Probable releases from Nikon in 2010

[rohan_iiitc]

Nikon D400
Effective pixels: 13.8 millions, DX sensor completely new design with maximized by increasing the sensitivity of more than 1 EV as “ultra-fast pixel register cache”, which allows to double the frame rate or increase dynamic range, including effective aid noise reduction with natural lodging details.
Image Size: 4550 x 3034 pixels
Continuous high-speed mode: 8 fps, 10 fps with BG, 12 fps with a double-exposure phase detection AF & mirror up 6/sec., 14 fps with BG to double-exposure with the phase detection AF & mirror up 7/sec.
ISO 200 - 6400, Lo-1, Hi 1
Movie - mode: 1920 x 1080 at 24 fps (Full HD)
Autofocus: Multi-CAM 4500 DX 61-point AF, Auto / User Drive dynamic AF-C, and intelligent co-operation with 2200-zónovým 3D Color Matrix meter to achieve great success autofocus.
Screening of additional information across a large area of the viewfinder.
Dual histogram for the double-exposure mode.

The question is, is D400 be the replacement for D90?

Nikon D4
Effective pixels: 15.7 millions, Full-Frame FX sensor. Completely new design with maximized by increasing the sensitivity of more than 1 EV as “ultra-fast pixel register cache”, which allows to double the frame rate or increase dynamic range, including effective aid noise reduction with natural lodging details.
Image Size: 4852 x 3234
Continuous high-speed mode: FX & DX mode 11 fps and 16 fps, mode FX with a double-exposure with the phase detection AF & mirror up 8/sec., DX mode 18 fps with a double-exposure.
FX & DX DR enhanced double-exposure mode: 5 fps for dNEF (new, may be something like Canon’s sRAW) JPEG, and without the composition, 3 fps.
DR enhanced double-exposure mode: Auto, manual setting of time for both the ISO and exposure in “M”, in the “A”, “S” and “P” mode with a semi-double exposure corrections in the range of + -5 EV in the range of 1 s. and 1/8000.
ISO 200 – 6400 (Format dNEF)
ISO 200 - 12800, Lo-1, Hi 2
100% Viewfinder, 0.78x magnification, integrated hledáčková magnifying glass for the DX cropping, Integrated sensor management Nikon CLS.
Movie - mode: 1920 x 1080 at 30 fps (Full HD)
Autofocus: Multi-CAM 4500: 61-point AF, Auto / User Drive dynamic AF-C, intelligent co-operation with 2200-zónovým 3D Color Matrix meter to achieve the elusive success of autofocus, the possibility of combination with contrast-detect AF for specific uses. The possibility of the electronic image projection or additional information to the entire area of a large viewfinder. Dual histogram for the double-exposure mode. Highlite map.

Nikon D4X
Effective pixels: 30.2 millions, FX sensor (Full Frame) completely new design with maximized by increasing the sensitivity of more than 1 EV as “ultra-fast pixel register cache”, which allows to double the frame rate or increase dynamic range, including effective aid noise reduction with natural lodging details.
Image Size: 6736 x 4490
Continuous high-speed mode: FX 6 fps, 10 fps with a double-exposure phase detection AF & mirror up 5/sec., DR enhanced double-exposure mode: Auto, manual setting of time for both the ISO and exposure in “M”, in the “A”, “S” and “P” mode with a semi-double exposure corrections in the range of + -5 EV in the range of 1 s. and 1/8000.
ISO 200 – 6400 Format dNEF
ISO 100 - 6400, Lo-1, Hi 1
Movie - mode: 1920 x 1080 at 30 fps (Full HD)

Note: Both the D4 and D400 have an unexplained “Double Exposure” feature on the list. This, combined with mentions of double histograms in this mode, hints at an in-camera HDR capability. It looks like the cameras will snap two pictures in quick succession and combine them to make one image with a huge exposure latitude. We have seen this in the Pentax K7. This will be very useful.

The oddities here are the video modes. 24p (p for “per” second in this case) is the preferred speed for pros as it matches film. It seems odd, then, the the top end D4 would run at 30fps and the cheaper bodies at 24p.

That the pixel-count has hardly jumped is a good thing, and shows that limiting the D3 and D700 to “just” 12MP hasn’t hurt sales.

Another interesting addition is the promise of “The possibility of the electronic image projection or additional information to the entire area of a large viewfinder”. This would, we presume, act like the frame-blocking of the D3, which crops out the edges of the viewfinder when using a DX lens, or like the overlay of a grid on the viewfinder screen on the same camera.

New Lenses
AF-S Nikkor 14 to 28 mm f/3.5-4.5G ED
AF-S Nikkor 120 to 450 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR
AF-S Nikkor 300 mm f/4G VR
AF-S Nikkor 400 mm f/5.6G VR
AF-S Nikkor 70 to 240 mm f/3.5-4.5G VR
AF-S Nikkor 105 mm f/2G DC
AF-S Nikkor 24 to 85 mm f/4G VR
AF-S DX Nikkor 60 to 95 mm f/2G VR
AF-S DX Nikkor 17-60 mm f/2.8G VR

Compact Camera: Nikon Coolpix P1DX
Compact camera with DX 12.3 MPx sensor.
Lens: 28 to 85 mm, f/3.5-5.6 with speed & stabilization sensors.
2.9-inch LCD for the 920-dot, head-up viewfinder, and internal flash.

ANy views are welcome, if any one knows more on these.

Cheers
Rohan

[OsmosisStudios]

Complete fluff.

All this business about the new sensors is complete BS, as are most of the stats you give. Most of the stats you have listed are either extraordinarily difficult or downright impossible.

The "D400" would be a D300s replacement. The D90 is more likely to be updated this year, and it won't be that big of a change.

As for the lenses...
AF-S 14-28 f/3.5-4.5: Not happening. That's what the 16-35 f/4 VR is for.
AF-S 120-450 f/4.5-5.6 VR: Weird range, so I doubt it. But there have been MANY rumours about an 80-400 VR replacement. Most indicate either a 100-400 or 100-500.
AF-S 300 f/4 VR: A simple addition. I havent heard anything about it, but I could see it happening.
AF-S 400 f/5.6 VR: Nowhere on Nikon's radar right now. It'd be nice though.
AF-S 70-240 f/3.5-4.5 VR: WTF? No.
AF-S 105 f/2 DC: Possible, more likely is a 135 f/2 DC though
AF-S 24-85 f/4 VR: Again, another lens that has had many rumours, but nothing like this. Most indicate a 24-105 f/4 VR
AF-S 60-95 f/2 VR DX: Not happening. Generally seen as impossible or simply not worth it.
AF-S 17-60 f/2.8 VR DX: Again, nothing I've heard of before. I'd more likely see a 16-60 (24-90) instead.

Basically, 90% of your post is complete nonsense. What isn't is a fair bit off the mark and most of the rumors reported on are pretty simple.

[Sime]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Complete fluff.

All this business about the new sensors is complete BS, as are most of the stats you give. Most of the stats you have listed are either extraordinarily difficult or downright impossible.

The "D400" would be a D300s replacement. The D90 is more likely to be updated this year, and it won't be that big of a change.

As for the lenses...
AF-S 14-28 f/3.5-4.5: Not happening. That's what the 16-35 f/4 VR is for.
AF-S 120-450 f/4.5-5.6 VR: Weird range, so I doubt it. But there have been MANY rumours about an 80-400 VR replacement. Most indicate either a 100-400 or 100-500.
AF-S 300 f/4 VR: A simple addition. I havent heard anything about it, but I could see it happening.
AF-S 400 f/5.6 VR: Nowhere on Nikon's radar right now. It'd be nice though.
AF-S 70-240 f/3.5-4.5 VR: WTF? No.
AF-S 105 f/2 DC: Possible, more likely is a 135 f/2 DC though
AF-S 24-85 f/4 VR: Again, another lens that has had many rumours, but nothing like this. Most indicate a 24-105 f/4 VR
AF-S 60-95 f/2 VR DX: Not happening. Generally seen as impossible or simply not worth it.
AF-S 17-60 f/2.8 VR DX: Again, nothing I've heard of before. I'd more likely see a 16-60 (24-90) instead.

Basically, 90% of your post is complete nonsense. What isn't is a fair bit off the mark and most of the rumors reported on are pretty simple.

Dude... chill out, you know this is the internet, right? hehe...

[OsmosisStudios]

That was calm. You don't wanna see me when I'm fired up.

[Sime]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

That was calm. You don't wanna see me when I'm fired up.

you're right, I don't... :-)

[Almond.Butterscotch]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

AF-S 60-95 f/2 VR DX: Not happening. Generally seen as impossible or simply not worth it.

Why not just make an 85 and tell people to use their feet? What's that? DX? Pshh

[OsmosisStudios]

Why not just use the (existing) 85/1.8 or /1.4.

There's absolutely no use for a lens with a 35mm zoom range, f/2 or not.

[Almond.Butterscotch]

Originally Posted by osmosisstudios

why not just use the (existing) 85/1.8 or /1.4.

af-s + vr?

[rohan_iiitc]

Hey hey heys guys,

I just got some writeup over the internet, and then i compiled in one post and posted it so that i can get some views.

OsmosisStudios is agree with your points. These are Buffs.

Thanks all for your replies.

[OsmosisStudios]

Almond.Butterscotch: Soon, according to most rumors. the 85/1.4 is expected to be replaced within the year with an AF-S and, supposedly, VR version.

rohan_iiitc: Where did you get this information?