amolitor
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- May 18, 2012
- Messages
- 6,320
- Reaction score
- 2,131
- Location
- Virginia
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
It might cost 300 euros if you factor in all the costs, and divide by the expected number of cameras.
This is really the reason lower volume stuff costs more, you can't just pretend the design and engineering costs, the setup costs, and so on are all zero. Somebody has to take the design for the NEX-7 can re-design the body for aluminum rather than plastic. Someone's got to convert those drawings to a program for the (possibly multiple) milling machines. Someone's got to devise specifications and tolerances, and devise jigs and tests to measure those tolerances.
Then, every time you want to manufacture some, someone's got to load the programs into the milling machines, knock a couple out for calibration, measure them up, re-calibrate the machine, and repeat these steps for all three of the machines you're going to use. Your waste material percentage goes through the roof since you're burning 3 or 4 or 20 raw billets just calibrating up for some tiny little run.
Then you finally get the whole thing going, knock out 150 bodies, pack them up for inventory, and you're done with that project for the next few months. Program, calibrate, test, measure for whatever you're doing next, valves for some hot rodded VW engine or whatever.
I think it's kind of stupid, polycarbonate is pretty amazing stuff. But if it's gonna be a Hasselblad, I guess it better have a metal body.
It's a long long way from 300 euros for the body to 5000 euros retail. They're probably making all manner of silly manufacturing choices all down the line, though, because they can, and to back up the artisanal flavor of the thing. Whatever, it's jewelry, not a tool.
This is really the reason lower volume stuff costs more, you can't just pretend the design and engineering costs, the setup costs, and so on are all zero. Somebody has to take the design for the NEX-7 can re-design the body for aluminum rather than plastic. Someone's got to convert those drawings to a program for the (possibly multiple) milling machines. Someone's got to devise specifications and tolerances, and devise jigs and tests to measure those tolerances.
Then, every time you want to manufacture some, someone's got to load the programs into the milling machines, knock a couple out for calibration, measure them up, re-calibrate the machine, and repeat these steps for all three of the machines you're going to use. Your waste material percentage goes through the roof since you're burning 3 or 4 or 20 raw billets just calibrating up for some tiny little run.
Then you finally get the whole thing going, knock out 150 bodies, pack them up for inventory, and you're done with that project for the next few months. Program, calibrate, test, measure for whatever you're doing next, valves for some hot rodded VW engine or whatever.
I think it's kind of stupid, polycarbonate is pretty amazing stuff. But if it's gonna be a Hasselblad, I guess it better have a metal body.
It's a long long way from 300 euros for the body to 5000 euros retail. They're probably making all manner of silly manufacturing choices all down the line, though, because they can, and to back up the artisanal flavor of the thing. Whatever, it's jewelry, not a tool.
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/37/37608-63b0d340b0972479217b548a4026df96.jpg?1619738149)
