Here in the United States the D300 was initially priced at $1800, and the D700 was initially priced at $3000. That's a difference of about $1200.
Based on the same criteria as above (initial price), here in the United States the price difference is about $900.
The D600 will have more resolution and better high ISO performance than those smaller sensor cameras have. There are a lot of crybabies in this forum who would put Nikon out of business if they got everything they seem to think they are entitled to, and then where would the check competition puts on prices be?
--What you should for is the "price balance" the d300 was at 2/3rds price of the d700 at introduction (world average minus insignificant price variations) and the D700 was constructed in Japan, which means that the difference would be even less if it was constructed at the same factory as D300.... this balance remained for all product life on both products. The D600 (FX version of D7K - or the same relationship as D300/D700), is constructed outside Japan at the same factory as D7K and now costs all over the world more than double the price.... Now speaking of dollar difference is like saying that if a DX was 9100$ and an FX 10000$ (9% difference) ...is the same relevance as a DX costing 400$ and an FX (similarly constructed) ....1300$(!!!!), clearly there is no logic to a person that thinks like that... a MORON's thought ...isn't it?
--There is no competition on D600... resolution has nothing to do with pricing or competition, the D3200 is much cheaper than D7K for other reasons than resolution as well as D4 is much more expensive than D800 for similar reasons, a much desired by many D800 with D4 sensor would cost about the same as today's D800 and this would be perfectly acceptable nor anybody ever complained about D700 price being similar to the Canon 5dmkii... now the D600 has too many compromises in it to cost that close to a D800..., especially in Europe where the 2150 vs. 2650 Euros for the D800 is outrageous.
Your math is pathetic, just like your ridiculous and hypothetical valuations of features.
Completely irrelevant.
I'm replying to the argument that "in terms of price and performance we have gone backwards." As I wrote in my last reply to you, each of us gets to value things according to what we think they are worth. By putting a value on more resolution and better high ISO performance, not to mention the question 135 format versus DX format, most of us don't agree that the D600 should only cost 50% more than the D7000. Personally, I think the D600 is worth twice as much as the D7000; if you think the D7000 is such a great value compared to the D600, then you should just buy a D7000 and take your whining over to DPR's D7000 forum.
If I were in Europe or England, I wouldn't even consider the D600 over the D800 based on price (first, I prefer the D800 regardless of price; second, I agree with you that the D600 price there seems a bit high). Unless you have a compelling reason to want the D600 over the D800, just get the D800, stop complaining and let market forces work their magic; if you have a compelling reason to prefer the D600 over the D800, then that reason will outweigh the mere 500 Euro savings you get for choosing the D600.
Since you insist in your moron's logic, deliberately excluding my "world average" and "Europe's" variations, you are now under judge from any sensible reader that knows little about logic...
Why is it then that you deny my right to have a well reasoned (like other dx vs. other FX) estimation of my own and discuss it with others? Is it because "features that worth different to individuals" means that your stupid judgement should be accepted by all all? Insane logic can only be insane logic... and what logic is... Is written in books by a man called Aristotelles... who is taught in all countries your's included! ...This (what you do) is not logic by rule! It's pure ...moron's insane!
--.........!!!! So, Nikon made investments outside Japan to increase costs eeeh? ...You certainly have an insane logic moron!
--1. Excluding only a phrase from a sentence in purpose to present it as a sentence, is a well known "method" of trolling which only pathetic maniacs continue to use, ...based on the fact that many morons don't follow threads but are looking for personal attacks to be engaged. ...Again, I suggest to look at logic's rules! ...To your surprise they do exist! ...It's exactly what differentiates humans from morons and animals!
Ya know jackass, when you put something in quotes and characterize it as something someone else wrote, then it should actually be something they wrote? There is nothing to be gained by arguing with a lunatic, so just go ahead and rant because most of us are dismissing you as a fool.
I would suggest you take your own advice. It's hard to picture anything that personifies trolling better than the constant stream of personal insults that you hurl at people.
Thank you for posting this!! But you missed a few things:
--Sensor and electronics contribute for about 8 to 14% in overall camera construction cost, given that both sensors are of leading technology but the D800's is of more complexity and edge technology a 2-3% of cost affection is what should be considered sensible... body construction and manufacturing are the 2 factors that affect DSLR cost, more than anything, especially if part of the frame is injection moulded the cost that can be saved is huge.
--LOL..., they have been included in the above general categories that model the cost affection, OTOH your estimation is a bit on the very high side.... the camera should be treated in cost the way D7K is treated allowing for the extra cost of FX electronics and viewfinder....
--I don't thing they care if it's APS-c or FF, you are right that APS-c is cheaper and thus can be applied well on the mass market, while FF is more appealing to enthusiasts and pros., the thing is that this product is much overpriced because it lacks competition....
