Went through the same thought process .... could have made the switch with an investment as well. Ended up buying a 1D Mk III refurb for about the same as a D700 .. or what we're probably going to pay for a Canon version of a D700. I'm figuring I'll use this for a while and see what comes out. Most logical is a 5D replacement at around $2,300 USD ... an entry level FF, just as the 5D is .... err was .... a FF 50D. Wait 6 months and I can grab one as second body for around $2,000 ... what I would have "invested" to change to Nikon. If we see a "3D" to compete with the D700 ... small pro grade body, I can pass on the "7D", give it 6 months for prices to settle down reviews to get done, then sell the Mk III and buy one of these if I like what I'm reading and seeing.
Beni wrote:
Just worked out that switching to Nikon with a couple of D700's to replace my 5D's and the usual other stuff such as lenses, flashes, etc would cost me £3200 after I sold all my rather battered canon gear and that's buying everything but the bodies in the US! Given the price of a D700 at £1750 and the 5D mkII will have to compete (we hope, the 50D is still more expensive than the D300 in the UK) I would have to say that the choice is still between doing nothing or upgrading one of my 5D's. It's all very well to say 'put your money where your mouth is' but that's one heck of a lot of money and I don't really think it's a justifiable business decision when that amount would buy me an upgrade to a 1Ds mkIII almost. Not that I want a 1 series, especially the mkIII versions!...Show more →
That's the thing though. There is no 17-40L, the 17-35 may be faster but it's double the price and I like that extra 5mm, I don't need f2.8 for that focal length. There is no USM 85mm 1.8, I use every drop of that USM focus speed, the 24-70 is a whole lot more expensive and there is nothing close to the 70-200 f4L IS, even the more expensive f2.8 VR is said to suck on FF anyway.
Like a lot of people I think that nothing will happen for me pre January when the Nikon Canon price wars over the 5DmkII/D700 will have calmed down, we have seen if the AF is actually working and the initial camera niggles have been fixed and then see about buying one. I paid £2500 for my 5D's a long time ago, the D700 is now almost half that and I hope the 5D mkII will compete for price, it certainly means that I could afford to upgrade one of my 5D's. Whether I'll bother or not is another question which will be left to canon to pursuade me. Even now I'm pondering using more primes to get the best AF experience with my 5D's rather than swopping the 24-70 I've given up on for the slower, nasty bokeh and distortion full 24-105L.
Beni wrote:
How many 'C' modes does the 50D have? Just wondering what to expect on a 5D mkII.
The 50D has 2, whereas the 40D had 3. The 40D/50D has all the programmed mode that the 5D2 should not have so Canon could add 2 to 8 'C' modes in theory (The 5D has only one). I would be happy with 3. And BTW, with the C modes, no more need of the MLU button, just program MLU to one of the C modes.
RDKirk wrote:
Given Canon's past performance, if it's announced this month you can expect it to start shipping in October, no later than December.
It is /was likely planned for immediate release. With no firmware snafu I would guess the first ones will arrive the first week of Oct.
The reviewers don't seem to have cameras. I expect if it annouced next week the new model will be given to reviewers next week.
The 50D is obviously a push for Canon. Announcing it early seems to suggest they wanted to slow Nikon momentum and get in fron of Sony. The 5D is a year overdue. The 50D user interface/features was likely developed for the 5D replacement.
I still see the 5DII as a FF 50D with photosites large enough to do one more stop of sensitivity. So ~20mp and ~5fps, or maybe they can go as high as ~25mp and ~4 fps. I'm guessing ISO25600 is a design goal. ISO25600 with max mp possible. Canon is probably uncomfortable with these specs considering the 1DsIII. But they are likely more uncomfortable with Sony and Nikon.
dcmiller wrote:
Canon is probably uncomfortable with these specs considering the 1DsIII. But they are likely more uncomfortable with Sony and Nikon.
Actually, this is NOT unprecedented. Canon did a similar move with the D30. Read what Phil Askey said here:
"Canon really did made life difficult for themselves, they knew full well that they would be judged on success of the D30, they know how important the digital photography market has become and how a camera like the D30 could affect their reputation.
An all Canon body, exposure system, electronics and imaging sensor plus the decision to use CMOS for the first time in a high resolution digital camera was a tough enough task, but to do all that at a price which would undercut the competition?"
I think Canon has reached a similar point in history again with the release of the 5D replacement. Now, whether they'll stand up to the challenge or sink back into the comforts of their past successes (by releasing a 50D body with FF sensor) will surely make or break their reputation forever.
Beni wrote:
That's the thing though. There is no 17-40L, the 17-35 may be faster but it's double the price and I like that extra 5mm, I don't need f2.8 for that focal length. There is no USM 85mm 1.8, I use every drop of that USM focus speed, the 24-70 is a whole lot more expensive and there is nothing close to the 70-200 f4L IS, even the more expensive f2.8 VR is said to suck on FF anyway.
Exactly why I can't give switching any serious thought. Plus there's no 35 f/1.4 (not an AF model anyway), which right now is my favorite lens. And no 24-105 f/4 IS, which is quickly becoming my default walk-around lens for casual use. Higher cost on equivalent Nikon lenses and holes in their lens lineup means I'm "stuck" with Canon for the foreseeable future. Not exactly a hardship, but Canon can do better on the body side.
thw2 wrote:
Actually, this is NOT unprecedented. Canon did a similar move with the D30. Read what Phil Askey said here:
"Canon really did made life difficult for themselves, they knew full well that they would be judged on success of the D30, they know how important the digital photography market has become and how a camera like the D30 could affect their reputation.
An all Canon body, exposure system, electronics and imaging sensor plus the decision to use CMOS for the first time in a high resolution digital camera was a tough enough task, but to do all that at a price which would undercut the competition?"
I think Canon has reached a similar point in history again with the release of the 5D replacement. Now, whether they'll stand up to the challenge or sink back into the comforts of their past successes (by releasing a 50D body with FF sensor) will surely make or break their reputation forever....Show more →
Forever in the electronics world is like...... 6 months.
My bet is that the 3D is not ready. I think they have to do it, but it will be next year.
I think a "50D 5DII" will be well recieved. But the days of Canon being universally better than Nikon on the higher end are over. There's nothing shocking about this change. The previous situation was unusual.
dcmiller wrote:
I think a "50D 5DII" will be well recieved. But the days of Canon being universally better than Nikon on the higher end are over. There's nothing shocking about this change. The previous situation was unusual.
Agreed. From a features point of view, Canon is seriously lagging. They can't even get some of their basics right, e.g. autofocus accuracy. If they do nothing to reverse the situation, many folks will have lost confidence in them. Then again, the same thing happened to Nikon 8 years ago... until the D3/D300/D700 were released.
