Give us modular SLRs! (D300 + D7000 sensor)

Why can't it be easy?

I probably don't need a D400.
At the same time, both D300s and D7000, while great tools, also both have something left to desire.

So why wait for months or more for a D400 announcement?
- it will take time before it is available,
- it will have some extra features that we don't really need or want to pay for,
- it will, therefore, be more expensive than necessary

Shouldn't it be easy: give us modular DSLR's, Nikon!

I want a D300 with a D7000 sensor in it.
Nothing more or less.
Make it, let's say, $100 more expensive than D300.
I will be happy :)

Wouldn't that be easy enough?
 
Depends on what you call easy enough. OEM prefer to introduce new models every two years or so. This is a good way to keep earnings high since technology is always in evolution and many photographers are not happy if they do not own the last and the best.
I bet it is not that difficult to switch a D300 sensor for the sensor in the D7000 but they do not do that, they prefer to introduce a new camera with a new sensor. Can you imagine for a second a D2X with a D7000 sensor?
Paying $100 more for the sensor you know is not real. Even if they could do that I bet the cost could easily be $300, perhaps more. It can be done, I am sure, but they do not do it.
I am in agreement with you but I am afraid those modular cameras will never exist.

William Rodriguez
Miami, Florida.
 
Asking camera manufacturers to provide modular sensors is like asking restaurants to serve portions at half the size and charge half the cost. It'll never happen because it will reduce the profits.
 
I think there is more to it than that. Putting a D7000 sensor in a D300(s) would require at least a firmware upgrade and probably a new processor in order to take full advantage of it.

But Thom Hogan has been flogging this concept for some time now.
 
You could hire Nikon to make you a "made to order" camera if you like. Problem is, it would cost 10 times more than a D3s. Just saying. :)
 
It'll never happen because it will reduce the profits.
I guess you are spot on.

That's why I said that a D400 will probably have more features then necessary, and "more" price then necessary, if you compare it to my modular concept.

I know how unlikely my idea is to happen.
But I still find it interesting enough to speculate.
 
Cars are already modular in the sense that the engine can be changed. How many people just update their engine. If you think that isn't valid because it's sooo much easier to change a sensor, then you have no idea of what's involved in replacing and aligning a sensor. It is nothing like changing the CPU in your PC. For that matter, what do you think the percentage of users that actually change CPU's or motherboards?
 
Bruce,

If the camera manufacturers were economically motivated to make it possible to change and realign a sensor and change the other aspects of the camera that would make doing so practical, they would make it happen. The whole point is that they are economically disincentivized to develop a camera system that would make doing so practical. Their profits would be reduced, so they won't do it.
 
sir oliver said:
That's why I said that a D400 will probably have more features then necessary, and "more" price then necessary, if you compare it to my modular concept.
Your modular concept would be more expensive, make no mistake. Not to mention D400 will probably have both better body and better sensor than what you're asking for, it'll handle better and it will be cheaper than your modular. Wait for the D400.

sir oliver said:
Shouldn't it be easy: give us modular DSLR's, Nikon!
Why would they do that? Everyone who tried failed and went out of business. Nikon arent stupid to make the same mistake.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bruce,

If the camera manufacturers were economically motivated to make it possible to change and realign a sensor and change the other aspects of the camera that would make doing so practical, they would make it happen. The whole point is that they are economically disincentivized to develop a camera system that would make doing so practical. Their profits would be reduced, so they won't do it.
If it raises the sale price of the camera it makes no sense, because to a first order approximation it is a feature that no one will use.

Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be done.

Nikon is in a different business than Phase I. Nikon makes money from selling lots of units to hobbyists. It's an extremely price sensitive competition with Canon.

You want Nikon to offer modular cameras? Get Canon to start selling them first. Nikon is a much more stogy company than Canon.
 
You want Nikon to offer modular cameras? Get Canon to start selling them first.
As I mentioned, it'll never happen. Canon has absolutely no economic incentive to offer modular systems until Nikon does and vice versa. Both are thrilled that neither of them will develop that strategy.

By the way, cameras are already modular; they have all sorts of interchangeable lenses, flash units, battery cassettes, etc. That came to be only because it was in the manufacturers' financial interests to make them that way.
 

Thorsten

Moderator
Moderator
The sensor module would need to include the needed electronics and compatible image processor, along with a newly designed alignment system to ensure perfect placement. That whole thing would probably cost half as much as an entire camera, if not more, and the camera itself would also go up in price.

But then at least we'd have the sensor swap capability: We could buy a $3000 D3s sensor module so we can put that into our D3. Oh wait, we already have that feature: Put the D3 for sale on our board, add $3000 and buy a D3s.
 
Dell does custom laptops & desktops, you just need to plan. There are other companies like Lenovo who don't do custom. In this today's world of advanced planning & designing products, it should be a fairly simple thing to design a modular camera that can be custom built. They just require a will, a strategy & a viability study.
 
Top