Canon 5D mark III

Ok, but why is it 500$ more expensive? Is it just the difference in ISO performance? and is it certain that the MarkIII has a better ISO perfomance than the D800?
 
Ok, but why is it 500$ more expensive? Is it just the difference in ISO performance?

Well, only the Canon and Nikon pricing people really know the answer to this I think. My take is that you charge what you think you can get... Only a small portion of the money you spend on a camera pays for the equipment itself, the rest goes to a long line of people doing everything from materials engineering to youtube marketing. Canon thinks they can charge $500 more, so they will... if it's not selling like they want it to, they'll lower the price.

and is it certain that the MarkIII has a better ISO perfomance than the D800?

Well, we haven't seen either one, so no, not certain. However, Canon claims the 5D III has the best ISO performance of any camera they produce, and that seems to be a big selling point for them. It shoots native ISO to 25,600 and expands to 100something thousand. Nikon doesn't talk much about ISO in their release, and they say it's 1 stop better than the D700. All the marketing around that camera has been about the resolution and AF. It only shoots native to 6400, and expands to 25,600.

So, all signs point to better performance from the Canon... but no one will know until actual copies of each get thoroughly tested.
 
Just spent about over an hour at B&H site reading review and public comments. Don't go there if you'd like to read positive comments about Canon and this camera. There is about 1 positive comment for 10 negative ones. And all because of the price disappointment!..
That has happened for every release of a Canon DSLR camera in the last 5 years (probably Nikon as well). The internet minions won't be happy until Canon gives them a 1Dx at the price of a Powershot.

Wait a few weeks/months and get reviews from pro photographers who are actually using it.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top