Paul_100A wrote:
and your genius opinion on Olympus' low pricing on their niche products was? or is Olympus not a niche product as had been stated so often for so long.
The cost of the sensor is a big part of the total cost of the camera. Smaller amounts of pixels require less horsepower to move around. Sony's APS-c cameras and lenses cost less than their full frame counter parts...surely you must understand this.
Atlasman2 wrote:
Oly's strategy of stills-centric cameras has got them where they are today: losing money and on the brink of death.
valid point but irrelevant to this discussion.
Olympus products are niche and also lower price than comparable main stream manufacturer's products.
why?
one expert states niche products are more expensive.
i must have missed his opinion on this matter.
chez wrote:
The cost of the sensor is a big part of the total cost of the camera. Smaller amounts of pixels require less horsepower to move around. Sony's APS-c cameras and lenses cost less than their full frame counter parts...surely you must understand this.
ohh I see. the smaller sensor in the camera makes the lenses less expensive too.
OK.
i guess i mistakenly understood 'it' as lower demand for a particular brand of an abundant product (ie. interchangeable lens camera body system) meant the less price manufactures can charge less, vs more popular competitors, for said products.
also might work for when a like product is in highest of demand and the manufactures are then willing to charge premiums.
i got it all wrong i guess.
Paul_100A wrote:
wow!!! i did not get the memo...are you the official boss or un-official boss of the forums?
i think the whole point of the discussion is that some folks seem not bothered to pay extra for something they do not want while some folks are indeed bothered to pay for something they do not want. i'm not aware of a 'master' stills only camera...are you? therefor i'm guessing then your term "master camera" means a body with high end stills and high end video capabilities. why did we stop using the catchy, new, and fresh term "hybrid camera"?
i think the evidence suggests that some folks indeed want a high end stills camera but prefer not to lay out large sums of money for a high end stills camera which includes an added premium for it's high end video capabilities.
seems like the discussion is going in going in circles don't it?...Show more →
I'm debating this "high premium" for video features you bring up. I've asked before...but maybe you have the answer...how much of the price of the A74 is because of this "high premium" video features? Do you know...or are you just guessing? Because these "high end premium" features are in phones that can be bought for $1,000.
I know for sure economies of scale reduce cost which typically reduces consumer prices. So incorporating video into cameras opens up a larger consumer base which allows ore sales of the camera which in turn allows the manufacturer to sell at a lower rice. This is fact. I'd like to see you facts on the extra costs for adding video to cameras. I've read on here that the A74 would be a $1,500 camera without video...I call this BS as I believe video increases a camera cost very little, but opens up the potential market greatly.
chez wrote:
I'm debating this "high premium" for video features you bring up. I've asked before...but maybe you have the answer...how much of the price of the A74 is because of this "high premium" video features? Do you know...or are you just guessing? Because these "high end premium" features are in phones that can be bought for $1,000.
I know for sure economies of scale reduce cost which typically reduces consumer prices. So incorporating video into cameras opens up a larger consumer base which allows ore sales of the camera which in turn allows the manufacturer to sell at a lower rice. This is fact. I'd like to see you facts on the extra costs for adding video to cameras. I've read on here that the A74 would be a $1,500 camera without video...I call this BS as I believe video increases a camera cost very little, but opens up the potential market greatly. ...Show more →
would you lay down $6500 for a high end video centric smart phone?
i wonder if cell phone manufacturers figured (market analysis) that their $35 (manufacturing cost) cell phone will sell well enough at $1000 but not so much at $6500?
when manufactures add 'goodies, if you will' to their products it also allows them charge for those goodies.
it most certainly does open up an extremely large market to the manufactures whom now add 'goodies' to their product and can now double dip on every single one of their customers thereby doubling their current consumer base.
chez wrote:
Exactly what stills only camera got Sony to where they are today? Video has been part of every Sony camera so I don't know where this 1000x market you are talking about comes from. And what about that billions potential phone users that Sony is trying to lure over...how do you think they would feel if their camera did not have video incorporated into it...duh.
I guess every camera manufacturer just got it wrong and are all alienating this 1000x market...
I didn't say a stills only camera did I. Reading comprehension not your strong suit. Like usual making things up. I said they got to where they are today without 4k60, flippy screen, and 10 bit. Which is accurate. Even with out those things their video features were still attractive enough and functional enough to get them where they are. Again I don't care about the video side and paying for things I'm not using until it takes away from the primary purpose of the camera. The A7 was a photography camera first. The A7s was the video camera first. Now they have turned the A7iv it into a video camera first. Which for many is annoying. not that complicated to understand. Again when I say video (meaning people that edit and color grade and need 4k60, 10 bit) is a niche market. Not talking about video that mom and dad use to film kids. The A6000 could do that effectively 6 years ago. Video people have plenty of options already. Sony doesn't have to ruin the experience and jack up the price for people primarily looking to buy a camera for stills.
Paul_100A wrote:
wow!!! i did not get the memo...are you the official boss or un-official boss of the forums?
i think the whole point of the discussion is that some folks seem not bothered to pay extra for something they do not want while some folks are indeed bothered to pay for something they do not want. i'm not aware of a 'master' stills only camera...are you? therefor i'm guessing then your term "master camera" means a body with high end stills and high end video capabilities. why did we stop using the catchy, new, and fresh term "hybrid camera"?
i think the evidence suggests that some folks indeed want a high end stills camera but prefer not to lay out large sums of money for a high end stills camera which includes an added premium for it's high end video capabilities.
seems like the discussion is going in going in circles don't it?...Show more →
Are there any products out there that are mass produced where you can pick and choose all of specific components you want and not the ones you personally will never use? If I only drive my car 50mph because I live in the city and never drive on the highway, should Ford make a Mustang for me that has a much smaller engine, less beefy transmission, smaller wheels, etc as I'll never use all of the bigger, more expensive components? Yes, they make smaller cars. But I want a Mustang tailor made to my needs. I don't need dual lighted vanity mirrors. I don't need an integrated wifi hotspot. I could go on and on with the list of standard features that I'll never use. Think Ford cares about my specific needs? And if not, why not? And then apply some of that some logic to cameras.
timgangloff wrote:
Are there any products out there that are mass produced where you can pick and choose all of specific components you want and not the ones you personally will never use? If I only drive my car 50mph because I live in the city and never drive on the highway, should Ford make a Mustang for me that has a much smaller engine, less beefy transmission, smaller wheels, etc as I'll never use all of the bigger, more expensive components? Yes, they make smaller cars. But I want a Mustang tailor made to my needs. I don't need dual lighted vanity mirrors. I don't need an integrated wifi hotspot. I could go on and on with the list of standard features that I'll never use. Think Ford cares about my specific needs? And if not, why not? And then apply some of that some logic to cameras. ...Show more →
Ford certainly did.
at one time could have purchased a 4 cylinder, 6 cylinder, or eight cylinder Mustang.
then the manufactures figured out how to 'work smarter' and charge more. manufactures have never looked back since.
what would happen if all camera customers completely stopped buying cameras. Period. dead stop.
we sent a letter stating the reason being we do not want hybrids.
i'd guess in a rather short times the prices of remaining hybrids would drop drastically and non-hybrid models would be rolled out soon enough.
Atlasman2 wrote:
You can't reason with irrationality.
Indeed.
We all will continue behaving “rationally” in paying for products and services we do not want.
Makes perfect sense.
Just because that rationale benefits manufacturers more than customers is of no concern.
Alex W wrote:
Maybe good at all trades, master of none is more like it. However its also not 6500.00 like the A1 or even 3500.00 like the A7RIV. I think for a lot of folks a "good at all trades" camera will be fine. An A9, A7RIV or A1 it's not nor is it an A7C. I think its price point is pretty on the spot. "A crippled camera" I do not think so. Folks can decide to buy it or not. I plan on adding one to my A9 and A7RIV but that's my choice and my money. The A7IV offers a couple of things my A9 and A7RIV don't have and a couple of things I want. ...Show more →
Im sorry, but a camera that only shoots 5fps RAW and one that has a massive 1.5x crop in 4k 60p has no business being anywhere close to $2500 going into 2022. Period.
chez wrote:
If you want a master camera...then open your wallet and lay down $6,500 for the A1 or $4,500 for the A7R4. If this A74 camera "angers" you so much...then get another camera...but stop your whining.
Had the a7R4, traded it on here for an R6 and now Ive got an a7R3. Would never pay $4500 for the a7R4 because they are only $3500 and can be had under $3k new. Would also never spend $6500 on an A1. Id go medium format way before I ever did that.
timgangloff wrote:
Are there any products out there that are mass produced where you can pick and choose all of specific components you want and not the ones you personally will never use? If I only drive my car 50mph because I live in the city and never drive on the highway, should Ford make a Mustang for me that has a much smaller engine, less beefy transmission, smaller wheels, etc as I'll never use all of the bigger, more expensive components? Yes, they make smaller cars. But I want a Mustang tailor made to my needs. I don't need dual lighted vanity mirrors. I don't need an integrated wifi hotspot. I could go on and on with the list of standard features that I'll never use. Think Ford cares about my specific needs? And if not, why not? And then apply some of that some logic to cameras. ...Show more →
OK , So let's run with that analogy. Ford produced all there Mustangs since 1964 as left side drive in the US. Then in 2022 they decided to switch the steering wheel to the right side. Car still works though, right? No big deal. I don't think anyone would care. Do you?
Just curious when your shooting sports how often are your using the flip/tilt screen?
nhsonyshooter wrote:
OK , So let's run with that analogy. Ford produced all there Mustangs since 1964 as left side drive in the US. Then in 2022 they decided to switch the steering wheel to the right side. Car still works though, right? No big deal. I don't think anyone would care. Do you?
Just curious when your shooting sports how often are your using the flip/tilt screen?
Better yet...Ford, and rest of the auto makers, put steering wheels and other controls, on both sides. They now charge 30% extra for the vehicles and some folks luv it. They say the added features and premium is totally worth it because it makes parking the vehicle in their garage easier. It opens up a whole new market which is another bonus.
aCuria wrote:
There’s so much bullshit in this thread that it’s hard to get any useful content out of it
Sony will make the stills only camera for you if you pay for the entire R&D and production costs. They legitimately have such a program
Go gather enough people who want this and you can get your camera. I won’t be surprised if it cost more than the a7iv though.
Yep. So much BS.
Sony, et all, already know how to make a stills only camera.
The people who want a stills only camera have been gathered since the start of photography.
The point is businesses are getting away from providing what customers want and rather dictating what they get, some folks are less OK with that than others.
wittyphrase wrote:
If there’s one thing there’s no shortage of on the internet it’s bad statistics and worse analogies.
hi witty,
what's a good statistic and better analogy relating to the issue at hand?
surely one so capable of ascertaining and criticizing statistics and analogies is capable of putting forth their own.
Dexter75 wrote:
Im sorry, but a camera that only shoots 5fps RAW and one that has a massive 1.5x crop in 4k 60p has no business being anywhere close to $2500 going into 2022. Period.
Blah. The camera shoots 10fps RAW just fine. You understand and don't like the compression compromises? Tough luck. Even the A1 can only shoot lossy when at full speed and apparently using that type of RAW works rather well for all those action shots in the A1 sub-forum.
