D810 successor in the pipeline?

[Hugh_3170]

Congratulations on your new D810.

Inverell, and indeed the entire New England region (located in the North of North East of Australia's State of New South Wales) has a lot of interesting scenery, history, and old buildings that are still largely intact.  Inverell  has a lot of old Art Deco stuff.  Getting there and back by country train is no mean achievement!

I recently got a used D810 for a bargain, only 3000 actuations too. Had to go on a 20-hour round trip (23 actually, NSW trains are an abomination ) to a remote town. A shame I didn't stay there for another night. This town is truly beautiful, it's called the Sapphire Village -- Inverell. The sellers were the nicest I've ever met!
............................................................

I still prefer the ergonomics of my D750, that being the deep grip and the flippy screen I always use. I don't think we well get a replacement till early next year, since Nikon usually start their new replacements from the cheaper models.

Anyway, this is a list of things I'd like to see in the D850 or whatever arbitrary number Nikon goes with:
42mp, I honestly don't need anything above 24.
7fps in Ch mode with a D5 battery installed in the grip
x2 XQD cards YES XQD
Ergonomics of the D500/D750
Faster and better AF, allow f8 AF
Flippy Screen
I'd like to see focus peaking too... focus peaking for liveview anyone? 

And some other things that I personally don't care that much about:
4k
wifi+GPS

[chambeshi]

recent synopsis fyi of Nikon and more

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/2017-glass-filling-or-empty/

[Akira]

The first DSLR to be updated in 2017 should be D610 which is essentially D600 released four and a half years ago.  D6X0 model is a main player for the potential Chinese market where a DSLR is considered as status symbol.  Might be announced at CP+ 2017?

The successor of D810 should come next and will followed by a D750 successor.  I don't expect any new DX models this year.  The Nikon 100-year-anniversary model should be a Df successor.

All models should employ the monocoque construction.

The hardware aside, I think Nikon is seriously in need of improving the SnapBridge software.

Allegedly Canon will release a full-frame mirrorless body that has EF mount (its concept is similar to that of Sigma sd Quattro).

[Roland Vink]

I wouldn't be surprised if there is one new DX model this year - an update to the D7200 (probably with Snapbridge etc) This series has been refreshed roughly every two years and the D7200 was launched in Feb 2015 so an update later in 2017 seem reasonable. The "problem" for Nikon is how to separate this model from the D500.

[Akira]

The next DX body to be updated will be D7200 for sure, but the update should be very major.  The construction should be designed from ground up (much like D750).  Considering that D7200 is still an excellent DX body in today's standard, and the need for the high-end DX body has been largely fulfilled by D500, Nikon would take some time to design the D7200 successor.  2017 will be the year of full-frame bodies.

I think the major problem in the DX line is if or how to develop higher-end lenses.

[Roland Vink]

So you think the D7300 will be a bigger update than the D5600 or D3400 were?

Yes the DX lens lineup needs filling out, but that's an old story...

[Akira]

So you think the D7300 will be a bigger update than the D5600 or D3400 were?

Yes, because of the employment of the monocoque construction.  The weight reduction of D5500 compared to D5300 was significant, which would happen in the D7X00 line.  D500 is about 10% lighter than D300S of the almost same size.

[chambeshi]

2017 will be the year of full-frame bodies.

...I think the major problem in the DX line is if or how to develop higher-end lenses.

Agreed! And your diagnosis WRT replacements for D810 etc makes sense together with centenary revision of the Df. All eagerly awaited

...the major problem in the DX line is if or how to develop higher-end lenses.

 Judged by the trend last sampled in 2016, Nikon seems to be investing in FX. Perhaps counter to many opinions here, I'm more than happy to have traded in all my DX models (10-24, 18-200 etc) As of early 2016, I only invest in FX lenses (my Zeiss 15 f2.8 does a more than a superlative job on my D500).

I agree with Thom Hogan that the priority for Nikon is to revise its many FX lenses that are long overdue for upgrades. This will consolidate on the highlights of 2016 > "we only got an incredible D5; an incredible D500; the incredible 19mm f/4 PC-E, 105mm f/1.4, and 70-200mm f/2.8E FL lenses..." and one can add the 300 f4E PF and 200-500 f5.6 Nikkors of 2015

this is one of the best diagnoses i've read in months http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/lens-articles/focal-length/missing-nikkors-2013-editio.html

[aerobat]

It wouldn't take much for Nikon to make DX more attractive to FX users. I'd like to add DX body to complement my FX kit. It would be my small kit for everyday and would also extend the reach of my 300mm PF.
So a small DX 23mm f/2.0 would make me drop the Fuji as it would make more sense to have a compatible camera rather than two systems.
Or Nikon could bring a mirrorless DX system which can use F mount lenses with an adapter and would also support CLS flashes.
If Nikon really develops a APS-C mirrorless system the lack of DX DSLR lenses could be understandable.

[Frank Fremerey]

I'm more than happy to have traded in all my DX models (10-24, 18-200 etc) As of early 2016, I only invest in FX lenses (my Zeiss 15 f2.8 does a more than a superlative job on my D500).

I saw DX as transitional from the beginning and though I used DX-bodies a lot I only once bought a DX-lens and that was as a present to a friend.

If you have a set of FX lenses and bodies already, the acquisition of an additional body like the D500 makes perfect sense though, giving any lens a second "meaning". I love e.g, to shoot portraits with the 1.8/85G mounted on my D500. Now the D500 is as heavy and bulky as a FX body, all weigh roughly 1.4/1.5 Kilos gripped. So the argument of "light travel kit" does not appeal to me. "Light" is defined as "I can take two bodies and the necessary lens set with me and do not get charged overweight on the airport".

2.0/16mm DX would be something I would contemplate buying if the lens was light weight small and high resolution. Currently all wide angle work is done in FX.

[chambeshi]

If you have a set of FX lenses and bodies already, the acquisition of an additional body like the D500 makes perfect sense though, giving any lens a second "meaning".
2.0/16mm DX would be something I would contemplate buying if the lens was light weight small and high resolution. Currently all wide angle work is done in FX.

Absolutely. With the D500 I carry MF wides 20 f4, 20 f3.5 and the 45 f2.8AIP Nikkor with addition of either the 55 f2.8 or 60 AF Micro-Nikkor + 300 f4E PF with TCE14. Often fit the 28-105 AFD Nikkor.
The 18-35 G Nikkor qualifies being light in mass (381 g) This is an attractive option i've yet to try

2.0/16mm DX would be something I would contemplate buying if the lens was light weight small and high resolution.

Agree :-) should be significantly lighter than 16-35 f4G VR ED or the 15 f2.8 Zeiss

[chambeshi]

Another feature in the focus system of forthcoming Nikon DSLRs is to improve the focus indication system. Why not have the indicators light up "in" the focus screen when locked on? This cannot be difficult to modify on the existing AF system of the D5 / D500, surely? Unless the concept is already patent-protected?

And supply the Df upgrade with a split-screen focusing screen, please. An the situation stands, this is an glaring gap in the Nikon inventory. It is inexcusable given the legacy of the F mount with so many MF lenses still in active use

Option to fit a Nikon split-prism Focus screen should be not just a standard feature of the Nikon System, but a flagship benefit in the 21st Century :-) And it will save all the hassles those of us encounter locating and fitting older or 3rd party focus screens.....

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I agree alternative focus screens would be a useful addition and Nikon should attend to this.

I always use continuous AF when using AF and would not find focus beeps or lights useful, but I do not have anything against them if others find them useful. The beep I do not like as it is distracting and brings too much attention to the camera and photographer IMO. Same with autofocus assist lights, red eye reduction etc. An optical indicator of focus would probably be better for most.

[Akira]

2.0/16mm DX would be something I would contemplate buying if the lens was light weight small and high resolution. Currently all wide angle work is done in FX.

Samyang makes the very 2.0/16 for DX, but it is big and heavy even though it is a simple MF lens.  Apparently the smaller format isn't much of a help to make the retro-focus optics smaller, so long as the flange back is long.  Remember the short-lived 4/3 format whose flange back was 38mm.  Nikon could make a DX 2.0/16 much lighter, but not much smaller.  I guess that the D500 and AF-S 16/2.0 combo could be bulkier than the D750 and AF-S 24/1.8 combo.

[Roland Vink]

Early DX cameras still had FX size mirrors, so there was no possibility of making DX lenses with a shorter back-focus, which would also allow the lens to be more compact. I suppose the long back focus was also retained to ensure the lens was more telecentric - digital sensors perform best if the ray angle is close to perpendicular. However I think modern DX now use smaller size reflex mirrors, and DX lenses with enough back-focus to clear a DX-size mirror would be no worse than an FX lens on an FX camera.

DX lenses with a shorter back-focus would of course be incompatible with FX cameras - when the picture is taken the reflex mirror would hit the rear of the lens. Users could be prevented from mounting DX lenses by modifying the mount so they wouldn't fit (in a similar way TCs have an extra tab so they only fit big telephoto lenses). Maybe Nikon thought it would be useful if DX lenses could mount FX cameras in DX mode. I'm not sure how useful this feature is, I suspect most owners of FX cameras rarely use DX lenses.

If DX lenses could be made with a shorter back-focus and the aperture was dropped from f/2 to f/2.8, a DX 16mm lens could easily be made much more compact. Even without a shorter back-focus, it should be possible to make DX primes which are relatively compact if the maximum aperture is not too fast. For example, the DX 16-80/2.8-4 already has a smaller filter size (72mm) than the Samyang 16/2 (77mm), a prime 16/2.8 would be smaller still.