What if a Nikon D700 was the size of a D40?

getting full frame into smaller dSLR bodies should be just matter of time. am not buying D700 because of this reason (+ another reason that I dont have need for that caliber body at this time, + third reason: money :) )
 
Super.

I want exposure metering with Ai lenses, Katz Eye screen, manual mode and nothing else would make me happy. 10/12 MP is fine. Whatever my D700 is.

Ain`t gona happen because only guy would buy it. Therefore I will get a D800 or D900 or whatever the next significant change is.

In the mean time I will use the D40 where appropiate.
 
I don't really like the d40 style body, but maybe something more along the lines of a e-420 non-grip style body would be better... like a digital fm2n
 
I have a D40x, I have big hands.
D40x is kinda small for my big hands, D700 is just right.

Kiu
 
I would not be very happy. I find that in reality the D700 with a 50 prime (one of their smaller lenses) is far better than the D90 with a larger lens. It is the lenses I feel that give it the pain in the @ss quality above that of a rangefinder. The D60 and such are simply to small and cramped. Nikon (which I enjoy using) still tries to cram in too many buttons and features. It is all too cramped on a D90 already and that is quite a bit larger.

I'd like either one in the form of the old FM2 bodies. ... and smaller lenses. Come to think of it ... it will never be a good replacement for a rangefinder. Nope. :)
 
Well, put the D700 sensor in an FM2n or a RF body like the S2.

Bob
 
kshapero said:
Now you are talking. My point was if the D700 wasn't so damn big. But everyone is different. Rangefinder and Nikon FM's really fit in my hand just right.
Click to expand...

Me too. My FM2n and M cameras are my favorite 35mm's, in terms of size, ergonomics, and features (like lenses available). If someone would put a good FF sensor into one of these bodies with RAW shooting, full manual control and maybe AE, an ISO adjustment and a small screen with a good histogram, I'd be done.

Oh- and P.S.- Really good optical finders are not negotiable- they are a must for a camera beyond a tiny P&S to be worth any of my money.
 
Yes. Make it minimalist as well please. I could even skip a rear lcd ya know. No menus. Make it raw and only the top lcd to choose iso, white ballance and other essential stuff. Perhaps a small lcd on the back 1/2 inch by 1 1/2 inch to show a live histogram.

But looking at your shots afterwards ... ahh, thats for kids! :D

Yeah make it simple and small, with a few small primes. Hey ... hold on? Isn't that mostly what we have with the M9? So the only problem is expense, right? I'd prefer manufacturers to really surprise me with the cost. Keep the price as is ... and somehow raise my salary! :D
 
That would be a thing of beauty. I also like the FM2n body suggestion, love mine. I have a D300 and without the grip it actually isn't too monstrous, handles well.
 
While we're really dreaming how about a digital Leica CL with the sensor from the M8.2, or similar as the crop factor is livable, manual re-cocking like the Epson and a price of around $2000.00 ... ? :)

Or maybe just anything new from Leica that actually fits my budget! :p
 
kshapero said:
You guys are singing my song
Click to expand...
Indeed, it's my song too!

But, there's a problem that will delay any such camera: The lenses.
Would Nikon make a new line of MF lenses? Not likely. Would they launch any new, small AF primes? Not likely, they will be faster than the current ones. Would anyone want an AF body like the plasticky D40, to use with outdated AF-D primes? Not likely.

:bang:

Edit: The problem here is spelled A U T O F O C U S
"Everyone" wants it, probably except for us in this thread. AF makes everything larger and less nice to handle.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top