-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
D400 for 2014? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Helios
- Start date
BillN
Well-known member
I got a D7100 about a year ago
had my D300 for a few years
The D7100 has twice the megga pixels and the crop function is useful
Reports say that the D7100 is so good that maybe Nikon won't replace the D300s
The D300 is a good camera - in lots of ways I prefer the user interface to that of the D7100 - but maybe it's me as I was so used to the D300
had my D300 for a few years
The D7100 has twice the megga pixels and the crop function is useful
Reports say that the D7100 is so good that maybe Nikon won't replace the D300s
The D300 is a good camera - in lots of ways I prefer the user interface to that of the D7100 - but maybe it's me as I was so used to the D300
I can’t see it coming out either; a model or two would have to go.
What I can see is a mirrorless (compact preferred) DF style, based on the Olympus but not so grand, how and where it’s pitched will be Nikons problem.
Both Nikon and to a lesser degree Canon, have compressed the choice available to potential buyers with their models being of similar ilk.
Those that own an array of lenses probably are satisfied with the camera they have. I don’t see any need to change from a D800. I would like Nikon to make a better compact for daily everyday use, but there’s no chance of that.
I would like to have had a wider choice, not in the number of models, but a more structured choice of price and specification, again I can’t see that, purely on the basis of the competition, increasing smart devices and customers expectations.
It could be argued that Nikon view a DX DSLR camera as a step backwards, as the market is saturated with full frame, and what we’ll get is mirrorless hybrid packed with gps, wi fi and editing software.
Thankfully, I’ve made my choice.
What I can see is a mirrorless (compact preferred) DF style, based on the Olympus but not so grand, how and where it’s pitched will be Nikons problem.
Both Nikon and to a lesser degree Canon, have compressed the choice available to potential buyers with their models being of similar ilk.
Those that own an array of lenses probably are satisfied with the camera they have. I don’t see any need to change from a D800. I would like Nikon to make a better compact for daily everyday use, but there’s no chance of that.
I would like to have had a wider choice, not in the number of models, but a more structured choice of price and specification, again I can’t see that, purely on the basis of the competition, increasing smart devices and customers expectations.
It could be argued that Nikon view a DX DSLR camera as a step backwards, as the market is saturated with full frame, and what we’ll get is mirrorless hybrid packed with gps, wi fi and editing software.
Thankfully, I’ve made my choice.
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
Yes and I agree. I have to say as one that moved from DX to FX I can't see why they'd go all out on a semi pro DX. Especially when you can crop an FX and get palatable results. It's even worst when most people seem happy to use hem on websites only and further underpins the need for quality. I've having a major problem with my macro shots taken on a D800. There is no medium unless I print all at A0 to really demonstrate the true quality that cameras can resolve. They seem wasted as 8x10's
Helios
Well-known member
Here's why I think we could see a D400 this year: -
1 Plenty of people who have heavily invested in DX would like to upgrade, and going to FX would mean replacing most of their lenses. For example if you have a DX zoom, a 10-20mm, a 35mm f1.8, and say the 70-200 mk 1, then going to FX would mean having to buy a whole set of lenses. Also no advantage of FX at the telephoto end, so if your a sports or event photographer, going FX would mean putting a extender on the lens or buying a longer one.
2 Missing reasonably priced sports camera from Nikon's lineup. If you don't want to spend 4k on a D4, your going to buy a used camera like a D3s, D700, or even D300s. The D7100 and D610 have a reasonable 6 fps but are disadvantaged by a large MP sensor combined with a small buffer. A D400 would plug this gap.
3. Both the D300 and it's rival the similar 7D were great sellers.
4. If Canon bring out a 7D mk II this year, Nikon would have to, wouldn't they?
1 Plenty of people who have heavily invested in DX would like to upgrade, and going to FX would mean replacing most of their lenses. For example if you have a DX zoom, a 10-20mm, a 35mm f1.8, and say the 70-200 mk 1, then going to FX would mean having to buy a whole set of lenses. Also no advantage of FX at the telephoto end, so if your a sports or event photographer, going FX would mean putting a extender on the lens or buying a longer one.
2 Missing reasonably priced sports camera from Nikon's lineup. If you don't want to spend 4k on a D4, your going to buy a used camera like a D3s, D700, or even D300s. The D7100 and D610 have a reasonable 6 fps but are disadvantaged by a large MP sensor combined with a small buffer. A D400 would plug this gap.
3. Both the D300 and it's rival the similar 7D were great sellers.
4. If Canon bring out a 7D mk II this year, Nikon would have to, wouldn't they?
tombac
Well-known member
Amen!
This is what it is about! I would be happy to move to a FX body anytime but I'm not willing to replace my lenses,that are adapted for DX cameras and that I"v spent thousands of euros on!
I would feel cheated!!
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
Nope going to disagree (as always lol) since moving to FX from DX (and I still have a D300, D200, D90 in the house) I haven't bought another lens!! On my D800 if I want to use a DX lens I do, okay it crops the sensor but as I stated earlier if you only post on line and don't print greater than A4 I can't see why it would be a problem (don't forget that before we had a gazillion mega pixels, people were happy with 4, 6 0r even 10 and would still live off the results (if you were a pro). I have friends who cut their digital teeth on bodies such as the D2H, a cropped sensor if I recall 6Mpx, it was the sports photographers tool of choice, these images taken with that body were printed in daily newspapers, magazines etc, this same people now use D3S and D4's, doing the same job with the same lenses!
Helios, I still use my 70-200vr Mk1 on my D800, I don't need to change it out. I don't automatically reach for TC's, the sensor definition is superb and when needed allows a harsh crop, yes I do still use them as i did on my D300 when needed.
I do agree that if you were a landscape photographer then you would need if you wished to retain the FX frame an FX compatible lens would be needed.
I've had an FX body now for 18 months and at no time have I felt that its been a backward step, I even managed to get a Kowa comp win last year on my very 1st day out with the D800!!
Now don't get me wrong, if they did bring out a D400 with 24+ Mpixels 8 fps, good AF and allowed me to shoot at 3200iso with no concerns yes I would look at one, until then there's no need to fear the full frame bodies.
Be interesting at the Photography Show in a few week at the NEC what the feelings are on this subject.
Oh yes one down side, on my D300 and D700 I could use the EL4 batteries giving me 7 fps and in excess of 2000 shots per charge, with the D800e I get about a ⅓, I do hatre Nikon for the consistent need to screw people with batteries, how can they possibly believe that the batteries in the D800 are better, more modern or more advanced than the ones in my D700
Helios, I still use my 70-200vr Mk1 on my D800, I don't need to change it out. I don't automatically reach for TC's, the sensor definition is superb and when needed allows a harsh crop, yes I do still use them as i did on my D300 when needed.
I do agree that if you were a landscape photographer then you would need if you wished to retain the FX frame an FX compatible lens would be needed.
I've had an FX body now for 18 months and at no time have I felt that its been a backward step, I even managed to get a Kowa comp win last year on my very 1st day out with the D800!!
Now don't get me wrong, if they did bring out a D400 with 24+ Mpixels 8 fps, good AF and allowed me to shoot at 3200iso with no concerns yes I would look at one, until then there's no need to fear the full frame bodies.
Be interesting at the Photography Show in a few week at the NEC what the feelings are on this subject.
Oh yes one down side, on my D300 and D700 I could use the EL4 batteries giving me 7 fps and in excess of 2000 shots per charge, with the D800e I get about a ⅓, I do hatre Nikon for the consistent need to screw people with batteries, how can they possibly believe that the batteries in the D800 are better, more modern or more advanced than the ones in my D700
Last edited:
tombac
Well-known member
Being(mainly)a birdphotographer I don't think that a 300mm lens is enough on a FX body.which it is on a DX,even if I most of the time also use a 1.4 or sometime a 2x converter.
Why buy a FX-camera if I have to start to crop the picture to get the reach?
I'm sure I would need at least a 500mm lens.
Why buy a FX-camera if I have to start to crop the picture to get the reach?
I'm sure I would need at least a 500mm lens.
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
Nope, I can only speak for my D800e but I can crop an image taken on that body to the same size as the image taken on a D300 and still get at least an equal output, usually better, don't forget with the D800 the full DX crop is still 15Mpx which is still more than a D300.
If you can try them both and see for yourself, if I get time this week I'll try and put up a couple of examples.
If you can try them both and see for yourself, if I get time this week I'll try and put up a couple of examples.
What a great question, and I don’t have the answer.
I would think you would have a better chance with Canon, than Nikon, but an upgraded 7D II, would pressurise the 5D III, unless it’s priced way beyond.
What do I think, well, both Nikon and Canon have got us all by the short and curlys over lenses, we can’t change unless we pay the price.
Nikon can play the nostalgia card to people like me who hanker after the design of film cameras. So for a limited period of time they could manufacture retro cameras in DF styles, compact, DX and mirrorless. The younger generation don’t want these, “what physically turn a knurled knob for ISO, how dated”. Some do like them for design and the unique status, a bit like the resurgence of vinyl.
So, maybe a mutation is in the pipeline, which takes DX. I would like to see a wider choice, but Nikon have not done themselves any favours, because the line-up at present is so good. There’s nowt wrong with the D300, it’s just the market parameters are changing, which makes those with DX feel left behind.
I can’t see Nikon wasting DX lenses, but a full version DX with all swings and bells on is not going to be cheap, and as Steve’s mentioned people have already changed to FF, why change back?
On the investment of DX lenses, well we’ve been there before, but the other way round, those with film cameras with FF lenses, only got cropped sensor.
Would I buy a DX camera, no, there’s no need, would I have liked the D800 styled as DF, you bet!
On Steve’s macro, it’s a nice problem to have.
Last edited:
Helios
Well-known member
Good point. 15MP and 6 fps in crop mode (with battery pack), with a decent buffer is definitely an option. Good solid build. Also plenty of cropping options for entering competitions and the like. Still a D800E with battery pack, battery, and a few 32 to 64 GB cards would be near £3K, the D800 about £2.5K. Nearly twice what I've ever paid for a camera. We'll see what the year brings but maybe if I see a used one at a good price..
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
D800 well under £2000 now, you can get one with a battery pack less than that from UK suppliers. Yeah it's not cheap but a D400 wouldn't be much less. Memory is so cheap I reckon that it's still doable under 2k for the lot.
When I'm birding I usually leave my D800 on 1.2x crop, reduces the file size a little and I rarely will fill the frame. Where these bodies excel is with macro on full FX. If you shot macro with a D800 you'll be astonished as to what it can achieve. Again it's all wasted on the net.
I never switch to DX mode unless it's a DX lens. No need as I can just crop it.
What everyone misses in this discussion is the latitude and noise control that the sensor brings. Highlights and shadow detail are much easier to manage. I feel like deleting all images from my older bodies and starting again (but I won't)
When I'm birding I usually leave my D800 on 1.2x crop, reduces the file size a little and I rarely will fill the frame. Where these bodies excel is with macro on full FX. If you shot macro with a D800 you'll be astonished as to what it can achieve. Again it's all wasted on the net.
I never switch to DX mode unless it's a DX lens. No need as I can just crop it.
What everyone misses in this discussion is the latitude and noise control that the sensor brings. Highlights and shadow detail are much easier to manage. I feel like deleting all images from my older bodies and starting again (but I won't)
tombac
Well-known member
You'r right about the preformance of the D800. The D300 is nowhere near tha.,It is a old camera. The AF is.especially when it comes to BIF,is nothing to cheer about comparing to the newer bodies. Also the Dynamic range and high ISO preformance isn:t what one can expect from a camera today. But the feeling and the handling of it is is superb.
I really hope that Nikon releases a follower in the future(very soon). Until that I stick to my old D300!
I have a D7000 which maybe would be worth trading to a D7100 (esp for the better AF}. I hardly ever use it for birdphotograpy.
I really hope that Nikon releases a follower in the future(very soon). Until that I stick to my old D300!
I have a D7000 which maybe would be worth trading to a D7100 (esp for the better AF}. I hardly ever use it for birdphotograpy.
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
As the frame rate isn't fast my main card is a lexar pro 64Gb 800x in the SD slot
I've a Sandisk extreme pro 32Gb. The SD card is rarely used and it's the default for video if I take any. I got the SD card when I bought the body so no cost. The Lexar I bought from www.mymemory.
Excellent point Steve, I find that I do not have to do anything with the images, apart from move the H/S a fraction and then sharpen.
On a clear crisp winter day, they really do come out well, if only it would stop raining.
