With the availability of full frame dslrs from Canon, Nikon and Sony, there has been a lot of discussion, both on Internet forum boards and in print about camera pricing and in particular, the pricing of “professional” dslrs. John Rettie in an article called “The Pricing Controversy on High-End DSLRS” which is in the current copy of Rangefinder Magazine commented that in his opinion, only the “top of the line” (in marketing speak – professional designated models) of Canon and Nikon cameras are overpriced and shares his take on where he believes these cameras should be priced.
It seems that a fair amount of disappointment with respect to the announced $8,000 price of the 24mp D3X, Nikons flagship camera was the result of Internet speculation and guesses, as well as Sony’s pricing of the A900, as opposed to any real indication from Nikon as to what the price would be. I have never regarded the professional designated cameras from Nikon or Canon, even though objects of desire in photo publications and on Internet forums, as the sales volume leaders for either company relative to their consumer-oriented entry and mid range products.
Rettie’s article got me thinking: “How much longer can companies charge a premium for their professional designated camera products?” It took a while but I had an epiphany: The answer is “as long as there are photographers who feel that the product will add value to their work flow and have the level of business to justify the expenditure.” There will also be a home for these expensive dslrs in many of the same rental houses that have $30,000 digital backs and $15,000 lighting systems available. And like the high end lighting products, the cache and halo of marquee dslrs often spills onto the less expensive, more mass consumer-oriented product lines.
As I consider the number of working photographers I know and/or am acquainted with, their specialties, clients, and billings vary tremendously. I wondered whether their decision making practices as it relates to equipment varies in the same manner.
Dave Black is a world class sports photographer, and Nikon shooter. Dave recently shared his rationale for buying the Nikon flagship in an article entitled “The Nikon D3x…Part 1” on his site. Dave’s analysis led him to conclude, that the addition of the D3X will open up new opportunities for him. Whether you agree with him or not, isn’t the point or an issue: Dave has made his decision based on the analysis of his business and market evaluation. This is a vastly different decision making process from the enthusiast who bases his or her purchase decision on the availability of discretionary income; or the person who lust for it but finds the price is too big a stretch for him or her, and expresses discontent.
Photographers who use the Canon 1DS series cameras have been making similar analyses for longer, as Canon has been offering a full frame professional designated model since 2002. John Pinderhughes, a premier commercial and fine arts photographer, and Canon Explorer of Light, shoots with a Canon 1DS Mark II and a 5D Mark II. When I asked John why he is still shooting with the 1DS Mark II and not the more current 1DS Mark III, he said that he felt “no need to rush” to change bodies sixteen months ago when the Mark III was introduced. He felt that he was still getting so much “amazing output” from the 1DS Mark II. His stance runs counter to the prevailing but unsubstantiated belief that every time a new body is released the working photographer automatically upgrades. As for his reason for shooting with a 5D Mark II: John cites the size, weight and output as major factors. When asked is the camera good enough for professional use, John’s response was “absolutely.” He did however say that under some circumstances and shooting conditions, he would opt to use the more robust 1 series camera. Additionally, he is considering adding a new 1 series camera to the fold “sometime in the not too distant future.”
Today, the high mp count is no longer limited to the top of the line. Both Sony and Canon have twenty-something mp cameras for under $3,000. So do they have all the bells and whistles of the Canon and Nikon flagships? No, but for many shooters who need and/or want the resolution advantages, all the bells and whistles of the flagships may not be necessary.
New York based photographer and studio owner Rod Goodman recently made the decision to replace his cropped sensor Canon camera with the 5D Mark II. Goodman felt that a 21mp camera at under $2,700 was a business expense he could justify; the $8000 1DS Mark III was not. As for Goodman’s reasons for shooting with the mid-level Canon consumer/prosumer cropped sensor models until recently; the driving factor in that decision was economics: 1) because he had opened a studio which was a major investment, 2) he primarily shoots head shots where the margins are smaller; and 3) the fact that his clients rarely need prints larger than 8×10. Goodman is quick to admit that he drooled over full frame dslrs for some time, but points out that running a business is about knowing how to allocate resources. His decision to stick with mid-level cameras and the “non-professional” designated 5D Mark II has not been a stumbling block in building his business.
Three working photographers, three different specialties and clients, and yet, all have made their camera equipment choices around their business needs, sometimes opting for the top of the line, sometimes not; sometimes opting for the new, and sometimes holding the line.
From a photographer’s vantage point and even that of product reviewers, it is dangerous to get into the camera company’s business model and workings. While it might be interesting, I know that personally, I am better off not ruminating on what their production costs and the like should be as there are too many unknowns and it sets a dangerous precedent: How long will it be before my customers or yours start telling us what the cost our product/services should be and how much profit we should be able to make? Or how long before readers tell publishing entities how much their magazines should sell for based on their analysis of ad sales, ink and printing costs and circulation? As photographers, we are consumers of camera company products, not Wall Street analysts, not investors or shareholders. We run our business and the camera companies run theirs. We should be making our decisions to spend our dollars based on good business sense.
I’d like to thank Dave Black, John Pinderhughes, and Rod Goodman for their willingness to be resources for this entry.
To learn more about Dave, John and Rod or view their work, or view referenced articles, scroll over or click on the blue highlighted text in the entry.
hdhd!! 
You must be logged in to post a comment.