Nikon's Rumored Sub D3x000 body (D2300?)

[TheLost]

Whats your take on this?
Nikon D2300 and Nikon Coolpix P8000 camera rumors | Nikon Rumors

• Nikon D2300 World's smallest DSLR camera (small like the Canon Rebel SL1)
• There is a possibility that the D2300 will be the first DSLR-like camera without an optical viewfinder
• D2300 is a preliminary name and it can change
• Weight: 290g
• Announcement in May 2014
• The Nikon D2300 could be the 3rd DSLR camera that will be announced this year

Im not sure i like the "First DSLR without an optical viewfinder"... ick

 

[runnah]

Im not sure i like the "First DSLR without an optical viewfinder"... ick

So why not make it mirrorless?

 

[Designer]

"the D2300 will be the first DSLR-like camera"

That is the word that gets my attention. I presume he means interchangeable lenses.

Oh, well, rumors are worth what you paid for them.

 

[TheLost]

Well... after browsing the Nikon Rumors comments and filtering out the crap.. This could be an interesting camera for Nikon.

A Tiny camera (can we call it a DSLR?) that doesn't need a mirror (no optical view finder) with the same flange to sensor distance that can use standard f-mount lenses. If you yank out the mirrors, AF sensors, focus screen and prism... what do you have?

Snippet of comment from Thom Hogan..

The primary thing that a mirrorless camera gains over a DSLR is less depth to the camera body. There's absolutely no reason why you can't build a DSLR that's the same width and height as an equivalent mirrorless camera. So what do you lose by making the camera thinner for mirrorless? The grip!


Now look at a mirrolress camera with a grip, such as the E-M1. On that right side, it's actually deeper than a Nikon Df!


I've said all along that the likely scenario from Canon and Nikon would be to use their existing mounts and just make the cameras smaller (width/height) and eventually mirrorless (EVF instead of optical finder).

And you cant call it mirrorless.. (one more quote from Thom Hogan)

We really don't have a good name for it, let alone the hybrid approach that Nikon also has in development. Sony had the same problem with the SLT. It's definitely going to pose a marketing problem.
First, you can't call it mirrorless, because that just says that all those companies that have been making mirrorless cameras were right and also what the heck is the Nikon 1 then? You can't call it DSLR because it has no optical viewfinder and isn't the same as your DSLRs.

Could this be Nikon's move into the 'next-big-thing'?

 

[Derrel]

Yeah, this might very well be the test ballon for Nikon's move into the next decade of camera design....or not...I dunno. The "without an optical viewfinder" issue sounds like a mixed bag to me. I am assuming they mean it will have an EVF system. Or, maybe an EVF as well as a rear LCD, like a digital P&S camera has. Dunno...

As to EVF; last week I went to ProPhoto Supply and demo'd the Sony A7. A well-made, small body. But the single BIGGEST PROBLEM??? The EVF sucks. It's not good enough for portrait work...the image as seen with the camera at the eye is crappy. Nowhere NEAR as good as even the viewfinder system the entry-level pentamirror d-slrs like the D3200. Not being able to actually SEE and EVALUATE the expression or the focus through the EVF sucked. I was terribly disappointed in how "video-y" and "jittery" the EVF image was on the Sony A7.

I looked at Canon's super-small d-slr the weekend before...."ehhhhh, crappy viewfinder image." The Canon 70D on the other hand was REALLy a nice viewfinder for a crop-frame body. The tiny Canon d-slr was--teensie! I was amazed at how dinky it felt. It would not be that difficult to beat Canon's ultra-small d-slr with a conventional NIkon design, but who knows what they've done with this "D2300"...

With the model number of 2300, I expect this thing should be to sell at the $400-something mark; but with Nikon's odd pricing strategies on small cameras (Coolpix A, anybody?), they'll probably over-price it, and have yet another small-camera sales turd on their hands.

 

[Designer]

Speaking of teeny cameras, what is the camera that several of the Olympians are using to snap pics? It is really dinky. I suppose it could be a GoPro without the mount, but since I haven't had a good look at either one, I can't say as I could call it a GoPro.

 

[runnah]

EVF Bad

This is probably the biggest hurdle right now for going mirrorless on everything. They will crack it eventually but not with this little Nikkin.

Which is strange because we know they can make small screens with enough pixel density to have a great image (oculus rift), but perhaps the cost is still too much.

 

[coastalconn]

Sounds a lot like the J-1 I just picked up with a built in FT-1 and a bigger sensor

 

[robbins.photo]

Yeah, this might very well be the test ballon for Nikon's move into the next decade of camera design....or not...I dunno. The "without an optical viewfinder" issue sounds like a mixed bag to me. I am assuming they mean it will have an EVF system. Or, maybe an EVF as well as a rear LCD, like a digital P&S camera has. Dunno...

As to EVF; last week I went to ProPhoto Supply and demo'd the Sony A7. A well-made, small body. But the single BIGGEST PROBLEM??? The EVF sucks. It's not good enough for portrait work...the image as seen with the camera at the eye is crappy. Nowhere NEAR as good as even the viewfinder system the entry-level pentamirror d-slrs like the D3200. Not being able to actually SEE and EVALUATE the expression or the focus through the EVF sucked. I was terribly disappointed in how "video-y" and "jittery" the EVF image was on the Sony A7.

I looked at Canon's super-small d-slr the weekend before...."ehhhhh, crappy viewfinder image." The Canon 70D on the other hand was REALLy a nice viewfinder for a crop-frame body. The tiny Canon d-slr was--teensie! I was amazed at how dinky it felt. It would not be that difficult to beat Canon's ultra-small d-slr with a conventional NIkon design, but who knows what they've done with this "D2300"...

With the model number of 2300, I expect this thing should be to sell at the $400-something mark; but with Nikon's odd pricing strategies on small cameras (Coolpix A, anybody?), they'll probably over-price it, and have yet another small-camera sales turd on their hands.

Just curious here Derrel because I've looked at (and owned) a couple of different cameras with EVF and I've never found an EVF that wasn't substandard when compared to OVF. I'm just wondering if you or anyone else has ever run across an EVF system that doesn't:

1) Perform poorly in low lighting conditions
2) Start lagging behind when firing a burst

Please note I'm asking the question in earnest. I'm not "bagging" on EVF here, but it's just been my experience with them that one of the two, if not both, is usually true. But I freely admit it's been a while since I've demo'd anything with EVF so I'm just wondering if they are some out there that are starting to overcome these issues.

 

[sashbar]

Well... after browsing the Nikon Rumors comments and filtering out the crap.. This could be an interesting camera for Nikon.

A Tiny camera (can we call it a DSLR?) that doesn't need a mirror (no optical view finder) with the same flange to sensor distance that can use standard f-mount lenses. If you yank out the mirrors, AF sensors, focus screen and prism... what do you have?

Snippet of comment from Thom Hogan..

The primary thing that a mirrorless camera gains over a DSLR is less depth to the camera body. There's absolutely no reason why you can't build a DSLR that's the same width and height as an equivalent mirrorless camera. So what do you lose by making the camera thinner for mirrorless? The grip!


Now look at a mirrolress camera with a grip, such as the E-M1. On that right side, it's actually deeper than a Nikon Df!


I've said all along that the likely scenario from Canon and Nikon would be to use their existing mounts and just make the cameras smaller (width/height) and eventually mirrorless (EVF instead of optical finder).

And you cant call it mirrorless.. (one more quote from Thom Hogan)

We really don't have a good name for it, let alone the hybrid approach that Nikon also has in development. Sony had the same problem with the SLT. It's definitely going to pose a marketing problem.
First, you can't call it mirrorless, because that just says that all those companies that have been making mirrorless cameras were right and also what the heck is the Nikon 1 then? You can't call it DSLR because it has no optical viewfinder and isn't the same as your DSLRs.

Could this be Nikon's move into the 'next-big-thing'?

Thom Hogan forgot about another primary advantage of a mirrorless camera - much smaller and cheaper to manufacture lenses due to the shorter flange distance. So a Nikon lense for this hybrid same-old-flange-distance camera will be a) bigger, b) heavier and 3) more expensive to manufacture than a similar quality lense for their mirrorless competition with the same sensor size. I do not know how Nikon is going to compete here. Their only advantage will be old customers with a lot of Nikon lenses and a huge number of used Nikon lenses on the market.