Thom's predictions for 2013...

jfriend00 wrote:

What factual data can you site that explains exactly what Nikon's intentions were with the D300? This just sounds like another of your opinions that you are again trying to state as fact.

I didn't say anything about abandoning DX. You sir are bashing the notion of a high-end DX camera (Nikon's best AF, at least 8fps, pro-style controls and ergonomics like AF-ON, etc...).

I don't know how Nikon's inner workings work, but most successful companies look first at the market and would love to serve market needs that competitors are not serving. I personally think a D400 would sell even better than a D600 and probably have an even higher profit margin because the sensor costs so much less. So, I think there's a significant opportunity there if Nikon wants to exploit it. The fact that a competitor isn't actively exploiting it make it an even greater opportunity if the market is really there.

The D300, when it was first shipped, was a very, very successful product. No doubt the D7000 will sell more than a D400 just like the D3200 outsells all of them. I personally think a D400 would outsell a D600 because for most photographers a D400 offers more value than a D600 (it costs less and does more). Only those shooting in the dark or super wide actually need FX.

Can you share your factual data on D600 sales vs. D300 sales?

Can you share your factual data on D800 sales vs. D300 sales?

Again you're entitled to your opinion, but stating your opinion like it's a known fact (when we all know it's not) just detracts from your credibility. You sound like you just want to run around stating you know the future and know exactly what will happen (when we all know you don't actually know it). Your arguments would have more credibility if you represented them as your opinion and then offered reasonoing for why you believe that's what going to happen.

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