# Canon Appears To Plan 10% RF Lens Price Hike in Japan



## [email protected] (Mar 10, 2022)

> A new PDF list of increased lens prices has been loaded onto the Canon Japan website, but has not yet been publicly linked. Digicame-info.com reported on the find, attributed to a forum post it believes to be “the usual person,” a reference it previously used for the author of the now-defunct Nokishita leak feed.
> The prices show increases of about 10 percent across the RF lens range, if this list were to become official Canon pricing. It should be noted that the Japanese Yen has fallen about 7 percent over the past year versus the dollar, so this pricing could be in part an “evening up” of prices being charged elsewhere.



Continue reading...


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Mar 10, 2022)




----------



## Berowne (Mar 10, 2022)

Graphic cards, Oil, RF-Glass. What is next?


----------



## SHAMwow (Mar 10, 2022)

Any hike, for any reason, is just absurd for RF glass. I love Canon and I love the new mount and all the new glass I own, but the prices are ludicrous. And any hike just seems tone deaf regardless of the yen, etc.


----------



## mxwphoto (Mar 10, 2022)

I hope the Japan price hikes will not translate into further hikes abroad as we just received hikes in February though given that Canon is a Japanese company, everything would be based off of the Yen. These hikes are definitely not due to inflation as Japan has minimal inflation at best vs US' currently high inflationary index. I do understand that parts and logistics have become more costly but if you look at the recently announced 800mm and 1200mm with their already sky high pricing and negative reception and now add news of a general 10% price hike to the mix, it would just seem ill timed at best from a PR perspective.


----------



## Maximilian (Mar 10, 2022)

just: MEEH! 

Thanks for sharing @[email protected]


----------



## David - Sydney (Mar 10, 2022)

mxwphoto said:


> I hope the Japan price hikes will not translate into further hikes abroad as we just received hikes in February though given that Canon is a Japanese company, *everything would be based off of the Yen.* These hikes are definitely not due to inflation as Japan has minimal inflation at best vs US' currently high inflationary index. * I do understand that parts and logistics have become more costly but if you look at the recently announced 800mm and 1200mm with their already sky high pricing* and negative reception and now add news of a general 10% price hike to the mix, it would just seem ill timed at best from a PR perspective.


Your chart shows inflation but inflation figures are based on a basket of goods and services. You could say that CPI is related to WPI but that is not always the case. Japan CPI represents:
Food (25 percent of total weight)
Housing (21 percent).
Transportation and communications accounts for 14 percent;
Culture and recreation for 11.5 percent;
Fuel, light and water charges for 7 percent;
Medical care for 4.3 percent;
Clothes and footwear for 4 percent.

What we really need to look at is wage rate increases. Major Japanese companies and labour unions agreed on wage hikes of 2.18% in 2019, 2% in 2020 and 1.86% in 2021. Kishida san is urging companies to raise rates to be 3% or more in 2022 to "restart new capitalism".

I think that you need to align what the labour vs component pricing would be within cameras and lenses. Lenses (particularly big glass) would have more labour cost but local Japanese assembly cost would be relatively small vs component cost. Shipping costs have gone up for sure but as a %?
SW costs is all labour and clearly that is an increasing % of the total cost but we don't know whether Canon are using local or external labour (eg India etc) for it. Wage rate increases may be low in Japan but higher elsewhere.
SG&A admin costs will be in Yen but sales/marketing costs will be spread around the world


----------



## macrunning (Mar 11, 2022)

Canon slowly working on pricing themselves out of business!


----------



## northlarch (Mar 11, 2022)

Canon is desperately trying to keep their numbers looking strong for shareholders despite a sinking market. I’m considering holding off investing any more of my funds here; we’ve got an unstable world and this is getting ridiculous. The consumers are eating all the trouble—when was the last time we read about the management getting a decrease in pay? How about shareholders perhaps getting a smaller than expected dividend or maybe lowering the forecast expectations a bit more so they don’t have to keep up the act? Continuing to crank up the prices to fill in the gap is not going to work for much longer, IMO. It’s untenable.


----------



## Rofocale (Mar 11, 2022)

FFS Canon’s MIJ gear is already priced higher than the US, why the hell do we have to pay so much more in Japan??? It’s getting to the point that if I want to buy glass, I’m better off flying from Tokyo to NY, buying from B&H and then flying back with change in my pocket.


----------



## vjlex (Mar 11, 2022)

Rofocale said:


> FFS Canon’s MIJ gear is already priced higher than the US, why the hell do we have to pay so much more in Japan??? It’s getting to the point that if I want to buy glass, I’m better off flying from Tokyo to NY, buying from B&H and then flying back with change in my pocket.


That's what I did! (Well, not literally)


----------



## jd7 (Mar 11, 2022)

macrunning said:


> Canon slowly working on pricing themselves out of business!


slowly?


----------



## home_slice (Mar 11, 2022)

We’re seeing this across the board with just about everything we buy. Now is not a bad time to add 10% to what you charge or ask for that raise. I did this towards the end of last year and haven’t heard a peep about it from clients.


----------



## PGSanta (Mar 11, 2022)

This is where Sony, as the much larger, much better diversified company has a distinct advantage in its ability to weather a volatile market. That said, I doubt the price changes are based on much more than the sliding Yen, and don't think it will have an impact on current U.S./E.U. pricing.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Mar 11, 2022)

PGSanta said:


> This is where Sony, as the much larger, much better diversified company has a distinct advantage in its ability to weather a volatile market. That said, I doubt the price changes are based on much more than the sliding Yen, and don't think it will have an impact on current U.S./E.U. pricing.


Sony halted production on affordable items


----------



## InchMetric (Mar 12, 2022)

Told you so. See my posts about the bizarrely overpriced RF 800 and 1200. Those are the new normal. RF 400 and 600 are underpriced and if you buy one now (I just did) you’ll be glad when the price for the same will be $1000-2000 higher next month.

A 600 for $13000 is going to look pretty good when they’re $15000 in six months. Mark my words.

it’s not just exchange rates, it’s global inflation. Is you have cash and want something, but it all now.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 12, 2022)

RF glass was already way too expensive . They’ll loose all the enthusiasts and they’ve already lost the compacts to phones. It’s for working pro’s only , and barely them in todays situation ..


----------



## InchMetric (Mar 12, 2022)

macrunning said:


> Canon slowly working on pricing themselves out of business!


I’d say they were pricing _you_ out of the business.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Mar 12, 2022)

InchMetric said:


> Told you so. See my posts about the bizarrely overpriced RF 800 and 1200. Those are the new normal. RF 400 and 600 are underpriced and if you buy one now (I just did) you’ll be glad when the price for the same will be $1000-2000 higher next month.
> 
> A 600 for $13000 is going to look pretty good when they’re $15000 in six months. Mark my words.
> 
> it’s not just exchange rates, it’s global inflation. Is you have cash and want something, but it all now.


I think you are right.
There is precedence for that.
When the EF 800 f/5.6 IS and EF 400 f/2.8 IS were introduced the EF 800 IS the EF 800 was much more expensive.
Over time the EF 400 caught up in price.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 12, 2022)

Canon has loyal customers but they are “testing” the loyalty with the price creep of already expensive L lenses. With so many pressures on fuel, food, heating etc. disposable income for luxuries like camera equipment will only be pushed further away by ever increasing prices.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 13, 2022)

jeffa4444 said:


> Canon has loyal customers but they are “testing” the loyalty with the price creep of already expensive L lenses. With so many pressures on fuel, food, heating etc. disposable income for luxuries like camera equipment will only be pushed further away by ever increasing prices.


I think working pro photographers will be hit hardest by this. Enthusiasts buying multiple lenses at >$2K each are less likely to be affected by inflationary pressures from the basic necessities.


----------



## northlarch (Mar 13, 2022)

I wish Canon the best of luck as a company but it takes some serious arrogance to continue jacking up prices and recycling lenses they’re charging $20K for. Especially when you’ve got a competitor like Nikon making the products they are and pricing them much lower. I understand Nikon’s strategy and that it might be short term, but in this market, I’m now looking at a Z9 and their incoming lenses for my next purchase. I’ve invested $30K into the RF mount thus far but I can comfortably say my future budget is on hold with Canon if this continues. May not be a huge loss to them but I’m certain others are feeling it and getting tired of the creep. Creep with pricing, creep with recycling lenses, creep with apertures. Too many great options out there right now.


----------



## OneSnark (Mar 13, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> I think working pro photographers will be hit hardest by this. Enthusiasts buying multiple lenses at >$2K each are less likely to be affected by inflationary pressures from the basic necessities.



Raising hand.

I am an enthusiast.

BUT - - - -between 
* RF lenses being released at stupid high prices
* RF lenses not being available
* RF lenses then getting a price hike - - -then suddenly being available at major retailers 2 days later

I think I am out. 

I was good with $1000-$2000 L glass. . . buying one every year or so. 
Then in the mid 2010's. . . we started seeing perfectly fine "L" lenses being replaced every two years . . .at higher and higher prices. I was fine with that. I was happy with the 16-35-mk 1. At the end - - -I was considering a 100-400 mkII to replace a 100-400 MK1. . . . But RF comes along and . . . the entire collection was obsolete? And the 100-400-MK1 at $1800 was replaced by an RF at $2700? And it's out of stock for a year? 

Tell me again how this is better than an iPhone? (J/K - - -I know the difference. I will just keep using my EF system. The toy money is now going to drones)


----------



## AlanF (Mar 13, 2022)

OneSnark said:


> Raising hand.
> 
> I am an enthusiast.
> 
> ...


The EF 100-400mm was introduced at the end of 1998. The Mk II was 16 years later in 2014, much improved, and is still current for EF cameras. That’s hardly a good example to quote of a lens being replaced every two years. And you can buy a RF 100-400mm for 700 £€$.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 13, 2022)

OneSnark said:


> But RF comes along and . . . the entire collection was obsolete?


Sorry, but that’s asinine. With a simple adapter, EF lenses function as well on mirrorless bodies as well as they do on DSLRs (there are 8 exceptions – 7 MkI IS supertele lenses lose the functionality of the AF stop button, and the 30 year old 35-80 PZ doesn’t power zoom). 

I have 10 EF-mount lenses and they all work great on my R3. Using adapted EF lenses enhances functionality in some cases, e.g. the drop-in filter behind my 11-24 and TS-E 17. It’s great to get 30 fps for birds in flight with my 600/4 II – can’t do that with a DSLR.


----------



## stillviking (Mar 13, 2022)

RF prices are making all my friends move to Sony and Fuji to be honest!


----------



## northlarch (Mar 13, 2022)

stillviking said:


> RF prices are making all my friends move to Sony and Fuji to be honest!


I know of three who are licking their chops to jump on the new PFs from Nikon, as well. Those recycled RF superteles and their prices really lit a fire under some of the Canon wildlife shooters I talk with. “Same old Canon. They’ll never change.” I think some, myself included, were hoping a little humility would come from the Sony mirrorless competition. Appears they’re back to business as usual now that they’ve got a reasonable lineup built.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 13, 2022)

stillviking said:


> RF prices are making all my friends move to Sony and Fuji to be honest!





northlarch said:


> I know of three who are licking their chops to jump on the new PFs from Nikon, as well.


As usual, everyone’s friends are switching away from Canon. Yet somehow…


----------



## northlarch (Mar 13, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> As usual, everyone’s friends are switching away from Canon. Yet somehow…
> 
> View attachment 202741


Not interested in the “brand wars” personally. I used my anecdote as an example of others in my immediate circle who are getting frustrated with the pricing and trajectory Canon is on presently, as am I. Regardless of you sharing who’s on top right now, that’s real and happening.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 13, 2022)

I think it's interesting that the third party lens makers haven't found a way to undercut Canon and Nikon (and now, with a couple lenses, Sony) on the super-telephotos. I've owned a few copies of Sigma's 500mm f/4, and it's nice for the money, but was a little less sharp than Canon's 500 f/4, and - what killed it for me - didn't take teleconverters nearly as well. 

I shot primarily Sony for one year, eventually acquiring their 600 f/4, which is the close equivalent of the EF 600 III/RF 600.

I would have thought that we'd see a $8000 600mm f/4 from Tamron or Sigma eventually, but that didn't happen. Perhaps my gut impression that there must be a lot of profit margin in a $13k lens is incorrect. 

As to the discussion above about Canon hurting itself with pricing, I do think that there is a segment of people not so much leaving Canon because of lens prices, but that there are people who *would* come to Canon but are factoring lens prices when deciding. Canon may well decide these are precisely the lower-margin customers they can do without. 

But Canon is stating explicitly that it wants to become #1 in mirrorless worldwide. That perhaps suggests they'll do what they did with the EF range, and split it into high-end and low-end ranges, with a profusion of new "cheap and cheerful" bodies and lenses.*

-tig

*Somebody, inevitably, is going to take this as meaning the M mount will come back. No. Stop. You have your whole life ahead of you. It's just a mount.


----------



## dirtyvu (Mar 13, 2022)

northlarch said:


> Not interested in the “brand wars” personally. I used my anecdote as an example of others in my immediate circle who are getting frustrated with the pricing and trajectory Canon is on presently, as am I. Regardless of you sharing who’s on top right now, that’s real and happening.


somehow people have a distorted view on "popularity". even if you just measure internet traffic, canon is miles ahead of sony. look at the web traffic stats for canonrumors.com versus sonyalpharumors.com and it's not even close. canonrumors.com is ranked at #26,924 whereas sonyalpharumors.com is ranked at 60,699 (using https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo). this matches up with the google stats as well.


----------



## macrunning (Mar 14, 2022)

InchMetric said:


> I’d say they were pricing _you_ out of the business.


Sorry to offend your 'feelings' mr. rich guy.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 14, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> *Somebody, inevitably, is going to take this as meaning the M mount will come back. No. Stop. You have your whole life ahead of you. It's just a mount.


I wasn’t aware it had left. It’s so ‘gone’ that M-series bodies have topped the domestic (for Canon) top-seller list for months.


----------



## dirtyvu (Mar 14, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> I think it's interesting that the third party lens makers haven't found a way to undercut Canon and Nikon (and now, with a couple lenses, Sony) on the super-telephotos. I've owned a few copies of Sigma's 500mm f/4, and it's nice for the money, but was a little less sharp than Canon's 500 f/4, and - what killed it for me - didn't take teleconverters nearly as well.



There are a few third-party RF lenses. Taylor Jackson swears by the Samyang 85 mm 1.4, preferring it over the Canon (mainly because it's cheaper and lighter). Laowa makes a few RF lenses. Rokinon.


----------



## northlarch (Mar 14, 2022)

dirtyvu said:


> somehow people have a distorted view on "popularity". even if you just measure internet traffic, canon is miles ahead of sony. look at the web traffic stats for canonrumors.com versus sonyalpharumors.com and it's not even close. canonrumors.com is ranked at #26,924 whereas sonyalpharumors.com is ranked at 60,699 (using https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo). this matches up with the google stats as well.


Well this is ironic isn’t it? You’re saying that _I_ have a distorted view of “popularity” and you’re comparing the website traffic of two rumor sites as evidence that Canon is somehow superior? One site could be trash and the other might be great at SEO—what’s your point? Those stats aren’t indicative of anything other than one rumor site doing better than another. Next you’re going to tell me that Canon’s the best because Peter McKinnon is cool and has millions of followers and chooses them.

Regardless, you’re the one making this a popularity contest—again, I simply used an example with a leading competitor who is undercutting with pricing right now. I could care less which one is most popular.


----------



## 2 cents (Mar 14, 2022)

Really not looking forward at buying more Canon gear. Was in the process of switching to RF system but there is really no point.

The prices are absurd as they are already.

It's funny how when I started out photography as a kid 35 years ago, just before the EOS system was released, I eventually saved enough money to buy two EOS 1's film cameras. I was still an avid amateur then when they were released. Still, I could save enough from an average salary to buy the gear.

Today I'm a full time professional photographer and there is no way I can afford any of pro series cameras. The 5D series is the best I can afford on my income.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 14, 2022)

mxwphoto said:


> I hope the Japan price hikes will not translate into further hikes abroad as we just received hikes in February though given that Canon is a Japanese company, everything would be based off of the Yen. These hikes are definitely not due to inflation as Japan has minimal inflation at best vs US' currently high inflationary index.  I do understand that parts and logistics have become more costly but if you look at the recently announced 800mm and 1200mm with their already sky high pricing and negative reception and now add news of a general 10% price hike to the mix, it would just seem ill timed at best from a PR perspective.
> View attachment 202713


Thinking inflation only influences prices where the inflation occurs is just plain wrong. Nearly everything produced in Japan is done by importing nearly everything from somewhere else. Inflation is the reason. By definition, Canon's price hikes are inflation demonstrated in stark reality. However, camera and lens sales are not counted in the formula for figuring a country's inflation. With low parts availability it makes sense (supply and demand) that Canon is probably paying premium for those parts. In my town, and the towns surrounding mine, there are zero new cars on any of the lots. Chip shortage. We were in a head-on collision December 28th. Progressive gave me $4,000 over blue book for my high mileage Hyundai. I was in total shock. I did not have gap insurance. I still owed $6,300 and was worried they wouldn't pay it all. I took that $4k and bought a used, beat-up, POS Ford F-150 (circa 1992) with 280,000 miles on it. The price? $3,850. Yup. Shortages and inflation. I've since put $1,500 in that truck to make it more reliable. 2 years ago that same truck would have been $1k at best.


----------



## Del Paso (Mar 14, 2022)

Companies ALWAYS charge the price they think the customer is ready to pay, regardless of the real value of their product.
Just think of a car's metallic paint, whose cost is about $50 more than standard paint.Take a look at the Porsche price list .
Sometimes, they overcharge, and then engage the reverse gear.
But this very rarely happens, because customers quickly get used to higher prices, after a short period of whining. Unfortunately...


----------



## dirtyvu (Mar 14, 2022)

northlarch said:


> Well this is ironic isn’t it? You’re saying that _I_ have a distorted view of “popularity” and you’re comparing the website traffic of two rumor sites as evidence that Canon is somehow superior? One site could be trash and the other might be great at SEO—what’s your point? Those stats aren’t indicative of anything other than one rumor site doing better than another. Next you’re going to tell me that Canon’s the best because Peter McKinnon is cool and has millions of followers and chooses them.
> 
> Regardless, you’re the one making this a popularity contest—again, I simply used an example with a leading competitor who is undercutting with pricing right now. I could care less which one is most popular.


You're making comments based on your confirmation bias and anecdotal experience. Which doesn't match up with the reality of the vast majority of users.


----------



## InchMetric (Mar 15, 2022)

macrunning said:


> Sorry to offend your 'feelings' mr. rich guy.


Someone who thinks they are smarter about pricing than the experts with all the information might end up poor, and throwing “rich” around as an epithet. 

buzz off


----------



## unfocused (Mar 15, 2022)

2 cents said:


> ...Today I'm a full time professional photographer and there is no way I can afford any of pro series cameras. The 5D series is the best I can afford on my income.


Camera manufacturers are going where the money is and the money is in enthusiasts not professionals. Enthusiasts have more discretionary income, their income is less sensitive to economic downturns and they are willing to spend more because it is for personal gratification. Professionals must justify purchases based on their income and with the shrinking professional market there is less and less of that income to go around.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 15, 2022)

stillviking said:


> RF prices are making all my friends move to Sony and Fuji to be honest!


Sony are no cheaper!


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 15, 2022)

unfocused said:


> Camera manufacturers are going where the money is and the money is in enthusiasts not professionals. Enthusiasts have more discretionary income, their income is less sensitive to economic downturns and they are willing to spend more because it is for personal gratification. Professionals must justify purchases based on their income and with the shrinking professional market there is less and less of that income to go around.


There has been a couple of recent reports that would challenge your assumption. Prices across the board are increasing at a rate not seen in recent times mainly created by energy increases including gasoline but also by shortages due to the Covid 19 closures. Depending on who you believe these are translating into between 6-8% on an entire household budget so even enthusiasts have less discretionary income to spend. Evidence of this are recent falls in share prices. This will lead to at best a stagnation of sales or a slight fall especially the more expensive an item is as the basket of price increases feed through to wallets. 

Right now Canon would do well to concentrate on the APS-C and non- L lenses that it manufactures in its Taiwan and Malaysia factories where labor costs are cheaper. Some of the current non-L RF lenses such as the RF 16mm, 35mm, 50mm, 24-105mm f4-7.1, 100-400mm f5.6-8 punch above their weight and whilst not as good as L lenses give perfectly acceptable results. In the case of the RF 100-400mm it may not be a 100-500mm but at a 1/4 of the cost it doesn’t give a 1/4 of the results and is far lighter.

Similarly Professionals don’t always buy lenses they rarely use but rent. Having been in the camera, lens and lighting rental business for over 40 years there has never been a time as busy as now for the rental sector and I don’t see that changing anytime soon. It’s not immune however to supply issues which is good and bad. Good because utilisation is high, bad because demand outstrips supply so money is left on the table.


----------



## fox40phil (Mar 15, 2022)

jeffa4444 said:


> Canon has loyal customers but they are “testing” the loyalty with the price creep of already expensive L lenses. With so many pressures on fuel, food, heating etc. disposable income for luxuries like camera equipment will only be pushed further away by ever increasing prices.


They tested it very successful with the overpriced 100-500 7.1.... >3000€ here. So many ppl have this lens in the photo groups/forums  thats crazy! Als private people. And bounded with the R5. So near to 10k€ for gear for the hobby. They could easily buy a R6 or R with a 150-600 or 100-400 II.


----------



## AlanF (Mar 15, 2022)

fox40phil said:


> They tested it very successful with the overpriced 100-500 7.1.... >3000€ here. So many ppl have this lens in the photo groups/forums  thats crazy! Als private people. And bounded with the R5. So near to 10k€ for gear for the hobby. They could easily buy a R6 or R with a 150-600 or 100-400 II.


Why is it crazy? The R5 + 100-500 is a fraction of the price of the R3 + RF 600 f/4 and RF 400 f/2.8, which are being bought by some enthusiastic birders, and I don't think they are crazy.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Mar 15, 2022)

jeffa4444 said:


> Sony are no cheaper!



But Sony E mount has many third party options which Canon lacks. For example the Sigma F2 primes are amazing.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Mar 15, 2022)

fox40phil said:


> They tested it very successful with the overpriced 100-500 7.1.... >3000€ here. So many ppl have this lens in the photo groups/forums  thats crazy! Als private people. And bounded with the R5. So near to 10k€ for gear for the hobby. They could easily buy a R6 or R with a 150-600 or 100-400 II.


Definitely not a representative sample! Very few photography professionals shoot wildlife, it's one of the smallest subcategories of photography, see table below, from https://petapixel.com/2020/12/02/br...nsights-from-2020-to-project-trends-for-2021/ which also indicates that it's one of the lowest paying photography niches alongside portrait and family. Yes I know the stats are based on online searches instead of surveys, but they're reasonably indicative otherwise they wouldn't be used!






The majority of people buying wildlife lenses are enthusiast, and they're predominately retired old men, these lenses really aren't representative of all other lens categories and photography genres. Just because this demographic has money to spend on their hobby does not tell us anything about most pro photographers and the majority of enthusiast photographers and their inability to afford overpriced Canon gear.

Now, consider that a RF 100-500 L is usually mated with a Canon R5, we're talking about a very expensive setup for the privilege of photographing birds at a fairly professional level with what would be considered as the entry level Canon lens that can provide what would be regartded as excellent image quality at such a long focal length. Wildlife lenses of this quality and higher are bigger and way more expensive.

EOS R5 Canon Store US: $3899.00
RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM Canon Store US: $2899.00

lens + camera = US $ 6,798 (9.89% of median annual income)
median household income in the US in 2019 was $68,703


EOS R5 Canon Store UK: £ 4,299.99
RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM Canon Store UK: £ 2,979.99

lens + camera = UK £ 7,279.98 (24.76% of median annual income)
median household income in the UK in 2019 was £29,400


EOS R5 Canon Store AU: $5,999.95
RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM AU: $4,999.95

lens + camera = AU $ 10,999.90 (21.40% of median annual income)
median household income in the Australia in 2019 was $51,389

These calculations show that an EOS R5 coupled with the RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM will cost a US buyer around 10% of the median annual income, whereas in the UK it's a whopping 25%, and around 21% in Australia.

Considering inflation, COVID hardship, and increasing prices, that's a heck of a lot to be shelling out for non-essential leisure, for the everyday person. The fact that the RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM is selling probably tells us there are quite a few retirees and people in well-paid jobs that want to venture into nature and take photos. We can't draw any inferences about Canon pricing itself out of the enthusiast market or not from the popularity of that lens.

Also, some brands differentiate themselves on price (and prestige), high prices make a product less affordable, and therefore more exclusive in the eyes of the market. Here, they rely on lower sales volumes and higher margins. That's another possibility that a company can take depending on their market position, status, and the size of the market.


----------



## macrunning (Mar 15, 2022)

InchMetric said:


> Someone who thinks they are smarter about pricing than the experts with all the information might end up poor, and throwing “rich” around as an epithet.
> 
> buzz off


All hail the Big Inch, we are not worthy.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 15, 2022)

jeffa4444 said:


> There has been a couple of recent reports that would challenge your assumption. Prices across the board are increasing at a rate not seen in recent times mainly created by energy increases including gasoline but also by shortages due to the Covid 19 closures. Depending on who you believe these are translating into between 6-8% on an entire household budget so even enthusiasts have less discretionary income to spend. Evidence of this are recent falls in share prices. This will lead to at best a stagnation of sales or a slight fall especially the more expensive an item is as the basket of price increases feed through to wallets.



I'm not sure how that would challenge my assumption. I wrote:



unfocused said:


> Camera manufacturers are going where the money is and the money is in enthusiasts not professionals. Enthusiasts have more discretionary income, their income is less sensitive to economic downturns and they are willing to spend more because it is for personal gratification. Professionals must justify purchases based on their income and with the shrinking professional market there is less and less of that income to go around.



Yes, enthusiasts may have less discretionary income to spend right now due to market losses and inflation, but they still have more discretionary income than most. So, while it may cause a temporary slowdown in sales, it isn't going to reverse the overall trend of camera manufacturers going after enthusiasts. If enthusiasts have less discretionary income now, professionals have even less because customers are pulling back due to inflation and financial uncertainty. Photography is, unfortunately, one of the first places that gets cut when companies and individuals scale back their spending.



jeffa4444 said:


> Right now Canon would do well to concentrate on the APS-C and non- L lenses that it manufactures in its Taiwan and Malaysia factories where labor costs are cheaper. Some of the current non-L RF lenses such as the RF 16mm, 35mm, 50mm, 24-105mm f4-7.1, 100-400mm f5.6-8 punch above their weight and whilst not as good as L lenses give perfectly acceptable results. In the case of the RF 100-400mm it may not be a 100-500mm but at a 1/4 of the cost it doesn’t give a 1/4 of the results and is far lighter.



1) What makes you think Canon isn't doing that? You just provided a whole list of low cost R lenses.

2) I don't give advice to Canon on what they should concentrate on. They seem to know that better than I do.



jeffa4444 said:


> Similarly Professionals don’t always buy lenses they rarely use but rent. Having been in the camera, lens and lighting rental business for over 40 years there has never been a time as busy as now for the rental sector and I don’t see that changing anytime soon. It’s not immune however to supply issues which is good and bad. Good because utilisation is high, bad because demand outstrips supply so money is left on the table.



Not sure what you point is here. It certainly doesn't conflict with what I wrote.


----------



## AlanF (Mar 15, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> EOS R5 Canon Store UK: £ 4,299.99
> RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM Canon Store UK: £ 2,979.99
> 
> lens + camera = UK £ 7,279.98 (24.76% of median annual income)
> ...


These figures are more relevant for the UK for 2018: https://equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic-inequality-uk
For the top 20% of households, and that's quite a lot, it's 5.5 weeks of disposable income.




Also the median annual earnings for full-time employees in the United Kingdom was approximately 31.28 thousand British pounds in 2021, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1002964/average-full-time-annual-earnings-in-the-uk/


----------



## LogicExtremist (Mar 16, 2022)

AlanF said:


> These figures are more relevant for the UK for 2018: https://equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic-inequality-uk
> For the top 20% of households, and that's quite a lot, it's 5.5 weeks of disposable income.
> 
> View attachment 202753
> ...


Thanks for the additional information Alan, it's incerdible how much people in the UK have to pay for their photography gear. I'm guessing Canon gives people in the US better prices because they're a larger market as they have a higher population, which translates to a greater volume of sales perhaps...


----------



## AlanF (Mar 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> Thanks for the additional information Alan, it's incerdible how much people in the UK have to pay for their photography gear. I'm guessing Canon gives people in the US better prices because they're a larger market as they have a higher population, which translates to a greater volume of sales perhaps...


It's horrible - I've brought it up several times, we are price gouged about 10% over the EU whereas Sony and Nikon are much better. The prices are decided by Canon Europe, not Canon UK or Canon Japan. But, there are reliable grey market importers. Canon LP-E6NH batteries cost at current exchange rates $150.


----------



## kaihp (Mar 17, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> These calculations show that an EOS R5 coupled with the RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM will cost a US buyer around 10% of the median annual income, whereas in the UK it's a whopping 25%, and around 21% in Australia.


If the 25% of median income is representative of the EU as well, then we have a fairly good reason why Canon choose to give preference to the US market over EU & GB.


----------



## ohm (Mar 18, 2022)

Two years of failing businesses, burning cities, lay offs, and shortages caused by all of the above, and we are worried about price hikes? It is inevitable and it will hit all aspects of our lives as it will hit every business. Prepare to cinch your belt and your wallet.


----------



## ERHP (Mar 21, 2022)

So the 100-500 in Japan ... 
407,000 Japanese Yen equals
3,412.84 United States Dollar

Based on the latest google conversion anyways.


----------



## Nemorino (Mar 26, 2022)

camnostic:
Sony Joins in Raising Prices


----------



## tyreman (Mar 29, 2022)

I never post much but I have sold off my 1DX and 1DXII, 100-400 L
Been using Canon since 1971 it was good run but I am done now
Tired of changing out gear to keep pace with "new" stuff that keeps getting dearer every year
change camera, lens, even flash/mount is newer on mirrorless I think
Keep what you got DSLR ? by planned outdating it'll be worth little in awhile as will these new mirrorless ones even worse
Canon basically changed their lens again now with introduction of new mirrorless cameras we can debate the necessity of this
Then you are basically testing the new mirrorless units and they respond with FW fixes
For me its just to much to invest for casual shooting, i never shoot video........... I just can't justify the cost any more and I certainly could manage to do so


----------



## LogicExtremist (Mar 29, 2022)

With the mess that the world is in currently, everyone is raising prices on everything because of cost increases in the supply chain, raw materials, freight and logistics.

The problem with Canon is that they came into the game with an RF platform that was mostly overpriced. When a a price is increased by 10%, affordable items become a bit less affordable, and overpriced items become 10% more overpriced than they were before, its simple math.

It's early days yet to claim a Canon victory over its current leading market share, as we have no idea what the RF platform will offer at the entry and mid levels, which is the majority of the photography market. The uncertainty may be working in Canon's favour in the short term, as the potential in what they might deliver is still alluring, but as time passes, that turns into a negative.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 29, 2022)

tyreman said:


> I never post much but I have sold off my 1DX and 1DXII, 100-400 L
> Been using Canon since 1971 it was good run but I am done now
> Tired of changing out gear to keep pace with "new" stuff that keeps getting dearer every year
> change camera, lens, even flash/mount is newer on mirrorless I think
> ...


That makes sense. Better also sell off your car, computer, phone, TV, and anything else electronic. They’re all improving over time and the current models are quickly becoming outdated and worth less. #Luddite


----------



## LogicExtremist (Mar 29, 2022)

tyreman said:


> I never post much but I have sold off my 1DX and 1DXII, 100-400 L
> Been using Canon since 1971 it was good run but I am done now
> Tired of changing out gear to keep pace with "new" stuff that keeps getting dearer every year
> change camera, lens, even flash/mount is newer on mirrorless I think
> ...


Hmm, Neuro's comment was a bit harsh, but I get where he's coming from... 

I've noticed people in various posts mix up a products *obsolescence *with the product being *superseded*, but these are not the same thing, and there's a huge difference.

When a product is obsolete, it's no longer usable, the dictionary definition is "_no longer in use or no longer useful_". This is a descriptor of functionality.
When a product is superseded, that just means that it's been replaced by something newer, and implies nothing about functionality. This term only describes an event in time.
If people listen to the marketing hype from Canon, the usual menagerie of YouTube 'influencers' and all the gear heads out there on forums, they would quite likely be under false impression that they must keep up with the latest gear, that mirrorless cameras do everything better than DSLRs, and that old gear is no good.

Marketing is a devious and manipulative game; create the demand that doesn't exist, and then provide the products to satisfy the artificially created demand.
The only pressure to buy RF gear comes from the self-imposed need to keep up with the latest. That's fine for tech buffs who enjoy owning the latest gear, or for anyone who gains a benefit from upgrading. When the need to have the latest gear just stems from the psychological fear of missing out, that's when the emotional manipulation of marketing does its dirty work. 

If a person is upgrading from EF-S of M crop sensor gear to full frame, or just coming into photography as a serious hobby and wanting to start on full frame gear (lucky you), Canon forces them onto the RF platform, as it makes no sense to start off and invest in a superseded platform that won't go anywhere. Even then, they may buy an RF body, and there are plenty of really good EF lenses that can be bought second-hand from people selling off their gear to buy RF equivalents.


----------



## SteveC (Mar 29, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> Hmm, Neuro's comment was a bit harsh, but I get where he's coming from...
> 
> I've noticed people in various posts mix up a products *obsolescence *with the product being *superseded*, but these are not the same thing, and there's a huge difference.
> 
> ...



Or another way to look at "superseded" is that what you have is no longer the best item out there (at whatever it is, that it does). That could be a big problem in some areas of endeavor (e.g., breaking codes, for which you need the fastest computer out there), which would render it "obsolete" as well as "superseded."

But photography is not like this. It is at least as much about the Indian as it is about the arrow. A good photographer can get something worthwhile out of truly ancient equipment. A bad one will get at best mediocre results out of the latest whiz-bang gear.

Unless you're struggling to get mediocre results out of the best gear, there's _no actual need_ to dump your old gear (unless it's actually broken--which could be an issue even for gear that isn't superseded, yet) for new gear.

I remember a co-worker of mine who, in the early nineties dumped thousands of dollars into the best PC money could buy at the time (rather than buying a machine half as good for one tenth the cost). He was actually furious a couple of months later when something better came out. What the Hell did he expect? But he was chasing "the best gear" for bragging rights, rather than "gear that can do the job well."


----------



## tyreman (Mar 30, 2022)

I have used lots of old gear over the years I agree it still works 
I doubt though most use film cameras now do they but they still work right?
My main point was basically mirrorless will be put in the forefront with this maker now and no further DSLR stuff
forthcoming from them. 'Cept existing stocks
Financially If you choose to keep their DSLR camera for just a few years from new its becomes an even faster depreciating item on the used market 
Cause people want mirrorless doesn't matter what the DSLR can do.
People wont get a DSLR for the most part they will go to a mirrorless
As for the old EF Lens with adaptor on new mirrorless but camera to lens communication wont be the total same
But you can do it I agree
Have a great day


----------



## koenkooi (Mar 31, 2022)

tyreman said:


> [..]
> As for the old EF Lens with adaptor on new mirrorless but camera to lens communication wont be the total same
> [..]


Yes, it's actually better in the case of the EF-RF adapter


----------

