File :-(, x, )
SpicEy Wolf !HoroFUQWJQ
Thoughts on this prohibitively expensive (To most non-pro's) camera.
>> Anonymous
>>130663
What's there to say that hasn't been said already?
>> Anonymous
If I won the lottery, I would buy one.
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
I'm waiting for a smaller / cheaper FX body. I'm sure a lot of us Nikon owners are, as the D3 right now is pretty freaking amazing.
>> Anonymous
>>130817
wait 3 - 5 years.
>> Anonymous
Pretty amazing, but I'm a Canon man. If I had the cash I'd get a 1Ds instead. Nikon ergonomics never agreed with me, and their focus threading is backwards.

Don't know why you're asking this, since the camera came out ages ago.

Ultimately, I also don't really like the full-size body format. The small manual lenses I use look really funny; my 50 1.4 would entirely fit inside the lens on that D3 with room to spare.
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>130819
More like 2 years, Theres no way they would sit on the one FX body for 3 more years. Even if its another pro body, it will kill the resale on the D3 and then I will pick one up used.
>> Jeremo
>>130832

well going by history nikon release the D2h before the D2x so... if you wanna argue that the D3 = the D2h it means the next FX may be a huge megapixel monster.

Obviously this put together with the 24mp 35mm sensor by Sony makes it seem more likely... bad news is obviously this means no real 5D competitor... but as Vince said, it could mean cheaper D3... or not.

Fuck Vince, i might just have to get a D300... i can't wait any fuckin longer.
>> Anonymous
Canon 5D II for $2,000 will make your Nikon a joke. rofl
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>130854
I thought they were going to call it a 7D
Anyway I hope that is released soon, Nikon needs a push into releasing a similar idea body.
>> Anonymous
>>130841
I honestly don't think Nikon will introduce a high-megapixel FX sensor camera. Twelve is more than enough resolution, and compromising DR and noise for 24 megapixels of resolution is a little silly. Anyone who needs that much is shooting with a medium format back already.

On the other hand, I don't think they'll come out with a smaller FX body anytime soon. Maybe eventually, but:

-There's no market incentive to. Loads of people with Nikkor lenses came hard enough when the D3 came out that Nikon is getting most of their market just from exuberance.
-Lots of Canon professionals who don't need the FPS or weatherproofing just use the 5D, and Nikon is avoiding getting their top professional camera undercut like that.
-FX chips are a major manufacturing investment. I wouldn't expect Nikon to even consider another FX body, with more megapixels or smaller size, until they have saturated the market with D3s.
-For no extra R&D for another camera, they're forcing people to choose and buy now either a D3
or a D300. Anyone who needs huge pixel counts switched to Canon at the 1Ds Mk. II long ago, so
no twenty-plus megapixel camera, either.
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>130856
You make me sad...
>> Jeremo
>>130853

Yeah, the D200 and D70s are doing great for me. But i'm gonna give the D200 to the old man since his Sony N-2 is kinda lame. And it'll be a cool father and son thing i can do with him, teaching him about photography and just chillind with him.

My only complaint about the D300 is that it's slightly bigger than the D200, my D200 fits perfectly into a little bag i have with the 17-55 where as the D300 with the 17-55 is just a few mm too big... bah.

>>130856

Whilst i definintely agree a smaller 5D ish body would not be on the cards for a while, i'll disagree with the market comment. If anything, the 5D is showing there is definitnely a demand for a high performance FX camera without the bells and whistles of the top end cams.

The main factor here that i think both of us agree on is time. It's simply not the right moment after introducing two top end cameras. But Nikon will have another FX camera in the works.

If the Sigma DP1 is an early indication, it may mean the pushing of APS-C sensor into compact digis too, what i'm saying is that the market placement of products shifts. Whilst APS-C DSLRs will not doubt still be the vast majority, we'll see ethusiasts such as ourselves demand FX cameras for the obvious improvements they do have over APS-C.

But again, it's a matter of time, what i'm descrbing needs a key ingredient... cheaper manfacturing processes. Unless that happens, the supply side may stagnant... but demand for improved quality will still be there. Of course that doesn not necessarily mean FX, it could mean new and improved APS-C sensors.
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>130888
If you didn't buy a D3, it wasn't really worth it though....
I pondered selling all my DX glass and D200 and D50 and picking up a D3, but I would still need to sink like 2500$ into it...
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>130888
My local store is also like that, it has a couple of D300's on the shelves and a D3 in the box out back. I played with the D300 and drolled all over it. I wanted to play or even just look at the D3 but it was in its unopened box.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>130891

technically, no, it wasn't worth it. but had i been searching for a d300 (like a lot of people) or a d3 (i wish), it definitely would have been. i also remember advising people to check their local shops for those before they were released, and a couple of anon just guffawed and said something like, "if amazon doesn't have it, your camera store definitely won't have it."
>> Anonymous
>>130893

abq fag here.. which shop are you talking about?
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>130908

kurt's.
>> Anonymous
>>130888
Fuck, I work at Ritz and we've got D300 aplenty on our shelves. I've ordered more than a few D3's and they are shipped to the store in under a week.
>> Anonymous
I'm fine with my D80, thank you very much... AH FUCK, WHO AM I KIDDING. WANT!!!!
>> Anonymous
I dunno man, reinvesting in FX glass might just finally tip me over into the insane category. I've shot with the D80 and it has been doing fine with me, and when I upgraded to the D300, I don't think a D3 would save me from the way I'm shooting (...badly...) The D3 is too much of a camera for me on the account of it's price tag alone.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>130854
>>130855
It doesn't have a definite name yet because it's nowhere near an actual product yet. Just speculation. Could be 5D Mk II, could be 7D, could be 3D, could be 5D+, could be 1Ds Amat.

I really hope Canon does release one of 'em soon, though. I wants it bad. And having a reasonably-priced, modern full-frame camera would be a good way to compete with the D3...
>> Anonymous
>>131056
I doubt it will be reasonably priced. The manufacturing cost of full-frame sensors is still high and there's no real competition, so Canon definitely won't miss the chance to bump up the price back to $3000+ like the 5D was originally.
>> Anonymous
you can save over 50% on a EOS 1D if you buy it from amazon
>> Anonymous
uh, why the fuck would they bump the price up to 3,000

the 1ds was released at 8,000, the 1ds II was at 8,000, the 1ds III is at 8,000 now

the 5d is selling steadily at 2,000 now, the new 5d will be at 2,000 as well
>> Anonymous
>>131066
>the 1ds was released at 8,000, the 1ds II was at 8,000, the 1ds III is at 8,000 now

>the 5d was released at 3,200, the 5ds II will be at 3,200

Fixed for better logic.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>131068
Perhaps, but the 5D has been at the $2000 price point for a significant chunk of time now. It's an established Price Point.

It's quite likely that Canon will leave that segment of the market's price where it is rather than bumping it back up, especially given that the 5D (and, presumably, it's theoretical successor) is seen as the "budget" alternative to the 1Ds line, and given that they're facing competition in the full-frame market from the D3. Having an FF camera $1800 cheaper than the competitor's is good. Having an FF camera $3000 cheaper is better.

And while it's true that full frame sensors cost a lot to make, you can still bet your ass that Canon's making a much bigger margin on every 5D sold than it is on every Rebel sold.
>> Anonymous
>>131071
>Perhaps, but the 5D has been at the $2000 price point for a significant chunk of time now. It's an established Price Point.

It's like that with each generation of Rebels, if you disregard that they've been upgraded twice as frequently. The price drops to around $500-600 and stays there, but then Canon makes a new model and bumps it back to $800-900. Of course, the 5D-II will eventually drop to $2000 and probably even lower, but that could take many months (depending on how many megapix0lz it will have, and how much money Canon wants to make on FF fanboys)
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
i'm willing to bet that if canon releases a new full frame camera in the same vein as the 5D, it's going to cost at least a grand more. i'm basing this on my inscrutable logic that canon tends to charge more the further they get along in a product line. that, and the only real competition they have is the D3, which leaves them about $2500-$3000 worth of wiggle room to set the price at whatever they want. People will pay it, too. What choice do they have?

rest assured, however, that those of you who are saving your pennies under the assumption that you'll get the 5D part deux for $2000 in the first year or two after release are completely delusional.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>131087
>>131091
Good points.

Of course, there's also the theory that Canon will never release a 5D successor. Which would make me sad...
>> Anonymous
>>131104
No 5D successor means that Canon will either release a high-end APS-C camera (and directly compete with D300, D2X and E-3) or forfeit the $1200-$4000 price range. Both of these options seem very stupid marketing-wise.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
IF sony bring out the A900 its another full frame camera that the 5D would be competing against. Im sure they can ignore Nikon as much as they want, but if two competitors are doing it it might help poke them in the direction of updating it.

See, sony is useful for something!
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>131224
It's cute how you think Sony matters.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>131257
but ofcourse!

Besides, isnt having 3 major players a good thing for everyone? Sony are outdoing olympus (but then so is minolta) and if the A900 turns out to be half good, sigma are going to have some trouble.

I dont care if you dont like them, but sony have such a massive budget that they could make quite some impact on the whole dslr market. Not saying they _will_ but they could.

oh and
SONY RULES CANON DROOLS
>> sage
>>131280


Sony is to the DSLR market what Xbox/MS was to the game market: They want to take a chunk out of the market and have the funds to do it, even at a loss.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>131283
Well not quite, they bought themselves into the market through minolta, not just out of the blue decided to make a console. They already manufacture P&S and bridge so a SLR was really the next step in the photo world for them.

Them being in the SLR market isnt bad for anyone (unless you're called Pentax, Olympus or Sigma)