« on: May 14, 2012, 01:51:56 PM »
You are missing the most important and obvious option:
High-quality video features drive up consumer demand, resulting in more sales and reducing the per unit price to still photographers.
Unfocused, I'm basically on your side, and I did not miss that argument: I was just re-iterating my understanding of the viewpoints of the "yes" camp. One one hand, more sales drive down per-unit cost by spreading fixed costs across a larger number of units. On the other hand, end-user price *could* hypothetically go up if demand exceeds supply, resulting in higher per-unit profit. E.g. iPads. Does it actually do this? I don't know, and I doubt we have access to data to prove one way or another. We only know that per-unit production cost goes down with increased sales.
My main argument against the "yes it does" camp is that there is no reason to believe that video adds significantly to the R&D and manufacturing costs. Any price increase would be due to market forces, and you can't expect any company to forgo extra profit to accommodate a minority of purists.
Personally, I believe the 5D3 was designed as a wedding/event camera, and it hits that spot pretty nicely.
In the end, we just don't know the answer, so it's not worth fretting over.
Oh yeah, I realize that you get it. Wasn't trying to imply otherwise. And, like you, I agree the "cost" of video isn't worth bothering with. I just have a hard time getting past my compulsion to correct things when I see people getting something wrong on the internet.
And yes, I absolutely agree with you that the 5DIII was designed with a very specific market in mind and seems to be succeeding quite nicely with that market.