PDA

View Full Version : Nikon D700




Hmac
Jun 18, 2008, 08:44 AM
Ostensibly from a guy who took some cellphone pictures in the printing plant that's doing the brochures etc for Nikon's upcoming small-body full-frame dSLR.

I don't know if it's true, but this rumor looks pretty believable to me.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/89/254289.jpg http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/90/254290.jpg http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/91/254291.jpg

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/92/254292.jpg http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/94/254294.jpg



hank-b
Jun 18, 2008, 08:53 AM
Interesting, and want one, but "700" is an odd number to use - did I miss out on the D400, D500 and D600? I know there's no rule that says they have to use the numbers in sequential order and of course they didn't with the D70, D80, D40, D50 and D60 - hmm, I appear to be disagreeing with myself now. I'll just shut up...

HB

Hmac
Jun 18, 2008, 09:13 AM
Interesting, and want one, but "700" is an odd number to use - did I miss out on the D400, D500 and D600? I know there's no rule that says they have to use the numbers in sequential order and of course they didn't with the D70, D80, D40, D50 and D60 - hmm, I appear to be disagreeing with myself now. I'll just shut up...

HB


I agree - the name is tough to figure. OTOH, I remember being confused at where the name for Canon's 5D fit into the scheme of things too.

N10248
Jun 18, 2008, 09:20 AM
Looks real to me, too many new styled parts like the sync covers, and it looks like it'll be the first non full sized body to have the round dk-17 eyepiece mount.

It has an AF assist lamp, but i can't see the join where the flash pops up, so it may not have a flash and instead have a proper glass prism, and have the assist lamp as a remote commander only.

Well made hoax if not though

termina3
Jun 18, 2008, 09:31 AM
Very good fakes if they are that. Of course, it's possible somebody printed the fakes then took "spy shots" of them to instill authenticity.

D700 makes sense…*they keep the D200, 300 line going up, and then they insert the new camera between the D300 and the D3 -> D700

It'll only be a few years though until Nikon has to completely rethink their numbering scheme… D60's follower will be what? the D70? The D80, D90, then the D100? Right now the D300 seems secure, at least.

I dunno, they could differentiate the number of 0's they put after the models to designate their "pro"-ness (e.g. D4000 or D4k, D800 or D8c, D30, D3)

N10248
Jun 18, 2008, 09:38 AM
could be a tribute to the D70...

D70 first non pro DX
D700 first non pro FX (well 50% pro I suppose)

although D300F or FX sounds better (cos in 3-4 years time: D40FX :) )

atari1356
Jun 18, 2008, 10:27 AM
I agree - the name is tough to figure. OTOH, I remember being confused at where the name for Canon's 5D fit into the scheme of things too.

I'm getting completely off topic here, but at least Canon and Nikon have numbering schemes, unlike Apple which is beyond confusing:

Person 1: I have a Mac

Person 2: which one?

Person 1: an iMac with a 24" screen

Person 2: oh, the newer aluminum one or one of the older white iMacs?

Person 1: it's the metal one

Person 2: oh, but which one? The newer aluminum one, or the original aluminum one?

Person 1: *gets frustrated with conversation and smacks Person 2*

:o:confused::D


Back on topic: I think a less expensive full frame Nikon would be great - would force Canon to be more competitive on price and features. Will be interesting to see what both Nikon and Canon do by years end.

Westside guy
Jun 18, 2008, 10:34 AM
I so want this to be true...

The numbering doesn't bother me. Well, any more than any product's numbering does - eventually they all have to break pattern, because otherwise they run out of numbers.

Hmac
Jun 18, 2008, 10:49 AM
I so want this to be true...

The numbering doesn't bother me. Well, any more than any product's numbering does - eventually they all have to break pattern, because otherwise they run out of numbers.


If they are indeed printing brochures, features and design must be locked in and they're likely already building the thing. Product release can't be that far away

ChrisA
Jun 18, 2008, 10:56 AM
Interesting, and want one, but "700" is an odd number to use - did I miss out on the D400, D500 and D600? I know there's no rule that says they have to use the numbers in sequential order and of course they didn't with the D70, D80, D40, D50 and D60 - hmm, I appear to be disagreeing with myself now. I'll just shut up...

HB

If this is a full frame camera, it will be expensive. Nikon is leaving so room for upgrades to the lower priced DX bodies. So there can be a D400 and D600 to follow the the current D300. So I'd guess there will be only two more generations of the DX format "hundreds" line

I've always thought that Nikon intended to go back to full frame but it looks like they will phase them in from the top down over the next 10 or 12 years and maybe even keep the DX format around forever as a low-end consumer camera. DX will always be cheaper and smaller.

Westside guy
Jun 18, 2008, 11:02 AM
If they are indeed printing brochures, features and design must be locked in and they're likely already building the thing. Product release can't be that far away

Availability may be further away though. :( I always wonder how some folks manage to get their ordered so quickly (non-pros; I could understand if pro photogs had special channels).

But this is the camera I've been waiting for, and the reason I haven't bought a D300...

Hmac
Jun 18, 2008, 11:11 AM
I think it's always been clear that cropped sensors were a compromise driven by the then-MUCH higher cost of the larger sensors, and that full-frame was the ultimate endpoint of digital photography. I think what we're seeing here is a continuation of that progression started by the 5D/1DsMkII, as full frame starts working its way down the model lineups of these two companies. Clearly, cropped sensors will ultimately become the province of the entry-level dSLRs.

I'm sure Nikon wants to leave room for a D400 D500 D600, but I'd be surprised of there ever is a D400. Or if there is, my guess is that it will be a DX-sensor replacement for the consumer-level D90. I think the follow-on to the D300 will be the D800.

hank-b
Jun 18, 2008, 11:12 AM
Availability may be further away though. :( I always wonder how some folks manage to get their ordered so quickly (non-pros; I could understand if pro photogs had special channels).

But this is the camera I've been waiting for, and the reason I haven't bought a D300...

Also, this isn't final artwork - if you follow the link in the original post, there's more publicity text, including one bit which contains a glaring typo (an apostrophe-s combination gets knocked off a word and onto the next line).

HB

I'm getting completely off topic here, but at least Canon and Nikon have numbering schemes, unlike Apple which is beyond confusing

Agreed, it's a real pain, particularly if you're trying to buy a second-hand Mac ("So, you say it's a 2.4GHz iMac - which one?")

HB

Padaung
Jun 18, 2008, 11:33 AM
The D700 name sounds very suspicious to me. To me there is no reason for it to be used (yet).

This rumour has a lot more credibility to me...
http://www.photographybay.com/2008/05/07/nikon-d10/

Life would be so boring without a little speculation, eh!!!


The Canon 5D name follows on from the old EOS 5 film camera, which at the time was placed in a similar position in their film camera lineup.

N10248
Jun 18, 2008, 03:28 PM
more pictures...

http://www.nikonrumors.com/

the 4th pic down shows a outline picture of it - note the diopter adjustment dial, matches up with the picture of the front posted earlier, too much detail to be fake (i think)

Westside guy
Jun 18, 2008, 05:10 PM
I'll be curious to discover the feature set of whatever full-frame camera ends up being released in this Nikon product slot.

DX crop - the D3 has this, but it seems like something that might be dropped in a lower-end camera. That'd be too bad, since it'd be nice to have the option to use existing DX lenses (okay I realize there's nothing really stopping you anyway, but getting proper exposure, framing, etc. might get a bit more involved). So I'm really hoping this makes it to the "D700".

Overall FPS - for pro photogs this can be important; and the companies all seem to use it as a big marketing point. Personally, I don't care all that much if it's 2.5fps or 8. :D

Pop-up flash - I've heard arguments that a full-frame camera won't have room for this because of the larger pentaprism required. The Canon 5D doesn't have one, and Nikon's film SLRs that share this body type don't have one either. I've got an SB-600, so it doesn't matter that much; but sometimes it's handy if you're going light (say if you're just taking photos at a family birthday party).

epicwelshman
Jun 18, 2008, 09:30 PM
I wants it.

onomatopoeia
Jun 18, 2008, 09:48 PM
Hmmm....anyone want to buy a 3 month old D300? :cool:

epicwelshman
Jun 18, 2008, 10:20 PM
Hmmm....anyone want to buy a 3 month old D300? :cool:

The price this D700 will be, whatever you get for the D300 won't even scratch the surface.

That being said, you may as well just donate it to me.

Digital Skunk
Jun 18, 2008, 10:30 PM
It's garbage, the viewfinder is the larger D3 type in one photo then the smaller shorter D300 one in another.

Besides, the rumor mill says that the FX short body Nikon is going to be deemed the D10, given the name of the D300 battery grip.

Abstract
Jun 19, 2008, 01:44 AM
D700 makes sense…*they keep the D200, 300 line going up, and then they insert the new camera between the D300 and the D3 -> D700


That has "bad idea" written all over it.

could be a tribute to the D70...

D70 first non pro DX
D700 first non pro FX (well 50% pro I suppose)

although D300F or FX sounds better (cos in 3-4 years time: D40FX :) )

Exactly. D300FX makes sense. This doesn't.



I guess this isn't worse than the naming schemes used by Nokia. Their "system" (i.e.: a four-digit, seemingly random number) is the worst.

I'll be curious to discover the feature set of whatever full-frame camera ends up being released in this Nikon product slot.

DX crop - the D3 has this, but it seems like something that might be dropped in a lower-end camera. That'd be too bad, since it'd be nice to have the option to use existing DX lenses (okay I realize there's nothing really stopping you anyway, but getting proper exposure, framing, etc. might get a bit more involved). So I'm really hoping this makes it to the "D700".

Overall FPS - for pro photogs this can be important; and the companies all seem to use it as a big marketing point. Personally, I don't care all that much if it's 2.5fps or 8. :D

Pop-up flash - I've heard arguments that a full-frame camera won't have room for this because of the larger pentaprism required. The Canon 5D doesn't have one, and Nikon's film SLRs that share this body type don't have one either. I've got an SB-600, so it doesn't matter that much; but sometimes it's handy if you're going light (say if you're just taking photos at a family birthday party).

I don't think a D300 sized FX camera would have any of these things. If the D3 stays at the same price it's at now, the mini-D3 can't have these specs unless its price is the same (or greater).

Hmac
Jun 19, 2008, 07:40 AM
I think the D700 (D300FX, D10...whatever) will likely have DX cropping. Nikon ultimately will abandon the Dx format (at least in upper level cameras) but not yet. This camera will be a kind of watershed camera for Nikon, signals a new direction, and not giving a nod to the many people who bought into DX within the last couple of years when Nikon introduced and pushed the concept, would be giving away too much too soon IMHO. Plus, they would likely want to provide the option to bump the frame rate, as they've done in the past.

Hmac
Jun 19, 2008, 07:51 AM
The price this D700 will be, whatever you get for the D300 won't even scratch the surface.


I dunno. Pricing would be a problem. Everybody is going to want to compare the D700 to the 5D. But the 5D (currently) is only a couple of hundred $$ more than the D300. Nikon wouldn't want to sabotage the D300 by pricing the D700 too close, but they also wouldn't want to give people too much of a price reason to consider Canon the 5D (or 5D Mk II) as an alternative. OTOH, they also aren't going to want to undercut sales of the D3 by pricing too far below that. Nikon has a large price gap as it is...there's no $3000 camera in their lineup - the spot that used to be filled by the D2Hs. Is this going to be the camera? Is it so much more than the 5D that they can justify it being $1000 more? What's the resolution of the 5D Mk II going to be? What happens if Nikon brings out a 12.7 mp D300FX and Canon's 5D Mk II turns out to be 17 mp? Heh heh...it's the D2H all over again.

Westside guy
Jun 19, 2008, 11:54 AM
I dunno. Pricing would be a problem. Everybody is going to want to compare the D700 to the 5D. But the 5D (currently) is only a couple of hundred $$ more than the D300. Nikon wouldn't want to sabotage the D300 by pricing the D700 too close, but they also wouldn't want to give people too much of a price reason to consider Canon the 5D (or 5D Mk II) as an alternative

It seems to me that Nikon, Canon, or both have been rather good at slotting their cameras in between their competitor's cameras, so direct comparison doesn't work (well, except for those rabid fanboys of either persuasion). Also, it seems Canon is generally more careful than Nikon about not putting "too much" into their lower end cameras such that they might risk cannibalizing sales of the next camera up in their line-up. So I'd be very surprised if the 5DmkII completely compares, feature to feature, with whatever Nikon eventually comes out with.

On a side note - in a camera like this, I'd actually prefer a full-frame 12MP sensor to a 17MP sensor. But then people keep bragging about their brand-spankin'-new compact camera with a 29MP sensor cuz "you can just print so much bigger with higher resolution", so what do I know.

cube
Jun 19, 2008, 12:01 PM
Exactly. D300FX makes sense. This doesn't.


It DOES make sense. They can launch D400, D500 and D600 in DX, while using D700, D800, and D900 for FX.

D400 clashes with the still available 400D. D1000 clashes with 1000D.

Like that, they can keep their legacy numbering scheme for a little longer without introducing anything radically new (like D1000).

Their numbering scheme at the low end was already messed up by D40x and D60. Don't expect much logic.

Besides, that, I hope there would be a 6MP D90 variant, the D75. Would be more interesting than a D55 (modern version of the D50, still 6MP).

LaJaca
Jun 19, 2008, 12:16 PM
El Fake-o Grande, I think. Look closely at the last 0 in 700. Suspicious for an add-on to the D70 usual look.

People have a great capacity to believe what they want to believe, I'm afraid.

Soma 115
Jun 19, 2008, 01:50 PM
Im not sure if this is real or not.... but it looks pretty sweet to me :cool:

termina3
Jun 19, 2008, 02:02 PM
I'm going to go ahead and join the "fake!" camp.

Maybe it's only because I don't want my D300 to be outdone…

LaJaca
Jun 19, 2008, 02:31 PM
El Fake-o Grande, I think. Look closely at the last 0 in 700. Suspicious for an add-on to the D70 usual look.

People have a great capacity to believe what they want to believe, I'm afraid.


Did some more looking. KR has a semi tongue-in-cheek take on this as well; though I'm not sure if he's serious or not - he's been about as wrong as, well, the rest of us! http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d700.htm

Still, I think it's crazy talk, but I love to read the rumor sites anyway....

Hmac
Jun 19, 2008, 02:49 PM
I have no clue about the accuracy of this D700 rumor. I'm not emotionally invested in that potential camera, but it is/will be/would be a significant event in the dSLR market.

I suspect there will be such a camera, or similar concept, but I don't know if this is it.

Digital Skunk
Jun 20, 2008, 12:41 AM
I'd love to have it to backup my (next year purchase) D3 or next two year's D4 purchase and I'd love it to be a true F100 styled camera without the pop up flash and rounded finder... a digital F6 and all that.

Spec wise it should be like the D300 sans the 8fps burst or IMO it would be a let down. Don't make it the D3 without a grip, just make it a D300 with an FX sensor and backward facing CF card door and D3 AF system.

Hmac
Jun 21, 2008, 06:30 PM
Leonard Goh placed a call to Nikon about the D700 printing plant leak.... (http://asia.cnet.com/2008/06/19/nikon-s-mid-range-full-frame-dslr/?scid=rss_c_crv)

As usual, we were told [by Nikon] no comments for now, but that Nikon "will say more when the date draws near". The spokesperson did volunteer that the pictures were taken at the agency where the brochures were printed.

Prediction is Photokina and $3000 USD.

Nikon enters the world of viral marketing?

Digital Skunk
Jun 21, 2008, 07:05 PM
Prediction is Photokina and $3000 USD.

If it's 12MP and 6 FPS with a D3 viewfinder and dual CF card slots two of them will be in my bag.

If it's basically a D300 with a D3 viewfinder and FX then I'd get one and a D3 as the main.

onomatopoeia
Jun 21, 2008, 07:16 PM
If it's 12MP and 6 FPS with a D3 viewfinder and dual CF card slots two of them will be in my bag.

I think they will continue to reserve dual CF slots for the pro cameras. Even at $3k I see this as a prosumer camera.

Digital Skunk
Jun 21, 2008, 07:22 PM
I think they will continue to reserve dual CF slots for the pro cameras. Even at $3k I see this as a prosumer camera.

I do as well. But my hopes are on Nikon taking some of the D3's frame other than just the viewfinder. I will be happy with a D300FX, but if that's the case then the D3 will be a future purchase as well.

Westside guy
Jun 21, 2008, 07:40 PM
Originally Posted by Leonard Goh
As usual, we were told [by Nikon] no comments for now, but that Nikon "will say more when the date draws near".


Well, hopefully what they say won't be... "SUCKERS!!!" :D

In any case, this summer and fall looks to be very interesting - and not just from a Nikon-centric point of view. New cameras, new lenses...

BTW wouldn't Photokina be a bit late, if they've already got the print materials in what looks to be camera-ready copy (no pun intended) form?

Hmac
Jun 25, 2008, 07:44 AM
As the rumored July 1 announcement of something(s) from Nikon approaches, there is more and more buzz about the D700. So, D700 -- July 1, or Photokina? 24 megapixel D3X? Three new lenses?

In the interest of stirring the pot, here's a photo from a Chinese web site, which in turn was apparently stolen from NikonRumors. I have no idea if it's fake or not - opinion is mixed on most of the sites.

http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/Nikon_D700_11.jpg

juanm
Jun 25, 2008, 08:57 AM
My guess, given the rumors

In a few months, Nikon's line will be:

- D300 12MP, DX
- D700 (or whatever they call it) 12MP, FX (the D3 sensor in a D300-like body). For those who don't need the speed of the D3, which is a sports camera, and yet want FX.
- D3: 12MP, FX Price reduced, still more expensive than the D700
- D3X (or whatever they call it) 20MP+, FX. 5000$+

Everythingisnt
Jun 25, 2008, 09:27 AM
As the rumored July 1 announcement of something(s) from Nikon approaches, there is more and more buzz about the D700. So, D700 -- July 1, or Photokina? 24 megapixel D3X? Three new lenses?

In the interest of stirring the pot, here's a photo from a Chinese web site, which in turn was apparently stolen from NikonRumors. I have no idea if it's fake or not - opinion is mixed on most of the sites.

http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/Nikon_D700_11.jpg

That's just a D300 with the d700 logo and a d700 strap. You can tell because the viewfinder is the one of the D300, and it has the pop-up flash line. If it was really FX it would have the D3 viewfinder..

Hmac
Jun 25, 2008, 09:52 AM
That's just a D300 with the d700 logo and a d700 strap. You can tell because the viewfinder is the one of the D300, and it has the pop-up flash line. If it was really FX it would have the D3 viewfinder..


Here it is compared to the D300. I've never seen a D300, but general consensus I've seen is that the prism housing on the supposed D700 is bigger and more bulbous to accommodate the full-frame viewfinder. Also, much has been made of the difference in the two terminal covers. No question, it could just be wishful thinking...

http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/Nikon_D700_11.jpg http://www.digicombos.net/newauctionimages/nikon-d300-3.jpg

Phrasikleia
Jun 25, 2008, 10:00 AM
Also, much has been made of the difference in the two terminal covers.

What's a terminal cover?

onomatopoeia
Jun 25, 2008, 10:03 AM
What's a terminal cover?

Look below the D700 & D300 logos.

Digital Skunk
Jun 25, 2008, 10:14 AM
It's a crap photo. It's noisy as are most fake mockups, and there is no way that the noob would have put a DX lens on the front of an FX camera.

I think Nikon will release the replacement for the D80 before we get a D700/D300FX. The only new lenses Nikon needs in it's lineup is a replacement for the 24-120 VR FX, so bring that on, and an 80-400 AF-S VR.

Shacklebolt
Jun 25, 2008, 10:17 AM
I'm sorry, this latest D700 photo looks like a cheap photoshop project. Plus, the 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 - if the D700 is really pushing the bounds of prosumerism, my bet is that there will be no with-lens-included package. In that case, Nikon loves putting prime lenses or pricey zooms, ala 50mm f/1.4 or 85 mm f/1.4, 24-70mm f/2.8, etc, to show off their big cameras, and I can't imagine the "D700" being any different:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/35/nikon-d3-dslr.jpg

http://sotoi.com/id/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/nikon_d3_002.jpg

Hehe, perhaps the "D10 battery grip" is just a bit of a MacGuffin, if you will.

Nikon guy 1: "Hey, I have an awesome idea!"

Nikon guy 2: "Oh yeah?"

Nikon guy 1: "Yeah - let's just name the battery grip the "D10"! People will go crazy trying to figure out what it means!

Nikon guy 2: "Totally!"

SRSound
Jun 25, 2008, 10:47 AM
aAny news of a D90? I'm not ready for a D700 (or even D300), but a D90 would fit the bill perfectly! Also, what ever happened to the rumors of Nikon's rangefinder (leica style) camera?

Westside guy
Jun 25, 2008, 11:18 AM
I know everyone is looking for a newer 24-120 full frame lens; but I'm wondering (given the relative quality between existing lenses) if the 24-85 f/2.8-4 will be upgraded to AF-S first. A lot of people don't think the existing 24-120 is all that great, while the 24-85 is pretty well reviewed. An AF-S version would make a nice, high quality walk-around lens for a full-frame D700/D10/whatever.

Digital Skunk
Jun 25, 2008, 11:29 AM
I know everyone is looking for a newer 24-120 full frame lens; but I'm wondering (given the relative quality between existing lenses) if the 24-85 f/2.8-4 will be upgraded to AF-S first. A lot of people don't think the existing 24-120 is all that great, while the 24-85 is pretty well reviewed. An AF-S version would make a nice, high quality walk-around lens for a full-frame D700/D10/whatever.

True, but then it would have to be a 24-"something past 85" since the current 24-70 is a superb piece of glass, and there isn't a big difference between 70 mm and 85 mm.

I am still going to expect to see a much better 24-120, since Nikon did botch the last one up royally.

juanm
Jun 25, 2008, 11:53 AM
If it was really FX it would have the D3 viewfinder..

No. Back in the days of cheap film Nikons, the viewfinders weren't necessarily bigger (externally, I mean). Take the F80, for instance. And the D1s/D2s have a huge viewfinder and yet are DX.

Hmac
Jun 25, 2008, 11:55 AM
http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/7734/dche9.gif

Everythingisnt
Jun 25, 2008, 12:11 PM
No. Back in the days of cheap film Nikons, the viewfinders weren't necessarily bigger (externally, I mean). Take the F80, for instance. And the D1s/D2s have a huge viewfinder and yet are DX.

True but then it wouldn't have a pop-up flash if it had to fit the pentaprism in there.

cube
Jun 25, 2008, 12:22 PM
The Kodak 14n is full frame, has a pop up flash, and has a crappy F80 viewfinder.

Westside guy
Jun 25, 2008, 12:33 PM
True, but then it would have to be a 24-"something past 85" since the current 24-70 is a superb piece of glass, and there isn't a big difference between 70 mm and 85 mm.

You might be right; but we're talking about a fairly light, fairly small (but good quality) consumer/prosumer zoom versus a big, heavy pro lens. In and of itself, the weight difference might be enough to differentiate between the two from a consumer point of view.

Everythingisnt
Jun 25, 2008, 12:45 PM
The Kodak 14n is full frame, has a pop up flash, and has a crappy F80 viewfinder.

Hopefully the D700 won't have a crappy viewfinder then..

Digital Skunk
Jun 25, 2008, 04:23 PM
....

Yeah, but I doubt it will be a 24-85 f2.8-4. I say just improve on the optical quality of the 24-120.

Hopefully the D700 won't have a crappy viewfinder then..

Indeed, hopefully we will get the F100 of the FX digital world soon.

Hmac
Jun 26, 2008, 09:09 AM
Here's yet another image - from Fredmiranda.com.

http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/2476/d700tk1.jpg

As near as I can tell, rumors are heating up that Nikon will begin a series of rollouts beginning July 1. I keep hearing about 5 new items....the D700, the D3X, and SB-900, and a couple of new lenses. Looking like the D700 is going to be at the head of the program....

Even Thom Hogan is on board with the July 1 prediction.

D700:

36x23,9mm cmos sensor FX- format 12, 1 MP effective.
RGB color filter array, build in low pass filter.
EXPEED prosessor 14 bit.
NEF, NEF + jpeg, tiff, jpeg file formats.
Auto crop when using DX lenses. All other lenses usable.
51 point AF, 15 cross type sensors.
Live view mode.
3D colormatrix II metering modes.
Iso 100- 25600.
CF card slot FAT32
Accu and grip same as MB- D10 (from D300).

juanm
Jun 26, 2008, 09:43 AM
I keep hearing about 5 new items....the D700, the D2X, and SB-900, and a couple of new lenses.

You probably mean D3X ;)

Hmac
Jun 26, 2008, 09:57 AM
You probably mean D3X ;)Yes. 'scuse me.

Digital Skunk
Jun 26, 2008, 10:55 AM
So I see that the corny mockup guy fixed their earlier flaws. Looks like the same photo as last time but with the correct viewfinder.

I do believe it will look much like that though. Hopefully with a good fps rate too.

Westside guy
Jun 26, 2008, 11:05 AM
Hmm... since when does Nikon put a camera model number on the strap?

juanm
Jun 26, 2008, 11:11 AM
So I see that the corny mockup guy fixed their earlier flaws. Looks like the same photo as last time but with the correct viewfinder.

I do believe it will look much like that though. Hopefully with a good fps rate too.

The Nikon hot shoe is quite small, and certainly not the width of the FPS selector on the left of the viewfinder. He just liquified the viewfinder to make it bigger, but he forgot about the flash shoe

http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/Nikon_D700_11.jpg

http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/2476/d700tk1.jpg

Hmm... since when does Nikon put a camera model number on the strap?

My D2X and D200 both have it, I think... :confused:

gwuMACaddict
Jun 26, 2008, 11:16 AM
Hmm... since when does Nikon put a camera model number on the strap?

seriously? they've done this since the "N" film bodies. my old N90s has this, my D200 does too.

Westside guy
Jun 26, 2008, 11:41 AM
TMy D2X and D200 both have it, I think... :confused:

seriously? they've done this since the "N" film bodies. my old N90s has this, my D200 does too.

Interesting - my D70 doesn't have that, and I'd swear my friend's D100 doesn't either. The strap just says "Nikon".

Digital Skunk
Jun 26, 2008, 12:14 PM
Hmm... since when does Nikon put a camera model number on the strap?

Nikon has done this on and off. The D1 series has it, but the D100 and D70 and D50 don't.

The D80 and D2x/h D200 and so forth do have it. And a good deal of film bodies have it.

Hmac
Jun 26, 2008, 12:18 PM
Hmm... since when does Nikon put a camera model number on the strap?
Both my D2H and D3 had straps like that, with the respective model numbers.

Westside guy
Jun 29, 2008, 08:30 PM
It's probably just a coincidence, but B&H's price for the D3 has dropped $180 to $4819.

N10248
Jun 30, 2008, 07:39 AM
i think this is the end of the rumors...

Abstract
Jun 30, 2008, 08:43 AM
Nikon has done this on and off. The D1 series has it, but the D100 and D70 and D50 don't.

The D80 and D2x/h D200 and so forth do have it. And a good deal of film bodies have it.

I don't even know where my straps are. :o


The D200 had it, the D300 has it, the D3, D2x, and D80 have it.......and I wish it didn't.


I want to know more about the SB-900. What improvements did they make to the SB-800?

N10248
Jun 30, 2008, 08:51 AM
I want to know more about the SB-900. What improvements did they make to the SB-800?

Apparently some overheating cut off circuit, 17-200mm range and can adjust between the fx and dx focal length differneces, and detect what colour gels are on it too.

Martin C
Jun 30, 2008, 10:43 AM
This magazine scan looks pretty credible:
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/1367/d700abq0.jpg

Diatribe
Jun 30, 2008, 01:03 PM
This magazine scan looks pretty credible:
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/1367/d700abq0.jpg

And reading it, that would almost be too good to be true.

Digital Skunk
Jun 30, 2008, 01:13 PM
I'd still rather have a D3 body with the grip taken out and body reworked. Every time I look at the mockups I get a little disappointed that the body won't be a true D3 without the grip.

Nothings wrong with the D300 with D3 viewfinder and FX sensor though. But having the dual CF card slots that open from the back and not the side, and the perfection that is the D* series body type is a little upsetting. I'd pay an extra $500 for that alone.

If it's a D300, great, if it's a D3 body type even better.

Westside guy
Jun 30, 2008, 02:06 PM
And reading it, that would almost be too good to be true.

Man I wish I spoke German...

Kebabselector
Jun 30, 2008, 02:29 PM
You should all find out tomorrow.

OreoCookie
Jun 30, 2008, 03:42 PM
The Kodak 14n is full frame, has a pop up flash, and has a crappy F80 viewfinder.
Compared to most crop viewfinder, the F80 had a great viewfinder. Even my F50 had a larger viewfinder than the small Canons (not sure about the new 450D, but everything from 300 to 400D is a lot smaller, ditto for Nikon's D40-D70).

Digital Skunk
Jun 30, 2008, 03:53 PM
i think this is the end of the rumors...

Not until I see it in English, or on Nikon's own site it's not.

Westside guy
Jun 30, 2008, 04:07 PM
You should all find out tomorrow.

Hopefully that's true. Even if these rumors are all fake, I'm really hoping Nikon's announcement is set for July 1 so we can put this all to rest one way or the other.

But the July 1 date is just a rumor too, as far as I know! :D

Kebabselector
Jun 30, 2008, 04:57 PM
Some UK Pros are fairly sure it is.

Hmac
Jun 30, 2008, 06:25 PM
Man I wish I spoke German...

How about French?

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5ye9t_nikon-d700-presentation_tech

http://www.focus-numerique.com/images/image-up/nikon-d700-3_4.jpg

klymr
Jun 30, 2008, 07:17 PM
As the rumored July 1 announcement of something(s) from Nikon approaches, there is more and more buzz about the D700. So, D700 -- July 1, or Photokina? 24 megapixel D3X? Three new lenses?

In the interest of stirring the pot, here's a photo from a Chinese web site, which in turn was apparently stolen from NikonRumors. I have no idea if it's fake or not - opinion is mixed on most of the sites.

http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/Nikon_D700_11.jpg

This image has been dubbed a fake. Here is the original:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2083/2613106469_8376111ba8.jpg?v=0

Hmac
Jun 30, 2008, 08:39 PM
This image has been dubbed a fake. Here is the original:



Yeah, I saw that. Maybe we'll find out tomorrow what the thing really looks like. Assuming the French video above is a fake too...

klymr
Jun 30, 2008, 08:43 PM
Yeah, I saw that. Maybe we'll find out tomorrow what the thing really looks like. Assuming the French video above is a fake too...

I don't know, there are a lot of photos that are similar to the one that you posted. I think there is a good chance that it may look similar to the photo and video you posted.

Digital Skunk
Jun 30, 2008, 08:46 PM
I don't know, there are a lot of photos that are similar to the one that you posted. I think there is a good chance that it may look similar to the photo and video you posted.

Of course it will look similar, we are talking about a D3 without the grip/F6 digital. It's a very good chance that it will look like a D300 with a D3 viewfinder on it.

If it looks different, and different for good reason I mean, then I will be very surprised.

Westside guy
Jun 30, 2008, 09:35 PM
Assuming the specs are anything like what these rumors say - I'll be pre-ordering one as soon as I am given the chance by a reputable dealer. Unfortunately B&H rarely does pre-orders - hopefully Adorama will.

I'm gonna be really bummed if this rumor doesn't pan out. :D

law guy
Jun 30, 2008, 10:56 PM
It's up on the Nikon France and Nikon UK sites:

http://www.europe-nikon.com/home/en_...road/site.html

http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/.../overview.html

http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/...627/views.html

12.1 megapixel FX (full-frame) CMOS sensor with high signal-to-noise ratio, wide dynamic range, and built-in self-cleaning sensor unit that minimizes dust.
ISO 200 – 6400: extendable up to 25600 (equivalent) and down to ISO 100 (equivalent).
5fps continuous shooting (8fps with optional MB-D10 battery pack with lithium-ion battery EN-EL4a or 8 AA batteries).
EXPEED image processing engine with 14-bit A/D conversion and 16-bit image processing for superb detail and tonal gradation.
Advanced Scene Recognition System combines the camera’s metering and AF sensors for precise exposures and sharply defined images.
Multi-CAM3500FX 51-point AF system. Individually selectable or configurable in 9-point, 21-point and 51-point coverage settings.
Picture Controls streamline in-camera image processing by enabling the pre-set customization of image parameters such as sharpening, contrast, brightness, hue and saturation in various color modes.
920,000 dot 3-inch VGA LCD monitor with wide, 170-degree viewing angle.
Live View with Autofocus enables composition of images by use of the LCD monitor. Two modes are supported: Handheld or Tripod.
DX Crop Mode can be automatically enabled when a DX format lens is attached.
Quick response: approx. 40 ms shutter-lag.
Active D-Lighting enables superior high-contrast images by automatically applying tone compensation at the moment of capture.
HDMI video output interface enables connection to high-definition video systems.
Intuitive ergonomics with optimized button placement for fast and comfortable handling.
Durable Magnesium alloy body: moisture and dust resistant.
Wireless LAN and Ethernet support via optional Wireless Transmitter WT-4.

The new SB-900 strobe is also up on the France and UK sites.


http://www.europe-nikon.com/resources/g==/GNEaxCabQL2I_aRF3JcbZWfCwjXv5sVk/e1tthQ_UrWG17akhdL3_96chZRVHwKyf/g7fHyEl_E53qGWBCx3C7p.jpg

http://www.europe-nikon.com/resources/g==/GNEaxCabQL2I_aRF3JcbZWfCwjXv5sVk/e1tthQ_UrWG17akhdL3_96chZRVHwKyf/Pf8PSePIUK9Fth7Q40oPV.jpg

I started a thread on it over on POTN (Ocean Blue) earlier tonight - we've been waiting over there on the 5D MK II for awhile.

law guy
Jun 30, 2008, 11:04 PM
Hands on preview is now up on DP Review - looks like they were waiting for July 1 in the US.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0807/08070103nikond700previewed.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0807/Nikon/d700press.jpg

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond700/images/d3d700.jpg

Martin C
Jun 30, 2008, 11:08 PM
It's on the Nikon USA site now as well...
http://nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25444/D700.html

Westside guy
Jun 30, 2008, 11:35 PM
WOW! It is EXACTLY the camera I wanted! All those "it'd be nice if it had..." features are all there!

I can't wait for the 25th!

Diatribe
Jul 1, 2008, 01:33 AM
WOW! It is EXACTLY the camera I wanted! All those "it'd be nice if it had..." features are all there!

I can't wait for the 25th!

Told you it sounded awesome. ;)

Abstract
Jul 1, 2008, 02:33 AM
This paves the way to what I really want: An 18 - 22 MP full frame camera that can switch to "DX mode" even when using a full-sized lens. I don't know if the D3 allows you to do that, but anyway, I really do like DX in many cases. The only time I want a full frame is when I want to shoot really wide (although my Tokina 12-24 mm is good for that), and when I take photos of people (which is rare). In fact, if I were allowed to take a D3, D700, or D300, I may still take the D300 over the others (if I wasn't allowed to sell the camera immediately afterwards).

There are plenty of reason why DX is better for certain applications:

1(a) Macro: depth of field -- With depth of field being a problem as it is, do I want to get even less depth of field at the same FOV (or same equivalent focal length as DX)?

1(b) Macro: reach. I like the FOV my 105 mm macro gives me, and to get the same from full frame, I'd need to either move closer to the subject, or buy a Sigma 150 mm f/2.8 macro. Of course, a Sigma 150 mm would give me even less depth of field than my Nikon 105 mm despite giving me the same apparent reach (See 1(a)).

2. For landscapes, a longer lens is sometimes preferable over really wide lenses. Ultrawides like my Tokina 12-24 mm are nice in tight spaces, but for landscapes, the photos are quite boring. There's still a place for 28 and 35 mm primes in this world, and it may be for many landscape photographers. I don't need to shoot wider to get better landscapes. Wide shots can appear quite boring.

3. Birding. You can get the same reach using smaller lenses. For those people who can't afford a 600 mm lens, a 400 mm lens can do the same job.

4. General Photography --- I find the sweet spot of general photography to be around 45 - 90mm focal range in 35 mm equivalent (or 30-60 mm on my D300). Do I want to carry a larger lens to cover the same range? I guess some form of 2X - 10Y f/4 lens would offer better focal range without making the lens bigger, but then I lose 1 stop (f/2.8 to f/4) on the lens, which would require me to use a slower shutter speed or higher ISO to compensate. Sure, the D700 is cleaner at higher ISO, but its still something to think about.



Depending on the type of photography you do, I really do feel that a D300 is a good choice. D300 users don't need to kill themselves just yet. ;)

Driver
Jul 1, 2008, 03:31 AM
And here I was with the rope and chair already set up... :)

miloblithe
Jul 1, 2008, 06:50 AM
Looks pretty awesome. Now I can't wait to see what Canon does with the 5D mark II. Nikon has really been leading some key advancements in the last year. The ability to use DX lenses on the FX cameras is really awesome. Canon needs to adopt that. Definitely best of both worlds.

epicwelshman
Jul 1, 2008, 06:52 AM
This is most excellent. My next camera will still probably end up being a D300/D400 rather than a D700/D800, but at least it shows that full-frame is beginning to filter down through the line. It also puts an end to the criticism that you have to pay $5,000 for a D3 when the 5D MkII will be around $3,000.

miloblithe
Jul 1, 2008, 06:57 AM
This is most excellent. My next camera will still probably end up being a D300/D400 rather than a D700/D800, but at least it shows that full-frame is beginning to filter down through the line. It also puts an end to the criticism that you have to pay $5,000 for a D3 when the 5D MkII will be around $3,000.

In theory though Canon might choose not to compete directly and make a $2000 full-frame camera, like the 40D and D300 don't line up either. I kind of doubt that'd be their approach, but it's a possibility.

Padaung
Jul 1, 2008, 07:04 AM
Oh dear, looks like my bank account is about to take a hit :D
I agree with others, this is the Nikon camera I have been waiting(hoping) for...

Over Achiever
Jul 1, 2008, 07:09 AM
Oh my goodness, I thought I was going to be satisfied with the D300 since the D3 is so out of my range ... and the D700 comes out. Lets see how Canon responds with the upgrade to the 5D =)

Abstract-From the press release:
• DX AF Nikkor: All functions supported
• When using DX lenses / DX mode 1.5x FOV crop

Grimace
Jul 1, 2008, 07:24 AM
It's real folks. Looks nice too! Here's hoping for a competitive 5D Mark II soon!

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2008/07/sidebyside_nikon_600.jpg

Hmac
Jul 1, 2008, 07:29 AM
This paves the way to what I really want: An 18 - 22 MP full frame camera that can switch to "DX mode" even when using a full-sized lens. I don't know if the D3 allows you to do that, but anyway, I really do like DX in many cases.

The image area on the D3 can be either automatic (DX if DX lens is attached) or user-selectable for FX, DX, or 5x4 no matter what lens you're using.

I don't know for sure about the D700, but I'm pretty confident that you'd have the choice of FX, DX, or automatic. I don't see in the product info that 5x4 is an option.

Over Achiever
Jul 1, 2008, 07:36 AM
I don't know for sure about the D700, but I'm pretty confident that you'd have the choice of FX, DX, or automatic. I don't see in the product info that 5x4 is an option.

Seems like they've removed the 5x4 option on the D700, but the FX, DX modes are still there.

N10248
Jul 1, 2008, 08:05 AM
the SB-900 is huge...

from the leaked pictures i thought they had made it smaller, seems not.

Naim135
Jul 1, 2008, 08:15 AM
I have been speaking to a guy at my local Calumet store, he seems to think that thanks to the D300 Canon has had to go back to the drawing board with the 5D Mk11 so maybe Nikon has just got the D700 out just prior to Canon's release. at the price point i am hoping the D700 will be about £1200 -£1500 in a few months time


It's real folks. Looks nice too! Here's hoping for a competitive 5D Mark II soon!

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2008/07/sidebyside_nikon_600.jpg

Abstract
Jul 1, 2008, 08:32 AM
^^^That's what I was thinking as well regarding Canon.

If Canon's 5D MkII had specs that already do not match up with the D700, and they had set their price at around $3000 USD, they're going to get some more negative press. Maybe this announcement will make them do an adjustment on the price or something. Their other option is to adjust the specs again. I'm fairly certain that the reason the 5D MkII hasn't been released for so long is because of the D300 and D3 release. I mean, just 1 year ago, they had no FF competition, so if Canon wanted to make a 5D MkII with 14 MP, 15 AF points, 4 fps continuous shooting, and 400 shot battery life, people hoping to get a FF camera at a decent price would have no choice but to take what Canon gives them. Now Canon has to compete, so Canon users are seeing a long delay.

If the specs of the 5D MkII match up to the D700, then Canon could still proceed according to plan.



The image area on the D3 can be either automatic (DX if DX lens is attached) or user-selectable for FX, DX, or 5x4 no matter what lens you're using.


Thanks. That answers my question. :)

For now though, I'd still rather stick with DX. Once there's a D800 or D900 that can give me at least 10 MP in DX mode, I'll happily replace my D300 (despite not really "needing" to). ;)

drlunanerd
Jul 1, 2008, 09:09 AM
the SB-900 is huge...

from the leaked pictures i thought they had made it smaller, seems not.

Yeah, I noticed it was even heavier than the SB800, but didn't realise it was even bigger too! Perhaps Nikon will keep the SB800 on then, especially as for some weird reason it's more powerful?
Still, I'm selling my SB800 as I just don't use it often enough, even though when I do it gives great results.

OreoCookie
Jul 1, 2008, 09:31 AM
Canon needs to adopt that. Definitely best of both worlds.
They can't, EF-S lenses would damage the mirror of full frame cameras (I think it's the same for 1.3x crop Canons), they physically cannot do that.

I am not sure about third-party lenses, though.

LaJaca
Jul 1, 2008, 10:38 AM
El Fake-o Grande, I think. Look closely at the last 0 in 700. Suspicious for an add-on to the D70 usual look.

People have a great capacity to believe what they want to believe, I'm afraid.

I am publicly and officially eating my words.

Now, I want to believe I have enough funds in my bank account! Great news, great news.

Westside guy
Jul 1, 2008, 10:45 AM
I'm curious to see how this all plays out. I'm happy to see 12MP on this camera, rather than a higher-density sensor. The noise characteristics are likely what'll sell it anyway. But I wonder if the D3's price will trend downward a bit over the next few months?

As an added bonus - the D700's only a centimeter taller than my D70, so I will be able to fit it into my existing bags. :D

I wouldn't necessarilly write Canon off though. They may be delaying their release; or they may have been targeting Photokina all along. Time will tell.

It's great to see the competition heating up, since it'll be beneficial to all of us over the long term. In the short term... the D700, spec-wise, looks like my perfect camera. Now to sell that to the wife... :D

Addendum: The BAD part of this whole announcement is the lenses. As in, where are the new full-frame lenses?

sonor
Jul 1, 2008, 11:05 AM
i am hoping the D700 will be about £1200 -£1500 in a few months time

We can hope.......current advertised price at Calumet and Jacobs is.......£1,999.99

Kebabselector
Jul 1, 2008, 11:51 AM
Give it 3-4 months, once the initial 'I must buy it now crowd' have been and gone then it'll be more likely £1500/1750.

RRP doesn't really mean anything anymore, the current RRP for the 5D is £1860! (can be had for £1200).

Abstract
Jul 1, 2008, 11:58 AM
Give it 3-4 months, once the initial 'I must buy it now crowd' have been and gone then it'll be more likely £1500/1750.


I'd give it 9-12 months. The D300 hasn't dropped in price where I live, although with the drop in price on the D3, the D300's price may drop a little bit soon.

taylorwilsdon
Jul 1, 2008, 12:19 PM
I'd give it 9-12 months. The D300 hasn't dropped in price where I live, although with the drop in price on the D3, the D300's price may drop a little bit soon.

D300 has dropped a lot here in the states. Places like Buydig and us1 have it for $1550 USD or less (US1 had it for $1500 at some point in June).

I got mine for $1200 with Live casback, brand new in box.

Hmac
Jul 1, 2008, 12:20 PM
I don't know about pricing. Nikon USA and Nikon Europe are different business units, so you can't just pick the current exchange rate for GBP or euros. Most of the rumors point to $2999 USD here in the US, and I note that Adorama is taking pre-orders for that price (http://www.adorama.com/INKD700.html?searchinfo=Nikon%20D700&item_no=1)...

cube
Jul 1, 2008, 01:24 PM
Compared to most crop viewfinder, the F80 had a great viewfinder. Even my F50 had a larger viewfinder than the small Canons (not sure about the new 450D, but everything from 300 to 400D is a lot smaller, ditto for Nikon's D40-D70).

The F80 viewfinder is barely usable. The D70 is way better.

OreoCookie
Jul 1, 2008, 02:14 PM
The F80 viewfinder is barely usable. The D70 is way better.
What?
I've owned both cameras. The D70's viewfinder was so pathetic that I sold it at the first opportunity and got a D80. The F80's viewfinder was larger and brighter.

I can't of a reason why the D70's viewfinder was better than the D80's. Can you?
And why go the extra mile and call it barely usable?

Digital Skunk
Jul 1, 2008, 02:17 PM
What?
I've owned both cameras. The D70's viewfinder was so pathetic that I sold it at the first opportunity and got a D80. The F80's viewfinder was larger and brighter.

I can't of a reason why the D70's viewfinder was better than the D80's. Can you?

Once you go F100 nothing else compares. :D

Seriously though, that's why I would rather have a D700 with D3 viewfinder. That would be the true digital F100, though the D200 and D300 did come pretty close.

I agree about the lens announcements. I am hoping for the AF-S primes, and that FX 24-120 VR update.

Westside guy
Jul 1, 2008, 02:20 PM
So, given that Nikon didn't announce any new lenses (except for the PC lenses, and we already knew about those) - what are people planning to use on their D700? I'm hoping to get the 28-70 f/2.8 at some point; but something lighter for walking around would be nice...

cube
Jul 1, 2008, 02:25 PM
What?
I've owned both cameras. The D70's viewfinder was so pathetic that I sold it at the first opportunity and got a D80. The F80's viewfinder was larger and brighter.

I can't of a reason why the D70's viewfinder was better than the D80's. Can you?
And why go the extra mile and call it barely usable?

I have bought both a Kodak 14n full frame with an F80 viewfinder, and a D70. Viewing on the D70 is no problem. Composing on the Kodak is almost as bad as with a P&S.

OreoCookie
Jul 1, 2008, 02:36 PM
I have bought both a Kodak 14n full frame with an F80 viewfinder, and a D70. Viewing on the D70 is no problem. Composing on the Kodak is almost as bad as with a P&S.
I'm asking why? Is the F80's/Kodak's viewfinder smaller? Is the exposure information harder to read?

cube
Jul 1, 2008, 02:47 PM
You have to fit a full frame in the F80 viewfinder, while the D70 is crop.

The F80 has a 17mm eyepoint, while the D70 is 18mm.

Hmac
Jul 1, 2008, 02:56 PM
So, given that Nikon didn't announce any new lenses (except for the PC lenses, and we already knew about those) - what are people planning to use on their D700? I'm hoping to get the 28-70 f/2.8 at some point; but something lighter for walking around would be nice...
Word is that Nikon has several product announcements upcoming over the next several months and they're dribbling them out so one product doesn't detract from the others. I keep hearing about two new lenses, although I don't know what they are. Other products include the D3X rumored around the Olympics, and the D90 in early fall.

My three main lenses are the 17-35, 28-70, and 70-200, all the f/2.8 versions. All three are magnficent lenses overall, but spendy. IMHO, I find that the 28-70 f/2.8 is the one that spends the most time on my D3 these days.

OreoCookie
Jul 1, 2008, 03:11 PM
You have to fit a full frame in the F80 viewfinder, while the D70 is crop.
… that's why the D70 has a smaller viewfinder. The F80 uses a pentaprism (which are brighter and larger), the D70 penta-Dach mirrors (which are cheaper and smaller). The D70's viewfinder is useless for MF.

Both have a magnification of about 0.75x (as usual, measured with a 50 mm lens), but a 50 mm lens won't have the same viewing angle on the two. If you want the equivalent of a 50 mm viewing angle on the D70, the image will be, well, smaller.

In fact, it was so small that one week after trying the D80, I bought one for just that reason. It was that bad. That's why I'm really surprised by your reaction. I was very content with the F80's viewfinder.
The F80 has a 17mm eyepoint, while the D70 is 18mm.
I haven't had problems with the F80, even though I wear glasses.

OreoCookie
Jul 1, 2008, 03:12 PM
Once you go F100 nothing else compares. :D
I'm sure of it. I just don't like tempting myself before I win the lottery! ;) :D

juanm
Jul 1, 2008, 03:56 PM
The F80 viewfinder is barely usable. The D70 is way better.

:eek:

The F80's viewfinder was (and still is) great for the weight of the camera. I don't know if Kodak did anything to it, but, back when my main camera was the F80, I got my hands on the D70, which I was about to buy (really, I went to the store with the intention of getting one), and changed my mind the second I peeped through its viewfinder. It was awful!
Compared to an F5 viewfinder, the F80 was smaller, but more than usable. The D70 set me back as soon as I tried it.

ChrisA
Jul 1, 2008, 05:00 PM
There are plenty of reason why DX is better for certain applications:

Yes but all you have to do is crop and the FX becomes DX.

Westside guy
Jul 1, 2008, 06:12 PM
Word is that Nikon has several product announcements upcoming over the next several months and they're dribbling them out so one product doesn't detract from the others. I keep hearing about two new lenses, although I don't know what they are. Other products include the D3X rumored around the Olympics, and the D90 in early fall.

My three main lenses are the 17-35, 28-70, and 70-200, all the f/2.8 versions. All three are magnficent lenses overall, but spendy. IMHO, I find that the 28-70 f/2.8 is the one that spends the most time on my D3 these days.

Thanks for the info (rumors though it may be). Given the dent the D700 is going to put into my credit card, I'm going to have to hold off on the pro glass for a while anyway. But I was able to find a used "E" rated 24-85 on Adorama; so I grabbed it. I've got a 35mm f/2 prime already, and I might grab a 50mm f/1.8 in the short term. Beyond that, I can always shoot in DX mode if I have to. :D I'll sit on my hands for a while and see when/if Nikon announces anything new.

The 17-35 f/2.8 is certainly on my list long term, though, as is the 24-70.

I'd love to see some f/4 zooms start coming from Nikon.

juanm
Jul 1, 2008, 06:16 PM
Yes but all you have to do is crop and the FX becomes DX.

But you don't get the same resolution. A D300 has 12MP a D3 in DX mode gets 5MP (or something like that). For teles, it's much cheaper to get a D300, unless you need the ultra-High ISO.

By the way, it seems that next time I change cameras, I'll get two D700s (or D800s...) They are exactly what I wanted.

miloblithe
Jul 2, 2008, 06:17 AM
They can't, EF-S lenses would damage the mirror of full frame cameras (I think it's the same for 1.3x crop Canons), they physically cannot do that.

I am not sure about third-party lenses, though.

Dang. That sucks. I forgot about that.

Cheffy Dave
Jul 2, 2008, 06:43 AM
Ain't no fake- Off ENGADGET

Nikon D700 gets real: full-frame, 12.1 megapixels
by Ryan Block, posted Jul 1st 2008 at 12:15AM


Well, we can finally put the D700 rumors to bed. The beast that houses Nikon's newest monster (near) full-frame FX format 12.1 megapixel CMOS (not dissimilar from that found in the D3) is officially announced tonight, and it takes UDMA CompactFlash, and comes packing with a live view 3-inch display, 51 point autofocus (with 3D tracking), scene recognition, four-speed active dust reduction, ISO up to 6400, 5 or 8 fps full-res shooting, HDMI out, and a whole lot more. Expect it in July for $3,000 US (for the body).

Also being released are the SB-900 speedlight (August, $500), and the PC-E Micro NIKKOR 45mm f/2.8D ED and PC-E Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/2.8D lenses (August, $1,800 and $1,740, respectively).

http://www.engadget.com/photos/nikon-d700-gets-real-full-frame-12-1-megapixels/893535/

yrsonicdeath
Jul 2, 2008, 07:45 AM
D300 in the mail. :(

Hmac
Jul 2, 2008, 07:56 AM
D300 in the mail. :(You can return it if you have the the extra $1350 to burn and the time to wait. AND, you may find some good deals on used D3's out there from people looking to move down to the smaller form-factor of the D700.

OTOH, the D300 is a great camera and may be more bang-for buck than the D700.

Hmac
Jul 2, 2008, 08:06 AM
Now the question is Nikon's next dSLR. D90, by all rumors, a downscaled version of the D300.

And then there's the oft-mentioned D3X. Seems like all they'd have to do is drop their 24 mp sensor in there and they'd be good to go. However there is a body of informed thought out there that is thinking that instead of it being a 24 MP version of the D3, it will be a 24 MP version of the D700.

Interesting concept...the D3 isn't that far off the 1Ds MkIII in picture quality, and that $8000 price point has to be a little thinly populated with buyers - so how much pressure is Nikon under to build that D3X camera? OTOH, Nikon will soon have the 5D MkII and the Sony A900 to contend with. Does the 24mp D900 make more sense, then?

OreoCookie
Jul 2, 2008, 08:14 AM
Now the question is Nikon's next dSLR. D90, by all rumors, a downscaled version of the D300.
That's what Nikon has done before with the D200/D80, so I agree.
And then there's the oft-mentioned D3X. Seems like all they'd have to do is drop their 24 mp sensor in there and they'd be good to go. However there is a body of informed thought out there that is thinking that instead of it being a 24 MP version of the D3, it will be a 24 MP version of the D700.
I don't think that'd make sense price-wise. The D900 (or whatever it will be called) will be significantly more expensive than the D700 and then it's not too far away from the price of a D3 -- if at all.
Interesting concept...the D3 isn't that far off the 1Ds MkIII in picture quality, and that $8000 price point has to be a little thinly populated with buyers - so how much pressure is Nikon under to build that D3X camera?
I think the D3 competes with the 1D MkIII, not the Ds, but in any case, the Ds is a niche camera. I think a D3X is inevitable
OTOH, Nikon will soon have the 5D MkII and the Sony A900 to contend with. Does the 24mp D900 make more sense, then?
From what I've heard, Canon wants to compete in the high-ISO, low-noise game. I don't expect that Canon significantly increases the resolution, because that would take away (part of the) the low noise characteristics and leave a gap in their line-up.

It would certainly make a very desirable studio camera, but then it would cannibalize sales of the 1 Ds and the price point would probably be higher than that of its immediate competitor.

Abstract
Jul 2, 2008, 08:16 AM
No. If they're going to make a D3x, they really need to do it in a D3's body, even if it's just to get 100% viewfinder coverage. I'd expect that from a studio camera where I have time to set up. I'd personally think that 100% coverage on a D3x is more important than it is on a D3, where you're more likely to be moving around and panning, which means you won't have time to get the perfect composition anyway. Same with the D700. I guess if they can put a D3's viewfinder into a slightly larger version of the D700, then OK, make a D3x out of it. However, I don't think people would mind a D3 sized body if it's going to sit on a massive tripod indoors.



Anyway, I'm more concerned about the D80s/D90 than anything else. Base it on the D300 design again (expect smaller), and you'll have the ultimate lineup.

Hmac
Jul 2, 2008, 08:41 AM
I don't think that'd make sense price-wise. The D900 (or whatever it will be called) will be significantly more expensive than the D700 and then it's not too far away from the price of a D3 -- if at all.

I agree, seems like that could make for an awkward pricing structure.

I think the D3 competes with the 1D MkIII, not the Ds, but in any case, the Ds is a niche camera. I think a D3X is inevitableI think the D3 is somewhere in the middle between the 1D MkIII and the 1Ds MkIII, and to some extent, competes with both of them. I do think the D3 has hurt the 1D MkIII a lot more than it has hurt the 1Ds MkIII, mainly because (as you say) the 1Ds MkIII is indeed a niche camera. The D3 is in a pretty smart market position.

Yeah, you're probably right. Thom Hogan now seems to think that the D900 is the next-up body instead of D3X. But given the pricing structures and the fact that the D700 will likely be in the same general arena as the 5D MkII and A900, and given the clamor for the D3X on places like DPR, I suppose the D3X makes more sense than a D900.




From what I've heard, Canon wants to compete in the high-ISO, low-noise game. I don't expect that Canon significantly increases the resolution, because that would take away (part of the) the low noise characteristics and leave a gap in their line-up.


I agree. With the D3, D300, and now the D700, high-ISO has become a bigger part of the market than high resolution. We don't know what the noise is going to be like on the A900, but I wonder if Nikon and likely soon Canon didn't just out-jink Sony.

OreoCookie
Jul 2, 2008, 08:44 AM
I agree. With the D3, D300, and now the D700, high-ISO has become a bigger part of the market than high resolution. We don't know what the noise is going to be like on the A900, but I wonder if Nikon and likely soon Canon didn't just out-jink Sony.
Right. That's Canon's logic for the current 5D, too. Feature-wise, it is arguably less advanced than the 40D, the selling point is the full frame sensors (and its advantages).

I think ~12 MP is about the sweet spot, most people don't really need more, including some professionals.

Hmac
Jul 2, 2008, 08:58 AM
Right. That's Canon's logic for the current 5D, too. Feature-wise, it is arguably less advanced than the 40D, the selling point is the full frame sensors (and its advantages).

I think ~12 MP is about the sweet spot, most people don't really need more, including some professionals.

Now Canon has free reign to bump up the features of the 5D MkII, if they can sell it for ~$3000.

Digital Skunk
Jul 2, 2008, 09:48 AM
Very nice and thanks for the post. Now I believe it. I am very grateful that it has the D3 viewfinder, and 8fps shooting with the grip I assume.

Now the real next question is, will nikon discontinue the SB-800, and where the hell is my FX AF-S shorties (50mm, 35mm, 28mm, etc) and my FX 24-120 VR AF-S update?

Abstract
Jul 2, 2008, 09:56 AM
Now Canon has free reign to bump up the features of the 5D MkII, if they can sell it for ~$3000.

Exactly. They'll have to if they're going to compete with the Nikon D700. Bumping the 5D's resolution to the rumoured 16 MP and keeping similar features (3-4 fps, no weather sealing, etc), isn't going to cut it anymore. People are more concerned about the features rather than the MP right now.

Canon used to be able to sell the 5D at over $3000, and I'm sure they'd like to do it again. It's probably in their best interest to keep the MP down to a minimum (say 12 MP again), since it obviously isn't a huge selling point. If it was such a disadvantage, the Canon 40D wouldn't sell so well. It's a fantastic camera, and nobody says its inferior to the A700, D300, K20D because of the sensor. If people prefer another camera over the 40D, it's for other reasons.

yrsonicdeath
Jul 2, 2008, 10:01 AM
You can return it if you have the the extra $1350 to burn and the time to wait. AND, you may find some good deals on used D3's out there from people looking to move down to the smaller form-factor of the D700.

OTOH, the D300 is a great camera and may be more bang-for buck than the D700.

I all honesty I'm perfectly happy with my soon to arrive D300. I'm upgrading from a Rebel XT. I'm recently no longer a college student which means I have hundreds of times the income as I have had the past four years. I don't however really have the money to justify dropping an extra grand on the D700. I'm eagerly awaiting my D300 it a huge upgrade over my current set-up. When I'm ready to upgrade the D300, I'm sure most things out there that fit my needs with be FF.

66217
Jul 2, 2008, 10:02 AM
Now the question is Nikon's next dSLR. D90, by all rumors, a downscaled version of the D300.


This is exactly what I am waiting for. I really hope it is a nice update.

The D700 and the possible new D3x are good news, but nothing I'll ever buy, so it isn't really that exciting for me.

Westside guy
Jul 2, 2008, 11:07 AM
I agree with the consensus on the D3x - it'll have to be the D3 body. There's just not that big a market for the camera, and they can't cut any corners if they want to get part of it. So they need the big body for the biggeest possible buffer, highest possible frame rate, etc.

Now, to the people that just ordered the D300 - it's not like that camera's specs suddenly dropped when the D700 was announced. :D It's still a great camera. While the D700 has some advantages over the D300, the D300 arguably has advantages over the D700 as well - weight being a big one (especially once you start adding lenses). Plus those of us that are going to get a D700 right now are going to be fretting over lenses for a while - the D300 is currently better situated in that regard, unless you're exclusively using pro glass.

OreoCookie
Jul 2, 2008, 11:30 AM
The D700 and the possible new D3x are good news, but nothing I'll ever buy, so it isn't really that exciting for me.
I'm only excited, because some of the technologies will eventually trickle down to cameras I can afford :)

Digital Skunk
Jul 2, 2008, 01:39 PM
I'm only excited, because some of the technologies will eventually trickle down to cameras I can afford :)

I am very excited for that, and because I always like to save money. This D700 is a looking to be that F100 digital that many have been waiting for.

Hmac
Jul 2, 2008, 03:17 PM
Here's a quote from Thom Hogan on DPR last night:

I'm going to go a different direction: no D3x. Yes, a 24mp FX body, but it'll be the D900. This allows them to use the Sony sensor and bring it downscale to compete with the A900/5DII.


I guess what makes more sense to me is (also from DPR):

$1599 -- D300 (12MP, DX)
$2999 -- D700 (12MP, FX)
$3599 -- D900 (24MP, DX, same body as D700)
$4799-- D3 (12 MP, FX)
$5999-- D3x (24 MP, FX, same body as D3)


Thom's a smart guy, and he tends to have inside information. I think betting against him is generally a losing proposition, but in this case....

cube
Jul 2, 2008, 03:19 PM
Here's a quote from Thom Hogan on DPR last night:

Completely wrong, because the Sony sensor is 12-bit, while those in the D300, D700, and D3 are 14-bit.

ksz
Jul 2, 2008, 03:25 PM
I am very grateful that it has the D3 viewfinder, and 8fps shooting with the grip I assume.
Just to be clear, the D700 with 95% frame coverage does not have the same viewfinder as the D3.
...

I was very tempted to buy the D300 when it came out, but my objective reasoning side simply could not justify it as an upgrade from my D200. So here comes the D700 and both my emotional and objective sides are in agreement. Waiting for July 25, but will most likely defer it by a few weeks until the rush subsides.

Hmac
Jul 2, 2008, 03:29 PM
Completely wrong, because the Sony sensor is 12-bit, while those in the D300, D700, and D3 are 14-bit.

So, Nikon is going to use a 12 bit sensor in their 24 mp full-frame camera, whatever it is?

Somebody should tell Thom that his speculation is impossible ;) .

Westside guy
Jul 2, 2008, 03:46 PM
Thom's a smart guy, and he tends to have inside information. I think betting against him is generally a losing proposition, but in this case....

Well, for what little it's worth - in this case I think he's dead wrong. However, in any case I'm glad they came out with a 12MP camera like the D700. I have no need for more pixels than that (I can't imagine more than 5%-10% of us - at most - do), and the noise performance is a big selling point IMNSHO. I would have been disappointed if their only full-frame F6-size offering had 18 or 24 megapixels.

Digital Skunk
Jul 2, 2008, 11:11 PM
Just to be clear, the D700 with 95% frame coverage does not have the same viewfinder as the D3.
...

I was very tempted to buy the D300 when it came out, but my objective reasoning side simply could not justify it as an upgrade from my D200. So here comes the D700 and both my emotional and objective sides are in agreement. Waiting for July 25, but will most likely defer it by a few weeks until the rush subsides.

Thanks for that one. That is a good consideration since 95% is a lot to cut off IMHO. The D200's viewfinder is a bit annoying. I agree about your situation, I would have stayed with the D200 unless your shooting style couldn't accommodate lowering your ISO, (though from what I am seeing on most sights most just got it because it was new :rolleyes: ). Either way, when it came time for me to choose my gear for my personal capital purchase, I opted out of the D3, Mac Pro, D300, etc, and bought a used D2xs, a bunch of glass, a bunch of strobes, a bunch of other gear, memory cards, and a new MBP.

Now, with a D700 I am going to be on the ropes again, gnawing my teeth over a D700, D3 or waiting for the next iteration of some other or completely new body.

As for the Sony sensor, I think it's a good chance that Nikon will use it and make adjustments to it to get those extra bits of info. Nikon gets their sensors from Sony, but not the entire mechanisms for image processing. And if they did use the 12 bit Sony at 24MP, it won't be a total lose unless you are shooting RAW and can actually notice that tiny bit of missing info.

Whorehay
Jul 3, 2008, 02:11 AM
It is a very exciting time for photography. It took a couple years, but Nikon has come roaring back :)

Abstract
Jul 3, 2008, 03:20 AM
I guess what makes more sense to me is (also from DPR):


A 24 MP DX sensor? Please don't, Nikon.

Hmac
Jul 3, 2008, 09:17 AM
Well, for what little it's worth - in this case I think he's dead wrong.

There are a lot of people over at DPR that agree with you. I don't know...Thom makes an interesting case for 24 mp FX D900 and no D3X.

Anyone interested - read this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=28474774).

Digital Skunk
Jul 3, 2008, 11:36 AM
It is a very exciting time for photography. It took a couple years, but Nikon has come roaring back :)

They were doing just fine, just that people got sucked into the Canon hype. The IQ from the D2h beat out the 1D even at high ISOs hands down, and the D2x did the same when compared to the 1Ds.

And when looking at all other areas of interest Nikon had better bodies than a lot of comparable Canon bodies (D70-->Rebel, D80-->XTi, D200-->20D/30D, etc.)

The biggest hurdle for Nikon was taking the Sony sensors and reducing the noise.

Then there is the lighting system to consider. The only real issue that Canon had Nikon beat on was optics and optic quality. Those few lenses that Canon has that Nikon has no equivalent, the primes that have motors in them, and the general quality of them across the board. Other than that it was touch and go with the bodies and flashes, pick your feature and run with it type of stuff.

There are a lot of people over at DPR that agree with you. I don't know...Thom makes an interesting case for 24 mp FX D900 and no D3X.

Anyone interested - read this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=28474774).

It would help Nikon to introduce one that is cheaper than the comparable Canon maybe. Leaving the D3 sized model for a shortly delayed length of time. Maybe, just speculation.

ksz
Jul 3, 2008, 04:23 PM
There are a lot of people over at DPR that agree with you. I don't know...Thom makes an interesting case for 24 mp FX D900 and no D3X.

Anyone interested - read this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=28474774).

I'm going to support you on this. Many people on these forums carve out a set of arguments in favor or in opposition of something that a company will or will not do and then they stick to it like gospel. How many people simply could not believe Apple would name an ultraportable as 'MacBook Air'? How many thought Apple's next O/S would definitely absolutely not be called 'Snow Leopard'? How many looked at the leaked photos of the iPod "fatty" and never believed for a second that Apple would release that as the new iPod nano? How many people firmly and resolutely believed that Nikon's competitor to the Canon 5D would be called the Nikon D300x or Nikon D3x or Nikon D300FX or something along those lines? No one suspected a "D700".

All we can do is make reasoned arguments. To believe in them resolutely is ridiculous.

Will Nikon use a 12-bit Sony sensor? Maybe they will and maybe they won't. Maybe they won't use a Sony FX sensor at all. They have experience with their own FX sensor and they can just continue working on their own proprietary sensor technology in order to remain differentiated.

Hmac
Jul 17, 2008, 03:59 AM
And then there's the oft-mentioned D3X. Seems like all they'd have to do is drop their 24 mp sensor in there and they'd be good to go. However there is a body of informed thought out there that is thinking that instead of it being a 24 MP version of the D3, it will be a 24 MP version of the D700.


Thom Hogan was the main proponent of the D900 concept, but as of a couple of days ago, he's retreated from that position and now is back to believing in the D3X, based on info he's received from Nikon, apparently.

You can look under "What's Next" at http://www.bythom.com/index.htm