Price : Canon 5D Mark III + 24-70 II == Nikon D600 + 24-70 + 14-24

[TonyY]

Price is based from Amazon:
Canon 5D Mark III + 24-70 II --> $3500+$2300 = $5800
Nikon D600 + 24-70 + 14-24 --> $2100 + $1900 + $2000 = $6000

Maybe it's time to switch to Nikon or Sony, unless canon can react fast. They are lossing the price war to Nikon and Sony(A99), plus their sensor is not as good as Sony's which are used by some of the Nikon models...

I guess Canon is focusing more on the video camera than still camera...

BTW, I just cancel my pre-order for EOS-M and ordered Sony Nex 6, the CMOS sensor (image quality) used in EOS M is not as good as Sony's previous generation Nex 5N.

 

[nightbreath]

The difference between brands is huge, but it's mainly in our heads. If Canon develops its most sharp and versitile zoom, how much do you think it should cost? $1.5k? ??? Yes, you need to pay extra, but you know what you're paying for.

If you don't like the prices and want something that others offer, I don't see any reason not to switch. Many people did that in the past (not matter what brand is) and many came back. Just compare brands in the areas you interested in and make a choice

 

[Imagination_landB]

Again comparing oranges to apples, the canon zoom's brand new, with a better camera that is also almost brand new, compared to 2 lenses that went out some of years ago and a brand new camera that is ''worse''

 

[pmac]

hahah fan boys are so funny..
How is the 5dmk3 the better camera than the d800.
theres so little difference between them, and the only people that have to compare them so hard are the fan boys .
Maybe due to not being able to afford either or because of there insecurities.

only a few years ago you all thought that 3fps was fine, a 3 year old prehistoric AF was fine and the canon 5dmk2 was better as it had more MP.

Now you think that lots of MP is rubbish & 4 fps is rubbish.

Nikon users are exactly the same though. so don't get al defensive, i just find it highly funny..there all crying at the d600 price just now.

Yes I'm a nikon user but would swap to canon if money wasn't an issue,all these new gen cameras work great and only trump each other slightly in different areas there not one thats stand out better than the other.

 

[JohanCruyff]

How is the 5dmk3 the better camera than the d800.

The price comparison was between 5D3 and Nikon D600.

Have a nice day.

 

[verysimplejason]

If you're not happy with the Canon offerings, then don't upgrade. Abstain and wait for the next offering. The market will prove if the new offering will be successful or not. If you need it for the job and you need the upgrade or a new body, just upgrade. Later you can upgrade again. If you're not willing to do both, then choose a new system but realize you'll be sacrificing some of your investments (if you have invested in lens.)

 

[Marsu42]

Price is based from Amazon:
Canon 5D Mark III + 24-70 II --> $3500+$2300 = $5800
Nikon D600 + 24-70 + 14-24 --> $2100 + $1900 + $2000 = $6000

Please don't calculate these things, it's depressing. Though the Amazon prices aren't the lowest for Canon, at least the 5d3 can be gotten much cheaper and will further drop in price once the 6d is out.

 

[wickidwombat]

I love it when people sign up to tell everyone they are changing to Nikon :
its so original

 

[iTasneem]

I hope 6D Canon will be priced <$1900, but it won't happen.

 

[Matthew19]

If Canon develops its most sharp and versitile zoom, how much do you think it should cost? $1.5k? ??? Yes, you need to pay extra, but you know what you're paying for.

Lets see Apple produced its fastest iPhone ever with the iphone5, does it cost more? nope. Whats the difference? Apple's production is in China, the Chinese currency, the RMB is pegged to the dollar right now. Prices don't move much, for the time being anyway. Canon's production is in Japan, the Yen has gained on the dollar because we are printing tons of money. The Yen price of the new lens is not much higher than the 24-70mm VI, same went for the price of the 5dmkiii everyone was pitching a fit about. American's don't understand currencies or their own monetary system. I guess when the Chinese unpeg their currency we will then be complaining bout how much EVERYTHING is going up in price. Its not that the price is up, the dollar is down.

 

[Musouka]

If Canon develops its most sharp and versitile zoom, how much do you think it should cost? $1.5k? ??? Yes, you need to pay extra, but you know what you're paying for.

Lets see Apple produced its fastest iPhone ever with the iphone5, does it cost more? nope. Whats the difference? Apple's production is in China, the Chinese currency, the RMB is pegged to the dollar right now. Prices don't move much, for the time being anyway. Canon's production is in Japan, the Yen has gained on the dollar because we are printing tons of money. The Yen price of the new lens is not much higher than the 24-70mm VI, same went for the price of the 5dmkiii everyone was pitching a fit about. American's don't understand currencies or their own monetary system. I guess when the Chinese unpeg their currency we will then be complaining bout how much EVERYTHING is going up in price. Its not that the price is up, the dollar is down.

But why should the consumer care? Canon needs to act proactively. Japanese car makers, in the face of fierce competition, have learned to adapt. The majority of Japanese cars sold in the US are actually made in North America. They also have other plants around the world. They are basically trying to limit the production from Japanese plants to the domestic market as much as possible.

Why couldn't Canon move some of its major plants offshore? Granted, they have several offshore plants but are these enough? Would consumers really value the "Made in Japan" more than, say, a 20% reduction in MSRP? Maybe they should start experimenting with new models. If Canon can make the 6D outside, you have bet they can price it sub-$2K.

In the end, it all depends on the company's strategy and perceived importance of itself in the market. Let us not forget that the strong Yen is actively driving many Japanese companies into the red. Sony, Panasonic and Sharp are all bleeding because of it. Sharp is mortgaging itself to stay alive; even with the iPhone 5 LCD deal.

 

[Matthew19]

weak currencies only seam to help exports in the short run. that is until those exporters have to pay higher raw material costs becuase of their weak currency. Most are hedged out a few months, so the game can last for a little while. Its just an illusion though. They would export just as much if they simply cut the price by the same amount that the currency falls. But then they wouldn't be able to pretend to have record profits in their home currency.

America was built on a strong currency. The first 150 years of this country had falling prices across the board. (except during war-time money printing) That encourages savings, which in turn increases capital, which creates more output, which drives prices lower. Now, we just borrow more from China and print the difference.

 

[pdirestajr]

I'm not a "fanboy", I just like the ergonomics and overall controls on my Canon cameras. Never liked the "feel" of Nikon (besides my F3). I also like my Canon glass.

People need to chill on the spec sheets, test charts and a few dollar price difference here and there.

 

[verysimplejason]

I'm not a "fanboy", I just like the ergonomics and overall controls on my Canon cameras. Never liked the "feel" of Nikon (besides my F3). I also like my Canon glass.

People need to chill on the spec sheets, test charts and a few dollar price difference here and there.

+1 but reality is that we also need to watch out for market trends. as hobbyists or professionals, it will be advantageous for us if the system we're using is not losing money. thus the market share must be maintained.

 

[RLPhoto]

The 5D3's AF takes a wet dump on the d600. They shouldn't even be compared here, now the d800 on ther other hand... That's the real competition to the 5D3.

 

[verysimplejason]

The 5D3's AF takes a wet dump on the d600. They shouldn't even be compared here, now the d800 on ther other hand... That's the real competition to the 5D3.

D600 isn't competing with 5D3. There are more than $1K reasons why...

 

[RLPhoto]

The 5D3's AF takes a wet dump on the d600. They shouldn't even be compared here, now the d800 on ther other hand... That's the real competition to the 5D3.

D600 isn't competing with 5D3. There are more than $1K reasons why...

Because its 1k$ more camera.

 

[Zlatko]

Price is based from Amazon:
Canon 5D Mark III + 24-70 II --> $3500+$2300 = $5800
Nikon D600 + 24-70 + 14-24 --> $2100 + $1900 + $2000 = $6000

Maybe it's time to switch to Nikon or Sony, unless canon can react fast. They are lossing the price war to Nikon and Sony(A99), plus their sensor is not as good as Sony's which are used by some of the Nikon models...

I guess Canon is focusing more on the video camera than still camera...

BTW, I just cancel my pre-order for EOS-M and ordered Sony Nex 6, the CMOS sensor (image quality) used in EOS M is not as good as Sony's previous generation Nex 5N.

"Price war"? There is no price war. Canon are making great products and selling them at reasonable prices, as are Nikon and Sony. None of them are set on being the ultimate price-cutters in some imaginary price war. People buy what meets their needs and preferences, and price is not the only factor. If price were the only factor, we would all buy the cheapest camera and nothing more.

The 5D3 and D600 are not exact matches for each other anyway (it never works that way). The 5D3 is built to professional specifications and offers great autofocus, an extended ISO range and variable raw file sizes — advantages for pros who shoot thousands of raw files in day. The D600 is prosumer — the Nikon press release emphasized over and over that it's for "enthusiasts".

Despite what some people say, camera prices are related to the resources that go into them. The camera business is more like the automobile business than the software business. If a camera is priced at $3.5K or $8K or $30K or whatever, it is not "just because they can" but because a heck of a lot of resources go into delivering a camera of that specification. When a camera is priced significantly lower, you can bet that fewer resources went into. (Of course, the lower-priced camera is often a better match for more people's needs and budgets.)

Want a Canon camera that's cheaper than the 5D3? Canon offers about seven DSLRs that are cheaper than the 5D3. Or wait for the next Canon full-frame. New cameras and lenses are released every year. I don't see how people make decisions about one brand or another based on what is available this month. If so, they must be changing brands every few months.

 

[Matthew19]

If a camera is priced at $3.5K or $8K or $30K or whatever, it is not "just because they can" but because a heck of a lot of resources go into delivering a camera of that specification.

Then by that measure if Canon re-tooled their factor to have gold plated machines they could charge 40k for a 5D iii because more resources went into making it.

You have it backwards, the amount of resources put into a camera is in direct relationship with the amount of money a manufacturer thinks they can charge. Thats what entrepreneurs do, anticipate market demand, and then meet that demand in the most efficient manner.

 

[Zlatko]

Then by that measure if Canon re-tooled their factor to have gold plated machines they could charge 40k for a 5D iii because more resources went into making it.

No, that's not what I'm saying. That is taking things to the absurd. It's neither realistic nor rational.

You have it backwards, the amount of resources put into a camera is in direct relationship with the amount of money a manufacturer thinks they can charge. Thats what entrepreneurs do, anticipate market demand, and then meet that demand in the most efficient manner.

And that is what I'm saying ... though perhaps not clearly enough. They decide at the start, before the product is built, how much they think they can charge. Then they build a product that will deliver a profit at that price. If they set the price lower, then they will necessarily deliver a lesser product. If they set the price higher, then they can build a better product to a higher specification. That's why I said, when a camera is priced significantly lower, you can bet that fewer resources went into it. And that's why when buying cameras [or lenses], we don't simply choose the cheapest one. And that's why, when comparing manufacturers' systems, we don't simply look for who is "winning the price war". When one camera costs more, there is often a good reason for it — you can see it in the level of quality and durability and the specific ways it meets users' needs — every bit of which took additional resources to build.