Garbz
No longer a newbie, moving up!
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2003
- Messages
- 9,713
- Reaction score
- 203
- Location
- Brisbane, Australia
- Website
- www.auer.garbz.com
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
I'm thinking more along the lines of building a dSLR that does not have to compensate for that R&D budget. Even if it where built like a thirty year old tank, with out the the additional technology companies could put a fully functional dSLR into the $150-$200 price range.
You would think so but no. Just removing buttons and features would constitute a whole re-design. Most of these things are handled by one integrated chip. Simply remove AF and metering, and you'd need to completely redesign the control chip, image processing chips, circuit boards, cases, need new moulds for cases, new body, and new software just to name a few. Contrary to popular belief companies do not spend their entire R&D budget on a sensor and magically a body appears around it. An even minor change could cost a fortune by the time the camera hits the shelf.
Without taking this one too far further I think we should agree to disagree straight up on this point. I think there would be a handful of people around the world (dedicated photographers who are tight on money) who would pick a feature-less manual SLR over an automatic point and shoot with manual controls which can be had for the same price. I would bet my last dollar that 90% of the people who want an SLR would either just grab a $20 film body like the Nikkormat F of ebay or would rather wait to get a D40. You definitely would not get a single consumer buying one of these. It really appeals to a niche portion of an already tiny target market and is still competing with film SLRs.They would sell. Contrary to popular belief people still have a hard time justifying $500+ on a used dSLR with kit lens. Sacrificing program modes, auto modes and whatever modes for $200 dSLR with kit lens new, compatable with whatever current lens linup is an easier decision to make. This could bring dSLR ownership to a wider range of buyers.
Now that's a crazy quote. You mustn't realise how popular these superzooms are. I think you're getting business sense confused with common sense. We may not like the super zooms, but they are the bees knees of the business and I'm sure the 18-200mm would have contributed highly on the Nikon's last profit statement.This would be a better business practice than blowing more R&D budget on super zoom P&S's.