Some of these comparisons and smart a$$ comments about depreciation are ridiculous. I don't think the OP should have started an entire thread dedicated to this and been so dramatic about it, but I can sympathize with his feelings on the 5D3 and 5D3 only. You all act like the drop is completely normal but name one other piece of Canon gear that dropped that much that fast?
Of course depreciation is to be expected, but I think the 5D3's drop was different. The price of the 5D Mark II dropped maybe $200 the first 2 YEARS it was out. And if the 5D3 price pattern is the norm then why is the 1DX not under $5k now? It's the same price it was at it's release...I don't think anyone here is stupid enough to believe their electronics won't ever depreciate, but most aren't complaining about the depreciation itself, just how quickly it happened...I don't care either way, I paid almost $3800 for mine and still think it's a great camera. But if you had told me I could save $1600 if I buy a refurb in 7 months, or $800 waiting 5 months, I would have considered waiting. But now I know for the future, lesson learned.
I don't disagree with any of this. But, the problem with the original post is that it is based on the assumption that somehow Canon is the source of the price drop.
The price has dropped because the market dictates prices and Canon has been unable to prevent retailers from lowering the price of the 5DIII to reflect the demand in the competitive marketplace. I repeat once more, the only price drop from Canon has been the relatively common reduction from a "rebate," which in the case of the 5DIII amounts to $200 in the U.S. All other price cuts have been driven by retailers willing to accept smaller profits in return for higher sales.
Canon may be complacent in this, but they are not the driving force – the marketplace is. I am quite certain that if Canon had its way, the 5DIII would remain at its introductory price. But, in a competitive, capitalistic market, they don't get to determine that – we as consumers do.
Consumers have been voting with their feet and retailers are responding. I sympathize with individuals who are dismayed by the apparent price drops, but it is wrong to attribute market forces to some bizarre conspiracy theory.
Mr Axilrod's post raises a very interesting point: is this part of a new trend or just a one time error on Canon's part? I agree, we would all be wise not to rush to purchase any new Canon products that seem to be overpriced for the market, but instead wait to see where the marketplace sets the "true" price.
(As an aside, I have to tip my hat to Mr. Radiating. It seems the joke may have been on us. His on-line persona – that of a fabulously wealthy economic analyst who in his spare time consults with Canon and provides their engineering department with solutions to problems that they themselves have been unable to solve – has got to be one of the most creative uses of trolling I've ever seen.)