Why have they released the 4000D?

I just received an email from Wex about some new Canon releases, the new 2000D and 4000D aswell as the mirrorless M50.

I really can't see any strategy behind releasing the 4000D?
I mean, body only there is £40 difference between the 4000D and 2000D. And without looking deeper into the specs you instantly see that £40 gets you the newer & higher resolution sensor and a better build quality. Then if you read deeper you see there is a smaller screen on the 4000D aswell - I just don't see anyone buying it over the 2000D.

If there was £100 difference then I think I'd understand.

Your guys thoughts?

You might not see people buying it but I do.
First, Canon have decided it's a worthwhile model to make and release. They do have a little bit of experience in this field.
2nd, price. Any reduction in price means more potential buyers.

I can imagine them releasing a super cheap DSLR just to get people in to their system, even if they lose a little bit per body sale.
Judging by the specs of this camera, they will make a profit on the body anyway.

A friend of mine is looking to get back into DSLR photography. She hasn't had a camera since her all-manual film days, 30 years ago. The 4000D seems to be aimed squarely at her needs.

If this sells, Canon will make a killing with it. No new parts, with the possible exception of the shell. Everything else has been sitting in warehouses for years, collecting dust and not generating any cash. Way to use up all those old parts, Canon!

Other than what Bassat said, I don't understand the low end DSLRs camera space at all. There are too many choices and it ends up confusing the consumer.

Hell, maybe that's the goal. Most have no clue anyway, just offer something in their price range and they will keep buying without forethought.

Here’s my humble and relatively uninformed opinion. The bottom end of the DSLR market is fast eroding due to the proliferation of high quality mobile phone cameras. For those people who do make the decision to upgrade to a real DSLR, perhaps Canon feels that the more options they have at different price points—even if those price points are relatively close together—the more likely they are to make the sale. It’s better to lose some 2000D/T7 sales to the 4000D/T100(?) or vice-versa than to lose them to Sony or Nikon. Many of those buyers may never buy a DSLR again, but for those who do buy additional lenses or accessories or future bodies, they’re in the Canon ecosystem.

Mike

There is a huge difference. The 2000d has a power switch and a green box mode. The 4000d has replaced the green box with the OFF mode.

mcoren wrote in post #18572463
...The bottom end of the DSLR market is fast eroding due to the proliferation of high quality mobile phone cameras... Mike

This is a very good point. Phone cameras are pretty amazing now and many people will tell you they have no need for anything else and nothing else is as easy and handy. Only the few of these people that want to go a little further with it may consider a dSLR camera. Just yesterday I read a quote from a Samsung exec regarding the Galaxy S9 duel lens design who said people no longer care that a phone is a phone, it's more about the camera now.

But yes, for 40 bucks or so, get the better camera!

Canon keeps playing the feature grab-bag game with their releases. The last several releases (SL1, T77, 6D2, etc) have all been mostly about what features they can add, and which they can remove. We predicted it years back, and that is where we are now at. I am prepared at this point to be completely underwhelmed with new releases this year.

Not a big deal because the 7D2 and 5D4 will do everything I need them to do. A 7D3 with a tilt/touch screen, the 80D low ISO DR, slightly better high ISO, a bit more resolution (28Mpx is fine) and faster built in WiFi/Web Services would be great though, even if they keep the same AF system. That might be enough for me to switch out the 7D2. Put back the dedicated AF LED per point like the 1DX2, and I would definitely switch, the LCD overlay system with LCD boxes for AF is a real pain during a basketball game when there are black curtains in the background and dark uniforms. These specs with the bright indicator for AF would do it for me!

The SL3 would be perfect if it had the 80D AF system, and had some buttons repositioned for better access. That would entice to me to switch out the SL2.

From your lips to Canon's ears.

I doubt that, but it would be great it was that simple!

True, otherwise the 1dx2 would weight 3 ounces and cost $3.

And, hey, if Canon can keep production profitable and retail pricing low then why not build a camera for every category you can think of and create. The big money comes from being appealing to the million of masses out there worldwide. And most of them don't know forums like these exist.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18572460
Other than what Bassat said, I don't understand the low end DSLRs camera space at all. There are too many choices and it ends up confusing the consumer.

Hell, maybe that's the goal. Most have no clue anyway, just offer something in their price range and they will keep buying without forethought.

Keep in mind that MANY of the people buying these cameras don't even understand specs. . I have 5 friends that I can think of off the top of my head that have bought DSLRs within the past year and a half. . Four of them talked with me about their purchases after they made them. . The fifth talked with me before purchasing, to ask for my advice.

When having the conversations with these people about their new DSLR, it became immediately evident that none of them knew anything about cameras or specs. . They don't compare one model with another. . They don't do any online research about the camera they are about to buy. . They just see something for sale, think it'll "be a good camera" because it's a DSLR, see that they can afford it, and buy it. . Heck, they don't even compare one retailer's prices with another retailer's prices. . It really is that simple for them.

The one friend that did ask me for advice simply said, "Tom, I'm going to buy this camera - is that a good one to get?" . . And they included a link to the camera they were about to buy. . When I called them to discuss it, and started to explain the differences in specs, compared to comparable DSLRs, they said, "Oh, I just want to know if it's a good camera - I don't understand all that other stuff. I just know if you say it's a good camera, then it'll be good for me." . They had no interest in learning about specs or comparing specs or anything like that. . They just wanted a yes or no answer to the question, "will it be a good camera".

I think this is typical of the demographic that buys low end DSLRs.

.

kkerry.photo wrote in post #18572397
I really can't see any strategy behind releasing the 4000D?

I mean, body only there is £40 difference between the 4000D and 2000D. And without looking deeper into the specs you instantly see that £40 gets you the newer & higher resolution sensor and a better build quality. Then if you read deeper you see there is a smaller screen on the 4000D aswell - I just don't see anyone buying it over the 2000D.

If there was £100 difference then I think I'd understand.

Your guys thoughts?

.
Did it ever occur to you that Canon released the 4000D in order to increase sales of the 2000D? . That could be the sole reason for its existence.


To those customers who do actually bother to look at more than one model and compare specs, they make the 2000D look like a "no brainer" for just 40 pounds more. . People like "no brainers" - things that make them feel that they are making a very good decision. . Seems like good strategy to me.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18572662
.
Did it ever occur to you that Canon released the 4000D in order to increase sales of the 2000D? . That could be the sole reason for its existence.

There is an interesting pattern to these releases. Take for example the T6i (announced 02/2015) which preceeded the T6 (announced 02/2016) by essentially one year. The T7i, also known as the 800D came out in February 2017 and here we are one year later with the T7.

Seems like the marketing geniuses figure that once that saturate the marketplace with the "i" models, they follow with the "non-i" model to gather up the remnants of the marketplace.