Nikon D90 now up for order at Circuit City

Nikon's still unofficial D90 DSLR may have been pulled from Target's website after making a brief appearance a few days ago, but it looks to be holding steady at Circuit City, where you can now get your pre-order in for the expected price of $1,299.99. As you can see above, the site is also listing the camera with a release date of September 5th, which is only a tad off the mark of some of our earlier tips. There's also no surprises with the specs, although the "real movie-like" video recording mode that piqued our interest yesterday is apparently now officially known simply as an "HD movie mode" -- a step backwards if you ask us.

[Thanks, Chris]

Update: Looks like the game is still afoot! Circuit City has pulled its page too.

[emjay @ Aug 26th 2008 2:59PM]

annnnddd.....GONE.

[The Joker @ Aug 26th 2008 2:55PM]

Already taken down.

[jrflesch @ Aug 26th 2008 3:00PM]

you are sneaky sneaky!

[OneLove @ Aug 26th 2008 4:57PM]

I "Hate" my Yellow Teeth

[jrflesch @ Aug 26th 2008 2:59PM]

first

and...


its down.

[chris @ Aug 26th 2008 3:03PM]

no more D90...wasn't that expected?

[Matt @ Aug 26th 2008 3:08PM]

It's nice that Nikon doesn't make camcorders. This allows them to move full steam ahead into melding HD camcorders and DSLRs. What a coup it would be if they were eventually able to make a DSLR with video better than Sony/Canon camcorders. The only way I could see a DSLR never being better than a camcorder is in zoom range. I don't think a Nikon D90 with a 70-300vr lens would be a slouch when it came to zooming in though.

How would Canon/Sony respond? Do they ditch their consumer camcorder lines? They obviously can't put HD video into their own DSLRs without stepping all over their camcorder sales.

[Temple @ Aug 26th 2008 3:41PM]

The sensor in the D90/D300 is actually a 12MP Sony CMOS sensor. So if a camcorder is made using this sensor it'll likely first come from Sony.

The lenses and sensor is completely different between a DSLR and camcorder. For the prosumer end most sensors are a minuscule 1/3" 3CCD and lenses are like 3.4-20mm etc. The "film-like" probably refers to the large APS-C sensor the D90 uses, with background blur, etc.

It'll be fun to take video with specialty DSLR lenses; macro lenses, fish-eyes, and pan-tilt lenses, etc

[Ace @ Aug 26th 2008 4:43PM]

Matt, you may not be aware that Sony makes the sensors for Nikon's DSLR's (as well as their point-and-shoots...Canon's point-and-shoots too, and other brands).

Canon, Sony, and Panasonic are the only companies making sensors for digicams, in the consumer realm. Nikon lagged behind Canon in image quality for so many years, because they were relying on Sony to produce chips in an area sony had little interest in, while Canon invested billions in R&D and fab plants to build their own. With Nikon's last couple high-end cams, the D3, D300, and D700, Sony for the first time delivered chips with superior noise characteristics to Canon sensors. Don't be fooled by "co-developed by Nikon and Sony" non-sense in brochures, it's all Sony. That's just a Japanese technique for Nikon to save face. The issue for Nikon is that they are a very small company compared to Canon. Canon's primary business is office printers, and they have loads of cash in the bank to pursue breakthroughs in camera tech for the still and video department. Sony does as well, of course, and that is an issue now for Nikon. Why? Because Sony now makes their own DSLR's. Sony mentioned they were going to release a 24MP+ full-frame body in the not-too-distant future. Luckily Nikon and Sony have a good relationship currently, and Nikon should be fine for the next few years. The best part about Nikon being too poor to build their own chips, is that since they were stuck with crap sensors (compares to Canon's), they went over-board trying to make fantastic bodies. The D300 is a superb example of that. For the money, that is one fantastic cam. But, really, it's more for gearheads. Silly stuff like HDMI out and dozens of focus points.

As a photographer, my primary interest is image quality. My first camera was a Pentax K1000, and that had all the features I needed, and most of what I need today. Every DSLR has a manual mode, as well as shutter and aperture priority modes. I picked up a 40D shortly before coming to Japan, because I knew Canon was going to release a cam with higher image quality than the D300 for much less money shortly. Well, that was officially announced yesterday, the Canon 50D. Costco's 90-day return policy is going to work out great for me, and I feel bad for the poor saps not sharp enough to figure out Canon was about to release a 40D replacement (they did this because of pressure from the D300...Nikon having a camera with better image quality, even it it was $600 more, was just not kosher).

In the bigger picture, both Sony and Canon (and Nikon inadvertently), are milking to market with Bayer sensors. You probably also aren't aware that the sensors in current cameras only record in black-and-white (except for Foveon's chip in Sigmas). Canon has several patents on color camera sensors, so we will eventually see "the real deal". But, for now, we're stuck with this bayer-pattern nonsense (with it's moire/AA-filter crud). A 10MP full-color sensor would knock the socks off of the current crop of bayers, and avoid the issues with diffraction we face now, with ever increasing densities. For example, my 40D, with it's 10MP APS sized chip already hits diffraction issue past F8, and that limits my depth of field control. I would like to be able to shoot at F11 or even F16 from time to time, but I know I'll pay a real price in sharpness. But, at 15MP, that limit is going to be even lower. F7? We'll see.

The 50D will be the last cropped-sensor camera I buy. Next will be a good 25MP or so full-frame camera, and then a full-color camera(which I suspect will be common and affordable in about 10 years, so that's a ways off...much more milking to be done). The 4MP Foveon in Sigma's camera's has its merits, but Foveon is a tiny company, and we're not going to see great leaps in full-color sensors until some serious cash is put into it.

Wow, I have gone off on a tangent. Anyway, I assure you, the movie mode in the D90 will be next-to-useless, and just a marketing gimmick (like most tag-line features on DSLRS). Sony is not going to let Nikon hurt it's video market with it's own sensors. On the other hand, since Nikon has put it on the D90, you can bet this feature will show up on other DSLR's. If their is a demand for the feature, that may lead to competition in the quality and utility of it. But, I won't be holding my breath for a DSLR that shoots in HDV, let alone something like AVC-Intra--Panasonic is the only camera maker utilizing that currently, and only on their broadcast gear--(that is intra-frame compression, not AVCHD crap).

The D90 will likely shoot a few minutes of severely compressed 720P footage, that wouldn't hold a candle to the HV30. Sony and Canon have nothing to be concerned about, and again, if there was an issue, Sony would just say, "yeah, not so much" and Nikon would put it's tail between it's legs, and bow down to it's master.

If you enjoy history, and Japanese corporate history in particular, you should read about Canon and Nikon's history. Canon was founded to produce a Japanese Leica, and Nikon was brought on the produce it's lens. Nikon had never made a camera lens, but Canon and Nikon worked close together, and the rest is history. A lot of American's don't understand the relationships Japanese companies have with each other, and think of business around the world as some American-style rivalry. I pissed myself laughing at the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray stuff on these forums. Sony, Toshiba, and IBM developed the CELL chip, the key component of the PS3. Toshiba used Microsoft (Microsoft was the HD-DVD/Blu-ray loser, they were the sucker). Microsoft is run by knuckleheads, and Toshiba easily swindled them. Days after Toshiba announced the HD-DVD nonsense was done, Sony announced they sold Toshiba their Cell factory for a fraction of it's price. So, Toshiba manufactures Sony's chips, as well as those used in Toshiba's laptops (high-end Toshiba laptops now have cell chips in them). Would Sony entrust their arch-rival to produce the most critical component of their PS3? Of course not, because Sony and Toshiba are not arch rivals. They co-developed the Cell, remember?

The story is a bit different with Nikon and Canon, because they are rivals. Sony is gracious intermidiary, supplying both canon and nikon with their point-and-shoot chips. Image Stabilization was co-developed by Canon and Sony. In video cameras, it was first seen in Sony's, of course, and in still cameras in Canon's. In the late 80's, Canon debuted the EOS mount, forever changing still cameras. With this new, huge, electronic mount, Canon was easliy able to develop silent focusing lenses, add image stabilization, etc, as all the tech was in the lens itself, interfacing with the camera electronically. Nikon stuck with their 50's mount, and had a heck of a time figuring out how to make a queit lens, let alone add image stabilization. They eventually added electronic contacts to the mount of course, like canon, but are currently in the messed up state of having a majority of their lenses still requiring a mechanical link. Nikon's cheaper DSLR's no longer have the mechanical link, so most Nikon lenses can not autofocus. If you go to digital photography review, you'll see in reviwing Nikon's D60, for example, they had to manually focus Nikon's 50mm, as they don't even make electronic version. If you want access to Nikon's full range of lenses, you need to spend more money on a higher-end cam. With Canon, the cheapest camera you can get is fully-compatible with every EOS lens ever made. The benefit of Nikon's system is you can use crap lenses from the 50's, if you buy their more expensive cameras. The benefit of Canon's is that all camera buyers can enjoy all their lenses. The other big advantage to Canon's huge EOS mount, is that you can put lenses from any manufacturer on it, including those same crap Nikon lenses from the 50's, or Leica's finest.

Anyway, most consumers can't take a picture, and wouldn't know a good image from a bad one, so it's all pretty irrelevant. They'll buy a cam like the D90, with the kit lens, and never even touch the manual mode, let alone buy a decent lens. It's gear heads that fuel the market, which is great, because it allows the few of us that actually take great pictures to enjoy the benefits.

[phanbouy @ Aug 26th 2008 6:05PM]

sweet baby jesus that's a lot of words

[Adam @ Aug 26th 2008 3:33PM]

Canon rules Nikon Drools....

[Johan S @ Aug 26th 2008 3:58PM]

HD movie mode? That reeks of 720p i guess. I was hoping it would do 1080p.

Or even 1200+ fps in a small area like that Exilim Pro EX-F1.

[Chris K @ Aug 26th 2008 6:36PM]

"A step backwards"!?!? Are you a fool? The eventual integration of video into DSLRs will revolutionize professional photography.

If this rumor is true, this is the Shot Heard Round The World, and will usher in the rapid adoption of video in all DSLR models.

[Don @ Aug 26th 2008 4:33PM]

I dont think it'll catch on... why?
Does photoshop suddenly open video.. dont think so, and we all know Nikon sucks at rendering colors from the camera.

On the positive, paparazzi + super telephoto lens = a world of possibilities

[Solomon Chase @ Aug 28th 2008 11:56PM]

Don... Bad comparison. Photoshop CS3 DOES open video. =)

[elloh7 @ Aug 26th 2008 4:15PM]

I'm very interested to see how the video thing performs, even though I don't necessarily agree with its inclusion on this sort of camera. If its revolutionary and genuinely useful even to those of us who might never use it, props. That makes it even better. If however, as I suspect, its just a gimmick, then... I'll just save up for a used D3 in a few years. :P I'd would have preferred to see this have 10MP and flawless still image quality than (possibly, only possibly!) wasted effort on the video functionality. Time will tell. If its awesome, I'll jump for joy as much as the next gadgetry lover. If not, it'll be what I expected.

[Andrew R @ Aug 27th 2008 2:22PM]

Ace

Normally I would agree with some of what you said but so much of your spiel was with photo elitist crap, canon EOS bias etc - I won't even get started on the 24MP issue or full frame sensor issues - just how many people actually make prints of any form big enough to warrant that resolution - and don't give me cropping arguments 'cause if you are the god like photog you seem to claim you are, you frame the image perfectly to start with and therefore never have to crop!

The ego in that last line is just way too much

Professional or not, the fact that you clearly and aggressively show so much distane for people who are not "gear heads" in my mind makes you no different that the audiophiles who use the same sort of "you just don't know better/enough"

Device convergence is fact, video mode convergence into DSLRs is fact and frankly I'll bet the Canon Nikon or anyone else sells a LOT more lower end gear at far average better ROI than they do high end cameras. That drives extended life cycles for their R&D efforts.

The truth is you won't get to continue to indulge your gear head needs without the volume sales.

[csmity @ Aug 26th 2008 11:19PM]

Kinda was hoping it'd be priced alittle lower. I've got a D40 now and have gotten to the point where its kind of lacking what I want to do. Its an awesome camera though. And would make an excellent travel, under water camera. But as far as the D90 i think an extra few hundred for the D300 is the way to go. Granted I would be just getting a body. the 18-200 lens is pretty much the only one I need.

Actually I wonder what the D90 body will run?? maybe $999-1099?

[bob @ Aug 27th 2008 2:11PM]

I'm pretty sure his "step backwards" comment was a joke.The writer is referring to the fact that they changed the name of the video mode.
It WAS called "real movie-like", now it's called "HD movie mode".

[rBoLt @ Aug 26th 2008 11:53PM]

Nikon are built for losers. end of argument. Canon still owns this industry.

[Eleni Shouftas @ Aug 30th 2008 10:48AM]

I am excited about the d90 and would like to buy it to check out its image quality compared with my D80.

This video mode thing seems interesting but I feel that it might be dissapointing if your looking for Tv quality stuff. From experience ive learned that when you get one do it all piece of equipement, it doesn't do it all quite as well as if it is dedicated to one thing.

I do think that the video mode is great for artists like me who like to play around with interesting effects. Also interested in seeing if it works well enough to use in istockphoto. I would like to see how much better it works than my digital cameras video mode.