artsupreme wrote:
There are many reasons but I give up. And no, the D3 sold just fine with many D3 owners buying a D700 for a backup.
Not according to several dealers I spoke to after the D700 release. By their account the D700 eviscerated D3 sales. According to them, its what prompted Nikon to release the D3s a year later (with its one stop high ISO advantage) while skipping a D700 upgrade.
thedigitalbean wrote:
Not according to several dealers I spoke to after the D700 release. By their account the D700 eviscerated D3 sales. According to them, its what prompted Nikon to release the D3s a year later (with its one stop high ISO advantage) while skipping a D700 upgrade.
He said she said? I heard differently and see plenty of D3's in the field......Anyway, I shoot with a couple guys who still use them believe it or not and they both have D700's for a backup. I guess only Nikon knows. Regardless, Nikon didn't lose out on the sale to another manufacturer, money in their pockets.
Split seems to make sense. At least both bodies seem to share the upgraded AF. If this all is true, the 5D3 seems to better than my 5D2 on AF and FPS. I wonder how the overall responsiveness will be better (shutter lag, VF black-out times, AF speed)? 5Dx will be of no use to me. Too much pixels. WIll be great for studio/commercial shoots that require huge output though.
And yet they came out with the d4 and d800 to repeat the mistake. Or did they? Actually, they upped the MP on the d800 at half the price. By cutting the framerate in half, even nikonians have to make a choice - which is the segmentation nikon wants. If canon made a 5dx (or 3d) and 5dm3 then 1dx sales would truly be hurt in the same way d3 sales were. But by only having a 5d3 canonites will also have to choose between affordable stupid-high MP at low frame rate or stupid expensive, great frame rate and plenty of resolution.
There aren't going to be 2 5d's - this rumor is bogus guys. It easily fails the "smell test"
I'm not sure about two 5D cameras but I do think Canon is gonna re-segment their DSLR line.
I'm thinking somewhat a little off of what's rumoured really.
i) A high MP (32-44MP) camera with a 4fps rate, 7D AF(albeit with improved processing engine), High dynamic range (1.5-2 stops more) , modest ISO up to 12,800.
This most likely being the 5DIII or 5Dx
ii) A moderate MP (18-24MP), FF or APS-H camera with a 6-8 fps rate, 7D or 1D4 AF ( slower AF processing engine). Same dynamic range as older 5DII, 1DsIII, ISO up to 51,200k.
This most likely being called something else. A different series. Possibly 3Dx or the likes.
It would create enough differentiation in performance as well as target audience. As well as justify for price differences as compared to the 1Dx.
Wether or not the names will be 5DIII and 5Dx, I hope this rumor is true. If it's true, Canon would be going in the right direction with both the 1 series aiming at photojournalists and sports shooters (and hitting the nail on the head there) and a split 5 series....as long as the 5 series replacements aren't intentionally crippled. When reading any camera forum, all I hear is a battle of high ISO vs high resolution. Duel small body full frame cameras that are identical except for one has 18-22 megapixels and amazing high ISO and one at 45 megapixels would be a wonderful thing for current Canon owners that would literally make everyone happy.
My frustrations with Canon have made me seriously consider switching to Nikon but I'll stay firmly planted in Canonland if they give me the 1Dx's sensor, clean ISO 12,800 (with depth), awesome HD functionality, auto focus that WORKS and a split focus screen option (another crippling under the 1 series), 1/250th flash sync for $2700. I also hope they move the erase image button to the top of the camera like Nikon . Since I'm wishing, face detection focus like the sony video cameras while shooting HD would be the bee's knees.
As for the crippled features of the 5 series, Canon really stuck their foot in their mouth with that because I know very few photographers (especially in today's economy) that are going to spring for 2-3 1 series bodies. Most photogs I know use the 5 series in 35mm digital and they all have the exact same gripes about auto focus, no split focus screen (for those who want it), etc. All the crippling did was make people mad (as further evident by the constant chatter I hear about it on forums) and still people didn't spring for the 1 series like Canon had hoped. Heck, they even discontinued the 1Ds3 because people weren't buying it over the 5.
timbop wrote:
And yet they came out with the d4 and d800 to repeat the mistake. Or did they? Actually, they upped the MP on the d800 at half the price. By cutting the framerate in half, even nikonians have to make a choice - which is the segmentation nikon wants. If canon made a 5dx (or 3d) and 5dm3 then 1dx sales would truly be hurt in the same way d3 sales were. But by only having a 5d3 canonites will also have to choose between affordable stupid-high MP at low frame rate or stupid expensive, great frame rate and plenty of resolution.
There aren't going to be 2 5d's - this rumor is bogus guys. It easily fails the "smell test"...Show more →
You assume that this implies Nikon made a mistake with the D700, thats not the case. It was a deliberate decision designed to challenge the way their main competitor had segmented the market. Nikon was in a weaker position compared to Canon at the time. When you are in a weaker position, you don't want to go up against the stronger company using their rules of market segmentation and value creation. If you do that, you're going to run out of options quickly and start getting into a price war, which is usually terrible for business (unless that is the entire value creation model for business like Walmart) because it erodes net margins and investors hate that. Instead you change the value model. Canon had segmented the market where the pro bodies are what got the whiz bam AF. Nikon, said nope, was living to live with whatever D3 sales they would lose to instead gain market share. This drive for market share can also be seen in another strategy they were employing "engaging key influencers". They went out, found prominent shooters and gave them a full Nikon kit at a massive discount (this was after they could try the system out for free for a couple of weeks and at the time a lot of the Canon shooters were bummed with the 1D3). Pure genius.
Now with the D800 and D4, this is not the same scenario as the D3 and D700. As you rightly point out the segmentation is entirely around frame rates.
Whats interesting here is just how Canon can respond without directly going after a specific body, because again that will likely lead to a price war and erosion of margins. It certainly will be interesting times.
maxxevv wrote:
I'm not sure about two 5D cameras but I do think Canon is gonna re-segment their DSLR line.
I don't have any inside information, but I think you are generally on a right track. The fixation on model numbers is making it hard from some to see the bigger picture.
The same thing happened when the 1DX was announced - we had breathless pronouncements that Canon was going to unify their lines and not produce high MP cameras, all because of uncritical readings of a few words uttered by someone representing Canon - words that could mean a variety of things.
In the end... we'll have to wait and see, won't we?
thedigitalbean wrote:
You assume that this implies Nikon made a mistake with the D700, thats not the case. It was a deliberate decision designed to challenge the way their main competitor had segmented the market. Nikon was in a weaker position compared to Canon at the time. When you are in a weaker position, you don't want to go up against the stronger company using their rules of market segmentation and value creation. If you do that, you're going to run out of options quickly and start getting into a price war, which is usually terrible for business (unless that is the entire value creation model for business like Walmart) because it erodes net margins and investors hate that. Instead you change the value model. Canon had segmented the market where the pro bodies are what got the whiz bam AF. Nikon, said nope, was living to live with whatever D3 sales they would lose to instead gain market share. This drive for market share can also be seen in another strategy they were employing "engaging key influencers". They went out, found prominent shooters and gave them a full Nikon kit at a massive discount (this was after they could try the system out for free for a couple of weeks and at the time a lot of the Canon shooters were bummed with the 1D3). Pure genius.
Now with the D800 and D4, this is not the same scenario as the D3 and D700. As you rightly point out the segmentation is entirely around frame rates.
Whats interesting here is just how Canon can respond without directly going after a specific body, because again that will likely lead to a price war and erosion of margins. It certainly will be interesting times....Show more →
I agree. I'd also add that a lot of people don't want a 30+ mp body, especially if there is no s/mRAW, and there is no telling how the D4 and the D800 will compare in regards to real world high ISO performance but I'm better the D4 will have the edge here.
Well, if there are a lot of people who don't want a 30+ mp body, they will have to leave Nikon unless they want to fork out for a D4 or keep their D700/D3 forever. That indicates that Nikon, by not catering to this segment, doesn't think it is that large...
philber wrote:
Well, if there are a lot of people who don't want a 30+ mp body, they will have to leave Nikon unless they want to fork out for a D4 or keep their D700/D3 forever. That indicates that Nikon, by not catering to this segment, doesn't think it is that large...
Dude, think outside the box - you don't have to record in full res. As mentioned, at receptions I often go to medium resolution on my 5d2/7d
I would be surprised to see Nikon make the same mistake Canon did and not offer a lower MP/faster fps true D700 replacement. It's probably already in the works and who knows what they will call it.
timbop wrote:
Dude, think outside the box - you don't have to record in full res. As mentioned, at receptions I often go to medium resolution on my 5d2/7d
I'm sure I remember seeing a thread showing that 5DII sRAW binned dynamic range during the downsizing, that's absolutely, categorically not an option for many shooters.
timbop wrote:
Dude, think outside the box - you don't have to record in full res. As mentioned, at receptions I often go to medium resolution on my 5d2/7d
AFAIK, and I could be wrong, Nikon doesn't offer sRAW or mRAW...at least not currently.
Pixel Perfect wrote: If I was a company I wouldn't really care how I achieved the bottom line. If I sell far more cheaper cameras than more expensive cameras and I end up with the same if not more money I'm not worried.
I think most people here agree, and Nikon agrees, but Canon doesn't. Why develop a hyper expensive 200-400 that will sell in microscopic quantities, when they could just add IS to the 400 f5.6, or produce a refractive (non-DO) 400 f4.5 (like the old FD 400 f4.5) that would sell for a profitable $2500? It would outsell the 200-400 by 100:1.
Why would Canon fall down on the floor, kicking and screaming, not agreeing to add IS to the 400 f5.6, and then put it on a 24 and 28mm prime, which no one asked for? I think it is clear that Canon has ideological blinders, rising above common sense and the desire to maximize profit.
maxxevv wrote:
I'm not sure about two 5D cameras but I do think Canon is gonna re-segment their DSLR line.
That's how it looks like indeed.
Reading the tea leafs, it seems very likely to me that Canon will be merging the 7D and 5D lines into single model, the 5DIII (5DX?) - with 18mp FF, 7fps, and 7D-level of AF.
That would be a true FF version of the 7D, which many have been asking for.
But as others have said, 18mp leave the door wide open for a higher MP body - which will be the true successor to the 5DII.
So, the 5D-series split makes a lot of sense - but not in the form presented in the CR rumor.
Of course with the 7D gone, the xxD series will have to become the top of the line 1.6x model again.
This also makes sense, since the 60D is too close to the Rebels right now, both in price and features.
. Since I'm wishing, face detection focus like the sony video cameras while shooting HD would be the bee's knees.