1. *All* SLR prices mean bring your own lens. The consumer-oriented ones also have an option for kit lens included, but thank God it's optional. You might be able to pick this up with a price reduction on the 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 VR. The asterisk is for after rebate.

Unless some hacker put this together and snuck it onto the Nikon site, it's real.

Posted at 6:26AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Ryan

2. Except of course for the half of DSLRs that have a fixed lens. As for the rest...I think the manufactueres tend to think of entry and mid-range SLRs as kits, with an option for just the body. Sure, you can get the Rebel XT without the lens, but the saleman's not going to show you one unless you ask, and he's going to quote you a price for the kit. And that's assuming you go to a photo shop. If you buy your shiny new D200 where most of them are going to be sold--electronics and computer shops--the store may very well only stock the basic kit configuration, and the salesperson almost certainly won't know about it if they do. Even a seach of the websites turns up exactly one configuration for most DSLRs (except for the D50, which comes with the option of 2 kit lenses).

You start moving up into the pro range, things change. I'm not even sure there is a kit for the DX2.

Anyway, the point here isn't about what normally comes or doesn't normally come with DSLRs. The point is that, yes, that's probably the price for the body. This isn't a kit price, no matter what hopeful math might lead some people to assume. Earlier reports of $1299 were just off by about $400.

Posted at 6:26AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Jay Savage

3. I've seen some conflicting reports of whether it includes a new 18-200mm lens. If so, this would be a pretty spectacular deal. Either way, it has me second-guessing my very recent purchase of a D70s. Especially seeing all these new point and shoots that are pushing the 6,7,8 MP barrier. I know this is like every other electronics field, you've just got to buy something good and then put blinders lest you see each subsequent upgrade. What do you think?

Posted at 6:26AM on Dec 19th 2005 by jesse

4. I am having a hard time choosing lense for my D70. I have a Nikon F100 with a set of prime lenses, but that setup doesn't work so well with digital SLR. I don't want to sell F100 yet so basically I am having a prime lense setup for F100, and zoom lense setup for D70.

Posted at 6:26AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Seattle Photographer

5. If it becomes available soon enough, this will dethrone the Canon EOS 20D as the "best" sub-$2000 DSLR (and best sub-$3000 DSLR, for that matter). However, the 20D has been around for over a year and will likely be updated in about six months. The D200 has mostly incremental (but still significant) improvements of the 20D's specs. (My favorite is the 22 NEF frames that can be shot in rapid succession with the appropriate card; quite a bit better than the 6 frames of the 20D.) I expected the successor to the 20D to be a relatively modest improvement, but if not, I wonder if Nikon has been aggressive enough? Another D2H-like fiasco (where the Canon 1D mark II counterpart had just far better specs and came out around the same time) would be a shame.

dpreview has more details, BTW.

Posted at 6:26AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Daveed V.