It has just been reported that Adorama is offering $1,400 to $1.500 for a D3 body. If D3 bodies start to be sold for around $2,000 that might be an upgrade path to FX. When the D400 and the D7100 come out this year it will be interesting to compare their image quality with the older D3 FX.
D4 out, what happens to D3s prices ?
(51 posts) (19 voices)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
donaldejose said:
It has just been reported that Adorama is offering $1,400 to $1.500 for a D3 body. If D3 bodies start to be sold for around $2,000 that might be an upgrade path to FX. When the D400 and the D7100 come out this year it will be interesting to compare their image quality with the older D3 FX.That's $1,200 - 1,400 OFF of a D3 refurbished body. D2x are going for $1,000 yet. (I don't get that personally.)
D700's are dropping like rocks on ebay. I have seen some go for $1,800 that are beat up. Most are still holding at $2200+.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Yes, it sure seems like a curious time for guessing the pricing trends of used Nikon FX bodies. Interesting to note the short-run cycles influenced by new body announcements (and, those expected to be announced). I'm keeping my eye on both, D700 and D3s used prices, with keen interest.
Posted 1 year ago # -
No Tao. Here is the quote: "In case anyone is curious, I was just talking to Adorama, who tells me that they are paying $1,400 - $1,500 cash for a used Nikon D3. They pay a lot more for the Nikon D3s, but since the used value of the D3s is varying so quickly, you'll have to contact them directly for specifics for your D3s." So if Adorama pays $1,400 for used D3 what are they going to sell it for? $2,000 or $2,800? We may see used D3, D700 and D3s prices lower than many had expected if the D4 gets rave reviews by all the independent testers.
To find out what they are paying now anyone can get a quote from them here: http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=process&func=usedquote
Posted 1 year ago # -
Misread it - Sorry donaldJose.
They are selling them for $1200 - 1400 off for referb. at $3400.It does not surprise me they are offering so little, but that is the case with any company buying gear. I have tried selling my gear to them, BH, KEH, etc. and the prices for bodies are generally 40-50% of what they think they can get for it used. Most actually trade on other gear - and if you want used items they have it can work out great.
Either way, I think the 40-50% (for bodies) I have always heard is close to correct as a finished price you get a D3 for 2,800 - 3k, which is about right for a well used body.
Posted 1 year ago # -
TaoTeJared said:
That's $1,200 - 1,400 OFF of a D3 refurbished body. D2x are going for $1,000 yet. (I don't get that personally.)D700's are dropping like rocks on ebay. I have seen some go for $1,800 that are beat up. Most are still holding at $2200+.
1800 must have got lot of shutters .we all know D800 will cost more than $3000 on which getting discount won't be easy for a year or so.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Abhinav said:
1800 must have got lot of shutters .we all know D800 will cost more than $3000 on which getting discount won't be easy for a year or so.Actually it looks like people off loading back-up bodies to pay for the upgrades (d4/d800). Saw one go for $1400 on ebay - mint condition. Someone really wanted to off load it quick to pay for something.
I will bet the D700 will remain above a D300s price for now. When the D400 comes out, that will determine the price - similar to what happened to the D2x. If the D400 passes/matches the D700 in High ISO, It will drop to above the D7000 (1300-1500). I bet the D400 will have the video almost the same as the D4 so it will be "worth" more than a D700 on that level - which lowers the price as well.
I doubt we will see any discount on the D800 for 2 years if ever since Nikon has stopped unauthorized dealers and put in place price controls.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I've heard some predict that the cost of a D3s will go back up to its debut price when the D4 hit's the market (in Toronto, the first shipments are for "pro photographers" only). If you have the budget for a D4 I'd go for the D4 over the D3s. Lots of worthy improvements over the D3s. If you're looking for a sports/photo-journalist's camera and would rather save a little money on a camera body...D3s. Even today or when the D4 comes out the D3s will still be one of the best choices if you're shooting anything with movement (which isn't to say the D4 wouldn't be great shooting portraits, landscapes...etc.). A jack of all trades (though, I'm not sure you'd want to carry around the heft of a D4 if you were shooting weddings).
Will the price of a D3s stay where it is (in Toronto)? Only time will tell.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@AGC: Are Toronto prices competitive for higher-end products, or does everybody pile in the car and drive to NYC to go to the discounters?
Posted 1 year ago # -
D3s are going for $3800-4800 right now (which is retarded IMO) given they are $5200 new still.
Once the D4's amazingness is realized, I figure they'll come down to used D3 prices, around $2800.
D3's will hover above the $2k mark, around where the D700 is.
And then they'll release the D400/D800 and all hell will break loose.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@shivaswrath wishful thinking...
Posted 1 year ago # -
What abilities in a D400 would make you think going to a D4 or D800 is not necessary for your work?
Let's just say, for example, that the D400
1. Had a 200,000 plus rated shutter,
2. Had all the high ISO ability of the D7000 sensor and a bit more: like less grain and better color depth at 6400 IS0 than the D7000 sensor due to either a better sensor or better software, very close to a D3s,
3. Had 24 megapixels,
4. Had HD video a bit better than the D7000,
5. and cost about $2,000.Now if you could get this package in a DX sensor D400 would you still be interested in a D4 or D3s or D700 or D800? You could get two D400 bodies for the price of one D4 body. Your back up camera could be the same as your primary camera.
If the D3s dropped to $2,800 would you get it as opposed to a D400 with the above specs?
If the D700 dropped to just under $2000 would you get it rather than a new D400 with the above specs for the same price?
So far people have been talking about the D3s as an alternative to a D4 or D800. Perhaps it is too early for that discussion. Perhaps we should wait to see what the D400 will offer and throw that into the mix even though it isn't an FX sensor.
Posted 1 year ago # -
There're a lot of people who have the funds to buy whatever they want regardless of that they really need photographically. Yeah, I hate'm too. Personally, if I already had a DX camera I'd more likely save, save, save for a FX 2nd body even if the latest DX (D400) was better than my current DX camera. It's just me though.
Some guy is advertising his D3S on Craigslist in the city where I work. States he's an amateur and the camera only has 4000 clicks. Wants $4500 for it. If he's truly an amateur, did he really need a D3S? Probably not, and he probably didn't get to stretch that puppy out like it was meant to be. But if he's got the funds, he'll buy the D4 anyway.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@donaldejose, excellent points. Two D400s vs one D3s, that's a tough one. That all depends on how much importance you put in FX. The D400 sould be a tough competitor to the D700. The D700 should still win in the high ISO field, but I am pretty sure the D400 will be much better at low ISO (DR, mp).
@RxPhoto, I just got an incredible deal on a D3s, I met someone that sold me his one year old D3s, with 2900 clicks, second battery, AC adapter and MC-30 cable release for 3900$ (converted, I'm in Switzerland). He wanted 4350$ but I talked him down. I told him that with the upcoming D4, the D3s will drop at around 3000$ (which is probably a lie), and that 3800$ was already a great price, and he accepted for 3900.
So, do I sell it for 4500$ and save for the D4 ? Do I keep it? I don't know yet.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I'll give you 3000 for it because the D4 will prolly push the price down to 2000 so I'm doing you a BIG favour - trust me......
Posted 1 year ago # -
I'm kicking myself now because I missed a "Second Chance Buy It Now" offer on an almost-new D3s on ebay. I didn't see the notification email and by the time I logged on, the Second Chance had gone. It was $3001. Bummer.
Posted 1 year ago # -
My D3s tracking on e-bay is setting the average at $4,000 with a low going for $3700 and a high of $4,300. Interesting nothing is going above that $4,300 and only a couple going below $3,900. (3 weeks data collected. Second chance offers not included.)
Posted 1 year ago # -
My D700 tracking on eBay has it running right around $2,000; currently half the price of a D3s. I have not been tracking D3 prices.
BUT, the real "price drop," if there is going to be one, will occur when both the D4 and D800 are in plentiful supply so anyone who wants to upgrade can do so easily and "glut" the market with used D3s and D700 bodies. When will that be? Maybe next fall? Maybe next winter? Right around the time a $1,700 to $1,900 D400 is out. Then we can all ask the questions: For just under $2,000 what is the best value in a camera for your needs and desires? I don't think the D3s will be in that group but the D700 should be and perhaps even the D3.
Thus, I am suggesting a used D3 and D700 will be cross-shopped with a new D400. And I will also go out on a limb and suggest the D400 will win because it will include advanced technology which will trump the advantage of FX sensor size combined with last generation technology.
I also suggest the D3s will provide better cleaner high ISO images than the D400 unless some new technology, which has not yet surfaced, appears in the D400.
Posted 1 year ago # -
zlik said:
So, do I sell it for 4500$ and save for the D4 ? Do I keep it? I don't know yet.
Don't know. You could try just to see if anyone bites. I hope you're satisfied with it enough to be happy in your own mind. The problem now is this...you try to sell it and can't -- the D4 starts shipping and the reviews from normal photogs (not McNally, Hogan, Rockwell, Moose) start rolling in -- and surpass all expectations. Now you've got a little remorse going on.
Personally, I don't think he'll get $4500 USD for it. Probably more like what you paid. So don't let it get to you. When he's down to $3400 I might give him a call. Enjoy your D3S and wait for the D5!
Posted 1 year ago # -
The D700 prices are really going to be interesting to see what happens. The D700 may just become one of those cameras that get passed around for years for people who want a FF camera even if DX passes it in all of the tech advantages. It won't take long before the only advantage is bokeh which is just the physical characteristic of the larger sensor. The lack of video will/has pushed many away from it already. That being said, I could see it hovering around $1500 for a few years.
If the D400 gets the video, wifi, AF, metering and a few of those other things from the D4 (which historically it has) with a sensor that can navigate the High res vs Low light, it could really push people out of FX back to DX who find the D800's price too steep to swallow.
If that happens and the D400 out performs the D700 in high iso, the D700 could drop like a rock to above the D7000.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I hope it falls like a rock: no, like two rocks!
I would like to see the used D700 become the "entry level" FX body selling for less than the top of the line DX body.
We can all wish.
Posted 1 year ago # -
You missed the point - If everything eclipses the D700 it will fall = D700 is no longer better than DX. Logically it wouldn't be a viable option if new, used with no warranty, the only who will go after it will be those who are fixated on full frame rather than quality.
I heard the same being said about the D2x how many were excited the D300 performed better so they could get a "Pro" body and people were clambering for a "pro" body rather than any real reason to get one.
Posted 1 year ago # -
If the top of the line DX eclipses the D700 FX there would still be some reasons to want an FX body in your inventory and to use it in certain situations. You don't always need the "latest and the greatest" for certain purposes.
For example:
1. Using lenses in their native range. I currently use a D7000 with a 35-70 2.8 and a 80-200 2.8 zoom to shoot High School Sports action in low light. This is giving me effective focal lengths from 42.5mm to 300mm. I love the lenses but would like to be able to swap bodies and use each lens in its normal range. I find the 35-70 on a DX body not quite wide enough and the 80-200 on a DX body a bit too long. I would like to have true 35 to 200 mm range in 2.8 zooms. Only FX gives me that with my current lenses.
2. Minimizing enlargement of the image. I would like to not have to enlarge the image so much to reach my final viewing product. I think IQ would look better and noise would be less noticeable in the same size enlargement from FX than from DX, for example.
3. The D400 may be 24 megapixels while the D700 is 12 megapixels. I would like to have the option of fewer megapixels when I don't need to enlarge the image much so as to avoid unnecessary storage space and processing time. Of course, I would also like a 36 mp body for those times when I want as much resolution as possible.
4. I would like to have a larger viewfinder than DX provides for looking through over long time periods.I don't think reasons like these are "being fixated on FX" for no good reason. FX just becomes a specialized tool which offers certain advantages other than IQ in certain situations. I would love to see a D700 drop to near the price of a D7000 so it becomes a viable second or third body to have around for specialized use.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Random thoughts:
1. Wouldn't a used 24-70 lens be just as much if not cheaper than the body and last much longer? Cheaper (and last longer) to add a wide angle as well. Just a thought of where money is best spent.
2. "I think IQ would look better and noise would be less noticeable in the same size enlargement from FX than from DX, for example." Although true at this moment - that is all technology that a DX will eclipse, if not the D400 then something else soon. The only physics that FX has over DX is Bokeh that DX can not eclipse.3. The huge MP is my concern as well since my computer will show it's age on those files. You can always shoot in "normal" or "basic" mode as well which would give if not the same but better results as the lower mp body. With the assumption - DX Tech eclipsed FX.
4. There is very little difference between the D300 and D700 viewfinder. I wouldn't mind a larger one as well, but that wouldn't be a item for me.I would be more concerned with a comparison of AF and metering systems especially shooting sports.
The thing that I keep looking at, even a good used D700 will be 2yrs old and 4yr old tech (everything of the D700 was in the D3 and D300), and I plan on keeping my cameras 3-4 years. So a D700 puts that at 8yr old tech with a user life at 5-6yrs for a fairly high cost with a end cycle of almost unsaleable. I bought my D300 for $1700 3 1/2 years ago. I should be able to sell it for $700. The camera cost me $1000 or $333/yr to use. A d700 @ $1800 with (3+years more) will be only hundreds if I could sell it ($600/yr cost). Plus there would be shutter life/button, body coverings, and other failures come into play.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Yes, good points. I too worry that investing in "old" technology will prove to be a waste of money. Old glass is not a waste of money since glass technology doesn't change as rapidly as sensor and in-camera processing technology. If new technology is affordable, as it is in the D7000 and will be in the D7100 and D400, it may completely trump an reason to purchase a sued D700. We will have to wait to see what those two cameras will offer later this year.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
