CKrueger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.26 #15 · •Nikons Announced: D3, D300, lenses | |
davewolfs wrote:
I completely agree. I for one have no concern for high ISO capabilities and I don't think you can compare a 5D to a D200, just as you cannot compare a 5D to a D3.
What we do know, is that the D200 was a superior camera to the 30D and again the D300 is superior to the 40D.
Perhaps since you are shooting race cars, you should consider the D3 as your 5D replacement.
Oh, I certainly am considering it as a replacement! 
Here's my pickle: right now I have a 5D (does everything) and a 350D (my wife's camera). They're both great at their jobs. No complaints there. I use a friend's 1DMk2n when I can to shoot races, but I need to get my own "sports camera". The 1DMk2n works great when I can shoot flash, but is just barely usable in this horribly-low ambient light I shoot in (think high school football field), and it's only usable if I use my 50/1.4. My 50/1.4 works for certain shots, but to be really effective at the track I need a zoom, and I can't do that at ISO3200.
The 1DMk3's ISO6400 gets me very close to usable speeds with an f/2.8 zoom. The D3's ISO12800 would be perfect. But only if (and I'm skeptical here) its noise is low enough to make 8x10's that your average race car driver/team (read: non-photographers) would find attractive. Otherwise I might as well pick up a 1DMk3, cause its ISO6400 is just fine.
So I guess what has me exicted is the propect of what is potentially the first camera ever that has a high enough ISO performance to allow me to shoot f/2.8 zooms in very low ambient lighting. That GREATLY expands my capabilities. The icing on the cake is that it can also replace my general-purpose camera, giving me one camera to do everything.
So you can see that for my use, I definitely can compare the 5D to a D3. Not because the cameras are in the same segment, but because the D3 can do the job of the 5D for me. It just so happens it can ALSO do the job of a 1DMk3... and more.
It looks like if I convert all my Canon gear to Nikon, and replace my 5D and 350D with a D3 and D80, I'd eat about $2000. Trimming the fat I can get that down to $1400 or so. Comparing that price to even a used 1DMk2, Nikon looks to be the best route for me.
I've got two things left to consider. First, do the Nikon cameras live up to their specs? If not, this is all moot for me. Second, what will Canon announce in response? If they announce a 5D replacement that is essentially a D300 with a FF sensor (ie: 12Mpixel FF, >=6fps, ISO6400, 45-point AF), I'll buy that and stick with Canon. But I don't see them doing that, as they'd largely kill the 1DMk3 from a price standpoint.
I hope Canon fast-tracks a new model in rseponse, because if November rolls around and I find the D3 matches the 1DMk3 at ISO6400, and makes halfway-decent 8x10's at ISO12800, I'm going to have a REALLY hard time staying with Canon.
|
