MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Nikon D3 price collapse.....  (Read 4894 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 15, 2008, 02:03 »
0
I see that here in Australia the price of the D3 has suddenly fallen to the $5400 area (AUD).  That's from a launch price in the $6900 range.

Although undoubtedly a great camera, my personal opinion was that the price at launch was way too high for an advanced 12.3mp camera.

Presumably the price has fallen in anticipation of the new Canon 5D being announced in April.

New 5D or not, the price difference between the existing 5D and Nikon's D3 was also too much - the 5D is a great tool so why pay an extra $4,000 to get the D3.

In my opinion the 'correct' price for a Nikon D3 is about $3,900 and I expect it to get there within a year, or earlier if Nikon announces a 16mp model for the Olympics (very likely).

With Pentax and Sony also in the frame, it looks like there will be some hefty price competition in the semi to pro end of the DSLR market.


« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2008, 09:31 »
0
It's nice if the price of the D3 goes down, but I don't think it has anything to do with the 5D, since they are two completely different creatures. The 5D is a slow camera with a nice sensor, while the D3 is a hyper-fast camera for sports and action. The Canon competitor is the 1DIII.

If I should guess, there are probably three reasons for the reduction. One is that the D300 for most practical uses is 90% of what the D3 is, and for well under 50% of the price. So they need to get the D3 closer in price, due to internal competition.

The second reason is that most of those who "must have" the D3, have already bought one. To convince hobbyists etc. to buy one, a lower price is always a good argument.

The third, and maybe the most important reason, is that the next pro Nikon (and I agree that it will probably be launched before the Olympics), will probably have to cost no more than $6,000, since it's very likely that the Sony with the same 24MP sensor will be priced in that area.

In 6 months, I doubt that it's possible to sell a DSLR body for $8,000 anymore, and that includes the Canon 1DsIII. From being the only player at the top end of the market, Canon is looking at a situation where there are two very strong competitors available to their customers. Good news for those of us who buy cameras  :)

vonkara

« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2008, 12:24 »
0
The D3 is in another category and match better whit the 1DmarkIII. The new 5D will have what Nikon would want to give us. Hope also for the FF 16mpx, but no rumors for now???

Pentax will probably never get where Nikon and Canon are. The new Sony 24mpx...Mmm we will have to see how it perform against the 1Ds MarkIII sensor. I see pictures of the 1dsIII and it will be difficult to beat that. I don't think Nikon will have advantage to use the Sony sensor like all others do whitout improving some features. Nikon must make their own sensor in my opinion like the D2 sensor was.

« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2008, 19:48 »
0
This is a good news, hopefully such price change would also affect entry level dSLRs as well. As for some people prices on them still above margin.

« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2008, 20:03 »
0
The current increasing strength of the Australian dollar may have something to do with it too. Local camera retailers are hurting a lot as the temptation to import from the US becomes overwhelming at 95cents Aus to the US dollar! (there are a lot of products where even the lack of warranty makes little difference as the price is just so much cheaper in the US you could almost buy two of them and be ahed at the moment!)

« Reply #5 on: March 16, 2008, 04:14 »
0
The basic problem is that they set same (!!!) price in euros and USD while USD is about 40% less then euro! When we realize very high custom fees and taxes in europe Im not surprised that it costs here twice as much as in USA. Anyway D3 price is far beyond reality because its better then 5D but lower resolution and still here in Europe nearly 3X more expensive with maybe 30% added value. Its very good camera but I wouldnt buy it for this price.

Vonkara:
I wouldnt be so sure about Pentax and Sony - they showed very aggresive strategy last year with quite high quality models. I dont think Canon 40D is competitor to Pentax K20D. Canon still have big advantage of its reputation and huge set of lenses and cheap accesories but cant competete against 14MP cameras with nearly same image quality with their 10MP camera - what is better for stock photography? Just think how much you must upsize pics from 40D and from K20D to alamy and you clearly see the difference!

vonkara

« Reply #6 on: March 16, 2008, 19:59 »
0



I wouldnt be so sure about Pentax and Sony - they showed very aggresive strategy last year with quite high quality models. I dont think Canon 40D is competitor to Pentax K20D. Canon still have big advantage of its reputation and huge set of lenses and cheap accesories but cant competete against 14MP cameras with nearly same image quality with their 10MP camera - what is better for stock photography? Just think how much you must upsize pics from 40D and from K20D to alamy and you clearly see the difference!
I didn't see any pictures from this new K20D yet. Having a Cmos sensor will surely help while every new cameras seem to go whit this option from now. But I'm a little affraid that having 4 over mpx on the same area will trend to more noise not really visible at 100 iso but maybe already visible at 200 iso.

The most great advantage to have a Pentax is not whit the sensor performance in my point of view. The bigger advantage is surely the anti-shake system incorporated in the camera. Pentax didn't follow the semi pro industry and still have a 11 areas autofocus. Now that I have my D300, 51 areas is a norm and I will not return to my D200 whit 11 areas.

The K20D is only 3 frame per second, what is not really enough to shoot sport or wildlife in all condition. The D200 was 5fps the D300 is 6fps up to 8fps whit the big battery at a thousand dollars :(. The 40D is 5fps if I remember correctly.

I hope to be able to see that K20D pics in the next month or so to see if they are back in the sensor business. I agree that Sony are agressive in the market and they seem to push really hard to get a place in the competition

« Reply #7 on: March 16, 2008, 20:05 »
0

The K20D is only 3 frame per second, what is not really enough to shoot sport or wildlife in all condition. The D200 was 5fps the D300 is 6fps up to 8fps whit the big battery at a thousand dollars :(. The 40D is 5fps if I remember correctly.


Canon 40D burst rate is 6.5 fps for up to 17 raw or 75 jpegs  ;)
Claude

« Reply #8 on: March 17, 2008, 02:40 »
0
Vonkara: Thats true but for stock the advantage of extra 4MP is very important. Im not using sequence shooting and 11 AF points are not too big disadvantage for me. I do mostly landscapes and macro so in fact I dont mind even 3 points AF with Olympus;)
I saw test pics from both Canon 40D and Pentax K20D and maybe Canon is very very little better. Both have pretty invisible noise even at iso800 so thats not an issue. With some denoising SW you can use them up to iso 400-800 with no problems, and if you downsize 14MP picture to 10MP, noise will surely disappear.

Back to Nikon - I dont see any reason to start with Nikon now - 80D is still plastic and no competitor to to K20D or 40D. D300 and D3 are again very good but too expensive against their competitors. With todays stock trend with extremely high MP requirements I dont see any reason to buy pricy 8-10MP camera while there are 14MP in semipro already.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
42 Replies
10999 Views
Last post May 21, 2008, 11:34
by massman
29 Replies
8788 Views
Last post June 02, 2008, 18:26
by cdwheatley
15 Replies
5806 Views
Last post November 22, 2008, 06:23
by lebanmax
9 Replies
4698 Views
Last post July 07, 2009, 07:42
by michealo
18 Replies
4446 Views
Last post May 15, 2017, 14:10
by wordplanet

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results