Why are old Nikons so expensive?!

[compuwar]

Yes, the D80 is a slightly cheaper, street, than my D70 was when I bought it. Of course you get much more for your money now so it's kind of hard to compare price bands without looking at what the rest of the market is doing over the same period. I do agree with you to an extent though.

I think it's not so difficult- Canon's 450D (XSi) is their entry level, and it's priced right around the D80 price point. People keep trying to compare the D40 to it, but they're actually aimed at different market segments- the D40's just good enough to compare upwards favorably. The market has moved what constitutes an entry-level camera pretty-much evenly, so the comparison washes there, it's just that this D40 price point body has fouled the normal logic.

Personally, I think Nikon's low-end strategy was pure genius, and I'd have probably kept at it if I were them, but the whole megapixel myth is against a 6MP dSLR at the low end, and the D60 is actually good in the bang-for-buck category. The resources to keep chunking out low-end consumer SLR cameras is probably cost-prohibitive as a continuous strategy, and if their new strategy is to do a year or two of low end then a year or two of high-end, that may place them very well in terms of share and profitability. A lot depends on the raft of 5% or less of the market companies (though I'd probably argue that the dSLR side could use 50% of the Nikon P&S resources and it'd be a bargain on both fronts.)

What's interesting to me is that Canon never went that low- preferring to let Nikon battle it out with the also-rans. I wonder if Nikon's now seeing what Canon saw all along, or if the Nikon strategy is really to hit the entry-level market every few years, then give them bodies to upgrade to. It'll be interesting to see what Nikon's strategy is next year and the year after to see which way they're leaning. Especially now that Sony is apparently about to do the raft of consumer dSLRs camera thing.

 

[cube]

Canon's entry level is the 1000D, not the 450D.

 

[compuwar]

I am talking about obtaining a Nikon with motor at a new D50 price, not a new D70 price, and certainly not at launch.

The D70 was Nikon's low-end camera for several years. Prior to that, the D100 was the low-end camera, the price point hasn't changed much over time, but regardless, the D50 was $740 street at introduction- so the D80 price is the same as the D50 price[1].

I'm not sure if Adorama is doing the same $100 discount on the D80 as they are on the D60, or if they've dropped their price in the last few days, but

http://www.adorama.com/INKD80R.html?searchinfo=d80&item_no=14

Shows a D80 for $639.95, or $100 less than the D50 was when it was new.

[1] Yet another link with the D50 body-only street price:
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/1505/camera-test-nikon-d50.html

 

[leighonigar]

It was only the low end camera because it was the lowest model in the range, not because it lacked features or was a 'low end' camera. The starting price for the processing, CCD etc for digital has come down a lot and so a new line of extra-cheap digitals have been facilitated.

The D70 was clearly not intended to meet the same audience as the D40, so, you're arguing that the D80 is low end, yes? Not for most people.

Anyway, this is all a bit futile. The guy just wants a motor.

 

[compuwar]

Canon's entry level is the 1000D, not the 450D.

Wrong again, Canon has announced the 1000D, but you can't buy one, so it's not yet their entry-level camera. Around the end of next month, this will no longer be true, but for now it is.

 

[cube]

The D70 was Nikon's low-end camera for several years. Prior to that, the D100 was the low-end camera, the price point hasn't changed much over time, but regardless, the D50 was $740 street at introduction- so the D80 price is the same as the D50 price[1].

I'm not sure if Adorama is doing the same $100 discount on the D80 as they are on the D60, or if they've dropped their price in the last few days, but

http://www.adorama.com/INKD80R.html?searchinfo=d80&item_no=14

Shows a D80 for $639.95, or $100 less than the D50 was when it was new.

[1] Yet another link with the D50 body-only street price:
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/1505/camera-test-nikon-d50.html

The D50 kit was selling for about $500 at the end.

 

[compuwar]

The D70 was clearly not intended to meet the same audience as the D40, so, you're arguing that the D80 is low end, yes? Not for most people.

Anyway, this is all a bit futile. The guy just wants a motor.

I am arguing that the D80 is the same price and the low end "photographer's" camera in the Nikon line. While the D50 and subsequently D40 were introduced to expand the low end to include picture takers who wanted more than a P&S would give them, at the time the D70 was introduced they were included in the D70 pool, though not directly catered to and obviously with more disposable income than the mean.

The exclusion of the motor in the body is a characteristic of a "family camera" rather than a "photography camera" in Nikon's mind. What I'm saying is that everyone who's complaining about the price point of "focus motor" is wrong when they think that the D70 and D50 were cheaper than the D80 is today. The D80 reflects the component cost decreases and feature increases compared to the D70D70s when new, as it prices at the same point the D50 did when it was new.

 

[leighonigar]

Wrong again, Canon has announced the 1000D, but you can't buy one, so it's not yet their entry-level camera. Around the end of next month, this will no longer be true, but for now it is.

Let's all run around screaming. Canon has had to keep old models in its line-up (350D, 400D) just because it lacks a low-end camera. I don't see what more demonstration you need. The 450D is a cut-above low end. It's canon's bottom of the current and available range but it is not low end.

This 'discussion' almost needs definitions for:

- low-end
- entry level

 

[cube]

Wrong again, Canon has announced the 1000D, but you can't buy one, so it's not yet their entry-level camera. Around the end of next month, this will no longer be true, but for now it is.

The 450D has barely been out that it is undercut by a new model. These are two cameras of the same generation. Canon keeps on selling their old cameras for a long time, so the current entry level is in fact the 350D. We'll see if the 1000D really replaces it.

 

[leighonigar]

I am arguing that the D80 is the same price and the low end "photographer's" camera in the Nikon line. While the D50 and subsequently D40 were introduced to expand the low end to include picture takers who wanted more than a P&S would give them, at the time the D70 was introduced they were included in the D70 pool, though not directly catered to and obviously with more disposable income than the mean.

I think everyone agrees on the reality. The D50/70 did get cheaper than the D80 is though - they had to to compete. For a while you could get the D70 after the D80 was introduced. Perhaps the D80 will be available 'closeout' (americanism) when the d90 turns up?

The 450D has barely been out that it is undercut by a new model. These are two cameras of the same generation. Canon keeps on selling their old cameras for a long time, so the current entry level is in fact the 350D. We'll see if the 1000D really replaces it.

I believe canon has now removed the 350D from its websites. You are correct in your statements about keeping models hanging around.

 

[cube]

What I'm saying is that everyone who's complaining about the price point of "focus motor" is wrong when they think that the D70 and D50 were cheaper than the D80 is today.

The D50 WAS cheaper than what the D80 costs now. If they had not discontinued it, it would still sell for $500 if not less.

 

[compuwar]

The D50 WAS cheaper than what the D80 costs now. If they had not discontinued it, it would still sell for $500 if not less.

I think you're wrong in terms of the economics of the retail industry. I'm pretty sure that the D50 was only deeply discounted at the end for two reasons.

1. The D40's price point made an "older" model at $740 too "expensive," and difficult to sell out because of the focus motor difference not being "worth" $300.

2. The D40's introduction and the cessation of manufacturing of the D50 meant that Nikon had to clear out inventory.

When you ship tens of thousands of units to retail channels, you have to get as close to selling out as possible, or the liability of unsold product hurts the bottom line. Let's say you send out 8,000 units to BestBuy and Ritz- that's roughly 3.5 units/store- if it cost you 50% to make and you split the profit between retail, distribution, shipping and yourself, then that's $370 of direct loss, plus shipping charges per unit, 8,000 * $370 isn't what your investors want to see in the loss column ($2.96M+)- and that's just a two retailer number. In fact, your investors would be happier to see you make nothing on those 8,000 units than to lose money.

Had Nikon continued to produce the D50, I'm pretty sure that the price point would not have been $500, especially for the kit.

Now, throw in the fact that the retailer isn't going to give you space if you don't have a product and they'd rather and older product than no product when you're in transition and you get the sale price and enough production to stock your retailers until the new unit is available in volume.