This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you.

 Moderated by: chrisbet, Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ...  Next Page Last Page  
Rumors again - D5? D400   -   Page   2
 Rating:  Rating
AuthorPost



Posted: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 01:44
 
11th Post
Judith



Joined: Fri Apr 13th, 2012
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 325
Status: 
Offline
 I also have a D200 and feel the same way as Robert about the D300. I like the size and weight of this range. The FX cameras are just too big and heavy for me and I hate the "feel" of the D7000. I borrowed one once and kept getting cramp in my hand from the size of it! I think the D600 must be a similar size to the D7000 as I didn't like it much when I had a play recently in a shop. I just want a much improved version of the D200, which is still a perfectly good camera but is rubbish in low light compared the the latest cameras.

PS Thanks, Eric - hopefully your track record will stand us in good stead!  Now, we just need Ray to buy a D300s... ;-)
 




Posted: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 08:46
 
12th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4566
Status: 
Offline
 novicius wrote:
What would be special about a D400 ?

The D300 was always regarded as the pinnacle of the DX bodies. It had the durability, features and speed of use of a 'pro' body but with the DX sensor. It enabled those who needed extra telephoto reach to use FX lenses and gain the 1.5x advantage.

The D300 was launched alongside the D3 and although it's IQ never matched the D3, it was for many a classic.

It didn't surprise me that until now it's never been replaced. Although it did, like the D3, have an 's' upgrade.

Why Nikon never launched a D400 when the D4 was launched, I don't know. Instead they seemed to prefer to release consumer DX bodies.

I suppose the D7100 is the nearest we have gotten to a pro DX body. But despite having some of the features and performance of a pro body it still lags behind with buffer capacity and maybe a few other features.

Whether Nikon believes that the D7100 is all that's needed for a pro DX body, remains to be seen.

Most people wanting a D400...simply want D4 performance on DX sensor.



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 09:05
 
13th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4566
Status: 
Offline
 Robert wrote:
The DX00 series are very popular, The D100 was a bit basic, but it was a competent camera in it's day. The D200 which I use as my prime camera is very good. The D300 and D300s are said to be an improvement although I am unconvinced that it was such an improvement. To me it wasn't worth trading my D200's in and shelling out for new bodies given I am more than happy with the results from the D200's.

The D400 is billed to be a significant improvement in line with and possibly exceeding the quality of the rest of the range, build quality and features, a sort of scaled down D4 without the D4 price tag. I don't believe the D300 was anything like a scaled down D3, it was just a slight upgrade of the D200, which in my opinion is why there is room for such a significant upgrade.

All that said, IF I were to get another camera body it would be FX. I have always regarded the DX sensor as a temporary expedient while Nikon discovered how to make a proper sensor (FX).

I see a D3 in my bag one day, perhaps wishful thinking but I am having lunch today with my buddy who supplies most of my gear nowadays and he tells me he has a 'rough' D3 in at the moment, so I may have a play... (Rough to him means it has a scratch on the bottom and the corners are rubbed.) I could live with a scratch on the bottom and rubbed corners for the quality of images from the D3!

:thumbsup:

I actually thought there was a noticeable improvement in the D300 over the D200 in terms of noise reduction. Unfortunately it was over shadowed by the D3 which was significantly better ....because if it's FX sensor with same MPs.

I always found that an equivalently cropped D3 image was as good as the image out of the D300. For this reason alone, I sold the D300, to decomplex my equipment choices.

My experience with the D7000 has been a mixed bag. It was bought as a lightweight walk around camera and as such it's been used with lightweight DX lenses. The results are ok ...but not as good as the D3.

Whether they would be as good or better than the D3 fast FX lenses, I cannot say. Using pro lenses with the D7000 would defeat the object of a less bulky, lighter walkaround camera...so don't intend to go that route.

But arguably, as technology has moved forward, the D7000 and D7100 using the best lenses SHOULD by now, have better IQ than the D3.

Trouble is....all things being equal the FX sensor with bigger pixels,will always have the edge.


I am surprised more people lusting after a D400 haven't bought the D800 and cropped !



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 09:08
 
14th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4566
Status: 
Offline
 Eric wrote:
Robert wrote:
The DX00 series are very popular, The D100 was a bit basic, but it was a competent camera in it's day. The D200 which I use as my prime camera is very good. The D300 and D300s are said to be an improvement although I am unconvinced that it was such an improvement. To me it wasn't worth trading my D200's in and shelling out for new bodies given I am more than happy with the results from the D200's.

The D400 is billed to be a significant improvement in line with and possibly exceeding the quality of the rest of the range, build quality and features, a sort of scaled down D4 without the D4 price tag. I don't believe the D300 was anything like a scaled down D3, it was just a slight upgrade of the D200, which in my opinion is why there is room for such a significant upgrade.

All that said, IF I were to get another camera body it would be FX. I have always regarded the DX sensor as a temporary expedient while Nikon discovered how to make a proper sensor (FX).

I see a D3 in my bag one day, perhaps wishful thinking but I am having lunch today with my buddy who supplies most of my gear nowadays and he tells me he has a 'rough' D3 in at the moment, so I may have a play... (Rough to him means it has a scratch on the bottom and the corners are rubbed.) I could live with a scratch on the bottom and rubbed corners for the quality of images from the D3!

:thumbsup:

I actually thought there was a noticeable improvement in the D300 over the D200 in terms of noise reduction. Unfortunately it was over shadowed by the D3 which was significantly better ....because if it's FX sensor with same MPs.

I always found that an equivalently cropped D3 image was as good as the image out of the D300. For this reason alone, I sold the D300, to decomplex my equipment choices.

My experience with the D7000 has been a mixed bag. It was bought as a lightweight walk around camera and as such it's been used with lightweight DX lenses. The results are ok ...but not as good as the D3.

Whether they would be as good or better than the D3 fast FX lenses, I cannot say. Using pro lenses with the D7000 would defeat the object of a less bulky, lighter walkaround camera...so don't intend to go that route.

But arguably, as technology has moved forward, the D7000 and D7100 using the best lenses SHOULD by now, have better IQ than the D3.

Trouble is....all things being equal the FX sensor with bigger pixels,will always have the edge.


I am surprised more people lusting after a D400 haven't bought the D800 and cropped !



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Sat Dec 28th, 2013 12:06
 
15th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6985
Status: 
Offline
 novicius wrote: What would be special about a D400 ?

Imagine a DX sensor with 24MP in a D800 body but smaller and you have a potential D400.

In fact I want a D5300 spec (24MP, wifi and GPS) in a D800 type (EXPEED3/4 chipset and user controls and 10pin, USB, HDMI) but in a D300/D5300 sized body.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Tue Dec 31st, 2013 10:17
 
16th Post
Iain



Joined: Thu Apr 5th, 2012
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom
Posts: 1485
Status: 
Offline
 Eric wrote:
Robert wrote:
The DX00 series are very popular, The D100 was a bit basic, but it was a competent camera in it's day. The D200 which I use as my prime camera is very good. The D300 and D300s are said to be an improvement although I am unconvinced that it was such an improvement. To me it wasn't worth trading my D200's in and shelling out for new bodies given I am more than happy with the results from the D200's.

The D400 is billed to be a significant improvement in line with and possibly exceeding the quality of the rest of the range, build quality and features, a sort of scaled down D4 without the D4 price tag. I don't believe the D300 was anything like a scaled down D3, it was just a slight upgrade of the D200, which in my opinion is why there is room for such a significant upgrade.

All that said, IF I were to get another camera body it would be FX. I have always regarded the DX sensor as a temporary expedient while Nikon discovered how to make a proper sensor (FX).

I see a D3 in my bag one day, perhaps wishful thinking but I am having lunch today with my buddy who supplies most of my gear nowadays and he tells me he has a 'rough' D3 in at the moment, so I may have a play... (Rough to him means it has a scratch on the bottom and the corners are rubbed.) I could live with a scratch on the bottom and rubbed corners for the quality of images from the D3!

:thumbsup:

I actually thought there was a noticeable improvement in the D300 over the D200 in terms of noise reduction. Unfortunately it was over shadowed by the D3 which was significantly better ....because if it's FX sensor with same MPs.

I always found that an equivalently cropped D3 image was as good as the image out of the D300. For this reason alone, I sold the D300, to decomplex my equipment choices.

My experience with the D7000 has been a mixed bag. It was bought as a lightweight walk around camera and as such it's been used with lightweight DX lenses. The results are ok ...but not as good as the D3.

Whether they would be as good or better than the D3 fast FX lenses, I cannot say. Using pro lenses with the D7000 would defeat the object of a less bulky, lighter walkaround camera...so don't intend to go that route.

But arguably, as technology has moved forward, the D7000 and D7100 using the best lenses SHOULD by now, have better IQ than the D3.

Trouble is....all things being equal the FX sensor with bigger pixels,will always have the edge.


I am surprised more people lusting after a D400 haven't bought the D800 and cropped !

The D800 is just a bit too slow for sporty and wildlife. I know a few guys that use it for wildlife and wish it was a bit faster and they tend to keep it in crop mode all the time.

I think that if Nikon bring out a D400 they better make sure they have good stock of them as most of the Nikon users I know would be in there ordering one.
 




Posted: Tue Dec 31st, 2013 11:54
 
17th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4566
Status: 
Offline
 Iain wrote:
Eric wrote:
Robert wrote:
The DX00 series are very popular, The D100 was a bit basic, but it was a competent camera in it's day. The D200 which I use as my prime camera is very good. The D300 and D300s are said to be an improvement although I am unconvinced that it was such an improvement. To me it wasn't worth trading my D200's in and shelling out for new bodies given I am more than happy with the results from the D200's.

The D400 is billed to be a significant improvement in line with and possibly exceeding the quality of the rest of the range, build quality and features, a sort of scaled down D4 without the D4 price tag. I don't believe the D300 was anything like a scaled down D3, it was just a slight upgrade of the D200, which in my opinion is why there is room for such a significant upgrade.

All that said, IF I were to get another camera body it would be FX. I have always regarded the DX sensor as a temporary expedient while Nikon discovered how to make a proper sensor (FX).

I see a D3 in my bag one day, perhaps wishful thinking but I am having lunch today with my buddy who supplies most of my gear nowadays and he tells me he has a 'rough' D3 in at the moment, so I may have a play... (Rough to him means it has a scratch on the bottom and the corners are rubbed.) I could live with a scratch on the bottom and rubbed corners for the quality of images from the D3!

:thumbsup:

I actually thought there was a noticeable improvement in the D300 over the D200 in terms of noise reduction. Unfortunately it was over shadowed by the D3 which was significantly better ....because if it's FX sensor with same MPs.

I always found that an equivalently cropped D3 image was as good as the image out of the D300. For this reason alone, I sold the D300, to decomplex my equipment choices.

My experience with the D7000 has been a mixed bag. It was bought as a lightweight walk around camera and as such it's been used with lightweight DX lenses. The results are ok ...but not as good as the D3.

Whether they would be as good or better than the D3 fast FX lenses, I cannot say. Using pro lenses with the D7000 would defeat the object of a less bulky, lighter walkaround camera...so don't intend to go that route.

But arguably, as technology has moved forward, the D7000 and D7100 using the best lenses SHOULD by now, have better IQ than the D3.

Trouble is....all things being equal the FX sensor with bigger pixels,will always have the edge.


I am surprised more people lusting after a D400 haven't bought the D800 and cropped !

The D800 is just a bit too slow for sporty and wildlife. I know a few guys that use it for wildlife and wish it was a bit faster and they tend to keep it in crop mode all the time.

I think that if Nikon bring out a D400 they better make sure they have good stock of them as most of the Nikon users I know would be in there ordering one.

Slow in what way Iain?

Is the buffer speed?



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Tue Dec 31st, 2013 14:16
 
18th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6985
Status: 
Offline
 The size of the image on the D800 make it less responsive for sports use.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Tue Dec 31st, 2013 15:04
 
19th Post
TomOC



Joined: Wed Apr 11th, 2012
Location: Sausalito, California USA
Posts: 616
Status: 
Offline
 I pulled out the D300s for a series of shots yesterday and I still love it...

No, it's NOT D800 resolution, but it increases the reach of my tele's by 50% and it makes a nice printed image up to 16x20...more than enough for my uncropped prints.

Happy New Year D300 !!!



____________________
Tom O'Connell

-Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem.

Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh
 




Posted: Wed Jan 1st, 2014 03:06
 
20th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6985
Status: 
Offline
 Judith wrote:
I also have a D200 and feel the same way as Robert about the D300. I like the size and weight of this range. The FX cameras are just too big and heavy for me and I hate the "feel" of the D7000. I borrowed one once and kept getting cramp in my hand from the size of it! I think the D600 must be a similar size to the D7000 as I didn't like it much when I had a play recently in a shop. I just want a much improved version of the D200, which is still a perfectly good camera but is rubbish in low light compared the the latest cameras.

PS Thanks, Eric - hopefully your track record will stand us in good stead!  Now, we just need Ray to buy a D300s... ;-)


The D600/610 and D7000/7100 are very similar bodies.
The D700 is very similar to D300 and D200.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 

Reply
1st new
This is topic ID = 818     Current time is 12:09 Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ...  Next Page Last Page    
Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Cameras > Rumors again - D5? D400 Top

Users viewing this topic

Post quick reply

Go to top
Go to end
Messages
Home
Recent topics
Unread posts
Last posts
Splash

Current theme is Modern editor



A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you.


Hosted by Octarine Services

UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0736 seconds (64% database + 36% PHP). 91 queries executed.