The Internet tubes have been rumbling about a new, high megapixal Nikon dSLR coming sometime this year and that rumor just got a little more official with a list of specs. The detailed list certainly seems feasible with a 3.5-inch touchscreen and dual SD/CF storage slots, but the 24MP spec throws up some questions, expessially if this digicam is to be called the D400.
Currently the only 24+ MP camera Nikon sells is the $7,999 D3X. The $2,999 D700 sports the same FX-series sensor but is only shooting 12.1MP. Would the D400 supersede the D700 for the number two slot or would the new camera slide in under the $3k price only to leave the amazing D700 to slowly fade out?
Nikon does need to keep up in the megapixal race and hopefully, the D400 would be equipped with the same FX sensor the D3X has to keep pace with the 24MP Canons. Either way, if Nikon makes the camera detailed here, they will have a hot seller.
pconline via nikonrumors
I was at a workshop in Oct. 2006 where we were shows some photos by some high-ranking Nikon folks (and I mean high-ranking). Photos that showed ISO 6400 images that blew us away. A year later, the D3 hit. At the time, this Nikon official said “The end of the megapixel war is about to end.”
So, Nikon obviously doesn’t intend for the megapixel gap to end quite soon. As a pro photographer that use both Canon (work) and Nikon (home/freelance) with a 1Ds Mark II and waiting for the next DSLR from Nikon, I’m not biased either way. I want both companies to come out with great cameras.
That being said, here’s the problem with the article. First, there isn’t going to be a big problem with Nikon matching the 5D Mark II with a new camera. But I think it would be called a D800, not a D400. The D400 would replace the D300, which is a DX body. So it’s not going to be full frame. Therefore it can’t possibly be 24 megapixels. Why? The pixels would be too crowded and high ISO noise would be horrendous. Nikon has stated the DX bodies are going to continue to be developed.
Now maybe this would mark the end of high-end DX bodies like the D300. In that case, maybe the D400 could break with naming conventions and be full frame. If it’s 24 megapixels, then it would likely be about $3000 or maybe even less. We’ll find out when it arrives. But I think the more likely scenario is a D800 will take its place next to the D700 as a high-resolution alternative to the stupendously high ISO champ that is the D700 (and D3).
Canon does it. My 1Ds Mark II at work cost $8,000 when we bought it. So it’s no surprise that Nikon’s first camera to compete in the “nearly medium format” arena would cost about that. But then note the D3 and D700 price difference with no difference in image quality. The same for the 1Ds Mark III and the 5D Mark II (which I also have at work now) and the tiny bit of difference in image quality.