http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/589778/0
If the body is the same (too thick/tall) with same price as before, even incremental improvements won't make it much of a competitor to the Nikon D300, and if a FF version of the D300 comes out next year at a lower price than the current 5D w/the D3's 6400ISO & hi-gain 12 & 25k ISO modes, hi-res LCD & - that will be a 5D MkII killer/slayer. Biggest advantage the 5D has over Nikons is that it can use Canon lenses. If only there was an adapter that would seamlessly allow you to mount Canon lenses on Nikon bodies.
I don't think a FF D300 is going to be out for another 2 years at the least... Nikon still needs a higher rez FX body to compete. As for the D300 beating the 5D... it's touch and go on that idea. It would depend on what you want in the body and the image quality.
The D300 with an FX sensor would be more than a Canon 5D....don't you worry about that.
My guess would be $3000. Also, even if it used the same body as the D300, it doesn't guarantee that everything else would be the same. Otherwise, what you're offering is a D3 in a smaller body, for a LOT cheaper. It doesn't make sense. I'm sure that if a smaller, D300-esque camera came out with a FF body, it would shoot at 4 fps and not offer the pro-level AF system. It may offer the same AF system that's in the D80 and D200, but not the D300.
The 5D has great image quality, but it's limited in what it can do. It is a stripped down full-frame camera, in a way. However, how else did you expect Canon to sell you a full frame DSLR 2 years ago? Those things aren't cheap to make, and the fact that they could even offer one is quite amazing. When the 5D MkII is released, I think it'll be cheaper than any potential D300 FX model by a lot of money.
Agree. The 5D in my opinion has the best IQ in it's class, and it's the cheapest FF camera you can buy, but I don't consider it worth the cash. Canon put their best tech in the body, then stripped it down compared to the 1D MK IIn. Even the 1Ds MK II has missing features like an electronic shutter and good flash sync. And for many PJ and some wedding photogs anything less than 5fps is slow.
A FX D300 wouldn't limit the tech thought... they didn't do it with the D200 and D80 that much. The AF was a different model and a bit slower, but it was still very accurate and speedy for both models. The only places where the D200 AF failed in my opinion was in focus tracking, and the D80 failed in low light and focus tracking.
To add to my previous post...
Previously: 1 - 5 - X0
Now: 1 - X0 - X00
Would make sense to drop 5D altogether. And if Canon wanted to sell cheaper full-frame model, they could just introduce a 40Ds to avoid confusion; likewise they have 1D and 1Ds.
I don't think the 5D is going anywhere. As far as FF bodies go it's king, and well worth the cash if you are looking for FF and a body that isn't as large as the 1Ds.
I think Canon should kill off their smaller than Nikon's DX sensor size. 1.6x is tiny, and kills any argument that DX is dead, or that FF is king. Canon has done a wonderful job at cramming 10 million diodes on a sensor that's even tinier than Nikons. I would have liked to see Canon redesign the mirror box on the 40D to fit the 1D MK III sensor which is at 1.3x.
Then they could have put in it in their Rebel and probably taken a lot of flame from Nikon's consumer sales.
Hmm...I guess we disagree. The definition of "pro" is also a tough spot. I know a lot of serious pros who use the 5D as their main camera. It probably depends on the field. Studio work -- sure, by a 1Ds - but for other stuff, the 5D has all the "pro" features needed.
Agreed. Many pros use consumer gear because it's becoming good at what it does. The D80 is a wonderful body, and there are a few pros that have taken to it because it's small, it uses SD which can fit in the Express Card slot on MBPs, and because it offers better JPG images than the D2xs and D200, which take better RAW images. There is a National Geographic photog that shoots with 3 D80s because the D200 was too large, as were the CF cards that he had to carry.
The 5D will always be in my eyes the poor mans 1Ds really and I dont mean it to sound like its a piece of crap or not worthy enough but really a FF 12.8MP camera for what $2299 now.. heck even $3299 when it came out is a damn good deal and if you dont need the 45AF points and weather sealing then the 5D is a great camera. The ONLY thing the 5D does is capitalize on 1D series body sales I mean unless you KNOW what kind of AF performance and sealing you need then it really steals away from 1D body sales.. I think the 5D was always kind of that red headed step child of the line, sure people love him all around the neighborhood and what not but the rest of the family hates him
I agree with you, but I don't think many of the buyers of the 5D consider it a poor mans 1Ds. I don't know how Canon can get away with selling an $8000 body with the feature set it has, and the only thing that somewhat justifies the price is the FF sensor. I think that many pro photogs would go for the 5D just because it gives them what they want at a good price, a FF sensor for $3200 at intro, now it's about $2300 - $2500. I could get an entire system based around a single 5D and 40D for $8000.
