Canon 5D Mark III - Price Drop Details
- Thread starter ramon123
- Start date
- Status
Re: 5D3 price drop?
Right on, V8. The most any photographer can do is nail the exposure, the perspective, timing, etc. The autofocus is something that a still photographer operating on their own cannot do, and must rely on the camera for. The days of the 80s are gone when anyone pretends to be able to keep perfect focus on a pole vaulter with manual focus, for instance.
For me the entire price of the camera was devoted to the autofocus system... otherwise, I would have been more than happy with extra copies of the cheaper 5D II.
V8Beast said:lady said:
Every damn penny
Right on, V8. The most any photographer can do is nail the exposure, the perspective, timing, etc. The autofocus is something that a still photographer operating on their own cannot do, and must rely on the camera for. The days of the 80s are gone when anyone pretends to be able to keep perfect focus on a pole vaulter with manual focus, for instance.
For me the entire price of the camera was devoted to the autofocus system... otherwise, I would have been more than happy with extra copies of the cheaper 5D II.
Upvote
0
J
jonathan9113
Guest
Higher mega pixel translates to higher noise. I switched to Canon because now Nikon is getting into mega pixel race Canon was in. The change was not without pain, getting rid of my Nikon D90 and the expensive lens. I have compared photos in low light between Mark iii (which I purchased with Amazon just in case I want to returned it) and my friend's D800. D800 obviously has more pixels but also more noise. If I shoot outdoor, I would upgrade to D800 but I am shooting mostly indoor so I am keeping the Mark iii. Also the focus speed and the auto white balance of the Mark iii is much better after careful comparison. My friend was silent after the comparison. I am not saying which one is better, it depends on what you are shooting. The mega pixel hype is to fool those who up to date still have no idea of the concept, no pun intended. You got to be kidding if Nikon or Canon can fool me to buy their camera base on mega pixel count. However, there is one thing I got to say, I am quite upset about Canon's sharp price drop. I am seeing $2995 in some stores, don't know their reputation but I suspect it may be grey market. I paid $3495, what a bummer! Canon, why is the price is so out of control, Nikon is doing a much better job stabilizing the prices? Grey market should only be $200 difference, not $500. I belief this a Canon price tactic, low balling Nikon with grey market after they discovered Nikon's better pricing point. The Mark iii should cost about the same as D800 to manufacture.
Upvote
0
S
stevenrrmanir
Guest
smirkypants said:
Wait until Nikon D600 comes out... watch Canon's potential buyers sway toward the better bodies. Canon will alienate their customers who bit the bullet on the MKIII by reducing the cost by $500... they should, but are too ignorant to realize that...
Upvote
0
S
stevenrrmanir
Guest
bornshooter said:
your thinking is backward - it is the OTHER way around...
prices for any device comes down as manufacturing improves...
prices staying high is an indication that:
a) limited supply
b) normal sales (ie. no blockbuster sales to warrant reduction in cost since profits are coming in)
Canon with their strategy these days reminds me of Sony!
Upvote
0
stevenrrmanir said:
I agree with you, Canon has now shut out independent repair shops except for a few big ones, just like Nikon.
At least Canon does support their products, and does not drop them whenever sales slow down. Try and get service or parts for a 2 year out of production Sony, if you need parts, they cost as much as a new camera, but you are safe, since there likely will not be any unless the part is also used in a current model.
Upvote
0
gecko said:When do you expect the 5D4 to be released?Daniel Flather said:
Personally, I would predict that the 5d4 (or equivalent ff 5d3 sensor upgrade) will be released sooner than the 5d2->5d3 period. Even if Canon would come up with a 5d2-like major firmware upgrade, that wouldn't update the sensor nor change the hardware for things like hdmi out.
Razor2012 said:
You could also calculate how many $$$ the 5d3 ownership has cost you every day
Upvote
0
O
Otter
Guest
There is no way the camera is dropping $1000 by next year. The actual cost for Canon to build this camera is $2400. They're not going to be selling it for $100 over cost. Perhaps 2 years from now it will hover between $3000-3200. Anyone who thinks it is going to see a huge price drop is just a victim of wishful thinking I suppose, not that there's anything wrong with that.
Upvote
0
Marsu42 said:
Ever heard of researchers like http://www.isuppli.com/ or others?
I do not know what the hw cost of the Canon are exactly in this case, though, didn't check my researches, but its certainly not that impossible to estimate. Nonetheless I agree the components like the sensor and further none hardware related costs are a factor too, still not impossible to come close. 2400 sounds high though to me...
On a side note, even though nobody might care...
I finally(!), after long long weeks of checking & comparisons (also with Nikon)
ORDERED my 5D3 as a Kit.
I reached my threshold and have a very good warranty on top from a good dealer.
Can't wait to get my beauty of the beauties ;D
Upvote
0
Otter said:
Well, thank you and your friend for sharing this information
... that certainly reduces the possibility of massive price drops, but I really wonder how the 5d3 can be so much more expensive to make? The 5d2 sharing basically the same sensor is sold for much less after all, and I assume Canon does make a healthy profit even with the older camera body.Is it maybe because the $2400 include the high advertising and r&d effort for the 5d3/5dx af system, and after the r&d is returned the actual hardware manufacturing cost is much lower?
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
I seriously doubt that any manufacturer, especially one with such a diversified product line, can say with certainty what one particular product costs them.
I'm not suggesting that they don't assign a cost to the product, I'm just suggesting that it is inevitable that the assigned cost has to factor in a number of assumptions that are not so easily segmented. Certainly, for their own internal accounting purposes, they would try to keep the camera division costs separate from the office machines division. And, I'm sure they try to segment the costs out as much as possible within a division – calculating real costs where possible and assigning shared costs as best they can.
But, costs don't fit neatly into clear assignments to individual products. Just use sensor research as an example. At some level, the research benefits every sensor they develop from the smallest point and shoot to the 1Dx. The cost of research unique to a particular sensor or format can be assigned, but the embedded costs of having a sensor development division must be allocated over the entire product line. Product development research must also be shared across products. The allocation will be done using hundreds of assumptions, many of which are made according to the overall goals and objectives of the company, not necessarily based on what percentage of the entire product line an individual product represents.
Ultimately, Canon is a single company and that means that various divisions must supplement one another depending on current market conditions, so that the entire product line survives over time. Just this spring, in their shareholder call, Canon stated that the office machines division was down and profits from the camera division were able to offset those losses.
This doesn't mean that Canon will or can lower prices. It doesn't mean that the $2,400 figure for the 5DIII is right or wrong or that they haven't assigned that number to the cost of the camera. It means that it's a little crazy to try to say "this camera costs this much to make" and even crazier to say "Canon is ripping me off because this camera should only cost this much."
In the end, the only relevant cost is the cost the consumer is willing to pay.
I'm not suggesting that they don't assign a cost to the product, I'm just suggesting that it is inevitable that the assigned cost has to factor in a number of assumptions that are not so easily segmented. Certainly, for their own internal accounting purposes, they would try to keep the camera division costs separate from the office machines division. And, I'm sure they try to segment the costs out as much as possible within a division – calculating real costs where possible and assigning shared costs as best they can.
But, costs don't fit neatly into clear assignments to individual products. Just use sensor research as an example. At some level, the research benefits every sensor they develop from the smallest point and shoot to the 1Dx. The cost of research unique to a particular sensor or format can be assigned, but the embedded costs of having a sensor development division must be allocated over the entire product line. Product development research must also be shared across products. The allocation will be done using hundreds of assumptions, many of which are made according to the overall goals and objectives of the company, not necessarily based on what percentage of the entire product line an individual product represents.
Ultimately, Canon is a single company and that means that various divisions must supplement one another depending on current market conditions, so that the entire product line survives over time. Just this spring, in their shareholder call, Canon stated that the office machines division was down and profits from the camera division were able to offset those losses.
This doesn't mean that Canon will or can lower prices. It doesn't mean that the $2,400 figure for the 5DIII is right or wrong or that they haven't assigned that number to the cost of the camera. It means that it's a little crazy to try to say "this camera costs this much to make" and even crazier to say "Canon is ripping me off because this camera should only cost this much."
In the end, the only relevant cost is the cost the consumer is willing to pay.
Upvote
0
unfocused said:
You're correct, thanks for expanding on the alleged $2400 price tag.
But I think there's still is a baseline price which includes just the manufacturing costs (parts (patent fees for ip, in-house and 3rd party parts), labor and shipping) without return of invest for r&d and setting up the whole assembly and without costs for supporting the whole Canon enterprise, including support & warranty.
This is the price the 5d3 will not drop under even if it's manufactured for 100 years. While it might be interesting how higher it's for the 5d3 vs. the 5d2, of course this has no meaning for real world consumer prices.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
