D'oh!!
Ok....I bid $2.
You can't do that. I was already on stage before you got called to "come on down!"
Upvote
0
D'oh!!
Ok....I bid $2.
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.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...
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?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.
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?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?
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.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.
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.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.
I see. You have a problem with "style." Calvin Klein will be so disappointed...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.
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?
$3599 Retail, (...)
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.
Of course, we can all speculate without fear of contradiction (at least for several years), but I am of two minds here: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.
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?
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.
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...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.