The Canon EOS R system turns 3 and Lensrentals.com gives us a breakdown of its progression

[SteveC]

I suspect most people did compare it to the 5D4 and see the R as a bargain. Despite all the talk on these forums, relatively few people actually switch brands. Investment in a system, familiarity and inertia keep most people in-brand. As I previously stated, the majority of ILC users already shoot Canon, so logically Canon should be aiming their products at Canon users for more than one reason. It's Sony and Nikon that need to be more concerned about inducing customers to switch.

Canon has dominated the market for nearly two decades, sells more ILCs than Sony and Nikon combined, and last year gained more market share than Sony. It's painfully obvious that they know more about the ILC market than you or anyone else on this forum.

A lot of the switchers on this forum switched from not actually owning Canon, to not actually owning S*ny.

 

[unfocused]

I find "skimming" to be a needlessly perjorative term that refers to the smart and ethical strategy of loading more development costs into early sales to be paid willingly by those customers who value the new developments the most.

I've long tried to explain that the market ultimately sets the price. If Canon sets the price of a product too high the price will come down. A classic example would be the non-L EF 24, 28, and 35mm lenses that were introduced at very high prices and eventually Canon cut the prices of each lens substantially. Prior to the pandemic-induced shortages, the traditional pattern with Canon cameras was a high initial price in the first year, followed by rebates and price cuts in the ensuing years as the cameras floated to a level that reflected the market.

It's misleading for someone to use the prices of lenses and cameras over the past two years as indicative of general market trends, because we are in a bubble where supplies are short and demand is high. If supplies eventually return to normal levels, we can expect the traditional pattern of price cuts to follow.

 

[Random Orbits]

I find "skimming" to be a needlessly perjorative term that refers to the smart and ethical strategy of loading more development costs into early sales to be paid willingly by those customers who value the new developments the most.

Never heard the term "skimming" used that way until this thread. I thought it as a form of first degree price discrimination, but then it's been 20+ years that I took microeconomics.

 

[Random Orbits]

I suspect most people did compare it to the 5D4 and see the R as a bargain. Despite all the talk on these forums, relatively few people actually switch brands. Investment in a system, familiarity and inertia keep most people in-brand. As I previously stated, the majority of ILC users already shoot Canon, so logically Canon should be aiming their products at Canon users for more than one reason. It's Sony and Nikon that need to be more concerned about inducing customers to switch.

Canon has dominated the market for nearly two decades, sells more ILCs than Sony and Nikon combined, and last year gained more market share than Sony. It's painfully obvious that they know more about the ILC market than you or anyone else on this forum.

I considered switching because the new mount meant transitioning eventually. I did not want to consider Sony because of bad experiences with DLP TVs and their Tough cards, but Sony was considered... as was Nikon. I did get out of the EOS M system because it wasn't being used. Hopefully, Canon handles APS-C going forward better than Nikon. Maybe it will stay with the EOS M, but the M made more sense before the EOS R was introduced.

 

[John Wilde]

I find "skimming" to be a needlessly perjorative term that refers to the smart and ethical strategy of loading more development costs into early sales to be paid willingly by those customers who value the new developments the most.

"Price Skimming" is a term used by business professionals. There is nothing pejorative about the term. Google it.

 

[Talys]

"Price Skimming" is a term used by business professionals. There is nothing pejorative about the term. Google it.

Skim Pricing, which means the same thing, sounds less sinister to those not familiar

Everyone in tech uses skim pricing. I mean, EVERYONE. All it means is that you start out with the highest price that people who are willing to pay more for it when it comes out early (and when demand is usually highest)... then lower the price a bit at a time until it hits the sweet spot on the price /profit curve, where profit is maximized in the medium/long term.

Unfortunately, skimming sounds like they're stealing off the top or cutting street drugs to make a higher profit

Edit: by the way, the opposite of skim pricing is penetration pricing. Skim pricing is most effective when you don't have enough product to meet demand anyways.

 

[Talys]

4I considered switching because the new mount meant transitioning eventually. I did not want to consider Sony because of bad experiences with DLP TVs and their Tough cards, but Sony was considered... as was Nikon. I did get out of the EOS M system because it wasn't being used. Hopefully, Canon handles APS-C going forward better than Nikon. Maybe it will stay with the EOS M, but the M made more sense before the EOS R was introduced.

There's a HUGE difference between Canon adapted lenses and Sony and Nikon, though. You can argue the usability of adapted lenses on FE/Z, but in the vast majority of cases, the adapted lens autofocus works works worse than the original lens on its original mount.

On the other hand, when you put an EF on an RF adapter and mount it to an R, in almost every real-life case, it works better, plus you have nifty options like a control ring or filters. For me, the main reason I'm "transitioning" lenses from EF to RF is either because the RF lens is much smaller and/or lighter without giving much up (like the 70-200/2.8) or because the RF lens does something really compelling, like 28-70/2.

I think that Canon has been very clever with the f/1.2 primes and the 28-70, giving people who (like me) would otherwise say, "well I already have that in EF and it works so well, I'm not going to bother" a reason to open up their wallets. It also sure doesn't hurt either that the new RF lenses are super-duper sharp and have much cleaner CA out of camera.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I think that Canon has been very clever with the f/1.2 primes and the 28-70, giving people who (like me) would otherwise say, "well I already have that in EF and it works so well, I'm not going to bother" a reason to open up their wallets.

Exactly…they had to be. At the risk of perseverating, Canon’s main target for R bodies and RF lenses is owners of Canon DSLRs and EF lenses. That’s why claims of some people here that ‘the Canon 50/1.2 is heavier and softer than the Sony’ or ‘the Sony 70-200/2.8 is (25 g) lighter than the Canon’ are mostly irrelevant.

The RF 50/1.2 is aimed at EF 50/1.2 owners, it’s sharper and has less LoCA. The EF 16-35/2.8 got 1mm wider and image stabilization. The 70-200 zooms got much smaller and lighter. Etc.

 

[InchMetric]

RF is ultimately a pointless move by Canon. The lenses are, with few exceptions, substantially larger, more expensive, and more cheaply built than any in the EF lineup.

Just look at that garish RF 50mm. Extraordinatily large, expensive, and with a cheap plastic shell.

Canon promised not to release any lenses unless they could do something innovative, yet they haven’t even tried to meet that promise. Just look at the 400 & 500mm…they’re exactly the same as EF just with an adapter screwed on…

There’s a reason the 1DxIII and 5D4 are holding their value so well, and EF lenses are too.

Odd use of "garish." Did you mean "extravagant"?

And I like lens housings that protect the optics by bouncing instead of denting.

"Price Skimming" is a term used by business professionals. There is nothing pejorative about the term. Google it.

not by this business professional. Link your best credible support.

 

[Aussie shooter]

RF is ultimately a pointless move by Canon. The lenses are, with few exceptions, substantially larger, more expensive, and more cheaply built than any in the EF lineup.

Just look at that garish RF 50mm. Extraordinatily large, expensive, and with a cheap plastic shell.

Canon promised not to release any lenses unless they could do something innovative, yet they haven’t even tried to meet that promise. Just look at the 400 & 500mm…they’re exactly the same as EF just with an adapter screwed on…

There’s a reason the 1DxIII and 5D4 are holding their value so well, and EF lenses are too.

I hope you are getting paid by Sony to say that. Otherwise it comes across as though you are saying it in the desperate hope they will notice the comment and give you a free Sd card or something.

 

[neuroanatomist]

not by this business professional. Link your best credible support.

Sorry, but that suggests some significant gaps in your business acumen.

Here’s a basic intro:

Price Skimming Definition: How It Works and Its Limitations

Price skimming is a strategy where a company will list a product as high as possible, gradually lowering the price until it meets a market average.

www.investopedia.com

 

[Darecinema]

Canon has done an amazing job, with some truly unique offerings and a lot of promise for the future.
But, and it's a big "but," Sony has done better... in every category except some specialty lenses like the new dual fish eye and the f/2 zooms.

It's Canon playing catch up now. And I am a Canon fan.

I mean, opinions vary on this. Sony did better primarily on sensor tech in my opinion which is no surprise as they are a world leader in that arena. I’m surprised they did as well as they did on lens design but it’s obvious there was a lot of reverse engineering on Canon lens design going on there, no shame in that either, all the big boys do it. But nothing in a single Sony lens made go hmmmmmm I have to have that until the recent 14mm 1.8. I’m happy Sony has those options for Sony shooters. And I believe at some point we will some of the other must have lenses for pro shooters such as tilt shifts.

My overall opinion is this: if you are in this game purely for sensor tech then you are a fool. Sensor tech doubles every 2 years more or less Moore’s law (?), you either are rich or will go broke bouncing between whatever company is leading at that moment.

Lenses always have been and always will be the determining factor of overall system longevity and investment value. And Canon is still the king of lenses. and not just because of optic design or weather proofing etc but for one factor that Sony doesn’t hold a freaking candle to and which is utterly, crucially, absolutely critical: service.

You simply can’t appreciate Canon service until you’ve had a very expensive lens completely destroyed on a shoot and have sent it in and have it come back as good as new, for free with a service pack, within 3 days.

Image quality is so excellent from any Sony or Canon system that it is often simply that factor of service which makes any company or professional stick with Canon even if their sensor tech needs to catch up, which it will. It wasn’t a Nikon or Sony that sparked the DSLR revolution of which mirrorless is simply the next stage of.

I own the best cameras of both systems, but all my glass is Canon. Cameras come and go, glass is forever.

 

[Ozarker]

NO TYPE OF BUYER COULD REALLY CONSIDER THE R FOR A YEAR BECAUSE NO TYPE OF BUYER HAD THE LENSES THEY'D NEED AVAILABLE.

Translation: "I couldn't consider the R for a year because there was no lens I needed available because I ain't got no EF gear either."

No type of buyer? Well, you had me until you started putting absolutely everyone into the same basket. Then it got crowded. It was your basket and you had the whole world in there. Nasty.

 

[Ozarker]

C'mon man, I'm just using normal conversational hyperbole. It's like you're just looking for something to complain about.

I grant I could have written more accurately or clearly, but are you like that any time anyone employs a figure of speech?

My point was addressed towards non-EF users, who wouldn't have a bunch of EF glass sitting around and wouldn't be keen to invest in such.

I know you from your long-time group presence and would rather hear your reaction to the actual idea of having released enough lenses on Day 1 for SOME kind of user without a bunch of EF lenses on hand to be lured to the system. Would you at least agree that the vast majority of R buyers were probably EF shooters? Do you or anyone know of a non-EF shooter that bought an R?

Man, whether I know anyone or not is irrelevant. Anecdotal stuff usually means nothing. The problem becomes even more apparent when guys like you (you say I complain?) run around thinking that their personal anecdotes equate to the real world and then start throwing vast blankets over the whole world... thinking we all see it just like you.

A person with no ef gear buying an R? Who the hell knows???? So what? You are a complaint fest. Guess what? When I started in 2008 I had no gear at all. Did. Not. Stop. Me.

So no, I won't agree that your personal anecdotes = reality.

Claiming "no kind of buyer" is NOT a figure of speech. If you want to express yourself with over the top hyperbole, go ahead. But that ain't no figure of speech. That's too lazy to be specific.

 

[neuroanatomist]

My point was addressed towards non-EF users, who wouldn't have a bunch of EF glass sitting around and wouldn't be keen to invest in such.

While I think Canon aimed the EOS R at Canon DLSR users, I could still see first time Canon or first time FF buyers jumping into the R and even more so the RP. Somewhere around 90% of ILCs are APS-C. If you just look at Canon's milestone camera and lens sales announcements, there's a lens:camera ratio of 1.4:1, mainly because the majority of camera buyers purchase a body with the kit lens and that's it. Canon had that on day one, EOS R with RF 24-105/4L kit. A few months later they launched the much cheaper RP along with a 24-240mm superzoom.

 

[stevelee]

Skim Pricing, which means the same thing, sounds less sinister to those not familiar

Everyone in tech uses skim pricing. I mean, EVERYONE. All it means is that you start out with the highest price that people who are willing to pay more for it when it comes out early (and when demand is usually highest)... then lower the price a bit at a time until it hits the sweet spot on the price /profit curve, where profit is maximized in the medium/long term.

Unfortunately, skimming sounds like they're stealing off the top or cutting street drugs to make a higher profit

Edit: by the way, the opposite of skim pricing is penetration pricing. Skim pricing is most effective when you don't have enough product to meet demand anyways.

Well, of course I was quite willing to pay a higher price for the 6D2 four years ago when it was new than I would be willing to pay for four-year-old tech now (ignoring the fact that the 6D2 wasn’t cutting edge even back then). “Gee, I think I will wait several more years to get a full-frame camera so I can save several hundred dollars,” is not a thought I ever had. No, I just joined here and kept checking to see when it would finally come out. The compromise I made with my budget was to get the non-L kit lens, a decision I have not regretted. That turned out soon to be an extra $600 (?) I could apply to the 100–400mm, so probably got it a little sooner than I might have otherwise.

 

[stevelee]

And “skimming“ still is going to bring to my mind the Mob in Vegas whatever anybody says.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Fair enough but how many people really wanted to use an outfit nearly exclusively with an adapter?

The sales records say: not many.

How many people would buy into the RF system, who didn't have EF glass? Zero, I think, would buy a new-mount body with old-mount lenses. Does anyone know a single such person?

And again I don't think it was the camera, so if it's not dislike of living with the adapter, what is it?

Note you're preaching to the choir, I shoot my R as much with a Leica M 35/1.4 as anything else! But you and I aren't "most people."

I still mostly use EF lenses.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I could still see first time Canon or first time FF buyers jumping into the R and even more so the RP.

That surprises me because I really don't.
The RP was and still is a great entry point into the R system.
Even today, I have a hard time thinking that someone with no gear or past experience with Canon would choose the R over the A7 III.
(Unless they pick both cameras up and go with ergonomics.)

 

[YuengLinger]

Would it be inappropriate for me to use this analogy: It seems as if we are still talking about hanging chads in the election of 2000?

(Sorry if this is a narrowly USA reference.)