Make all DSLRs with metal bodies, how would it hurt?

RichA wrote:
1. They'd all be better for it.

And then the makers would go out of business when the competitor came
out with cheaper cameras that used quality plastics.

2. Solid construction doesn't have to mean hugely heavier.

Nor does it have to mean metal.

3. Costs would be higher, likely $800/ea.

And that's how you go out of business.

--
Ray Fischer

RichA wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:

1. *They'd all be better for it.

And then the makers would go out of business when the competitor came
out with cheaper cameras that used quality plastics.

Sony is already selling DSLRs at a loss in order to gain market
share.

So you claim.

$2k for a 24 megapixel FF versus $6000 from Canon and $8000
from Nikon.

Are you really so stupid that you don't know the difference between
production cost and retail price?

Well, yes, you are. Canon starts at under $3000 for a FF dSLR and I
bet that Nikon is trying to come out with a competitor.

--
Ray Fischer

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 11:20 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:
1. They'd all be better for it.

And then the makers would go out of business when the competitor came
out with cheaper cameras that used quality plastics.

Sony is already selling DSLRs at a loss in order to gain market
share. $2k for a 24 megapixel FF versus $6000 from Canon and $8000
from Nikon. What exactly will change?


great who wants to buy a sony...as if they are trying to monopolise the
world as it is.......