MarkBarbieri
Semi-retired
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,171
I think Nikons intent is for people to buy the D40 with the kit lens and then to add the 55-200. That's obviously what Canon has been doing with great success on the Rebel side. It helps drive down the cost of the initial purchase while enticing customers to come back for more. If you think about it, they're just following the pre-digital equivalent of selling with a 28-80 kit lens. In this case it's the equivalent of a 27-82.5.
I don't know whether they split the range that way because it sells more long zooms or because they can make a 18-55 much cheaper than they can make an 18-70 of similar quality.
As for not supporting lenses without motors, it looks like one of two possible directions. They may be conceding that Canon was right to rely on motors in lenses. It may also be that they are using this as a differentiating factor to push the model line further away from the Dx00 series.
Camera companies have frequently crippled the lower end of their camera lines in order to capture price sensitive buyers at the low end but entice more serious amateurs with their mid-range cameras. I remember the fuss when the Rebel first came out. In many ways it was a crippled 10D. In fact, someone came out with a firmware update the enabled just about all of the 10D features that were disabled. A lot of new 10D owners were upset about having spent $500 more for a camera that was pretty darn similar.
I would expect that at similar price points, P&S cameras would tend to beat out DSLRs in most areas except where the DSLR has a natural advantage. With a P&S, you can use a smaller sensor (and therefor smaller lenses), you don't need mounts, and you don't need a mirror assembly. I would expect that someone would only buy a DSLR if they wanted some of the advantages that it offered, like interchangable lenses, a larger sensor, wider apertures, and a through-the-lens viewfinder. Because of that, I don't think you'll see DSLRs compete on price directly with P&S cameras.
I don't know whether they split the range that way because it sells more long zooms or because they can make a 18-55 much cheaper than they can make an 18-70 of similar quality.
As for not supporting lenses without motors, it looks like one of two possible directions. They may be conceding that Canon was right to rely on motors in lenses. It may also be that they are using this as a differentiating factor to push the model line further away from the Dx00 series.
Camera companies have frequently crippled the lower end of their camera lines in order to capture price sensitive buyers at the low end but entice more serious amateurs with their mid-range cameras. I remember the fuss when the Rebel first came out. In many ways it was a crippled 10D. In fact, someone came out with a firmware update the enabled just about all of the 10D features that were disabled. A lot of new 10D owners were upset about having spent $500 more for a camera that was pretty darn similar.
I would expect that at similar price points, P&S cameras would tend to beat out DSLRs in most areas except where the DSLR has a natural advantage. With a P&S, you can use a smaller sensor (and therefor smaller lenses), you don't need mounts, and you don't need a mirror assembly. I would expect that someone would only buy a DSLR if they wanted some of the advantages that it offered, like interchangable lenses, a larger sensor, wider apertures, and a through-the-lens viewfinder. Because of that, I don't think you'll see DSLRs compete on price directly with P&S cameras.
