What's Next from Nikon--and do i need it?

[eric_arnold]

<p>you know what i want? D3s functionality in a small, compact body.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p><em> I keep coming back to a question that haunts me (and may haunt Nikon soon): what do I need in a D4 that I don't have in my D3s and D3x?"</em></p>

<p>Those cameras are the most advanced DSLRs available today. Of course someone who owns both would not feel pressure to upgrade to a D4 - and that's the way it should be. I don't understand why anyone would be stressed about <em>not</em> having to upgrade every two years (which is one half generation in Nikon pro DSLRs). It's a good thing! </p>

<p>For me, about half of what I shoot is low light, high ISO but then there is some tripod-based landscape, macro, and architecture also, and finally studio portraits, for which I could benefit from more pixels. However, before shelling out 6200 EUR for a D3X I want it to be upgraded in such a way that it has a nice implementation of live view (like in the D7000). Also I would like to see more focusing screen options. Finally I think Nikon should make all the autofocus points cross-type, so that they can be used with greater reliability. I am hoping that the D4, and/or a D800, will offer these, and if so, I will buy such a camera provided that the price is reasonable. However, after that I doubt there is much need to stay up to date with camera technology. I think that these kinds of cameras should be worn out until there's not much left, not replaced every few years...</p>

<p><em>Bottom line is Nikon & Canon stay with current infrared systems for the forseeable future.</em></p>

<p>I doubt that very much. Infrared works unreliably in many common situations. If the surfaces in the room are dark, it won't fire in all situations. If the room is large, it may not fire. If we are outdoors using the remote flash for fill, it will not fire. Radio is a necessity for even the most basic portrait situations. And it needs to be integrated into the flashes so that all features of CLS are supported. If Nikon fails to see this then they are causing a lot of unnecessary pain on photographers. Having to make separate models for each market that has different frequencies (or provide dip switches to set the flash to work locally) is not much of an issue and many companies have to do that anyway. This is a really pathetic showing from Nikon ... see all the threads about Nikon and Canon TTL pocketwizards and their problems. It's a very expensive product and Nikon should at least offer enough support to pocketwizard that they can make them work reliably and with future cameras and flashes as well.</p>

[elliot1]

<p><em>"have to increase MP and have better dynamic range... D4--...will do neither.'</em></p>

<p>He is probably wrong. I believe the improvement in those areas in the D7000 over previous DX models gives us a preview of what we can expect improvement wise in those two areas in a D4.</p>

<p>Additionally, I believe most improvements, including those in IQ (not related to sharpness), will be more software based with enhanced processing speeds as a result of both improved software and hardware (excluding the sensor).</p>

<p>Alan, you have not used the D3 enough to understand what it is capable of, especially in the AF area where I know you have had some difficulty. You may not be aware of this but D3's buffer can be expanded. Info on that can be found here:<br>

<a href="https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/25465">https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/25465</a></p>

<p>If the D90 had as many AF points as the D3, or the D3 had as few AF points as the D90, performance in changing the point would be the same. </p>

<p>The D3 writes a RAW file(14 bit lossless compressed) in about 1/2 second or so using 300x HDMA cards. Using a slower card will give the appearance that the D3 is not 'fast'. What kind of cards are you using?</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<blockquote>

<p><br />you know what i want? D3s functionality in a small, compact body.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Like Thom, I would look elsewhere, Eric. Nikon will most likely be dead last with a mirrorless and people laughed when I suggested a FX D40/FM3a... </p>

[BelaMolnar]

<p>I second to Richard Snow. I also own the D700 and the D300. I used to have the D2X and all the previous pro bodies, back to 36-40 years, starting with the Nikon F, plain prism. The later models all with a motor drive. The D700 camera can do everything, what ever I like to do and except from a digital body. Bdw, I still using my F5, FE 2, etc., even the bellowed "F" some time, if I like to shoot film. The F5 fit in my hand like a glove, like the D3 do. The problem with the D700 is, it is clumsy to hold the camera, don't give me a good stability. If I'm attaching the MD-10, the darn thing is bigger, and heavier then the D3. Never mind the stupid pop up flesh, which I never using it. I always cary in my packets the SB-400 flash, witch is more powerful and practical for me. The D700 with build-in battery grip would be smaller then the separate grip unit + the camera, and I would gladly pay the higher price, but not as high as the D3, D3s. For those cameras, I have to mortgage my house. One more! I really, don't want 24MP, the 12 MP is good enough, the better dynamic range would serve me much better.<br>

I agree with Richard all the way. The D700, . . . . . . . </p>

 

<p>" It does everything I want EXCEPT fit in my hand as well as a D3(s/x) with it's grip.<br>

What would I like in a D800 or D4?</p>

<ul>

<li>18MP [PROBABLE]</li>

<li>Usable at ISO 12800 [PROBABLE]</li>

<li>An ISO range with a base of 100 that covers ISO 25 all the way up to whatever Nikon decides (see previous comment) [uNLIKELY]</li>

<li>Better dynamic range throughout the ISO range [PROBABLE]</li>

<li>Priced between $3500 and $5000 USD [LIKELY]</li>

<li>10+ FPS</li>

</ul>

<p>As for the D400?</p>

<ul>

<li>MAX resolution of 18MP</li>

<li>Everything the D4 gives in an DX Body</li>

<li>Built in grip</li>

<li>8+ FPS "</li>

</ul>

 

[nikofile]

<p>I think all the technical reasons for upgrading to new models don't matter as much as the fact new buyers enter the market, and a lot of people simply want the latest equipment to reignite interest in photography. For new buyers (professional level) Nikon has to offer products competitive with Canon. So whether or not it will make a difference in the photos of current Nikon users is a moot point. Plenty of them will upgrade regardless.<br>

I think the most important arena is mirrorless. The new Olympus PEN is not a pocket camera by any stretch, but it is smaller than entry level DSLR cameras, and if reports are correct, it is a very high performance camera. With two power house companies in this arena, Sony and Samsung (not to mention Panasonic), mirrorless cameras are on the verge of changing the market forever. Nikon and Canon will be squeezed out of the entry level market, and that will spell doom for their pro level equipment.<br>

I hope we get a surprise announcement from Nikon that they have decided to introduce a mirrorless camera sometime this year. I know I will be buying a mirrorless in the not too distant future, and the new PEN appears to be the most compelling model yet. I'm in no hurry, however, and I would like to see what Nikon could do with this, APS at least, and probably the D7000 sensor.<br>

For DX cameras I believe 24mp is a bridge too far. It's fine for a talking/selling point, but for the people using this level of camera it is simply unnecessary. The sensor of the D7000 with the performance/handling of the D300s would provide a fantastic camera for enthusiasts, and even some pros. But the sensor is there, so we will probably get 24mp.</p>

[Two23]

<p>Ikkla--<br />I actually don't have a lot of problems with the current Nikon CLS when used for portrait fill lighting, including in sunlight. I just make sure the sensor on the flash is shaded. After talking to both the Nikon and Canon people, I still don't see Nikon getting into radio triggering. The market is relatively small, and Nikon seems to barely have enough money to develop lenses and their own sensors lately. Add to this that radio triggers continue to evolve very rapidly. In just the past three years I've owned a set of ElinChroms, Pocket Wizards, CyberSyncs. That means I've changed systems once a year, and I buy 10-12 at a time. By the time Nikon could come out with anything, it could already be obsolete. Just don't see it.</p>

<p>As for switching from Nikon to MF digital, I've been saying that here for the past six months. The prices of used ones are coming down, and eventually they could actually be affordable. There are two things that trip me up about MF though. The first is ISO seems to top at 400. The second is there really aren't any fast zooms. My style of shooting is well served by compact bodies and versatile f2.8 zooms. If I ever want to carry a bulkier system and single lenses out into the woods, I can just take my 4x5.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[steven_p]

<p>Basically, just ask any D300/s owner what would make them bite again. The buying trends in the US are still fairly flat. Every "potential" DSLR buyer pretty much already has one.<br /><br />For the DX user, there are many of us hanging on to the D300/s because of dedicated manual controls and faster frame rate. Given the price point of the D7000 a more feature rich DX camera would have to be something phenomenal to drive sales of something close to a $2K camera body.<br /><br />A possible +/- $2K, 16mp full frame body would gobble the entire high end DX market and there would be a frenzy in production and sales of both bodies and full frame lenses. <br /><br />There will always be a high end market for the the most MP's and features, (D3X) but for the masses, a lower sticker price/+ "bang-for-buck, prosumer" models are what will drive new sales.</p>

[ruslan]

<p>Better skin-tones and finer JPEG details in all sub top-notch SLR cameras. Resolution: DX=18Mp, <em>affordable</em> (less than 3000 $) FX=28 Mp. Lens: 100/2.0 G, (VR maybe). </p>

[martynas_photo]

<p>Nikon, please, hire a team of professional programmers/developers and make the otherwise brilliant Capture NX2 FASTER and BUG-FREE!</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Basically, just ask any D300/s owner what would make them bite again. The buying trends in the US are still fairly flat. Every "potential" DSLR buyer pretty much already has one.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Precisely.</p>

<p>Back in November 2007, I bought a D300 as soon as it was available. I was shocked how good that $1800 camera was; it completely killed the D2X that I bought 2.5 years earlier at close to $5000. That is why I am now reluctant to spend another $5K on a DSLR.</p>

<p>I used a loaner D300S to write the review for photo.net, but I never bought one myself. The D300S video capability, shell I say: has lots of room for improvement. I can live with just one memory card. Other than those, the D300S is essentially the same camera as the D300.</p>

<p>The D7000 gives us a preview how the D300S can improve. Video capture is now 1080p and video/live view AF has improved, but there is still plenty of room for further improvement. The pixel count has gone up but so has the high-ISO capability.</p>

<p>If Nikon wants to sell something that replaces the D300/D300S, they certainly need to provide more new and meaningful capabilities, and I would imagine that they are more than capable of delivering that. A lot of Canon high-end DSLRs are also due for update; the competition is not going to sit still. But until we see the specifications and have new cameras in hand to test, it is merely empty talk.</p>

<p>Do I need the next new camera while the details are not known? The answer is definitely a maybe.</p>

[bikealps]

<p>OK, I'm going to have to go beat the CLS dead horse here for a bit...</p>

<p>I think Nikon has done a remarkable job of supporting us photographers with their bodies and lenses, but CLS has not lived up to its promise and I believe Nikon can and should make it a more useful system.</p>

<p>So, on my D90, I can set up commander mode from the camera and put my SB-600 on a stand and get some pretty cool photos. It's way more convenient than setting up studio strobes. Setting up lighting ratios and having the camera calculate exposure means I don't have to use a flash meter and can work much faster.</p>

<p>Only problem: the IR trigger only works IF I'm indoors, the sensor is pointed right, I'm within a certain (small) distance, walls are not black, AND I get lucky. This is not a professional system.</p>

<p>So I upgrade to a D3 and get an SB-900. Now there is no commander mode on the camera and I have to use a $500 SB-900 simply as a commander and I still have to deal with undependable short-range IR trigger. Gimme a BREAK!</p>

<p>So now I can go buy a bunch of radio poppers at $200 per -- I need 3, 1 for the camera, 1 for each of two flashes -- and they will be reliable but they won't work with all, the CLS features? Gimme a BREAK!</p>

<p>I understand that radio frequencies vary by country. Same deal for cell phones, but cell phone makers put quad-band front-ends in their radios. Nikon would have to pay to develop a chipset, but this IS technically feasible.</p>

<p>This will be a bit of a hurdle for Nikon. They will have to:</p>

<ul>

<li>put commander mode back into their pro cameras</li>

<li>put a radio trigger in the pro camera</li>

<li>make one or two new flashes with built-in radio receivers</li>

</ul>

<p>Granted, the new flashes obsolete all our existing flashes. This will be really painful for us and for Nikon, but Nikon's got to have to courage to make this jump.</p>

<p>That said, I have utmost respect for the people of Nikon and their engineering accomplishments and discipline. These cameras are a combination of incredible engineering in multiple disciplines -- optics, electronics, mechanics, user interface, ... -- and Nikon has done a truly fine job. I believe we should all support our friends in Sendai by buying as much pro Nikon gear as we can afford.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>My wish list for the next version of D700 is quite short:</p>

<p>Wishes 1 to 100 - fix the awful metering! Nikon's 3D colour matrix metering is too complicated for its own good. Just stop the camera from blowing pixels and I for one would be extremely happy.</p>

<p>Wish 101 - implement D-lighting in hardware. Have the camera apply a (preferably selectable) tone curve at the <em>analog amplifier stage.</em> Applying essential tone adjustment after digitisation is too late! The A/D conversion has already thrown away far too much information in the extreme shadows. AFAIK no camera manufacturer has tried this before, so Nikon could steal a march on the competition here. The dynamic range would be greatly enhanced and noise could also be reduced.</p>

<p>Wish 102 - 16 bit A/D conversion as standard.</p>

<p>Wish 103 - More pixels (predictable), but with the same or better noise performance at high ISO settings, and better colour fidelity.</p>

<p>Wish 104 - Easier to access bracketing with a bracketing mode, or modes specifically geared towards HDR capture.</p>

<p>Wish 105 - More non-cpu lens selection slots. 6 is not enough for my collection of MF primes. Oh, and while you're at it make the custom WB easier to set and select and ........ on second thoughts maybe my wish list isn't quite so short.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>Allan, just a thought, but the "WiFi" standard is almost completely internationally accepted and legal to use. Using IP packets to setup flash parameters and trigger them is perfectly feasible, as would be the use of Bluetooth to control and trigger camera functions. I don't see any major hurdles to using these technologies either integrated into a camera or as a relatively cheap add on. In fact a mobile phone could easily be programmed to perform the task of remote control.</p>

<p>As for the cost of "radio poppers", most of them are outrageously overpriced and underfeatured when compared to the technology that goes into something like a simple 446MHz PMR transceiver. Some of these PMRs have a transponder mode to automatically check whether they're still in range of each other, and nearly all have subsonic Control Tone squelch suppression - a technique that could be easily adapted to firing flash groups. Their reliable range is also at least 5 times what you'd get from a flash popper. And these little PMR transceivers cost what? About $35 a piece?</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>For DX cameras I believe 24mp is a bridge too far. It's fine for a talking/selling point, but for the people using this level of camera it is simply unnecessary. The sensor of the D7000 with the performance/handling of the D300s would provide a fantastic camera for enthusiasts, and even some pros. But the sensor is there, so we will probably get 24mp.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>i think this is part of the problem in a nutshell. it would be one thing if nikon offered an array of upper-echelon bodies at varying MP counts: 12/14/16 for DX, 12/18/24 for FX. but it essentially looks like the 12mp body in both DX and FX will be discontinued, and both new buyers and upgraders may end up with bells and whistles they don't need, just to get the features they actually want.</p>

<p> </p>

[john_n._wall]

<p>Eric writes, "both new buyers and upgraders may end up with bells and whistles they don't need, just to get the features they actually want."<br>

I agree completely, but that's actually been true for generations of Nikon bodies, way back into the film era.</p>

 

[wchen]

<p>I have used a D200 for over four years now, and don't have any intention to update. What I hope D200 to improve in terms of functionality already appears on new similar level bodies. However, all the new bodies just don't speak to me as D200 did four years ago. But a "D3s functionality in a small, compact body" (F3?) or a "FX D40 or digital FM3A" difinitely will glue my eyes on them and open my pocket!</p>

[vince-p]

<p>D3s on a compact body sounds essentially like what a follow up to the D700 should be. With 1080 p video and suffient processing for alternative frame rates and good external sound etc etc etc . Price = $2999. At its lowest. probably more like $3200. The F100, D300, and D700 are all just about the same size. Is this not compact enough? The 5DMkII might be slightly smaller. Slightly. That's about as small as a full frame dslr can go at this point, no?</p>

[Sanford]

<p>It's amazing! In this country, being satisfied with something you own and not desiring the next best, latest incarnation is tantamount to being a bad consumer, i.e. a bad American. I told someone the other day that I thought my Scion would be the last car I ever bought and they asked me if I had a fatal illness!</p>

[vince-p]

<p>Jimmy Carter, July 1979: "Consuming things can never satisfy our longing for meaning."<br>

Headllines, Nov. 1980: Reagan Defeats Carter by Shocking Landslide<br>

Welcome to America pal. We don't have social class. We don't care about intellect or art. We hate the idea of sex. What we care about are real estate (often in terms of whole nations) and stuff. That's what we're good at. Acquisition of same. Often on credit.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>both new buyers and upgraders may end up with bells and whistles they don't need, just to get the features they actually want.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Eric, we discussed this before, recently. The "bells and <strike>shistles</strike> whistles" you don't need could be the features someone else wants. Some other bells and <strike>shistles</strike> whistles they don't need could be the features you want.</p>

[Sanford]

<p>Shun - is "shistles" is miss-type, a Freudian slip, or put in there on purpose?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Sorry Sanford. I thought I had cut and paste from Eric's post and ended up messing it up. Thanks for pointing it out.</p>

[DB_Gallery]

<p>I'll take whatever is next because it is time to replace my D700's, one has 65,000 cycles on it and the other is at 103,000. As long as it is as good as the D700 or better, I could really care less as my clients only really care about the final image and have no problem in making billboard sized prints from 12MP.</p>

[nikofile]

<p>Talking about bells and whistles, Hogan says he will talk about improvements for photography next, relating to the D4. But you know they can always improve on the AF system. If they put 24mp in that D400 body the AF system is going to have to be a beast just to get similar results to the D300. Assuming the D4 will take AF up another notch to hold it out there like the carrot Canon can never quite catch, the D400 should reap the benefit. So there's that. And you know it is going to have improved dynamic range. They couldn't sell it if it didn't. I don't know what else they can do that would be earth shaking. But maybe video improvement is more important than I think. I'm certainly not on the edge of my seat about the D400, especially if they are going to stick in a 24mp sensor. I can't make good use of that.</p>