Nikon D90 at Thom Hogan's site - Page 2

Parallax · 08-06-2008, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by gnaztee

I disagree with this. While it may seem gimmicky to some, it is an advancement that really helps when shooting from low angles. Where do you draw the line on what advancements are acceptable and which are mass consumer gimmicks? If live view makes my job as a landscape shooter or macro shooter easier, isn't that what it's about? Shouldn't the "tools" we use be as effective as we can possibly make them to get the results we want? Just my 2 cents.

Todd

It (Live View)also helps greatly when using a MF lens in lighting conditions that are too low clearly focus. The ability to zoom live view to 4x with the rear e-dial makes it just that much easier.

deudeu · 08-06-2008, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by RaduA

I gave up crack because it was eating my lens money . Here the word is that the initial price will be 1000 Euro (I don't know if kit of body only). Right now D80 body only is 630 Euro (incl. VAT) and 860 Euro in kit with 18-135. So, 1000 doesn't seem so far fetched and I think Nikon mirrors prices in euro/USD.

Radu

To me there is one of two things that is wrong:
Either Thom Hogan is wrong about the features to be expected in the D90 or "the word" is wrong about the pricing.
The features that Thom mentions are pretty close to what the D300 has to offer. Actually, it has features that the D300 does not have, just probably a cheaper frame and shutter, and a smaller buffer.
This being said, just look at what the other manufacturer are doing: Pentax is just over $1000 with the K20D, Sony is at $1300 the the A700, Canon is at a little less than $1000 with their 40D, and Oly doen't really have anything in that range other than the E-3 which is more comparable to the D300 and costs $1500. All of these have lowered their prices by about 15% since they came out.
From the features mentioned by Thom, the D90 is going to be better than all of these, is newer, and has been awaited for a while. Nikon will be able to sell them easily at $1300, why would they sell them for less?
Or Thom is wrong... That would not be the first time!

RaduA · 08-06-2008, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by deudeu

To me there is one of two things that is wrong:
Either Thom Hogan is wrong about the features to be expected in the D90 or "the word" is wrong about the pricing.
The features that Thom mentions are pretty close to what the D300 has to offer. Actually, it has features that the D300 does not have, just probably a cheaper frame and shutter, and a smaller buffer.
This being said, just look at what the other manufacturer are doing: Pentax is just over $1000 with the K20D, Sony is at $1300 the the A700, Canon is at a little less than $1000 with their 40D, and Oly doen't really have anything in that range other than the E-3 which is more comparable to the D300 and costs $1500. All of these have lowered their prices by about 15% since they came out.
From the features mentioned by Thom, the D90 is going to be better than all of these, is newer, and has been awaited for a while. Nikon will be able to sell them easily at $1300, why would they sell them for less?
Or Thom is wrong... That would not be the first time!

I would say that Nikon wants to kill Canon on two most important markets (US and Japan) and if the pricing and features are correct except for the 6.5 fps the 40D cannot hold a candle to such a camera. So Canon both lose market share and margins as they cut more and more the price. Canon and it's "slow, incremental change" of the medium range from the 20D to 40D just got what they deserved.
And about the price of the D90 I guess after about 800k D300 sold they have pretty much covered up for R&D costs and making other cameras with most of the same "guts" inside only improve their costs per unit.

Radu