for sports then you will know. I shoot a lot of indoor showjumping where the light is a bit low and the action needs to be captured quickly.
    I have a D300 and a backup D7000 which I generally use for gig work, but also comes in handy as a spare. My D300 stopped focussing in the middle of an event and so I quickly switched over to my D7000. Were the shots nicer? Probably. Did I get anywhere near as many? No

    The D7000 autofocus was not quick enough to keep up with moving subjects in low light, the buffer filled very quickly leaving me waiting when I could have been shooting, and the balance of the camera with the 70-200mm f2.8 was just wrong. The shots that I did get were nicer, but as far as consistancy I just couldn’t rely on this camera on a regular basis to get the shots.

    The D600 looks like it will be in a d7000 body essentially, which is great for people who want a smaller full frame camera but it just doesn’t stand up to the same amount of abuse that I can give my D300. It’s also not as durable weatherwise as I’ve found on a few occasions with my d7000 (oops)

    One of the big reasons I want this camera to materialise is the crop factor. As far as sports go I mostly shoot football and horses. Every other person I see shooting with full frame cameras at these events needs to spend a LOT of money on glass in order to get the same reach that I have with my 300 f2.8. I just cannot afford to spend thousands on every single lens as this is only a part-time money earner for me. My D300 has stood the test of time and it works great, but I need something to replace it because it’s worn done and I have money burning a hole in my pocket.

    Bob

  13. 25
    ) Iqbal

    To me, FF means:
    - better image quality (low noise)
    - wider angle of view (I love wide lenses)
    - larger viewfinder
    - better bokeh
    - better balance with FF lens
    - pricey :)
    I’m a Nikon shooter and personally do not own any of Nikon ff line-up (really out of my budget, even the used ones :(
    Canon FF is much cheaper is my country. And it is much easier to find a used 5D mark II rather than D700, and with very good price too. All those things makes me think to change ship to Canon… untill I hear this D600 rumor!!
    I think D600 is better idea. It will increase the sales of Nikon FF lens, lower the price, and increase Nikon market share.
    Well, I’m not a sport or wildlife shooter anyway, nor an economic analyst :D
    Just my 2cents…

  14. About a year ago I switched from Canon 7D to Nikon D7000 to improve sports shooting — primarily improved auto focus. While I did achieve that — I was disillusioned by the teeny tiny buffer in the 7000! What is the point of being able to shoot many frames per second if u can only shoot three frames before being forced to wait for 2 or 3 seconds to take the 4th frame? (I prefer to shoot RAW but the tiny buffer of the 7000 forces me to shoot JPG. And yes, I use a high speed card.) Since day 1 I have dreamed of the D400 being announced. However, in your speculative specification lists you don’t mention anything about the buffer size — that will be critical to me in considering purchasing a new body. Do you have any idea how many RAW frames the D400 can port to the card before the buffer locks out new exposures?

    • I used to believe the more Mp, the harder work the camera has to buffer. This is disproved in that Canon succeed this admirably. Have no fear of a D400 as I expect it to have as a minimum the same fps as the D300 and D300s, which was 7 frames per second continuous shooting (buffer: 17 RAW, 44 JPEG fine, 100 JPEG Normal), more with a grip. As a wildlife snapper this was adequate for me and in fact the D700 is the same spec. The D7000 was a disappointment in this aspect as is the reduced focus points and it’s inability to enable saving of custom bank settings back to a spare card.

      I hope it will be a D300s/D700 in build quality, I am going to be most disappointed if we don’t see one this year.

    • My d7000 shots exactly 9 RAW before the buffer is full (certainly not 4!) and about 19 JPEGs (largest size). SD card quality does make a huge difference when it comes to writing out that buffer. I tested two class 10 SDHC cards. It takes 19 seconds to write out the full buffer on Kingston 32gb class 10. It takes 10 on a 32gb Sandisk Extreme Pro 95Mb/s. In practice, the difference is quite noticeable. I did have to wait on the camera a couple of times with the Kingston card, never happened since I switched to Sandisk.

  15. 28
    ) Eaton Zhou

    I still believe that after 2012, the Nikon lineup will be 3 dx and 3 fx camera bodies…..I think the D600 will be about $2k with the D7000/D300s replacement merged

  16. 30
    ) Ed Green

    This really throws a spanner in the works for me, I’m torn with what to do now.

    I’m in the market for an upgrade later in the year and the rumours of the D600 are seriously tempting. I’m making provisional plans of action in my head should that materialise as rumoured.

    As a current DX shooter, that means a move to FX. I have around £1200 of gear at 2nd hand prices, should I sell up, and another £1000-£1200 again set aside to go with that.

    My main interest lies in landscape photography so given I have a love of ultrawide, my upgrade path to FX would be D600 and the 16-35mm – which would be my only lens and would have to serve me on its own until I was able to expand into FX further. With this D400 rumour, I could trade in my body only, probably for a similar overall outlay.

    What to do, what to do.

  17. Looking forward to defend D400 because I like to use the supplied targets to shoot HD experience. Currently I have a d300.

  18. 34
    ) elliot madriss

    Check this out: i shoot sports professionally in New Mexico – 99% of the gyms here are extremely dark caverns, required ISOs of 4000-6400. My main shooting rig is the Nikon D700, and because of financial constraints, my backup is a d300. When the latter camera’s shutter failed at just over 150,000 shutter actuations (not very pleased with this), i did not fix it. The Nikon d300′s low light performance is extremely poor – so i bought a D5100. This camera has very good low light performance but a very poor auto focusing system that does not react well to low light, low contrast subjects, like one color jerseys etc. A good backup camera for me would be either the D600 or the D400 but here is the catch: Nikon is such a poorly run company that if one or both cameras are released at Christmas time, you will not be able to get them for about 3- 6 months or even longer. I just checked B and H for the availability of the Nikon d3200 and you can’t get one – same for the d800. So at Christmas time, the availability of the d800 should improve, these other cameras will not be available for purchase and the consumer will be forced to buy a $3,000 D800 – very smart Nikon!!!!!!!

    • 76
      ) PAG

      Elliot, I follow Nikon Rumors and one thing I’ve learned from the comments is that when it comes to finding camera bodies that are in short supply, B&H and Adorama are the worst places to look. There are people STILL on the D800 waiting list at B&H while others have been snapping them up at Best Buy and their local camera shops.

      • 89
        ) joey

        I agree with PAG. I purchase most of my gear locally and do not experience the wait times described on many of these forums. The D800 I purchased arrived within 3 weeks of my order date.

  19. 35
    ) Bare

    I’m affraid that D400 is nothing more than a wishful thinking. With price 0f cca $2000 it will be similar priced as D600 and interesting mostly for birders while D600 will atract much broader market segment.
    Also Nikon will soon introduce AF-S 24-85 F3.5-4.5 VR. I doubt it’s aimed for D800 users.

    Even last rumors from Canon suggests they will abandon 7D line and will fulfil that market segment with an ‘entry’ FF model.

  20. 36
    ) bisho

    hello Nasim,
    do you think that Nikon will surprise us by making this D400 a replacement of both D300s and D7000? I know there would be a price gap between D400 and D5100 but again, I think people would wait and see what a D7100 would offer and this will affect the sales of D400. I think Nikon is working on making distinctive differences between different models and decrease the overlapping

  21. 38
    ) Charcoal Grill

    Once the old models are discontinued the only fast sealed camera with a big buffer cache would be the D4 starting at a pricepoint of 6000 USD with the need for expensive FX lenses.

    I am sure we will see a D400. There is a market for a fast pro level DX body.

    A slow entry level FX body is no replacement. It has an entirely different philosophy of use.

    And I do not think that FX will keep it’s high iso advantage. I think already today on most prints of real photographs (not some shots of test charts made in the dark basement) you won’t see a difference between a modern DX and FX body. You have to keep in mind that on a real photograph you will have to go down one f-stop on the FX body for the same depth of field which reduces the high iso advantage.

  22. 40
    ) RRRoger

    1st off, the D300s is made in Thailand,
    The D400 probably would be designed in Japan.

    2nd, I can see why it would cost more than a D600FX.
    It will be in a D800 body with better 51pt AutoFocusing, buffer etc. than a D3200

    The D600 will be in a D7000 body with 39pt AutoFocusing smaller buffer etc.
    It will also sell in much greater number, thus cheaper.

    I may take one of each and return one just like I did with the D300 when the D3 came out.

  23. 42
    ) Shebnik

    My workhorse for a indoor sport photography is D300. I can’t afford D4, so I might go for D700 – 12Mp is more then enought for me. And my fast moving subjects are always a little out of focus (I have to shoot 2.8), so ‘gigapixels’ would not help.

    • 50
      ) RRRoger

      Shebnik, you should get a used D3.
      It is a much greater upgrade than a D700.
      And better yet get a used D3s if you can afford it.

      • 52
        ) Shebnik

        in Russia, Far East (quite a big distance from big city) it’s hard to find lightly used D3 for a fair price. And getting used from US would add about 30% of taxes :-)

        I would love to use fast focusing pro body, but I don’t have too much games to shoot to cover such expences…

      • 53
        ) Shebnik

        I have an option to buy a used (28k on the shutter) D700 with a grip for a 2k. It might work well. Don’t need megapixel madness – I shoot about 18k each year and store most of them, just in case (sometimes my club asks for old pictures in original size).

  24. Does anyone else think that maybe Nikon should concentrate on getting their orders filled on the d800 and the d4 before putting out new models? I’m just saying

    • 49
      ) RRRoger

      When Nikon announces each new camera they get more new people thinking Nikon.
      They are after market share and doing a good job of it because demand for their products has far outstripped the supply.
      There are new buyers now that are settling on “intern” cameras while waiting for their D800s.
      I think it is a smart move to announce new products in advance of delivery.

  25. 46
    ) Roger

    I also heard rumors that the D600 is a D300s replacement?

    I am a D300s shooter and for the longest time wondering why they released the D7000. With the D600, it make sense. It also make a lot of sense to the effect that the world of ever more pixels is being pursued by all manufacturers of sensors? Whether it is the image sensor on a smartphone to the image senors with medium format digital cameras, etc.

    I am betting that there may NOT be a D400 to replace the D300s. That is just a personal opinion, however.

    • 83
      ) TimR

      no the D600 will be a new entry for the full frame lineup as it will be a entry level version FX… the D400 will be a DX Pro camera replacing the old D300s

      Nikon retired the Dxx line making way for the new Dxxx line… from where the D90 left off, the D7000 comes after that. The D7000 sits between the D5100 and the new D400.

      DX Lineup:
      D3200 (entry level) replaced the older D3100
      D5100 (entry – mid-level)
      D7000 (for enthusiast and intermediate) new entry (many say it replaced the D90 Nikon says its a new addition)

      D300s (old DX Pro) soon to be replaced by new D400
      D400 (new DX Pro)

      Full Frame (FX) Lineup:
      D600 (new entry-level FX)
      D700 (old FX Pro) replaced by D800
      D800 (new FX Pro)
      D3s (old FX PRO) replaced by D4
      D4 (New FX Pro)

      • 91
        ) Roger

        TimR,

        I am aware of the model line up. In fact, I have friends and relatives that shoots with D4, D800 (two already), D3, D700, D300s, D7000, D90, …

        The issue with this post by the author is that it looks like it is a wishlist from CAPA Magazine’s editor.

        See: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/06/05/nikon-d400-predictions-in-the-japanese-capa-magazine.aspx/#more-40344

        Obviously, whether there will or will not be a D400 – or whether a D400 will be the similar to what is rumoured here – is entirely up to the people at Nikon. However, I tend to stay with the track record of nikonrumors.com and they have been usually accurate so far.

        Given the price point as per this post for the D400 and the price point of D600 – and that nikonrumors.com also speculating that “Nikon may completely eliminate the high end DX line (D300s)”. I am also betting that there will be no D400 and the D600 is a D300s replacement.

        • 95
          ) Roger
          • Roger, already posted on the D600: http://photographylife.com/nikon-d600-release-imminent

            I already responded to your earlier comment – no, I did not take the above specs from the CAPA link. They were sent to me via email by multiple people. One of them sent me the D800 specs before the camera was announced and they were 100% accurate.

            As for the elimination of the high-end DX line, I also spoke about that a while ago in this post: http://photographylife.com/is-nikon-d600-on-the-horizon

            However, after seeing the D600 pictures today, now I would say it is even more likely that we will see a pro DX body this year. Nikon took the D7000 and put an FX sensor into it, calling the camera D600. I would not believe that we will not see a fast DX camera with a weatherproof body and advanced AF system…

            • 99
              ) Roger

              Nasim,

              MSRP $1,799 for the D400 – let’s wait and see if it comes out.

              May the same source that gave us the D600 pictures would have an idea – if the D400 is going to be made – it is probably going to be made in Thailand.

  26. 48
    ) Alan Klaw

    This body seems to make sense since it allows a framerate that would appeal to many d300 shooters married to a body that would appeal to some tempted by a low cost full frame camera .The mystique of full frame is hobbled for DX users by the need for new costly glass.Where this leaves the D7000 who can guess as well as potential DX customers of the much mentioned introductory FX D600.Interesting times.I hope your source is accurate . Best Alan New Mexico

  27. I wish they’d just go back to making beautiful cameras with lovely new bells and whistles, but leave off the flippin’ movie stuff. Good heavens. Why does a PHOTOGRAPHER have to spend money on stuff that VIDEOGRAPHERS want? ( hugging my D300 closer) Sigh … where’s my horse and buggy … I’m outta here.

    • 174
      ) Tom

      I’m finding that there are more and more clients who want both stills and video shot during a session, especially given the popularity of YouTube (now the second most popular search engine behind Google) and the integration of video on web sites and inserted into sales presentations. I find that being able to shoot stills and video with the same camera helps to stimulate my creativity and provides great value for a client. I have a D7000 which I love….and I’m looking to add another Nikon body specifically to enhance the video shooting aspects of my service (i.e. 30 fps 1080 and 50 and 60 fps in 720).

      I think the line between photographer and videographer is blurred at best…..and I think what clients really want is value for their money….and for most of them that means excellent stills and video clips being produced during the same photo session.

      Maybe we should call ourselves imagegraphers from now on…. :)

  28. 55
    ) thomas

    who that owns a D7000 would upgrade to this? who really needs the fps and the better weather sealing? and it comes in the fall but production has already started? That makes sense to you? You know we are talking about nikon right..not apple!

    • 151
      ) Geoff_K

      I own a D90, skipped the D7000 as I did not see enough improvement over my D90 to spend ~$1200 when it came out. At this point in the D7000 life cycle I am definitely not interested in a it.

      A d400 with fast FPS and (hopefully) useable iso 6400 would be perfect for my shooting and would get my money.

      If this does not appear, a D600 is a likely upgrade for my aging D90.

  29. 56
    ) Mike

    I recently upgraded my camera from a D90 to a D800. I had been switching to FX lenses over the last few years so the switch wasn’t too costly but still a fair chunk of change. If Nikon does release both a DX D400 and an FX D600 at about the same price it will take some good marketing to differentiate them. On the other side of the coin, any DX shooter looking to upgrade their body may be tempted by the D600 as full frame is ‘supposed to be better’, right? The problem is you are changing your system, not your body. Be prepared to buy new lenses, bags, memory, etc. What may look like a $1800 body upgrade can easily be a $5000 system upgrade when all said and done.

    Also, if anyone says they can use their DX lenses on the FX body is really buying things in the wrong order. Buy the glass first and use it on your DX body, you will get better results than doing it the other way around.

    Mike

    • 74
      ) Charcoal Grill

      This can easily get way more expensive than $5000 if you need a pro level frame rate:

      D400 +2.8/70-200 = $4000

      D4 + 2.8/300 = $ 12,000

      • 75
        ) Mike

        No question it can be more than $5K, add a couple of primes and the cost is huge.

    • I think a Pro Dx and an entry level Fx at the same price wouldn’t be a marketing error. They are two different systems with the F-mount in common, which is great because you can use your Fx (and old) lenses on your second body with no compromise on image quality.

      I don’t understand why the second body has to be worser than the primary. For example, what if I liked to shoot wide angled nature photographs for my hobby and I’m a professional sport photographer?
      There my second body would probably be an Fx ;)

      Best regards from Italy, Sebastiano

      • 188
        ) Mike

        Well, your first body would likely be a D4, your second body for nature could be anything.

        I’m not saying that your second body has to be worse than the first. What I’m saying is that if Nikon has two $1500 cameras, a D400 and a D600 and the biggest difference is the sensor size it will create confusion in the market. Not everyone who is buying a DSLR know what the difference is, that you may need different lenses, depth of field implications, effective reach, etc. They just see two cameras at the same price and one has a higher number than the other (600 > 400). That is the confusion and it is up to Nikon marketing to make a clear distinction between the two.

        Mike, from Canada :)

        • Hi Mike,

          I really hope who loves photography and Nikon very good products will make its choice depending on what he wants to get with his new gear, not olny its name ;) but I really understand your comment is really true :)

          The marketing aspect that really impressed me about D800 marketing choice has been “I’m the big picture”. May be italian nikonians will not all catch the deep meening of what this implies, but I think this sentence perfectly summarizes what that camera is able to do.
          If its name would have been D700H I would have loved it too :)

          So I hope who’s in his mind to buy a new DSLR or upgrade his one will not be impressed by the body name only :)))

  30. I’m glad to see the wildlife shooters speaking up for a professional grade DX camera, so I hope the D400 materializes! It’s about speed, autofocus accuracy, durablity, and most of all the extra REACH (who can afford a 600mmf4, and whose back can afford to carry it all day?). As for low light capability, why do we need 24 mp? If 16mp is enough for the D4, it should be more than enough for a smaller sensor. I still get great photos with my D300/300f4/TC17, but I have to work for them! Still quite happy with my D700 for everything else…

    Thank you all for your observations… this is one of the best blogs out there.

    • 152
      ) Geoff_K

      I would not be interested if it is only 16MP. I might as well buy a D800 and shoot crop sometimes and FF others. I could live the the 6fps (in dx mode) of the D800 instead of the 8 or 9 of the D400.

      I think it has to be at least 20MP

  31. 58
    ) Roger

    Hi Nasim,

    Can you talk about your sources as I have seen this: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/06/05/nikon-d400-predictions-in-the-japanese-capa-magazine.aspx/

    It could be just a wishlist of the editors at CAPA magazine? Love to hear your sources.

    Thanks,
    Roger
    in Canada.

    • Roger, no, it was not from the wishlist – the specs were sent to me via email.

  32. 60
    ) Che Ibarra

    After using my friends D300, I just liked the way it felt and performed compared to my D7000. I now shoot with the Nikon D4. I love the camera…no regrets. I am turning out beautiful results at my lowlight events with my D4. I don’t care what it cost me, the D4 was my first foray into FX and I’m thrilled. That being said, I am selling my D7000 and thinking of buying either a D800 or rumored D600. The idea of a D400 appeals to me bc it gives me that extra reach on my 200mm (I also shoot a lot of cycling and 10k events)…..I can also shoot the D800 at DX mode but it just seems more natural to me to use the full frame of the sensor. Would it be wise to choose a possible D400 over a D800 or D600 base on what I described as my main photography?

    • 153
      ) Geoff_K

      unless you are well off enough, a D400 might work best at the best price for what you described. you get the extra reach and fast fps. that is my 2 cents. ;- )

  33. 63
    ) Michael

    At the end of this month Nikon will show us a new budget lens: Nikkor AF-S 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR. This is full frame lens. Cheap standard for cheap D600.

    I can’t believe in D400…

  34. 64
    ) Pankaj

    I am mystified by Big camera makers’ strategy of not including GPS and Articulating LCD in their cameras. Its agonizing really to see a potential winner here (D400 replacing my D300s) but only to find these features missing. GPS can be done with an add on but screen?? I would call Canon’s T4i a real upgrade over their T3i. A capacitive touch screen with focus capabilities and much more. At least they are not gimmicks. When will these companies make a “perfect” camera :-)

    • I’m surprised why they have never thought to an also detachable touch screen display, you can use as an advanced remote commading unit.

      This wouldn’t be very difficult to implement using a simple bluetooth o wi-fi connection between the body and the display and would be a benefit using tripod and bad light conditions.
      ;)

  35. Nasim, or anyone please.

    Just for a change in the midst of these multitudes of posts re: D400, can anyone tell me how I can turn off the followup e-mails on this thread please. This thread has, as expected, gone almost viral! I will still jump in and out, but my inbox is kind of overflowing! I have checked the box below for replies in hope that someone can advise me.

    Anyone know how to turn it off please? Thanks.

    Richard

    • woops, sorry should read the email properly. have un-subscribed from this thread, but will watch it with great interest.

  36. 66
    ) Tim Behuniak

    you might have said this in the review but i can’t seem to find it. This apparent D400 will be a DX camera correct? or FX only? And for the people up top, i don’t believe the D7000 should replace the D300(s) cameras. The D300 has a good reputation and has been out a while, and is a solid, well-built camera. I’ve only heard too many complaints with the D7000, but don’t get me wrong, i’ve also heard its a great camera. I just want this D400 or a D300s!

    • 85
      ) TimR

      Correct. The D400 will be a DX camera that will be replacing the old D300s.. the new D600 will be an entry level full frame FX camera

  37. 67
    ) ogotaj

    Call me crazy but if D600 will end up with many of its features crippled as predicted so far (inferior AF, lower fps rate, etc.) then I would pay $300 more to get D400 in a heartbeat. FX is simply not a dealbreaker for me.

  38. 68
    ) Tim Behuniak

    Also, maybe the rumors about a D600 are true, but instead its called this – the D400. Maybe they switched the names but highly unlikely. Also, if they do come out with the D600 and D400, i think it’d be smart. They have to fairly reasonable priced cameras, one FX and one DX and consumers can pick what they want. Maybe people will choose the D400 as a backup camera, or some people don’t want FX for the farther reach with the APC-S crop.

  39. It should be remembered that when the D700 FX was launched it retailed at about 35-45% more than the retail price of the D300 DX launch price in comparative terms. The D700 sensor and low noise processor was lifted from the D3. Nikon won’t make that mistake again as many pro’s turned to the D700 as it was so good. There is no pro DX model above the D300s so it will fill that bill, next down will be the D7000, then I think the D5100 will go and not be replaced. That will leave the entry level D3200. My guess is the D400 will retail at about 75% more than the D7000 was at launch. As for the D600 mmmm I have mixed feelings mainly because it won’t be a D800 lite version and will probably have to really replace the D700.

    It’s all speculation, but I’d put money on the launch of the D300s replacement in the fall.

  40. 73
    ) dakine

    Is it just me or does this rumor make the D3200 look like a great bargain? It’s like finding out Nissan has been putting GTR racing engines in the Altima.

  41. 77
    ) PAG

    I and at least 4 bird photographer friends are waiting to buy the D400. Three of us have D7000s and two have D200s. We all have credit cards. There is definitely a market for this camera and it isn’t a niche market. Top of the line AF, high FPS, deep buffer, and a weatherproof body all make this more desirable than the D7000.

    With the D400, however, comes a need for some better affordable wildlife / sport lenses. I love my 300mm f/4 but there are situations where I could really use VR and the AF isn’t exactly lightning fast. I sold my 80-400mm which I used successfully but because it focused too too slowly and required a step down in aperture for best results I wasn’t really using it much. And Canon bird photographers love the 400mm f/5.6, a lens Nikon has no real answer for except to use a TC (I do) but that slows down the AF even further. Nikon has some serious work to do in this department.

  42. You got everything right BUT the price point. The D600 is gonna sell for $2000… the D400 for $1300… and that $700 difference is what will keep buyers going to BOTH cameras… ;)

  43. 82
    ) Jon McGuffin

    I think most people here have it mostly right but it seems quite obvious to me the way this is going to play out…. 6 months from now, this is what the field will look like…

    D4 – $6000 – The ultimate tool, does virtually everything at the highest level possible
    D800 – $3000 – Professional quality high resolution monster, built tough.
    D600 – $2200 – Low End FX Entry, most of the D800 in a cheaper built body, lower resolution, etc
    D400 – $1700 – Professional quality and build with a DX sensor. Built like a D4 (better than D600, similar or better than D800). Essentially a D4 with a DX Sensor
    D7100 – $1300 – Prosumer DX camera, basically a D600 in DX.
    D5100 – $850 – Consumer Toy
    D3200 – $700 – Entry level for beginning DLSR enthusiasts to cut their teeth on.

    The D600 will mostly cut the feet out of the D700 but Nikon will technically be able to market it as a lower end camera because build quality and some other smaller elements won’t be up to par with the D700; though the vast majority of features will be superior.

    The D700 will essentially be in the same situation the D90 is right now. Nikon will *say* the D90 is the model between the D7000 and the D5100, but in reality there will be no market for it because everybody will find a better reason to go with the model above (D800 for instance) or the model below the (D600). This will gracefully allow the D700 to be retired officially over the next 6 months…

    Take this to the bank… :)

    • Jon, I agree with your roadmap – it makes a lot of sense to have a high-end DX and a low-end FX.

    • 102
      ) PAG

      I’m wondering if the D5xxx line will survive. Other than an articulating screen, what does it provide that’s not in the D3xxx line?

      The Nikon 1 seems like the natural camera for picking up the low-end interchangeable lens market. With the f-mount adapter, it can also pick up the higher performance compact market if they make the f-mount lenses work a bit better. The V1 already shoots 5fps in mechanical shutter mode, while the D3200 does 4fps. Kind of nice to be able to cover compact and DSLR without having to invest in two complete systems.

    • 126
      ) Dave

      I’ve been following the D400/D600 conversation both here and at Nikon Rumors and am really torn. I’ve got some really good FX glass which I invested in because of a) build quality and b) option to upgrade to FX.

      For me the issue is ultimately build quality. If the D600 comes in with the same build quality as the D700 I’m willing to pay the extra. If it’s coming in with the build quality of a D7000 (and from the pictures on NR that seems to be the case) I’m less keen, especially if the D400 is built like the D300.

      Getting a used D700 would be appealing – but finding a new one in Canada is impossible and B&H doesn’t ship to Canada so that isn’t an option. And I wouldn’t say that the D600 is cutting the feet out from under the D700 since the latter model is officially discontinued – you’ve either got one, buying one of the few new ones left, or picking up a used camera.

      I’d like to invest in a camera that will last me longer than 5 years but don’t really want to get one that is based on technology that is already 4 years old (D700). Ideally, I’d like to see a refreshed D700 – I don’t think that the D600 will be it if they base it on the D7000 body. Will wait to see more details on the D400 before making a final decision.

    • 200
      ) jukekey

      thumbs up…agreed…same thoughts:)

  44. 84
    ) Francesco

    A camera with 24 Mpx at 8 Fps generates 20% more output then a 16 Mpx camera 10 fps. This leads to have ultra-fast processor, very large buffer and very fast memory card. For cards you need CF 1000X and XQD. In addition, a camera of this kind should have the same autofocus of D4, which is more complex and expensive as hardware and firmware.

    I think it is very difficult to think a such D400 at a cost below the 2500-3000 U.S. dollars, with operating costs rather high. It ‘s too much for a DX.

    I think it’s more realistic to think of a 16Mpx sensor for a “DX sports and wildlife camera.” Require less electronic sophistication and provide excellent results as IQ.

    A further problem is represented by the quality of the lenses. Taking full advantage of a 24 MP DX sensor is beyond the laws of physics. A different matter is for a landscape camera; you cannot reach max resolution, but you can achieve other advantages.

    If 24Mpx DX is even excessive, a 24Mpx FX sensor would be really ideal for advanced amateur and for many professional uses.

  45. 86
    ) Shebnik

    in the past, we could select our film – for resolution, for color, for speed.
    I would like interchangeable sensors :-) So I can select tough body (I had several direct ball hit on a streetball) with a sensor I need. And for sport (especially when 99% goes to web), I don’t need more than 12mp (heck, I was more than happy with D70!), as I store most in a RAW. So, I would like new body, perfect low light performance, and 12-16mp….

  46. 87
    ) Hoang

    In my opinion , I really dislike the idea of 24 Mp pro DX , the test samples say that the D7000 has better noise performance than the new D3200 , and if the D400 has the same sensor with D3200 , it’s really a disappointment !

    A $2.000 D600 sound more attractive than $1.800 D400

    • 175
      ) Tom

      http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d3200/21

      The above link will take you to a review of the D3200 on dpreview.com. There is a good feature on the site where you can compare a wide range of other cameras to the D3200. If you click on “include all categories” you can compare the D3200 with the D7000. If you do you will discover a couple of interesting things in terms of image quality. The D7000 blows the D3200 out of the water in terms of jpeg image quality and low light performance, but the D3200 is very slightly better than the D7000 in terms of image quality with RAW files. This tells me that Nikon has purposed dialed back the jpeg image quality on the D3200 with its software. The fact that the D3200 produces very slightly better RAW files would indicate that Nikon likely has the capability to deliver very high quality jpegs with a 24mp sensor….they are just choosing not to do so with their entry level camera.

      Personally I would much rather have a ‘pro spec’ D400 than an entry level D600 with limited functionality. The D7000 set a new high water mark for crop sensor cameras when it was introduced and I believe the D400 could raise the bar yet again.

      • 176
        ) PAG

        Tom, another reason for differences in JPEG quality might also be the processor. I don’t know the internal architecture of the D3200 vs. the D70o0, but if the D7000 has a lot more processing horsepower then it can create better quality JPEGs without slowing down it’s ability to shoot. Also, the D7000 has a 16MP sensor vs. the D3200′s 24MP so it has 25% less data that it has to process. Of course any processor can make a fantastic JPEG, but you don’t want to wait 2 seconds between shots.

  47. 92
    ) Ranjeet Rain

    I spent over 15 minutes typing a comment and it won’t let me post. The program finds it as “spammy” :-)

  48. The future is FX. With technology becoming more viable and production costs going down each day, it makes sense that DSLR category become synonymous with (and a complete replacement of) film cameras. Which can only come true if they all have FX sensors. And with production costs going down, it shouldn’t be hard.

    It makes sense in another way too. There are much lighter ans faster cameras on the market with APS-C/H sensors already, which match or surpass the quality of many DSLRs. Why then, people would still stay stuck with an APS-C DSLR?

    If I were the policy maker of Nikon, I would complete the following by the end of 2013.

    (1) Nikon D(4-digits) – Entry level affordable DX camera (for the masses, who cares about image quality and would sacrifice the size advantage of compacts for it). In other words, keep the D3xxx line.

    (2) Nikon D(4-digits) – Complete spec DX camera, meant for serious amateurs. This would be the bread and butter of serious amateurs and Nikon’s mainstay in full-frame.

    (3) Nikon D(3-digits) – D(4-digits) in a pro body, better speed with grip for sports shooter. Working pros with huge investment in DX lenses. Everything about this camera should be top end except for the sensor size. Dx with a DX sensor.

    (4) Nikon D(2-digits) – Affordable FX camera. Dxxxx with a FX sensor. Would be the final curtain down on 35mm film shooters. A huge mass will take this, who don’t have much investment in lenses.

    (5) Nikon D(2-digits) – Complete spec FX camera in a pro body. This would be the bread and butter of pros and Nikon’s mainstay in full-frame.

    (6) Nikon D(1-digit) – Bleeding edge of Nikon technologies. Fast frame rates, built to military spec. Dream machine of sports, landscape, studio shooters alike.

    By focusing on a simplified line Nikon will create a much cleaner image in customers line and would make Nikon synonymous with DSLRs.

    • 129
      ) markogts

      Image quality is not only a matter of sensor size. Fast and accurate AF, lag time, reliable metering, good viewfinder etc are all things that are more important for iq than 50% sensor size.

      • 130
        ) Ranjeet Rain

        The I agree with the spirit of your post, that everything contributes to the overall “camera experience”. However, technically, what you said is not correct.

        Among what you listed, only metering is directly related to image quality. Wrong metering may ruin a photograph.

        No camera in the world (regardless of its price) will get the focus right 100% of the time. In tricky situations you need to manual focus. And it would be expected that someone who wants to own a full frame DSLR body in range of 1.5-2 grand, will use manual focus when demanded by the situation.

        Regarding lag time, viewfinder etc, can you tell me about a Nikon DSLR that has unacceptable viewfinder or is unusably slow? Have you tried the D3100 and D3200? Check them out. They will blow your mind. Even they don’t suffer from the kind of problems you are mentioning even as they are the bottom of the Nikon ladder. So it is highly improbable that any FF DSLR launched by Nikon will have unacceptable AF, Metering or poor VF.

      • 132
        ) Francesco

        An accurate measurement system and an AF at the state of the art are key factors.

        But the IQ depends on the lenses even more than the characteristics of the sensor; the surface of the frame is decisive. For these reasons, a large print from MF seems better than the one taken with a D800, even though DXOmark tests assigns a better score to the Nikon sensor.

        For the amateurs (and most professional duties) DX is more than enough, but FX format is a winner when you want obtain large prints or access to the world of very high ISO.

        • For me the biggest advantage to FX is it’s better DOF. It helps save tons of money on lenses. 85mm f/1.8 gives a better bokeh than 85mm f/1.4 on a DX body. One will only appreciate this if someone needs, demands and craves for ultra fast lenses.

          Second biggest reason for me is, it will turn my nifty 50 into a very useful piece of glass which is gathering dust as of now due to very limited usability on a crop sensor.

          Technically speaking, larger surface area does have its own importance. May be some day technology will improve to such levels that even a 1/6 inch sensor will record 108 million noise-free pixel at ISO 51200. But that time is far. Till then FX sensors would do the trick for me neatly. And even if it comes with a slightly inferior AF than the top of the line DX, it works for people like me.

          And none of it means there is no need or room for a top of the line DX body, with military spec build, blazing fast writes, gigantic image buffer and tons of control for one touch operations. See post #93 (though I left tons of typos in there and there is no way to edit them out).

          • I’m craving FX as well, mostly for low-light capabilities for events and those lenses you mention make more sense on it. That said, don’t let your 50 collect dust! It’s a wonderful lens, perfectly usable even in tight spaces for candid headshots. Not to mention the fact that I have learned more about DOF, composition, and photography in general by using a single prime for extended periods. I even used the 50 for commercial work. I just checked my lens use by the way for this year:
            8-16 Sigma 916 pics
            16-85 Nikkor 862 pics
            85mm F1.8 G Nikkor 1316 pics (and it’s only a month old!)
            50mm F1.8 G 3013 times!!
            At first the 50 (or the 85mm) looks a bit limited on a crop camera, but go out and shoot it, and soon you’ll discover more and more things to shoot ;) I’m in my 85mm month now, a portrait lens by definition, right? I had a recent photography trip (landscapes for a company) and I took more landscape photos with the 85 than with my landscape lenses ;)

            • Wow, that’s around 75% of your shots. You are a 50mm man for sure.

              Actually that’s what this hobby (or profession as applicable to different people) is all about. Breaking the rules!

              But to break the rules, one needs to firstly learn them (so that they can break it intelligently and meaningfully).

              I like your collection. It neatly covers the ranges other than telephoto. I have a mix of primes and fast zooms covering from 15mm to 200mm. When I go out for a walk or cover events I take zooms because they help me get more shots and better composed than primes. I keep primes for controlled usage such as studio and portraits.

  49. 100
    ) Timothy Behuniak

    I would much rather go with the high nd DX- D400. Nasim, so you think they’d attach a battery grip to it without u having to buy one so it’s more of a D4 looking thing? Like a DX D4 or D3x or whatever you want to refer it to?

    • 101
      ) RRRoger

      No, they will not use a D4 body as that would at least double the price.
      More likely they will use the D800 body and expensive add-on grip.
      I hope so because that would give 3rd Parties even more incentive to come out with a cheaper one that had built in LCD, WiFi, GPS, etc.

  50. 104
    ) Shebnik

    I think long range shooters would benefit more from 4/3 bodies like OM-D. It’s 2x factor, it has smaller long range lenses (and less expensive), and you always can take some old 35mm tele with adapter.

    As for FX, it simply has different ‘look’ at the picture. But not on all lenses.

    • 111
      ) PAG

      I think you’re about 3-5 years early. From all I’ve read the AF performance, shutter lag, high ISO, and other factors are not there yet. I’m sure they will be in the future, just not yet.

      You mention lens size but the m4/3 lenses don’t save that much on size from a DX lens. I think that’s why Nikon picked the smaller sensor size in the Nikon 1 series. A 200mm (effective 540mm) on that mount would be a real size/weight saving.

  51. 105
    ) Mark Stothard

    I’m looking forward to the D400, for the 1.5 crop factor which will make my 600mm f4 a 900mm f4 instead of D4 or D3s with a TC1.4 + 600m f4 = 900mm f5.6

    Great for those wildlife images.

    • 106
      ) Shebnik

      OM-D EM-5? 1200mm/4

  52. 107
    ) James

    I currently don’t have any FX lenses. Just an 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 and 35mm f/1.8 for DX to go with a D5100 (my first D-SLR). Even though I’ve only had the D5100 for around 8-9 months, I have noticed several limitation that are frustrating me a good bit. Even if there is a kit lens with the D600, I will likely go with a top of the DX for now, and invest in FX compatible lenses for when I am ready to make the switch.

    For me, and FX with limited features/specs would probably end up frustrating me like the D5100 is after a short time. So…DX with good feature set…prep for FX switch…be ready for D900, D1000, Dwhatever.

    • 108
      ) James

      “several limitations” & “Top of the line DX” …correction probably not necessary, but really should proofread myself better.

    • D5100 owner too… love that camera… GREAT value for the dollar… but definitely jumping on the D600 when it comes out in AUGUST!… ;D

  53. 109
    ) markogts

    I don’t understand why a D400 DX can not be priced higher than a D600 FX. Size doesn’t matter, as they say. Of course sensor cost increases dramatically with size (way more than linearly) but it is also true that sensor prices go down with time (Moore’s law). It may well be that we are now at a point where sensor cost is not the biggest part of the camera cost any more. 51 AF points, Expeed processor, durable shutter, good viewfinder plus all the bells and whistles of a pro camera are expensive items too.

    IMHO, the D600 FX will be the sister of the D7000 in terms of specifications. The D400 will be the top end camera for DX format, aimed at pro for sports and wildlife end at the advanced amateurs that have some good DX lenses already and think their needs are well served by a good DX sensor (that’s me, actually). The D600 will surely not be a pro camera, but more aimed at the rich rookie and at the low light photographer on a budget. I wouldn’t be surprised if the D600 will start a price war with Canon and Sony in the FX arena: in that case, we will soon see a “D3300″ FX too.

    Really, I do see a market place for both cameras. Don’t forget the D2Xs wasn’t cheaper than the D700…

    • 110
      ) PAG

      Agreed about the D600 effectively being an FX D7000. I think there is a lot of wishful thinking out there that the D600 will be a near pro level FX camera for under $2,000. There is already wailing and gnashing of teeth from the usual types at Nikon Rumors that the body is too small, it’s built cheaply, it won’t have the top of the line 51 point AF system, it has a “green” auto mode on the top dial (the silliest complaint of all), etc. There’s plenty of room for people who want FX for a reasonable price and for people who want a pro-build DX camera.

  54. 113
    ) Roby B

    I think, Nikon is changing the GAME of Photography! Nikon is changing the market in the world.
    I think, Nikon is working on new coming target: an inexpensive full frame camera for everyone, and a very good DX for everyone! Nikon is CREATING several new targets. In other words, Nikon sells the BEST new cameras for less money, that is a new marketing strategy. Canon still sells the old stupid cameras(and stupid old sensors) for much money. It is easy to see, that Nikon has a better innovation, better marketing, BETTER PRICES and better CAMERAS. Yes, D400 and also D600 are coming, after the D3200 and the D800. THIS IS A NEW MARKET STRATEGY! Best quality, best prices, several new choices for several new targets.

  55. 115
    ) HansD

    How would a DX F-mout mirrorless Nikon body change the game?

    May guess, in one or two years time Nikon wants/will:
    - introduce DX F-mount mirorless line-up of amateur/enthousiast bodies (using the current and growing series of DX lenses)
    - compact users to upgrade to these DX mirrorless P&S type of bodies
    - have a series of cheap compact FX bodies and lenses
    - current enthousiast DX users to upgrade to FX
    - have just one (semi-)pro grade DX body (with mirror)
    - and offcourse a full line up of pro-grade FX bodies/lenses.

    Once this has happenend we might see:
    - mirrorless F-mount FX bodies
    - a new mount for new cheap and less bulky mirrorless DX and/or FX bodies and lenses. A new amateur system with al limited set of zoom lenses (1 ultra wide, 1 all purpose, 1 ultra tele)

  56. 116
    ) Adnan Khan

    AsA, Nasim :) ,hope you are doing fine :)

    I wonder in film days from basic simple SLRs like F501,F801,N55,N65,N80,N90,etc to advance F100 and Giant F5 ,Nikon and all other makers were making full frame 35mm film cameras in all categories ,Nikon still makes an FM10 from Cosina and the fantastic F6 , OK, I understand that digital is just 10-12 yrs old but now they have this advance technology to build full frame sensors and even have different crop modes (so, now the DX lenses can’t go to waist) and by introducing a giant MP sensor in D800 in a very well reduced price as compared to D3x which is just a rugged body with more levers but now it’s image quality is beaten by the half priced D800 or even i think the D3200 is much better than a D3x only if one is not a Nat.Geo photographer :) I think Nikon should make all of their cameras in full frame and categorize them as they used to do in full frame SLRs.
    1- A basic full frame in a cheaper body with the very basic functions plus ability to crop in DX so that DX lenses can be used. (Optional stupid video feature)
    2- An advanced feature camera with motor like the D7000,D800 (weather sealed)
    3- A powerful motorized camera like the D300 or D400 ,D3s for action shooting (weather sealed rugged and more levers for better n quick access )
    4- A full Pro level body like the D4

    (Personally I don’t like the video feature and have never even tested it on all the 4 Nikon cameras I’ve owned so far.)
    Well, that’s just my own opinion about video ,in one or two models they can put this feature but removing or replacing buttons essential for still photography is too much annoying as they did in D800.

    The best thing Nikon did to D7000 was it’s U1 and U2 settings (so convenient) and they removed them in D800! (looks like someone did get a jolt of earthquake in their head in japan)

    But I think the consumers should put more pressure on these companies to build more full frame models and it is forums like this where we can yell :) ,so that you can tell the distributors and retailers what public wants , guys like you are our representatives and Senators :)

    take care
    Adnan

    • 117
      ) Roger

      Adnan,

      I think it makes a lot of sense if they focus on producing full frame sensor cameras now – due to the fact that they can produce much better sensors. I mean, even Nokia has a phone that has 40+MegaPixels.

      In such regards, I believe my nice D300s is probably the last of the DX format camera … and probably not do a D400 at DX format with pro like features. Especially at $1,799 MSRP. May be $1,199 MSRP? Given that the D600 is around $1,500 rumored?

      I mean, D7000 is at $1,099 on Amazon.

      When they came out with the D7000, I was a little surprised at its feature and others have suggested that it is a D300s replacement too.

      Longer term, your item 3 could contradict with the idea of “more full frame models” if Nikon wants to do more full frame. Or, may be item 3 will become history in 5+ years that given the technology evolution and they can produce better and bigger sensors. May be the D300s or the D400 is the last of the DX format?

      I guess we should buy more FX lenses?

      • 128
        ) markogts

        Sensor price has very little to do with pixel count. What matters is sensor size, because the bigger the size, the bigger the silicon wafer free of defects has to be. So let Nokia build gazillionpixel, two mm sized sensors, but FX will still cost more than DX.

  57. 118
    ) Marc Labbe

    Very interest but need better AF than 3500 Multicam for DX
    I already have it and compare to D700 it is s…..

  58. 119
    ) Adnan Khan

    Hi Roger :)

    Actually they make more profit in DX than they do in FX and now as the tech. has advanced the sensors are becoming cheaper and they can make FX sensors for DX level bodies ,it’s not a big deal.
    All the consumer has to do is that they should stop thinking about that a DX camera is much cheaper and a FX camera is for “big guns” .In film days 35mm film was the sensor and all models from $400 to $3000 were having the same “sensor” in different size bodies with limited or extra features. The so called ” ignorant moms” were shooting full frame in cheap point n shoot rangefinders.

    They can make even more money by making the full frame cameras as the digital shooters are increasing every month in thousands, no one gives their 16yr old a film camera as a birthday present anymore :)

    Point n shoot cameras have their place,it’s due to their small pocket size which comes handy and one can make videos too :)
    But I think only 4 models are more than enough.

    Just check Nikon,Canon and Fuji’s site and see how many useless point n shoot models they have,if a new customer wants to choose they certainly will not choose a camera for it’s features but for it’s price.

    Yes! of course everyone who has plans on upgrading to FX should get FX lenses according to budget but do try to get primes as they are consistent in delivering image quality, mediocre zooms always will vary in performance (their might be many factors, temperature and different performance on different aperture values at different focal lengths are primary)

    Just a few suggestions :

    For cameras with motors,like the D90, D7000,D300 and all FX

    50mm F1.8 D is super sharp and the cheapest Nikon lens for about $110 to $120 new.
    50mm 1.4 AF-D is about $275 a stop faster but very sharp and gives great bokeh.
    85mm F1.8 AF-D is also very very sharp at all apertures about $350 (used at about $200 in very good condition can be searched) a must have lens for everything especially portraits.
    24mm 2.8 AF-D is better than many high end zooms starting or ending at 24mm for architecture ,group photos and landscapes.
    180mm 2.8 AF-D is a Pro lens and used ones can be found on eBay or KEH at reasonable price.
    300mm F4 IF ED is a fantastic sharp lens for action ,birding or landscapes ,though it is called “Poor man’s Tele” but at about $1250 to $1300 new or around 800 to $900 used in good condition is a bargain.
    The 70-300 VR FX is a fantastic zoom lens for about anything new for $550 or can be found at B$H or KEH in refurbished (new) condition for $50 to $80 less.
    Best upper middle level ultra sharp wide zoom with VR is the 16-35 F4 VR with Nano at about $1200 (I sold my 24-70 2.8 and got this as VR is best and it’s pretty wide)
    For $1000 all in one 28-300 VR is a very nice zoom with fantastic focal length.
    If one is in Macro the 105mm 2.8 VR is the best.
    All of these above mentioned lenses give best performance at F4 to F8
    You can choose according to your genre in photography
    I’m waiting for the 24mm 1.8 G review from Nasim ,I’m sure it is going to be a very nice lens in medium price range.

    Cheers!
    Adnan

    • 120
      ) HansD

      … this is typical Pro talk (or may be heavy enthousiast). That’s fine. But that is not where Nikon is going to save the company. Indeed Nikon’s future depends on the mass market, the consumers/amateurs, the birthday presents. I think consumers just want cheap, least bulky and most P&S type camera’s that take briljant pictures 100% of the times they press the (only one) button. These consumers, although addicted to photography (that is getting the right spot, moment and framing ), don’t want to change lenses nor carry them or even think about them. (They also don’t like doing a lot of Photoshop).

      These consumers are willing to buy a new (and more convenient and more fun) camera every few years. Nikon just has to invent a line up of camera series that can fullfill their whishes. Cheap FX bodies and lenses is one of these series (at least for the next 7 to 12 years), there is enough temptation and challenge in such an offering. (In addition and/or next these FX things have to get less bulky.)

      And more is needed, the gap between compact and cheap FX will still be rather big. A series in between compact and FX is needed. OK, that is DX. But what could make DX more attractive to current compact enthousiasts? To me it is DX mirrorless, with or without a new mount/back focus length.

      So this is one reason why I think Nikon (and Canon) will suprise us with a DX-mirrorless-system. There are more arguments but to put it simple:
      - my wife had a Canon compact/bridge camera (her 3th camera), tried a m4/3 for 6 months, and dropped it to buy a Nikon D5100 18-100mm combo. She’s very happy now.
      - I had a Minolta A1, D80 and bought a D90 (because of the D80 metering “problems”). I managed to control myself not to buy a D7000 and probably won’t buy a D7100/D400. But I will definetly buy a cheap FX body with a cheap mid-zoom FX lense.

      (May be the future of the current type F-mount DX lenses is to be used on a FX mirrorless bodies. I don’t know if this makes any sense technically, but in the scenario above it sounds like a way out to save Nikons and our investment in DX lenses).

      (I havent thought about compact DX/FX but it sounds like niche, not like mass/mainstream market).

      • 124
        ) Adnan Khan

        Hans,
        You either this way or that way said and elaborated on what I was trying to say :)
        but I cannot predict on a mirrorless system by Nikon or Canon in DX or APS-C size.
        Though Sony is in it and being a giant company they and Canon can jump into it :)
        Nikon is a small company compared to Panasonic,Canon,Sony or even Samsung, they always have been very careful about reliability and image quality of their cameras.
        Maybe if Fuji patches with them again they might bring out some fantastic products :)
        Fuji’s XPro 1 has made all Leica wannabes happy :) , though if they only make a full frame rangefinder that will bring Leica to it’s knees :) , Fuji can make as sharp lenses as Leica and if they deliver an answer to M9 that would be fantastic! they recently released the Leica mount for the XPro1 ,so now all Leica lenses can be used on it but they are pretty expensive and Fuji with a full frame camera can introduce at least 4 lenses in a much cheaper but sharper package as Fuji also makes cameras for Hasselblad and some very sharp large format lenses , Nikon also makes some pretty good large format lenses.

        Ha ha, who doesn’t want cheap n good cameras :))
        My basic point was this and i was trying to say that DSLR camera market is growing by the day in huge numbers and many people do upgrade when they see their tiny P$S performance as compared to a large sensor camera and 99% it’s the DX camera they choose due to it’s price and simpleness as the full frame cameras are a “myth” to them even if they can easily afford one.But, if these were film days ,how and what they will be buying ? …a full frame film camera of course ,no choice in that. So, why not make FX cameras and let enjoy everybody in the same pool …. though I’m not ruling out the plus points of P$S cameras they have their own place and now the phones are catching up so fast that actually it’s a threat to P$S but not to the big boys :)

        Yes, you should go for a FX body ,let’s see what the D600 has in the bag :) ,otherwise D800 is a fantastic camera and it’s a real bang in the digital world :)

        cheers!
        Adnan

  59. So, will this share a grip with the D600 or D800? If it shared a grip with the D800 it would be the perfect complimentary camera for longer focal lengths and faster fps for many wedding and landscape photographers. Serious sports shooters would still likely prefer the higher ISO of the D3s and D4. Such a shame the D600 won’t share the same grip as the D800 and offer 8fps, or it would be the perfect backup camera (although the focus system seems a bit weak).

    • 122
      ) Adnan Khan

      Aaron , as I’m not going to buy anymore DX cameras I don’t know ,but it shares the D7000 battery which in turn is shared by the D800, so it makes a good combo for me :) ,I don’t use grips on either of them,just 5 batteries are enough for me :) and I’m going back and upgrading to LF 4×5 so it really not an issue for me :)

      D3s is still the king of high ISO and I think many good used ones are available now for less as most new pro shooters ran towards the D4.
      If it’s in your range I’ll highly suggest a D3s otherwise the new D400 is also going to be great camera.
      These are electronics do buy the new model if you can as these are not “real” cameras which can be passed by father to son :)
      The focusing system looks the same from D4 ,D800 and don’t think it’s weak, how did you come to know it’s weak ?
      Please share your knowledge :)

      cheers!
      Adnan

      • Well, all this is speculation obviously, but it appears that the D600 will share the D7000′s AF system, and not the higher end one from the D800 and D4 (39 vs 51 focus points, 9 cross type vs 15, f/5.6 limit vs f/8, etc.). In fact, the D7000′s AF system has been quite a bit weaker than the D700 in my experience. I suspect a D400 will share the D800 and D4 AF system, hence the higher cost over a D600 even though it is not FX. Quite a dilemma for D800 shooters as to which makes a better backup camera, do they need AF performance and high fps or full frame / high ISO? :-)

        D3s has insane high ISO, but for me the D800′s dynamic range and boosting details out of shadows with Lightroom 4 would make it the more useful camera for my 4K timelapses, not to mention the higher resolution for more panning / cropping. The price doesn’t hurt as bad either! I’m still happily shooting with my D700 for the moment though, and my sister-in-law is still happily shooting with my old D70 too. That camera was a very good model.

        • 125
          ) Adnan Khan

          Well, yes until the real thing comes out we can just chit chat on this as Nasim himself though posted the juicy post but in his words it’s a bit “speculative information” ,though enough for us to talk about :)

          I actually never had any kind of auto focus issues with the D7000 and if I lost all my gear this will be the digital camera I’ll buy first if it’s new model doesn’t come out or the D600FX is not available :)
          It was the auto focus system that was new in D7000 and was pretty much amazing . My most snaps are on AFA-auto ,only when I’m shooting birds or bees or butterflies I limit it to AFC-auto or chose points. You must have known the manual focus cameras with no point and then the first Gen. auto focus with 3 to 4 points and then 8 or 11 points :) ,I still use my F100 at 2 to 3 roll per month and don’t care about auto focus :) it works just fine :)
          Actually I’m more than happy when I’m shooting with FM3a :)
          Yes, people are still using the D70 and D40 and D100 too! but remember these are electronics and more new and more mouthwatering stuff will always be coming up every other year :) ,actually it costs more than film if we look at all the upgrading and computer and software costs :)
          But if one is just using it for family snaps and is not into serious photography and they print a 4×6 rarely, a 2MP is enough for them :) ,my first digital camera was a Fuji 203 2MP and it still works fine as it takes common AA batteries :) ,yes no doubt D70 or the later D70s were very nice cameras :)

          Right now I’m very much satisfied with D800 and D7000 combination in 35mm digital ,maybe it’s human adaptive nature ,we get used to things and adjust ourselves :)

          cheers!

  60. 127
    ) Jan

    I’ve been following the D400/D600 speculations and rumors for quite some time now and i don’t quite understand, why they shouldn’t be able to coexist even if the price for the D600 is possibly lower than the D400. Why can’t the DX and FX ranges overlap to some point? Why does it necessarily have to be the way, that the feature set of the top line DX is inferior to the entry-level FX? The wildlife and sports photographers are looking for more pro features (high fps, larger body and more controls etc) but want the 1.5x crop factor that the DX format gives you (over the full possibly 24MP, not just in DX mode) and enthusiast upgraders or even serious beginners may prefer to go with the full frame D600 straight away and get the better lowlight IQ and all the benefits of a FF sensor. It’s not like the image quality of APS-C sized sensors is comparable to the quality from a couple of years ago, progress is being made in every sector. So I don’t really see why a D400 with a possibly larger body form factor (like a D300s successor should look like) than the D600 (close to D7000-size maybe?) can’t make everyone happy and still not cut sales on each other. Just my thoughts, really hoping both the D400 and D600 will make it to production!

    Cheers, Jan

  61. I’m a semi pro motorsport photographer currently using a D300 and D300s, the specs listed above of the “D400″ excites me so I really hope the camera is coming as the DX crop factor saves me a fortune on lenses. If it sees the light of day I will be buying one.

    I will also be in the market next year for an FX camera so the D600 is sounding interesting as well.

    Time will tell.

  62. 138
    ) Mike

    I would be most surprised if there was no replacement for the 300s’ Nikon will want to keep in the pixel race, the 300s has a lot of fans out there but it is being out dated technology wise by it’s rivals, I am intrigued by the prospect of a D600, there must be a few of us out there wondering which way to jump if both cameras are announced.

    • 140
      ) markogts

      More than a few: given that nobody buys new D300s nor D700 any more, I think there is a vast group of people willing to pay something more than the 900$ of the D7000 but less than the 2500$ of the D800. The question is: shall we trade off on sensor size or on the feature list?

      • 142
        ) Roger

        That is a good point. I would go for a bigger sensor – assuming the sensors are of the similar generation.

        The D400 as it is here will NOT entice to buy assuming I am currently at a certain scenario of ownership:
        1. Upgrade from D300s or D7000. If I have money, I would go for D800/D4. If I don’t I would go for D600 and live with less feature but bigger sensor.
        2. Upgrade / buy new from D90 or lower/older. I can go D7000 if I am on a budget but go for D600 if I have a little bit more … as most likely I will not need the features anyway?
        3. Upgrade / addition to/from a D700 just because of a better feature but may be will use it as a back up to the D700. Since I already have the pro-like features on my D700, D600 would give me a backup while D800/D4 – if I have the budget – would give me the upgrade.
        4. Addition from a D800/D4 – may be if I am a pro and/or have the budget and has a higher end camera, I may go for the D400 as a backup. This is assuming that I have a real need for the features.

        It looks like the D400 may have a narrow market? Given its MSRP of $1,800?

  63. 141
    ) RRRoger

    The price difference makes sense to me.
    If the D400 DX has a D800 body and controls and is made in Japan,
    It will be a lot more expensive to make even if it has a cheaper Sensor.

    The D600 will probably come off the D7000 assembly line in Thailand.
    The cheaper body and controls will more than make up for the price of the Sensor.
    And , it will outsell the D400 by at least 10 to 1 and probably more like 100 to 1.
    Plus it will require new, more expensive and more profitable FX lens.
    I have a hard time with the $1500 price, but I did not believe $3000 was possible for the D800 either.

  64. 143
    ) Vartkes Nadjarian

    I have the D7000 and 7 lenses:

    4 which are DX:

    nikon 35 f1.8 DX
    nikon 17 – 55 f2.8 DX
    Tokina 100 f2.8
    Tokina 11 – 16 f2.8

    3 which can be used as proper FX lenses:

    nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6g vr
    Rokinon 35 f1.4
    Carl Zeiss 50 f1.4

    I love the D7000 and will keep it, but I would like to add another body. If all the rumors are true and Nikon come out with a D400 DX and a D600 FX, which one would make more sense in my case or will it be better to go for the D800 or even a D700?

  65. 145
    ) Ferdinando

    I love the idea of the D400. I would expect it to be a professional camera for those who do not want to carry the weight of an FX body and lenses, but that do not want to give up on quality and options.
    I will be in line with my travelers’ cheques in my sweaty hands.

    • 146
      ) RRRoger

      The larger body of the D400 DX will be heavier than the D600 FX.
      You will be able to use lighter cheaper DX lens more effectively though.
      You should also be able to enjoy all the features of a semi pro body as well.

  66. 148
    ) Jason

    I have no idea how accurate these predicted specs are, but in my mind it makes good sense for Nikon to stay leaders of the DX market. If they introduce the D600, so be it. I have a D700 and am not tempted to but the D800 for it’s cropping ability – especially since it has a slow frame rate and shallow buffer. I’d rather have a fast shooting DX for sports (and reach) than buy big expensive FF glass. This means I can use my 70-200 + TC20iii to get 600mm equivalent, rather than shell out $10K for a true 600mm that has no zoom and I will barely use. My only concern is that the 70-200 VR2 focuses well on a D400 and gives relatively sharp images.

    Does anyone have an idea how sharp and fast focusing the 70-200 & TC20iii combo are on the D7000?

    I’d happily pay $1800 for a pro DX for sport, rather than getting a lens for full frame…I don’t shoot sports that often.

  67. 150
    ) Alexander Shevchenko

    There was an interview with Nikon representatives and I remember they told that they want to separate the camera lines.

    D800 is not a replacement of D700, but a new line of studio cameras. There will be no D3X-like cameras anymore.

    Professional line will be completely FX. I think D700 AND D300s will be replaced by a single budget pro D600 (D400).

    The camera your source is writing about is a DX one. So, this should be D7100 or D5200 one.

    I have no source, it is my opinion based on interviews with Nikon officials only.

  68. 155
    ) TommyTobasco

    I am looking to purchase a dx camera and want the d7000… I’m having 2nd thoughts now that the d400 might be coming out in the Fall… Right now the going price for a d7000 is under $1000 (some stores selling it under $900)… what are the advantages of waiting for the d400?… will it be better in low light?… what will the probable difference in price be…

    • 156
      ) Adnan Khan

      These are electronics ,every new model is slightly better in picture quality apart from the features.
      Technically D7000 and FX D700 are head to head with D700 being better as a full frame camera and D7000 came 2 years after D700 with little bit better dynamic range.
      Of course the D400 will be a better DX camera and top of the DX line.
      If rumors about D600 a full frame camera are true, I personally will ditch the DX and go full frame :)

    • 157
      ) PAG

      Tommy, I have the D7000 and love it but I’m looking to upgrade to a D400 for bird photography for several reasons. First, I would expect it to have a better autofocus system, critical for birds in flight. Second, it will have a bigger buffer. Right now I’m limited to about 12 shots at 6fps on the D7000. For BIF, I’ve found that to be limiting more than once.

      On the downside, I suspect that all the Nikon DX cameras are going to 24MP since the D3200 is already there. I don’t need that and it will simply eat disk space and slow down my photo editing, but that seems to be the direction that things are going. Oh, well.

      • Well, you are right about the tiny buffer being the problem with the D7000! Because you are okay with shooting JPG you are getting 12 shots but I shoot RAW and I can only get 2 or 3 before the buffer is full!
        Altho I am sure the D400 will have better autofocus than the D7000, I find the D7000 fast enough for birds in flight — especially with a fast 2.8 lens that gives the focus sensor spots a nice bright image to work with.
        I will surely upgrade to the D400 because of this buffer problem. I actually prefer the smaller sensor (over say the announced D800 or D600) because the magnification comes with no f-stop penalty so my 70-200 becomes a 360mm (35mm equivalent) f2.8 lens!

        • 159
          ) Adnan Khan

          Though not a specialized action shooting camera D7000 is still OK.

          With a freshly charged battery I get 100 Normal Jpgs at optimal quality setting. at 4 fps.

          with some functions like Auto delight. off, distortion control off,Cont.AF to RELEASE
          and High ISO noise off etc.

          Also get the Sandisk extreme or Lexar high speed SDHC cards to write data fast and the buffer will be empty quickly, I’m using SanDisk Extreme Pro SDHC – UHS-1 95MB/SEC – 633X cards of 16GB pairs ( 100 JPG data gets written in 3 to 5 sec. and it’s ready again) but better to shoot in shot bursts of 10 to 20 unless a really awesome action like a Bear fight or Bison male ramming or a Cheetah chase is going on :) then don’t lift your finger! :)
          For those who don’t know or haven’t read the manual :

          Increase the number to max in CUSTOM SHOOTING MENU (PENCIL)
          d SHOOTING/DISPLAY
          A6 CL MODE SHOOTING SPEED 4 OR 5 FPS (4fps is better,just to be on the safe side)
          D7 MAX CONT. RELEASE = 100
          Also setting the exposure AE-L/AF-L button to focus lock or exposure lock according to your shooting needs reduces time, as some lenses start “focus hunting” if settings are not correct.

          Focus = AFC AUTO, 3D or 5 points for birds works for me.One can test according to their lens which setting works for them.

          Have not tried it but maybe reducing resolution to 9MP might even increase buffer for RAW shooting
          I only shoot RAW for landscapes ,for every other thing it’s JPG at Normal set to optimal vs size.
          The minor tweaks I do in LR does not need the file to be a RAW.
          Here the U1 and U2 settings come really handy and D800 is missing those :( with the annoying Vid.rec. button.

          BTW the S line is normally fast as D3S and D300s are for action ,but in DX D7000 has better PQ vs to D300s ,so I guess the D400 to be a little faster with a larger buffer (at 24MP it has to be large shooting at 8 fps) ,this battery might not do as according to the above specs ,maybe it comes with a D4 battery (I wish) :) ..who knows :) but then D4 will nearly be obsolete! ;)

          Randy. for calculating your FX lens Angle of View (crop factor) on a DX sensor ,multiply the Focal Length by 1.5 e.g 300mm x 1.5 = 450mm

          For Canon it’s 1.6 as APS-C size sensor is 1mm shorter on both sides.

          To check your real FL , right click on the JPG file then properties then details and you have your Exif data there displaying real FL of a lens and then 35mm equal. eg. it will say 85mm to a real 85mm lens but in equal to 35mm it will also say 127mm. (though it’s 127.5 but it shows the nearest round number without points)

          cheers!

        • 161
          ) PAG

          Randy, I only shoot raw and get 11-12 shots before I have to wait. If you’re gobbing up at 2-3 shots, I suspect that either something is wrong with your camera or your card. I’ve seen multiple comments and one review and all state the same buffer performance as I experience. You’re definitely the outlier.

          • I think we are talking apples and oranges. You are referring to the number of shots before the buffer locks up. I am referring to the sustainable rate! When there are runners approaching the finish line 4 and 5 at a time I can not wait 2 or 3 seconds between shots — the D7000′s sustainable rate. It takes about 12 to 15 seconds for the available capacity to return to 10 after the last shot of a series.
            Regarding cards: my cards claim to be fast — Delkin 32 gb PRO SD HC Class 4 and SanDisk 16gb 45MB/s’ Class 10. The Delkin is 3 years old but gave me satisfactory write speeds with my Canon 7D. I tested a friend’s Canon 5DMkIII and I got a sustained frame rate of better than 1 per second after the buffer filled at about 18 frames. However, I will research and buy/rent/borrow or beg a newer card to see if you are right. I would love it if the D7000 can achieve 1 frame or better sustained shooting with the battery grip. Thanks for the advice.

            • 163
              ) Adnan khan

              PAG is right Randy , I also get 11 to 12 shots of RAW in one go, and 100 JPGs.

              Yes ,this is the battery being gasping after a huge discharge :) ,quickly swap it with another or get the grip :)
              Class 4 card is not fast dude :) ,that is why you have to wait as the data is being written on a class 4 card, put your 16gb 45mb/s card in slot one and use “overflow” for RAW in U! or U2 settings customize one with optimal action shooting settings , do try the Sandisk extreme pro 95mb/s card, it’s really fast n good, and will be handy in future cameras of higher Res. Until the SDXC cards’ prices get down to Earth, I think the D7000 cannot support SDXC cards ,or is there a firmware patch released ? …gotta find about this as my D800 badly needs it :)
              And I just got 127 shots in one press of basic full size jpgs with optimal quality ,i’m sure if I switch to size it will be more :) ,so it means faster cards really do matter a lot.

              Both Canons buffers are bigger as they are 18 and 22 MP , though a D700 owner can put more info on it’s buffer ,when I had it I never tested it (as I was taking long exposures on a tripod,so never felt the need) .
              I think Nasim has demonstrated in a video comparing D800 and D700 buffer or frame rate ,you can search in older posts.

              cheers!

            • 164
              ) Alexander

              I also get 11 – 12 RAWs. You should upgrade your firmware. It really helps to work with SDXC like your 16gb 45mb/s card.

            • 166
              ) PAG

              Guys, Andy’s follow-up post explains that we’re talking about 2 different things. I said the D7000 would should 11-12 frames raw and then stop to empty the buffer, and we all agree. I believe he’s saying he can only set the camera to 2-3fps and keep firing without having any stop, which I’ve never tried.

              Either way, I think a large buffer would be one of the big differences in stepping up to a pro DX camera.

            • 178
              ) Tom

              Hi Randy, I shoot with a number of different Class 10 cards with my D7000….Lexar Professional 133X, SanDisk Extreme 30MB, SanDisk Extreme 45MB, and SanDisk Extreme 95MB. None of these cards makes any difference to the buffer size in terms of number of RAW images before the buffer on the camera fills. There is some difference with the number of sustained shots I can do in a 10 second jpeg burst with the 95MB card producing a few more shots in a 10 second test….it certainly isn’t enough of a difference to warrant the extra money. I bought the 95MB cards for video work in order to make downloading very fast…which they are. The faster cards will likely work much better if I upgrade to a D400 when it becomes available (if the rumored burst rate is actually correct and if the buffer is large enough)

          • 177
            ) Tom

            Hi PAG….thanks for the input. Just wondering if the processor issue would explain the fact that the D3200 produces slightly better quality than the D7000 when it comes to RAW images, but falls far short when comparing jpegs and shooting in low light. It would seem logical to me that if a faster processor in the D7000 was the main contributor to better jpeg quality and better low light performance then the D7000 should also produce better quality RAW files as well. Since the D3200 is a bit better than the D7000 with RAW it makes me think that Nikon has suppressed the jpeg quality in the D3200 as not to compete with the D7000….this would also then allow Nikon to use the same sensor without any quality suppression to be used in the D400 and thus enable the D400 to produce better overall quality with jpeg and RAW files…and perform better in low light.

    • 160
      ) Alexander

      If it will be D400 with DX sensor it will cost around 1700-1500 USD. If they will present D600 with FX sensor it will cost may be 2200-2000 USD. Any camera they present will be in stock on November 2012.

      I think all new Nikon cameras will have better video and dynamic range. But ISO will not be much higher than D7000 has.

      I recommend you to buy D7000 now and take pictures with pleasure if you do not care about video. I own D7000 and have some complains about usability, but picture quality is good.

  69. 165
    ) DavidW

    I don’t think Nikon will, or should, make a D400. There just isn’t enough call for a professional DX camera. Most pro’s are moving to full-frame leaving very little to no demand for a pro-DX body. It just doesn’t make any sense to me and I suspect it doesn’t make sense to Nikon, either.

    • Unless you are a wildlife and/or sports shooter, in which case it makes a lot of sense. And there are lot of those kind of shooters out there. As a wildlife shooter myself, it doesn’t make much sense to me to use a D800 and a teleconverter to get the same reach as the proposed D400.

      • 170
        ) DavidW

        Sean – I don’t think you quite understand the way the crop factor between DX and FX works. You’re not getting any extra focal length from your lenses using a DX body. You’re simply getting less of the same focal length, which can be easily duplicated by cropping an FX image down in size to match the DX version of the same image.

        • 171
          ) Geoff_K

          David,

          If you use a 200mm on your FX you have to crop your image to fill it whereas with a DX and a 200, one gets to keep all the pixles for the image.

          You need a longer lens to fill the photo with the subject, yes you get a narrower DOF for using the FX camera, however at the end of the day the DX with a 300mm keep all their MP for print, where a FX user has to toss some.

          I own both dx and fx

        • Thanks David, but yes, I understand exactly how the crop factor works. The same amount of pixels on a smaller sensor will, in effect, create a more magnified image. So to use the example of two cameras with the same megapixels — the D30o and the D700, both of which I own and currently take on just about every outing — I use the D300 on my longer lens because I get more reach. If I was to take the same exact image with both cameras with the same lens, standing in the same place, and then cropped the image taken with the D700 to match the image taken with the D300, the resulting image from the D700 would have less pixels. So in this example, the DX camera does result in more focal length.

  70. 167
    ) Walter

    Hi – I do not see myself qualified to comment on any of the above issues. I am just a very ordinary guy with a handful of lenses who is trying to find a way through the jungle of opinions but also, in all honesty, to exploit the second-hand market. Wonderful offers abound and that is where the calculations enter. Now, with the D4 and D800 in the open, the various gaps are considered between them and the 3200, the 5100, the 7000, the 300, the 300s and the 700. Trying to work my way through this jungle and taking into consideration the latest offerings of lenses by Nikon, things appear to gel, I think. Let me spell it out, for myself, that is (and for you, if you find this in any way worth commenting on): the D700 has been sacrificed. And as such, will remain the very dependable FX workhorse it has proved to be. It is replaced by the D800. Full stop. The D700 will remain in FX where the D300 was left in DX. One of the best ever. Now – next to be considered are the rumoured D400 and D600. I think it is pretty clear by now – extrapolating from the latest lens offerings – that there will be a D400 and it will be a sharpened D300s step-up and there will be a D600 which will be an entry-level FX-offering to allow bigger sensor enthusiasts to enter the bigger sensor playing field, lenses and all. I think, that is more or less a given. Now, for myself, and perhaps with a handful of other guys, we will have to make up our minds – do we want to go the re-fined DX route and there with the new and much improved 18-300mm lens or do we want want to hold on to our collection of FX lenses – 24, 50, 60 and 70-300mm? I know, this is, apart form sharpness and other considerations, a decision we will have to make ourselves while, perhaps, anxiously looking out for pre- Photokina rumors. I do think though there will be nothing unexpectedly new beyond the above. We still will be, I fear, none the wiser. I for one, would love to go for a sophisticated D400, would throw in all of my primary lenses, except for one, acquire the new 18-300mm DX lens and take it from there. But for now, it is still early time. What do you think? Sorry, for being so longwinded – I am but an amateur.

  71. 168
    ) Brent

    It likely goes without saying, but by Christmas, Nikon will have revamped their entire DSLR lineup:

    D3200
    D5200
    D7200
    D400
    D600
    D800
    D4

    The consumer wins again. The D7000 will be out on Ebay, Kijiji, Craigslist, etc. for $750 or less. Anyone lucky enough to get one will own a tremendous camera. I hope to be one of those lucky people.

  72. 179
    ) JR

    I agree with the comment above about DSLR manufacturers reaching a limit on sensor size and offering different features per body type/style. Just like we had in the 35mm, MF and LF worlds.

    In Nikon’s case, there’s no reason why they couldn’t offer all of their FX bodies in one sensor size, say 36MP, with variable image/file size, variable transfer rate and variable frame rate. The technology is there and it’s just a matter of time before it gets implemented across all the models.

    As for DX, the same thing could happen. Nikon could tap out at 24MP for their DX line and offer the same sensor size in all of their DX models; from the entry level model all the way up to a D400-like, feature laden machine.

    I would welcome that move with open arms!

    I do most of my landscape shooting while backpacking on overnight trips in the Colorado back country. The last thing I need is to haul around 2.8 FX glass. I would much rather have a D400 DX, 24MP, 8fps body(if the noise was acceptable, of course…and I’m sure it would be) than a 36MP FX behemoth. The difference in size and weight of the DX vs FX lenses, alone, would be the determining factor for me.

    Not only size of lenses, but quality, too. I cringe when I read lens reviews and see that so-called Nikon pro FX glass is softer and distorts more than MUCH LESS expensive DX glass. Take, for instance, the Nikkor 16-35mm F4 and compare its performance to that of the DX 16-85mm f3.5. Altough offering different focal ranges on their respective systems, the former is a dog compared to the latter. The DX glass is half the size, weight and COST!

    IMO, the only two Nikkor FX zooms that are close to being worthy of their price tag and weight are the 24-70mm f2.8 and the 70-200mm f2.8. DSLR lenses don’t get any better than that. If I’m going to pay that kind of money and carry that kind of weight and have to alter my backpack to carry HUGE glass, it better be PERFECT. And those two are the only ones that come close to being perfect. But the rest of the Nikkor FX zooms are a waste of money. Some may have a focal range here and there that are sharp, while others may not distort at this or that focal length…but none can stand up to the aforementioned dynamic duo.

    A friend of mine showed up at an event last week with his new D800 and several FX pro zoom lenses. Honestly, he looked like he was shooting with medium format equipment. He looked silly. His camera bag was HUGE and the equipment kept getting in the way of his shots. Everything about his shooting was slower than it would have been had he carried his D300 and smaller, lighter lenses. Would he have shot the same QUALITY images? Of course!!! It’s not like his output was going to be judged by a panel of pixel peepers, looking at 30×45 prints.

    Ultimately, he admitted to me that his new stuff was way too big to take outside of the studio!

    That said, I truly hope that Nikon keeps the DX line alive. In an era where smaller bodies and smaller lenses are becoming more and more popular, the last thing we need is for Nikon to give up on DX.

    • 180
      ) JR

      And to those who believe that at 24MP sensor in a D400 DX body would not be able to compete with the image quality offered by FF sensors, I welcome you to read the following:

      http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D3200-Review/Sensor-performance

      The principal strengths of the Nikon D3200

      The Nikon D3200’s great strength lies in its Sony CMOS sensor, starting with a record dynamic range that surpassed 13EV at 100 ISO, making the D3200 of great interest for landscape photography.

      But the Nikon is also characterized by a high color depth of 24.1 bits, the best score of all the APS-C reflex cameras. It even does better than many full-frame cameras and is beaten only by medium-format cameras and the Nikon D4 and D3x.

      The measurements: the second-best APS-C SLR

      With a DxOMark Score of 81, the Nikon D3200 arrives in 9th place overall among all cameras tested on DxOMark — in other words, equal to the Canon EOS 5D Mark III!

      The writing is on the wall, friends. Nikon *WILL*, in some form or other, come out with a higher end DX camera that will sport this fantastic 24MP DX sensor. Will it be in a D7000-like footprint? Or, a more advanced, heavier duty D300s-like footprint?

      I’m guessing that it will be a hybrid of the two. It will be heavier and more robust, with better ergonomics, but perhaps not as large as a D700. Somewhere in between a D7000 and a D300s.

      Surely, we’re going to be getting a FANTASTIC DX camera in the nea future!

      • 181
        ) Tom

        Please see my earlier web link posted re: the manufacturer of the sensor in the D3200….it is actually a Nikon produced sensor.

        • 182
          ) JR

          Ah! Thanks, Tom, for the link(I’d missed your previous post).

          Well, either way, it’s a good sensor, capable of better RAW output than the D7000 and there’s no reason to believe that the same, or better, couldn’t be achieved on a higher end DX body.

  73. 190
    ) Egami

    i wish if Nikon will produce mid level- all around FX camera , just like 5d mark3, it is nearly perfect for every one who wish to go into Fx arena, d600 will be far limited to Mark 3 , i wonder why Nikon makes it harder for their fans to choice , they remind me Nokia when they are dominating the phone market..they used to produce their phones according to the type of user ( this phone is for movies and songs lovers… this one with best camera for photo lovers …. this for internet user …ect..) until iPhone and Samsung took the market crown and the throne from them because of their different market strategy ..one product which suffice nearly all users..I’m thinking seriously to change my Nikon gears for Canon in order to get 5d mark 3 ,what a tough step to take :(

    • 214
      ) PAG

      I’m interested why you don’t think the D800 is a good “mid-level all around FX camera.” What features are missing? Everything I’ve read is that it’s a fantastic all around camera. And it’s $450 less than the Canon.

  74. 191
    ) DavidW

    If I were a betting man I would bet Nikon will not make another pro-level DX camera body. Nearly all professional photographers have gone to FX and there simply is not enough demand for a pro-level DX body. As a result, those waiting for a D400 announcement will be waiting a very very long time.

  75. 192
    ) thomas

    C Mon D400, cmon

  76. 193
    ) Mike Fook

    I bought the D5100 about a year ago, thinking I would decide which better camera I really wanted, and give the D5100 to wifey. Well, I’m STILL on the fence about which to buy. The D5100 has surprised the heck out of me and it has almost been adequate for most of what I do. It isn’t adequate, but it has surprised me, lets say that.

    Now I’m looking at the D600 and D7000. I don’t need a $2100 camera body (D600), and I do like all the features of the D7000. The D7000 would work for 95% of what I need it for. However, now that there might be a D400 or D7100 or D8000 coming out – I’m back to waiting and watching.

    There must be many of us in this waiting to buy mode… Would it hurt for Nikon to let us know definitively what is going to be released over the next couple months?

    • 194
      ) Adnan Khan

      Mike ,

      The D5100 and D7000 have the exact same sensor but D7000 has a built in motor for AF-D lenses and can meter with AI-s manual focus lenses too ,shutter speed is 1/8000 vs 1/4000 of D5100 and D7000 is faster in fps and has 39 focus points ,picture quality is about same or D5100 is 1 point better in DR :)
      D600 is a full frame D7000 with better meter and is 24 MP :)
      You can wait till the end of Oct. or early Nov. for the new DX body :)
      If they tell us then who is going to buy the current models ;)

      cheers!

    • 195
      ) Bare

      Mike, you think that D600 is FF F7000 it’s far from true. Although they share AF module, AF acquisition is much faster and better with D600. Also grip of D600 is much deeper than D7000.

    • 196
      ) TommyTobasco

      Mike:

      I think there are many people thinking like you… I am in “buy mode” also… I been wanting the D7000 but understand that the D400 might be coming out… I want to stay DX because of price but want something good in low light… the D7000 would be perfect for me but I would hate to see something come out better a month after I buy it… I have no problem waiting a bit but would love to know if/when the D400 is coming out… how much it would be… and what effect it would have on the price of the D7000….. and who knows, there is even talk of an upgrade to the D7000… does anyone have any input or insight…

      • 197
        ) RRRoger

        Right now may be the best time to pick up a mint D7000 used.
        A lot of people including myself are selling to raise money for the D600.
        There is also a sale going on for new ones.

        The D400 may never be built or be too expensive for most buyers.
        Very few photographers need more pixels or better sensor than the D7000.

  77. 198
    ) Eng Teck

    Hi Nasim,

    I’m planning to upgrade my camera from Nikon D3100 to either D7000 or D400. D7000 brand new now cost around $1000 while the rumoured D400 will cost around $1799 for its better specs. Do you think the difference between the two bodies is that great? Cause I’ll be sticking to the body for quite a long time once I go for either one. I’m currently only using the Sigma 50mm F1.4 and Nikon 50mm F1.8G, but planning to sell off the Sigma since I don’t really need two 50mm primes. Thus, I would like to hear some advice from you which body should I go for, thank you and have a nice day.

    Regards,
    Eng Teck

    • 201
      ) Adnan Khan

      Eng Teck ,
      You are getting 75mm field of view from both lenses ,you can also keep one or sell both and get the Nikon 50 1.4 G or for less same quality 50 1.4 D ,the AF-D lenses can work with the D7000 or cameras with motors.
      As for today in DX the D3200 has the best image quality ,but if you want a higher fps plus motorized camera then now D7000 is the best upper DX class.
      it all depends on your type of shooting ,guessing that you have only 50 mm primes. If getting a camera now is important then I think best option is to get the D7000 + 35mm 1.8 G DX (it gives sharper results on DX cameras as it is a DX lens) ,if you want to upgrade in future to FX then get the 50 mm 1.4 FX lens.
      D7000 is a marvelous camera and I’m using it as a second body for telephoto and longer zooms.
      Or , yo can keep the Nikon 50 1.8 and sell everything and if your budget allows the D600 full frame camera is to get.
      One of my friend has the best combination on D7000 ,a 35 1.8 G DX ,18-55 VR DX and a 70-300 VR FX ,all this costed him for $1200+120+100+560 USD in May 2011. I’m sure now it will be about $250 USD less :)

      cheers!

      • 202
        ) Eng Teck

        Hi Adnan,

        Alright noted, thanks so much for your help. Really appreciate it, will go for your advice. (: I had sold off my 50mm for now since able to sell at a good deal. Comparing 35 1.8 vs 28 1.8, may I know which one would you recommend?

        Regards,
        Eng Teck

        • 203
          ) Adnan Khan

          You are most welcome Eng Teck :)
          The 35mm 1.8 DX is actually a 50mm (normal) lens for DX and 28 1.8 G is a FX lens, it will give 42 mm FoV on a DX camera (multiply the focal length of a FX lens by 1.5 to get DX FL ) ,I personally don’t like it that much ,my 24 mm 2.8 AF-D is much satisfying on film cameras and gives sharper results on D800 and is also better on D7000 but on DX nearly all FX lenses give less resolution as there image circle is bigger and is made for 35mm full frame.On DX it will take a lot of pictures to find out the sweet spot :) ,it will be better to suggest if you tell what kind of shooting you do mostly and on what camera you have made your mind :)

          cheers!

          • 204
            ) Eng Teck

            Ohh alright. Thanks so much for your advice and information. (: I wanna try go into landscape photography and some portraits too, but on a slightly tight budget now as i’m still a student. I plan to get a walkabout lens like the 35mm and also a wide angle lens for landscape. Many people had recommended the Tokina 11-16mm Pro DX II since it has some improvements over the first version. Anyway, I decided to go for the D5100 instead of D7000 as the sensor of both cameras are the same just that performance of D7000 is better. However, I would rather use the extra money to get better glasses than a better body, that’s why in the end I went for the D5100.

            Cheers,
            Eng Teck

            • 205
              ) Adnan Khan

              OK ,thanks :)
              The D5100 is a very good choice but will not auto focus with the old Tokina 11-16 maybe new one is AF-s, 11-16 is very sharp ultra wide zoom but the old model had some ghosting issues ,I don’t know about the new version if they fixed that or not ,but if it can auto focus with the D5100 then it’s wonderful! just do try to avoid getting Sun in the frame and you are fine.
              For the ultra wide new Tokina 11-16 it will be better to wait and see some reviews and user comments on it’s weaknesses as it is a new lens. I’ve only used the older version on D90 and D7000 it was wonderful! better than all the Nikon zooms in DX class of ultra wides :)

              35 mm DX is a superb prime lens for everything. It can isolate subjects at 1.8 with wonderful creamy bokeh.
              You can also use a 25mm Kenko Auto focus extension tube to make it a macro lens in bright light for flower and insect PG. :)

              Also do not underestimate the 18-55 kit lens they can be found in very good quality on cheap rates as mostly people either sell them or just want the body instead. I have used that zoom and it was really impressive ,only down side is that it does not have a longer life if used too much ,I’m sure around 60-70 USD you can find a good sample do try it ,it’s light weight and 18 mm will give you about 27mm for landscape n architecture and you can shoot portraits at 55mm ,it’s cheaply made as a kit lens but very sharp and is very good contender for walkabout lens and focuses really close for macros :)

              If budget is tight then go step by step no one can build a system in one day as there are many things that have not been invented yet :)

              D5100 body and 35 mm 1.8 DX is a very good start ,having just one lens will force you to take better pictures by moving and getting the composition right :) ..if you find the 18-55 used at around $50 first try it then go for the expensive ultra wide Tokina.
              They are all at their best in sharpness from F 5.6 to F 11 .

              Cheers!

  78. 206
    ) Eng Teck

    Yup, I understand that the first version of Tokina 11-16mm Pro DX will not autofocus on my D5100. Planning to go for the second version as it has ghost control improvement and built in motor. Will be reading up on some reviews before buying though. (:

    For portrait would you recommend the 85mm 1.8 G? Wanted to go for the 1.4G in the future but seems too expensive, and from several reviews and also from mansurovs, the 1.8G seems like a good lens too as compared to the 1.4G, especially in terms of price too. Another alternative I’m considering is the 105mm VR micro lens, which can be used as a portrait and for macro too. I quite like the contrast of this lens, but some may say that it has too much contrast to be used as a portrait lens.

    By the way, I had sold my 18-55mm kit lens as I find the lens too small and the rubber ring too tight to zoom easily. So basically, I have no lens now, thus planning to go for a general lens and a wide angle lens first. Actually, I also found the D5100 a bit small for my hands.. Now comtemplating to sell it off to get a D7000 instead but can’t seem to find any buyers. If nobody buys it, I guess will just continue using it anyway.

    Cheers,
    Eng Teck

    • 207
      ) Adnan Khan

      I see ,well the kit lens would have been great for rough use and no worries if it breaks as not so expensive :)
      I have the 85 1.8 and 1.4 D lenses and both are sharp and more solid built than the G lenses ,remember the new G version is actually a handicap not a feature and only very few lenses are actually good in G class.
      The D5100 will not AF with AF-D lenses both AF-D lenses are sharper than the G versions. I am using the 105 mm Micro for portraits also if it happens to be on the camera :) ,it is the sharpest lens in whole of Nikon’s lens line and can be in top 3 of all the 35 mm class lenses.
      Sadly with D5100 you have limited choice in specialized lenses as there is a lot of cheaper ,very sharper stuff in AF-D and AI-s class.
      The specially built for portrait only lenses in Nikon are all 85mm , 105 DC ,135 DC. (I’m excluding the super expensive teles from 200 to 400)
      I have 135 AF-D DC but I like the 85 1.8 AF-D it is super sharp on all apertures and is the cheapest with good built quality .

      If you are changing your mind about the camera then for D7000 the 85 1.8 AF-D is the lens to get.If you want macro plus portrait then also consider the Tokina 100 2.8 as it’s cheaper but as or more sharp than both the 85 and 105 VR.
      If you like 85 1.4 then the AF-D is much better than the G version and is very well built a true pro lens but will work on D700o. The G version has slightly better optics but in real photography it is not of any importance.The 85 1.8 AF-d lens is flawless! from portraits to landscapes it’s performance amazes me and is the cheapest in 85mm class.

      You can exchange camera bodies at the camera store ,that’s what I do ,when I bought D7000 I gave D5000 body plus the amount settled but the retailers do buy gear for lesser price as they have to make a profit :) ,try different shops and who ever gives you a better deal go for it :) ( one option) … good luck!

      • 208
        ) Eng Teck

        ohh alright, noted. Thanks so much for your help! Really appreciate it alot. (: Anyway think I’ll just ettkle with the D5100 and go for lenses. Do you think I should get the 35mm first or the 11-16 Pro Dx II? For portrait lens, have to wait till another time I guess, when i had saved up more money.

  79. 209
    ) Adnan Khan

    You are welcome :)
    35 mm is great for everything if you want to improve your photographic skills.
    If your interest is more on landscapes and architecture and know how to use ultra wide lenses then get the 11-16 , personally as a starter lens i’d go for 35 mm.

    • 212
      ) Eng Teck

      Alright then. Thanks for all the advice given (: Have a great week ahead. (:

  80. 210
    ) J-Man

    Can you guys please quit talking about lenses, D7000′s and the rest. We are waiting for the D400. Go start a new thread if you must keep this up.

    Thanks

    • 211
      ) Adnan Khan

      LOL …it’s just about due J-Man :)) , keep refreshing Nikon’s sight :))
      —-
      hey ,no harm in helping a kid ,we all have gone through this at some stage ;)

    • 213
      ) Eng Teck

      Sorry man, newbie here, be patient with me abit thanks.

      • 215
        ) J-Man

        That’s cool guys, I understand that. Was just getting a little bit like skype/facebook chat, you know?

        Anyways…

        ANY NEWS RE: D400 OUT THERE?

  81. iam & 10000 photographers for waiting nikon d400 camera

Leave a Comment

*