Middle Class Cameras

Re "standard mainstream" in regard to enthusiast cameras, here's how Canon Japan classifies its own cameras, translated from Japanese per its domestic market website:

'Professional': EOS-1DX Mark III
'High Amateur': EOS R3, EOS R5, EOS R6 Mark II, EOS R6, EOS R, EOS 5D Mark IV
'Middle Class': EOS R7, EOS R10, EOS RP, EOS 6D Mark II, EOS 90D
'Entry': EOS Kiss M2 (M50 Mark II), EOS M200, EOS Kiss X10i (Rebel T8i), EOS Kiss X10 (Rebel SL3), EOS Kiss X90 (Rebel T7)

Mike
(Hat tip to Oren Grad)

Original contents copyright 2023 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)

Featured Comments from:

Stéphane Bosman: "Isn't that simply too many models? Five entry-level cameras! Twelve models for people who are between consumer and pro! Really?"

Comments

[John Holmes]

And not a Sony in the mix.

[Jon Erickson]

I note the "professional" camera has the fewest megapixels. It is also outmatched in many respects by the newer R3. Canon must be giving a lot of weight to the 1DX's best-of-breed optical viewfinder, which sadly may also be last-of-breed.

[Craig]

It would be kind of amusing, I suppose, if some internal document were to be leaked from a major camera manufacturer in which their product line was divided as follows:

1. Cameras for the Rolex crowd who think owning a camera that costs as much as a car will enhance their social status
2. Cameras for people who think more expensive gear will make them artists
3. Cameras for people who know how to read an MTF chart but are otherwise reasonably normal
4. Cameras for people who just want to point and shoot and always center the subject in the frame

[John Krumm]

Shows that they are still likely working on a mirrorless replacement for the 1DX. An R1X or something like that.

[Arg]

A few years ago I saw an interview with a Sony executive who described the A7 II (or was it III) as an entry level camera. That surprised me.

[s.wolters]

Juzaphoto.com has overviews of all the cameras and lenses that are available. It looks as if Canon killed their M-line already.

[Bear.]

A ‘professional’ camera is often less about image quality than about the ruggedness of the gear, which needs to operate reliably in all conditions and under all sorts of abuse…. Most press photos won’t be published for critical viewing anyway. If I can swallow the cost of all new glass, I’m thinking of going in one jump from a D3 (2008 and still going strong) for a Z9 and just run one system instead of a low rez high-speed and a high rez lower speed, which I do now.

[Luke]

Well, Craig, I'm pretty sure my social status would improve if I could afford a car worth as much as my camera.

[Speed]

Usually a shrinking market will result in fewer products. Or so I thought ...

The Profit Potential Of Shrinking Markets Is Rooted In How Firms Respond To Competitor Actions In The Marketplace

https://business.rice.edu/wisdom/peer-reviewed-research/firms-profit-while-markets-shrink

There's a lot of, "On one hand ... On the other hand".

[KeithB]

s.wolters:
If there was any doubt about killing the M line, look at the just announced R50.

[J T K]

Well, actually my camera gear IS worth more than my car according to my insurance carrier. The car is an eighteen years old Lexus, but none of my cameras are Leica and I don't wear a watch at all. (although I do have some watches in a draw)

[Dan Khong]

I thought I could qualify as High Amateur but my EOS RP puts me in "Middle Class". I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.

[Rick Denney]

Professional for whom? Journalists? Sports photographers? Wedding photographers? Product photographers? Landscape photographers who sell prints at the local street flea market? There are so many use cases for even just professional cameras that I don't think Canon's extensive product line accommodates them all by any means.

And not everyone--even amongst amateurs--who buys an expensive camera is wealth-signaling like (some) Rolex buyers. Some of us paid a lot because we had specific requirements that only some cameras fulfilled. As for me, my Pentax 645z (with no Canon equivalent) was the cheapest camera that fulfilled the requirements of one of my use cases (landscape prints at 16x20 or 20x24 where the illusion of unending detail is preserved even on close viewing), and that allowed me to work the way I wanted to work. If I was wealth-signaling, maybe I'd have bought a Leica S2 at the time. But good, affordable lenses was also a requirement.

I'm glad I'm not a pro. Depending on photography for groceries is no picnic, and requires considerations disconnected from personal expression, even if that expression is limited to technical skill. Which, in all honesty, mine probably is.

[LARRY]

I'd suggest someone in management reduce this models list by half. Having four levels is fine for consumers, but simplifying the catalog should produce efficiency and savings in production, inventorying and distribution, and consumers would probably be better able to discern which camera to buy.

[Hugh]

“Too many models”?
Canon generally know how to sell cameras in different markets. The Rebel and Kiss/M cameras will be gone soon.