I was not.You were asking a general question. I did not see that it was a rhetorical question. I thought you were actually seeking examples.
Then you are missing out on seeing where the incremental changes can come from.I'm looking at bodies with which I have experience. I haven't considered the D50/60/70/80/90/3000/5000/Coolpix cameras as I have no desire to use any of those.
That may well be how it is marketed but the device is essentially a D300 with a D3 sensor. They may well differentiate the product so as not to take sales from other models - or they might market it in a way that does exactly that!The D700 is essentially not a D300 replacement, it's the first model of a completely new product line - prosumer/low end pro body with a full frame sensor.
I'm not saying that it is or isn't. Just that the 'huge improvement' was not one big jump from Nikon.Have you ever used either of the bodies? The D300 is a huge improvement over the D200.....
I don't have a DSLR.Didn't we establish on another thread you shoot old film cameras, and don't shoot any digital? or am I mistaken.
Rather like Kaouthia, by considering them only as 'Professional' 'prosumer' and 'consumer' bodies you seem to be putting in place the marketing devices designed to blinker you to the incremental changes made in camera body development.So ?
This was the time when there WAS a big difference from one generation to another.
Rather like Kaouthia, by considering them only as 'Professional' 'prosumer' and 'consumer' bodies you seem to be putting in place the marketing devices designed to blinker you to the incremental changes made in camera body development.
But that is all about marketing - not the innovation.It is about the generations.
If the new D90 comes out and is better than the D300s in a few ways people will not buy it if they are D300s users (normally) they will wait a short while till the D400 comes out. The D400 might have a few of the extras that debut on another body but the jump is D300s to D400.
No, it's not all about marketing. It's about products aimed at specific audiences.
That might be the case, but that does not make the innovation in your current camera over the last 'monumental'.Voyager you seem to be blinkered by your own argument. I don't treat them that way because they tell me to but because the camera I want is IN that bracket. I don't even care what is in the Dx000 ranges because they are too small and made of plastic. I did not change my D200 to a D300 or D300s because there was not a jump in spec or features that appealed to me. If the D400 comes out and has more features that I find useful I MIGHT change but I will NOT be changing to a D90 range camera because I like the D200/300 range pro bodies.
While I think it is you who really don't get it.I really believe that he does not get it !
While I think it is you who really don't get it.
I said in my first post on this topic "It is currently not in the interest of this economic model to make large jumps in innovation." and you, instead of looking at Nikon innovation, digressed in to looking at changes in the ranges that are marketed.
That might be the case, but that does not make the innovation in your current camera over the last 'monumental'.
When has a replacement ever been much better?
But what happened to other (Nikon) cameras in the meantime?
You are just looking at one model - others in the Nikon range were getting the incremental updates too. Put them together with whatever they did for the D FX series and you think see a 'big' change. But it isn't really.
I was not asking you a question. I was just asking Rob 80386 what replacements would be 'much better' as generally I agreed with his prognosis.
....For instance the D700 is essentially a D300 with the D3 sensor, the D300 was a D200 with updated electronics. The D80 was essentially a D200 in a more 'plastic' body. And so on ad infinitum.
But the minutiae of differences are essentially not important - it is just the range of cameras forever changing and it is the marketing that is designed to make you feel that old kit is worthless and new is better. Even though it is not - otherwise who were the mugs buying all that old tat?
There have been lots of updates and new generations, some accepted with acclaim, some seen for the tweak they really were.
I think that is exactly what I'm suggesting.Safe to say, it seems Voyager is not subscribing to the idea of new models being released and their merits. There have been lots of updates and new generations, some accepted with acclaim, some seen for the tweak they really were.
Anyway, there will always be lots of new models, lots of incremental improvements and the manufacturers will market them in such a way that makes you want to believe that your old kit is worth replacing.I think that is exactly what I'm suggesting.Anyway, there will always be lots of new models, lots of incremental improvements and the manufacturers will market them in such a way that makes you want to believe that your old kit is worth replacing.
The D90 is a good piece of kit and whether it 'worth' getting one now is always the 'how long is a piece of string' question - and obviously will depend rather on what they bring out next and what it's costs.
I don't think it needs replacing yet - unless they want to harmonize model range names. Will it be a D9000? I think history suggests to expect the D300 to become a 16MP(?) D400(?) and the D700 to be made into a competitor to the Canon 5D MkII (perhaps with the sensor from the D3x?) before there is any need for an update for the D90.
But I do wonder how much the global recession has altered the release of new kit - and Nikon is well behind Canon with the adoption of video...
Well, I would expect an 'incremental' update on the big sensor too, wouldn't you?The D700 with a D3x sensor would be a different camera though as the D3x sensor is RUBBISH at high ISO and pretty much a specialist product.
I agree for if you are considering purely stills photographic use - but the 5D MkII and 7D are cleaning up in professional DV production and Nikon are losing market share to these two big time as the D90 isn't really up to it.The D700 really does not need a replacement nor does the D90 and neither of them will be replaced this year![]()
I think there has to be a 'pro' DSLR video coming and I'd do it with the 'next' D300 body if I were Nikon with the D700 replacement doing video as well later. Unless they plan to take a leaf out of Panasonic's book with their AG-AF100 and make a specific video camera to take on Red/Panasonic/Sony/Arri.....The D3000's incremental upgrade is likely to come (as has been stated elsewhere D3100) and from the information I have there will be another camera BUT the D90, D300s, D3, D3x and D700 will not be replaced![]()
Well, I would expect an 'incremental' update on the big sensor too, wouldn't you?
I agree for if you are considering purely stills photographic use - but the 5D MkII and 7D are cleaning up in professional DV production and Nikon are losing market share to these two big time as the D90 isn't really up to it.
I think there has to be a 'pro' DSLR video coming and I'd do it with the 'next' D300 body if I were Nikon with the D700 replacement doing video as well later. Unless they plan to take a leaf out of Panasonic's book with their AG-AF100 and make a specific video camera to take on Red/Panasonic/Sony/Arri.....
As much as i'm enjoying reading the posts on this. I'm not going to lie, i'm learning alot about history of nikon camera's on this thread.
I've ordered my D90 18-105 + 35mm + Battery Grip.
Thanks for the advice guys![]()
No, I'm considering what Nikon might well be bothered about. Losing any market share to Canon is not something they will want to read about in the boardroom.I would expect a D90s and D700s early next year but neither of them is falling behind against the Canon equivalents unless you are talking about video (as you appear).
Well, my wife who works in film and TV, bought a Nikon for her photography! But is regularly working with the Canons on adverts and pop video shoots.So changing the software etc and creating S variants would make sense especially as they already have a D3s but the D700 is still taking customers from Canon.
Oh no, they've just launched the D90x - £399 with 24px, free grip, FF, video, 256000 ISO and a free dish washer.
No, I'm considering what Nikon might well be bothered about. Losing any market share to Canon is not something they will want to read about in the boardroom.
Well, my wife who works in film and TV, bought a Nikon for her photography! But is regularly working with the Canons on adverts and pop video shoots.![]()
I'm stating that I know that there are no plans to replace the D90, D700 or D300s this year. Might be another camera though![]()
My info was something slightly different but nikon can always change their minds
Oh no, they've just launched the D90x - £399 with 24px, free grip, FF, video, 256000 ISO and a free dish washer.

Nikon can also feed misinformation to the general public to keep their plans secret.![]()
whats the point in telling people you know something if you can't tell them what it is or how you know?
OHHHH !!!! is the dish washer red ? if not I'm not going to get it !![]()
![]()

so essentially we've got an unknown source, and an unknown prediction that might change
i just personally hate the whole cat and dog game that predictions follow, if you've got something to say then say it if you're not allowed to then why not keep it to yourself?
this isn't a personal attack on you cowasaki btw just my little bleat about something that irritates me![]()
whats the point in telling people you know something if you can't tell them what it is or how you know?
my thoughts exactly , school playground stuff !
I can't tell you who the source is.
Well, I was told that they're bringing out a D3s replacement at a D5000 pricepoint..
Can't tell ya who said it though.![]()