The next Nikon cameras

[Duke Leto]

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/07/entire-nikon-2009-2010-dslr-product-roadmap-leaked/

[rioja]

I think I'll wait until there's something better on offer !!!!!

[Gentoo]

I saw this on nikonrumors. Doesn't yet impress me either.

[StuartReeves]

Some interesting lenses though.

[stoop]

I was about to buy the 300mm f4 in the coming months but see it will have VR in 2010! ...and an AF-S 400mm f5.6 VR should be nice for birders! Lenses look great! I'm planning some birding trips for the end of this year...what to do?

[pe'rigin]

I’m not as pessimistic as everybody else, I think Nikon have just ‘bumped-up’ their range. We can’t expect revolution at this time, there is a downturn worldwide which will affect the way consumers and manufacturers think and respond.

What is important is how Nikon structure their prices for these products. It’s a stagnating market, the larger percentage of consumers want cheaper all-in-one cameras.

The carrying of lenses, tripods and all the other flotsam & jetsam is not appealing to many people.

The 300mm, and 400mm VR will be eagerly awaited.

[rioja]

I think one or two people are taking this list as a done deal. It's not confirmed by any means and is most probably a figment of someone's imagination.
Whenever you buy anything that involves fast moving technology you risk seeing your purchase being outdated in next to no time, however, the longer you delay the more you deny yourself the pleasure. Live life now !


I'm waiting to see what replaces the D300, which I have lusted after for 18 months;)

[Phil Bishop]

Not exactly convinced about any of these. The D4 specs look nice, and some of the lenses could be useful, but how much of this is real, and how much is just fantasy is anyone's guess.
Have just been reading Thom Hogans overview of Nikons digital history and future roadmap (probably in response to this and similar rumour mongers) and he suggests that a D4 is not likely until 2011.
http://www.bythom.com/nikonroadmap.htm

[Birder Ozzie]

I'm defo not convinced. Why on earth would Nikon bring out a D300s in 2009 followed by a D400 just one year after?? Also, the 400 f5.6 G has no VR.
I also don't believe than the D4 will have 16fps. I hope it's true though. The 120-450 looks nice!!

[pduxon]

I'm defo not convinced. Why on earth would Nikon bring out a D300s in 2009 followed by a D400 just one year after?? Also, the 400 f5.6 G has no VR.
I also don't believe than the D4 will have 16fps. I hope it's true though. The 120-450 looks nice!!

well the d70s cam out in '05 and the d80 in 06.

the 300s is a holding position. slightly "refreshed" video. apparently the out of camera jpegs are "slightly" better from the d5000/d90 so slightly better jpeg performance.

the 400f5.6 does have VR on that list.

its probably a wish list. although I'd imagine at least 3 of the lenses 120-450 300f4 and 400f5.6 would be popular here!

the hot rumour is that the 3000 will be launched first week of august if that has 7 point af then the list will gain some credence. since I think it is expected to have a 3 point af ala the d60.

[pe'rigin]

We just don’t know what Nikon intends to launch. Thom Hogan has given a pretty good anayisis.

With the D3 and D700 Nikon edged in front of Canon, you would have thought that they would have delivered the ‘coup de grace’ on Canon, but they have always been a Company with a capital ‘C’ for conservatism.

The market is ready for the Nikon 15Mb, DX, self cleaning, ISO and FPS matching the D700, all sitting in a D3 body, price it sensibly at around the D700 and it will fly off the shelves. Granted the gross profit per item may have to be reduced but the World is in a global recession. Nikon is no different than any other equipment manufacturers who have to change direction to maintain market share.

Those people who have D1, D2’s, D200, D60, D80 and even D300 would consider upgrading.

Canon on the other hand have a different scenario, they will launch a MkIV, but most of those people with MkII’s and III’s will question the justification whether spending another £3+ on a camera that delivers exactly the same image quality, only a wee bit bigger and faster.

Canon have saturated their middle market, there’s room (just) for a Nikon.

[rioja]

The market is ready for the Nikon 15Mb, DX, self cleaning, ISO and FPS matching the D700, all sitting in a D3 body, price it sensibly at around the D700 and it will fly off the shelves. Gmarket share.



I'll have one of those please !

and I won't settle for anything much less either.

[pduxon]

We just don’t know what Nikon intends to launch. Thom Hogan has given a pretty good anayisis.

With the D3 and D700 Nikon edged in front of Canon, you would have thought that they would have delivered the ‘coup de grace’ on Canon, but they have always been a Company with a capital ‘C’ for conservatism.

The market is ready for the Nikon 15Mb, DX, self cleaning, ISO and FPS matching the D700, all sitting in a D3 body, price it sensibly at around the D700 and it will fly off the shelves. Granted the gross profit per item may have to be reduced but the World is in a global recession. Nikon is no different than any other equipment manufacturers who have to change direction to maintain market share.

Those people who have D1, D2’s, D200, D60, D80 and even D300 would consider upgrading.

Canon on the other hand have a different scenario, they will launch a MkIV, but most of those people with MkII’s and III’s will question the justification whether spending another £3+ on a camera that delivers exactly the same image quality, only a wee bit bigger and faster.

Canon have saturated their middle market, there’s room (just) for a Nikon.

canon could do the same thing. price it between the 50d and 5d mkII....

the camera you describe doesn't really interest me. Will it fly off the shelves? image quality. if it isn't better than the d300 what's the point? I accept some pros will want it but for most amateurs? they'd be off spending the money on lenses.

I wonder if we are reaching saturation point. The latest Sony cameras got an underwhelming response.

now me personally? can I have a p6000 body. a d40/d60 sensor (got to keep the cost down eh) and give it a 18-55 equiv lens and I'll be very happy.

if nikon aren't paying attention and canon want to do something similar or panasonic......

[rioja]

image quality. if it isn't better than the d300 what's the point?

Lots of point if you don't happen to have a D300...like me !

[Gentoo]

Here's what we're talking about on nikonrumors:

http://nikonrumors.com/2009/07/24/nikon-rumors-and-expectations-for-next-week-recap.aspx

[Gentoo]

Apparently the D300s and D3000 have been confirmed.

http://nikonrumors.com/2009/07/25/nikon-d300s-and-nikon-d3000-confirmed.aspx

[rioja]

As a D200 user, purchased 2 years ago, I have resisted the temptation to get a D300 despite all the rave reviews. I can resist the D300s just as easily if all I'm getting is a movie mode.I can buy a video for a fraction of the cost.
As for dual cards, no appeal at all.
A quiet shutter, very nice but not a sales pitch for me.
Oh well sit back and wait for the next one.

[pduxon]

Lots of point if you don't happen to have a D300...like me !

fair point. but I'm not certain it'll come out.

d400 maybe.

I'll be interested what the supposed Sony Alpha 850 is. that may give us a hint as Nikon and Sony are co-operating on sensors.

the d300s will offer some jpeg improvements I believe. but I could do without video.

[Gentoo]

99% there will not be a D400 this year.

[Duke Leto]

As a D200 user, purchased 2 years ago, I have resisted the temptation to get a D300 despite all the rave reviews.

I was the same until I tried one and then bought one, its not so much a natural evolution of the D200 but a whole different species. D300 is a far more capable body that anything other than the D3's.
If you can pick up a nice used D300 you won't regret it........

oh next generation, if my D300 had the same low light capabilities as my friends D3 I'd be very happy, its about time Nikon offered better quality pro-summer lenses such as a 400/4vr or a 500/5.6vr
They need to bridge the gap between the £1000 300/4 and the pro range lenses such as 300/2.8, 500/4 600/4

[pe'rigin]

I think both Canon and Nikon really do have some serious thinking to do over the next year or so, to revaluate their market strategy.

The DSLR market is under threat from the spectre of recession and the compact camera.

Thom Hogan wrote a couple of years ago that he thought that 6/7 current cameras was the ideal range for Nikon, I thought at the time that was a pretty good assessment. I don’t now, I feel 3 or at a push 4 should be the limit.

DSLR cameras are a luxury item; we are witnessing a range of similar priced products that people are simply not buying. The USA is the heartbeat of the World’s economy. Their market is in meltdown.

The compact camera is pushing to gain a foothold in the entry level and mid range of DSLR, over the coming years these cameras will start to take over as they improve technically. People just don’t want to carry around all this clutter. Companies such as Sony, Panasonic and Fuji have identified that this will be their growth market.

Users want to fire the shutter and email it within 30 seconds, being told to hang on a minute while the lens is being changed is something their father and granddads did.

These cameras have an advantage that they are relatively deposable with upgrading to a new model, we don’t mind spending £2/300, that’s a big difference on say a Canon MKIII, @£3K, upgrades on DSLR’s are pricy.

The professional market is under threat as well, mainly through cost, quality of the user and expertise. So Nikon and Canon will see their market being squeezed from both ends.

[rioja]

I was the same until I tried one and then bought one, its not so much a natural evolution of the D200 but a whole different species. D300 is a far more capable body that anything other than the D3's.
If you can pick up a nice used D300 you won't regret it........

oh next generation, if my D300 had the same low light capabilities as my friends D3 I'd be very happy, its about time Nikon offered better quality pro-summer lenses such as a 400/4vr or a 500/5.6vr
They need to bridge the gap between the £1000 300/4 and the pro range lenses such as 300/2.8, 500/4 600/4

Trouble is I bought my first DSLR, the D200 just a few months before the launch of the D300 and I don't want to fall for the same mistake again and seeing a D400 that I want even more but gone for the D300. Instead of a body I invested in glass as everyone advises long term it's a better investment. I know I'm very lucky to now have both the 300mm f2.8 VR and 500mm f4VR lenses.However, I just feel the D200 doesn't get the best out of either, particularly the latter. Mind you I am still very much a novice in every way and maybe it's my technique and lack of knowledge that's to blame as much as anything else.

[rioja]

Pe'regin....My take on your comments differs a bit, not that I am an expert or privy to actual marketing statistics it's the way I sense it !


I think both Canon and Nikon really do have some serious thinking to do over the next year or so, to reevaluate their market strategy.

I think they have already identified the mass market isn't DSLR's

The DSLR market is under threat from the spectre of recession and the compact camera.

Yep and no !

DSLR cameras are a luxury item;

Well, yes, but they are more a specialised need aren't they ? Even in the days of film your average user was more likely to have a simple "box brownie" than an SLR camera

The compact camera is pushing to gain a foothold in the entry level and mid range of DSLR, over the coming years these cameras will start to take over as they improve technically.

From what I can see, compacts took over a long time ago.

People just don’t want to carry around all this clutter.

Me included. I prefer to carry a compact to take my landscape pictures rather than change to a short lens whilst out and about "birding".

The professional market is under threat as well, mainly through cost, quality of the user and expertise. So Nikon and Canon will see their market being squeezed from both ends.
It's digital photography more than anything that has put the professional photographer under threat. With the ability to take and delete as many pictures as you want at no cost, the odds are you can take what you consider a professional quality image sooner or later , so why pay through the nose for a photo of the new born or family pet.
I would think that whilst film processing has virtually gone, the manufacturers of digital have enjoyed boom times. The "crunch " will of course effect the market but if anything the higher end user market has probably increased. 10 years ago what chance of seeing a big lens down at your local nature reserve ? What was strictly for pro's is now open to a legion of enthusiastic amateurs like me !






Cheers
Dave

[pe'rigin]

Good points Dave,


I think that we generally agree.


The issue I was trying to raise was I wrote sometime ago about the DSLR market stagnating. I think to a degree it has not moved forward since the D3 was introduced. In my mind introducing variations on theme cameras strike me as treading water. As good as the D700 is, it’s just a clone of the D3.

If we take Nikon as an example and it could apply to Canon just as much, later this week they will (we think) introduce the D300s, it’s not a great difference from the original, so those people who have the D300 would (probably) ignore the latest reincarnation, those who own below the D300 would think that £1k is a bit pricy at this time.

Without being ageist about things, I would say that a very high proportion of people using DSLR camera’s are those who can remember trouping down to Boots to get their film and trannies developed.

There’s a whole new generation who think that a camera should encompass a wide angle and telephoto combination. Those features that we value such as image quality, accuracy and colour balance are not important to them. Sony, Panasonic and Fuji are determined to supply these products. Canon has responded, Nikon, well!!!!

I’ll admit that I was hoping for more from Nikon, the rumours abounded beforehand on a DX 15Mb camera. The D300s looks good, but you just feel that they could do more.

The buying of DSLR cameras and lenses is not a cheap option, those that do buy, generally have the spare cash to fuel their hobby. That market will shrink, through natural wastage, cost and the pressure exerted by the new breed of compact cameras.

[Duke Leto]

Hmm, can't see any compact cameras on the market or forecast that will get close to performing like an SLR, focus times, shutter lag, optical quality is no where near what we expect and demand from the equipment we buy (this doesn't include digiscoping).

If any vendor could deliver a hybrid that had a 600mm image stabilised f4 lens with AF speed and accuracy matching a 1DMk3 or a D3, superb noise characteristics like a D3, could shoot at 8fps and be weatherproofed it would probably cost the same as the SLR option..........

[stoop]

Have just seen that Nikon has just announced the D300s, + an entry level DSLR and new 70-200mm and 18-200mm lenses, both with new VRII. Hmmn, I'm sitting on my money for a new 300mm F4 for a bit...

[Duke Leto]

Not sure why Nikon have done this apart from a perceived threat from the competition??? Having a very quick comparison, you get the ability to shoot mpegs (not a requirement in my book), dual cards which is a nice addition just a shame they're both not CF so you don't need to buy 2 different card types, possibly 1 fps more in CH mode.
Looks like the same CMOS sensor and AF system
As a first time buyer upgrading from say a D40/50/60/70/80 yes you'd probably take it but if your looking for technical advances if you already play in this market its not an evolved body but a D300 with a bit of bling chucked in. Oh and its only £200 less than a D700!

Come on Nikon, you know what people want, there's a ready market waiting to purchase better pro-sumer optics so get on with it. 400/4vr, 500/5.6vr 600/5.6vr

As for the new 70-200vr, can honestly say that I have never heard a complaint from an owner of this lens, its a superbly sharp zoom lens that will last a life time, again why tart up existing lens stock especialy one that is raved about.

Come on Nikon, you know what people want, there's a ready market waiting to purchase better pro-sumer optics so get on with it.

[postcardcv]

Come on Nikon, you know what people want, there's a ready market waiting to purchase better pro-sumer optics so get on with it.

I think that you're right and Nikon do know what people want and that's what they are making... there's no way that they would sell anywhere near as many 500 f5.6/600 f5.6 lenses as they will 70-200s and 18-200s. The simple fact is that the section of the market interested in big long lenses is very limited but they can sell wide ranging walkabout zoom by the truck load. Also the introduction of the lenses you suggested would sure dent the sales of the long faster primes.

[pduxon]

As for the new 70-200vr, can honestly say that I have never heard a complaint from an owner of this lens, its a superbly sharp zoom lens that will last a life time, again why tart up existing lens stock especialy one that is raved about.

Come on Nikon, you know what people want, there's a ready market waiting to purchase better pro-sumer optics so get on with it.

a number of Full Frame owners complain about the corners on the current 70-200.

"on FX bodies you could see significant light fall off and sharpness loss in the corners". T Hogan.

one of the problems camera companies have is that users expect constant improvements rapidly. that's what we've had.

its possible we're in a time where we aren't going to get that as frequently. honestly guys, from a Nikon point of view, compare a d1x with a d5000? one a pro body costing thousands one £500 and I know what takes better images!! we can't realistically expect such big increases.

Sony owners were well miffed at their recent upgrades

from photoclubalpha
"who, after all, would have predicted the direction the Alpha 230, 330 and 380 took? They came as a surprise. I can remember getting a surprise like that when I was about five years old. All my friends were getting bicycles (very small ones, with stabilisers). I got… a scooter! Nikon and Canon got the D5000 and 500D, Sony got the scooter."

I didn't see lots of Canon users raving at the 40d to 50d upgrade.

I don't want more pixels I want better pixels.

is the d300s worth it? for me? no. but then I have no need to buy a new body for yonks. the d300 work well enough.

Nikon's net big camera will be I guess a 700x and some full frame lens for it. the 14-24f.8, 24.70f2.8 and i suppose the new 70-200 f2.8 are cracking lenses BUT Canon has a range of more portable lenses. You don't always need a big heavy f2.8.

as to big lenses? go on dpreview and photo.net, they are asking for fast short primes. New 20mm f2.8, 35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4 with VR and AFS.

from a nikon perspective the new Sony a850 will be interesting. especially the sensor.

[Duke Leto]

Pete fair comment, I hadn't considered the full frame issue, but this lens works well on my F100 which is full frame???

[pduxon]

Pete fair comment, I hadn't considered the full frame issue, but this lens works well on my F100 which is full frame???

read that before, odd eh

[Gaz Shilton]

I am/was thinking of getting a Canon 40D+300/f2.8.
I already have a D200. Would the Nikon 300/2.8 suit this camera or would getting the D300s pair with it better?
Would it warrant an upgrade over the D200?
Or should I save a few hundred quid and go with Canon?

[Helios]

I have both a D80 (similar to the D200) and a D300, and to be honest, there's not too much difference image quality wise. Infact, at low ISO I can't tell the difference between them. Not much difference between the autofocus either. THe D300 is a little more sensitive which can be a good or a bad thing depending on the circumstances.

The D300 is easier to use in that it has a superior screen, processor is faster so its quicker to move to navigate through images, and the battery lasts longer.

Never have used a Canon DSLR camera, so can't comment on the 40D.

[Duke Leto]

Helios, slight sidetrack but my D300 is a huge step forward when compared to my D200. The af is faster, more accurate, tracks better, it's just better, the CMOS is far superior wrt noise by at least one stop.

[pduxon]

Helios, slight sidetrack but my D300 is a huge step forward when compared to my D200. The af is faster, more accurate, tracks better, it's just better, the CMOS is far superior wrt noise by at least one stop.

I'd agree that AF is faster on the d300 when compared to the d80.

at base ISO I'd agree with Helios that there is little difference in image quality. BUT as soon as you bump it up you definitely can see the difference. In the UK to get shutter speeds up you need high iso.

[Helios]

Helios, slight sidetrack but my D300 is a huge step forward when compared to my D200. The af is faster, more accurate, tracks better, it's just better, the CMOS is far superior wrt noise by at least one stop.

Can't really agree. The autofocus is more sensitive but tends to get sidetracked more into focusing on something other than the subject. My D300's favourite is switching from a seabird I'm tracking, to the waves in the sea, due to the greater contrast. Happens less with the D80.

I would agree that the D300 is slightly less noisy, but I'm not sure I'd go as far as saying the D300 is as good at, say ISO800, as the D80 is at ISO400.

Still use both cameras when I take the 500 f4 lens out, and I'd be lying if I said that I was taking superior images with the D300. I only really post 150k files on BF. If I was producing large prints, I may have another opinion.

[pduxon]

I would agree that the D300 is slightly less noisy, but I'm not sure I'd go as far as saying the D300 is as good at, say ISO800, as the D80 is at ISO400.



i would ;)

[666taz]

In the paper today that Nikon lost 24 million for the first three months to june so maybe they'll put their prices up to make up the losses .

[Duke Leto]

Helios, in difficult situations such as low contrast situations, actually nearly all the time for tracking BIF I use single point AF.
Yes tracking a bird against the sea would be difficult if you left too many AF sensors active, the same would go for my D200 as its focusing grid is not as complex as the D300
My D300 is a good at 800iso as my D200 is at 400iso, having not tried a D80 I couldn't comment but I thought the sensor was the same as the D200

[pe'rigin]

In the paper today that Nikon lost 24 million for the first three months to june so maybe they'll put their prices up to make up the losses .

Taz,

I don't think they'll do that, unless Canon does likewise.

Both are under serious pressure from Panasonic and Sony at the entry level. Sales have nose-dived.

They will cut costs by redundancy, product and R&D freezing, manufacturing cutbacks in the vain hope to ride out this slump.

It would be unique if they did reduce their prices, but we can all hope.

[Duke Leto]

Taz,

I don't think they'll do that, unless Canon does likewise.

Both are under serious pressure from Panasonic and Sony at the entry level. Sales have nose-dived.

They will cut costs by redundancy, product and R&D freezing, manufacturing cutbacks in the vain hope to ride out this slump.

It would be unique if they did reduce their prices, but we can all hope.


Not a financial wizard but the attached financial results may show a downturn but not a loss

[pduxon]

Hmm, can't see any compact cameras on the market or forecast that will get close to performing like an SLR, focus times, shutter lag, optical quality is no where near what we expect and demand from the equipment we buy (this doesn't include digiscoping).


i'm after image quality, if it can perform like a Canon G10 or Panasonic LX3 then that's great. Something that will go in a jacket pocket.

don't need focusing times of a dSLR for landscapes etc.

this'll do http://photorumors.com/2009/08/06/panasonic-gf1-micro-four-thirds/

its sad when the big innovator in cameras is a consumer electronics company.

[666taz]

Not a financial wizard but the attached financial results may show a downturn but not a loss
Yes i see ,the paper diddent say this there still in profit just less than normal,I wish papers would print the whole story.One thing that does bug me is if people arnt getting wage rises the companys arnt paying better wages i know the exchange rates have altered so price rises are expected but why so high wouldent it be better to sell at a lower price to get people buying rather than hiking up prices, where less people can afford.smaller profit higher sales means more profit in the long term.

[Duke Leto]

Pete you're right I too was looking at the G10 as something I could keep at me at all times, I may have to investigate compacts in more detail