timbop wrote:
[
Dude, there definitely an air of someone living in lalaland.......
As you said, the D3 is an all around camera. But THAT'S THE POINT. You get the capabilities of the 5D AND 1Dm3 (OK 1 frame per second less than m3 and the effective sensor size of 1dm2n) rolled into 1 body, for a little more money. Or, a TRUE baby m3 in the form of the D300. Look at it with an open mind, and you will recognize that the D300 has this distinction - at least on paper: PRO AF, weather sealing, 8fps (1D mark 1), lens microadjustment, ISO 6400.
If the D300 delivers on its' specs then it is Canon who exaggerated wrt 40D being a baby 1dm3. ...Show more →
When did Canon say the 40D was a "baby 1dm3"? I quoted Nikon above. I have no problem with the idea that both the 40D and the D300 may be good choices for many people depending on needs and budgets. I see we're back to "weather sealing". Could you point me to where Nikon makes that claim? Also, the D300 has 6 fps without that add on thing. The 40D had 6.5, I believe. The 40D also really has a 14 bit process, as opposed to Nikon imaginary one on the D300.
I made specific remarks about the D3, specs and features. What specifically are you disagreeing with?
mill4570 wrote:
Nikon has always tried to build an "all everything camera" in their pro body. The D2x can do sports although not as well as a Mark II, and it can do studio work although not as well as the DsII. Canon has addressed these as two seperate markets with two seperate requirements. Nikon has chosen a different path. Note; I did not say the wrong path, just a different path. There are many who believe Canon is milking their customers with the two pro bodies although I am not one of them
Very few people and businesses will jump from Canon to Nikon because of the D3. The cost to do so is just too great plus in 24 months they would have to jump back. Pictures from the Mark II and Mark III cameras did not lose IQ because of the introduction of the D3 and most people know that. Of course there are always some with too much disposabel income, or too much credit, or both that will move to Nikon. To them I say good luck and can I see your for sale list before anyone else.
To the Nikon faithful who have stuck with Nikon over the years, I am happy for you. The D3 looks really great and I'm sure you will be happy with it. Nikon has much to be proud of with the D3. To me it is in keeping with Nikon's "all in one" camera design, but again many feel that is a good selling point.
I'll stick with Canon. I have had great success with them over the years so I will just have to learn to say "the D3 isn't that much better than a MK III."
Richard K....Show more →
And the D3 is a good strategy against Canon. Canon ability to build a good, inexpensive full frame is their answer. 16 mp 4fps $3000. People will want one or the other. I guess the other possibility is two mid to high range cameras from Canon. But they've already released a lot of cameras.
I curious how the D3 low ISO images stack up against the current 5D.
Not sure comparing low ISO D3 images to the 5D is relevant. All of us Canon faithful need to view the coming of the D3 and the D300 as a good thing. When there is serious competition, everyone benefits. My only complaint with the D3; is why it wasn't out a year ago? If it had been, my DIII would have cost less and had a better feature set. In a year all of this will flip again, but until then Nikon has what looks to be the Sports / PJ / Wedding camera to beat. Personally, I can live with that because I know I will not have to live with it for very long, and I doubt I will lose a single customer or nickel of revenue to the D3.
dcmiller wrote:
When did Canon say the 40D was a "baby 1dm3"? I quoted Nikon above. I have no problem with the idea that both the 40D and the D300 may be good choices for many people depending on needs and budgets. I see we're back to "weather sealing". Could you point me to where Nikon makes that claim? Also, the D300 has 6 fps without that add on thing. The 40D had 6.5, I believe. The 40D also really has a 14 bit process, as opposed to Nikon imaginary one on the D300.
I made specific remarks about the D3, specs and features. What specifically are you disagreeing with?
I can't find it at the moment, but some of the press release analysis classified the 40D as a baby m3, so I admit that it is probably a mistake on my part to attribute those remarks to Canon. However, "that thing" is called a battery grip and I am about to toss my bg-2e into the river because it locks up my damn camera too often. Perhaps a more fair comparison would be comparing the d300 to a 1dm2N - which is a very fine camera indeed. But, as you mentioned with sports/wildlife crop factor helps a great deal - and the d300 beats the 1dm2n there.
My disagreement is that you are harping on some really silly shortcomings of the D3 and missing the big picture. Sometimes you just have to admit that your team got beaten and concede; frankly Canon got smoked.
No camera has attained perfection yet, but so far the D3/D300 look great and if the ISO 12800 shots from the D3 are real, then Canon has something else to worry about as it smokes the 1D III on noise. God help them if the D3/D300 gets the AF spot on.
After all has been said and done, the D300 and D3 announcements come at a great time for Nikon. Does it make the Canon cameras crap? hardly. It does however, expose the differences with Canon and Nikon strategy/philosophy. This has never been hidden but is being harped on now because some Canon users feel that their brand has been upstaged (only real world performance results of the Nikon cameras will prove this).
For my part, the D300 will make an amazing upgrade from my D50 which is still a beautiful camera. Now if only Nikon would release a version of Canon's MPE-65? macro lens (the one that goes to 5X magnification) i'd be ecstatic.
timbop wrote:
My disagreement is that you are harping on some really silly shortcomings of the D3 and missing the big picture. Sometimes you just have to admit that your team got beaten and concede; frankly Canon got smoked.
A bit early to say that Canon got smoked, isn't it?
I agree that there seem to be some very nice things in the new Nikons, and as long as they haven't done something really silly like put in compulsory poor NR, they should provide far stiffer competition than the old D2x, D2h lineup - but that hardly indicates that Canon will be 'smoked'
Aside from obvious issues like seeing how the cameras actually perform, there are also cost issues and so on which are unclear.
To a lot of people like wedding photographers and so on the AF and frame rate of the 5D may be quite OK, and they won't really see any need to fork out twice the price on a D3 for no more pixels.
As a sports camera too the great uncertainty is the price of the new long Nikon glass - if they follow previous Nikon custom then it will cost way more than the Canon equivalents, even disregarding that you would need to buy 600mm glass instead of 400mm for similar FOV to the 1.3 1DIII.
Neither is it a high rez camera like the 1DsIII, so I really can't see what camera in the Canon line-up is threatened by the D3, nice as it is for F mount shooters to have the D3 in their line-up.
At the more mundane level of the D300 vs 40D, the extra $500 or so for the D300 is far from trivial at this level, especially if the D40 does everything you actually need it to do, as opposed to giving you options which whilst they may be nice to have may not be essential for your use.
Of course, like most people I am very enthusiastic about the implementation of pro-level AF in this class of camera, and there appear to be some excellent cameras coming from Nikon - it is just that it is hardly the slam-dunk you are inferring.
Regards,
DaveMart
If you read through this thread and many others on other forums you'll notice that is is the 'professionals' who seem to be threatening to jump ship. To clarify, the D3 is aimed at the 1D Mark 3. This is because reach is not so important for PJ and wedding work. For those sports where reach may be an issue, the crop mode is available at 5MP. Previous posts have confirmed that this is more than enough for publications and newspapers.
When it comes down to it, assuming the specs of the D3 live up to paper, the 1D3 has some serious competition from an arguably more versatile camera with similar cost and better IQ plus some bonuses like better LCD, more flexible live view, etc thrown in for good measure.
Similar arguments apply to the 40D/D300 case. The D300 is practically a 1D mark 3 without a vertical grip and slightly inferior FPS. The 1D3 sensor has the advantage of possibly better high iso performance whilst the D300 sensor has better 'reach' due to the crop factor and higher pixel density. In other areas they both trade points to each other. When you look at it that way, the 500 bucks doesn't look like all that much does it, considering how much Canon are asking for the 1D3?
The star of the show appears to be the D3 but i suspect the REAL threat to Canon sales will be the D300. Its so well featured that anyone not needing full frame would be hard pressed to justify getting any other crop camera (assuming no lens commitments). The 1k to 2k price bracket will far surpass the 5k-8k bracket on sales and market penetration AND these are the guys who are more likely to step up to a 1 series or D3 camera.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
It's funny that 6 months ago I said Canon shouldn't worry about the D200 when they make the 40D, but the D300 which surely would be quite an upgrade from the D200. If an idiot like me could see it coming not sure why they couldn't. The D3 was a surprise however.
Well , you're no idiot Whayne. You're Australian!
I can say that even the rep's at Nikon have been saying that the D200 would be 'slightly upgraded' to a D200s or x., a month before the D300 announcement. It was out of character for them to release it now.
So from Canons point-of-view, life cycles and best guess senario, produce the 40D now and the 50D in 18 months to compete with the D300.
I've used the 40D and think its quite nice. But I was begging for a 1D mini though. It should have happened ages ago. It will,... just like the Nikon users screamed for a full frame chip. They got it eventually.
timbop wrote:
[My disagreement is that you are harping on some really silly shortcomings of the D3 and missing the big picture. Sometimes you just have to admit that your team got beaten and concede; frankly Canon got smoked.
The D3 and D300 are not yet available, so while Canon may get smoked, it actually hasn't happened yet. I find it is always better to wait until something exists before making such statements. The new Nikons looks great on paper, but right now that is all we really have- a spec sheet. We don't even have any real sample photos. Lets see if Nikon can make their set in stone, highly specific release date of "November" first.
Believe me I have no problem with Nikon pushing the envelope and maybe rattling Canons cage a bit, but you won't find me on the Nikon board making such statements about Nikon if Canon realeases something that appears trump Nikon's latest release.
There are sample photos all over the place. Plus live shots from the Osaka Games and the Volleyball Grand Prix held at the end of Aug.
On another point, there's only going to be 6000 D3' s produced each month. First off the ranks is the current NPS upgrades, so no-ones going to be jumping ship in a hurry.
Absolutely it is too soon to decide if the Nikon's are going to live up to the hype, but the point is that from a PR perspactive Canon got creamed. Nikon completely deflated the hype over Canon's releases and stole the show for sure. Yeah the 1dsm3 is the top notch camera, but the market is so small it doesn't really matter. The 40D's specs look amateurish, and the 1dm3 isn't faring too well in light of it's AF issues.
mill4570 wrote:
All of us Canon faithful need to view the coming of the D3 and the D300 as a good thing
I'm just curious...what makes a pro, amatuer, anyone for that matter Canon or Nikon "Faithful"?
What is to be gained from that?
For example, I will use medium format 6x9 film when my 5D's are not cutting it. I will use my M8, M6, MP-3 when I want to be low key and keep it lighter. I will use my Hasselblad XPan when a more versatile landscape rig is needed. I will use my rugged FM3A's when light and fast for climbing is the order of the day.
And I will sell my entire Canon kit to go back to Nikon to have a fully functional system in which I can use a low noise full frame D3 along side of FMA's loaded with Kodachrome to keep my gear signature low while on the road...
While Canon was a great move for me a few years ago, going back to just one SLR system is going to be a welcome change...
The Canon system is great and the Nikon system is great...but faithful?
timbop wrote:
Absolutely it is too soon to decide if the Nikon's are going to live up to the hype, but the point is that from a PR perspactive Canon got creamed. Nikon completely deflated the hype over Canon's releases and stole the show for sure. Yeah the 1dsm3 is the top notch camera, but the market is so small it doesn't really matter. The 40D's specs look amateurish, and the 1dm3 isn't faring too well in light of it's AF issues.
From a forum/technobuzz perspective Canon did get creamed. But I think the most excited people overestimate the importance on one set of announcement. It's important to the latest and greatest crowd. Entry level is not affected. Dispite the poll here that said 50% will be switching, the number won't be near five percent. But it does provide momentum for Nikon, and importantly makes Nikon a very attractive choice, with more of a feeling of a complete line.
Presumably Canon can cut their prices substantially to maintain market share. So we may talk about what Canon "should" do, but of course it their sales numbers that dictate pricing. They may even know more about the market than us internet experts. Nikon must find Canon personality a double edge sword. Canon's predictable so placing products against them is not a guessing game. But they seldom "screw up" in a major way in any aspect of their business.
I doubt Canon is surprised at Nikon's new product. What they probably couldn't be confident about is the quality of the new cameras, and the markets reaction.
If you read through this thread and many others on other forums you'll notice that is is the 'professionals' who seem to be threatening to jump ship. To clarify, the D3 is aimed at the 1D Mark 3. This is because reach is not so important for PJ and wedding work. For those sports where reach may be an issue, the crop mode is available at 5MP. Previous posts have confirmed that this is more than enough for publications and newspapers.
When it comes down to it, assuming the specs of the D3 live up to paper, the 1D3 has some serious competition from an arguably more versatile camera with similar cost and better IQ plus some bonuses like better LCD, more flexible live view, etc thrown in for good measure.
Similar arguments apply to the 40D/D300 case. The D300 is practically a 1D mark 3 without a vertical grip and slightly inferior FPS. The 1D3 sensor has the advantage of possibly better high iso performance whilst the D300 sensor has better 'reach' due to the crop factor and higher pixel density. In other areas they both trade points to each other. When you look at it that way, the 500 bucks doesn't look like all that much does it, considering how much Canon are asking for the 1D3?
The star of the show appears to be the D3 but i suspect the REAL threat to Canon sales will be the D300. Its so well featured that anyone not needing full frame would be hard pressed to justify getting any other crop camera (assuming no lens commitments). The 1k to 2k price bracket will far surpass the 5k-8k bracket on sales and market penetration AND these are the guys who are more likely to step up to a 1 series or D3 camera....Show more →
The D3 certainly sounds a fine camera for PJ and event work not requiring long glass.
F mount users should be as pleased as punch about it's release, and for people buying a new system then if it lives up to specs it should be the finest on the market for this sort of work.
That doesn't mean to say that the Canon's offerings in this area are suddenly useless, and whilst some will doubtless swap, especially those who have always hankered after Nikon's handling and so on, and only steered clear because of high ISO performance, there doesn't really seem to be any pressing need to swap, especially since Canon will undoubtedly respond in due course.
As far as the D300 is concerned, nice though that may be for pros as a second camera and so on, that is a tiny fragment of the market at this price point, and the choice of Canon to go for the marginally less capable but considerably less expensive D40 may well be the correct one from the sales point of view.
This is strong competition from Nikon, but won't lead to mass defections unless Canon make absolutely no response - that doesn't sound liek Canon, although it will take a while.
Regards,
DaveMart
nikt wrote:
There are sample photos all over the place. Plus live shots from the Osaka Games and the Volleyball Grand Prix held at the end of Aug.
On another point, there's only going to be 6000 D3' s produced each month. First off the ranks is the current NPS upgrades, so no-ones going to be jumping ship in a hurry.
Please provide links to full size sample photos. I asked a couple days ago and no one had any. There were two cropped supposed sample photos on dpreview but the origin was unknown, the exif was missing, and they were resized.
tarpon6 wrote:
Please provide links to full size sample photos. I asked a couple days ago and no one had any. There were two cropped supposed sample photos on dpreview but the origin was unknown, the exif was missing, and they were resized.
Well, 72 pages of discussion on the new Nikon camera on a Canon forum versus only 17 pages of discussion on the new 40D. I believe Nikon made a big statement with this release. Enough said.
