I just don't get these 2001 prices??

Started Jan 7, 2012 | Discussions
NeilJones
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,303Gear list
Like?
I just don't get these 2001 prices??
Jan 7, 2012

Why are you pro's still saying its ok for Nikon/Canon to charge these silly prices!!

Technology has jumped so much over the years and prices for all these components in these cameras have come way down and yet you are still ok paying what you did 10 years ago??

Yes, I know the components used are better but it's just simply easier and cheaper to make them now!

Look at the Sonys a77. A 24mp sensor in a really nice camera with many cool features. It's $1400. I know, I know, it does not compete with the D4 but please don't tell me that it costs that much more to make the D4. (a77 also has incredible 60p 1080 hd video too)

Even the full frame Sony a900 with 24mp is less than 3 grand. (with new one on the way for probably not much more)

It's time for you "working pros" to tell Nikon/Canon to stop with their over inflated camera prices on these so called "pro cameras" as this is 2012 not 2001!

-- hide signature --

Shoot like it's your last day..

Nikon D4 Sony SLT-A77
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Frida
Regular MemberPosts: 259
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

Most folks on these boards are from the US, and Americans are particularly good at justifying whatever corporations tell them. It's part of why we're the last rich country left without healthcare or mandatory maternity leave. No matter how overpriced Canikon's latest gear becomes, you will always have loads of folks willing to defend them, and insisting that if Canikon doesn't charge X for Y, they'll go out of business. Personally, I'd suggest voting with your wallet. I never buy brand new camera gear; used and refurbished gear does a little less to line their pockets.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Harry Behret
Forum ProPosts: 11,434Gear list
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

The price is pretty much in line with the D3/D3s prices when they were released. The camera bodies are superior to the Sony bodies you mentioned and the shutters will last way longer than the Sonys also. Their high ISO performance is also better than the mentioned Sonys.

Now if one wants to discourage Nikon from charging so much for these cameras, just dont buy one.

Harry

-- hide signature --

http://behret.smugmug.com

'if you ain't having fun, you ain't doing it right'

 Harry Behret's gear list:Harry Behret's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Nikon D4 Nikon D800E
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NeilJones
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,303Gear list
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to Harry Behret, Jan 7, 2012

Harry Behret wrote:

The price is pretty much in line with the D3/D3s prices when they were released. The camera bodies are superior to the Sony bodies you mentioned and the shutters will last way longer than the Sonys also. Their high ISO performance is also better than the mentioned Sonys.

Don't use this silly "longer shutter" argument again. How many shutters have you worn out over the years Harry? Do you know you can replace most for a couple hundred dollars!

The bodies are superior? How much do those molded bodies cost to make I wonder.

Now if one wants to discourage Nikon from charging so much for these cameras, just dont buy one.

Harry

-- hide signature --

http://behret.smugmug.com

'if you ain't having fun, you ain't doing it right'

-- hide signature --

Shoot like it's your last day..

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CriticalI
Senior MemberPosts: 1,777
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

It is not cheaper to make anything. It is possible to buy higher spec electronics at the same prices, but mechanical mass production costs the same now as in 2001, more if you account for wage inflation and Yen values.

How come cars are no cheaper now than in 2001?

NeilJones wrote:

Why are you pro's still saying its ok for Nikon/Canon to charge these silly prices!!

Technology has jumped so much over the years and prices for all these components in these cameras have come way down and yet you are still ok paying what you did 10 years ago??

Yes, I know the components used are better but it's just simply easier and cheaper to make them now!

Look at the Sonys a77. A 24mp sensor in a really nice camera with many cool features. It's $1400. I know, I know, it does not compete with the D4 but please don't tell me that it costs that much more to make the D4. (a77 also has incredible 60p 1080 hd video too)

Even the full frame Sony a900 with 24mp is less than 3 grand. (with new one on the way for probably not much more)

It's time for you "working pros" to tell Nikon/Canon to stop with their over inflated camera prices on these so called "pro cameras" as this is 2012 not 2001!

-- hide signature --

Shoot like it's your last day..

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Steve

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chris Tasker
Junior MemberPosts: 27
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

Cost of production is only one element of the total cost equation. Development of "new" technology is not inexpensive and pricing is usually based on anticipated volume on whic said development can be recouped. That said, there is always a premium attached to premium products, which site place Canon and Nikon live. Pentax tried to offer better value and they are now owned.by Hoya. Minolta, bought by Sony. Add the names to the list. This is true of most developed and manufactured products in our world, the only variable being local market price adjustments and currency affects etc etc.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RedFox88
Forum ProPosts: 21,946Gear list
Like?
a car with a more...
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

A car with a more powerful engine, which keeps all road noise suppressed sells for much more than a low end Kia, right? Same goes for cameras.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Timothy Stark
Regular MemberPosts: 102
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to CriticalI, Jan 7, 2012

Retail pricing has nothing to do with the component cost of an item. Camera company's marketing groups spend a lot of time calculating the uptake of their new products based on an estimated retail selling price (not to be confused with MSRP).

Economics 101 provides the clue that for every given sale price the company will sell X thousand cameras. This is a curve function and could see the marketing VP out the door if they get it wrong. The calculated price will include the marginal cost (more cameras sold mean each unit becomes slightly cheaper to produce) and an acceptable return on investment cost per unit.

Consumer behaviour is notably fickle and based on forward estimates by marketing, will determine what features are in any product, based on price point.

The Bank of Canada has a nice little inflation calculator on its website at

http://www.bankofcanada.ca/rates/related/inflation-calculator/

My 1973 Nikon F2 purchase at $550 is about $2700 in todays funds. A $4500-$6000 pro level body gives a lot more functionality than my old F2. Even more telling is the FE I purchased in 1978 for $329. Today's equivalent is $960. Hence the D7000 is about right on target.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NeilJones
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,303Gear list
Like?
Re: a car with a more...
In reply to RedFox88, Jan 7, 2012

RedFox88 wrote:

A car with a more powerful engine, which keeps all road noise suppressed sells for much more than a low end Kia, right? Same goes for cameras.

Stupid analogy.

-- hide signature --

Shoot like it's your last day..

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GMack
Senior MemberPosts: 2,928
Like?
Try telling it to the ink peddlers.
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

Epson and Canon at $1/ml. of ink? A gallon of OEM ink is not worth $4,700. You'd think the stuff was more valuable than blood.

And some $500 printer that goes on sale at Adorama for $50 is way overpriced to begin with. If they are making money off it at $50, then the profit margin is far too much even though the dealers say "We don't make much profit off gear." Sure they don't.

All these pocket cams must cost $3 to make for such a flood of them to appear.

Mack

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
perpetua
Regular MemberPosts: 474
Like?
Re: a car with a more...
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

NeilJones wrote:

RedFox88 wrote:

A car with a more powerful engine, which keeps all road noise suppressed sells for much more than a low end Kia, right? Same goes for cameras.

Stupid analogy.

Not so stupid, it takes a lot more $ from companies to engineer high-end products, so the price doesn't only justify the material or production price, but also all investment the company made to engineer and test flashgrip products. Low end models are mass selling so if they sell a million of D3100 and earn 10$ from each to pay lower engineering costs, they have to earn 1000$ (fictive numbers) or even more for each D4 sold: they also sell a lot less of them and they have to cover all initial big investment. This logical concept applies to every lucrative company.

Now it would be stupid for Nikon to sell more D4 for less money, it would kill the low-end models mass market, so the cheaper cameras would also be more expensive, so people would buy even less of them. Its very logical. And I'm sure that all these scenarios were analyzed by experts in the marketing department.

I hate people who think that prices must reflect only production cost. That is stupid.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Motts
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,998
Like?
Re: a car with a more...
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

NeilJones wrote:

RedFox88 wrote:

A car with a more powerful engine, which keeps all road noise suppressed sells for much more than a low end Kia, right? Same goes for cameras.

Stupid analogy.

I'm obviously extremely stupid compared with you. Why is this a stupid analogy?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
golf1982
Contributing MemberPosts: 660
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to Frida, Jan 7, 2012

Prices are dictated by the market. Simple as that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Motts
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,998
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

NeilJones wrote:

Don't use this silly "longer shutter" argument again. How many shutters have you worn out over the years Harry? Do you know you can replace most for a couple hundred dollars!

The bodies are superior? How much do those molded bodies cost to make I wonder.

Have you ever actually compared a D3 to say, a D5000? Have you ever even picked one up?

A lightweight, lightly built camera having a shutter replaced or being repaired on a regular basis is no good to a pro.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
golf1982
Contributing MemberPosts: 660
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

Lke most things in life you get what you pay for. I wonder what you think to leica prices then???

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Motts
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,998
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

Just because some components are less expensive than they were doesn't make development, shipping, assembly, labour etc any cheaper.

I'm quite happy for Nikon / Canon to make a success of it and to be able to develop amazing equipment as a result. I rely on their gear for a living so it's in my interest for them to be profitable, to be able to afford high level R&D and produce first class professional equipment.

Also, the fact that they are not working an aggressive pricing policy means that other manufacturers stand a better chance of staying in the game.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
phiri
Contributing MemberPosts: 967Gear list
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to John Motts, Jan 7, 2012

John Motts wrote:

NeilJones wrote:

Don't use this silly "longer shutter" argument again. How many shutters have you worn out over the years Harry? Do you know you can replace most for a couple hundred dollars!

The bodies are superior? How much do those molded bodies cost to make I wonder.

Have you ever actually compared a D3 to say, a D5000? Have you ever even picked one up?

A lightweight, lightly built camera having a shutter replaced or being repaired on a regular basis is no good to a pro.

Dont waste time on this guy. He wants everybody to buy Sony. Why worry if you are not going to buy it. I am not worried about the price of the D4 because I am not planning to buy one. I dont need it but for those who do, its their call to decide whether the price is fair or not
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/39182144@N03/

 phiri's gear list:phiri's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 J1 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Fred Mueller
Senior MemberPosts: 2,346Gear list
Like?
I won't defend the OP too strongly ...
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

but the Japanese are famous for corporate collusion, and it just might be that Canon and Nikon calibrate their "feature" rollout so market share stays approximately the same, but the overall market is effectively monopolized - at least a segment of it ... ie Canikon effectively controls the hi end "pro" body market and enjoys a premium margin as a result, and Sony might just be playing along - they after all have a dog in the fight with chip manufacturing....

this is not necessarily a bad thing BTW - tech companies are famously unstable because it is so easy to go down a blind ally developmentally. These highly spec'ed cameras are not strictly commodity items

It is possible for two boxers to bloody each other so badly, that neither ever fights again regardless of who "won".

Fred

 Fred Mueller's gear list:Fred Mueller's gear list
Nikon D600
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Fred Mueller
Senior MemberPosts: 2,346Gear list
Like?
google: Keiretsu
In reply to Fred Mueller, Jan 7, 2012
 Fred Mueller's gear list:Fred Mueller's gear list
Nikon D600
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
260684
Senior MemberPosts: 1,909
Like?
Re: I just don't get these 2001 prices??
In reply to NeilJones, Jan 7, 2012

NeilJones wrote:

Why are you pro's still saying its ok for Nikon/Canon to charge these silly prices!!

Technology has jumped so much over the years and prices for all these components in these cameras have come way down and yet you are still ok paying what you did 10 years ago??

Yes, I know the components used are better but it's just simply easier and cheaper to make them now!

Look at the Sonys a77. A 24mp sensor in a really nice camera with many cool features. It's $1400. I know, I know, it does not compete with the D4 but please don't tell me that it costs that much more to make the D4. (a77 also has incredible 60p 1080 hd video too)

Even the full frame Sony a900 with 24mp is less than 3 grand. (with new one on the way for probably not much more)

It's time for you "working pros" to tell Nikon/Canon to stop with their over inflated camera prices on these so called "pro cameras" as this is 2012 not 2001!

-- hide signature --

Shoot like it's your last day..

Agree, the problem is only 2 companies control the camera market, needs to be many more contenders to bring down prices.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads