From: Me Here on

"N" <N(a)onyx.com> wrote in message
news:491f990c$0$7570$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> ".." <Ginnaam1(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:GLMTk.1784$V71.947(a)newsfe10.iad...
>> Nikon brings out a new DSLR only to update it 6 months later. The D700
>> has
>> not be available that long and now they are discontinuing it and
>> replacing
>> it with an upgrade, D700X. They did the same with the D40X introduced it
>> and
>> then 4 months later discontinued it.
>> I was looking at a D90 but if there is a chance it could be discontinued
>> in
>> 6 months maybe I should wait?
>>
>
>
> Do you use the same logic when buying clothes or a car?
No, but in consumer electronics buyers are merely sheep led around by the
marketing weasels, Cars normally run a 12 month cycle, not withstanding the
2008 1/2 models.

Get with the program!!!

Resistance is futile.



From: SMS on
Me Here wrote:

> No, but in consumer electronics buyers are merely sheep led around by the
> marketing weasels, Cars normally run a 12 month cycle, not withstanding the
> 2008 1/2 models.

Cars are a much more mature product. More importantly, if you buy a
Toyota one year, and buy a Honda 5 years later, you don't have to throw
away a bunch of stuff that works only on the Toyota. I.e., I've used my
Thule racks on a succession of vehicles from VW, Honda, and Toyota (2),
with only minor outlays for some vehicle specific roof mounting. I can't
use my Canon lenses on a Nikon D-SLR (the opposite is possible but not
desirable).

In reality, in this case, it's the electronics's buyers that are leading
the consumer electronics companies around. If you buy a Nikon camera and
several lenses, and a flash, you're pretty much committed to Nikon for a
very very long time, which is how Nikon wants it. Ditto for Canon. So
it's vitally important to these companies that their products don't lack
some key feature that the competition has, because of the long-term
implications. Nikon _must_ quickly upgrade the D700 to avoid the long
term loss of customers to Canon, because of Canon's introduction of the
5D Mark II. Conversely, Canon's at a disadvantage with their XSi versue
the D90, since the D90 does video and the XSi does not, and in a segment
that is geared toward those upgrading from a video-capable P&S, the D90
has a compelling advantage to those that don't like hauling both a D-SLR
and a camcorder around. Ditto for the D300 versus the 50D. Nikon will
almost certainly introduce a D300 replacement with greater resolution,
and may add video to leapfrog the 50D. The cost won't go up, but the
features will.

The most minor feature can tip a buying decision. I remember seeing a
story about Honda on TV. Many years ago, when the Accord/Camry battle
first started, Honda introduced cup holders in the Accord, and the Camry
didn't yet have them. There were customers that felt the two vehicles
were equal in quality and price, and were basing their final selection
of the Accord over the Camry on the presence of cup holders.
From: Alan Browne on
nospam wrote:
> In article <PNydnfaJOuzDM73UnZ2dnUVZ_s3inZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne(a)Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>> it's not practical.
>> Better not tell Hasselblad.
>
> not relevant; hasselblad was designed for interchangeable backs and
> doesn't have the limitations that a 35mm slr does.

I don't accept the limitations other than the slightly reduced (still
larger than APS-C) and cost per back. That's all that did it in.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
From: Chris H on
In message <LeWUk.5252$hc1.1178(a)flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com>, SMS
<scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> writes
>
>> I note that Digital Photo and Practical Photography voted Nikon Best
>>across the board fro 2008
>> Best Pro DSLR D3
>> Best Advanced DSLR D300
>> Product of the Year D3
>
>I guess Nikon placed more ads than Canon. To claim that the D3 is a
>better pro camera than the 1Ds Mark II is ludicrous.

Strangely DXO also place the D3 above the 1D
They are very good at testing optics.

Never mind you are the only one who is right.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



From: Steve on

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:27:00 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com>
wrote:

>Chris H wrote:
>> In message <j67Uk.7253$yr3.7176(a)nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>, SMS
>> I note that Digital Photo and Practical Photography voted Nikon Best
>> across the board fro 2008
>>
>> Best Pro DSLR D3
>> Best Advanced DSLR D300
>> Product of the Year D3
>
>I guess Nikon placed more ads than Canon. To claim that the D3 is a
>better pro camera than the 1Ds Mark II is ludicrous.

That depends on what the pro is shooting. For fast action or low
light, the D3 is a much better camera than the 1Ds. For studio
photography, maybe/maybe not. A good pro will use the right tool for
the job, which could be either depending on the job.

But for general purpose all around shooting if you could only have one
camera and had to make a choice between the D3 and 1DsMkII, those
magazines got it right. As we all know, megapixels isn't everything
and 16.7 MP isn't all that much more than 12.1 MP when it comes to
real world photography. Even compared to a 1DsMkIII, I'd take the D3
if I could only have one.

Steve