M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX

Started 11 months ago | Discussions
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 4,954Gear list
Like?
Re: I'm curious
In reply to ThomR, 11 months ago

ThomR wrote:

peevee1 wrote:

ThomR wrote:

If you put the $500 Nikon 85mm lens on a new D7100 take a pic at F1.8 and then crop it down to 16MP and a 4x3 aspect ratio, how would the image compare to the Olympus 75mm lens on an E-M5 at F1.8? I have no idea, but that would be a good comparison.

It is in fact will be very very close.

I am not so sure. Unless you have done a test we can say either way.

I don't see why the images would be significantly different. 16 mpix 4:3 crop of D7100 sensor is very close in size to the sensor in E-M5, and DxOMark noise graph differs by about 0.5 stop such crop would eliminate.

These companies sell items for what the market will pay. If there is less competition and no used market/supply, the prices will be high.

I am not sure what "market will pay" means.

It means they list it at a price and see if it sells. If if does they keep that price. I am sure they do their research too. After a few years, like most lenses, the price drops because of the used market and costs to make the lenses drop.

What do you mean "it sells"? 1 lens a month - does it mean "it sells"? 10?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 4,954Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to captura, 11 months ago

captura wrote:

LTZ470 wrote:

None of the Sony lens are in the same class as the m43 12-35, 35-100, 100-300, 75mm f/1.8, 12mm f/2 for size, quality and weight...I own the Nex-7 and several E-Mount lens, they reek of the cheap seats for sure, even the Nex-7 compared to Em-5, it just doesn't have it compared to EM5, great camera but m43's camera quality and build are a step above...

Shot the EM5 in the rain all day one day...you ain't gonna do that with a Nex...or you'll need a "nex"...next camera...

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

The coming NEX-7x is said to be dustproofed..I suppose that means weatherproofed.

Without weatherproof lenses it is useless. And both expensive zooms just announced are not weatherproof.

Some of the many lenses for E-mount NEX are excellent, and a few are good values.

Especially (both):

- E50 f1.8

- E35 f1.8

- Zeiss E16-70Z

How do you know it is excellent, any tests? Expensive for sure.

- Sigma 19 f2.8

- Sigma 30 f30

- Sigma 60 f60

Boring slow primes.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sean Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,923
Like?
Re: I'm curious
In reply to peevee1, 11 months ago

peevee1 wrote:

ThomR wrote:

peevee1 wrote:

ThomR wrote:

These companies sell items for what the market will pay. If there is less competition and no used market/supply, the prices will be high.

I am not sure what "market will pay" means.

It means they list it at a price and see if it sells. If if does they keep that price. I am sure they do their research too. After a few years, like most lenses, the price drops because of the used market and costs to make the lenses drop.

What do you mean "it sells"? 1 lens a month - does it mean "it sells"? 10?

Are you being deliberately obtuse?   The manufacturers set a price that they hope will maximize profits.  They do market research to get an idea of what the demand is, and then they set the price as high as they think they can which will still sell enough units to bring in the amount of revenue they've planned for.    They set a high price initially because it's a lot easier to lower the price than to raise the price if they've misjudged.

Of course market research can be wrong, so they monitor how many units actually sell.   If sales are close to or above estimates, they generally leave the price alone.   But if sales are below expectations then they'll lower the price in order to stimulate more sales.   There's normally a pretty good margin built into the product so that they have a fair bit of room to lower prices and still make money.   The goal is to maximize profit - that's a very different goal than maximizing the number of units sold.

I often see complaints about the price of M43 glass because of some comparison of the supposed production cost - for example "M43 f/2.8 lenses aren't any bigger than FF f/5.6 lenses so they shouldn't cost any more".   That's ridiculous - prices have only a very tenuous relationship to production cost.   Prices are set by marketing departments based on their estimate of the demand for the product.   The fact that M43 lens prices may be higher in relation to their production cost is an indication that the lenses are in high demand, at least in relationship to the manufacturers' planned sales volumes.

You can criticize high lens prices as much as you want, but if they were really "too high" (i.e., higher than most people were willing to pay) then the manufacturers would be forced to lower them in order to stimulate sales.   This is pretty obvious when you look at what happens to older M43 bodies.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tomtom50
Senior MemberPosts: 2,335Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to mpgxsvcd, 11 months ago

mpgxsvcd wrote:

The only company that doesn't compete very well right now is Canon.

The EOS-m fire sale continues. An Eos-m with kit lens is $345, and that lens is sharper than NEX kits by a good margin. Further the 22mm f2 pancake is very sharp and can be bought new on ebay (from broken up kits) for $130.

Canon doesn't compete in that they are dumping product at a loss, but the Eos-m is very competitive right now.

The Eos-m focus is improved (new firmware) to the point where it is the same as my NEX-3n. I like both cameras in their own way, and focus speed is not what differentiates the two.

Unbeatable value

 tomtom50's gear list:tomtom50's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS M Olympus PEN E-PM2 Sony Alpha NEX-3N
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dennis
Forum ProPosts: 13,133
Like?
Re: Confused...
In reply to peppermonkey, 11 months ago

peppermonkey wrote:

Why are we even bothering to compare the Oly 75mm with the Nikon 85mm?

The OP compared m43 to NEX and I know that I'm using 85/1.8 on APS-C.  The Oly 75/1.8 would be about the closest match were I to consider a move to m43.  Slightly greater magnification in the frame (I'd prefer something a bit shorter).  But it's close all around.

- Dennis

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jimini
New MemberPosts: 2
Like?
M43 is indeed overpriced
In reply to mpgxsvcd, 11 months ago

Comparison of body with modern sensor, viewfinder, high quality fixed aperture zoom:

Olympus: EM5 ($1000) + 12-40/2.8 (rumored at $900) = $1900

Sony: NEX6 ($650) + 16-70/4 ($1000) or 18-105/4 ($600) = $1650 or $1250

The larger NEX sensor makes the aperture difference negligible.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Thorgrem
Regular MemberPosts: 387Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 is indeed overpriced
In reply to Jimini, 10 months ago

Jimini wrote:

Comparison of body with modern sensor, viewfinder, high quality fixed aperture zoom:

Olympus: EM5 ($1000) + 12-40/2.8 (rumored at $900) = $1900

Sony: NEX6 ($650) + 16-70/4 ($1000) or 18-105/4 ($600) = $1650 or $1250

The larger NEX sensor makes the aperture difference negligible.

It doesn't. Also the NEX 6 lacks controls and has a sucky interface. Nice try, better luck next time.

 Thorgrem's gear list:Thorgrem's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P3 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads