Reading mode: Light Dark

Latest from Thom Hogan on Nikon and enthusiasts

Go to last post
T

Tony Beach

Forum Pro
Messages
11,967
Solutions
5
Reaction score
7,035
What Happened?

Thom essentially writes that a D400 would be a big hit. I'm similarly convinced of this. Also, Thom says targeting consumers with no real investment in your gear is shortsighted. Again, I agree with Thom about this. Bottom line (I think): Enthusiasts have been and should be Nikon's core market, and said enthusiasts are well served by a competent DX system (a mostly tacit point in Thom's article is that cameras alone do not make a competent system).

Anyway, draw your own conclusions, and by all means feel free to share them here. I think that rather than speculating on when or if a D400 comes about, a more philosophical discussion about why that would be a good thing for Nikon would be a useful one to have here.
 
Last edited:
Looking at the product timeline chart it is as clear as day that the D600 was the replacement for the D300S.
 
I have to agree, there are a LOT more "enthusiasts" than "pros" and the enthusiasts are the ones who can and do buy new cameras more often- bigger market and disposable income. If it is anything like the music industry, the full-time pro can't afford to buy every new gadget.....
 
Tony Beach said:
What Happened?

Thom essentially writes that a D400 would be a big hit. I'm similarly convinced of this. Also, Thom says targeting consumers with no real investment in your gear is shortsighted. Again, I agree with Thom about this. Bottom line (I think): Enthusiasts have been and should be Nikon's core market, and said enthusiasts are well served by a competent DX system (a mostly tacit point in Thom's article is that cameras alone do not make a competent system).
Click to expand...
I agree completely. Wow, this article is one of Thom's best, IMO. He presents a very compelling argument, without really mashing Nikon. For those of you that haven't read the article, I highly recommend that you do, simply by clicking on Tony's link above "What happened?".
Tony Beach said:
Anyway, draw your own conclusions, and by all means feel free to share them here. I think that rather than speculating on when or if a D400 comes about, a more philosophical discussion about why that would be a good thing for Nikon would be a useful one to have here.
Click to expand...
Again, I agree that it is better to have the philosophical discussion than the speculation. In the past, we've had a number of posts on why many of us want the d400, but often they got lost in the mix with posts of those that like to speculate on what Nikon will/won't do.

Personally, I think that Thom has outlined the philosophical discussion very well and, at least at the moment, I don't have anything to add what he said. I'll have to think about it further.

Kerry
 
Tony Beach said:
OceanFroggie said:
Looking at the product timeline chart it is as clear as day that the D600 was the replacement for the D300S.
Click to expand...
A consumer FX camera replaces a "prosumer" DX camera?
Click to expand...
I agree. I don't think that folks that really want a d400 have any desire to "replace" their d300's with a consumer FX camera. Some may want to add the consumer FX to their kit, but that won't alleviate their desire for a true d300 replacement. Lots of discussions on DPR, Fred Miranda, and Nikon Cafe demonstrate that desire quite well.

Kerry
 
Nikon are rationalising their line up and making a clear hierarchy. Mirrorless, DX, FX. An odd strategy in the short term as it alienates the upper DX crowd, but they don't want to compete with their own products. Canon aren't putting any pressure on the situation.
 
jkjond said:
Nikon are rationalising their line up and making a clear hierarchy. Mirrorless, DX, FX. An odd strategy in the short term as it alienates the upper DX crowd, but they don't want to compete with their own products. Canon aren't putting any pressure on the situation.
Click to expand...
 
jkjond said:
Nikon are rationalising their line up and making a clear hierarchy. Mirrorless, DX, FX. An odd strategy in the short term as it alienates the upper DX crowd, but they don't want to compete with their own products. Canon aren't putting any pressure on the situation.

--
Wedding and fine art photographer based in the Lake District, UK
Click to expand...
To get to the D300s' level of body features one has to get a D800, which, for most users, is overkill, especially those in local pro jobs like universities, schools and even local news services that cannot afford a D4s. I think Nikon will announce a D400 only if Canon announces a 7D2, and there are rumors one is coming, even though there have been such rumors for a long time now. An alternative would be a D700+ at 24 MP, but even that is overkill for many. But at least would be better adapted to many people's needs, including wedding shooters.

--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
 
Last edited:
Philosophically, Nikon have always been a company about pros and enthusiasts that really value their photography. I think a D400 and a D700+ would be very popular. They need the entry-level dslrs to collect more revenues and keep attracting all sorts of people interested in photography beyond smartphones and compacts.

I think the ercent downturn in sales of all sorts of cameras, including dslrs, whcih were doing better than the rest, will certainly cause them to rethink some of their strategies and camera lineups, as well as some of their lens lineups, like the DX only lenses.

2014-15 will be very interesting IMO.
 
I've been shooting Nikon DX for 13+ years, starting with the D1 through the D2h, D200 and the D300 for the last six years. Before that I had F5 (three of them) and F4 bodies, so I've been with Nikon quite awhile. I used to be an NPS member and was a SysOp on Compuserve's photo forum, moderating the Nikon section and co-hosting a weekly online chat about Nikon stuff.

I laughed when I read Thom's article, because I had recently told my wife that I'd be the first in line if Nikon would just stuff a 24M sensor into a D300, keep the other specs the same and call it whatever DXXX they would like. I admit I'd like to see the D4S Metering and AF in there too, but just a modern sensor would be great. I thought this was an excellent article by Thom and echoes my feelings exactly.

I have no big interest in FF, but that's partly because Nikon's current lineup doesn't include an FF body that appeals to me--The D4 is too expensive (and as I get older, it seems too big; I like that I can remove my MB-D10 and have a smaller camera when I want it,) and both the D800 and D600 are too slow. If I wanted FX right now, I'd be more tempted by a D700.

As a RAW shooter who does lots of critters, I won't buy a body without a big buffer, at least 8 FPS and a dedicated AF-On button, so I've had zero interest in Nikon's current DX lineup. I've been avoiding the many D400 discussions here because enlist rants about wants, wishes and speculation seems like a waste of time. At some point I'll probably try to find a different solution, but my D300 still works fine. I hope for better from Nikon in the future, though--maybe they'll wake up soon.

Danny W.
 
OceanFroggie said:
Looking at the product timeline chart it is as clear as day that the D600 was the replacement for the D300S.
Click to expand...
I would think so too. But then, Nikon should have upgraded the D610 with both a CF card slot, as well as SD. To me it's logical to faze out DX and go totally FX.
 
Your logic is different than mine :)
 
28to70 said:
To me it's logical to faze out DX and go totally FX.
Click to expand...
That's never going to happen. In a real sense, DX/APS-C is the new 135 format in much the same way that FX is the new Medium film format; even MFDB's are themselves crops of the old medium film formats, and those have largely replaced even 4x5 film format. The point here is that the bar has been moved because we are that much farther ahead in image quality and ability to gather light now in the digital age than we were in the film age, so the old paradigm no longer applies. Ironically, consumers get this even as the camera companies don't -- just look at how today many enthusiast photographers who would have used 135 format film are now using DX/APS-C format digital.

The reason DX/APS-C format will not be fazed out in favor of FX/135 format is really even more fundamental than the above mentioned reality of the modern age, it's that smaller sensors cost a fraction of what larger sensors cost to fabricate. No matter how cheaply you can make an FX/135 format sensor, you will always be able to make a DX/APS-C format sensor for a fraction of that price. This is not only important to entry level cameras, it also has a lot of significance for enthusiast level cameras.

Your prediction is repudiated by a simple fact, that being that we can have the features of the D800 for substantially less than the D800 costs, and what drives that difference is the difference in the sensor costs going from FX to DX. Again, the D600 is not the replacement for the D300, and a big reason for that is that the D600/D610 is a consumer camera and not a "prosumer" camera, so the argument that the sensor cost differential is somehow disappearing is a false one.
 
Last edited:
I don't have the level of Nikon gear and experience that you have, but I've done the D100/D200/D300 trick and each one was better than the previous model. It is only my investment in glass that keeps me from checking out the competition. And as I too get older, Nikon maybe just forcing me to keep my trusty D300 and not purchase newer gear from them. The ball is in Nikon's court......
 
28to70 said:
OceanFroggie said:
Looking at the product timeline chart it is as clear as day that the D600 was the replacement for the D300S.
Click to expand...
I would think so too. But then, Nikon should have upgraded the D610 with both a CF card slot, as well as SD. To me it's logical to faze out DX and go totally FX.
Click to expand...
Why? To me DX is to FX as the film 135 format was to 2¼. You did not see people aspiring to get a Hasselblad or a Rolleiflex as an upgrade to their Leica.

The confusion in digital arises because DX can use the existing lenses, and mentally people were used to the 135 format focal lengths. Nobody in their right minds would dream of using their Speed Graphic lenses on 135. But DX gives you the possibility to use your old format lenses. Now that one has to keep in mind the 1.5 multiplication factor, many can't twist their minds around that.


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
 
rhlpetrus said:
jkjond said:
Nikon are rationalising their line up and making a clear hierarchy. Mirrorless, DX, FX. An odd strategy in the short term as it alienates the upper DX crowd, but they don't want to compete with their own products. Canon aren't putting any pressure on the situation.

--
Wedding and fine art photographer based in the Lake District, UK
Click to expand...
To get to the D300s' level of body features one has to get a D800, which, for most users, is overkill, especially those in local pro jobs like universities, schools and even local news services that cannot afford a D4s. I think Nikon will announce a D400 only if Canon announces a 7D2, and there are rumors one is coming, even though there have been such rumors for a long time now. An alternative would be a D700+ at 24 MP, but even that is overkill for many. But at least would be better adapted to many people's needs, including wedding shooters.
Click to expand...
I find the gap mind boggling too. They could have produced a parts bin special for very little development cost a long time ago. But they definitely put a smaller sensor in mirrorless so as not to overlap with DX. Crazy as for many DX hits the ideal in terms of size, budget and quality.

If dslrs had started out as FX, then DX would have been produced in the same way as APS, a more budget product. If nikon and canon had a time machine, the d300 and d7 would never have shown their face.
rhlpetrus said:
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
Click to expand...
--
Wedding and fine art photographer based in the Lake District, UK
 
Last edited:
The only reasonable idea is that due to the natural disasters and economic crisis they decided to care first for the 2 groups most likely to buy something else and let the most loyal user group wait. But I think we waited long enough, if they do not come out with a D400 or D700 replacement by the end of 2014 we must understand that Nikon has given up on that user group and just expects them to buy whatever gimmicks they come up with.
 
jkjond said:
str8pipe said:
jkjond said:
Nikon are rationalising their line up and making a clear hierarchy. Mirrorless, DX, FX. An odd strategy in the short term as it alienates the upper DX crowd, but they don't want to compete with their own products. Canon aren't putting any pressure on the situation.
Click to expand...
It is impossible for a company to compete with it's own products. Products sold with the same company name goes into the same account.
Click to expand...
Two people buy a camera each from one supplier, but the design and production are different.

Two people buy identical cameras from one manufacturer.

You do the maths.
Click to expand...
What if one, or both of those people choose a different brand altogether?
Member said:
Member said:
Not coming out with a D300 replacement is more like leaving money on the table.
Click to expand...
Spending R&D, tooling costs and advertising it taking money off the table.

I'm with you, I'd have loved a d400, but took the nikon route and went full frame.
Click to expand...
Then Nikon's route is to strip down the camera's features or charge even more in exchange for a larger sensor, often lose reach, and charge more for the lenses? Is that the best way to serve the core of their customer base? Canon may not be putting any pressure on Nikon in this regard, but other companies are, so it is better to compete with your own products then to let another company offer the competitive option
 
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