Why is the lower number more powerful than the higher number? Shouldn't be the oposite?
They are now doing the nikon D5, but what will happen after the nikon D9? Nikon D10?
Wouldn't the numbers overlap a previous existing camera?
Or the D500 for DX cameras, the next obvious step would be the nikon D600, but there is already a nikon D600. WTF nikon?
They should have done a system where the higher the number is, the newer the camera is. Then there would be no mistake as the numbers keep rising always.
>>2768974
canon have a very similar naming system
the 1D series are the top of the line pro bodies
5d series are the enthusiast/pro grade ff bodies
6d are consumer grade ff
x0d are advanced consumer
x00d are higher entry level
xx00d are pleb tier
>>2768974
>>2769050
Dx Nikons are flagship pro, full frame and ultra rugged. Aimed at photojournalists, sports and wildlife photographers.
D800 series is for high resolution cameras. Aimed at photographers doing landscaper, architecture, portraits, product, fine art and any other use where high resolution and dynamic range is preferred over continuous burst frame rate and AF accuracy.
D700 series is semi-pro FX like the D800, but competes more with the 5D III type cameras. Emphasis is on having an 'all around camera' with pretty good AF, burst mode, and image quality. These are like lighter, cheaper versions of the flagship Nikon cameras.
D600 series is entry level full frame.
D500/D300 are similar to the 700 series, only DX instead of FX.
D7000 is upper entry level/prosumer DX. These used to be the Dxx series (D70, D90, etc.)
D5000 is one step above the D3000 series, adding a bit more functionality over the latter which is as entry level as you can get.
>what would happen after the D9?
Given that there's about 4 year gaps between those cameras, we've got around two whole decades before a successor to the 'D9' comes out. And who knows what the camera world will look like then? Yeah, nobody does. So it's not a big deal.
>>2769144
everyone will shoot iphone by then.
>>2768974
Fuck I just hope the chinks at Nikon get their shit together. They already have the foundation for a good lineup of bodies but if they fucking release another DF or DPlebthousand, I will be fucking pissed.
Full frame
DX- No compromises bombproof pro body. 20-24 megapickles, fastest AF and burst.
D8XX- 36-42 megapickles. Pro body, ultimate IQ from a Nikon camera. Landscape, portraits, product
D7XX- 24-26 mp. Fast AF and burst, great IQ, Pro features like fucking 1/8000 SS and body construction to a pro level. Basically competing with the 5DIII while coming out slightly cheaper but a better camera.
D6XX- 20-24 mp. Entry level FF. Cheap, just has to be better than the Canon 6D.
Crop
D5XX- Pro grade crop. D5 in a D7XX body without the FF sensor.
D7XXX- High enthusiast crop. For the pleb with money to spend.
D5XXX- Enthusiast crop.
D3XXX- Entry level crop.
Revamp the 35 1.4G, introduce a pro 50 1.4G, design a 70-200 that is better than the Canon.
Improve the QC, ship lens production back to Japan.
There, I just fixed Nikon.
>>2769249
>Here's some tips on how Nikon can be better than Canon!!
>All they have to do is just BE BETTER than them!
WOW
>>2768974
Canon kills Nikon in naming conventions. It's clear what's what level.
The L lenses are another bit of brilliance in customer discrimination with like three exceptions, you know you're getting a weather sealed lens. With Nikon, have fun figuring out what lenses are weather sealed.
>>2769249
>D5XX- Pro grade crop. D5 in a D7XX body without the FF sensor.
Speaking of this, I don't know why they don't just put the top crop guts in a pro body at this point. I don't think anybody's buying these things anymore except for sports pros who use crop bodies as teleconverters. Better to just have the handling match their flagship FF bodies and take the same batteries.
>>2769249
>introduce a pro 50 1.4G
It's called the 58 1.4
>>2768974
This is only a problem if you're completely fucking new to photography, in which case the consumer models stack up quite well - 3000, 5000, 7000. If you're in the market for a D5 or D750 or whatever, you already know exactly what every single model is.
>>2769466
It blows my mind that people would spend 2k on a lens and not take 2 minutes to read a review or comparison of their options. How is this an issue for anyone who does more than 5 seconds of research at best buy?
>>2769602
He is wrong. The D500 is not a D5 in a D7XX body. The D500 have a pro body.
>>2769622
You're forgetting where you are anon. Nikon's numbering system probably triggers many anons' autism.
>>2769651
I know, I meant that it's a "standard" size body instead of a D5-style body with the integrated grip, latching card door, extra LCD for ISO/Qual/WB/etc, standard compatibility with the D5's batteries, and all those other goodies.
>>2769628
This is kind of my stance as well. That aside, it's pretty easy to tell if a Nikon lens is "pro" or not just based on specs and price, but I guess Canon's L line makes it easier for people who just argue about glass on the internet and don't actually buy it.
>>2769628
>It blows my mind that people would spend 2k on a lens and not take 2 minutes to read a review or comparison of their options. How is this an issue for anyone who does more than 5 seconds of research at best buy?
The fuck? Nikon is literally notorious for being pretty damn silent about what has weather sealing, how much it has, and the like.
>>2769691
You're a fucking mongoloid.
Sealed and resistant are the same thing.
Proof is different.
In any event, it's more than one "rubber gasket" and pretty fucking important to some people.
Irrespective of whether they exist on a lens, your preferences in sensor performance or whatever, Nikon fails in basic marketing by making it difficult to discern which of their lenses have these.
>>2769704
>Nikon fails in basic marketing
That is funny as you gobble their shit right up. Resistant is a weaker (marketing) term used to promise that it will hold up in rain, but not actually have to deliver products that will do that.
>>2769721
>That is funny as you gobble their shit right up.
Who says I have? You know, someone with a little critical thinking skills might realize that I came to my opinions through trying to research this. It's not that far, if you're capable of noticing even basic context clues like my rather negative view of them, to conclude that I haven't bought anything from nikon.
>you now pretend to teach me something I already know but in doing so you reveal your ignorance on the topic
So is sealed and other equivalent terms.
weather-proofed is the one that has to meet certain standards.
In any event, the presence of sealing does mitigate fluids getting into places they shouldn't, irrespective of it being covered by warranty. It might just be like a 5% improvement, but that improvement can be the difference between bricking an expensive piece of gear and nothing happening to one.
>>2769736
But nikon lenses with weather resistance does not have any sealing other that the gasket (which only serves to keep dust out of the mirror housing. So you are shit at researching dude.
Maybe you should stop spouting shit about things you don't know anything about okay?
>>2769664
If you want to go full-retard in purchasing "good" nikon lenses, nikon does have the gold ring for its better lenses.
>>2769747
>But nikon lenses with weather resistance does not have any sealing other that the gasket (which only serves to keep dust out of the mirror housing. So you are shit at researching dude.
...the 24-70mm 2.8 has 8.
>>2769249
>if they fucking release another DF or DPlebthousand, I will be fucking pissed
>BAWWW why do companies make products that I personally don't want!!!!
>>2769144
>sports and wildlife photographers using FF
lol
>>2770527
>not using a FF nikon and taking advantage of DX mode+the generally much faster processing hardware found in FX bodies
Also, a lot of pros are using FF now and just cropping. They're definitely the exception and not the rule in things like sports reportage where time is massively important, but in shit like wildlife? There's no point in losing that bit of framing flexibility that cropping later gives you and not taking advantage of the larger sensors' light collection ability.
>>2770531
>larger sensors' light collection ability
Kill yourself, read a book. Flat out pointless.
>>2770536
>thinks that larger individual sensors aren't better at collecting light than smaller individual sensors.
Ok guy.
>>2770539
Ever heard of pixel density, m8?
>>2770549
You mean how you can have a 24MP sensor in a variety of fucking format sizes? You mean how I'm referring to how crop bodies have a higher pixel density which is a tradeoff for smaller individual sensors which makes them inherently worse at gathering light and that's the property I was referring to?
Nope, never heard of it at all.
At least their number system makes more sense than their old name system.
F, FM, FE, S, EM, EL, EG, ETC, IE, whatever the fuck all they had. If you were lucky, some of them had numbers after the letters to tell you how new it was.
