"But this time, it's been Canon to breathe a HUGE sigh of relief when the specs of the D700 were released."
Assuming that Canon did breathe a sigh of relief when the D700 was released (which is a pretty big assumption that I have no way of knowing whether it is true), I think the question is why did they breathe a sigh of relief?
It may be because the replacement for the 5D will have better specs and or price than the D700, but it might simply be relief that Nikon didn't announce a camera that bettered Canon's two latest offerings. When Canon announced the 1DMKIII it looked like a nice upgrade to me, then there were AF problems and then Nikon announced the D3 which had a number of better specs. What looked like a nice upgrade quickly came to look like a dud. In the meantime, Canon announced the 40D. Again to me it looked like a nice upgrade. A new brighter viewfinder, more cross type AF points, higher resolution sensor, a bunch of other bells and whistles. It looked like the biggest upgrade ever to the XXD lineup, but then Nikon announced the D300 which had better specs in almost all categories except price. Again what looked like a very promising upgrade lost all or almost all its luster. This trumping by Nikon could not have been much fun for Canon execs. Perhaps the relief they experienced if any is that Nikon was not announcing a D90 to totally trump what looks like a nice upgrade in the XSi. Nikon has not even yet announced the highly rumored D3X, which might have trumped what looks like a very good 1DsMKIII. Of course Nikon might well release these cameras shortly and even at or before Photokina, but for now their absence might spell relief for Canon execs and they just may be hoping that Nikon is spending its time addressing the potential 5D, and instead of going after the more lucrative low end or the more prestigious high end....Show more →
Seriously there's no way Canon can really out spec the D700 except in resolution unless you believe the rumours of a new sensor that also captures HD video. Canon would have to basically put a 1Ds III in a 5D body (16MP though and missing a few bells and whistles) and sell it for around $3.5K to match the D700. There's a snow balls chance in hell of that happening unless they have had a complete clean out of the conservative management IMO.
Chassuer D'Images has implied that Nikon will not be calling their 24MP monster the D3x as expected but D800 and say a D3 update with dust buster is on the cards and more FX updated lenses. Sony is updating many Zeiss lenses to SSM and releasing more new lenses when the A900 is announced for Photokina.
nikt my only problem with your op is the wording implies you somehow know for a fact Canon were very relieved when they saw the D700. Do you have a inside contact, as I've not seen any official Canon response at all to the D700.
Whayne, in a word. yes. But is that Canon hyping things up, don't know. There's definately no official statement, but there is a buzz around things at the moment.
I think Canon could out spec the D700, but I agree with Whayne that it will be surprising if they do. It seems likely that Canon will use a 16 megapixel sensor based on the pixel pitch of the 1DMKIII sensor. That sensor has been out for awhile, so it would not be unreasonable for them to be able to improve the ISO over the 1DMKIII. Now if they improve the ISO over the 1DMKIII in the new camera it ought to have very similar high ISO performance to the D700, so the new sensor could have higher resolution and just as good high ISO performance. If they wanted to it seems they could also put enough computing power in the 5D MKII to let it shoot at 5 fps and there is no reason not to add pro autofocus at least the system that was in the 1D2 series of cameras. If it has 14 bit A/D conversion, live view, highlight tone priority, the dust shaker, etc. and perhaps they will even add an OLED screen on the back, it would out spec the D700 in my view. We will see if they were shaken up enough by what Nikon did last year to shift gears with this camera or not. They have certainly known for almost a year that Nikon was putting pro AF in their mid level cameras. Will Canon try to match this feature? It will be interesting to see what they decided to do. We shouldn't have to wait much longer. My best guess is that they will be happy having a camera with a better sensor and worse features in almost every other respect, but I hope they prove me wrong.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Seriously there's no way Canon can really out spec the D700 except in resolution
I can think of a few ways to out-spec the D700
(i) more pixels but even better high ISO (at ISO 6400 and above) performance
(ii) higher fps without the battery grip nonsense
(iii) OLED vs whatever LCD you can think of
Actually, the first factor is the single most important one, and the one that really matters.
Remember when the 1D MkIII was first announced and everyone thought it would be hard to surpass it... well the D3 certainly did that couple of months later.
Of course, this is still speculation.
And we've all learn from history it's best to keep our hopes low and think only of a 40D with a FF sensor.
I'd be pretty happy just with a great leap in high ISO IQ performance. The resolution issue is being handled at anything above 10MPS for my purposes. I'd also place great value in a display that is larger and more accurate.
thw2 wrote:
I can think of a few ways to out-spec the D700
(i) more pixels but even better high ISO (at ISO 6400 and above) performance
(ii) higher fps without the battery grip nonsense
(iii) OLED vs whatever LCD you can think of
Actually, the first factor is the single most important one, and the one that really matters.
Remember when the 1D MkIII was first announced and everyone thought it would be hard to surpass it... well the D3 certainly did that couple of months later.
Of course, this is still speculation.
And we've all learn from history it's best to keep our hopes low and think only of a 40D with a FF sensor....Show more →
Danmithchell / Breitling et al
Nik is a senior and very knowledgeable salesperson with a major camera retailer in Australia. Despite the fact he has a D300 he goes to extreme lengths to fit the camera to the customer, taking into consideration the customers experience, intended use and budget.
No he is not a troll and has never trolled, so those of you who find it impossible to have a discussion without looking for an ullterior motives, Just go back to your therapists.
Yes, I shoot Nikon ( a lowly D70s with kit lens) but that doesn make me a troll because I am here on the canon gear site. I am here because there are many talented and wise photographers right across FM and I learn by reading and listening.
Grow up or as I say to my sheep dogs when they are yapping too much, "Sit and shut"
Tim
Edited by Tim Ashton on Jul 23, 2008 at 06:04 PM GMT
Breitling65 wrote:
I wouldn't agree on this statement. At very high level yes they are looking like same body. Based on this logic I could say pretty much no difference between 20D & 30D & 40D. Also same logic will say D700 is same as D3 just 1/3 less tall
I shot lots of macro with both 20D and 5D and same lenses. 5D does it better just because AF is better, I shot AI Servo and 5D does it better because extra assist points. 5D exposure metering is more sensitive as well as ISO, I am getting faster shutter on 5D on same ISO/lens/aperture. Many other things including shutter sound and viewfinder ... So, no Yakim it is not just sensor!!! ...Show more →
Of course it is not just sensor but the other things are minor ones. Well, at least IMHO.
thw2 wrote:
I can think of a few ways to out-spec the D700
(i) more pixels but even better high ISO (at ISO 6400 and above) performance
(ii) higher fps without the battery grip nonsense
(iii) OLED vs whatever LCD you can think of
Actually, the first factor is the single most important one, and the one that really matters.
Remember when the 1D MkIII was first announced and everyone thought it would be hard to surpass it... well the D3 certainly did that couple of months later.
Of course, this is still speculation.
And we've all learn from history it's best to keep our hopes low and think only of a 40D with a FF sensor....Show more →
Emile Gregoire wrote:
That's a big IF indeed... nobody knows if they're actually making money out of it or have just released it to regain market share on Canon. Often manufacturers have a few products that they actually loose money on just to have a full line-up of products.
Based on the D700 and in spite of Nik's theory, it might actually be the other way around: a truckload of people disappointed in Canon when they bring out the 5D's successor. In that case, Nikon's gamble will have paid off.
Sorry Emile, I have to disagree.
My post was a rhetorical as in "if there was a sun in the sky".
There is NO question that Nikon is selling the D700 profitably. I'd go so far as to say they're making at least $500-$1000 on each camera (at wholesale cost) if not more. Selling 10k/month is $5-$10 million in profit a month. Nikon is definitely NOT losing money and they've never been known for holding "blue light specials" (from K-Mart, a cheap retailer in the US) on any gear; at least never in my lifetime.
Nikon is not your/my/anyone's friend. They're a 100% "for profit" business and do not give anything away. They know they'll drop the price in the future, so they're not going to start on the negative side and make it worse. Just not going to happen.
Breitling65 wrote:
Sure Yakim, did you ever own 5D?
No. I felt this is a camera with two different facets. Great IQ but features' wise I felt it is lacking. Thus I waited and bought the 40D instead. If the 5D Mk II will be a 40D with FF and there will be no 1D Mk III N will surface I will probably buy it.
That said, I played quite a bit with my friends' cameras (10D, 20D, 30D, 5D, 1Ds, 1D Mk II etc.) over the years and I can not say I felt any difference beside that. Looking at the spec sheets this is hardly surprising. Also, none of my friends which upgraded from 20D/30D to the 5D (and I know plenty of these) felt any difference either. All stated that the big VF and IQ as the only significant change they felt. Several stated that it was the only difference they felt.
No. I felt this is a camera with two different facets.
That explained lot to me, no further questions.
No Yakim, you are wrong! as well as your firends, it is huge gap between 20D and 5D. Different league in anything. I am sure you would get different opinion trying 5D with L primes like 85L or 135L.
No metter how good new bells in 40D it still not even close to 5D IQ. I sold it and no regrets, simply toy to my new mkIII.
Breitling65 wrote:
That explained lot to me, no further questions.
No Yakim, you are wrong! as well as your firends, it is huge gap between 20D and 5D. Different league in anything. I am sure you would get different opinion trying 5D with L primes like 85L or 135L.
No metter how good new bells in 40D it still not even close to 5D IQ. I sold it and no regrets, simply toy to my new mkIII.
I really hate when people quote just part of the sentence and ignore the rest.
O.K., apart from IQ, what is huge gap between 20D and 5D?
Dawei Ye wrote:
You know what new cameras need? A kensington security lock socket to prevent theft. Just came to me in a flash of inspiration today
I actually think this is a good idea. Any reason it is not offered? I know it would only keep honest folks honest, but it certainly doesn't seem like it could hurt.
jamesf99 wrote:
My post was a rhetorical as in "if there was a sun in the sky".
There is NO question that Nikon is selling the D700 profitably. I'd go so far as to say they're making at least $500-$1000 on each camera (at wholesale cost) if not more. Selling 10k/month is $5-$10 million in profit a month. Nikon is definitely NOT losing money and they've never been known for holding "blue light specials" (from K-Mart, a cheap retailer in the US) on any gear; at least never in my lifetime.
Nikon is not your/my/anyone's friend. They're a 100% "for profit" business and do not give anything away. They know they'll drop the price in the future, so they're not going to start on the negative side and make it worse. Just not going to happen....Show more →
What Nikon has done with the D300, D700, and the D3 is sustantially lower their R&D costs by using a similar feature set (e.g., sensor, focus, metering, etc.). Surely they're passing those cost savings to the consumer, or at least they'll have the opportunity to significantly cut prices to better Canon. On the other hand, everyone here is demanding something completely new, something we've never seen before, yet at a price point of $2,000. It's not going to happen. Something totally new = $$$; warmed over 40D with FF will be cheaper. We can't have our cake and eat it too.
