But has it actually sold like hotcakes? It is an important niche camera for Canon, no doubt, but I suspect it didn't sell nearly as well in its first year on the market as a $3000 camera as Canon planned, and the price reductions we have seen since are as much more about inventory reduction than an indication of true cost structure of FF cameras in 2007/2008.
Not soon. Apart from sensor volume issues - like Nikon presently are getting about 10,000 FX sensors a month from their fab partner and I doubt they could increase that to 100,000 a month even if they wanted to - the sheer price difference between DX and FX sensors from the fab means that an FX camera close to the D300 price point is still a long way off.
It wouldn't ruin the sales of the D300, because it would be at another 1000 dollars/euros more expensive than the D300. Possibly more, depending on the feature set and body. Which would make such a camera sit in a whole new market segment for Nikon. And that is the conundrum - is there really a business case for a stripped down, low specification FX camera priced midway between the D3 and the D300? Because that is what you are effectively asking for.
Expect the 24Mp FX studio/landscape camera based on the recently announced Sony full frame sensor at Fotokina. The other camera due to refresh this year is the D80. I doubt Nikon has the engineering capacity to do more than three new bodies in a calendar year. That puts any new body beyond the two expected later in the year into 2009 or beyond.
Well, you can be buying this hotcakes if you can not wait, since current 5D are almost same price as D300.
--
Amen!!!i wanna see a D3X.
--
rice is good for when your hungry and want 2000 of something.
chris!
The increase in # of FF sensors would not need to go from 10,000 to 80,000 a month. More like an increase of 20,000 sensors at the most, though largely dependent on the selling price of the body those sensors would be in. And it would likely need to be a different FF sensor made to a lower price point to put into a camera with a lower sale price. Canon has done that with the 5D sensor. The 5D sensor is made with a different process than the 1Ds FF sensors that allow the lower sale price of the 5D.
What pressure? The launch of the D3 and the D300 is a clear indication that Nikon is not playing Canon's game (read: not competing vis-a-vis) but setting up their own rules as far as market competition is concerned.
Although Canon hinted in the 5D whitepaper that they might be able to make some of their larger photodiode sesnor designs on less expensive wafer feed stock, I haven't seen anything to suggest that the 5D sensor is made on a different process. Quite the opposite, in fact. It appears that Canon are making all of their CMOS imaging sensors in the same 200mm mixed device fab using the same process.
That's what everyone keeps saying.... That might be right, but maybe they just want to wipe the shelves for the newer version of the 5D.
Bull cr@p.
Figures out of Japan indicate it has had less than 2% of market share since late 2006. The 1D II out sold it several times over. In the UK the D200/300 probably outsell the 5D 10 to 1.
You have to think about basic economics as well. What other camera offered full frame, 12mp or more, for less than 3k (give or take)? The 5D for many photographers was the only camera that offered affordability, resolution and good portrait performance in its price range.
I'm not holding my breath waiting though, I'll keep on shooting with what I got.Save me a seat.
