R5 Release Price. Just for fun.

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,543
367
S Florida
I'm a bit surprised at how many optimistic folks around here think the R5 will launch at a lower price than the 5DIV. That's not Canon's style in my observations, but I'd love to be mistaken...
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

Kit.

EOR R
Apr 25, 2011
1,735
1,076
I'm a bit surprised at how many optimistic folks around here think the R5 will launch at a lower price than the 5DIV. That's not Canon's style in my observations, but I'd love to be mistaken...
I don't think the launch price for the R5 is below what was the launch price of 5D4, but if we are to believe that there is some "Canon style" enforced for setting prices for Canon products, then we can observe that "Canon style" prices for mirrorless cameras are lower than the launch price of 5D4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quackator

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,543
367
S Florida
I don't think the launch price for the R5 is below what was the launch price of 5D4, but if we are to believe that there is some "Canon style" enforced for setting prices for Canon products, then we can observe that "Canon style" prices for mirrorless cameras are lower than the launch price of 5D4.
Since Canon's only 2 FF MILC releases were far less capable than the 5DIV, they aren't accurate examples. I am not aware of many examples of Canon's releasing an updated and improved camera for a lower price, perhaps you could provide a few?
 

Kit.

EOR R
Apr 25, 2011
1,735
1,076
Since Canon's only 2 FF MILC releases were far less capable than the 5DIV, they aren't accurate examples. I am not aware of many examples of Canon's releasing an updated and improved camera for a lower price, perhaps you could provide a few?
Isn't a single example (such as 5D2) enough to prove that Canon is capable of thinking out of the imaginary box some people tend to confine it to?

But anyway, R5 is not an "updated and improved 5D4", that would be 5D5. R5 lacks OVF, so the quality of its EVF will be an important factor in finding a suitable price this camera. I hope that this EVF will be expensive, but it's just my personal preference, I have no idea what Canon thinks about it.
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,543
367
S Florida
Isn't a single example (such as 5D2) enough to prove that Canon is capable of thinking out of the imaginary box some people tend to confine it to?

But anyway, R5 is not an "updated and improved 5D4", that would be 5D5. R5 lacks OVF, so the quality of its EVF will be an important factor in finding a suitable price this camera. I hope that this EVF will be expensive, but it's just my personal preference, I have no idea what Canon thinks about it.
My comment was about the release price of the R5 vs the release price of the 5DIV. I'm not sure what you're arguing about.
 

Kit.

EOR R
Apr 25, 2011
1,735
1,076
My comment was about the release price of the R5 vs the release price of the 5DIV. I'm not sure what you're arguing about.
Your comment was about alleged "Canon's style" in pricing. There is no such "style"; Canon is a big and quite successful commercial company, whose prices are guided by market research, not by some self-imposed "style", especially when it comes to introducing a new product line on a declining market.
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,543
367
S Florida
Your comment was about alleged "Canon's style" in pricing. There is no such "style"; Canon is a big and quite successful commercial company, whose prices are guided by market research, not by some self-imposed "style", especially when it comes to introducing a new product line on a declining market.
I see. You have a problem with "style." Calvin Klein will be so disappointed...
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,222
1,255
Since Canon's only 2 FF MILC releases were far less capable than the 5DIV, they aren't accurate examples. I am not aware of many examples of Canon's releasing an updated and improved camera for a lower price, perhaps you could provide a few?
EOS 1D X introductory price: $6,799 in U.S.
EOS 1D X Mark II introductory price: $5,999 in U.S.
 

Quackator

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2011
341
183
$3599 Retail, (...)
Yes. Or less, depending on how deep the A7RIV falls
until Canon finally determines their launch price.

Personally, if Canon wanted to clean the floor with the competitors
they'd be selling at $2995 per unit and to a certain extent this could
be a viable move as their main competition is the A7iii, iv and riv.
Not the A9.
Still, it would kill the A9II in one roundhouse swing just as well.

I also think that the R5 is a technological war machine,
geared towards winning market share back.

And it is meant to do so in a landslide.

Which sets the price point.
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,466
2,297
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
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.

Those EF body owners whose now-preferred, higher-value, newer body is an RF will similarly hesitate before buying a new-priced EF lens.

Just my predictions, heavily biased by the widespread bias that others are like oneself.
Of course, we can all speculate without fear of contradiction (at least for several years), but I am of two minds here:

1) I hope Canon starts producing big whites in the RF mount and it drives down the demand and price for EF lenses, so I can afford an EF big white; on the other hand:

1) The R5, or a subsequent model, has to prove itself. Until mirrorless cameras can match DSLRs for sports and action, including BIF, I don't see many of these customers dropping their DSLRs and going all mirrorless. So much of the speculation on this forum assumes a magical R5 that matches the 5D in all performance aspects. As a user of the R, I am reserving judgement on that happening.

2) You say, "...Others may doubt whether RF will effectively supplant EF, but all signs are that is will..." But, I'm not sure what signs you are seeing. Perception can vary from person to person, but the public statements from Canon have been pretty clear that they are not abandoning the EF mount. They have said that they are temporarily concentrating on RF, which is only natural since they need to build out the line, but they have also said they will add new EF lenses if the market is there.

3) For many users there would need to be a viable APS-C option. Now, a 45 mp sensor comes close to the 7D II, but it is far less resolution than the 90 D. Who knows if we will ever see an R model that is crop sensor?

4) Who is buying these big whites? Professional sports photographers and their supporting agencies will continue to use the 1Dx series for at least the next four years, and I suspect they represent a large percentage of big white buyers. As they need to replace lenses, they are going to opt for the lens that has the most flexible mount, which is EF.

5) Will there be any advantage to the RF mount? So far, we aren't seeing many benefits that would translate into a better big white lens, so why buy an RF mount and limit your options and possibly reduce resale value? (Unlike most other lenses, I believe many individuals who buy a big white do so planning on being able to recoup at least a portion of their purchase price upon resale.)

6) From a very personal standpoint, if I could afford a big white, I can't see myself buying an RF mount. It will be more expensive and I will not be able to use it with anything but an R body. (In fact, I have been going through this mind exercise lately with the 70-200 f2.8. My lens is getting long in the tooth and should probably be replaced soon. If I bought the RF version I could better fit it into my bag and it would be nice to have to use with the R, but I need to be able to use it with the 5D and the 1Dx as well, so I will instead buy a 70-200 III and continue to use the adapter.) Perhaps someday I will switch completely over to R bodies, but not within the next five years or so. So, I would much prefer an EF to an R when investing in a big white.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Quackator

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2011
341
183
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?
The answer depends on wether he wants to use it now,
and what his expected remaining lifespan is.

Since nobody knows exactly how long the waiting time would
have to be, and what the price of the hypothetical new RF lens
would be..... yes.

If you have an application for a supertelephoto lens,
it is available now at known performance and cost.
 

wockawocka

EOS 7D MK II
Sep 13, 2011
787
109
Yes. Or less, depending on how deep the A7RIV falls
until Canon finally determines their launch price.



Still, it would kill the A9II in one roundhouse swing just as well.

I also think that the R5 is a technological war machine,
geared towards winning market share back.

And it is meant to do so in a landslide.

Which sets the price point.
I think we need to factor in the full specs too. Even though the initial info looks good, Canon could easily kill this puppy with a silly boardroom decision.
 

slclick

Cyclist, photog, drummer & sardonic haiku writer
Dec 17, 2013
4,014
1,882
What are the holes in the argument for loss leadering the body to attract future RF sales? The body is once, the lenses are numerous.
 

koenkooi

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
864
641
What are the holes in the argument for loss leadering the body to attract future RF sales? The body is once, the lenses are numerous.
I would think a loss leader wouldn't get heavily discounted over time, which is what Canon has done in the past.

Coming from the other end, what's the ratio between new 600mm L lenses and bodies? I would think that for every 600mm lens Canon sells that same person would buy at least 2 bodies over time. I bought most of my EF lenses 10 years ago, before I had kids and a mortgage, but I did buy a number of new bodies since then.
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,543
367
S Florida
What are the holes in the argument for loss leadering the body to attract future RF sales? The body is once, the lenses are numerous.
The biggest hole from my perspective is that Canon has no reason to. I think there is more than enough pent up demand for a 5DIV replacement and folks seem to be responding rather well to mirror-less, so why wouldn't Canon sell it for whatever the market will bear? If they aim too high like they did with the release of the original M or the EF IS primes, then they will make a correction. In the mean time I expect a high release price (my guess is $3899) that will likely remain until the holidays. Or not...
 

slclick

Cyclist, photog, drummer & sardonic haiku writer
Dec 17, 2013
4,014
1,882
Too high and I stick with my 5D3 for at least a year and/or until a Holiday sale or until it dies. I'll survive, it still works.
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,543
367
S Florida
I expect to wait a year and a half before picking up an R5. I have a 5DIV that shoots like new and an R to play with, so I'm good. The only photo-related item I was an early adopter of in recent memory was the EF 16-35 f/4L IS. Not a bit of regret on that one...
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanj