>Not sure I agree with that. Nikon are not going to allow Canon >to produce a new 7D without an appropriate response. I >believe both will arrive close together. I seriously >suspected a D400 would not come, but also that we were coming >to the end of DX cameras, I will be very pleased to be proved >wrong >
I think the 'Canon has one therefore Nikon will make one' argument is overrated and history tends to swing both ways on it in any event.
Nikon will make cameras to maximize profit, period. They will make D400 if they believe it is economically smart to do so. I am not sure they see it that way. I think Nikon sees their path to maximizing profits by putting all their resources into pumping out volume, less 'pro' DX cameras, with the d7100 representing incredible value for the money (I.e. will still sell in large numbers). A high priced DX body ($2000+) is a very niche market, low volume seller. I don't think Nikon wants to release a DX camera that costs more than the d600. Just my view.
Right now the professional sport shooters and photo journalists are almost stuck buying a very, very expensive D4 to get the FPS they need, and they are doing it. I have been at city hall here for press conferences and easily 75% of the PJs are running around with D4s. Nikon has never been too keen on the wildlife, bird market - lens wise Canon has had much better options for some time. So I don't know that Nikon thinks they are losing out with their current lineup.
That being said, the D800 completely baffled me when released and now I own one, I would never have predicted that camera or my owning one.
What will be really interesting is if Nikon does what they did for FX and release a D400 that is not a high buffer, high FPS machine, but rather tries to take the d100-300 users down a different path, like the d700 users.
Either way, as one poster already said - seeing is believing. At this point the D400 has become a bit Yeti-like, lots of 'sightings' no proof.