It is still too vague, indeed. Never-the-less, it would be nice to see a D700-like camera body with a D4 or D4s sensor or at least D600 for that matter. And this rumor gives us some hope So, at the moment we can only speculate on the subject. If you dislike speculations, please, ignore the rest of this message.
SPECULATIONS: For the last several years Nikon was missing a modern affordable "PROper" action cameras in both FX and DX markets (direct D700 and D300s upgrades). If they are interested in satisfying these markets I see several strategies for them:
Strategy 1. Come up with a D700/D300-like combo. Make cameras similar to reduce on the development/production cost and use the existing sensors. In this strategy it would make sense(?) to use the same megapixel count sensors in both. Assuming this is an already existing sensor, 24MP sensors from D7100 and D600 would be a natural pair. Alternatively, it could be a D4/Df sensor in D710 and higher MP-count D7100 (or newly developed 16MP) sensor in D310.
Strategy 2. Come up with purely FX body that has enough MP for cropping. D810 seam to fit the bill here.
If I understand correctly, the performance of the Expeed processor was a limiting factor in producing an affordable D700/D300s upgrade. The new Expeed 4 processor is now 30% faster compared to Expeed 3 that is in D600. So, in principle it should be able to handle speedup from 6 to 8 fps for a 24MP sensor. I would think that strategy 1 should be selected.
Also, if this is going to be a "PROper" action camera like D700 was, it is hard to see how it can be cheaper than D810.
Wed 20-Aug-14 03:15 AM | edited Wed 20-Aug-14 03:20 AM by vitalishe
This is what NikonRumors are saying, indeed. And there are quite a few things I cannot wrap my head around.
First the understandable part: 1. "Action" oriented camera. Nikon is well overdue in this department. 2. 24MP sensor - natural choice. Just pull it from D600. 3. Expeed 4 - that's just what goes in latest generation of DSLRs. 4. Wi-Fi also well overdue (although what does support mean? built in or an adapter?). 5. D7x0 series. D700 was an action camera and then the line split into D6x0 and D8x0 series. So natural to attribute "action" camera to this series.
Confusing part: 1. Tilting LCD. What? That does not sound rugged. 2. Very light body. That does not sound rugged either. 3. Name will be D750. Why? What happened to D710 D720 D730 and D740?!
The way I can make sense of the confusing parts 1-3 is if this is NOT going to be a direct D700 upgrade This is going to be something consumer-oriented like D600 with upgraded frame rate, upgraded AF and the new gizmo - tilt screen. Since it is NOT a direct D700 upgrade it does not get the name D710. On the other hand, since it is clearly between D6x0 and D8x0 and the only digit between 6 and 8 is 7 it gets this silly intermediate name. On the other hand, if the above assumptions are correct, I would name it D650 or something like D610ST (S for sport and T for tilt screen).
Nikon's naming system is screwed up. Just when we thought the naming convention became clear there is another marketing change that messes it up. What's wrong with Canon's convention of Mark 2,3,4?
I think people get too caught up with the direct replacement concept. In reality Nikon thinks a FX is the place to be for serious photography. A faster entry level FX body for sports might make sense to them. If its target is enthusiast, then a plastic build and light weight are line with that market space. It has nothing to do with a direct replacement of a D700 and the pro build theme.
The reason so many of us are "caught up" with an idea of a direct upgrade for D700 is that D700 had/has a perfect BALANCE of features and capabilities. Now we want to see that same BALANCE in a more modern camera. That's why we are talking about a DIRECT upgrade. D6x0 and D8x0 are great cameras, but each one of them stepped away from the BALANCE point in some direction getting better in some areas at the expense of others. Specialized cameras are great, but many of us still want to see that special balanced one D700 once was.
I really hope so, loving my d700 and have not been tempted by nikons other offerings, but if this is even better in high iso and does have some decent video capabilities my wallet will bleed. I shoot mosly basketball and handball indoors, so this might be an upgrade for me
I have been holding fast to the DX format and I love my D7100, but this camera will pull me into the FX world for sure. IF Nikon announces a D400/D9300, then I'll certainly give it a hard look and possibly stay. But given that I shoot a lot of indoor sports and other activities, this camera looks like just the ticket for me.
I agree with Brian, people are arguing over guesses and speculation. If a new camera has a different body, AF system, sensor and video, is it a direct upgrade? I understand the concept of balance, but in reality features and function are weighted differently by each of us. I think Nikon's new sales model is more oriented towards selling a lot of bodies. It's not let's put all the right pieces in one affordable body for good balance.
I had a D700 and it was/is a very nice camera. The camera operation spoiled me for that body design.
What would be the follow-on from the D700 that I would prefer would look like:
o) A D700 body on the scale of the Df but with the built-in strobe o) the option of a vertical grip o) max of 24MP with current Df iso sensitivity and dynamic range o) 8fps o) D810 AF
I would consider that an upgrade to the D700. The Df stays a retro snapshot camera with exceedingly respectable credentials. The D810 the high resolution micro detail leader and the D4s the sport shooters dream
Everyone wants their own cake, but this is the flavor that I would find very motivating.
Roger It's still, ISO, aperture and shutter-speed, right?
Brian's hit the nail on the head. It's better to wait and see what Nikon announces. I've come to learn and accept that patience can pay big dividends in the end. One thing I've learned in photography is all camera's are made with compromises as they are made to sell to a large audience and photographers have to make compromises when selecting a camera based on their needs and shooting style. I'm no exception. Charlie
Brian usually hits the nail on the head. I'm anxious to see what Nikon announces and I'm not going to lose any sleep over what might be.
However, I find the speculative discussions interesting because people often reveal how they actually use the cameras or want to use them; plus ways they find the current ones deficient. I'm guilty of often fitting my usage to what the tool allows or how my imagination translated the manual. In extending those boundaries sometimes we get to see inside someone else's creative nature.
Added in Edit: I'm also very interested in the technology and marketing strategy of any new Nikon DSLRs. The current lineup is in my mind quite complex from a new product POV. There is a clear "ceiling" with the D4s, a very powerful high pixel density camera in the D810 that by many accounts is also a great general purpose camera. The Df niche offering creates an interesting bump in a D700 upgrade path. What features can you add that doesn't infringe on any of these products. What features on the D810 can you "dumb down" that still makes a D750 viable and not just make the Df obsolete on it's release. The features I mentioned in my first post pretty much tromp all over the Df and D810 territory.
Roger It's still, ISO, aperture and shutter-speed, right?
On the D810 I would eliminate the video and, add wireless to eliminate tethering. Also increase the frame rate to 6-7 frames per second. What I was attempting to say was that as a photographer is we have to adapt the equipment to our abilities. Charlie
Sat 23-Aug-14 04:30 PM | edited Sat 23-Aug-14 05:15 PM by westcoast
Video is becoming an important element in photography, I don't think you can eliminate it from a modern body. High frame rates is something that Nikon has struggled with beyond 16 MP. Nikon did not decide that 4 or 5 fps is all we need, it's an engineering issue. The D810 only delivers 6 fps in 1.2 crop mode (25 MP) or 7 fps in DX (18 MP). A D750 at 24 MP would need to reach 8 - 9 fps if it's going to be a true sports body. So it will be interesting to see what Nikon can deliver. Until Nikon can solve the speed issue, with a new Expeed 4 variant, sports photographers will continue to be disappointed.
Based on the latest update D750 will have 8fps in the body, which is fast enough but slower than D4s. If rotating screen is implemented in D750 it will be safe to assume that it will have video. Rotating screen is not very useful during fast bursts. So there has to be another use for it. In fact, with the rotating screen D750 has a potential to be a better camera for video than D810 is. A lot will depend on the functionality, such as aperture control.
I've been shooting a D700 for several years. I've found that I don't need much else. It's weird typing those words, but I think I'll be shooting my antiquated camera for several years to come. No upgrades for me...but a big "THANK YOU" to Nikon for pushing forward.
Tue 26-Aug-14 01:47 AM | edited Tue 26-Aug-14 01:50 AM by westcoast
Actually if the D700 had video I don't think I would be in the market either. I would prefer a pro body DX camera for sports, but doesn't look like one will be coming from Nikon. A FX 750 that does 8 fps and cost much less than a D810 would be worth considering. I didn't buy the D700 for sports, I bought it for my MF lenses and wide angle. DX was / is for sports with longer lenses. Nikon is putting me in a tough spot if I stay with them and they don't offer a top DX sports body. Any other FX or Canon solution with lenses may be out of my price range.