Why hasn't Nikon released a f/2.8 DX zoom?

Guidenet wrote:

The D7000 is at the end of it's production run and the price has fallen quite a bit. The D600 is at the beginning of it's run and yet we were able to buy it for around $2000 including a $500 lens during December. With this rebate and not long after introduction, we have the D600 FX camera at around $1500. I'll bet that had I told you a couple of years ago you'd be able to buy a 24 mp full frame camera from Nikon for that price, you'd have choked. I actually did on these forums several times.

So, if the price of FX has fallen so much that we can put a 24 mp sensor in a camera at that price and make money for Nikon, the middle man and the retailer, how far has the cost fallen in just a few years since the D3X? Think about it.

As Nikon cranks out these newer steppers and as Sony gets better and better, the price drops. This is true of any electonics. Minituration shrinks and the price drops. Look at computer CPUs which actually are much more complex than a sensor. I paid $1259 for my first meg of RAM from Applied Engineering. That was when Bill Gates was telling the world nobody would ever need more than 640k. What's 8 Gig of RAM cost these days? Nothing much. It costs next to nothing to make anymore.

I'll bet also had I said two years ago, Nikon would release a D700 replacement with 36 mp, you'd also have choked and pointed out how that couldn't happen without noise going out the roof.

So, I'm telling you now. In a couple of years, you'll see a sub-$1000 FX camera. You won't remember this conversation and it won't seem a big deal then, but it will happen just like the D600 happened not long after the D3X.. just like the D800 happened with incredible dynamic range and low noise. Science and technology double every couple of years or so, and the price keeps falling.

--
Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile