ahsanford said:neuroanatomist said:ahsanford said:I think most people's disbelief with 9 fps is more 1DX2 cannibalization threat than a technical matter. The higher the fps gets on the 5D4, the more likely the cheaper 5D4 might steal 1DX2 business. Yes yes yes, there is far more to the 1DX2 than framerate, but some cannibalization will occur if the 5D4 framerate gets above a certain number.
Canon doesn't care if the 5DIV cannabalizes some 1D X II sales, per se. They care about overall revenue and profit. If their marketing research determines that a 5DIV at 9 fps vs. 7 fps will allow them to sell it for an extra $100, that will yield far more revenue and profit than what would be lost in 1D X II sales because of that higher frame rate.
No one would buy $4k+ 5D4, would they?
- A
I sure would at 9-10 FPS and would still be totally not in the market for a 1DX Mark II because of price. If a person like me were to buy a 5D Mark IV with 10 FPS it wouldn't cannibalize 1DX Mark II sales at all, and there are a whole lot of "me" out there.
The 5D Mark III was released 3 or 4 years ago. $4k is the new $3.5k
Besides, the assumed "bump" in price to offset 1DX II cannibalized sales still assumes that the market for the 1Dx II is more profitable than the 5D IV market. I don't know, but I'd guess the 5D market volume is vastly more profitable than the 1DX Mark II's.
I think having to increase the 5D mark IV price by $500 to offset the "sales cannibalization" caused by a still 6 or 7 FPS difference between the two is way off base. Firing off a 5D mark IV (@9 FPS and a 5D mark III (@6FPS) at the same time as a 1DX mark II at the same subject would still leave the 1DX Mark II winning. It beats the two 5D models put together. There's a yuge difference between the two cameras.
Upvote
0