Reading mode: Light Dark

There will be no D800 for quite a while

Go to last post
I agree that the D3X is a better camera than the 5D2, but I am also saying that there are not enough photographers willing to shell out $8K for its advantages, vs the $2.5K of the 5d2. That is 3 times the price, and the extra $5K+ can be used to buy several good lenses. The slow autofocus was accepted by the marketplace judging by the success of the 5D2 sales.

My point is that I seriously doubt that Nikon will produce a D4X given Canon's experiences with its 1DS3 vs 5D2. I expect that the high mp Nikon will be the D800 at the $3K level, and the D4 will be professional sports oriented camera, similar to the Canon 1DX.
Ilkka Nissilä said:
Ilkka Nissilä said:
Whatever the case is, the market has spoken, and Nikon can read the tea leaves as well as Canon can.
Click to expand...
So what you're saying is that Nikon should produce a high resolution full-frame camera which cannot stand humidity, drops out its main mirror every once in a while, and takes 1 second to autofocus in dim light, with the central censor, and not at all with other sensors?

I think the D3X will sell just fine against such competition.
Click to expand...
 
Hosh said:
The D800 is quite a ridiculous rumour, don't you think?

I mean, think about it. A camera with 50% more pixels than the flagship D3X, just as fast and with much higher ISO, all in a consumer body a third the price.

It would instantly make the all the top current cameras obsolete (D3S, D300S, D400, D4X), at a fraction of the price, meaning all current inventory would be wasted and Nikon's profits from the D800 would be dramatically lower (because let's face it, you can't charge $8,000 for a consumer body).

Nikon may have broken its "new flagship every four years" rule, but it'll keep doing things at an orderly, regular pace.

The next Five pro cameras will be, in order:

D3XS
D4
D400
D800
D4X

The D4/400/800 will all have the same resolution, probably 20-50% more pixels (so 15-18 MP), a little more speed (perhaps one more frame per second) and two or three more stops of ISO.

But yeah. I think the current D800 speculations are a dreamer's myth and really ought to cease. Nikon's already had two natural disasters this year. They're not going to self-impose a third upon themselves by throwing away all their pro revenues on a cheap (albeit high resolution) consumer camera.

--
Banff National Park / Canada
http://queenbathurst.tumblr.com/
D3 + 24-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, SB-800
Click to expand...
It's mental. The dreamings of some horny geekboy gearhead. You know the other thing. The olympics are in summer, barely 8 months away yet Nikon hasn't said if or if not they are realising any new FF cameras? Doesn't sound like a great business move.
 
Ilkka Nissilä said:
Ilkka Nissilä said:
Much like when D300 appeared and made the D2x obsolete over night. Think about it. You either obsolete your older models or your competition does it for you.
Click to expand...
First of all, the D200 already offered more or less D2X image quality in a small body; the D300 subtly changed the sensor and added pro AF; it was hardly Earth shattering. When the FX cameras came out DX no longer held the top of the line product status therefore the price was cut.

Nikon and Canon will always want a product for which they can charge top dollar. The difference in price between 1Ds Mk III and 1D X is subtle and of little significance - both are very expensive to most people and the difference is just pocket change to someone who can afford one.

The "problem" with high-priced cameras is just a problem for people who spend their time online chatting about cameras, and desiring to own "the best", not so much for photographers. The latter are busy working and could not care less if their cameras are top of the line or not; they just buy what they need to execute their vision.
Click to expand...
Very well said. It's rare I read posts on here that have such sense to them.
 
Ilkka Nissilä said:
Ilkka Nissilä said:
Whatever the case is, the market has spoken, and Nikon can read the tea leaves as well as Canon can.
Click to expand...
So what you're saying is that Nikon should produce a high resolution full-frame camera which cannot stand humidity, drops out its main mirror every once in a while, and takes 1 second to autofocus in dim light, with the central censor, and not at all with other sensors?
Click to expand...
If your referring to the 5DII that'a absolute fanboi rubbish.

Sal
 
"If Moore's Law held true, it would be a 48MP camera. 2007-12MP, 2009-24MP, 2011-48MP. "

Moore's Law does not apply to image sensors, so it is not a good analogy. I think we will see a 36MP sensor with low SNR or 18-20MP sensor with high SNR, but that's probably about the limit of resolution for the 35mm format, at least in the foreseeable future.
 
Hosh said:
The D800 is quite a ridiculous rumour, don't you think?

I mean, think about it. A camera with 50% more pixels than the flagship D3X, just as fast and with much higher ISO, all in a consumer body a third the price.

It would instantly make the all the top current cameras obsolete (D3S, D300S, D400, D4X), at a fraction of the price, meaning all current inventory would be wasted and Nikon's profits from the D800 would be dramatically lower (because let's face it, you can't charge $8,000 for a consumer body).

Nikon may have broken its "new flagship every four years" rule, but it'll keep doing things at an orderly, regular pace.

The next Five pro cameras will be, in order:

D3XS
D4
D400
D800
D4X

The D4/400/800 will all have the same resolution, probably 20-50% more pixels (so 15-18 MP), a little more speed (perhaps one more frame per second) and two or three more stops of ISO.

But yeah. I think the current D800 speculations are a dreamer's myth and really ought to cease. Nikon's already had two natural disasters this year. They're not going to self-impose a third upon themselves by throwing away all their pro revenues on a cheap (albeit high resolution) consumer camera.
Click to expand...
If YOU say so... :)

--
Kindest regards,
Stany
http://www.fotografie.fr/
http://www.fotografie.fr/fotoforum/index.php

I prefer one really good picture in a day over 10 bad ones in a second...
 
The best comparison is using the same frame size.

The D1H was 2.7 MP.

The D2H was 4.1 MP. Increase of 52%.

The D3 (which was the H camera) was 5.1 MP (in DX crop mode). Increase of 25%.

IF the D4 were to increase by 25%, then at full-frame, it'd be about 15 MP.
Roy Prasad said:
"If Moore's Law held true, it would be a 48MP camera. 2007-12MP, 2009-24MP, 2011-48MP. "

Moore's Law does not apply to image sensors, so it is not a good analogy. I think we will see a 36MP sensor with low SNR or 18-20MP sensor with high SNR, but that's probably about the limit of resolution for the 35mm format, at least in the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...
--
--
Banff National Park / Canada
http://queenbathurst.tumblr.com/
D3 + 24-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, SB-800
 
Hosh said:
The best comparison is using the same frame size.

The D1H was 2.7 MP.

The D2H was 4.1 MP. Increase of 52%.

The D3 (which was the H camera) was 5.1 MP (in DX crop mode). Increase of 25%.

IF the D4 were to increase by 25%, then at full-frame, it'd be about 15 MP.
Click to expand...
But what if it was a D3H?

There is a very good possibility the next models from Nikon will not be the D4 and D4X. Rather they might be the D3Hs and D3Xs.
 
Hosh said:
We already had a D3Hs, it was called the D3s.
Click to expand...
The D3s frame rate has been superseded by other camera's. Hence the need for the D3Hs.

And some forum members are dying for a 36 MP camera, so a D3Xs may satisfy them.
 
Nope, I got the order right. They're not going to release a consumer-level 36MP D800 before they release a new flagship.

They may very well not have a D3XS at all, but there will definitely be a D4 before a D800.

And there will be an upgrade to the D300S before the D800 too, which will be the D400.
Grevture said:
Hosh said:
The next Five pro cameras will be, in order:

D3XS
D4
D400
D800
D4X
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
--
Banff National Park / Canada
http://queenbathurst.tumblr.com/
D3 + 24-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, SB-800
 
Hosh said:
Nope, I got the order right. They're not going to release a consumer-level 36MP D800 before they release a new flagship.
Click to expand...
Why not? In that area a competitor of theirs is making good sales and probably lots of money. They don't. Unlike in the segment of the market where the D3s and a possible D4 is targeted - there Nikon is successful and not even the Eos 1D X seem to make much headway to change that situation.

I think Nikon is more likely to go first where they feel weak.
Hosh said:
They may very well not have a D3XS at all, but there will definitely be a D4 before a D800.
Click to expand...
Again why? If the D4 is a D3s replacement, that is not a segment where they are under any significant threat from their competition.
Hosh said:
And there will be an upgrade to the D300S before the D800 too, which will be the D400.
Click to expand...
That makes more sense - the combination of Eos 7D and Nikons own D7000 really makes the D300s vulnerable, and this is a crucial segment to make money.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!

By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny
 
The flagship is just that. It's the best offering. They're not going to release a camera that's better than the current flagship (D3X) before releasing a new flagship.
Grevture said:
Hosh said:
Nope, I got the order right. They're not going to release a consumer-level 36MP D800 before they release a new flagship.
Click to expand...
Why not? In that area a competitor of theirs is making good sales and probably lots of money. They don't. Unlike in the segment of the market where the D3s and a possible D4 is targeted - there Nikon is successful and not even the Eos 1D X seem to make much headway to change that situation.
Click to expand...
--
--
Banff National Park / Canada
http://queenbathurst.tumblr.com/
D3 + 24-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, SB-800
 
First, I rather belive they first go where they get the most money, flagship or not.

If Nikon has a flagship camera, it is rather the D3s then the D3x. Just think about it this way: if Nikon had to choose, shut down production of the D3x or the D3s, which one do think they would keep making? A D800 as in the rumours is not a competitor to the D3s at all.

Looking at those who really want a high megapixel camera (think landscape, studio, architecture shooters), a D800 as in the rumours would make a lot of sense. The D3x is a rather odd camera, as is the Eos 1Ds Mark III which is quite similar. Canon effectively killed the 1Ds Mk3 when introducing the Eos 5D Mk2, and I don't think Nikon would think twice about killing the D3x with a camera like a D800.
Hosh said:
The flagship is just that. It's the best offering. They're not going to release a camera that's better than the current flagship (D3X) before releasing a new flagship.
Grevture said:
Hosh said:
Nope, I got the order right. They're not going to release a consumer-level 36MP D800 before they release a new flagship.
Click to expand...
Why not? In that area a competitor of theirs is making good sales and probably lots of money. They don't. Unlike in the segment of the market where the D3s and a possible D4 is targeted - there Nikon is successful and not even the Eos 1D X seem to make much headway to change that situation.
Click to expand...
--
--
Banff National Park / Canada
http://queenbathurst.tumblr.com/
D3 + 24-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, SB-800
Click to expand...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!

By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny
 
... to wait till next spring or summer. Their d700 is looking quite oldish in terms of resolution, and no video and no useable live view.

Canon 5dII has been getting more buyers and awards and such, because it is more attractive to most buyers.

d700 is too old already!

Bernie
 
Grevture said:
Looking at those who really want a high megapixel camera (think landscape, studio, architecture shooters), a D800 as in the rumours would make a lot of sense. The D3x is a rather odd camera, as is the Eos 1Ds Mark III which is quite similar. Canon effectively killed the 1Ds Mk3 when introducing the Eos 5D Mk2
Click to expand...
They did not. The pros who need a full frame camera with high end autofocus are still using the 1Ds Mk III, 1Ds Mk II etc. It's just that the 5D Mk II market is much bigger and that's why it might seem there are no 1Ds series cameras in use.
Grevture said:
I don't think Nikon would think twice about killing the D3x with a camera like a D800.
Click to expand...
But they have thought twice, by not bringing the D700X to market (in 2009). They are protecting the D3X market, as is Canon protecting the 1Ds III (by leaving fast autofocus out of the 5D Mk II). Now that the 1D X has been announced it's still at a price close to the 1Ds Mk III's even though it has probably 5x the market since it's a fast camera.

Ilkka
 
260684 said:
It's mental. The dreamings of some horny geekboy gearhead.
Click to expand...
What is mental is the idea that 'pixels' are expensive. The dreamings of misinformed consumers taking marketing speak for gospel, including those that paid premium money for the former flagship iteration and now fear the eminent price plummet.

D300 vs D2x anyone?

--
Philip

 
Bernie Ess said:
... to wait till next spring or summer. Their d700 is looking quite oldish in terms of resolution, and no video and no useable live view.

Canon 5dII has been getting more buyers and awards and such, because it is more attractive to most buyers.

d700 is too old already!
Click to expand...
Mine takes just as fine images as it did three and a half years ago when new.

--
larry!
http://www.larry-bolch.com/
 
Flashlight said:
What is mental is the idea that 'pixels' are expensive.
Click to expand...
No one has said that "pixels" are expensive.

Top of the line, however, is expensive, because some people have to have it, and it would be criminal for Nikon to give it away at less than market price. It would be a gross betrayal of trust by the management of the company on its shareholders.
Flashlight said:
The dreamings of misinformed consumers taking marketing speak for gospel, including those that paid premium money for the former flagship iteration and now fear the eminent price plummet.
Click to expand...
No one buys a flagship digital camera without being aware that new products can move ahead quickly. What they also know is that they are using it while others just talk, year after year after year. D3X early adopters have been shooting with it for almost three years now.
Flashlight said:
D300 vs D2x anyone?
Click to expand...
The D2X was expensive because it was top of the line at the time of its introduction. FX replaced DX in the high end (for most applications) and so the price of the DX offerings were reduced since it could no longer claim top of the line status.

The D3s is less expensive than the D3X not because it has fewer pixels but because it's vastly more popular. Greater volume => lower price.
 
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