5D Mark 3 Battery Grip for $91????

larrycumba wrote in post #14542002
3500.00 camera and a china grip? no thanks, I got the cannon.

smart man, and I'm not saying just because it's made in China, it's bad. I just don't understand how any reasonable person thinks they're gonna get anywhere near the quality of the Canon grip at a ~400% discount...smh If something sounds too good to be true, it usually it....

Stone 13 wrote in post #14542642
smart man, I just don't understand how any reasonable person thinks they're gonna get anywhere near the quality of the Canon grip at a ~400% discount...smh

Because you can... buy enough equipment including aftermarket grips through the years, and you come to this conclusion by experience. For example, Phottix makes or made some high quality grips that were very, very nice and fit just like the Canon grips. There are others today as well now.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #14542650
Because you can... buy enough equipment including aftermarket grips through the years, and you come to this conclusion by experience. For example, Phottix makes or made some high quality grips that were very, very nice and fit just like the Canon grips. There are others today as well now.

I don't disagree, but if something goes wrong, and I admit that's a big if. Is that company going to stand by their product and fix your camera once Canon refuses to cover a repair?

Phottix has a decent track record but looking at the 7D for example, the phottix grip is only about 30% cheaper, 60% cheaper if you compare it to Canon's suggested retail price which no one pays.

We're talking about a 400% discount here. Labor is cheap in China, but I'm sorry, it's not that cheap. I'll stop trying to tell people how to spend their money now but I already know how this story ends.

You definitely want to be diligent about which aftermarket grip to buy, no doubt. However, if you are careful, read the reviews, check out the longevity of the brand-name of the grip, etc, the savings (won't be 400%, that is for sure) can go toward glass or other accessories. In the OP's situation, I would definitely dig a bit deeper to see what is out there on this grip.

Stone 13 wrote in post #14542718
I don't disagree, but if something goes wrong, and I admit that's a big if. Is that company going to stand by their product and fix your camera once Canon refuses to cover a repair?.

No, in the unlikely event that it breaks, you just throw it away and buy another one - and you've still only paid $180 instead of $350.

For me, the price has to be a fair reflection of a thing's value (which is partly subjective), in both monetary and utility terms. If the Canon grip was 3 - 4 times better than the Pixel, I'd say buy the Canon, but I don't believe that's the case. A battery grip is a relatively simple thing, with very little development cost, which persuades me to think the Canon grip is overpriced.

OTOH, I will happily pay a premium for most Canon L series lenses, because I believe they are that much better than the competition and good lenses are hard to make (with much higher R&D costs than a battery grip).

Steve of Cornubia wrote in post #14542874
A battery grip is a relatively simple thing, with very little development cost, which persuades me to think the Canon grip is overpriced.

That's the thing, isn't it? Canon's engineer did the R&D. And the 3rd party companies basically took one and tweaked it.

As a friend once told me, getting a patent is a long and arduous process. And once gotten, it is only as good as your willingness to spend money on lawyers to defend and protect it.

You can reward those who designed it, or reward those who copied it. There's no right/wrong answer. It's just whatever you are comfortable with. In the end, someone is spending money, someone is making money, and someone is losing money.

My grip will arrive Friday. I purchased it on Amazon. It cost more than $91.

Steve of Cornubia wrote in post #14542874
No, in the unlikely event that it breaks, you just throw it away and buy another one - and you've still only paid $180 instead of $350.

That's in the "unlikely" event that only the grip breaks, but if the grip breaks your camera which CAN and does happen, you're out of far more than $91. If my 3rd party grip only broke itself, then I would not have complained but it resulted in an expensive repair to my camera as well. I spent way more than I saved to fix the camera, maybe I was just unlucky but the company I bought my grip from was far more reputable than this one. Again your mileage may vary.

Steve of Cornubia wrote in post #14542874
For me, the price has to be a fair reflection of a thing's value (which is partly subjective), in both monetary and utility terms. If the Canon grip was 3 - 4 times better than the Pixel, I'd say buy the Canon, but I don't believe that's the case. A battery grip is a relatively simple thing, with very little development cost, which persuades me to think the Canon grip is overpriced.

I don't think anyone has taken delivery of the Pixel so we don't know if the Canon is 3-4 times better. Is the Canon grip overpriced, probably but it's not 400% overpriced. Name one product on the market with that kind of markup. I don't know of any other than possibly some obscure luxury items, which the Canon grip is not.

Steve of Cornubia wrote in post #14542874
OTOH, I will happily pay a premium for most Canon L series lenses, because I believe they are that much better than the competition and good lenses are hard to make (with much higher R&D costs than a battery grip).

Canon doesn't price L glass anywhere near 400% more than it's competition. I'm done, someone will be brave enough to try it out sooner or later. I know I wouldn't be 1st..lol

jwcdds wrote in post #14542959
That's the thing, isn't it? Canon's engineer did the R&D. And the 3rd party companies basically took one and tweaked it.

Whilst I do not condone IP infringment, we have to be thankful that thousands of companies around the world offer alternatives to OEM parts. Without them, I can assure you that we would be paying even more for the Canon grip, and almost everything else.

If a company produces a 'clone' - a straightforward rip-off copy of the original - they deserve to have their ass sued. However, if they simply mimic the function - making sure the product is compatible - but is cheaper/simpler, then good on 'em. The success of the whole 'IBM PC' was founded on the concept of allowing other companies to offer alternative, compatible products, though that is a simplistic analogy.

And there is no real R&D in a grip, only engineering. There are no 'smarts' in a grip, nor any new technology that I'm aware of, just a battery compartment and some very simple connections. The internal architecture of the BG-E11 is probably more or less exactly the same as their other grips, but wrapped in a different shell to fit the 5D3. The work of just a few hours for an engineer and his CAD package.

I worked for many years in high-tech instrument manufacturing, and one of the goals when designing a new product was to 'invent' new consumables, such as sample carriers. Ther was an absolute motza to be made from sales of these things, just like ink cartridges for printers. So much so in fact, that engineers are encouraged to avoid standardisation and instead come up with new sample carriers/ink cartridges for every new product. In these situations, non-OEM suppliers can be well worth considering!

Let's face it, those bright and talented engineers at Canon could easily have designed the 5D3 to take the same grip as the 5D2 or 7D.........

Steve of Cornubia wrote in post #14543043
Whilst I do not condone IP infringment, we have to be thankful that thousands of companies around the world offer alternatives to OEM parts. Without them, I can assure you that we would be paying even more for the Canon grip, and almost everything else.

If a company produces a 'clone' - a straightforward rip-off copy of the original - they deserve to have their ass sued. However, if they simply mimic the function - making sure the product is compatible - but is cheaper/simpler, then good on 'em. The success of the whole 'IBM PC' was founded on the concept of allowing other companies to offer alternative, compatible products, though that is a simplistic analogy.

And there is no real R&D in a grip, only engineering. There are no 'smarts' in a grip, nor any new technology that I'm aware of, just a battery compartment and some very simple connections. The internal architecture of the BG-E11 is probably more or less exactly the same as their other grips, but wrapped in a different shell to fit the 5D3. The work of just a few hours for an engineer and his CAD package.

I worked for many years in high-tech instrument manufacturing, and one of the goals when designing a new product was to 'invent' new consumables, such as sample carriers. Ther was an absolute motza to be made from sales of these things, just like ink cartridges for printers. So much so in fact, that engineers are encouraged to avoid standardisation and instead come up with new sample carriers/ink cartridges for every new product. In these situations, non-OEM suppliers can be well worth considering!

Let's face it, those bright and talented engineers at Canon could easily have designed the 5D3 to take the same grip as the 5D2 or 7D.........

Yeah, Canon engineers could easily have just cut-n-paste the new grip from the 5D2 and 7D. But they didn't. The 3rd party grip makers could have easily used the same engineering from their old 5d2/7D cloned grips for the 5D3. But yet they didn't, and somehow miraculously came up with a very similar design to the NEW BG-E11 grip, similar tray and battery orientation, etc... Why bother making it "similar" when it's simply about function: 2 batteries, make sure buttons/switches/dials work?

While this is speculation on my part, it wouldn't and doesn't surprise me that the new design was "leaked" or "stolen" from one of Canon's prototype grips being field tested. And just because it's simply repositioning the wiring and connections, doesn't mean that it's any less violation of IP.

The problem is simply, Canon never intended on selling enough grips to make them a lot of money. Looking at the history, you can easily see that Canon has almost always priced their grips (to their respective camera bodies) roughly ~10% of the MSRP. The little statisticians they have tucked away in the basement probably figured maybe 10% of the consumers who purchase the bodies would purchase the grip.

Considering 3rd party makers sell their grips for much cheaper, yet still faces a low-percentage of consumers who would even consider the grip in the first place, they aren't laughing their butts off and running to the bank. Canon can't win that war simply because:
1) The 3rd party company is likely setup in a nation that doesn't care too much about violation of IP and make it difficult to sue.
2) Canon will lose the public relations war because it'll be like the millionaire walking down Skid Row and bullying/picking on the homeless. It's a PR nightmare, regardless of what is legal or ethical.

But it all boys down to the consumer and Canon knows that. They know they're not going to lose too many customers to the 3rd party manufacturers because they realize they never had them as customers of their grip to begin with. While the 3rd party manufacturers are merely competing for the very small segment of the market where someone wanted to buy a grip, but otherwise wouldn't buy because they wouldn't pay Canon's asking price to begin with. It's a win-win for everyone and Canon doesn't have to spend a dime paying lawyers to defense a hopeless cause.

Ultimately, it's down to the consumer because there is where the source of the money is. We decide where and how we spend our money. To some, they're thankful there are 3rd-party makers copying a grip to make it "affordable or more inline with what they value the accessory." To others, they want/expect a certain amount of quality from purchasing Canon and they choose to reward Canon's engineers with their purchase.

Again, no right or wrong. But Canon would never bother suing for the reasons I listed above. It's just not worth their money and not in their best interests when it comes to accessories such as grips. It's not because enough of the design was tweaked and no longer a violation of IP/patents.

this is their website:

http://www.pixelhk.com

official 5D3 Pixel battery grip info/page:

http://www.pixelhk.com​/Proshow.aspx?id=181

It claims to use "the same raw material with the camera body". Wonder if that means that it is not completely plastic like all the other knock offs.

Boss302 wrote in post #14539819
No. This is absolutely incorrect. It is inflation caused by the weakness of the U.S. Dollar. Our government (USA) and others around the world have gone on insane money printing sprees in the last few years. In the USA TRILLIONS of new dollars (paper money and virtual money that is just numbers in bank computers) have been created.

So what happens when trillions of new dollars are created, literally out of thin air? All the existing dollars go down in value and have less purchasing power, and prices go up. All of those bailouts and stimulus programs, cash for clunkers, etc. have a VERY REAL price. You are now paying that price with every purchase you make with US Dollars.

Inflation is not a natural or normal part of economics.

Well said!!! This is one of the best descriptions of inflation I've seen since college. Sadly, this is what our government is doing!!! The disaster in Japan last year didn't help camera prices either. It's ridiculously expensive to buy decent Canons and Nikons now.

Back to topic....
Has anyone yet had a chance to work with the $91 grip? How does it feel?

vk2gwk wrote in post #14581931
Back to topic....
Has anyone yet had a chance to work with the $91 grip? How does it feel?

Actually mine came this morning.
Here in the UK www.ukhighland.co.uk are the official stockists for pixel.
They selling the grip at £69 postage paid
Pixel are a well known 3rd party manufacture and make some quality goods.

Anyway,
Got it out the box and it feels good, a nice rubber feel on the grip.
The battery compartment is a little different to other grips I have used on the 7D and 5DII, not sure if it is the same on the official BG-E11, not a problem, just felt a little wiered.

There was a nice handy clip to clip the original battery cover in to the grip so you dont lose it.

Load the battery magazine with 2 x EP6 and slot in, there is a small plastic clasp that you then twist to lock the magazine. This is the only flimsy peice to the whole grip and I fear this could be easily snapped.

Over all, the whole grip feels great and makes the body feel a lot more steady and easier to hold. I hate using bodies with a heavy lens without a grip.

All the function buttons worked as expected and even my unbranded ep6 batteries dispaly the power usage in the battery info screen.

Not had chance to test it much but cant see any real issues.
If anyone has any questions then please ask away and will try and help.