This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the usual photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing a camera for xxx" http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
frederick wrote: > This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the usual > photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing a camera for > xxx" > http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 > So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
"if it's true, it's just a smaller D3."
Sounds nice! I would love a smaller full frame Nikon.
Paul Furman wrote: > frederick wrote: >> This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the usual >> photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing a camera >> for xxx" >> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 >> So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
> "if it's true, it's just a smaller D3."
> Sounds nice! > I would love a smaller full frame Nikon.
I would too - but not at US$3500. US $2,700 sounds okay to me, so long as features like the LCD, AF fine tuning, auto CA correction, and low-light AF performance aren't downgraded from the D3/D300. That's why I think it will be $3500 - I don't think Nikon want to compete directly with the Canon 5d, nor Sony's a900.
frederick wrote: > Paul Furman wrote: >> frederick wrote: >>> This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the usual >>> photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing a camera >>> for xxx" >>> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 >>> So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
>> "if it's true, it's just a smaller D3."
>> Sounds nice! >> I would love a smaller full frame Nikon.
> I would too - but not at US$3500. > US $2,700 sounds okay to me, so long as features like the LCD, AF fine > tuning, auto CA correction, and low-light AF performance aren't > downgraded from the D3/D300. That's why I think it will be $3500 - I > don't think Nikon want to compete directly with the Canon 5d, nor Sony's > a900.
The guy on the chinese forum keeps posting more shots that he claims to have taken from a cellphone cam. Cam 3500DX 51 point AF. The MB-D10 (D300) grip fits it. So, it will be a D3 - sans integral grip, maybe 8fps rather than 9/11. Gossip is $3k - I doubt it. A price less than the cost of a D3 less MB-D10 becomes a bargain.
> This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the usual > photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing a camera > for xxx" > http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 > So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
frederick wrote: > Paul Furman wrote: >> frederick wrote: >>> This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the usual >>> photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing a camera >>> for xxx" >>> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 >>> So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
>> "if it's true, it's just a smaller D3."
>> Sounds nice! >> I would love a smaller full frame Nikon.
> I would too - but not at US$3500. > US $2,700 sounds okay to me, so long as features like the LCD, AF fine > tuning, auto CA correction, and low-light AF performance aren't > downgraded from the D3/D300. That's why I think it will be $3500 - I > don't think Nikon want to compete directly with the Canon 5d, nor Sony's > a900.
I don't see any mention of live view. That might be one way to cut down costs... wouldn't bother me much I guess if it was missing.
> And the famous D80x that never surfaced > "frederick" <l...@sea.com> wrote in message > news:1213751921.279826@ftpsrv1... >> This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the usual >> photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing a camera for >> xxx" >> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 >> So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
I have from a reliable source that Nikon will announce the D90 this year, leaks will start around late August, formal announcement just before PhotoKina 2008. The D700 model doesn't fit Nikon's numbering sequence, so hard to comment.
Paul Furman wrote: > frederick wrote: >> Paul Furman wrote: >>> frederick wrote: >>>> This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the usual >>>> photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing a camera >>>> for xxx" >>>> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 >>>> So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
>>> "if it's true, it's just a smaller D3."
>>> Sounds nice! >>> I would love a smaller full frame Nikon.
>> I would too - but not at US$3500. >> US $2,700 sounds okay to me, so long as features like the LCD, AF fine >> tuning, auto CA correction, and low-light AF performance aren't >> downgraded from the D3/D300. That's why I think it will be $3500 - I >> don't think Nikon want to compete directly with the Canon 5d, nor >> Sony's a900.
> I don't see any mention of live view. That might be one way to cut down > costs... wouldn't bother me much I guess if it was missing.
The "leak" is probably faked. Some things don't stack up. The photo of the front of the camera, the pentaprism looks too small. The brochure isn't consistent with other Nikon brochures in layout. The wording also seems unusual. The chinese guy posting the "leaked" photos also commented about the price, but claimed to have sneaked cellphone camera shots at the print shop where he worked. Printers don't know the price - and it's surely not going to be printed on a brochure. It's also not consistent with reasonable expectations that the next dslrs from Nikon will be the D3x (already accidentally confirmed by Nikon with the D3 firmware mistake) and a D80 replacement.
frederick wrote: > Paul Furman wrote: >> frederick wrote: >>> Paul Furman wrote: >>>> frederick wrote: >>>>> This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the >>>>> usual photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing a >>>>> camera for xxx" >>>>> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 >>>>> So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
>>>> "if it's true, it's just a smaller D3."
>>>> Sounds nice! >>>> I would love a smaller full frame Nikon.
>>> I would too - but not at US$3500. >>> US $2,700 sounds okay to me, so long as features like the LCD, AF >>> fine tuning, auto CA correction, and low-light AF performance aren't >>> downgraded from the D3/D300. That's why I think it will be $3500 - I >>> don't think Nikon want to compete directly with the Canon 5d, nor >>> Sony's a900.
>> I don't see any mention of live view. That might be one way to cut >> down costs... wouldn't bother me much I guess if it was missing.
> The "leak" is probably faked. Some things don't stack up. > The photo of the front of the camera, the pentaprism looks too small. > The brochure isn't consistent with other Nikon brochures in layout. The > wording also seems unusual. The chinese guy posting the "leaked" photos > also commented about the price, but claimed to have sneaked cellphone > camera shots at the print shop where he worked. Printers don't know the > price - and it's surely not going to be printed on a brochure. > It's also not consistent with reasonable expectations that the next > dslrs from Nikon will be the D3x (already accidentally confirmed by > Nikon with the D3 firmware mistake) and a D80 replacement.
Paul Furman wrote: > frederick wrote: >> Paul Furman wrote: >>> frederick wrote: >>>> Paul Furman wrote: >>>>> frederick wrote: >>>>>> This rumour/leak seems to have a bit more credibility than the >>>>>> usual photoshopped images and reports of "a guy I know is testing >>>>>> a camera for xxx" >>>>>> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/657828 >>>>>> So, I wonder what's happened to the D3x?
>>>>> "if it's true, it's just a smaller D3."
>>>>> Sounds nice! >>>>> I would love a smaller full frame Nikon.
>>>> I would too - but not at US$3500. >>>> US $2,700 sounds okay to me, so long as features like the LCD, AF >>>> fine tuning, auto CA correction, and low-light AF performance aren't >>>> downgraded from the D3/D300. That's why I think it will be $3500 - >>>> I don't think Nikon want to compete directly with the Canon 5d, nor >>>> Sony's a900.
>>> I don't see any mention of live view. That might be one way to cut >>> down costs... wouldn't bother me much I guess if it was missing.
>> The "leak" is probably faked. Some things don't stack up. >> The photo of the front of the camera, the pentaprism looks too small. >> The brochure isn't consistent with other Nikon brochures in layout. >> The wording also seems unusual. The chinese guy posting the "leaked" >> photos also commented about the price, but claimed to have sneaked >> cellphone camera shots at the print shop where he worked. Printers >> don't know the price - and it's surely not going to be printed on a >> brochure. >> It's also not consistent with reasonable expectations that the next >> dslrs from Nikon will be the D3x (already accidentally confirmed by >> Nikon with the D3 firmware mistake) and a D80 replacement.
> Yes it does seem flaky. > I still want one though!
I would too - sort of. It would need to come with a free 17-35, and a good 300mm f4 to keep up with what I use now. To significantly better it would cost serious money (14-24 24-70, 70-200 & 300mm). If Nikon were to make f4 zooms like Canons f4l lenses, then Fx might be of more interest to me. I carry 10-20 18-70 80-200, sometimes 105 macro in a backpack. Even a "compact" Fx makes a too heavy system for my needs ATM, as well as a massive price premium for a significant improvement.
|
