carlsbadbum wrote:
Wow! over 100k viewed and getting closer to 100 pages for a new dslr. I didn't read all the posts, did anyone here post a picture of the 40D?
It's unclear what that $1599 price was for... It could have been for a standard kit with 17-55mm lens... or it could have been for a body only... or it could possibly be for a kit which includes the 28-135mm IS lens. I don't think the person who posted it has made any new responses since they basically said... 'oops, I guess I should not have posted that due to NDA'.
List price upon introduction of the 10D: US$ 1999, expected street price $1499. This was back in februari 2003.
20D list price upon introduction in august 2004, body only: US$ 1499. Kit: US$ 1599.
And for the 30D, in februari 2006? Body only list price at introduction: US$ 1399. Kit: US$ 1499.
Now, assuming that Canon wants to keep the 40D in the 10/20/30D price bracket (and not bleed any more potential buyers to the D200), one can expect that the US$ 1599 price will be for the kit. The kit lens has become quite a bit more expensive, if it turns out that the information on it having IS is correct.
Steve Ryan wrote:
The UPC on the price tag matches the UPC on the form and the listing on the UPC database that identifies this as a 40D. A lot of trouble to go to for a hoax...
The entry in the UPC database was created yesterday, in temporal proximity to the appearance of the pricetag/screen capture. Maybe I am a cynic, but that just seems a tad odd. The big question is: "who can enter UPC's into that database?"
Tentacle wrote:
Now, assuming that Canon wants to keep the 40D in the 10/20/30D price bracket (and not bleed any more potential buyers to the D200), one can expect that the US$ 1599 price will be for the kit. The kit lens has become quite a bit more expensive, if it turns out that the information on it having IS is correct.
Unless it's for the 40D/17-85 IS kit, which would put it in line with the previous XXD models. Alternatively, they really might have an 18-55 IS kit lens, which would be $100 more expensive than it's predecessor.
List price upon introduction of the 10D: US$ 1999, expected street price $1499. This was back in februari 2003.
20D list price upon introduction in august 2004, body only: US$ 1499. Kit: US$ 1599.
And for the 30D, in februari 2006? Body only list price at introduction: US$ 1399. Kit: US$ 1499.
Now, assuming that Canon wants to keep the 40D in the 10/20/30D price bracket (and not bleed any more potential buyers to the D200), one can expect that the US$ 1599 price will be for the kit. The kit lens has become quite a bit more expensive, if it turns out that the information on it having IS is correct....Show more →
Keep in mind that IF it is legitimate, we are talking about Best Buy here. They have a higher markup on their stuff than B&H and all the good discounters, and certainly will put a premium on a hot new product.
List price upon introduction of the 10D: US$ 1999, expected street price $1499. This was back in februari 2003.
20D list price upon introduction in august 2004, body only: US$ 1499. Kit: US$ 1599.
And for the 30D, in februari 2006? Body only list price at introduction: US$ 1399. Kit: US$ 1499.
Now, assuming that Canon wants to keep the 40D in the 10/20/30D price bracket (and not bleed any more potential buyers to the D200), one can expect that the US$ 1599 price will be for the kit. The kit lens has become quite a bit more expensive, if it turns out that the information on it having IS is correct....Show more →
The 10D never had a list price of $1999. It had a MAP of $1499. when announced by Canon the end of February and a street of $1499. when sold in March. Mine shipped March 13 from B&H.
Did the 10D come with a kit lens, I cant remember. I was assuming the 40D was priced with a pretty large lens instead of the 18-55 efs since it said 3.7lbs. The 30d and the 28-135 weigh 2.6 lbs. The 40D must be a lot larger if thats just the body
ward1066 wrote:
Did the 10D come with a kit lens, I cant remember. I was assuming the 40D was priced with a pretty large lens instead of the 18-55 efs since it said 1,7kg. The 30d and the 28-135 weigh 1,2kg. The 40D must be a lot larger if thats just the body
(my translation to understandable units)
Keep in mind that the quoted weight is most likely shipping weight, which inludes box, manuals, charger etc.
The 10D never had a list price of $1999. It had a MAP of $1499. when announced by Canon the end of February and a street of $1499. when sold in March. Mine shipped March 13 from B&H.
[...] Other good news comes with the price, the US list price will be $1,999 (expected street $1,499)
I dunno what's up with the difference, but this was the info on introduction price I found. Doesn't matter really, the 1500 number is accurate enough, official list price or not.
Edited by Tentacle on Aug 08, 2007 at 08:01 PM GMT
I dunno what's up with the difference, but this was the info on introduction price I found. Doesn't matter really, the 1500 number is accurate enough, official list price or not.
Mmm, Maybe we are both right, suspect that Phil screwed up.
Tentacle wrote:
Not likely. I mean, why would Canon stop using the BP-511(A) batteries? Ok, the 350D and 400D need a smaller size because the grip is too small to house a BP-511(A), but the rest of the dSLR range, from the early D30 on, do just fine with the current form factor.
A new grip doesn't automatically mean a new battery form factor, The BG-ED3 (D30, D60, 10D), BG-E1 (300D), BG-E2 (20D and 30D) and BG-E4 (5D) grip all take BP-511 and BP-511A batteries.
The new grip may be necessary because the 40D body is different than the 30D. That's a possibility! Maybe bigger because of the 3" screen size
ward1066 wrote:
Did the 10D come with a kit lens, I cant remember. I was assuming the 40D was priced with a pretty large lens instead of the 18-55 efs since it said 3.7lbs. The 30d and the 28-135 weigh 2.6 lbs. The 40D must be a lot larger if thats just the body
The 10D did not come with an official kit lens, However I saw allot of camera stores selling it with the 24-85 and 28-135 IS bundled with the camera.
As far as I know, the first Canon d/SLR to come with a official kit lens was the 300D/d/Rebel and EF-S 18-55 lens.
Back on topic, I don't see why Canon would offer the 28-135 IS with the 40D as a kit lens, with plenty of EF-S options now available (17-85 IS comes to mind).
Hey, we're in August! I'll go with a Sept. announcement for the following spring with a 2 month delay in shipment, only to be sold out to a waiting list 3 months long and my existing 20d dies somewhere in the middle of it all.
Does anyone remember if the 20D/30D sold out and needed a waiting list? I would think with the Rebels and 40Ds Canon would want to maximize their supply and sell as many as they can.
Stunnaz wrote:
Does anyone remember if the 20D/30D sold out and needed a waiting list? I would think with the Rebels and 40Ds Canon would want to maximize their supply and sell as many as they can.
20D was a hot seller and there were waiting lists for it. It sold as a kit only at first, you could get a 10D or 18-55 pretty cheap.
I don't remember much excitement or a wait for the 30D.
Cicindela wrote:
The 10D never had a list price of $1999. It had a MAP of $1499. when announced by Canon the end of February and a street of $1499. when sold in March. Mine shipped March 13 from B&H.
In Australia the 10D had an RRP of $3499AUD from Canon. It was much dearer than the EOS 3 at the time. That is one reason I wouldn't touch it.
