Shouldn't we add the lens cost?

Started Sep 18, 2012 | Discussions thread
All forumsForumParentFirstPrevious
ultimoamore Regular Member • Posts: 297
Shouldn't we add the lens cost?

Nikon bodies (d600 vs 6D, d800 vs 5d III) are somewhat cheaper (one can say that the 5d is better than the d800, but still 500$ more).

But aren't Canon lens cheaper? Is it possible that Nikon is selling cheaper cameras, and get the money back from lens?

I was looking at my collection:

100 f2
70-200 f4

and the price difference would be much more than the difference in cameras prices (when a comparable lens exists).

I'm not a Canon fanboy; in fact, I think I made this "research" because the d600 is the camera I wanted: light, and with all of the features I need. But the lens I would use would be more expensive, or would not exist.

Is everyone looking at the cameras, without understanding that we're buying "systems", not just "cameras"?

Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 6D Nikon D600 Nikon D800
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
All forumsForumParentFirstPrevious
All forumsForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow