Pretty much exactly what people have been asking for in a D400 for years, isn't it.
Since they say March 2014 for the Canon, maybe in 4 or 5 months we'll see something about a D400.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Since they say March 2014 for the Canon, maybe in 4 or 5 months we'll see something about a D400.
Well I am, since he started this thread, and I presume he will be back shortly to answer
maybe you should ask him why he wants a new camera before telling he doesn't?
n057
Veteran Member
??????
He has said so before, he wants a DX D400, not FX
JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
jimoyer
Veteran Member
Only in the DPR Forums will two people argue about what a 3rd person wants/needs/etc. 
n057
Veteran Member
jimoyer wrote:
Only in the DPR Forums will two people argue about what a 3rd person wants/needs/etc.
JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
P
Patco
Guest
Or one of these with a sensor (not so good for action/sports, though):
http://www.fotoart.gr/photography/history/historyphotos/onephotoonestory/thelargestcamera.htm
--
Patco
A photograph is more than a bunch of pixels
jfriend00
Veteran Member
I laugh at this notion. When did someone ever have too good a product to release? If it's "too good" that means tons of people will want to buy it. Isn't that great for a manufacturer, particularly in these times of challenging sales?
They can price it appropriately so that they're glad to have the sales from it, even if some people buy it instead of something else.
Besides, if it's possible to build a really good one, then someone else (Pentax, perhaps) is going to do it and then where is Nikon - losing sales to some other company because they were afraid of making too good a product.
n057
Veteran Member
I would have to give up the shorter long lenses, the reach and the FPS, but I am salivating at the tought of the shallow DOF, the DR, the high-ISO, the resolution ... Bigger is better no?
And it sure would look retro
JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
It has amazing details, DR, and AF. You will be set for a long long time... the above shot shows incredible details in distant foliage (try viewing at 1:1). nikon never lost its mojo, just trying to focus on crushing canon in every way at the moment.
D800E is definitely pricey but it is stunning when it comes to everything in a package that is a joy to use.
Below are 100% crop samples from my recent trip to India. the IQ looks like it have been resized
of course D400 will be an ideal DX camera - when it does come out
Attachments
Last edited:
rhlpetrus
Veteran Member
I understand the frustration of those that want a fast camera with tough built and APS-C sensor for reach. But you are basically a WA shooter that likes great tonal range. An FF camera that dispenses with most of the extras of the digital age could work very well you. I don't think Nikon will actually build a retro body, it'll certainly have a good amount of modern flexibility, in a tighter body and excellent build.
What do you think?
What do you think?
jimoyer
Veteran Member
Very nice images Devendra. It's images like that, and the nearly eternal delay of the D400 that saw me go to a D7100 as a temporary stop gap, and ultimately make the decision that full frame is the path for me. If Nikon comes out with something worthy of the DX legacy I may change my mind, but I've given up on waiting/hoping. I currently am down to 2 DX lenses and that is going to be 1 in the immediate future.
Kerry Pierce
Veteran Member
I don't want to try to speak for Dez, or anyone else for that matter. But, when it comes to making a choice for the lesser of 2 evils, that's not a good thing.
Sure, FX would likely work for Dez, for much (perhaps all) of what he does, but at what extra cost? If the d400 would do what he wants done, at half the price (including lenses), then what is the point of going FX?
Well, by not providing an alternative, that's what Nikon wants people to do. Personally, I am greatly offended by that. People should go FX because it is what they want to do, not because they don't have a viable DX camera with the features that they want....
A lot of what Dez does, I used to do and still do once in a while. There's just no way I'd want to take my d800 and expensive lenses downtown. That is tantamount to painting a target on your back, and camera insurance doesn't cover the issues, when you're pushing up the grass in the local cemetery or sitting in a local ICU.
Then, there is simply the matter of cost. Why should someone buy a $3k camera, when there should be one that suits them, is available for under $2k, one that gives you the FOV that you like and are accustomed to shooting and doesn't require that you buy new lenses?
I'd much rather do my cityscapes and other stuff that I do in the city, with one of my DX bodies, usually the d300. I won't take my d3s or d800 downtown at all, unless I'm going to an indoor event that has the security set up so I don't have to worry about being inside or getting in/out.
Kerry
Sure, FX would likely work for Dez, for much (perhaps all) of what he does, but at what extra cost? If the d400 would do what he wants done, at half the price (including lenses), then what is the point of going FX?
Well, by not providing an alternative, that's what Nikon wants people to do. Personally, I am greatly offended by that. People should go FX because it is what they want to do, not because they don't have a viable DX camera with the features that they want....
A lot of what Dez does, I used to do and still do once in a while. There's just no way I'd want to take my d800 and expensive lenses downtown. That is tantamount to painting a target on your back, and camera insurance doesn't cover the issues, when you're pushing up the grass in the local cemetery or sitting in a local ICU.
Then, there is simply the matter of cost. Why should someone buy a $3k camera, when there should be one that suits them, is available for under $2k, one that gives you the FOV that you like and are accustomed to shooting and doesn't require that you buy new lenses?
I'd much rather do my cityscapes and other stuff that I do in the city, with one of my DX bodies, usually the d300. I won't take my d3s or d800 downtown at all, unless I'm going to an indoor event that has the security set up so I don't have to worry about being inside or getting in/out.
Kerry
Rockwallaby
Forum Enthusiast
If a D400 is in the wind, then Nikon should grow some balls and tell us. If Nikon would just make a press release to confirm that they intend to offer a D300 replacement in the near future, it would generate some positive energy for their customers. If there is not going to be a D300 replacement, then just say it so that people can can get on with making decisions on what gear they want to get.
This forum post and others like it are evidence that people have lost confidence in the Nikon brand/management such that negativity is now surfacing. Negativity and talk of the benefits of other brands on a Nikon forum is not a good indicator. Erosion of sales potential for Nikon can be the only result.
This forum post and others like it are evidence that people have lost confidence in the Nikon brand/management such that negativity is now surfacing. Negativity and talk of the benefits of other brands on a Nikon forum is not a good indicator. Erosion of sales potential for Nikon can be the only result.
B
Bajerunner
Guest
Rockwallaby
Forum Enthusiast
You are right Kerry, there are some of us who don't want to fork out $3k+ for a D800 that still does not deliver the capabilities many of us have enjoyed in the D300 feature set. We would like a new camera more in tune with sports/fast action shooters at a reasonable price.
Let me know where we can buy a D400?
No people will buy what they think is a great camera that meets their needs at the time of purchase
You are seriously stereotyping NYC here.
Maybe the downtown of the city you live is unsafe. But in NYC - camera's of all types are everywhere. I have shot in the dark in Central Park multiple times. Oh yeah, my D800E is a tool that can act as a heavy hammer/weapon too - dual usage!I think Dez has some amazing lenses. Mostly FX too. An FX body will be 1k more depending on when D400 comes out.
being paranoid will not save you anywhere - whether inside a city or a long hiking trail through the bear country or hot desert. i am happy to shoot in every possible condition to get away with the best shot.
Attachments
Last edited:
Kerry Pierce
Veteran Member
Why do you have to take an attitude?
The real point to my post is that there are are legitimate reasons that the simplistic "Buy a d800" answer that is frequently thrown around here, simply doesn't work.
We'll have to agree to disagree on that.
I am not going to debate this issue. First, what you are willing to do, is not the standard by which everyone else is measured. Second, this is just a diversion from the main point that I made. Not everyone wants to buy and use FX and there is absolutely nothing wrong with anyone that doesn't want to do so, no matter what the reason.You are seriously stereotyping NYC here.
Kerry
jimrpdx
Veteran Member
And ironically, similar BS is in the Pentax forum with a retro-LX rumor. Even rumors are losing their creativity nowadays. The only thing sillier than these rumors would be their coming true. :-|
jfriend00
Veteran Member
DezM
Veteran Member
For the simple reason that the sensors found in the recent Nikon bodies with increased dynamic range are made by Sony. I'm not seriously considering but we all have more options then ever before.
The new Sony FF mirrorless cameras are still not there yet. I own a NEX and really like it but not so much for full pro use.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum