Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon rumors say D7000 = D90+ 100% + 16-18MP + 25600ISO + mag alloy + ...

Go to last post
rhlpetrus said:
I think Holmes' way of seeing it as a consumer is right on the money. My brother-in-law was shopping for his first dslr. He liked my D80 and the D90 was out for almost a year, 1,200 with kit lens at B&H. He debated a lot if he should get a D5000 at 1,000USD with kit lens or the D90. In the end he went with the D90. Had it been 1,500 (with lens, likely price if body only is 1,200), I doubt he'd go with it.
Click to expand...
But he would have gone for the D5000. So the question for Nikon is how many customers spend the extra $200 (if we assume $1200 body price) against those who buy the $130 less D5000. Look at it this way, the D5000 price point is $729, the D300s $1699. The mid point between those two is $1214, so pricing it there they put it neatly between the model up and model down. remember, the D90 price point was established when there was no D5000 in the range, only the D60 and D40, with the D40 at a lower price point than Nikon would want.
rhlpetrus said:
If Nikon stays with this new (rumored) D7000 at 1,200 body-only, stop making D90-class camera, there'll be a big hole in lineup between D7000 and D5000 line models (D5000 is now 700USD now with basic kit lens), they'll will loose a lot of sales, my guess.
Click to expand...
Again, you have to stop confusing street price with suggested retail price. Cameras will always launch at suggested retail price and get cheaper. The D5000 suggested retail price is $729 body only. And very soon there will be the D5100 to keep the price up there. Why would they loose sales? Where will those sales go? To Canon - the $800 550D or $1100 60D, to Pentax and the $1150 K-7, To Sony and the plethora of plastic DSLR's?
rhlpetrus said:
They could upscale the D5000 line to pentaprism, dual wheels, etc, just like a D90 now, but then hole appears between that and D3100.
Click to expand...
I don't think Nikon engineered the D5000 body for a year only. There will be a D5100, same price point as D5000, probably 920k dot screen, D3100 sensor plus electronics. At $1200 the D7000 will fit mid way between that and the $1700 D300s/D400/D9000. (all suggested retail prices, all of which will drop as the model matures).
 
rhlpetrus said:
I think Holmes' way of seeing it as a consumer is right on the money. My brother-in-law was shopping for his first dslr. He liked my D80 and the D90 was out for almost a year, 1,200 with kit lens at B&H. He debated a lot if he should get a D5000 at 1,000USD with kit lens or the D90. In the end he went with the D90. Had it been 1,500 (with lens, likely price if body only is 1,200), I doubt he'd go with it.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what has happened with me. I'm a D80 owner with 3 lenses and a flash, and I want to keep the D80-specific features like an AF motor, big viewfinder, and wireless flash controller. My D80 is probably worth about $400 right now. I figured I was willing to spend $500 to get video w/ AF and improved noise/resolution, more fps, and an articulating LCD (all things I hoped for with the D7000). I'd stretch it to $600, figuring that that's what the D7000 would cost.

Then I found out it was $1200, and my response: "Ugh." Then I found out the new Sony A55 has an AF motor, has a big viewfinder, has a wireless flash controller, has an articulating LCD, and has unbeatable AF in video for $750. And it throws in GPS, in-body IS for use with fast primes, and a limited 10 fps mode on top of that.

My response: Sony, here I come.
 
And Canon makes....? Every Canon I know of with video has a mic input jack....

BTW, Disruptive technology always works that way. It gets better and better until it's good enough for pretty much everyone. In this case, I think it's good enough for me. If not, I'll be back with my tail between my legs. :)
 
Joel Kleppinger said:
Then I found out it was $1200, and my response: "Ugh." Then I found out the new Sony A55 has an AF motor, has a big viewfinder, has a wireless flash controller, has an articulating LCD, and has unbeatable AF in video for $750. And it throws in GPS, in-body IS for use with fast primes, and a limited 10 fps mode on top of that.

My response: Sony, here I come.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure of the logic of that. Sure, the A55 has an AF motor, but it's a motor that drives Sony/Minolta lenses, so if you go to Sony, you'll still have to change your screw drive Nikkors for new lenses. You don't win. In any case, every lens Sony releases now has a focus motor in it, it's only a matter of time before they leave out the focus motor from the cameras too. You have to face it, lens focus motor is a better system, as Canon realised 23 years ago.
 
My primary lenses will all have a focus motor (and do currently). However, I'll always have a used prime lens or two around that will be cheap and fast, and for the moment those lenses require AF motors in the body.

I've done the analysis, and I can switch everything I own over to Sony equivalents for about $300. That's $500 cheaper than going to the D7000. And in-body stabilization/GPS has been calling to me for quite some time. :) The biggest thing I'll miss is a high quality 18-105 lens like Nikon's. It looks like I've got to decide between Sigma's 17-50 2.8 and 17-70 HSM lenses.
 
if spec'd as rumored, at 1200USD, it's a perfect upgrade from my ageing D80. In fact, for many D70, D80 and some D90, this IS a perfect upgrade, not so expensive as D300 line, but with what the D90's line misses: better AF and higher fps, for action.

And sensor is probably best ever APS-C, again!
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
 
You are probably right, there'll be a DX D400, with some extras, as Tyrone as mentioned, like new AF system (not just better, but new design), some surprises.
RutgerH said:
rhlpetrus said:
quibobjinn said:
That's not currently known. Considering the anticipated price, though, I'd say it will have a motor.
Click to expand...
And the reason is, as some are already speculating, that D7000 will be the top DX camera, replacing D300s, with D400 or whatever name it gets, being a baby D700, a simpler and cheaper FX body in the 1,800-2,000USD price point.

Thus, actually, the DX line will go back to the earlier times of 3 body lines: D50, D70, D200. Now, D3xxx, D5xxx, D7xxx. Then it's clear D5xxx line will be upscaled to a D90's body level, like D7xxx is moving up to Dxxx line level.

The D70-D80-D90 sold so well because they are a line of cameras that an enthusiast likes, with dual wheels, AF engine, DoF preview, and all controls w/o requiring to go to a menu, at 1,000 USD body price. Nikon needs such a camera. My guess it'll be the D5100 next, same sensor as D7000, same video, but D90's body class.

At the bottom, maybe we'll see, soon, an EVIL (mirrorless, interchangeable camera) line arriving.
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
Click to expand...
Seems weird to release a camera that will replace the D300s instead of a camera that will replace the D90 as seems to be indicated. The D300 segment has hardly been a bestseller and the D300s is still pretty new. This doesn't make sense. Why not release a D5100 or a D6000 instead?

I believe this new camera will come in at the same price point as when the D90 launched. Even though it seems to be a big upgrade Nikon still has to compete with the Canon 60d and 7d. Upping the real D300s replacement to FX is not a good solution, Nikon still needs a pro DX camera. DX is better than FX for some pro users and the D7000 doesn't really seem to have all the bells and whistles a real D300s replacement needs.
Click to expand...
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
 
rhlpetrus said:
if spec'd as rumored, at 1200USD, it's a perfect upgrade from my ageing D80. In fact, for many D70, D80 and some D90, this IS a perfect upgrade, not so expensive as D300 line, but with what the D90's line misses: better AF and higher fps, for action.

And sensor is probably best ever APS-C, again!
Click to expand...
All good, and think of this

If the spec's right, and this D7000 is close of better than the D300s and they keep the Dx00 in the line as the 'baby Dx' then think how good the D4's going to be to make the D400 a load better than the D7000.
 
"That said, I would love to see a new body size between the D90 and D300. That would be the perfect body size for me, as I feel my D80 is a bit too small in the hand and the D300 is a bit too large."

I can't believe I'm actually going to say this, but today I was using my D80 with the 70-300VR and the body did seem a bit small with the heavier lens on it. But, I want that slightly larger body to be an FX.

--
If Today is the First Day of the Rest of Your Life, How Will You Spend It?
 
When I was shopping for my first DSLR, I really liked the Canon 20D, but the price was more than I could handle so I got the Nikon D50. Later upgraded to the D70s and now the D80. I never cared for the Canon Rebel line.
--
If Today is the First Day of the Rest of Your Life, How Will You Spend It?
 
Only problem that I have with lens-based motors is the increase in size. I like my manual focus, no VR, Nikon 35-70mm zoom for my Nikon FA film SLR. Compact and well built. Even the 18-55VR is a little bulky and is made of cheap plastic with a poor manual focus ring.
--
If Today is the First Day of the Rest of Your Life, How Will You Spend It?
 
Tyrone Wellhung said:
Tyrone Wellhung said:
Then please explain why the rumored d7000 specs are sounding like specs you would expect from the d300s replacement? ;)
Click to expand...
Because Nikon wants to give more bang for the buck than Canon. The specs look to me like a 60D killer, designed before it was clear that the 60D was designed to be a D90 killer. Put it this way, it's a camera designed to beat the camera that the Canon guys hoped they'd have been given. It's going to beat what the Canon guys have been given out of sight.

It still leaves scope for a D400, which will have most of the goodies that the D4 has in it. that plan worked brilliantly for Nikon with the D300, so I expect them to do it again. The only problem is, it only works when there's a Dx model replacement.
Click to expand...
"Leaves scope for the d400" is an understatement. Just what would the d400 have room to be? 11 fps? 18 MP? What else? If the d95/d7000 because essentially what the d300 is at $1100, you will get few takers willing to shell out the extra $700 for a d400? It really seems that dSLRs, like P&S cameras, are about to get a bit chill out period because so much as already been added to them that there is little that can be added without turning entry level and hobbyist level cameras into pro level cameras at dirt cheap prices.

Remember, until Spring 2007 8.5 fps was reserved for $4500 pro level cameras and now you expect 8fps to be offered for $1100 in an advanced amateur model? Granted sony is offering 10 fps with the a55, but it seems its implementation is being widely discounted with poor auto focusing and viewfinder/image display during that burst.
 
RedFox88 said:
Tyrone Wellhung said:
RedFox88 said:
Then please explain why the rumored d7000 specs are sounding like specs you would expect from the d300s replacement? ;)
Click to expand...
Because Nikon wants to give more bang for the buck than Canon. The specs look to me like a 60D killer, designed before it was clear that the 60D was designed to be a D90 killer. Put it this way, it's a camera designed to beat the camera that the Canon guys hoped they'd have been given. It's going to beat what the Canon guys have been given out of sight.

It still leaves scope for a D400, which will have most of the goodies that the D4 has in it. that plan worked brilliantly for Nikon with the D300, so I expect them to do it again. The only problem is, it only works when there's a Dx model replacement.
Click to expand...
"Leaves scope for the d400" is an understatement. Just what would the d400 have room to be? 11 fps? 18 MP? What else?
Click to expand...
The question is, what will the D4 have, because the D400 will have it in DX form. Rumoured is off the sensor PD AF covering the whole frame with very many AF points. Maybe 12FPS with AF. Probably 24MP. All those goodies which the D7000 doesn't. Remember the D4 starts a new generation of camera and the D400 the new generation DX.
RedFox88 said:
If the d95/d7000 because essentially what the d300 is at $1100, you will get few takers willing to shell out the extra $700 for a d400?
Click to expand...
Tjhat's why the spec bodes well for the D4- if a mini D400 is to be above it, the D4 will be quite a camera.
 
Tyrone Wellhung said:
The question is, what will the D4 have, because the D400 will have it in DX form. Rumoured is off the sensor PD AF covering the whole frame with very many AF points.
Click to expand...
You can't have the AF points cover the whole frame frame in FX. The bottom of the light box would have to be bigger than the light capturing area. That means abandoning the F-mount.

--
http://1000wordpics.blogspot.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top