5D MkII pricing strategy

[BigBlueDodge]

The 1D MKIII was introduced at a price of $4499 when the 1D MKIIN was introduced at a $3999 price. However, the 40D was introduced at $1299, at the same price of it's predecessors 20D/30D.

What are people's thoughts that the 5D replacement price will be released at? Do you think they will maintain the $3299 street price that the 5D was released at, or will they increase it in the way they did with the 1D MKIII?

I'm scratching my head on this. Before Nikon's announcements, I was pretty sure that they would release it at the $3299 or high price, but Nikon really increase the competition, so I'm wondering if Canon will drop the price to be more competitive with the D300.

[JeffreyG]

The 1D MKIII was introduced at a price of $4499 when the 1D MKIIN was introduced at a $3999 price. However, the 40D was introduced at $1299, at the same price of it's predecessors 20D/30D.

What are people's thoughts that the 5D replacement price will be released at? Do you think they will maintain the $3299 street price that the 5D was released at, or will they increase it in the way they did with the 1D MKIII?

I'm scratching my head on this. Before Nikon's announcements, I was pretty sure that they would release it at the $3299 or high price, but Nikon really increase the competition, so I'm wondering if Canon will drop the price to be more competitive with the D300.

It's so tough to tell because Nikon continues to play their game on a different court. The new Nikon D300 is still APS-C format but has features beyond the 40D and is priced above the 40D. Really, I don't see the D300 as a 5D alternative because the D300 is really a fast burst / high function sports camera more like the 40D.

Then Nikon has the new D3...which is not really a 1Ds alternate because it is not in the same high MP / resolution range. But the D3 is also nothing like a 5D.

You almost wonder if Nikon and Canon are deliberately avoiding head to head pricing battles....or if they just have such a different take on the market. Interesting to watch how these new releases play out.

[Jon_Doh]

The 5D replacement will be full frame and likely have the 16mp sensor so it won't really directly compete with either of Nikon's new cameras. As long as Canon keeps the price under the D3's it will be competitive both price wise and feature wise. But I do hope they hold it under 3 grand.

[metalsaber]

I'll be interested to see what the pricing point will be. Or whether that current 5D will be a bargain if the fall rebates come through.

[jkoc]

canon will kick butt if they msrp at 2500.... sheer volume of sales will destroy noink!

[scokar]

Probably cost more than what you want to pay and less than it should cost.

[BigBlueDodge]

I'm in a bit of a quandry. I'm 90% sure I will purchase a 5D when the Canon rebates come out (assuming the price drops under $2000 after rebate).

However, what keeps sticking in the back of my mind is that the 5D replacement COULD debut at a lower price point than the original 5D. There are two main reasons why. First, since the 5D was the first camera of class, the first models always absorb the initial production costs to produce that line, and as a result they tend to be priced higher than subsequent models. Since the 5D has been out for 2 years now, I have to assume that the initial production costs have gotten absorbed by now.

The second reason, is the Nikon factor. They released some very stiff competition for Canon, so I am curious to see how Canon will respond with the 5D MKII. Will they pack in more features, in which case I think they may potential up the price (aka, similar to what they did on the 1D MKIII), or if they try and compete on price, in which case they put in minor upgrades (ie bump in MP and LCD) and release the camera at the original 5D price or at an even lower price.

I'm quite sure I will be happy with the 5D, but it's always nice to get the latest and greatest technology. The ONLY way I can afford the 5D is if it goes under $2000 with rebates. If the 5D MKII is released at say $2500, then it might be worth it to save a bit longer and get the newer technology for $500 more.

[Sprout Crumble]

$2500 makes sense.

Canon need to get a grip on the market and a 14-16mp 5D-II at this price would have huge benefits market-wise. Even with a 40D-spec, it'd make the D3 look very expensive.

An $1800 crop mini-1D, a $3750 1D3 price and a cut in the 1Ds3 to $6000 would also be great. Am I the only one that thinks its about time that prices on the higher end stuff started to fall?

[RedHot]

The 1D MKIII was introduced at a price of $4499 when the 1D MKIIN was introduced at a $3999 price. However, the 40D was introduced at $1299, at the same price of it's predecessors 20D/30D.


This is incorrect. The 20D came out at $1500, 30D $1400 (both without lens).

The 5D2 will be $2500 to $3000 due to competition and will be 16MP, 4fps, digic3, 14bit, 40D AF, 1-series new viewfinder and af-microadjustments.

[Dragos Jianu]

my bet is 2000-2200$

[Sprout Crumble]

Same here. Max $2200. No way its $3000 as that'll leave a gaping hole in the range right where the D300 sits and right where a cut-down D3 will sit next year.

[Punisher77]

The 5D2 will be $2500 to $3000 due to competition and will be 16MP, 4fps, digic3, 14bit, 40D AF, 1-series new viewfinder and af-microadjustments.

This sounds perfect to me. I'm especially interested in the af microadjustments. I really hope they bring that feature to the 5d.

[datadump]

This sounds perfect to me. I'm especially interested in the af microadjustments. I really hope they bring that feature to the 5d.

yesss i 2nd that

[Yohan Pamudji]

Same here. Max $2200. No way its $3000 as that'll leave a gaping hole in the range right where the D300 sits and right where a cut-down D3 will sit next year.

That depends entirely on the specs now, doesn't it?

First, let's tackle Nikon's lineup since it's much more straightforward. The rumored cheaper FF Nikon will be priced between the D300 and D3. Let's assume for a second not a cut-down D3, but a D300 with a FF sensor since the comparison will be easier, although some would say that the D300 is already a cut-down D3 with a crop sensor. If the D300 is $1800, I think it's a reasonable guess that the FF version would be priced in the high $2k up to $3000. So let's say $2800-$3000. I would personally think more along the lines of $3000-$3300, but let's go with the more optimistic estimate.

Now we come to the 5DII. The safe money is on it being essentially a 40D with a FF sensor feature-wise except for framerate, just like the 5D was basically a 20D with a FF sensor. In this case, I would agree that $3000 is way too much for it considering what Nikon would be offering at about the same price--weather sealing, pro AF, 100% viewfinder, etc. (actually, even without Nikon's offerings to compare against, I would consider $3000 too much for a 40D with a FF sensor, but that's just me). With those specs, the 5DII would have to come in at about $2300-$2500 IMO. $2000 is a pipe dream I think--I would think their margins wouldn't be big enough at that price.

But what if Canon decided to beef up the 5DII specs above 40D levels to bring it closer to that mythical 3D we always talk about? Pro AF, weather sealing, 100% viewfinder. I could see that costing $2800-$3000, and I could definitely see myself getting one at that price and being absolutely ecstatic about it.

So to me it all hinges on the specs of the 5DII. 40D + FF? $2300-$2500. Stripped down 1DIII + FF? $2800-$3000.

Oh, and if I'm right about the 1DIII coming down in price soon to about $4000, that's downward pressure on the 5DII to be priced accordingly to maintain the price gaps. But that's even more speculation, and I'm speculated out for now :lol:

[Sprout Crumble]

Canon are notorious for not speccing bodies too close to the 1D series and its their biggest failing. For that reason alone I'd look to the 5D-II being more 40D than 1D specced and the price being lower.

[datadump]

Stripped down 1DIII + FF? $2800-$3000.

heck ya... i'd pay for that

[Yohan Pamudji]

Canon are notorious for not speccing bodies too close to the 1D series and its their biggest failing. For that reason alone I'd look to the 5D-II being more 40D than 1D specced and the price being lower.

Very true that this has been Canon's modus operandi in the past, and with the rumors of the 5DII already being "feature complete" back in August it could very well extend to the 5DII. As I said, the safe money is on the 5DII having basically a 40D feature set with lower fps.

But, if Canon pays attention to the market, which I'm sure they do, they know how much Nikon's latest camera announcements have shaken up the landscape, particularly the D300. The D3 might be an incredible camera and a real world-beater (we'll see when the reviews hit the streets, but the early test shots are amazing), but the D300 is what will really put the pressure on Canon for their future strategy in the 5D segment. Nikon have shown it entirely doable to make a pro-spec camera under $2000, putting pro AF, weather sealing, and 100% viewfinder into the 1.5x crop D300. Moving forward, does it make sense anymore for Canon to have a camera that's priced between the xxD and 1D lines, yet feature-wise loses out to an $1800 camera in every way except for sensor size?

I really believe the D300 will revolutionize the market, as long as it delivers on all fronts. As Canon users we might not see the fruits of this revolution until 18-24 months from now, but I truly believe that Canon cannot continue to ignore the demand for a pro-spec 1.6x body as well as a pro-spec FF in a smaller package than a 1-series chassis. Nikon and Canon might continue to avoid fighting each other head-on in most market segments and Canon might not put out a pro-spec 1.6x body to compete with the D300, choosing instead to continue to fill the low-$1k with the prosumer xxD line, but in light of the D300's feature set I don't think Canon can justify a 5DIII with features that compare so poorly against the D300 or its replacement. It's most likely too late to make those changes for the 5DII, since it's already late into development and Canon are a big company--not very agile--but for the next generation after that definitely expect some big things.

[Yohan Pamudji]

And with a D300 + FF coming soon-ish based on interviews with Nikon execs, a 5DII with 40D specs would look even less appealing with the D300 besting it from below at $1800 and Nikon's as-of-yet-unnamed small form-factor FF besting it in every way from above at $3000. It wouldn't matter how Canon priced the 5DII in such an environment, as it would still look weak no matter which way you look at it, unless they go firesale prices below the D300 which won't happen. Only the "fullframe uber alles" crowd could justify such a camera, and I don't think there's enough of them to keep a weak 5DII afloat if Nikon's D300 + FF rumors are true.

[Sprout Crumble]

I'm actually a little underwhelmed by the D300 and don't know what all the fuss is about.

Great on paper (51 AF points, VGA screen etc) but what is there that really makes it that much better than a 40D?

[Yohan Pamudji]

I'm actually a little underwhelmed by the D300 and don't know what all the fuss is about.

Great on paper (51 AF points, VGA screen etc) but what is there that really makes it that much better than a 40D?

Underwhelmed? Really? Pro AF, weather sealing, 100% viewfinder are the features frequently labelled as pro features because Canon's 1-series cameras have them while the non 1-series don't. D300 has all of these in an $1800 package. The nice LCD screen is a plus, and add a small 2MP bump in resolution on top of all that and $500 is a small price to pay to move up to the D300. If Canon put out a D300 equivalent at the same price, I'd choose it over the 40D, and I think a lot of other Canon users would too. The 3 features I initially listed are among the main features Canon uses to differentiate their pro line from their prosumer line, and the D300 has changed expectations of what is possible at a particular price point.

[chinch]

but $1800 is alot for a 1.5x crop camera that can cripple lenses (unless you need long, long reach). 51pt AF is overhyped for nonpros (most people use center point exclusively). 100%vf is not a deal-breaker or camera maker. Alot of geek features but 30% higher cost and not FF.

for the prosumer it's in a weird spot designed on paper more than marketplace (time will tell but the D40 resurrected nikon not the D3/D300).

[bbbig]

For a $3k+ camera nowadays, 5DMkII better have a weather-sealed body. "Smart" focusing isn't as important, as long as center-point focus is fast and accurate. I don't think most people look for more than 5fps unless shooting action all the time (I usually try to get ONE shot right - otherwise I'd be a videographer, not a photographer!). That plus 14-bit A/D would be great.

[Yohan Pamudji]

but $1800 is alot for a 1.5x crop camera that can cripple lenses (unless you need long, long reach). 51pt AF is overhyped for nonpros (most people use center point exclusively). 100%vf is not a deal-breaker or camera maker. Alot of geek features but 30% higher cost and not FF.

for the prosumer it's in a weird spot designed on paper more than marketplace (time will tell but the D40 resurrected nikon not the D3/D300).

So basically $1800 is a lot for a non-pro to pay for pro features? Uhm... duh? :lol: Not everybody would appreciate so-called "pro" features, that's certainly true.

Honestly, I would rather Canon designed a simpler system. I don't need a bazillion AF points either, but I'm stuck with a 1DII because of its fast and accurate AF. I'm starting to really sound like a broken record about this particular wish list item, but an 11-point AF system with 9 of the AF points laid out in a rectangular grid (none of this diamond nonsense) with the corners at the rule-of-thirds intersections; and the other 2 AF points on either end of the rectangle--that's what I would really want. Make all 11 AF points cross-type sensors and get the AF calculation speed on par with the 1DII (leave the Mark III generation as the fastest) and there's not much else I could ask for in terms of AF.

[bbbig]

I wonder - would it make sense to re-use 1DMk3 body for next 5D (3D?), just put 16mp FF sensor, same electronics (sans AI focusing issue), same features, at 5fps, and price it exactly the same as 1DMk3? I'd go for that.

[Yohan Pamudji]

I wonder - would it make sense to re-use 1DMk3 body for next 5D (3D?), just put 16mp FF sensor, same electronics (sans AI focusing issue), same features, at 5fps, and price it exactly the same as 1DMk3? I'd go for that.

Too close to the 1Ds Mark III at about half the price--no chance.

[chinch]

So basically $1800 is a lot for a non-pro to pay for pro features? Uhm... duh? :lol: Not everybody would appreciate so-called "pro" features, that's certainly true.

Honestly, I would rather Canon designed a simpler system. I don't need a bazillion AF points either, but I'm stuck with a 1DII because of its fast and accurate AF. I'm starting to really sound like a broken record about this particular wish list item, but an 11-point AF system with 9 of the AF points laid out in a rectangular grid (none of this diamond nonsense) with the corners at the rule-of-thirds intersections; and the other 2 AF points on either end of the rectangle--that's what I would really want. Make all 11 AF points cross-type sensors and get the AF calculation speed on par with the 1DII (leave the Mark III generation as the fastest) and there's not much else I could ask for in terms of AF.
one nice thing about the 9pt system is using the nub/joystick to choose AF points instantly & directly. once you have that you can't go back. mappping 11 points would be trickier (double press right or left to hit the outer box i guess).

faster/better AF is always welcome but wouldn't help overall 40D sales (profit) if they raised the price $600 though imho

[Yohan Pamudji]

one nice thing about the 9pt system is using the nub/joystick to choose AF points instantly & directly. once you have that you can't go back. mappping 11 points would be trickier (double press right or left to hit the outer box i guess).

If they stuck with 9 points but laid them out as I described, that would be a good compromise--still use the joystick to go directly to the desired AF point, and you'd have AF points in more useful spots than they are now. I'm talking more about a 5D replacement where the diamond layout really covers way too little of the viewfinder/image. On a 1.6x crop the diamond layout isn't so bad.

faster/better AF is always welcome but wouldn't help overall 40D sales (profit) if they raised the price $600 though imho

I would say keep the 40D and its replacements where they are at $1300 or so and put out a D300 equivalent at $1800 or so. But they don't pay me to do their market research, so who knows if that's even viable for Canon. They probably have their hands full already with 5 DSLR lines going at once.