Camera of the year

[bcooter]

A few comments about the pricing of compact system cameras, and comparisons to Canon/Nikon DSLR pricing:

4) With most camera makers struggling to break even, let alone make big profits, it is absurd to accuse them of "gouging"!

From a professional use viewpoint, I'm not asking camera makers to drop prices.  In most cases far from it.  I'm asking them to add features and raise prices.  I like the idea of modular, which evf's should offer advantages.  I like the idea of pay as you go.  Don't want video, don't buy the module.  Want 4k video buy that module, etc. etc.

The 4/3 cameras, well at least the gh3 makes great motion imagery, to the point it's kind of scary for the price, I mean $1,200 for that quality is unheard of at any point in time.

If they shoot great stills that's even better.

Last week I was finishing a video to to go the sound tech.  I wanted to find the raw and change the grading of one image.  I was positive it was from the gh3 which was good, but I thought needed some work.

Turned out I shot it with the R1 RED.   So if I can't tell in an edit which camera I'm using  . . . one that cost $25,000 or one that cost $1,200 then yes, things have gotten a lot better for the professional image makers.

I just finished post production on a still portrait from the same shoot. Lifestyle image from the olympus em-5 at 400 iso, f 2.5.  I't beautiful, I processed it out in Adobe Camera Raw and think I uprezzed it in processing to 80mb.

The client, who will be critical, will never remember that the camera I used was 4/3 and small enough for one hand, they'll just look at the image.  Me I look at the colors, tone, workable file.

But my point is rather than constantly ask us to toss perfectly good cameras because the next catch phrase will be 4k it's just better for all if we could add modules and parts.

I'm with 4/3, and btw it's not cheap with good glass.   The new Leica 4/3 f 1/2 40 something mm lens is $1699 and I'll place the order this week.   There are things these little cameras can do that are wonderful in still and motion, but don't hobble them, put the foot on the floor and separate your camera from the point and shoot/mobile phone crowd.

To me, that's how to return to profit.

IMO

BC

[barryfitzgerald]

A few comments about the pricing of compact system cameras, and comparisons to Canon/Nikon DSLR pricing:

1) Some of the entry level CSCs with no EVFs are priced below DSLRs; it is the higher level, lower volume, models with EVFs that are "not inexpensive".

2) Pricing depends on far more than component costs; indeed factory door component costs are often only about half or less of the retail price. Other cost factors relate to economies of scale and how much new R&D expense has to be defrayed. So of course the long-established, high volume, consumer level DSLR lines from Canon and Nikon have a cost advantage --- at least for now.

3) In a competitive market (rather than a centrally controlled command economy or some other economic fantasy world), prices are set on the basis of what is expected to produce the most profitable balance of unit margins and volume, not something like a fixed percentage markup over unit cost. Cutting prices to increase sales volume is _not_ always a profitable business move, despite this being by far the most common advice I see given to camera makers in internet forums!

4) With most camera makers struggling to break even, let alone make big profits, it is absurd to accuse them of "gouging"!

Couple of quick points...
In Europe £299 secures a super budget DSLR (and in some cases even lower than that) and kit lens, there are not many ILC's below that price bar the odd blow out stock clearance offer.
Even up to the £500 price mark some makers such as Sony don't even give you a hot shoe, nor any viewfinder nor any way to add one (I believe that's a turn off for some buyers)

Pricing does depend on more than component cost, let's throw another bone into the mix. Assembly time, clearly it's going to take longer to assemble a DSLR than a CSC which has far fewer components, another strong argument for better prices.

Thing about cutting prices is it brings more users onboard, and some of them will buy more bodies and lenses later on. On the other hand one shop manager I spoke to said most people buying a Nikon 1 at crazy prices were simply looking for a better IQ compact and will likely NEVER buy another lens or anything else. It's true some DSLR users don't, but the lower price point is the "hook" and "bait" for some users who will invest in a system heavily.

Anyway, the other point is as said too many makers, market saturation another problem. As for compact makers they've been lazy for years offering mostly pin head sensors and not seeing the smart phone attack coming (which was quite obvious)

I personally see a big push for FF coming in the next few years as the top 2 struggle to maintain sales, that means lower prices and cheaper APS-C bodies too, something everyone should welcome. Is the EM-1 overpriced? That depends where you live, in Europe I think it's quite absurd to price it at near FF levels. Don't expect Olympus to gain big market share with such pricing strategies.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

A pest.

[Isaac]

A place in Hungary?

(Sorry, I messed that up. The response should obviously have been -- Bud.)

[Telecaster]

Just ate dinner...Hungry no more.

-Dave-

[NickNod]

To me, the device is Sony A7R. Though I just handle it for 3 times. It gives me strong impression. Great in appearance and performance.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Love at first sight. Proposed on third date?

[Telecaster]

A place in Hungary?

(Sorry, I messed that up. The response should obviously have been -- Bud.)

Buds make you hungry!

-Dave-