Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]If you compare the EOS 1D with its FF equivalent, the EOS 1Ds you will find it much more expensive. Here in England the FF Nikon D3x is a bit more expensive than a M9 and the EOS1Ds mk3 is a good bit more expensive than that. The EOS 5d is a lower priced item with a lot lower spec than the EOS 1 series, and seriously simpler AF. FWIW. Frank On 31 Mar, 2010, at 03:56, Vince Passaro wrote: > The only camera I know of that's less than full frame but costs more than > its brother full frame is the Canon 1d Mark ...IV? what ever the mark. It's > a 1.3 crop camera and costs I think $5K or thereabouts. A lot more than > aforementioned FF Canon 5d Mark II. > > And yes, for my money, the D700 (from my research I should say, rather than > from my experience) is the best camera $2400 can buy. > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Frank Filippone <red735i at > earthlink.net>wrote: > >> I was only pointing out the problem with assuming that a FF sensor would >> be >> more $$$ than a smaller sensor.... >> No comment on the CV side of the completed camera.....nor final price on a >> camera from anyone..... >> >> My son lives his D700...... and If I had not gotten a M8, I would have >> probably bought one as well...... $2500 for a FF D-SLR with great >> reviews..... A sure winner.... >> >> Frank Filippone >> red735i at earthlink.net >> >> >> >> My take on costs was entirely based on what I think CV perceives its >> marketing model to be: an area of some interest to me. >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information