in february Nikon launches the new 4D for $ 6000.
will this price the Canon DX drop also to 6K intead the $ 6800,-

Possibly, but I should think we also need to take into account investment in lenses. Its not that easy to buy a D4 instead of a 1DX, just because it costs less, especially if you're heavily invested in L glass. Selling all your glass for less than you paid for it and then having to replace with the Nikkor/Nikon equivalents might be a step too far for most. It may also cost you more in the long run.

Others may totally disagree

I think the D4 price was dictated by the 1Dx, I don't see them changing the pricing unless D4 went for Ģ5000.

I think if you have to make a decision to Canon or Nikon, this could be the reason

No...who would make a $6K commitment one way or another to save $800? Features might influence one's decision in deciding what pro body to choose, but I doubt price is too much of a factor when the price tags are that close.

Both prices quoted, $6000 for the Nikon and $6800 for Canon are suggested retail. We'll have to wait a while to see where the street prices settle.

jdben622 wrote:
No...who would make a $6K commitment one way or another to save $800? Features might influence one's decision in deciding what pro body to choose, but I doubt price is too much of a factor when the price tags are that close.

Not when you have $20K worth of glass to also worry about.

it would only be a factor if you weren't committed to either brand yet.

Pixel Perfect wrote:
jdben622 wrote:
No...who would make a $6K commitment one way or another to save $800? Features might influence one's decision in deciding what pro body to choose, but I doubt price is too much of a factor when the price tags are that close.

Not when you have $20K worth of glass to also worry about.

it would only be a factor if you weren't committed to either brand yet.

Indeed, as a total cost of investment for serious photogs the cost of bodies are relatively minor compared to lenses. Unfortunately bodies depreciate much faster than pro glass...which go as long as 10 years between refreshes. But you're right...the cost difference between the 1Dx and D4 (whatever it will be) is a non-issue.

Bones74 wrote:
Possibly, but I should think we also need to take into account investment in lenses. Its not that easy to buy a D4 instead of a 1DX, just because it costs less, especially if you're heavily invested in L glass. Selling all your glass for less than you paid for it and then having to replace with the Nikkor/Nikon equivalents might be a step too far for most. It may also cost you more in the long run.

Others may totally disagree

I agree. When I had the opportunity to change, Nikon equivalents were way overpriced so I stayed with Canon & have no regrets. In fact I've cash that I must spend for business but am waiting for the next 5D as I am perfectly happy with my set up as it stands. Buying used has its limitations for CPS qualications & Canon dealers ask a premium so invariably I buy new.
A note on goods purchased from a non Canon dealer-in Australia. In June I purchased the 70-200 2.8 IS vII from a reputable but not Canon recognised dealer. I registered the lens with CPS to find out that whilst covered by the standard Canon warranty it would not qualify for CPS benefits eg 72 hour turnaround for repairs etc.

I would not expect a price drop, before both cameras are out and will be previewed.
Good thing is: If the Nikon rumor price turns out as correct, Canon will not be able to raise itīs price. That is good enough, I guess. It will be down for about $1000 - 1.200 anyway within the first year.

Those are pro machines. I guess for a pro in busyness, who can afford 6000, a $800 difference is no hint. Its half to 3rd a lense they already have.

D4 Auto focus at F8...could be a game changer for me.

Not sure about price but if the D4 has the rumored video features, in particular uncompressed HDMI out, that might force Canon's hand to unlock that feature on the 1DX.

Bones74 wrote:
Possibly, but I should think we also need to take into account investment in lenses. Its not that easy to buy a D4 instead of a 1DX, just because it costs less, especially if you're heavily invested in L glass. Selling all your glass for less than you paid for it and then having to replace with the Nikkor/Nikon equivalents might be a step too far for most. It may also cost you more in the long run.

Others may totally disagree

never thought about this but its def true... and I am sure Nikon does it deliberately

Is $800 really a deal breaker on a near $7000 camera?

matt4626 wrote:
D4 Auto focus at F8...could be a game changer for me.

I heard 1 series can do that too, but need a special trick. It looks like auto focus at F8 is feasible, but Canon didn't make it official, maybe there is a reason for that.

Well, now that we know the official D4 specs, it's not just one AF point at f/8, but actually 11, with the center one a cross sensor. For a certain group of photographers, this might be a huge feature that will outweigh any kind of price difference when the entire package is taken into consideration.

I think Canon announced the 1DX early to keep those invested in the system happy - to show that there is a serious update from the 1DIV and 1DsIII coming - but intentionally hadn't nailed down the final specs. As you can see on Canon's site, a number of features are still TBA, such as weight and buffer capacity. So yes, I do think they wanted to wait for the D4 announcement before finalizing, but more so for features rather than price. Who knows, maybe aspects of the D4 will cause Canon to upgrade the X's specs, resulting in a price increase instead. The 1DIII jumped $500 once it actually shipped... some of the new super-teles were bumped up $1000...

Tony B wroteit would not qualify for CPS benefits eg 72 hour turnaround for repairs etc.


This doesnt seem a fair policy. Its not like the lens is a knockoff! I've got all my kit registered with CPS... for what its worth. still a two week turn around

Will the price difference make a difference?
Absolutely not.

For starters, and what people are not considering, is that Nikon charge for remote software you get for free with Canon.

Next. I just did a price comparison in shop. Let's say you're a pro. You buy a flash. The Nikon flash is more expensive. You buy a particular lens. One might be cheaper. Another accessory, the Canon is more expensive. et etc etc

I'm not going to go through it, but I just hit the "=" buttons. 14,700.. the other camp is $15,000.


......... (where's my tumbleweed gif)

Tony B wrote:

A note on goods purchased from a non Canon dealer-in Australia. In June I purchased the 70-200 2.8 IS vII from a reputable but not Canon recognised dealer. I registered the lens with CPS to find out that whilst covered by the standard Canon warranty it would not qualify for CPS benefits eg 72 hour turnaround for repairs etc.


That's interesting to know. I've always assumed they covered anything that was imported via Canon Australia. Which retailer did they reject for CPS?