Fujifilm Is Raising Camera Prices By Up To $800 (theverge.com) 131
Fujifilm has raised prices on cameras and lenses across its lineup, with price hikes reaching into the hundreds of dollars. From a report: Among the hikes is an increase to the price of Fuji's ultra-popular X100VI from $1,599 to $1,799. The capable X-T5 has gone from $1,699 to $1,899. And the already very expensive GFX100 II has gone from $7,499 to $8,299 -- an $800 increase.
Increases to lens prices appear to be somewhat more modest, with bumps in the $50 to $150 range.
Increases to lens prices appear to be somewhat more modest, with bumps in the $50 to $150 range.
Fine (Score:5, Interesting)
As long as the price rises are US only, it's fine. You guys pay your winning tariffs, but don't expect the rest of us to subsidize your choices.
Re: (Score:2)
yep, that increase looks like about the amount of the tarriff on japan. So that makes sense.
The thing is when the tarriffs disappear eventually, the prices win't go down. (We saw it during covid.)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What makes you think the tariffs will disappear? The Republicans support them and the Democrats are fine with them.
Democrats aren't fine with them (Score:5, Insightful)
The news media is almost completely controlled by the Republican party these days. So much so that we've had to create new words to describe what they're doing, sane washing. So it's difficult for the Democrats to get a word in edgewise.
I remember the death panels. Back when there was talk of a public option for health insurance the Private health insurance industry spent half a trillion dollars shutting that down by scaring you with the concept of death panels for Grandma. It worked and we're now looking at cuts to Medicaid that are going to close about half the rural and suburban hospitals.
I'm saying given what the Democrats are up against and the scale of it it's not a surprise that they are having a tough time doing anything about tariffs. For what it's worth they are backing a bunch of lawsuits questioning Trump's authority here, it's painfully obvious that he's abusing emergency powers, but the courts are pretty well packed so that's probably going nowhere.
Talk to your Gen x or Boomer buddies, same thing really these days, and try to get them to stop freaking out about whatever moral panic is making them vote Republican this week. If you don't then well, better get comfortable with eating cat food in your old age. And I don't mean the fancy wet stuff
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
voters somehow stop obsessing over trans girls in sports
When it's your daughter losing to a man, you'll obsess over it too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure so it's a good thing we voted for the "$200b gestapo, 18th century economics, no civil rights and open bribery" party.
Oh and apparently by all the continued obsession I see this "problem" is not in fact "solved" by any means so I would say the OP point stands.
Re: (Score:1)
by any means so I would say the OP point stands
As does mine. I agree there would be no issue for the right if the left dropped the trans issue completely,. We should ban trans athletes completely from women's sports, just as we should ban people who think they're Jesus from telling everyone they are and they should worship them. Women have a right not to pl
Re: (Score:2)
There you go with trans people again. Are you really ok with the country spending millions on rounding up people picking fruit and doing kitchen prep work? That's the most important issue the country is facing?
Re: (Score:2)
My budget for removing from the country people who are here illegally would dwarf the DOD budget.
Re: (Score:2)
And that kind of of absolutely pants-on-head economic retardation should not be allowed within 600 miles of political power.
Making the entire nation poorer, more divided and weaker on the world stage because against the consensus of all available data because "too many brown people for my tastes"
Re: (Score:2)
No. I'm an admitted opiate user.
Not everyone on drugs is addicted to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Only your own racism causes you to believe everyone else is racist.
I have zero issues with "brown people" or people of any other color. I'm happy to have immigrants here. Legal immigrants.
As I've said on here many times, if you don't like the law, then change the law via the cherished "democratic process". In the meantime, have some respect for your cherished "democracy" and uphold the existing law.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's just be sure. I have a bill that grants amnesty to all illegal.immigrants not having a felony record and are employed.
Do You support that?
Re: (Score:2)
No. That's rewarding people for breaking the law and kicking the face of every single immigrant who came here legally.
Anyone supporting a bill like that should be shot.
Re: (Score:2)
But then they'd be legal.
You see why maybe myself or anyone else might be suspicious your motivations here. The law isn't really at issue with you deep down.
Re: (Score:2)
You can pass a law giving amnesty and removing status for ALL criminals too. Does that seem reasonable?
Hell, to people like you, it probably does.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, sometimes it does. I believe one of our last couple presidents commuted the sentence of non-violent marijuana offenders in prison.
Not all laws are the same, we made them up, we can decide which ones are worse than others.
You have decided that the punishment for living in America, having a job, probably having a family and not committing felonies is that you should be kicked out, no questions asked.
Amnesty is such a out there left wing crazy idea that only fuckin out there weirdo like... oh Ronnie Reag
Re: (Score:2)
Yes
I knew it!
You have decided that the punishment for living in America, having a job, probably having a family and not committing felonies is that you should be kicked out, no questions asked.
Only for those who came here illegally.
....Ronnie Reagan would consider such sacrilegious actions.
Reagan...that traitorous California piece of shit deserved a bullet, and it's too bad that motherfucker didn't die when he got one.
Again, I'm not anti-immigration. Under my policy, the following would happen:
1). Anyone here illegally has 72 hours to leave voluntarily, no harm, no foul. If they fail to leave, then, if and when caught, they would be completely dispossessed, imprisoned for ten years, and then deported with a permanent bar on re-entry for any re
Re:Democrats aren't fine with them (Score:5, Insightful)
Absolutely. Those used to be jobs that Americans held, then people like you come around and try to race bate us. I've watched crews who do roofing go from being Americans to being illegal immigrants. I've seen so many manual labor jobs in general go from being held by Americans to being held by illegal immigrants because they can work for less because they don't have to pay income taxes.
Maybe you should direct your anger at the managers and CEOs hiring illegal labor instead of the people filling the roles. Why are the laborers whisked away by masked men while the person who hired them walks away and hires a dozen more?
Re:Democrats aren't fine with them (Score:5, Informative)
Timeframes please, when did you watch that happen.
Educated guess, around the late 70's and early 80s?
Maybe when tax rates got historically slashed and lowered?
Destruction of labor unions for those manual jobs began to be dismantled?
Many states move to "right to work" laws thus eroding the worker power balance?
The laxing of regulations and the rise of the "corporate raider" culture.
I love this so much. Conservatives spent the last 40 years setting the town on fire and will make up any reason to blame anyone but themselves when they can't build what they want today from the rubble. It's pathetic.
Re: Democrats aren't fine with them (Score:2)
Legal immigration is also a problem. The HXX visas all let an employer hold immigrants hostage. It is legislated human trafficking. Musk loves his H1Bs because he can pay them less and work them harder. E series visas where switching jobs is ok are fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you should direct your anger at the managers and CEOs hiring illegal labor instead of the people filling the roles
Maybe you should have read the entire comment instead of just jumping to conclusions. I wrote:
And before you go down that route, yes, the owners of these firms are also to blame just as much.
And if you're complaining about the masks, keep in mind there are left wing idiots and and, more pressing, violent gangs who will attack our law enforcement. Regarding the latter, have you not been paying attention to what happened to law enforcement in Mexico and Latin America when they stood up to them?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not 2002 that doesn't mean "not conservative" anymore.
Did you vote for Biden 2020 and then Harris 2024? Clinton in 2016 as well?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Voting on policy, not party."
If this was true the words "Jill Stein" would not cross your lips and you would say "easy, of course I voted D, they have policies". You don't give w shits about policy outside of culture war, thus, "MAGA lite".
Or you like Republican policies so thats why you keep voting for them?
Re: (Score:2)
And if you're complaining about the masks, keep in mind there are left wing idiots and and, more pressing, violent gangs who will attack our law enforcement. Regarding the latter, have you not been paying attention to what happened to law enforcement in Mexico and Latin America when they stood up to them?
Those boots sure are delicious.
Re: Democrats aren't fine with them (Score:2)
Why does it need to be either or? Also keep in mind that in many cases the law is being followed both in spirit and to the letter. Often these guys arrive with forged documents, stolen identities, etc. They tend to bring with them documents from their home country as well, which they use to do anything from apply for driver's licenses to apply for a bank account.
California for example doesn't require legal residence for a driver's license or even a vanilla state ID, but they do require proof of identity and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is the complete opposite of "dropping the issue"
No, it's realizing this is a psychological issue, not one based on the reality of the situation. Go watch the movie, "What Is a Woman?" The end is great. They bring up the issue with an African tribe in, IIRC, Kenya. This is humans in their most basic and natural state. It's great. They've never of heard of such a thin
Re: (Score:2)
See now what you have done is spent all this time assuming my position when all i've done is point out the flaws in your own. This is where "you are exactly what you claim to despise" is quite true. You're ready to brow beat me with your cultural preferences and they are so strong you're willing to look past all those other issues to oppose it. So, you got what you wanted, enjoy the tariffs and the gestapo and the legalized bribery. You won.
Also I did watch that movie and I would question why would you
Re:Democrats aren't fine with them (Score:5, Insightful)
voters somehow stop obsessing over trans girls in sports
When it's your daughter losing to a man, you'll obsess over it too.
You have to hand to the GOP with the way they get their base to rally around inconsequential issues. It has proven an effective way to distract people from the real problems in this country.
Re: (Score:2)
If it is so inconsequential, why are Democrats hell bent on supporting it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No one is hell bent on supporting it. Not being a discriminating arsehole banning things doesn't mean you're hell bent on supporting something.
Just like you. I think you're quite an arse and disagree with virtually everything you say, but I support your right to say it because we should live in an open society where opinions can be expressed. But fuck anyone who thinks I support your view or you in particular.
Re: (Score:2)
When it's your daughter losing to a man, you'll obsess over it too.
Actually, most normal people don't obsess over their children winning at sports. A lot of us think that sports can be healthy, fun activities, but that obsessing over how well they rank is usually pretty unhealthy.
Re: (Score:2)
So everybody dopes. We the people all want this, and the only news is right wing news on this planet.
You went full retard...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure the republicans will stop worrying about boys pretending to be girls as soon as democrats stop encouraging boys to pretend they're girls.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure the republicans will stop worrying about boys pretending to be girls as soon as democrats stop encouraging boys to pretend they're girls.
When you say "democrats", do you mean a few Democrats or the majority of Democrats? Because if you mean the latter, it's never happened.
Re: (Score:2)
The news media is almost completely controlled by the Republican party these days.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
The news media is, and has always been, completely controlled by their advertisers, who kowtow to whoever is in office at the moment. That is why you got whiplash from watching how fast most of the outlets reversed direction when Trump took office and Republicans got control of both houses of Congress. It'll be the same when the Democrats take it back.
By and large, the "news" media
Re: (Score:2)
The news media is almost completely controlled by the Republican party these days.
Is it? Or just the "real news" instead of the "fake news"? If it was all controlled by republicans why are republicans labelling it as fake? Maybe you need to look at what news you surround yourself with.
Re: (Score:2)
But besides the lawsuits and hoping the voters somehow stop obsessing over trans girls in sports and woke there isn't a hell of a lot they can do.
Excuses. Fucking excuses. The Democrats squandered all of their righteousness by accepting bribes and playing ball with Republicans. Your fucking party is worth less than a $2 whore. Go ahead and suppress Bernie (as you should, but that is not the point) and Jasmine Crockett or AOC. All you do is suppress the will of the people you are supposed to fucking represent. Democrats believe they are right and will do things in support of that. They should be following principles instead of whatever they think is r
Re: (Score:3)
I hope for America's sake that after Trump there is a big reset and things are put right. But I have little faith that the Democrats will actually do it. The damage may be permanent.
It certainly turned out that way with Brexit.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, it was permanent. This is the end of the US Empire for sure and that isn't rebounding; but it's likely other things too. The day after Trump stole the election, BRICs more than doubled in members and continues to grow (and the "s" is "S" with the attacks on South Africa;) aside from the world planning to isolate the USA which the USA is actively working towards as well.
Making threats just buys a little time while greatly motivating the long term exit from the abusive relationship... Take the mess with
Re:Fine (Score:5, Insightful)
"After Trump" will require fair elections. Fair elections, unfortunately, is a quaint notion that has been killed by the GOP.
Re:Fine (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, how about this [apnews.com]?
When your arguments in appeals court are met with judges giving comments like "“IEEPA doesn’t even mention the word ‘tariffs’ anywhere” when you are specifically arguing that the authority for enacting the tariffs comes from the IEEPA, it's not so good for your argument.
There is no constitutional authority for the President to unilaterally enact tariffs. Period. Not under that law, and not under any other law Congress has passed, that they have named as what allows them to do this.
That's why I think the tariffs will disappear.
Also: Democrats are *not* fine with them. That's some baseless shit you made up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What? You think evil will disappear just because it doesn't have any legitimacy? I am not legitimate, and yet somehow or another, I still exist... for now. Legitimacy needs to be proven in order to find out that something is illegitimate. Nobody is testing/proving so illegitimacy survives.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You think Canon and Sony won't follow suit? They presumably have to pay the same beautiful tariffs ("presumably" because I don't know where the three companies have their manufacturing facilities).
As for the tariffs disappearing, in order for that to happen the taxes which are being reduced now are going to have to be reintroduced. Will that happen?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
but it seems like both Canon and Sony are taking advantage of Fujifilm's large price increases to pad their own pockets, strategically.
The article mentions Canon as putting up prices already, so that part isn't true. But padding their own pockets? Without price increases, they are absorbing the tariffs themselves, which will take money from their own pockets.
Rot-Off Writeoff FUDing RoundUp (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, just like that then?
Yeah, I'm sure they can just pick up a few billion dollar manufacturing plants and just drop them into Kentucky because one tangerine-tinted asshole who won't be here in 3 years said so. No problem.
Delusional.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm sure they can just pick up a few billion dollar manufacturing plants and just drop them into Kentucky because one tangerine-tinted asshole who won't be here in 3 years said so. No problem.
Ridiculous. They did it before. How do you think the plant got offshored in the first place?
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, you're going to have to back that up with some kind of evidence.
Please show where Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm, Canon, or any serious company that makes cameras has had US manufacturing of their products in the last 40 years.
Here's a hint: some of their stuff was never manufactured in the US, because these are predominantly Japanese companies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Assuming they even do it, they will only consider moving enough manufacturing to the US to satisfy US demand. The rest of the world will be supplied by their existing factories at a lower cost.
Re: (Score:2)
No that does not work. The factory still needs to get the parts needed to make the product, and those are still imported and covered by the tax.
It is possible to "promise" to build a factory in the USA, that may result in the tariffs being dropped as Trump may be fooled into thinking he "won".
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt Trump is fooled. His base however...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The "left" tries to use tariffs to change behavior, for instance "unless you bring your worker protections up to American standards you get this tariff". IMHO the chances of this working are just as dismal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Fine (Score:5, Interesting)
The "liberal" media sure does a great job of shielding dear leader from any consequences. None of them ever say flat out "Fuji raises camera prices due to Trump tariffs".
Re:Fine (Score:4, Informative)
Because Free Speech doesn't exist in the US anymore. Trump has basically ensured that expressing any negative opinion about any Trump policy has negative impacts on you.
CBS/Paramount cancelled Colbert as part of the $16M 60 minutes interview settlement. Colbert is well known for his opinions and you can bet as part of the settlement (which remains sealed) is "Fire Colbert". Now Trump wants "Bias Monitors" to watch CBS for any "biased reporting".
Just this past week he fired the head of the BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics) when they revised the job creation numbers downwards by a quarter million.
Anyone with half a brain knows the reason. The media is basically under attack for not reporting things Trump wants reported. And sometimes dancing around is the only solution.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They are probably factoring in the weakening USD too.
They aren't going to start making Fujifilm cameras in the US.
Tariffs are used to address systemic unfairness in trade, not because some idiot thinks that having a trade deficit is a bad thing. At best you might get a few new factories where robots do final assembly on some products, and high inflation. Best case.
Re: (Score:2)
The market will make products manufactured in the US more desirable,
Which products are those?
And if you think tariffs don't work, why do other countries use them?
I suggest you study some history of economics. There is plenty of evidence that tariffs don't work.
Re: (Score:2)
The increase for the three quoted items are 12.5%, 11.8%, and10.7%. Apparently the previous tariff was about 2% so the increase is actually 13%.
Tariffs are used because they are an income source and a regressive tax. They basically rely on the fact that nobody is able to manufacture the object locally.
Re: (Score:2)
You guys pay your winning tariffs, but don't expect the rest of us to subsidize your choices.
It is a 'global' economy. Of course 'we' expect you to pay for it. 'We' didn't get rich by paying our own way. 'We' lied, cheated, and outright stole.
Or to put it another way, you will pay or you will suffer. 'We' don't pay for shit. Look at the crimes going on with Social Security. 'We' only care about ourselves. 'We' have no loyalty and will rob grandmas and grandpas of money 'we' promised to hold for them so that their end years can be peaceful. LOL, fuck that. They will die in misery while 'we' build ne
Ultra-popular? (Score:4, Insightful)
Fuji's ultra-popular X100VI from $1,599 to $1,799
Who the fuck is paying $1,600-1800 for a single function "pocket" camera? It's no wonder smartphones destroyed that industry.
Speaking of smartphones, my local TV news is frequently self filmed by the reporters on iPhones. The picture quality is seemingly just as good as the VERY much more expensive shoulder cams. Even when viewed on large 70"+ HD screens.
Is it really though? (Score:2)
But there's a reason why Hollywood films aren't shot using iPhones
Get your eyes checked, troll (Score:2)
Fuji's ultra-popular X100VI from $1,599 to $1,799
Who the fuck is paying $1,600-1800 for a single function "pocket" camera? It's no wonder smartphones destroyed that industry.
Speaking of smartphones, my local TV news is frequently self filmed by the reporters on iPhones. The picture quality is seemingly just as good as the VERY much more expensive shoulder cams. Even when viewed on large 70"+ HD screens.
Your eyesight is FUBAR if you can't tell the difference on a 70" 4k screen. If you're filming on a sunny summer day at the beach with clear skies...OK, you might fool someone if they're viewing on a small phone, but definitely not a 70" screen....film in anything but EXCESSIVE light and the differences are massive and visible, even on smaller screens. Film anything indoors? A skilled operator can make things look good...your iPhone will be blocky and noisy and look like shit.
Also, who is paying that?.
So You're The One (Score:1)
I'm guessing from the extreme butt-hurt that you are exhibiting, that you're the one that Fuji is selling this overpriced drek to? I feel sorry for you. You should get some help.
Also, you might want to upgrade beyond the iPhone 4, the camera's are quite amazing these days. Or try a Samsung camera and have your mind blown.
Re: (Score:2)
The other guy's right. You're full of shit. Talk about butthurt! Go play in the dark with your iPhone or Samsung, or whatever. No doubt Samsung's fake moon pix had you jacking yourself off over the quality of the phone's camera.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/13/23637401/samsung-fake-moon-photos-ai-galaxy-s21-s23-ultra [theverge.com]
Leave discussions of photography for people who have a clue. You don't.
This is in comparison to iPhone 16 Pro Max (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, you might want to upgrade beyond the iPhone 4, the camera's are quite amazing these days. Or try a Samsung camera and have your mind blown.
You should try to use a dedicated camera for a change - photo shops will often rent you some equipment so you can test before you buy. Here are some things that a dedicated camera (with the right lenses and a competent user) will always do better:
Re: (Score:2)
I shoot with Canon (R5, R6ii) and Sony (A7r3) mirrorless bodies and I have a Samsung S25+ that I regularly forget has any value as a camera at all. I've made efforts to add smartphones to the work that I do, but even with contemporary flagship devices and a willingness to shoot in LOG format for use in big-boy editing software, it's a lot more work to deal with output from a phone than to use a proper camera. Low-light performance is poor at best and shutter lag is a real thing on phones even when they're j
Re: (Score:2)
"Who the fuck"
I call this old ditty the "Lament of the /. old person"
Re: (Score:2)
Who the fuck is paying $1,600-1800 for a single function "pocket" camera? It's no wonder smartphones destroyed that industry.
Except ironically for your point, that industry isn't destroyed. The cheap pocket cameras are gone from the market, the expensive ones are doing just fine. Who pays for that? People who realise that a shitty phone sensor + AI can't reproduce what these cameras do. Probably not you, if you don't understand why someone would buy it then your hobby / work doesn't require the performance you get in the package it is shipped in.
On the flip side I have 3 friends with X100 of varying vintages. I was close to buyin
lenses (Score:1)
Now /. is a photography website. Please provide reviews of Nikon lenses.
Re:lenses (Score:4, Funny)
This is slashdot. The only thing we do with Nikon anything is argue about how to pronounce "Nikon".
Re: (Score:3)
It's pronounced "Canon".
Re: (Score:2)
Shorter version: prices increased by 10-12% (Score:4, Interesting)
Quoting "$800" is meaningless without a baseline price. The actual price increase is between 10% and 12%. Which is annoying and stupid, but hardly shattering news.
This is industry wide. (Score:5, Informative)
Fuji's GFX line have larger-than-full-frame sensors that sometimes get called Medium Format. Given the limitations of Fuji's lens ecosystem, you're almost definitely a professional portrait or nature photographer if you're buying one, and since the only competition they have in that space are Leica and Hasselblad bodies that ALSO cost north of US$8000, this isn't a huge deal. Fuji is actually a bargain in comparison.
But lenses and cameras have seen prices raised across the board. None of the pricing is out of line from Tariff policy, but it does mean that I'm not buying any new gear until someone sane gets back in charge of trade policy in the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
This was a motivating factor for me making a quit browsing and commit to a large camera equipment purchase in April: I could see this coming down the line. Comparing MSRPs before and after, making that purchase in April has saved me 17%.
Re: (Score:2)
None of the pricing is out of line from Tariff policy, but it does mean that I'm not buying any new gear until someone sane gets back in charge of trade policy in the USA.
The ONLY reason I think America hasn't completely fallen yet is that one of Trump's lackeys claimed that the guy Kilmar whatever Garcia would NEVER step foot in America again... and yet he is here, to speak to a judge, which they claimed would never happen. Someone somewhere has some sort of a spine and some amount of power if they got that man in front of an actual judge on American soil.
I am curious... how exactly did Kilmar get out of CECOT? Who was the utterly ballsy mother fucker who did that?
Tarrifs always improve profits for smugglers (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, such very expensive cameras will just be hidden in the fentanyl shipments if they are easily bought for the original price in Japan.
price increase (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Buyers always set a price on a product.
That's demonstrably untrue. Not once have I ever told the ambulance how much a ride should cost. Same for taxis. Same for groceries. Same for electricity.
If you knew even a tiny bit of economics, you'd know the elasticity of supply and demand determines who pays for a new tax.
Buyers always set a price on a product. These are NOT essential items, People can choose to not buy or buy something else.
I as a consumer say the price is to high I dont pay...
But you never bought them anyways, so what you say means nothing.
For a professional, these are essential because there's nothing else on the market that delivers that kind of picture quality.
In other words (Score:2)
In other words, they are raising prices about 10-15%, why couldn't you just say that? Raising a$7,499 camera to $8,299 isn't that big a deal - if you had the $7,499 to buy it before, is it now wildly out of your price range at $8,299? At that level, these are tools that provide value to their owner, and they aren't nearly as price-sensitive as the average consumer...