RobertLynn wrote:
Doesn't someone here have that maeda or whatever his name is on speed dial? Call him and check west fall and let them know we are pissed.
Then have Ashton kutcher call and say "you've been punked".
Get it, because it was the dude on the show and he's the Nikon guy ;$
anorphirith wrote:
3500$ for the 5D3 ??...... the new features aren't worth 1500$ more than the 5d2 for me, I"m still going to use center focus point, I"m still going to shoot ISO 100-3200. I'd rather buy a new lens for the 1500$. THAT is really going to improve my photography
I agree, a landscape shooter (or someone who doesn't make money shooting events) can buy a nice condition 5Dii and a 24 TSE for the price of a 5Diii body. Or a D800 and used 14-24 for the a little more than the 5Diii kit. Everyone will just pick what makes the most sense for their work. If you have less then 5 lenses (and bought most used or did a tax write off of new stuff) switching is pretty easy.
After a recent disappointment with Nikon warranty "service" I was fully prepared to make the jump to Canon and the new 5D3. I was even prepared to spend a bit more on the camera body due to the good value of Canon's 70-200 IS II compared to Nikon's 70-200.
But the $500 (US) premium of the 5D3 over the D800 and the $2,299 price of Canon's new 24-70 has me scratching my head instead of placing a pre-order.
jamesf99 wrote:
They have a 1.2x/25mp crop mode. That *is* small RAW..
haha oh James, you know that ain't the same thing.
$3500 is about $500 more than I want to spend at this point in time, so it looks like I'll be waiting a little while. Hopefully Canon allows me to give them my money eventually, because they have just released several products that I would like to have, unfortunately they are all overpriced from my point of view.
Alex Nail wrote:
Its way worse in the UK.....£3000 vs £1500 for the mkII!
£3000 is a stupid price for it, but they know they've got us by the balls, the D800 has to be cheaper because Nikonites can just say "sod it, I don't need the megapixels, I'll stick with my D700" whereas those of us on this side who've been waiting for this camera have precisely zero other choices except the double-priced 1Dx.
Very cynical opinion, but I doubt I'm far wrong.
What I find even more laughable though is the 600EX - that's MORE in sterling than in $, that really is taking the piss.
From a pro perspective, and knowing a lot of fellow pros, money most definitely doesn't grow on trees which is why the vast majority of shooters I know shoot with 5D/5D2's over the 1Ds2/1Ds3 despite having complaints about the 5D series. $3500 is just too much for this camera and from what I'm reading on forums and social networking and hearing from my circle, Canon is going to sell 1/4 of what they would have if the camera came in at $3K. All this high pricing is just marketing hype of the strange kind. Keeping the 5D2 in production is purposely adding to the high price despite the face the 5D3 is precisely what the 5D2 should have been 2 years ago. A grip should not be almost $500 and a non-IS 24-70 should not be $2400. They're just trying to play king of the hill and look how much we can charge and I think it's going to backfire on them just like it did with their dumbed down platform practices.
Nikon would be very very smart right now to announce a firmware fix of 18 megapixel sRAW in the D800. Funny that a lower mp option would, I feel, inspire Canon to lower the price of the 5D3 even faster.
cineski wrote:
Nikon would be very very smart right now to announce a firmware fix of 18 megapixel sRAW in the D800. Funny that a lower mp option would, I feel, inspire Canon to lower the price of the 5D3 even faster.
danielsan wrote:
Obviously it is not a situation where money is no object if you are a professional but the simple truth is the pain threshold for amateurs is going to be a lot lower than for professionals.
I don't know that I agree. There are a lot of serious amateurs that do not make money from photography. Hobbyists are well known to be willing to spend a lot of money for a hobby they are passionate about.
Professional photographers, on the other hand, actually have to justify the cost of the purchase. The gear has to "pay for itself" over time.
To me, the cost of a 5DIII is exceptionally painful because it seems to not offer me much that will really benefit my commercial work. I had been thinking that if it had been close to the price I had paid for a 5DII three years ago ($2699) I could maybe justify its purchase as my new primary camera because the dual card slots would be a nice safety net. But $3500 is way too much for me to spend to get a camera that will make images not likely distingishable from my current gear.
I like how everyone is quick to point out the 5D3 is $3,500 and the D800 is "only" $2,999. 3000-2000... WOW, the 5D3 is ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS MORE EXPENSIVE!1!1
I've not seen one person quote the 5D3 at $3,499 or the D800 at $3,000. Also, I'm not sure why 15% on an item that costs 3 grand is suddenly a breaking point. I get it on the basis of principle, sure, but people saying they can't afford it? If $500 is going to make or break your ability to put food on the table, maybe you shouldn't be buying a $3,000 camera that you don't need?
The value of the USD vs. the JPY is about 15% lower now than in Sept. 2008 when the 5DII was announced, so you could say the 5DIII in 2008 equivalent dollars is about $3000... not such a huge difference for its better AF, build, etc...
leftymgp wrote:
I know others have probably said it, but I'd be surprised if the "street price" of the 5d3 is actually $3500 after it's been out in the world for a few months.
The 5DII came out at $2699, and, as I recall, stayed at the price for quite a long time. Given Canon's past track I would not be too optimistic about a price drop within "a few months."
Pixel Perfect wrote:
If I were Nikon I'd drop the D4 sensor in a new FF camera, that does 8fps but otherwise is same specs as D800 and call it the D750.
I wouldn't doubt this is going to happen soon....and it will probably be priced less than the 5DIII. The real D700 replacement. They just dropped the price on the D700...TKO!
leftymgp wrote:
I know others have probably said it, but I'd be surprised if the "street price" of the 5d3 is actually $3500 after it's been out in the world for a few months.
artd wrote:
The 5DII came out at $2699, and, as I recall, stayed at the price for quite a long time. Given Canon's past track I would not be too optimistic about a price drop within "a few months."
Well, let's hope that there are a lot folks that switch to Nikon then or at least, order the D800 instead of the Mark III. Judging by the overwhelmingly negative tones here, the orders of the early adopters it certainly sounds that they will be filled fairly soon, and then the price will start to drop to around $3,000.
Kirivon wrote:
I like how everyone is quick to point out the 5D3 is $3,500 and the D800 is "only" $2,999. 3000-2000... WOW, the 5D3 is ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS MORE EXPENSIVE!1!1
I've not seen one person quote the 5D3 at $3,499 or the D800 at $3,000. Also, I'm not sure why 15% on an item that costs 3 grand is suddenly a breaking point. I get it on the basis of principle, sure, but people saying they can't afford it? If $500 is going to make or break your ability to put food on the table, maybe you shouldn't be buying a $3,000 camera that you don't need?...Show more →
It's not that at all. People simply aren't going to buy something if they feel they are not getting a good value or being ripped off. I could easily afford two, but I'm not going to give Canon my money unless I feel like I'm getting a good value. Same reason I still have my MkIII instead of buying a MkIV. I can afford a MkIV, but I don't see the value in it over my MkIII at it's current retail price.
The recent outrageous telephoto prices and now the IDX and 5DMKIII priced materially higher than the D4/D800 makes me sit down and consider a switch to Nikon. I might bite the bullet now because I do not want to be tied to a system where the company is significantly higher priced than a equally good competitor. I am assuming that canon will be going forward with this pricing structure which makes all future purchases/upgrades more costly. The main thing that will push me over the ledge is if Canon announces their 200-400 at $11,000, which is the price the rumor sites have it at.
