Cost of camera features in DSLRs?

[TXForester]

I understand that producing entry level, enthusiast and FF cameras varies in cost. For the consumer that can be beneficial if you can get a body at a lower retail value if it meets the customer's needs.

This makes perfect sense with physical features. The R&D, tooling, resources, energy etc. are all factors in physical features. If you have two models that are similar, but differ in a features, such as sensors or articulated LCD vs. fixed LCD, then the cost will obviously be different.

What I don't understand and would like to know is why are features based on firmware not present in some models? Obviously firmware related to different physical features are different. Firmware for a single feature that is physically different in various models would also differ (such as two different LCDs in different bodies). This would affect the cost of writing and implementing the firmware, but maybe not by much.

But why would code in firmware be missing if it does essentially the same thing in all the bodies? For example, how much different would the coding for mirror lockup be in various bodies? Is it that much different that writing the code actually affects the cost of a body by an appreciable amount? It's not like the engineering feat that it is for film cameras where you had to turn the knob to lift and lock the mirror.

Before somebody says the code in the mirror lockup example can't be implemented in all bodies, I'll say that is wrong. If the mirror has to be up to take make the exposure, then code for lockup is possible. I can back that up by pointing out hacks that adds the feature to bodies without lock up.

Thanks for any input.

 

[JoeV]

If you assume for the moment that the high-end camera is made with only a modest profit margin, then it makes some sense. But actually, most of these cameras, even the low-end ones, are made with enormous profit margins.

And so then, removing features from the lower-end models, only to include them in higher-end models, serves to justify the exorbitant mark-up, and maintains the suspension of disbelief required of the consumer that the higher-end products are "worth it" in some cost::benefit analysis.

~Joe

 

[Aristophanes]

Because system on chip is vastly cheaper but can do everything. So leaving features out allows for price point differentiation. It is purposeful marketing starvation.

It is emulated on camera bodies by physical, tactile controls with inclusion or exclusion depending on price points.

 

[TXForester]

Because system on chip is vastly cheaper but can do everything. So leaving features out allows for price point differentiation. It is purposeful marketing starvation.

I'll buy that explanation, but I'm still left with why leave out mirror lockup? It's one of most basic tools for achieving relatively vibration free exposures. Are people who buy entry level cameras not expected to care about image quality?

 

[robbeiflex]

One word: Marketing!

 

[GaryLH]

Model differentiation.. If u are savy enough to know about mirror lock up, then the product managers are hoping it will steer u to the more expensive camera body. Same thing w/ no metering of any type for Nikon ais lens on the bottom feeder camera body but if memory serves me around the d7xxx model, u get average and maybe spot metering w/ full manual or aperture priority.

It is marketing ploy to get u to buy upscale as others have said. If u don't know any better, u buy the cheapest body that has the features u are interested in.

Gary

 

[Spanik]

I'll buy that explanation, but I'm still left with why leave out mirror lockup? It's one of most basic tools for achieving relatively vibration free exposures. Are people who buy entry level cameras not expected to care about image quality?

Afraid it is that way. Easier to sell some kind of stabilisation as this is sufficient monetisable voodoo compared to a tripod and mirror lock-up.

OTOH I have it and rarely use it as mirrors are so well damped that it seldom is an issue. Only body I do use it with is a P6/Kiev60. But on something like a Mamiya 645 you need to get a tripod because long exposure times before mirror lock-up helps.

Anyway, who cares about that for a selfie?

 

[David Hughes]

I'll buy that explanation, but I'm still left with why leave out mirror lockup? It's one of most basic tools for achieving relatively vibration free exposures. Are people who buy entry level cameras not expected to care about image quality?

Well, um, look at the entry level lenses they are happy with...

Regards, David

 

[TXForester]

Well, um, look at the entry level lenses they are happy with...

Regards, David

True, but I'd rather buy an entry level body with the basics and decent (for entry level) sensor, and put more of my money in lenses. Seems the best way if you are on a budget.

Also, the buyer probably doesn't download a pdf manual and pour over in details to find out a model doesn't offer the basics. They tend to look at the points the marketers use to sell the camera.

 

[David Hughes]

Hmmm, it's probably like that politician said; something about not wanting intelligent people voting for him because he wanted a majority...

Having said that, I agree with you. It would be nice if we could buy the camera and then customise the thing's software. But I'd say the same about Windows, there's a lot in it I don't need and a few bits I love to have. It would be nice to be able to sort it out for my use.

Regards, David

 

[Godfrey]

...
Before somebody says the code in the mirror lockup example can't be implemented in all bodies, I'll say that is wrong. If the mirror has to be up to take make the exposure, then code for lockup is possible. I can back that up by pointing out hacks that adds the feature to bodies without lock up.
...

Perhaps in some cases you are correct, but certainly not in all. Less expensive bodies often have simpler mirror-shutter regulation mechanisms, to reduce costs, which do not allow the camera to separate their operation into a full mirror lock-up or mirror pre-fire.

For example, way back in the day when you set the mirror lock up on a Nikon F, you had to release the shutter to lock it up, wasting an exposure. The Nikon F2 model includes an update to the mirror mechanism that allows you to manually lift the mirror with the lock up control, not wasting any film in the process.

If the Nikon F were made electronically controlled, no amount of firmware magic would enable its mirror to be locked up without wasting a frame, whereas a similarly electronically controlled F2 could have a little servomotor or solenoid to lift and lock the mirror based on a firmware command.

There are plenty of cases where a camera's feature set was trimmed or held back by a trivial change simply to price position the camera in the manufacturer's line up. It's a long-used technique to provide model differentiation and some value to buyers who are not interested in various features. I recall a common one in years past was differentiating a mid-line model from top of the line by eliminating 1/1000 shutter speed and the self timer, producing a model with only 1/500 second fastest shutter speed. IN most cases, the shutter itself was identical, but it saved a lot of money for the company in that they didn't have to QA a faster shutter speed and they could position the mid-line camera at a $50-100 savings.

Moral of the story: If you value a feature, just buy the camera that has it and don't waste time and energy belaboring over its lack. Put that time and energy into making photographs ... that's worth more than the additional feature cost you. 🙂

G

 

[Addy101]

It is so easy to blame those nasty marketing guys, but why? My gut feeling? Godfrey is right

 

[TXForester]

It is so easy to blame those nasty marketing guys, but why? My gut feeling? Godfrey is right

I'm not blaming marketing. They sell what others in the company decide is a profitable product.

Simply, mirror lock up is a basic tool. It should be on a dslr. You can cut out all sorts of other physical and software related features to create cameras at different price points without taking away basic tools. Leave in mirror lock up and take away the articulated LCD for all I care. Heck, for the first 30 years of taking photos, I didn't have an LCD. It got in the way of loading film. 😀

 

[Godfrey]

I'm not blaming marketing. They sell what others in the company decide is a profitable product.

Simply, mirror lock up is a basic tool. It should be on a dslr. You can cut out all sorts of other physical and software related features to create cameras at different price points without taking away basic tools. Leave in mirror lock up and take away the articulated LCD for all I care. Heck, for the first 30 years of taking photos, I didn't have an LCD. It got in the way of loading film. 😀

99% of all owners of lower end DSLR cameras that lack a mirror lock up feature would never miss it, never use it, likely never know it's there if it was. That same 99% love the articulated LCD. You'll never win using that strategy to try to convince a manufacturer.

Do not confuse what YOU, assumed an "aspiring amateur photographer," might find essential compared to what the average low to mid range camera buyer values. Probably 80% of that they value most you will never be interested in. And probably 90% of what you value most they could care less about. Their money in volume sales fuels your ability to buy the camera YOU want.

An amusing case in point is the Leica R8 I acquired recently. Right there on the front panel of the camera are two switches, one for first/second curtain flash sync and one for mirror lock up (prefire). When I show this lovely camera to young, aspiring photographers, 90% haven't got a clue why I'd want second curtain flash sync or mirror lock up at all. They're looking for the scene mode control ... Which doesn't exist on the camera, of course, and which I've never used on any camera that had it.

G

 

[css9450]

99% of all owners of lower end DSLR cameras that lack a mirror lock up feature would never miss it, never use it, likely never know it's there if it was. That same 99% love the articulated LCD.

I have a high-end DSLR and wish it had an articulated LCD! Man that would be nice for those pics where I have the camera 6" off the ground...

 

[icebear]

Hmmm, it's probably like that politician said; something about not wanting intelligent people voting for him because he wanted a majority...
....
Regards, David

ROFL 😀

99% of all owners of lower end DSLR cameras that lack a mirror lock up feature would never miss it, never use it, likely never know it's there if it was. That same 99% love the articulated LCD. You'll never win using that strategy to try to convince a manufacturer.
...

An amusing case in point is the Leica R8 I acquired recently. ...They're looking for the scene mode control ... Which doesn't exist on the camera, of course, and which I've never used on any camera that had it.

G

A camera without scene mode control 😱, you got to be kiddin' 😀 😀 😀

 

[Aristophanes]

I'll buy that explanation, but I'm still left with why leave out mirror lockup? It's one of most basic tools for achieving relatively vibration free exposures. Are people who buy entry level cameras not expected to care about image quality?

Mirror lock-up is a power supply issue on lower-end models. They require more capacitors and circuitry, so that's a bigger board, more cost to assemble, electrocmagnets, and so on.

 

[TXForester]

Mirror lock-up is a power supply issue on lower-end models. They require more capacitors and circuitry, so that's a bigger board, more cost to assemble, electrocmagnets, and so on.

How can it be a power supply issue? Lower end cameras have live view. First, the mirror has to be up for LV to work. Second, LV has got to suck more from the battery than mirror lockup alone. The explanation that most low end users either don't know about mirror lockup or are unlikely to use makes better sense.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Very common in broadcast business, same hardware, even firmware is same.
But different pricing for limited, standard and advanced levels of what same box is capable of.
Want more functionality and options, pay more, get activation key to unlock more.

I don't see it in cameras. At least with Canons. They have x00 and x000 consumer DSLRs. More zeros less functionality. But I believe bodies are slightly different as well.