Canon 1DC is IDENTICAL to 1DX other than firmware

[Chewy734]

so why we talking about all this??

just shut up, don´t voice your opinion.. buy or don´t buy canon stuff.. that is the solution for everything canon!!

I hope you forgot the /sarcasm tag there.

Why wouldn't you discuss this in an open forum?  For example, people are discussing how crappy the new maps are on iOS 6 on the Apple forums.

[marekjoz]

so you all stop complaining about canons decision to sell the crippled 6D for 2100$... pathetic bunch.... 

if 6000$ more for firmware is ok then sure the 6D is worth 2100 dollar.

so why we talking about all this??

just shut up, don´t voice your opinion.. buy or don´t buy canon stuff.. that is the solution for everything canon!!

I like to read this forum as a place where I can learn something and find useful links for more lecture. I can advice the same for others.

[pdirestajr]

What is the difference in price between PhotoShop Elements & CS6 Master Suite?

[DB]

As a research student at university, I pay a reduced amount for Windows 7 Pro and Adobe CS6 (through suppliers like Software 4 Students), so I appreciate fully the difference between an individual (like myself) purchasing Adobe CS6 for 1/10th of the price of say an Advertising Agency who will use it as a tool to make money. I will play with Photoshop and Premiere Pro for my own amusement. Therefore I understand the compelling argument that commercial enterprises can afford to pay a higher price. I still do not understand though why Adobe would want to charge me - as an individual - €3,600+VAT (sales tax @21% where I live), or approximately US$5,000 for their full suite of tools.

With regards to morals & ethics, well morality is a very grey area, after all who can say definitively what is right and what is wrong, however, ethics is an entirely different matter. Ethics relates to conduct and behavior, particularly professional conduct, and it is not imho ethical to admit to customers that product A and B are identical physically, but because of a slight difference (in software), that one customer is expected to pay double. Indeed, commercial organizations do not divulge their costs to the public in detail (especially product detail), nor are they legally required to. It is also not ethical to divulge that your employer makes a product for 8 bucks and sells it for 250! Ask any HR director or personnel executive. Or worse, ask your boss!

As Neuro said above, Canon do not operate on a Cost+ basis. They sell their DSLR 'lifestyle' products (most are not targeted at Professionals but at hobbyists and serious amateur enthusiasts) to people who want particular features and are prepared to pay for them. Neuro has a 1DX and a lot of L glass, and does not really care if the 1DX cost Canon $2k to manufacture and he paid $6k for it in a store. He wanted it, so he bought it.

But getting back to the original question regarding the identical (physically) products that are controlled by different firmware. We live in a world where if you buy a product, it is yours and you can do with it what you wish. It's your property after all. Which is why most of us would agree that using Magic Lantern software on a Canon camera is legitimate - it may invalidate your manufacturer warranty - but that is your choice.

Ergo, using the last argument, if a buyer purchases a 1DX for full retail, then pays ML a $50 contribution (along with thousands of other 1DX owners) towards a bootable firmware upgrade that turns a 1DX temporarily into a 1Dc (and back again when you remove the memory card) then that is perfectly fine and legal.

Now if this does happen, is it then ethical for a TV network to buy 4 x 1DX's instead of 4 x 1Dc's and buy the firmware off of ML in an effort to reduce costs? Answer: of course it is.

So I fundamentally disagree that Canon was ethical divulging this proprietary fact that has commercial implications. There simply was no need to. Furthermore, they should have designed a slightly different body for the 1Dc such that it's physical appearance would not have prompted customers to ask in the first place.

Canon have made a faux pas here, and in the process have dangled a challenge to hackers and software developers to have a go (and they will, try at least). Now that is not in the interests of Canon Inc. shareholders.

[victorwol]

What is the difference in price between PhotoShop Elements & CS6 Master Suite?

Tons of features and more programs. Not just allowing you to sabe bigger files...  You are kidding right?

[marekjoz]

I hope I'm wrong, but in this case it may be not so easy for ML as just unlocking these features. There may be quite a lot of code necessery to write, in order to make it running on 1Dx. It can even be not possible at all and until ML team takes in it their hands, no one except Canon knows it more or less sure.

I don't find it not ethical, what they admitted. It owuld be not ethical, if they would deny but someone would prove it.

If this is what they did was not ethical, then we live in a world, where everything is not ethical as well, or worse.

Windows Pro vs Windows Server - without one byte in register, different price.
Printers differing in one additional chip making them worse for purpose
Processors with bridged jumpers to force them work at specific speed
Ink cartridges with processors
Car engines operated with software not allowing optimized results
Producing another case and some buttons for commercial product and selling it for three times the price
Car parts requiring to be changed for no reason after the guarantee period is over

As far this business is more ethical than others, because here I haven't seen something like planned obsolescence (read more for explanation and other links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence). In terms of ethics I will defend Canon in this case (not being a fanboy myself) because I have seen hundreds of really not ethical behaviors and this is not the one. Hiding this information would not be ethical, admitting it is ethical.

[ishdakuteb]

Youre essentially paying for the software that costs the company money and time to develop. Programmers arent free guys.

Being a programmer myself, I agree

Shawn L.

+1

[DB]

Canon do not have to lie, they just have to say "We do not comment on certain technological aspects of our products for commercial reasons".


The software coding issue is very pertinent - we do not know if it is a lot of code or just a few lines. Thus it may be an impossible task to crack, then again just like a ML coder had an "Aha!" moment and 3-years of not being able to crack the 7D firmware with 2 processors becomes another Canon camera to be added to the list of ML scalps.

[pdirestajr]

What is the difference in price between PhotoShop Elements & CS6 Master Suite?

Tons of features and more programs. Not just allowing you to sabe bigger files...  You are kidding right?

Um, I didn't ask what was the difference between the programs- I was making a point referring to the difference in price!

IE: Software comes in a range of prices, hence, the reason the 1DC can be so much more expensive.

[simonxu11]

In the end, it's still a canon forum~~people here try to defend canon as hard as they can while canon is laughing,  they will continue this strategy as long as they can because the existence of these truly loyal consumers.

[thatcherk1]

I think what I have a hard time understanding is the fact that they think they'll make more money from having the two different models: X vs C. Yes there are many medium-end filmmakers who will pay the price premium, and Canon will make some money off them to be sure. However there are many many more low-end filmmakers who have a 5D, GH2, etc. that won't pay 13,000 for a 4k camera, but would pay $6800 for it. It's not so big a leap in price for those who make a smaller amount of money shooting. I'd think that the profit they could make off of a $6800 camera that shoots 4k would far exceed that of a $13000 camera. Because at $1300 they are lining up to be just another one of many competitors. If they could hit that 7k price point they could be the leader of the market again.

You might think that a low-end also as a 1Dx owner I thought for a little bit about getting a 1Dc, but I just couldn't justify the cost at the time. But I would like 4k SLR very much because I shoot wedding photography and videos and an all-in-one camera would be awesome. And now that I've forke over 7k on thee 1Dx I might be willing to fork over another 6k for a firmware update. There will be many like me who will change their mind after the fact, and would pay for a firmware update, but wouldn't pay another $1300 for an entirely new camera.

Just some thoughts. Canon can do what they want. I'm a capitalist. I price my weddi work like a capitalist. I just fail to see how they would make more money at the higher price point with this kind of market. But I'm a photographer not an economist.

[sublime LightWorks]

Unethical...  Immoral...

You keep using those words.  I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

Totally agree.  People here have never seen an episode of Shark Tank it seems.

When you go to a movie and pay $10 for a ticket per showing when you could buy the Blu-Ray for $20, is that unethical?  Is paying $20 for two drinks and a large popcorn when it costs the theater < $2 for that immoral?? 

Those complaining here are the same lot that complain that the 5D3 should sell for $1200, or that they didn't get all the features of the 1Dx in a body 1/3 the cost, or gee whizz the 6D does not have the same AF as the 7D.  Unrealistic whiners who would fail as corporate leaders.

They also would probably cry that BMW puts in restrictions on the US versions of the M5 that limit it's maximum horsepower and still charge you over $100k for the car.

[FunPhotons]

I work for a company that does this. A lot of companies do this. If you think there is something wrong with it then you have a naive view of production costs for a technological item. You aren't buying  a commodity like carrots here folks, these things are the products of a long R&D cycle where no money is being made, and lots of money is being spent for a long time.

The reason they do this is to lower production costs and thereby reduce the cost to the consumer and maximize profits to the company. In this case they can get a better ROIC on the 1DX by having a higher priced 1DC to help fund it - and I bet the price on the 1DX is lower than it might be if this didn't happen. The 1DC costs more because it sells to a tiny market - and don't believe that it doesn't take expensive marketing resources to sell to that market.

It's called a product line. Dishwasher manufacturers do the same thing. All their models usually derive from one basic chassis where they add on different front panels and parts. In this case the 1DC has a software add on and a name tag. And don't pretend for a minute that the firmware development came for free.

Grow up and get over it.

[victorwol]

The only difference with the 1D X is that records in 4K using the same machine. So that is like Adobe charging you 10 times more for allowing Elements to save bigger files. Your comparison with Elements and the full suite does not makes much sense since we are talking about hundreds of more features. Not just one. Now if the difference where 4K, vectorscope, RAW codec, HDSDI output, 10 bits recording, 4:4:4 etc... Then I can see that being paid no problem. But just allow a 4 K recording on the same hardware for twice the money seems a bit too much for mostly everyone in here.

[preppyak]

Again, what other companies offer 4k for $6800? Aside from JVC with a fixed lens, tiny sensor camera.

The closest thing is the theoretical 4k of Sony when they release it, and even that will likely cost $10k as a package. It'd be insane for Canon to offer their 4k camera for significantly less than their competitors, especially when it would destroy the rest of their video line (who buys a C300 or C500 when they can get better res at half the price).

Also, if you consider that the cost of R&D has to be spread out over potential buyers, who is to say it doesn't cost a S___ ton of money per camera. 4k isn't just some cakewalk piece of software....Sony hasn't even delivered theirs despite announcing their camera 6 months ago. Nobody even seems to know what it will cost or when it will release. Panasonic only has a concept camera that does 4k. Everything else that does 4k is $20k+, and the industry standard stuff is $50k+. The number of people who buy a camera this pricey might literally be in the hundreds or low thousands, and most of that will be production studios and rental shops.