Nikon D800....when?

[sjackal]

take out the built in flash gun and have a bigger 1:1 prism - that will do the trick. ISO high also no need much flash. Maybe i should work for nikon...hehe

Agreed, the pop up flash is a weak point in construction and takes up space. The only usage people find good is the CLS commander, but at this kind of level usually people going for radio triggers or another speedlight on-cam as commander with 3 groups.

Dual card slots would be nice.

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

Agreed, the pop up flash is a weak point in construction and takes up space. The only usage people find good is the CLS commander, but at this kind of level usually people going for radio triggers or another speedlight on-cam as commander with 3 groups.

Dual card slots would be nice.

- 8 fps
- usable ISO6400
- (near as makes no diff) 100% VF
- dual card slots

probably good enough to entice me ;p Though it may not be deemed as significantly different from D700's specs.

but Nikon will probably be 'coerced' to follow the MP race. If they release another 12-14MP camera, I think there'll be a lot of condemnation from the buying public.

 

[ortega]

thom said

"[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]We'll find out how Nikon decided to update the D700 within a few months. I have to wonder if we'll still think of it as being the jack of all trades and the right balance for a one-camera user or not. Just adding pixels isn't going to work."[/FONT]

 

[kriegsketten]

- 8 fps
- usable ISO6400
- (near as makes no diff) 100% VF
- dual card slots

probably good enough to entice me ;p Though it may not be deemed as significantly different from D700's specs.

but Nikon will probably be 'coerced' to follow the MP race. If they release another 12-14MP camera, I think there'll be a lot of condemnation from the buying public.

8 fps, bump-able to 11 fps with grip... now that's really going to get me excited... :bsmilie: Not that I'll machine gun all the way, but short bursts will help in some intense situations.
D3s sensor with the same ISO capabilities (oh...mah... gawd!)...
I'd prefer 100% VF if it won't push the price too high up.

 

[jeff7id]

Keep the ISO quality of D700 and bumps the Megapixels from 12MP to 24MP + add the ability to record Full HD video, this New Nikon would be the jack of all trades of all entry level FF.

This would easily wipe out this Canon 5D Mark II or Sony A900 :devil:

 

[kentwong81]

from www.mansurovs.com:

The sensor is the most important component of a digital camera, because it is directly responsible for capturing an optical image and converting it to an electric signal, which later gets optimized and converted to a digital image by other camera electronics. Just like your computer screen, sensors contain millions of pixels, except they are there to collect light, not display it. When you see a digital camera with 12 megapixels, it literally means that the camera sensor contains 12 million tiny pixels for the sole purpose of gathering light. Think of those pixels as buckets that attract light particles – the larger the bucket, the more light particles it can store in a given amount of time. These buckets are known as “photosites” and their size plays a huge role in sensor sensitivity and ability to accurately gather light in various lighting conditions. Bigger buckets are always better than smaller ones, because more light particles can be stored in those, without getting over-filled. The information about light particles is then passed on to the camera processor, which assembles a digital image starting from the first pixel all the way to the last. And all of this happens in a matter of milliseconds!

While larger pixels (or bigger buckets) work best for sensors, they are also extremely expensive to manufacture. To keep the costs low and product accessible to a broader customer range, many camera manufacturers produce smaller sensors. Obviously, as the size of the sensors decrease, so do the number of pixels. To combat this problem, manufacturers have been cramming more and more pixels into tiny sensors while simultaneously increasing the efficiency and throughput of each pixel. Unfortunately, this resulted in a “megapixel race” among the manufacturers and we are seeing more and more pixels in the modern sensors, despite the fact that the size of the sensors has pretty much remained the same.

 

[DarNikon]

i stop waiting and got myself a d3s....

Wah, I envy you...I have limited moolah

 

[DarNikon]

read this.

Thanks

 

[DarNikon]

thom said

"[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]We'll find out how Nikon decided to update the D700 within a few months. I have to wonder if we'll still think of it as being the jack of all trades and the right balance for a one-camera user or not. Just adding pixels isn't going to work."[/FONT]

Agreed. However, I have been reading some very troubling reviews about the D700 though there are admittedly good ones as well. I am quite lost...to wait or not to wait. the D700 photos with the overexposed highlights at nght scared me the most :dunno:

 

[DarNikon]

8 fps, bump-able to 11 fps with grip... now that's really going to get me excited... :bsmilie: Not that I'll machine gun all the way, but short bursts will help in some intense situations.
D3s sensor with the same ISO capabilities (oh...mah... gawd!)...
I'd prefer 100% VF if it won't push the price too high up.

Yup that's the other thing with the D 700 the VF is on wat 95% oh I wonder why not 100%. nikon should have gone the whole way. See even the D7000 has a 100% VF.

 

[Actururss]

Nikon is very considerate, they give you time to save enough money for the D800.

Some may have saved enough for a Hasselblad.

 

[ageha]

100% VF in this size body, to me at least, is probably asking for too much

Sony's A900 has a 100% VF.

 

[daredevil123]

Yup that's the other thing with the D 700 the VF is on wat 95% oh I wonder why not 100%. nikon should have gone the whole way. See even the D7000 has a 100% VF.

Have you looked through the view finder of the D700 vs a D7000 (or D300)?

Don't know about you, but that D700 95% VF looked a whole lot bigger than D7000's 100% VF.

What's the big deal on not having a 100% VF? Just crop your pic loh.

 

[Cowseye]

Yup that's the other thing with the D 700 the VF is on wat 95% oh I wonder why not 100%. nikon should have gone the whole way. See even the D7000 has a 100% VF.

Becos D700 is a step down version of D3 in 2008 while D7000 is a step up version of D90 in 2010. You cannot compare these two model in this manner.

 

[kkvolution]

Becos D700 is a step down version of D3 in 2008 while D7000 is a step up version of D90 in 2010. You cannot compare these two model in this manner.

Well said. Apple to Apple, Pear to Pear comparision is needed.