Barely believable Nikon D10 images surface
By Darren Murph 
posted June 11th 2008 10:19AM
posted June 11th 2008 10:19AM
[Via PhotographyBay]
posted June 11th 2008 10:19AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
For one, it probably wouldn't be full-frame (FX), unless Nikon wanted to effectively invalidate pretty much every camera but it.
This has been the talk of the Nikon community since the D3 (and even before). Many hope for a full-frame camera with no grip, like the 5D. Nikon doesn't have a dog in that fight yet. It won't "invalidate" anything, as long as Nikon gets the feature set right and the marketing department does its job...
And as for the "it's fake because it doesn't have a vertical grip," vertical shutter grips are nice when you need to take portrait-oriented photos, but when you're hiking in to do landscape/nature work, every ounce matters. I imagine this is the group that such a camera would be marketed toward. No, it won't be the pro studio guys or sports guys, but the advanced amateur and even pro landscape guys, I'd wager.
Yep. That's the big question,
Nikon already put most of the pro features found in the D3 into the D300. pro 51-point autofocusing, viewfinder with .95 magnification 100% coverage, 8 fps shooting with MD-D10 grip, etc.
Megapixel-wise the D300 and D3 are pretty identical. The main difference between the D3 and D300 is the full-frame (FX) sensor (and the benefits that go with it) and the fact the D3 has a built in battery grip.
If they make a FX based D300, it pretty much weakens the justification for the $5,000 D3. Also, the fact Sony is bringing out a full-frame 24.8 megapixel 5D competitor called the A-900 this year, its very likely Nikon would use a variation of it (since Sony is their sensor supplier). The rumors have been pointing more towards the D3x, but the question would be what sensor they will be putting into their prosumer FX camera.
Then again, Nikon used to name their grip after the body, for instance the D200 grip used to be called the MB-"D200", but the D300 grip is called the MB-"D10" assuming the same grip would fit on another body, Food for thought.
The D3 barely came out. This is a FAKE
Wouldn't it be called Nikon D400? I saw a picture of the rumored Nikon D400 on Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dominic_kamp/2142736468/in/set-72157605244685895/
Im gonna call Shenanigans on this one. it looks fake to me.
Fake.. sorry.. but the last time Nikon Used that Font for the model badge was on the D100, all Pro series use the outline font for both the alpha and numeric model designation. Also, only PRO models, D2, D3, etc have the model badging on the left (as facing the lens mount) (the D1 series did have the badging on the right, but that was a different font) all pro-sumer or consumer models have the model designation on the right side of the lens mount. Further, all recent pro-sumer and consumer models have an emblem badge and not a screened model badge. Any unit that is professional will also have a built in grip, this unit does not.
Actually, I do note that the D200 and D300 do use that font style, however, again it was used on the other side of the lens mount.. The prosumer and consumer models have the AF illuminator on the left of the lens mount. Plus.. why would Nikon go from D3 to D10 (D4 is the next logical step for a professional body, and D400 would be the prosumer body, again likely with an AF illuminator)
Labrati,
Though you make some good points, this would not be a professional model, any more than the Canon 5D would be considered a professional model. But the line blurs here. Many pros do use the 5D. Shoot,
I know a prominent art photographer in Philadelphia (a friend since the days when GENIE was the Internet for many of us, CompuServe was the expensive alternative and we laughed at people who used AOL or Prodigy) who used Digital Rebels and an 8x10 view camera. So I understand "Pro" is defined as the high-end cameras designed specifically for them. And this kind of camera is not that. It would in fact be the equivalent of the F100 to the F5, or the D200 to the D2X.
At least the guy using Photoshop to fake this understood you need a bigger finder to accommodate the light path of a full frame camera. Not a bad job at all.
But I really would like it to be true!
Actually, the only thing that makes a camera 'pro' or not is how it's used by its owner. If someone uses a pinhole camera to make 80% of their income, then that pinhole camera is a 'pro' camera.
Don't get caught up in marketing. A Canon 1DMKII is no more pro than a Porsche 911.
It doesn't help that the D10, Fx, and Nikon logo themselves are noisy whereas the rest of the camera is pretty clean.
Thing I find most fake is the over-saturated red on the Nikon lateral grip. The big indication that the picture has been over processed.
For the price of a full frame camera, I would think it would at least have a vertical shutter release... I am calling fake.
The D3 has the integrated vertical grip. This would be a competitor to the Canon 5D... full frame sensor in a regular body.
Is that lens mount tiny or the camera huge?
The mount has to be standard F mount. Nikon is never going to give that up.
If it's true, my Facebook status will go from "in a relationship" to "single"...
Where's that EOS 6D when you need it.. sigh
Well, Canon 5D replacement is coming, so a full frame Nikon sloted between the D300 and D3 makes sense.
Hope it's true; the D3 is out of reach for me.
Looks like an altered Nikon F6 35mm SLR to me.
LOL at the fakery!
please! take a look at the perfectly square artifact surrounding the D10.
move along please...
That looks strangely similar to the shape and size of my Canon Digital Rebel XTi.
No, in Canon terms, it should be the body size of the 40D or 5D, not the smaller, cheaper, plasticity Rebel. In Nikon terms, it should be closer to the D300 then the D40/D60.
I don't know what the actual product will look like, or what it will be called, but the Nikon "compact" (D300-sized) full-frame body is the product I'm waiting for. Also, it has to be of D300 build quality, not D80.
You guys are late - nikonrumnors.com posted that 4 days ago...
Come on, guys. The image is a Photoshopped fake. Nikon has VERY tight control over new product releases.
Just be patient.
A
You guys are late - nikonrumors.com posted that 4 days ago...
Your mom's 4 days late. Oh, and so is your sister. Sorry, the drug store was closed.
The words Not likely come to mind!
Nikon's range works as follows:
Dx0 range - D40, D40x, D50, D60, D80 (with D90 anticipated in September)
Dx00 range - D100, D200, D200x, D300 (with rumour of D300X or Hs)
Dx range - D1, D2, D2x, D2Hs, D3 (with D3x or D3Hs almost being a certainty)
There has long been rumour of a bridge between the D300 and D3, but given the main difference is FF support and faster FPS its not likely.
Also D10 would be out of sequence with their numbering system. Canon's 1000D for example , even though a massive number jump from 450D still atleast followed its numeric order (xx0D (now xxx0D), x0D, and xD).
Problem for Nikon is that they really don't have a logical numerical ordering to fit between the D300 and D3.
Also I'm sick of the whole "D" usage. I used to own an old Canon "D10" back in the day, now Nikon wants to release a "D10", also, Canon has a 40D, Nikon a D40, Canon used to have a 300D, and Nikon has a D300. Being that its a digital now lets get rid of the "D" in every name.
Personally I think the new FX camera, full-frames, should have "FX" in their name. Maybe a FX-300 or FX-10, and the APS-C sensors as D or DX.
Actually, it looks very non-sleek to me, but maybe that's because i'm used to sleek Canon SLR's...
-Taylor
Fake.
I recently purchased the Canon SX100 IS which is a very high end consumer grade camera. It's not a DSLR but you wouldn't know it from the picture quality. Even the videos it takes are jaw droppingly good. And it's a steal at $250 from Walmart too.
If Canon can make such a solid product, I almost expect something of this grade to be possible too.
Sure it could be real, but it would be so easy to fake. (i'm sure you'll all disagree with me) but all Nikon cameras pretty much look identical. Same with the canons. And pentax i think, and olympus
. Sony , for right now has been designing different looking cameras (besides the a200,300, 350) so i can at least tell them apart better. For now.
the pattern in the grip handle under the thumbwheel on the left is discontiguous at around 4 o'clock
That's one of the worst mockups I've seen since the fake D300. Nikon is very conservative in their design. I've been using pro nikon equipment for many years and this goes against many of their design principles. Let not forget the fact that an FX format does not fit into nikon's consumer/prosumer business model with all of their DX lenses.
I've heard the rumors and speculation that thye might sqeeze a FX in between the D3 and D300 but this is not it. Nikon has no reason to let something like this leak until sept.
TravisO, hate to break it to you, but the SX100S, first of all, is a bottom-feeder. It's one of Canon's cheapest cameras out there and the build quality is significantly worse than the others, while the zoom is also much slower than units like the S5IS. It takes good pictures, sure, but don't be delusional and think it's "higher-end" by any means, just like I wouldn't think a loaded Toyota Corolla would be high end.
No way is that thing real. Judging from the size of the mirror ff that really was an FX sensor the camera would be gargantuan, thus losing any advantage it might have had over the D3. It certainly would not have a higher pixel count, otherwise it would be a D4.