Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/01/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I don't think it is a matter of price alone; know-how may well play a role. The Sony A700 and Nikon D300 use the same sensor, but have only 50% price difference between them now (the difference was less a few months ago). Yet there is a significant difference in performance in favour of the Nikon. The Canon 5DII and Alpha 900 sell for about the same price. Here the Canon seems to do better. Much of the difference in price between A900 and D3X must be attributed to the better build quality of the D3X, which is positioned as a true pro camera. Further, Sony is not selling the sensor to Nikon at cost. I expect it actually costs Nikon a lot more to build the D3x than it costs Sony to build the A900. Lower noise interface chips (if that is indeed giving the Nikon an edge) and 14bit D/A converters should not push the price up by a factor of three. It might well be that Nikon has higher margins on the D3x . Let us see how the next generation full frame Alphas do. In the meantime, I sure would be tempted by an A700X: an A700 with the D3X sensor. ----- Original Message ----- From: <wildlightphoto@earthlink.net> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Thursday, 15 January, 2009 9:23 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] OT - Nikon D3X > "A. Lal" wrote: > >> >>Here's an interesting comparision: >> >>http://tinyurl.com/83krwe >> >>How does Nikon get so much more out of this sensor than Sony? >> > > Much can be done if you have a few more $thousand to work with. Perhaps > this is why the D3X costs so much more than the A900. > > Doug Herr > Birdman of Sacramento > http://www.wildlightphoto.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >