Nikon D3200 - Early Image / Photo & Price Info

http://www.nikon.com/news/2012/0419_dslr_01.htm Anyone see this yet?

This too:
http://www.dpreview.com/products/...ikon_d3200

Quote from shnitz : I'm not so sure that the D400 will exist. Considering how amazing the D800 is for the price they made it, and in DX crop mode, it's essentially what the D400 would be (besides framerate), I don't think a D400 really has a place in the market, especially with the price that the D700 has been depressed to. I have a D200, and thought I wanted a D400, but seeing what Nikon did with the D800, I'm actually taking a serious look at the D7000. When the D7100 comes, I think I may consider a used D7000 to replace my current camera.

Except that the viewfinder area in DX crop is the same size as the cheapest DX cameras, it's at least a grand more than a D400 would likely cost, and it's too slow for sports and birding which are the two most likely uses of a D400.

Quote from cyrusfox : Yeah well I have a couple of lenses already for the D60, but the body has take a couple spills and the AF on the standard 18-55mm lens is having issues, so the time is right. As for my photo capabilites they are still lacking, but if I was going to blow money on a new nikon today it would still be the D7000 and I would change out my 55-200 lens for the 55-300 lens, I have heard great reviews on it. Someday I'll shoot in raw and do post processing...

The 55-300mm is just the 55-200mm with an extra 100mm tacked onto the end of it. It may be worth it if you're just coming into photography, but if you already have the 55-200mm, it's not worth wasting your money "upgrading" to it. Your logical upgrade, if you want more performance, is the 70-300mm VR. Once you use it, you'll see why.

Quote from AkumaX : 24mp in a crop body...

It's not surprising that it's 24MP in a crop body. This is basically a D3100 with a few small improvements, plus the sensor from a NEX-7. Nikon loves Sony sensors, and this 24MP one is Sony's newest.

Quote from Mako1215 : So is this pretty much a D5100?

No, it isn't pretty much a D5100. Still doesn't have the more advanced features or the tilt screen of the D5100. It's still an intro-level camera, just with more resolution. It takes more than megapixels to make a camera. Otherwise, there wouldn't be a place for the D7000, as the D5100 gives the same image quality.

Quote from Gembarrameda : I read that they have body only? Can anyone confirm?

I highly doubt it. But considering that Nikon historically charges $100 for the 18-55mm lens kit (comparing prices of other Nikon cameras as body-only vs with kit lens), as soon as you get the camera, you can likely sell the kit lens for $100-$120 losing little to no money.

Quote from big mike : Except that the viewfinder area in DX crop is the same size as the cheapest DX cameras, it's at least a grand more than a D400 would likely cost, and it's too slow for sports and birding which are the two most likely uses of a D400.

Seeing that the D7000 directly competes with the other high-end APS cameras today, such as the K-5 and 7D, I don't foresee them likely bringing a D400. The D7000 moved the mid-level APS body that much closer to the D300 level performance. Doesn't have the full-pro buffer or controls, but it's better than the D300 in some ways, worse in others. I could very well see Nikon saying that it's "good enough" for enough shooters that they'll forego the D400. And yes the D800 is more expensive, but given that you can use the DX mode and essentially get a free D7000-level output from the camera, it helps offset it. For example, my 300mm f/4 lens on a D800 can either be used in FX mode, as a 300mm lens, and without switching lenses or bodies, I can go to DX mode and voila, it's now a 450mm-equivalent lens. All with 6fps, which while not blazing fast, is pretty good for most people. If you want better, get yourself a D4.

Is their lineup a perfect answer to everyone? No, but with the current features, I'd say it's close enough for most. A D400 would be nice, and I'd hope that they release one, but with the D700 hovering in the low $2,000's they very well may skip it.

Quote from shnitz : Seeing that the D7000 directly competes with the other high-end APS cameras today, such as the K-5 and 7D, I don't foresee them likely bringing a D400. The D7000 moved the mid-level APS body that much closer to the D300 level performance. Doesn't have the full-pro buffer or controls, but it's better than the D300 in some ways, worse in others. I could very well see Nikon saying that it's "good enough" for enough shooters that they'll forego the D400. And yes the D800 is more expensive, but given that you can use the DX mode and essentially get a free D7000-level output from the camera, it helps offset it. For example, my 300mm f/4 lens on a D800 can either be used in FX mode, as a 300mm lens, and without switching lenses or bodies, I can go to DX mode and voila, it's now a 450mm-equivalent lens. All with 6fps, which while not blazing fast, is pretty good for most people. If you want better, get yourself a D4. Is their lineup a perfect answer to everyone? No, but with the current features, I'd say it's close enough for most. A D400 would be nice, and I'd hope that they release one, but with the D700 hovering in the low $2,000's they very well may skip it.

The D400's price point if it inherited the reins of the D300 series would be closer to 1700 than 2200 where the D700 sits. I've heard a lot of big negatives about the D800 viewfinder in crop mode, using an FX capable lens there's no point in using the DX mode at all, you can just run full frame and crop anywhere in the sensor area to DX quality levels. And as far as I'm concerned the D7k doesn't cut it on buffer, memory type, controls or AF performance to be the new top of the DX heap. Unless Canon also abandons the 7D as a dead end one shot product they'll lose droves of less well heeled hobbyist bird, motorsport, outdoor sports, etc shooters, Canon already has a number of better lenses for that crowd (70-200 non IS and f4 models, 100-400, etc), but Nikon has the technology to EASILY run the table at this point, a D400 would run Canon firmly out of the top seat in pretty much every performance category.

too expensive for entry lvl SLR...sounds to me like bad marketing by Nikon which puts it in direct competition with D5100.