Topic: Really Enjoying my new Nikon D400 (Read 27367 times)

PhotoEcosse · « **on:** January 14, 2014, 06:17:04 am »

...so to speak.

Having decided, almost a year ago, that I wanted a Nikon DX body to augment my D800 and D800E and give me, as it were, the full kit (as far as bodies are concerned) I put off purchasing until the much-predicted D400 arrived.

Eventually, I gave up waiting and opted for a D7100 instead.

Having used it a for a bit, I have to say that I suspect we will never see a D400. There really would be no point. OK, the D7100 has lots of features that I will probably never use but then, with my FX cameras there are also features - such as movie mode and live view - that I don't use. That's not a problem. What is important is that, in terms of features that do matter to me - such as image quality, AF performance, etc - it is so far ahead of my previous DX model (a D300).

Other bonuses are the fact that it has a magnesium alloy body (rather than polycarbonate) and that it has the same dust- and water- proofing as the D800.

I have to add the caveat that I have used it, so far, almost exclusively with the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII lens but, within that limitation, I can't see that it was worth waiting any longer for a D400. I am surprised, but pleased.

BernardLanguillier · « **Reply #1 on:** January 14, 2014, 08:43:23 pm »

The only reason why a D400 might show up is the frame rate/buffer size I guess.

I have worked with a D7100 and the image quality is indeed remarkable, especially in terms of DR, file processability,...

Cheers,
Bernard

Silver Halide UK · « **Reply #2 on:** January 15, 2014, 11:27:28 am »

Quote from: BernardLanguillier on January 14, 2014, 08:43:23 pm

The only reason why a D400 might show up is the frame rate/buffer size I guess.

I have worked with a D7100 and the image quality is indeed remarkable, especially in terms of DR, file processability,...

Cheers,
Bernard

interesting observation. How does the DR compare with that of your D800? Any significant real life difference?

JonathanRimmel · « **Reply #3 on:** January 15, 2014, 02:20:40 pm »

I'm glad your happy with the D7100.

I still can't bring myself to compromise by getting a D7100. I would miss the pro features of my D300 too much. A strong lens mount, large buffer, higher fps, 10-pin, additional menu and button flexibility, etc.

Going full-frame isn't much of an option either since I would need two to three times the cash for lenses. (a used D700 or D3 would be tempting otherwise)

I hope they bring out a D400 first half of this year. But there appears to be no sign of it coming whatsoever.

PhotoEcosse · « **Reply #4 on:** January 16, 2014, 02:18:40 pm »

Quote from: JonathanRimmel on January 15, 2014, 02:20:40 pm

I

I still can't bring myself to compromise by getting a D7100.

That's why I delayed, Jonathan. But what I am delighted about is that it has turned out not to be a compromise at all - but rather a very significant improvement. I must confess that I laboured under the misapprehension that the D7100 would be less "professional". For example, I thought it would have a polycarbonate body and less weatherproofing than the pro models. But, in fact, it is the same type of construction and proofing as my D800 and D800E. Compared to the D300, it is not so much that it is more "professional" in any sense - merely that it is so much more up-to-date in terms of the technology it employs.

I was prepared to be disappointed but delighted to discover that it is the opposite.

JonathanRimmel · « **Reply #5 on:** January 16, 2014, 02:24:06 pm »

I don't know what type of shooting you do most, so I will ask the following: do you miss the larger buffer? do you miss the 10-pin (I use this for wireless remote)? What about putting big heavy lenses on the D7100? The front doesn't have magnesium alloy.

PhotoEcosse · « **Reply #6 on:** January 16, 2014, 02:25:49 pm »

....by the way, in case you are wondering why a have three dSLR bodies, it is simply that I enjoy the luxury of having three lenses mounted and ready for immediate use.

My three most-used lenses are the Nikkor f/2.8 "Holy Trinity". I normally had the 14-24mm on the D800E and the 24-70mm on the D800. Now I also have the 70-200mm on the D7100 which seems to work really well.

Incidentally, I "wasted" £300 when I bought the D800E. In my photography styles/genres and at my standard output (usually not larger than A3+ prints), I genuinely cannot visually discern any difference in IQ between the D800 and the D800E.

The reason for the three bodies being purchased over a 2-year (almost) period is that, for the past 50 years I have had a rule that my hobbies have to pay for themselves, so I only buy photographic equipment after saving up royalties from my previous output.

PhotoEcosse · « **Reply #7 on:** January 16, 2014, 02:31:54 pm »

Quote from: JonathanRimmel on January 16, 2014, 02:24:06 pm

I don't know what type of shooting you do most, so I will ask the following: do you miss the larger buffer? do you miss the 10-pin (I use this for wireless remote)? What about putting big heavy lenses on the D7100? The front doesn't have magnesium alloy.

Mainly landscapes, wildlife, street, still life and suchlike. The size of the buffer and the frame rate are not issues for me as I don't shoot sport or motorsport very much. Heavy lenses are not an issue as, when using big lenses (even the 70-200mm f/2.8 ) I always carry the assembly by the lens and have the tripod mount on the lens - so it is the weight of the camera body that is more significant than the weight of the lens. Haven't missed the 10-pin yet. (On my D800 and D800E I have 10-pin splitters so that I can use two accessories simulaneously but haven't needed that yet on the D7100). The "normal" accessory socket on the D7100 takes things like wireless remote, GPS, etc., perfectly satisfactorily. It also has the advantage of front and back IR sensors for an IR remote - don't know why Nikon left that out with the D800/E (and my D3s before them).

Theodoros · « **Reply #8 on:** January 16, 2014, 05:00:58 pm »

What is a D400….?

JonathanRimmel · « **Reply #9 on:** January 16, 2014, 06:29:30 pm »

Quote from: PhotoEcosse on January 16, 2014, 02:31:54 pm

The "normal" accessory socket on the D7100 takes things like wireless remote, GPS, etc., perfectly satisfactorily. It also has the advantage of front and back IR sensors for an IR remote - don't know why Nikon left that out with the D800/E (and my D3s before them).

Well then the D7100 may at least be satisfactory for studio and landscape work. Then I would still have my D300 for daytime action & wildlife. But no low-light action cam...

JonathanRimmel · « **Reply #10 on:** January 16, 2014, 06:30:21 pm »

Quote from: T.Dascalos on January 16, 2014, 05:00:58 pm

What is a D400….?

Sarcastic or Serious?

Theodoros · « **Reply #11 on:** January 16, 2014, 06:42:53 pm »

Quote from: JonathanRimmel on January 16, 2014, 06:30:21 pm

Sarcastic or Serious?

Serious… I mean, i know many talk of a future Nikon D400, but what exactly are they talking about? D400 (if it will ever exist) will be an FX camera being labeled with 3-digits and starting with even number, as opposed to DX which are 4-digit and start with odd number, ….just a basic FX model lower than the D6xx line.

MattNQ · « **Reply #12 on:** January 16, 2014, 07:18:26 pm »

he he, when I saw the thread title, I thought you might announce that you have bought a Pentax K3..

Jeff Weir · « **Reply #13 on:** January 16, 2014, 07:52:11 pm »

FWIW I also bought a D7100 and have been very impressed with the results.
In the studio I use a Sinar 54H. Location stuff goes to my Canon 5D MkII. I got tired of lugging the Canon around for personal work so I took a long shot and bought a D7100. Couldn't be happier. Great image quality, light weight, all the bells and whistles I need.

My buddy has a D3 and I couldn't imagine lugging that thing thru the city or the woods. I'd need a back brace in no time!!!!!

PhotoEcosse · « **Reply #14 on:** January 17, 2014, 09:45:22 am »

Quote from: T.Dascalos on January 16, 2014, 06:42:53 pm

Serious… I mean, i know many talk of a future Nikon D400, but what exactly are they talking about? D400 (if it will ever exist) will be an FX camera being labeled with 3-digits and starting with even number, as opposed to DX which are 4-digit and start with odd number, ….just a basic FX model lower than the D6xx line.

You have your analysis of Nikon model numbers a bit mixed up.

Many of us thought that a D400 would be the natural successor to the D300s (which was the successor to the D300, which was the successor to the D200, .....)

D300 and D200 were DX
D700 was FX

But my point was that, having become impatient at waiting for the D400 DX Nikon, I finally caved-in and got a D7100 - and am very pleased to have done so.

Theodoros · « **Reply #15 on:** January 17, 2014, 01:10:46 pm »

Quote from: PhotoEcosse on January 17, 2014, 09:45:22 am

You have your analysis of Nikon model numbers a bit mixed up.

Many of us thought that a D400 would be the natural successor to the D300s (which was the successor to the D300, which was the successor to the D200, .....)

D300 and D200 were DX
D700 was FX

But my point was that, having become impatient at waiting for the D400 DX Nikon, I finally caved-in and got a D7100 - and am very pleased to have done so.

All D300 , D200 & D700 where before D3000 all D3xxx, D5xxx, D7xxx, D6xx, D8xx are after D3000...

Hulyss · « **Reply #16 on:** January 17, 2014, 01:47:21 pm »

Yep, the D3000 was the milestone of the decline of the Empire.

RobSaecker · « **Reply #17 on:** January 17, 2014, 02:05:14 pm »

A quick google couldn’t find anyone talking about a D400 as anything other than a D300 replacement, i.e. a pro-level DX camera. Nikon’s naming conventions are, of course, subject to change. But claims that a D400 will be FX are speculative, at best.

Theodoros · « **Reply #18 on:** January 17, 2014, 02:43:14 pm »

Calling D300's replacement (which in my opinion will never happen) a D400, is even more speculative, since all Nikon replacements in 5 years are are a second digit change… (i.e. d7000 - d7100, d600-d610)… Mind you that all cameras (but the "different" Df) of Nikon after D3000, follow the odd starting number - four digits =DX, even starting number - three digits = FX rule, all 14 of them with no exemption what so ever… At least one could refer to (possible) D300 replacement as a D9000… (that would make some sense). But certainly to expect Nikon as to change their policy is much less reasonable…. Nikon now has the most successful naming policy out of all makers - before D3000 it was a disaster..., they now can:
1. Make clear what is DX and what is FX to a new comer.
2. Attract more people to upgrade.
3. Avoid people confusing a DX user with an FX user.
4. Make generation (tech) advancement more obvious.
5. Create more "prestige" jealousy. (another reason to upgrade)
6. inform more people (people that are not into camera market) of their line.
….and many-many more, surely you don't expect them to through all this away, only by introducing a …D400 now, do you?

PhotoEcosse · « **Reply #19 on:** January 17, 2014, 03:21:53 pm »

Quote from: T.Dascalos on January 17, 2014, 02:43:14 pm

3. Avoid people confusing a DX user with an FX user.

Errmmmm.

I "upgraded" from a D80 to a D300. Then I "upgraded" from a D300 to a D3s. Then I "downgraded" from a D3s to a D800. Then I added a D800E. Then I added a D7100.

So, what would you confuse me with? And why should either I or Nikon care?

Author Topic: Really Enjoying my new Nikon D400 (Read 27367 times)