>It is hard for us to judge what is a reasonable price for >this camera. We do not know the research and development >costs, how those costs will be amortized over time and units, >etc.
. . . and why should we care. Just as you speculate on these things, so too do I speculate that Nikon is targeting the D4 not only at professional photographers but also at the luxury market. In other words, a $6K retail price for its own sake.
>Also, this is a true "professional" camera which >means that the purchases are expensed against a corporate >budget and represent a capital investment that will be >accounted against taxes and will be amortized over time in the >company budget. This is true whether the purchase is by a good >sized company or by an individual professional photographer. >What is sensible is what works economically in terms of the >expense versus the return. That is the analysis that every >professional has to make. My guess is that it will be sensible >for most professional who are committed to the Nikon system.
Your thoughts seem logical on their face, but there's an inherent contradiction I think. By your logic, why should Nikon not price a new pro body at $10K instead? After all, if the primary considerations include amortization, business expense deduction and so on, why stop at $6K? Frankly too, professional photographers do not automatically always look at every new body released by the system maker they prefer.
I respect your approach, but I must refrain from any further comment or expression of opinion until after an official Nikon announcement. Somehow, in this thread, I allowed myself to be sucked into a discussion about yet another rumor. Must stop that.