It's funny that so many are saying Canon is mad to charge the prices it is charging for the 5D3.
However look at forums and you will see plenty of people of people have pre-ordered.
I don't see a price decrease until near the end of the year.
Then there are stacks of people queuing up to buy it at $300/£300 cheaper.
This camera will sell sell sell.
I also suspect that despite a few who talk about switching to Nikon, in the grand scheme of things very few will actually switch. And for those that switch to Nikon there will be just as many switching to Canon.
Personally I try to stay one camera behind the current model. So I will be looking to get a low actuation 1D4 for £2000. Currently they go for £2200 to £2500.
laytonp wrote:
You can thank your Politicians, for the Dollar devaluation.
NOPE. You can thank the "we don't care about anything but how cheap something is" mentality that pervades our society. Oh, and the "all that matters is this quarter's numbers" corporate "management" strategies.
Hate to get political, but we are giving China our kid's futures...
arijill wrote:
A lot of this is guessing the 'hows' and 'whys' of decisions made by one of the most successful companies in the history of the world. We don't have access to the mountains of data that folks a lot smarter than most of us get to review before making pricing decisions.
Seems like most of us reading this thread have 5/2's and we were hoping to be able to upgrade for a decent price asap. So we'll have to wait a bit before it's affordable. So what? Does this new version seem ALL that exciting on paper? Most of us won't even take advantage of the new features so I don't really feel like I'm missing-out on anything particular. Until we start seeing comparisons proving it actually takes better pictures, I'm sitting back kinda glad that the 'gotta have it' factor doesn't exist at $3500....Show more →
Oh, it exists!
What I do not understand is something completely different. There was a 5D, generation a huge success involving the video market into DSLR. Canon started 6.5 years ago to connect highest IQ at an affordable price with video capabilities. After 3 years they added another feature: highest (except two pro cameras) resolution at highest IQ and video capability. They just generated a new market, that was not served (and still is not - except announcements -) by competitors. And they where very succesfull. Now they added again highest IQ (we will see, it is what Marketing promises) a fantastic (surely not even compared to its predecessor) and a great speed at great resolution to 5D (now III).
And Canon people are moaning about "it is more expensive" than Nikons D800. Of course it is.
D800 is nobodys competitor. Nikon just tries to do the same in an different field 6.5 years after Canon. They try to generate a stand alone market. But they did not do anything then enhance resolution. And raise the price about 700. For me this camera is a gimmick. And I talked to many Nikon users (no, only four). All of them wished a D700 with 5-10 MP more, D3s IQ and ... video. At D700s price (that here in germany is still about 1000$ higher than actual D5 IIs.
The competitor of 5D II was D3s (at 9MP less). And this is still Nikons camera 5D III has to compete against. Now it has 10 MP more (compared to 9) 3 ISO stops more (compared to a bit less then same), it has (we will see) assumed even better AF with higher sensitiveness at low light, it has 3 less fps at 80% higher resolution and compared to that 3 Year old camera it is still about 500-700 cheaper at it΄s "horrible" price.
What do you expect from Canon? To give away their new product for 700 less, than the competitors 3 year old offer against a 3.5 year old successfull model? Why should they do that?
I moan myself. Here in germany the new 5D is about 1200$ more, then I payed three years ago for 5D II. And yes, I WANT it cheaper. But I think it is worth every cent.
To answer the initial question: Every manufacturere has to reposition himself with any new product.
People today are not as uninformed like they have been 20 years ago. Most of the moaning people here are 5D II users. Some say: Great, others are not happy. About resolution, the price or whatever.
But those, who again and again tell around. this is the camera, Canon should have done 3.5 years ago ... WHO did it? There was no competitor. And even if, where you willing to spend $ 5000 for a midrange competitor camera 3.5 years ago? If, why you did not? D3s was there at this price.
Canon did the 5D II. Concerning me, I made and make money with that camera. Much more then I ever did with any other one (I could afford).
If Canon fulfills their promises with 1D X and 5D III, I guess they will not only be number one what they are. They will have 65% of market share within the next 3 years.
I guess that is their target. Yeah! They are repositioning themself.
R.
To compete Nikons D800 they will just bring out a 7D X with 39 MP. If they do not chanvge anything else it will compete D800 easyly at about 1999$
Ralph Conway wrote:
24-70 2.8 L II:
As far I can see (and that means I can not afford it and I do not had it in my hands) after specs this will be the best lens in that range existing on the world. Like argued here its start price is the same like its predecessors. And even if not. There seems to be nothing conparable on the market.
Any competitor? I do not see one.
70-200 2.8/4.0 L IS USM:
One is 2000, the other is 1000 (both Euro). Those ARE the both best 70-200 mm lenses on the world!
They are both better then many primes. There are no competitors in quality. Those which exist are worse, not even same. Canon shooters can choice between 2.8 and 4.0., depending on wishes, needs, vallet. Any competitor? I do not see one.
If you need the best purchasable equipment from 24-200mm Canon serves you at 7500 (5D III) up to 10500. Thats it. Who else does. And if, who does it for less?
Yes, I guess Canon works hard in repositioning themselfes. Not only beeing No. 1 in sales, but beeing it in quality, too.
Come on Ralph I know you only see the world through your rose colored Canon glasses.......but come on Ralph....the best lens in the World !! Very good yes my be....but the best in the world ?? I really think you need to step outside your little Canon World sometime and look around. You might be surprised at what you find......
Sorry, I forgott to say "zoom lense" Any competitor out there? Tell me, I like to correct my foolish knowledge.
Of course I hyped it. To 24-70mm I can say nothing. But I can to 70-200 2.8 L II and 4.0 L IS USM. You know what a Nikon collegue asked my? Is your 70-200 not finding fokus in 50-70%, too (he purchased it for about $2.800)?
But It is just true, that D800 is not competing anything and D3s can not compete 5D III. And that it is much more expensive.
Why should camera gear become cheaper with any generation, adding new features?
A standard midclass car 15 years ago was about 18.000 german marks The 3 generation follow up is about 25. to 30.000 now. That is about an 3times price increas. And its juat a usual CAR.
12monkeys wrote:
You're discussing price increases in dollar when Canon sells wholesale in yen.
You're also forgetting supply and demand. Initially, Canon will only be able to make a limited amount of 5DIII, for example. They will fly off the shelves. Over time, supply will increase, people who were willing to pay top whack will already have a camera, and the price will fall accordingly.
A lot more people have DSLRs than when the 5DII was released. High-end photography isn't a niche market any more. Let's say your potential market was one million people in 2008 but two million people in 2012. If your initial production run is (plucking figures out of nowhere for the sake of argument) 50,000 cameras because that's the most you can make regardless of market size, then of course you're going to jack up the price. It's not repositioning, it's just maximising profit.
Same with the lenses. You've quoted the prices of new releases only. Prices will fall when Canon can no longer sell existing stock.
You're also dealing with what is effectively a duopoly. They can do whatever they want and if they make a mistake, worry about it later. People have too much money invested in lenses to switch at the drop of a hat....Show more →
Ralph Conway wrote:
Why should camera gear become cheaper with any generation, adding new features?
R.
maybe it should, maybe it shouldn't, it's complicated, but for the record it's not a crazy concept either:
10D - $1499 - early 2003
20D - $1499 - late 2004
30D - $1399 - late 2006
40D - $1299 - late 2007
50D - $1299 - late 2008
60D - $1099 - late 2010 (granted this one was a mix of step forward and step backward in features)
5D - $3299 - late 2005
5D2 - $2699 - late 2008
5D3 - $3499 - early 2012
D700 - $2999 - late 2008
D800 - $2999 - early 2012
game:
which entry doesn't belong?
easy game, no?
All that said i'd rather more $ and 1DX AF than less and 7D AF, but since it seems like not much on the stills is upgraded other than the AF after 3.5+ years you wouldn't think it would go up $800 just from that alone, well OK the fps went up to but it also went up in the xxD range and now maybe FF box costs more so then you don't decrease the price any as on the xxD and so on and the dollar has collapsed more (but prior to the 60D and D800 entries as well) so maybe it doesn't go lower, that would not be expected at all, and maybe it doesn't even stay at $2699 either, but it really does seem surprising for it to have risen above $2999, especially $500 above.
Plus Sony/Nikon invested in a modern Exmor fab and have spent to get increased dynamic range, while according to Pixel, Canon turned down tech as far back as the 5D2 design era that could have given them Exmor-like dynamic range. So if Canon is milking the old fab and tech and Sony/Nikon are spending to update....
Of course it remains to be seen, perhaps they really did finally improve dynamic range a bunch and spend on new sensor tech, BUT if so why no mention of it at low ISO in any press release? If so then why do they claim the 1DX is nearly a stop better than the 5D3?!? What room does that leave the 5D3 to improve with over the 5D2? Virtually none. So we might get maybe 1/3-1/2 stops better at most? Canon DR and SNR may have improved less than half a stop in the last half decade. The D800 sensor could end up having 50% more MP and yet being within 1/3-1/2 stop in SNR and ahead by 2 stops in DR. I hope not, but it's not a completely unlikely scenario in any fashion.
Now I really hope that is not the case. I hope the stuff about 1DX being a full stop better is just marketing BS trying to make 1DX buyers feel better and I hope the lack of mention of low ISO DR improvements is just some marketing guy not even realizing that mattered and thinking that everything is about high ISO. And I hope we do get at least a 1.5 stop jump in low ISO DR, if not 2 stops. I hope the banding mess and clumping noise from that is gone at low and high ISO. I hope they did do wonders and get a full stop noise improvement over the 5D2. Then we would be getting improve image quality too, even if not a MP increase. But these things are very far from certain and the talk from Canon isn't entirely encouraging. The early samples make it seem like high iso banding might be less but it's hard to say.
D800 also includes intervalometer and pop-up flash (maybe $250 value in Canon timer and mini-third party flash terms terms) and a better metering system with a fancier metering chip and logic circuit. Although going from an 8fps to 6fps mirror box maybe saves a little money, perhaps?
The D800 will almost unquestionably be able to deliver better image quality to the ISO100 tripod landscape/studio shooters, SNR means little at ISO100 with any modern camera, it will most likely has as good or better maybe even much better DR and it has 50% more MP. If the DR is equal for the two then the only difference would be if you care about 50% more MP or not though. For mid to high ISO usages it remains to be seen which will deliver better image quality. The 1DX being one stop better than the 5D3 makes it hard to see the 5D3 winning by enough to matter here but Canon has said someone logically incompatible things it's hard to know what to make so who knows. It is not impossible for the 5D3 to end up delivering a full stop better image quality for high ISO shooting though.
Hopefully the AF will totally rock and zoom past Nikon AF. Hopefully they somehow did noticeably improve the sensor so we get the same D800 DR plus 2/3 - 1 stop better SNR. Hopefully the video mode will be much cleaner from artifacts than the Nikon. We do get 6fps vs 5fps without paying for a grip (although for those who want the grip for sports shooting anyway this suddenly becomes moot point). Maybe the 5D3 would be worth $500 more to many then (unless the MP count was your key interest, that certainly would be nice for landscapes and wildlife, etc.) if almost for certain not to the strictly 100% ISO100-200 tripod based shooter where it would almost certainly be worth less to them. I have some doubts about all that though, but maybe Canon knows the answers and the answers are yes.
My 60D in 2002 was about 2.300 (I du not know how much that meant in $ 2002).
My 30D in 2007 was about 970 instead of already announcet 40D for about 1.249.
My 50D was about 1.170 brandnew in 2008.
My 5D II was about 2.329 in May 2009 (half year after announcement).
I do not know what 60D was when introduced. Actuell it is around 920-950.
For me each new generation body was cheaper then the previous one. Except 5D II, but that I graded up from D50. It is 1750 now.
Concerning Nikon:
D700 here was 2.700 (, not $) at introduction. It went down to 2300 within 5 month. Then it was offered at 2.300 including grip for 3 month. After the grip kit was canceled and it went up again to around 2.400 (again not $).
D800 is offered at a preorder price of 2899-2999 (3850-3960$) here in germany.
That looks like 200-300 more to me then 2008 here in germany.
One other item to toss out there are the Olympics. Is Canon trying to keep the price high to eek a little money out of the pros covering the Olympics and the fans who "Want to have the best equipment to capture their visit to the Olympic games!"?
skibum5 wrote:
maybe it should, maybe it shouldn't, it's complicated, but for the record it's not a crazy concept either:
10D - $1499 - early 2003
20D - $1499 - late 2004
30D - $1399 - late 2006
40D - $1299 - late 2007
50D - $1299 - late 2008
7D - $1699 - late 2009 You for got this one. 60D - $1099 - late 2010 (granted this one was a mix of step forward and step backward in features)
5D - $3299 - late 2005 5D2 - $2699 - late 2008
5D3 - $3499 - early 2012
D700 - $2999 - late 2008
D800 - $2999 - early 2012
game:
which entry doesn't belong?
easy game, no?
Yep, easy. In other words, Canon's take is that the 5D3 is a FF 7D in the same way that the 5D2 was a FF 50D and the 5D was a FF 30D; i.e., the 5D3 is not a FF 60D and you pay accordingly.
