Frustration with Nikon / D300 waiting game

<p>I am sure this has been brought up time and time again... but are any other shooters losing faith in Nikon? Why on EARTH is it taking YEARS for a D300 replacement? I've gone through 2 shutters on my D300 and I dont want to jump ship to a D600 because I dont want to revert back to SD cards.<br /><br />Does ANYONE have any ACTUAL FACTUAL information as to when Nikon might come out with an actual DX framed/ CF Card slangin camera? I could care less about the size of the files. I want upgraded sensor/ISO, and most of all just better dynamic range like I get in my D700. When I'm working out on the race track my D300 photos now are looking so dull to me compared to my D700. <br /><br />Anyway, if anyone has any info that would be great. Shun?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I am sure this has been brought up time and time again...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Does ANYONE have any ACTUAL FACTUAL information</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, which is why it keeps getting brought up.</p>

 

<p>Thank you for your insightful post.</p>

<p>If I had real information, I would be under NDA such that I can't discuss it in public. But in this case, I have no information. My personal believe is that Nikon should update the D300S this year, but I also thought they would do that in 2011 and then 2012.</p>

<p>In the mean time, my D7000 is working great and even survived my accidental drop test. On the FX front, my D800E and D700 are also working great. In fact, my D300 still takes good pictures, although I don't use it much any more.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, we can start another 100 threads on this topic. Until Nikon announces something, there will be no useful information.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Thank you for your insightful post.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You're welcome. Wait, you were being sarcastic, weren't you? Well, I wasn't. This <em>has</em> been brought up repeatedly, and there <em>isn't</em> any factual information available to the public. Full stop. I understand your frustration, but that's just the way things are.</p>

 

<p>Anyone jonesing for this sort of thing needs to hang out at the tabloid-style rumor sites, Darren. Check in there.</p>

<p>They were blathering about the D7000 being cut just the other day--just like last summer. In both cases--no proof, no sources, no follow-up.</p>

<p>Nikon did replace the D300 with the D300s. If you feel you need to replace your D300 the D300 is is readily available new.</p>

<p>What I did was buy a D4 and use that for my photography. The IQ is outstanding.</p>

<p>Shun, Jonathan, C Watson, thanks guys. Sorry for another thread. I was too lazy to filter through 100 threads. <br /><br /><br />I guess my thread was also based on the fact that I'm more suprised its been this long and/or that Nikon hasnt released any further info as to the "why" behind taking so long. More than just the typical thread complaint.<br /><br />But thanks for your replies none the less.</p>

<p>Like you I'm waiting for an upgrade but between my D300s and D700 I don't think I loosing much. What I'm after is better high iso and the 24mp to make cropping easier.</p>

<p>Mark I'd be happy with even an 14mp image with better quality out of a DX sensor.</p>

<p>"What I'm after is better high iso and the 24mp to make cropping easier."<br>

<br>

"I'd be happy with even an 14mp image with better quality out of a DX sensor"<br>

<br>

Nikon already has bodies that meet these criteria.<br>

<br>

There are affordable used upgrades from the D300 also currently available.</p>

<p>Elliot, using CF card slots?<br /><br /></p>

<p>Darren, I think there are SD cards today that are much better than CF cards were back in 2007 when D300 hit the market. This should not be a reason for you to not try a D600. If dynamic range is important for you D600 will blow your mind... it is nicer in IQ than D700. I use a combo of D800/D600 but D600 gets more work from my part. I really like this camera and with the cost of the cards today I have two reliable Sandisk of 64GB each so I really never feel limited in this regard.</p>

<p>Darren, I suspect Nikon won't release a DX sensor body with a CF slot, at least not any time soon. The fact that the D800 has one CF and one SD slot, and even the D4 has one CF and one XQD slot, suggests to me that Nikon is looking for a direction to shift away from CF cards.</p>

<p>I also rather suspect that the number of people stridently demanding DX plus CF is ... well, the four of you probably aren't a sufficiently large market to justify the design. </p>

<p>I am demanding 4x5 and CF! And off course affordable for me...</p>

<p>I'm demanding 24 MB and built-in 128 GB mSATA (around $120 today on Newegg). Actually, my D300 still takes the same great quality pictures it did when I purchased it in 2008. I, as the photographer, unfortunately don't always know the best place to stand when I trip the shutter.</p>

<p>First of all, Nikon has introduced 3 extraordinary game changing professional/pro-am cameras (D4, D800, and D600) in the last 9 or whatever months, or four cameras if the D800E is counted separately, so while I kinda share your pain it's hard to put it in the context of "losing faith" in the company.</p>

<p>Using B&H prices, USD, Nikon is currently offering the D7000 DX body at $1196, the D300s at $1696 and the D600 at $2096. Obviously a replacement for the D300s has an extremely narrow pricing slot to fill -- once you have a hot new kick ass D400 in the $1600-range, it's going to be competing with the D7000 (or D7100) below it and the D600 above it more than it is competing with other non-Nikon products (ok, a slight exaggeration but you can see my point). So this might be part of the delay -- sell out the D7000 and wait for a leveling off in sales of the seemingly very popular D600 before you introduce a camera that is going to cut into the sales of both. Whenever they DO introduce the D400 type camera they have to believe it's going to do well so they're not losing anything with such a strategy. And it's not as if anyone is actually suffering out here. If they were trying to maximize profit on the cure for Type II diabetes I'd be pissed off but this doesn't seem too bad to me.</p>

I didn't lose any faith. I wanted to up my sensors and so picked up a couple of D5100s at a great price, put a lens on each

and use them for all kinds of stuff. If and when something else comes along I'll weigh it out.

<p>I had to eat my CF cards (figuratively, not literally) when I switched from a D300 to my new D600. Memory cards are cheap -- I don't remember exactly how much I paid per GB when I bought my first CF cards, but now high quality SD is about a buck a gig. SD cards also have the advantage that many computers have built-in slots for reading them, but not CF. CF is definitely losing popularity all around, so don't be afraid to make the switch. Also when you compare the cost of a new camera (~$1500 to $2000) to the cost of replacing all your CF cards ($200 maybe) that's only a tenth of the camera cost, not much more than your sales tax (depending where you live).</p>

<p>It is understandable to want a new top-of-the-line DX camera, but not wanting to switch memory card formats can't really be high on the list---especially with SD cards being so much less expensive than equivalent performing CF's. I have learned this recently in the FX world , with the new D800E taking both types. Mixed card types on the same camera---now that's a questionable idea!</p>

<p>The D3, (very affordable, excellent value) and D3s (still kind of pricey) would make excellent upgrades from the D300 and both use CF cards.</p>

<p>I have both types and always seem to grab the CF cards over the SD cards.</p>

<p>But frankly, if you are not in a rush, I would wait a bit longer until the new body is released.</p>

<p>I too am waiting, but my next Nikon will probably be a d5200. I really can't justify buying a D800--I won't earn more $$ from photo sales if I did. I don't take the D600 seriously, especially for its cost. SO, while waiting for Nikon (or canon) to come out with a camera I want to buy, I've been buying historic camera gear. Last week I paid $300 for a vintage 1887 Prosch rapid rectilinear lens in a cool early shutter, and also $1,500 Petzval made in Paris by Derogy in 1858. I probably don't have the cash to buy a new "D400" right now if one did appear, LOL! In the big picture, I guess I'd rather spend $1,800 on 19th century photo gear than put it on current Nikon digital cameras. Ten years from now the Derogy should still be worth what I paid, but I might be lucky to get 25% of the cost of a DSLR. If Nikon doesn't want my money, MW Classic cameras in London does!</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

</blockquote>

<p>How about Kent in CF? :-)</p>

<p>Good catch, Shun. If I moved about 150 miles north, I'd be "Kent in ND". I would then have no density.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

Central Florida would be a lot warmer. :-)

 

A friend of mine works for SanDisk. He said they named those cards SD after SanDisk; not secure digital.