spdntrxi wrote:
D300 w/FX sensor would be too close in spec to D3..so I dont think it will happen anytime soon and definately not at that price.
If someone said the same thing about a D200 successor 3 months ago that trounced the D2X, i'd tell them the same thing. Nikon doesn't seem to play the same games that Canon does with rigid partitions between pro and non-pro gear
If the full frame chips get cheaper, I think it will happen
Yero wrote:
(though I don't see Nikon abandoning their pro DX glass soon).
I agree that it won't happen soon, but it could happen sooner than we realize. The new 14-24mm and 24-70mm are likely to be very nice. Many of us Nikon users have avoided the DX lenses, except at the ultra wide end (12-24mm and 10,5mm fish), because there is no advantage, even with the current format. The 17-35mm and 28-70mm lenses, for example, are remarkable on FF or DX.
However, for entry level and prosumer the DX format and the lenses are just too darn good to give up. Look at the image quality of the D40 with a kit lens. It's very high, regardless of how cheap it is.
Having found that shooting primes wide open during bright wedding ceremonies is next to impossible even with iso 100 and a 1/8000 I would venture to say that having had to cart an ND filter around for the old auto flash days (to bring the shutter down to sync) I have no wish whatsoever to go back to that necessity.
Many people are saying that the D300 is a 5D killer and the 5D II will have to be incredible to match, what most people forget is that we put up with a 20D body for one reason only. Full Frame. We wanted the incredible noise (don't tell me any 1.5X chip could match it, not a chance!), the DR and latitude, we wanted to use our lenses as they were intended to use (what's the point of a 24-70L or 24-105L on crop, it just isn't a general purpose lens anymore), we wanted less DOF when we chose, we didn't want diffraction limiting at f11, we wanted the big viewfinder. The 5D is an extremely sucessful niche product that by definition the D300 could never replace, not with a crop chip. If it wasn't for the FF then there would have been little or no point in paying that price for a 5D - in which case, don't hold your breath wishing for anything more than the 40D's upgrades to the 5D mkII whenever it comes.
I have a wishlist for the next 5D, basically all the features from the 40D upgrade plus another C mode. I doubt I will have the money to upgrade either of my 5D's when the time comes however much 14 bit and cross sensors makes me get excited. What I do know is that I would need the D3 and not the D300 if I were to switch, I need 12 megapixels of FF not crop and two D3's plus all the money I would lose, plus the loss of the 24-105L (my walk about) and 70-200 f4L and the cheap 85 1.8, and the perfect range of the 17-40L and the loss of the incredibly light, cheap and versatile flash battery pack (nikon's is clumsy, expensive and never available), and of course the need to carry two larger cameras, I could go on...
Methinks that in the real world Nikon have made these camera to lock their present consumer market into the Nikon system for good. Can't see them sweating over pie charts of how many 5D users will switch systems.
The Nikon forum has had Canon flamers for years. Good idea to confine the flame to a single thread. Not to flame, but I certainly hope Nikon's new releases have fewer problems than the Mark III. Specs look good, but it all depends on performance. I'll wait until Nov/Dec before I get excited.
EOS20 wrote:
The D300 looks like what all us Canon shooters have been waiting for! A pro model in a small body with a good removable battery grip, good AF, and proper weather sealing! Pretty much what everyone have been calling the "EOS 3D"
And the D300 price is only slightly higher then the 40D!!
I'm sitting here thinking the same thing...I've been waiting for Canon to give the 5D replacement weather-sealing and a new AF system. That D300 is a very interesting (tempting) camera indeed...
It amazes me how many Canon users are willing to jump ship because of this announcement... The recent Canon offerings are (1D Mk III) and will likely be (40D, 1Ds Mk III) great cameras. This announcement does not render them obsolete, but slightly overpriced... The Nikon announcement is great - it appears they have made some great strides in these two cameras. Have they caught up or passed Canon - perhaps but that has yet to be determined. All of this armchair tech spec comparison is useless as, IMO, Nikon marketing is doing a great job kicking up enough dirt to make their cameras look just that much better through slight of hand and small little asterisks to denote caveats in the tech specs (i.e. 11 fps vs 9 fps just to look better than the 1D Mk III). Let's wait until the reviews are out.
As for the ISO performance debate - everyone is placing a lot of faith on numbers and not real world data. Canon has enjoyed a significant lead over Nikon in the CMOS production arena. I find it hard to believe that Nikon has found a way to surpass Canon in this area as Canon actually makes the sensors whereas Nikon outsources... That does not imply Nikon cannot have a good sensor, but the vertical integration of the CMOS design, R&D, and production that Canon has makes technology improvement and tech transfer much easier. I suspect (but could be wrong) that the new ISO 65xxx of the Nikon is a lot of smoke and mirrors. I have no doubt that the Nikon ISO performance will improve greatly, but it will not (again IMO) surpass Canon sensor technology - it may now be in the same ballpark, but no better.
The new Nikon lenses are also a welcome addition as it may provoke Canon to offer a few new lenses, and perhaps update lenses like their superteles with their generation 4 IS. The price delta between the Nikon and Canon superteles still favors Canon significantly.
In the end, this announcement is the best thing that could happen to a Canon user. Canon will have to respond to the fact Nikon has introduced two cameras that offer much more camera at a lower price point. In addition, it just made the next 5D much more attractive and probably 500 dollars cheaper than what Canon planned to charge for it. I think prices on all Canon gear will drop a bit to make them more competitive.
The one feature of the Nikon that makes me jealous is the new LCD display (it's better but it does not make the images taken any nicer).
I suspect the following will happen:
40D will (maybe) drop another 100 dollars in street pricing to keep more people interested
1DMIII - this will drop 500 in the next few months. Thank goodness mine was over 10% off.
1DsMIII - there is still no competition for this camera. Canon would be wise to drop the price, but there is no current reason to do so.
Future cameras
5D replacement - cheaper than current model, pro-like AF system, even better ISO, weather sealing.
Rebel replacement - hopefully they will get rid of the form factor and use the same body as the 40D and get rid of some features - this would be the way to stay competitive. Make it 100 cheaper too.
1DnMIII - This will likely be Canon's "answer" to the D3. Similar LCD panel, increased MP, expand ISO if Nikon claims are true (I doubt it).
Bob, that's all very well, but the real problem for me is that Canon do not, and possibly will not offer a camera that has three key features that I would like: full-frame, high frame rate, and high iso. Nikon are offering such a camera, while Canon seems to think that we should buy at least two cameras, each of which lacks one of those features.
If a 5D replacement (not soon if Canon's financial projections are anything to go by) has bleeding edge high iso performance and 5 or 6 fps, that would be great, but there is no suggestion that it will, when it finally comes. So very likely we face a year or more of Nikon being the only firm offering those three features in one camera.
My phone has a better LCD than Canon's current flagship. Nikon have succeeded in making Canon's best products look flawed.
Edited by brainiac on Aug 26, 2007 at 07:59 AM GMT
Smacks of Nikon running scared to me! Canon announce 40D & 1DsIII, to better than expected acclaim. Less than a week later Nikon announce new models. Feature comparison is all Marketing hype. Canon's 40D is already available in HK. Where are the new Nikons? November > that's 3 months away. It's just marketing trying to stop imminent Canon sales of mid > hi end equipment.
Tentacle wrote:
The problem is this: Canon has the biggest installed user base. Nikon wants to take a bigger piece of the pie. Canon will be more reluctant to empty its gun clips, while Nikon is blazing away to catch up. It's all a very complex balancing act between R&D, tech specs and economics.
As end-user it isn't desirable to see a manufacturer hold back, so healthy competition is a good thing, but it is understandable.
What you are not considering is that large installed user base may not upgrade when there is only incremental upgrades to their system. I would love to have a D3 type camera, and debating to return my new 70-200/2.8 IS lens back to B&H and wait for results of the D3. Problem is I have three Canon cameras (1DMKIIN, 30D, 5D), and not counting the 70-200/2.8 IS, have seven L series and two EF-S series lenses. In the end, even if I have to wait two more years, I'll more and likely wait. What I would love is a clean ISO 6400 FF camera in a pro body, but will settle for the 1.3 crop.
bob_wfmc wrote:
The one feature of the Nikon that makes me jealous is the new LCD display (it's better but it does not make the images taken any nicer).
As has already been mentioned early in this thread, the Nikon has 900,000 DOTS, not pixels. There are three dots to a pixel, so the Nikon LCD is approximately 300,000 pixels. Clever marketing indeed.
Yep, they're terrified! Shak'n in their boots I reckon.
Actually Woofy, maybe you should consider this senario. On the 11 July, Nikon announced they will sponsor the upcoming IAAF World Championships in Athletics; to be held in Osaka, Japan from August 25 to September 2, 2007. They ALWAYS planned to announce the camera on the 23rd August, to give Nikon Profssional Services members and a few CPS members the cameras for the event.
Canon wanted to announce two days earlier because 'anything' after that date would be a big let down. There's shak'n going on alright... just not sure I think its the same side your talking about.
gearhead5 wrote:
As has already been mentioned early in this thread, the Nikon has 900,000 DOTS, not pixels. There are three dots to a pixel, so the Nikon LCD is approximately 300,000 pixels. Clever marketing indeed.
Steve
Aah.....Whichever way you look at it, its much better than Canon's. Canon's marketing is no slouch either. Their displays are 230,000 pixels - if you were to apply the "DOT" stick to Canon its a measly 76,800(320*240).
gearhead5 wrote:
As has already been mentioned early in this thread, the Nikon has 900,000 DOTS, not pixels. There are three dots to a pixel, so the Nikon LCD is approximately 300,000 pixels. Clever marketing indeed.
Steve
Steve, as has been pointed out, Canon has a 230,000 'pixel' LCD, which is actually dots. So Canons LCD is approx. 76,000 pixels. Funny I never heard anyone complain about it before.
