Nikon announces D3 and D300

[handicap18]

I feel like I just got my D80 last November. It's too soon for me to be looking at new bodies. The new D300 looks like a great camera but I'll probably spend my camera money on lenses and see what's out there for a body upgrade in a year (or two).

It's exciting to see these two new cameras announced. The only concern I have is the resolution of the D3 with a DX lens on it. It's so low that I don't know why anyone would do it. I think if I were upgrading to a D3 then I would be looking to sell my DX lenses. If they had gone for a resolution closer to Canon's 21mp, the DX crop would have still given you very usable images.

Take a look at high ISO images from the 6.1MP D50 or D40 with DX lenses. Now the sensor on the D3 may only be 5MP but the sensor itself is larger. Larger sensor area with only a little less megapixels. Put that baby on ISO6400 and you'll probably end up with some very more than acceptable images similar to what the D50 would be at ISO1600.

Now I can't say this for sure as I haven't seen any images. Its just speculation. But we see the differences from PnS camera on the tiny sensor and dSLR's with the larger sensor. The D3 is even larger.

 

[handicap18]

Found this on another site. Very good read, very hard for me to pass up and buy the same amount in glass.......


D300 Features Outlined

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

I've had my D200 for a little more than 18 months and have loved it. If that were my only camera I would probably be content but I also have a D100 and a D70x. The D300 would be a great replacement for the D100 and give me a D300 with D200 back-up.

Hmm, I wonder if this will work. I'll tell Trina how sorry I am that she has had to put up with the D100 so out of the goodness of my heart I will trade her cameras and she can have my D200. Then after months of agony she will be so tired of hearing me complain that she'll suggest a D300 just to stop the whining. Yeah, that might work.

Jeff

 

[Furgus]

I've had my D200 for a little more than 18 months and have loved it. If that were my only camera I would probably be content but I also have a D100 and a D70x. The D300 would be a great replacement for the D100 and give me a D300 with D200 back-up.

Hmm, I wonder if this will work. I'll tell Trina how sorry I am that she has had to put up with the D100 so out of the goodness of my heart I will trade her cameras and she can have my D200. Then after months of agony she will be so tired of hearing me complain that she'll suggest a D300 just to stop the whining. Yeah, that might work.

Jeff

That is what I try......it usually works...got myself a R1800 a couple weeks ago cause my R340 couldn't print baby pictures that well, and I needed sometime to practice I can't believe that worked.
Was thinking if I ever do get a D300, I would prob keep my D50 and turn it into an IR camera.

 

[gokenin]

I know that you will more than likely never find the ideal camera but I was wondering how often do you guys upgrade your cameras? I have to admit it is one of the things that concerns me about dslr's the constant desire to upgrade heck i dont have one and i constantly look at cameras just curious how often people change bodys since i know that some lenses can go from one camera to another

 

[handicap18]

My camera history is:
Not including the 126 film camera and Kodak Disk camera.

*Some model Canon semi SLR from '86-96 (camera was stolen)
*Nikon N6006 SLR from 89-96 (stolen)
*Nikon N70 from 97-present (sitting in a dresser drawer)
*Canon S30 3.1MP P&S Mar '02-present (used it almost exclusively till about 6 months before I got my D50. I had to go back to the N70)
*Nikon D50 6.1MP Jan '06-present. While I would love to upgrade, I'm looking at a few more years down the road. Maybe sometime in the summer/fall of '09 when Nikon announces the repalcement for the D300, I'll pick up a discounted D300. Till then I'm looking at new glass.

If my N6006 hadn't gotten stolen I never would have had any reason to get the N70 and would still have it today and would have used it up till I went digital. Even once I do get a new body I'll keep my D50. It certainly wont stop working and would make a nice backup. Even when the shutter goes somewhere around 50,000 actuations I can get it replaced for just a few hundred $$.

 

[extreme8]

I wouldn't hold out much hope for a flood of D200 bargains on the used market. I don't think there is enough difference between the two to warrant the upgrade....

I don't know, if the D300 high ISO is a big improvement over the D200 mine will be available. I think I'll be able to cut you a pretty good deal if you want the MB-D200 grip to go with it!
The Multi-CAM 3500DX focus system with the 14 additional cross-type focus sensors is probably worth the cost of the upgrade alone.

 

[Gdad]

I think the used market in general may be interesting over the next six months- lots of people will be upgrading from D70/D80 ranks also. Not to mention lenses- may be a good time to pick up a nice tele when someone upgrades to the new vr version.

 

[tinksdad]

Found this on another site. Very good read, very hard for me to pass up and buy the same amount in glass.......


D300 Features Outlined

That IS a good review. Explains some of the new features.

This is a big plus for me as well;

Approximately twice the number of images can be captured with an EN-EL3e battery compared to the Nikon D200. Improved and better than the Nikon D70s.

Battery life has been a big complaint among users. It hasn't bothered me to much once I got the MB200 battery pack, but this is very good news. Takes the same batteries too!

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

I know that you will more than likely never find the ideal camera but I was wondering how often do you guys upgrade your cameras? I have to admit it is one of the things that concerns me about dslr's the constant desire to upgrade heck i dont have one and i constantly look at cameras just curious how often people change bodys since i know that some lenses can go from one camera to another

Let me preface this by saying I am definitely not the norm (I have been told that in so many aspects of life). I usually update technology whether it be SLR body, printer, scanner, computer, software, etc. approximately every 18 months. That is definitely not necessary as most of the equipment is still very workable and produces outstanding results. I mostly upgrade to take advantage of new features that coincide with changes to my photography style. As my knowledge evolves I find that new technology enables me to create images that would have been more difficult with what I currently had. Notice I said more difficult, not impossible. I can do pretty much everything with my D100 that I can with my D200 it is just takes a little more to do it. At this point in my life time is more precious than a few dollars (I seem to be able to make money when I need it but I have yet to figure out how to make time). So I upgrade when I find a combination that will allow me to produce images faster or easier than I could have before. Of course it may just be a personality flaw where I am never content with the present and I am always looking for change just to spice things up.

Jeff

 

[Groucho]

Not really. But it would be worth a look, as long as my Nikon glass is usable.

That is the main reason I went with Nikon when I went DSLR. They have a real commitment to the entire consumer base and the the backwards compatibility, as well as forward of almost all their lenses. The older Nikon glass will still fit and be usable on the newer cameras. That in itself is pretty amazing! Of course, some of the newer features are not possible like AF and some metering. But they still mount and work!

I can't let this one pass... if Nikon has such a great commitment to backwards compatibility, why did they pull the focus motor from the D40 and D40x, significantly hampering the usability of a huge number of lenses for new Nikon purchasers? Yes, they will work, but not as well as they did on an older Nikon camera.

Don't get me wrong, I like Nikon, but I don't buy that they care that much about backwards compatibility. It seems like last time this came up, the rap from Nikon fans was that they were pulling the focus motor specifically to help kill off the use of lenses without built-in focus motors (hence bringing the technology forward to everyone one way or the other), which is kind of the opposite of your claim.

My opinion is that they're just trying to save a few bucks on their cheapest DSLRs. I don't think they have any particular corporate concern for backwards compatibility nor are they attempting to kill off the use of older lenses - somehow I suspect that these new models will still have the focus motors than the D40/D40x lack.

 

[Anewman]

I can't let this one pass... if Nikon has such a great commitment to backwards compatibility, why did they pull the focus motor from the D40 and D40x, significantly hampering the usability of a huge number of lenses for new Nikon purchasers? Yes, they will work, but not as well as they did on an older Nikon camera.

Don't get me wrong, I like Nikon, but I don't buy that they care that much about backwards compatibility. It seems like last time this came up, the rap from Nikon fans was that they were pulling the focus motor specifically to help kill off the use of lenses without built-in focus motors (hence bringing the technology forward to everyone one way or the other), which is kind of the opposite of your claim.

My opinion is that they're just trying to save a few bucks on their cheapest DSLRs. I don't think they have any particular corporate concern for backwards compatibility nor are they attempting to kill off the use of older lenses - somehow I suspect that these new models will still have the focus motors than the D40/D40x lack.

I agree with what you are saying, you can not brag about backward compatibility if a current model is not backward compatible with some older lenses. But, maybe as a Canon shooter I am missing something.

My guess would be that since the D40 series is considered a true ENTRY LEVEL camera, one can assume that few D40 purchasers have any of those older lenses we are talking about. While a pro photographer that spends $5k on a new pro body might have a very large collection of older gear.

Again I dont shoot Nikon so I dont really know, but I have never seen a real uproar about this on any photo forum, from Nikon shooters that is. So if it does not bother persons that have those lenses, it dont bother me either.

 

[tinksdad]

I can't let this one pass... if Nikon has such a great commitment to backwards compatibility, why did they pull the focus motor from the D40 and D40x, significantly hampering the usability of a huge number of lenses for new Nikon purchasers? Yes, they will work, but not as well as they did on an older Nikon camera.

Don't get me wrong, I like Nikon, but I don't buy that they care that much about backwards compatibility. It seems like last time this came up, the rap from Nikon fans was that they were pulling the focus motor specifically to help kill off the use of lenses without built-in focus motors (hence bringing the technology forward to everyone one way or the other), which is kind of the opposite of your claim.

My opinion is that they're just trying to save a few bucks on their cheapest DSLRs. I don't think they have any particular corporate concern for backwards compatibility nor are they attempting to kill off the use of older lenses - somehow I suspect that these new models will still have the focus motors than the D40/D40x lack.

I'm just a Nikon user, NOT a board member or one of the design team. My observation was my opinion (obviously) and not based on any other information.
My guess why Nikon didn't put focus motors in the D40/x -- Money! People are cheap and this is a way to get more folks using the camera at a lower price point. (which has been working).

I know folks that buy a DSLR with a kit lens and never buy another lens..... Is that wrong? Of course not, but there is that segment of the population that will not spend the money for a "better system".

Again, my opinion, but why would they make the new full frame FX D3 compatible with the DX lenses? I think that is wise decision, and what I based the comment on.


Heck, it's all speculation anyway.......

 

[AustinTed]

Having a D200, it would probably be a year down the road before I'd consider the D300. The D300 is available in November and by the time some decent reviews come out and we get over the usually supply constraints, we'll be pretty far down that road anyway.

The main feature of the D300 that would appeal to me is if it really did have a workable ISO3200. I don't really need the bigger display or the 8fps. Going from 10 to 12MP is negligible. 14-bit raw is really nice, but it comes at the expense of lower fps and larger file size. I don't know about you guys, but the current raw file sizes are about as big as I want to deal with right now.

Not trying to sound overly negative. Nikon did a fine job. The D200 is already such a great camera I want to see some D300 reviews and pictures.

 

[Gdad]

I just got my wife a D40 with the 18-135 kit lens as she decided she is ready for her first dslr. I understand some lenses will not AF with it but I think as long as you know the capabilities of the camera going in this is not a big issue. And had been said- as a true entry level camera probably not a big deal- at least to me. One of the big things she likes about the D40 is the small/compact body so maybe this would not have been possible with an internal focus motor also. Just my $0,000,000.02

I can't let this one pass... if Nikon has such a great commitment to backwards compatibility, why did they pull the focus motor from the D40 and D40x, significantly hampering the usability of a huge number of lenses for new Nikon purchasers? Yes, they will work, but not as well as they did on an older Nikon camera.

Don't get me wrong, I like Nikon, but I don't buy that they care that much about backwards compatibility. It seems like last time this came up, the rap from Nikon fans was that they were pulling the focus motor specifically to help kill off the use of lenses without built-in focus motors (hence bringing the technology forward to everyone one way or the other), which is kind of the opposite of your claim.

My opinion is that they're just trying to save a few bucks on their cheapest DSLRs. I don't think they have any particular corporate concern for backwards compatibility nor are they attempting to kill off the use of older lenses - somehow I suspect that these new models will still have the focus motors than the D40/D40x lack.

 

[Master Mason]

I think that the reason for the reason they pulled the focus moter is that they are going to the focus motor in the lens. I believe that all of the new anouncements have the in lens moter, and expect that to be the case moving forward.

the reason they pulled it from an entry level camera was A) to make it cheaper to produce and B) the assumption that as an entry level buyer you didn't have any of the older glass in the first place. Someone that had older glass most likely wouldn't be buying an entry level camera like that so it wouldn't be an issue for them.

Anytime your changing the way a system works, there are going to be people that are unhappy. so you have two choices, you can ease it in as Nikon is doing, or you can put a hard stop on it, as Canon did years ago. Which way is better, who knows.

 

[Geoff_M]

My opinion is that they're just trying to save a few bucks on their cheapest DSLRs. I don't think they have any particular corporate concern for backwards compatibility nor are they attempting to kill off the use of older lenses - somehow I suspect that these new models will still have the focus motors than the D40/D40x lack.

Groucho, I have no doubt that the main reason that the motor was dropped was to help with their price point on the D40. But I don't find the move to be an indictment of the "backwards compatibility" claims from Nikon. For starters, there is a perfectly good selection of consumer based AF-S lens for the D40 to choose from. Also, the non-AF-S lenses work just find in manual mode. A friend of mine with a D40 shot along side me at our local softball world series last week and he frequently borrowed my 80-200 f.28 AF Nikkor when I wasn't using it and manually focused it. He was perfectly happy with the results. You can get the same quality images from an AF Nikkor as you can with an AF-S Nikkor. In fact, he went out and bought a non-HSM Sigma lens afterwards because he was perfectly happy using the in-board focus indicator and manually focusing the lens. This certainly isn't to say that AF isn't desirable, but instead to say that the lack of it isn't a fatal issue that makes a lens all but useless.

Also, if you want to get down to tacks, this isn't the first such situation in Nikon history. For example, when they came out with AI lenses and dropped the "pen register" meter couplings on the F2's people with non-AI lenses found that had to resort to stop-down metering if they wanted to use them on their new cameras (or pay a third party to cut an "AI" notch in their lenses).

There was also a film analog to the D40 made in the late 1970's, it was the Nikon EM. It was a very inexpensive entry level SLR that was almost totally automated. On other AI metering SLRs there was a way to flip up the AI coupling on the body to allow the mounting of older non-AI lenses. However, this option was not present on the EM. It was physically impossible to mount a non-AI lens on an EM. No doubt this was a small part of the production cost savings that allowed for the EM's low price. I'm sure that, like now with the D40, Nikon back then didn't think it would even be an issue with entry level users since there was available a series of cheaper "consumer" lenses ("E Series") that was there for the pickings.

But in the end it's still "Viva La F-Mount!!!"

 

[Groucho]

the reason they pulled it from an entry level camera was A) to make it cheaper to produce and B) the assumption that as an entry level buyer you didn't have any of the older glass in the first place. Someone that had older glass most likely wouldn't be buying an entry level camera like that so it wouldn't be an issue for them.

The only problem with that is some of Nikon's currently available lenses (including the 50mm F1.8 that'd be desirable to someone with few bucks but some knowledge) still require a focus motor. And I've very sorry, but that the lens mounts but doesn't auto-focus just doesn't impress me - and I like manual-focus lenses.

Anytime your changing the way a system works, there are going to be people that are unhappy. so you have two choices, you can ease it in as Nikon is doing, or you can put a hard stop on it, as Canon did years ago. Which way is better, who knows.

No disagreement there. However, either way is not putting a huge value on backwards compatibility... as far as I know, only one manufacturer has maintained 100% compatibility with all legacy lenses, and those all work with full functionality on every DSLR of theirs. This doesn't make it them better or worse cameras, but when I think of a company valuing backwards compatibility, that's what I think of.

I still think they're just trying to save a few bucks and it hurts the entry-level buyers, and that they're trying to phase out the older lenses is just lip service to appease D40/D40x buyers - now if they remove the in-body focus motors from these new high-end cameras, they might convince me, but I suspect all but their entry-level cameras will continue to sport focus motors, which torpedoes the whole "moving the line forward" theory. I'd rather see the D40/D40x replacement have the focus motor added again, but I'm not sure that'll happen, either.

 

[Furgus]

So how about the D3 being able to tell if there is a DX lens attached to it....that kind of freaks me out.....

 

[cryssi]

hey guys, haven't been able to post here, but DH told me the other day that we're upgrading to the D300...we won't be a 2 body family...

so...we'll see! I do have to say that it does sound fabulous, though...

we're ok on glass for now, so it's not like we're trading one for the other...