>Some sort of "entry level" FX body makes a lot more >sense than having a higher end prosumer DX body.
Why? I am just trying to wrap my head around this. Entry level FX will FORCE Nikon to produce "entry level" glass, because NO ONE who is getting into entry level FX is going to want to pay for the pro glass that really makes FX shine.
>I don't think >we are going to see the end of DX, but that the DX bodies >going forward are clearly going to be aimed more towards the >1st time DSLR buyer.
This is an awful waste. If we had 24MP 10fps FX cameras, I wouldn't care. But we don't. Right now, we only have low density, fast FX cameras that do that, and low density DX cameras that do that.
>I do think that Nikon is going to finally start making FX more >affordable for the "masses". If this erodes the >higher end DX market, I am all for it.
Yep, they'll sell a bunch of new cameras. Yay. The erosion of DX, without adequate replacement, will be very sad for us sports shooters and other users of long glass.
>Yes, it is a bigger sensor (by a 3rd), but the price jump into >FX has been astronomical.
And amazingly, they are selling in record numbers. The cost of FX is not stopping the people it's aimed at. Same with medium format.