EOS 6D MK II
- Feb 28, 2013
My gut feeling is they will price in the UK at launch between £ 3,500 & £ 3,700. Its less parts than a 5D MKIV but that was around £ 3,500 at launch.
I'd pay more to get one that was as superior (in size and image quality) to the RP's as the Nikon Z6 is. That's aside from the issues of the display itself.I think it depends on the quality (and cost) of the EVF you would find acceptable for your main camera. I won't be surprised (nor hesitant) to pay a $500 more for an EVF that is much closer to the quality of a FF OVF than the EOS R one.
If we are talking about backup or crash cameras, that's another story, but I don't think it would be the main niche for the R5.
I wonder the same thing, you would think that on some level they monitor these sites but it would be interesting to know exactly how close they do and what they do with the information if anything.I have gone thru all of this thread looking at all the comments with great interest. Slightly tongue in cheek, if Canon were to do the same as I did they would get a great insight as to price expectations for the R5 and if the price they set at launch were within the parameters discussed here they would know in advance that they were on to a winner. The question is .. is this thread self determining the price which could be higher than Canon had in mind ?
Yes, I also would find it very interesting to know if/how much Canon monitor / follow sites and forums like this one, DPReview, etc.I wonder the same thing, you would think that on some level they monitor these sites but it would be interesting to know exactly how close they do and what they do with the information if anything.
Well, that's the thing that I think is the 'catch'.The A9 is currently $3499. A7III is $1799. I assume you meant A7R IV which is $3499.
If they price R5 higher than $3299, they're repeating old mistakes. One of the benefits of MILC is that they're (usually) cheaper than DSLRs, and it's the main reason A7III killed everything else in the FF market in the past 2 years. Canon's RF lenses already sell for a hefty premium, and if they start charging $4000+ for MILCs that aren't even flagship level, they're just being greedy. It would be a huge mistake that I'd rather not see them make. Sony forums are also banking on the R5 being ridiculously expensive, because they know it will stop people from jumping to Canon.
Being overpriced (along with the RF lenses that arguably already are) will also make EF users apprehensive about jumping to mirrorless. Or it might drive them to Sony, which is what this camera is supposed to prevent.
I'm of the thought, that anyone that is truly in the market for the R5, isn't gonna let $400 sway them one way or the other.I didn’t read his words that way at all. I agree with him that many of those shopping in this range might be indifferent to a marginal change in price within a plausible range (now I’m paraphrasing him, hopefully accurately).
But that reasonable principle of elasticity of demand (inelasticity in this case) can’t be taken to absurd extremes. Not good logic.
My question is this: Would an owner of only R bodies ever buy a new EF big white lens for $7000-12,000 for adapter use, if they could wait for lenses designed for the RF? I've asked this before, and never heard anyone say yes.And I'm thinking at the r5 level, which to me is sounding more like high end prosumer market, that this market won't have many/any qualms about using the EF/RM adapter.
You are assuming that their "growing RF customer base in need of big whites, but without backup EF bodies or EF glass" will be big enough to matter. I'm not sure it's that likely on a shrinking market.My question is this: Would an owner of only R bodies ever buy a new EF big white lens for $7000-12,000 for adapter use, if they could wait for lenses designed for the RF? I've asked this before, and never heard anyone say yes.
A working pro might with an immediate and ongoing need surely, but he's 99% likely to have an EF body.
I'm not an adapter hater - they are great for using existing or bargain used lenses but otherwise make me cringe. I suspect that Canon's internal data will show they aren't selling new EF lenses to their growing RF customer base.
You may be right that today, those who own only RF bodies is a small segment. After the R5 brings switchers that will increase, and as EF owners switch to RF that will continue. If Canon wants to won more switchers, having an appealing range of current pro lenses not requiring adapters reduces resistance to switching. Others may doubt whether RF will effectively supplant EF, but all signs are that is will.You are assuming that their "growing RF customer base in need of big whites, but without backup EF bodies or EF glass" will be big enough to matter. I'm not sure it's that likely on a shrinking market.
This is the summary so far:
3299 * 1
3399 * 1
3499 * 1
3500 * 1
3599 * 1
3600 * 2
3799 * 1
3887/8 * 2
3899 * 1
4299 * 1
4350 * 1
Soon we will know. The winner will get a sunglass emoji from me. I promise.