Hopes for the next generation DSLRs?

[Markw]

Hey everyone. Now that the D800 and D4 are out, what are your hopes and expectations for the next round of FX DSLRS? Not necessarily only the D800 and D4 replacements, but the future of DSLRS within the next 5 years. Personally, this is what I hope to expect:

Nikon D400
16-24MP (probably closer to the mid-lower end)
DX sensor
100% VF
popup flash
At least 2 stops better ISO performance than D300s
Full magnesium alloy, weather-sealed body
8-9FPS
Excellent buffer
D3s/D4 AF system
D800/D4 video functionality

Nikon D7100
18-24MP (probably closer to the higher end)
DX sensor
100% VF
popup flash
1 stop better ISO than D7000
5-7FPS
Not-so-great buffer
Etc, etc. Boiled down D400.

D7100 is a bit hard for me to pinpoint where it will stand between D400 and D7000.

Nikon D700 replacement
SHOULD THERE BE ONE within a year...
D3s sensor
100% VF
Popup flash
D4 video functionality -CX crop
D800-like body
7-8FPS
D3s/D4 AF

SHOULD IT COME 16months+ in the future
Same treatment D700 got from D3, but from the D4 sensor.

If the D700 replacement comes out in either one of these configurations, it will easily be the greatest, and most highly demanded DSLR ever produced by any manufacturer. It will be on backorder for practically its entire lifecycle.

What do you expect, or what would you like to see?

Mark

 

[tirediron]

I'd be happy with cheaper!

 

[Markw]

I'd be happy with cheaper!

Hahaha, wouldn't we all.

Mark

 

[Derrel]

I'm kind of with Thom Hogan in thinking that the D300s will be replaced by a low-cost full-frame camera, and not another crop-body. WHY? As he points out, the market for d-slr's is now almost ALL "upgraders", and not buyers who are new to the market category. Yet another crop-body will not be much of an upgrade to D300s or even D7000 shooters,or to Canon shooters anxious to join the company that's currently in the lead. Why upgrade when there is so,so little to be gained by buying a crop-body camera, when the simplest Full-Frame sensor easily betters the imaging performance of the D7000's sensor? The way I see it, the high-end enthusiast's camera from Nikon has been a fantastic camera--for decades, dating all the way back to the Nikkormat days. Moving the high-end enthusiast's camera to an affordable full-frame body makes a lot of sense, and the current sensor tech that Nikon has EASILY allows the user to have MULTIPLE capture sizes--all in the same camera!!!

Why make a $1799 high-end camera that is only DX, when it's just as easy to make it FX, with DX crop capability, as well as 5:4 and also 1.2x capability [multi-format]? Nikon has been doing that on the pro bodies going on five years now...and beginning with the D2x, they offered both APS-C and 2.0x crop capabilities, so eight years on that [dual-format] now...

 

[Markw]

Well, honestly, extra reach is all I can think of. And besides that, it will save thousands of dollars as far as lenses are concerned. That being said, I haven't heard of Nikon putting out many new DX lenses. Though, they did file a patent for a new 16-85, and are supposed to be announcing an 18-300 with the D3200. I understand the argument isn't "why DX at all?" though. In order to get a respectable DX image (in today's mindset, anyhow) from an FX camera, it will need to be at least 24MP.

As for the multiple formats, you could just as easily implement 5:4, 1.2x, 1.5x, 2.0x, and 2.7x in a DX body as you could in an FX body. Especially since they're practically having the same amount of MP now.

Personally, I would much rather have a 24MP DX camera than a 55-60MP (or whatever it would equate to) FX camera. Same pixel density, completely different camera, image quality, and usability.

Mark

 

[Nikon_Josh]

I'm kind of with Thom Hogan in thinking that the D300s will be replaced by a low-cost full-frame camera, and not another crop-body. WHY? As he points out, the market for d-slr's is now almost ALL "upgraders", and not buyers who are new to the market category. Yet another crop-body will not be much of an upgrade to D300s or even D7000 shooters,or to Canon shooters anxious to join the company that's currently in the lead. Why upgrade when there is so,so little to be gained by buying a crop-body camera, when the simplest Full-Frame sensor easily betters the imaging performance of the D7000's sensor? The way I see it, the high-end enthusiast's camera from Nikon has been a fantastic camera--for decades, dating all the way back to the Nikkormat days. Moving the high-end enthusiast's camera to an affordable full-frame body makes a lot of sense, and the current sensor tech that Nikon has EASILY allows the user to have MULTIPLE capture sizes--all in the same camera!!!

Why make a $1799 high-end camera that is only DX, when it's just as easy to make it FX, with DX crop capability, as well as 5:4 and also 1.2x capability [multi-format]? Nikon has been doing that on the pro bodies going on five years now...and beginning with the D2x, they offered both APS-C and 2.0x crop capabilities, so eight years on that [dual-format] now...

I do hope your right, I think Nikon will clean up if they do this. I think the market is changing hugely, the D4 and D800 are both cameras that most general consumers are unlikely to buy. Bringing full frame to the masses would be an amazing marketing move that could make huge potential gains!

 

[Markw]

True. But, until nice FX lenses are being made for cheap, it really makes no difference what price the entry FX camera's coming in at. I suppose that's why Nikon just patented a 24-70/3.5-4.5.

Mark

 

[rexbobcat]

I do wish that Canon would offer FF and crop I the same body.

And internal radio triggers.

If they could just implement those things I'd be happy.

 

[TheBiles]

I do wish that Canon would offer FF and crop I the same body.

And internal radio triggers.

If they could just implement those things I'd be happy.

I came here to say internal radio triggers. Only being able to use the pop-up flash is annoying. Other than that and the standard noise improvements, I'm totally happy with the 5D Mark III.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

 

[Derrel]

True. But, until nice FX lenses are being made for cheap, it really makes no difference what price the entry FX camera's coming in at. I suppose that's why Nikon just patented a 24-70/3.5-4.5.

Mark

Nikon is not in the business of making cheap lenses. The price of Nikon FX lenses is not that high. I don't know what you're really taking about Mark; in fact the HUGE majority of Nikkor lenses HAVE been FX lenses. Almost any modern FX lens will work acceptably well. I think you are artificially creating some type of mental "obstacle" in your thinking. An FX sensor paired with a moderate quality lens yields a higher total system resolution than a HIGHER-MP count, smaller sensor and the same lens. A 12 MP FX sensor can out-perform an 18MP crop-sensor, with the same lens. I am not interested in the proliferation of "cheap FX lenses". If I had wanted cheap lenses, I would have started buying Canon lenses in the early 1980's...then had my investment trashed just four years later...instead I went with Nikon, and got lenses that are still viable today, 30+ years later...

Nikon does not want to be the manufacturer of cheap lenses, and involved in a race to the bottom of the price structure. That is SONY's game.

 

[zamanakhan]

I too saw Thom's article on lower cost FX and i saw a nikon rumour up for fx d400. I am truly hoping that the d400 will be FX, if it is and is about $2000 i will be saying good bye to my d7000 for about 800ish and putting money down on a nice D400, and a 50 1.8g. I am waiting for the announcement, so i can purchase a mid range zoom, if nikon announces an FX d400 than i will be buying a 24-70 and using it on my d7000 for the time being but if no other FX announcements i will be getting a 17-55 2.8 and keeping the d7000 for another full run.

 

[zamanakhan]

True. But, until nice FX lenses are being made for cheap, it really makes no difference what price the entry FX camera's coming in at. I suppose that's why Nikon just patented a 24-70/3.5-4.5.

Mark

i think you are looking at it the wrong way, the current line up of fx lenses aren't that much more than the DX lenses. 17-55 is about 1500 while 24-70 is 1800ish. 50 1.8 $200, 35 1.8 $200, 10-24 $900ish 16-35 $1100ish and it includes VR!!! Comparable cost similar whether dx or fx. Its not that much more expensive for people to shoot FX in terms of lenses. Alot of prosumers or Well off amateurs like myself already have glass that functions on both FX and DX, the logical upgrade route for people like me is an FX camera. The FX camera isnt a entry level, its just more affordable FX like a d3100 is more affordable compared to d300s, But you are not going to mount a 18-55 on a d300 (well u can and it is a good combo but most people that buy the d300 wont be using a 18-55 but instead a fast prime or a 17-55.) If nikon comes out with a d7100 with lets say 24mp and similar iso performance i dont think they will be getting my money this fiscal year, but they can certainly tempt me with a $1500-1800 Fx camera. The extra $1000 saved would be going towards a 16-35 and 24-70

 

[chuasam]

I want one that would automatically find my clients, and shake the spare change out of them.
Seriously though, I would like a better autofocus grid for Fx cameras, Full weather sealing for lower end models, and a pop up flash the fires shards of glass into the photographer's face when used in AUTO mode.

 

[bhop]

I don't really see any need for more than is already available.. except for the 'cheaper' part..

 

[EchoingWhisper]

For me:
D400/D7100
24MP DX sensor, would love some extra stops of noise performance, but seems unlikely.
D4/D800 metering system, AF system (D7100 could have a lousier one) and processor (D7100 could have a lousier one).
Pop up flash.
100% viewfinder and preferably larger.

But then, it doesn't seem likely that Nikon will produce a D700 replacement, seeing that D800 is so successful. Even if they produced a D700 replacement, I don't expect the sales to be as strong as you said. The noise performance isn't much better than D700, though the AF, metering and processor system is enough of an improvement.

To me, D400 seems likely, but not a D710 or whatever it is. D4 is to compete with 1DX, D800 is to compete with 5D3, D400 is to compete with 7D(2), then what would D710 compete with?

EDIT: IMO, it's either D400 with the 24MP sensor or D710 with the 16MP sensor that will be announced.