Reading mode: Light Dark

Final nail in the D400's coffin?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Go to last post
B

Billy Ray Valentine

Guest
Adorama has 7D II for $1050 today. That getting close to 1/2 price in a year. (The Canon store has not even taken off the "New" logo from the 7D II webpage, lol)

Looks like Nikon is right and the market for this type of camera is tiny. Or is Canon trying to just gather market share pricing the ~same as the D7200?
 
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Adorama has 7D II for $1050 today.
Click to expand...
Just went there, and I see it for $1400; same as B&H, minus the free printer. Maybe you saw an "OPEN BOX" deal there, those disappear after someone buys them.
Member said:
That getting close to 1/2 price in a year. (The Canon store has not even taken off the "New" logo from the 7D II webpage, lol)
Click to expand...
It's already been discussed here. It's hardly a reason for Nikon to gloat, it just means the 7DII is that much more attractive compared to what Nikon is offering.
Member said:
Looks like Nikon is right and the market for this type of camera is tiny.
Click to expand...
You think you know what Nikon thinks?
Member said:
Or is Canon trying to just gather market share pricing the ~same as the D7200?
Click to expand...
Do you think a D400 would sell for the same or less than a D7200? It's not a question of what Canon gets for a 7DII, or how much they make off of those cameras even after they're heavily discounted (I bet it's more right now than Nikon is making off of D610, maybe even more than what Nikon makes off of D750 bodies), it's a question of how much Nikon could make off of a D400.

Also, saying Nikon knows best isn't supported by the fact that they are not gaining on Canon and are losing market share.

For every camera Nikon sells they sell at least one lens. Sell more cameras, sell more lenses. Sell a better camera to someone, they likely buy a better lens -- and Nikon's latest DX lens seems aimed at D400 users, not bargain hunters.

--
http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages
 
Last edited:
Tony Beach said:
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Adorama has 7D II for $1050 today.
Click to expand...
Just went there, and I see it for $1400; same as B&H, minus the free printer. Maybe you saw an "OPEN BOX" deal there, those disappear after someone buys them.
Tony Beach said:
That getting close to 1/2 price in a year. (The Canon store has not even taken off the "New" logo from the 7D II webpage, lol)
Click to expand...
It's already been discussed here. It's hardly a reason for Nikon to gloat, it just means the 7DII is that much more attractive compared to what Nikon is offering.
Tony Beach said:
Looks like Nikon is right and the market for this type of camera is tiny.
Click to expand...
You think you know what Nikon thinks?
Tony Beach said:
Or is Canon trying to just gather market share pricing the ~same as the D7200?
Click to expand...
Do you think a D400 would sell for the same or less than a D7200? It's not a question of what Canon gets for a 7DII, or how much they make off of those cameras even after they're heavily discounted (I bet it's more right now than Nikon is making off of D610, maybe even more than what Nikon makes off of D750 bodies), it's a question of how much Nikon could make off of a D400.

Also, saying Nikon knows best isn't supported by the fact that they are not gaining on Canon and are losing market share.

For every camera Nikon sells they sell at least one lens. Sell more cameras, sell more lenses. Sell a better camera to someone, they likely buy a better lens -- and Nikon's latest DX lens seems aimed at D400 users, not bargain hunters.

--
http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages
Click to expand...
No matter which camera co is selling more camera at the moment the writing is on the wall for the future of DSLR's, especially large bodied aps-c. With full frame sensors ability to deliver 1.5 crops at high MP theres so much more value in a pro bodied FF. To imply that the average hack here knows better than Nikon or Canon or anyone else is laughable! Most wildlife pros now shoot FF and are not complaining. A favorite of many sports and wildlife pros is the D750. With cheap lenses in the Nikon 200-500 and 150-600 theres little need for additional crop factors. As for this notion that 6 FPS is too slow is also laughable. If you cannot capture a moment of motion @ 6FPS you should give it up.
 
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Adorama has 7D II for $1050 today. That getting close to 1/2 price in a year.
Click to expand...
A 7dII for $1050 might make me consider being a dual brand user. So, I went there to find this great deal, and to see why the price is so low. I can't find it for that price. All of the new 7dII that I saw were $1399 for body only.
Member said:
Looks like Nikon is right and the market for this type of camera is tiny. Or is Canon trying to just gather market share pricing the ~same as the D7200?
Click to expand...
Nobody knows why Nikon hasn't made a d400. Given that Nikon has thus far ceded the high end sports/wildlife market to Canon, I'd guess that Canon is pretty darn happy about that.

The 7dII has always been several hundred dollars higher than the d7200, and 7dII ahead of it on top 100 sales (list found here) according to Amazon. The 7dII is listed as #15 while the d7200 is listed as #19. That's pretty remarkable when one considers the prices. Yeah, Canon is probably laughing all the way to the bank.

Kerry
 
PeterPaul said:
No matter which camera co is selling more camera at the moment the writing is on the wall for the future of DSLR's, especially large bodied aps-c. With full frame sensors ability to deliver 1.5 crops at high MP theres so much more value in a pro bodied FF.
Click to expand...
That's a matter of personal opinion. I own 3 of Nikon's finest FX cameras, including the d810 and I despise the 1.5x crop mode. For my needs, a 20+ MP DX camera would be much preferable to the d810.
PeterPaul said:
To imply that the average hack here knows better than Nikon or Canon or anyone else is laughable!
Click to expand...
This kind of stuff is not necessary to the conversation. Nobody here or on the FX forum knows what and why Nikon is doing. That's all a matter of speculation.
PeterPaul said:
Most wildlife pros now shoot FF and are not complaining.
Click to expand...
What "most" pros want to use is not material. For one thing, I've seen several posts from wildlife pros stating that they'd like to have a d400 style camera. More importantly, the d400 is an amateur's sports/wildlife camera because most amateurs can't afford or don't want to spend huge sums on adequate FX kits.

The d300 was a huge hit. There's no reason to believe that a similarly spec'd d400 wouldn't also be a profitable camera, in spite of the fact that there are so many other choices now.

Kerry
 
[ATTACH]media_3346500[/ATTACH] PeterPaul said:
Tony Beach said:
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Adorama has 7D II for $1050 today.
Click to expand...
Just went there, and I see it for $1400; same as B&H, minus the free printer. Maybe you saw an "OPEN BOX" deal there, those disappear after someone buys them.
Member said:
That getting close to 1/2 price in a year. (The Canon store has not even taken off the "New" logo from the 7D II webpage, lol)
Click to expand...
It's already been discussed here. It's hardly a reason for Nikon to gloat, it just means the 7DII is that much more attractive compared to what Nikon is offering.
Member said:
Looks like Nikon is right and the market for this type of camera is tiny.
Click to expand...
You think you know what Nikon thinks?
Member said:
Or is Canon trying to just gather market share pricing the ~same as the D7200?
Click to expand...
Do you think a D400 would sell for the same or less than a D7200? It's not a question of what Canon gets for a 7DII, or how much they make off of those cameras even after they're heavily discounted (I bet it's more right now than Nikon is making off of D610, maybe even more than what Nikon makes off of D750 bodies), it's a question of how much Nikon could make off of a D400.

Also, saying Nikon knows best isn't supported by the fact that they are not gaining on Canon and are losing market share.

For every camera Nikon sells they sell at least one lens. Sell more cameras, sell more lenses. Sell a better camera to someone, they likely buy a better lens -- and Nikon's latest DX lens seems aimed at D400 users, not bargain hunters.

--
Photo 1 of 12, Twelve Images
Click to expand...
No matter which camera co is selling more camera at the moment the writing is on the wall for the future of DSLR's, especially large bodied aps-c. With full frame sensors ability to deliver 1.5 crops at high MP theres so much more value in a pro bodied FF. To imply that the average hack here knows better than Nikon or Canon or anyone else is laughable! Most wildlife pros now shoot FF and are not complaining. A favorite of many sports and wildlife pros is the D750. With cheap lenses in the Nikon 200-500 and 150-600 theres little need for additional crop factors. As for this notion that 6 FPS is too slow is also laughable. If you cannot capture a moment of motion @ 6FPS you should give it up.
Click to expand...
 
Calm down Tony, here is the link...

It is $1049 after a mail in rebate. I missed the printer earlier or maybe it got added.

http://www.adorama.com/ICA7DM2Z.html

9b269ef081744c799bbd7f03c5f79532.jpg

If I was not so invested into Nikon this would be tempting. Canon must be hurting, look at this one too!

www.adorama.com/ICASL1K1Z.html

Talk about a way to get started in photography cheap! Heck that printer lists for $399, free SL1 and two lenses, WoW!
 
Last edited:
Kerry Pierce said:
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Adorama has 7D II for $1050 today. That getting close to 1/2 price in a year.
Click to expand...
A 7dII for $1050 might make me consider being a dual brand user. So, I went there to find this great deal, and to see why the price is so low. I can't find it for that price. All of the new 7dII that I saw were $1399 for body only.
Kerry Pierce said:
Looks like Nikon is right and the market for this type of camera is tiny. Or is Canon trying to just gather market share pricing the ~same as the D7200?
Click to expand...
Nobody knows why Nikon hasn't made a d400. Given that Nikon has thus far ceded the high end sports/wildlife market to Canon, I'd guess that Canon is pretty darn happy about that.

The 7dII has always been several hundred dollars higher than the d7200, and 7dII ahead of it on top 100 sales (list found here) according to Amazon. The 7dII is listed as #15 while the d7200 is listed as #19. That's pretty remarkable when one considers the prices. Yeah, Canon is probably laughing all the way to the bank.

Kerry
Click to expand...
 
PeterPaul said:
No matter which camera co is selling more camera at the moment the writing is on the wall for the future of DSLR's, especially large bodied aps-c. With full frame sensors ability to deliver 1.5 crops at high MP theres so much more value in a pro bodied FF. To imply that the average hack here knows better than Nikon or Canon or anyone else is laughable! Most wildlife pros now shoot FF and are not complaining. A favorite of many sports and wildlife pros is the D750. With cheap lenses in the Nikon 200-500 and 150-600 theres little need for additional crop factors. As for this notion that 6 FPS is too slow is also laughable. If you cannot capture a moment of motion @ 6FPS you should give it up.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that the D750 is pro bodied?


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
 
PeterPaul said:
PeterPaul said:

No matter which camera co is selling more camera at the moment the writing is on the wall for the future of DSLR's, especially large bodied aps-c. With full frame sensors ability to deliver 1.5 crops at high MP theres so much more value in a pro bodied FF. To imply that the average hack here knows better than Nikon or Canon or anyone else is laughable! Most wildlife pros now shoot FF and are not complaining. A favorite of many sports and wildlife pros is the D750. With cheap lenses in the Nikon 200-500 and 150-600 theres little need for additional crop factors. As for this notion that 6 FPS is too slow is also laughable. If you cannot capture a moment of motion @ 6FPS you should give it up.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Can you please explain what we are supposed to see in that chart?


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
 
n057 said:
PeterPaul said:
n057 said:


should give it up.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Can you please explain what we are supposed to see in that chart?

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
Click to expand...
I see the market returning to normal after the digital disruption of photography. (This mirrors the flat panel TV sales disruption) The photography market has hit sufficiency levels and people are starting to replace on fail, not because tech advances...
 
Billy Ray Valentine said:
n057 said:
PeterPaul said:
Member said:


should give it up.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Can you please explain what we are supposed to see in that chart?

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
Click to expand...
I see the market returning to normal after the digital disruption of photography. (This mirrors the flat panel TV sales disruption) The photography market has hit sufficiency levels and people are starting to replace on fail, not because tech advances...
Click to expand...
Where does it show anything about pro-DX?


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
 
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Calm down Tony,
Click to expand...
What makes you think I'm not calm?
Member said:
here is the link...

It is $1049 after a mail in rebate. I missed the printer earlier or maybe it got added.

http://www.adorama.com/ICA7DM2Z.html

If I was not so invested into Nikon this would be tempting.
Click to expand...
What does that tell you about which company looks more attractive to someone who wants to invest in a DSLR?
Member said:
Canon must be hurting, look at this one too!

www.adorama.com/ICASL1K1Z.html
Click to expand...
Canon is not hurting. Canon is a big and diversified company. Nikon is hurting, and big time, because Nikon is a smaller and they are a specialized company. Nikon only makes money off of their cameras and lenses, so if they can't make money off of those then they are going to be toast. Nikon is losing market share right now, and they can't afford that.

Canon's 70D is selling at Adorama today at $900. Nikon's D7100 came out a few months before the 70D (both cameras were introduced at $1200), and it is selling at Adorama today at $700. Canon's 5DIII, a camera that came out in 2012, is currently selling for $2500. Nikon's D750 came out last year and is selling for $1900. If prices alone tell us who is hurting more (they don't), then by that measure Nikon is hurting more than Canon.
 
PeterPaul said:
No matter which camera co is selling more camera at the moment the writing is on the wall for the future of DSLR's,
Click to expand...
That's a more broad argument.
PeterPaul said:
especially large bodied aps-c. With full frame sensors ability to deliver 1.5 crops at high MP theres so much more value in a pro bodied FF.
Click to expand...
I have a D800, and I see lots of value in a D400, more than in any FX offering.
PeterPaul said:
To imply that the average hack here knows better than Nikon or Canon or anyone else is laughable!
Click to expand...
Well, the numbers don't lie. Nikon is losing market share, so saying they are on the right track has to reconcile that inconvenient truth. Canon OTOH, does seem to be on a better track.
PeterPaul said:
Most wildlife pros now shoot FF and are not complaining. A favorite of many sports and wildlife pros is the D750. With cheap lenses in the Nikon 200-500 and 150-600 theres little need for additional crop factors.
Click to expand...
I would like to use the Nikon 200-500 on a D400.
PeterPaul said:
As for this notion that 6 FPS is too slow is also laughable. If you cannot capture a moment of motion @ 6FPS you should give it up.
Click to expand...
Wonder why all the highest end cameras have that feature. Are pros less capable than amateurs?
 
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Calm down Tony, here is the link...

It is $1049 after a mail in rebate. I missed the printer earlier or maybe it got added.

http://www.adorama.com/ICA7DM2Z.html

9b269ef081744c799bbd7f03c5f79532.jpg

If I was not so invested into Nikon this would be tempting. Canon must be hurting, look at this one too!

www.adorama.com/ICASL1K1Z.html

Talk about a way to get started in photography cheap! Heck that printer lists for $399, free SL1 and two lenses, WoW!
Click to expand...
A few days ago, there was a discussion here on how it is easier to recommend Canon to a beginner rather than Nikon, because Nikon does not have an affordable entry for high performance pro bodies. You seem to agree with that now. Once you get started, you buy lenses and accessories, that is how Nikon is losing market share.


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
 
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Adorama has 7D II for $1050 today. That getting close to 1/2 price in a year. (The Canon store has not even taken off the "New" logo from the 7D II webpage, lol)

Looks like Nikon is right and the market for this type of camera is tiny. Or is Canon trying to just gather market share pricing the ~same as the D7200?
Click to expand...
In the UK the the 7DII was released at £1799 in Sept 2014, and is £1159 atm. So has lost about 35% in 15 months .

The D7200 was released £940 in March 2015, and is now £749. So that is about 20% reduction in 9 months , and for the last 5 months they have had an offer of a free grip, worth about £230. Which is 24.5% of the cost of the camera. :-/ It will be interesting to see what price the D7200 will be after 15 months, and how long the grip offer applies.

The 7DII seemed to hold its full price for about 6 months, and the D7200 seemed to hold its full price for about 3 months. The 7DII price started to come down about March, coincidently, when the D7200 was released. ;-) How many did they sell during those first 6 months? Only Canon know, but they got 6 months of full price sales compared to Nikon's 3 months. Doesn't tell you how many each sold, and what profit they were making on each camera.

Nikon also have the D7000 and D7100 still available 9 months after release of the D7200. Canon seem to have cleared the stocks of the 7D. I know the that was only one camera they had to replace, and the time between cameras was quite long, but all the 7D stock has gone. ;-)

It has to said that Canon are also offering a cashback deal of between £60 - £250 if the 7DII is bought with various lenses. But you have to buy a lens to get it, so they sell a lens as well as the camera.

It will be different deals in different countries to try and manage sales/stock. What can gleaned from all that is up to what spin you want to put on it. :-)
 
Tony Beach said:
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Adorama has 7D II for $1050 today.
Click to expand...
Just went there, and I see it for $1400; same as B&H, minus the free printer. Maybe you saw an "OPEN BOX" deal there, those disappear after someone buys them.
Click to expand...
It's 1049 after a mail in rebate, which also includes a printer thrown in. So now the 7d ii sells for less than the D7200, and with a printer thrown in!
Tony Beach said:
Tony Beach said:
That getting close to 1/2 price in a year. (The Canon store has not even taken off the "New" logo from the 7D II webpage, lol)
Click to expand...
It's already been discussed here. It's hardly a reason for Nikon to gloat, it just means the 7DII is that much more attractive compared to what Nikon is offering.
Click to expand...
Falling price means declining demand; the fact that the 7d ii has come down to the price point of the D7200 is rather shocking.
Tony Beach said:
Tony Beach said:
Or is Canon trying to just gather market share pricing the ~same as the D7200?
Click to expand...
Do you think a D400 would sell for the same or less than a D7200? It's not a question of what Canon gets for a 7DII, or how much they make off of those cameras even after they're heavily discounted (I bet it's more right now than Nikon is making off of D610, maybe even more than what Nikon makes off of D750 bodies), it's a question of how much Nikon could make off of a D400.
Click to expand...
No one here knows those profit margins; all is speculation.
Tony Beach said:
Also, saying Nikon knows best isn't supported by the fact that they are not gaining on Canon and are losing market share.
Click to expand...
Nikon is holding steady in market share as is Canon, in a declining market. Their relative market share has remained steady for years.
Tony Beach said:
For every camera Nikon sells they sell at least one lens. Sell more cameras, sell more lenses. Sell a better camera to someone, they likely buy a better lens -- and Nikon's latest DX lens seems aimed at D400 users, not bargain hunters.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. A camera body may be sold to someone who already has the lenses. But yes, in general, the more camera sales, the more lens sales. However the issue is that the market for a D400 is small. If the 7d ii is not selling well, why should Nikon jump into those same waters?
 
Tony Beach said:
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Calm down Tony,
Click to expand...
What makes you think I'm not calm?
Tony Beach said:
here is the link...

It is $1049 after a mail in rebate. I missed the printer earlier or maybe it got added.

http://www.adorama.com/ICA7DM2Z.html

If I was not so invested into Nikon this would be tempting.
Click to expand...
What does that tell you about which company looks more attractive to someone who wants to invest in a DSLR?
Click to expand...
Less expensive always looks tempting. But it isn't always the best business model.
Tony Beach said:
Tony Beach said:
Canon must be hurting, look at this one too!

www.adorama.com/ICASL1K1Z.html
Click to expand...
Canon is not hurting. Canon is a big and diversified company. Nikon is hurting, and big time, because Nikon is a smaller and they are a specialized company. Nikon only makes money off of their cameras and lenses, so if they can't make money off of those then they are going to be toast. Nikon is losing market share right now, and they can't afford that.
Click to expand...
Repeat after me: Nikon is not losing market share, nor is Canon. Their relative market shares have remained remarkable steady over the last several years. Thom Hogan has written about that.

Both companies are trying to keep sales going in a market that is in decline thanks to smartphones.
 
Kerry Pierce said:
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Adorama has 7D II for $1050 today. That getting close to 1/2 price in a year.
Click to expand...
A 7dII for $1050 might make me consider being a dual brand user. So, I went there to find this great deal, and to see why the price is so low. I can't find it for that price. All of the new 7dII that I saw were $1399 for body only.
Click to expand...
The price of 1050 is with a mail in rebate, and includes a printer. On the Adorama page I am looking at is says "1049 after mail in rebate."
 
Thoughts R Us said:
Tony Beach said:
Billy Ray Valentine said:
Calm down Tony,
Click to expand...
What makes you think I'm not calm?
Thoughts R Us said:
here is the link...

It is $1049 after a mail in rebate. I missed the printer earlier or maybe it got added.

http://www.adorama.com/ICA7DM2Z.html

If I was not so invested into Nikon this would be tempting.
Click to expand...
What does that tell you about which company looks more attractive to someone who wants to invest in a DSLR?
Click to expand...
Less expensive always looks tempting. But it isn't always the best business model.
Thoughts R Us said:
Thoughts R Us said:
Canon must be hurting, look at this one too!

www.adorama.com/ICASL1K1Z.html
Click to expand...
Canon is not hurting. Canon is a big and diversified company. Nikon is hurting, and big time, because Nikon is a smaller and they are a specialized company. Nikon only makes money off of their cameras and lenses, so if they can't make money off of those then they are going to be toast. Nikon is losing market share right now, and they can't afford that.
Click to expand...
Repeat after me: Nikon is not losing market share, nor is Canon. Their relative market shares have remained remarkable steady over the last several years. Thom Hogan has written about that.

Both companies are trying to keep sales going in a market that is in decline thanks to smartphones.
Click to expand...
Thom wrote 6 days ago at Nikon Rumors that Nikon is losing market share. Latest numbers I've seen show a 2.5% decline last year while Canon held steady and Sony gained 1%. In 2008 Nikon's D300 was new and Nikon pulled even with Canon that year.
--
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
n
Next
w
Next unread
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top