Let's be realistic: the D400 is not coming. Practical options?

Started Aug 31, 2012 | Discussions thread
Michel F Senior Member • Posts: 2,003
Re: Let's be realistic: the D400 is not coming. Practical options?

I agree with you for the most part. I'm in the same situation. I have an aging D300 and a D5100 and FX is of very little interest to me (mainly for reach reasons but also for cost). The option to keep my D300 for another year or two is out of the question for me. I hate to say this but my D5100 has better IQ and I find myself using it more and more just for that reason. I wish it was weather sealed, was as rugged and beefy as the D300, had a top LCD, had more focus points, had an internal focusing motor, had a faster burst rate but alas, it doesn't and the future D7000 (D7100 ?, D8000 ?) will probably have most of what my present D5100 lacks except the ruggedness I want and top LCD which I find extremely practical therefore a D7100 is pretty much out of the question for me.

If Nikon doesn't come out with a D400, the only choice I have is a D800 for it's DX mode. I don't like it but I can see no other alternative. A D600 will be another crippled camera like the D3100 was and the present D3200 is on DX. At one time I thought about selling all my Nikon stuff and going Sony or Canon but I have invested too much in lenses. Logistically and economically this would not be a wise choice for me IMHO. I have no doubts that some people will make that choice though.

Nikon will come out with a D400 and it's going to be the ultimate DX machine. They just want to surprise everybody. Got to keep hope alive.

Idy wrote:

Like a number of you, I've been waiting for the D400 for the past three years. With no serious rumour whatsoever, and the upcoming launch of the D600, I'm crying. But I have to be realistic and assume the D400 will not be. So, what are we going to do? I see a number of options, depending on each and everyone's use case and budget. I'd be curious to know what you think of them for yourself.

Option A.

Wait for a D7100 with improved burst rate (to be seen), better ISO, improved AF but unlikely to have better grip, still at 39 AF points, and still the same D7000 design/build.

Option B.

Opt for a D4 for those who need the burst rate if you have the cash and if you are not satisfied with the D7100's features. But you lose the reach.

Option C.

Opt for a D600, especially if the burst rate is not your key decision factor. After all, it would have a crop/DX mode (10MP which is just enough for the majority of cases) and you'd benefit from a full-frame sensor for hopefully great IQ and ISO. Fair enough, DX lenses wouldn't work on this body.

Option D.

Buy a refurbished or keep your D300s. But the sensor is old and some features pale in comparison with some of the new models.

Option E.

Buy or keep your D700. Not sure one would opt for that one but I've seen a number of users mentioning that option.

Option F.

Opt for a D800 and use it in DX mode for the meagerly increased burst rate. Very close to option C at a higher cost. Yes sure, the D800 is way better compared to the D600.

In my own case, I'm hesitating between options A and C. If image quality is really superior in the D600 case, I may go for that and give up on the burst rate (I'm rather a right-on-time shooter although I do appreciate a good burst rate for wildlife/sports occasionally). 10 MP is enough for me. The crop mode would give the "reach" which I need and at the same time have higher IQ overall and when I use wide angle, at least it'll be really wide.

I don't know. What do you think?

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow