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.
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.
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.