> >I agree. That would be to leave too much money on the table. >But try this on: Suppose Nikon got really smart (I know, when >the next flock of pigs lands at JFK ) and introduced a >killer mirror-less DX camera at that price point, one with >features that clearly distinguished it from the Nikon 1 >series. Just suppose ... . >
If Nikon were to make my dreams come true, it would be a 24mp mirrorless crop factor (large investment in DX lenses) camera with all the best of the D300/D300s & D7000 (and some of the new features of the D600) plus a faster frame rate. Personally, I could live with a 6 fps with a larger/faster buffer.
I personally don't get the D600. Yea, it's a lower priced FX, but the body isn't the real cost, it's the glass. Perhaps, Nikon is trying to suck us into the lower cost FX in order to make more money off the FX glass.