Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price

[BaconBets]

At $3500...
Half the people say they are torn because the 5d3 is $1200 more than the 5d2
Half the people say they are torn because the 5d3 performs close to the 1dx for $3000 less
So Canon got it right, the camera is priced perfectly

They took a revolutionary camera, and not only fixed the weaknesses, but brought some of them to flagship level.
This is the best all around camera ever produced, and that's not just specs talking, but the pros who have tested it.

There are 2 groups of people:
1. The fantasy whiners who wade through a sea of contradictions
2. The rest who already have a body (or 2) on order

[tt]

But the MkII is still MRSP'ed at 2499.
[/quote]

Worth pointing out also - the 5D Mk II might have gone down in retail price you buy it at but the
MRSP is the same. And that's the price you should insure it at too (for new for old from what I read looking into insuring a 5D).

For those wanting a discount - you only have to wait 1-3 months based on historic price fluctuations of the 5D MkII I've looked at before you get $100-300 off.

And those buying them now will be testing it for you whilst Canon smooths out the firmware glitches hehe

[Axilrod]

There are little, subtle changes in the camera that I think will make $3500 seem even more reasonable.  The click wheel on the back is actually fixed, and touch sensitive, which I thought was really cool.  Not super high-tech or anything, but definitely cool.  Vibration/silent mode is very useful for me, I can't wait to shoot some Astro time lapses with it, can't wait to see what this sensor is capable of "seeing."

[MikeHunt]

I can appreciate that most potential 5D MkIII candidates find the new price of $3,500 (or £2,999 = $4,700 in the UK) a major setback and of course a huge disappointment. Another thread on CR illustrates that the new 5D3 price is similar to that of the 5D2 when it was announced back on 17 September 2008, in terms of Japanese Yen - which is the 100% consideration for Canon Inc.

Notwithstanding this comparatively high price in USD, AUD, GBP, EUR etc., I truly believe that the new prices by the end of this summer will have fallen back below $3k (or £2.5k), the logic being very simple: the gap between the new 5D is just too big between it and the old 5D which it replaces, as well as the gap between the 5D3 and 7D.

By way of illustration, I bought my new 7D last September for £939 online. I shoot a lot of video and I'd love to do so with a FF body, but here's the acid test: I could buy 3 x 7D's or 2 x 5D MkII's for the price of 1 x 5D MkIII  

Shooting HD video with multiple cameras for a videographer is as important as ISO, DR, NR are for a stills photographer. Now before the purists go off on one, just look at the 22.3MP sensor -> HD video driven resolution on the new 5D Mk III, headphone socket?? separate/manual audio controls in Live View??

A lot of videographers made the 5D Mk II the go-to HD DSLR, plus where would T2i/T3i sales be without 1080p HD recording at selectable rates. The question is will they all want to trade up to the newer more expensive model? Canon is keeping the 5D Mk II for now, presumably at a new soon-to-be reduced RRP of probably $1,999  or less, that is they'll have to discount the current recommended price by about 500 bucks. That will likely entice a lot of current 7D users (who shoot both stills + video) to want to buy an entry-level FF body.

I think Canon are constrained, firstly, by the Yen 300,000 domestic selling price, but secondly, they really don't know where the effective demand is from a price point, so they go high, keep the old model and see what happens. After all, they're not going to be able to satisfy all new demand for the first 3 months anyway (pre-orders, early-adopters etc.), so they can afford to be a bit pricey-now.

Bottom line: unless you really need a new 5D Mk III, wait 6 months and prices may be a lot cheaper (say $2,999)

[richard_mitchell]

Years ago people spent $2000+ for a laptop.  Now you get 3 to 4 times faster CPU, 2 to 3 times bigger memory and hard drive, and much lighter weight.  Are you going to pay $4000+ for a laptop?
Supply and demand determine the market price.  3500 might be a right price for the market.  However, people shouldn't think 1000 dollars more is okay to buy some new features from a new device.  You are comparing the two different cameras from different age and background.

Interesting analogy, but you are comparing a commodity (computer hardware) vs. a specific hardware brand. It would be better to have compared Canon to Apple.

I would have been happy to see the price at $2999 for the 5D mkIII, but over a three year period, the extra $14/month isn't going to keep me up at night. If nothing else, it simply makes me want to buy it earlier so I might ekk out a few more years with the camera.

[XanuFoto]

"I'm selling my Mark II and buying a Nikon D800 for $2999"


Out of curiosity I was wondering what sort of lens  these 20 respondents had.  You are moving to another ecosystem to save on the Nikon camera body. You will take a haircut on your lenses along with the MKII. And will have to spend more money new Nikon lenses and a new computer. Obviously this decision is not because the MKIII is 500 dollars more expensive. Am I missing somethings here?

[Toveri]

I just recently switched from Nikon to Canon.

The reason i switched to Canon was for the glass. In my opinion that will give you the best image quality boost for your buck. I too was waiting for the Mark3 but I am still happy with a Mark2 for $2000.

I dont understand all the complaining on the $3500 price tag. If you don't want to spend it... don't. But don't think that $500 will be left in your pocket after your switch to Nikon. Nikon glass is more expensive so it will cost ya more.

[Martin]

"I'm selling my Mark II and buying a Nikon D800 for $2999"


Out of curiosity I was wondering what sort of lens  these 20 respondents had.  You are moving to another ecosystem to save on the Nikon camera body. You will take a haircut on your lenses along with the MKII. And will have to spend more money new Nikon lenses and a new computer. Obviously this decision is not because the MKIII is 500 dollars more expensive. Am I missing somethings here?

24-70 2.8
50 1.4
85 1.8
135 2.0
70-200 2.8 IS II

Yep. I just want to be happy with my system and camera. I just want to be sure that if i am be loyal to one brand it will not disappoint me in future. Nikon never did. I really like their system. Once upon a time  I just needed more mpix and iso 100 when d700 was hot in the market, so I decided to switch to Canon and THIS was mistake for me, a serious one. I even stopped taking photos due to 5d2, which i really don't like. And now, canon made a good (standard) AF system and probably nothing more important, selling camera for 3500$? Joke? Campetition has probably better AF, better build quality, more MP (not soooo important for me but...), far better ergonomics, is more customizable, has great flash system, better and more precise exposure mattering has better in-camera mechanics, can take more photos (200K), so far can register more DR, has much higher "real" x-sync, has no banding and visible noise @iso100, me NEFs are better for PP (maybe i am just used to nefs but i dont think this is the reason), is cheaper, more reliable. Hmm am I missing something? I just find Nikon more customer orientated  and Canon leaded by accountants and financial managers (how to earn money, giving them almost same thing but let push them to pay more and more). Nikon invents, Canon follows. It's strange that u have to pay for 1series to achieve focus properly. I had a perfect and reliable AF in D300. Why I had to wait for years to have 3500$ good AF (probably). I wait for reviews for final decison bur so far I cant convince myself to stay with Canon.

[jwong]

I just recently switched from Nikon to Canon.

The reason i switched to Canon was for the glass. In my opinion that will give you the best image quality boost for your buck. I too was waiting for the Mark3 but I am still happy with a Mark2 for $2000.

I dont understand all the complaining on the $3500 price tag. If you don't want to spend it... don't. But don't think that $500 will be left in your pocket after your switch to Nikon. Nikon glass is more expensive so it will cost ya more.

That might have been true in the past, but recent Canon prices on new hardware is going the opposite way.  The 5DIII and 24-70 come to mind.  The Canon 200-400 and 100-400 are both expected to cost significantly more than existing versions or their Nikon counterparts.  I think most of the frustration that people that view photography as a hobby is that they will be priced out of it if current trends continue.

[EchoLocation]

I just recently switched from Nikon to Canon.

The reason i switched to Canon was for the glass. In my opinion that will give you the best image quality boost for your buck. I too was waiting for the Mark3 but I am still happy with a Mark2 for $2000.

I dont understand all the complaining on the $3500 price tag. If you don't want to spend it... don't. But don't think that $500 will be left in your pocket after your switch to Nikon. Nikon glass is more expensive so it will cost ya more.

I absolutely would have agreed with you..... until I saw the 24-70 2.8 II
2300 dollars!
After that, I thought for sure the 5DIII would be a reasonable price so as to tempt people with the camera then get them to buy expensive glass later... but no.
Now i'm looking at an extra 1000 dollars to have a Canon 5DIII and a 24-70 instead of an 800 with the same.
The recent trend at Canon is really high priced glass(and now camera bodies too,) and I don't see any sign that this will be changing.

[briansquibb]

24-70 2.8
50 1.4
85 1.8
135 2.0
70-200 2.8 IS II

Yep. I just want to be happy with my system and camera. I just want to be sure that if i am be loyal to one brand it will not disappoint me in future. Nikon never did. I really like their system. Once upon a time  I just needed more mpix and iso 100 when d700 was hot in the market, so I decided to switch to Canon and THIS was mistake for me, a serious one. I even stopped taking photos due to 5d2, which i really don't like. And now, canon made a good (standard) AF system and probably nothing more important, selling camera for 3500$? Joke? Campetition has probably better AF, better build quality, more MP (not soooo important for me but...), far better ergonomics, is more customizable, has great flash system, better and more precise exposure mattering has better in-camera mechanics, can take more photos (200K), so far can register more DR, has much higher "real" x-sync, has no banding and visible noise @iso100, me NEFs are better for PP (maybe i am just used to nefs but i dont think this is the reason), is cheaper, more reliable. Hmm am I missing something? I just find Nikon more customer orientated  and Canon leaded by accountants and financial managers (how to earn money, giving them almost same thing but let push them to pay more and more). Nikon invents, Canon follows. It's strange that u have to pay for 1series to achieve focus properly. I had a perfect and reliable AF in D300. Why I had to wait for years to have 3500$ good AF (probably). I wait for reviews for final decison bur so far I cant convince myself to stay with Canon.

I dont where you are getting your information from but I would start reading/listening elsewhere.

Only series 1 focus properly? Oh dear me you have been lead up the garden path - I suppose you are going to tell us next that the 7D is a lousy camera for sports and the 5DII is useless at weddings.

If that is how you feel I suggest you go back to Nikon before you smell the coffee

[bdeutsch]

Count me in the undecided category. I'm ready for a new camera and new glass (all my gear is 5-10 years old and VERY well used), so it's either the 5dm3 or the d800.  I'm waiting for the reviews and then I'll have to price the glass and camera together.   

Actor Headshots NYC | Gotham Family Photos | NY Wedding Photos

[briansquibb]

I just recently switched from Nikon to Canon.

The reason i switched to Canon was for the glass. In my opinion that will give you the best image quality boost for your buck. I too was waiting for the Mark3 but I am still happy with a Mark2 for $2000.

I dont understand all the complaining on the $3500 price tag. If you don't want to spend it... don't. But don't think that $500 will be left in your pocket after your switch to Nikon. Nikon glass is more expensive so it will cost ya more.

I absolutely would have agreed with you..... until I saw the 24-70 2.8 II
2300 dollars!
After that, I thought for sure the 5DIII would be a reasonable price so as to tempt people with the camera then get them to buy expensive glass later... but no.
Now i'm looking at an extra 1000 dollars to have a Canon 5DIII and a 24-70 instead of an 800 with the same.
The recent trend at Canon is really high priced glass(and now camera bodies too,) and I don't see any sign that this will be changing.

Oh please dont make me explain yet again the difference between msrp and street prices. Wait 3 months and you will find the difference disappear like ice in the Grand Canyon in the summer

[unkbob]

I even stopped taking photos due to 5d2, which i really don't like.

The 5D2 is such a bad camera it made you quit photography?! LOL that's hilarious, and stupid.

[bornshooter]

I just recently switched from Nikon to Canon.

The reason i switched to Canon was for the glass. In my opinion that will give you the best image quality boost for your buck. I too was waiting for the Mark3 but I am still happy with a Mark2 for $2000.

I dont understand all the complaining on the $3500 price tag. If you don't want to spend it... don't. But don't think that $500 will be left in your pocket after your switch to Nikon. Nikon glass is more expensive so it will cost ya more.

I absolutely would have agreed with you..... until I saw the 24-70 2.8 II
2300 dollars!
After that, I thought for sure the 5DIII would be a reasonable price so as to tempt people with the camera then get them to buy expensive glass later... but no.
Now i'm looking at an extra 1000 dollars to have a Canon 5DIII and a 24-70 instead of an 800 with the same.
The recent trend at Canon is really high priced glass(and now camera bodies too,) and I don't see any sign that this will be changing.

Oh please dont make me explain yet again the difference between msrp and street prices. Wait 3 months and you will find the difference disappear like ice in the Grand Canyon in the summer

+1 a couple of months maybe by xmas price will drop and settle then i will pounce lol