Jump to content
Dallas

Nikon D5 costs more than a VW Up in South Africa

Recommended Posts

I just heard that the local dealer price for a Nikon D5 (body only) is R131,000. You can buy a brand new VW Up base model for a little bit less than that. Or if you're inclined to buy cheaper you'll get a brand new Kia Picanto for about R120,000. 

 

Wow. 

 

I don't know how it compares with prices in other countries, but I don't know how Nikon SA are going to find buyers for their top line machine at those prices. Crazy. 

 

VW-Up-Hbrid-1_jpg_2740211b.jpg

 

nikon_1557_d5_dslr_camera_body_1214152.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D5 or a week at Sabi-Sabi including airfare and money left over......

Or, you can get a D500 plus a week at Sabi-Sabi.....plus some money toward your airfare.

Edited by fredazinger
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw that one of the guests coming to us for UB5 this year has already got their air ticket from Delta for around $1400 return, so yeah, it's really cheap for you guys to come here right now. What does the D500 cost? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree on that, Ann. Even if I could afford a D5 I do not see any discernible advantage it will give me over the Olympus E-M1 for the kind of work I do. The only thing it will do better is high-ISO and AF-C. Everything else is moot as far as this professional photographer is concerned because it won't add anything to my bottom line at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be willing to bet that the majority of D5 buyers are not professional photographers but rather well heeled enthusiasts, or semi-pro weekend photographers. 

 

Also, remember that most professional cameras these days are well capable of withstanding just as much abuse as the pro spec DSLR's. Unless you're planning on getting all Jeremy Clarkson on them, in which case they'll all wilt! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the local price that shocks me. That is really a lot for a camera body. You can completely equip yourself with either Sony, Fujifilm or Olympus top end equipment for much less than that.

From a photography business perspective, you'd be able to claim depreciation of around 20% a year, so your main question (if you are buying one for business purposes and not to satisfy the GAS) is whether the acquisition will benefit your business' bottom line. Otherwise it's a capital expense that may prove difficult to justify. I'm speaking from a South African perspective where photography income is very different to what it is in the first world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here in Norway the D5 is less than half the price of a VW Up base model. NOK 69k vs 147k.

My D810 would cost 32K these days, and I'll keep mine for a few more years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might stand corrected but my contact told me that the R131k was a dealer price, which would exclude 14% VAT and whatever the dealer decides to add on top of the dealer price (usually 5-10%). That puts the camera into super-elite territory if its true.

 

I simply can't see the average pro here shelling out even half of that for their primary tool. In real terms it would be about double what I earned from photography last year. Granted, I don't do weddings, so those guys might have a sniff at it, but knowing quite a few of them from these parts I just don't see it being back-ordered in SA...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NOK 69k (VAT included) is about ZAR 129k so that's not far off.

 

The real problem is the insane taxes on cars in Norway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be willing to bet that the majority of D5 buyers are not professional photographers but rather well heeled enthusiasts, or semi-pro weekend photographers. 

 

Also, remember that most professional cameras these days are well capable of withstanding just as much abuse as the pro spec DSLR's. Unless you're planning on getting all Jeremy Clarkson on them, in which case they'll all wilt! 

I believe this to be true.  The semi pro guys get an immediate tax write off for their gear, car expense and home office expense.  They take a loss against their day job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if this is what your photos of cameras look like, I just can't wait to see what your photos of fishermens catchs will look like!

 

(I suspect that PS has a lot to answer for.)

 

:D :D :D

 

 

If you thought D5 is expensive, wait for D8000.    

 

To carry it you need a VW van or a sherpa.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as buying one doesn't prevent you from being able to join safaris in the future I'm all for you getting one. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only downside I can think of is that you may have a perpetual smirk on your face! :D 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got to see the Australian price - A$9000. Unfortunately VW Up is not in the Australian line up at the moment - it was available a year or two back. Anyway, the current cheapest new car I could identify is Mitsubishi Mirage for A$12,000 - that means you can get a 24-70/2.8 with the D5 for the price of a car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$9,000 was inevitable. Nikon's responses to currency movements are entirely predictable, and are like Oil Company philosophy - when the currency gains value against the US$, don't drop the price to reflect this, when it loses value, increase the price immediately to the full value, or more, than the currency value lost.

 

For $9K you could buy a full-house Fuji X-T1, lenses and accessories outfit. So just a so-so D5 & a couple of lenses kit will do around $15K plus, which is bonkers.

 

Same is happening with cars, particularly that the Australian car industry is now all but finished. I'm so glad I bought my (imported) car when the $ was near parity - the replacement model is now nearly $20K dearer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can buy a decent, properly equipped, used Land Rover Defender (V8, TD5 or 300TDi) for less than the cost of a new Nikon D5.

 

I have developed an unhealthy obsession with those vehicles in the past year. My friends all think I am nuts and are trying to convince me to buy a Toyota instead, but because of the high risk associated with the Japanese marque in SA, I'd put them last on the list of adventure vehicles I will consider. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will never ever buy Canon. They made my lenses obsolete when they changed the mount. I had a Canon A-1 and assorted lenses at the time.

 

Wow, that was in the 80's. You sure can hold a grudge. Remind me to never wrong you in any way...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't want to put you off, but my Land Rover (bought new) was the worst vehicle I ever owned. It leaked diesel fuel (not oil) copiously from day one. Repaired many times under warranty, the problem always returned within a week.

 

I've heard the horror stories, but I won't be buying new and will have some experts come with me to check out any prospective purchase before I make it. Did you have the TD5 or the TDi, Vivion? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To get back on track with this thread, I have now seen that the recommended retail price of the D5 in SA is R150,025. That is about the same as a Honda Brio, Chev Aveo 1.6i, Polo Vivo 1.4i and many other mid priced cars here. It's also about 10% of the price of an average 3 bedroom house in a decent suburb in most parts of the country. 

 

That... is just plain ridiculous for a camera. Sorry. They have completely lost the DVD, let alone the plot. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I no longer do 35mm DSLR and I never did Nikon, I think Ann has the right idea.  If you have a pile of Nikon glass and you want to get the max out of your outdoor trips, and you have the budget for it, I totally understand ordering a D5 for $6500.   Sorry for photographers living where the cost is even higher.   Once the camera is shipping and readily available elsewhere, it could be worth a trip to get the body.  I know a photographer in ZA/SA who did that years ago to get his 1DX.   Another option, have a tourist bring one in for you.  Last time we went to ZA/SA we brought in a GoPro and saved someone quite a few ZAR.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ann you are spot on.  Never give up the passion!   If a D5 is what you want and need, go for it!

 

That is how the wife feels about getting her 300 Pro lens.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't want to put you off, but my Land Rover (bought new) was the worst vehicle I ever owned. It leaked diesel fuel (not oil) copiously from day one. Repaired many times under warranty, the problem always returned within a week.

 

Land Rover has changed.

The slow-selling Defender is no more, it having only been kept alive by a group of fanatical flag wavers who still fancied themselves staking more territory for the Empire dressed in Pith Helmets and Safari Shorts while fending off hordes of savages from the safety of their hand-built, 1948-designed examples of all-terrain mechanised transport.

 

Under Ford's ownership the first attempt to kill off that antique relic that had become a millstone around the refinement of other models in the range failed spectacularly, the "pip-pip" brigade having launched a blitz that saw Ford give up and sell the company to TATA industries of India, leaving just one fully designed and developed by Ford modern model to continue (known either as the Freelander 2 or LR2).

 

Since then the Anglophile boss of TATA has seen the Ford-designed Range Rover models reach the showroom, along with the new and still-Ford based Discovery Sport (replacement for the Freelander 2). The Discovery 4 is the last hold-out from the days when BMW, then Ford battled the unwilting Pith helmets in the sun for the complete deletion of the hammer and baling wire build of Land Rovers of old, but that, too, is shortly to end as TATA hits full stride and clean-slates that line as well. If the job that TATA has done with Jaguar transfers in its entirety, then Land Rover has perhaps the brightest SUV future of the lot.

 

They still have their plates full holding off the pressure from the shorts-and-gaiters brigade wanting another 1948-era 4x4, while secretly building something in which occupants don't have their kidney stones rattled loose or their internal organs displaced in just driving to the shops, and in which the occupants have a better than 5% chance of surviving any collision with anything in - and now pushed off until 2018, while they concentrate on building modern, capable all-terrain cars that actually sell. From personal experience with a 2011 Freelander 2 in which I have now driven over 80,000km over all sorts of country, if TATA does indeed keep the direction that Ford attempted to set the brand on with that car, they have a bright future in producing the most reliable cars that are actually capable of some serious off-road travel. Not one thing has gone wrong with my Land Rover since I bought it, and it is far and away the best car I have ever owned, even more reliable than my Honda, (unlike my Range Rovers from the 1980's.... designed to fall apart when not parked, they were. Oil leaked on the driveway overnight indicated that there was oil - if the ground was dry you had serious problems :blink:)

 

However IMO, the best Land Rover ever built (at the time I bought it, of course):

CXZ7eYh.jpg

Edited by Alan7140
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Kenya this past November it seemed as if the Toyota Land Cruiser is the basis for the vast majority of safari vehicles.  I asked several of the ranger/guides.   They said the Cruisers where simply much more reliable and easier/cheaper to repair.   They were not the cheapest to purchase initially.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Kenya this past November it seemed as if the Toyota Land Cruiser is the basis for the vast majority of safari vehicles.  I asked several of the ranger/guides.   They said the Cruisers where simply much more reliable and easier/cheaper to repair.   They were not the cheapest to purchase initially.

Interesting. We've spoken with many of the Rangers at Sabi Sabi during the course of their transition from Land Rover Defender to Land Cruisers now that the Defender is consigned to history and they all say the same thing: the Rover is simply a more capable off road vehicle. Believe me, they have taken us through terrain with those things that I thought was impossible to traverse, especially river beds, and apart from the failure we experienced with Putt-Putt behind the wheel last year, they just go on and on. When said Putt-Putt got us stuck last year they called another vehicle to pull us out - a Cruiser - and it failed. Not enough torque.

The reason we got stuck was because Putt-Putt forgot to put fuel in the tank before taking us on the morning safari, so when attempting to drive up the 45 degree incline of the river bank, the remaining fuel was draining out of the system and the vehicle kept cutting out.

But Alan, your analogies with the pith helmeted invaders are funny, LOL. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By visiting this website you are agreeing to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy & Guidelines.