Ralph Conway wrote:
I read several times now about Nikon D700 specs the new 5D2 will not match. Maybe somebody could explain me what specs are mentioned?
IMHO...
Anyone comparing specs of the D700 to the 5D2 is full of it. There's so much speculation of the specs of the "supposed" 5D2, I'm pretty sure only Canon knows. Therefore the speculators are quite certainly full of it...
...just my .02
Edited by Photomatt on Aug 05, 2008 at 10:38 AM GMT
The only cause, why I still wait and do not purchase a 5D is that I do AL. I expect a great IQ in Iso 6400. 16 MP would be nice, but are no MUST. A shutter lifetime of 300.000 would help to overcome the next two camera generations.
Ralph Conway wrote:
@ abam:
Yes, I forgott to mention the price. :-)
The only cause, why I still wait and do not purchase a 5D is that I do AL. I expect a great IQ in Iso 6400. 16 MP would be nice, but are no MUST. A shutter lifetime of 300.000 would help to overcome the next two camera generations.
Honestly I don't give a rat's (butt) about 16MP. Although a worthwhile ISO 6400 would have me so excited I'd wet my pants.
My last wedding I had to push my 20D to ISO 1600, and the results were far from impressive. To say the least, I'm eagerly awaiting the 5D2 (or whatever they're calling it today)...
I shot a fashion show in Munich in bad light conditions with a friend. My Iso 1600 pics (D30) where horrible more noisy than the (calculated) High Iso (3200) of his 5D.
Anyone comparing specs of the D700 to the 5D2 is full of sh!t. There's so much speculation of the specs of the "supposed" 5D2, I'm pretty sure only Canon knows. Therefore the speculators are quite certainly full of it...
...just my .02
Well, with such a convincing and classy argument as this........
Or next week, Canon will announce a 24-105 f/2.8 IS And discontinue the 24-105 f/4 IS, And the resale value will plummet!
FWIW, I've only seen 1 place selling the D700 with the kit lens, Everywhere else only have the body only in stock (Most places still have a couple in stock, Which is surprising!) Down here in Australia.
D700 is a nice camera, But the price difference between the Nikon and Canon lenses is pretty big (Well down here anyway) For example, The Nikon 24-70 is about $700 (Au$) more then the Canon version, The Nikon 70-200 VR Is about $350 (Au$) more then the Canon version, So already thats over $1000 (Au$) more for lenses then you would pay over a Canon, Then the D700 costs $1500 more then a 5D (Not surprising though).
If the 5D2 Is just going to be a 40D/50D With a FF Sensor, I hope Canon prices it accordingly (I hope Canon doesn't think they are going to charge us anywhere near what the D700 costs with a warmed over 5D!!). I reckon the RRP Will be around $3000 (Au$) And a street price of around $2500-$2700 (Au$) when it hits the market in October/November (Assuming Canon announces it a Photokina).
D700 is already selling for around $3400 (Au$) Online (The RRP Is $3999 (Au$) For the D700), So I expect the 5D2 to be well bellow the $3000 (Au$) Mark.
Didn't someone say that Canon is having a sales meeting this week??
EOS some of that difference has to be attributed to the newness of the Nikon glass. In 2-3 years time the Nikon glass will be cheaper I'm sure and newer Canon glass will be dearer. But part of it is brand name.
Yes, I know that the Canon glass has been out allot longer then the newer Nikon glass, But that was the deciding point or me to stick with Canon, Rather then get a D700 and Nikon lenses.
I don't really need f/2.8, And Nikon don't really offer any "Gold ring" non f/2.8 glass in the 24-XX range for the FX format. I did like the feel of the Nikon 24-70 (IMHO I think it's nicer then the Canon version) But I find it hard to justify the expense of the faster glass, And D700, Over a 24-105 f/4 IS, And a Canon FF Body (Either the 5D, Or 5D2).
At the end of the day, I'm really only interested in the IQ I get from my photos, Rather then all the wiz bang features and gimmicks the camera has to offer, So I hope Canons 5D2 continues to deliver excellent picture quality, With low High ISO noise, And a few more MP's will be nice, And I want weathersealing, And maybe a few more AF Points.
EOS20 wrote:
Yes, I know that the Canon glass has been out allot longer then the newer Nikon glass, But that was the deciding point or me to stick with Canon, Rather then get a D700 and Nikon lenses.
I don't really need f/2.8, And Nikon don't really offer any "Gold ring" non f/2.8 glass in the 24-XX range for the FX format. I did like the feel of the Nikon 24-70 (IMHO I think it's nicer then the Canon version) But I find it hard to justify the expense of the faster glass, And D700, Over a 24-105 f/4 IS, And a Canon FF Body (Either the 5D, Or 5D2).
At the end of the day, I'm really only interested in the IQ I get from my photos, Rather then all the wiz bang features and gimmicks the camera has to offer, So I hope Canons 5D2 continues to deliver excellent picture quality, With low High ISO noise, And a few more MP's will be nice, And I want weathersealing, And maybe a few more AF Points.
Agreed. I don't own a lot, so I doubt if I would have trouble divesting of canon. But, replacing what I have in nikon black (along with a d700 and d300 as backup) would just be steeper than I would like. The loss from divestiture and the additional cost is what is keeping me where I am - for now.
CANON will contra attack the D300 and D700 with two cameras with nice features and a lot of resolution making both the highest resolutions cameras in their class. One of them will rival the flagship of CANON 1 series.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I agree, Nikon's only failing is a lack of f/4 zooms. I think they may surprise us with a 24-120 f/4 VR though sooner rather than later.
Why would they do that when they already have such a lens? It's the 24-120 3.5-5.6 VR, which, for all intents, averages out to an F4 lens.
AJ Nadershahi wrote:
Why would they do that when they already have such a lens? It's the 24-120 3.5-5.6 VR, which, for all intents, averages out to an F4 lens.
Not really. You can call it an average, but that's some funny math in the real world, because you certainly aren't averaging f4 at 120mm.
AJ Nadershahi wrote:
Why would they do that when they already have such a lens? It's the 24-120 3.5-5.6 VR, which, for all intents, averages out to an F4 lens.
AJ Nadershahi wrote:
Why would they do that when they already have such a lens? It's the 24-120 3.5-5.6 VR, which, for all intents, averages out to an F4 lens.
it probably avgs out to f/5 knowing how variable zooms usually end up working
anyway, at the long end you are a full stop down and near it a good 1/2 to 2/3 stop down
crivera wrote:
CANON will contra attack the D300 and D700 with two cameras with nice features and a lot of resolution making both the highest resolutions cameras in their class. One of them will rival the flagship of CANON 1 series.
As Ben said in the first post on the first page, Canon sales meeting is Aug. 7-14, so lets wait and see in a few days. However, we usually see leaks within a week ahead, and this time there aren't any which is disconcerting. Canon may just kill off the 5D and concentrate on the low end and high end. At the end of the day, its sales which make the difference.
Canon may just kill off the 5D and concentrate on the low end and high end.
Let's re-word that to "... VERY high end".
Let's assume that the present 5D is out of date, and as of today, no 5DII exists. Further, let's say that the 1D3 is tainted, because of unsolved AF issues.
That means there is a massive $7,000 hole or gap, with no desirable Canon bodies between 40D and 1Ds3. Meanwhile the D300, D700, and D3 are positioned right in the middle of this massive hole.
This reminds me a of a ghost ship, aimlessly circling in an empty ocean, sails tattered and flapping in a slight breeze. Hellooooooo ... is anybody home?
