You know, I understand its been discussed, but it is worth reiterating, MP is not the end all be all. You can get a 10MP POS off a news stand for less than $400, but it doesn't really do much and its limitations are many.

Its so over used by the camera companies to do this and yet the public doesn't seem to get it because of the dearth of information out there for them. Or maybe their own lack of researching it?

I apologize if this may not sound nice to Nikon fanboys, but to me the D40x is Nikon's way of saying, "Gee, we thought we were gonna sell more 6 MP's D40s, let's cram more megapixels and see if they sell better..."

The 30D was not Canon's smartest move, and now it seems that Nikon is recognizing that the D40 was not their smartest move either.

My 2 pesos.

Ignacio

While I do tend to agree with you on this... the flip side is that Nikon realized it's mistake... and well, Canon still has a 30D. Now, I'm not MP crazy, and I don't really think that for better photos you need more... but I do think the 30D is in need of some new technology.


IFeito wrote:
I apologize if this may not sound nice to Nikon fanboys, but to me the D40x is Nikon's way of saying, "Gee, we thought we were gonna sell more 6 MP's D40s, let's cram more megapixels and see if they sell better..."

The 30D was not Canon's smartest move, and now it seems that Nikon is recognizing that the D40 was not their smartest move either.

My 2 pesos.

Ignacio

a new 40D will probably list for $1500 retail just like the 20D and 30D.

a used 5D can be found for $1800~2000 if you look hard enough.

am i missing something here?

now, where's my stupid 1Ds3?

-erik

You can make a real case that Nikon's 6.1 Mp sensor looks better than Nikon/Sony's 10.1Mp sensor (especially at ISO 800 and above).

IFeito wrote:
I apologize if this may not sound nice to Nikon fanboys, but to me the D40x is Nikon's way of saying, "Gee, we thought we were gonna sell more 6 MP's D40s, let's cram more megapixels and see if they sell better..."

The 30D was not Canon's smartest move, and now it seems that Nikon is recognizing that the D40 was not their smartest move either.

My 2 pesos.

Ignacio

I think that the D40X is simply the D50 replacement. It's priced at about 50% more than the D40.

SoundHound wrote:
You can make a real case that Nikon's 6.1 Mp sensor looks better than Nikon/Sony's 10.1Mp sensor (especially at ISO 800 and above).

But is it?

IFeito wrote:
I apologize if this may not sound nice to Nikon fanboys, but to me the D40x is Nikon's way of saying, "Gee, we thought we were gonna sell more 6 MP's D40s, let's cram more megapixels and see if they sell better..."

The 30D was not Canon's smartest move, and now it seems that Nikon is recognizing that the D40 was not their smartest move either.

My 2 pesos.

Ignacio

If that's the case, I have to say it's fairly impressive on the part of Nikon to be able to analyze the market and push out a new camera only 4 months after the release of the previous one. Of course, it's possible that they had both designs ready all along, decided to try the 6 MP version first, then when they realized it's not selling so hot, pushed out a 10 MP model. It seems more likely though that they had this planned all along, although it makes for a rather lackluster showing at the two recent trade shows.

I like Nikon gear, especially the D200, but their latest lens releases have been a bit of a yawn, especially compared to what Canon has pushed out in the last year. Granted, some of those, like the 50/1.2 haven't been too well received :/

Nikon had to have the D40x in the works before the D40 ever hit the streets. Certainly had it in place before any decent sales numbers were available.

I think that Nikon has done a great job of taking advantage of Canon's blatant refusal to offer new DSLR's as the technology becomes available. All of the big guys release 4-8 new point and shoots every six months or so because they can. Meanwhile Canon sits around on a very profitable product and makes a spectacle out of their 1.5 year life cycle. Now Nikon has introduced 3 new low-mid range DSLRs in the past year while Canon has released just 1.

The products may not be exciting to anybody with thousands of dollars already in their bag, but they will excite new buyers. Those will be a lot of new buyers that don't have any interest in L glass.

The days of the 300D are over.... Canon is now playing catchup in the entry market. It's going to take more than commercials with Agassi to make the "rebel" relevant again.

The days of the 300D are over.... Canon is now playing catchup in the entry market. It's going to take more than commercials with Agassi to make the "rebel" relevant again.

I have to agree. At the low end the 400D is a fine camera, but it does not stand out from the competition from Nikon, Sony, and Pentax at this point. Lots of people buying at that level do not have the prior investment in lenses and are therefore free to select whatever manufacturer they want.

Canon still owns the high end - from 5D up. But while that is the prestige part of the market, it is also a smaller part of it.

Canon is a very smart company, so I trust that they will make some sort of move before too long.

Edited by danmitchell on Mar 07, 2007 at 09:31 PM GMT

I know that Canon's new offerings don't change the capabilities of my 20D, but what worries me is that Canon isn't bringing new technology or even cameras. I bought into the EOS system and the 20D because I thought that as time went on, my investment in lenses would be wise as dSLRs became more capable. I'd have to say that if I could swap my 17-40L and my 70-200/2.8LIS for their Nikon equivelents, I'd drop my 20D like a brick and go to a D200.

I love my F1NEW and the FD glass, but if I could go with a D200 and an FM3A and use the same glass, I'd be better off.

Worse than the lack of products is a lack of communicated vision from Canon. Sure they tout full frame, but seriously, if the 5D is as cheap as it is going to get, full frame is never a real player. (I know full frame sensors will get cheaper per MB, but crop cameras get higher MP and lower noise, plus you can get crop sensor lenses to offset the wide angle limitation.)

The 30D (20Dn really) is almost three years old.

It kind of reminds me when Nikon ruled the roost and Canon came out with all the new technology and cameras in the EOS line. Maybe Canon is just milking it.

If this really is a special year for the EOS line, they better try harder.

The slap in the face with the G7 getting a slower lens and lack of RAW is another example of Canon arrogance. I as planning on getting the new G, but never mind.

As penance Canon can either bring out an APS-c sensor P&S with a 24-80 lens on it, or a new full frame M-mount rangefinder camera at the price of the 5D.

Mark

nads wrote:
The days of the 300D are over.... Canon is now playing catchup in the entry market. It's going to take more than commercials with Agassi to make the "rebel" relevant again.


Aren't you overstating it just by a little bit? During the Holiday season, the 400D outsold any other dSLR model (D40, D80, A100, K10D, etc) by a ridiculously huge margin. In Japan, you could total the number of D40 and D80 december sales together, and their collective sum would only be -marginally- higher than the sales of the EOS 400D by itself.

Irrelevent? Probably not.

The Rebel series is fine. Canon's troubles stem from the commercially inept EOS 30D. I'm quite surprised that there hasn't been a replacement model announced this month.

anselwannab wrote:
I know that Canon's new offerings don't change the capabilities of my 20D, but what worries me is that Canon isn't bringing new technology or even cameras. I bought into the EOS system and the 20D because I thought that as time went on, my investment in lenses would be wise as dSLRs became more capable. I'd have to say that if I could swap my 17-40L and my 70-200/2.8LIS for their Nikon equivelents, I'd drop my 20D like a brick and go to a D200.

I love my F1NEW and the FD glass, but if I could go with a D200 and an FM3A and use the same glass, I'd be better off.

Worse than the lack of products is a lack of communicated vision from Canon. Sure they tout full frame, but seriously, if the 5D is as cheap as it is going to get, full frame is never a real player. (I know full frame sensors will get cheaper per MB, but crop cameras get higher MP and lower noise, plus you can get crop sensor lenses to offset the wide angle limitation.)

The 30D (20Dn really) is almost three years old.

It kind of reminds me when Nikon ruled the roost and Canon came out with all the new technology and cameras in the EOS line. Maybe Canon is just milking it.

If this really is a special year for the EOS line, they better try harder.

The slap in the face with the G7 getting a slower lens and lack of RAW is another example of Canon arrogance. I as planning on getting the new G, but never mind.

As penance Canon can either bring out an APS-c sensor P&S with a 24-80 lens on it, or a new full frame M-mount rangefinder camera at the price of the 5D.

Mark



I have to agree with this quote 100 percent. For the first time at the high school baseball game I had to answer a question with a different answer than I usually would. A mom looking to get into taking pictures of hs baseball, Nikon all the way. I have never said that, ever before. She needs the camera with in a month, D80 or the D200 all the way. I could not tell her canon, as the 30D is old tech! I told her if I could sell all my lense without a loss and buy the D200...I would in a heart beat right now. If Canon does not step up in the next few months...I will get tired of waiting. Don't take this wrong, I love my lens...just would like a little faster camera. The 5D is not there with speed for sports, and the 1D camera's are much to heavy/big for me to haul around to kids sports!

The Rebel series is fine.

Yes, but it no longer excels in comparison to the competition as it did not too long ago.

I'm not giving up my Canon gear any time soon, but for a new buyer at the entry-level price point, Canon is far less compelling in comparison to the competition than they were a year ago. It isn't that Canon has gotten worse - it is more that at the entry level Canon has stood still while others have caught up. Well designed 10MP crop sensor cameras are now available from several good manufacturers.

I don't disagree about Canon's sales over the past holiday season, but it seems that they will need to offer something other than "me too" products in the crop sensor cameras if they want the pattern to continue.

Just to let everyone know, I was in Best Buy today (March 7) and they had just received new 30D kits the night before. This new kit was the 30D + 28-135 USM IS lens. Unless they just forgot to change the price tag, its cost was $1499, just as much as it used to be with the 18-55.

Just my little information.

tbartick wrote:
A mom looking to get into taking pictures of hs baseball, Nikon all the way. I have never said that, ever before. She needs the camera with in a month, D80 or the D200 all the way. I could not tell her canon, as the 30D is old tech! I told her if I could sell all my lense without a loss and buy the D200...I would in a heart beat right now. If Canon does not step up in the next few months...I will get tired of waiting. Don't take this wrong, I love my lens...just would like a little faster camera. The 5D is not there with speed for sports, and the 1D camera's are much to heavy/big for me to haul around to kids sports!


I can't see how's the differences between the 30D and D80/D200 would change something to Mom and Dad.

The 70-200/4 IS on the other hand........

ure they tout full frame, but seriously, if the 5D is as cheap as it is going to get, full frame is never a real player

Well, right now full frame is something you have to pay for. The 5d has become the entry level pro camera for those not needing 45af points and weather sealing. When it was released, many were super excited because the image quality is nipping the heels of the 1dsmII (the difference between 12and 16 mp is really not much in print size and the low noise perfomance is amazing) and at less than half the price. I would say that's nothing to scoff at. Just because every amature can't pick one up doesn't make FF irrelevant. When I picked mine up, I was doing just a little bit of paid work every 3 months or so and had a full time job. I saved cash for a bit and bought it. To me it seems like if you want nicer equipment, the real thing is to find a way to get it. Don't blame Canon if you think 3000 is expensive for FF and almost 13 mp.

Of course I too would love to see FF in a 1600 camera, but at almost twice the size of aps-c it seems like they're going to stretch out the upgrade game a little bit.

Canon just came out with some great technology for their 1dmkIII. It's only a matter of time before certain new features evolve into the other pro and prosumer bodies.

And by the way, I think the 5d was an amazing investment for me. When I upgraded to it, I was able to submit stock to Getty, do bigger jobs and now am shooting full time. So sure, a D200 is a great camera at a great price but Canon and Nikon have different timetables on when they're going to release certain cameras.

I also know that in the past, that lots of people were complaining that the cameras were being updated so fast that every time they upgraded something new was released. And now that things have slowed down a touch, everyone complains that it's all not happening fast enough. I say shoot with what you have until it wears out an upgrade only when you have a real reason to do so. With all this time waiting I'm sure Canon will come up with some great gear...I mean look at what they did with the 1dsmkIII. They started from square one, re-evaluated all of the customer needs and came out with an amazing product.

Now, that takes time and money and because of that the price didn't come down, but the better product exists because of it. Being the top of the market means that there's always going to be a bit of a premium for premium gear. Just be glad you're not locked into Leica lenses and picked up a lackluster m8...now thats a great company at the top coming out with an overpriced excuse for an "upgrade".

That is interesting.... I wonder why B&H doesn't list this kit... B&H added a new kit a week or so ago with a 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II... and they want $1499 for it... someone said that you can buy a body and the lens sepratelly for less money...


Andrew Dale wrote:
Just to let everyone know, I was in Best Buy today (March 7) and they had just received new 30D kits the night before. This new kit was the 30D + 28-135 USM IS lens. Unless they just forgot to change the price tag, its cost was $1499, just as much as it used to be with the 18-55.

Just my little information.

I wish someone would offer a 24-105 as a kit lens for the Mk III.......

Hi guys!
Im still hoping that 40D is the suprice from Canon at the PMA. It starts today right?
Anyone got any news?
//Bass