Anyone annoyed that the Nikon D5100 camera will NOT autofocus with some Nikon lenses?

I did not say anything about the 3000 entry level series, and I agree with you there.

I see it the other way around. Why should "the vast majority" of consumer pay for useful features they are not getting, and would probably use if they were there? Don't you think an ISO button would be used by everyone who owns a Nikon DSLR? I do. I don't feel cheated that I paid for the AI lens coupling feature in the D7000 that I will probably never use, but maybe when I sell it someday, the buyer will want that feature and use it. Regardless, it is there if needed.

Some of the things I mentioned would cost pennies or nothing at all to add. Wireless flash and AF fine tune uses the sensors already in the camera and lenses and just needs a bit of firmware to make it happen and the cost is negligible, as would be a built-in intervalometer and electronic virtual horizon. . Please, How much would an ISO button cost Nikon? 50 cents, maybe?

You are being very presumptuous here. Many entry level DSLR users can not afford the latest and greatest AF-S lenses, but would benefit from the option of of being able to use older lenses that lack a motor. For instance, most Tokina lenses made for the F mount do not have motors and I own two of them, the Tokina 16-50 f2.8 and 50-135mm f2.8. The total cost to me for both of these lenses together was less than $800. What would comparable AF-S lenses cost me? A lot more, I can tell you!

Why should a consumer pay for a kit lens they do not need or want, which is the case with many Nikon ILC cameras? Why should a consumer pay

Really? I don't think so. I say make the product and let the consumers decide. Nikon can always adjust their line-up within 6 month, or a year tops. They have done it before and can do it again. We are not talking about designing a whole new camera here, but just adding some useful features to existing bodies. Why are you so opposed to that? Are you not on the side of the consumer who is paying good money for a camera and expects comparable features to the competition? Consumers are smarter than you are giving them credit for.

Nonsense. Nikon is doing better financially than any other camera company right now. However, if Nikon don't offer as much, or more in their cameras for the same amount of money as the competition, they will lose market share, and that would be a much bigger threat to the company's bottom line than adding a few dollars worth of features to a $800 camera body.

I think Nikon has a very good market strategy with their full frame camera line right now by offering excellent value and features where others are not. However, I feel Nikon has taken their APS-C DSLR customers for granted for too long now, and if they don't wake up and smell the coffee soon, they will lose even more DX users to the makers of m43 cameras who are continuously adding value to their cameras and lens line-up. Even Thom Hogan has replaced his Nikon DX kit for landscape photography with an m43 kit. If that does not worry Nikon, it should.
- Jon