- Status
you forgot to add the option of "I think canon should pay me to use it for them"
without having seen or tested the camera its pretty hard to determine how much i think is fair to pay for it based on half a dozen specs off a rumour dont you think?
without having seen or tested the camera its pretty hard to determine how much i think is fair to pay for it based on half a dozen specs off a rumour dont you think?
Upvote
0
Nick888 said:
A bit hard to say since we don't know the FPS yet or if they fixed the banding and low ISO DR or if the AF really is the full 1DX AF, etc.
I couldn't vote at this time, just not enough known for sure.
If it has some crummy, poor 61pt AF and 3.9 fps I'd be disappointed if it cost $2500. If it has full 1DX AF with no crippling and the new system works well and it has the 7.5fps of the Aquatech rumor and they imprved low ISO DR by 2 tops then it could be worth the $3500.
If I had to vote, of course I'd vote $2500, since hey why would anyone want to pay more if the price is not tied to the specs.
Upvote
0
Voted anyway.
5d2 shutter life expactancy is set to 150 000 and camera costs let's say 2000$. Although you can repair it, let's assume that you would throw it away. So each 1000 shots costs ca 13$ (without counting lens, power, CF etc). I find it interesting if firmware would allow you making photos after you have bought additional package (like prepaid) of let's say 1000 actuations for 20$. Would you find it interesting to buy 5d2 for 200$ and later:
- pay for each 1000 photos, let's say 30$ (10 000 for 250$, 50 000 for 1000$)
- pay addional monthly fee of ca 10$?
No matter how these are calculated, it's just an illustration.
Of course I doubt it would ever happen (firmware security at least) but I'm interested if you would like buy a camera paying this way?
Pros who earn on it, can always lease it and don't find it interesting. But amateurs maybe could pay per use?
5d2 shutter life expactancy is set to 150 000 and camera costs let's say 2000$. Although you can repair it, let's assume that you would throw it away. So each 1000 shots costs ca 13$ (without counting lens, power, CF etc). I find it interesting if firmware would allow you making photos after you have bought additional package (like prepaid) of let's say 1000 actuations for 20$. Would you find it interesting to buy 5d2 for 200$ and later:
- pay for each 1000 photos, let's say 30$ (10 000 for 250$, 50 000 for 1000$)
- pay addional monthly fee of ca 10$?
No matter how these are calculated, it's just an illustration.
Of course I doubt it would ever happen (firmware security at least) but I'm interested if you would like buy a camera paying this way?
Pros who earn on it, can always lease it and don't find it interesting. But amateurs maybe could pay per use?
Upvote
0
To upgrade for the new AF system only, I would not pay more then $3k. However if this new camera also has significant ISO performance improvement AND the new 61 point AF system, then I dont really care for price, I would even pay $5k for this small body 1dx!!!
Upvote
0
DzPhotography said:Stupid question, the less, the better
Not neccesserely
The quality and improvements have their price. Assuming base functionality and base price on 5d2 k,vel, I'd rather like to pay more and get more. I don't believe we can have more for the same price as 5d2. I'd rather like to get improvements worth additional 1000$ in comparison to 5d2 functionality and it's current price.
Upvote
0
A
april
Guest
marekjoz said:DzPhotography said:Stupid question, the less, the better
Not neccesserely
The quality and improvements have their price. Assuming base functionality and base price on 5d2 k,vel, I'd rather like to pay more and get more. I don't believe we can have more for the same price as 5d2. I'd rather like to get improvements worth additional 1000$ in comparison to 5d2 functionality and it's current price.
I'll ha ve my fingerrs crossed on this hoping that you'd be wrong. I do hope canon will drop the 5d2 price the have the 5dIII/x take overr that price position... Isn't it a better deal????
Upvote
0
april said:marekjoz said:DzPhotography said:Stupid question, the less, the better
Not neccesserely
The quality and improvements have their price. Assuming base functionality and base price on 5d2 k,vel, I'd rather like to pay more and get more. I don't believe we can have more for the same price as 5d2. I'd rather like to get improvements worth additional 1000$ in comparison to 5d2 functionality and it's current price.
I'll ha ve my fingerrs crossed on this hoping that you'd be wrong. I do hope canon will drop the 5d2 price the have the 5dIII/x take overr that price position... Isn't it a better deal????
That would be much better deal and I wish the world would look like this
I also hope I'm wrong. I could even smite myself once for each $ below 3000$.
Upvote
0
May the cameras be for free and all the money to be made on lenses (of which I already have a few) ;D
Upvote
0
cps_user said:Hard to say. For most people however I'd say: keep the 5d II and spend some $$$ on developing photo skills. I do this too and it's much more helpful than just some new stuff.
+1. Agreed!
Upvote
0
Yes, consumers who have no clue about development or manufacturing costs should set prices. Although Canon makes money on these, as cameras don't make good loss leader products, any increase in price does not mean that it's pure gravy for them. Yes, the cost of a product is considered in placing it but so are myriad other factors. Plus the idea of bitching about the cost of something that isn't even established is ridiculous to me. Same thing with the lens prices "ohh that's way too much" having never seen a single sample image... silly. No this does not mean I like paying more.
Upvote
0
ions said:Yes, consumers who have no clue about development or manufacturing costs should set prices. Although Canon makes money on these, as cameras don't make good loss leader products, any increase in price does not mean that it's pure gravy for them. Yes, the cost of a product is considered in placing it but so are myriad other factors. Plus the idea of bitching about the cost of something that isn't even established is ridiculous to me. Same thing with the lens prices "ohh that's way too much" having never seen a single sample image... silly. No this does not mean I like paying more.
Exactly. There is a term: "demand curve" and except other factors (influence on other product and competition) it is most important factor considered when price setting. Basing on marketing research, historical data and actual economic situation you can draw a curve within axes price vs demand (projected sales number). As far as we can determine total production, tax and delivery costs we can set the price for a customer at which the total profit on sold items will be maximum. But who cares?
Upvote
0
- Status
