Jump to content

Introducing the Canon 400000000D


Andrew Reid
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Don Kotlos said:

Only Canon can be so damn stupid. What the hell is wrong with them!!! God they really are risking, other than @mercer buying a camera from them :grin: losing the farm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ha ha!! (for both posts!)

It also has 9 points AF. 9. 

"Beyond the plastic mount, the buttons themselves aren’t even labeled. The writing is imprinted onto the body, and the buttons are blank. I once bought a copy of Monopoly in Bangladesh that was clearly made on someone’s inkjet printer, and it looked better than this."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

From your link...

Quote

There's nothing wrong with a "my first camera" type of DSLR. Dedicated cameras, even as smartphones continue to get better, can still do things that your phone cannot.

Canon should consider cameras like the 4000D as an opportunity to fill classrooms with affordable and capable cameras that can act as an entry point for young artists and storytellers. The 4000D should cost even less and it should be in the hands of young people in countries where a $500 camera is a luxury that simply cannot be afforded. I would love to see a cheap, easy-to-fix and easy-to-replace camera be at the center of a larger and broader movement toward giving voices to people who have long gone unheard. There are so many stories out there which deserve to be told and making versatile cameras more accessible is a step toward that end.

Makes sense to me.  I really don't see the problem.  DP Review says it is the lowest launch price they have ever seen for a DSLR.  The actually retail price a few months out during Black Friday will be even lower.  As Mattais indicated buying cameras for full price at launch is a personal choice.  I wait for the inevitable price drop.

I'm sure I could get a better deal on my groceries.  I see stories all the time of people getting $100 worth of stuff from the grocery store for $5.  They clip coupons and stack them and find out what is on special, etc, etc.  They probably look at you and me like idiots.  For some people they get great deals on cameras.  For me it is clothes.  Some other people it is groceries.  There are not enough hours in the day for everyone to be good at all three.

Funny story.  I remember when the BMPCC came out at $999.  I said that was too high for my purposes.  I could list for you all the people in this thread who jumped down my throat and said I didn't know what I was talking about.  Well I was very happy to pick up the BMPCC for $499 simply by just waiting patiently.

I could sit here all day analyzing $150K sports cars and $5 shirts from Walmart.  But you know what?  It would be a complete waste of time because I am not the target market for that stuff and I don't know a thing about it nor do I know a thing about the lives of people who buy that stuff.

It is totally okay to say, "I don't know," and just move on.  We don't have to comment on everything.  Otherwise there would be a section of the forum dedicated to point and shoots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, but the point of the article was that:

1. The camera is still too expensive for many

2. The components in the camera are too old and don't really add up to the value of the camera indicating higher profit margins for Canon. 

3. You can already get better quality at a cheaper price point 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, basically the author of this article, with all his infinite wisdom, gets to decide what price Canon should sell their product for, who they should price this camera for and why they understand the internals of Canon’s production cost pipeline moreso than Canon themselves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Damphousse you completely ignored the whole article and took just a paragraph out of it in a way that suits you. It is silly trying to fool people like this, we can read.

@mercer people can not judge Canon's choices and new releases? Since when? and I thought it is the job of professional writers and journalists to write such articles. In this thread and various articles have been proposed better options with less, or slightly more money (in our humble opinion of course), I mentioned a couple of Canon offerings a few posts ago. Seriously, there is nothing to defend on this abomination. In my humble opinion (I have to start every paragraph with this from now on I guess) this should cost something like 199$ to make it a statement. 450$-500 kit is not cheap at all in India.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@Damphousse you completely ignored the whole article and took just a paragraph out of it in a way that suits you. It is silly trying to fool people like this, we can read.

 

No.  I read the whole article.  I believe others covered other aspects of the article.  In fact it was I who posted the parts that were ignored.  Sorry for breaking the echo chamber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Damphousse said:

No.  I read the whole article.  I believe others covered other aspects of the article.  In fact it was I who posted the parts that were ignored.  Sorry for breaking the echo chamber.

This is the conclusion paragraph for the people that do not have as much free time as us, just to complete the big picture.

"It's odd to call a manufacturer greedy when a camera is so low priced right out of the gate, but the move to include so many low-end pieces and clearly left over parts and still charge $500 for it leaves few to come to any other conclusion. Obviously for many of us reading Imaging Resource, we care about Canon and all manufacturers being aspirational by way of innovation and advancing camera technology, and moves like the 4000D don't do that in the slightest. There's a place in the world for yesterday's camera too, and it's not on store shelves in the UK (or at your local Best Buy in the US, should the 4000D ever hit North American markets), it's in classrooms around the world, particularly ones who may not otherwise have access to digital cameras. It's a real shame Canon doesn't see that."

Also, 

"I wait for the inevitable price drop."

So, is this in your buying list? I am eagerly awaiting for your review!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

@Damphousse you completely ignored the whole article and took just a paragraph out of it in a way that suits you. It is silly trying to fool people like this, we can read.

@mercer people can not judge Canon's choices and new releases? Since when? and I thought it is the job of professional writers and journalists to write such articles. In this thread and various articles have been proposed better options with less, or slightly more money (in our humble opinion of course), I mentioned a couple of Canon offerings a few posts ago. Seriously, there is nothing to defend on this abomination. In my humble opinion (I have to start every paragraph with this from now on I guess) this should cost something like 199$ to make it a statement. 450$-500 kit is not cheap at all in India.

Kisaha, opinions are fine but how can this gentleman have any idea what it costs Canon to manufacture a camera or the costs to market the camera? And who made him the social police in his crusade to persuade or bully Canon into providing low cost cameras to needy school children? 

The whole premise is silly and self righteous  

Of course, I am a bit of a hypocrite because I regularly share my opinion on cameras I feel are too expensive. I guess the tone of the article got under my skin, but you’re right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Also, 

"I wait for the inevitable price drop."

So, is this in your buying list? I am eagerly awaiting for your review!

Did you read Mattais' post or mine or did you just "ignore" it?  ALL of these cameras drop in price after a few months.  Body only this thing's announced launch price is $385.  A few months down the road on black Friday the price of this camera will be closer to $300 than $400.  That's the jumping off point for doing your analysis.  It doesn't mean I'm going to buy this camera or the billion other cameras I have spoken about over the years.  It means I use real world numbers when I walk down the street and see what is available not some phony aspirational number from a manufacturer or someone making disingenuous arguments on the internet.

As far as reviewing and buying this camera, please read my post before replying...

1 hour ago, Damphousse said:

I could sit here all day analyzing $150K sports cars and $5 shirts from Walmart.  But you know what?  It would be a complete waste of time because I am not the target market for that stuff and I don't know a thing about it nor do I know a thing about the lives of people who buy that stuff.

We are not the target market for this camera.  And after observing the business acumen or lack there of on this forum I don't think there are many businessmen on here.  Canon could very well make plenty of money with this camera... or it could be a money losing flop.  In America we have a company called GAP.  They have at least two other brands.  Old Navy is the low end brand and Banana Republic is the higher end brand.  I have seen Banana Republic shirts on sale with an additional coupon selling for a few dollars more than Old Navy shirts.  It is somewhat unusual but it does happen from time to time.  The Old Navy shirts are garbage.  I steer clear of them.  Banana Republic shirts are high quality.  If you pay attention to the business press the Old Navy brand consistently makes more money than the Banana Republic brand.  There is example after example like that in business.

Quote

Within two years, Konik added he believes Old Navy alone will account for more than 75 percent of Gap's earnings per share. "Old Navy is a powerful and stable business with off-mall real estate, value pricing, and mid-teens margins."

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/01/gap-q4-2017-earnings.html

You guys are clueless about business.  And the sad thing is all you have to do is turn on the TV or read something on the internet other than camera snob posts.

The price difference between Old Navy and Banana Republic is far narrower than between a 4000D and a 1dX ii.  But the quality difference to even the casual observer is far bigger.  And yet Old Navy does a tidy business selling their shirts.  It would not surprise me if the same is true for Canon.  You guys post rants but I really don't know what they are based on.

You may think Canon is ripping people off and that this camera has no use case at this price.  That's fine.  That's your opinion.  Hey you might be right.  But to declare Canon are idiots and have made a mistake is a bit much.  I've seen numerous things that I wrote off as money losing crap that turned out to be moneymakers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mercerThis thread supposed to be the one to release some tension and have a good laugh, and suddenly it turned to an opinion war again! All opinions are good, some people agree, some disagree, and this and that. Canon plays a big part in our psyche, we all want them to succeed! Sure things are more tensed here than they used to be!

 @Damphousse I have read all the posts, actually the last week I have read so many posts, that it starts becoming weird!

Certainly I never said Canon idiots, why to say that? I am not 7 years old. I have an AE-1 and a full set of FD lenses! Seriously, Canon is the brand I have used, and owned most in my life. Also, you don't have to call all the people here clueless, you don't know all of them.  You can call me, clueless, I disagree, but certainly respect your opinion.

I have a whole post of how much ILC cameras sell (around 12.000.000 per year lately, CIPA statistics) and that the bulk of sales happen at the entry level and older models, that I posted yesterday, here https://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/26717-canon-m50-mirrorless-camera-features-4k-video/?page=14

At least we agree we are not going to buy this camera! World Dictatorship has to burn all the cameras of the world, so I do have to use one of those, in any other case, I would choose something else, and of course that is my opinion!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Members

I just had a look at what my local store is asking and I see a winner. An entery level DSLR that only costs $40 more than the previously cheapest model they had.

A 24mp APS-C camera with everything you need to take stunning photos. Ad the cheap nifty-fifty to hit the street running. And you get a Canon, the brand everyone you know has, with the sense of security that brings.

This thing is gonna fly of the shelves.

Btw, earlier people where upset about a plastic mount but all I see is metal. Did it change or maybe the store just uses an older pic just to have something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

I just had a look at what my local store is asking and I see a winner. An entery level DSLR that only costs $40 more than the previously cheapest model they had.

A 24mp APS-C camera with everything you need to take stunning photos. Ad the cheap nifty-fifty to hit the street running. And you get a Canon, the brand everyone you know has, with the sense of security that brings.

This thing is gonna fly of the shelves.

Btw, earlier people where upset about a plastic mount but all I see is metal. Did it change or maybe the store just uses an older pic just to have something?

https://www.canon-europe.com/cameras/eos-4000d/ 18megapixels sensor (from 2009), and seems like a plastic mount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Members

I realized that the camera I was looking at and thinking "Wow! Canon is gonna sell a ton of these!", Was the 2000D.

So that means that the 4000d will be even cheaper with the 18mp and plastic mount!!

Im sorry but if you don't see how these two models is a genius move and will absolutely fly of the shelves, indoctrinating new users into the EOS system... then I don't know what to tell you.

I own ZERO canon cameras and have no plans on buying any. But my hat is off to Canon. They have once again knocked it straight out of the park and will continue to dominate the camera market for yet another season.

 

impressive.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mattias BurlingI feel the same about Canon, but not this one.

I will add another camera to a dozen we have already mention being a better buy.

The 1300D kit with the Canon EG100 bag and a 16GB SD card costs 325-350euros over here (all the shops selling this kit, and the country has one of the highest VAT numbers in Europe), and it has everything the 40000 has, plus a larger more detailed screen (Gordon Laing's words, not mine), metal mount, better build quality (also the usual Canon lettering and symbols on the buttons) and NFC. Everything else spec wise is the same, and the 40000D will launch for 380 euros body only. I will gladly pay less and get a better camera, + a lens, + a bag (it's free, why not) and a 16GB SD card.

From whatever angle, it doesn't cut it. This should have been a 199$ release, so more people in India and China buy Eos cameras. A 380euros body only camera is not cheap for India.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

@Mattias BurlingI feel the same about Canon, but not this one.

I will add another camera to a dozen we have already mention being a better buy.

The 1300D kit with the Canon EG100 bag and a 16GB SD card costs 325-350euros over here (all the shops selling this kit, and the country has one of the highest VAT numbers in Europe), and it has everything the 40000 has, plus a larger more detailed screen (Gordon Laing's words, not mine), metal mount, better build quality (also the usual Canon lettering and symbols on the buttons) and NFC. Everything else spec wise is the same, and the 40000D will launch for 380 euros body only. I will gladly pay less and get a better camera, + a lens, + a bag (it's free, why not) and a 16GB SD card.

From whatever angle, it doesn't cut it. This should have been a 199$ release, so more people in India and China buy Eos cameras. A 380euros body only camera is not cheap for India.

Exactly. For North America and most Europe there are much better cameras and deals. For the same money you can even get the FF A7 and strap on a manual lens with an adapter and the quality will be miles better. 

Forthe countries that would really benefit from a low price point this is just too much. 

A mirrorless design would make much more sense than a crappy DSLR. 

Here is another article:

https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2018/03/02/canon-4000d-dumb-idea-or-canny-plan-please-let-it-be-the-latter

Or this https://www.techradar.com/reviews/canon-eos-4000d

However, while this low price point is designed to tempt new users, our worry is that the limited feature set and poor screen will see them quickly revert back to their smartphone. Eat beans for a month if you have to, but if you want an entry-level DSLR you'll be better off spending a bit more and getting something like the EOS 2000D or Nikon D3400. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Members

Heart = Nice/agreed

Laughing face = Thats funny

Thanks = Thanks

Downvote = disagree

It does not mean violence. It means that I disagree but don't have the time or energy to debate. 

Also, you have told me that I'm not allowed to adress you in this forum. Which is fine by me. I have at the same time asked you not to quote me or tag me in your comments.

Now you tag me. And given how I am forbidden by you to answer with words I use the proper emojicon. You then call it voilence... 

So the next time you feel this way you can consult the list at the top of this post. This list is from now on what I mean when using the emojicons, no more, no less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...