I didn't mean by the country/state tax institution, I meant by the companies. All electronic manufacturers seems to add 5-10% on electronics just because it's Europe.0% on digital photo cameras. At the moment, 1.6% on video camera recorders (those that can record video for more than 30 minutes continuously; used to be much higher in the past).
UGH...I could NOT deal with that.Yes, but then you are obliget to pay a VAT locally, at your country, right after the import, not to mention some possible customs duties, or you are simply breaking a law. In CZ, VAT is 21%.
Finland 24% at the moment. When I was living there, I believe it was 22%.UGH...I could NOT deal with that.
My state and local stales tax for purchases here is just a bit shy of 10%...and to me, that's too much.
21%? No freakin' way.....I know better what to do with my money that the government.
Oh, really?BUT the camera and lenses were Rollei, Leica, Linhof and later Hasselblad which of all the precision and reliability were just great and we all know..
Canon R 5 - given will be built with perfect precision - is not a *mechanical* Camera, is a complicated software into a shell, BUT we know that Software doesnt cost as assembling perfectly those cameras I named above.
Your post was about "precision mechanics" of some camera brands as opposed to Canon R5's.The sense of my post was NOT on the very special features of today cameras compared to those of past
Personally, I have zero interest in collectibles. I prefer to use a camera for taking pictures with it.lasting 50 years but on how similar the investment of past is the today one .. Will Canon R 5 last for the next 75 years ?
I suspect that the R5 sensor, the DIGIC X processor and IBIS were in development for quite a while. I doubt that the market reception of the R had any effect on R5 development.My guess is Canon ramped up EOS R5 timeline about 15mins after the less than favorable EOS R reception. The heavy lifting was done with EOS R and RP. The new mount was designed and the general shape and construction was there already. I would also guess tge majority of the minor components will be shared with R, RP, R5 and R6
I mostly agree with that, but I keep thinking about the touch bar on the R and the optical joystick on the 1Dx3. Why is the R the only Canon body with a touch bar and why does the 1dx3 have the optical joystick, but not the R5?I suspect that the R5 sensor, the DIGIC X processor and IBIS were in development for quite a while. I doubt that the market reception of the R had any effect on R5 development.
It doesn't work this way."Your post was about "precision mechanics" of some camera brands as opposed to Canon R5's."
No, you should read what is written - not what you instead would like to read..
I don't know what makes you think so.Canon R5 is insanely overpriced once you set up a minimum of professional set. 2 bodies, 2 flashes and so on..
I don't understand this claim.This very starting professional set has the same cost of excellent - very long lasting cameras as Leicas, Rolleis, Hasselblads that needed a highly skilled mounting capabilities.
What makes you think so? Especially as we have already established that R5 is superior in its mechanical specs to these ones?Canon R5 is built in much different way - the high price paid is mostly for the software.
What kind of photographic profession are you in if you change your cameras every 2 years?Within a 2 year-time Canon R 5 will need a mark 2 update and your investment will be thrown out of windows. Canon R5 real price as a good tool for photographers and not for uppish - limited income week end amateurs should be around 2500 tax included.
1- I like this debate over nothing while you Kit trying to steer the sense of my post - the cost of a Canon R 5 minimal professional set compared to mechanic camera of past - while the 1st will last until Canon different decision, the 2nd we still have it..It doesn't work this way.
What is written is a sequence of letters.
What I try to read is some coherent message behind this sequence.
Preferably, somehow based on the observable reality.
I don't know what makes you think so.
Besides, if you don't need all that extra hardware functionality of R5, you can get yourself an R6. Which will still be better than the "classic" 5DII, and will likely cost less than that one used to cost at the introduction.
I don't understand this claim.
Are you saying that you bring two Rolleis to your photo assignments?
Or do you claim that you could do the job with one Rollei body, and the same job would require two R5 bodies? Can you name that Rollei body? Is it Rolleidoscop or what?
Or are you trying to compare apples and oranges?
What makes you think so? Especially as we have already established that R5 is superior in its mechanical specs to these ones?
What kind of photographic profession are you in if you change your cameras every 2 years?
Is it Sony "ambassador"?
Or is it some sort of private glamour photography where your clients care more about how your camera looks like than how your photos look like?