When Nikon released the D3 in 2007, and then the D700 a year later with the same sensor, the distinction between the top two cameras in the line up boiled down to size, build, viewfinder coverage, maximum frame rate, and a few other little niggles. It made perfect sense at the time. Up until the D3, Nikon had been lagging behind Canon in low-light performance and they desperately needed to get that capability to a wider set of users and not just keep it reserved to those that bought the flagship. The fastest way to do that was to leverage the inevitable efficiencies which come with volume production of known tech. Hence a D700 that gave the same image quality but in a smaller and slightly less robust package.
Then came the D3S in late 2009, a nominally minor update which brought an amazing full stop of extra low-light performance. If you needed a camera to make still images in the most challenging light environments on the planet, the D3S was the clear option. Many figured that the D3 to D700 pattern would repeat and a D700S would soon be in the works, but months stretched on and there was no D700S to be seen.
I think the lack of a D700S was a hint of things to come.
The common feature needed in both the D3 and D700 replacements was a set of video features that can compete with Canon’s cameras. After that, however, needs diverge. Making some broad generalizations, the kind of users that gravitate towards a D3 are, by and far, those that need (or simply want) a camera that can take both hard knocks and deliver publishable images in any kind of light. The D3S was a clear improvement in that direction from the D3. A D4 had to continue that mission with no compromise.
A D700 user looking for an upgrade, on the other hand, might be the type that would appreciate or even demand a serious step up in resolution. Resolution may not be the only thing that counts, but all other things equal, it certainly doesn’t hurt. And, given that Nikon wasn’t sucking wind in the low-light performance department any more, well, diverging the primary mission for the two lines would make sense from a market perspective as long as they roughly met the bar set by the D700 at equivalent usage sizes.
Today’s announcement of the D800 following the D4 announcement in January is the crystalization of that divergence. The D4 is the clear successor to the throne for the best photojournalism camera on the planet. The D800 looks like it’s destined to compete head-to-head with Canon’s 5D Mark III (or whatever they end up calling it) on the resolution front. The addition of the D800E—which comes sans-antialias filter—is the frosting on the cake for those looking to wring the last bit of resolution out their Nikkor lenses.
Where does that leave a successor to the D3x, the previous Nikon high-resolution champ in a super-rugged body? I may be crazy, but I don’t think there will be one. There certainly isn’t a good place for one barring some big jump in sensor technology that’s not already on the table.
Posted by James Duncan Davidson.