We've already had info about D600 specs. But today we have new information, including D400 specs and even some leaked photos of the D600, Nikon's entry-level full-frame DSLR!
Rumored Nikon D400 Specs via Mansurovs.com:
Sensor: 24.2 MP DX CMOS, 3.82µ pixel pitch (same as on the D3200)
Sensor Size: 23.2 x 15.4mm
Resolution: 6,016 × 4,000
Native ISO Sensitivity: 100-6,400
Boost Low ISO Sensitivity: 50
Boost High ISO Sensitivity: 12,800-25,600
Processor: EXPEED 3
Metering System: 3D Color Matrix Meter III with face recognition and a database of 30,000 images
Dust Reduction: Yes
Weather Sealing/Protection: Yes
Body Build: Full Magnesium Alloy
White Balance: New White Balance System
Shutter: Up to 1/8000 and 30 sec exposure
Shutter Durability: 200,000 cycles, self-diagnostic shutter
Camera Lag: 0.012 seconds
Storage: 1x CF slot and 1x SD slot
Viewfinder Coverage: 100%
Viewfinder Magnification: 0.94x Approx.
Speed: 8 FPS, 9 FPS with optional battery pack and Nikon D4 or alkaline batteries
Exposure Meter: 91,000 pixel RGB sensor
Built-in Flash: Yes, with Commander Mode, full CLS compatibility
Autofocus System: Advanced Multi-CAM 3500DX with 51 focus points and 15 cross-type sensors
AF Detection: Up to f/8 with 9 focus points (5 in the center, 2 on the left and right)
LCD Screen: 3.2 inch diagonal with 921,000 dots
Movie Modes: Full 1080p HD @ 30 fps max
Movie Exposure Control: Full
Movie Recording Limit: 30 minutes @ 30p, 20 minutes @ 24p
Movie Output: MOV, Compressed and Uncompressed
In-Camera HDR Capability: Yes
Two Live View Modes: One for photography and one for videography
Camera Editing: Lots of in-camera editing options with HDR capabilities
GPS: Not built-in, requires GP-1 GPS unit
Battery Type: EN-EL15
Battery Life: ~900 shots
USB Standard: 3.0
Weight: 800g (body only)
Price: $1,799 MSRP
If this is in fact the price, Nasim Mansurov is right when saying on his blog that Nikon will have a tough time selling this DX body at this price next to a D600, as rumored. Something has to be off. I think we can all agree that anyone in their right mind would buy a roughly $1500 D600 over this D400 at $1800. So what's the catch? Or is this all wrong? Meet me in the comments section...
D600 Pics thanks to Nikon Rumors:
![[News] The Canon 5D Mark III Announced!](https://cdn.fstoppers.com/styles/small-16-9/s3/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/canon-5d-mark-iii-back.jpg)
2012 is a interesting year so far....
Nikon: Hey everyone come out and buy the new insanely high megapixel D800. It's our new FF camera! It's only $3000. How can you go wrong? If you've been waiting to switch from DX to FF this is the camera for you!
Casual photographer: I've really been waiting for a FF camera. I don't need all those megapixels - and I kind of wish the iso performance was better but since this is a better price than the D4 which I couldn't afford if my life depended on it then I will preorder.
*3 months later*
Nikon: Hey everyone. So that D800 is pretty great (unless you're still waiting for yours, which most of you are). Check out the D600. It's our new FF camera! It's only $1800! How can you go wrong? If you've been waiting to switch from DX to FF this is the camera for you!
Casual photographer: Woohoo, I just got my new D800. I love this FX camera. Sure the megapixel count is super high, and i've had to upgrade my computer to handle the files; and buy memory cards but finally a FF camera. I'm going to check the internet now for my daily dose of photo information.
*Sees D600 info*
FFFFFFFUUUUUUCCCCCKKKKK.
I wonder if this will cause some of the D800 orders to get cancelled?
I wouldn't be surprised...
Anyone who bought the d800 and didn't know why they wanted it is going to feel this way. If someone didn't need 36MP over 12, or 16, or 24, then why did they buy it?
Can't expect Nikon to announce all their cameras 5 years in advance can we? Hmm...
Really this leaves me wanting 1 or 2 D600s to supplement the D800. I'm still really excited about the D400 too because DX on the 70-200 is very useful for weddings AND there are a lot more useful DX 2.8 lens with VR for video than for FX. My hopeful setup for next year's weddings would be 1 D800, 1 D600 and 1 D400 ....I'd be good to go for a long while.
The same from this side:
1 D800 with 24-70 f/2.8
1 D600 with 28 f/1.8
1 D600 with 85 f/1.8
1 D400 with 70-200 f/2.8 II VR
Nikon rocks!!!!
Why mix in the D600? Just to have a lens on each body and not change?
One photographer works d800 and D400 and the second photographer works with d600's.
Ben Chrisman works two 5DMarkII with one 35 f/1.4 and other with 85 f/1.2.
Do you understand?
I always hire 1 or 2 assistants for each weddings so we can split up (one goes with groomsmen, one stays with me for video, etc).
For weddings you def need 2 cameras if for no other reason to have a backup. But once you start working with 2-5 bodies with different lenses on them, it's so much easier to quickly change systems instead of having to awkwardly carry lenses around and change lenses out in the open.
I'd much rather have 2-3 extra DSLRs than one perfect DSLR....Lee and I actually both canceled/returned our D4s for this very reason. In my book having two D800s or even 3 "D600s" for the price of 1 single D4 out ways any advantage the nicer camera might have (plus I don't shoot sports).
I purchased the D800 when it came out, and now that the D600 is rumored to be on the horizon I don't regret my decision at all. The D800 is a better build, the D600 is rather small and doesn't have the ergonomics of the D800. Also, rumor has it that the D600 won't have a Sony EXMOR derived sensor, but a sensor from Aptina. Remains to be seen how it will perform, but I doubt it will be on par with the D800. I think the D800 will still be better, but considering the higher price that is to be expected.
Indeed - had 2 D800's on order.
1 was cancelled by the seller1 still pending from Amazon (UK)Now considering - what should I do
- get it + keep it
- cancel it
- get it + sell on new (I ordered before UK price went up)
- get it + sell almost new when D600 turns up(Would prefer the ISO perfomance over Mpx)
Argh - this waiting game that manufacturers put us through is so aggravating.
any approximated rumored release date?
Since Canon looks to be aiming for September, we can probably assume the same for Nikon. Or sooner.
Photokina 2012 :)
lol wow :-) a dx and an fx, around the same price point... Okayyyyy :-) I'll take a D600 FX BADASS please.
People wanting to buy the
D600: Advanced hobbyists, semi-pros, etc, wanting to upgrade to full frame. Those people that want the benefits of a full-frame camera, but they don't need 9fps, or 36MP, or have the budget to go D4/D800. Look at the pictures of the body, it's small, compact, but doesn't have a PC sync jack, or external control jack -- just like the D7000. Think of it as a full-frame D7000 and it will appeal to the same audience (and it's pricing suggests that is a potential upgrade path).
The D400 is more of a D4/D3 for DX users. If you look at the D200/300 they are a pro style body with weather sealing, with pro style features including fairly fast fps -- lots of connectivity and dedicated buttons over menus. Common uses would be sports and wildlife photographers that need the extra reach of the DX format or already have several DX lenses. Just as photojournalists would be more geared towards a D4 instead of a D800, the same could be said for the D400 vs. D600.
Basically I see the upgrade path as follows:
High ISO, run and gun photographer needing fps and quick focus (sports, wildlife, photojournalism)
Existing DX camera (Think D7000, D300, D200, D90, D80, etc.) --> D400 --- > D4
Portrait/Product/Commerical photographer or the advanced hobbyist
Existing DX camera (Think D3X00/D5x00, D90, D80, etc.) --> D600 ---> D800 ---> and potentially D4x
The D600 would also be a good choice as an upgrade above as the D3X00/D5X00 photographers looking to upgrade may not have tons of DX lenses. They've got a probably got a kit lens, a tele-zoom, and maybe a nifty 50. They could sell the kit lens and tele-zoom with the older body and then keep the 50 for use with the FX camera.
I could see the D400 being fitted with a 70-200 f/2.8 as a second body for someone who shoots with a D4 as a primary using either a 24-70 (for event coverage) or a big zoom (300 f/2.8 or bigger) for sports that doesn't have the budget to have multiple D4 cameras. I know of several pros now that carry a D7000 for backup to their D4.
There is room in the market for an all rounder FX camera (like the D700). The D4 & D800 are specialist cameras. A general practitioner FX camera will be most welcome for people who don't need the speed/über ISO D4 or the huge MP of the D800. Originally I thought the D400 & D600 were going to be the same camera - one general FX update for the D300s. D300s people wanting an upgrade would rather go FX (IMHO). It wouldn't make sense to stay in the "same tier" of cameras when upgrading, we should always be upgrading up to FX (at least the serious amateur/semi-pros will - who the D300s was made for). If you've bought your lenses correctly, buying FX glass the whole way along, there's nothing holding you back from FX land (hence I don't get the proposed D400 specs or price point). People at the highest level of pro-sumer cameras want to go FX, just haven't been able to afford too. With the D600 incarnation, it might be a closer reality! :)
Hmmm... we're seeing D800 and D700 (decreasing) for FX bodies, and D100, D200, D300 (increasing) for DX bodies. Can we expect D500 to be the most epicly awesomest camera?
The d600 seems like the upgrade all of us d300/d300s users have been waiting for; however, if the d400 is truly more expensive there must be some catch. I really want to go full frame but haven't been able to justify the expense of the latest cameras....
Is it sad that I'm looking the other way? That instead of a D7000-II or a D600 or a D400 I'm looking at how awesome the lower end cameras keep getting - with the same chip (D3200) or the same ISO (D5100) and I keep thinking: I should just buy one of those, replace/sell the lenses that don't AF on them (50mm and 70-300mm), and realize that in 10 years the camera will be basically garbage fodder for my kids to play with.
Oh, and I'll save a thousand bucks.
I'm not too shocked. That's not sad... And I'm surprised, too, at how good those are getting. But I've played around with friends' 'lower end Nikons' and just could never go that route. No dual thumb and forefinger dials for shutter speed and ISO? It's all buried in menus... Can barely fit in my hand without feeling I'm going to crush it...not for me.
Real excited for D600
oh my god, - it's a picture camera - remember pictures, those visual clues at what you were doing at the time = most people are using their phones for this now. So unless you're REALLY serious in your creative quests, please get real and save your money for another evolution of cameras.
I am in for one.
You're right, no one would buy an $1,800 D400 over a $1,500 D600....that's why the D600 is going to be more like $1999 (conservatively, prob more like $2199), and the D400 will be $1799.....there's always like $1000 (give or take, sometimes less) between each level of camera....$1500 between the D600 and D800 is a huge gap...and at $1500 for a D600, D800 sales would TANK....
Personally I don't see why the D400 wouldn't be a bit more...there's a lot of people that want a pro camera with the DX reach and a bit larger DOF.
There are still ways the D600 could be cheaper:
-Lower FPS
-No 14bit RAW
Now I understand why Nikon is holding back the D800 supply... perhaps releasing the D800 too soon was a mistake? (still waiting for my D800 over a month later)
By all accounts the D800 was meant to be released earlier - but was delayed due to natural disasters in Japan/Thailand.
Doesn't have some of the new funky features of the D4
Everybody is assuming that D300/D300s owners want to upgrade to FX. I, (and many others, I am sure) am perfectly happy with the D300 and would just want to get the next generation to take advantage of evolutionary improvements (like higher ISO and better video).
So a D400 with a spec as listed here would be highly interesting.
No one seems to have mentioned the big price difference between FX and DX lenses. 17-55 2.8 (DX) is just over 1065GBP, whereas the 24-70(FX) - which is pretty much the same focal range, is 1250GBP. As Nikon increase their DX lens range - which are lighter, and just as sharp as their FX counterparts, they will be selling top lenses for less...Not sure where profit sits in here - but if I were a camera salesman - that would be my pitch "The D400 is a little more expensive in outlay - but the pro lenses are ultimately cheaper" So spend now, save later.
Plus the weight of the big lenses can get a little grueling - again, a big bonus with DX lenses.
Nikon shifted the game massively when they released the D800 - making two top pro bodies very different. Previously we have just had similar sensors in different bodies (Remember how the D700 KILLED D3 sales?) and so marketing strategy is to create different camera, for different people, for different uses.
I love my D800. I love my D700. I would love to own a D4, and will definitely be buying a 600 :) I would not be suprised if the D400 comes in a little more expensive - when bought with a kit lens, it will probably end up being the same price as a 600 - and these cameras are aimed at people buying their first 'big cameras'.
Bah! What's price got to do with it! Some of these people are talking about buying multiple D800 bodies with a D4 as a backup.....just in case. You know...just in case.
It's all so silly. I wonder how many of these photographers have truly gotten the most out of their current gear. Enough to warrant throwing THOUSANDS at a new product...a product they will be dissatisfied with in about another year and half.
"That's part of the fun", they'll say. FUN! That's not fun, but hyper-consumerism to the Nth degree. A sure sign that either people have more money than they know what to do with, or have very little in the common sense department.
The executives at Nikon must be laughing all the way to the bank.
Real pro's like CJ really need backupcamera's for a shoot. They've signed contracts and paid amounts for organising a shoot with 8 or 10 people. Can't afford to get it spoiled by a stupid body or a body that crashed for some reason… Yes, it is a matter of consuming, that is the demand of our world today and yes as part of that commercial photography plays a role in it. We're blinded by images these days showing us all the wanna have and do's and be hip. And showing us landscapes we never ever will see with our own eyes, but we love it and keep us dreaming about a world that is outhere… somewhere to be captured… with a Nikon. It's just a body they sell but it can be you behind it and you'd love to have an FX camera, who doesn't!
Very interesting and silly too !!!!!!!!!!!! You all are fighting with a very good photoshopped photograph of D700 !!!!!! Rumour could be that much silly !!!
Here is the original photograph of D700
Here is the original photograph of D700
RUMORS ARE THAT THEY ARE RUMORS