October 22, 2014, 12:50:11 AM

Author Topic: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?  (Read 20357 times)

Chuck Alaimo

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 986
    • View Profile
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #75 on: November 29, 2012, 03:17:54 PM »
it's not a flame war (not calling you names, not being personal, just having a conversation I thought at least), I admit my car comparison there was off.  Just a quick google search.  Silly, shouldn't have done that.  But my other points are valid - i reposted it because the selective quoting did totally ignored the valid points.

i would also take issue with the idea that a camera body is an investment (which you say no, buy gold that's an investment).  If your business is photography then anything you buy for your business is an investment! 

Will there be a sub $1000 brand new FF body?   I hold to my points that the only way this happens is a) when APS-C is phased out and all SLR camera's are FF.  Or, b) if one of the big 3 puts 8 year old tech in a cheap plastic body - a true rebel FF.  Other than that, there is the used market.

And, in regards to the 6d - none of what we say means anything right now because it's an unknown!  How good/bad is it?  Maybe the IQ is better than the mk2?  Maybe it is just as good as the mk3 in ISO performance.  Maybe it isn't and the thing blows chunks.  If the 6d ends up sucking the big fat one, then yeah the price will drop and canon will phase it right on out!  But then again, if it sucks that bad, whose going to want it even at the bargain cost?  and on the other hand, it may be a good and capable camera which enjoys a 2-3 life cycle!  Who knows the answer to to that!  None of us yet, but we'll have a better idea of where this body stands soon enough.

Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

canon rumors FORUM

Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #75 on: November 29, 2012, 03:17:54 PM »

CharlieB

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 302
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #76 on: November 29, 2012, 05:35:11 PM »
@CharlieB

Please could you enlighten us all and tell us precisely what it costs (the nearest $ will do, round-up the cents) Canon to make the 5D3 or 1DX?

You are the fountain of all wisdom :P

edit: using your screwed up logic Porsche could produce a Carerra Turbo for less than $10,000 but hey those mean Germans just won't do it...eh?

If you want to discuss things on the basis of manufacturing practices, and how market analysis derives the "suggested selling price", and how marketing derives the feature/benefit set (and the price point) and how engineering must then find a way to make it profitable, fine.  If you want to be a sarcastic asinine twit, leave me alone. 


weekendshooter

  • Guest
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #77 on: November 29, 2012, 11:26:07 PM »
Never

Chip costs for the sensor won't allow for pricing to be that low and everyone making a markup.  Compromises made to the 6D at the $2k price point seem to piss everyone off, so to think of a $1k price, it wouldn't even be a p&s type.  Refurb on sale gets a 5d2 down to 1,400-1,500 range, but that's about as low at it will go.

I don't believe that the FF sensors cost dramatically more to make than 1.6 crop sensors.  They use the difference to allow them to sell cameras at a lower price point to 95% of the people buying cameras without undercutting the prices on their own FF models. 

It may cost a lot to develop new sensor models, but I really don't think FF sensors cost a whole lot more money to crank out than a crop sensor, and I don't think either one really cost as much per unit to fab as people imagine.  Chip fab facilities in Taiwan, etc., just crank these things out like saltine crackers.  There should be no reason camera sensor production economics should be dramatically different from all the other chips and things we are surrounded with.  The difference is in the huge markup they are allowed due to very little competition.  High-end camera sensors have not become commoditized like most other microelectronics.     

The manufacturing  cost of a 24x36mm sensor is many times higher than the APS
Replacing 5dmk2 sensor= cost of purchasing 8000 SEK = around 1200 USD three years ago

And the point is missed again. 
1.  The fact Canon charged you 1200 dollars to replace a sensor does not mean it costs common that much to make it. Actually it proves the opposite. Canon made a profit on that part plus labor cost too.
2.  Maybe a FF sensor does cost Canon several times more to manufacture than a crop sensor costs canon to make. But so if the crop sensor only costs canon 25 bucks to make, then you are talking only a couple hundred or few hundred bucks.

OH sorry,  I should explain , that was the in-house price, what Canon Service Center paid for the replacement sensor.
How much the customer was charged I do not know, service time, and VAT
A 24x36 sensor cost much more than you think to manufacture than a APS and all assembling is not in-house
it is up to  four- to seven times more expensive to produce a 24x36 sensor, depending on the technology. Other things like  mirror mechanism, prism house etc. will also be  much more expensive.

oh crap, I actually agree with Mikael on something??? time to go jump off a bridge, see you later guys.

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1440
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #78 on: November 30, 2012, 01:42:40 AM »
Hi,

The title says it all. 

Cheers

Already discussed ad nauseam: Large hunks of chips are disproportionately expensive, companies need to keep a margin of profit, there is a camera to wrap around that large chip- all true and relevant.
But I ask: why and for whom? Considering good lenses that take advantage of new sensor techs are becoming so expensive, who will buy cheap FFs just because they are so darned cheap? Like somebody mentioned, causal shooters don't care about FF (indeed, not many even know what it is and shoot pretty nice pics all the same).
Like all electronics equipment, I am sure cameras will become crazy cheap some day. Maybe companies will even sell them at a loss to tie customers to their more expensive lens collections (not sure that's not happening even now). Lenses won't become cheap though. Unless someone invents some artificial UD glass and the like that costs pennies to make AND doesn't care about patents!
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

sandymandy

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #79 on: December 01, 2012, 04:33:52 PM »
I still agree that all tech cost comes down with time. The more common something is the less pricy it will be OR there will be cheap alternatives at least. Just think of the first computers lol they were so ridiculously expensive!! Today u will find a processor thats as fast as a 100.000$ computer in a mobile fone.
You can also get a cheap car. Or a cheap camera. Imho there are more cheaop alternatives nowadays to get good photo results than were available at the beginning of the 35mm film era.
I guess its something like at the dentist. The actual material cost isnt so high but its other factors that can icnrease the price a lot.

p.s.

please FF camera for under 1k$ w/o video mode, wifi or such :P Reduce it to just what we need. Aperture, shutter speed, iso.
Uhh sounds like Leica....lol

Chuck Alaimo

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 986
    • View Profile
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #80 on: December 01, 2012, 06:41:28 PM »
I still agree that all tech cost comes down with time. The more common something is the less pricy it will be OR there will be cheap alternatives at least. Just think of the first computers lol they were so ridiculously expensive!! Today u will find a processor thats as fast as a 100.000$ computer in a mobile fone.
You can also get a cheap car. Or a cheap camera. Imho there are more cheaop alternatives nowadays to get good photo results than were available at the beginning of the 35mm film era.
I guess its something like at the dentist. The actual material cost isnt so high but its other factors that can icnrease the price a lot.

p.s.

please FF camera for under 1k$ w/o video mode, wifi or such :P Reduce it to just what we need. Aperture, shutter speed, iso.
Uhh sounds like Leica....lol

one thing that seems to be missing (which is why i think some are advocating a race to the bottom instead of a race to the top) is the if you look at the market how is it divided?  APS-C sensor camera's (with the exception of the 7d and the d7000) are consumer grade bodies.  FF sensor bodies are directed and marketed to Pro's.  This isn't to say lower models are bad.  If your experience is with a P&S, just making that step into a t3i with kit lens is a huge WOW experience.   And from there you move up the tiers as your experience builds.  Most causal users will never actually outgrow this camera! Then you get to higher level APS-C, all the way up to 7d then after that it's FF.

And that leads me to that idea of racing to the bottom instead of racing to the top!  Yeah, canon ccould cut quality control on FF sensor lines - that would cut the cost.  But it would also lead to a hit or miss sensor.  They could wrap that hit or miss sensor in a plastic body, give the minimal amount of features, assemble it with cheap labor  - then push it out at under a grand.  But why would they do that when they could offer a much better APS-C alternative?

I could see canon making such a move if they weren't making pro product as well.  A super cheap no quality control FF would cheapen everything else in the canon line.  And so the alternative to this is used, cause older tech is cheaper than new tech if your trying to stay on the cutting edge (yeah, on that level I'd much rather the R&D team be working on ways to increase DR and other things on their pro sensor line rather than spending time plotting out a rebel FF).

What I really don't get here is why people tend to seem so down on the used market????  Granted most of my used stuff is lenses, but, I would buy a used body as well  (I'm weighing options now, a used 5d2, a new 6d, a new/used if i find one mk3, or a used 1dmk4 -  don't really need to move on it till spring so i am seeing what happens). 

So feel free!  There are FF options under a grand!  And yeah, as with all things in an expensive area like photography, you make trade off's when you buy.  Look at lenses.  In a pinch you can snag the $100 50 mm 1.8, and the IQ on it isn't half bad, but the build q is horrid (i know many who have had to bring the camera into the shop cause in the summer the plastic will expand and the lens will be stuck on the body).  and in the L range lenses - yeah when I bought my 70-200, I wanted it to be 2.8 but couldn't quite afford the one with IS, so i saved x 2 by snagging a used one without IS (it's now one of most used lenses!!!!).  We all make trade offs when we buy.  And yeah, Canon knows there is a used market (On canon's end, why waste factory time making cheap FF's when better quality used ones are out there????).  Let the used market take care of those who want FF but can't leap into one of the newer systems. 

I still agree that all tech cost comes down with time. The more common something is the less pricy it will be OR there will be cheap alternatives at least. Just think of the first computers lol they were so ridiculously expensive!! Today u will find a processor thats as fast as a 100.000$ computer in a mobile fone.
You can also get a cheap car. Or a cheap camera. Imho there are more cheaop alternatives nowadays to get good photo results than were available at the beginning of the 35mm film era.
I guess its something like at the dentist. The actual material cost isnt so high but its other factors that can icnrease the price a lot.

p.s.

please FF camera for under 1k$ w/o video mode, wifi or such :P Reduce it to just what we need. Aperture, shutter speed, iso.
Uhh sounds like Leica....lol

Reread above...lol

Also, taking video out wouldn't be wise as it would cut the potential market for it drastically (unless they really limited it and stripped it of a live view function too) - from the accounting dept side of things any sub $1000 body is going to make less total $$$ per body than the higher level ones.  For the sub $1000 level, it's all about volume.  And if your going to sell a crippled FF camera in that range it would have to have video because there are a ton of video people that would buy it.  I never use video, but, if it helps drive sales and doesn't really harm anything else, why not? 

Back to the biggest point of all though, seriously think about the used market!  2 of my lenses - used, both of my flashes - used.  I tend to trust B&H and adorama with used stuff.  Got my 70-200 from b&H,  had it now for well over a year and the thing is awesome!  And I just picked up a used 16-35L v2, I see no flaws in it all so far.  The only reason I'm not leaping on a used 5d2 right now is because I want to see what the 6d can do, and if that sucks then I am snagging another mk3 (shooting weddings and having 2 would just make sense no one body works one way the other works another way kind of stuff).  And if i am waiting till  spring, there may just be a few mk3's onm the used market (think about people that snagged a mk3 but actively saving for 1dx, once goal is met, sell mk3 snag 1dx).   

If you want FF and under a grand - snag a 5d classic at $750, then buy a few cheap manual flashes and a few cheap transmitters. 
   
Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1440
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #81 on: December 01, 2012, 10:21:50 PM »

There are 2 types of CR blogger: Generation X and Generation Y. The former were those born between 1965 to 1980 (the Baby Boomers preceded them from 1946 to 1964), but the Generation Y - those born since 1980, well they stick out like a sore thumb on CR. They never shot and processed/developed their own film, they expect everything for nothing, especially if it is on the Web, and they particularly do not understand the time value of money ???

I hate to generalize, but you can tell the age of a poster on CR, just from their whining tone, unrealistic expectations, and moreover, their complete failure to acknowledge that Canon Inc. is a superb company that makes excellent products, albeit at a reassuringly high price (and I mean that last sentiment as Canon's pricing policy has protected the value of my L glass immeasurably).

Generation Y people are also quick to throw tantrums and be verbally abusive, but that's just a reflection of the solipsistic society that we now live in. ::)


If you HATE to generalize, then don't.
Making arbitrary statements will only negate the correct ones, making you look foolish and biased.
By the way, I don't fall in your 'dreaded' Generation Y ;)
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

canon rumors FORUM

Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #81 on: December 01, 2012, 10:21:50 PM »

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3352
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #82 on: December 01, 2012, 10:34:35 PM »
Canon could make and sell a sub-$1000 full frame body, but honestly, who would want to buy a 2.5 frame per second, ISO1600 max ( and a very noisy 1600 to boot), 8 megapixel camera......

As time moves forward technology gets cheaper, but we are not using the same technology as just a few years ago.... enormous strides have been made in image processing algorithms, processing power, power saving, sensor sensitivity and density, storage speeds and size, and just about everything else that goes into a DSLR, with, of course, the obvious exception of the rubber grip....

That is what we pay for.. and that is why newer cameras cost more..... yes, Canon makes more profit, but that profit is what pays for the research that makes the newer cameras possible. You can't have one without the other.
The best camera is the one in your hands

Chuck Alaimo

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 986
    • View Profile
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #83 on: December 02, 2012, 06:38:52 PM »
Canon could make and sell a sub-$1000 full frame body, but honestly, who would want to buy a 2.5 frame per second, ISO1600 max ( and a very noisy 1600 to boot), 8 megapixel camera......

As time moves forward technology gets cheaper, but we are not using the same technology as just a few years ago.... enormous strides have been made in image processing algorithms, processing power, power saving, sensor sensitivity and density, storage speeds and size, and just about everything else that goes into a DSLR, with, of course, the obvious exception of the rubber grip....

That is what we pay for.. and that is why newer cameras cost more..... yes, Canon makes more profit, but that profit is what pays for the research that makes the newer cameras possible. You can't have one without the other.

exactly what I was saying up there man!  Stack it up, why the heck would anyone buy a "2.5 frame per second, ISO1600 max ( and a very noisy 1600 to boot), 8 megapixel camera......"  when for the same price you could get a much more capable crop sensor camera (or a used FF)?  Stick a hobbled 5d classic in a plastic rebel body --- do you think that body will sell used for $750 in 3 years?  where if you snag a used 5d classic for $750, unless you trash it in a year you could probably get $650-700 for it.  2 years from now, $600-650.  Yeah, eventually the shutter will go on it.  But, my bet is that if they made a rebel FF - the still circulating 5d classic would outlast it!

Not to mention that you could also scoop up something like these:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800906281-USE/Canon_9443a002_EOS_1DS_Mark_II_Digital.html
Canon EOS-1DS Mark II, 16.7 Megapixel, SLR, Digital Camera (Camera Body) --- $999.  This one has a quality rating of 7, which means it's definitely worn - shutter count would be an issue.   But damn, would you honestly say a brand new rebel FF would be better than a 1d series body???????  45pt AF, what would a rebel FF have?  9 point at best!  ISO not that great, but the 1ds was more geared towards lower ISO performance anyways.   If I was desperately seeking a FF body under $1000, I would seriously consider these.  And yeah, there is another of the same model but in better condition for $1200.   Look around people!!!!!  There are goodies to be found a plenty out there if you look! 
Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1859
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #84 on: December 02, 2012, 09:21:38 PM »
At the end of 2012 Noisy 1600 top ISO FF camera and 8Mpixel at the same time! Wow, someone has very vivid imagination  :o


Rocky

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 631
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #85 on: December 04, 2012, 05:45:32 PM »
Canon could make and sell a sub-$1000 full frame body, but honestly, who would want to buy a 2.5 frame per second, ISO1600 max ( and a very noisy 1600 to boot), 8 megapixel camera......

It will never be that way. the cheapest way to build anything is to use the existing and the cheapest parts. Actually, the 6D is as cheap as it can get. (execpt the "new" sensor) So the next "$1000"FF will have a 6D sensor, AF system. Single Digit V, etc. The reasons why the 6D is at $2000 are: 1. it need to recap the sensor development cost ( No big deal just a new mask set). 2. It needs to recap the AF module developement cost. 3. It is intended to be a 5D II replacement. So it got to be in the same price range. 3. Canon wants higher profit.
Canon should be able to build a $1000.  Whether it will be sold at $1000, that is another story.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2012, 07:05:39 PM by Rocky »

Hillsilly

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 781
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #86 on: December 14, 2012, 10:57:46 PM »
You can currently pick up a Nikon D600 Digital Camera with a 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR Lens and other accessories for $1996.  If you take the normal sale price of the lens ($597) and accessories ($174) away, you could say that the underlying price of the camera is $1225.

Getting very close to your $1,000 mark.
1000FN | 7E | 3000 | 3 | LS-100TS

CharlieB

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 302
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #87 on: December 15, 2012, 12:26:07 AM »
The reasons why the 6D is at $2000 are: 1. it need to recap ..... 2. It needs to recap the AF.....  3. It is intended to be a 5D II replacement....3. Canon wants higher profit.
Canon should be able to build a $1000.  Whether it will be sold at $1000, that is another story.

Not true. 

The reason the 6D is priced as it is, is because Canon's market research indicates that the market (you and me, the buying public) will support the 6D's feature set at that given price.  Which also happens to be the reason _anything_ is the price it is.  If the market won't support the price, you either have no more product soon, or you lower the price and hope your costs are well contained (and they should be based on the scale at which Canon can produce cameras).

canon rumors FORUM

Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #87 on: December 15, 2012, 12:26:07 AM »

StepBack

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #88 on: December 17, 2012, 04:50:34 PM »
Cell phone makers will push camera manufacturers out of business as Moore's Law lowers the price point for sensors and open source software developers hack out algorithms over the weekend for fun which will pummel all but the highest end cameras.

preppyak

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 787
    • View Profile
Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #89 on: December 17, 2012, 05:44:57 PM »
Cell phone makers will push camera manufacturers out of business as Moore's Law lowers the price point for sensors and open source software developers hack out algorithms over the weekend for fun which will pummel all but the highest end cameras.
...looking forward to that full-frame phone that people carry around in their pocket. Should be comical to see; seeing as the smallest full-frame camera has more in common with an 80's phone than an iPhone

canon rumors FORUM

Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« Reply #89 on: December 17, 2012, 05:44:57 PM »