Nikon Prices. The D300 and 18-200mm lens...and more.

[pcassity]

I am becoming increasing confused about the pricing of the D300 and the 18-200

VR. At many mail order locations the D300 can be purchased for $1799 (body

only). The 18-200 goes for about $679 ($2,498 for both if purchased separately.

However, if purchased as a kit, the price is $2,539 (an additional $41). Today

I notice that everyone is giving an instant $300 rebate if the the 2 are

purchased as a kit, lowering the price to $2,239. However, if purchased

separately, no rebate. I have the 18-200. I don't need another one. I am

tempted to buy the kit at the reduced price and sell the lens to someone at a

reduced price so that they don't have to pay the $679. Does anyone have any

thoughts about what is going on?

 

Now, my second issue and it really becomes an even greater one since I can't

buy the 300 at a reduced price. I currently have a D200. I have been extremely

happy with this camera. It was all I needed until, of course, Nikon came out

with the D300 that effectively made it inferior. I still have the articles that

came out prior to the release of the D200 praising it as one of the greastest

cameras that Nikon had ever released. I well understand the advances made in

technology every year (if not every day) which would explain why all I could

get was no noise at IS0 400 yesterday but today I can get the same performance

at ISO 1600. However, if I am will to pay $3000 more, I can get that same noise

reduction at ISO 3200 (if not higher) what I am having a hard time believing is

that the technology for the D300 didn't exist until last year.

 

I am not naive. I am 54 years old and have been 'chasing technology' for my

entire life and I really don't mind continuing to do so (up to a point)but

what's next? Are we going to effectively be able to purchase the D3's

performance for less than $2,000 next year? Maybe the technology is actually

there now to give us 50 megapixels and an ISO of 100000! (I know, I know. a bit

of an exageration.)Ok I will stop. Just need to vent.

 

Your thoughts?

[mtan]

Upgrading is a part of life. New improvements don't necessarily make previous versions obsolete. Inferiority is a function of comparison, not of action. Take pictures. Be happy.

[titospna]

Yes, tomorrow's stuff will be better than today's stuff. You can keep waiting for something always better over the horizon. Trouble is, you might run out of time. So, buy what you can and use it and be happy for the moment. God, that sounds awfully trite. Sorry, but that's just reality. If you can't enjoy a D300, then you need to do something else. Good luck.

[elliot1]

<...hard time believing is that the technology for the D300 didn't exist until last year.>

 

It actually did - you just needed to know where to look for it.

 

<...able to purchase the D3's performance for less than $2,000 next year>

 

You can do that today with the D300.

[Hector Javkin]

There are so many false assumptions here that it is difficult to know where to begin.

 

1. Your D200 did not lose any photographic capability when the D300 came out. The viewfinder is still where it was, the shutter button also. All its technology is intact, unless you threw it down in disgust when you learned that there was new camera.

 

2. You're unhappy over the release of the D300 (because you believe it devalues your D200) yet you would like to have technical innovations released even faster.

 

3. The idea that Nikon is hiding its technology is simply wrong. For a long time, Nikon was significantly behind Canon in several areas, particularly high ISO performance in the bodies, and in the range of long lenses with IS/VR. It very much hurt their market share, which was probably only saved by the wonderful ergonomics of cameras like the D200. The technology lag is still hurting, even as Nikon caught up, because many photographers committed to Canon because of its advantages, and they don't have a reason to change now. Nikon certainly would have produced newer technology sooner had they had the possibility.

[pcassity]

Thanks for your thoughts but nobody has addressed my pricing concerns.

 

'New improvements don't necessarily make previous versions obsolete.'

 

I agree with only the 'don't necessarily' part. I feel that 'new improvements' could certainly give a professional an edge over another professional using a model with less or inferior features.

 

'There are so many false assumptions here that it is difficult to know where to begin.'

 

I 'don't necessarily' feel that my opinion should be considered 'false assumptions.

 

I am not unhappy with the release of the 300. I am a bit disapponinted with Nikon's pricing structure.

 

'The idea that Nikon is hiding its technology is simply wrong.'

 

I would have to say that if there is any false assumption it could be that statement.

 

However, I respect and understand all of your comments and thoughts.

 

Thanks.

[eric_arnold]

pat, at least you're not a d2x user who has seen their $5k camera devalued by as much as 70% with the release of the d300. you say you're not 'naive' but admit to 'chasing technology.' at some point maybe it will dawn on you that part of what you're chasing is marketing hype. if you're 'extremely happy' with the d200 as you say, then what's the problem?

[pcassity]

Eric, personally I don't believe that 'chasing technology' particulary makes one 'naive'. I have been extremely happy with with the 200 up to the point that something better became available. So, there is not problem. I don't believe that chasing real live improvements is necessarily the same thing as chasing marketing hype, as you call it.

 

Thanks though for your opinion. As of Saturday, I am now the owner of the 300 and will be using the 200 as a back-up.