[RonHendriks1966]

Wel overproduction during the past years made the market different. You can buy Nikon D3100 still New, wile that is some years old and many New model came after it.

[boriscleto]

Wel overproduction during the past years made the market different. You can buy Nikon D3100 still New, wile that is some years old and many New model came after it.

Nikon has always over produced. You can still buy a new D300s or D90. When I was looking to get my first DSLR in 2009 you could still buy a D40 new, and the D3000 was 2 models newer...

[Bagga_Txips]

It may also be the case that Pentax deliberately overproduces new camera bodies for first rollout. If they had only produced enough cameras for the take up percentage of their existing customer base, the cameras would have been even more expensive than the 1200 dollars being quoted here. This would negate one of Pentax's main selling points, which is that Pen taxes are always great value. So, they make a large production run, which lowers initial price, knowing that will increase interest, and benefitting from economies of scale.

Massive price drops after a year or two are part of a pattern that has been occuring for decades, especially in the field of electronic "toys", so anyone who buys anything like this shortly after launch should be aware that they are subsidising future buyers, and by buying they are accepting this. I am grateful to early adopters, they beta test the bugs away, and in the case of the K-3 mean that I will soon be able to buy for 600 dollars a camera that was pie in the sky for me when it was launched!

[magkelly]

I am grateful to early adopters, they beta test the bugs away, and in the case of the K-3 mean that I will soon be able to buy for 600 dollars a camera that was pie in the sky for me when it was launched!

Exactly. It took me like two years to be able to grab a K5II and the 18-135WR. If they were priced anything near the same as they were when they first came out I'd not have them. It's that simple. As it was because of "depreciation" I paid less than $600 bucks for both PLUS I finally got an AF 50mm out of the deal. I wasn't planning on it. I was pretty happy with my pretty K-30's but all that for less than $600? You can bet I wasted NO time in grabbing my plastic and going for it. I probably saved a grand waiting for that sweet little deal. When it comes to buying electronics patience IS a virtue. ")

[kooks]

Massive price drops after a year or two are part of a pattern that has been occuring for decades, especially in the field of electronic "toys", so anyone who buys anything like this shortly after launch should be aware that they are subsidising future buyers, and by buying they are accepting this. I am grateful to early adopters, they beta test the bugs away, and in the case of the K-3 mean that I will soon be able to buy for 600 dollars a camera that was pie in the sky for me when it was launched!

Lets hope that we can see this some how with the lenses too.. at least the 70-200 already dropped $200 ..

[starbase218]

Massive price drops after a year or two are part of a pattern that has been occuring for decades, especially in the field of electronic "toys", so anyone who buys anything like this shortly after launch should be aware that they are subsidising future buyers, and by buying they are accepting this. I am grateful to early adopters, they beta test the bugs away, and in the case of the K-3 mean that I will soon be able to buy for 600 dollars a camera that was pie in the sky for me when it was launched!

Sure, I bought a digital cable receiver with hard disk a number of years ago, the first model to feature HDMI if I'm not mistaken, and easily paid over 300 euros. Today you can pick them up for less than half the price. And the used market is being flooded with simpler models, starting as low as 35 euros.

With regard to Pentax though, I think there is more to it. Pentax cameras may be good value, but they don't hold their value as well as Canons or Nikons. You can still get a Canon 7D new for as "much" as 750 euros. Now imagine paying that much for a new K-7, which was introduced around the same time. I just did a quick search, and the asking price on used 7D's starts just above 500 euros. I saw one K-7 with an asking price of 220 euros, less than 7000 actuations and it included a lens.

Now, the 7D may be an extreme example. So let's look at the Nikon D7000. Asking prices are no lower than 400 euros. It was introduced in 2010, so let's compare it to the K-5. I have a K-5 here, which I don't actually use anymore because I got a K-3. But I don't think I would get one interested person if I asked 400 euros for it.

Which kind of leads me to another interesting observation. Everybody is saying that Canon and Nikon are so expensive. And if you look at prices new, sometimes they are (case in point: the new 7D Mk2). But over time, as you replace your body and sell of the old one, I think it might not actually matter that much, or anything at all.

The only question that remains (which may or may not be relevant to you): why do Pentax bodies lose their value so fast?

[Rondec]

Sure, I bought a digital cable receiver with hard disk a number of years ago, the first model to feature HDMI if I'm not mistaken, and easily paid over 300 euros. Today you can pick them up for less than half the price. And the used market is being flooded with simpler models, starting as low as 35 euros.

With regard to Pentax though, I think there is more to it. Pentax cameras may be good value, but they don't hold their value as well as Canons or Nikons. You can still get a Canon 7D new for as "much" as 750 euros. Now imagine paying that much for a new K-7, which was introduced around the same time. I just did a quick search, and the asking price on used 7D's starts just above 500 euros. I saw one K-7 with an asking price of 220 euros, less than 7000 actuations and it included a lens.

Now, the 7D may be an extreme example. So let's look at the Nikon D7000. Asking prices are no lower than 400 euros. It was introduced in 2010, so let's compare it to the K-5. I have a K-5 here, which I don't actually use anymore because I got a K-3. But I don't think I would get one interested person if I asked 400 euros for it.

Which kind of leads me to another interesting observation. Everybody is saying that Canon and Nikon are so expensive. And if you look at prices new, sometimes they are (case in point: the new 7D Mk2). But over time, as you replace your body and sell of the old one, I think it might not actually matter that much, or anything at all.

The only question that remains (which may or may not be relevant to you): why do Pentax bodies lose their value so fast?

Because Ricoh chooses to lower the prices on new gear over time. I bought a k3 for 1100 dollars. The current price that Ricoh is selling a new K3 for is 700 dollars. Of course, in that situation, the price for a used K3 is going to drop.

I doubt that anyone would get takers in the US on a D7000 selling for 400 euros. Looks like on Amazon you can get a new D7000 for 550 dollars, so not sure why someone would pay more than 350 to 400 for a used one (there are currently a bunch of used D7000s on sale on Amazon Marketplace for exactly that range). As far as I can tell, the used K5s are selling for really similar prices to the D7000s.

Certain cameras (lower end gear in particular) are much more likely to get discounted in order to move units. If you bought a Nikon D600 or D610 or a Canon 6D towards the beginning of their release, you would take a beating on resale value, as the new cameras are being sold for considerably less than their release prices.

Some of the downward pressure on prices may be from Sony. They seem to be able to do mirrorless cameras for quite a bit cheaper than DSLRs and that has to push Nikon and Canon to lower their prices on their full frames, so as not to be out of the same price range.

Anyway, I don't think Pentax gear is actually that different from most Canon/Nikon gear as far as holding value. Certain cameras at the top end will hold value better (D4, 1D, etc), but lower end gear not so much.

[starbase218]

Well, maybe the situation in the US is different from here. I don't know, I don't live there.

Still, I wonder why Ricoh chooses to lower the prices by so much. I mean, they are a company, they like making money. So there has to be a reason. Maybe they are not selling well otherwise, because Pentax is already a small brand and people are more inclined to buying Canon/Nikon otherwise.

Also, you are probably right that used Pentax cameras are so cheap because of the discounts on new gear. But one way or another, this causes the value to drop. So as you replace your body, you probably will lose more money. Or at least I think you will.

OTOH, you don't HAVE to replace your body.

[bladerunner6]

Because Ricoh chooses to lower the prices on new gear over time. I bought a k3 for 1100 dollars. The current price that Ricoh is selling a new K3 for is 700 dollars. Of course, in that situation, the price for a used K3 is going to drop.

I doubt that anyone would get takers in the US on a D7000 selling for 400 euros. Looks like on Amazon you can get a new D7000 for 550 dollars, so not sure why someone would pay more than 350 to 400 for a used one (there are currently a bunch of used D7000s on sale on Amazon Marketplace for exactly that range). As far as I can tell, the used K5s are selling for really similar prices to the D7000s.

Certain cameras (lower end gear in particular) are much more likely to get discounted in order to move units. If you bought a Nikon D600 or D610 or a Canon 6D towards the beginning of their release, you would take a beating on resale value, as the new cameras are being sold for considerably less than their release prices.

Some of the downward pressure on prices may be from Sony. They seem to be able to do mirrorless cameras for quite a bit cheaper than DSLRs and that has to push Nikon and Canon to lower their prices on their full frames, so as not to be out of the same price range.

Anyway, I don't think Pentax gear is actually that different from most Canon/Nikon gear as far as holding value. Certain cameras at the top end will hold value better (D4, 1D, etc), but lower end gear not so much.

I just looked at KEH:

Used D7000 EX+ is $468

Used K5 IIS LN- is $468

That is pretty darn comparable.

[starbase218]

I just looked at KEH:

Used D7000 EX+ is $468

Used K5 IIS LN- is $468

That is pretty darn comparable.

The K-5 II s is much newer than the D7000. It would be more fair to compare prices with the D7100.

edit: there's an EX+ one for $729...

[bladerunner6]

The K-5 II s is much newer than the D7000. It would be more fair to compare prices with the D7100.

edit: there's an EX+ one for $729...

I think you need to compare features more than age.

The K-5 II I s 16 megapixels, while the 7000 is also 16 megapixels. The 7200 is 24 megapixels. There are other considerations, but that is a big one in consumers minds.

Comparing to the K-3 which is also 24 megapixels is a better comparison in many ways. And that goes for $648 used LN-

[starbase218]

I think you need to compare features more than age.

The K-5 II I s 16 megapixels, while the 7000 is also 16 megapixels. The 7200 is 24 megapixels. There are other considerations, but that is a big one in consumers minds.

Comparing to the K-3 which is also 24 megapixels is a better comparison in many ways. And that goes for $648 used LN-

So you are saying that Pentax is a number of years behind Nikon feature-wise? That in itself may be reason enough for the necessity of these big discounts.

Not that I agree on megapixels being an important feature.

Btw I mentioned the D7100, not the D7200.

---------- Post added 06-21-2015 at 08:54 AM ----------

Btw, there's a 14.6MP K20D for $218, and a 12.3MP D90 for $349. Both are EX+.

[Rondec]

So you are saying that Pentax is a number of years behind Nikon feature-wise? That in itself may be reason enough for the necessity of these big discounts.

Not that I agree on megapixels being an important feature.

Btw I mentioned the D7100, not the D7200.

---------- Post added 06-21-2015 at 08:54 AM ----------

Btw, there's a 14.6MP K20D for $218, and a 12.3MP D90 for $349. Both are EX+.

Those cameras are both pretty old. Hard to tell why someone would pay 350 for a D90 when they could get a new D3100 for the same price. I don't mind used gear, but even EX+ camera bodies that are 7 years old are an ify proposition.

There certainly is a certain cachet that comes with Canon/Nikon cameras that Pentax doesn't generate presently. Perhaps when there is a full frame camera body, things will improve a little, but as of present, there is just a bigger body of users of Nikon gear and they will pay more, even for an ancient Nikon camera than for an old Pentax camera.

[bladerunner6]

So you are saying that Pentax is a number of years behind Nikon feature-wise? That in itself may be reason enough for the necessity of these big discounts.

Not that I agree on megapixels being an important feature.

Btw I mentioned the D7100, not the D7200.

---------- Post added 06-21-2015 at 08:54 AM ----------

Btw, there's a 14.6MP K20D for $218, and a 12.3MP D90 for $349. Both are EX+.

My bad about the model numbers. I do admit that changes the dynamics of the argument somewhat in your direction.

[starbase218]

Those cameras are both pretty old. Hard to tell why someone would pay 350 for a D90 when they could get a new D3100 for the same price. I don't mind used gear, but even EX+ camera bodies that are 7 years old are an ify proposition.

I have come up with several examples now, and people here react by commenting on those specific examples, somehow arguing that they are exceptions. Nevertheless, not one person has mentioned a used Canon or Nikon being offered at a lower price than a comparable Pentax body.

So maybe you can understand why I say that Pentax bodies generally lose their value faster.

And yes, I do compare cameras based on their initial release date being close together (say within 1/2 year). Because that to me is the definition of losing value: you measure it over time.