With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
olstrup Veteran Member • Posts: 3,809
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?

The right price is the price the market will bear.

-- hide signature --

"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." (Henri Cartier-Bresson)

noggin2k1
noggin2k1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,490
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
1

Does anyone here actually pay RRP for Sony kit though? I know I certainly don't.

There's always deals to be had on Sony. In Canon's case, they just have to make their deals a little more "visible" to the general public, as the product alone isn't enough to shift units.

 noggin2k1's gear list:noggin2k1's gear list
Sony a9 Sony a7 III Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Tamron SP 35mm F1.8 Di VC USD Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM +8 more
bloodlmt Regular Member • Posts: 158
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
1

In  Malaysia, the EOS R is collecting dust on many store's shelves coz the price is $500 more expensive than a7iii body only.

If the $1500 price is reflected here, probably some people will grab it.

Sony will not reduce the a7iii as it still selling very well until they out the a7 mark IV.

surume Junior Member • Posts: 27
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
6

I'll add Japanese prices for reference as well.

Prices taken from Yodobashi, a major electronics retailer in the Japanese market.

Since Yodobashi provides 10% of purchase price in in-store points (1 point = 1 JPY), I have subtracted 10% off the price tags. Exchange rates calculated at 110 JPY / 1 USD.

SONY a7ii $1066

CANON EOS RP $1298

SONY a7rii $1622

CANON EOS R $1923

SONY a7iii $2025

Now, with SONY providing $182 cash rebates for purchasing an a7ii or a7iii until the end of the year, while CANON only provides rebates if you buy one of their lenses as well (and the rebates are in the form of a VISA gift card...) the prices of the bodies alone become as follows:

SONY a7ii $884

CANON EOS RP $1298

SONY a7rii $1622

SONY a7iii $1843

CANON EOS R $1923

 surume's gear list:surume's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony a9 Sony 2x Teleconverter (2016) Sigma 30mm F1.4 for Sony E Sony FE 85mm F1.8 +3 more
Miki Nemeth
Miki Nemeth Senior Member • Posts: 1,546
Canon EOS R is more expensive in my city than Sony A7III
5

MILC man wrote:

tqlla wrote:

This weekend, Canon put the EOS R on sale for $1500, with discounts as low as $1300.

Hah, in my country not any sign of any discount, the EOS R price is a hefty $2200 USD Sony A7III is $2100.

I know these dont have dual card slots or IBIS,

Lack of IBIS is a major one, unfortunately, the RF2870f2, none of the Sigma ART lenses, none of the RF prime lenses can enjoy the support of IBIS.

no lens selection either.

In a sense, you are totally right. Sigma, Tamron makes no RF lenses. On the other hand, modern Sigma lenses work excellently on the 1.6 firmware updated EOS R via the adapter.

but they do have a better touch screen,

Verbatim, yes, but in practice no. EOS R touch operability is not available on a number of screens, you have to remember where touch can be used, totally frustrating. On Sony, Sigma fp, Fujifilm X cameras, the situation is dead simple, touch operation is only for focus point handling.

better EVF than the A7iii,

The EVF on EOS R in video at slow shutter speeds is barely usable.

included an adapter that works like native,

Credit to Canon, the adapter is really great and included. But the ring adapter is not included and a hefty $200 extra. For that price you can buy a Sigma MC11 adapter, which works on the A7III at least as great as the Canon adapter on the EOS R.

and a flip screen.

I prefer back tilting screen. The best solution is what Panasonic made for the S1H or Fujifilm for X-T100, both tilts back or left protruding.

you don't need an adapter with sony, because there are more lenses for e-mount than any other milc format on the planet... e-mount has a future

Yes, you are right, with the MC21 and Metabones adapters you can use the modern EF-mount lenses from Sigma and Canon on A7III and later model, as if they were native FE lenses. This is not true for earlier Sony bodies and old EF lenses. My 1998 Canon 100400L works on the A7III as excellently as it works on EOS R, for example. Both the Sigma 70200f2.8 Sports and Canon 70200f2.8 worked brilliantly on both the A7III and EOS R.

On the other hand, Sigma and Tamron are churning out state of the art quality lenses with dedicated E/FE mount, and these work even better on Sony cameras especially as their focus motor is totally silent, and even more snappy in tracking video.

I am planning to buy again an EOS R, but I wouldn't buy a single RF lens, since with the adapter all moder EF lenses work excellently. When you have the brilliant Sigma 70200f2.8 from Sigma's Sports collection, you can use that same lens excellently on EOS R, A7III, A7RIV, A9, A9II, A6600, A6400, Sigma fp (and possibly Panasonic S1, S1R, S1H, Nikon Z6, Z7, but I had no chance to test them with my own hands).

a better adapter should have been done by now.

No, the Canon RF adapter is not better as Sigma MC11 and Metabones on Sony A7III, they are equal. The RF ring adapter is more expensive than MC11, and not included.

adapter for what, exactly? and why, when e-mount has such a vast lens lineup.

Yes, yes, yes. If you are not planning to use the same lenses on multiple systems, E/FE-mount lenses from Sony, Zeiss, Sigma, Tamron, Samyang/Rokinon, just to name the major makers are so abundant and excellent that you don't need adapters.

On the other hand, if you believe in RF, you can buy excellent lenses from Canon today. Canon RF lenses are expensive, just like Sony GM/Zeiss lenses; you don't have the option to buy for your EOS R brilliantly small and sharp lenses like the Tamron 1728f2.8 for half the price. So in the EOS R ecosystem and adapter is indispensable. In the Sony system it is optional.

-- hide signature --

Thank you for taking the time reading. I use DPReview as my photography/videography blog. If you like it, click Like, or leave some comments.
Have fun on http://www.flickr.com/photos/99398503@N07/sets

 Miki Nemeth's gear list:Miki Nemeth's gear list
Nikon Df Sony a5100 Sony a9 Sony a7 III Canon EOS R +4 more
voronspb Senior Member • Posts: 1,593
Re: Canon EOS R is more expensive in my city than Sony A7III
2

Native glass is always more convenient than adapted one. Yes, non-native lenses may be cheaper, but you'll pay for that with added bulk, possible misalignment, additional entrance for elements, additional moving parts and electrical contacts to fail, you name it.

Competition is always great for customers, and given the current Canon prices, it looks like they decided to stop the leaking DSLR users now and forever - no matter the cost. In contrary, Sony still looks quite confident with A7III and steadily growing number of good native lenses.

-- hide signature --

Vladimir Gorbunov

 voronspb's gear list:voronspb's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony a7 III Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD +7 more
101Colors
101Colors Regular Member • Posts: 239
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?

It appears Sony would rather to continue to manufacture and sell older bodies like the A7 ii as a lower cost entry into the system, rather than offering high discounts on newer models early in their release cycle. ( the recent .edu discount was surprising though.)

Factoring in those older and lower cost options, it appears the system - or at least the bodies- are priced for buyers of all price points.

Sony branded lenses do seem too expensive - and rarely heavily discounted, IMHO.

tqlla wrote:

This weekend, Canon put the EOS R on sale for $1500, with discounts as low as $1300. Even less using Canon's loyalty program, which Sony doesnt have. The EOS RP is only $1000.

I know these dont have dual card slots or IBIS, but they do have a better touch screen, better EVF than the A7iii, included an adapter that works like native, and a flip screen. If you are looking at current like for like prices. Also consider the RF lenses are brand new designs the FE has been around for a couple years.

  • A7iii is $1800 vs EOS R $1300 vs EOS RP $1000
  • 35mm FE=$750 vs RF=$450
  • Adapter FE=$180 vs RF=included or $100
  • 70-200 GM=$2600 vs RF=$2700
  • 24-70 GM=$2200 vs RF=$2300
  • 24-105 GM=$1100 vs RF=$900
  • 24-200 GM=$950 vs RF=$900

I love that Sony advances the sensors so quickly, but things like a flip screen and a better adapter should have been done by now. And now it looks like Sony needs to adjust their prices.

-- hide signature --

«««««« : »»»»»»
What the world needs is more geniuses with humility, there are so few of us left.
:
My other gear ::
Olympus G.Zuiko 50mm ƒ 1.4 (silver nose)
Several other cheap FE lenses

 101Colors's gear list:101Colors's gear list
Sony a7R III Zeiss Batis 25mm F2
golfhov Forum Pro • Posts: 11,891
Supply and demand

tqlla wrote:

This weekend, Canon put the EOS R on sale for $1500, with discounts as low as $1300. Even less using Canon's loyalty program, which Sony doesnt have.

Yup. And the a7iii is $1800 or as low as a little over 1500 with edu or other discounts.

The EOS RP is only $1000.

And the a7ii is 900. The a7rii is 1300

I know these dont have dual card slots or IBIS, but they do have a better touch screen, better EVF than the A7iii, included an adapter that works like native, and a flip screen. If you are looking at current like for like prices.

It's a "competitive" product without going into the whole breakdown. To me where they want wrong was releasing it at too high a price compared to the competition

Also consider the RF lenses are brand new designs the FE has been around for a couple years.

  • A7iii is $1800 vs EOS R $1300 vs EOS RP $1000

My only problem with this figure is that you are using the current sale price of the R plus hidden discounts. Sony has EDU and cash back deals but no loyalty program .

  • 35mm FE=$750 vs RF=$450
  • Adapter FE=$180 vs RF=included or $100
  • 70-200 GM=$2600 vs RF=$2700
  • 24-70 GM=$2200 vs RF=$2300
  • 24-105 GM=$1100 vs RF=$900
  • 24-200 GM=$950 vs RF=$900

Sounds about right. For all the talk of "overpriced" lenses it seems the competition is largely pricing lenses similar to Sony and now that Sony has gained traction it has a lot of third party native lenses that have joined the ranks. Some even prioritized for r the mount. Like the Tamron 28-75

I love that Sony advances the sensors so quickly, but things like a flip screen and a better adapter should have been done by now.

You won't ever see a better adapted from Sony. They are getting to a point in their cycle where the adapter is less of a priority. They want you to buy their lenses.

Like before. I won't even bother with a "defense" of the a7xx line. Everyone knows their are advantages and disadvantages

And now it looks like Sony needs to adjust their prices.

Meh. I think the people at these organizations know more about business than we do. I am curious how long these firesale prices will last. I think I saw RP bundles with the superzoom for $1300. That's insane given the age and original MSRP of those items. It will definitely put some pressure on Sony if those prices continue.

 golfhov's gear list:golfhov's gear list
Panasonic LX10 Sony a7R II Sony a7 III Samyang 14mm F2.8 ED AS IF UMC Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD +11 more
LenRivers Senior Member • Posts: 1,784
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
3

No,  Nikon and canon see how late they are to the party and are desperate I think to stop the bleeding of those leaving Nikon and canon for Sony

as soon as technology evens out you won’t see this as much.

I would not be surprised If on a canon and Nikon work bench is a Sony camera with its guts poured out studying it

it is like two gas stations of different names across the street from one another with a 2 cent cost difference some that matters too for some reason.

OP tqlla Veteran Member • Posts: 5,397
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
1

MILC man wrote:

  • Adapter FE=$180 vs RF=included or $100

you don't need an adapter with sony, because there are more lenses for e-mount than any other milc format on the planet... e-mount has a future, while canon camera sales have been dropping like a rock..

I love that Sony advances the sensors so quickly, but things like a flip screen and a better adapter should have been done by now.

a better adapter for what, exactly? and why, when e-mount has such a vast lens lineup.

IMO, not having a good adapter shows they dont care about their previous customers.

  1. They havent updated the LA-EA1 to allow PDAF, even though the A6300+ can do PDAF with adapted lenses.
  2. The LA-EA3 doesnt work as well as the Sigma MC-11, even though Sony still sells A-mount lenses.
  3. Sony doesnt have a loyalty program.
  4. Sony's non-pro customer repair service is not good.
 tqlla's gear list:tqlla's gear list
Sony RX1R II Sony a99 II Sony a7R III Sony 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* Sony 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* +1 more
voronspb Senior Member • Posts: 1,593
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
2

tqlla wrote:

IMO, not having a good adapter shows they dont care about their previous customers.

  1. They havent updated the LA-EA1 to allow PDAF, even though the A6300+ can do PDAF with adapted lenses.
  2. The LA-EA3 doesnt work as well as the Sigma MC-11, even though Sony still sells A-mount lenses.

Ask yourself - why didn't Metabones or Sigma make the perfect A-E adapter which would rule them all? Because actually too few people need the 5th adapter of same kind, the Minolta system being not really popular even in its best days.

Sony's made as many as four adapters in early days of NEX/Alpha system. Two of them were extremely complicated, offering about the best AF available with contemporary tech. So the users of A-mount were served well those days.

But now the E-mount system is developed, and making even better adapter will not bring Sony anything but added expenses for RnD. Such adapter will have really poor production volumes, which translate into extremely high cost. For what?

In the meantime they've done what they could, removing as many restrictions as possible while using the adapter.

-- hide signature --

Vladimir Gorbunov

 voronspb's gear list:voronspb's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony a7 III Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD +7 more
golfhov Forum Pro • Posts: 11,891
Adam Smith

tqlla wrote:

MILC man wrote:

  • Adapter FE=$180 vs RF=included or $100

you don't need an adapter with sony, because there are more lenses for e-mount than any other milc format on the planet... e-mount has a future, while canon camera sales have been dropping like a rock..

I love that Sony advances the sensors so quickly, but things like a flip screen and a better adapter should have been done by now.

a better adapter for what, exactly? and why, when e-mount has such a vast lens lineup.

IMO, not having a good adapter shows they dont care about their previous customers.

  1. They havent updated the LA-EA1 to allow PDAF, even though the A6300+ can do PDAF with adapted lenses.

They discontinued the Laea1. No?

  1. The LA-EA3 doesnt work as well as the Sigma MC-11, even though Sony still sells A-mount lenses.

Meh......

  1. Sony doesnt have a loyalty program.

They do not. Yest they still seem to sell cameras.

  1. Sony's non-pro customer repair service is not good.

It's is not as good as Canons. It has been getting better. Seeing as how Nikon seems to be going the opposite way in some markets I am curious where the state of them all now. Another fun fact was CPS wasn't weighing the R bodies very high on their points when they were released. Not sure where they are now.

Also everything has pros and cons. The earliest bodies didn't have great AF anyway and adapters weren't a great experience. It has all gotten better BUT now that the lens lineup has filled out for the "average user" it is less of a concern than before.

To some people an a7iii is never going to be worth the price it costs no matter where that lies. Given that it is a model that has retained most of it's MsRP for almost two years is impressive. The reason the R price has been slashed is people don't think it is worth what Canon did. With this new price we will see

 golfhov's gear list:golfhov's gear list
Panasonic LX10 Sony a7R II Sony a7 III Samyang 14mm F2.8 ED AS IF UMC Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD +11 more
Hans vdC
Hans vdC Veteran Member • Posts: 3,498
Re: not in belgium...

Prices in Belgium:

EOS R body : € 2.159

A7III : € 1.849

But I have to admit I'm very much considering selling my A7III+Tamron+55/1.8 to go with Canon (again). Left them a few years ago, but always longed for the Canon-system which I always adored (but hated them missing the mirrorless train).

 Hans vdC's gear list:Hans vdC's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7 III Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +5 more
Trollmannx Veteran Member • Posts: 6,048
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
1

LenRivers wrote:

No, Nikon and canon see how late they are to the party and are desperate I think to stop the bleeding of those leaving Nikon and canon for Sony

Sony asked for competition from day one. Guess that took more time than expected.

as soon as technology evens out you won’t see this as much.

Guess Canon and Nikon expect to raise the price as new and improved cameras are launched. Sony has used a very clever price strategy by increasing the price in step with technological advances - and we cheared and paid.

I would not be surprised If on a canon and Nikon work bench is a Sony camera with its guts poured out studying it

Guess a big part of this game is the processor and the software - not so much the guts.

it is like two gas stations of different names across the street from one another with a 2 cent cost difference some that matters too for some reason.

Would for sure NOT choose the other gas station! 

rythie
rythie Regular Member • Posts: 347
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
1

It's not going to stay like that forever. It's aimed at Canon SLR shooters who might be put off Canon mirrorless due to the lack of lenses. I'm sure the goal is to get people to switch and then be locked into the R-mount cameras. Canon will produce more expensive R-mount cameras as time goes on.

In the UK at at least the a7ii was £1200 when I bought it and you could get the a7 for less than £1000 and £500 used. That was back when there were few lenses. When the a7iii came out it was £2000 and there were a lot more lenses by then.

 rythie's gear list:rythie's gear list
Sony RX100 III Sony a7 III Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +11 more
AZheaven Contributing Member • Posts: 989
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
1

The Sony A7III came out in April of 2018. Body only was $1,999. And it stayed that way until just this November when it's now $200. off.

Nikon's Z's came out and already they have had 2 sales (not to mention a recall on some models). Sales of the Z's has been lackluster at best from what's being reported.

Canon EOS-R. Same situation as Nikon? Low sales? Don't know enough about the Canon mirrorless lineup.

I remember the enthusiasm over the A7III during the Vegas release back in 2018. That's one of the reasons I switched to Sony from Nikon. The Nikon release was controlled, while Sony seemed to go all out.

onlyfreeman
onlyfreeman Senior Member • Posts: 2,081
Re: Supply and demand
2

golfhov wrote:

Meh. I think the people at these organizations know more about business than we do.

When you say "these organisations", are you including Olympus in that?

 onlyfreeman's gear list:onlyfreeman's gear list
Sony a7 II Sony FE 50mm F1.8 Sony FE 85mm F1.8 Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 III FastStone Photo Resizer +1 more
golfhov Forum Pro • Posts: 11,891
Low hanging fruit

onlyfreeman wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Meh. I think the people at these organizations know more about business than we do.

When you say "these organisations",

Sorry. Guess I should have just said "businesses".

are you including Olympus in that?

OUCH.......that's low. I have no dog in the fight but I am sure Olypmus will recover. They have been around too long and have too many faithful fans. Thier products aren't for me but I wish luck to those that enjoy them .

I guess my point was that these businesses have people who's entire day consists of observing the markets with much better data than we have and setting prices. I have my opinions on soem market forces BUT I don't for one second pretend I know better than they do

 golfhov's gear list:golfhov's gear list
Panasonic LX10 Sony a7R II Sony a7 III Samyang 14mm F2.8 ED AS IF UMC Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD +11 more
OP tqlla Veteran Member • Posts: 5,397
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?

voronspb wrote:

tqlla wrote:

IMO, not having a good adapter shows they dont care about their previous customers.

  1. They havent updated the LA-EA1 to allow PDAF, even though the A6300+ can do PDAF with adapted lenses.
  2. The LA-EA3 doesnt work as well as the Sigma MC-11, even though Sony still sells A-mount lenses.

Ask yourself - why didn't Metabones or Sigma make the perfect A-E adapter which would rule them all? Because actually too few people need the 5th adapter of same kind, the Minolta system being not really popular even in its best days.

Sony's made as many as four adapters in early days of NEX/Alpha system. Two of them were extremely complicated, offering about the best AF available with contemporary tech. So the users of A-mount were served well those days.

But now the E-mount system is developed, and making even better adapter will not bring Sony anything but added expenses for RnD. Such adapter will have really poor production volumes, which translate into extremely high cost. For what?

In the meantime they've done what they could, removing as many restrictions as possible while using the adapter.

Of course Sigma doesnt care to make A-E adapters. They dont have any loyalty to A-mount users. But A-mount users are SONY users, sony should take care of Sony customers.

How expensive can R&D be for the adapters? Canon makes the adapters and gives them away with purchase. Sony cant even update the firmware on the LA-EA1?

 tqlla's gear list:tqlla's gear list
Sony RX1R II Sony a99 II Sony a7R III Sony 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* Sony 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* +1 more
MILC man Senior Member • Posts: 3,865
Re: With Canon's low sale prices, is Sony becoming too expensive?
2

tqlla wrote:

MILC man wrote:

  • Adapter FE=$180 vs RF=included or $100

you don't need an adapter with sony, because there are more lenses for e-mount than any other milc format on the planet... e-mount has a future, while canon camera sales have been dropping like a rock..

I love that Sony advances the sensors so quickly, but things like a flip screen and a better adapter should have been done by now.

a better adapter for what, exactly? and why, when e-mount has such a vast lens lineup.

IMO, not having a good adapter shows they dont care about their previous customers.

  1. They havent updated the LA-EA1 to allow PDAF, even though the A6300+ can do PDAF with adapted lenses.

afaik, laea1 is out of production... it serves no purpose, because the laea3 works on crop bodies.

  1. The LA-EA3 doesnt work as well as the Sigma MC-11, even though Sony still sells A-mount lenses.

the pdaf functionality works just as good as it does on the mc-11, and in fact with real-time tracking, laea3 af is better than it is on any a-mount body.

sony does limit the framerate to 3fps af-c or less on the a7 bodies, and 10fps on the a9, but that is a deliberate choice.

laea3 has a tripod/monopod mount, mc-11 doesn't.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads