Nikon's Response to the Canon 7D MKII??

[pics]

<p><strong>"- Body of tough magnesium alloy </strong><br /><strong>- Dust and water</strong><br /> <strong>- Continuous shooting</strong> <strong>10 frames / sec</strong>."<br /> <br /> <strong><br /></strong>Nikon seems to have indicated over the last few years that they are not interested in offering these features along with the pro-control, 10 pin connector, and pc sync port, in their sub $3000 cameras. For Nikon, the $1600-$2500 range is apparently "consumer grade/novice."</p>

[michael_bradtke]

<p>Bob Flood</p>

<p>According to the Canon USA web site the buffer for RAW images is 31 shots with a UDMA 7 card.</p>

<p>http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/digital_slr_cameras/eos_7d_mark_ii?selectedName=Specifications</p>

[rick_m.]

<p>We Nikon shooters simply have to admit that Canon has a camera with which Nikon is unprepared to compete. For the price of Nikon's only real sports camera, the D4s, the aspiring pro or advanced amateur can have a Canon 5D MKIII full frame camera and a 7DMKII 10 FPS sports camera. The 5D MKIII shoots 6 FPS at full resolution so at that it challenges the D750.</p>

<p>Canon is listening to the consumers and Nikon is listening to the marketing department. Nikon could surprise us all tomorrow but my opinion is that since the D800 Nikon has offered very little in the area of innovation. (I love my D7100 but it not really innovative.) Couple that with Nikon's abysmal service after the sale and Canon is out front by a long shot. </p>

<p>I don't know what Nikon's long term strategy is, but cameras are sold today. When I advise young photographers which kit to choose I have to recommend Canon. This is a pity because I have been personally loyal to Nikon for 50 years. </p>

[mag_miksch]

<p>Nikon has the D7100, the glorious successor to the D300;<br>

this new Canon is just the punishment for ignoring a lot of D300 fans like me, I wish Nikon gets a bloody nose. They had the luck to produce a piece of gold with the D200 body and killed it for a 7xxx and a 6xx and 7xx</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>What are you all getting so excited about?</p>

<p>One thing I have noticed about this forum over the years is that as soon as Nikon or Canon release a semipro or pro DSLR body two discussion threads ALWAYS appear:</p>

<p>If it's a Nikon DSLR there is a thread on the Nikon forum discussing the new camera and revelling in its specification. A few hours later another thread will appear on the Canon forum taking about how Canon are dragging their feet and need to get their act together to match the new Nikon offering.</p>

<p>Same story every time. Canon released the 5D MkII and all of a sudden the Nikon shooters went nuts because their D700 was no longer good enough (even though it had been fantastic before the 5D MkII was released). Nikon released the D800 and Canon 5D MkII shooters went nuts wanting the same specification in a Canon body.</p>

<p>Take a chill pill. The camera you own is still as good as it was last week.</p>

<p> </p>

[orcama60]

<p><em>Think about it, it took Canon 5 full years to update the 7D (introduced on September 1, 2009) to the 7D Mark II, if Nikon introduced some D400 in 2011 or even 2012, it would have little competition for a couple of years.</em><br>

<em>.... </em>then now is the right moment ....<br>

<em> </em><br>

Shun, here’s are my questions :<br>

is not possible that Nikon already have the design of a camera to match the Canon 7D Mark II and probably producing this camera as we speak ? As you said, it is strategy on both companies but being Canon the first one to respond to their customers’ need, don’t you think that Nikon is leaving behind a very resentful and probably anger on their customers by not giving us the replacement of the D300 or the D7100 upgraded model ? <br>

Do you think that it will be a great strategy not to match what Canon did ? It does not makes sense, don’t you think so ? Switching from Nikon to Canon will not be that easy for the D300’s users, but it is not impossible either; do you think that Nikon just give up on us and instead updating the D300, is forcing us to jump to FX which for a lot of us is not what we want ? What do you think please ?<br>

Don’t you think that we will have a D7100 upgrade by the end of the year ? It won’t matter what the name of that camera would be, but it will make sense and not just will retain a lot of customers but at the same time, Nikon will be still in the game.<br>

When I see the cell phone industry, then we have the famous iPhone but Samsung has come with some products that were introduced in the market and were well accepted by the customers to the point that now, if you are a Samsung’s owner, you do not have anything to envy to the iPhone. Samsung entered this industry with the intention to stay ahead of Apple and they got it!<br>

Canon came up with this camera and now, Canon is ahead of Nikon in all respect. Do you think that is a great strategy for Nikon, to stay behind Shun ? What would you do Shun if you were one of Nikon’s owner ? <br>

Thanks for your answer.</p>

<p> </p>

[Two23]

<p><<With the cost of FX sensors coming down, Nikon should phase out all the DX gear.>></p>

<p>I disagree. Fuji is doing quite well with their XT1. The D5300 is a very good seller. As new gear comes out, I constantly re-evaluate what it will do for me. A few days ago someone on another forum emailed me with an offer of $1,500 for a D800 with less than 5K pops on it. Just a few months ago this was selling for $2,000! He might have taken even less--he was in a pinch because he just ordered a D4s. I can easily afford $1,500 but started looking at the very minimal lenses I would want. It's still costing me thousands to make a switch. Looking at DxO ratings there just isn't enough difference between what I have (D7100) and D800 to justify this expense. Yes, I would gain stop & half of ISO, but I rarely shoot over ISO 1600 as it is. FX would be moving to a larger (heavy, bulky) system, and I'm headed the other way, looking at M43 OM-D. D800 at $1,400? No thanks. FX? No thanks.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Kent,</p>

<p>I'm hearing those kinds of stories a LOT right now it seems. (I just migrated from DX to µ43 myself.</p>

<p>And people who are going the other way towards mirrorless are not going with Nikon 1, it seems.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>My hands aren't getting any smaller, and I prefer to use cameras which fit my hands comfortably and offer controls that are easy to use. The D7100/D610 style body is nice for its light weight and I think this size is about right for most users, if they actually want to take control over the camera, whereas my own hands fit best on the D3/D4 style body as I have long fingers and wear glasses. But I also enjoy the mid-sized bodies such as the D810 (which has nicer grip shaping than the original D800) and think e.g. the Df is also nice to use with its superb viewfinder and tactile controls.</p>

<p>I find most mirrorless cameras not well shaped, with tiny buttons placed in such a way that I can't really operate them quickly because they're too small and too closely spaced. I dislikely artefacty electronic viewfinders and the mess the image becomes when substantial parts of the image changes e.g. in response to subject movement, they give me nausea and are general unpleasant to use. Cameras which don't have EVF but just the LCD panel are nice enough to use if tiny cameras is what you want. I will probably never buy an EVF camera again for my own use, it just takes the joy out of photography for me.</p>

<p>I noticed in the specifications that the 7D Mk II is heavier than most Nikon DSLRs currently made; the D810 and D4s appear to be heavier whereas the D750, D610, and Df are FX cameras lighter than this 1.6x camera.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Shun, here’s are my questions :<br /> is not possible that Nikon already have the design of a camera to match the Canon 7D Mark II and probably producing this camera as we speak ? As you said, it is strategy on both companies but being Canon the first one to respond to their customers’ need, don’t you think that Nikon is leaving behind a very resentful and probably anger on their customers by not giving us the replacement of the D300 or the D7100 upgraded model ?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Maurice, just about anything is possible. However, as I pointed out earlier, even before Nikon introduced the D300S in mid 2009, it was already known that they could no longer sell it in Japan after November 2011. If there is any successor in plan, why wasn't that introduced in 2011 before that regulation kicked in or 2012 the latest? By not introducing any D400 in 2011/2012, Nikon has already angered those who wanted a successor to the D300.</p>

<p>By 2012, the Canon 7D was already 3 years old and so was the D300S, which is actually more like 5 years old by then since it is just a repackaged D300 from 2007 with the same electronics. Canon is not exactly quick to update the 7D; it took them 5 full years. Why would Nikon wait all these years, missed a whole generation of sales when the 7D got quite dated, and then come in after Canon? That would have been an extremely stupid business strategy. Of course, I have seen a lot of very stupid management; hopefully Nikon is not among them.</p>

<p>Recall that the D300 was introduced simultaneously with the D3 in August 2007. At the time the D3 was Nikon's first and only FX-format DSLR @ $5000. By 2012, $2000 FX-DSLRs such as the Canon 6D and Nikon D600 began to appear and took over that price segment. With the addition of the D750 this month, Nikon already has the $2300 D750 and $1900 D610 in the $2000 area. Adding another DX body in that price range will merely compete against their own models, which is a problem Canon will face between the 6D and 7D Mark II.</p>

<p>As I said, the window to introduce the successor to the D300/D300S was 2011 to 2012. That window has come and gone two years ago. Nikon is not exactly shy about not providing any successor to the D300. When they introduced the D7100 in early 2013, they openly called it their "flahship" DX body. Somehow, certain people simply refuse to believe that Nikon is not interested into adding another $1800 or so DX body and keep on reading those rumors that fail to materialize again and again.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Same story every time. Canon released the 5D MkII and all of a sudden the Nikon shooters went nuts because their D700 was no longer good enough (even though it had been fantastic before the 5D MkII was released). Nikon released the D800 and Canon 5D MkII shooters went nuts wanting the same specification in a Canon body.<br>

Take a chill pill. The camera you own is still as good as it was last week.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Those who love to complain about Nikon (and Canon) simply seize the opportunities to complain.</p>

<p>Now that the D750 is out (sort of an update to the D610, which remains in the lineup for now), other than the Df, the D7100 is the only current Nikon body that still uses EXCEED 3. Logically that is the next one to be updated. If Nikon updates it to use the latest UHS-2 SD cards, the limited buffer issue will be gone immediately. I am sure 10 fps would have been better, but after a year and half, I am quite happy shooting wildlife with the D7100.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>Shun (and Thom Hogan) hit the nail on the head about Nikon's shift to FX. their product launch track record since 2007 supports that, and Thom breaks it down on <a href="http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-consumer-electronics.html">this post </a>where he analyzes the different iterations of Nikon's FX bodies.</p>

<p>Given that a d400 would have already appeared if there was going to be one, it has to be a bitter pill for Nikonistas to see the 7dII launch with those specs. it's like waiting for a girl to turn 18 so you can marry her, then finding out she married someone else.</p>

<p>the 7d should do quite well for Canon, but i'm not sure that will be enough to change Nikon's marketing strategy. what's frustrating for Nikon users is that there is no high-end DX pro camera, and also that the D750 is more consumer-oriented than we would have liked, with--gasp--scene modes in a $2300 body and no direct ISO button. while it makes sense, perhaps, to have an entry-level FX camera at $1800-$2000 (d610), the next model up (d750) has slightly better performance specs, but isn't fully pro-oriented -- though at that price it should be. i could see paying a little more for a 24mp FX body that's fully pro-oriented, say 8fps, but not sure there's enough differentiation between the d750 and d810 price points to make that a reality. adding insult to injury, samsung just announced a pro-spec APS-C body with 16-50/2-2.8 and 50-150/2.8 lenses, bluetooth, and 4k video.</p>

[Mike D]

<p>Nikon has a very nice line of FF bodies now and they are all readily available for purchase (except the D750) for those that want one. It's even better news that retailers are now offering freebies to move them off their shelves. I don't think I ever remember a time when all Nikon cameras were in stock at the same time. However, I suspect the 7DII will be out of stock for the next 6 month, just as the D800 was when it was introduced. </p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Shun (and Thom Hogan) hit the nail on the head about Nikon's shift to FX. their product launch track record since 2007 supports that</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, Hogan is unfortunately well known for predicting the so called D400 many times since 2008, as documented by this DPReview post a year and half ago: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51256976<br /> As recently as last month, on his blog, Hogan was still expecting some D400 or D9300 for Photokina. I am glad he may have finally come around.</p>

<p>When Nikon introduced the D7100 in February 2013, during a conference call with them, Nikon had all but outright pointed out to me that there would be no follow up to the D300/D300s, and I shared that information with this forum back then: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00bNA6</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Nikon emphasizes that the D7100 is built to the same moisture and dust resistance specification as the D300/D300S, and they also expect current owners of the D300/D300S as well as D7000 to upgrade to the D7100, plus consumers who have D3000 and D5000 series cameras to move up. Reading between the lines, my guess is that there will be no more updates to the D200 and D300 series. Nikon already could not sell the D300S in Japan starting from November 2011 due to battery safety issues. If there were going to be some "D400," it should definitely have appeared before the D7100.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I sure hope that nobody is still dreaming about some future D400, as a successor to the D300. You are just kidding yourself. For the last 2, 3 years, Nikon's strategy is to move prosumers and above to FX. For those who want a high-end APS-C DSLR, the Canon 7D Mark II is your answer, and I think its specs look great. And of course I know that also means replacing some lenses. But keep whining on this forum is not going to improve anything.</p>

[Mike D]

<p>I recently bought a Sigma 120-300 Sport (awesome lens) and have pre-ordered the Sigma 150-600 Sport, both in Nikon mount. I am hoping Nikon will relent and release a 8 or 10 FPS body in cropped frame format with reasonable buffer. I'll give them about a year, and if not, I'll buy the 7DII and have Sigma change the Nikon mount to Canon mount. I am really glad that I've been buying switchable mount Sigma lenses instead of Nikon lenses. </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Time again for JDM's law:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>At time T, either Nikon or Canon will be in the lead on a given technology.<br>

At T+1, it will be the other way around.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Jamie has it spot on.<br>

For those with very special needs, there will be improvements and they will cost a lot.<br>

Otherwise, at this moment in time, I think it would be very difficult to find a camera in either Canon or Nikon lineups that is a "dud", certainly not in terms of general photography.<br>

All of them have more than ample megapixies, all autofocus at incredible speed by standards of MF days, ......</p>

 

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>I'll give them about a year, and if not, I'll buy the 7DII and have Sigma change the Nikon mount to Canon mount. I am really glad that I've been buying switchable mount Sigma lenses instead of Nikon lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>wow, i didnt know this was even possible. luckily i have a bunch of sigma lenses myself, but my 24-70 and 70-200 are in f-mount. i'm still using the D3s and D300s, and cant afford to upgrade both to a newer model, so i'd probably pop for a new FX camera if anything. But the 7dII looks good, especially the 4k video. i can't see how depriving pros of a choice between high-end sensor formats helps Nikon. But then i also didnt understand why the Df had so many consumer-grade features in its DNA.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Well, Hogan is unfortunately well known for predicting the so called D400 many times since 2008, as documented by this DPReview post a year and half ago:<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51256976" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51256976</a><br />As recently as last month, on his blog, Hogan was still expecting some D400 or D9300 for Photokina. I am glad he may have finally come around.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>lol, well, i didn't say thom was always right. but he may have had inside knowledge of prototypes which never made it into production. his latest blog does appear to definitively state that the d400 window has closed, so maybe he smelt the coffee and backtracked.</p>

[Uhooru]

<blockquote>

<p><em>I truly believe that Nikon "overdelivered" more with the generation of cameras that included the D90/300/700/D3(s)</em><br>

<br /> That generation of Nikon cameras had really low resolution (for FX) except for the 8000€ D3X whereas at the same time Canon and Sony were selling high res (21-24MP) full frame for one third of the price. So in that respect Nikon underdelivered in that generation, but they certainly fixed that in the 2012+ generation.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is old argument. I recall a lot of people complained that Nikon "shorted" resolution on the D700 when it came out. But after use, the D700 became one of the most popular cameras Nikon has made and are still being used by many event shooters. I think Shun is correct when he says that it would make sense that Nikon would have produced updated versions of the D300s and D700s a couple of years ago if they had wanted to. Now many of us would like to see such a camera, but I don't think its going to happen and apparently Nikon told Shun exactly that. Its too bad, because this new Canon is more of that type of camera or so it seems. Unfortunately, so many are invested in Nikon glass that it makes no sense to switch on this issue, and maybe that's the camera business now. Territories are staked out and the real competition is becoming more and more as to the mirror-less systems which are becoming a very viable solution to many photographic situations at much less weight and cost.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>I recently bought a Sigma 120-300 Sport (awesome lens) and have pre-ordered the Sigma 150-600 Sport, both in Nikon mount. I am hoping Nikon will relent and release a 8 or 10 FPS body in cropped frame format with reasonable buffer. I'll give them about a year</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It should be clear by now that the D7100 will be the next in line for update, to EXPEED 4, etc. If Nikon makes it SD UHS-2 compatible, the D7100 can easily write 7, 8 fps, 24MP directly into the memory card with no more concern about the buffer. However, I don't think that kind of consumer-grade body is going to sustain 8 fps for long; the mirror box is not going to last.</p>

<p>As I said, the time window for Nikon to update the D300 has long gone. Whether that is the right business decision for their part is debatable, but for anybody who is still dreaming about a Nikon version of the 7D Mark II, you are merely setting yourself up for another year of frustration. If I were you, I would plan on buying a 7D Mark II and lenses in the EOS mount rather than some vaporware.</p>

<p>I shoot surfing once in a while too. In surfing, the action typically lasts a second or two. If you use fast SD cards in the D7100, 6 fps for 1 to 1.5 sec should be able to get the job done. 10 fps maybe a bit better, but it is not going to make any huge difference.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Quick summary for the cropped frame sports shooter (me). Canon 7D II shoots 1090 JPEG images at 10 FPS. My D7100 shoots 33 JPEG images at 6 FPS.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why would anybody need to shoot 1090 JPEG images? Do you hold down the shutter release @ 10 fps for 100 consecutive seconds? Those number are good for silly debates. In actual sports photography, you can certain find better tools than the D7100, but my experience after a year and half is that I am quite happy with it.</p>

[Mike D]

<p>Shun, you may be correct and that's why, after waiting a couple years to replace my 10 year old 80-400, I never did. Nikon lost a sale to me that a couple years earlier would have been a sure bet. On your second point, I was at the Wedge a couple weeks ago during large surf conditions and ran out of the 50+ JPEG buffer on my A77 II with 70-400 G (purchased instead of new Nikon 80-400) many times. There simply were too many waves and too many surfers all surfing the different breaks at the Wedge all at the same time. It was mind boggling.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Michael, I have tested the D7100 with 95MB/sec SanDisk cards. If you shoot the JPEG large, the only limitation is Nikon's artificial 100 image limit (mainly to prevent the camera from firing indefinitely if its shutter release is accidentally pressed inside a camera bag, etc.). Those cards are fast enough so that they can write as fast as images are captured @ 6 fps so that buffer size doesn't matter. However, unless we go to UHS-2, we cannot do the same for the much bigger RAW files.</p>

<p>Again, if I were you, I would plan on getting a 7D Mark II, unless in the unlikely event that production versions show up with serious problems. It'll save you a lot of frustration.</p>

<p> </p>

[mike_halliwell]

<blockquote>

<p>Yes, I know the D750 is a D5300 with an FX sensor and costs 4 times as much....but just how much is the sensor's cost actually involved?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Just in case there are any others out there like Shun, that didn't understand my crazy statement; all I was saying is that the D750's position between the D610 and the D810 is analogous with the D5300 being between the D3300 and the D7100. </p>

<p>The D750 has the fold out screen, WiFi and 60P video, just as the D5300 does but costs many times more. If Nikon are wanting us all to go FX, then why such a big price hike for what is in effect, just a 1/3 bigger slab of imaging chip. There are only very minor price increases for up-scaling other components.</p>

<p>Seems no-one actually knows how much a DX or FX sensor actually costs anyway..:-)</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Just in case anyone is interested, I found the mount conversion pricing (in the UK) for Sigma's lenses that Eric A mentioned above.</p>

<p>http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/mount-conversion-service</p>

<p>This has made jumping ship a much, much less painful experience. Sigma's lenses of late have in many cases been superior to those of Nikon or offer a unique focal length. I suspect <em><strong>all</strong></em> their future lenses will have this feature.</p>

<p>The prohibitive cost of lens replacement was about the only logical reason for brand loyalty. With Sigma offering an alternative, the camera maker's better step up their game or more people <em><strong>WILL</strong></em> jump ship 'cos they can even jump back again in a few years time too! Game Changer.</p>

[nico_morris]

<blockquote>

<p>D7100 can easily write 7, 8 fps, 24MP directly into the memory card with no more concern about the buffer. However, I don't think that kind of consumer-grade body is going to sustain 8 fps for long; the mirror box is not going to last.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You've made this kind of assertion before. Could you please outline your engineering design or repair experience. Independent workshops doing insurance repairs have been known to fraudulently resort to the mirror box replacement tariff because it is the highest, which skews the statistics.<br>

The mirror mechanism I believe is controlled by more than one electromagnet in modern cameras. It's not fired on a spring, waiting to shatter.<br>

Mainly I believe people miss the point that the retail price reflects the features ladder and profit margin.</p>

[edwardchen]

<p>I am puzzled with nikon AF technology; it stays conservative with 15 cross-type AF points from D3 to the latest D4s. Though they improve the sensor module but I think the cross-type AF points have lots to do in accuracy especially in dim light situation. I find my 5dmk3 has much more success rate compared to d800e in that situation.<br>

We are discussing canon vs nikon, unaware that there's another brand coming out strong. Samsung has been catching up and its latest Samsung NX1 spec is quite amazing on paper. They have been adding their fast lenses on their lineup too.<br>

the speculated spec from DP preview:</p>

<ul>

<li>28.2 megapixel APS-C BSI-CMOS sensor</li>

<li>Hybrid AF system with 205 phase-detect points covering 90% of the frame</li>

<li>15 fps burst shooting with continuous autofocus</li>

<li>4K (DCI 4K & UHD) video recording using H.265 codec</li>

<li>Can output 4:2:0 8-bit 4K video over HDMI</li>

<li>Stripe pattern AF illuminator with 15m range</li>

<li>Weather-resistant magnesium alloy body</li>

Context-sensitive adaptive noise reduction

<li>3" tilting Super AMOLED touchscreen display</li>

<li>2.36M dot OLED EVF with 5ms lag</li>

<li>LCD info display on top of camera</li>

<li>Built-in 802.11ac Wi-Fi and Bluetooth</li>

<li>USB 3.0 interface</li>

<li>Optional battery grip</li>

</ul>

<p>When it's out, and the spec is as good as i expect it to be, I am heavily considering ditching nikon and canon.</p>

[edwardchen]

<blockquote>

<p>Unfortunately, so many are invested in Nikon glass that it makes no sense to switch on this issue, and maybe that's the camera business now</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No need to switch. Use both (invest both). Keep both lenses. Buy and use the most current and advanced body. Lenses prices will not drop significantly so no need to worry for keeping them for a while. Switching bodies is marginal. <br /> Use the best of the two can offer.</p>