Photicious All Photography

With the war between Canon and Nikon in full swing on all fronts: image, features and price (lucky us!), I can’t help but notice the production inefficiencies of Nikon, ultimately hurting us consumers but also Nikon. This is evident from small details.

The D300, D700 and D90 have the same 3″ display, right? That’s good.

But look at the display covers:

D90: BM-10

D300: BM-8

D700: BM-9

Say what?

Yes and they are not interchangeable, although the size difference is in the millimeters!

(the D3 has no display cover)

The D3X was just announced and I’m still wondering why Nikon chose this path.

Who needs the D3X? Commercial photographers and landscape photographers.

Hasselblad territory, although I doubt those people will stray Nikon’s way (those who wanted chose Canon a while ago).

With the Canon 5D-II with it’s 21MP just out, at ONE THIRD the price of a D3X, and the Sony A900 offering the same pixel count as the Nikon also at ONE THIRD the price, there is simply no reason for anyone to go Nikon, other than to reuse an available lens collection for supplementary commercial work.

Nada.

Bad move, Nikon. You should have plunked the sensor into a D800….