Being On the Market a While...Good or Bad Thing?

twittopher · May 15, 2011

When a certain model camera is on the market for several months/years, is that a good or bad thing?

Good: Proven the test of time (no recalls, no undiscovered defects, etc.)
Bad: Soon to be outdated, runs risk of being discontinued.

Which would you say is more accurate?

With cars, the good outweighs the bad. But this is because cars are less prone to be discontinued so soon, whereas technology is outdated as soon as it hits the shelf.

Thoughts?

KmH · May 15, 2011

Consumer entry-level DSLR camera bodies seem to have a product cycle time of 24-36 months, and is the product category camera makers make most of their camera sales profits from.

Prosumer and pro level gaear have longer product cycle times, 48+ months, because far fewer of them are sold.

The digital camera is still a fairly new technology, so refinements definately occur at a fairly rapid pace. However, most people using a DSLR camera don't really understand how to use their camera to anywhere near it's fuill potential.

Consequently, the camera makers make sure they target their marketing to those aspects of a new model that the average entry-level, not really very well informed, shooter thinks is important.

Derrel · May 15, 2011

Canon ran through the D30-D60-10D-20D-30D-40D-50D-60D sequence in approximately 18 month intervals between bodies, according to articles I've read. KmH's above statement about 48-month lifetimes are typical of Nikon's flagship, 1-digit series body lifespans. So, there are two extremes in the d-slr market, best exemplified by Canon 's mid-range, semi-pro offerings, and Nikon's very high-priced flagship models. One thing to keep in mind with the rapid iteration Canon was following was in what some people call the "prosumer" space. A "prosumer" customer is a customer who demands new features, new specifications, and advancements, and is always looking to upgrade as soon as anything new hits the market. During the bulk of the EOS 10D-30D era, megapixel counts were going up from 6,8,10 MP with each new generation. As the OP asked about "technology is outdated" when either the market, or individual users consider it to be outdated. "Prosumer" customers consider technology outdated immediately upon something newer, or higher-spec'd being offered for sale. Many pro and serious amateur photographers are much less in need of having the latest and greatest. And frankly, it seems now, ten years in, that the d-slr megapixel race is slowing down.

Markw · May 15, 2011

KmH and Derrel both offer very valid points. The "less pro" a photographer is, the more quickly they feel they must upgrade as soon as the new product hits the market. I was (and kind of still am) subject to this for quite a while. In all honesty, how long the camera is on the market doesn't signify that it's a bad camera. Of course, the ultra-outdated cameras from 2002 like the D100 and the like aren't used very much and their price has depreciated quite a bit. That is mainly because of the MP, I think. It only has 2.65 megapixels. That number is only seen now in cell phones. Nikon would be disowned for offering a new camera with that number. But, the camera still takes great photos. It is a good camera and will still work for alot of what photographers want. The D40 is still looked at as being one of the best consumer bodies Nikon has ever made and still fetches a higher price than the Newer D3000 does. I can't speak for Canon. I have never shot with them, but I know they are well-known for spitting out new camera bodies like nobody's business. Nikon, on the other hand, is much more modest with their releases.

So, all in all, I honestly don't think the amount of time on the used market really matters. Learn each camera's features and limitations. Once you know this, you will know what camera is good for you and if it's worth buying to you.

Good luck!
Mark

twittopher · May 15, 2011

I should refine my question.

I'm in the market for an entry level DSLR, and I'm looking at several models with similar specs but different ages. I'm concerned that the older model, although its specs look great, might pose problems in the future if I need repairs on it, or if I want to upgrade parts on it.

KmH · May 15, 2011

As Derrel mentions Canon seems to have a much shorter product cycle span. I had that in mind and should have mentioned it.

I am not an early adopter, and tend to buy older, used, camera bodies (and lenses).

Mecal · May 15, 2011

I don't know about before, but now Canon seems to have slowed down. The XS (1000D) came out in August 2008. Its replacement just recently came out , the T3 (1100D)