Here's a link to their website: http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=11933 Harold
Wow! I wonder if that will drop the price of the Nikon D2X, which is currently about $4500. And not full frame.
I wonder what announcements, if any, Nikon will make at the upcoming Photokina 2005 show. </font>[/QUOTE]The D100 replacement.....D200.
I wonder what announcements, if any, Nikon will make at the upcoming Photokina 2005 show. </font>[/QUOTE]The D100 replacement.....D200. </font>[/QUOTE]No mention of it on their website.... Harold
I wonder what announcements, if any, Nikon will make at the upcoming Photokina 2005 show. </font>[/QUOTE]The D100 replacement.....D200. </font>[/QUOTE]No mention of it on their website.... Harold </font>[/QUOTE]There's no official announcement yet but there are STRONG rumors that it will be this fall.
It's been hinted that I should hold off any Nikon purchases for a while--at least until Nikon responds.
That's still pretty steep, even for a tax write-off. I'm still waiting for Nikon's response. Even if a Nikon D2X drops, I'll still have the dilemma of buying lenses that can exploit its capabilities. The 12-24 may be the best for those lengths; the 24-85 ED may be OK; I don't shoot mcuh with the 70-300 except when I'm "hunting" wildlife. But none of them are pro lenses. Ah, decisions, decisions!
Not cheap... Also, since I just ponied up for a 17-85 EF-S lens, I have to bear in mind that it will NOT work with the full frame 5D... Oh well... Harold
The 10-20 is nice.... I think Canon already has something similar. Harold [ October 09, 2005, 06:02 PM: Message edited by: chessie ]
Canon has the 10-20; Nikon has the 12-24. Both are great lenses. I have the Nikon. The Canon has a 35mm film equivlaent of 16-32mm; the Nikon an equivalent of 18-36mm.
