Very few EOS 1 bodies sold - wonder why!!

[pwp]

Video isn't an important area for me and if it was I'd get a dedicated video camera.

I love it when people make statements like this. You're not a videographer, yet you feel compelled to make summary judgement on the 5D2's video capabilities?

Point taken. My video experience closely approximates zero. I know the video files a 5DII delivers are spectacular quality with a unique look.

Paul Wright

 

[dr croubie]

I remember the electricity utility I spent most of my life working for always offered 3 versions of everything. The profit margin was always highest on the mid-range item and the customers logic ran like this "We are not rich, so we will not buy the most expensive shower unit, but nor are we cheapskates so we will avoid the cheap and nasty one. Lets go for the middle one dearest"

Reminds me of an article I just read in a magazine a week ago:
A shop sold only one breadmaker, for $250. They introduced a new 'deluxe' model for $450. They hardly sold any of the deluxe model, but sales of the original model doubled.


Also, noone's mentioning lenses. How many 1d/s, or even 5/7d owners are there with only one lens? Sell an 1100d with an 18-55 and they've sold 1 body and 1 lens. Sell a 1d and they've sold maybe 4 or more high-markup L lenses as well...

 

[Shamus1]

I shoot professional dance and primarily use a 1DMkIV, DMkIII & 5DMkII, altho I have a 7D, 5D & 50D available. The 5DMkII is a wonderful body, but my first choice will always be one of my 1D series bodies. I am holding my breath when I hear of a possible merge of the 1Ds & 1D as that will shoot the price up :-[ Yes FF is great, but unless you consistently use a 1.3x body, you'll see some advantages. Just an opinion.

 

[aldvan]

The market always rewards the top of range. That doesn't mean biggest numbers, but biggest profits. As anybody knows, it's easier to sell one Aston Martin than thirty Ford Focus, since always there will be a rich man for wich the expenditure for any item is marginal relative to his wealth, while for the average customer/user every expenditure is affected by personal and general situations. Furthemore, for many pros, the tools of their job are a status symbol very important to the eyes of their customers. By the way, electronic world is quite different from the mechanical one. When you bought in the past an Hasselblad, you could be sure that the next fundamental step will be made after ten-twenty years, now you can see doubling resolution in two years and, although everybody is ready to snobbishly affirm on a forum that this is not important for him, everybody knows how is important to have two (good) pixels instead of one... So if your investment is not marginal compared to the profit you get from it, or the expenditure is not marginal relatively your wealth, spending more the double of a 5D MkII on a 1Ds is not so easy if you think that in two-three years its features will be definitely surpassed by the new one. Old 1D features can be very good, but a 10Mp image can't compete with a 20Mp one, specially in top class, where Canon or Nikon don't trick with numbers...

 

[Edwin Herdman]

There aren't many EOS-1 bodies being sold now because everybody's moved away from film.

 

[macgregor mathers]

While it must be true that very few 1D and 1Ds bodies are sold compared to the "prosumer" bodies and below, the range must have a flagship to attract media attention and buyers.

I remember the electricity utility I spent most of my life working for always offered 3 versions of everything. The profit margin was always highest on the mid-range item and the customers logic ran like this "We are not rich, so we will not buy the most expensive shower unit, but nor are we cheapskates so we will avoid the cheap and nasty one. Lets go for the middle one dearest"

It worked like that 19 times out of 20. We humans are more predictable than perhaps we would like to think.

Hence the 1Ds at the top and whatever body now occupies the bottom end. Your average punter will ignore both and choose from the rest.

There's a book called Predictably Irrational, which says similar things. E.g. a restaurant added a new dish which was the most expensive on the menu, and profits went up. The reason was not that the new dish sold well, but because the 2nd most expensive dish (which was, previously, the most expensive on the menu) sold a lot better.

 

[motorhead]

"There's a book called Predictably Irrational, which says similar things. E.g. a restaurant added a new dish which was the most expensive on the menu, and profits went up. The reason was not that the new dish sold well, but because the 2nd most expensive dish (which was, previously, the most expensive on the menu) sold a lot better".

Very many thanks for that. I have read a quick review of the book on wikipedia and it sounds fascinating. The strangeness of some human behavior is intriguing , trust sales experts to have figured out how best to use that to manipulate us into parting with cash.

 

[Steve Todd]

I don't know what the original intent was for this post? There are many of these Pro bodies in the hands of working Pros and those that have the ability to afford them, than the average photog would imagine. Just watch any major news or sporting event and you will see more 1D/1Ds cameras than any other model. Why is that...because they (Pros) demand the best performance at any price. However, how many 1D/1Ds bodies are sold really doesn't matter much to me or anyone else I know in the photo business, as long as there's enough of them made to go around! I have shot motor sports since the 1970s with film SLRs and manual focus lenses, so I really appreciate what Canon has accomplished with the EOS-1 and EOS-1D/Ds series of cameras and EF lenses. There simply is not anything else out there that does what the 1D/Ds cameras do or do it as well, at this time. Each time an updated model is released, many folks jump on it, as newer tech often results in better/sharper images. I'm sure Canon loves this. However, many pros and others too, keep their previous models until they are all used-up or are missing shots they might have "nailed" with newer equipment. And I guess there are some that "just have to have the newest and greatest models of anything!" Sure, we would all love it if the prices were lower...but that is just not going to happen in today's
market. OBTW, my 5D, 5D Mk II and 7D don't get much use, as my 1D Mk IVs do it all and do it better! I've never been disappointed with the 1.3 crop of the 1D4 or felt it necessary to use a FF model instead. Bottom line (really), you can't fairly compare non-pro body sales (including the great 5D/5D Mk II) with the pro models, different needs/markets!

 

[Edwin Herdman]

I remember the electricity utility I spent most of my life working for always offered 3 versions of everything. The profit margin was always highest on the mid-range item and the customers logic ran like this "We are not rich, so we will not buy the most expensive shower unit, but nor are we cheapskates so we will avoid the cheap and nasty one. Lets go for the middle one dearest"

Neat story (and thanks to macgregor mathers as well), though I will say that I don't think this specific reasoning applies here. The EOS-1 doesn't make the 5D Mark II look cheaper. Rather it makes Canon look better. I know for sure that when I started looking at Canon DSLRs I was very interested in just starting off running and adding higher quality components as time (and hopefully funds) allowed. Obviously most people get locked in with the consumer zooms that way.

I think the routine is: Step one, get cheap camera body + good cheap lenses -> Step two, add good expensive lenses -> Step three, add good camera body. I think that Canon's market positioning of the EOS-1 is being disturbed by the success of lower-level offerings, including their own (as macfly said). That said, I don't think the EOS-1 market is so large that they will be able to place "cost reduced" versions, e.g. with slower max shutter speeds or other features cut out, alongside the top of the line. Between the 5D Mark II and the EOS-1 there may be room for another camera, but it just as likely might be a 5D Mark II repositioned higher in the same way the 7D was (of course, a 5D Mark II with 7D-like autofocus accuracy and features would infringe more on the EOS-1 territory, but again the EOS-1 is supposed to be a best offering).

@ Steve Todd: I also think that a lot of those EOS-1 cameras seen at sporting events travel around quite a bit.

 

[Don12x20]

Actually, the 1DMkIV has been sold out each time a new shipment arrives from Japan.

I had to wait a considerably time for my second 1DMkIV body (on a long waiting list from January through May), so I was also watching the availability at B&H and Adorama. They got quite a number of small shipments since January but each time they sell out. They're sold out again (unlike the 7D, 5D2, and other bodies which seem to have high availability).

So comments about poor sales seem contradictory to reality at the dealers. (although we can all argue that maybe Canon should be making more!)

For wildlife photography, including birds in flight, they are outstanding bodies.

 

[Duranmoritz]

I had 2 1DMarkIV. And I was delighted. But - and this was the reasen why I sold them after approx 3000 shots:
That format APS-H is a big disadvantage using wide angle lenses. You simply loose space. a 28mm lens is only a
37 mm lens. I bought 2 EOS 7 D. They are only APS-C format but the lenses are built accordingly and the camera is excellent. I am waiting for a 1DsMARKIV or whatever the camera will named. But it must a FF Camera. I am very interested if there will be the new model in august.

 

[kubelik]

I had 2 1DMarkIV. And I was delighted. But - and this was the reasen why I sold them after approx 3000 shots:
That format APS-H is a big disadvantage using wide angle lenses. You simply loose space. a 28mm lens is only a
37 mm lens. I bought 2 EOS 7 D. They are only APS-C format but the lenses are built accordingly and the camera is excellent. I am waiting for a 1DsMARKIV or whatever the camera will named. But it must a FF Camera. I am very interested if there will be the new model in august.

curious to know what focal lengths you found yourself shooting most often. the 16-35 on a 1DMkIV is a 21-46mm equivalent, which is a very useful range. I wouldn't recommend the 1DIV OR the 7D if you shoot a lot of wide angle ... and find it strange that you insist on a FF camera but didn't buy the 5D Mark II instead

 

[RuneL]

I had 2 1DMarkIV. And I was delighted. But - and this was the reasen why I sold them after approx 3000 shots:
That format APS-H is a big disadvantage using wide angle lenses. You simply loose space. a 28mm lens is only a
37 mm lens. I bought 2 EOS 7 D. They are only APS-C format but the lenses are built accordingly and the camera is excellent. I am waiting for a 1DsMARKIV or whatever the camera will named. But it must a FF Camera. I am very interested if there will be the new model in august.

That doesn't make a lick of sense to me, going from 1.3 to 1.6 crop - wat? The 16-35 is plenty wide on a crop and was more or less made to cater for the crop cameras. People have just gone completely overboard on what is wide angle. A 50MM is more or less considered a tele these days...


Regarding topic - this has been said:

The 5D II is a great camera for what it's good at. But it fails hard in some pretty crucial areas compared to the 1D IV.
Autofocus, speed, build quality = the things that the 1D is. It cannot match it. My 1D II is better in those respects.
Where it wins is the smaller, less threathening size.

Regarding image quality: The 1D IV is less noisy than the 5D II, especially for video.

And they sell plenty. Just got back from sporting event, all 1D IV's or Nikon D3. Same as last time. And the time before that.

 

[gferdinandsen]

One thing that really came to mind for me with this thread. I just sold my ten year old 1V, for which I paid $2100. One thing that was nice in the film days, your camera was top of the line for a long time, and for much less money. I now use the 5D2, and boy do I miss the 45 point AF of the 1V, but since I do mostly landscapes, it's not much of a loss. But I know in 10 year, my 5D2 will be very dated

 

[Rowbear]

Lets be honest the question we need to ask is... where is the professional sector going? The professional sector has been struggling for years. With the event of everything turning digital it has made it even easier for people to get into the industry and be good at it. Also making it very hard for pros to make as much money. Look at other companies that are struggling in their professional line up:

Apple - Apple's success and saviour was its professional following, they have now pretty much deserted these customers with pro hardware and software that is taking 2-3+ years to replace/update infuriating customers (2-3 years is a long time in the computer world). Instead they are concentrating on their consumer products, macbook pros and imac outsell mac pros 1000:1 the market isnt as strong in this sector anymore so putting money into it isnt as worth it. Upgrading them every 6s months makes sense and costs alot less because of the volume sales.....

+1 Best post I've read in a long time. Your analogy with Apple is spot on 8)

 

[TerjeS]

Size and price, is my primary thought...
My future wish is full frame 1D without the vertical grip, to the cost of 5DII. Even slightly higher pricing would be ok.
I have both 5DII and 1DIII, I love the 1DIII. 5DII is small and light, and great to bring along everywhere, but photography with 1DIII is far more fun and intuitive whatever the subject, but it's to often to big.
It reminds me of the time I had both 10D and EOS3, 10D was practical but 3 felt like heaven.