Photography Thailand Forum

[epixx]

Marc,
I still think you compare D3 with the wrong camera. The Canon competitor is the 10MP 1DIII, even if that is not full frame. That's the only Canon camera with comparable specs to the D3. It's also important to notice that Nikon's previous top model, the D2Xs (which btw. was ordered by NASA in a quantity of seventy-something a couple of days ago), has not been discontinued. The D2Hs on the other hand, which used to be Nikon's sports-shooter camera, has been discontinued.

[Marc Schultz]

My comparison is based upon FF cameras only as I mentioned earlier. In that case you would have to compare it to the first FF DSLR from Canon which was the 1DS. That was something like 6 years ago and why I said Nikon is quite late to getting onto the FF playing field. I hope it is not another 6 years before they put out something at the same resolution as the 1DS Mark III since 12MP is not really considered high enough res anymore at the professional level with Canon's 21MP DSLR and digital backs now approaching 40MP.

[David Salmanowitz]

Marc--the Canon 1Ds Mark3 is amazing in that it can compete with medium format, though perhaps the sellers of the MF backs do not want to hear that and will give reasons and things it cannot do. But look at the price of MF backs, and then you still need a camera. :-)  I am just amazed how quickly it all changes. Epix--maybe Nasa bought them to plug the holes where the space shuttle tiles fall off. :-)

[Marc Schultz]

I think you are right David. Maybe they plan to give them to Martians to fool them into thinking we have limited digital camera technology on "camera" earth.

[epixx]

If sensor size is the deciding factor, the 1DsIII obviously can't be compared to MF either. Still, it's being done.

The fact that Nikon didn't release an FF camera until now is CENSORED WORD more than technological. At some point, they decided that technology would advance fast enough for the difference in sensor size to become unimportant. What has happened now show that they were wrong. More important though, is that Sony probably has an FF sensor under development, a sensor that they may have chosen not to share with Nikon, since they are now competitors within the DSLR market.

If Canon hadn't recently released the 1DIII, I believe that they would have launched an FF version very fast. Now, they will probably wait until next year before they do that. So, there will probably be a 1DIIIn as well, not because that camera needs an FF sensor, but because Canon needs it for marketing purposes. They can't allow themselves to be left behind Nikon in any area, particularly not the pro sport-shooter market, that they have dominated for so long.

[epixx]

David,
I believe the reason why NASA buys Nikon has nothing to do with the cameras, but that the materials used in the Canon telephoto lenses are not suited for use in space. Not much competition for Nikon there.

[epixx]

One important factor that tends to be forgotten in a discussion like this: Nikon and Canon doesn't have a single DSLR that competes directly with a camera from the other manufacturer. It's very interesting to see how they fill different holes in the market, and how Olympus and Pentax try to do more or less the same thing. As it is now, the combined Nikon/Canon line-up could well have been from one single manufacturer: D40, 350D, D40X, 400D, D80, 30D, D200, 40D, D300, 5D, 1DIII, D2Xs, D3, 1DsIII.

It's not so much a question of finding the right camera as finding the right system. Since they both get better all the time, that isn't always easy. The nice thing is that they are both amazingly good.

[David Procter]

Blimey, this is heated.
I really dont have anything to add except,
I love my 5D.

[Marc Schultz]

Don't worry David, it is all friendly fire. And yes, you are sitting pretty with your 5D. Just be glad you weren't a Nikon user waiting for a FF body or you would have to open your wallet even wider.

Good points Jorgen and if all camera manufacturers had exactly the same lineups for sure it would leave all of them without any niches at all.

[Markus]

<quote>I think at this point though it is good to agree that there will remain to be 2 camps which will always see the same exact issues from different perspectives. And at least Canon and Nikon users can agree that they will never agree on some things.</quote>

Marc has said it, Canon and Nikon do it well, it seems they step on each other toes, but they don't. They keep up a for both camps a healthy competition, innovating carefully without cannibalising their markets and actually complementing each other. Its almost the same with Kawasaki and Yamaha, or BMW and Mercedes, Apple and Windows, Blonde or Brunette. It all depends on the feeling... I have recently browsed a lot of pics on the Internet and in no instance I could have guessed which cam made which picture...

To not get misunderstood here: I like the blondes and the brunettes, but the D200 feels as good as the Kawasaki over Yamaha and Mercedes suits me better and I use Windows because Apple sucks for me..l.

[Gary Dublanko]

Marc, you make some very good points re full frame and they are obvious points because Nikon made it known years ago they would concentrate on the Dx format while Canon surged ahead with full frame. And I'm glad they did for wildlife shooters like myself, the current combination of Nikon glass and D2x/D200 cameras result in what I believe to be the best combination available today. The D300 follows in that line and should be a killer camera as well. Nikon were a bit slow coming to the table with VR but it has to be said that the quality of their professional lenses is difficult to beat (the 200-400 f4.0 VR is a good example and I'm sure the new 400mm and 600mm VR will be as well). Yes, they are a conservative company but being conservative often means getting it as close to perfect the first time and this of course takes time. It may not make economic sense in the short term but in the long term, they've gained a solid reputation for quality. It can be frustrating of course and there were times when I considered switching years ago, but Nikon have always followed up with exceptional products. I don't need to be the first in line (nor do I want to be) and will always put quality first even if that means waiting another 12-18 months. Past experience has taught me that patience is truly a virtue even when it comes to digital cameras and lenses. Since I do not shoot full frame it's hard to make an educated opinion on the D3. On the surface at least the lower resolution of the D3 does not really provide for an accurate comparison to the Canon 22 mp offering so I agree from a purely image size point of view, they are apples and oranges. It's hard to say what Nikon's strategy is with the D3 but it will come out in time.

[epixx]

It's hard to say what Nikon's strategy is with the D3 but it will come out in time.

Actually, it's very easy to say what Nikon's strategy is with the D3:

1. It replaces the now discontinued D2Hs, which was Nikon's sport-shooter camera, but which also did a great job for wildlife and weddings, in spite of having only 4MP.

2. It will compete with Canon 1DIII, which is Canon's sport-shooter camera, and which specs are similar. The difference in sensor size is of little importance here. Those two cameras do more or less the same job. It must be said though, that with 10 and 12MP, both of them are much better allround cameras than their predecessors.

3. It will be Nikon's stepping stone for the next stage, the D3X, which will have more megapixels. and which will compete more directly with Canon 1DsIII. Most industry analysts predict a launch in second or third quarter 2008, but it may as well be earlier or later.

This is all in line with Nikon's earlier track-record. The "sports-model" have always been launched 6-12 months before the higher resolution model (D1H/D1X - D2H/D2X). The difference this time is that the "sports-model" seems to be the allround camera, while the X-model will probably be more of a specialist camera, with more resolution than most photographers need, and a higher price than most of us are willing to pay. I wouldn't be surprised if they price it higher than the 1DsIII. This is probably also the reason why the current camera is called D3 and not D3H.

Another interesting point: the D300 is in almost every way a better and more advanced camera than the D2Xs, but for less than half the price. It has a better sensor with the same MP-count, it's faster, has a much better auto-focus and with the battery grip, it can even take the D2Xs battery (if I've understood things correctly). It's a bit difficult to understand why the D2Xs is still available. It may be because Nikon doesn't want to leave the top space open, and that the D3X isn't too far away. As far as I remember, they did a similar thing with the D1X when the D2H was launched, making the former more or less obsolete.

[Marc Schultz]

Amongst the worry about which equipment is better, the greater value, and which camera to buy, I thought this Haiku written by photographer Vernon Trent (courtesy of Markus Staas) is interesting food for thought:

Amateurs worry about equipment,
professionals worry about money,
masters worry about light,
I make pictures...

Vernon Trent

[gregoire]

555

So true!

[Gary Dublanko]

It's hard to say what Nikon's strategy is with the D3 but it will come out in time.

Actually, it's very easy to say what Nikon's strategy is with the D3:

1. It replaces the now discontinued D2Hs, which was Nikon's sport-shooter camera, but which also did a great job for wildlife and weddings, in spite of having only 4MP.

2. It will compete with Canon 1DIII, which is Canon's sport-shooter camera, and which specs are similar. The difference in sensor size is of little importance here. Those two cameras do more or less the same job. It must be said though, that with 10 and 12MP, both of them are much better allround cameras than their predecessors.

3. It will be Nikon's stepping stone for the next stage, the D3X, which will have more megapixels. and which will compete more directly with Canon 1DsIII. Most industry analysts predict a launch in second or third quarter 2008, but it may as well be earlier or later.

This is all in line with Nikon's earlier track-record. The "sports-model" have always been launched 6-12 months before the higher resolution model (D1H/D1X - D2H/D2X). The difference this time is that the "sports-model" seems to be the allround camera, while the X-model will probably be more of a specialist camera, with more resolution than most photographers need, and a higher price than most of us are willing to pay. I wouldn't be surprised if they price it higher than the 1DsIII. This is probably also the reason why the current camera is called D3 and not D3H.

Another interesting point: the D300 is in almost every way a better and more advanced camera than the D2Xs, but for less than half the price. It has a better sensor with the same MP-count, it's faster, has a much better auto-focus and with the battery grip, it can even take the D2Xs battery (if I've understood things correctly). It's a bit difficult to understand why the D2Xs is still available. It may be because Nikon doesn't want to leave the top space open, and that the D3X isn't too far away. As far as I remember, they did a similar thing with the D1X when the D2H was launched, making the former more or less obsolete.

I completely agree the D300 is more of a replacement for the D2X than anything else. Watch the prices of the D2X on eBay plummet.