kakomu
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
M Vers wrote:
There are going to be some tough tradeoffs if people are expecting a FF body from Canon at or under 2K. Just look at the 5DII--great sensor, great size, not so great AF. Again offering a lot in one department and completely limiting another. FWIW I can't see Canon releasing another line of FF bodies, specifically a cheaper line and if they do you can bet it will be underwhelming.
One thing to note is that the Camera manufacturers have their own, secret business plans. Without accurate manufacturing costs, we can't determine what the business plans are. Canon may have thin margins, or the 5D2 may be their biggest cash cow yet. Who know? We can't say what is possible without any accurate information.
Without someone from Canon's manufacturing line here to fill us in on production costs, we can't make any accurate statement of what can and cannot be done. If there's one thing the DSLR market has shown us, the technology costs are decreasing radically. In the span of 9 years, we've seen dozens of DSLRs come and go from just Canon and Nikon. The D30 started at somewhere just below $3k for 3.1 mp and now you can buy a Rebel XS for $500 with 10mp.
With this in mind, it seems difficult to believe that the costs of the 5D2 aren't falling all the time or that the original 5D couldn't be produced at a fraction of the price. This points to the above that the 5D2 may just be a huge cash cow. If this is the case, it seems reasonable to assume that Canon is intentionally holding things back. Not that Canon cannot put in certain technologies (such as a faster processor or better AF), but they choose not to in order to inflate the worth of other items (namely, the 1 series). As I mentioned before, we can't make any determination without any accurate source, but I find it difficult to believe that the costs on the 5D series are stagnating.
orangefirefish wrote:
I agree entirely- since the 5D is already a budget full frame, I don't see any reason for Canon to go any more "budget" than it already is. However, offering a different feature set, at the same price and expense of perhaps resolution, is definitely a possibility. I quite frankly don't give about what Sony has to offer. In my mind there are really only two brands to choose from at this point if you want a complete system- and this will likely be for awhile. Certainly, the seasoned pros would never venture into the Sony system (though certainly there is churn between Canon and Nikon).
Despite Sony's recent advancements in the sensor area, the price of their lenses and also the lack of fast teles (300/2.8 is as good as it gets) will make it a very prohibitive system for most of us- and I really don't care how good their sensor, price point, or bodies are. They aren't designed with the professional in mind- rather, to capture the new DSLR user, and also the users that don't need pro lenses.
...Show more →
While Sony has a collection (albeit small) of fast, expensive lenses, I seriously doubt that they're trying too hard (at the moment) to cater to the professionals. They seem to be doing what they can to cater to the regular consumer. Moreover, the Sony cameras accept (Konica-)Minolta lenses, so it's not like the only available lenses are solely those that Sony has released recently. Minolta AF lenses have been around longer than EF lenses.
|
I guess compared to a 1dsmk3..then again there is a 4500.00 gap between the 2 hmmm.So if Canon was to bring out a cheaper priced FF