# Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600



## Astro (May 24, 2012)

i want this .. i want such a canon camera!! 

http://fstoppers.com/new-rumor-good-news-for-the-nikon-d600




> The Goods:
> 
> – 24.7MP Full-Frame Sensor — Could it be more perfect?
> – 5fps, 2 SD card slots
> ...


----------



## Kingnog (May 24, 2012)

This is a rumor...you might not see a Nikon like that either.


----------



## Chewy734 (May 24, 2012)

Kingnog said:


> This is a rumor...you might not see a Nikon like that either.



I bet you that the rumor is pretty close to being true, and it'll ship before the 1D X is shipped in mass quantities to the general public.


----------



## AndysRollei (May 24, 2012)

Kingnog said:


> This is a rumor...you might not see a Nikon like that either.



There were rumors of the 36MP D800 back in September and October (maybe even earlier), and everybody called BS.

And as far as I can tell, rumors about Canon, Nikon, Leica or any other camera maker have pretty much been right, or not too far off. 

Andy


----------



## hyles (May 24, 2012)

5DII in not mutch more expensive, quite similar spec. And you don't have to wait to get it.
I think 5DII will shortly be less expensive, becoming entry level FF for a few month, till a new cheaper body will be relased.
Diego


----------



## drjlo (May 24, 2012)

In all honesty, since fewer people actual swap brands than imagined, the D600 (if true as spec'd) will eat mostly into other Nikon sales, especially D800 and D3X. I know Nikon shooters who do not want 36 MP and are waiting for a lower MP full frame body.


----------



## cliffwang (May 24, 2012)

hyles said:


> 5DII in not mutch more expensive, quite similar spec.


Similar specs? Are you serious?

– 24.7MP Full-Frame Sensor — Could it be more perfect?
– 5fps, 2 SD card slots
– Will likely be weather sealed
– 39 AF Points

I wish there is a easy way to sell all my Canon stuff and switch to Nikon. I know that's most likely not going to happen. So disappointed with Canon.


----------



## awinphoto (May 24, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> hyles said:
> 
> 
> > 5DII in not mutch more expensive, quite similar spec.
> ...



Go for it... no ones holding you back


----------



## Kahuna (May 24, 2012)

Astro said:


> i want this .. i want such a canon camera!!
> 
> http://fstoppers.com/new-rumor-good-news-for-the-nikon-d600
> 
> ...


----------



## Marsu42 (May 25, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> I wish there is a easy way to sell all my Canon stuff and switch to Nikon. I know that's most likely not going to happen. So disappointed with Canon.



The specs are only rumors, but even if only half of it is true Canon has to do something.

However, it's important to differentiate between things Canon can and cannot do. They cannot compete with Sony's sensor tech. However, they can release a ff body at $2000 that is actually usable and has a better af than the 5d2. I'd wish you'd start selling your gear and let Canon know about it, because that's the only way to make them listen. Let's see how much the 440rt flash will cost. $200 like the 430ex2 or $400?



awinphoto said:


> Go for it... no ones holding you back



Of course this is the message of the day in a Canon enthusiast forum, if people aren't prepared to pay $3500 for an up-to date camera body, it's their own fault. But seriously, if there aren't any hidden drawbacks and the price would be indeed around $1500, Canon is toast in the mid-range segment, and rightly so.

The 5d2 with its af isn't comparable, though it runs magic lantern which is the reason I got a Canon dslr in the first place. I'm holding back any further Canon purchases until the very moment I really need them to see what Canon does next.


----------



## cliffwang (May 25, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Go for it... no ones holding you back
> ...


I used to be a big fan of Canon camera. Recently I actually have stopped my Canon upgrade after I see 3.5K 5D3 and 2.3K 24-70mm MK2. I might really switch to Nikon if Canon still tries to make more money from its royal customer.
To awinphoto:
We all want both Canon and Nikon make better and cheaper cameras for us. Don't be so childish.


----------



## llcanon (May 25, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > awinphoto said:
> ...



I am OK with a 3.5K 5D3. It's absolutely amazing. A 2.3K 24-70 is a little too much. Actually it does not appear that you have invested a lot on Canon's glass. Those amazing lenses have very good resale values. Maybe it's time to switch to D800. Or you can give the 5d3 a try first. It's amazing.


----------



## stevenrrmanir (May 25, 2012)

llcanon said:


> cliffwang said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



spoken like a true fanboy!

so, you are saying the D600 with those specs at under $1500 is NOT worth, but the Canon 5D MKIII at more than double the price, $3500 is worth it?


----------



## stevenrrmanir (May 25, 2012)

hyles said:


> 5DII in not mutch more expensive, quite similar spec. And you don't have to wait to get it.
> I think 5DII will shortly be less expensive, becoming entry level FF for a few month, till a new cheaper body will be relased.
> Diego



5D MKII = 5 year old tech, why bother with something that old for the same price?


----------



## llcanon (May 25, 2012)

stevenrrmanir said:


> llcanon said:
> 
> 
> > cliffwang said:
> ...



LOL.... Man, you just hate this camera or Canon. 3.5k is very well worth! Have you used one? If not, I suggest you do. If you have and felt Canon robbed you, return it. A rumored 1.5K for rumored specs is an amazing dream. I wish it come true...


----------



## stevenrrmanir (May 25, 2012)

I am now officially selling my Canon gear. I will be writing Canon a letter (via mail) and let them know that I have been waiting since 2008 for a sub $2000 body worth upgrading to. 
They have been dragging their feet with incremental upgrades and substantial price hikes.

Enough is enough! I am taking my money elsewhere!


----------



## daniemare (May 25, 2012)

drjlo said:


> In all honesty, since fewer people actual swap brands than imagined, the D600 (if true as spec'd) will eat mostly into other Nikon sales, especially D800 and D3X. I know Nikon shooters who do not want 36 MP and are waiting for a lower MP full frame body.



I do not know about this. I have seen many polls on many photo websites where most people indicate that they have between 1 & 2 lenses. With an entry level FF conceivably targeted at the Crop upgrader, these 1-2 lenses are most likely EFS in any case. So an upgrade to FF means new lenses to most people, so there isn't really "swapping systems" and a cheap Nikon might just steal a lot of Canonites as well



hyles said:


> 5DII in not mutch more expensive, quite similar spec. And you don't have to wait to get it.
> I think 5DII will shortly be less expensive, becoming entry level FF for a few month, till a new cheaper body will be relased.
> Diego



Why, since the 5DIII, do so many people see a 3-4 year old camera to be Canon's answer to the entry level FF market. And really, it is in no way similarly specced to the rumoured Nikon

I for one would appreciate a rebel FF. Only Canon I would upgrade to new - the rest is kijiji for me


----------



## pdirestajr (May 25, 2012)

Bodies come and go. Canon glass is great.


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

stevenrrmanir said:


> llcanon said:
> 
> 
> > cliffwang said:
> ...



spoken like a true fanboy!


----------



## V8Beast (May 25, 2012)

If the rumored specs prove true and the D600 sells for $1,500, I will be very impressed. In the meantime, I'm holding out hope for a $1,500 Hasselblad ;D


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> If the rumored specs prove true and the D600 sells for $1,500, I will be very impressed. In the meantime, I'm holding out hope for a $1,500 Hasselblad ;D



And I am holding out for a mint 427 AC Cobra replica for $1500 and Ford will be toast


----------



## nicku (May 25, 2012)

If the rumor is true a 24MP FF with those specs well under $2000 i will strongly consider switching to Nikon ( despite the fact i will loose a lot of money switching the lens).


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

nicku said:


> If the rumor is true a 24MP FF with those specs well under $2000 i will strongly consider switching to Nikon ( despite the fact i will loose a lot of money switching the lens).



I love the mindset where Nikon rumours get people to start switching when the known upgrade from Canon hasn't been anounced

Are people in such a hurry to switch that they cant wait?


----------



## TAR (May 25, 2012)

If D600 is true then i think canon is pretty f..ed ...they stuck with 22 MP..i dont see any new FF camera for 1500 ..only thing they can reduce the 5d2 price to 1500..i don't see any new replacement of 5d2 ..even if they come with lower MP new FF for 1500 still D600 going to be a killer camera for the price.. 




briansquibb said:


> nicku said:
> 
> 
> > If the rumor is true a 24MP FF with those specs well under $2000 i will strongly consider switching to Nikon ( despite the fact i will loose a lot of money switching the lens).
> ...


----------



## cliffwang (May 25, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> nicku said:
> 
> 
> > If the rumor is true a 24MP FF with those specs well under $2000 i will strongly consider switching to Nikon ( despite the fact i will loose a lot of money switching the lens).
> ...



People are getting disappointed when D800 and 5D3 released. 5D3 is overpriced and looks D800 is better than 5D3 from many reviews. If Canon is just want to make money from its existing customers, Canon will see many of its customer switch to Nikon. I am one of the Canon users considering to switch to Nikon. I am just waiting to see how Canon response to Nikon D600. 39 AF points are already good enough for me. I don't really need 61 AF points. I have not problem to sell my 24-70mm because I don't really like it anyway. However, I might miss my 70-200mm MK2 if I really switch to Nikon.

Here is my true reason. I want to switch Nikon is not because Nikon makes better cameras. I want to switch to Nikon because Canon disappoints me. I feel Canon want to take advantage from its existing customers(at least me) I know many PROs have too many Canon lenses, so that will be very difficult to switch Nikon. However, Canon will see Nikon gets many of its non-PRO users. Two of 5D2 owners in my company(one is me) are really considering to switch to Nikon. We recently are doing our homework for Nikon lenses. Canon have better wake up before many of its customers switch to Nikon.


----------



## nicku (May 25, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> nicku said:
> 
> 
> > If the rumor is true a 24MP FF with those specs well under $2000 i will strongly consider switching to Nikon ( despite the fact i will loose a lot of money switching the lens).
> ...



First of all i make a living out of photography; If the rumors are true and Canon will do nothing about it than i will do what is the best for my business (regardless the fact that i use Canons cameras for about 10 years and i love Canon DSLR's). I don't afford (yet) flagship cameras like 1DS mk3, 1DX or Nikon D3X, so i will do what is the best for me and my business.

PS. i said that i will consider,....


----------



## AvTvM (May 25, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> People are getting disappointed when D800 and 5D3 released. 5D3 is overpriced and looks D800 is better than 5D3 from many reviews. If Canon is just want to make money from its existing customers, Canon will see many of its customer switch to Nikon. I am one of the Canon users considering to switch to Nikon
> ...
> Here is my true reason. I want to switch Nikon is not because Nikon makes better cameras. I want to switch to Nikon because Canon disappoints me. I feel Canon want to take advantage from its existing customers (at least me) I know many PROs have too many Canon lenses, so that will be very difficult to switch Nikon. However, Canon will see Nikon gets many of its non-PRO users.
> ...



+1 to that!

I have been a Canon non-pro user ever since my first DSLR [350D/Rebel XT] to my current 7D and this is exactly, where I stand now. 

Nikon has scored big time with the D800. The 5D3 is not bad, but essentially only what the 5D2 should have been from the start (adequate AF-system). Sensor-wise its a minimal improvement. And it gets blown out of the water by the D800 not only in terms of resolution but more importantly to me, in DR at the most used lower ISOs. There is no doubt whatsoever that the 5D 3 is way overpriced while it outta be less expensive than a D800. 

If Nikon now doubles that up with a D600 at around 1.5k and if its sensor also creams the 5D3 - which I fully expect - than Canon will indeed "be toast" in the all-important non-pro, photo-enthusiast segment of the market. That is us, the guys who buy by far the largest share of higher-end, high-margin lenses and speedlites, as well as future cameras. 

Especially "FF upgraders" coming from Canon APS-C with mainly EF-lenses, that they need to sell anyway, WILL be switching to Nikon in large numbers, as soon as a good, affordable D600 comes out. And while Nikon glass was generally somewhat more expensive than comparable Canon glass up until about 4 years ago, it has turned the other way round by now after many rounds of massive Canon price hikes.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 25, 2012)

stevenrrmanir said:


> so, you are saying the D600 with those specs at under $1500 is NOT worth, but the Canon 5D MKIII at more than double the price, $3500 is worth it?



The "worth it" discussion is pointless, because worth doesn't only concern if the camera fits one's requirements, but also simply how the financial background is. However, I recently asked myself if Canon didn't mess up the other way around: The could have sold the 5d3 at $4000 and most people would have still bought it!


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

I have no problem with people moving to Nikon. However I do think that the constant putting down of Canon to justify moving to Nikon with so called 'facts' to justify their move is not appropriate on a Canon Rumours forum. I dont logon to this forum to join in with speculation/rumours about Nikon kit.

You dont hear me critisicing Canon, Nikon or any of the other manufacturers. I have a lot of old kit which one might say is ready for replacement (from a technology point of view). 

I dont say that the 5DIII is overpriced - that is a purely subjective point of view.

I dont say that the D800 is a great camera and the 5DIII is rubbish because again that is a purely subjective point of view

I cannot even say that I will upgrade 'to get the best' because I am nowhere near achieving the potential from my existing kit (even though I could fancy the latest and greatist and upgrade)

Older technologies still deliver, and deliver cheaply. My 1Ds3 is now worth about the same as a new 5DII. I would consider the 1DS3 an upgrade from a 5DII - _*for my photographic needs*_. In fact I did upgrade my 5DII to the 1DS3 when I heard the 5DIII specification - _*because it met my needs better*_. When making the decision it was made entirely on the basis of the offering from Canon. I am not angry or disappointed with Canon because the 5DIII did not meet my needs. If none of the offerings met my needs I would have had 3 options:

1. Not upgrading - the 5DII gave high IQ images, so from that point of view I didn't *need* to upgrade. I did loads of weddings and christenings with it without a problem

2. Wait to see if anything else was coming along - the existing kit still gave the same good IQ

3. See if any other manufacturers offerings met my needs. Unlike most, I have bought most of my kit used so I would not 'lose' a lot of money on the existing kit. Obviously moving manufacturer is a *lot* more than buying a new camera. 

It would have been sad to move away from Canon because I have nearly 20 year experience with them - but to feel angy or disappointed with them - definitely not. And I wouldn't vent my anger against them on a Canon Forum either as they have given me a good ride for 20 years. Switching camps is one thing, abusing the other camp is another.

I have 3 cameras and a bunch of lens that are outdated but they are upto anything I would like to do.

I wonder whether sometimes people upgrade because they believe that it is the kit which is as fault rather than their ability. I bought the best kit I could afford and then started working on getting the best images and I know I haven't got there yet - I wish sometimes other people in my position would focus on improving their photographic skills rather than moan about their kit and say how the latest will improve their photos - when in fact after upgrading they just churn out the same old photos they did on their old kit - and then vent their anger at the manufacturers about the poor kit.

The 7D 'soft focus' issue was 90% user error IMHO. I have 'fixed' so many 7D's which were 'rubbish' - the 7D I have at the moment I got cheap because it 'had the problem'. It is a cracking little camera, spot on AF and decent IQ. Yet Canon got so much stick because of this. This is another case of mass hysteria - one or two people got a faulty AF unit - and vented their anger long and loud on the forums so that suddenly all the useless owners thought they had the same problem and they vented their anger on the forums until it sprialled nearly out of control. Shades of the 5DIII 'light leak' methinks.

Bottom line is: 

If you dont like the offering dont buy it
If you dont like the offering it isn't the manufacturers fault
If enough people dont like the offerings then the manufacturers will offer something else or go bust


----------



## Astro (May 25, 2012)

hyles said:


> 5DII in not mutch more expensive, quite similar spec. And you don't have to wait to get it.
> I think 5DII will shortly be less expensive, becoming entry level FF for a few month, till a new cheaper body will be relased.
> Diego



this D600 is a NEW camera.

given the latest sensor performance from sony/nikon i guess this will beat the 5D MK2 sensor.
not to mention the AF.

so im not very tempted to buy a 4 year old camera over the D600.


----------



## Astro (May 25, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> If the rumored specs prove true and the D600 sells for $1,500, I will be very impressed. In the meantime, I'm holding out hope for a $1,500 Hasselblad ;D



well hassy reduced price last week.
a 8000$ drop (60MP H4D-60 ) are not that bad.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 25, 2012)

Astro said:


> so im not very tempted to buy a 4 year old camera over the D600.



... unless you want it to run magic lantern with its killer features for video and very convenient addons for still shots. So getting an older body is not the worst decision in every case.


----------



## pdirestajr (May 25, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I have no problem with people moving to Nikon. However I do think that the constant putting down of Canon to justify moving to Nikon with so called 'facts' to justify their move is not appropriate on a Canon Rumours forum. I dont logon to this forum to join in with speculation/rumours about Nikon kit.
> 
> You dont hear me critisicing Canon, Nikon or any of the other manufacturers. I have a lot of old kit which one might say is ready for replacement (from a technology point of view).
> 
> ...



+100

I think a lot of the complainers are more into the toys, tech, comparing specs & reading charts. They need the higher ISO IQ and improved dynamic range to photograph the back of their lens cap and brick walls.

It's a shame how this forum has degraded so quickly, it used to be a place to share in a positive way.


----------



## Mike Miami (May 25, 2012)

Nikon and Canon both have different strategies for making money.

Nikons new strategy is more bodies on the streets of the world = more $$ through lens and accessories sales
Canons new strategy is to increase prices with minimal R/D = more $$

I like Nikons way of thinking!!!


----------



## pdirestajr (May 25, 2012)

I still see a 10-1 difference in Canon to Nikon with people carrying DSLRs around NYC.

Nikon is being aggressive because they NEED to win back some of the market Canon dominates.

Canon is continuing to evolve their brand as the world evolves to a more multi-media driven place. The EOS brand now includes cinema cameras. I think it's fair to say, Canon & Nikon are evolving in different ways. Neither is right or wrong.

Choose to tools that best suits your needs. It's doesn't have to always be a fanboy battle.


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> Choose to tools that best suits your needs. It's doesn't have to always be a fanboy battle.



+10


----------



## awinphoto (May 25, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I have no problem with people moving to Nikon. However I do think that the constant putting down of Canon to justify moving to Nikon with so called 'facts' to justify their move is not appropriate on a Canon Rumours forum. I dont logon to this forum to join in with speculation/rumours about Nikon kit.
> ...



Couldn't agree more


----------



## awinphoto (May 25, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> stevenrrmanir said:
> 
> 
> > llcanon said:
> ...



Marsu, you're missing the point. It's not that i'm being a canon enthusiast or fanboy or any other name you wish to bestow on me. I'm also not saying its anyones fault for not being able to afford the camera. Heck, at the initial release, I didn't have the extra grand needed to make the purchase, but I worked hard, shot a few more big jobs, got the money and now it's mine. Is the 5d3 overpriced? I suppose you could say that. Is the 1dx overpriced? Hell yeah. Is the 1dx and 5d3 worth every penny? If you do this for a living, yes, if not, then only you can answer. I dont begrudge anyone who wants to buy a 1d series, a 5d series, or heck, anyone to move over to nikon and visa versa. it is what it is. But to post crying like a crybaby "whaaaa the camera of my dreams is out of my price range and budget and i'm so disappointed that i may jump to nikon"... who cares? Frankly after reading this forum for the last few months I'm sickened by some of the gripes... The LCD light leak.. the 5d2 had it, 40D had it, and yet NO ONE GRIPED until this camera... Now people are griping about the black AF points in the VF... it was in the 7d and granted the 19 AF were slightly bigger and spread out compared to the clustered 61 points, but I cant recall a time where I ever lost a shot because I couldn't tell or know where the AF points were... Heck, even the user manual says, depending on the mode and case scenario you have it set at, the camera will track your subject outside of the AF points should it move outside... All this whining and griping about old old issues that never seemed to affect people with older cameras just seems ridiculous to me. To gripe about the camera being more money than nikons is as ridiculous as well. It's like a guy wanting to buy a new ford f250 griping that the Dodge ram is a few thousand cheaper... Buy it, dont buy it, switch, or wait for rebates and save up in the interim. Those are your 4 options. I'm not trying to sound elitist, or a jerk, but seriously griping just for the sake of griping... makes me think we as photographers have gotten spoiled or feel entitled somehow or there's a like of nikon fanboys in canon's clothing here. Of course I'd love the 1dx at a $3000 price point but it's not going to happen.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 25, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> Marsu, you're missing the point.



First off, I'd never call anybody an anything-fanboy because it doesn't help. In extreme cases, I'd point out that one's heavy investment in equipment might produce a somewhat biased point of view, but I didn't do this in this case.



awinphoto said:


> But to post crying like a crybaby "whaaaa the camera of my dreams is out of my price range and budget and i'm so disappointed that i may jump to nikon"... who cares?



For the same reason stated above, I hardly think calling me a "crybaby" is appropriate. I perfectly understand the "tool" point of view of pro photogs, and I'm trying to get some money out of this sooner or later, to. Me pointing out that I'm not sure in which system to invest in seems like a perfectly valid topic for a photography forum, and you as a "pro" should understand this very well. And I'm happy to hear different helpful opinions on why Canon is a sound system to get - sadly, yours last statement doesn't qualify.

Generally, there are enough people who like to reason about Canon's upcoming stuff, competition and strategy - this is Canon *rumors*, you know? But please feel free to not care. In this case, there is always the option to just ignore threads like "Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600".


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> In this case, there is always the option to just ignore threads like "Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600".



I think in this case the best option would have been to post this thread on a more general photographic forum.


----------



## AnselA (May 25, 2012)

The cameras/lenses and software now available are, in many cases, way beyond the capabilities, training and talent of most photographers purchasing them. I say this as someone that can be included in that group and that was weened on 120mm and 35mm film with a variety of cameras (Kodak, Rollei, Minolta, Olympus, Nikon, Canon and now both Nikon and Canon DSLRs). The capabilities of digital are outstanding and I can say I have improved the most since I bought my first Nikon digital and moved through to where I am today. The greatest opportunities today lie in being able to experiment at little or no additional cost and to easily do "darkroom" work that would have required tens of years of experience and an incredible time commitment in the past. With the proper feedback and some dedication you can produce work that was only possible to professionals. That said, much of what is shared here as information, facts or analysis is really just polished forms of emotions run wild or fears writ large. Even if you have an investment in a lot of equipment nothing Canon has done recently will ruin you or humiliate you personally or professionally. Only the most anal among will be forced to change to Nikon because Canon was just inadequate. They may choose for some feature(s) that they want but rarely is it because they just can't do their work.

This constant attacking of Canon is somewhat sad and I agree heartily with briansquibb. The Canon product line reflects where they want to develop the business of still and video photography. The cameras/lenses we have to choose from are outstanding and although not the very best in every dimension, measurement or price they are quite competitive and produce great results. We are not made to buy or be loyal but can choose to do so if the value proposition is right. We can choose otherwise without attacking the firm, their integrity or intelligence. They are very successful by any means (just look at the sidelines at any pro sporting event or just walk the streets of any world city to see). From point and shoots of every shape and color to the forthcoming Canon EOS-1D X it is an amazing series of products for every skill set.

I owned a Nikon DSLR kit and now I shoot with Canon. I was happy then and I am happy now. I spend my energy learning away to get better every time I go out and, hopefully, to do the equipment I own justice.


----------



## awinphoto (May 25, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu, you're missing the point.
> ...



I wasn't referring to you as a crybaby, but more to the person i was originally referring to in the very beginning, cliffwang who threw out there that he wishes to switch to nikon, but probably cant and how disappointed he was in canon (for not providing a camera he could afford/aspire for). I was not referring to you in particular but more of a blanket statement to all those who do nothing but throw out idle threats "i'm switching to nikon because i'm throwing a hissy fit because I cant afford x camera and I dont like where canon is going........." Each statement in itself is valid and every photographer, pro or not, has to justify purchases, whether its to shareholders, to a spouse, to a bank, or even to themselves. It's been 2 full months since the 5d3 has been for sale, more than that since it was announced... We've heard every excuse, valid or not, on why someone would, why someone wouldn't, and why they couldn't buy this camera. Buy it, dont buy it, save up and or wait for rebates, or find another camera/brand/whatever to suit your needs... But to still be on here over 2 months later humming and hawing over the same thing we were 2 months ago... It just feels like the saying, crap or get off the pot. I get the feeling that people posting forum threads like these are simply phishing for reaction with no real point or purpose sitting back laughing their butts off on the chaos that is to follow. Its getting old.


----------



## ScottyP (May 25, 2012)

Instead of getting pissed off when we see a new Nikon that is better and/or cheaper than comparable Canon gear, we should be happy. It means that Canon will have to respond (albeit not as instantaneously as you might wish) by lowering prices or improving cameras or both. 

Without Nikon around, Canon would not be as good as it is now, and vice-versa. I also hope Sony cameras continue to improve and threaten/challenge Canon. Also Panasonic and all the other "also-rans". Competition gives better products at lower prices. The worst thing in the world, frankly, would be to see Nikon or Sony crater and bow out of the DSLR market. A monopoly Canon would be a very bad thing for quality and value and inovation.


----------



## cliffwang (May 25, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Bottom line is:
> ...


The big problem here is too many Canon fans or employees trying to tell Canon is always right.

1. People have to have good skills to use cameras.
2. People cannot complain the product you would like buy because that's against your choice.
3. The lack of features are no problem because that's the company I like.
4. Too many lenses to switch to another company. Here we are talking about CAMERAS, not lenses.
5. Many resources from other websites are wrong because they don't know Canon.
6. Anything against Canon is wrong.

A very interesting forum.


----------



## AndysRollei (May 25, 2012)

> The big problem here is too many Canon fans or employees trying to tell Canon is always right.
> 
> 1. People have to have good skills to use cameras.
> 2. People cannot complain the product you would like buy because that's against your choice.
> ...



Kinda like

1. The Captain is always right.
2. If the Captain is wrong, refer to rule number 1.

Andy


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> The big problem here is too many Canon fans or employees trying to tell Canon is always right.
> 
> 1. People have to have good skills to use cameras.
> 2. People cannot complain the product you would like buy because that's against your choice.
> ...



This site is for users interested in Canon equipment, not for people to spread the word about how good Nikon a camera in comparison to Canon's camera - especially one that is only rumoured. 

Having slagged off Canon, now you are slagging off the users on this forum. Wow   

1. People on this forum are from noobs to top pros where help is freely given and information willingly exchanged.
2. People can choose whatever camera they want and give the reason they chose the camera they bought.
3. The lack of features maybe the reason people didn't buy the offering not a reason to slag of Canon.
4. Too many lenses to switch to another company may be a reason that the budget stops us switching
5. Many resources from other websites biased against Canon and some are biased towards Canon
6. Anything defammatory against Canon is stupid if it is just your point of view - see 3.


----------



## Kernuak (May 25, 2012)

The point is, many of the people criticising the 5D MkIII and lauding the D800 (and even the currently mythical D600) haven't used either. It's like me saying that Lamborghini's are better than Ferrari's, I haven't driven either and am never likely to. I have used the 5D MkIII and was impressed, but I haven't tried the D800, although I'm sure I'd also be impressed with that.
A lot of it is down to what features you as a photographer need. If you need high resolution, then get the D800 (if you can afford to switch), if like me, low light performance and faster frame rate is more important, then go for the 5D MkIII. To keep on going over the same ground, griping about the price and supposed quality of one camera over the other, especially when you haven't even tried them is pretty pointless and eventually with any luck, most people will stop listening. Perhaps it would be an idea for some people to look at the photos in the gallery section, rather than complain about how other cameras are lacking something. There's even a thread showing what cheap equipment can achieve, with much lower specs than either the 5D MkIII or D800.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 25, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> The big problem here is too many Canon fans or employees trying to tell Canon is always right.


So true.


----------



## cliffwang (May 25, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> This site is for users interested in Canon equipment, not for people to spread the word about how good Nikon a camera in comparison to Canon's camera - especially one that is only rumoured.
> 
> Having slagged off Canon, now you are slagging off the users on this forum. Wow
> 
> ...




Sounds like true Canon fanboy or employee!
Who rule this site cannot talk about how good Nikon is? That's the way to push Canon making better products for us.
Slagging off the users here? I feel someone did first, not me.
1. People here are sharing their experiences, feeling, and ideas for anything about/related Canon. Here is not for ONLY PROs. Everyone has right to post here.
2. People are sharing what they like and dislike of a camera related to Canon.
3. Many non-PROs are still using their 5D2, not upgrading to 5D3 because of many reasons including features, price, and emotional thing.
4. I agree that many people may not switch to another camera company because of budget. However, that shouldn't be the reason to against other good cameras.
5. We should appreciate Canon and other camera companies making better and better for us. We shouldn't against some companies because they are not on our side, right.
6. Please don't make yourself like that.


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 25, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> I think a lot of the complainers are more into the toys, tech, comparing specs & reading charts. They need the higher ISO IQ and improved dynamic range to photograph the back of their lens cap and brick walls.
> 
> It's a shame how this forum has degraded so quickly, it used to be a place to share in a positive way.



oh please spare us that sermon..

if im going to buy a NEW camera i want the BEST i can get for my MONEY.. not something that is GOOD ENOUGH.

that´s human nature.

and im not some fanboy that does not see or say when nikon has a good/better product.

and the D600 looks like a great product on paper... we will see.





briansquibb said:


> This site is for users interested in Canon equipment, not for people to spread the word about how good Nikon a camera in comparison to Canon's camera - especially one that is only rumoured.



well this site (especially the third party forum) is for what users are intersted in.. and suprise suprise that is maybe something different then you are interested in. ;D


----------



## kazeye (May 25, 2012)

Sounds like a nice camera in theory, even if it does get produced good luck getting it in the next 5 years once you pre-order it with all of Nikon's production problems.


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 25, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > In this case, there is always the option to just ignore threads like "Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600".
> ...



are you running for a mod job?

this is the third party forum and i clearly see his wish for such a product from canon... if you don´t want to read about nikon or have a nikonphobie.. don´t read this forum.


----------



## BobSanderson (May 25, 2012)

cliffwang - I am totally sold on your trail of tears and so departure is the only honorable thing left ...here are some links to get you warmed up on the Nikon flaws:


http://www.petapixel.com/2012/05/04/nikon-offers-temporary-fix-for-d4d800-lock-up-issue/
http://fstoppers.com/news-nikon-d800-has-confirmed-focusview-finder-issues
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5517


----------



## V8Beast (May 25, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> If Nikon now doubles that up with a D600 at around 1.5k and if its sensor also creams the 5D3 - which I fully expect - than Canon will indeed "be toast" in the all-important non-pro, photo-enthusiast segment of the market. That is us, the guys who buy by far the largest share of higher-end, high-margin lenses and speedlites, as well as future cameras.



How do you know that the "non-pro, photo-enthusiasts segment of the market" are "the guys who buy by far the largest share of higher-end, high-margin lenses and speedlites." I'm curious is you have any statistics that backs up your claim, or if it's pure speculation. If I interpret your statement correctly, then it sounds like you think that it's hobbyists that purchase expensive L-series lenses and accessories in the greatest quantities? 

Most entry-level SLR buyers I come across stick with Rebels, xxDs, and cheap kit lenses. Sure, there are lots of "non-pro, photo-enthusiasts" that have very nice bodies and pro-grade lenses on the internet, but do you really think the internet is a true representation of overall market demographics?


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



If I want to read about Nikon I go to Nikon Rumours. I dont come to Canon Rumours to listen to the Nikon Fanboys tell me what a poor job Canon are doing.


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> Sounds like true Canon fanboy or employee!



Oh the ultimate insult


----------



## sheedoe (May 25, 2012)

Chewy734 said:


> Kingnog said:
> 
> 
> > This is a rumor...you might not see a Nikon like that either.
> ...



And when will they ship the D800 in mass quantities? lol


----------



## cliffwang (May 25, 2012)

BobSanderson said:


> cliffwang - I am totally sold on your trail of tears and so departure is the only honorable thing left ...here are some links to get you warmed up on the Nikon flaws:
> 
> 
> http://www.petapixel.com/2012/05/04/nikon-offers-temporary-fix-for-d4d800-lock-up-issue/
> ...



Thanks for the links. Just took a look of those posts. Looks Nikon need to fix some problems in their new firmware. I am happy with my 5D2 and actually haven't decided to switch to D800 yet. If D600 rumor is true, that might be the most interesting one for me. 39 AF points / under 2000 is what perfect for me. I hope Canon will have similar model with similar price soon. I guess I need more time to study Nikon cameras, so I still have a lot of time to make my finial decision.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 25, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> How do you know that the "non-pro, photo-enthusiasts segment of the market" are "the guys who buy by far the largest share of higher-end, high-margin lenses and speedlites." I'm curious is you have any statistics that backs up your claim, or if it's pure speculation. If I interpret your statement correctly, then it sounds like you think that it's hobbyists that purchase expensive L-series lenses and accessories in the greatest quantities?


Because photo-enthusiast hobbyists vastly out number working pros by a zillion to one? 

Even a tiny fraction of hobbyists buying L lenses would exceed the total number of working pros. The exceptions *might* be the extremely long L primes (400, 600, etc), but even there, there exists a huge number of non-pro nature photographers that use these regularly.


----------



## aznable (May 25, 2012)

Astro said:


> i want this .. i want such a canon camera!!
> 
> http://fstoppers.com/new-rumor-good-news-for-the-nikon-d600
> 
> ...



is it an sony Alpha 900 on budget?...maybe they are repackaging the unsold a900as nikon d600


----------



## cliffwang (May 25, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> Because photo-enthusiast hobbyists vastly out number working pros by a zillion to one?
> 
> Even a tiny fraction of hobbyists buying L lenses would exceed the total number of working pros. The exceptions *might* be the extremely long L primes (400, 600, etc), but even there, there exists a huge number of non-pro nature photographers that use these regularly.



I don't know how big the non-pro and pro markets are. However, I agree you many no-pro buy L lenses. In my company(about 50 people), three 5D2 and 4 L lenses. I own 2 lenses(see my signature).

Edit:
I buy good lenses even they don't have red ring.


----------



## awinphoto (May 25, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> V8Beast said:
> 
> 
> > How do you know that the "non-pro, photo-enthusiasts segment of the market" are "the guys who buy by far the largest share of higher-end, high-margin lenses and speedlites." I'm curious is you have any statistics that backs up your claim, or if it's pure speculation. If I interpret your statement correctly, then it sounds like you think that it's hobbyists that purchase expensive L-series lenses and accessories in the greatest quantities?
> ...



I agree that there is a vast majority of hobbyists compared to working pro's, but how many hobbyists have the budget to spend on such a camera and or L lenses? Unless they have large chunks of disposable income, and or are neuro, then most stick to their budgets (i.e. whatever they can buy at costco/best buy). But if you guys find any data backing your idea up that hobbyiests in large numbers are buying $2000+ cameras and or lenses, or even have $2000+ invested total in camera gear, it would be interesting to see.


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> UrbanVoyeur said:
> 
> 
> > V8Beast said:
> ...



You can tick me down as having more than $2000 in camera gear.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 25, 2012)

aznable said:


> is it an sony Alpha 900 on budget?...maybe they are repackaging the unsold a900as nikon d600



You might not be far from the truth. The A900 could well have been using an earlier version / manufacturing run of the same sensor now in the D600. 4 years ago it could have been much more expensive to produce. Nikon is using Sony sensors.


----------



## KeithR (May 25, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> The big problem here is too many Canon fans or employees trying to tell Canon is always right.



Nope.

The "problem" is whiny trolls (like stevenrrmanir - _please_ p*** off to Nikon and leave this forum be) who simply can't get it through their heads that - whether or not _they're_ happy with Canon's offerings - many of us are _extremely_ satisfied.

It betrays a fundamental lack of intelligence to parse someone else's satisfaction with a brand into "fanboyism" just because _they're_ throwing a stroppy hissy-fit about some imagined insult caused by Canon's "refusal" to make them their own personal wet-dream camera.

It is actually _infantile_ to characterise people who are broadly happy with Canon as fan(boy)s who are "trying to tell Canon is always right" - much as I appreciate my 7D, I can give you a list as long as my arm of things I'd like done differently.

But I'll happily stand should-to-shoulder with anyone, shooting any subject matter they like with any camera they like, and I _guarantee_ that I'll match them or beat them in terms of the end result, because there's simply no such thing as a bad camera these days, and the tiny differences between them are so piddling as to make equalising them at conversion/in PP trivially easy.

The whining malcontents who purport to believe that _if only_ Canon made cameras like Nikon, their life would be worth living again, _might benefit more from learning to use the gear they've got, and from learning how to convert and process the files from them properly_ instead of transferring their own lack of talent and ability onto the cameras they use.


----------



## briansquibb (May 25, 2012)

KeithR said:


> cliffwang said:
> 
> 
> > The big problem here is too many Canon fans or employees trying to tell Canon is always right.
> ...



+100 Nicely put


----------



## awinphoto (May 25, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > UrbanVoyeur said:
> ...



Okay, I stand corrected, hobbiests other than neuro and briansquibb =)


----------



## HarryWintergreen (May 25, 2012)

I think Canon should give it some thought that competitors are not in a shock-stiff hibernation.


----------



## Axilrod (May 26, 2012)

Competition fuels innovation, I'm sure if Nikon releases a D600 and it really is only $1500 that Canon won't just sit around and do nothing. And to those saying the 5DIII is a "bad camera" compared to the D800, have you even used it or is this just based on other people's opinions? Because if I recall correctly they both scored the same on DPReview and there are plenty of people that absolutely love the 5DIII and prefer it over the D800. They both have their purpose and it really boils down to personal preference. But from personal observation, I would say 8/10 people I see shooting with DSLR's are shooting Canon, so it makes sense that Nikon would try to undercut them to take their users. And people are talking about the 5DII like it is some bastard camera that's incapable of taking good pics, it's perfectly fine for the majority of people and can still produce stunning images. People have been shooting professionally with the 5DII for years, and now people are talking about it like it's a Rebel from 2004. If you genuinely believe you can't get great images with a 5DII, then you need photography lessons.

But for the people threatening to switch to Nikon, it seems like you're angry about the price and not so much the camera itself. If you really hate Canon that much and their cameras suck why are you screaming on a forum pretty much begging them to come out with something better/cheaper? If Nikon is so superior what are you waiting for? Go buy a D800 and register at Nikon Rumors.


----------



## Axilrod (May 26, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> The big problem here is too many Canon fans or employees trying to tell Canon is always right.
> 
> 1. People have to have good skills to use cameras.
> 2. People cannot complain the product you would like buy because that's against your choice.
> ...



1. People don't have to have any skill to "use" a camera, but to get professional looking pictures you do.
2. People can complain all they want, but some of the complaints are ridiculous and more related to price than performance.
3. Please tell me what features the 5DIII lacks? SO many people are very happy with the 5DIII, whether or not the features are good enough for you is an opinion, not a fact.
4. If you have $10k in lenses and a bunch of Canon accessories it makes it much more difficult to switch systems.
5. I don't get what you're saying here, any credible photography source knows Canon.
6. Anything against Canon is wrong. So you say you don't like Canon, but someone else might like them and disagree with you, that doesn't mean they are saying that you are wrong, they just share a different opinion from you.

It sounds like your biggest problem with the 5DIII is the price, but because the price is too high you tell yourself that it's not a good camera. Just for a moment, forget about Nikon, forget about the price of the 5DIII. Is it still a "bad camera?" Your problem is that you think that anyone that disagrees with you is wrong, you you believe that they think that you are wrong, when in reality they may just have different needs or preferences.


----------



## AvTvM (May 26, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> UrbanVoyeur said:
> 
> 
> > V8Beast said:
> ...



no need to back up things that are obvious with statistics. But you are more than welcome to do some digging.

Me, well currently I own Canon gear that cost me a total of exactly Euro (not USD) € 7782,60. 
7D, BG-E7, 10-22, 17-55, 60 Macro, 50/1.4, 100/2.0, 70-200/2.8 II, Extender 1.4x II, 2x 430EX II, 580EX II, ST-E2, couple of LP-E6 batteries, Canon remote Control, and some other Canon accessories. I am a pure hobbyist and have earned any money with photography in my life. I regularly meet with other hobbyists and my kit is about middle of the road - there are lots of other amateurs I personally know, who have spent way more money on photo gear than I did. And I know, there are millions of us out there, without being abvle to gibve you an exact number. It does not matter. We definitely outnumber Pros by at least 10.000 to 1. 

And a lot of us will switch to Nikon if Canon continues to ****** us up with incremental improvements rather than true innovation. And if Canon thinks, they can stuff their unwanted and unneeded video crap down our throats, they are dead wrong. We do not have the time nor the creative talent or funds to produce "quality video" worthwile watching. And for cheap youtube crap we just use our iPhones like everybody else, rather than a DSLR. It is as simple as that.

We would happily buy a 5D3 at Euro 3200, if the bloody thing had the D800 sensor and electronics in it and an amazing 2012 version of Canon's Eye Control Focus on top. But none of us will shell out 3200 Euro for a 5D3 that is inferior in every way to a Nikon D800 at 2.900 Euro or even to a D600 at Euro 1500 or so. Rest assured, the D600 will come! Nikon will use the opportunity to really win big time market share from this sorry, fat, self-content company Canon has turned into under its bloody geriatric top management.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 26, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> We would happily buy a 5D3 at Euro 3200, if the bloody thing had the D800 sensor and electronics in it and an amazing 2012 version of Canon's Eye Control Focus on top.


I really miss Eye Control Focus. Selective spot meter AND focus, just by looking at a part of the frame. I would pay a premium to have that again (even though I know the technology costs Canon next to nothing to implement).


----------



## Jason Beiko (May 26, 2012)

In my mind there is no question that Canon has to respond strongly if this rumour comes true. My logic is as follows.... I think the vast majority of Canon shooters who are heavily invested in Canon glass are not going to switch to Nikon despite their current, arguably, superior sensors. If, however, Nikon continues to produce arguably better and cheaper cameras, then those individuals waiting to see how Canon responds will begin to switch (I'm in this category). 

Now I think the big market share issue is not people switching from Canon to Nikon but rather capturing the individuals who are new to the DSLR market. Your first DSLR will be a major determinant of which lenses and other accessories you buy. I think that someone who is thinking about purchasing their first DLSR will find better reviews praising Nikon's new cameras/sensors then for Canon. I can tell you that my first DSLR was a Canon 7D because, at the time, the reviews for the camera and the brand were high. In my mind the new sensor technology in the Nikons have catapulted them to the forefront WRT to dominating the perception of the product. I think anyone who is considering Nikon versus Canon right now, in terms of purchasing their first DLSR, would get the impression that Nikon is at the top of the game. This is why I think that if Canon does not respond they are going to lose future market share. 

Right now I still love my Canon 7D, but I am on a complete upgrade /lens purchasing hiatus until I see where this is going.


----------



## kalmiya (May 26, 2012)

I'm on the market (in wait-mode) watching out for developments. Currently have a 550d with 3 L-lenses, and this Nikon does sound like the camera in my price-range and with the features I want ( don't feel like switching though). 

I'll just wait to see what canon will come back with as a "starter-full-frame". Note that I'm sure the 5d3 is a great cam, would love to have it, but for me - personally - it's not worth the money ( other bills to pay, different priorities), so just have to wait and see what other options will come in the next few months - and again this Nikon sound like having the features I'd like for the price I'm willing to put down.


----------



## V8Beast (May 26, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> Because photo-enthusiast hobbyists vastly out number working pros by a zillion to one?
> 
> Even a tiny fraction of hobbyists buying L lenses would exceed the total number of working pros. The exceptions *might* be the extremely long L primes (400, 600, etc), but even there, there exists a huge number of non-pro nature photographers that use these regularly.



OK, so no stats, just pure speculation. I got it 



AvTvM said:


> And I know, there are millions of us out there, without being abvle to gibve you an exact number. It does not matter. We definitely outnumber Pros by at least 10.000 to 1.



OK, so no stats, just pure speculation. I got it 

For someone purchasing camera gear as a hobby, I sense a lot of anger in your tone. Why get mad about something that you're supposed to be doing for fun? If Nikon has the better product for your needs, just switch and be happy. I don't see what the big stink is about.


----------



## pete vella (May 26, 2012)

as i don't make money off my photo's. 
i do love taking them. i would not say i am a hobbist. i am a passionate photographer. i started with a xt upgraded to a 60d. have 4 lens, and a flash. one is an L, and that was my last purchase. after using my L the other lens don't get to much action. really want to upgrade to full frame but the 5diii is a bit out of reach, and I'd rather spend 3.5 k on a ff body and a new L. i know canon will make a competitive body to the d600. That is if nikon does make it, so till then i will save and shoot with what i have. if canon wants my money a camera like the d600 is where it is at. hope i don't have to wait to long.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 26, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> OK, so no stats, just pure speculation. I got it


Unfortunately, the stats I could find are all locked away in high priced reports from PMA and other research groups. If anybody can find these numbers free, please share.


----------



## BRNexus6 (May 26, 2012)

I wouldn't hesitate to switch over to Nikon if this rumor turns out to be true. This camera paired with the 50mm 1.4G lens would be an amazing photography tool for under $2k. I'm getting way too excited over this rumor. This would be the smartest move that Nikon ever made. I mean how would Canon react to this rumored inexpensive Full-Frame if it actually became a real product?


----------



## D_Rochat (May 26, 2012)

The trolls are out again and the locals are getting restless. Is there a new release coming?


----------



## briansquibb (May 26, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> The trolls are out again and the locals are getting restless. Is there a new release coming?



Just proves what I said - rumours of this kind get people into a state of mind where they have to get the latest and greatest even though their current kit can produce top IQ images.

Seems that they get technology fixated - on this forum it seems to be APS-C and FF polarisation with a touch of mirrorless. Strange because the image IQ is the objective regardless of how it is produced.


----------



## Jotho (May 26, 2012)

I might not know much about all issues concerning Canon vs Nikon surrounding all previous and current models. I know that today I just paid deposit on my MkIII and I feel great about it. I come from 400D and 60d and have spent some money on upgrading to L lenses. I felt it was time for the next step although I might not be able to use all the capacoty in the MkIII. 

I am a pure amateur but have sold some photos together with some golfing and biking articles I've written over the years. Of course image quality, exposure and all is important in many aspects of photography, but to me it seems that many forget the actual image they are trying to capture. Be there in the moment. In fact many of my best pics I have taken with my G11 that's always in my car ready for action.My photographer friends that have taught me a lot about things have always emphasized that I should have fun with it and that's what I will continue to do. My aim for the next year will be to make back themmoney I spent on the MkIII. I think it's doable.


----------



## briansquibb (May 26, 2012)

Jotho said:


> I might not know much about all issues concerning Canon vs Nikon surrounding all previous and current models. I know that today I just paid deposit on my MkIII and I feel great about it. I come from 400D and 60d and have spent some money on upgrading to L lenses. I felt it was time for the next step although I might not be able to use all the capacoty in the MkIII.



Congratulations on your new purchase . Like all new cameras it will take time to understand and use the full potential of the camera - but it is fun learning


----------



## Jotho (May 26, 2012)

Briansquibb, thanks. Yes it will be great fun I hope. I got a few fun projects planned for after the summer and will make sure I am prepared for them.


----------



## briansquibb (May 26, 2012)

Jotho said:


> Briansquibb, thanks. Yes it will be great fun I hope. I got a few fun projects planned for after the summer and will make sure I am prepared for them.



What kind of biking? Pedal or Motor?


----------



## Jotho (May 26, 2012)

Briansquibb, being new posting here I don't know how to incorporate your question in my reply yet. Motorbiking, I currently live in Southeast Asia, have been on and off for the last nine years. So just motorbiking travelling around the region here. The views and adventures gets more in focus than the actual biking as such.


----------



## Wild (May 26, 2012)

aznable said:


> is it an sony Alpha 900 on budget?...maybe they are repackaging the unsold a900as nikon d600




They probably just turned the "a" into a "d" and flipped the 9 upside down. Voila!


----------



## Wild (May 26, 2012)

Jotho said:


> Briansquibb, being new posting here I don't know how to incorporate your question in my reply yet. Motorbiking, I currently live in Southeast Asia, have been on and off for the last nine years. So just motorbiking travelling around the region here. The views and adventures gets more in focus than the actual biking as such.



Jotho - If you click on the little box that says "quote" in the upper right part of a person's message, it'll add their quote to a new message for you, and you can type your response beneath it. If you're not sure it'll look right, just check out the preview and tinker with it ;D


----------



## elflord (May 26, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> D_Rochat said:
> 
> 
> > The trolls are out again and the locals are getting restless. Is there a new release coming?
> ...



Not only the complainers seem to lack perspective on how little difference tech makes (while they are whining liked spoiled children about 5DII's "unusable" AF, m43 enthusiasts are shooting with legacy glass and manually focusing) 

Also seems the complainers lack perspective on how little difference the body makes -- for example if you spent 3k on glass, could you replicate that setup on Nikon, how much would it cost, and how would it perform ? Last I checked, Nikon glass was generally more expensive, so unless you're planning to pair with a cheapo zoom, the apparent cost advantage might evaporate by the time you've acquired a kit at which point the complainer will whine about how Nikon are "screwing them with high lens prices". :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

Choosing the system based entirely on who has a slightly cheaper or better speced body is putting the cart before the horse.


----------



## Astro (May 26, 2012)

i dont know where you buy.. but here i can get a nikon 24-70mm f2.8 for 1499 euro.
and a nikon Nikon 70-200mm 2.8G AF-S VR II ED would cost me 1799 euro.

if i buy the latest canon models i have to pay 700+300 euro more (the same reseller).

so no i don´t see much of a price difference.
especially not with the "new" canon "price strategy".... i have to pay less for some nikon glas.


----------



## Jotho (May 26, 2012)

Wild said:


> Jotho said:
> 
> 
> > Briansquibb, being new posting here I don't know how to incorporate your question in my reply yet. Motorbiking, I currently live in Southeast Asia, have been on and off for the last nine years. So just motorbiking travelling around the region here. The views and adventures gets more in focus than the actual biking as such.
> ...



Wild, thanks for the tip. I hope it will make things easier. I used the ipad earlier and things just keeps getting messed up with that. Now I can see how it works.


----------



## Kernuak (May 26, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > awinphoto said:
> ...


You'd better add me to the list too . Although I strive for professional quality (like Brian, Neuro and many others) and I have licenced some images and sold some prints, so I have made money out of it, even if I am making a loss overall. It's a real pain having to do a tax return for the privilege of that loss-making though .
That said, while hobbyists do outnumber professionals, the vast number of those hobbyists don't have a huge arseanl of lenses I'd imagine. Many have 3-4 lenses at most, so they aren't really the major target market for the higher end bodies. Using any figures that may (or not) be available for the number of hobbyists would be entirely misleading. It's also pretty irrelevant, as the purpose of a camera is to use it, not to analyse the quoted specifications and decide on which is the "deficient" camera without actually trying any out.


----------



## AvTvM (May 26, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> ..
> For someone purchasing camera gear as a hobby, I sense a lot of anger in your tone. Why get mad about something that you're supposed to be doing for fun? If Nikon has the better product for your needs, just switch and be happy. I don't see what the big stink is about.



Yes, my Canon gear lets me make good and sometimes even amazing pictures. Most of the time doing so is a great experience and fun. 

BUT ...
what makes me and so many other Canon users increasingly mad at our current supplier, is what I would call "fully justified buyers remorse".

When I bought my first DSLR in May 2005, I decided on Canon as my system supplier because the 350D was superior to Nikons D70 in virtually every aspect. Canon EOS Cameras all delivered superior image quality and better value than Nikion's competing products then. Canon CMOS sensors and DIGIC processors ruled supreme - resoulution, Hi-ISO noise, image quality, operational speed. Eyually important, Canon had a much broader and deeper lens lineup, that generally cost about 20% less than roughly equivalent Nikon lenses.

Within the next few years all of that has reversed. Nikon has not only caught up but in 2012 has leapfrogged Canon: more resolution and at the same time better DR, cleaner images at low ISO and even at Hi ISO - and all of this for significantly less money. And Nikon's lens setup today is on par with Canon - with the notable exception of a few special lenses that are more important for Pro-photographers (fisheye zoom, TS-E 17, 24 II, superteles Mk. II). 

I have been watching with growing dismay how Canon is diverting more and more of their attention and resources to all the video crap in DSLRs which I do not need and want, rather than on creating the world's best still photo cameras, competing full blast with Nikon. I am sick and tired of the excessive market differentiation and purposful crippling of cameras even in terms of ultracheapbut useful firmware features [e.g., Auto-ISO on my 7D compared to any Nikon camera!]. I am sick and tired of constant massive price increases with little if any additional value to me as paying customer. I am sick and tired having to pay extra for every lens hood on evry non-L lens. I am sick and tired watching, that I could be using better cameras for less money had I only chosen Nikon over Canon. And it amkes me angry that I may end up having to sell my gear at a big loss, just because Canon is not able to effectively compete with Nikon any longer. 

And whether you like it or not: I will not ask for your permission before I complain and I will do so as long as I please and certainly as long as Canon does not finally get their act together and sells me cameras and gear that is clearly better than any competitive product or at least on par AND not more expensive.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 26, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> I have been watching with growing dismay how Canon is diverting more and more of their attention and resources to all the video crap in DSLRs which I do not need and want, rather than on creating the world's best still photo cameras, competing full blast with Nikon. I am sick and tired of the excessive market differentiation and purposful crippling of cameras even in terms of ultracheapbut useful firmware features [e.g., Auto-ISO on my 7D compared to any Nikon camera!]. I am sick and tired of constant massive price increases with little if any additional value to me as paying customer. I am sick and tired having to pay extra for every lens hood on evry non-L lens. I am sick and tired watching, that I could be using better cameras for less money had I only chosen Nikon over Canon. And it amkes me angry that I may end up having to sell my gear at a big loss, just because Canon is not able to effectively compete with Nikon any longer.
> 
> And whether you like it or not: I will not ask for your permission before I complain and I will do so as long as I please and certainly as long as Canon does not finally get their act together and sells me cameras and gear that is clearly better than any competitive product or at least on par AND not more expensive.


I agree. I wonder if Canon is trying to position itself as a premium brand - like Apple is now, or Sony used to be in TV's and electronics. Not the super high end like Leica, but the most expensive of the general consumer gear.

It could be a more profitable strategy. I don't know.


----------



## Actionpix (May 26, 2012)

I do not agree with Canon pricing new lenses double the price of the predecessors is a bad thing. In fact it is a good thing. My current L gear will look like a bargain when I sell it, second hand, for more than I paid for it new. This way it is more easy to change system and in fact I have been making pictures for free till now.


----------



## joemod (May 26, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> V8Beast said:
> 
> 
> > ..
> ...


Just to add to that. I bought yesterday my first L lens (24-105 f4, YAY!) and the man at the store (one of Athens' most popular) was very much puzzled on Canon's marketing policy. He even told me, that he most probably won't stock any of new Canon L lenses because they are pretty much more expensive than the older models or Nikon's counterparts. 
I admit though that Greece is not Canon's primary target so that won't matter much to Canon.


----------



## hyles (May 26, 2012)

I think that before complainig about canon answer to d600... we should at least wait for the d600 to be true and not a rumor.
After that we can talk about everything.
But just beeing sick about rumored cameras doesn't seem right to me. I mean, if you need a FF body now, you have plenty.
D800, 5dIII, d700 5DII, you can allways seek second hand 5D, 1Dsx... If you need it... If not, then just keep talkin about nothing and wait to see what will happen.
Diego


----------



## Marsu42 (May 26, 2012)

joemod said:


> Just to add to that. I bought yesterday my first L lens (24-105 f4, YAY!) and the man at the store (one of Athens' most popular) was very much puzzled on Canon's marketing policy. He even told me, that he most probably won't stock any of new Canon L lenses because they are pretty much more expensive than the older models or Nikon's counterparts. I admit though that Greece is not Canon's primary target so that won't matter much to Canon.



It's might be not Greece, but the kind of shop - many retailers have not the kind of customers who buy L lenses at $1500+ and thus are well-advised to stock aps-c, kits or 3rd party gear. But still - I'm interested to see how many shops in Berlin will have Canon's 24-70ii on display and in stock.

Off topic, and if for the reason alone this might actually be helpful: You know the 24-105L is the one L lens that is to be found rather cheap used because it's a kit lens and many people dump it for this reason? If you want to save some money, I guess you can still return it and look on ebay, craiglist or whatever else you've got down there.


----------



## Wrathwilde (May 26, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> BUT ...
> what makes me and so many other Canon users increasingly mad at our current supplier, is what I would call "fully justified buyers remorse".
> 
> When I bought my first DSLR in May 2005, I decided on Canon as my system supplier because the 350D was superior to Nikons D70 in virtually every aspect. Canon EOS Cameras all delivered superior image quality and better value than Nikion's competing products then. Canon CMOS sensors and DIGIC processors ruled supreme - resoulution, Hi-ISO noise, image quality, operational speed. Eyually important, Canon had a much broader and deeper lens lineup, that generally cost about 20% less than roughly equivalent Nikon lenses.
> ...



Whiny, Bitchy, Angry and Self Entitled... +1, would laugh at again.

By the way, Canon has got their act together, it's just not the act you've deluded yourself into thinking you need. Secondly, maybe if you had _*your*_ crap together... then price wouldn't be an issue. I seriously doubt Canon's cameras are what's limiting your photography.

Cheers,
Wrathwilde


----------



## Axilrod (May 26, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> I have been watching with growing dismay how Canon is diverting more and more of their attention and resources to all the video crap in DSLRs which I do not need and want, rather than on creating the world's best still photo cameras, competing full blast with Nikon. I am sick and tired of the excessive market differentiation and purposful crippling of cameras even in terms of ultracheapbut useful firmware features [e.g., Auto-ISO on my 7D compared to any Nikon camera!]. I am sick and tired of constant massive price increases with little if any additional value to me as paying customer. I am sick and tired having to pay extra for every lens hood on evry non-L lens. I am sick and tired watching, that I could be using better cameras for less money had I only chosen Nikon over Canon. And it amkes me angry that I may end up having to sell my gear at a big loss, just because Canon is not able to effectively compete with Nikon any longer.
> 
> And whether you like it or not: I will not ask for your permission before I complain and I will do so as long as I please and certainly as long as Canon does not finally get their act together and sells me cameras and gear that is clearly better than any competitive product or at least on par AND not more expensive.



First off, if you think the D800 is better at high ISO's than the 5DIII you need to have your eyes checked. As for Canon diverting too many resources towards video, that's just not true. The 5DIII had minimal video upgrades and TONS of still upgrades. And the video feature on the 5DII required basically no effort, they had no idea it would take off in the video world like it did. Sure they may be marketing their cameras towards video shooters more than before, but it's pretty clear that most of their efforts went towards stills with the 5DIII. And if you took care of your Canon gear and kept the boxes you should have no trouble at all getting back the majority of what you invested (unless we are talking about really old bodies). Canon glass holds it's value extremely well and I would lose next to nothing if I got rid of my stuff (It would be more likely that I'd make a bit on them). Remember, just because you hate Canon doesn't mean everyone else does, there are plenty of people still willing to pay top dollar for used Canon gear. 

If you haven't noticed, everything is more expensive nowadays, our economy is in the crapper and the dollar simply isn't worth what it was 5 years ago, I think some of the price increases are justified. People keep comparing the 5DIII to the CURRENT price of the 5DII, forgetting that it debuted at $700 less than the 5DIII did, it's really not that much of a difference considering the 5DIII is a far superior camera. Regardless, the price of the 5DIII being "overpriced" is totally an opinion, it wouldn't be selling like it was if everyone felt that way. 

No matter what you buy there will always be a more expensive version, and people generally just buy what they can afford and don't complain about what they can't. I'd love a Ferrari, but it's too damn expensive for me, but I'm not going to write Ferrari and demand that they stop ripping people off and make a car that I can afford. That's just a way to blame someone else for why I can't have something.

Go ahead and switch over to Nikon, Canon has way too many happy users to respond to whining on a rumor forum so I doubt this will get you anywhere. Try fredmiranda or craigslist to sell your gear.


----------



## Axilrod (May 26, 2012)

Actionpix said:


> I do not agree with Canon pricing new lenses double the price of the predecessors is a bad thing. In fact it is a good thing. My current L gear will look like a bargain when I sell it, second hand, for more than I paid for it new. This way it is more easy to change system and in fact I have been making pictures for free till now.



What lenses aside from the 24-70 are double in price? And the 24-70 v1 is $1599 at B&H, $1599 x 2 is $3198, and the 24-70 II is supposed to be $2300. Not to mention it's replacing a 10 year old design, is much more compact, and from what I hear it's an incredible lens. If it's anything like the 70-200 II I may seriously consider it, the sharpness of primes out of a zoom is worth the price IMO.


----------



## Axilrod (May 26, 2012)

Astro said:


> i dont know where you buy.. but here i can get a nikon 24-70mm f2.8 for 1499 euro.
> and a nikon Nikon 70-200mm 2.8G AF-S VR II ED would cost me 1799 euro.
> 
> if i buy the latest canon models i have to pay 700+300 euro more (the same reseller).
> ...



Did you look up the Nikon prices at B&H and the Canon prices on ebay from the crazy people that try to sell lenses for $1k over msrp or something? This just isn't true, the Nikon 24-70 is $1886 from B&H (which is still a good bit more than the current 24-70) and the 70-200 is $2396 which is almost $100 more than the Canon 70-200 II (which is arguably the best zoom lens in the world). 

And no one really knows anything about the new 24-70, how do you know it's not worth it? And when the 24-70 I was announced the press release said MSRP would be $2100 and it ended up being much less, the same could happen with the new one.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 26, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> And no one really knows anything about the new 24-70, how do you know it's not worth it?



For the same reason, I was recently wondering why lots of people recommend the 24-70ii as a perfect lens if no one's seen it until today, and this started long ago once it was rumored. So to be fair, there might be rather a tendency here to think upcoming Canon gear will be stellar, while Nikon is out to produce vaporware ... just noticing.

Still, if rumors and only announced products would be treated equally from any manufacturer, I still think discussing upcoming Nikon bodies from a Canon perspective has its place here, because the competition will influence what Canon does and what we all will probably buy next.


----------



## V8Beast (May 26, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> BUT ...
> what makes me and so many other Canon users increasingly mad at our current supplier, is what I would call "fully justified buyers remorse".
> 
> I am sick and tired of the excessive market differentiation and purposful crippling of cameras even in terms of ultracheapbut useful firmware features [e.g., Auto-ISO on my 7D compared to any Nikon camera!]. I am sick and tired of constant massive price increases with little if any additional value to me as paying customer. I am sick and tired having to pay extra for every lens hood on evry non-L lens. I am sick and tired watching, that I could be using better cameras for less money had I only chosen Nikon over Canon. And it amkes me angry that I may end up having to sell my gear at a big loss, just because Canon is not able to effectively compete with Nikon any longer.



Like I said, I sense way too much anger regarding something that's supposed to be a hobby. Perhaps switching systems would bring you more happiness than sticking with Canon and complaining? I'm not saying this to be a smartass. I just don't see the point of participating in a hobby that evokes such extreme anger, when the solution (switching to Nikon) is so simple. 

It's not like you're switching spouses  It's f'n camera gear for goodness sakes. No one's asking you to put your first born on eBay. 



> And whether you like it or not: I will not ask for your permission before I complain and I will do so as long as I please and certainly as long as Canon does not finally get their act together and sells me cameras and gear that is clearly better than any competitive product or at least on par AND not more expensive.



Easy, buddy. I really don't care if you complain. I just find it confusing. As the saying goes, "it takes two to suffer." Your Canon gear is obviously causing you extreme pain and anguish, so the easy solution is getting rid of it.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 26, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> As the saying goes, "it takes two to suffer."



Currently with this thread, there are lots more suffering: Given the participation and the thread title, it's always on top of the main page and many more people will pick up the message


----------



## SteenerMe (May 26, 2012)

As a canon user for many years and just recently upgraded to the 5D3 Ive got to say it is one bad a$$ camera. Price is relative. My 7D makes wonderful images, but the 5D3 is just on another level. Yes i was happy with the 7d but now much happier with the 5d3. My partner shoots with the nikon D800 and after using it would never switch over. The image quality us neglegable unless peeping. Bit the camera feels like a cheap toy. And dont geet me started on the lenses...


----------



## briansquibb (May 26, 2012)

I have had another great days shooting using my out of fashion 1DS3 and 24-105 - why would I spend money to change it?


----------



## D_Rochat (May 27, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I have had another great days shooting using my out of fashion 1DS3 and 24-105 - why would I spend money to change it?



That's pretty good for ONLY 21mp ;D . Nice to see a sunny day in GB!


----------



## ScottyP (May 27, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I have had another great days shooting using my out of fashion 1DS3 and 24-105 - why would I spend money to change it?
> ...



Ah, but there's a sheep down there that is kind of grainy and pixelated. Look right there, approximately 2.6 miles out, at about 2 o'clock.


----------



## V8Beast (May 27, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I have had another great days shooting using my out of fashion 1DS3 and 24-105 - why would I spend money to change it?



Nice shot, but I don't know why you insist on shooting with that cheap kit lens. Get yourself a fast prime, and that ancient 1Ds3 will be sharper than you could ever imagine ;D


----------



## joemod (May 27, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> joemod said:
> 
> 
> > Just to add to that. I bought yesterday my first L lens (24-105 f4, YAY!) and the man at the store (one of Athens' most popular) was very much puzzled on Canon's marketing policy. He even told me, that he most probably won't stock any of new Canon L lenses because they are pretty much more expensive than the older models or Nikon's counterparts. I admit though that Greece is not Canon's primary target so that won't matter much to Canon.
> ...


This retailer is targetted to serious amateurs /pros. Casual photographers usually buy from Saturn/similar stores. 


For the off topic I tried to answer you via pm, but it was rejected. In short I bought the bulk version which is 300 euros cheaper than the retail


----------



## briansquibb (May 27, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> Nice shot, but I don't know why you insist on shooting with that cheap kit lens. Get yourself a fast prime, and that ancient 1Ds3 will be sharper than you could ever imagine ;D



This was a good example of an amatuer assignment - I took pictures for this gliding club for their website etc (for nothing) and I got a 3/4 hour flight (for nothing) ;D

The only primes I had were large white ones and the pilot seemed relectant to let me take the 600 in the plane - it was a bit snug in there ;D The window was just big enough for the 24-105 to poke through. 


This was taken with - gasp - a APS-H sensored camera and a mk1 lens. If I believed the rumours this should have been a terrible mess of a picture    With only 16mp I didn't crop else the IQ would have dropped. PS I put a 1.4 on this combo and took candids of the club members  

Health warning - dont try this shot with a 24-70 : : :

1d4, 600mm, 1/1600, f/4, iso100


----------



## Marsu42 (May 27, 2012)

joemod said:


> For the off topic I tried to answer you via pm, but it was rejected. In short I bought the bulk version which is 300 euros cheaper than the retail



I had pm disabled, changed it, but this might be interesting for other people, too: *300* € less than retail? How much did you pay? Is this your current economy that makes prices drop so much? In Germany, the regular 24-105 is ~975€, and the bulk version only about ~100€ less! On ebay, it sells for 600€-700€ used.


----------



## elflord (May 27, 2012)

Astro said:


> i dont know where you buy.. but here i can get a nikon 24-70mm f2.8 for 1499 euro.
> and a nikon Nikon 70-200mm 2.8G AF-S VR II ED would cost me 1799 euro.
> 
> if i buy the latest canon models i have to pay 700+300 euro more (the same reseller).



I'm looking at current prices on bhphotovideo.com. For the two brand L lenses that I have, the 135mm f/2 and the 35mm f/1.4, I would pay about $300- more per lens for the Nikon counterparts (10xx vs 13xx for the 135mm, ~13xx vs ~16xx for the 35mm). My 85mm it should be a wash because I have the Sigma. 

But this debate is really beside the point anyway. The point is that an incremental technology difference in the body will make much less difference to your pictures than your glass. If you're choosing based on who has the best technology, go with Sony, but if you're shopping for a system, then technology is only a small part of the picture.


----------



## Albi86 (May 28, 2012)

I guess people still mistake who those cameras are meant for.

5D3 + new 24-70 f/2.8 + 70-200 f/2.8 IS2 = best low-light shooting equipment available. No conicidences that Canon has also updated its speedlites and there is talk about new 35, 50 and 85mm L-primes. All is meant for wedding/concerts/events pros. Apparently Canon is giving priority to this segment, hard to say if it is exactly what they wanted or just the best they can do with what they have.

D800 is much more an all-rounder camera with better specs but yet cheaper, which is why it feels so "better", or at least surely a much better bargain. That said, it is also right to consider that D800's pumped-up specs leave room for a very decent entry level FF camera, while you can't downgrade the 5D3 that much and still make it look attractive.

I don't think there's anything new here. Nikon keeps doing better cameras, Canon keeps doing better lenses. Probably I'm over-simplifying, but in the end it comes down to this. I prefer a worse camera and a better lens, so I stick with Canon. To someone who can't afford L-grade lenses, though, I would advise Nikon with no second thought. Anyway I have the feeling that the D600 will be such a bargain to make me (and many more) seriously consider a swap.


----------



## AvTvM (May 28, 2012)

Albi86 said:


> ... Nikon keeps doing better cameras, Canon keeps doing better lenses. ...



up to 5 years ago I would have agreed. But since then a lot has changed. Nikon has been making big time gains with lenses that I am interested in: 

24-70 ... Nikon is better than Canon Mk. I and it remains to be seen how much better Canon Mk. II will be
14-24 ... Nikon is absolutely unmatched, Canon 16-35 II is a total loser by comparison 
85/1.8 ... new Nikon rules supreme at very affordable price
24-120 ... Nikon has now basically matched Canon 24-105

I do not need and will not buy super-teles. For occasional rentals the Nikons would do just as well as Canon. f/1.2 lenses ... I consider them "nice", but not offering enough advantage over 1.4 Nikon lenses (e.g. 85/1.2 vs. 85/1.4) and the 50/1.2 is a dud. Fisheye ... I would not need or want a zoom, 8-15 ... unnecessary for me. Canon does have a major advantage with TS-E 17/4 and 24 II. I guess, Nikon will update their PCE T/S lenses soon and will probably match Canon in that area as well.

I have been waiting for years for a newly designed Canon 100-400/4-5.6 with latest generation IS and somewhat better optical qualities while retaining an affordable price tag ... but Canon is just not listening there. And while they refuse to update the aged 100-400, which would be a mega-seller with 10.000s of units a year sold, they pour resourcesinto such lenses as the new and utterly unnecessary 24/2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS and in a 24-70 without IS, but a huge price tag.


----------



## KeithR (May 28, 2012)

Albi86 said:


> D800 is much more an all-rounder camera



That's simply not remotely true by any measure - the D800 is pretty much the epitome of the one trick pony.

With the sole exception of low ISO DR landscape stuff - where the D800 has a small (not nearly as enormous as some of the whiners on here would have us believe) advantage - the 5D Mk III does pretty much _everything_ else better: sport, wildlife, journalism, event photography (especially low light work), reportage-style wedding photography, and they'll be a wash for studio-based work.


----------



## Albi86 (May 28, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> Albi86 said:
> 
> 
> > ... Nikon keeps doing better cameras, Canon keeps doing better lenses. ...
> ...



If we talk about 85mm primes, then I'd go Sigma 
Sorry but I do not agree about the 24-120. I do not see any field in which it matches Canon's 24-105, let alone beating it. It's not even cheaper. To be honest, 24-105 is one of the big reasons why I am reluctant to switch to Nikon.
Many people would want a new 100-400L, but to be honest I think the chances of seeing it in a short time are quite thin. There is a 70-300L and a new, extremely expensive 200-400L. A new, improved 100-400L would just blow them both away in seconds. Not cool, marketing-wise.




> That's simply not remotely true by any measure - the D800 is pretty much the epitome of the one trick pony.



Eeerr.... no?


----------



## awinphoto (May 28, 2012)

KeithR said:


> Albi86 said:
> 
> 
> > D800 is much more an all-rounder camera
> ...



I would generally agree with you there, although I'm sure I'll be flamed by some here... It all boils down to usage, needs, wants and expectations... Some such as mt spokane found the d800 to be more of his liking for how he shoots, others have found and loved the 5d3 for what it offers their photography... I think if you objectively look at all the features side by side, for every canon advantage, given how big or slim it may be, nikon has an equal advantage. It all goes to the wash anyways.


----------



## briansquibb (May 28, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> I would generally agree with you there, although I'm sure I'll be flamed by some here... It all boils down to usage, needs, wants and expectations... Some such as mt spokane found the d800 to be more of his liking for how he shoots, others have found and loved the 5d3 for what it offers their photography... I think if you objectively look at all the features side by side, for every canon advantage, given how big or slim it may be, nikon has an equal advantage. It all goes to the wash anyways.



Personally I believe that my prints from either manufacturer would be pretty much the same. A lot of the IQ difference on the best lens is really quite acedemic and wouldn't show significantly on a print.

We all shoot differently so our opinions will differ greatly - as they are opinions they are subjective so no one is right nor wrong.

I wouldn't buy a D800 because of the 4fps - that is to slow for what I need. My friend and I go shooting together and we have totally different styles - he has a 5DIII and thinks it is the dog's b's - over the weekend he wasnt trying to get the moment when a glider was just lifting off when being towed - which was when the full 10fps was needed. Horses for courses.


----------



## lola (May 28, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I wouldn't buy a D800 because of the 4fps - that is to slow for what I need. My friend and I go shooting together and we have totally different styles - he has a 5DIII and thinks it is the dog's b's - over the weekend he wasnt trying to get the moment when a glider was just lifting off when being towed - which was when the full 10fps was needed. Horses for courses.



Why not consider D800 a 5fps camera? Yes, with a grip and DX crop but that's still cheaper than the 5D3 with more pixels!

What's really amazing is that somehow some people rate 1fps difference more precious than 36MP and 14.5 stops of dynamic range... Wow...


----------



## awinphoto (May 28, 2012)

lola said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I wouldn't buy a D800 because of the 4fps - that is to slow for what I need. My friend and I go shooting together and we have totally different styles - he has a 5DIII and thinks it is the dog's b's - over the weekend he wasnt trying to get the moment when a glider was just lifting off when being towed - which was when the full 10fps was needed. Horses for courses.
> ...



Well then again you get the extra FPS but at a cost. Sometimes it's more important to others, sometimes not. Sometimes color rendition is more important, which canon is generally better from most testers, sometimes the AF, which canon takes the slight edge assuming you don't need the F8 shooting with certain lens combos. Sometimes the processing, video, and ergonomics are more important. Sometimes it's the service that matters or the other lens options. No one is equal and others will prefer the nikons latitude and extra workflow needed to handle 36mp files are more important. It is what it is. 

There are probably 3 different camps of photographers who actually are able to afford these cameras. 15-20% there the canon is best for what they shoot, how they shoot and needs and expectations. 15-20% whom the Nikon rules. And 60-70% whom either camera would suffice and go over and beyond their own personal experience level. No one camp is more correct than the other and it doesn't make one better than others, it just is the way it is.


----------



## TAR (May 28, 2012)

i think people just say more FPS but more than 90% photos posted on web are either static or landscape or portraits.. and i don't know how many people really use high speed mode all the time ..i am sure less than 20 percent of the time..but for the sake of arguing they say they use.


----------



## awinphoto (May 28, 2012)

TAR said:


> i think people just say more FPS but more than 90% photos posted on web are either static or landscape or portraits.. and i don't know how many people really use high speed mode all the time ..i am sure less than 20 percent of the time..but for the sake of arguing they say they use.



Well shoot, how many 7d shooters use all 8FPS on a regular situation? It's nice to have when you need it


----------



## Marsu42 (May 28, 2012)

TAR said:


> i think people just say more FPS but more than 90% photos posted on web are either static or landscape or portraits.. and i don't know how many people really use high speed mode all the time ..i am sure less than 20 percent of the time..but for the sake of arguing they say they use.



I agree many people value specs they'd do without - but it's not fps, because it's not only used for continuous shooting until the buffer is full. I often use 0,5-1ev 3x bracketing bursts either for exposure fusion or to make sure the exposure is spot-on in one of them. Also there is always something wrong in non-static scenes, so it's good to have 2 backup shots. For these, I'd like to have more fps because they'd be in closer succession.


----------



## Axilrod (May 28, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> up to 5 years ago I would have agreed. But since then a lot has changed. Nikon has been making big time gains with lenses that I am interested in:
> 
> 24-70 ... Nikon is better than Canon Mk. I and it remains to be seen how much better Canon Mk. II will be
> 14-24 ... Nikon is absolutely unmatched, Canon 16-35 II is a total loser by comparison
> ...



I agree that the Nikon 14-24mm is an awesome lens and it would be nice if Canon had a comparable offering. But you talk about everything else like it's crap just because you personally don't need or want it. The world doesn't revolve around you, Canon makes decisions based on profitability and what the majority wants. And since when has the Canon 85 1.8 been a bad lens? For the money I thought that lens was amazing and can't imagine the Nikon being that much better (not to mention they are the same price). Either way you should be able to take awesome pictures with ANY of the lenses you mentioned, if you can't then a new version isn't going to be much help. 

We get it, you hate the 5DIII, you hate Canon lenses and you want to make sweet love to the D800. That's ok, but I just don't get why you are complaining about it on a Canon Rumor site. Nikon clearly is a better choice for you and I think you would be a happier person if you sold your Canon gear and bought Nikon gear.


----------



## awinphoto (May 28, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > up to 5 years ago I would have agreed. But since then a lot has changed. Nikon has been making big time gains with lenses that I am interested in:
> ...



Haha +1 

That said let me say a quick prayer,

Lord forgive us for our transgressions and Prepare us for the ass chewing we are about to receive from all the Nikon fanboys


----------



## Marsu42 (May 28, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> We get it, you hate the 5DIII, you hate Canon lenses and you want to have sex with the D800. That's ok, but I just don't get why you are complaining about it on a Canon Rumor site. SHUT UP AND SWITCH TO NIKON ALREADY!



You're ignoring the most sacred forum rule: Don't feed the troll or you might become one, too. We won't have to wait for long to have tons of real Nikon "fanboys" around if Canon enthusiasts are provoked that easily once Nikon's products may have a slight edge... which is regrettable, because I don't see how "Canon rumors" cannot be a good place where rumors that place Canon at a disadvantage are disproven, too.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (May 28, 2012)

lola said:


> What's really amazing is that somehow some people rate 1fps difference more precious than 36MP and 14.5 stops of dynamic range... Wow...


I find it amazing too. 
I guess for some it is a big deal. For others, I think they will justify anything Canon puts out.


----------



## pete vella (May 28, 2012)

after more research noticed d600 is a dx format camera.
so would be direct competition to the 60d or upcoming 70d
so we will for sure se a nice update to the 70d af system. 
Canon should update the sensor too. This is a first time buyer
segment where many users will buy the camera with the kit. 
Good news for the 60d/7d users


----------



## aznable (May 28, 2012)

the canon 60d price was (correct me if i wrong) 1099$..we are talking about a rumored camera at 1500$ (optimistic price that would kill d700 instantly)


----------



## Marsu42 (May 28, 2012)

pete vella said:


> after more research noticed d600 is a dx format camera.



Where did you get this from? If I search for it the main source nikonrumors says it's full frame (fx). The next dx camera will probably be a d7000 update.


----------



## pete vella (May 28, 2012)

Well yesterday i asked a staff member in London Camera Exchange in Charing Cross about D600. I was told it is coming for sure (so it is not a rumor) but it will be DX camera!!! It’s 24MP sensor is well known – we can find it in NEX7, Alfa77 and D3200.

via NikonRumors.com


----------



## Albi86 (May 28, 2012)

lola said:


> What's really amazing is that somehow some people rate 1fps difference more precious than 36MP and 14.5 stops of dynamic range... Wow...



+1
Exactly my thought. 
The 5D3 is a great camera within its scope, the D800 is a great camera in every respect. 
The ridiculous fact is that the D800 is 500$ cheaper, while it should be the other way around. 
The amount of flaws you can accept is of course heavily dependent on the price you pay. Round 5D3's price tag 1000$ down and we all will agree that it's an amazing camera in every respect.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 28, 2012)

pete vella said:


> I was told it is coming for sure (so it is not a rumor) but it will be DX camera!!! It’s 24MP sensor is well known



Alas, the Canon world is saved again if it's really only dx. Personally however, I'd wished for a fx body because it would have put pressure on Canon to follow suite and replace the 5d2 with something competitive - I am sure the 5d2 will not be around forever, if because of the name alone.


----------



## briansquibb (May 28, 2012)

lola said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I wouldn't buy a D800 because of the 4fps - that is to slow for what I need. My friend and I go shooting together and we have totally different styles - he has a 5DIII and thinks it is the dog's b's - over the weekend he wasnt trying to get the moment when a glider was just lifting off when being towed - which was when the full 10fps was needed. Horses for courses.
> ...



Camera 1 - sports, general purpose

1. I need 10fps

2. I dont need more mps

3. I dont need more DR

4. I dont want ff

Camera 2 - portrait

1. I need 5fps

2. 21mps is enough

3. I dont need more DR

I would prefer a 300 f/2.8 II to a d800


----------



## x-vision (May 28, 2012)

Albi86 said:


> Round 5D3's price tag 1000$ down and we all will agree that it's an amazing camera in every respect.



Exactly. 

At $2500, the 5DIII will start being perceived as the best camera Canon has ever made .

The thing is, this is exactly what Canon needs to do ... ASAP. 

Because no, the D600 will not be DX. 

It will be a FF camera priced at $1999 that will kill (at least) two birds with one stone: 
- the 5DIII at its current price
- any hope that Canon might have to charge more than $1500 for the 7DII (if there's a 7DII)

Can't wait for the D600 to get released. Go Nikon!


----------



## briansquibb (May 28, 2012)

x-vision said:


> Because no, the D600 will not be DX.
> 
> It will be a FF camera priced at $1999 that will kill (at least) two birds with one stone:
> - the 5DIII at its current price
> ...



Oh good - off to NR then?


----------



## Kit. (May 28, 2012)

TAR said:


> i think people just say more FPS but more than 90% photos posted on web are either static or landscape or portraits..


90% photos posted on web are pics of cats in poor light. Half of them are pics of fast-moving cats.


----------



## gmrza (May 29, 2012)

Albi86 said:


> lola said:
> 
> 
> > What's really amazing is that somehow some people rate 1fps difference more precious than 36MP and 14.5 stops of dynamic range... Wow...
> ...



Looked at another way, Nikon feels it cannot charge as much for the D800 as Canon can for the 5D3, and Canon feels it can charge more for the 5D3 than Nikon charges for the D800. That is not saying one camera is better than the other - that is just how Canon and Nikon see their offerings in the market, and how they judge market demand.

Better products don't always sell better. I have worked for an organisation that had an inferior offering to its main competitors, but we killed our competitors in the market.


----------



## Axilrod (May 29, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> Axilrod said:
> 
> 
> > We get it, you hate the 5DIII, you hate Canon lenses and you want to have sex with the D800. That's ok, but I just don't get why you are complaining about it on a Canon Rumor site. SHUT UP AND SWITCH TO NIKON ALREADY!
> ...



Fixed: We get it, you hate the 5DIII, you hate Canon lenses and you want to make sweet love to the D800. That's ok, but I just don't get why you are complaining about it on a Canon Rumor site. Nikon clearly is a better choice for you and I think you would be a happier person if you sold your Canon gear and bought Nikon gear.


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

gmrza said:


> Looked at another way, Nikon feels it cannot charge as much for the D800 as Canon can for the 5D3, and Canon feels it can charge more for the 5D3 than Nikon charges for the D800. That is not saying one camera is better than the other - that is just how Canon and Nikon see their offerings in the market, and how they judge market demand.
> 
> Better products don't always sell better. I have worked for an organisation that had an inferior offering to its main competitors, but we killed our competitors in the market.



Rather like Betamax and VHS then


----------



## Dylan777 (May 29, 2012)

TAR said:


> i think people just say more FPS but more than 90% photos posted on web are either static or landscape or portraits.. and i don't know how many people really use high speed mode all the time ..i am sure less than 20 percent of the time..but for the sake of arguing they say they use.



Most people wouldn't post their kid pics (playing sport) on the internet, where high FPS would be used. I'm one of them


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> TAR said:
> 
> 
> > i think people just say more FPS but more than 90% photos posted on web are either static or landscape or portraits.. and i don't know how many people really use high speed mode all the time ..i am sure less than 20 percent of the time..but for the sake of arguing they say they use.
> ...



... or beach volleyball ...


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Camera 1 - sports, general purpose
> 
> 1. I need 10fps
> 2. I dont need more mps
> ...



How is it even possible not to want more DR?!?!? It's not a preference or personal taste, it's the very essence of image capture! This is no different than saying, for example: I don't want a camera capturing the color red, it's no big deal since I have all the other colors... That's amazingly and unbelievably... well... I don't want to pick a word for here...


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Camera 1 - sports, general purpose
> ...



Have you checked what DR you are currently using then?

Here is a picture from the weekend - 7DR taken with a 11DR camera.

So what possible benefit would the (so called) 14DR give me? 10fps is far important for me.

You have to remember that the 14DR is not a straight from the camera 14DR, it is a pp'd image to get it (it is a DxO fabricated number). Out of the camera the D800 doesn't manage 12DR so in reality the D800 buys very little extra DR. Sorry that reality doesn't match your Nikon fuelled dreams


----------



## Albi86 (May 29, 2012)

gmrza said:


> Albi86 said:
> 
> 
> > lola said:
> ...



Surely.
As I said some pages back, Canon has better lenses and they alone force many people (including me) to stick with Canon. I accept to pay a bit more to have a slightly inferior camera for the sake of coupling it with a top lens. 

But there is of course a limit to it, provided by mere common sense. If Nikon's D600 proves itself to be such a bargain and if Canon doesn't lower prices considerably within 1 year (let's say the old 5D2's price point, at 2900€ for the kit), then it becomes quite inconvenient.

Very good MF primes from Samyang and Voigtländer are chipped in their Nikon versions but not in Canon's. Nikon's 24-70 f/2.8 and 14-24 are very good lenses. Telezooms can be provided by Sigma and Tamron. 
My point is... if I can get a very good FF camera for less than 2000€, then I can make it work also without L-grade lenses, and it would be unlikely for me to pay a 1500€ premium for a similarly specced camera.


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

Albi86 said:


> Very good MF primes from Samyang and Voigtländer are chipped in their Nikon versions but not in Canon's. Nikon's 24-70 f/2.8 and 14-24 are very good lenses. Telezooms can be provided by Sigma and Tamron.
> My point is... if I can get a very good FF camera for less than 2000€, then I can make it work also without L-grade lenses, and it would be unlikely for me to pay a 1500€ premium for a similarly specced camera.



Do you drive a Mercedes or a Ford.

It is your personal choice - but please dont try to make out that we are foolish in our choice just because it is different from yours


----------



## Albi86 (May 29, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Albi86 said:
> 
> 
> > Very good MF primes from Samyang and Voigtländer are chipped in their Nikon versions but not in Canon's. Nikon's 24-70 f/2.8 and 14-24 are very good lenses. Telezooms can be provided by Sigma and Tamron.
> ...



Eeeerrrr.... when did I insult anyone?
I am clearly talking about price/quality ratios, which is for me the most important feature. There are also people who won't care about it and buy the cheapest or the most high-end product. I'm not saying it's stupid, as long as they don't say it is the best solution on the market.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> How is it even possible not to want more DR?!?!?



Imho it's self-evident that everybody would take more dr for free and w/o other tradeoffs, so obviously it's about "what do I want next?". And indeed, personally even on my 60d I very seldom have a problem with dr if I overexpose and recover highlights from raw. The one problem is very low resolution in shadows, but it doesn't concern that many shots.

So for my current shooting style & if'd be asked, I'd want less iso noise over more dr - the latter might be more convenient if shooting events and the like with flash where you often get the exposure wrong and cannot do bracketing.


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Do you drive a Mercedes or a Ford.
> 
> It is your personal choice - but please dont try to make out that we are foolish in our choice just because it is different from yours



Blonde vs. brunette is personal choice, not Mercedes vs. Ford. It's simply a matter of how deep your pockets go! You may not afford a Mercedes but thinking a Ford is "better" is just foolish...


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Have you checked what DR you are currently using then?
> Here is a picture from the weekend - 7DR taken with a 11DR camera.
> So what possible benefit would the (so called) 14DR give me?


I believe you're missing the conception of DR... Please read this article for starters.



briansquibb said:


> 10fps is far important for me.


Since when 5D3 shoots at 10fps.?



briansquibb said:


> You have to remember that the 14DR is not a straight from the camera 14DR, it is a pp'd image to get it (it is a DxO fabricated number).


Since DxO measures sensor performance, of course they work on post-processed RAW images, what's wrong with that? Don't tell me you're hanging on to JPEG dynamic range in D800-5D3 debate...



briansquibb said:


> Out of the camera the D800 doesn't manage 12DR so in reality the D800 buys very little extra DR.


If by saying "out of the camera" you mean shooting JPEG, that's even worse because if you're leaving how your photos will look to a software engineer, you shouldn't even be discussing dynamic range...



briansquibb said:


> Sorry that reality doesn't match your Nikon fuelled dreams


There's no need to dream of cameras, they are simply tools; just like phones, mp3 players, cigarette lighters, etc... I just go and buy whatever fits my needs... Canon now, Nikon tomorrow, something else the other day... Don't get too attached...


----------



## AvTvM (May 29, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Do you drive a Mercedes or a Ford.



the choice here is: if a "truly excellent" Mercedes cost USD/€ 2.900 and a "quite good" Ford cost USD/€ 3.300 ... why would anyone in their right mind get the Ford? 

It really all comes down to Canon's pricing of the 5D3. It is at least 500 too high, no matter which way one looks at it. And even though there are a ton of people who don't care and will buy anyway, that pricing decision is going to bite Canon in the back, as soon as initial market demand is satisfied. 

And the pain will be even greater, if/when Nikon comes out with a FF D600 at around 1500.


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Do you drive a Mercedes or a Ford.
> ...



I totally agree... If 5D3 was priced somewhere around $2700, there wouldn't even be a D800-5D3 debate... People would simply see them cameras of different segments... Now, along with the expensive new lenses, people who have invested deeply in Canon feel insulted somehow, thinking that Canon, backed up with the market share, is milking them!


----------



## Albi86 (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Have you checked what DR you are currently using then?
> ...



I quite like you!


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

Albi86 said:


> I quite like you!



Thank you!


----------



## Marsu42 (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> It really all comes down to Canon's pricing of the 5D3. It is at least 500 too high, no matter which way one looks at it. And even though there are a ton of people who don't care and will buy anyway, that pricing decision is going to bite Canon in the back, as soon as initial market demand is satisfied.



Not necessarily, since they are free to lower the price once early adopters have gotten it. And for them, Canon could have priced the 5d3 @$4000 because they've got the "it it worth it" debate anyway and it's still less money than the 1dx that might be even too much for well-off amateurs.

And if they lower the price, people will still have the "anchor price" $3500 in mind, resulting in two thoughts: "This must be a great camera" and "It's a bargain, since now it's only $2700".


----------



## Jotho (May 29, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> TAR said:
> 
> 
> > i think people just say more FPS but more than 90% photos posted on web are either static or landscape or portraits.. and i don't know how many people really use high speed mode all the time ..i am sure less than 20 percent of the time..but for the sake of arguing they say they use.
> ...



I completely agree there. Also I shoot a lot of golf with my friends and I am really really sure that no one else than us wants to see those pics where we are trying to understand our swings etc.


----------



## Albi86 (May 29, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> lola said:
> 
> 
> > It really all comes down to Canon's pricing of the 5D3. It is at least 500 too high, no matter which way one looks at it. And even though there are a ton of people who don't care and will buy anyway, that pricing decision is going to bite Canon in the back, as soon as initial market demand is satisfied.
> ...



This is true, but not only. There also is a problem of market saturation.
Now the 5D3 is quite a hot seller because everyone who had the need, the firm will and the possibility of buying it is doing so. This includes pros who needed to replace their 5D2 asap, and amateurs... "Canon enthusiats".

Soon enough all these people will have their camera and sales will go down, then there will be warehouse issues and the price will go down to clear the production surplus. If Nikon's D600 is similarly specced and costs a half, then probably this is going to happen even sooner. If Canon is also planning to produce a high-MP camera, I would not be surprised to see the 5D3 priced between D600 and D800, with the new camera above the D800. It would be quite a regular pattern.

As I said, when this camera will cost 2200-2300€ body only, I'll be happy to buy it.


----------



## KeithR (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> [DR is] the very essence of image capture!



Oh, is that right, now?

Firstly: any problems with the DR in these images, from my "lowly" 7D?

This to this.

And 

this to this.

I'll answer for you. No, there isn't. 

The fact is, DR isn't nearly the unattainable Holy Grail that the whiny, incompetent, malcontent trolls on here would have you believe - and the 5D Mk III is a damn' sight better than the 7D.

Secondly: the base ISO DR advantage of the Noink is just that - the _base ISO_ DR advantage. As soon as you're north of 100 ISO, things are more or less even, and eventually actually become a 5D Mk III advantage as ISO increases.

I _never, ever_ shoot at base ISO, because - for me - shutter speed is always _infinitely_ more important than some notional DR advantage at ISOs I never use: and besides, the images above prove that there's all the DR any reasonable person could reasonably want in any Real World situation - you've just got to know how to get to it, and many don't. 

More to the point, I've yet to see the image from any of the whiners that "_only_" the D800 could produce - and that's because _it doesn't exist_.

Frames Per Second _matters_: the wing position of this Short eared owl is "perfect" - not because of any Ninja-like reflexes on my part that allowed me to react to the millisecond to capture the perfect wing position, but because my 7D had the FPS to get just the right moment: I would _literally_ have had only half the likelihood of getting this image if I'd been shooting the D800, and in my experience of bird and sport photography, 6 fps is the lowest frame rate that I would happily work with.

Getting the point yet? The D800 is a nice enough camera, but a complete and utter irrelevance in my world, delivering precisely _no useful performance improvements whatsoever_ for my photography.

The only thing I like about the D800 over the 5D Mk III is the pixel density - but that doesn't get _close_ to outweighing its practical shortfalls in every other context that matters to me.

But you're doing what so many on here do: you assume that what you shoot is what everyone else shoots, that what you want from a camera is all anyone could want from a camera, and that this is therefore _all that matters_ when evaluating one body against another.

Well, you're wrong. Completely, utterly, and unequivocally wrong.


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Have you checked what DR you are currently using then?
> ...



Thank you - yes I do understand DR, and yes DPP gives you the DR of your photo. I shoot RAW and DPP gives the DR of the raw image.

Shame you didn't read my equipment line - else you would have spotted that I dont have a 5DIII

Dont worry just buy yourself a D800 and imagine you are getting 14DR even though there is no need for 14DR in the majority of images.


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

KeithR said:


> lola said:
> 
> 
> > [DR is] the very essence of image capture!
> ...



1. Calling people who are asking for better image quality "whiny, incompetent, malcontent trolls" doesn't make you look/sound pro. That's yesterday's trick.

2. Please excuse me for not sharing your low standards for image quality. The shared photos are probably good memories to you but mean absolutely nothing to me in terms of image quality. I would have to quit the business if I delivered the skull and bicycle quality shots to my clients.

I do understand - and even sometimes feel - the need for a high-fps, fast camera. What I don't understand is; how your need of a high fps camera makes the 5D3 a better camera than the D800.

I kindly ask you to quote the post where I've implied that what I shoot is what everyone else shoots, that what I want from a camera is all anyone could want from a camera, and that this is therefore all that matters when evaluating one body against another.

Please don't defend a company as if it's your family business... That way you're missing the whole point; the point that Canon is selling a camera which is below competition spec-wise and above competition price-wise. I don't recall anyone calling the 5D3 crap...


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> I do understand - and even sometimes feel - the need for a high-fps, fast camera. What I don't understand is; how your need of a high fps camera makes the 5D3 a better camera than the D800.



'Better' is a subjective word that implies personal taste/requirements w.h.y.

If fps is a requirement for a person then if camera delivers the required fps then it is clearly better for that person than one that doesn't

In my case and Keith's clearly we feel the need for fps. Therefore the D800 fails at that point.


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Thank you - yes I do understand DR, and yes DPP gives you the DR of your photo. I shoot RAW and DPP gives the DR of the raw image.
> 
> Shame you didn't read my equipment line - else you would have spotted that I dont have a 5DIII
> 
> Dont worry just buy yourself a D800 and imagine you are getting 14DR even though there is no need for 14DR in the majority of images.



I never assumed that you had a 5D3, where did that come from?

Oh, I will buy a D800... Just waiting for Photokina, just in case Canon accidentally comes up with some serious camera without stuff like rate button and in-camera HDR that you'd expect Sony or Samsung would come up with... If they don't; then what the hell, a D800 and a Nikkor 70-200 sums up around $5000 and should cover fashion shots just fine for starters...

And by the way, what are the facts you're basing on when saying Nikon's DR is imaginary and there's no need for 14 stops of DR? I'd really like to hear that.


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> 'Better' is a subjective word that implies personal taste/requirements w.h.y.
> 
> If fps is a requirement for a person then if camera delivers the required fps then it is clearly better for that person than one that doesn't
> 
> In my case and Keith's clearly we feel the need for fps. Therefore the D800 fails at that point.



5D3 measuring up to your needs doesn't change the fact that it's an overpriced camera that disappointed many people.


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> I never assumed that you had a 5D3, where did that come from?



Look here for the 6fps



lola said:


> [Quote
> 
> 10fps is far important for me.



Since when 5D3 shoots at 10fps.?

[/quote]

If a picture does not have 14DR then there is no need for a 14DR camera. So you would be wasting your money buying a D800 just for the DR (which wont show in prints either)


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > 'Better' is a subjective word that implies personal taste/requirements w.h.y.
> ...



You haven't worked this out yet. *I dont have a 5DIII nor am I buying one *

The value of an item is subjective so to tell us that it is overpriced is meaningless as it only tells us *your opinion*


----------



## AvTvM (May 29, 2012)

Dear Brian ... as long as Canon has many customers like you, we will never get a camera with the qualities of both the 5D 3 [6 fps + EF-mount] AND the D800 [everything else] at the price of the latter.


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> lola said:
> 
> 
> > I never assumed that you had a 5D3, where did that come from?
> ...



It's a discussion on 5D3!!!!! It's not assuming you have one!
You said you wanted 10fps, and I said 5D3 doesn't have it!

Gee, man!

I don't feel the strength in me to continue this debate anymore... I give up!
Dynamic range is dog-crap, resolution is pig-crap... Long live Canon!


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> Dear Brian ... as long as Canon has many customers like you, we will never get a camera with the qualities of both the 5D 3 [6 fps + EF-mount] AND the D800 [everything else] at the price of the latter.



Yep you wrong yet again - I am not looking for either a 5DIII or a D800 - so why would I care?


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> It's a discussion on 5D3!!!!! It's not assuming you have one!
> You said you wanted 10fps, and I said 5D3 doesn't have it!



Wrong again - this thread is about the D600 - and the D600 doesn't have it nor does the D800. So you comments about the 5DIII were a complete red herring


----------



## AvTvM (May 29, 2012)

lola said:


> Dynamic range is dog-crap, resolution is pig-crap... Long live Canon!



ROFL! ;D ;D ;D
You really made my day!


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

Well there are two trolls who have come out of the closet. Go back to NR lads


----------



## AvTvM (May 29, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Well there are two trolls who have come out of the closet. Go back to NR lads



why should we? Up to now (!) I am still a Canon user, so I am fully entitled to write here. 
Plus, it is way too much fun to shake up deeply devoted Canon fanboys in their beliefs with facts. And even more fun to drive Canon-sponsored posters thru town! ;-)

Nikon's D600 as currently rumored over on NR will quite likely be the next tough test of the Canon-devotees unwavering faith. It may well deliver as much or more than the Canon 5D 3 at less than half of the cost. Slightly more resolution, almost for sure more DR, quite likely also same speed 6 fps, heck, maybe even 7? plus a very capable AF-system (probably even working at f/8). 

Not that I care for it in the least, but to test the Canonites creed, Nikon may even put better video in it? ;-)


----------



## rj79in (May 29, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Well there are two trolls who have come out of the closet. Go back to NR lads
> ...



Isn't it wonderful that neither Nikon nor Canon charges you for dreaming


----------



## aznable (May 29, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> Nikon's D600 as currently rumored over on NR will quite likely be the next tough test of the Canon-devotees unwavering faith. It may well deliver as much or more than the Canon 5D 3 at less than half of the cost. Slightly more resolution, almost for sure more DR, quite likely also same speed 6 fps, heck, maybe even 7? plus a very capable AF-system (probably even working at f/8).



if it's going to cost just $1500 is gonna destroy sales of d800 too :'( … except nikon hasnt a very capable AF system on d800 so i doubt it would be implemented on D600


----------



## awinphoto (May 29, 2012)

dilbert said:


> aznable said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Thought people on a few pages back said the d600 was going to be a crop camera, not full frame? I could be wrong... Either way I doubt the D800 will be effected unless it effects itself with shotty production that is currently going on, but it will eat into the D300s market tho... unless they cripple that series.


----------



## cliffwang (May 29, 2012)

Haven't checked the thread during the weekend. I am so surprised more and more users join the discussion for the D600 rumor. I really hope Canon can hear the voices from non-PRO Canon users. Retain the strength and improve your weakness from competitors, then I will be happy to stay with you. Hopefully we can see a response from Canon soon.(Then I can plan to buy my new Canon lenses ;D)


----------



## aznable (May 29, 2012)

dilbert said:


> If you want 36MP and you've got $3000 to spend on a camera, spending $1500 on a D600 that only has 24MP will not get you there. For people that are just looking for a full frame DSLR, the D600 will add new options for potential purchasers. So rather than ponder over spending $3000 and whether you can afford that much, you'll have the option of a camera at about half that price so lots of people that have been thinking about it can just say "Yes!"



yes $3000 for a camera at 36mpix that is slower than my 450D taking photos. now the option for nikonians are 12mpix/36mpix, and the d800 has a better sensor than d700, so in my opinion a faster camera with a good sensor at 24mpix would kill also the d800 sales

of course i am talking about the dream camera of rumors spreading around; i guess the price of d600 will be higher and feature wise would not in the same League of d800, so it will not be a competitor of 5dmk3


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 29, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> I really hope Canon can hear the voices from non-PRO Canon users.



Canon hears them...just not the ones posting here...


----------



## jaduffy007 (May 29, 2012)

Cliff, I don't think switching is as costly as many make it out to be, especially if you buy (trade) used. Plenty of mint condition used equipment "out there". Just need to make sure Nikon makes lenses to replace your fav Canon glass. Nikon has great glass, but has winners and losers just like Canon. For example, if you use a Canon 17mm TS a lot, Nikon doesn't make a TS that's quite as good. On the other hand, Canon doesn't make a lens that equals Nikon's 14-24.

If the D600 really comes out at $1500 / 1600...wow. Especially after the D800, that will make many contemplate if they're on the "right ship". Canon would absolutely have to respond with a competing product imo. Not even a used 5d2 would be equal to the rumored D600.

The great thing is, you can't go wrong with either Canon or Nikon 




cliffwang said:


> hyles said:
> 
> 
> > 5DII in not mutch more expensive, quite similar spec.
> ...


----------



## jaduffy007 (May 29, 2012)

KeithR said:


> lola said:
> 
> 
> > [DR is] the very essence of image capture!
> ...



Hilarious. First, from your comments, you really don't understand the enormous benefits of greater DR. Then, make statements that are entirely based on "assuming what you shoot is what everyone else shoots"...only in the end to criticize people for doing so. CLASSIC !!! Mirror please.


----------



## cliffwang (May 29, 2012)

jaduffy007 said:


> Cliff, I don't think switching is as costly as many make it out to be, especially if you buy (trade) used. Plenty of mint condition equipment "out there". Just need to make sure Nikon makes lenses to replace your fav Canon glass. Nikon has great glass, but has winners and losers just like Canon. For example, if you use a Canon 17mm TS a lot, Nikon doesn't make a TS that's quite as good. On the other hand, Canon doesn't make a lens that equals Nikon's 14-24.
> 
> If the D600 really comes out at $1500 / 1600...wow. Especially after the D800, that will make many contemplate if they're on the "right ship". Canon would absolutely have to respond with a competing product imo. Not even a used 5d2 would be equal to the rumored D600.
> 
> The great thing is, you can't go wrong with either Canon or Nikon


I like to buy new lenses because I can return them if I get a bad copy(not my 24-70mm). I don't want to buy lenses from someone I don't know. That's why I believe it's costy for me to switch to Nikon. Hopefully we will see the Canon's response to D600 if the D600 rumor is true.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 29, 2012)

dilbert said:


> With LR4, the D800 will allow you to _HDR_ a scene with one photo that would take multiple shots with anything that Canon offers. The D800 allows you to say "I don't need 3 exposures for HDR to get the most out of this scene, I can do it with one!"



Many typical hdr scenes (like shooting in the snow or at the beach with bright sunlight and wanting to have details in the shadows) will still require 3,5,7... exposures for some time to come, even with the d800 sensor. I'd like to have it to on my Canon of course, but let's stay realistic what it can do. And it cannot entirely replace hdr.

Btw: it's a viable option with any sensor to hdr or better exposure fuse a single picture with LR because it saves you local editing, I wish Adobe would build single image exposure fusion into it out of the box.


----------



## hutjeflut (May 29, 2012)

nah doesnt have focus points in the 4 corners so i dont want it.

i dont get excited untill i can shoot at night without flash or untill we get focus points in the corners.


----------



## Kernuak (May 29, 2012)

Funny, all these years, I thought that photography was all about good light and composition, but apparently I was wrong, it's all in the dynamic range a camera is able to produce. At least now, I know that I just need to buy a D800 to make lots of money. I no longer need to pick my moment or maximise my chances with a higher frame rate, because the D800 will do it all for me.


----------



## cliffwang (May 29, 2012)

Kernuak said:


> Funny, all these years, I thought that photography was all about good light and composition, but apparently I was wrong, it's all in the dynamic range a camera is able to produce. At least now, I know that I just need to buy a D800 to make lots of money. I no longer need to pick my moment or maximise my chances with a higher frame rate, because the D800 will do it all for me.



I still believe light and composition is the most important factors for photography. However, if a camera can bring you more convenience, why not?
By the way, D800 is not high frame rate for me. 7D is much faster than D800. If I have lot of money, I will consider 1D X and D4.


----------



## briansquibb (May 29, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> Kernuak said:
> 
> 
> > Funny, all these years, I thought that photography was all about good light and composition, but apparently I was wrong, it's all in the dynamic range a camera is able to produce. At least now, I know that I just need to buy a D800 to make lots of money. I no longer need to pick my moment or maximise my chances with a higher frame rate, because the D800 will do it all for me.
> ...



+1

I would love to see the images that the D800 fanboys think have a DR of 14. I have been through about of thousand of mine and most are in the 8stop area, with one maxxing out at about 10.5 - this is on the 1DS3 which is capable of about 11 stop.

If this is true across the board then very few will benefit from the DR of the D800. So then it would just be a case of choosing between fps and mps.


----------



## aznable (May 30, 2012)

dilbert said:


> aznable said:
> 
> 
> > yes $3000 for a camera at 36mpix that is slower than my 450D taking photos. now the option for nikonians are 12mpix/36mpix, and the d800 has a better sensor than d700, so in my opinion a faster camera with a good sensor at 24mpix would kill also the d800 sales
> ...



ops sorry, my mistake, it's a long time i dont use that camera; just wanted to say that 12mpix more than 24mpix will not justify the double of the price, so the sales of d800 would be killed.

anyway i think that d600 will have a lot of features scaled down from d800

btw we are getting too serious about those rumors...this topic is a joke plain and simple


----------



## briansquibb (May 30, 2012)

dilbert said:


> I wonder if the end of this year will see Canon on the bottom of the megapixel pile in all DSLR categories?



Like the D4 vs 1DX flagship catagory??


----------



## AvTvM (May 30, 2012)

aznable said:


> ops sorry, my mistake, it's a long time i dont use that camera; just wanted to say that 12mpix more than 24mpix will not justify the double of the price, so the sales of d800 would be killed.
> anyway i think that d600 will have a lot of features scaled down from d800
> btw we are getting too serious about those rumors...this topic is a joke plain and simple



I look at it this way: Nikon made a blatant mistake with the D3x ... 24 Megapixels, FF sensor ... but way too expensive. Result: the D3x did not sell at all. Nikon realized what the problem was and released the D800 ... 36 fantastic Megapixels combined with virtuellay every other hi-end feature of the D3x [AF, metering, etc.] ... at HALF THE PRICE. This is why the D800 is such a game-changer. It establishes a totally new price-structure for higher-end DSLRs. A D600 with 24MP, slightly scaled-back features and a price of USD/€ 1500-1700 will nicely complement it. 

Old structure, "pre-2012/D800"
* Canon and Nikon "flagship big megapixel DSLR with all the trimmings, except speed" (D3x, 1Ds3): USD/€ 6,000
* Canon/Nikon - speed flagship DSLR with max. speed, but less resolution (D3/s, 1D IV) - USD/$ 4,000
* Canon/Nikon "second tier, massively downscaled FF-DSLR" (5D1+2, D700): USD/€ 2,500

New structure:
* Nikon D4/Canon 1D X - flagship specialist journalism/sports camera, max speed, limited resolution - USD/€ 6,000 
* Nikon D800 - max. resolution, fully featured, except speed: USD/€ 2,900 
* Nikon D600 - second-tier FF-model, less resolutuon, features scaled back: USD/€ 1,500-1,700 

Canon has failed to adequately repond to this and will undoubtedly pay the price in market share. While the 5D3 is definitely a good camera, it is nothing more than what the 5D2 should have been from the very start. As so often with Canon: too little, too late, too expensive. In order to really win big time, it would have needed a killer new sensor [24 MP would have been enough, but with massively mproved DR and Hi-ISO noise] and a killer feature helping users to more keeper shots more easily - e.g. fully working, 2012 implementation of Eye Control Focus - in order to justify a higher price and effectively compete with the D800.

And yes, initial 5D3 sales may be good, as impatient people are skimmed off their excess purchasing power (no problem with that). And yes, Pro's may not switch immediately due to large system investment. 

But MANY "FF-upgraders"/enthusiasts/semi-pro's will quite easily switch from Canon to Nikon. Especially since they need to sell their EF-S lenses anyway since these are unusable on Canon FF DSLRs. Even more so, if/when Nikon comes out with a 24 MP, "well-enough featured" D600 @ USD/€ 1500-1700. There are many more people (amateurs) able and willing to spend that amount of money rather than 3 grand or more for a camera. The D600 will therefore nicely complement the D800 ... difference in price, resolution and features will be nicely balanced.


----------



## aznable (May 30, 2012)

a scaled down FF camera already exists...it's from canon, has 21mpix sensor and it's called 5D mkII; selling for 1600€ here in italy

i cannot see crowds of amateur switching from their aps-c camera maybe because they dont care about FF


----------



## AvTvM (May 30, 2012)

aznable said:


> a scaled down FF camera already exists...it's from canon, has 21mpix sensor and it's called 5D mkII; selling for 1600€ here in italy
> i cannot see crowds of amateur switching from their aps-c camera maybe because they dont care about FF



Once a D600 comes out, the 5D 2 will no longer be a contender ... not very many people will find a 4 year old camera design attractive, when a new FF cam with better sensor/IQ and way better AF-system and other photographic features (Auto ISO for example ...) is available at a similar price. 

Depending on video capabilities of a D600, the 5D 2 (with ML) may remain interesting to video-users though.


----------



## aznable (May 30, 2012)

it's pointless...the 5D MKII exist and the D600 it's a rumor; so we have now a relatively inexpensive FF camera with FPS and AF scaled down from MK3 and a similar sensor technology and it's not putting the market on storm for sure.

if the D600 will have the stellar sensor that you and some Others are dreaming (it will end-up with a better high iso performance than the D800 one, same DR and 30% Mpix less), more FPS, same A, it would destroy the D800 sales for sure and i dont think nikon wants that. they have to cut a lot and they will do… starting with a no-wather sealed body built with more policarbonate and a sensor not so capable


----------



## Marsu42 (May 30, 2012)

aznable said:


> it would destroy the D800 sales for sure and i dont think nikon wants that.



Nikon does not necessarily act like Canon. Canon with it's large market share tries to squeeze as much $$$ as they can get away with out of their existing customer base. Nikon obviously wants to gain market share and sell lenses and maybe they place this priority over internal cannibalizing of the d600/d800.


----------



## cliffwang (May 30, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> Once a D600 comes out, the 5D 2 will no longer be a contender ... not very many people will find a 4 year old camera design attractive, when a new FF cam with better sensor/IQ and way better AF-system and other photographic features (Auto ISO for example ...) is available at a similar price.
> 
> Depending on video capabilities of a D600, the 5D 2 (with ML) may remain interesting to video-users though.



I don't care about it is new or old model. 5D2 actually is good for me. What the D600 rumor makes me interested in is 39 AF and cheaper price.
I believe 5D2's price will be lower than D600 if Canon has no new model to response to D600. And Nikon no doubt will gain some entry level FF market from Canon. I am so happy to see that because we all end-users are big winners here.



Marsu42 said:


> Nikon does not necessarily act like Canon. Canon with it's large market share tries to squeeze as much $$$ as they can get away with out of their existing customer base. Nikon obviously wants to gain market share and sell lenses and maybe they place this priority over internal cannibalizing of the d600/d800.



+1
That's what I thought. Nikon is trying to get more market share with lower profit. And Canon is trying to maximum its profit with it market share power. That's how to run a business. Just too many people cannot see the points. Canon and Nikon are big companies and have many investors. Their decision makers need to make right decisions for their investors, not their users.


----------



## Kernuak (May 30, 2012)

A work colleague has the D800. Aside from his amusement about the US apparently grabbing the European share of the early batches, leading to the US market haveing the worst of the teething problems (such as major lockups), he couldn't understand some of the gripes that are being aired on these forums. I asked him if he is able to pull 4 stops of shadow detail. His response was "why would I want to?". I think that says it all about the importance of the reported 14 stops of DR. If and when I get the 5D MkIII, then we could do some comparisons, but by that time, I expect (hope) there would be some comparisons to settle it once and for all, rather than listening to hearsay and lab tests.


----------



## jaduffy007 (May 31, 2012)

Kernuak said:


> Funny, all these years, I thought that photography was all about good light and composition, but apparently I was wrong, it's all in the dynamic range a camera is able to produce. At least now, I know that I just need to buy a D800 to make lots of money. I no longer need to pick my moment or maximise my chances with a higher frame rate, because the D800 will do it all for me.



Ignoring your sarcasm....
I don't understand why you don't see the value in greater DR. Why wouldn't you want images that get far closer to the DR your eyes can perceive, resulting in more life-like, powerful images? DR is a big deal.


----------



## jaduffy007 (May 31, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> lola said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...




Can you please share your measuring stick that is free from subjectivity and opinion?


----------



## D_Rochat (May 31, 2012)

Why won't this thread just die already!?!


----------



## wickidwombat (May 31, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> Why won't this thread just die already!?!


because it got bitten by the DR zombie i think you need to shoot it in the head...


----------



## cliffwang (May 31, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> Why won't this thread just die already!?!



I think you just made this thread went to the front page...lol


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

jaduffy007 said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > You haven't worked this out yet. *I dont have a 5DIII nor am I buying one *
> ...



The point that fanboys miss is that every person has their own measuring stick and that is different from everyone elses.

The only absolutes are in the specs - like mps, fps etc. 

Some people might think the best camera is based on value for money - that might be a used 500D with a 55-250 lens - but others will think that is awful and insist on a MF for max IQ. Both are valid using their own measuring stick.

The one thing that irritates the hell out of me is presenting opinion as facts or manipulating/changing facts to suit their opinion.


----------



## aznable (May 31, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> That's what I thought. Nikon is trying to get more market share with lower profit. And Canon is trying to maximum its profit with it market share power. That's how to run a business. Just too many people cannot see the points. Canon and Nikon are big companies and have many investors. Their decision makers need to make right decisions for their investors, not their users.



no...Canon is a big company. 4 times bigger than nikon for market cap/revenues and profits.

and no...from the balance sheet of the last financial year nikon increased the revenues lowering cost of manufactoring, so it's doing the opposite you are telling us.. no-one is on the market for charity


----------



## Marsu42 (May 31, 2012)

aznable said:


> and no...from the balance sheet of the last financial year nikon increased the revenues lowering cost of manufactoring, so it's doing the opposite you are telling us.. no-one is on the market for charity



The point is: No one thinks Nikon is out to make less profit, but they may very well risk more internal cannibalization like Canon to gain market share and sell lenses, so they might be inclined to cut less features from a d800->d600 than Canon would do with the 5d3->5d2 successor.

With the Sony sensors and the d800 release price, it seems Nikon wants to attack Canon and not just go along with them, and a budget ff body might be the way to throw down the gauntlet.


----------



## x-vision (May 31, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> This is why the D800 is such a game-changer. It establishes a totally new price-structure for higher-end DSLRs.



+1000



> New structure:
> * Nikon D4/Canon 1D X - flagship specialist journalism/sports camera, max speed, limited resolution - USD/€ 6,000
> * Nikon D800 - max. resolution, fully featured, except speed: USD/€ 2,900
> * Nikon D600 - second-tier FF-model, less resolutuon, features scaled back: USD/€ 1,500-1,700 2,000
> ...



My thoughts exactly - except that the D600 will be USD/€ 2,000.

I also think that Canon is failing to respond adequately to the current market trends .. for now. 
They will have to, though. 

Canon won't get much help from the film/video crowd this time around.
So, they will have no option but to drop the 5DIII price in order to make it attractive to photo-enthusiasts.

Patience, padawan, patience 8).


----------



## x-vision (May 31, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> With the Sony sensors and the d800 release price, it seems Nikon wants to attack Canon and not just go along with them, and a budget ff body might be the way to throw down the gauntlet.



I think that Nikon and Canon are just targeting different crowds with their new offerings.

Canon seems to be targeting pros and the video/film crowd with the 5DIII. Hence the high price: 
Pros will pay anyway and the video/film crowd supposedly has deep pockets. 

Nikon, on the other hand, has pros and photo-enthusiasts in mind with the D800. 
And the rumored D600 will obviously be targeted squarely at enthusiasts. 
Thus, the lower prices - especially for the rumored D600.

The question is, what happens if the video/film crowd doesn't line up to buy the 5DIII as they did for the 5DII?


----------



## Jason Beiko (May 31, 2012)

I'm not sure why people think it is important that the rumoured D600 will canabalize sales of the D800? This only matter if the profit margin on the D800 is more than the D600? Just because the D800 costs more does not mean that it has a higher profit margin!

Market share is very important because it lends consumers to purchase company specific equipment. Think PS3 versus XBOX 360 versus the Wii. Quite a bit of the profit in these platform is generated by platform specific software. In fact when the PS3 was released it was rumoured to be priced below cost.

It seems to me that market share is very important and the newly released Nikon's might have a significant role in boosting their profile.


----------



## Astro (May 31, 2012)

aznable said:


> a scaled down FF camera already exists...it's from canon, has 21mpix sensor and it's called 5D mkII; selling for 1600€ here in italy



oh you are a canon marketing genius. :

i think we are all more then happy to pay for 4 year old technology while nikon users will have a better FF camera with the D600 (and yes i think there is no doubt it will be better).

tell it canon.. i think they will be more then happy to stop spending money on R&D.. we just buy their old technology.

that makes so much sense!!! ???



> i cannot see crowds of amateur switching from their aps-c camera maybe because they dont care about FF



now let´s ask... what do you know?
honest... how can you tell such BS when in every photography forum people scream for a "cheap FF" camera.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 31, 2012)

Astro said:


> now let´s ask... what do you know?



The question wasn't meant for me, but I have to say nobody can know either way because there is no budget ff option yet.

Maybe many people will jump from aps-c because they've heard that with ff, you get instant great pictures, but maybe many won't because they'll realize that they hardly max out their current sensor & cheaper ef lenses are worse on ff. And because lenses they use either won't work at all (ef-s ultrawides) or don't have the reach they want, while carrying around a 70-200/2.8 as a walkaround is not for everyone.


----------



## aznable (May 31, 2012)

Astro said:


> aznable said:
> 
> 
> > a scaled down FF camera already exists...it's from canon, has 21mpix sensor and it's called 5D mkII; selling for 1600€ here in italy
> ...



there is a diffence between d600 and 5dmkii....that d600 doesnt exists, it's not annouced yet and we dont know how the camera will be (if...it will be)

it tell such bullshit because i cant see a lot of people switching to FF, neither Forum peoples that represent 1/100000 of people that buy a dslr…maybe thay are waiting for a FF in 500€/$ range...lol


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

Who cares how old the technology is - the only important issue is whether is produces the high IQ


----------



## AvTvM (May 31, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Who cares how old the technology is - the only important issue is whether is produces the high IQ



as you may know, in digital cameras these two characteristics are inversely proportional. 

5D II IQ is outclassed by the newer D800
7D IQ does not match the newer D7000 

Both cameras are still capable IQ-wise, but the 5D 2 is seriously let down by a sorry old AF system, which was already significantly below the previous competitor's model specs (D700 - which in turn was hampered from the sub-par resolution of its sensor ... Nikon makes mistakes too!). 

Current 5D 2 owners certainly don't have to rush for an upgrade, unless the extra resolution and DR of the D800 are needed or if they don't mind to pay more for the 5D 3's improved AF and speed than for a D800. 

But for people about to get their first FF DSLR, the dated 5D 2 is certainly not first choice. And it will become even more unattractive, if/when Nikon brings out an "enthusiast IQ and features" D600 at an "FF entry level price". Not all APS-C users want to switch to FF, but there is a huge number of people who want to "upgrade" to a decently priced "FF" camera.


----------



## cliffwang (May 31, 2012)

aznable said:


> cliffwang said:
> 
> 
> > That's what I thought. Nikon is trying to get more market share with lower profit. And Canon is trying to maximum its profit with it market share power. That's how to run a business. Just too many people cannot see the points. Canon and Nikon are big companies and have many investors. Their decision makers need to make right decisions for their investors, not their users.
> ...



1. I have mentioned Canon is bigger than Nikon.
2. I have mentioned businesses need to make decision for their investors, not users.
3. There is no conflict between "lower profit and making more profit than before" If a company can make 500M last year and it could make 750M this year, the CEO said let's make only 650M and get more market share. Any conflict here?

I really don't get why you quote my post and replied with something not related.


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

@Cliff - your answer didn't suit their point of view so it was ignored

I seems to me that there are several anti Canon/pro Nikon threads - and it is always the same group of suspects whinging and whining


----------



## hyles (May 31, 2012)

I think that DR of 5D is quite enough for most people/situation. Having more DR may be sometime usefull, but i would never buy a d800 with its huge 36mp/50mb files.
If i had to chose between 5DIII and d800 i would go for the canon.
I am not going to to buy the 5DIII, it is very expansive. I think it may be worth its price, but i do not want to spend so mutch for a camera. Even if i have been tempted.
I think that d800 is very expensive as well. 2800 $ it is not cheap. If I was to spend so mutch money, i would not care spending 500 $ more for the canon.
I don't want to spend so much, but i could spend 1600 euro for 5DII. I would not mind any cheap nikon FF camera, since i have a lot of canon glasses and DR and AF of 5DII suites my needs. And IQ of the camera is very high. Even if it is 4 years old, everybody it is here to say that 5DIII has not improoved IQ over the older model so it must be a High quality 4 years old tecnology.
But if I needed it right now i could go to a shop and buy one.
And I am quite sure that canon will have FF entry level camera after the 5DII. So i am waiting to see what will happen, even if it will be next year, I am not in hurry.
Diego


----------



## Kernuak (May 31, 2012)

jaduffy007 said:


> Kernuak said:
> 
> 
> > Funny, all these years, I thought that photography was all about good light and composition, but apparently I was wrong, it's all in the dynamic range a camera is able to produce. At least now, I know that I just need to buy a D800 to make lots of money. I no longer need to pick my moment or maximise my chances with a higher frame rate, because the D800 will do it all for me.
> ...


The simple answer is, that there are other criteria which are more important to me than DR (such as low light performance, where DR is low anyway). If it's there I'll take it, but not at the expense of something that I consider important. Personally, I think the significance of DR has been overestimated. Photography isn't meant to be easy, otherwise everyone would be doing it and there would be no need for professinoal photographers, hence my sarcasm (well that and the fact that we've been over the same ground countless times in the past month or so). Also, why worry about more DR if it is of no benefit in print? I sell small volumes of prints and stock (which also is generally print based, although occasionally web based) and DR is then limited by more than what any current Canon camera can produce. Also, I have had very few problems with DR, if the DR is more than what the camera can capture, then most of the time, I can simply use a grad filter, otherwise, for what I photograph, then I'm better off waiting for better lighting or I compromise in certain areas. My style tends to make use of strong shadows, so I have no need to extract intimate detail, I just want the suggestion of detail. Just like in attraction, often a suggestion is stronger than having something "in your face". If I need to extract 4 stops of shadow detail, then I've failed, the shot gets binned and I reshoot with the correct exposure, adding a grad filter if necessary.


----------



## x-vision (May 31, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I seems to me that there are several anti Canon/pro Nikon threads - and it is always the same group of suspects whinging and whining



And of course there are always the Canon apologists. 
No matter what Canon does (and how overpriced it is), it's always good. 

I never understood the mentality of an apologist, btw. 
What is it that drives an individual to defend the profit-driven decisions/actions of a profit-driven corporation ??? ?

Me? I just hate overpaying and like to get good deals when paying with my money. 
No brand loyalty from me if I feel that a corporation is trying to milk me.


----------



## aznable (May 31, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> That's what I thought. Nikon is trying to get more market share with lower profit. And Canon is trying to maximum its profit with it market share power. That's how to run a business. Just too many people cannot see the points. Canon and Nikon are big companies and have many investors. Their decision makers need to make right decisions for their investors, not their users.



no...Canon is a big company. 4 times bigger than nikon for market cap/revenues and profits.

and no...from the balance sheet of the last financial year nikon increased the revenues lowering cost of manufactoring, so it's doing the opposite you are telling us.. no-one is on the market for charity
[/quote]

1. I have mentioned Canon is bigger than Nikon.
2. I have mentioned businesses need to make decision for their investors, not users.
3. There is no conflict between "lower profit and making more profit than before" If a company can make 500M last year and it could make 750M this year, the CEO said let's make only 650M and get more market share. Any conflict here?

I really don't get why you quote my post and replied with something not related.
[/quote]

1. you said both are big companies...i dont think nikon is big; nikon is active in too few business segments
2. i said just what you said, so dont be angry. btw they are "listening" what people will buy....that's called marketing, but for the higher segment they listen also to "users" (i guess you refer to pro and forum's people), infact they have improved the 5d in the way the "users" asked (no more megapixels,better autofocus, faster framerate)
3. you said that nikon was expanding the marketshare lowering the margin, but from financials they are doing the exact opposite...at least from their last FY


----------



## Tayvin (May 31, 2012)

To answer your question - Canon was listening when they built the 5D mark iii. The majority of bloggers were saying they wanted a better AF system, faster fps, same amount of megapixels, and superb low-light ISO. I think most of you got what you asked for. Now the real question is would the $3500 price tag be acceptable if the D800/D800e never existed? I think it would have.

And even a brand fanboy has to admit that that D800e is pretty amazing - if you can get one


----------



## Aglet (May 31, 2012)

Well, some kinda of luck smiled in my direction then put a huge dent in my credit card and now I've added a D800 to my pile of Canon gear. A pre-order I'd placed WAY back actually came in so I'm stoked that I'll get to play with it this summer as the D800e I'm likely to be waiting for until September with how backlogged my supplier is with orders for it.

I've only put about 100 shots on it but I can already tell this is going to be my landscape camera of choice. Now we really need a better 24mm tilt-shift for Nikon! The DR *is* amazing with clean shadows I can bring up if I want to without the signature ruddiness of a Canon image.
The detail level from all those extra pixels *is* noticeable and will make for big sweet prints with impressive detail.

It may also be my close-up work camera of choice in some situations too after seeing the output from using a decades-old manual Nikkor macro lens on it. Used it in low natural outdoor lighting at ISO 3200 to nab a shot that had amazing detail with very little noise-reduction required and that was only to smooth the OOF transition areas.

So I've already identified shooting situations where this superior sensor will make at least ME happier with the results and this is all while using cheap old manual lenses from 2nd hand sources.

That said, I still wish its user interface was as simple and intuitive to use as Canon's but it's worth the effort to learn the new equipment's quirks. I'll also still be using my 5D2 next weekend to shoot some group portraits, mostly because that's what my lighting matches up with right now.

So in summary;

I really wish CANON had made this camera.
But they didn't.

I really hope Canon can make a similarly improved IQ camera in the very near future.
But I'm not waiting for them to do so.

And while I'm now enjoying the best of these 2 worlds, I'm still looking forward, just as eagerly, to the next hi-IQ, FF body, from _either_ camp. 
Meanwhile, I feel the need to add a bit more inventory to the Nik side of the sheet to broaden what I can use it for.
Canon's failure to release a seriously improved body didn't just lose a sale of a body, a pile of my loot is now going elsewhere on accessories since there's no need to upgrade my Canon stuff beyond what I've got.


----------



## cliffwang (May 31, 2012)

aznable said:


> 1. you said both are big companies...i dont think nikon is big; nikon is active in too few business segments
> 2. i said just what you said, so dont be angry. btw they are "listening" what people will buy....that's called marketing, but for the higher segment they listen also to "users" (i guess you refer to pro and forum's people), infact they have improved the 5d in the way the "users" asked (no more megapixels,better autofocus, faster framerate)
> 3. you said that nikon was expanding the marketshare lowering the margin, but from financials they are doing the exact opposite...at least from their last FY



That's very interesting answers. Can you just ask people around you if Nikon is a big company? I would like to see if you will change you mind after you do that. Based on the last year information cannot explain Nikon's marketing strategies. It's not difficult to guess what Nikon is trying to do from its recent products and pricing. Of cause you can have your idea. And I believe that's the only thing you can argue with me.


----------



## aznable (May 31, 2012)

@tayvin
in my opinion the price it's too high, just because the mk2 debuted at a lower price, and i am used to get a better product at same price if not lower after some years, but for sure they listened to "users"

@cliffwang
i dont have to do a poll, nikon would enter barely in top 10 Canada's companies by revenues as an example; i didnt say it's a small company but i dont see it as a big company


----------



## briansquibb (May 31, 2012)

x-vision said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I seems to me that there are several anti Canon/pro Nikon threads - and it is always the same group of suspects whinging and whining
> ...



Which individual is that? Me? I am not a fanboy - just the person that is after a camera that demands good IQ from a camera that suits.

For me to move to Nikon would mean buying a D4 to replace the 1D4 - I just hate spending and like to get good deals when paying with my money - that is why all my kit is bought used. Can you say that?


----------



## psolberg (Jun 8, 2012)

since my switch to the big N, I'm really looking forward to this D600 as a backup body to the D800. If it pans out, nikon will have a sweet FF lineup

D700 (8 fps low MP)
D600 (5-6 fps, mid MP)
D3X (though build, mid MP)
D4 (tough build, fast fps, high ISO)
D800 (big MP, high DR)

wow.  Now if they can just mix them all into the nikon D4XS ;D


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 8, 2012)

psolberg said:


> since my switch to the big N



Good, Canon-trusting people of EOS land! Get out the holy water, wooden stakes and garlic and go for him!


----------



## aznable (Jun 9, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > since my switch to the big N
> ...



i dont think garlic would be effective...it's effective just against vampires and as an 800 owner he cant be a vampire


----------



## BCMAR15 (Jun 11, 2012)

An A/F motor in the BODY!!! You mean like Minolta used to have and got nothing but grief for? No, no, Nikon, A/F motors belong in the LENS. This is 2012, right?


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 11, 2012)

AF motor in the body is so that the old school nikon lenses will work


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 11, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> AF motor in the body is so that the old school nikon lenses will work



So much for the trolls claim than Canon is out of date .... ;D ;D ;D


----------



## psolberg (Jun 12, 2012)

aznable said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > psolberg said:
> ...



;D funny. But Nikon is the land of vampires.... and they are resonably old vampires, nearly 5 years since turning. I've never been much of one. Maybe that's why I'm fleeing the canon lands?



briansquibb said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > AF motor in the body is so that the old school nikon lenses will work
> ...



still not confirmed but I hope not. I never understood nikonian's obsession with lenses they don't buy or own anyways. It's like 1% of the population wants a feature and it is so vocal, yet every lens worth shooting with moved to USM long ago. Nikon just needs to do away with the added cost of that motor drive and let whoever is holding off to ancient nikon lenses to buy the more pricier cameras. They will complain about some lower end body not having a feature yet they will just buy the high end D4 anyways. what's the point then!

this should be a budget FF dslr for people that only own USM/SWM glass anyways. do away with that drive.


----------



## simonxu11 (Jun 14, 2012)

Some D600 images just leaked


----------



## V8Beast (Jun 16, 2012)

Kudos to Nikon if they can bring the D600 to market at the rumored price and with the rumored specs. Whatever entry-level FF body Canon comes out with in response will be my next backup body ;D

Nikon is pulling out all the stops this round, so it wouldn't surprise me if they pulled it off. Prior to the D800's release, many people thought a 36 mp FF body with a 51-point AF system and dual slots would cost $4K, but the rumored price of $3K was spot on. 

Even as a Canon shooter, I don't see what there is to get upset about. Competition is a beautiful thing


----------



## D_Rochat (Jun 16, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> Even as a Canon shooter, I don't see what there is to get upset about. Competition is a beautiful thing



+1


----------



## idimoe (Jun 16, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> Even as a Canon shooter, I don't see what there is to get upset about. Competition is a beautiful thing



This is a positively refreshing take and exactly what this forum needs. Thank you.


----------



## Albi86 (Jun 16, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> Even as a Canon shooter, I don't see what there is to get upset about. Competition is a beautiful thing



It's also a nice message to send to companies: bring out great gear at a fair price, and we'll buy it.


----------



## V8Beast (Jun 16, 2012)

Albi86 said:


> It's also a nice message to send to companies: bring out great gear at a fair price, and we'll buy it.



Precisely. If Canon loses market share because of the D600 and D800, it will force Canon to up their game. I own Canon gear, not Canon stock. As such, I don't care what other people shoot with, but Canon shooters can only benefit if Canon has some real competition. For many years, Canon didn't have any real competition. So here's to hoping that Nikon keeps pushing the envelope of technology and value, forcing Canon to keep pace.


----------



## Albi86 (Jun 16, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> Albi86 said:
> 
> 
> > It's also a nice message to send to companies: bring out great gear at a fair price, and we'll buy it.
> ...



Exactly!
Canon has been a bit too much on the pricey side lately. My biggest complaint about the 5D3 is - in facts - its price.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 16, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> Precisely. If Canon loses market share because of the D600 and D800, it will force Canon to up their game.



Companies don't want the largest market share unless it's a monopoly, they want the biggest profit. And being a premium vendor with a dedicated but smaller customer base is much safer and profitable (like Porsche) than having a great market share but being on the edge of going bust because your customers are cheapos (like Nokia).


----------



## V8Beast (Jun 17, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> Companies don't want the largest market share unless it's a monopoly, they want the biggest profit. And being a premium vendor with a dedicated but smaller customer base is much safer and profitable (like Porsche) than having a great market share but being on the edge of going bust because your customers are cheapos (like Nokia).



You're right, making money is priority #1 for companies, but to generalize that profit margins are more important than market share is silly. I'm no economist, but I'd venture to say that it's balancing act market share, sales volume, and profit margins. 

Since you brought up Porsche, I'll point out that it's a company that's teetered on the brink of financial collapse many times throughout it's history. Likewise, Ferrari is owned by Fiat. As for Lamborghini, Bugatti, and Rolls Royce, they're all owned by Volkswagen. Proud British marques like Jaguar and Land Rover are owned by Tata motors. So the only way these glamorous and super exclusive marques that subscribe to the low-volume, high-profit margin business model can stay in business is to tap into the coffers of parent companies that build pedestrian, low-profit margin products in very high volume. This doesn't even take into account the economies of scale factor, which lowers production costs and increases profit margins more than you might think even if you're selling a relatively inexpensive product. 

In contrast, GM cleared roughly $135 billion in revenue, $7.6 billion of which was profit, in 2011. Ferrari, even with it's $200K-plus cars, can only dream of that kind of profit. That said, I'm not so sure that "being a premium vendor with a dedicated but smaller customer base is much safer and profitable," as you suggest


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2012)

I absolutely LOVE to see this massive competitive pressure from Nikon on Canon. If the geriatric Canon management does not really wake up soon, they are in for deep sh*t. Ever so tiny incremental improvements and an intricate system of dumbing-down features less expensive camera models "for reasons of market differntiation" will lead them into a disaster zone. Canon really needs to change its ways in a big way.

So I am looking forward to see an absolutely stunning Nikon D600 at an absolutely stunning price any time soon!


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 17, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> You're right, making money is priority #1 for companies, but to generalize that profit margins are more important than market share is silly. I'm no economist, but I'd venture to say that it's balancing act market share, sales volume, and profit margins.



Well' I was trying to make a point and contrasting the issue. Of course it isn't good to be a premium vendor with a large profit margin, but only one client. So market share is there for safety, because customers have different requirements and parts of them will always jump ship from or to you for one reason or another. 

This is what happened to the premium car vendors you mentioned, they either failed due to mismanagement (wrong products resulting in too low profit and/or too high prices, resulting in customer loss - like the British premium vendors) or due to the economy and exchange rates (resulting in customer loss, too - Porsche knows about this). 

And concerning Ferrari/GM you have to relate their profits to the amount of people getting them and the part they have too keep for investments, so personally I'd like to be a Porsche shareholder vs GM. It would be interesting to have an economist's input on this, but every businessman I ever spoke to sees large market share as either a lever to dictate terms or as a fix for low profit margins - but they'd rather have less customers paying much more.

That's why I think Canon isn't that much bothered by Rebel users jumping ship, while they re-build their entry line as mirrorless and gain a stable, profitable foothold in the premium dlsr market.


----------



## Albi86 (Jun 17, 2012)

All of you though are taking examples in which appearance and social value have a much more heavier weight than for cameras. I still like to hope that photography is mainly based on results and real IQ....


----------



## V8Beast (Jun 17, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> It would be interesting to have an economist's input on this, but every businessman I ever spoke to sees large market share as either a lever to dictate terms or as a fix for low profit margins - but they'd rather have less customers paying much more.



Of course they would. This even applies to your typical small-time photographer. I'd much rather have a small handful of clients willing to pay a premium for my images rather than having a larger client base that has a much smaller photography budget. From a creativity, self-fulfillment standpoint and time-invested standpoint, you'd always prefer the former over the latter. Unfortunately, the market has changed dramatically in recent years, and unless you're among the smallest percentile of elite photogs out there - whether it's due to talent, marketing skills, or past business relationships - many photogs have had to adapt to more of a higher-volume business model.


----------



## psolberg (Jun 19, 2012)

> Precisely. If Canon loses market share because of the D600 and D800, it will force Canon to up their game



well, if you consider how dominant canon was just 10 years ago, and how that dominance has waned over the last decade, then you can see that it has already happened. They went from being virtually unchallenged, to being just one more player, alas a major one, but certainly fallen from their prior mile high advantage.

Look at Microsoft. Once unchallenged and now it is being outmaneuvered by once smaller meaningless rivals. With size and a market to protect, companies often fall behind. They are too big and slow to react. Canon, and to a lesser extent Nikon suffer from their reliance on mirrors and outdated mounts that make it impossible to design small thin cameras consumers want. They have models to protect where as the rest have nothing to lose. The rest of the crowd, lead by sony has no such concerns are are busy with their mirrorless entries which will one day make DSRLS join film cameras in a musseum.

We've seen this transition before. Kodak failed to adapt and died off.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 19, 2012)

psolberg said:


> We've seen this transition before. Kodak failed to adapt and died off.



... and surely there is a lesson to be learned from Kodak - isn't it, Canon?

But maybe Canon figured that Kodak's problem was being stuck in the budget mass market, so they were gone in no time once these very flexible customers switched away. And Canon is trying to build a position in the premium & pro video market instead to be immune from disgruntled customers posting "Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600" threads.


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 19, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > We've seen this transition before. Kodak failed to adapt and died off.
> ...



Interesting statement puporting to be Canon's mission statement

Have you evidence to support 

"Canon is trying to build a position in the premium & pro video market instead to be immune from disgruntled customers posting "Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600" threads"

Or even evidence that they are reading the threads?


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 19, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Have you evidence to support
> Or even evidence that they are reading the threads?



No, I don't have evidence, this is my personal opinion of a possible lesson a company might get out of Kodak getting stomped: having a large share of the mass market doesn't help if the chips are down, so better build a strong foothold elsewhere.

And of course Canon isn't reading these threads - it was just an example that a budget to midrange customer base is more likely to grumble and jump ship than premium or pro customers owning and gotten used to lots of Canon equipment.


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 19, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Interesting statement puporting to be Canon's mission statement
> Have you evidence to support
> "Canon is trying to build a position in the premium & pro video market instead to be immune from disgruntled customers posting "Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600" threads"
> Or even evidence that they are reading the threads?



No need whatsoever to constantly defend Canon and sound as if you were a Canon-paid PR agent or Canon marketing employee.

* It is evident that Canon has been falling behind Nikon in stills photography during the past 4 years
* It is evident that Canon is pumping massive resources into all sorts of overpriced video crap .. from "HD DSLRs" (anything from Rebel to 7D to 5D 2+3, 1D X) to "Cine DSLRs" (1D C) to "real camcorders (C300,C500 -serien).
* It is evident that the 5D 3 is overpriced compared to better competitive offerings by at leats 500 USD/€
* It is evident that Canon is trying to milk, nickle and dime its DSLR-customer base for as long as possible 
* It is evident that incremental improvements instead of true innovation is a dead end business strategy
* It is not YET evident but nevertheles very likely that Canon will follow Kodak into the corporate grave sooner rather than later if they continue to ignore a large percentage of their key customers ... and yes that is us, the guys buing expensive cameras and a bunch of expensive lenses and flashes along with it. 

We hold these Truths to be self evident!


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 20, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> * It is evident that incremental improvements instead of true innovation is a dead end business strategy



I agree with everything you wrote more or less - though I don't think incremental improvements and true innovation are mutual exclusive. It's perfectly ok to update the 5d2 to the 5d3 as it is, even if the price is debatable. And no few will jumping ship because a manufacturer's tech is behind say for two years until catching up. 

The problem is: Canon is innovative on the low end, they release silent lenses and phase detection on sensors while masking their sensor problems (hdr and multi-shot noise reduction modes). And they are innovative on the high end, they release top lenses, class-leading af systems and fps rates. But the midrange customers that tend to write in internet forums like this are starved by feature-cut firmwares, though it would be so easy to port many features of magic lantern into the core Canon firmware.


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 20, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting statement puporting to be Canon's mission statement
> ...



So it is just your opinion then with no evidence whatsoever

Just your daily anti Canon diatribe


----------



## Richard8971 (Jun 20, 2012)

I'm sure this has been said but even if Nikon's were half the price they are now, I still wouldn't shoot with them.

Canon makes one hell of a camera and the market sales prove it. I see 2 to 1 of Canon's over other bodies. (usually more!) Nikon has to sell cheap cameras to get people to buy them. 

D


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 20, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> * It is evident that Canon...



Most important, though, it is evident that Canon still makes a healthy profit from its camera sales. There is no evidents....er um, evidence, that Canon is incapable of matching Nikon's sensor tech, only that they have not chosen to do so already because the market hasn't demanded it. Likewise, Nikon seems to be behind on AF right now. I'm no fanboi; if I were starting over I'd be as likely to buy Nikon as Canon, but I continue to be amazed at how many people pass judgement on for-profit corporations as though they were impolite relatives (can you believe cousin Josephine said that?!!!) 

In case you weren't aware, for-profit corporations have done deeds far more more heinous than charging a bit too much for their product, or compromising performance in one area in favor of performance in another.

To all you complainers, whether you complain of Canon or Nikon or anything else, if you're going to blame anyone you should blame the purchasers who buy the over-priced, under-performing products. If you want Canon to put better sensors in their products, and if you want Nikon to implement better speed and ergonomics, then you need to get a bunch of people to refrain from purchasing the current models, or to buy Pentax.

Unless we believe there is collusion going on, it's 100% in the hands of the consumers. Y'all need to stop getting out of joint over it. Buy it or don't buy it -- it's your call. It's also OK to post calm, rational evaluations of the positives and negatives from your photographic perspective. (Sorry, I should say, from your photographic tilt or shift, but I digress...) However, to be upset with a camera company when there are evil energy companies out there? The mind wobbles!


----------



## birdman (Jun 20, 2012)

psolberg said:


> > Precisely. If Canon loses market share because of the D600 and D800, it will force Canon to up their game
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Whats with all this mirrorless garbage, people? I hope you "people" don't want a camera body without a viewfinder, like the mirrorless 4/3 garbage cameras out now have, right? You want to take a picture by looking at the back of your small monitor? Thats going to dominate? Really? And we thought the Unabomber was a nut with all of his anti=tech mumbo jumbo!! SLRs are not going anywhere for a while, buddy. What are sports shooters going to use.? A small box with a bright screen and a huge telephoto lens that makes it look like a whale eating a tadpole. People these days.....


----------



## birdman (Jun 20, 2012)

Here is the future, guys. All teenagers, soccer moms, and adventurous grandparents are gonna take over the industry of photography with their mirrorless cameras. And the old professionals and prosumers, well they will be left behind with their 22MP and 36MP full-frame antiquated DSLRs. How 2012 is that? Or as Bruno would say, "Borat was so 2006."


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 20, 2012)

birdman said:


> Here is the future, guys. All teenagers, soccer moms, and adventurous grandparents are gonna take over the industry of photography with their mirrorless cameras. And the old professionals and prosumers, well they will be left behind with their 22MP and 36MP full-frame antiquated DSLRs. How 2012 is that? Or as Bruno would say, "Borat was so 2006."



Great sense of humour there ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Albi86 (Jun 20, 2012)

birdman said:


> Here is the future, guys. All teenagers, soccer moms, and adventurous grandparents are gonna take over the industry of photography with their mirrorless cameras. And the old professionals and prosumers, well they will be left behind with their 22MP and 36MP full-frame antiquated DSLRs. How 2012 is that? Or as Bruno would say, "Borat was so 2006."



This is exactly how it will go.
Teenagers, soccer moms and adventurous grandparents are the most important segment in the market, the one providing the biggest slice of incomes. The ugly truth is that big companies would sooner lose all their respectable pros than all their despicable consumers. Just face it. Who else would seriously benefit from a small sensor mirrorless camera if not they? 
Consumers, in my experience, hate the bulk of a reflex camera. These people usually take pictures with a P&S or even with their cell phones, they buy a reflex only when they're compelled. And this is exactly the kind of people Canon, Nikon, Samsung, Panasonic, Sony and everyone else is striving to please.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 20, 2012)

Orangutan said:


> To all you complainers, whether you complain of Canon or Nikon or anything else, if you're going to blame anyone you should blame the purchasers who buy the over-priced, under-performing products. If you want Canon to put better sensors in their products, and if you want Nikon to implement better speed and ergonomics, then you need to get a bunch of people to refrain from purchasing the current models, or to buy Pentax.



This is the problem in a market with limited competition due to brand loyalty and people being stuck to their equipment proprietary lens & flash systems. Many will bite the bullet and say "In comparison to my lenses and other equipment $1000 more for the 5d3 isn't that much, I'll pay it and forget the price as fast as I can". If the 5d2 wasn't around anymore maybe I'd do the same.

About "complaining": Maybe people with 1 post saying "I'll get a d800 instead of the 5d3, hahaha" are complaining or trolling. But there is a difference between this and pointing out perceived problems and wanting to discuss with people about this to see if one's opinion makes sense - and I certainly build my opinion about the 5d3's strengths and weaknesses reading threads like this because reviews don't tell the whole story.



birdman said:


> Whats with all this mirrorless garbage, people?



It's *currently* garbage. In 10 years from now (or more?), you'll have an electronic viewfinder you can hardly tell from an optical one, the shutter sound and speed limitations will be gone, and the af system except for the very pro top will be ok. And you'll have features only an efv can deliver: "I want to track the red bird, please", focus peaking right and so on in the viewfinder, night-time shooting through the viewfinder, ... there are many possibilities many people would throw away their 1dx this second - if they'd have gotten it yet :->


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 20, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > you should blame the purchasers who buy the over-priced, under-performing products. If you want Canon to put better sensors in their products, and if you want Nikon to implement better speed and ergonomics, then you need to get a bunch of people to refrain from purchasing the current models, or to buy Pentax.
> ...



I think we need an equivalent of the Four Thirds standard for APS-C, FF, MF, etc to create compatibility among components of different manufacturers. If there is an international organization of pro photographers, maybe they should lobby the larger "camera countries" (e.g. Japan, U.S., EU) to put that into law. Yes, it would obsolete older or now-current models, but we need to think medium/long term. Of course, they could do a booming business retro-fitting older glass to the new standard. ("Legs off, fins on, stick a little pipe through the back of its neck so it can breathe, bit of gold paint...")

Then we'd get some real competition among the big players, and it would lower the "barrier to entry" for smaller players.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 20, 2012)

Orangutan said:


> Then we'd get some real competition among the big players, and it would lower the "barrier to entry" for smaller players.



The EU nearly couldn't agree on a standard power supply for mobile phones, and even that took ages. Considering that the lens-camera combination (physical and protocols) are a major competition factor, I don't think there's any chance for forced standardization - but it would be nice all the same.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 20, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Then we'd get some real competition among the big players, and it would lower the "barrier to entry" for smaller players.
> ...



Ha the EU cant even pay their own credit card bill...

I think anyone that WANTS any government to interfere in MORE stuff than they already do
needs therapy

cop pulls you over, "I'm sorry sir but i noticed your canon sensor doesnt have enough dynamic range
I'm afraid I'm going to have to fine you, that'll be $100 thankyou"

Ahhh living in fascist dictatorships dressed up as democracy 

discalaimer: this is a heavily sarcastic post for anyone that cant recognise that from the  on the end


----------



## V8Beast (Jun 21, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> I think anyone that WANTS any government to interfere in MORE stuff than they already do
> needs therapy
> 
> Ahhh living in fascist dictatorships dressed up as democracy



And I thought Americans were the only ones that spewed crazy talk like that ;D Do you by chance get Fox News is Australia ;D?


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 21, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > I think anyone that WANTS any government to interfere in MORE stuff than they already do
> ...



 yeah but you gotta pay extra for that  and because of the high cost of the 5Dmk3 I cant afford it


----------



## V8Beast (Jun 21, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> yeah but you gotta pay extra for that  and because of the high cost of the 5Dmk3 I cant afford it



That's a shame. Fox News has some really hot blonde anchors.






















No wonder Fox has the highest ratings amongst all the cable news networks.


----------



## Kernuak (Jun 21, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > yeah but you gotta pay extra for that  and because of the high cost of the 5Dmk3 I cant afford it
> ...


Is that really one brain I mean person?


----------



## psolberg (Jun 21, 2012)

wow, from the D600 to the fox babes. If a Nikon manager is watching this, he must me laughing his pants off.


----------



## birdman (Jun 21, 2012)

psolberg said:


> wow, from the D600 to the fox babes. If a Nikon manager is watching this, he must me laughing his pants off.



Make that Fox babes, sir. Thanks ;D


----------



## V8Beast (Jun 22, 2012)

psolberg said:


> wow, from the D600 to the fox babes. If a Nikon manager is watching this, he must me laughing his pants off.



Or maybe took his pants off for a different reason


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 22, 2012)

psolberg said:


> wow, from the D600 to the fox babes. If a Nikon manager is watching this, he must me laughing his pants off.


I would say the thread is moving in a positive direction then


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 22, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > wow, from the D600 to the fox babes. If a Nikon manager is watching this, he must me laughing his pants off.
> ...



Do you think the Nikon manager likes Gypsy Tarts with his afternoon tea?


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 29, 2012)

Canon has lost this generation of camera bodys. So what? Nikon had been living in canons shadow since the d30. 8)


----------



## idimoe (Jul 2, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Canon has lost this generation of camera bodys. So what? Nikon had been living in canons shadow since the d30. 8)



Agreed. Simply because something is (arguably) technically superior doesn't mean it will sell more. Canon can rest it's laurels on its reputation and brand. Well, at least it will buy it some time to counter IMO.


----------



## psolberg (Jul 6, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Canon has lost this generation of camera bodys. So what? Nikon had been living in canons shadow since the d30. 8)



I think if you look at the landscape today, the trends are in a different direction. you know what caused nikon to fall? precisely thinking "so what, we're still the big boy".

nikon/sony are already eating the majority of the marketshare from canon which used to be as big as both combined marketshare wise. Sony/NIkon have kept going up in the past decade while canon wanes. while they are still holding the majority of the dslr market, they are significantly weaker than 10 years ago where nothing else would even come close. And if what we've seen from sony and nikon continues, canon is going to have to earn its customers. something which they seem honestly not used to doing.

can you see a trend? or should canon just sit pretty because they are the big boy of the past decade?

I think what we're seeing today in canon is similar to how nikon nearly got sinked. too much reliance on protecting an existing market. too slow and affraid to change. Rivals taking bigger risks and with technology to match. Just about the last thing canon should do is stick their head in the sand and keep believing they are too big to fail.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jul 6, 2012)

psolberg said:


> I think what we're seeing today in canon is similar to how nikon nearly got sinked. too much reliance on protecting an existing market. too slow and affraid to change. Rivals taking bigger risks and with technology to match. Just about the last thing canon should do is stick their head in the sand and keep believing they are too big to fail.



What ever might people annoy about Canon and their marketing devision, they are certainly seeing the writing on the wall and are moving r&d resources to video and mirrorless. And they are taking a risk with this, because they are currently annoying a lot of loyal Canon users in the traditional dslr market.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 6, 2012)

@RLPhoto



> Canon has lost this generation of camera bodys. So what? Nikon had been living in canons shadow since the d30. 8)



I would have said Nikon had been living in Canon's shadow since the first ring type USM lenses.



> Sony/NIkon have kept going up in the past decade while canon wanes.



Really? 10 years ago Sony's camera division didn't do SLR's. Konica Minolta did and they were nearly dead.

Up until the D3x, the D800 and the D3200 Canon had the march on Nikon at every price point regarding MP, and usually feature set.



> And if what we've seen from sony and nikon continues, canon is going to have to earn its customers. something which they seem honestly not used to doing.



Are folk jumping to Sony DSLR's? most of the talk I hear is of folk hating the SLT finders. Before Sonys most recent range their DSLR's were usually plagued with horrible noise from moderate ISO's. Perhaps the mirrorless segment is where they are gaining ground, a segment lets not forget, where Canon are not yet present.



> Just about the last thing canon should do is stick their head in the sand and keep believing they are too big to fail.



Don't get hung up on bodies so much, look at Canons lens range. Loads of new versions and even completely new lenses in the last 3 years, from TSE's to pancakes, to super telephoto L's. All that resolution is only as good as the lens in front of it...

Who knows what Canon have in the pipeline? The 5D2 is still a brilliant camera at a briliant price. The 5D3 may not have been the leap that pixel peepers wanted, especially in the shadow cast by the D800, but then, they are clearly different tools for different jobs.

If what you are using is working for you then keep using it if you aren't happy with the current offerings.

I remember when Canon launched the c300 with some fanfare and all the canon knockers were scoffing because the 4k red was launched the same day. A year down the line it's quite apparent that canon have had the last laugh. The c300 is a go-to bit of kit. Folk realised that 4k isn't necessarily better for every type of job.

Maybe folk need to start realising that 36MP isn't necessarily better, or that the D800 isn't necessarily the best camera for every job.


----------



## AvTvM (Jul 6, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> Up until the D3x, the D800 and the D3200 Canon had the march on Nikon at every price point regarding MP, and usually feature set.



while I agree with many of your other points ... I see this one differently.

For me, Nikon passed Canon somewhat earlier: with the D3 and D300. Whereas the preceding generation of D2h/X were crop only and along with the D200 sensor-wise way below Canon, D3 and D300 for the first time were clearly superior to the Canon counterparts at the time. 

Canon partially recovered with the 7D, since Nikon did not come out with a worthy D400 until now. But D7000 and now D3200 pulled ahead even further in terms of sensor-quality.

And while Canon did only manage marginal improvements in the 5D 3 sensor over the 5D2, Nikon came out with the D800, leaving everything else in the dust in terms of resolution and DR - not only at base ISO but all the way upt to about ISO 3200. D4 and 5D3 take it only from there. 

If Nikon's D600 trounces the 5D3 even at high ISO and comes at the rumored "bargain price", Canon will be in really deep sh*t across their entire product portfolio. 

It is really beyond me, why Canon choses to invest scarce R&D, time and money to bring out a 4k video cam in the shape of the 1D C ... and not simply as a much more video-suitable C### cine-cam. Why as a clearly sub-optimal DSLR with mirror, prism and OVF in the way of video capture?


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 6, 2012)

> It is really beyond me, why Canon choses to invest scarce R&D, time and money to bring out a 4k video cam in the shape of the 1D C ... and not simply as a much more video-suitable C### cine-cam. Why as a clearly sub-optimal DSLR with mirror, prism and OVF in the way of video capture?



They did, it's called the c500.

A lot of pro-togs are required to shoot video and shoot stills. If they need it and will pay for it then canon will make it. Canon wouldn't be investing all this R&D if they didn't think they were going to benefit from it.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 6, 2012)

AvTvM said:


> paul13walnut5 said:
> 
> 
> > Up until the D3x, the D800 and the D3200 Canon had the march on Nikon at every price point regarding MP, and usually feature set.
> ...



The d3 was an expensive camera that 99% of people couldn't afford nor want to lug around. On the other hand, canon 5Dc was still selling like hot cakes because of its FF at low cost. When the d700 was released, the legendary canon 5D2 stole the show until the d800 release. 

As for the d300, the 7D did get around to it but alittle late to the show.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 6, 2012)

> As for the d300, the 7D did get around to it but alittle late to the show.



I would have said very late to the show... there wasn't really a comparable model in Canons line up for the D100 or the D200 either. But better late than never, always had bother trying to mount my canon lenses on Nikons. You'd think they'd make them all the same wouldn't you?


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 6, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> > As for the d300, the 7D did get around to it but alittle late to the show.
> 
> 
> 
> I would have said very late to the show... there wasn't really a comparable model in Canons line up for the D100 or the D200 either. But better late than never, always had bother trying to mount my canon lenses on Nikons. You'd think they'd make them all the same wouldn't you?



D100 was introduced to compete against the Canon D60
D200 was introduced to compete against the Canon 30D/5Dc


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 6, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> > As for the d300, the 7D did get around to it but alittle late to the show.
> 
> 
> 
> I would have said very late to the show... there wasn't really a comparable model in Canons line up for the D100 or the D200 either. But better late than never, always had bother trying to mount my canon lenses on Nikons. You'd think they'd make them all the same wouldn't you?



The XXD series was the series canon tried to pitch against the DXXX series cameras. The 20D was a solid performer and introduced the EF-S range but the d300 shifted canon to up it with the 7D. Nikon still hasn't quite answered against the 7D, as the D7000 is more of a 60D competitor.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 6, 2012)

When did the 5D become the 5Dc? Can a six year old dslr be a 'classic'?

hmmm.

Even as a firm canon user, I always thought the Dx00's were more like where the film EOS 3 sat... I know it's apples and pears as even the rebels have usually been more comparable to Elans, but bear with me... until the 5D...c... there wasn't really a direct competitor, and even then it was a different segment camera.

Just an opinion. If I'm wrong it won't be for first or last time.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 6, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> When did the 5D become the 5Dc? Can a six year old dslr be a 'classic'?
> 
> hmmm.
> 
> ...



D60 was the camera the D100 couldn't match


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 6, 2012)

The d100 just felt better in the hand though. I think it had better AF too. Anyway, I've enough conflict on my hands defending video... let's not go there.


----------



## AvTvM (Jul 6, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> The d100 just felt better in the hand though. I think it had better AF too. Anyway, I've enough conflict on my hands defending video... let's not go there.



Video for pro-togs. Yes, ok ... wedding, events, news ... BUT: one would think, the video capabilities in 1D X and 5D 3 should be plenty.

What really puzzles me is the 1D C! Hi-end "4k cine cam" ... in the form factor of a DSLR and burdened down with all the video-unfriendly stills-imaging stuff (Mirrorbox, mirror, prism, OVF). WHY not as top-level C6900, or C700 or whatever number ... but in a camcorder form factor and in the C-line? Of course with optional EF-mount - I see no problem with that one. I cannot imagine users of 1D C to capture many stills shots .. other than possibly some "making-of" pics behind on the set ... just for kicks. But for that a rebel or P&S would do as well. 

To me Canon looks hell-bent to just produce the broadest and most confusing smattering of HD/2k/4k Video- DSLRs and C-### videocams in parallel. There is a tremendous amount of redundancy going on in those product lines. 

I don't believe even Chuck Westfall himself could clearly state, who should use a 1D C, a 1D X, a 5D 3, a C500 or a C300. It is just a plethora of video cams, with stills not much more than an afterthought.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 6, 2012)

They do seem to have abandoned the XL format as well.. shame theres no servo zoom EF lenses (asides from 35-80 PZ, obviously)

An XL shaped body, EF mount... 

The c300 and c500 are clearly video dedicated, I wouldn't expect to see a stills shooter spending much time on a c300 or c500.

But then Canon probably didn't foresee feature films being shot on a 5D2 or 7D.

Plenty of choice. At plenty of prices. A good thing I think. 1D users buying will be buying for stills with video. I can't really imagine anybody buying purely for video buying any DSLR above the 5D3.

I had an HD 1080 camera five years before I had a HD telly, and five years before anybody asked me if I could deliver on HD. Maybe theres a stills analogy in there for 4K?

I've always said if they can make a stonking 22MP sensor then why can't they make an exceptionally stonking 8 or 10MP?

I only buy and use the stuff. And a 1D is not on my map.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 6, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> The d100 just felt better in the hand though. I think it had better AF too. Anyway, I've enough conflict on my hands defending video... let's not go there.



The D60 feels like all xxD's and it has similar controls.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 6, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> When did the 5D become the 5Dc? Can a six year old dslr be a 'classic'?
> 
> hmmm.
> 
> ...



It became a classic when it capture the photographic communitys heart by offering something that was once previously un-attainable in digital. Affordable FF and I like the name befitting such a solid camera. 8)


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 6, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> paul13walnut5 said:
> 
> 
> > When did the 5D become the 5Dc? Can a six year old dslr be a 'classic'?
> ...



Just for the record the 5D came out in 2005 - so 7 years old. That and the 1DS2 of 2004 were cameras that confirmed Canon as the major player in DSLR


----------



## markd61 (Jul 6, 2012)

Astro said:


> i want this .. i want such a canon camera!!



You will only complain once it comes that it should be cheaper, should be weatherproof,should have no AA filter, should have a titanium body, shoot 12 fps, 4K video, and satellite uplink. And all that after only reading the published specs.

There is no end to gear lust. and the complaining that goes with it.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 6, 2012)

markd61 said:


> Astro said:
> 
> 
> > i want this .. i want such a canon camera!!
> ...



Shame on you, markd61 for posting a comment that actually has to do with the subject of this thread!


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 6, 2012)

@briansquibb


> The D60 feels like all xxD's and it has similar controls.



The D60 feels a bit like a 60D, but actually feels more like a rebel, and felt exactly like the Elan 7.

Cheap.

The 10D-50D had magnesium bodies and actually felt a lot better.

Which AF point would you like on your D60? The Left, the Right or shall we split the difference?

The D60 is a benchmark only of where canon were at the time. Which wasn't very far.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 6, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> @briansquibb
> 
> 
> > The D60 feels like all xxD's and it has similar controls.
> ...



Everyone to their own. For 2002 it was the best around - at the low end. The real bonus is that it has a full sized body rather than a Rebel sized. D60 had a metal shell - so not like the polycarbonate 60D

3 good AF points are adequate - 5D owners survived a long time on just the central point - and has bright red AF points in the viewfinder.

Would you like to comment on the 10D and 1DS2 that came shortly afterwards?


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 6, 2012)

Personally I think Canon have something up their sleeve - they are not going to let Nikon take the market away from them. Trouble is that it takes time to respond.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jul 6, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Trouble is that it takes time to respond.



The Canon rumors crew and loyal customers should sign a petition for Nikon to stop all r&d for 1 or 2 years to let Canon catch up - borrowing Sony tech ain't fair 

Actually, I hope Canon wont have to "respond" at all because they were putting new products in the pipeline before Nikon released the d800. If Canon is too passive, they're going to have a tough time.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 6, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Trouble is that it takes time to respond.
> ...



I suspect this is something for Photokina

For the record when the D60 was released Nikon were caught out - and they were more expensive

See here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneosd60/4


----------



## Marsu42 (Jul 6, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> For the record when the D60 was released Nikon were caught out - and they were more expensive



Those were the times - dpreview states the d60 has "Excellent resolution, lives up to the six megapixel label" and "Noise very low all the way up to ISO 400"  ... but then again in 2022 everybody will smile at the puny 5d2/5d3 sensor, too.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 6, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > For the record when the D60 was released Nikon were caught out - and they were more expensive
> ...



Ironically a web image requires a D60 image to be cropped ....... so is there a market for an A1 IQ body with a sensor of about 4mps?


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 7, 2012)

> Everyone to their own. For 2002 it was the best around - at the low end. The real bonus is that it has a full sized body rather than a Rebel sized. D60 had a metal shell - so not like the polycarbonate 60D
> 
> 3 good AF points are adequate - 5D owners survived a long time on just the central point - and has bright red AF points in the viewfinder.
> 
> Would you like to comment on the 10D and 1DS2 that came shortly afterwards?



D60 had plastic shell. Sorry. Metal chassis. Plastic shell.

ooh bright red lights!!!

10D- Waste of time, one to ignore unless very cheap. 20D better resolution, EF-S mount. Only marginally more expensive. 10D Improvements would have been enough to make film users finally switch at time, notihing remarkable now, 20D eminently more usable.

1DS2.. came quite a bit after the D60. Probably the only one on our wee list that I would consider having in my kit bag today. And even if they were launched on the same day? So what? What's your inference?


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 7, 2012)

Just checked. 3 & 1/2 years between D60 and 1DsMk2. I'm not the spiciest chilli in the fajita, but was that an elephant trap that @dampsquibb tried to lay for me there?


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 7, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> Just checked. 3 & 1/2 years between D60 and 1DsMk2. I'm not the spiciest chilli in the fajita, but was that an elephant trap that @dampsquibb tried to lay for me there?



We are talking history here - not buying now. You gave me the impression that you knew about the relative merits of the D60 and D100 so I was curious as I didn't get to use Nikon, but contemporary reviews seem to favour the Canon range. Just look how quick new cameras were being released

d60 - 2002
10D - 2003
300D (first Rebel) - 2003 - cut down 10D
1DS2 - 2004
20D - 2004

The 1DS2 is still a very usable camera with its 45 point AF and 16mp

I find that a lot can be learnt from history as history = experience.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 17, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...


1Dmk1 buddy can be had very very cheap still has 45 point AF and a solid AI servo, tons of pattern noise if you try push shadows though 
I sold mine for $500 though


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Aug 6, 2012)

TIFFs, crikey. Does it work with IBM microdrives as well?


----------



## briansquibb (Aug 6, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> TIFFs, crikey. Does it work with IBM microdrives as well?



I expect it to come with a drop down keyboard with all the option buttons on


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 6, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> paul13walnut5 said:
> 
> 
> > TIFFs, crikey. Does it work with IBM microdrives as well?
> ...



Oh come on. I want the 1 megapixel sony to come back from the early 80's that shot onto a floppy disk


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Aug 6, 2012)

I had an Mavica FD88. Bought new. It wasn't the early 80's. Very late 90's early 00's!

1.3 of your megapixels.


----------



## iris chrome (Aug 7, 2012)

dilbert said:


> Rumored D600 top LCD panel....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Actually that's the middle section of the D800's rear display.


----------



## Gino (Sep 13, 2012)

The sample photos taken from the D600 look pretty solid!

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d600/sample.htm


----------



## cliffwang (Sep 13, 2012)

Wow! Super old thread alive again.


----------



## aznable (Sep 13, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> Wow! Super old thread alive again.



yap...and i want to resume an important line from the first post

– Could be as cheap as $1500! — D3x was already killed by the D800…but Nikon obviously doesn’t mind beating it down further…

too bad is $2100 (in europe we have 2385€ for ireland, 2150€ for germany and 1956£ for england)...not exactly a low price


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 16, 2012)

Just one comment concerning "Canon, are you listening - Nikon d600": 

Canon obviously has listened and at least made one clever move with the 6d low light af that will probably outperform the 5d3 and the d600 - the latter is *not* the event photog's cheap full frame dream according to the dpreview preview: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d600/12



> Another area in which the D600 lags behind the D800 is its AF sensitivity in poor light. The D800 is rated for accurate focus in light as low as EV-2, which is approximately equivalent to moonlight. In use, we've found this to be true. The D600 is rated down to EV-1, and in normal use, with a 50mm F1.4 prime mounted, we've found that indeed, the D800 is the better tool in low light. But when shooting low-contrast targets at EV levels between 0-1, the difference between the two cameras is only noticeable at the point where we could barely perceive our subject in their viewfinders. The Canon EOS 6D has an AF system rated down to -3EV, and we will perform more in-depth comparisons between this and the D600 when the 6D becomes available.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 16, 2012)

DEAD THREAD.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 16, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> DEAD THREAD.



No, it isn't, you and me just posted  ... and it seemed the appropriate thread for this piece of information. Will surely get attention because you cannot unsubscribe to threads in this forum :->


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 16, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > DEAD THREAD.
> ...



The resurrection has arrived to CR forums.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 16, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> The resurrection has arrived to CR forums.



It is often interesting to read former predictions after the release of the actual product - the 6d will be no different, I'm esp. looking forward to the "real life" dpreview af comparison between the d600 and 6d, Canon might have found a nice for the 6d after all beyond the obvious gps-tourism.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 16, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > The resurrection has arrived to CR forums.
> ...



The 6D will be a repackaged 5D2. If its anymore than this, My expectations are exceeded.

My only gripe is the lack of a multi-selector.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 16, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> My only gripe is the lack of a multi-selector.



... and I'm ok with this since I've got a 60d and am used to this - so even if it's a 5d2 repackage with better low-light af, wifi (nice) and gps (idotic) I'm considering it because it's €1000 cheaper than the 5d3. Well, it won't be long until the first reviews.


----------

