40D vs D300 real price diffence is only $118

[brian57]

I'll be here trying to learn a little about my new 40D, or out shooting pics, or working, or playing with my kids, etc....

 

[ThomasH_always]

This is a very good point! Thanks for this analysis.

Aside of the wireless and remote functionality, interesting is that Canon did not matched the dynamic grid on/off function in the viewfinder. I use it with my D200 and for me its a real blessing, avoiding tweaking with tweezers on these fragile screens. Not to talk about the extra price:

Canon viewfinder Grid Screen.....................$39

Thomas

 

[rwbaron]

Interesting statement that Nikon offers "more for your money". Under certain circumstances for certain people this may be true but your logic makes no sense to me.

You own 3 L lenses but are considering, I assume, selling them and your 10D to buy Nikon equivalents. Nikon lens equivalents to their Canon counterparts are typically more expensive. Couple this with the depreciated loss on your Canon gear and you're not doing much for your money in fact you'd be losing big time. If you keep the Canon gear and add Nikon you're then duplicating equipment which again is an even bigger money losing proposition. You also state you're not too concerned with image quality but yet you own Canon L glass. Many Canon L lenses do not have direct Nikon equivalents, especially when you consider IS.

I could somewhat understand your logic if you are considering moving down to a D40 or D40X or even a D80 but this thread is about the D300. If you are truly considering the D300 then why would you pay so much for a camera body if you're not too concerned about IQ? From your statement below it sounds as though you're looking at this with a very narrow camera body only perspective.

Only you know best what you need and it's your money so I really could care less but your statement does not make much sense.

Bob

Exactly what are you trying to prove? Of what value is this to Canon
shooters?

--
http://www.pbase.com/rwbaron
My PBASE page is new and growing so please be patient.

 

[DocDAT]

It's become quite an infestation around here...

If you want to start rediculous comparisons like that here is the real price difference for those of us outside the US:

Nikon D300: 1764 Euro (lowest price available)
Canon 40D: 1086 Euro (lowest price available)

Difference: 678 Euro = $941

Even if you included the add-ons (which is nuts, since most people don't need or want them) the price difference would be:

678 Euro - (175 Euro + 109 Euro + 20 euro) = 374 Euro = $520

So basically your lame comparison doesn't even favor the D300. And again, those add-ons are not wanted by 99% of the people who'd buy these cameras, wheras probably an even larger percentage cares about image quality....

Oh and lets try to compare prices when you start buying lenses:

D300 + 17-55 F2.8 = 1764 + 1320 = 3084 Euro
40D + 17-55 F2.8 IS = 1086 + 800 = 1886 Euro

That's a price difference of a whopping 1198 Euro = $1663 USD!!!
And the Nikon 17-55 doesn't even have IS and isn't sharper!!

I could also start comparing the ultra wides and teles, but I don't think that's necessary??

Anyone claiming the price difference doesn't mean much must be either insane or have more money than sense!

There are many people that believe that the Nikon D300 is over priced
and many that believe it should not even be compared to the Canon 40D
because of its feature set and price difference. So if one was to
look at a feature by feature comparison the real price difference,
one might say that the D300 is price very well, once you upgrade the
40D to make for a more fair apples to apples comparison.

Canon 40D.......................................... $1299
Canon ST-E2..........................................$210
(to add wireless flash controler)
Canon TC-80N3 Remote...........................$133
(to add Time lapse/interval shooting)
Canon viewfinder Grid Screen.....................$39
------------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................................$1681
versus
Nikon D300 w/above features included.....$1799

Real Difference.......................................$118

Now this for an additional $118 you get a few more features you
simply can't upgrade a 40D to have such as a 51point AF module, a
920,000 pixel LCD display and Spot Metering for all AF points.
http://nickmjr.smugmug.com/
Nick M

 

[rrcphoto]

This is a very good point! Thanks for this analysis.

Aside of the wireless and remote functionality, interesting is that
Canon did not matched the dynamic grid on/off function in the
viewfinder. I use it with my D200 and for me its a real blessing,
avoiding tweaking with tweezers on these fragile screens. Not to talk
about the extra price:

Canon viewfinder Grid Screen.....................$39

Thomas

there's a method to canon's madness on that .. high precision matte screens which nikon has no equivalent for ultra fast lenses .. also the ability to switch in MF screens as well.

canon would be reducing it's functionality and flexibility by making a LCD / matte screen which couldn't be replaced IMO.

when you start looking at the overall picture, you find that canon usually tends to have more options and choices by leaving things alone outside of the body versus adding everything into it. Ironically it's been nikonians that have been heralding the fact that nikon cares more about IQ, versus marketting, but when you look at their system as a whole, the opposite seems to be true more than naught.

 

[subdoodle]

• for many common post processing needs. You can do 10-15 minutes of PS work in 20 seconds in many cases. Plus the raw converter is better than ACR. Sharper, truer colors, uses in-camera settings. I think NX is a baragain and I use it on Canon images (jpegs) all the time.

 

[rrcphoto]

• for many common post processing needs. You can do 10-15 minutes of

PS work in 20 seconds in many cases. Plus the raw converter is
better than ACR. Sharper, truer colors, uses in-camera settings. I
think NX is a baragain and I use it on Canon images (jpegs) all the
time.

ah no, DPP would be the bargin. it's free and fast and included with every single canon digital SLR free of charge, even the lowely rebel.

something that costs around 200 bucks to purchase isn't really a "bargin" no matter how you spin doctor it, and btw .. that software wasn't developed by Nikon. Nikon simply bought the rights and rebranded it

 

[ZoomBoy]

Payback time! Just kidding, but it seems that nikonauts (or niko-nuts) tend to manage their frustrations by trolling in the Canon forum. I wonder why are they frustrated, as Nikon is a pretty impressive system (well, not as impressive as Canon, to be honest).
--
ZoomBoy

'All pixels aren't created equal!'

 

[thecameraguy]

So after checking your profile....

a) you come to canon forum to trash canon
b) you sit and masticate in the nikon forum...

sigh.. so pitiful
--
~ Being over-exposed can get you arrested ~

 

[subdoodle]

Certain things that take way longer in PS and that DPP can't do at all. Spend some time here:

http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/software/capturenx/nxsp/tutorials.htm