Interesting D700x rumor

[compuwar]

I don't see how it'd fit with the traditional pricing, but someone an DPR said that Nikon USA was targeting the D700x to be the same price point as the D700.

That's interesting to me because at that point you'd basically be paying a premium for high-ISO, high-speed shooting, or getting a discount for higher low-ISO IQ. Sensor cost is basically driven by physical size, so I'm almost sure the economics would actually work out ok- but that'd mean Nikon not maximizing per-unit profits, but instead going for volume. With the more accurate focusing module from the D3x, that'd potentially make Canon's choice to re-use the 5D mk I module a bad choice[1].

[1] 1DsmkII folks who've played with the D3x have said focusing accuracy is better, the 5DII is bested by the 1Ds bodies as near as I can tell.

 

[Cliff3]

I think they're dreaming. Hogan has been forecasting $3500 to $4000. Once short term demand is satisfied, I could see rebates being used to discount the body some. And before anyone jumps in with some chat about the 5DMkII, Nikon is aiming to set the performance bar higher than that.

 

[compuwar]

As I said, I don't see how it'd fit- but I admit the possibility could be one of those ground-breaking moves- pretty sure to gain the lion's share of high-end DSLR sales if it happened. Those buyers are lens buyers, and lens buyers get locked in- maybe too bold a move for a company like Nikon, but fun to speculate on anyway!

There's nothing inherently wrong with the 5DII, and the delta is likely to be incremental enough to not move 5DII owners, but downstream from that it could get interesting.

 

[peskaa]

I can't really see it being introduced at the D700 point - more towards the 5D2 point if anything, possibly even more. Whilst it'd be a very interesting move if it was at the D700 price, I just think it is very very unlikely.

If it happened, it'd force Canon to slash the 5D2 to compete.

 

[compuwar]

If it happened, it'd force Canon to slash the 5D2 to compete.

Actually, that's a bigger argument for not doing it than anything else. It could kill Canon at the most profitable price point, and I don't think Nikon would want to do that. Getting market share is fine, but killing Canon would open up the door for Sony, Pentax and Olympus. I think Nikon's happy to be heading for, if not #1 in the DSLR space at the moment and anything more than 10 or so points on Canon is a riskier thing than staying 4-5% ahead of them.

 

[wheelhot]

Haha, I thought of Nikon making the D700x as the high-res version of D700, something like what Nikon did with D3x and D3.

Price point wise? I expect the D700x to be near the ballpark with D3, so Nikon users had to choose, either go with the full sized body low res D3 or go for the compact sized body high res D700x.

Hmm, now should I get the D300s or D300? (Making my switch to Nikon, if I get the D300s, then I can wait a lil longer till I have enough money or I have to loan money from parents, D300 I can get it while it is still in stock (means I have to get it quick!) and it should be cheaper right?)

 

[compuwar]

Haha, I thought of Nikon making the D700x as the high-res version of D700, something like what Nikon did with D3x and D3.

Yes, that's what it will be.

Hmm, now should I get the D300s or D300? (Making my switch to Nikon, if I get the D300s, then I can wait a lil longer till I have enough money or I have to loan money from parents, D300 I can get it while it is still in stock (means I have to get it quick!) and it should be cheaper right?)

[/quote]

You can't take pictures with a camera you don't have- and the D300 is a great camera. Most of the times the 's' models come in just above the street price for the original and settle down, but it'll be a bit before they're available.

 

[wheelhot]

Yeah, i know the d300 is a great camera cuz i was hoping for the price to drop due to clearance, but so far i see that ain't happening

 

[Cliff3]

Yeah, i know the d300 is a great camera cuz i was hoping for the price to drop due to clearance, but so far i see that ain't happening

From what I've been reading, D300 inventories have been fairly tight. I don't think broad end of life discounts are too likely with this camera. Certainly nothing like what was seen with the D200.

 

[wheelhot]

From what I've been reading, D300 inventories have been fairly tight. I don't think broad end of life discounts are too likely with this camera. Certainly nothing like what was seen with the D200.

yup I was hoping for the D300 price to drop considerably when the D300s come out so I can save a few more bucks, but if the D300s and D300 price is going to be about the same, might as well I get the D300s.

If only the D700 and D300s price gap, ain't that huge then I can jump to D700 straight, although the lack of step up FX glasses is a huge problem for me. Guess I get D300/D300s first and get a few FX glasses before making the jump to D700/D800(by that time)

 

[Cliff3]

You might want to read the section titled 'Where to Spend $2000' in this archive (http://www.bythom.com/2009 Nikon News.htm) and ask yourself if a conversion to FX is the right investment for you. The price delta between the two bodies will continue to be around $700, give or take.

I don't see prices declining on the D700 with the introduction of the D700x as I don't think the target markets for the two cameras overlap much. The price difference between the D3 and D3x is ~$3000. My guess is the price delta between a D700 and D700x will be upwards of $1000 and the two bodies aren't going to compete with each other. If anything, economies of scale might cause the price of the D3x to come down.

 

[wheelhot]

You might want to read the section titled 'Where to Spend $2000' in this archive (http://www.bythom.com/2009 Nikon News.htm) and ask yourself if a conversion to FX is the right investment for you. The price delta between the two bodies will continue to be around $700, give or take.

Good article, but yeah, I will eventually upgrade to FX, but not now especially when I have no glasses to boot it with (and not to mention Nikon FX glasses is just very very expensive to make the leap in one go, just I had the crazy though of it [since Im switching from Canon to Nikon]) guess I have to settle with the D300/s first

That should suffice for a long time Now, time to think bout lenses

 

[JSF]

wheelhot, have you considered the D90? If you don't need the build quality and fps of the D300, I would go with the D90. The D90s image quality is the same as the D300 and cost significantly less. This is just a personal opinion, but, I would not even consider the D300s, if I were going full frame in the near future. You could get a new D700 from Amazon for $2,350 (not sure if the sale is still on), about 500 more than the D300s. A used D700 can be had for $2,000, only $200 more than the D300s. Since you are switching to Nikon you are going to have to buy a new lens right? If you buy a dx sensor camera now and if your serious about going full frame in the future your probably going to want to buy lenses for the dx that work with full frame as well. Just something to think about.

 

[compuwar]

although the lack of step up FX glasses is a huge problem for me.

There are tons of older lenses that are from the film days that work just fine. Most are bargains, though some prices seem to be creeping up.

 

[compuwar]

Im switching from Canon to Nikon

I have to ask why you'd switch from Canon to Nikon rather than continuing to build on a Canon system? There's not much difference between them performance-wise.

 

[wheelhot]

wheelhot, have you considered the D90? If you don't need the build quality and fps of the D300, I would go with the D90. The D90s image quality is the same as the D300 and cost significantly less. This is just a personal opinion, but, I would not even consider the D300s, if I were going full frame in the near future. You could get a new D700 from Amazon for $2,350 (not sure if the sale is still on), about 500 more than the D300s. A used D700 can be had for $2,000, only $200 more than the D300s. Since you are switching to Nikon you are going to have to buy a new lens right? If you buy a dx sensor camera now and if your serious about going full frame in the future your probably going to want to buy lenses for the dx that work with full frame as well. Just something to think about.

Yeah, you are correct bout the D90 part, I am considering it but likely I will go with D300 due to the button layout and ergonomics, tried D90 layout and it felt all weird to me. Also when I go for the FX format, I will keep the D300 as a secondary body. And since it will take lots of money for those FX lenses, so it will take me quite awhile to get those FX lenses before I get a FX body, heck I have a feeling by the time I get those FX lenses, a D800 will be on the horizon.

There are tons of older lenses that are from the film days that work just fine. Most are bargains, though some prices seem to be creeping up.

Yup, I'm looking at some now

I have to ask why you'd switch from Canon to Nikon rather than continuing to build on a Canon system? There's not much difference between them performance-wise.

Cuz I used both the D700 and 5D (both are friends) and the D700 ergonomic just works for me, the 5D just felt awkward (button placement) and I can't get used with Canon main control dial (used 40D, 50D, 5D and 5D mark II) proved this. Also the fact that my most expensive lens with Canon is my 100mm f/2.8 Macro. So for me to change brand is not as expensive as those who already invested in a few L lenses.