how fast will prices drop?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Proteus, Jul 25, 2005.

  1. Proteus

    Proteus Guest

    Any speculations/guesses on what a street price might be on a Canon EOS 1Ds
    digital (16Megapixel) in maybe 2 years? I see now it can be had for about
    $7000. Out of my budget, but drooling. Curious how the price might drop in
    a year or two (guesstimates of course)? Right now I am using a Canon 10D,
    only 6Megapixel); I sure would like to upgrade to the 1Ds resolution!
     
    Proteus, Jul 25, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. I assume you are talking about the mk II version of the 1Ds. If you are
    talking new, don't expect it to drop at all. Maybe $1000 at the most with a
    rebate or something. And probably only before it's about the be replaced.
    Canon uses a minimum advertised price (MAP) for all retailers so they can't
    go lower than what Canon said is the MAP. As for used, I don't think they
    will drop very quickly, considering how they didn't ever drop for the old
    model until the new model came out. Finally the only the old model is down
    around $4000 used, last I checked.
     
    Dave R knows who, Jul 25, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Proteus

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    I doubt it will, especially if they keep selling at the current price.
    However, depending on which romor mill you subscribe to, Canon will
    introduce a "gap" model between the 20D and the 1-series cameras that will
    be full frame. This is, or course, useless speculation and until Canon
    actually ships a product, irrelevant. If it dropped a few grand I'd have one
    too.
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Jul 25, 2005
    #3
  4. Presumably he's talking about the 1Ds2 optical performance in a more
    affordable body.

    The Nikon D2x optical performance could be available in a more affordable
    body almost immediately, since it's a 1.5x sensor, and therefore no more
    expensive than any other 1.5x sensor.

    I think that should mean that Canon's under pressure to release something
    with higher resolution that's affordable. There are lots of rumors flying,
    and one person said "There's likely to be a new Canon dSLR in the fall, and
    if there is, everyone's going to be surprised."

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jul 25, 2005
    #4
  5. Proteus

    ftran999 Guest

    Coming out of lurkdom to reply. I have albsolutely no economics expertise
    to dispute your claim of "prices not dropping at all or maybe $1000 with
    rebates." However, I'm not sure I would agree with you. Right now there
    are two factors that are keeping the price relatively high. 1. Cost of
    new technology. Right now it must be costing Canon a lot of money to make
    those 16MP sensors. The other factor is lack of competition. I believe the
    only one giving them a run for the money is the Nikon D2X. In the next few
    years with the manufacturing costs coming down and more competition as other
    camera makers introduce their own double digit MP cameras, overall prices
    should come down significanty. Case in point. I remember browsing around
    BestBuy a year, year and a half ago and seeing Panasonic EDTV plasmas for
    over $4K. Now they have them for just around $2.5K.
     
    ftran999, Jul 25, 2005
    #5
  6. Proteus

    Bill Hilton Guest

    Proteus writes ...
    The original 1Ds with 11 Mpixels (which I have) sold for $8,000 and
    sold very well, holding that price for two years. When the 1Ds MII
    came out last Sept the 1Ds used price dropped to $6,000 pretty fast,
    and then to around $4,000 not too long after (I was watching the prices
    carefully, wondering whether to sell and upgrade).

    So if the 1Ds Mark III with (my guess) 22 Mpixels comes out after a
    year at $8,000 then I'd expect the price of a used M II to drop in a
    similar fashion. But, no one *really* knows. A used 1Ds or 1Ds M II
    is still a good bargain because the cameras are built very well on the
    1V body, with 150,000 - 200,000 minimum shutter actuations (most
    consumer models are rated about 1/3 that). You can check the total
    shutter actuations in the exif file with a good converter like Capture
    One so if you get a low mileage model you should be good for a while,
    so a used one is a bargain.

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Jul 25, 2005
    #6
  7. Proteus

    eawckyegcy Guest

    Who cares what the number might be? Replacement cost for the shutter
    is only a few hundred bucks. _MUCH_ more important is the desire of
    Canon to continue maintaining the camera.
     
    eawckyegcy, Jul 26, 2005
    #7
  8. Proteus

    Bill Funk Guest

    I don't know for sure, but isn't the MAP connected to *advertising*?
    Such that the retailer can't *advertise* a lower price, but is allowed
    to *sell* for a lower price (the reason for those "call us" notes
    instead of a price in an ad)?
     
    Bill Funk, Jul 26, 2005
    #8
  9. Proteus

    Beck Guest

    I am curious as to what someone will gain from a 16 megapixel camera. What
    is the attraction? Its a sincere question, I am not trying to be funny or
    anything :)
     
    Beck, Jul 26, 2005
    #9
  10. Proteus

    Bill Hilton Guest

    You can check the total shutter actuations in the exif file
    I do. I'd much rather buy a used camera with 20,000 actuations instead
    of 200,000. What a stupid question ...
     
    Bill Hilton, Jul 26, 2005
    #10
  11. Proteus

    C Wright Guest

    Enough pixels to produce some very large prints without having to upsample.
    Also enough pixels to satisfy some magazine editors who formerly insisted on
    film.
     
    C Wright, Jul 26, 2005
    #11
  12. Sure. Anything larger than A4 looks a lot better with 16.7MP than with 8MP.
    Even at A4, 16.7MP will do a better job rendering textures and fine detail
    with the best of the current inkjet printers.

    More generally, medium format and large format make really gorgeous prints
    at 11x14 and up; 8MP isn't even close. For folks who know what a good print
    is, 16.7MP is very attractive.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jul 26, 2005
    #12
  13. Proteus

    Stacey Guest

    It won't drop. They'll just stop making this model and make an equal price
    replacement.
    So how much have they dropped the price on the 10D? :)
     
    Stacey, Jul 26, 2005
    #13
  14. Proteus

    Patrick Guest

    Any speculations/guesses on what a street price might be on a Canon EOS
    1Ds
    Canon Outlet on Ebay have a refurbished one for a Buy it Now price of £3,100
    ($5,391).
    I believe they only sell to the uk - but if you know someone in the uk, then
    that might be an option.

    http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30070&item=75330484
    69&rd=1

    There is only 1 day left on this one - but if you keep an eye on the outlet
    another will come up.
     
    Patrick, Jul 26, 2005
    #14
  15. This is actually a very legitimate question. As cameras go up in
    megapixels, I think we're actually getting diminishing returns from the
    increased megapixels, i.e. how much of an improvement can you really
    see between 8 megapixels and 16? I suspect for most photographers, even
    serious ones, 4 to 6 megapixels is perfectly adequate.

    It's the same thing as with computers - very few of us really need 3
    GHz, for the vast majority of us, 2 GHz is more than enough.
     
    Bruce Coryell, Jul 26, 2005
    #15
  16. In some sense, you're right. Most people (including many photographers whose
    only experience is with 35mm) just don't get it how incredibly gorgeous a
    good MF or LF print can be.

    But for those of us who do, 16MP is really attractive.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jul 26, 2005
    #16
  17. Proteus

    Beck Guest

    Thankyou David. To the naked eye, would we see a difference between 16mp and
    8mp?
     
    Beck, Jul 26, 2005
    #17
  18. Proteus

    Beck Guest

    Too much for home printing though?
     
    Beck, Jul 26, 2005
    #18
  19. Proteus

    Beck Guest

    Thats what I was thinking, surely to the naked eye we would not see a
    difference. As with anything the quality of prints also depends on the
    printer and the paper used.
    I can understand higher megapixels for an advertiser because they may want
    to print giant things like billboard posters, etc but not for normal use.
    The other problem I see is that while the megapixels in cameras is
    increasing at quite an alarming rate, the size of cards available is not.
    Take fuiji cards for example which my camera uses, they go up to 512mb and I
    think there is an unofficial 1gb card out there (might be official not
    sure). That matters not, my point is that to make such a great use of 16mp
    or more we are going to have to have much larger cards available, but at the
    moment, they are far too expensive.
     
    Beck, Jul 26, 2005
    #19
  20. At 11x14 and up, most definitely. At A4 (8.5x11.5), 11MP looks a lot better
    than 6MP, but 8MP may be enough for all but the very fussiest at A4.

    Note that it also depends on the subject. Landscapes and cityscapes really
    like a lot of detail. Sunsets, portraits need less. (But group portraits
    like more.)

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jul 26, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.