Canon 30D To 40D

[meyerweb]

A final word on cost comparisons.  I find fascinating all the discussion about the 40d being so much cheaper than the d300.  I think the comparison  is bogus, even when the talk is of adding in the cost of accessories which supporsedly make the bodies more equivalent.  The comparisons ought to be with cost of the lenses (plural) added in that one plans to use with the body.  If the person is satisfied with a kit lens, well, yes, there is still a difference that might make a difference to some.  But start adding in a suite of lenses that anyone who is serious about photography is going to buy eventually, the percentage difference diminishes very quickly.
Cheers, Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=154852\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hmm, maybe.  But almost all the focal lengths I use regularly are significantly more expensive from Nikon than Canon. Which would increase the cost savings of the Canon over Nikon, not diminish it. (If I consider that I already own a significant number of Canon lenses, the cost difference becomes astronomical.)

Don't get me wrong, I think the D300 looks very impressive, but I don't see very many scenarios where it's even close to the price of the 40D

[steeliejim]

Hmm, maybe.  But almost all the focal lengths I use regularly are significantly more expensive from Nikon than Canon. Which would increase the cost savings of the Canon over Nikon, not diminish it. (If I consider that I already own a significant number of Canon lenses, the cost difference becomes astronomical.)

Don't get me wrong, I think the D300 looks very impressive, but I don't see very many scenarios where it's even close to the price of the 40D
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155110\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I guess I've been out of the loop re. the cost of Nikon lenses, but just checked on the 70-200mm 2.8 professional glass for  both co's and the Canon would be more expensive by over $150. than the Nikon eqiv. except for a $175. instant rebate.  So, I guess my contention is "maybe" depending on which set of lenses a person is wishing to buy to complete a system.  

I'm really anxious to see what Canon does to the 5d follow-on, esp. now that it looks like Nikon is really putting the pressure on.  

Jim

[steeliejim]

Hmm, maybe.  But almost all the focal lengths I use regularly are significantly more expensive from Nikon than Canon. Which would increase the cost savings of the Canon over Nikon, not diminish it. (If I consider that I already own a significant number of Canon lenses, the cost difference becomes astronomical.)

Don't get me wrong, I think the D300 looks very impressive, but I don't see very many scenarios where it's even close to the price of the 40D
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155110\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

p.s.  I'm starting to see your point.  I love my old FD 500mm 4.5L lens, and have thought someday I'd like to get the EF f/4.0 500mm  L IS.  Pretty pricey I thought at $5500. (at B&H), but it's a bargain compared to the Nikon version at over $1200. more. And Nikon, apparently is coming out with a brand new f/4.0 500mm  which will be even more than that, over $7,800. according to B&H.  Whew!

[Ray]

I'm really anxious to see what Canon does to the 5d follow-on, esp. now that it looks like Nikon is really putting the pressure on. 

Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155144\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Me too. I wonder how much industrial espionage goes on. I get the impression that large companies with research labs have a road map. They may not be able to respond quickly to a competitor's new announcement unless they had some forewarning.

Perhaps Canon is now furiously rescheduling its priorities so they can announce a killer 5D MkII in the near future. I hope so   .

[matt4626]

Sensor cleaning & 6+ fps were enough for me.