Roger wrote:
Greetings Sigma People
You ever wonder how much longer new digital camera will keep coming out, and what this means for lens sales? I mean they will be around, but to be honest why buy? My son is in school for video production, and for all his stills and video work he use the FP and the Minolta XD11 with Minolta MD lenses. Why? Because they are inexpensive and excellent cameras and lenses. He shoots film for his important still work, he says it's different, has a different look and his customers like it better. His cost ($6.00 USD a roll for processing and film his B&W are about $.75 cent USD a roll this includes scanning) are way lower than a new $4000 USD
You can get a brand new 40 MP Fuji X-T5 for just $1,700. Why spend $4,000?
Film is very different, and if you like it, then great. I don't. I think digital is way better in so many ways . . . but I think film is still pretty cool. Some day I hope to get an 8x10, but it seems that day is far off.
digital camera and lenses to match, his FP works with different adapters, is FF and has a different color palette. Even with the EFV-11 it's still cost less than others, and it interchanges with Leica (My Leica CL and FL) the CL and the FP use the same lenses and batteries. With the MC-21 adapter SA to L I can use all my SA lenses if I want to, or if he wants too.
To be honest I'm done buying, I have no need for new,
. . . until the FFF comes out, and then you'll be ready, because you'll already have lenses that will work on it.
I have way to much gear and I can see where this would be an issue for Sigma and other camera companies. Why design and produce a new camera that may not sell enough units to recover the expense of producing that unit.
The cost of development per unit is probably less than $10 for most cameras. That's just a guess (which is why I used the word "probably"). I think this because I believe most camera companies that are selling cameras for $2,000 or less are making those cameras in high volumes of 50,000 to 100,000 units each. I wouldn't be surprised if Sigma made 50,000 units of the fp. I doubt they made so many of the fp L (probably more like 10,000 or 20,000), but then the fp L didn't need much development, because all that Sigma had to do was switch out the sensor and do some reprogramming (and maybe some other little electronic stuff).
Before you condemn me for blurting out numbers, remember that these companies did not start from scratch. They all have been making cameras for years. They likely used many parts from a previous camera to make the new model, though the new model might have an all-new body. The shutter is likely the same shutter that they used on a previous model. The viewfinder might be the same, though that is often different. The screen might be the same. For example, Sigma used the same screen on the SD1 that they used on the SD 15. Sigma used the same battery (and surely the same battery compartment and associated electronics inside the camera) for the SD 14, SD 15, and SD1.
Here's one of my thoughts on development costs. People seem to think development costs millions of dollars, and sometimes it does, but from one camera to the next in a line of cameras, I don't think it does. It's not like the design takes years of time for multiple parties or something. They come up with a new design in a few weeks, and then they tweak that design over a period of months, though that's not the only thing the designers are working on during those few months. Tooling takes days or weeks, not months or years. None of the processes are new (normally). When a new process actually is put into place, it is used for more than just one camera, so you can't say the entire cost of putting that new process into production has to be absorbed into the development cost of one new camera. After-all, it may be used in the production of the next five or six cameras, right?
Look at all the used stuff on the market, not to mention cell phones. Look at what the new Google Pixel 7 and the iPhones can do. Do you real need a digital camera and lenses to boot?
Hell yes! You can't put a fish-eye lens on the Google Pixel 7 . . . or an iPhone, and get decent results. Likewise you can't put a 100-400mm lens on either of those cameras and get decent results. Just try shooting birds in flight with one of those smartphones!
I was watching a program about the new I want to be a Pro Photographer, what was their answer, P mode. They gave the wanna bees a Leica M to shoot an assignment with, what a mess, one could even turn it on, another wanted her AF back as it was to hard to shoot the Leica.
So why buy? I think I'll use my money to travel keeping in mind smaller is better.
Go out and just do it
Roger J.
It is a good idea to just get out there and shoot, no matter what equipment you have Roger, but frankly I want to spend $5,000 on equipment before I go spending $25,000 on traveling and shooting over the next few years. Does that make sense?
I'm not going to say I don't think smartphones will replace cameras. They've been doing that for years now. I do think professional photographers will stick with "real cameras" though, and I believe "real cameras" have a long way to go before they have been made obsolete by something else (such as some future generation of smartphones or some other media creation/capture device). As long as pros use them, other people will buy cameras and lenses. I do believe that will continue for many many years to come (possibly forever). Size matters. You can't pack all the technology and capabilities into a smartphone that you can fit into a camera backpack. A set of seven or eight lenses and a good camera will most likely allaways have advantages over what they can put into a smartphone.
BTW, there are billions of potential customers out there becoming wealthier, as what were once third-world countries develop. I bet India, China, and a few countries in Africa will be the biggest markets for companies like Sigma, Sony, Nikon, Fuji, and Canon over the next twenty or thirty years. In fact, I believe China has already eclipsed the U.S. as the biggest market for just about every product, including cameras and lenses.
All that said, I'm sure millions of photographers are using their Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra smartphones to make amazing 100 MP photos.
