Shutterbugsailer wrote:
With camera models changing every year or two, in much the same way that cars used to, I notice that the newer models tend to be ridiculously expensive at introduction, while last years' leftovers are often a bargain. IMHO, the most overpriced new introduction is the Sony RX100VI. Any other opinions?
Not sure what the point of this post is, seems to not to be based on the title. Single over priced camera would seem to me to be the some one for the last several years. The Nikon Df. Nice, cute, but very pricey for what you get.
I wouldn't buy it all it is is a point and shoot --my Canon Elph does the same thing and is so much cheaper
Shot with Nikon at first, changed to Canon for quite some time and now the proud user of the sony platform. Best move I made.
The D850 with all the extras (battery, grip, charger, etc) is over priced!
drklrd wrote:
Always thought Hasselblad was over priced. Which is why I used a Bronica SQA for many years. Back then I thought Sony and all the new names were just flashes in the pan and would soon be gone. I owned Canon and now Own Nikon. the price for back conversion and Hasselblad digital back come to almost 20 g's. I figure if I wanted to spend that much I would just buy a 'Blad. Still think Sony is more into the pro digital video cameras than digital still cameras. Nikons give a larger lens selection.
Because of Hasselblad's pricing (read "price gouging"), I use the Mamiya RZ67's. Has about 15 - 20 different lenses (or more); I have 10 of them.
Only $20K, with a decent back (not the one that you're talking about) much closer to $40,000, if not more.)
lamiaceae wrote:
Not sure what the point of this post is, seems to not to be based on the title. Single over priced camera would seem to me to be the some one for the last several years. The Nikon Df. Nice, cute, but very pricey for what you get.
And I think the price of the Df is exactly right.
Ditto for Sony RX100VI and that model line. Nikon D850 and Df are not overpriced, especially if you already own a lot of Nikkor lenses. You can use Nikkor lenses, including non-AI lenses, going back to 1959.
sb wrote:
Keep in mind that you are also paying for a very capable and very small computer, which is the same or more than in many cameras with larger sensors.
IMHO, this Sony is a great pocket camera, but a lousy $1200.00 camera
How about the Phase 1 for about $50,000?
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
BebuLamar wrote:
And I think the price of the Df is exactly right.
And your comment is exactly what I mean. For everyone it seems, if you really like the camera and what it does, the price is always going to be exactly right. Doesn't matter the make or model. Their is that "exactly priced camera for them". Congratulations, I believe the Df is one of a kind (of course it has the guts of a D4 so it has to be good).
adm wrote:
Ditto for Sony RX100VI and that model line. Nikon D850 and Df are not overpriced, especially if you already own a lot of Nikkor lenses. You can use Nikkor lenses, including non-AI lenses, going back to 1959.
Comparing the Sony RX100VI to the Nikon D850 seems silly to me. The RX100VI is a compact camera that over achieves. The D850 is
all full sized DSLR for serious photography. The only thing I can tell you is the RX100 series is amazing. If is a great video camera.
Reviews D850 are great sounds like a wonderful camera. The RX100 has a new built in with lens 24-200 and is ready to go for 1198.
The D850 is $3300 without a lens. Yes many of us have Nikon lens I have some. The uniqueness of the VI is its lens is a breakthrough.
And it's size. I carry an RX100 everywhere I go in my messenger bag briefcase. These camera's mentioned in this forum are
great inventions. Amazing machines. How can we judge overpriced? The Mercedes is overpriced. The highest profit margin of
cars. I own a 2006 Porsche Boxster with 36K miles and it rans like a new car. It was 49k 12 years ago. It that to expensive?
WJW wrote:
Shot with Nikon at first, changed to Canon for quite some time and now the proud user of the sony platform. Best move I made.
But how many actual pixels are used to get the image? If as I heard the sensor is a 1 inch square in a Sony.
how large a print can you make from that Sony v/s the new Nikon D850 that is 45 mpx which has the full frame sensor that is bigger than a 1 inch square?
drklrd wrote:
But how many actual pixels are used to get the image? If as I heard the sensor is a 1 inch square in a Sony.
how large a print can you make from that Sony v/s the new Nikon D850 that is 45 mpx which has the full frame sensor that is bigger than a 1 inch square?
The Sony a7rIII is a full frame camera with 42 max and a unique sensor. It is the most innovative Sony to date in the Nikon 850 range.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.