If nothing else, it will be very interesting to see what price they actually list it at and then to see who bites.
2 years ago
45
I'd personally bite at $3K, but I don't even want a mirrorless camera, so $3K is obviously too low. I think $4K would be a good happy medium and could potentially gain Nikon a lot of market share.
I believe the Z8 will be between US$4,000 to US$4,500.
That's all great, but......How many D850s do you think Nikon would have sold if they priced at at $5000? $1500 gap, right? No way this Z8 is 5k. I will eat crow if Nikon is that stupid.
I agree and this might be one time where if they think its a 4k camera, price it $5 under and put it in the 3s. That would send a pretty strong message and sell a lot of cameras.
the rumoured price is 4600 euros, that translate into 3800 USD ...
I would not be surprised that we see USD 3600 and EUR 4400.Let's hope the current crew at Nikon aren't looking for instant gratification and are in fact playing the long game. Sure, they'll sell some cameras at $5K, but I wouldn't be surprised if putting the $5K number out on the street was to simply get everyone thinking high. Get customers to mentally commit to spending $5K, then the drop the Z8 at a much lower price, absolutely guaranteeing that they'll buy it and also selling them some Z lenses in the process, further locking them in.
Nikon's main focus, long term, should be market share. Their immediate goal should be a legit competitor to the A1 and R5 at the same size/weight form factor (the rumored Z8 appears to be) at a lower price, then completely overwhelm ShillTube with your puppets. This strategy worked with the Z9. Don't stop there. Get more people locked into your ecosystem. At least get your damn defectors back.
Nikons main focus should be long term sustainability in a shrinking market. A combination of profitability and marketshare. Low price purely to move units doesn’t make sense. This isn’t going to be a camera for the masses anyway. It should be priced and marketed accordingly.
It does when it will force those consumers to purchase your Z lenses at full pop, effectively locking them into your brand, most likely long term.
I’m not certain the Gillette model applies here. Lenses aren’t a consumable. There will be those who only ever purchase a single lens, providing little recovery on the lost margin. Others might not buy an additional lens at all. A significant number of Z8 purchasers will looking to upgrade, or for a second body. Lenses can also be purchased used.
In Nikon’s shoes I’d prioritize sustainable. The market for this level of camera isn’t overly price sensitive to begin with and it’s easier to reduce the price than to raise it later on in the product cycle.
Agreed. But they are an anchor.
Sustainability automatically implies "long term". This requires that you stop bleeding customers. They can do this with the Z8 AND bring back customers they have lost to Sony and Canon. But they'll need a very attractive price to do it.
On the pricing of the Z???? coming out, I'm afraid I just don't understand. I do not consider myself poor, but for sure not rich either, just very comfortable I suppose, and cannot understand how camera manufacturers can stay in business by only making cameras in the pro price range. Nikon already has models in this price category. And it was originally kicked around that the mysterious Z8 might be a replacement for the D500. But it's not common to replace a $1500 camera with a $4500 camera. I know a fair amount of people who dabble in the hobby and a couple of pros that live in the area, but I'll pretty well guarantee that none of them would even consider purchasing a $4500 camera body. How many pros are there in the world to support this many expensive camera bodies.
But hopefully they are aware of the market.Pros make up a very small percentage of those buying the most expensive camera gear, and the camera manufacturers know that. Hobbyists with a lot of disposable income are the target market.
So there are thousands of hobbyists that will pay that for a camera body? Guess I live in the wrong part of the world.
Absolutely.
Pros in the US use gear as a business expense. They are not paying $4500 for the body.
What do you mean "They are not paying $4500 for the body"?