Nikon D300: End of the line?

[lex_jenkins]

I'm inclined to agree with Shun regarding pricing. Assuming certain economic factors remain relatively stable (relationships between currency and values of goods, services, labor, etc.), the tendency in the electronics industry has been to sell at certain price points. As a certain model approaches obsolescence it is quickly replaced by a more sophisticated model at or near the same price point.

 

In some cases the now-obsolete model isn't even heavily discounted. In some areas a model is withdrawn from the market and sold elsewhere in order to minimize competition with the new model.

 

If the industry follows this trend we'll see more sophistication and improvements at the roughly $2,000 price point, but not a significant change in the price point itself. And camera manufacturers won't simply repackage obsolete features into a cheaper camera.

 

As an example, there is still no new dSLR selling for under $1,000 that incorporates all the features and capabilities of the Nikon D2H. There are models with far superior low noise/high ISO performance. There are models with higher resolution. But there are none that include the same fast frame rates and near 100% finder and top notch AF capability and rugged build for all-conditions performance. To get those capabilities and features you still have to go to the models at the higher price point.

[Richard Williams]

Here in the UK we've had a rather different experience. Just to check my memory wasn't deceiving me, I had a look at the pricelist from a major UK dealer back in 2002, and found that the D100 was selling for 1795 GBP:

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20021116081842/www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/products/digital.html

 

Grays don't generally have the very cheapest deals, but their prices are usually pretty representative (D300 is currently 915 GBP, D700 is 1575 GBP). Even in 2004, the D100 price was still as high as 1275 GBP:

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20040109213219/www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/products/digital.html

 

All UK prices include sales tax, of course, but the rate hasn't changed this century.

[Richard Williams]

Part of this will be down to currency fluctuations, of course. Until very recently the dollar was weak (making

the later cameras artificially expensive) and the pound strong (making them artificially cheap). I wonder what

the initial street price in yen was for each model?

[ShunCheung]

Richard, what you are observing is the general decrease in prices for camera equipment in the UK.

I recall that 5, 6 years ago, I was reading a British photo magazine and found that prices in the advertisements were

similar to those in the US in terms of numbers, but the currency unit was in Pounds instead of dollars, and back then

1 Pound was almost US$2. In other words, camera equipment was almost twice as expensive in the UK a few years

ago, although those prices included VAT. That gap has narrowed quite a bit now.

 

In terms of US dollars, you can easily see Canon keeps on returning to $8000 for the 1Ds, 1Ds Mark II and 1Ds Mark

III, Nikon keeps on returning to $5000 for the D1 (actually $5500), D1X, D2X and D3 and $1700 - $2000 for the D100,

D200 and D300.

 

The D70 was priced at $1000 (actually $999) back in early 2004. The D80 debut at $1000 in August 2006 and sure

enough, the D90 is also $1000 now. Each time you get "a lot more camera," i.e. a lot more features, in the new

model, but the price is reset to the high point over and over.

[Richard Williams]

Certainly some prices have fallen here over the last few years (maybe a consequence of the exchange rates?) - e.g., the basic pro zooms are perhaps 80% of the price of their nearest equivalents back when the D100 was current (though some lenses have actually gone up in price). But on this side of the pond the dSLR body prices have dropped further than Nikon's other products in a 'like for like' comparison. If we also take into account the 'lot more camera' factor, I'd argue that in some cases the successor models have been in a completely different class to the previous model - e.g. the D300 is for most purposes a 'better D2X', not just a D200 replacement. Similarly, the D70 was (mostly) a 'better D100', but several hundred GBP cheaper.

 

I wouldn't dispute that Nikon will be selling *something* for (say) 1300 GBP, but I think it'll be FX rather than DX sooner than some people think.. Let's imagine (as seems likely) that a D300 successor with a few more Mpixels and a movie mode is introduced before the D700 is due to be replaced (and that the D700 price continues to fall). What price can they launch it at that will persuade me to buy it in preference to a sub-1500 GBP D700? The FX advantage is likely to trump anything they can cook up to improve DX performance for all except the confirmed telephoto addicts.

 

Of course, in the current economic climate, all such predictions may be way off base, and many of us may end up holding on to our current cameras for the foreseeable future...

[graham_thompson1]

Still producing 70000 units a month of the D300.