The size of the D300 comes from having a metal chassis, additional controls on the outside of the body, a full size viewfinder and more ruggedness and seals than the D90. If you want a smaller body, go buy the D90. I personally want a DX body and don't want to give up any of the things that the D300 brings over the D90.
And the answer is no !
Oops. Did you just violate your Nikon NDA? Because if you didn't, you really have no basis in fact to make this pronouncement.
Ah, so this is a guess. Well, just so we know...
I don't know if its worth having this conversation. We were talking about affordability, and now you seek to talk about lowlight (new topic in this portion of the thread) and somehow expect that argument is going to satisfy affordability. Hint: if you can't afford a sensor that does great lowlight captures, you can't enjoy the benefits of lowlight -- you have to look for alternative options, and yes, compromises. Even the D300 and D90 today -- you know, those old, obsolete cameras -- are reasonable compromises.
See my other response regarding Nikon NDAs, but while we can hope for this, the rest of us would wonder about this camera that adds MP and increases high ISO capability all in one fell swoop. Not even the D3s managed to do that, so we wonder how a smaller sensor would accomplish this double feat.
No I did not order one ! Nor am I related to that camera in any way.. quite frankly i am using 2 D700 cameras at the moment of which one is in repair at the moment.
they very highly probably wont... so thats a highly probable guess : )Oops. Did you just violate your Nikon NDA? Because if you didn't, you really have no basis in fact to make this pronouncement.
Ah, so this is a guess. Well, just so we know...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It's easy to argue about equipment and technique, but hard to argue with a good photograph -- and more difficult to capture one .
Gallery and blog: http://esfotoclix.com
Special selections: http://esfotoclix.com/store
Wedding & Portrait: http://esfotoclix.com/wedevent
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03
Cameras are getting better with every generation and better for low light withI don't know if its worth having this conversation. We were talking about affordability, and now you seek to talk about lowlight (new topic in this portion of the thread) and somehow expect that argument is going to satisfy affordability. Hint: if you can't afford a sensor that does great lowlight captures, you can't enjoy the benefits of lowlight -- you have to look for alternative options, and yes, compromises. Even the D300 and D90 today -- you know, those old, obsolete cameras -- are reasonable compromises.
See my other response regarding Nikon NDAs, but while we can hope for this, the rest of us would wonder about this camera that adds MP and increases high ISO capability all in one fell swoop. Not even the D3s managed to do that, so we wonder how a smaller sensor would accomplish this double feat.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It's easy to argue about equipment and technique, but hard to argue with a good photograph -- and more difficult to capture one .
Gallery and blog: http://esfotoclix.com
Special selections: http://esfotoclix.com/store
Wedding & Portrait: http://esfotoclix.com/wedevent
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03
But the 50D will be replaced by the 60D which will have a plastic body. So in a way the places will be switched and Nikon and Canon will go back to the usual pattern of avoiding direct confrontation - the D300s and 7D is an exception. It can be a repeat of the D300-D2x story. Nikon replaces a high end modell with a lower, but with such good specs and value that there is little to complain about. Then they try get the prosumer target group of the D300 to take the step over to fullframe.
--Leaving a large gap between the 5000D and D95 would mean leaving room for the competitors to take that segment.
D3100 - D5000 - D95 - D300s - D700 - D3s - D3x covers all bases, just like
500D - 550D - 60D - 7D - 5D2 - 1D4 - 1Ds3
But judging by the numbering scheme, they could also be up to something else
--
Ai-S all the way!
I dont want to argue for what Nikon should do, I am speculating in what I think they might do. I do think that Nikon wants to pull over the semi pro users to FF.
--
Because that is where dx is going to........
Very highly probable scenario ! The new 28-300 lens is a sign that that could be the case..
Here's where I think the argument doesn't work. For me to go to a FF body for large field sports and maintain the same reach and viewfinder and AF performance, I'd have to buy a new 600mm f/4 lens that costs over $10,000, weighs 4 pounds more than the 200-400 I already have and is a complete loss of zoom flexibility. So, they want me to spend an additional $12,000 (I'm guessing on the cost of the FX body), add weight and lose zoom. How is that an upgrade? I'm not doing that. Nikon will probably lose me as a customer if that's the only path they offer me for the future. I think Nikon would lose a lot of other advanced amateurs who want/need reach/zoom and or aren't going to spring for a $10,000 lens.
