Lee Saxon
Well-known member
Of course having a exchangeable lens mount costs more money.
There are many more mechanical pieces that go into an exchangeable lens mount, Many more electrical interfaces and internal adjustments that are incredibly complex, that not only cost more on a pure part level but take alot longer to manufacture, test, assemble and calibrate.
I'm certainly not surprised that the actual manufacturing and QC cost of a Raven with an interchangeable mount system would be higher than a Raven with a normal fixed mount.
But assuming that Raven uses the same processor architecture (and consequently, codebase) as the other cameras, and could be made physically compatible with the existing mounts, I would have thought that a big chunk of the R&D cost of making Raven work with the existing mount options had already been spent. Therefore I am surprised that the increase in volume on those mounts wouldn't have more than made up for a somewhat narrower margin on the Raven brain.
That's not a criticism, especially since you've already narrowed the margin quite a bit increasing the sensor size. Just a comment.