Maps, Directions, and Place Reviews
Vote on template format
Option 1
Option 2
Dslr Camera Classes Video
Placement of D7000
In Nikon's D7000 press release, it says that the D7000 "a model that introduces a new line of mid-class Nikon DX-format digital-SLR cameras.". Should we introduce another class of camera for the template? Or am I interpreting this sentence incorrectly? SC?RECROW 09:28, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
IMHO, no needs to create a new row now. We will see later is it a new line or a successor of D90. Sergey Shandar (talk) 10:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
D300S discontinued?
D300S is listed as discontinued in Nikon Japan's website . I believe it was discontinued in Jan 2012 around the time D700 was discontinued as per screenshot. -ad. (talk) 18:08, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
D300s is still being sold (as per september 2014), so it is not discontinued globaly. In US, it was discontinued in early 2014. (I think). According to rumours, it will be replaced by D9300 sometime. TorKr (talk) 06:05, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I tried to do some more research. There is no doubt that D300S is at the end of its lifecycle. However, it is listed as part of Nikons current DSLR lineup on its global website and is being sold on Amazon UK . To the best of my understanding, D300S is partially discontinued ... :) TorKr (talk) 06:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I noticed that D3X, D3S and D90 is still in Nikons official lineup. However, none of those cameras are being sold anymore... TorKr (talk) 06:44, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Formatting
In the Early models section and below. there is text with green background and underlined text. What does that signify? ---- Gadget850 (Ed) talk 01:34, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- DSLRs are added right: No problem. Only classes are added below: already 3 MILCs. Discuss again later if there are 5 MILC-classes. MILCs use FT1 adaptor: see photozone.de new reviews (english).
- "collapsing the early camera model columns as valuable information will get lost this way": WRONG: 1999 to |2-4|, 2000,2001,2002 from |1|2|3|4| to |1-4|. Tagremover (talk) 10:08, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I support MICL & DSLR being together in this template, as they both fit under the umbrella of "interchangeable lens cameras by Nikon". Mathmo Talk 10:09, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Proposed separate templates for Nikon DSLRs and Nikon MILCs
1 (A)Template:Nikon DSLR cameras:
==See also==
- Nikon MILC cameras
- Nikon 35mm film SLR cameras
- Canon DSLR cameras
- Minolta/Konica Minolta/Sony DSLR cameras
- Sony MILC cameras
- Olympus DSLR cameras
- Pentax DSLR cameras
- Sigma DSLR cameras
- Kodak DSLR cameras
- Fujifilm DSLR cameras
1 (B)Template:Nikon MILC cameras:
==See also==
- Nikon DSLR cameras
- Nikon 35mm film SLR cameras
- Canon DSLR cameras
- Minolta/Konica Minolta/Sony DSLR cameras
- Sony MILC cameras
- Olympus DSLR cameras
- Pentax DSLR cameras
- Sigma DSLR cameras
- Kodak DSLR cameras
- Fujifilm DSLR cameras
--Matthiaspaul (talk) 01:01, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Proposed combined template for Nikon DSLRs and MILCs
2 Template:Nikon DSLR cameras:
Both variants with fully or partial blue "Nikon 1 MILC" field.
3 Template:Nikon DSLR cameras:
Both variants with fully or partial blue "Nikon 1 MILC" field.
==See also==
- Nikon MILC cameras
- Nikon 35mm film SLR cameras
- Canon DSLR cameras
- Minolta/Konica Minolta/Sony DSLR cameras
- Sony MILC cameras
- Olympus DSLR cameras
- Pentax DSLR cameras
- Sigma DSLR cameras
- Kodak DSLR cameras
- Fujifilm DSLR cameras
Here is the voting between 3 proposals, additional variants and decision for the actual variant possible. Decision probably in the second half of February? Tagremover (talk) 09:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Variant 3: Integrates all cameras and allows related, important navigation. Tagremover (talk) 09:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Enabling MiszaBot?
Imho a good idea. Tagremover (talk) 07:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
D600 placement
Anywhere that's not where it's currently placed. A new line above the D7000, a new line under the D800, whatever. But the D600 is in no way a successor to the D300s, which does not have a replacement out yet and is still available for sale. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.229.108.53 (talk) 09:58, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
A navigation template stays a navigation template: IMHO there are NO CLASSIFICATION templates necessary: If someone needs that, better make a classification article or list. There were the same discussions on the introduction of the D3, D700, D3X, D5000 and the D7000: I participated as IP and are TIRED of those discussions. NAVIGATION is the main PURPOSE.
Else: Entry level PROFESSIONAL : Whats that?
Other changes: See above. [7]
Tagremover (talk) 18:12, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
I would suggest the following new format for the navigation. It would be more logical, and not any less good for navigating purpose. The problem with current one is that since D600 clearly is not follower of D300S, the current navigation gives a wrong impression of D600's level (as has already been discussed here). Also, since D600 is basically D7000/D7100 with full frame sensor, it would be logical to link it somehow to D7000 line and keep it below D300S line which is more professional camera line (call it Semi-Professional or Professional Half Body or whatever). In this you version you would right away see that D600 is really advanced camera but not quite professional one.
To show how the navigation would look in the near future, I have added the soon-to-be-released D610 and D5300. Plus I have added D400 which may be released in 2014 when Canon is likely to bring 7D Mark II out. Obviously if new template model would be put live, then those non-existing models should be removed till they do exist.
User:RMJJRM/Nikon Template 1
RMJJRM (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Requested move
Future layout of this template
Thanks everyone for all the hard work on this template. Currently I'm just a lurker that is watchlisting this template so I can learn about new Nikon DSLR models as they get released. I have a couple of old film Nikon SLR cameras and a pile of Nikon goodies, and have been wanting to upgrade to a DSLR at some point.
1) When will you add 2015 to the table? I noticed the text for "D750" doesn't fit properly, so adding 2015 might fix it.
2) What are the plans for this table as more and more years get added? Do tables with numerous years eventually split into more than one table, or just keep adding years in the same table? I'm not asking you to make a decision, but asking what's the norm?
o Sbmeirow o Talk o 00:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I see the need for consistency among the templates. But I also think they need to be rotated 90 degrees. That way, there will be a constant number of columns (six or seven), and the years can be extended down the screen as far as needed. Perhaps this is a topic for the photo project. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:07, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Another thought is to eliminate the quarters of a year. This will buy some time. I know many of them came out in the middle of the year, but just having the year would be good enough for the template. If someone wanted a more exact date, they can click to go to the article. (Right now, the D750 entry is running off the right edge of the template on my screen.) Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:49, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Discuss please
After several reverts, it is time to discuss the proposed change or leave the matter be. Samsara (FA o FP) 01:57, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Just adding a datapoint: in a recent interview with DpReview, Toshiaki Akagi, one of Nikon's department managers, said: "We understand that there is still some demand for a successor to the D300S and all we can say at this moment is that we are studying that demand." This would argue against listing the D600 as a successor of the D300s. -- Edgar.bonet (talk) 20:07, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Seems that there isn't much discussion here. I would have expected the other contributor to the edit war to give his opinion. Anyway, for what it is worth, here is my mine.
All seems to boil down to how the D600 should be considered relative to the D300s: higher-end, lower-end or same class. From what I read, there seems to be a consensus that the D600 is inferior to the D300s in terms of build, controls, AF and speed. Actually the D600 is very similar to the D7000 in these respects, while the D300s is most similar to the D700. On the other hand, the D600 has a superior sensor and better image quality, especially at high ISO. Then it is understandable that there is a lot of disagreement out there about which one is overall "better": a lot of subjectivity is involved in deciding which aspects are more important.
In an attempt to get some objective data, I checked the launch prices. The D600 seems to be ~ 20% above the D300s (2100 v.s. 1800 USD). Not a huge difference, but certainly enough to rule out listing the D600 as lower class than the D300s. Then I would put the D600 either in the same line or on the line above the D300s. I do not have strong feelings either way:
- On the one hand, there is the argument I pointed out before: Nikon acknowledges that the D600 is not a true successor of the D300s. Then the D600 should be listed above the D300s.
- On the other hand, as of today, there is no evidence the D300s will ever have a "true" successor. Rather it seems that Nikon is pushing this category of customers towards full-frame. Also, the price difference is small, and keeping both on the same line would make the table shorter.
I think I would rather keep them in the same line, at least until Nikon releases a D400, if this ever happens. But that's just personal preference, it would be good to hear other voices. -- Edgar.bonet (talk) 11:05, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Do such sources exist? -- Edgar.bonet (talk) 07:39, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Nikon D750
The D750 is the first of its kind in a new line. http://www.nikon.com/news/2014/0912_dslr_01.htm ? MMXX talk 15:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
D7100 replaces ...
According to this, the D7100 replaces the 7000 (of course) and also the 300s. So that kind of juggles up things in the chart. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 06:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
video properties
I think the way that video properties (HD video / Video AF / Uncompressed) is indicated (the underlining) should be changed to something else, probably superscript or subscript notes. The plain link underlining looks exactly the same as "video AF". Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 00:46, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
D5500
The D5500 has been added, but it shows the fourth quarter of 2014, and it wasn't announced until Jan 2015, right? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 03:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
D50 and D40
The D50 article says that it was succeeded by the D40. The D50 was the entry-level model at that time - should it be listed on the same line as the D40? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:42, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
"Upper-entry" becoming "Mid-range"
On May 29, an anonymous editor replaced the Upper-entry header with Mid-range. The edit summary is:
Although the edit could in principle make sense, it creates a duplicate header. And it is not clear what the editor means by ""DSLR, SLT and MILC cameras with HD video" section in Wikipedia". A search for that section title did not reveal anything relevant.
On May 30, I reverted the edit for the second time, while inviting the editor to discuss his/her intent here. A few minutes later, the same edit was re-introduced with the same edit summary by a different IP, with no discussion. I assume it's the same editor. I am, again, inviting the anonymous editor to explain the intent of that edit, and the meaning of ""DSLR, SLT and MILC cameras with HD video" section in Wikipedia".
-- Edgar.bonet (talk) 19:28, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Source of the article : Wikipedia
EmoticonEmoticon