Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price

[Kliphten]

So it's out. Seems like a great camera, but I'm incredibly disappointed in the price. After about 4 years after the II, the III comes out at a much higher price tag. Now, if you look at Apple, they release products every year that are better spec'ed yet they don't increase the price with each release just because it was better than the last iteration.

It's expected that technology improves, right? I understand the dollar has weakened over the last few years but this just seems like a ridiculous price increase. Looks like I won't be getting one, not because I can't but because I feel it isn't worth it.

How's everyone else feel about it?

 

[lseamer]

That sucking sound you hear is market-share going to Nikon and Sony. I can not believe the MkIII has only
22 Mega pixels, 2 different memory card formats (ugh), very little (if any) new technology and a hefty price increase. The EF 24 -70 II has no IS. Both at a significantly increased price. The only upside is that my MkII and 24 - 70 are still the best values in the market. I CAN believe that the Canon CEO recently resigned.

 

[randplaty]

That sucking sound you hear is market-share going to Nikon and Sony. I can not believe the MkIII has only
22 Mega pixels, 2 different memory card formats (ugh), very little (if any) new technology and a hefty price increase. The EF 24 -70 II has no IS. Both at a significantly increased price. The only upside is that my MkII and 24 - 70 are still the best values in the market. I CAN believe that the Canon CEO recently resigned.

Who cares about megapixels. Seriously. 22 megapixels can make HUGE prints. I'm glad the price has increased so that people who care about megapixels (non pros) won't buy this camera.

 

[Kliphten]

That sucking sound you hear is market-share going to Nikon and Sony. I can not believe the MkIII has only
22 Mega pixels, 2 different memory card formats (ugh), very little (if any) new technology and a hefty price increase. The EF 24 -70 II has no IS. Both at a significantly increased price. The only upside is that my MkII and 24 - 70 are still the best values in the market. I CAN believe that the Canon CEO recently resigned.

Who cares about megapixels. Seriously. 22 megapixels can make HUGE prints. I'm glad the price has increased so that people who care about megapixels (non pros) won't buy this camera.

That's not really the best reason to increase the price. I think this is a great camera but after 4 years of R&D, to come out with this price seems unreasonable, to me.

 

[StevenBrianSamuels]

Who cares about megapixels. Seriously. 22 megapixels can make HUGE prints. I'm glad the price has increased so that people who care about megapixels (non pros) won't buy this camera.

You Sir, have no idea what you are spewing.

MPs a extremely important to the studio and landscape crowd. Landscape folks what better detail in big prints. Studio folks want to satisfy clients needs for higher MPs so clients can crop as much as they want and still have enough MPs for a variety of uses.

In your mind MF folks using huge MP digital backs arent pros?

 

[Kingw]

Well what do you expect the price will be, below 3k? It won't happen because it is Canon.

If you're unhappy about the price, just wait until next year and maybe the price will drop.

 

[jaduffy007]

It's a 5d2n for $3,500. No thank you.

 

[Bob_McBob]

I'm wondering who would pay $300 extra for the privilege of buying their 5D3 from a Canadian vendor when the dollar is above par.

 

[Bonnau_Photo]

I am hugely disappointed too. But not for the same reasons you are..
2 stops better ISO, Almost the same AF as the big dog. 22MP full frame. Better weather sealing. Now I can see not much of a reason to justify the purchase of the 1D X.. Faster frame rate, better body and slightly better AF.. Hard to justify the double price tag..
I seriously wish the 1Dx was $5K.

EDIT: for clarity.. I wish the 1D X was $5K

 

[BlueMixWhite]

Overall, seem like a FF sensor living in 7D. Currently in my country, the price for Mk2 is MYR6,700 and converting latest mk3 USD3,500 to MYR....it would be MYR10,500. That like paying extra MYR3,800 for it.

 

[SwanSong]

At 3500 I would rather just pick up a used 5d2 with a 70-200 2.8l mkii and call it a spring! I'm pretty sure the 3500 sticker price will scare many non-pros away.

 

[kdsand]

Is this inflation? Canon has always charged top dollar but.....

 

[capertillar]

yeah, it's a shame...

question is *why* they set that price point...

my random guess is they already know that there will be severe shortage of the product, given that they need to produce sufficient supply of both the 1DX and 5Dmk3... so during this low supply, high demand period, they figured they may as well boost the price, pocket the extra dollars, and when they're able to produce the 5Dmk3 in larger supply, they can cut the price and market to the "rest" of us

could be awhile before the price cuts happen though... but i cant justify dropping 3500 on this... specs are awesome, but no matter how i see it, it's just a boosted 5dmk2, which as many others have outlined, is expected for the next iteration of the 5dmk3...

imagine what wouldve happened if they released the 5dmk3 with 4 fps, 45 pt AF, same MP (which happened), similar video capabilities, etc etc... wouldve been a major flop (i.e. beaten in most every category by the D800), so all they did was keep the darn thing competitive, while overcharging by a solid 500 USD

 

[buster84]

The price should have been 3k to at least compete with Nikon. I'm betting that the CEO of Nikon is laughing at canon for sending them lots of new customers.

 

[takoman46]

I didn't want the 5DmkIII to be priced at $3500 but I pre ordered one anyway because I feel it is still worth it based on the specs and the sample images from the canon japan website. But then again I do not fall into the "non-pro" category as the many of you have described. I think it is a great value compared to the 1Dx, especially for shooting portraits and weddings. Much more of what I want compared to the Nikon D800. It just depends on what your purposes are and what you expect out of your tools.

 

[nicku]

Many of us have complained about poor AF , slow fps, and others in the 5Dmk2.... NOW canon have solved almost all those problems, AF FPS etc. is not normal to keep the price at $2700 ( don't mention the inflation and other raw materials price increase).

In my opinion $3500 is a fair price for what this camera offers.

 

[wockawocka]

Who cares about megapixels. Seriously. 22 megapixels can make HUGE prints. I'm glad the price has increased so that people who care about megapixels (non pros) won't buy this camera.

You Sir, have no idea what you are spewing.

MPs a extremely important to the studio and landscape crowd. Landscape folks what better detail in big prints. Studio folks want to satisfy clients needs for higher MPs so clients can crop as much as they want and still have enough MPs for a variety of uses.

In your mind MF folks using huge MP digital backs arent pros?

MF Folks, myself being one use a sensor 3 times the size of a 35mm DSLR. For certain portrait work I use a Leaf Aptus 22mp back from 2004, the pixel pitch is 9 microns and at ISO 50 it noticeably beats the 5D2, 1Ds3 and 1D4 for IQ.

I would never really consider a 40mp 35mm sensor. Not until a second generation version at least. Image quality is king and even with my 1Ds3 I've taken landscapes that print a meter wide.

High MP = Small pixels = not good for IQ

 

[Kliphten]

I am hugely disappointed too. But not for the same reasons you are..
2 stops better ISO, Almost the same AF as the big dog. 22MP full frame. Better weather sealing. Now I can see not much of a reason to justify the purchase of the 1D X.. Faster frame rate, better body and slightly better AF.. Hard to justify the double price tag..
I seriously wish the 1Dx was $5K.

EDIT: for clarity.. I wish the 1D X was $5K

Well, that is definitely one way to think of it. After seeing the price of the Mark III and the similar specs to the 1DX, I feel that Canon overpriced the 1DX because they know only the pros are going to buy it (not for the masses) and then set the price of the 5DIII where it is at so that everyone would think that it is such a great deal (because you're almost getting a 1DX). I now feel both are over priced.

 

[h4ldol]

Of course I would have been thrilled if the 5DIII was being released for $3000, or even $3200, but since I'll be upgrading from a 40D (that has served me well for the past four years) I feel that it'll be worth the full $3500. If I had a MKII I might feel differently, but this sounds exactly like the FF DSLR I've been waiting for (which is why I just preordered it!).

 

[Kliphten]

I am hugely disappointed too. But not for the same reasons you are..
2 stops better ISO, Almost the same AF as the big dog. 22MP full frame. Better weather sealing. Now I can see not much of a reason to justify the purchase of the 1D X.. Faster frame rate, better body and slightly better AF.. Hard to justify the double price tag..
I seriously wish the 1Dx was $5K.

EDIT: for clarity.. I wish the 1D X was $5K

Ah, okay, just saw your edit. Thought you trying to say what a great deal the 5D III was.