Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon NOOOOOOOO!

Go to last post
ImageAmateur said:
Phathom wrote:

Nikon Rumors believer an APS-C sensor might be dead with Nikon... Looks like another FF camera will be announced.

http://nikonrumors.com/2014/08/08/another-full-frame-nikon-dslr-camera-coming-for-phiotokina.aspx/

Only ONE FF spec makes sense after the D810 and D610 releases. It would be a USD 1,300 or 1,500 FX D5300 equivalent.

That would certainly sell well at such price and for many users.

However, it might also kill D610 sales, as the D610 really does not have the specs for many (AF etc) and the FX 5300 equivalent would satisfy them anyway.

Nikon rumours quotes USD 2,500, I think that is too much, either FX or DX. For just USD800 more one can get a D810? Not at all, D810 is tops in every manner. For the marginal increase in money, no one in their right mind would buy another camera at close to that money. Any new release at that price will flop.

That said, I think NR has it wrong. My expectation is an APS-C D300 replacement with 24MP, D4s AF and high quality video.

For about USD 1,800.
Click to expand...
I am certainly no expert on Nikon, but I think it would be very illogical for them to give up on the APSC market. There are too many uses for which APSC is desirable because of the crop factor. There seem to be very credible rumors that Canon is about to release an updated successor to their 7D. They apparently have not walked away from that format.

Time will tell though.
 
Agree wholeheartedly with the previous poster. I am well over 100,000 shutter activations and my backup camera is a d70. I have been waiting for what seems like a no brainer from Nikon. Replacing a number of DX lenses plus possibly my 70-200 Vr1 just does make sense for what I do. I feel like the next few weeks are "crunch time" for me (as well as many of us). I just can't understand ( and apparently NR can't either), how Nikon could leave us hanging .....
--
Barbara O.

Zenfolio | Barbara J Osborn Photography

Galleries containing event, equine and travel photography
barbarajosborn.zenfolio.com
 
n057 said:
n057 wrote
Click to expand...
n057 said:
Keeping things in context, before the D3, people assumed there was never supposed to be a "Full Frame" Nikon either. Many left Nikon in despair at the time ...
Click to expand...
People have been ignorant for a lot longer than we have been alive. Anyone who did not know there would some day be 35mm digital cameras falls into that group. Nikon never, ever said there would be no 35mm DSLR. Everyone else was just guessing.
 
n057 said:
Tony Beach said:
arachnophilia said:
Phathom said:
Nikon Rumors believer an APS-C sensor might be dead with Nikon... Looks like another FF camera will be announced.

http://nikonrumors.com/2014/08/08/another-full-frame-nikon-dslr-camera-coming-for-phiotokina.aspx/
Click to expand...
i believe nikon's design philosophy now is that APS-c is only for rank amateurs, even enthusiasts should be using FX. i think the D600 demonstrated that.
Click to expand...
The D600/D610 shares the same basic body as the D7000/D71000, so clearly Nikon hasn't gone so far as to relegate DX to "rank amateurs."
Click to expand...
Since the D7000 was the granddaddy of that body style, logically, would you say that FX is relegated to consumer DX level? ;-)

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
Click to expand...

I like your thinking ! :-)
 
OceanFroggie said:
OceanFroggie wrote

Met another lady with a D800 also using it only in auto mode!!! All that weight and not even using its features.
Noel
Click to expand...
I guess its better to have features and not need them than to need them and not have them :-)
 
Last edited:
DaytonR said:
DaytonR said:
OceanFroggie wrote

Met another lady with a D800 also using it only in auto mode!!! All that weight and not even using its features.
Noel
Click to expand...
I guess its better to have features and not need them than to need them and not have them :-)
Click to expand...
The D800 doesn't even have an Auto mode !

The D810 is better in every way apart from 1 fps and a lower price. It is astonishingly good for wildlife and I guess Nikon would expect Pro shooters to use this FX camera. After all, ALL super telephoto lenses are FX. For those using shorter DX lenses where a buffer isn't so important then I guess they would say the D7100 is good enough. They may correct the buffer anomaly with the D7300.

I hope Nikon produce a pro DX lens and if they do I will get one to augment my D810 but I don't expect it to beat the D810's IQ and low light performance even then.

--
Cheers, Brandon
FlickR site
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/
Flickr D810 & D800 gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/sets/72157629726734905/
Flickr D7100 gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/sets/72157633409947519/
Flickr AFS- 80-400VR gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/sets/72157633211093293/
FlickR Nikon1 V1 & V3 gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/sets/72157628774050455/
 
Last edited:
Rob Bedows said:
So, I've got a question, and not at all sarcastic. So here's the question for those who have used both cameras. A lot of folks say that the weight of FF is excessive yet if you look at the specs on camera weight with the battery in, the D300 actually outweighs the D810 by a totally insignificant amount. So, weight is basically a non factor assuming one already has some good glass (I've got the 70-200 VRII (among others) and think that it's a fantastic lens). Not having shot FF, I think there's no doubt that FF exceeds DX for DR and high ISO performance. Probably for detail and certainly for resolution FF rules as well. Still, does the "it weighs too much" argument make sense? If one is comparing D300 and D810 weights, it doesn't seem as if it does...
Click to expand...
The folks that talk about the weight & size advantages of DX are talking about the lenses that are needed to make the equivalents on an FX camera.

For example, the 70-200 f/2.8 on a DX camera acts like a 300 f/2.8 on FX. The difference in size and weight of all of the longer lenses is pretty substantial.

Now, a lot of folks say that the high MP sensors like the d800 negate the DX advantage, because you get about 15mp with a DX crop from the d800. But, that only works for those that are shooting things where the DX crop makes sense. For me, it doesn't work in too many cases when I am shooting sports/action.

Actually, I despise trying to use the DX crop mode on the d800. I don't like using a 1.4x TC on FX either. I'd much prefer a 16mp or more DX camera, where you have the viewfinder magnification and all the benefits of the crop factor for lenses.

But, the bottom line today is that many folks have accepted the d800 as a d300 replacement, so the crop factor benefits apparently isn't as important as it used to be, at least to those folks.

Kerry
 
Franglais91 said:
I had a D300. I now have a D800 and a D7100. Both outclass the D300 (in different ways).

Do you know what you're missing?

What is it about the D300 that makes you hang onto it and hope for a successor?
Click to expand...
I too have moved on from a D300 to a D7100. It generally outclasses the D300 in image quality, which has to be the main reason for spending that much on a camera. And if I can ever afford it I'll have a D800/810 too. But I cannot say either camera feels as right in my hand as the D300 did. And I certainly miss the speed and buffer.
 
Kerry Pierce said:
Rob Bedows said:
...does the "it weighs too much" argument make sense? If one is comparing D300 and D810 weights, it doesn't seem as if it does...
Click to expand...
For example, the 70-200 f/2.8 on a DX camera acts like a 300 f/2.8 on FX. The difference in size and weight of all of the longer lenses is pretty substantial.
Click to expand...
The best equivalence would be the 200/2 on FX and the 300/2.8 on DX because DOF (and other characteristics like noise that are associated to how fast the lens is) are the same for those two lenses. The weight is the same for those two lenses.
Kerry Pierce said:
Actually, I despise trying to use the DX crop mode on the d800. I don't like using a 1.4x TC on FX either. I'd much prefer a 16mp or more DX camera, where you have the viewfinder magnification and all the benefits of the crop factor for lenses.
Click to expand...
Adding a 1.4x TC is another way to achieve equivalence. It gets back to more fundamental reasons to prefer DX over FX: Lower cost (no TC for instance) and more viewfinder magnification.
 
Franglais91 said:
I had a D300. I now have a D800 and a D7100. Both outclass the D300 (in different ways).

Do you know what you're missing?

What is it about the D300 that makes you hang onto it and hope for a successor?
Click to expand...
I am missing the modern sensor. And that is what we are asking for.

If I go to the D800, I will miss the magnification effect. Since I shoot a lot at or around 200mm, I would need a longer, heavier, more expensive lens to get the same FOV.

If I go to the D7100, I will miss the controls I currently have, even with the D200, and I also *do* care about the build.

If you are happy with the D800 and D7100, more power to you. Sorry that you do not seem to know the finer points of the D300.


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
 
What I'm missing by going to FX is:
  • Reach. Without buying expensive new lenses. And a teleconverter is a poor substitute.If you don't shoot sports or wildlife, reach may not mean much to you. But it is very important to those of us who do.
  • Please don't tell me that I can use the FX in DX mode, because when you do that the viewfinder is not good.
  • I'll be out considerably more money. Why should I pay 1k more to shoot in DX mode? Not to mention the expense of replacing my DX lenses.
Please, just give us a D810 body with a DX sensor. Because if Nikon doesn't, maybe Canon will.....
 
William Baburchak said:
What I'm missing by going to FX is:
  • Reach. Without buying expensive new lenses. And a teleconverter is a poor substitute.If you don't shoot sports or wildlife, reach may not mean much to you. But it is very important to those of us who do.
  • Please don't tell me that I can use the FX in DX mode, because when you do that the viewfinder is not good.
  • I'll be out considerably more money. Why should I pay 1k more to shoot in DX mode? Not to mention the expense of replacing my DX lenses.
Please, just give us a D810 body with a DX sensor. Because if Nikon doesn't, maybe Canon will.....
Click to expand...
Pentax already does, with the K3. Only thing missing on the K3 is an F-mount, which gives me pause. But I won't pause forever. Going to FX will also mean new lenses anyways, so I am documenting everything to find the less painful migration path.

That gives Nikon a reprieve too :-)


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
 
Sony HAS to be loving this- more A77MkII sales......
 
William Baburchak said:
What I'm missing by going to FX is:
  • Reach. Without buying expensive new lenses. And a teleconverter is a poor substitute.If you don't shoot sports or wildlife, reach may not mean much to you. But it is very important to those of us who do.
  • Please don't tell me that I can use the FX in DX mode, because when you do that the viewfinder is not good.
  • I'll be out considerably more money. Why should I pay 1k more to shoot in DX mode? Not to mention the expense of replacing my DX lenses.
Please, just give us a D810 body with a DX sensor. Because if Nikon doesn't, maybe Canon will.....
Click to expand...
With an F-mount? Ahaa, don't think so.

Anyway with a bunch of lenses, flash and all the other stuff that is brand-specific incurs more cost by selling his gear and buying new from the other brand than the price penalty for FX.

But yes, a D300 with a newer sensor would be nice.
 
pavi1 said:
Tap0 said:
pavi1 said:
The logical upgrade for most users of high end DX users is FX. I see most DX users upgrading to either the D600 or D800 series cameras.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Isn't that a lot like saying the next logical purchase for an owner of a Ford F150 is a Ford F650?

--
Everything happens for a reason. #1 reason: poor planning
WSSA #44
Click to expand...
Where I live, Ford does not sell very well. But the Japanese cars do.
 
There is a - partial - solution for the D7100's small buffer:

1. Use the fastest SD card on the market (they are listed in the manual. I have Sandisk Extreme Pro)

2. Shoot JPG

I tried this out a couple of weeks ago when the Tour de France came past. Spray and Pray. I did 121 24Mpix images in 25 seconds.
 
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