CompactFlash or CompactFlop?
"I paid $470 at Amazon for a Canon S10 with extra 16 MB memory card. Still that's a lot of money for most people, especially when they can get by for a while with a cheap film point and shoot, or even a disposable. There are cheaper substitutes for all the digital products using flash memory."
Lucius,
I wanted to remark on your statements.
First thanks for considering CompactFlash in your purchase
and for contributing to SanDisk earnings recently.
Canon makes some excellent and rock solid digital cameras.
I bought my sister the Canon A50 last Christmas.
One comment I wished to make regarding SanDisk and the digital photo market (which is driving CompactFlash card sales) is that many people who are making camera purchases in the mid- and upper-echelon price range are the early adopters and highly motivated hobbyist. The price points currently prevent mass adoption of these devices. However, anyone with a PC is a potential SanDisk customer. These people will purchase a digital camera because of the Internet and because they are both comfortable and familiar with image manipulation, the PC interface and storage on the PC. They are looking to enhance their PC experience. And cheap film point-and-shoots and disposable cameras are not what they are interested in as alternatives when they contemplate a digital camera purchase. The options are a digital camera vs. nothing at all. Through 1999 the choices were either an expensive digital camera with excellent resoluton or a slightly less expensive (but still expensive) digital camera with average resolution. This year the options are totally different.
I saw today, for example, that Target is carrying the HP Photo Smart 315 for only $299.99 at retail.
digitalkamera.de
This is not a sale price. The camera has 2.1 megapixel resolution, an 8 MB SanDisk CompactFlash card and a fixed focus lens. I dare say that this is a very tempting entry level purchase especially when you consider that only 2 years ago a reasonably solid XGA (1024 x 768 resolution = 0.7 megapixel) digital camera would cost about $500.00 at retail.
In many ways things are progressing much like Eli predicted. Price points for point-and-shoot digitals are tumbling down and the "sticker shock" that one experienced not too long ago is now less of a hindrance to a digital camera purchase. Personally, I would still balk at a 1.3 megapixel Sony Cybershot for $499.99 (also at Target) and $199.99 for a Lexar 64 MB CompactFlash card (CompUSA), but a sub-$300 2.1 megapixel camera that works out of the box is almost getting to be a no-brainer. Similarly, Kodak DC 215's (1.0 megapixel) were clearanced from Target the past week or so at $179.99. For someone interested in taking the first step toward an enjoyable digital photography experience, price is becoming less and less of an obstacle.
My hopes for the holiday season are as follows. Last year and the year before people probably splurged on bigger ticket electronics like new PC's, big screen TV's and the like. This year they will think, "Hey, maybe I should lower my expectations a bit and just get one of those digital cameras for some holiday pictures that I can e-mail to Ma and Pa Kettle (who got a PC last year, too)."
I think that the current offerings give people the option to test the waters without risking an arm and a leg. The upper end cameras may still have a good holiday season, too. And while I don't know the demographics of middle- and upper-tier digital camera purchasers, I suspect that many are baby boomers with more in the way of discretionary income who are looking for a gift with that allows them not only freedom of artistic expression, great utility & a very high enjoyment quotient, but also enhances their PC experience. I hope many have sufficient discretionary income not only for a personal purchase, but also for there 20-something and 30-something kids living a few states away with the grandkids or grandkids to be.
MMC is a different story we can chat about another day.
All IMHO,
Ausdauer |
