Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 124 posts | 
by steve mackay on Fri Mar 08, 2013 6:57 pm
steve mackay
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4725
Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Location: kent, England
....This is getting truly ridiculous!!!!......I probably don't care so much about a wonderful 80-400 f5.6 lens (although am of course interested in this gear and how it evolves....including the knock on effect to other brands........and the new Nikon 80-400 looks very cool indeed)...........but I am genuinely becoming worried that I am not going to be able to afford ANY of this new stuff in the years to come.........so what the flying **** is going on!?????..........I know the saying "the rich get richer, the poor get poorer" is perhaps truer now in my lifetime than ever? (or maybe I've just become an adult and finally realise this? lol).......but these new gear prices are truly becoming insane!........I thought it was just going to be the new super Tele's.....but most obviously not!

.......so please, I know it may be un PC to say it?.....but please, will someone tell me the reason for this pricing and who the market for this stuff is right now? (nation, class, gender, age...whatever)......I used to be in the market for this stuff, but I don't think I can afford much of this stuff anymore (don't get your Violin's out just yet, i'm not starving HAHAHAHA)........but what are your opinions on who's buying it and what's their credential's?

I live in the UK and we are pretty well known for selling stuff at stupidly overrated prices (.....yes, if customs weren't a problem we would all come over to the US to buy our expensive gear lol...and I was given the very generous gift of a 500mm lens coat from NSN..That ***** UK customs taxed me on the fullest.....but of course HUGE cheers to NSN for the lovely gift :-))....but it's clear every country is getting their prices ramped up significantly.........so who's this new cash cow base? (that is ostracizing the old?).......OK I realise the word "ostracizing" may be a bit strong?.......but $2700 for a very good zoom 400/f5.6 lens????????, come on man!!!!.....I don't think the word "ostracize" is that unreal, do you?

.......I think I went way off topic?....sorry guys! :oops:
[url=http://www2.clikpic.com/mackay123/index.html][color=#000000]Steve Mackay Photography[/color][/url]
 

by E.J. Peiker on Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:03 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
I completely agree with you Steve! There are always those that buy the new stuff regardless of what it is but I think at some point they will price themselves out of the game. And it isn't just Nikon. Canon tripled the price of their 28mm f/2.8 lens when they came out with a new one this year. Right now with the rebate you can get the old 80-400 for $1300 so this is a doubling from old model to new model. Camera body and kit lens prices haven't moved much but other lenses are anywhere from 1.5x to 3x when they introduce new models of older lenses these days. New stuff usually doesn't see rebates right away although the timeline on some of it has come down dramatically so waiting maybe a year and saving as much as 25% may be the best solution.
 

by Mike Ogle on Fri Mar 08, 2013 9:22 pm
Mike Ogle
Forum Contributor
Posts: 225
Joined: 3 Jun 2012
All our money is moving to China; they are the new consumers (good for them). What do you expect?
 

by E.J. Peiker on Fri Mar 08, 2013 9:58 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Mike Ogle wrote:All our money is moving to China; they are the new consumers (good for them).  What do you expect?
What does that have to do with the pricing of Japanese camera gear?
 

by Mike Ogle on Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:00 pm
Mike Ogle
Forum Contributor
Posts: 225
Joined: 3 Jun 2012
They price what the market will bear; it just happens the market of disposable income is now in China.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:01 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Prices are different in every market.
 

by penghai on Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:33 pm
penghai
Forum Contributor
Posts: 489
Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Location: San Jose, CA
Instead of competition, Nikon and Canon seem matching their each others prices now.

Hopefully the market will balance it out eventually.

Eric
 

by Craig Browne on Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:54 pm
Craig Browne
Forum Contributor
Posts: 173
Joined: 10 Jan 2012
Location: Hudson Que,Canada
Ime really thinking someone at nikon made a spelling mistake 2700$ for a plastic 5.6 zoom..now 1700$ is what it must be the D7100 at 1200$ sounds ok,the D600 at 2000$ is ok.But 2700$+taxes for plastic zooms must be a mistake...On a side note i noticed moose peterson using the D7100+70-200F4 and the 2x converter in one of his videos. Maybe that will be my new setup also.Or for 2100$ i could get the full pro metal jacket 70-200vr2.
 

by steve mackay on Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:42 pm
steve mackay
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4725
Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Location: kent, England
Cheers for your reply E.J, much appreciated......certainly not just Nikon, I reckon Canon were the first off the starting "rip off" blocks!

Mike, I definitely see what you are saying.......but there is a large difference between making a profit and taking the cronic piss with these prices!..........you must of course take my words with a pinch of salt, I personally have no clues regarding business or pricing (and how it all works)...........but the fact remains that many of us feel that all this wonderful gear's manufacturing costs may not truly reflect these frankly insanely over inflated pricing techniques!.

Perhaps we would all appreciate it if these companies would finally grow a set and explain the situation?...at least then we could perhaps understand the logic?.........but to me the "logic" is just to make as much cash as possible, regardless of what seems appropriate to me/my needs/wants.......but of course my words are idealistic and naïve to the extreme...it is what it is...unfortunately...
[url=http://www2.clikpic.com/mackay123/index.html][color=#000000]Steve Mackay Photography[/color][/url]
 

by E.J. Peiker on Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:06 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
I think the strategy these days is to start with very high prices and shake out the buyers that buy everything regardless of cost and maximize the amount of money they get from those. Then, not long after intro, once supply outpaces demand, offer substantial rebates to get those that really want it but couldn't justify the original price. Rebates used to be used on products nearing the end of their life, but now we are seeing rebates on lenses only 9 months old. I'm sure the corporate bean counters have decided that this is the way to maximize profit.
 

by dbostedo on Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:35 pm
User avatar
dbostedo
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1593
Joined: 24 May 2007
Location: Fairfax, VA, USA
steve mackay wrote:....but there is a large difference between making a profit and taking the cronic piss with these prices!..........you must of course take my words with a pinch of salt, I personally have no clues regarding business or pricing (and how it all works)....

Perhaps we would all appreciate it if these companies would finally grow a set and explain the situation?...at least then we could perhaps understand the logic?.........but to me the "logic" is just to make as much cash as possible, regardless of what seems appropriate to me/my needs/wants....
I think maybe you do understand it Steve. A few notes to back up your thinking :

-- Prices are set to maximize revenue (and usually therefore profit). End of story pretty much.

-- Generally, if prices go up, they sell less. But if that still nets more revenue, then the price increase is probably a good idea.

-- So if Nikon or Canon could make more by doubling the price of a lens and selling a few less, they would, and they should. That's their job - not to satisfy the highest number of people possible, or to only make a profit that some people judge as "reasonable". Their job (and almost every companies job) is to make the most profit possible, unless there is some sort of massive PR blow-back.

-- Therefore, there is no rip-off - only a company setting a price that they think will make them the most money. They don't need to explain anything other than that.

-- The best ways to get prices down are 1) competition between brands and 2) don't buy it if it's too expensive. There may be some price consideration the company gives to their user base and attempting not to alienate them. But that doesn't get much weight unless it costs a lot of sales (now or in the future) typically.
David Bostedo
Vienna, VA, USA
 

by rtfm on Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:42 am
User avatar
rtfm
Forum Contributor
Posts: 129
Joined: 18 Nov 2007
Location: Finland
It sounds a somewhat expensive (and fortunately I do not have a need at now), but thinking other way round: if looking for a reach for FF-body what are the cheap options from Nikon?
Perhaps this new 80-400 has been thought to compare with 70-200VR2 + TC20 -combo? Price of both options is roughly the same, but the  image quality should be better in 80-400 which has been thought to justify the price?
Anyway, if this is the price level to come for new tele lenses, what will be the 300/4VR when it will be published?
br;
    Jari T.
 

by steve mackay on Sun Mar 10, 2013 5:57 am
steve mackay
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4725
Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Location: kent, England
Thank you David (Bostedo)...I most definitely hear you!, thanks for your insight...I completely agree!
[url=http://www2.clikpic.com/mackay123/index.html][color=#000000]Steve Mackay Photography[/color][/url]
 

by Giulio Zanni on Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:28 am
User avatar
Giulio Zanni
Forum Contributor
Posts: 248
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Location: Bosnia-Herzegovina and Italy
The 200-400 is my main lens for wildlife and when going to Africa I also rent a 600 on location. Still, traveling with the 200-400 (plus other various short lenses) as the only long lens is a pain and handling the 200-400 + 600 on separate bodies on a vehicle for me has proven to be a dangerous exercise even if I brought home great pics. If this 80-400 will be a good performer it will probably replace my 200-400 doesn't matter the price and actually the fact that is made of plastic for me is a plus. In the field I had much more problems with my previous D3s than from my "cheap" D7000. Given aging, back problems and airlines weight limits, I really appreciate lighter stuff and I am ready to compromise a little.
www.giuliozanni.com


Last edited by Giulio Zanni on Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 

by John Guastella on Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm
John Guastella
Forum Contributor
Posts: 340
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
The best way to get prices down... don't buy it if it's too expensive
This is the key point.  The consumer has the ultimate power: not to buy in the first place.  A buyer's strike would bring camera gear prices back to reasonable levels very quickly.

That's the approach I'm taking.  I would very much like to upgrade from my 7D to a 5D Mark III, but I refuse to pay what I feel is the currently inflated price.  If the price comes down to a level that I feel is appropriate, I'll buy.  If it doesn't, I won't.  Pretty simple!

John
 

by DChan on Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:58 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
steve mackay wrote:....This is getting truly ridiculous!!!!......I probably don't care so much about a wonderful 80-400 f5.6 lens (although am of course interested in this gear and how it evolves....including the knock on effect to other brands........and the new Nikon 80-400 looks very cool indeed)...........but I am genuinely becoming worried that I am not going to be able to afford ANY of this new stuff in the years to come........
Then don't buy. Isn't that simple enough? That's what many people do in the real world...you know...not many people buy Ferrari. Great photographs are still being made with "old" cameras and lenses everyday.:)
 

by Andrew Kandel on Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:13 pm
Andrew Kandel
Forum Contributor
Posts: 881
Joined: 17 Feb 2009
Location: Missoula, Montana
It's funny.  I'm wondering if this lens could end up being a huge bargain.  Instead of a 70-200 and a 200-400 I'm wondering if I could get by with just this lens.  I'll be very interested in reading reviews because I could sell both, buy the 80-400 and have plenty left over for investing in another lens or a trip or marketing my business, etc.

Likewise, I currently hike with my 24-70, 70-200 and 200-400.   Shedding the 70-200 and 200-400 would be a significant drop in weight and in backpack size.  

However, I've never held a 80-400 so I'm not sure how light it is or how hand holdable.
[url=http://www.andrewkandel.com/]Website[/url] - [url=http://wherebuffaloroam.wordpress.com/]Blog[/url] - [url=https://plus.google.com/112207995176022333771/posts]Google+[/url]
 

by steve mackay on Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:23 pm
steve mackay
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4725
Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Location: kent, England
DChan wrote:Then don't buy. Isn't that simple enough? That's what many people do in the real world...you know...not many people buy Ferrari. Great photographs are still being made with "old" cameras and lenses everyday.:)

I do live in the "real" world....and i'm not buying.........so. yes, it is very simple!.......but I think you missed my point!
[url=http://www2.clikpic.com/mackay123/index.html][color=#000000]Steve Mackay Photography[/color][/url]
 

by DChan on Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:13 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
steve mackay wrote:
DChan wrote:Then don't buy. Isn't that simple enough? That's what many people do in the real world...you know...not many people buy Ferrari. Great photographs are still being made with "old" cameras and lenses everyday.:)

I do live in the "real" world....and i'm not buying.........so. yes, it is very simple!.......but I think you missed my point!
Well, prices have been going up since time immemorial. And these days, many people are out of a job, can't even afford buying used stuff let alone having the luxury to have a camera.
 

by Baywing on Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:42 am
User avatar
Baywing
Forum Contributor
Posts: 868
Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Location: CT
The decision not to buy can have a negative effect, too. If enough people elect not to buy, there won't be enough profit for the company to invest in R&D of new products. People have been asking for an updated 80-400 for years and finally Nikon has produced one. I'm not wild about the price, either, but I do see many products coming out of Asia with hefty price increases. As the local economy in depressed regions improves with the influx of western manufacturing, the cost of the workforce increases which drives up the price of the product.
Photos at: http://www.pbase.com/baywing
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
124 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group