Mel Gross wrote:
That's always possible, but I doubt it. It assumes that photogs would be buying a much cheaper body, and then buying more lenses than they would otherwise. Why could that be assumed?
If they were trying to save money in the first place, and they know what they need, why would they buy more?
they would be buying nikon lenses instead of canon lenses and a complete new kit at that, is what I meant
Will Patterson wrote:
yikes... guess I better get on some more waiting lists
Maybe I should order from Ritz and see which ships first. Plus It doesn't help that my 5DI shorted out at a wedding last Saturday and is in for repairs.
Will Patterson wrote:
What sites aren't charging taxes? That's like another $220 for me.
If the store has any "physical presence" in your state, they will charge you whatever sales tax your state requires.
I don't know of any store that charges a sales tax if they don't have a "physical presence" in your state. That would actually be a pain in the accountant's okole for an Internet dealer to administer nationwide.
andrewd01 wrote:
Maybe the whole 5D-II thing is one big conspiracy? Maybe the 21mpx sensors actually do add thousands to the cost of the camera and Canon is taking a big loss on each 5D-II in order to bluff Nikon on the D3x? (they didn't take the bait) Canon are limiting their losses by only producing a very limited supply of 5D-II, just enough to supply the on-line reviewers and high profile professionals. Everyone else is told "it will ship soon!"
just my cynical views, sense of humour needed!
Well, that sort of thing does happen in fact. It's called predatory pricing and it is considered antitrust, although it's hard to prove... sort of the gray area of the anti trust regulations
orangefirefish wrote:
Well, that sort of thing does happen in fact. It's called predatory pricing and it is considered antitrust, although it's hard to prove... sort of the gray area of the anti trust regulations
I think that since the 5D mkI was so highly regarded and it is over due for upgrading, there is a tremendous world wide desire to get this camera and Canon can just make so many cameras with it's manufacturing resources, what ever that number may be.
Of course they are looking over their shoulder at Nikon and other competition and with every product they release there has to be some sort of chess game being played with cameras. But lose money on the 5D mkII? They won't, they'll make it up in battery and grip sales
skibum5 wrote:
they would be buying nikon lenses instead of canon lenses and a complete new kit at that, is what I meant
I doubt that too many Canon users will have switched to Nikon, and visa versa. A small number will always be switching back and forth, but it's really unusual.
People upgrading to a D700 or whatever from Nikon are most likely Nikon users already, upgrading from older equipment, just like the Canon users here.
I suppose users from those "other" makers might do it, if they are willing to buy more expensive equipment that they are used to buying. Even the D700 and the 5D mkII are more than two times the price of the other makers top models, except for the new a900 from Sony, of course.
orangefirefish wrote:
Well, that sort of thing does happen in fact. It's called predatory pricing and it is considered antitrust, although it's hard to prove... sort of the gray area of the anti trust regulations
No. It's actually legal. The law recognizes that over list pricing by individual stores is allowable, esp. if the item is in high demand, and stock is low.
The antitrust doesn't come into effect unless it can be proven that several entities are conspiring to keep prices up.
I had a quick hands on today, the camera feels really good, perfectly sized, the finish is excellent, the screen vivid and the "quick" menu very useful, the camera feels powerfull
but the viewfinder... when I saw these focus points I thought I'd rather keep my XSi...
