Finally, a competition to canon FullFrame.

Somehow, I'm kinda glad that it arrived, The Nikon D3, I also expect Sony would

follow sooner than expected. <p>

 

Reason for being glad, Is that canon FF will surely come down in price faster

than before:) My 24-105L is waiting for FF. <p>

 

<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond3/" >LINK to D3</a>

That is cool. Finally I can hope to own a FF. So are we going to see two models in the Canon FF lineup?

There are already 2 Canon FF bodies: EOS 5D and 1Ds MKIII. Been that way for 2 years...

Considering the full-frame, 12-megapixel Nikon lists for approximately $7,000, it doesn't look like it will be putting much price pressure on the $8,000, 21-megapixel 1Ds mk3 or on the $3,000, 12-megapixel 5D. Not yet, anyway. But I'm all for competition.

A $5000 12MP probably isn't going to drive down the price of the 5D ($2500), 1D MKIII

($4000) or 1Ds MIII ($8000).

Canon is still way ahead of Nikon - I don't think people are switching from Canon to Nikon. New users will have to make a decision but, at that price level the deciding factor will not be...price! Between a 7k and an 8k camera one looks at the whole system, features, etc...

In other words there won't be a 'price war' on FF and/or pro body cameras anytime soon.

:Considering the full-frame, 12-megapixel Nikon lists for approximately $7,000, it doesn't

look like it will be putting much price pressure on the $8,000, 21-megapixel 1Ds mk3 or on

the $3,000, 12-megapixel 5D. Not yet, anyway. But I'm all for competition."

 

Maybe, but one interesting thing is that it combines full frame with the speed of the 1DMKIII.

In some ways it seems like a more powerful version of that camera than a direct competitor to

the 1DsMKIII.

I thought I read usd5000, FF upto 11 fps@6m. wheres dat 5d2?

From the dpreview preview: "Guide price: D3 body only 3399.99 pounds / 5180 euros"

 

At current exchange rates, that about US$ 6,800 to 7,000.

 

I don't really see it as a direct competitor to the Canon 1Ds, either. At this point, very few people are going to be deciding whether they should get the Nikon full-frame camera versus one of the Canon full-frame cameras. It really seems more like a way to provide those who've stuck with Nikon an option for full frame (and to prevent more of their professional user base from switching to Canon).

"The D3 will be available in November, at around US$5000."

Note that Nikon have finally gotten around to putting VR in their 400/2.8, 500/4 and 600/4 lenses. Maybe they'll stop losing users to Canon now...

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00MKbW

Thank you, thank you, thank you Nikon. This is a step in the right direction. Now I can stop cursing your name. Unfortunately the wire services are so far into Canon equipment at this point that this won't make a huge dent. But I suspect that stringers will jump on this camera in force.

 

We'll see how the noise compares to the Canons.

 

Keith

This is a 1DmIII killer at the high end (And the D300 is at the low end) not a 1DsmIII killer.

 

But Nikon's seriously back in the game. Especially with the new 14-24G and 24-70G lenses. The Pro market has some real competition, and the 1DmIII is eclipsed (11fps in 1.5x crop mode, 9fps otherwise, 12MP, ISO 25600, the specs on the D3 are insane).

I doubt it'd put a dent in Canon sales. And I doubt those people who converted to Canon will be converting back to Nikon. There is not much of a difference between a 1Dmk3 and the D3. Full frame 12mp at 9 fps. How many sports shooters need full frame how many fashion photographers need 9fps. So it's kind of a mixed bag. Fashion shooters will still stick to the 1DsMk3. And sports shooters will just have to decide whether it's worth the extra 2 megapixels and full frame to convert to Nikon. Other than that the 1DMk3 has everything else.

 

The D300 looks awesome though. Clearly beats the 40D in all areas (on paper at least).

I think it's been very clever of Nikon not to target Canon head-on with the D3. This way, it's unclear to the average punter which DSLR is actually better. Actually, it's unclear for everyone! Doesn't matter, sounds like a great camera which should put a bit more pressure on Canon, especially pricewise (hopefully). Looking forward to seeing more Nikon FF DSLRs too...

The good thing about the d3 is that it supports DX lens on cropped mode, Very nice feature to those (most of the) people who supported DX lens.

 

I would expect canon to do the same with their future FF body.

 

Another thing is, Nikon's new bodies have the ability to AF in live view, like a digicam ( doesnt drop the mirror and up again), In addition to "ordinary" live view :D, albeit , at slower speed, But still.

 

Makes me wonder, If canon will make firmware upgrade to allow the 40d to have live view AF like a digicam, using the main sensor as the AF sensor, So the mirror wont have to drop.

Is there a comparison table somewhere between 40D & D300?

"There are already 2 Canon FF bodies: EOS 5D and 1Ds MKIII. Been that way for 2 years..."

 

Problem is, I could'nt justify the purchase at the current cost,

I'm not that good to use it to it's max. potential, And I'm not a pro.

 

The d3 will cost $5,000 , I hope the sony FF will be cheaper, and would initiate the downward spiral of FF bodies' price faster than would have been possible if nikon had'nt made FF body( and soon, Sony).

 

Though, I have no plans to buy into Nikon dslr system, I think their new offerings , including their new lens are awesome.

40D vs D300 here:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos40d%2Cnikon_d300&show=all

 

It doesn't really give the full picture though - the Nikon is the better body by some margin on specification, albeit at a somewhat higher price. The interesting thing will be to see how the cameras fare in image quality.

Thanks for the link mark,

 

 

AFAIC, The biggest difference between them is the LCD screen.

 

Both have 3" size screen, But while the canon have 233K pixel resolution, The d00 have 933K of resolution, OUCH!

 

 

I'm starting to think that the d300 is becoming a bit of a nightmare to canon. :D The only saving grace for the canon is it's lower price.

I don't rekon folks will be leaveing Canon for the camera either. I am just happy for the Nikon folks. who used to say, and I quote "We don't need no stink'n full frame". Now you can stop kidding yourself and feel whole again. :0)

 

Just kidding guys, but I am happy for them. besides competition will be good. and hey, if Nikon would of had FF a few years ago I might would have become a nikonian my self. ;0)

 

Jason

The D200's already been a nightmare for Canon and the D300's only going to up the ante. If you add the grip and an EN-EL4e battery you have a camera that offers almost the speed of a 1DmIII (8fps) and essentially everything else, for half the price. And it beats the 1DmIII on some specs (AF in live view, wireless commander flash built-in, the much higher resolution LCD). The real question is will Nikon have the teething problems with Multi-CAM3500 that Canon is having with the 1DmIII's AF unit. If not, Canon's going to be hurting in a bad way in the pro market as people dig out their F mount glass for D3's and D300's.

Nikon is definately in the game.

 

First, the D3 is clearly aimed at 1D-III market. The specs read like a Full Frame version of a 1D-III, with all the speed AND full frame. And only a 10% price difference ($4500 vs $5000). Very IMPRESSIVE. Hopefully these will both be $3000 cameras soon :)

 

As for the D300 -> Heh. OK, at $1999 I am not sure it competes with the 40D. It seems to compete against the mythical Canon 3D that they seem to never release. The D300 has a 51pt AF system. Is fast. Has a 12mp sensor. Bring the price to $1400, then we have SERIOUS competition!

 

As Mark indicates, image quality will be key. How is noise at ISO 800?

I`m wonderin what the noise level will be at ISO6400, and how this boost works.