D400/D8000 incoming...

I agree.   Multiple models help a manufacturer compete more effectively vs competitors and allow customers to go up the price curve as much as they want without feeling like they are forced into a compromise they don't want.

I believe Nikon would/could make more money with two separate cameras, one at the D7000 price point and one at the D300 price point.

The reasons not to make multiple models are really only when the market isn't interested or the cost of producing the multiple models is more than the incremental revenue they would bring in.

In this case, there seems like very clear distinctions between what two camps of people want:

D7100 camp:

• $1199 MSRP that drops down to $999 once it's been in the market awhile ($999 is an important psychological price level)
• Smaller body style
• Best features Nikon can offer at this price level with distinguishing features from D5200
• This is a high-end "value" camera.  Good bang-for-the-buck for action shooting (very competent AF and fps), but not the best Nikon can offer

• Willing to pay for best AF and fps Nikon can offer for under $2000
• Wants all pro-style controls and ergonomics (such as AF-ON)
• May want or appreciate larger body style

If Nikon tries to put these two separate desires into one single camera, they would have several scenarios.

Scenario #1: If they simply drop the D400 needs and come out only with a D7100 at around the D7000 price point and with an expected evolution of D7000-like features, then they give up a segment of the market and the opportunity to sell a more expensive camera to a segment of the market.  Some portion of the D400 camp ultimately begrudingly buys some other camera and feels a bit betrayed by Nikon, some portion buys nothing in this camera generation (not good for Nikon) and some portion goes to a competitor over time that better serves their needs (really not good for Nikon).

Scenario #2: Make a single combo camera where the D7100 inherits some (but not all) of the D300 and desired D400 capabilities and the price of the D7100 rises a few hundred dollars.  This would be a compromise between the two camps.  It wouldn't be a true upgrade to the D300 so it wouldn't capture all of that segment.  And, it would cost more than the D7000, but move upscale in features/capabilities.  The challenge here is that Nikon would be giving up on the very successful D7000 price point.  If Nikon really intended to do this, I think we would have seen the D5200 go more upscale in price than it did (it only went up $50 in Europe) to better fit in the gap between D3200 and the higher price point of the D7100.  Nikon would also be abandoning the opportunity with folks who were willing to pay more for a real D400.

Scenario #3: Make a single small body camera that covers all D7100 and D400 features except the body style and external control features that don't fit on the smaller body.  If this is truly a full upgrade to the D300 except the body style, then probably most D400 desirers will buy this and be happy.  If Nikon can also do this with at least 8fps and top of the line AF (key D400 features) and keep the general D7000 price level, then this is probably a win for nearly everyone.  But, if putting the desired D400 features into this camera pushes the D7100 price up several hundred dollars, then Nikon probably loses some overall sales by missing out on the important ~$1000 price level and creating a pretty big price gap between the D5200 and D7100.  Existing D7000 users are probably willing to move up to the D7100 (small increment for them), but many fewer people from lower price levels will move up to the higher level (the whole reason that companies offer more models at more prices).

Scenario #4: Make a single large body camera (a D400) and there's no direct successor to the D7000).  This seems the least likely since the D7000 is a very successful camera at a very important price point.  While D400 desirers would be fine with this scenario, this ignores a bit and important segment for Nikon around $1000.  It seems very unlikely Nikon would do this.

So, to summarize, #1 abandons the D400 market segment.  #2 combines the two with a compromise for both audiences (higher price for the D7xxx segment, missing features for D400 segment).  #3 would mostly work if possible at the D7000 price level, but that seems unlikely because the features of a D400 (top AF, 8+fps, etc...) cost money.  #4 abandons the D7xxx market segment which seems even dumber than #1.

None of these seem compatible with Nikon's desire to become #1 in worldwide dSLR sales (because they give up segments of the market that they once owned).

--
John
Gallery: http://jfriend.smugmug.com