Which new body would you want NIkon to introduce first?

<p>Thom Hogan <a href="http://www.bythom.com/">recently speculated</a> that whichever new body (or the EVIL system) Nikon introduces this month, people will be unhappy anyway. Well maybe. Which body do you think would be the most important for Nikon and users to roll out the soonest? The D4, the D300s or D700 replacement, or the small mirrorless/EVIL camera?</p>

<p>Disclaimer: I'm not a gearhead, I still shoot with CCD Nikon bodies, and actually use film most of the time, so I don't really care about new stuff very much personally. Well unless the tech is developing backwards, which is often the case (see P&S cameras). I also wouldn't jump the boat and switch to Canon or whatever. Sigma maybe, but they'd need to have some capable bodies less expensive than a car first.</p>

<p>Anyway, from the 4 options available, I think the D300s is due for replacement the soonest. I kinda like the camera, especially the dual card slots (I'd prefer CF and a better card door, but whatever), the handling and build is very good. But I've never been a fan of its sensor. For people who prefer the CCD 'look' at low ISOs and use NX to get it best, the 12 MPx CMOS never felt quite right. The D7000 is much better in this regard (IMHO) and very competitive in other areas, so no wonder it cannibalizes on the D300s. The D7000 is Nikon's bestseller after all and the lack of a proper replacement for D300s (or D200 if you use vintage like me :) ) is part of the reason. Quite a lot of people who buy the D7000 now would at least consider getting the higher-end body if it was current.</p>

<p>Personally, I'm most excited about the EVIL camera however. It just seems that if there's anyone to make a good camera with this form factor and make the most use of it, it's Nikon. We'll still have to wait and see if they can actually make a proper camera (seriously, the Coolpix P series is quite underwhelming), but I hope someone brings some sense into this marketplace and Nikon might do just that. Well, call me optimistic. We already know almost for sure it won't be priced right.</p>

<p>D700 replacement? Not necessary in my opinion. There's not a single thing wrong with the D700 if you ask me. Yeah, I also wonder why there was no D700s (with dual card slots for example), but I'm not looking forward to a higher-resolution, worse-performing video-enabled sensor. Actually I hope D700 remains on the market unchanged long enough for me to be able afford it.</p>

<p>As for the D4... Now there's a huge can of worms in this area, such as deprecating both the D3 and D3x. If people really want it, let them have it, but there's nothing wrong with either of the two, either.</p>

<p>So what do you think?</p>

<p>"D700 replacement? Not necessary in my opinion."<br>

I'm with you on this. I don't see anything wrong with this camera but everyone keeps calling "outdated" and just because it is 2 or 3 years old people think that it MUST be replace.<br>

Lately it feels like people don't think if the camera is still on top of the rest. They seems to think that is old and there should be a newer model no matter what...<br>

Sorry but I really get this feeling when I read so many threads about it....</p>

<p>An EVIL body with DX sensor and possibility to F-lenses(with adapter) with all options available.</p>

<p>I wanted them to introduce a certain new DSLR.<br />But they are just too late now.<br />I am off for a 10+ months journey with second hand gear.<br />Nikon will have to wait for my purchases another year.<br />They are just too late.</p>

<p>Personally, I'd be most interested in seeing the D700 successor. In the hope that the D700 prices will go a bit more down....Unless the new one brings something spectacular to the table, in which case my bankaccount will sigh and I will smile.</p>

<p>All the others interest me more in seeing how Nikon wants to move forward.<br>

The pair D3-successor and D300s-successor, I want to see what Nikon can pull out of the hat. The D3 successor has got big boots to fill with the D3s and D3x, where the D300s successor has got its work cut out with the D7000.<br>

The EVIL stuff doesn't interest me as much, but as a business, Nikon has to move. Especially for the Japanese market, these cameras are important. It'll be interesting to see what they bring, and how they'll try to protect the D3100/D5100 strong sales from being eaten by their own product. But I'm not expecting them to come with something I myself would want to buy.</p>

<p>Definitely the D700 replacement for myself. I'm intrigued by the 'EVIL' body idea but I'm afraid it is going to be small, full of comprimises and ridiculously unweildy sporting F-Mount lenses (if this is even an option). If the EVIL body was something closer to an FM2 or even an FG size, with some of the innovations made possible by loosing the mirror then I would be interested. However a camera like that would seem to threaten the D3100 market which is supposedly one of the more lucrative markets for Nikon. </p>

<p>Even if the EVIL camera isn't a truly interesting camera for me I'll be happy if it comes out because hopefully it means Nikon is paying attention to at least some market segments.... just not me! </p>

<p>The EVIl model is what I'm interested in seeing, though I expect the first few generations to be odd, clumsy and finding their way. The days of the SLR are numbered. </p>

<p>Yuch, yuch, yuch! Good or EVIL... other than my smartphone, and even if I had money in my pocket, there is NO camera in my future if it doesn't have an optical viewfinder. No matter what they do to them, you can't see those screens when you're using the camera in anything like the light they do best in, and the electronic imitation viewfinders are no substitute for looking at the real thing you are looking at. Cameras like that are only good for camera magazines and review sites. I hope Nikon keeps concentrating on what they do best: SLR's.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The days of the SLR are numbered</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't think you could be more wrong... today's consumers may be trading in their D3100 for an EVIL Nikon, but I doubt you'll see any pro sports photogs trading in their D3s for one...nor do I see this happening any time in my life...small sensors just have too many issues when you start going up over 10-12 MP</p>

<p>Here's my want list:</p>

<p>#1 D3 series replacement. Why? Used D3 prices should drop, which means I can probably buy one...unless, as Wouter has already mentioned, There is something so spectacular announced that I HAVE to buy the new camera...and it would have to be more than more megapixels, faster frame rate, and ISO 204,800. Additionally, any leaps forward with pro cameras eventually trickle down to consumer cameras...rarely do I see leaps forward in consumer cameras that move into pro cameras, (Video is the sole exception to this rule in recent memory, which I could care less about).</p>

<p>#2 D300 series replacement. Hopefully at the same time as the D3 series replacement, and with similar innovations.</p>

<p>#3 D700 replacement. I love my D700, and although many see this camera as needing an update before the two mentioned above, I can't see Nikon upgrading this camera before their professional level D3. If it was simply a refresh of the current camera with faster frame rate and video, so be it...release away! I think most current D700 users, (myself included), would like more than a quick refresh of this camera.</p>

<p>#4 Nikon EVIL - I have very little interest in this type of camera, although there are many people I've pushed towards a D3000/D3100 that I would have otherwise pushed towards this if it were available. This camera market is probably the fastest growing and it will hopefully bridge cell phone/P&S shooters into the DSLR market. It's likely what Nikon will announce first since they have no foothold in this market while SONY and Olympus are on their second generation of EVIL cameras. This announcement makes the most sense NOW so consumers will have something to look forward to this holiday season... ... ...</p>

<p>RS</p>

<p>Nikon D3s with slightly more resolution + 1080p24 AVCHD video: 'D4'</p>

<p>Yes.</p>

<p>Nikon mirrorless: DOA.</p>

<p>I would have liked to have seen Nikon make their version of a DX-sensored Fuji X100 or even a consumerish Sony NEX, but, now, unfortunately they won't. With the options available from other manufacturers today, I wouldn't even consider a camera with a sensor smaller than DX or APS-C. Just like when I couldn't have cared less when micro-4/3rds was announced.</p>

<p>I have no interest in a D4. No way I'm paying that much for a camera body, not even if it was a gold plated Leica. I next have no interest in an EVL camera. Don't want to be buying a new set of lenses. Next, I have little interest in a D700 replacement UNLESS it is a radical step up, such as 20mp & greater dynamica range. Most interested in a D300 replacement. All of the cameras you mentioned have fallen well behind Canon and are now obsolete. D300s and D700 are especially outdated now. Not near enough resolution.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

<p>I'll have to join the D300s replacement crowd. As a relatively new studio, we are working on upgrading gear and had planned to buy 2 D300s bodies back in May when I got wind that the 300s was about to reach end-of-life. I'd rather not wait until next spring to upgrade. I cannot afford to replace all my DX glass and move to a full-frame body. I am being sorely tempted by the D7000, but really do want to more rugged D300s style body and the more professional capabiilties would seem to be forthcoming in a D300s replacement. I'm trying my best to hold out for the D400s (or whatever it will be called).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>but I doubt you'll see any pro sports photogs trading in their D3s for one...nor do I see this happening any time in my life...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well I don't know how old you are but I plan to be around at least another 40 years. Electronic viewfinders will continue to get better. I think in 40 years (but probably more like 5 years) they will have high enough resolution and quick enough refresh that you can follow action with them. I wonder how many people in 1950 thought photographers would hang on to rangefinders and not switch to an SLR.</p>

<p>Fuji already has sensor based phase detection AF and Nikon may soon as well. I would actually like to see Nikon either return to interchangeable finders and provide both optical and EVF systems or something like Fuji's X100 hybrid where you have both. When shooting on a tripod the ability to zoom in Live View is very helpful for checking critical focus. It would be better if I could do it from the main viewfinder and zoom and pan around.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>small sensors just have too many issues when you start going up over 10-12 MP</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Perhaps now but they will also continue to get better. Of course you can have an EVF with a small sensor, big sensor, or anything in between.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>D300s and D700 are especially outdated now. Not near enough resolution.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Kent, maybe I'm in the minority, but I find 12MP to be more than enough to enlarge to 20"x30" without an issue. I don't often print this large, but do find I print at 16"x20" quite regularly.</p>

<p>The reason I would want more MP is for cropping...which I can't do much of with the D700 if I want to print big. </p>

<p>For me, the perfect D700 replacement would be around 18MP with a base ISO of 100 and the ability to go down to ISO 25. On the high end, being able to get high quality results at ISO 6400 would be great...any higher would be better, but I rarely shoot higher than ISO 1600 right now... Dynamic range at ISO 100 would need to be around 10-12 EV since currently you get about 8 stops @ ISO 200 when shooting 14-bit RAW. Finally, for the D700, I would like 7-8 FPS since 5 is just too slow. It's not bad when shooting with AAs in the grip, but I'd prefer to be able to shoot high speed without using AAs since they just don't last long enough. Also...dual card slots would be a must.</p>

<p>RS</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Perhaps now but they will also continue to get better.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But they can only get as good as physics allows...which means you will need to increase sensor size...which means you need a bigger camera body...etc etc </p>

<p>I just can't imagine paying for a super high resolution, ultra fast refresh rate EVF in a camera that will be the size of a DSLR when you have DSLRs already. I firmly believe that EVF cameras will continue to be consumer grade cameras and DSLRs will be the product for avid amateurs and professional photographers. <br>

(I could be wrong...it wouldn't be anything new since I haven't had a reliable way to read future events since my Magic 8-Ball broke :p )<br>

<br />RS</p>

<blockquote>

<p>But they can only get as good as physics allows...which means you will need to increase sensor size...which means you need a bigger camera body...etc etc</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You'll have to be more specific. There are already millions of people relatively happy with 10MP 1/2.7" sensors. I'm not really happy with them but then I also don't see anyone (other than Pentax) trying to make a high end system using such a small sensor. </p>

<p>The laws of physics may not change but our understanding of them is constantly changing. Quantum dots, black silicon, multi-exciton generation. They are research buzzwords now but so was "charge coupled device" in 1970.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>An EVIL body with DX sensor and possibility to F-lenses(with adapter) with all options available.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>From the latest rumor, which seems very credible, the new EVIL cameras will have the so called CX format to join the FX and DX lines with a 10 MP 2.7x crop factor CCD sensor. The cameras as well as the lenses are reported to be "very small." Adapters will be available for the F-mount. This system is rumored to have many innovative features that have not been seen before with any digital cameras, but what those are are not clear. I am not excited by the update of another heavy-body traditional dSLRs, which will no doubt continue to improve on ISO and DR and live view AF.</p>

<p>As for DX-sensor EVIL, there are already many cameras like that, SONY NEX, Samsung NX, SONY A, and Fuji X100.</p>

<p>Next D300 replacement will be, of cource DX sensor size. It will be based on Sony's latest sensor with 24.3 Megapixels. The sensor is already used in Sony NEX-7 camera. <br />Nikon has smarts to make this sensor work better in the D300 replacement camera.<br />In the passed Nikon used Sony sensors, yet managed to get incredible camera improvements over the originals.</p>

<p>However... if this a wish list what I want ?</p>

<p>I want FX camera sensor size with pixel density of the sensor used in NEX7. - I will keep dreaming.</p>

<p>I would like the D300 to be replace by the D400. FX users already have the D700 which is newer than the D300 and beside that, as far as I know, it is the best FX camera out there so that replacement can wait I guess, but the D300 is overdue and we need the new one. This is my opinion. </p>

<p>No one wants to upgrade here... If Nikon takes this seriously probably would stop developing new camera bodies. ;P</p>

 

<p>Heh. I wondered how long this thread would take to get bumped out of the Nikon forum. Rumour doesn't live there, even if it's Nikon-specific. :-)<br />

<br />

The next Nikon camera I get will be a replacement for my D700, and probably in the same market segment. Unless they implement every feature I've asked for, I doubt I'll do so on this upgrade cycle, though - the D700 is still more limited by me than vice versa. Go on Nikon, tempt me.</p>

<p>Make an affordable, interchangeable lens Nikon S2 digital rangefinder in the path of Fuji X100. APS-C or Full frame sensor. New small zoom and AF prime lenses. VR in body. Adaptability to older MF lenses. It will never happen but I can dream can't I.</p>

<p>Louis - you want an affordable version of one of the most expensive cameras Nikon has made? (Rangefinder systems are fiddly.) And with a zoom lens? (Rangefinders with zoom are appreciably more complex.) Assuming you don't actually <i>mean</i> rangefinder, since the X100 isn't one, then I'd have thought a number of existing compact system cameras would work for you, and you can adapt Nikon lenses to all of them - Nikon's trick will be to distinguish itself from the market, although being able to autofocus AF-S lenses would help.<br />

<br />

Speaking of rangefinders, I always thought it should be possible for someone to make a rangefinder M lens adaptor for one of the mirrorless formats. I guess it would be expensive, but it'd be nice to see. [Edit: to clarify, I know you can get M adaptors - I mean one that actually has an optical rangefinder built in.]<br />

<br />

Re. small lenses... a question to the assembled masses: historically, normal lenses have been a fairly simple design. Without the mirror box in the way, could one make a (slow) normal lens with a telephoto design, thus making it shorter? I don't know whether there's inherent coverage problems trying that, but it would be nice to have some other short options than the existing pancakes - Pentax seem to manage a range of the things.</p>

<p>Yes Andrew, I mean and accurate optical viewfinder. And yes, the S2 was/is expensive but a digital version wouldn't have all the clockwork innards but it could have the heft and feel of a quality traditional camera.<br>

I want an APS-C or larger digital version of my Contax G system. I want a digital camera that will make me want to retire my old Canon P and Contax rangefinders. The Fuji X100 got 3/4 of the way there...just no interchangeable lenses. Drat! The Leica M9 got there, but I don't want to take out a second mortgage to afford it.<br>

I doubt Nikon or Canon will make it (anytime soon) but RETRO is IN and Fuji or Samsung are nimble enough that they might and when they do I'll be there to buy it.</p>

<p>Oh s**t, I forgot Sony already has the 24 MP APS-C sensor and thus Nikon will want to use it too. Well that means the D300 replacement is doomed right from the start. 16 MP as with D7000 is lots enough. I'd rather have 7 - 12 MP with the current tech. Just like what the 12 MP D3 did - that was amazing. Canon and Sony should burn in hell for upping the megapixel count to ridiculous amounts. Well, it seems it will be back to film for me.</p>