D300 upgrade coming?

[Kajo]

Hi guys,
I was wondering if there is ever going to be a D300 upgrade coming (D400??) or if the pro-sumer DX market is dead and everyone slowly needs to go towards FX if they want pro gear....
I heard rumours about a D400 but who knows when and if that will ever happen.

I guess I could always upgrade to a D800 and shoot it in 15MP DX crop mode if I need to but I'm shining away from the expense at the moment.

[Lance B]

Hi guys,
I was wondering if there is ever going to be a D300 upgrade coming (D400??) or if the pro-sumer DX market is dead and everyone slowly needs to go towards FX if they want pro gear....
I heard rumours about a D400 but who knows when and if that will ever happen.

I guess I could always upgrade to a D800 and shoot it in 15MP DX crop mode if I need to but I'm shining away from the expense at the moment.

But, do you think a pro-spec DX camera will be cheaper than the D800 anyway? The D800 can be had for about $3,000 (I've seen some advertised for AU$2,599!!) and I doubt that a pro-spec DX camera with possibly 20+Mp will be much cheaper. Even if it were a tad cheaper, why not just spend the little bit extra and get the best of both worlds with the D800, ie, FF and DX. This is what I like about the D800/E, and that is that it is basically two cameras in one, 36Mp FX and 16Mp DX.

[Iscariot]

I agree with Lance. I think the D400 (or whatever it will be) if it ever even turns up will only be marginally cheaper than the D800 and you are missing out on a great new camera while waiting for something to materialize. Do you need a faster frame rate than 4 (Or 5 in DX) frames per second? If not I think the D800 is seriously worth looking at, maybe even explore the second hand market.

[Sifor]

In my opinion, Nikon would be better off making the D7000 replacement more of a 'pro' DX camera. So you'd have the D3X00 (entry), D5X00 (mid) and D7X00 (high end) for DX and D600 (entry), D800 (mid) and D4 (high end) for FX. But if Nikon thought that'd be a good idea they would be doing it..

Unless you absolutely need the high FPS the D800 can handle pretty much everything you throw at it. Don't forget you can switch the D800 into DX mode, get a grip and shoot at 6fps.

[Kajo]

Yeah I agree with you guys. My D300 is on it's last legs so it's time for a worthy replacement. Of course the D800 would fit the bill perfectly and if it gets down do mid 2xxxx I'm in for one.

[Lance B]

Yeah I agree with you guys. My D300 is on it's last legs so it's time for a worthy replacement. Of course the D800 would fit the bill perfectly and if it gets down do mid 2xxxx I'm in for one.

Well, you're in luck. DD Photographics in North Sydney has it for AU$2,599.00.

http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/...y-Only%29.html

I do not know whether they are grey or not and I would not buy grey, but that is just me, and they do offer extended warranty of 3 years for an extra $238.00.

[Iscariot]

Well, you're in luck. DD Photographics in North Sydney has it for AU$2,599.00.

http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/...y-Only%29.html

I do not know whether they are grey or not and I would not buy grey, but that is just me, and they do offer extended warranty of 3 years for an extra $238.00.

They are grey. Their goods are generally sourced from Korea. I have bought a few lenses from there.

[Wayne]

Yep, Lance is right, I have seen them new grey for $2500, which is insane given they were $3K less than 12 months back on launch, which was in itself a very cheap price at which to enter the market.
The depreciation has been staggering for such a great body, and hopefully it stabilises there for a long while yet.

Grey never put me off, especially if you save enough to warrant it (ie- cover postage both ways to country of origin for a claim IF needed). I bought the D4 2 weeks back, best local price I could get for Aus stock was $6459, I bought it grey from HK for AUD$5089, plus shipping AUD$75. Even adding the GST ($516) and you are still a mile in front, certainly enough to cover several return post trips to HK.

I'm not sure there is enough fat in the D800's local price to warrant buying it grey, as I have seen them sold locally, Aus stock for $2999 on a deal. I bought mine in May last year while in SG, and got a bargain at the time given stock was incredibly difficult to get.

[Warren Ackary]

Yes Lance is on the spot.. they are going that cheap.. which is great.
Looked at the D800 ages ago, cant afford it, had to get a D7000 but need a 2nd body.

Kajo, from what I have seen and played with the D800 would be right up your alley.. only downside is the huge file size of 52MB (I think from memory).. alot of CF Cards needed. The guys above have been a better help than me but all helps

[Tommo1965]

Well, you're in luck. DD Photographics in North Sydney has it for AU$2,599.00.

http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/...y-Only%29.html

I do not know whether they are grey or not and I would not buy grey, but that is just me, and they do offer extended warranty of 3 years for an extra $238.00.

if you buy a warranty from these guys ..then your better off buying a Aussie model....I recently bought mine from a camera House store...I paid $2850 and because I bought it during December Nikon added another years full warranty ..so three years all up....given the crappy QC problems all cameras seem to suffer these days..buying local with a comprehensive warranty makes sense to me ..and as Wayne said.. there's not enough difference between the local and grey prices of the D800 and particularly if you factor in a extended warranty as Lance has pointed out.

if I was after a D4..i might go Waynes route..but only after extensive haggling with local stores ..

[swifty]

Just a theory.
A $2000 (at launch) APS-C prosumer camera would likely have a higher profit margin than the D800 at around $3000 and sell in larger volumes. Hence I still think a D300s successor is coming.
Now its either a standalone DX flagship at close to $2k or a beefed up D7000 successor at $1500-$1700.
I guess we'll get a better idea soon enough with the D7k replacement due at CP+ at the end of the month. How high they push this model and price it will give us a clue whether there's a model above it.

[Wayne]

I think the price of the FX D600 which can be had easily for sub AUD$2k will tempt many to the FX side of the fence when considering upgrades, and again in DX mode you have 2 cameras in 1.

I think if it was coming, and it was going to be anything other than an incremental upgrade, it would have arrived by now. I say if it comes, expect a consumer D7000 replacement...

[swifty]

Jz saying a high MP, APS-C, rugged, weather proof, high FPS, top-of-the-line AF camera is highly differentiated from a D600 in the sub $2k market even if priced similarly.

[arthurking83]

....... This is what I like about the D800/E, and that is that it is basically two cameras in one, 36Mp FX and 16Mp DX.

But what would make the D300s replacement differ is that it'll have to have at least 24Mp!!

And D800 is not sports camera .. frame advance rate is too slow for modern standards.

[Tommo1965]

But what would make the D300s replacement differ is that it'll have to have at least 24Mp!!

And D800 is not sports camera .. frame advance rate is too slow for modern standards.

neither was the D300s a sport camera if you shot in 14 bit as I wanted to..as it only achieved 2.5 FPS and then only 5 FPS in 12 bit..where as the D800 will shoot 14 bit in DX mode at 5 FPS..still delivering a 15 MP image {almost the same as D4} over a 12 MP..so more cropping ability ..

what people fail to see is why DX cameras were even bought about...if the cost for a 36x24 sensor had been cheaper from the off set, there would never have been DX cameras..so now the sensors for FF are cheaper..I think the DX market will die

[arthurking83]

D300/s are both 4 years older technology.
A more modern/updated version of this level of camera would have 20-24Mp, 6-8fps(possibly more) better high ISO quality, etc.

Technically speaking, as a sports shooter, you wouldn't even be thinking of 14bit mode over 12bit quality mode anyhow.
A sports shooter's brief would be to get jpg images to their final destination ASAP. 14bit mode would be wasted anyhow, if:
1. you shot in jpg mode
2. you converted to jpg mode immediately, with minimal processing.

The difference between 12bit and 14bit mode on raw files is basically about the ability to retrieve image information that the human eye can barely see!

ie. the increase to 14bit mode was an advantage that your typical landscaper/fashion photographer would use more so, than your typical sports shooter.

(FWIW) I switched back to 12bit mode a long time ago, on my D300, possibly way back in 2008. I saw no real advantage in using it, only the inability to shoot quickly if the need arose.
With the D800 tho, I've maintained 14bit mode, as the speed of the camera is less affected.

Also the advantage of having a Dx sensored body at this level is about pixel densities, mixed in with a touch of financial advantage.
Yeah it's a bit cheaper, and there's always a market for cheaper, but a 24 mega pixel D300s/D7000 are still mightily more numerous than any full framed camera can provide in crop mode.

What will eventually kill off Dx, is simply the number of pixels that could be safely crammed onto the sensor, not so much the actual price(remembering that APS-C is always going to be cheaper than FF).
As they start to reach a certain number of pixels per mm² absolute image quality(ie. 100% view) will begin to decrease, and images from these cameras will begin to look more like images from a P&S.

The advantage of FF is that in 'pure marketing speak' those cameras will always have the ability to pack in more pixels than an APS-C (or smaller) camera has.

[swifty]

what people fail to see is why DX cameras were even bought about...if the cost for a 36x24 sensor had been cheaper from the off set, there would never have been DX cameras..so now the sensors for FF are cheaper..I think the DX market will die

I have to say I disagree.
Certainly 10+ years ago it was very expensive to produce a digital 35mm sensors but costs have come right down. However, similarly APS-C prices have also decreased significantly and still represents a large saving over FX.
At the same time, some advantages of the smaller sensor format have been realized and today I believe APS-C is as important as it ever was. Furthermore even smaller formats such as m43 are starting to realize their potential as technology improves to a state where it produces results above an 'acceptable' threshold such that some may see no advantages to moving up the sensor size ladder.

I don't think DX is going anywhere and it's probably more likely we'll see the death of the mirrorbox before we see the death of the DX market IMO. What is concerning though is that there seem to be little focus by Nikon on DX lenses, where the majority of its customer base lies.
If a fully fleshed out line of high calibre DX lenses existed I wonder how many would make the FX upgrade.

[kiwi]

DX is dead people, move on. Temporary aberration in the life of cameras.

[Wayne]

I think from Nikon's perspective, they see it as dead or dying. I dont think they will invest the $ to produce an APS-C based 24mp body, with huge frame rates (we know that the higher the density, the more data moved, the harder to drive that frame rate - hence slow D800 Vs D4 etc check frame rates of D3200/5200), weather sealing etc etc.

The fact that Nikon have released 3 FX bodies this year, all being revolutionary in their lineup, not evolutionary (D600 brand new entrant) and only a couple of DX lenses, suggests they are somewhat focused on FX. We saw the D800 introduced at a price point nobody expected, so the cost to produce such an FX body must have decreased somewhat since the making of the D700 (remembering the D800 now has full HD video, the D700 had none) and the D600 an even cheaper FX body. Has the cost to produce a revolutionary DX replacement dropped by similar margin?

Consider that if Nikon provided a body with almost the same spec as a D4 (maybe even higher resolution, if that's possible bearing in mind write speed to cards etc) in an APS-C format, what would it have to be priced at in the market to;

A) Not cannibalise D800/800E/4 sales
B) Be cheap enough to sway people from going to D600/800/4

I don't think it could be done and still remain reasonably profitable.

I think DX is alive and well, just not in the pro/prosumer market segment. For entry level and mid-range enthusiasts it will remain for some time..