Aesop's fable and the D800

Started Mar 3, 2012 | Discussions
Rational
Regular MemberPosts: 287
Like?
Aesop's fable and the D800
Mar 3, 2012

In the well-known Aesop's fable, the fox was salivating about some juicy ripe grapes that it could not reach. "Ah, they are probably sour", the fox said to appease itself.

Nikon D800
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
NikonScavenger
Regular MemberPosts: 173
Like?
Re: Aesop's fable and the D800
In reply to Rational, Mar 3, 2012

Rational wrote:

In the well-known Aesop's fable, the fox was salivating about some juicy ripe grapes that it could not reach. "Ah, they are probably sour", the fox said to appease itself.

People with several thousand dollars' worth of Canon lenses will buy the mark III and rationalize why it's the best camera on the market in its segment for the price and how you have to be an idiot to buy the Nikon.

People with several thousand dollars' worth of Nikon lenses will buy the D800 and rationalize why it's the best camera on the market in its segment for the price and how you have to be an idiot to buy the Canon.

Someone just beginning to invest in a camera and lens system will wonder why the Mark III costs MORE than the D800, which looks much better on paper.

...the real winners are hopefully anyone who is in the market for the D700 and mark II.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
schnoodles
Forum MemberPosts: 62Gear list
Like?
Re: Aesop's fable and the D800
In reply to NikonScavenger, Mar 3, 2012

NikonScavenger wrote:

Rational wrote:

In the well-known Aesop's fable, the fox was salivating about some juicy ripe grapes that it could not reach. "Ah, they are probably sour", the fox said to appease itself.

People with several thousand dollars' worth of Canon lenses will buy the mark III and rationalize why it's the best camera on the market in its segment for the price and how you have to be an idiot to buy the Nikon.

People with several thousand dollars' worth of Nikon lenses will buy the D800 and rationalize why it's the best camera on the market in its segment for the price and how you have to be an idiot to buy the Canon.

Someone just beginning to invest in a camera and lens system will wonder why the Mark III costs MORE than the D800, which looks much better on paper.

...the real winners are hopefully anyone who is in the market for the D700 and mark II.

And all those groups of people will just be speculating until more is known about the real-world performance of those cameras.

Personally, going on the paper stats alone, I'm happy with the Mk III (but then I'm upgrading fromt he original 5D, so the benefit is clearer. I think it's a great camera, if it performs as well as we'd hope. But while I've already per-ordered it, I do think it's over-priced (especially in the UK). What happened to the 5D being the "affordable" full-frame camera? Also, if I was starting out from scratch, I'm not sure which brand I'd go with. They both have pros and cons.

As a side note, looking at the stats of this beast, is it even a 5D any more? I can't help feeling that it's not. The 5D (and Mk II) was always considered more of a landscape camera. The Mk III looks like more of a multi-purpose camera. In fact, I'd say it has most of the features that people always wanted from the mythical 3D. Looking at the Mk III side-by-side with the EOS 3, it looks like a marginally superior camera. It's even got a faster frame rate than the EOS 3 without the booster.

 schnoodles's gear list:schnoodles's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NikonScavenger
Regular MemberPosts: 173
Like?
Re: Aesop's fable and the D800
In reply to schnoodles, Mar 3, 2012

What do you think I shoot landscapes with?

My old 5D mark I. Of all the Canon gear I unloaded a few years ago, I couldn't part with it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
meland
Senior MemberPosts: 3,255
Like?
Re: Aesop's fable and the D800
In reply to NikonScavenger, Mar 3, 2012

NikonScavenger wrote:

Someone just beginning to invest in a camera and lens system will wonder why the Mark III costs MORE than the D800, which looks much better on paper.

I'm not sure most buyers who can contemplate the purchase of a camera for around this price are going to let $500 be the decider.

Given that the body is simply part of a system many other factors are going to come into play like the lenses (which focal lengths, quality and how much), service back up (not the same world wide), availability (not the same world wide), and other parts of the system.

On your basis someone purchasing a car would always buy the one that was best on paper and / or the cheapest. Now some people do buy cars like that but car enthusiasts are more motivated by more intangible things like handling and brand. I'd suggest that most buyers of expensive DSLRs are more like car enthusiasts than purchasers of white goods.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jack A. Zucker
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,539
Like?
I think you're somewhat incorrect
In reply to NikonScavenger, Mar 3, 2012

Replace the word "people" in your post with "pros" and you'll be correct.

Enthusiasts will either not upgrade at the $3.5k price or will jump ship. Many enthusiasts have a $2500 camera and a $500 28-300 zoom lens and take most of their photos of their child scooting around in the walker. They don't know or care about anything other than the "quantity" specs. How many megapixels, how many focusing points, iso range, that sort of thing.

They also make up the largest segment of the market in the prosumer camera range (D800/5D).

IMO, even the knowledgeable enthusiasts will likely not upgrade, (Myself included). I'm not disappointed in the camera. I would love to upgrade from my MK II but at $3500 I just cannot justify the expense since it is not my livelihood.

I think the pricing is a big mistake on canon's part. It's not about quality. It's not about better dynamic range and it's not about canon making the decision to prefer IQ over megapixel wars. It's simply a matter of cost.

I suspect the majority of folks will feel the same.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
David Hull
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,329Gear list
Like?
Re: I think you're somewhat incorrect
In reply to Jack A. Zucker, Mar 3, 2012

Jack A. Zucker wrote:

Replace the word "people" in your post with "pros" and you'll be correct.

Enthusiasts will either not upgrade at the $3.5k price or will jump ship. Many enthusiasts have a $2500 camera and a $500 28-300 zoom lens and take most of their photos of their child scooting around in the walker. They don't know or care about anything other than the "quantity" specs. How many megapixels, how many focusing points, iso range, that sort of thing.

They also make up the largest segment of the market in the prosumer camera range (D800/5D).

IMO, even the knowledgeable enthusiasts will likely not upgrade, (Myself included). I'm not disappointed in the camera. I would love to upgrade from my MK II but at $3500 I just cannot justify the expense since it is not my livelihood.

I think the pricing is a big mistake on canon's part. It's not about quality. It's not about better dynamic range and it's not about canon making the decision to prefer IQ over megapixel wars. It's simply a matter of cost.

I suspect the majority of folks will feel the same.

If the price was a big mistake, well the price is the easiest spec to change -- time will tell.

 David Hull's gear list:David Hull's gear list
Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jnk
jnk
Regular MemberPosts: 121Gear list
Like?
Re: Aesop's fable and the D800
In reply to NikonScavenger, Mar 3, 2012

...the real winners are hopefully anyone who is in the market for the D700 and mark II.

Well said and agreed 100% on this rationalized statement.

 jnk's gear list:jnk's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D300S Nikon D800E +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
schnoodles
Forum MemberPosts: 62Gear list
Like?
Re: Aesop's fable and the D800
In reply to NikonScavenger, Mar 3, 2012

NikonScavenger wrote:

What do you think I shoot landscapes with?

My old 5D mark I. Of all the Canon gear I unloaded a few years ago, I couldn't part with it.

So if the original 5D is a landscape camera, then why isn't the Mk III?

 schnoodles's gear list:schnoodles's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
schnoodles
Forum MemberPosts: 62Gear list
Like?
Re: I think you're somewhat incorrect
In reply to Jack A. Zucker, Mar 3, 2012

Jack A. Zucker wrote:

I think the pricing is a big mistake on canon's part. It's not about quality. It's not about better dynamic range and it's not about canon making the decision to prefer IQ over megapixel wars. It's simply a matter of cost.

I suspect the majority of folks will feel the same.

I suspect this might be true. £3,000 (UK) is a very high price tag. I'm lucky enough to be able to afford it, but I can't imagine many amateurs stretching to that figure. However, I don't have access to the market research that Canon has presumably done, so maybe they know something I don't.

 schnoodles's gear list:schnoodles's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dmanthree
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,420Gear list
Like?
Asap's rationalizations
In reply to Rational, Mar 3, 2012

Rational wrote:

In the well-known Aesop's fable, the fox was salivating about some juicy ripe grapes that it could not reach. "Ah, they are probably sour", the fox said to appease itself.

Yes, rationalizing is nothing new. But I see lots to like about the D800, but would proceed with caution. I'll wait until I can see a side by side comparison of RAW files before drawing any conclusions. Also, don't forget the glass. I won't give up my 24-105 and 70-200 f4 IS. Nikon hasn't got any equivilants.

It ain't just the body...

-- hide signature --

No Signature.

 dmanthree's gear list:dmanthree's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS4 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX30V Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
KatManDEW
Senior MemberPosts: 1,532
Like?
Re: Aesop's fable and the D800
In reply to schnoodles, Mar 3, 2012

schnoodles wrote:

NikonScavenger wrote:

What do you think I shoot landscapes with?

My old 5D mark I. Of all the Canon gear I unloaded a few years ago, I couldn't part with it.

So if the original 5D is a landscape camera, then why isn't the Mk III?

There's the $64 question. Why did they change the target audience for the 5 series?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
schnoodles
Forum MemberPosts: 62Gear list
Like?
Re: Aesop's fable and the D800
In reply to KatManDEW, Mar 3, 2012

KatManDEW wrote:

schnoodles wrote:

NikonScavenger wrote:

What do you think I shoot landscapes with?

My old 5D mark I. Of all the Canon gear I unloaded a few years ago, I couldn't part with it.

So if the original 5D is a landscape camera, then why isn't the Mk III?

There's the $64 question. Why did they change the target audience for the 5 series?

But the Mk III is still better equipped for taking landscape shots than the Mk I or Mk II, surely?

However, I agree the target audience has changed. They've focused on making it a multi-purpose camera. As to why... well, a lot of people have been crying out for a 3D. This is it in all but name.

Personally, I'm quite happy with a multi-purpose camera. It's exactly what I wanted. But you can't please all of the people all of the time.

 schnoodles's gear list:schnoodles's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mogthecat
Forum MemberPosts: 71
Like?
Re: Asap's rationalizations
In reply to dmanthree, Mar 3, 2012

I have to agree that it comes down to glass. I can't see anything in Nikon's line up that matches the 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 F4s either for price or quality. I'm happy with my 5D2 as I was with my 5D, so any upgrade for me is likely to be to the 5D3, but not for some time yet.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Fred Briggs
Senior MemberPosts: 1,002Gear list
Like?
Re: I think you're somewhat incorrect
In reply to schnoodles, Mar 3, 2012

schnoodles wrote:

I suspect this might be true. £3,000 (UK) is a very high price tag. I'm lucky enough to be able to afford it, but I can't imagine many amateurs stretching to that figure. However, I don't have access to the market research that Canon has presumably done, so maybe they know something I don't.

Yes - agreed £3000 is very high for the non-pro enthusiast. I believe the key figure for body only in the UK is circa £2000 for this market - i.e. 5D/5D II type camera. For many people £3000 is not just a stretch, but totally out of reach.

In my case I was willing to add up to £1000 to the proceeds of selling my 5D II to purchase the 5D III, giving me a fund of £2300. Another £700 on top of that is just not justifiable.

It would be more understandable if the 5D III was clearly aimed at a different and higher market segment and named differently in recognition of this. However it is clearly not given the naming. Also, the upgrades over the 5D II, though welcome, are only incremental and long overdue, and to be honest no more than should be expected in a 5D II replacement after nearly 4 years.

Fred

 Fred Briggs's gear list:Fred Briggs's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony FE 24-70mm F4 OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
James C. Murray
Senior MemberPosts: 1,929
Like?
Re: Asap's rationalizations
In reply to mogthecat, Mar 3, 2012

mogthecat wrote:

I have to agree that it comes down to glass. I can't see anything in Nikon's line up that matches the 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 F4s either for price or quality. I'm happy with my 5D2 as I was with my 5D, so any upgrade for me is likely to be to the 5D3, but not for some time yet.

I agree, and for one of my interests, birds, you can add the 400/f5.6 and the 100-400 zoom. Once you go past these in reach, the costs are in another league for both brands and I can't find an equivalent for the prime.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dmanthree
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,420Gear list
Like?
Re: Asap's rationalizations
In reply to James C. Murray, Mar 5, 2012

James C. Murray wrote:

mogthecat wrote:

I have to agree that it comes down to glass. I can't see anything in Nikon's line up that matches the 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 F4s either for price or quality. I'm happy with my 5D2 as I was with my 5D, so any upgrade for me is likely to be to the 5D3, but not for some time yet.

I agree, and for one of my interests, birds, you can add the 400/f5.6 and the 100-400 zoom. Once you go past these in reach, the costs are in another league for both brands and I can't find an equivalent for the prime.

When a nice camera like the D800 comes along, I think people forget that you're buying into a system, not just the body. The best example of this is the NEX series. Killer sensors, great bodies, crap lens selection (unless you want to deal with clunky adapters).

I'll stick with the 5D III.

-- hide signature --

No Signature.

 dmanthree's gear list:dmanthree's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS4 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX30V Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dominique Dierick
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,467Gear list
Like?
Re: Asap's rationalizations
In reply to mogthecat, Mar 5, 2012

16-35G VRII, 24-120VRII are two very comparable lenses. The third is missing.

Never liked the Canon 24-105 myself. Sure, reasonably sharp, but not the best if straight lines are supposed to be in the image (can be solved with pp to some extend tho).

D.

mogthecat wrote:

I have to agree that it comes down to glass. I can't see anything in Nikon's line up that matches the 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 F4s either for price or quality. I'm happy with my 5D2 as I was with my 5D, so any upgrade for me is likely to be to the 5D3, but not for some time yet.

-- hide signature --

My equipment: Nikon D3s, D700, D7000
The ladies equipment: Panasonic LX5 and GH2 for video

 Dominique Dierick's gear list:Dominique Dierick's gear list
Fujifilm X100S
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dmanthree
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,420Gear list
Like?
Re: Asap's rationalizations
In reply to Dominique Dierick, Mar 6, 2012

Dominique Dierick wrote:

16-35G VRII, 24-120VRII are two very comparable lenses. The third is missing.

My brother shoots Nikon and has the new 24-120. Honestly, it's OK at best and nowhere near the quality of the 24-105. My copy of the Canon lens is very good, and as you point out the curvature issues are easily solved in ACR by simply clicking the lens correction button.

Anyway, to each his own, but it isn't as simple as choosing a body. It's all about the system. And I'm betting when we get to see raw samples from each of these truly excellent cams the differences in resolution and noise will be minimal.

Never liked the Canon 24-105 myself. Sure, reasonably sharp, but not the best if straight lines are supposed to be in the image (can be solved with pp to some extend tho).

D.

mogthecat wrote:

I have to agree that it comes down to glass. I can't see anything in Nikon's line up that matches the 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 F4s either for price or quality. I'm happy with my 5D2 as I was with my 5D, so any upgrade for me is likely to be to the 5D3, but not for some time yet.

-- hide signature --

My equipment: Nikon D3s, D700, D7000
The ladies equipment: Panasonic LX5 and GH2 for video

-- hide signature --

No Signature.

 dmanthree's gear list:dmanthree's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS4 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX30V Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Like?
Re: Asap's rationalizations
In reply to dmanthree, Mar 6, 2012

dmanthree wrote:

James C. Murray wrote:

mogthecat wrote:

I have to agree that it comes down to glass. I can't see anything in Nikon's line up that matches the 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 F4s either for price or quality. I'm happy with my 5D2 as I was with my 5D, so any upgrade for me is likely to be to the 5D3, but not for some time yet.

I agree, and for one of my interests, birds, you can add the 400/f5.6 and the 100-400 zoom. Once you go past these in reach, the costs are in another league for both brands and I can't find an equivalent for the prime.

When a nice camera like the D800 comes along, I think people forget that you're buying into a system, not just the body. The best example of this is the NEX series. Killer sensors, great bodies, crap lens selection (unless you want to deal with clunky adapters).

Nikon as a system is as good as any in photography. Certainly, I'm not sure I've ever heard the term "crap" used to describe the Nikon's complete lens line-up and accessories which include CLS, arguably the most advanced flash system in photography.

And many spray and pray photographers who absolutely must have AF forget that Nikon never changed their lens mount like Canon did, so all F-mount Nikkors work on even the most modern Nikon body. There are some legendary AIS Nikkors with proper dampend MF rings, engraved distance scales, and extraordinary performance that can be found in Ebay for extremely low prices. Indeed good, cheap manual Nikkors with manual aperture rings are one reason so many Canon videographers have large collections of AIS Nikkors. Canon FD lenses can be used on EOS cameras ONLY with an adapter that includes optics that allow the lens to focus at infinity.

As far as AF lenses, I'm not sure why I keep reading that the 24-105 L has no equivalent when Nikon makes the AF-S 24-120 VR. And for wide angles, the 14-24 2.8 may be the very best wide zoom ever made which is why it's not uncommon to see Canon shooters using it with an adapter. Price is the main reason the 17-40 L is talked about as it's performance on FF is nothing spectacular.

So as far as complete systems, other than the MP65 Macro or the 400 5.6, there is really nothing that Canon has that Nikon does not.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads