You are absolutely correct, Bob. However, just in the world of Nikon,
there are multiple generations of AF lenses with varying degrees of
compatibility. Of course, the top-dog bodies and top-dog lenses seem
to be pretty compatible. I would say that both Nikon and Canon (post
FD) have done a fantastic job of maintaining continuity. Not like some
companies that have zero respect for the customer.
>From a pricing perspective, I have a very hard time justifying the D4
as my ROI calculations just won't justify it in any way shape or form.
As to the E-1, well, let's just say that for SOME stuff it still
rocks, but for everything else, it stinks up the room. A D4 would rock
for most everything but at a high cost. Considering my lens
compatibility issues, I'd go for the new Canon instead, but either
way, if the numbers worked, I'd be all over them. Well, maybe. My
wrists say otherwise.
As businessmen, we have to consider the ROI. It's totally about the
numbers. If the numbers work, then you buy it. If not, well, then it's
ego. For the kind of work you are doing, if I was you, I'd be getting
the D4 or a D3X like next week. Would you get a positive ROI? Maybe or
maybe not. But in the market you compete, the D3 may be getting dated
and holding you back. Sooner or later you'll no longer be relevant as
print sizes will be full-wall murals. That's the problem I'm running
into with the E-1. It just isn't capable of competing in some
categories. As a result, I've generally avoided those categories and
put my efforts elsewhere. If print sizes started going back down again
(in some regards they are), then my E-1 just might be OK again.
AG
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|