joychris
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.3 #14 · Is Canon repositioning itself? | |
rscheffler wrote:
Actually, they do see this coming and are bracing for it with the new pricing strategy we're all complaining about. With lower volume, per unit production costs, R&D, etc., will be higher, therefore retail prices will be higher. For higher volume items such as a 5DII the increase will be minimal, but for much lower volume items such as the 1DX, the increase is more dramatic. And for really low volume items, such as the 600 IS II, yeah, it's nearly double the price it was 4 years ago. The reality is what you described also applies to the pro markets. Newspaper journalists are shooting video with iPhones. Reporters are filing images from their phones... The paper where I work bought the staff photographers D7000 bodies instead of more 'professional' D300s, let alone wait for the ludicrously priced (in their accounting department's eyes) D4 to ship... There is zero chance the department will ever again order top-of-the-line pro cameras when $1000 DSLRs offer good enough performance and more than good enough image quality. It will be interesting to see where this trend goes over the next 5 years as more and more tech is packed into smaller packages.
So, it Canon repositioning itself? I think they're telling photographers that if you value high-end features, you're a niche buyer and will have to pay accordingly as demand for such features declines. Perhaps it is like Leica after all, but at least Leica produces some really top of the line glass (based on personal experience, of course), which some still care about....Show more →
What you're talking about with your paper is also happening in TV, broadcasters are moving away from $50,000 shoulder mount cameras with $30,000 lenses attached and using $5,000 prosumer HD cameras like the Sony EX3, high end HD camcorders and even the $300 GoPro. I worked for an NBC affiliate and we were moving to smaller cameras as the big shoulder mount cam's started to crap out. We could sell it used with a lens and buy 3 or 4 EX3's. We beat those cameras to hell and after a few years they still worked perfectly. Why spend $50-75,000 when you can get 98% of the functionality and image quality for a fraction of the cost. Yes the prosumer cam probably won't last 15 years, but with cell phone video regularly integrated into many news stories now, anything that shoots true 1080p is more than sufficient for broadcast TV.
And its not just local affiliates, the Today show and 60 minutes still shoot sit-down interviews with bigger shoulder mount cameras, but many of the cut-away shots and anything action oriented is always a smaller camera. BBC's Top Gear is the same way, there's a mix of cameras, but all the car interior shots, smoking tires on the track and such are smaller cameras. Those three shows certainly have the budget for pretty much anything.
That being said - again I think Canon is missing the boat here - the C300 at $15,000 is the only big chip camcorder it produces with an EOS mount. Where's the Canon competitor to the Sony VG-20, FS-100 of the Panasonic AF-100? The only thing keeping the VG-20 from being more popular with the video guys is lack of proper audio connections, the FS-100's form factor is not very run-and-gun friendly (though it shoots stunning video) and the AF-100 is just way too bulky. Make a EOS camcorder with an APS-c chip, XLR inputs that's sub $2,000 and it will sell in droves.
I use a 5d2 with Zeiss lenses because the IQ is unmatched IMHO by anything within 2x what I have into my setup and I live with the hassle of external audio, crappy variable ND filters, awkward form factor for video and so on. I'd happily buy an EOS camcorder just for the fact that I would own some of the finest small video camera optics around. Sadly, I think the next Nex or Panasonic will get it right and that's what I'll buy over a 5d3.
|
