Guy Mancuso wrote:
Tom and Dave i agree with both of you they are making some strides forward no question the 2 new lenses does bring some hope and the 85 1.2 did also. this is good but like I always say we need to be all over there backs to keep going and don't get comfortable , we want them to feel our pressure to move forward in more revolutionary ways, and yes it won't happen every time but make some of those jumps just a little bigger it is confusing people in the hobbyist market. like i said pair it down a little to 3 or 4 and concentrate there....Show more →
Sorry, I guess you and I are just on different wavelengths. :0 But what is confusing hobbyists? I exclude form that category new-to-DSLR newbies who want 10mp just because it is a bigger number.
A lot of good points have been made here over the last several pages and it is good to see Guy weighing in on the Canon forum again. I would urge people to remember that Canon's goal is to make money. The fact that this segment of the company makes its money through cameras is almost secondary. Their goal is not to make the best camera, merely the most profitable one.
From that perspective, the 400D will be a huge success and represents a timely upgrade of features to counter offerings from Sony and Nikon. The bar on the low-end is not being raised as a result of new technology or consumer demand but as a reaction to market forces. Basically, it is all advertising and the game is to see whose is bigger. Just think of the number of times someone has come up to you and said "nice camera, how many MP?" and you'll realize that Canon is approaching "their" market very creatively.
On the upper end, Canon has had to deal with only Nikon and so far Nikon's lack of a decent sensor has kept them from playing a very influential role. There hasn't been any real pressure on Canon to dramatically improve the Series 1 bodies in the manner that Guy is referring to. Perhaps Leica or the MF backs can exert the needed pressure because so far Nikon seems incapable of doing so. At this level, the corporate gains to Canon are primarily secondary and result from advertising association. Basically their pro bodies are selling their consumer bodies for them and don't represent a significant independent profit center. As long as they are doing that job there is no vested interest in substainally upping the bar. Pressure from users only comes from enough people switching systems but even there people switching to Leica and MF don't represent a real threat because those companies don't have consumer products in competition with Canon.
Sony entering the fray is probably the best thing that could have happened for us. With any luck, Canon will just try to stomp them out before the get a toe hold and use the force of their entire line to do so. If not, the best we can hope for is that Nikon finally pulls their heads out of their butts and realizes that it ain't 1972 and they aren't in Kansas anymore.
Guy I agree with you that the D200 is quite impressive. I owned one for some time and am amazed by how solid and well thought out the camera side is. The image quality was very good (although banding does occur in some instances, it's quite rare). The one down side for me was the ISO performance. The sensor seemed to produce results similar to where the D60 was, or about 2-3 generations behind Canon. Not bad, but ISO 1600 was not a 'gee wow that's amazingly clean!'
I do predict a new Pro camera, and soon, though. Canon needs to react to the D2X/D2Xs. It is an all in one sports shooting tool. I'm quite surprised and impressed with its AF performance. The other aspects still haunt it-- that is such as driving non-G lenses using 'the old screwdriver', and Nikon's idiotic attitude towards non-US cameras and warranty work. But going from the D2X to a 1DmkII is quite a jarring experience. It's a plus/minus kind of debate. Canon has to answer that with a market dominating pro camera.
I hope and pray they go to the detachable grip ala the film 1-series. The days of the brick are, I hope, over.
Hrow wrote:
A lot of good points have been made here over the last several pages and it is good to see Guy weighing in on the Canon forum again. I would urge people to remember that Canon's goal is to make money. The fact that this segment of the company makes its money through cameras is almost secondary. Their goal is not to make the best camera, merely the most profitable one.
From that perspective, the 400D will be a huge success and represents a timely upgrade of features to counter offerings from Sony and Nikon. The bar on the low-end is not being raised as a result of new technology or consumer demand but as a reaction to market forces. Basically, it is all advertising and the game is to see whose is bigger. Just think of the number of times someone has come up to you and said "nice camera, how many MP?" and you'll realize that Canon is approaching "their" market very creatively.
On the upper end, Canon has had to deal with only Nikon and so far Nikon's lack of a decent sensor has kept them from playing a very influential role. There hasn't been any real pressure on Canon to dramatically improve the Series 1 bodies in the manner that Guy is referring to. Perhaps Leica or the MF backs can exert the needed pressure because so far Nikon seems incapable of doing so. At this level, the corporate gains to Canon are primarily secondary and result from advertising association. Basically their pro bodies are selling their consumer bodies for them and don't represent a significant independent profit center. As long as they are doing that job there is no vested interest in substainally upping the bar. Pressure from users only comes from enough people switching systems but even there people switching to Leica and MF don't represent a real threat because those companies don't have consumer products in competition with Canon.
Sony entering the fray is probably the best thing that could have happened for us. With any luck, Canon will just try to stomp them out before the get a toe hold and use the force of their entire line to do so. If not, the best we can hope for is that Nikon finally pulls their heads out of their butts and realizes that it ain't 1972 and they aren't in Kansas anymore.
Excellent analysis. Perhaps it is also worth pointing out that the money to develop all the dream cameras at the top end comes from teh millions of cameras sold lower down, and that the people who buy them are not necessarily being misguided or foolish.
If you are a hobbyist and can only afford the lower level, then for instance cameras like the D50 or D80 may have a lot going for them, and would be my preference.
But if your priorities are compactness and portability together with convenience at a good price as you are an occassional user, then the 400D has been designed with you in mind.
Canon know their market, anad that is not solely to cater for enthusiasts and dedicated hobbyists.
Fortunately for us, Canon seem to see their role as to provide imaging solutions across the whole market, even going so far as making a dedicated astronomy camera in the 20a, which must have cost them a fair amount of money.
Sure, a couple of new primes would be nice - but little birdies are telling me that we may even get a 200/2 IS, so the Canon range ain't bad, just missing a couple at wide.
Regards,
DaveMart
pauljas wrote:
OK, I'll bite, who is Paul Pope?
He is a pro photographer who gets inside info from time to time of what is coming, mainly in the pro cameras, and shares some of that information.
There have been various dramas about some personalities on cameras forums, and so some of the big players have their supporters and detractors.
Personally, if someone has done me no harm,. it doesn't bother me what soaps people have got themselves involved in.
Regards,
DaveMart
Paul Pope is one of 3 or 4 posters that I've seen that have had accurate predictions about upcoming Canon products. He's been a bit off on occasion, and he dances around things with subtle hints rather than hard predictions, but he seems to be "in the know".
Guy Mancuso wrote:
Henry if i could only write so well. very well said BTW. I also agree on Tom's and daves comments and some of these facts that we talk about like market share and such play big roles on what you buy. reason I said be careful , don't get caught up in the hoopla. Even for Pro's we have to analize every purchase we make to see if there is a gain to it, and will it give you what you are after. we just don'y buy blindly, so my advice is always do the research and find the best product that makes photo sense than deal with the money issue as asecondary issue....Show more →
Thanks, Guy.
Don't worry about me getting caught up in the hoopla, at least not about the 400D. I think it's a great new camera, and it fits its price segment very well. But it isn't something that I want. I've been down the 350D road, and while it was a nice little camera, it didn't serve my needs well. And it was too small.
Bells and whistles sell, especially when the camera finds itself on the shelf of Best Buys, Circuit City, and WalMart. And it's easy to train a 20 year old college student/salesman to recite a list of bells and whistles, while simultaneously selling a 5 year, $200 extended warranty. (I admit that I have recently encountered one of Best Buy's finest salesmen in the I-Pod department, trying every trick in the book to sell a product of which he knew little).
I haven't been following the rumor and speculation threads here in FM recently because I'm not overly concerned about market forces or which company makes how much money, etc.
Any developments in the DSLR world that advance our photography are welcomed here no matter what company makes them. All of the major players will adopt any new technology that's worth while adopting. Currently, as has been the case for a very long time in the small format area, Canon and Nikon are the only two offering a full line of DSLRs, lenses and accessories to go with them. Sony, Fuji, Pentax ( my old favorite SLRs from the film days), Panasonic etc. compete mostly in the entry level market, although of course any one of them is capable of making inroads into the pro-sumer and pro market. But, will they? Is it worth the time and effort to Sony to try to whoo advanced amateurs and professionals with a heavy investment in Canon or Nikon gear to switch to them ? What could they offer us that Canon and Nikon don't?
If you're just getting into a DSLR cetainly there are a greater number of choices out there than a few years ago.But if you've been around for awhile, the only two real choices are still C and N.Good luck.
Guy Mancuso wrote:
Sorry if i put you in that newbie category or sounded that way
It was not a personal reaction, just that you were making your arguments in terms of Canon when you (I think) meant the entire industry.
It was unclear or clear but inaccuratly focused.
I wish cameras were like cars; I could choose the features I wanted. Body size of the 300d, noise level and buffer of a better camera, no direct print button.
Guy Mancuso wrote:
You could say that about women too.
Just never get it exactly what you want.
Ain't that the truth! Too bad the fast ones with big buffers are usually lacking in DR.
Now, just to be politically correct I must acknowledge that many men could benefit from a good stabilization system, a smaller body and an improved focusing algorithm that wasn't so prone to lock onto to ESPN.
Sony is betting on their name? This is supposed to be positive? Considering their recent exploits - exploding computer batteries, sneaky software...
All I need is an expensive DSLR with exploding batteries, non-secure/spy software, possibly a defective sensor, no real past and an uncertain future. Guess it would keep life interesting.
The Sony name is past its best. Even in Japan its considered one of many but Sony's management continues to stick their head in the sand. The comments regarding the PS3 in particular have passed well into the land of outright arrogance.
They're also seen as a company lacking commitment. I'm sure Canon or Nikon would tough out a rough patch, but Sony would possibly dump the business and move on to something else. Camera systems are a long-term commitment. I remain sceptical.
10DFT wrote:
(I admit that I have recently encountered one of Best Buy's finest salesmen in the I-Pod department, trying every trick in the book to sell a product of which he knew little).
Hmm, we were in Best Buy recently to get a TV and the 20 year old salesman apparently had difficulty with spelling 'LCD'. He kept calling it 'LSD'. Count the problems in that encounter.
Guy,
Of course Sony does have a very recognizable name, but it doesn't carry much weight in the photographic world. It may attract some attention from the P&Shooters looking at the cheaper DSLRs as I said, but I don't see them making any immediate inroads with the rest of us.
Steve Torelli wrote:
Guy,
Of course Sony does have a very recognizable name, but it doesn't carry much weight in the photographic world. It may attract some attention from the P&Shooters looking at the cheaper DSLRs as I said, but I don't see them making any immediate inroads with the rest of us.
Unfortunately, the "rest of us" don't really matter all that much. The 20D/30D outsell the 5D by 50 to 1 and I would suspect the Rebels outsell the 20D/30D by 10X that. I would be surprised if the Series 1 bodies even register as a blip on the sales charts.
I think you're missing the point that Sony is picking up Minolta loyalists. Sony also adopted the 'Alpha' name for their cameras, which was Minolta's Japanese name for Maxxum.
Minolta was #3 back in the film days. I'm not surprised Sony has quickly risen to #3 in DSLR sales in Japan with the A100.
Ain't that the truth! Too bad the fast ones with big buffers are usually lacking in DR.
Now, just to be politically correct I must acknowledge that many men could benefit from a good stabilization system, a smaller body and an improved focusing algorithm that wasn't so prone to lock onto to ESPN. [/quote
sorry to cut in here, it is a pleasure to follow this discussion and Guy is a welcome returnee whose opinions I always read, but how could you guys let henry's comments on big buffers and DR go unapplauded....henry that has to be the wittiest thing I have read online in ages...thanks for the laugh....aloha....peter
Hrow wrote:
Unfortunately, the "rest of us" don't really matter all that much. The 20D/30D outsell the 5D by 50 to 1 and I would suspect the Rebels outsell the 20D/30D by 10X that. I would be surprised if the Series 1 bodies even register as a blip on the sales charts.
May I ask where you get your data from? 50 to 1 and such?
Thanks
George
very well said BTW. I also agree on Tom's and daves comments and some of these facts that we talk about like market share and such play big roles on what you buy. reason I said be careful , don't get caught up in the hoopla. Even for Pro's we have to analize every purchase we make to see if there is a gain to it, and will it give you what you are after. we just don'y buy blindly, so my advice is always do the research and find