What Would It Take for A New DSLR to Break Through
October 16, 2007: Listener Eric clued me in to the new Olympus E-3 DSLR, their semi-pro entry into an already crowded marketplace. Imaging-Resource has been using a prototype model and it sounds like they really like it. This is from their analysis:
The Olympus E-3 is by far the most advanced Olympus digital camera I’ve used, very satisfying to shoot with, and one of the more compelling SLRs launched this season. Its design, though big, is ergonomically pleasing and handsome, and it gives you a feel of confidence and control. The E-3’s build matches the sturdy feel of Olympus’s high-end lenses, which are some of the tightest we’ve seen.
The E-3 is slated to cost $1,699, body only.
This brings me to an interesting question: What would it take for a new DSLR to really break through – specifically, one that isn’t a Nikon or a Canon, the two players who dominate the market?
I know there’s a fan base for Olympus hardware, but are they going to expand on that base with a $1,700 body? Even with the E-3’s nice features, including an articulating LCD (I love these), built in wireless strobe capacity, and what’s said to be great autofocus ability, I don’t see anything here that’s going to shake up the sales charts.
I’m a Canon user, but I’d love to see another company come in and really step up the game. For example, I’ve always understood that most of the camera companies make the majority of their money off accessories. So why not give people a really kick-butt camera, with features like those on the E-3, for $999? If you could convert them to your system of lenses and other add-ons, you’d be golden. Once people start investing in your company’s products, you probably have a customer for life.
I keep waiting for a company to do this – to really underprice the camera and gain market share, but no one has yet. That’s what I understand Microsoft does on the Xbox and Sony does with the Playstation 3 – they take a loss on the hardware, because they know they’ll make it back (and more) on games and accessories.
I thought that Sony, with their really deep pockets, might do something like that with their Alpha series, but as far as I can see, their prices are competitive, but not earth-shaking.
The other way to go would be to add some really new and exciting features, but I can’t imagine what those would be. What’s left to add?Â
What do you think? If you have a DSLR and an investment in lenses and other accessories, what would it take you to jump ship?
Scott
October 17th, 2007 at 11:05 am
More than anything, for me to jump ship would be a situation where I feel I am being taken advantage of by the vendor. Companies that take advantage of their market position in socking it to the consumer in as many ways as possible make me froth at the mouth. I know it’s kind of a personal vent here Scott, and my apologies, but it is kind of an answer to your question:
Vendors should always be cognizant that if they presume too much about their bread and butter (the consumer), and keep socking it to them in real terms such as warranty support, customer service, and licensing restrictions, just to name a few, then ultimately those customers will vote with their feet when given the opportunity. (I recently did with Microsoft as I am grappling with a macbook Pro). Other examples include Canon (yes, I shoot with Canon) who has lost some of my respect from their less than qualified support on Mac support (they are clearly Windows-biased in their training). Likewise, Adobe also likes to double dip in your pockets if you happen to hve multiple OS environments. I am seriously looking at GIMP as an option lately.
It’s been no secret that Dell has lost market share due to it’s of-shoring of customer support, and other big players seem to not be learning much from this (except HP it seems who apparently delivers superior service and likes to brag about it.)
The upshot though, is that if one is invested in a system, the expectation is there to have the “system support” when needed.
October 17th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
“…I’d love to see another company come in and really step up the game.”
The Pentax K10D did this last year and will probably follow again this year with features that match the Nikon D300/Sony A700 for 2/3rds the cost. Problem is the lack of available semi-/Pro lenses(fast zooms) and long fast glass (200mm+).
October 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Scott:
I agree with you completely. Pentax does this to a certain extent in that they put features in their lower priced camera bodies that not many others do at the same price point.
But, I don’t understand why camera manufacturers don’t view camera bodies the same as Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo view their game systems…almost as a loss leader. They don’t make the money on the body, they just use that to get people into their line of goods.
I wonder when this will happen?
October 19th, 2007 at 2:24 am
I don’t see any committed, “long time” Nikon or Canon user jumping ship based solely on body price point. When we buy these cameras, we basically are buying a passport into a system, not just a camera body. I happen to shoot with Nikon, and after having invested into lenses, flashes, etc., there is no way I am going to jump ship to save 800 bucks on the body alone. A 1st time buyer may. But you have to hand it to Canon and Nikon-they know their stuff. Today’s JD Powers news on Nikon was very gratifying to me.
A
October 19th, 2007 at 4:45 am
What Scott failed to point out is that the E-3 was not meant to be a starter camera (the Evolt E410 priced at around $600 is). And that’s where camera companies recruit their customers.
If I didn’t have an investment in Canon lenses, I would seriously consider the Olympus system. They use the “open-sourced” Four-Third lens mount. Panasonic, Leica and Sigma also use it and lenses from those companies are be interchangeable.
October 21st, 2007 at 3:09 am
Hey Scott, what’s mentioned here should not be news to you. I did mention this to you earlier with a blog entry. I have nothing vested here as I am a Nikon shooter and do not plan to switch brands. What many are not getting is that Olympus is not planning to steal Canon and Nikon shooters. Most of these heavy shooters will need to stay with these brands as they have much vested in earlier lenses and accessories. This is the main reason that they have made the DSLR bodies backwards compatible with their earlier lenses…
Olympus does not have this issue as there is nothing to go backwards with. Remember that they left the SLR film market in the 1980s with the OM series 35mm film cameras. Now, they finally came into the DSLR market. So, their 1980s offerings are of the past and everything starts new with the DSLR. This is a perfect position in optimizing their full DSLR line to go fully digital. Notice that their 4/3 sized sensor is slightly smaller than the APS sized sensors used by Canon and Nikon. But, it’s odd that their 4/3 lenses have larger glass than the ‘designed for APS only’ lenses! This is not by chance as their lenses focuses the light straight onto the sensor, not in an angle as in the non 4/3 lenses. This creates a much more accurate image over the full sensor. Also, this shows in the prices of their lenses as they are more expensive and heavy. The only lens with more weight is full 35mm lenses…
I decided to stick with Nikon as the full line up is cheaper than Olympus! This sounds crazy, but it is true. A friend of mine has an Olympus wide angle zoom where it cost $1,800 and the price has gone up. Heck, my Sigma for my Nikon only cost slightly over $400. The Olympus is great, but outside of my price range. But, their optics have been getting almost perfect scores. With the 4/3 technology and the much higher prices, I guess they should be perfect!…
As some have mentioned that the podcast seems to be really Canon biased, I hope this will open everyone’s eyes as to the competition from others along the DSLR lines. Do a little research and you will see much of what Canon is offering as new features was pioneered by Olympus at least 2 years earlier…
October 22nd, 2007 at 7:47 am
Hi. I recently bought a Pentax K100D for the following specific reasons:
1) I could just about afford it!
2) I own/inherited some Pentax K lenses and SLR bodies and can be green and recycle this and still use it on the DSLR body.
I’m no expert and am gradually improving my knowledge and photography through practice. That said, these two factors for me made a big difference to my purchasing decision, particularly the fact that Pentax has kept its new DSLR bodies backwards compatible.
Taken a few shots with my Pentax SMS 50mm f1.7 manual prime lens, which equates to a 75mm on the K100D. Really pleased with its performance so far.
For me new DSLRs will break through if manufacturers think more about a cradle-to-cradle lifecycle for their products, rather than the cradle-to-grave approach of our consumer lifestyles. Must have the latest, no longer compatible with anything else type of gadget and bin the old stuff.
Seem to be a lot of Olympus fans out there. Shame Olympus has closed the door on its old, great kit and started a new 4/3 system.
It is great that the thousands of Pentax K lenses out there in second hand shops, at the back of cupboards, and eBay get a second chance and don’t get dumped in landfill.
Not only that, new features like anti-shake work with my old analogue lenses on the K100D. Real value for money.
In this new era of thinking about the environment, I am becoming more like my grandparents and will ‘make do and mend’ rather than buy new and throw away.
So keep up the good work Pentax! They may not be Canon or Nikon, but they demonstrate good Corporate Responsibility.
October 24th, 2007 at 4:51 am
I recently had a play with a Sony alpha and I wasn’t especially impressed with it. It does have a full-sized sensor going for it, anti-dust technology and the one I was looking at was 12 megapixels. On the downside, it’s a bit clunky and only takes Minolta lenses. I’d put it around the same level of a Canon Digital Rebel xTi.
Features I would like on a DSLR include;
Voice notation
GPS location in the EXIF
IR remote included
Bluetooth/WiFi access
October 31st, 2007 at 6:17 am
I’ve been using Oly stuff since I inherited my dads OM1 film SLR. I have used nikon and canon offerings but I find nothing more pleasing than using good glass and thats the bottom line olympus knows how to make good lenses I wish i could afford all of them. I’ve been shooting with an e-500 for about 1 year and a half and its never failed me it even went through a sand storm in Morocco and still does not require servicing and more importantly its anti-dust system actually works unlike other competing systems. I think the e-3 probably won’t go mainstream but it will become the choice of those interested in a reliable fast semi-pro set up more than capable of matching and beating the leading manufactures but Oly’s problem is that they remain niche however you can now by leica and panasonic cameras that use the 4/3 mount which means their lenses will gain wider acceptance and usage so perhaps its not necessary for oly to drop prices on the body since most of its income will come from the lenses anyway. Just my two cents worth.