Follow-up poll: If you're not buying a 5D3 due to price....

[scrappydog]

I upgraded to the 5DII from the 60D, and am keeping both.  I just did not think the weak-sauce DR was worth the upgrade cost (although the camera appears fabulous in every other way).  Maybe the next rev of the 1-series or 5-series.  Until then, I am happily shooting with my crop and FF cameras.

[nonac]

After using Canon for 30+ years, I am seriously considering switching to Nikon. Canon is overpricing their products. Name alone is not going to get me to pay more for something equal to or less than what the competition offers.

[Ayelike]

I got a 5D3 at the weekend. I was travelling to Europe to visit a friend anyway so picked it up there to save over £300 from the UK price.

It's still an expensive bit of kit at £2600 but I've been waiting for this camera for over a year and I wasn't about to let another year pass waiting for a possible entry level full frame or 7D2 and sticking with a crop. You only live once!

Putting the money into it has made me determined to master the camera and attempt to make some money out of photography. I'm hoping this step up raises my game.

It's worlds apart from my 450D - I'm no longer scared of poor light conditions with or without a flash.

[tron]

Being an amateur 5D Mark II user that uses the camera mostly for landscapes I find the 5D mark III not worth the money at all.

Apart from the obvious improvements in AF, fps and (less so in) noise I think it has introduced some drawbacks too.

1. Not an easily user replaceable screen! What were they thinking? They could have used the same screens as in 5D Mark II and let people use third party if they desire so. For example I use Canon's grid screen for now.

2. Unless someone convinces me otherwise I suspect it has stronger AA filter hence the problems in all but Canon software and the recent corrections in Canon's DPP.  But adding PP sharpening does not seem the same as being sharp in the first place.

3. No Magic Lantern (for now)... OK this is not Canon't fault obviously but I mentioned it for completeness...

[RLPhoto]

I use crop and FF bodies. Both are great at what they do, but 3500$ for a 5D3 plus the support it will need will be too expensive for me to justify over my aging, die hard, 5Dc.

5D3 - 3500$
Windows 7 Pro retail - 250$
RAM to run Win7 - 200$
Lightroom 4 to process RAW files - 150$

Total for moving to a 5D3
4100$ + Tax.

Ouch. Too much $$$$ for what i offers compared to just 1700$ for a MK2.

[V8Beast]

So much for my theory. Looks like the poll results are split right down the middle.

[AvTvM]

So much for my theory. Looks like the poll results are split right down the middle.

not surprising to me ... the 5D 3 is too expensive for what it is .. unless you earn money with it and have enough money to start with. :-) 

[briansquibb]

So much for my theory. Looks like the poll results are split right down the middle.

not surprising to me ... the 5D 3 is too expensive for what it is .. unless you earn money with it and have enough money to start with. :-)

That is a big presumption that users are going to be pros

[Random Orbits]

So much for my theory. Looks like the poll results are split right down the middle.

not surprising to me ... the 5D 3 is too expensive for what it is .. unless you earn money with it and have enough money to start with. :-)

That is a big presumption that users are going to be pros

I guess that's the next poll...

[AvTvM]

That is a big presumption that users are going to be pros

Of course non-pros will buy as well. But the pool of pure hobbyists willing and able to plonk down 3.5k for a body alone is limited ... especially if a better camera is available for 2.8k from the competition.

Pro's are often somewhat more "looked in" by sizeable investments in glass, speedlites etc. and with regards to the cost of a major change in their workflow.  SO to them 3.5k vs. 2.8k is a comparatively smaller issue. 

[JerryB]

I was lucky.  A friend sold me his for 3100.  It's an expensive camera.  I also own a 5dm2 which I'm keeping.  It takes great photos.  As a photojournalist, I need a second camera.  If I didn't need the faster focus and the low light, I would not have bought it.  A salesman once told me that Canon likes the higher prices as a way to separate "pro" photographers form amateurs,  U don't know if that is true but you do have to wonder.  I was luck to find a deal; otherwise, I would have purchased another 5dm2.

[crasher8]

I just voted, did that take away or add to this poll's suckiness?

[briansquibb]

That is a big presumption that users are going to be pros

Of course non-pros will buy as well. But the pool of pure hobbyists willing and able to plonk down 3.5k for a body alone is limited ... especially if a better camera is available for 2.8k from the competition.

I would think hobbyists are less likely to swap because of the implications on changing the rest of their kit.

[AvTvM]

I would think hobbyists are less likely to swap because of the implications on changing the rest of their kit.

most hobbyists I know - including many with a 5D 2 - own not more than 2, max. 3 lenses (kit + telezoom and/or portrait fixed focal) and possibly (!) one Speedlite. For many of them switching to another camera supplier is not really a hard decision.  Pro's typically do own much more and more expensive gear plus are quite dependent on their in-depth experience using it plus their established workflows as well as factors like good contacts with CPS (or NPS on the Nikon side) ... for many of them a whole lot tougher to change horses mid-race. 

[V8Beast]

I just voted, did that take away or add to this poll's suckiness?

No, it would have sucked either way