Rebel XT Black Costlier than Silver. Why?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Artistry, Apr 13, 2005.

  1. Artistry

    Artistry Guest

    Does anyone know why the black Canon Rebel XT is running around $65.00 more
    than the silver version?

    The Canon BG-E3 Vertical Grip/Battery Holder for EOS Digital Rebel XT looks
    like it is black. It would visually blend better with the black body. But,
    I could put the $65.00 to better use.
    Artistry, Apr 13, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Artistry

    John Guest

    Because Silver looks like crap.
    John, Apr 13, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Artistry

    Frank ess Guest

    Judgemental John, with the ready answer.

    Fry's had a black kit for $957 yesterday, but it was the display
    (abused) model; they'd transferred the only other one to different
    Frank ess, Apr 13, 2005
  4. Artistry

    Roger Moss Guest

    Nikon have done this for years - eg Fm2, FE2, etc.

    Black was always the Pro's option, as it's much more discrete than silver.

    I'd suspect that a black paint job with proper preparation on a brass body
    would be more costly to produce than satin plating - but then Canon is
    working with (ulp) plastic...

    Lesson: fashion costs.

    Roger Moss, Apr 13, 2005
  5. Artistry

    Sheldon Guest

    Black was always the pros choice, and generally costs more in any pro or
    semi-pro camera when compared to silver. Back in the good old days the old
    Nikons were made of brass and the silver coating was somewhat reflective and
    brought more attention to the photographer. The black bodies not only
    looked better, but when the black wore off photographers wore their cameras
    with the brass showing through like battle ribbons.

    Also, as you've noticed, many accessories are black, and match the "pro"
    body. I have a motor drive on an old Nikon F, and the camera is silver
    while the motor drive is black.

    I don't know what's under the silver or black on the Canon . At least on
    the Nikon I think the black (plastic) is solid black so it will never wear

    Since the black looks more stylish and is considered more "professional
    looking," they charge an extra $65 because they can. One nice thing is that
    the silver color makes it stand out from all the other SLR's out there.
    Sheldon, Apr 13, 2005
  6. Artistry

    Bill Crocker Guest

    It's the Boner-Bonus factor!

    Bill Crocker
    Bill Crocker, Apr 13, 2005
  7. Artistry

    PhotoMan Guest

    In the past the black bodies cost more simply because there were fewer made.
    They didn't charge more because they could - it just cost more to make a
    lower production unit. I don't know how that applies to plastic bodies. If
    the body outer shell is plastic, the plastic itself could be black, and
    painting it silver would cost more than leaving them black, in which case
    they could charge more for the silver units.
    PhotoMan, Apr 14, 2005
  8. Artistry

    Yip Yap Guest

    The black version must be in higher demand. IMHO
    the black version does look much nicer.

    -- Yip
    Yip Yap, Apr 14, 2005
  9. Artistry

    leo Guest

    Yep. Simple supply and demand determined by the merchants. I would think
    Canon charges the same price for either one. I just bought a Logitech
    RED optical mouse, because it is not only cheaper than the blue one but
    also has $10 rebate (RED only, not BLUE).
    leo, Apr 14, 2005
  10. Artistry

    SimonLW Guest

    I'd actually prefer the silver one at the lower cost. Black gets so darn hot
    when out in the sun.
    SimonLW, Apr 14, 2005
  11. Artistry

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Ain't it the truth! Especially in the US southwest!
    Ron Hunter, Apr 14, 2005
    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.