Nikon D3 FX , D300 DX - 23-08-2007 ?

Although not Canon - here's something interesting:
An upcoming Nikon D3-FX, and D300-FX (4 more days ...)
http://www.google.com …air=ja%7Cen&hl=​en&ie=UTF8

===============
As for body 2 types.

　D3 FX format (full size) 12Mpixel Nikon make CMOS
　　　　At the time of second 9 scene DX crop second 11 scene
　　　　ISO 200~6400 Lo 1 (ISO 100 suitable) Hi 2 (ISO 25600 suitable) setting possibility

　D300 DX format 12Mpixel CMOS
　　　　At the time of second 6 scene battery grip use second 8 scene (there is no crop)
　　　　ISO 200~3200 Lo 1 (ISO 100 suitable) Hi 1 (ISO 6400 suitable) setting possibility

　Also both types as for AF area, 51 point cross 15 points
　Live view possibility. Live view time, contrast AF possibility


　As for lens 5.

　AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm F2.8G
　AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm F2.8G

　AF-S VR Nikkor 400mm F2.8G
　AF-S VR Nikkor 500mm F4G
　AF-S VR Nikkor 600mm F4G
===============

For the original page (who can translate more humanly ?):
http://f2f4d1x.at.webr​y.info/200708/article_​20.html

I'd be very surprised to see a usable ISO 25.6k come from Nikon before it did Canon - that'd shake things up a bit!

But what's even more interesting is the AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm F2.8G ...
If true, than Canon will HAVE the follow suite, with an EF 24-70 f/2.8 IS USM ...

the scary part are the 400, 500, 600 VR lenses. matching canon's playbook!!

Im so happy for Nikon

roli_bark wrote in post #3753267
But what's even more interesting is the AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm F2.8G ...
If true, than Canon will HAVE the follow suite, with an EF 24-70 f/2.8 IS USM ...

What? It doesn't imply that the Nikon will be a VR lens so why would Canon need to answer with an 24-70 IS? I think you misread that post.

If those announments are true, its still not enough to keep me int he Nikon camp. I'm switching from a D200 to a Canon 30D. Noise is a serious concern of mine as well as availability of lenses like the 70-200mm f/4 IS.

I would bet that the D300 comes in at about $2000 also.... just guessing.

jwil wrote in post #3754732
What? It doesn't imply that the Nikon will be a VR lens so why would Canon need to answer with an 24-70 IS? I think you misread that post.

I didn't misread at all.
It's all about competition: If Nikon comes out with a 24-70 F2.8 non-VR, Canon may reply with an IS version of its own, just to have the edge over Nikon.

roli_bark wrote in post #3754985
I didn't misread at all.
It's all about competition: If Nikon comes out with a 24-70 F2.8 non-VR, Canon may reply with an IS version of its own, just to have the edge over Nikon.

Nonsense, if Nikon make a 14mm 2.8 rectlinear lens then will Canon make 14mm 2.8 L IS? lol

can you imagine.... Nikon the new leader in ISO quality.. wouldn't that be something...
ISO 6400, on the D300 would be something i would be interested in seeing in action..

I think this is good news for everyone but the most hardcore fanboys.. Just imagine what the 5D MkII will be like if Canon is pushed by these specs....

I'll be amazed if Nikon can suddenly tool up for, and maintain supply of, 2 new bodies and 5 new lenses. The 18-200 alone was a supply shambles.

I don't buy the ISO claims, and I don't buy the built-in grip for a D300. I'm not entirely sure why this particular rumour is getting the attention it is.

farrukh wrote in post #3755557
Nonsense, if Nikon make a 14mm 2.8 rectlinear lens then will Canon make 14mm 2.8 L IS? lol

Don't know. And you included. All's speculation.

And please refrain from using words like "nonsense" in a Rumors thread.
This is what this sub-Forum is about.

MagicNikon wrote in post #3754842
If those announments are true, its still not enough to keep me int he Nikon camp. I'm switching from a D200 to a Canon 30D. Noise is a serious concern of mine as well as availability of lenses like the 70-200mm f/4 IS.

I would bet that the D300 comes in at about $2000 also.... just guessing.

If your getting a New FIRST Canon, invest in the 40D, not the 30. noise is even less from what Canon specified.

Also, welcome aboard, but I would have changed your user name.

It's a fake - says so on the document itself.