Konica-Minolta 5D vs Canon EOS 5D

Why would Canon use the same model number? This presumes the Canon 5D
exists.

 

Why would Canon use the same model number? This presumes the Canon 5D

IF it exists (some significant doubt) it is doubtful they would grab the
same model number as a direct competitor

Toa

 

Because by the time Canon is done with their 5D, people will be saying,
"Minolta what - who?"

 

That would assume the market was hot for a $4000 body. The fastest selling
camera at the store I am at right now is the S2 IS! In dSLRs it's the D50,
XT and D70s. I have sent half my 20D stock back with problems (back focus,
etc). The market will be strong for the KM 5D as it will sell for $100 less
than the XT. The same price as the D50, and the new *ist DL. So the RebelXT
is the most expensive entry level dSLR camera at the moment. Nobody really
knows the price of the EOS 5D (if it exists)

With 10% or less margins dealers will buy what sells, the market dictates
volume sales. We sell 10 XT's for every 20D, 5 D50 for each D70s. We are
sold out of EOS 1D mk.II, and 1Ds mk.II, we had both on the shelf.

 

etc). The market will be strong for the KM 5D as it will sell for $100

I can't argue with that logic.

Toa

 

I think $4000, or even $3500 is too much.

Now if Canon was to launch it at say $2650, drop the 20d to $999 and the
xt @ $750, then we could kiss everyone but Nikon goodbye.

But this is just my pie-in-the-sky fantasy.

 

Do you work for Canon? (I'm referring to the "we" in your post)

Why is it important that other brands fail. I think competition is
healthy. The more good cameras from all suppliers the better
it is for all buyers.

I have noticed very few people say they are unhappy with their
choice of dSLR whichever brand.

-Mike

 

Why is it important that other brands fail. I think competition is

Yup. If it were left to Canon on their own (or even Canon vs Nikon) there
would be very little incentive for them to invest heavily in product
development.

Toa

 

I totally agree... you're reading too much into what I wrote.

I haven't said anything ill about other brands, not would I.

 

Or for them to improve them at all..

If fuji hadn't been in competition with Kodak in the film marketplace,
neither would have done anything to improve their products as long as
people kept buying them.

What I don't understand is why some people feel like camera brands are like
a football game and their team must CRUSH the other team? Ah, maybe it is
something besides photography at work here?

 

Slack wrote:

So the below quote was what? I'm sure this wasn't meant in a condescending
way..


Because by the time Canon is done with their 5D, people will be saying,
"Minolta what - who?"

 

I think this is just a bad coincidence. As another poster recently
pointed out, there was a EOS 5 model a few years back to which there is
no DSLR equivalent... the EOS 5 would fit nicely between their 10
series and 1 series.

Canon's somewhat confusing naming conventions do have a logic:
1series - best available (EOS 1D mk II, mk IIs)
10series - prosumer (10D, 20D)
100series - consumer (300D, 350D)

A 5 series bridges the gap from $2000 CAD to $8000 CAD. I doubt there's
a need for a 50series to bridge the gap from consumer to prosumer
though.

As for Maxxum, there's a 9D and a 7D...next in logical progression is a
5D.

PS Think anyone will make the mistake in future of assuming the D30 is
a nikon model based on vague references in charts down the line?

 

This is true. What's happened in digital SLRs is not good for the
market, with Nikon and Canon essentially establishing an oligopoly,
controlling around 98% of the market, with the few other manufacturers
fighting over the remaining 2%. The problem is that SLRs, especially
digital SLRs, lend themselves to such oligopolies.

Some people are at least able to honestly state issues with ANY product
that they own, since no product is perfect. What I don't like to see is
mindless bashing of other products, but simply stating the pros and cons
of specific products is legitimate and valuable.

 

The Nikon full frame models will be the D3 series, it's about the worst
kept secret around.

 

Ah, Tracy, consider yourself trolled.

 

Good analogy for some.

How would you answer the same question of yourself?

 

Then there would be a duopoly, which would actually drive prices up. It's
competition that drives prices down. If somehow even Mitsubishi (Nikon) were
to fold under that concept, then Canon would be granted a monopoly. The idea
you suggested would be considered illegal in the USA, under the "Dumping
Laws" and the USA Government could impose tarriffs, or could even ban the
product outright. This is called anti-trust.

A single maker market ends up being like the company store at a mining camp,
or like the G.U.M. Store in the former Soviet Union.

 

I doubt there will be a 24x36mm sensor in Nikon. The APS-C is doing pretty
well.

 

Trust me, I know about the importance of market diversification and
competition, I'm a Buyer for an Aerospace Co. and there's nothing I hate
more, than to be tied to a sole source. This only guaranties you'll
soon be bent over a barrel, skivvies around your ankles.

But the above scenario would allow be to snap up a spare camera ;-P
which was the point.

Well, we'll see what materializes in the next few weeks.

 

It is odd, as Canon should see the Minolta modeling numbering pattern.

OTOH, as the EOS "pro" numbering was always low (1, 3...) and the Maxxum
pro numbers were always high (8, 9) this situation was a bit innevitable.

Finally, I don't think the folks at Canon are much concerned with
Minolta's numbering ... eg: "f&ck-em".

Cheers,
Alan