Canon smarter than we think

[XanuFoto]

Like many other, I also with the 5DIII were priced closer to $3,000 than $3,500, but at the end of the day, I was more than willing to cough up the extra dough for its substantial improvements in AF, FPS, and build quality.

That said, I don't think Canon has showed all its cards just yet. There's been talk of an entry-level FF body for quite some time, and if it turns out to be true, the 5DIII's price point makes more sense. The fate of the 7D line is unknown at this point, either, so if Canon does axe the 7D or merge it into the xxD line, then an entry-level FF body priced somewhere between the 7D and the 5DIII makes even more sense.

Nailed it.

 

[nehemiah]

Interesting that the ones who can't afford the camera seem to be the ones who have the strongest business advice for Canon.

I'm a non-pro that's been posting in the BH and Amazon threads like many many others that can't currently buy this camera (I've ordered, not in stock). Obscure shops may have a couple in stock briefly, but the big retailers like BH and Amazon -- good luck. You can go right now and will have to wait 1-2 months according to their website for body-only.

I've done pretty well in business (on a small business scale). I own a 7D, several primes, 2 L lenses, 2x583EX2's, Elinchrom 500W strobes, and now am buying the 5D3. But you know what? Still my coffee set up costs more than my photo gear put together. And as for business advice for Canon? Don't have any -- they seem to be doing great. Since all indications are that the 5D3 is better than the 5D2, it's going to be a pretty fantastic camera. 3.5K is reasonable.

 

[keithfullermusic]

Interesting that the ones who can't afford the camera seem to be the ones who have the strongest business advice for Canon.

I'm a non-pro that's been posting in the BH and Amazon threads like many many others that can't currently buy this camera (I've ordered, not in stock). Obscure shops may have a couple in stock briefly, but the big retailers like BH and Amazon -- good luck. You can go right now and will have to wait 1-2 months according to their website for body-only.

I've done pretty well in business (on a small business scale). I own a 7D, several primes, 2 L lenses, 2x583EX2's, Elinchrom 500W strobes, and now am buying the 5D3. But you know what? Still my coffee set up costs more than my photo gear put together. And as for business advice for Canon? Don't have any -- they seem to be doing great. Since all indications are that the 5D3 is better than the 5D2, it's going to be a pretty fantastic camera. 3.5K is reasonable.

whether or not you can afford it is irrelevant. people can still understand business models without tons of cash in their pockets.

 

[Loswr]

whether or not you can afford it is irrelevant. people can still understand business models without tons of cash in their pockets.

True...but it can bias their viewpoint. Consider an extreme example - the cost of Vertex Pharmaceuticals' Kalydeco, a treatment for cystic fibrosis. I understand the business model which results in pricing of $300,000 for a year of drug, but if I had a child with CF I'd certainly be damn angry about it...

 

[Marsu42]

Interesting that the ones who can't afford the camera seem to be the ones who have the strongest business advice for Canon.

What magic insight enables you to tell if people can't afford the camera at all or just aren't willing to pay a premium for the real world photography advantages that the 5d3 offers over the 5d2 or aps-c bodies?

They have priced a camera for the segment you are talking about. Its called the MKII

I very much doubt that the mk2 is here to stay, it is very unusual that a clear successor would be kept along the original. Imho the 5d2 is here to dampen the 5d3 price tag and enable people to get a ff at a somewhat reasonable price until a real entry level ff body is there.

 

[awinphoto]

whether or not you can afford it is irrelevant. people can still understand business models without tons of cash in their pockets.

True...but it can bias their viewpoint. Consider an extreme example - the cost of Vertex Pharmaceuticals' Kalydeco, a treatment for cystic fibrosis. I understand the business model which results in pricing of $300,000 for a year of drug, but if I had a child with CF I'd certainly be damn angry about it...

Fair enough but a child with cystic fibrosis NEEDS the medicine and are being gouged... No one NEEDS a 5d3... A lot of people WANT a 5d3 but there are so many options/solutions/other offerings to get by without it... in this case it's Needs vs Wants

 

[briansquibb]

it's a better sports camera than any other camera Canon has made. And if the AF is as good as it looks to be, that alone may well make up for the slightly slower framerate over the pre-1DX cameras.

mmm - I would guess that 1D4 owners would dispute that .....

 

[Loswr]

whether or not you can afford it is irrelevant. people can still understand business models without tons of cash in their pockets.

True...but it can bias their viewpoint. Consider an extreme example - the cost of Vertex Pharmaceuticals' Kalydeco, a treatment for cystic fibrosis. I understand the business model which results in pricing of $300,000 for a year of drug, but if I had a child with CF I'd certainly be damn angry about it...

Fair enough but a child with cystic fibrosis NEEDS the medicine and are being gouged...

I agree with your point, but that's exactly the bias I was referring to...'gouged'. A business model is a business model, and many factors go into setting a price point. In this case, CF is a very small market, and the drug is only effective in 5% of patients in that already small market. R&D costs are high, and spent, and must be recovered for ROI.

Similarly, the cost to produce a 1D X is not double that to produce a 5DIII, but the cost to the consumer is double. Or for an even more direct example, compare the D800 with the D800E - basically the same camera (in fact, they took something away rather than adding something to the -E version), but fewer expected sales means a $300 higher cost for the product. Selling price has nothing to do with production costs, but rather is a combination of market forces and, to some extent, R&D recovery - that's why pills that cost literally pennies to produce can cost hundreds of dollars for the patient.

 

[awinphoto]

whether or not you can afford it is irrelevant. people can still understand business models without tons of cash in their pockets.

True...but it can bias their viewpoint. Consider an extreme example - the cost of Vertex Pharmaceuticals' Kalydeco, a treatment for cystic fibrosis. I understand the business model which results in pricing of $300,000 for a year of drug, but if I had a child with CF I'd certainly be damn angry about it...

Fair enough but a child with cystic fibrosis NEEDS the medicine and are being gouged...

I agree with your point, but that's exactly the bias I was referring to...'gouged'. A business model is a business model, and many factors go into setting a price point. In this case, CF is a very small market, and the drug is only effective in 5% of patients in that already small market. R&D costs are high, and spent, and must be recovered for ROI.

Similarly, the cost to produce a 1D X is not double that to produce a 5DIII, but the cost to the consumer is double. Or for an even more direct example, compare the D800 with the D800E - basically the same camera (in fact, they took something away rather than adding something to the -E version), but fewer expected sales means a $300 higher cost for the product. Selling price has nothing to do with production costs, but rather is a combination of market forces and, to some extent, R&D recovery - that's why pills that cost literally pennies to produce can cost hundreds of dollars for the patient.

Good point. I guess I was initially failing to see the correlation until you pointed it out

 

[x-vision]

Interesting that the ones who can't afford the camera seem to be the ones who have the strongest business advice for Canon.

There's a difference between "affording" and "overpaying".
Smart buyers hate overpaying ;D.

 

[briansquibb]

My bad for hurting the feelings of non-pros with $3.5K of disposable income ;D ;D.

You are forgiven 8) 8) 8)

 

[XanuFoto]

Interesting that the ones who can't afford the camera seem to be the ones who have the strongest business advice for Canon.

There's a difference between "affording" and "overpaying".
Smart buyers hate overpaying ;D.

Its overpaying when a comparable camera is available for less.

 

[briansquibb]

Interesting that the ones who can't afford the camera seem to be the ones who have the strongest business advice for Canon.

There's a difference between "affording" and "overpaying".
Smart buyers hate overpaying ;D.

Its overpaying when a comparable camera is available for less.

I uess it is hard to detirmine whether one camera is comparable with other - certainly this would be difficult with a D800 and a 5DIII as they are very different

 

[x-vision]

There's a difference between "affording" and "overpaying".
Smart buyers hate overpaying ;D.

Its overpaying when a comparable camera is available for less.

It's overpaying when perceived value does not match the price tag.

 

[awinphoto]

There's a difference between "affording" and "overpaying".
Smart buyers hate overpaying ;D.

Its overpaying when a comparable camera is available for less.

It's overpaying when perceived value does not match the price tag.

Sooo... one of the top AF systems out in the market, period, the highest ISO range in it's class and one of the top out in the market, period, 100 VF, weathersealing, 2 memory cards, better preformance, better metering system, more controls, better shooting systems... yeah your right... $3500 isn't a fair perceived value...

 

[nehemiah]

Interesting thought that only pros would buy a 5DIII - I know 3 people with 5DIII and none of those are pros - so what is that presumption based on?

Hehe. You seem to be missing my point ... while at the same time confirming it ;D.

As I said in my post, pros have never been the core market of the 5D series.
The 3 non-pros you know that bought the 5DIII are just another confirmation of that.

The thing is, as the price increases, the ratio of pro vs non-pro buyers increases too.

Non-pro buyers will still account for a large part of the of 5DIII sales.
However, pro buyers will now constitute a larger percentage of the total 5DIII sales compared to the 5DII (well, until the price drops, of course).

From that perspective, Canon did reposition the 5DIII as more of a pro camera compared to the 5DII.

I guess the expression "strictly for pros" is incorrect, though. I stand corrected.
There will be hobbyists buying the $6.8K 1DX camera and $14K 800/5.6L lens.
So, technically, non of these products is "strictly for pros". Same for the 5DIII.
My bad for hurting the feelings of non-pros with $3.5K of disposable income ;D ;D.

The bold seems to imply that the poster is not in this category.

My beef is not with those that can't afford the camera -- it's with those that presume to give business advice in a condescending way to Canon like they know better re: camera sales. That's quite a presumption.

Instead of implying that the MD3 is a sales failure by indicating that stores have them in stock (which is mostly not true anyway), the best way to see if the MD3 was a success for Canon would be to compare the sales to the MD2. These numbers will truly indicate which model sold better. It wouldn't surprise me to see that the MD3 sells more or at least in similar numbers to the MD 2 when you compare monthly or quarterly sales after launch.

 

[awinphoto]

Interesting thought that only pros would buy a 5DIII - I know 3 people with 5DIII and none of those are pros - so what is that presumption based on?

Hehe. You seem to be missing my point ... while at the same time confirming it ;D.

As I said in my post, pros have never been the core market of the 5D series.
The 3 non-pros you know that bought the 5DIII are just another confirmation of that.

The thing is, as the price increases, the ratio of pro vs non-pro buyers increases too.

Non-pro buyers will still account for a large part of the of 5DIII sales.
However, pro buyers will now constitute a larger percentage of the total 5DIII sales compared to the 5DII (well, until the price drops, of course).

From that perspective, Canon did reposition the 5DIII as more of a pro camera compared to the 5DII.

I guess the expression "strictly for pros" is incorrect, though. I stand corrected.
There will be hobbyists buying the $6.8K 1DX camera and $14K 800/5.6L lens.
So, technically, non of these products is "strictly for pros". Same for the 5DIII.
My bad for hurting the feelings of non-pros with $3.5K of disposable income ;D ;D.

The bold seems to imply that the poster is not in this category.

My beef is not with those that can't afford the camera -- it's with those that presume to give business advice in a condescending way to Canon like they know better re: camera sales. That's quite a presumption.

Instead of implying that the MD3 is a sales failure by indicating that stores have them in stock (which is mostly not true anyway), the best way to see if the MD3 was a success for Canon would be to compare the sales to the MD2. These numbers will truly indicate which model sold better. It wouldn't surprise me to see that the MD3 sells more or at least in similar numbers to the MD 2 when you compare monthly or quarterly sales after launch.

Also dont forget canon has been building more inventory of the 5d3 compared to the 5d2 launch, double the factories producing the 5d3 compared to the 5d2 launch, and were basically better prepared in this launch than the 5d2...

 

[sarangiman]

Canon 5DMkII cannibalized 1Ds sales. People who still sprung for the 1D series probably wanted (1) better AF; (2) better speed; (3) better sealing.

Now Canon releases a 5DMkIII which is essentially a 5DMkII that can actually (1) focus, (2) has 6fps vs. 3.9, & (3) apparently has better weather sealing.

Essentially closing the gap between 5D & 1D series even further.

But they open up pre-orders for it before you can even pre-order a 1Dx. Probably forcing a lot of people who've been looking for an upgrade to just go with the 5DIII even if they'd initially had their eyes on a 1Dx.

That really makes me question the foresight of their marketing team.

Unless they release some reports showing the vastly better tech of the 1Dx pronto (improved sensor? higher processing power to downscale 18MP to 2MP for 1080p video better using more sophisticated downsampling?), my feeling is they're going to once again have the 5DIII cannibalize 1Dx sales.

But I may be wrong.

 

[psolberg]

It is ok but it is not worth the cost for mos mk2 owners. 3500 is too steep.

 

[AmbientLight]

In my humble opinion Canon is doing well in terms of corporate strategy and execution. Lowering prices is often bad for business (would it be any good for yours?), so Canon trying to stick to a higher initial sales price, which is not even higher once you calculate currency effects, is just good business sense. Corporations want to earn money, not to give away new goods for less, which in my opinion would be sign of really bad business sense. Of course the trick is to set the right price for the market. If the pricing would be off, we can expect price corrections to increase sales volume, just to keep those factories occupied and to avoid stockpiling goods in warehouses, which does have a cost attached.

So for all of those who complain about $500 more or less in a camera's price, why don't you just wait? If many do feel like you, the price of the camera body will indeed come down to what you want. You only need some patience. If on the other hand there are so many people buying the camera for the initial asking price, that you are simply not part of the initial buyers group, you can still wait for eventual availability of a used camera or you can just save your money until you have sufficient funds. I don't think these are bad options. I myself am currently waiting, wondering if the price will come down. It doesn't make me question Canon's ability to perform business.

Regarding the 1Dx I believe Canon just wants to avoid errors, so they delay the launch until they feel they are ready.