Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 12:55pm

It's that age old question of Canon or Nikon? Canikon anyone? Does the Canon EOS-1Ds mkIII full frame 21 megapixel sensor really warrant the extra few thousand you can expect to pay over the Nikon D3? Perhaps it's not so much a "Canon / Nikon" argument, but more what's inside the kit. If Nikon dashed out with a 21mp full frame sensor (D3x...?) then would it be an advantage or a hindrance? Where will each party go next? Your views...

Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 4:36pm

I have been using a d3 for a few months now and it is a camera that can change the way you work! I do not see the need for 21mp images I print upto 36" x 24" with images off my D2x with no problems. I am biased but I cannot see how Canon can justify the extra couple of grand

Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 12:04pm

There's been a fair amount of problems at camp Canon too - the 1D mkIII recall, plus further alleged issues (though not official) with the 1Ds mkIII sensor alignment... It may have caused a shattering of confidence from a portion of consumers.