A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Metal cameras, what happened to them?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 14th 06, 02:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?

It's true that only the medium and high priced DSLRs today are metal.
The lower-end models are plastic. So what happened to DSLRs and
formerly, some SLRs? What happened in the years 1983 and later?
The camera makers found out the miracle of plastic allowed them to
fabricate SLRs out of plastic and sell them to people on the cheap.
Or was it actually cheap?
No, it wasn't. Metal cameras (the OM-1, OM-2, Nikon FE-2 and FM-2)
jumped pretty radically in price just after introduction of plastic
(like the T50 Canon) SLRs. The OM-1 went from about $225 to over $300
in one shot. At the time, it was a pretty big jump.

IMO, something happened to the economics of SLRs that made the
companies grab for more profit by using plastic and reserving metal
for the higher-end cameras and jacking-up the prices of pre-existing
"entry level" metal SLRs. Remember the Pentax K-1000? It was
primarily metal and cost about $175 for the body prior to the
introduction of plastic SLRs..

Today, if you want a metal DSLR, you are looking at around $1100 just
for a body for a Canon. Nikon you are looking at $1700.

So what cause this jump in the average price of a "metal" camera?
Some industry watchers had speculated that it was Canon and Nikon's
reaction to the growing use of aftermarket lenses, which sapped
profitability of SLR systems both companies had. In order to make
money on a system, lenses had to be bought because the bodies were
just too inexpensive to profit off, especially when sold with a $100
50mm "prime" lens, which most kits came with in those days.

IMO, it was the rapid increase in the Japanese standard of living.
It forced them to find a way of preventing inflation from driving the
price of cameras (SLRS) beyond the reach of too many people.

So, they did raise the prices of metal ones, the market was obviously
still there, but they introduced plastic ones because they needed to
preserve the low-end market and maintain overall profitability.
There was nothing preventing the Japanese from introducing plastic
SLRs in 1970, except that they weren't faced with the kind of economic
pressures (opportunities?) they found 15 years later.
-Rich
  #2  
Old January 14th 06, 03:26 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?

They rusted.

--
Måns Rullgård

  #3  
Old January 14th 06, 03:43 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?


"Rich" wrote in message
...
It's true that only the medium and high priced DSLRs today are metal.
The lower-end models are plastic. So what happened to DSLRs and
formerly, some SLRs? What happened in the years 1983 and later?
The camera makers found out the miracle of plastic allowed them to
fabricate SLRs out of plastic and sell them to people on the cheap.




I used to be a big fan of mag-alloy, but having owned a 'plastic' (actually,
a composite fibre reinforced material) dslr for a year or so I've changed my
mind.

'plastic' shrugs off the sort of minor knocks and abrasions that would soon
have a metal camera looking shabby, and let's not forget the tendency for
modern clothing to produce bucketful of static electricity - the 'plastic'
camera makes a great insulator against static charge.

Of course, there is 'plastic' and 'plastic' - but a well made composite
plastic body on a solid steel subframe is a better choice than magnesium
alloy, imo.


  #4  
Old January 14th 06, 05:30 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?


"Rich" wrote in message
...
It's true that only the medium and high priced DSLRs today are metal.
The lower-end models are plastic. So what happened to DSLRs and
formerly, some SLRs? What happened in the years 1983 and later?
The camera makers found out the miracle of plastic allowed them to
fabricate SLRs out of plastic and sell them to people on the cheap.
Or was it actually cheap?
No, it wasn't. Metal cameras (the OM-1, OM-2, Nikon FE-2 and FM-2)
jumped pretty radically in price just after introduction of plastic
(like the T50 Canon) SLRs. The OM-1 went from about $225 to over $300
in one shot. At the time, it was a pretty big jump.

IMO, something happened to the economics of SLRs that made the
companies grab for more profit by using plastic and reserving metal
for the higher-end cameras and jacking-up the prices of pre-existing
"entry level" metal SLRs. Remember the Pentax K-1000? It was
primarily metal and cost about $175 for the body prior to the
introduction of plastic SLRs..

Today, if you want a metal DSLR, you are looking at around $1100 just
for a body for a Canon. Nikon you are looking at $1700.

So what cause this jump in the average price of a "metal" camera?
Some industry watchers had speculated that it was Canon and Nikon's
reaction to the growing use of aftermarket lenses, which sapped
profitability of SLR systems both companies had. In order to make
money on a system, lenses had to be bought because the bodies were
just too inexpensive to profit off, especially when sold with a $100
50mm "prime" lens, which most kits came with in those days.

IMO, it was the rapid increase in the Japanese standard of living.
It forced them to find a way of preventing inflation from driving the
price of cameras (SLRS) beyond the reach of too many people.

So, they did raise the prices of metal ones, the market was obviously
still there, but they introduced plastic ones because they needed to
preserve the low-end market and maintain overall profitability.
There was nothing preventing the Japanese from introducing plastic
SLRs in 1970, except that they weren't faced with the kind of economic
pressures (opportunities?) they found 15 years later.
-Rich


I don't buy it. In many cases (no pun intended) plastic actually has a lot
of advantages over metal, and as someone else said, there's plastic and
there's plastic. Actually, metal bodies may be produced mostly for people
who "assume" they are better, and they charge for it. I mean, if you could
pick up a plastic DSLR and flex it like a plastic notebook computer I'd side
with you, but that's just not the case.

And I can't believe the reason has to do with buying off brand lenses.
People have been buying off brand lenses for their SLR's for years, and I
really don't see Nikon or Canon freaking out about it. Just forces the
manufacturers to make their OEM lenses worth what you pay for them.

I predict we'll soon see carbon fiber used a lot in high end DSLR's, and
that stuff ain't cheap.


  #5  
Old January 14th 06, 06:27 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?


"Sheldon" wrote in message
...

I predict we'll soon see carbon fiber used a lot in high end DSLR's, and
that stuff ain't cheap.


Yes it is.
The cost may be significant if you're making a yacht or an aeroplane, but in
quantities required for cameras, its for-nothing.

--
Jeff R.


  #6  
Old January 14th 06, 11:17 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?

Man:
You sit here, dear.

Wife:
All right.

Man:
Morning!

Waitress:
Morning!

Man:
Well, what've you got?

Waitress:
Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and plastic;
egg bacon and plastic; egg bacon sausage and plastic; plastic bacon sausage
and plastic; plastic egg plastic plastic bacon and plastic; plastic sausage
plastic plastic bacon plastic tomato and plastic;

Vikings:
Plastic plastic plastic plastic...

Waitress:
...plastic plastic plastic egg and plastic; plastic plastic plastic
plastic plastic plastic baked beans plastic plastic plastic...

Vikings:
Plastic! Lovely plastic! Lovely plastic!

Waitress:
...or Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a
Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate,
brandy and with a fried egg on top and plastic.

Wife:
Have you got anything without plastic?

Waitress:
Well, there's plastic egg sausage and plastic, that's not got much
plastic in it.

Wife:
I don't want ANY plastic!

Man:
Why can't she have egg bacon plastic and sausage?

Wife:
THAT'S got plastic in it!

Man:
Hasn't got as much plastic in it as plastic egg sausage and plastic,
has it?

Vikings:
Plastic plastic plastic plastic... (Crescendo through next few
lines...)

Wife:
Could you do the egg bacon plastic and sausage without the plastic
then?

Waitress:
Urgghh!

Wife:
What do you mean 'Urgghh'? I don't like plastic!

Vikings:
Lovely plastic! Wonderful plastic!

Waitress:
Shut up!

Vikings:
Lovely plastic! Wonderful plastic!

Waitress:
Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't have egg bacon
plastic and sausage without the plastic.

Wife:
I don't like plastic!

Man:
Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your plastic. I love it. I'm
having plastic plastic plastic plastic plastic plastic plastic beaked beans
plastic plastic plastic and plastic!

Vikings:
Plastic plastic plastic plastic. Lovely plastic! Wonderful plastic!

Waitress:
Shut up!! Baked beans are off.

Man:
Well could I have her plastic instead of the baked beans then?

Waitress:
You mean plastic plastic plastic plastic plastic plastic... (but it is
too late and the Vikings drown her words)

Vikings:
(Singing elaborately...) Plastic plastic plastic plastic. Lovely
plastic! Wonderful plastic! Plastic pla-a-a-a-a-astic plastic
pla-a-a-a-a-astic plastic. Lovely plastic! Lovely plastic! Lovely plastic!
Lovely plastic! Lovely plastic! Plastic plastic plastic plastic!



  #7  
Old January 14th 06, 12:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?


"Steve Franklin" wrote in message
...
Man:
You sit here, dear.


snip lovely image

Thank you, Steve.


  #8  
Old January 14th 06, 01:46 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?

In u,
Jeff R scribed:
"Steve Franklin" wrote in message
...
Man:
You sit here, dear.


snip lovely image

Thank you, Steve.


cue Band of the Grenadier Guards
He he! Me too, although I doubt the OP will 'get it' as he both lives on the
wrong side of the Pond, and gives every appearance of being an anglophobe.
;-)


Nigel


  #9  
Old January 14th 06, 04:19 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?

Sheldon wrote:
"Rich" wrote in message
...
It's true that only the medium and high priced DSLRs today are metal.
The lower-end models are plastic. So what happened to DSLRs and
formerly, some SLRs? What happened in the years 1983 and later?
The camera makers found out the miracle of plastic allowed them to
fabricate SLRs out of plastic and sell them to people on the cheap.
Or was it actually cheap?
No, it wasn't. Metal cameras (the OM-1, OM-2, Nikon FE-2 and FM-2)
jumped pretty radically in price just after introduction of plastic
(like the T50 Canon) SLRs. The OM-1 went from about $225 to over $300
in one shot. At the time, it was a pretty big jump.


Metal prices change. Drastically and quickly. This drives the change
to other materials in many, many situations.

IMO, something happened to the economics of SLRs that made the
companies grab for more profit by using plastic and reserving metal
for the higher-end cameras and jacking-up the prices of pre-existing
"entry level" metal SLRs. Remember the Pentax K-1000? It was
primarily metal and cost about $175 for the body prior to the
introduction of plastic SLRs..

Today, if you want a metal DSLR, you are looking at around $1100 just
for a body for a Canon. Nikon you are looking at $1700.


It's also a fantastically complex body (internally) compared to the
earlier models. This drives up cost signficantly, as the demands on the
casting process have skyrocketed.

So what cause this jump in the average price of a "metal" camera?


Price of raw material and increase in complexity. As well, the
quantity produced has some effect, like you said.

Some industry watchers had speculated that it was Canon and Nikon's
reaction to the growing use of aftermarket lenses, which sapped
profitability of SLR systems both companies had. In order to make
money on a system, lenses had to be bought because the bodies were
just too inexpensive to profit off, especially when sold with a $100
50mm "prime" lens, which most kits came with in those days.


This is a reasonable theory. Its been a long-standing practice in
industry to sell the starter component at cost and reap profits on
accessory sales. Only someone internal to the company could verify or
disprove this theory.

IMO, it was the rapid increase in the Japanese standard of living.
It forced them to find a way of preventing inflation from driving the
price of cameras (SLRS) beyond the reach of too many people.

So, they did raise the prices of metal ones, the market was obviously
still there, but they introduced plastic ones because they needed to
preserve the low-end market and maintain overall profitability.
There was nothing preventing the Japanese from introducing plastic
SLRs in 1970, except that they weren't faced with the kind of economic
pressures (opportunities?) they found 15 years later.
-Rich


That's one way of looking at it.

So what's the point of all this? You still whine and complain about
plastic.

Dave
  #10  
Old January 14th 06, 05:20 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Metal cameras, what happened to them?

Jeff R wrote:
"Sheldon" wrote in message
...

I predict we'll soon see carbon fiber used a lot in high end DSLR's, and
that stuff ain't cheap.


Yes it is.
The cost may be significant if you're making a yacht or an aeroplane, but in
quantities required for cameras, its for-nothing.


I suspect the demands for detail in the moldings make carbon fiber
almost impossible. Having significant fiber in the plastic makes the
casting process extremely difficult.

Dave
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to Buy a Digital Camera [email protected] Digital Photography 0 January 18th 05 04:39 PM
A Review: "Collecting and Using Classic Cameras ", Matanle Paul 35mm Photo Equipment 5 September 9th 04 01:20 AM
Best Price on Digital Cameras. Joe Walsh Digital Photo Equipment For Sale 0 August 18th 04 09:52 AM
Fuji S2 and Metz 44 Mz-2 Flash elchief In The Darkroom 3 April 7th 04 10:20 AM
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? Michael Weinstein, M.D. In The Darkroom 13 January 24th 04 10:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.