Started Feb 10, 2013 | Discussions thread
jfriend00 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,355
Re: uh, it's really obvious what is going on

intensity studios wrote:

WD wrote:

I agree 100%. I'm convinced, the reason we haven't seen a D400 or new DX lenses is that Nikon is directing their energy, research and development in the mirrorless direction. The V1 is a working test-bed from which the DX mirrorless system will evolve.

Nikon realizes they're in a horse race and near the back of the pack, rounding the first turn and heading into the backstretch. They need to show their supporters they're like Secretariat, who could come from behind and win by 10 lengths! (I just hope Secretariat has a good Jockey!)

And while we wait, since the race has a way to go yet, give us the dang D400! It's probably the last one you'll ever have to design.


What do you need, nikon to send a telegram to you personally? They are slowly killing off DX while putting their main energies into FX. They are testing the waters with mirrorless, but aren't going "all in" with it. All you have to look at is last year's product announcements to see the writing on the wall. It's not that complicated.

Yes, DX will be around for a few more years. They will definitely continue the D3xxx, D5xxx and D7xxx lines for a few more generations. We *might* get a D400, there's a chance. And then what? It could be another 5 years until they update the "pro dx" line after that. Because it is not a moneymaker for Nikon.

DX always was a stopgap measure to get DSLRs to the masses. With the falling cost of full frame sensors, DX is becoming irrelevant. And please, spare me the "DX has more reach" argument. That is super amateur talk. If reach is a major concern with you, there's always teleconverters.

There's a little problem with your argument. The price range of FX + lenses is way more than 80% of the dSLR market is willing to pay. FX lenses aren't getting less expensive - in fact they've gone up in the last few years. There's still NO FX body that costs less than the most expensive DX body from the last generation (the D300).

So, if Nikon wants to put all their eggs in the FX basket, they can do that and watch most of their customers move to more affordable options that now have very, very good IQ.

I personally have no interest in either the D600 or D800 because neither is optimized for shooting fast action which is THE reason I own a dSLR and some expensive teles and I'm not going to spend $6k for a D4.

So, instead Nikon is just not getting any of my money because they haven't made a camera FX or DX that is great for what I shoot. And, because their mirrorless is getting the pants beat off it by other mirrorless options like Sony NEX and Oly OMD-EM5, when I buy a more compact camera, it's not even going to be a Nikon either. Nikon can go focus on FX and shrink their target market to ~15% of the total market. Of course, they won't last long as a company doing only that because it won't pay all their bills. Let's hope they're not listening to your ideas. That stopgap measure (DX) is what earns most of the money at Nikon and still is even though Nikon has put so much of their recent development into FX. Good luck Nikon if you think FX and CX are enough for you to stay afloat.

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(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