Cost of DSLR components (info for us all)

[Progress Lover]

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/16988/000114554907000125/k01271e6vk.htm

Thats Canon info for Q4 '06. Pretty UTD.

Canon state:

"Enhancing cost competitiveness

Amid intensified price competition in the marketplace, we continue our efforts to strengthen cost competitiveness in order to raise the price competitiveness of our products. In addition to further advancing the various reform initiatives that we have carried out until now—including production reform activities, centered on the cell production system, and “prototype-less” development, in which every effort has been made to eliminate the need for physical prototypes in the product-development process—we will strive to realize a “three-in-one” foundation for manufacturing that organically integrates development, manufacturing technology, and the factory floor. We will also promote the introduction of automated production lines using automated assembly systems and robots that operate around the clock, making possible production in Japan at costs that are competitive with production elsewhere in Asia. To realize this goal, we are planning the construction of a new production-engineering center to speed up the strengthening of our production technology capabilities. In addition, we are focusing our energies on in-house production, ranging from key devices to various manufacturing equipment and molds, and on further promoting procurement reforms aimed at improving procurement efficiency of the Canon Group under the policy of total optimization. By thoroughly carrying out these cost-reduction activities we strive to further lower our cost of sales ratio."

So one could say that we were on the right lines. They either produce in cheaper Aisian countries or set up automated prodution lines in japan that can build at a similar unit cost.

Interesting.

Also interesting to note the desire to avoid prototypes. Could be tough to spot the testers and their gaffer tape in future!

Do you really have a schezmo of the thing? That would be
interesting to see. The PDF appears to be no more than a high
level service center parts list.

A rule of thumb commonly applied to consumer electronics is to
divide the retail price by a factor of 5 to get an estimate of the
BOM cost. This is never exact but it will get you in the ball
park. This applies to things like satellite boxes and TV's --
maybe not to cameras but it is probably close. I would guess that
the cost of parts for a 30D is in the range of $300 - $400. I
doubt that this holds for the 1DS Mark II which I suspect that they
get a more significant premium for since it has no real competition.

I would also guess that the assembly costs for this stuff are
pretty high. I don't think that this equipment is built by
machines. I am going to guess that the higher end cameras probably
require even more attention and calibration, more elaborate focus
system in the higher end devices for example may require some more
detailed individual calibration. I suspect that something like a
1DS Mark II gets more attention and is more difficult to build –
just a guess.

--
Keep photography wild.

 

[Progress Lover]

Having to field lame, irrelevant, OT comments like yours is indeed hard to bear. Lol.

It's ok though. You just bump the thread and I'll always get back on topic...

Like this:

So. I have been kindly directed to Canon's accounts in a post further down.

I managed to get a little more than that here: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/16988/000114554907000125/

If you click any folder and then the docs ending in ".htm" there is a wealth of information written by Canon themselves offering all kinds of nice data about factor affecting their business and their strategies towards said factors.

For example in their analysis of the figures for Q4 2006, here: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/16988/000114554907000125/k01271e6vk.htm

There's a little info about production techniques amongst other stuff.

All this helps to give one an idea of the processes and costs involved in the precious DSLRs that we must defend to the death as being the best EVER and indeed the best IMAGINABLE product for a value that can never be surpassed...

Fanboys take note. Progress and even improvements are possible. Canon even think so. Get used to it.

--
Keep photography wild.

 

[Progress Lover]

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/16988/

Thats the one. Sorry last link was to a sub-folder. Some of that stuff is just public announcements. Other stuff is accounts etc.

All the accounts have plenty of details of the marketplace challenges Canon faces and details of how they're dealing with them for anyone interested.
--
Keep photography wild.

 

[Progress Lover]

According to Canon's fin stats camera profits were at 27% up to Q4 '06.

Page 11 here: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/16988/000114554907000125/k01271e6vk.htm

That means $300 on a 30D.
--
Keep photography wild.

 

[Progress Lover]

Who says this thread can't tech anyone anything?!

Ok. So we're probably talking $100 for the sensor after all is said and done INCLUDING R&D and making it into the unit that get's plugged into the camera. Just the type of discussion I was hoping for. Thanks again.

List revised.

LSI chip $15
Body casing + chassis + lens mount$??
LCD screen $??
Buttons $1?
Shutter unit (inc motor & mech) $40
Sensor unit(inc AA filter etc) $100
Mirror unit (inc motor & mech)$??
Prism/VF $??
Batteries (both main and button cell) $5?
AF system $??
Connectors (terminals on body) $??
Built in flash $??
Memory $??
A couple of circuit boards $1?
Fixings (screws etc) $1?
Putting it all together $??
Packaging $??
User manual $??
Cables/charger $5?
Bundled software $??
International logistics costs/unit (assume 300k units)$??
Corporate perks $5?
Advertising/marketing $36
Margin at 27% $300
R&D $ 89
Depreciation of equipment $56

So we're up to about $650 without including most of the components, assembly, packaging, the shipping or the dealer's cut!

This really shows exactly what I was expecting. Components are not the main cost of a DSLR. Most users seem to think otherwise and that is clearly a misconception.

I'm sure that between us we have the knowledge to nail this.

I doubt that they are using 12 inch, but that is pretty much my
point -- nobody knows, so this exercise has limited value. There
was a white paper from Canon a while back that had some of that
information. I don't have the link handy.

You can get a rough idea of how many sensors come off a wafer from
as follows: A=PI*(D/2)^2, divide that by the area of the APS-C and
deduct a bit for the loss on the corners of the reticule.

For 12" wafers and APS-C sized dies, figure 70% of the wafer area
has potentially useable dies. My calculation comes up with 130 dies.

Then
there is the yield -- I don't know what that might be for sensors
of this type.

Let us be generous, here, and figure 50% yield (including all of
the dies saved by redundancy features, and stuck-at cells that are
programmed out in DIGIC). Say 65 dies, or $15/working die.

And then there is the cost of the testers. I suspect Canon has the
number of test insertions down to 2 insertions per produced die (3
if burn in is used). A $10 million tester with a life of 5 years
and a throughput of 300K dies per year, is adding only 1/3rd to 1/2
of the cost of the die (itself) to the cost of the working die!
Maybe a little less, but not much.

In order to use this die, it must be mounted in a package, and
because it is a light sensitive device, the front of the die has to
be protected with a glass (or more typically quartz) top that is
hermetically sealed often with anti-reflective coating on both
sides. I have a quote for such a package in the $100 range in
quantities of 100K units. So, there is every possibility that the
package to put the sensor in costs more than the sensor itself! By
up to 7X more!

For normal IC's we try to get in the 90's. If we
end up much lower than that we have what we call product engineers
who go to work looking for the root cause of the yield hit and a
solution.

Processor companies like Intel and AMD introduce processors into
the market as yeilds rise above 20% and like to hit 90% by end of
life.

Incidentally, the mask cost for a 12 inch 90 nm part is $1 million
-- yep, that is Million with a big M.

While my last chip mask set cost $1.5 million; it contained 11
layers of metalization and was bump attached to its package. I
suspect that the sensor mask set is only 1/2 of this number of
layers due to the 3 (or 4) layer metalization. Thus I would figure
$0.75 million. I consider this in GOOD agreement with your figure.

So, we have a $1 million dollar mask set and maybe $20 million
dollars of designer+process-engineer time to amortize over way less
than 1 million sensors.

Now, somebody has to actually pay for the FAB. Small 12" fabs cost
in the just under 1 Billion (with a big B). ANd while this FAB is
written down over several generations of sensors (say 8-10 years),
it is written down at way less than 1 billion sensors! In all
actuality, it is those pesky little P&S cameras that are paying for
the FAB, allowing the big (relatively speaking) sensors we love in
dSLRs.

So the designers time, the mask set, and the cost of the fab itself
are way bigger than the marginal cost of the sensor itself.

So each time you FU%K up,
cha-ching, TSMC gets another cool million.

This depends upon what kind of FU%K up you performed. A 2 layer
change only costs $200K! This is one reason to spend as much time
in verification as in design itself (it is simply less expensive).

If you want to make money in the silicon business, get into package
manufacturing! and stay far away from the testing side of the
business.

Summarizing, that $15 working die on an uncut silicon wafer,
becomes a $100+ part by the time you can plug it into a camera
assembly.
--
Mitch

--
Keep photography wild.

 

[Progress Lover]

This thread may not have done what I hoped quite as efficiently as I had hoped. It may also have attracted more inane crud than most threads.

However, major progress has been made.

Firstly what I set out to do (show the proportion of DSLR retail cost applicable to component costs) is well on track (see current list down the page).

Also, we now have decent info on sensor costs, Canon's production techniques and links to Canon fin stats with info on both performance and strategy. We also know the %age of sales that goes into advertising and the r&d budget as a %age of sales.

You might notice that it's a little more useful/productive/interesting (to some) than anything Robert 55 has achieved around here recently. He he.

Anyway. Here's the list so far which although incomplete and comprised entirely of educated guesses and deductions from financial statements shows that component costs are not* a major part of what you pay at the retailer. Hopefully that will free people's minds from the notion that you can't have progress in a DSLR because the parts cost too much. That is patently not true.

Unless the LCD costs $300 (HA HA), the cams are build, packaged & shipped for free and the dealer makes nothing...

LSI chip $15
Body casing + chassis + lens mount$??
LCD screen $??
Buttons $1?
Shutter unit (inc motor & mech) $40
Sensor unit(inc AA filter etc) $100
Mirror unit (inc motor & mech)$??
Prism/VF $??
Batteries (both main and button cell) $5?
AF system $??
Connectors (terminals on body) $??
Built in flash $??
Memory $??
A couple of circuit boards $1?
Fixings (screws etc) $1?
Putting it all together $??
Packaging $??
User manual $??
Cables/charger $5?
Bundled software $??
International logistics costs/unit (assume 300k units)$??
Corporate perks $5?
Advertising/marketing $36
Margin at 27% $300
R&D $ 89
Depreciation of equipment $56

So we're up to about $650 of the $1120 retail price without including most of the components, assembly, packaging, the shipping/distribution or the dealer's cut!

Can anyone throw any light on those areas too? Thanks in advance.

We have also established

Progress Lover wrote:
snip

Well congrats on the most useful and intelligent comment so far.

Thx
more snip

33 to 53 [including this post]
these are hard numbers, though I may be off one or two in either
direction

--
Keep photography wild.

 

[duncan74]

This thread may not have done what I hoped quite as efficiently as
I had hoped. It may also have attracted more inane crud than most
threads.

However, major progress has been made.

It's proved you to be rude, uncaring (how do you know that NONE of the Suffolk girl's families are photographers) and have way way too much time on your hands.

And don't forget this post is discussion, so it's 'worthwhile' ;-)

 

[Marcel]

When I read this subject I will add this on my own site including the
european partnumber.

http://www.sportphotocollections.com/Apparatuur/pages/indexpag.html

http://www.sportphotocollections.com/Canon/pages/indexpag.html

Note : It will be added in some time.

M.
--
I hope my camera sees a lot to shoot about.

 

[Progress Lover]

You're right. I don't give a damn about delusional timewasters.

Thanks for bumping the thread though.

Now do you actually have anything to add to the thread or are you just going to break policy with OT rubbish?

If you can't help the discussion, why not just let others get on with it?

If that's too much to ask, at least show off how much better your time was spent than mine.

I shot and edited nearly 400 product shots today and ALSO made some progress on the forum... I just came back to take a break as it's just gone midnight where I am today. I'm not quite done and I wanted a break before I tweak the last few. I find you've queezed out yet another OT brain-turd on the thread.

If you've got enough time to drop snide comments, you must have already finished processing the masterpieces you shot today. Why not post some of today's great works to humiliate me by proving that your day shooting and making pointless comments on the forum was better spent than my day of shooting and making progress on the forum?

Now if you had the slightest reason for suspecting that of the 20 something people (other than you or I) that have contributed to this thread, any are related to anyone else I'm sure you can explain how you came to that conclusion and indeed why they don't seem to care?

I'm sure you understand that even if by some twist of fate, one of these 20 or so people is actually related* to an ex suffolk hooker; (if they would admit such a thing), why do you think that they would disagree that these things happen in that area? After all it's an absolute fact that they did!

They aren't and would probably be insulted at your suggestion.

Whilst we're making stuff up, maybe they would be annoyed at yet another OT comment from you? If they're reading this thread as you allege, they probably don't appreciate your pointless interjections getting in the way of what they're reading about...

BTW. I never said that "NONE were photographers"...

I said that every single one definitely was. That was sarcasm. Get it?

Now please butt out. You walked into this of your own free will asking for trouble. The rude response you got was quite deserved and could have been avoided quite easily if you just had the willpower to find a more productive use for your time than wasting that of others.

You know that if you don't like the subject of a thread, you don't have to read it never mind post. Just let interested parties get on with what they're doing.

You could even express your dislike for the subject and still make a useful contribution... As Mr Hull has done. Crazy idea I know!

Your comment was both off topic, useless, and a deliberate attempt to derail the thread. Nothing more.
Did you expect thanks for breaking forum policy (a 2nd time)?

Why not start a productive thread to keep yourself busy? Good normally comes of them even though a few people can't help but post rubbish. Don't worry about people like that though. You can send them off with their tail between their legs by getting them to realise what utter hypocrites they are.

You can't be surprised to get the response you did. You posted just to be rude.

Stop trying to twist things around and pretend you're not just a bored chap who sadly found himself in rip-off Britain with nothing to do, too much time and too little subject matter.

I hope that attempting to derail threads that you claim not to care about isn't your only form of entertainment. It's even worse that you had to come back for a second bite when after a few more bored hours you still hadn't found something better to do.

I ignored your first comment for a reason. Better things to do. Perhaps you were insulted that it was about the only comment so pathetic that it didn't even get a response?

Even so, surely you could have resisted going OT again? I hope a little negative reinforcement helps your problem.

If you want to join in, get things back on topic and redeem yourself with some potentially useful information!
That would be a nice gesture. Thanks in advance.

This thread may not have done what I hoped quite as efficiently as
I had hoped. It may also have attracted more inane crud than most
threads.

However, major progress has been made.

It's proved you to be rude, uncaring (how do you know that NONE of
the Suffolk girl's families are photographers) and have way way too
much time on your hands.

And don't forget this post is discussion, so it's 'worthwhile' ;-)

--
Keep photography wild.

 

[thecameraguy]

And then it can be concluded that in 150 posts this exercise will have produced nothing more than a number less than or equal to the retail cost of the 30D.

As i recall, the whole exercise was to support useless speculation about what features canon should put into a product we know nothing about to be released at some unknown timeframe, knowing full well that Canon (if they have any sense at all) will be totally ignoring this and all other forum.

Can we get back to speculating in the 40D....after THIS thread, that seems like fun.
--
~ Being over-exposed can get you arrested ~

 

[MitchAlsup]

What technology was that 1.5M mask set in?

65nm; 4 processors on a single 17mm*17mm die; 11 layers of dual damacene copper; partially depleted with strained transistors.

--
Mitch

 

[wight1979]

Cost of 40D production is obviously next. I wonder how much the parts for hte yet to be built camera will cost. I know this is a tekkie forum but this has all gone on too long

 

[thecameraguy]

--
~ Being over-exposed can get you arrested ~

 

[dwalby]

Now I just mostly lurk for the comedy value. This one is beyond belief.

 

[dswcamera]

Your guess could be from 2x to 3x off.

Their business model, negotiated prices with vendors, offsite mfg costs etc are unique to them. If you gather info from all over the mfg sector, the numbers are pretty much meaningless.

Canon won't let anybody know what their real costs are as that is part of their secrets to success/or not.

I worked with Panasonic several years ago in the hard disk drive business. it is a relatively similar technology mix. They would hide the real numbers from us all the time.

But good luck in your quest. This would certainly be a useful exercise for a business or marketing major.

Cheers
--
'A bad idea in search of a good cause is..
just a bad idea' ... me

 

[Steve Balcombe]

Now I just mostly lurk for the comedy value. This one is beyond
belief.

If you've enjoyed this thread, take a look at the last paragraph in this one...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=22632834

"I've just run a thread" ... "established pretty firmly" -- nearly cost me a mouthful of coffee!

 

[David Hull]

Yep... 65nm was my guess. Thanks.

 

[David Hull]

I'll help with the quest for 150.

 

[Progress Lover]

And totally made up somehow in your mind.

The point is to find out what proportion of the shelf price is made up of component costs and/or therefore whether components cost are a major proportion of the shelf price.

The point is to allow people to move away from the incorrect assumption that progress can't be made in certain areas because of component costs (including the r&d).

Whilst the figures that have been produced are not precise they have been arrived at reasonable - from the experience of those that know and/or Canon's own financial statements.

So, point is proven for all intents and purposes.

Now one could argue in light of this information that certainly the key features (AF system, shooting speed, seals, interface etc) of a '40D' could be significantly improved with no increase in shelf price.

However that's a potential use for the info that you seem to have made the link to. Paradoxical? Perhaps this info isn't neccessarily as useless as you think.

Certainly there's some good info on this thread unless you feel that the contributions on sensor costs are BS and that Canon's fin stats offer no insight into anything?

And then it can be concluded that in 150 posts this exercise will
have produced nothing more than a number less than or equal to the
retail cost of the 30D.

As i recall, the whole exercise was to support useless speculation
about what features canon should put into a product we know nothing
about to be released at some unknown timeframe, knowing full well
that Canon (if they have any sense at all) will be totally ignoring
this and all other forum.

Can we get back to speculating in the 40D....after THIS thread,
that seems like fun.
--
~ Being over-exposed can get you arrested ~

--
Keep photography wild.

 

[Progress Lover]

Your guess could be from 2x to 3x off.

Well let's think about that. If I'm two or three x off in one direction then the retail price of the 30D is $2000. Say no more on that one.

If I'm 2-3x off in the other direction then my point is 2 to 3 x more valid as component costs are absolutely negligable.

So. In other words there is absolutely NO CHANCE at all that I am even '2x off' in either direction...

Think about it.

Their business model, negotiated prices with vendors, offsite mfg
costs etc are unique to them. If you gather info from all over the
mfg sector, the numbers are pretty much meaningless.

Canon won't let anybody know what their real costs are as that is
part of their secrets to success/or not.

I worked with Panasonic several years ago in the hard disk drive
business. it is a relatively similar technology mix. They would
hide the real numbers from us all the time.

But good luck in your quest. This would certainly be a useful
exercise for a business or marketing major.

Cheers
--
'A bad idea in search of a good cause is..
just a bad idea' ... me

--
Keep photography wild.