How would you vote on a "DSLR camera of the Decade?"

Bruce wrote in
:

RichA wrote:
I'd have to give it to the D700. I know the new D800 is better from a
few aspects, but considering when it was released, the fact it
performs outstandingly, has low noise, was affordable, a great body,
focusing, terrific customer satisfaction levels, etc., I'd say IMO,
the D700 is number one with the Canon 5D coming in second.


The Canon EOS 5D also 'performs outstandingly, has low noise, was
affordable, a great body, focusing, terrific customer satisfaction
levels, etc.' The significant difference between the Canon EOS 5D and
the D700 was that the 5D was a true game changer - the first
affordable full frame (24x36mm) DSLR.

Of course the D700 is the better camera, but it wasn't a game changer.
Nikon took many months to work out just what the EOS 5D could do, and
how. Those lessons helped make the Nikon D3 a better camera than the
5D (albeit at a much higher price) and the further time Nikon took to
develop the D700 helped design out some cost.

But you have to ask why it took Nikon a whole 34 months after the
release of the 5D to release a DSLR that competed with it. So while I
am a big fan of the D700 (and of the D800/D800E I now own) my DSLR of
the decade would definitely be the Canon EOS 5D.

I think Nikon, after years of being bested by Canon was finding its
footing. Maybe they just didn't want any screw ups? Meanwhile, look at
today, nearly every camera released recently has had problems.

In article , Bruce
wrote:

You could argue that Nikon was also in denial after Canon introduced
the EOS 1Ds and EOS 5D and Nikon denied (for some time) that there was
any need for DSLRs with full frame sensors. ;-)

nikon never said there wasn't a need for full frame sensors.

nospam wrote:
In article , Bruce
wrote:

You could argue that Nikon was also in denial after Canon introduced
the EOS 1Ds and EOS 5D and Nikon denied (for some time) that there was
any need for DSLRs with full frame sensors. ;-)

nikon never said there wasn't a need for full frame sensors.

Are you sure? I seem to remember they did. They sure acted
that way, not having even one in their program.


-Wolfgang

In article , Wolfgang
Weisselberg wrote:

You could argue that Nikon was also in denial after Canon introduced
the EOS 1Ds and EOS 5D and Nikon denied (for some time) that there was
any need for DSLRs with full frame sensors. ;-)

nikon never said there wasn't a need for full frame sensors.

Are you sure? I seem to remember they did. They sure acted
that way, not having even one in their program.

positive.

what they said was they would release full frame when they thought it
was financially viable to do so, which is what they did.

nospam wrote:
In article , Wolfgang
Weisselberg wrote:

You could argue that Nikon was also in denial after Canon introduced
the EOS 1Ds and EOS 5D and Nikon denied (for some time) that there was
any need for DSLRs with full frame sensors. ;-)

nikon never said there wasn't a need for full frame sensors.

Are you sure? I seem to remember they did. They sure acted
that way, not having even one in their program.

positive.

what they said was they would release full frame when they thought it
was financially viable to do so, which is what they did.

So where did they say that? URL please ...

-Wolfgang

"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message
...
[]
what they said was they would release full frame when they thought it
was financially viable to do so, which is what they did.

So where did they say that? URL please ...

-Wolfgang

Yes, there was such a statement made, and I recall reading it. You would
need to search DPReview. It was either a statement from or an interview
with a Nikon executive, perhaps at a show, but it was some time ago. I
tried searching with Google but couldn't find it.

David

In article , Wolfgang
Weisselberg wrote:

You could argue that Nikon was also in denial after Canon introduced
the EOS 1Ds and EOS 5D and Nikon denied (for some time) that there was
any need for DSLRs with full frame sensors. ;-)

nikon never said there wasn't a need for full frame sensors.

Are you sure? I seem to remember they did. They sure acted
that way, not having even one in their program.

positive.

what they said was they would release full frame when they thought it
was financially viable to do so, which is what they did.

So where did they say that? URL please ...

i heard it at trade shows from nikon themselves, on multiple occasions.

it was also reported elsewhere.

nikon took their time with full frame and came out with the d3 which
blew away everything canon had at the time.

prior to that, canon's full frame was $8000 and later the 5d which
didn't sell very well at first, needing multiple rebates to move it.

nospam wrote:
In article , Wolfgang
Weisselberg wrote:

You could argue that Nikon was also in denial after Canon introduced
the EOS 1Ds and EOS 5D and Nikon denied (for some time) that there was
any need for DSLRs with full frame sensors. ;-)

nikon never said there wasn't a need for full frame sensors.

Are you sure? I seem to remember they did. They sure acted
that way, not having even one in their program.

positive.

what they said was they would release full frame when they thought it
was financially viable to do so, which is what they did.

So where did they say that? URL please ...

i heard it at trade shows from nikon themselves, on multiple occasions.

it was also reported elsewhere.

Then you can find an URL, right?

nikon took their time with full frame and came out with the d3 which
blew away everything canon had at the time.

Sure, that is what happened.

prior to that, canon's full frame was $8000 and later the 5d which
didn't sell very well at first, needing multiple rebates to move it.

I see. the 5D didn't sell very well. I see.

-Wolfgang