Reading mode: Light Dark

What I want from Nikon in future. Your thoughts?

Go to last post
M Lammerse said:
rhlpetrus said:
I agree a new AF system is coming more likely with D4, but if D800 or whatever the D700+ is called sticks with the present AF, I hear the marketing people: "what if the 5Mk3 comes with a better AF"? (Or one that just looks better?). Even though, as you say, the D700's is not only better than anything out there but better than what most users of the camera can actually do. This is part of the equation, Nikon may introduce it first on the D700+. BTW, I and many around here wouldn't have guessed that Nikon would introduce the new top DX sensor below the D300 line. So tradition has already been broken once in Nikonland.
Click to expand...
The AF system in the follow up of the D700 will be an adoption of the one in the D7000. With new AF system I meant the one which is already there in the D7000 and that was already rumored beginning of this year (development of the new AF system) which I mentioned here.
Click to expand...
Why would that be the case? The D700 already has and AF module more highly specced than the D7000. I can believe that Nikon continues to improve the AF algorithms, and will apply them across the range but why would the choose to downspec the AF module, especially as its possible Canon will upspec the 5DIII module to the one in the 7D?
M Lammerse said:
M Lammerse said:
M Lammerse said:
It will be the D5100 in march. the big question is, does it get the D3100 or D7000 sensor.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I will bookmark this one, lets see! :-) Unfortunately no wine betting any more, otherwise I put a bottle on it for sure! :-)
M Lammerse said:
Agree, that's name of next DX, like D3000 -> D3100. My guess is D7000's sensor. It's there to compete with the 550D, and that's already 18MP. At that level, pixel count and video are big marketing issues.
Click to expand...
If there will be a D5100 it wil not have a larger sensor than the D7000, that's sounds indeed logic (even by Nikon logicality ;-) ) Nothing about a D400, wonder if we ever will see one.
Click to expand...
There will be a D5100, otherwise Nikon's new number system makes no sense. The question is where and when, but better be soon, because when they've sold out all the D90's there's a gaping hole in the range between the D3100 and the D7000, just where a D5100 needs to be. And its bound to be DX, a larger sensor makes no sense.

As for the D400, there has to be an even chance it'll be called a D9000, but I have this suspicion that the Dxx00 numbers are reserved for non-pro models and the pro models will be Dx and Dxx0. I would still fully expect the D400 to be a compact slightly despecced DX D4 and the D800 to be an FX D400, just like the last generation.
--
Bob
 
Hence the comment "maybe they will upgrade that one" ;)

I want a 50/f1.6 just to be different, still not going to happen. A cheap 1.8G replacement is all he/she can hope for.

--
I'z lovez my AiS'ez
 
What the hell do you care if I already own a D700 or not? What does that have to do with what I would want in a D800?
 
It seems like everyone here has really hit a nerve for you. It must suck to be you.
 
This is what I would want in a new D800 body.

My D800, (In Close to their Order of Importance).

1) At least 18MP.

2) 100% Viewfinder (at least as big as D3s)

3) Live View - Seen Through the Viewfinder (by an easy to flip switch)

4) ISO as good as D3s is now.

5) At Least 5 frames per second.

6) Overall IQ that is at Least as Good D3s is now, (but with more detail)

7) A Dedicated Multi-Bracket Button, that is Easy to Turn Off and On.

8) Good Build Quality, but Lighter and Weather Sealing that is at Least as Good as the D700 is now.

9) Pop-Up Flash.

10) (screw video, I don’t care a thing about it.)

They give me all that, and a somewhat reasonable price, and I’m buying.

Bob :P
 
Next D700:
HD video (possible with 60fps)
Bonus:
16+ mp
Better ISO, but not required.

I really miss video on my D700. Just don't care for having to separate units with me and my mobile phone just doesn,'t cut it in low light...
 
The main thing turning me off Nikon these days is the sheer size of the damn things.

My old Nikon rig with a fast zoom was simply too heavy for casual shooting.

I really like what Pentax is doing with the K5. Smaller but weathersealed and really tough.

I'm less bothered about fast standard zooms these days like the 24-70 because they are so huge and heavy ! I hate lugging the damn things around. I'd rather have a smaller, slower but still very high quality zoom and a couple of fast primes in my pocket.

I look down at my huge Billingham and realise I must have been mad to carry that load around the world. Never again.
 
topstuff said:
The main thing turning me off Nikon these days is the sheer size of the damn things.

My old Nikon rig with a fast zoom was simply too heavy for casual shooting.

I really like what Pentax is doing with the K5. Smaller but weathersealed and really tough.

I'm less bothered about fast standard zooms these days like the 24-70 because they are so huge and heavy ! I hate lugging the damn things around. I'd rather have a smaller, slower but still very high quality zoom and a couple of fast primes in my pocket.

I look down at my huge Billingham and realise I must have been mad to carry that load around the world. Never again.
Click to expand...
What Pentax is doing is producing a camera about the same size as the small film SLR's but with a much smaller sensor - since sensor size affects SLR size in a number of areas around the VF particularly, it begs the question of why DSLR's are intrinsically bigger than film SLR's. I think there are three reasons, the first two are to do with why late film SLR's were getting bigger in any case - the AF systems, particularly the AF motor and the multi pattern metering, which bloat the top and bottom of the camera. Then there's the rear LCD and associated PCB's which make the camera at least 10mm thicker. So, in the end, a modern FF DSLR will be maybe 20-30mm taller and 10mm thicker than an FM2.

So first thought - why have an LCD on the back of the camera? Surely a better solution would be a wireless link to your iPad, smart phone or other generalised display device.+ There's the 10mm thickness back. Now, one rumour for the D4 is that it will have off the sensor PDAF, and if the reflex mirror is letting light through to the sensor, it can use the sensor for metering too - so that's one component of the height gone. Next, bite the bullet and can the AF motor. Not going to be popular, I know, but needs to be done. Now, with all those there could be an FM2 sized FX digital camera. The D4 can be the brick, the D800 the compact alternative, only this time, truly compact.

Bob

+ The correct answer to this question, in homage to Leslie Nielson, is 'don't call me surely'.
 
What I hope for is that Nikon finally introduce SDHC/SDXC card support in their top of the line DSLRs. Most laptops or computer readily accepts SDHC cards only and I have to travel with ugly USB CF reader.

I don't believe there is speed benefit of CF interface over SD any more.

At least a combination of CF + SD like it is in D300s would be nice in successors of D3s/D700...
 
Body-wise , I'd love a D700s or similar, with better viewfinder, and catching up the D3s in low light (meaning finally shooting with confidence at iso6400).

It'd better get rid of the AF-lag (the delay from the moment you push the AF button to the beginning of AF action. It's a delay I never understood).

Better Live view (taking a shot without reflipping the mirror...), and working better in low light and displaying sharper enlargments, to better focus.

Would be nice to get an increase to 16MP or so, so to allow more cropping latitude. And with more pixels it usually get more DR as a boon.

Lens-wise ... A line of "more affordable" primes (F2, AFS... I'd love a 24/28, a 35 and a 100, priced well below their 1.4 counterparts). Simply can't justify spending that amount of money for a 24/35 1.4 now.

A long, cheaper prime, like a 400F5.6 VR, for 1000€ euros, extremely sharp wide open. The hardest part of going FX is getting the reach: sharp telephotos start from 5000+$ (300 2.8) way up to almost 10k...

All those lenses (400 3.5 and 5.6, 24/28/35 F2 existed in AI form, some even in AF). I understand Nikon needing to milk the pros, but if there's a market for 4 kit lenses and 4 dx series bodies (3x00, 5x00, 7x00, x00) I'm sure such a stratification for lenses would work too.

--

'The human race is a race of cowards. And I'm not only marching in that procession, but carrying a banner.'
Mark Twain
 
I am quite happy with cameras, what I want is 85mm 1.2!
maxmelvin19 said:
Sorry if this question's been asked before, but when are Nikon going to but an FX sensor in a smaller body?

Many will say that they don't need it but the point is many other people really want it so it would be a good move. Film slr cameras were tiny (think pentax me super) so I don't see why dslrs never caught up...?

I doubt very much that the technology isn't there to shoe-horn an fx sensor into a small solid body. I know I'd buy one in a second. Remember years ago when even being a professional photographer didn't necessarily mean you had to have a camera the size of a small child. Btw, I am not a professional but I'm just making the point that camera size and pay-grade didn't always correlate.

In the next decade I'd like to see Nikon split their entire line. DX cameras into various very small, well built EVIL cameras with metal bodied options at the top end and very small rangefinder sized lenses - interchangeable lensed versions of X100 type cameras, done the nikon way, perhaps. And then have all their dslrs with FX sensors with models for everyone - from small dslrs for consumers/travellers up to the D3 sized cameras (perhaps even with sensors and lenses the size of the Leica S2...)

I just think it's time that Nikon added to their excellent technology with some cameras that aren't just digitised copies of their entire line up from 20 years ago. And it wouldn't hurt if they got a couple of technicians/board members who cared/knew about design. It seems like the only camera companies (like fuji and leica) that still make beautiful objects need to make them look like pre-1970 relics. When are we going to get modern cameras that don't look like they were designed by bi-focal wearing, brown-jumpered geeks with socks under their sandals? Why does there need to be a disjunction between good camera and beautiful object?

(I actually think sony got close with a couple of their zeiss branded lenses like the black metal sony zeiss 85mm 1.4 - a modern looking lens that exudes quality and aesthetic minimalism, unlike the plasticky, chintzy, gold-ringed nikon equivalents.)

So in conclusion, Nikon should make a few bold decisions about their line up as sensor price falls and consumer expectance rises. A full FX dslr line up from tiny to large, a small dx interchangeable lens line up and some move to make more cameras out of metal again and introduce a genuine Nikon design aesthetic for the 21st century.

I remember the beautiful (cheapish consumer) small metal minolta srt-101 in a leather halfcase that my dad owned, that got me interested in photography in the first place. I know cameras are about pictures but surely that need not mean they have to be ugly, pedestrian, oversized, black plastic boxes...

What are your thoughts?

Max
Click to expand...
--
http://www.salmanh.com/blog
 
SixDasher said:
Please enlighten me why 100% is so much better than 98% that people can not live without it?
I'z lovez my AiS'ez
Click to expand...
The D700 is actually less than 91% that means if you fill the frame you are turning your 12Mp camera into 10.8mp and massively increasing your time in post porcessing.
 
M Lammerse said:
At least I hope you are joking...you never know at an international forum about camera gear :-)
Michel
Vince P said:
massively increasing your time in post porcessing.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Not joking, if you can't accurately crop and compose in camera yoiu have to crop almost every shot in post. I do have a D700 and it hardly ever gets used because of the 90% viewfinder.
 
Hugoneus said:
Better dynamic range than D3s
Equal or better ISO than D3s
1080p video with all the bells and whistles
New auto focus sensor (more cross types, more coverage if possible)
100% view finder, brighter than D700, at least as good as D3s
ISO shown in viewfinder
New grip with WiFi (file transfer) & bluetooth for remote operation
18MP to 24MP

I think this is a reasonable set of requests, no? ;)
Click to expand...
I would upgrade from my D700 to the D800 if it just had these four things...

Equal or better ISO and overall IQ than the D3s
100% view finder, brighter than D700, at least as good as D3s
A dedicated "Multi-Bracket" button.
And at least 18mp.
(Screw Video)

If the replacement for the D700 does not have all of that , I will purchase either a D3s or a D3x when prices start to drop.

THANKS :p
Bob
 
bbbinohio said:
Hugoneus said:
Better dynamic range than D3s
Equal or better ISO than D3s
1080p video with all the bells and whistles
New auto focus sensor (more cross types, more coverage if possible)
100% view finder, brighter than D700, at least as good as D3s
ISO shown in viewfinder
New grip with WiFi (file transfer) & bluetooth for remote operation
18MP to 24MP

I think this is a reasonable set of requests, no? ;)
Click to expand...
I would upgrade from my D700 to the D800 if it just had these four things...

Equal or better ISO and overall IQ than the D3s
100% view finder, brighter than D700, at least as good as D3s
A dedicated "Multi-Bracket" button.
And at least 18mp.
(Screw Video)

If the replacement for the D700 does not have all of that , I will purchase either a D3s or a D3x when prices start to drop.
Click to expand...
If you view is the common one, that would be a very good reason for Nikon never to release a D800.

--
Bob
 
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