how fast will prices drop?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Proteus" <nospam@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:jqbFe.17662$bG4.7207@fe06.lga...
> 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!
>

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.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dave R knows who" <kilbyfan@spamnotAOL.com> wrote in message
news:XRcFe.5534$p%3.30974@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> "Proteus" <nospam@nowhere.net> wrote in message
> news:jqbFe.17662$bG4.7207@fe06.lga...
>> 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!
>>
>
> 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.
>
>
>

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.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>Proteus writes ...
>
>Any speculations/guesses on what a street price might be on a Canon EOS
>1Ds (Mark II) digital (16Megapixel) in maybe 2 years?

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

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:30:31 GMT, "Dave R knows who"
<kilbyfan@spamnotAOL.com> wrote:

>
>"Proteus" <nospam@nowhere.net> wrote in message
>news:jqbFe.17662$bG4.7207@fe06.lga...
>> 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!
>>
>
>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.
>
>
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
replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>>You can check the total shutter actuations in the exif file

>eawckye wrote ...
>
>Who cares what the number might be?

I do. I'd much rather buy a used camera with 20,000 actuations instead
of 200,000. What a stupid question ...

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Beck" <my_bulkmail@btopenworld.invalid> wrote:
>
> 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 :-)

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

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> 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

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 [...] m=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

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "Beck" <my_bulkmail@btopenworld.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> 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 :-)
>
> 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.

Thankyou David. To the naked eye, would we see a difference between 16mp and
8mp?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bruce Coryell wrote:
> Beck wrote:
>> Proteus wrote:
>>
>>> 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!
>>
>>
>> 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 :-)
>>
>>
>
> 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.

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.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Bruce Coryell" <bcoryell@chesco.com> wrote:
>>
>> 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 :-)
>
> 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.

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

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J. Littleboy wrote:

> 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."
>


Well I could even be happy for a few more years getting something like a
rumored Canon 30D 10 megapixel, which would be 50% more pixesl than the
Canon 10D I have now. Then perhaps in a few years move up to 16 mp.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 7/26/05 6:27 AM, in article 3kml1mFv9t8oU1@individual.net, "Beck"
<my_bulkmail@btopenworld.invalid> wrote:

> C Wright wrote:
>> On 7/25/05 8:02 PM, in article 3klgdeFue6mbU1@individual.net, "Beck"
>> <my_bulkmail@btopenworld.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Proteus wrote:
>>>> 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!
>>>
>>> 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 :-)
>>>
>>>
>> 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.
>
> Too much for home printing though?
>
>
Not too much for home printing IMO. Canon's i9900 printer and Epson's
2200/2400, for example, will do 13x19 prints where the difference is
noticeable. Those who spring for something like Epson's 4000/4800 can do
17x22 at home! Finally, many photographers like to take their hero shots to
a custom lab where much larger sizes are possible. That said, if the
largest size print that you are _ever_ going to print is 8x10, 16 MP is
probably more than needed.
Chuck

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

C Wright <wright9_nojunk@nojunk_mac.com> writes:

>> 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 :-)

>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.

Also, a wider field of view from any wide-angle lenses they may already
own from Canon film cameras. (In other words, for some the
full-frame-sized sensor may be the attraction, not the extra pixels).

Dave

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 01:58:57 +0000 (UTC), Dave Martindale wrote:

>> 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).
>
> Are you talking about XD cards? They are an odd format, expensive
> compared to other cards, and limited in size. Perhaps a reasonable
> choice for P&S cameras, but a real disadvantage for any 16 MP camera.

Yep, xD cards. And they used to be much more expensive than CF
and SD, but no longer. The 1GB cards have been available for a
couple of months (I got one about a month ago) and are now
reasonably priced. I got two 1GB cards at the same time, one xD and
the other CF. Both for $89, and while the CF card was faster, both
were much faster than my cameras can take advantage of.
Manufacturers have said that xD cards will eventually be available
in larger sizes, at least up to 8GB. While I used to prefer CF, I
think the future (at least the near future) will be owned by SD
cards. You want a really fast pro DSLR for sports photographers?
How'd you like to get a Nikon D3x (or Canon equiv.) in a couple of
years that takes 4 or more 8GB SD cards to give you a speedy RAID
array capable of being written to at speeds well over 40GB/sec? For
handling ease, 4 SD cards (or xD even more so) could fit into a
relatively small card carrier. One capable of holding 4 CF cards
would be quite large.