Gear Talk > Canon General
Why pay over the odds for 5D mkiii ??
agierke:
i myself and many others are getting the 5D3 for the improved AF and improved low light capabilities. i didn't even blink at the $3500 price tag. to us its worth every penny and then some.
if you have trouble understanding that this camera is not for you.
TrumpetPower!:
--- Quote from: neuroanatomist on April 02, 2012, 11:44:55 AM ---
--- Quote from: TrumpetPower! on April 02, 2012, 10:53:28 AM ---...it's not uncommon for at least a couple of those lenses to cost multiple times as much as a single camera, a few of them about as much as a camera, and several of them more than a top-of-the-line point-and-shoot camera....
--- End quote ---
Lol. I've got filters that cost more than many top-of-the-line P&S cameras, and my cheapest lens (not counting TCs) costs more than the G1 X, which is a pretty damn expensive P&S...
--- End quote ---
What, no Plastic Fantastic? I mean, ya gotta admit, it's so small and cheap and light and amazing optically...almost makes the perfect body cap, to be honest.
And does it count if my light meter costs almost as much as the G1 X? I mean, the G1 X not only has a light meter, it's got a camera and a lens as well! And a flash -- so why spend about that much on a big bulky flash to put on top of your 5DIII (which doesn't even have a flash! LOL!!1!)? Speaking of flash, there's my collection of AlienBees....
Cheers,
b&
AvTvM:
the issue is not only the absolute price point of the 5D 3. It is the "PAYING OVER THE ODDS" bit that irks so many of us.
Fact is, the Nikon D800 is a way better photographic tool - with the single exception of shooting speed - for 600 Euros less.
Nikon tried it too ... with the ludicrously overpriced D3x and they hit the wall with it. NOW, all of a sudden, they are able to sell a camera that is way better than the D3x for half the price of the D3 ... we can and should expoect Canon to do the same thing. A camera better than the 1Ds III for half the price of a 1D IV ... wghich would get us to exactly the pricepoint where the D800 sits.
5D 3 is a good camera but after all only offers, what the 5D 2 should have offered from the start: a decent AF module combined with a decent sensor. IQ from ISO100 to 1600 is hardly better than the 5D 2.
3300 Euro for the 5D 3 is exactly 600 Euro too much. Nobody in their right mind should spend 600 Euro for nothing. Even if it still makes some economic sense, because one is TRAPPED by a bigger investment in Canon lenses. :-)
tomscott:
--- Quote from: AvTvM on April 03, 2012, 06:22:32 AM ---the issue is not only the absolute price point of the 5D 3. It is the "PAYING OVER THE ODDS" bit that irks so many of us.
Fact is, the Nikon D800 is a way better photographic tool - with the single exception of shooting speed - for 600 Euros less.
Nikon tried it too ... with the ludicrously overpriced D3x and they hit the wall with it. NOW, all of a sudden, they are able to sell a camera that is way better than the D3x for half the price of the D3 ... we can and should expoect Canon to do the same thing. A camera better than the 1Ds III for half the price of a 1D IV ... wghich would get us to exactly the pricepoint where the D800 sits.
5D 3 is a good camera but after all only offers, what the 5D 2 should have offered from the start: a decent AF module combined with a decent sensor. IQ from ISO100 to 1600 is hardly better than the 5D 2.
3300 Euro for the 5D 3 is exactly 600 Euro too much. Nobody in their right mind should spend 600 Euro for nothing. Even if it still makes some economic sense, because one is TRAPPED by a bigger investment in Canon lenses. :-)
--- End quote ---
Have to say I agree with you. As a pro I like to keep my gear as long as possible until it is in dire need of replacement or there is something that completely changes the industry or allows me to shoot something impossible with my previous body. Because the less you spend on bodies the more profit you get from the stills. Obviously when it comes to lenses it is different. Good glass is paramount and what you stick it in front of is much less important. But regardless whether you make money with the camera that £600 is Canon premium, just like Apple over Microsoft.
Yet I still use Canon and Macs because I prefer both to the competition.
A bad craftsman blames his tools. Most pros will be able to get better results with a XXXD than an amateur with an XD. People get too tangled up in specs!!! Just go out and shoot!! Half the people on this forum buy the cameras so they can shoot test sheets to see how well or poorly the camera performs which is a huge shame. This forum used to be full of decent people who were good photographers now it has turned full circle.
What the pro cameras offer compared to the amateur ones is all the complex settings that allow you to do things faster and more efficiently. Also better layout, ergonomics, higher quality build using them all day long you need these things. I no a lot of pros who shoot only on APC and get incredible results. Its just when they come to blow things up they have problems.
The rest is Apples and Oranges.
I used to contribute a fair amount earlier on to the forum but half the people on here make me so fed up of reading the forum! Same old BS.
This 5D MKIII thing has got out of hand and I hope the moderators sort it out. The camera has been out no time at all stop whining.
DavidRiesenberg:
I think that one point is missed by the argument that we are "trapeed" by investment is Canon glass. Personally, I don't feel trapped at all. One of the biggest reasons I shoot Canon is in fact their lens selection. And the bottom line is that for me the D800 doesn't offer anything worth missing on the 50 1.2, 85 1.2 and MPE65 for example. Regardless of price. And I am positive that many feel the same.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version