Isn't the latest NEX 7 release right around the corner?
Oh, and an NEX 9 same release period as 7DMkII, whatever an NEX 9 is...
Then there are updates to both the Fuji X Pro1 and Fuji X-E1 later this year.
Personally, I am wanting a Fuji X-E1.
Tax refund, any day now...
M Lucca wrote:
D7000 and d7100 are in the same class as the x0d.
I wish the 70D would be spec'd as the D7100 ... but I doubt it.
This leaves the 7DII as the closest thing in terms of specs.
Looking at the D7100 price, though, the 7DII would be a no-go for me if priced higher than $1600.
The rumored $2199 price is totally laughable at this time.
Wahoowa wrote:
I haven't dug deep into the specs, but don't Nikon cameras normally perform much better with its battery grip?
Well they did that with the d300 and d700 but I don't think they have with anything else.
That fps upgrade grip was a real con though. Not only did you have to buy the very over priced grip but you had to invest in the battery and charger from the D3 . So unless you were a d3 owner it would probably have cost the dark side of £500!!!
When you consider the body is capable of the extra fps and all your doing is using higher power battery its a big gouge .
RobDickinson wrote:
Aye canon was late to compete with the D300 but then the 50d was close or better at the time in certain areas , 6.5fps and 15mp.
50D makes it to one year, if I feel extremely fanboyish and make the 50D a D300 competitor. In fact, D300 was announced 3 days after 40D was announced.
Feb 21, 2013 at 05:33 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
RobDickinson wrote:
It confuses me why build a camera with pro/sport af and 6-7fps and give it a shitty buffer.
We have to be realistic and not live in fantasy land here This is a camera that cost just over $1k. It also produce files that are a larger than any existing pro/sport body from Canon/Nikon. Bodies like 1DX--1D4--1D3--7D--D3--D3S--D4 all have smaller files than this new body. Most of them a lot smaller. Which make the buffer a lot better when counting how many shots instead of how much data it clear.
And you are surpriced the new $ 1k body has a shitty buffer compared to those
I think it's fantastic if you can get "pro AF" and 6-7fps in a $ 1k 24MP body
Those who are enamoured with photographic "reach" via sensor pixel density will have a chance now to go big time with D7100. Its pixel density is 33% higher than that of 7D.........so who is switching to Nikon ?
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
Just looking at the spec of the new D7100 and there is alot to be liked.
But the real kicker is the price. £1099 body only for the pre order price.
So if as rumours of the new 7D2 are even close and the projected price is around £2000 then I think they could have a couple of problems
As someone that wants a great 7D2 I'd be prepared to swallow a bit more £ than the D7100 but certainly not nearly double
D7100 is very dissapointing to me, and I'm a dual-system user. As a D7000 buyer, im still waiting for a 7D/D400 class body. 7D II seems to be the last fading hope.
EBH
Feb 21, 2013 at 09:19 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
PetKal wrote:
Those who are enamoured with photographic "reach" via sensor pixel density will have a chance now to go big time with D7100. Its pixel density is 33% higher than that of 7D.........so who is switching to Nikon ?
Remember that in it's 2x crop mode, it will go down to about 15MP
PetKal wrote:
Those who are enamoured with photographic "reach" via sensor pixel density will have a chance now to go big time with D7100. Its pixel density is 33% higher than that of 7D.........so who is switching to Nikon ?
It only does 6FPS, the buffer s icrap, and it uses the flimsy SDXX cards.
EBH
Feb 21, 2013 at 09:30 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
EB-1 wrote:
It only does 6FPS, the buffer s icrap, and it uses the flimsy SDXX cards.
EBH
6 FPS is not that bad even for wildlife photographers, and could make do in sports or JP.
On the other hand, why would landscape or portrait photographers need even 6FPS ?
Buffer crap ? What is the burst depth with JPGs only ?
I see no problem with using SD cards in my 1DsMkII and 1DMkIIN.
Feb 21, 2013 at 09:38 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
PetKal wrote:
6 FPS is not that bad even for wildlife photographers, and could make do in sports or JP.
On the other hand, why would landscape or portrait photographers need even 6FPS ?
Buffer crap ? What is the burst depth with JPGs only ?
I see no problem with using SD cards in my 1DsMkII and 1DMkIIN.
