An anonymous source just sent me this: “The X-Pro1 is going to be released at the originally rumored $1299. The brief $1,699.95 that was on Amazon was a marketing trick to help the real price seem even more attractive. That $1299 price includes the F1.4 lens kit 🙂
P.P.S. The X-Pro1 flash will be optional and has a cost of $299“
Is he telling us the truth? If the prices he is mentioning here are correct than it might be. But I don’t know if that marketing trick was really necessary…if there was any trick. Because I still don’t believe Amazon did leak this for purpose!
P.S.: The Amazon X PRO 1 page is now blank (Click here to see a blank page…LOL).
P.P.S.: The full real specs have been posted a couple of hours ago: http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/in-deep-look-fuji-x-pro-1-specs/
21 Responses
first!!! for that price, count me in!
i’ll buy two!!
With every year passing by.
I start to dislike them marketing departments more and more. One day, Marketing fellas will be the new wallstreet bankers
This is a rumor from a “source” about “marketing” for a camera that’s not announced. I wouldn’t jump to too many conclusions (though that shouldn’t stop you from not liking marketing, lol).
That’s why I kept my pre-order in. I am hoping getting in queue still counts, but that the price will adjust.
At $1299 with lens I’m getting one, at $1699 body only, I’m not. It’s quite cut and dried.
Well, Fuji is simply THE STATE OF THE ART of marketing of all camera manufactures!
Look at the hype for the X-Pro1… its simply amazing how they manage this.
As I said earlier, $1,699 for a body alone is pretty steep (even for a Leica with their faithful followers). Fuji has no such thing except for the few odd web reviewers who would like to jump ahead and buy anything at any price.
All camera makers should actively consider selling their first few hundred odd samples to these reviewers for 3X the retail.
Fuji marketing? Where… All I see is rumor site marketing and amazon. $1,699 steep for a Leica? Huh Vivek?
I agree… It’s amazing to see that some people’d buy it at any price and without having any idea of the handling and image quality !
Vivek
They should be paying the reviewers, not punishing them!
Handling and image quality can be imagined by X100 fans… if you like the X100, there is no reason you won’t like this.
Amaxon at least owns one mega review outfit. These folks make more than enough as is, I think.
Camera makers should make money off them and subsidize the actual buyer/user! 🙂
I hope that it was just a ‘marketing trick’! $1300 with the lens is a much more attractive buy than the $1700 body only price. That price put me off buying one, but if it is the original price then that’d be nice.
If that price is accurate I’ll save up for one!
I highly doubt this was a marketing trick. Probably just a miscommunication of price or something. More likely it’s something like $1300 body only and something closer to this price with lens.
Fuji, come on! Dont’t break our hearts!!!
1700$-body only = dead dreams of many of us 🙁
I have a hard time believing Amazon.com would pull of a “marketing trick” like this. It’s ridiculous.
Amazon simply goofed up by putting up these pages too soon. I wouldn’t be surprised if all their prices were wrong.
There’s very little they can learn from a marketing point of view by putting these prices up. The camera hasn’t even been officially announced!
What do you think they would learn? How many people check rumor sites 24/7 that would be willing to pay 1699 for a camera with very little specs known but that looks retro?
Sorry, anyone that studies marketing knows that the sample size amazon would even get would not be representative of a big enough population to get any reliable information from.
Your source is bogus.
Bring it on!!!
i feel sick.. get on with it!!! GIVE IT TO ME!!!
I’m going with Amazon making a mistake with the description myself – my bet’s on $1699 for the body + 35/1.4 kit. At that price I’ll get that and the 18mm. If the $1399 pipe dream is true, I’ll get all 3 lenses!
I doubt that Amazon was involved with that purposely. It was likely some weird mistake, because that sort of marketing trick would only work on the small group of people who would be watching for posts.
And the new price is much more reasonable. If the quality is good, I will consider it. At the earlier price, I would not have considered it even if the image quality had been excellent.