By the way, our friend Nikt has now started a thread in the Nikon forum claiming he's not welcome here and that Nikon is going to introduce something revolutionary - of course without any evidence. Might as well close this thread down and continue our discussions in a new thread...
David, sorry, I don't really know. It's more just info I'm hearing and drawing conclusions from. Sometimes I get actual facts, and sometimes I can share them.
nikt wrote:
Nope, I definitely have no solid info.
David, sorry, I don't really know. It's more just info I'm hearing and drawing conclusions from. Sometimes I get actual facts, and sometimes I can share them.
nikt to me the Nikon lineup is looking very top heavy with another high-end camera to come. They dropped the ball a little on the D60, with the 450D turning the tables. And why no D80 replacement? Seems strange given the big money comes from the bottom end. Did you pick up any insight to this area?
Hey Whayne, Nikons been making plenty of waves about aiming more at the top end. Here's a thought while we're on it though. You'll sell many times more D60/450D's than you will D700's, but ...you'll rarely sell another lens to a D60 owner (especially a D60 owner).
The D60 users are happy with a small simple camera with twin VR lenses. It's a strategy that's working for them, at the moment. Nikon know that the higher end users are likely to buy lenses and other accessories. There's good money in the repeat business.
But you're right, it's seems top heavy. The 'professional' is where the conversations seems to go all the time. I think it's also because there is competition from Sony with the A200, A300, A350; the Oly's E420 and E520, and the Pentax K200.
Like Canon have done, build good high end equipment that the pro's use and people will talk about your brand and buy the entry stuff.
It does lead onto the D80 replacement, and this is where Nikon is being outclassed by the likes of the Canon 450D and the Canon 40D. But it's due to be replaced and it wouldn't be too hard to imagine it's most likely announcement is in the beginning of September.
Specs? Again it wouldn't be hard to guess at the obvious 3in, live view, 3.5 or 4fps. Basically, just under the 40D, but it will probably cost more.
Nik, it seems to me that the reason why Canon execs may be rubbing their hands with glee is that Nikon has 3 cameras boasting "only" 12Mp. That is less than a Sony 350, a Pentax K20, even a Sony compact DSC 30 W, all of them much cheaper gear than the Nikons. While pixel count is not the only factor far from it, it is still the "easiest" number on which non professionals can hang their hat on. So, if Canon does announce a 5DII soon, it will leave Nikon having to argue defensively on the pixel count of no less than 3 very recent cameras. And they have no other clear advantage that would keep them in a leadership position in their market segments for the "normal" length of time a new products gets. Might it be that Nikon didn't get it right and aimed too low?
It could very well be that Canon is happy that the D700 is only 12MP, and they have more and that's all there is. I'm not sure about the 'no other clear advantage' though. I think for the money and feature set, the D700 ain't bad.
But whatever happens with the 5D replacement, it will again occupy a niche or segment others don't play in, that is >12MP FX camera at a more affordable price tag.
philber wrote:
Nik, it seems to me that the reason why Canon execs may be rubbing their hands with glee is that Nikon has 3 cameras boasting "only" 12Mp. That is less than a Sony 350, a Pentax K20, even a Sony compact DSC 30 W, all of them much cheaper gear than the Nikons. While pixel count is not the only factor far from it, it is still the "easiest" number on which non professionals can hang their hat on. So, if Canon does announce a 5DII soon, it will leave Nikon having to argue defensively on the pixel count of no less than 3 very recent cameras. And they have no other clear advantage that would keep them in a leadership position in their market segments for the "normal" length of time a new products gets. Might it be that Nikon didn't get it right and aimed too low?...Show more →
I hope that's not what they are thinking. 12MP is a lot of data, and a large portion of 5D owners are more than happy with it. Heck, for my needs 8mp is plenty. Where the d700 outclasses the 5d is in the af, frame rate, weather resistance, high ISO, etc. I personally would much rather have a d700-like camera that is more versatile, than a 5d successor whose only change is the number of MP.
And nik, I apologize if you felt flamed on this and I welcome your insights. It's a shame, but this forum has really gone downhill in the last year or so. There seem to be a lot more people with "internet muscles".
Radiohead wrote:
Does anyone really think that Nikon launching the D3/D700/300 has Canon rubbing their hands with glee?
Honestly.
Yes, honestly.
One can argue that the rush to get the D700 out the door relatively quickly might be forced by what the 5D Mk II will bring. It's conceivable, though I am not convinced myself. Mind you, this wasn't about the D3 or D300. Nor the D3x.
Guy, you may have misunderstood my post. 'Canon rubbing their hands with glee' was simply meant that Canon are very keen for September to come around and release their 5D replacement.
Radiohead wrote:
I personally can't see that loss of market share will ever be welcomed, but there you go.
I agree, but the fact is that we don't have any idea what Nikon is up to in the long term. Ok, so the D700 will likely take big chunks out of the D3 sales. The Nikon system as a whole gets a lot more attractive with the 5D-like D700 in the line-up so Nikon might just be willing to sacrifice those D3 sales in order to get more users to the Nikon F-mount.
nikt wrote:
Guy, you may have misunderstood my post. 'Canon rubbing their hands with glee' was simply meant that Canon are very keen for September to come around and release their 5D replacement.
Sorry if I misunderstood then.
Personally I'm surprised that Canon have delayed the release this long and equally surprised that Nikon got the D700 out of the door so quickly.
Tentacle wrote:
I agree, but the fact is that we don't have any idea what Nikon is up to in the long term. Ok, so the D700 will likely take big chunks out of the D3 sales. The Nikon system as a whole gets a lot more attractive with the 5D-like D700 in the line-up so Nikon might just be willing to sacrifice those D3 sales in order to get more users to the Nikon F-mount.
I think you're right - and they're probably a lot happier than losing those sales to 5D's...
To me as a mainly Canon user at present, the Nikon offers me a longstop. Yes, I hope Canon are about to release a great and affordable 5D replacement, but if what they do release is too expensive, or hasn't got the features I need, then at the very worst I could buy a D700. Its not like Canon are the only FX game in town any more. Thats what has really changed.
I am increasingly wondering what Sony's FX plans are, everyone is talking about Canon and Nikon - I suspect Sony are going to be coming on strong when they do go FX.
vkalia wrote:
I dont get something here. What exactly is the downside of a FF 40D with 16MP, that everyone here seems to think it is an incremental upgrade?
As long as it has good high ISO (say usable ISO 6400), that'd be a kickass camera. The 40D is a very good body indeed and is not slouch in the AF department (I use a 1D2 as my other body, so I am used to the 1-series AF). Weather-sealing would be nice, but a shower cap costs next to nothing and probably does a better job. LCD - who gives a damn? It isnt as if a VGA LCD is going to show that much more useful info.
I'd be happier with a 40D-specced, 16MP FF body for less, than a body with weathersealing, higher-res LCD, etc, etc for more....Show more →
Smartest post I've read so far, Vandit..!
nikt wrote:
It could very well be that Canon is happy that the D700 is only 12MP, and they have more and that's all there is. I'm not sure about the 'no other clear advantage' though. I think for the money and feature set, the D700 ain't bad.
But whatever happens with the 5D replacement, it will again occupy a niche or segment others don't play in, that is >12MP FX camera at a more affordable price tag.
Edited by nikt on Jul 28, 2008 at 10:49 PM GMT
some seem to be hinting strongly that they will continue the 5D on for a while as a super low cost 'FF 30D' and introduce a '3D' with many advanced trappings, much higher than many expect MP count (18+) and HD video and a more than worthy competitor to the D700 (not much mention about AF though, but hopefully), perhaps OLED LCD too.
But also at the same or slightly later time a '7D' which is the new 5D a basic 20D->30D type upgrade, basically liveview, marginally higher MP, a tad more weatherseals, larger LCD.
Then:
5D like $1600-1700
7D like $2000-2200
3D like $2800-3200
some hint instead a 50D and 5D for low end and just the 3D.
There is no way Canon has 3 full frame bodies in the $1500-3000 range. Simply isnt going to happen for a bunch of reasons, two of which are: too much manufacturing variation required for relatively small differences, and SKU limitations of retailers.
Just b/c we would like all sorts of little variations doesnt mean we'll get them.
And I dont know who these "some" are, who're hinting that the 5D will continue for a while. Your post is the first I've heard of it - care to provide a source?
