April 18, 2014, 05:28:10 PM

Author Topic: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?  (Read 16755 times)

dilbert

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2370
    • View Profile
Re: How many cameras will they sell without it?
« Reply #75 on: May 13, 2012, 12:56:48 PM »
Today, Canon would not sell a DSLR without video in sufficient volume to recoup R&D costs.
Seriouly. Can you imagine if the 5DIII didn't have video (cause they were saving it for the Cine cameras)? People are already flipping out about DR, banding in shadows, a light leak "issue". Now take video away from the camera they've been waiting 3 years for and this forum would have imploded.

Exactly.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: How many cameras will they sell without it?
« Reply #75 on: May 13, 2012, 12:56:48 PM »

stevenrrmanir

  • Guest
Re: How many cameras will they sell without it?
« Reply #76 on: May 13, 2012, 01:14:34 PM »
Today, Canon would not sell a DSLR without video in sufficient volume to recoup R&D costs.
Seriouly. Can you imagine if the 5DIII didn't have video (cause they were saving it for the Cine cameras)? People are already flipping out about DR, banding in shadows, a light leak "issue". Now take video away from the camera they've been waiting 3 years for and this forum would have imploded.

History will look upon MKIII as a FAIL. Just watch.

A few years ago dSLR with video were unheard of and the interest was not there. Today it is the opposite - all have the video.

I would like to see a very good dSLR body for photos (that is why it is called a camera and NOT a videocamera) at a reasonable price. The MKIII at $3500 before taxes is a JOKE!

Why can't they have a nice MKII upgrade for photos only at about $2500 or lower?

Reason: greed + ways of charging more for "features" some don't need...

I want choices at good prices!

cayenne

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1199
    • View Profile
Re: How many cameras will they sell without it?
« Reply #77 on: May 13, 2012, 01:22:31 PM »
Today, Canon would not sell a DSLR without video in sufficient volume to recoup R&D costs.
Seriouly. Can you imagine if the 5DIII didn't have video (cause they were saving it for the Cine cameras)? People are already flipping out about DR, banding in shadows, a light leak "issue". Now take video away from the camera they've been waiting 3 years for and this forum would have imploded.

History will look upon MKIII as a FAIL. Just watch.

A few years ago dSLR with video were unheard of and the interest was not there. Today it is the opposite - all have the video.

I would like to see a very good dSLR body for photos (that is why it is called a camera and NOT a videocamera) at a reasonable price. The MKIII at $3500 before taxes is a JOKE!

Why can't they have a nice MKII upgrade for photos only at about $2500 or lower?

Reason: greed + ways of charging more for "features" some don't need...

I want choices at good prices!

I think you just need to try to wrap your head around the concept....that the video onboard these cameras...is NOT increasing the cost beyond your means.<P>
If you took the video capability off the 5D's.....they'd not drop a penny in price.

stevenrrmanir

  • Guest
Re: How many cameras will they sell without it?
« Reply #78 on: May 13, 2012, 01:34:11 PM »
Today, Canon would not sell a DSLR without video in sufficient volume to recoup R&D costs.
Seriouly. Can you imagine if the 5DIII didn't have video (cause they were saving it for the Cine cameras)? People are already flipping out about DR, banding in shadows, a light leak "issue". Now take video away from the camera they've been waiting 3 years for and this forum would have imploded.

History will look upon MKIII as a FAIL. Just watch.

A few years ago dSLR with video were unheard of and the interest was not there. Today it is the opposite - all have the video.

I would like to see a very good dSLR body for photos (that is why it is called a camera and NOT a videocamera) at a reasonable price. The MKIII at $3500 before taxes is a JOKE!

Why can't they have a nice MKII upgrade for photos only at about $2500 or lower?

Reason: greed + ways of charging more for "features" some don't need...

I want choices at good prices!

I think you just need to try to wrap your head around the concept....that the video onboard these cameras...is NOT increasing the cost beyond your means.<P>
If you took the video capability off the 5D's.....they'd not drop a penny in price.

Exactly.

My point: greed

Canon now has an excuse, smoke and mirrors, to charge you $3500 because their camera does video as well... why $1500 between the MKII and MKIII - is MKIII worth that extra $1500?

zim

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 621
    • View Profile
Re: How many cameras will they sell without it?
« Reply #79 on: May 13, 2012, 01:49:02 PM »
I think you just need to try to wrap your head around the concept....that the video onboard these cameras...is NOT increasing the cost beyond your means.<P>
If you took the video capability off the 5D's.....they'd not drop a penny in price.

Really?
Put two 5D3s (or any other camera with video for that matter) in a shop window. One has the video disabled no other changes, which one would sell? the shop would have to lower the price of the one without video to sell it.

I asked earlier is there definitive proof that video affects the quality of stills images? for me that’s the only issue. If not then there is no problem having video if it does then that’s the argument for splitting the line at the pro level.

Marsu42

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 4089
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: How many cameras will they sell without it?
« Reply #80 on: May 13, 2012, 03:31:16 PM »
If you took the video capability off the 5D's.....they'd not drop a penny in price.

I don't know if the price would drop w/o video, but the body is geared towards still shooting because they didn't put in a swivel screen. I guess the reason is because video has still a cheapish appeal to old school dlsr shooters, and these would buy the 5d in any case.

lady

  • Guest
Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #81 on: May 13, 2012, 03:54:17 PM »
Video is not the reason this thing is more expensive. The 5D2 HAD video when it came out and it did not cost this much. Getting rid of video will not change the fact that Canon is getting greedy.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #81 on: May 13, 2012, 03:54:17 PM »

dilbert

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2370
    • View Profile
Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #82 on: May 13, 2012, 04:00:35 PM »
Video is not the reason this thing is more expensive. The 5D2 HAD video when it came out and it did not cost this much. Getting rid of video will not change the fact that Canon is getting greedy.

No, getting rid of video won't make the US Dollar  buy more Japanese Yen.

lady

  • Guest
Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #83 on: May 13, 2012, 04:12:32 PM »
Video is not the reason this thing is more expensive. The 5D2 HAD video when it came out and it did not cost this much. Getting rid of video will not change the fact that Canon is getting greedy.

No, getting rid of video won't make the US Dollar  buy more Japanese Yen.

If that was the issue, then almost all new Canon products would be seeing a massive price hike like this, and they aren't.

HurtinMinorKey

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 402
    • View Profile
    • carolineculler.com
Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #84 on: May 13, 2012, 04:47:01 PM »
Video is not the reason this thing is more expensive. The 5D2 HAD video when it came out and it did not cost this much. Getting rid of video will not change the fact that Canon is getting greedy.

The reason the price has increased is because DEMAND has increased, thanks in large part to the success of the 5d2.

elflord

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 705
    • View Profile
Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #85 on: May 13, 2012, 05:39:58 PM »
Video is not the reason this thing is more expensive. The 5D2 HAD video when it came out and it did not cost this much. Getting rid of video will not change the fact that Canon is getting greedy.

They're always "greedy" in the sense that they want to maximize sales revenue. Price will inevitably drop if/when they lose enough sales for it to outweigh the extra revenue from the  higher prices. They probably figure that most of the target market for this are spending so much on glass, tripods, lighting etc that they won't sweat a few dollars on the body.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2012, 05:42:45 PM by elflord »

lady

  • Guest
Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #86 on: May 13, 2012, 05:54:12 PM »
Video is not the reason this thing is more expensive. The 5D2 HAD video when it came out and it did not cost this much. Getting rid of video will not change the fact that Canon is getting greedy.

They're always "greedy" in the sense that they want to maximize sales revenue. Price will inevitably drop if/when they lose enough sales for it to outweigh the extra revenue from the  higher prices. They probably figure that most of the target market for this are spending so much on glass, tripods, lighting etc that they won't sweat a few dollars on the body.

To me, greedy isn't just wanting sales. "Greedy" is purposely charging a significant amount more for the product than its actual worth with no consideration for the customer. I believe the 5D2 was fairly priced at launch and would gladly have paid that amount of money for a camera. Canon still makes their profit, while I believe I'm paying a fair price. Greed comes in when the profit exceeds what the consumer believes to be a fair price. Some people will still pay the price for it (and if they can, then props to them) because to them as long as they have the product it doesn't matter. Other people will be more choosy.

If it were $3,000 I don't think I'd be complaining at all, actually. Maybe even $3,100. But $3,500? Very optimistic on Canon's part and it's taking advantage of the fact that some people don't actually care about price vs value (usually this happens when someone has enough money that a $500 difference seems minuscule).

I can afford it, so I'm not one of those people who's upset because they can't. I just care a lot about the value of what I'm getting.

illogict

  • PowerShot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 16
  • Enlightener
    • View Profile
Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #87 on: May 13, 2012, 06:01:11 PM »
Video is not the reason this thing is more expensive. The 5D2 HAD video when it came out and it did not cost this much. Getting rid of video will not change the fact that Canon is getting greedy.


No, getting rid of video won't make the US Dollar  buy more Japanese Yen.


If that was the issue, then almost all new Canon products would be seeing a massive price hike like this, and they aren't.


Then I wonder what explains the high growth of lens prices (http://www.canonpricewatch.com/canon-lenses-better-stocks/) for some years now... Compare to the USD value against the Yen: the dollar lost ⅓ of its value against the yen in five years!
Should have Canon (a Japanese company, may I remind you, whose accounts are done in Yens) really followed it, a lens costing $1000 (= 120000¥) in August 2008 should be $1500 now!
Canon EOS 500D — EF 20mm f/2.8 USM, 28mm f/1.8 USM, 85mm f/1.8 USM, 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM — EF-S 18-55mm IS, 55-250mm IS — Lensbaby Composer Pro, Double Glass — 2×Speedlite 540EZ, 2×430EZ — Joby Gorillapod SLR-Zoom + Ballhead X — Domke F-5XC

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #87 on: May 13, 2012, 06:01:11 PM »

lady

  • Guest
Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #88 on: May 13, 2012, 06:18:46 PM »
Video is not the reason this thing is more expensive. The 5D2 HAD video when it came out and it did not cost this much. Getting rid of video will not change the fact that Canon is getting greedy.


No, getting rid of video won't make the US Dollar  buy more Japanese Yen.


If that was the issue, then almost all new Canon products would be seeing a massive price hike like this, and they aren't.


Then I wonder what explains the high growth of lens prices (http://www.canonpricewatch.com/canon-lenses-better-stocks/) for some years now... Compare to the USD value against the Yen: the dollar lost ⅓ of its value against the yen in five years!
Should have Canon (a Japanese company, may I remind you, whose accounts are done in Yens) really followed it, a lens costing $1000 (= 120000¥) in August 2008 should be $1500 now!


For every product that's gone up in price, I can name one that's stayed the same. Their printers, their powershots, the starter DSLR line, etc.

elflord

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 705
    • View Profile
Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #89 on: May 13, 2012, 06:32:03 PM »
To me, greedy isn't just wanting sales. "Greedy" is purposely charging a significant amount more for the product than its actual worth with no consideration for the customer.

And how do you determine what a product is "worth" ? We have something called a "market place" that does a very good job of determining what something is "worth".  I put it to you this thing called a market place will sort it out, and neither the manufacturer nor the consumer has the power to dictate what the optimal market price for the item is.

Quote
Canon still makes their profit, while I believe I'm paying a fair price. Greed comes in when the profit exceeds what the consumer believes to be a fair price.

To me, all that indicates is that "the consumer" is not part of the target market for that product. If the consumer doesn't find the item to be worth the asking price, they may decline to purchase it. For example, I declined to purchase a medium format digital back. This doesn't necessarily mean that the manufacturer is "greedy", just that it isn't right for me.  The same is true of the 5D Mark III (I already own a MkII)

That's how this thing called a "market place" works. If "the consumer" in aggregate, really believes the item to be overpriced, the item will fail to sell at that price and the seller will usually find that they get more revenue by lowering their price.

By the way, gradually lowering their price is one way to effectively do "price discrimination" -- that is, if 10 people are willing to pay 3500 and 10 people are willing to pay 3000, you want your revenue to be 65000, not 35000 (if you had a fixed price of 3500) or 60000.

Quote
If it were $3,000 I don't think I'd be complaining at all, actually. Maybe even $3,100. But $3,500? Very optimistic on Canon's part and it's taking advantage of the fact that some people don't actually care about price vs value

I don't understand why anyone is "complaining". No-one is forcing them to buy that or any other product, and it's not as though that is the only body that is compatible with Canon gear. There are a number of other very good camera bodies that will work with the accessories you have.

Quote
(usually this happens when someone has enough money that a $500 difference seems minuscule).

Again, if you're in the target market for this product, AND you're one of the people who needs to own the latest model almost immediately after its release, you probably have a few thousand dollars worth of equipment and really won't sweat $500.

Quote
I can afford it, so I'm not one of those people who's upset because they can't. I just care a lot about the value of what I'm getting.

Again, what is your measure of value ?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?
« Reply #89 on: May 13, 2012, 06:32:03 PM »