Why is the d7100 cheaper than the d7000?

Started Feb 26, 2013 | Questions thread
eddyshoots
Senior MemberPosts: 2,174
Like?
Re: To push people buying it and compensate the gap
In reply to JakeB, Feb 27, 2013

JakeB wrote:

FTH wrote:

between a pro DX / FX body and advanced consumer bodies. (even if the D7100 specs offer amazing options, it is not considered to be pro)

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Nikon D7100 IS the new DX pro model.

This thread started with the OP questioning the pricing of the D7100. I think the $1199 price point suggests very clearly that there is going to be another camera to fit in between the $1199 D7100 and the $2000 D600, something right at the D300s price of $1700. I don't know for sure what it'll be but I'd wager it's the D400. I'd be basing my wager on the facts that the D7100 isn't spec'd to replace the D300s nor is it priced to replace the D300s. On the other end of the price range, the D600 isn't priced nor spec'd to replace the D300s. Additionally, there appears to be a very real possibility that Canon is soon coming out with the APS-C 7D mk II this summer and the rumor mill has it spec'd out right where our own ProDX crowd wants the D400 to sit. I doubt that Nikon can afford to leave this segment undefended. The only alternative to a D400 would be a D750 FX camera priced around that $2000 price point, but considering the price of the D600 it doesn't look like Nikon is currently capable of producing a $2000 FX sports/action camera. For those reasons I'd be putting my money on a D400.

What are you basing your assertion that the D7100 is the ProDX model? Other than a slightly twisted desire to tweak the ProDX crowd's noses (one I sometimes share) I don't think you have anything to back it up.

-- hide signature --

eddyshoots

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow