Maps, Directions, and Place Reviews
Sources
Nikon D40: Entry Level: http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/26/nikons-entry-level-d40-dslr-reviewed/
Nikon D60: Entry Level: http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-9206-9245 Entry Level: http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/8924.html
Nikon D50: Entry Level: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D50/D50A.HTM Entry Level: http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Nikon-D50-Digital-Camera-Review-.htm
Nikon D300: Prosumer: http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3314&review=Nikon+D300
Nikon D200: Prosumer: http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D200-Prosumer-Must-Haves/lm/R258UA5JCH8CNS
Nikon D100: Prosumer: http://photo.net/nikon/d100/preview.html
Nikon D80: Consumer: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D80/D80A.HTM
Nikon D70: Amateur/Consumer: http://www.noendpress.com/pvachier/cameras/nikon_D70.php
Can I stop now? Thank you.. SyBerWoLff 03:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Nikon Camera Classes Video
Consumer and Prosumer
I think the terms "consumer" and "prosumer" are unclear. In reality the distinction between consumer and professional is a false one, since anyone who uses a camera as opposed to being a dealer or a reseller, is a consumer whether they are professional or not.
In the camera magazines that I have read, "prosumer" refers to high spec compact cameras, not a digital SLRs. If you google "Nikon Prosumer" for example you get hits for the Nikon P5000, which is a different class of camera entirely.
I would suggest replacing the terms "consumer" and "prosumer" with "enthusiast" and "mid-range".
--Molar999 04:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082313nikond300.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082312nikond3.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0703/07030602nikond40x.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06080903nikond80withpreview.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021605nikon_d2hs.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04091605nikond2x.asp
Of the above links the ones for the D2Hs and D2Xs called them by a label, but I can't find any Nikon source calling the D40, D60, or D80 anything. Cburnett (talk) 02:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
D100 and D200
in this box tell, D100 n D200 is prosummer, but in above article D100 and D200 is professionals, how? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.129.186.11 (talk o contribs) 05:32, 21 March 2007, UTC.
D40 and D40x
The D40 and D40 are both still being produced, with the 40x being a higher-quality version of the 40. I wanted to modify the template to reflect this, adding a second row to the "enthousiast" row starting from the D40x, but I don't know how to do that. Anyone? -- Yoe 19:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
The D3 and D300 bodies
Nikon has somewhat changed (at least for now) the way in which its high end models are targeted at various market segments, which means that, at least for now, the old system of D2X/D2H/D200 doesn't really apply anymore.
The D3 is very much about high speed, low noise, and *low* pixel density - making it very much a D2H replacement, and nothing like a D2X, with its very high pixel density/resolving ability.
The high-res (densitywise) D300, on the other hand, is a serious step forward from both the D200, and in a way replaces the D2X too - so it could in fact be shown as superseding both models.
On the other hand - if Nikon were to release a full-frame, high pixel density "D3X" (or similar) - then it would fall nicely into the scheme once again. In any case, the D3 certainly cannot be seen, or act as a substitute for the D2X. --Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.74.250 (talk) 11:57, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
D3 as D2H(s) Replacement
The D300 is definitely a D200 replacement as all the features of the D200 are found in or surpassed by the D300. The D300 is not IMO a D2H(s) replacement as it has lower continous drive 6fps (d300) vs 8fps (D2H). I think the D3 is a replacement for D2Hs as everything from the D2Hs is improved or found in the D3 also it can't be called a high resoulution model because Nikon has had 12 megapixel sensor since q2 2004. And since it's a Full Frame i have renamed the category from "professional - High Resoulution & High Speed" to "professional - Full Frame - High Speed" Sorry if my train of thought is not that coherent. --Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.136.26.193 (talk) 16:13, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
I think there needs to be some clarification on what exactly is being debated. I don't understand what either of you want the template to look like. Tejastheory (talk) 03:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Pricing: you yourself seem to think pricing is the be all end all of camera class designation, so here we go. In on June 15th, 1999 Nikon released the D1 for $5,000 USD. Then, a year and a half later, February 5th, 2001 Nikon released the D1H and D1X priced at $4,350 USD / $5,350 USD respectively. As such (and the fact that Nikon had no other digital bodies) the D1h/x clearly replaced the D1. Fast forward to July, 2003. The Nikon D2H List price was... you guessed it: $5,000 USD Does that number sound familiar? Then, on September 16th, 2004 Nikon Released the D2X List price: do I need to write it? -$5,000 USD Then there was the enigma of the D2Hs Which was the only D(single digit) camera to hit $3,500 USD. This is probably because no one would pay more for a 4.1mp sensor. But indeed, the D2Xs Was priced at $4,700 USD I don't need to tell you that the D3 was introduced at, wait for it, $5,000 USD These cameras all clearly share the same price point (if not the exact same price) and there has certainly never been a more expensive line from Nikon. The D700 is much cheaper and its a shocker to me that it finds itself ahead of the D1/2/3 series.
- External design: The D1, D2 and all of their X,S, and H versions all had build in battery grips, the D3 is the only current nikon with that design feature. As with canon, the built-in battery grip is reserved for the "flagship" cameras at the top of the said line. Also, the D(Single-digit) line also includes much more extensive weather sealing and much higher weight than the D700, D300 or any other Nikon. Also, from the D1 to the D3, no pop-up flash is included as it is with all the other models. How do you explain these clear design patterns?
- Nomenclature: D1... D2... hmmmm, I wonder if you can complete the pattern? 1... 2... ah, I know, its somewhere between 300 and 700! or perhaps 3!
D300 as D2x and D2Hs replacement
These categories seem a little silly. The D300 is a DX camera, just like the D2x and the D2Hs. It has a better sensor than either the D2Hs or the D2X. It shoots faster than the D2x and the same as the D2H (8fps). It is modular in that the grip must be added to achieve 8fps, but without the grip it will still do 6fps - faster than the D2x. The D300 autofocus module is improved over both the D2h and D2x. The high iso capability is greater in the D300. The body is professionally sealed against moisture and dust. The grip takes the same style high-capacity battery as the D2x and D2h.
Taking all this into account, the table should really be changed, as it could mislead a photographer into thinking the D300 is less camera than it actually is. Or conversely, the table could suggest that the D2x and D2h are more camera than they actually are.
Here in Canada, Nikon is marketing the D300 as a prosumer camera, but that is a marketing definition. Take a look at www.sportsshooter.com - there are many professional photographers upgrading from a D2h or D2x to a D300. --Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.31.13 (talk) 18:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I still miss the E-series in this timeline? Wich were the first Nikon digital SLR's --Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.83.8.11 (talk) 20:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
The D300 is clearly better than the D2'ish models, that doesn't mean its replacement of the professional D2 series. The D3 is the direct successor of the D2 series. The professional D3 is vastly better than the D300. The D300 is a entry-professional at most, and an awesome prosumer at worst. --Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.43.229 (talk) 05:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Formatting bug
On my browser (Firefox) there's a weird bug where the bottom right-half border on the D3 isn't showing up. Not quite familiar enough with the syntax to fix it. Tejastheory (talk) 18:25, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
An idea for the references
How about we put the references for the category names in <noinclude> tags so that they appear on the template page, but don't clutter up pages where it's transcluded? This way, the references will still be there to discourage edit warring over the category names, but won't take up space on pages for individual camera models. Cburnett, others, what do you think? A reasonable compromise or not? ????xo? (contrib) 03:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Since there were no objections, I've went ahead and made those changes here. If there aren't any other objections, I'll (or some else can) convert the other templates in a few days. Tejastheory (talk) 07:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal?
I notice that syberwolff has requested mediation here: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-03-31 Nikon DSLR cameras
I'm not too familiar with these sorts of things, but I'm wondering if third parties are allowed to contribute to the discussion? Because it would seem to be limiting if a mediation decision was made based on discussion limited to just two people. Tejastheory (talk) 20:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
D700 as mid-range ?
I don't agree with 67.240.23.47 's edit of the template, as the D700 sits between the D3 and the D300, making it a high-range model. Nikon brands it as a professional camera, see: http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25444/D700.html SirDarius (talk) 12:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Every new feature doesn't need a new row!
Seriously people, There should just be 5 or 6 rows: Entry level, Midrange, Semi-pro DX, Semi-pro FX, Professional High speed, Professional, High res. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 04:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Votes
- Support Option 1 See the exhaustive comments above. Price point: D3 is identical to the D1 and D2 series. Nomenclature: 3 follows 2 follow 1. 1... 2... 3... Body design: No pop-up flash, included vertical grip, weather sealing. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 17:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
- These templates are navigational templates. The more details you put in there the less they are about navigation. I entirely agree with the sentiment of #Every new feature doesn't need a new row! above. The more details you put the more contentious they get, especially if you use vague, unclear words like "prosumer". I'd go for option 1 over options 2 but drop the green color as it's ancillary detail that's not needed for navigation. If you want a feature matrix (FX vs. DX) then make Nikon DSLR cameras and go nuts. KISS! Cburnett (talk) 21:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
- The D3 is clearly just an evolutionary step from the D2Xs/Hs It doesn't need it's own row. I like Option 1.(Giligone (talk) 22:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC))
- Another vote for Option 1, more inline with what Nikon mention about their offerings. Plus it does indeed look like the D700 starts a new product line, but not the D3. I think that while confusing, the D3 is just about correctly placed. However if a D3x comes out, then we'll have to make some more edits. redandwhite90 (talk) 14:23, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- I saw this late so I'll vote. Option 2. Why? Because while some of you may see the Nikon D3 as "evolutionary", compared to the D1 and D2 models; and some are mentioning "price points", let's face it: both the D3 and the D700 use a larger mirror box assembly, etc. than the so-called FX models. Option 2, to me, shows that separation. I expect to see many manufacturers going with "full-frame" 35mm size chips (either CMOS or CCD) simply because most of their lens lines support a 24mm x 36mm format, with only a few lenses offering "DX" format. I have a D300 and I've been waiting for a full-frame chip for some time. However, Sony's new flagship model with it's very impressive resolution has me thinking about waiting until 20-24 or more becomes the standard. My prediction is that in a year or two, only the low end DSLR's will have FX sensors. I expect that, in a sense, the long "fight" between 35mm and medium format will be 'won' in the digital arena by the successor models to the film cameras that some of us have been using for years.--MurderWatcher1 (talk) 23:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- I think you mean ""only the low end DSLR's will have DX sensors"". --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 22:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - as an owner of a D100, I don't think this camera was ever High End. It was always below the D1H/D1X options and later on the D2H, so I can't fully support either option. Option 1 is perhaps a little better, as there is a level above High end, called Flagship, while with Option 2, the D300 is High end and the D700 is Mid Range, which seems wrong to me. If Option 2 is adopted I can see us having the same discussion again when the D3H and/or D3X are released. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 22:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
D3X did not replace D2X
The chart gives the impression that the D2X was sold until the D3X was introduced and replaced it as the high resolution flagship. This is not the case. The D3 is as high in resolution as the D2X, with the added advantage of full frame. Besides, the D2X was not manufactured after the D3 was introduced. The D3 was the sole flagship Nikon body from fall '07 to fall '08, and should be listed on both rows for that period. --rogerd (talk) 04:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
You are right. I think this is better. 212.159.240.24 (talk) --Preceding undated comment was added at 10:42, 9 December 2008 (UTC).
D5000 is replacement of what?
- D40
- D60
- both D40 and D60
- between D60 and D90 --Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergey shandar (talk o contribs) 19:00, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
I thought it was put in between the D60 and D90. It certainly does not replace the D40 due to it's price.68.83.12.109 (talk) 11:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
By Matthew Choi: I think it should not be a replacement for D40, and yet its price is set between D60 and D90, and dpreview claimed that it's not a directly replacement for anything, so there is a big chance that it is, in fact, a new product line.
Entry-level Proposal
References:
- "Nikon has unveiled the D5000 upper-entry-level DSLR ...", D60 body only - £399.99, D5000 body only - £ 719.99, D90 body only - £ 849.99, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0904/09041402nikond5000.asp
- Introduction prices: Nikon D40 - $599 (Kit), Nikon D50 - $899 (Kit). http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/
--Sergey Shandar (talk) 19:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
The new D5000 competes in PRICE and TECHNOLOGY with the Canon 450D/500D and this are MIDRANGE SLRs!!!
Thats the main reason. And it has a new name.
So its a NEW CLASS!
TheinfinitelyProlonged (talk) 14:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I would agree on price and technology but new name. The only names left D10, D20, D30 in entry level so that can be reason to change name.--Sergey Shandar (talk) 00:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
They are not midrange DSLRs... because they are not in the middle of that camera company's DSLR range. There are half a dozen terms to refer to DSLR categories: Hobbyist, Enthusiast, Pro-sumer, Consumer, Entry Level, Flagship, Pro, High-End, Mid range, Semi-Pro, Amateur, etc. We are not going to cater to everyones favorite word for midrange DSLRs. If a camera manufacturer has 7 DSLR's on the market at a given time, numbers 2 through 6 are not mid range, maybe number 3, 4 and maybe 5 but certainly not 2 and 7.
The D5000 is, as of now, at the bottom of Nikon's range of DSLR's. THIS ARE entry-level SLRs!!!
-Fcb981(talk:contribs) 23:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Most of this template is hopelessly in violation of WP:VERIFY
This template purports to divide the product line up into categories such as high end, midrange, and so on. From what I can tell, these categorizations are the opinions of the various editors. Is there any verifiable source which states that, a D3X is a flagship model or that a D90 is a midrange? If not, then I don't think we should be making those categorizations ourselves. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
- Consumer
- Semi-professional
- Professional
Well, the Consumer, Semi-Pro, Pro categorization are just the same. The D5000 is definitely entry-level and not mid-range. The market is yet undefined, we can have several options like the D700 and D300 line merging, the D40 and D60 line giving way to the D5000 line... why not simply eliminate these classifications and see? Or maybe we can just divide in Pro-Body (metal magnesium alloy bodies) and Am-Body (polycarbonate ones)? --Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.226.88 (talk) 13:13, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
However, if D5000 is entry-level then Canon EOS 500D is also has to be entry-level then Canon has no mid-range at all :-( --Sergey Shandar (talk) 15:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
D3000, D5000
Just another idea for the template:
--Sergey Shandar (talk) 15:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Have a look my page for the price comparison. --Sergey Shandar (talk) 00:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
According to the price (kit $850), D5000 is a successor for D60 (kit $750), D40 (kit $800) and D50 (kit $900). --Sergey Shandar (talk) 00:30, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Distinguishing bodies without autofocus-motor
Would it be an idea to give bodies without an autofocus-motor a different background color? It limits the lenses you can buy, just as the DX/FX difference does. --Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.85.16.106 (talk) 13:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
What is the color would be if Nikon releases an FX, no autofocus-motor camera? --Sergey Shandar (talk) 03:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Early models
These may be historically relevant but I feel they should be left out of this template. --212.159.240.17 (talk) 13:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Then add them to the left it is a time line isn't it? --212.159.240.18 (talk) 13:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
D40 Discontinued?
I was wondering why it looks like the D40 was discontinued after the first quarter of 2009. It is still for sale and still advertised on Nikon's website. --Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.247.124.209 (talk) 00:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
It is hard to say when it was discontinued. Most of the Nikon web sites shows only Nikon D60 and no D40 (for example: http://nikon.com.au, http://nikon.com, http://www.nikon.co.uk).--Sergey Shandar (talk) 06:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
D3S or D3s?
What is the right name for the cameras D3s, D300s, D70s, D2Hs, D2Xs? --Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergey shandar (talk o contribs) 04:24, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Separate articles for D40x and D70s
D300s, D3s, and D3x all have their own articles. Why can't the D40x and D70s have their own too? --The High Fin Sperm Whale (Talk · Contribs) 00:31, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
inserting a template
can someone tell me HOW to insert a template like this into a page? i'd like to have the same sort of grid for the Nikon SLR page for Sony DV cameras, but can't work how to insert it, even though i have all the data ready! --Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederick Michael Thomas (talk o contribs) 05:57, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
based on what?
Hello, what is the basis of categorization in this table? --BlackKnight (talk) 13:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Comparison_of_Canon_EOS_Digital_Cameras
Anybody interested to make a Nikon table? Find it useful. Wispanow (talk) 17:01, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Removal of Sensor Type Column
The sensor type column in this template provides ambiguous information. Of all the Nikon DSLRs produced only 5 models namely D3X, D2Xs, D3S, D3 and D700 use full-frame sensors all other models use the APS-C sensor. Thus, I would suggest that the entire type column be removed from the template. Additionally the article Comparison of Nikon DSLR Cameras can provide users with more detailed information about the sensor sizes. --JovianEye (talk) 00:56, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Has the D5000 been discontinued, if so is there a reliable source for it?
At the moment it is claimed that it was discontinued in Nov '10. The d5000 article supports this with sources from 2 rumor sites. I can't find any reliable sources for this, and Nikon's site still shows it. Don't understand how to edit this template, if it is wrong!93.96.148.42 (talk) 01:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
D5100 announced 5th april 2012- so why is it shown earlier in table?
Don't know how to change dates in the template, but is currently wrong!93.96.148.42 (talk) 22:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Timeline
What happened to the timeline?? I referred to the timeline A LOT! Why was it removed and replaced with just a table in categories?? Every other major DSLR brand still has the timeline. Tmlim526 (talk) 00:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
D600
Why was this added? There is no reliable information about this camera except some questionnable "leaks" on a rumors forum. BadaBoom (talk) 14:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
MILCs
time is moving: so have we. tried move to Template talk:Nikon DSLR and MILC cameras, but all links in the listed cameras has to be changed: no time now. Guess a bot can do that. Tagremover (talk) 10:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
D600 Classification
Nikon UK categorizes cameras as Professional and Consumer. As per Nikon UK, D600 is a consumer camera. Nikon's Europe product registration site has similar classification --Anish Dosslin 20:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC) -- Preceding unsigned comment added by Anishdosslin (talk o contribs)
- ^ Based on pricing
- ^ Based on pricing
Source of the article : Wikipedia
EmoticonEmoticon