Nikon d3s announcement - 720p only, absurdly good low light, high price

[Steve Castle]

I guess you got me a little confused here (which isn't difficult to do!). If you say the Canon 5D II isn't a professional camera, but you'd be a fool to trade it for a 1DIII (which you say is a professional camera) for shooting landscapes, then I'm not following your logic. Are not professional landscape photographers professional enough? :Þ

If you are a professional "landscape" photographer, and the 5D II is better suited than the 1DIII, why call it a non-professional camera? I guess it's semantics because I do make a substantial part of my living shooting landscapes and I chose the 5D II because, in my opinion, it is the single best landscape camera on the market today, better than Canon's flagship series. Does that make me or the camera non-pro or that I'm using a tool not really suited for true professionals? I'm a wee bit lost.

The 5D II is weatherized, very well built, I've never had any problems with focus (auto or manual), it's full-frame, shoots RAW and is 21 heckapixels so I can make larger-than-life sized razor prints. It's awesome on skin tones for portraits and it's incredible for landscapes. I wouldn't prefer to use it for the Indy 500 or covering a basketball game, but it'd still do a good job there too with fast lenses and a skilled shooter. It has the latest DIGIC 4 sensor, self-cleaning, and it's also light enough to take on extended backpacking trips. I think it's simply the best digital still SLR camera on the market for landscapes that a 'professional' can buy, bar none. I don't care about the price-point or how it lines up with Canon's other offerings, it is what it is. Plus it happens to have 1920x1080 high-def video thrown in for good measure.

As for Canon or Nikon professional 'services', that's not an issue at all for me. I carry two bodies on important shoots, as I'd think most pros would, so if one malfunctions I don't need to rely on a 'professional services' service thing to give me another while it's being fixed. To me that's where the extra $$ is going for the higher priced lines and I don't want it. I have a full selection of Canon L series glass suited for each type of shoot and I carry what I need (bodies, lenses, filters, accessories, batteries, etc.). But that's just me. And (knock on wood) so far I've done pretty well and luckily each year gets better despite the tough economic times of late. The 5D II is a fantastic 'professional' tool.

If we want to get into semantics. By Canon's own definition a 5DII isn't a "professional" camera. You aren't even eligible for professional services if you don't own a 1D/1Ds. The EOS-1 line has always been their professional line of cameras. As for the Eos-3, the Eos-5/A2, even going back to the film-days, the Eos-5x series has always been an high-amateur camera.

"A full-time photographer is defined as someone who generates the majority of their income from photography and who operates through a registered business" (this is Canon's verbatim definition)

But it doesn't mean you can't use the 5DII to make a 'professional' living, its a popular camera amongst wedding and mall photographers. You can use a Rebel to take your landscape photography if you like; you can stitch shots together to get higher resolution, bracket-shots to get high dynamic range, you can take incredibly beautiful pictures with an entry-level tool (go look at Flickr). The reality is, you can consider yourself 'professional' from anything from a H3D, P65+, all the way down to a cheap point-and-shoot.

It's not the camera that defines the photographer.

..but the same thing can be said of the camera; the photographer doesn't define the camera- just because you can use the camera 'professionally' under a narrow set of circumstances, it doesn't make its a 'pro' camera.

 

[mattsand]

yeah, nothing stops a pro from using amateur gear or vice versa. a professional camera is not necessarily one that's being used by professionals. the 5d isn't a pro camera the same way as "real" pro cameras are, but of course it can be used professionally, thinking it can't is fairly ignorant.

 

[damonb]

Canon's definition of professional arises from the company's dslr product range and marketing, doesn't it?

In etymological terms, "professional" and "profession" have nothing to do with equipment - be it paint, brushes, cameras, golf clubs, scalpels, etc - it is the gradual development of specialised knowledge and application within a field of endeavour that requires exceptional commitment to attain. The idea that the professional is simply one who is currently being paid to do something rules in for instance the employed bartender (which I have been, no insult intended) and rules out the retired orthodontic surgeon.

It really makes little sense to say that a person with money and no real interest who buys a 1Ds Mk III or a D3x now owns a professional camera. Without knowledge and application, that camera is an expensive lump of electronics, regardless what the marketing might say. I don't think we can have it both ways: to the extent that great material can fall out of the device without knowledgeable human input, the camera renders professional redundant.

Are clients or buyers interested in the photographic equipment a professional photographer uses? I assume the client or buyer is interested only to the point that it might cost them more or be more inconvenient for them. I assume that beyond cost and inconvenience, they are interested in the result. I would assume that the professional photographer operates by the very same terms. I am not a professional photographer, and I would happily be corrected.

 

[Buck Forester]

If we want to get into semantics. By Canon's own definition a 5DII isn't a "professional" camera. You aren't even eligible for professional services if you don't own a 1D/1Ds.

But what do I care what Canon's marketing department says about what is or isn't a "professional" camera? So they can charge $5,000 more for a lesser camera and slap a "pro" sticker on it and provide "professional services" that I don't care about and would ever use?

The Canon 5D II is MUCH MORE of a camera than Canon's original IDs (pro line) when it first came out years ago. So this "pro line" is a moving target. Their "pro" camera of today will be a Cracker Jacks toy in a few years. I don't put much stock in what their marketing guys (or of any company) say about what is pro or not because it doesn't matter to the true professional. If a professional is using the camera, which a lot of pros do with the 5D II, then it's a professional level camera whether it has the marketing sticker on it or not.

 

[mattsand]

In etymological terms, "professional" and "profession" have nothing to do with equipment

while i'm a fan of etymology myself i can't see how it could possibly be relevant here. a camera can't be professional and yet we call it that, why? and what happens when an amateur picks up that very camera? that's your homework for next time. good luck.

 

[damonb]

while i'm a fan of etymology myself i can't see how it could possibly be relevant here. a camera can't be professional and yet we call it that, why? and what happens when an amateur picks up that very camera? that's your homework for next time. good luck.

I see the problem here. I'll employ dot points and pictures in future.

 

[Steve Castle]

But what do I care what Canon's marketing department says about what is or isn't a "professional" camera? So they can charge $5,000 more for a lesser camera and slap a "pro" sticker on it and provide "professional services" that I don't care about and would ever use?

The Canon 5D II is MUCH MORE of a camera than Canon's original IDs (pro line) when it first came out years ago. So this "pro line" is a moving target. Their "pro" camera of today will be a Cracker Jacks toy in a few years. I don't put much stock in what their marketing guys (or of any company) say about what is pro or not because it doesn't matter to the true professional. If a professional is using the camera, which a lot of pros do with the 5D II, then it's a professional level camera whether it has the marketing sticker on it or not.

I'd agree that the 1Ds is looking very dated (it is due for an update), but a camera is much more then megapixels. Canon has taken huge step back, and widened the gap between their product lines, in terms of AF/AE/speed for their high-amateur line compared to the film days.

Again, if you're happy a great 21MP sensor with an outdated 9-point AF and barely over 3fps, then more power to you. If that fits the need of what you're trying to do- then great. Congratulations.

You can make the same argument for video, the 5DII produces fantastic results, used within its limits it can rival equipment that costs multiple times its price. It can, and has been used 'professionally" for video, but is it really a "professional" grade video camera. No, not really. It lacks the flexibility, it lacks the inputs, and you have to still work within its limits (aliasing, 30P, etc). As a video camera, its a piece of equipment that may meet or exceed professional video cameras in some areas, but is still deficient in very key areas.

 

[MikeGunter]

Hi,

Canon has CPS (Canon Professional Services), Nikon has NPS (Nikon Professional Services), if one of your bodies break, they'll be there to fix your equipment, give you a loaner, while you do your job. If you need a $10,000 Nikkor 600mm f/4G because the press area is farther then you expected, NPS will lend you one, and be there so you never have to worry about the equipment.
...
This is a crucial difference, and this is another reason why Canikon dominates this industry, because they back up their professional products.

(photo deleted)

NPS backup equipment for the 2002 Winter Olympics.

I've used the Nikon Professional Services and haven't been too impressed. It used to be expensive to participate and expensive to use. If you wanted that lens or camera, it was an arm and leg.

It really depends upon how deep the pocketbook is, and how important that job(s) is in context. For a lot of average joes, owning some backups might make as much sense for small operations.

If, on the other hand, you're slugging it out in remote area where your options for replacement are few, you might want the service. There are other points of view.