gdanmitchell wrote:
By the way, the spectacle of people ranting about the "$9k" price of a camera that is nothing more than a faint rumor lacking any detail at all about price, timing, model-level, or anything else is rather funny. I'm expecting a new thread to start any minute: "I'm outraged by the 9K price of Canon's new 46MP camera!"
;-)
Dan
So how do you explain that Nikon is able to sell a 36 MP FF camera for about $3000, and now a new Canon 46 MP FF should suddenly be priced at $9K?! I think it is just wishful thinking by a few who bought or are selling the 5D III to avoid seeing this one drop in price rapidly after a new Canon high MP FF camera appears.
artd wrote:
This is exactly right. For example, try pricing out a medium format system to do architecture photography where you need wide angle with shift capabilities.
I know a Sinar Artec with a P65 or 45 back and a few Schneider or Rodenstock wide angle lenses will be significantly more expensive than a Canon 3D? 46mp (which has no price so far, if it even exists at all), is with some TSE's.
John Mills wrote:
I know a Sinar Artec with a P65 or 45 back and a few Schneider or Rodenstock wide angle lenses will be significantly more expensive than a Canon 3D? 46mp (which has no price so far, if it even exists at all), is with some TSE's.
This is talk as though a new model "3D" has been announced, has specs, and a price -- have I missed something, or has speculation turned into imagination?
The kind of high resolution body that people are talking about (40+) is virtually just around the corner.Nikon have produced an affordable 36 mpx body with excellent noise characteristics (something I wouldn't have believed possible until just now).
That is the state of the art. All the other serious manufacturers will have to equal and exceed this and at a comparable price. Because Nikon are there already, they've done it.
Who needs such high resolutions? Everyone does potentially. In my view, on prints my humble 5D2 gives me comparable resolution to my old film Hasselblads. I would love my 5D4 or whatever, to go further and give me comparable resolution to my old 5x4. Why not? Its just more possibilities for us all.
If you don't need the higher res just use sRAW or downsize in Photoshop. Canon aren't bringing out the Mk2 lenses for the sake of it, they know that high res is going to be the name of the game, and Nikon have already proven that high res doesn't mean highly priced either. Its a done deal. In five years time I reckon I will be shooting night photos under starlight at ISO 25000 with a resolution of more than 75mpx. Lets see if I am right or wrong!
Canon really needs to work on its sensor. I was reviewing Fred's review on the 5D3 and the Nikon and the Nikon sensor is really great for shadow details. The new system should be a Canon sporting the Nikon sensor. That would be a dream.
retrofocus wrote:
So how do you explain that Nikon is able to sell a 36 MP FF camera for about $3000, and now a new Canon 46 MP FF should suddenly be priced at $9K?! I think it is just wishful thinking by a few who bought or are selling the 5D III to avoid seeing this one drop in price rapidly after a new Canon high MP FF camera appears.
Perhaps that appears to be an extreme price difference, but remember that the 1Ds MK III was 2.5x the price of the 5D II. Certainly I'd be willing to pay $9K if it could deliver ~40MP at ~8FPS. The 4FPS D800 sluggard is rather annoying for moving subjects and there are a few other "features" I'm still fighting with. A bargain is not really such a bargain if it is not quite what is desirable.
David -- I'm all for a new high MP camera, but I haven't seen anything to indicate one might be around the corner. Every rumor seems backed by hysterical speculation. Are we that needy? The DR also needs major improvement and we haven't heard a hint of such an overhaul. Hopefully my pragmatic side is wrong and we'll have an affordable wonder-cam before Christmas. But so far, it's mostly people whining nervously about how they want a new mega-pixel cam to vanquish the D800. Please, let's not become like the Nikon forum -- poor folks had been in second place so long they have a cultural inferiority complex.
David Baldwin wrote:
The kind of high resolution body that people are talking about (40+) is virtually just around the corner.Nikon have produced an affordable 36 mpx body with excellent noise characteristics (something I wouldn't have believed possible until just now).
That is the state of the art. All the other serious manufacturers will have to equal and exceed this and at a comparable price. Because Nikon are there already, they've done it.
Who needs such high resolutions? Everyone does potentially. In my view, on prints my humble 5D2 gives me comparable resolution to my old film Hasselblads. I would love my 5D4 or whatever, to go further and give me comparable resolution to my old 5x4. Why not? Its just more possibilities for us all.
If you don't need the higher res just use sRAW or downsize in Photoshop. Canon aren't bringing out the Mk2 lenses for the sake of it, they know that high res is going to be the name of the game, and Nikon have already proven that high res doesn't mean highly priced either. Its a done deal. In five years time I reckon I will be shooting night photos under starlight at ISO 25000 with a resolution of more than 75mpx. Lets see if I am right or wrong!...Show more →
EB-1 wrote:
Perhaps that appears to be an extreme price difference, but remember that the 1Ds MK III was 2.5x the price of the 5D II. Certainly I'd be willing to pay $9K if it could deliver ~40MP at ~8FPS. The 4FPS D800 sluggard is rather annoying for moving subjects and there are a few other "features" I'm still fighting with. A bargain is not really such a bargain if it is not quite what is desirable.
EBH
The D800 is an excellent camera and Canon still has to match this performance. There is no excuse.
I am sure Fred is out somewhere in the desert right now testing his 17 TSE on the big megapixel camera Canon has lent him. He just cannot say it...(smiling to himself, thinking if they only knew)...
retrofocus wrote:
So how do you explain that Nikon is able to sell a 36 MP FF camera for about $3000, and now a new Canon 46 MP FF should suddenly be priced at $9K?! I think it is just wishful thinking by a few who bought or are selling the 5D III to avoid seeing this one drop in price rapidly after a new Canon high MP FF camera appears.
I think the point was that it is silly to rant about the price of a camera that doesn't exist and even if it will in the future no one has any idea what it will cost. It has nothing to do with Nikon selling a $3k camera, no need to explain anything.
46 MP is just the same pixel density as the 7d 18MP sensor, so the rumour could just be a guess about what will happen if they just scaled the sensor tech.
artd wrote:
This is exactly right. For example, try pricing out a medium format system to do architecture photography where you need wide angle with shift capabilities.
Funny you should mention that specific issue. A friend and well-know landscape photographer whose path has gone, over the course of some decades, from BW LF film to color LF film to scanned color LF film to high-end MF digital systems recently told me that when we shoot together this fall he will be using a... Nikon D800e! Why? For one reason, because he wants to make a certain type of photograph of water and felt that a tilt/shift lens would be useful for that. He found a really nice one for his MF digital system... and realized that he could buy the Nikon camera and an excellent TS lens for less than the cost of the MF lens. ;-)
retrofocus wrote:
So how do you explain that Nikon is able to sell a 36 MP FF camera for about $3000, and now a new Canon 46 MP FF should suddenly be priced at $9K?! I think it is just wishful thinking by a few who bought or are selling the 5D III to avoid seeing this one drop in price rapidly after a new Canon high MP FF camera appears.
Sometimes I wonder if people actually read the posts to which they reply. There is no "new Canon 46 MP camera" at $9k or any other price. It is (barely) a rumor!
Further on in this thread, I think I actually saw people reporting a rumor that a rumor may not be true. But that's just a rumor. You can tell them you heard it here first! And, yes, its not just another rumor. It is a real rumor. Trust me! ;-)
retrofocus wrote:
The D800 is an excellent camera and Canon still has to match this performance.
I'll agree with that much of what you said, and there is no doubt that in the continual game of back-and-forth that is the DSLR market, Canon will do so. And then Nikon will respond. And then Canon. And then...
jctriguy wrote:
I think the point was that it is silly to rant about the price of a camera that doesn't exist and even if it will in the future no one has any idea what it will cost. It has nothing to do with Nikon selling a $3k camera, no need to explain anything.
Oh, knock it off. You actually read my post and then, and then you understood it! That kind of level-headedness will get you nowhere in a photography forum. ;-)
David Baldwin wrote:
The kind of high resolution body that people are talking about (40+) is virtually just around the corner.Nikon have produced an affordable 36 mpx body with excellent noise characteristics (something I wouldn't have believed possible until just now).
That is the state of the art. All the other serious manufacturers will have to equal and exceed this and at a comparable price. Because Nikon are there already, they've done it.
Who needs such high resolutions? Everyone does potentially. In my view, on prints my humble 5D2 gives me comparable resolution to my old film Hasselblads. I would love my 5D4 or whatever, to go further and give me comparable resolution to my old 5x4. Why not? Its just more possibilities for us all.
If you don't need the higher res just use sRAW or downsize in Photoshop. Canon aren't bringing out the Mk2 lenses for the sake of it, they know that high res is going to be the name of the game, and Nikon have already proven that high res doesn't mean highly priced either. Its a done deal. In five years time I reckon I will be shooting night photos under starlight at ISO 25000 with a resolution of more than 75mpx. Lets see if I am right or wrong!...Show more →
I wish they could do that with CS6 or CS56, like have an auto fix but look like an actual knowledge person processed it, for those of us (me) that are slow "learner"s! I am certain this would be the laissez faire or layman's way, but oh the possibilities! See my horrid samples!
GIMMPED The Sign2 by Americo.Rodriguez, on Flickr
EB-1 wrote:
Perhaps that appears to be an extreme price difference, but remember that the 1Ds MK III was 2.5x the price of the 5D II. Certainly I'd be willing to pay $9K if it could deliver ~40MP at ~8FPS. The 4FPS D800 sluggard is rather annoying for moving subjects and there are a few other "features" I'm still fighting with. A bargain is not really such a bargain if it is not quite what is desirable.
EBH
the d800 can manage 6fps with grip in 1.5x crop mode for wildlife action
not ideal but something and far more useful their speedy crop modes than canon's sRAW slugs
Couldn't agree more with this statement.
