I really doubt that. The cameras that run on a continuous low volume
line are Canons and Nikons in the $4K to $8K range. At an opening bid
of $1699 the E-3 is priced a hundred bucks less than a D300 which is a
high production camera. If the E-3 is going to be assembled like a
1DMk III what are they leaving out? The 4/3 sensor could not be that
much cheaper to produce. Since the D300 outspecs the E-3 in several
areas that a salesman could easily talk about and demonstrate I would
guess that the E-3 price would drift down right away to somewhere
above the amateur pack of 10MP competition which is hovering around
the $1K to 1.2K mark. It may not slide much though. I would guess
around $1499. I think the choice that will be faced most often in a
store is going to be whether the e-3 is THAT much more desirable than
a 40D.
Winsor
Long Beach, CA
USA
On Nov 18, 2007, at 2:51 PM, Moose wrote:
> The E-3 should be a different kettle of fish. Like the high end Ns and
> Cs, it's more likely on a continuous, relatively low volume, assembly
> line intended to run for at least a couple of years - and with luck,
> many years. That gives some flexibility in production rate and the
> ability to incorporate changes as the model goes on. With the right
> combo of design quality, market success and just plain luck, the line
> can be retooled for the next model at minimal cost.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|