Recently, we've seen the D3300 and the D5300 consumer dSLRs. The D600 was revised and it became the D610. The D4 has become the D4s with useful enhancements, also.
I'm just not sure why the D300s was not replaced or why the D7100 comes up short. Truth be told, the Canon 7D is still hanging in there, and the 70D, while revised, isn't much of a divergence from the 60D.
Without the D400 to replace the D300s, there seems to be a hole in the line that isn't filled by the D610. A few people might have gone up to the D800 or to the older D700, regardless of resolution. I've looked at the D700 and D300s several times but don't see a solution. The Ricoh/Pentax K-3 seems the true successor to the D300/D300s, slight weirdness and all.
I really don't understand where Nikon is going between US$1000 and $2000, or if they're not interested at all. It almost seems as though we should be seeing the D7100 replaced, along with the D800/D800E pair but it doesn't seem that the company is in any hurry.
Is anyone excited about the D4s?
That huge, top ISO sensitivity number from the D4 has been doubled. The new Expeed 4 processor is much faster and you can shoot 11 frames per second vs. 10, without being locked into auto focus or auto exposure settings. After seeing 12 frames per second in burst mode from the Panasonic GH4, it doesn't seem a huge deal, but I'm certain everything is locked down to get 12, versus the 7.2 fps from tracking mode on the GH4.
So, will the D4s be so much better at getting night time football game photos? I won't know because I don't watch NFL or the other pro ball games, and I won't be buying a D4s, but the possibilities certainly get my imagination started.
No comments:
Post a Comment